Good morning, everyone. Ladies and gentlemen, the Myer EGM is about to commence. My name is Timothy Clark, and I'm the Executive General Manager of Property, Store Development, and Services at Myer. From a housekeeping perspective, please note that should an emergency arise that requires evacuation, venue staff will be on hand to direct you. Please follow their instructions using the nearest emergency exit. There are five emergency exits located in the building: two exits on this lower level, one to my left, one to my right, and there are another three on the next level up, again one to my left and two to my right. Please also note that photography, audio, and video recording is not permitted during the meeting. Myer Executive Chair Olivia Wirth will now commence the meeting. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Olivia Wirth, and I'm the Executive Chair of Myer, and it's my pleasure to welcome you to today's extraordinary general meeting on the proposed combination of Myer and Apparel Brands. As we gather for this meeting today, which is also being webcast, I'd like to recognize the various traditional lands on which we do our business. From my location today, I'd like to acknowledge the custodians of the land on which we meet, the Kulin Nation, and pay respect to elders past, present, and emerging. As always, we do plan to make this meeting interactive with an opportunity for shareholders to ask questions in person, online, or over the phone, and to vote either in person or online. We look forward to taking any questions you may have later in the meeting as we progress through the agenda. Joining me on stage are fellow members of the Myer board, Jacquie Naylor, hi, Jacquie, Terry McCartney, and Rob Perry, and our other director, Deputy Chair Gary Weiss, who is currently overseas and has also joined us by the phone. Our CFO, Matt Jackman, and Company Secretary Paul Morris also join me on stage. And finally, I'd also like to welcome the Myer Executive Team, who is present here today, along with Teresa Rendo, Jason McVicker, Josh Molloy, senior executives from Apparel Brands, Rory Moriarty from our solicitors, Clayton Utz, and Tim Farag, who's representing the share registry of Link Market Services. So, with the quorum present, I now formally declare the meeting open. The Explanatory Memorandum and Notice of Meeting have been distributed to shareholders with information available on our investor website. I will take the Notice of Meeting as read. As set out in this notice, there is one item of business to be covered at today's meeting, that being the resolution to approve the combination between Myer and Apparel Brands. Voting on the combination resolution will be by way of a poll for Myer shareholders. For those in attendance in person, voting on the resolution will be conducted via the voting card. You will have received this when you arrived at registration. For those attending online, voting will take place via the online meeting platform. I will explain the Q&A and voting procedures in more detail when we get to the formal items of business. I now declare the poll open. This means you can vote on the combination resolution at any time from now until the poll is closed at the end of the meeting. Full details of the combination are contained in the Explanatory Memorandum, but I would like to take the opportunity to outline some key reasons why Myer's independent directors have determined that the transaction is compelling and in the best interest of Myer shareholders. Today, you are voting on one of the most significant corporate transactions in the company's history, the transformational combination of Myer with Premier Investments Apparel Brands. It will enable us to fast-track our strategic priorities by leveraging the complementary strengths of both the Myer and Apparel Brands businesses. When I took on the role as chair, we commenced a comprehensive strategic review to increase Myer's profitability and drive sustainable earnings growth. As an outcome of the preliminary phase of that review, we identified the potential opportunity of a combination with Apparel Brands. Our strategic vision is to create a leading Australian retail platform by identifying opportunities to deliver a step change in Myer's market position and generate substantial strategic and financial benefits that will create value for you, our valued shareholders. The combination with Apparel Brands accelerates our strategic priorities, and given the challenging trading environment, this task is more important than ever. As shown in our trading update released last week, Myer has not been immune from the cost of living crunch affecting the broader retail sector and other parts of the economy, both here in Australia and around the world. It demonstrates why it is crucial for retailers to continually innovate and evolve to strengthen and grow their businesses, and that, in essence, is what today is about: adapting our business to ensure it is best placed to thrive in the years ahead in a highly competitive and rapidly evolving retail market. The combination of Myer and Apparel Brands, which includes the well-known brands Just Jeans, Jay Jays, Portmans, Dotti, and Jacqui E, brings together two businesses that are highly complementary. The breadth of Myer's category offerings and brands, coupled with our strengths in loyalty, data, and e-commerce, will benefit the Apparel Brands businesses, while their deep experience in product development, design, and sourcing will uplift Myer. The combined Myer Group is set to emerge as a leading retail platform across Australia and New Zealand with unique strengths, expanded capabilities, and a significant wealth of retail talent and experience. Our combined businesses will be a leading omnichannel retail platform with pro forma historical annual sales of more than AUD 4 billion in FY24 and a stronger balance sheet to help fund future investment and growth. It will create a business with an extensive footprint of 783 department and specialty stores, supported by more than 17,000 team members. The combination creates a more resilient Myer Group with genuine and significant scale across Australia and New Zealand, an omni-retail business with diversified earnings, a larger customer base that spans Australians across all demographics. It enables us to leverage MYER one across an enlarged customer base, which will provide valuable customer insights to drive incremental sales over the longer term. The combined Myer Group will be better placed to capitalize on our first-party data to drive customer-led cross-shop benefits, spanning an expanded customer base. There will also be advantages from accelerating the full potential of our Myer-exclusive brands through enhanced product development and sourcing capabilities and scale opportunities through combining sourcing functions. We plan on leveraging our scale and brand expertise of Apparel Brands to improve the performance of Sass & Bide, Marcs, and David Lawrence. There is also an opportunity to enhance and optimize the combined MYER group's store footprint to drive further operating leverage and efficiencies. MYER's exceptional e-commerce capabilities will help expand Apparel Brands' online penetration and deliver incremental sales, and we will be continuing our disciplined approach to cost management to drive efficiencies. We also intend to explore a refinancing of MYER's existing debt facilities in the near term, an initiative that has the potential to generate substantial annual savings in interest and financing costs. Now, I'd like to touch on both the review conducted by our independent expert as well as the recommendation of our independent directors. First, the independent expert appointed to assess the merits of the combination has concluded that it is fair and reasonable to non-associated Myer shareholders in the absence of a superior proposal. A copy of the independent expert's report is contained in the Explanatory Memorandum, with a supplementary report released to the ASX on the 15th of January 2025. With respect to the independent directors on the Myer board, after carefully reviewing the opportunity, the independent directors continue to unanimously view the combination as both compelling and in the best interest of Myer shareholders. The independent directors also confirm that at this time of the meeting no superior proposal has emerged, and we are not aware of any superior proposal likely to emerge. Accordingly, the independent directors continue to unanimously recommend that shareholders vote in favor of the combination resolution. A wide range of reasons helped independent directors form this view, including that the combination creates a business with significantly enhanced scale and capabilities to drive growth and operating leverage benefits. It also introduces new customers to MYER's loyalty program. It generates expected pre-tax annual earnings benefits of at least AUD 30 million on a run rate basis over the short to medium term. It will boost our balance sheet, providing greater capacity to invest in growth across the combined MYER group and produces opportunities for MYER to take advantage of Apparel Brands' capabilities in product development, design, sourcing, and distribution to deliver improved margins for the group. It will expand and diversify MYER's shareholder base with improved share trading liquidity and also access to capital. The Myer board has declared a fully franked pre-completion dividend of AUD 0.25 per share to existing Myer shareholders, conditional on the combination proceeding, which will deliver to Myer shareholders value of approximately AUD 20.9 million in aggregate. So, in closing, the strategic financial rationale of this transaction is compelling. The Myer Apparel Brands combination delivers significant scale and enhanced ability to invest and innovate in a highly competitive and rapidly evolving retail market to support future growth. The combination represents an opportunity to grow the business and deliver financial and strategic benefits for both Myer and you, our valued Myer shareholders. We'll now move to the rest of the formal agenda of today's meeting. Before I put the combination resolution to the meeting, I'd now like to take a moment to run through the procedural matters relating to your participation in this meeting. Only shareholders, proxy holders, or appointed representatives are entitled to speak or vote at this meeting. Only shareholders who are entitled to vote at this meeting may cast a direct vote on the resolution. For those attending the meeting in person, you can cast your vote by filling out the voting card that you received when you registered at arrival. If you have any questions, please see Link Market Services team member at the registration desk. For those participating in the meeting via an online platform, you can cast your direct vote using the electronic voting card that you received when you validated the registration. For those attending the meeting in person, you would have been given an attendance card when you registered on arrival. If anyone with a yellow or a blue card wishes to speak, please make your way to the microphone at the appropriate time. Identify yourself before asking the question and then proceed. For those who are participating via our online platform, you will be able to submit questions registering as a shareholder or a proxy holder and selecting the Ask a Question tab, and then follow the instructions on the platform. A facility has also been made available for shareholders not physically in attendance to ask verbal questions during the meeting. In order to do so, you will need to have obtained your unique PIN from Link Market Services before the meeting. If you have your PIN, please follow the steps in the virtual meeting online guide and ask a verbal question. With respect to the overall Q&A process, it's my duty as chair to allow a reasonable opportunity for shareholders as a whole at the meeting to ask questions. We will endeavor to get through as many questions as possible, and where it's not possible to answer all questions, we'll endeavor to ensure that the most commonly raised questions and issues are answered. Tim Clark, who you met before, will assist me during this part of the meeting by reading out questions that have been submitted online. As set out in the notice of meeting, there is one item of business to be covered at today's meeting, that being a resolution to approve the proposed combination between Myer and Apparel Brands. In particular, the item of business is to consider and, if thought fit, to pass as an ordinary resolution that for the purposes of ASX Listing Ruling 10.1 and 10.11 and for the purposes approval is given for the issue of 890,500 shares, Myer shares to Premier Investments Limited in connection with the proposed acquisition of the Apparel Brands businesses from Premier Investments Limited on the terms and conditions set out in the Explanatory Memorandum. I now formally propose the combination resolution to the meeting. Voting on this resolution will be by way of a poll, and as an ordinary resolution, a simple majority of the votes cast is required for the resolution to pass. Tim Farag of Link Market Services is appointed as a returning officer for the purpose of the polls. As I mentioned earlier, the poll is now open and will remain open until five minutes after the close of the meeting. The voting restrictions for the resolution are also included in the notice of meeting. Accordingly, Premier Investments Limited will be excluded from the voting on the resolution. When voting on a poll, proxy holders must vote as directed, subject to any applicable voting restrictions. Any directed proxies that are not voted at the meeting will automatically default to the chair, and I'm required to vote those proxies as directed. The proxy indirect votes received prior to this meeting will now be shown on the screen. I'll now take questions on the combination resolution, starting with questions from the floor. Thank you. I'll now take questions from number one. Chair, may I introduce David Kingston, shareholder? Good morning, Chair. You did a great job as CEO of Qantas Loyalty, but delivering sustainable shareholder value as executive chair of Myer involves much harder challenges. Myer is such an iconic brand, but with such a sad history as a listed company. Totally infamous IPO at AUD 4.10 in 2009. Sixteen years later, the Myer share price is less than a quarter of the IPO price. Clearly, Chair, the grossly overpriced IPO debacle is not your fault, but the current deal before shareholders today is a defining moment and absolutely is your issue, particularly as, with controversy, you have the dual responsibilities of chair and executive, which is very unusual in Australia. You and your fellow directors are recommending that Myer issue over half of its share capital to Premier for the Apparel Brands. It might be a short-term sugar fix, but personally, I have my doubts whether it will work in the medium term. Is the purchase of Apparel Brands just a wild punt? Chair, I am shocked that twice in your opening address you described it as compelling. I appreciate issues are subjective, but in no way, shape, or form is this, in my opinion, a compelling deal. You listed a number of motherhood rationales. You mentioned they're highly complementary, the two parts. I doubt that. No one would describe the Apparel Brands being purchased as A-grade brands. Just Jeans, Jay Jays, Portmans, Dotti, Jacqui E. They're B-grade brands at best. Indeed, well-respected Chanticleer has recently described the Apparel Brands as yesterday's hero in Lew's Empire. I won't sing the song. I'm not a great singer. Yesterday's heroes. Okay. Chanticleer also described the Apparel Brands, quote, "Baggage. Baggage Brands. Ouch." That's a well-respected commentator, which flies in the face, Chair, of your comment that the deal is compelling. Yes, the share market was initially enthusiastic with the hype of this deal. The share price rocketed up, but the major earnings downgrade ten years ago by Apparel Brands and Myer led to a substantial fall. I really doubt, Chair, this acquisition of Brands. Myer's previous strategy of buying Sass & Bide, Marcs, Trent Nathan, David Lawrence, it hasn't really succeeded, Chair, and arguably those brands are more compatible with Myer as concessionaire brands than the Apparel Brands. I doubt that you're going to have Just Jeans, Jay Jays, Portmans, Dotti, Jacqui E as concessionaire brands in the Myer stores. So the previous acquisition of Brands didn't work very well. Let's try again. Is it a wild casino bet? I'll table a couple of specific issues. Let me also refer to the Kroll's Independent Experts report that you referred to, Chair. After the major earnings downgrades by Myer and Apparel ten days ago, Kroll reassessed the deal and continues to conclude it's fair and reasonable. Assessment of any corporate deal involves significant subjectivity. It's not as if Kroll can sprinkle holy water over this and guarantee it. Kroll have written positive independent experts reports on two recent deals, which were actually withdrawn, Chair, before even reaching the shareholders' meetings, namely the sale of one of humm's businesses to Latitude and the merger of the CD Private Equity Funds. Also, Chair, Kroll's recent report on the Perpetual Pendal merger received some criticism at the extraordinary general meeting. Deal is the purchase of those brands and AUD 82 million cash, albeit the standalone Myer has a higher level of cash. In return, Myer will issue 890 million Myer shares to Premier, and Myer holders will be diluted to just 48.5% of the enlarged capital. Solly Lew's Private Company will hold 26.8% of the expanded Myer after Premier distributes its new shares and its existing shares. Let's turn to 13 January. Myer EBIT dropped 16 million to 48 million from the previous corresponding period, over a 22-week period, a 25% fall. But the Apparel Brands, even worse, they dropped 16-18 million to 31-35 million from PCP. Based on the midpoints, that's a horrendous fall of 34%, and that's what you're buying for AUD 700 million or AUD 800 million. Kroll's revised values are AUD 733-828 million, and Myer consideration shares AUD 697-901 million. If we take a midpoint, Chair, the deal is not fair because based on the midpoint, it's AUD 780 million value received by Myer versus AUD 799 million paid. So based on midpoint, the deal is unfair. Kroll get around that, Chair, by saying it is irrelevant where in the range the revised value of AB falls. Not sure that I agree with that, but that's Kroll's opinion. Notwithstanding the substantial fall in Apparel Brands EBIT just announced, Kroll surprisingly adopts the same maintainable EBIT for Apparel Brands of AUD 76.6-78.6 million. Pretty surprising with a 34% drop in earnings, and they just say, "Who cares? We'll adopt the same EBIT." All they did was drop the multiple by 15% to 8.5-9.5 times on a controlled basis. I assume Kroll didn't change the maintainable earnings as it considers the earnings fall to be cyclical. I think that's a fairly facile view. I think everyone would accept there are some structural issues that are impacting upon Apparel Brands and also on Myer. Kroll also adopted the same maintainable EBIT for Myer of 75.6 and dropped the multiple to a very low 4.45-5.25 on a minority basis. That's less than half the median EBIT multiple of 11.1 times that for Australian New Zealand retailers shown in Kroll's own report. So they're punishing Myer. Multiple of less than half. It's also way below the median multiple shown in Kroll's own report for global department stores of 7.8 times. So they seem to think that Myer is the dunce of the class. It's unclear why Kroll adopted a very similar maintainable EBIT for Myer and Apparel Brands when the just announced results show Myer with much higher half-year EBIT. I appreciate there's some cyclicality there, seasonality. Also, I'd point out that when there's a merger of equals, which this is, half and half, basically, both the buyer and seller are often assessed with earnings multiples on the same control or minority basis. But Kroll have reached their conclusion by assessing the value of Apparel Brands on a control basis and Myer on a minority basis. Also, Kroll has applied a multiple to Apparel Brands EBIT, nearly double what it's applied to Myer's EBIT. In my opinion, existing Myer shareholders should receive the majority of the merge group, whereas they're only receiving 48.5%. In my opinion, Myer is overpaying. Chair, I'll come to some questions now. I assume you have personally assessed the deal very closely, both prior to and post the major profit downgrade. I assume you are not just relying upon Kroll. First question has a couple of parts, and then I have a second question as well. How can you, Chair, personally support the deal when Apparel Brands fell by 34% compared to Myer just by 25%? How can you support the deal when Apparel Brands is contributing just 20% of the combined revenue but receiving over half of the cake? This rests on the assumption that AB's margin will continue at a far higher level than Myer's margin. And Chair, why should Myer be valued at a very low multiple of 4.45-5.25 EBIT when the median multiple in Kroll's table for department stores is 7.8 times? If the median multiple is applied, Chair, the conclusion on the deal changes dramatically. So that's my first question. Thank you. Thank you, David. I think your question was potentially as long as my opening remarks. So thank you for sharing your views, and I really welcome that, and I think it's important that all shareholders have an opportunity to speak today. So thank you. And look, I will cover off a number of areas. Firstly, as I outlined in the opening remarks and as very clear through the explanatory memorandum that we've provided to all shareholders, we have taken a very much a medium to longer-term view about the combination of both Myer and the Apparel Brands. You've got to remember that this transaction is an output, one area that we've undertaken as part of our strategic review. A strategic review was kicked off some months ago, which was all about how do we set up Myer for the future and what is the full potential of this very important retailer in Australia. It became clear that there are a number of ways that we could ensure that Myer was set up for future growth and future potential. One of those particular areas was to strengthen the product availability as it relates to women's apparel, men's apparel, and children's apparel. There was an opportunity for us to do better in the very important private label business or Myer exclusive brands, of which you mentioned some of them previously. This is important because it delivers for our customers. It delivers a unique proposition for our customers, which drives loyalty. Importantly, for our shareholders, it drives margins. This is one particular area of our strategic review. There are many ways that we could solve for this, but we believe the combination with Apparel Brands is absolutely the right way for us to set ourselves up for the future. It will ensure that we deliver scale. It will deliver diversifications of earnings. And as I've mentioned before, importantly, the capability that exists within Apparel Brands, we believe, can supercharge the way that we approach the apparel business within Myer. We've been very clear around the approach that we've taken. We've considered all aspects of this business in a very thorough due diligence process. So yes, we have absolutely assessed the business. We've got to know the business particularly well. We've spent a considerable amount of time with the executive team, and we have considered all paths forward for Myer. We believe, in addition to the independent expert's report, which again is available online, this is an independent company, Kroll, which David mentioned, is an independent company who has assessed the report and where they have landed, not on one but two occasions. In their opinion, this is absolutely in the best interest of Myer shareholders, and you can see from the vote that we've received today, there is overwhelming support, overwhelming support of Myer shareholders for this transaction, so we look forward to, beyond the transaction, working with the Apparel Brands, moving on the combination, and making sure that the Myer business is strong. This is all about not looking at one simple trade period or one cycle. This is all about establishing Myer to make sure that we can deliver returns through the cycle. It is a challenging industry, and we need to make sure that we can participate in the growth that exists in the markets where we play a role, whether that's Apparel, whether that's beauty, whether that's home. This is all about establishing strong foundations for the Myer business. We turn 125 years this year, 125 years. So it's on us, on the directors here sitting beside me, on the management team who joined me here today. It's on all of us to make sure that this business is stronger for the future and that we can make sure that we not only deliver for our shareholders who are here today, but importantly, deliver for our people. There's 17,000 people that turn up every day, every day post-transaction with Myer, with Jay Jays, with Just Jeans, with Dotti, with Jacqui E, and they turn up and provide a phenomenal experience for our customers. We want to make sure that we can invest in that customer experience going forward. We want to make sure that we can improve that in-store experience, that online experience. We can't do that. We can't provide the jobs. We can't provide the fabulous experience. We can't provide the products unless we are strong. And that strength will absolutely come about as part of what this transaction will absolutely build on that strength. It gives us a stronger balance sheet. It means that we can battle the headwinds that we will see in retail. So I appreciate your view, but I strongly disagree with it. This is a phenomenal brand, a phenomenal brand, a one that is well-loved by Australians, Australian-wide, and has for over 100 years. We are going to make changes to this business to ensure that this is around for years to come and for generations to come. So I appreciate your view. I think you can see that the shareholders also possibly don't agree with your point of view given the resounding response here, but we do need to make change. I am convinced, as are the directors sitting here beside me, that this is part of the change and that this will make us a stronger business as a result. So thank you, David. I'm happy to take your next question. Thank you, Olivia. Look, clearly this transaction will be approved. It's got unanimous recommendation from all of the directors, and it's also got Kroll's holy water for whatever that means. So it's going to be approved. This is all about putting it on the record today, Olivia, about the facts. You're very eloquent in your comments. You speak beautifully. I suppose I focus more on the hard numbers, Olivia, and I haven't yet had any response from you on the hard numbers. I think a lot of shareholders are philosophical about this. They're prepared to give you a chance. You're putting your reputation on the line, Olivia, so they're going to give you a chance. But really, the judgment for you is not going to come today because it's going to be approved today. The judgment for you and your fellow directors is going to be, where is the maintainable EBIT of Apparel Brands in a year's time or two years' time? This is a defining moment for the company. You're taking it down this path. I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying I've got doubts. I vehemently disagree with you, Olivia. This is not a compelling deal. You've used that word twice. That, in my opinion, is wrong. But it will be approved. But the real issue is how you deliver. Let me move to my second question. We all have huge respect for Solly Lew. I know Solly, great operator. There is a principle, Olivia. Never buy a business from a smart operator. You talk about synergies and all this motherhood stuff, but at the end of the day, I would doubt that you are going to be able to extract much more out of the Apparel Brands than Solly has been able to. Premier are retaining their two premium brands, Peter Alexander and Smiggle, but they're selling you the weaker brands. I repeat Chanticleer's reference. These are yesterday's heroes in the Lew's empire. That's a pretty damaging statement. I say they're B-grade brands. Chanticleer says they're baggage brands. We all know in retail that B and C-grade brands are challenging at present. Look at Mosaic Brands. It's got a whole lot of B and C-grade brands. Where are they? In receivership. Let's look at another one, City Chic. Everyone got excited. They were over AUD 6 a while ago. Where are they today? AUD 0.12. Let's look at the margin on Apparel Brands. It's fallen substantially over the last couple of years. They're declining brands. It's not cyclical. It's significantly strategic. They're not glamour brands. They're B-grade at best. Question for you, Olivia, and a few parts, please. Can you assure Myer shareholders? Because you are in a difficult position. You are chairwoman, and you are also executive director. Huge amount of responsibility on your shoulders. Can you assure the Myer shareholders personally that you can maintain the margins from Apparel Brands and that its margins won't fall further? Second part, can you assure the Myer shareholders? You refer in glowing terms to Kroll's report. I'm not as convinced. Can you assure the Myer shareholders that the maintainable EBIT for Apparel Brands that Kroll has assumed of AUD 76.6 million-AUD 78.6 million? Can you assure Myer shareholders that in next year's AGM, the following year's AGM, you will proudly say that you have been vindicated and you are going to deliver what Kroll is saying you can deliver? Thirdly, do you really think, Olivia, that you can enhance shareholder value by paying AUD 700 million or AUD 800 million for these declining brands, which is near one-time revenue for the Apparel Brands? One-time revenue, that's a big revenue multiple. When lots of B-grade retail brands sell for well under half of revenue, indeed, Myer's current value is 20% of its revenue. And yet you are going out there and using the word compelling. In a compelling statement, you are saying you are going to pay one-time revenue. I can guarantee you, Olivia, if those brands were put up for sale today, there is zero chance anyone would pay AUD 700 million for them. Zero. Thanks, David. I'm happy to take those questions. Final part of that. Okay. I just wanted to ask whether you disagree with Chanticleer's fairly painful description of what you're buying. Thank you, Olivia. Thank you, David. Appreciate your question. Look, let me be clear. I don't run the business based on what media commentary and what they say and what they don't, and I'll just leave it at that. The media are absolutely allowed to have their own opinions, and we welcome that, but that is not the framework, all the input, all the analysis by which we run our business. There are a number of issues that you raise, so let me work through them. Hard numbers, there are hard numbers. There is detailed analysis, and this is set out in the booklet that we've provided the shareholders, and we encourage our shareholders to read that in detail, and I assume they have, which informed the vote, which again is obviously overwhelmingly positive in favor of this arrangement. Secondly, we, of course, will work as hard as possible to ensure that the margins improve not only of Apparel Brands but also for Myer over the medium to longer term. But let me be very clear. This was not about a short-term sugar hit. This is about establishing a longer-term viable future for Myer. It's about ensuring that we can face the challenging environment that all retailers are facing, not only in Australia but globally. It's ensuring that we can meet the needs of our customers, which are changing, and it's ensuring that we can continue to, 12 months' time, two years' time, can sit here and discuss with our shareholders how we have delivered upon not only this transaction but also the broader strategic review. Let me just touch briefly on the Apparel Brands business. This is a very well-run business. As I outlined before, David, there are skills and capabilities in this business. They are experts in terms of design, production, and brand management. As you would expect, we did our own research and intelligence in this market about what the consumers think of these brands. And they are well-loved, and they are cherished, and they are heritage brands. So I would disagree with your proposition about how you position these brands. I know this, and I don't just speak from personal experience. I know this from the consumer insights that we have. Many of these brands have been around for decades, and they are cherished by lots of Australians. We will continue to invest in them to make sure that they are relevant and compelling offerings for all age groups, whether it's the younger ones with Dotti's and JJ's, or it's the older customers in Jacqui E, or it's those first starting their first job. I know where I bought my first suit when I left university, and it was Portmans. We want to make sure that we continue to invest in these brands and continue to invest in our people and our stores, so the experience is a great one. In summary, thank you, David, for your views. That's your last question for today. We will go to other shareholders. This is about the longer-term, creating longer-term value for the shareholders. It's about creating a longer-term view envisioned for Myer, and once again, we believe that it's a compelling one. I will use that word again because it is true. It delivers scale. It delivers resilience. It delivers pre-tax earnings benefits. It boosts our balance sheet. It takes advantage of Apparel Brands' capabilities, and it expands our shareholder base. Can I just have one follow-up, Olivia? Because I don't think you've answered my question. Can you give the shareholders today, please, Olivia, some comfort that you are confident that you will continue to deliver the 76 million EBIT that Kroll are assessing as the maintainable EBIT? And can you give the shareholders today your personal confidence and assurance that you will maintain the Apparel Brands' margin at the current level? Thank you. Look, I have answered that already. We are very much committed to ensuring that we deliver for all our stakeholders. That includes our shareholders, and I give you my personal commitment that I will do everything possible, as will the directors sitting here beside me, as will not only the 17,000 people that turn up every day to deliver a fabulous customer experience to Australians, but also the combined executive teams. We absolutely will have that in mind. We want this business to survive. We want this business to be great, and that includes all aspects from customer experience, delivering for our customers, delivering for our shareholders, and delivering to our people. So thank you for your questions, and I'm happy to move on to anyone else that may have another question in the room. If not, then we might turn, sorry, we do have someone. Yes. Thank you at the back. Chair, I'd like to introduce Roger Fyfe, shareholder. Thank you, Chair. As a Coles Myer and unfortunately recent float Myer shareholder, I've got a long memory of things that got lost along the way and things that could have been done better and some of the hostilities that were counterproductive. I'm grateful for David providing the depth of detail that he did. My questions are for the board as a whole, and they relate to implementation of this merger, which you've indicated. It's critical. Implementation is critical, and the full board need to support you. The first comment, and then the question is, the model of a department store owning chains of apparel stores is a world first. Again, I'm quoting from David's sources. Are there any examples that you can indicate around the world where this sort of mix is successful? Thank you for your question. And you're right. It is, in many ways, a unique model, but it is not a unique model for retailers to come together to ensure that they can have the best offering for their customers. Myer, for example, has run its own private label businesses for a couple of decades, and that's not often well known by our customers. So these are brands like Regatta. They're brands like Basque. They're a well-known children's brand, home brand. So running private labels is actually quite common practice for department stores and also for Myer. We do believe that this is unique. And as I've mentioned before, the benefits are numerous, but we believe that there is more strength in bringing these two complementary brands together. And we haven't spoken about many other complementary aspects that Myer has, for example, which we believe will benefit the specialty stores as well. I would make the point, though, as part of this transaction, that we are very fortunate that it is the executive team from Apparel Brands who has deep expertise in running these businesses. I mentioned before that Teresa and Josh and Jason are here with us today, and we're very fortunate that the executives who have been running these brands for some time, whether that's in property, whether that's retail operations, whether that's running the brands, will also become part of the Myer executive team. So we will have the expertise, and we will be able to tap into what the similarities are and what the differences are to make sure that every aspect of our business can benefit, whether it's the conversations we have with landlords about property, whether it's the product teams coming together to discuss how we make better product, whether it's the loyalty and data teams to better provide insights about what our customers want. So we are very confident that this is the right model. It may not be something that others have done overseas, but that doesn't mean that this is right. Australia is a unique market. It is a unique market. We are building out what we believe to be Australia's most compelling online and in-store retail platform, and this will ensure that it doesn't matter what happens in the market, that we will be best placed in order to meet the changing demands of our customers, deliver the right products, and ultimately the right experiences. So we're not necessarily looking to someone else to follow their path. We're going to tread a path that we believe is right for this business, right for our customers, right for our shareholders, and ultimately right for the Myer business into the future. Thank you. My second question, again quoting analysts, Premier's people are supposed to be the best in apparel at sourcing brands and clothes, and also reference that the skill set that they could bring will be different to the existing skill set of Myer people. My question is, are you aware what golden handcuffs Premier has put in place to ensure that key people are retained after the merger? Yeah, it's a really good question because people are our key. Without the top talent at an executive level or in-store, that is ultimately what will make or break our business. People are absolutely key. And yes, we obviously have had conversations, both from a board perspective and also more broadly with the management team here, to make sure that we can have continuity for the top leadership team as part of the transaction. And come Investor Day, we look forward to providing more details on how we can make sure that we align how executives are remunerated and judged into the future, which makes sure that aligns with our shareholders' interests as well. So the answer is yes. Yes, we have some great talent. Yes, we're very confident that we can ensure continuity in these executives. And three, we want to make sure that we align the reward and recognition program for our executives with those of our shareholders to make sure that we can deliver for you. Thank you. My third question. The Apparel Brands are currently 1,719 stores across Australia and New Zealand. In the next 12 months to two years, will Myer expand the number of stores of those existing Apparel Brands? Yeah, I think what you mentioned there, there's 793 Apparel Brands stores both in Australia and New Zealand, and obviously that will continue to play a really important role as part of the broader Myer Group portfolio. We will obviously, in coming months and coming years, continue to assess which are the right markets that we have presence in, not only from a Myer perspective but also Apparel Brands' perspective, and that's an ongoing piece of work that we'll continue to do with Apparel Brands, making sure that our presence not only in city areas but regional and rural communities is the right one, and importantly, making sure that as an omnichannel retailer, that we also have the right online experience, so specialty stores will continue to be very much an important role for the Myer Group going forward, and obviously we'll continue to assess which are the right markets that we have a presence in. And my final question is, it's a global market, especially online. How do you anticipate building sales, holding on to what you've got when you've got overseas competitors such as Temu and Shein? Yeah, you're absolutely right. There's a lot of changes happening in the online market, and it's very important for not only for Myer but Apparel Brands to have a strong presence. As you will have noted, and as we've discussed and outlined in our booklet, Myer does have a very strong e-commerce business and capability. We are very confident in the offerings that we have, and currently around 21% of our sales, from a Myer perspective, are online. We believe that this provides further opportunity online for us, and we will continue to invest to make sure that that customer experience from a digital sense is a positive one. So it is an area that you will hear from us in the future, and it is an area that we'll discuss further come Investor Day later in the year. So thank you very much for your question. And my sardonic sense of humor gets me into trouble, but your performance today, you are worth the money. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Well, there are no online questions or phones, so we will now move, sorry, to online. If there's no other questions in the room? Oh, there's one other. Sorry. Sorry at the back. Number three. Chair, may I introduce Patrick Batho, who is a shareholder representing himself? A good person to represent, Madam Chair. I've read the Kroll report and, of course, your documentation quite closely. While they say fair and reasonable, I ask myself, is it rational? Becoming bigger and bigger is not necessarily a good thing. You can't be too big to fail. The way you spoke up about the Apparel Brands leads me to think, if this is such a fantastic thing that it will supercharge Myer, why is Premier letting it go? If it's so valuable, why is it going? It's a conundrum, if you like. It seems to me that it can't be that valuable. It won't supercharge Myer at all. And as for the new customers you bring to your loyalty program, as you must be aware, loyalty programs can become a trap. People are trapped in them. They find that there are better bargains elsewhere. They become disillusioned. So I think getting bigger is not necessarily the answer. Doing better is probably the answer for Myer. Fortunately, I didn't buy my shares at AUD 4.10. I wisely waited. And if the combination goes through, perhaps my opportunity of wisely waiting will come again. Thank you for your question. Look, let me answer that in a few parts. I'm not necessarily proposing, and the board isn't proposing that big is better, but we are proposing that this is better, and that is both in the interests of Myer and Apparel Brands, that there will be a stronger business, a stronger business that will have greater scale, will have diversified earnings. It will help us manage the challenging cycles that we all face. So we absolutely affirm our view, and thank you for taking time to read the Explanatory Memorandum and the Kroll report because I think within that you will see that we've provided significant details to explain why. As I mentioned, obviously Kroll is independent, and they have not only once but twice confirmed their view that they also believe that it's in the best interests of the Myer shareholders. So thank you. We will check now. Thank you for online. If there are any questions online, we can go from there. Yes, Olivia, there is. We have received the following questions submitted before the meeting. The first one is from Robyn Freshwater. The question is, "I'm concerned this may diminish the Myer brand customer experience. How will the proposed combination of brands affect the shopping experience for Myer customers?" And secondly, "Will we see Just Jeans, Jacqui E, etc. brands in Myer stores as boutiques?" Thank you very much for the question. Look, obviously the combination of Myer and apparel businesses will see Myer become one of Australia's leading retail platforms, and we know it's going to create greater opportunities and value for our customers with an improved proposition. We have not yet determined the level of integration of these brands within Myer and within the in-store environment, but we're very confident that we will deliver a proposition that meets the needs of both our current and future customers. As we pointed out in the opening remarks, the combination with Apparel Brands is just one component of our strategy to strengthen Myer, and as part of the strategic review, we're looking at a number of aspects of our business, and we're going to share more of these with you come Investor Day. As part of this, though, we are going to look at how we improve many aspects of the Myer business, and this clearly includes the in-store experience. So watch this space, and many thanks for your question. Tim, are there any other questions online? There is one more online question, and the question is from Yin Li Kang. "What is the benefit for shareholders to vote one way over the other?" I think we've spent a considerable amount of time talking about that today, so thank you for your question. There have been a number of reasons of why we believe this is absolutely the right thing for our shareholders, which is why it's our recommendation from all the independent directors here. You unanimously indicated that they are in support of the merger with Apparel Brands, and as we outlined earlier, the combination clearly provides enhanced scale, new capabilities. It will drive growth and operating leverage. It brings new customers to the MYER one loyalty program. It will generate pre-tax earnings of around 30 million on a run rate basis. It strengthens our balance sheet, and ultimately it opens up opportunities for us to capitalize on the capabilities that Apparel Brands have in product, design, development, sourcing, and distribution. And ultimately, this will generate better margins. It expands our customer base, and it improves liquidity. So we believe it's the right thing for Myer shareholders. We do believe it's compelling, and we can see that from the overwhelming support that we've had from shareholders for this particular transaction. So I'm now going to turn to any other questions that have been submitted online during this meeting, Tim. There are no more online questions, and there are also no phone questions. Okay. Perfect. Thank you, Tim. Well, that concludes our discussion of the item of business of the meeting. We'll now proceed to voting on the resolution. If you intend to vote and have not yet cast your vote, you should do so now. Voting will close approximately five minutes after the end of the meeting. You'll be notified on the online platform exactly how much time is left to vote. The counting of the votes on the poll may take some time, so rather than wait for the results, we will formally close the meeting. The results of the vote will be advised via the ASX later this afternoon and will be made available on our investor center website. There are no other further business. I'll now declare the meeting closed, subject to finalization of the poll. In closing, I'd like to thank all shareholders for their attendance at the EGM, whether that be here in person or online. Thank you, one and all. Thank you.