A warm welcome to this update regarding our Guidance for 2025 and also Preliminary Second-Quarter Figures for the Solar Agreement. Together with me here at our headquarters in Vienna, I have my colleague, CFO Michael Jeppesen. The agenda today will be pretty short. I will give a general update on our guidance and also try to explain why we have just even lowered our guidance for year 2025. Then Michael will take over and give you some more detailed figures as background for this issue. Finally, there will be questions and answers. What we saw was an unexpected market slowdown for especially industry and to a lesser extent for installation. Sweden's climate energy delivered growth driven by mainly Solar Polaris, who are right now building a major solar park project. Summarizing up, our figures for Q2 and especially July show disappointing revenue growth in all key markets. In Q2, we therefore executed additional staff reduction and continued to initiate measures to optimize our operating model. Our half-year results therefore include transition costs of DKK 12 million regarding Kumla, but also restructuring costs of DKK 45 million, of which the latter is expected to generate nearly equivalent savings in 2025 and fully savings of approximately DKK 70 million, equal to an improvement of 0.7% into 2026. Therefore, we have decided to lower our 2025 revenue guidance to a range of DKK 11.8 billion -DKK 12.3 billion, from previously DKK 12.3 billion- DKK 12.8 billion. Also, our EBITDA guidance to a range of DKK 450 million -DKK 510 million, down from DKK 530 million -DKK 600 million. Given our resilient business model combined with the already executed initiatives, we are convinced that Solar will be able to improve profitability in our strategic period despite the increased uncertainty in the market. Finally, I want to state that we have to go seven years back to the autumn of 2018 since we were in a similar situation as now. With those words, I will hand over the word to my please, Michael. Thank you, James. Please turn to page five. Bear in mind, these are preliminary figures. I'm only going to say this once. What we'll do is give you a 10,000 feet overview on both Q2 and H1, and then some more meat to the bone regarding the new guidance. If we start on page five, the revenue was disappointing in Q2 with an organic growth of -1.2%. Bear in mind, Solar Polaris, which is currently a major growth driver. If we adjust for them, we're actually looking at a negative growth in the remaining part of the business of -3.6%, even when adjusted for working days. The challenge with Solar Polaris is that it is a business with a very limited scale effect. Of course, also on the other hand, they have a very limited risk. Everything is higher than, but it doesn't get that no operational leverage in it, basically. We ended with DKK 3 billion versus DKK 3.1 billion last year in revenue. EBITDA came out with DKK 112 million, which was below our expectations. If we look at the underlying EBITDA, because we, as James also said, did restructuring of approximately DKK 5 million, it's DKK 117 million versus last year, you can see that we are going down earnings-wise. If we look at cost of goods, the figure shows that it's down 0.1% compared to last year. However, given the strong performance in Solar Polaris, and since this is a low margin, this actually dilutes the margin 0.4%. Consequently, the underlying margin, as you define at the rest of the business, is actually increasing compared to last year, which is a trend shift. It doesn't change the fact that it is our assessment that there still is a fierce price competition in the market in all segments and all product categories. The restructurings we carried out in June had a cost of DKK 5 million, which was expended in June, but they will deliver full year savings of DKK 10 million, and they will be cost neutral in 2025. Regardless of this, we'll continue to have a very strong focus on the cost development and ensure that we continue to have a downward trend in it. Loss on trade receivables is still under control. We may have seen the first signs of a slightly worsening situation among some customers. Credit management is really a core competence within Solar. Please turn to page number six. If we take a quick look at H1, with EBITDA of DKK 186 million, you can say that H1 came out also below our initial expectation due to the performance in Q2. The result is affected by restructuring cost of DKK 45 million compared to DKK 27 million last year and transition cost of DKK 12 million, meaning if we adjust for this and compare like for like, we're looking at an underlying performance of DKK 243 million versus DKK 252 million, meaning it's a more flattish development compared to what immediately springs to the eye. Again, as we saw in Q2, there is a diluting effect on the gross margin also on H1 from Solar Polaris. If we adjust for that, we will actually see that the margin is slightly increasing also in H1 if we adjust for this. To conclude, on H1, yes, the development in Q1 was in line with expectations, whereas Q2 is clearly below our initial expectations. Please turn to page seven. To look at the figure on the left side, you can actually see what is happening with the growth rates, the constant improvement we've been seeing since Q1 2024 turned in Q2. If you adjust for Solar Polaris, it's actually slightly more downturn where Solar Polaris doesn't really play any role in the preceding quarters. This continued into July where we ended with a negative organic growth of approximately -3%. This trend shift is the main reason behind the fact that we had to adjust our guidance. We still expect an improvement in the market during this year compared to the current level. If we look at the main segments, we now expect a slightly negative development overall for installation and a clearly negative development within industry for the positive development within trade. Regarding trade, this is solely driven by Solar Polaris, which is reported as part of trade. Where we've seen the most headwind, if you look at the segments where we expect the most headwinds to unfold, it's the industry segment, whereas installation, varying a bit from market to market, is only slightly negative. Some actually even being positive, but not sufficient to offset the industry. If we look at the guidance, it changed the revenue range down from DKK 12.3 billion -DKK 12.8 billion to now down to DKK 11.75 billion -DKK 12.25 billion. As a consequence, we also changed our EBITDA from a range of DKK 530 million- DKK 600 million, now down to DKK 450 million- DKK 510 million. If we take the mid-range, and you can see it in the figure in the middle, the reported mid-range guidance is DKK 480 million, whereas last year we reported DKK 646 million. Last year had quite some extraordinary income. In the first half, it was expensive, but the remaining part of the year was income, mainly capital gain on sale on property. The net effect was DKK 81 million, meaning that the underlying performance last year was DKK 565 million. If we do the same exercise in 2025, we end up at DKK 537 million, meaning we are approximately 5% down. Given the initiatives we already have implemented, we do have an impact on the margin and all other things equal of 0.7%. We are fairly comfortable that looking ahead and also here within the current strategy because we will be able to improve the profitability going forward. Thank you. Thank you, Michael. Now it's time for questions, so please. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one one one again. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. We will now take the first question from the line of Christian Overgaard from ACCO Group ApS. Please go ahead. Yes, hello. I was just wondering if you could define transition costs versus restructuring costs, the difference. Thank you. Okay. Yeah. The transition cost relates to closing down of our operation in Halmstad. We are in the process of moving from two to one central warehouse in Sweden. We're constructing a new one in Kumla, which is just outside Europe. As a consequence, we have to close down two of the central warehouses. We've been able to accelerate the plan, meaning we can now close down Halmstad even before Kumla is finalized, meaning we can both free up capital earlier than initially expected, and we also reduce the total risk. The risk in moving from one central warehouse to another is less than the risk of moving from two central warehouses to one central warehouse. It's the cost of closing down, saying goodbye to people, cleaning up. That's the difference. That's the DKK 12 million, yes. That's the DKK 12 million, whereas the remaining DKK 45 million is simply redundancies. Urobo is sold, and Halmstad is on the market right now, just to clarify that. Thank you. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Sebastian Grave from Nordea. Please go ahead. Hi, Jens and Michael, and thank you for hosting this call. My first question, you alluded to a market slowdown for industry, and I know we get a lot more details in conjunction with numbers next week. Is it possible to expand a bit on what you're seeing here in industry and where you're seeing it? I guess most importantly, why you are seeing it? Is this a trade war scare and companies holding back, or could you maybe add some colors to this at this point? Of course, it's pretty early days, but there's no doubt that the tariffs are to some extent postponing decisions. Thereby also, we have seen a lot of small machine builders who are exporting to the U.S., which are, of course, in a situation should they even sell. If they could, then they manage the now 15% tariffs that was before 10%. At least those decisions are postponed to some extent. I think overall, the uncertainty due to all the gossip around tariffs still has some kind of impact. We are not 100% sure yet, but it's widely spread. It's not that one or two or three customers have left because that's not the case in Solar. We have a hell of a lot of customers, so it's more a spread of uncertainty among mainly industry customers because that is more export-related than, of course, installation. If you look at where we see it, we see also [Magnum 2.5] is suffering. Exactly. This was partly expected because some of their big blue-chip customers have announced that they are expected to purchase less this year compared to the year before. They also expect it to pick up late this year, early next year. It's actually less than what we see. Here we talk medtech and high tech, and so they're suffering. If you take a geographic view on it, I think Norway is the only one which is not suffering, but industry in Norway is almost 100% marine offshore and utility as an infrastructure. Whereas if you look at the other countries, we see that particularly MRO and OEM are struggling and to some extent also infrastructure in other countries. It is, as Jens was saying, it's widely spread, and we're, of course, monitoring this very closely. It's not that customers have completely left this and they're just buying less. It seems as they're postponing all this. Thank you for the detail. That was very appreciated. Maybe to follow up, I mean, you use the formulation a market slowdown. Do you have any strong indication that this is a question of a market slowdown and not you losing market shares or anything like that? We are fairly convinced that it's, I mean, we have, I think it's running an industry. We had, I think, 15,000 customers plus minus. Don't kill me on the details. I think that's legal. We have, of course, been in close dialogue with a lot of these customers. It's not the feedback that we receive, and we can see that some of our main international competitors, though we cannot see in which segments, have also announced headwind at the European markets, even though they cannot see the exact same markets as we are operating in. We are fairly convinced that this is a market thing also because it actually materialized rather suddenly. Normally, you don't see that in a shift in market. It's not like they stopped completely, but I think they just buy less. We are not depending on a few customers. It's widely spread, as I said before. Of course, that's a concern, but that's also why we are sitting here today and have made the adjustment. Thank you. If I may, another one here. You're expecting to see a pickup in the latter part of H2. Now, given July was slower than Q2, what makes you believe that we're going to see a pickup here in the latter parts? In phase, first of all, we have a range. Of course, if you enter the mid-range, then you should look at the assumptions that we have given because that's basically what will lead to the mid-range plus. The assumption is that part of this is also that people are reducing inventory, and you can do that to a certain amount of time. Also, it's based on the feedback from some of the customers where they say, "Yeah, it's a bit like they like to sit on the fence and wait." It is uncertain, of course. I can't give you any firm guarantees. It's based on the intelligence that we can collect from our customers, what they tell us. There are no guarantees about that, that's for sure. I'm well aware. Thank you. The last question here from my side. I was just a bit puzzled about the gross margin comment. Adjusting for solar parks, the underlying gross margin improved year over year and also from Q1. I'm just puzzled. How does that work? Is it a question of mix or is it you raising prices or you're sourcing cheaper or can you help me? It's these big solar parks that they are constructing. They have a very, very low single-digit margin. Now that the revenue suddenly starts to weigh very heavy as a part of the total revenue, you get this diluting effect. It's basically to make sure that you understand because we have been on a downward trend for several quarters in the remaining part of the business in the gross margin. If you just look at it from a distance, you would say, "Wow, it's continuing down." That's not the case because the mix between the companies has shifted dramatically. Whereas you couldn't collect Solar Polaris previously because they had a high gross margin also because they built small roof installations, that also drove a lot of costs below gross margin. They don't do that now because everything is higher than. They have a very, very low gross margin. I think it's around 7%. Don't tell me on the details. It's way below 10%. There's not that many costs. There's still some costs below, but the main part is above. That's simply now because they have reached the size, they have diluted the margin to the extent that it's been. Sebastian, you're right. It's about mix. It's also about country mix. Our solution series is growing pretty well, and there we have a higher margin. Of course, also a higher cost, but we have a higher margin. There, at least, we are doing pretty well. No, thank you. Thank you for hosting this call. Talk to you later. Thank you. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Christian Thalin from SEB. Please go ahead. Yes, thank you. I have two questions. The first question is on your growth. You're saying organic growth between -4% and 0%. If my quick calculations are right, that would imply between -10% and -2% in the second half of the year. Obviously, remembering the second half last year, Solar Polaris was quite strong. Maybe just an elaboration on what's the expected growth sort of excluding Solar Polaris because obviously -10% sounds a bit high. How does that stack up with the comment of expecting improving markets in the? You're spot on because what we expect to happen is that Solar Polaris, as they're finalizing this huge project, this will wear off the effect from Solar Polaris that you are seeing right now because they don't have any new projects coming in to the same extent. They are ahead of schedule. That will wear off going forward. The impact they have on the figures will be much less, all other things equal, in Q4 than what you see right now. That is the main explanation. Of course, there are always ongoing negotiations about new startup of new projects, but it's always difficult to say exactly in what months. Again, given the operational leverage in this business, it doesn't really impact the earning that much, I would say. Solar Polaris is one of the key reasons for this. Is there any way you can quantify that? I mean, how many percentage points in your second half? If you look at it right now, they deliver like something they approximate 3% of the growth. In Q2. In Q2, it's even more in July. They deliver an even bigger part there. If you take that out. Yeah, you had the awful truth. Yeah. The same question goes to your cost reductions. You announced some restructuring in Q1, and then you announced a bit more here in Q2. How much more can you do if things don't improve? Is there more you can do, or are you at a level now where it's difficult to do much more without more major strategic moves? I think we have done at least a bit. There's always something to do. Looking ahead, at least what we believe, I think we are pretty close to the limit of what we will do in the current situation. Of course, we have a hell of a work with our gross margin, and we have a huge work of picking up or increasing the share of wallet at existing customers because I think that's the easiest way to at least maintain some kind of growth, even though the uncertainty in the market is lowered quite a lot, at least as we see it. Michael also stated it. One of our biggest competitors or worldwide competitors, but they're also in Europe, stated the same as we have stated right now as we speak in Europe. Sorry. Yeah. Understood. Thank you. That was helpful. Thank you, Christian. Thank you. As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one and one on your telephone. That's star one and one if you wish to ask a question. There are no further questions coming at this time. I would like now to turn the conference back to Jens Andersen for closing remarks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for listening in, even though we have hoped for better results this time. At least we had to go back, as I said, to 2018 since we had a similar situation. I wish you all a great weekend, and thanks for listening in. Bye-bye.