20190501 Analyst Presentation -...

TSX GUY guygold.com

Optimized LOM Plan Workshop Presentation – May 1, 2019

DRIVING CHANGE, POSITIONED FOR GROWTH

GUYANA GOLDFIELDS INC. TSX GUY guygold.com

FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION AND LEGAL DISCLAIMERS

2

The data, information, and opinions contained or referred (the “Information”) in this presentation of Guyana Goldfields Inc. (the “Company”) contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements.” Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements, or developments in our industry, to differ materially from the anticipated results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts and are generally, but not always, identified by the words “expected”, “targeted”, “advanced”, “appears”, “scheduled”, “guidance”, “on plan”, “test”, “potential” and similar expressions, or that events or conditions “will”, “would”, “may”, “could” or “should” occur. Information inferred from the interpretation of drilling results and information concerning mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates may also be forward-looking statements, as such information constitutes a prediction of what might be found to be present when and if a project is actually developed. Forward-looking statements in this document also include statements regarding: the Company’s strategy, projects, priorities and plans (including the Company’s proposed life of mine optimization plan at the Aurora Gold Mine), future financial or operating performance, business prospects, planned capital expenditures, cost reduction initiatives, exploration programs, plans and targets, corporate social responsibility initiatives, potential upgrades of mineral resources to mineral reserves, and certain corporate objectives, goals and plans for 2019.

There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate. Actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements, and readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially or otherwise from the Company’s expectations include, among others: risks related to fluctuations in mineral prices; uncertainties related to raising sufficient financing to fund planned work in a timely manner and on acceptable terms; changes in planned work resulting from weather, logistical, technical or other factors; the possibility that results of work will not fulfill expectations and realize the perceived potential of the Company’s properties; uncertainties involved in the estimation of resources and reserves; the possibility that required permits may not be obtained on a timely manner or at all; the possibility that capital and operating costs may be higher than currently estimated and may preclude commercial development or render operations uneconomic; the possibility that the estimated recovery rates may not be achieved; risk of accidents, equipment breakdowns and labour disputes or other unanticipated difficulties or interruptions; the possibility of cost overrun or unanticipated expenses in the work program; the risk of environmental contamination or damage resulting from the Company's operations; risks associated with title to mineral properties; and other risks and uncertainties discussed appear elsewhere in the Company’s documents filed from time to time with the and Canadian securities regulators.

Certain forward-looking statements contained herein may also be considered to be future-oriented financial Information or a financial outlook for the purposes of applicable Canadian securities laws. Future oriented financial Information and financial outlook contained herein about prospective financial performance, financial position or cash flows are based on assumptions about future events, including economic conditions and proposed courses of action, based on the applicable management team’s assessment of the relevant Information available to them at the applicable time, and to become available in the future. In particular, the Information contains projected operational Information for future periods which are based on a number of material assumptions and factors. The actual results of the applicable operations for any period could vary from the amounts set forth in these projections, and such variations may be material. Further, there is no assurance or guarantee with respect to the prices at which any securities of the Company will trade, and such securities may not trade at prices that may be implied herein. See above for a discussion of the risks that could cause actual results to vary from such forward-looking statements.These forward-looking statements are based on a number of assumptions, including assumptions regarding general market conditions, the availability of financing for proposed transactions and programs on reasonable terms, the cost of exploration and development and the ability of outside service providers to deliver services in a satisfactory and timely manner. Forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs, estimates and opinions of the Company’s management on the date the statements are made. Except as expressly required by applicable securities laws, the Company undertakes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements in the event that management’s beliefs, estimates or opinions, or other factors, should change.

This presentation uses the terms “Inferred Resource”, “Indicated Resource”, “Measured Resource” and “Mineral Resource”. The Company advises readers that although these terms are recognized and required by Canadian securities regulations (under National Instrument 43-101), the US Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize these terms. Readers are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves. In addition, "Inferred Resources" have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that any part of an Indicated or Inferred Mineral Resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under applicable Canadian securities laws, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources may not form the basis of feasibility or pre-feasibility studies, or economic studies except for a Preliminary Assessment as defined and permitted under National Instrument 43-101. Readers are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an Inferred Resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable. The Mineral Resources stated in this presentation are not Mineral Reserves and, in the absence of a current feasibility study, do not demonstrate economic viability. The determination of Mineral Reserves can be affected by various factors including environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, sociopolitical, and marketing issues.

For further information on the Aurora Gold Mine, see the Technical Report entitled, “Technical Report on the Aurora Gold Mine, Guyana” on the Company’s profile on SEDAR (the “RPA Report”). The compilation of the RPA Report, including the updated reserve and resource model and life of mine plan was completed by Jason Cox, P.Eng., David Ross, P.Geo.,and Katharine Masun,P.Geo., of RPA, who are independent Qualified Persons as identified by National Instrument 43-101 and have reviewed, approved and verified the technical content of this presentation.

Unless stated otherwise herein, all scientific and technical data contained in this presentation has been reviewed, approved and verified by Mr. Ron Stewart (P.Geo) who is a qualified person for the purposes of NI 43-101 and is a member of the Association of Professional Geoscientists of Ontario. Mr. Stewart serves as Senior Vice President of Technical Services and Corporate Development for the Company.


FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION AND LEGAL DISCLAIMERS

3

Disclaimer Respecting Publicly Sourced Information

Certain of the Information, including, but not limited to, Information concerning the Company and members of its noted peers, has been taken from or is based upon publicly available sources. The Informationalso includes industry data and other statistical Information obtained from independent publications, research reports and other published independent sources. Although the Company believes its sources to bereliable and has no knowledge that would indicate that any Information taken from or based upon those documents, records, publications, reports or other public sources are untrue or incomplete, the Companydoes not provide any representation or assurance as to the accuracy or completeness of the Information, or the appropriateness of the Information for any particular analytical purpose and does not assumeand expressly disclaims any liability in relation to such Information taken from or based upon those documents, records, publications, reports and other public sources, or for any failure by such entities todisclose publicly events or facts that may have occurred or that may affect the significance or accuracy of any such Information, but that are unknown to the Company. The Company has no intention andundertakes no obligation to update or revise any such Information or data, whether as a result of new Information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law. The Company has not soughtor obtained consent from any third party to the use herein of previously published Information. The use of such Information should not be viewed as any third party indicating support for the views expressed bythe Company herein.

Non-IFRS Measures

This presentation makes reference to certain non-IFRS financial performance measures. These measures are not recognized measures under IFRS, do not have a standardized meaning prescribed by IFRSand may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. Rather, the Company believes that these measures provide investors an improved ability to evaluate the underlyingperformance of the Company. Non-IFRS measures have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation nor as a substitute for analysis of the Company’s financial Information reportedunder IFRS. Non-IFRS measures used in this presentation include “Average Gold Operating Cash Costs (Including Royalty)”, “Average Gold Operating Cash Costs (Excluding Royalty)”, “Average Gold Mine-Site All-in Sustaining Cost”, “All-in Sustaining Cost”, and “Cash Costs Per Ounce – Before Royalty”, as referenced below. For further details on certain of these non-IFRS measures, please refer to the “Non-IFRS Performance Measures” section in the Company’s latest MD&A available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

Securities Laws

This presentation does not constitute an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities discussed herein in any jurisdiction where such would be prohibited. This presentation is not an offer to sell, or asolicitation of an offer to purchase, any securities in the United States. The securities referred to in this presentation will not be registered under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933 and may not be offered or sold inthe United States except pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933 and applicable state securities laws. The Information contained in this presentation doesnot and is not intended to constitute a “valuation”, “formal valuation”, “appraisal”, “prior valuation”, or a “report, statement or opinion of an expert” for purposes of any securities legislation in Canada orotherwise.

Data Verification

In October 2018, the Company implemented the Fusion Suite integrated data management system to accommodate data storage and management of geological, geotechnical, geophysical, geochemical,downhole survey, mapping, QA/QC, and sample data at the Aurora Gold Mine. In February 2019, the Company audited 7.5% of the master diamond drill hole database completed on its Mining Licence from2004 to year end 2018. The audit included checking drill holes for errors in collar location, survey, and assay data. The latter involved comparing 11,104 digital assay records from the master database to 176digital laboratory certificates. The Company did not identify any material limitations in verifying the data.


AGENDA

4

Introduction Scott Caldwell President & CEO

Geology Boaz Wade Exploration Leader

Resource Model Ron Stewart SVP, Technical Services & Corporate Development

Reserves/Optimized LOM Plan Forbes Gemmell VP, Corporate Development

Operations Update Suresh Kalathil SVP, COO

Financials Chris Stackhouse Interim CFO

Exploration Boaz Wade Exploration Leader

CSR Strategy Perry Holloway SVP, Strategy & Corporate Affairs

Conclusion Scott Caldwell President & CEO


WELL ESTABLISHED GOLD PRODUCER

• 22+ years active presence in Guyana

• Performing to highest H&S standards and exceeded one million person-hours without a Lost Time Injury¹

• Major local economic contributor:

– One of country’s largest employers

– 96% Guyanese workforce

– ~US$30M+ annual local payroll

– One of largest foreign investments in Guyana’s history

– 250+ Guyanese vendors used

• Largest gold producer in Guyana mining 25% of all gold in-country

– Approximately 4% of Guyana’s GDP (2018)

• Guyana is the only English speaking country in South America / legal system based on English law

• Pro-Mining Government, democratically elected

– Royalty rate (NSR): <$1,000/oz US@ 5%, >$1,000/oz US @8%

– Corporate income tax rate: 25.0%

Source: Company reports1. As at March 18, 2019

5

Attractive Asset Package Located in Guyana


POSITIVE TRANSFORMATION IS WELL ADVANCED

6

Ensuring Long-Term Value of Aurora is Realized

Enhancing ExecutiveLeadership

• Four significant recent senior management changes (Operations, Exploration, Talent, Country Management)

• Streamlined communications and accountability

• CEO succession plan underway

Board Renewal Well Advanced

• New Non-Executive Chairman role and 4 new independent Board members

In-Depth Review of Resource Model

• RPA Report released in March 2019 addressed key issues with grade

• Updated reserves and resources model and LOM Plan to allow for more reliable production and cost forecasting

• 2019 production and cost guidance incorporate results of RPA Report

Operational Improvements Underway

• Optimized Life of Mine Plan released on April 30, 2019 which includes several opportunities not captured in the RPA Report

Underground Exploration• Licensed and permitted for underground exploration decline

• Approved to begin access to higher grade mill feed

Refocused Exploration• Refocus exploration primarily on high-return brownfield exploration opportunities

• 30,000 m drill program in 2019 to target conversion of resources to reserves

GEOLOGY


AURORA GEOLOGIC SETTING

• Situated in the Paleoproterozoic Guiana Shield

• Orogenic Gold Province hosted in granite –greenstone terrain

• Regional structure dominated by compressional strain imparting a strong NW-SE penetrative cleavage

• Guiana Shield – 110MM oz Gold Province

• Geological extension of the West African, Birimian and Tarkwaian gold province.

• Continuous gold bearing terrain extending over 2,000 km parallel to the Atlantic coast.

• Significant Gold Endowment: El Callao (18M oz); Las Christinas (17MMM oz); Gross Rosebel (13.7MM oz); Nassau (9MM oz); Toroparu (10MM oz); Brisas (10MM oz); Merian (9.0MM oz); Aurora (6.5MM oz); Omai (5MM oz)

• Under-explored compared to other well known granite-greenstone terrains (Yilgarn, Abitibi, Ashanti)

8

Source: Bardoux et al, Geologic Survey of Canada, 2018

Geologic Reconstruction of South America and West Africa

Aurora


MINE GEOLOGY

• Orogenic Gold Province hosted in granite –greenstone terrain

• Regional structure dominated by compressional strain imparting a strong NW-SE penetrative cleavage

• Aurora Deposit Comprised of two distinct mineralized hosts:

1. Rory’s Knoll Diorite

• 175m diameter, intrusive pipe traced to 2.0km in depth

• Stockwork / quartz flooded mineralized zone

2. Satellite Volcanoclastic Zones

• East Walcott, Mad Kiss, Aleck Hill zones;

• Fold hinge and vein dominant

9

Aurora Mine Geology

Source: RPA and Company reports


RECENT WORK

• Updated geological understanding based on:

• 3 years of production experience

• Blasthole data analysis

• Pit mapping

• 50,000 metres of core relogged

• 12,801 metres (88 holes) of new diamond drilling including oriented core control on some holes

• Orogenic Gold Province hosted in granite – greenstone terrain

• Recognition of L-Tectonite strain rather than shearing & lateral displacement

• Recognition of isoclinal fold geometries within volcanoclastics

• Recognition of correlation of gold mineralization with quartz percentages

10

Mad Kiss, Hole MKD-02L-Tectonite Strain

Source: Company reports


IMPROVED GEOLOGICAL UNDERSTANDING Fold Control to Gold Mineralization

• Current understanding suggests gold mineralization is controlled by fold closures as opposed to mineralized shear zones

• Structure characterized by penetrative cleavage / foliation striking ~3000

• Fold hinge lines plunge 700 to 800 to the NE

• Continuity of mineralization along the Z-Axis (good plunge continuity) and short horizontal (X-Y) dimensions

• Rory’s Knoll diorite characterized by a broad zone of brittle deformation, preferentially mineralized

• In satellite deposits gold mineralization concentrated in fold hinges and as foliation parallel veins in fold limbs


11

Short X-Axis

Short Y-Axis

Long Z-Axis

FoldHingeFold

Hinge

TSX GUY guygold.com

RESOURCE MODEL


SCOPE OF WORK

• Geology Domains

• Four separate models: 1) RK/EW; 2) MK; 3) AH; 4) AH-UG

• Domaining based on geology, structure, quartz percentages, grade distribution

• Data Verification & Analysis

• 1,712 DD holes @ 422,676m drilling; 1,325 RC holes, 102,775 Blastholes

• Statistical analysis, capping, compositing, spatial analysis (variography)

• Grade Estimation

• Combination of OK and ID2

• Verification included statistical tests (nearest neighbour); visual, blasthole model, production records

• Reporting

• Classification according to varigraphy, geometry, drill hole spacing

• OP within Whittle shells; UG outside shells

13

Four Separate Resource Models

Source: RPA


RORY’S KNOLL

• 513 Diamond Drill Holes; 21,714 assays

• Hard boundary wireframes at 0.4 g/t Au plus lithology

• Assays capped to 35 g/t Au in RK; 10 g/t and 25 g/t Au in EWK; 6.8% of metal removed

• Composited to 2.0m

• 5m x 5m x 5m blocks; sub-blocking to half in each direction;

• Ordinary Kriging; RK high grade (>5.0 g/t) restricted to 33 m x 33m x 15m

• Classification

• Measured: 1/3 variogram range

• Indicated: ½ variogram range plus elevation consideration & clean up of isolated blocks

• Inferred: based on elevation, non-indicated below -800m RL; all blocks below -1400m RL

14

Rory’s Knoll Intrusive Domain

Source: RPA


MAD KISS

15

• 120 Diamond Drill Holes; 780 assays

• Hard boundary wireframes of QFP

• Assays capped to 35 g/t Au; 12% of metal removed

• Composited to 2.0m

• 5m x 5m x 5m blocks; sub-blocking to half in each direction

• Ordinary Kriging

• Classification

• Measured: none

• Indicated: first pass interpolated bocks with 50m or less spacing & at least 2 drill holes.

• Inferred: All other blocks assigned as inferred

Mad Kiss QFP Intrusive Domain

Source: RPA


ALECK HILL & SATELLITE ZONES

16


• Quartz Percentage model as underlying physical control

• Assays capped to 35 g/t Au for 50-100% Qtz; 25 g/t for 20-50% Qtz; 10 g/t for 5-20% Qtz and 3 g/t for 0-5% Qtz; 10% of the metal removed

• 4 Qtz Domains created by IK interpolation, creating a hard boundaries, gold grade interpolation by OK

• Classification

• Measured: none

• Indicated: assigned manually to areas with good grade continuity & supported by 50m spaced drill holes.


Relationship Between Percent quartz and Gold Grades

Source: RPA


ALECK HILL UNDERGROUND

17


• Hard boundary wireframes at 1.5 g/t together with dominant structural trends

• Assays capped to 22 g/t Au; 6% of the metal removed

• 4 Domains; interpolation used OK and ID2

• 5m x 5m x 5m blocks; sub-blocking to half in each direction;

• Classification

• Measured: none

• Indicated: first pass interpolated bocks with 50m or less spacing, restricted above -470m RL


Aleck Hill Underground Domain


UPDATED MINERAL RESOURCE STATEMENT

18

Notes:1. CIM (2014) definitions were followed for Mineral Resources. Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves2. Open pit Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 0.52 g/t Au for saprolite and 0.70 g/t Au for fresh rock, and underground Mineral Resources are reported at a cut-off grade of 1.2 g/t Au for

Rory’s Knoll area, and 1.7 g/t Au for other areas. Cut-off grades are based on a price of US$1,500 per ounce of gold and gold recoveries dependent on mine method, material type, and/or location.3. Minimum mining widths of 5 m for open pit and 3 m for underground were used.4. Bulk density is 2.8 t/m3 for fresh mineralization and 1.73 t/m3 for saprolite mineralization.5. Stockpile data based on EOY 2018.6. Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves.7. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability.8. Numbers may not add due to rounding.9. The mineral resource estimate was prepared by David Ross, P.Geo., and Katharine Masun, P.Geo., both of RPA Inc., “qualified persons” under NI 43-101 and independent of the Company.10. The Company confirms that there are no known legal, political, environmental, or other risk factors that could materially affect the development of the Mineral Resources

(Mt) (g/t Au) (koz) (Mt) (g/t Au) (koz) (Mt) (g/t Au) (koz) (Mt) (g/t Au) (koz)Open Pit

Rory's Knoll 4.4 2.68 382 1.5 2.58 120 5.9 2.66 503 - - -East Walcott - - - 1.3 2.30 96 1.3 2.30 96 0.6 3.02 55Aleck Hill - - - 0.7 4.04 94 0.7 4.04 94 1.2 2.25 90Walcott Hill - - - - - - - - - 0.2 1.94 10Stockpile 0.8 1.24 31 - - - 0.8 1.24 31 - - -

Total - Open Pit 5.2 2.47 414 3.5 2.78 310 8.7 2.59 724 2.0 2.44 155Underground

Rory's Knoll 0.1 3.52 16 27.3 2.96 2,601 27.4 2.97 2,617 24.3 2.19 1,709East Walcott - - - 1.1 3.73 134 1.1 3.73 134 0.4 3.22 44Aleck Hill - - - 1.5 5.59 264 1.5 5.59 264 0.4 4.23 60Mad Kiss - - - 1.8 4.57 268 1.8 4.57 268 0.4 3.81 48

Total - Underground 0.1 3.52 16 31.7 3.20 3,268 31.9 3.21 3,284 25.6 2.27 1,861Total - OP + UG 5.3 2.53 430 35.2 3.16 3,578 40.6 3.07 4,008 27.5 2.28 2,016

As of December 31, 2018

DepositMeasured Indicated InferredMeasured & Indicated


NEW MODEL; NEW APPROACH

• What is New?

• Drilling, production data

• Mapping, geological interpretation

• Grade estimation domains, method and parameters

• Cut-off grades

• Classification criteria

• Resource reporting pit shells

19

Comparison of Capping Limits

Comparison of Cut-Off Grades

Parameter Units OLD 2019Gold Price $/oz 1,300 1,500Open Pit

Saprolite g/t 0.30 0.52Rock g/t 0.40 0.70

UndergroundRory's Knoll g/t 1.80 1.20Volcanics g/t 1.80 1.70

No. Of Grade Pct. Of No. Of Grade Pct. Of

Domain Composites Cap (g/t Au) Capped Metal Assays2 Cap (g/t Au) Capped MetalRory's Knoll 16,511 80 13 2.2% 17,328 35 56 5.0%East Walcott 3,803 30,40 7 9.2% 4,386 10,25 52 5.1%Mad Kiss 702 60 4 5.4% 857 35 12 12.0%

Aleck Hill & Other1 9,194 15,30,70 24 2.4% 91,011 3,10,25,35 10.0%Aleck Hill UG 331 22 9 6.0%Totals 30,210 44 3.2% 113,913 56 6.9%1. Old model analyzed capping on composites within ore domain envelops only, whereas 2019 model analyzed all data

2 No. of Assays in 2019 model assessed for capping limit determination

No. No .Old Model 2019 Model


Source: RPA

RORY’S KNOLL DOMAIN MODIFICATION

• Rory’s Knoll domain enlarged and smoothed out from level to level

• Both high-grade domain (>5 g/t Au) and Internal Waste Domains removed

• New model considers all composite data within the mineralized zone

20

Eliminated Subdomains

Old Model (-63m RL) 2019 Model (-63m RL)


Source: RPA

EAST WALCOTT DOMAIN MODIFICATION

• Domain envelopes reduced in both quantity and size

• Remodeled to reflect folded geometries

• Horizontal continuity of ‘shear-trend’ largely eliminated

21

Tightened Domains

Old Model (-10m RL) 2019 Model (-10mRL)


Source: RPA

ALECK HILL DOMAIN MODIFICATION

• New model used all data and quartz percentage to develop geologic model

• Old model created using hard boundary envelopes around ‘ore-grade’ data (join the dots)

• Considerable reduction in both implied continuity and resulting ore tonnage

22

New Approach

Old Model (+33m RL) 2019 Model (+33m RL)


4,008

(1,766)

6,018

(244)

December 31, 2017 Depletion Model Changes December 31, 2018

M&I MINERAL RESOURCE RECONCILIATION

Source: RPA & Company reports

23

Change in gold ounces (000’s)

(4% of 6,018)

(29% of 6,018)


1,777

(99)

338 2,016


INFERRED MINERAL RESOURCE RECONCILIATION


24


(6% of 1,777)

(19% of 1,777)

RESERVES / OPTIMIZED LOM PLAN


CUT-OFF GRADE ASSUMPTIONS

26

• Metallurgical recoveries based on constant tail equations

• Capped at 95%

• Higher recoveries at lower throughputs

• Range of 92% - 95% at annual feed grades

• Lower at Open Pit cut-off grade level

• Costs based on operations with consideration for potential improvements:

• Partnership with Mining Contractor

• Supply contracts –diesel, explosives, SMBS


Notes:1. UG mining cost assumption for Rory’s Knoll underground based on a SLC/SLR mining method. UG mining cost assumption for Satellites underground based on a long hole stoping mining method.

Sap Rock Rory's Knoll Satellites

Gold Price US$/oz 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200

Royalties % 8% 8% 8% 8%

Process Recovery % 76.5% 83.0% 94.0% 95.0%

OP Mining Cost US$/t mined 2.00 3.00

UG Mining Cost1 US$/t mined 24.83 48.35

Processing Cost US$/t feed 6.30 14.50 14.50 14.50

G&A Cost US$/t feed 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00

Cut-off Grade g/t Au 0.60 0.83 1.5 2.2

Cut-off Grade Y-E 2017 g/t Au 0.44 0.64 1.5 2.4

Open Pit UndergroundParameters Units


DILUTION & EXTRACTION ASSUMPTIONS

27

• Same methodology as previous studies, applied to new block models

• Dilution grades applied based on block model, ranging from 0.03 g/t Au to 0.3 g/t Au

• Open pit – 0.5 m on block edges in contact with waste, four waste contacts = loss

• RK pit – 5% dilution, 3% mining loss

• Aleck Hill North pit – >20% dilution, 15% mining loss

• Aleck Hill pit – >22% dilution, >33% mining loss

• Underground – factors for Longhole, flow modelling for SLC

• RK longhole – 10% dilution, 95% extraction for initial level, 85% thereafter

• Satellite longhole – 15% dilution, 95% extraction (sill and rib pillars)

• RK SLC – 14% dilution, 85% extraction



RK OPEN PIT OPTIMIZATION

28

• Pit slopes based on most recent geotechnical recommendations

• Other inputs as per COG

• All shells evaluated on incremental basis

• Pit shell #40 selected (pit bottom of -240mRL)



UNDERGROUND DESIGN

29

• Portal collared at Mad Kiss

• Shallower satellite longholeareas accessible on the way to RK

• Stope optimizations run on updated block models

• Previous development design modified to fit

Mad Kiss

Aleck Hill

East Walcott Rory’s Knoll



UPDATED MINERAL RESERVE STATEMENT

30

(Mt) (g/t Au) (koz) (Mt) (g/t Au) (koz) (Mt) (g/t Au) (koz)Open Pit

Rory's Knoll 3.91 2.61 328 1.94 2.43 151 5.85 2.55 479Aleck Hill - - - 0.19 4.17 26 0.19 4.17 26Other - - - 0.09 3.47 10 0.09 3.47 10Stockpiles 0.78 1.24 31 - - - 0.78 1.24 31

Total - Open Pit 4.70 2.38 360 2.22 2.62 187 6.92 2.46 546Underground

Rory's Knoll - - - 17.46 2.50 1,404 17.46 2.50 1,404East Walcott - - - 0.53 2.74 46 0.53 2.74 46Aleck Hill - - - 1.03 4.30 142 1.03 4.30 142Mad Kiss - - - 1.02 4.21 139 1.02 4.21 139

Total - Underground - - - 20.04 2.69 1,731 20.04 2.69 1,731Total - OP + UG 4.70 2.38 360 22.25 2.68 1,918 26.95 2.63 2,278

As of December 31, 2018Proven & Probable

DepositProven Probable

Notes:1. CIM (2014) definitions were followed for Mineral Reserves.2. Open pit Mineral Reserves are estimated at a cut-off grade of 0.60 g/t Au for saprolite and 0.83 g/t Au for fresh rock.3. Underground Mineral Reserves are estimated at a cut-off grade of 1.50 g/t Au for Rory’s Knoll and 2.20g/t Au for satellite deposits.4. Mineral Reserves are estimated using an average long-term gold price of US$1,200 per ounce.5. Open pit Mineral Reserves used a minimum mining width of 5 m. 6. A minimum mining width of 5 m was used for Rory’s Knoll underground and a minimum width of 3 m was used for the satellite deposits.7. Bulk density is 2.8 t/m³ for fresh mineralization and 1.73 t/m³ for saprolite mineralization.8. Numbers may not add due to rounding.9. The mineral reserve estimate was prepared by Jason Cox, P.Eng. of RPA Inc., a “qualified person” under NI 43-101 and who is independent of the Company.10. The Company confirms that there are no known legal, political, environmental, or other risk factors that could materially affect the development of the Mineral Resources


2,278

(1,505)

3,971

(188)


MINERAL RESERVE RECONCILIATION


31


(5% of 3,971)

(38% of 3,971)


PRODUCTION RECONCILIATION

* East Walcott refers to Volcanoclastic ore within Rory’s Knoll Pit

32

3 years of Commercial Production (2016 – 2018)561K oz from Mine Actuals

• 2016 – 2018 Mine Actuals 7,384,005 tonnes @ 2.36 g/t Au for 561,000 oz

• Old model overestimated contained ounces by 17.6%; 2019 model underestimated ounces by 8.4%


RATIONALE FOR OPTIMIZED LOM PLAN

33

“Optimization of the underground production and development plan has not been completed, as the Rory’s Knoll underground is ready before the open pit is complete.” -RPA, 43-101 Report


Starting Point: 43-101 Ore Mined vs Mill CapacityRationale for optimization:

• RPA not able to optimize production plan due to time constraints

• OP pre-strip requirements peak in 2020 coinciding with peak UG capex spend

• Sizeable stockpile of 2.4Mt built up in 2021

• Remove/reduce financing requirements

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Tonn

es (k

t)

Open Pit Underground Mill capacity


OPTIMIZED LOM PLAN APPROACH

34

Item Approach

Open Pit • Redesign phases at Rory’s Knoll to reduce strip ratio in 2019/2020 & lower mining rate

• Ramp gradient of 12% vs 43-101 study of 10% (40t rigid frame trucks can achieve 15%)

• No change to ultimate pit design

Underground • Production tonnes deferred where possible to align with new OP schedule & to reduce stockpile build up

• Development schedule slowed down & matched to align with UG ore production schedule

• No changes to actual mine design

Processing • No changes to throughput or recovery assumptions

Operating Costs • No changes to operating cost assumptions

Capital Costs• Defer/reduce UG capex profile where appropriate based on new schedule



OPEN PIT PHASING COMPARISON

35

RK Phase 3

RK Phase 4

43-101 Phase Designs Optimized Plan Phase Designs

Source: Guyana Goldfields Inc.

• Optimized plan allows access to more ore in bottom of pit

• Optimized plan takes bottom of phase four 15m deeper


OPEN PIT SCHEDULE COMPARISON

36

Deferral of ~5 Mt of waste from 2019/2020 to 2021/2022

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

2019 2020 2021 2022

Ope

n Pi

t -To

nnes

Min

ed (k

t)

Waste (43-101) Waste (AGM Optimised) Ore (43-101) Ore (AGM Optimised)


Minimal change in y-o-y mining rate


UG SCHEDULE COMPARISON

37

No Change to UG design, only to Schedule:

• RK Open Benching: Deferred two months

• RK SLC: Deferred nine months

• AH: Brought forward 12 months

-

50

100

150

200

250

Sep-19 Jan-20 May-20 Sep-20 Jan-21 May-21 Sep-21 Jan-22 May-22 Sep-22 Jan-23 May-23 Sep-23 Jan-24 May-24 Sep-24

(kt)

43-101 UG Mining Schedule

RK Development RK Open Benching RK SLC EW LH MK AH

-

50

100

150

200

250

Sep-19 Jan-20 May-20 Sep-20 Jan-21 May-21 Sep-21 Jan-22 May-22 Sep-22 Jan-23 May-23 Sep-23 Jan-24 May-24 Sep-24

(kt)

Optimized LOM Plan UG Mining Schedule

RK Development RK Open Benching RK SLC EW LH MK AH



ORE TONNES MINED BY SOURCE

38


Ore Mined vs Processing Capacity

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Tonn

es (k

t)

43-101


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023To

nnes

(kt)

Optimised Plan



REDUCED STOCKPILE BALANCE

39

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Jan-19 Jul-19 Jan-20 Jul-20 Jan-21 Jul-21 Jan-22 Jul-22 Jan-23 Jul-23 Jan-24 Jul-24

Mon

th e

nd st

ockp

ile b

alan

ce (k

t)

43-101 LOM Optimised LOM



TONNES PROCESSED BY SOURCE

40


0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031

(Au

g/t)

(kt)

43-101 LOM Plan

OP ore UG ore SP Head grade

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031

(Au

g/t)

(kt)

Optimised LOM Plan

OP ore UG ore SP Head grade


PRODUCTION & AISC PROFILE

41

• 2019-2022: Similar production profiles

• 2023-2024: Lower production under Optimized LOM plan due to UG deferral

• 2031: Deferred UG ounces are only caught up at end of mine life

• AISC: no material changes over LOM


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031

AISC

(US$

/oz)

Oun

ces p

rodu

ced

(koz

)

43-101 - Au Produced Optimised Plan - Au Produced

43-101 - AISC Optimised Plan - AISC


(40.0)

(30.0)

(20.0)

(10.0)

-

10.0

20.0

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

$ m

lns

Breakdown of Yearly Change in Capex - 43-101 vs Optimized Plan

Lateral Development UG Truck Purchases Refrigeration Electrical Other

CAPEX REDUCTION BY SOURCE

42

• UG lateral development: ~$20mln of capex in 2020/21 deferred through 10,000m less of development

• Refrigeration: $13mln in 2021/22 deferred to 2024/25

• Electrical system: total of ~$8mln reduction mostly in 2020

• UG Trucks: $8mln in reduction in 2020 through purchase of 40t rigid frame trucks


Total Capex deferred/reduced by $58 mln in 2019/20/21


TYPICAL UNDERGROUND SUBLEVEL PLAN

43


UG DEVELOPMENT COMPARISON

44

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Apr-1

9Au

g-19

Dec-

19Ap

r-20

Aug-

20De

c-20

Apr-2

1Au

g-21

Dec-

21Ap

r-22

Aug-

22De

c-22

Apr-2

3Au

g-23

Dec-

23Ap

r-24

Aug-

24De

c-24

Apr-2

5Au

g-25

Dec-

25Ap

r-26

Aug-

26De

c-26

Apr-2

7Au

g-27

Dec-

27Ap

r-28

Aug-

28De

c-28

Apr-2

9Au

g-29

Dec-

29Ap

r-30

Aug-

30De

c-30

Apr-3

1Au

g-31

Dec-

31

Met

ers

43-101 - Total Lateral Development by Month

Decline LH Ore Drift LH Waste Drift Other (Capital Development)

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Apr-1

9

Sep-

19

Feb-

20

Jul-2

0

Dec-2

0

May

-21

Oct-2

1

Mar

-22

Aug-

22

Jan-

23

Jun-

23

Nov-

23

Apr-2

4

Sep-

24

Feb-

25

Jul-2

5

Dec-2

5

May

-26

Oct-2

6

Mar

-27

Aug-

27

Jan-

28

Jun-

28

Nov-

28

Apr-2

9

Sep-

29

Feb-

30

Jul-3

0

Dec-3

0

May

-31

Oct-3

1

Met

ers

Optimized Plan - Total Lateral Development by Month

Decline Ore Drift Waste Drift Other (Capital Development)



BENEFITS OF 40T RIGID FRAME TRUCKS

45

• Initial purchase price ~75% lower than standard 45t UG articulated truck

• Superior fuel efficiency

• Only one control system -lower maintenance costs/improved availability

• Assumed three year rolling purchases & no capex related to rebuilds

UG decline sized to accommodate rigid frame trucks

Source: RPA and Company reports


LOM PLAN SUMMARY COMPARISON

Source: Company and RPA 1. This is a non-IFRS measure. Refer to ”Non-IFRS Performance Measures” section in the December 31,2018 MD&A2. 43-101 and Optimized capex include contingencies of US$11M and US$7M respectively3. Includes US$6M in reclamation

46

NPV Largely Unchanged – Benefits of Capex Deferral Offset by Deferred Au Production

Total Capex reduction of ~10% or $44mln versus 43-101

43-101 LOM Plan Optimized LOM Plan

Mine Life (years) 13 13

Throughput Capacity (tpd) 7,500 7,500

Strip Ratio (OP) (w:o) 9.6 9.6

LOM Au Head Grade (g/t) 2.6 2.6

LOM Au Recovery (%) 94.4% 94.5%

LOM Au Recovered (k oz) 2,146 2,147

LOM Avg. Annual Au Payable Production* (k oz) 177 170

Avg. Annual Au Payable Production (2019-23) (k oz) 218 213

Mining Cost (OP) (US$/t mined) $2.91 $2.91

Mining Cost (UG) (US$/t mined) $29.74 $29.85

Processing Cost (US$/t processed) $16.24 $17.39

Site G&A (US$/t processed) $10.96 $11.52

Au Operating Cash Costs (Incl. Royalty) 1 (US$/oz) $813 $835

Au Operating Cash Costs (Exl. Royalty) 1 (US$/oz) $709 $731

Au Mine-Site AISC 1 (US$/oz) $930 $953

LOM Initial / Expansion Capex 2 (US$M) $124 $80

LOM Sustaining Capex 3 (US$M) $256 $257

After-tax NPV5% (US$M) $454 $462

Au Long-Term Price Assumption (US$/oz) $1,300 $1,300

* Excludes last year of mine life as it's a partial year for 43-101 Plan

Operating Parameters

LOM AverageOperating Cost

per Tonne

LOM AverageCash Costs

Capex Parameters

Economics


OPPORTUNITIES

• UG development - current design appears conservative; opportunity to reduce number of meters of development per level

• Power savings - current cash flow model does not incorporate savings from reduced power costs from the deferral of UG refrigeration

• UG refrigeration - opportunities to eliminate altogether (as has been assumed in previous studies)

• Processing - opportunity to optimize mill operations from 2023 onwards when mill capacity only being partially utilised

• Cost reduction initiatives - tangible opportunities being pursued not incorporated in cash flow model


47

Additional opportunities exist to further improve on Optimized LOM Plan

OPERATIONS UPDATE


Q1/19 RECAP

Source: Company reports. Numbers may not add due to rounding(1) These are non-IFRS measures. Refer to the “Non-IFRS Performance Measures” section in the March 31, 2019 MD&A

49

Key Statistics 2019 Guidance Q1 2019

Gold Produced ounces 145,000-160,000 36,600

Cash costs per ounce – before royalty¹ ($/ounce) US$/ounce 800 - 850 839

All-in sustaining¹ (“AISC”) US$/ounce 1,175 – 1,225 1,378

Cost of sales (prod, royalty and dep) US$/ounce 1,175 – 1,225 1,302

Gold Sold ounces 38,200

Average Realized Gold Price US$/ounce 1,301

Gross Revenue US$ mlns 49.7

Ore Mined t (‘000s) 502

Waste Mined t (‘000s) 5,037

Total Mined t (‘000s) 5,539

Strip Ratio waste:ore 10.0

Tonnes Mined per Day tpd 61,542

Ore Processed t (‘000s) 649

Tonnes Processed per Day tpd 7,213

Head Grade g/t Au 1.94

Recovery % 90.5

Gold production in line with annual guidance

Decrease in mining rate compared to prior quarter due to focus at the bottom of the Phase 3 pit at Rory's Knoll

Record quarterly mill performance of 7,200 tonnes per day

Costs higher in Q1/19 due to lower grades, higher strip ratio & higher production costs

On Track to Meet Annual Gold Production Guidance


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19

Ore Waste

OPERATING MOMENTUM ACHIEVEDMining Rates Have Improved

The mining rate has improved through various initiatives:

• Contractor ramp-up with 100% mobilization of equipment

• RC drilling to enhance grade control

• Transition to 10m benches

• Blasting fragmentation improvements

• Optimized haulage routes

• Supply chain renegotiation of explosives costs and other major consumable costs


50

Mining Rate (tonnes per day 000s)


5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

4Q17 1Q18 2Q18 3Q18 4Q18 1Q19

MILL EXPANSION COMPLETED FEB 25, 2019Mill Performance Exceeding Expectations

• Expected to further improve recovery by up to 2%, throughput by 10%, and allow for 75% redundancy of the primary crusher thereby further lowering per unit costs

• Saprolite used as a viscosity reagent to improve hard rock throughput and overall recovery

• 20-25% gravity recovery

• No major additional works planned for the mill over the life of the mine


51

Milling Rate (tonnes per day)


COST REDUCTION INITIATIVES


52

• Numerous areas of identified cost reductions through quoted rates or contracts

– Total estimated cost savings of US$15-20M on an annual LOM basis

• Contract miner savings of ~10% results in annual savings of $5-10M

• Replacement of ex-pat employees with local employees

• Key areas of savings include: diesel, explosives and SMBS

– Phase 2 mill expansion commissioned in Feb 2019 expected to further improve recovery by up to 2% from 2018 recoveries, throughput by 10%, and allow for 75% redundancy of the primary crusher and improve per unit costs

– Other potential areas to reduce costs identified in road maintenance, inland trucking, barging service and lubricant supply

– Ongoing evaluation of other areas of operational optimization to further reduce costs and improve efficiencies

• Includes evaluation of current operating procedures and potential equipment changes or enhancements


UNDERGROUND EXPLORATION DECLINE

• Underground exploration decline approved Feb 20, 2019

• Early works resumed in 2Q2019: secure portal and drive decline 200 metres, budget set at US$2.0 million

• Reviewing bids for contract to advance ramp 2,500 metres to access Rory’s Knoll and satellite deposits

• No material delays expected to development timeline

• Exploration ramp allows access to perform infill drilling at depth to delineate exploration targets and potentially add mineral resources, as well as convert mineral resources to mineral reserves

• Underground drilling expected to commence in 3Q/19

• Test mining of up to 350,000 tonnes to supplement mill feed


53

Long-Term Future of Aurora


UNDERGROUND EXPLORATION DECLINE


54

Early Opportunities for Test Mining at Mad Kiss

TSX GUY guygold.com

MAD KISS STOPING


MAD KISS – STOPE 1

56



57



58



59



60



61

FINANCIALS


SOLID BALANCE SHEET

1. The Company elected to retire the full portion of the debt on April 30, 2019. The debt & cash balances s at May 1, 2019 are unaudited and are after repaying the full portion of the Company’s debt.

63

Capital Structure

Total Shares Outstanding 173,530,802

Options 5,366,678

Warrants Nil

52 week: Hi/Lo C$5.42 / C$0.88

Market Cap (at C$1.02) C$165 million

Cash Balance - Mar 31, 2019 US$73 million

Debt - Mar 31, 2019 US$35 million

Cash Balance1 – May 1, 2019 US$36 million

Debt1 – May 1, 2019 Nil

South America

Cash and cash equivalents1

Debt Facility1

Nil

US$36M

Financially Disciplined


LONG TERM DEBT RETIRED

64

On April 30, 2019, the Company elected to retire the remaining debt balance of US$35M. Under theoriginal terms, the debt was contemplated over $5M quarterly principal repayments until extinguishmentat the end of 2020. No prepayment penalties apply.

The early retirement election was taken for the following reasons:

Provides immediate reduction in interest and administration costs, forecasted to be approximately$3M over the remaining life of the loan

Eliminates the administrative burden to advance the underground development associated with loancommon terms agreement

Release of all security associated with the loan, to allow for flexibility in exploring new financingalternatives

Release of $3M of restricted cash currently on the balance sheet as a condition of the existing loan

While the current plan envisions the self-funding of underground development through 2019 and 2020,management is actively exploring various alternatives with institutions and advisors looking at financingalternatives available to provide additional balance sheet flexibility through the next 24 months.



BALANCE SHEET FORECAST

65

Near-Term Cash Position Vastly Improved Under Optimized Plan


-100

0

100

200

300

400

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Year

-end

Cas

h Ba

lanc

e (U

S$m

lns)

43-101 Plan @ $1,200/oz Optimised Plan @ $1,300/oz Optimised Plan @ $1,200/oz

Notes – cash balance forecasts are based on the repayment of the Company’s full portion of its debt on April 30, 2019.

EXPLORATION


LARGE, PROSPECTIVE LAND PACKAGE

67


2019 EXPLORATION PLAN

68

BUDGET US$6.75M and ~30,000 metres of combined surface and underground drilling

Phase 1

• Two surface diamond drill rigs to continue to test potential high-grade ore shoots

beneath the satellite ore zones at Aurora

• To be completed through 1H/19

Phase 2• Underground reserve definition drilling expected to commence in 3Q/19

• 2H/19 - Company will continue to drill with one surface and one underground drill

Phase 3

• Resumption of the regional, greenfield exploration activity further assessing and

testing targets

• Field work expected to commence in 2Q/19

Refocused on Brownfield Potential



NEAR MINE EXPLORATION

69

MAD KISS

HAIMARALLI FALLS

NW ALECHILL

SOUTHMAD KISS

ALECHILL

“GOLDEN SQUARE MILE” LIKELY OCCURS ON SECONARY HINGES (AND LIMBS) OF LARGER SCALE FOLD ‐ ARCHITECTURE INDICATED BYMAGNETICS

ANOMALIES ATSURFACE IN SOILSAMPLES

SWAMP VEIN

MULTIPLE FOLD HINGES INDICATEDBY MAGNETICS

POWIS HILL

HIGH GRADE DRILL ANOMALIES IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO LARGER SCALE FOLDSTRUCTURES

ANOMALIES AT SURFACECLOSE TO BATHOLITH CONTACT

ALEC HILLWEST

2000m

EASTWALCOTT

RORY’S KNOLL



BROWNFIELD EXPLORATION: RESOURCE GROWTH POTENTIAL

70

Openlaterally and atDepth

Strategy: Majority of drillingfrom

surface to ‐400m.

Drill/define high grade underground ore shoots at East Walcott andMad Kiss

Near mine saprolite resourcedevelopment

Source: RPA


RESOURCES TO RESERVES

71

• Opportunity to capture / upgrade resources to reserves

• 1.73 Moz M&I Resources not in Reserves

• 2.02 Moz Inferred Resources for potential upgrade to M&I resources

• Continued focus on local geological control and distribution of mineralization



GEOLOGICAL DRIVEN TARGETS

Rory’s Knoll Targets Prioritized (1a, 1b, 1c)

• Silica Replacement + Pyrite

Mag Destruction Targets (2a, 2b)

• Magnetite destruction (Fe+2 reports to pyrite)

72

Aurora2b

2a

1c

1a

1b


CSR STRATEGY


CSR STRATEGY

74

• Projects will be part of an overall strategy

• Projects chosen with the help of all parts of Company

• Projects will not prefer one group in Guyana

• More work will be done with the Government of Guyana

• Except for strictly humanitarian projects, sustainability will be a factor

• Documentation for each project including results achieved

• Credit for the good work being done; one placement a month is the goal

University of Guyana Site Visit – April 16, 2019

New Team, New Approach



WHAT WE HAVE DONE SO FAR

75

• Hired a local coordinator who was a journalist plus kept one employee from previous team

• Team beginning to develop a sustainable strategy

• Government and press relations has been a major focus

• Initiated outreach to Ministries of Health and Education for future programs

• Potential solar, environmental, agricultural and training & education projects currently being assessed

Government & Media Mine Tour – April 4, 2019

Progress Underway


CONCLUSION


SUMMARY

77

Recognized our challenges and are meeting them head-on

Management team fortified by highly experienced new hires

Strategic plans being implemented corporately and locally in Guyana

Recently exceeded 1 million person hours without a lost time injury

Optimization and continuous improvement of mining and milling operations underway

Updated reserves and resources model and LOM Plan allowing for more reliable production and cost forecasting

Received EPA approval for underground exploration decline development

Exploration refocused on high return brownfield opportunities

Enhanced corporate governance practices

APPENDICES

GUYANA GOLDFIELDS INC. TSX GUY guygold.com 79

OPTIMIZED PLAN - PRODUCTION SUMMARY

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031INPUTS UNITS TOTAL Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13

MININGOpen Pit

Operating Days days 1,825 365 365 365 365 Tonnes milled per day tonnes / day 3,360 4,835 6,473 870 4,619 Tonnes moved per day tonnes / day 35,454 64,188 67,422 33,197 12,463

Production '000 tonnes 6,131 1,765 2,363 318 1,686 - - - - - Au g/t 2.61 2.59 2.48 2.48 2.83 - - - - - Waste '000 tonnes 58,572 21,664 22,246 11,799 2,863 - - - - - Total Moved '000 tonnes 64,703 23,429 24,609 12,117 4,549 - - - - - Stripping Ratio w:o 9.55 12.27 9.42 37.15 1.70 - - - - - - - - -

UndergroundOperating Days 365 days 4,745 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 365 Tonnes mined per day tonnes / day 4,220 84 1,406 6,052 3,125 5,010 5,956 5,458 4,662 4,648 4,657 4,670 4,769 4,367

Production '000 tonnes 20,026 31 513 2,209 1,141 1,829 2,174 1,992 1,702 1,696 1,700 1,705 1,741 1,594 Au g/t 2.69 5.39 3.69 3.12 3.26 3.15 2.98 3.04 2.63 2.53 2.26 2.03 1.98 2.12 Waste '000 tonnes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Moved '000 tonnes 20,026 31 513 2,209 1,141 1,829 2,174 1,992 1,702 1,696 1,700 1,705 1,741 1,594

PROCESSINGMill Feed tonnes / day 7,200 7,500 7,300 7,500 5,100 6,000 5,500 4,700 4,600 4,700 4,700 4,800 4,400

'000 tonnes 26,911 2,618 2,731 2,671 2,739 1,849 2,174 1,992 1,702 1,696 1,700 1,705 1,741 1,594 Au g/t 2.63 2.08 2.66 2.95 3.00 3.47 2.98 3.04 2.63 2.53 2.26 2.03 1.98 2.12 Contained Au oz 2,271,576 175,209 233,743 253,768 263,940 206,544 208,411 194,485 143,637 137,993 123,365 111,127 110,854 108,501

Net RecoveryAu % 94.4% 91.2% 94.4% 94.6% 94.7% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 95.0% 94.6% 94.4% 94.8%

Total RecoveredAu oz 2,146,724 159,822 220,653 240,026 249,850 196,217 197,990 184,761 136,455 131,093 117,196 105,098 104,698 102,864


OPTIMIZED PLAN - CASH FLOW SUMMARY


REVENUEMetal Prices Input UnitsAu US$/oz Au 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$ 1,300$

Au Payable Percentage ##### US$ '000 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95% 99.95%

Au Gross Revenue US$ '000 2,789,346$ 207,664$ 286,706$ 311,878$ 324,642$ 254,955$ 257,259$ 240,069$ 177,303$ 170,336$ 152,279$ 136,559$ 136,040$ 133,656$ Total Gross Revenue US$ '000 2,789,346$ 207,664$ 286,706$ 311,878$ 324,642$ 254,955$ 257,259$ 240,069$ 177,303$ 170,336$ 152,279$ 136,559$ 136,040$ 133,656$

TransportAu ##### US$ '000 4,723$ 352$ 485$ 528$ 550$ 432$ 436$ 406$ 300$ 288$ 258$ 231$ 230$ 226$

Refining costAu ##### US$ '000 644$ 48$ 66$ 72$ 75$ 59$ 59$ 55$ 41$ 39$ 35$ 32$ 31$ 31$

Total Charges US$ '000 5,367$ 400$ 552$ 600$ 625$ 491$ 495$ 462$ 341$ 328$ 293$ 263$ 262$ 257$

Net Smelter Return US$ '000 2,783,980$ 207,265$ 286,154$ 311,278$ 324,018$ 254,464$ 256,764$ 239,607$ 176,962$ 170,008$ 151,986$ 136,297$ 135,778$ 133,399$

Royalty NSR 8.0% US$ '000 222,715$ 16,581$ 22,892$ 24,902$ 25,921$ 20,357$ 20,541$ 19,168$ 14,157$ 13,600$ 12,159$ 10,904$ 10,862$ 10,672$

Net Revenue US$ '000 2,561,264$ 190,684$ 263,262$ 286,376$ 298,097$ 234,107$ 236,223$ 220,439$ 162,805$ 156,408$ 139,827$ 125,393$ 124,916$ 122,727$ Unit NSR US$/t milled 95.18$ 72.84$ 96.41$ 107.20$ 108.83$ 126.63$ 108.66$ 110.66$ 95.67$ 92.20$ 82.25$ 73.56$ 71.77$ 76.99$

OPERATING COSTMining (Open Pit) US$/t moved 2.91$ 2.84$ 2.73$ 3.16$ 3.63$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Mining (Underground) US$/t ore mined 29.85$ 183.95$ 52.46$ 23.13$ 34.71$ 34.82$ 34.16$ 28.14$ 27.19$ 27.85$ 28.17$ 28.25$ 27.97$ 26.58$

Mining (open pit) US$/t milled 7.00$ 25.37$ 24.60$ 14.33$ 6.03$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Processing US$/t milled 17.39$ 13.75$ 13.18$ 13.48$ 13.14$ 19.47$ 16.56$ 18.07$ 21.15$ 21.22$ 21.18$ 21.12$ 20.68$ 22.58$ G&A US$/t milled 11.52$ 11.46$ 10.99$ 11.23$ 10.22$ 15.15$ 11.50$ 12.55$ 11.75$ 11.79$ 11.77$ 11.73$ 10.34$ 10.04$ Total Unit Operating Cost US$/t milled 58.13$ 52.74$ 58.63$ 58.17$ 43.85$ 69.07$ 62.22$ 58.76$ 60.09$ 60.86$ 61.11$ 61.10$ 59.00$ 59.20$

Mining (Open Pit) US$ '000 188,377$ 66,424$ 67,166$ 38,279$ 16,509$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Mining (Underground) US$ '000 597,868$ 5,629$ 26,927$ 51,103$ 39,589$ 63,688$ 74,265$ 56,058$ 46,269$ 47,243$ 47,881$ 48,163$ 48,684$ 42,371$ Processing (incl Rehandle) US$ '000 468,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ 36,000$ G&A US$ '000 310,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 30,000$ 28,000$ 28,000$ 25,000$ 25,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 20,000$ 18,000$ 16,000$ Total Operating Cost US$ '000 1,564,245$ 138,053$ 160,093$ 155,381$ 120,097$ 127,688$ 135,265$ 117,058$ 102,269$ 103,243$ 103,881$ 104,163$ 102,684$ 94,371$

Operating Cashflow US$ '000 997,019$ 52,630$ 103,169$ 130,995$ 177,999$ 106,420$ 100,958$ 103,381$ 60,537$ 53,164$ 35,947$ 21,230$ 22,232$ 28,356$


OPTIMIZED PLAN - CASH FLOW SUMMARY


CAPITAL COSTDirect Cost

UG Mining - RK US$ '000 55,370$ 13,743$ 41,627$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ UG Mining - Sat US$ '000 7,750$ 6,750$ 1,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ OP Mining US$ '000 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Processing US$ '000 5,000$ 5,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ On-Site Infrastructure US$ '000 2,000$ 2,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Off-Site Infrastructure US$ '000 3,000$ 3,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Total Direct Cost US$ '000 73,120$ 30,493$ 42,627$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Other Costs US$ '000EPCM / Indirect Cost 0% US$ '000 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Subtotal Costs US$ '000 73,120$ 30,493$ 42,627$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Contingency 10% US$ '000 7,312$ 3,049$ 4,263$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Initial Capital Cost US$ '000 80,432$ 33,542$ 46,890$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Sustaining US$ '000 251,395$ 9,900$ 6,380$ 43,148$ 34,050$ 28,284$ 24,586$ 19,657$ 28,997$ 19,705$ 19,810$ 15,235$ 1,644$ -$ Working Capital US$ '000 (19,312)$ 947$ 3,797$ (184)$ (4,276)$ 3$ 931$ (2,476)$ (2,725)$ 28$ (208)$ (138)$ (194)$ (1,081)$ Reclamation and closure US$ '000 6,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

Total Capital Cost US$ '000 318,515$ 44,389$ 57,067$ 42,964$ 29,774$ 28,287$ 25,517$ 17,181$ 26,272$ 19,732$ 19,601$ 15,096$ 1,451$ (1,081)$

CASH FLOWNet Pre-Tax Cashflow US$ '000 678,504$ 8,241$ 46,102$ 88,031$ 148,226$ 78,132$ 75,441$ 86,200$ 34,265$ 33,432$ 16,346$ 6,134$ 20,782$ 29,438$ Cumulative Pre-Tax Cashflow US$ '000 8,241$ 54,343$ 142,374$ 290,599$ 368,732$ 444,173$ 530,373$ 564,638$ 598,070$ 614,416$ 620,549$ 641,331$ 670,769$

Taxes US$ '000 88,198$ -$ 2,522$ 7,992$ 10,922$ 9,017$ 15,815$ 18,217$ 7,837$ 6,880$ 3,014$ 1,241$ 1,304$ 3,437$

After-Tax Cashflow US$ '000 590,305$ 8,241$ 43,580$ 80,039$ 137,304$ 69,116$ 59,626$ 67,983$ 26,427$ 26,552$ 13,332$ 4,893$ 19,477$ 26,001$ Cumulative After-Tax Cashflow US$ '000 8,241$ 51,822$ 131,860$ 269,164$ 338,280$ 397,906$ 465,889$ 492,316$ 518,868$ 532,200$ 537,092$ 556,570$ 582,571$

All-In Sustaining Cost US$/oz 953$ 1,033$ 861$ 934$ 724$ 902$ 914$ 847$ 1,069$ 1,045$ 1,163$ 1,244$ 1,104$ 1,025$ All-In Cost US$/oz 990$

PROJECT ECONOMICS

Pre-tax NPV 5% 5.0% US$ '000 $528,768 0.976 0.929 0.885 0.843 0.803 0.765 0.728 0.694 0.661 0.629 0.599 0.571 0.543Pre-tax NPV 7.5% 7.5% US$ '000 $471,969 0.964 0.897 0.835 0.776 0.722 0.672 0.625 0.581 0.541 0.503 0.468 0.435 0.405Pre-tax NPV 10% 10.0% US$ '000 $423,975 0.953 0.867 0.788 0.716 0.651 0.592 0.538 0.489 0.445 0.404 0.368 0.334 0.304

After tax NPV 5% 5.0% US$ '000 $462,313After tax NPV 7.5% 7.5% US$ '000 $413,702After tax NPV 10% 10.0% US$ '000 $372,579


OPTIMIZED PLAN – NPV SENSITIVITIES

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

$900

70% 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 130%

Afte

r Tax

NPV

at 5

% D

isco

unt R

ate

(US$

M)

Percent Change From Base Case

Head Grade Recovery Au Price Operating Cost Capital Cost

DRIVING CHANGE…

…POSITIONED FOR GROWTH

20190501 Analyst Presentation -...

Documents

Transcript of 20190501 Analyst Presentation -...