Good morning, good morning everyone, and welcome to the Costa Group Holdings Limited Scheme Meeting. This meeting relates to a scheme of arrangement under which all the shares, all the issued shares in Costa Group are proposed to be acquired by Paine Schwartz Partners, LLC, who I will refer to during the course of this meeting as PSP, Driscoll's, Inc, and British Columbia Investment Management Corporation, other than Costa shares that these entities and associates already own. I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which we meet today and pay my respects to elders past and present. My name's Neil Chatfield, and I'm the Chairman of the Costa Group. I'd just like to remind people if they wouldn't mind turning off their phones. Today we have a meeting which is a bit different to the general meetings that we've held in the past. So we've got online calls as well as telephone dial-ins. So yeah, you'll bear with us so that we make sure everyone's got the opportunity to raise any questions. So as mentioned, this morning we're holding this Scheme Meeting for the Costa Group, and I now acknowledge that we have a quorum and open the meeting. As I said, we're conducting a hybrid meeting today, which is a combined in-person and virtual meeting, and shareholders and their representatives or proxy holders online will be able to participate in the meeting in real time, including by voting and asking questions. An online virtual meeting guide, which explains how Costa shareholders may participate virtually, is on the Costa website and was previously released to the market. For those of you online, on your screen you will see the presentation slides next to the live webcast of the meeting. At the bottom of the screen you will see two boxes. These allow you to get a voting card and ask a question. You'll always also see a number of relevant documents, that are available for you to download. The meeting, this Notice of Scheme Meeting and Scheme Booklet, which all can also contains Independent Expert’s Report, have been circulated, and I will take those documents as read. I'd now like to introduce your Directors and our key management personnel. So to my left, Harry Debney, Jane Wilson, Tim Goldsmith, Peter Margin, Janette Kendall. And in the front row here we have the Company Secretary David Thomas, our CFO Wayne Johnston, and our Deputy Managing Director Marc Werner. So welcome, welcome to everyone, and welcome to those in the meeting. So the way that the meeting will be conducted today is I'll make a few comments and an address, and then we'll proceed to the resolution, and at that time there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Just before I do that, I'd like to set out the details of the meeting and its operation. Voting on today's resolution will be via a poll, with votes lodged in person here at the meeting and online. On that basis, I now declare the poll open. Following discussion on the resolution, proxy and direct votes which have been cast on the resolution will be displayed on the screens behind me. Only eligible shareholders, a representative or attorney for an eligible security holder, or a proxy for an eligible shareholder are entitled to vote. As outlined in the Scheme Booklet, excluded shareholders will not vote on nor participate in the Scheme Meeting. Any directed proxies that are not voted will automatically default to me as Chair of the meeting, and I am required to vote these proxies as directed. Any proxies that are open and available to the Chair of the meeting will be voted in favor of the resolution. Those voting today in person need to have obtained their voting card available to you when you registered, and shareholders or proxies in the room with yellow voting cards or blue non-voting cards are welcome to ask questions. If you have difficulty completing the voting card, please raise your hand, and a representative from Link or our share registry will assist you. In terms of asking questions, the online guide which is attached to the Scheme Booklet, provided shareholders with information on how to participate, ask questions, and vote at the Scheme Meeting. For those of you in attendance, if you have a question, just please raise your hand and ask questions through me. For those attending online, questions can be submitted through the online meeting platform at any time, and from now until voting of the resolution concludes. To ask a question, just click on the Ask Question button on the web page,. And once you've typed the question, please remember to click Submit Question button. Please note that questions may be moderated to avoid repetition and particularly lengthy questions as we may need to summarize them in the interest of time. Depending on the questions asked, I will either answer myself or ask a member of the Board or key management to respond as appropriate. I encourage you to submit any questions as soon as you can. So fellow shareholders, today we are meeting to decide whether the proposed acquisition of Costa Group Holdings Limited by PSP, British Columbia Investments Corporation and Driscoll's, Inc, otherwise known as the consortium, through a scheme of arrangement is agreed to and approved. Before I speak about the scheme, including the reasons for voting for or against the scheme and the Board's position and recommendation, it's appropriate to reflect, and note that Costa is a company with a long and successful history. It's grown from being a family-owned and operating company to a truly international and world-leading agricultural business, where our agronomic expertise and innovation are widely acknowledged as being best-in-class. It has our workforce that has fundamentally been responsible for this, and they deserve enormous credit and acknowledgement. I've spoken many times before about the unmatched passion and dedication that our people have for the work that they do. They deal with the positives and the negatives that accompany the fresh produce industry in equal measure, and do so with a professionalism that is focused continuously on innovation, both in terms of new product development, growing techniques, including things like protected cropping, and supply chain efficiencies and quality, so as to ensure that optimal product is produced to consumer satisfaction. So I want to, on behalf of all shareholders, sincerely thank all of our people throughout the organization for their commitment and ongoing efforts to the Costa Group. So moving to the details of the scheme, the proposed scheme of arrangement is outlined in detail in the Scheme Booklet, and that was distributed to shareholders on the 13th of December 2023 in accordance with the orders of the Federal Court of Australia issued on 8th of December 2023. If the scheme proceeds, each Costa shareholder, other than the excluded shareholders, and largely those of the consortium, is entitled to a scheme consideration of AUD 3.20 per Costa share, less the amount of any dividend that was determined, has been determined by the Costa Board, whether fully franked or otherwise, and paid to Costa shareholders after 22 September 2023 and prior to the implementation of the scheme. It should be noted that the Costa Board has determined that we will not pay such a dividend to Costa shareholders in respect to the financial year which ended on the 2nd of July 2023. The scheme consideration values Costa's equity at approximately AUD 1.496 billion, and an enterprise value of approximately AUD 2.459 billion, based on the number of Costa shares and rights over Costa shares currently on issue, and this information is set out in the Scheme Booklet. The offer of AUD 3.20 per Costa share represents a price for each share that is some 43% higher than the closing price on 25th of October 2022 of AUD 2.23, which represents the last closing price prior to PSP acquiring a 13.78% relevant interest in Costa. It also represents a 23% higher price of the AUD 2.60 per share, the price that PSP acquired of the AUD 2.60, which was the price that it was actually acquired by PSP, and it's some 18% higher than the closing price on the day immediately prior to the market speculation around the possible change of control proposal being 30 June 2023. In addition, it's 25% higher than the three-month VWAP, weighted, volume-weighted average price to the closing price on 30th of June 2023 of AUD 2.57 per share. So shareholders, fellow shareholders, the Board has identified various reasons why Costa shareholders may vote in favor of the scheme and various reasons why they might consider voting against the scheme. Rather than, these have all been set out in the Scheme Booklet, and rather than read through each of those, we've detailed these on the screen behind me. As I say, these are set out in the Scheme Booklet as well. So the Scheme Booklet also contains further information, including details regarding both the risks associated with the scheme and the continued investment in Costa. I also think it's appropriate to recognize the undoubted experience and commitment each member of the consortium has with respect to investing in agriculture and especially fresh produce. PSP have a long and established record investing in the agriculture and food supply chain, which includes Costa. Over the past few decades, they've invested some AUD 5.7 billion in food and agriculture. This includes not only companies that grow produce such as Monterey Mushrooms, but also ag-tech companies such as AgroFresh, which is a global leader in providing pre- and post-harvest solutions, technologies, and services to enhance the quality and extend the shelf life of fresh produce. Driscoll's, of course, are well known to Costa and have been a longstanding joint venture partner both in Australia and in China. Driscoll's are a leading global breeder and marketer of fresh berries. They would bring a considerable knowledge and resources to the business and the capability to potentially expand the Costa global footprint. Finally, British Columbia Investment Management Corporation is a major global international institutional investor with some AUD 233 billion in gross assets under management. Their investment in agriculture assets includes ownership stakes in Viterra and mushroom and citrus businesses. The consortium undoubtedly sees the value of the Costa business, and this highlights how positively our company is viewed in the global agricultural investment markets. Let's turn to the Independent Expert's conclusion. The Costa Board appointed Kroll Australia as the Independent Expert to assess the merits of the scheme. The Independent Expert concluded that the scheme is both fair and reasonable and in the interest of Costa shareholders, other than those excluded shareholders, in the absence of a superior proposal. The Independent Expert has assessed the value of a Costa share on a 100% controlling interest basis to be in the range of AUD 2.62-AUD 3.28. The total amount Costa shareholders will receive of AUD 3.20 per share falls within the upper end of this range. The Independent Expert's full commentary in relation to the scheme is contained in their report, which is included in Annexure A of their Scheme Booklet. On our turn to the Costa Board recommendation, fellow shareholders, in conclusion, given the reasons that I've stated, the Costa Board considers that the reasons to vote in favor of the scheme outweigh reasons to vote against it, and that the scheme has the potential to realize greater benefits to Costa shareholders than any other alternative currently available, including Costa continuing as a standalone entity. At the time of this meeting, no superior proposal has emerged, and Costa Directors are not aware of any superior proposal that is likely to emerge. Each Costa Director who holds or controls shares has voted in favor or has given instructions to the relevant holder of the shares to vote in favor of the scheme. As noted, I, along with my fellow Directors, unanimously recommend that shareholders vote in favor of the scheme. In making our recommendation, the Board considered an extensive range of issues and have had regard to the overarching responsibility to act in your interests. In terms of the conditions precedent attaching to the scheme, the consortium has received approval from the competition regulators in the EU and in China in connection with the scheme. The implementation of the scheme remains primarily subject to the following conditions precedent. That is, approval of the scheme by a resolution of shareholders here today, receipt of the Foreign Investment Review Board approval, which is currently expected to be received by 6th of February 2024, and approval of the scheme by the Federal Court of Australia at the second court hearing, which is currently scheduled for 9:30 A.M. on 7th of February 2024. The scheme is also subject to other customary conditions precedent, which are described in detail in the Scheme Booklet, noting that the scheme is not subject to any financing or due diligence conditions. The consortium has advised that the FIRB, or Foreign Investment Review Board approval is expected to be received by 6th of February 2024, which is prior to the second court hearing date, in which case we would not require any changes to the present timetable. As at the time of today's meeting, we, Costa shareho- Directors, are not aware of any circumstances that would cause any of the outstanding conditions not to be satisfied or waived if applicable. Turning to the implementation timetable, if the scheme is approved by shareholders today, the key events and expected timing in relation to the approval and implementation of the scheme are set out in the timetable shown on the screen behind me. The second court hearing for approval of the scheme is currently scheduled, as I say, for Wednesday, 7th February 2024, and if approved by the Federal Court, the effective date and the last trading date for Costa shares on the ASX is expected to be Thursday, 8th February 2024. If the scheme is approved, it is then expected to be implemented on Monday, 26th February 2024, and it is on that date that the scheme consideration being AUD 3.20 per share will be provided to eligible Costa shareholders, in respect of shares held, on the record date, which is expected to be 7:00 P.M. on Monday, 12th February 2024. All these dates are subject to the satisfaction of the outstanding conditions precedent and the scheme becoming legally effective. For example, if FIRB approval is delayed beyond 6th of February, the second court hearing would need to be rescheduled, and this would have a consequential impact on the rest of the timetable. Any changes to the dates or time in the current timetable will be announced to the ASX and be included in the Costa Investor website. If the outstanding conditions precedent, including shareholder and court approval, are not satisfied, the scheme will not proceed, and Costa Group Holdings Limited will continue as a standalone entity listed on the ASX. Shareholders are likely now to move to the formal business of the meeting, and of course, we just have one item today, as set out in the notice of the meeting. That is, in accordance with the provisions of Section 411 of the Corporations Act 2001, A, the arrangement proposed between Costa and the holders of its ordinary shares, as contained in, and more particularly described in the Scheme Booklet accompanying the notice convening the meeting, is agreed to, and the Directors of Costa are authorised to agree to such alterations or conditions as are thought fit by the court and subject to the approval of the scheme by the court. The Board of Directors of Costa is authorised to implement the scheme with any such modifications or conditions. For the scheme to proceed, votes in favour of the scheme resolution must be received from a requisite majority of Costa shareholders, other than those excluded shareholders. As explained in the Scheme Booklet, a requisite majority for the purposes of a scheme resolution is a majority in number of Costa shareholders, other than the excluded shareholders, who are present and voting either in person or by proxy, attorney, or in the case of corporate shareholders by corporate representatives, and at least 75% of the total number of votes cast on the resolution to approve the scheme, again, other than from the excluded shareholders, who are present and voting either in person or by proxy, attorney, or in the case of corporate shareholders by corporate representatives. So I know all that, that was a lot of legal discussion, but I think in terms of progressing the meeting, I'd now like to open the meeting for any questions in relation to the proposed scheme. The way I'd like to run it is, we'll have questions from the online platform first, and then we'll come to the questions in the meeting itself. So Michael Toby will read the questions, which we've had two or three questions in advance of the meeting, and then we'll sort of take it from there. But let's start with you, Michael. Thanks, Chair. I'll start with the questions asked in advance of the meeting. There were three questions asked. The first to ask why a dividend is not being paid for the most recent financial year, and what is the status of franking credits? Thanks, Michael. So just sort of giving some context here, we last paid a dividend in April 2023. It was AUD 0.05 per share. Franked out to 40%. I think as we'd flagged previously, given the mix of business onshore and offshore, the level of franking was likely to continue to be less than 100% and be quite low. So, as the bid progressed, the proposal from the consortium dealt with a price which included any payment of a dividend. As we announced the proposal, we deferred any consideration of the dividend in respect to the half year. That was based on we wanted to understand how the rest of the season, particularly in citrus, progressed. And unfortunately, as we notified the exchange in September and again later in the year, we had a really disappointing end of the season, particularly in citrus, which meant that the earnings in the second half of the year for the company were not up to what we thought. On that basis, we took the view that we would not pay a dividend, on the basis that we believed retaining the liquidity was appropriate given perhaps the uncertainty and of timing, particularly in terms of the proposal. And we obviously, shareholders were kept holding whole in any way, in any event, by having the full AUD 3.20 price. So, you know, I think we're aware that shareholders do value dividends, but we regard it as being prudent not to declare a dividend in respect of the second half of the year. And the third question was, why did Directors accept bidders' plainly opportunistic reduction in offer price and not hold firm on the original AUD 3.50 for the best interest of shareholders? Yeah, again, in terms of timing, the proposal, the non-binding proposal received, was predicated on due diligence and, in particular, a long-range forecast, and obviously short-term earnings. As we progressed through due diligence, pleased to say there wasn't anything that the consortium advised to us that they were concerned about. Having said that, our forecast proved to be over-optimistic, particularly as a result of the citrus season that we had. There was quite a shortfall in cash flow and earnings, which caused the consortium to return with a lower bid, which we whilst we did note that it was probably less than the original bid. Obviously it was less than the original bid. We felt it was worth taking it to shareholders and also going through the process of the Independent Expert report. And I'll note that the Independent Expert report, the range of AUD 2.63-AUD 3.28, we sit very close to the top of the range. So, we still believe that it's an appropriate price. And as the Independent Expert has opined, it's a fair and reasonable price. You say currently there's no questions admitted online. You can so if we move to questions via the phone, I can see one question, and it's from Helen Rhodes. Thank you. There are no questions on the phone line. Okay. Thank you. So, yeah, this technology is interesting. Okay. All right. Well, thank you online. And, let's go to questions from the floor. Happy to take any questions. Yeah. We'll bring the microphone across. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name's Henry Stephens, and I'm from the Australian Shareholders Association. I've got 237,000,000 proxies. Costa's a great Australian company story, and we should think very carefully about whether it should be sold to overseas interests at this stage of its development. Having first listed on the ASX in July 2015, the company has become a leading horticultural company in Australia and more recently globally. At recent AGMs, shareholders have been told that there remains substantial upside from the purchase of 2PH. We've been told that demand in China continues to grow. We've been told that Costa is a technology leader in the use of genetics and water management and holds proprietary rights in these areas. We've been told that Morocco has been a great success. At last year's AGM, the Chairman said, quote, "The Board believes the company is well placed to achieve long-term growth and generate increasing shareholder returns." In relation to the revised offer price of AUD 3.20 per share by the overseas consortium, having previously offered AUD 3.50 per share, one would suggest this is a very opportunistic acquisition on their behalf and fails to recognize the long-term value in the company as it continues to grow its business. My question, I've got two questions. My agriculture by nature is seasonal and volatile business, very reliant on weather conditions and global pricing that applies within a particular crop and season. Retail investors understand these risks when they invest in Costa. It appears that the Board is not recognizing this and is selling out at a time when growing conditions have not been ideal due to weather events. Given it was only in mid-year 2018 that the share price was trading above AUD 7.50 per share, why is the Board so convinced now is the time to sell the company to an overseas consortium who intend to delist the company from the ASX and deny retail shareholders the opportunity to invest in this great company? After all, you don't have to accept the bid just because the valuer says that it's fair and reasonable. We could, you could wait, and keep the company going, and wait for the cycle to turn. That's my first question. Do you want me to sit down? No, do your second question at the same time. Okay. Thanks, Henry. Based on what management and Directors have told us about the company, there appears to be considerable upside for Costa. And in view of this, the ASA would like to know whether the Board was overly influenced by large institutional shareholders and did not take into consideration retail shareholders who make up 86% of the 20,000+ shareholders on the company's share register. Right. Well, thanks. Thanks, Henry. And I appreciate your interest in the company over a long period. And I, you're absolutely correct. I think Costa is a wonderful company, and we have great assets and a wonderful footprint across the country. Directors have a fundamental interest in to fundamental requirement and obligation to operate in the interests of all shareholders. And of course, the Directors don't sell the company. It's the shareholders make that decision. And what we can do is provide shareholders with what we think and what the, you know, what we, and with independent views on whether it's fair and reasonable. And as I went through the discussion, there is significant premium on all the data points of the Costa share price, in order to get to the AUD 3.20. So you know, it's we're here today for shareholders to make the decision, not for the Costa Board. We do think that, in fulfilling our obligation that, it is in the best interest of shareholders to vote in favor. And we will all individually be voting in favor. Thanks, Henry. Any other questions? Yeah. Norman Wills, Chair. Henry's taken a bit of my thunder in relation to what I was about to say, which is, and you've outlined it yourself, Chair, this is a fabulous country. We've got wonderful assets. The world's in demand for good quality food. And in my view, we're giving this company away at a low ball price. And a couple of reasons for that. Certainly, in relation to, you must have done your due diligence on Kroll. Kroll, there was an interesting article in the Australian Financial Review written by Michael Roddan back in November of 2022, where Kroll was questioned in the Supreme Court in New South Wales about one of their valuations. Now, I'm not suggesting that Kroll hasn't done a fair and reasonable job. What I am suggesting is that we've seen in consultancies over the last 12 or 18 months, sometimes recommendations from outside consultants happen to correspond with the views of the Board. Now, I'm not suggesting that's the case with Kroll, but I'm suggesting in view of that particular circumstance, it would be incumbent upon you and the Board to seek a second opinion on the valuation of this company. I think it's a lowball offer. You, in your opening address, you've indicated what a wonderful asset base this company's got. And here we are giving it away for AUD 3.20. It's ludicrous. Thanks, Norman. Look, I understand completely the sentiment. The share prices, you know, we don't dictate the share price. We have our own views on value and we have, as individuals, share prices function markets. And, as I said, the premium that's being achieved above the various market data points is, we believe compelling for shareholders. In terms of the Independent Expert, that, you know, that's obviously what they are. But Directors didn't just say, well, we'll abdicate our responsibility to the independent. If they say it's okay, then we're okay. That's not the way it worked. We have, we had, other advisors who looked into precedence. They looked into, again, those premiums that I've talked about. We were satisfied on the range of things, including taking the information from the Independent Expert that it is in the best interest of shareholders. Now, you know, we, I think we all sometimes wish that the market would value companies the way that we see them. But many, many shareholders will look at the long term. You talk about going through the cycles, and that's right. We do take a long-term view. Many shareholders in the market, particularly institutional shareholders, and some retail shareholders will be very short-term in their outlooks. And the volatility that comes with an agricultural company can sometimes be a bit difficult for those shareholders. So we understand that. You know, we've put all of this information together, and we've concluded that this is in the best interest of shareholders. It won't be lost on any of us that if this bid wasn't on foot today, the share price is quite likely to be significantly lower than AUD 3.20. So. Yes, Henry? Do the institutional shareholders believe that agriculture is just too hard to invest in, and that's the main reason why they're selling, because there's just too many issues that management can't control and that they don't want to be investing in it anymore? Yeah, look, institutional shareholders have a whole different range of ways that they look at their portfolio. If you look at the current register, most of the institutional investors have moved on to something else, and the register's changed shape since we announced the bid, which is quite normal. I think the market in Australia is, you know, by global standards, quite a small market. And companies that tend to be very volatile tend to have a less limited, less significant following than, you know, perhaps the big banks or that sort of thing. So I just think that I can't speak for individual shareholders, institutional at least, but, you know, we do know that they do have a focus. We report six months in, there's an intense focus on the outlook, and that's the way the market operates. Yeah, so look, our responsibility is to all shareholders, not just institutional shareholders. And we feel that, having regard to everything as I said, this is in the best interest of shareholders. Yeah. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Board, and fellow shareholders. The initial offer of AUD 3.50 was a very low opportunistic offer. The bidders then proceeded to cut the offer to AUD 3.20, having sensed that the Costa Group Board was unlikely to provide much in the way of resistance. They then went even further and also refused to allow us, the shareholders, to receive a final as well as an interim dividend. This, in effect, brought the offer down to something like AUD 3.10. As the share price was AUD 2.90 prior to the offer being made, the bidders are offering us a meager 6% takeover premium for our company. Somehow, the Board has decided that this is an outstanding offer, and as a result, have invited us here today recommending that we vote in favor of the scheme. With the offer being as low as it is, I will be voting against the scheme and advise all other shareholders to do the same. Can you please explain how the Board can possibly feel that they are acting in the best interests of us shareholders? Thank you. I understand the question, and it's obviously on a similar theme. All I can say is that I don't want to get into, you know, whether 6%, you know, you've done a construction of what the premium might be. Of course, that share price that you're referencing included the fact that the consortium had made a bid, so the share price was obviously elevated. If you go back and look at the premiums at each point, each point, these premiums are significant. As I said, the Independent Expert has basically given us a view that it's at a top of the range that they would determine. So look, I understand. I think we all would be really keen to have a share price that reflected the long-term capability of this organization. But we live in a world where we need to take account of the seasonality, take account of the current outlook, and the market looks at all those things to generate a share price, of course. So quite respect your point of view, but we feel that it is in the best interest of shareholders and all the information that we have in front of us. Doug. Yeah, Douglas Schirripa. Look, there's a lot of pros and a lot of cons with this scheme. However, if we look at the horticultural industry and what's happening now with global warming and all the things that are happening, I think it's got a big effect on horticulture right across the world, not just here in Australia. If you look at the United States, there's over 30 states that are snowed under, crops completely destroyed. We're at the mercy of Mother Nature, unfortunately. And I think that if we look at the share price, you know, people talk about how good the company is and how we value it and we're underselling it and all of the, why haven't the shares gone up? The last 18 months they've been sitting between AUD 2.50 and AUD 2.80. Paine's came in and bought, I don't know, 15% of shares at AUD 0.8 less than what they're offering. And I believe it's a fair offer if we look at the term of the industry and how it's operating, and we should take our money and run and invest it in something that we can make quicker money, a quicker return. Yeah, thanks, Doug. Again, I understand the sentiment, but obviously the reason we're here today is for shareholders to weigh up the pros and cons. And again, that's the responsibility of the Board to bring something like this to shareholders, to, you know, to make their own call. So yeah, I agree. So thank you. Any other questions? Okay, so I'll now display the proxies and direct votes for the resolution received prior to the meeting, which are shown on the slide behind me, I think. Yeah, they come. Yeah. So ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the resolution and the business of this Scheme Meeting. You'll have another five or so minutes to submit your votes on through the online platform. And there is a, as I understand it, there's a countdown, a timer on that platform before the poll closes. So the results of the poll will be announced to the ASX and published on our website once the votes have been counted and checked. I do thank you for your long-term interest in this company. I know that all of us will have a thought about Costa every time we have mushrooms and avocados and Driscoll's berries. So I'd just like to, on behalf of all the Board, I want to thank all present and past shareholders for their commitment to invest in Australian agriculture. Also, I want to just take two minutes to recognize the tremendous legacy left by our founder, Frank Costa, and his family. It's a wonderful legacy that family has left, and we've been really proud to carry that on. Last but not least, I want to thank my fellow Directors who have, and we've heard some comments today about the difficult job of Directors in coming to conclusions. But in terms of being ready to make decisions and be involved in the company and the support that they've I know they've given, certainly myself and Harry over the time and the current management group, I'd just like to thank everyone for that. So I now declare the meeting closed, and please join us for refreshments. Thank you.