© 2024 Alpha Spread Limited. All Rights Reserved.
www.alphaspread.com is not operated by a broker, a dealer, or a registered investment adviser. Under no circumstances does any information posted on www.alphaspread.com represent a recommendation to buy or sell a security. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, investment advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. In no event shall Alpha Spread Limited be liable to any member, guest or third party for any damages of any kind arising out of the use of any content or other material published or available on www.alphaspread.com, or relating to the use of, or inability to use, www.alphaspread.com or any content, including, without limitation, any investment losses, lost profits, lost opportunity, special, incidental, indirect, consequential or punitive damages. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance.
You don't have any saved screeners yet
Intrinsic Value is all-important and is the only logical way to evaluate the relative attractiveness of investments and businesses.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to today's Lundin Mining Fourth Quarter Results. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Marie Inkster, President and CEO. Please go ahead.
Thank you, operator, and thank you, everyone, for joining Lundin Mining's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2020 Results Call. I would like to draw your attention to the cautionary statements on Slide 2 as we will be making several forward-looking statements throughout the course of this presentation. On the call to assist me with the presentation and answering questions, are Jinhee Magie, our Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and Peter Richardson, our Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. On Slide 4, I want to take some time to touch on several of Lundin Mining's achievements in 2020 as they place us in an excellent position to perform well in 2021 and the years ahead. While responding to COVID-19 required that we adjust some of our plans earlier in the year, we had our share of challenges in the fourth quarter. We acted quickly and decisively to overcome these. The loss of our colleague at Neves-Corvo in the third quarter remains top of mind within our organization. A fatality is a rare event within Lundin Mining because of the dedication and focus of our workforce when it comes to safety. In 2020, we achieved the best ever safety performance, as measured by the total injury frequency rate and several other indicators. This achievement is particularly notable in a year filled with the distraction, both personally and professionally, of the global pandemic. We achieved our most recent production guidance for all metals with cash costs in line or better than our guidance, including notably low first-quartile cash costs at Chapada and Eagle. This led to the generation of nearly $860 million of adjusted EBITDA in a volatile metal price environment over the course of the year. We were able to complete our Candelaria Mill Optimization Project in the fourth quarter and make progress on growth initiatives. We were achieving excellent progress advancing the Zinc Expansion Project at Neves-Corvo prior to our proactive decision to temporarily suspend the project to protect the operation and the local communities from the onset of COVID-19. Mining works continued throughout the year, and the project officially restarted in January of this year. At Chapada, following a brief suspension of the exploration program in March, we were able to ramp back up quickly and safely and completed nearly 42,000 meters of drilling that will help inform our expansion studies. At Candelaria, we progressed our internal studies evaluating medium-term opportunities to expand the underground mines. Lastly, we remain focused on value creation through disciplined allocation of our shareholders' capital. In late November, we announced an anticipated 50% increase to our regular dividend. This increase to an annualized $0.24 per share was approved by the Board yesterday. We continue to pursue actionable M&A, while remaining disciplined to our strategy and our criteria. In short, we are very well positioned to deliver on our strategy and drive shareholder returns. With that, I will turn the call over to Jinhee to highlight the full year 2020 financial results. Jinhee?
Thank you, Marie. Looking at a summary of our results on Slide 5. Our operations in aggregate produced nearly 420,000 tonnes of base metals in 2020, including over 96,000 tonnes in the fourth quarter. In addition, we produced 163,000 ounces of gold in 2020, an increase of 15% year-over-year with the full year's contribution from Chapada. For the year, we sold over 380,000 tonnes of payable base metals and generated revenue of over $2 billion. Fourth quarter revenue totaled $530 million, including positive price adjustment for prior period sale. Prior period price adjustments had a negative $50 million impact on revenue or $0.08 per share for the year. However, with strengthening metal prices, the fourth quarter impact was a positive $48 million or $0.065 per share. A detailed breakdown is available in our MD&A. Consistent with the prior year, 65% of our revenue was generated from copper sales in 2020. Gold contributed 12% to revenue, up from 9% in the prior year, with a full year contribution from Chapada and the increase in the gold price. Zinc, nickel and lead contributed a combined 19% to total revenue in 2020, down from 23% the prior year, largely a dilution effect with the first full year of copper and gold sales from Chapada. We remain predominantly leveraged to copper and well-diversified geographically. Slide 6 presents a summary of the full year financial results. I will also touch on our fourth quarter results. 2020 revenue was 8% greater than last year, mainly attributable to the first full year contribution of the Chapada mine following acquisition as well as higher realized copper and gold prices. Gross profit was 13% higher, reflecting the Chapada acquisition and offset by higher depreciation. Attributable net earnings from operations were $0.23 per share for the year, in line with the prior year and $0.16 per share for the quarter. Fourth quarter earnings were higher than the comparable period in 2019, primarily due to higher realized metal prices, partially offset by lower copper sales volumes. Adjusted earnings were $0.31 per share for the year and $0.15 per share for the fourth quarter. Fourth quarter adjustments include $5 million of costs associated with the labor action at Candelaria and nearly $4 million for project standby and suspension costs. Details of the adjustments are broken down in our MD&A issued last night. We generated adjusted EBITDA of $857 million in 2020, a 21% increase over 2019, including $235 million generated in the fourth quarter. 2020 cash flow from operations were $566 million, in line with that of 2019. When adjusting for noncash working capital changes, operating cash flow was $645 million or $0.88 per share, 17% greater than last year. Fourth quarter capital expenditures on a cash basis were $100 million, bringing the total spend for 2020 to $431 million, marginally lower than the most recent guidance of $445 million. We ended the year with $141 million in cash and equivalents and net debt of $63 million. As of February 18, these numbers has further improved to $165 million in cash equivalents and $50 million of net debt. Lastly, our Board of Directors declared regular quarterly dividends of CAD 0.04 per share, totaling CAD 0.16 per share in 2020. And yesterday, our Board approved an increase in the next quarterly dividend to CAD 0.06 per share or CAD 0.24 per share on an annualized basis, an increase of 50%. I will now turn the call back to Marie to discuss our operations and projects.
Thank you, Jinhee. Moving to Candelaria on Slide 7. In December, after reaching new collective agreements with all unions representing employees, the operations safely ramped back up to full production and exceeded our most recent guidance, producing nearly 127,000 tonnes of copper and 76,000 ounces of gold at cash costs of $1.45 per pound of copper for the year. The fourth quarter cash costs includes the expense of approximately $13 million associated with the new collective agreements, though it excludes $5 million of costs directly associated with the labor action. This is detailed in the MD&A. The Candelaria Mill Optimization Project is now complete with the installation of the final ball mill motor completed in December. Full year capital expenditure of $216 million, is modestly below guidance of $225 million. 2021 capital expenditures are forecasted to total $345 million, including $160 million on waste stripping. Candelaria is positioned to deliver 40% production growth this year on improving copper head grades and achievement of planned processing rates. Our 2021 guidance reflects our expectation that copper head grades will be similar to those in the second half of 2020 as we start the year and increase as mining progresses to lower higher grade benches in the open pit. 2021 copper C1 cash costs are expected to decline to $1.35 per pound on this increased production. Moving to Chapada on Slide 8. The Chapada team responded quickly to the motor mill damage event late in the third quarter with effective action plans to minimize the production impact. Two spare motors were installed on the SAG mill in early October and enabled resumption of milling at approximately 35% of the nameplate capacity. Throughput was further improved with the installation of a motor loaned from Samarco on the ball mill in mid-November, and a return to full processing capacity was achieved in late December with 2 repaired motors received at site and installed. The remaining 2 motors that were successfully repaired and are being maintained as spares. The operation exceeded our most recent guidance, producing over 50,000 tonnes of copper and 87,000 ounces of gold for the year. In fact, the 50,000 tonnes of copper produced was within 1,000 tonnes of the original guidance provided for the year in December of 2019 with our operations outlook at that time. Chapada was also able to achieve better results on cash cost on our guidance. In the fourth quarter, the mine achieved an impressive negative $0.18 per pound of copper, despite the constrained mill throughput and for the year achieved a first quartile $0.29 per pound. This positions the operation as one of the lowest cost open pit copper mine in South America. Crusher and conveyor maintenance was undertaken during the fourth quarter, and excess mining capacity was focused on waste removal activities. Full year capital expenditure of $39 million is directly in line with guidance. The mining mills continue to operate as expected. And they are well positioned to achieve our 2021 guidance of 48,000 tonnes to 53,000 tonnes of copper and 75,000 to 80,000 ounces of gold. 2021 capital expenditure guidance is $65 million. Worth noting, we do not expect a significant year-over-year change in the underlying operating costs on a per tonne basis. Our $1.10 per pound of copper cash cost guidance assumes a gold price of $1,700 per ounce and a U.S. dollar to Brazilian real exchange rate of BRL 4.75, amongst other various assumptions. Chapada's exploration program had a strong second half to the year, drilling greater than planned 42,000 meters. The primary focus remains on near-mine targets to better understand the mineral resource potential and inform our expansion studies. Study work progressed during the year and is being advanced in parallel with the exploration efforts. The 2021 campaign of 60,000 meters of drilling is underway. There are currently 4 exploration rigs on site at the moment with plans for 6 for the majority of the year. Moving to Neves-Corvo on Slide 9. The operation produced over 32,000 tonnes of copper and over 69,000 tonnes of zinc. Copper production achieved most recent guidance and zinc was within 1,000 tonnes. The full year cash cost of $2.09 per pound of copper was in line with guidance of $2.10. In the fourth quarter, while the zinc plant achieved greater than planned throughput, zinc metal production was impacted primarily by below planned ore grades. The mine is continuing to focus on several action plans to improve productivity of horizontal and vertical development in order to optimize the blend to the mills. 2020 full year capital expenditures of $128 million, including expenditures on the Zinc Expansion Project, were modestly greater than the guidance of $120 million, as additional mobile mine equipment was purchased in the fourth quarter. Fourth quarter ZEP preparation work included progress on the vent raises, activities on the SAG mill, including commissioning with waste and work on surface conveying systems. The project was officially restarted in January of this year. Progress towards completion will continue to be dependent on the future effects of COVID-19 with government public health requirements and internal measures taken to protect our employees and contractors. We have mobilized a smaller number of contractors on an extended schedule, given the current safety requirements for social distancing and other personnel limitations. Consistent with our previous guidance and time line, construction is to be completed in stages over the course of 2021, with production ramp-up planned to commence later in Q4 '21, following final commissioning of the underground materials handling systems. The 2021 capital expenditure guidance of $70 million on the project is unchanged. Approximately $30 million will be spent in early 2022, primarily reflecting a timing of payments. 2021 total capital expenditure guidance for Neves-Corvo is $135 million, including the ZEP expansionary expenditure. On Slide 10, Zinkgruvan finished 2020 on a strong note. In its 164th year of continuous production, the operations set several records, including ore hoisted, total material hoisted and mill throughput, all while achieving its lowest ever recordable and all injury frequency rates. Zinc and copper production both achieved annual production guidance with zinc approaching the upper bound of the guidance range. Zinc production finished strong, with a grade-driven significant increase in production during the fourth quarter. The guidance for 2021 is 71,000 to 76,000 tonnes at a cash cost of $0.65 per pound of zinc. The full year capital expenditures of $37 million for 2020 were modestly less than guidance of $45 million.Sustaining capital expenditure for 2021 is estimated to total $50 million. Around half of this is for underground development with the remaining amounts, including production improvement initiatives, underground control systems and infill drilling. Exploration efforts continue on existing orebodies as well as targeting Dalby and Burkland deposits, which remain high priorities. Nearly 18,000 meters of exploration drilling was completed in 2020, and we have an active program planned for 2021, with 27,000 meters of drilling planned as part of a $6 million program. Lastly, on Slide 11, Eagle performed extremely well again in 2020. The Eagle team's record for consecutive days without a recordable injury continued into the fourth quarter, passing 1 year and achieving 412 days. As mining progressed into the higher grade regions of the Eagle East orebody, nickel production increased nearly 25% and copper over 30% compared to 2019. Full year production guidance was achieved with average grades in recoveries of both metals improving year-on-year. On the strong operational performance and increasing metal prices, Eagle's already first quartile cash cost improved further, achieving an average of $0.10 per pound of nickel for the year and an impressive $0.89 negative in the fourth quarter. With minimal capital expenditures of just over $11 million, Eagle generated nearly $140 million of free cash flow for the year, including nearly $60 million in the fourth quarter. Eagle remains well positioned to generate significant free cash flow in the coming years. 2021 nickel production guidance is 15,000 to 18,000 tonnes and copper production guidance of 17,000 to 20,000 tonnes. Underlying costs are very stable here and our $0.50 per pound of nickel cash cost guidance assumes a conservative byproduct copper price of $2.95 per pound amongst other assumptions. 2021 capital expenditures are estimated to total $15 million. Slide 12 provides a summary of current guidance as discussed in the operational section. This production guidance, along with our capital expenditure guidance of $610 million, is unchanged from when originally provided in late November. Also, as previously outlined, exploration expenditures are expected to be $40 million in 2021 with over 140,000 meters planned. As we are all well aware, the global effects of COVID-19 are continuing to evolve. While we continue to proactively manage under our readiness and response plans, our guidance does not reflect the potential for significant disruption to operations due to COVID-19. Turning to Slide 13. We have an excellent growing production profile from our current assets. We are guiding for copper production to increase roughly 25% this year and a total of 30% by next year compared to 2020, primarily on increasing grades at Candelaria and full year uninterrupted contributions from both Candelaria and Chapada. Zinc production is forecast to modestly increase in 2021 and as the Zinc Expansion Project is completed and fully ramped up is set to increase 65% in 2023 compared to 2020 and be roughly 230,000 tonnes per annum. Gold production is forecast to be 175,000 ounces at the midpoint of guidance for this year, an increase of 7% over 2020. Of this, nearly 110,000 ounces are unencumbered and received full market pricing. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that the investments we have made over the past several years have positioned Lundin Mining well to benefit from the current commodity price environment with multiple years of production growth, decreasing cash costs and free cash flow generation ahead. And with that, operator, I would like to open the lines for questions.
[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Orest Wowkodaw from Scotiabank.
I was wondering if I could ask a couple of questions about Candelaria specifically. Marie, did I hear you correctly that you said grade profile there in the first half of '21, will be similar to the back half of '20? Was that correct?
Not exactly the first half, Orest, but we'll start the year in those levels. We expect it to improve as we go throughout the year.
Okay. So you're going to start out around the kind of 0.55 level. What -- can you give us some insight in terms of what should we assume for the average grade for the year if it's going to start out that low?
Well, I mean, you can probably back into it from the guidance. But when you look at last year, we were directly in line with our technical report issued in 2018 when you look at the grades. So there shouldn't be any great surprises. We know that it gets better as we get deeper in the pit. And so we'll have an improving profile. Peter, I don't know if you want to comment on that. We don't typically guide on grade, but just some general guidance there.
No. But it's -- as you said, we know that Phase 10 improves with that, and we're getting deeper and deeper down in Phase 10. So that's all according to the technical report from 2018.
Okay. Now that you've completed the mill optimization, can you give us a sense of what kind of throughput levels are you achieving? And has the ore hardness issue gone away?
Sure. Peter, did you want to take that one?
Yes. So first of all, CMOP, the mill optimization project, the aim there was to increase throughput by 4,000 tonnes a day and also improve metal recovery in copper by 1.7%. That was the goal of the target. We are seeing better throughput as we also get lower down on Phase 10. As we've said previously, the lower we get down on Phase 10, the softer the ore is. We know that. The ultimate throughput rate also depends on the ore blend at the time. And at the same time, we're feeding more and more ore from the underground, which is harder. So it's going to be a combination of the blend. But we're seeing better throughputs as we get to deeper down in Phase 10. We also see we have more power now in the secondary mills.
Are you getting close to that kind of 80,000 tonnes a day level? Is that kind of what we should be thinking about?
We don't disclose the info in this quarter, but throughputs are improving.
Okay. But is that ultimately where you're going or where Candelaria is going with the improvement of 80,000 tonnes a day?
Yes. That's the way...
Yes. I think we've been there, Orest, at those levels. And so we just finished with the last installation of the ball mall motor. We're working on new liners. So we'll probably have a couple of months where we work out the kinks and the new -- with everything in place. But yes, I'd say that we're looking at that as a typical level that we would aim to achieve on a consistent basis.
And your next question will come from Jackie Przybylowski from BMO Capital Markets.
Just a couple of other project update questions maybe. First of all, on the ZEP, can you maybe talk a little bit about remobilizing the contractors there? I know that you mentioned in the early part of the call that it was difficult to keep the contractors on site due to COVID. How is that situation in Portugal right now? And is remobilization going well? Or is that at all a risk as you ramp that project back up?
Yes. We don't see it as a risk. We had built into our time line that we would be mobilizing with less people on site, smaller numbers and an extended schedule. So that's built into our base case. Peter, do you want to talk about the project and what we've been doing and the remodeling?
Yes, yes. No. Sure. So we have been removing people, both underground and the surface. At the moment, we're working with piping and mechanical work underground of the splicing of belts and on surface with the piping and mechanical work and some work in the grinding section. As Marie said, we have built that in, in our time schedule. We are also working under strict COVID rules and restrictions and procedures. So we test everyone that comes back, put people that are outside of the area into quarantines and are proactive before they could come on site. So we're making sure that everyone that is on site is fit for duty and then does not have any COVID symptoms or infections.
That's great. And then maybe shifting gears just to Chapada. So hard to tell from the release that came out yesterday, but I mean, it sounds like you're still kind of reviewing the options in terms of the size and scope of a potential Chapada expansion. Are you able to give us maybe a bit of updated color in terms of where you're at on the drill program and on the studies? And when we may expect to see a result or at least to see sort of the study results and maybe the options you're looking at? Is there any color on the time line at this point to getting that completed?
Yes. So for the study and any release to the market as to where we're going with the studies, that's going to take a while, Jackie. We're looking at a midyear internal review with our Board of the various scenarios, and we do continue to study the scenarios and everything from the modest expansion work up to a doubling. So there's 3 primary scenarios that we're looking at. But as you mentioned, the exploration program will really feed into that, and it's been going very well. We did curtail the program early in the year in 2020, but we've ramped up quite quickly, and we're able to complete more than the 40,000 meters that we had originally targeted. And then another 60,000 meters this year is what's in the plan. So -- and we don't think we'll have any issue meeting that target, and that will be important to inform the studies as well. So I would say that the next update that we would provide would be on an exploration update, probably midyear, if we can have a reasonable update at that time. And we're working on some different land acquisitions and other things. We hope to have those wrapped up within the first 2 quarters so that we can provide an update in midyear. And then probably the studies will be a bit longer before we come to ground on which avenue might be appropriate for the expansion scenario.
Is this -- the schedule seems like it's a little different from what you had first thought when you acquired the property. Is it because of COVID and the delays that you experienced in drilling-related to COVID? Is it an issue that the opportunity to just -- maybe there's more opportunities than you expected and your -- you just want to sort of investigate all of them? Or what exactly is the cause of the some exploration kind of taking longer than you initially thought?
Yes. I think there's a lot of opportunity, and it's really -- if you're talking about building a new plant or moving significant infrastructure, you want to make sure that you have the drilling done to support where you're going to put those things, where the future center of gravity is going to be, make sure you're not repeating what's happened already, which is infrastructure on an orebody. So there's a lot of information coming from the drilling programs and a lot of good work ongoing on the various scenarios. So we don't want it to take forever, but we do want to make sure that we have the best information that we can before we go forward with a major investment.
And your next question comes from Ioannis Masvoulas from Morgan Stanley.
Three questions from my side. The first one on Chapada again. Just a follow-up to Jackie's question. Should we be thinking about full update on the expansion option in early 2022 now instead of back-end of this year? Then the second question around Neves-Corvo. You seem to be putting a lot of effort on optimizing the ore mix and improving the development rates. But is that going to benefit Q1 production? Or shall we expect a slow start to the year for Neves? And the third question for me, just on capital allocation. We're seeing the step-up in production rates this year and strong metal prices, suggesting a nice step-up in free cash flow. But at the same time, dividend yield is below 2%. So I'm just trying to figure out in terms of timing on any additional cash returns. Would you wait until ZEP is fully derisked before making any decision around that? Or would you have confidence if the current commodity price environment process to increase the dividend without necessarily waiting for Q4 once the ZEP is fully commissioned?
Okay. Sure. So we got 3 there. I'll go back to the first question on the timing and follow-up to Jackie's question, which was around the timing of Chapada. And we'll obviously want to bring that forward as fast as we can. We would like to have something in the back end of the year. But I don't want to make any promises that we can't keep if we're not ready then. So we'll bring the information as soon as it's realistically available and reliable to the market. But yes, it could be early next year. It could be end of this year. We're working on that, and we'll try to expedite that as well as we can. On Neves-Corvo for the ore mix, the Q1 production, I would say, rely on the guidance. We did have a backlog of development activities, but we are improving there. Peter, I don't know if you want to comment on the ore mix and the availability of stopes as the key for the production there?
No. Not more than you said. I think it's really good that you said, rely on Q1 production forecast. We're continuously working on improving mine productivity and primarily focus on, as you said previously, horizontal and vertical drift drilling development to be able to build inventory. So we can optimize both production and then the mix.
Yes. Thanks, Peter. And then on the third question of capital allocation and the free cash flow, yes, we're quite happy and excited to see that we're in a great metal price environment and have been investing over the last couple of years. So we're positioned well to take advantage of that. We did increase the dividend by 50% just recently. So $0.24 per share per annum is the current rate. And we've committed to our Board to come back midyear with a review of where we are. So we'll have an update on that midyear. As I said, we're not going to wait until ZEP is finished or anything else. We'll have a look at that midyear.
And your next question will come from Jack O'Brien from Goldman Sachs.
I just want to clarify firstly on the unit cost guidance you've given. I think you mentioned for Chapada that there's no significant sort of change in operating costs year-on-year '21 on '20. It's mainly a function of some of your assumptions. I noticed there's also increases at Neves-Corvo and Zinkgruvan and Eagle, albeit lower. Can you just confirm for those 3 mining areas as well, it's really just a function of assumptions? Or are there any sort of underlying considerations? We should also factor those? That's my first question.
Yes. It's a combination of the output -- and the unit costs on a cost per tonne milled in each of those places is very stable. So we don't expect any step change in costs. Our budget assumptions are in the table where we put our cash costs. So they're very small. So you need a magnifying glass to see them. But we do use, say, for example, BRL 4.75 with our assumption for our 2021 budget. And we know that, that is in our favor as well as the copper price, which we budget at $2.95. So that's just an example. The euro-U.S. at $1.20 and the Swedish kronor SEK 8.50. So depending on where that goes, it will affect the cost profile because the costs are in those local currencies. But underlying costs, there's nothing fundamental that's changing in the business that would affect those costs.
Got it. And just a couple of small follow-ups. Are there any -- can you remind us just if there's any other sort of union negotiations due in 2021 across your portfolio?
Typically, with Brazil, it's an annual negotiation, and they passed quite calmly and without event. Our Chilean mines, which are the ones, of course, that people will be most concerned about and typically is a more prolonged and difficult process of negotiation. We don't have any expiring contracts until 2023. We just agreed a new contract in Portugal. Peter, I'm not sure of the duration of that. I know there's an annual salary adjustment, but I think the union agreement itself hasn't changed in many, many years.
Yes. That's correct.
Yes. And then in Sweden it's annual. Yes.
We just closed the ones in Sweden as well.
Yes, yes. And Eagle mine is not unionized.
Okay. That's incredibly helpful. And then just a final one. Obviously, you've touched quite a lot on some of your exploration and sort of internal expansion opportunities. First, I was just wondering. I noticed your guided exploration spend is actually sort of down fairly meaningfully for '21 on '20. So just interested in thoughts there. And then, I guess, the follow-up. Given that there is so much in sort of your existing footprint or near it, should we assume that kind of internal opportunities are your first priority over M&A?
I would say that they're not mutually exclusive. And if we found a good project, we would definitely take advantage of that and invest and drill. And we continue to look for properties that we can develop and drill. And we have a team in Toronto and in South America looking at opportunities on the early stage exploration side. So we don't have any -- we have a lot of opportunity around our sites, which is why you see the big budget around our sites and it's very prospective. But I wouldn't take that as an indication that we don't have interest in other opportunities. I'd say the opposite that we would like to have additional opportunities, but we do have very good opportunities in and around our sites. I think one of the big differences is the Zinkgruvan program is a lot less in terms of spending this year, but that's because we've moved a lot of the drilling from surface to underground. So even though we still have a lot of meters planned, I think it's 27,000 meters, Peter, correct me, if I'm wrong. We still have a lot of meters planned, but they're drilling from underground base. So it's a lot cheaper than the surface drilling. So that brings the budget down quite a bit. So -- but no, we have a lot of prospectivity, a lot ongoing, and we'll continue to be active on the exploration front.
And your next question will come from Daniel Major from UBS.
A couple of questions and slightly follow-up questions, but I'll ask them anyway. On the sort of cash returns and the balance sheet, if we look at the cash generation this year and certainly if the super cyclists out there are right, there's going to be a large net cash position at the end of the year. Can you give a preference at this stage, special dividends or buybacks? And do you intend to be exercising anything on the NCIB at this point and at the share price level? That's first question.
Yes. So I would say that given where we are in the cycle and we're high above our long term pricing, and we're not at an all-time high for our stock price, but we have a very good healthy stock price. It's probably less likely that we would undertake a buyback at this point in the cycle and more likely to give returns in other ways.
Okay. Very clear. And then second question, I mean, from what it sounds like on your comments around the Chapada expansion, we're not likely to hear much until the end of the year or early next year. Is it fair to assume then that it's unlikely that you would be able to deploy meaningful amounts of capital into that project until 2023? If that is the case, should we be assuming CapEx somewhere around $450 million, $460 million mark in 2022?
I'm not sure what our -- you'd probably be able to get the number from our technical reports because they're pretty fresh. I would say you're probably in and around the right ballpark. I mean we go between, call it, $500 million and $375 million, depending on where we are with pushbacks in the various pits. So there is a bit of a range there. I would say, averaging $400 million plus or minus $100 million, depending on what we're doing and where we are. But I wouldn't say your number is off base. So without having all information right in front of me for that year, I wouldn't say that you're materially off base.
And just, is it correct to assume it's unlikely that there's a huge amount of upside risk from that driven by Chapada?
No. And I would say that if we are going to invest in a project, it would be one with a good return. So where you have cash flow reducing in the near term, you should have a NAV bump in the long term. I think -- I'm just trying to remember from the budget. Jinhee, 2022 CapEx, similar levels, but slightly lower than '21, I think, and then a little bit of a drop off, '23, '24. Do you recall?
Yes. That is correct, Marie.
And your next question will come from Abhi Agarwal from Deutsche Bank.
Congrats on a strong set of results amidst such a challenging year. I have 2 questions, please. So the first one is on the balance sheet. When you think about balance sheet, is there a net cash level you think about, in case you have to execute on a transaction? And my second question is a generic question on inflationary pressures. A lot of your peers who have reported have highlighted inflationary pressures coming through. Are you also seeing that come through your operations?
Sure. I'm going to ask Jinhee to field that because I know that she's been working with the sites on our minimum cash balances and also has been monitoring the inflation and other cost pressures. So Jinhee, do you want to take those 2? Jinhee, you may be on mute.
I was on mute. Sorry. So I didn't catch all of the first question. Can you just repeat the first question?
Was on the -- oh, sorry, go ahead.
So my question was when you think about the balance sheet, is there a net cash level you think about in case you have to execute on a transaction?
Yes. Sorry. No, we -- when we think about executing on a transaction, we look to -- we can always borrow to execute on transactions. So we don't manage our net cash for purpose of transacting. So we look at shareholder returns from our operations, and then we can look at borrowing, if needed, to act on transactions. And then I think your second question was on the inflation. And overall, we're not actually seeing any significant general cost inflation at our operations at this time. Where we are seeing some inflation is -- or expecting some would be in some specific consumables, but, for example, in the grinding media. We are expecting some increase there because of the current steel prices. And again, another one like diesel, again, is another area where the price will be impacted by broader markets. But generally, I would say our operations are not seeing significant general inflation. And I think when we look at some of our maintenance service contracts, some of those -- many of our operations have long-term service contracts. So again, not seeing a short-term inflation impact. On a country-by-country basis, I think Brazil is one that experienced a little higher inflation in the recent year. And I think there, though, at Chapada, what we have going for us is that the exchange rate there is quite favorable, and so it's offsetting any of the inflation that we might see. So again, I guess, overall, really not expecting -- we're experiencing costs in line with our expectations and more of an impact, I would say, on our lead times than prices at this point.
And your next question will come from Ioannis Masvoulas from Morgan Stanley.
Yes. I have a couple of follow-ups, if that's okay. The first one on Chapada. In terms of the expansion, my understanding was that if you were to go down the path of a significant expansion, let's say, in the order of 50% or 100% of the existing throughput rate, that would require expense permitting process that could take a bit of time. Could you just remind us how long could that to first production, if you were to announce a plan, let's say, 1st of January 2022? How long would it take to actually get the approval and hypothetical construction time line? And then, secondly, in terms of working capital, I was just wondering because you have had the disruptions around Candelaria and Chapada in Q4. Is there any excess inventory that you may have to work through? Or do you feel that overall inventory balances and working capital in general is at a normal level as of the end of Q4?
Okay. Yes, sure. On the expansion permitting time lines, the permitting process in Brazil has changed recently. It used to be based on throughput levels and tonnages and things, but now they've moved to a footprint-based type of scenario. Peter, I know you've been looking into this and have been talking about the permitting time lines and potential time lines. Can you give a little more color on that?
Well, it's a little bit early to say on the time lines for the project. It all depends on what alternative is chosen at the end of the day. Permitting time lines -- they have been increasing. So it's also difficult to say. It is going to also reflect finally on what alternative is chosen. So I don't know if we can say much more now on that, Marie.
Yes. I think if you look at, say, a new EIA in Chile takes -- it used to be 24 months, and now it's probably closer to 36 months. But it would probably be something less than that, and there's probably -- it'd probably be less than half of that. But there might be preparatory works that you could do in the meantime and other things that you could do to advance the project while you're waiting for certain permits. So again, Peter is correct. It's difficult to say exactly. But we would anticipate that we could start early works and do different things within the existing footprint, as we wait for any major permits that are required. On the working capital, excess inventory, Jinhee, did you want to address that one? I don't -- I'm not aware of anything, but you may be.
Yes, sure. I'd say we have a little bit more in the inventory than we did at the end of the third quarter. That's because we did have a shipment delayed at Candelaria. But I would say it is in line with what it was at the end of last year. So I wouldn't say it's excessively too much inventory at the end of the year, but it is a little bit higher than it was at Q3.
And your next question will come from John Tumazos from...
Could you review what your size thresholds are for new projects in terms of mine life, total tonnes, copper equivalent, NPV or IRR? There are few big porphyries available, but there's a lot of little projects dancing around.
Yes. Typically, we wouldn't look at something under, say, a 50,000 tonne copper equivalent unless we felt there was a prospect to get it above that. And the reason for that is that an operation takes an equal amount of management time and effort, if it's 20,000 tonnes or if it's 200,000 tonnes, if it's got challenges. So we don't want to be in a position where we have 15 mines and 10 of them offer you 5% of your NAV. That sounds like a base managerial and administrative nightmare for not a lot of return for your effort. So we'd rather focus on things that are going to be meaningful. And if we're going to acquire something to make sure that we're spending our efforts on things that are going to make a difference for the company. And then in terms of mine life, I think Eagle was a very special one for us, and it remains very special in terms of being an exceptional orebody. And you'll see from the free cash flows that it's an excellent operation. We wish that it had a longer mine life. And so typically, with mine life, we're looking at things of a greater than 15-year mine life and recognizing that. We're lucky with Eagle that we were able to find Eagle East and that we're benefiting right now from some very good pricing. But in this business, we've been below our long-term copper price for almost the last 10 years. And so if you have a short mine life and you invest at a long-term pricing, you may not make your money back if you don't have -- if you can't ride at least 1 or 2 of the cycles, then you risk not making your money back in this business. So we do look at that from time to time, but we really have been sticking to our criteria in terms of what we're looking for.
Does this mean only porphyries and that you can save time by just skipping VMS deposits?
No. The -- none of our last acquisitions were porphyries. Chapada is not, depending on who you ask. Candelaria is an IOCG and Eagle -- it's a sulfide. So it doesn't necessarily mean that we won't look at those types of orebodies. I mean we do have a very good underground expertise within the company. And we have -- that's one of our core skills and so large block caves. And at Candelaria, for example, we're doing 14,000 tonnes per day, which is one of the larger non-block caves underground mining operations. So I think our mines are open, and we'll look at various options for things.
We have no further questions in queue. Oh, wait a moment. We have Jackie Przybylowski. John Tumazos, are you finished taking your question?
I'm finished.
Okay. We can make Jackie's line.
Sorry, is it my turn ? Okay. Sorry about that. I just hopped on again at the last second. I just wanted to circle back on your dividend. I realized that the announcement just came out today for the $0.06 dividend per quarter. And I know the day a dividend is announced, it's probably not the right time to ask about the next dividend announcement, but I'm just kind of curious if you could talk through sort of the expectations you're using when you set the dividend. And I realized you've already gone through the commodity prices, but I'm thinking more in terms of like how much spending do you think that you would sort of be comfortable with. I know you kind of talked about this already on net cash, but like what kind of net cash or net debt level would you be comfortable with going forward and incorporating that -- into that sort of the Chapada expansion or any kind of new future projects? Can you give us just a little bit more color in terms of like where you might see the dividend from here? You mentioned earlier that you might prefer not to do a buyback at this point, but maybe some other options. Is there a possibility that you'd incorporate like a special into the mix at some point? Can you just give us a little bit of color on what your thinking is around all that?
Yes. So that's what we'll be discussing with the Board mid-year, and so we'd like to -- we've just come off a fairly rough quarter, and we'd like to see a good chunk of time with some steady production and to see the continuation of the metal prices. We also know that the market has been heating up. In terms of M&A, we want to look at the opportunity set and what options there are for investing in some accretive transactions. So we'll look at that in connection with our cash balances and the expectations going forward midyear. And I'd say our general view is you don't borrow to pay a dividend. You borrow to invest, and you pay your dividends from cash flows. So that's the mentality that we would use when we look at the dividend. And I think Jinhee talked about the net cash, and we have no intention of hoarding cash on the balance sheet for a rainy day or anything like that. That's not what we want to do. We want our assets, including cash, to give us returns. So we'll look at that midyear. Okay. Thank you, everyone, for participating in the conference call and looking forward to reporting a good strong Q1 result to you in April.
Thank you, everyone. This will conclude today's conference call. You may now disconnect.