Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody. Thanks for joining our investor call. My name is Fabian Siegel, Founder and CEO of Marley Spoon, and I have with me here today Jennifer Bernstein, our CFO. Earlier today, we released our third quarter results for our financial and calendar year 2021, and we are looking forward to presenting to you today these results, as well as providing you with an update on the business. At the end, as usual, we will open the call to your questions. Now, reflecting on 2021 so far, I can say that we are experiencing an environment with very volatile customer behavior. When it comes to skip rates or holiday behavior, it turns out that neither 2020 nor 2019 are good reference years. The volatility in customer behavior has a particularly big impact on our sales forecasts because the vast majority of our revenue is made up by repeat customer purchases. Whereas in the time before COVID, our models allowed us to predict customer behavior and therefore sales quite accurately and also far out. It turns out that in 2021, revenue prediction is much harder, both when it comes to modeling the development of our sales to existing customers or the modeling of our customer acquisition activities. Now, we started the year with guidance revenue growth to be between 25%-30% after doubling our sales in 2020. After the first quarter, our models predicted an acceleration of growth, which made us adjust guidance upwards. Now, after the summer in the Northern Hemisphere, the outlook has come back to where we started the year. Specifically in Q3, we have seen higher than normal skip rates and a higher cost acquisition environment in the Northern Hemisphere due to the stronger than usual holiday impact that we observed this year. In order to maintain attractive unit economics, which to us means six to eight months payback and 3x return over the lifetime, we reduced customer acquisition investments, and this will impact Q4 revenue. The reason why Q3 revenue was broadly in line with our expectations is due to the incremental revenue caused by the return to lockdowns in Australia, which somewhat offsets the higher than normal holiday-related revenue impact in the Northern Hemisphere. Nevertheless, the decision to reduce acquisition volumes in order to maintain our target unit economics will have an impact on Q4 and therefore requires us to revise our 2021 net revenue growth to be between 26% and 28%. We have seen a recovery in base behavior and improved customer acquisition costs, and Q4 net revenue growth is currently trending higher than Q3 at the PCP. 2021 has also been volatile on the operating side, where we have been facing supply chain disruptions, labor challenges, and input cost inflation. Given that we operate in such an environment, I think we made very good progress in Q3, improving our operating margins by about 150 basis points quarter-on-quarter as well as year-over-year. These improvements were led by improvements in our U.S. segment by about 200 basis points quarter-on-quarter. Now we expect further margin improvement in Q4 as our investments into our operations teams, processes and technology are expected to yield additional benefits for our business. At this point, I would already like to thank our teams that are working very hard in this volatile operating environment every day to build manufacturing excellence at scale in order to delight our customers globally. Now overall, 2021 has been a year of investments to people, processes and infrastructure that we require to operate at the scale achieved by doubling our business last year, and that prepares us for the continued growth towards our midterm ambition to build a EUR 1 billion revenue business. Those investments consequently continued in Q3 and combined with a disciplined investment in marketing, led to a negative operating EBITDA of EUR 13 million for the quarter. In the fourth quarter of this year, we expect continued revenue growth and expanded margins to lead to a significantly lower level of losses compared to Q3. With this overview, I'd like to hand it over to Jennifer, who will walk us through our key metrics and our individual segments. Thanks, Fabian. We saw active subscribers grow again in the third quarter, 20% versus the prior corresponding period, led by Australia, which grew 35% and accelerated versus Q2, hitting nearly 100,000 active subscribers. However, as mentioned, customer behavior was very volatile during the summer months, such that we saw a more challenging acquisition environment in the U.S. and Europe. As a consequence, active subscribers in these regions slowed slightly versus the previous quarter, even as they grew versus the previous year. Basket size increased by 5%. This increase was influenced partly by price increases implemented globally, but principally in the U.S., where we raised prices by approximately 9% at the end of the quarter. Looking at our performance on a regional basis, we saw mixed outcomes across the segments. Australia went back into COVID lockdown, which provided tailwinds to the business such that the region grew 30% versus the prior corresponding period, a strong acceleration over the previous quarter. Australia's growth was delivered amidst operational challenges, which saw the team needing to incorporate costly COVID measures to protect the teams and enable the continuation of business operations. Despite these incremental costs, Australia delivered an operating contribution margin of 43.5% in line with the prior corresponding period. Contribution margin declined versus the prior corresponding period, due to a higher share of voucher spend incurred to take advantage of a strong acquisition environment. We would also like to share that we have just launched our Marley Spoon brand in Western Australia, joining our Dinnerly brand there, which launched in December 2020. Early sales are strong, and this launch means we are now offering both of our meal kit brands nationally. In the U.S., we face a very volatile market characterized by higher skip rates. This was a result of more pronounced holiday behavior than expected during the summer months, with consumers more frequently away and ordering less, behavior which we have seen abate at the end of Q3. The result was slower growth than expected, 3% versus the prior corresponding period, while active subscribers grew 5%. We also saw costlier acquisitions in the third quarter, which we opted not to pursue in line with our disciplined approach to maintaining attractive unit economics. This is having a subsequent impact on Q4 net revenue, which is what partially led to our revised full-year net revenue guidance. Operationally, the U.S. is showing encouraging signs of improvement and an ability to better navigate external cost pressures which persist. Operating contribution margin reached 34% and nearly two percentage point improvement versus the PCP. This is despite continued challenges related to staffing our fulfillment centers, labor rate challenges, and food cost inflation, all of which we managed to offset in the quarter with the pricing actions on both brands. Contribution margin, which landed at 23%, was just slightly up versus the prior corresponding period, a lower rate of expansion versus operating CM due to an increase in marketing voucher spend compared to an unusually low voucher share in the PCP. Finally, in September, we moved into our new California fulfillment center, significantly expanding our footprint and creating capacity for future growth. We also rolled out a new manufacturing process in all three U.S. fulfillment centers, which is simplifying our operations, improving the customer experience, and enabling further order personalization. Lastly, in Europe, we grew net revenue 15% while growing active subscribers 34% versus the prior corresponding period. We were similarly challenged as we were in the U.S., with consumers vacationing at high rates, thereby impacting base sales and acquisitions. We also faced a similar operating environment as that experienced in the U.S., with labor shortages, wage rate, and food cost inflation hitting us in Europe. Nevertheless, contribution margin and operating contribution margin both held in line with the previous year while expanding versus the previous quarter. Turning to cash, the company ended Q3 2021 with a cash balance of EUR 33 million, an improvement of approximately EUR 17 million versus the prior corresponding period. Cash from operating activities landed at EUR -7.7 million, ahead of our global operating EBITDA landing, thanks to favorable working capital. This puts our year-to-date cash from operations at EUR -10 million. We continued to invest in our fulfillment centers and digital platforms, which contributed to an outflow of cash from investing activities of EUR -5.5 million in the quarter. These investments were funded in part with new financing activity, including an asset financing facility with National Australia Bank Limited in the amount of EUR 3.7 million at an attractive 3.5% interest rate. This week, we also drew the remainder of Tranche 1, a total of $15 million of our debt facility from Runway Growth Capital. The second tranche of $20 million remains undrawn. The company expects to finish 2021 with adequate cash and existing funding facilities to continue to fund its growth strategy in 2022. Finally, the third quarter saw W23, an affiliate of Woolworths Group, convert its last two outstanding convertible bonds, which combined totaled EUR 17 million. With this conversion, our balance sheet is significantly improved. As we have previously mentioned, the volatile consumer environment that we witnessed in Q3 will have a carryover effect on our Q4 net revenue, such that we have revised our net revenue guidance back to a range in line with our guidance at the start of this year, between 26%-28%. Our expectations for contribution margin remain unchanged. With that, I would like to hand it back to Fabian. Yeah. Thanks, Jennifer. Now, despite all the volatility and supply chain challenges, Q3 was another quarter in which we continued to build our team's capabilities, processes, and increase capacity. The operating margin performance this quarter reflect a positive impact from those investments flowing through, and we expect further improvements materializing until the end of the year. While revenue this year has been harder to predict, the underlying growth trend stemming from the overall channel switch from offline to online shopping for groceries continues to be intact. Consequently, our midterm growth ambition to build a EUR 1 billion business over the coming years remains intact as well. Our growth strategy continues to be driven, on the one hand, by continued growth of active subscribers and on the other hand, by offering additional services and grocery add-on items next year, leading to higher revenue potential from each of our customers. After doubling our business in 2020, we will significantly grow again this year, and we expect ongoing significant growth at attractive unit economics and disciplined cash management for the coming years. As we scale, we will see additional operational gearing to come through, improving our operating EBITDA margins. Despite us having delivered 1 million meals each week this past quarter, we believe we are still at the very beginning of our ambition when it comes to building this company. Over the coming years, we aspire to build Marley Spoon into a much bigger business that's solving our customers' everyday problems in personalized and sustainable ways. I'm grateful for the support of each of our customers, each of our team members, and all of our shareholders as we continue on that journey. Thanks so much for taking the time this afternoon, and with that, I would now like to open the call to questions. Thank you. Your first question comes from James Ferrier from Wilsons. Please go ahead. Hi, Fabian and Jennifer. Thanks for your time, this evening and morning your time. First question's about the contribution margin guidance. Quick back of the envelope, it looks like you'd need something in the order of 32% margin at a group level to hit the full year guidance. Does that sound right? Yeah, I think if you do the math. Of course, the fourth quarter is a bit bigger than the other quarters, and therefore you have a bigger impact on the fourth quarter. Yes, I think it has to be north of 30%. Okay, thanks. Sort of, I guess, building on that then, Fabian, is that sort of number, north of 30%, indicative of where you would see calendar 2022 at a starting point? I appreciate there is historically at least some seasonality from quarter- to- quarter. Is that north of 30% an indicative starting point for calendar 2022? You have indeed the seasonalities, where in the summers, when we have normally higher packaging costs rise, that somehow has a negative impact on margin, and then in the winter, it's reverse effect. You have the seasonality, how margin goes up and down. The first quarter margin often is then a higher margin, first and fourth quarter margin. I think what we see at the end of the third quarter, we saw within the third quarter continued improvement of margin with every month, which gives us a good outlook onto Q4, where we expect to be in the range that you mentioned, above 30%, and that's what we're seeing exiting the quarter. Therefore you expect the Q4 margin profile to be somewhat where the year will start. I don't want to give guidance for 2022 on margin. I think we commented on the volatile operating environment these days. Therefore, the margin guidance these days are much harder than it used to be. I don't want to speak to 2022 in general, but you expect to start 2022 where you end 2021. Okay, thanks. That's helpful. On marketing costs, it was EUR 22 million in the quarter against EUR 17 million in the second quarter. It's quite a big step up and as a percentage of revenue, it increased to 28% of revenue. I'm trying to reconcile that quite significant step up in marketing spend with your comment that you sort of dialed back the customer acquisition activity given the less favorable environment for that. Can you just explain those two- Yeah, sure. somewhat conflicting points? Absolutely. They're not contradicting. Q3 always is a strong historically. It's been a quarter where customer acquisition has been quite successful for us and we tend to invest more in the third quarter, and then in the fourth quarter, it goes then down significantly. The fourth quarter, again, it's an environment where we see we can acquire customers at very attractive unit economics and at scale. You have the seasonality of marketing as percentage of sales fluctuating quarter-o ver- quarter. Again, Q3 and Q1 are those quarters we expect those to be higher. Q2 and Q4, you expect us to be lower. Actually, we had planned to acquire even more customers because normally it is a very attractive environment where you can acquire good unit economics. Compared to our plan, we actually spent less on marketing. We had expected to spend more than what we have spent. But we saw that over the summer months where the vacationing was quite extensive, that not only leads to your existing customers skipping more often, but there's also less eyeballs available, and so your marketing efficiency declines. We were not able to acquire the level of customer growth that we wanted, and at least not at the prices we thought make sense. That's why we dialed it back. That of course had an impact on our plans for the fourth quarter. It was definitely a stronger quarter of investment and customer acquisition, and we acquired a lot of customers. Our ambitions were higher. We wanted to acquire more customers, but the environment was not there, not at the unit economics that we deemed to be healthy for the business. That's why at the end, we spent less than we had planned, and that has an impact on Q4 revenue. Okay. At a 28% of sales, that sounds like that was sort of what you were targeting, albeit the dollar spend that the euro spend ended up less and the sales ended up less. As a percentage of sales, that 28% sounds like it's sort of what you had been anticipating. Therefore, if we look forward into calendar 2022, that level of spend, sort of 28%, which we haven't seen since sort of 2018, is that 28% of revenue a reasonable level of investment that you're looking to make on the marketing line? Not for the full year. No, for sure not. I mean, again, Q3, these are normally strong marketing quarters. Q1 and Q3, so you expect this to be higher. But on a full year basis, of course it looks differently. So the 28% is not a good predictor for next year. I think what you would rather do is you would look at the full year marketing as percentage of sales for 2021. And I think you take this as a starting point, and we are now actually deciding what's the profile for next year, and we'll talk about this next time we talk to the market, whether what's the amount of growth investments we deem to be the right profile. I can already tell you, and we've mentioned this in the past, our ambition is to grow within the means that we have. That will guide our decision, how much we're gonna invest into growth next year, and that also will then drive the decision how much marketing as a percentage of sales we're willing to invest. It's a choice that we can make, and we'll have to find the right profile here. Maybe one more comment, again, to Q3. Yes, we spent less on what we wanted to spend on. We want to spend a little bit more and get a little bit more customers, but also within the quarter, as I mentioned, we saw acquisition costs rise to the area where we didn't feel it to be attractive. That also means, within the quarter, in certain weeks, we had just high acquisition costs. The way the euro didn't give you the same amount of customers that you would have expected, and then your CPA is down again to where you want them to be. It's in a way, it's like when you see the market not being able to provide you the efficiency, your acquisition costs go up, and then you manage the acquisition costs down again where you want it to be, but then you lose normally volume. I think it's a mixture of in Q3 we wanted to acquire more customers for the money that we have spent. Acquisition efficiency wasn't where it needed to be, and that's where we dialed it down to at the end of the quarter, leading to, in the end, even slightly lower spend that we had planned, but also more importantly, missing some of the acquisitions that we had planned for, coming in towards the end of the quarter and then impacting Q4. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Fabian. I appreciate the insight. Thanks, James. Thank you. Your next question comes from Elijah Mayr from CLSA. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, guys. Thanks for the question. Maybe just firstly on, I guess looking at, if we can maybe to 2022, kind of only a couple of months away. I mean, what are your thoughts around, I guess, the step up in Australia then reverting again like we've seen in Europe and America? How does that sort of feed into your sort of revenue expectations, I guess post this calendar year? Yeah. I think what we've seen in 2020 is every time we grew and we have new customers trialing our services, they realize cooking with Marley Spoon is so much more convenient than cooking with the supermarket and provides much more variety that these customers stick around. People last year, when we doubled our business, they were wondering, "Well, if you double in 2020, 2021 has to be down because you can't keep everybody." Well, it turns out 2021 is another year of growth because we grow on top of that step up that we make. What we will see, what we expect therefore for Australia is now we've seen, as you could see, a big step up in growth in Australia. We expect that these customers will behave in line what we've experienced toward 2020. Retention of customers acquired in lockdown situations tend to be as good or better than what we normally tend to see. These customers stick around. What also will happen, and we saw it on the Northern Hemisphere in Q3, is that the activity of the base can fluctuate. Now, when lockdowns go down, people are going out more to restaurants, and they want to meet their friends again, and this can have an impact on at home cooking. You see frequency changes. You see, this not having a negative impact on the retention. Therefore, what we expect is that this increase in new customers that trial Marley Spoon and Dinnerly during the lockdowns, we expect them to stick around. We do expect, however, also for Q4, as we modeled it, that the frequency as lockdowns ease will be negatively impacted of the base customers. Not just the new customers that we just acquired, but all the customers that we have in the base, that are now maybe seeing their friends and going to restaurants. Again, we expect every time we do a growth step forward, we've seen in 2020 that these customers stick around. We expect this to be also the case for those customers that joined us in Q3 in Australia just now. We have planned in the lockdown opening up, which will have an impact on the base behavior, and that's also reflected in our revised guidance. I understand. I guess maybe if we're just sort of looking more specifically at USA and sort of what's going on over there. Can you comment on whether the price increases there would've had an impact on the lower volume perhaps factoring into sales? Or is it purely down to the change in behavior? When we do our modeling exercises, we take into account holiday periods, special days, labor days, and because we see historically they have an impact on how people behave. When it comes to price increases, we do the same. When we see price increases, we don't see necessarily an impact on frequency, but we do see an impact on churn, because of course, nobody loves the price increase. When you announce the price increase, you often have customers leaving on that announcement day. That's always a part of the analysis. Before going into a price increase, you try to model out and understand what's the impact, what's the expected impact of a price increase. You have a benefit as you increase your revenue, and you improve your margins, but you also have a negative impact on your business for those customers that don't follow you in that price increase. We have a historic reference point of when we have increased prices, and we took these historic reference points to model this specific price increase in the U.S. in the summer. What we saw is that the amount of people leaving us due to the price increase was lower than what we had expected. Our read of the data is that customers did follow us with that price increase because they have seen prices increase in supermarkets and they have seen this all around them. I think the audience that we are targeting, which for Marley Spoon customers are households with an average household income of $25,000-$50,000 roughly. The Dinnerly customer household is around $70,000-$80,000. We have seen that these households probably experience similar price increases in the supermarket, and they were not particularly surprised or offended by the price increase. We definitely see that our brands they have quite some pricing power because in the end, this is a convenience promise that we make and a promise of elevating people's lives, making people's lives easier or elevating the people's lives by having better cooking. Customers definitely see the value and follow us, therefore, when we see prices increase throughout our supply chains, and we feel like we have the data at least so far as we analyze it, suggests that we have the pricing power, to roll over, in case we continue to be in an inflationary environment, also going forward. We do believe that as input costs, as food costs increase, that customers will be able to follow us with these increases. With, I guess, in the U.S. when you've got the step down in active customers on a quarter-over-quarter basis, it's probably fair to say most of that is just from the change in behavior and increased sort of post-lockdown holiday behavior. Can you give a sense of how much of that step down? It's a combination. is change? Yeah, yeah. It's a combination of higher skip rates and acquisition dynamics. An active customer is a customer who either gets a box in a given week or could get a box. They have an active subscription, and it's an average throughout the quarter. You take every week and then you average it throughout the quarter. If you acquire less customers, it has a negative impact on that number. If customers frequency is lower, it also has a negative impact on that number. We saw a combination of both impacting that metric, whereas the customer acquisition is the bigger impact. I think it's more that towards the end of the quarter. In August, we saw acquisition costs totally not going where I wanted it to be. We increased our addition in volume. July normally is a big holiday month where we somehow were somewhat careful. In August, we ramp, but we saw acquisition costs go up, but volume not really go where it needed to be. We decided to manage down where we like to be our acquisition costs to make sure we have the unit economics that are attractive. That was successful, but it also in terms of the acquisition costs that we achieved in September at the end of the quarter. The volume, the amount of customers that we could acquire was much less than what we had planned, and that has an impact on the active customer, active subscriber numbers. Also more importantly, I think it flows through not so much in the quarter itself in Q3, but it has this flow and effect on the fourth quarter. Thanks for the response. Cheers. Thanks, Elijah. Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Owen Humphries from Canaccord. Please go ahead. Good day, guys, and thanks for taking my question. Just a quick question on the quarter. How much do you believe the skip rates impacted the quarter, from a revenue perspective versus if you had assumed FY 2020 or FY 2019 skip rates, what would the revenue have been? We've done the analysis and it is so without giving a specific number, it is definitely a couple million. I think our first model for Q3 saw not something like EUR 79 million, but more step up towards Q2, so something in the EUR mid-80s million. In the end actually, as we entered the quarter, we saw the skip rates going up. I think the revenue impact is somewhere around that line. You can also look at the development of the year-on-year customer growth and revenue growth. Now there is a delta here, and the delta is also a little bit indicative of the delta in sales. I would say, I don't know, EUR 4 million, EUR 5 million in sales is just due to the higher skip rates that we saw in that specific quarter. Okay. Go on. Just on the U.S., so I understand the third quarter or the second quarter had an impact on the third quarter. We've seen margins drop down further. Can we just touch on when, and just to clarify, was the price rises, did I hear 9% with Jen? Just to understand when the price rises came through and, just understand how you guys exited the period, and maybe you can talk about October because I thought the margins would have picked up a little bit more in the third quarter. Well, I think they picked up quite nicely, to be honest. When you think about 200 basis points improvement quarter-over-quarter, where the environment actually has not much improved in terms of inflationary environment, operating environment. I think that's a good step. Now, the price increases did come through at the end of the quarter, and also we had the Marley Spoon in September, and we had the Dinnerly at the end of August. So of course, you don't see that full impact, and so therefore you see continued improvements. At the same time, we also saw continued food costs. Now, we mentioned this in the call earlier. Food costs continue to increase and so therefore it's not just you increase price by 9% and your margin goes up proportionally. Unfortunately, we see continued input price volatility, operational volatility. I thought it was a very good step forward, but it's not the end of it. As I mentioned as well, there's more improvement flowing through, especially as we saw every month in the quarter improvements. The exit rate is higher than the way we started the quarter, and that's what gives us confidence on the guidance on the margin for the full year. Because we see this continued trend of improvements and expect more improvements to come through. I think given the environment where actually other businesses sometimes see eroding margins, I think we saw expanding margins despite this environment. We were actually on the margin side, on the operational side, especially in the U.S. We see the team stepping up and having a nice traction, and we expect continued improvements in Q4. All right. I thought I had it down. Maybe correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the U.S. contribution margin was 24% in the second quarter and 23% in the third quarter. Have I got my model wrong? Well, we look at operating CM because in the CM, don't forget there is also a marketing impact. The marketing vouchers impact your contribution margin. If, as Q3 is normally a bigger step up in terms of marketing activity, you have a bigger impact. Also year-over-year, last year, we had a very different marketing environment with where it was very much still dominated by COVID first lockdown phase. Therefore, the operating CM, I think is a better predictor in true underlying operating performance, and I think that's what's encouraging. The CM is also impacted by the quarterly change in marketing activity and also year-over-year change in marketing activity. Maybe that's another way to look at it. Maybe I can just add one point on that, Owen, to clarify. So the two points that Fabian referred to before is versus prior year. So you're right about the quarter-over-quarter on CM. On operating CM, it was mostly flat, but there were still quite some headwinds that the U.S. had to absorb, and what we were encouraged by was the sequential improvement throughout the quarter. So we saw actually month-over-month in Q3 an improvement on the operating CM in the U.S. You know, that gives us the encouragement and the confirmation that a lot of the initiatives that we need to counteract some of those external pressures are, in fact, working. Good one. Just lastly from me to the comments also within your materials, obviously the fourth quarter, we should see our numbers look like a EUR 5 million increase in contribution profit, the midpoint, and then I'm assuming marketing kinda steps down from that EUR 22 million. Maybe talk about what the fourth quarter would look like. I'm guessing you get a EUR 4 million or EUR 5 million tailwind in that fourth quarter. I imagine cost of EUR 6 million. Then, can you, just to understand for next year, where are we thinking about operating cash flow for the full year next year? In the past, they've been around that break-even point. Is that still what you're thinking? Yeah. I mean, we're not really guiding for 2022 yet, but you know, that's generally kind of our mantra as you know, that we tend to try to operate towards the operating cash flow break even. Yeah, I mean, we're not really commenting on 2022 yet, to be honest. Okay. That assumption is right that we should see when you say significant operating leverage, it sounds like the EBITDA should be between EUR 3 million and EUR 5 million for the fourth quarter. Is that appropriate? Well, what we're saying is we're seeing improvement over Q3. And, Q3, you know, I think we've explained what led to the operating EBITDA miss. Certainly, we're expecting to improve significantly versus this current Q3 quarter. We expect Q4 to do better. We're not guiding to a specific number. You know, as Fabian mentioned earlier in one of the questions, the contribution margin, we do expect to step up. As we said, we exited Q3 pretty positively from all the regions. The sequential month-over-month, Q4 is typically a good margin quarter because of the seasonality shift in terms of the packaging requirements in the Northern Hemisphere, and just the continued operational improvements that we're making in the U.S., California being up, alive and running. All of our new manufacturing processes now actually live and operate in each of the three fulfillment centers in the U.S. We're still right now we feel good about the contribution margin expansion to come in the fourth quarter. That should have a positive impact on operating EBITDA relative to Q3. Good one. Thanks, guys. Thanks, Owen. Thank you. Your next question comes from Victoria Petrova from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Thank you very much for taking my questions, and apologies if I missed anything. My first question is on Australia. Have you been gaining market share in Australia, and has your growth been supported by some disruption at HelloFresh production facilities in Australia in this third quarter? Could you please also mention, maybe comment on your market share dynamics in the U.S. and Europe. Are you gaining market share? Are you seeing any new players? Are you seeing any additional disruption from any newcomers or maybe e-grocery? How do you look at it as sort of in the post-COVID environment? Thank you very much. Yeah. Maybe starting with Australia, we are fortunate that we were able to navigate this Q3, the third quarter, without major disruptions, especially at the beginning of the quarter. There were the risks of being shut down by the government based, if you would have seen individual cases in your facilities. The teams were very prudent to put safety measures in place, and to make sure we continuously test, trace, and so we were able to operate the whole time without major disruptions. That was helpful. We don't look at market share analysis on an ongoing basis, but we were happy that we could go through this quarter without any disruptions. Maybe as you saw, we saw good growth in Australia. I think there is other meal companies, especially, our larger competitor, HelloFresh, doesn't break out the region specifically, so therefore it's a bit hard to say what the market share situation looks like. I think overall, the market environment, the market dynamics, they are not different in Australia compared to Europe or even in the U.S., which is, we see a very small amount of meal kit operators. In fact, there's two, only two companies operating meal kits globally, which is our much larger peer, HelloFresh, and then there's us. We often see ourself in a duopoly situation where they are the much larger company, we are a much smaller company, but the market is massive, which is groceries, which is just at the beginning to switch from offline to online. Therefore, we in the past have seen and continue to see our growth at really attractive unit economics at good IRRs. That's what gives us our confidence in the market dynamics. If you look at the margin that we operate at, we actually tend to operate at similar or higher margins despite our scale difference. That gives us the confidence to operate in this environment. We don't see a lot of market entries. In fact, I can't remember last time a meal kit business entered one of our markets and achieved scale since we started the business seven years ago. I think we were the last company to enter the industry and achieve scale. We therefore feel the operating environment is relatively benign because we have normally a two-player situation. Then in the U.S., we have two, maybe three other meal kit companies that are relevant. Maybe you have four to five meal kit businesses operating in groceries, which is a massive vertical. Therefore, as we see continued channel switch from offline to online and groceries, this will allow us, I think, to fulfill our growth ambitions at the right unit economics also in the future. Therefore, we don't see a lot of competitive pressure. Now, the grocery market is, in general, a market that is now seeing lots of changes. We see ultra-quick grocery delivery models in many markets that don't really compete with our use case. Our use case is we make weeknight cooking easy for customers that have a weekly habit, and we do it in a way that's much more convenient that provides much more variety, much more personalization than what the supermarket tends to provide to the customer at an attractive price point, which is the same price point as the supermarket. We have other models that are more the milk run that solves a problem. I need something in 10 minutes that I forgot, or I just have the craving or something, which is this ultra-convenience side of this grocery space. I think what we see an unbundling of the supermarket and unbundling of use cases. Where we cover the weeknight cooking use case quite successfully, there's other use cases that other players are bundling. I think supermarkets are, of course, under pressure of seeing this competitive pressure from all these different players that are unbundling certain services that these supermarkets can provide to customers. We don't think the operational environment or the competitive environment has changed in the last 12 months, so far as we see it on the customer side, and the use case side. At the same time, we are constantly thinking what incremental problems can we solve for our customers. We will be therefore leveraging the fact that we send a box to our customers nearly every week for weeknight cooking and see what other problems could we solve for those customers. Think about lunch, think about breakfast, think about adjacent problems. You'll see us definitely venture into that space and increase the problem solutions offered to our customers. We think this will provide another avenue for growth for us, not just by acquiring new customers to our services, but also by expanding the basket size, expanding the solutions to our customers and increasing the ARPU of our customers along the way. This is the second growth direction that we're very excited about for next year. Thank you very much. Yep. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Siegel for closing remarks. Yeah. Thanks everybody for joining today. As I try to structure it in my remarks at the beginning, we saw Q3 operations very encouraging, not because it was easy, quite the opposite. Operationally, it remains a very difficult environment, but we've seen good improvements. The investments in people, processes, talent, technology, we see these benefits starting to flow through and expect them to flow through further, which is just fun and great to see. We also saw a lot of volatility in customer behavior, which was disappointing to us because we had expected more. In the end, we just have to accept that customer behavior is quite volatile this year. It was volatile last year, it's volatile this year. It doesn't change the story though. The story is that this business, after doubling last year, continues to grow not only this year, also in the coming years at attractive unit economics. While this year we probably will not be able to follow the approach of operating within a neutral operating cash flow environment, overall this ambition hasn't changed. Therefore, we think as the company will be at larger scale next year, while we're making these choices now, what's the right profile? Our ambition is to grow next year within the means that we have to grow the business, basically following the strategy of operating around operating cash flow neutral. It will continue to be the guide, the guardrails for us. We're very excited, as we think we're just at the beginning of building this business, and we expect continued growth over the coming years. We're looking forward to the support of shareholders as we build this business. Now, we're on the road show next week, so I hope that we'll be able to connect to many of you, in person, via some of the broker calls or one-on-one calls. Please reach out to our investor relations team if you like to schedule something. We're excited to see all of you next week. Thanks everybody for joining.