Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Encavis AG's conference call regarding consolidated financial statements 2020. At this time, all participants have been placed on a listen-only mode. The floor will be open for questions following the presentation. Let me now turn the floor over to your host, CFO of Encavis AG, Dr. Christoph Husmann. Please go ahead. Ladies and gentlemen, good morning and a warm welcome from Hamburg. A warm welcome to our analyst and investors call on our fiscal year 2020 and guidance 2021, a very warm welcome to our first call being a member of MDAX Index, the mid-cap index of Deutsche Börse. Ladies and gentlemen, we do live in turbulent times. Still, 2020 was a successful year for Encavis. Due to our protected business model, Encavis developed in a positive way, unimpressed from COVID-19 and its impact on the overall economy. Yesterday evening, we published our revenues of EUR 292.3 million compared to EUR 273.8 million previous year, which is up by 7%. This, although 2019 was a meteorological extraordinary year, 2020 was pretty much a meteorological standard year. This increase of 7% was due to an increase of our capacity in the wind segment of an 81 MW wind farm in Denmark, which was acquired at the end of 2019, and a 14 MW wind park in Germany acquired midst of last year. Both portfolios contributed EUR 15.8 million additional revenues. In addition to that, Encavis Asset Management developed very well in the last year and contributed additional fees of EUR 4.9 million to our top line. We were able to connect the first Spanish fully privately financed PPA park, La Cabrera, with 200 MW in August 2020 to the grid, and in the ramp-up phase, it was possible to generate already EUR 2.9 million of additional revenues from this park. That, unfortunately, was partially offset by negative meteorological deviation of EUR 8.6 million. In 2019, we had a positive meteorological impact of EUR 10.5 million on the top line. In 2020, this boiled down to merely EUR 1.9 million. The point is that the capacity growth as well as the additional fees from the asset management is accompanied by additional costs as well, while the negative meteorological effect is not accompanied by any cost reductions. Therefore, we were able to increase our EBITDA to EUR 224.8 million compared to the EUR 217.6 million by 3%. This is pretty flattish on the EBIT and the EPS level. Please have in mind that there is a huge impact of meteorological effect in 2019 in it, which is not there in 2020. The operating cash flow still could be increased by 12% to almost EUR 213 million. This is due to the asset management development, as well as the reimbursement of some taxes. As a matter of fact, with that fiscal year 2020, we exceeded all KPIs which were laid out in our guidance 2020 in March last year, based on this time and relevant portfolio, and we reached or exceeded all figures from the analyst consensus. Until the third quarter of 2020, the group's KPIs were pretty much behind previous year's Q3 figures, and this due to several arguments. Firstly, we had negative meteorological effects throughout all consecutive first three quarters of last year, and we had some burden from the additional cost for the stock option program due to the very sharp increase of our stock price. In addition to that, we had a pretty much backloaded business of the Encavis Asset Management, and we had a delay of disposal of minorities, which happened in 2019 in Q2 and was planned in 2024 Q4. Until the end of the year, there were still the negative meteorological effect and the additional cost for the stock option program, Encavis Asset Management fulfilled all its goals and surpassed them even in Q4 and contributed alone EUR 10 million of revenues in Q4. In addition to that, we got the disposal of the minorities done in Q4 as well as we already reported. That helped us that although there was some shortfall compared to 2019 until Q3 to fulfill all our targets in the full year. If we then have a look into our segments, firstly, we should have a look on the solar segment, which is by far the biggest part of our group, contributing in 2020, 68% of our revenues. In the development of 2019 to 2020, we see a decline of the revenues. Although La Cabrera, a 200 MW park, was connected to the grid. Although it was connected to the grid at year's end, it contributed positively with EUR 2.9 million to the sales line. The metrological effect in the solar park segment, with negative EUR 7 million, is relevant here. In 2019, we enjoyed additional radiation, and with that, additional revenues of EUR 14.1 million. In 2020, this was just positive EUR 7.1 million. To make that clear, this is now the sixth consecutive year in which irradiation is above standard expectation, but it is lower than it was in 2019. In addition to that, we have to state that the margins in that segment are still solid. The only deviation we see here, the negative deviation, is due to that negative metrological effect. The wind farms contributed in 2020, 27% to the top line. That was an increase of EUR 14 million, EUR 15.8 million due to the capacity increases, which I've already pointed out, like the addition of 81 MW into the Danish portfolio and 14 MW to the German portfolio. Here, we suffered a EUR 1.4 million lower meteorological effect. It was negative EUR 3.6 million in 2019 and minus EUR 5 million in 2020. In addition to that, the wind farm segment enjoys some EBITDA improvement due to minority disposals, which was EUR 4.2 million profit in 2020 compared to EUR 4.7 million in 2019. The margins are stable here as well. The technical service here we had the biggest change in the last year due to the disposal of our technical service entity, Stern Energy GmbH, to Stern Energy SpA in Milano. As you might recall, we acquired a 30% stake in Stern Energy in Milano with the intention, by put and call options, to grow that business by 100% into our group within the next five years. As one of the first steps, we sold our German entity, the Encavis Technical Service, mainly due to the Stern Energy. That profit of EUR 2.8 million is reflected in the 2020 figures. That's the reason why we have a one-off here, which contributes positively to the EPS as well. In the asset management business, we see a strong growth. Back on an equity commitment by investors of more than EUR 350 million and investment of such capital in the amount of EUR 217 million, the company grew substantially. The managed megawatt, which were at 680 MW at the end of 2019, increased to 1 GW in 2020. That led to a substantial increase in fees for structuring and for management and for consultation within Encavis Asset Management and improved the efficiency of the group. Ladies and gentlemen, if we then do compare our segment report with the guidance 2020, which we published in March last year, we see that the solar park segment fulfilled the goals on all levels. The margins were slightly below the guidance. The reason for that is that some of the management level employees in the solar park segment do have stock options as well. As we pointed out, we had some additional provisions for the stock option program due to the sharp increase of the stock price last year. Despite that, all target guidance figures were fulfilled here. This applies to the Technical Service and to the Asset Management the same way. The wind farms are the only segment which did not fulfill the goals, that is due to the very low wind volume. The guidance is always based on standard weather and the lack of EUR 5 million of revenues in the wind farms, which cannot be compensated cost-wise, is shown here. Well, in a nutshell, although the meteorological conditions in 2020 were far below the outstanding 2019, due to our capacity increases, we could reach and go so far as to exceed the 2019 figures or at least reach them. Although we had to compensate for EUR 5.3 million of provisions for the virtual stock option program, compared to EUR 2.9 million in 2019, which is additional cost of EUR 2.4 million, which were covered here. The operating cash flow reached EUR 213 million, a record-high key figure. That is an increase of 12%, far above what we expected. Firstly, there was a planned contribution from Encavis Asset Management due to their very good business performance in Q4 2019, which became cash relevant in the first quarter of 2020. Secondly, and that was not planned, a positive effect from reimbursement of capital gains tax. As you might recall, this is an issue because German tax authorities pay whenever they want to. Last year we had the luck that they paid it already in 2020. Ladies and gentlemen, if we have a look on the long development from 2014 until 2020, then we see that we have a substantial increase of our revenues with a CAGR of 26.3%. That, what is most important, with pretty stable EBITDA margins and EBIT margins. You see that because the EBITDA and EBIT grow almost at the same level as the revenues do. With the 2020 results, we could keep up our margins in this very competitive environment. These stable margins are driven by our approach, not only to acquire parks and manage them properly, but to systematically skin economies of scale and scope throughout our group. That it be financially, legally, administration-wise, by digitalization, by streamlining the processes and standardize them, and by technical improvements. We do a lot of making our parks run at its best to harvest whatever nature offers to us. Our business is continuously growing the operating business, and this is backed by very solid equity ratios. Our balance sheet total grew by 3%, and that does not really reflect fully the growth of the business. As you might recall, last year was a substantial milestone for us by constructing the two big Spanish parks, La Cabrera and Talayuela. While the cost of the construction of La Cabrera is already fully reflected in our balance sheet because it is fully consolidated as of August last year. It is that Talayuela is at equity consolidated with 80% only because here we are just an 80% shareholder. Until COD, the developer has a major influence on the park, and so the decision-making is not solely on our side. Therefore, we are under IFRS, not under control. Therefore, with the full consolidation of Talayuela, there will be a further increase of the balance sheet total beginning of this year. This has a positive or will have a positive impact on the equity as well. As you might see, we had an increase of the equity in 2020 from EUR 722 million to EUR 751 million. You maybe recall last year we reported to you that the PPAs were negatively reflected twice in our balance sheet. PPAs usually securing a price on a lower level than market price are accounted for with a negative value. Since the park was accounted for at equity, it was necessary to count the PPA again a second time directly in the equity, and therefore had to suffer slightly. This PPA valuation for Cabrera was taken out in 2020 due to the full consolidation and improved our equity by EUR 48 million. This will happen again or similarly with Talayuela. Ladies and gentlemen, as you might know, in these days it is very important to be certified. The most important certification we have, one of the most important ones, is our investment grade issuer rating from Scope, which was confirmed in 2020. This reviews our strong creditworthiness and helps us to realize the very positive impact on our financing conditions as I will line out on the later pages. In addition to that, it is very important to show and explain the market that we are compliant with all ESG regulations. This is something my colleague, Dierk Paskert, will be happy to explain to you of one of the further pages. 2020 was a very busy year for us by operational growth of the company and construction. On the financing side, we were not as active externally. As you might recall, our Fast Forward 2025 program relies on the strength of our balance sheet. We are not intending to raise equity to finance our ordinary growth. We try to align the investments, sorry, and all our financings year on year. In 2019, we raised sufficient cash, and we were able to release more cash from our parks, which were trapped there on the accounts in 2020. That allowed us to finance our growth of 2020, and therefore there was not such a need in 2020 to go to the market and ask for some debt. Honestly said, that was timing-wise very positively for us. Because due to COVID-19 and to the risk expectations the banks have seen in the market, it was that the interest rate margins increased somewhat, and therefore, we did not suffer under that. We got all our financing done cheaply before the COVID-19 crisis hit the market. Ladies and gentlemen, in the past and in these days, we talked a lot about weather adjustments. Honestly said, it is, from my point of view, extremely helpful to understand the figures, why in some years there is some fluctuation in the figures. Our business is extremely stable and only the irradiation or the weak performance has a volatile impact on our figures, which management cannot forecast. We only can forecast standard weather. As a matter of fact, we have to admit that it becomes more and more difficult, and the figures are not as clear with the time being. As of 2020, we could clearly define the weather effect, but that won't be possible in the future. Why? Firstly, in the markets, there are a growing number of PPA projects, and PPA projects cannot usually be 100% hedged with PPAs. Some of them can, others cannot. It is a different world than in a feed-in tariff in Germany. In a feed-in tariff in Germany, any kilowatt hour is reimbursed by a fixed rate, and therefore, if the sun shines one day longer or one hour longer and more kilowatt hours drop out of the market, it is remunerated with that fixed rate. Clearly it can be stated that there is a positive metrological impact on the revenues line. If you have a PPA project and you cannot hedge it 100%, you have a certain unhedged position. Encavis limited its own exposure to such non-hedged revenues to a maximum of 5% in 2020, sorry, we had 3%. It's wrong. I think it's 2020. La Cabrera currently is fully hedged for the year 2021. Despite the Amazon contract, we have a short-term hedging of the remaining energy production for the full year pay as produced again. No risk to our company. In Talayuela, with a different PPA contract, here, just 75% of the production volume is hedged. If there is more irradiation in Spain, it is very likely that the kilowatt hour production of Talayuela is increasing. At the same time, there's more electricity in the market, not only from our project, but most likely from other solar projects as well. Since this energy is a commodity, has a negative impact on energy pricing. The additional energy has a lower price. This does not only apply then to the additional energy, but it applies to the 25 standard energy of Talayuela as well. It is hard for us to define what is a price effect and what is a metrological effect, and I think part of the metrological effect is the related price effect as well. That applies to the feed-in tariff schemes as well. There are more feed-in tariff scheme where a certain volume of electricity per annum is subsidized and not the total output, like the SDE++ in the Netherlands. Here we do have a certain output, which in the end is the standard energy output. If there is an excess output due to higher radiation, then this has to be sold to the spot market. Additional electricity does not here mean necessarily additional revenue. In that moment of time, all solar parks in the Netherlands produce additional electricity, and that competes with low price for the sale. Having said that, it will become more and more difficult, specifically, if you have in mind that we are in 10 different jurisdictions with several different price zones, and that will make it more and more critical, really, to say what the revenues impact of additional irradiation might have been. Our guidance of the fiscal year 2021 is standard weather, and we can tell you whether we produce more or less in our group. We won't be able to tell you that on revenues or profit line in future. Ladies and gentlemen, based on today's portfolio, we publish a guidance for fiscal year 2021 of more than EUR 320 million, and with that, exceeding the EUR 300 million threshold for the first time, which is almost 10% up compared to previous year. The operating EBITDA of EUR 240 million is an additional 7% compared to previous year. Please be aware that fiscal 2020, this was more or less standard weather. Therefore, these figures are more or less comparable. The operating EBIT shall increase to more than EUR 138 million, and this up 4%. Operating cash flow will be more or less on the level of the 2020 year. Please have in mind that with the reimbursement of the gains tax in 2020, we had one off of EUR 8 million. In total, there is an increase in the operating, in the really operating cash flow without any extraordinary effects here. The operating EPS will increase from EUR 0.43-EUR 0.46, fully in line with our Fast Forward 2025 business plan, leading to the EUR 0.70 in 2025. Ladies and gentlemen, if we do compare the 2020 actual results and the guidance 2021 with your consensus, then we have to see that the 2020 figures fully fulfilled your expectations. Slightly in EBIT, there is a slight deviation of approximately EUR 1 million, but all other figures in 2020 surpassed the average consensus we have published on Monday. With the fiscal year 2021, here from my point of view, we are more or less in the same range. I want to underline that the guidance which we published is above EUR 320 million. It is above EUR 240 million for the EBITDA, above EUR 138 million for the EBIT, therefore covering the range which the consensus average shows us as well. Ladies and gentlemen, let's come now to the guidance of the respective business segments. The solar part, here we expect to reach a guidance revenues of more than EUR 220 million and an operating EBITDA of EUR 176 million, keeping up the margin here at approximately 80%, which we already enjoyed in the past. Here we do see the impact of the Spanish projects, which both will contribute fully to the whole year. The technical services here will contribute the same revenues as we enjoyed it in the past, but the operating EBITDA will be without the extraordinary effect, which we enjoyed in 2020. The wind farms will have slightly higher guidance figures compared to the 2020 figures, with some minority sales included here as well. The asset management is planning to reach, again, the extraordinary level, which was possible in 2020, and to go ahead with their very successful investment strategy. Ladies and gentlemen, that was in short and in a nutshell, our 2020 figures and the guidance 2020. I will be happy to answer your questions after listening to my colleague, Dierk Paskert, who will have a look into the future of energy, which is now. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you, Christoph, very much for that presentation, for these robust and very well in line numbers. Also welcome from my side to the audience, and I'm now happy to share a couple of minutes just with you, our first ESG report, which we just published now, and I can only urge you to really have a look at it because it gives a further insight into Encavis, not just on our numbers, which you already know, but also with regard to how we manage our business and that there is, besides the numbers, also other ambitious goals which we are pursuing. As Christoph rightly pointed out already in his presentation, 2020 was very much a year of transition as planned for Encavis, and we used that time really to prepare ourselves for a changing market environment with a lot of new challenges. PPAs are worthwhile mentioning, but also with a lot of growth potential, as we all know, and therefore we have to position ourselves and be well prepared in order to tackle these challenges. This includes also a certain shift in investors' mindset and also on the investor base. You might have seen through different publications in last year that there is a trend from international institutional investors into our stock, increasingly focused also on ESG criteria. To be honest, while we were thinking at least two years ago, being green is kind of sustainable enough with our focus just on wind and solar production. This has shifted also on our side, and we know that this is not, let's say, the only basis we can live on. It's further things which we have to bring to the table. Therefore, we started an ambitious program together with our employees to define ourselves, our ESG criteria. We took part in PRI and also UN Global Compact. We embraced all the goals set out in these principles. We fully subscribe to these principles. We also actively shape our corporate culture together with our employees in order to be able to tackle the challenges from this positioning. From the sustainable development goals set out by the United Nations, we picked 12 of these criteria, which we think at least are very much important for our future business. I won't go into that into further detail. Please have a read in our report. You can then judge yourself how and why we picked these criteria. This is not just something nice to read and which gives a further green cover to Encavis. This is much more than that because we set ourselves as we do and as Christoph just pointed out in our guidance, we not only set ourselves ambitious financial goals, we also set now ambitious goals in our ESG management. This covers four areas. Strategy, governance, economy, environment and social. In strategy and governance, we set our goal that Encavis will improve its MSCI ESG rating from double A to triple A by 2025. We just moved up to double A and the next goal is now becoming triple A by the end of 2025, so which also achieving our fast-forward growth targets. From an economic perspective, we significantly increase our non-subsidized electricity production by the end of 2025. Why is that? Because we would really bring our share to the table to make society in future independent from big subsidy schemes in order to allow renewable business. We think renewable business has come out of its infancy and is able to be really a contributor to the energy world without any subsidies, and we would like to bring our share to that goal. From a social perspective, it's the conclusion of a long-term partnership with a non-profit organization, which we will pick in 2021. We have a couple of ideas in mind. We will judge them over the next months and then we will go into a longer-term partnership with a non-profit organization and contributing to their goals. From an environmental perspective, it's quite operationally. We still have some parts which are using the power for operation from, let's say, the gray power in the grid, and we will definitely increase the share of green electricity purchases to 100%. This is not yet done in all the parts. That will be finished by end of 2025. We are not only just producing 100% green energy, but we are also taking out of the grid 100% green energy. Those four goals are the main goals we set ourselves. We will revisit these goals on a timely basis, and we will also put these goals into the incentive schemes, not just of management, but also of our employees. Everybody in Encavis will embrace these goals and is not just incentivized on financials. With that having said, I would stop here and open now the table for further questions from your side, which you definitely will have on our 2020 results. Thank you very much for that. Gladly. Ladies and gentlemen, the floor is now open for questions. If you would like to raise a question, please press nine and star on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, please press nine and star a second time. We have a first question. It comes from Jan Bauer from Warburg Research. Your line is open, please. Good morning. I've got a few questions. First one is, you made a payout in the financial assets of roughly EUR 60 million. Is this for the acquisition of Stern Energy? Sorry, I was muted. We made a payout for the acquisition of Stern Energy. Stern Energy was already acquired in 2019. Okay. In 2020, we sold the German entity to Stern Energy. Now, the payout, which you can see in here, is that since Talayuela is at equity consolidated, all money we borrow to Talayuela is seen to be associated company and therefore external. Okay, perfect. This is not an acquisition of another. No PPA out of a corporation? It is just the ongoing equity or some of part of the equity contribution we give into Talayuela in form of shareholder loan. Since this is at equity, it's associated only and therefore external. Okay, thank you. You write that you have the cooperation agreement with GreenGo and Sunovis should result in a few larger projects in Germany and the Netherlands for 2021, especially with GreenGo, you write that some of the projects should already be under construction during Q1. Can you give us a little bit more light on what the size of the projects will be and what will be the financial metrics? I can probably take that. We will see first contributions from our partnership project development pipelines in 2021. We will only start each and every partnership with, let's say, smaller parks and not just already the bigger ones, because we just want to, let's say, get acquainted with our partners and see how they can really bring to the table what they have promised. Therefore, these will be first in the range of 12, 20 MW parks. We have seen through COVID-19 also a little bit of time shift on the permitting side. It's probably not Q1 anymore, where we would start construction. You have also to see that ready to build doesn't mean that we start already immediately construction, because for construction, we need then also a PPA. That will be done in 2021. I won't give any promise on a particular quarter now, because that depends a little bit also on the right timing, to close a PPA and on market conditions. Therefore, we will take our time to really step into the market and locking in the energy prices for the long-term PPA at the right price. Okay. There we need a little bit of flexibility and we can't, let's say, promise on quarters there. Yeah. Understandable. To Mr. Husmann, what's the amount of the yearly debt repayment out of the SPVs currently? It is approximately EUR 100 million. It hasn't increased with the acquisition of Talayuela and La Cabrera? No. Well, it hasn't increased. There is, in fact, on the long-term debt, a flat development, because in the end, it's just only an increase of EUR 50 million or so. In the end, we amortized EUR 100 million on SPV level and took up new debt for Cabrera and Talayuela and further other ongoing developments in direction to ready to build over the course of the year. Okay. There's a flattish light upward trend. Okay. Due to the growth of the company. Okay, one last question. You said you will tend more towards spot marketing of electricity due to the PPA structure. Do you think about installing a spot market trading team in your company, or do you have a cooperation partner for that? I think we could split that question into two parts. Let's first of all, regarding there is no trend. It is just that we have to admit that it is usually not possible to hedge 100% of the electricity. First of all, not 100% of the standard electricity, and specifically not 100% of the electricity, which is produced in excess of the expected kilowatt hours based on standard weather, because that has to be hedged. We defined for ourselves that we want to limit our merchant part of the electricity in a year to maximum of 5%. It is still very limited. Therefore, maybe the second part of the question, Dierk, you can answer whether we want to have a trading desk. All right. Thank you very much. We are not building up a trading desk. What we do is, we have to, and we built that up already, the competence to participate in the merchant markets with different hedging strategy. That means on the one hand, reading the markets, and prices in the markets at the appropriate time in order to be able to get good market conditions and lock them in. Secondly, this is more internal preparation. This is our hedging strategy, and this stays very conservative, so we will not shift, let's say, the overall positioning of the company by now going aggressively into merchant markets. The secured revenues will be also in the future, the nature of Encavis' business model. Part of it, the vast majority is still with feed-in tariffs. The other part is with PPAs, long-term PPAs. There is a third part, which we have to look at now, which is hedging strategy at the day-ahead markets. That can be hedges over six months, one year, 18 months, or only over two weeks. That is part of our portfolio will be exposed to this market, and we will actively manage that, but with very conservative criteria as we do on all our other topics. Okay. Thank you. The next question comes from Charlotte Friedrichs from Berenberg. Your line is open, please. Hello. Good morning, and thank you for taking my question. The first one would be around the outlook that you have for your pipeline. How should we think about the phasing of capacity additions in the coming years? I do realize that you can't really predict it exactly, but should we, for instance, expect more of a focus on 2022 or 2023 with regards to the buildup towards your 2025 target? The second question would be, what's your view on the market in Europe in general? Which countries are you finding most attractive at present? The third question would be around the dividend policy, if you have come to a conclusion about how to proceed from here. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Should I take the first one and do you take the other ones? Yeah. That's okay. Mrs. Foley, thank you very much for the question. I think what we stated last year is what the endpoint in 2025 might be. We still are confident and convinced that we will be able to double our capacities up to 3.5 GW until then. As a matter of fact, what we haven't foreseen beginning of last year is that the COVID-19 crisis hits the overall market. Our business model is very robust, as you have seen during the course of the last year. We have to admit that the robustness does not apply to the authorities in the European countries and not to the overall electricity market. Therefore, we have two issues which we cannot calculate regarding the megawatts per year, which will be connected to the grid. One is, the authorities are obviously in a lockdown. We see throughout Europe that the IT systems of these authorities are not in a way that they really can work from home. Some of them do not have laptops. If they do not have, they don't have a VPN access to the documentation, so they cannot be able to work. Some of them don't have cell phones, and they don't hand out the private numbers. Therefore, there is overall in Europe, a delay in the approval of new projects. Therefore, we cannot tell you. This won't last forever. The population will be vaccinated within the next month. There might be maybe a small dip. We don't know. We can't say that precisely. Therefore, we are not able to tell you exactly what megawatts will be. If there is a mutation which will have an impact on the economy, maybe the additional lockdown, we cannot forecast that. I think it would not be smart to chase new PPA contracts if there is a slump of the electricity prices as we have seen them in March. In the long run, we are absolutely confident and convinced to reach our goals, but we are not currently in a position to tell you in which year the parks will be connected to the grid. The pipeline is there. The developers are developing them. We do not carry the direct development risk, and we will be confident to get them connected to the grid. Whether this will be done this year, beginning of next year, I think for a project which is calculated over 30 years, that does not really make a difference. I understand that it makes a difference for the P&L, but this is something in these turbulent times we cannot precisely forecast yet. Understood. Yeah. In addition, probably also fair to say that we are not just dependent on our project development partners. We can easily compensate any shortfallings out of that pipeline on a timing level with, let's say, acquisitions on the market. I can clearly tell you that we have a couple of projects earmarked, which do not come from our development pipeline. I don't want to set any negative tone on the, let's say, on the development pipelines. Yes, there might be, let's say, a few time shifts in permitting, but this is really overall minimal, and we can still compensate with acquisitions on the market. I always give the guidance. You know our final target 2025, so it's still one point something, 1.5, 1.6 GW outstanding until 2025. There's more or less, including this year's, five years left. If you divide that number with five years, I think it gives you at least an average number, what we would like to achieve in the years. It could be in one year a little bit more and the other a little bit less, but this should be somehow okay as a rule of thumb. With the markets, currently, lot of demand for PPA projects in Germany. This is getting really very interesting, also with very good prices. Very little projects available which come on stream now in 2021. Italy, Denmark, definitely also of interest. Spain, yes, there's a lot of things being talked about in Spain. We do not see that all the projects which are, let's say, pursued there will be really connected to the grid. I think there is also a lot of projects which finally will not be built. Therefore, we are happy that we have already logged in our two big projects in Spain. U.K., again, back on the radar screen also with very ambitious green targets over the next years and further additions. I could probably, there is not one market which we can completely exclude, and increasingly also might come in focus over time, not this year, but in years to come, is Eastern Europe, where we could see that with, let's say, backing from the EU, from the Green Deal, we will also see further build-up of renewable business in eastern parts of Europe, like Poland, be it Romania or other countries. Definitely of interest. Third question, with regard to dividends, we have a dividend policy still in place, which holds until the AGM next year, and we will advise on dividend policy, let's say, before we reach next year's AGM. Therefore, that is something we have to come up with during this year. Are there further questions? Right now, there are no further questions. Please let me repeat. If you would like to raise a question, please press nine and star on your telephone keypad. We have a next question, again from Jan Bauer from Warburg Research. Your line is open, please. Hey. If no one is in queue, I might ask you another question. Can you give us a feeling of the split between the management and the acquisition fee in the asset management segment in 2020 and what do you expect in 2021? Yes. Thank you. First of all, the management fee in the asset management goes up, by the way, I think we have to differentiate in the revenues of the asset management between the one-off fees and the regular fees. The one-off fees are slightly above EUR 5 million. They're either for consultation or for structuring and investment of such funds, and the remaining part of it is revenues for steady state business. To be precise, for the 2021 guidance or for the 2020 figures? Well, we expect the same amount for the 2020 figures. Therefore, we expect the same amount of approximately six or seven, maybe EUR 8 million of one-offs, and the remaining part are then the standard ongoing revenues. How is your feeling whether you can keep the one-off, or what I call acquisition fee, stable at this level? That would require that you fund further funds for investments. Yeah. The inflow for green investments is still extremely high. As I pointed out, we had a committed equity of more than EUR 350 million in the last year and invested just EUR 217 out of that. Approximately EUR 130 million, EUR 140 million are still available just out of the amount of money which was committed last year. There is committed equity from previous years as well. I think as a full year of investment, more or less, the equity is already available and new funds are going to be structured and started within 2021. I don't see currently that the committed equity will stop in the inflow. There is still a need, and not only on investment side, on the financial side, but as well on side of the need for green energy. The new parks are needed and therefore financing is needed for them as well. Okay. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Further questions came in. The next question comes from Teresa Schinwald from Raiffeisen Bank International. Your line is open, please. Thank you. Good morning. I have rather a general market question and your perspective. A lot of the utilities majors, and particularly the Ørsted, have been complaining about oil majors actually ruining prices in offshore wind. Could you give us your perspective on the markets you are in about competition also outside of the usual suspects? Yeah. There's definitely in the tenders for projects which are put on the market with projects connected to the grid or having reached ready to build, there is a certain margin pressure, without any doubt. This is not caused by the oil majors in PV and in onshore wind. It's just the, let's say, the amount of institutional money on the globe, which is, let's say, being flushed into this asset class now. Therefore, that is one way how to compensate that and not being dependent on that and be exposed to that margin pressure. We went early already in our partnership agreements with pre-agreed IRR expectations from our side, and getting exclusivity at very early stages for our projects. Thereby, we try to avoid that pressure. We haven't seen, let's say, the oil majors or the bigger utilities directly in our market segment. They are there definitely, but do not have the same impact. Offshore is a complete different market. It is really for the big boys with deep pockets. There I can very well imagine that case. In the more fragmented PV market, we haven't seen to full extent such effect. Thank you very much. We have another question from Martin Tessier from Stifel. Your line is open. Yes, good morning. Thanks for the presentation. Two questions from me. The first one is, could you give us an idea about the number of ready-to-build projects that were introduced to you in 2020, and what is the year-on-year trend in 2021? Second question is a bit more hypothetic, but if you are not able to find enough attractive projects in the midterm, would you consider the acquisition of a developer? Many thanks. Probably, to be honest, I won't, as we already said. Development pipeline is something which is not just consisting out of a ready-to-build park. The second part of it is really finding, at the appropriate time, a good deal in the market and a good offtaker at attractive, let's say, market prices. Therefore, please forgive us for not going into further details on our development pipeline, in which market the project is developed, and whether it's mid-stage, late stage, or ready-to-build already. I can only say that there are projects which we can bring to the market, but we will be prudent and wait on the right timing. That in terms of development partnerships, we feel very happy. We have now entered into 10 partnership agreements. We don't see the necessity, really, to buy into development capacities. There are two main reasons for that. One is, we do not want to expose ourselves to the full development risk. Yes, definitely on a single project, this might be very attractive, because it really cuts the development fee, which we have to pay. However, on a blended basis, so if you include all the projects, not just the ones which come to the market, but also the ones you have to count in which do fail and never reach the market, then we don't see that this is something which we would like to have on our balance sheet and P&L. Secondly, we would like to have the free choice of the market. We would like to build projects where we see also attractive offtake agreements from customers. That, let's say, your own development team is always able to deliver the best project at the right time, at the right place, I think is an assumption which we at least do not take. Therefore, from our perspective, we are better off if we partner with the market, logging it in at early stages with exclusivity rights, but not taking the full development risk. That strategy will hold at least until we deliver on our 2025 targets. Okay, many thanks. There are no further questions. Good. Thank you very much for dialing in. Thank you very much for your attention. Hopefully, we could answer all your questions. If you have any further questions afterwards, please feel free to call us, we will answer the questions. Hopefully, in the months to come, we will see you again physically. In the meantime, please stay safe and healthy. Thank you very much.