Good morning, everybody. Here we are with Marcelo, the head of IT, M&A, and corporate areas, and Mariette, the director of governance, press, and CFO, to present the earnings results for the second quarter 2026. Let's begin with our main results. In the second quarter, net revenue reaching BRL 4.6 billion, an increase of 7% vis-à-vis the second quarter 2025. Of these 7%, 6% are organic growth. Adjusted EBITDA ex IFRS, we reach BRL 445 million in the quarter, 10% higher than the same quarter last year, with a 9.7% margin higher than last year once again and higher than the first quarter of this year. In adjusted net profit, we had a non-recurring event in the S system. Further ahead, I will detail this, the cash impact of this, so I won't speak about this net profit. I'll speak about the elimination of that non-recurrent effect, BRL 180 million adjusted net profit ex S system, 16% higher than the same quarter last year with a 3.9% net margin. In this quarter, we have 4,543 customers and an NPS score of 67%. We carry this out every half year. Now, the percentage of net revenue by line of solution, catering spearheading this with 25%. This is a relevant solution in our service portfolio. Facilities, 23%, maintenance and industrial services, 21%, and security, 19%. We have a broad diversity of solutions, and we are able to offer the customer a very broad and full service portfolio. Additionally, we have temporary labor services and field marketing, 7%, indoor logistic, 5%. We are not concentrated on any customer. This quarter, the main customers represented 5% of our. The top customer represents 5%, and within this, we can have a broad number of contracts as we offer a broad diversity of services. We have more than 15 contracts with this top customer per service and per region. Let's speak a bit about the net revenue for the quarter. As I mentioned, we had a net revenue 7% higher than in the second quarter 2025 and 6% organic growth. Now, we remind you that our organic growth is still being impacted by the 2024 cohort that was enormous in our M&A program. It includes the GRSA, and obviously, we make the adjustment of contracts that have no rentability within our minimum standard, and this means we have a certain drop of revenues in the cohorts we acquire through time. As a 2024 cohort was very relevant, it still exerts pressure on our net revenue. It's still going through organic growth, and the negative effect here is of approximately 2%. If we look at the quarter, the scenario is very similar. Total net revenue, 8% higher than in the first quarter of 2026, with an organic net revenue of 6%, still impacted by that effect of the 2024 cohort. For the 2025 cohort made up of RHMed, Nutricar, and Tagg, we also had a growth for the quarter. Now, I will turn the floor over to Marcelo to speak about our M&A program. Thank you, Mariette. Good day to all of you. Here you see a summary of our acquisition program for 2025 and 2026. 2024 was a highly intense year where we acquired GRSA, a very relevant acquisition, and we had an increase in leverage 1.1x net debt-to-EBITDA in 2025. Because of this, we slowed down the pace a bit. Last year, we acquired three companies, RHMed, Tagg, and Nutricar, with a combined revenue of BRL 3 million. Now they are under our management, and they are beginning to contribute results. This year, our proposal is to recover the speed and intensity of the M&A program. We have net debt-to-EBITDA standing at a very comfortable level. This is a considerable advance regarding this indicator. Now, along with GPS, we have one of the largest companies in security. We have already signed the contract for purchase. We have Uniflex, a company for marine hotel services, and this will consolidate our leadership in Macaé, in the basin of Campos. We have a significant participation there. If I'm not mistaken, this company has already been approved by the CADE, the antitrust agency, and we're now moving towards closing the full acquisition. Aster, which is a security company concentrated in São Paulo. Interesting program for the monitoring of residential buildings. If I'm not mistaken, it has been approved by the antitrust agency. We're simply awaiting the decision of the federal police. These companies invoice BRL 500 and some million 12 months before the acquisition, where I'm going to speak about the program accrued as a whole, and then I will speak more about M&As. Well, this is a slide we always share with you, showing you the M&A since the IPO in 2021. We have acquired 29 companies with BRL 9.1 billion in terms of gross revenue, BRL 1.8 billion of revenues acquired per year. It's been five years, of course, and there's no reason to slow down our pace. Quite the contrary, we would like to step up the pace a bit. Here you see the acquisitions carried out and the importance of each of these. First of all, we have qualified, enhanced our operation in industrial maintenance through the acquisition of eight companies, Sulzer, ENGIE, e-Vertical, and TLSV. This was relevant for us until the IPO. After the acquisitions, they have become our third main business in the company, representing 21% of our revenue. Second relevant point that I would like to mention is our growth in catering. Once again, not very relevant until the IPO. Now we have the acquisitions of Marfood, GRSA, and more recently, the acquisition of Uniflex. This has become our main business at GPS, responsible for 25% of our revenues. Well, I believe that we have successfully used the M&A tool to penetrate new businesses that have synergy with us, that have good labor and share the management systems. To speak of our pipeline going forward, we're quite optimistic. I had mentioned this at our last call. The scenario remains unaltered. The pipeline is extremely active. We have a complicated scenario of high interest rates, customers suffering in the day-to-day, our procurement teams of our customers working more intensely negotiating price. Of course, this is difficult for our competitors, especially the small and medium-sized competitors. So this is a favorable moment for M&A. We're not concerned with the origination of possibilities. Quite the contrary. Our pipeline changed very little compared to our last meeting. We have approximately 20 companies interacting with us with approximately BRL 8 billion of combined revenue. We're working with the diligence going forward. We have nine companies in this, and we had 10. One of them has dropped out. We converted three. We acquired three companies since the last call. These companies have BRL 9.4 billion of combined revenue. This is not a matter of concern. We are concerned with the quality of price. The rule for M&As becomes ever more stringent, and compared to the last meeting, we have become even more rigorous. The interest rate in the last quarter was very high, but we had a perspective for a greater drop in the midterm. We no longer have this perspective. The market is negotiating 6.5x EBITDA to acquire a company, even though we pay 5x EBITDA in the acquisition. We have to have a highly relevant potential for synergy. The pipeline has increased, we are being very conservative, very cautious. I think the moment demands this, and we are only going to acquire companies that offer a very relevant, very clear, and tangible potential for synergy. Companies with a highly qualified customer portfolio, little concentration on specific customers, and highly qualified customers. We are enthusiastic with a pipeline that continues to be qualified and our degree of stringency has increased, as I mentioned, once again, due to the economic context. We are going to continue on speaking about our EBITDA. We always use adjusted EBITDA. This quarter, we also had an adjustment in the EBITDA of the S system. We had a provision for this that had impacted our EBITDA last year, but in the reversion, we are considering this as a non-recurring item, withdrawing the impact on EBITDA. Basically, therefore, we have an EBITDA with a 10% growth vis-à-vis the second quarter with a 9.7% margin, and we can see this for the first half of the year as well. What we can say about this margin is that it had a qualitative evolution. In the first quarter, we had low labor expenses, 1.3. This quarter, we are back to 1.8 again, and we have maintained a margin of 9.7%. We begin to see an improvement in operating performance when it comes to margins. The labor issues increasing almost 50 basis points, and we had a result of 9.7% this quarter. We have done our homework. Our priority is to stabilize the contracts. This is something constant under management, and through time, we seek a margin improvement in the sustainable contracts, long-term contracts. This will be one of our strong performance indicators, a consistent and sustainable indicator, as we always mention. Regarding adjusted net profit, we had a non-recurring effect. With this, we had an exceptional net profit result this quarter. When we withdraw this effect, we still have an evolution in net profit. When we had the reversion of the S system, there was a positive effect for this quarter. If we withdraw that effect, net profit grew 16% quarter-on-quarter and compared between the first quarter 2026 and the second quarter. Cash flow, this is a highlight. It was highly positive this quarter. We had an improvement in the quality of our build contracts. Significant work was carried out with the customers. When you look in the rearview mirror, there are some contracts that were not performing. We made adjustments there in their cash, adjustments in Control, in the maintenance of electrical system, and now we have a positive cash flow effect that is consistent through time. I believe this is a great highlight, a very positive cash flow. Simply a contribution, Mariette. This is an example of some of those difficult situations we mentioned. What has contributed to this relevant cash flow is the decision that Gustavo and his team made at the beginning of the year. They were working with a large number of contracts for the maintenance of electrical wiring, for Control, and for telephony networks for TLSV. These were mobilized in the first and second quarters with relevant mobilization costs that hampered our margin. Besides being in deficit, they had a monumental consumption of working capital. These results in the second quarter are very relevant simply because of these mobilizations. In terms of cash generation, what we now have is hotel services, maritime hotel services. We're becoming consolidated in this sector, which is very positive for us. Do listen to the podcast by Wilian, who is the regional director. He's leading this business, and you can listen from him and understand how this business truly operates. It's a business that requires initial investment, but that has a good cash return and margin, especially at the end of the year and beginning of this year. We're still in the second quarter, but we will have an improvement in the second half. Another highlight is leverage. Thanks to our discipline, when we acquired GRSA, we were at 2.2x net debt-to-EBITDA. Presently, we're at 1.3x net debt-to-EBITDA. A very comfortable leverage for us that we deem to be our goal to remain at 1.5x and below. With this, of course, we can continue with our M&A program and investments that we deem to be important. I would like to stop here for a minute to speak about the S system. We had several questions about this yesterday, so I'll make the most of this earnings call to reach an alignment. We had a provision in the S system representing BRL 740 million. It was made up of two topics or two processes. One, the Tema 1079 that deals with SESC, SESI, SENAI, and S, that's why it's called the S system, and this topic received a favorable, positive decision. That is why we are reversing that provision that positively impacts our results. There's Tema 1390, another topic contribution to third parties specific for SEBRAE, INCRA, and Salário-Educação. This also had movements in the provision differently from the Tema 1079 system. The decision was not favorable, and Receita Federal is now collecting for this. We are forced to reverse the provisions and make deposits for the provision. Two different topics, one with a positive effect on our results, the Tema 1079, the other one, a write-off of the reversion of the provision, but with a neutral effect, null effect. We had to revert the provision, and this does have a cash effect. Very well, we began with BRL 740 million. We reversed the Tema 1079, the principal, and the currency, the monetary redressing. We also revert the part of the Tema 1390, BRL 83 million plus BRL 181 million, and with the balance, we have only BRL 145 million. This balance that you see, a large part refers to GRSA, and we have an indemnity that refers to the S system because of contractual issues, and a large part of those BRL 145 million are due to that. Now, it does not make sense to anticipate and pay the debit what is left, because this topic is still under discussion. There is a recourse at the Supreme Federal Court to speak about the minimum duration of Tema 1390 and other processes. So this is simply a balance moving on Note 28. We went from 100 and some million to BRL 140 million. Another impact is in the results. Now, the only one that impacts our results is the Tema 1079. That received a favorable decision. In May, we began to pay contributions to the S system, but we had a prior favorable decision. We did not have to pay that in June. Therefore, this reversion came into effect. This topic, this last decision, is now classified as a possible probability, and it will come out of our balance. And with that, we revert almost BRL 240 million of principal plus BRL 108 million of monetary correction with an effect of BRL 348 million. Here we are adjusting this in net profit, and we only adjust the part of the principal in the EBITDA, BRL 240 million in the EBITDA and BRL 229 million as we have that part of monetary correction. We also have an effect of that Tema 1390 portion that has no impact on our results. It was a contingency. We reverted the contingency. The effect is nil. It will have a cash effect because I will remove it from cash to deposit that portion of the provision, because we have lost the process. We have a total of BRL 274 million, including interest rates. As we have been remarking, we can always use tax credits, which enables us to offset most of these BRL 274 million. Now, the remaining part that we would also have to pay, we have decided to divide it in installments. The cash effect of these BRL 274 million will have a net effect of BRL 108 million throughout six months. And this expense had a provision. It was not deductible. It now becomes deductible and will have a positive effect in our calculation of income tax. It is a cash benefit that we will capture in July, where we pay the income taxes for the second quarter. So here we have the three effects, the effect balance, the cash effect, and should you still have any doubts, we can dissipate them here or subsequently. With this, I would like to end the presentation. I remind you of two important points. The podcast, we are on our fifth episode. For those who have not watched the others, please come to our channel, watch this live. And through the podcast, we make important presentations for you to have more contact with the GPS leaders. This quarter, we have Wilian Salgado, and we ask them to go more in depth in the maritime hotel services. Additionally, we are also disclosing our sustainability report, which you will be able to find on our site. We will have the version in English in September. All of this available to all of you. With this, we would like to close the presentation and go on to the questions. Let us open the audio for Andre from Bradesco, please. Good morning, everybody. Thank you for taking my questions. Congratulations for your results. I have two topics. Organic growth for the second quarter. I know that further ahead in the year, this will be a factor of slowdown. This is the base of comparison of GPS. The further ahead, the lower the base of comparison because of churn. Why is the organic growth closer to 6% instead of 7% that you had in the first quarter? The second question, about the development of contracts in GRSA, if these have been well accepted and which is the level of acceptance? Let's speak about the organic growth in the following way. The company's priority has always been and continues to be margin. In that context, if we have to withdraw from some contracts, that will be the option through time in a more cautious way. We have done this movement, especially in GRSA. This is something constant for the company. We have a minimum margin that we seek, and in the renegotiation, we resort to the customer to ensure that the contracts are balanced. A relevant point for the organic growth is this one. We're seeking margin, and it's always a trade-off, margin and organic growth. We're building the path towards more sustainable margin, going back to two digits, but we may have some contract losses. Marcelo mentioned some of them. These two contracts that we made the decision to discontinue because of their margin levels and consumption of our working capital. Well, they were demobilized through the first quarter and had a full impact on non-performed revenue in the second quarter. This is relevant for organic growth. Control and TLSV from the 2024 cohort, one from the 2025 cohort. It's a cleaning out process of the contracts acquired that will have an impact on organic growth, and it will be relevant in the second half. In GRSA, the behavior is very similar. Besides transfers of prices, we're seeking a rebalance, always with the necessary care. These are different contracts. They're not similar to those of Control and TLSV, but we do seek a margin that is more aligned with our target margin. We can say that so far, there has been no significant attrition in GRSA. Of course, this takes time, and when you carry out the negotiation, the negotiation can end up being lengthy. If you look at accounts receivable, for example, they will grow through time, and they will reflect that readjustment we're seeking. In November, we will see what we have been able to transfer or increase. The summary here is the organic growth does have an impact in the cleaning out of our contracts, not necessarily reflected within GRSA. The other two businesses were more relevant. In GRSA, we have a negotiation without relevant attrition up to this point. Thank you. Thank you very much. Have a good day. Let's unmute the microphone for Andre Mazini. Good morning, Andre Mazini. Thank you for taking our question. Perhaps a follow-up of previous questions. I would like to explore the challenges with GRSA. I think the issue of margin is very clear in these heavy catering companies before the acquisition. Now, after somewhat more than two years of the acquisition, has this ended up being more challenging than you had imagined from the viewpoint of contracts, the system and profitability of the operation? How do you carry out that assessment two years after the fact, and which are the learnings of this new company? Secondly, in terms of margin, despite the challenges of the quarter contracts inputs, you maintained a flat margin quarter-on-quarter. From previous comments, I understand that in the second half of the year, we should see an increase in the margins, at least. The company has made this clear in the comments and the release. Which is a possibility that this will not happen. We have an asymmetry of risks from the viewpoint of profitability, which were your learnings from GRSA and margin going forward, given your previous remarks. Well, thank you, Andre Mazini, for the question. Regarding GRSA, we turned the key of the systems in January of last year. Now, after almost 2 years, system integration is only 1 year and a half. Of course, we expect more. We wanted to be in a better position than today. We have high expectations. Now, all of that synergy that we could have captured through indirect systems management were captured, and they created a significant increase in the results. We are now in that phase of capturing cost reductions and synergies with a greater complexity. When you implement measures to capture that synergy, you have a higher cost that you can reduce in the future. For example, we made the decision that the logistics of GRSA would be outsourced. The distribution of catering and the DC would be outsourced. We made the decision that this was a strategic operation that had to be organic. We had to operate that. So in São Paulo, where we have the operation of GRSA, we changed the operation. We took away the outsourced operator, rented a huge warehouse in Pernambuco, and during part of the first quarter, but mainly in the second quarter, we had the full cost of the outsourced supplier, plus the total cost of lease. The team mobilized everything to start working at our distribution center. We only began to work without the outsourced team in August. This is, of course, an element that had a significant impact on the results of the quarter. It was an additional cost of BRL 2 million and some per month, but we no longer have that double cost. We have already removed the outsourced people, and going forward, we will capture better results. The cost of the operation is lower. We have a buffer. We will have higher inventories to buy spot, to buy based on opportunity. So there are measures for efficiency gain and cost reduction that are more for the long term. They are more costly to put in practice, and this is what we are doing now, implementing the long-term measures at GRSA. Of course, we would like to be at a better margin level. Unfortunately, it was not possible. Notwithstanding this, we are very confident for the future. We have several actions that will benefit our results. In the short term, you impact the results, some structures, but in the long term, the margin results will be relevant. We acquired a business of 25%. We have greater margin volatility in this business. This brings about more volatility quarter on quarter. This is part of the business. The acquisition per se had a very positive effect. It is a business where we have grown the most. In fact, we were able to put in place the cross-sell of the service. As Marcelo mentioned, we are confident that we will take the margin to the standard margin of GPS because of the initiatives we are putting in place for operational efficiency, and that is where the greatest risk lies as well. To converge to an EBITDA margin of 10% or somewhat higher, we have to have GRSA performing at that level as well, and that is where the risk lies. We're transferring readjustments, successful implementations of the DC, stabilization of the maritime hotel services. This was always our business with the most qualified margin. In the last quarters, we have gotten rid of several contracts. We're sure that this business will have more positive margins, and it is a very important business for GPS, the maritime hotel services. This is where the greatest risk lies, in the catering services. Thank you. That was very clear. Let's unmute the microphone for Lucas Marquiori. Good morning, everybody. I have two topics as well. First of all, I understand that you have that trade-off of margin versus growth. Looking towards 2027, we have the headwinds of the tax reform, two businesses performing with a margin low, catering and others, and 2027 will not be an easy year. I don't know what will happen with the economy. Perhaps the margin can bring you a relief for all of these challenges that we see. The second point, to test your capital allocation. In cash, you have a positive cash because of the system. GPS is at a 6x trailing. After that, it will be below the range. Is there a window for you to allocate capital, pay back dividends? Which is your matrix of priority for capital allocation? Therefore, I would like to understand which is the priority for capital allocation within these scenarios I just mentioned. When we speak about margins for 2027, we will have the reductions from the tax reform and that specific regime that we have with a reduction of 60 basis points or something around that 60, 70, which is a given reduction. With this, we don't have the expectation for margins for 2027 that will represent an increase vis-à-vis 2026. That effect of TOP will not happen during the year. It will take place through time. PIS/Cofins has a transition that will last 12 months, and there will be a change in the TOP regime, and this will lead to a change in margins. 2027 will be very peculiar in terms of margins. What we're seeking is that path for an incremental margin. We're treading that path this year for incremental margin after every quarter, and 2027 will not be different. Our priority has always been and will continue to be that trade-off of the organic growth and margin. It's a trade-off that sometimes with pain, as Marcelo mentioned, we have to continue with. In the sector that we're in, we create a vision of the growth of top line without consistency and profitability. Of course, in the mid and long term, this path will derail. This is what we see with the competitors. We want to prioritize profitability. If we speak about a margin in 2027, we have to remember the top line. Operationally, it is the constant quest for evolution of the standard levels for GPS, 10%-13%. We will have that impact in 2027, the top-line effect. 2027 will be a very complicated year. We're attentive to that issue of the tax reform. I think it will be a rather turbulent year with significant changes in pricing. To add some points to what Mariette said, in the day-to-day, we already see a greater pressure of customers. Our customers are being pressured. There is pressure on their profitability, and the procurement groups of customers gain force, and they are going to see cost reductions. This is what is expected from them, and we have perceived enormous pressure and growing pressure in our contracts, in our conversations with the customers. As Marisa mentioned, the priority is always profitability. Eventually, the growth will be higher one year, lower another year. These are temporary situations. The negative effect that you have in a company of living with a definite contract is a permanent situation. So the cash impact and the company's leverage is a cultural effect. We tell the companies that we accept to live with contracts in a deficit. If we do that, this will go through the culture of the company, and our culture will simply disappear. So we speak about this a great deal. To gain contracts, lose contracts, grow 6 or 7, grow more one year than another, this is part of the business. To lose profitability is something permanent for the company culture. So our priority is always profitability. Yes, we are concerned with the coming year. We are getting ready for it. We have a huge challenge to maintain our profitability level without the benefit of the top line. We are seeking efficiency gains to maintain our margin, and the challenge will be significant. We have perceived growing pressure in our daily interactions with customers. This scenario is very difficult for everybody. Regarding capital allocation, our board has to deliberate on this. We are awaiting a position for this. Mathematically, even though we acquire companies at 5.5x EBITDA, and we have a better EBITDA after capturing synergies with an improvement of 2.53x, the level of risk is enormous in the buyback of shares. We are buying back shares in a controlled environment. When we carry out an M&A, there is information that we are lacking. The level of asymmetry in M&As is enormous when you begin to weigh the risks. Buying at 6x or carrying out an M&A where if everything works out can converge at 3x, well, this is where we begin that conversation about buyback of shares. Mathematically, it is very complex. Capital allocation has always been and will always be in M&As. In the future, we may have an interesting opportunity. So let us continue. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Lucas. Let us unmute the audio for Lucas Marquiori. Good morning, Marcelo and Marisa. I also have two questions. Thinking about the rest of the year, organic growth from a more macro viewpoint, the scenario for the customers is still under stress. So how is this impacting your loss of contracts and on the part of the supply of labor, what is a bottleneck to ensure growth? Secondly, about your catering contracts, which percentage of the contracts have that readjustment in mid-year? Which is the attitude of customers when it comes to price adjustment? This could perhaps point towards margin for the third quarter. Our vision on organic growth in the second half of the year, and this is something we are monitoring, is that the customer with an electoral scenario plus a tax reform will lead to a behavior of holding back, of being on standby to hold back on bids, hold back on investments, and pressure in terms of prices. In this context, if the intensity arises a great deal, of course, the organic growth will be hampered by this. What we see so far is not something that points to something highly negative. We see a bit of that standby effect, which is natural. If I am working with bidding, the price will change going forward in 4 months because of the tax reform. It is natural, therefore, for the customer to look at that and say, "You know what? I am going to wait a bit." Now, this does impact our achievement, and it also impacts the contracts with our present-day customers. It could create the pace of lower growth in organic systems in the second half of the year if this becomes exacerbated, if customers decide to wait a bit because of the uncertainty of the elections, the tax reform, and they will wait to bid further on. Once again, this does not mean that we will have more churn necessarily. Everything will be at the same standpoint. But obviously, organic growth will be impacted because our level of achievement will be impacted. We will not have a greater number of losses, of course. We are monitoring that environment, and this is a possible scenario for the second half. It does not make sense for a customer's procurement team to open up a bidding process at present. It is a burdensome process that will change in 4 months. The price will change in 4 months. What does make sense is a slowdown in the bidding processes. What has happened with customer interaction is customers asking for reductions, a better scope. We put in more equipment, we take out people. It is part of the game, and this is happening because the scenario is truly not very favorable for our customers or for anybody. Regarding the supply of labor, the main consequence of supply of labor is that we have several vacancies. I think we spoke about this in the previous call, and we cannot comply with everything, paying the salary of our employees. We have to resort to extra hours, and this has been happening since last year because of the vacancies. When we do not have a new employee at disposal, we have to pay additional hours for those who are under contract. But we have faced that reality since last year, and nowadays, the price of the GRSA has already been remarked on. There is nothing different this year. Every year, we have to transfer a readjustment for the customer. The inflation this year is somewhat higher. It will be more difficult. But in the market, all competitors have to also transfer these new prices. You cannot survive without that. It is the entire industry focused on this to maintain the contract. There is nothing very different this year vis-à-vis previous years, Lucas. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Lucas. Let us open the audio for Gasparete, please. Good morning, everybody. Thank you for taking my call. We have two questions. The first one about organic growth. In the release, you spoke about the company NPS. You had difficulty in receiving answers, 8 percentage points, I believe. Is this a reason of concern if it could translate into greater churn? Secondly, once again, to speak about M&A. We heard comparisons, shares, the situation of 2027. Although the pipe has never been this qualified, as you mentioned, in quantity and quality, I would like to understand your expectation in terms of conversion. We know that the customers are holding back on the bid. Perhaps negotiations are somewhat colder. Would you like to speak about the NPS system? Sure. Go ahead. NPS, Net Promoter Score. We carried out a change of platform. We changed the way in which we approach and send the questionnaire. This may have an impact on initial engagement. We did make efforts to work better with engagement. This is one of the aspects. About the score itself, we are not concerned with that, not as you mentioned. Why? Because what we see in the change of the score, when you carry out the breakdown of the score, there has not been an increase in detractors. I think the main issue here was the way in which we approached the customer, different from what we did historically. Until the customer understood that he will receive this through email and no longer through the quality area, they have to work through a link. The link has a different way of asking vis-à-vis what we did last year. Our analysis on this result is that what happened is that we had a higher number of neutral responses. When we look at the NPS scale, it is like having a score 8, you reduce the number of promoters. In fact, this is what happened. We had a migration between 9 and 8 and not detractors or very negative answers. This is a very relevant indicator for us. It is part of the variable remuneration for the regional director, for example. We are focusing on this. There has been a system change, a process change. Regardless of that, we are looking at the results and creating action plans with the customers to look at this as a goal, that we always had a goal above 70% historically. Concretely, this is not an indicator that refers to potential churn. It is not a warning sign of criticism, an increase in criticisms, or very negative relationship with the customers. The churn refers much more to the price issue that is more relevant than the quality. Quality is something we are focusing on, of course, and is an important indicator, but that did suffer the effects I mentioned. Regarding the M&A pipeline, some important points. We are only going to carry out acquisitions of companies where our goals are aligned. If companies have low EBITDA, we want EBITDA maximum 5.5x. Companies with high revenues, 2% of net profit. If they have 2%, 3%, 4% of EBITDA margin with a highly qualified customer portfolio, that will allow us to work with cross-selling of our new services. Companies that do not have that concentration of revenue on a single customer. When the economic conditions were better, the interest rates were better, we were more flexible. At this point, we are completely inflexible. Despite all of this, we do have things in the pipeline that comply with our requirements. It is a cost of negotiation that tends to delay the closing, but we have the right raw material in our pipeline to allow us to acquire 1.5x revenue this year. Companies that fulfill our requirements. What we will define if we are going to deliver that volume of M&A is a decision that we will take to buy back shares or not. If our board in the future understands that at that price it makes more sense to buy back shares, we may reduce our M&A pipeline. This perhaps could lead us not to comply with our global goal. It is a balance between M&A and the purchase of shares. Today, we do not have a clear vision of what will happen. There is a third relevant factor. We have perceived the financial situation of our competitors, especially mid-size competitors, until BRL 300 million, BRL 400 million, BRL 500 million a year. There has been a significant deterioration here. Mid-size companies, they pay 25% a year in interest rate. Now, for you to carry out an M&A in Brazil, you have to be patient, know the right movement at the right time. We are in waiting mode. In the next six months, there will be plenty clear opportunities for the acquisition of good companies with a good customer portfolio that are financially complicated, once again, because of the context, and we have to be ready to explore that opportunity. These are the three variables, therefore, that we are managing. Well, thank you. Thank you very much. If you could speak about default, if you have any time for this. I think we improved this quarter. It has been a concern as well. We have been highly diligent. Now, we always have an evolution here because at the end of the day, this is a readjustment that grows until the third quarter. In the fourth quarter, we carry out a readjustment, but the default levels are more positive this quarter. Thank you, Marieta. Marcelo. Have a good day. Let us unmute the audio for Luiza, please. Good morning. I am going to try to break down the makeup of margin for the quarter. You spoke about catering, hotel services, and telecom, and electrical contracts. We wanted to see which had a greater weight. How can we think about labor expenses at present, if there has been a change in terms of what we discussed last quarter? Thank you. I do not know which is the breakdown in profitability here. A bit more catering. Secondly, maritime hotel services. And third, as a sequence, the electrical services and telephony. The good news is that catering and hotel services do have a solution that is underway. This was a one-time pressure. I am sorry, what was your first question? Labor expenses. They are back to 1.8. This year we will have greater variations because continuously we make that effort to reduce the more expensive and lengthier suits. There is a stock that we still have to eliminate. In the third quarter, the figure will still be high and somewhat lower in the fourth quarter. For the entire year, it will be somewhat below that of last year. You will always have an incremental improvement year-on-year with large volatility quarter-on-quarter. Last year, 1.9. This year it should be lower and in 2027. Well, this is something we do constantly, small reductions throughout the years. Thank you. Thank you very much. Let us unmute the microphone for Gabriel Frazao. Thank you for taking our questions. First of all, about the acquisitions announced recently in security, where you acquired a majority stake of the company. If you could comment on why you chose this format in a sector where you are already present, and if we will see this format in the remaining companies in the pipeline, perhaps to move away from the prices. And about the non-recurring items, there are three that were more relevant: acquisition processes, non-labor provision, and tax credits. What led to a greater magnitude of these effects this quarter, and if going forward, everything will be more aligned with normality? In terms of the partial acquisition, you, I think, observed well. We don't like to carry out partial acquisitions in companies we're operating already because of competition. It's very difficult to manage the issue of competition. In the case of Aster, what led to this partial acquisition is that they're very strong in monitoring those totems on the streets that we have in several neighborhoods in São Paulo. They have a small operation because this is a fragmented business, but they know how to work on it. Despite the business being difficult financially because it is fragmented, it does create adherence to our relationship with the customer in the long term. You may lose a security station in a company, but you will maintain the security services. So we acquired it partially because of this peculiarity it has and the expertise in the monitoring business, those monitoring totems on the streets. Now, to speak about the movements of these adjustments we have in EBITDA. First, about provision for non-labor contingencies, the reclassification of three processes, two civil, one tax. They became probable, and with this, we had an increase in the provision. Now, there is a relevant parcel of that process that became probable, and that is why we had to come up with a provision that refers to GRSA, and it has indemnities, and you will see the effect of the indemnities in the asset. So the provision that I had to come up with corresponds to the indemnity that refers to that contingency contractually defined in the acquisition of GRSA. Another item that changed processes with indemnity, referring to the same issue, and tax debits. It refers to the program Litígio Zero that we adhered to a short time ago. When you adhere this, after having an approval by the Receita Federal, you have the obligation of reverting the provision and creating a debit. The Litígio Zero process was an opportunity. We negotiated this with the Receita Federal, and because of specifications of Receita Federal, you stop paying fines in a very favorable context. These were the atypical movements this quarter. This is not something recurrent. It happened this quarter. I don't imagine that this will continue on in future quarters. That was very clear. Thank you very much. João, if he's still there, if we can unmute his microphone. Okay. Very well. No further questions. I would like to thank all of you. We're at your entire disposal. Have a very good day, and thank you so much for your attendance. Thank you all for your attendance.