Massawa gold project January 2016
Senegal permits onto geology SENEGAL N Sadiola Yatela Teranga MALI Kanoumba Massawa Gara Yalea Permits Surface(Km 2 ) Miko Segala Kanoumba 506 Miko 61 Dalema 228.3 Tomboronkoto 225 Bambadji 315 Tomboronkoto Sangola Dalema Bambadji MajorStructures 100km Tabakoto Gounkoto Total 1335.3
Senegal-key points to date Massawa does not yet meet Randgold s filters for development, principally the requirement for a potential reserve of 3Moz at $1000/oz with an IRR of 20% Actions being taken to move the project up the value chain. Understand the metallurgical domaining impact on Massawa and associated processing routes optimisation based on a simple process route comprising gravity and CIL recovery Assessing alternatives for refractory ores vs. non-refractory ores Progress Sofia non-refractory target Find additional non-refractory satellite open pit resources Identification of opportunities across the Mako belt and within Senegal
Resources Areas for infill or deep infill drilling Au (g/t) Total 2014 measured + indicated + inferred at $1500/oz pit Open Pit 40.71Mt 2.57g/t 3.36 Moz Underground 2.51Mt 4.40g/t 0.35 Moz Open pit satellites 16.51Mt 1.74g/t 0.93 Moz Total resources 59.74 Mt 2.42g/t 4.64 Moz
Massawa Central Zone - high grade quartz-stibnite mineralisation - drill orientation N Central zone Central Zone Current GC RC Programme Northern Zone 300m 500m DO zone Orientation programme (15 x 10m) to test drilling and assay methods completed on Central Zone lodes Objective is to test the high grade qz-sb and Au variability by close drilling up to 100m vertical depth Compare the gold grade of the current drilling to the predicted BM Results show further work requires phased RC drilling and assay by Leachwell in the Central Zone Met test work on collected samples to differentiate met recovery by domain Au (g/t) >8 5 8 3 5 1 3 0.5 1
Massawa orientation drilling and Central Zone remodelling COG Tonnes Grade Ounces 2010 DO Area Reserve 0.5 960 727 3.17 97 941 2015 DO Area Model 0.5 524 029 4.45 74 973 Change % -45% 40% -23% Drill orientation block showing ore zones 4, 5 and 6, with phase 2 structure within boarder phase 1 envelope The key items highlighted by this program are: If the predicted block model grade increase and volume reduction percentages were extrapolated to the rest of the Central Zone area mineralisation, then the total resource @ $1000 would be 7.7Mt @ 3.54g/t for 872koz, (representing a 261koz loss compared to the current public reserve) The refractory phase 1 proportion of the resource Central Zone would be 4.2Mt @ 1.09g/t for 148.3koz The vein style phase 2 portion of the resource would be 3.5Mt @ 6.52g/t for 724koz Phase 2 style mineralisation contains 83% of the contained gold within 45% of the total ore tonnage
Massawa ongoing work Central Zone gravity-leach response tests Deportment on BLEG tails indicates incomplete dissolution of course gold (after 24 hour leach) To better understand the met recovery in Central Zone, the two styles of ore are sampled separately Northern Zone BIOX batch amenability tests 13 metallurgy results indicate high gravity component and further leach work on gravity tails underway Flotation confirmation completed and concentrate production underway Concentrate to be sent for BIOX bulk amenability test work Previous Central Zone BIOX tests produced 90%+ results on ROM float and tails float concentrate Prelim costs and reagent consumption to bring understanding to level of POX work North Zone long section looking NW
Massawa processing cost sensitivities Pre-feasibility costs used Current costs Oxide Transition Fresh Latest energy costs Diesel 33 c/kwh $24/t $25/t $53/t Diesel 20 c/kwh HFO 20 c/kwh $20/t $25/t $43/t HFO 13 c/kwh Grid 10 c/kwh $17/t $18/t $33/t Grid 11 c/kwh Cost above used for Pre-feasibility compared with updated fuel costs As an example of the impact of lower fuel prices, lower energy costs at Loulo (which has a much simpler process) have contributed to a reduction in process costs of approximately $5/ tonne in 2015 Expect to see a reduced process cost based on lower unit energy costs as the pre-feasibility is updated
Massawa - satellites and potential Bambaraya 21,114oz @ 2.33 g/t SR:9.24 (16km) R:80-94% N Delya 122,675oz @ 3.85 g/t SR:10.2 (15km) R:39% Tina 50,126oz @ 1.06 g/t SR:3.2 (4km) R: 70-97% Sofia 730,846oz @ 1.66 g/t SR:3.26 (10km) R:92% ^ ^ Massawa 3.36Moz @ 2.57 g/t Four satellites proximal to Massawa host 0.92Moz @ 1.74 g/t: Sofia, Bambaraya, Delya and Tina Preliminary metallurgical work shows a good recovery of between 75% and 97% in all satellites except Delya which has a similar refractory nature to Massawa ^ Tombo 579,587oz @ 0.97 g/t SR: 3.12 (30km) R:93% 15km Kawsara 1,413,374oz @ 0.65 g/t SR:2.2 (5.5km) R:75-90% Existing deposit New target Two additional satellites host a combined potential of 1.9Moz @ 0.7g/t. Large portfolio of exploration targets along 70km of strike of the Mako Belt
Sofia target delivers encouraging results SSOFIA 730,846oz @ 1.66g/t Section 7 SFRC060 34m @ 5.31g/t Section 6 SFRC059 35m @ 3.06g/t S Massawa 3.36Moz @ 2.57g/t Infill section 7-8 SFRC061 44m @ 6.16g/t 21m @ 0.81g/t 1000m At Sofia, located 10km from Massawa, five RC holes were completed, and three confirmed a hypogene source for high grade mineralisation Results include 35m @ 3.06 g/t, 34m @ 5.31 g/t and 25m (tw) @ 6.16g/t in 3 separate sections over 280m strike Sofia South drilling confirms main zone over 650m Further trenching and drilling were completed in Q4 with good potential to increase Sofia resource. Results are pending
Sofia typical section and met samples results The main ore zone is hosted in a strongly sheared gabbro and felsic intrusive units with silica flooding and carbonate-sericite alteration 11 bottle roll results confirm non-refractory nature of Sofia ore with results averaging >90%
Sofia corridor - new targets within permits... 2016 Greenfields outputs Review all data within the Sofia region to evaluate the potential and initiate follow-up drilling to add ounces by testing models Sofia region shows a potential of +3Moz over 2g/t along the Sabodala mineralised structure which host Sofia-Mikona-Matiba and its splays Sofia east target and Makana 2. Trenching /drilling on track. Mikona-Matiba shows continuous alteration/mineralisation. Significant Trenches results along N010 Shear including 13m@1,48g/t; (MBTR001), and 24m@0,57g/t (MBTR002). Makana 2: trenching program over 600m shows: 16m @ 2.47g/t (KMTR002); 29.5m@1.08g/t (KMTR006). Sofia East target, northern continuity of Sofia NE branch, show a linear soil anomaly on insitu laterite (3 km x 800-1000m > 25ppb). Prioritise regional targets and propose work programs including geochemistry, field reconnaissance plus litho-sampling to identify anomaly and gold bearing structures
Community Labour: 85% of the labourers come from the surrounding villages / region Social: 5 millet machines for 5 villages around Massawa for the ladies 3 boreholes water for Tinkoto and Mandinkole villages 4 equipped classrooms (computers and solar panels) Emergency room at Kédougou hospital 2 classrooms at Karakaene Various actions in the surrounding villages Scholarship for students at Dakar university 2 Waterbore Equipment at Kédougou hospital Various social actions at Kédougou School 2 class rooms +Office + 2 rooms Randgold / Senegal labourers 85% came from surrounding villages/regions (Kedougou and Tamba) Dakar (4.28%) Diourbel (0.13%) Fatick (1.65%) Kaffrine (0.08%) Kaolack (3.96%) Kedougou (74.94%) Kolda (1.43%)
Conclusion and way forward Outputs for Massawa complex Complete test work on Central Zone gravity-leach program and BIOX batch test work on Northern Zone sulphides Understand metallurgical domaining on the Massawa strike and create options for alternative development strategies Continue to expand non-refractory Sofia resource, grade and tonnes Discover and expand further non-refractory satellite pits as contributors to the Massawa complex Update prefeasibility of combined Sofia and Massawa project
Disclaimer CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS: Except for the historical information contained herein, the matters discussed in this presentation are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the US Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the US Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to the future price of gold, the estimation of mineral reserves and resources, the realisation of mineral reserve estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production, reserve determination and reserve conversion rates. Generally, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as will, plans, expects or does not expect, is expected, budget, scheduled, estimates, forecasts, intends, anticipates or does not anticipate, or believes, or variations of such words and phrases or state that certain actions, events or results may, could, would, might or will be taken, occur or be achieved. Assumptions upon which such forward-looking statements are based are in turn based on factors and events that are not within the control of Randgold Resources Limited ( Randgold ) and there is no assurance they will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of Randgold to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including but not limited to: risks related to mining operations, including political risks and instability and risks related to international operations, actual results of current exploration activities, conclusions of economic evaluations, changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined, as well as those factors discussed in Randgold s filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ). Although Randgold has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Randgold does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements herein, except in accordance with applicable securities laws. CAUTIONARY NOTE TO US INVESTORS: The SEC permits companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proven and probable ore reserves. We use certain terms in this release, such as resources, that the SEC does not recognise and strictly prohibits us from including in our filings with the SEC. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any parts of our resources will ever be converted into reserves which qualify as proven and probable reserves for the purposes of the SEC s Industry Guide number 7. Randgold reports its mineral resources and mineral reserves in accordance with the JORC 2012 code. As such numbers are reported to the second significant digit. They are equivalent to National Instrument 43-101. Mineral resources are reported at a cut-off grade based on a gold price of US$1 500/oz. The reporting of mineral reserves is also in accordance with Industry Guide 7. Pit optimisations are carried out at a gold price of US$1 000/oz, except for Morila which is reported at US$1 300/oz. Mineral reserves are reported at a cut-off grade based on US$1 000/oz gold price within the pit designs. Underground reserves are also based on a gold price of US$1 000/oz. Dilution and ore loss are incorporated into the calculation of reserves. Cautionary note to US investors: The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) permits mining companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proven and probable ore reserves. Randgold uses certain terms in this annual report such as resources, that the SEC does not recognise and strictly prohibits the company from including in its filings with the SEC. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any parts of the company s resources will ever be converted into reserves which qualify as proven and probable reserves for the purposes of the SEC s Industry Guide number 7.