Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Encavis AG conference call regarding Encavis AG interim report Q2 six- month 2021. At this time, all participants have been placed on a listen-only mode. The floor will open for questions following the presentation. Let me now turn the floor over to your host, Dr. Christoph Husmann, CFO. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, a warm welcome to our conference call on the first half year 2021 figures. A warm welcome specifically. Thank you very much for dialing in on this very special day in the summer season. Why is it a special day? It looks to be the only day this year which could be called summer in Germany. Thank you very much for taking this time on this very special day to dial in. On the very first page here, we show you today a photo of our solar park, Talayuela. Why that? Because in the first half year figures, we see the impact of the capacity increase in Spain, which we enjoy and you will see in detail later on what that means to our business. Let's flip to the pages. Let's have a look on the highlights in 2021. I want to recall all these points of our highlights, which I already stated during Q1, but we have two further developments. In June, Liberum published its first full research coverage of Encavis and Pareto Securities in July 22nd, both with a buy rating and a target price of EUR 19 and EUR 20 respectively. In total now, we have 14 active coverages with an average target price of EUR 18.86. One thing I would like to highlight is that we have two changes in the number of shares since our last call, which is not relevant for the first half year report, but for the future reports. Firstly, on our annual shareholder meeting, we had the approval for our dividend, and 43% of our Encavis shareholders chose the scrip dividend instead of the cash dividend. By that, we created 814,031 new shares, increasing our number of outstanding shares to 139,251,265 shares. In addition to that, the first owner of a hybrid convertible bond with a nominal value of EUR 800,000, converted his hybrid convertible into 112,936 new shares. In total now we have 139,364,201 shares. Well, on our acquisition side, we were quite active, specifically the Encavis Asset Management, acquired in the last two months, two new portfolios for the Encavis Infrastructure Fund II. One is a 43 MW park, Warnsdorf, which is a wind farm in the district of Prignitz, Brandenburg, and a 45.5 MW photovoltaic park in Brandenburg and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, together with the investment partner of badenova. We were quite active on our own portfolios pipeline as well, but I would not like to line that out, but would leave that to my colleague, Dierk Paskert, who will, in the end, give you more insight into the pipeline at the end of this presentation. Regarding financing, there were, over the summertime, no major movements. We still have some firepower for investments. What we have seen during the course of this year is that cyber attacks are a relevant topic for many companies. There are not a lot of companies who suffer cyber attacks, and therefore, we invested some time and effort into the strengthening of our defense systems and independent backup solutions at all IT levels in the company to protect the operations of our company, and so therefore, that we can sustainably produce electricity and sell it to our customers. For that, we worked on our data protection system and the security of information system. To be sure that we did everything which is state-of-the-art, we got a certification of a group-wide data protection management system, and this defense system done. Ladies and gentlemen, let's have now a look into the isolated Q2 figures. Before we go to the full first half year, I think it is very good, better to understand the development after the very weak Q1 due to the very weak weather condition, now to understand what happened in Q2. If we have a look on the first line, the energy production, we see that in Q2 2021, we produced 875 GWh of energy compared to 563 GWh in Q2 2020. This is an up of 312 GWh or plus of 55%. This is mainly driven by our new acquisitions. If we take out the new acquisitions, which is not only the 500 MW Spanish solar farm, but wind farms in Germany, Denmark, and Finland as well. We see that the electricity production of Q2 2020 from 515 GW was reduced to 483 GWh, which is a down of 32 GWh or -6%. That is somewhat a positive news. Why? Firstly, Q2 is not really a weak weather, as was Q1 not either. Q1 of previous year and Q1 of previous year was extraordinarily good weather. While we had a shortfall of 100 GWh in the first quarter last year to this year, now that boiled down to a shortfall of 32 GW only, therefore closing the gap. That 32 GWh shortfall due to weather was easily overcompensated by the newer acquisitions. Due to that, in the isolated Q2, we enjoyed an increase of our revenues from EUR 89.6 million in Q2 2020 to EUR 103.3 million in 2021, is an up of EUR 13.7 million or plus of 15%. What we see here now that in EBITDA, EBIT and EPS, we do see a strong increase by 20% compared to previous year's Q2. That is positive news, because I would like to recall the reduced revenue, due to weak weather conditions, drops down to the bottom line of the P&L one to one, while the compensating revenues of new parks are accompanied by cost, and so therefore only the margin drops down to the profit line. It shows you the commercial soundness of our new acquisitions that they could compensate for the shortfall of the weather in Q2. Well, let's now look on the half year figures. As we call you all, although both quarters were weak in weather compared to extraordinarily previous year. If we then have a look in the full half year, then we see that the very weak Q1 is more or less compensated by the much stronger Q2. In total, we could generate 1,411 GWh of electricity compared to 1,120 GWh of previous year's first half, which is still an up of 26% or 291 GWh. While that was a negative deviation Q1, there was a major impact from Q2, and therefore comes out to a positive change in the energy production. Without the new acquisition, so only for the existing portfolio of last year's first quarter and the energy production of this year's first quarter, we see still a reduction in the energy production, and that still is the weak weather, comparably weak weather. In revenues, EBITDA, we already see a positive development where this shortfall of the weak weather is overcompensated by the Spanish parks and the new wind farms. We could generate EUR 162.2 million of revenues compared to EUR 154.8 in last year. The same applies not only to the P&L, only we have slight shortfall still in EBIT and EPS, but are positive that with the further contribution of the Spanish parks and new wind farms during the course of this year, this will be further compensated. We see that the operating cash flow at EUR 109.4 million is slightly below last year's six months. Please have in mind that in the operating cash flow, we not only have the impact of the very weak Q1 2021 compared to previous first quarter, but we have the impact of the very weak Q4 2020 in here as well. Please recall that cash flow and EBITDA are the same in our company, but with a quarter deviation. The EBITDA of Q4, more or less, was cashed in in Q1 this year, and the weak cash of Q1 this year was cashed in in Q2. There's always a delay. Therefore, there is some negative impact in the cash flow. If we then have a look into the consensus, then we see that in the Q2, we exceeded on the average of the analyst consensus and for the half year as well. The impact of the new Spanish parks can be very well seen in the segmentational report. Here, we do see an increase of the revenues of EUR 118.5 million compared to EUR 105.9 previous years. Half year, sorry. Here we do have a positive impact by the Spanish parks of EUR 16.6 million of contribution of revenues. That boils down to the EBITDA and EBIT, and here we could keep up our high margins and have a positive impact on our profit figures. That, although even solar, we have a negative impact from the weather. Compared to previous first half year, we have a EUR 4 million negative revenues and profit impact from very weak weather conditions, not only in Germany, but in U.K. as well. In both countries, we are 12% below the energy production of last year in solar alone. In the Netherlands, similarly, that's -9%. In the wind farms, we see a reduced revenues. Here we have now revenues of almost EUR 36 million compared to EUR 43.6 million of previous year. Here we do have a negative weather impact of EUR 8.2 million and a positive impact of the wind farms, the additional ones. That looks to be small, but please have in mind that specifically the big Danish wind farms were already partially connected to the grid in the first quarter of last year, and therefore contributed already to last year's profit line. Wind is pretty weak this year compared to previous first half year. In Denmark and Germany, the biggest markets we have, we have a shortfall of 22% and 25% respectively in the electricity production. Technical service is running the same like last year. If we have a slump in the EBITDA, then this is due to the last year's reflection of the Stern Energy sale to Stern S.p.A. EUR 1.9 million profit was in the first half year's line. There, that was a special effect which cannot be repeated. The asset management is running very well. While they were very active in the third and fourth quarter last year, they are better off running in the first half year this year, and therefore could already realize EUR 6.8 million of revenues compared to EUR 5 million in the first half of last year. If we then have a short look in our balance sheet and the total balance sheet total, there was not a big movement. We have a slight increase in our retained equity, and therefore do have now an equity ratio of 25.9%, which is up 0.4% compared to last quarter. Having a look into the guidance. Well, we had a look into the guidance, and with most of our KPIs already fulfilling 50% or slightly more of our full year guidance in the midst of the year, we are positive that we will realize this year's guidance. The meteorological effect for us is not really a reason to discuss or to reduce our guidance. The reason for that is, yes, we see in specific markets harsh negative deviations in the meteorological effect. Here, I think you see the beauty of our business, because we are the only pan-European platform and with two technologies. That gives us the chance to diversify even that meteorological risk over the two technologies and over very many different meteorological zones where we have positive and negative developments, and that pays off here. Ladies and gentlemen, I thank you very much for listening. Now I would like to hand over to my colleague, Dierk Paskert. Dierk? Thank you, Christoph, for the explanation of our half year figures. Welcome from my side to the audience. I'm happy to give you now a few views on our strategic outlook. You know that we have found already two, three years ago, a certain way for Encavis to secure at an early stage, projects which we then can bring to the market at later stages. I would like to reiterate a little bit that approach to you and also give you more details of the pipeline ahead of us. We know, and we have been asked many times from various market participants why we are taking this specific approach. We think for Encavis, that's the right way to develop its business. It, on the one hand, gives us a growth or delivers the growth we need. On the other hand, it keeps somehow the specific development risks to a certain level, which we do not want to exceed. Therefore, we stay with our strategy that we are not a developer. We do not want to acquire development companies, but we want to go into partnership agreements with development companies. Last time we spoke, we had 10 of them. Now we are more heading to the 12 partnership agreements. First time we are also now looking at Sweden, not yet secured the projects, but in very, let’s say, detailed discussions. Therefore, we are extending this approach into the market day by day. Last year, if you look at the timeline and you have seen that we have been relatively silent on the market this year, not adding too much to our asset portfolio in the first half year. Why is that? Because there's a certain time lag in the development with strategic partnerships, and you know that this is always only a rough guess when projects come to the next level, so from mid stage to late stage and then to ready to build. We have seen that Corona or COVID-19 had a certain effect there because simply, people were not available, permissions were not granted. Not because the projects were not good, because people were not simply available to take decisions. Therefore, that had slowed down a little bit the development process, at least compared to what we would have seen 18 months ago. This is not significant, and we are pretty confident that we will show some of the projects in the nearest future. If we have a look at this and divide the portfolio in these three different stages, late stage, mid-stage, early stage, we stick to our promise that with the development partnerships and with a very prudent approach, that we are not counting every project, which we are currently seeing, but only take 30%-50% realization of these projects, we still can see a solid growth ahead of us, which will fulfill our strategic plan until 2025. If we have a look at the early stage projects, which we would see 2024, 2025 on our balance sheet, it is roughly around the 2 GW numbers. If we then move up to the mid-stage projects, we can already see slightly below the 1 GW line with a higher probability to be realized, and they would come between 2023 and 2025. The ones which we are definitely most in focus now is late stage and close to ready to build. There we can see 0.5 GW coming within next year, timeframe of next year, so 2022, latest 2023. That gives you a little bit more a feeling on the timeline. We are pretty confident that the strategic development partnerships will pay off, that projects will come. We had a certain delay due to COVID-19, but nothing, let's say, or related to the projects as such. It's simply the timeline we had to look at. With that, I would close, and give you, let's say, from management team, the confidence that we are well on track also for our longer-term targets until 2025. I would then hand over back to the operator who will now take your questions. Thank you very much. Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd like to ask a question, please press nine star on your telephone keypad. Please press nine star on your telephone keypad if you'd like to ask a question. The first question comes from Martin Comtesse from Jefferies. Your line is open. Yes. Good morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my question. I would like to start with three, if that's okay, and then I go back to the queue. First one is, could you remind us of the cash reserves that you currently have for acquisitions? Because you were just referring to the half a gigawatt that you expect to basically materialize within the next year or 18 months. Would that be enough, or how do you think about financing these acquisitions? The second question would be on current sourcing. Do you see any type of price changes, cost pressure because of the abundance of capital that is in the market? Because we see that with all real assets at the moment, basically, that prices are going up. Is that something that you see, too? Lastly, any additions that you would announce in the second half, because you were referring to that in the press release today, additions that are already grid connected, would they come on top of this year's guidance or is that already implied? Thank you. I would like to take the questions one and three, and then Dierk, I would like to ask you question two. First of all, the firepower, as we stated already in the last call, we have EUR 80 million of firepower available for the equity ticket. In addition to that, as you might recall, and this is part of our Fast Forward 2025, we see that with the ongoing amortization of the debt on SPV levels, we create headroom for further debt take up on corporate level to pay for the equity ticket. Overall, the operational growth will be financed by using the debt headroom we have in our group. No equity issuance for the ordinary growth is planned. We are confident that we are successful on that, and the negotiations with the banks are very positive. The second question is whether new acquisitions will be on top of the guidance. In fact, if we buy parks in a substantial way, which are already connected to the grid, this is not included to the guidance we have currently out there, which we have seen during this presentation, again, was based on the capacities which we had in our hands in March this year. Dierk, would you take question two? Yeah. Thank you, Christoph. With regard to prices in the market, yes, definitely we see also that effect, that above all EPC costs have gone up significantly over the last months, and that is headache to everybody who develops and builds projects currently. That's not just on our side. That is headache for everybody in the market. We foresee this trend until the, might be end of next year. That is a challenge which we face and which we have to manage over the next years. That's for everybody in the market. This is not just due to increased cost in modules and other equipment. A big portion of that is transport cost. If you look at transport cost, for instance, for a container lease for a container, it moved up from not far ago, EUR 4,000 up to EUR 20,000 now. It's five times the transport cost. That is a very hefty burden for everything which comes, especially from China. If I look at recent, yesterday, news from close down of harbors in China, that's probably something which doesn't make things better currently. Therefore, that is a challenge we face, which we have to manage, we will manage. As always, we will stay prudent and we'll only do projects which deliver and have the potential to deliver finally also then the expected returns. That's the best way to mitigate this challenge. It is there, so nothing which we can deny. If you might, just following up very briefly. Are you able to quantify that sort of cost increase currently? Is it 10%, 20% on a new build? Yeah. In EPC, it's, I would say roughly, at least 20% and more, just on the EPC cost, compared to, let's say, levels 12 months ago. If not more. It depends always, so when you have secured your EPC. It's definitely 20%, which you can see there. Thank you. The next question comes from Charlotte Friedrichs from Berenberg. Your line is open. Hello. Also three questions, please. The first one, picking up from the previous topic, on cost inflation. Can you give us an overview of how the allocation process basically works with your development partnerships? Does the developer bear the increased cost to you? Is there a sharing mechanism for the development projects that you do have? Second question would be if you can give us an update on PPA pricing environment that you see, for instance, in Germany or in Spain, how that has been developing, if you've become more keen or less keen on any particular regions. Thirdly, on the development partnerships, are you seeing more competition for these types of partnerships or how is that developing? Thank you. Christoph, I would take those questions, if okay, and you, let's say, flip in. Certainly. On cost sharing, yes, there's a certain flexibility built into the partnerships because these movements in the markets are hard to predict, but you know that they will come. Therefore, we have, let's say, minimum IRR targets, and a certain level of, let's say, margin, which we then share if we surpass a certain IRR target. Therefore, in a certain way, let's say, we take half, the developer takes half. It gets more difficult if we come to the minimum IRR line, and then we simply have to negotiate, and that is something which we would then also do. Not every project is already down to the minimum IRR line. That is not the message. If we would come to that level, we would simply have to sit down with the developer and see whether first reaction could be we simply postpone the project and say it's not worthwhile to build it with current EPC costs. We move it 12 months ahead of us. You have to look whether you lose any permits. That is always something to bear in mind. The other way is, the developer cuts its development fee to a certain extent because he wants to build now. That is the kind of negotiation we will be having. PPA pricing, that is the good news, actually. Whereas we see increasing EPC cost, we see also strong markets in terms of PPA pricing. That is the good news. Not only the short-term energy prices have risen significantly over the last months. Also, the outlook for PPA pricing is very promising. Also, if we look above all into the years 2022, 2023, they stay at a very high level or comparatively high level. That is very good, and that can offset a little bit also of the increased cost. Where we do not see so much movement yet is at the longer end, 20 years ahead of us, as you know that we have to calculate 20 to up to 30 years. There we do not see yet that effect, but we are pretty confident that this effect also with increased CO2 costs in Europe will be also shown and reflected into the price curves with a longer outlook, 10 years, 20 years, or even longer. On the competition for partnerships, yes, this approach is not unique to Encavis. Sorry. It's not unique to Encavis. Other companies are trying to find their way and kind of copying it or doing it their way, but not too different from Encavis. Therefore, yes, there's always competition. However, what is appealing for counterparties is that we come with a certain package. First of all, we have all the documentation available, so in terms of contracts and so on. We are experienced in this way. Therefore, I would say that's definitely a plus on our side. Secondly, we also bring to the table financing plus the PPA offtake. That in package, it's appealing for a partner. If you just would buy the project and leave the PPA to the developer, leave financing to the developer, that's probably something which is very competitive. However, if you take PPA and financing on your part, then that's becoming appealing because the developer can really concentrate 100% on the development of the project, and once it's ready, it simply transfers it onto us. That is our approach, and we see there is appetite also in the market for that approach. Yes, there is also competition, but we are still increasing our numbers of strategic partnerships. Have a meaningful impact from your merchant exposed part of the Spanish portfolio in the second quarter? Christoph, would you like to take that or should I take that? I would need to understand the question correctly. What to the commercial impact of our- Of the merchant part. Of the merchant part. Well, I think that. Of the Spanish project. I think that's your turn, isn't it? Okay. Yeah. So, could you take it? There, you know that we left open 25% of the energy volume in Spain, and we have a hedging policy for that also in place. It's not just at the day-ahead market. We are hedging. Currently, we are definitely enjoying the very high market pricing in Spain. That helps definitely also, let's say, within the numbers. Please bear in mind what Christoph said, with regard to the weather. That's also, let's say, with regard to pricing, we always have a portfolio approach, and whereas we keep in certain countries, we might keep certain positions open, we close them 100% in other markets. Therefore, that is always looked at from a portfolio perspective, and it's not that this is one size fits all, that we have the same hedging policy in every market. What is important for us is that overall the hedging fits and that we do not keep too many positions completely open in the market. Currently, we are definitely enjoying the high pricing, not only in Spain, also in Italy, in U.K., where prices exceed the EUR 100 line at the day-ahead market. That is definitely something which helps currently. Thank you very much. The next question comes from Peter Crampton from Barclays. Your line is open. Barclays. Thank you for taking my question. We've got a very big event coming up with the German elections on the 26th of September, and obviously lots of movement in the polls, but it does look very likely you'll get the Green Party in the next government. I was wondering what your kind of expectations were in the next government. Obviously, there's some big CO2 reduction targets for Germany into 2030. Big historic issue, quite difficult building onshore wind and solar on the scale that's needed, and whether there was an opportunity here for Encavis of maybe doing even more in Germany. Thank you very much. Yeah, thank you for that question. I think, first of all, the scene has been set by the European Commission already, and now member states have to follow. That is only a reaction then to what has already been discussed in Europe, and there are ambitious targets. I could even think of more ambitious targets if we look at climate change. I think over time, we might even see more ambitious targets in the years to come. That will be definitely supported by Green Party if it becomes part of the next German government. Therefore, from that perspective, to my expectation, it only can get better. Therefore, I do not see any significant downside from that. It's hard to predict what the specific impact from a green government on the business could be. You know also that we are less, let's say, relying on political movements in Europe or in Germany. We would like to really go into the free and open energy markets for green energy. There we see the biggest effect. The demand for originally produced green energy will boost over the next years. We see that in the PPA markets. Everybody, ESG topics with everybody. That is something which will boost significantly the market. That is above all the market trend we are expecting and which will help us. It will be then, let's say, coupled with political moves and regulatory moves. The free and open markets, that is something we are looking at most and which will help us probably most. Okay. Makes good sense. Thanks for your answer. The next question comes from Jan Bauer. Your line is open. Hello. I hope you can hear me. Thanks for taking my question. I have three. First of all, can you give us a volume indication for Q4? You expect the first parts from your pipeline to be ready to build? Can you give us a cross-feeling of how much in megawatts this will be? Secondly, regarding the pressure on prices or let's say the pressure on IRRs on your side, can you give us a feeling of how much of this price pressure on the cost side will be offset by probably higher or by the current level of PPA prices? The last question would be, so valuation for most IPPs in Europe has been come down a lot since the end of last year. Would maybe be an M&A option be on the agenda for you? Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Christoph, also or if I, let's say, asked first for the first question, volume expectation, you mean for Q4? Yes. Oh. Including, let's say, new projects? Yes, exactly. To be honest, that is really hard to predict. I would now have to figure out which project still will come in Q4 and which might come only in Q1. Therefore, I wouldn't, let's say, from top of my head, would give you now any number. That is something we might figure out and where I would like to give the answer, let's say, a little bit later. It's a little bit speculative. Also, with regard to M&A activities of, let's say, already ready-to-build parks or already connected to the grid parks, which we are also looking at. To give you the number, whether that's 100 MW, and then it's always the question, is it, let's say, wind or is it solar? Wind would have a completely different impact on the energy volume compared to solar. Therefore, forgive me, but I don't want to give that, let's say, answer now from the top of my head. We will look whether we can give you a certain guidance on that. The price offset with regard to PPAs and increased cost and then increased prices for the PPA, as I already said in my previous answer, it is to a certain extent offset on the short-term end. Yes, we see for the next two, three, four years, significantly higher prices on the PPA side, but not yet at the longer end. That is also to be taken into the IRR calculation. Therefore, we expect that this will be reflected in PPA prices longer term also and also then in the price curves longer term. Not yet done. Therefore, we are expecting the next outlooks in autumn. I would expect at least that some of that price increase is also then reflected at the longer end in price curves, but still to be seen. On the M&A side, there's nothing new to be reported, but you are certainly right. The market always offers opportunities, above all in times where prices have come down or where certain players have disappointed the market. That is definitely always something we are mindful of, and we are carefully always looking also on the M&A side, and we have never excluded M&A opportunities, but this will be always on an opportunistic pace, and we can only talk about this once it's done. You are certainly right, there might be opportunities in the market. Okay. Thank you. The last question comes from Teresa Schinwald. Your line is open. Yeah. Good morning, everyone. I have two questions remaining, and they're rather general in concerning the market, rather than your strategy. The first one is on short-term pricing. What's the extent of the impact you observe on the strong day-ahead prices all over Europe? In connection with that, is there an increasing tendency you can observe on merchant-only projects? What's your view on the developments on that side? The second one is also a general take on how many projects could be abandoned given increasing costs on the supply, PPA years last auctions still very competitive, just to give us a better feeling on what's happening there on the realization side. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for those two questions. On short-term pricing, yes, always when prices short term are rising, you are inclined to look more on the merchant side because it gives you, let's say, a certain uplift. However, we have to be mindful that we are in really long-term investments, and the day-ahead market and the next one or two years is only a snapshot in the lifetime of such asset. Therefore, we wouldn't change, just due to rising short-term energy prices, our overall strategy. Therefore, we stay prudent. Also for project financing and leveraging the projects, we stay with our, let's say, basic idea of securing at the long term end with a PPA or with a feed-in tariff, roughly 75% of the energy volume, and then leaving 20%, 25% open at the day-ahead market. Also with a certain hedging strategy, so that doesn't mean that these volumes are completely open. We try only to leave maximum 5% of our yearly turnover open. The rest will be hedged shorter term basis then, and that can be yearly hedges, quarterly hedges, whatever. That is something we are building up. This competence, we are already into that. Our partnership agreement with Statkraft helps us very much in that respect, but also other partners we are onboarding. Therefore, we do not change just due to rising energy prices our overall investment strategy. We are trying to make benefit out of the bullish pricing in the market. With regard to abundance of complete projects, I don't see that we would skip any project completely currently. Maximum, we would move it by a couple of months, but also that is nothing we have decided yet. We are not yet there. If we would see further cost increase on the EPC side, we could come to that stage, but we are not yet there. There's a certain stress on the margins, but it's not to an extent that we would skip complete projects. Okay, great. Thank you. The next question comes from Martin Tessier. Your line is open. Yes. Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Two questions. The first one relates to your pipeline. You mentioned that you have around 500 MW that could come in 2022 or 2023 with a 60%-90% probability. Is it an exclusive access that you have to these megawatts, or other competitors could also buy these projects? Second question is regarding the returns that you observe currently on the ready-to-build parks or on the already operating parks. Could you elaborate a bit more on the difference of returns? Because on the one side, you have higher EPC costs, like 20% increase you mentioned for the RTB parks, and on the other side, we have a high amount of capital with high valuations for the already operating parks. What is the most attractive market today? Thank you. Yes, these are exclusive pipelines. Only if we say no, the developer is free to sell it to somebody else. Therefore, it first has to be evaluated by us. If we don't take the project, the developer can sell it to somebody else. I would say from today's perspective, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't take those projects. Financing is there. Therefore, we are looking for further growth. Above all, as we haven't done too much in the first half year, therefore, I don't see that we would leave too much for other parties. That probably will be absorbed 100% by us. On the return expectations, actually, no news really there. We have built in our return expectations in the partnership agreements already 12, 18 or 24 months ago. With a certain flexibility. That we are not aware, as in Spain, for instance, where we announced that the two big projects we just connected to the grid came with around the 8% IRR. I would definitely say that is, in current markets, not available anymore. We were very lucky that we secured those very big projects at these levels at that time. That is currently not available, and you would definitely have to go a little bit lower. It is not that this is a complete margin erosion. We would still, let's say, foresee IRR levels, which might be 100 basis points below, but not 200 or 300 as some market participants contemplate. Therefore, we think it is, in the current market, still a valid investment. There is competition, definitely, but it's not a complete margin erosion. Thank you. This is different, probably, if I can add that. You have always to compare apples and apples. For strategic development partnerships, you build in this certain flexibility and you give security also on the offtake, so therefore, you can also expect a slightly higher margin. If the developer would take that project simply in an auction in current markets, then you're absolutely right. We are significantly down in the margins. Everything what is auctioned and you have not secured in earlier stages, there you definitely see a high margin erosion. That is definitely the case. Thank you. There are no more questions. Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd like to ask a question, please press nine star. On your telephone keypad, please press nine star if you'd like to ask a question. I think if there are no further questions, I would say thank you. Also, Christoph, on your behalf, thank you for participating in today's call and for all your questions. We hope we have satisfied at least your expectations with our numbers, and we will be out with further news in the months to come on any new projects, and definitely also then with updates on our quarterly results. Thank you very much for participating today, and enjoy the rest of the summer. Thank you. Enjoy the rest of today. Thank you. Bye. Bye.