Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the conference call on the Ad Hoc application about ams OSRAM reassessment of the microLED strategy. I am George, the call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in listen-only mode, and the conference is being recorded. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session. You can raise different questions at any time by pressing star and one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Jürgen Rebel, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Good morning. This is Jürgen speaking. Thank you for joining us on such short notice. In the call today, we have Aldo, our CEO, and Rainer, our CFO. We wanted to give you the opportunity for questions and answers after last night's ad hoc notice, and we're happy to do so after some introductory remarks by Aldo and Rainer. Aldo, please go on. Yes, thank you, Jürgen, and welcome, everybody. And thanks for joining on short notice. Yes, you are as surprised as we probably were yesterday by the reason for this call. We were informed that the Cornerstone program that we've been working on for a number of years now has been canceled on the microLED side, and that of course yeah, caught us by surprise and also caught us off balance, if you will. We have been making, I think, very solid progress over the last years on the technology. And therefore, we're clearly expecting this program to continue and to become a launchable product in the near future, as we have also discussed with you. But the customer has decided otherwise, as we were informed. Yeah, the shock is still there, I must say. We just came out of also our internal communication with our employees and our teams, and they have been working extremely hard on this, both on the technology and R&D side, where we have solved over time many very difficult riddles important for this technology to be resolved. And we think, we continue to think that we have a very strong technology base here. And also on operational side, where the Kulim factory was built in record time and is also operational and starts to also contribute to the development effort. The teams are, of course, also very disappointed and are wondering about the next steps, like you are. Honestly speaking, we are in the process of sorting this out ourselves. It is still an application space and a technology space that is exciting, that has a future for us. At the same time, now with the Cornerstone program being canceled, it does make the introduction, at least in this timeframe, much more difficult, given that it is important that you have a deep program to start with, to really yeah, bring this technology to life. Because it is not only our piece of technology that needs to come alive. As you also know, there are a number of other steps in this chain as well that need to come alive to make it feasible to really process these ultra small structures into exciting display technology. So in that sense, a lead customer is important, and a lead program is important also to then ramp and get the learning curves going. And we have to see now how we now develop this effort further, and see how we can use what we've learned in in the same space, but potentially with a different timeframe. Also in spaces left and right of the technology that we've been working on. We have to see how the building blocks fit together for a number of these other applications. So that's why we said yesterday in the, in the report, we are reassessing the situation. However, it's also clear that the launch at the volume, at the timeframe that we had envisioned, is not gonna happen. And therefore, there's also a number of financial implications that I would like Rainer to comment upon. Yeah. Good morning. Good morning from my side. Good afternoon, good evening. To say also a few personal things in the beginning, I must say, I was extremely surprised, and I'm very sad about what happened. I mean, and yeah, we all said that, as Aldo was saying, that the calls with our internal people, I mean, we had hundreds of people that are working on the project. We're building a factory in record time and kind of, you know, had a huge commitment to deliver the product. And we perfectly thought everything is on track and then seeing that sudden change in the strategy of our customer, which truly, we don't understand where that suddenly came from. We're very disappointed, and a lot of people in the company were disappointed. But more than that, I mean, obviously, we have to take some very massive decisions in the next few days and weeks, and that will impact a lot of people. Now let me quickly point out a few of the assumptions we have behind what we communicated yesterday. yesterday. The first one is the impairment. That is nothing to do with goodwill or anything, but that is an impairment on the building, on the equipment, and on the capitalized R&D. So we have some, let's say, EUR 1.3 billion value in the books. Most of that is building and equipment, plus the capitalized R&D. I think the best assumption we could take today is simply saying we write off all of the R&D, and we would sell the tangible assets, the building and the equipment. Now, we took some assumptions and what money, what percentage of the investment we could recover, and that led us to the conclusion that out of the EUR 1.3 billion, we have to write off EUR 600 million-EUR 900 million. That also includes the equipment that is still on order, where we have entered into commitments. We will obviously be trying to stop as much of that as possible. But, you know, we need to get into discussions with our suppliers there to see what is possible. It does not mean automatically that our plan is to sell it, but that, that is... I mean, but that's definitely one of the, the options. There's other customer interest, but, I mean, obviously nothing that has, the same timeline and the same order of magnitude. Now, on the EBIT impact for 2024, we obviously can no longer capitalize any R&D expenses, and we also see a smaller impact that we will get a bit less government grants as we had originally planned. Now, at the same time, we have to massively reduce the cost associated with the, with the project. But as you know, reducing costs takes some time, so that's why we say that there will be -EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million impact. We try to reduce it. As we will no longer be producing samples in the new factory, we obviously can reduce the work cost there quite a bit, and we will try to do that quickly. We obviously have to keep the factory powered on. We have to keep the HVAC running to maintain the value of the clean room, no matter if we were to use it or if a potential buyer was to use it. So, as I said, we will try to reduce the impact as much as possible. Now, on the cash side, the whole thing is probably rather positive in the short and medium term. Not in the very short, because I mean, we have to work to get the cost down, and there is a lot of equipment on order. But definitely, we'll try to cancel some of the orders, and then going into next year, we should see a positive cash effect, because we'll bring the CapEx down, try to get the cost down as much as possible. So, and also we're trying to sell stuff, obviously, which will then, in addition, be a positive. Now, what does that mean for the midterm? And I cannot give you definite answers, but, you know, we have been saying that our growth trajectory is on the reduced base after we sold some businesses, and I just reestablished the Base program. From that reduced base, we would grow 6%-10%, and a bit of that was associated, obviously, to microLED. Not too much, because, you know, we are expecting significant revenues in 2026, and some minor maybe in 2025. So we said, "Okay, it's probably no longer 6%-10%, more like 6%-8%." As we always pointed out, the majority of the growth comes from the existing, you know, automotive applications, the LED and laser emitters, and also from the sensors into industrial and medical. Now, what does it mean for the adjusted EBIT? And I understand that you're asking for it. Please also understand that we cannot give you a definite answer because there's a lot of changes to the model. But that's kind of giving a very rough estimate. I mean, assuming there were like, let's say, EUR 200 million of revenue in 2026, and I'm not saying that is the number, just you know to build a quick model. And assuming there were EUR 100 million of depreciation in 2026, plus then you know cash costs to run the factory and so on. Now, if we eliminate both the revenue and also the depreciation, because we're basically writing it off now, impairing it or sell it, then you shouldn't expect any significant impact to the EBIT margin in 2026. And again, please don't take it as a definite answer, but kind of for modeling purposes, I do not see a massive change. In the EBIT margin in 2026, as that depreciation will be down, revenue will be down, not too much—it was obviously will, the EBITDA will be a bit lower, because with that EUR 200 million we would have made, a bit of EBITDA, quite a bit of EBITDA that would go away. But, you know, in 2026, that was just the beginning of the ramp of the new product. So, the impact on the EBIT margin is probably negligible. For in the short term, I said, you know, it's positive for the cash flow. It's obviously a negative for the equity ratio, but kind of we'll try to reduce the cost as soon as possible, try to take the right decisions on the future of the technology. We'll definitely reallocate some of the resources that we have to accelerate some of the other projects that we have. That will be very helpful to also improve our technology position there. I think that's for the introductory comments from my side, and with that, I hand back for questions. Perhaps before we go on to questions, just a few last sentences from my side. I think Rainer has very well described the impact of the microLED change. Now, I think what we have at the same time also keep in mind is what we've outlined already during the last quarters. This company is so much more than just microLED. And of course, microLED with this certain decision is again very much in the midst of attention, logically so. But the same that we have been saying last quarters about the other core businesses, that they are really healthy, strong, long-term, sustainable, attractive businesses, also continues to be true. That hasn't changed. I'm at the moment myself in China this week, visiting a lot of the major car and consumer electronic players here, and I can tell you that we are a highly welcome, highly respected, highly valued partner for many of them here and around the globe. And that will not change because of this microLED change in the situation. And we will continue to push very hard to expand our position in these core markets, automotive, where we're the market leader by far since a long time. Medical, a very attractive sticky market, our industrial markets, where we are rebounding and selective consumer applications. These are good place, these are good positions to be in, and we will continue now to, of course, work even harder on these, as Rainer said. Also, the reallocation of a part of our engineering effort towards these product lines will do them good. I mean, we have put obviously our brightest minds on the microLED technology, and we will continue also here. There's not a decision that we stop completely, but it will be reduced effort. So we will be able to put some of those brightest minds on some of the other riddles that we need to solve, to create innovation for the other exciting spaces that we're in. I think that's important to keep in mind, and also with that, the guidance that Rainer gave in terms of growth and in terms of profitability is for me still a very logical picture, looking at the underlying strength of these businesses that we have proven in the past, and that we are recovering again, with reestablishing the base, with the divestments of the businesses that are not performing. And yeah, once we then digested this this very unfortunate event, then also yeah, the numbers will show the strength of this business that we're in and that we have a very strong, well defendable position in. So just wanted that to mention that as well, to round up the picture. Yeah, with that, we would open it up for questions. We will now begin the question- and- answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. You will hear a tone to confirm that you are added to the queue. If you wish to remove yourself from a question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use only handset when asking questions. Our first question comes from Robert Sanders with Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning and commiserations. I just said the first question was just could you remind us of the loading on your LED footprint in front end outside of Kulim 1 and Regensburg? Sorry, sorry, I mean, outside of Kulim 2. So to what degree your utilization and, you know, is in Kulim 1, Regensburg, I mean, to what extent can you serve your growth out of those 2 lines? And then the second one would just be what does the sale and leaseback mean for your ability to sort of generate proceeds from the sort of potential closure of Kulim 2? Thanks. Yeah, let me take the first one, and Rainer will take the second one, I think. I mean, we have not disclosed loading numbers in detail, but it is clear that we have available space and capacity in Kulim one and in Regensburg. So the growth of the next years was not dependent on Kulim 2 to ramp up. In the very long term, of course, one day, yes, but in the foreseeable future, we were planning to have the traditional LED, at the very traditional LED, chip being manufactured in Kulim one and Regensburg facilities, and that continues to be the case also in this new situation. Yeah, Rob, and for the sale and leaseback, I mean, I mean, I haven't looked through for all details, obviously, but I... The assumption is that, you know, I mean, a potential buyer could either enter into the sale and leaseback, or we would terminate and then, you know, get the money and repay it. So, I haven't worked through all the details, but, there's definitely the assumption that we could sell it if that is the time. Got it. Thanks a lot. ... Next question comes from Francçois-Xavier Bouvignies, from UBS. Please go ahead. Thank you. My first question is a bit to have more clarity on on the reason for such cancellation. What is your assessment? Is it is it a competitive loss or just technology readiness? I'm asking because it seems surprising that it's canceling it. I mean, you could argue that the postponing is one thing, because it's not ready yet, but why canceling? You see what I mean? Is it because this customer program won't adopt at all, or it shows another supplier? Just trying to get some clear on that would be great. Yeah, that's... As you know, in general, already quite difficult to comment on this specific customer, but in this case, even more so, because we just got the information and also ourselves, not a lot of clarity around that. I think just looking at the competitive space and what is needed to make the application work, and we said this before, we feel that we are in a quite unique position. And if that position is now given up by canceling the program with us, I think it will be difficult to find an alternative for that. So again, you have to ask the customer yourself. We cannot speak for him. But, I feel strongly that the technology is alive for us, and that there are a lot of decisions being made at the customer side that make it not needed anymore. Yeah. Again, thank you. And maybe, you know, understand it's early days, and there are a lot of things moving parts. Maybe can you detail the different scenarios, at least, that you have in mind? I'm not sure, you know, if you plan to still do microLED or you are just, you know, giving it up, or just trying to understand the different scenarios on the table. I understand you will make a decision later on, but what do you have in mind, in terms of different outputs? The whole range is to be thought through. I mean, this is for us such a significant change. Obviously that it requires really some thought on what to do now next with all the know-how and experience that we have gathered in this field and the investment that we've made. At the same time, also knowing that such a large step you have to win also with a large-scale program, and something like that, it should be on a tangible horizon to make that work financially. So it's not such an easy call to make, and we'll have to take some time to really think that through, as we have been very focused, obviously, on making this program happen, as this was, in our mind, the biggest live program in the space available that we were working on and focusing on. And with that, yeah, we have, of course, looked left and right before, but not to the level of detail that is needed to make now this judgment call. And so we'll need some time to digest and think that through. But, yeah, the whole spectrum of opportunity or possibilities there is on the table and so forth. Okay, thank you. If I may squeeze a quick one, is how easy is it to reallocate? You mentioned reallocating potential. I mean, I guess you have all the equipments already, and and it's a very dedicated fab. I would assume it would be very difficult to, you know, change to another product line, and and if it's possible, very costly. I mean, is it- Well, I mean, yeah, I mean, I think the comment was in the first line here towards the reallocation of R&D resources. And that, of course, has a high level of mobility. The bright minds that thought about micro LED can also think about the next headlamp solution or the next sensor. They've done it in the past as well. So, that's the main focus. Also, I think there is learning in what we have done for micro LED for the more standard products, if you will, for the more established products. And we didn't really have time to think that through and to make those derivatives out of what we have learned into the product portfolio that we have. Now we have that time, of course, in a sense, unfortunately, but we do have it now to see what can we transfer from a technology building block perspective, to improve our products. And yes, you're right. In terms of the pure production, it is not impossible. I mean, we've made switches. If you look at our history, we started with 2-inch, and then we're the first to go to 4-inch, and we're the first to go to 6-inch, and we would have been now the first to be on 8-inch, in mass volume. You have to pick the right time to make that switch, and the microLED was kind of pulling in that time, because it would need an 8-inch capability and also would need an 8-inch capacity. With that now not being available for us at the moment, we have to see whether a transition from 6- to 8-inch makes sense already now or at a later date. It's probably a bit early for a move to 8-inch for standard LEDs. Technically, it can be done, but you have to also economically look at it, whether it makes sense. So also this is part of the topics that we have to work through now. How do we best utilize the equipment, the infrastructure capacity that we have to make best use of what we have learned and make best use of what we have invested in? Got it. Thank you very much. Sure. Our next question comes from Pierre Flom, with Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning, gentlemen. Thanks for letting me on. I've got a few questions. My first question is on CapEx. Can you give us a sense of the amount of CapEx you spent on the buildup of that fab for that particular customer? And how do you see your sort of capital intensity going forwards once you have you know normalized the situation? I've got a couple of follow-ups, if I may. Yeah, sure. I think I said that CapEx amounts before, it is we roughly have EUR 1.3 billion in the books, and that includes the capitalized R&D. And that also includes the pilot line in Regensburg, which is much smaller. So the CapEx into the second factory in Kulim, Malaysia, including the outstanding or the committed orders, is a bit north of EUR 1 billion. We will try to negotiate that we don't have to fulfill the commitments we have, that might cause some cancellation fees. But yeah, we will definitely try to reduce CapEx, and then not sure we still have a good EUR 150 million commitment, which is included. Not sure how much we can reduce that. We have to figure that out. But that, most of that is this year. So for next year, the microLED related CapEx is supposed to be very close to zero. And that should bring us then down to the very much to the target range we had, which is around 10% of sales for CapEx. Very helpful. Thank you so much. Second question is, obviously here there is a breach of contract, so do you expect to get some damages from that particular customer from cancellation of the project? Well, we can't really discuss the terms of the contract. That is up for discussion with the customer, as you understand. Obviously, I understand. No, that's, that makes sense. Oh, maybe my time is up. Now my last question is more on the, you know, the, the sort of core business going forward. Mm-hmm. Do you intend to... Because the question was kind of asked before. I mean, you have now an installed base, capacity of specific MOCVD systems. Is there any chance you can reuse those equipment to enter new market, perhaps silicon carbide or gallium nitride or anything compound semiconductor related that would take advantage of the capacity? I imagine the answer is no, but I just want to make sure that there is maybe a recoverable value from those equipment and the massive CapEx spend you've done over the last few years for that customer. Well, I mean, I think in terms of can we do that, would we do silicon carbide tomorrow ourselves? No, I think that is, there are quite a leap number of other players in that industry that would be far ahead of us. Is some of that equipment usable? Is the set for something like that usable? Yes, potentially, yes. So if, when Rainer spoke about selling the equipment, if we decide not to use them ourselves anymore, if we would decide after the analysis to sell the facility, then those kind of players might be the ones that could be interested. This is not so far away from that world. So in that sense, there's definitely a space that we would explore to see that we get the most out of the investment that we have made. Brilliant. Thank you very much and good luck. Thank you. The next question comes from Sebastian Percival. Yes, go ahead. Yeah, hi, everyone, and thanks for taking my question. We have this new on Apple on the microLED strategy. What is the potential roadmap to move from OLED going forward? If you don't move to microLED, is there any new technology that can, I would say, fill the gap with the OLED technology right now? And the second one on the CapEx, just to understand, what should we put in the model for CapEx for 2024, given the recent announcement? And should we expect that you are at 10% of revenue 2025? You don't have any further savings to go below 10% of revenue 2025? Thank you. Yeah, on the first one, obviously the customer would be the more knowledgeable partner to answer that question. As I see the space, it is not obvious that there's anything beyond OLED and microLED on the horizon. So, yeah, you have to kind of pick the technology that is the best suitable for the specific application that you want to service. And sometimes it might still be LCD that is suitable for, sometimes might be OLED, and in some cases it might be highly transparent and very contrast rich microLED display. It really depends on what the customer is looking for. And we see still that there is. Overall, if you look at the microLED space, there is activity. I mean, we, we were one player and a major player with our activity and technology being able to go to very small structures. But there's a lot of other players also working their way into this, which basically is also a signal that, that there is still a strong belief that microLED is an interesting technology to use. But yeah, you have to have the use case, and, and the use case is defined by the customer. So they, they need to, at the end of the day, weigh the pros and cons and make the right choices for themselves in general, not only with this specific customer, but for the customers and applications.... Yeah, interesting on the, on the CapEx. Yeah, you know, it's, I mean, as I said, we still have EUR 150 million obligation related to the microLED project. We will try to reduce that, though, at this point of time, we have to assume that we won't be overly successful because most of that equipment will have been built. We will try to cancel it, even if there will be penalties. Otherwise, you know, probably must follow it or try to sell it right away, whatever the right option is. At this point of time, I think we should not assume that the number we have guided for, which is a good EUR 500 million, plus the Capitalized R&D, plus that carryover from last year, that we can reduce that significantly this year. But, you know, once we talk to the equipment suppliers, when we report the quarterly numbers, we probably have an update for that. And then in 2025, there will be, I mean, very little that we have in commitment for that project. So we should get down significantly, much closer. We're very close to the 10% of sales that we have as a target. And again, I'm sure we would have some divestments related to the project as well, no matter if we sell just some equipment or we sell the entire factory. But I would also assume then definitely some proceeds from divesting some of the unused equipment or buildings. Okay, thank you. Our next question comes from Sandeep Deshpande with JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi, thanks for letting me on. Maybe I going back to the project that was canceled, was that project for a consumer application or for an automotive application, given that microLED has applications in both the areas as such, really? And then I have a couple of follow-ups. Mm-hmm. Yes, Sandeep, unfortunately, this is not for us to comment on. Then my follow-up is, I mean, given that microLED has automotive applications, can you not take the technology on and, you know, make it happen in the automotive market quickly, quicker than, you know, it would have happened in a normal sort of way? Or is it that this project is now completely dead and you're gonna have to, you know, the next move is gonna have to be whether you shut down or sell that factory and, you know, all these other bad things as such, really? Well, that's the assessment that we need to make. It is not trivial, because we make the light-emitting part of the product, but there's also transfer technology involved that we do not control. And as that's now kind of the project and that approach falls apart, then we have to really focus our efforts on both getting this product towards automotive application, following your example, but also need to find the appropriate and qualifiable transfer technology. So it's not a no-go. I mean, it's clear that the automotive industry is a good place for current type of displays, given the contrast and the brightness and the transparency and so on, that you can achieve with it. But it's not a trivial exercise either. So by not having this lead project, I think timing-wise, it is not realistic to expect something that would come earlier than what we have been working on anyway, and that got now canceled. If we are able to do this, it will take probably more time. And this, by the way, I think not only us, I think also if you look at the generic market, the automotive application is showing a lot of interest and potential, but this is a little bit further out. Then another question I could ask is, I mean, you've been disposing various assets in various areas. Could this asset, the so-called microLED project, be, you know, separated out and somebody might be interested in investing in it? You know, some other company may be interested in investing it, in it for the long term, or is there no such possibility, given that you're only doing one part of it and you're not doing the whole supply chain? We will think through also this option in the whole scope of reassessing what we will do next. Yeah, it's just too fresh to have such far-reaching thoughts, but we will not exclude anything that generates value out of what we have been doing over the last years. And then finally, sorry to have to ask this question, but, you know, you've written down a large value associated with this project, but there is the ongoing, you know, the debt cannot be written off as such. Really, the debt on your balance sheet still remains. Are there any covenants on that debt that we need to be aware of that could get triggered because of what has happened in the near term? Clearly, over time, you can, you know, recover things and, you know, various actions you can take. But in the near term, are there any covenants that are at risk? So, I mean, in terms of covenants, there's maintenance covenants really only with the revolver, and we have a headroom and a net debt to EBITDA. So I don't see anything there that would be a major concern. Yes, the debt remains. That is definitely a good comment, but, you know, as I said, I mean, in the near term, I expect rather a positive impact on the cash flow. ... Okay, thank you. Next question, coming from John. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Just looking at the margin impact for this year and the profile of margins through the course of this year. You know, you've, you've suggested that the hit on EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million will come this year, and, and that profitability even in Q1 will be impacted, but suggesting that it's going more to the low end of that range of 4%-7%. I'm just wondering, is the EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million uniformly distributed across the four quarters of this year? Are you still expecting a jump in your profitability into the second half, given the new circumstances, because of the exits from the business, businesses that you're planning, and the ramp of the other areas in smartphone sensing and automotive LED, which you've been saying that will ramp in the second half of the year? And the second one is just on the possible sale of the Kulim fab of Kulim two. In your experience, what is the timeline for this sort of thing to happen? Are we talking something that can be possibly achieved within this calendar year, or is this more likely to come to fruition sometime in 2025? Yeah. No, that that's a lot of very good questions. We said EUR 30-50, and we will stay within the guidance band for Q1. Obviously will have a negative impact in Q1. I do not exactly know the distribution of the EUR 30-50 over the year. But again, I mean, we'll try to reduce it as much as possible to get the cost out. Obviously, the negative impact of not no longer being able to capitalize it is something that we have immediately, while kind of taking the cost out takes a bit of time. We definitely expect what we had said, you know, the design wins in the second half of the year and the stock that we regained and also additional savings from Re-establish the Base that will kick in H2. So we remain in that way confident of larger improvement in the second half of the year. When it comes to the sale, I mean, we obviously have experience with selling it. It's kind of, you know, we haven't put together a list of potential buyers. We also haven't even decided that we will sell it or if there's other options, what we could do. You know, we have to talk to some customers and so on. So, it's too early to give a timeline for that one. Understood. Thanks. The next question, coming from [inaudible]. Please go ahead. Hi. Yeah, good morning. I would like to ask, is there, you know, the discontinue program, would there be any other program that you see materializing in the time frame that's like late 2025, early 2026, or was this the only microLED program that you've been running? Yes, this was the program that, that was the most tangible, and then the one that was the, the earliest large-scale program. That's what we've been focused on very heavily to make this one happen. Okay. And second one, on your balance sheet health. Now, when you write down the EUR 600 million-EUR 900 million, and reflecting on the balance sheet health afterwards, how do you think about the implications of potentially getting gaining new clients for R&D programs, as they might require a certain balance sheet health, in order to step up those programs? Is this an issue? No, that has not been a topic of discussion in my last 30 years in the semiconductor, in the opto-semiconductor space. People come to us for the innovation power that we have, and we're still a healthy company with a reasonable balance sheet. And with that, I think there's no doubt that we are a long-term supplier with the technology skills that they need, and therefore, they will continue to work with it, is my strong belief. Hmm, okay. And what about the ecosystem? Is it possible for you to somehow set up such an ecosystem in order to offer a full solution to a potential client in the micro LED space? Or would this only work if you have a, that's your client in the end, sets up the whole ecosystem? We have to see. I mean, we haven't taken care of it because of the clear segregation of who does what in this program that we worked on. So in that sense, it is a bit of new territory for us. So I can't really answer the question very, very well. This needs to be done, and we have to see where it then is done best, whether close to the LED maker is best or close to the panel maker is best. There's no established model for this industry yet, so it is something to be explored. ... Mm-hmm. Okay, perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from Suzanne Rushne from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yes. Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. I have just one. I basically want to get a better idea on, whether in the past, have you, like, ever received any interest from any other potential customer regarding the same, microLED? Even sort of like initial talks or just basic conversation on the same, where they showed some sort of interest. Definitely. I mean, it's clear that there is interest in this technology, and there was interest as a partner, but we were very occupied working on this program. So, we have stayed focused on that. So yes, there has been interest, but at the same time, as I said before, that this probably was the most significant tangible program in the near future that was out there. And therefore we were so focused on this, and then we have to re-engage it, continue to be a part of this of the technology. Is it safe to assume that maybe in the near future, maybe by the end of this year or next year, it's possible that we receive a news regarding another such major project coming up for microLED? Anything is possible, but I think, as I said, a lot of programs at the moment are not so clear in the industry. So, it is definitely possible that there will definitely be interest in the technology. I think that has not gone away. And then we will work with those partners, depending on our strategic position of the microLED technology. But the timeframe and the scale of the project as we had originally envisioned it, I think will be hard to replace in the near future, at least. Okay, understood. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Our next question comes from Frank Belov with MD. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning. My first question is, what is the cash you have available, available right now? And the second question is: What is the sum of available credit lines, you have today? And my last and third question is, as you said, you have write-off of EUR 600 million-900 million. That's a wide range. So, is this wide range due to the fact that you don't know yet what kind of compensation you get from the not mentioned customer? I didn't hear all the question. But we don't- I can repeat. The last question is, why you have such a wide range on your write-off assumption, EUR 600-EUR 900? Is it as there is negotiations ongoing? So let me be sure that these assumptions do not include any compensation. And this is nothing we want to discuss here. There's definitely nothing we could book as a receivable today, right? That may take time. So we are purely looking at kind of what value, what the assets that we have, what would it have in case we would try to sell it, and then we are taking assumptions. Obviously, those assumptions are not easy, and we would need to go through it in more detail, more like equipment for equipment, also kind of figure out what is really the value of the building. And that's why there is a range, because we will need to do a more detailed assessment going forward. Have you got the first two questions? No, please repeat. Okay. Then, very briefly, the first question is, what is the cash you have available right now? And the second question is: What is the sum of available credit lines you have today? We have more than EUR 1 billion in cash. We have EUR 800 million revolver, and we have some other bilateral credit lines. We are planning to use some of that to repay the 25 convert. But definitely cash is not a problem. Thank you. Our next question comes from Nick Rob with Barings. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the question. I don't know how you're able to answer this question, but how well was the microLED technology working? And what I'm getting at is, just given the headlines around the project cancellation, yesterday, I can see why there'd be a cut, but I'm trying to understand why that would be everything that the potential customer could do. And I was wondering if you're able to comment on whether there was an issue with the underlying technology progressing. ... No, can't really, can't really comment on this because the rationale wasn't laid out in detail. We have been, as we have been saying in the past, progressing significantly in our technology over the last years. That's what I know, that's what I can see, and what led to the customer decision or the cancellation, I cannot answer. Okay. But so from what you saw internally, there was no issue with the technology kind of working by back end of next year, call it, and being, you know, up, up to speed manufacturing and being able to be sold to consumers? So far as we had an overview to our part of the project, we have said before that we were working towards this timeline, and there was still work to be done. But we were confident that the results that are remaining could be solved, and that we had a good line of sight on that. That would still be our view. Okay, that's clear. Thanks, guys. Appreciate you taking the questions. Our next question comes from Anthony Gupta with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hey, thanks for taking my question. Just have one question, actually. I might have missed it, but can you just explain about, more about the EUR 13 billion sale and leaseback fund you have right now? Like, whether you have to return it back or how it's going to work from now, from here on. Okay. Not sure I again fully understood the question, but the impact of the sales, I think that was related to this project. I mean, we had just seen some very small revenues in 2025 and more in 2026. Or was the question not related to sales? Well, sale and leaseback- It was for sale, sale and leaseback, I think the question was related to. Oh, okay. So the sale and leaseback was basically we kind of sold the building to some investors, and we have the right to buy back, and we have to buy it back after 10 years. So but yeah, and during that time we pay a lease. It is in the way it is. You can also see that a bit as a financing instrument. It is not a financing instrument, just to make it clear, but it's in the way that we give something and later we buy it back, and then in the meantime, we pay a fee. Rainer and I also have to move on very quickly. We have maybe time for one last question, please, from the audience. Our last question comes from Lionel with Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Two quick ones. Just wanted to just make sure I, the accounting treatment of Kulim two, have you recorded any underloading charges? I assume the answer is no, but just wanted to double check in your gross margins. And then on depreciation, what's the depreciation as allocated to that, to that fab, if any? And then the second question, obviously, you have a relationship with that particular customer on other parts of your, your business. Were there any conversations as to, you know, let's say, a broadening of the engagement with that customer in some form of compensation, which would be morally probably the right thing to do for them? Just any color on that would be helpful. So on the utilization cost, yes, certainly, we already had cost of running the factory. We already have cost of running the factory, right? We are, the clean room is up and running. There's always the rule of thumb that the running clean room already consume half of the electricity, and we also have people there, I mean, engineers, but also a lot of people on the shop floor, because we have been producing samples for internal qualification, but also being ready to send samples. And we already send samples to customers. So yeah, there is a significant cost already there. The depreciation for the building also will kick in very soon. So that, that's the way is running costs that are already there, that we now have to try to eliminate as much as possible. Yeah. And on the second question, we cannot comment on the overall status of the negotiation. But we have, of course, a broader relationship and which of course will be part of the discussion. Okay. And just, can you say how many people are employed in that Kulim 2 fab? A few hundred. All right. Thanks very much. Ladies and gentlemen, this is our last question. Exactly. Thanks so much for your interest and for your time and the good questions. Unfortunately, we have come together on this because of this event, we hope we get clarity and the transparency that you have gotten used to as far as we can give it to you. We have, I think, again, today, shared with you our view and our understanding of the situation. Yeah, I hope that we can give further clarity when we publish the quarter one results and comment on those. Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus School, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your lines. Goodbye.