At the end of the meeting. I am sharing my screen, so hopefully you can see it. You can see it, Sean. What we wanted to do today is just give you a business overview from our first half results for FY 2025, and we will talk about the financials more in detail as well. FY 2025, three parts of our business, as you guys know: platform administration, funds management, and advice. Starting off from platform administration, we are quite lucky to have the strongest net inflows in the first half that we have experienced in a little while. We have clocked about AUD 186 million net inflows from our Fiducian Financial Services financial planners, and that has been coming both from the organic flows as well as the acquisitions that we have done in the past, money moving across. We are very pleased to see that, as well as almost 100% of our net inflows that come through, we are experiencing that goes through the Fiducian funds as well. Just looking at the statistics, funds under administration, about a year back, half year ending December 2023, our average was just over AUD 3 billion, AUD 3 billion and 84 million. Today we start as at end of January, AUD 3 billion 788 million. Roughly about AUD 700 million ahead we are compared to our average about a year back. If you were to extrapolate that in applying our margins, that could potentially contribute to additional AUD 2 million in revenue if the market holds at the same level or it grows. Our financial planning system, our platform administration system, is fully integrated with our financial planning software as well, and we will see that on our IT capabilities. We have got the branded core Fiducian platform, and within the core platform, we have got quite a comprehensive investment menu comprising our Fiducian funds, managed accounts, as well as external managed funds. In the next slide, we have just given some visuals on our net inflows as well as the relationship between the funds under administration and the platform revenue and profit before tax. On the left side of the chart, as you can see the core platform net inflows. In the recent past, the first half, as I mentioned before, we have recorded AUD 186 million net inflows, and roughly about 60% of them is brand new money that's coming into our advice network, which is flowing through our platform, and roughly about 40% of that is all the external platform. If it's right for the clients, the advisor might have recommended them to Fiducian platform, and that's what's coming through, about 40%. Taking a step back, the average revenue that we have got for the platform side of the business is roughly about 60 basis points, and that includes the normal administration fee, any transaction fee, the interest margins that we earn, but also the expense recovery, any out-of-pocket expense recovery that we do from the fund as well. We are very pleased to observe that both salaried as well as franchise planners are contributing from our FFS network into the net inflows, and as I mentioned, it's coming from both angle, organic as well as inorganic. With that, just moving on to our Auxilium and Badges. As you might have heard from our presentations before, we are very energetic and very focused and enthusiastic about the new Badges product that we have launched out about a couple of years back, and Auxilium as of today has got the same level of service for the rest of the Fiducian platform that we provide, which is really way ahead compared to where the industry stands. The Auxilium pricing point is one of the lowest, if not the lowest, headline rates in Australia at the moment among the platform providers. We are really hoping to disrupt the disruptors, some of the newcomers that have come into the platform industry and platform business, and we are really hoping to attract those clients that could benefit from the service that we provide. Total, we have got roughly about five Badges, and we are also working through a very strong pipeline of IFA networks. What we are experiencing is that some of our competitors, as they have grown bigger and bigger, their appetite for smaller financial advisors or financial advice group is sort of waning, and that's the space that we believe we can go and add value. We have got an extensive investment menu that can be offered through this platform, and we have been able to clock in roughly about, it's early days, but roughly about AUD 30 million in net inflows in the new platform. Overall, taking the IFA monies as well as the platform and Badges, we have got end of December, roughly about AUD 440 million, and as I mentioned, our business development team is working very, very hard to convert some of those people into pipeline, and negotiations are underway. The way we saw this was slightly different to what we hear from some of the more successful platforms like HUB24, Netwealth, and Colonial First State and others, where they speak of big developments in technology. We see that our technology is as good as the best, if not better, but really the difference from us is service. At the end of the day, clients generally send an application form in, and that's processed, sent to the custodian, it's invested, you get a report back, you get a confirmation, and then on a quarterly basis or a half-yearly basis, you get your statements, and you can see your investments online every night. Besides that, we also have something called Drill Down, where a member or an investor can actually see every single listed security held anywhere in the world and the percentage against it. Where we see it is it's not so much more technology or talking about it, because it's not rocket science. Where we see the difference is our service, and a lot of the big platforms are not looking after the smaller advisors, people with smaller volumes of money to move, but we are, and we are helping these advisors to set up their processes to indeed improve their statements of advice and improve their processes of helping clients. That's why we're seeing a fair bit of interest coming through now. Not many numbers, but I know that just last week, four new advisors came on the platform we didn't even know. It's starting to build, and I think we're reasonably positive about it. Thank you, Indy. Moving on to the funds management part of the business, as you guys know, we are multi-manager, which means that we don't manage, we don't buy BHP and sell REO, but we choose fund managers, and we work with over 40 fund managers, both domestically as well as overseas fund managers. Our investment team, their objective is not to shoot the lights out, but really to generate target-generating above-average returns by taking low-average risks. Our funds under management, again, similar comparison as we saw in platform, was sitting roughly about AUD 4.5 billion, about six-monthly average end of December 2023, and we are starting the year about AUD 5.7 billion. Roughly about AUD 1.1- 1.2 billion more compared to where we were, what our average was about one year back. Again, extrapolating that to the margins that we have, that could potentially add AUD 5 million extra revenue compared to the six-monthly average back in December 2023. As you might recall, we also launched a new investment bond product through Generation Life, and also the conversation is still going on with the governments as to what happens with the AUD 3 million cap in superannuation. What we believe is we are very well poised if it becomes law, and as the people look for revenues, look for new products to put their money into the new structure, if the cap comes through, we are fully ready for that. Currently, we offer roughly about 15 managed investment schemes and also a few of the SMA products as well. As I said, our focus is really on over the long-term returns and the long-term process. When we have stuck to anything and when we have delivered on the process, what we have experienced is top quartile or top decile returns in 37 out of 64 ratings all across the fund manager survey that Janet does for us, about 168 fund managers. We have also put up the returns here, one year, three years, five years, seven years, and I'll just request Indy to maybe just give a little bit more flavor on the returns and some of the peculiarities of that rankings. Yeah, Rahul, thanks. Look, we're multi-manager, 29 managers in our balanced and growth funds. The balanced fund somehow had crept into the growth area. As you can see, it's being measured against growth managers, whereas in the balanced category, when it comes down into the balanced area, it'll have a much superior performance compared to other balanced funds because it's not that it doesn't have that much in growth assets. I think it's done reasonably well. Obviously, it's been very hard for active managers to beat the index. There's very few who have been able to do it, but as history tells us always, and as we've been watching, give it a little time. When there's a mean reversion, the active managers always outperform over the longer term. So we retain that bias. We do have some index-style managers just as an anchor, and we have increased exposure to them over this period. You can see over the longer term, it has done quite well. The one-year returns for our specialist funds like technology and India, I think now technology would be about 45% for the year. I think people are doing well, funds are doing, and do not worry about the ranking. What is important is the actual return, which is, if you see over the year, ultra growth is 18%. I think we are doing okay and as we expected. Thank you, Indy. A quick visuals on how the fund revenue and profit before tax compares with our average fund. Again, going back about five years, June 2020, our level of funds was roughly about AUD 2.7 billion, which has doubled to about AUD 5.4 billion now in December 2024, and corresponding growth from revenue from AUD 9.1 million to AUD 16.9 million, and also the profit from AUD 4.2 million to AUD 8.9 million, a little bit over doubled. Now, we often get asked the question, so why Fiducian funds? If Fiducian does not select BHP and does not sell REO, why come to Fiducian at all? Why do not the clients go directly to BT or Colonial or Weber? The fees that we charge are very similar to what the industry charges, what the single manager charges. Just for the sake of argument, if a client wanted to go to BT Australian Share Fund, the fees that they'll be paying is no different to what Fiducian charges for the Australian Share Fund. Coming to Fiducian, they have got a benefit of diversification. Taking the example of balance fund, if one client wants to put AUD 1,000, AUD 5,000, they actually get access to what, about 23 different fund managers, 27 different fund managers to their AUD 1,000 investments. That is practically impossible for a single client to invest only AUD 1,000 and access 27 different fund managers. Using your example of BT or Ausbil Share Fund, both of whom are underlying fund managers for us, if you put $1,000, you would get BT, you put $1,000 with Fiducian, you get six different share managers for the same money, same fee. Correct. Yeah. They get the diversification, they get the process, as well as they are no worse off from the fees compared to what they'll pay elsewhere. One of the benefits that our model has, unlike a pure fund manager, is that as our volume grows, the margin that we get from our fund managers, there's a potential for that to expand as well. By that, again, I'm making up these examples, but if we have appointed BT as a fund manager, we might pay them 50 basis points for the first AUD 40 million that we give them to manage. Then, maybe for the next AUD 25 million, we might not give 50 basis points, we might only give 40 basis points, and so on and so forth. As the funds grow, there's a potential for our margins to expand. The clients still pay, the members still pay the same fees that they would be paying, but the proportion that goes to the fund managers has got a potential to reduce, which could benefit Fiducian as a group, as well as the shareholders. The annualized revenue is roughly about 48 basis points on the average fund, and that is after paying out the fund manager cost for us. Just moving on to the fintech case, about 2012, we insourced the platform, and all the technology, which is faster, our platform administration is fast tracked, and all the technology is in-house. We have got a development team, a testing team, resource team, etc., everything in-house. What we believe is that gives us full control over the development cycle and as well as the turnaround time we have got for the market. All the development costs that we do, everything is expensed, so nothing is sitting in the balance sheet for the shareholders to feel the pain in the future years. Unlike our competitors, we expense everything. There is no sin sitting in the balance sheet that will come up as an expense in two years or five years' time. There have been some tremendous developments for automation. We do not have a staff burgeoning model here. We are pretty tight on how many people we employ. As we automate more and more, we find some tremendous values added and cost benefits. There has been a lot of modification constantly in the background. As Rahul said, we have a fantastic system that is really up to date, and everything is expensed. Absolutely. We do not capitalize anything. Indy, if you indulge me to share one of the examples that I always, or at least always try to take up, is that in 2012, the funds under administration was roughly about AUD 850 million. At that point of time, we had roughly about 18- 20 people in the administration team who were supporting the clients that we have. Today, we are close to AUD 4 billion, and ordinarily we would expect the staff numbers also to extrapolate accordingly. Actually, we have got roughly about 16 staff as of today supporting all the clients. Although our funds under administration has grown about four to five times, we have been able to contain the number of staff through the system efficiencies that we experience. As Indy touched upon earlier, our main differentiating factor is really the service standards that we provide, which we believe are higher than the industry, what the other advisors are accustomed to. That is the fast track. Force, which is our in-house financial planning software, and again, a full-fledged software comparing with Xplan without the clunkiness of Xplan and the slowness of Xplan. Xplan, the market leader that caters to maybe 10,000, 2,000, 5,000 advisors and has got many varied features which no one uses, but our software, which is Force, which really focuses on the efficiencies for the advisors that we have, and through that, they can spend more time with the clients rather than doing the back office work. Both of those systems are also fully integrated with our Fiducian Online, which is the client reporting system, which is a real-time system. Indy touched upon in a different context that is every client has got not only the access to what investments that they are making, but also the underlying investments just through a click of a button. If they want to see Fiducian Balance Fund, what are the actual investments, it's one click of a button, and about 700 or 800 stocks come in in the same proportion that the client is holding. Very, very powerful system, especially when all of those come together. We have also recently launched out our Fiducian Mobile App, and with that, there's direct access for the clients to get more engaged with their account holdings and the affairs that they and the financial affairs that they have with Fiducian. Maybe I'll move on from this slide maybe with one example, cybersecurity trend and true multi-factor authentication. I left that point, but actually, we rolled it out about maybe two and a half years, three years back. That was interesting because maybe about three months back or four months back, one of our competitors made a big announcement in the media saying that they have now rolled out MFAs or multi-factor authentication. We are thinking, that's great, but that's something that we have already rolled out three years back. We often do not advertise that much. We often do not maybe promote that much, but our system is very much cutting-edge compared to the tiers. Financial planning, that's the enabler of Teddy Flows. We have got about 78 financial advisors across 47 offices all across Australia. This financial year, we have upped the targets for them as well as the revenue targets, which I'll request Indy to give a little bit more flavor on that. Yeah. We had 80 last time we announced. One lady broke her shoulder and decided she'd like to retire. Her business, we've sold off and funded another one of our existing advisors to take that over and merge it with his client base. There is one other advisor, I think, in South Australia who retired as well. It is not that we're sitting idle. There are conversations going on with quite a few advisors who are talking with us and who might want to join us. Two documents have just been sent out. I think mainly both of them were in one Northern New South Wales, one in Queensland. There are a number of others in progress. We are going to continue to build. We've got a project team that's aiming to get us to at least 100 advisors, and they meet regularly to plan their strategy and get new ones. We are looking also for acquisitions, and there's one which seems quite positive. There's another one in the north. One will bring another six advisors. The other could be more, but we're in negotiation with them, and they're both looking very positive. That will raise the numbers as well. Besides simply getting new franchise on, and these franchises will hopefully bring clients with them. That's even better at no cost. It's looking good. We will not get to 1,000 advisors like some people want to do. I think it's more trouble than benefit. If we can have up to 100-150 advisors at best and raise the target for them so that we can get at least AUD 1 billion of new inflow a year, which is probably, I'd say, the highest inflow you can get around in Australia. No, that's fine. Thank you, Indy. Currently, we have got roughly about AUD 5 billion funds under advice and about AUD 1.6 billion in external platforms. External platform is an interesting one. There will always be situations where clients' money should remain in external platforms, be it for capital gains issues or whether they are social security benefits and so on and so forth. If it's right for the clients, as the advisors meet their clients, their clientele, if it's right for the client, they may recommend that to Fiducian Platform and Fiducian Funds. There's an opportunity, at least a part of that, to migrate across to a Fiducian Platform. A quick mention on the staffing. Our staff numbers December 2024 was pretty much similar, slight increase of roughly about four compared to December 2023 to increase the support to support the increase in business growth. Our staff really, really tend to remain loyal. We have got one of the highest retention rates amongst our cohorts. I myself joined Fiducian about 13 years back, and Indy continuously reminds me I am still one of the newest person in his team. What we believe is that when we look after the staff, when we treat them as equals, treat them as family, they will reciprocate, and also they will give their best. We invest quite a lot on training and professional developments, and staff retention remains key for us. We pay above average compared to the market, and all of those things have helped. Even during the COVID period, we made zero staff redundant. We stuck by them, and we often see that same feelings are being reciprocated towards us. With that, I just wanted to talk about the financials a little bit. I'm on page 14 now, slide 14 now. Operating revenue, about AUD 44 million. Gross revenue, 14% growth compared to the prior comparative period. Net revenue, about AUD 33.6 million. Gross margin, 76%. I don't intend to go through all of those numbers, but as you can see, the two triangles show quite a strong growth. Underlying impact, roughly about AUD 9.9 million. 20% growth. Statutory impact, 26% growth, AUD 8.6 million. Underlying EBITDA margin improved from 29% to 31%. Funds under management, AUD 14.4 billion, about 11% increase. What we find really amusing and, of course, satisfactory is our profit numbers. Underlying impact, underlying EBITDA, whichever measure you take. Mind you, we have got a platform of roughly about AUD 4 billion. We have got some of our peers, some of our competitors who are sitting about AUD 100 billion, north of AUD 100 billion, and their profit is roughly about two and a half times, three times compared to our profit. Although we are at AUD 4 billion and some of our competitors sitting at AUD 100 billion, 25 times compared to what they have in their platform versus ours, their profit is actually just about three times more than us. That really shows maybe I will just ask the question. What do you think about that, Indy? How are we different compared to some of our peers? I think just this morning, I received an email from one of our institutional investors who said he's amazed by the continuous growth in the earnings and profit over 10 years. I said, you know, it surprises me that the market has completely missed the very powerful compounding nature of this model. You'll see that as volumes grow, as we get more money in and the market holds, the profit starts to compound higher and higher and faster. It is a very powerful model, and it's worked with us in tough times and in good times. The objective for me is always to give a good return to our shareholders. They get good income from the funds or the investment, and to the point that if it's franked, it gets higher. In a few years' time, like now, someone who might have invested in 2015 or something like that would be getting almost, put $1,000, would be getting almost $450 as a dividend, which if you compound, it gets close to $700, which means two years you get your money back. That is what I think. Some people think it is old-fashioned. They would like to see huge acquisitions and billions of dollars coming in. My view is always that if the revenue grows by a certain rate, our profit should grow by a higher rate. We are using shareholders' capital well. When we do use that money to increase revenue, it should not be at the expense of the profit declining because then whose money are we using? Just for the sake of buying things, for the sake of buying. We do not do that. As I said before, we do have a few discussions in the pipeline, which hopefully, and I think I'm sure will be EPS accretive. If people want too much money or it's not good enough for us, we just walk away. Thank you. A quick look on the segment reportings. The main message from this slide is the fact that all of our business segments are contributing positively to the bottom line and adding value. The next slide, a quick visual on FID performance from June 2012 till date. During this period, including all the dividends, all odds actually went up by about 255% and Fiducian about almost about 1,500%. Our dividend payout policy is 60%-80% of underlying net profit after tax. Why underlying net profit, you might ask? Because that's the closest to the cash profit. That's the closest proxy to the cash profit. All the cash profit that we earn, both position is that 60%-80% of that will be paid out as dividends. H1 of FY 2025, we are declaring about AUD 0.219 dividend per share. As Indy mentioned, if someone invested $1,000, they would have experienced quite a lot of dividend growth, even leaving aside the actual price growth. In fact, over the 25 years we have been listed, we have been able to generate double-digit growth, 19 out of those 25 years since listing. Double-digit growth remains the growth strategy at this stage. Funds under administration, FUA growth, again, over the years, you can see June 2020, AUD 8 billion. Today, we are about AUD 14.4 billion. Very strong growth we have been able to experience over the years. Really, my last slide is this slide on the screen. By no stretch of imagination, this is not a projection. This is not an estimate. It is more of a conceptual representation of what could happen. It is not a forecast, more of a conceptual representation. If I take you guys through this slide very quickly, on the left of the screen, 2013, we had FUM of roughly about AUD 3 billion in 2013. The green line are the revenue lines, and the red lines are the actuals. All of the solid lines are the actuals that we have experienced, and all of the shaded are just a conceptual representation. As you can see, over the years from 2013, today we have grown to about AUD 14.4 billion. We ended December 2024 about, and these are all the average FUM. December 2024, we were about AUD 12.9 billion. Over the years, as you can see, the red line has increased. If you look at the green line, that has increased at a much faster rate compared to the red line. The gaps between the red and green, the jaws of growth, as we have traveled across the right of the scale, as our FUM have grown, that jaws of growth have also expanded. As a result, the horizontal bars, which is the EBITDA back in 2013, a little bit less than AUD 5 million for that year. On this, right now, you can see it is roughly a little bit more than AUD 20 million. What we believe is that as we are able to grow the FUM, the potential for the revenue growth is there. The expense line, as we saw, is pretty much well contained. It will grow, but much slower compared to the revenue growth. There is a potential for all these additional revenues to go directly to the bottom line, which would help the company to reinvest, but also the shareholders' return as well. In fact, we did the acquisition of PCCO back in February 2022, just about three years back. You can see from in the graph, in 2022, the green line suddenly, red line also jumped, but the green line suddenly jumped. The distance did not really change much. Over the years, as we started getting the revenue synergies from that acquisition, the green line grew much faster compared to the red line. That cost increase was really a reflection of the fact that we took on 40 new employees from PCCO, which was advisors and support staff and systems and processes and setting them up in the offices and things. That is what we saw jump, but that is now paying dividends. That is right. No, thank you, Indy. Those are the things we wanted to share with you guys. I just wanted to open up the floor for questions if you have any. Indy, while we're waiting for questions, maybe I'll ask you the first one. Where from here? As we saw, we have got quite a phenomenal growth, steady growth, and very predictable growth. Not one year you're growing 100%, next year going down 20%, but very consistent, sustainable growth. Where to from here, Indy? The important thing is that we're going to stick to our knitting, something we understand, something we know, and something we can manage. We are going to grow on all four pillars, the financial planning. We're starting to get new advisors. We're looking at acquiring other businesses of planners. With terms of platform administration, we're expecting that there's a lot of money sitting outside in other platforms. As Rahul mentioned, 60% of our inflows is from new money and only 40% when they review a client and find that the client can be better off in a Fiducian platform, does that money come across. We will, I think, continue with that and hopefully get more inflows into our platform. I think our funds are doing quite well. They give people a secure, defensive investment with the diversification of managers, of styles, of processes. I think it's a powerful model. System development is our own. We have our own IT team, which helps us get to market faster. It helps us when changes are required by regulation to change quicker and to be able to test and make sure that it's accurate. Yeah, I think all models must grow and all must expand. The one that's now starting to look good is Auxilium, which is a platform for super and non-super, which we have opened, which is not for Fiducian advisors, but mainly for the market to disrupt the so-called disruptors. It is starting to gain some traction. As I said, the people coming to us who we didn't know, who we have spoken with, and I think the pipeline there is quite positive. Let's wait and see, but it is starting to gain traction and it is not costing us too much more. Existing administrators are administering and distribution teams are working hard to get more people on. That is an interesting part for our business. Thank you, Indy. There were a couple of questions that were put to us before. I'll try to respond to them. One of the questions was how much money we have got in Auxilium and Badges products as of end of December 2024 compared to December 2023. As you can see on the screen, Funds Under Administration, which includes the core platform from IFA Money's core platform, has got about AUD 440 million. If we leave out core platform, only Auxilium and Badges has currently got roughly about AUD 135 million. There was another question, more of a procedural question. We are comparing against Zenith, and previously we used to, sorry, the rankings that we are giving out is Zenith's ranking and not Morningstar, as we used to do previously. In the last year or so, we have switched over from Morningstar to Zenith as a data provider and pricing and performance provider, and that's why we're using Zenith. I can see there is one question on the chat, and Indy, if I just start off and then maybe you can help me out on complementing that as well. The question refers to, I'll read out the question first. Someone once said, "Your high profit margin is my opportunity. So why does that not represent a competitive risk to our company's margins?" Maybe I'll look at different parts of the business. I'll start with the financial planning part of the business. Financial planning, when I look at, our average fees that we charge is roughly about AUD 2,800 from each client. As Indy touched upon before, our objective is to raise that fee from between 10% and 20% during the year. Now, what does the industry charge in Australia? In the industry, if a client were to go to their financial advisors, they'll be paying roughly about AUD 4,600. Essentially, the fee that we are charging is well below the market and really not commensurate with the services that we provide. What we see is there's more of an opportunity for us to right price it so that it gets closer to what the industry is rather than being much lower. Let's talk about the funds management next. Funds management, again, in our presentation, we covered that is why would a client come to Fiducian at all. They are coming to Fiducian because they are paying the same prices as what the industry is paid, what they have to pay if they go to a normal fund manager, but also they are getting the diversification. We very much benchmark ourselves again where the industry is. If the industry, all of the industry comes down, we will come down also accordingly. We have not seen any trend towards that. Essentially, we are not higher than the industry. Finally, looking at the platform, as I mentioned, Auxilium product, it has got one of the lowest fee, if not the lowest fee in the Australian industry. If a client were to come in, the headline rate is about 20 basis points for the first AUD 100,000. From AUD 100,000 to AUD 1 million, it is about 15 basis points, and then it scales down to zero. Essentially, we are very, very competitive on that particular sector segment of the business. Now, in the core platform, our core administration fee is again roughly about 35 basis points, 40 basis points on an average. That is no different to what our competitors are charging as well. We have expense recovery and other fees that take it a little bit more compared to the headline rates, but the headline rates are very much comparable. That brings us to the question that is, how is Fiducian delivering such strong results when our peers are not able to? Indy, I know you already touched upon it before. Anything you wanted to add, Indy? Nothing more. I've already said that. Look, we're not just one simple business. We're actually a power, it's a very powerful compounding nature of this business where we grow financial planning. We expect that more flow will come in. We grow the platform where our fees are pretty static, but competitive. More volumes come in, we can charge there. We can charge at the advice level, and we charge on our investment management, funds management level. We have that combination, a very powerful combination backed by our IT. I think it's actually a moat or a defense against competition because we capture all parts of the value chain, whereas many of our competitors are sort of stuck with one particular part or either funds management or only platform and stuff like that. I think it's a strong model. There's another question that's come through. Could you comment on succession plan, Indy? Yeah. At the AGM last, I was asked when I had one employee about 28 years ago, "What's your succession plan?" I said, "I've only got one employee. I haven't even started. I was basically going to wash up the plates and cups and saucers for the evening." Look, the way we structured it is basically, will the business continue as a going concern? Yes, it will. Because we have the services, which Rahul looks after. He's Chairman of that, and he's responsible for that part of the business, which covers all our services from finance, IT, admin, marketing, that sort of stuff. There is another business called Fiducian Investment Management Services, which is funds management, and Conrad Burge is Chairman of that, and he's responsible for that part of the business and growing the business. We have the third, which is Financial Planning, which is Robbie Southall is Chairman of Financial Planning, and that's his responsibility to grow the advisor numbers to 100 and beyond that, 250, and we're working on the 100. I think the business will continue irrespective, and I think the only person who is indispensable is someone up in the sky. Otherwise, we're all passengers and human beings who come and go. The business will continue. It's a listed company, and it will find ways to keep going. If the model is retained, I think it'll be pretty strong. Thank you, Indy. There's a question from BRETA. Oh, there's a question there about my golf. I'm still going, but it's getting worse and worse, Jeff, which is like everyone. I might be on the circuit otherwise if it went the other way. I'm still playing. No, that's very informative. Thank you, Indy. There was one more question from BRETA Securities. BRETA has been covering Fiducian stocks for maybe a year or year and a half, and they do a pretty good job. Rob and Steven Scott from there, any questions, just reach out to them. The question from BRETA is whether we can comment on the seasonality for first half and second half. Thank you, Steven, for that. Traditionally, what happens in our kind of business, and particularly at Fiducian, is that we announce half-year results, and then again, we announce full-year results also. Traditionally, we would expect the market to go up. In most of the years, over the long term, it would. As a result, what we've experienced is that, first of all, we are starting January 2025, which is the second half, on a higher level of FEMA compared to when we started in July 2024. That is the first half versus second half. Secondly, again, we expect some market growth to come through also. What the market will do is anyone's guess, but our planning assumption is 6% growth or 6.5% growth over the year. As the market grows, it takes up our funds as well, level of funds also. Finally, what I mentioned is in the first half, we got AUD 186 million net inflows. Every year we set plans, and this year we have actually surpassed the plan that we have set for ourselves in terms of net inflows. Now, as the net inflows come in, that adds to the FEMA level also. Essentially, we have got a much higher, or at least normally we would expect a higher FUM, average FUM in second half compared to the first half, which generates more additional revenue. The last point is the expenses. Most of the expenses, a lot of expenses are staff cost, and staff cost gets reset on July 1, which means the first half, the expenses have already gone up, which is already baked in. As we saw, the revenue has not caught up as yet as it would in the second half. The cost is pretty much stable in second half. Revenue, hopefully, will grow. Traditionally, what we have seen is there is a little bit of seasonality between H1 and H2, where if the market is going in the right direction, there is a potential for H2 to be higher compared to first half. Steven, any other questions or comments? With that, Indy, maybe I'll ask one more question. You touched upon this before, Indy. Advisor numbers, last reporting period 80, this reporting period 78. As you mentioned, the team is working through quite a strong pipeline and trying to convert at least some of them in the next half. Where do you see, and I also recall you mentioned we do not want to be 1,000 financial advisors. Two questions. Why not 1,000? Second question is, if not 1,000, what are you targeting, Indy? Let me answer your second question first, one or a thousand. Just have a look at the history in Australia. All those big groups that have gone to 1,000 and 2,000 have come plummeting down. It's not easy to manage them. You can see one of the problems with the Royal Commission was people were not being properly monitored, not being coached, not being guided, and they were doing things they shouldn't have been doing with their clients. We feel that about 150 would be the tops. They could be managed. They can be controlled. We have, in fact, an advisor to support person ratio of something like 6.5. About 13 advisors. There are two of our management people in terms of quality assurance, compliance, practice management, business development, supporting them and helping them to do the right thing by their client. We are very, very strict on compliance and checking. There is a cost there, and I think if any other group had that ratio, they would never be able to make any money. I think that is about the limit. What was your other question? Why not 1,000? Yeah. What numbers are we targeting? Yeah. I think, as I said, I'd say if I get 150 and each one writing, right now we put a target or budget on them to write at least AUD 6 million of new business each year. We can get to 6 or 7 with 150. You're talking well over AUD 1 billion of new inflow every year, I think, which is probably the highest you'll get in any company in Australia. Thank you, Indy. I believe we have got a hands-up from Claude. Claude, if you've got a question, you can go. Oh, good. Yeah. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. All right. Great. Thanks. I had a question about Auxilium. Just as Indy was saying, it's an exciting possible business model because it would allow growth without you having to have thousands of advisors. What are the actual growth strategies for Auxilium? How are you planning to grow this and gain share? Yeah, Claude, let me clarify that first. When I spoke of 150 advisors, that's purely Fiducian-affiliated advisors. With Auxilium, we're competing with the likes of the HUB24s, Netwealth, Colonial First State, Macquarie, and whatever. We're actually drawing clients from there. These are advisors who are out in the open market. There's something like 16,000 of them. It's their choice. They can use the products they want. We are pretty strict there. We don't just allow anything. In fact, we review their Statements of Advice. We review their products. We help them set up their Statements of Advice in some cases. We help them with their compliance in some cases. They find great service from us. That is an area of growth, something like what HUB24 and Netwealth have done. We've got no limit on number of advisors there because they are responsible for their clients, not us. We're responsible for our product as either the responsible superannuation entity or the responsible entity. We just monitor the products. We look at that. If any advisor has an SMA which isn't performing too well, we get back to them and ask if they are concerned and that they're aware of this. Sometimes they take action. Sometimes they say, "No, we'd like to hold this." We've done our due diligence to get back to them and alert them to the fact that maybe they need to lift their game. They're not managing their money. Yeah, yeah. I understand that. I guess my question is, how many advisors of those independent financial advisors do you have on Auxilium at the moment? How do you expand that number? How do you actually go and market? What's your go-to market for this product? Because you've said how it's low cost and how it's got great tech. Also, that's at least part of the picture of gaining market share. What's the actual strategy then to actually get that rolling out and to try and gain market share with that? Yeah. We have a team now of four whose job it is to go and meet advisors, talk to them, bring them across, convert them. Remember that we're a little late into entering this market, so we have to give something extra. Our competitors are the ones you know, and we're actually winning business against them. These guys have to go back to talk to advisors, make phone calls. They get kicked out of the office. Their phones put down on them. They go back again. That is one way where they go and speak to them and explain the benefits of being with Fiducian. These advisors who are using some of the others start using us. That is the main way. The second is advertising. We are also advertising. We are advertising for advisors. We are advertising for acquisitions. We're advertising for not just advisors for Fiducian, but also for Auxilium as a separate product. People can see our website. That is about the way we're going about it. Sometimes the smaller groups want a little support for their training, for their compliance, and we're prepared to give it to them at times free using our own resources. There is a lot of work going on there, Claude, to try and build that up. I can say it's early days, but I can also add that it's quite encouraging the way when we speak to these people who have been using other platforms talk to us about the service they're getting from us. Thank you, Indy. Thank you, Claude, for that question. We have got one more question on financial advice pricing and how Fiducian is making advice more accessible to most people. Look, there is a lot of talk about pricing and accessible to the market in terms of affordable advice. I have been telling the media over and over again and the government that, look, the only affordable advice is that advice which can allow the financial advisor to stay in business. You can squeeze as much as you think, but you will get something that does not cover your requirements. Those who are willing to pay the price and those who know that there is a value proposition and a benefit to them from using that advice will come to us. The other side, when you talk about affordable advice and the mass market, we are now in the process of developing certain software that could use a bit of AI once it becomes readily available. Right now, it is interactive and stuff, and we do not want to give everything away. Where the software can be dealt with a person who may not have too much money, for example, I gave over a trucky who's driving to Brisbane. I don't think that person would be ready to come and sit in front of an advisor for an hour and a half and then come back for another meeting. They don't have time because when they come back, they're off to Melbourne or somewhere else. They have time to meet us in Coffs Harbour, and they sit on their phone when they have a coffee break or something for half an hour. That's when our advisor should get to them on their phone, ask them their questions, ask them their needs, ask them requirements. It goes into our systems, which are already developed in the software. It churns out some questions and some advice statements. We should get back to these people very quickly on the phone and be able to send a new statement or advice to them on their phone itself, which they can sign off on the phone. Also, that gives us permission to see the money they've got in other products that they're not so happy about. There is work going on that. Mass market is there. It's possible. With the mass market, and these are people with AUD 100,000 or AUD 120,000, our average is close to AUD 500,000, AUD 450,000 or something like that. These people also need advice. Generally, people with that kind of money, they do not have complex marital issues and problems and three wives and estate planning and kids demanding money and stuff like that. Basically, they need advice on their investment strategy. They need support for their planning. They need insurance because maybe the wife passes away. Who's going to look after the kids? Or the husband passes away. The wife needs money. There's a mortgage. Things like this can be dealt with quickly and can help them. With a plan and a strategy to go forward, that this portfolio serves them now, and the portfolio gets amended with time as they go further and gives them more diversification, initially more growth. Yeah, we're definitely looking at that to make it convenient, make it easier for actually the client to access this advice. Thanks. Thanks for that question. We are right on time. Indy, do you want to say any final words? Any final questions or? None that I can see. I just want to thank all of you for being at this presentation and genuinely thank all of you for your support. You've been fantastic shareholders. Our job is always to deliver for our shareholders. As I said, the dividends we've been paying for someone who would have come in at 2012, 2014, 2015, in two years, they would have got their money back with franking credits, and we invested. We look after you. We know that we're not going to spend money willy-nilly just like that if it does not create earnings for us. We are not going for the sake of buying assets for the sake of buying them to show, "Hey, we bought this billion dollars and a $2 billion there," and the share price starts to come off like it has done for some of our large competitors. You would know all their names. If we can have revenue going up, we want the profit to grow at a faster%, faster rate, which means that we're spending your money well. As far as we're concerned, we're working hard, expanding the business, expanding revenue sources. I can promise you one thing: we will continue to work hard for you because that's our motto. It's integrity, trust, and expertise. We want to keep our staff, keep them happy, and make sure that we generate earnings for you. Bear with us. We're working hard, and we'll continue to keep working hard for you. Thank you all. Thanks again for your time. Thank you very much, all of you. Thank you.