Hi, hello, hi everyone. Thank you for joining us today for this Whitefield Group webinar update. My name is Monica Knight from Whitefield. We'll get started with the presentation in just a minute or so. I can see lots of people logging in right now. Presenting today, we have Whitefield Group Chairman and Managing Director, Angus Gluskie. Give us a wave, Angus. And Whitefield Executive Director and Investment Manager, Will Seddon. Today we'll provide a year-end update for Whitefield Industrials, with its year-end being March 2025. We'll also provide a progress update on Whitefield Income following its listing and launch in December last year. The presentation will run for about 15 minutes, and the team have intentionally kept it quite compact for you to ensure we've allowed time for questions at the end. On questions, please feel free to add your questions into the Q&A panel on the right-hand side, and Will and Angus will do their best to cover them off at the end. Okay, let's get started. I'm handing over to Whitefield Group Managing Director, Angus Gluskie. Thanks, Monica. Yeah, welcome all. This morning we're going to be primarily focused on the outcomes for Whitefield Industrials year-end, but we will also touch on Whitefield Income's first five months of operation. On both counts, it's been a very successful and constructive period over the last while. We're very happy to be taking you through these results. We'll just move across to our first slide here, which is Whitefield Industrials' financial year-end. We were very pleased with the performance of the company over the last financial year on a broad number of dimensions. In summary, earnings per share increased by 10%, dividends were increased both at the interim and the final. The total investment return, including franking, was quite strong. There was strong outperformance of the portfolio versus benchmark, and there's very good risk control. We have no periods of sustained or material underperformance over many, many decades. Looking at those results in slightly more detail and turning to earnings first. Earnings for the year rose 10% to AUD 22.4 million. This was mirrored in an increase of 10% in the earnings per share, which rose to AUD 0.187. We saw dividend increases across a moderate number of holdings and certainly a majority of the portfolio, but not all holdings. It was a bit mixed. Notable dividend increases came from the major banks, CBA, Westpac, and NAB in particular, also from insurers QBE and Suncorp. We also saw increases across the retail sector, including Scentre Group, JB Hi-Fi, and Woolworths, and also in some general industrials such as Origin, Brambles, Telstra, and CSL. Based on this strong growth in the underlying earnings, we were comfortable increasing both our interim dividend and our full-year dividend up from AUD 0.1025 per half to AUD 0.105. Both those dividends are fully franked, and we've attributed 20% of each to LIC discount gains. That means that eligible shareholders, so individuals and superannuation fund shareholders, can obtain the benefit of a further tax deduction equivalent to the CGT discount. That's an added benefit for investors. Looking at the charts on those two slides, and those charts go from 1970 right through to the present, so 55 years. The takeaway we'd like to give you from both those charts is not just the steady trajectory of earnings growth and the even steadier flow of dividends and dividend growth for shareholders, but that it's a very extended period that this has occurred and also that it's continuing. It is worth considering why this is the case. The Australian industrial economy has been a very good long-term place to invest for many years. In fact, as Will often points out, the Australian share market has outperformed the US share market over the last 100 years, which is a fact that many people do not often realize. Moving along to the next slide, we have just shown some details there on asset backing and how it moved across the year. It just kind of explains the moving parts behind the company. You can see if we start with the asset backing at the end of the last year, we have generated a level of income across the financial year. There is a small level of tax and expenses paid. We have also generated unrealized and realized gains in the capital appreciation of the portfolio. Out of the income, we've paid dividends back to shareholders. The net effect of all those movements is collectively that the asset backing rose across the year to AUD 6.04 at the year-end, given that the market has moved higher since that time. It is also that asset backing has pushed upwards as well. Looking at the graph on the right, and that chart again goes from 1970 to the present. Once again, it shows the steady upwards growth in the asset backing over that time. If you look at the scale on the left-hand side, you'll realize that the progressive growth, once compounded over time, is—and actually, that's not compounded; that is just the asset backing growing—it ends up being quite significant. Of course, in the background, the thing that drives all of those outcomes are our investment returns. I'll just hand over to Will to talk through the next slide. Thanks, Angus. There are a few performance highlights for this period. Over the last year, the portfolio return was 7.5%, which was about 70 basis points ahead of the benchmark and 4.4% ahead of the broad market. Over three years, the portfolio is 20 basis points per annum ahead of the benchmark and 2.2% per annum ahead of the broad market. Over the last 40 years, the portfolio is about 60 basis points ahead of both the benchmark and the broad market. We'll just make the one point here, which is that across half a century of measurable results, Whitefield Industrials has not had a single extended period of underperformance. A pretty good degree of consistency. On the next slide, we can just see the sectoral exposures. Whitefield Industrials is highly diversified. We hold at least 160 stocks, and we carefully control our overweights and underweights versus benchmark. You can see that reflected in the tight net exposures on the right-hand chart there for each sector. Within each of those, we've got a number of overweights and underweights. That's really a—that's one key driver of the consistency of performance that we've seen on the previous slide. By controlling or managing tightly, we're creating the opportunity for some outperformance, but with limited risk of underperformance. Thanks. Thanks, Will. Just going across to the next slide, we just note, as we've seen for the last 18 months, the market share price of Whitefield shares has lagged the rally in the underlying portfolio. If you look at the light blue line on that chart, you can see that from that point in March 2023, which is kind of a post-COVID point, the asset backing of Whitefield Industrials has rallied very sharply and steeply through till recent months where we've seen a slight bit of softness in the market. Our actual underlying share price has not responded fully to that, which means the company has been trading at a slight discount. We just note that this discounting is consistent at the moment with the other major Australian equity LICs and most likely reflects a level of current investor caution about equities generally and equity valuation. If you look historically through many different periods, what you tend to find is when the market moves to extravagant highs, LICs, closed-end funds can tend to trade a little bit cheaply as investors get cautious about the marketplace. There are other times in that market cycle, particularly when income becomes a little bit more uncertain, that investors find the certainty that comes from the closed-end fund dividend flow to be increasingly valuable. We have typically seen LICs trading towards premiums in those periods. The divergence in price creates one of those opportunities for long-term investors to acquire Whitefield shares advantageously relative to net asset backing. It is worth remembering that if you get the chance to buy a dollar of assets for 90 cents, it is a very valuable thing over the long term. As a guide, if you've bought $100 of shares with an asset backing of $100, you bought them for $90. If those assets are producing $10 of return or 10% on the asset backing, the $10 on the 90 is in fact an 11% return. You've picked up an extra 1% of outperformance just because you've purchased at a discount. Every year subsequently, whether it's five years, 10 years, or 20 years that the company generates a further $10 of investment income, you will always be getting that 11% return on your $90. It is a long-lasting benefit once you get the opportunity to acquire advantageously. In terms of this next slide, we're just showing long-term outcomes, and that's a chart from back in the early 1980s, which is when the index figures are first available. It shows two interesting elements. One is the outperformance and the performance and compounding benefits of the Whitefield portfolio itself versus market. It also shows or alludes to some of the benefits of acquiring occasionally at discounts. If you invested AUD 100 in 1985 in Whitefield shares, it would result in today an accumulated investment value in our net asset backing of around AUD 6,000, significantly more than its benchmark over that same timeframe. If you include franking, which is what we are showing on the light green line on that chart, and you also use the Whitefield share price in 1985 when it was trading at a discount to asset backing, your AUD 100 actually would have accumulated into AUD 16,000 of accumulated value today. Part of that is the value of the franking being accumulated in there. Part of it is the value of the discount that you are able to buy at. We just note investors perhaps should be less afraid of discounts when they occasionally occur and perhaps be alert to the opportunity for value that that creates. Another point from that slide, it is a reminder that sensible long-term investment, which is chasing good returns, but on a repeated basis, can deliver very good wealth accumulation with relatively good control of risk. We think that balance between sensible return generation and good control of risk is a good way to run a portfolio over time. Next, we'll just touch briefly on Whitefield Income. Whitefield Income is a sister company to Whitefield Industrials that was listed on ASX five months ago in December 2024. The strategy had operated prior to this for four years in an unlisted fund format. It is actually now the fifth year of strategy operation. The key characteristics for those who do not know of Whitefield Income are that it systematically and actively invests in ASX 300 equities over key points in their income generation and dividend payment cycles. It provides a very differentiated way to generate return and outperformance from an equity investment. It benefits by taking advantage of the statistical patterns of faster income recognition in share prices late in the six-monthly earnings cycle as income certainty increases and as dividends are paid. It benefits from a quality tilt because the portfolio holdings rotate continuously to invest in profitable dividend-paying, cash flow-positive businesses as the economy changes over time. The company generates most of its return as dividends and it distributes these to investors as monthly franked dividends. It is designed to be a differentiated but complementary strategy to Whitefield Industrials. Both strategies have the potential to provide strong equity-level total returns, but they use very different strategies to do that. Industrials provides growth plus income. Whitefield Income provides its return to investors as income. In terms of outcomes over the five months since operation, as well as outcomes over the full four and a half years, we just note there that in terms of gross income, the strategy has generated 5.1% over the five months since listing. That includes franking credits. The long-term average is 13.1% per annum over the four and a half years. In terms of outperformance, the strategy has generated 1.6% outperformance over the five months and 4.2% per annum over the four and a half years. We stated in the prospectus we'd commence dividends in this Whitefield Income after one full quarter of operation, which we've now done. Monthly dividends are being paid and have been paid since April a month ago. Those initial dividends are being paid at the base rate of 8% per annum. That is a percentage of the IPO price, inclusive of franking credits. That equates to 5.5% on a cash basis. The returns of the strategy there, we have shown over three time periods, the five months since listing, a rolling one year, so you can see how things have done over the last 12 months, and also a per annum basis over the four and a half years since strategy inception. The one-year figures are somewhat indicative because they do show that not only it gives you, I guess, a 12-month kind of feeling for how these figures might land, but gross income on a rolling year basis sits at 11%. The actual net return after all costs sits at 10%, inclusive of franking credits. If we compare that to benchmark, the benchmark return was 3% over the same 12 months. The rolling outperformance of this strategy versus benchmark sits at 7%. Just the point we want to leave people here with is the returns over the five months are very consistent with what we've achieved over the four and a half years of full strategy operation and also consistent with our back testing, which goes back over another 20 years. It has been a very good start for Whitefield Income, which we're pleased to report on, in addition to a very good year for Whitefield Industrials. Just turning to some more issues that are affecting markets and the outlook, Will's just going to comment briefly on some of the major features that relate to market conditions. Thanks, Angus. What we wanted to highlight here on this first slide is one of the big influences on markets recently being Donald Trump. As we know, some of his policies, but probably more generally his approach, have surprised or even appalled many investors. The point we wanted to make on this next slide about that is that whether you love him or you hate him, and there are lots of people in either camp, his agenda items do aim to resolve several issues that most would agree need to be resolved, whether that be widening twin deficits, destabilizing inequality, or unsustainable debt levels. We think successive administrations are likely to pursue many of the same objectives. These are not necessarily bad things for economies and markets, and investors maybe do not need to be overly fearful about them. Just on the next slide. We do think that means we're in for a period of elevated uncertainty. The short-term implications of the current policies might be slower growth and higher inflation. However, any success towards the longer-term objectives I mentioned may be viewed favorably. There could be deflationary elements in some areas, possibly Australia. The policies themselves are evolving rapidly. It's important not to be too distracted by all this noise and remain focused on what's happening in Australia and in the markets here. Australia is relatively insulated, and possibly the main influence on our economy might be softer commodity prices should we see concerns about their growth outlook persist. However, we'd just point out that this doesn't directly affect Whitefield Industrials given the portfolio doesn't hold resource shares. Also, none of this noise really affects what we're doing day to day, apart from possibly reminding people of the importance of investing in companies with strong fundamentals and possibly throwing up added more opportunities than usual as we see policy noise creating share price noise that then creates opportunities to buy good companies cheaply that otherwise may not have occurred or as new economic trends start to create new earnings trends that we can invest in. Those kind of characteristics are key features of our strategy. Since Trump was returned to the White House, the strategy has performed quite well. We think we might be able to expect this kind of situation to continue. Thanks, Will. All right, that brings us to the end of the formal presentation. We might now go across to addressing some questions. I do note we've got some questions that have been put through. Just one of the quick questions here is when analyzing our companies, what are the key metrics that we look at? It's worth thinking from a fundamental perspective. There is a bit of a difference between Whitefield Industrials and Whitefield Income. Whitefield Income, we're obviously looking at not only the fundamentals, but also exactly the timing of when they're generating income and paying dividends. Underneath the surface, and this certainly applies for Whitefield Industrials as well, the key fundamentals we're looking at, we group them into three key areas, which are easily understandable. One is value. One is the earnings momentum, so the way in which the company is generating current and future earnings, and also the quality, which is the company's resilience and ability to keep generating those earnings over future periods. All the time we're balancing up between those three metrics because we think it's vitally important to be looking at all three parts of that equation, not just any one. Is there anything you'd like to add there, Will? Not particularly. Okay. I guess that was a good summary. Yeah. We've had a couple of questions. We noted on one of the slides there that Whitefield Industrials has been trading at a discount in the same way that some of the other major Australian equity LICs are trading at a discount at the present. One of the questions is, should we be doing a buyback? It's just worth recognizing that just doing buybacks don't necessarily resolve that issue. In fact, in some ways, if they're done poorly, they can be non-constructive. Historically, there have been lots of people attempting buybacks, and all that they end up doing is buying back stock at discounted levels. That doesn't solve the issue for an investor who's selling. All it does is create a slight amount of accretion for existing and ongoing shareholders. Buybacks per se, just done blindly and on the back foot, do not resolve issues, those kind of issues for shareholders. Another thing, if you have a number of listed investment companies trading at the same discount level, it can really reflect the fact that investors are choosing to price the closed-in community or a portfolio of shares at that level compared to the general market at the present time based on market conditions. That might be a reasonably rational choice by investors. They are saying if they choose to value stocks in the market in that way, that can be their decision, which might, well, history shows it progressively changes over time. There are other periods where people will increase their perspective in valuing a closed-in portfolio of Australian shares. We think the better ways to resolve and see a very fair market in listed investment company shares is really back on the fundamentals of the company itself. If we manage the portfolio well, particularly if we produce outperformance and can deliver those returns to investors, we'll increasingly attract additionally more investors and advisors who want to buy shares on market. It is really a case that that additional buying helps to match up any just natural selling that you see in shares as people adjust their holdings. That is the thing that tends to create a fair market over time. We think that type of thing, continuing to perform well, is one of the most vital ingredients for ensuring that our share price maintains a good relativity to asset backing over time. I do refer to investors, the share price on market, it's important when you buy in, it's important when you sell out, but between those times, it's not the thing that generates your return. The thing that generates your return is the underlying asset backing that we're generating income on. And we just remind investors, don't get, t says this, people say this about BHP, it applies to any share. The share price itself isn't the thing generating you the return. It's the underlying business or assets of a listed investment company that are generating your returns. We're just looking for additional questions here. Monica, you can flag any if you would. There's one here around, are you going to keep increasing the dividend for Whitefield Industrials? Okay. Obviously, it is dependent on our underlying income, but assuming over upcoming periods we continue to see steady growth in that underlying income from the businesses we're invested in, that's the precondition that will put us in a position to continue to increase. Just to provide some historical perspective there, we kept our dividend at the pre-COVID peak levels to give investors consistency of income flow since that time. Our underlying income is increasingly up to those levels that were there a couple of years ago pre-COVID. Going forward, we're likely to have capacity to increase our dividends as we see that underlying growth occur. There's another one here around research ratings. Will you be talking to research houses to get research ratings? Yeah. At the moment, we're rated by IIR and Lonsec, and they review us on a regular basis. That is an ongoing process. We would hope our good performance continues to be reflected in good ratings or increasingly better ratings as well. We can't see any reasons why a very extended period of good performance would be underrated by analysts. We've got a comment there. Can you comment on CBA and why it trades where it is? Will, do you want to address that one? I think there are a few theories floating around. There are at least two that I think kind of make sense. One is that there's just a large number of holders who have cost bases that are so low that it just makes no financial sense to sell the shares almost regardless of how overvalued they may or may not be because your total wealth is more or less going to halve once you've done that and paid the tax. You really have to be reinvesting at a much higher rate of return than what you're walking away from by selling at that higher price. The other one is that there's been a huge increase in the market share of other lenders, potentially into riskier parts of the lending market. One argument is that the quality of the loans that the major banks are now making has improved compared to what it might have been 10 or 20 years ago. Therefore, comparisons of CBA's current market valuation to what it has tended to be historically may not be—they might be a bit biased. They may be overlooking the current qualities of their business in comparison to what those may or may not have been 10, 20, 30 years ago. All right, just a technical one here. Whitefield Income IPO price was AUD 1.25. NAV at the last month in was AUD 1.20. Why the drop in the NAV? Obviously, Whitefield Income is invested in shares, so the underlying asset backing will fluctuate all the time. The income generation is relatively steady in comparison. But remember, it is an Australian shares investment, so it does fluctuate. And if you think it's been a volatile time since we listed Whitefield Income, November 2024 or December 2024 was a reasonably full point in the market. The markets had uncertainty since then as the Trump administration initiatives have come through. But as we've seen over the last month or two, the markets rallied back quite strongly. So NAV was AUD 1.20 at the end of April. If you think that the markets run on strongly since then, you'd need to extrapolate that or apply that to the underlying portfolio of Whitefield Income, and it gives you an estimate of where the underlying portfolio value might be today. It's probably worth reiterating as well that had we invested that AUD 1.25 into the benchmark index directly, that AUD 1.20 at the end of April would be about 2% lower. Yeah. So the outperformance of that company itself is certainly boosting that as well. There was a question there. Should Whitefield Industrials invest in Whitefield Income? Would it make sense? It's worth thinking that Whitefield Income is very much in demand. It's got a really tight share register. I don't think there'd be any scope to do it, even if it did make sense. It's an interesting concept. I think we'll like to keep them nicely independent, though. Looking through just some other comments in terms of Whitefield Industrials, we basically own ASX 200-less resources in there. Yeah, we monitor, and the question is, what's the difference between Whitefield, say, and an industrials-based ETF? I think it's compared to the broad 200. I think the question's two-part. Two parts there. Okay. Obviously, one difference compared to the broad ASX 200 is we do not have the resources. We control our positions relative to index very tightly in Whitefield Industrials. The reason is that helps us control risk while still giving us a very broad spread of holdings. We are then making continuous divergences in terms of our underweights and overweights relative to that index on a fairly scientific basis. It is those overweights and underweights which then can layer on a level of outperformance, which is what we have achieved over the last year and over recent decades. We believe this is a good way to manage this type of portfolio because you are getting the benefits of the big spread of an index, but you are getting the potential for outperformance that comes with it. If you compare it maybe to an ETF, in an ETF, you're going to get the market return guaranteed less the costs of running that ETF. You're going to inherently underperform. We're giving people the potential for outperformance there as well, but a relatively low risk of underperforming to the downside. I could just add as well, Whitefield Industrials is a company structure. So we've got an ability to retain our profits, which we've utilized over lots of years to smooth out the level of our dividends and deliver a steady growing stream. An ETF being a trust is a pass-through. So as that fund has to realize gains and losses, that affects what distributions are made to holders. So they end up with a much more variable stream of distributions than what you would have got from Whitefield Industrials. Question there is, are we currently bullish or bearish on markets? Look, and what that means for our cash holdings. We're always typically fully invested in both these companies, Industrials and Income, for the reason that we want to give people a fully invested strategy. We do have our opinions on markets. I just refer back to Will's comments about the Trump administration issues. It's creating uncertainty. People either love it or hate it. Importantly, it's unsettled. It's still changing. I think people need to be very careful about trying to pinion themselves to one viewpoint or the other. I think it's much more important to be kind of happily divorced from, I guess, the emotions or the passion and really just look at the facts about what's occurring in the economy and form opinions based on that. Right at the moment, the Australian economy is performing reasonably well. Employment's fantastic. Unemployment is incredibly low. We do not have major holes or risks sitting in the economy at the moment. We are largely insulated from things such as the U.S. tariffs with one or two minor exceptions. It is not a bad position to be in. We are kind of comfortable being long-term investors at the present. In some ways, while we recognize there might be some volatility over the next while, we are excited about the potential for just ongoing economic growth in a relatively benign environment as it appears at present. All right. In terms of comments on the health sector, we have a few questions here about stocks such as CSL, Sonic, and Ramsay. I mean, in that healthcare sector, the stocks themselves are quite disparate in terms of their operations. They are quite different. I think it's important to view them each separately. As you'll see across our portfolio, we are investors in quite a number of the healthcare stocks. We like the general characteristics long-term. Equally, we realize there are points where, depending on where their share prices move to or depending on how the risks in terms of their future outlook are going, we may occasionally look to move underweight on some of those stocks. Will, do you want to add any immediate comments at present? Yeah. I guess generally, they're all a little bit expensive on our measures or the HR. As Angus said, they've each got their own specific drivers and their quirks going on under the surface. They've traditionally been high-quality investments, each of them. Ramsey in particular has ended up being quite a low-quality investment. That's partly due to heavy debt loads. Their returns on capital have been coming under pressure from regulatory influences and things like this in recent years. That's probably the lowest quality ranking stock in that grouping. That's the one that we would be least positive on. Yeah. Yeah. I guess our thoughts are there that it will take some time for the, I guess, that environment between the rising costs faced by Ramsay and its revenues, which are dictated by regulators and insurers on the other side. They need that equation to resolve. It will take some time for that to happen. The thing for investors not to forget, though, is that the market tends to price that in well in advance. They are all known factors. It tends to mean that the opportune times to build investments in stocks going through those periods can be when the market is feeling quite pessimistic about that outlook, but ahead of the outlook changing for the better. In each of those stocks, certain elements move in cycles. All right. We have just got a minute or two. We'll just have a scroll through some of the any additional questions that are there. There's a question there about would we move Whitefield Industrials' dividend to monthly? There's quite a bit of administration and paperwork in terms of the monthly dividends. I've got some hesitation about doing that for Whitefield Industrials. Look, we note that question. I think it more typically falls into kind of the six-monthly basket of payers for efficiency. One of the reasons that question was suggested by an investor was that a lot of the monthly dividend payers have been priced up at premiums in terms of their relativity to asset backing. What I note is that I don't think it's so much the monthly payments that are causing the premiums. It's that right at the moment, when we measure across the listed market, what we can see is that the very high dividend yield payers are being favored. That's where the demand is because people are trying to find yield that's greater than current deposit rates. It's really the quantum of the yield that's the attraction at the present. Given Whitefield Industrials seeks to maintain a bit of inherent growth in its asset backing, but also provide a level of return as dividends, it's providing that more balanced mix to investors, given that we do have investors who want that growth income combination. There's a question, why can't a LIC use the ETF system of having a market maker keep the share price near NAV? It's a good question, but a really interesting one. The market makers in ETFs do two things. One, they're taking a margin. They're acting against the interests of shareholders and the company itself. They do that because they're profit-making. They're trying to make a profit from the margin between a buyer and seller. If you have those market makers in your market at all times, you're actually going to have a more costly market for your investors, buyers and sellers, and the company itself. You want to think, do you really want that? It comes at a cost to all parties. One of the benefits of a LIC structure or closed-end structure is we don't have that cost being subtracted all the time. If one investor buys, another investor sells, they're getting the full benefit of whatever that pricing is with no middleman taking a margin out of the middle. That's one of the benefits of the closed-end structure. Another is the market maker only matches up that market because at the end of the day, if they have a net volume of sellers or a net volume of buyers, the fund's open-ended. They actually reduce the size of the fund by selling back those shares into the company or the ETF structure itself. Remember, the ETF isn't closed-end. Its size is changing all the time. You can think it's an AUD 100 million fund one day, but if you have a lot of sellers, it's going to be an AUD 20 million fund the next day. That creates uncertainty. It also creates a lot of managerial cost and administration cost that at the end of the day gets borne by investors, either through the buy-sell margin that's deducted or through the company bearing the costs itself. The closed-end fund is closed-end because we do not face those costs, and we believe we can provide investors with a better cost longer-term structure. The closed-end nature also means it is easier for us to manage the capital more effectively. Particularly in companies such as Whitefield Income, it is really important for us to manage the capital without the dilution of shareholders coming and going day to day. That is just a couple of reasons that explain the differences and the benefits between closed-end funds and what we are trying to achieve for long-term investors and open-end ones in ETFs. That ETF price at asset backing, it is doing a lot of work just to keep the price at that level, which might give people mental comfort, but it is coming at a cost to the people in the fund itself. All right. Monica, are there any last questions there before we wind up? I can see a couple of quick ones here. Maybe there is a Whitefield Income. Typically, how many times is the portfolio turned over? Okay. Portfolio turnover in Whitefield Income is much higher than Whitefield Industrials, the reason being it's actively targeting a particular point of time in each company's annual or six-monthly cycle. So it has to keep moving between investments. The turnover's 400%. The average holding period is around 11 weeks. So very different to Whitefield Industrials, where we've got some holdings that are in there for many years, many decades. I can see one more here around a potential share purchase plan for Whitefield Income, whether that would be on the agenda. Okay. I guess Whitefield Income, we're intending to, it's AUD 200 million market cap at the moment. We don't intend to grow it beyond AUD 400 million. So it's ultimately a cap size. We've only got a limited scope to increase the scale over the next few years. If there is excess demand for the stock and people want a share purchase plan opportunity, we'll certainly consider it. We've got to be careful about when we do it in terms of a year just to make sure it doesn't dilute income. Also, we can only do a share purchase plan once a year under regulation. I think it's the same as with Whitefield Industrials. It's an opportunity. If there is demand for that, we'll certainly consider it. All right. We've hopefully addressed most of the questions from investors. As we said at the outset, we're very pleased to have been able to have this chance to speak to people. We hope it's been informative. We will be reporting to investors over upcoming months, one for the Whitefield Income year-end, which is 30th of June, and we will be reporting a net asset backing, obviously, close to each month end, but the annual results in August for that entity. Back to you, Monica. Okay. Thanks for attending, everyone. If there are any other questions that happen to have been missed, then please feel free to shoot us an email. Thanks again. We will look forward to updating again in a couple of months' time. Bye for now.