Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Centuria Industrial REIT FY 2026 results. All participants are in a listen-only mode. There will be a presentation followed by a question- and- answer session. If you wish to ask a question, you will need to press the star key followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Grant Nichols, Centuria Head of Listed Funds and CIP Fund Manager. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thank you for joining Centuria Industrial REIT's 2026 full year results presentation. My name is Grant Nichols, CIP's Fund Manager. Also presenting today is Kate Mitchell, Centuria Capital Group Data Center Fund Manager, and Michael Ching, CIP Deputy Fund Manager. Starting on slide three, I would like to commence today's presentation with an acknowledgment of country. We are joining you from the lands of the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. Centuria manages property throughout Australia and New Zealand and pays its respects to the traditional owners in each country, to their unique culture, and to their elders, past and present. In today's presentation, Kate, Michael, and I will provide an overview of CIP's 2026 financial performance, an update on our data center progress and opportunities within this subsector, analysis of the CIP's operational performance, an update on our development projects and pipeline, a summary of market conditions, and conclude with an outlook and guidance statement. Moving to slide four. Centuria Industrial REIT is managed by Centuria Capital Group. Centuria has over AUD 22 billion of assets under management, and CIP is the largest fund managed by Centuria. CIP unitholders benefit from Centuria's deep real estate expertise, including a fully integrated property, facilities, and development management platform, synergies across the group's broader industrial real estate portfolio, and strong alignment, as Centuria is CIP's largest unitholder and the manager's interests are strongly aligned with yours as unitholders. On to slide six. CIP's longstanding vision and strategy remains unchanged. We aspire to be Australia's leading domestic pure-play industrial REIT with a primary focus on delivering income and capital growth to investors from a portfolio of high-quality Australian industrial assets. We believe we have distinguished CIP through this strategy by creating a portfolio focused on Australian urban infill industrial assets that maintains high levels of tenant demand in markets with limited or no land supply. We believe one of the defining features of CIP today is the disconnect between direct market evidence and its listed market valuation. The portfolio continues to be validated through leasing outcomes, independent valuations, and realized asset sales, yet the REIT continues to trade at a material discount to NTA. As management, we remain focused on converting operating performance into earnings growth, value creation, and ultimately improved recognition by capital markets. Turning to FY 2026 highlights on slide seven. It has been another impressive year for CIP, marked by near record-breaking leasing activity. The high volume of leasing, along with consistently strong re-leasing spreads, enabled CIP to achieve significant net operating income growth, which is translating into tangible growth in funds from operations. Throughout the year, CIP has continued to capitalize on persistently strong investment demand for Australian urban infill industrial real estate. In FY 2026, CIP divested AUD 200 million of assets at an average 17% premium to book value. Importantly, these outcomes are not isolated, as CIP has consistently realized sale prices at or above book value. We view this as powerful third-party validation of the portfolio's carrying values and further evidence of the disconnect between direct market pricing and CIP's listed market valuation. In FY 2026, CIP completed three developments, securing strong leasing commitments for two and achieving an excellent internal rate of return from the sale of another. These results underscore the benefits of developing in constrained markets, as well as the expertise of Centuria's in-house development team. On the capital management front, CIP refinanced AUD 450 million of debt on competitive terms, with margins secured between 10 and 20 basis points lower than previous terms, while the weighted average debt maturity was extended to four years. The REIT also settled AUD 320 million of exchangeable notes at an increasingly attractive fixed annual coupon of 3.5%. Turning to slide eight. FFO and DPU were delivered in line with FY 2026 guidance, and the portfolio maintains 95.2% occupancy and an attractive seven-year WALE. FY 2027 guidance implies earnings growth, with FFO expected to be up to 5.5% higher than FY 2026. Importantly, that growth is expected to be driven predominantly from embedded rent reversion, leasing execution, and operational initiatives rather than acquisition-driven expansion. We believe this highlights the strength of CIP's internal growth profile. Looking at this in more detail on slide nine. We estimate the portfolio is approximately 17% under-rented on average, providing a significant runway for future earnings growth beyond FY 2027. Put simply, a meaningful proportion of existing leases remain below prevailing market rents and provide a visible earnings growth opportunity. Approximately 55% of leases expiring over the next three years are currently under rented, creating a clear pathway to future earnings growth without requiring additional balance sheet deployment. Further, the Australian industrial market has relatively low vacancy rates, and we anticipate that future supply will decrease. This creates an excellent environment for medium-term rental growth, further enhancing the potential for future earnings and valuation growth across the CIP portfolio. These solid market conditions should also support increased occupancy, driving further like-for-like earnings growth in future years. We believe this embedded rental reversion remains one of the most unappreciated drivers of future earnings growth within our portfolio. Considering the disconnect between CIP's investment metrics and its trading price, along with the positive earnings potential that could be generated, we believe the value CIP currently offers is very compelling. Moving on, CIP continues to progress its data center strategy. I will now pass over to Kate to take you through that strategy and the opportunities that lie ahead. Thanks, Grant. Starting on slide 11. To set the scene, Australia's data center market is being shaped by three forces. First, supply is generally constrained, with limited new large-scale power capacity realistically deliverable over the next two years. Second, Australia has real structural advantages, a competitive cost base, sovereign and regulatory positioning, a strong renewable energy pipeline, land availability, and sub-sea connectivity, providing low latency access to Asia and North America. Third, Australia is well-positioned to capture the next wave of AI-driven demand. AI is creating incremental workflow growth, not simply replacing existing compute demand. Capital is already flowing, with major global platforms, including Amazon and Microsoft, committing substantial capital to their Australian AI infrastructure rollouts. In this context, the greatest strategic risk is not oversupply, but that AI value is created offshore, leaving Australia a consumer rather than a producer of digital intelligence. For owners of industrial land with proximity to power and connectivity infrastructure, increasing scarcity is materially enhancing the strategic value of suitable development sites. In our view, the value creation opportunity increasingly sits not simply with the operating data center, but in controlling scarce power-enabled real estate. That gap is precisely the opportunity CIP is positioned to capture. Turning to slide 12. CIP's strategy is to generate real estate returns from the data center opportunity without operating risk. CIP does not operate data centers, it owns and leases the underlying data center assets. The strategy has two core pathways. The first is existing operational data centers, which provide long, secure income streams without exposure to operating performance. The second is asset conversion, taking large land holdings and unlocking their highest and best use through obtaining power allocations and planning approvals, then taking advantage of tenant-led demand. These assets can then be structured as powered land, powered shell, or fully fitted leases, depending on the risk-return profile and the end tenant requirements. CIP already has multiple development opportunities capable of delivering new operational capacity over the next few years, with further upside beyond. From a funding perspective, the approach is deliberately flexible, ranging from powered land leases and asset sales post-approval through to capital partners, joint ventures with operators or hyperscalers, and potentially a future demerger of CIP's data center assets. This optionality allows CIP to fund growth in a disciplined way without overextending. Importantly, management believes a significant portion of this future data center optionality is not reflected in current carrying values or in the REIT's current market value. Our objective is to unlock this value in a disciplined manner while retaining flexibility around funding structures and risk allocation. Slide 13 shows a map of the national platform CIP is building. CIP already has live capacity today, 10 MW in Western Australia, 12 MW in Victoria, and 2.5 MW in Queensland. Sitting above that existing capacity is an identified substantial development pipeline of more than 250 MW across Australia. Final capacity remains subject to design and approvals, but the message is clear. This is a geographically diversified footprint, combining income-producing assets today with significant growth optionality. This footprint provides the platform for CIP's strategy and leads directly into the asset-level opportunities that support the investment thesis. Slide 14 provides tangible proof points for the strategy. The Telstra data center has a triple net lease over existing data center through to 2050. A partial surrender of underutilized land has created opportunity for a standalone second facility with a development application already lodged for circa 40 MW and approval expected in the near term. The site also benefits from the ability to leverage Telstra's existing connectivity ecosystem. Thomastown is arguably the largest prospect. A 10-hectare holding, less than 100 m from a terminal station with existing capacity. Power applications are well progressed on the site for what we expect to be a significant power allocation. The Centuria DC asset in Toowoomba is operational today, leased to 2041, with 2.5 MW of life capacity and room to expand within the existing facility and adjoining CIP-owned land. Yarraville and Hazelmere are early-stage industrial holdings, both close to terminal stations and leased through to 2028 and 2027 respectively, providing future conversion optionality. The Fujitsu asset is a live 10-MW co-location facility leased to late 2030 with additional power and densification upside after expiry. Across all six assets, the common thread is proximity to power and connectivity, secure income today, and stage leasing expiries that allow data center value to be unlocked in a disciplined way over time. I will hand it over to Michael, who will run through the FY 2026 financial results and operational highlights. Thanks, Kate, and good morning, everyone. Turning to slide 16 and the financial results. Net property income rose to AUD 204 million for the year, an increase of AUD 11.7 million on the prior year. Strong re-leasing spreads and capturing of rental reversion resulted in like-for-like net operating income growth of 5.2%, despite CIP carrying lower occupancy in FY 2026 compared to FY 2025. Finance costs increased by AUD 6.9 million to AUD 65.9 million, reflecting the higher average cost of debt. CIP delivered funds from operations of AUD 114.1 million, or AUD 0.182 per unit, representing 4% earnings growth on FY 2025, and declared distributions of AUD 0.168 per unit in FY 2026, in line with guidance. Moving to capital management on slide 17. During the year, CIP completed a significant refinancing program with approximately AUD 450 million of debt refinanced on improved terms. Margins tightened by around 10 to 20 basis points compared to prior facilities, while the debt duration was extended. CIP continues to benefit from strong support from its lending group. This materially reduces refinancing risk and enhances financial flexibility entering FY 2027. Another key capital management initiative over the year was the issue of a new AUD 325 million exchangeable note to fund the repurchase of the prior notes. The new issuance lowered the all-in coupon to 3.5%, a substantial discount relative to the current marginal cost of debt. CIP maintains substantial liquidity of over AUD 450 million, which covers pending FY 2027 debt maturity. The AUD 100 million fixed rate facility matures in December, and at this stage, we expect to repay this facility using available liquidity. Approximately 54% of debt is hedged, and we continue to monitor interest rate movements and manage our interest rate exposure to balance earnings stability with some flexibility as the interest rate cycle evolves. Moving on to slide 19. CIP's portfolio has been deliberately constructed to benefit from structural demand drivers. 86% of our assets are located in core urban infill markets in close proximity to population centers and critical infrastructure. These are markets which benefit from the deepest tenant demand while supply is most constrained, and have historically demonstrated strong rental growth, low vacancy, and superior liquidity in broader industrial markets. CIP's average tenancy size of approximately 8,000 sq m aligns with the most active segment of the leasing market. Average portfolio site coverage of 44% provides opportunities for select redevelopment, generating earnings and NTA accretion while improving overall portfolio quality. This portfolio composition continues to underpin CIP's ability to generate strong leasing outcomes through cycles, while also providing multiple avenues for future value creation through asset repositioning and select development. Slide 20 presents a case study on CIP's success within our Melbourne portfolio. Conditions in the broader Melbourne industrial market have been challenging, with vacancy increasing to approximately 4.7% during the year, the highest nationally. Despite these conditions, CIP completed nearly 125,000 sq m of leasing across its Melbourne assets, representing around 29% of the portfolio by area, and lifting Melbourne occupancy to 97%. As noted in the half-year presentation, a notable transaction was the new 10-year lease to Tesla at 346 Boundary Road in Derrimut. This is an example of the flexibility our sites offer, where we pivoted strategy to defer a larger redevelopment project to lease the asset as is to a global covenant, delivering 130% re-leasing spread and resulting in a AUD 21 million value uplift. Another noteworthy outcome was the successful renewal of the tenant at 324 Frankston-Dandenong Road in Dandenong South. This seven-year renewal across 29,000 sq m achieved a 45% re-leasing spread and materially mitigates our FY 2028 expire profile. These results highlight the benefit of CIP's in-house asset management capabilities, as well as the benefits of a deliberately constructed portfolio focusing on smaller functional assets in established infill locations. Turning to divestments on slide 21. During FY 2026, CIP divested AUD 200 million of assets at an average 17% premium to book value. Individual transactions included 67- 69 Mandoon Road in Girraween in New South Wales, sold for AUD 98 million at a 15% premium, and 50- 64 Mirage Road, Direk, in South Australia, a recently completed development which sold for AUD 50 million at a 33% premium to total project costs. The opportunistic transactions completed during the year comprised both on-market and off-market deals and were executed with a diverse range of counterparties. These divestments are not a one-off. Since FY 2023, CIP has divested approximately AUD 460 million of assets, all at or above book value, achieving an average premium of 12%. This further demonstrates the underlying demand and liquidity for the type of assets within CIP. Despite repeatedly demonstrating direct market demand, liquidity, and pricing above book value, CIP continues to trade at approximately 25% discount to NTA. We believe this represents substantial disconnect between direct market evidence and listed market pricing. Looking at valuations on slide 22. Approximately half of the portfolio by value was externally revalued in June 2026, with the portfolio recording a like-for-like valuation uplift of AUD 116 million. This marks the fifth consecutive period of valuation growth, while the weighted average capitalization rate remained broadly stable at 5.8%. Importantly, valuations continue to be supported by direct market transactions. Recent sales were completed at an average passing yield of 4.9% compared to the portfolio's weighted average capitalization rate of 5.8%. Slide 23 further reinforces this point. CIP's portfolio valuations remain significantly below estimated replacement costs. We estimate the current average portfolio value to be approximately 50% below replacement cost estimates, while around 60% of the portfolio's value is underpinned by land alone. In our view, it is increasingly difficult to reconcile the REIT's current trading price with either replacement cost estimates or recent direct market transactional evidence. We believe this valuation disconnect creates a compelling proposition for long-term investors. I will now hand back to Grant to talk through CIP's development pipeline. Thanks, Michael. Picking up on slide 24. A key feature of CIP's development strategy is flexibility. Our entire future pipeline are income-producing assets, allowing projects to be sequenced and delivered at optimal points in the cycle rather than being forced by mounting holding costs. In addition to flexibility, all identified development projects are located in infill markets where supply is severely constrained, supporting feasibility and future rental outcomes. CIP has one current project under construction, 51 Musgrave Road, located in the Brisbane infill market of Coopers Plains. This development is a multi-unit estate that will deliver high-quality units between 1,500 sq m and 3,000 sq m. This segment of the market maintains the deepest term demand, and we expect to leverage strong leasing and rental outcomes. For all of our development pipeline, we aim for a minimum yield on cost of 6.5%. Our FY 2026 completed projects exceeded this target, generally delivering yields of 7%+. Turning to ESG on slide 25. Under Centuria's management, CIP has established a flexible and relevant sustainability framework that includes a target of achieving zero scope 2 emissions by the year 2028. A goal to attain a five-star Green Star design for all future industrial developments, participation in the Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark, an ongoing partnership with Healthy Heads in Trucks & Sheds, an organization dedicated to promoting mental health in the transport and logistics industries, and the continued evaluation of how to optimize roof space for solar panel installations across CIP assets. Moving to an overview of Australian industrial markets on slide 27. The ongoing Middle East conflict, which escalated in February, created uncertainty among tenants, particularly in relation to diesel and transport pricing. This curtailed the improvements in tenant inquiry and leasing activity evident from October 2025 to February 2026. As the uncertainty dissipated, we have seen an increase in tenant activity, particularly in Perth and Brisbane, and expect net absorption to improve in the remainder of calendar year 2026 before normalizing in 2027 and 2028. Despite the temporary blip in demand, the Australian industrial vacancy rate remains anchored at a relatively low level below 4%, and supply is becoming increasingly constrained. Economic rents remain cemented above prevailing market rents for the majority of development sites, impairing development feasibilities. As a result, many proposed developments are being deferred, muting supply. Continuing on slide 28, these conditions present an optimistic outlook for Australian industrial markets. The expected improvement in net absorption and reduction in vacancy will in turn see incentives begin to contract, particularly in infill markets with limited supply, markets consistent with the broader CIP portfolio. As a result, it is expected that effective rental growth will trend decidedly higher over the medium term, supporting future NOI and earnings growth. These conditions should support further earnings growth, valuation stability, and ongoing rental reversion opportunities across the CIP portfolio. Concluding on slide 29, for FY 2027 and beyond, CIP's focus is on maximizing value add opportunities from leasing, development, and asset repositioning while maintaining balance sheet capacity. Looking beyond FY 2027, we believe CIP is particularly well-positioned given the combination of embedded rent reversion, active asset management opportunities, development potential, and identified data center optionality. We are pleased to provide FY 2027 FFO guidance of between AUD 0.188 and AUD 0.192 per unit, and distribution guidance of AUD 0.173 per unit. Portfolio valuations continue to be supported by direct market transactions. The balance sheet remains well capitalized, and management remains focused on converting operational performance into sustainable earnings and value growth for unitholders. This concludes the formal part of this presentation. We thank everyone for listening and for their interest in CIP. I will now hand back to the operator for any questions. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. We ask today that you please limit yourself to two questions per person. Your first question today comes from Cody Shield with UBS. Please go ahead. Morning, Grant, Kate, and Michael. Thanks for the time this morning. Just starting with some of the vacancy there. Fairfield East and Bundamba obviously been a little bit stubborn. You had an HOA on Bundamba, I believe, at the half, which looks like it has fallen over. What do you think you will need to see to get some of that vacancy filled? Yeah, thanks, Cody. As mentioned on the call, the geopolitical uncertainty that occurred through February into March certainly curtailed tenant demand. If it was not for that, I would have been confident that we would have leased both Bundamba and Fairfield. If you recall, at the half, we had leased half of Fairfield on a short-term lease. That tenant was expecting to grow into the facility in totality. Unfortunately, particularly the increase in diesel costs had an impact on their foresight. They were unable to make that commitment at that stage. As we have moved ahead, we have certainly seen an improvement in tenant demand over the last couple of months, particularly in Brisbane. We remain optimistic for the leasing prospect of both Fairfield and Bundamba of getting done within FY 2027. Just in terms of guidance, because this question will come up, apologies to the equity analyst who are going to ask it anyway. The range that we have provided for FFO guidance is pretty much dependent on the leasing of Bundamba and Fairfield. We have forecast that they will be leased in the second half of FY 2027, which would enable us to meet budget, which is at AUD 0.19. Obviously, if we do better than that, we will be able to upscale that FFO guidance. Okay, that is great. Thanks. Just on the buyback. You have extended the timeframe there. Would you look to push that beyond AUD 60 million if that gap to NTA persists? Yeah, I think that's the fact that we have extended the buyback. We are continuing to give consideration to it. Obviously, we did announce an AUD 60 million buyback, and we have completed AUD 36 million of that. That was accretive up to AUD 0.01 to NTA through the course of FY 2026. I think it remains one of the capital allocation options that we have available to us. Obviously, CIP is trading at a 25% discount, which makes it very attractive from a value perspective. The counter to that is that with the rise in debt costs, it is not as accretive to earnings as it once was when we contemplated commencing the buyback 12 months ago. Okay, got it. Thanks, Grant. Thanks, Cody. Your next question comes from Richard Jones with JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hey, Grant. Just on Wetherill Park development, can you also just give us a bit more color on leasing demand and when that may kick off pending pre-commitment? Yeah. Thanks, Richard. Look, we would certainly be hopeful that we have commenced construction through the course of FY 2027. We are seeking pre-commitments at this stage, and we have got at least a couple of parties that are showing genuine interest in the site. So I will certainly be hopeful that in the coming six months, we get much closer to getting that pre-commitment done so that we can commence through the second half of FY 2027. I would make mention that tenant demand that we have seen across the country over the last 12 months, Sydney probably has been one of the weaker markets. We are certainly seeing improved market activity, particularly in Perth and Brisbane. Melbourne has probably been superior to Sydney in terms of tenant demand. Notwithstanding that, Wetherill Park is infill location within Sydney. There are very limited opportunities to get high-quality industrial facilities of scale in that market. We think that the proposed development that we have within CIP will do very well. Okay. Second question, just for Kate. Just wondering if you can just talk us through best case scenarios around both Clayton and Thomastown. When could, conceivably, construction commence? Yeah. They are on different paths at the moment. We are progressing power applications and DA on the two of them. We are going to be customer-led on these, so it will be dependent on those customer negotiations that we have or tenant negotiations in the background. Just to confirm, they have to be co-designed with those end customers. So, that is happening in the background. But on an actual time to market, we do have some forecasts on RFS, so we can work to with the power supply, which is around a 2028, 2029. But as I said, it is going to be a customer-led development. Richard, just to provide a bit more context on that. If you think about Thomastown, leases are in place until 30 June 2027, so we cannot commence construction until those leases expire. In Clayton, Telstra is still decanting from some of the sites that form part of our development site. That will probably progress for the next 9- 12 months. So again, I think both for Clayton and Thomastown, the construction is probably more of a FY 2028 thematic rather than FY 2027. Great. Thank you. Your next question comes from Lauren Berry with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. Thank you. Just a follow-up on Clayton. How are you thinking about funding this one? I know you've given a range of options, but when do you think you'll make the decision whether to go ahead with a land sale, a JV, or something a bit more dramatic like a demerger? How are you thinking about the timeline? Yeah. Thanks, Lauren. I think Kate articulated this pretty well on the call, in that at the moment, there is nothing material to fund, and we are keeping all options open. The point that these things become a decision in terms of what to fund, firstly, we have to consolidate both planning and power outcomes on both Clayton and Thomastown before you get to a point where you'd need to make a decision on funding. At the moment, our focus is about maximizing the highest and best use of these sites and increasing underlying land value. Once we do get further down the track, we'll become more prescriptive as to what we do next. But at this stage, and as Kate articulated, all options are on the table. There are a number of options we could explore that don't require significant funding from the CIP balance sheet. Okay, sure. Second one is just the decision to reduce your debt headroom when you've got a data center pipeline, you've got developments, and you've also got the buyback as an option as well. Can you talk about why you want to do that right now? Look, I think you're asking about our current hedge rate at 54%. We're happy to have a bit more exposure at this point in the rate cycle. We'll continue to look at opportunities throughout the course of the year and put hedging in place when we think it deemed appropriate. I think through FY 2026, we did put in some hedging, but more certainly, we also completed the exchangeable note, which gives us debt at 3.5% across AUD 325 million. So it's something that we are continuing to monitor. We know where the yield curve currently is, but as mentioned, we're happy to have a bit more exposure at this point in the rate cycle. But it's something we'll actively manage through FY 2027. Okay, great. Thanks. The next question comes from Andrew Dodds with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, guys. Just one from me. Just if you look at the FY 2026 leasing spreads of 30%, it implies a pretty, I guess, sharp moderation in the second half. You have also called out that spreads exclude a number of things, including a deal following an unexpected tenant liquidation. Are you just able to provide some color around this? Also, what spreads would have been if you included everything? Yeah. Thanks, Dodds. I appreciate this question because I think it is worth working this out a bit. We have been saying for a number of reporting periods that do not get fixated on the re-leasing spreads because it is going to be dependent on the geographic location in which leasing is completed. Across all of FY 2026, which was a near on record leasing year for CIP, near on 60% of that leasing was completed in Victoria, which has not had as strong a leasing spreads as what we have seen in New South Wales, and to a lesser extent in Queensland and Brisbane. The fact that the concentration of the leasing that we completed through the course of that year was in Victoria meant that our re-leasing spreads were not as strong as what we incurred in FY 2025. Looking forward, again, I think leasing spreads will bounce around. Obviously, we have a lot of under renting still to unwind across the CIP portfolio. There is very, very good opportunity for very strong leasing spreads to continue into the future. In terms of the question you asked, what would the re-leasing spreads be if we included the other three mills that were excluded? They will be slightly over 20%, which I think would still be a very, very good outcome when you compare to other commercial real estate vehicles out there at the moment. That is great. Thanks for answering. Your next question comes from Andy MacFarlane with Bell Potter. Please go ahead. Give me a minute. I dialed in an hour before. I wonder if it is not been registered. Hi, Andy. How are you, mate? Pardon me. We'll move on to the next question. This is from Tom Bodor with Jarden. Please go ahead. Good morning, Grant, Kate, Michael. My first question is just around the level of distributions. If I look at your FFO of AUD 114 million and deduct maintenance and leasing CapEx, I get to AUD 102. Then if I deduct rent-frees, I get to AUD 79 million, the distribution's AUD 105 million. Have you considered lowering your payout ratio to match free cash flow? Thanks, Tom. We've been starting on this vehicle for some time that we will slightly reduce our payout ratio. FY 2027 is another step in that direction. The payout ratio will be closer to 90%. I think it was 93% in FY 2027. Just for clarity, maintenance CapEx across this portfolio in FY 2026 was about AUD 9.3 million, which represents about 23 basis points of gross asset value. In the context of commercial real estate, that, in my view, is quite low. We don't see that. We foresee that changing in due course. When you look at what we're holding back, we're preparing to hold back for FY 2027, which will be in excess of AUD 12 million. In our view, that will more than cover our maintenance CapEx, and also the CapEx required for incentives and leasing costs. Sure. You've got AUD 22 million of rent-free or AUD 23 million, sorry. Does that tell me, it's pretty consistent with where it was the year before, so you're comfortable paying out the rent-frees as distributions? Yeah. So rent-frees and the payments will bounce around depending on how much leasing is completed in the course of a given year. Tom, as mentioned, this was a new on-record leasing year for CIP, so the expectation that that will be consistent year in, year out, I think is probably a premise that we don't accept. Okay, sure. The other question I had was around hedging. Your 2027/2028 hedging dropped away from the first half. There was a comment in the first half around assumes all extendable swaptions are exercised. Can you just talk through what's happened there, and is there any other sort of non-vanilla hedging across your book? Yeah. Pretty much all of the, all the hedging that remains is vanilla. What changed through the course is obviously the change in the yield curve. So the interest in the yield curve has meant that some of those extendable hedges have not been extended, which has contributed to reducing our hedge cover. As mentioned to Lauren's question, though, we are pretty comfortable with where we currently sit, having exposure at this point in time, and it's something we'll continue to manage through FY 2027. Okay, sure. Thanks. Your next question comes from Calum Ramer with Macquarie. Please go ahead. Good morning. Grant, can you just go back to the guidance for this year and just give us a little bit more color on that? In FY 2026, I guess you ultimately came in at the low end of guidance. I guess I'm trying to get the context of, you said AUD 18.8 million-AUD 19.2 million, and I think you referenced the budget being around AUD 19 million. Can you just talk about those key assumptions? You've got the 2.7% expiring. Are you able to tell me where you're at with known outcomes on that 2.7% and maybe any known outcomes you've got on the 4.8% of vacancy? If you're assuming anything in relation to the buyback, just weighted average cost of debt, et c, just other key assumptions that you've got in that guidance. Yeah, thanks, Cal. Just to try and hit those sequentially. In terms of our cost of debt, we're forecasting cost of debt, our all-in cost of debt into FY 2027 at being about 5.2%-5.3%, based on a floating rate of 4.7%. Now, obviously, the floating rate at the moment is below that. If it continues to be below that will provide some earnings tailwind to CIP through the course of FY 2027. In regards to the budget, we haven't assumed that we'll complete anything further with the buyback. If we did, I don't think it would have a material impact on earnings. The AUD 36 million of buyback that we completed through FY 2026 didn't really move the needle in terms of earnings, albeit it did have some upside to NTA. Now, in terms of where we actually completed FY 2026, FFO at AUD 0.182, that was at the lower end of our upgraded guidance. Our original guidance 12 months ago was AUD 0.18-AUD 0. 185 per unit. We obviously tightened that to AUD 0.182 in February. When we tightened that guidance, we certainly weren't aware that there would be an Iran war, which had a material impact, as mentioned, on particularly diesel pricing, which has a huge implication on tenant demand within industrial markets. At that stage, we probably had a better outlook for tenant demand than what occurred through the second half of FY 2026. As we move into FY 2027, as mentioned on the call, we're starting to see that concern moderate and dissipate. Tenant demand has been improving in a number of markets, and we have got a level of confidence, particularly Fairfield and Bundamba will be leased through the course of FY 2027. Depending on when they are leased, that is what is going to cause the variation in range in FFO. In terms of the FY 2027 expiry profile, you were quite right. It is relatively benign. It's a relatively small number for a portfolio as diversified as this. We don't foresee it as being something that we cannot work through. But at this stage, we haven't got any information that we haven't announced that we can provide. Thank you. I guess ultimately, just to check on one thing. The expectation in the guidance is that you'll finish the year with a higher level of occupancy, effectively equivalent to the Fairfield and Bundamba ones? Yes. My expectation is that we'll have higher occupancy at the end of the year than we did at the start. I think it's also worth reflecting on FY 2026 in that context. Through the first half of FY 2026, we completed about 140,000 sq m of leasing, including a lot of vacant space. If that had not been completed, occupancy within the portfolio probably would've been in the low 90s. So through FY 2026, we actually carried a lot more vacancy than we did in FY 2025 and what we project through FY 2027. So I think there is certainly some opportunity for improved occupancy through FY 2027 compared to FY 2026. Thanks. I just thought I would follow up on the data center question as well. Just in relation to the data centers, I think Kate alluded to the idea that it is going to be customer-led. Can I just clarify with that? Does that mean you do go and seek a DA approval for design, et c, of the data center? Can you talk a little bit about the customer's willingness to pre-commit rather than the expectation of you starting the data centers? It would seem to me that the typical industry view is that you have to start these speculatively in order to ultimately convert into a legally- binding agreement with a data center occupier or operator. Yeah. I will start off answering this, and if Kate has got any further comments, she can chime in as well. I think what Kate is articulating there is that we will not fully speculatively develop an entire data center. There are components of data center construction that you would probably need to speculatively start, primarily in relation to securing power. I think that is where once power is fully secured, that is when you can certainly see pre-commitments for the remaining part of the development. As Kate also articulated at the moment, the demand for data centers far exceeds what we expect to be built within Australia. We think there is a really good opportunity for the next three or four years to get product into the market to feed that demand, because there is going to be a scarcity supply. That is obviously what we are trying to direct our opportunity set toward. Okay. Thanks very much. I appreciate it. Thanks, Cal. Your next question comes from Murray Connellan with Moelis Australia. Please go ahead. Morning, everyone. Could I ask what the average incentive level was across leasing done by CIP in the past year and how that would compare to FY 2025? Yeah, thanks, Murray. It was a slight tick up in incentives through the course of FY 2026, so the average incentive given for the entire year was about 19%. That was a slight increase from FY 2024 and FY 2025, which incurred average incentive about 15%. As mentioned on the call, the national vacancy rate is currently below 4%. We don't foresee that increasing materially from here. We think it will actually decrease from here. As you go into calendar year 2027 and 2028, we think there is a really good opportunity for incentive to contract across industrial markets. Thanks, Grant. Just zooming into the balance sheet for a second. Obviously, a fair amount of investment that has come through in the second half. Would you expect to remain a net seller of assets near term? I guess, where would you like to see gearing, in anticipation of the prospective capital requirement from the data center build-out in a few years' time? Yeah, look, we are pretty comfortable with where gearing currently sits. I think in that 30%-35% range is where we are pretty comfortable. We note that we are currently at 34.9%, but we have a circa AUD 100 million asset that is going to settle through the first half of FY 2027, which will reduce that by about a full percentage point. So we are pretty comfortable with where gearing currently sits. As to further asset divestments, look, part of this, the divestments we have completed in recent past, part of it has been opportunistic. People offering us what we believe is above what we perceive to be value for those particular assets. We think those opportunities will continue across the portfolio. As to how many and how much, look, we are not prescriptive at this stage. We have not got a target that we are seeking to manage towards. A lot of it will be opportunity-led, either from getting off-market approaches or, for some assets where we deem we have maximized the value opportunity set in the near term, we will seek an on-market opportunity to sell those assets as well. Got it. Thank you, Grant. Cheers, Murray. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone. Your next question comes from Claire McKew with Green Street. Please go ahead. Thanks, guys. Just to follow up on capital allocation acumen. I just was wondering if you could clarify your comments around rising debt costs make the buyback less optimal. Are you saying that deleveraging is preferred to drive earnings accretion over NTA accretion? Then maybe more broadly, can you just clarify what your current views are on the highest and best use of your capital as you continue to sell assets opportunistically? Yeah. Thanks, Claire. Look, I think the comment in relation to the buyback is in regards to the all-in cost of debt. If we had an all-in cost of debt at 5.3%, but then you think about the marginal cost of debt we are at the moment, which is closer to 6%. When we commenced the buyback 12 months ago, the marginal cost of debt was probably sub 5%. Obviously we fund the buyback by drawing down on debt. Any spare cash we have, we utilize to pay down revolver debt facilities. If you are obviously drawing debt at a higher cost, that is not as favorable to your earnings as what it would have been if debt was 1 or 2 percentage points lower. So that is the comment in relation to that. In regards to the capital ranking allocation, look, I think it's great to have multiple opportunities across CIP, which we think are all accretive. The buyback, in our view, is still something that we would consider pursuing given where we currently trade at a discount to NTA. Developing our existing pipeline, we will be delivering stock in FY 2026, with yields in excess of 7% when we have been selling stock at a passing yield of 4.9%. There is the data center opportunity set within CIP, which we think is very exciting too and could potentially provide an even greater return on capital. At the moment, I wouldn't say there is a clear favorite. I think there is multiple opportunities across CIP, and the fact that we have that, I think is a really good opportunity for unitholders more broadly. All right. Thanks. That's helpful. Yeah, just in terms of perhaps just pushing a bit more on the buyback, though. If you are continuing to sell assets at material premiums, is there no appetite to ramp up that divestment program for the sort of non-core assets that don't necessarily have the IRR upside, versus some other assets in your portfolio to fund the buyback as opposed to debt? Yeah, look, I think that's something that we will continue to consider. We have obviously sold a bunch of assets, not only in FY 2026 but in FY 2025. So we have sold in excess of AUD 400 million of assets over the last couple of years, all at strong premiums to book value. Now, obviously, putting that back when you are trading at a 25% discount to NTA is beneficial, and it's something we will continue to see. I think one of the concerns that we had when we commenced the buyback in the first half was that it did create an escalation in gearing. If we did get a more significant bunch of transactions or divestments through FY 2027 and that reduced the gearing down to a level where we could continue that buyback, that is something we would consider. All right. Thanks. Just another quick follow-up from me, just around the re-releasing spreads. Are you able to give us some color around what they would be on an effective basis? When you look at sort of the under-renting of the portfolio of 17%, how would that translate on an effective basis? It's probably even greater on an effective basis because incentives have generally been lower in the current market than what they would've been, particularly pre-2021. We don't have that number to hand, but I'd argue that you're probably seeing re-leasing spreads in excess of what we are quoting. Right. Thanks, guys. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Nichols for closing remarks. Well, thank you everyone for joining today's presentation. If you have any follow-up questions, please don't hesitate to contact any of the team. That concludes today's presentation. We thank you for your interest in Centuria Industrial REIT and wish you a very good day. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.