I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Anthony Wamsteker, Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead. Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Nice to see so many people online and interested in the Praemium half year results. David and I look forward to presenting an update on the business and then taking some questions after we've finished. Obviously, this presentation and the results themselves have been loaded to the website, and I encourage those of you who have access to the ASX website to follow along with us, although, of course, the slides will also be up as we go through. At Praemium, we acknowledge the traditional custodians of country. We pay our respects to their elders, past and present. I draw your attention to the disclaimer on page three. Whilst I won't read it, it's very important background for the presentation that we're about to go through. As I go to the agenda, you can see there what we're going to cover, and I won't dwell on that. We'll just get straight into it. As I've said, I'm delighted to be joined again by David Coulter. Unfortunately, this is the last half-year or the last results presentation that David and I will do together. I think everyone will be across the announcement we made today that David is going to be leaving Praemium, which is disappointing for me at a personal level, but we obviously wish David very well going forward, and I'll say a bit more about that at the end. Going to the business highlights, the highlights for the half-year. If I could just start off with this observation, I think many people on the call, perhaps most people on the call, will have joined calls like this before. I've said previously that we get the opportunity to have presentations of this type of nature, a business update or a company update, about seven times a year. There are four quarterly releases, there are two financial releases, and there is the AGM. What you will notice is that for a number of years now, we've been relatively consistent in the sorts of things we focus on, and we have said that one of the things we try to do is set our strategy as a long-term strategy. We try to be quite disciplined about looking at the market and where we think it's going and our own strengths and opportunities to meet the needs of those market conditions, and that should lead to a longer-term strategy. What we start to see if we're doing that right is that the results that come through half- on- half, or indeed when we present at the quarter, should reflect the way we're executing on a strategy that is relatively well known amongst our close shareholders and the analysts who follow us. I think what we see this half is, when you look at those numbers, a relatively impressive set of numbers where we're comfortable with where the business is tracking and we're comfortable that they reflect that we're starting to see the results of executing on that consistent strategy. One of the things that's very important to us is revenue growth. Again, I'll talk a little bit more about that later, but we're pleased to see the very strong revenue growth and the translation of that into underlying EBITDA. The other thing is you've got to have the right product, and so, of course, we're delighted to have launched our new core product in the overall range, Spectrum, and so I'm starting to see that the fund under administration in that platform growing. Very happy with the growth. Finally, of course, the business is owned by the shareholders, many of whom are on the call. We, as always, thank you for your support, and we're conscious of our duty to, as the opportunity arises, to return money to shareholders, and we've been able to do that again in the last six months. If I go to the next slide, I did talk about the product, and it's very important that our product meets the needs of our target market, which, as you know from our strategy, is the high net worth advice segment. We were successful in the most recent investment trends survey that's only just came out to retain our overall rating of number three in the market overall. We were number one in the two categories that we value the most highly, and so that was a very good outcome for us, and we were number one in 18 subcategories. Overall, the platform is 89%. Again, quite pleased about that. It was actually marginally above 89%, but we've rounded it here for 89%. If I then go to the strategy, which I did talk about, and people have seen these five columns in the past, and so those columns, we've narrowed the focus this time. The five categories are product, operations, service, or customer service, superannuation, and acquisition opportunities. We sometimes have slightly different headings, but we've just been a bit more precise this time about what the actual area of focus is, and then used the bullet points to talk about what we've been up to in the last half-year in each of those areas. Whilst I won't go into them in detail, needless to say, with the launch of Spectrum and the repricing of Scope, we are very happy where our product suite is at the moment. We're never going to rest and say there's no further improvements needed, but we are very happy that we've now got the comprehensive product suite that we need to meet the needs of our preferred segment in the market. Operations, we have again been very busy behind the scenes somewhat. Obviously, operations are often seen a bit more behind the scenes, but we're very excited about the progress that we've been making. There are two continuous improvement programs that are always underway in operations. One is Lean Six Sigma, and we've had some good wins there, and we continue to be pleased that that's the improvement methodology that we've chosen for our business. We are extraordinarily excited, like everyone, about the potential for AI already and going forward, and we're very confident about some of the initiatives that we're running. There are a few AI pilots running in our business at the moment, and AI will deliver a range of improvements for our business and for our customers. Very pleased with the focus of ongoing improvement in the way we run our business operationally. Service, we have always said customer service is crucial to what we do. Once again, I don't hesitate to say when we target the high net worth market, we're conscious that high net worth individuals are used to having the best service in whatever they do. They're used to doing business with enterprises that have got a very high net promoter score, whether it be the cars that they drive, the restaurants they dine at, the entertainment that they look at, or the holidays they go on, or whatever. We have to aspire to be number one in customer service because that's what the demand is, and we're pleased with the progress that we've been making, and we're also pleased. We're very confident with the way we survey our client base. There's always ad hoc surveys available to people in the market and anecdotal feedback, but we've got a very disciplined process of surveying our customers. We've recently completed that. We tend to do that at least once, sometimes twice a year. We'll certainly be doing it twice a year this year. Part of the reason why we value the work that we do on that front is because it's so good at telling us, "This is what you need to do next to continue to drive the customer service up," so that remains and will always remain a very important area of focus. Superannuation, I don't need to tell anyone on the call the wonderful success story of superannuation in Australia and the ongoing continuous growth that that delivers. Whilst we've got a lot of superannuation money on our platform, a lot of that's from self-managed super funds, which you would expect when we target the high net worth segment, we do feel that we're probably underweight in terms of our retail superannuation offering. The work that we're doing there is to say, as we continue to grow, the retail superannuation offering, which is marginally under 10% of the total assets on our platform, should be significantly higher than that in a proportion of the total assets. We have to improve the overall offering. Whilst self-managed super funds will always be the preferred vehicle for high net worth people, there is a significant demand for the retail superannuation offering, and we're going to make sure that our offering is completely consistent with the bespoke type of services that a high net worth individual would expect. On the acquisition front, we continue to be very pleased with how OneVue is going. We always get asked, so before we get asked, we will say that we do have a few files open at the moment on some new opportunities, some in the same line of business as we do now, and some that are related to what we do and would represent synergistic improvements in the total desktop offering that we give to our advisors. Having mentioned OneVue, and for two reasons, it's always of interest to our shareholders how it's going, but it's also a good discipline for us to say we don't lose sight of the fact that we need to finish the execution of that transaction, and it is tracking to plan. We recently issued the first earnout statement. Nil was earned. That was because the way that the earnout is calculated, it's below the AUD 3 billion threshold at the 15th of January. We expect that it will remain that way, but part of the reason for that is that our emphasis has been on ensuring the relationships are commercially sustainable, and we feel that the pool is going to land in a place where all of the relationships that stick with us for the longer term on the Praemium Product Suite and technology will be just as commercially viable as the rest of our business having recently undergone an exercise in repricing. The final slide for me before I hand over to David is you've heard me talk many times about our stakeholders, and we have taken the opportunity this time to just put this slide together about the various stakeholders in our business: our people, our clients, our shareholders, and the broader community. Again, it's a detailed slide, and I encourage you to look at it, and if there are questions about what we're doing there, we would welcome those questions. Needless to say, all four stakeholder groups are very important to us and the way we run our business, and we don't think any business can be successful unless you achieve good outcomes for all four stakeholder groups, and that remains our focus. With that, I'm happy to be handing over to David, and David, I look forward to you walking us through the financial results. Thanks very much, Anthony. Thanks for those kind words at the commencement of the presentation as well. It's a great set of results that I've got to present to shareholders, analysts, and other stakeholders today. I'll start with the group results overall, but I won't dwell on them for very long, and the reason for that is that they're colored greatly by the inclusion of OneVue in one of the halves, but not in the first half or the prior comparative period. Running through it quickly, you've got outstanding revenue growth, you've got reasonable discipline on costs, and you've got a good drop-through to EBITDA at the bottom line. We've got a reconciliation to the detailed OneVue contribution, the detailed ex-OneVue contribution as an appendix to the pack, and I'd encourage you to look at that. Also, the statutory financials in the operating segment note go into a lot of detail about the various contributions from OneVue, ex-OneVue. Turning, however, to the group result ex-OneVue, we're just having a little delay on our slide, to carry forward I think, today. Focusing on what has happened within the group ex- OneVue, noting that OneVue is essentially at run rate as was established for the second half of the 2024 financial year. Anthony, in particular, has been very consistent that the aim of the Praemium business is to run revenue at double-digit% growth and constrain cost growth to something in the order of, I'd say, 10% or lower, and we've been able to achieve that now consistently across three halves. The platform margins have improved because we've repriced, we've had good organic growth, and we've had very kind tailwinds from markets, admittedly. Revenue growth on platforms up 12% on the last half and on 23% on the prior comparative period. Our portfolio services business, and we'll have some detail on all of those, we're expecting there to be significant second half tailwinds as we reprice the Scope product. It's stable to the prior period, and it's up significantly on the prior comparative period. As we've grown portfolios, although I did note, and we'll get into this in some of the other slides, we had some rationalization on portfolio numbers from one of our major clients. On the cost side, as you'd expect, and as I've noticed for a lot of participants in this sector, our IT costs are up reasonably significantly. It's not as though it's a complete arms race, but we recognize as management in these companies that we need to invest significantly, one in our people capability, of course, but also in our IT capability to stay at the leading edge functionally and with technological capability. We're no exception to that. What I would note, though, is our cost of operations, as our IT costs have been increasing, is that our cost of operations have been able to be constrained to close to flat over that period, in fact, a slight decline. What we've also been able to absorb in the current half, particularly as it pertains to comparing to the second half 2024, is the launch of a brand new product in Spectrum. We estimate outside of essential additional STIs paid to people who worked very hard on that project, it cost around AUD 800 thousand overall in additional marketing and IT and other administrative costs to launch Spectrum in the first half of 2025. It's not the same. We don't give guidance that we'd be expecting our marketing costs necessarily to decline in the second half of 2025, but do note that there is a spike there for having done something that you wouldn't conventionally do half on half on half. I'm very happy, of course, with the way that Spectrum's been received by the market and its initial green shoots. As said earlier, OneVue's really just on a run rate, and we have detailed backup for the OneVue result in an appendix and in the operating segment result. I referred earlier to our margins, and we probably show more detail in this regard than any other participant in the market. We have a platform revenue margins for the SMA product, for Powerwrap, and the impact that that has on our portfolio overall. As a footnote, I've provided the OneVue average there as well. OneVue can be a little more volatile given the way that we've been repricing or looking at accruing for the revenue in that business. But these are the outcomes for the group overall. You can see with the big red oval circling there, the impact that it's had repricing from April 2024 in the SMA and the elevation we've gained to the portfolio overall. You have that margin increase backed by good organic growth and good market growth, you're going to get the revenue increase that you've seen. I'm happy to take any questions on some of the trends that slide here. Turning now to that custodial business and the fund flows therefrom. This is something that we issued to the market on the 23rd of January on our fund flows. There's no new information in this slide, but it is worth revisiting that we've had very significant flow. We've got elevated FUA, and in the Powerwrap product in particular, we've been able to rebound strongly from advisor exits that were well publicized. We continue to have a drag on Powerwrap, admittedly, but we've been able to rebound from that to restore Powerwrap's flows to at least just above parity. Looking now in more detail at these portfolios and the revenue derived therefrom, just a little more detail on the SMA and Powerwrap in terms of portfolio numbers, average revenue per portfolio, and also the advisor numbers. Turning to the SMA first, you can see clearly here that the impact of the SMA repricing has been entirely positive for the corporate overall. We've gone from first half 2024, AUD 628 per portfolio, up to now AUD 839 per portfolio, and our portfolio, or account is the other way to describe it, account numbers have even grown strongly in the meantime. I would note that there's been a slight decrement to the advisor numbers, and we had said on many occasions that we expected there'd be some potential decrement there as a result of doing the repricing, and that's fine. The question was whether or not we'd be able to wear it in terms of the eventual revenue drop-through, and these statistics and the P&L itself demonstrate that we've been able to do that very capably. On the Powerwrap side, the average FUA portfolio has elevated very significantly. That's no surprise in a high net worth business where you've had good market tailwinds. Advisor numbers are relatively steady, meaning although we've suffered some advisor exits, those businesses have been able to recruit back in to make up the shortfall. It is a more stable, mature business. It is earning what it is earning as revenue per portfolio as we'd expect because these high net worth businesses, even though the FUA increases greatly, we do have a lot of cap fees and ITCs within those businesses that constrain the absolute amount of revenue that's derived from the portfolio. That costs AUD 3,000 per. That's as much as you could expect to earn anywhere in the market. That's reasonable for the sort of bespoke service that Powerwrap offers. We'd expect that that's the continued trend that we'd see within that business. Turning now to the non-custodial business. Again, with the net flows and FUA for non-custody, we're looking at something that we'd already published in January for the December quarter. You've got the half-yearly stats here. Scope portfolio is up significantly. Scope+ portfolio is up significantly. Scope+ FUA is up significantly. I'm very pleased to report that the pipeline remains very strong. To some extent, this is where we—well, not to some extent. We absolutely dominate the market in this space, and we're looking to continue that dominance. When Anthony mentioned that we're on the lookout for accretive acquisitions, it's in this space that we're particularly interested and see ourselves as being able to add more value to clients who are interested in taking a, say, a Scope+ service, or acknowledging that the Scope reporting function is leading in the market and that to avail themselves of it would put them in a very strong position. We see ourselves as being able to grow very strongly in this part of the market. Cash flow. There's something here of a disconnect from our EBITDA to our cash flow generation. As we've grown so strongly, we've grown our working capital component to a larger degree than I'd be necessarily comfortable with. You can see in the detailed balance sheet where the receivables are up, and we've been paying down the payables. We've also had, beyond the operating cash flow, a return to the conventional cadence on PAYG income tax after having a tax benefit from a significant refund over the divestment loss for tax recognition on divestment of the international business, and there's a lag on receiving that money from the ATO. I'm pretty sure no one would be surprised that there's a lag on receipts from the ATO, but that's as much as I'll say. Everywhere else on the cash flow here, you're seeing a very regular pattern of investment in our intangibles and a very regular pattern now of returns to shareholders. The dividend paid there represents the dividend paid as a final on the full year 2024, and very pleased that we've announced another one cent per share dividend, which is a quote for AUD 4.8 million as well for the 2025 financial year as metering dividend. Net cash movement is down because we're returning funds to shareholders, and we continue to make investments. The cash position overall at AUD 37.3 million, given our requirements on licenses, is extremely strong. The requirements on licenses are disclosed in the balance sheet slide, which is the next in the presentation. On the balance sheet, cash of AUD 37.3 million, a very strong balance sheet. There are funds available there to fund future growth. There is good cash flow through on operations, and how it's allocated for investment returns to shareholders is now fairly predictable and reasonably reliable, notwithstanding that we do have to make further investments in OneVue, which will be the subject of the slide to come. I just wanted to, on this occasion, go into some detail about the OneVue one-off costs. It's easy to talk to an underlying EBITDA number in these presentations, but the one-off costs that we've been spending on OneVue, very, very sharply focused on these because they represent genuine cash outflow. We had announced when we made the acquisition, and we've talked in successive presentations to market, that we expected to pay AUD 1.5 million on acquisition, AUD 4 million for integration, and another AUD 1.5 million in separation. I'm focused only on acquisition and integration on this slide because we haven't spent a cent on the separation just yet, as we've worked assiduously to get this business integrated into the greater whole. We've talked a little about that, or Anthony's referred a little about that in terms of working our way through commercially sustainable relationships, repricing, and the impact on earn-out FUA. In a little more detail, we had expected to spend AUD 1.5 million. We've ended up spending AUD 1.8 million. To some extent, when you get into drafting of legals, you can enter into a fairly iterative process, so that went slightly over our forecast. I also referred to a PPA, which is a purchase price allocation there, which was somewhat more complex than we'd expected it to be. Very happy with the service provided by those service providers. I think an overrun of that degree, given the amount of uncertainty you'd have in any M&A activity, is not something that I take lightly, but is also something that I'd reconcile myself to as having been reasonable under the circumstances. On integration costs, we've incurred AUD 2.3 million so far. That's AUD 1.4 million this half and AUD 0.9 million in the prior half. These are largely focused on a TSA from Iress and also having contractor project management resources at our disposal to make sure that our own integration staff are not distracted and to keep us well on track with how we expect this to roll out. I expect these costs will come into forecast at around AUD 4 million. That they might roll out a little more quickly is something that we would acknowledge, but that would be great for us because that would mean we were getting our OneVue clients onto Praemium technology a little quicker than we might have otherwise expected. At the next half, I am sure, having established the precedent here, we will talk more about whether or not we have made it to that forecast and also about our separation costs of AUD 1.5 million. Overall, should the—and Anthony will talk to this in some more detail as well—if the earn-out remains at zero, we've paid AUD 1 million upfront, and we've paid around AUD 7 million to execute the transaction itself. For the sort of revenue that OneVue will continue to generate, even with the reduction in FUA that we've seen from the earn-out statement, we'd expect that that's going to be a very, very successful acquisition. With that, I'll turn it back to Anthony for the strategy section of the presentation. Excellent. Thank you, David. Going to our Venn diagram, which we continue to use in these presentations, just as a reminder of how we view the market. I think also to just highlight that there has not been, other than the growth in the two segments, both are continuing to grow very strongly, but there has not been any significant change in the way that the market is playing out and the convergence between those markets for the reasons we have highlighted there. In one way, a lot of that is demographic. There is an aging population. There is a relatively wealthy country with a cohort of very high-net-worth individuals, and that is demographics, and demographics is destiny. We do not expect that this is going to change materially over the coming period. When we view the market that way, it allows us to set a strategy to say, "How can we succeed in a market that is composed in that way and likely to stay composed that way, but likely to grow continually very strongly?" In terms of how we meet the needs of that market, now that we've launched Spectrum, we're able to put a slide up like this that talks about what our various offerings are and how they meet particular needs as encapsulated in the Venn diagram on the previous slide. Again, very happy to take any questions. I encourage you to look at that and consider those bullet points individually and why that positions Praemium very well to enjoy ongoing success in what is already a very dynamic market. That leads us to conclude with just what our focus is and the outlook over the coming period. First of all, we do want to realize the full potential of that product range. We regard it as the best overall platform and administration solution for high-net-worth advice. The challenge now for us as a management group is to realize the full potential of that. We want to continue to develop our leadership position in alternative assets. Again, there are more and more conversations and reporting on the fact that as our wealth grows in Australia, mostly superannuation, but also non-superannuation wealth, that that has to find appropriate investment alternatives. You cannot just keep piling into the Australian stock exchange because the wealth is growing faster than the stock exchange itself. There has to be more and more investment in alternative assets. We have a leadership position, and we want to further develop that and demonstrate to our clients that the ability to execute and report and administer alternative assets on our platform means that there is no degradation of the reporting and the visibility that clients have of their overall portfolio just because they are starting to invest in assets that do not have the same requirements for reporting that an ASX-listed security does. We have the tailwind now of the Scope repricing, and we want to realize the financial benefit of that as part of our aspiration to continue to grow revenue in double digits. We obviously need to complete the full integration of OneVue. Finally, we continue to target greater scale. The reasons, whilst they might be obvious or worth stating, one is to allow ongoing investment in the development of our technology. You can see from our numbers we continue to invest in technology. Our technology spend is growing as a proportion of our total spend. That is justified at the moment. For those who have heard me say before about the wonderful opportunities that technology is providing at the moment and the growth in AI as one example of that, whoever does the best over the next five years and beyond, the change from where you are today will be extraordinary. You have to get that right. You have to make the investment, but you have to be intelligent and smart about how you make that investment. We're very happy with how it's going so far, but we continue to be cautiously optimistic, I should say. We're not going to be complacent about where we invest. Part of the value of scale is to allow that investment to take place without detracting from shareholder returns. That is the second key point about the scale. It should allow a gradual increase, not just in overall profit, but in profit margin. They are the areas of focus in terms of executing on our strategy. Once again, as this is the last formal ASX presentation I'll do with David, I want to say how tremendous it's been to sit with David through all of these presentations quarterly and half-yearly. It's been a privilege to sit with him as CFO on these calls. I'm delighted that as part of the changes he's making, he's agreed to continue to be involved in our investor relations function going forward. We're a small enterprise, and we don't have our own investor relations people, so we do it internally with a bit of help from our marketing people who are tremendous at the way they help us on this. David has really lifted that over the years, and I'm delighted that he'll continue to be involved in that way. I obviously wish David great success as he continues to pursue a career. In my opinion, he's a very young man still, and so he's got a lot of runway in front of him. Thanks, David, for all you've done over the years, and hopefully all the questions that we now get will be for you. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Lafitani Sotiriou with MST Financial. Hi guys, and good morning. Can I start off with OneVue and the anticipated synergies cost out? Can you just remind me what the timing of that is and how we should think about it? If you look at your split out for OneVue, it's got an annualized about AUD 9 million of expenses. How much of that will transition into the new organization or the existing organization, or how should we think about the underlying cost out from here? We have consistently focused on one metric, which is AUD 3 million in synergies, meaning that is the amount of cost out we would expect to take from a normal run rate. To the extent then that we have a second and equally important commitment in the market, it is to have mid-teens accretion on EPS, which is a demand on us to either ensure that we have the same revenue, grow that revenue, or go further on the cost. We are very focused on those. We would restate those commitments, but I would suggest that at least AUD 3 million in cost because we have been consistent in every presentation to the market on focusing on that number. Just clarifying, and the timing of those? The timing will be first half next year. There's nothing will drop through in the second half of 2025, or if it does, it would be marginless at best. I think would be the best way to describe it. The nature of transitioning these clients to our own technology is very much akin to big bang. It's a lift and drop. Well, it's not really that, but it's going to take place holistically with very few exceptions on the one transition date. Got it. And just with the repricing, I know there's been repricing estimates like for men, there's a slide there. But just for, does it seem like there's also been repricing for VMA or what is now Scope as well? Yes. That was what I was referring to as the second half tailwinds in the presentation on P&L. We had originally planned that we would go contract by contract, reprice to clients. We found that, counting against ourselves to some degree here, that because Scope was such a long-lived product in the marketplace relative to wealth management businesses and their lifespans, we had a number of different contract terms, a number of different manners in which we would have to edit it. The easier way to get this done was a big bang, 1 January 2025, mail out to clients, "Here's your new terms. Here's your new contract. Please indicate your acceptance here. Now, I'm not going to sit here and pretend and maybe Anthony would want to reflect on it as well, but every client just thought that that was wonderful and signed up to it and returned their form within three days. By and large, that's been a pretty successful means by which we've negotiated with clients for what realistically had to occur in an inflationary environment. I mean, by and large, we haven't seen price increases in Scope for around 10 years. Everyone understands that that's not the way that cost bases of suppliers have worked over the last four years in particular. Okay. I'll just push one more multi-part question. Just with a staff headcount, you can see a drop-off in Armenia in the last couple of months. Can you just talk to the strategy? Are you moving away from that as a support center? Has that just been downsized to locally? Just more broadly, Anthony, with succession planning, and David's only been in the role three years. I think when you were first appointed, it was more of a sort of an emergency type scenario. Could you just talk us through your own intentions and what the succession planning would be over the medium term? How did we get to a situation where you've lost a CFO after three years? Yeah. Thanks, Laf for those questions. I'll go to the Armenia one first, then I'll come back to the more substantive question. In terms of Armenia, what we have done, we had about 90 people over there, as you can see from the graph, and it's dropped to around 50 now. Now, initially, it was set up as a technology and development, i3 developments. And then with the success of that, we expanded and put some administrative staff there or operational staff. Now, we also have operational staff in India, and it's not only a different geography, but it's a different arrangement because the Armenian people are employees of Praemium, whereas the Indian team is an outsourced provider who provides a service to a lot of financial service companies globally and quite a number in Australia. We made the choice that what we want to do was just run the administration function that we offshore out of India. There was a number of reasons for that, but we came to the conclusion that was a better outcome for us, and it was better to do that through an outsourced provider rather than employ the people directly. We've got no plans to get out of the technical development and the technology people that we've got in Armenia. It continues to be a very successful development hub for us. Part of the reason for the change, I said there was a number of reasons. One of the reasons was because we just wanted the people in that office to come in and know we are technology development people. We just do software development. That's what we do. We're very happy to have made the change. It's been very well received in Armenia. It's still a very low-cost operation. The Armenian currency tends to be closely related to the U.S. dollar. As the AUD reduces, it can slightly lift the price to us, but you're talking it's well under half the cost of an equivalent resource in Australia and very high-quality people. Just focusing that office on development. We've still got the same office space, and part of it was the people in Armenia tended to have less space per person than an office worker in Australia. We want them to have more space without having to go and find new premises as well. That played into it as well. I should say in Armenia, the people come in every day. There's no work from home over there. People are coming into work every day by choice. We just wanted that to be focused on that. In terms of the succession, first of all, on my plans, I'm very appreciative to our shareholders because one of the things that they did at the AGM was award a grant of performance rights to me that go out for three years. There is a financial incentive for me to stick around for another three years. As you quite rightly said, it wasn't sort of envisaged that when I was appointed, it might be a six-year appointment. I feel like I'm closer to the end of my career than the beginning, although I'm conscious that I'm very lucky to be living in a country where life expectancy is long, and perhaps I shouldn't think of now that I'm 60 just getting out and doing nothing for 20 or 30 years if that's how long I've got. I am very happy. I love the challenge, and I'm very happy to have a financial incentive for at least another three years, which is significant, and it would be material to me not to either shy away from the fact that my own personal investment in Praemium, which is all every share I own in Praemium has been bought with cash in my self-managed super fund, and so I've got a significant financial interest in it doing well. Having said all of that, people can take this as they like, but I'm genuinely interested in making sure that the business has the right person running it. If I ever thought somebody else should run it rather than me, I'd be very happy to hand that over. What I've tried to do is say to the board, every one of the direct reports that I've got is, in my view, a potential successor for the role. I think all of the people in the business have done very senior jobs, not only with Praemium, but in other areas, and all of them. Richard Warner, Denis and James being the other four execs, and Brett Marsh, who's come into the business through OneVue and was essentially the CEO of OneVue when it was in Iress. We've got five people besides David who would all be considered viable alternative successors to me. If the board ever told me, "We think that one of those five is ready," I'd be only too happy to say, "Let's get it done." I would like that because all of them have been involved in developing the strategy and how we execute the strategy, and it would give a certain continuity to do it that way. Obviously, the CFO is typically another role that can be thought of as a successor. That's why we've said in the announcement, we won't move to a permanent CFO straight away. We'll get an interim. I think everyone knows that interim executive positions are a feature of the market and something that you can do. We're in final discussions to appoint an interim CFO, and then we'll take our time to get a permanent CFO, and we would anticipate that we would get somebody to come into the role who, as they prove their worth in that role, will ultimately also be a potential successor to my role. I do feel I want to close by not saying, "Oh, yeah, I'm just waiting for three years to go." I'm very enthusiastic about the opportunity. This is a wonderful opportunity. I'm actually inspired by how well our two bigger competitors in the challenger space do. They've been two of the great success stories in Australian business generally and financial service specifically. I don't think it's gone forever. I do believe Praemium can have a journey like that as well. I'm extremely motivated by the opportunity. I feel that I'm very young. I'm coming off the back of a cold, you might tell from the way I'm talking, and nobody ever feels at their best as they've just come out of a cold. Other than that, I feel fitter and healthier than I've ever been, and I relish the challenge. I'm delighted with the team we've got. I've loved working with David, but three years is sometimes that's about the average of a role in Australia these days. We shouldn't be surprised if somebody after three years is ready to say, "I'm ready to do something else. Just to clarify, Anthony, you said that a new CFO, once they can prove themselves over a few years or may be considered for the top role, is it in your view or the board's view that David proved himself over the last three years? Yes. David certainly was a very, he made a huge contribution to Praemium, and he not only made a contribution in the areas that he was involved with, and I hope that all shareholders see the value of what he did, but he made a great contribution at the executive team, not only on saying to the executive team, "Here's what we do in finance," but also is how the business as a whole should work. He made a general contribution, not just a specific contribution of finance. Yes, there was no doubt David was, when we talked about my direct reports all potentially being successors, in my view, if that had fallen to David, he would have been outstanding in that role. We are where we are. I f we might move on just to give some of the other guys on the line an opportunity, you can come back, of course. Thanks, Laf. Your next question comes from Tom Tweedy with MA Moelis Australia. Good morning, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just want to start off with how you think about the pipeline for the custody side of the business, maybe just across the three different products, sort of SMA, Powerwrap, and Spectrum. Can you give us a sense of, especially Spectrum, what you're seeing there in terms of potential pipeline wins, tenders into the second half or potentially FY2026, what the environment's kind of shaping up to look like? Yeah. Look, I'm not going to give you the pipeline, of course. It's market. It's commercially sensitive information. Our pipeline is healthier than it's been in the whole time I've been here. We take a lot of time on the pipeline now. We have a meeting. Obviously, the salespeople are working with their pipeline every day, but we've introduced the discipline under Denis's leadership of meeting monthly on the pipeline, and any of the executive team can go to that meeting. I go to the meeting every month, and it's always a challenging meeting. Not challenging in the sense there is genuine challenge from the executives about are the opportunities moving through at the right pace. If somebody's been in stage two of the pipeline for a few months, it shouldn't be there. It should have dropped out altogether, or it should have moved to stage three or stage four. We are very happy with it. There are quite a number of big opportunities, and big opportunities in our sweet spot, which is the high net worth advisor. Yes, we are confident. We are encouraged by the flow of new leads into the pipeline, thanks to the work that our marketing people did around the launch of Spectrum. We have no reservations about that. Of course, pipelines are a probability-weighted exercise. In stage one, your chance of winning a prospect who moves into the pipeline might be only 5% or 10%. By the time they get to the final stage in the pipeline, you might be up to 50% probability of it landing. It is still a probability. You have still got to land it. There is still work to do to get all of those prospects in the pipeline through to fruition and close the sale. Very happy with how it sits. There are big opportunities out there, which is why I said earlier in response to another question, we do not feel the opportunity has gone, that the market has now been decided and market share is locked in on a trajectory for the next 5 or 10 years. We feel that it is a very dynamic opportunity still, and there will continue to be significant market share shift as well as growth in the overall market. We feel that if we were able to go in the DeLorean five years down the track, we should have success in growing our share of the market from where it is now. Thank you. Just to follow up on the cost-based expectations going forward, a couple of years of the recent result, sort of revised costs slightly higher in the near term just to capitalize on the opportunity. How are you guys thinking just overall blending, obviously, full-time FTE and IT costs, etc., going forward? If we look at overall expense growth, how would you be thinking about that sort of in the next sort of 12 months or for the full year anyway, for the financial year? We think that expenses continue to grow, partly through inflation. Like people would say, inflation's been conquered now. We still see some inflationary forces at play, and we will respond to that. We're not going to underpay our people. And partly through growth. What we have been able to achieve in more recent times is more of the growth comes from investment in technology than in support staff. We would anticipate that happening. Everyone on the call probably reads the newspaper, and there's articles here and there about what people are doing on GenAI. I encourage anyone who was interested in that field, you should read a lot about it. I certainly read a lot about it, and so do most of my executives, and are all closely involved in our AI initiatives. Yesterday's article that was particularly interesting was what Westpac are doing with Accenture. You only have to look at that article as an example of the sorts of efficiencies that are coming out of use cases at the moment. We're starting to see that ourselves. Some of the growth that we would see will be in investment in technology. As use cases come to fruition, and we say, "Oh, yes, there's an opportunity to invest a bit more and get some more synergies," we may be able to grow the business without needing to grow the operations and support staff numbers as much, but we'll continue to invest in tech. We see growth. Our aspiration is for the revenue to grow at a faster rate than the expense line. Obviously, every now and again, people ask us, "This AI, it's so powerful. Do you ever envisage that there'll be a dramatic cost reduction? You can't rule that out, but we're not budgeting for that at this point in time. Great. Thanks, guys. I'll jump back in a queue. Your next question comes from Nick McGarrigle with Barrenjoey. Yeah. Thanks for taking questions. I guess my first suggestion is you should reach out to Grant Boyle, who's recently retired from Netwealth. He might be a good appointment. Maybe just on the OneVue cost outs, can you just give us a sense of, as you've gotten into the business, is that AUD 3 million you think a conservative estimate? Timing you mentioned early next year, is there kind of a more harder date than that that you can allude to? I guess the notice from one of the larger clients that they're withdrawing AUD 1 billion, has that been effected, or is it just a notice at the moment? I'll just start with the last part of that query. It's not a single client for AUD 1 billion that's subject to the reduction in FUA between what was announced for December and what was aggregated for the earnout statement. That's a number of clients with whom we've had protracted discussions and come to a conclusion that we couldn't establish a commercial relationship. Even under those circumstances, it's not as though the separation's entirely free from goodwill. We will do that responsibly and amicably with those clients. It's not a single client for AUD 1 billion. I just want to clarify that. Anthony might turn your attention to the other parts of that question, with the exception of the Grant Boyle comment. Yeah. Look, just for the under AUD 3 billion that we, the way the earnout works, it's not obviously when we published our FUA recently, there's more than AUD 3 billion in OneVue. It's partly the way that we have the conversations with clients about the transition to Praemium and how that will work. One of the things probably I know you understand, Nick, and probably most people understand, OneVue was quite a diverse business. There was a range of services that were provided, not just the pure platform and administration services. There were various niche services provided as well. Some of the FUA that's dropping off is because when we look at those niche services and how we would provide those going forward on the Praemium technology, the commercial arrangements just weren't going to work for both parties. It has all been pretty amicable on that front. We still remain very excited about that. We think where that land is, we would not expect a quarter of the revenue to drop away. We would expect the revenue drops away a lot less than that. We certainly still see the potential for the synergies. We are still saying that it is AUD 3 million of synergies. We have got line of sight about how to get that AUD 3 million of synergies. That makes it a very profitable acquisition for us. We have just got to keep delivering on that. Okay. Thanks. I guess in terms of the new products you mentioned, I don't know if you can give us an update on kind of new advisor groups that have signed up to use the new products and what kind of the run rate. Obviously, in December, it had kicked off well. Just an update, any kind of sentiment statements you can provide us into Jan and Feb? Yeah. No, the sentiment's still strong. As I said, the pipeline's very encouraging. We're happy with the way prospects are moving through the pipeline, as you would expect if you're watching a sales pipeline. Certainly, people understand that Spectrum is now realizing the full potential of what Praemium's got to offer. Sentiment remains strong. We're encouraged by what we're seeing in terms of the interaction we're having with prospects and also our existing client base. Okay. Thanks for that. 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 Nick Burgess with Ord Minnett. Morning, gentlemen. A couple of questions. Firstly, just on OneVue, can I follow up that previous question? For each billion of funds, you're losing somewhere between 1 and 1.5 billion. You've given an update on the revenue margin in the half of 28 basis points. A little more help would be appreciated on the revenue impact, given you've said it's going to be less than 25% or less than the proportion of fund loss. How should we think about that 28 basis points? Are there fee increases going through on that 28 basis points exclusive of the loss of fund anyway? Any updates on those items would be appreciated. Yes, on those fees, what we've done with the Spectrum pricing as we've launched it, it's built on the back of the pricing work we did on the SMA and the platform pricing there. What we've now got is what we regard as the premium price point for different products and services. OneVue fits into that. Our view, without putting the exact dollar amount on it, is that the average cost or the average revenue that we'll generate from a client who sticks with a OneVue client who sticks with Praemium through the migration onto the Praemium product and technology will be higher than it was before. That's the answer to that. We have not, just as when we repriced the SMA, I think you will probably remember, Nick, that we were not overly prescriptive about how much that might be because there are a few moving parts that if we were to give guidance about how much the uplift is, we are not confident enough that we have all the moving parts sorted out to be confident enough to give the guidance about, "Here is what we think it will be." We certainly do not think if you took a pro rata of AUD 4 billion and it finishes at AUD 2.6 billion or AUD 3 billion or wherever it finally settles, that if it was AUD 3 billion, you should say the revenue will be three-quarters. It will be higher than three-quarters in our view, but we are not going to give you guidance about exactly what we think it would be. Okay. If we think about the SMA going from low 30s to high 30s, something of that vicinity of a new overall premium pricing point is an appropriate place to start, at least on that calculation based on the logic that you mentioned there. Yeah, it is. As long as you again, and I know you know a lot about OneVue because you've researched Karl [Marks] and you've looked at the acquisition and all of that. Just be conscious because it is a diverse client base. There are clients in OneVue who would be more like Alaric clients, and there are clients in OneVue who would be more like SMA clients. You know there's a big difference because of the average account size rather than because the pricing philosophy is different. The pricing philosophy is the same in both, but the difference in average margin comes about because of the different account size. As long as you factor in a bit that there'll be some very large accounts in OneVue and some more like the SMA average account size. The very large accounts will continue to get what would appear on a basis point number to be a lower price. However, when you look at it as a dollar per account, as we put in the presentation, it will be higher. Yep. Okay. Got that. Last question, just on your strategic priorities, superannuation. You've mentioned this for, I think, a couple of years now as a priority. Just wondering what the progress there is on those improvements and what sort of timeframe we should think about for completion and what the potential outcome is. Are you looking at a reduced cost to serve, an increase in satisfaction, increase in flows? What's the outcome of those issues that you've identified on super? Yeah. So just very quickly on the part, what are you doing? You might, but it's probably burned in everyone that a few years ago we had to talk about backdating a significant price increase on the administration service that we had to wear. And so for a few years, we've been paying a higher price for our admin service, and that was part of an uplift by the provider to lift the service. And we're still working through that. The service is lifting, but one of the two things that we're doing is with the trustee of our super fund, which is Diversa, with whom we've got a good working relationship. Diversa has, with all of their funds, because we're not the only fund that they're the trustee of, have been undertaking a process just to review the market. Given that the pricing went up, given they know what they know about the service levels, they've been saying, "Can we?" It became time for them to review the market and who's providing services. It's a dynamic market. Many of you will know that there was a company called Grow Technologies, or there is a company called Grow Technologies. There's a new provider in the market. There's a whole lot of others. Recently, there's been some publicity around Superhero or building out a super admin solution. The market's in a state of, and indeed, our supplier, which is Iress OneVue Superannuation Services, is now being sold to Apex. It's a dynamic market. We were very supportive of the trustee when they said, "We think it's time to review the market and just make sure we're getting a good alternative." In conjunction with that, we're also looking at whether we should bring the administration in-house, and we're doing the work on that. We're not yet landed on a final decision. I'm sorry, that took a bit of a while, but that's about what are you doing and also why are you doing it. What do we want the outcome to be? Nick, I read enough about the state of the superannuation market in Australia. I think perhaps because it has grown so fast and the unusual structure, but there doesn't appear to be anyone who's doing this as well perfectly. By definition, nobody will be perfect, but there's a lot of problems in the market. You read about it all the time. You read about even big super funds being fined, being sued by ASIC and the like. You read about challenges that a number of people have got. Superannuation, very few, if anyone, can say, "We've got super rights." Where do we want to land? We want to make sure that we've got, because we're a high-net-worth business in high-net-worth demand, high standard of service, we want to have what would be regarded as a best-in-class service offering in superannuation. That's our aspiration about where we'll land. We do think we can do that cost-effectively based on the work we've done so far, and it should be. It should be cost-effective. Obviously, we're not trying to be the biggest player in the market, but we're trying to be a player that uniquely meets the needs of a high-net-worth individual who still has a need for retail super as opposed to just a self-managed super fund. If we get that right, we feel that our proportion of platform assets in super can grow significantly from the current less than 10%. It could grow. If our whole business grew, then if somebody said, "We think you should double your business," and if super as a proportion of the business doubled, you can do the maths and say, "Gee, that super fund's going to be massive in a few years' time. Okay. Thank you very much. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back for any closing remarks. Thank you, everyone, for your interest in the call. As always, I value all of the people who are involved in our business, all stakeholder groups. I want to especially say thank you to all the people who work in Praemium who have helped to deliver this result, which we're very pleased with. Thank you to our clients who have given us their business and their trust that we will serve them well. Thank you to all of you who are shareholders on the call for your support. We look forward to continuing to try to execute on that strategy. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.