管理層發言
Hello, everyone, and welcome to SSR Mining's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Financial Results Conference Call. This call is being recorded. At this time, for opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the call over to Alex Hunchak from SSR Mining. Please go ahead.
Thank you, operator, and hello, everyone. Thank you for joining today's conference call to discuss SSR Mining's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 financial results. Our consolidated financial statements have been presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP. These financial statements have been filed on EDGAR and SEDAR, and they are also available on our website. There is an online webcast accompanying this call, and you will find the information to access the webcast in this afternoon's news release and on our corporate website. Please note that all figures discussed during the call are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated. Today's discussion will include forward-looking statements. So please read the disclosures in the relevant documents. Additionally, we refer to non-GAAP financial measures during our discussion and in the accompanying slides. Please see our press release for information about the comparable GAAP measures. Rod Antal, Executive Chairman; will be joined by Michael Sparks, Chief Financial Officer; and Bill MacNevin, EVP Operations and Sustainability, on today's call. I will now hand the line over to Rod.
Great. Thank you, Alex, and good afternoon to you all. We closed 2025 on a high note, delivering full year production above the midpoint of our guidance range and generated more than $100 million in free cash flow in the fourth quarter. As a result, we finished the year with $535 million in cash and more than $1 billion in liquidity. Based on the operating guidance provided with today's financial results, we expect this material free cash flow generation to continue in 2026. Accordingly, and coupled with our view that our share price does not reflect the full value of our portfolio, we are pleased to announce that our Board has approved a share buyback of up to $300 million. If you remember, share buybacks have been a key component of our capital allocation framework in the past, and we are pleased to reestablish a program again. Before moving on to the next slide, I want to take a moment to highlight a number of key catalysts and milestones that we delivered since our third quarter results and also speak to some of the opportunities ahead. First, I want to note particularly strong fourth quarter results from our Cripple Creek and Victor mine and Puna operations which saw both assets exceed their full year guidance ranges and deliver exceptional free cash flow. At Puna in particular, the mine theaters production guidance for the third consecutive year and set records for tonnes processed in both the fourth quarter and over the full year, which was a terrific result. Second, we delivered two technical report summaries, both demonstrating long-term free cash flow generative assets that will bolster our portfolio. The Cripple Creek and Victor TRS, released in November, highlighted an initial 12-year life-of-mine plan with an $824 million NPV at consensus metal prices. With nearly 7 million ounces of resources in addition to the reserves, there is significant optionality here for meaningful mine life extension into the future. In January, we released a TRS for the Hod Maden development project, which highlighted a $1.7 billion NPV and a 39% internal rate of return at consensus metal prices. I will talk more on this in a moment. And thirdly, we continue to advance a compelling brownfield growth projects across the portfolio, which I'm also going to speak to in a moment. As you can see, 2025 was a very successful year, and we're well positioned to continue building on this momentum in 2026. So let's move on to Slide 4. We have a number of highly prospective growth targets across the business. These prospects represent potentially low-cost, high-return growth opportunities that can deliver significant value to our shareholders. In 2026, we have committed a substantial amount of capital investment across the business, and a large portion of that CapEx will be allocated to advancing these growth opportunities through the development pipeline. We look forward to sharing additional details on the projects, including both Marigold and Puna over the coming years. Now let's turn to Slide 5 to focus on Hod Maden. In January, we published a technical report summary for the Hod Maden development project. The TRS clearly reaffirmed Hod Maden as one of the better undeveloped copper, gold project in the sector, and we are thrilled to have a development asset of this quality in our portfolio. As a reminder, Hod Maden is an underground copper, gold project in the northeastern Türkiye. The mine will be accessed through a single surface portal, and ore will be extracted through a combination of long-haul stoping and cut-and-fill mining methods. The process plant is designed with a nameplate capacity of approximately 2,200 tonnes per day with life of mine average head grade of 7.6 grams of gold and 1.3% of copper. The plant will produce a single high-quality concentrate with life of mine gold and copper recoveries averaging 87% and 97%, respectively. Moving on to the next slide for a few of the TRS highlights. Hod Maden is a unique project with significant scale, best-in-class grades and first quartile all-in sustaining costs that position the asset to deliver compelling free cash flow in the future. On a 100% basis, production is expected to average 240,000 gold equivalent ounces over the first 3 years and 220,000 gold equivalent ounces over the first 5 years. At consensus metal prices, Hod Maden is expected to generate average annual free cash flow of $328 million. While at a $4,900 gold price, that free cash flow would jump to approximately $500 million annually. Hod Maden's execution has been meaningfully derisked as a result of the significant engineering and the work completed since our initial investment in the project as well as the benefit of early site works that are taking place. Inclusive of earn-in and milestone payments, SSR's remaining investment is expected to total $470 million, which we expect to fund from our liquidity position and free cash flow outlook. We anticipate a 2.5- to 3-year construction period once the project decision is made. We are very excited about Hod Maden and look forward to providing further updates in due course. Turn over to Slide 7, and I'll hand the call over to Michael.
Thank you, Rod, and good afternoon, everyone. In 2026, we expect to produce between 450,000 and 535,000 gold equivalent ounces from our Marigold, CC&V, Seabee and Puna operations. All-in sustaining costs are expected to range between $2,360 and $2,440 per ounce or $2,180 to $2,260 per ounce, excluding the impact of care and maintenance costs at Çöpler. While Çöpler isn't in operation, we continue to guide to cash care and maintenance costs of $20 million to $25 million incurred per quarter. Total gross spend is expected to total $150 million in 2026, driven mainly by capital investments in leach pad expansions at both Marigold and CC&V as well as continued exploration and resource development spend globally. Capital expenditures at Hod Maden are expected to total up to $15 million per month as engineering access road development and site establishment activities continue ahead of a formal construction decision. Upon a positive construction decision by the joint venture, we will provide an update to our growth CapEx outlook for the project. Now let's move to our Q4 results, starting on Slide 8. In the fourth quarter, we produced 120,000 gold equivalent ounces at AISC of $22.50 per ounce or $202 per ounce, excluding costs incurred at Çöpler in the quarter. Fourth quarter sales were 117,000 gold equivalent ounces at an average realized gold price of $4,142 per ounce. Net income attributable to SSR Mining shareholders in Q4 was $181 million or $0.84 per diluted share, while adjusted net income was $190 million or $0.88 per diluted share. For the full year, production of 447,000 gold equivalent ounces exceeded the midpoint of our full-year guidance. As we discussed with our third quarter results, higher-than-forecasted royalty costs tied to higher gold prices and share-based compensation brought our full-year AISC to the top end of our consolidated guidance range. Full-year AISC, excluding costs incurred Çöpler, was $1,923 per ounce comfortably within our guidance. Now let's move to Slide 9. As highlighted in the table on this slide, free cash flow totaled $106 million in the quarter, and $252 million for the full year. Excluding the impact of changes in working capital, full year free cash flow was more than $400 million in 2025. These are excellent results, considering our investment in growth projects across the portfolio. We ended the quarter in a strong financial position with $535 million in cash and total liquidity of over $1 billion. This cash and liquidity position combined with our free cash flow outlook in 2026, supports our continued investment in growth initiatives across the portfolio while also giving us the confidence to initiate a share buyback of up to $300 million. Share buybacks have historically been a key component of our capital allocation and shareholder return approach. Between 2021 and 2024, we repurchased 20 million shares at an average price of $15.76 per share. With convertible notes issued in 2019 with a conversion price of $17.61, these share buybacks provided significant value to our shareholders. Our historical share buybacks, combined with the announcement of a new share buyback program, reiterate our commitment to ensuring our shareholders realize growth on the key per share metrics going forward. Now over to Bill for an update on the Q4 results and 2026 guidance for the operations, starting on Slide 10.
Thanks, Michael. I'll first start with EHS&S, 2025 as a successful year of strengthening our programs and application in all areas of EHS&S. Key areas advanced were in critical controls and risk management for safety, the integration of closure work into life-of-mine plans to bring forward the work as well as to reduce costs and the upgrading of our community engagement and development application. As I will outline today, we are currently working on growing our business through both greenfield projects and brownfield growth opportunities at all the operations. Safe production and quality implementation of EHS&S standards is our focus ahead to enable an increase in activity to successfully advance all of these opportunities. Now on to Slide 11 for our year-end MRMR. We closed 2025 with 11 million ounces of gold equivalent mineral reserves, a testament to the scale and longevity of our diversified operating platform. Reserves were up nearly 40% year-over-year, driven largely by the incorporation of CC&V and Hod Maden into our consolidated totals as well as other minor impacts from drilling additions and model changes. Mineral reserve price assumptions in 2025 remain very conservative at $1,700 per ounce gold and $20.50 per ounce silver. We hold another nearly 15 million measured indicated and inferred gold equivalent ounces that can support mineral reserve growth across our portfolio in the future. More impressively, we have consistently delivered on our track record of replacing mine depletion. Since 2020, as shown on the right side of this slide, we have more than replaced depletion before incorporating any of the benefits of our accretive M&A transactions over the period. Inclusive of M&A, our mineral reserves are up approximately 40% since 2020, an impressive outcome that ensures our portfolio is poised to benefit from constructive gold and silver markets for years to come. Now on to Slide 12 for a discussion on Marigold. In the fourth quarter, Marigold produced 43,000 ounces of gold and an all-in sustaining cost of $2,089 per ounce. As expected, this is Marigold's strongest period of production in 2025. Technical work around ore body knowledge and processing planning at Marigold has now matured to where this is being integrated into the planning process. As a result of previously highlighted ore blending requirements and to ensure pad recovery performance, the Marigold mining schedule has been updated to account for the blending of durable and nondurable ore. In addition, increased gold prices have resulted in pit expansions and the relocation of a planned waste dump to avoid sterilizing ounces. While this work has changed the production schedule, the total ounces produced at Marigold at the 5-year period is materially the same, as reflected in the 2024 TRS. In 2026, Marigold is expected to produce between 170,000 to 200,000 ounces of gold and an all-in sustaining of $2,320 and $2,390 per ounce. Production is expected to be 55% to 60% weighted to the second half of the year. AISC will be highest in the first half due to both production profile and sustaining capital, which is expected to be 70% weighted to the first half. Sustaining capital in 2026 is expected to total $108 million as we made significant investment in fleet and component placements and process planned improvements. These investments will help to ensure Marigold is well positioned for both additional near-term haulage requirements and to enable development of potentially significant mine life extension opportunities ahead. To that end, Buffalo Valley and New Millennium projects continue to advance and SSR Mining anticipates potentially integrating both deposits into an updated Marigold TRS over the next 18 months. Now on to Slide 13 for an update on CC&V. CC&V had another excellent quarter, producing 39,000 ounces of gold and all-in sustaining cost of $1,596 per ounce. Quarterly production benefited from better-than-expected gold recoveries and drove full year SSR Mining attributable production of 125,000 ounces, well exceeding the 110,000-ounce top-end guidance. It is also important to highlight that CC&V generated more than $200 million in mine site free cash flow to our count in 2025, an exceptional outcome when compared to the $100 million upfront transaction outlay we paid to acquire the mine last year. In November, we released a technical report summary for CC&V, showcasing an initial 12-year life of mine with an NPV of $824 million at consensus metal prices. The mine plan was based on 2.8 million ounces of reserves, and CC&V has an additional nearly 7 million ounces of measured indicated and deferred resources to support potential mine life extensions over the long term. Combined with our long-term production platform at Marigold, this TRS reiterated our position as the third largest gold mine producer in the United States. SSR now holds more than 6 million ounces of mineral reserves in the U.S. along with an additional 7 million ounces of M&I resources and 2 million ounces of inferred resources, all calculated at conservative metal price assumptions well below the current spot market. In 2026, we expect CC&V's production and costs will be well aligned with figures outlined in the TRS. Full year production of 125,000 to 150,000 ounces and ASIC between $1,780 and $1,850 per ounce should position the asset well for another year of strong free cash flow. Production will be 50% to 55% weighted to the second half of the year, with costs trending above full-year guidance in the full first half. Now over to Slide 14 to discuss Seabee. As highlighted in our Q3 results, Seabee's fourth quarter reflected a continued focus on underground development in the second half and saw increased oil contributions from the lower-grade gap hanging wall. Accordingly, the production totaled approximately 9,000 ounces at an ASIC of $3,433 per ounce in the fourth quarter. In the first half of 2026, underground development will remain the focus as we look to improve stope availability going forward. Full year production of 60,000 to 70,000 ounces gold is expected to be approximately 60% weighted to the second half, with the strongest results in the fourth quarter. ASIC guidance of $2,170 to $2,240 per ounce will be higher than the first half, reflecting the aforementioned production profile and the typical cadence of spend, given the winter road season to start the year. Work at Porky continues to advance and we were able to declare a maiden 200,000 ounce mineral reserve at Porky with the year-end update. We are also excited about some of the recent drilling results at Santoy, and we'll continue advancing both near-term drilling and development at Santoy targeting high grades. Regional exploration is also expected to continue across the property in 2026. Now on to Puna to Slide 15. Puna delivered another excellent year, exceeding its production guidance for the third consecutive year. Record tonnes in both the fourth quarter and over the full year was a major factor in Puna strong results with Q4 production of 2.1 million ounces of silver and ASIC of $18.39 per ounce. Full year ASIC of $14.24 per ounce was slightly better than the guidance and drove mine site free cash flow of more than $250 million in 2025. Puna has been an exceptional contributor to our portfolio, and we see potential to extend operations of Puna well beyond 2028 through growth opportunities both at Chinchillas and Cortaderas going forward. In 2026, we expect Puna will produce 6.25 million to 7 million ounces of silver and all-in sustaining costs of $20 to $22 per ounce. As noted, we are pursuing opportunities for additional pit laybacks at Chinchillas as well as further evaluation of the leaner target to the northeast of the current Chinchillas pit. Drilling has also been very successful at Cortaderas, an underground brownfield deposit on the Pirquitas property. And we are advancing engineering work to delineate its potential contribution to Puna's longer-term profile. Now I'll turn back to Rod for closing remarks.
Great. Thanks, everyone. We had an excellent finish to 2025. We delivered solid operating results that are well aligned with expectations and now went to 2026 in a strong financial position with a number of key catalysts on the horizon. We're well positioned to deliver year-on-year production growth and strong free cash flow and are also well advanced on a number of growth initiatives across the portfolio that we look forward to sharing over the next 12 to 18 months. So with that, I'm going to turn the call over to the operator for questions. Thank you.
分析師問答
Our first question comes from George Eadie with UBS.
Can I start with Marigold, please? Just looking at the 21 million to 23 million tonnes stacked at 0.4 gram a tonne and 0.35 in Q4. My math that gets me to the top end of guidance. So maybe just a little bit more color here. Like is there a bit of conservatism baked into the guidance range of 170 to 200?
I'm going to hand it to Bill.
As we talked, we've been doing a lot of work, particularly on the technical front, and we baked that now into our updated forward schedule. And that considers how we actually have to complete our blending. So that blending and the updated plan for that is actually well outlined in the plan forward. So we believe that guidance is a good indication of what we will deliver this year. A different stacking plan comes with that.
Okay. But looking at the tech report, like I know it's old now, but the next 2 years, it had 0.3 gram a tonne. But given the commentary before, like should we expect next year's grade incrementally higher versus this year? And then 2027 to 2028, just clarifying, like should we be looking at a stacking grade of high 0.4 to low 5s potentially, given the commentary before about keeping the sort of medium-term outlook unchanged?
Yes. I think what Bill is outlining is based on the work we've completed regarding the blending requirements for durable and nondurable law. We've been working for the last two years to improve our understanding of the ore body, so this wasn’t just a one-quarter effort. It involved a significant amount of work over time. We've incorporated this into our plans, as Bill mentioned, regarding the blending requirements and various opportunities we've identified due to adjustments in the mine plan that would have impacted future prospects. We're finalizing all of that work now. Additionally, with Buffalo Valley and New Millennium, we will need a new technical report. This report will present updated profiles not only for the next five years but also for the entire mine's lifespan, including growth opportunities. So, please be patient with us; we'll present everything to you within the next 12 months.
Yes. Okay. No, that's clear. And maybe just one more if I can, for Puna, what silver prices do you sort of needed a minimum to go beyond 2028? Like it's 70 ounces or higher? Could we be talking well into the 2030s potential? Or is it a bit too early and dependent still on Cortaderas success?
We're excited about what we have in front of us. Cortaderas presents an underground opportunity with a significant amount of work ahead, but the outlook is very positive. Regarding Chinchillas, we believe there is potential for prolonging its operation through ongoing work in the Chinchillas pit and possibly additional step-backs, as well as the Molina pit nearby. The work is currently in progress, and the silver prices provide ample support for this. We're actively engaged in this work now, and we see it extending into the future.
Yes, I would like to echo what Bill mentioned regarding the opportunities at Puna, which have emerged from significant effort by the team over an extended period. If we were to prioritize, I would say Chinchillas, Molina, and Cortaderas are where we see the sequence unfolding. The silver price is definitely beneficial as we look ahead at these opportunities. Overall, I believe the outlook for Puna is quite positive. We just need to complete some tasks, especially related to Molina and Cortaderas.
Next question comes from Cosmos Chiu with CIBC.
Great to see the new TRS at Hod Maden. Maybe, Rod, can I ask, is there any kind of timeline that we can expect in terms of SSR Mining coming to a construction decision? And if you can't give us a timeline, could you maybe talk about the different factors that you will consider before making such a decision?
Cosmos, it is a great tech report. It certainly outlined a terrific project for all the joint venture partners that are involved. So what's going on at side right now, the work on the ground still continues. So it's not like we've got pens down and we're waiting for approvals. It's the efforts on the ground for the early earthworks, some of the creek diversions, the civil works, the road access tunnels and others is underway and ongoing. So that work hasn't stopped. Post the publication of the tech report, we're now just going through the sort of review processes with our partners. And once that is completed, we'll have a project decision. So I'm not going to set out a timeline on behalf of everyone. But clearly, we're maintaining some progress on the ground there as well. So don't think of it as like a pens down, then we'll pick them back up. We are maintaining some of that momentum.
Understood. Maybe going to Puna a little bit here. I noticed that the guidance to 6.25 million to 7 million ounces is slightly lower than 7 million to 8 million ounces that you highlighted back in the August 2025 study for 2026. Could you maybe talk a little bit about that?
Yes, I'll pass that one on to Bill.
Just the permanent timeline for the work that we're completing, was it? Yes. So the 6.25 to 7 we're talking is our guidance range. You wanted an update against that? Sorry because I missed...
So the August 2025, your Q3 2025 update indicated that you expected 2026 silver production at Puna to be between 7 million and 8 million ounces.
Yes, with the current work we are doing, there is additional mining happening at Chinchillas, which is changing the timing of our ounces. We're aiming to maintain production levels at a higher rate for a longer period. While we initially anticipated a quicker decline, it has come down, but we are now expecting to sustain a higher level for an extended time. We look forward to providing updates as we complete this work in the future.
Okay. So it's a timing thing. We should take those ounces that are not produced in 2026, put into 2027 or 2028?
It will be, yes. It will be better.
Perfect. At Marigold, could you explain the difference between durable and nondurable ore and blending? I'm not fully understanding the technical aspects of it.
To simplify, the content of the fines and the height of the heap create compression on the material, which can affect the effectiveness of solution transfer. If we reflect on our history at Marigold, we faced challenges in late '22 and early '23 when our heap became bound up. Through extensive efforts, we've gained a better understanding of the ore body. As a result, we have established new guidelines regarding what materials can be mixed, which alters our schedule for combining different parts of the ore body. This approach is designed to ensure optimal blending and recovery from the heap leach pads moving forward. It's not just a temporary fix; it will be a continual aspect of our operations at Marigold. The ongoing work we have undertaken has been substantial, and we will release a new technical report detailing these requirements and potential growth opportunities.
Yes. I think I got it now. When you mentioned fines, I think I remember that now. So great. And maybe one last question. I see that you're still using fairly conservative numbers for your MRMR estimate $1,700 an ounce for reserves at Marigold. So I guess my question is, I don't know how much you can answer about, but what would a higher gold price assumption due to what you can do at the ore body? It sounds like you're considering it because you're talking about not sterilizing some of the certain parts in the ore bodies or you're leaving that optionality open. And so to the point that you can share with us, what would a higher gold price assumption mean? And could that be incorporated into this new sort of technical report that could come out in 12 to 18 months' time, and you talked about Buffalo Valley and also New Millennium. Could those be part of that new study coming out as you well?
Yes, that's correct, Cosmos. We believe that for this year, given our established profile and various growth opportunities, we will hold off on decisions regarding increasing the gold price, lowering the cutoff grade, or adjusting margins. We haven't identified a need to pursue that work at this time. We have numerous growth studies, not influenced by the gold price, that we are currently examining. This is our primary focus right now as we aim to complete the technical work, allowing us to incorporate these findings into future technical reports. We will revisit the gold price discussion later, especially in terms of how sensitive certain operations are to increases in gold prices. This year, we have a lot on our plate, and we want to finish what we have before addressing that topic again.
And then would that coincide with your timeline, say at Marigold? Because as you say, you're going to come up with a new technical study in Marigold in 12 to 18 months. Could this sort of reevaluation of the gold price coincide with that timeline as well?
Correct. Yes, good. And particularly New Millennium and some of those other targets as well.
The next question comes from Ovais Habib with Scotia Bank.
Congrats on a good quarter, especially at Puna and CC&V. A couple of questions from me and just again, going back to Marigold following up on the previous caller's questions, the fine that Marigold, looks like blending is working. And I mean, is this issue now behind us? Or are we still expecting to see this issue linger into Q1?
No. Looking ahead for the surveys, it's straightforward. We will encounter fines in the future throughout the ore body. Since 2022, we've done extensive work, including drilling, to better understand the specific areas where fines exist. This information has been integrated into our future mine plans to facilitate the blending of durable and nondurable materials. You'll hear us mention this in the future as well. It guides our scheduling to ensure we maintain the right blend for optimal outcomes on the heap leach pads moving forward. This is not a one-time issue; it's going to be a persistent aspect for Marigold. The work we've been doing has been excellent preparation to manage this. Additionally, as I mentioned, we will have a new technical report that will detail all these requirements along with other growth opportunities.
Got it. And just again, I think there's a follow-up question on Puna as well. I mean drilling has been pretty successful at Cortaderas. Don't believe this deposit has been included in Puna's mine life extension. Rod, are you looking to release any sort of a new mine plan for Puna in the near term, including Cortaderas as well as Chinchillas?
I think we'll likely see some extensions to the mine life at Puna, but it really depends on the upcoming work. As we begin drilling at Chinchillas and potentially at Molina, along with continuing some technical efforts at Cortaderas, there's a chance we may consider a new technical report in the future. Presently, the team has done an excellent job in establishing a longer life for Puna, and we see potential for additional extensions. Furthermore, we're optimistic that some of the larger opportunities will contribute positively to Puna in the longer term. It's exciting to reflect on how far we've come, especially when not too long ago Puna was viewed as a depleting asset nearing the end of its life. Our findings suggest the opposite is true.
Excellent. And then just moving on to CC&V, which has been a real success for SSR. Currently, I mean, the project holds 4.8 million ounces in M&I. Now you already have a 12-year mine life at CC&V, but what's the plan there to accelerate these ounces into the mine plan and improve the production profile of CC&V? Is this just the permits? Is it more infrastructure that needs to be allocated? Any sort of color there?
It's currently straightforward from our perspective, Ovais. The mine extension depends on the successful approval of the amendment. This approval is necessary for us to proceed with the pad expansions, which are already planned over the next 5 to 10 years. This marks the initial phase of growth based on the existing reserves. We are always looking for ways to optimize, as that's part of our role. However, like Marigold, Cripple Creek also has durable and nondurable ore, so it's crucial to manage this asset carefully to safeguard the future. We’ll certainly aim for it, but the plan is largely established. Additionally, we will explore the possibility of converting the approximately 7 million ounces of resources we have, which would require another expansion permit. Overall, the asset has performed exceptionally well since our acquisition, and we are proud of the team's efforts there. They have successfully integrated into SSR, and they deserve recognition for that. Our focus now is to optimize and sustain this asset well into the future, showcasing its strength within our portfolio. We are excited to have it.
And just my last question then on Çöpler, Rod. I mean, any sort of progress there that we can kind of put our finger on or any sort of updates that you're looking to provide in the term future on Çöpler? Any sort of discussions going ongoing that you can talk about?
Yes. Look, I think that's right, discussions are ongoing. So in terms of like activities, there really was nothing to note since the last quarter. I mean the activities at the site, as Michael sort of mentioned in his financial discussions, had sort of wound down in terms of material movements and site rehabilitation, what we're waiting for the final approvals for the e-storage facility and pad closure. The guys are obviously still very busy in that in regards of care and maintenance of the activities around the plant, in particular, to maintain integrity for a start-up. But that's really been the sort of key focus on the ground at site. And then obviously, as you note, we continue to progress the various discussions with different parts of the government and government authorities. So it's just ongoing at this stage.
Next question comes from Don DeMarco with National Bank.
A lot of my questions have already been answered. But Rod, I'll start off with this. For Hod Maden just continuing on as we're looking forward to this formal construction decision and I see that in the interim, you're looking at maybe spend on the order of about $15 million per month, should we pencil that into our model like beginning as of January 1, I think? Or should we wait until a construction decision? In other words, are you kind of getting ahead of yourselves a little bit here with some of that spending before the formal decision is made?
No. A lot of the spending was already committed. The early site works I mentioned are ongoing, including the tunneling. We just had the first blast of the tunnel, which is great for site access. Many civil works around the creek diversion are also in progress. This work was already underway, and as I mentioned earlier, we're still very active on site while we await the decision. The team is busy preparing the site, and once we receive the construction decision, we are ready to execute contracts and start the larger build. I think it's reasonable to consider that spending. We will provide an update to the guidance once we calculate the actual cash outflow for construction capital in 2026.
Okay. Okay. That's helpful. And just my final question then, shifting to Marigold, so I see that there has been a sizable increase in sustaining CapEx in '26. And of course, the print details that there's some fleet replacements, of course, there's the plant upgrades. So is this sort of this spend to be onetime in '26? Or should we also be modeling maybe a little bit higher CapEx going forward in the next '27, '28 years?
Yes. Look, I'll answer and then Bill can jump in, if you like, as well. I think we do what we always do when we look at our fleet and our mine plans in the long-term exercises around total cost of ownership. Fleets obviously have a useful life arm and particularly parts and maintenance and major component rebuilds. We completed that work for Marigold last year. And what I determined was, in some cases, that it was wise for us from a value perspective to do that work in 2026. So that's really what you're seeing there. So it's normal course. In some cases, some of them might have been accelerated by a year or 2, and some of that fleet replacement might have changed as well, but it's really just sort of an exercise in value for the fleet of understanding the optimized approach to that replacement. But nothing out of the ordinary. Bill?
That's correct, Rod. And a lot of work, looking at what the optimum timing is for value. So some things are a little bit earlier than they originally planned, but that's because it gives a very positive financial return to the business. That's why we're doing it.
This concludes the question-and-answer session and today's conference call. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating, and have a pleasant day.