Good morning, everyone from Düsseldorf. Welcome to our Q1 2022 results call, and thank you for your participation. We have in the call our entire management with our CEO, Lars von Lackum, our CFO, Susanne Schröter-Crossan, as well as our COO, Volker Wiegel. The presentation document, as well as the quarterly report within the IR section of our homepage. Please note that there is also a disclaimer which you'll find on page three of our presentation. Without further ado, I hand over to you, Lars. Thank you, Frank. Good morning also from my side. Our Q1 numbers show that we had a strong start to the year. We grew our FFO 1 by almost 17% to EUR 121 million, clearly benefiting from the acquisitions made last year and from the rent increase of 2.7% achieved for our portfolio on a like for like basis. Our financial and operational KPIs show that we are well on track for our guidance and that we still run a conservative balance sheet with an LTV level of 43% in line with our risk appetite. Moody's just confirmed our Baa1 rating, another proof of our solid and resilient setup. Therefore, we are happy to confirm our guidance for the FFO 1 in the range of EUR 475 million-EUR 490 million in 2022. Our portfolio is attractively positioned when it comes to locations. The same holds true when it comes to market segments. The demand for affordable housing remains high. At the same time, we expect nearly no additional supply due to the lack of material and workforce, the increase in costs and energetic requirements, and all of that on the back of lower state subsidies for new construction. Therefore, we expect another valuation uplift in the order of 6%-7% for H1 2022. At the same time, we are happy to present to you today our new sustainability report, which you find on our webpage. In 2021, we further reduced our carbon footprint by 5%. Location-based, our CO₂ footprint now amounts to 34 kilogram CO₂ equivalent per square meter, compared to 37.6 kilogram at the end of 2020. The respective market-based numbers shrunk from 34 kilograms to 32.3 kilograms CO₂ equivalent per square meter. As presented to you already last year with our ESG agenda, ESG is an integral part of our strategy and business. It provides challenges, but we believe it also offers opportunities, relevant, tangible business opportunities to us. We therefore strive to become a solutions provider and drive the required change. Together with the renowned Austrian construction company, Rhomberg, founded RENOWATE. The joint venture develops serial refurbishment solutions. Its products will come to the market by the end of 2023. The idea behind RENOWATE is to reduce the costs and the required time for energetic refurbishments by standardizing and utilizing the processes as well as to develop an industrialized product. The approach addresses simultaneously cost sensitivity of tenants as well as scarcity of craftsmen. We'll later provide you with some more details. Furthermore, we provided more than 300 flats to refugees from the Ukraine since the beginning of the war in late February. This support is done via the strong effort of the entire LEG team. Our team supports refugees not only to find flats, but also when it comes to finding furniture, food, toys, and supporting with administrative challenges. I want to thank all of my colleagues who dedicate a substantial amount of their spare time to support Ukrainians in need for shelter and help. While we are proud of our progress in ESG matters, we consider ourselves to be well-positioned for every type of challenge from a fast changing environment. Our lean setup allows us to quickly adapt to a changing environment. I would like to provide you with some more details on our setup on the following slide. I am now on page seven. Overall, we believe our business setup offers a low risk profile on the back of a strong balance sheet. It allows us to quickly adapt to a changing environment. Firstly, no surprise to you, I guess, as you have heard us over the past years and nothing has changed. We are a pure play. We focus entirely in German residential, and within residential, we focus on only one target customer group and one asset class, affordable housing. Additionally, we are active only in our core markets in Western Germany. We do not operate in foreign markets with different languages, currencies, regulations. Therefore, we are exposed to lower complexity than our peers. Secondly, our business focus is coupled with a strong and clean balance sheet. We have almost no upcoming maturities until 2024, and with an equity ratio of 4%, we operate on the basis of a strong balance sheet. Our LTV stands at 43%, and our rolling net debt to EBITDA amounts to 13.5x. Thirdly, we always pointed out that given our focused business approach, development activities have always been only a minor exposure for us. We shied away from building up a huge own development pipeline or engage in corporate M&A in this area. By that, we avoided the long tail risks of that business, like cost risk, price risk, or in the case of build to sell, distribution risk, which all come with it. I believe our decision to be underexposed proves us to be right. In our development business, we follow a gradual approach. On the one hand, we buy turnkey ready projects and forward deals from reputable, experienced third-party developers. For those projects, we do not bear the price risk. On the other hand, we do own developments, mainly on own land via redensification. Our current development pipeline comprises an investment volume of around EUR 1 billion. This represents just around 5% of our current GAV to put this number in perspective. Around 40% of the EUR 1 billion are based on third-party development projects with fixed prices. The third-party developer bears the price risk. The remainder are own development projects, which are either almost completed, fixed in pricing, or are in such an early planning phase that we can easily withdraw or completely cancel this, the projects. The investment volume for which we bear the price risk amounts to only EUR 100 million or 0.5% of our current GAV. The majority is allocated to our beacon projects in Monheim and Euskirchen. There, in cooperation with Goldbeck, we want to create affordable new housing using serial and modular construction. Therefore, rising construction costs do not cause us sleepless nights, excuse me, and are no risk for our strong balance sheet, neither in absolute nor in relative terms. The rising costs and the uncertainty regarding state subsidies for new developments drove our decision to reduce our targets for that part of our business. We do not plan to reach a number of 1,000 flats per annum starting from 2026, but we remain more cautious by targeting a number of 500 by 2023. Fourthly, integration risks are not a major risk for LEG. Although the recent acquisition of 15,000 units from Adler Group was the biggest transaction for LEG, it was simply bread and butter business. In 2021, we added 15% of units to our platform. 100% fall within our asset class of affordable housing. They just came at a larger scale. We onboarded the portfolio swiftly. We transferred the data on day one into our IT platform. If and as far as necessary data was not available in digital format, we digitalized all required information needed and fed it into our systems. At the same time, we implemented our processes and intensively trained the new colleagues to help them to adapt to the LEG processes and standards. We did not have to deal with different corporate structures, processes, or IT systems. Therefore, the level of complexity for this integration was very manageable for LEG. Finally, we can quickly adjust our business. Therefore, we do not fear the challenges which might be ahead of us. We have a low-risk profile set up in a very stable asset class that will more than ever benefit from structural demand. We can quickly adjust to changes in the environment, and this is what we did already. First, we significantly increased our disposal program to 5,000 units from an original 300 units-500 units. This allows us to also benefit from the current disconnect of the public and private market prices. I will also try to shed some more light on why we believe in the persistence of the supply-demand gap, especially in our asset class of affordable housing. Second, as already mentioned above, we also reacted in respect to our development program. As it is just a small platform, we quickly adjusted our plan in order to further de-risk our balance sheet. Although we just increased our new build target to 1,000 units by 2026 last year, we now withdraw that target for the time being, in particular, while the future subsidy regime of the federal government remains unclear at this point. That brings down future capital spend. As explained, we have a high flexibility anyway, as we never ran this big scale. Based on the projects already acquired, we will reach our 2023 ambition of 500 units. However, we do not give further guidance for the years beyond. Based on our current pipeline, completions would come in at a lower level based on what is fixed today. Third, the same holds true for our BCP stake and option. We have full flexibility. Let me quickly recap where we stand today with the current stake in and option on BCP. With regards to our stake in BCP. Meanwhile, we hold 35% of BCP, which we acquired on average at a 10% discount versus BCP's last reported NTA. Together with the option on slightly more than 63% in the company, we hold the keys in our hands to delist BCP at some point. According to our lawyer's assessment, with a bigger than 98% stake, we and the other owner are more than safe for the delisting. To get across that level, we bought some more shares in the market over the last weeks. As always, a delisting is the precondition for any owner to generate full value, especially to realize all operational and financial synergies. Regarding the option in BCP. It runs until the end of September 2022 and entitles us to buy the shares at a price of 157 EUR per share. We still have time to continue our financial, tax, and legal due diligence and then decide on the best use of that option. Currently, we are amid the due diligence and analyze together with external consultants the recently filed documents. You should be aware that BCP already published their financial report for 2021 on the 24th of March. That report is available on BCP's webpage. The report has been audited and received an unqualified opinion by KPMG. Within the coming months, we will decide on the best use of that option for us. In general, we see a high level of optionality for the stake and the option. From today's perspective, all options are on the table. We can sell the stake, remain a minority shareholder, or exercise the option, potentially together with a capital partner. We believe BCP offers a high level of optionality given a strong standalone residential portfolio, but also offering exposure to 3 highly attractive development projects in Düsseldorf. This could be interesting for us as well as for third parties. We are certainly aware that the BCP stake and option is of importance to you. Rest assured it is of utmost importance for us as well. We are aware that the environment has changed since we announced the transaction in early December. We know our share price level, and we will certainly take this into account when thinking about potential next steps. Let's now move to slide 8. From my perspective, it is important to build a joint understanding for the main drivers of the market. We see an immigration wave steadily reaching Germany. 600,000 refugees from Ukraine are looking for shelter in Germany. Those people enter a residential, especially that for affordable housing, which is already fully rented out. Vacancies are at record lows. Still, the Federal Employment Agency demands a yearly immigration of 400,000 skilled workers to Germany to make up for the decrease in the German workforce as baby boomers are now entering retirement. At the same time, new construction is about to get softer due to higher financing costs, lack of additional craftsmen capacity, supply shortages, higher energy efficiency requirements, and no or lower state subsidies. This means that the ambitious new construction targets of our new government turn out to be more or less unrealistic. At the same time, we expect fluctuation to come down again if and when the economic situation deteriorates. In these times, tenants prefer to stay in their flats. They do not start to seek for bigger, maybe higher priced flats, also to avoid moving costs. Therefore, structurally, the supply-demand imbalance should even widen. There's just no quick fix available to reverse the situation. This holds even more true for our asset class of affordable housing. Rents of just about EUR 6 per square meter cannot be achieved for new build homes as construction costs currently go up by double-digit rates. Additionally, we believe that our portfolio offers an attractive yield, even against the backdrop of the latest rise in yields. There is still a positive spread of more than 300 bps versus the ten-year bond. Moreover, we expect at our end, further valuation uplift and a rent increase of 3%. We are convinced that we own an asset class and a balance sheet which should do well in an inflationary environment. Real assets should appreciate in prices. Rents will follow price trends. For our subsidized units, which make up for around 33,000 units, that will happen strictly in line with CPI. For our free rent apartments, it will also happen, but with a bit of a time lag due to the 6-year look-back period of the rent tables. Moreover, we have long-term financial liabilities locked in at an average interest rate of 1.16%. Certainly, this will rise once we start refinancing. However, this is still 2 years down the road, and it will happen only gradually. With this, let me briefly touch on our carbon balance sheet on slide 9. In our carbon balance sheet, our figures are based on actual consumption in the year 2020 and then extrapolated for 2021, as the billing always takes place in the year following the year of consumption. Our data have limited assurance from Deloitte, which is the highest level of confirmation in this field. Please take special note that we cover 100% of our portfolio. From the scale at the bottom right of the slide, you can also see how our buildings are distributed across the various energy efficiency classes. On average, the consumption per square meter is 144.5 kWh per m² and reflects the construction years of our assets. As a provider of affordable housing, we have an above average share of units built in the fifties, sixties, and seventies. Let's now move to our path towards climate neutrality. I would like to explain to you our figures and show you where we stand versus our ambition and our plans. Now on slide 10. For LEG, ESG topics have the same priority as the financial targets. We are therefore constantly striving for improvements in this area, not only in our actions, but also in the quality of our ESG reporting. We have reported on our CO₂ reduction in the past, but we are now going to present the relevant figures in a more meaningful way. Looking at slide 10, you can see that we are now disclosing both location-based figures and market-based figures. Furthermore, we present climate-adjusted figures to exclude distortions due to weather fluctuations. Both metrics are important for international climate initiatives and should support us in our conversations with those organizations and rating agencies. We are fully committed to the Federal Climate Change Act to achieve climate neutrality by 2045. We are pleased we could make significant progress in 2021. Overall, we reduced the CO₂ emissions of our portfolio by 5% to 32.3 kilograms CO₂ equivalent per sq m on a market-based approach. On a location-based calculation, it was -5.4% to 34.7 kilograms CO₂ equivalent per sq m. What are the key drivers of this development? First, this is due to our refurbishment measures. In 2021, we completed energetic refurbishment for 3.5% of our units, outperforming our target of 3%. In addition, we realized that we have a better footprint, especially with our district heating grid than originally assumed. Based on both metrics, you can find our 2024 and 2025 targets, which are part of our LTR components, therefore directly linked to management's remuneration system. There is a slide on our remuneration system on page 27 in the appendix. For more information on ESG, please take a look at our sustainability report 2021, which was all released today and which is available on our website. With this, I hand it over to Volker, who will give you some background on the operational performance. Thank you, Lars, and good morning, everybody from my side. In comparison to our full year 2021 presentation, the changes on this slide are very limited. Our total portfolio grew by roughly 150 units in the last three months to approximately 166,300 units, reflecting our highly opportunistic approach with regard to further acquisitions. In comparison to Q1 2021, our current portfolio size corresponds to an increase of 15%. At the end of fiscal year 2021, the share of properties outside NRW amounted to 20% at the end of Q1. Our units are well balanced with regard to their market category. 30% are in both the high growth and higher yielding markets, and 40% in the stable markets. Let's go into details now. The increase in units of roughly 150 in Q1 2022 is composed of roughly 400 additions to our portfolio and roughly 250 disposals. The additions were in locations where we have had already a considerable amount of units. As of now, the net increase of units in Q2 will be below 200 units. In Q3, we will have, as of now, 450 additions to our portfolio. Partly, these are still acquisitions agreed on already last year, but transfer of ownership lasted longer than expected. The small number of acquisitions underlines that we are very selective when it comes to new acquisitions. In order to gain maximum market transparency, we are screening the market regularly, but you should not expect any bigger portfolio transaction from us in the current market environment. As you may remember, we announced to sell up to 5,000 units in the current fiscal year. However, the date when these units will leave our portfolio is not yet defined. The sales team's focus is nearly exclusively on getting the envisaged disposals of assets done this year, which is nearly tenfold the number being sold in a regular business year. We are now coming to slide number 13 and the rent development. In comparison to Q1 2021, the in-place rents grew by 2.7% to €6.20 on a like-for-like basis. Rent table adjustments contributed 1.4%, while modernization and reletting contributed 1.3%. The in-place rent for our free finance units increased by 3.2% to €6.58 on a like-for-like basis. The in-place rent for our rent restricted units increased to 0.4% to EUR 4.99 on a like-for-like basis. The next adjustment of cost rents will take place in 2023. Keep in mind that those adjustments will be driven by the CPI development, i.e., for 33,000 units or around 30% of our portfolio, we are inflation hedged. The in-place rent of our free finance units grew the most in stable markets with 3.5%, followed by the high growth markets, 3.1%, and the higher yielding markets with 2.9%. Overall, we believe that we are very well on track to reach our 3.3% like-for-like rent growth target this year. Let us now move on to slide 14. On this page, I would like to highlight that we had again a very positive development of our EPRA vacancy rate on a like for like basis. It declined by 40 basis points to 2.4%, which means that we are basically fully let with regards to the units that belong to our portfolio since at least 12 months. With -70 basis points, the vacancy rate decline was most pronounced in the higher yielding markets. You might have already spotted in our quarterly report that our actual EPRA vacancy stood at 3% at the end of Q1 2022. This higher figure is a result of the acquisitions we made in the course of the fiscal year 2021. In particular, the portfolio report from Adler has a higher vacancy rate in comparison to the units we have developed over the last years. To mention here are, for example, the roughly 7,000 units in Wilhelmshaven with a vacancy rate of 7.9%. We are currently actively working to set up processes to speed up refurbishment rates as a prerequisite to bring down vacancy there. We see an attractive, stable demand in these markets. The decision by the German government to establish a liquid gas hub for Germany in Wilhelmshaven, as well as the envisaged additional EUR 100 billion to increase military spending, including the naval forces based there, should be supportive for the local residential market as well. In the last 12 months, we were very particularly successful in reducing the vacancy rate in sizable markets such as Düsseldorf by 110 basis points to 1.2% and Gelsenkirchen by 160 basis points to now 7%. Coming to slide 15 and our investments. Overall, our investments increased by only 4.2% to EUR 98.2 million, despite having 15% more units in our portfolio. That means that the investment per square meter, among other adjusted for our own development activities, declined by 16.4%. In particular, the turn cost contributed to that decline in Q1. Overall, CapEx declined by 6% to EUR 60.1 million, as you can see from the chart. The decline highlights our cost discipline also in the area of CapEx spend, given the currently more volatile market environment with increasing construction costs. However, you should not expect a similar development in the next quarters. This means that we expect CapEx spending to increase in the following quarters as we continue to invest into our portfolio. However, we will limit spending strictly to EUR 46-48 per square meter, which we guided for. In case of further cost increases, we will withdraw, reduce, or postpone projects. At the same time, we confirm our target of 4,000 tons of CO₂ reduction from modernization projects. Easily to be concluded that we do not cut any project at the expense of our ESG strategy. On my last slide, which is slide 16, I would like to introduce to you a real operational as well as strategic highlight, our joint venture, RENOWATE. The name comes from the words renovate and now. We wanted to express that we need to find a solution to quicker and cheaper modernization of real estate now, as we just cannot wait any longer if we want to make sure to reach our climate targets by 2045. The energetic refurbishment is one of the key drivers to get housing climate neutral. With this joint venture, we expand our value chain into the EUR billion market of energetic serial modernization of properties. RENOWATE is a one-stop shop. We offer everything that is needed to refurbish a property, measuring of building, planning, production, and installation, as well as the linkage to optimize subsidies. The key goal is to reduce time, manpower, and consequently, the investment to make the climate goals realistic. The joint venture partner is the Austrian Rhomberg Group, an innovative, internationally operating construction company with about 3,400 employees. The concept foresees measuring the existing buildings with drones and turning the collected data into a digital twin. That is the starting point for the planning process. Afterwards, the modular envelope components for the building are produced industrially and delivered just in time to the construction site. Finally, the modules will be put on the existing building. The energy supply, i.e., new heating systems and/or solar modules, will be sourced and installed by the joint venture as well. Our initial investment is limited to a low double-digit EUR million amount and includes the cost for 10 LEG pilot projects with more than 200 flats. The first project is scheduled to be completed this summer. After an R&D focused trial period of about 2 years, we plan to scale up the processes, deepen the value chain, and to offer the product to third parties, which provides us a CapEx light growth opportunity and taps a multi-billion EUR market potential. With this, I hand over to Susanne and to the financials. Thanks a lot, Volker, and good morning from my side. I will continue with slide 18 and the development of our key P&L items. During the first quarter, net cold rent rose strongly by 17.3% or EUR 29 million to EUR 197 million, driven by our acquisitions, which accounted for more than 80%. The recurring net rental and lease income, which is the net rental and lease income adjusted for special effects, was up 16.1% on the previous year. Apart from net cold rent, there was a higher contribution from value-add services. Contrary to that, there was an increase in staff costs as 275 new colleagues were onboarded, most of them joining us from Adler. Adjusted EBITDA grew by 16.8% to EUR 147 million. The EBITDA margin was nearly stable at 74.5%. As you know from previous years, some items are not evenly distributed over the year. We expect some rebalancing throughout the year and are confident to reach our EBITDA margin target of around 75% by year-end. The FFO one reached EUR 121 million. That's plus 16.6% overall and plus 16% on a per share basis. For the detailed drivers of FFO, let us now move to the next slide. With EUR 20.2 million, the highest contribution to our FFO one came from the acquisitions in 2021 that show their full impact in 2022. This is followed by rent increases in the existing portfolio with EUR 4.8 million. Furthermore, lower cash taxes had a positive impact, as well. EUR 1.1 million from the biomass heating plant, which are included in the item others, contributed as well. We benefited from higher energy prices here. Higher cash interest had an opposite effect of EUR 6.3 million. These higher costs are directly linked to the increased financing volume driven by our acquisitions from 2021, funded by the issuance of corporate bonds. The acquisitions also account for slightly higher operating costs, mainly staff costs, as already explained. Now we are coming to slide 20. Our portfolio still offers an attractive yield, which amounts to 4.3% up 10 basis points year-on-year 2021 following the integration of the assets bought from Adler. The gross value per square meter stood at EUR 1,713 on average at the end of Q1, ranging from EUR 1,162 per square meter in the higher-yielding markets to EUR 2,419 per square meter in the higher growth markets. We believe these are still conservative figures in times when there is so much talk of strong demand for affordable housing and a surge of construction costs. Our total gross asset value, including a very small commercial portion, now amounts to EUR 18.8 billion, including leasehold, land value, and assets under construction. The gross asset value is EUR 19.3 billion. We continue to do our portfolio valuation twice a year. For the upcoming valuation date, as of June thirtieth, we expect a further uplift in the portfolio in the range of 6%-7%. Let's now move to slide 21. The bar chart on the left-hand side shows our maturity profile and underlines the fact that maturities for LEG until fiscal year 2024. It includes the EUR 1.5 billion bond that we used to refinance the bridge loan for the acquisition financing of last year's Adler portfolio acquisition. The bond was issued in three tranches maturing in 2026, 2029, and 2034 respectively. Overall, and from a year-on-year perspective, our average interest cost came further down by 13 basis points to 1.16%. The average debt maturity is now 7.3 years. Our financial profile continues to be well-balanced and solid. The latter is also underlined by a hedging ratio of around 95% and a net debt to EBITDA ratio of 13.5x. Our LTV stands at 43.1%, which is in line with our risk appetite. You should be aware that we adjusted our calculation in line with market practice and in agreement with our auditor to allow for the inclusion of stakes in other companies, here in particular BCP, as assets, and to include short-term deposits as cash. We have adjusted the previous year's figures accordingly for reference. Overall, this results in an LTV of 43.1% at the end of the reporting period versus 42.1% at the end of 2021. You can find the details on slide 33 in the appendix to our presentation. With this, I hand it back to Lars for the guidance. Thank you, Susanne. I am now on page 23 with our guidance. Overall, our guidance remains unchanged. We confirm our FFO 1 target range of EUR 475 million-EUR 490 million. This should be based on an EBITDA margin of around 75%. As always, our guidance does not include income from acquisitions or disposals. We confirm our disposal target for up to 5,000 units. The sales team is supported by all available resources of the acquisition team to make sure that we reach that target. The team is already in discussion with several interested parties on different portfolios. The financial effect of the disposals on the 2022 financials depends on the timing of the transfer of ownership. At the same time, we are very, very selective on the acquisition side as we are aware of our share price level. However, we continue to screen the market to gain the market price transparency and to allow us to act opportunistically. Execution of acquisitions and the further treatment of the stake in an option on BCP depends on the market environment. Let me reiterate that for BCP, we will evaluate all options, including a non-execution of the option, a sale of our stake, or the execution of the option backed by an equity partner. On the investment side, we confirm a level of EUR 46-48 per square meter. You can rest assured that this figure will not inflate due to rising costs. We will rather cut down on investments than spending more, certainly safeguarding our commitment to reduce our CO₂ footprint in line with our climate path. With this, I come to the end of today's presentation. My colleagues and I are now very happy to take your questions. Thank you, Lars. With this, we begin the Q&A session, and I hand it over to you, Narubi. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we will begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wish to ask a question may press star followed by one on their touch-tone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star followed by two. If you're using speaker equipment today, please lift the handset before making your selections. Anyone who has a question may press star followed by one at this time. One moment for the first question, please. The first question is from the line of Andres Toome from Green Street Advisors. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. I was just wondering, since you are running at the moment both acquisition and sales processes, could you maybe give some pricing anecdotes from that, what you're seeing in the bidding trends in the last month or so, as we've seen financing costs increase significantly on the debt side? Are there any potential repricings that you have seen on the back of that? Yeah, very happy to do so. Good morning, Andres, and thanks for your question. Yeah. We are active on the acquisition as well as on the sales side. Honestly, there has been no impact so far from the rising interest rates on the acquisition processes or on the sales processes. The demand is still incredibly high. The number of people within certain processes has not eased. Also, there has been no repricing of any transactions which we have been aware. Everything seems to be very intact in the market. Therefore, we already, and that was what we tried already during our March call to give you a bit of an insight of what we have seen in the market, and that's now being reflected in that valuation uplift of 6%-7%, which we are expecting for H1 2022. Thanks for that. Just wondering, given the deteriorating cost of capital that you are seeing, and you are being more conservative, kind of in your guidance as well when it comes to external growth, could it be possible that we don't actually see any acquisitions this year? Yeah. At least I think you can be quite confident as long as we have that share price level, we will definitely not look for bigger portfolios. There might be opportunities in the market, but unfortunately, due to the current price level, we will not be able to take advantage of those. It's interesting to be in the market, get as much market transparency. It's also very helpful for the sales side that, let the BCP option aside, bigger portfolios are currently not something we are looking at. Thanks for that. My final question is about financing costs that you are seeing from the bank side. Any indication on that would be helpful. Yes, of course, Andres. Obviously the rising interest rates also have an impact on the bank financing. On the spread side, the situation is quite stable on the bank side. Currently the differential between the banks market as well as the corporate bond market for like, let's say, example, 10-year financing is around 1%. We look at our bonds where they're trading, the bank financing is about 1% inside of those levels. Perfect. Thank you very much. The next question is from the line of Thomas Neuhold from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Hi. Morning, everybody. A question on BCP. I mean, thanks for the update you've provided. Wondering if you could provide a bit more color on what are your key considerations to decide on whether to execute the BCP option or not. I mean, I understand there's a strategic value for the delisting option, I would say. Also maybe how do you see the chance for JV structure here? Finally, what would be the financing terms for this transaction currently? Yeah. Thanks a lot for the questions, Thomas. With regards to BCP, once again, I'm very happy to once again share, we are in the midst of doing diligence. As you can imagine, there have been publications of the company as well as of the mother company. What we are currently doing with external consultants' help, look very deeply into all the documents which have been provided and do a proper tax, legal, and financial due diligence on that issue. As you can easily imagine also it is that we want to do and, as always, come up with utmost care and looking at the assets, that's also something which we are doing in parallel. Being as comfortable as possible with the complete portfolio, not only on the existing assets, but also on the three development plots, which are based, all of them in Düsseldorf, Benrath, Gerresheim and Grafenberg, sound similar but are quite different animals. All of that takes quite a lot of time, and we will do all that due diligence with utmost care. As long as we do not feel convinced that we've seen everything, that we have a proper view of all the opportunities as well as risks in the company, we will not come up with a decision. With regards to looking into the option of a joint venture, certainly we have started to have first talks in the markets, with different interested parties, and the interest in the market is enormous. Plenty of players as well as investors being very, very interested to look into an option to acquire BCP jointly together with us. All of those talks certainly are at the beginning. We have not yet shared any data with them, because before we do that, we want to be sure that we've seen everything and that we really feel comfortable to perhaps then go down the route of a possible execution of that option. With regards to the financing, as you can easily imagine, financing is existent within the company, so no immediate need to refinance all of that. Certainly part of the consideration is also to optimize the financial side of the company. That would also be something if we would decide for an execution of the option, which once again is only one of the options. Non-execution of the option is also on the table, as well as the sale of the stake is on the table. Therefore, looking at that, in detail and certainly making that part of our decision-making going forward. Okay. Thank you. Maybe one question on your underlying acquisition target of the 7,000 units, which I think you have reiterated basically. At the same time, you also say that external growth options are to be evaluated. I mean, can you provide some color here, what we can expect? Yeah. I think you can expect that it will be incredibly difficult to reach that 7,000 units target if you are not doing bigger portfolio deals. Those which we have also ruled out during today's call, because that seems to be something at the current share price level we do not feel comfortable with. Smaller additions, taking advantage of smaller opportunities, sometimes because they are mispriced or offer a substantial upside from our perspective, certainly we want to have the freedom and flexibility to take advantage of and then to execute. But it will be, if we are not doing the BCP option, nearly impossible to reach that 7,000 units target. Therefore, once again, we are very, very selective on the acquisition side. Okay, that's helpful. My last question is actually on your property valuation guidance of 6%-7%, which you expect in the first half, which I think is even more than previously expected. I mean, I'm sure you talked to CBRE, the appraiser. I mean, what is the key driver for that? Because it's somehow counterintuitive given the rate hike recently. Yeah. Thank you, Thomas, for the question. You're absolutely right. Of course, we are in very close discussions with CBRE on the topic, and certainly they have also confirmed our views here. What is driving the valuation uplift is really a combination of the transaction multiples that we are seeing from transactions in the market, the prices that are being paid for transactions in the market. That is at the end of the day driven by the strong demand which we've mentioned, I think, a couple of times also in today's call, for the product. We have not yet seen an impact from rising interest rates on the multiples that are being paid in the transaction market. I think you're also aware from previous calls that obviously what is driving valuation in the first half is to an extent also transactions towards the end of last year and the beginning of this year. There's always a bit of a time lag also in terms of when you would see an impact. Again, so far, no impact visible in terms of multiples that's really driving the valuation uplift we are expecting. Okay. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Jonathan Kownator from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I have three questions, if I may please. The first one on organic growth and your target of 3%, how do you think this is going to evolve with inflation? You say that part of your portfolio, the restricted part is CPI linked, but not every year. And also as a corollary to that question, what are you seeing in terms of market rent evolution for the free units in the market? Are you seeing any rental growth acceleration given the current environment and the limited availability to that? First question, I think we can probably start by that. Thank you. Thanks, Jonathan. Happy to take the question. Yeah, you pointed rightly out that the subsidized units are linked to CPI. We have the next adjustment in 2023, so just next year, where we will have the average on the cost inflation for the last three years reflected in the adjustment. We cannot give you precise numbers for the increase we will see there as we need to collect the data from this year. The data, the CPI development from this year will go directly into the adjustment for these 2% of the portfolio in the subsidized market. On the market rent for new let buildings or new let flats, sorry, we see very attractive demand, as you also can see in our reduced vacancy rates. Yes, we see an increase in prices there exactly in line with the CPI or sometimes also so above it and sometimes below it. That depends very much on the market, but we see very active demand and also contributing to higher prices there for the newly rented flats. Effectively from that 3% level, and you're not touching the modernization level, it's fair to expect then that that's going to increase with inflation, correct? Sorry, Jonathan, I didn't really get the question. I was just asking whether- We Whether there was any mitigating factor to think about when we think about the evolution of that 3%? Inflation should drive that up, but are there any mitigating factors here that we need to think about? Yeah. No, right. Inflation should drive this up in the future. This year we reiterated the 3% guidance. Okay. We will give you an updated guidance then in November. All right. Thank you. Next question was on regulation. How are you seeing the environment evolve here? I mean, obviously some investors are concerned, and we could see more regulation with some caps in your ability to increase rents. What is your opinion there, and what are you seeing around you on this topic? Do you think the government is gonna come up with with more measures as was expected early on, but we haven't seen anything? Thank you. Yeah, Jonathan. For the time being, I think politicians in Germany, like all over the world, seem to be completely absorbed with the Ukrainian crisis and as well as, especially in the case of Germany, finding a solution for the dependency of the German economy from Russian fossil fuel imports. That seems to be top of their agenda, and then there is just nothing else. All the other changes, like increases in military spending, which we came across during our presentation, everything seems to be directly connected to that crisis. Therefore, currently, we are not aware of any discussions going on the federal level with regards to additional regulation. That is something where we cannot shed more light on. There is just no one being discussing that topic at the current moment. Whether this is going to come up over the next months, certainly I cannot see, but I strongly doubt it. There is only one topic which has recently been raised, Minister of Construction. That is the ability for communities to buy in transaction processes. That right has been removed due to a court ruling in Germany. The first proposal now is being discussed very intensely, but strongly opposed by the Minister of Justice, who is from the federal party. That is something which helps you to get a better assessment. It also seems to be that at least among the governing parties, the idea of additional regulation for our market seem to differ widely. Also that might be a help for keeping away politicians of doing more regulations to our markets. Okay. Thank you. One very last quick question. You said there was enormous interest for partners on the BCP stake, and we talked also about the acquisition market. Can you perhaps shed a bit of light on the type of buyers that you see out there? Are these buyers without requirements for debt? Are these the leverage buyers who remains active in the space? Is most important at this stage. Yeah. Certainly, the big state funds, sovereign wealth funds are being active. There are pension funds as well as insurers being very active, and those are certainly the type of potential joint venture partners or equity partners we have reached out to during that BCP option and evaluating that going forward. That is the type of investors we have spoken to, and interest once again has been incredibly high. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Kai Klose from Berenberg. Please go ahead. Hey, yes. Good morning. I've got two quick questions on page 34 of the presentation. First one, could you indicate or give more comments on the increase of the allowance on rent receivables? I think it might be because of the acquisitions we did in Q4, but maybe you could comment and also comment how that might develop over the next coming quarters. We had a positive cash tax item after a negative one in Q1 last year. Maybe you could comment on that as well. Thanks. Sure. Very happy to, Kai. Firstly on the rent receivables, you are correct. It is related indeed to the acquisitions. We have taken a slightly cautious approach here, and we expect this to normalize and even out over the course of the full- year. In terms of the tax, it's a special effect that comes in fact from the difference in the German tax accounting and IFRS and relates to the sale we made from some of the parts of the portfolio. I think this is a very sort of German tax specific aspect and, if you want to take this offline and do a follow-up discussion on that, happy to do so as well if you would like. Thanks so much. The next question is from the line of Marios Pastou from Société Générale. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I just got a couple of follow-ups, actually. Firstly on BCP. Can I just check whether you're still considering a full acquisition yourselves or whether you would only consider now in the current markets an equity partner? Just a bit of guidance there. Just on your acquisition ambition, can I just confirm again that if the BCP option went ahead, that acquisition ambition will fall away effectively, that it won't be an additional number of units if financing environments allowed that to happen on top of BCP? Yeah. Thanks a lot and good morning. Marios, with regards to your question, with regards to BCP and our current share price level, I cannot imagine how we could execute the option without a partner. That's just not working with the current level, with regards to cost of capital we are currently running at. Second question with regards to acquisition. No, the 7,000 are not on top of BCP. That is something which we can definitely rule out. Very happy to also once again reiterate that we will be near. It will be nearly impossible to reach the 7,000, but if we are not going to do the BCP deal, because the size of the portfolios we are currently working on and looking at, within with regards to our acquisition department, they are quite small portfolios and very much opportunistic and very much driven by certain situations which might give us the chance to benefit from special situations in the market. That is something which we are definitely not going to do on top, on the BCP transaction if we would decide to do that. Very helpful. Thank you. Just finally on the Renowate, I appreciate it's fairly early, and this is potentially going to be offered to third parties, from 2023 or beyond 2023. Is there any guidance at this stage of how large that could be? Are we thinking more of a extension of your services business in terms of the level of FFO contribution, or is this something which could be more significant? Marios, happy to take your question. As you pointed out correctly, it's a bit too early to give you any more guidance. We started this R&D phase of about 2 years and set ourselves ambitious goals there and set up the processes to bring down costs. We committed ourselves to bring down, or we set the goal to bring down costs by about 30% versus everything that can be bought as a comparable product in the market right now. To decide on how to scale this business up. We consider it as a very attractive market that we want to tap there, and we are very, very convinced that we have a perfect partner for this on our side with the Rhomberg Group, who is very innovative in doing construction business in a very innovative way, so that we are really confident to gain knowledge how to make very cost efficient and speedy serial modernization measures. We will then provide you with more details how to scale it up. Very helpful. Thank you very much. The next question is from the line of Paul May from Barclays. Please go ahead. Hi, everyone. Thanks for taking the question. I've got three sort of, I suppose, clarification points. On the first one, you've obviously adjusted your acquisition targeting and thinking due to increased cost of capital, but then you say effectively nobody else in the market has done so, in terms of the private market remaining very well bid. I just wonder, is that a view of yours that the private market will change and you're taking advantage of the situation to dispose now, or that you don't believe it will change? I'm just trying to reconcile, 'cause I consider yourselves to be, you know, fairly at the forefront of this in terms of, you know, the forward thinking and the ability to generate returns. I'm just wondering if you can't do it, why can others at these sort of levels? If you want to take that one first, I've got the other two to follow up thereafter. Yes. I'm very happy to at least answer that question, Paul. You're right, certainly with increasing interest rates, in the past, we have seen also declining values. This time it seems to be really different, and we just try to point that out with regards to the new development activity. What you currently see and the construction and completion numbers are just those of the past, because people have certainly been able to find workforce, to find material, to find cheap financing. All of that is going to be completed over the next two years. After that, there will be a big gap. The big gap certainly being driven by the fact that we are lacking the workforce, we are lacking material, we are facing tremendous, really tremendous inflationary rates on material costs, unprecedented at least in the market for many, many years. Finally, then we have those rising financing costs. All of that, and on top of that, you are aware of that already. State subsidies have come to an end. There will be no state subsidies since April until the end of 2022. Get clarity about the new realization regime, perhaps in Q4 this year. Then certainly everyone needs to plan again, so there will be, before you have then first handing in of those documents, another half a year. At least for that one and a half year, nothing will happen on the new development site. At the same time, we are in desperate need for immigrants, skilled workers coming to Germany. We are ourselves as a small company, just 1,700 people being employed here. We are lacking skilled workers across all the boards. Regardless whether you talk people really working on the ground, craftsmen, skilled workers in different departments of our company, we are lacking that workforce. Immigration needs to pick up substantially as soon as we get the way and across, hopefully from that horrible COVID crisis, which no one is talking anymore about, but which has stopped immigration into Germany substantially for the course of the last two years. Therefore, that's our substantial understanding of the market, the supply-demand balance, which we have always talked about, will be there on a persistent basis. As always, if you have a supply-demand imbalance, if you have rising construction costs, then I would wonder if we are not going to see rising prices on especially the product we are focusing on affordable living. Therefore, Paul, my personal experience would have said exactly what you would have expected. Rising interest rates bring about lower prices on for real estate in the market. It is this time completely different, and therefore, our expectation is that we are going to see rising prices, especially for affordable living in Germany. Just to follow up on that, and I appreciate obviously your share price has declined, which arguably impacts on your cost of capital probably differently to others. I think you have said, and were quite clear at the full- year, that you didn't need to issue equity in order to acquire BCP or to acquire the 7,000 units. You were quite clear that the equity wasn't a factor. At that point, or at least that was my understanding of the situation. You're also saying that you expect the market is different this time, so returns are going to still be strong going forward. I'm... You can understand I'm struggling to slightly reconcile your, shall we say, more cautious view on what you're doing versus what you seem to be saying, which is the market still remains very strong and well bid. I'm just trying to understand is the market more difficult or it's more expected to be more difficult or is it actually gonna be very strong and you're just cognizant of the fact that your leverage is slightly higher than it has been in the past and hence that's more the decision around the capital allocation rather than the cost of equity or the cost of capital specifically. It's more the levels of capital, should we say. Paul, the market seems to be completely intact, so we try to also shed a bit of light on where the transaction markets currently are and how much capital still is looking to be directly invested into German residential. That is also something which we have laid out during today's presentation, that we are seeing that our share price level is depressed. Therefore, as a listed entity, we do not currently, and that is what we once again reiterate, we do not plan to issue equity at the current depressed share price level, which once again then limits our opportunity to grow. Which then once again falls in line with what we have said with regards to BCP. With regards to BCP, the stake as well as the option, all options are on the table, including not executing the option, selling our stake or finding a partner and executing that option together with that partner. All on the table. Demand, once again, and capital inflow into the market seems to be intact, and once again from our assumed shortage of affordable living will persist also going forward. That's from our current perspective, the reading of the situation. Well, thank you. Sorry, one final one on that point. Is there a chance given that thought process that you're more likely to sell 5,000 units than you are to acquire 7,000? Or if you sell 5,000, does that mean you have the capacity and the appetite to acquire the 7,000? Just to get a sense as to, you know, could you be a net disposer of units this year, which I think would be the first time for a while, just given that bringing all of those thought processes together. Yeah, Paul. That might happen. If we are not going to execute the BCP option, we will end up being a net seller within 2022. Cool. Thank you very much. Sorry, final one on a separate matter. I think you mentioned not cutting investment in, on a square meter basis or on totality, but reducing the number of projects within that total investment given cost inflation. Does that also then impact on the return expectation moving forward? You've got positives on like for like from inflation, but maybe a negative from fewer projects being undertaken given cost inflation. Is that the right way to think about it or not? Yeah, Paul, I think what we wanted to highlight with mentioning it that way is that we keep flexibility and optionality also on the CapEx side. I think we can definitely assure you we're not gonna spend more per square meter than we have indicated, so we will remain very disciplined. If we have to, we will cut back on projects. We haven't said that we will cut back on projects. You will be aware that a lot of the projects we are currently doing, which are part of the 2022 CapEx program, have been planned last year, are already in execution, and have already been awarded the projects to the different craft companies and so on. We may not have to cut back on the investment program for this year at all. When it comes to next year's CapEx program, that's obviously something we are working on right now and where we will provide you with a proper update as every year with our Q3 financials. I can assure you that of course, the increased cost of capital, also the increased discount rates of course that we will be using to calculate the NPV on all the projects we are looking into will reflect the current market conditions. As such, that will have an impact on the projects that eventually make it into the pipeline for next year. A little bit too early to say today what the volume is going to be and what the return expectation for the future CapEx programs will be. Cool. Perfect. Thank you very much. Our next question is from the line of Manuel Martin from ODDO BHF. Please go ahead. Mr. Martin, please unmute your microphone. Sorry. Yes, I was on mute. Two questions from my side, please. Let's do that one by one. Question number one, sorry, to come back on BCP. Maybe a bit nasty, the question, but is it also a possible scenario that you say, "Okay, look, BCP, we're not going to execute the call option on that price." Do you think it might be a possibility to renegotiate the price in the current market environment? Yeah. Thank you, Manuel. Certainly thanks a lot for, once again, a question on BCP. For the time being, currently, we have that option that runs until September thirtieth. It's priced at EUR 157 per share. That is what we currently are looking at. Whether if and whether the markets change and they have changed over the course of the last month and whether Adler is now willing to re-agree on a lower price, I'm not able to say. For the time being, we work with the option we have in hand, and that's our basis assumption we are working on currently. Thanks. My second and last question. Again, in the current market environment, with the discrepancy that we see between the real bricks-and-mortar market prices and the share prices of listed companies, including LEG, what do you think about the share buyback program when it comes to LEG's low share price? For the time being, that's nothing we've considered to be done immediately, seeing that our LTV currently is at 43%, so there is not too much cash sitting around waiting for investments. At the same time, we will be behaving very conservatively. It is an option on the table, but nothing we currently consider to be the wisest use of the money at hand. Okay. Thank you very much. Our next question is from the line of Simon Stippig from Warburg Research. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. Thank you very much for taking my question. My first question would be in regard to the energy costs for tenants, and I wonder if the assumption is right that LEG is able to dampen the increase of energy costs, such as heating compared to the market or compared to competitors in your geographic locations, especially due to the LEG infrastructure? Simon, your question on the rising energy prices is, if we can pass it on to the tenants, or what's your question? Exactly. Sorry, maybe I should clarify a little bit more. You have a certain infrastructure in LEG in regards to heating, so you provide your tenants with heating. I wonder if your energy costs you charge your tenants is actually lower than what you see, for example, in a neighboring flat owned by a private landlord. Is that assumption right, or do you pass it through in full and there's no differentiation compared to the tenant on the other flat? Well, we charge market price to our tenants, and as you're right, we have our own energy unit, which provides heating to a significant number of our flats. We source the gas via the unit on the spot market and roll it over to the tenant, and the price increases with some statistical figures and based on the price indices as they develop. You won't see a significant difference in the energy prices for our tenants and for neighboring tenants, as we charge market prices to our tenants. Great. That's all clear. Thank you very much. The second question would be in regard, I'm very sorry, but, BCP and capital allocation. So you mentioned that you bought shares in the market in the past weeks, and I just want to understand what your thinking is about the implied cash flow pricing of those shares compared to your shares. Then, a little follow-up question to that or an add-on would be, because also you lowered your capital allocation to a longer-term development pipeline. These three parts in regard to capital allocation and your thinking around it would be very interesting. Thank you. Yeah. Simon, first of all, we’ve been active in the market, gathering a few more shares over the course of the last weeks, just to make sure to get across that 98% threshold. Before, as you knew, we’ve been already making the 95% threshold. Security there to be successful with a squeeze out was assumed by lawyers to be around 80%. Now, having the key in our hand to get across the 98% threshold is considered to be rock solid, a 100% chance of doing a squeeze out and delisting of the company then quite quickly. That was the reason why we’ve taken the decision strategically to buy more shares in the market, and that’s it, and that came to an end by now. With regards to capital allocation and reduction of development, you know that development has never been the core of our business. It always has been an extension which we thought to be well advised to provide due to the social aspects of new homes. In a situation where there is no state subsidies being in place and all limiting factors which we have came across during today's calls, rising financing costs, rising material costs, rising workforce costs, no material being available and a lack of workforce, all of that is limiting, from our perspective, the ability to really earn a decent risk return on that part is currently not there. Therefore, we were cutting down on that quite drastically, as you have heard from us. Going forward, we will be quite cautious with regards to doing more on the development side. Great. Very informative. Maybe just one follow-up question in regard to what you said of the 98%. Is there any issue in regard to the RETT blocker and the 10%? You, that well, you mean a structure of 10.1% in order to avoid the RETT? Exactly. To be triggered? Certainly I think once again, we are in the midst of structural discussions with potential partners of how the contraction would look like going forward, Simon, is not yet decided. Up to now, you also know that, after the Adler transaction, we have opted for a full transaction, also paying full real estate transfer tax. Of how a potential transaction might look like, I think it's too early to talk about. Also there we are looking at different options. Okay, great. Thank you very much. As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one. Our next question is from the line of Paul May from Barclays. Please go ahead. Hi, everyone. Sorry, apologies for slightly monopolizing the questions. Just on the scrip dividend moving forwards, given the share price decline, is that something you would now be not offering? We've seen it with others, not necessarily in gen resi, where they've removed the scrip option given share price declines. I just wondered, given the discount, whether you'd still be considering a scrip on future dividends. Thank you. Yeah, Paul, it is on the agenda for our AGM next week, as you may have seen, and the way I tend to think about the scrip dividend is like an at-the-market rights issue. We offer the option to all our shareholders, and each shareholder has the option to decide on their own. From that perspective, I don't think that the share price level is actually that relevant in the context of a scrip dividend relative to other dilutive capital increases. Sorry, just to follow up on that. I struggle to see how it's any different, but that's fine. I mean, you're still issuing equity at a discount versus issuing equity at a discount. I don't quite see the difference if you were to use a rights issue, say, in terms of equity issuance, but we can debate that one offline. I yeah, struggle to see how it's any different from that's okay. Thank you. There are no more questions at this time. I hand back to Frank Kopfinger for some closing comments. Yes, thank you, and thanks for all your questions. As always, should you have further questions, then please do not hesitate and contact the LEG IR team. Otherwise, please note that our next scheduled reporting event is on August the tenth, when we report our half year result. With this, we close the call, and we wish you all the best and hope to see you soon. Thank you and goodbye, everybody.