Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you all for joining our half-year analyst and investor call. I hope you've had a great summer because we are ready to present to you some sunny results. As always, I am joined by my two colleagues, Els Vervaecke, our CFO, and Inna Maslova, our Investor Relations Manager. Together, we will guide you through our strong results. With Els, I will start by sharing the key highlights. I will then give you an update on our growth, and then Inna will walk you through both our portfolio and our markets. Els will return with what you are probably most eager to hear, our outlook, and I will close with an update on the progress of our ESG targets. Finally, as always, we look forward to your questions. Inna will lead us through the Q&A session. Let's start with the highlights. As you see at Montea, all lights are on green. We are advancing in our growth. We now reach a EUR 3 billion portfolio. We have 150,000 sq meters that we have either signed in new leases or renegotiated leases, and we were able to increase the rents by 6% on those leases. We have the highest occupancy rates of all logistics players in the continent. Els, this great performance, what does it do to our results? Good question, Jo. The EPRA results increased by 20% year-on-year to EUR 54 million. The EPS increased by 6% year-on-year to EUR 2.35 per share, despite an increase in the weighted average number of shares by 14%. The net result stands at EUR 77.5 million and includes, besides the EPRA result, a EUR 13.5 million positive portfolio revaluation and a EUR 7 million deferred tax assets. The net result per share stands at EUR 3.40 per share. Looking into more details into our financial figures, the net rental income increased by 23%, driven by strong rental growth and, of course, our strong portfolio expansion. The like-for-like rental growth increased by 3.7%, of which 3.3% is linked to rent indexation and 0.4% is linked to rent renegotiation. The operating margin stands at 87.6%, a slight improvement compared to last year. The financial result increased by 28% to EUR 7.9 million. This reflects the expected increased interest expenses that were due to new debt taken out as part of the financing of our Track 27 growth plan. All of these figures lead to a nice EPRA result of EUR 54 million, a 20% year-on-year increase driven by organic growth, income from new acquisitions, pre-let from developments that have been delivered, as well as the disciplined cost control. More good news, Fitch affirmed the investment-grade credit rating of BBB+ with a stable outcome, which recognizes our disciplined balance sheet approach, as well as the resilience and the quality of our portfolio. In the first six months of the year, we financed and refinanced over EUR 360 million of debt. The hedge ratio stands at 96%, and with six years' average remaining debt maturity, we can talk about long-term funding. The liquidity position is strong, with EUR 260 million of funding immediately available. The cost of debt decreased compared to last year from 2.3%- 2.1%, and we will be able to keep this low cost of debt level of 2.1% throughout 2025 and 2026. With the refinancing that has been done, there is no debt that is maturing before 2027, and the debt that is maturing in 2027 only amounts to EUR 75 million. The prudence of our balance sheet is shown in the KPIs: net debt on EBITDA adjusted at 7.5x, the interest cover of 4.5x, and a loan-to-value that stands at 38.3%. Funding is diversified and long-term. 53% are credit lines and 46% are bonds, with a maturity of financing and hedging of both six years. As I already mentioned, we really take care of the well-spreading of the maturity days for both credit lines and bonds. Back to you, Jo, for the growth update. Thank you, Els. As you know, we have the ambition under Track 27 to grow our portfolio by EUR 1.2 billion based on our four growth pillars, being in-house developments, partnerships, acquisitions, and green investments. As already mentioned, we're well on the way to do this based on a good balance between our four growth pillars. In the first half year, you see that 30% came from in-house developments, 40% from partnerships, mainly the one with Wirtz in Liège. Overall, on the four growth pillars, we are able to achieve an investment yield of 150- 200 basis points above market yield, which you see here. EUR 187 million has been invested in the first year-half, EUR 36 million in acquisitions, EUR 142 million in development and partnerships, and EUR 9 million in solar panels and batteries, at an average net yield of 6.7%. Let's first look at the acquisitions. We bought a building on Blue Gate Antwerp, which now enables our park, Blue Gate, where we already had three developments, to connect it to the river Schelt. We did a nice investment in Zaltbommel. I call it a real Montea product because it's a mix of yielding landbank and development potential. After the end of the semester, we also did an acquisition in Zeewolde with a huge reversionary potential in the future. We also delivered 111,000 sq meters of fully pre-let in-house projects. The biggest one we ever did is the one in Tiel. That was for Intergamma. Of course, now, since it is delivered, the rent will start kicking in as of 1 July. That's why the year-on-year EPS growth of 6% that we have shown here will grow to 8% by the end of the year because we will have these nice developments, the rent income kicking in. The smaller one is in Aalst, an extension we built for Movianto. In Amsterdam, we also did a project for Blond. Looking at the pipeline, we have 150,000 sq meters of 100% pre-let developments in the pipeline. That's, of course, 40% of the development with Wirtz. It's a building in Oss that is also under construction for Voss Logistics and two projects where we have the tenant in place, but we are now waiting for the permit, which will probably come in the last quarter of this year. We will start the construction probably in the first quarter of 2026. We signed another LOI for a project of roughly 30,000 sq meters. More information to come there later in the year. In short, 75% of the growth plan under Track 27, the EUR 1.2 billion growth plan, is now secured. It's partly in execution, part is under negotiation. Let's look at what is in execution today. It's EUR 31 million of acquisitions we did after the end of the semester. It's mainly the one in Zeewolde. We have projects under development today for EUR 65 million, yielding above 6.5%. We have another EUR 11 million of solar panels and battery energy storage systems that are also under construction. We have under exclusive negotiation another EUR 76 million of yielding investments, solar panels for another EUR 52 million, and EUR 45 million of non-yielding landbank that will also generate 6.5% after development. We've already been through these projects, and these are the ones that are either delivered this year or that are still under construction. We are absolutely focused on these ones. These are the ones that are either permitted but waiting for a tenant or where we have a tenant but we are waiting for the permit. You know where the land plots are. They are mainly in Belgium and Holland right now. The landbank, which is really the main strategic advantage we have within Montea, has increased to over 3 million sq meters now. That gives us a future development potential of 1.5 million GLA, which is 60% of our existing portfolio, and over 70% of that is grey and brownfield. We took out Tiel because that is now the part that is developed for Intergamma, has been taken out of the landbank. Huge potential there to continue the growth plan. Under Track 27, just based on the landbank we want to develop before the end of 2027, we will be able to increase our rent by 30%. The rest of the landbank will lead to another increase to even 74% of our rent roll. It's not only rent increase, it's also value. We believe that we can increase, based on our landbank, the value of our developed portfolio to EUR 4.4 billion, with the development margins up to EUR 330 million linked to that landbank. Let's be clear, this is the first engine of our growth ambitions. Now over to you, Inna, for our portfolio updates. Thank you, Jo. On our portfolio, we have reached an important EUR 3 billion milestone, thanks to the investments that have been mentioned before, but also as a result of a positive portfolio revaluation that we have seen on our standing assets. We can confirm our EPRA net initial yield at 5.1%, remaining stable vs year-ends. Just to provide an overview of the bridge, a clear evolution of the portfolio is coming from the CapEx and our growth program execution. Our developments continue to book significant gains, with over EUR 110 million of development gains booked since 2022. Our portfolio has been showing a rather flat evolution in the second quarter of this year, with yields remaining stable and ERVs showing a mild positive growth. Our portfolio remains with an 8% reversionary potential, unchanged vs Q1. As we will show in the upcoming slides, we have been able to secure the uplifts in line with that reversionary potential, which is a clear sign of the portfolio and the value of our portfolio as being confirmed by the market and the clients themselves. Importantly, our occupancy rate remains at 99.7%. As Jo has already mentioned, we are roughly 450 basis points above the market average within our countries. This is also secured thanks to the progress on the leases and lease negotiations that have been up for maturity or extension during 2025. The progress there now stands at 92%, so only 8% for us to go for over the course of this year. As a result of that, we have also extended our average lease maturity by 6.2 years until break. More importantly, on the lettings momentum, given that Q2 has been a more challenging quarter, we have seen in the first half of this year roughly 150,000 sq meters of letting activity, partly linked to our existing portfolio, but also signing new leases with clients for our existing portfolio, as well as a pre-let in Holland. We have achieved an average uplift on the previous rents of 6%. If we look specifically at Q2, the activity has been at 60,000 sq meters, and we have seen an acceleration of the rental uplift to 10% vs the first quarter. It is important also to mention that the leases have been signed above the latest ERVs on average. Our retention rate remains above 90%, which is in line with the last five-year average. As a result of this activity, we're also able to confirm that our occupancy rate will remain at least at 99.5% throughout the remainder of the year. We see this activity recovery at the levels of 2023. Clearly, it's not only about the new dynamics, which we will come back to, but also the tenants continue to go for good locations, and that's where we see the activity picking up in our existing portfolio. A brief overview of the sectors that have been active in lease signing: it has been ranging quite a diverse mix between construction, pharma, F&B, as well as 3PLs that have been active. If we look at the overall picture in the market, we see that the prime yields have been clearly showing signs of stabilization. In case of markets like Belgium, they're even showing a slight yield compression. Gradual prime rent evolution has been supporting this. There is, where we notice that there is a clear polarization between A and B grade locations, with A grade locations still securing a rental increase above indexation. If we look at the take-up evolution, Q2 has specifically been more muted in terms of recovery for the markets where we're active, and the market vacancy has been a result of this as well. Again, I would like to reiterate, there is a clear divergence between the A and B grade locations when it comes to those assets. Broad market demand is expected to gradually recover. Looking at the survey conducted across European occupiers, which represents roughly 90 million sq meters of space, the survey indicates that 95% either plan to expand or retain the same footprint. As a result of this, the downsizing appears to be near the end for European logistics occupiers. There is a more cautious approach when it comes to three-year or medium-term expansion plans, and we believe this is leading more to a normalized trend in demand that we have seen prior to COVID. Specifically on the sectors, 3PLs are back, and also post and parcel delivery clients are looking for additional space. A big driver across all of this is e-commerce, where we see that European e-commerce on average is projected to grow at around 6% on average over the course of the next three years. What does this mean for us and for other logistics players? For every $1 billion of e-commerce sales implies a space demand of 93,000 sq meters for new logistics space. Not unimportant to mention is also how crucial the location and increasingly so the grid power connectivity has become for future occupiers. Real estate availability, and that's also linked to labor availability, has become more critical in the past years. Occupiers no longer look at real estate costs only on a rent basis, but more as a total of their operating costs. Finally, sustainability is a clear point of focus with obsolescence still being present in the market. We believe we as Montea are able to capture this as a result of our grey and brownfield landbank focus, with over 70% of that being connected to the grid or being zoned for industrial use, and also our clear focus on reaching high sustainability standards in our investments and developments. Els, over to you for the outlook. Thank you very much, Inna. With these great results, we can reconfirm our 2025 EPS guidance of plus 8% year-on-year to EUR 4.90 per share. This excludes the potential one-off EUR 0.08 from the FBI recognition for fiscal year 2024 in the Netherlands. In terms of dividend, the same growth target of 8% year-on-year can be reconfirmed to a level of EUR 3.90 per share. This dividend target also excludes the potential one-off of the FBI recognition in the Netherlands. We are also happy to reconfirm the 2027 guidance to an EPS of EUR 5.60. The growth will be done, as always, through a disciplined financial allocation with focus on operational excellence. The leverage will remain under control, consistent with our track records. Going to an adjusted net debt on EBITDA of eight times, we will have an investment capacity available under Track 27 of EUR 500 million. The investment volume of 2025 of EUR 300 million will be done through the growth via our four growth pillars: investments in owned developments, investments via standing investments, acquisitions of yielding and non-yielding landbank, but also standing investments, partnerships with developers and also landowners, as well as green investments in solar panels and battery energy storage systems. The EPS target will be reached through a consistently high occupancy rate that won't go below 98%, an average cost of debt that won't exceed 2.5%. For 2025 and 2026, we can confirm a maximum of 2.1% and an operating margin going to 90% by the end of 2027. We have a strong EPS track record with an EPS growth on average over the last 10 years by 9% per year on average. We promise to the market a 6% growth of the EPS in the upcoming years. We have a strong track record in the return. Total accounting return for a 10-year period is on average plus 19%. Now I give back the floor to Jo for the ESG update. Thank you, Els. I'm going to be short on the ESG update. As you know, we have an ambition there under Track 27. We delivered the first two battery energy storage systems in Belgium. We did it in Willebroek and Ghent. We're planning to do another 45 MW, of which 32 in Belgium and 13 in the Netherlands, with the aim to go to 100 MW by the end of 2027. Also on solar, we want to invest another EUR 25 million in order to get to 135 MW by 2027. We continue investing in heat pumps. 50% of our buildings must be equipped by heat pumps by 2027. Where 80% of our buildings now have LED lighting, this will have to go up to 100% by 2030. In short, ladies and gentlemen, I think the results we present to you today are unmatched. I think we can say that we are the only players that can say that they are involved in two out of the five largest single-tenant developments in the Benelux. We have an occupancy rate that is at an all-time high compared to the market average. Last but not least, we are involved in 150,000 sq meters of 100% pre-let projects in the Benelux. These results, ladies and gentlemen, give me a lot of confidence in the months and quarters to come. We are, of course, open for all of your questions, and I give the floor to Inna. Thank you, Jo. We'll now open the Q&A session. You have two options to ask your questions. If you're joining us via webcast, please raise your hands. In case you're joining us through the dial-in option, please press pound key five to join the queue to ask your question. If you would like to withdraw from the queue, please press pound key six. We have our first question coming in from John Wong at [Kempen]. Good morning, John. Hi, good morning. Hope you can hear me well. Could you provide a bit more color on what is understood under the term under exclusive negotiation? Does, for example, the 30,000 sq meters of LOI fall under this category? What's the timeline you see for closing these investments? Thank you, John. Indeed, the 30,000 sq meters LOI has been added to deals under exclusive negotiation. The progress we have shown since we first started reporting deals under exclusive negotiation in Q1 is we had 175 roughly in terms of volume that we were able to, that we were targeting to execute on in the coming months. In the one-quarter time, we were able to close on EUR 60 million of those deals. Most of them have also been yielding. We have now replenished the pipeline under exclusive negotiations with another EUR 60 million worth of deals. In terms of the timeline, again, it will be executed in the coming months. I think given the quarter progress, it gives you roughly the idea of what we would be looking to achieve there. Okay, Claire, thank you. On the Zeewolde acquisition, could you perhaps talk a bit more about the reversionary potential that you see? Also, what's the timeline you expect to capture that? I understood it was developed five years ago. It screams to me that it's still a relatively new asset. Yes, absolutely. It's a relatively new asset, John. It has a 40% upside potential that might be in the longer run because there is an existing tenant in the building. This means that value will go up as we go longer in the lease. This is a typical example of, in my opinion, what Montea likes to do. We have a long-term commitment, and we know that the closer we get to the end of the lease, the more the value will go up. This is really a long-term reversion and will be rather long-term. The upside is huge with our estimate today at 40%. OK, that's clear. Thank you. Just the last one on solar panels. Could you provide a bit more color on the $7 million write-down? It does screen like it could be a double-digit write-down if you look at the current fair value. Just to confirm that this would be fair value accounting and not cost accounting. The EUR 7 million write-down is linked to the negative energy prices for putting energy on the grid. Since this is happening since 2023 or 2024, with an impact on the solar panel income, as you have noted last year and also a little bit this year. As of this year, we have foreseen to curtail the solar panels and to stop producing energy when there are negative energy prices in the market. The decrease of the income of the solar panels has, of course, also impacted the, and we had to rectify on the valuation side. Okay, that's clear. Does that impact your decisions on solar panel investments? I could imagine it does impact your IRR underwriting. It does. The business case is still very profitable in case you can produce the energy for the tenant, and the tenant takes over the energy produced. On the other hand, if you can add battery energy storage systems near the solar panel systems, we can approve or confirm our 8% IRR on these projects. OK, Claire, thank you. Thank you, John. Thank you. Thank you, John. Our next question comes from Wim at KBC Securities. Hello, hi. Can you hear me? Perfect. Hello? Yeah, we can hear you. thanks. Sorry. Okay. Thanks for the presentation. I've got two questions related. One on the mix between developments and acquisitions. Can you give an idea on how you look at your Track 27 commitments? If you go back a couple of years, I think the mix would have been skewed a bit more to developments. Now we see that the pre-letting of the permitted pipeline is maybe taking a bit longer. Suppose that continues, would you then shift more to acquisitions, or would you then maybe extend '27 to '27 and a half, or maybe wait until, you know, the letting or the leasing situation improves in the market? I think two things are important. First of all, if you look at the acquisitions we have done, Wim, you see that we do them at an average yield of 6.7%. With our boots on the ground, with our people going deep into the market, we are able to do creative deals that also give us returns above 6.5%, contributing to the 5.6% target we have on EPS. We do not depend on the development of the landbank to reach the EUR 5.6 EPS target. That's a very important one. We want to do those developments, but we don't need them in order to get to the result. This being said, if we look at the landbank, indeed, it takes longer. What we see is that a lot of the projects we are currently talking about are consolidation projects. This means it's, for example, a 3PL who has three, four operations in a certain region, and he wants to consolidate them in one energy-positive new building. Of course, to make that exercise to consolidate, they have to go through an entire process. It's about labor law. There's a lot of things that are involved in that. That's taking longer. We only communicate on what is signed, on what is committed. There is much more in the pipeline. We absolutely believe and we reconfirm that we want to do those developments that were announced under Track 27. We want to do them, but it's also important to mention that we don't depend on them in order to reach the 5.6% EPS target. Okay, yeah, that's a perfect bridge to my next question. It's really specifically, and maybe you were talking already about it, Tongere, which is along the highway E313. Also, in the landbank, you have 160,000 sq meters available. I'm a bit wondering, because you see if you go more to the north of the E313, there's the canal, which has, the bridge is lifted. It's more multimodal, I would say. Can you give an indication on how the competition for space is specifically in that area of Tongere? Because also, I believe in the south, you have competition. I think the deal from Wirtz also had some properties around that area. Maybe also you mentioned about labor laws. Is that an opportunity now that labor laws have changed recently, that Tongere, because it's close to the Dutch border, becomes more interesting? Just your view on specifically that area. Good question. Every country has a certain area where there is more offer than others. For Belgium, that's definitely the Limburg area. I think with Genk, with Tongeren, with some other projects, there is some offer there, compared especially to other markets. Even if there is demand, and there is demand, there is competition. If you compare it, for example, to Antwerp, to Ghent, to Brussels, there's much less projects available. It's a bit like the Lille-Resel area in France. It's also a very nice area. There's a lot of demand, but there's also a lot of offering. I would say if I talk about traction on our landbank, it's less on Tongeren, and it's more on some of the other projects. Tongeren is indeed a bit more difficult today than it was, let's say, two years ago because of the offer that is available in the larger area. Okay, very clear. Thanks a lot. Thank you, Wim. Our next question comes from Steven at ABN. Good morning. Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I have some specific questions on, first, you booked a EUR 5 million result from joint venture. Could you please explain what that number entails and what to expect from this line item in the coming years? That's my first question. Good question. I would have to get back to you on that one, Steven, because I don't have it by heart. Okay, sure. I do another question. Could you provide some color on the 2026 lease expiry? More specifically, are there some large sites in the 40% expiry? What is the average in-place rent versus market rents for the 2026 expiry? Maybe also some color on the discussions you're having there. Steven, I think it's a fair question, but I think we are, given the fact that we are halfway through the first year and we are completing now the discussions for 2025. In terms of 2026, again, our commercial teams are busy with it. In terms of the profile that we have there, we have a couple of breaks. We have also some maturities going on. I think at this stage, it's a bit early to say on what there is specifically to be negotiated. We will provide more context on that towards the end of the year. At this stage, the focus for us is still the remaining now four months of the year where we would like to close the 0.7% of our rent roll in terms of negotiations. In any case, Steven, for this year, the occupancy rate won't go below 99.5%. For the next two years, it won't go below 98%. It will be, we are very confident about the re-letting of the areas that become vacant. Also, the prospects of renewables, just as you have seen in H1, positive renewables. Sorry, I didn't catch that, Steven. The renewables in? You say you are confident that occupancy won't drop below 98%. Are you also confident that that entails renewables will be positive again, as you've shown also in H1? We have a track record now on 90% renewables. We don't see big bears on the road that might be an issue next year. There's no reason to think that it would be different next year compared to this year or last year. Steven, and maybe to add to your question as well, our target is always to secure ERV level of rents. We are 8% under on average at the moment. If we look at the country mix, specifically Belgium and France, we have a lower under rent than Germany and the Netherlands, for example. It will also depend on where the leases are expiring. Our target is to deliver at least ERV. Of course, above ERV is a great to have. We hope to deliver a similar result than we did in the first half of this year. Okay, great. Thank you so much. My final question is, am I on the Zaltbommel site? Are there any discussions with potential tenants already for that acquisition? Of course, we cannot give, so there's roughly two-thirds of the site is a long-term lease. There's roughly five hectares of land for development. We are now assessing, we are talking with potential clients both for a new development that will take them a bit longer to have a positive impact, but also for outside storage. We have a demand for outside storage. It will be one of the two. We are open for both options. One will, of course, be yielding much sooner than the other one. There is definitely traction for both outside storage as redevelopment. Great, very clear. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, Steven. Our next question comes from Thomas at Deutsche Bank. Good morning, Thomas. Hi, morning, everybody. A couple of questions. The first one is on tenant demand. I'm just trying to get a better understanding about the momentum comparing Q2 vs Q1. There was a slower letting momentum in the second quarter. What do you expect for the second half of the year, maybe considering the activity you saw in July and August? I think if we talk about the new projects, as I said, some of them are either under LOI or under negotiation. It will depend on factors out of our scope, which means it's mainly consolidation. As I said, it's not new demand. It's really bringing different facilities to one new efficient building. When we see the energy that is put in by the potential tenants, by the prospects, they're not just making an exercise. They're really trying to get to a deal. It's also important to mention there, Thomas, that again, as we have said in the past, it's not about rents. We are not renegotiating rents. Everybody is aligned on what market rent today is. We are not into competition for those projects. It's exclusive negotiations. It really depends on procedures with the prospect that it takes a bit longer to get those things signed. I think this is a more back-to-normal market where people take 6- 12 months in order to get a lease really approved and signed, where we have been spoiled, I would say, after the pandemic for some months, for some years, where people had to rush to get the lease signed because otherwise their competitor would take the building. The market is normalizing. All our teams are really working hard on those deals. We are very confident that we will be able to sign new deals in the next half year. Okay. The second question is on rental growth. You saw a pickup of uplift in the second quarter, and the re-lets basically above ERV is what you said. I'm just wondering if you might have a more update on rental growth outlook. In our, what we include at the moment in our guidance is we have the indexation of around 2% throughout the end of Track 27 and the execution. We do see a positive momentum on capturing the reversion as well. It's certainly more realistic to see that we would be, we would continue seeing growth at least at ERV levels. Of course, the result, it's rather specific side by side. Again, we clearly see that in some cases, there is a lot of demand, and we are much more, let's say, in control when it comes to negotiations. That's where we are also able to secure sizable uplifts above ERVs. Okay. The third and last question is actually on the Track 27 program. You've already got 75% secured. I mean, should we expect this momentum to continue next quarter? Could this mean that you execute the program already ahead of schedule? Good question. In my opinion, a lot depends also on the performance of the share price. I think that given the current share price, we have to focus on the landbank, on the development of the landbank, which is, of course, yielding at 7% yield on cost. If we are able to do it with in-house development, with standing acquisitions that also yield at 6.7%, 6.8%, then of course, it makes sense to focus a bit more on standing investments. I think the absolute growth is, for a shareholder, less of a target. What he wants to see is the EPS growth. My first target is a 5.6%, given the fact that with more than two years to go in the program, we are already 75% committed. That means that we will probably reach that target, and we might outperform. Let's face it, it's not the first target. The first target is the EPS target of EUR 5.6. Okay, thank you. Add maybe that the focus is on the yielding projects that provide an upside compared to the market yield of 150- 200 bps. We really focus on the value creation. Growth for growth has never been our strategy. That's very important, the value creation on the long term. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Thomas. Thank you. Our next question comes from Paul at Barcley's. Good morning. Hi, guys. Hopefully, you can hear me. Standing in for Inna Maslova, and apologies for the background noise. A few questions from my side. On the capitalized interest policy, just noting that it's obviously increased year on year despite a smaller current pipeline. I think it's about 10% of earnings now. Just wondering if you could explain your policy again and what we should be expecting for the remainder of this year and what's being included in the Track 27 plan as a proportion of earnings. That'd be great. I've got a couple of other questions, and we'll probably take them one by one. The capitalized interest is done at a rate of 4.5% for this year. For the next years, it's around 4% on equal loans and attached to the interest rate evolution, of course. It's done at the marginal cost of debt, indeed. Also, this marginal cost of debt is taken into account when we calculate and report on the yield on cost that we announce. Paul, to add to what you mentioned on the shrinking development pipeline, the capitalized interest, we delivered the project with Tiel, which is 95,000 sq meters. It represented a very big chunk of our development pipeline. We delivered it effective end of June, so we were able to continue capitalized interest up until the end of the quarter closing. Okay, perfect. Do you capitalize on land acquisitions as well? Yeah, from the moment you have to under IFRS, as from the moment you identified your landbank as being a development and you have started the permitting process, the pre-letting process, you have to. We do for those projects. Okay, perfect. Second question, just changing tack slightly. It's a slightly provocative start point. How out of touch do you think the value is? Just looking at the market, you've had tenant take-up was down, I think, every year since the 2021 peak, and year to date is down as well. We've got market rental growth has largely ground to a halt. Marginal financing costs, if you look at five-year and sort of 10-year swaps, are higher year to date. Particularly the opportunity costs, the 30-year bund and so on, are much higher than they were at the beginning of the year. Vacancy rates continue to increase, yet prime yields have slightly compressed. It does seem a bit that there's something wrong in that scenario. I just wonder what your thoughts were and whether you think it's the occupancy and the tenant side will improve, or actually, is there a risk that the value was slowly realized that the market is actually weaker than they're probably hoping for and there's an adjustment. Could we see values moving down again in the near term, or do you think it's the occupancy and the tenant side that would improve? I absolutely don't agree on that, Paul. I think we see in every of our markets, we see market transactions at yields that are in line with the valuations that we see in the market today. I would think about a recent Wirtz portfolio deal. The market says it's around 5.3% that that would have been traded to Intervist. No, absolutely not. The scarcity of product, and as I already mentioned, makes that rent levels are stable. Yes, there are regions where there is a bit more competition due to the fact that there is a bit more offer. In total, we think the market is very, very resilient. Sometimes we forget what a stable market means. In my opinion, and I've said that in the past several times, a stable market for me has an occupancy rate of 95%. That's where you find the equilibrium between demand and offer. We've had bad times in the past. After the financial crisis of 2008, we went to 92%, 93%. Today, the average is still 95%, 96%, 97% in different markets. Of course, we are no longer in the, I would say, euphoric times where occupancy rates were at 100%, even at very remote locations. I would say, luckily, we're no longer there because this was leading to crazy deals with yields going towards 3%. That didn't make any sense in the long run. A lot of those deals are now off the market. We are now back in a more normal market than we were before. I absolutely do not agree on the fact that there would be a slowdown that is below the long-year average. As Inna mentioned in the market update, I think the growth of e-commerce, let's not forget that we only have a 14% penetration of all sales, retail sales in continental Europe today, are e-commerce, are linked to e-commerce. If you look at the U.K., if you look at the U.S., you are at 30%. As Inna mentioned, every billion euros of turnover will lead to 100,000 extra sq metes needed. We don't have the land available to do it. I'm absolutely positive that logistics remains the first and most resilient asset class in the real estate environment. Perfect. Thank you very much. Just one last one. You mentioned the boys in the markets in the fives. I think in the answer to the last question, you mentioned that you were buying or able to buy assets at sort of high 6%, 6.7%, 6.8%. I just wonder, what is the sort of capital allocation thought process versus the landbank that you mentioned? I think at a yield on cost of 7% and buying assets that are immediately earnings-reducing at sort of 6.7%, 6.8%. Will we see a shift from the landbank investment and some of the oncoming development into more acquisitions? Do you think we'd continue with predominantly for development? A pure standing asset, triple A top product just delivered. As I said, yields could be between 5% and 5.25%. On in-house projects, we can go to 7%, 7.5%. I would say that's where the two reference points are. What we try to do is to position ourselves a bit in the middle as a developing investor, which means it's a landbank. It's value-added. It's buildings that are not the last buildings along the last standards. They are older buildings, but on great locations where we say, Okay, we have a yielding landbank or we have an income-producing asset for the next years. We first of all look at the redevelopment potential at the end of the lease. That's why this is buildings that are not interesting for a pure developer because he wants to develop tomorrow. He doesn't want his equity to be blocked for many years. It's not interesting for a long-term investor because he doesn't want to do the redevelopment. That's where the sweet spot for Montea is. That's why I said that Zaltbommel is such a great example for Montea's strategy. You have part is yielding, a part you can start developing immediately. With that creativity, with that boots on the ground, we are able to outperform the market on those acquisitions. Excellent. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next question we have is from Vivien at De Groof. Peter Peter comes with a written question. Your last two acquisitions are rather core-plus acquisitions. Do you see a more attractive risk-return profile in this type of investments compared to value-add investments? Are you therefore targeting more acquisitions of these types of assets on the circa 25% of investments still to go under Track 27? Could you provide a breakdown between the developments and acquisitions according to the internal target? When we talk about the last two acquisitions, we're talking about Blue Gate Antwerp and Zaltbommel, I presume? Blue Gate Antwerp is indeed a more standing investment. We don't have to do anything, but it's more in the monopoly game, which at the end of the day, real estate is. We are the core investor in Blue Gate Antwerp. If we can buy the building that is linking us immediately to the river Schelt, of course, we have to do it. This is more of an opportunity. Your neighbor is only sold once, so when his house is for sale, you have to buy it. Looking at Zeewolde, that's indeed a more corporate deal, with a huge reversionary potential of 40%. This is an easy one. As already mentioned, Zaltbommel is a mix of both. Part of it is immediately yielding, and another part is development potential. As we said before, our financing has become more scarce, with the share price being under pressure. We don't want to raise capital at every price. As Els Vervaecke already mentioned, we are in the game for value creation, EPS, and NAV value creation. The mix of in-house developments and acquisitions will really depend on, of course, the in-house developments on the traction we get on our landbank, and the acquisitions will depend on the opportunities we are able to create ourselves. It's really difficult to give any view on that. It would just be a guess. What is important is the mix of both and by adding the green investments, of course. The mix of those three will lead to the 5.6% earnings per share by 2027. That is the main target. It appears we have no further questions. Over to you for the concluding remarks. Thank you all for your participation. Thanks for your question. The future is bright. We look forward to realize all the commitments we made today. We are looking forward to seeing you over the next weeks in some of the roadshows we are having at different locations. Thank you all for joining today. We are looking forward to seeing you in the near future. Thanks. Bye-bye.