Investor Update

Mar 6, 2020

Press Release

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Anglo American Platinum Investors and Media Call. All participants will be in listen only mode. There will be an opportunity to ask questions later during the conference. Please note that this call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Chris Griffith. Please go ahead, sir. Thanks, Claudia. So thank you for joining me and the Finance Director, Craig Miller and also our Executive Head of Processing, Gary Humphries at short notice for the call. Unfortunately, we've had a material event at our Anglo Converter Plant or as we know ACP, which will impact our refined production and sales for this year. As you would have seen in the recently announced sends and media release that we've announced the temporary shutdown of the ACP, which is an integral part of our processing chain. As we're unable to complete processing our material, this has led us to declare force majeure. There were a series of incidents and extensive attempts at mitigation which were unsuccessful and ultimately led to the need to temporarily close the entire ACP. Firstly, the Phase A converter plant at Waterfall smelter in Rustenburg was damaged following a coal dust explosion in the converter on the February 10. Very fortunately, nobody was injured in the event and Phase A was shut down to secure a safe working environment and to begin the critical repairs, which is estimated to be complete in 2021. As per the normal business processes then, our Phase B unit, so we always have one of the two units in standby was then commissioned to take over from Phase A. In the process of ramping up Phase B to steady state, we detected water in the furnace. We then proceeded to do extensive testing and that was conducted to determine the source of the water with the most likely source being in the water cooling circuits of the furnace. After a number of potential leaking circuits were isolated, water in the furnace continued however to be observed. And this has led to a very high risk of explosion and the company has had no option but to temporarily shut down the Phase B unit to ensure the safety of all employees and to avoid a catastrophic event. Phase B has thus been shut down for repairs and that's anticipated to take approximately eighty days. As a result of the temporary closure of the entire ACP, Anglo American Platinum has had to declare force majeure to customers, suppliers of third party purchase of concentrate and suppliers of tolling material as we are unable to complete the processing of material during the converter repair. Whilst production from our own mines will continue and the concentrate from those mines will continue to be smelted at one of the four smelter complexes, production from our own mines as well as third party material will not be able to be converted to final production whilst the ACP is undergoing repairs. Our initial estimates indicate that this will have a significant impact on our refined production guidance. And as a result, we've decided to provide an indication of H1 twenty twenty, so the first half refined production guidance as well as revising our full year revised production outlook. Our new H1 twenty twenty, well, we've never given H1 guidance before, but so our guidance that we provide today for the first half is in total PGMs between eight fifty and one point zero five zero million ounces, platinum 400,000 to 450,000 ounces, palladium 300,000 to 350,000 ounces and rhodium 65,000 to 75,000 ounces. By the end of the year, we will expect to have made up some of that shortfall in refined production and to reduce the work in progress inventory. However, it will take us probably about two years to fully process this work and that should be completed during the course of 2022. Our revised full year 2020 refined production guidance is total PGMs between three point three million and three point eight million ounces. We previously guided 4,200,000 to 4,700,000 ounces. So you can see about 900,000 ounces will be impacted this year. Platinum 1,500,000 to 1,700,000 ounces that was previously 2,000,000 to 2,200,000, palladium 1,100,000 to 1,200,000 and that was previously 1,400,000 to 1,500,000 ounces. And then rhodium 250,000 to 350,000 ounces and we previously that was part of our other metals that previously unguided. Our key priorities are clearly to get operational as soon as possible without compromising on our safety standards and to seek to work with customers to limit the impact of these deferred shipments where possible. And to this end, we'll be engaging directly with customers and other key stakeholders. So now I will open up the line for questions for myself, Craig and Gary. Thank you very much. Operator? Or on the keypad on your screen. If you decide to withdraw the question, please press star then 2. Again, ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question, please press star then 1. We will pause to see if there are any questions. We have a question from Jason Fairclough from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hi, yes. Good afternoon, Chris. Thanks for this update. Just two quick ones for me. Are you able to give any indication of the cost impact? Should we just be thinking about higher costs? Or do those costs actually just get buried in inventory? Also, I'm just wondering if you could give us a little bit of color around the working capital, if you've done any dangerous math on what sort of build of working capital we should think about in dollar terms? Thanks Jason. Hi Jason. So Jason I don't have an estimate for you in terms of the cost impact at the moment. What we will do if we're so required to do so we will provide an update around our unit cost guidance for the year. But that's if there is a requirement for us to update from what we previously guided when we issued our results a few weeks ago. In terms of the working capital build, I don't have we don't have that just at the moment. But clearly it will be quite material for 2020 and then clearly it will start to unwind into 2021 and 2022. If I could just follow-up. So you've declared force majeure. Does that mean that there are no penalties to be paid here except in as much as you'll have to take the cost of the repair itself. But in terms of your customers you don't have any liability, any penalty to be paid to them? Jason, we're obviously working through that at the moment and engaging with our customers. And so we've obviously got different contractual commitments with them. Clearly the decision to declare force in the year was to mitigate any impact that could arise out of that. Okay. All right. Thanks for the color. The next question is from Chris Nicholson from R and B Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hi, Chris. Hi, Craig. Guys, could you just I I noticed the wording in the in the press release specifically talks to third party parks. So could I just confirm that you would continue processing as a matter of priority the material from the Bicco and Crandall, which are obviously your your JV share? I would imagine, secondly, that would be through Mortimer, if I'm not, if you could just confirm that. And then finally, just to frame up on my understanding of the ACP, can you still put the base metals through the BMR? Does the ACP just impact the PMR? Thanks a lot. Thanks, Chris. The answer to your first question is that we are unable to treat any material through the ACP. And so just to explain how that works, all of the mats that comes from all the furnaces, so the four furnace complexes all send their mats, so it's a product from the furnaces go to the one point. So this is the sharp end of the funnel and it all goes through the ACP before it can go to the BMR and then the PMR. So we are unable to treat any material. So we're not able to give any preferential treatment to any customer for example or even to our own material. So I think what we were clear to say whilst we will continue mining and our own mining concentrate will go through the smelters, We actually can't even we can't put our own material through the smelters either. So it will affect all sources of supply both own production, third parties or tolls and third parties include third parties and joint ventures. It will affect all of us for that period that we have the let's say the two point five months worth of shut. And so that concludes also then your second question which is you can't bypass the ACP to be able to get to the base metals. So it will mean that all base metals and precious metals will be impacted for the duration of the repair of Phase B, which is currently estimated to be somewhere in the region of eighty days. Okay. Thanks, Chris. The next question is from Patrick Mann from Bofa. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon and thanks very much for the call. I think following on from Chris' question, just in terms of the priority of metal, my understanding is that there's kind of a fixed period for tolling and POC where you assume it takes three months. Then so is there any does your metal notionally go to the back of the line? Or is it all done on a kind of pro rata basis here? So is everybody affected the same, I suppose, is the question? And then do you what are your refined or your final inventory balances like? Can should we assume that refined production guidance is going to be similar to the amount of net or sold? Or have you got anything in the cupboard that you can use to tie through this period? And then maybe the last thing is, is there no way to do toll refining yourselves or to perhaps sell concentrate or metal in process to somebody else who might have capacity? Thanks. Okay. So Chris, mean clearly we will work within the force majeure provisions with our customers to work through the metal. But our anticipation is that we would pro rata put everybody's metal through so everyone is treated fairly once we commence operations. But I don't think anyone goes to the back of the queue. I think that's a key point. We don't have anything in the cupboard. So we've given the sales, the refined and the sales guidance. You can see they're very close to each other. And so there's nothing in the cupboard that we'll be able to sell more metal than we refine. And then lastly on coal refining, mean that's clearly now something that we have now that we've declared force majeure, now that we've notified the market now clearly we can have some conversations with third parties to see if there's any potential to mitigate some of the losses that we've just announced. So we'll be going to our peers in the industry to see if there's any potential to do some toll refining. Thanks. That's clear. Thank you, Chris. Thanks, Patrick. The next question is from Richard Hatch from Berenberg. Please go ahead. Thanks, Chris, the call. Appreciate it. Just first one is just, are you expecting any impact on 2021 guidance at this point? Or perhaps you can just clarify that? And secondly, I suppose it wasn't disclosed the event wasn't disclosed before this just because you weren't quite sure of the exact impact and the need to declare force majeure, just to be clear? Okay. So on 2020 guidance, so I think it's a bit early for us now because we're to need to understand the quantity of metal that we'll get through the course of this year and then what our ability to catch up is in the following year. So that's still really early days for us now. And I think through the course probably at H1, we will be able to give more guidance as to what that may look like and the catch up. I think the real bottom line is that we are unlikely in the fullness of time to lose the value because we'll continue mining and as far as we can then that metal will still be available to be treated at some point. But I think it just is a little early now Richard to be able to provide 2021 guidance and we'll do that probably at the half year. And then the event was not disclosed. I mean we have now disclosed the event when the event became an event. So up to now because we've got the two converters, the event in the first one, yes, well that was a material event, but it meant that we could move over to Phase B. We have a second converter. And where we've had events between converters in the past, they haven't been notifiable to the market because we've had a spare converter and been able to manage that. The moment that we became unable to treat material through our second converter clearly then that was going to have an impact on our production and therefore an impact on the market and that's why immediately we've notified the market. So the moment that it was only last night we just got off a call with the Board this morning that we've decided and this is the course of action that we will be able to do. Then that's why immediately we have notified the market. Yes. Thanks, Chris. I appreciate that. Glad no one was injured. And just to be clear, so should we perhaps expect some kind of update on CapEx impact in maybe the half one? Yes. So Richard, if there is a need for us to adjust the CapEx guidance and the unit cost guidance we'll do that when we've got further information. So if there isn't certainly we'll be coming back to the market at H1. But if there's any changes we'll certainly let everybody know. But the current expectations, the range for CapEx, I think we're okay with that for the moment. But clearly we've got some work to do over the next few weeks. If those change materially, we'll come back to and let you know. Thanks. The next question is from Nkateko Matonsi from Investec Bank. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, Chris. Just to help me understand in terms of force majeure, my understanding was it needs to be an act of God. So we just wanna be clear that you can declare or you are able to declare a force majeure even though it's not an act of God. I also wanted to get a little bit of clarity in terms of the extent of damage on the A converter. How long do you expect the A converter to be offline? And the third question is what is the probability that the B converter takes longer than eighty days? Ankit Tekur. Thanks very much for the question. So acts of guard are force majeure events, but there are other events including explosions that are covered in the force majeure provisions. So in this particular case, we believe that now due to those circumstances we are unable to fulfill our contractual obligations therefore declaring force majeure. So no, it is one of the provisions within the force majeure clauses in our contract. On the Phase A, it's currently our anticipation that it will take until about the 2021. I think that's still a little bit conservative at the moment and Gary's team is certainly working at trying to bring that forward. But at the moment most of what takes up that time is the production of the high pressure coolers. So it's actually the long lead items as opposed to the time that it takes to actually install those things. So those are the things that as we stand now, I think our guidance is 2021. But clearly in that process we'll be trying to say are there ways that we can bring back the unit to sort of like basic readiness if we could to be able to if we had potential issue in the future to be able to switch over earlier. But as it stands now, second quarter twenty twenty one and then eighty days, again, that's probably our best guesstimate now being slightly conservative. But I think Gary will not like me to say that he thinks we can do that a bit early. I think we it's really early days now. The team are planning to the minutest detail now the repair. We've got to rebuild the half and we've got to move across the coolers from Phase A into Phase B. And then in the meantime in the background we'll be manufacturing also in long lead items the spare coolers for Phase B. So that process is underway. It's our best guess at the moment. But we're not being that's not our overly aggressive guess as to what this could look like. But eighty days we think is a realistic guideline of what it will take us to repair phase b. Nkateko, do you have any further questions? No, nothing. Okay, thank you. The next question is from Yana Marez from Anglo American. Please go ahead. Yes, So, yeah, it's from Felix Nginia at Bloomberg. Sorry. You used my login details to dial in. Okay. Hi, Can you please Yeah. Hi, Chris. Are you are you able to name some of the the local companies that you were to refining the metaphor just to confirm? Yes. So all our normal partners, Felix, so Xibanya, Xiyanda, Arm, who and else? RB Plat. And RB Plat. Those are the parties that we treat material for. Okay. Thank you. Next question is from Myles Alphrop from UBS. Please go ahead. Thanks. Just a when you restart the ACP, will you have any flexibility as to which products you produce? Clearly, there's a much bigger deficit on the palladium side and rhodium side than on the platinum side. So can you kind of try and produce more of the PGMs that are wanted? And then the second question is just more looking at the second converter. When was that last used? Have you been understanding on CapEx sort of over the last few years now? Thank you. So the answer to your questions, Myles, thanks for that, is no, you can't differentiate the metals. So the metals come out in the basket. They'll go through the ACP. We'll then take out the base metals first and then you've got the rest of the precious metals. And then through the process, they sort of go through a big long sausage machine and depending on the part of the process you're in, it will either drop out platinum, palladium, rhodium and the other precious metals. So they each have a sequence that they get dropped out in. So you can't prioritize, for example, to selectively drop out more rhodium or selectively drop out platinum first. They've all got different times that it takes to drop out of the process and that's all as part of one long sausage machine. And then secondly, your question on CapEx is no, we don't think we've been under spending on CapEx. As a matter of fact, over the last five years or so, our spend on CapEx in the processing division, but in particular around smelting has risen materially as we've put smelters on to very rigorous and brought forward some of the timing of smelter rebuilds. So we would argue that no, we haven't been underspending our capital as opposed to rather we've been spending a bit more CapEx on processing and smelting than we have in the past. And about a year ago, we switched over to Phase A and Phase B was running at that particular time. So there was absolutely no issue and we had introduced some new designs into Phase A. So we wanted to make sure that we had Phase B on standby just to make sure if there were any issues with the new designs that we'd be able to switch back across to Phase B at any time, which is what we were doing now. So now again, we have just spent a very significant amount of money on Phase A and have upgraded it in a range of different ways to make sure that it has the latest technology, has the latest designs And at the right time when we felt confident enough, we would then have sort of bring some of these designs into Phase B as well. So no, Myles, I don't think well, I'm convinced that we have not been underspending on CapEx and this has not been the event either the coal dust explosion portion or this issue now with the leaking out of the converters have not been underspend of capital issues. The issue with the water leaks now, the reason that we're stopping is just because we can't isolate and detect the source of that water. And so rather than take a chance because if we have an explosion with water in that furnace then we will be out for more than a year with no production from Anglo Platinum. So I think it was much more prudent both for the safety of our staff and also for the expedited delivery of material to rather stop and repair Phase B. And we'll be in production a lot faster if we do that, but it is going to mean that we need to shut down for a period of time. But rather than take a risk both for safety or for having a catastrophic event, we decided to make that call now. Okay. Is Phase A and Phase B the same size? Or if you got I mean, is Phase B bigger than Phase A and such? I think they're the same size. Gary, can you confirm that? Yes, Chris. They're identical or largely identical units, same throughput capacity. Of course, is more recent vintage because we rebuilt it recently. Yes. Thank you. Thanks, Gary. Thanks, Myles. The next question is from Emily Gosden from The Times. Please go ahead. Hi, there. First of all, I just wondered if you could tell me for hello? Hi. I wonder if, first of all, you could tell me for each of platinum, palladium and rhodium, how much of the global market does this take out this year? I don't know. Emily, can we get back to you on that? I mean, we know the data, but offhand, just won't be able to reel that off, but we can certainly provide that data to you in the next couple of minutes. Emma, we'll Thank be in contact with you. And in terms of the the kind of causes of this, I mean, you just said it's not underspunned. But does this not kind of suggest some pretty serious safety savings? I mean, presumably, the cold has build up, presumably, you should have process in place to stop that. And you're saying a number of potential leaks isolated. You you kind of you're still not sure where it's coming from. Does this suggest some kind of pretty serious safety issues? No, I would argue that it's because of the need for ensuring safety that we're taking the actions that we are taking. One of the things that you want to avoid at all costs for the smelter is that you don't get water into smelter. And the moment that we detected water in the furnace, Gary and his team over the last two odd weeks or so have been spending extensive amount of time pressure testing the cooling systems. And remember, cooling system sits in the middle of big thick copper blocks. So it's very difficult. You can't see it, for example, from the inside of a hot furnace as to where leaks are coming from. But you can pressure test them with water to ensure that your systems are intact. And through that process we have identified some areas that a few we were able to isolate and still be safe. But when Gary and his team detected water in that furnace and we were unable to know where it was coming from rather than take a chance we've had to stop that. We will take those coolers out, replace them with others and then we will do tests on those coolers that we've taken out to determine where the leaks have come from. But it's exactly for the reason that we want to be safe that we've taken the course of action that we have. I just wondered also how many employees there are at the plant that have had to be presumably evacuated or whatever? And just to differentiate between the two explosions you've had, you're saying that the second one with the water in the furnace poses risk of a catastrophic event. Was the first explosion in Phase A like much more minor? Could that have been catastrophic with people just happened to not be in in the wrong place at the wrong time? So I'll let Gary talk too as well. I'll just make a point is that we've protocols in place that we call critical controls. For example, when we are starting up a new phase and that's what was happening on the phase a when we had the coal dust explosion, that when you do a startup at that time then all people are removed from the furnace floor so there's nobody there at the time. And when we did the startup, it's quite a convoluted explanation as to how we had the coal dust explosion that we were feeding coal into the furnace When the furnace launched at the end of the launch, the heat, fire at the end of the launch went out, there was still continued feeding that was not noticed that the fire had gone out and there was a buildup. And when the fire came back on in the launch there was coal in the converter itself and there was an explosion contained within the converter. But nobody is allowed near the converter during startup processes and it was exactly because of our safety protocols in place that nobody was hurt. So again on both counts I think our safety processes meant that nobody has been exposed to these events. Gary, don't know if you want to add anything to that? Because I think you've covered it adequately. I think the important thing is the start up protocols with the launch ignition protocols and withdraw people from the operation. We understand that it's high risk procedure, so we withdraw people from the area. The thing about the flame out is that we had also call it a positive pressure event at the same time due to a lower downstream, which had come online. And as a result of that, had the puff of coal dust. So I guess a line up of two or three issues, which caused the coal dust explosion, the flame out and then the ignition and the backup of coal dust from the blower downstream. But I don't want to go into too much more detail on that. The important thing is that nobody was injured and we've taken the right decision regarding Phase B. Thanks, Gary. Emily, does that answer your question? Thank you. The next question is from Efraim Ravi from Citi. Please go ahead. I just want to know if there were any insurance claims that you could kind of get some money from as a result of this. Is the whole process insured? Yes. So if I'm saying just in terms of the insurance, we have engaged with our insurers. A loss adjuster has been appointed. We'll obviously go through the process in terms of business interruption and it's something that we're working on as a group at the moment. And so yes, so that has taken place. So in terms your second question around the restart, there's clearly a protocol that we need to follow in terms of the legal agreement. But our intention is certainly to try and treat everybody as appropriately as possible that we're able to do within the framework of the agreement. But that's obviously something that we'll now be working through with the various parties over the coming weeks. Thank you. Just on the first insurance, can you just give us an order of magnitude? Is it in the tens of millions dollars or is it hundreds of millions? Yes. So look, as I said, last adjuster has just been appointed and we'll work through that. As Chris outlined a little bit earlier, the impact for us in terms of production, refined production and effectively sales is about 900,000 PGM ounces lower than what we had previously guided. At current spot prices that equates to about billion lower EBITDA than what we would have realized or roughly $1,100,000,000 Clearly the impact at the half year will be more significant. I think the increase is round up to about billion at the half year dollars 1,600,000,000.0. But as Chris said, we will look to mitigate that in the second half as we reduce the full impact of the lower refined production and sales. And therefore the full year impact on EBITDA at current spot prices would be about ZAR18 billion lower or ZAR1.1 billion. And all of these are obviously taken into the mix as we go through the discussions with the various stakeholders. Thank you. The next question is from Arnold Van Rhone from Nedbank. Just a follow-up on the earlier question around third party material. I just want to make sure I properly understand this. So will you be turning away third party concentrate? Or will you still be smelting that concentrate and accumulating the mat? Or does it imply third party material will accumulate in a concentrate form off-site? So the answer to that question is, Arnold, is that something we'll have to work together with our third party deliveries to determine. As stands now, force majeure notice will be notified to third parties to say we can't accept any concentrate because we can't deal with it because it's at the receipt of concentrate that ownership transfers. There may however be a discussion to be held with third parties to say if we get some of that material in and get it smelted, it will reduce some of the pipeline and then the payment terms for some of the contracts could be reduced. That's detailed though that will have to be discussed with third parties. But as it stands now, force majeure will indicate that the company cannot accept material, but then the provisions of force majeure mean that you will try and work with third parties to mitigate some of those effects as far as possible. And some of the things that you mentioned may be part of that mitigation that we can consider. Thank you very much, Chris. That clarifies it. The next question is from R. Hochreiter from NOAH. Please go ahead. Hello, Chris. Sorry about your misfortune. Did I get the number correct? 900,000 ounces of six e for the year. Is that the right number? That's the right number, Rene. Yes. Okay. So about half of that is Refined, refined and sales. Refined, okay. Sorry, just to be clear, refined and sold, yes. About half of that is platinum, so that should put the platinum market into a deficit for the year. A quarter of that is palladium, so that should put the palladium deficit into more than 2,000,000 ounces for the year. Have I got the sort of ballpark numbers correct? Yes, Raina, I don't think we want to talk about that. I mean at the moment what we're trying to do is make sure we can get metal to the market, get metal to our customers. This is not about trying to have increasing deficits of metals. Exactly what that will look like in what's turning to be a pretty uncertain time in the world at the moment, we'll have to see how that pans out. But I mean our major focus is for our customers to get going as quickly as we can so that those that supply material to us, we can take that material as quickly as we can. There's other businesses that rely on us. And at the same time, there's customers that need our metal and we're trying to get back as quickly as we can. What the implications on the market will be, we'll have to see. Good. I hope you recover quickly. Thank you, Rene. The next question is from Liam Fitzpatrick from DB. Please go ahead. Thank you. Two questions from my side. Just wanted to confirm in terms of mine or concentrate production. So you're saying there's going be absolutely no slowdown in terms of your production levels and that will fully build up on the balance sheet through the first half? And then secondly, I know you don't want to comment too much on the market, but what is your sense in terms of the market's ability to absorb this over the next two to three months? Do you think there are sufficient stockpiles throughout the supply chain to avoid production cuts further down? Thank you. So as it stands now, I think that is an important point is that the plan is still to continue mining as much as possible. Suppose that the metal is not lost to the market and as quickly as we can catch up we will. So I think that is a good point. And as far as we can, we will continue. And my guess is although I can't speak for the third parties, my guess is that we will be able to my guess is the third parties would also seek to continue mining and so that when they can be on a fairly even basis supplied to us, they will. And then the final point around the market is that we contractually have about 60% to 70% of our volumes are contracted and it's still our expectation that we will meet our obligations for the year to our current contractual customers. And then I mean clearly there is still in the greater scheme of things still the ability for the market to be more evenly balanced to a substitution of platinum back into palladium. We all know that it's probably going to take a bit more time. But there is combined between the metals and ability to supply all the metals to our customers that they need. That's all. Thank you. The next question is from Sergey Donskoye from Societe Generale. Please go ahead. Yes. Thank you very much. I have just one question left and I'm sorry if it was asked at the beginning of the call. I understand that you will be accumulating some inventories even if you increase processing in the second half of the year. And I appreciate it's too early to give any guidance for 2021 as you mentioned before. But just for us to understand the flexibility that you may have, what sort of a headroom will you have on the system assuming that Phase B is back and running as it's supposed to be to increase production above the level that were supposed to be kind of churned out in 2021 in terms of kind of what sort of a spare capacity do you have to run through this backlog of mined concentrate? Thanks Sergey. So we haven't provided them. Those certainly some of the things that we're still busy working on at the moment. But I think if we said that we would catch up the 900,000 ounces in two years, then roughly I think you should just take half half at the moment just to get a feel for what some of that catch up may look like and then we'll give more definitive guidance at the half year. Gary, would you have any problem if Serge used that sort of rule of thumb? I think that's a pragmatic answer at the moment. Obviously, chain is very complex and it depends on agreements in terms of what concentrates and we do not smell. If they come in later then obviously there's bottleneck in different parts of the process. So I think half half over the next two years is pregnant. Thank you very much. We have a follow-up question from Patrick Mann from Bofa. Please go ahead. Hi guys. I just realized your previous guidance didn't include the tolling ounces. So you've cut the you know, as this total guidance, I just wanna check, it's it's your own mines and purchase of concentrate. And I just want to get a feel because of the impact on the market, how many tolling ounces you were expecting and then now what you're expecting to be able to produce? So Patrick, I'll tell you, let me get back to you on that. I just want to think through because some of that clearly will depend on what our anticipation is of catch up in the second half of the year. If we can't give any more definitive guidance than we have now, we'll let you know. But as it stands now, I mean clearly there's an expectation that through our third parties we would try to catch up as quickly as we could. Exactly what that looks like, my guess is going to have to also come out between in discussions between ourselves and our third party suppliers in the next few days. And then we'll probably be able to get a feel. I think for our currently as it stands, I think that's about the best guidance that we can give now. But let me just have a look with the team as if we could if there's anything else we need to say, we'll get back to you on this. Okay. Thanks. But just to make absolutely sure that 900,000,000 is not including Sibanye, so the biggest tolling customer. So that 900,000,000 is just the Amplatz mined and POC? That's correct, Patrick. It's on a like for like basis. So exactly how the 4.2 to the 4.7 with Thoman, it's exactly the same. The 3.3 and the 3.8 is on the same basis. Got it. Thank you. The next question is from Adrian Hammond from SBG. Please go ahead. Yes. I have a question for Gary on phase b units. How long can you run that for uninterrupted? In other words, if you're requiring maintenance work to be done, when is the first point you need that to be? And then for Chris, just are there any savings measures you can implement to offset the loss sales, please? So should I go first? You go, Gary. So once the repair to Phase B is done, once we've got the coolers in place, there should be no impediment at all to any Phase B until the new repairs to Phase A are complete and that is what our plan is to change over to the good rebuild units as soon as we can and getting that to quarter two twenty twenty one is certainly not going to be or shouldn't be any difficulty for us. Adrian, just on thanks, Gary. On savings, as it stands now, we are still planning to run normally. So all of our normal improvement projects, etcetera, at the operations, we would expect all that to continue. Clearly there will be additional costs. Craig spoke a bit earlier about how much of that gets picked up by insurance. All that we're very unsure of. I mean clearly there will be some extra costs of processing that we'll only know in the next couple of months what that looks like. But for the rest of the business, we're hoping to run those as close as possible to normal. And certainly in the mining production, continue mining, continue the normal focus, get that material, put it through the smelters and get the smelted mat ready to be able to be processed at ACP as soon as it's up and running. So hopefully for the rest of the business, it will be business as normal. But clearly this is going to be an unusual situation and you can imagine that we'll be turning over again every penny that we have to make sure that where there's possibilities of savings we would be. But for the rest of the business, for example, what we're not going to be doing is trying to send people home for a couple of months at the mines or something because if we lose the value of the mined material ultimately we would lose that value forever. And it still is our anticipation of being able to get that metal to market to get that metal to our customers that need the metal. So yes, be turning over every penny, but at the moment it's for the rest of the business, business as normal. Thanks. And just to understand the 900,000 ounces reduction that two year unwind of that, is that effectively being cleared by what is their capacity in your system to make that up? Yes. Okay. It's not just a normalization of your inventory? No. No, this will be a buildup of inventory that where we've got some capacity, we would use that capacity to unwind the inventory. Okay, got you. Thanks. The next question is from Alan Sikone from Business Bay. Please go ahead. Hi, there. Chris, I can see Tommy, Natasha Fulian, who's your replacement. She's head of processing at Anglo American. Is she involved in this process at all? The answer is absolutely. Natasha is on the line if you want to say hi. So Natasha has been working very closely with us and she officially takes over on the April 1, but we've been working very closely together and she and Gary have been working very closely together to ensure that we all linked up, tied up and that in the handover to come that Natasha is 100% up to you. Fair enough. You happy to confirm that, Natasha? Hi, Chris. Hi, everybody. Yes, I can ask you to confirm that. And then the second one for me, if I may. Chris and to me, knowing what you know of your peers, is there spare capacity in the converters and refiners to take your material? And any idea of how much that might be? The answer is we don't know. I mean, know where we think some of that potential may be. But I think we would the answer is we don't know, Alan. We would have to start engaging with our peers to see if they've got any ability to pick up some of the slack. But we haven't clearly we haven't been able to have that conversation yet because this is such a recent event and clearly we need to advise the market. We've now advised the market. Now we could go to peers and start having that conversation. But we just don't know the answer to that question yet. Are the refineries in Europe or The states that you could call on as well? Or are those too small? I think the answer generally is that they are too small and are not really configured for the metal that we have. But I mean, clearly, Gary, over next few days is going to be doing exactly that, calling everybody with from a blowtorch to a furnace to see if something we can do and get help with. Chris, thank you very much. Okay. Thanks, Evan. We have a follow-up question from Sergey Donskoy from Societe Generale. Please go ahead. Yes, thank you. Just one more small thing just to make sure the numbers that we have are correct. If you could remind us what was your plan in terms of third party tolling volumes for this year before the emergency? I understand that you don't provide guidance for what might be now, but what before would be helpful. Thank you. Yes, Sige, we don't provide that guidance. It's dependent upon the receipt that we receive. So that's the reason why we don't provide that guidance. You have to direct that question to Subanya. I think we're going to have to call it a day. And to the operator, thank you very much for the time given to us to be able to take questions on what's clearly a very difficult situation for us. But if you would like to if there are any further questions, I urge you if it's media questions, please reach out to Jana Marie. And if it's IR questions, please reach out to Emma Chapman, and we'll be able to get back to you. So thanks very much, everyone, and thanks, operator. Thanks, Gary, Natasha, for joining us as well.