Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the TORM First Six Months and Second Quarter 2024 results call. Please note that today's call is being recorded. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question during this time, simply press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, press star one again. Thank you. I will now turn the call over to Jacob Meldgaard, CEO. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you, and thank you everybody for joining us on this call today. This morning, we released our company announcement with the results for the second quarter of the year, and I'm pleased to report that again, this quarter, TORM has achieved a strong financial performance. Our time charter equivalent earnings increased to $326 million, and EBITDA improved to $251 million, as freight rates remained firm throughout most of the quarter. Again, we have witnessed a continuation of the market dynamics that we've seen in the previous quarters, i.e., geopolitical tension stemming from both the Ukrainian-Russian conflict and the escalating confrontations in the Middle East that lead to rerouting of vessels, longer voyages, and higher ton-mile demand. This, of course, adds to an already tight supply-demand balance in the product tanker market. We remain optimistic about the prospects for the coming years, as we believe that the supportive fundamentals for the positive rate environment is likely to stay intact. Thus, we expect longer ton-mile, higher utilization rates in the years to come, and at the same time, manageable newbuilding deliveries. Consequently, and in line with what you have seen in previous quarters, in early July, we entered into an agreement to acquire additional second-hand vessels. This time, 8 MR vessels to be delivered during the second half of this year, for a total consideration of $340 million. The vessels have all been built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard in 2014, 2015, and 6 of the vessels have been fitted with scrubbers. As you would expect us to do when our vessels reach a certain age, we have divested one 2006-built MR tanker for delivery in the third quarter, 2024, for a cash consideration of $23.3 million. Thus, adding it all together, we are both expanding and replenishing our fleet, and as we've done for some time now, we are using our partner share-based structure to finance the transaction. By continuing this way forward, we believe that TORM will be in a strong position to further add to our value creation over the coming years. All in all, this has been a very satisfactory quarter and in line with our intention of distributing the cash flow net of debt repayment, TORM has declared a dividend for the quarter of $1.8 per share, thus adding to the positive dividend load seen over the recent quarters. Here, please turn to slide five. In the past two and a half years, geopolitical tensions, first in Europe, then in the Middle East, have led to the product tanker rates increasing to a new, higher average level. At the same time, we've also seen increased volatility in rates as the fleet utilization has moved closer to full utilization. Please turn to slide eight. The main impact of these geopolitical tensions has been a reshaped product tanker trade towards longer distances. All while overall trade volumes have risen, supported by increasing oil demand and changes in refinery landscape. The EU sanctions against Russia in 2023 led to a trade rerouting towards longer haul trade, both for European imports but also for Russian exports. This year, the product tanker market has been strongly affected by the Houthi attacks against commercial vessels at the Bab al-Mandab Strait. The share of global clean petroleum products trade transiting the Suez Canal has declined from 12% to only 4%, meaning 8% of the global trade has been redirected. The majority of this is going a longer route around the Cape of Good Hope. While the Middle East situation is very dynamic, the recent escalation of the conflict between Iran and Israel suggests that the timeline for disruption continues to be drawn out. Now, please turn to slide 7 for a closer look at the market development here in the second quarter of the year. In the second quarter of the year, trade volumes with refined oil products increased by 2% compared to the same quarter last year, supported by higher oil demand and recent changes in the refinery landscape. Together with the longer trading distances, this has led to an overall increase in ton-mile demand for product tankers. At the same time, earnings for larger crude tankers have been subdued, both seasonally, but also given the fact that VLCCs have not directly benefited from geopolitical drivers.... This has led to a cleanup of a number of VLCCs and Suezmaxes since the end of the second quarter. However, as we move towards the fourth quarter, TORM expects a seasonally improving crude tanker market to significantly reduce incentives for crude cannibalization, at the same time as both seasonality and volatility with continued market disruptions will keep clean trade distances longer. Please turn to slide 8. When we combine the tonnage demand and supply drivers, our calculations show that the product tanker demand supply balance has stayed on a much firmer footing than before the geopolitical tension started. After an 8% increase in ton miles last year, the Red Sea disruption, together with organic growth and trade volumes, has so far this year added around 10% to ton miles. This has been front-loaded, but actually, more than what we had forecasted. What is important to mention here is that ton mile has grown significantly, also on trades not directly related to the Red Sea disruption. At the same time, net fleet growth has been much more limited. The clean-ups of both LR2s, as well as large crude carriers, have increased the supply of tonnages. But even with this, so the supply growth has been much more limited than the growth in ton-miles. Please turn to slide 9. The product tanker ordering at shipyards has picked up after years of subdued newbuilding activity. Currently, the order book stands at 19% of the fleet. As we have pointed out earlier, newbuilding activity has largely concentrated around the LR2 segment. Given the versatility of the LR2 fleet, which can trade both clean and dirty products, the LR2 order book should be seen in connection with the dirty Aframax order book. The combined order book is currently at 17%, which is equal to the share of the combined fleet being candidate to recycling. Furthermore, it's important to mention that the current order book is spread over 4 years, and with the increasing average delivery time, vessels ordered today will most likely not be delivered before 2028. Now, kindly turn to the next slide. Turn to slide 10. When we look further ahead in time, we now expect the potential additional ordering of the product tankers from 2028 onwards to be lower than our previous forecast. This is predominantly due to Chinese shipyards opting to build container vessels, LNG carriers, and other vessel segments where China has strategic import interests. This coincides with a period where an increasing share of the fleet reaches a natural scrapping age. Should a strong freight market result in less than expected scrapping activity, we still expect older vessels to leave the mainstream market and go into sanctions or cover frost trades. Please turn to slide 11. Lastly, behind the geopolitical factors that have reshaped refined products and the trade, there is a refining industry in flux. In recent years, new refining capacity has been added in net exporting regions such as the Middle East. On the other hand, a number of refineries have been closed in net importing regions, for instance, Europe and Australia. This has led to higher trade volumes and higher demand for product tankers. Beyond the already announced closures, the refinery environment remains dynamic. The risk of falling utilization rates in mature demand regions raises the likelihood of further capacity closures before the end of the decade. Here, especially Europe stands out with older, relatively small, and less complex refineries that are more open to international trade than in other regions. A new wave of refinery closures is likely to again increase trade with refined products. Now, with these comments, I conclude my part of the presentation. I'll hand it over to my colleague, Kim, who will walk us through the financials. Thank you, Jacob. Now, please turn to slide 12 for the financial highlights. In the second quarter of the year, our time charter equivalent earnings increased to $326 million, and based on this, we achieved $251 million in EBITDA and $194 million in net profits. When we adjust for the unrealized gains on derivatives in Q2 2023, the operating result is around 30% year-on-year, up around 30% year-on-year, driven by both the firm freight rate environment and the increased relative share of LR2s in our fleet. TORM achieved fleet-wide TC rates of more than $42,000 per day, with LR2s close to $52,000 per day, LR1s at more than $42,000, and MRs at more than $38,000. It should be noted that spot rates were at a relatively high level in the first part of the quarter, followed by some retreating towards the end of the quarter as season softening started. Our fleet had a total of 7,749 earning days, i.e., a little higher than the 7,451 days we had in the same quarter last year. However, as previously mentioned, with LR2s accounting for a relatively higher part of the total compared to last year. We believe these are strong numbers, and altogether, they reflect a very satisfactory performance, enabling us to realize TCE rates per day that have increased by $5,700 compared to Q2 2023. Further, the results that we have produced translate into a return on invested capital of 29.5%, thus underscoring the positive environment in which we are operating. And as highlighted previously, you should expect us to maintain a stable and conservative financial leverage, also in periods where we are increasing our operational levels, leverage, as we are using our shares as part of the consideration in connection with acquisitions of vessels. Again, this quarter, our business is generating significant profit and cash flow, and again, we remain firmly committed to returning a significant part of our earnings to our shareholders. Slide 13, please. The chart in the upper left illustrates how vessel values have increased over the previous quarters, leading to a total value of $3.7 billion, and Net Asset Value showing a similar progression, reflecting higher broker valuations of the vessels, as well as an increased fleet. Also, on this slide, we show in the chart in the lower left corner, the development in our net interest-bearing debt, which now amounts to $737 million, thus $157 million lower than a year ago. As we have increased our cash position somewhat, and thereby more than offset an increase in our gross debt. Based on this, we currently stand at a net Loan-to-Value ratio of 20.4. However, when subtracting the declared dividend for Q2, then it will be around 25%, but continuing the quarter-by-quarter decline in financial leverage. Slide 14, please. On this slide, we have made an overview of per share development in recent quarters. The result we announced today translate into an EPS of $2.08, significantly higher than the same quarter last year. Share count has increased by 10 million shares over the period, since last year, driven by our equity share-based transactions, and is up from 84.9 to 94.9 over the same period. Based on our strong earnings, the board of directors has declared a Q2 2024 dividend of $2.80 per share, thus upping the dividend by $0.30 per share compared to the same quarter last year. And now please turn to slide 15. These slides give you the full overview of the dividend distribution and the key dates to observe. Ex-dividend date for the shares on Nasdaq Copenhagen will be on 28th August, and for the shares on Nasdaq New York on 29th August, as shares are now trading T plus one in New York, but otherwise, the same process as usual. And now turn to slide 16 for the outlook. Based on the satisfactory results we have published today and the coverage we have for the third quarter of 2024, we increased the low end of our guidance range with $50 million, and thereby narrowing the guidance range, reflecting the increased transparency on full year numbers. Thus, we expect TCE earnings for 2024 of $1.15 billion-$1.35 billion, and EBITDA of $850 million-$1.05 billion. The table shows that we, in the third quarter of 2024, expect to have 7,859 earning days, and as of 12 August 2024, we had fixed a total of 64% of those at a fleet-wide rate of $38,340 per day. Further, for the full year, we are now at 68% coverage at a fleet-wide rate of $42,205 per day. And with this, I conclude my part of the presentation, and I will hand it back to the operator, who will take care of the Q&A session. Thank you. Thank you. We will now open the line for your questions. If you have dialed in and would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad to raise your hand and join the queue. To withdraw your question, simply press star one again. If you have dialed in and are listening via loudspeaker on your device, please pick up your handset and ensure that your phone is not on mute when asking a question. Our first question comes from Jonathan Chappell with Evercore ISI. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon. Jacob, I'd hate to start with a big macro one. Seasonality makes complete sense. We've seen it many years. I think your chart that explained the crude and product was very interesting. But there is a little bit more, I think, macro uncertainty today. We've seen some softer numbers out of China. I think there's more concern about the consumer in general, IEA estimates for growth coming down. Your third quarter bookings have been good so far, but do you think that some of the weakness in August could be more than just seasonality and a little bit more cyclical headwinds, as we think about how we come out of the summer and into the stronger winter? Yeah. Thanks, John. Yeah, certainly, that's that could be a scenario. If I look back, then it was exactly the same last year. We were experiencing if you, if you plot, you know, in your data points, if you plot July, August, September last year, we saw exactly the same erosion in rates. So, you know, yeah, it could be that it's not seasonality and it's something more fundamental. I don't think that there's something that really points to that at this stage, but, you know, clearly, that would be a risk for our market. But that's not... You know, that's a risk that we are having all the time. When I look at it, sort of, if I take it a step, a notch up- ... And I think that the oil consumption globally and sort of what we thought would be a potential risk, let's say, a couple of years or three or four years ago, which would be a transformation of the underlying economies away, aggressively away from fossil fuels. I think that has. That's not what I'm looking at right now. So there will be seasonality, and there will be bumps, but sort of- In the broad view, I don't think this is a sign of this. And, and looking back, as I say, to 2023, the numbers, it was exactly the same price mechanism in the market. Okay. And if we tie that together, you know, with now the fleet reaching 96 vessels, which is, I think by anyone's estimation, certainly critical mass gives you some optionality and flexibility with the fleet. If I go back and look at, you know, 7% ton-mile benefit from Russia, 6% from Red Sea, certainly seems like these issues have probably more duration than anyone would have anticipated when they first began. But given, you know, that great impact, given now 96 vessels, given maybe some of the macro concerns, is there a desire, or, or maybe are you looking at a little bit more, a little bit more balance in the fleet? Because it does feel like the contract market has been far more steady and substantially more elevated than the weakness in the spot market we've seen recently. You know, clearly, the markets are, I would say, not reflecting that there is this bump, speed bump, you could say, currently. I think we are gonna take it really, opportunistically, you know. Currently, we are of the expectation that this is a seasonality and that it will, come back. I think that's the time to actually make those calls, rather than in the current, environment. Okay. So we'll be- Thank you, Jacob. Thanks. Thank you. These are good questions, John. Our next question comes from the line of Omar Nokta with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Thank you. Hi, Jacob, and Kim. Good afternoon. I, you know, obviously, nice earnings as usual, and wanted to maybe piggyback a little bit on John's first question. You know, we've obviously, we're in a very strong market. Things have clearly cooled off a bit. They remain elevated, definitely from a historical perspective. I guess there's been some talk of refinery run cuts in Asia, and just wanted to get a sense from you if, do you feel like the spot market or the charter markets as they are today are reflecting that already? And then do you see risk, or are you seeing signs that refinery run cuts will be coming into the Western Hemisphere as well? So when we look at it, then actually, I think, we're starting to see that activity with our clients in Asia is actually coming back from the lows that we saw maybe a couple of weeks ago. It is on the back of the China demand have been slow, as you pointed to. Slower VLCC movements, and also that the product, how do I say, flow internally in China has been relatively slow. Of course, leading to that, you are not calling on more crude into your, into your facility. But it may actually lead to being a beneficiary, that the product tanker market will have, is that China is still running at a rate that is higher than what their local consumption would be, and that you could see that there will be additional export quotas likely to be provided. So let's see. It's a political decision, but I think so it's stacking up against that we will see more exports out of the region rather than less exports out of the region in the coming months. Okay. So it sounds like effectively then, the market sort of has been reflecting this for some time. A couple of questions just to follow up more, a bit more on terms specifically. This is perhaps an easy one that I think you probably have answered in the past, but just wanted an update. You mentioned that the 68 scrubbers that are installed on your fleet of the 85 plan. I guess, is the plan still to move forward with those remaining installations? And would you do those, I guess, as part of your ordinary dry dock of those ships? Yeah. So our plan is, is currently intact, and it will be, as you say, also done in the ordinary course of, of the business. That's a mix of some of the acquisitions we've done over the last couple of years, where it makes still financial sense. Of course, we will do it case by case and sort of look at what we deem to be the net present value of making the, investment. The time is actually not so relevant because we're doing it during the ordinary course. But of course, you know, installation itself is costly, and we do, take it case by case and look at whether the installation makes sense. For now, our plan is to go ahead. Okay, great. And then just a final one, just regarding the dividend. I think this one, it's 87% of earnings, this last $80. I guess, just in terms of the policy, how should we think about it in terms of it being formulaic? And, and you-- I know you get this question a lot, but is the dividend quarterly, is it still formulaic in regards to basically paying out excess cash that's above a reserve, or has it become a bit more discretionary by the board? ... Yeah, it is, it's always been up to the board, for its discretion in, you know, at the end of the day. But, the way we sort of think about it is, as you're saying, and I think we should all think about, like, whatever we earn of, or we generate of, liquidity from end of a quarter or start of a quarter to end of a quarter, that is basically what we sort of have the ability or anticipate to pay out as dividends or distribute out. So it's the same thinking, but of course, if the board deems, together with management, that we should sort of have another calibration of the final dividend, we could do that. But in the outset, it's the same way we are thinking. We just take the net cash generation per quarter, then that's the outset for us, that we will distribute that. We have not changed it, per se, over the quarters, the last many quarters. Okay. Well, very good. Thank you for that, color. I'll turn it over. Thanks, Omar. Our next question- Thank you. Comes from the line of Climent Molins with Value Investor's Edge. Please go ahead. Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my questions. I wanted to follow up on Omar's question on Chinese demand. I mean, diesel demand has been fairly weak year to date as some trucks shift to LNG. And on the other hand, as EV adoption in the region increases, that could also weigh on gasoline demand. Could you provide some commentary on when do you expect gasoline and diesel demand in the region to plateau? And secondly, do you believe China's infrastructure is able to support continued LNG and EV adoption? Okay, thanks for those questions. I think I'll start with Chinese demand for products. Well, of course, there is, as you point to, a number of factors that is impacting how the Chinese infrastructure sort of developing, both on EVs, adoption of that, and also on consumption of diesel and gasoline on the other side of the equation. We see that Chinese demand is going down, but that is obviously not necessarily bad for product tanker flows. So we are more concerned, not so much about the internal distribution of energy sources in the Chinese ecosystem, but rather what is the impact on trade flows out of the refineries? And there, everything has been equal. We don't see that there is a threat from the EV adoption, nor from how the sort of infrastructure issues that may or may not be there to build that further, that that is having a negative impact on the product tanker market, as such. That's very helpful. Thank you for taking my questions, and congratulations for the quarter. Thanks a lot. Thanks for dialing in and for the question. Our next question comes from the line of Petter Haugen with ABG. Please go ahead. Hello, and good morning, or good afternoon, I want to say. Two questions from my side. In terms of the TC market these days, would you consider doing something longer, on current levels, on current levels? I'm reading is, well, just shy of $30,000 for MRs for three years, or a little bit more than $40,000, for $40,000 per day for LR2s. Are those levels attractive, you think, for three-year chartering activities now? Yeah, I think you are right on. We did, we did do that, Petter, during the quarter start, and that took for 3 years with one of our clients in the low, low mid 40,000. So yeah, we would, we would look at that as, you know, depend on the, on the trade and our clients. That is a market that we are constantly evaluating, and that we also did this call. Yes. Okay, understood. And in terms of the volumes done, would you sort of consider doing a larger share of your fleet to lock in those rates? Or are you happy to trade spot, so? We're happy either way, you know. So, obviously, we are believers in the market will offer, you know, good rewards, good risk return when you are stuck. And also from part of it, we will also happily engage with our clients. So I don't think it is an either/or, also given the number of assets that we've got, that I think we can play both sides, Peter, on that. The current levels are, in our opinion, attractive enough to also engage in. Yes. Mm. Okay, thank you. And a second question from myself. In terms of your presentation in slide 8, you're here showing approximately 8 million deadweight ton, if I read it correctly, of crude tankers or LR2s and crude tankers moving into the product tanker fleet. Is this to be understood as your expectation for the full year, or does this imply that you'll have some sort of reduction from what we now hear are, well, even the OCCs are doing a clean trade. ... Thank you, no, that's a good, good observation. Good question. So this is the here and now, this is what we see, the portions of crude tankers that have migrated, and you can say, and for us, cannibalized on the product tanker trade. So this is not our estimation of where we will end the year. We do expect that, you know, a significant ratio of these vessels will go back into the trade once you see a seasonal pickup also in the VLCC and in the Suezmax trades. So this is here now, what we can identify as vessels that are carrying clean petroleum products as we speak. Okay. And just as a quick follow-up on that, speaking for myself, I was pretty surprised when I heard about all those VLCCs, in particular, trading clean. And to some extent, it makes me somewhat worry about the product trade, of course, because the crude tanker fleet is larger, and if all of them are capable of coming out and cannibalizing your market, I would think about that as a threat. But to what extent have you been surprised to see the migrations coming into your part of the market over the past couple of months? Yeah, so for us, it is not surprising if the V market is offering, you say, let's say, you know, pick your number, $20,000-$25,000 today for a V, and that you can, in a way take two LR2s, and LR2s are trading at $50,000, and that you can then, optimize your earning on the V to, let's say, $40,000. That makes sense, if I'm a V. But if, if the market for an LR2 is $30,000, and I'm getting $25,000 on a V, you're not gonna do two, LR2s because it's simply not, economically feasible. So there was a window where the Vs were where the, you could say, the gap between what a V were making and what LR2 were making, made that incentive. I don't think it is incentive even today to do it, because your alternative from, you know, going after the V market is not attractive right now. So I think what it demonstrates is that, that crude and product is not two separate markets. And obviously, if you have no V market, Vs will try to cannibalize on CPPs if those rates are... So I think that's just I think it's more that there is a, you cannot have a differential, let's say, of three times LR2 to a V, because then it will be attractive to do two, LR2 stems on a V, and you get a higher TC. Does that make sense? Yes. So there's a limit to how high an LR2 rate can go on its own over time. That doesn't make me nervous. Yes. Because let's say that it was, you know, Vs trading at $50, well, then LR2 could- I'm not, I'm saying a little tongue in cheek, but then they could be double, Yes without making it cannibalized for V to switch over. Yes, and thank you. Fully understood and agreed to. I was more speaking to the technical complications of actually cleaning up those tankers. I thought it was nearly impossible to see those ever trading or be accepted. Oh, got it. Yes. by the cargo owners to actually trade clean. But fully agreed and understood in terms of economic incentives. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. That's a good question. Thank you. We have no further questions at this time. I will now turn the call back to Jacob Meldgaard for closing remarks. Okay. Thank you very much for dialing in to the second quarter of 2024. Have a great day. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect.