All right. I think we can get started slowly here. Welcome today to our Investor Day, to the Marley Spoon Investor Day. Thanks for dialing in here today. We want to spend today the time to explain our business model a little bit in more detail with you. I also have some of my colleagues with me here that will walk us through some of the individual areas of the presentation. I'll present them in a bit. We also want to share with you our vision that we have for the mid-term, what do we believe the business should be by the end of the decade, but also as a midpoint by 2025. Maybe let's start from the beginning. Marley Spoon, we started the company in 2014, we've been always kind of focused on improving the little everyday life that our customers have, the little problems that you face currently. You might think this is a small thing, why not solve the big problems in people's lives? We believe if you have a consistent, good impact on the everyday, it's actually quite impactful. Our vision for the company has been from the beginning, making a better everyday just for you, just right. Specifically, this means, as you know, our Marley Spoon and Dinnerly brands, but bringing delightful market fresh and easy cooking back to the people. Now connecting consumers directly with producers, making life effortless, making the cooking effortless, making weeknight dinner effortless. That's kind of what we're here to do. When we look forward into what's the ambition after seven years, we have some good perspective, now we look forward into the middle of the next decade or maybe by the end of 2030. We believe Marley Spoon will be a much bigger business, a very different business from what it is today. Our ambition is to be at EUR 5 billion in sales by the end of the decade, and multiple brands, global reach, and serving millions of subscribers. Really impacting millions of subscribers, helping them to have a better everyday. Today we'll talk about this, and we'll have various sections. I'll start with a high-level overview on what's our strategy. Rolf, who is the CEO for our business in Australia, will walk us into more detail through the direct-to-consumer subscription model. Julie, who's joining us today, who's running our U.S. business, will give us a deep dive on the U.S., given that U.S. is such a big part of our business and an important part of our growth strategy. We'll be excited to learn more from her about the business. Underpinning this, we wouldn't have been able to grow as dramatically as last year and also the years before, if it weren't for our scalable technology platforms. Jonas will walk us through them as they are also instrumental for this ambition that we have to grow the business quite substantially over the coming years. Then Jennifer will basically bring it all together because I think our financial model or the financial structure and mechanics of our business, they're quite attractive, and it'll be very interesting, I think, to share with you what's the outlook financially and as we grow the business, what will this all look like from a financial perspective? Then as always, at the end, we'll open up for questions and be very excited to hear and answer many of your questions. If you really want to take a step back, we do believe we solve some meaningful problems here. I think when you start a company and you want to ask yourself, what is it you want to do? Solving meaningful problems, I think is something that's where we wanted to start with. When it comes to everyday cooking, we believe that is a meaningful problem. We see on average, our customers tell us five nights a week. On average, we can serve three of those five nights for our customers. We do believe we have a meaningful impact on their weekly lives. That's one big problem where we can make life just a little bit better. We're not only elevating the experience for our customers, making their life a bit easier, we're also at the same time addressing a big problem. The problem that we address here is the global food waste crisis. I think everybody gets more and more aware about making sure we are able to live on this planet for a long time and building a sustainable society. When it comes to global warming emissions, I think it gets more and more clear that it's not just about transportation energy. The way how we produce food is also an important contributor. 25% of global CO2 emissions are generated by the agricultural and the food sector. The majority of fresh water, for example, is not consumed for washing cars or showering. It's actually going into the agricultural sectors. We've got this very big part of our society that uses and consumes a lot of resources, but then tons of those things that we produce, we're just throwing it away. 30%-40% of the entire U.S. food supply chain is wasted every year. You'll learn today that our unique manufacture-to-order or source-to-order supply chain is actually very different from a traditional retail supply chain. It is literally waste-free, waste of below 1%. We're not only impacting our customers' lives, and we have the ambition to serve millions of customers, but as we scale, we do believe we solve and address one of the big problems that we have, which is the global food waste crisis. Cooking with meal kit is just much more sustainable as it reduces a lot the waste that we otherwise find in a supply chain. Last but not least, the impact that cooking from scratch has on the health of your family is also something that is meaningful. If you knew what would be in processed food and a frozen pizza, you probably might not want to eat it anymore. Just the fact that you cook from scratch makes the nutrition for your family healthier. That's something we enable. We make it very easy and convenient to make weeknight cooking a reality for our customers, and therefore impacting also on making sure people are better feeding their families. We're in the food space. We think relevant problems. One of the exciting thing about the food space is just the size of it. It's a massive TAM, it's a massive market. It's globally a EUR 7 trillion industry. There's really very few things you spend more money on as a consumer than food. Maybe your mortgage or your rent comes first, but just afterwards, you already have groceries and food as one of the biggest expenditures you have. It's a massive market. It's also the last vertical that switches from offline to online. If you compare this to others, I don't know, fashion, if you compare this to electronics, to toys, some of these verticals have moved 30%-40% from offline to online. This channel switch has happened for those categories. That channel switch is yet to happen for the grocery space. It's just happening as we speak. As we have this massive TAM, the largest vertical consumer spending, it's just starting now to switch from offline to online. That drives a lot of the growth that we've experienced so far, but also will continue to drive the growth going forward. Just as a reality check, there's by some estimates, the global grocery market is at 0.1% of global grocery penetration. That translates to $8 billion in sales. The scale is quite mind-boggling, and it's always good to remember a little bit of, even though the percentages might seem low, the overall markets are quite large. That is one of the large growth drivers that we believe we are very well positioned to benefit from. Also we are actually already today operating across a large relevant region when it comes to online groceries. We're operating in the U.S., Europe, and Australia. As another reality check, at the end of the first quarter, we had around 250,000 active subscribers, but our network reach allows us to serve already today 190 million subscribers. Our penetration is around 0.1% when you think about it. The ability to have a large consumer household reach, positions us very well to benefit from the channel switch in the grocery space and the TAM. This was one reason why the business has grown so fast in the past. Marley Spoon has been growing on a 60% CAGR before COVID. This business has been a fast, high growth business. Of course, 2020 was a tremendous and exceptional year where we saw compressed growth into one year. What we had expected to happen over a longer period just happened suddenly within the relatively short period of one year. Beyond that, we see additional growth. We guided 30%-35% revenue growth for this year, and we do expect continued growth going forward as this channel switch is not going backwards, it's only going forward. We'll hear a little bit of interesting market research from Julie about that kind of covers that this is a one-way street as people switch from offline to online shopping. After the pandemic, many people miss going back to their friends and many people miss restaurants, but walking to the supermarket, not something people terribly miss. You'll see that this is an ongoing switch, and we therefore believe it'll continue to help us grow the business. Which kind of leads us to our growth ambition. Today, the business is a quarter million euro in sales. By 2025, Marley Spoon, our ambition, should be a EUR 1 billion business, and by the end of the decade, we want to be a EUR 5 billion business. A business at attractive and massive scale. There's going to be four growth drivers that help us to get there. The biggest one I already touched on is just this fact that this is a massive TAM that's just starting to switch from offline to online. That will drive a big amount of that growth. It's not just only about acquiring more and more subscribers and improve their lives on a recurring basis. It's also as we acquire those subscribers by offering better services, by innovating around the services. We've proven in the past, and you'll see later today, that we also can offer them more. We can increase the basket sizes, which is another growth driver that is helping us to grow the business over the next years. What we've also seen is that now that we start to engage with our customers and create these individual customer relationships, we are in a position to actually serve even more problems that those customers have. To give you one example, today, we make it very easy for people to cook for their family. What's on for dinner is something we can help with. What if you don't want to cook? What if there's the situation where you don't have time to cook, or maybe you want to have a lunch option where you're too busy to cook? We already today in Australia offer a ready-to-heat option where we solve an adjacent problem for you. There is the opportunity to grow into adjacent categories as we build these large subscriber pools and customers that we start to engage individually and that we start to understand better. We can actually solve more problems for them, and we can grow therefore into the space via adjacent categories. The geographic reach is something that will provide us another avenue for growth. Today, we have the ability to serve 190 million households, and you could say that's already a pretty large geography that we can serve. We could serve more. There's more regions that we could enter over the next years, which would help us also to continue to grow the business. What you can see is there's kind of four big growth drivers that will help us, we believe, to fulfill our ambition for 2030. Very important, we always have been guided by the unit economics, by making sure every dollar we invest is an attractive investment with good return on the capital deployed. Rolf will walk you through some of the more granular disclosures that we've made in this deck to show you how attractive this business is, to show you how fast the paybacks are. That's been in our DNA since the very beginning. We are very much focused to understand every dollar we invest, regardless into which brand, regardless into which region, to make sure that we have attractive return profiles. That financial discipline will continue to guide us going forward. It's kind of within our DNA to ensure that it just makes sense to invest this capital into this opportunity. That's how we approach growth. As we execute our growth strategy, over the next years, touching on these four growth drivers, you can be assured that we'll be very disciplined and diligent to make sure that we can invest capital at very attractive unit economics and generate high IRRs for all the capital we invest into the growth. The ambition is to build a meaningful company that touches billions of customers. It's not just about scale, it's also about doing the right thing. Our ambition is also to build a sustainable business for the long-term view. This has been guiding us since the very beginning when we started the company. Of course, it also helps to have a business model that's inherently sustainable. If you benchmark Marley Spoon with a supermarket, and benchmark cooking with a supermarket, there was a study of the University of Michigan that concluded that cooking with a meal kit has a 30% lower CO2 footprint than cooking with a supermarket, just because of the reduced amount of waste that our unique manufacturing source to order supply chain provides. That in itself makes the business already inherently sustainable. You could argue sustainability and profits are kind of aligned because the less waste, the higher the margin, but also the better for a more sustainable environment. The very few items that we are not able to ship, which is when you test, for example, ingredients for quality, you can't send them to your customer anymore, but they're still good, we either donate them, or actually we compost them. We make sure that there is a more or less waste-free supply chain that's serving our customers. It goes beyond that. It goes also that understanding our overall carbon footprint, our overall impact on the environment, trying to reduce, reducing not just the waste of the food, but also reducing energy usage and making sure instead of using conventional energy, we're using sustainable energy and trying to reduce as much as we can. What we cannot reduce, we are offsetting already. Marley Spoon has been operating as a carbon neutral business since 2020. Now we started our carbon emission footprint analysis in 2019, and so we have been consistently since 2020 operating as a carbon neutral company. We'll continue to do that also going forward. That's a commitment that we are giving. It's just one example of how we intend to build the business, not just at scale, but that's also environmentally sustainable. Next to the planet, it is important to also build a business that is doing the right thing by the societies we live in. Again, there's many aspects. One aspect we wanted to point out here today, building a gender-balanced company, making sure there's gender balance throughout the organization has been a priority since the very start, and that led to a company that's not just overall roughly gender balanced, but more importantly, when it comes to leadership, there is a majority in our executive team and the supervisory board that is actually driven by female leadership talent. That's just one example of how we are intending purposefully to build the business, not just at scale, but also a business that's doing the right thing. So far so good from an overall perspective. I'm excited to hand over to Rolf, who will actually dive into more detail into the unique supply chain and subscription model that we've built here. Rolf, very excited to have you here with us. Yeah. Thank you. First time, I didn't forget to unmute myself. Cool. In the next few slides, I'll dig deeper into what we understand are the key advantages of the direct-to-consumer subscription model and how it's better serving other business models out there. I'll explain a bit more of how the demand-driven manufacture-to-order model leads to superior operating margins. Lastly, I'll speak a little bit to the customer acquisition excellence and discipline, how that has and will continue to deliver super low customer acquisition costs. These are ultimately underpinning our very attractive unit economics. There are a few monumental shifts in consumer behaviors exemplified in a bunch of trends. These are leading to significantly increasing demands and expectations of consumers towards the brands that serve them, to fulfill their individual needs. Even before COVID, these trends were well underway, and their adoption has since accelerated. We don't see that slowing down anytime soon in a post-pandemic world as we're luckily seeing now with the vaccines rolling out and other than in India, of course. What do we mean with those headlines? Sorry, if you could go back. With conscious consumption, we mean that more and more consumers are focusing on living a more sustainable life and becoming more mindful about the impact that they are having on the environment, as well as on the society. In addition, there's a significant shift in consumers to live a healthier and better life rather than curing any illnesses that happen. They want to prevent those illnesses much, much earlier and therefore spend significantly more focus on understanding what they're eating, spending money and time on mental and personal fitness and so forth. They're looking for brands that help them do that so much better. They're also spending more and more efforts and money and looking for brands that help them living their busy lives much easier, and therefore looking to higher levels of convenience on one hand, but also spending more and more time on experiences and effort, rather than on individual products. They expect customers to do this for them and deliver those solutions in a highly personalized, highly tailored way. As rapid digitization shifts the daily activities more and more online or on mobile platforms, the data that gets generated, customers expect that that data on their personal behaviors gets put to good use, and therefore the solutions get tailored to the very individual needs. Before we look at how our direct -to -consumer model is perfectly suited to serve these trends and demands, let's just recap what we do in very simple terms. At the end of the day, as Fabian already pointed out, we're looking to make lives easier, and we do that by making cooking very, very easy. In the beginning, based on a lot of customer data, our chefs across our many brands in the U.S. and Australia and in Europe, design and develop great recipes. There's more than 60 recipes being developed every week. Customers can then easily choose either preselected recipes that we put already into their order, or they can swap out other things depending on how their life changed, and within minutes have their weekly cooking for the next week or the next four weeks planned. Really, frictionless and really time efficient in making these choices. Based on these early choices and the subscription model of our business, we can then source the ingredients with very low waste levels, pick and pack them in our facilities, and then ship them to a customer's door where they're really easy, within 30 minutes, our customers can put delicious meals, nutritious meals on the family table. Overall, there's obviously already a range of advantages that play into those consumer trends that are highlighted before. Our AI models already drive the pre-selection of the order based on individual customer behavior. As we are developing more and more our tools that Jonas will go into, will get better in really serving up a highly individualized menu to each individual customers. Rather than displaying the large meal variety to everyone, we will present a selected variety to each of our customers. Of course, there's a high level of convenience, and we're supporting kind of a frictionless cooking. You only have to make the choices and everything else, everything around the chores of cooking, choosing what you eat, going shopping, Doing the shopping and everything else is taken care of, and you only have to do the cooking for yourself. By that, we're helping families to achieve great family experiences in their home. That leads to a sense of accomplishment as well as food education, learning new techniques, having more variety on the table, and overall, the experience around food is elevated. Now also, our consumers and our customers expect that we help them making healthy choices and help them to kind of be a conscious, mindful consumer. Fabian already explained how we do this by our food waste reduction, our own carbon footprint reduction, but also helping our customers through reduction of the waste in their fridges to do their own bit, as well as we're going forward, provide them with more and more information how they can reduce their carbon footprint by themselves, and therefore lead a more sustainable life, on top of partnering with a company like us that puts sustainability high on the agenda. Moving forward, we believe that our direct -to -consumer model is significantly more customer friendly than most other solutions that are out there serving those weeknight eating needs. Of course, you can and you will, and we all do, every here and then have a meal delivered to your door when you're tired or you don't have the time to cook it for yourself. This is not a solution that you want to do kind of several times a week. While it is convenient and there is some variety and choice. It is not necessarily healthy or affordable, and you don't learn much, to be honest. The other traditional models, be it grocery delivery or traditional grocery shopping in supermarkets, of course, have high convenience factors, a lot of variety, and they're reasonably affordable depending on where you go. However, they don't serve all the other needs that meal kits are conveniently serving. Therefore, we believe that there is no real competition out there to a meal kit. There is other players that serve other certain needs around food delivery and weeknight cooking, but there is not really a competition for meal kits out there in the market. Let's move forward and have a deeper look into our supply chain, there's two key messages that I want to make. On one hand, our direct-to-consumer model enables us to personalize the experience based on each individual customer preferences. On the other hand, the data that our customers generate by their behaviors feeds back into our marketing efforts, be it in customer acquisition, be it in CRM, retention or reactivation models. The feedback feeds into the way we develop the recipes for our customers. All that insight that our customers generate by choosing certain meals, but also deselecting certain other meals, feeds back into our customer development processes, therefore, we can develop those highly centric meals to put in front of them. We do that with a very simple on one hand, but also very efficient supply chain, where we do in-house most of the things that are reasonably costly to operate in any other way. The feedback loops from our customers drive that we have a source to order manufacturing process, which, as Fabian already mentioned, reduces all the waste that normally is inherent with grocery supply chain, for example, where you never really know what customers are consuming in which store at what time. On the other hand, we have standardized processes around the globe, and therefore significantly driving these efficiencies in picking and packing our orders that then get serviced and delivered to our customers with our network partners to take those boxes to the doors of our customers. While this operating model is very efficient, it's also very lean when you compare it to other players or traditional retail operating models in the market. You can see with CPG or other grocery supply chains, they're reasonably convoluted. There's many ways to reach a customer, going through warehouses, wholesalers, distribution centers, retail shops, and so forth. They're designed to deliver high volumes of individual products to their customers. They're not necessarily designed to value add services. They're not necessarily designed to meet experience requirements of our customers. They're just basically pushing products that got produced somewhere, straight down the line through various channels to the customer. When you compare that to the Marley Spoon operating model, it's kind of a push-pull model. It's very, very quick from the manufacturers, the farms, to one of our seven distribution centers around the world. In those distribution centers, we actually manage the complexity of putting these orders together quite easily, then at very high frequency, bring these orders to our customers in this demand-driven way that we talked about in the past. There's other drivers that are superior compared to other models. We have this huge selection of meals, 60 and growing, in any given week for our customers, more than you'd ever need. We get this combined out of a very low SKU count in any given week, and that helps to keep complexity down as well as save a huge amount of waste. We only have those seven fulfillment centers around the globe, but with these seven fulfillment centers, we already reached those 190 million consumers. Therefore, we believe we have a very asset light on global scale operating model to achieve very high revenue. The relationships that we are establishing with our customers give us rich data, and these relationships are based on the service that we put around the products that we're selling. We don't sell individual ingredients. We sell a meal solution to our customers, and this is what our customers are valuing, and therefore they keep reordering in a high frequency. In addition to that kind of lean setup of our chain compared to other operating models, traditional retail models, our supply chain is also very highly integrated. Therefore, we're able to prevent significant margin leakage, which leads to superior long-term operation EBITDA margins. What are the differences? In normal grocery or CPG channels, there is a producer, there is brand margin, there's wholesale margin, there's retail margins that need to be paid along the way to the various players as I highlighted before. This then ends up in roughly a 5%-8% operating EBITDA margin potential in those supply chains. When you contrast that to Marley Spoon and our highly vertically integrated supply chain, where we do a significant chunk of the manufacturing in-house ourselves, we have a high and increasing number of home brands. We also have a lean infrastructure and waste reduction. All these things lead to a long-term at-scale operating margin of +15%. In Australia already, and we're still a small business, in 2020 have already achieved 11% operating EBITDA margin. We're moving with our business model here as it scales towards these 15%+, and we're quite confident that we can reach that in a reasonable amount of time. We talked about the advantages of the supply chain operating efficiently, reducing waste, driving those EBITDA margins. On the other hand, we want to talk about revenue and revenue retention. Revenue retention is a key topic that's been brought up by many analysts that I speak with Fabian or Jennifer speaks with all the time. We get generally asked kind of, how long does a customer stay with you? The answer is, well, we don't have one customer. We have many different customers and many different customer behaviors. We, of course, have some that only trial us out, and then they learn in the first few weeks of ordering those discounted boxes that Marley Spoon isn't actually for them just yet. They may not lead a predictable life, or they learn that they're actually not that great a cook and rather eat ready-made meals. There is intermittent cooks that buy our services on Dinnerly or Marley Spoon regularly, but more maybe in seasonal behaviors for those special meals, but they do this several times a year. We have regular chefs that potentially buy Marley Spoon maybe one or two times a month, but they continue to do so in regular intervals. Of course, we have our long-term loyal chefs that cook with Marley Spoon or Dinnerly three to four times a month, and they continue to do so for many, many years. The key point to make here, regardless of in which bucket our customers fall into, more than 90% of our revenue already is generated by recurring orders. More than 60% of the revenue is coming from customers that are with us for more than six orders. This is over time building a very strong recurring back book of business, where only 10% at this point is coming from new orders and over 90% is coming from those recurring orders. We expect this to continue as, if we go to the next page, as we are building our customers over a long period of time. This strong recurring back book of business is visible also here in those retention curves. On one hand, you see in the beginning that there is a drop off of customer revenue in the first few quarters as they stay with us. More importantly, over time, we also see that those retention curves stabilize and the revenue retention kind of stabilizes around the 20% mark. You see here the curves for around 2018 - 2021, and it's pretty clear that on one hand, they're stabilizing. On the other hand, they're really, really flat and seem to continue for the long term. That's one point to make. The other one is that over a period of time, as we get better in predicting demand and learning about our customer's behavior, as we're adding more and more meal services and choice, and other opportunities to serve our customers, we also see those retention curve improving over time and getting better and better. When you look at those retention curves, you look at our very efficient operating and supply chain models, then we can also look, okay, what do we do now with regards to those customers that we are acquiring? How are we going about acquiring our customers, and what does it cost us to acquire these as we go forward? There's a clear trend. There's a bunch of clear trends here on this slide. On one hand, as you can see from Q1 2019 to Q1 2021, there's a significant downward trend of customer acquisition costs. Starting off at around EUR 72 in Q1 2019, and currently in Q1 2021, we're at EUR 49. There's a significant downward trend of these CACs, and that downward trend was already happening pre-COVID. We of course, see there is a COVID impact over the quarters in Q2 to Q4 in 2020, but the overall long-term trend is there. On the other side, we see a significant increase in the amount of customers that we actually have acquired over the same period. We're seeing decreasing trends in customer acquisition costs while we're increasing the actual volume of customers that we are acquiring. On the other side, we see that the time that it takes to have the customers paying back the amount of acquisition costs that we are spending has also been decreasing over time, also significantly already pre-COVID, to at the current level of just 10 weeks and slightly increasing in Q1 as we're slightly moving out of those pandemic-driven lower customer acquisition costs. Again, we see that the trend of lowering those payback weeks has been on the downward trend, even pre-COVID, and we expect this to continue going forward. Overall, we've been talking that we are managing our payback framework up to a maximum of six months. Our direct-to-consumer model has significant advantages. I talked about the high margins, I talked about long-term retention, I talked about how we actively managed and lowered our acquisition costs. You can see that they have yielded very attractive unit economics over the past year. Here we're showing a blended rate between 2019 and 2020 of the payback periods of the marketing spends, as well as the return on those marketing spend of 3x over a period of 36 months. Of course, you can expect that that return is increasing as customers stay longer than 36 months over time. This leads to a very high internal IRR of over 40%, and it's very attractive allocation of spend as we're moving forward. In summary, we can obviously, hopefully agree that our direct-to-consumer subscription model has many advantages and is highly attractive compared to other e-commerce or CPG models and grocery businesses. The order frequency is very high. Demand is highly predictable and therefore helps us to drive a very efficient business and very efficient operations. The revenue retention is also very high over the long term. We already operate with very high operating contribution margins in the mid-40s, and we've been doing so several times already with Marley Spoon in Australia. Therefore, we have these very short payback periods and very high customer return on investments. That then leads me to hand over to Julie, who will tell us a little bit more of how we are deploying this business model in our largest markets and the best growth opportunity we have, as she will explain a little bit more about the U.S. markets. Great. Thank you so much, Rolf. Good morning, good afternoon to everybody. Yes, I'll take you through the U.S. business, which has been a very exciting journey over the last year. Really what I hope you take away from this is three things. One, the U.S. really is our largest market and represents our largest growth opportunity. We have a differentiated brand portfolio, and I think we're uniquely positioned to win, and I'll walk you through why that's the case. That our fulfillment network is designed to scale. We've really invested in that and have a huge opportunity to capitalize on the growth that we see in the U.S. market. Let's go to the next slide. Fabian talked up front about the overall global market opportunity, but I really wanted to put that into a U.S. context. If you look on the right side of this chart, the total U.S. grocery business is huge. It's a $1 trillion. It's absolutely massive. Of that, online grocery is still pretty small at about $100 billion, so only about 10%. I'll talk about the growth trends there in a minute. If you look at overall U.S. meal kit market, just in general, not just Marley Spoon, it's coming in around $4 billion, so less than 1% of that. This addressable market is absolutely huge. Even if you just double or triple the meal kit penetration, it's still only a fraction of what the overall market size is. Looking at this, one thing we know for sure is that COVID has had a meaningful and permanent impact on the market, and the way consumers acquire food has really changed forever. What these two charts show you on the left side, we see kind of the overall size and growth trajectory of the U.S. grocery market in the bar charts. The two line charts show in red what the growth was predicted to be prior to COVID, and in the line above, the green line, what it is now that we've experienced COVID. What you see is a very sharp hockey stick impact with COVID in 2020. It's interesting, is prior to COVID, Fabian talked about this, the penetration of online grocery shopping was pretty small in the U.S. at about 3%, despite the fact that overall online e-commerce is quite large and highly penetrated in this market. It really was a meaningful difference. If you look to the right, what you see is our growth, the quarter-over-quarter growth since 2018, and you see exactly the same hockey stick impact with COVID and the continued trajectory of growth beyond that. As they say, necessity is the mother of invention, and when COVID emptied the shelves in the U.S. in the early days of COVID and customers were sheltering at home, it really got rid of that lingering reticence of shopping for fresh groceries online. I think once customers got there, they realized the convenience of this, and there really is no going back. Encouragingly, meal kits are expected to grow. There's lots of estimates out there as to how much they're going to grow. I picked this one. It's the most conservative view, and it shows us doubling in about seven years. This is total meal kit estimated market size over the next seven years. Even if that's true, it still demonstrates a really strong growth trajectory for the overall market size. There's also some very favorable dynamics as well that support these growth assumptions. One, if our business follows online grocery, as we demonstrated earlier, we're seeing that grocery shoppers are not looking to return to the brick-and-mortar stores post-COVID. We have some data that shows that. The second really encouraging thing is that this business appeals disproportionately to Millennials. Rolf talked a lot about the trends that we see overall that speak to our business. For Millennials, that healthier trend, that desire for experiential, the need to save time, and this at-home experience are really amplified. Our own internal research shows us that. Externally, we know that about 29% of Millennials have tried a meal kit. Interestingly, that's 2.5x more than Baby Boomers. This really is something that appeals to that very high and fast-growing segment of the marketplace. The other important trend I'll point out is that 25% of Americans who've never used a meal kit are interested in trying one. This is really since COVID. They've become more aware of this and more interested in trying it overall. I think it's also interesting to pause on why consumers are using meal kits. This data from Mintel tells an interesting story and underpins the value proposition of meal kits. What it tells us is that consumers are looking for a more elevated experience versus the utilitarian acquisition of food that you get by online grocery shopping or takeout food delivery. They're really pointing out to a couple of trends here. 48% of customers use a meal kit to try new recipes, 40% to try new cuisines, 29% to improve their cooking skills, and 19% see it as a shared activity with family and friends. This really is talking about this bigger experience that they're looking for. Now, don't get me wrong, that 48% to save time, that's still real and important. Convenience is a huge part of this market opportunity. I'll talk to how we're adjusting both types of customers as we go forward. Our brands are complementary, and they're allowing us to capitalize on the key drivers of meal-kit adoption. Importantly, what we're starting to do is push away from just focusing on category benefits and into differentiated value propositions in our brand offerings and in our customer communication. As the category is relatively new, we have seen most brands in the marketplace have focused on communicating what we call the category benefits. Easy and convenient and quality ingredients. These are really table stakes. These are basic assumptions that customers have for the brands in the meal kit marketplace. I think there's an opportunity for us to push beyond that and really leveraging that insight and knowledge that we have and the market research that we've done. We know that there are a couple of areas we could go. For our Martha Stewart and Marley Spoon brands, that customer is really looking for a more sophisticated experience. They're kind of the foodies. They're looking for experience, and the key things that appeal to them is recipes that taste great and exciting choices. What we have is a partnership with Martha Stewart that really gives us a unique point of difference in the marketplace. Martha has huge awareness in the U.S. market, over 70% in general, over 80% among women, and she has very strong image association for being a cooking expert, for being friendly, entertaining and talented. That really lends itself well to differentiating our brand versus what else is out there. From a Dinnerly standpoint, this is a very different consumer. This is that pragmatic consumer. She's looking for an easy solution to just get a decent meal on the table every night. We offer her this easy and affordable brand with a taste that she's going to love. It's underpinned by simple recipes, maximum of five steps, six ingredients, very family-friendly, tastes they recognize. They're not looking to explore. This is really about getting a good meal that everybody's going to eat on the table, and one that's affordable. If we look at the overall marketplace in this chart and this mapping that I have on the right-hand side of the slide, we've really segmented the market into that low fuss, pragmatic customer versus the elevated cooking experience, and then affordable versus premium. What you can see is our brands really cover that marketplace. Martha Stewart and Marley Spoon kind of in that top quadrant, and Dinnerly in the bottom left-hand quadrant. This really plays out when you look at our customer base in the U.S. They represent an attractive and large revenue pool. In a nutshell, if you look at all this demographic data, our customers are female. They cover a broad range of ages, and they're generally two adult plus households. I think this is really important when you look at where the U.S. population is sitting right now that I already talked about Millennial population is the largest segment of the market now representing a full 22% of U.S. population and eclipsing now the Baby Boomers who are still important and meaningful at 70 million. That squeeze generation in the middle at 65 million for the Gen Xers. If you drill down a little bit deeper, you can see that our brand positioning covers different segments of the customer base on two levels. First, on the age demo with our Martha & Marley Spoon brand, we really cover a broad range of age groups. We're pretty well entrenched with Millennials at about 47% of our customer base, but really doing strongly with Gen X and Baby Boomers. We think that's the impact of Martha Stewart, who's well known across those age demos. We also cover that higher price point, as I talked about on the mapping, and our average price per serving on Martha Stewart and Marley Spoon is around EUR 9. On the other side, we have Dinnerly. A strong appeal among Millennials and a little bit less so among Gen X and Baby Boomers. Really with that EUR 5 price point makes it highly affordable. It's about half the price of most other meal kits on the marketplace, so it really does offer that attractive price point, decent low-fuss meals that appeals to those Millennial customers. We know this is working because when you look at our brand growth over the last year or year-over-year net revenue growth, it's pretty equal between Martha Stewart and Marley Spoon and Dinnerly at about 132% for Martha, 135% for Dinnerly. As we look at our growth strategies over the next couple of years, our primary focus is to continue to drive growth by driving further penetration. I think this slide says it all. If you look at total U.S. households, what that opportunity is, about 128 million households in the U.S. If we narrow that down and really look at what we would consider the addressable part of that market, those households with greater than a 75% annual income, not, $75,000 annual income is just a little bit above the U.S. median income, which is coming in around $68,000. That gets you to 60 million households. Today, if you look at our Q1 active subscribers, we have about 120,000. That gives us household penetration of less than 1%. Huge opportunity to really grow from there. How are we going to do that? We're acquiring customers through a diversified channel mix, and we have a very diversified channel mix that allows us to target customers at all points along the customer journey and through that customer funnel. You're going to hear more about our central governments and flywheel, but as our business grows, we invest more and more in upper funnel activities that allow us to broaden reach. You can see that play out here when you look at the channels that we've invested in. I've shared fiscal year 2020 and then what Q1 has looked like for us. We're still strongly entrenched with the key digital players like Facebook and Google. It really plays across the funnel from awareness, consideration, and conversion. We're moving more and more of our spending into other players as well as direct mail, which has proved to be extremely valuable for us. As we learn more and more about our customers, we're able to make these higher funnel or upper funnel channels more efficient for us because we're just able to pinpoint those customers much better. TV, we've moved a little bit in there, as well as audio and some other. That really is on the acquisition side. That's coupled with investment in CRM, particularly in reactivation. We have those lapsed users, those trialists, and intermittent customers that Rolf talked about. We're able to go back. We know who they are and reactivate them at lower cost. We invest in partnerships with other brands out there where we know who our audience is, and we find brands that have a similar audience, and we're able to offer partnership deals with them to reach their audiences in a meaningful way. We have a really strong referral program. We all know that word of mouth is the strongest marketing tool, and so we give our customers the opportunity to give a free box, to gift a free box to their friends and family to get them into the Marley Spoon or Dinnerly family. Of course, we leverage social media, both paid and organic, to drive community and drive engagement with our customer base. Our second key growth driver is to grow the basket size or the customer basket size. We want to capture a larger share of their wallet by increasing the problems that we solve and inspiring them to cook more. Our innovation strategy is really focused around three key pillars. The first is to increase personalization. We do this through menu expansion and new dietary offerings. Rolf talked about our AI that allows us to increasingly customize what we serve up as recommended meals to our customers. We know what they like, we know what they have rated well, and we are able to use that to offer them each week things that we think they're going to like even more. As well as continuing to expand our recipe count. We're now at 29 recipes on Martha and 19 recipes on Dinnerly and expand into new dietary offerings. We've added over the years vegetarian, vegan, keto, low calorie. Secondly, we're introducing new meal occasions. Meal occasions like breakfast, lunch, and desserts. These are highly incremental to us. They don't cannibalize the core business of dinner, and the trends are favorable, particularly as it relates to breakfast and lunch. These have been largely meals that have been eaten out of the home, especially among our high working customer base. Now with new work-from-home and hybrid models going forward, we see lunch as a hugely untapped area, and we know from our own internal research that this is highly desirable new extension for our two brands. Highly incremental from that standpoint. As well as our third strategy, which is to offer convenience. We know one of the barriers or one of our key challenges is people want to get meals on the table quickly. We've been increasingly offering quick cooking meals. We're about to offer ready-to-heat in the U.S. We've had a very successful launch of this in Australia, we're following suit in the U.S. with ready-to-heat meals that will be part of our offering in the coming weeks. As well as convenience items or add-on items. What I would tell you about these is a range of things that we can do here. One kind of interesting example is during the early days of COVID, U.S. grocery shelves were really depleted, particularly among meats and proteins. There were some major challenges in the retail supply chain that really made it difficult. We were able to quickly capitalize on that. We put together what we call our protein packs of different assortment of meats and sold those incrementally and had quite a high add-on or adoption rate of those. All of this from a customer impact, it reduces the skip so our customers have the opportunity to skip a week. We see when we offer a menu expansion and new meal opportunities, there's less likelihood of skipping. There's much more likelihood of retaining them longer to improve those cohort curves. We broaden our appeal to new segments. We bring in those vegetarians who now have a full six meals a week of vegetarian, so a real full complement of meals to offer them, as well as this incremental purchase opportunity. It really drives the basket size. How do I know this has been working? Well, if you look at year-over-year in the second half of 2020, our year-over-year average revenue per user increased 23%. This is something we will continue into the future. Just as we expand choice, just to bring it home a little bit, this is global data, but what we've really seen, this has been our strategy for some time, is really to grow that basket size with customers. Our revenue growth is outpacing our subscriber growth, which is testament to the fact that we're seeing increase in net revenue per subscriber. It really follows what has been one of our core strategies from early on, which is to increase that menu count week-over-week. Again, this is global data, but you can see over the years we've continued to increase that menu count. Whether it's in broadening into vegetarian meals or keto meals, et cetera, or whether it's adding lunches and breakfast, we continue to increase the count, and we see that revenue per subscriber increase accordingly. Oh, go back. One more. There we are. All right. With all this growth that we're well-positioned for, how are we going to fulfill that? I would say that the huge market and growth strategies are in play. We are really set up to meet this demand. If you look at our overall national network of fulfillment centers in the U.S., we can service 96% of U.S. households today. We have three fulfillment centers scattered across the country, as you can see from this map, in New Jersey, in Newark, New Jersey, just outside New York City, Texas, just south of Dallas, and then in California, in Tracy, California, which is just outside of San Francisco. The colored dots really show the concentration of our business and how well we're set up to serve. We have a strong concentration on the coast and in major urban centers and really, a little bit less in those less densely populated middle states, if you will. Texas represents about 50% of our customer base we serve out of there, and then California and New Jersey are 25% each. We're really well set up to do this. We have line of sight of where we would put new facilities as we continue to grow, and that's work underway as we speak. From a logistics standpoint, we have a really diversified logistics ecosystem. This is something we outsource, and we really tap into the established network of our partners, our third-party partners. The yellow dots show the sort centers. We have three shipping points. That's our three facilities. We have two freight partners, so we line haul out of Texas. We do about 50 trucks a week. We inject into about 21 sort centers across the U.S., and we have 10+ last mile carriers, and I say plus because we're continuing to add more. Really what this leaves us with is this very diversified carrier base, which I think de-risks the model for us. It allows us to look regionally at who are the biggest and/or who are the best players and really get very specific into those regions. It allows us to build in some redundancy so we have some flexibility to move around if we need to. We will partner with these 10 last mile carriers, but they might have overlap in terms of the regions that they serve. If need be, we can shift between those partners, and we do that quite frequently to make sure we optimize the customer experience. I think Fabian is happy on the trigger there. All right. With that, our current setup, but we're continuing to invest for growth. We have two major capital investments that were planned for 2020 that will allow us to meet these growth expectations for the foreseeable future. The first is that we're investing in what we're calling Manufacturing 2.0. These are new production lines that we're putting into all three of our U.S. fulfillment centers. These are automated production lines, which is a major upgrade versus where we are today. These are phasing in as we speak. The equipment's all just landed in our New Jersey facility, and they'll phase in over the May to August timeframe this year. As I said, automated conveyors. It will give us 3x more picking station ingredient slots versus our current setup. Why that's really important to us is that allows us to offer more recipes every week so we can get even more customized, in our approach. We'll have multiple automated quality checkpoints, and again, this allows us to improve the quality, improve the overall customer experience. We'll be able to hone in on where the problems are if we've got mispicks or missing ingredients and really correct those in real time. Underpinned by this real-time reporting on both performance from a throughput and productivity standpoint, as well as quality metrics. The overall benefit of this is we'll see improved throughput and improved productivity overall, which we'll have as well as improved quality. Better customer experience at a cheaper cost, I think is a nice model to move forward with. Our second major capital investment this year is our new California fulfillment center. As the business has grown, we really outgrown that current facility. We're in the process of building out a new facility in Tracy, California. We'll stay local. Our California facility has some of our strongest productivity globally, we want to maintain that base of employees who help deliver that every week for us. Our current timeline is to have this completed by August this year. We're going from 51,000 sq ft in the current facility to 124,000 sq ft. 58,000 sq ft of that is our cool room. What we're adding uniquely and differently from our current facility is about a 17,000 sq ft freezer. This is going to give us the ability to do in-house ice production. The U.S. is a high consumer of ice. It gets really hot here in the summer, and we don't have a cold chain distribution network. Ice is really important, and if we can do it in-house, it's about 1/3 the cost of what it is to do it externally. A really important cost savings opportunity for us. 21 dock doors will really significantly improve our efficiency of inbound and outbound. Most importantly, we'll achieve about a 3x increase in weekly box production capacity once we've completed this. Finally, just to sum it up, we've had a very successful business for several years. If you look at our two-year CAGR prior to COVID, we're about 67%. We were growing significantly prior to COVID. We did get that nice hockey stick effect, and you can see 137% year-over-year growth with the COVID. We continue to see our growth strategies and our investments in our fulfillment capability are ready to take on even more growth. With that, I think I'm turning this over to Jonas to talk about our scalable technology platform. Thanks, Julie. Nice to be here. We've now heard and covered the nature of the subscription model. Julie has exemplified how we operationalize that in the U.S., what I want to cover now and show you is how our business is deeply rooted in technology. The three core takeaways of the following slides will be how our platform drives customer engagement and order fulfillment through the use of technology, how data is the underlying enabler of everything we do at Marley Spoon, how we as a business have been and will continue to be committed to investing into technology. If we start with a bird's-eye view, our platform has really been designed with our core value chain in mind. From customer acquisition to the arrival of the box with a happy customer, all core process steps are supported and in fact driven by technology. These modules are organized around the customer and her order, where everything is ultimately about generating demand in the customer engagement module, and then around the supply chain processes where the demand is fulfilled on a continuous basis. The underlying enabler here is the data intelligence module, which is indeed continuously fed by, but equally continuously feeds back into the customer engagement fulfillment module. It basically sources data from the above two modules, then provides aggregations, which give intelligence to the business for analysis and better decision-making, and then equally returns predictions that help us optimize processes within the above two modules. If we want to go a little bit deeper into the individual components. We've basically, in the customer engagement module, we've developed technology solutions that help us quite literally take the customer by her hand and guide her from first becoming aware of Marley Spoon, but then to landing in our engagement and retention loop. This module basically underpins the life cycle of our customer. This life cycle, we broadly split into three parts. On the left, you see the customer acquisition component. We've talked about this a little bit already in the previous section, and here it's really about effectively finding new customers. Not just finding new customers, but finding customers that are likely to stick. We don't just want to acquire to an attractive CAC, but we want to ensure a high probability of this customer being sticky. When you think about the sort of latency, you acquire a customer, only a week to a week after they get their first delivery, and then it takes you a couple of weeks to see the quality. It's quite essential that we collect early signals to predict the likelihood of stickiness. We don't deploy capital into channels and domains, where we don't see the paybacks that we want to achieve. The technology we use here basically helps us manage a vast amount of channels. Julie alluded to some of them, and also allow us to handle a lot of data points from the first touch point of the customer to the acquisition event, labeled here by conversion. Once the customer is converted, the job slightly changes, and it turns to onboarding and engaging her, to help build the habit of cooking with a meal kit. It's the demand creation space, so there's some onboarding to do. What's very essential here, technically speaking, is multi-channel orchestration technology. We can ensure consistency of the message to the customer. Basically, we don't want to end up in a space where we say A, through our email communication, for example, and then B, in our communication inside the box. Consistency is key here to properly onboard, engage, and delight. The third building block on the right ensures retention and reactivation of the customer. We basically run models that provide churn prediction signals. We get into a space where we can start giving the customer a friendly nudge, when she starts lagging, which is quite a cost-efficient way to get them back into displaying the habit. Equally, we can very effectively win the customer back in case of a cancellation event. I think in our space, which is a subscription space, now often we talk about cancellations, but in reality, it provides us a very strong signal to know when to reengage a customer, whereas in any marketplace or e-com environment, these events are not present. In that space, from an operational standpoint, also technically speaking, we are equally eager to deploy capital very effectively, and deploy similar mechanisms of CAC to LTV governance in the reactivation space as we would in the acquisition domain. When we consider the customer journey and the ultimate goal of generating demand, it is quite essential that we find technology solutions that help us scale our core competencies and increase efficiencies. You see some of these core competencies on this slide. If we just cover a couple of them. The ability to acquire at an attractive CAC that ensures payback within a desired timeframe. As I mentioned, requires us to use software that gives us very fast data access. If you think about media deployment, capital deployment within the six-digit domain on a daily basis, we need to be in a place where we react very fast to movements in the market. This is a daily process to ensure efficiency around capital deployment. We do this, in fact, across all of the entities and sort of opportunistically where we see best returns on a daily basis as I said. The complexity of those engagement capabilities, I still believe is best shown when you look at the hundreds of channels, and there's actually thousands of media partners associated that is managed by a pretty small in-house team. Of course, this wouldn't be possible to do in-house without software solutions that facilitate the media buying process. Then in fact, also the orchestration of your activities across online, offline channels, but also within our own channel, the box, so to speak. Across the entire customer journey, we obviously rely on design and brand assets. If you take last year, we've developed over 2,500, all of that in-house again. Of course, that's achieved through workflow management software. Equally what's quite critical here is that we have a seamless flow of the assets into the channel. We use software solutions that also facilitate asset deployment, which further reduces operational overhead. Lastly, on the bottom right, an integral part of our activities is also our promotions. Last year alone, we generated over 20,000 promotion campaigns. This is obviously not just about handing out a promotion to anyone. It's actually about intelligently finding the right incentives for every individual customer based on our segmentation logics, so we can maximize the value of a single customer back into the business. These tech-supported competencies, they are in fact agnostic of brand, product, and market by nature. They're highly scalable in all of these three directions. We obviously continuously investing into scaling those and finding further operational scalability. While the customer engagement module helps us generate demand, on the flip side of that is the responsibility to fulfill demand. Not just fulfill demand, but fulfill demand at high efficiency and high quality. We see the desired retention on the back of it. The fulfillment process, and I think we alluded to that in the previous section, spans across demand prediction, purchasing, manufacturing, and last mile and line haul operations. Really in every step, and this is obviously a high level view, but in every step, we use technology to drive supply chain efficiency. If we take demand prediction, we actually reach a 98% product distribution accuracy on a weekly basis, seven weeks out. What this helps us achieve is, it keeps waste very low in the system. Fabian talked about how our model inherently generates less waste than supermarkets. This visibility here is a contributor and obviously helps us drive margin, but also helps us generate a better ecological footprint. If we take the purchasing process, the ERP systems we use, they allow us to handle a large number of SKUs, large numbers of suppliers and POs per month with very little headcount associated, also very scalable environment. If you take the manufacturing footprint, we've developed seven facilities. They are designed to bring flexibility to the customer. To give you one example here, we pick ingredients agnostic of the recipe, which ultimately brings us ultimate scale and ability to combine 158 ingredients in any shape or form to build any recipe to the liking of the individual customer. We're also working on implementing real-time visual recognition technology to identify picking mistakes before they hit the customer. Again, not just focusing on flexibility, but also on providing maximum quality in our operations. In the last step in the mile, where we work with third-party solutions. We have a large network to deal with, a large logistics network. 115,000 zip codes we are serving as of today. Obviously, with geographic expansions, we need to ensure an easy way to also expand that. This complexity we manage with a in-house logistics software that allows for easy zip code expansion and also very flexible shipper integrations. Ultimately self-management possibility to manage our logistics network. The fulfillment platform we've built already last year allowed us to ship close to 6 million boxes. However, the ambition, of course, and Fabian talked about the EUR 5 billion in sales by 2030. The ambition is that we keep innovating to support our growth, and actually surpass over 100 million boxes that our network can ship by 2030. We've covered the core two technology modules that help drive and fulfill demand. However, as I mentioned at the start, that the true value driver, the sort of underlying value driver when it comes to scale in particular, is data. Probably no major surprise. The strategy we are pursuing here is a strategy of data centralization. The data warehouse technology we're implementing is one that allows us to very flexibly source data from all sorts of domains. That work that is undergoing, and ultimately the data centralization will help us drive and derive aggregations for intelligence and also do predictions. To give you two examples here associated with the respective modules, we talked a little bit about personalization and recommendations. The way this works really is that we've developed an algorithm that based on purchase history, based on response to an individual recipe of a customer, we score every shippable product or recipe on a weekly basis for every single customer. This way we can actually achieve full personalization of the menu. In the past, this category has been about building the biggest possible menu. We know menu size correlates with reduced skip and churn associated with culinary reasons. We're now moving into a space where we are focusing on relevance of the individual catalog item. This has been very successful in driving retention across the globe for us. On the fulfillment side, to give you a second example, we are working on automation of our logistics network planning. It's not just about allocating an order to any shipper, it's really about being smart which shipper to give the order to based on quality of the last mile delivery, and also cost, of course. Again, intelligent modeling that ultimately improves retention and drives margin up. Over the last couple of years, we've been incrementally investing into our technology capabilities as you can see here. Last year for the business there was a step change in terms of growth, which also meant a step change for us in terms of technology investments. To put us into a space where we can leverage the tremendous opportunity ahead of us. I think what's important to note here is that technology is not just the support for our growth or the enabler for growth, it will actually drive growth. It will drive growth, and become a core growth and margin driver that leads us into the future. This hands things over to Jennifer to look a little bit more into the financial outlook. Thanks, Jonas, and hi, everybody. We wanted to just kind of bring it all together with the financial story, which is really a function of our flywheel. As the flywheel expands and grows faster and gets more efficient, we're actually able to grow margin, expand it, deliver more cash, creating fuel for growth. It's that we believe makes Marley Spoon a compelling financial story. It all starts with growth, which we've been very fortunate to have a lot of in the last several years. You can see most recently we grew last year, we doubled our business, in fact, 102% versus 2019. If you actually take a step back, we've had consecutive half year periods of expansive growth. Between 2017 and 2019, we had a two-year CAGR of 60%. Well before COVID, this was a business that was basically seeing the benefits of a change in consumer behavior, and that accelerated shift of behavior from offline to online shopping. In fact, this growth is continuing because we just recently reported our Q1 results where we had 81% year-over-year, Q1 2021 versus 2020. This growth continues. It's really this growth that makes our flywheel essentially fly. What does that mean? As we grow, we bring in more subscribers. They order more. That leads to scale. We also get smarter. We get sharper. We get more data. We are more efficient with our marketing. We get more leverage. Our fixed costs are spread across more customers. What that results in is being able to grow our profit per subscriber. With more profit, of course, we have more investment fuel, which we fuel back into the business in terms of the digital capabilities that Jonas described, operational improvements. The reason we focus on these is because ultimately we want to improve the customer experience. We want to improve our product. In investing in these areas, we're able to deliver more in terms of personalization. It just means that we're able to bring in even more subscribers into the business. It really kind of builds on itself. This flywheel goes faster, it gets more traction. What it ultimately does is it fuels margin improvement. You can see that over the last several years, going back to 2017, in fact, we've added 11-12 points of margin. Something we're very, very proud of. It's very much a function of this flywheel that as we continue to get sharper, as we invest more, we bring in more business, and that just makes us better with our margin profile. Now, we've guided 2021 margins to still expand, delivering between 30% and 31% for the full year. You may be wondering why has our margin profile slowed down a little bit despite having an improvement over the prior year. The reason is that we're choosing to invest back into the customer experience. You have to. I would argue that it becomes even more essential as you scale your business because the cost of getting it wrong with the customer is just even greater. We do want to invest back into the customer. We do so by improving ingredient standards, increasing our portion sizes. We also are a young business. We had explosive growth last year, and with that growth comes the need for some operational improvements. There is some room to improve our business. We're introducing new Fulfillment Centers, and as those go online, there are some learnings. Ultimately, we are always very focused on making sure we deliver more margin. That's happening because with everything that we do, there's P&L discipline. I would argue it's actually not just P&L. Certainly, it's discipline across investments and margins and operating EBITDA and even cash. The point is, we are always focused on trying to turn over every stone and not leave anything untouched. Just a few examples of how we still are able to expand margins. It's looking at moving to micro-shippers for regional logistics solutions to counter some of the capacity issues happening in logistics, kind of industry-wide in the U.S. It's trying to get volume rebates on some of our food costs, which we're able to do as we gain more scale. Why is this CM so important and the expansion of it? If we look to the next slide, it's the CM that actually is the starting point for creating a profit pool for us, which gives us flexibility. What do I mean by that? Well, it's our ambition to get to low to mid-30s CM over time. We're tracking well. As I mentioned, we've got year-over-year solid improvement in contribution margin. If we think a few years out, getting to this ambition of low to mid -30s, and combine that with our scale leverage and the impact that that has on our fixed cost base, we can imagine a future where we get to a G&A as a percentage of net revenue down to mid-single digits. That has to be in our ambition. A lot of you ask us, many shareholders ask us when we're talking to them, "What could this business deliver in terms of operating EBITDA margins?" We think the answer is very attractive margins. We also have very attractive unit economics. What's attractive about this improving contribution margin and the declining and more leveraged G&A is the fact that together, it creates a profit pool that gives us optionality. That optionality is to invest back into our business or to drive profit margins. The option to invest is really about a deliberate and careful decision on the basis of unit economics. We've talked about unit economics before. We're currently tracking with a four-month payback, but we're always looking to manage towards a six-month payback maximum with a 3x return after three years. It's those unit economics that guide us. If you move to the next slide. It's not just our margin, though, that we think gives us an advantage. We have a really attractive cash-generating business, partly because we have some unique cash dynamics. We get cash in from our customers who actually pay us five days before their meal kit is delivered. We don't actually have to pay the suppliers for the cost of those boxes until 30 days later. That's a healthy 35-day cycle of receivables being higher than payables. When you combine that with our inventory levels, we generate cash. Our inventory is generally very attractive because of our unique source-to-order operating model. We don't have to carry a lot of inventory at any given time. We're really kind of a just-in-time order dynamics. The two together means that we're able to deliver positive cash from operating activities, which we did for the very first time in the company's history just last year. We did it again in Q1 of this year, and that gives us fuel to continue investing. I would say, I talked about financial discipline, and it's something we're constantly looking at. As mentioned, it's not just in the top line, it's really across all of our key metrics, top line, margin, operating EBITDA, and cash. We're generally looking to manage towards a breakeven operating cash flow over time over the course of a year. What are we investing that cash in? Well, we've spent some time talking about it today. Julie and Jonas covered the fact that we're looking at upweighting our spend on technology platforms, the digital tech stack that is so important to the customer experience, but also to our supply chain improvements. We're expanding capacity. It's important to note here is a couple things. One is there is a big upweight in our investment between this year and last year, and that's very deliberate, and that's also very growth-oriented. I get asked a lot, "What is the amount of maintenance CapEx that you're having to fund?" The truth is very, very little. I would say about under 5%. Partly, we're young. Benefits of being young, you don't need a lot of maintenance. I don't speak about myself, by the way. The point is, we are in high growth mode. We opened a new FC in Australia, our seventh FC, at the end of 2020. We are expanding our Sydney FC. We're expanding our California FC this year. We're bringing in new technologies to make our manufacturing more efficient, greater throughput, greater productivity, and greater ability to deliver the kinds of personalization that our customers want. The growth is very much about the customer experience, a better product, and so that's what you'll be seeing coming out of Marley Spoon more this year. Finally, how do we bring it all together? We think that the strong financial model and a very scalable operating model that we've taken you through feed off each other, are very complementary, and it's the two together that give us the confidence that we can deliver this ambition of a multi-billion euro company by the end of the decade. How are we tracking on that? First, the ambition of operating contribution margins being in the mid-40s. We delivered 2020 in the high -30s. Australia is already there, in the 40%+ range. We feel good about being able to deliver that. The payback in customer ROI, I think we're almost a bit of a broken record on this one. We are always managing to unit economics, which, as long as they're still attractive, with those thresholds being the six-month payback and the 3x ROI. By the way, we're tracking better than that right now. This is our mantra, and this is what guides us. Looking more here and now, net cash. We are enjoying a very comfortable net cash position, something we're very proud of. Thanks to the balance sheet activity that we had in 2020, we were able to have more flexibility, more streamlined, cleaned up balance sheets, such that we've got a positive equity ratio at the end of last year. In terms of the operating model, the order frequency we've talked about, as we bring in more subscribers, as we scale our business, as that flywheel continues to gain traction, pick up speed, we get more orders, which gives us better view on the customer. We get more data, more intelligence, which means that we can get sharper, get smarter, predict better, ultimately leading to the real testament to the strength of our business, which is the revenue retention. Just a quick note before I turn it back to Fabian for closing remarks. We've added some new disclosures in the appendix Q1 detail by segment, and that's something we'll be doing on a go-forward basis on quarterly. Thanks for your time, over to Fabian. You're on mute, Fabian. Here we go. The classical Zoom question or pointer. Yeah. Thanks, Jennifer, and thanks, Julie, Jonas, and Rolf for taking us through today. I want to quickly sum it up. We started with our ambition, and our ambition was to build a EUR 5 billion in revenue by the end of the decade. We think there's a lot of growth drivers that will get us there, starting with the massive TAM and all the other drivers that we touched on. It's very important, what we wanted to spend the time on today, to explain how the direct-to-consumer subscription model is very different from what you would assume if you compare to an e-commerce retail model or an offline retail model or a traditional CPG model. We have a very different model, and that model drives margin and drives strong unit economics. That is something we think is very attractive if you combine it with the overall TAM. Massive TAM, we believe very interesting and efficient, direct-to-consumer subscription model. From a geography perspective, we are really well positioned to benefit for the growth opportunity. U.S. has been a very dynamic market and will continue to be a very dynamic market. That's why we spent some more time on it today. Overall, we believe we are well-positioned, from a geography perspective, to benefit from the growth. It wouldn't be possible if you don't have the underpinning technology platform. Without our technology platform, we wouldn't have been able to double our business last year. Would not have been possible. Going forward, in order to ship 100 million boxes a year by the end of the decade, we'll have to continue to invest in this technology platform that's underpinning the growth and enabling the growth, and also driving the growth that we expect over the coming years. Financially, this leads to, we believe, a very attractive model. The combination of the massive TAM, the combination of the efficient supply chain, and the geography that we are positioned in will allow us to build a business that gives us optionality. Are we going for growth or are we going for EBITDA margin? I think what's been guiding us over the past years, will continue to guide us, is unit economics. The unit economics always tell us what's the IRR, what's the rate of return for a dollar invested. As long as our rate of return is significantly higher than the cost of capital, your cost of capital, your internal IRR requirements, we believe as a prudent steward of capital, we should be using that capital to invest for growth. As we're building a business that has the ambition to hit EUR 5 billion in sales by the end of the decade, you will see us operating to a cash flow break-even environment, investing the cash into attractive unit economics and into growth over the coming years. Some people might ask, is that possible organically? I think if you look at the CAGR that we've had in the past, that's easily possible. If you actually even discount the CAGR by 50%, if you look at our revenue guidance for this year, you'll see that from a growth perspective, it's pretty possible, straightforward possible to actually have organic growth into that growth ambition. The overall market TAM, market size allows us to do that. I think overall, we are very excited. I keep saying the company is seven years old, but we're just at day one. We're just getting started here. We're super excited on the journey, and I'd love with that to turn over to Michael, who will be host, I think, posing questions. Hold on. Here we go. If you have questions, please use the Q&A function in the Zoom and Michael will then be the emcee here and direct questions. Very good. Thank you, Fabian, thank you to the rest of the speakers. Let's open the Q&A session and dive straight in. Question one, question for Fabian. Can you please talk about the strategy of keeping the top line continuing to grow in a future environment where macro conditions could see a downturn from the current level? How much of that thinking around the potential downturn in the economy has been put into the current operation and business plan? Yeah, that's a good question. When we think about economic cycles, we have actually at the beginning of the pandemic, when nobody knew what would happen, we did quite some analysis. In fact, I was very conservative. I looked at the Great Recession. I looked at the Great Depression. I looked at how spending patterns, how purchasing patterns actually changed. 2007 was the data point. 1928, 1929, 1930 was the data point. I wanted to understand, if the world really goes in that direction, what would happen to consumer spending pattern? In fact, when you look at, as a reference point, the Great Recession or the GFC, as many call it, you actually saw that spending for grocery reasons, spending for in-home cooking went up. Restaurant spending went down, spending for cooking went up. Even if you look at the Great Depression, actually, the amount of money spent on food actually did not decline. It was actually relatively stable, where certain things like furniture and durable goods plummeted in the Great Depression. We felt with the positioning of Dinnerly and Marley Spoon, we entered this potential crisis very well. What happened, I think we all were surprised that from a demand perspective, we saw the opposite. We saw, of course, online demand booming, but in general, discretionary spending has not been down, it's been up, which is probably a function of the stimulus that you've seen in the U.S. and Europe, which is unprecedented in terms of how much stimulus money has hitting consumers' pockets. I think currently we do not see a demand shortage. We don't see the economy from a demand side, from a consumer demand side, receding. We do see growth picking up globally. From our perspective, we currently do not foresee the consumption of groceries and consumption of weeknight cooking and eating, where people are going to slim down on those one. If at all, we see the opposite. However, if there were a GFC-like crisis to come in a second wave from an economic perspective, we think our business model is very well positioned to withstand, if not even to benefit from it, as again, people were shifting discretionary spending from restaurants to actually home cooking. In that environment, I think we're well positioned, especially as we're not only offering the Marley Spoon service, but also the Dinnerly service, which provides a very affordable solution for convenient weeknight cooking that our customers demand for. We believe our business is very well positioned within economic downturns and economic cycles to continue to provide growth. Don't forget, underlying, we're seeing the channel switch happening. Even if groceries is sideways, the fact that we can offer week night cooking at the same price point as if you would walk to a supermarket. It's not a premium experience. It's a like-for-like shift. We do believe that even in a downturn environment, we can deliver this healthy growth as consumers switch from offline to online. That's the trend that has just started, and we expect for this trend to continue going forward. Okay. Thank you, Fabian. Financial question for Jennifer. Jennifer, the appendix references 24+ million LTV. Sorry, months rather than million. My mistake. Does Marley Spoon have an estimate for average customer LTV, as I can't see it in the slides? Well, that's an interesting question. LTV is an average of customers already within a distinct cohort. I'm not sure if I understand the question fully. I think it's already an average. Beyond that, we don't get no disclosure, for example, on types of customer. I'm not sure if that answers the question. Okay. Very good. Let's move on. Seeing we've got 16 questions in the queue already. Fabian, one for you. Do you expect to need to raise capital again to reach the EUR 5 billion revenue target, or will all the growth be internally funded? We don't have to raise capital to reach that growth target. I think if you think about the current guidance we've given for this year, 35% growth using cash to reinvest for growth, you can see that at this stage, this model self-funds that kind of growth. If you think about 30% growth per year, that's self-funded organic growth that you don't have to raise capital for. We're also in a position from a balance sheet perspective, that when we talk about CapEx, we are in a position to well finance such CapEx to very traditional asset-backed funding that you would do when you normally invest into a durable capital invest like machines, machine leasing. We feel very well capitalized and the growth ambitions that we have laid in front of you is not based on the requirement to raise additional capital. Very good. Thank you. Question here on the CAC LTV ratio. First of all, do you have the ratios for the four different types of customers? Are all marketing costs included in the CAC calculation, or is a portion considered brand marketing and therefore not included in the CAC? Jennifer, do you want to take that one? Sure. I think I answered part of this already. The fourth group of customers, we don't disclose that. We have had quite some disclosures today. We hope that you guys are happy with kind of lifting the hood a little bit, but I think that's probably as good as it gets for now in terms of disclosures. We've got the net revenue retention broken out literally by quarterly cohort for each of the last three years, to try to give you more history there, as well as the history on CACs and acquisitions and paybacks. Looking by customer type is not something that we get into in more detail. With respect to CAC, I mean, we can look at it in terms of, there's gross and there's net. We look at marketing in terms of voucher spend, as well as media spends, which is, I guess, what you would call the brand marketing. The CACs that you see listed on the, I don't have the slide number in front of me, I'm afraid, but the charts that show kind of the decline going down to about a EUR 40 some odd CAC level, if I'm not mistaken, is the media spend. Maybe to add that, the question, breaking out the LTV by the different kinds of customer type. I don't think that's the right methodology. By definition, when you acquire a group of customers, you will always have different customers. Some customers will try to explain our trial ists. Some customers will cook on a regular basis. Some customers are super loyal. Of course, the loyal customers are much more valuable than the tria lists. On the trial ists, we don't make any money. We lose money on those customers, of course. It's the mix that matters, because you always get a mix of customers. You always have the user behavior that certain customers try a product, and it's not for them. It's actually quite usual CPG experience. Actually, a customer that walks into a supermarket to pick up a new brand for the first time, only 40% will buy the same product a second time. 60% are trialists, they'll never come back. That's how the world works. From an LTV perspective, you have to look at your group of customers as a blended group, because that tells you the true profitability. We could, of course, reverse engineer and break it out and back solve into, but the answer is pretty straightforward. Trialists, you lose a lot of money for. You don't make money. You know our margin profile, you know our average basket size, you know 30% margin, EUR 50 basket, you compare it to the CAC that we've disclosed, you're losing money on those customers. That's evident. It's really important that on average, bringing them together, we have this very attractive fast paybacks on average, meaning the loyal customers, they actually pay for the trial ists. In together, as a group, it's a very profitable cohort, so to say, that breaks even fast and gives attractive returns. I think that's the way to look at it, that you not look by individual customer behavior, but you try to bring it together as a group, make sure that the group in general is an attractive unit economic profile. Okay. Thanks, Fabian. Jonas, question for you. On slide 20, it looks like around 700,000 customers were acquired in FY 2020, but active customers grew by around 150,000 in FY 2020. How do we reconcile these numbers? Does it imply customer churn of greater than 100%? This is, I mean, here it's important to understand the methodology. When it comes to active customers, we look at a weekly average over a quarter of customers with an active account. That's how we derive active customers. What I tried to allude to in my section already is that when it comes to cancellations, it's not an uncommon phenomenon in our category because ultimately, customers play with cancellations to also manage their accounts. Cancellation by no means means a customer has left the system. In fact, we have reactivation rates that are well into the double digits, both organically and paid. It's not easy to reconcile those numbers, but what's important here is coming back to CAC to LTV and how with every cohort that we build, we ultimately ensure the desired payback rate. When the look comes to payback rates, there is also cancellations and reactivations baked into every single cohort. Great. Thank you, Jonas. We've got a question from Owen Humphries here. Fabian, one for you. Your medium term revenue targets assume CAGR of 30%. Can you break this down into four key growth drivers that you identified? Yeah, absolutely. I think it's actually very simple, and we like to be conservative bottom up. You can generate 30% CAGR growth just by growth driver number one, getting more subscribers or growing together with the TAM. You could argue all the other three growth drivers are opportunities on the upside. You can grow this business at a 30% growth rate on a year-to-year basis just because from a TAM and from a penetration perspective, as the channels continues, we can grow together with the overall market as it develops. It's hard to pinpoint it and break it out. I would take it very simple. We can grow 30% a year just by growth driver one, which is additional penetration, but we can incrementally grow through the other growth drivers as well, or elect to shift growth from one to the other. Okay, very good. Next question. I might direct this first of all to Julie to give us a view from the U.S. and then Rolf to give us a local perspective. Are you confident you'll be able to pass on any input price rises, e.g., meat, fruit, and veg, if we get some inflation? Or will margins be compressed in this situation? Julie, do you want to start with that? Yeah, I'm happy to. Obviously, as COVID happened, we saw all kinds of dynamics starting to happen. What I would tell you is two things. One, just the pure scale that we experienced gave us more negotiating leverage, but it didn't completely cover it. We actually took pricing already in the U.S. We took it in December, on an average of about 6% across the total business, which we were able to pass through very, very successfully. The answer is, we're pretty sure we can take pricing because we already have. Very good. good. Rolf, what are you seeing locally? Well, with regards to pricing, we always look at how we're priced in the market on one hand, and on the other hand, we're not serving individual ingredients. As I say, we're also in a seller service. If prices go up overall in a market, then we can adjust. We've done so in the past, through droughts in Australia. Last year, meat prices have gone through the roof, and we implemented a price change then and there. We're not afraid of any price changes because we believe that ultimately all these changes will implement affect the whole market, and therefore we can move along. With supermarkets shifting online, that's already happened. As supermarkets and any other players improve their online capabilities, so we will. I do think that our delta with regards to competition, our delta with regards to the service providers, will continue to maintain that healthy difference in between us and the competition. Okay. Thank you, Rolf. Jennifer, a quick financial question for you. Can you speak to how much capital expenditure you will require per annum over the next two to three years? Sure. You see the big step up in 2021. It's important to note that what's in there is not only some of the bullets that I outlined on the slide, so the expansion of Sydney, California, and the new technologies, but also a second FC in Europe. I would say that given the growth of the two FCs, Sydney and California, meaning the size of those, there's room to grow into those FCs. That said, we're always looking opportunistically at how we can continue to grow the business, tap into that addressable market. That was kind of the rationale behind the size of those FCs, leaving us room to grow into the business. I don't think we're going to need to see necessarily the same levels that we have anticipated for this year. I think it's about a 2.5x increase versus 2020, which is what we're forecasting for this year. I would say for the next couple of years out, somewhere in between that as we want to try to continue to invest in digital, as we want to maybe bring even more, let's say, productivity generating manufacturing technologies into those FCs. The big ticket items, the FCs themselves, should sustain us. As we've mentioned, we can reach with our existing footprint, 190 million households. That is going to be a huge driver of growth for us, just increasing that penetration. At the end of this year, with the FCs that I've talked about, we should be able to deliver that and then some. I would say that in short order to give you kind of an estimate, somewhere between last year and this year. Okay, that's very helpful. Thanks, Jennifer. A question for Rolf. Rolf, what observations can you provide about a mature customer evolution in areas such as Victoria or New South Wales in Australia post-lockdown? How have habits evolved over, say, the last two years? It would be great to have some color around the customer journey from the first meal through to today. During or when COVID hit us, there were kind of two developments. On one hand, we had new customers flooding in because you couldn't buy your groceries in the supermarkets because you were afraid for your life, and the shelves were empty. The other behavior was that existing customers upped their orders. On one hand, they ordered more often during the month, moving from three maybe to four times. On the other hand, they moved towards ordering maybe four or five meals instead of three. Now, these behaviors of existing customers have retreated largely back to normal. Customers that used to order three times, they're now maybe ordering 3.1x meals per week. That has largely retreated back to normal. When you see at the or look at those retention curves that I shown earlier, these are pretty much exemplifying kind of the mature customer behavior. There is no material differences between customers in Victoria or New South Wales or, in fact any other regions. I also talked about the various different types of customer. There is not one kind of customer journey. We talked about trialists as opposed to our loyal chefs, and the customer journeys for each of those customers is very different. The trialists come and maybe in a year's time when they're stopping studying and moving into a relationship, maybe then they're a meal kit customer. Then loyalists, maybe they're moving to another location or they split up, perhaps moving into another pattern. There's not one kind of customer journey that applies. There's many different journeys, and Jonas and his team have built the appropriate tools in order to manage the habits of our very different customer segments along these very different journeys. Great. Thank you, Rolf. Fabian, question for you: Is the ASX the most appropriate market for the company to be listed on? Would you consider listing on an alternate market such as Europe, where perhaps the business is better understood and appreciated? I think we are spending the time to explain the business, and I think over the past two years, we've come a long way on the ASX. We entered the ASX 300, so we're starting also to be open for a, I would say, different investor universe that weren't really able to invest in us, I think maybe one year ago or one year and a half ago. I think overall, the ASX has been a really good home for us, good listing home. I think as the overall scale of the business today, while we have massive growth ambitions, we still also, at this point in time, also, from a size perspective, I think well-positioned on the ASX overall. I don't think it's a step that we are considering in the short term. Again, I think the story is just starting to be understood and we're just starting to engage with the broader investor universe, in Australia. Having said that, we also have a large U.S. holder group, so to say, U.S. investors that invest into ASX stocks and also now invest us into Marley Spoon. We are believing that we have good access. What's also true is we are not satisfied with the multiples of the business. We believe this business, given its recurring rate of revenue, given its strong unit economics, given its growth profile, should trade as a premium to other e-commerce models that you see on the ASX, but also in other markets. We think over time as investors understand our business better and hopefully exercises like today contribute to that understanding. We also, on top of that, very actively communicate and explain the story at various investor conferences that are coming up in the next couple of months. We do hope that today and the data that we've provided today explain a compelling story, and then I do believe we will get the appreciation, and we have the ambition to then see also other revenue multiples apply to our business. Again, given that the business is well-funded and well-capitalized for its growth strategy, there is no short-term urge. I think over time, as we build the business and focus on building the business and focus on creating value, the capital markets will appreciate that, and I think the equity value will follow that story. We actually are not contemplating, in the short term or medium term, any other listing venue. Okay. Thank you, Fabian. Julie, one for you. Looking at the U.S., why did you choose $75,000 of income as a threshold for the addressable market? Can you also explain how you define ARPU in the context of the reference to + 23% growth on page 33? Thank you. Yep. Absolutely. The choice of $75,000 household income was a little bit arbitrary. I was looking at the top part of the market and kind of comparing that to where we know the average income falls for our U.S. customers across Dinnerly and Marley Spoon. The median household income for Americans is around $68,000, I just chose $75,000 because actually that was the data I could get the breaks for. There's nothing really magical in it. It's really just isolating to the top income market, which we think is more likely to be interested in meal kits. In terms of how we define ARPU, we really looked at our revenue and divided by our active subscriber base for the second half year-over-year, second half of 2020 versus second half of 2019. I chose second half really just to take the noise of the early stages of COVID out of the mix and get a more realistic picture. Obviously, things were a little bit crazy in Q2 last year as COVID initially happened, and so that's really the driver of getting to that + 23%. Okay. Terrific. Thank you. Jonas, question for you sent via the email. On slide 19, net revenue retention for customers acquired in the last 12 months, i.e., the yellow line, look to be underperforming customers acquired the year prior, the green lines. Why is that? Were customers acquired during COVID less sticky? Those are quite the opposite. During COVID times, the customers showed, especially in Q2, an influx of retention. I think what the graph shows you quite well is how the second quarter in 2020 really gave a bump to every single cohort line over the years. That's why you see the green lines also traveling up with the top yellow line being the ones that we acquired, the customers that we acquired within the COVID period. I think the core takeaway here is that we saw a bump in the business, but we are already, and we have already seen normalization, and that still leads to very attractive unit economics in also sort of a post-pandemic area. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Question here for Rolf. It's really a follow-up to Fabian's comment on channel shift. Do you guys see any shift from Marley Spoon to Dinnerly or the other way around during COVID? Yes. Yes, we do a shift from Marley Spoon to Dinnerly, and we also see a shift from Dinnerly to Marley Spoon, and that is another advantage of our two-brand strategy. There is customers that have a very high household income, and then there is customers that have a medium or lower household income. The latter ones may be attracted to Marley Spoon, but over the long term, that may not be affordable, and therefore they would then choose Dinnerly. Instead of losing these customers for which Marley Spoon is not a solution, they actually shift to Dinnerly, and that leads to lower acquisition costs over time. Vice versa, Dinnerly is a value product, so there's a bunch of services that we don't offer to our Dinnerly customers in Australia, for example. Meals are packed individually, recipe cards are provided. There is significantly more choice, especially for vegans, vegetarian and other needs. There's more add-on products on Marley Spoon, and so forth. These are our services and features that some customers value and others don't. Therefore, some customers decide that while Dinnerly is significantly more affordable, they want to have these other service levels provided to them and then choose Marley Spoon as a result. These shifts are not necessarily driven by COVID. It was a thought that we had in the beginning, and therefore we were quite satisfied that we have the Dinnerly product in the market as a means of providing a very affordable solution, depending on the impact of COVID on household incomes, in Australia. That we followed that clearly. During the initial lockdowns of certain businesses, we've seen some customers telling us that they couldn't afford Marley Spoon anymore and therefore would be switching to Dinnerly. That is not something we do see anymore as the economy is going back to normal and people are more or less back into work. Rolf, let me follow that up with a supplementary question we've received. Are there any material differences in retention rates between Marley Spoon and Dinnerly customers? Jonas, help me out, but, we don't see any material differences between the two brands. Great. Okay. Thank you. Fabian, back to you on long-term strategy and targets. The EUR 5 billion target by 2030, is that on the basis of existing markets, i.e. U.S., EU and AU? If not, what other markets were built into your assumptions, please? I might add to that also, do you expect to grow via acquisitions to reach your growth ambitions, or is product development expected to be done in-house? Yeah. When it comes to the ambition of building a EUR 5 billion business by 2030, we believe the current geographic footprint is we're well positioned to capture this now. Today, we have the ability to serve 190 million households. We are, at the same time, at the end of the first quarter, we had 250,000 active subscribers. We believe the current geographic footprint is sufficient to reach that growth ambition easily. However, it could be an effective way to grow by slightly expanding the geographic footprint in the future, because we might be able to acquire customers more effectively in another region. To give you just an example, while we haven't planned it imminently, we could serve a market like France from Europe, and that could allow us to acquire customers at attractive unit economics. I wouldn't rule out incremental geographic expansion because in the end, it might be the more effective way to deploy capital and grow to this ambition, but it's not necessary, and we haven't factored it in at this point in time. Regarding the other questions, the ambition to build a business that will be EUR 5 billion by the end of the decade does not require inorganic growth. It can be achieved organically by the brands that we operate, by investing into the growth of those brands. Maybe even by launching additional brands, on our platform that Jonas presented, which is highly scalable. We run Dinnerly, Marley Spoon, Martha & Marley Spoon. There is that opportunity to really find the right segments in the market and grow organically at a very attractive unit economics. I think for us to grow inorganically, it would have to not only make a lot of sense from an industrial perspective, it would also have to make a lot of sense from a financial perspective and provide some significant financial arbitrage because of the attractive unit economics that we have and the ability to grow organically, an inorganic opportunity would have to really pass a high hurdle because it's not necessary to fulfill our growth ambitions that we've laid out today. Thank you, Fabian. Couple of questions coming through on the differences between Marley Spoon and Dinnerly. Jonas, I might direct these to you. First of all, can you provide some color on the differences between the CAC and LTV between the two brands? The second question we have is: Do you have the two brands in all the markets now except WA? When will Marley Spoon start in WA? Rolf, you might want to answer that as well. Yeah. I can start on CAC -to -LTV differences. It's a function of the desired payback rate or payback time that we want to see. Typically, as we mentioned earlier, we orientate ourselves towards a six-month payback. For every brand and country, we look at the LTV, the predicted LTV based on historical data, which is a function of retention, basket size, and margin. When we think about the differences between Marley Spoon and Dinnerly, for those two brands, as I just mentioned, we have fairly consistent retention rates. Dinnerly, however, is priced at a lower price point, also comes with a slightly smaller margin. What you end up with is a slightly smaller CAC target for the Dinnerly brands next to Marley Spoon. However, because the addressable market and because of the lower price point is also bigger, we still manage to acquire very effectively a very large volume of customers. I mean, regarding Dinnerly, so we're currently operating Dinnerly in the Netherlands and Germany in Europe, in the U.S. nationwide, in Australia, where we also operate Marley Spoon, and then on top, WA. I think there was one more part, Rolf, that you would cover. Yeah, I think the question was when do we plan to move with our Marley Spoon brand into WA? I think, first of all, I wanted to point out that we opened up the Marley Spoon operations in WA when we couldn't travel there. We're generally based in Sydney and Melbourne, so it was already a mean feat to get our Dinnerly operations up there because of a lower SKU count and slightly simplified picking methodology. We were able to manage finding a warehouse and hiring people and partners, training them up and launching the product, even though we couldn't travel there from afar. Now, as we get to launching Marley Spoon, while the unit economics are attractive, there's also a finite pool of marketing that we can spend across the whole world, which is managed centrally in Berlin. If we were to launch Marley Spoon in WA, we need to kind of set up another picking line, which requires more capital. We're looking very carefully at what point is the right time to launch Marley Spoon in WA compared to all the other opportunities we have to deploy that marketing dollar while then driving our unit economics in more mature sites, having better margin, as it always takes some time to launch a new product in a new market with new team members. We look at it with regards to the overall marketing spend that is available, the capital that we're deploying. Don't forget, we're setting up a new facility in the U.S., setting up a new facility already in Sydney, and there's another one coming in Europe. Therefore, we diligently look at the CapEx required, the margin implications, and so forth before we make that decision. Thank you, Rolf. Fabian, question for you: Why did we choose to acquire so many customers in Q1 when the CAC was higher at EUR 49, instead of acquiring in Q3 or Q4 last year when CAC was only EUR 33? Was it only due to capital availability or was there another driver? Yeah. First of all, we always try to acquire as many customers as possible at a certain CAC target. It's not necessarily possible to double the spend and get the double amount of customer at the same acquisition cost. We are not in a demand fulfillment environment. As you can see from our channel mix, we are about demand creation, making customers find us. When you are in a demand creation environment, you can't just double your marketing spend from one month to the other and expect the same marketing efficiency. It's a gradual deployment of capital. You also have seasonality impacts where certain seasons are better suited to acquire customers than other seasons. For us, Q1 and Q3 tend to be really good quarters to acquire customers. Q1 especially is a good quarter. Q4 tends to be a quarter less interesting for us because especially during the holidays when habit forming can be interrupted as people go visit their families. We've seen that it's more effective to acquire customers, for example, after the holidays. Media costs tend to go up prior to the holidays as everybody is going in for the Christmas business. There is some seasonality in our business, but as always, we try to acquire as many customers that we can for the target acquisition cost that Jonas mentioned. 2020, as you can see, there were some exceptions on CAC. This was an unusual year, Q2, Q3, Q4. I think what we wanted to show is that this EUR 49 in Q1, that's a very attractive acquisition cost if you think about the long-term trend. It's not only low acquisition cost, it was also record volume. We never acquired more customers in any given quarter historically than we did in Q1. Because of the seasonality, because of the overall favorable environment in Q1, you see this big acquisition growth in Q1, which again, if you look at acquisition costs and the historic trend, it's at EUR 49. It's very, very attractive, which then relates, and I think that's the important part, it relates to the payback periods that are coming in very, very attractively as well. I hope that covered the question. Yeah. Thank you, Fabian. Interesting question here. Can you talk a bit more about the competitive intensity. You have competitors, but it seems with the TAM available, there's a fair bit of growth to go around. Won't this attract new, big, serious players to the market? Maybe I can continue that. Yeah, it is correct that the competitive environment is relatively benign. We see globally only two companies that are focusing on this opportunity. One is HelloFresh and the other one is us. We are in a way in the duopoly that we operate. In each region where we operate, there are our brands. There are HelloFresh-driven brands, with the exception of the U.S., where there's a couple of other players. Julie gave us a little bit of transparency. Again, if you look at the overall TAM, it's fair to say that there's not a lot of competition given the overall size of the market. Now I have to speculate, why are not other players entering the market? The supply chain that we operate, the business we operate is quite unique. It's a little bit like a manufacturing business, which you would argue Unilever and Procter & Gamble, they know how to build and manufacture brands. It's direct -to -consumer, which a little bit sounds like e-commerce, like, I don't know, a retail business like Amazon, but they don't manufacture. We have an interesting, unique combination of direct -to -consumer and manufacturer, but actually very flexible manufacturer. Manufacture to order. Every box is a bespoke box manufactured for each customer, which again, doesn't really fit what a traditional CPG company would do because they produce a million toothpaste units that are all exactly the same. The fact that we look a little bit like a manufacturing business, but we're actually not because we are very customized. We look a little bit like an e-commerce business, but we are not an e-commerce retail company. We don't source to stock and sell from stock and have this kind of retail model, makes this a very unique business that there's very few companies that have inherent DNA for them to just switch on. In fact, we are building a unique company that is solving recurring problems in the manufacture-to-order way using a direct-to-consumer acquisition model and direct-to-consumer supply chain model. That's quite unique. Now, speculation is that because it's so unique, there's nobody that can just jump right in and say, "Oh, that's something that we do, and meal kits have great margins and massive TAM." That's why maybe we haven't seen a lot of market entry. It is correct to say that we feel we can acquire customers at great unit economics, while we're not the only company that can enjoy growth and good unit economics in this space. Therefore, we expect that while there's other companies that are now in the space that build multi-billion dollar businesses or have built multi-billion euro businesses in the past, we think the market is big enough for us to build our multi-billion euro business next to them because of the overall scale of the market and the strength of the brands that we've built. Okay. Question perhaps first for Julie, and then I might ask Rolf to comment. Have you considered more immediate term new revenue activities to monetize the existing customer base, i.e., specials with other existing third-party consumer brands to Marley Spoon customers? Definitely, we're really just starting to scratch the surface on this. I alluded to in my part of the presentation on some partnerships, but we're definitely monetizing our customer base. We find partners that want to sample products. We initiated this with a bar company back in August last year where they paid to put the bar in our boxes, and we were able to provide incremental value to our customers and make some money in the process. Definitely a big opportunity for us. I think there's more that we can do here, but it's super exciting. We're also looking even at our supplier base and doing some partnership there, where we're leveraging our customer base to talk about their product, and they're subsequently doing the same thing with their email subscriber list, et cetera. We just did a partnership with Philadelphia Cream Cheese, with Kraft, where they really promoted Marley Spoon to their customers, and we promoted the fact that we were making one of our dessert recipes with their product to our customers. Maybe not monetizing, but certainly leveraging each other's capabilities and access to customers. Pretty much the same happens in Australia as well. We have what we call an inbox partnership program, where now pretty much every box we ship includes a gift for our customers from brands that align with our own brands and are really useful for our customers, and that is a considered program and already drives a little bit of revenue on the side. In addition, we have those partnerships with, I think we did cranberries, dried cranberries the other day. We developed, with a partner, a bunch of recipes, put these in our boxes, and that helped us to bring our food cost down, and there's many more of those. More importantly, what we're looking at is, how can we serve the other needs of our customers? We added, mid last year, the ready-to-heat options in Australia, and they're seeing great results and good attachment rates because we know that customers cook maybe three, four times a week, and as restaurants are opening up, and people are going to work, there's other things to worry about as well, especially around lunches, quick dinners, and so forth. There is other eating occasions, be it breakfast, be it lunch, be it kids' lunches, and so forth. We're working on developing solutions to meet these other needs, and we'll add them as they come online, and we're confident that they make sense for the customer and that there is this service component that I talked about, where we're not only providing them with a product that really solve a problem. Thank you, Rolf. Jennifer, financial question on email for you. What is the definition of your contribution margin, and does it include discounting, or is that below the line? Sure, I can answer that. It's pretty straightforward. We start with gross revenue. The discounting, I believe you're referring to are the marketing vouchers, which are in the top line, which is how we derive net revenue. Then we back out COGS and our fulfillment expenses. Those include costs like our food ingredients, packaging ingredients, the cost of shipping the boxes, also assembling, so the picking costs. That's basically contribution margin. I would say you can probably refer also to our 2020 annual report, which is on our investor website. That breaks it down in some clear detail also. Good. Thank you. I might prompt for any more questions. Very happy to take any more, please feel free to submit them on the Q&A channel. Okay. On that note, always happy to take questions offline, I might move to Fabian for closing remarks, please. Yeah, thank you, thanks again for joining today. I hope we were able to bring across that we are having a lot of ambitions going forward, and the company's been seven years old, and there's been quite some dramatic growth over those last seven years, but we're just getting started. We really feel like this is day one on what we want to build. We want to build a much larger business, a sustainable business, a business that solves everyday problems just for you, just right. We've been growing before COVID, and COVID accelerated this channel-switch-driven growth. There's more growth coming going forward because it is a massive market. It's a massive term. We feel like we're well-positioned from a geography perspective, from a product perspective, from a brand perspective, to benefit from that ongoing channel switch from offline to online. We have multiple growth drivers with the organic growth of the overall TAM being probably the strongest, but not the only one. We wanted to make hopefully that clear today that there are growth drivers at our disposition. The ability for us to grow is very much underpinned by the technology platform that we have built and we continue to invest in. I think there was a famous quote from Jeff Bezos when he said Amazon's a software company, and people were wondering, but it's all about these brown boxes. He says, "Yes, but it's the software that brings the box to the customer." It's very much underlying these days that the software and the technology that we are building is actually the differentiator. It's what makes this company scale effectively. That also then leads to an attractive financial model, healthy margins that allow us for self-funded organic growth over the coming years. Whatever we do, it's been part of our DNA, the unit economics, making sure there are effective and attractive returns on the capital we deploy has been guiding us to today and will continue to guide us going forward. Thanks again, everybody, for joining. We'll be happy, if you have any questions, to also answer questions by email. Going forward, you see Michael's email address here, but there's also investor conferences we are attending. If you go to our investor relations page, you'll be able to see those conferences in the coming months that we'll be attending and be very excited to answer more of your questions. Thanks again for joining, everybody, and hopefully see and hear from you soon. Thank you.