Q3 2025 Cameco Corp Earnings Call

November 5, 2025

Thank you for standing by. This is the conference operator.

Welcome to The Chemical Corporation, third quarter, 2025 results conference call.

As a reminder, all participants are in a listen-only mode. And the conference is being recorded.

Following the introductory remarks, there will be an opportunity to ask questions.

To join the question queue. You may press star then 1 on your telephone keypad,

Should you need assistance during the conference call you may signal an operator by pressing star and zero.

Webcast, participants are asked to wait until the Q&A session before submitting their questions. As the information they are looking for maybe you provided during the presentation.

The Q&A session will conclude at 9:00 am Eastern Time.

I would now like to turn the conference over to Corey cough. Vice president investor relations. Please go ahead.

Cory Kos: Thank you, operator, and good morning everyone. Welcome to Cameco's Q3 Conference Call. I would like to acknowledge that we are calling in from both Toronto and Saskatoon today. Toronto is on Treaty 13 territory in the traditional territory of many nations, including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabe, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee, and the Wendat peoples, and now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples. Our corporate office in Saskatoon, which is on Treaty 6 territory, is the traditional territory of the Cree people and homeland of the Métis. With us in Toronto are Tim Gitzel, CEO, Grant Isaac, President and COO, and Heidi Shockey, SVP and CFO. Rachelle Girard, SVP and Chief Corporate Officer, is joining from our Saskatoon headquarters.

Thank you, operator. And good morning, everyone. Welcome to chemicals third quarter conference. Call

I would like to acknowledge that we are calling in from both Toronto and Saskatoon today.

Toronto was on treaty 13 territory and the traditional territory of many nations including the missaghi that

And the windat peoples, and now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit and matei peoples.

Our corporate office in Saskatoon, which is on treaty 6, territory, is the traditional territory of the creep people, and homeland of the matey.

With us, in Toronto are Tim Gil, CEO.

Grand Isaac president and coo,

and Heidi shock, SVP and CFO.

Cory Kos: I'll hand it over to Tim momentarily to speak to the strong financial results we've delivered through the first nine months of the year, which have kept Cameco in a solid position amid growing momentum in nuclear markets. Tim will also touch on the recently announced agreement for the US government to purchase Westinghouse reactors, which is expected to drive significant value to Westinghouse and to Cameco, setting up the Westinghouse reactors as the leading technology in the global deployment of gigawatt-scale nuclear. After, we will open up to your questions. Today's call will be approximately one hour, concluding at 9:00 AM Eastern Time. Our goal is to be open and transparent with our communication. We want to respect everyone's time and conclude the call by 9:00 AM.

Michelle Gerard SVP and chief corporate officer is joining from our Saskatoon headquarters.

I'll hand it over to Tim momentarily, to speak to the strong financial results we've delivered through the first 9 months of the year, which have kept camo in a solid position amid growing momentum in nuclear markets.

Tim will also touch on. The recently announced agreement for the US government to purchase Westinghouse reactors. Which is expected to drive significant value to Westinghouse in the Campo. Setting up the Westinghouse reactors as the leading technology in the global deployment of gigawatt scale nuclear.

After we will open up to your questions.

Today's call will be approximately 1 hour concluding at 9:00 a.m. eastern time.

Cory Kos: Therefore, should we not get to your questions during this call, or if you would like to get into detailed financial modeling questions about our results, we will be happy to respond to any follow-up inquiries. There are a few ways you can contact us with additional questions. You can reach out to the contacts provided in our news release, you can submit a question through the Send Us a Message link in the Investors section of our website, or you can use the Ask a Question form at the bottom of the webcast screen, and we'll be happy to follow up after this call. If you join the conference call through our website event page, there are slides available which will be displayed during the call. In addition, for your reference, our quarterly investor handout is available for download in a PDF file on our website at cameco.com.

Our goal is to be open and transparent with our communication and we want to respect everyone's time and conclude the call by 9:00 a.m. therefore. Should we not get to your questions during this call? Or if you would like to get into details Financial modeling questions about our results, we will be happy to respond to any follow-up. Inquiries

There are a few ways you can contact us with additional questions.

You can reach out to the contacts provided in our news release.

You can submit a question through the send us a message link in the investor section of our website or you can use the ask a question form at the bottom of the webcast screen and we'll be happy to follow up after this call.

Cory Kos: Today's conference call is open to all members of the investment community, including the media. During the Q&A session, please limit yourself to two questions and return to the queue. Note that this conference call will include forward-looking information which is based on a number of assumptions, and actual results could differ materially. You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from these forward-looking statements, and we do not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statements we make today, except as required by law. As required by securities laws, we also need to make you aware that during today's discussion, the company will make a number of references to non-IFRS and other financial measures. Cameco believes these measures provide investors with useful perspective on underlying business trends, and a full reconciliation of non-IFRS financial measures is available at cameco.com/invest.

If you join the conference call to our website event page, our slides available, which will be displayed during the call. In addition for your reference, our quarterly investor handout is available for download in a PDF file on our website at camo.com.

Media.

During the Q&A session, please limit yourself to 2 questions and return to the queue.

note that this conference call will include forward-looking information, which is, based on a number of assumptions and actual results could differ materially

You should not place on your Reliance on forward-looking statements actual results. May differ materially from these forward-looking statements and we do not undertake any obligations to update. Any forward-looking statements, we make today except as required by law.

Cory Kos: Please refer to our most recent annual information form and MD&A for more information about the factors that could cause these different results and the assumptions we have made. I will now turn it over to our CEO, Tim Gitzel.

As required by Securities laws. We also need to make you aware that during today's discussion. The company will make a number of references to non-ifrs and other Financial measures chemical believes these measures provide investors with useful perspective on underlying business Trends and a full reconciliation of non-ifrs. Financial measures is available at chemical.com invest.

Please refer to our most recent annual information form and mdna. For more information about the factors that could cause these different results and the assumptions we have made,

Tim Gitzel: Well, thank you, Cory, and hello, everyone. We appreciate you taking the time to join our discussion today. Hope everyone is doing well and has had the opportunity to enjoy some quality time with friends and family over the past few months, whether that meant settling into the last days of summer or enjoying the early signs of spring, depending on where you are in the world. The baseball fans out there, what a ride it was for the Toronto Blue Jays and the L.A. Dodgers in the World Series this past week. As Cory said, we're actually calling in from Toronto, Canada today, and I can tell you the air is still a little heavy.

I will now turn it over to our CEO. Tim gitel.

Well thank you, Corey. And hello everyone. We appreciate you taking the time to join our discussion today.

Hope everyone is doing well and has had the opportunity to enjoy some quality time with friends and family over the past few months.

Whether that meant settling into the last days of summer, or enjoying the early signs of spring, depending on where you are in the world.

The Baseball fans out there, what a ride. It was for the Toronto Blue Jays and the LA Dodgers. In the World Series this past week,

Tim Gitzel: Even though the home team Blue Jays didn't come out with the trophy as the only Major League Baseball team here in Canada, they certainly gave us all a thrilling run and plenty to be proud of. We're here in Eastern Canada for this call because we had the opportunity as a board and a management team to head south to Georgia yesterday, where we took a tour of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, which are Westinghouse AP1000 technology and the two newest reactors in the US. Seeing that technology in action was a powerful reminder of what's possible when innovation, policy, and industry align. Speaking of alignment, I'm delighted to start today by touching on the recent announcement of the transformative partnership between Cameco, Brookfield, and the US government and Westinghouse, marking a major milestone for the company and for the entire sector.

As Corey said we're actually calling in from Toronto Canada today and I can tell you the air is still a little heavy.

Even though the home team Blue Jays didn't come out with the trophy as the only major league baseball team here in Canada.

they certainly gave us all a thrilling run and plenty to be proud of

We're here in Eastern Canada for this call because we had the opportunity as a board and a management team to head south to Georgia yesterday.

We took a tour of Vogtle Units 3 and 4, which are Westinghouse AP1000 technology, and are the two newest reactors in the U.S.

Seeing that technology in action was a powerful reminder of what's possible when innovation policy and industry align.

Speaking of alignment, I'm delighted to start today by touching on the recent announcement of the transformative partnership.

Between camo Brookfield and the US government and Westinghouse.

Marking a major milestone for the company and for the entire sector.

Tim Gitzel: Backed by at least $80 billion in planned investments in Westinghouse nuclear reactors, we expect this milestone will accelerate the global deployment of Westinghouse's reactor technology, strengthening energy security, revitalizing domestic supply chains, and creating significant growth opportunities for both Westinghouse and for Cameco. For the nuclear industry, this long-term commitment to new nuclear is a clear sign that the growth story continues to build momentum. It's not just about energy security. It's about powering the infrastructure behind AI, data centers, and hard-to-abate sectors with the next generation of clean, reliable electricity. For Westinghouse, the partnership highlights clear support for its best-in-class reactor technology from the nation that hosts the largest nuclear fleet and has the most significant experience in operating nuclear reactors. The support from the US bolsters confidence for the global jurisdictions that are currently advancing toward AP1000 deployment.

Backed by at least 80 billion dollars US in planned investments in Westinghouse nuclear reactors.

We expect this Milestone will accelerate the global deployment of westinghouse's reactor technology.

Strengthening energy security.

revitalizing domestic Supply chains and creating significant growth opportunities for both Westinghouse and for camo,

For the nuclear industry. This long-term commitment to new nuclear is a clear sign that the growth story continues to build momentum.

It's not just about energy security, it's about powering the infrastructure behind AI data centers, and hard to Abate sectors with the next generation of clean, reliable electricity.

For Westinghouse the partnership highlights clear support for its best-in-class, reactor technology from the nation that hosts. The largest nuclear Fleet and has the most significant experience in operating nuclear reactors.

Tim Gitzel: For those countries still deciding on a technology for their nuclear build-out, this partnership should provide an incredible amount of confidence that the Westinghouse designs are the technology of choice. For us at Cameco, the agreement adds significant support to the industry growth story. It's positive for the outlook for nuclear across North America and globally, and therefore positive for Cameco's long-term contracting and production strategy. If it wasn't already clear from the press release this week, let me reiterate that the agreement signed with the US government is about support for nuclear energy and Westinghouse reactor technology. That's a great development for Cameco and our stakeholders, thanks to our investment in Westinghouse. Let me directly address some of the misinformation we've seen published in the last few days.

The support from the US bolsters confidence for the global jurisdictions that are currently advancing toward ap1000 deployment.

And for those countries, still deciding on a technology for their nuclear buildout. This partnership should provide an incredible amount of confidence that the Westinghouse designs are the technology of choice.

For us at camo. The agreement adds significant support to the industry growth story.

This positive for the outlook for nuclear across North, America, and globally, and therefore positive for chemicals. Long-term Contracting, and production strategy.

It wasn't already clear from the press release this week. Let me reiterate that the agreement signed with the US government is about support for nuclear energy and Westinghouse reactor technology.

That's a great development for chemical and our stakeholders. Thanks to our investment in Westinghouse.

Tim Gitzel: The US government partnership interest does not extend to Cameco's core business. Although our uranium products and fuel services are certainly well positioned to support the build-out and long-term operation of the global fleet as it grows. Partnership strengthens our footprint to create meaningful value for our stakeholders. The participation interest by the US government is only focused on the Westinghouse business. It's a rare opportunity to combine policy momentum, proven technology, and commercial scale, and we believe it positions both Cameco and Westinghouse to deliver sustainable growth, ongoing innovation, and energy leadership for decades to come. As we look ahead, it's clear that today nuclear energy is not just maintaining relevance as the global energy landscape evolves, it's undergoing an expansion and meaningful transformation. Within that transformation, the entire fuel cycle is now receiving more significant attention than ever, not just the front end of uranium mining.

We need directly address some of the misinformation we've seen published in the last few days.

Report the build out and long-term operation of the global Fleet as it grows.

Partnership strengthens our footprint to create meaningful value for our stakeholders.

But the participation interest by the US government is only focused on the Westinghouse business.

It's a rare opportunity to combine policy momentum. Proven technology and Commercial scale.

And we believe it positions both chemical and Westinghouse to deliver sustainable growth.

Ongoing Innovation and energy leadership for decades to come.

As we look ahead, it's clear that today nuclear energy is not just maintaining relevance as the global energy landscape evolves.

It's undergoing an expansion and meaningful transformation.

Tim Gitzel: From conversion and enrichment to fuel fabrication and reactor deployment, the momentum is real, and we're frequently seeing new promises of future supply and capacity within each stage. Unfortunately, a compelling narrative alone won't turn a turbine. Execution is key, and Cameco is in an exceptional position to execute and deliver value. With decades of experience operating unique and complex assets, we play a critical role in the long-term health of the nuclear industry. That experience gives us the ability to be selective and strategic, committing unencumbered productive capacity under long-term contracts that align with customer needs. Our approach ensures downside protection while preserving exposure to future market price improvements. It's a disciplined strategy that balances risk and opportunity built on trust, performance, and a deep understanding of how to build value across market cycles.

Within that transformation, the entire fuel cycle is now receiving more significant attention than ever. Not just the front end of uranium mining.

From conversion and enrichment to fuel fabrication and reactor deployment, the momentum is real.

And we're frequently seeing new promises of future Supply and capacity within each stage.

Unfortunately, the compelling narrative alone. Won't turn a turbine.

Execution is key.

And kamo is in an exceptional position to execute and deliver value.

With Decades of experience operating unique and complex assets. We play a critical role in the long-term health of the nuclear industry.

That experience gives us the ability to be selective and strategic committing unencumbered productive capacity under long-term contracts that aligned with customer needs.

Our approach ensures downside protection while preserving exposure to Future market price improvements.

Tim Gitzel: As demand continues to grow, driven by energy security, decarbonization, and digital infrastructure, we're confident Cameco, with assets that are critical to the industry, is well positioned to support the next chapter of nuclear growth. Turning to a discussion centered on those assets, I want to run through a few brief highlights for the quarter and year to date. I'll first note the update we shared in late August regarding our McArthur River and Key Lake operations, where development delays in 2025 resulted in a decreased annual production forecast. We previously expected 18 million pounds at McArthur Key, and we now expect packaged production of between 14 and 15 million pounds on a 100% basis.

It's a discipline strategy that balances risk and opportunity built on trust performance and a deep understanding of how to build value across Market Cycles.

As demand continues to grow driven by energy security, decarbonization and digital infrastructure. We're confident camo with assets that are critical to the industry is well positioned to support the next chapter of nuclear growth.

Turning to a discussion centered on those assets. I want to run through a few brief highlights for the quarter and year to date.

I'll first note, the update we shared in late, August regarding our MacArthur River and key Lake operations.

For development blaze in 2025, resulted in a decreased annual production, forecast.

Tim Gitzel: Depending on operational performance at the Cigar Lake mine in the Q4, we may be able to make up some of the shortfall from McArthur, but we do not expect to make up all of it. We therefore reduced our consolidated production outlook for 2025, and we now expect our share of production to be up to 20 million pounds of uranium. Remember that while our mine production is expected to be lower, our supply sourcing flexibility is one of our many competitive advantages. At JV Inkai, which as a committed purchase is among our sources, production is going well. We continue to expect production of 8.3 million pounds, of which our purchase allocation is 3.7 million pounds.

We previously expected, 18 million pounds of MacArthur key and we now expect packaged production between 14 and 15 million pounds on 100% basis.

Depending on operational performance at the cigar Lake mine in the fourth quarter, we may be able to make up some of the shortfall from MacArthur.

But we do not expect to make up all of it.

We therefore reduced our Consolidated production outlook for 2025, and we. Now, expect our share of production to be up to 20 million pounds of uranium

Remember that, while our mind production is expected to be lower. Our supply sourcing flexibility is 1 of our many competitive advantages.

At JB inai, which, as a committed purchase is among our sources.

Production is going well.

Tim Gitzel: A portion of that allocation is currently in transit to Canada, including about 900,000 pounds that had remained at JV Inkai from our 2024 purchase allocation. In our fuel services division, our annual production outlook remains on track, totaling between 13 million and 14 million KGU of combined fuel services products. To meet our sales commitments and deliver full cycle value, we plan years in advance and always provide for flexibility in how we source the supply we need, including production, inventory, product loans, and both market and long-term purchases. This quarter reflects our flexibility as we adjusted a number of the supply levers that we have at our disposal, including our planned market purchases and product loans to help offset the impact of the production changes. We will continue to balance all available sources with a focus on value creation, risk management, and sustainability.

We continue to expect production of 8.3 million pounds of which are purchase allocation is 3.7 million pounds.

Portion of that, allocation is currently in transit to Canada, including about 900,000 pounds. That had remained a JB inkai from our 2024 purchase allocation.

In our fuel services division, our annual production Outlook remains on track.

Totaling between 13 million and 14 million kgu of combined Fuel Services products.

To meet our sales commitments and deliver full cycle value. We plan years in advance and always provide for flexibility in how we Source the supply. We need including production inventory, product loans, and both market and long-term purchases.

This quarter reflects our flexibility as we adjusted a number of the supply levers that we have at our disposal, including our planned Market purchases and product loans.

To help offset the impact of the production changes.

We will continue to balance all available sources with a focus on value creation.

Risk management and sustainability.

Tim Gitzel: Moving to Cameco's financial results, after a solid first nine months, we're in a position for a strong finish to the year, supported by the higher expected deliveries in our uranium and fuel services segments in Q4 and a solid quarter for Westinghouse. Key contributor to the positive performance year to date was the increase of over $170 million in our share of Westinghouse's revenue recorded in Q2. While quarterly uranium and fuel services sales volumes were lower overall, we saw continued improvement in average realized prices in both segments. As we always highlight, quarterly results will vary due to timing of our customers' requirements, and it's our annual expectations that matter most. As I said earlier, those expectations continue to point to higher deliveries in Q4.

After a solid first 9 months, we're in a position for a strong finish to the year.

Supported by the higher expected, deliveries in our uranium and Fuel Services segments in the fourth quarter.

And a solid quarter for Westinghouse.

He contributor to the positive performance year to date was the increase of over 170 million us in our share of westinghouse's Revenue recorded in the second quarter.

While quarterly, uranium and Fuel Services sales volumes were lower overall.

We saw continued Improvement in average realized prices in both segments.

As we always highlight, quarterly results will vary due to timing of our customers requirements.

and it's our annual expectations, that matter most

As I said earlier, those expectations continue to point to higher deliveries in the fourth quarter.

Tim Gitzel: Looking at our financial position, we've remained disciplined in managing liquidity to support our operations and sourcing decisions. Our discipline enables us to deliver on our strategy, take advantage of opportunities, and self-manage risk. We're maintaining a strong balance sheet guided by our investment grade rating and supported by strong cash flow generation. From a financial perspective, we are in excellent shape with $779 million in cash and cash equivalents, $1 billion in total debt, and a $1 billion undrawn revolving credit facility. Subsequent to the quarter in October, we received $171.5 million US from Westinghouse related to the Korean reactor build in the Czech Republic, which was announced in Q2.

Looking at our financial position. We've remained disciplined in managing liquidity to support our operations and sourcing decisions.

Our discipline enables us to deliver on our strategy. Take advantage of opportunities and self-manage risk.

For maintaining a strong balance sheet Guided by our investment grade rating, and supported by strong cash flow generation.

So from a financial perspective, we are in excellent shape with 779 million in cash and cash equivalents.

1 billion in total debt.

And a 1 billion dollar, undrawn revolving credit facility.

Tim Gitzel: With our improving financial performance and the receipt of the additional distribution from Westinghouse, our board of directors elected to accelerate our plan to grow the dividend and have declared a 2025 annual dividend of CAD 0.24 per common share. These are incredibly exciting times for this industry, the outlook is becoming stronger with each passing day. That strength is reflected in Cameco's improving performance as we navigate challenges and seize opportunities. It's about more than just supplying fuel. It's about enabling a future energy system that is secure, reliable, and carbon-free. We remain focused on strong partnerships and long-term value creation, enhancing energy and national security objectives, and advancing nuclear as a cornerstone of the clean energy transition. We're not just participating in the energy transition, we're shaping it. Before we conclude, I'd like to highlight a couple of changes to our executive team.

Subsequent to the quarter in October. We received 171.5 million us from Westinghouse related to the Korean reactor building in the Czech Republic, which was announced in the second quarter.

With our improving financial performance and the receipt of the additional distribution from Westinghouse.

Our board of directors elected to accelerate our plan to grow the dividend and have declared a 2025 annual dividend of 24 cents per common. Share,

These are incredibly exciting times for this industry and the Outlook is becoming stronger with each passing day.

That strength is reflected in Cameco's improving performance as we navigate challenges and see opportunities.

It's about more than just supplying fuel. It's about enabling a future energy system, that is secure reliable and carbon-free.

We remain focused on strong partnerships and long-term value creation.

Enhancing energy and national security, objectives, and advancing nuclear as a cornerstone of the clean energy transition.

We're not just participating in the energy transition. We're shaping it.

Tim Gitzel: Our Chief Marketing Officer, David Doerksen, has announced his intention to retire at the end of the first quarter of 2026. It has been an absolute pleasure to work with David during his 28-year career with Cameco, over which he has held senior positions in corporate strategy, corporate development, treasury, and marketing. On behalf of the board and management team, I'd like to thank David for his significant contributions, not only to Cameco, but to the entire nuclear industry, and for sharing his deep industry knowledge and expertise over the years. We wish him the absolute best in his retirement. Beginning 1 January 2026, David will assume the role of Senior Advisor, Marketing until his retirement date of 31 March 2026. Lisa Aitken, currently Vice President, Marketing, has been with Cameco's marketing group for nearly 20 years.

Before we conclude, I'd like to highlight a couple of changes to our executive team.

Our chief marketing officer. David Dirksen has announced his intention to retire at the end of the first quarter of 2026.

It has been an absolute pleasure to work with David during his 28-year career with Gamo over, which he has held senior positions in corporate strategy, corporate development Treasury and marketing.

On behalf of the board and management team. I'd like to thank David for his significant contributions. Not only to camo, but to the entire nuclear industry and for sharing his deep industry, knowledge and expertise over the years.

We wish him the absolute best in his retirement.

Beginning January, 1 2026, David will assume the role of senior adviser marketing until his retirement date of March 31st 2026.

Tim Gitzel: She will be appointed Senior Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer effective 1 January 2026. I'm pleased to welcome Lisa with her strong leadership and the market experience that she brings to the senior executive team. Tim Shirkey, currently Senior Director in the marketing group, will move into Lisa's previous role of Vice President, Marketing. Thank you all for joining us today, both on the line and via webcast. We appreciate your continued interest, and we'll now open the floor to your questions.

Lisa Aken currently vice president, marketing has been with chemicals Marketing Group for nearly 20 years.

She will be appointed senior vice president and chief marketing officer effective January 1 2026.

I'm pleased to welcome Lisa with her strong leadership in the market experience that she brings to the senior executive team.

Tim Cherie currently senior director, in the Marketing Group will move into Lisa's previous role of Vice President marketing.

So, thank you all for joining us today, both on the line and via webcast.

We appreciate your continued interest and will now open the floor to your questions.

Operator: We will now begin the question and answer session. In the interest of time, we ask you to limit your questions to one with one supplemental. If you have additional questions, you are welcome to rejoin the queue. To join the question queue, you may press Star then one on your telephone keypad. You will hear a tone acknowledging your request. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing any keys. To withdraw your question, please press Star then two. Webcast participants are welcome to submit questions through the box at the bottom of the webcast frame. The Cameco investor relations team will follow up with you by email after the call. Once again, anyone on the conference call who wishes to ask a question, you may press Star one at this time. The first question today comes from Ralph Profiti with Stifel.

We will now begin the question and answer session.

In the interest of time, we ask you to limit your questions to 1 with 1 supplemental.

If you have additional questions, you are, welcome to rejoin the queue.

You work your own acknowledging, your request?

If you are using a speaker-phone, please pick up your handset before pressing any keys.

To withdraw your question. Please. Press star. Then 2

Webcast. Participants are welcome to submit questions through the box at the bottom of the webcast frame.

The chemical investor relations team will follow up with you via email after the call.

Once again, anyone on the conference call who wishes to ask a question, you may press star 1 at this time.

Operator: Please go ahead.

The first question today comes from Ralph profiti with diesel, please go ahead.

Ralph Profiti: Thank you, operator, and good morning, team Cameco. Tim or Grant, on the issue of the standby product loan facilities, which are part of the supply levers, are those discussions as flexible, and is that material as accessible as in the past, say the last one or two years? What can you tell us about the timing of when those pounds need to be repaid?

Uh, thank you operator and good morning, team kamo.

Tim Gitzel: Morning, Ralph, and thanks for the question. I'll get Grant to handle it.

Uh, Tim Tim or Grant, uh, on the issue of the standby product loan facilities, which are part of the, uh, Supply. Levers are those discussions as flexible and is that material, as accessible? Uh, as in the past, say, the last 1, or 2 years. And what can you tell us about the timing of when those pounds need to be repaid?

Grant Isaac: Yeah, Ralph, I'm just gonna use a word you did, which is flexible. We don't have a standard arrangement. It differs by counterparty. Availability continues to be strong as demonstrated by the adjustments to our outlook. Production was down, but our market purchases didn't go up. In terms of what the actual repayment looks like, that just differs from counterparty to counterparty, and we just always aim to create the most amount of value under our contract portfolio for doing it. A really important tool in our toolbox. I can't emphasize that enough. It is a very unique incumbent advantage that Cameco has that others don't, an advantage we continue to take full use of when required.

Morning, Ralph, and thanks for the question. I'll get Grant to handle it. Yeah, Ralph, I'm just going to use a word you did, which is "flexible." We don't have a standard arrangement; it differs by counterparty. Availability continues to be strong, as demonstrated by the adjustments to our outlook. Production was down, but our...

Grant Isaac: Ultimately it comes from the fact that you can only store uranium at a few places, and we just happen to have a couple of those licensed facilities and, therefore it gives us a tremendous advantage.

Market purchases didn't go up. Um and then in terms of what the actual, uh, repayment looks like that just differs from counterparty to counterparty and we just always aim to uh, create the most amount of value under our contract portfolio for doing it. So, a really important tool in our toolbox. I, I can't emphasize that enough. It is a very unique incumbent advantage that camo has that others don't. Um, and Advantage. We can continue to take uh, uh, full use of uh, when required uh, and and ultimately it comes from the fact that you can only store uranium at a, at a few places and we just happen to have a couple of those licensed facilities and and therefore, it gives us a tremendous advantage.

Ralph Profiti: Okay, thanks for that. I have a follow-up that's sort of on a different topic. The US seems to be taking a much more of a leadership role when we think about, you know, the demand outlook. Do you think that we're close to a market where conversion production decisions may be viewed differently on pricing dynamics if that material is sourced from within the US versus non-US production? Do you still see this as a one-price homogeneous market?

Okay, thanks for that. And uh, I have a, a follow-up that's sort of on a different topic. Um, the US seems to be taking a a, a much, more of a leadership role when we think about. Um, you know, the demand Outlook. Um, and do you think that we're close to a market where chemicals production decisions?

Grant Isaac: Yeah, Ralph, that is it's a great question. I would say, this market already is recognizing the value of incumbent producers, in particular sovereign safe jurisdictions. What I mean there, I'm just gonna illustrate it by the long-term price of uranium.

May be viewed differently on pricing Dynamics. If that material is sourced from within the US versus non us production, or do you still see this as a 1 price homogeneous Market?

Ralph Profiti: Yeah.

Grant Isaac: You know, we see a long-term price around $84 US per pound. You know, folks have heard me say before, when you look at that long-term price, remember all you're looking at is the information that's collected from those who are willing to fix a portion of their forward sales. Market-related contracts don't inform that long-term price. We know at Cameco we can do better than today's long-term price if we were fixing a portion of our supply going forward. Given that long-term price is an average, it must mean that somebody is fixing below that $84, clearly indicating that Cameco is capable of driving premiums in the market. I think that type of market pricing dynamic is already occurring. I think some jurisdictions are having to discount around that.

Yeah. Ralph that is a it's a great question. And I would say um this Market already is recognizing the value of incumbent producers in particular sovereignty, jurisdictions. And what I mean there, I'm just going to illustrate it by the the long-term price of uranium, you know, we see a long-term price of around $84 us per pound. And I, you know, folks have heard me say before when you're, when you look at that long-term price. Remember, all you're looking at is the information that's collected from those who are willing to fix a portion of their forward sales Market related contracts, don't inform that long term price.

We know as kamo we can do better than today's long-term price. Uh, if we were fixing a portion of our supply going forward,

Given that, that long-term price is an average. It must mean that somebody is fixing below that 84 dollars. Clearly indicating the camo is capable of driving premiums in the market. Um, so I think that type of uh, Market, uh,

Grant Isaac: Unfortunately, when the price reporters then report, they like to report the lowest offered as opposed to, you know, where the demand is actually sitting. That's just a construct in our market. One that we think is improving, but clearly indicates that stronger pricing is there for not just origin, Ralph, but the quality of the supplier. When we're dealing with a counterparty, they know Cameco has never missed a delivery of uranium, and that's worth a lot.

Uh, pricing Dynamic is already occurring. I think some jurisdictions are having to Discount around that, um, unfortunately, when the price reporters, then report, they like to report the lowest offered as opposed to, um, you know where the demand is actually setting. That's just a construct in our Market 1 that we think is improving, uh, but clearly indicates that stronger price.

Pricing is there for not just origin Ralph.

But the quality of the supplier and when we're dealing with a counterparty, they know kamo has never missed a delivery of uranium and that's worth a lot.

Ralph Profiti: Those are helpful answers. Thank you to both.

Tim Gitzel: Yeah. Thanks for your questions, Ralph.

Those are helpful answers. Thank you to both.

Yeah. Thanks for your questions Ralph.

Operator: The next question comes from Brian Lee with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Brian Lee: Hey, guys. Good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. Condolences on your Blue Jays. What a great series.

The next question comes from Brian, Lee with golden sex, please go ahead.

Grant Isaac: Ouch.

Brian Lee: On the flip side, kudos on the Westinghouse, Cameco, Brookfield US government deal. I think a lot of folks are trying to hone in on some of the details here. Not sure what you can share here, but I'll do my best. You know, with regards to the sort of $80 billion agreement here with the government, I guess there's a lot of questions just around how the mechanics are going to work. You know, it sounds like the government will be responsible for ultimately reaching the FID go, no-go decision. Then maybe thoughts around including the required IPO type of event if that were to come to fruition between now and January 29.

Brian Lee: Also what the, you know, the 20% equity stake from the government and the $17.5 billion of cash distributions. Just maybe walk us through some of the mechanics of how those pieces came together, but just starting from the top of the funnel maybe first, you know, government FID, what's involved there? What are the milestones, between now and then?

But, uh, on the flip side, Kudos on the, uh, the the Westinghouse camo Brookfield US Government deal. I think, um, a lot of folks are, are, are trying to hone in on some of the details. You're not sure what you can share here, but um, I'll I'll, I'll do my best, uh, you know, with, with regards to the sort of 80 billion dollar agreement here with the government. I, I guess there's a lot of questions just around how the mechanics are going to work. You know, it sounds like the government will be responsible for ultimately, uh, reaching the FID go, no-go decision, and then may maybe thoughts around, um, uh, including the, the required IPO, um, type of event if, if that were to come to fruition between now and January 29th. Uh, and and also what the, um, you know, the 20% Equity stake from the government, and the 17 and a half billion dollars of, uh, cash distributions. Just maybe walk us through some of the mechanics of how

Tim Gitzel: Brian, I'll just say at a high level, we're absolutely delighted to be part of this deal with our partner, Brookfield. All came together about a week ago, I guess it was a week ago Tuesday, 28 October. We signed the deal. I was with a bunch of CEOs from US Utilities yesterday, and it's really we've been waiting to kickstart the nuclear build in the United States and really around the world, and I think this does it. Grant and Dominic have been very involved with Brookfield and the US government and others in putting it together. Grant, maybe you can just walk through what we know today. Obviously, we're early in the process and we're working out the details, but what we know today, Grant.

How those pieces came together, but starting from the top of the funnel, maybe first just, you know, government, FID. What’s involved there? What are the milestones between now and then?

Brian, uh, I'll just say at a high level. We're absolutely delighted to be part of this, uh, deal with our partner Brookfield, all came together uh, about a week ago, I guess, a week ago, Tuesday, October 28th, that we signed the deal. Uh, I was with a bunch of CEOs from us, utilities yesterday, and it's really we've been waiting to kickstart

Grant Isaac: Yeah. What this reflects obviously is a very clear signal from the US government that it is time. We were, I think, struggling as an industry in the United States to find lift-off conditions. What is going to get reactors going? And not just a first 2 pack, but a meaningful order of reactors that would stimulate sufficiently the supply chain in the US and quite frankly, globally. And I think the US government just recognized that for it to have energy security, for it to take advantage of the tremendous technology that is the AP1000, it would need to be a bigger investment than just sort of the next 2. What the US government has done is committed to step in and be that stimulant, if you will. Their commitment is to facilitate the financing.

Start the the uh, the nuclear build in the United States and and really around the world. And I think uh this does it Grant and Dominic have been very uh involved with the Brookfield and the US government and others and putting it together. So Grant maybe you can just walk through. So what we know today, obviously we're early in the process and we're working out the details. But uh what we know today Grant? Yeah. What this reflects obviously is a very clear signal from the US government that it is time. Um, we were, I think struggling as an industry in the United States to find liftoff conditions, what, what is going to get uh, reactors going and and not just a first 2 pack, but a meaningful order of reactors that would stimulate sufficiently the supply chain in the US and quite frankly globally. And and uh, I think the US government just recognized that for it to have energy security for it to take advantage of the tremendous technology.

Grant Isaac: Just on that point, I would say we are assured there are a number of options that are available to the US government in order to facilitate that financing. That ranges from, you know, direct support through known structures like perhaps the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office, all the way through to project financing dollars that may come from other jurisdictions. We're assured that there is a lot of interest in investing this minimum $80 billion in order to begin the process. The next step then is to figure out what an order looks like. You know, when are we FID. That is part of the next steps of coming to a definitive agreement. We've got a lot of things to work out. We are just absolutely delighted by the fact that this is entirely performance-based.

That is the ap1000. It would need to be a bigger investment than just sort of the next 2. So what the US government has done is committed to step in and be that stimulant if you will. Uh, their commitment is to facilitate the financing and just on that point. I would say we are assured. There are a number of options that are available to the US government in order to fill a facilitate that financing that ranges from you know direct support through.

Grant Isaac: In order for the US government to meet its vesting interest in this potential part-partnership, they have to deliver, and they have to deliver fast. We just think that's a wonderful alignment for Westinghouse and the US government, and therefore for Brookfield and Cameco with the US government. After that, if we see FID on this $80 billion minimum worth of spend stimulating the supply chain, getting the reactor technology going, identifying sites, removing any of the impediments to approvals and licenses and permits, then the US government will have gone a long way to meet its vesting condition. That $80 billion then allows it to consider participating in the Westinghouse business. I'm just gonna draw a point on that. The Westinghouse business only. It's not a participation interest in either Cameco or Brookfield.

Known structures, like perhaps the department of Energy's Loan program office all the way through to pro project. Financing dollars. That may come from other jurisdictions. We're assured that, there is a lot of interest uh, in investing this minimum 80 billion dollars in order to begin the process. The next step then is to figure out what an order looks like. Uh, you know, when are we at FID? And that is part of the, the the next steps of of coming to a definitive agreement, we've got a lot of things to work out. Um, we we, we are just absolutely delighted by the fact that this is entirely performance-based in in order for the US government to meet its vesting interests. In this potential partnership, they have to deliver and they have to deliver fast. And we just think that's a wonderful alignment for for Westinghouse, in the US government and therefore for Brookfield and Camo with the US government.

Uh, after that, if we see FID, on this 80 billion, minimum worth of spend stimulating the supply chain, getting the reactor technology going, uh, identifying sites removing, um, any of the impediments to approvals and licenses and permits.

Grant Isaac: It is only in Westinghouse. The mechanics of that are very simple. Westinghouse is worth a lot more today than when Brookfield and Cameco acquired it. That's recognized in that first claim of $17.5 billion of distributions. They go to the current owners. That is the value that we have been building and we have been investing in. The US government support would then participate beyond that. If you use the example of a $30 billion underwritten value at time of an IPO decision, you have the potential for the US government to be an 8% holder in Westinghouse, the difference between $17.5 billion and $30 billion, which by the way, seems like a very reasonable participation. That means they have performed.

is that is the value that we have been building and we have been investing in

Grant Isaac: They have invested $80 billion. Reactors are under construction in the United States, which are then creating a platform for a global deployment of this leading AP1000 technology. I always think of it as that means the pie is growing and everybody's slice has just gotten a heck of a lot bigger. This is set up to be a performance-based, fully aligned partnership designed to create energy security in the United States and be the platform for energy security elsewhere. A lot still to be decided: source of funding, site selection. Obviously, we have definitive agreements to complete. I just want everybody to understand the main takeaway is the United States has decided it is time to start building AP1000s, we are very excited about that.

Uh, the US government support then uh, would would then participate beyond that. And so, if you use the example of a 30 billion dollar underwritten value, at time of an IPO decision, you have the potential for the US government to be an 8% holder. In Westinghouse the difference between 17 and 1.5 billion and 30 billion, which, by the way, seems like a very reasonable participation. That means they have performed. That means they have invested 80 billion dollars. That means reactors are under construction in the United States, which are then creating a platform for a global deployment of this leading, AP 10000 technology.

and,

And and I I always think of it as that means. The pi is growing and everybody's slice has just gotten a heck of a lot bigger. So so this is set up to be a performance-based fully aligned partnership. Designed to create energy Security in the United States and be the platform for energy security elsewhere. A a lot still to be decided source of funding site selection. Um, obviously, we have definitive agreements to to, uh, to complete

But I just want everybody to understand the the main takeaway is the United States has decided. It is time to start building AP 10000 and we are very excited about that.

Brian Lee: Super comprehensive. Thank you for all that color. Maybe just the second one, and I'll pass it on, a bit more mundane on the pricing side. You know, we've seen term pricing, up $4 a pound or so in the past couple of months for U3O8 after being flat for most of the year. Be curious what you're seeing in terms of contracting activity, maybe expectations year and to year-end, given what's been a relatively soft volume environment year to date. You know, general thoughts around the appetite amongst customers for higher floor ceilings, given these recent moves in term pricing. Thank you guys.

Super comprehensive, thank you for all that color. Um, maybe just the second 1, and I'll pass it on a bit more mundane. Um, on the pricing side, you know, we've seen term pricing, uh, up 4 bucks a pound. Or so, in the past, couple of months, for you 308, after being flat, um, for most of the Year, be curious, what, what you're seeing in terms of Contracting activity, maybe expectations here and to your end given what's been a, a relatively soft volume environment here today. And then you know, General thoughts around the appetite amongst customers for higher floors ceilings. Um given these recent moves in turn pricing, thank you guys.

Grant Isaac: We continue to be very constructive on where the uranium price needs to go. It is at the heart of the fact that we remain in supply discipline. We are not in a mood to ramp up production because we think price needs to reflect more fundamental production economics than we're seeing today. I point to the World Nuclear Association's recent fuel report. That fuel report indicates an even bigger gap between where demand is going, demand that has just been absolutely strengthened by the US government partnership that we just talked about. Where that demand is going and where the supply is in fact going. I would also point out when we look at something like that gap in the World Nuclear Fuel Report, we believe it actually dramatically understates demand. It does not include the demand that we just talked about.

We continue to be very constructive on where, uh, the uranium price needs to go. It is at the heart of the fact that we remain in Supply discipline. We are, we are not in a mood to ramp up production because we think price needs to reflect, uh, more fundamental production economics than we're seeing today. I, I point to the world, uh, nuclear association's recent fuel report that fuel report, indicates an even bigger gap between where demand is going demand. That was just been absolutely strengthened by the US government partnership that we just talked about where that demand is going and where the supply is. In fact, going

Grant Isaac: That is not baked into there. It does not include the demand that a lot of people are ascribing to nuclear through AI. This is a really important point to make. The fundamental investment opportunity in uranium does not require the AI build-out. You know, that is an absolute accelerant to it, but it just requires the known reactor fleet plus the reactors under construction to continue. We look at the supply side and we say it's grossly overstated. We say that the fuel market report includes stuff that will not be in the market in that timeframe and will not be in the market at an $84 long-term price.

Grant Isaac: We look at these fundamentals, Brian, and we say now is the time to remain disciplined, allow that market to express more demand because that expression of demand is ultimately gonna push prices to where they need to be to incent the next tranche of material that's going to begin to fill that demand. This looks very, very good to an incumbent uranium producer who not only has tier one assets, but is a globally recognized tier one supplier. That term market is just not there yet. A couple of factors for that. On the uranium side, I would say there remains a little bit more focus downstream in the services, especially enrichment, than there is in uranium. On the supply side, like, let's just be really clear.

Like I would also point out when we look at something like that Gap in the world nuclear fuel report, uh we believe it actually dramatically understates demand. It does not include the demand that we just talked about. That is not baked into their. It does not include the demand, that a lot of people are obsessing ascribing to nuclear through Ai and and and this is a really important point to make the the, the fundamental opport investment opportunity in in uranium does not require uh, the AI buildout it is, you know, that is a an absolute accelerant to it, but it is just it just requires the known reactor Fleet plus the reactors under construction to continue. Um, and then we look at the supply side and we say it's grossly overstated, we say that that the, the fuel market report includes stuff that will not be in the market in that time frame and will not be in the Market at an 84, long term price. So we look at these fundamentals, Brian. And we say,

Now, is the time to remain disciplined, allow that market to express more demand because that expression of demand is ultimately going to push prices to where they need to be uh to incent the next tranche of material that's going to begin to fill that demand. This looks very, very good to an incumbent uranium producer who not only has Tier 1 assets. But is a globally recognized Tier 1 supplier that term Market is

Just not there yet a couple of factors for that on the uranium side.

Grant Isaac: One of the headwinds on the demand formation for uranium is all of the hyper promises that are coming from those who have projects that have never delivered before, have never done, quite frankly, anything before, that are promising huge volumes of uranium in a very short period of time. If you're a fuel buyer, you're sitting there wondering if that material is really coming to the market, and it's giving you a little bit of pause. There are those on the supply side that are responsible for some of the hesitation that we're seeing among fuel buyers to bring big uranium demand.

Grant Isaac: Now, ultimately, this is a good thing because those projects will not be proven out, they will not perform well, we're going to see more panic buying in the market, and that's gonna discover probably even higher prices. Now is the time to remain disciplined. That's exactly what you're seeing from us.

Wondering if that material is really coming to the market and it's giving you a little bit of pause. So, so there are, there are those on the supply side, um, that, uh, that are responsible for some of the hesitation that we're seeing among fuel buyers to bring big uranium demand. Now, ultimately, this is a good thing because those projects will not be proven out. Uh, they will not perform well, and then we're going to see more Panic buying in the market, and that's going to discover probably even higher prices. Now is the time to remain disciplined, and that's exactly what you're seeing from us.

Brian Lee: Appreciate it. Thanks a lot, guys.

Tim Gitzel: Thank you, Brian.

Appreciate it. Thanks a lot, guys.

Operator: The next question comes from Alexander Pearce with BMO. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Brian.

The next question comes from, Alexander Pierce with BM. Oh, please. Go ahead.

Alexander Pearce: Great. Morning, all. You touched on the on the Westinghouse partnership. Obviously, it does look now like the pipeline is accelerating in terms of new builds. Maybe you can just touch on, you know, how Westinghouse is set up right now in terms of capacity for new build projects and what kind of investments you think need to be made in the business, obviously, to deliver what could be quite a sizable change in new builds?

Great, uh, morning all. Um, so you you touched on the, um, on the Westinghouse partnership. Um, obviously it does look now like the um, the pipeline

Is accelerating in terms of new builds. Um, maybe you can just touch on on, you know how

Westinghouse is set up right now in terms of capacity for new build projects and and what kind of Investments you think need to be made in the business, obviously, to deliver what could be quite a sizable change um, in in new builds?

Tim Gitzel: Well, Alex, obviously even before this announcement, we had a healthy pipeline of projects. We were just at Vogtle yesterday, the last two that were finished in the US. If you look around the world, there are AP1000s being built today at countries in Eastern Europe that we've been working with that plan to build. I can't think of a whole lot of countries around the world that aren't looking at new nuclear build and AP1000 as part of the build-out. This has just added accelerant, as Grant said, lighter fluid, to the desire to build new AP1000s. On the Westinghouse side, Grant, you can talk about the Energy Systems group.

Grant Isaac: Yeah. The, the key thing to delivering on this kind of vision, Alex, and like Tim said, we were already in flight starting to move forward the Poland new build, the Bulgaria new build, participate in the Czechia new build. There's important Westinghouse equipment that goes into that. At the heart of this are three simple concepts. Number one is standardize, number two is sequence, number three is simplify. If we get that right, it's not clear what the boundary condition is for how much you can put in the pipeline. You know, if you go back to the build-out in the sixties and seventies, you had a situation where Canada was bringing on a reactor a year. The United States was bringing on 7 reactors a year. France was bringing on 8 reactors a year.

Well Alex uh obviously even before this announcement we had a a healthy pipeline of projects uh we were just at Bogle yesterday the 2 that the last 2 that were finished in the US but if you look uh around the world, there are AP 10000 is being built today, countries in Eastern Europe that we've been working with that plan to build and, and can't think of a whole lot of countries around the world that aren't looking at new nuclear build and AP 1000 as part of the, uh, the build out. And so this has just added the accelerant as Grant said lighter fluid to to the desire to build new, AP 10000. And, and so on the on the Westinghouse side Grant, you can talk about the energy systems group.

Yeah the um the the key thing to delivering on this kind of vision Alex and and and like Tim said, we were already in Flight starting to move forward the uh the poll in new build the Bulgaria new build participate in the check in new build. There's a there's important, uh, Westinghouse equipment that goes into that.

At the heart of this.

Are 3. Simple Concepts number 1 is standardized.

Number 2 is sequence.

Number 3 is simplified.

Grant Isaac: Of course, now we're seeing the Chinese starting 10 reactors a year. If you standardize, you sequence, and you simplify, it's not really clear that there's a boundary condition on doing that. If you just look at Westinghouse today, there is capacity to start a number of reactors, as long as those long lead items are flowing and you're not doing a shotgun start on every program and you're sequencing it properly. You can start to build up that supply chain, that stimulated supply chain, allows you to lever to obviously a new outcome or a higher level of orders. We're not there yet, I'm gonna go back to the comments I made about the US government partnership. The key to the $80 billion investment was the understanding that it's not sufficient just to start with the next two.

If we get that right, it's not clear what the boundary condition is for how much you can put in the pipeline, you know. If you go back to the build out in the 60s and 70s, you had a situation where Canada was Canada was bringing on a reactor a year. The United States was bringing on 7 reactors a year. France was bringing on 8 reactors a year and of course now we're seeing the Chinese starting 10 reactors a year so if you standardize you sequence and you simplify it's not really clear that there's a boundary condition on doing that. If you just look at Westinghouse today, there is capacity to start a number of reactors. As long as those long lead, items are flowing and you're not doing a shotgun start on every program in your sequencing it properly. Um, you can then start to build up that supply chain that stimulated supply chain, then allows you to lever to um obviously a

New outcome or a higher level of orders. We're, we're not there yet, but I'm going to go back to the comments. I made about the US government partnership.

Grant Isaac: You have to start with a bigger order, because that bigger order is what creates the critical mass to get the supply chain going. Once that's going, we will understand better what are the investments that need to be made in order to bring that along. We feel very comfortable, you know, that Westinghouse is in a position to start, you know, two-packs a year and put that into the system as long as we standardize, sequence and simplify.

The key to the 80 billion dollar investment was the understanding that it's not sufficient, just to start with the next 2. You have to start with a bigger order because that bigger order is, what creates the critical mass to get the supply chain going. And then once that's going, we will understand better what are the Investments that need to be made in order to bring that along? But we we feel very comfortable you know that Westinghouse is in a position to start you know 2 2 packs a year and put that into the system as long as we standardize sequence and simplify

Alexander Pearce: Okay. Thank you for those comments. Maybe I can just ask a question around conversion now. Obviously you've mentioned, Tim mentioned that the interest is increasing in the rest of the fuel cycle too. Is the timing now right to restart conversion capacity at Springfields? Or, you know, is there actually any additional upside potential in your Canadian operations too?

Okay. Thank you. Uh for those comments, maybe I can just um ask a question around conversion now and obviously you've mentioned Tim mentioned that the the interest is is increasing the rest of the fuel cycle too. Um,

Grant Isaac: Conversion is a very interesting market, and I think it's illustrative of what's coming into the uranium space. The issue for making a decision around bringing new capacity back at something like Springfields's, you may be surprised to hear this, Alex. It's not price. I mean, conversion price is at historic levels, and we could probably find a handful of utilities globally that would be willing to underwrite the restart of Springfields's at a premium to today's historic price. They wanna do it for a very short duration contract. Utilities are very smart. They want to stimulate capacity to come into the market, and then they want to reprice it when there's more capacity in the market. You and I would do the exact same thing if we were a fuel buyer.

Is the timing now, right to restart conversion capacity at Springfield's. Um or you know is is there actually any uh additional upside potential in your Canadian operations, too?

Yeah. Conversion is a is a very interesting Market. I think it's illustrative of what's coming into the uranium space.

Before, uh, making a decision around bringing new capacity back at something like Springfields.

Is it may be surprised to hear this Alex? It's not price. I mean conversion price is at historic levels and we could probably find a, a handful of utilities globally that would be willing to underwrite the restart of Springfield's at at a premium to today's historic price.

But they want to do it for a very short, duration, contract utilities are very smart. They want to stimulate capacity to come into the market.

Grant Isaac: That would be our job. For us, it's about blending appropriate pricing with appropriate tenor. What we wanna see is a longer-term commitment to restarting something like Springfields. The example I will use is when our friends at Constellation made the decision to restart the Crane Clean Energy Center at Three Mile Island, they didn't do it on spec. They didn't do it for a three-year contract. They did it for a twenty-year contract with Microsoft that was above market to support the restart of infrastructure. The nuclear fuel cycle should not be looked at any differently. For us to restart infrastructure that's in care and maintenance, we need to see pricing as well as tenor that supports that capacity. The lesson learned in uranium is you only get one chance to bring new capacity into the market.

And then they want to reprice it when there's more capacity in the market. Uh, you and I would do the exact same thing. If we were a fuel buyer, that would be our job. And so, for us, it's about blending appropriate. Pricing with appropriate tenor. What we want to see is a longer term commitment to restarting something like Springfields. And and the example, I will use is when our friends at constellation, made the decision to restart the crane clean energy center at 3 Mile Island. They, they didn't do it on spec. They didn't do it for a 3-year contract. They did it for a 20-year contract with Microsoft, uh, that was above Market to support the restart of infrastructure, the nuclear fuel cycle, should not be looked at any differently for us to restart, uh, in infrastructure that's in Karen maintenance, we need to see

Grant Isaac: We're hearing some very silly statements from some saying, Well, you know, we're gonna contract, but we're only gonna contract for 3 years, and then we'll roll that contract over to a higher price afterwards. You, you absolutely won't, because now you're competing with your own capacity. In this market, driven by long-term value creation, you need price and you need tenor. On the conversion side, price is there, tenor's not there yet. Although it's feeling pretty constructive that we're gonna get there.

The pricing as well as tenor that supports that capacity. And the lesson learned in uranium is you only get 1 chance to bring new capacity into the market. So we we're hearing some

very silly statements from some saying well you know we we we're going to contract but we're only going to contract for 3 years and then we'll roll that contract over to a higher price afterwards and you you absolutely won't because now you're competing with your own capacity. So in this market driven by long-term value creation, you need price and you need 10 or and on the conversion side prices there, 10 or is not there yet. Although I'm it's feeling pretty constructive that we're going to get there.

Brian Lee: Okay. Thanks, Grant. Thanks, Tim.

Tim Gitzel: Thanks for your questions, Alex.

Okay. Thanks Grant. Thanks Tim.

Operator: The next question comes from Andrew Wong with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Thanks for your questions, Alex.

The next question comes from Andrew Wong. With RBC Capital markets, please go ahead.

Andrew Wong: Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. The US government partnership, it's for at least $80 billion of investments, which supports, let's say, 8 to 10 AP1000s. The wording of at least implies there's potential upside to that. Grant, I think just your previous commentary on the previous question kind of touches on the longer term buildup potential here. You know, the longer term goal for the US is, and other countries, is to triple nuclear capacity. Is there a scenario where the US government supports 20 or 30 or maybe more reactors? Has anything like that been part of discussions? Maybe did that US government partnership spark any conversations with other potential partners on a bigger build-out?

Hey, good morning, thanks for taking my questions. Um, so, the US government partnership, it's for at least 80 billion dollars of Investments which supports let's say 8 to 10 81000. Um, but the wording of at least implies there's potential upside to that and brand. I think in your just your previous commentary on the previous question, kind of touches on the longer term. Build up potential here, so

You know the longer term goal for the US is in in other countries is to Triple nuclear capacity. Is there a scenario where the US government supports 20 or 30 or maybe more reactors and is anything like that being part of discussions? Um, or maybe did that US Government partnership, spark any conversations with other potential Partners on a bigger build out.

Tim Gitzel: Well, Andrew, the great question. This has just been priming the well. Of course, we've been talking to all of the utilities I think, in the US about nuclear for years now. It really got spruced up earlier this year. I think it was 23 May that the president put out his 4 executive orders on nuclear, you know, calling for 10 new ones to be started by 2030, which we're now working on and there's a plan behind those. Then to have, I think 400 gigawatts of nuclear by 2050. So, I think he's serious about it. We're seeing the indications of this deal we put together last week with Brookfield and the US government.

Tim Gitzel: Now we're, yesterday, Grant and I, talking to US utilities, all of them super interested, and I'd say excited about this, saying, hey, how do we get involved, and how is it all going? Lots of work to do over the next days and weeks. First, to get more details on how we're putting it together, and then pulling together the utilities and starting to drive it forward. The answer to your question is, yes, we're just getting warmed up and I think there's 94 units in, as Grant said, in the US, they did that before. They've done it before, this administration and these utilities wanna do it again, the economy needs it so.

Well, Andrew that a great question. Uh, this is just been priming the well, of course, we've been talking to all of the utilities I think in the US about nuclear for years now. And it really, uh, really got spruced up uh, earlier this year. I think it was May 23rd that the president put out his 4 executive orders on on nuclear, uh, you know, calling for 10, new ones to be started by 2030, which we're now working on. And, and there's a, a plan behind those. And then to have, uh, I think 400 gigawatts of nuclear, by by 2550. And so, uh, I think he's serious about it. We're seeing the indications of this deal. We put together last week with Brookfield and, and the US government. And, and now we're, uh, yesterday, Grant. And I talking to us, utilities all of them super interested on. I'd say, excited about this saying, Hey, how do we get involved? And how's it all going? So lots of work to do over the next.

Grant Isaac: Andrew, we did use the term minimum, and you see that throughout the agreement. I like to think about this as the stimulant for launch conditions in the United States. It is absolutely reasonable to assume that once financing is arranged, permitting and licensing is approved, and long lead items are ordered under this structure, that the order book among the traditional utility base, both within the United States and beyond, is going to grow because this is at the heart of eliminating what the main barrier was, which is that next of a kind, being that next 2-pack or the next 2-pack after that. We never had a problem engaging people for five, six, and beyond.

Days and weeks, uh, first to get more details on on how we're putting it together and then pulling together, the utilities and, uh, and starting to drive it forward. So the answer to your question is, yes, we're just getting warmed up and and I think uh there's a 94 units in as Grant said in the US, uh, they did that before. They've done it before and this Administration and and these utilities want to do it again in the economy needs it. So

Andrew, we did use the term minimum, uh, and you see that throughout the agreement.

The the the stimulant, uh, for launch conditions in the United States, it is absolutely reasonable to assume that.

That once financing is arranged and permitting and Licensing is approved and long lead items are ordered under this structure that the order book.

Grant Isaac: It was just starting the process, and the US government has stepped in to overcome that really big hurdle to being the next of a kind, being the next up. It's promising a bigger investment than I think anybody was anticipating. We do expect that it will create some followership. There may be other countries interested in foreign direct investment in the United States that might wanna partner in a very similar fashion. We've seen early indications of a willingness to engage in this kind of project financing for critical infrastructure at a time when the US government is prepared to support the leading gigawatt scale technology. We didn't do this as a deal that, you know, now we're done with energy systems.

Uh among the traditional utility base both within the United States uh and Beyond is going to grow because this is at the heart of the limiting what the main barrier was which is uh that next of a Kind being that next 2 pack or or the next 2 pack after that we never had a problem. Uh, engaging people for 5 6 and Beyond it was just starting the process and the US government has stepped in to overcome that really big hurdle to being the next of a Kind, the being the next up, it's promising a bigger investment that I think anybody was anticipating

And, and we do expect that it will create some followership there. There may be, um, other countries interested in foreign direct investment in the United States that might want to partner in a very similar fashion. Uh, we've seen early indications of a willingness to engage in this kind of project financing for critical infrastructure uh at a time when the US government is prepared to support the leading gigawatt scale technology.

Grant Isaac: We did this as the deal to kickstart the very exciting opportunity for energy systems, which as everybody remembers, we essentially valued at 0 when we acquired Westinghouse. The upside to the acquisition case is enormous.

Okay, so we we didn't do this as a as a deal that you know, now we're done with Energy Systems. We did this as the deal to Kickstart the very exciting opportunity for Energy Systems which as everybody remembers, we essentially valued at zero when we acquired Westinghouse, so the upside to the acquisition case is enormous

Andrew Wong: That's great. Just maybe on switching over to enrichment. GLE recently achieved TRL 6 and had it independently verified. What are the next steps from here? What does that TRL 6 demonstration tell us about the economics of GLE? Does this mark the start of Cameco's option, to increase its ownership stake in GLE?

That's great. Um and then just maybe on just switching over to enrichment. Um,

Grant Isaac: Yeah, good question. I would characterize TRL 6 a little bit different. This is a structure that goes all the way to technology readiness level 9, and we're at 6. 6 means that we can verifiably ensure that we can enrich uranium to the nuclear reliability level, that 99.96 sigma level of reliability. Effectively, it means the technology risk is removed from GLE. Levels 7, 8, and 9 are where you prove up that the project risk can be minimized. There's still more work to do. Ultimately, we wouldn't have pushed it to TRL 6 if we didn't think there was an economic opportunity. You continue to evaluate that as you go. Now the real attention is taking a verifiable technology and figuring out the project delivery of it.

You know, recently achieved trl6 and had it independently verified. So what what are the next steps from here? Um, the what is the trl6 demonstration? Tell us about the economics of G. And is this the does? This Mark the startup chemicals option um to increase its ownership stake in jelly

Yeah, good question. I, I, I would characterize trl6 a little bit different, and this is a, a structure that goes all the way to technology Readiness level 9. Uh, and we're at 6, and 6 means that we can verify that we can enrich uranium to the, the nuclear reliability level that 99.96 Sigma level of reliability. So if effectively, it means the technology risk is removed from GLE.

Levels.

Grant Isaac: It's an important stage in the nuclear industry because as we talked about with conversion and just talked about with uranium, you sell this capacity forward under long-term contract. You don't build an enrichment plant and then start knocking on people's doors and trying to sell enrichment supply because just like uranium, just like conversion, there's no in-year demand for this stuff. Building it for a spot market exposure is about the stupidest thing you could do. What you wanna do is start building your capacity into long-term contracts. TRL 6 is a really important milestone because now we can engage more meaningfully with utilities about the support case for GLE, and we've removed the technology risk. Yes, there's still some project risk in it, but we've removed the technology risk.

7, 8 and 9 are where you prove up that the project risk can be minimized. So there's still more work to do. Ultimately, we wouldn't have pushed it to trl6. If we didn't think there was an Economic Opportunity, you continue to evaluate that as you go. But now the real attention is taking a verifiable technology and figuring out the project delivery of it. It's an important stage in the nuclear industry because as we've talked about with conversion and just talked about, with uranium, you sell this capacity, forward under long-term contract. You, you don't build an enrichment plant and then start knocking on people's doors and trying to sell enrichment Supply because just like, uranium just like conversion. There's no in your demand for this stuff, so building it for a spot Market. Exposure is about the stupidest thing you could do. So what you want to do is start building Your Capacity into long-term contracts.

Grant Isaac: It really is an important milestone, and absolutely, we're proud of the team, we're proud of their achievement, and we continue to believe that this is a world that wants not only supplier diversification and enrichment, but technology diversification, and wants it from a proven, reliable supplier like Cameco.

TRL 6 is a really important milestone because now we can engage more meaningfully with utilities about the support case for GLE, and we've removed the technology risk. Yes, there's still some project risk, but we've removed the technology risk, so it really is an important milestone. We are absolutely proud of the team; we're proud of their achievement, and we continue to believe that this is a world that wants not only supplier diversification but also enrichment.

but technology diversification, and once it from a proven reliable supplier, like, camo,

Andrew Wong: Okay, great. Thank you.

Grant Isaac: Thanks, Andrew.

Tim Gitzel: Thanks, Andrew.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Operator: The next question comes from Bob Brackett with Bernstein Research. Please go ahead.

Thanks Andrew.

Bob Brackett: Hey, good morning. Before October 28, you all in Westinghouse had laid out a fairly clear contracting framework around capturing 25% to 40% of the plant cost with EBITDA margins of 10% to 20%. I note you've repeated that in your investor deck. Is that a stale framework, or should we continue to think about using that as the framework?

The next question comes from Bob bracket with Bernstein research. Please go ahead.

I note you've repeated that in your investor deck. Is that a stale framework, or should we continue to think about using that as a framework?

Grant Isaac: We are continuing to use that as the framework, subject to the finalization of definitive agreements with the United States, subject to finalization of securing what that financing package is gonna look like, where it's gonna come from, and subject to the magnitude of initial long lead item orders. Why I think that framework remains useful, I'm gonna go back to something I said earlier, which is the key to delivering new nuclear at the gigawatt scale is to standardize, to sequence, and to simplify. Even if we pull forward the long lead items on a number of critical nuclear components, you still wanna sequence the reactor builds accordingly, much like the United Arab Emirates did partnering with the Koreans on the Barakah site, for example. Much like Bruce Power and OPG sequenced the refurbishments, the major component replacements in Ontario.

We are continuing to use that as the framework subject to the finalization of definitive agreements, with the United States subject to finalization of securing, what that financing package is going to look like where it's going to come from and subject to the magnitude of initial long lead item orders. Um, why I think that framework remains useful. I'm going to go back to something. I said earlier, which is the key to delivering

new nuclear at the gigawatt scale is to standardize the sequence and to simplify. So even if we pull forward, the long lead items on a number of critical nuclear components,

Grant Isaac: It is still a very good framework to use, subject to figuring out exactly how we're going to bind this agreement with the US government and the flow and the rate at which the financing is coming.

Bob Brackett: Very clear. The follow-up would be the participation infrastructure allows the government to receive 20% of cash distributions exceeding $17 and a half billion from Westinghouse. If I think about Westinghouse's free cash flow year to date, it's around $433 million. You've gotten a distribution of maybe $350 million. Am I comparing apples to apples that we should think about maybe Westinghouse's free cash flow as feeding the cash distribution, and therefore, there's a lot of room before we get to a $17 and a half billion threshold?

you still want to sequence. The reactor builds accordingly much like the United Arab Emirates did partnering with the Koreans on the Baraka site. For example, much like uh, Bruce power and OPG sequence. The refurbishments, the major component Replacements in Ontario. So it is still a very good framework to use subject to figuring out exactly how we're going to, uh, bind this agreement with the US government and the flow and the rate at which the financing is coming.

Grant Isaac: You're absolutely thinking about it right. Some of the things that would affect that, of course, are the speed at which the projects are advanced in the US, therefore the speed at which the procurement part of the long lead items kicks in. Quite frankly, the success of the Koreans in building APR1400s in other markets, triggering royalties that come back to Westinghouse. All of those things would be upsides to the case. You're thinking about the right way. Westinghouse is worth a lot more than when we acquired it, and that's what's being reflected in the CAD 17.5 billion distribution claim for Cameco and Brookfield prior to the US participating in anything.

Very clear and the follow-up would be the um, the participation interest structure allows the government to receive 20% of cash. Distributions exceeding 7 and 17.5 billion from Westinghouse. If I think about westinghouse's free cash flow uh, year to date, it's around 433 million. You've gotten a distribution of maybe 350 million. Am I comparing Apples to Apples that that, uh, we should think about, maybe westinghouse's free cash flow as feeding the cash distribution. And therefore, uh, there's a lot of room before we get to a 17 and a half billion threshold.

Bob Brackett: Very clear. Thanks for that.

You're you're absolutely thinking about it, right? And then some of the things that would affect that of course are the speed at which the projects are advanced in the United States, therefore, the speed at which the procurement part of the long lead items kicks in. Um, and quite frankly, the the success of the Koreans uh, in building APR 1400s in other markets, triggering royalties that come back to Westinghouse. All of those things would be upsides to the case, but, uh, but you're thinking about the right way. Um, Westinghouse is worth a lot more than when we acquired it and that's what's being reflected, uh, in the 17.5 billion distribution claim for a chemical in Brookfield, prior to the US participating in anything.

Grant Isaac: Thanks, Bob.

Very clear. Thanks for that.

Operator: The next question comes from Craig Hutchison with TD Cowen. Please go ahead.

Thanks Bob.

The next question comes from Craig Hutchinson with TV Callan. Please go ahead.

Craig Hutchison: Hi, good morning, guys. I just wanted to circle back on the partnership with the US government. Obviously, congratulations. Huge deal to see. Is the expectation that the US government will own these reactors longer term? Are they just financing them? If they are owning them longer term, is there a possibility at some point they could sell these to utilities? Just trying to understand that. Maybe it's a follow-up question, I know it may be a difficult question to ask, but if the government is spearheading the financing and the permitting, can you give us any kind of rough goalpost in terms of how long you think it would take to permit a new AP1000 in the US? Thank you.

Hi, good morning, guys.

Grant Isaac: Yeah. Two really big questions there. you know, I characterize this in answer to an earlier question as really being a catalyst, the US government stepping in and saying, It is time. It's time to get going. I think we have to have a range of options in mind. One that goes from, you know, the US government simply finances somebody else's build, own, and operate, to the US government does its own build, own, operate, or something in between where it's build, own, and then transfer to a utility. I think all options are on the table because the driver here is to get 24-hour base load, carbon-free electrons onto the market as soon as possible in order to meet the onshoring demand and meet the AI demand.

I just wanted to circle back on the partnership with the U.S. government. Obviously, congratulations. Um, huge deal to see. Um, is the expectation that the U.S. government will own these reactors longer term? Are they just financing them? If they are owning them longer term, is there a possibility at some point they could sell these to utilities? Just want to try to understand that. And then maybe it's a follow-up question. I know this may be a difficult question to ask, but if the government is spearheading the financing and the permitting, can you give us any kind of rough goalposts in terms of how long you think it would take to permit a new AP1000 in the U.S.? Thank you.

Yeah, 2 2, really big questions there. Um, you know, I characterize this, uh, in answer to an earlier question, as really being a catalyst, the US government stepping in and saying it is, it is time. It's time to get going. So I think there, we have to have a range of options in mind 1 that that goes from, you know, the US government simply finances. Somebody else's build own and operate, uh, to the US government, does its own build own operate, or something in between, where it's build own. And then transfer to a utility, I

Grant Isaac: I think there's gonna be a number of structures which is going to make for a very exciting part of this project, figuring out how to structure it. It's a little bit tied to your second question, which is, how should we think about permitting. Remember, one of the executive orders back on 23 May actually spoke to using federal lands to deploy new nuclear and doing that under a federal exemption or a federal domain exemption. There could be possibilities of accelerated licensing and permitting or, you know, we could take a page out of the DOE Liftoff Report from last year and simply look to sites that already have pads that are approved for large nuclear power plants, but weren't built on as a consequence of the slowdown after Three Mile Island.

I think all options are on the table because the driver here is to get 24-hour base load carbon free electrons onto the onto the market as soon as possible in order to meet the on-shoring demand and meet the AI demand. So I think there's going to be a number of structures which is going to make for uh, a very exciting part of this project figuring out how to structure it. Um you it's a little bit tied to your second question, which is, um, how should we think about permitting?

Grant Isaac: I guess what I'm trying to say, Craig, is there's a lot of optionality here, but what was holding everything up was who was gonna finance that next of a kind, and that's what's been unlocked with this deal. I think, you know, if there are, you know, eight plants representing four large nuclear power plants as the first initial launch, there could be four different commercial structures to go along with it. That's just the reality that we're all getting prepared for and designing for, and figuring out how to bring the right partnerships and the right coordination together to achieve that.

May 23rd actually spoke to using Federal lands to deploy new nuclear, and doing that under a federal exemption, our federal domain exemption. So there could be possibilities of accelerated licensing and and permitting. Or, you know, we could take a page out of the doe liftoff report from last year and simply look to sites that already have pads that are approved for large nuclear, power plants, but weren't built on as a consequence of the Slowdown after 3 Mile Island. So I, I guess what I'm trying to say Craig is, there's a lot of optionality here, but but what was holding everything up, was, who was going to finance that next of a kind and that's what's been unlocked with this deal, but but I think, you know, if there are, you know, 8 plants representing 4, large nuclear power plants at, as the, as the first initial launch, there could be 4 different commercial structures.

That goes along with it, and that's just the reality that we're all getting prepared for, and designing for, and figuring out how to bring the right partnerships and the right coordination together to achieve that.

Craig Hutchison: Okay, perfect. I guess the AP300 could also be part of the mix, correct?

Grant Isaac: It absolutely could. Remember, one of the most elegant things about the AP300 is it's part of an AP ecosystem. If you're a utility and you're looking at new nuclear, the prospect of having a similar or the same instrumentation and control environment, the same fuel and fuel handling environment, essentially the same reactor where up to 85% or 90% of the supply chain is identical, that is a pretty compelling business case, especially if we're going to underwrite that ecosystem with the build-out of AP1000s. Which our priority here is AP1000, just given the scale of the demand. We've always said the best way to sell an AP300 is to start building AP1000s.

Okay, perfect. And I guess the AP 300 could also be part of the mix, correct?

It. Absolutely could remember 1 of the most elegant things about the ap300 is it's part of an AP ecosystem. And if you're a utility and you're looking at new nuclear, the prospect of having a, a similar or the same instrumentation and control environment, the same Fuel and fuel handling environment. Uh, essentially the same reactor where up to 85 or 90% of the supply chain is identical. That is a pretty compelling business case, especially if we're going to underwrite that ecosystem with the buildout of 8 p 10000. It's our, our priority here is ap1000 just given the scale of the demand.

But we've always said the, the best way to sell, an ap300 is to start building ap1000.

Craig Hutchison: Okay, great. Thanks, guys.

Grant Isaac: Thank you, Craig.

Okay, great. Thanks, guys.

Operator: The next question comes from Gordon Johnson with GLJ Research. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Craig.

Gordon Johnson: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the question. I appreciate it. I just want to revisit, I know there's been a lot of questions about the deal with the US government. I just want to ask maybe the question from a different angle. Looking at what Areva did roughly eight years ago when it spun out its fuel cycle business, and then looking at, you know, you're in Brookfield, 49% ownership of Westinghouse. In the deal you announced with the US, clearly you're not getting the $80 billion check up front. Clearly it looks like every AP1000 built in the US directly benefits your downstream, earnings, fuel fabrication, service parts, et cetera.

The next question comes from Gordon. Johnson with glj research, please go ahead.

Hey guys, thanks for taking the question, I appreciate it. Um, I just want to revisit, I know there's been a lot of questions about the deal with the US government, but I just want to ask maybe the question from a different angle so looking at what ariva did roughly 8 years ago when it spun out its fuel cycle business and then looking at, you know, you're in Brookfield, 49% ownership of Westinghouse.

Gordon Johnson: Is it possible that you guys could potentially look to spin out Westinghouse, given the interest and hype around AI and the potential risks further down the line, of the US deal? I have a follow-up. Thanks.

Um in the daily announcement the US clearly you're not getting the 80 billion dollar checkup front um but clearly it looks like every ap1000 built in the us directly benefits your Downstream um earnings fuel fabrication Service Parts Etc.

so,

Is it possible that you guys could potentially look out? Look to spin out Westinghouse given the, um, interest and height around Ai and

The potential risk further down the line uh, of the US Bill and then I have a follow-up. Thanks.

Grant Isaac: Gordon, I'll jump in here and I would say agree and echo one of the points you made. At the time of us acquiring Westinghouse, folks will remember that we talked about its alignment with what we do because we love strategic assets. We love assets that are tier one, they're proven, they're scarce, they're absolutely mission critical, and Westinghouse had those assets on the fuel side. So it just fit beautifully with McArthur River, Cigar Lake, Key Lake, and all the assets that Cameco already had. It was a bundling of just the world's best nuclear fuel assets together in a joint venture, which we absolutely loved. Why did we love the energy systems? Because of the AP1000.

Gordon. I I'll jump in here. And uh, and I would say

Agree and and Echo 1 of the points you made.

at the time of us acquiring Westinghouse, folks will remember that we talked about its alignment with what we do because we love strategic assets, we love assets that are Tier 1, they're proven they're scarce they're absolutely Mission critical and Westinghouse had those assets on the fuel side and so it it just fit

Grant Isaac: You know, a reactor where the design was locked down, the fuel was locked down, the licensing risk was locked down, the regulatory risk had been dealt with by the good folks at Southern Company who had built two of them, and it really was just down to project risk. Westinghouse had everything we liked, and what we particularly liked was as we grew energy systems, it grew the core of the business. We have a business model where the growth of energy systems actually grows the whole business. In other words, as the US government partnership showed, we can grow our own demand for the core of our business, and that is a great place for us to be and to be in control of.

Grant Isaac: When we think about the value of Westinghouse, we are always looking to make sure there is no trapped value for our shareholders. There is definitely a unique interest in investing just in Westinghouse, and Cameco is a funny proxy for that. Brookfield's probably an even funnier proxy to invest in just Westinghouse. We're always mindful that the last thing we wanna have is trapped value within this family of assets that we've put together to benefit shareholders. Let's just say we're gonna keep all options on the table. This partnership agreement does not force us to leave Westinghouse in 2029.

Beautifully with MacArthur River, cigar Lake Ki Lake and all the assets of the camo already had. It was a bundling of just the world's best nuclear fuel assets together in a in a joint venture, which, which we absolutely loved. Why did we love the energy systems? Because of the ap1000, you know, a reactor where the design was locked down, the fuel was locked down. The licensing. Risk was locked out. The regulatory risk had been dealt with by the, the good Folks at Southern Company who had built 2 of them and it really was just down to project risk. So Westinghouse had everything we liked and what we particularly liked was as we grew Energy Systems, it grew the core of the business. So we are, we have a business model where the growth of energy systems actually grows the whole business. In other words, as the US government partnership, showed we can grow our own demand for the core of our business. And that is a great place for us to be and to be in control of

Grant Isaac: We don't have to sell any of our share, or we may, if the value of Westinghouse is so significant come 2029 when that window opens up and every option in between, but we will just maximize the optionality for the maximum benefit of Cameco shareholders.

We are always looking to make sure there is no trapped value for our shareholders. There, there is definitely a unique interest in investing just in Westinghouse and it it's hard to its tamako is a funny proxy for that brookfield's, probably an even funnier proxy to invest in just Westinghouse. So we're always mindful at the last thing we want to have is trapped value within this family of assets that we've put together to benefit shareholders. So we let's just say we're going to keep all options on the table. This partnership agreement does not force us to to leave Westinghouse in 2029. We don't have to sell any of our share uh, or we may if the value of Westinghouse is so significant, come 2029 when that window opens up and and and every option in between, but we will just maximize the optionality for the maximum benefit of camo shareholders.

Gordon Johnson: That's helpful. That's very helpful. Thank you. Just one last one from me. You know, I would like to know, and I'm getting a lot of these questions from investors, you know, when will the market see signs of serious contracting from utilities? Like, what's the precursor? Because that is the precursor for U3O8 prices to go up. What signs should we be looking for of serious signs of contracting, long-term contracting from utilities from your standpoint? Thank you for the question.

That's helpful. That's very helpful. Thank you. And then just just 1 last question for me.

you know, I would like to know in

In in, I'm getting a lot of these questions from investors, you know, when will the market see signs of serious Contracting from utilities? Um like what's the precursor? Because that is the precursor for e308 prices to go up. So what size should we do? Looking for of serious sign of Contracting long-term, Contracting from utilities from your standpoint.

Tim Gitzel: Thanks, Gordon. Grant.

Point. Thank you for the questions.

Grant Isaac: You know, ours is a market that has time and time again proven that it does not respond to forward forecasts. It responds to the reality of the contracting environment that it's in. Conversion is at historic pricing because a couple of years ago, so much conversion capacity had been shut in that when utilities went into the market following the Russian invasion of Ukraine looking for conversion, it was not there. Uranium has not discovered that yet for two main reasons. One, you have a group of uranium producers who have come back to the market, small volumes, did not do the hard work of building homes for that supply and stuck it into the front end of the market, into the spot market, which then allowed traders, intermediaries to compete for some of the long-term demand that was coming into the business.

Thanks Gordon, Grant.

you know, I

ours is a market that has time and time again. Proven that it does not respond to forward. Forecasts it responds to the reality of the Contracting environment, that it's in conversion, is at historic pricing, because a couple of years ago, so much conversion capacity had been shut in that when utilities went into the market, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine looking for conversion, it was not there.

Grant Isaac: In other words, nobody has shown up yet to contract in uranium and discovered that there isn't a willing counterparty, and in some cases, a counterparty willing to discount. On the other hand, there are utilities that are looking at the supply stack, they're looking at the promises of big supply out into the future, and they're saying they're willing to take the chance. This was my point earlier, Gordon, that there are some utilities who are actually believing some of the definitive feasibility studies that are out there, and they're looking out into a window and they're saying, There's gonna be a lot of producers who haven't done any contracting today. They're gonna build big assets, and then they're gonna be flopping around the market trying to place it.

Uranium has not discovered that yet for 2 main reasons. 1, you have a group of uranium producers who have come back to the market, small volumes, but did not do the hard work of building homes for that supply and stuck it into the front end of the market into the spot Market which then allowed traders intermediaries to compete for some of the long-term demand that was coming into the business. In other words, nobody has shown up yet to contract in uranium and discovered uh, that there isn't a willing counterparty. And, and in some cases, a, a counterparty willing to discount. On the other hand, there are utilities that that are looking at the supply stack. They're looking at the promises of Big Supply out into the future and they're saying they're willing to take the chance. So, this was my point earlier Gordon.

Grant Isaac: I might as well take advantage of that. That has not been proven to be a failed strategy yet. If we want the uranium price to reset like we have in other parts of the supply chain, everybody who's invested in a producer who is undisciplined, who is over-promotional, and sensational needs to tell that management team to understand how the market works and that they're not helping the formation of price in this market.

That there are some utilities uh who who are who are actually believing some of the definitive feasibility. Studies that are out there and they're looking out into a window and they're saying there's going to be a lot of producers who haven't done any Contracting today. They're going to build big assets and then they're going to be flopping around the market trying to place it. So I might as well take advantage of that.

That has not been proven to be a failed strategy yet. So if we want the uranium price to reset, like we have in other parts of the supply chain,

Everybody who's invested in a producer who is undisciplined?

Who is over Promotional and Sensational, needs to tell that management team to understand how the market works and that they're not helping the formation of price in this market.

Operator: The next question comes from Lawson Winder with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

The next question comes from Lawson, Winder with Bank of America, please go ahead.

Lawson Winder: Thank you very much, operator. Hello, Tim and Grant. Thank you for your presentation today. Can I just fit in a question on McArthur River? Just how would you handicap the potential for McArthur development delays to fall into 2026 and impact 2026 production? Similar vein, but just looking at Cigar Lake as a potential offset, you've highlighted the potential to produce up to an additional 1 million pounds from Cigar Lake versus the original 2025 guidance of 18 million pounds, 100% basis. What are the factors driving that? Could that also show up in 2026? Thank you.

Uh, thank you very much operator. And, uh, hello Tim and Grant, thank you for your presentation today. Um, can I just fit in a question on MacArthur River and and just, how would you handicap the potential from MacArthur development delays to then, um, fall into to 2026 and impact, 26 production and then

Similar vein. But just looking at cigar lake is a potential Offset. You you've highlighted the potential to produce up to an additional 1 million pounds.

Tim Gitzel: Yeah. Thanks, Lawson. Great question. Grant was just up there. Grant's, of course, our Chief Operating Officer in addition to everything else he does. He just visited McArthur and had a look underground.

Grant Isaac: Yeah, I did. I was up there, McArthur River, Cigar, Rabbit. You know, Lawson, it just was a good reminder for me just how extraordinary our assets are and how strong our incumbent position is and how grateful we are that we don't have a greenfield project that we have to try to build right now because it's difficult. It's difficult to build new. It's difficult to execute on that. All of that will eventually be reflected in uranium pricing. It's too early for us to put out our guidance for next year. We normally do that in our Q4, so that will come out in February. When you think about McArthur River or you think about Cigar Lake or any of our assets, you can never divorce our operating decisions from our strategy.

Grant Isaac: As I've said a number of times already today, our strategy is that we remain in supply discipline because as the last question reflected, this market has not even brought replacement rate demand into the uranium segment yet. We're not gonna front-run that. That means we're not going to make heroic decisions with our operating assets when the market is not yet valuing it. We produce for our committed sales. We look at McArthur River. We see that there have been some challenges setting up the mining areas, not mining, but setting up the mining areas, which is complicated mining. It requires a certain amount of freeze infrastructure before we go in and develop underneath that freeze in-infrastructure. There have been delays setting it up, and we're just in a position of supply discipline where we're not gonna take any heroic actions.

You know, and and Lawson I I it just was a good reminder for me just how extraordinary our assets are and how strong our incumbent position is and how grateful we are that that we don't have a green field project that we have to try to build right now, um, because it's difficult, uh it's it's difficult to build new. It's difficult to execute on that. Um, and all of that will eventually be reflected in, uranium pricing. Um, it's too early for us to put out our guidance for next year. We normally do that in our Q4, so that will come out in February. Uh, when you think about MacArthur River or you think about cigar lake or any of our assets, you can, you can never divorce our operating decisions from our strategy. And as I've said a number of times already today, our strategy is that we remain in Supply discipline because as the last question reflected, this Market has not even brought replacement rate demand into the Iranian segment yet.

So we're not going to front run that. That means we're not going to make heroic decisions with our operating assets, when the market is, not yet, valuing it. So we produce for our committed sales, we look at MacArthur River, we, we see that there have been some challenges setting up the mining areas. Not mining, but setting up the mining areas. If it's complicated mining, it requires a certain amount of freeze infrastructure before we go in and develop underneath that breeze in infrastructure. So there have been delays setting it up and

Grant Isaac: We are just gonna pace this out at the pace that the market is signaling. Whether that affects 2026 or not is too early to tell, but it would require a change of our strategy, which would require more demand in the market for us to do anything different than we're currently doing now. A responsible uranium producer has a strategy to mine, mill, and market uranium as a united strategy, not, you know, you just produce as much as you can, and you hope to God the market is there for it. That is a failed strategy.

We're just in a position of Supply discipline where we're not going to take any heroic actions. We are just going to paste this out at the pace that the market is signaling. Whether that affects 2026 or not is too early to tell, but it would require a change of our strategy, which would require more demand in the market for us to do anything different than we're currently doing now. A responsible uranium producer, has a strategy to mine Mill and Market uranium as a United strategy, not, you know, you've just produced as much as you can and you hope to God, the market is there for it. That is a failed strategy.

Lawson Winder: Thank you very much.

Tim Gitzel: Have a great day. Thanks, Lawson.

Thank you very much.

Operator: This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Tim Gitzel for any closing remarks.

Have a great day. Thanks a lot.

This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Timothy Gitzel for any closing remarks.

Tim Gitzel: Yeah. Well, thank you, operator, and thanks to everybody who joined us today. We appreciate it. You know, as Cory noted in the intro, if you have any detailed follow-up questions related to our Q3 results or any questions that we didn't get to answer today, please send those in. We'll be absolutely happy to address those directly. Just to wrap it up, we're seeing continued momentum through pro-nuclear government policies to energy-intensive industries taking action to decarbonize and to public sentiment around nuclear that is increasingly positive and better informed. These trends point to a global convergence. Nuclear is essential for safe, constant, secure, and reliable power, and Cameco is exceptionally well-placed to deliver on the promises of nuclear. Thanks again, everybody, for joining us today. Stay safe and healthy, and have a great day. Thanks.

No, thank you operator. And thanks to everybody who joined us today, we appreciate it.

You know, as Corey noted in the intro, if you have any details, follow-up questions, uh related to our third quarter results, or any questions that we didn't get to answer today, please send those in. We'll be absolutely happy to address those directly.

Just to wrap it up. Uh, we're seeing continued momentum through producer, government policies, through energy intensive Industries, taking action to decarbonize and to public sentiment around nuclear that is increasingly positive and better. Informed.

The these Trends point to a global convergence nuclear is essential for safe, constant, secure and reliable power. And Camo is exceptionally. Well, placed to deliver on the Promises of nuclear.

So, thanks again, everybody for joining us today. Stay safe and healthy and have a great day. Thanks.

Operator: This brings to an end today's conference call. You may now disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating, and have a pleasant day.

You may now disconnect your lines. Thank you for participating and have a pleasant day.

Q3 2025 Cameco Corp Earnings Call

Request a DemoDemo

CCJ

Cameco

Earnings