Welcome to the Q&A session. At a customer's request, this conference will be recorded. The replay of the conference will also be available as an on-demand video webcast in the investor relations section of the Mercedes-Benz website. If you have difficulties during the conference, please press zero and the pound key on your telephone keypad for operator assistance. I would like to remind you that this conference is governed by the safe harbor wording that you will find in our published results documents. Please note that our presentations contain forward-looking statements that reflect management's current views with respect to future events. Such statements are subject to many risks and uncertainties. If the assumptions underlying any of these statements prove incorrect, then actual results may be materially different from those expressed or implied by such statements. Forward-looking statements speak only to the date on which they are made. May I now hand over to Christina Schenck, Head of Investor Relations, Digital and Communications at Mercedes-Benz, and Willem Spelten, Head of Corporate Communications at Mercedes-Benz. Thank you very much. Welcome back here in the room, and welcome back online for our more interactive part now, the Q&A session. I have with me Harald, Ola, Oliver, and Matthias for our Q&A, and we have roughly 1 hour time, which we will dedicate the first 30 minutes to the analyst and the investor questions, and the last 30 minutes to journalists. Once we've wrapped up the questions from the analysts, we will change to the media Q&A. We start with analysts, go then to the media. The media part will be held in German. We're starting in English, second part will be in German. If you're bilingual, we kindly ask you to pose your question in whatever language you prefer, English or German, and we will answer in the same language you chose. Simultaneous interpretation is available for all participants. German is on channel one, English is on channel two, and Chinese is on channel three. So let's now begin with the analyst and the investor questions. As usual, please bear with me for some instructions. I see your hands already. For the participants online, the operator will explain the procedure for registering your questions on the phone line again shortly. For participants here in the room, as usual, please raise your hand, and we will call you up. To be audible to everyone, please press the button on the microphone in front of you. Please also tell us your name and the name of your organization. When your question is answered, please make sure to switch off your microphones again. Our conference call will end around 11:45. Please take your time with your questions and ask them slowly and clearly, so that the translators can do their job well. Thank you, and now I hand back to the operator. If you want to ask a question, please press nine and the star key on your telephone keypad, and you will hear the following message: "Thank you for your participation. Your request to speak is registered." When it's your turn to raise a question, you will hear the message, "You are now in talk mode." To withdraw a question, please dial three star, after which you'll hear the message, "Your request to speak has been removed." You will be called upon by us. One moment, please, we are now registering your questions. I will now hand back to Christina Schenck. Let's start with the questions in the room. I go for Horst Schneider. Horst, over to you. Yeah, push the button, yeah? Push the button. Yeah. Now you can hear me. Thank you. Yeah, thanks for taking my questions. I mean, first of all, it's great detail that you provided in these midterm targets and how they can be achieved. I got it that you target down 7% revenue growth, and you target, we said also positive price mix. Positive price mix, especially mix, does not mean that also this positive mix arrives at the bottom line. So maybe can you outline the details, when you expect this price mix line to improve, which is still on price minus 0.5% in 2026. So you assume that to continue this level of negative price or this pricing on earnings line also flips positive or neutral. Some details on that would be appreciated. The second question that I have is on China, because I looked recently at the sales figures of the CLA, which is very attractively priced in China. I think it's a great car, but I was disappointed how low the unit sales are. You target also for the upcoming EVs and unit sales growth in China. My impression on the back of that, it's not the product, it's basically that the Chinese customer has got prejudices against foreign EVs. So my impression is that the price needs to be lower than the Chinese car before the Chinese buy them. So therefore, what is your confidence that you take, that you can really succeed with EVs in China? Thank you. Yeah, maybe I kick it off with the first question, Horst, in terms of the margin profile. I mean, I would suggest, I mean, let's depart from the outlook, the guidance to 2026. So the 3-5, and for the sake of the argument, if you want to take them in the midpoints, there's a departure point from there. When I said before, it's minus 1 on FX and hedging, on tariffs, it's a +1.5 on volume, price, mix, BEV, and it is a 4 on efficiency. So basically, obviously, going from around 1.8 million to 2-ish, with a stronger top end, sounds rather like a lower number. But clearly, I mean, you can see in that plan, therefore, I mean, we are not over ambitious when it comes to the margin from the growth, but more ambitious when it comes to the margin from the cost. I think that's number one, you know, what you can read in there. Number two, at the beginning of the ramp-up of the EVs, obviously, you still have, I mean, an EV margin, which is lower than ICE, and therefore, I mean, an EV dilution sitting in there. So that is, I mean, a net number of all of the levers, volume favorable, pricing, mix, and EV. How should you think about the profiling maybe of that, without giving each and every detail now in terms of fiscally or even quarter in 2027? But clearly, when you heard it, 2026 is a ramp-up year in H2, so I think that suggests that, that in 2027, we should see some meaningful contribution from the top line, so from that volume and mix in 2027 already. I hope that helps. Coming back to CLA. First of all, I agree to your assessment. It's a great product, and that's why our customers feedback, these activation rates, user rates on the technology given. If you look closely at that segment, you see the CLA is a touch more niche in China than it is here, because cars and everything have gotten so much bigger in China, so we deliberately position it a touch more niche. Secondly, you have seen the vast pricing pressure, especially in Q4, on BEVs. In light of the incentives and the fade-out of incentives, there was extreme measures in the market. We did not participate in those measures, because we believe that the substance of the product will require a certain amount of time for customers to be fully understood and fully appreciated. If we now deliberately, very fast, go into this, more aggressive positioning, I believe the attractive positioning is the right one. The overly aggressive entails further risks. You've also seen, apart from the list price, if you look at the financial offerings, which many of the peer group offer, you see quite a deterioration in the net pricing. Year-over-year, some of these subsidies were dialed back, and I believe this will, in the foreseeable future, also help that there's going to be a slight rebound in pricing, and then the relative attractiveness of the CLA will increase. And then the plan for China is stabilized profitability or the increased profitability again? Yes, and you will see with the next coming launches, especially the electric GLC, it is coming at a, as a significantly larger vehicle, a bit more sweet spot, a bit less of this niche. Like, these CLA sedans is something where the whole market has shifted a bit. Mm-hmm. So, we will always have it, but, for us, the CLA is the anchor car for this tech stack to show its capability. That's why we opted for a fixed pricing approach. And also, together with Momenta, we can offer, roughly 10 cities right now, and we constantly roll it out, so the next cars coming will enjoy the fully deployed tech stack. Okay. On that journey, just to add to that, I agree with everything Ola said. Look at the profile of our portfolio and also the average transaction price of our portfolio. You mentioned it, where we sit above the relevant peer group. The most important action for us on NEV starts with the electric GLC. And needless to say, then E-Class next year and so on are gonna be very important. Mm-hmm. Okay, thank you. Thanks very much. Raise of hands. Tim, over here. Yeah, thank you. Oliver, if I can maybe follow up on that in China, what's the mid to long term here? Should we expect you guys to have the same market share with BEV as you used to have on the ICE side, or will we have to get used to simply a smaller market with perhaps, to Horst's question, a stabilized profitability? I believe some segments in the Chinese market have shifted, and going to remain shifted. If you jump into the pre-COVID era, the 2019, then the whole entry segment looked completely different to what it looks today. If you just scale back in time and look, when did we deploy a long wheelbase A-Class in 2019, what kind of vehicles are now in those segments? Secondly, in China, half of the market, half of the car market is now NEV. If you look at and dissect the market by price segments, especially below 300,000 RMB, below 200,000 RMB, that share even increases. So, I, I would say in that segment, we will offer a few cars, but no longer this full lineup as we have seen 2019, or if you scale back further. So, I do foresee, like deployed and I explained, the growth perspective, but it is to a lesser extent on the entry vehicles. But as of today, we cannot offer in midsize SUVs an electric alternative, right? So we are, we are happily enjoying great sales for our combustion GLC. It, it leads the pack. However, for the 50% seeking NEVs, it will be by mid of this year that we come with a long-wheelbase GLC. Okay. Don't forget that Ola mentioned in his presentation a segment where we have enjoyed a very nice business for many years: the CBU imports. So the GLE, one of our- ... core vehicles in our portfolio worldwide, that turns local this year, with a specific China version of that vehicle. So those segments become even more important. And in light of the tariff situation that Harald described, well, there was a slight shift in tariffs between the United States and China in 2025, which is not supporting export business in the same way that it did before. So it's crucially important to now localize such a core vehicle in our portfolio, and we think that will build momentum in that segment. And two more follow-up questions, please, to what was said. I maybe with you, Ola, or Harald, because you also very much stand for this. I don't think I've heard the word growth as often from you guys as today over the last 4 years, ever since Monaco. Certainly scared a few people, judging from my inbox on the investor side. Is value over volume over with this announcement? Do you now say 2 million units is what we need to achieve, we need the fixed cost coverage, or do you still very much prioritize margins? And if we then think about margins, Harald, to the 4 percentage points, sounds very ambitious with all the front loading you do on ADAS, as we discussed about yesterday, Ola, the cost going up on DRAM, all the other inflation. What makes you confident that we don't stand here next year and you're telling me: "Yeah, we achieved 4%, but actually the costs went up, so the net number is more like 2% or 3%"? How should we think about that? So on the first one, if we go all the way back to that original presentation, pillar two is called profitable growth. It's not called profit or growth, it's profitable growth. And listening carefully to what Matthias said in his presentation, it is still profitable growth, but it's not profit without growth. And we do think that it matters, that if you invest into such a comprehensive innovation, technology, and product portfolio, you must have the ambition that you have success in the market with those products. When you go into a few segments where you literally have a wide spot at the moment, electric GLC or electric C-Class, and we know that that is the bulk of the premium electric volume in Europe, and you have no offering today, you must have an ambition to grow. So profitable growth, and I believe that is the word we used, yeah, profitable growth remains the mantra. And maybe a bit of switch of gears is, as you can see, with the back or the support of the efficiency measures now and also moving forward, we believe we can generate and create ourselves and mean more headroom in terms of stepping up competitiveness. Without forgiving value, but stepping up the competitiveness also on the commercial side of things. The other question in terms of what makes us confident that the net number, I mean, shouldn't look different than the one I'm telling you today here. I make one caveat on the slide, please pay attention to it. It was on the raw mats and all of the hedges I think I gave. I mean, consciously separated the raw mat effect from the efficiency effect, yeah. Obviously, we are exposed to risk, but also to opportunities in this respect. I think, I mean, other measures, I mean, are chiefly behind us, as we think about, I mean, regulatory stuff. I mean, you mentioned the EU7 engines. Obviously, that means quite a lot of content coming to the vehicles, but I think, I mean, we know what it is, and, I mean, that is included and calibrated in the entire envelope I gave earlier today. Moving on, Christina, over to you. Yeah, hi. So first of all, could you detail the product mix dynamics within the top-end vehicle space in 2026, but also 2027? So, you know, the impact of AMG versus the refreshed S-Class. That's my first question. I can ask and then I have two more, which is, second question would be the net tariff headwinds. You detailed it for 2026, but please, if you could elaborate on post-production localization measures, what is the net impact? And also, how should we think about the net tariff impact as we head into 2027. And then lastly, just, something specific to your China dealer restructuring efforts, what is the impact in 2026 on those for the P&L and for cash? Thanks. You want me to take it? I'll... Yeah, I'll start with the first one, to break it down in more detail for you on AMG. So if you look at the current portfolio, the entry point to the AMG brand are the entry vehicles on the current MFA2 architecture. So like an A 35, and then you have the full performance version with A 45. As we go into, MMA, and electrification, we're going all in on electric performance, which means that that entry, sliver of the, AMG sales winds down in this year. That is why that affects the headline number to start with. But I want to emphasize that that is the lowest level of the AMG portfolio. What happens now on AMG is a very comprehensive, product offensive in the next couple of years. On the combustion side, led by the brand new six-cylinder, further developed six-cylinder, you can see that they came out with a statement now that it starts in the middle of this year with the CLE 53, which is one of the most important segments. The brand new V8 that has gone into this car. There is, of course, an AMG version of that, and that will find itself into a product next year. And, stay tuned for how far that can go in terms of performance. There is some very exciting developments in the pipeline there. On the electric side, we're now gonna reinvent performance electric vehicles. Some of you have had the chances to get some initial sneak previews, but it will be mind-boggling performance, where we try to pair it with the emotion for the ones that still have petrol in their veins. And the signature flagship product in that offensive is, of course, the AMG GT that we will show in May as a world premiere, and it comes in the H2 of this year. But that technology, that superior performance, and that emotion is then rolled out into the whole portfolio. So you will have MMA versions of that, you will have MB.EA versions of that, et cetera, et cetera. So this run-out and then run-up for AMG, in particular, 2026, is a run-out and then to prepare for a run-up. I think we're gonna then see a run-out, and then into 2027, very, very good momentum on AMG. That's what's going on. On the other two questions, Christina? Just on the S-Class, you didn't mention the S-Class, the new- Yeah, S-Class. Well, S-Class, the production starts in a couple of months from now. Here it is. You saw the Maybach version of it yesterday. And then with the lead times, I don't know, we hit China in September-ish, United States in the summer. We will then be in Europe in roughly May-ish typical timeframe. So of course, you first go down, and then you start going up. Full firepower of the S-Class is 2027 and forward. So when we think about the mix of the top-end vehicle space, is there a significant shift then with the S-Class and the AMG? 27, growth, change over year, 26. So your second question, I think, was on the tariff impact and any localization. So we'll have, I mean, the run rate impact of the tariffs in 2026, as I outlined earlier, stepping up from 110 basis points in 2025 to around, call it 150, is obviously in 2025. In the Q1, there weren't, I mean, any incremental tariffs, so I think that explains the 2026 number. Then in that number, you already have the localization of the GLE in the U.S., in China, sorry. But, I mean, the vast majority of the incremental tariff headwind is anyhow the U.S. tariffs, mainly, which impact the imports into the U.S. So as we have the target to grow in the U.S. towards the 400, as Matthias, I mean, pointed out, that has a tariff impact going along with it. That's why in the midterm, I said, I mean, that could go up, I mean, from 150 to 200 basis points. Yes, in the longer midterm, or, I mean, towards the end of the decade, I think I mentioned it in the localization section, there is clearly an opportunity with next generation GLC to come. That could be a significant mitigant to that tariff, but I think that is probably a bit outside the midterm territory we were using in the financial guidance outlook. Then on the dealer section, Oliver, you wanna take it or? Maybe I can take it. So first of all, the dealers in China, they are more than just part of the process. There is a very close and intensive partnership, so we walk the whole strategy for China hand in hand with our dealer partners. That is important 'cause we deploy new formats to acquire customers. We're gonna bring something for the top-end vehicles, which I think is attractive in the customer journey. We complement it with the uplifted digital journey. Now, this is hand in hand because also this kind of recalibration of the density of the network is at the benefit of our dealer partners, because it is on the after-sales revenue and generally on the profitability for the network and uplift. So, I would say we are well on track with the figures Harald presented, to proceed. I take one more question in the room, and then, I'll give people online the chance to also ask a question. Henning, over to you. Yeah, thank you very much. To Harald, please, thanks for being so forthcoming with your bridges. I just have a clarification, please, because I think when you spoke about '2026 to the midterm, I think you mentioned 1 percentage point headwind from tariff and FX again, and I just wanted to make sure you actually meant that. Or is it from the starting point of 4? Is it just the 4 efficiency and 1.5 volume structure price? Yeah, to clarify, so the starting point 26, so the 3-5. Again, take the midterm, the midpoint as a, as a reference. Minus 1% from tariffs and FX, incremental tariffs and FX, and then the 1.5, I mean, we talked in terms of top line volume, mix pricing and BEV, and around 4 on the efficiencies. Okay, so another one from... for the period from- Another one. Okay. Thank you. Tariffs and FX. Yes. And sorry, that's mainly related to hedges rolling off, yeah? The delayed effect of the FX coming through. ... in 2026, I think we're still well covered. Also at a pretty good rates when it comes to the US dollar and also on the renminbi. So, I mean, if current spot, and more kind of, yeah, call, call it towards the 1.20 kicks in, and, the other currencies, interestingly enough, I mean, only the euro is strong. And continue where they are, obviously that creates, some further headwind, for the years, plus to 2026. Thank you. And the second question is on China, please, and the profitability there. I think at the CMD, we talked about trying to protect a double-digit margin. I think you were coming from still 15% or so in 2024. I don't think you probably deliberately didn't give a pinpoint update today. But if we could just talk conceptually, is that going lower before it's starting to go higher? And if you could give any color for profitability between imports and local, if that's a good way to just explore it a little bit further. Thank you. Sure. We made a slide, which we called We Deliver On The Targets We Promised Here, and in 2025, we still delivered a double-digit margin in the joint venture. 2026, as characterized by all the ramp-ups, it is going to be down year-over-year. Then we will have pretty much H2 of 2026, and then transitioning into 2027, the benefit of, like, a vehicle like the GLE long wheelbase, providing additional profitability. At the same time, we see the facelift cycle for GLC C-Class, which also get their combustion side. What is definitely a topic of intensive work is the profitability in China for the electric vehicles. So this will slightly weigh on the profitability on in the BBAC. But, that is why we embark on this mission of a deep localization there, taking out cost, which is increasing the resilience on the combustion side, as well as improving the, resilience on the electric vehicles. So yes, year-over-year, first, delivered on target for 2025. Second, 2026, slightly down. 2027, we, we will do our best to, return to where we were. So, let's move on to the telephone line. We have questions there, and I would start with Patrick Hummel. Hello, good morning. Patrick from UBS. Thanks for taking my questions. My first one would be a clarification about cash returns and DTG, specifically. Harald, thanks for all the color on that specific slide. You highlighted EUR 2 billion of M&A inflows. I was just wondering, Athlon, there were some media articles suggesting that could be worth about EUR 1 billion. Some additional German distribution outlets, I guess that's also a few hundred million EUR. So that would leave a relatively small amount for DTG, if you know, the total M&A bucket is about EUR 2 billion. Should we read it that way, or could it just well be if you execute all of these transactions, DTG, Athlon, and the distribution networks, that the M&A-related inflows would exceed EUR 2 billion? Would that also directly translate into additional cash return to shareholders? Or would you say it's the EUR 6 billion that we talked about, EUR 5.1 billion is the dividend, and the EUR 1.7 billion remaining from the existing buyback, so whatever happens on the disposal front, the cash return this year won't exceed EUR 6 billion. Am I misreading that? I have a second question then. Thanks, Patrick. Well spotted. I think the numbers, I mean, you reminded us, I think, correct in terms of Athlon, in terms of, the, own retail divest potential. And, I think the EUR 2 billion we put on the chart, I mean, should not, be seen as a cap, in terms of, cash generation from M&A. Maybe a, a bit of a, a prudent approximation. A way the financial statements coming out early, early March. As I said earlier, you will see assets held for sale. I think that rather gives an indication in terms of, the, the size, so the order of magnitude we have in mind on, on DT. So does it mean therefore, M&A cash proceeds could, be above EUR 2 billion? That could be a distinct possibility. Let's talk about it when we're getting there. I think the message here is, a solid underlying cash flow of more than EUR 4 billion on the industrial side, including a significant cash out on the restructuring program. So in terms of underlying cash generation, I think that's a pretty reasonable number. And then this potential of cash generation on top of it. So I think, I mean, the message here in terms of potential for shareholder return and our commitment on shareholder return, I think, that should should be attractive for investors, and I think that should also be a bridge, to look through somehow 2026, while we extend the margin in 2027 forward. Thank you, Harald. My second question, I guess, is for Matthias or Ola. The next generation A-Class or whatever it's going to be called, when we think back at the Monaco CMD, you basically painted a picture that suggested that, you know, the very low end of your entry segment is not very attractive, neither from a margin standpoint, maybe also not from a CO2 compliance standpoint. So I'm just wondering, what changed your mind? Why do you think you need this model, and what can you do to avoid margin dilution? Is it maybe just that, you know, the cost structures in Rastatt are what they are, and you have to have a certain capacity utilization there? I mean, I get the point about young buyers getting sort of attracted to the brand, but you know, the financial impact, at least in the history of that model range, has been rather dilutive. If you can just share a bit more behind your thought process, why you bring this model back or bring a successor? Thank you. Patrick, good to hear from you. I'll do the financial mechanics and let Matthias do the market. Now we have the MMA architecture fully industrialized, and all the technologies available. And when we looked at this equation again, weighing in what it means for the overall market presence in Europe, and it's really about Europe, for a very reasonable investment amount, very reasonable, and with the variable cost projection that Harald was alluding to, the sum of those financial mechanics said that this can meet our lower-end threshold, I would say, Harald. But it does play a role in the market, and I want to let Matthias reflect upon that. Absolutely. I mean, Europe, as I pointed out in my presentation as well, is extremely important for us. It's a market where the segment is being well served, and, the A-Class, as it is today, is a vehicle where the average age of our customers is seven years younger than for all other Mercedes-Benz products on average. So that means we have the early opportunity getting younger customers into our vehicles. Plus, and I mentioned the topic of our new unit, we have very attractive downstream business combined with it, so we believe that it absolutely makes sense in Europe to have this product available, including the downstream effect. It will definitely a profitable case, and very important for us to get customers acquainted with our brand at the very early beginning. The designers did present us something in 2025. When I saw it, I just thought to myself, "It's hot as hell. I want that." That's the irrational part of the equation. Your new company car then. Yeah. Okay, we do one last- Thank you very much. Sorry, Patrick. We do one last question in the room. I'll take a look for hands up. Stephen? Thank you. Stephen Reitman from Bernstein in London. Question on China again. Obviously, you talk about the potential of filling the white spaces with the new BEV platforms that you're coming out with, the new BEV models, like GLC, electric and, and such like. Could you just comment on the research you're doing on the Chinese customers? To what extent the customers have gone away? How much do you expect them to come back? What is the dealers' confidence in the product portfolio, which obviously you've shown to them as, during your journey? Thank you. Most certainly. Let's talk about the Chinese customer, and obviously maybe one of the most demanding customers in the world. So on average, for Mercedes, 37, S-Class, 39. I think Maybach just sits directly on 40. If you do a poll on what does Mercedes-Benz still mean for customer groups, it is still, for 65%, an icon of success, and they aspire to own such a car. What is today one of the biggest detractor, if you will, and that is, I guess, where your question is aiming to, the detractor could be intelligence. Can Mercedes offer the same level of ADAS infotainment updateability as they have seen by other competitors? And that is what we have shown today, that with the tech stack we have developed, we close that, so to say, gap, where you have it. Specific vehicles in our portfolio, like the E-Class, they massively contribute to the highest average ATP in the market. They outsell any competitor because they already have a level two-plus system. They don't have the point-to-point navigation. That is why we cascade this tech stack now into each and every segment. Returning back to those customers, we have more than 7 million and still growing customer base, and we have also, due to the combination with financial service, now the opportunity to strive with a new offering, which were maybe on the fence, waiting. Can you take away this detractor reason? So overall, the ambition to own a Mercedes-Benz is not fading. The attractivity to buy one is elevated and is going to be elevated with each and every model we are offering. So therefore, we are pretty confident on it, but still realistically also showing where have we lost customer, what were the reasons, and how to get them back. That was on my slide, 100% China fit. We have to offer more comfort. We have to offer more space. Especially on the SUV side, we have seen this additional race of space and larger vehicles at lower price points. So that is something where all our product decisions for the next 24 months kick in to cater for that. ... So basically, you're saying the Chinese customers haven't been spoiled by these very cheap offerings of, with a lot of high tech, at very low price points? Especially on the lower segments. Especially on the lower segments, and if they are in an all-out price war against each other, that is when we chose to be a little bit more cautious, as Oli mentioned before. How do you convince them also? I mean, or is it very clear to them, the key characteristics of Mercedes and the legacy brands, about the long-term value of the vehicle, the, you know, the residual value, which clearly, among the cheapest Chinese cars, doesn't seem to be a consideration. People think these are almost like throwaway products after four or five years. Exactly, sir, and that is, what kind of a product are you willing to throw away? The more pricey the vehicle gets, the more you are willing to also look after your residual value. A lot of the equation is also uncertain to that extent. I personally visited a used car market, south of Beijing, to take a look, how are actually some of the other cars returning after 2 years, 3 years? What's about their longevity? What's about their substance quality over time? I think there is something, what is sometimes questioned, that is safety. It is only questioned until something happens. And those are the moments when, I would say, our continuation in these core values, our communication to the strength and to the attributes of the brand, they then yield results. Obviously, we cannot put this at the absolute forefront or at every point in time, but it is seen, perceived, and then obviously convincing, when others might have cut a corner here or there. So, yes, And I it alludes to the entry segment question, and probably an A-Class, this has to be completely differently assessed in China. Therefore, it is a European and not a China. That's due to size, expectations of vehicle formats. But our more comfort, more space, more intelligence should take away those detractor reasons which might be existing right now. Thank you. So thank you very much for your interest and all of your questions. I would be handing over to Willem now to leave some time for questions from media. Yeah. So we are now switching to German. There's, of course, translation available for everybody who's not fluent in German. Okay, let us now start with the journalist part. We still have half an hour for questions. We also start here with questions from the room, and we'll also check for questions that online participants might have. Who would like to start with the first question? I'd be interested in what how you define medium-term. Does that mean 2027, 2028, 2029, or does it mean, "Oh, let's just wait and see, but we're not really sure"? What is midterm? Well, thank you very much for the question. Well, this is something that is just, was left undefined. Well, it's not 27, otherwise, we would have said it's 27. However, why is this important? Why do we call this midterm? Well, we live in a time where we are faced with volatilities, insecurities, and the like. So even though we are confident in the plan, as such, we are not in a position to say which quarter this will materialize in, basically. But it's not 2027, but it's also not the end of the decade. This doesn't leave so much room of maneuver for speculation as to which year this might refer to, so I would not just leave this astray. So, after 27, but before the end of the decade. Next question, please. Okay, so let's just ask another question. I have an additional question on the US tariffs and the impact on your profit. You told me this in margins and points. Can you tell me this in absolute numbers? So what was the impact of US tariffs in 2025, and what do you expect the impact to be in 2026, in absolute numbers? And then also, a question on China. I heard a little bit about, well, Mr. Blume of Volkswagen, saying that in China, he's looking at an 80% decline in the luxury business, and he doesn't believe that's going to recover anytime soon. So I'd be interested in finding out what your stand on that is. How do you think the luxury segment is going to develop in China in 2026? Well, the first question is, if you just take the passenger car revenue in 2025, and with the outlook that we gave for 2026, so the passenger car revenue figures should remain the same, around EUR 100 billion. You know, that's the ballpark we're talking about, and, then times 1.1%, from twenty-five. So EUR 1 billion was the impact that we saw in the tariff impact in 2025, and it's going to go up in 2026 because we'll have a full year impact, so it's gonna be a significant number. So thank you very much for asking the question, because very often you look at the percentage points and you're like, "Well, it sounds so little," but it's actually a lot of money. About China, I don't think it's a secret that consumption, especially in the upper price bandwidths, is a bit subdued. So the consumer mood is a bit gloomy. ... This also includes things like coffee that people buy at a discounter, for example. There is a certain degree of price attrition, and it is definitely a problem that we still have the real estate issue, and there is certainly a correlation to be seen when it comes to being willing to spend on luxury goods. The problems mentioned by our colleagues from other car manufacturers, I don't see for us. We have lost 19% in our segment. The total market went down by 15%, which means for 2026. However, products, as Ola said, like the S-Class, GLS, S-Class, and Maybach have gone past the H1 of their life cycle, so they are going to be refreshed, including the intelligence that we build into these vehicles. I think this will give us a chance to see a simulation in sales of these vehicles. Okay, Ms. Engel, please. Two questions. First of all, Kecskemét will be the biggest plant in Europe in the future. Why do you invest so much into there? I mean, you mentioned the cost of energy, of labor. Are these the only reasons, or are the framework conditions, regulatory conditions, also a reason? Is everything easier there? And the other thing is exports from China, not to the U.S., not to the EU, but do you expect exports from China could push out exports from Europe in other regions of the world? Or do you want to ATP into new consumer groups, or do you see a push-out effect already, or do you expect such an effect? And if so, how big would it be? On your first question, if we had just some sort of industrial plant, well, like the automotive industry, all dimensions in Eastern Europe are more attractive if you want to invest, and this applies to us as well. It's more attractive to invest in Eastern Europe, but we have a long-standing tradition in Kecskemét. It's a fantastic team there, just like in Germany, and I would like to thank all the employees and workers who are listening right now. We have a very modular strategy, so Kecskemét really suggests itself for using this. And then we have greenfield sites, and we have a new brownfield site. So we really have the chance to perfection all the processes in addition and on top of what you can do in an existing plant. On top of that, we can remain CO2 neutral right from the start. So we are really at the spearhead when it comes to decarbonizing our production in Kecskemét. As regards the streams of goods around the globe, well, the glass is not always and everywhere half empty, even though 2025 was really a challenging year for global trade. But adopting a middle or long-term view, there are some signals. Free trade agreement, I'm thinking of Mercosur, and I assume that at the end of the day, the European Parliament will finally reach a conclusion, and I think they want to have some kind of preliminary approval and then the formal approval. But also the signal that comes from the free trade agreement with India. When it comes to global trade, there are also certain impulses that induce us to believe that the situation might improve. And I don't know if it was you or Matthias who said when Thailand does a deal with China, and suddenly there are no tariffs imposed. I mean, it's obvious that we use the production structures that you have in China. So we also have such tactical changes to bear in mind. Thank you. So Rachel More from Reuters. My first question is about the decline in sales in China. Can you give us a figure for 2026, and do you plan to adjust prices because of that? And another question regarding the push ahead in Europe. What do you think of local content measures? Do you think these make sense? Maybe first Oli and then Ola. Well, we said that in 2026, sales will remain below 2025. This is our expectation. I believe that we showed that our product campaign, that will really have a bigger effect in the H2 of 2026. We will be able to improve our situation, but in some total, sales will remain below 2025. But you also said that on prior year level, as regards the total sales expectation, we of course want to make sure that we can compensate elsewhere in the world to make up for that. Number two, price adjustments or price adaptations, you referred to that in the market. There is a gap between the list price and the transaction price, so we have done a few strategic price adaptations already earlier that year, but they don't have any effect on the transaction price of the vehicle on the market. Rather, they are one component in a plethora of components of what we do in order to optimize our cash flow, and our dealers are involved, too. We want to sell attractive, but not overly attractive prices, European content, and everyone is waiting for a positioning of the European Commission in this field, which is expected to come at the end of the month. I'll try to give you a balanced answer. In addition to my job as CEO of Mercedes, I'm also the president of ACEA, and we are intensely discussing this issue among the manufacturers, but also with our suppliers. Let me tell you this, we all, we all agree on CO2, and we can see some movements here, but the small print still requires a lot of improvement, and the industry, more or less, has closed ranks, both manufacturers and suppliers, the many thousands of suppliers. When we talk about European content, the situation is more complex because the profile of the companies is very, very different. German manufacturers are global entrepreneurs, especially premium manufacturers. Their business model has been built over the last 70+ years, and they sell goods in all directions. So we are also big exporters, also from other regions, the U.S. being the best example in this case. Like another premium manufacturer, we are the biggest exporters from the U.S. If you have such a profile, of course, it is quite obvious and logical that you're in favor of open trade and open markets, and against protectionism. If you're a manufacturer that has a regional footprint, and you strike it lucky in one of the big economic regions of the world, it may be tempting to think, "Well, whatever other economies do out there, this is not my living-level playing field. Let us, raise the bar a bit or the obstacles." I can follow that, I can relate to that, and I, I can understand this. So there is no one single exact position across the industry regarding this question. But I think everyone agrees that the supply networks, they are not supply chains, they're supply networks that have been built over decades, that have been perfected. They are the invisible hand of the market. And the high-tech vehicles, for example, the S-Class, really features components from all five continents. I think that protectionism and its unintended consequences, first thought, we shouldn't change this drastically, and we all have this common denominator across the industry. If you do that, another market player, I'm in favor of a level playing field. So whatever you do regulate, you should really use a very, very fine saw, not the chainsaw, and make sure that no unintended consequences will ensue, especially after concluding a free trade agreement with 1.4 billion there and several hundred million people there. Well, I expect, in this case, the most intense debate in the course of the year 2026. One more question from the room, and then we go online. So if you want to register for a question, then press nine and star. Mr. Willem, from DPA. One question with regard to the plant and Kecskemét. Did I get it right that this year you will increase the units from 200,000 units to 400,000 units, so double the units? This is the first question. Second question, if Hungary is the biggest production plant of Mercedes in Europe, I ask myself, is that only the beginning, maybe, for cost reasons? Of course, it would be quite natural to transfer even more capacities to that site. Or why shouldn't you do that? This was the capacity potential that Harald showed in the slide. So it won't happen overnight, all of a sudden. This is the capacity potential. Having said that, this is a clear message also to the colleagues here in Germany. We, of course, stand behind Germany. We have seen a robust two-digit billion EUR amounts being invested in factories, tools, machines. The accounting, Harald, of course, is not done on a nation level, but I think it's fair to say that more than 50% of this investment is spent for Germany. So we do a lot of upgrading here in the plants, here in Sindelfingen, for instance. We did a lot in Rastatt to prepare for the launch of the MMA. So we did that last year. This is also very important. So considering that, our worldwide sales in Germany, compared to the rest of the world, is 12%-14%, but investment is more than 50%, and more than 60% of the employees work here. So, I mean, this is a clear commitment to Germany. If this is no commitment, I don't know what kind of commitment I can give you, and you will hardly find any other company with such a commitment. Having said that, Germany- ... must increase competitiveness. We have had many years where we compensated higher costs with intelligence. But if everything happens at a time, higher energy prices, because of the horrible war in Ukraine, because of the higher labor costs compared to other economic regions, then the slowness, then the control level, et cetera, et cetera. Then you reach a point where competitiveness as such is put into question. This trend has to be turned around because capital chooses the risk, the risk oriented return. There's no preferred nation of capital. This is the reason why we in this union, together with many other industry sectors, we asked Brussels and Germany, "Please, let's increase the competitiveness, the competitiveness of Europe." That's the best protection for economic growth, labor, innovation, et cetera. Online. Now, let's take an online question from AFP, and Lewis from Boxer Wolf. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. Just, first of all, on Made in Europe, the ACEA warned this week that such a strategy could invite, countermeasures, protectionist measures from other markets. To what extent do you share those fears, and why? And my second question would be, with the cars return on sales next year, you guide 3 to, this year, in fact, 2026. You guide 3%-5%, I think. Could you please elaborate a little bit, what kinds of factors might drag you down closer to 3? What might push you up towards 5? Thank you. So I'm not 100% sure if you heard my German answer to almost the same question before. I'm not gonna repeat most of that, but I can say this: If you, as an economic actor, act against another economic region with protectionist measures, it would be naive to believe that that other economic actor just sits back and says, "Whatever." It's more likely that that other economic actor would devise a countermeasure. And the most prominent recent example of this is the EU anti-subsidy study on BEV vehicles, which I understand the reasoning behind it. And it was about level playing field, which I understand and I have understanding for. But the Chinese side, not obviously with the same measure, has already acted, and it affects businesses, European businesses in that market. That is why I say handle with care, from the headline that might sound good in a campaign, Go European, and I'm as European-loving citizen as you can find. We live in a global economic network, and certainly the auto industry is one of the most global ones. So when you devise policy on that, do it with precision, and not with rough measures. On your second question, and I think I explained the walk from 2025 to 2026, so I'm not going to repeat that. But, I mean, if I think about your question in terms of what could either bring us closer to the 3 or the 5 within the guidance corridor, and I would probably say some potential on commodities and maybe on FX, be it on the raw mat side, could take us into a higher level. What could take us, I mean, to a lower level, I mean, China is always, I think, unforeseeable in terms of the intensity of the competitive environment, that could be an element which could bring us in further down. Right now, I would rather say it's a calibrated approach, which we take for 2026, thinking about the 3-5. Back to the room here. Hi, again, in English, it's Stephen Wilmot from the Wall Street Journal. On the US growth ambition, when do you expect to get to that 600, sorry, 400 thousand targets? Is that again midterm ambition? It wasn't totally clear whether that was the same timeframe. What's the path towards that? Is it selling? Is it the localization of the GLC, which will make a big difference? Is it selling all of the local vehicles, or are you? It sounds like from your tariff guidance, you're also counting on more imported sedan, more, sorry, selling more imported vehicles, too. It'd be good to get some color on that growth ambition. Thanks. ... So on the 400, we stay consistent to midterm. That's true. We finished last year with roughly 300,000 units, and we believe we can grow that midterm to 400,000 units. If we look at our original past market shares in the market, having a comparable product portfolio to our competitors, I think it's a reasonable assumption to believe that we can grow and win back market share with the brand we have, with the brand new products we have, with the technology we have presented today, with the further increase in localization, and with the partnering up with global partners like Microsoft, Google, NVIDIA, et cetera, to get closer to the customer demands in the United States. So, these five elements I just pointed out, we believe, make us very confident that that's an ambition, and it's a tough ambition, but that's an ambition, not unrealistic. So, done. This brings us to the end. Mr. Gerster, you showed a hand? Yes, I have one more question. With regard to the top-end area, you've mentioned the medium-term targets, 14%-15%, an increase to 15%, so this is really modest. You used to have very ambitious targets. You also had a share of 16%. I mean, can you explain why in this segment it will be so challenging in the years to come? I already gave you part of the answer on that, in that we take the entry AMG, offer, that's the 35 offer, so we'll discontinue that. So it's a great volume element, but not a great earnings element. And if you take that out, and if you look at the other products that are coming, you will be looking at quite a substantial growth, so greater than 15% in the midterm, and then a share in the overall sales of, of 15% or greater. Now, if you look at what Matthias said, then some of the growth will happen in the core, in particular with the electric core product. So this element also will grow. It might seem superfluous because you're saying, "Okay, well, you're coming from 10-11, and you're already present in that segment." Yes, we build up a great position. Yes, we're leading worldwide in that segment, but it is still a more balanced and ambitious journey in the next 2-3 years, in particular with the entry AMG that is not mathematically part of that. Thank you. Last question, Mr. Demler. Well, do you believe that you'll be able to compensate for the tariff effect in the U.S. by price increases, or is that something that's hopeless? We're not, we're not making this assumption. No. Done, uh, Okay, that was a short question and a short answer, so let us come to the end of this media Q&A, and I'm going to be switching to English. Participation today both here in person and online via the live streams. We truly appreciate all your questions today and your attendance. This concludes the event. It was wonderful to have all of you with us. See you next year in an even brighter future. Take care. Bye-bye.