Ladies and gentlemen, I'm very happy to welcome you to our call on the financial results of the Q2 in 2022. The press release, the following presentation, and our quarterly statement have been published today at 7:00 A.M. Central European Time on our investor relations website in the reports and presentation section. In addition, you can also find an overview of the most important KPIs on a quarterly basis available for your convenience on the website. We will also make, of course, this recording available afterwards. Before we come to today's agenda, I'm sure you have all taken notice of our famous disclaimer. As you have seen in the invitation, Andreas Wolf, our Chief Executive Officer, and our Chief Financial Officer, Werner Volz, are here to guide you through our presentation of the financial results. As always, they will report on the most important developments of the last quarter, the group and business unit development, as well as our cash flow and balance sheet. Afterwards, both gentlemen will be available for a Q&A opportunity. Now, without further ado, let me hand over to our Chief Executive Officer, Andreas Wolf. Yeah. Thank you, Heiko, and thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, for joining today. Another quarter is in the books, and it really was another challenging quarter that we had to manage, starting with the lockdowns in China, which led to a very weak month of April. It just continued with ongoing semiconductor shortages, the war in Ukraine, and precautionary measures we had to take to manage a potential gas shortage in Europe. In this environment, we conclude another solid quarter with sales of almost EUR 2.2 billion and 1.5% adjusted EBIT margin. That means that we also made further progress regarding the increasing input cost and the pass-through to our customers. Also, the free cash flow was slightly positive, even though we had increased our investments in the Q2. Main drivers for the positive free cash flow were some one-off effects, especially in the working capital. Of course, we also made progress in our transformation towards electrification. We had EUR 235 million of electrification sales in quarter two, amounting to a total electrification sales of half a billion EUR in the first half of 2022. In addition, we also managed to win some more significant orders in electrification, a total sum of EUR 3 billion in quarter two only. That means that more than 80% of our total order intake in quarter two are coming from the area of electrification. This does also include the EUR 1.7 billion battery management order intake, which we have communicated already during the quarter one presentation. We could also communicate our strategic partnership with Renault. You have certainly all seen the press release a couple of weeks ago. We will join forces in the development of a high-voltage One Box comprising the DC-DC converter, the onboard charger, and the inverter. Our goal is to increase the compactness by 45% and be ready for serial development in the mid of the decade. In addition, we will also start delivering our own High Voltage Box, which combines the DC-DC converter and the OBC starting in 2025. A part of that award volume is already included in the quarter two order intake figure. Further order wins should follow once we reach certain development milestones. As you can see, it was a very busy Q2, but with plenty of good news for Vitesco Technologies. Let us now dive a little bit deeper into the financial part of it. As I've mentioned already, we generated sales of EUR 2.165 billion, an increase of 3.3% compared to the previous year. Of course, there were two major effects which massively contributed to that increase, FX of 5.4% and the price increases, which we could negotiate with our customers. Without these effects, we would have lost sales year over year, especially due to the China lockdowns. The adjusted EBIT came in at 1.5%, still significantly influenced from the semiconductor shortages and increasing input costs, which especially burdened the business unit Electronic Controls. CapEx was at 5.2% of sales, and I already mentioned the positive cash flow of close to EUR 2 million. Our equity ratio at the end of quarter two was at a very strong 40.4%. If we now look at the development in light vehicle production, you can basically see the trend of the previous quarters continuing. Europe remains challenged and also China lost significant volumes due to the regional lockdowns, especially in April. Overall, the worldwide vehicle production was flat year-over-year. Our core technologies, we managed to outperform this flat market organically by 3.2 percentage points, mainly driven by the strong sales development in EC and S&A core technologies. At group level, however, we underperformed 1.4 percentage points compared to the light vehicle production, mainly because of our higher exposure to the weak European market. With that, Werner will now give you some more details and KPIs around our Q2. Yes. Thank you, Andreas. Hello and welcome also from my side. Andreas mentioned the key facts for the group already, and I just want to highlight one additional information to provide some more insight. I would like to start at sales. The main driver for our sales increase to EUR 2.2 billion were currency effects of 5.4 percentage points, mainly from the strong US dollar. The second main effect were price increases, which we managed to negotiate with our customers and which at least partially compensated for higher input costs. On the negative side, I must especially highlight the volume which could not be produced due to the lockdowns in China. Overall, we lost potential sales of more than EUR 150 million in April and May. In addition, in Q2, we had to deal another time with additional cross costs, which amounted just in Q2 to around EUR 140 million from topics such as price increases in production material, energy, and also freight. With our progress in our negotiations with our customers, we are still confident to achieve the targeted 80% cost recovery for the full year. The share of actual costs which we passed on in Q2 has already slightly increased compared to Q1. As a result, our adjusted EBIT came in at EUR 33 million and a margin of 1.5%. As already mentioned during our Q1 call in May, please keep in mind that we had a little more than EUR 15 million positive one-off effects in the quarter of the prior year accordingly. Two-thirds of this in Electronic Controls, one-third in Sensing & Actuation. Our margin without the ramp-up business in Electrification Technology in Q2 2022 was at 5.1%. Although not showing in my presentation, I would like also to address the positive earnings per share in the first half year. Part of that is attributable to windfall profits in deferred taxes coming from a revaluation of our pension liabilities besides the fact of our continuously improving our global tax situation. Coming back to the operational business and talking about Electrification Technology now. Also here, we continued to suffer from global semiconductor shortages, which significantly held back our production output. Overall, we reported flat sales year-over-year, especially due to a challenging European market. Only our growth in China with our ET business could compensate for that. If we look at the profitability, we continue to record a positive gross margin also in Q2, even though the input costs increased significantly. Upfront expenses related to our high order intake, especially in research and development, were additional burdens and led to a slight decrease in adjusted EBIT of EUR -70 million. As in the previous quarters, order intake was the big positive news for Electrification Technology. Out of the EUR 3 billion electrification order intake, EUR 2.3 billion were reported in Electrification Technology. A large part of that was obviously related to the order for battery management systems, which we have already communicated in May. Now I'm getting to slide nine, and let us look now at business unit Electronic Controls. I think it's slide nine. As in the previous quarters, the impacts from material cost increases and lower sales had the highest impact in EC. As a result, the EUR 922 million of sales only translated into EUR 20 million of adjusted EBIT, a margin of 2.1%. Which is a margin of 2.1%. Since most cost increases are related to our core technologies, the margin here was even lower. However, we are starting to see some positive sales momentum, especially in Germany and North America. The exceptionally high profitability in EC's non-core technologies was mainly due to a one-off effect related to a closure of a warranty case, which led to an income of almost EUR 20 million in Q2. Now on the next slide, we see Sensing & Actuation, which on the other hand, continues to navigate very well in these difficult waters. Of course, currency was a helping factor by 5.5%, but the main drivers for the strong profitability of 10% was the whole business unit. For the whole business unit were solid demands in Germany and North America, as well as reimbursements for higher input costs, which we could negotiate with our customers. As a result, Sensing & Actuation's core technologies performed well with an adjusted EBIT margin of 13.4% at EUR 673 million of sales. Once more, a very resilient quarter for Sensing & Actuation, which of course also allows us to further finance our electrification strategy. In our fourth business unit, Contract Manufacturing, we continued with the phase out. Organically, sales went down by 4.2%, even though we saw higher sales from higher input costs also in Contract Manufacturing, which we of course completely pass on within higher prices towards Continental. In addition, also currency effects led to more than EUR 20 million higher sales in Q2, despite declining volumes. The adjusted EBIT margin came in at 3% in line with the bilateral productivity, which we agreed with Continental. A reminder here, at that stage on a group level, this is still a wash since we purchased a similar amount from Continental, resulting in lower costs of goods sold in our business units ET, EC, and Sensing and Actuation. Let me now get to the cash flow. Despite the lower profitability, we kept the operating cash flow on previous year's level. This was mainly due to some earlier than anticipated payments, which we received from some customers in a lower double-digit EUR million range. As expected, we also saw a higher cash outflow from CapEx in Q2 compared to Q1, approaching now the targeted 6% of sales. Please remind that Q2 2021 was still heavily influenced by spin-off effects with Continental, which materialized mainly in the investing and financing cash flow back then. Anyhow, our liquidity situation, which you can see on slide 13, remains very comfortable. Despite the slight decrease in cash to EUR 810 million, we still hold liquidity reserves of more than EUR 1.6 billion with no near-term refinancing need. I think this is important to know. Our net working capital has increased year-over-year to now 5% of sales, mainly driven by the elevated inventory levels. Our net debt ratio remains stable compared to Q1 at -0.5 x net debt to adjusted EBITDA. Our equity ratio actually increased significantly to 40%. The main reason for this was the revaluation of pension obligations, considering anticipated higher interest rates, which resulted in an increase of OCI of around EUR 280 million compared to Q1, 2022. All in all, our balance sheet related KPIs reconfirm again our robust and solid balance sheet structure. Now finally, let us take a quick look at our guidance for the whole year of 2022. Here, I think the main message is that there is nothing new to be told. We can confirm both our guidance and the outlook for the worldwide light vehicle production. Despite the continuous challenging markets, we expect and we are confident to reach our targets. This is especially driven by supporting factors like for, number one, currency, number two, our price negotiations, as well as, number three, gradual improvements of the overall semiconductor availability, which we do already see and anticipate to continue for the second half of 2022. With that, and I hope the line kept stable, I have reached the end of my part of the presentation, and Andreas and I are now looking forward to your questions. First, back to Heiko, I guess. Thank you very much, Andreas. Thank you, Werner. Once again, apologies for the connection problem, and of course, for your patience. As announced, we will now enter the Q&A part of today's session. As always, since we would like to offer all participants the opportunity to ask questions, that is why we kindly ask you to limit yourself to two questions. Also, of course, if time allows, you can ask additional questions after going back into the queue. Operator, we are now ready to take on the first questions. Certainly. As a reminder to ask a question, please signal by pressing star one. Now, first question comes from José Asumendi from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Thank you very much. It's José Asumendi from JP Morgan. Couple of questions, please. The first one, I would like to understand a bit better, what you are seeing in terms of, the ability to source semiconductors, and whether the sourcing is becoming easier. Second, I would like to understand a bit better your view of the production outlook, across different regions, mainly Europe and China, if you could share some thoughts there. On the third topic, I see one of your key customers, Stellantis, they are going to be, they are already enforcing the e-powertrain, and it's, at the same time simultaneously, it is one of your largest clients. On the other hand, you are also, and congratulations on that, you are winning very strong orders in electrification. How do we think about this transition in the next maybe year or two years, where maybe you lose some orders or sales momentum with one of your largest clients, Stellantis, but on the other hand, you capitalize on the very strong order backlog? Thank you. You take? I'm not sure whether I understood everything. Sorry for that. The line is not really stable here. I understood sourcing, but I think it's meant to how is the supply of the semiconductor in the second half of the year. I think Werner Volz touched on that already. We see improvements. That's why we are now excluding everything else positive for the second half of the year. The other thing which is also true is that we have some surprises with other components from time to time. All in all, if I look to the situation, we see that what was around already announced, that increase in capacities, availability getting better, et cetera, can be seen for the second half and obviously then also looking into 2023. Now, looking to Europe and China, I think it's a little bit linked also to that. Assuming no further lockdowns, we see China on a positive trend. Because if I look to the first half year with all those lockdowns, not only for the automotive industry, but also the supply of components and parts of the automotive supply industry, that should all be a little bit better. That all in all, the outlook should be flat or somehow comparable to H1, first half year, maybe with a little bit of improvement. That's really hard to say. On the European side, I mean, you saw that maybe in the slide Werner has shown, I think you referenced to it, we expect a slight growth of 3%-5%. Now, the question around Stellantis, I did not really get. We have strong business with Stellantis, but maybe you repeat it because I'm looking around the room. We are not sure whether we got it. If it's around insourcing. Yeah. Exactly. Stellantis is completing the e-powertrain and at the same time, you know, they are one of your biggest customers. I mean, I think it could represent maybe 10%-15% of your sales within the electronics division. I'm trying to understand whether the business wins you're gaining will offset the potential decline in business you will have with Stellantis in the next three years. Yeah. Got you. First of all, this internal insourcing, I have to repeat again that looking to the market and the massive growth, we have our own view of what is even possible on our customer side to insource from a technological point of view, but also from a cash flow point of view. Because if all those forecasts come true, the increase in production of mainly battery electric vehicles, every cent is needed to be invested into production lines, et cetera. I'm not sure whether this money is really available also on our customer side. This is something we will also obviously cover then during the Capital Markets Day in October. Obviously yes, if that would move into that direction at Stellantis, we can, I don't say easily, but we can compensate this trend, yes. That will not impact our top line. Thank you. One final one from me. On the order book or on the business wins you have won, can you give some color on, you know, by region maybe, where have you won these orders? Or maybe by OEM, but maybe region will be helpful. Thank you. Yeah. José, you know that we are not allowed to give customer names if not, especially given the okay. The answer is very simple. In all product fields, with basically all customers in all regions of the world. That's a bold statement, I know. That's where we are currently. Very good. Thank you very much. Very helpful. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks, José. Christoph Laskawi from Deutsche Bank, please go ahead. Hey, good morning, and thank you for taking my questions as well. The first one would be on a potential outlook on order intake. You have been very strong in H1 already. Do you see the same amount of RFQs in the market? Would you assume the same win rate? Or should we expect most of the RFQs for 2022 to be done already, and it should be far lower amount later in the year? I guess in H1 2023, we should expect further uptick again. That will be the first. Then we've seen other competitors emerging in especially 800 V SiC inverters. It seems that the market is getting a bit more crowded there. Do you see an increasing number of competition as well and sitting on the table when you discuss with OEMs? Or is the markets largely unchanged from where you had it? Just the last question on ET. Is there a way, because you mentioned that the revenue growth was weighed down by semis availability, that you could potentially allocate from other divisions to ET and support growth going forward? Or are the semis that you use in that division very different from the others so that there is no allocation possible? Thank you. Maybe I start with the third one, then the second one, and then the first question. If wished by our customers and assuming we have the same component in an electrification product or in a product for a combustion engine, yes, we reallocate inside a given volume for our customers. We have really daily calls or twice, three times a week calls where we look into how we can best use the components on hand. In many cases, it's not just a plug and play component we can use here or there, so it's a bit more difficult. As said, in agreement with our customers, we can do so, also understanding that average consumption is important to avoid any fines, et cetera. Yes, we do that. If a simple component, which is a specific component to an inverter or so is not available, then we have no chance to reallocate. Now, the number two, competition increasing. Yes, there are smaller companies trying to enter that field, because now after a couple of years, obviously everybody understood that that's the playing ground that you have to be. If you're not in, then you're out. They come with good ideas and PowerPoint, but they don't have the experience we have in the area of 800 V applications and SiC. I think we discussed that point also during Q1 Q&A. We see basically the same number of competitors, which are able to develop and produce those huge volumes on a worldwide scale. I can only repeat that the experience we have, more than 3 million cars on the road, gives us tailwind in the sense of we are strong and robust, and we have the trust of our customers that we make it. Because if the inverter is not working, then you can't sell the car. I see the normal suspects around me, but not tons of competitors. Now the order intake, I can only also again repeat what I said. It's not that we are now stopping or that the market stops to ask suppliers to quote. We continue to see significant order intake also in the second half of 2022, and I also assume that huge order intake will be out and possible for us in 2023. The market is not slowing down. If you look to the overall increase in the share of battery electric vehicles or plug-in hybrids, et cetera, over the next years, it is natural to assume that the overall volume and RFQs which will be sent out will not decline. The momentum continues and we will continue to get a large share of those orders also in the second half of the year. Thank you. Did I answer your question? Okay. Yeah, you did. Thank you. Just one follow-up, if I may. There must be a certain limit of orders that you can take on. For now and with the possibility to scale up the business, towards the end of the decade, there's not a cap which we should assume for your order intake in the next two years, at least. Right? Yeah. That's a little bit more complex. It's a very good and sounds like an easy question. My answer can be very complex, but I try to make it simple. We carefully watch that on one hand, we get all the orders in which are interesting for us and which pave the way towards our growth plans for the outer years. On the other hand, we also don't wanna overdo it in the sense of not being able to deliver. Means we wanna run those projects we get from our customers seamlessly, so that they are happy to work with Vitesco Technologies. That's a little bit the how can I say? The optimum we have to achieve. We obviously plan significant order intake also for 2023. Very clear. Thank you. Yes, Christoph, is that answering your question, your follow-up question? It is. Thanks a lot. Yeah. Giulio Pescatore, Exane BNP Paribas. Please go ahead. Hi, everybody. Thanks for taking my question. The first one on energy risk in Europe. I think you mentioned that you have started preparations for potentially facing the shortages of energy. Can you maybe outline what preparations are you doing and how are you planning to offset this risk or face this risk? The second one on the one-off from the warranty case. Did I misunderstand it, or there was a EUR 20 million positive effect on adjusted EBIT in Q2 this year? And, if that's the case, was that included in the guidance and expected? One last question on the contract with Renault. Very interesting contract. Well done on the win. It's interesting to see that Renault will in-source production of this product for its BEVs while leaving to you the production for the plug-in hybrid vehicles. Why do you think they've decided to go down that route, and what is driving that? Thank you. Yeah. Let's switch. Where do I now start? First one was around energy weakness in Europe, and how are we prepared. When we talk about gas, the simple answer would be, we don't use gas in our production processes. We are using gas for heating purposes only. It's nothing where we feel threatened. The threat comes more from the fact that gas is used for other industries, and those industries are important for the automotive market, like glass, steel, and so on. We would be indirectly hit. I think that that's basically answering your questions. Somehow things like we have seen also with the Ukraine war, where we are not directly involved, but indirectly when other competitors or the OEMs are not able to build their cars. Now. Sorry, can I just follow up on this. Thanks for sharing that. Can you just maybe share also your views on what could happen in Germany? I mean, just I know that it's very difficult to predict, but just, you know, your high-level views on what could be the impact on the supply chain, on the industry in general, if we do go into a situation of energy shortages, would be super interesting for us. I know it's very difficult to predict, but yeah. That's exactly the problem, because that's a little bit of crystal ball. Nobody knows. I know that on European level, there was this agreement of helping out each other. That helps a lot because obviously the situation of Germany is quite different from the situation of Spain and so on. We will have the chance as European community to use gas of the community itself, so that will help a lot. What will exactly happen if that comes true is not known so far. It's a little bit of speculation as you already included in your answer. Now I would go to the third one, and maybe Werner can talk about the warranty case. Yes, I mean, there is the wish to insource parts of the electrification product field from Renault. It's also very clear that, as I mentioned before, if all that comes, the increase in production of battery electric vehicles, everybody needs each single cent to be invested into their own lines. Means, car production lines. The split between who does what, which value add will be defined in the outer years. We see that extremely positive that, I mean, very simply speaking, Renault starting 2025, when we talk high voltage applications, it comes from us. Whether everything will be produced by us or not, we will see later. Maybe with that, Werner, can you briefly elaborate on the warranty case, whether it's included in- Yes. Giulio, I guess your question was, what was it about? I think the last point, if I caught it right, was related to our guidance. But it is an older warranty case that we had for injection systems. Well, due to certain technical measures, but also negotiations with our customers, we were able to close that on a lower level, which resulted in these roughly EUR 20 million additional benefits that we were able to now show in the Q2. With regard to our guidance, it would be included in our guidance, obviously. Since we provide a range for our bottom line, yes, it is included. Was that your question, Giulio, or is there anything else I can- Yeah. You were expecting this EUR 20 million when you gave your guidance at the start of the year? Yes. Okay, thank you. Okay. We will now move to our next question from Michael Jacks of Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning, thanks for taking my questions. My first one is just going back on production outlook. As I'm sure you're aware, late last week, one of your U.S. peers cut its guidance, specifically downgrading its outlook for Europe to - 5% year-on-year for 2022 on reduced production schedules. Can you perhaps give us some insight into the underlying trend that you're seeing in your customer production schedules over the past two months, whether there's been an upward, downward movement or if it's stayed the same? My second question relates to energy as well, a follow-up there. Firstly, how exposed is Vitesco to spot electricity and gas prices for the remainder of 2022, and how should we think about it going into 2023? Thanks. Maybe I start with your first question, Michael, and Werner will talk a little bit about energy spot market and so on. While I speak, he has the time to prepare himself. For the outlook, it's really difficult because the underlying assumption from us is that, as I said before, availability of semis will be better. Assuming so, the outlook in Europe is set something between 3%-5%. Now, what is not included is, I don't know, a second war in Europe or aggressive movements around Taiwan. That's obviously not included. This would obviously then also lead to a new forecast for the production outlook, especially in Europe. We saw that Aptiv was a bit more negative or more super conservative. We don't see that in the same way. It's a little bit of speculation on all sides, but we are more on the positive side, looking also to the, especially to the availability of component supply. Thank you. OEMs haven't reduced their schedules in the last month from what you can see? We don't see reductions of call offs. We could deliver by far more, slow down, as said, by availability of semis at the end. Understood. Thank you. One additional point is, which is not always reflected completely, that the supply chains, all supply chains worldwide are completely empty. There are no cars in stock. There is no inventory available of those critical components. I mean, that's a little bit of an assumption now, another month or one month just to refill or even more to refill the pipelines. Therefore, we are still on the realistic positive side. With that, energy-wise, I hope that Werner is prepared now to give the answer. Should always be prepared, yes, getting back to this energy question and just as a general information, well, of course, we're suffering from significant increases in energy cost overall on a year-over-year basis. Just as a reference, our energy cost increased by roughly 30%. Since that is basically driven by energy increases in Europe, I think I would like to focus my answer on Europe. Here we have, the general answer is here, we basically are covered in all our plants, in all our countries by long-term contracts that we have with utility suppliers. To this extent, we, of course, we're suffering from the general energy cost increases, but we're not really exposed to spot prices in the energy market. Is that answering, Michael? Yes. Maybe just asking this in a more specific way. Obviously you are exposed to some degree of increase in underlying prices given the 30% increase that you've experienced year to date. How does that look relative to the increase in market-related energy prices? How much of the underlying increase in market energy prices are you absorbing versus your suppliers? I'm not sure whether I got your question. The line is not really that good, sorry. No problem. Let me try ask it in a different way. Spot energy prices year to date are up significantly more. The fact that your costs are up 30% year-on-year means that you are having to cover some of that underlying increase. Just wondering how much of the underlying energy cost increase your suppliers are passing on to you. If we look to the energy part of the cost increases coming from our suppliers, I'm not sure. If you talk about the component suppliers, it's already built into their price. Sorry, just to be clear, I'm speaking specifically about the energy cost itself. Your direct payments for electricity and gas. I think we have to take that, afterwards because we don't really understand where you wanna go. I mean, if you talk energy price level for, or getting energy from the energy, suppliers, or is it the energy cost part of a component which would be covered by the material price increases, which are already factored in. No, it's the former. Maybe we can have a short. Yeah. Okay. No problem. Maybe we can have a follow-up on it afterwards. Thank you. Sanjay Bhagwani, Citi, please go ahead. Hi. Thank you very much for taking my question as well. I've got a couple. My first one is just coming back to Renault. If I understand this correctly, you are co-developing One Box, which is basically integrating the housing of the onboard charger, DC-DC converter and inverter, all three of these. As it stands now, Renault will be leveraging your onboard charger and DC-DC converter, but still continues to source the inverters from a competitor of yours. I just wanted to understand that given the purpose of this whole One Box is to reduce the weight and increase the efficiency of the vehicle, how important that this all three components come from single supplier? Second, what are the development milestones after which you feel like Renault could also award you for the inverter component of this three-in-one box? That is my first question, and I'll follow up with the next one after. Yeah. I mean, our audio line is extremely weak, so it's hard to really answer. First of all, when talking about Renault, I hope that I captured it correctly, we are talking about two products. There is a co-development of a three-in-one product. It's called a One Box. This new product has those efficiency gains, a reduction in size, a reduction in weight, et cetera, which we'll see the likes of in a bit of this decade. That's where we are co-developing and really physically sitting together with Renault and working with them to have the best and most efficient and most cost-wise best product in the world. That's one thing. The other thing is that an existing product, easily speaking, will already. That's where we have already order intake where the inverter is not integrated. It is the DC-DC plus the onboard charger. Both products somehow pave our way to make step-by-step more sales with Renault. Over time, there will be a situation where, depending on whether we talk about the battery electric vehicle side or the plug-in side, that one or the other product will have higher or lower sales, but we will see that step by step. Anyhow, our assumption is that going into the second half of the decade, the battery electric vehicle will be, from a technology point of view, the one which is the mainstream. As often said, the plug-in hybrids and also 48 V applications are bridge technologies and we build our cases always around a long-term sustainable business case, focusing on battery electric vehicles. Thank- Is that answering your question? Yeah. Thank you. Maybe just on the first one you mentioned three-in-one product. Who is going to be supplying these three products? When you basically co-develop, what sort of value is coming, let's say, for inverter, DC/DC converter and onboard chargers from Vitesco? Is it like these three components are going from Vitesco and integration is taking place at Renault? Is that fair to say? Or just two of these components are going and the third one may go from Vitesco? Yeah, it's an interesting question because this is not finally defined because we wanna work together. We know that everything which is high voltage applications will come from us. The final work split, I mean, we talk mid of the decade, are we delivering components, are we delivering the full product, what is the share of deliveries between components and the full product is not finally defined. It's clear that for me, it is clear that there will be a large portion of production also for us. Thank you. What are the next milestones to get some more color on this? For example, in three-in-one product, this is basically on the order side, like, because if you, let's say, if there's a conclusion that you provide these three high voltage products, then Yeah. I can imagine more updates to come on the order book. Yeah. Yeah. The assumption is correct. There are some milestones. I don't have them now here with me, but clearly targeting again, also mid of the decade start of production. Once specific key milestones are met, this will then also be linked to additional order intake. We will report out when that happens. We can obviously do that also publicly, because also the corporation was public and no doubt about it. It will step by step be clear what is the exact order intake linked to it, once we met those important milestones. Thank you. There'll be a possibility to reach out to Nissan and Mitsubishi as well, given they all are developing these products together. Yeah, that's a very clever hint from your side. It's somehow the start of a long journey, I would say. We are well aware of Renault, and we are happy to have that contract with Renault, but you mentioned already that Nissan is behind and also Mitsubishi can be behind. Let's start and make a good job for Renault. While we are working and meeting milestones, I could imagine that Nissan and Mitsubishi might also be very interested to work with us. Thank you. That is very helpful. My final question is more on the financial side. On the cost recovery, how is it working with SG&A, which seems to be like facing lower cost headwinds and the recovery is higher versus Electronic Controls? Can you please provide some more color? What is driving these like additional, like, let's say the differences in the cost itself and the recovery between these business units? Well, maybe I can take that question, and I'll try to explain it. With their product portfolio, I think this is some of the basic things we have to understand in this context, Sanjay. It is sensors and it is actuators, and, of course, there are also electronic components included. We do not see the specific electronic components, like for instance, ASICs, which is very predominant in the EC business, but also starting now in the ET business. Even though they are also directly impacted from the overall supply chain situation, they're not that specifically negatively impacted as the other two business units. On the other side, with their products and, well, I would call it with their market position, which they have in certain product areas to be really with difference to other competitors, number one. They also are first to be able to carry on price increases into the market. I think that's in a nutshell the basic success story that we have here in Sensing & Actuation. One side not that heavily being exposed to these negative effects coming from electronics. On the other side, having really strong market position, they are also able to allocate price increases easier into the market than probably the other business units at this stage. Thanks. Yeah. Thank you. That's very helpful. Is there like, let's say, looking in the next year and the year after, anything structurally changing with EC core tech, if, let's say, these ASICs and these microcontrollers continue to, let's say, the price of that go up? How would you see? Because this thing, this division makes margins of somewhere around 8%-10%, and in quarter two we are at 1%. How should we think of this? Is there any structural change here? I would expect that already the second half of 2022 will improve because the full effect of passing through the cost, material cost increases on the semis side also, that's mainly on the semis side for the business unit Electronic Controls, is planned to take place in 2022, second half. We should see an improvement of the performance. As you correctly say, with the 1% or 2%, that's not the performance we have seen in the past. Now, in 2023, the clear goal is to basically stabilize on a comparable old level, higher level, because this is also important. We are not talking about one-time payments or so for those products, but we are talking about real price increases, which then would also carry forward into 2023 and onwards. Thank you. That is very helpful. We will now take our next question from Philipp Koenig from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hey, guys. Thanks so much also for taking my questions. I just wanted to come back on the pricing recoveries. I know that you already provided a lot of color. I just wanted to sort of gauge you know how the recoveries or how the negotiations have gone so far. If you sort of look back when you set up the guidance for the year, how has the feedback been or how has the progress been more positive? Has it been a little bit more slow? Has it been in line with what you expected and what you set yourself for the year? My second question is on the EV powertrain market as it pertains to new entrants into the EV space, are those also already customers? Thinking about new entrants that want to grow very quickly, but don't have access to their own technology that you could provide with the whole system, are you in negotiations with any of those names? Any color there would also be very helpful. Thank you so much. Maybe on the price recovery side, it is in line with our expectations. Obviously there are differences customer by customer. I can also, with all respect, say that those negotiations are running in a very creative cooperative way. Therefore, we have no reason to change our outlook of the expected 80% coverage of costs we can pass on. Therefore, no big disappointments, no big changes, positive changes. It's in line with what we thought is possible. On the powertrain market, new OEMs, yes, we are close to those new customers. We have even specific resources focusing on the OEMs. They come with new technologies. We have also with one or the other already won contracts. We are really looking into those new customers. We also know that the traditional ones, so to say, have huge volumes and we have, how can I say, a certain criteria to rank those possible orders. There are some obviously with new entries into that market, but there's also those heavyweights where we talk about EUR 2 billion order intakes, et cetera, and sometimes even more, which is also very attractive. We try to really weigh arguments and using a set of KPIs to decide whether we also take in the specific orders from new customers on the DMG side. This is true for the U.S. and then also mainly for China. Thank you. Can I just quickly follow up on the recoveries? You know, once you've hit that 80%, which is a target that you've set yourself. For the remaining 20%, is that then something that you think about negotiating on top of that maybe into 2023? Or do you just view it as more realistic that, you know, you will get back 80% and maybe the remaining 20% is something that you will have to pay for? My view is that this type of price adjustments will continue. It's not a one wave and then it's over, work stream. It is more that it is the first 80% to be precise now, but we see additional cost inflation here and there, and we will continue to work with the same spirit with our customers to always adjust accordingly our prices. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Eduardo Spina, HSBC, please go ahead with your questions. Good morning. Thank you for taking my follow-up question on the pricing. Thanks a lot for all the details that you provided. I just wanted to clarify perhaps on the scope of these price negotiations. If you can help us to understand, I suppose raw materials are definitely included in this, but is energy also part of the equation? Finally, on the labor cost, I think usually these are recovered through productivity gains by the suppliers. Now labor costs could be exceptionally high. Are you able to include the labor and other fixed costs in your negotiation with the car makers? Or do you need to go to price new products at a higher level? Thank you very much. First of all, it's true. It was a rule in the automotive supply industry that cost increases should be covered and netted by efficiency gains of the supplier. That's true. That was the past. That's no longer true now, because now with the cost increases we see, we cannot basically eliminate those cost increases with our productivity. That's not working. Then also answer the first part of your question, Eduardo, is we started the first wave with focusing on the semiconductors price increases, raw material increases, and so on. In some cases also premium freight costs, which we have seen. As I said before also to Philip, we continue to monitor our cost situation, be it on the energy side, be it on cost increases, other cost increases. If they are going beyond a certain threshold, which we can really compensate with productivity gains, we have to go back to our customers and ask for further, price increases, to be very precise. There's no other way. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. With this, I'd like to hand the call back over to Heiko for any additional or closing remarks. Over to you, sir. Thank you very much. Since I guess we have no further questions in the queue, I would first of all like to thank you all for your time and your interest that you were bearing with us despite the little connection problem. Thank you very much for this. Before I close today's call, as always, if there are more questions coming to your mind afterwards, feel free to give a call to Jens or myself. Also as a reminder, even it was mentioned already before, we will host our Capital Markets Day, October eleventh, and of course, very much looking forward meeting you there. I hope that you all have the chance to recharge a bit after the Q2 reporting season. I wish you on behalf of everybody here in the room, some relaxing days. Speak to you soon. Bye-bye, and have a good one.