Welcome to the conference call on MTU Aero Engines AG First Quarter Results 2025. For your information, the management presentation, including the Q&A session, will be audio-taped and streamed live, or made available on demand on the internet. By attending in the conference call, we grant permission for audio recordings intended for publication on the internet to be taken. The speakers of today's conference call are Mr. Lars Wagner, Chief Executive Officer, and Mr. Peter Kameritsch, Chief Financial Officer. Firstly, I will hand over to Mr. Thomas Franz, Vice President, Investor Relations, for some introductory words. Yes, thank you, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to MTU's Q1 2025 results call. As usual, we will start with a look at the past quarter with a review from Lars. Peter will give a financial overview and a deeper look into the segment results. Following that, Lars will walk you through the pre-release guidance update for 2025. This will then end the presentation, and we will open the call for questions. With that, I'll hand over to Lars for the review. All right, thank you, Thomas, and a warm welcome from my side. Good to have you with us today. Let me start with some words on the market environment. Global passenger traffic increased by 5.3% in the first three months of 2025. Within this, international traffic improved by 7.7%, while domestic traffic increased by only 1.4%. Global load factors remain high at around 80%. The number of scheduled flights for April and May looks very promising. Dedicated cargo traffic has continued its growth, with a slight increase in Q1 by 2.4% in CTK. This start into the year is very promising for air traffic, and the outlook remains positive. Anyway, the announced tariff environment creates uncertainties in the global markets. It remains to be seen how passenger and cargo traffic will be impacted in the coming months. A downturn in the global economy would undoubtedly affect the aviation industry and us. Therefore, this topic is on everybody's watch list. Really good news for the GTF program. In February 2025, the GTF Advantage received its FAA certification, marking another important milestone in the success story of the GTF engine family. The initial deliveries of the GTF Advantage to Airbus are on track for later this year. The Advantage offers the lowest fuel consumption and CO2 emissions for single-aisle aircraft, providing more thrust and value, especially for longer-range aircraft like the A321XLR. It delivers 4%-8% more takeoff thrust, enabling higher payload and longer range. Based on an extensive test program with over 100,000 hours of test flights and 38 million flight hours of in-service operation of the GTF-based version, the Advantage ensures increased robustness in service and on-wing times, enhancing customer satisfaction. To expand the improvement to the actual in-service fleet, the certification of an upgrade package is in the making. This targets to incorporate significant durability improvements from the Advantage configuration into the existing fleet during MRO shop visits. The target is to have this package available for its customers next year. Let me conclude the GTF news with some updates on the GTF Fleet Management Plan. The program remains on track, and we see progress in shop turnaround times and material flow. Therefore, we are quite optimistic that the aircraft on ground situation will start to trend down in the second half year. Overall, the GTF Fleet Management Plan remains consistent with our previous comments. On the MRO side of the business, we have exciting developments. In March, we celebrated the official opening of our second MRO shop in China, MTU Maintenance Zhuhai Jinwan branch, a new site focusing on PW1100 engines. Initially, it will add a yearly capacity of up to 260 engine shop visits, and combined with the main site, MTU Maintenance Zhuhai, it will become the largest MRO facility in the world with over 700 shop visits annually. This positions MTU Maintenance for continuous strong growth in the global engine MRO market and strengthens the GTF maintenance network with increased capacity and expertise. The new facility was built in just 18 months, with its engine test cell already in operation since summer 2023. The Jinwan branch will start with around 280 employees and will grow to 600 engine experts once fully ramped up. Coming from China to the other side of the Pacific, where we are very proud to announce the expansion of our footprint in North America. This expansion allows us to introduce MRO services for the LEAP-1A and LEAP-1B engines and implement GEnx full engine MRO services under a new agreement with GE Aerospace. This expansion represents a multi-billion dollar revenue potential for MTU over the lifetime of both engine programs. MTU Maintenance has been named one of six exclusive premier MRO service providers for LEAP engines globally, allowing us to offer full performance restoration and extensive repair capabilities for these engines. The LEAP is one of the largest engine programs globally, and demand for capacity and expert support is high. In addition to the LEAP engine, the Fort Worth facility, which includes a 43,000 sq meter space with an engine test facility capable of up to 100,000 lbs of thrust, enables us to also offer full overhaul capabilities for GEnx engines, enhancing our competitiveness and service range in North America even further. By investing heavily in the ramp-up of our MTU Maintenance Fort Worth site, we are transforming it from a pure on-site service center into a comprehensive disassembly, assembly, and test facility, delivering state-of-the-art engine maintenance for narrow body and wide body engines. These are just two examples of our MRO expansion, Jinwan and Fort Worth, showing that we are expanding the depth and scope of MTU's engine MRO solutions worldwide, thus underlining our trust in the long-term outlook in this business. We are extremely well placed globally to expand our market share and benefit from the outstanding market opportunities in this field. This brings me to a less popular topic of additional U.S. tariffs. U.S. tariffs have caused significant confusion and uncertainty in global markets, making it difficult to predict the impact on air travel. However, we aim to share some information on how we assess the situation and provide some estimates on the direct impact on MTU. As you know, MTU has locations in Europe, Canada, and Serbia that are not directly affected by tariffs, especially since aviation products have not been subject to countermeasures by the EU or Canada to date. The main burden of tariffs, therefore, falls on our U.S. partners and customers, which could potentially increase their costs as tariffs are normally borne by the importer. Our sites in China are either located in a free trade zone or use privileged customs procedures, so we do not expect any direct burden from Chinese import duties on U.S. engines or spare parts here either. We do not see our collaboration with our U.S. partners at risk, as we have established long-term relationships through our RRSP partnerships over the years. Additional capacity in engine maintenance is globally scarce and requires significant investments, making quick alterations difficult and impossible. All this cumulates to a possible headwind for our profitability. Before mitigation effects and based on actual delivery routes and volumes, the impact has been assessed to a mid to high double-digit million amount, double-digit million euro amount. Having said this, we are actively monitoring tariffs and are in direct contact with our U.S. partners to mitigate the impacts of the tariff environment. As one example, we are already starting to implement alternative delivery routes on certain modules and achieve an effective avoidance of tariffs on these parts. Now, let me hand over to Peter for the financials. Thanks, Lars, and also a warm welcome from my side. In the first quarter of 2025, we booked group revenues of nearly EUR 2.1 billion, marking a 25% increase from last year. In U.S. dollar terms, revenues rose by 22%. Adjusted EBIT increased 38% to EUR 300 million with a margin of 14.3%. This strong margin was primarily driven by a favorable business mix in commercial OEM. Similarly, adjusted net income improved 41% to EUR 221 million. On free cash flow, with EUR 150 million, we had a very strong start into the year. Now let's go into our two business segments, starting with the OEM segment. Total revenues increased 11% to EUR 620 million. Military had, as always, a slow start into the year with a small decrease in revenues to EUR 113 million, which is a typical pattern. Commercial business revenues in euros rose 17% to EUR 507 million. Within that, organic OE revenues grew 5%, driven by a rather strong spare engine sales volume. Organic spare part sales in dollars increased mid-teens, supported by mature wide body platforms and narrow body engines. Adjusted EBIT here was up 35% to EUR 176 million, resulting in a margin of 28.4%, primarily reflecting the very favorable business mix in the commercial OEM business. Turning the page and moving on to the commercial MRO segment. Reported MRO revenues increased 33% to EUR 1.5 billion, while U.S. dollar revenues were up 29%. This strong growth was primarily driven by the PW1100G, the CF6-80, GEnx, and the GE90 engines. Adjusted EBIT increased 42% to EUR 125 million, resulting in a margin of 8.2%. EBIT margin improved mainly due to volume effects and a better profitability on certain engine programs and contracts. At this point, I would like to hand back to Lars for some words on our guidance for 2025. All right, Peter, thank you very much. On our guidance, we already informed you all early last week with our ad hoc news on the 25th of April. In our business segments, we can confirm the organic growth drivers in our different segments. Based on this, the adjusted revenue outlook on a U.S. dollar basis remains unchanged, while it has been reduced in euros in light of recent exchange rate developments. Adjusted revenue is now expected to reach between EUR 8.3 billion and EUR 8.5 billion in 2025. Previously, we had forecasted a range of EUR 8.7 billion-EUR 8.9 billion. The updated forecast is based on the U.S. dollar-euro exchange rate of $1.10 instead of the previous assumption of $1.05 per euro. As announced, we further confirm our guidance for 2025 for adjusted EBIT, adjusted net income. On free cash flow, we are also confident to reach EUR 250 million-EUR 300 million, as outlined with our full year release in February. On all this, please keep in mind that given the high volatility and uncertainty on the broader tariff environment and possible market tensions, we have not incorporated any effect thereof into these estimates. This closes the formal presentation. Thank you for your attention, and we're now ready to answer your questions. Thank you very much. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 11 on your touch-tone telephone. The operator will announce your name and when it's your turn to ask a question. In case you wish to cancel your question, please press star 11 again. Chloé Lemarié from Jefferies, maybe you had your question. Yes, good morning, Lars and Peter. Thanks for taking my question. The first one would be on tariffs because, Lars, you commented on how your manufacturing footprint and the MRO activities are largely shielded from the direct impact, but still, at the top end of the impact that you're quoting, it's still relatively significant. Just trying to get a bit more color on what specific flows would lead you to paying those tariffs. If you could comment on the mitigation measures that you could put in place and whether that could help you stay within your current guide. The second is actually on the strike at RTX Arlington facility. If you could give any color on what it could mean for GTF deliveries or product metal parts production this year. Thank you. Right. Yeah, on the first one, like stated, it's very volatile, the situation. We have assessed that thoroughly in the past couple of weeks, and we have a cross-site, cross-function team available to assess every news. What we have, our baseline is basically the movements of OEM and MRO inside and outside of the U.S.. That has been the baseline for the calculation. It is still to be proven and seen what kind of tariffs will finally show up. We are working with Pratt and also internally MTU on countermeasures that could be rerouting of engine modules to prevent any kind of border crossing into the U.S. and back and forth. We are revisiting the shipments of different parts, spare parts, but also modules. The key word is always the country of origin versus the country of export. The origin is where you substantially transform the part or the engine. We are in thought and in discussion with different partners. How do we manage or verify the country of origin? Last but not least, contract management. We do have some contracts that are allowing the tariffs to be pushed to the customer, and some of them are not, so that needs to be seen. These are, in a nutshell, the activities we are investigating. Let me state, I continue to be an optimist. The aerospace industry is an oligopole, so these tariffs would burden everyone in our industry. I am kind of optimistic that we find a good solution with both entities, east and west from us. The second one on the strike, we do not yet have information. As you know, we have warehouses where commissioned engines are available, and it needs to be seen what kind of impact that has. I don't have any information for you as of this morning. Okay, thank you. Just on the guide, should we be adding part of the impact that you've quoted as a headwind to the guide, or are you still comfortable with the level that you've maintained with the release? No, I wouldn't edit right now. I'm comfortable. Perfect. Thank you. Benjamin Heelan from Bank of America maybe had your question. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, morning, guys. Thank you for the question. I had a couple of pleas. Firstly, on the OEM business and the margin, the comment that you made that the spare engine and leasing contribution supported the margin. Can you just help outline kind of how significant that was and how big of a margin? By not increasing the guide, my assumption is that a lot of that is pulled forward. Can you just kind of help us understand a little bit how to think about that? Second thing is maybe one for Peter, but it looks as though the equity accounted investment contribution to EBIT ramped very significantly. I think it was roughly EUR 59 million in the quarter versus EUR 17 million this time last year. Can you just help us understand why? Is that sustainable? Is that what we should be thinking about for the rest of the year? From memory, the majority of that goes into the MRO business, so is that a big driver of MRO this year? A question on cash. Obviously, you've done the kind of 150 this year. You've guided for 250-300. It's not implying a lot of cash in the last nine months of the year. From memory, you talked about more program participation costs in the second half of the year, and obviously, you have potential tariff impacts. Do you have any views at this point of where net debt will end this year? Do you think there will be an improvement in net debt? Those were the three. Thank you. Yeah. I take all of the three, I guess, then. Starting with your last question regarding free cash flow, I mean, the 150 was a very strong start into the year. That compares quite favorably to the 300 or 250-300, which we guide for the full year. Keep in mind, I mean, free cash flow is always not a very linear development throughout the year, throughout the quarters. I mean, the cash flow was a small, let's say, source of disappointment in Q4 2024. You remember that the 180, so we had a very strong November and December regarding revenues. The 150 is, let's say, the cash flow spillover of the quite strong business we had at the end of 2024. That will not go on like that. We are rather cautious to increase the guidance after one quarter with a very good cash flow. At equity results, both things are true. The one is a strong contribution from Zhuhai, as you know. The other thing is also that the lease code or the entity in the U.S., which provides lease engine support for the GTF, had also made a quite good result in the first quarter of 2025. These both companies contributed favorably to that one. OEM margin, I would not split out that. I mean, we had a higher share regarding deliveries for spare lease engine. Net pricing for spare lease engines are higher compared to installed engines. I would say that contributes maybe 1 or 2 percentage points to the margin in the OEM segment. 28% will not be the sustainable level for the full year. I mean, OE is going to ramp up throughout the year, also picking up. GEnx will also pick up throughout the year as the GTF engines. That will normalize. Okay. Okay, Pete, sorry, just one quick follow-up on the equity accounted investment because it was a EUR 40 million swing year on year. It was quite material. How should we think about that for the remainder of this year? Are these positive results going to continue, or will it normalize back to this kind of 2025 level that it's been historically? Yeah, rather. The next quarters will rather go down to the historic level. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Peter. Thank you. Thanks for your thoughtful standing. May we have your question? Hi, morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one is just on the MRO growth. Can you give us the GTF share of revenues in the quarter? Second question is on your U.S. expansion with GE. Can you maybe just profile the kind of revenues and profit generation potential from that deal over the medium term? And then last one, if I may, just on OEM, a follow-up to a previous question. What was the commercial series OE sales growth in the quarter? Or maybe asked a different way, what was the percentage of spare engines delivered in the quarter? Thank you. What we say is that OE growth was 5% revenue-wise, which I gave in the call already. OE net sales grew 5% year-over-year in Q1. The GTF share was in the low 30% in the MRO. 34%. 34% was the. The opportunity with GE, medium term? You know, this program, they span about 20- 30 years. So it's a rather long-term investment. We're building up capacity for that as we speak. We are saying here it's a multi-billion opportunity, but let us highlight a bit more details during the capital market day in June in Paris. We are prepared for that over there. Okay. Thanks so much. [audio distortion] from Deutsche Bank. Maybe you go ahead with your question. Yes, good morning. I had three questions. The first one is on R&D and the steep increase you had in Q1. It's only Q1, quite obviously. Can you comment related to this R&D increase, whether it's linked to the WET program and the fact that you had to switch a little bit gears on this? Second question is on the MRO growth. You mentioned GTF, you mentioned the wide body. You haven't mentioned V2500. Is it just because it is growing less, or are you starting to feel some pinch from lower level of induction because of GTF on the V2500? The last question is on FX. The current situation, is it changing anything to your strategy of hedging? Are you slowing down? Basically, I mean, it's an open question on your FX strategy at the moment. Thank you. Christoph, I'm going to start with FX strategy. No, we won't trade. As you know, we don't speculate. I mean, we have a bandwidth for the next, let's say, 16 quarters, and we go a little bit up and down. It's a little bit opportunistically, but we keep our path. There is nothing that we see that we hedge now. We fully hedge for the next three or four years or so. As you see, I mean, we are fully hedged more or less this year, next year, roughly 60%, then 30% or so, and we're going to continue to do so. There is no principal reassessment of our FX hedging strategy so far. On R&D, no, it's a one-timer, which we had in Q1. You know we have an 18% program share on the GTF, and as such, we have to contribute also 18% of all R&D efforts related to the GTF Advantage in our work share. We did not do a lot of, let's say, alteration of the parts and spent own R&D efforts, but we have to bear the full development cost, 18% of the full development cost. It was a kind of an imbalanced payment related to R&D, which we capitalized. We shared, let's say, 18% of the costs Pratt & Whitney did for their work share, in easy words. Maybe let me comment on the WET activities, Christoph. It's insignificant. Plus, there is a funding involved in that program as well. You won't see a pike for these kinds of R&D activities in our balance. Maybe last one is on the V25. We haven't mentioned it because it's stable. This program continues to be a contributor, and I think we said last time around 800 shop visits are continuing, certainly this year, and that this program keeps on being strong but stable, and therefore we didn't comment it. Okay. That's very clear. Thank you very much for all the details. Very comfortable. May we have your question? Yeah. Hi, Lars. Hi, Peter. I'm actually really greedy and ask four questions, please. They're quite short. One of them, just in the press release, you have this sentence. It says talking about the growth in the OEM business. It says it was primarily leasing and spare engines that drove revenue growth. Can you just clarify what's the difference between a leasing and a spare engine there? Can I just start with that one? I mean, when you sell, you can either sell an engine to Airbus, then it's an installed engine, or you sell an engine to an airline as a spare engine, then it's a spare engine. Typically, a spare engine has a better pricing, or you give less discounts because it's used not so frequently and bears less aftermarket. That's why the OE price is higher. The other side of the medal is you give less discounts, and the leased engine you sell to a third-party leasing company. That's the difference. Basically, they're the same. They're both spare engines. I just wanted to check it was spare engines. It's not a leasing business per se. No, no, no. It's a spare engine. You send it to the island or you send it to a lessor. These are the two. Finally, that's a spare engine and a different owner. Okay, fine. It is the same activity. Okay. Exactly. Yeah. Fine. Okay. Just to repeat Christoph's question on FX, and he talked about FX strategy, which I know you will not change because it has been the same for 20 years. It has worked well. In a hypothetical situation, we go into a period of dollar weakness. What industrial levers do you think you have? Do you think your successor will be able to find cost reduction if needed, or have you left such a lean—are you leaving such a lean business? There is not a lot of fat there. That would be one. I will rattle through the rest of the questions. I am not sure if you answered Ben Heelan's question about the timing of the next entry payment on LEAP. If you did, sorry, I missed it. The last one, Lars, is just with the—I know it has only been a month since Liberation Day. Any signs at all of stress in the supply chain, or are you worried about kind of paperwork, litigation, stuff that could jam up the supply chain? Thank you. Let me start with the first one. That's probably rather easy. No, I'm not concerned right now. I'm on paperwork. That is my least concern in all that tariff environment. You had to look at the worldwide ecosystem, and I'm more concerned on pricing availability than on paperwork. As I said in the beginning, I'm an optimist, and this industry is so important for every country and state that I believe we're going to see some ease up in the hopefully days and weeks to come. We have, as I mentioned several times, we have a multi-source supply chain that is especially valid for MTU. If worst come to worst, we have flexibility shares on different suppliers when you have double, triple, or quadruple sources. I think I'm good stressing other sources more than the ones affected for higher tariffs. Okay. I mean, regarding reaction to a strong U.S. dollar weakness, probably we would have to look into our cost base for sure. I mean, typically, the reaction scheme would not be, let's say, going into the U.S. with production or so. Moving production from the euro to the U.S. dollar to reduce exposure, as I think we mentioned that before. I mean, it takes a lot of years to, let's say, relocate parts, get all the certification stuff from FAA and the ASA and so on. The U.S. is also not a low-cost country. It is not, let's say, that we can produce with a very low cost base in the U.S. compared to Europe. That is also not the case. Yeah, if there is a dollar weakness, we would have to look into our cost, into our manufacturing footprint, but probably not with the result that we're going to relocate parts to the U.S. or so. I don't think that will be the final outcome. Here again, as every company, we are continuously looking on our unit cost and our cost base. We are giving some more details again on the capital market day, how do we transform the company into the next decade, and unit cost improvements are certainly on the agenda of the whole board. On the LEAP, so the near term, there will not be another payment. I will not give you the payment plan, which we agreed with the OEM, but nothing to expect this year or next year. Thank you. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, please press star 11 on your touchtone telephone. The operator will announce your name when it's your turn to ask a question. In case you wish to cancel your question, please press star 11 again. We have a follow-up question from the line of Chloé Lemarié from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Yes, thank you very much for allowing me back in the queue. I just wanted to follow up on the performance from AML because obviously last year it was a pretty strong performance. Just commenting on this for Q1 and whether you had an impact on your margin performance. The other one was actually in terms of within your cash flow, you had a pretty significant headwind from provision. Just wanted to check that I understood what was driving this in Q1 this year, please. Thank you. You mean MLS margin? A comment on the MLS margin. Our leasing entity in the Netherlands, yeah? Yes, sorry. Yeah, okay. The margin was a bit weaker in Q1, but that's a natural thing. In quarters where you have, let's say, a lot of asset management transactions, you have a strong margin, and in others, you have a little bit of weaker margin. I mean, if you look on the MRO margin sequentially, we had Q3, Q4 had a margin level of 9%, where MLS did something like a 20% margin. Q1 was a bit weaker, maybe 15% or so in that ballpark. That was also the reason why we are a little bit below the 9% level, which we had the last two quarters. 8.2, I mean, 8.2 is strong compared to the 7.7 we had last year in Q1, but sequentially, it's a little bit weaker. Higher GTF share and a little bit reduced MLS margin, but the next quarters will be different. Nothing to worry about on that side. Your second question was provisions. Yeah, provisions. That's always a difficult animal to look only on the provisions line. I mean, you have to, especially in the context of the GTF fleet management plan, you know that a lot of airlines get in the first step credit notes, and then you technically consume the provision, but on the other side, you instantly build up a liability. You have to look on both lines together. That is not only on the provisions line. In our case, we paid roughly $70 million in the first quarter of 2025 for the fleet management plan of the GTF. As I said, it's difficult to look only in the provisions line, so you cannot do that. Sorry, the $70 million is the compensation that you paid, or if it's? Exactly. Money which flowed out of our accounts towards airlines through the different lines in their cash flow statement. Perfect. Very clear. Thank you. Christoph from Agency Partners, may we have your question? Oh, fantastic. Thank you. Good morning. I just have a couple of follow-up questions. One is mitigation for the PW1100G in the event that tariffs become very difficult. Would it be possible, and have you been discussing with Pratt & Whitney for you to assemble all the PW1100Gs for Airbus for Europe and China at MTU in Europe rather than splitting them between Europe and the U.S.? My second question is on R&D. Your company-funded R&D went up EUR 22 million in the first quarter, but your capitalization of R&D went up EUR 27 million. I wondered if you could just explain what the spending is on at the moment, given that you have completed the GTF Advantage certification, and how you see that developing for the rest of the year. Thank you. Maybe on the first one, it's obviously a theoretical question right now, but I would say it's obviously possible that MTU is doing more than we do today, but we have a physical limitation in our test set. There is a limit of how many engines we can test here in Munich in our facility. Then again, if worst come to worst, we would find slots in our MRO facilities in Hanover, for example, or in Poland. I'm not able to answer the question fully, but there are scenarios that we weigh a little bit, the engine assembly between the U.S. and Europe. I mean, the capitalized R&Ds had a quite significant spike in Q1. I answered that earlier, that we had one-off payment in the first quarter, which is an imbalanced payment related to the PW1100, the GTF Advantage. That won't happen in the next three quarters. That is always only once a year. The run rate regarding capitalization for the next quarters is rather in the ballpark, EUR 20 million-EUR 25 million per quarter. Thanks so much. Apologize. My line dropped for that. Thank you. No problem. Eileen Kerner from [audio distortion], may we have your question? Yes. Thank you. Good morning, Lars, Peter, and Thomas. I just had a quick question. I'm sorry if you have answered before. You had a very strong organic growth for your MRO, excluding the GTF in Q1. What are your expectations for the remainder of this year, excluding GTF? I mean, excluding the GTF, so it's more or less, I would say, more or less between 10% and 15%, I would say. I mean, GTF grows a bit stronger as we expect to go from, let's say, 30%, which we had last year, to rather, let's say, a 40% share, 35%-40% share. That implies already that GTF will grow a bit stronger, maybe in the ballpark of, let's say, 20%-25%, and the remaining MRO, so excluding GTF, rather between 10% and 15%. Thank you, Peter. A follow-up question from the line of Benjamin Heelan from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yeah, thank you, guys, for the follow-up. Obviously, your competitor, CFM, has had some challenges in terms of delivery, and you've obviously just won the certification of the Advantage. Can you talk a little bit about what you're seeing kind of in terms of campaigns, medium term, and if you're seeing customers or airlines potentially shifting more towards you or not? I'm just interested in how the market share dynamics have played out given the challenges that CFM has had. Just a final one. It sounds like there's going to be a business update at the air show. Is there going to be a medium-term guide that we can expect at that event? Thank you. You answered the first one for the CMD. Yeah. I mean, it's always a challenge to give a medium-term guidance in a, let's say, environment where we are today with unsecure outlook what the tariffs will put. We will talk a little, we will talk about the next five years in a little bit more or less detail. Let's see. But we will give a rough picture for the next five years, yes. Yeah. Let me comment on the market share. We stated several times that the campaigns for the deliveries in the next two or three years have already been done years ago. We are now looking at campaigns more or less aiming towards the end of the decade and beyond. I do not necessarily believe that the current weakness of deliveries of the CFM engines has a big impact on these. What we can say, the sales of the GTF last year were pretty successful. I think we sold around 1,950, I believe, was the number of GTF engines. That was still with the base in mind, but now we have the Advantage certified. Obviously, we are hoping that the Advantage can prove all the improvements that we are promising to the market, and then the market share and momentum kicks in for the next year or in two years when we have the first results visible for our customers from the Advantage. Okay. Very clear. Thank you. To ask a question, please press star 11 on your touchtone telephone. The operator will announce your name when it's your turn to ask a question. In case you wish to cancel the question, please press star 11 again. Ian Douglas- Pennant from UBS, may we have your question? Thanks very much for having me on. I've been kicked off the call more times than I have the patience for, which I'm sure is a UBS issue. If the question's been asked already, do please just pass me to the transcript. Just thinking about cash flow, inventories reduce very materially quarter-over-quarter which seems abnormal with normal seasonality patterns that we see. How is this? It seems to be a major driver of cash flow. Why did they decrease? Is this persistent? How should we think about that? Very similar question for receivables as disclosed in your presentation also seems to be a major driver of cash flow. Is this trade contract assets or imbalance payments? Is that linked in some way to capitalized R&D? Maybe you could help us think through that. Obviously, large moving payables, which I assume is an offset to the receivables. Maybe you could just help us think through the working capital moves. Thank you. No, yeah. I mean, I think if you want to go into very details, very deep details, then you have to talk to IR. I mean, the general thing is that we obviously in Q4, we had a very strong Q4. Shopload, all of our MRO shops were full. That reflects a high number of a high amount of PoC receivables. It's not so unfinished engines in the MRO shops are all accounted for as PoC receivables. You ship it to the customer, then it's transferred from a PoC receivable to a trade receivable. Finally, the customer pays, then it goes out of working capital. I mentioned that I think before that we had a quite strong Q4. Working capital moved up in Q4. Cash flow in Q4 was a little bit disappointing. We had a lot of customers paid now, and we had a strong cash flow in Q1. That is a little bit the phasing in the receivable line. On inventories, I mean, that's also more of a typical pattern that MRO shops acquire spare parts at the end of the year. In some cases, for the old spare parts list price, then you have, let's say, a higher level of inventories. Once the inventories are consumed, are allocated to certain engines in the shop, you saw the spare parts move from inventories to the PoC receivables and goes down the road as described before. In general, going through working capital line item by line item is not really, let's say, helpful, I would say. If you want to go into every detail, I think Thomas is very happy to do that exercise with you. Yeah. A follow-up question from the line of Christoph Minner from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Yes. Thank you for retaking the questions. I have two follow-ups. The first one is on the tariff. Just to be clear, you're going to be sharing the cost with Pratt & Whitney of the tariffs of your components being shipped into the U.S. and also on the tariffs of the components of your Japanese partners shipping into the U.S.. That's the way we should be thinking about it on the OE side. That was the first question. Second question is on GTF Advantage. I mean, quite honestly, you will be delivering in series those engines at the end of the year, but airlines may require some upgrades of the existing GTF to GTFA. Will it be visible in your P&L? I mean, is it an MRO element that will be coming, I don't know, in 2026, 2027, or is it part of the warranty cost? I'll start, Christoph. I'll start with the first one. This is my understanding today. Everything that is on the OE side goes into the IAE, and then it's shared to the work share and the percentage that we have on the program. That is clearly valid for the OE environment on the 1100. On the GTF, I don't understand the question. We are doing these upgrades within the regular shop visits starting somewhere targeting for next year. Can you? Okay. Oh, yeah. My question is, if I have today a normal GTF and I want this to be upgraded to the GTFA, do I need, as an airline, to wait for my next shop visit to be upgraded, or can I be upgraded before? When it comes into the shop visit, the normal shop visit, will the airline pay an additional fee, or is it part of the standard warranty work that you're doing on the GTF? Christoph, so far it's called an upgrade package. I don't have the information right now whether this is paid extra or for me, it's certainly not warranty, but this needs to be approved. I can't answer right now. Okay. No, thank you very much. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time, so I will hand the call back to Thomas for closing remarks. Yeah. Thank you. This ends our Q1 results call. Thank you, Lars. Thank you, Peter, for presenting, and to you all for your participation. Looking forward to get in touch in the coming days and weeks, and looking forward to see as many as possible of you on different meetings at the Paris Air Show. Thank you. We want to thank Mr. Lars Wagner and Mr. Peter Kameritsch and all of the participants of this conference. Goodbye.