Thank you. Good morning, everybody. Thanks for joining us for Aroundtown's Q3 2022 results call. You should have received our corporate news. You can view this presentation on aroundtown.de, either on the Home section or under Financial Reports of the Investor Relations section. As said, I am Katrin Petersen, Aroundtown's Group Head of Communications. With me today are CEO, Barak Bar-Hen, CFO, Eyal Ben David, Chief Capital Markets Officer, Oschrie Massatschi, Executive Director, Frank Roseen, Investor Relations, Timothy Wright, as well as representatives from Grand City Properties. For the duration of the call, all participants will be in a listen-only mode. Following our presentation, you will have the opportunity to ask questions. We have asked you before to send your questions via email to info@aroundtown.de. Please feel free to continue to send us your questions via email also during this presentation. Again, the email address is info@aroundtown.de. I now hand you over to Oschrie, who will begin to guide you through the presentation of the results. Thank you very much, Katrin. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Aroundtown's nine-month 2022 earnings call. During the first nine months this year, the listed real estate segment was impacted significantly by macroeconomic challenges around the globe, from stagflation to supply chain disruptions, volatile capital markets, the European war that keeps us all on edge for over nine months already. With cost inflation and nominal debt yields continuing to be volatile on an elevated level, cash preservation became a high priority. We managed to navigate well-prepared through these times that require tough yet forward-looking decisions. We keep all types of stakeholders in mind while doing so. The positive impact of our continuous disposal activities and liability management from recent years has placed us in a robust cash position with no pressure to raise funds in the near term. This cash position, together with signed disposals, cover our maturities until the end of 2025, with no short or mid-term pressure to refinance. We prioritize cash retention to maintain this important financial flexibility, which will enable us to navigate the company successfully in the next years. Any additional funds will extend this timeline. More on this later. Our operations continue to perform well. We remain concerned about the macroeconomic environment across the market, which could potentially lead to a deep recession in our markets. This could impact the rental demand negatively, put pressure on valuations, create further refinancing challenges. Today, we also announced that we decided not to exercise our option to call the January 2023 perpetual notes at its first call date. This decision was taken due to the current market uncertainties and our focus on cash preservation. We will elaborate also on this during the presentation. Starting on slide four, we summarize our financial highlights achieved during the first nine months of this year, which is a reflection of our efforts to strengthen and improve the fundamentals of our company. We continue to prioritize a strong level of cash and liquid assets to ensure an uninterrupted operational performance. Hence, the liquidity position at the end of Q3 amounted to EUR 2.3 billion, which reflects about 16% of our debt level. This level is already after the repayment of over EUR 1 billion of short-term debt during the reporting period, and does not include signed disposals after Q3. Our KPIs have been improved, and we will discuss each of them in more detail later. Moving to slide five, we demonstrate once again our competitive advantage in finding the right buyers for our assets, even in times of rising capital rates. Year to date, we signed EUR 1.1 billion of asset disposals at around book value, of which EUR 785 million were signed in H1, EUR 175 million in Q3, and EUR 170 million in Q4 to date, showing our ability to dispose properties also in the most recent market environment. On the left-hand side of the slide, you can see the well-diversified disposal breakdown by asset class and geography. Our value creation efforts to identify development potentials and to successfully dispose them is confirmed by a share of 32% of all disposals. Since early 2020, when the COVID pandemic just started to spread across Europe, together with GCP, we achieved about EUR 7 billion of successful disposals over book value, which has placed us in a financially stable position in preparation for worsening of the macro environment. Most of our buyers were real estate companies, private equity, real estate funds, asset managers, as well as sovereign and pension funds. Whilst we recognized vital benefits to our liquidity position from these cash proceeds, we also see a decreasing volume of potential buyers in the market due to the more challenging financing environment for buyers and anticipation for price correction of properties. As a result, we already experience a slower pace of disposals. Note that we are under no pressure to sell quickly and will execute deals only if we feel terms are appropriate. The debt repayments year to date have reached EUR 1 billion. Moreover, we significantly reduced the pace of our ongoing share buyback program and have executed less than EUR 200 million of the EUR 500 million program that expires end of this year. The majority of which was executed during the first half of this year. On the following slide, we will present our operational results. Following our most recent asset rotation, our portfolio split presents as follows: 44% in offices, 31% in residential, 17% in hotels, together making 92% of the portfolio value. The remaining 8% are in logistics and retail. Due to the low impact on our portfolio by these two segments, we will focus on our operational presentation on the three main asset classes, but you can find additional information on retail and logistics on page 37 in the appendix. Also, with 93% in value, our investment locations maintained its focus on the key European markets with a strong focus on top-tier cities in Germany, the Netherlands, and London. Follow our long-term strategic investment plan and monitor key European metropolitan regions for accretive acquisition opportunities if and when they arise. In the short term, however, although there could be material volumes of distressed opportunities in the market, we anticipate continuing to be a net seller. On slide eight, you see a snapshot of our diversified and strong tenant structure that is a valuable part of our asset repositioning. Our healthy commercial tenant diversity counts around 3,500 different commercial tenants from various industries and limited exposure to any single tenant. Our 10 largest tenants continue to account for less than 20% of the group's rental income. The diverse tenant structure is further supported by the highly granular residential portfolio of Grand City. Aroundtown's group portfolio platform at the end of Q3 amounted to EUR 29.3 billion with close to EUR 1.2 billion net rental income run rate, and a rental yield of 4.3%. The WALT remained stable at 7.4 years for the group and an EPRA vacancy rate of 7.6%. For the coming periods, we expect some rent increase potential from index commercial rental agreements, also assume less demand from new tenants, given that we are potentially facing a recession. Depending on the length and severity of a recession, this could also result in existing tenants reducing space to save costs. Reduced new developments in the market due to increased construction costs can partially offset some of the potential negative momentum. We break down our office assets on slide nine. This segment focuses mainly on top-tier metropolitan cities in Germany and Netherlands and represents the lion's share of our group portfolio value with a steady 44%. We continue to hold our largest sub-portfolio in offices in key cities such as Berlin, Frankfurt, Munich, and Amsterdam, which alone make up 61% of our portfolio office value. Additional key locations of Germany and the Netherlands, such as North Rhine-Westphalia, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Dresden, or Stuttgart, are also amongst our top strategic investment locations. With a balanced average lease term of 4.3 years and no significant dependency on a single tenant or location, we continue to maintain a well-diversified tenant structure that should mitigate the risk of market-specific volatilities. The slowdown in supply of new development project has become evident in the market as replacement and financing costs continue to rise, providing support to demand. Our commercial rental contracts are mostly CPI linked or have contractual rent step-ups. We expect over EUR 25 million rent growth on an annualized level from index leases this year, of which about EUR 20 million are included as part of September portfolio, which will have a full year effect from next year. The indexation of leases in combination with our high EBITDA margin will support to offset higher operating and interest expenses in the next periods. Our vacancy level remained fairly stable at 10.9%, and we recorded 3.3% like-for-like rental growth as of September, mainly due to indexation. Going forward, we remain cautious for the coming periods as we anticipate a potential recession to have a negative impact on office tenants, as cost cutting will become a more dominant topic in such an environment. On the following slide, we point out some facts about the performance of the German office market so far this year based on the latest market data. The IFO Business Climate Index in Germany, published last week, shows the deteriorating trend since the beginning of the year, which we also experience in the tenants' hesitation when negotiating rental contracts. The labor market in Germany remains strong, corporates appear to be in better shape than during the global financial crisis. It's uncertain how robust they will be during a severe recession. We also see that vacancy and rent levels did not show much negative impact so far. We are concerned this might change next year due to macroeconomic forces or under a lengthy recession period. We take these signals seriously, and in order to be as good prepared as possible in a more challenging environment, we focus on our cash preservation options available to us. Our strategic long-term investment in the residential sector through Grand City is reflected on slide 11. This asset class represents the group's second largest segment, with 31% of the portfolio value. At the end of November, the effective holding rate in Grand City Properties stood at 60%, excluding shares GCP holds in treasury. The contribution of residential assets located in strong metropolitan locations of Germany, plus London, continues to have a stabilizing impact on the diversification of the group's portfolio. This becomes evident particularly in such uncertain times, when we see that our diversified portfolio reduces the exposure risk to macroeconomics for any single asset class or location. Overall, Grand City's portfolio recorded a like-for-like rental growth in September of 3.1%, of which 0.8% derived from occupancy decrease. Increase, sorry. 2.3% from in-place rent growth, driven by the continuous supply-demand gap in Germany. With 78% value exposure in North Rhine-Westphalia, Berlin, Dresden, Leipzig, London as organic growth drivers, Grand City is complementary to Aroundtown's top-tier investment locations and balances the portfolio between asset classes with different fundamental drivers. In addition to German key cities such as Munich, Hamburg and Frankfurt, the London portfolio counts over 4,400 units, including pre-marketed units in the pre-let stage. 19% of Grand City Properties portfolio value. The occupancy level continued to improve in this location due to increased demands and stands now at 96%. Starting with an occupancy level of less than 90% before the outbreak of the pandemic, this shows not only the healthy demand for this asset class in London, but also the operational achievements of the local teams. The rents in London are mostly unregulated with shorter-term leases, which enables us to capture the inflation impact faster and allows for frequent adjustments to market rent levels. Barak, please continue. Thank you, Oschrie. On slide 12, we present our hotel portfolio amounting to 17% in value of our overall investment portfolio. We aim to ensure strong geographic diversification across multiple operators and hotel types. Our hotel portfolio remains stable with 15 years WALT and 86% in value in the four-star category. Although we reduced our hotel exposure over recent times by selling selectively, we continue to maintain our investment focus in top cities across European countries like Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, the U.K., France and others. As you can see on the following slide, the number of leisure travelers reached this year pre-pandemic levels, whilst business travels are not back yet in the same numbers and market reports expect the path to full recovery of the European hotel market stretching to 2024. Let's move to slide 14, when we show you this impact also on our portfolio. The end of the last restrictions in May this year has marked the beginning of the recovery for the hotel segment in our markets, and we continue to see the improvement in our rent collections in line with our expectations so far. As Q1 was still significantly impacted by existing travel restrictions across Europe, resulting in only 45% collection rate, the second quarter showed a significant improvement to 70%, as most restrictions in May were lifted and the travel rebound gained sustainable momentum for the first time in two years, unlike the short-lived summer rebounds we saw in the past two years. Q3 was influenced mostly by increasing leisure travelers, and we saw our hotel collection rate climb to 80%, a level that continued also in October. Business and international travelers are not back yet in full numbers, as there are still many virtual meetings and conferences. We see that virtual alternative is continuously retreating as an option. MICE hotels will therefore continue to recover over the coming two years in the absence of further restrictions. Our long-term fixed contracts with over 30 different third-party operators have no variable component, and we therefore maintain the same rental baseline for our collection rate calculation since before the pandemic. We maintain our full year expectation for the hotel collection rate at 65%-70% for 2022, which includes the weak Q1 performance. The collection for Q2 to Q4 this year is expected to be around 75%. Although we expect a continuity of the hotel recovery over the coming periods, we are aware of the significant negative impact on our external operators' profitability due to the ongoing cost inflation, shortage of qualified staff, and ongoing subdued international and business travelers. The potential recession is an additional threat to the recovery of the hotel business and may impact all segments. We present on slide 15 the composition of our development and building rights portfolio, which accounted for 5% of the total assets at the end of Q3. Although this is not material on a group level, it provides an additional value creation driver and also a source of funds if disposed, without reducing the recurring operational profits. Our strategy remains to identify additional value on land plots of existing assets we already own by obtaining sellable building permits or conversion rights. We are planning to self-develop only the most accretive development opportunities, where we see attractive upside at low risk from high pre-let ratios. Given the increased material, energy, and wage inflation, we do not have any major construction projects and we are therefore not materially exposed to the increasing prices. The timing of new projects will be re-evaluated continuously based on the updated pricing levels. In general, we plan to dispose more of our development rights. During the reporting period, we signed disposal of EUR 200 million of development rights around book value. We continue to see further demand, but as said before, in lower volumes, which will affect the result of disposal going forward. The composition of development rights is illustrated on two pie charts. Berlin is the dominant and most attractive location in Aroundtown's development portfolios. The locations of our largest development rights include Berlin, Paris, Frankfurt, Munich, and Rotterdam. These five hubs together make up around 68% of this segment. In terms of our development rights breakdown, 44% of these segments are offices, 38% residential and mixed use, and the remaining 18% for hotels. In the appendix of this presentation, you can find detailed explanation for some development projects, plus some new projects for which we obtained pre-permits. Slide 16 summarizes some of the key defensive measures to balance the ongoing operational cost inflation and increase in interest expenses. This year and going into 2023, we continue to discipline with our CapEx investment, as we want to maintain a strong level of liquidity and focus mainly on essential CapEx and energy improvement investments. This slide validates again our top-line growth drivers, which also serve as defense against cost inflation. As we discussed most of these points already, we just want to highlight the well-distributed commercial lease expiry profile at the bottom of this slide, with no single year being exposed significantly more than the average of the next decade, providing us with a steady re-letting volume over the next years to come. To wrap up our operation sections on the following slide, we want to elaborate on the potential impact on each asset class we see from rising energy prices. Although the German government has announced support for households and corporations by proposing a price cap on gas, a decision for rising electricity energy cost is still outstanding. Whatever the support will look like, it's only going to limit the effect on tenants. So far, Aroundtown's commercial portfolio shows limited impact for cost inflations. However, if this cost inflation will continue, we think that a certain impact will be inevitable. As we expect a greater cost burden on residential tenants, we anticipate a higher degree of price sensitivity on the gross rental amount going forward, and limited rent increases in the short term. From our third-party hotel operators, we already received feedback that the energy and wage inflation significantly impact their profitability margins. However, this impact is already reflected in our collection rates as increased average daily rates have not been able to compensate fully the increased costs. Nevertheless, we have conservatively created a provision in the amount of EUR 25 million in the event that energy prices will have a more negative effect on the rent than we currently anticipate. I'll now hand you over to Eyal, who will present the financial part. Thanks, Barak. Please move to slide 19, where we present the profit and loss results for the first nine months of the year. Our recurring net rental income resulted in EUR 903 million, a growth of 19% year-over-year, and as seen on the chart, it is resulting mostly from the consolidation of GCP and is partially offset by disposals. As a reminder, assets that are already marked for sale are excluded in this figure, as well as in the adjusted EBITDA and FFO, despite their positive contribution, as this will be non-recurring. Our like-for-like net rental income, excluding hotels, amounted to 3.4% in September. Including hotels, the like-for-like amounted to 2.6% overall, of which 3% comes from interest rents and minus 0.4% from occupancy decrease. We recorded property evaluations and capital gains in the amount of EUR 409 million. As the hotel segment continued its recovery during Q3, the rent collection from hotels operators increased, and we booked EUR 15 million extraordinary provision in Q3. Bringing the total for the reporting period to EUR 60 million, 40% less compared to the same reporting period last year. Half of that was accounted for only in Q1 this year. Administrative and other expenses were stable at EUR 45 million, and finance expenses were up EUR 11 million year-over-year to EUR 141 million, mainly due to the consolidation with GCP. Our average cost of debt increased during the third quarter to 1.3%. Other financial results came in at EUR 175 million. The fair taxes increased to EUR 127 million and were comprised mainly of the fair tax expenses relating to revaluation gains. As a result, the net profit for the first nine months was 11% lower year-over-year and amounted to EUR 578 million, generating EUR 0.27 earnings per share. On slide 20, we review our portfolio valuation. As mentioned before, we recorded property valuations and capital gains in the amount of over EUR 409 million. About 85% of our properties were evaluated in the reporting period, mostly in the first half of the year. Updated valuations of the portfolio will be included in the full year 2022 results. When comparing the December 2021 valuation with that of September 2022, we underline the stable like-for-like valuation gains of 1.3%. You can see the breakdown per segment on the slide. Despite the positive revaluation results so far, we defensively anticipate some weakening of valuations in the next 12 to 18 months of around 5%, depending on the segment and markets. Please note that the sharp increase in inflation we experience has led to rent increases across our commercial rental agreements. This will partially absorb the impact of rising discount rates. As you can see from the middle of the slide, our average portfolio valuation showing a gap of EUR 1,200 per square meter or around 45% buffer to the current replacement cost. This is not factoring costs for land, which have materially increased in the last years. On slide 21, we illustrate the adjusted EBITDA before the contribution from joint ventures, which increased in September year-over-year by 15%, from EUR 625 million to EUR 718 million, predominantly as the result of the consolidation with GCP and contribution of the like-for-like, but offset by disposals. The adjusted EBITDA calculation is after excluding EUR 10 million EBITDA contribution of assets held for sale, and therefore referring to the recurring long-term portfolio. Positive contribution continued to derive from our proportional holding in Globalworth and other JV investments, which contributed EUR 40 million in total as of September. Looking at our funds from operation on slide 22, we recorded an FFO 1 of EUR 775 million or EUR 0.25 per share for the reporting period, which is within our full year guidance expectations. Year-over-year, this reflects a 3% increase on an absolute level. Further positive effects have become evident from our past year buyback program as they increase our FFO per share by 9% year-over-year, as seen on the lower right-hand side of the page. We lowered our share buyback volume since Q2 this year already in line with our focus on cash retention. The total profit over cost from disposals in the reporting period amounted to EUR 290 million as results from the successful completed disposals of EUR 1.3 billion. Year-over-year, the FFO 2 decreased to EUR 564 million from EUR 615 million. On the next slide, we provide an overview of our EPRA NTA and NRV metrics. Compared to December 2021, the total EPRA NRV and NTA remained stable and increased by about 1% to EUR13.2 billion and EUR11.6 billion respectively. The positive results are also reflected on a per share basis with 3% and 2% growth in both KPIs for the same period respectively, or 4% and 5% if adjusted for dividends. Oschrie, please continue. Thank you, Eyal. On slide 24, we emphasize our healthy balance sheet fundamentals and conservative debt metrics, which are a result of our disciplined capital structure. In recent months, it has become more and more important in our view, to focus on cash preservation and ample liquidity during these challenging times of geopolitical unrest and negative macroeconomic impacts. Nominal debt yields have become much less attractive compared to last year's. Therefore, it has become a significant challenge for the listed real estate players to identify attractive capital sources and manage capital allocation. Since December last year, we have been able to keep our LTV level stable around 40%. EPRA LTV, which assumes perpetual notes fully as debt, stands at 54%. We see the LTV of 40% as a correct measurement of the company's risk level, as the perpetual notes are equity in all aspects, including IFRS accounting and on covenants. There's no characteristic related to the perpetuals. There's no debt characteristic. The average debt maturity is 5.3 years, with current average cost of debt at 1.3% and an interest cover ratio of 5.2 x. Our current 96% hedge ratio is expected to be reduced to 85% over the next year due to the expiration of some hedging instruments. This will increase next year's average cost of debt to approximately 1.6% based on expected mid-swap levels. While secured financing is still more attractive than unsecured corporate debt, we also notice that banks become more selective and the lending process takes much longer nowadays. Therefore, maintaining a high ratio of unencumbered assets supports the achieved secured financing at rates lower than current bond yields. We still maintain 83% or EUR23.5 billion of the portfolio value free of lien, which provides additional sources of capital. The net debt to EBITDA stands at stable 12.2 x annualized at the end of September, down from 12.8 x year-over-year. As our bond covenants have moved into the spotlight in recent times, we want to highlight our significant headroom in relation to each covenant on the following slide. It's important to note that the perpetual notes are treated as full equity for the covenant calculations. To emphasize a key covenant, total net debt to total net assets, you see at the top of the slide that we stood at 34% in September, which is well below the 60% covenant threshold. In a stress test scenario, our September total asset values need to drop by 40%, which implies over EUR 15 billion decrease in property values before this covenant will be triggered, all else being equal. On slide 26, we place our strong liquidity position in the spotlight. Given the challenging financial markets and rapidly increased cost of finance in the market over the course of this year, we have less pressure today from the many years of disciplined and successful early refinancing achievements. On the right-hand side of this slide, we break down our current cash and upcoming signed disposal proceeds as of September this year, amounting to about EUR 3.2 billion and covering our debt maturities until the end of 2025. On top of that, we have revolving credit facilities available in the amount of over EUR 1 billion without MAC clause. As mentioned earlier, we see bank financing more favorable than bond financing, and we benefit from the strong long-term relationships we fostered with many banks, even in times when bank financing yields were less attractive than bond financing yields. Since the outbreak of the war in the Ukraine, about EUR 290 million of secured debt were raised to date. Our EUR 23.5 billion of unencumbered assets place us in a strong position to leverage from further bank financing. I will now hand you over to Frank to explain the rationale about our decision for the January 23 perpetual notes on Slide 27. Thank you, Oschrie. After careful consideration and many discussions with our stakeholders, we reached to the decision not to exercise our option to call the perpetual note with the January 23 call date. The unfavorable economic conditions that we see currently in the market in respect of rising interest rates, inflation, potential recession, and the potential negative impact on our business led us to reach this decision. It is most economically sound decision to make in these volatile and uncertain times. We were hoping that by this day, the market environment would have been more positive to allow us to feel comfortable with deploying EUR 370 million on an equity instrument. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Our offer to the note holders was to refinance this note long prior to this call date. At the beginning of 2021, two years prior to the call date, we have tendered the January 23 perpetual note and offered the perpetual holders to cash out with a premium. Out of the EUR 600 million, about EUR 230 million accepted and the remaining did not accept our offer and decided to stay with the note. It was clear to us back then that we will try with a new tender during 2022, closer to the call date. However, as we all know by now, the market conditions changed dramatically and the reissue coupon is significantly higher than the reset coupon. Our decision takes into consideration the best interest of the company and its stakeholders. The decision for each note will be taken closer to its own call date, such as the next one in July 2023. From an FFO perspective, considering that both ourselves and GCP don't call any of the notes in 2023, the impact on our FFO will be an additional cost of about EUR 60 million on an annualized basis based on the current market conditions. From a credit rating perspective, we do not expect a negative impact on Aroundtown's credit rating by S&P for not calling this note. We do see our economic rationale for the January 2023 perpetual note in line with S&P's view, especially following the publication of their note last week. We would like to mention that we remain committed to retain perpetual notes as part of our long-term strategic capital structure. We want to share with you the opinion of S&P on non-called hybrid capital instruments on Slide 28. The quotes from this document were published by S&P on November 24 of this year. It is up to date with high relevance to the current market environment for perpetual notes that we navigate in. S&P wrote, "Hybrid capital instruments are designed to act like senior debt when credit conditions are good. They pay a non-coupon and redeem on predictable dates. When credit market conditions weaken, the equity-like characteristics kick in. These characteristics include not exercising optional calls if that makes economic sense for the issuer." It is worth to note that S&P believes that there is no automatic link between their rating decision and the removal of equity content of any or all of our issuers' hybrid instruments due to no call. Even the coupon deferral could be seen as a positive to conserve cash as an issuer. In summary, S&P emphasized no calls are typically credit supportive, economically rational financing decisions, and they expect the reputation impact to be short-lived. Oschrie, please continue. Thanks, Frank. On the next slide, we continue to confirm our full year 2022 guidance. For the full year, we guide FFO 1 to be in the range of EUR 350 million-EUR 375 million and FFO 1 per share to be in the range of EUR 0.31-EUR 0.34, up from EUR 0.30 in 2021. Bottom line, we continue to be well on track to achieving our full year guidance for this year. Based on a 75% dividend payout ratio from FFO 1, dividends per share for 2022 should be in the range of EUR 0.23-EUR 0.25. Note that the recommendation for dividend payment will be based on the market conditions closer to the AGM invitation in Q2 next year. Finally, on slide 31, we want to emphasize three strategic efforts that we prioritize as we navigate through the current macro and geopolitical challenges. We maintain our focus on stable asset classes. We continue to extract the embedded value in our portfolio through our highly experienced operational teams and management. By maintaining strong operations, we ensure a healthy organic growth momentum even in volatile market conditions. Choosing the optimum asset mix in quality locations supports our rental efforts and allows us to invest more time in the ESG efforts necessary to achieve our long-term goals for the portfolio. Secondly, as we highlighted already throughout this presentation, preserving sufficient liquidity and strengthening our fundamentals through asset rotation and disciplined capital allocation. This is a foundation to reinvest the capital into higher yielding investments such as new asset acquisitions, ESG investments, debt repayments, or deeply discounted share buybacks. Finally, we place great emphasis on our disciplined and flexible financial profile, coupled with high liquidity and sufficient headroom to all our financial covenants. Having a low average cost of debt, a long debt maturity profile, and sufficient liquidity to cover our upcoming debt for the next three years, allows us to weather this current crisis without the need to issue debt at unfavorable terms. This strategy outlook wraps up our Q3 2022 results presentation. I'd like to hand you over now to Katrin, who will lead the Q&A session. Thank you, Oschrie. Before we invite your direct questions, we will now answer questions that we have received by email prior or during this call. Thank you for sending them. For simplicity reasons, we have grouped similar questions in order to answer as many of them as possible. We will now begin. I will start with the first question. What is the letting situation of your office portfolio? Could you share what you experience in the market? What are your expectations for the coming periods? We so far experienced a stable performance supported by the indexation. Potential tenants are very careful about the looming macro risk, which is making them more hesitant. The letting process is taking longer than usual, which results in lower demand in comparison to former periods. The uncertainty is expected to slow down the letting process and potentially can lead tenants to lower their overall expenses and reduce space and rates. On the supply side, we don't expect new projects to start and anticipate delays in existing projects, which will halt growth of supply and might slightly offset the potential negative momentum. Regarding our operation in the first nine months of 2022, we have captured EUR 22 million of rents through indexation, which have a partial impact on the first nine months of 2022 and will have a full impact in the next periods. We recorded like-for-like rental growth in the office portfolio of 3.3%, mainly driven by indexation and signed and prolonged 311,000 sq m. Of this, new lettings comprised around 108,000 sq m at an average in-place rent of 13.8 years per sq m and a WALT of 6.3 years. The remaining of 12.7 years per sq m and a WALT of 4.7 years. In recent years, we have streamlined our portfolio through the disposal of non-core properties and a stronger focus on top cities. Additionally, our office portfolio continues to maintain a defensive tenant structure, with over 30% governmental and public sector tenants and a long WALT of 7.4 years. We entered this difficult market environment well-prepared. However, an occurrence of a potential deep recession, which may come, will have an impact across all markets and sectors. Can you please comment on your revaluation profit? How do you expect your values to develop in the coming periods? We revalued around 85% of our portfolio across all asset types and locations in the first nine months of 2022, resulting in a revaluation and capital gain of EUR 410 million. The revaluations resulted in like-for-like value increase of 1.3%. The strongest results were 1.5% in office and 2.5% in residential, both driven mostly by operational improvements. In Q3 2022 standalone, we only revaluated the small portions of the portfolio. We will update the portfolio values by year-end as part of the annual report. Looking forward, although valuations are supported by higher market trends, good operational results, low supplies of properties in the market, and increased replacement costs, we see the pressure of the high interest rate and magnitude and length of this difficult market environment impacting the discounts and cap rates in a stronger manner. The valuation levels are also linked to the transaction market. We have disposed properties at around book value, which confirm our valuations, but at lower volumes than previously, as the market is not liquid as it was in the last years. We wait to see more evidence in the transaction market to indicate the valuation directions. However, we do think that under the existing market condition, we may see valuations to decrease in the next 12 to 18 months by around 5%. Could you please provide an update on your residential portfolio? Will you continue increasing your position in GCP? As of September 2022, the residential assets make up nearly a third of our portfolio as we have increased our position in GCP to 60% and participated in the scrip dividend of GCP in July. The operations of the German residential market in general, as well as GCP's portfolio, continue to perform well so far despite the volatile capital markets, mainly due to increasing demand-supply gap. GCP recorded like-for-like growth of 3.1%. Vacancy decreased further to 4.4% as of September. Nevertheless, we do see some headwinds as a result of the significant increase in the cost of living, which has an impact on the disposable income of our tenants. We expect that this will likely have a negative impact on the ability to increase rent in the short term, and conservatively assume residential rental growth to be mostly flat next year. We expect that there will be likely also an impact on valuations of the residential portfolio of up to 5% value decrease over the next year. GCP's London portfolio has already seen a small negative value adjustment. As this market is generally more liquid and volatile, property values adjust faster to changes in the macro environment. In the current price levels of GCP's share price, we expect to continue increasing our position in the Grand City. Could you please provide an update on the hotel market? We continue to see asymmetric demand across the segments, with leisure recovering fast, but business travel is taking longer to recover. This year's Q3 was strong for the leisure hotels, reaching pre-pandemic levels. The city hotels improved, but are still in the recovery stage. In many markets and locations, demand has reached pre-pandemic levels. Rates have increased strongly. Revenues have mostly recovered. Costs have increased significantly for hotel operators. The hotel operations are impacted by the significantly higher cost of energy, as well as by a combination of higher personal expenses and a continuous shortage of staff, limiting capacity. These factors impact the profitability of the hotel operator and also impact our collection rates. We have seen collection improved materially since the beginning of the year and expect that over the time to stabilize. Our collection rate in Q3 was 80% in October. In the nine-month period, we collected 65% as compared to slightly over 40% in the same period of 2021. We expect collection to be closer to 70% for full year 2022, including the low Q1 2022 collection rate, which was still heavily impacted by the pandemic restrictions. Excluding Q1, we expect collection to be around 75%. We expect 2023 to have a higher collection rate and to reach close to full recovery by 2024. What is the impact of cost inflation on your business, and how much of that can be offset by your CPI-indexed leases? The main cost drivers continue to be energy, which are mainly passed through to our tenants, and material cost, which impact our CapEx projects. We are able to limit CapEx costs as we have a high level of control over the execution of such projects and can limit part of this at our discretion. We saw an increase of around 10% for regular CapEx expense and tenant fit-out. We have additionally experienced an increase in personal expenses, driven by a continued strong labor market in our locations, as well as from pressure as a result of the higher cost of living, which also impact our employees. The inflationary environment impacts our business mainly from the increased cost of energy, which could have a negative impact on the collection of ancillary costs of our tenants. We conservatively created provision in the first nine months of 2022, around EUR 25 million for uncollected rents and ancillary expenses. Regarding CPI protection, our commercial portfolio is mostly indexed to CPI or has step-up rents. The higher inflation is supporting our top line and offsets higher costs. We do see macroeconomic headwinds that may impact operation in the coming periods, which may offset the impact of the CPI indexation. 31% of our portfolio comprises of residential. The German residential market is rent-regulated, and as a result, does not move with inflation as quickly, but takes several years to be fully reflected in the market rents. Increases are limited to 20% in three years or up to 15% in tense markets. Furthermore, around 20% of GCP's portfolio is located in London with a short-term lease structure, and as a result, faster conversion of CPI. However, w e do see the increase in cost of living negatively affecting households, expect that in the short term, rent will remain broadly stable. Can you provide some more details on your rental like-for-like? What is your expectation for the next periods? Like-for-like rental growth of 2.6% in the 12 months period ending September. This was driven by 3% in-place rental growth offset by 0.4% occupancy decrease. The rent like-for-like came mostly from the office and residential portfolio, excluding hotels like-for-like rental growth was 3.4%. Higher in-place rental growth was driven mainly from indexations, also from higher rents of new lettings, further supported by in-place rent growth in the residential portfolio. In the hotel portfolio, rent like-for-like remained flat, as we have postponed rent increases until we see higher recovery. Regarding the outlook, here we remain cautious. We see CPI indexation as a continued driver of like-for-like rental growth also for the next year, which will incorporate the current inflation. We do see macroeconomic headwinds developing, which may have negative impacts on new lettings and market rent levels, which could offset the impact from indexation. Furthermore, the residential portfolio is facing negative headwinds due to the significantly increase in cost of living. As a result, GCP expects like-for-like rental growth to be broadly flat in the short term. We expect that the combined impact of these factors will result in flat or even negative like-for-like in the coming periods. Could you provide an update on your disposals? Do you expect to continue disposals in the current market? The transaction market has slowed down since July. The uncertainties and increase in funding costs held back potential buyers, which are waiting to see how the market evolves and what are the updated price for properties. We managed to continue disposing properties also in the current environment, although at slower pace. In the first nine months, we sold at book value. Since July 2022, we signed nearly EUR 350 million deals, with recent deals slightly below book values. However, we do receive offers for below book values and believe that future transactions might include disposal below book. Our ability to dispose properties in this challenging environment is part of our competitive advantage. We have a deal sourcing capabilities to find the right buyer for our assets, which today is more important than ever. It should be mentioned that we are under no financial pressure to dispose properties. Year to date, we have used over EUR 1 billion of disposal proceeds to repay debt and used around EUR 200 million for share buybacks. The remainder of the proceeds supports our strong liquidity position and thus reduces our net debt while we maintain our flexibility with no material debt maturity in the next few years. We intend to keep liquidity from disposals, mainly for developing and seize cash preservation in the current market as a key to further strengthen the company. What is the appetite for mortgage banks to lend money? We are in the opinion that the appetite is there, but this difficult market found many banks unprepared for the demand they receive for secured financing, and therefore, the process takes much longer than before. The increased demand also makes banks more selective on the project they finance. Our assets and country diversification are therefore key in obtaining the funds as mortgage banks will also want to diversify and not only focus on lending to one asset class or location. As a result, our diversified exposure to different markets and locations allows us to deal with a wide network of mortgage banks. We believe that our assets' quality and credit rating, combined with the strong banking relationships we have, will enable us to utilize this source of funding successfully. Important to note is that we have over two years until material amounts of our debt will mature. We are in no rush to secure funding, but we are aware that the lending process currently takes longer than usual, and as we are always planning ahead, we are already preparing all our options now. We so far see margins of secured financing in the range of 1%-2%, depend on asset type and location, for a period of five to seven years, which together with mid-swap, result at 3.5%-4.5% all-in interest rate, which is more attractive than the unsecured market. While we don't assume so far our planning The market may have stabilized in the next years, and it could be that unsecured funding will become relevant again. How much secured financing can you raise according to your covenants? As the large majority of our debt is unsecured and we have a low leverage, we have a very high amount of unencumbered assets of nearly EUR 24 billion, or 83% of the portfolio. We have a very high headroom to our covenants, which provide us flexibility to access the secured lending market. Technically, we could replace our unsecured debt with secured debt over the next years. While we assume that this will not be necessary as the unsecured market may recover in the midterm, in which case our funding sources will remain a well-balanced mix, it does provide us flexibility. Considering the market environment and your strategy to retain cash and your decision on not exercising your option to call the January perpetual, will you pay a dividend next year? We have a payout policy. Generally, paying dividend is always subject to market conditions. We currently set a high priority to preserving cash. We will need to assess the situation going forward and decide whether to pay a dividend based on the market environment closer to the mid-next year. Now that you have decided not to exercise your option to call the January perpetual notes, did you decide about the perpetuals with the call date in July 2023? As the market continues to be highly volatile, we will take a decision at closer to the call date and assess what is best for all stakeholders at that time. Regardless of our decision, this equity instrument will remain equity and are strengthening our capital structure, which becomes even more apparent in times as such as this. We want to take the right decision for the company and all its stakeholder, and therefore, we keep all options open. We still have a few months left until July with currently fast-changing markets. Would you consider deferring the perpetual coupon payments? How will this impact your dividend payments? In order to distribute dividends or do a share buyback, we must pay all perpetual coupons. We see preservation of cash as one of our main targets in the next period. We currently cannot estimate the magnitude of the difficult market environment on valuations, leverage or liquidity. Therefore, we keep in our toolbox all options that will enable us to retain sufficient liquidity. This includes potentially not paying dividends, as well as deferring the perpetual principal and coupons. You have a significant cash balance, which covers around 20% of your debt, and considering ongoing disposals, this will increase further. Why don't you use it to repay debt and or perpetual notes? Maintaining a strong liquidity has always been part of our strategy. We prefer to maintain a strong cash balance, which, on one hand, provide a security cushion in times of stress. Debt and perpetual balance reduction would clearly be an opportunity, but currently, with the recession looming, we put the focus on cash retention, even though we have no material debt maturities in the next years. We can still repay debt and or perpetuals at the right point in time. Bond yields remain high. Interest rates have increased further in recent months. How do you expect this to impact your business? Will you raise new debt in the near future? Do you expect a negative impact on your valuations? We have always taken a proactive approach to managing our debt profile. In recent years, have taken advantage of favorable financing rates to extend our maturity schedule. As a result of which, we have no material maturities until early 2025. We continue to focus on maintaining strong liquidity position, which amounts to EUR 2.3 billion of cash and liquid assets as of September, further supported with over EUR 1 billion of undrawn credit facilities, which are not subject to MAC. We are working in increasing liquidity by try taking more secured financing. We are in discussion with wide range of banks regarding financing opportunities. Furthermore, we currently have disposal proceeds of around EUR 830 million, comprising of vendor loan, as well as signed, but not yet closed transactions, which are not included in our current liquidity position, but which will provide additional liquidity in the coming periods. On top, we are in negotiation for disposing additional several hundred millions of properties. The impact in the business is not clear yet. Getting mixed signals. Letting performance has slowed down. However, we're seeing higher rents from indexations and continue to grow out our rent. However, we're cautiously looking ahead to see how the trend continues, which depends on the severity of the market turmoil, and the length on high inflation rate. Regarding the impact on valuations, we currently expect some negative impact from the increased yields. However, the environment remains volatile, and it is hard to assess exactly where yields will stabilize and how much of this will flow into property valuation, as there are also offsetting factors such as supply-demand imbalance and CPI index pieces. As mentioned previously, we currently expect a value decrease of up to 5% next 12-18 months. Did you obtain any further development rights, or were you able to sell any? Would you consider developing or prefer to sell in this current environment? Especially this year, we have made very good progress and obtained several high-valued building rights in top locations, of which we have sold some successfully, resulting in strong gains for the company, as we have elaborated in previous periods. Since our H1 publication, we continued with the strong progress and obtained further development rights, which are also presented in the appendix of our presentations, as usual. We have filed for a pre-permit for an office building in central Berlin, next to Ku'damm in Charlottenburg, which is a densification as well as roof addition in top office market in Berlin, which adds 10%-15% more space. Further, we have obtained the pre-permit for another office property in central Berlin, in Bergmannstrasse, which is one of the Berlin most sought-after residential districts. The pre-permit is for conversion to residential, floor additions and densification, which almost doubles the space. You can find more details on our development rights in the appendix of our presentation. Besides several successful disposals of development rights we have had in the past two years, we recently signed the disposal of two further development rights. One is an office property with high vacancy in Frankfurt Niederrad, for which we obtained the pre-permit for conversion into residential. Another is in The Hague, Netherlands, for an office property, which we received the rights for demolition and a 70-meter residential tower instead. Both deals were conditioned on receiving permits, which we successfully managed. Generally, we analyze our portfolio for internal value creation. We then aim to achieve the building permits and decide from there. We are in no rush to act after receiving the permits, as they are granted for several years. What we prefer to continue selling these, as this materializes our value creation process. Given that new financing rates are materially higher than your current cost of debt, and that the perpetual notes reset coupon is much higher than the original coupon, how will your FFO evolve in the next years? The fact that we have a long debt maturity of over five years, means that refinancing will come gradually in the next years. We need to see where rates will stabilize in the next years. We see cost of secure debt of around 4% at the current relevant cost of debt of the company, and not the unsecured bonds, which are traded much higher. We believe that we are in the midst of very high volatility market due to the uncertainty when inflation will reduce. The fact that we do not have to repay debt until 2025 gives us time for the yields to stabilize. Increasing cost of debt is expected to weigh on our FFO in the upcoming years. However, we do have tools to partially mitigate this impact. It is too early to quantify the impact on the FFO. We do believe that we have the means and the time to reduce the impact on our future cash flows. Thank you. These were the questions that we have received so far. We can now start the open session for your questions. We appreciate if you can ask all your questions at once together, and we will answer them one by one. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we will begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star followed by one on their telephone keypad. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star, then two. As a reminder, please ask all your questions at once. One moment for the first question, please. First question is from the line of Paul May with Barclays. Please go ahead. Hi, everyone. Thanks for taking the questions. I've got, I think it's five questions. You mentioned continuously about cash retention. I understand you're still undertaking the share buyback. That doesn't sort of tally in terms of the cash retention that you've mentioned. I think you mentioned asset value declines of 5%, I think it was, you said over the next 12-18 months. Looking at prime values, they're down by, I think sort of 10%-15% year-to-date in terms of the yield expansion that has been recorded. Just wondering why your portfolio is performing significantly better than prime office values in Germany. I think you mentioned EUR 1 billion of debt repayment year-to-date. Looking at the balance sheet, I think debt has only come down by about EUR 362 million. I appreciate it's a bit of consolidation difference with Grand City. Net debt's actually increased by EUR 500 million. Just wanted to reconcile that. Looking at the FFO impact of not calling the hybrids, just wonder whether you consider that to be a bit of a profit warning on the FFO, or is that something that was sort of pre-expected? You mentioned Aroundtown recession likely to impact office tenants. Have you had any pushback against inflationary rent increases year-to-date? Just wonder how that sort of negotiations are ongoing or happening. Thank you. Hi, Paul. Thank you for the questions. I hope I got all of them. About cash retention and buybacks, we already minimized buyback level to a very insignificant level. It's not really pushing or impacting the cash retention. Anyway, the program ends end of this year. It's in a month. We will need to consider if we continue. About the valuations, about 5%, that's our current anticipation. We have discussed with our valuers, based on the assets, and remember that in our opinion, already the existing valuations that we have are conservative. The impact might not be as big as maybe others that you are referring to. About the repayment of debt, we are talking about EUR 1 billion is gross debt. We also took some new debt in the reporting period, and some of it, or most of it, was bank debt that we have taken as part of working with secured financing. In terms of inflation, so far, we see that we get a good response from our tenants on inflation. Many of the tenants are anyway govies that are paying in time. We don't have any material pushbacks on that. Clearly, if inflation will continue to increase every year, we will reach to a point that we are getting some discussions. At the moment, we see it okay. About the FFO impact for next year, we will include it part of the guidance of next year, the potential impact of higher coupons on perpetual notes. Thank you. Next question. Next questions, please. Next question is from the line of Rob Jones with BNP Paribas Exane. Please go ahead. Yeah. Good morning, everybody. Thank you for taking my question. Just want to follow up from one of Paul's questions on FFO evolution. Is that a profit warning? Indeed, one of the pre-questions you'd prepped in advance was around FFO evolution in the coming years. The way I understand it from a hybrids perspective is, if market conditions don't currently change, and of course, we don't know whether that's the case or not, but let's assume that's a base case. Your reaction to that would be to continue to not call hybrids. If we assume a recession environment over, say, the next 24 months, so potentially we could be in a scenario where you don't call hybrids for two calendar years. The FFO impact for that could be north of EUR 100 million, which would imply an FFO cut of about 30%. Clearly in that scenario, you wouldn't even be able to pay the divvy even if you wanted to. I just want to understand whether I'm right in my math surrounding an environment where you continue to elect to not call the hybrids. If you don't call, is there any plans to replace equity components, mandatory converts, equity raise, et cetera? That's the first question, if I may. Thanks, Rob. I think that we will eventually analyze and decide based on every hybrid closer to the call date. To prepare a scenario that, what if we are not paying all of them and then what will happen to the FFO, I think it's not the right time. We do have elements and tools that are improving. We have indexation that is improving. Many of the things that we have talked about are depending on the market condition. If we manage to continue dispose properties and have more liquidity, we have the ability to do a liability management, which will reduce the cost of debt. Bottom line, what I'm saying is that we will need to analyze period after period and really read the map of the market and in a way that we feel that we are taking the right decisions to have a minimal impact on the FFO. Clearly, let's say facing the results of the market, on our business. Thank you. Next question, please. Next question is from the line of Ash Nadershahi with CreditSights. Please go ahead. Hello. I just wondered if we can talk about the vendor loan business. I just wanted to know how much percentage of assets were development assets, and how much above book value were these assets executed at. The second question I had was really about rental demand destruction in a recessionary environment. What kind of figure do you think that we should be modeling? Would it be a 15%-20% decline given the cyclicality of the office segment on the portfolio? Hi. I'm just sure I got the last questions. On the vendor loans, those were not being connected to a development or actual properties. They were sold at book. Can you repeat, please, the second question? Sure. The second question was about rental demand. Just wanted to understand what kind of rental demand destruction do you expect to see in a recessionary environment. Would it be fair to say 17%, 15% on the total portfolio? Okay. Look, we have the very low WALT of about five years. If we are talking about the office segment, we are expecting next year expiries of about 10%. From experience, high portion of that are prolonging which makes the new letting activity to be in the level of, let's say, 3%-5% from the total of this tenant that is expiring. I think 10%-15% on the overall sounds to me a bit high. Again, it's very hard now to measure the magnitude of the recession, because it could be that we'll have requests for termination. So far, we see on the vacancy side, on the offices, more or less about 3% pressure on the vacancies. Thank you. Next question, please. Next question is from the line of Kai Klose with Berenberg. Please go ahead. Yes. Good morning. I've got two quick questions, if I may. The first one is on page 25 of the nine-month report regarding the deferred taxes. You mentioned there that the increase in the deferred taxes came from valuation gain for properties in jurisdictions with a higher tax rate. May you could elaborate a bit more on that, give more details on that. The second question is on page 15 of the presentation. Could you indicate how much capital is tied up in the third bucket, so to say, on the developments at small scale? Thank you. If I may, Kai, I will answer now about the tax. About the capital, we'll need to look at the page and then answer you after. We saw higher tax rates coming specifically in the U.K., and we saw also some higher taxes because also in Germany, part of the portfolio is under a 16% tax rate, and part of it is at 30%. When you revalue the part which is at 30%, then this is the deferred taxes that you are booking. I will come back to you on the other part after the call. Thank you. Next question. Next question is from the line of Neeraj Kumar with Barclays. Please go ahead. Hello. Thank you for taking my question. I have three questions from my side. First one is, you are talking about drafting coupons on your hybrids, and at the same time you said that you can continue to buy Grand City shares. Can you please explain how does it align with your cash preservation strategy? My second question is, if Grand City was to call any of its hybrid without replacement, will you lose equity treatment on all your hybrids from S&P, given the fact that you fully consolidated Grand City? My third question is, can you please provide more color on your OGM agenda, where you say that you can look to lend 10% of shares for whatever reasons, and if it provides you any flexibility regarding your hybrids? That's all from me. Hi. Thank you. Please, next time when you say the question, if you can do it a bit slower. About the Grand City shares. The increase in Grand City was predominantly done by the scrip dividend, it was not with the cash. We now have nearly no execution of acquisitions of the share, it is in line with our cash share preservation. I will go first to the last questions and then come back to the second. Maybe you need to remind me. On the OGM, the point is that when we are looking for all options or cheap sources for funding, clearly part of the items that came up was convertibles or mandatory convertibles that we have considered. It is not completely not connected to the perpetuals. From experience, we know that we did in the past some convertibles, and where there is sufficient lending shares out there, the premium you pay on convertibles are lower. We thought that we would like to have the flexibility to do so should we decide to do any transaction. At the moment, there are no transaction on the table that we are considering or thinking. It is just to have additional flexibility and maybe also to gain some profits if we decide to do so on lending some shares. The second question referred to the hybrids and the Grand City and the Aroundtown hybrids. S&P, from our understanding, are looking at these two separately. They analyze Grand City perpetuals and Aroundtown perpetuals separately. Basically, Aroundtown enjoys the equity credit of the Grand City hybrids as well. Thank you. Next question. Next question is from the line of Andrew Griffiths with Janus Henderson Global Investors. Good morning. Can you just confirm, in terms of your decision whether to defer coupons or not, that you will take that on an instrument-by-instrument basis, i.e., is there a scenario where you could opt to defer coupons on a specific instrument but not others? Hi. In general, the decision will be one-by-one, clearly. Based on the terms and conditions of the hybrids, once you pay a coupon to any perpetual, you need to pay all the deferral coupons for the others as well. Practically, once you decide to defer, it could mean that you need to defer all until you decide to pay, and then you pay all the accumulated. Thank you very much. Next question, please. Next question is from the line of Manuel Martin with Oddo BHF. Please go ahead. Yes. Hello, gentlemen. Thank you for taking my questions. Two questions from my side. The first one would be on the dividend. You seem to become a bit more careful in saying that you're going to evaluate the payout of the dividend during the next year. What could be a scenario for you to reduce or to cut the dividend? Maybe you can give us some flavor on that. That would be the first question. The second question is on your CapEx program. Do you see yourself in a position of having some flexibility in reducing your CapEx program, without endangering the decarbonization path or without disturbing the property that you have in portfolio? This is the second question. Thank you. Thank you, Manuel. I think the decision on the dividend and the coupon are more or less related to the same topics. How we see continuous disposals, how do we see the market, how deep is the potential recession and market condition, access to capital, secured financing progress and so on. We will need to evaluate all those together and the headrooms and the valuations, before we are taking decision on the dividend. In terms of CapEx and the flexibility on CapEx. We do have flexibility. Our CapEx includes some projects that are a decision that we are making. Currently, our CapEx is about 1.3% from investment property. We do see it reducing. As part of the cash preservation, we'll only do projects that are necessary and essential. Clearly, we are going to choose which projects we are doing or not in the next period. Thank you for the questions. Next question is from the line of Janaka Ariyasena with Rubrics Asset Management. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking the call. Just on the hybrids. S&P allows up to 10% of the hybrid debt stack to be redeemed over a 12-month period. Is that something that could be of consideration? Just because in your statement, you said you've got a commitment to the hybrid debt class, and therefore implicitly the investor base. Interested to know your thoughts. Thank you. Hi. At the moment, we took the decision not to exercise our option for the January. Clearly, if we see a change in the market condition in the future, this could lead for us coming back and using cash or disposal proceeds for the 10% repayment. At the moment, it's not something that we see as visible, but clearly, if we see a change in market, a positive change, it will be part of the consideration. Thank you. Next question is a follow-up question from Rob Jones, BNP Paribas Exane. Please go ahead. Hi, just one on hotels. You mentioned obviously you're seeing further rising cost from a tenant perspective, falling profitability, and obviously a recessionary environment you highlighted likely to impact all hotel sectors and I guess to some extent, business travel, as well as leisure, which the latter's obviously recovered to pre-pandemic levels so far. On the back of those challenges that your operators are facing, I'm just intrigued to understand why you believe that you think hotel collection rates will improve further in FY 2023. Thanks. First, Clearly, there is a question how all this business is going to be operated, and as we said, we are caution on the operation of all the commercial sector next year. For the moment, and based on the budget we will see from operators, we see an improvement, and that's why we think that collection rates will stay stable as we see them today. There could be an improvement if, let's say, business travelers and leisure will continue, but if it will be with a deep recession, yes, there could be a scenario that collection rates will not be improved. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Thomas Rothäusler with Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Yeah. Morning, everybody. Couple of questions. The first is on your decision not to call the perpetual. If you assume financing markets won't recover, it basically would mean your full perpetual note equity consideration would turn completely into debt, with, I think, corresponding negative impacts on LTV. What would be the consequence for the credit rating? You are referring to a rather generous view from S&P on the topic, but I assume this is only based on a few cases where you do not call perpetual. Do other rating agencies have a different view on it? That would be my first question. The second one, actually, on financing. Could you provide some recent examples for secured lending deals you have done with the banks? The other question would be on your rental growth outlook, just to clarify, I think, is it right that you expect like-for-like rental growth for next year, zero or even negative? Just to clarify. On vacancy, you sound rather cautious on vacancy for next year, referring to recession risks. What should we expect here for vacancy? Thanks, Thomas, for the questions. On the credit, we work with S&P and know their methodology. Clearly, if you are not calling any of the hybrids and you lose the equity content on all of them, this could impact your leverage of S&P. From our perspective, we analyzed the January one, and we saw that there is not expected to be any impact. This is what we also reported. I think it is too early to decide what will happen with July and the rest, but even when we consider, let's say as long as we don't pay, there could be more pressure on the LTV of S&P. I can say that S&P by themselves state that pressure coming only from the fact you don't call in a hybrid is not as if you are taking debt. This is something that probably part of their modifiers will see it as a positive point in terms of not calling hybrid and comparing to taking debt. I also want to remind that, based on IFRS, and this is very important, that LTV according to IFRS and all our bond covenants are based on IFRS results, where perpetual notes are equity regardless if they are called or not called. On the bond covenants, we don't expect to see any impact. On the secured financing, we did took so far about EUR 250 million-EUR 300 million of bank financing. The margins were about 1.2%-1.3%. Far, we are working on additional secured financing. Since the process takes longer, we will see the fruits of these efforts, I believe next year, and we'll be able to elaborate more. The range that we see on the margins is, as we already answered, between 1%-2%, depends on the asset class and the location. In terms of like for like, we will give a guidance of how we see the like for like within the year-end results. So far, we cautiously estimate zero, meaning so pressure on vacancies will be, let's say, mitigate by indexation or maybe even a slightly lower like for like. We'll be smarter when we publish the year-end results, and we give a clear guidance there. Thank you. Next question. Next question is from the line of Leon Wei with Jupiter Asset Management. Please go ahead. Yeah. A quick question on your hybrids. Your comments on the call is very well understood. Just wanted to understand whether you're open to buying the hybrids back on the secondary market or not. If so, how do you think about pricing? We will act at a level considering and balancing our liquidity, future sources and uses, market trends, and the cost of the new financing. We currently focus on cash preservation until we see more clarification on market conditions. Clearly, this is one of the alternatives for extra cash to be used. I think it's too early to discuss about pricing. It will be discussed if we decide to do a deal, price to the deal. Thank you. Next question is from the line of Philippe Slotboom with Société Générale. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I have two, please, on the risk of hybrid coupon deferral. Given that the decision on the dividend will be taken in Q2 next year, is it fair to assume that you'll defer the hybrid coupon in January, then decide on the dividend, and if you decide to pay a dividend, pay the deferred coupon at a later date? Second question is, can you just confirm that you're able to defer the hybrid coupon while still buying back shares? Thanks for the questions. If we defer coupon, we are not able to distribute dividends. If we decide to defer the January coupon and then want to distribute dividends in July, then we need to pay the deferred coupon. If we defer coupon, we are not able to do buyback of shares. Thank you for the questions. I think this was the last question. Yeah. Many thanks to all who took the time to participate in this call and the questions you've submitted before and as well during the call. Look forward to meeting all of you in person over the coming months, and don't hesitate to reach out to us if you'd like to discuss any topic in more detail. Enjoy the festive season and stay well. Goodbye.