Dear ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the webcast of thyssenkrupp. May I now hand you over to Claus Ehrenbeck, who will lead you through this conference. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thank you very much, operator. Hello, everybody. This is Claus Ehrenbeck from the investor relations team. Also on behalf of the entire team, I would like to wish you a very warm welcome to our conference call today on Q3 and nine-month numbers. All the documents for this release have already been disclosed this morning at 7:00 A.M and are available on our website. This is all so far from my side. I would like now to hand over to Klaus Keysberg, our CFO, who will lead you through the presentation and the slides, and afterwards, there will be a Q&A session. Klaus, please. Yeah. Thank you very much. Also, a warm welcome from my side here to today's conference call. Let us briefly take a look at some key financial highlights reflecting our strong operational progress year-over-year, upswing year. Fueled by continued market tailwinds, particularly related to the materials and automotive businesses, we were able to improve our top line year to date with a significant order intake and sales increase by 28% and 14% respectively year-over-year. Consequently, we recorded a nine-month order intake of EUR 25.3 billion and sales totaling EUR 24.6 billion. Simultaneously, we have been able to generate a positive EBIT adjusted of EUR 266 million in Q3 alone. This results in a nine-month figure of EUR 564 million, supported, of course, by stringent cost restructuring measures. This figure represents a significant improvement vis-a-vis the EUR -1.16 billion loss recorded during the same period of time for the nine months of the previous fiscal year, and includes also a negative EUR -236 million effect from the Multi Tracks segment. We recorded an even stronger performance in Q3 this year with an EBIT adjusted of EUR 266 million compared to EUR 220 million in Q2, which is up 21% and by far more than sales growth, which was 1%. This positive development is also reflected in the free cash flow before M&A, which has improved substantially by EUR 3.1 billion year-on-year from EUR -4 billion in the first nine months of the fiscal year 2019/2020 to EUR -953 million thus far in the fiscal year 2020/2021. With the latter figure including also Business Cash Flow of a EUR -167 million from the Multi Tracks segments. In this context, it should be noted that Q3 contributed a free cash flow before M&A of EUR -235 million, representing a marked improvement versus the EUR -750 million in Q2. Let me emphasize at this point that we will relentlessly continue our efforts to render TK a much better company and to drive performance regardless of the current tailwind we can see. Let us now jointly take a look at the performance in Q3, more specifically starting with our performance and restructuring progress. In light of a strong demand, particularly in the case of Materials Services, we achieved the already mentioned EBIT adjusted of EUR 266 million. Without externalities, this figure might have been even higher due to Automotive Technology, Industrial Components being affected by the well-known semiconductor shortage, causing lower customer call-offs and higher steel costs and primary products, and Steel Europe being hit by high raw material prices due to the time lag in reflecting price developments in contracts with our customers. We have continued to stringent execution of our headcount reduction and reached a cumulative FTE decrease of roughly 6,900 FTE within our defined programs. We have already achieved more than half of our overall reduction target of more than 12,000 FTEs. At the same time, we have achieved a total headcount reduction including additional ended attrition of 7,700 FTEs so far. Regarding our free cash flow before M&A of EUR -235 million, significantly higher earnings were offset by a required net working capital buildup of roughly EUR 700 million. As I mentioned in previous conference calls already, we anticipate the current fiscal year to exhibit disproportionately higher investments, especially, but not only at Steel Europe, which are markedly above depreciation to create a sustainable performance boost. Last but not least, we have a strong balance sheet with a net cash position of EUR 4 billion supporting our transformation program and enabling degrees of freedom for pursuing performance-enhancing actions. Moving on to our portfolio transformation, we see clear and swift progress in the streamlining of Multi Tracks with the signing of the mining sale to FLSmidth, leading to a positive effect on net cash, pensions, and equity alike. At the same time, we have accomplished the signing of the infrastructure business sale on August 5th and have entered the due diligence phase at AST, underlining our commitment to a rapid portfolio transformation. In terms of Steel Europe, we are working on optionality for a standalone solution. As reported already earlier, a decision regarding the preferred future scenario will be taken most likely in spring next year. The next slide depicts and summarizes where we stand with the restructuring plans for our businesses. As part of our restructuring, entailing a reduction of more than 12,000 FTEs, we estimate that two-third of our current target will be achieved until the end of this fiscal year, fiscal year 2021, within an almost equal split between Germany and the rest of the world. This target can be reconfirmed given that we have already accomplished a cumulative headcount reduction of 6,900 FTEs until the end of June. As part of the restructure, we expect a EUR low to mid three-digit million cash out for the entire fiscal year, while provisions will also be in this range. Based on these restructuring efforts, we will have realized from this headcount reduction programs, a low to mid three-digit million EUR number in sustainable annual savings since 2019/2020 until the year-end. In addition to savings from other restructuring initiatives, for example, closure of sites, reflecting our strong commitment to substantially improve the bottom line. Let me briefly highlight some major developments at our business segments in the following, starting with Materials Services, which reported an outstandingly strong quarter, the strongest in at least the last 10 years, and it looks as if this will be also true for the entire fiscal year. We see also good dynamics going on for the next weeks and months ahead. As you can see, we have revised the format of our presentation, thereby presenting one chart per segment reflecting the group of companies concept. In addition to business insights, we have also added some information regarding market trends on the right. At Materials Services, we were able to benefit from strong market recovery, leading to a notably shipments increase year-on-year, even though these figures are still below pre-pandemic levels. It should be noted that shipment volumes would have recovered even stronger if demand would not have exceeded supply from steel mills for some materials. Moving on to sales, the segment clearly benefited from an increase in material prices, especially for carbon, stainless steel and the significantly higher shipment translating into a 70% surge year-on-year. In addition, the demand for steel has experienced a significant increase year-on-year across Europe and North America, particularly in the case of carbon steel in Europe. Simultaneously, EBIT adjusted has improved substantially to a total of EUR 232 million in Q3, in line with the favorable price dynamics in the spot market that led to sizable windfall profits and productivity gains achieved inter alia via continued FTE reduction. This is also important to say, this FTE reduction totals to 1,800 versus the fiscal year 2018/2019. These developments broadly reflect the overall market picture, where strong demand recovery is likely to drive shipments above pre-pandemic levels during the next fiscal year, if supply from producers is available. Moving on to Industrial Components, we have recorded a 40% increase in order intake and sales year-on-year. In case of Bearings, the growth mainly came from industrial applications in Europe and the Americas, while the demand for the wind energy was temporarily lower year-on-year as expected, given the tax incentive-driven extraordinary strength of the Chinese market last year. Forged Technologies witnessed a strong demand with components across all regions, mainly for trucks and construction machinery, with a slight effect of the semiconductor shortage on car manufacturers. At the same time, EBIT adjusted has increased by EUR 41 million year-on-year, particularly due to Forged Technologies, driven by the top line, as well rigid cost control and savings related to personnel costs and procurement. On the other hand, Bearings recorded a lower EBIT adjusted year-on-year due to changes, particularly in the product and regional mix, as well as higher steel prices. Nonetheless, the business achieved positive effects year to date due to scale economies in wind energy, product mix effects, and efficiency gains inter alia via restructuring. Looking further out, a positive midterm trend for wind turbines is clearly expected with the rising demand for energy and the shift towards larger wind turbines and rotor blades as key drivers, for which we offer the right solutions with our products. For Forged Technologies, market experts such as IHS predict further demand growth for heavy duty engines and construction machinery, which obviously goes very much in line with the GDP growth. Next up is Automotive Technologies, which experienced a significant upswing across all businesses, supported by strong automotive demand, especially in China. As a consequence, the order intake and sales have increased year-on-year by 53% and 49% respectively, despite the aforementioned semiconductor issues. Simultaneously, Automotive Technology was able to substantially improve their EBIT adjusted year-on-year based on high plant utilization rates at all businesses, particularly for new plants, a more favorable order structure, and cost savings related to higher production efficiencies and restructuring. This result has been achieved despite headwinds stemming from higher logistics and packaging costs. Taking a look at the overall market environment, IHS expects further growth in the global automotive production to 80 million units in calendar year 2021, which is still below pre-pandemic levels. Over and above, we believe that we are well positioned with our products to benefit from the major trends of autonomous driving and e-mobility. At Steel Europe, we recorded significantly higher shipments, sales volumes and prices, particularly related to the automotive industry. In more concrete terms, shipments increased 55%, while sales rose by 74% year-on-year, reflecting the strong demand recovery in the steel sector. Furthermore, net sales per ton have ramped up quarter-on-quarter, and we are confident that we will see positive effects also in the quarters to come. Moving on to EBIT adjusted higher selling prices and an optimized product mix were partly offset by higher material costs and temporary production constraints, mainly due to the relining of Blast Furnace 1 initiated in Duisburg in the third quarter. Our long-term contract structures mean there is a delay in increased raw material and steel prices feeding through to our revenues and earnings. While we expect a significant positive sales and margin effects from our contract in upcoming quarters, this margin improvement will in Q4 be offset by the blast furnace relining just because of lower volumes. For the upcoming fiscal year, we expect a significant margin and EBIT adjusted improvement based on the already signed and respectively upcoming signing of long-term contracts with clients and ongoing cost cuttings under Strategy 20-30. To sum it up, the positive effect on earnings will come. We will just see it later than our competitors. Marine Systems. Q3 order intake mainly consists of smaller surface vessels and marine electronics as well as corresponding services. The Q3 figure represents a 24% growth year-on-year, it remains below Q2 due to the impact of the sizable Italian Navy order in that quarter. It should also be noted, however, that the big ticket, the EUR 5.5 billion order for submarines from Norway and Germany, was signed in July and will hence be booked in Q4. Sales have followed a similar development with a slight increase year-on-year due to the handover of the second and third corvette to the Israeli Navy, but below Q2, where a frigate handover to the German Navy occurred. In terms of EBIT adjusted temporarily, higher costs related to the percentage of completion accounting of ongoing projects have led to a slight deterioration. At the same time, we have initiated performance initiatives in new orders and to secure the profitability of current order backlog. Looking at the overall market, the Norwegian and German submarine orders could have lighthouse effect and serve as entry ticket to additional orders from European navies. Last but not least, at Multi Tracks, there has been a significant improvement across all major KPIs. In particular, AST took advantage of the favorable market environment. We also managed to win a first reference project in the United States for water electrolyzers, where the client intends to produce green ammonia based on green hydrogen. In the light of more favorable trading conditions, we managed to boost our sales by 16% year-on-year and the order intake by an even more sizable 90%. Furthermore, we have substantially enhanced our EBIT adjusted from previously EUR -189 million in Q3 2019/2020 to a loss of only EUR 45 million over the same time frame in fiscal year 2021, mainly driven by the improvements at AST and Plant Engineering, the latter being driven also by the strong progress that the mining as well as the cement business are making. Overall, ongoing restructuring programs across all units with a total of now 700 measures led to an FTE reduction of roughly 1,500 thus far. Over at the [audio distortion], we made some significant progress regarding our portfolio transformation for our Multi Tracks business, where we aim for a strategic partnership sale or closure, and this is the number one reason why we established this segment last year in May. A solution is already in reach for five businesses as of today. As previously announced, we have initiated the closure of heavy plate and carbon components, and during Q3, we have been able to conduct the successful signing of the mining sale on July 29th and the sale of infrastructure on August 5th, and of course, started the due diligence with potential buyers for the AST business. Based on the solid performance during the first three quarters, we would like to confirm our previously increased guidance for sales and EBIT adjusted and further details our guidance for free cash flow before M&A. We still expect all segments to contribute positively to EBIT adjusted, with the sole exception of Multi Tracks. Regarding Q4, we anticipate a lower positive EBIT adjusted quarter-on-quarter because seasonality effects at our auto-related components business, the blast furnace relining at Steel Europe, and effects of likely slower Abrufe from OEMs due to their supply chain constraints. Seasonality might also have effect on Materials Services, however, cushioned by the obviously persisting strong trading conditions. We expect a positive mid-three digit million EBIT adjusted for the entire fiscal year, and this at the top of the implicit range, which includes a Multi Tracks loss of approximately EUR 300 million. In terms of free cash flow before M&A, we anticipate a significant improvement and to move towards a year-end figure of a EUR -1 billion with a range of EUR -1.2 billion to EUR -1.5 billion, mainly caused by a net working capital build-up in line with sales growth and high commodity prices and the effects from temporarily previously mentioned supply chain issues at our customers. The variability of the cash profile at Marine Systems and Multi Tracks and investments above depreciation to further support our plant performance step-up going forward. Moreover, it should be noted that our free cash flow before M&A guidance includes the negative business cash flow assumptions of around EUR 350 million for Multi Tracks. In this context, I would like to recapitulate the supportive fundamentals going forward which lead us to expect sound trading conditions to prevail beyond 2021. Before outlining this positive development though, let me reemphasize that we will have to continue monitoring the semiconductor supply situation. First of all, the continued favorable demand situation for cars, trucks, and off-highway vehicles alike are set to benefit AT and Industrial Components. Next, we witness a strong demand for steel and industrial materials positively affecting our material businesses. Moving on, we expect a further decarbonization and the related green hydrogen trend to lead to increased demand for industrial scale electrolyzers supporting our thyssenkrupp Uhde Chlorine Engineers business. In addition to these market related factors, we have secured long-term contracts with our clients at Steel Europe that consider the strong demand as well as high raw material prices. Moving on to the next slide, I would like to reemphasize our commitment to value creation and provide you with an overview of what we are building on. First of all, in almost all our business, we are amongst the market leaders. In this context, I would like to once more highlight our leading position in the green hydrogen electrolyzers, which we are confident to leverage even stronger in the future. Over in the [audio distortion], we are renowned for our technological expertise based on our longstanding engineering expertise, including IP and profound ties with our customer base. Furthermore, we have successfully initiated our financial turnaround by demonstrating that we are capable of extracting value from our restructuring efforts and via achieving some first success stories as part of our ongoing portfolio streamline. Simultaneously, we possess a strong balance sheet with an equity ratio of 29% and a net cash position of EUR 4 billion, thereby creating a solid basis for continuing our restructuring efforts and portfolio streamlining. Finally, we have a clear commitment to sustainability, which will continue to be a management priority moving forward and have defined a roadmap leading to Science Based Targets initiative approved climate targets. Having said that, I would now like to take the time to answer your question. Thank you very much. Yeah. Thank you very much, Klaus. Hello, operator. Could you please take over for the Q&A session? Yes, of course. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin our question and answer session. If you have a question for our speakers, please dial a zero and one on your telephone keypad now to enter the queue. Once your name has been announced, you can ask a question. If you find your question is answered before it is your turn to speak, you can dial zero and two to cancel your question. If you are using speaker equipment today, please lift the handset before making your selection. Please only use a maximum of two questions. One moment please for the first question. The first question is from Ingo Schachel, Commerzbank. Your line is now open. Please go ahead, sir. Yes. Thank you. My first question would be on your free cash flow and on the free cash flow expectation for next year. Of course, it is still highly uncertain what the earnings level is going to be. Also this year, I think you have shown that the company can be cash flow breakeven before net working capital swings and before restructuring related cash outflows. Can you already tell us a bit what that means for next year with regards to those, let us say, more one-off related factors, for example, on net working capital. Maybe it is the opposite of the debate we had in previous years after a strong Q4 net working capital build up, which you naturally expect to release next year. Any reason speaking against that? Also on restructuring, maybe you can already tell us whether or not the cash outflow for restructuring is going to be similar next year like this year, and then maybe also anything special on CapEx that we should already be aware of for next year? Thank you, Mr. Schachel, for this question. The cash flow performance is, of course, one which I normally get the most questions for. If you look first at the free cash flow development in this year. We always get the question, now you're increasing your EBIT, why you are not increasing your free cash flow so much in line with? If you look at the structure of our free cash flow, you have to bear in mind the following. We have, in principle, two high priorities. The first priority is to come to a positive free cash flow. Yes. What we also always said is that we have to come to a position where we enable our businesses to come to a position to be in the top three peer groups. Therefore, we have to enable our businesses. This means we have to restructure the business on the one hand, but we also have to invest in the business, which we consider as core. This is what we are clearly doing. If you look at our full year cash flow or our full year performance, then you have to bear in mind that we invest in our business 160% of our depreciation. This is something, 160%. We do this because we are strategically totally convinced that this is the right way to do. This is the first one. This is an investment. We could easily say, "No, we are not doing this." We could come up here and say, "Well, we have a positive cash flow, but we are investing on a depreciation level." We could do so, but this is not something where we are strategically convinced. The second item is we are investing in restructuring. We are investing in restructuring, as said before, a low to mid cash out in this year. This is something we do by intention because we think that the restructuring is necessary. We could postpone the restructuring to save cash flow. No, we are not doing it because we want to speed up. This is something we are also doing with our cash flow. Of course, we have some business in the Multi Tracks. Yes, we do have, where we have structural problems. This is what we always said. With these three items, we do that what we always said what we would do. We are investing it. Our balance sheet position, we have to come back to positive cash flow. This is very clear. This is one of the reasons why we also divested elevator, to be in the position to enable our businesses. Now coming to net working capital. You all know the raw material price development. Of course, if you look at our net working capital development for the full year, we will have an effect of a very high three-digit number from net working capital. 80% or something like that is coming just because of prices. This comes not as a surprise to me. I don't like the number, but it's not coming as a surprise to me. This is the structure of this year. If you now come to the next fiscal year, we will still have a cash out for next fiscal year for restructuring. This is something which is also a low three-digit number. We will also have investments which are exceeding depreciation. This is what we clearly intend to do to further enable our business. In spite of having this, our clear target is to have a positive free cash flow. I cannot say more at this moment, but this is at least what we are aiming for. I hope it answers. Okay. Sure. No, it answers the question. Thanks for sending a very clear message on the cash flow ambition. Can I also ask you about the timing of your, I think, decision on the, I would say, strategy or structure for Steel Europe? I think you've now indicated early next year as a point in time when you want to make a decision. I think you've already looked into this matter for a while. I think in the last quarters, we were under the impression that maybe it's the steel market outlook, where we still want to see how things play out before you take a decision on Steel Europe. Now, of course, steel markets being at these seemingly more stable waters right now, what is it that prevents you from taking a decision earlier? Is it maybe the performance gap that you want to have more visibility how quickly you can close, or that you want to demonstrate that the margin gap to peers is closed? Or the competitive landscape, and that you need a firmer view of your willingness of your competitors to engage into M&A activity with you? Or why do you now aim for spring next year? If you come to a decision to, let's say, separate a business, if you look at other examples for this, and you look in detail to this, you never get to a decision very quick to this. You have to make preparations. You have to talk to this and that and so on and so on. If we say that we will intend to have a decision on this in spring next year, on the timeline, this is not too conservative. This is more normal timeline for us. What you said, of course, is playing, of course, a role. If you look at the performance of the steel business, we indicated that we consider this business is going up with margins and EBIT because of the structure of the contracts. You all know this. Of course, this is helping, and we have to see these proof points for us and also for the outside world to take a decision from this. Of course, you know that we are working on, let's say, make also some assumptions regarding the transformation to carbon neutral steel. This is something, of course, we want to have a bit more planning security. These are some items which, of course, let's say, lead to the fact that we plan to do the decision in March next year, or whenever. Not March, in spring next year. Sorry for this. In spring next year. Okay. Thanks very much. Yeah. Yeah, Ingo, thank you very much for the questions and also for asking only two questions at a time. We would also like to ask all other participants who ask questions only to ask two questions at a time so that as many as possible participants have a chance to ask their questions. Thank you. Operator, please continue. The next question is from Alan Spence. Jefferies, your line is now open. Please go ahead. Thanks. Good afternoon. First one is on the blast furnace relining. What percentage of the cost was taken in Q3? How much will be the remainder for fiscal Q4? I don't know whether I got the question right. What's the cost for the blast furnace relining and? Q3. Q3. Yeah, I think the cost for the relining is a low two-digit number in this respective Q3. Is it fair to assume it's a high two-digit in Q4? Yes. Okay. My second question around the pension. You obviously have got a large amount of net cash. What's the catalyst for fixing the pension liability? By fixing, I don't mean topping it up completely. Putting in sufficient cash to the plan assets that it can meaningfully self-fund its annual requirements. Yeah, we could do so. This is clear. This is something we will always, from time to time, consider for ourselves. In the past, we did not because we want to, let's say, keep the flexibility with the liquidity. I think we explained it also before. Now it's the time. If you come to certain, let's say, M&A decisions regarding steel and things like this, we would like to have a clearer picture on what the portfolio will be in the coming months or years, and then take a decision on this. If you talk about the steel business, you know that in the steel business, there are EUR 4 billion in pension liabilities, and it makes a difference how to deal with these pension liabilities, if you consider this as part of the group or standalone and things like this. Therefore, we are at the moment a bit reluctant on making a decision on this. In principle, we could do. This is the reason why we do not so far. Okay. after spring 2022 then? Yeah. Most likely. Okay. Thank you very much. The next question is from Jason Fairclough, Bank of America. Your line is now open. Please go ahead. Yep. Thanks very much for the presentation, Dr. Keysberg. I appreciate it. Just on steel, you mentioned that the profit is going to come, it's just going to take longer than peers. I was looking at it, this business once earned more than EUR 1.7 billion in EBITDA per year for five years in a row. This year, it looks like it's going to do EUR 400 million in the strongest steel market ever. So I guess the question is, can it recover, or is it permanently broken? Is anybody at thyssen held accountable for the contracts that mean that this thing is under-earning? First answer to the first question, very clear. Yes, this business can come back to this level. Very clear. We are totally convinced about it. Totally. If you come to the explanation of this, our contract structure is more long-term. I explained it several times. Our spot price exposure is not much more than 10%. The other competitors do have much more. If you look now into the development of the steel prices and the raw material prices, which we saw in the last 12 months, I know something about the steel business, and you surely also. I have never seen such a price development of both of sales prices and raw material prices in the last 20 years. If you now have contracts, 12-month contracts or six-month contracts, which we normally do with our customers, it's very clear that it takes longer. Our net sales per ton increase. The spot market increased much more, and the raw material costs were also quicker. Because of the long-term structure of our customers, we will see the benefits later, and we will see it in the upcoming months. This is very clear, and we are totally convinced that we see this coming. Totally. You have to take into account that we have, let's say, this relining of the blast furnace. In this year, we are losing volumes in these times. Especially in this quarter, we could use these volumes, of course, to gain sales on a profitability base, but this is not possible. This is something, of course, this is not a good news, but I think we know that this is coming, and starting from 1st October, this will be changed. The other thing is also, we always said we have to restructure the business. You know that we have a restructuring program running, which is 3,750 people. The restructuring is running in plan. So far, roughly 800 people left the company. You can see we are on plan with this, but we are not at the end of this. Profit improvement is also coming out of this. We are very much convinced that starting with next year, we will see a good development in this business. Okay, just a second sort of follow-up, and not really a question, but actually a request to you as CFO, Dr. Keysberg. Would you please consider focusing on EBITDA rather than EBIT as your key focus figure? All of your key peers use EBITDA, so you really do stand out in using EBIT. Obviously we have distortions there because of the write-downs and the differences in D&A over time. Yes, sir. I will take it into my consideration, yes. Thank you for that. Okay. Thank you very much. The next question is from Carsten Riek, Credit Suisse. Your line is now open. Please go ahead. Thank you very much. I have two questions on Multi Tracks. We have seen good progress here over the past few weeks, with regard to potential disposals. Is there any solution in sight for the remaining Plant Engineering businesses? Here I refer to chemicals and cement in the portfolio of Multi Tracks. That's the first one. Thank you. Yeah. Chemical and the cement business, you know that the cement business we try to, let's say, divest, and we got orders which we did not accept. We always said we do not make fire sales, and we rejected what we saw there. Then we decided to, let's say, stop this process for a while, and we will start this process at one point of time again. We will do so, but I cannot tell you when. We are always considering what will be the right time to start this process for the other businesses here. I can tell you that for most of the businesses which are now still in the Multi Tracks business, which are not divested so far, our target is to start the process in the next fiscal year again. This is also valid for the other business you can see here. Yeah. Okay, perfect. Thank you. The other question I have is more on the free cash flow. You mentioned the chip shortage and lower automaker call-offs. What is actually the headwind here in the net working capital because of that? Do you see it as a part of your revised guidance on the free cash flow? Yeah. Maybe you could shed a little bit of light in here. Yeah, this is part of this. This situation is a bit difficult to explain. If you remember, I was always talking about this semiconductor shortage and, let's say, the impact on our business of this. Meanwhile, I think it is more obvious or more public in the communication that also the OEMs are admitting that they have problems with this. What we see is the following, and this is difficult to handle. The OEMs, they do come up with order intakes for us. So-called Abrufe. I don't know the English word for- Call-offs call-offs. The call-offs. When they see or recognize that they are not able to produce something, all of a sudden they are closing down a plant. The warning time is not very long. They are several days, or if it's long, a week, where we say, "No, this plant is going to be shut down the next 14 days," or, "This plant is going to be shut down the next three weeks." This is something where we clearly see, what we see also in the Q3, that of course we are working to the call-offs we see in the systems. At the end of the day, it's not sure whether they are really call-offs because of the shortages. The OEMs would produce if they could. They would even produce more. Sometimes they make shutdowns because they cannot produce, because they have shortage of materials. This we see also in the Q4. This is very clear. This is difficult to predict. For instance, for the September, we see quite a good number of call-offs, but we cannot be very sure if the call-offs are really taking place because of this shortage of semiconductors. Could you give us an? Yeah. Sorry. Sorry. Could you give us a number for the previous quarter, so the third quarter, how much those kind of headwinds were in the net working capital? No, not so much. Okay. I cannot give you a number. It is more than you can imagine, but it's something. I cannot give you a number. Okay. Fair enough. Thank you very much. Yeah. Next question is from Tom Zhang, Barclays. Operator, your line is now open. Please go ahead. Yes. Good afternoon, Dr. Keysberg. Just the first question from me, please. The assumptions underlying your guidance, clearly you hit a EUR mid-three-digit million number you're implying Q4 EBIT down to maybe EUR 100 million, EUR 150 million. I understand the sort of seasonal weakness in industrials and steel, it feels like Materials Services could be the swing factor here. Could you just elaborate on where you see steel prices in the next two months, whether or not you're assuming any sort of further inventory gains or losses in that guidance? Sort of just trying to get a sense of whether there's upside or downside that we might expect to that range. Wait, the line was not too good. I was just checking whether I got the question right. The first one is where we see our EBITDA guidance. Is this, or what are the fundamentals behind this? No, more so, with Materials Services, what assumptions you make with steel prices, really, or raw material prices. Yeah for the next quarter, just whether or not there should be more inventory gains that you're expecting or losses. For the Materials Services business, we think that just the assumption is that we will have quite stable steel prices and also the raw materials prices we saw, it's not so much really for Materials Services here, more the steel prices. On the raw material prices, we see a development which is slightly below the Q3 number. Slightly below Q3. Slightly. More stable. Okay. Very clear. Second question, please. We're seeing more signs of slowing China demand, especially now with signs of renewed lockdowns. Are you feeling any impact from this yet in auto and Industrial Components? Does it worry you at all in the next few quarters? We see clearly a slower dynamic in China also because of semiconductor. This is what we're seeing. We cannot really judge how much the impact will be. That's the reason why we are also cautious for Q4. This is very clear. Anyway, all in all, if you don't focus on one business, the July we have seen so far was quite, let's say, successful, was quite a good start in the quarter so far. Okay. That's clear. Thanks very much, Dr. Keysberg. The next question is from Rochus Brauneiser, Kepler Cheuvreux. Your line is now open. Please go ahead. Yes, thanks for taking the questions. First one is on Steel Europe. Not sure whether this has been covered before, but can you give us a sense about how much of the employee reduction at Steel Europe, the total of 3,750, will be realized by the end of the next, in two years' time? To get there, you said 800 are so far removed. Can you maybe give us a bit more visibility on the timeframe? Yes. Just wait a minute. I think. Let me just have a look. I think in the next two years, we will get additional 1,200 people redundant, and then we will have, I think, an effect in 2024 of additional 300 or 400, something like this, because of the closure in Bochum. Okay. Got it. Maybe on the blast furnace reline, which obviously started a bit earlier than initially planned. How big will be the volume loss now in the fiscal year 2024 from this measure? I think the volume loss will be 300,000 tons or something like this. It is always difficult, really, just because you know that normally you buy slabs to compensate on costs. This is also what we did, but of course, at the moment, prices are not favorable to do so, but we, of course, did it some way also. Yeah. Okay. The 300 refer to the shipment level, yeah? Yeah. Okay. Makes sense. Finally, on hydrogen, I think I could read on the tape that a stake sale is still being considered. Just want to get a sense about the priorities. I think you have high expectations in that business, why diluting eventually that stake you have, instead of funding through exit from other peripheral assets, such as reducing your elevator stake or other optionalities? Can you also give us a sense what your expectations are about the potential CapEx funding you see for the next five years in this joint venture, tkUCE? This is a difficult question regarding the future funding. This is something I will not comment on at this point of time. Sorry for that, but you may understand this. The question about the, you can say it, what are we doing with this business? In principle, the most priority is to really have a look, what are we doing with this business? Do we proceed alone, or do we proceed with a partner? The partnership could be one partner, which is, let's say, really strategically contributing to the business. Could also be, at the end of the day, that we make a, let's say, a partial value crystallization to fund future investments. We have not made up our mind on this. I can tell you, and I think I said it also last time, that we are approached by very much companies who offer partnerships regarding this, and we clearly have to make up our mind. In some cases, these are really good strategic stories behind this, and we have to sort it out. Of course, let's say if we talk about partnerships, also valuation on this is an important role about this. Therefore, we cannot confirm on the one or the other direction here. This is something which is still in consideration here. Can you give a direction? Would you say that the strategic fit is the absolute priority over the optimum or the highest potential valuation, which is feasible in the market? The strategic fit does play a very important role, yeah. Okay. Thank you very much. The next question is from Luke Nelson, JP Morgan. Your line is now open. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. Firstly, again, just on Steel Europe and the blast furnace reline, the guidance of mid-double digit impact in Q4. Can you just highlight, reiterate what's included in that number? Is that just direct maintenance, or does that include loss margin, underutilization, et cetera? That's the first question. Everything is included. Yeah. Okay. Very clear. Yeah. Secondly, on restructuring of cash out restructuring of low-mid, three-digit million this year. If I look at Slide four, for mid-term guidance, it looks like restructuring next year. There's potentially more. There's no particular scale to it. Could you maybe just give a bit more granularity around what the cash out for restructuring will be next year? Thanks. Next year, it will be a bit lower than this year. It will be a bit lower. In 2023, then it will be, let's say, in a high two-digit number. Yeah. This year, low to mid. Next year, it's more low than mid. In 2023, it's a high two-digit number. This is the profile of the restructuring expenses. Okay. Thanks a lot for clarifying that. Yeah. Look the graph next to the 2021. Where you see way to go until 2022, 2023, this is for two years. Yeah. Therefore, it appears that there will be more in the next year to come. In fact, it's for two years. That means it's actually less than in 2021. Okay, sure. Thanks for clarifying. Ladies and gentlemen, just as a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press zero and one on your telephone keypad. The next question is from Bastian Synagowitz. I'm sorry. Deutsche Bank, your line is now open. Please go ahead. Yes. Good afternoon, all. Just to have one more follow-up on steel. Sorry if part of that maybe has been already clarified, but I'm trying to get to the bottom of what's happening there. Just firstly, on realized prices and margins, if I look at the average ASPs, they've been increasing by roughly EUR 80 and costs obviously more than absorb this. Has the increase in ASP been mostly driven by maybe mix rather than actual price increases? Obviously, the margin isn't really reflecting at all what's happening in the market. Secondly, just also looking at your order intake, it seems like it's been literally flat for the last three quarters, and has been pretty much in line with the better quarters of the last couple of years, while obviously steel prices have more than tripled. I'm wondering what's going on here, as this obviously doesn't really make too much sense because, A, we're not really seeing any impact from higher steel prices. Also, technically, you should be able to do more volumes, I guess, in this environment. I'll take the first and then you add in. I don't know whether I got your question right because you were talking about ASP, at least I understood that you were talking ASP. ASP. Sorry, Average Selling Prices. I was talking about Average Selling Prices in steel. Okay. Sorry for getting you confused. No, it was my mistake. If I got the question right, you were saying that the Average Selling Price in steel, it is the development, you cannot follow the logic, or what's the? Yeah. No. I'm basically wondering, the EUR 80 increase here, is this mostly mix-driven? Obviously the higher prices haven't really been falling down to your bottom line. Your margin is declining, not rising. I was wondering, is this just mostly a mix effect, not really a price increase effect, which has been driving up the ASP? Is this what has happened there in the steel business? Obviously your margin isn't expanding. Well, no, this is not what is happening. All in all, we saw an average price increase per ton. We clearly see an increase per ton in selling prices. I don't know where you got your information from. First point, the sales per ton, net sales per ton, are increasing or increased in the first nine and six months in these businesses. It increased. Yeah, it increased in the six months and also quarter-on-quarter. I don't know where you got your things signal from. The question is now, what is the increase in the coming months and quarters? We are now, let's say, bringing it into the long-term quarters more and more, the price development, which we see on the spot. Definitely, net sales per ton, sales per ton increase in this fiscal year. This is something which is clear. I don't know where you got your information from. Maybe you could work it afterwards with the team here, but I cannot follow. Yeah, sure. No, actually, clearly your ASPs did increase by EUR 80 per ton, I guess. I guess the question is, has this been driven by an actual price increase or more by a mix change? You say it's been actually the price increase and cost more than offset that. Yeah. It's not only a mix, it is a price increase. Yeah. Okay, cool. On order intake? On order intake, the question was why we did not. The question is, I think order intake is EUR 2.4 billion, has been pretty much around those levels for three quarters now. In that time, steel prices went up two times, three times, and volumes obviously should be pretty good. This is basically order intake in line with better quarters of the past two to three years. We can't really see that reflected in the order intake. I'm wondering what's happening there. We are capturing price increases, but not as much as you might consider if you look at the spot market. We are also capturing, of course, volume increases, but which you can see only later because you know that our total output in this year will be definitely much lower than previous year. I know you know the explanations about this, and this is some kind of explanation to this, but maybe you can also follow this afterwards, because you know that in the Q4, we have lower shipments, which is very clear. This is then more spread on the timeline than the order intake. Yeah. Yeah. Shipments in Q3 were a bit lower than in Q2. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Maybe just one very last follow-up, if that's okay, on Multi Tracks. I think you've been giving some guidance in terms of the upper ceiling of the cash out in Multi Tracks. I think it's been EUR 350 that would imply almost, I think, EUR 200 million of cash out for Multi Tracks in Q4, if I reconcile that correctly. Could you maybe let us know how much of that is probably for heavy plate, where we obviously going to shut it down in the fourth quarter, and you're probably going to have a bulk of the restructuring payment. I think the AST business probably should sequentially do quite well in terms of cash contribution into the fourth quarter. Well, this is a very detailed question. Let me have a check on this. One moment. Well, heavy plate is going to contribute to this negative number, a mid-two-digit number. Yeah. The rest are operative issues, of course. Heavy plate is contributing a mid-two digit negative number. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thanks for taking my question. Good. The next question is from Tristan Gresser, Exane BNP Paribas. Your line is now open. Please go ahead. Yes. Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. The first one on ETS. Can you please comment on your current carbon credit position, if you have seen any OpEx inflation this year, and what do you expect for the next year? When do you expect generally to hold short of inventory free allocation and buy more actively on the market? If I got the question right, it was about the. Carbon credits the carbon credits. Yeah. Okay. I mean, the carbon credit, you know that we get this free allocation on the one hand, and on the other hand, we also buy and sometimes sell. At the moment, we can say that we are more or less covered to the end of our planning time. This is 2024 or something like this. We are pretty much covered, we do not expect a major effect out of this. You know that the European Commission is talking and considering what they are doing. This is something we cannot foresee at the moment. This is going to have an impact on the whole industry. All right. That's helpful. Maybe on decarbonization. You put out decarbonization CapEx figures. Some peers expect some level of policy support of 50%. Is that a figure or number you can also expect? Maybe if you can give us some sense of where your applications are with the European Innovation Fund and maybe at the German levels, how much you've applied, and when should we expect some decisions there? Thank you. I can clearly confirm this 50%, but I have to say this is at least 50%. There are still talks going on where there might be the possibility to get more. This is very open. This is also something which is not so much for the publicity, but I think there is a big commitment to at least to support more than 50% on this. This is where we are in talks with European and also German government. Yeah. Just when should you expect this, some decision taking place by year-end or maybe next year? I think the problem is. Not the problem. Every steel producer is now planning to build up and invest in the direct reduction equipment to install the capacity to produce it. We also do so, and our plan is to do this in 2024, 2025. We have our applications running, and we have, let's say, so-called Pre. Pre-approval. Pre-approval to this. This is now to be checked by the European Commission. With that, what is in there, we are quite happy with this. This is something where we see quite good progress. The problem is this is only the first step. The transformation of this industry into carbon neutral business is not only an issue of two or three years, it is an issue of 10, 20 years. Politics, they only think in two or three years. They only give commitments for the next two years or three years. That is a bit the question. I think we are quite okay with the first phase of investing. Having said that, we have to take care about the next phase of investing. Here, we have to fight for further support. This is the CapEx side. There is also, of course, there are other sides, that producing carbon neutral steel, you might get into situations where the producer of carbon neutral steel with hydrogen is more expensive than the legacy production with metallurgy, and therefore the industry is asking for carbon contracts for difference. This is also something where German politics is supporting, at least the actual one, and European ones are looking at it. This is something where we also have to get more clarity. All right. Very clear. Thank you. It's a question of CapEx, OpEx, and market behavior. Our customers really asking for green steel, but they have to be ready also to pay for this. This is a process, let's say it this way. There are currently no further questions. As a final reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press zero and one on your telephone keypad. If there are no further questions, then we would like to thank you for participation. Of course, as always, we are happy to continue the dialogue with you. If you might have further questions, then please call us. We are available for you, and we are also looking forward to seeing you on the road at conferences once the marketing season has started again, and this will foreseeably be early September. Of course, if you wish to have conference calls with us, please tell us and we are happy to arrange something for you. Thank you very much, and look forward to staying in touch. Bye-bye. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your attendance. This conference has been concluded.