10-Q

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-Q

[X] Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006.

OR

[   ] Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
For the transition period from ______ to ______

Commission file number 1-8641

_________________

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Idaho	82-0109423
(State or other jurisdiction of	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
incorporation or organization)

PO Box I,
505 Front Ave.
Coeur d’Alene, Idaho	83816
(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

(208) 667-3511

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days: Yes |X|     No |_|

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer or a non-accelerated filer (See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act).
Large accelerated filer |X|      Accelerated filer |_|      Non-accelerated filer |_|

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes |_|     No |X|

Applicable only to corporate issuers: Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of Issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: Common stock, par value $1.00, of which 278,994,490 shares were issued and outstanding as of July 27, 2006.

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION

INDEX

		Page No.
Part I.	Financial Information
Item 1.	Financial Statements
	Consolidated Balance Sheets - Unaudited	3
	June 30, 2006 and December 31, 2005
	Consolidated Statements of Operations and	5
	Comprehensive Income (Loss) - Unaudited
	Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2006 and 2005
	Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - Unaudited	6
	Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2006 and 2005
	Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements - Unaudited	7
Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
	Financial Condition and Results of Operations	27
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	49
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	50
Part II.	Other Information	50
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	50
Item 4.	Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders	54
Item 6.	Exhibits	54

2

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)

	June 30, 2006			December 31, 2005
ASSETS	(In Thousands)
CURRENT ASSETS
Cash and cash equivalents	$	373,392		$	214,616
Short-term investments		19,896			25,726
Receivables		28,597			27,986
Ore on leach pad		28,740			25,394
Metal and other inventories		13,394			12,807
Deferred tax assets		3,855			2,255
Prepaid expenses and other		6,590			4,707
Assets of discontinued operations held for sale (Note D)		--			14,828
		474,464			328,319
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
Property, plant and equipment		111,918			105,107
Less accumulated depreciation		(61,033	)		(57,929	)
		50,885			47,178
MINING PROPERTIES
Operational mining properties		124,721			121,441
Less accumulated depletion		(110,759	)		(105,486	)
		13,962			15,955
Mineral interests		72,201			72,201
Less accumulated depletion		(5,417	)		(2,218	)
		66,784			69,983
Non-producing and development properties		119,519			72,488
		200,265			158,426
OTHER ASSETS
Ore on leach pad, non-current portion		34,265			29,254
Restricted cash and cash equivalents		19,035			16,943
Debt issuance costs, net		5,303			5,454
Deferred tax assets		2,292			923
Other		7,574			8,319
		68,469			60,893
TOTAL ASSETS	$	794,083		$	594,816

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

3

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)

	June 30, 2006			December 31, 2005
	(In thousands except share data)
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
CURRENT LIABILITIES
Accounts payable	$	24,324		$	17,189
Other current liabilities		11,315			6,274
Accrued interest payable		1,031			1,031
Accrued salaries and wages		6,723			7,840
Current taxes payable		5,445			66
Liabilities of discontinued operations held for sale (Note D)		--			12,908
		48,838			45,308
LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
1¼% Convertible Senior Notes due January 2024		180,000			180,000
Reclamation and mine closure		24,278			24,082
Other long-term liabilities		3,677			3,873
		207,955			207,955
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Common Stock, par value $1.00 per share; authorized 500,000,000
shares, issued 278,994,490 and 250,961,353 shares in 2006 and
2005 (1,059,211 shares held in treasury)		278,994			250,961
Additional paid-in capital		776,305			656,977
Accumulated deficit		(504,722	)		(551,357	)
Shares held in treasury		(13,190	)		(13,190	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(97	)		(1,838	)
		537,290			341,553
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY	$	794,083		$	594,816

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

4

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIESCONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) (Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
REVENUES	(In thousands except per share data)
Sales of metal	$	54,041		$	33,504		$	98,895		$	65,739
COSTS AND EXPENSES
Production costs applicable to sales		21,587			18,811			41,687			36,153
Depreciation and depletion		6,989			4,372			13,307			8,521
Administrative and general		4,528			5,156			9,618			10,705
Exploration		1,934			2,896			3,901			5,605
Pre-development		--			3,718			--			6,086
Litigation settlements		469			--			469			1,600
Total cost and expenses		35,507			34,953			68,982			68,670
OTHER INCOME AND EXPENSE
Interest and other income		4,794			1,335			7,314			3,284
Interest expense, net of capitalized interest		(367	)		(562	)		(888	)		(1,132	)
Total other income and expense		4,427			773			6,426			2,152
Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes		22,961			(676	)		36,339			(781	)
Income tax benefit (provision)		(2,829	)		147			(2,481	)		(532	)
INCOME (LOSS) FROM CONTINUING OPERATIONS		20,132			(529	)		33,858			(1,313	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income taxes		1,357			(1,172	)		1,968			(1,533	)
Gain on sale of net assets of discontinued operations		11,159			--			11,159			--
NET INCOME (LOSS)		32,648			(1,701	)		46,985			(2,846	)
Other comprehensive income (loss)		1,736			121			1,740			120
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)	$	34,384		$	(1,580	)	$	48,725		$	(2,726	)
BASIC AND DILUTED INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
Basic income (loss) per share:
Income (loss) from continuing operations	$	0.07		$	(0.00	)	$	0.13		$	(0.00	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations		0.05			(0.01	)		0.05			(0.01	)
Net income (loss)	$	0.12		$	(0.01	)	$	0.18		$	(0.01	)
Diluted income (loss) per share:
Income (loss) from continuing operations	$	0.07		$	(0.00	)	$	0.12		$	(0.00	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations		0.04			(0.01	)		0.04			(0.01	)
Net income (loss)	$	0.11		$	(0.01	)	$	0.16		$	(0.01	)
Weighted average number of shares of common stock
Basic		277,474			240,028			265,049			240,007
Diluted		302,188			240,028			289,832			240,007

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

5

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2006 and 2005
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
	(In Thousands)
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net income (loss )	$	32,648		$	(1,701	)	$	46,985		$	(2,846	)
Add (deduct) non-cash items:
Depreciation and depletion		6,989			4,372			13,307			8,521
Deferred taxes		(1,058	)		(559	)		(3,131	)		120
Unrealized loss on embedded derivative, net		4,760			426			3,201			35
Share based compensation		538			174			1,164			574
Loss (gain) on sale of net assets of discontinued operations and other		(11,306	)		167			(11,322	)		167
Other charges		175			429			692			840
Changes in Operating Assets and Liabilities:
Receivables		(4,020	)		(11,554	)		810			(12,871	)
Prepaid and other current assets		(1,362	)		(1,603	)		(1,025	)		(722	)
Inventories		(4,355	)		(5,937	)		(8,945	)		(9,193	)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities		8,554			4,695			7,636			2,363
Discontinued operations		469			1,946			(176	)		1,370
CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES		32,032			(9,145	)		49,196			(11,642	)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Capital expenditures		(25,677	)		(21,889	)		(53,484	)		(25,388	)
Purchases of short-term investments		1,498			(12,294	)		(9,883	)		(22,840	)
Proceeds from sales of short-term investments		3,300			16,097			13,616			22,112
Other		(202	)		61			(443	)		33
Discontinued operations		14,862			(733	)		14,365			(1,366	)
CASH USED IN INVESTING ACTIVITIES		(6,219	)		(18,758	)		(35,829	)		(27,449	)
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Retirement of long-term debt		(352	)		(76	)		(689	)		(156	)
Proceeds from issuance of common stock		--			--			154,560			--
Payment of public offering costs		--			17			(8,388	)		(552	)
Other		280			--			(74	)		--
CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES		(72	)		(59	)		145,409			(708	)
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS		25,741			(27,962	)		158,776			(39,799	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		347,651			261,231			214,616			273,068
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	373,392		$	233,269		$	373,392		$	233,269

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

6

Coeur d’Alene Minesand Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)

NOTE A – BASIS OF PRESENTATION

        The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for interim financial information and the instructions for Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all the information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2006 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2006. The balance sheet at December 31, 2005 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (“Coeur” or the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2005.

NOTE B – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

        Principles of Consolidation: The consolidated financial statements include the wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Company, the most significant of which are Coeur Rochester, Inc., Coeur Alaska, Inc., CDE Cerro Bayo Ltd., Coeur Argentina, CDE Australia and Empressa Minera Manquiri S.A.. The consolidated financial statements also include all entities in which voting control of more than 50% is held by the Company. The Company has no investments in entities in which it has greater than 50% ownership interest accounted for using the equity method. Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Investments in corporate joint ventures where the Company has ownership of 50% or less and funds its proportionate share of expenses are accounted for under the equity method. The Company has no investments in entities in which it has a greater than 20% ownership interest accounted for using the cost method.

        Revenue Recognition: Pursuant to guidance in Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 104, “Revenue Recognition for Financial Statements”, revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the price is fixed or determinable, no obligations remain and collectibility is probable. The passing of title to the customer is based on the terms of the sales contract. Product pricing is determined at the point revenue is recognized by reference to active and freely traded commodity markets, for example the London Bullion Market for both gold and silver, in an identical form to the product sold.

        The Company’s reported revenues included revenues from its primary product, silver, in addition to revenues from associated by-products which consist primarily of gold. For the quarters ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, by-product revenues totaled $17.5 million and $13.8 million, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, by-product revenues totaled $32.1 million and $28.2 million, respectively.

        Under our concentrate sales contracts with third-party smelters, final gold and silver prices are set on a specified future quotational period, typically one to three months, after the shipment date based on market metal prices. Revenues are recorded under these contracts at the time title passes to the buyer based on the forward price for the expected settlement period. The contracts, in general, provide for a provisional payment based upon provisional assays and quoted metal prices. Final settlement is based on the average applicable price for a specified future period, and generally occurs from three to six months after shipment. Final sales are settled using smelter weights, settlement assays (average of assays exchanged and/or umpire assay results) and are priced as specified in the smelter contract. The Company’s provisionally priced sales contain an embedded derivative that is required to be separated from the host contract for accounting purposes. The host contract is the receivable from the sale of concentrates measured at the forward price at the time of sale. The embedded derivative does not qualify for hedge accounting. The embedded derivative is recorded as a derivative asset, in prepaid expenses and other assets or as a derivative liability on the balance sheet and is adjusted to fair value through revenue each period until the date of final gold and silver settlement. The form of the material being sold, after deduction for smelting and refining is in an identical form to that sold on the London Bullion Market. The form of the product is metal in flotation concentrate, which is the final process for which the company is responsible.

7

        The effects of forward sales contracts are reflected in revenue at the date the related precious metals are delivered or the contracts expire. Third party smelting and refining costs of $3.6 million, $6.1 million, $2.7 million and $4.8 million during the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively, are recorded as a reduction of revenue.

        At June 30, 2006, the Company had outstanding provisionally priced sales of $43.9 million, consisting of 2.9 million ounces of silver and 16,719 ounces of gold. For each one cent per ounce change in realized silver price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $28,600; and for each one dollar per ounce change in realized gold price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $16,700. At June 30, 2005, the Company had outstanding provisionally priced sales of $46.1 million consisting of 3.9 million ounces of silver, 42,095 ounces of gold and 656,617 pounds of copper. For each one cent per ounce change in realized silver price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $39,000; for each one dollar per ounce change in realized gold price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $42,000; and for each one cent per pound change in realized copper price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $6,600.

        Cash and Cash Equivalents: Cash and cash equivalents include all highly-liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase. The Company minimizes its credit risk by investing its cash and cash equivalents with major international banks and financial institutions located principally in the United States, Chile, Argentina and Australia with a minimum credit rating of A1 as defined by Standard & Poor’s. The Company’s management believes that no concentration of credit risk exists with respect to the investment of its cash and cash equivalents.

        Short-term Investments: Short-term investments principally consist of highly-liquid United States, foreign government and corporate securities with original maturities in excess of three months and less than one year. The Company classifies all short-term investments as available-for-sale securities. Unrealized gains and losses on these investments are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss as a separate component of shareholders’ equity. Any decline in market value considered to be other than temporary is recognized in determining net income/loss. Realized gains and losses from the sale of these investments are included in determining net income/loss.

        Ore on Leach Pad: The heap leach process is a process of extracting silver and gold by placing ore on an impermeable pad and applying a diluted cyanide solution that dissolves a portion of the contained silver and gold, which are then recovered in metallurgical processes.

        The Company uses several integrated steps to scientifically measure the metal content of ore placed on the leach pads. As the ore body is drilled in preparation for the blasting process, samples are taken of the drill residue which is assayed to determine estimated quantities of contained metal. The Company estimates the quantity of ore by utilizing global positioning satellite survey techniques. The Company then processes the ore through a crushing facility where the output is again weighed and sampled for assaying. A metallurgical reconciliation with the data collected from the mining operation is completed with appropriate adjustments made to previous estimates. The crushed ore is then transported to the leach pad for application of the leaching solution. As the leach solution is collected from the leach pads, it is continuously sampled for assaying. The quantity of leach solution is measured by flow meters throughout the leaching and precipitation process. After precipitation, the product is converted to doré, which is the final product produced by the mine. The inventory is stated at lower of cost or market, with cost being determined using a weighted average cost method.

8

        The Company reported ore on the leach pads of $63.0 million as of June 30, 2006. Of this amount, $28.7 million is reported as a current asset and $34.3 million is reported as a non-current asset. The distinction between current and non-current is based upon the expected length of time necessary for the leaching process to remove the metals from the broken ore. The historical cost of the metal that is expected to be extracted within twelve months is classified as current and the historical cost of metals contained within the broken ore that will be extracted beyond twelve months is classified as non-current. The ore on leach pad inventory is stated at actual production costs incurred to produce and place ore on the leach pad during the current period.

        The estimate of both the ultimate recovery expected over time and the quantity of metal that may be extracted relative to the time the leach process occurs requires the use of estimates which are inherently inaccurate since they rely upon laboratory testwork. Testwork consists of 60 day leach columns from which the Company projects metal recoveries up to five years in the future. The quantities of metal contained in the ore are based upon actual weights and assay analysis. The rate at which the leach process extracts gold and silver from the crushed ore is based upon laboratory column tests and actual experience occurring over approximately nineteen years of leach pad operations at the Rochester Mine. The assumptions used by the Company to measure metal content during each stage of the inventory conversion process includes estimated recovery rates based on laboratory testing and assaying. The Company periodically reviews its estimates compared to actual experience and revises its estimates when appropriate. The length of time necessary to achieve ultimate recoveries for silver and gold is currently estimated between 5 and 10 years. Commencing in 2003, the estimated recoveries for silver and gold were revised to 61.5% and 93%, respectively, from the 59% and 89% used in 2002. The impact of this change in recovery increased the estimated recoverable ounces of silver and gold contained in the heap by 1.8 million ounces and 41,000 ounces, respectively. However, the ultimate recovery will not be known until leaching operations cease, which is currently estimated for 2011.

        Metal and Other Inventory: Inventories include concentrate ore, doré, ore in stockpiles and operating materials and supplies. The classification of inventory is determined by the stage at which the ore is in the production process. Inventories of ore in stock piles are sampled for gold and silver content and are valued based on the lower of actual costs incurred or estimated net realizable value based upon the period ending prices of gold and silver. Material that does not contain a minimum quantity of gold and silver to cover estimated processing expense to recover the contained gold and silver is not classified as inventory and is assigned no value. All inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost being determined using a weighted average cost method. Concentrate and doré inventory includes product at the mine site and product held by refineries and are also valued at lower of cost or market value. Metal inventory costs include direct labor, materials, depreciation, depletion and amortization as well as administrative overhead costs relating to mining activities.

        Property, Plant, and Equipment: Expenditures for new facilities, capital leases, new assets or expenditures that extend the useful lives of existing facilities are capitalized and depreciated using the straight-line method at rates sufficient to depreciate such costs over the shorter of the estimated productive lives of such facilities or the useful life of the individual assets. Productive lives range from 7 to 31 years for buildings and improvements, 3 to 13 years for machinery and equipment and 3 to 7 years for furniture and fixtures. Certain mining equipment is depreciated using the units-of-production method based upon estimated total proven and probable reserves. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred.

9

        Operational Mining Properties and Mine Development: Costs incurred to develop new properties are capitalized as incurred, where it has been determined that the property can be economically developed. At the Company’s underground mines, these costs include the cost of building access ways, shaft sinking and access, lateral development, drift development, ramps and infrastructure development. All such costs are amortized using the units of production method over the estimated life of the ore body based on recoverable ounces to be mined from proven and probable reserves. Interest expense allocable to the cost of developing mining properties and to construct new facilities is capitalized until assets are ready for their intended use. Gains or losses from sales or retirements of assets are included in other income or expense. Costs incurred during the start-up phase of a mine are expensed as incurred. Ongoing mining expenditures on producing properties are costs of product inventory and charged against operations as products are sold. Major development expenditures incurred to increase production or extend the life of the mine are capitalized. Mineral exploration costs are expensed as incurred.

        Mineral Interests: Significant payments related to the acquisition of the land and mineral rights are capitalized as incurred. Prior to acquiring such land or mineral rights, the Company generally makes a preliminary evaluation to determine that the property has significant potential to develop an economic ore body. The time between initial acquisition and full evaluation of a property’s potential is variable and is determined by many factors including: location relative to existing infrastructure, the property’s stage of development, geological controls and metal prices. If a mineable ore body is discovered, such costs are amortized when production begins using the units-of-production method based on recoverable ounces to be mined from proven and probable reserves. If no mineable ore body is discovered, such costs are expensed in the period in which it is determined the property has no future economic value.

        Asset Impairment: The Company follows Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (“SFAS”) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” to evaluate the recoverability of its assets. Management reviews and evaluates its long-lived assets for impairment when events and changes in circumstances indicate that the related carrying amounts of its assets may not be recoverable. Impairment is considered to exist if total estimated future cash flows or probability-weighted cash flows on an undiscounted basis, are less than the carrying amount of the assets, including property plant and equipment, mineral property and development property. An impairment loss is measured and recorded based on the difference between book value and discounted estimated future cash flows or the application of an expected present value technique to estimate fair value in the absence of a market price. Future cash flows include estimates of recoverable ounces, gold and silver prices (considering current and historical prices, price trends and related factors), production levels, capital and reclamation costs, all based on life-of-mine plans and projections. Assumptions underlying future cash flow estimates are subject to risks and uncertainties. If the assets are impaired, a calculation of fair value is performed and if the fair value is lower than the carrying value of the assets, the assets are reduced to their fair market value. Any differences between significant assumptions and market conditions and/or the Company’s operating performance could have a material effect on the Company’s determination of ore reserves, or its ability to recover the carrying amounts of its long-lived assets resulting in impairment charges. In estimating future cash flows, assets are grouped at the lowest level for which there are identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of cash flows from other asset groups. Generally, in estimating future cash flows, all assets are grouped at a particular mine for which there is identifiable cash flow.

        Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents: The Company, under the terms of its lease, self insurance, and bonding agreements with certain banks, lending institutions and regulatory agencies, is required to collateralize certain portions of the Company’s obligations. The Company has collateralized these obligations by assigning certificates of deposit that have maturity dates ranging from three months to a year, to the respective institutions or agency. At June 30, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Company held certificates of deposit and cash under these agreements of $19.0 million and $16.9 million, respectively, which were restricted for this purpose. The ultimate timing of the release of the collateralized amounts is dependent on the timing and closure of each mine. In order to release the collateral, the Company must seek approval from certain government agencies responsible for monitoring the mine closure status. Collateral could also be released to the extent the Company is able to secure alternative financial assurance satisfactory to the regulatory agencies. The Company believes there is a reasonable probability that the collateral will remain in place beyond a twelve-month period and has therefore classified these investments as long-term.

10

        Deferred Stripping Costs: Effective January 1, 2006, the Company adopted Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 04-06, “Accounting for Stripping Costs Incurred during Production in the Mining Industry.” EITF Issue No. 04-06 addresses the accounting for stripping costs incurred during the production phase of a mine and refers to these costs as variable production costs that should be included as a component of inventory to be recognized in costs applicable to sales in the same period as the revenue from the sale of inventory. The consensus requires application through recognition of a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings in the period of adoption, with no charge to current earnings for prior periods. The Company recorded a charge of approximately $0.4 million to retained earnings at January 1, 2006 to write off deferred stripping costs, as the cumulative effect of a change in accounting method.

        Reclamation and Remediation Costs: Effective January 1, 2003, the Company adopted SFAS No. 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”, which addresses financial accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement costs. The standard applies to legal obligations associated with the retirement of long-lived assets that result from the acquisition, construction, development and normal use of the asset. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 143, reclamation costs were accrued on an undiscounted, units-of-production basis. SFAS No. 143 requires that the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation be recognized in the period in which it is incurred if a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. The fair value of the liability is added to the carrying amount of the associated asset and this additional carrying amount is depreciated over the life of the asset. Accretion, representing the increase over time in the present value of the liability, is recorded each period. As reclamation work is performed or liabilities are otherwise settled, the recorded amount of the liability is reduced.

        Future remediation costs for inactive mines are accrued based on management’s best estimate at the end of each period of the undiscounted costs expected to be incurred at the site. Such cost estimates include, where applicable, ongoing care and maintenance and monitoring costs. Changes in estimates are reflected in earnings in the period an estimate is revised. Refer to Note H for additional disclosure.

        Foreign Currency: Substantially all assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries are translated at exchange rates in effect at the end of each period. Revenues and expenses are translated at the average exchange rate for the period. Foreign currency transaction gains and losses are included in the determination of net income.

        Derivative Financial Instruments: The Company accounts for derivative financial instruments in accordance with SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” (as amended by SFAS No. 137) and SFAS No. 138, “Accounting for Certain Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activities.” These Statements require recognition of all derivatives as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and measurement of those instruments at fair value. Appropriate accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives held is dependent on whether the derivative instrument qualifies as an accounting hedge and on the classification of the hedge transaction.

        For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges, the effective portions of changes in fair value of the derivative are recorded in other comprehensive income (loss), and are recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations when the hedged item affects net income (loss) for the period. Ineffective portions of changes in the fair value of cash flow hedges are recognized currently in earnings. Refer to Note I – Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value of Financial Instruments.

11

        Stock-based Compensation Plans: Effective January 1, 2006, the Company began recording compensation expense associated with awards of equity instruments in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment”. Prior to January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for awards of equity instruments according to the provisions of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and related interpretations, and therefore no related compensation expense was recorded for awards granted with no intrinsic value. The Company adopted the modified prospective transition method provided for under SFAS No. 123(R), and, consequently, has not retroactively adjusted results from prior periods. Under this transition method, compensation cost associated with awards of equity instruments recognized in the first six months of 2006 includes: 1) amortization related to the remaining unvested portion of all awards granted for the fiscal years 1995 to 2005, based on the grant date fair value, estimated in accordance with the original provisions of SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation”; and 2) amortization related to all equity instruments awards granted subsequent to December 31, 2005, based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). The compensation cost is included in administrative and general expenses.

        The compensation expense recognized in the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 for awards of equity instruments was $0.5 million and $1.2 million. As of June 30, 2006, there was $2.8 million of total unrecognized compensation cost (net of estimated forfeitures) related to unvested stock options, restricted stock grants and performance share grants which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average vesting period of 2.3 years.

        The Company continues to estimate the fair value of each stock option award on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. The Company now estimates forfeitures of stock based awards based on historical data and adjusts the forfeiture rate periodically. The adjustment of the forfeiture rate will result in a cumulative adjustment in the period the forfeiture estimate is changed. During the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company recorded an adjustment of $0.1 million to reduce compensation expense for forfeited awards.

        Income Taxes: The Company computes income taxes in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” SFAS No. 109 requires an asset and liability approach which results in the recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences or benefits of temporary differences between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of assets and liabilities, as well as operating loss and tax credit carryforwards, using currently enacted tax laws.

        In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income and tax planning strategies in making this assessment. A valuation allowance has been provided for the portion of the Company’s net deferred tax assets for which it is more likely than not that they will not be realized.

        Comprehensive Income (Loss): The company reported no tax effects associated with other comprehensive income (loss) as there are none due to the availability of net operating loss carryforwards and related deferred tax valuation allowances. Comprehensive income (loss) includes net income (loss) as well as changes in stockholders’ equity that result from transactions and events other than those with stockholders. Items of comprehensive loss in addition to net income (loss) include the following:

12

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
Net income (loss)	$	32,648		$	(1,701	)	$	46,985		$	(2,846	)
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable
securities		20			109			121			157
Change in fair value of cash flow
hedges, net of settlements		(503	)		12			(598	)		(37	)
Minimum pension liabilities		2,219			--			2,219			--
Other		--			--			(2	)		--
Comprehensive income (loss)	$	34,384		$	(1,580	)	$	48,725		$	(2,726	)

        Net Income (Loss) Per Share: The Company follows SFAS No. 128, “Earnings Per Share,” which requires the presentation of basic and diluted earnings per share. Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during each period. Diluted earnings per share reflect the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into common stock. The effect of potentially dilutive stock options and debentures outstanding in the three and six months ending June 30, 2006 and June 30, 2005 are as follows:

	Three Months Ended June 30, 2006						Six Months Ended June 30, 2006
(In thousands except for EPS)	Income (Numerator)		Shares (Denominator)		Per-Share Amount		Income (Numerator)		Shares (Denominator)		Per-Share Amount
Basic EPS
Net income (loss) from continuing operations	$	20,132		277,474	$	0.07	$	33,859		265,049	$	0.13
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	12,516		277,474		0.05	$	13,127		265,049		0.05
Income (loss)	$	32,648		277,474	$	0.12	$	46,986		265,049	$	0.18
Effect of Dilutive Securities
Equity awards		--		1,030		--		--		1,099		--
1.25% Convertible Notes		338		23,684		--		822		23,684		--
Diluted EPS
Net income (loss) from continuing operations	$	20,470		302,188	$	0.07	$	34,681		289,832	$	0.12
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	12,516		302,188		0.04	$	13,127		289,832		0.04
Income (loss)	$	32,986		302,188	$	0.11	$	47,808		289,832	$	0.16

	Three Months Ended June 30, 2005								Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
(In thousands except for EPS)	Income (Numerator)			Shares (Denominator)		Per-Share Amount			Income (Numerator)			Shares (Denominator)		Per-Share Amount
Basic EPS
Net income (loss) from continuing operations	$	(529	)		240,028	$	0.00		$	(1,313	)		240,007	$	(0.00	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	(1,172	)		240,028		(0.01	)		(1,533	)		240,007	$	(0.01	)
Income (loss)	$	(1,701	)		240,028	$	(0.01	)	$	(2,846	)		240,007	$	(0.01	)
Effect of Dilutive Securities
Equity awards		--			--		--			--			--		--
1.25% Convertible Notes		--			--		--			--			--		--
Diluted EPS
Net income (loss) from continuing operations	$	(529	)		240,028	$	0.00		$	(1,313	)		240,007	$	(0.00	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	(1,172	)		240,028	$	(0.01	)	$	(1,533	)		240,007		(0.01	)
Income (loss)	$	(1,701	)		240,028	$	(0.01	)	$	(2,846	)		240,007	$	(0.01	)

        For the three and six months ended June 30, 2006, options to purchase 336,363 shares of common stock at prices between $6.66 to $15.19 were not included in the computation of diluted EPS because the exercise price of the options was greater than the average market price of the common shares. The options which expire between 2006 to 2015 are outstanding at June 30, 2006.

        The following potentially dilutive shares have been excluded from earnings per share calculation as of June 30, 2005 as their effect is antidilutive:

13

	June 30, 2005
Stock Options		2,334,588
1.25% Notes
Convertible at $7.60 per share		23,684,211
Total potentially dilutive shares		26,018,799

        Debt Issuance Costs: Costs associated with the issuance of debt are included in other noncurrent assets and are amortized over the term of the related debt.

        Use of Estimates: The preparation of the Company’s consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in their consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. The areas requiring the use of management’s estimates and assumptions relate to recoverable ounces from proven and probable reserves that are the basis of future cash flow estimates and units-of-production depreciation and amortization calculations; useful lives utilized for depreciation, depletion, amortization and accretion of future cash flows for long lived assets; estimates of recoverable gold and silver ounces in ore on leach pad; reclamation and remediation costs; valuation allowance for deferred tax assets; post-employment and other employee benefit liabilities; and assumptions for stock option and restricted stock forfeitures.

        Reclassifications: Certain amounts in prior years have been reclassified to conform to June 30, 2006 presentation. The most significant reclassifications were to reclassify the consolidated balance sheet amounts and the consolidated statements of operations from historical presentation to assets and liabilities of operations held for sale on the consolidated balance sheets and to income (loss) from discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations for the period ended June 30, 2005. The consolidated statements of cash flows have been reclassified to reflect discontinued operations separately for all periods presented.

NOTE C- METAL AND OTHER INVENTORIES

        Inventories consist of the following:

	June 30, 2006		December 31, 2005
	(in thousands)
Concentrate and dore inventory	$	7,746	$	7,836
Supplies		5,648		4,971
Metal and other inventories	$	13,394	$	12,807

NOTE D – DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS AND ASSETS AND LIABILITIES HELD FOR SALE

        During the first quarter of 2006, the Company committed to a plan to sell Coeur Silver Valley Inc. (“CSV”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation, that owns and operates the Galena underground silver mine and adjoining properties in Northern Idaho. On April 10, 2006, the Company announced that it had entered into an agreement to sell 100% of the shares of CSV to U.S. Silver Corporation for $15 million in cash. On June 1, 2006, the Company completed the sale of 100% of CSV to U.S. Silver Corporation for a total of $15 million in cash. The stock purchase agreement provides for a post-closing working capital adjustment. The Company recorded additional consideration to be received of $1.1 million for working capital. The Company recorded, within discontinued operations, a gain of approximately $11.2 million, net of $0 income taxes in the quarter ended June 30, 2006. Pursuant to SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” CSV was classified as held for sale and the results of its operations reported in discontinued operations for all prior periods.

14

        The following table details selected financial information included in the income (loss) from discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
Sales of metal	$	5,513		$	4,525		$	11,223		$	9,104
Production costs applicable to sales		(3,973	)		(4,736	)		(8,233	)		(8,635	)
Depreciation and depletion		(86	)		(501	)		(681	)		(1,013	)
Mining exploration		(69	)		(450	)		(279	)		(859	)
Other		(28	)		(10	)		(62	)		(130	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	1,357		$	(1,172	)	$	1,968		$	(1,533	)
Gain on sale of net assets of discontinued
operations		11,159			--			11,159			--
Net income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	12,516		$	(1,172	)	$	13,127		$	(1,533	)

        The major classes of assets and liabilities of discontinued operations held for sale in the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2005 is as follows (in thousands):

	December 31, 2005
Assets
Receivables	$	2,036
Prepaids		906
Inventory		2,561
Property, plant and equipment (net)		2,016
Operational mining properties, net		6,357
Other		952
Total assets of discontinued operations	$	14,828
Liabilities
Accounts payable	$	747
Accrued liabilities		166
Accrued salaries, wages and benefits		578
Reclamation and mine closure		6,905
Defined benefit liabilities		2,588
Other non-current liabilities		1,924
Total liabilities of discontinued operations	$	12,908

NOTE E- SHARE-BASED COMPENSATION PLANS

        The company has a Long Term Incentive Plan and Directors’ Plan, which is more fully described in Note K of the Company’s notes to the consolidated financial statements included in the 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K, that provides for the grant to eligible employees and directors of stock options, share appreciation rights (SARs), restricted shares and performance shares.

        Stock options granted under the Company’s incentive plans vest over three years and are exercisable over a period not to exceed 10 years from the grant date. Exercise prices are equal to the fair market value of the shares on the date of the grant. The value of each option award is estimated on the date of the grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model.

15

        Restricted stock is granted at prices equal to the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant and vest in equal installments annually over three years. Holders of the restricted stock are entitled to vote the shares and to receive any dividends declared on the shares.

        Performance shares also are granted at the fair market value of the underlying shares on the date of grant. Vesting is contingent on meeting certain performance measures based on relative total shareholder return. The performance shares vest at the end of the three-year service period. Performance shares granted under the plan assume that the performance measure will be achieved. If such performance measures are not met, no compensation cost is recognized and any recognized compensation is reversed.

        Effective January 1, 2006, the Company began recording compensation expense associated with awards of equity instruments in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment”. Prior to January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for awards of equity instruments according to the provisions of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and related interpretations, and therefore no related compensation expense was recorded for awards granted with no intrinsic value. The Company adopted the modified prospective transition method provided for under SFAS No. 123(R), and, consequently, has not retroactively adjusted results from prior periods. Under this transition method, compensation cost associated with awards of equity instruments recognized in the first three months of 2006 includes: 1) amortization related to the remaining unvested portion of all awards granted for the fiscal years 1995 to 2005, based on the grant date fair value, estimated in accordance with the original provisions of SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation”; and 2) amortization related to all equity instruments awards granted subsequent to December 31, 2005, based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). The compensation cost is included in administrative and general expenses.

        Prior to the Company’s adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), benefits of tax deduction in excess of recognized compensation costs were reported as operating cash flows. SFAS No. 123(R) requires excess tax benefits be reported as a financing cash inflow rather than as a reduction of taxes paid. There were no significant excess tax benefits for the six-month periods ended June 30, 2006 and 2005.

        The compensation expense recognized in the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 for awards of equity instruments was $0.5 million and $1.2 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2006, there was $2.8 million of total unrecognized compensation cost (net of estimated forfeitures) related to unvested stock options, restricted stock grants and performance share grants which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average vesting period of 2.3 years.

        The Company continues to estimate the fair value of each stock option award on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. The Company now estimates forfeitures of stock based awards based on historical data and adjusts the forfeiture rate periodically. The adjustment of the forfeiture rate will result in a cumulative adjustment in the period the forfeiture estimate is changed. During the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company recorded an adjustment of $ 0.1 million to reduce compensation expense for forfeited awards.

        The impact of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) as of January 1, 2006 resulted in a decrease in net income of $0.3 million, or nil per basic and diluted share for the six months ended June 30, 2006. Cash received from share options exercised under the Long-Term Incentive Plan for the six months ended June 30, 2006 was $0.4 million and is reflected as a financing activity in the Company’s consolidated statements of cash flows. The impact of adoption excludes the amortization of restricted stock awards in the amount of $0.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2006. Compensation expense related to the amortization of restricted stock awards was recognized prior to the implementation of SFAS No. 123(R).

16

        The following pro-forma information, as required by SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123,” is presented for comparative purposes and illustrates the effect on net income per common share for the periods presented as if the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to stock-based employee compensation prior to December 31, 2005.

	Three Months Ended June 30, 2005			Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
	(in thousands except per share data)
Net loss As reported	$	(1,701	)	$	(2,846	)
Add: Stock-based employee compensation
expense included in reported net loss
		174			574
Less: Stock-based employee compensation
expense determined under fair value for
all awards		(379	)		(982	)
Net income - Pro forma	$	(1,906	)	$	(3,254	)
Net income per share:
Basic and diluted - As reported	$	(0.01	)	$	(0.01	)
Basic and diluted - Pro forma	$	(0.01	)	$	(0.01	)

        The weighted average fair value of stock options on the date of grant, and the assumptions used to estimate the fair value of the stock options using the Black-Scholes option valuation model were as follows:

	Six Months Ended
	June 30, 2006		June 30, 2005
Weighted average fair value of options granted		$3.35		$3.92
Expected volatility		68.5%		68.5%
Expected life		6 yrs.		6 yrs.
Risk-free interest rate		4.6%		3.9%
Expected dividend yield		0.00%		0.00%

        The expected volatility of the option is determined using historical volatilities based on historical stock prices. The expected life of options granted during the first quarter of 2006 was based on the Company’s historical share option exercise experience. The Company estimated the expected life of options granted using the midpoint between the vesting date and the original contractual term. The risk free rate was determined using the yield available on U.S. Treasury Zero-coupon issues with a remaining term equal to the expected life of the option. The Company has not paid dividends on its common stock since 1996.

        The following table summarizes stock option activity during the six months ended June 30, 2006:

	Number of Shares			Weighted Average Exercise Price
Outstanding at December 31, 2005		2,218,629		$	3.16
Granted		332,169			5.14
Exercised		(326,554	)		1.92
Forfeited		(37,980	)		9.01
Outstanding at June 30, 2006		2,186,264		$	3.55

17

        The following table summarizes information for options currently outstanding at June 30, 2006:

	Options Outstanding						Options Exercisable
Range of Exercise Price	Number Outstanding		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (Years)		Number Exercisable		Weighted Average Exercise Price		Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (Years)
$0.74 to $1.22		442,641	$	0.80		5.27		442,641	$	0.80		5.27
$1.23 to $1.85		385,243	$	1.74		6.17		385,243	$	1.74		6.17
$1.86 to $2.63		111,502	$	2.10		6.40		111,502	$	2.10		6.40
$2.64 to $3.92		565,329	$	3.86		7.98		269,218	$	3.79		7.27
$3.93 to $7.09		643,944	$	6.01		8.45		247,368	$	6.82		7.15
$7.10 to $17.94		37,605	$	11.68		1.07		37,605	$	11.68		1.07
		2,186,264	$	3.55		7.05		1,493,577	$	2.95		6.15

        As of June 30, 2006, the total future compensation cost related to non-vested options not yet recognized in the statement of income was $1.1 million and the weighted average period over which these awards are expected to be recognized was 2.2 years. The total intrinsic value of share options exercised during the second quarter of 2006 and 2005 was $0.6 million and $0, respectively. The total intrinsic value of share options exercised during the six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005 was $1.4 million and $0 million, respectively. At June 30, 2006, the total intrinsic value was $2.8 million and $2.8 million for stock options outstanding and exercisable, respectively.

        The following table summarizes restricted stock activity during the six months ended June 30, 2006:

	Number of Shares			Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value
Outstanding at December 31, 2005		661,381		$	3.30
Granted		220,894			5.14
Vested		(445,025	)		2.71
Forfeited		(14,903	)		4.81
Outstanding at June 30, 2006		422,347		$	4.83

        The fair value of restricted stock is determined based on the closing stock price on the grant date. As of June 30, 2006, there was $1.0 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to restricted stock-based compensation to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.3 years.

        The following table summarizes performance shares activity during the six months ended June 30, 2006:

	Number of Shares			Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value
Outstanding at December 31, 2005		--		$	--
Granted		220,894			5.14
Exercised		--			--
Forfeited		(6,495	)		5.14
Outstanding at June 30, 2006		214,399		$	5.14

18

        The fair value of performance shares is determined based on the closing price on the grant date. As of June 30, 2006, there was $0.7 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to performance shares to be recognized over the weighted average period of 2.6 years.

NOTE F- INCOME TAXES

        The Company computes income taxes in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” SFAS No. 109 requires an asset and liability approach which results in the recognition of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the carrying amounts and the tax basis of those assets and liabilities, as well as net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards, using currently enacted tax laws. The Company has U.S. net operating loss carryforwards which expire in 2008 through 2025. Net operating losses in foreign countries have an indefinite carryforward period.

        For the three months ended June 30, 2006, the Company reported an income tax provision of approximately $2.8 million. The income tax provision is comprised of a $0.7 million net deferred tax benefit, based upon actual earnings for the quarter, a release of $0.5 million valuation allowance due to anticipated increases in proven and probable reserves and revised projected future taxable income at CDE Cerro Bayo Ltd. and Coeur Argentina, and a $0.4 million deferred tax benefit in Australia, offset by $3.7 million in current taxes payable in the United States, Argentina and Australia. The Company recorded a current $0.2 million tax provision for foreign tax withholding.

        For the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company reported an income tax provision of approximately $2.5 million. The income tax provision is comprised of a $3.0 million net deferred tax benefit, based upon actual earnings for the quarter, a release of $3.5 million valuation allowance due to anticipated increases in proven and probable reserves and revised projected future taxable income at CDE Cerro Bayo Ltd. and Coeur Argentina, and a $0.2 million deferred tax benefit in Australia, offset by $5.2 million in current taxes payable in the United States, Argentina and Australia. The Company recorded a current $0.5 million tax provision for foreign tax withholding.

        The income tax provision for the first six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005 varies from the statutory rate primarily because of foreign operations and management’s determination as to the realization of net deferred tax assets.

NOTE G- SEGMENT REPORTING

        Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is available that is evaluated regularly by the chief operating decision maker, or decision-making group, in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. The Company’s chief operating decision-making group is comprised of the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, the Senior Vice President of North American Operations and the President of South American Operations.

        The operating segments are managed separately because each segment represents a distinct use of company resources which contribute to Company cash flows in its respective geographic area. The Company’s reportable operating segments include the Rochester, Cerro Bayo, Martha, San Bartolome, Kensington and CDE Australia (Endeavor and Broken Hill) mining properties. As of May 31, 2006, the Company completed its sale of Coeur Silver Valley (Galena). For the period ending June 30, 2005, CSV was classified as held for sale and reported in discontinued operations (see Note D). All operating segments are engaged in the discovery and/or mining of gold and silver and generate the majority of their revenues from the sale of these precious metal concentrates and/or refined precious metals. The Cerro Bayo and Martha mines sell precious metal concentrates, typically under long-term contracts, to smelters located in Japan (Sumitomo Corporation and Dowa Mining Ltd.), Mexico (Met-Mex Penoles) and Germany (Nordeutsche). Refined gold and silver produced by the Rochester mine is principally sold on a spot basis to precious metals trading banks such as Standard Bank and Mitsui. Concentrates produced at CDE Australia (Endeavor and Broken Hill mines) are sold by the mines’ owners to Zinifex, an Australia smelter. The Company’s exploration programs are reported under the “other” segment. The other segment also includes the corporate headquarters, elimination of intersegment transactions and other items necessary to reconcile to consolidated amounts. The accounting policies of the operating segments are the same as those described in the summary of significant accounting policies above. The Company evaluates performance and allocates resources based on profit or loss before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, unusual and infrequent items, and extraordinary items.

19

        Financial information relating to the Company’s segments is as follows:

Segment Reporting
(In Thousands)

	Rochester Mine		Cerro Bayo Mine			Martha Mine		Endeavor		Broken Hill		San Bartolome		Kensington			Corporate and Other			Total
Three Months Ended June 30, 2006
Sales of metal	$	25,613	$	11,560		$	9,804	$	770	$	6,294	$	--	$	--		$	--		$	54,041
Segment profit (loss)		15,136		5,279			5,292		734		5,484		--		(83	)		(1,056	)		30,786
Depreciation and depletion		3,480		1,580			306		105		1,452		--		--			66			6,989
Interest income		--		123			--		--		--		--		--			4,614			4,737
Interest expense		--		22			--		--		--		--		--			345			367
Litigation settlement		--		--			--		--		--		--		--			(469	)		(469	)
Income tax (benefit) expense		--		(354	)		1,592		--		--		--		--			1,591			2,829
Segment assets (A)		84,549		42,871			11,447		15,316		34,059		37,280		129,883			7,331			362,736
Capital expenditures		584		1,814			694		--		--		1,521		20,928			137			25,677

	Rochester Mine		Cerro Bayo Mine		Martha Mine			Endeavor		Broken Hill		San Bartolome		Kensington			Corporate and Other			Total
Three Months Ended June 30, 2005
Sales of metal	$	12,267	$	14,626	$	6,356		$	255	$	--	$	--	$	--		$	--		$	33,504
Segment profit (loss)		5,059		4,395		2,510			240		--		25		(3,947	)		(4,024	)		4,258
Depreciation and depletion		2,940		1,051		220			72		--		--		18			71			4,372
Interest income		--		25		(1	)		--		--		--		--			2,260			2,284
Interest expense		--		--		--			--		--		--		--			562			562
Income tax (benefit) expense		--		93		(278	)		--		--		--		--			38			(147	)
Segment assets (A)		83,357		36,224		5,270			16,914		--		27,630		26,906			5,836			202,137
Capital expenditures		782		845		329			15,100		--		3,690		893			250			21,889

	Rochester Mine		Cerro Bayo Mine			Martha Mine		Endeavor		Broken Hill		San Bartolome			Kensington			Corporate and Other			Total
Six Months Ended June 30, 2006
Sales of metal	$	47,817	$	22,274		$	15,231	$	1,336	$	12,237	$	--		$	--		$	--		$	98,895
Segment profit (loss)		25,596		10,601			7,269		1,242		9,832		(3	)		(90	)		(3,444	)		51,003
Depreciation and depletion		6,518		2,902			548		215		2,985		--			--			139			13,307
Interest income		--		171			4		--		--		--			--			7,506			7,681
Interest expense		--		49			--		--		--		--			--			839			888
Litigation settlement		--		--			--		--		--		--			--			(469	)		(469	)
Income tax (benefit) expense		--		(2,441	)		2,083		--		--		--			--			2,839			2,481
Segment assets (A)		84,549		42,871			11,447		15,316		34,059		37,280			129,883			7,331			362,736
Capital expenditures		743		2,914			1,377		--		--		3,465			44,680			305			53,484

20

	Rochester Mine		Cerro Bayo Mine		Martha Mine			Endeavor		Broken Hill		San Bartolome			Kensington			Corporate and Other			Total
Six Months Ended June 30, 2005
Sales of metal	$	27,715	$	27,961	$	9,808		$	255	$	--	$	--		$	--		$	--		$	65,739
Segment profit (loss)		10,996		10,023		3,678			240		--		(89	)		(6,559	)		(7,817	)		10,472
Depreciation and depletion		5,569		2,322		390			72		--		--			35			133			8,521
Interest income		--		45		(1	)		--		--		--			--			4,085			4,129
Interest expense		--		--		--			--		--		--			--			1,132			1,132
Litigation settlement		--		--		--			--		--		--			--			(1,600	)		(1,600	)
Income tax (benefit) expense		--		772		(278	)		--		--		--			--			38			532
Segment assets (A)		83,357		36,224		5,270			16,914		--		27,630			26,906			5,836			202,137
Capital expenditures		969		1,432		1,000			15,100		--		5,569			999			319			25,388

(A) Segment assets consist of receivables, prepaids, inventories, property, plant and equipment, and mining properties

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
Income (loss) from continuing operations before
income taxes
Total segment profit	$	30,786		$	4,258		$	51,003		$	10,472
Depreciation and amortization		(6,989	)		(4,372	)		(13,307	)		(8,521	)
Interest expense		(367	)		(562	)		(888	)		(1,132	)
Litigation settlements		(469	)		--			(469	)		(1,600	)
Income (loss) from continuing operations
before income taxes	$	22,961		$	(676	)	$	36,339		$	(781	)

	As of June 30,
	2006		2005
Assets
Total assets for reportable segments	$	362,736	$	202,138
Cash and cash equivalents		373,392		233,269
Short-term investments		19,896		46,978
Other assets		38,059		31,102
Total assets held for sale		--		12,748
Total consolidated assets	$	794,083	$	526,235

21

Geographic Information

Three Months Ended June 30, 2006	Revenues		Long-Lived Assets
United States	$	25,613	$	144,640
Australia		7,064		46,665
Chile		11,560		19,688
Argentina		9,804		3,402
Bolivia		--		36,538
Other Foreign Countries		--		217
Total	$	54,041	$	251,150
Three Months Ended
June 30, 2005
United States	$	12,267	$	51,100
Australia		255		15,027
Chile		14,626		14,518
Argentina		6,356		1,674
Bolivia		--		26,674
Other Foreign Countries		--		202
Total	$	33,504	$	109,195
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2006
United States	$	47,817	$	144,640
Australia		13,573		46,665
Chile		22,274		19,689
Argentina		15,231		3,402
Bolivia		--		36,538
Other Foreign Countries		--		217
Total	$	98,895	$	251,150
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2005
United States	$	27,715	$	51,099
Australia		255		15,028
Chile		27,961		14,518
Argentina		9,808		1,674
Bolivia		--		26,674
Other Foreign Countries		--		202
Total	$	65,739	$	109,195

NOTE H- RECLAMATION AND REMEDIATION

        Reclamation and remediation costs are based principally on legal and regulatory requirements. Management estimates costs associated with reclamation of mining properties as well as remediation cost for inactive properties. The Company uses assumptions about future costs, mineral prices, mineral processing recovery rates, production levels and capital and reclamation costs. Such assumptions are based on the Company’s current mining plan and the best available information for making such estimates. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates and assumptions; however, actual amounts could differ from those based on such estimates and assumptions.

22

        Changes to the Company’s asset retirement obligations are as follows:

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005
	(in thousands)
Asset retirement obligation - January 1	$	30,429		$	23,436
Accretion		1,104			876
Additions		--			--
Sale of discontinued operations		(7,120	)		--
Settlements		(536	)		(69	)
Asset retirement obligation - June 30	$	23,877		$	24,243

NOTE I- DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS AND FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

        The Company enters into derivative instruments to manage the Company’s exposure to foreign currency exchange rates and market prices associated with changes in gold and silver commodity prices. The Company accounts for its derivative contracts in accordance with SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.” Accordingly, unrealized gains and losses related to the change in fair market value of derivative contracts, which qualify and are designated as cash flow hedges, are recorded as other comprehensive income or loss and such amounts are recognized into earnings as the associated contracts are settled.

Forward Foreign Exchange Contracts

        During the second quarter of 2006, the Company entered into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to reduce the foreign exchange risk associated with forecasted Chilean peso operating costs for 2006 at its Cerro Bayo mine. The contracts require the Company to exchange U.S. dollars for Chilean pesos at a weighted average exchange rate of 525 pesos to each U.S. dollar. At June 30, 2006, the Company had foreign exchange contracts covering $9.6 million U.S. dollars. For the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company recorded a realized loss of approximately $149,000 in connection with its foreign currency hedging program. As of June 30, 2006, the fair value of the foreign exchange contracts was a liability of $0.8 million. Change in gains (losses) accumulated in other comprehensive income (loss) for cash flow hedging contracts are as follows:

	For the Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005
Beginning balance	$	(171	)	$	--
Reclassification to earnings		149			--
Change in fair value		(747	)		(37	)
Ending balance	$	(769	)		(37	)

Commodity Derivatives

        The Company has occasionally entered into forward metal sales contracts to manage the price risk on a portion of its cash flows against fluctuating gold prices. As of June 30, 2006, the Company had no outstanding forward sales contracts for either gold or silver. For metal delivery contracts, the realized price pursuant to the contract is recognized when physical gold or silver is delivered in satisfaction of the contract.

23

        The credit risk exposure related to any potential hedging activities is limited to the unrealized gains, if any, on outstanding contracts based on current market prices. To reduce counter-party credit exposure, the Company deals only with a group of large credit-worthy financial institutions and limits credit exposure to each. The Company does not anticipate non-performance by any of its counter parties. In addition, to allow for situations where positions may need to be revised, the Company deals only in markets that it considers highly liquid.

Concentrate Sales Contracts

        The Company enters into concentrate sales contracts with third-party smelters. The contracts, in general, provide for a provisional payment based upon provisional assays and quoted metal prices and the provisionally priced sales contain an embedded derivative that is required to be separated from the host contract for accounting purposes. The host contract is the receivable from the sale of concentrates at the forward price at the time of sale. The embedded derivative, which is the final settlement price based on a future price, does not qualify for hedge accounting. These embedded derivatives are recorded as derivative assets (in Prepaid expenses and other), or derivative liabilities (in other current liabilities), on the balance sheet and are adjusted to fair value through earnings each period until the date of final settlement.

        At June 30, 2006 the Company had outstanding provisionally priced sales of $43.9 million, consisting of 2.9 million ounces of silver and 16,719 ounces of gold, which had a fair value of approximately $42.9 million, including the embedded derivative.

NOTE J- LONG-TERM DEBT

1 ¼% Debentures

        The $180.0 million principal amount of 1 ¼% Debentures due 2024 outstanding at June 30, 2006 are convertible into shares of common stock at the option of the holder on January 15, 2011, 2014 and 2019, unless previously redeemed, at a conversion price of $7.60 per share, subject to adjustment in certain events.

        The Company is required to make semi-annual interest payments. The Debentures are redeemable at the option of the Company before January 18, 2011, if the closing price of the Company’s common stock over a specified number of trading days has exceeded 150% of the conversion price, and anytime thereafter. Before January 18, 2011, the redemption price is equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes plus an amount equal to 8.75% of the principal amount of the notes, less the amount of any interest actually paid on the notes on or prior to the redemption date. The Debentures are due at maturity on January 15, 2024.

NOTE K- DEFINED CONTRIBUTION, 401(k), DEFINED BENEFIT AND POST-RETIREMENT MEDICAL PLANS

Defined Contribution Plan and 401(k) Plan

        The Company provides a noncontributory defined contribution retirement plan for all eligible U.S. employees. Total plan expenses charged to operations were $0.3 million and $0.2 million in the second quarters of 2006 and 2005, respectively, and plan expenses charged to operations for the six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005 were $0.6 million and $0.5 million, respectively, which is based on a percentage of salary of qualified employees.

        The Company maintains a savings plan (which qualifies under Section 401(k) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code) covering all eligible U.S. employees. Under the plan, employees may elect to contribute up to 100% of their cash compensation, subject to ERISA limitations. The Company is required to make matching cash contributions equal to 50% of the employees’ contribution to a maximum of 3% of the employees’ compensation. Employees have the option of investing in thirteen different types of investment funds. Total plan expenses charged to operations were $0.1 million and $0.1 million in the second quarter of 2006 and 2005, respectively, and total plan expenses charges to operations for the six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005 were $0.4 million and $0.3 million, respectively.

24

        In connection with the sale of Coeur Silver Valley, the Company no longer maintains the Post-Retirement Medical and Defined Benefit Plans.

NOTE L- COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Labor Union Contracts

        The Company maintains two labor agreements in South America, including a labor agreement with Syndicato De Trabayadores De Compania Minera Cerro Bayo Ltd. at its Cerro Bayo mine in Chile and with Associacion Obrera Minera Argentina at its Martha mine in Argentina. The agreement at Cerro Bayo is effective from December 22, 2005 to December 21, 2007 and the agreement at Mina Martha is effective from June 12, 2006 to June 11, 2008. As of June 30, 2006, the Company had approximately 42% of its worldwide labor force covered by collective bargaining agreements.

Termination Benefits

        In September 2005, the Company established a one-time termination benefit program at the Rochester mine as the mine approaches the end of its mine life. The employees will be required to render service until they are terminated to be eligible for benefits. Approximately 80% of the workforce is expected to be severed by mid-2007, while the remaining 20% are expected to stay on for residual leaching and reclamation activities. As of June 30, 2006, the total amount expected to be incurred under this plan is approximately $3.1 million. The liability is recognized ratably over the minimum future service period. The amount accrued as of June 30, 2006 was $1.1 million and was charged to production costs.

	Three Months Ended June 30,					Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005		2006			2005
	(in thousands)					(in thousands)
Beginning Balance	$	986		$	--	$	542		$	--
Accruals		197			--		936			--
Payments		(64	)		--		(359	)		--
Ending Balance	$	1,119		$	--	$	1,119		$	--

NOTE M- SIGNIFICANT CUSTOMERS

        The Company markets its metals products and concentrates primarily to bullion trading banks and five third party smelters. These customers then sell the metals to end users for use in industry applications such as electronic circuitry, jewelry and silverware production and the manufacture and development of photographic film. Sales of metals to bullion trading banks amounted to approximately 43.4% and 37.0% of total metals sales for the six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Generally, the loss of a single bullion trading bank customer would not adversely affect the Company in view of the liquidity of the markets and availability of alternative trading banks.

        The Company currently markets its silver and gold concentrates to third party smelters in Japan, Mexico, Australia and Germany. Sales of metals concentrates to third party smelters amounted to approximately 56.6% and 63.0% of metals sales for the six months ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The loss of any one smelter customer could have a material adverse effect in the event of the possible unavailability of alternative smelters.

25

NOTE N- LITIGATION AND OTHER EVENTS

Federal Natural Resources Action

          On March 22, 1996, an action was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Idaho by the United States against various defendants, including the Company, asserting claims under CERCLA and the Clean Water Act for alleged damages to federal natural resources in the Coeur d’Alene River Basin of Northern Idaho. The damages are claimed to result from alleged releases of hazardous substances from mining activities conducted in the area since the late 1800‘s.

        In May 2001, the Company and representatives of the U.S. Government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture, reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit. The terms of settlement are set forth in a Consent Decree issued by the court. Pursuant to the terms of the Consent Decree, dated May 14, 2001, the Company has paid the U.S. Government a total of approximately $3.9 million, of which $3.3 million was paid in May 2001 and the remaining $0.6 million was paid in June 2001. In addition, the Company will (i) pay the United States 50% of any future recoveries from insurance companies for claims for defense and indemnification under general liability insurance policies in excess of $0.6 million, (ii) accomplish certain cleanup work on the Mineral Point property and Caladay property, and (iii) make a conveyance to the U.S. or the State of Idaho of certain real property to possibly be used as a waste repository. Finally, commencing five years after effectiveness of the settlement, the Company will be obligated to pay net smelter return royalties on all of its domestic and foreign operating properties, up to a cumulative of $3 million, amounting to a 2% net smelter royalty on silver production if the price of silver exceeds $6.50 per ounce, and a $5.00 per ounce net smelter royalty on gold production if the price of gold exceeds $325 per ounce. The royalty payment obligation commenced on May 14, 2006 and will expire on May 14, 2021, or earlier once the cumulative amount has been paid. During the second quarter of 2006, $469,000 of royalty expense was incurred in connection with this settlement and recorded as a litigation settlement in the consolidated statement of operations.

States of Maine, Idaho And Colorado Superfund Sites Related to Callahan Mining Corporation

        During 2001, the United States Forest Service made a formal request for information regarding the Deadwood Mine Site located in central Idaho. Callahan Mining Corporation had operated at this site during the 1940‘s. The Forest Service believes that some cleanup action is required at the location. However, Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation did not acquire Callahan until 1991, more than 40 years after Callahan disposed of its interest in the Deadwood property. The Company did not make any decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at the site. Therefore, it is believed that the Company is not liable for any cleanup, and if Callahan might be liable, it has no substantial assets with which to satisfy any such liability. To date no claim has been made by the United States for any cleanup costs against either the Company or Callahan.

        During 2002, the EPA made a formal request for information regarding a Callahan mine site in the State of Maine. Callahan operated there in the late 1960‘s, shut the operations down in the early 1970‘s and disposed of the property. The EPA contends that some cleanup action is warranted at the site, and listed it on the National Priorities List in late 2002. The Company believes that because it made no decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at this location, it is not liable for any cleanup costs. If Callahan might have liability, it has no substantial assets with which to satisfy such liability. To date, no claim has been made for any cleanup costs against either the Company or Callahan.

        In January 2003, the U.S. Forest Service made a formal request for information regarding a Callahan mine site in the State of Colorado known as the Akron Mine Site. Callahan operated there in approximately the late 1930s through the 1940s, and to the Company’s knowledge, disposed of the property. The Company is not aware of what, if any, cleanup action the Forest Service is contemplating. However, the Company did not make decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at this location, and therefore believes it is not liable for any cleanup costs. If Callahan might have liability, it has no substantial assets with which to satisfy such liability. To date, no claim has been made for any cleanup costs against either the Company or Callahan.

26

Federal District Court of Alaska Permit Challenge

        On September 12, 2005 three environmental groups filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Alaska against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps of Engineers”) and the U.S. Forest Service (“USFS”) seeking to invalidate permits issued to Coeur Alaska, Inc. for the Company’s Kensington mine. The Plaintiffs claim the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit issued by the Corps of Engineers authorizing the deposition of mine tailings into Lower Slate Lake conflicts with the CWA and is thus illegal. They additionally claim the USFS’s approval of the Amended Plan of Operations is arbitrary and capricious because it relies on the 404 permit issued by the Corps of Engineers.

        On November 8, 2005, the Corps of Engineers filed a Motion for Voluntary Remand with the court to review the permit issued to the Company under the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 and requested that the court stay the legal proceeding filed by the plaintiffs pending the outcome of review. On November 12, 2005, the Federal District Court in Alaska granted the remand of the permit to the Corps of Engineers for further review. On November 22, 2005, the Corps of Engineers advised the Company that it was suspending the Section 404 permit pursuant to the Court’s remand to further review the permit.

        On March 29, 2006, the Corps of Engineers reinstated the Company’s 404 permit. On April 6, 2006 the lawsuit challenging the permit was re-opened, and Coeur Alaska, Inc. filed its answer to the Amended Complaint and Motion to Intervene as a Defendant-Intervenor in the action. Two other parties, the State of Alaska and Goldbelt, Inc., a local native corporation, also filed Motions to Intervene as Defendant-Intervenors as supporters of the Kensington project as permitted. The Company, the State of Alaska and Goldbelt, Inc. have all been granted Defendant-Intervenor status and have joined the agencies in their defense of the permits as issued.

        The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation or its impact on the project or when the court will rule on the case. The Company plans to continue to move forward with full-scale construction of the mine.

Item 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

        This document contains numerous forward-looking statements relating to the Company’s gold and silver mining business. The United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a “safe harbor” for certain forward-looking statements. Operating, exploration and financial data, and other statements in this document are based on information the Company believes reasonable, but involve significant uncertainties as to future gold and silver prices, costs, ore grades, estimation of gold and silver reserves, mining and processing conditions, changes that could result from the Company’s future acquisition of new mining properties or businesses, the risks and hazards inherent in the mining business (including environmental hazards, industrial accidents, weather or geologically related conditions), regulatory and permitting matters, and risks inherent in the ownership and operation of, or investment in, mining properties or businesses in foreign countries. Actual results and timetables could vary significantly from the estimates presented. Readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update publicly these forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

27

        Management’s Discussion and Analysis includes references to total cash costs per ounce of silver produced both on an individual mine basis and on a consolidated basis. Total cash costs per ounce represent a non- U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) measurement that management uses to monitor and evaluate the performance of its mining operations. A reconciliation of total cash costs per ounce to U.S. GAAP “Production Expenses” is also provided herein and should be referred to when reading the total cash cost per ounce measurement.

General

        The results of the Company’s operations are significantly affected by the market prices of silver and gold which may fluctuate widely and are affected by many factors beyond the Company’s control, including, without limitation, interest rates, expectations regarding inflation, currency values, governmental decisions regarding the disposal of precious metals stockpiles, global and regional political and economic conditions, and other factors.

        The average price of silver (Handy & Harman) and gold (London Final) for the first six months of 2006 was $10.98 and $591 per ounce, respectively. The market price of silver and gold on July 27, 2006 was $11.43 per ounce and $639 per ounce, respectively.

        The Company’s operating mines are the Rochester mine in Nevada, the Cerro Bayo mine in Chile and the Martha mine in Argentina. In addition, the Company owns all of the silver production and reserves, up to certain limits, at the Endeavor and Broken Hill mines in Australia, which are owned and operated by other companies. As of June 1, 2006, the Company completed the sale of Coeur Silver Valley to U.S. Silver Corporation for $15 million in cash plus an estimated $1.1 million working capital adjustment.

Operating Highlights and Statistics

South American Operations

        Cerro Bayo Mine:

        At the Cerro Bayo mine in Southern Chile, silver production was 789,746 ounces and 9,935 ounces of gold in the second quarter of 2006 compared to 691,846 ounces of silver and 15,100 ounces of gold in the second quarter of 2005. The increase in silver production was primarily due to an increase in tons mined. The decline in gold production was primarily due to a decrease in ore grades as a result of the Company focusing its mining activity in lower gold grade areas of the mine. Total cash cost per ounce in the second quarter of 2006 was $1.82 per ounce compared to $0.76 per ounce in 2005. The increase in cash cost per ounce is primarily due to a lower gold credit, due to lower gold production, compared to the second quarter of 2005.

        For the six months ended June 30, 2006, silver production was 1,305,568 ounces and gold production was 18,729 ounces compared to 1,351,139 ounces of silver and 29,967 ounces of gold for the same period of 2005. The decrease in silver and gold production was primarily due to a decrease in overall ore grades as a result of the Company focusing its mining activities in lower grade areas of the mine. It is expected that ore grades will improve to historical levels during the second half of 2006. Total cash costs per ounce for the first six months of 2006 amounted to $2.47 compared to $0.31 during the same period in 2005. The higher cash costs per ounce were due to lower gold credit due to lower gold production as compared to the same period of 2005.

28

        Martha Mine:

        At the Martha Mine in Southern Argentina, silver production was 633,014 ounces in the second quarter of 2006 compared to 606,121 ounces in the second quarter of 2005. The increase in silver production was due to a 38% increase in ore grades partially offset by a 24% decrease in tons milled as compared to the second quarter of 2005. Total cash costs per ounce in the second quarter of 2006 were $5.14 per ounce compared to $4.43 per ounce in 2005. The higher cash costs per ounce were primarily due to higher operating costs, including increased royalties resulting from higher realized metal prices, in the second quarter of 2006 compared to the second quarter of 2005.

        For the six months ended June 30, 2006, silver production was 1,176,500 ounces compared to 985,181 ounces in the same period last year. The increase in silver production was primarily due to a 30% increase in ore grades, partially offset by a modest decrease in tons milled. Total cash costs per ounce in the six-month period were $5.04 per ounce in 2006 compared to $4.68 per ounce in 2005. The increase in cash costs per ounce was primarily due to increases in operating expenses.

North American Operations

        Rochester Mine:

        At the Rochester mine, silver production was 1,153,295 ounces and gold production was 18,265 ounces during the second quarter of 2006 compared to 1,208,584 ounces of silver and 14,412 ounces of gold in the second quarter of 2005. Total cash costs per ounce decreased to $2.61 from $7.58 in the second quarter of 2005. The decrease in cash cost per ounce is primarily due to the higher gold credit as a result of increased gold production and higher gold prices.

        Silver production for the six months ended June 30, 2006 was 2,301,658 ounces compared to 2,344,581 ounces for the six months ended June 30, 2005 and gold production increased to 34,382 ounces from 28,404 ounces for the six months ended June 30, 2005. Total cash costs per ounce decreased by 50% to $3.46 compared to $6.96 for the same period of 2005. This decrease in cash cost per ounce is attributable to lower operating costs and higher gold production and prices.

Australia Operations

        Endeavor Mine:

        On May 23, 2005, the Company acquired all of the silver production and reserves, up to a maximum 17.7 million payable ounces, contained at the Endeavor Mine in Australia, which is owned and operated by Cobar Operations Pty. Limited (“Cobar”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of CBH Resources Ltd. (“CBH”) for $38.4 million. While the Company is entitled to all of the silver production and reserves up to a maximum of 17.7 million payable ounces, based on the most recent ore reserve report, the current ore reserve contains approximately 9.6 million payable ounces based on current metallurgical recovery and current smelter contract items. Expansion of the ore reserve will be required to achieve the maximum payable ounces of silver production as set forth in the contract. The Endeavor Mine is located 720 km northwest of Sydney in New South Wales and has been in production since 1983. Under the terms of the original agreement, CDE Australia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Coeur, paid Cobar $15.4 million of cash at the closing. In addition, CDE Australia, subject to certain conditions, will pay Cobar approximately $23.0 million upon the receipt of a report confirming that the reserves at the Endeavor mine are equal to or greater than the reported ore reserves for 2004. Payment could occur in 2006. In addition to these upfront payments, pursuant to the original agreement, Coeur pays Cobar an operating cost contribution of $1.00 for each ounce of payable silver plus a further increment which was to begin when the silver price exceeds $5.23 per ounce. This further increment was to begin on the second anniversary of the agreement and would have been 50% of the amount by which the silver price exceeds $5.23 per ounce. A cost contribution of $0.25 per ounce is also payable by Coeur in respect of new ounces of proven and probable silver reserves as they are discovered.

29

        On March 28, 2006, CDE Australia Pty, Ltd. (CDE Australia), reached an agreement with CBH Resources Ltd. to modify the terms of the original silver purchase agreement. Under the modified terms, CDE Australia owns all silver production and reserves up to a total of 20.0 million ounces, up from 17.7 million ounces in the original agreement. The silver price-sharing provision is deferred until such time as Coeur has received approximately 2 million cumulative ounces of silver from the mine or June 2007, whichever is later. In addition, the silver price-sharing threshold increased to US$7.00 per ounce, from the previous level of US$5.23 per ounce.

        In connection with the modification of the terms of the agreement, CDE Australia agreed to provide CBH with an advance of up to A$15.0 million of the A$30 million that remains to be paid under the terms of the original agreement. The remaining payment from Coeur to CBH is subject to the Endeavor mine achieving certain operational benchmarks. The advance, in the form of a loan facility, will bear interest at 7.75% per annum once drawn by CBH. The term is for a twelve month period with an option to extend an additional six months.

        The Company’s share of silver production during the second quarter of 2006 amounted to 80,890 ounces compared to 58,464 ounces in the second quarter of 2005. Total cash cost per ounce increased to $2.79 from $1.89. For the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company’s share of silver production amounted to 165,170 ounces compared to 58,464 ounces for the same period in 2005. The cash cost per ounce of silver production increased to $2.45 compared to $1.89 due to higher smelting and refining charges associated with the increased market value of silver deduction charges pursuant to the smelting and refining contracts. Production rates at the Endeavor mine have not yet returned to expected levels as the mine continues to recover from a rock fall that occurred in October 2005. Based on the progress made to date in correcting issues related to the ground fall, the Company now expects production levels to return to normal levels during the fourth quarter of 2006.

        Broken Hill Mine:

        On September 8, 2005, the Company acquired all of the silver production and reserves, up to 17.2 million payable ounces, contained at the Broken Hill mine in Australia, which is owned and operated by Perilya Broken Hill Ltd. (“PBH”) for $36.0 million. The Broken Hill Mine is located in New South Wales, Australia and is a zinc/lead/silver ore body. Pursuant to the agreement, the transaction includes up to a maximum of approximately 24.5 million contained ounces (or 17.2 million payable ounces) of silver to be mined by PBH at Broken Hill on the Company’s behalf. While the Company is entitled to all of the silver production and reserves up to a maximum of 17.2 million payable ounces, based on the most recent ore reserve report, the current ore reserve contains approximately 12.5 million ounces of payable ounces based on current metallurgical recovery and current smelter contract items. Expansion of the ore reserve will be required to achieve the maximum payable ounces of silver production as set forth in the contract. In addition CDE Australia will pay PBH an operating cost contribution of approximately $2.00 for each ounce of payable silver. Under the terms of the agreement, PBH may earn up to US$750,000 of additional consideration per year over the first eight years of the contract by meeting certain annual silver production thresholds. The Company’s share of silver production during the second quarter of 2006 amounted to 528,041 ounces. The cash cost per ounce of silver production was $3.27. For the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company’s share of silver production amounted to 1,085,353 ounces. The cash cost per ounce of silver production was $3.07.

30

Discontinued Operations

        Coeur Silver Valley (Galena) Mine:

        On June 1, 2006, the Company completed the sale of 100% of the shares of its wholly owned subsidiary Coeur Silver Valley, Inc. to U.S. Silver Corporation for $15 million in cash and additional consideration to be received of $1.1 million for working capital.

        At the Galena Mine, silver production for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 was 269,027 and 768,674 ounces, respectively, as compared to 559,700 and 1,269,996 ounces, respectively, produced in the same periods of 2005. Total cash costs per ounce increased to $10.72 from $8.05 per ounce in the second quarter of 2005. Total cash costs per ounce increased to $9.75 from $7.32 in the six months ended June 30, 2005. The lower production and higher costs per ounce for the periods presented are due to lower than expected production grades as mine operations adjusted to changing geologic ground conditions and the sale of Coeur Silver Valley on June 1, 2006.

31

Operating Statistics From Continuing Operations

        The following table presents information by mine and consolidated sales information for the three- and six-month periods ended June 30, 2006 and 2005:

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
Rochester
Tons processed		2,737,547			2,293,621			5,269,447			4,652,034
Ore grade/Ag oz		0.76			1.09			0.72			1.00
Ore grade/Au oz		.009			.010			.011			.010
Recovery/Ag oz (A)		55.5	%		48.5	%		60.9	%		50.5	%
Recovery/Au oz (A)		75.1	%		63.4	%		58.3	%		62.8	%
Silver production ounces		1,153,295			1,208,584			2,301,658			2,344,581
Gold production ounces		18,265			14,412			34,382			28,404
Cash cost/oz		$2.61			$7.58			$3.46			$6.96
Total cost/oz		$5.80			$9.93			$6.70			$9.25
Cerro Bayo
Tons milled		115,361			92,666			215,636			191,250
Ore grade/Ag oz		7.20			7.80			6.43			7.41
Ore grade/Au oz		.094			.174			.094			.168
Recovery/Ag oz		95.1	%		95.7	%		94.2	%		95.3	%
Recovery/Au oz		92.1	%		93.4	%		92.1	%		93.1	%
Silver production ounces		789,746			691,846			1,305,568			1,351,139
Gold production ounces		9,935			15,100			18,729			29,967
Cash cost/oz		$1.82			$0.76			$2.47			$0.31
Total cost/oz		$3.77			$2.28			$4.63			$2.03
Martha Mine
Tons milled		6,817			8,915			15,666			16,753
Ore grade/Ag oz		97.79			70.82			79.75			61.54
Ore grade/Au oz		.134			.088			.105			.077
Recovery/Ag oz		95.0	%		96.0	%		94.2	%		95.6	%
Recovery/Au oz		91.8	%		94.0	%		92.0	%		93.5	%
Silver production ounces		633,014			606,121			1,176,500			985,181
Gold production ounces		839			735			1,509			1,206
Cash cost/oz		$5.14			$4.43			$5.04			$4.68
Total cost/oz		$5.61			$4.78			$5.50			$5.07
Endeavor (B)
Tons milled		118,775			53,069			221,778			53,069
Ore grade/Ag oz		1.11			1.46			1.20			1.46
Recovery/Ag oz		61.3	%		75.5	%		62.1	%		75.5	%
Silver production ounces		80,890			58,464			165,170			58,464
Cash cost/oz		$2.79			$1.89			$2.45			$1.89
Total cost/oz		$4.09			$3.13			$3.75			$3.13
Broken Hill (B)
Tons milled		525,888			--			1,106,911			--
Ore grade/Ag oz		1.32			--			1.35			--
Recovery/Ag oz		75.8	%		--			72.2	%		--
Silver production ounces		528,041			--			1,085,353			--
Cash cost/oz		$3.27			--			$3.07			--
Total cost/oz		$6.02			--			$5.82			--
CONSOLIDATED PRODUCTION TOTALS
Silver ounces		3,184,986			2,565,015			6,034,249			4,739,365
Gold ounces		29,039			30,247			54,620			57,577
Cash cost per oz/silver		$3.03			$4.87			$3.46			$4.53
Total cost/oz		$5.25			$6.50			$5.78			$6.25
CONSOLIDATED SALES TOTALS
Silver ounces sold		3,249,854			2,881,145			6,127,744			5,534,242
Gold ounces sold		29,157			34,029			54,891			69,213
Realized price per silver ounce		$13.10			$7.25			$11.82			$7.05
Realized price per gold ounce		$649			$431			$620			$427

(A) The leach cycle at Rochester requires 5 to 10 years to recover gold and silver contained in the ore. The Company estimates the ultimate recovery to be approximately 61.5% for silver and 93% for gold. However, ultimate recoveries will not be known until leaching operations cease which is currently estimated for 2011. Current recovery may vary significantly from ultimate recovery. See Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates – Ore on Leach Pad.

32

(B) The Company acquired its interests in the Endeavor and Broken Hill mines in May 2005 and September 2005, respectively.

Operating Statistics From Discontinued Operation

        The following table presents information for Coeur Silver Valley which was sold on June 1, 2006:

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005			2006			2005
Silver Valley/Galena
Tons milled		20,224			35,933			52,876			73,391
Ore grade/Silver oz		13.92			16.01			15.15			17.79
Recovery/Silver oz		95.6	%		97.3	%		96.0	%		97.3	%
Silver production ounces		269,027			559,700			768,674			1,269,996
Cash cost/oz		$10.72			$8.05			$9.75			$7.32
Total cost/oz		$11.04			$8.95			$10.64			$8.11
Gold production		58			54			180			145

“Cash Costs per Ounce” are calculated by dividing the cash costs computed for each of the Company’s mining properties for a specified period by the amount of gold ounces or silver ounces produced by that property during that same period. Management uses cash costs per ounce as a key indicator of the profitability of each of its mining properties. Gold and silver are sold and priced in the world financial markets on a US dollar per ounce basis.

“Cash Costs” are costs directly related to the physical activities of producing silver and gold, and include mining, processing and other plant costs, third-party refining and smelting costs, marketing expense, on-site general and administrative costs, royalties, in-mine drilling expenditures that are related to production and other direct costs. Sales of by-product metals are deducted from the above in computing cash costs. Cash costs exclude depreciation, depletion and amortization, corporate general and administrative expense, exploration, interest, and pre-feasibility costs and accruals for mine reclamation. Cash costs are calculated and presented using the “Gold Institute Production Cost Standard” applied consistently for all periods presented.

Total cash costs per ounce is a non-GAAP measurement and investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on it and are urged to read all GAAP accounting disclosures presented in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying footnotes. In addition, see the reconciliation of “cash costs” to production costs under “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Cash Costs to GAAP Production Costs” set forth below.

Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Cash Costs to GAAP Production Costs

        The tables below present reconciliations between Non-GAAP cash costs per ounce to production costs applicable to sales including depreciation, depletion and amortization (GAAP).

        Total cash costs include all direct and indirect operating cash costs related directly to the physical activities of producing metals, including mining, processing and other plant costs, third-party refining and marketing expense, on-site general and administrative costs, royalties and mining production taxes, net of by-product revenues earned from all metals other than the primary metal produced at each unit. Total cash costs are a performance measure and provide management and investors an indication of net cash flow, after consideration of the realized price received for production sold. Management also uses this measurement for the comparative monitoring of performance of our mining operations period-to-period from a cash flow perspective. “Total cash cost per ounce” is a measure developed by precious metals companies in an effort to provide a comparable standard, however, there can be no assurance that our reporting of this non-GAAP measure is similar to that reported by other mining companies.

        Production costs applicable to sales including depreciation, depletion and amortization, is the most comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP to total cash costs. The sum of the production costs applicable to sales and depreciation, depletion and amortization for our mines as set forth in the tables below is included in our Consolidated Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Loss.

33

THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2006 (In thousands except ounces and per ounce costs)
	Rochester			Cerro Bayo			Martha			Endeavor (1)			Broken Hill (1)			Total
Production of Silver (ounces)		1,153,295			789,746			633,014			80,890			528,041			3,184,186
Cash Costs per ounce	$	2.61		$	1.82		$	5.14		$	2.79		$	3.27		$	3.03
Total Cash Costs (Non-GAAP)	$	3,008		$	1,439		$	3,251		$	225		$	1,727		$	9,650
Add/Subtract:
Third party smelting costs		--			(1,021	)		(469	)		(155	)		(762	)		(2,407	)
By-Product credit (2)		11,535			6,298			522			--			--			18,355
Other adjustments		197			--			--			--			--			197
Change in inventory		(4,130	)		(245	)		(159	)		(6	)		332			(4,208	)
Depreciation, depletion and
amortization		3,480			1,537			302			105			1,452			6,876
Production costs applicable to
sales, including depreciation,
depletion and amortization (GAAP)	$	14,090		$	8,008		$	3,447		$	169		$	2,749		$	28,463

THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2005 (In thousands except ounces and per ounce costs)
	Rochester			Cerro Bayo			Martha			Endeavor (1)			Broken Hill (1)		Total
Production of Silver (ounces)		1,208,584			691,846			606,121			58,464			--		2,565,015
Cash Costs per ounce	$	7.58		$	0.76		$	4.43		$	1.89			--	$	4.87
Total Cash Costs (Non- GAAP)	$	9,166		$	527		$	2,683		$	111			--		12,487
Add/Subtract:
Third party smelting costs		--			(519	)		(302	)		(58	)		--		(879	)
By-Product credit (2)		6,168			6,452			314			--			--		12,934
Other adjustments		(101	)		(18	)		(101	)		--			--		(220	)
Change in inventory		(8,240	)		2,600			167			(38	)		--		(5,511	)
Depreciation, depletion and
amortization		2,838			1,051			215			72			4,176
Production costs applicable to
sales, including depreciation,
depletion and amortization (GAAP)	$	9,831		$	10,093		$	2,976		$	87			--	$	22,987

SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2006 (In thousands except ounces and per ounce costs)
	Rochester			Cerro Bayo			Martha			Endeavor (1)			Broken Hill (1)			Total
Production of Silver (ounces)		2,301,658			1,305,568			1,176,500			165,170			1,085,353			6,034,249
Cash Costs per ounce	$	3.46		$	2.47		$	5.04		$	2.45		$	3.07		$	3.46
Total Cash Costs (Non-GAAP)	$	7,972		$	3,222		$	5,932		$	405		$	3,336		$	20,867
Add/Subtract:
Third party smelting costs		--			(1,792	)		(781	)		(257	)		(1,334	)		(4,164	)
By-Product credit (2)		20,476			11,171			893			--			--			32,540
Other adjustments		936			--			--			--			--			936
Change in inventory		(7,022	)		(1,596	)		(223	)		(54	)		403			(8,492	)
Depreciation, depletion and
amortization		6,518			2,820			540			214			2,985			13,077
Production costs applicable to
sales, including depreciation,
depletion and amortization (GAAP)	$	28,880		$	13,825		$	6,361		$	308		$	5,390		$	54,764

34

SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 2005 (In thousands except ounces and per ounce costs)
	Rochester			Cerro Bayo			Martha			Endeavor (1)			Broken Hill (1)		Total
Production of Silver (ounces)		2,344,581			1,351,139			985,181			58,464			--		4,739,365
Cash Costs per ounce	$	6.96		$	0.31		$	4.68		$	1.89			--	$	4.53
Total Cash Costs (Non- GAAP)	$	16,319		$	418		$	4,615		$	111			--	$	21,463
Add/Subtract:
Third party smelting costs		--			(1,238	)		(499	)		(58	)		--		(1,795	)
By-Product credit (2)		12,160			12,800			515			--			--		25,475
Other adjustments		(201	)		(10	)		(174	)		--			--		(385	)
Change in inventory		(11,798	)		3,266			(35	)		(38	)		--		(8,605	)
Depreciation, depletion and
amortization		5,368			2,322			381			73			--		8,144
Production costs applicable to
sales, including depreciation,
depletion and amortization (GAAP)	$	21,848		$	17,558		$	4,803		$	88			--	$	44,297

The following tables present a reconciliation between non-GAAP cash costs per ounce to GAAP production costs applicable to sales reported in Discontinued Operations (see Note D):

Coeur Silver Valley/Galena	THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,						SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
	2006(3)			2005			2006(3)			2005
	(In thousands except ounces and per ounce costs)
Production of Silver (ounces)		269,027			559,700			768,674			1,269,996
Cash Costs per ounce	$	10.72		$	8.05		$	9.75		$	7.32
Total Cash Costs (Non-GAAP)	$	2,883		$	4,508		$	7,498		$	9,290
Add/Subtract:
Third party smelting costs		(595	)		(835	)		(1,464	)		(1,959	)
By-Product credit (2)		677			689			1,473			1,628
Change in inventory		1,008			373			726			(323	)
Depreciation, depletion and
amortization		86			501			681			1,013
Production costs applicable to
sales, including depreciation,
depletion and amortization (GAAP)	$	4,059		$	5,236		$	8,914		$	9,649

(1) The Company’s share of silver production at Endeavor and Broken Hill commenced in May 2005 and September 2005, respectively.

(2) By-product credits are based upon production units and the period’s average metal price for the purposes of reporting cash costs per ounce.

(3) Amounts represent two and five months ended May 31, 2006, respectively.

Exploration Activity

Cerro Bayo Mine (Chile)

        Exploration at Cerro Bayo during the second quarter of 2006 focused on reserve development/delineation drilling and discovery of new mineralization. Approximately 18,900 meters (62,200 feet) were drilled in the two programs. The majority of the drilling (69%) was devoted to definition of new reserves around the current mine operations areas. Results from both programs are expected to produce additional reserves and mineralized material though the impact of the new drilling will not be fully evaluated until the program is completed.

35

Martha Mine (Argentina)

        At Martha, a total of 5,100 meters (16,700 feet) of drilling was completed during the second quarter to expand reserves and discover new mineralization. Results obtained from drilling R4 Deep, Francisca and Catalina continues to expand the strike and depth of the mineralization in those veins, which were discovered in 2004. Drilling will continue throughout the year on these and other targets in the Martha mine district.

        In the second quarter of 2006, the Company accelerated its grassroots explorations activities in Chile and Argentina. As a result, two new properties were acquired via option-to-purchase agreements with private Argentinean interests. The largest is the Costa property at 39,800 hectares (98,500 acres) which lies about 150 kilometers (90 miles) north-northwest of the Company’s Martha mine. The second property, termed El Aguila, is located in the eastern part of the Santa Cruz province approximately 150 kilometers (90 miles) north of the town of San Julian. The Company plans to commence exploration in the next quarter on both properties.

Tanzania (Africa)

        In the second quarter of 2006, the Company continued exploration on its properties in the Lake Victoria Goldfields District of northern Tanzania. Mapping and sampling was conducted on the Geita 2, Bunda, and Biharamulo tenements as well as on the new Saragurwa concession acquired in the fourth quarter of 2005. A RAB (rotary air blast) drill program commenced in the second quarter of 2006 on Geita 2 with a total of 1,200 meters (3,800 feet). An airborne geophysical survey over Saragurwa and Bunda is scheduled to commence in the third quarter of 2006.

Development Projects:

San Bartolome (Bolivia)

        During 2004, the Company completed an updated feasibility study, obtained all required permits and commenced construction of the San Bartolome mine. Based upon the results of the updated feasibility study, the Company estimates the capital cost of the project to be approximately $135 million, and the annual production to be approximately 6-8 million ounces of silver over a mine life of approximately 14 years.

        During the second quarter of 2005, the government of Bolivia experienced political unrest which resulted in the resignation of that country’s President and the appointment of a temporary President. In December 2005, an election was held which resulted in a new president, without the necessity of a runoff election, as well as changes in numerous other levels of government. As a result, the Company is continuing the development of the project but has extended the construction period until it has been determined that the recent election has mitigated the political uncertainty. Construction work undertaken during the first half of 2006 included the construction of access roads to and around the site, rough cut grading of the mill site, and diversion channels around the mill site. Additional work planned for the third quarter of 2006 includes preparation of an ore stockpile area, movement of some ore to stockpiles and the construction of a fence around the perimeter of the plant site area. The Company is proceeding with engineering and procurement activities.

        During the six months ended June 30, 2006, Coeur expended approximately $3.5 million and plans to incur additional construction costs of approximately $63.4 million in 2006, assuming a full-scale construction schedule is implemented during the year. The Company is aiming to complete construction activities toward the end of 2007.

        The San Bartolome project involves risks that are inherent in any mining venture, as well as particular risks associated with the location of the project. The estimate of mineralized material indicated by the geologic studies performed to date are preliminary in nature and may differ materially after further metallurgical testing is completed. Also, managing mining projects in the altiplano area of Bolivia, where Cerro Rico is located, presents logistical challenges. The political and cultural differences of Bolivia may also present challenges.

36

        We have obtained a political risk insurance policy from the Overseas Private Insurance Corporation (“OPIC”) and another private insurer. The policy is in the amount of $155 million and covers 85% of any loss arising from expropriation, political violence or currency inconvertibility. The policy is expected to cost approximately $3.4 million during the course of construction and $0.21 per ounce of silver produced when the project commences commercial production.

Kensington (Alaska)

        The Kensington project consists of approximately 6,000 acres, of which approximately 750 acres are patented claims. The property is located on the east side of Lynn Canal between Juneau and Haines, Alaska. Coeur Alaska is obligated to pay Echo Bay a scaled net smelter return royalty on 1.0 million ounces of future gold production after Coeur Alaska recoups the $32.5 million purchase price and its construction and development expenditures incurred after July 7, 1995, in connection with placing the property into commercial production. The royalty ranges from 1% at $400 gold prices to a maximum of 2 ½% at gold prices above $475, with the royalty to be capped at 1.0 million ounces of production.

        During the fourth quarter of 2004, the U.S. Forest Service issued its Record of Decision (“ROD”) for the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (“FSEIS”). On June 28, 2005, the Company received the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) Permit. In addition, the Company received the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps of Engineers”) 404 Wetlands Permit, which authorized the construction of a Lower Slate Lake tailings facility, millsite road improvements and a Slate Creek Cove dock facility. All permits were reviewed for consistency by both the Alaska Coastal Management and Department of Governmental Coordination, which issued its final ACMP permit certification.

        On September 12, 2005 three environmental groups filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Alaska against the Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Forest Service seeking to invalidate permits issued to Coeur Alaska, Inc. for the Company’s Kensington mine. The Plaintiffs claim the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit issued by the Corps of Engineers authorizing the deposition of mine tailings into Lower Slate Lake conflicts with the CWA and is thus illegal. They additionally claim the U.S. Forest Service’s approval of the Amended Plan of Operations is arbitrary and capricious because it relies on the 404 permit issued by the Corps.

        On November 8, 2005, the Corps of Engineers filed a Motion for Voluntary Remand with the court to review the permit issued to the Company under the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 and requested that the court stay the legal proceeding filed by the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (“SEACC”) and the other environmental groups pending the outcome of review. On November 12, 2005, the Federal District Court in Alaska granted the remand of the permit to the US Army Corps of Engineers for further review. On November 22, 2005, the Corps of Engineers advised the Company that it was suspending the Section 404 permit pursuant to the Court’s remand to further review the permit and on March 29, 2006, they reinstated the Company’s 404 permit. The Company is continuing to move forward with full-scale construction of the mine.

        On April 6, 2006 the lawsuit challenging the permit was re-opened, and Coeur Alaska, Inc. filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint and Motion to Intervene as a Defendant-Intervenor in the action. On April 6, 2006, Goldbelt, Inc, a local native corporation, and on April 7, 2006, the State of Alaska, both joined in filing their respective Motions to Intervene as Defendant-Intervenors as supporters of the Kensington project as permitted. All parties were granted Defendant-Intervenor status on April 25, 2006. The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation or its impact on the project.

37

        No assurance can be given as to whether or when regulatory permits and approvals granted to the Company may be further challenged, appealed or contested by third parties or issuing agencies, or as to whether the Company will place the Kensington project into commercial production. The Company currently estimates the total cost of construction to be approximately $190 million. The Company believes that commercial production could commence in late 2007.

        Total expenditures by the Company at the Kensington property in the six months ended June 30, 2006 were $44.7 million. Such expenditures were used to continue the permitting and development activities. The Company plans to incur additional construction costs of approximately $59.8 million in 2006.

        The Company recommenced an underground core drilling program at Kensington this year in a continuation of the program conducted in the second half of 2005. In the second quarter of 2006, over 7,000 meters (23,000 feet) of core drilling was conducted from underground positions at Kensington. The program is designed to expand the project’s proven and probable reserves through conversion of portions of its large mineralized material inventory to probable reserves. A surface drilling program is scheduled to commence at the Company’s Jualin property in the third quarter of 2006.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

        Management considers the following policies to be most critical in understanding the judgments that are involved in preparing the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the uncertainties that could impact its results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. Our consolidated financial statements are impacted by the accounting policies used and the estimates and assumptions made by management during their preparation. We have identified the policies below as critical to our business operations and the understanding of our results of operations. Management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based on our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). The preparation of these statements requires that we make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. We base these estimates on historical experience and on assumptions that we consider reasonable under the circumstances; however, reported results could differ from those based on the current estimates under different assumptions or conditions. The impact and any associated risks related to these policies on our business operations are discussed throughout Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. The areas requiring the use of management’s estimates and assumptions relate to recoverable ounces from proven and probable reserves that are the basis of future cash flow estimates and units-of-production depreciation and amortization calculations; useful lives utilized for depreciation, depletion, amortization and accretion of future cash flows for long lived assets; estimates of recoverable gold and silver ounces in ore on leach pad; reclamation and remediation costs; valuation allowance for deferred tax assets; and post-employment and other employee benefit liabilities. For a detailed discussion on the application of these and other accounting policies, see Note B in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of this Form 10-Q.

Revenue Recognition. Revenue includes sales value received for our principle product, silver, and associated by-product revenues from the sale of by-product metals consisting primarily of gold and copper. Revenue is recognized when title to silver and gold passes to the buyer and when collectibility is reasonably assured. The passing of title to the customer is based on terms of the sales contract. Product pricing is determined at the point revenue is recognized by reference to active and freely traded commodity markets, for example, the London Bullion Market for both gold and silver, in an identical form to the product sold.

38

        Under our concentrate sales contracts with third-party smelters, final gold and silver prices are set on a specified future quotational period, typically one to three months, after the shipment date based on market metal prices. Revenues are recorded under these contracts at the time title passes to the buyer based on the forward price for the expected settlement period. The contracts, in general, provide for a provisional payment based upon provisional assays and quoted metal prices. Final settlement is based on the average applicable price for a specified future period, and generally occurs from three to six months after shipment. Final sales are settled using smelter weights, settlement assays (average of assays exchanged and/or umpire assay results) and are priced as specified in the smelter contract. The Company’s provisionally priced sales contain an embedded derivative that is required to be separated from the host contract for accounting purposes. The host contract is the receivable from the sale of concentrates at the forward price at the time of sale. The embedded derivative does not qualify for hedge accounting. The embedded derivative is recorded as a derivative asset in prepaid expenses and other, or a derivative liability on the balance sheet and is adjusted to fair value through revenue each period until the date of final gold and silver settlement. The form of the material being sold, after deduction for smelting and refining is in an identical form to that sold on the London Bullion Market. The form of the product is metal in flotation concentrate, which is the final process for which the company is responsible.

        The effects of forward sales contracts are reflected in revenue at the date the related precious metals are delivered or the contracts expire. Third party smelting and refining costs are recorded as a reduction of revenue.

        At June 30, 2006, the Company had outstanding provisionally priced sales of $43.9 million consisting of 2.9 million ounces of silver and 16,719 ounces of gold. For each one cent per ounce change in realized silver price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $28,600; and for each one dollar per ounce change in realized gold price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $16,700.

Reserve Estimates. The preparation of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ from those estimates. The most critical accounting principles upon which the Company’s financial status depends are those requiring estimates of recoverable ounces from proven and probable reserves and/or assumptions of future commodity prices. There are a number of uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of reserves, including many factors beyond our control. Ore reserves estimates are based upon engineering evaluations of samplings of drill holes and other openings. These estimates involve assumptions regarding future silver and gold prices, the geology of our mines, the mining methods we use and the related costs we incur to develop and mine our reserves. Changes in these assumptions could result in material adjustments to our reserve estimates. We use reserve estimates in determining the units-of-production depreciation and amortization expense, as well as in evaluating mine asset impairments.

        We review and evaluate our long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the related carrying amounts may not be recoverable. We utilize the methodology set forth in Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” to evaluate the recoverability of capitalized mineral property costs. An impairment is considered to exist if total estimated future cash flows or probability-weighted cash flows on an undiscounted basis is less than the carrying amount of the assets, including property, plant and equipment, mineral property, development property, and any deferred costs. The accounting estimates related to impairment are critical accounting estimates because the future cash flows used to determine whether an impairment exists is dependent on reserve estimates and other assumptions, including silver and gold prices, production levels, and capital and reclamation costs, all of which are based on detailed engineering life-of-mine plans. An impairment loss exists when estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition are less than its carrying amount. Any impairment loss recognized represents the excess of the asset’s carrying value as compared to its estimated fair value. The Company reviews the carrying value of its assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of its assets may not be fully recoverable. The Company did not record any write-downs during the periods ended June 30, 2006 and 2005.

39

        We depreciate our property, plant and equipment, mining properties and mine development using the units-of-production method over the estimated life of the ore body based on our proven and probable recoverable reserves or on a straight-line basis over the useful life, whichever is shorter. The accounting estimates related to depreciation and amortization are critical accounting estimates because 1) the determination of reserves involves uncertainties with respect to the ultimate geology of our reserves and the assumptions used in determining the economic feasibility of mining those reserves and 2) changes in estimated proven and probable reserves and useful asset lives can have a material impact on net income.

        Ore on leach pad. The Rochester Mine utilizes the heap leach process to extract silver and gold from ore. The heap leach process is a process of extracting silver and gold by placing ore on an impermeable pad and applying a diluted cyanide solution that dissolves a portion of the contained silver and gold, which are then recovered in metallurgical processes.

        The key stages in the conversion of ore into silver and gold are (i) the blasting process in which the ore is broken into large pieces; (ii) the processing of the ore through a crushing facility that breaks it into smaller pieces; (iii) the transportation of the crushed ore to the leach pad where the leaching solution is applied; (iv) the collection of the leach solution; (v) subjecting the leach solution to the precipitation process, in which gold and silver is converted back to a fine solid; (vi) the conversion of the precipitate into dorè; and (vii) the conversion by a third party refinery of the dorè into refined silver and gold bullion.

        We use several integrated steps to scientifically measure the metal content of ore placed on the leach pads during the key stages. As the ore body is drilled in preparation for the blasting process, samples of the drill residue are assayed to determine estimated quantities of contained metal. We estimate the quantity of ore by utilizing global positioning satellite survey techniques. We then process the ore through a crushing facility where the output is again weighed and sampled for assaying. A metallurgical reconciliation with the data collected from the mining operation is completed with appropriate adjustments made to previous estimates. We then transport the crushed ore to the leach pad for application of the leaching solution. As the leach solution is collected from the leach pads, we continuously sample for assaying. We measure the quantity of leach solution by flow meters throughout the leaching and precipitation process. After precipitation, the product is converted to dorè, which is the final product produced by the mine. We again sample and assay the dorè. Finally, a third party smelter converts the dorè into refined silver and gold bullion. At this point are we able to determine final ounces of silver and gold available for sale. We then review this end result and reconcile it to the estimates we had used and developed throughout the production process. Based on this review, we adjust our estimation procedures when appropriate.

        Our reported inventories include metals estimated to be contained in the ore on the leach pads of $63.0 million as of June 30, 2006. Of this amount, $28.7 million is reported as a current asset and $34.3 million is reported as a noncurrent asset. The distinction between current and noncurrent is based upon the expected length of time necessary for the leaching process to remove the metals from the broken ore. The historical cost of the metal that is expected to be extracted within twelve months is classified as current and the historical cost of metals contained within the broken ore that will be extracted beyond twelve months is classified as noncurrent. The ore on leach pad inventory is stated at actual production costs incurred to produce and place ore on the leach pad during the current period, adjusted for the effects on monthly production costs of abnormal production levels.

40

        The estimate of both the ultimate recovery expected over time, and the quantity of metal that may be extracted relative to such twelve month period, requires the use of estimates which are inherently inaccurate since they rely upon laboratory testwork. Testwork consists of 60 day leach columns from which we project metal recoveries into the future. The quantities of metal contained in the ore are based upon actual weights and assay analysis. The rate at which the leach process extracts gold and silver from the crushed ore is based upon laboratory column tests and actual experience occurring over approximately nineteen years of leach pad operation at the Rochester Mine. The assumptions we use to measure metal content during each stage of the inventory conversion process includes estimated recovery rates based on laboratory testing and assaying. We periodically review our estimates compared to actual experience and revise our estimates when appropriate. The length of time necessary to achieve our currently estimated ultimate recoveries of 61.5% for silver and 93% for gold is estimated to be between 5 and 10 years. However, the ultimate recovery will not be known until leaching operations cease, which is currently estimated for 2011.

        When we began operations in 1986, based solely on laboratory testing, we estimated the ultimate recovery of silver and gold at 50% and 80%, respectively. Since 1986, we have adjusted the expected ultimate recovery 3 times (once in each of 1989, 1997 and 2003) based upon actual experience gained from leach operations. In 1989, we increased our estimated recoveries for silver and gold to 55% and 85%, respectively. The change was accounted for prospectively as a change in estimate, which had the effect of increasing the estimated recoverable ounces of silver and gold contained in the heap by 1.6 million ounces and 10,000 ounces, respectively. In 1997, we revised our estimated recoveries for silver and gold to 59% and 89%, respectively, which increased the estimated recoverable ounces of silver and gold contained in the heap by 4.7 million ounces and 39,000 ounces, respectively. Finally, in 2003, we revised our estimated recoveries for silver and gold to 61.5% and 93%, respectively, which increased the estimated recoverable ounces of silver and gold contained in the heap by 1.8 million ounces and 41,000 ounces, respectively.

        If our estimate of ultimate recovery requires adjustment, the impact upon our inventory valuation and upon our income statement would be as follows:

	Positive/Negative Change in Silver Recovery						Positive/Negative Change in Gold Recovery
	1%		2%		3%		1%		2%		3%
Quantity of recoverable
ounces		1.6 million		3.3 million		5.0 million		12,508		25,017		37,525
Positive impact on
future cost of
production per silver
equivalent ounce for
increases in recovery
rates		$ .80		$1.41		$1.90		$ .35		$ .68		$ .97
Negative impact on
future cost of
production per silver
equivalent ounce for
decreases in recovery
rates		$1.10		$2.71		$5.26		$ .41		$ .89		$1.44

        Inventories of ore on leach pads are valued based upon actual production costs incurred to produce and place such ore on the leach pad during the current period, adjusted for the effects on monthly production of costs of abnormal production levels, less costs allocated to minerals recovered through the leach process. The costs consist of those production activities occurring at the mine site and include the costs, including depreciation, associated with mining, crushing and precipitation circuits. In addition, refining is provided by a third party refiner to place the metal extracted from the leach pad in a saleable form. These additional costs are considered in the valuation of inventory.

41

        Reclamation and remediation costs. Reclamation and remediation costs are based principally on legal and regulatory requirements. Management estimates costs associated with reclamation of mining properties as well as remediation cost for inactive properties. Such costs related to active mines are accrued and charged over the expected operating lives of the mines using the units-of-production method.

        The estimated undiscounted cash flows generated by our assets and the estimated liabilities for reclamation and remediation are determined using the Company’s assumptions about future costs, mineral prices, mineral processing recovery rates, production levels and capital and reclamation costs. Such assumptions are based on the Company’s current mining plan and the best available information for making such estimates. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates and assumptions; however, actual amounts could differ from those based on such estimates and assumptions.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

        Three Months Ended June 30, 2006 Compared to Three Months Ended June 30, 2005

Revenues

        Sales of metal from continuing operations in the second quarter of 2006 increased by $20.5 million, or 61%, from the second quarter of 2005 to $54.0 million. The increase in sales of metal is attributable to increased metals prices realized and increased ounces of silver sold during the second quarter of 2006 as compared to the same period in 2005. In the second quarter of 2006, the Company sold 3.2 million ounces of silver and 29,000 ounces of gold compared to 2.9 million ounces of silver and 34,000 ounces of gold for the same period in 2005. Realized silver and gold prices were $13.10 and $649 per ounce, respectively, in the second quarter of 2006 compared to $7.25 and $431 in the comparable quarter of 2005.

        Included in revenues is the by-product revenue associated with by-product metal sales consisting primarily of gold. In the second quarter of 2006, by-product revenues totaled $17.5 million compared to $13.8 million for the same period of 2005.

        The Company believes, based on the best estimates, that presentation of these revenue streams as by-products will continue to be appropriate in the future, with the exception of the copper by-product revenue associated with Coeur Silver Valley which was sold on June 1, 2006.

        In the second quarter of 2006, the Company’s continuing operations produced a total of 3,184,986 ounces of silver and 29,039 ounces of gold, compared to 2,565,015 ounces of silver and 30,247 ounces of gold in the second quarter of 2005. The increase in silver production is primarily due to increased silver production at the Cerro Bayo mine and the silver production from the Endeavor and Broken Hill mines in which the Company acquired the silver production and reserves on May 23, 2005 and September 8, 2005, respectively.

Costs and Expenses

        Production costs applicable to sales from continuing operations in the second quarter of 2006 increased by $2.8 million, or 15%, from the second quarter of 2005 to $21.6 million. The increase in the second quarter of 2006 is primarily due to production costs associated with the Endeavor and Broken Hill mines in which the Company acquired the silver production and reserves on May 23, 2005 and September 8, 2005, respectively.

        Depreciation and depletion increased by $2.6 million, or 60%, in the second quarter of 2006 compared to the prior year’s second quarter, primarily due to the increase in depletion associated with the newly acquired Endeavor and Broken Hill mines.

42

        Administrative and general expenses decreased by $0.6 million in the second quarter of 2006 compared to the same period in 2005 and is primarily due to lower outside audit services related to financial reporting compliance activities.

        Exploration expenses decreased by $1.0 million in the second quarter of 2006 compared to the same period in 2005 as a result of lower exploration activity in 2006 compared to 2005.

        Pre-development expenses decreased $3.7 million from the second quarter of 2005 due to the classification of the Kensington project as a development-stage property in the third quarter of 2005.

        Litigation settlement expenses increased by $0.5 million from the second quarter of 2005 due to the commencement of the net smelter return royalty related to the Federal Natural Resources settlement decree dated May 14, 2001. Under the terms of the settlement, the Company is required to pay a net smelter royalty on all of its domestic and foreign operations until May 14, 2021, or earlier once the cumulative amount of $3.0 million has been paid.

Other Income and Expenses

        Interest and other income in the second quarter of 2006 increased by $3.5 million to $4.8 million compared with the second quarter of 2005. The increase was primarily due to increased interest income from short-term investments due to higher levels of invested cash and short-term investments on hand and higher interest rates.

        Interest expense was $0.4 million in the second quarter of 2006 compared to $0.6 million in the second quarter of 2005. The decrease in interest expense is related to the higher capitalized interest associated with higher capital expenditures at the Kensington and San Bartolome projects compared to the same period in 2005.

Income Taxes

        For the three months ended June 30, 2006, the Company reported an income tax provision of approximately $2.8 million. The income tax provision is comprised of a $0.7 million net deferred tax benefit, based upon actual earnings for the quarter, a release of $0.5 million valuation allowance due to anticipated increases in proven and probable reserves and revised projected future taxable income at CDE Cerro Bayo Ltd. and Coeur Argentina, and a $0.4 million deferred tax benefit in Australia, offset by $3.7 million in current taxes payable in the United States, Argentina and Australia. The Company recorded a current $0.2 million tax provision for foreign tax withholding.

Results of Discontinued Operations

        On June 1, 2006, the Company completed the sale of 100% of the shares of Coeur Silver Valley Inc. to U.S. Silver Corporation for $15 million in cash. Pursuant to FAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, Coeur Silver Valley has been classified as an asset held for sale and reported in discontinued operations for the six month period ended June 30, 2005. The Company recognized a gain of $11.2 million on the sale in the quarter ended June 30, 2006.

43

        The following is a summary of the Company’s discontinued operations included in the consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 and June 30, 2005 (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005
Sales of metal	$	5,513		$	4,525
Production costs applicable to sales		(3,973	)		(4,736	)
Depreciation and depletion		(86	)		(501	)
Mining exploration		(69	)		(450	)
Other		(28	)		(10	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	1,357		$	(1,172	)
Gain on sale of net assets of discontinued operations		11,159			--
Net income (loss) for discontinued operations	$	12,516		$	(1,172	)

        Six Months Ended June 30, 2006 Compared to Six Months Ended June 30, 2005

Revenues

        Sales of metal from continuing operations in the six months ended June 30, 2006 increased by $33.2 million, or 50%, over the same period of 2005 to $98.9 million. The increase in product sales of metal is attributable to an increase in the realized prices for both silver and gold and an increase in the ounces of silver sold. In the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company sold 6.1 million ounces of silver and 55,000 ounces of gold compared to 5.5 million ounces of silver and 69,000 ounces of gold for the same period in 2005. Realized silver and gold prices were $11.82 and $620 per ounce, respectively, in the six months ended June 30, 2006 compared to $7.05 and $427 in the comparable period of 2005.

        Included in revenues is the by-product revenue associated with by-product metal sales consisting primarily of gold. In the six months ended June 30, 2006, by-product revenues totaled $32.1 million compared to $28.2 million for the same period of 2005. The increase in by-product revenues is primarily due to an increase in the realized prices for gold. The Company believes, based on its best estimates, that presentation of these revenue streams as by-products will continue to be appropriate in the future with the exception of the copper by-product revenue associated with Coeur Silver Valley which was sold on June 1, 2006.

        In the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company’s continuing operations produced a total of 6,034,249 ounces of silver and 54,620 ounces of gold, compared to 4,739,365 ounces of silver and 57,577 ounces of gold in the same period of 2005. The increase in silver production is primarily due to the silver production from the Endeavor and Broken Hill mines in which the Company acquired the silver production and reserves on May 23, 2005 and September 8, 2005, respectively.

Costs and Expenses

        Production costs applicable to sales from continuing operations in the six months ended June 30, 2006 increased by $5.5 million, or 15%, from the same period of 2005 to $41.7 million. The increase in the six months ended June 30, 2006 is primarily due to production costs associated with the Endeavor and Broken Hill mines in which the Company acquired the silver production and reserves on May 23, 2005 and September 8, 2005, respectively.

        Depreciation and depletion increased by $4.8 million, or 56%, for the first six months of 2006 compared to the first six months of 2005 primarily due to the increase in depletion associated with the newly acquired Endeavor and Broken Hill mines.

44

        Administrative and general expenses decreased by $1.1 million, or 10%, in the six months ended June 30, 2006 compared to the same period in 2005 due to lower outside audit services related to financial reporting compliance activities.

        Exploration expenses decreased by $1.7 million in the six months ended June 30, 2006 compared to the same period in 2005 as a result of lower exploration activity in 2006 compared to 2005.

        Pre-development expenses decreased $6.1 million from the six months ended June 30, 2005 due to the classification of the Kensington project as a development-stage property in the third quarter of 2005.

        Litigation settlement expense decreased by $1.1 million in the first six months of 2006 to $0.5 million due to commencement of the Federal Natural Resource settlement decree dated May 14, 2001. Under the terms of the settlement, the Company is required to pay a net smelter royalty on all of its domestic and foreign operations until the earlier of May 14, 2021 or once the cumulative amount of $3.0 million has been paid. This increase is more than offset by a legal settlement of $1.6 million in the first quarter of 2005.

Other Income and Expenses

        Interest and other income in the six months ended June 30, 2006 increased by $4.0 million to $7.3 million compared with the same period of 2005. The increase was primarily due to increased interest income from short-term investments due to higher levels of invested cash and short-term investments on hand and higher interest rates.

        Interest expense was $0.9 million in the six months ended June 30, 2006 compared to $1.1 million in the six months ended June 30, 2005. The decrease in interest expense is related to higher capitalized interest associated with higher capital expenditures at the Kensington and San Bartolome projects as compared to 2005.

Income Taxes

        For the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company reported an income tax provision of approximately $2.5 million. The income tax provision is comprised of a $3.0 million net deferred tax benefit, based upon actual earnings for the quarter, a release of $3.5 million valuation allowance due to anticipated increases in proven and probable reserves and revised projected future taxable income at CDE Cerro Bayo Ltd. and Coeur Argentina, and a $0.2 million deferred tax benefit in Australia, offset by $5.2 million in current taxes payable in the United States, Argentina and Australia. The Company recorded a current $0.5 million tax provision for foreign tax withholding.

Results of Discontinued Operations

        On June 1, 2006, the Company completed the sale of 100% of the shares of Coeur Silver Valley Inc. to U.S. Silver Corporation for $15 million in cash. Pursuant to FAS 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, Coeur Silver Valley has been classified as an asset held for sale and reported in discontinued operations for the six month period ended June 30, 2005. The Company recognized a gain of approximately $11.2 million on the sale in the six months ended June 30, 2006.

45

        The following is a summary of the Company’s discontinued operations included in the consolidated statements of operations for the six months ended June 30, 2005 (in thousands):

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2006			2005
Sales of metal	$	11,223		$	9,104
Production costs applicable to sales		(8,233	)		(8,635	)
Depreciation and depletion		(681	)		(1,013	)
Mining exploration		(279	)		(859	)
Other		(62	)		(130	)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations	$	1,968		$	(1,533	)
Gain on sale of net assets of discontinued operations		11,159			--
Net income (loss) for discontinued operations	$	13,127		$	(1,533	)

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Working Capital; Cash and Cash Equivalents

        The Company’s working capital at June 30, 2006, increased by $142.6 million to approximately $425.6 million compared to $283.0 million at December 31, 2005. The increase in working capital was primarily attributed to the net proceeds of $146.2 million related to the public sale of common stock on March 22, 2006. The ratio of current assets to current liabilities was 9.7 to 1 at June 30, 2006, compared to 7.2 to 1 at December 31, 2005.

        Net cash provided by operating activities in the second quarter of 2006 was $32.0 million compared to net cash used in operating activities of $9.1 million in the second quarter of 2005. The increase of $41.1 million in cash flow from operations is primarily due to the change in net income. Net cash used in investing activities in the second quarter of 2006 was $6.2 million compared to net cash used in investing activities of $18.8 million in the prior year’s comparable period. The decrease of $12.6 million in cash used in investing activities is due to cash proceeds of $15.0 million for the sale of Coeur Silver Valley partially offset by an increase in capital expenditures related to construction activities at the Kensington and San Bartolome projects. Net cash used in financing activities was $0.1 million in the second quarter of 2006, compared to $0.1 million used in the second quarter of 2005. As a result of the above, cash and cash equivalents increased by $25.7 million in the second quarter of 2006 compared to a decrease of $28.0 million for the comparable period in 2005.

        Net cash provided by operating activities in the six months ended June 30, 2006 was $49.2 million compared to net cash used in operating activities of $11.6 million in the six months ended June 30, 2005. The increase of $60.8 million in cash flow from operations is primarily due to the increase in net income. Net cash used in investing activities in the first six months of 2006 was $35.8 million compared to net cash used in investing activities of $27.4 million in the prior year’s comparable period. The increase of $8.4 million in cash used in investing activities is due to an increase in capital expenditures related to construction activities at the Kensington and San Bartolome projects partially offset by the cash proceeds of $15 million related to the sale of Coeur Silver Valley. Net cash provided by financing activities was $145.4 million in the first six months of 2006, compared to $0.7 million used in the first six months of 2005. The increase was primarily due to the receipt of $146.2 million of net proceeds from the issuance of 27.6 million shares of common stock completed in March 2006. As a result of the above, cash and cash equivalents increased by $158.8 million in the first six months of 2006 compared to a decrease of $39.8 million for the comparable period in 2005.

46

Debt and Capital Resources

        At June 30, 2006, the Company had $393.3 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. Management therefore believes that its existing and available cash and cash flow from operations will allow it to meet its obligations for the next twelve months. The Company estimates approximately $115.6 million will be spent during the remainder of 2006 on capital expenditures at its operating mines and development-stage properties.

Issuance of 1 ¼% Convertible Senior Notes

        On January 13, 2004 the Company completed its offering of $180 million aggregate principal amount of 1.25% Convertible Senior Notes due 2024 (the “1.25% Notes”). The 1.25% Notes are convertible into shares of Coeur common stock at a conversion rate of approximately 131.5789 shares of Coeur common stock per $1,000 principal amount of Notes, representing a conversion price of $7.60 per share. Interest on the notes is payable in cash at the rate of 1.25% per annum beginning July 15, 2004. The 1.25% Notes are general unsecured obligations, senior in right of payment to Coeur’s other indebtedness.

Issuance of Common Stock

        During the first quarter of 2006, the Company completed a public offering of 27.6 million shares of common stock at a public offering price of $5.60 per share. The Company realized net proceeds of $146.2 million after payment of the underwriters’ discount and other offering costs.

Litigation and Other Events

Federal Natural Resources Action

          On March 22, 1996, an action was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Idaho by the United States against various defendants, including the Company, asserting claims under CERCLA and the Clean Water Act for alleged damages to federal natural resources in the Coeur d’Alene River Basin of Northern Idaho. The damages are claimed to result from alleged releases of hazardous substances from mining activities conducted in the area since the late 1800‘s.

        In May 2001, the Company and representatives of the U.S. Government, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture, reached an agreement to settle the lawsuit. The terms of settlement are set forth in a Consent Decree issued by the court. Pursuant to the terms of the Consent Decree, dated May 14, 2001, the Company has paid the U.S. Government a total of approximately $3.9 million, of which $3.3 million was paid in May 2001 and the remaining $0.6 million was paid in June 2001. In addition, the Company will (i) pay the United States 50% of any future recoveries from insurance companies for claims for defense and indemnification under general liability insurance policies in excess of $0.6 million, (ii) accomplish certain cleanup work on the Mineral Point property and Caladay property, and (iii) make a conveyance to the U.S. or the State of Idaho of certain real property to possibly be used as a waste repository. Finally, commencing five years after effectiveness of the settlement, the Company will be obligated to pay net smelter return royalties on all of its domestic and foreign operating properties, up to a cumulative of $3 million, amounting to a 2% net smelter royalty on silver production if the price of silver exceeds $6.50 per ounce, and a $5.00 per ounce net smelter royalty on gold production if the price of gold exceeds $325 per ounce. The royalty payment obligation commenced on May 14, 2006 and will expire after May 14, 2021, or at a sooner date once the cumulative amount is paid. During the second quarter of 2006, $469,000 of royalty expense was incurred in connection with this settlement.

47

States of Maine, Idaho And Colorado Superfund Sites Related to Callahan Mining Corporation

        During 2001, the U.S. Forest Service made a formal request for information regarding the Deadwood Mine Site located in central Idaho. Callahan Mining Corporation had operated at this site during the 1940‘s. The U.S. Forest Service believes that some cleanup action is required at the location. However, Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation did not acquire Callahan until 1991, more than 40 years after Callahan disposed of its interest in the Deadwood property. The Company did not make any decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at the site. Therefore, it is believed that the Company is not liable for any cleanup, and if Callahan might be liable, it has no substantial assets with which to satisfy any such liability. To date no claim has been made by the United States for any cleanup costs against either the Company or Callahan.

        During 2002, the EPA made a formal request for information regarding a Callahan mine site in the State of Maine. Callahan operated there in the late 1960‘s, shut the operations down in the early 1970‘s and disposed of the property. The EPA contends that some cleanup action is warranted at the site, and listed it on the National Priorities List in late 2002. The Company believes that because it made no decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at this location, it is not liable for any cleanup costs. If Callahan might have liability, it has no substantial assets with which to satisfy such liability. To date, no claim has been made for any cleanup costs against either the Company or Callahan.

        In January 2003, the U.S. Forest Service made a formal request for information regarding a Callahan mine site in the State of Colorado known as the Akron Mine Site. Callahan operated there in approximately the late 1930‘s through the 1940‘s, and to the Company’s knowledge, disposed of the property. The Company is not aware of what, if any, cleanup action the U.S. Forest Service is contemplating. However, the Company did not make decisions with respect to generation, transport or disposal of hazardous waste at this location, and therefore believes it is not liable for any cleanup costs. If Callahan might have liability, it has no substantial assets with which to satisfy such liability. To date, no claim has been made for any cleanup costs against either the Company or Callahan.

        Federal District Court of Alaska Permit Challenge

        On September 12, 2005 three environmental groups filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Alaska against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps of Engineers”) and the U.S. Forest Service (“USFS”) seeking to invalidate permits issued to Coeur Alaska, Inc. for the Company’s Kensington mine. The Plaintiffs claim the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit issued by the Corps of Engineers authorizing the deposition of mine tailings into Lower Slate Lake conflicts with the CWA and is thus illegal. They additionally claim the USFS’s approval of the Amended Plan of Operations is arbitrary and capricious because it relies on the 404 permit issued by the Corps of Engineers.

        On November 8, 2005, the Corps of Engineers filed a Motion for Voluntary Remand with the court to review the permit issued to the Company under the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 and requested that the court stay the legal proceeding filed by the plaintiffs pending the outcome of review. On November 12, 2005, the Federal District Court in Alaska granted the remand of the permit to the Corps of Engineers for further review. On November 22, 2005, the Corps of Engineers advised the Company that it was suspending the Section 404 permit pursuant to the Court’s remand to further review the permit.

        On March 29, 2006, the Corps of Engineers reinstated the Company’s 404 permit. On April 6, 2006 the lawsuit challenging the permit was re-opened, and Coeur Alaska, Inc. filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint and Motion to Intervene as a Defendant-Intervenor in the action. Two other parties, the State of Alaska and Goldbelt, Inc., a local native corporation, also filed Motions to Intervene as Defendant-Intervenors as supporters of the Kensington project as permitted. The Company, the State of Alaska and Goldbelt, Inc. have all been granted Defendant-Intervenor status and have joined the agencies in their defense of the permits as issued.

48

        The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation or its impact on the project or when the court will rule on the case. The Company will continue to move forward with full-scale construction of the mine.

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk

        The Company is exposed to various market risks as a part of its operations. In an effort to mitigate losses associated with these risks, the Company may, at times, enter into derivative financial instruments. These may take the form of forward sales contracts, foreign currency exchange contracts and interest rate swaps. The Company does not actively engage in the practice of trading derivative securities for profit. This discussion of the Company’s market risk assessments contains “forward looking statements” that contain risks and uncertainties. Actual results and actions could differ materially from those discussed below.

        The Company’s operating results are substantially dependent upon the world market prices of silver and gold. The Company has no control over silver and gold prices, which can fluctuate widely and are affected by numerous factors, such as supply and demand and investor sentiment. In order to mitigate some of the risk associated with these fluctuations, the Company will at times, enter into forward sale contracts. The Company continually evaluates the potential benefits of engaging in these strategies based on current market conditions. The Company may be exposed to nonperformance by counterparties as a result of its hedging activities. This exposure would be limited to the amount that the spot price of the metal falls short of the contract price. The Company has historically sold silver and gold produced by our mines pursuant to forward contracts and at spot prices prevailing at the time of sale. Since 1999, the Company has not engaged in any silver hedging activities and is currently not engaged in any gold hedging activities.

        The Company enters into concentrate sales contracts with third-party smelters. The contracts, in general, provide for a provisional payment based upon provisional assays and quoted metal prices and the provisionally priced sales contain an embedded derivative that is required to be separated from the host contract for accounting purposes. The host contract is the receivable from the sale of concentrates at the forward price at the time of sale. The embedded derivative, which is the final settlement price based on a future price, does not qualify for hedge accounting. These embedded derivatives are recorded as derivative assets (in Prepaid expenses and other), or derivative liabilities (in Accrued liabilities and other), on the balance sheet and are adjusted to fair value through earnings each period until the date of final settlement.

        At June 30, 2006, the Company had outstanding provisionally priced sales of $43.9 million, consisting of 2.9 million ounces of silver and 16,719 ounces of gold, which had a fair value of approximately $42.9 million including the embedded derivative. For each one cent per ounce change in realized silver price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $28,600; and for each one dollar per ounce change in realized gold price, revenue would vary (plus or minus) approximately $16,700.

        The Company operates in several foreign countries, specifically Bolivia, Chile, and Argentina, which exposes it to risks associated with fluctuations in the exchange rates of the currencies involved. As part of its program to manage foreign currency risk, the Company enters into, from time to time, foreign currency forward exchange contracts. These contracts enable the Company to purchase a fixed amount of foreign currencies. Gains and losses on foreign exchange contracts that are related to firm commitments are designated and effective as hedges and are deferred and recognized in the same period as the related transaction. All other contracts that do not qualify as hedges are marked to market and the resulting gains or losses are recorded in income. The Company continually evaluates the potential benefits of entering into these contracts to mitigate foreign currency risk and proceeds when it believes that the exchange rates are most beneficial. During the first quarter of 2006, the Company entered into forward foreign currency exchange contracts to reduce the foreign exchange risk associated with forecasted Chilean peso operating costs for 2006 at its Cerro Bayo mine. The contracts require the Company to exchange U.S. dollars for Chilean pesos at a weighted average exchange rate of 525 pesos to each U.S. dollar. At June 30, 2006, the Company had foreign exchange contracts of $9.6 million in U.S. dollars. For the six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company recorded a realized loss of approximately $0.1 million in connection with its foreign currency hedging program. As of June 30, 2006, the fair value of the foreign exchange contracts was a liability of $0.8 million.

49

        All of the Company’s long-term debt at June 30, 2006, is fixed-rate based. The fair value of the Company’s long-term debt at June 30, 2006 was $160.6 million. The fair value was estimated based upon bond market closing prices at June 30, 2006.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures

        The Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by it in its periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms. Based on an evaluation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures conducted by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, such officers concluded at June 30, 2006, that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a reasonable level.

(b) Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

        Based on an evaluation by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, such officers concluded that there was no change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ending June 30, 2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

PART II. Other Information

Item 1A. Risk Factors

        Item 1A (“Risk Factors”) of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 sets forth information relating to important risks and uncertainties that could materially adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition or operating results. Those risk factors continue to be relevant to an understanding of the Company’s business, financial condition and operating results. Certain of those risk factors have been updated in this Form 10-Q to provide updated information, as set forth below. References to “we,” “our” and “us” in these risk factors refer to the Company.

We may be required to incur additional indebtedness to fund our capital expenditures.

        We have historically financed our operations through the issuance of common stock and convertible debt, and may be required to incur additional indebtedness in the future. During 2004, we commenced construction at the San Bartolome project and in 2005 we commenced construction at Kensington project. Construction of both projects could require a total capital investment of approximately $325 million of which approximately $198.9 million will be required in future periods. While we believe that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments combined with cash flow generated from operations will be sufficient for us to make this level of capital investment, no assurance can be given that additional capital investments will not be required to be made at these or other projects. If we are unable to generate enough cash to finance such additional capital expenditures through operating cash flow and the issuance of common stock, we may be required to issue additional indebtedness. Any additional indebtedness would increase our debt payment obligations, and may negatively impact our results of operations.

50

Prior to 2005, we did not have sufficient earnings to cover fixed charges, which deficiency could occur in future periods.

        As a result of our net losses prior to 2005, our earnings were not adequate to satisfy fixed charges (i.e., interest, preferred stock dividends and that portion of rent deemed representative of interest) in each of those periods prior to 2005. The amounts by which earnings were inadequate to cover fixed charges were approximately $3.1 million in 2001, $80.8 million in 2002, $63.9 million in 2003 and $22.7 million in 2004. Earnings have been sufficient to cover fixed charges subsequent to 2004. As of June 30, 2006, we are required to make fixed payments on $180 million principal amount of our 1¼% Senior Convertible Notes due 2024, requiring annual interest payments of approximately $2.25 million until their maturity.

        We expect to satisfy our fixed charges and other expense obligations in the future from cash flow from operations and, if cash flow from operations is insufficient, from working capital, which amounted to approximately $425.6 million at June 30, 2006. Prior to 2005, we experienced negative cash flow from operating activities. The amount of net cash used in our operating activities amounted to approximately $29.9 million in 2001, $8.5 million in 2002, $5.1 million in 2003, $18.6 million in 2004 and $6.7 million in 2005. During the first half of 2006, we generated $49.5 million of operating cash flow. The availability of future cash flow from operations or working capital to fund the payment of interest on the notes and other fixed charges will be dependent upon numerous factors, including our results of operations, silver and gold prices, levels and costs of production at our mining properties and the amount of our capital expenditures and expenditures for acquisitions, developmental and exploratory activities.

The market prices of silver and gold are volatile. If we experience low silver and gold prices it may result in decreased revenues and decreased net income or losses, and may negatively affect our business.

        Silver and gold are commodities. Their prices fluctuate, and are affected by many factors beyond our control, including interest rates, expectations regarding inflation, speculation, currency values, governmental decisions regarding the disposal of precious metals stockpiles, global and regional demand and production, political and economic conditions and other factors. Because we currently derive approximately 69% of our revenues from continuing operations from sales of silver, our earnings are primarily related to the price of this metal.

        The market price of silver (Handy & Harman) and gold (London Final) on July 27, 2006 was $11.43 and $639 per ounce, respectively. The price of silver and gold may decline in the future. Factors that are generally understood to contribute to a decline in the price of silver include sales by private and government holders, and a general global economic slowdown.

        If the prices of silver and gold are depressed for a sustained period and our net losses resume, we may be forced to suspend mining at one or more of our properties until the price increases, and record additional asset impairment write-downs. Any lost revenues, continued or increased net losses or additional asset impairment write-downs would adversely affect our results of operations.

The estimation of the ultimate recovery of metals contained within the heap leach pad inventory is inherently inaccurate and subjective and requires the use of estimation techniques. Actual recoveries can be expected to vary from estimations.

        The Rochester mine utilizes the heap leach process to extract silver and gold from ore. The heap leach process is a process of extracting silver and gold by placing ore on an impermeable pad and applying a diluted cyanide solution that dissolves a portion of the contained silver and gold, which are then recovered in metallurgical processes.

51

        The key stages in the conversion of ore into silver and gold are (i) the blasting process in which the ore is broken into large pieces; (ii) the processing of the ore through a crushing facility that breaks it into smaller pieces; (iii) the transportation of the crushed ore to the leach pad where the leaching solution is applied; (iv) the collection of the leach solution; (v) subjecting the leach solution to the precipitation process, in which gold and silver is converted back to a fine solid; (vi) the conversion of the precipitate into doré; and (vii) the conversion by a third party refinery of the doré into refined silver and gold bullion.

        We use several integrated steps to scientifically measure the metal content of ore placed on the leach pads during the key stages. As the ore body is drilled in preparation for the blasting process, samples of the drill residue are assayed to determine estimated quantities of contained metal. We estimate the quantity of ore by utilizing global positioning satellite survey techniques. We then process the ore through a crushing facility where the output is again weighed and sampled for assaying. A metallurgical reconciliation with the data collected from the mining operation is completed with appropriate adjustments made to previous estimates. We then transport the crushed ore to the leach pad for application of the leaching solution. As the leach solution is collected from the leach pads, we continuously sample for assaying. We measure the quantity of leach solution with flow meters throughout the leaching and precipitation process. After precipitation, the product is converted to doré, which is the final product produced by the mine. We again weigh, sample and assay the doré. Finally, a third party smelter converts the doré and determines final ounces of silver and gold available for sale. We then review this end result and reconcile it to the estimates we developed and used throughout the production process. Based on this review, we adjust our estimation procedures when appropriate.

        Our reported inventories include metals estimated to be contained in the ore on the leach pads of $63.0 million as of June 30, 2006. Of this amount, $28.7 million is reported as a current asset and $34.3 million is reported as a noncurrent asset. The distinction between current and noncurrent is based upon the expected length of time necessary for the leaching process to remove the metals from the crushed ore. The historical cost of the metal that is expected to be extracted within twelve months is classified as current and the historical cost of metals contained within the crushed ore that will be extracted beyond twelve months is classified as noncurrent. The ore on leach pad inventory is stated at actual production costs incurred to produce and place ore on the leach pad during the current period, adjusted for the effects on monthly production costs of abnormal production levels.

        The estimate of both the ultimate recovery expected over time, and the quantity of metal that may be extracted relative to such twelve month period, requires the use of estimates which are inherently inaccurate since they rely upon laboratory test work. Test work consists of 60 day leach columns from which we project metal recoveries into the future. The quantities of metal contained in the ore are based upon actual weights and assay analysis. The rate at which the leach process extracts gold and silver from the crushed ore is based upon laboratory column tests and actual experience occurring over approximately nineteen years of leach pad operation at the Rochester mine. The assumptions we use to measure metal content during each stage of the inventory conversion process includes estimated recovery rates based on laboratory testing and assaying. We periodically review our estimates compared to actual experience and revise our estimates when appropriate. The length of time necessary to achieve our currently estimated ultimate recoveries of between 59% and 61.5% for silver, depending on the area being leached, and 93% for gold is estimated to be between 5 and 10 years. However, the ultimate recovery will not be known until leaching operations cease, which is currently estimated for approximately 2011.

        When we began leach operations in 1986, based solely on laboratory testing, we estimated the ultimate recovery of silver and gold at 50% and 80%, respectively. Since 1986, we have adjusted the expected ultimate recovery three times (once in each of 1989, 1997 and 2003) based upon actual experience gained from leach operations. In 2003, we revised our estimated recoveries for silver and gold of between 59% and 61.5%, depending on the area being leached, and 93%, respectively, which increased the estimated recoverable ounces of silver and gold contained in the heap by 1.8 million ounces and 41,000 ounces, respectively.

52

        If our estimate of ultimate recovery requires adjustment, the impact upon our inventory valuation and upon our income statement would be as follows:

	Positive/Negative Change in Silver Recovery						Positive/Negative Change in Gold Recovery
	1%		2%		3%		1%		2%		3%
Quantity of recoverable
ounces		1.6 million		3.3 million		5.0 million		12,508		25,017		37,525
Positive impact on
future cost of
production per silver
equivalent ounce for
increases in recovery
rates		$ .80		$1.41		$1.90		$ .35		$ .68		$ .97
Negative impact on
future cost of
production per silver
equivalent ounce for
decreases in recovery
rates		$1.10		$2.71		$5.26		$ .41		$ .89		$1.44

        Inventories of ore on leach pads are valued based upon actual production costs incurred to produce and place such ore on the leach pad during the current period, adjusted for the effects on monthly production costs of abnormal production levels, less costs allocated to minerals recovered through the leach process. The costs consist of those production activities occurring at the mine site and include the costs, including depreciation, associated with mining, crushing and precipitation circuits. In addition, refining is provided by a third party refiner to place the metal extracted from the leach pad in a saleable form. These additional costs are considered in the valuation of inventory. Negative changes in our inventory valuations and correspondingly on our income statement would have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

We are required to obtain government permits to expand operations or begin new operations. The acquisition of such permits can be materially impacted by third party litigation seeking to prevent the issuance of such permits. The costs and delays associated with such approvals could affect our operations, reduce our revenues, and negatively affect our business as a whole.

        Mining companies are required to seek governmental permits for expansion of existing operations or for the commencement of new operations such as the Kensington development project. Obtaining the necessary governmental permits is a complex and time-consuming process involving numerous jurisdictions and often involving public hearings and costly undertakings. The duration and success of permitting efforts are contingent on many factors that are out of our control. The governmental approval process may increase costs and cause delays depending on the nature of the activity to be permitted, and could cause us to not proceed with the development of a mine. Accordingly, this approval process could harm our results of operations.

        On September 12, 2005 three environmental groups filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Alaska against the U.S. Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Forest Service seeking to invalidate permits issued to Coeur Alaska, Inc. for the Company’s Kensington mine. On November 8, 2005, the Corps of Engineers filed a Motion for Voluntary Remand with the court to review the permit issued to the Company under the Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 and requested that the court stay the legal proceeding filed by SEACC and the other environmental groups pending the outcome of review. On November 12, 2005, the Federal District Court in Alaska granted the remand of the permit to the Corps of Engineers for further review. On November 22, 2005, the Corps of Engineers advised the Company that it was suspending the Section 404 permit pursuant to the Court’s remand to further review the permit which was then re-instated on March 29, 2006. On April 6, 2006 the lawsuit challenging the permit was re-opened, and Coeur Alaska, Inc. filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint and Motion to Intervene as a Defendant-Intervenor in the action. That motion was granted on April 25, 2006 and the Company has joined the agencies in their defense of the permits as issued. The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this litigation or its impact on the project.

53

Our business depends on good relations with our employees.

        The Company could experience labor disputes, work stoppages or other disruptions in production that could adversely affect us. As of June 30, 2006, unions represented approximately 42% of our worldwide workforce. On that date, the Company had 364 employees at its Cerro Bayo mine and 74 employees at its Martha mine which are working under a collective bargaining agreement. The agreement covering the Cerro Bayo mine expires on December 21, 2007 and a collective bargaining agreement covering the Martha mine expires on June 11, 2008.

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

        The Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders was held on May 9, 2006. Of the Company’s total 250,209,834 shares of common stock outstanding on March 21, 2006 (the record date), 205,079,482 shares (or 81.96% of the outstanding) were represented in person or by proxy at the Annual Meeting.

        The first proposal was the election of directors. The following persons were nominated and elected to serve as members of the Board of Directors for one year or until their successors are elected and qualified by the votes indicated: Cecil D. Andrus – 201,890,040 for and 3,189,442 withheld; James J. Curran – 199,483,548 for and 5,595,934 withheld; Andrew Lundquist – 200,135,219 for and 4,944,263 withheld; Robert E. Mellor – 202,838,028 for and 2,241454 withheld; John H. Robinson – 201,104,094 for and 3,975,388 withheld; Timothy R. Winterer — 201,413,327 for and 3,666,155 withheld; J. Kenneth Thompson – 201,083,251 for and 3,996,231 withheld; Alex Vitale – 199,817,184 shares for and 5,262,298 shares withheld; and Dennis E. Wheeler – 201,526,036 for and 3,553,446 shares withheld.

        The second proposal was the proposed ratification of the appointment of KMPG LLP as the Company’s independent accountants. The proposal was approved by the holders of more than the required majority of the shares of common stock voting at the meeting. The proposal was approved by a vote of 201,544,389 shares for (representing 98.3% of the shares voting), 2,936,203 shares against with 598,890 shares abstaining.

Item 6. Exhibits

a) Exhibits.

10.1 Employment agreement, dated July 31, 2006, between the Company and Alan L. Wilder

10.2 Amendment, dated July 31, 2006, to employment agreement between the Company and Donald J. Birak

10.3 Amendment, dated July 31, 2006, to employment agreement between the Company and Mitchell J. Krebs

31.1 Certification of the CEO

31.2 Certification of the CFO

32.1 Certification of the CEO (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

32.2 Certification of the CFO (18 U.S.C. Section 1350)

54

SIGNATURES

        Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

COEUR D’ALENE MINES CORPORATION
(Registrant)

Dated July 31, 2006	/s/ Dennis E. Wheeler
	DENNIS E. WHEELER
	Chairman, President and
	Chief Executive Officer
Dated July 31, 2006	/s/ James A. Sabala
	JAMES A SABALA
	Executive Vice President and
	Chief Financial Officer

55

EX-10.1

Exhibit 10.1

Employment Agreement

        This Agreement is made effective on the 31st day of July, 2006, between Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (“Company”), and Al Wilder (“Employee”).

WITNESSETH:

        In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained to be kept and performed by the parties hereto, the parties agree as follows:

1.    Employment. The Company agrees to, and hereby does, employ Employee as Sr. Vice President-Project Development and Employee accepts such employment, on the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

2.    Term Of Employment. The initial term of this Agreement shall be from July 31, 2006 through June 30, 2008, unless sooner terminated as herein provided. It is further agreed that this Agreement may be considered for a one year extension during the month of June, 2007, to the end that the parties may be once again bound to a two year duration of this Agreement. It is understood, however, that termination can occur in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 7 below, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this paragraph 2.

3.    Compensation. The Company shall pay to Employee during the duration of the term of this Agreement as follows:

    (a)        A base salary of $226,600 annually, payable in equal monthly installments, which may be reviewed annually during any Agreement year, but which may not be decreased, and any higher salary to become the base salary for the purposes of this provision, it being understood, however, that failure to increase the salary shall not be grounds for termination of this Agreement;

    (b)        A one time signing bonus, payable in cash of US$50,000 before taxes and withholdings. The signing bonus will be fully vested upon Employee and payable within 30 days of execution of this Agreement by the Company.

    (c)        Such other compensation and benefits that may be made available by the Company in the discretion of the Board of Directors, consisting of bonuses, short-term and long-term incentive plans, pension plan, retirement plan, profit sharing plan, stock purchase plan and any other kind or type of incentive programs approved by the Board. It is understood that Employee shall be a participant in all compensation and benefit programs, both pension and welfare benefit plans, which exist for the executive staff of the Company;

    (d)        Employee shall be entitled to earn an annual incentive bonus during each calendar year of this Agreement payable in cash pursuant to the Company’s Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) equal to no less than 40% of Employee’s then current annual salary, which, at the date of this Agreement, is the potential sum of $90,640 and a maximum of $181,280. In addition, Employee shall be entitled to earn a long-term incentive bonus, payable in cash and/or stock, stock options or other compensation under the Company’s Long Term Incentive Plan (LTIP) with a target level of 90% or a potential $203,940. Such bonuses are at the discretion of the board of directors; and

    (e)        Employee will be eligible for a cash vehicle allowance to be paid by the Company monthly commencing with the month of July 2006.

4.    Duties. Employee, during the term of this Agreement, shall perform the duties usually and customarily associated with the office specified in paragraph (1) above and as assigned to Employee from time-to-time by the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. As a part of Employee’s duties it is agreed that Employee will become familiar with and comply with Employee’s duties under the Sarbanes-Oxley laws and under the Company’s corporate governance policies, and Employee will promptly execute the necessary public filings and certify the contents of such documents on the date of their filing.

        Employee shall devote Employee’s best efforts and substantially all of Employee’s time during business hours to advance the interests of the Company. Employee shall not engage in business activity in competition with the Company.

5.    Vacation. Employee shall be entitled to four (4) weeks of vacation during each contract year of this Agreement commencing with the year 2006-2007, during which the compensation provided in this Agreement shall be paid in full.

6.    Disability. In the event Employee becomes disabled (inability or incapacity due to physical or mental illness or injury to perform Employee’s duties) during the term of this Agreement, which renders Employee unable to perform Employee’s duties, Employee shall be entitled to participate in the Company’s disability payment plan in effect at the time of the disability.

7.    Termination Of Employment. This Agreement shall be terminated as follows:

    (a)        In accordance with paragraph 2 above upon the expiration of the term of this Agreement or any extension thereof;

    (b)        Upon the death of Employee;

    (c)        By mutual agreement of the parties;

    (d)        Upon disability of Employee, when such disability renders Employee unable to perform Employee’s duties for more than 90 continuous days;

    (e)        By the Company without giving any reason for termination, but with the understanding that the compensation provided herein, except for participation in the 401K & Defined Contribution Plan; and the life insurance, accidental death and dismemberment and disability insurance benefits (the “Excluded Benefits”), but including the base compensation, vehicle allowance, target annual incentive bonus and the long term incentive bonus if Employee is so entitled (it being understood, however, as to the incentive plans the Plan documents control the Employee’s rights) (“Included Benefits”), shall be paid or provided in full to Employee in accordance with this Agreement, for the period of the remaining duration of this Agreement. It is agreed that the Company may set-off against the compensation and Included Benefits due to Employee under this subparagraph any items of like compensation which Employee receives from other employment after the date of termination, there being no affirmative obligation for Employee to obtain other employment following termination;

    (f)        By the Company “For Cause”. For purposes of this Agreement, any of the following constitutes For Cause termination:

(i) failure to perform Employee’s duties, as defined below, after having received from the Company written documentation that Employee’s duties are not being performed, which written documentation shall specify how performance is deficient, and Employee then fails to resume satisfactory performance promptly after receipt of such documentation and failure of performance is not satisfactorily rectified, or

(ii) a serious and substantial failure to perform Employee’s duties, which failure is so obvious and so harmful to Company that written documentation and an opportunity to rectify conduct need not be afforded by Company to Employee, or

(iii) a conviction of, or plea of nolo contendere to, a felony, or engagement in illegal conduct which may not constitute a felony but which is injurious to the Company, in either such case Company need not allow Employee to rectify nonperformance, or

(iv) a material breach of Employee’s obligations under the “Confidentiality Agreement’ as described in section 8 herein.

        For purposes of this provision, Failure To Perform duties in section (f)(i) above includes, but is not limited to; misfeasance or nonfeasance of duty which was intended to, or does in fact, injure the Company’s reputation or its business or relationships; willful and continued failure of Employee to substantially perform his duties under this Agreement (except by reason of physical or mental disability, which is dealt with in paragraph 7(d) above); personal dishonesty in the performance of Employee’s duties; and/or material breach by Employee of the covenants contained in paragraph 4 above;

    (g)        Upon change in control of Company, as “Change in Control” is defined in the so-called Change in Control Agreement between Company and Employee, a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment A, and which will be executed by the parties hereto when this Agreement is executed by them. In the event of termination for this reason, Employee’s and Company’s rights with respect to compensation and all other matters related to employment shall be as specified in the Change in Control agreement, and not this Agreement; and

    (h)        Upon the insolvency or dissolution of the Company or the cessation of business or operations; and

    (i)        By Employee for “Good Reason”. For purposes of this Agreement, Good Reason is defined to mean any of the following;

(i) a material reduction in Employee’s responsibilities, authorities or duties compared to those in existence on the effective date of this Agreement which is evidence of the duties contemplated by paragraph 4; or

(ii) failure of the Company to pay to Employee any amount otherwise vested and due under this Agreement or under any plan or policy of the Company,

which failure in either (i) or (ii) above is not cured within five days from receipt by the Company of written notice from Employee which specifies the details of the failure.

In the event of termination of this Agreement for any of the reasons specified above other than item (e) regarding termination by the Company without giving any reason, Employee shall be entitled to be paid his base salary prorated for the calendar year to the date of termination. All other benefits, if any, following such termination shall be paid in accordance with the plans, policies and practices of the Company which are in effect on the date of termination. As to termination in accordance with item (e) above, Employee shall be paid in accordance with that subparagraph.

8.    Confidentiality. Employee agrees to keep information acquired in connection with Employee’s employment confidential, in accordance with the Confidentiality Agreement which is attached to this Agreement, marked Attachment B, to be executed by Employee when this Agreement is executed. With respect to confidentiality, Attachment B controls the rights, duties and obligations of the parties, rather than this paragraph 8.

9.    Specific Performance. Employee understands that the obligations undertaken by Employee as set forth in this Agreement are unique, and that Company will likely have no adequate remedy at law in the event such obligations are breached. Employee therefore confirms that Company has the right to seek specific performance if Company feels such remedy is essential to protect the rights of Company. Accordingly, in addition to any other remedies which Company might have in law or equity, it shall have the right to have all obligations specifically performed, and to obtain injunctive relief, preliminary or otherwise, to secure performance. Employee agrees that the arbitration provision below will not be used to assert dismissal of an action in court for injunctive relief, and agrees that the availability of arbitration is not intended by the parties to prevent Company from seeking specific performance and injunctive relief.

10.    Arbitration. The Company and Employee will attempt to resolve any disputes under this Agreement by negotiation. If any matter is not thereby resolved, within 30 days after written notice by either party to the other, any dispute or disagreement arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or the breach of it, will be subject to exclusive, final and binding arbitration before one arbitrator to be conducted in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act of the State of Idaho and the applicable laws of the State of Idaho governing arbitration of disputes. The parties to this Agreement specifically acknowledge that any such dispute under this Agreement, even though this Agreement is between an employer and an employee, is subject to said Act. Each party hereby submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state courts in Kootenai County, Idaho if it is necessary to proceed in court to enforce this paragraph 10.

11.    Other Items. The parties also agree:

    (a)        This Agreement shall not be amended or modified in any way unless the amendment or modification is in writing, signed by the parties. There shall be no oral modification of this Agreement.

    (b)        No provision of this Agreement shall be waived by conduct of the parties or in any other way.

    (c)        This Agreement and its validity, interpretation, construction and performance shall be governed by the laws of the State of Idaho.

    (d)        Employee acknowledges that he received upon execution of this Agreement a copy of the Company’s Insider Trading Policy, Attachment C.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above.

Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation

By_____________________________

_______________________________
Employee- Al Wilder

EXHIBIT A:
CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT

        THIS AGREEMENT, dated as of July 31, 2006, is made and entered into between Coeur d’ Alene Mines Corporation (the “Company”) and Alan Wilder (the “Executive”) and is made in light of the following circumstances:

        A.        The Company recognizes the valuable services that the Executive will render and desires to be assured that the Executive will continue his active participation in the management and business of the Company; and

        B.        The Company considers the establishment and maintenance of a sound and vital management to be essential to protecting and enhancing the best interests of the Company and its shareholders, and the Company recognizes the existence and continued likely existence of possible change in control of the Company, as defined below, causing uncertainty among management and resulting in the possible departure or distraction of members of management to the detriment of the Company and its shareholders; and

        C.        The Executive is willing to serve the Company, but desires assurance that in the event of any such change in control of the Company, he will be protected against the financial impact of an unexpected termination.

        NOW, THEREFORE, the Company agrees that the severance benefits described below will be provided, subject to the terms and conditions set forth below, to the Executive in the event the employment of the Executive with the Company or its subsidiaries is terminated subsequent to a change in control of the Company, as defined below, under the circumstances described below:

1.     Company’s Right to Terminate. During the Term of Agreement, as defined below, the Executive agrees, so long as he continues to be employed as an officer of the Company or any of its subsidiaries, to continue to perform his regular duties as such officer of the Company in accordance with the Employment Agreement dated as of July 31, 2006. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Company may terminate the employment of the Executive at any time, subject to providing the benefits hereinafter specified in accordance with the terms hereto and subject to all terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement of July 31, 2006.

2.     Effective Date. The “Effective Date” shall be the date of this Agreement as above set forth.

3.     Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall have a termination date which is identical to the Employment Agreement and shall continue from day-to-day until terminated in accordance with the termination provisions of the Employment Agreement, unless a change in control of the Company, as defined below, shall have occurred prior to that date, in which event it shall continue in effect during the two (2) year period immediately following such change in control as provided herein.

4.     Change in Control. No benefits shall be payable hereunder unless there shall have occurred a Change in Control of the Company, as defined below, and the employment of the Executive by the Company shall have been thereafter terminated in the manner described in Section 5 hereof. For purpose of this Agreement, a Change in Control of the Company (“Change in Control”) shall mean and be determined to have occurred in the following instances:

(i) any organization, group or person (“Person”) (as such term is used in Sections 13(d) and 14(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended)(the “Exchange Act”) is or becomes the beneficial owner (as defined in Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act), directly or indirectly, of securities of the Company representing 35% or more of the combined voting power of the then outstanding securities of the Company; or

(ii) during any two-year period, a majority of the members of the Board serving at the Effective Date of this Agreement is replaced by directors who are not nominated and approved by the Board; or

(iii) a majority of the members of the Board is represented by, appointed by or affiliated with any Person whom the Board has determined is seeking to effect a Change in Control of the Company; or

(iv) the Company shall be combined with or acquired by another company and the Board shall have determined, either before such event or thereafter, by resolution, that a Change in Control will or has occurred.

5.    Termination Following Change in Control. If a Change in Control shall have occurred, the Executive shall be entitled to the benefits provided in Section 6 hereof upon the subsequent involuntary termination, whether actual or constructive, as defined below, of the employment of the Executive within the two (2) year period immediately following such Change in Control, for any reason other than termination for cause, disability, death, normal retirement or early retirement. For the purposes of this section:

(a)     Constructive Involuntary Termination” shall mean voluntary termination of employment by the Executive as a result of a significant change in the duties, responsibilities, reporting relationship, job description, compensation, perquisites, office or location of employment of Executive without the written consent of the Executive.

(b)      “Cause” shall mean termination of employment on account of (i) fraud, misrepresentation, theft or embezzlement, (ii) intentional violation of laws involving moral turpitude or which is materially injurious to the Company, (iii) willful and continued failure by the Executive substantially to perform his or her duties with the Company or its subsidiaries (other than failure resulting from the Executive’s incapacity due to physical or mental illness), after a demand for substantial performance is delivered to the Executive by the President or the Chairman of the Board of the Company, which demand specifically identifies the manner in which the Executive has not substantially performed his or her duties.

(c)      “Disability” shall mean inability or incapacity, due to physical or mental illness, of the Executive to perform his or her duties with the company for a period of three continuous months.

        Any termination of the employment of the Executive by the Company shall be communicated by a written notice of termination addressed to the Executive and any termination of the employment of the Executive by the Executive, except by death, shall be communicated by a written notice of termination addressed to the President or Chairman of the Board of the Company. The notice of termination shall specify the date of termination (“Date of Termination”) and the characterization of the termination.

6.    Benefits Upon Termination. If the Executive’s employment by the Company shall be terminated as provided in Section 5 hereof, other than for cause, disability or death, the Executive shall be entitled to the benefits provided below:

(a)     Base Salary and Bonuses. The Company shall continue to compensate the Executive at his or her full annual base salary at the rate in effect immediately prior to the termination of the employment of the Executive, and to pay short-term and long-term bonuses at target levels pursuant to the Company’s then current Long-Term Incentive Plan, for the period of two (2) years following actual involuntary termination or Constructive Involuntary Termination, if such termination occurs during the period in which this Agreement is in effect (the “Salary Continuance Period”). Benefits paid in accordance with this Subsection 6(a) shall not be reduced in the event the Executive is employed elsewhere during this time period, or by reason of death or disability.

(b)     Medical and Dental Benefits; Long-term Disability Benefits. The Company shall maintain in full force and effect from the Date of Termination through the end of the Salary Continuance Period, all medical and dental benefits and all long term disability benefits in which the Executive was entitled to participate immediately prior to the Date of Termination, to the same extent as if the Executive had continued to be an employee of the Company during the Salary Continuance Period, provided that such continued participation is feasible under the general terms and provisions of such plans and programs. To the extent such continued participation is not feasible, the Company shall arrange to provide the Executive with substantially the same benefits as those to which he or she would have been entitled to receive under such plans and programs. All such medical and dental benefits shall be subject to the group health plan continuation coverage requirements as provided in Section 162(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (The “Code”). All such medical and dental benefits shall be discontinued upon employment by the Executive with another company and the commencement of coverage of the Executive pursuant to a long-term disability plan of such new employer.

(c)     Stock Options. In the event of a Change in Control, all outstanding stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, performance plan awards and performance shares granted by the Company to the Executive under the Company’s Long-Term Incentive Plan shall become immediately exercisable in full and otherwise vest 100% in accordance with the subject to the provisions under Section 13 of such Long-Term Performance Plan.

(d)     Retirement Benefits.

(1)     Defined Contribution Plans. The Company shall not use the provisions of any defined contribution plan to deny a lump sum option to the Executive unless this occurs under uniform treatment applicable to all plan participants.

(2)     Defined Benefit Plan. The Executive shall be entitled to continued credit for years of service under the defined benefit plan of the Company from the date of Termination through the Salary Continuance Period, and any compensation paid to the Executive pursuant to subsection 6(a) above shall be treated as salary compensation for purposes of such plan. To the extent that such augmentation of the defined benefit plan is not possible under such plan, the Company shall pay the Executive an amount equal to the present value of such augmentation, or arrange to provide the Executive with substantially the same benefit.

(e)     Certain Executive Reimbursement. The Company shall pay the Executive an amount necessary to reimburse the Executive for all legal fees and expenses incurred by the Executive as a result of the Change in Control of the company and such termination of employment, including any fees and expenses incurred in contesting or disputing any such termination or in seeking to obtain or enforce any right or benefit provided by this Agreement; provided, however, that the Company shall be obliged only to pay amounts necessary to reimburse the Executive for legal fees and expense incurred by the Executive with respect to any claim or claims made by him as to which he shall substantially prevail in litigation relating thereto against the Company.

        The payment provided for in subsection 6(a) hereof shall be subject to applicable payroll or other tax required to be withheld by the Company. Payments to the Executive hereunder shall be considered severance pay in consideration of past service and his or her continued service after the date of this Agreement. The payment provided for in subsection 6(d)(1) hereof shall be made to the Executive within five (5) business days after the Date of Termination. The Executive shall not be required to mitigate the amount of any payment provided for in this Section 6 by seeking other employment or otherwise, and expect as provided in subsection 6(b) above, the amount of any payment provided for in this Section 6 shall not be reduced by any compensation earned by the Executive as a result of employment by another employer after the Date of Termination, or otherwise.

7.    Limitation on Payments. If the severance payments provided for under this Agreement, either alone or together with other payments which the Executive would have the right to receive from the Company, would constitute a “parachute payment,” as defined in Section 280G(a) of the Code as in effect at the time of payment, such payment shall be reduced to the largest amount as will result in no portion being subject to the excise tax imposed by Section 4999 of the Code or the disallowance of a deduction by Company pursuant to Section 280G of the Code. The determination of the amount of any reduction under this section, and the plan and payment to which such reductions shall apply, shall be made in good faith by the Executive and such determination shall be binding on the Company.

8.    Successor; Binding Agreement

(a)     The Company will require any successor (whether direct or indirect) by purchase, merger, consolidation or otherwise, to all or substantially all of the business or assets of the Company by agreement in form and substance satisfactory to the Executive, to expressly assume and agree to perform this Agreement in the same manner and to the same extent that the Company would be required to perform it if no such succession had taken place.

(b)     This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the personal or legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors, heirs, distributees, devisees and legatees of the Executive. If the Executive should die while any amount would be payable to the Executive hereunder if the Executive had continued to live, all such amounts, unless otherwise provided herein, shall be paid in accordance with the terms of this Agreement to the devisee, legatee or other designee or, if there be no such designee, to the estate of the Executive.

9.    Notices. For the purposes of this Agreement, notices and all other communications provided for in the Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when delivered or mailed by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed:

if to the Company: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Coeur d’ Alene Mines Corporation
505 Front Avenue
Coeur d’ Alene, ID 83814

if to the Executive: Alan Wilder

or to such other address as either party may have furnished to the other in writing in accordance herewith except the notice of change of address shall be effective only upon receipt.

10.    Miscellaneous. No provisions of this Agreement may be modified, waived or discharged unless such waiver, modification or discharge is agreed to in writing signed by the Executive and on behalf of the Company by the President, the chairman of the Board or such other officer as may be specifically designated by the Board. No waiver by either party there of, or compliance with, any condition or provision of this Agreement to be performed by such other party shall be deemed a waiver of similar or dissimilar provisions or conditions at the time or at any prior to subsequent time. No agreements or representations, oral or otherwise, express or implied, with respect to the subject matter hereof have been made by either party which are not expressly set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement shall not supersede or in any way limit the rights, duties or obligations the Executive may have under any other written agreement with the Company. The validity, interpretation, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Idaho.

11.    Severability. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provisions of this Agreement shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect.

12.    Arbitration. Any dispute or controversy arising under or in connection with this Agreement shall be settled exclusively by arbitration in Coeur d’ Alene, Idaho in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect. Judgment may be entered on the arbitrator’s award in any court having jurisdiction.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first-above written.

THE COMPANY	COEUR D' ALENE MINES CORPORATION
	________________________________
	Dennis E. Wheeler
	Chairman & CEO
THE EXECUTIVE	_____________________________________
	Alan Wilder
	Title: Sr. Vice President-Project Development

EX-10.2

Exhibit 10.2

First Amendment to Employment Agreement

        This First Amendment to Employment Agreement is made effective on the 31st day of July, 2006, between Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (“Company”), and Donald Birak (“Employee”).

        Whereas, the parties executed an Employment Agreement dated July 1, 2005 (the “Employment Agreement”), and

        Whereas, the Employment Agreement initial term was defined as July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007, and

        Whereas, the Employment Agreement additionally sets forth a provision for a potential one year extension during the month of June, 2006 such that the term would once again be for a two year period, and

        Whereas, the parties desire to further extend the term of the Employment Agreement as contemplated by the Employment Agreement and as set forth below;

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained to be kept and performed by the parties hereto, the parties agree as follows:

1.    Term of Employment. The Employment Agreement shall be amended in Section 2 to read that the term of employment shall be extended to the 30th day of June, 2008, unless sooner terminated as provided in the Employment Agreement. It is further agreed that the Employment Agreement may be further considered for an additional one year extension during the month of June, 2007, to the end that the parties may be once again bound to a two year duration of the Agreement. It is understood, however, that termination can occur in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 7 of the Employment Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this First Amendment to Employment Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the day and year first written above.

Coeur d’ Alene Mines Corporation

By___________________________
Dennis Wheeler, President and CEO

_____________________________
Employee

EX-10.3

Exhibit 10.3

First Amendment to Employment Agreement

        This First Amendment to Employment Agreement is made effective on the 31st day of July, 2006, between Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (“Company”), and Mitchell J. Krebs (“Employee”).

        Whereas, the parties executed an Employment Agreement dated July 1, 2005 (the “Employment Agreement”), and

        Whereas, the Employment Agreement initial term was defined as July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2007, and

        Whereas, the Employment Agreement additionally sets forth a provision for a potential one year extension during the month of June, 2006 such that the term would once again be for a two year period, and

        Whereas, the parties desire to further extend the term of the Employment Agreement as contemplated by the Employment Agreement and as set forth below;

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained to be kept and performed by the parties hereto, the parties agree as follows:

1.    Term of Employment. The Employment Agreement shall be amended in Section 2 to read that the term of employment shall be extended to the 30th day of June, 2008, unless sooner terminated as provided in the Employment Agreement. It is further agreed that the Employment Agreement may be further considered for an additional one year extension during the month of June, 2007, to the end that the parties may be once again bound to a two year duration of the Agreement. It is understood, however, that termination can occur in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 7 of the Employment Agreement, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this First Amendment to Employment Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the day and year first written above.

Coeur d’ Alene Mines Corporation

By___________________________
Dennis Wheeler, President and CEO

_____________________________
Employee

EX-31.1

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Dennis E. Wheeler, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation;

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

    a)        designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

    b)        designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

    c)        evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation, and

    d)        disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

    a)        all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

    b)        any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: July 27, 2006	By:  /s/ Dennis E. Wheeler
	Dennis E. Wheeler

EX-31.2

Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, James A. Sabala, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation;

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

    a)        designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

    b)        designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

    c)        evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation, and

    d)        disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

    a)        all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

    b)        any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: July 27, 2006	By:  /s/ James A. Sabala
	James A. Sabala

EX-32.1

Exhibit 32.1

Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the undersigned Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Dennis E. Wheeler
Dennis E. Wheeler
July 27, 2006

EX-32.2

Exhibit 32.2

Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the undersigned Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Coeur d’Alene Mines Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ James A. Sabala
James A. Sabala
July 27, 2006