Good morning, everybody. Good morning from Wolvertem. Let's start and look a little bit more close to what's happening in the logistic real estate markets in Western Europe. I think we can say, with interest rates and inflation both converting towards 4% by year-end, and an economy who is slowing, slowing down, I think step by step, the fog is clearing in real estate country. We as WDP, we adapted ourselves, again, taking into account the new cost of capital for a longer time. Our EUR 125 million new acquisitions and developments this year are the proof of that, with development yields above 7%, taking into account, of course, all elements of a development. Yes, the future will be more complex, more redevelopments, taking into account the specific location, I think, as we showed in our property tour at the Kempen seminar, the end of May, and our energy investments, adding a new function to our storage and distribution points, namely, charging points. Who knows, more acquisitions to come. Besides this, I think we still can say that the fundamentals of the logistic real estate market are very strong. Yes, economy and consumption are slowing down and probably stocks too, but this does not mean that there is less need for warehouses. Only the throughput will be less, and decisions are taking longer. This is the normal way of acting in the cycles. A little example, the half year results of Kuehne + Nagel this week. Kuehne + Nagel, sea and air freight, minus 50% the first half year, that's about the slowing down of transport of goods between the continents. On the contrary, Kuehne + Nagel contract logistics flat, the handling in the warehouses stays where it is. Scarcity. Scarcity of land, electricity on site, and workforce drives our clients to take care of what they have and automate it. Anyway, more investments in the heart of their business, their warehouses. All this supports rental growth, at least following inflation. This gives us a like-for-like rental growth of more than 6% and current rent still 9% below ERVs. I give you a small example of what we have seen in our portfolio. Near Brussels, in one year and in two steps, we hired the rent in a warehouse from EUR 550,000 up to EUR 750,000. The ERV of today, after a bankruptcy of the first new client. In Dutch, we should say, "Uit naar de absoluta." Then our results. This all those things comes together in our EPS growth guidance for this year of 12%. 8% recurring, 4% one-off. Wait, don't forget it, 10% more shares than last year. This supports strongly our growth plan up to 150 in 2025. In order to be able to do all this, we can rely on a strong liquid and fully hedged balance sheet, with a fixed cost of debt of 2% this year, still having full entrance to unsecured financing. A loan-to-value below 40, Net debt / EBITDA of 7, and becoming more and more important, a strong ICR, ICR of more than 6, thanks to full and long hedging's in the past. More than enough from our side. Now it's up to you, and we are open for all your questions. Maybe to all participants, if you want to ask a question, please either raise your hand or use the live chat and we will address them one by one. We have a first question from Pieter Runneboom from Kempen? Hi, team. Thanks for taking my question. I was wondering, what do you currently see, in the investment market? Are there some interesting opportunities already to be seized? I think it's, it starts, let's say, people, because of the fact, like I said in the intro, we see stabilization of inflation and interest rates by the end of the year. I think everybody now understands that they have to accept the new world, and that it is not temporary. There you see, I think, step by step, you see people who have to refinance, who have to sell, are saying, "Okay, we have to adapt to the new reality. Let's start again." We see step by by step, some potential files coming to the market, and we think that we will see more of them, let's say, as from September. Then the question is, are they already willing to sell at the adapted prices? We see opening of the markets. The next question from Steven, from Oddo. Hi, good morning, thank you for taking my questions, of course. If the occupying markets are healthy, availability remains record low, you can sign 7% yield on cost, why don't you develop more? What are the constraints that you see here? Maybe as a follow-up to the same question, can you quantify a bit where you think development volumes could go for the coming years? We'll go back to the previous highs, for example. Well, first of all, I think, you say, why don't you develop more? I think it stays difficult to develop and to realize the 7% yield on cost in Western Europe and the 9% in Romania. That's not easy, we think and there is still a very nice pipeline of projects, but it all takes longer. Instance, decisions, are taking longer due to the combination that indeed, rents are higher in a new development than, let's say, foreseen a year ago. Now with economy slowing down, people are also thinking more and thinking longer about it. Will we jump or will we not jump? It's not that we don't want to do developments, but we, yeah, the market needs to be there, the clients needs to be ready to decide. Indeed, we still buy. If we can, we will buy land, speculatively, but we don't do speculative developments like we didn't do that, let's say also in the last 10 years, there is no need to do speculative developments. People who take time to think also today have still the time to decide. On, let's say, will the good old times come back? Well, that depends on, yeah, the possibility to do acquisitions. We also, we always have done, let's say, during the different moments in the cycles, more acquisitions, more developments. Let's say, we lowered our goal from EUR 500 million a year to EUR 250 million a year, but we are very confident, and we are self-confident that we can reach the EUR 250 million. We said 250 because we want to do profitable investment instead of just investments. Okay, clear. Thank you. Frederick from, Kepler. Yes, hi, good morning, team. Three questions on my side. The first one would be, have you made an exercise on the part of the portfolio that is no longer ESG or compliant to ESG standard, or at least to the latest trends, and for which a retrofitting could be done with the impact of a sharp increase in rent? I refer to the example you just gave us on the, the tenant, which meant bank, which were bankrupt. In other terms, would you favor a tenant relationship or structural financial growth? That's the first question. We will always think and work together with our clients. We are not short-term hedge fund or temporarily investor in the sector. We are long-term, and we live it from our clients in good and bad moments, and it will be together. Just, for example, kicking out a client because he's not paying the last EUR, yeah, we will always go in negotiation with them, speak with them, and, yeah, we have to live from them. Our growth, also the last 25 years, was done with existing clients. A client is and stays important, and together, we will reach it. It's much more faster by, let's say, inflation and indexation is that's over the whole portfolio, while, let's say, okay, a little shot with 1 tenant or 1 client, it's always, let's say that does not change in, in, in the big figures, but clients relations are and stays very clear. Yeah. In addition to that, you know that we've developed more than 2/3 of the portfolio ourselves and due to the steep growth in the last couple of years, in the last 10 years, so the portfolio is a very high quality. Indeed, there are a couple of 100,000 square meters, which in the next years, it's not concentrated in, in any year, that will come at the end of the lease. There, there are some opportunities to upgrade and redevelop the building Probably, most likely in, in, in partnership with the existing clients, who is most likely to stay, give you the example. Joost made it in the last couple of quarters, the example of the company in the Netherlands who was at the end of their lease, they're fabricating the big fiber, fiber optic cables for the Olympic Games. Initially, they wanted to go to another continent, and there they stayed, and they want us to upgrade, upgrade, expand, redevelop the building. We have a, an example in Belgium, too, where a tenant said, "I need more room, more space. I will look for a new land plot." In the end, they stayed, and we do a redevelopment and upgrade project with them. In other cases, it will be because of better optimization of the volume of a building, eh? We have a lot of volume in the building, too. That's a trend we also see, is that they will also start to automate. There we can also play a role because we have that knowledge, so we can offer that service too, to our to our clients. Yeah, in addition, I would say that, let's say those sites who are not ESG future compliant, yeah, that's income-generating land bank for future redevelopments. Like we mentioned in May, and like we showed in May, from an old, sinking building in the port of Amsterdam, we made a perfect urban logistics hub at a higher rent for Amsterdam. Near Schiphol, we bought, 10 years ago, an old flower hub. There we can make a new air freight transport hub. In Breda, we can do new city logistics buildings. That's part of the portfolio that is not ESG compliant, but old and ugly, I would say, are the perfect, are the perfect locations to do future redevelopments with adapted functions to the new function of that location. Frederick? Frederick, is that an answer on your question? You had two more questions. Frederick is currently out of the call, so we'll- Okay. continue with, Inna from the Degroof Petercam. Yes. Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much on the-- for the presentation. Two questions from my side. First one, how do you see current opportunities for land acquisitions? More. I would be really interested to hear more on the fact on whether you start to see any distressed land plots coming up for sale that are, well, that are available at adjusted prices. My second question is, if you could give us a little bit more color on the investment market in Romania, and more specifically, on the levels of ERVs that you are seeing there, and what indexation are you able to secure on your portfolio on the leases? Perhaps a follow-on question on Romania is whether you expect that in the EUR 250 million per year mix that you would like to continue adding on, whether you expect the proportion of Romania to remain roughly in line with where it is in your portfolio at the moment. Thank you. I will answer first the land question. I would have hoped to be able to buy land at cheaper prices, but I mentioned the word scarcity and scarcity and scarcity. It's absolutely not possible. On the contrary, we have seen some land positions that have been sold at even higher prices than expected. Even then, they pay. There was a tender in the Netherlands, let's say in the middle of the country. It was a deal, and you had to offer at least EUR 200, and you had no certainty of any availability of electricity on site. Well, the prices went above EUR 250. Then on that location, I would say, at those prices, you cannot develop, let's say, up the right yields. Indeed, it were all end users who bought those lands at those high price. Prices of land are absolutely not coming down. I would say, if something is available, everybody wants it. Romania, let's say there, let's also nothing changes. We stay within the 20% limit that we mentioned already a lot of years. Let's say there we are, let's say neutral. Within those limits, we are neutral, and if we can do a good project in Romania, we do it in Romania. If we can do it here, we do it here. I think you could roughly foresee that we stay within the 20% limit. Yeah, okay. That, that stays on the total portfolio level, as we have mentioned and guided for. In the proportion of the EUR 250 million there, it will. It's obviously depend on opportunities, but now, as it is running right now, it's a balance between the countries, and it should stay more or less at that proportion, unless there is, in one or the other country, a nice opportunity, then it will be a bit in the other way, but still within the 20%. I think the biggest- Limit ... difference is that we until last year, we could count, I would say, almost on the Netherlands alone, and now we have to count on. Let's say our 3 offices, the Belgian, the Dutch, and the Romanian, and they are doing, let's say, almost the same. Yeah. Uh- In incremental growth. Yeah. Rental levels, yeah, they still are-- they are flat. They are, let's say, from new developments, they are also higher, eh, because they are. We, we, we are seeing the ERVs also in Romania. Yeah for the first time, have an uptick this year. Like in the other countries, it started already a while ago now. We had it in Romania, too, but there also indexation follows European indexation levels, and we can pass it on to the tenants. It's the same as in the, in the other countries, and that has been absorbed and passed on to the tenants. Thank you. Just, just to follow up on the investment market overall, because historically, of course, it's, it's one of the places where we have seen a limited number of transactions. Do you see any movement there in the, in the last 6 months? No. No, it's still a, it's still an, a developer investment, investor market, with the likes of WDP, CTP, already owning 50% of the market. 50%. More than 50% of the market does not sell anything, so. Great. Thank you very much. We have the next question from Wim, KBC. I hope you can hear me fine because I'm having some internet troubles. It's, it's fine, Wim. It's fine. Oh, great. I've been shut out for a while, so I might repeat a certain question, but my first question would be on the yield expansion. You saw 12 bps in the second quarter, so that's a slight deceleration versus the first quarter. I think 15 bps there. Can you quantify a little bit, compare the two quarters? Where is it still coming from the same sources, or is it maybe a catch-up in other areas? How do you see it going into the next of the year, the rest of the year? Well, yeah. When you as well as from the peaking at the end of Q3, values have come down, and let's say, the speed of the yield expansion has been a bit different in, in terms of the countries, et cetera. Generally, generally, the tendency is a bit the same, and that we get this yield expansion, and of the yield expansion, you have seen until over the last 3 quarters, let's say 50% has been offset by ERV growth, eh? Yeah. More, more or less. Now we are at 5.2% Net Initial Yield for the entire portfolio, 4.8% for excluding Romania, so for Western Europe. We repeat what we have said over the last couple of quarters, that we see Net Initial Yields in the market going towards 5% mark, and we are, let's say, close by the 5% in our portfolio, too, at 4.8%, and with still indexation coming in, and with still upward pressure on ERVs. That's the same message we wanted to bring today. That's what we expect. Okay. Maybe just more into the countries drill down. Last quarter, you mentioned, and I think also it was mentioned at the year-end, that the Netherlands were accelerating a bit earlier because they have a more liquid market. Is that still the case, that the Netherlands, but because at a certain time, that should level out, and then it should be- Yeah, yeah- Yeah. We expect it to level out among the countries. There are no in the investment markets, there's no reason to have fundamental differences in the investment markets. We believe in Western Europe, yields will just simply go to 5%, which is also where the funding cost is in. Okay. Okay, okay, fine. A follow-up question, just some, some details on the solar income, eh? I think it grew about year-on-year, about 5%, and you, you quantify or you qualify that a little bit by balancing capacity growth with electricity prices. Can you give a bit more detail how that's gonna work out into the second half? There, last year, I remember you had the spike in energy prices, ar- around August, September. Is that, is there still some, some potential there, that the, that it could, could come down a bit more? Or have they been hedged, let's say, anyway, and that it's not, that, that impact will not be felt? Yeah. Most of the, most of the, most of the income is either at the fixed price or the fixed price from the Green Energy Certificates we get, and we have only a small portion in that's in the Belgian portfolio, which is more linked to the spot markets. That's unhedged, so there you have a bit, a bit of volatility. Let's say, in the first half of the year, it was EUR 1 million lower than we should have expected, so it's not dramatic. Yes, it's in percentage-wise, it has an impact on the line solar income, but not on the entire group. That's simply because, yeah, when we budgeted, prices were still very high and prices came down, but also prices came down for the short term, there is no... Let's say, they were also very, very high as a result of the war and the energy crisis. Now, they have come in a bit, but the long-term energy price forecasts are still pretty much intact. ... Yeah. Just a last follow-up on that. When you add new capacity, that's the timing when you actually fix the hedge in the future, or have you already pre-hedged? You should not see it like that, because it's not possible to hedge electricity prices like you do in the interest rate swap market. For example, when you sell the electricity, you either sell the electricity to the client, and therefore to the client, we offer to the client a reduction on the grid electricity price, because we save distribution, transport, and taxes, and that's can be variable, that it follows at a discount and the price he gets from the grid, or we lock it in for a fixed, at fixed, and we give the option to the client. We have both scenarios there, and what we inject into the grid, there, we try to lock in for 1, 2, or 3 years, but it's not possible to have a hedge on that for more than 2, 3 years. Typically it follows with a lag, the energy market. We typically have for the injection part, 1 or 2 years fixed prices, and then it converges in the end, again, to the market. Unless in the future, we think, we can sell a bulk to a corporate wanting to buy green energy. Do note that that is not our... We could do that for some parts of our energy portfolio, but do note that so we are ramping up our capacity to have more production of green electricity. Yes, in this new ramp-up, we will have less auto-consumption by the tenants in the buildings, but that's done deliberately as we want to have full rooftop capacity. Why? In the short term, it will lead to more injection, and that's a bit more variable, and a bit at a lower price, but that's done deliberately because the transport of our clients is electrifying. When you have a, when we have a building, a normal logistics operation is not that energy intensive. When, for example, the transport of the client electrifies, and I'm not talking about the cars, but the vans and the trucks, then the electricity consumption goes at least 3 times. We want to be ready to capture that and to be ready to offer that service to our clients, because we are now working on pilot projects with truck charging, et cetera. Then it's a competitive advantage to also have the electricity. That's what we try to accomplish. When we can then sell behind the meter, we say to the client, we can achieve a much better price than injecting, even though it would be then partly variable. Yeah. No, no, that's interesting, especially when the grid is getting saturated. Well, thanks a lot. Very clear, and thanks for taking my questions. Paul May from Barclays, floor is yours. Hi, guys. Sorry, just 1 quick 1 from me. You mentioned the statement that it's getting or it remains challenging to achieve target returns on investments despite costs stabilizing and in some cases coming down. Just wondered what it is or how you're looking at funding investments moving forwards. Obviously, stock trades where it does, at a big premium to your EPRA NTA values, and you see that as a, as an attractive source of funding, or is debt capital, as you say, a sort of 5% plus cost still attractive given the high yield on costs on your, on your project? Just wondering how you're thinking about funding sources moving forward. Nothing's really changed there. We will continue to do what we've done in the past, having a prudent balance sheet and a good debt-equity mix. As we already stated, it's also in the presentation, we will fund maximum 50% of our debt, of our investments with debt and minimum 50% with equity. Of the equity part, which is indeed, the equity is all, our marginal cost of equity is almost similar or all than the marginal cost of debt. Indeed, that's a trade-off we need to make. Note that, for example, you've seen what we've done last year. We're in a good balance sheet position. We have a net debt to EBITDA of only 7 times, and there is also each year coming minimum EUR 150 million of equity staying into the company through retained earnings and scrip dividends. For example, when Joost is saying, we could see a bit more investments in, on, on the acquisition front, then we would be happy if that would be funded through a contribution in kind, for example. That would be the preferred route to fund an acquisition, for example, so that it's earnings, earnings neutral and reinforcing for our, for our balance sheet, but that depends a bit on, on opportunities. Cool, thanks. I just, I suppose when you say no change, there has been quite a big change in the market, and that's why I was just wondering, it's surprising that from your side, there's no change in your thought process, particularly as you say, given the marginal cost of debt and the risks that come with that are broadly the same as the marginal cost of equity, yeah. I, I fully understand your question, but I think we have made that change already last year. We made that change last year. You can see we have. Look at what we have invested over the last 12 months, and our net debt has not changed over the last 12 months compared to 30 June last year. We have funded in the last 12 months, everything with equity. Yeah. Yeah. Cool. Sorry, I just had a- We already meet. already already moving along that path. Yeah, yeah, indeed. Sorry, I just had one quick one incoming from a, from a client, actually. How are discussions on secured bank debt moving at the moment? Is that available, and what sort of cost and margins would that be available? You mean you mean unsecured, I hope. Uh- I've spoken about unsecured finance. No, no, no. Just to be very clear, the last couple of weeks and months, we have received some questions on our negative pledge clause. Yes, we have a negative pledge clause in our bank and bond documentation, that we do not provide any mortgages or pledges or whatsoever, because that's the core strength of our funding model, is that we raise all debt at the level of the group, senior, unsecured, everybody fully aligned, fully aligned governance. That allows us to be very efficient, very flexible, and allows us to be, have a very diversified debt book, and have very good access and fast access, also for big amounts, eh? We know that in the market, some players are experiencing some difficulties with their balance sheet or access to funding, and that they are turning more towards the secured lending market. That is then an opportunity for some players to access funding in a good way, but I can assure you, we can still have a very good access to unsecured lending, the way we have done it already for many years. Of course, today, tapping the European bond markets would be too expensive. We all know that that market is extremely difficult. It's always open, the market, at the right price, of course, but we do not need it today. For example, for the refinancing, we do it with the traditional lending banks. There, we so see no big change in pricing and a lot of support from our, from our lending banks. We are not only reliant on the home, Benelux lending banks. We, we talk a lot with international banks, international investors. We even get for unsecured lending, reverse inquiries, so we are not concerned at all about access to unsecured lending. That's what we've been trying to do, establish over the last 10 years. That is one keyword: diversification. Diversification. We can also now use our, our, our good credit ratings to continue to have that good access. The baseline is, yes, we have good access to unsecured lending at a decent pricing. Okay. Well, are you able to share- Don't forget, we have also EUR 1.5 billion in undrawn credit facilities. Yeah. Are you able to share on what the margins are today versus, say, 12 months ago on the unsecured? Um- Broadly. Let's say for marginal, yeah, 10, 10, 15 bps for traditional bank lending. Okay. sort of high one hundreds now or sort of mid one hundreds as a sort of spread? High, high 100s. High 100s. Cool. Thank you very much. We have some questions in the chat from Fred. It seems that you're back in the chat. Fred, you can, you can ask them. Yes, I'm, I'm back. Sorry, I, I froze out. Since I had the same provider on internet and, and, and Win. Just 2 questions. Maybe could you split the revaluation loss between the portfolio revaluation and the development gain? Because I saw that you deliver some asset in H1. Maybe could you comment on your strategy today in France and Germany? It seems that you're still, well, relatively quiet in the development process. Just wondering if you have seen some land which could be cheap there, and on which you could make a potential breakthrough in the country in the futures. Anything would be useful. Thank you. Yeah, on the development gains, we've shown around 20, 20% development gains, which is consistent with the yield on cost you saw and the, and the valuation yields on the, on the portfolio. We also- On France and Germany, let's say there we are still open, and we still want to invest in those countries, let's say, as markets were closed, yeah, they were also closed in Germany and in France. I said, when he was kicked out, that indeed, land prices are not coming down, on the contrary. Still open, investigating, and let's say by markets reopening, yeah, we see probably some more possibilities in Germany and France, let's say we still have to wait for the final pricing. Yes, we are still open, and if tomorrow we can do a good development or a right acquisition, we will do it in both countries. Let's say there, the strategy is not changed. We just have to be careful and to count well. Just to come back on the, on that, 2 follow-ups. Do you think you need to invest more in your local teams? 'Cause we've seen several other or some of your competitor investing into their teams upfront. Is it something that you need to do, or you, you believe you have the right partnership today in Germany to continue and in France as well? The second question, you said that land price is not going down, or you don't see evidence of it going down. I'm just wondering, wondering how is it possible in a world where the cost of funding has gone up to the roof? For the lands, there is 1 word, scarcity. Let's say even-- and there is more than developers, and there are end users, there are end investors. They can- and they are thinking and counting, making a different calculation. If it is not because we cannot develop, profitable on a piece of land, that it cannot be interesting for an end user. That's different. There, indeed, yeah, because of the scarcity and all those threats, let's say, in certain regions, that they don't want new industry zones, or they don't want new logistics, and there are those things that you could see in the Netherlands. Let's say, make that land stays where it is, at least. Concerning the teams, yeah, you can say there are 2 strategies or you go for the team first, and then you go for to try to do projects. We say, we have very good teams in the Netherlands and Belgium, we do Germany with 1 German business development guy, supported by the Dutch office, of which some of them have experience in Germany and living very also close to the German frontier. France is done from here, from Belgium, also with some French-speaking colleagues. We have always been from the principle, do first your investments and then build further the team, instead of just build building up first teams and then doing investments. Okay, thank you. Maybe last one for me. Could you give a bit more detail on the partnership you have today with Gosselin? Is it something you see more and more with the end user going through partnerships? I think there, there, that's an end user also having a very nice activity and a very good track record and also a known portfolio, and they are used to developing themselves. We got to know each other and helped each other. Then in the end, we said, we can reinforce each other, and we can, they can accelerate faster with us, and we can also participate to these projects and put our knowledge together. It's a way for us, specifically in the Belgian market, where the market is more than 50% held by owner-occupiers, to also take part of or participate in that owner-occupier market. We have identified with them a volume of EUR 100 million of projects, in which we will take a 25% stake with the potential, but that depend also on our partner, of course, to, in the future, for example, do a step-up acquisition and offer liquidity to our partner, when they would have other opportunities in their business or would want to sell down part of that portfolio. This one, for example, is really because it is a very interesting micro location, just near Antwerp, where you cannot enter, let's say, without them, together we can do it. Then let's say you are on the table, then we can hope that by working further together, that we can indeed see it as step-up acquisitions. Yeah, we only as you can see we can only, we only do it when there is a reasonable volume- Yeah. in that JV of minimum EUR 100 million, when there is a strategic, angle here, close to the, close to the port, like Joost mentioned, that is how we-- what our reason is. Obviously, our main business for, for all clarity, will stay, to be the full owner of, projects. It's not that it's- Yeah. expect it to become disproportionate in the entirety of WDP, but, as Joost mentioned, it's suffice for profitability, and we need to be smart, creative, and, and there, that's the way forward. It's an add-on on our existing business. It's not our new core business, but it's, it's an add-on. Yeah. It's an extra that otherwise would be not open for us. Thank you very much. Mark, from Kempen & Co.? Yes, hello, everybody. Thank you for the presentation and the very clear answers. If the market gets open and you start buying again, are you targeting a portfolio or rather individual buildings? We are targeting interesting things, Mark, like we always did, and that can be individual things, and that can be portfolios. It all depends on the opportunities. I suppose you are rather looking to Germany and France? As for us, let's say one, one region, if there is something interesting in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in Luxembourg, in Germany, in France, in Romania, there are the countries where we are active. There we are looking for interesting things, and if something is interesting, we do it. wherever it is. It will depend on opportunity, but you are right, it would be a plus if it could be, for example, in France or Germany, so that we could ramp up the activity and then further invest, for example, in a team, and when we have been able to build critical mass, but only when it's profitable, of course. Okay, thank you. That's clear. Inna, you had a follow-up question? Yes. Thank you. Just a follow-up question on, on expansion in France and Germany. Would you consider joint venture structures again, like, similar to what you had with VIB in place with a local partner, let's say, in either of the geographies? I would say we would prefer, of course, to be full owner. If there is really a good region, reason to do that, like we said, here, it's an add-on, but we should like, if we can choose, let's say, we should like to have, first, a good basic portfolio on our own. Never say never. Okay, thank you. At this moment, this, currently concludes our Q&A session, so I will turn back the call to Joost. Okay. Thank you, all. I said we are ready for September, and we hope to see you all at our Institutional Capital Markets Day on thirteenth and fourteenth September, on the road between Rotterdam and Ghent. I would say, I'm referring to the presentation, thanks to scarcity, we can speak about, and we will show you multilayer buildings, automation, energy, redevelopments, and all those fantastic things about the future of logistic real estate. Top of the bill, we will be able to taste our brand new WDP beer at the end of our two-day journey, brewed in our own warehouses. Is that reshoring, stay-shoring, or local shoring? It's up to you, make your choice by September fourteenth, and in between, enjoy the summer. Thanks a lot. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Bye. Thank you. Bye-bye. Bye-bye. Thank you.