Hello. Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to our first quarter 2026 conference call, results conference call. Before we begin, I'd like to remind you that the presentation contains forward-looking statements, please refer to the disclaimer included in the appendix to the slides. Marco Patuano, our CEO, will open with the main highlights of our results and some strategic commentary. Then our CFO, Raimon Trias, will take you through some more details on the results for this quarter. Then we'll be available to take your questions as usual. In addition to the slides in the pack that we've just posted on the website, we've also included, as we have in the last couple of quarters, some frequently asked questions slides. In addition, we're highlighting some IR materials in the back of the presentation that are now available on our website, and that covers some of the more recurrent themes that come up in conversations with you, and our investors. We hope you find them useful. With that, let me hand over to Marco. Thank you. Thank you, Maria. Good evening, everyone. It's a pleasure to be with you again, as we open Q1 2026 and reflect on what has been a strong start to the year. In Q1 2026, we continued to deliver on all fronts, confirming the resilience and predictability of our industrial model. The macro environment remains volatile, we continue to execute our strategy with conviction, our results speak for themselves. Let me take you through the five key themes of this slide. The first is on operating and financial performance. Our business fundamentals remain very healthy, as shown by the 4.7% year-on-year growth in PoPs, demonstrating a sustained demand from our customers across the portfolio. We had another strong quarter in terms of organic financial performance, reflecting the solid performance of all our business drivers and our ability to drive operating leverage. Revenues, +4.7%. Adjusted EBITDA, +6.4%. EBITDA after lease by 7.2%, with margin expanding from 58.8%- 60.5%, led by the ongoing efficiencies measures and proactive then management initiatives. The recurrent levered free cash flow grew by 12.2%, and on a per share basis, the increase was 18%, combining the impact on organic growth and our share buyback program. As a second point, I would like to highlight the consolidation of our free cash flow turning point. We generated EUR 118 million of free cash flow in Q1 2026, an increase of EUR 184 million versus Q1 2025. Free cash flow is no longer a forward-looking commitment. It's here. It's growing. Third point, a comment on macro and capital markets. Our revenue and cost structure remains naturally hedged against inflation, and our balance sheet is well-insulated from rate volatility with ample cash and undrawn revolving credit facilities, providing funding optionality to avoid unfavorable market windows. I will talk a little bit more about this point. The fourth point is on asset rotation. In Q1 2026, we cashed in the proceeds from the disposal of our French data center, which was EUR 373 million, and from the DIV II fund participation, which was EUR 170 million. This transaction further sharpen our focus on core telecom infrastructure assets and enhance our financial flexibility. Last, the fifth, shareholder remuneration. 2026 dividends total EUR 500 million, two equal tranches. The first tranche has already been paid, EUR 250 million on January 15, 2026. The second tranche of the other EUR 250 million is going to be paid on July 15, 2026. Our share buyback program continued throughout the quarter with EUR 60 million executed in Q1 2026. As of March 31st, 2026, EUR 260 million out of the EUR 500 million announced on November 6th has already been completed, and the outstanding balance is on track to be completed by year-end 2026. I ask you kindly to move to slide five, where I want to take a moment to reinforce why our business is structurally resilient in the current environment. Our macro protection framework rests on 4 pillars: revenue, cost, rates, and liquidity. Which offer protection in the volatile environment we are living in. On revenues, 65% of our revenues are linked to inflation, and a further 35% have fixed escalators, meaning that our entire revenue base has built-in growth mechanism regardless of the inflation environment. On costs, approximately 80% of our energy consumption is directly passed through to tenants by contract, and the remaining residual exposure is hedged through forward contracts and PPAs. In practice, our energy cost base is almost entirely price protected. OpEx growth is below inflation, which drives margin expansion and reinforcing operating leverage. Net inflation exposure results to be positive. On rates, 78% of our debt is at fixed rate, providing contained exposure to rate fluctuations. Our variable debt, 22% of the total, is linked to the one-month Euribor, which has shown a relatively low volatility and is further protected through pre-edge mechanism. Our average maturity is 4.3 years. It gives us a balanced refinancing profile spread over various years, avoiding any near-term concentration risk. Liquidity, w e entered the quarter with approximately EUR 6 billion of liquidity, EUR 3 billion in cash, and a further EUR 3 billion in undrawn committed revolving credit facilities. Our 2026 maturities are fully funded. We maintain the flexibility to tap bond markets opportunistically when market conditions are going to be considered favorable. As you may recall, in Q1 2026, we issued a dual series bonds for EUR 1.5 billion to pre-fund our 2026 refinancing needs, extending maturities to 5 years and 10 years and securing pricing at an average of 3.4%. This framework is not new. It has been a cornerstone of our investment case since our Capital Market Day, and it is increasingly visible in our number quarter- after- quarter. Let's move now to slide six. I want to take a moment to show you that our margin expansion story is not a recent deployment. It is a multi-year trend, and it is accelerating. On a pro forma basis, excluding Ireland, French data center, the O&M business discontinued in Spain. Our EBITDA margin has expanded consistently from 82.7% in Q1 2023 to 84.7% in Q1 2026. It's 200 basis points of expansion over three years, driven by continued organic growth, operational transformation of our industrial platform, strict cost discipline, and inherent operating leverage of our infrastructure model. The EBITDA after lease picture is even more compelling. EBITDA after lease margin moved from 55.3% in Q1 2023 to 60.6% in Q1 2026, more than 530 basis points of improvement in the same timeframe. This reflects not only EBITDA progress but also the tangible results of our proactive land management program, which is structurally reducing our lease cost base over time. The trajectory of success is clear, and possibly there is more to come. In slide seven, I want to spend a few minutes on a topic that I know is in front of mind for many of you. The MNO consolidation in France and specifically the SFR process. I wanna be direct. We're well-positioned, well-protected, and we intend to be a proactive and constructive part for the solution. Let me walk you through our exposure and the contractual protection we have in place. We operate approximately 33,000 PoPs across 27,000 sites in France. Our contracts are structured to require Cellnex consent for any changes to the MSAs, including transfer or contract splits, which means that we are a necessary party in any consolidation scenario. In terms of our exposure to the SFR-related process, out of our total SFR PoPs, approximately 12,000, a little over 40% are located in dense areas. Of those, less than 10% are known anchor PoPs. In rural areas, the Crozon areas represent 57% of the PoP outside dense areas. Risk is very low. RAN sharing between SFR and Bouygues Telecom is already in place in these areas, and secondary contracts have already been renewed for 10 years or 20 years or 12 years, providing long-term visibility on that portion of the portfolio. We have performed extensive analysis of potential overlap post-consolidation. It is confirmed that estimated impact remain limited. Critically, from a structural demand perspective, France ranks 49th globally in the 4G, 5G availability according to Opensignal. Densification is needed in urban areas. There are set new deal, and the 5G obligation require further rollout by 2030. This means that regardless of ownership structure, network investment must continue, and Cellnex is the natural partner. On the contractual structure, you can see at the top left of the slide our long-term MSA agreement maturing in more than 10 years with all or nothing extension, and also the secondary contracts were both recently renewed in 2023. As a leading provider of critical infrastructure in the French market, Cellnex will inevitably have to be part of the discussion and an enabler for a solution that is beneficial for all. Our objective is straightforward: preserve the NPV of our contracts, secure relationship with financially healthier clients, and minimize any POP losses while maximizing the use of committed and future densification programs. I want also to set the right expectation on timing. This is a complex regulatory and commercial process, it is not likely to be solved quickly. We are talking about a multi-year journey, one that will involve regulatory review, commercial negotiation, technological realignment, careful sequencing across multiple parties. All this will be happening while operations still need to deliver best-in-class communication experiences to their customers. From Cellnex perspective, that is not a source of concern. It is actually a source of comfort. Our contracts are long-term, our protections are contractual, and time works in our favor. We are in no rush, and we will not be pressured into outcomes that do not preserve the full value of our infrastructures. We are available to support our customer throughout this strategic transformation of their business, but with full visibility on the strength of our position and the conviction that we will achieve an outcome that is positive for our customers and for us. We will keep you updated as the process evolves. On Italy, there has been no change in the fundamental of our business. We recently covered the key dynamics of the market and our business in detail, including our position regarding the ongoing discussion between Iliad, Fastweb, Vodafone, and TIM. We had a fireside chat hosted by Morgan Stanley on March 31st, 2026, and the full recording and supporting materials are available on our IR website. I encourage you to refer to the session for a comprehensive view of our perspective on the Italian market. You will find a direct link to the IR materials at the end of this result presentation. After this rush, let me hand over to Raimon, who will walk you through the details of our Q1 2026 results. Thank you, Marco. Good evening, everyone. I would like to start by reinforcing the very positive performance we delivered in the first quarter 2026 in terms of organic growth and cash conversion. Robust revenue growth, combined with continued focus on operational excellence, is driving higher profitability, a stronger operating leverage, and expanding cash flow. As you can see in the slide, the improvement is visible across every step of the waterfall. On a pro forma basis, starting with organic revenue growth, we delivered a solid 4.7% year-on-year. Adjusted EBITDA grew by 6.4%, supported by our ongoing business transformation and increased operational efficiencies. EBITDA after leases was 7.2% higher, incorporating our proactive lease management activity. The recurring levered free cash flow rose by 12.2% year-on-year, supported by the disciplined implementation of our capital allocation strategy. The headline metric that reflects our focus on shareholder value creation, recurring levered free cash flow per share grew by 18%. Driven not only by operational improvement and disciplined financial management, but also by the continued execution of our share buyback program. As usual, on slide 10, we show you the bridge between the reported and organic pro forma revenue growth. Starting from EUR 964 million of revenues in the first quarter 2025, the perimeter adjustment for Ireland, the French data centers, and the O&M business line discontinued in Spain brings us to a pro forma revenue base of EUR 941 million. The combination of escalators and CPI contributing EUR 14 million, colocation and other business adding EUR 9 million, and build-to-suit and fiber revenues of EUR 21 million led to organic revenue growth on a like-for-like basis of 4.7%, bringing organic revenues to EUR 985 million. A small combined effects and perimeter adjustment of EUR 1 million takes reported numbers of the first quarter 2026 revenues to EUR 984 million. The strong organic revenue performance is led by consistent PoPs growth. As you can see in the next slide, gross PoP growth was 5.4% year-on-year, and net PoP growth was 4.7%. Let me give you some further detail. In the first quarter 2026, we added 1,772 gross new PoPs, comprising 962 from gross colocation and 810 from build-to-suit additions. Churn was contained at 885, of which Spain accounts for the majority. This gives us 1,587 net new PoPs in the quarter. If we look at it on a country- by- country, France was the lead country, mainly by the solid rollout of our build-to-suit programs with Iliad and SFR. Italy's performance was driven by Fastweb, Vodafone, and Iliad brand sharing program. While Poland continues to deliver the execution of build-to-suit with Play. In Spain, program churn from the MasOrange deal was offset with an additional build-to-suit and organic growth in PoPs, evidence of continued demand for network densification and coverage in the Spanish market. The sequential trend is consistent with typical seasonal pattern. First quarter is historically a softer quarter for colocation activity, with momentum building progressively through the year, as you can see in the chart at the bottom. I would like to highlight that the net PoPs in the first quarter 2026 is 28% higher than the same quarter last year. The strength of our operational performance flows directly into tower revenues, which grew organically by 5.3% above the consolidated revenue growth rate, reflecting the continued outperformance of our core business, as you can see in the slide 12. Starting from EUR 778 million of tower revenues in the first quarter 2025, the Ireland perimeter adjustment brings us to a pro forma base of EUR 767 million. From there, escalators and CPI contributed EUR 13 million, colocation added EUR 10 million, and build-to-suit generated EUR 18 million, reaching organic tower revenue growth of 5.3%. After an FX perimeter adjustment and order of - EUR 7 million, reported tower revenues in the first quarter came in at EUR 801 million. Moving to slide 13, let me cover our other business lines. Fiber, connectivity and housing services grew 4.3% organically, adjusted for the French data center disposal and supported by the continued rollout of the Nexloop project in France. DAS, Small Cells, and RAN-as-a-Service grew 1.1% organically, adjusted for the O&M activity discontinued in Spain. Within this segment, DAS and Small Cells delivered growth of over 16% year-on-year, reflecting a strong momentum in the U.K. and other key markets. The quarter was negatively impacted by lower trading project in the first quarter and the FX impacts from the RAN in Poland. Broadcasting grew 0.2% organically. As agreed in the 2025 contract renewals, CPI indexation will start contributing from April 26, so we expect a more meaningful contribution from broadcasting in the second quarter onwards. The next slide captures how our continued focus on operational efficiency is translating into tangible cost improvements across all key expenses lines. All metrics are on a pro forma basis, again, excluding Ireland, the French data centers, and the O&M business in Spain. Our efficiency initiatives are translated in clear margin expansion, -5.7% in the staff cost, +4.6% in repair and maintenance impacted in this quarter by timing effects. We expect for the full year 2026 a reduction in line with our efficiency plan proof on prior results trends. SG&A was down 13%, and leases 0.2%, enhanced by our land acquisition plan that is accelerating, and the rent renegotiations and cash advances. In summary, the operational efficiency is not limited to top-line growth. It runs through the full cost structure. Moving to slide 15. The slide shows the bridge from reported EBITDA after leases to free cash flow and all the components that shape our cash generation in the first quarter 2026. Starting from EBITDA of EUR 595 million, after maintenance CapEx of - EUR 20 million, working capital of -EUR 37 million, net interest paid of EUR 122 million, tax paid of - EUR 39 million, we arrive at recurrent levered free cash flow of EUR 378 million. Deducting expansion CapEx of EUR 67 million and the build-to-suit CapEx of EUR 193 million, the free cash flow comes in at EUR 118 million. As Marco mentioned, it's a turning point when compared to the same quarter last year, where free cash flow was - EUR 66 million. The strong free cash flow generation in the first quarter 2026 is driven by three main factors: operational performance, our efficient capital and tax structure with optimized cost of debt, and lower CapEx intensity as the build-to-suit cycle normalizes. Moving to the next slide, our operational improvements are clearly flowing through to cash, and this slide puts that in perspective. On a pro forma basis, recurrent levered free cash flow grew by 12.2% to EUR 363 million from EUR 323 million in the first quarter 2025. Recurrent levered free cash flow per share increased by 18%, with additional per share improvement coming from our ongoing share buyback program, which continues to reduce the share count and enhance value per share. Looking at reported free cash flow, it reached EUR 118 million in the first quarter 2026 versus -EUR 66 million in the first quarter 2025. An improvement year- on- year of EUR 184 million. As explained before, this improvement is driven by solid recurrent levered free cash flow growth by lower intensity of CapEx as build-to-suit declines. First quarter 2026 confirms the positive trajectory we described at our full year results 2025. The inflection in free cash flow generation is no longer a projection, it is a fact. Moving to slide 17. Our liquidity and funding position remains robust. As of the end of the first quarter 2026, we have total liquidity of approximately EUR 6 billion, comprising EUR 3 billion in cash and further EUR 3 billion in undrawn committed revolving credit facilities. Our 2026 maturities are fully funded, providing complete visibility on near-term refinancing needs. As highlighted, in the first quarter 2026, we successfully issued dual series bonds for EUR 1.5 billion, with maturities of 5 years and 10 years at a blended pricing of 3.4%. This was a proactive move to anticipate our 2026 refinancing requirements, extend duration and locking attractive pricing in a window of favorable market conditions. The transaction attracted strong investor demand and further demonstrates the confidence the debt capital markets have in our credit story. Our strategy when issuing bonds allow us to preserve our cost of debt while maintaining ample liquidity buffers. On gross debt composition, our EUR 20.2 billion stack is well diversified. Euro trade bonds represent circa EUR 12 billion, convertible bonds circa EUR 3.5 billion, and bank debt circa EUR 3.5 billion, with Swiss instruments at around EUR 1 billion. This reflects the disciplined funding strategy that underpins the free cash flow trajectory we described. Moving to slide 18, I would like to give you a clear picture of where we stand on shareholder remuneration, both what has been executed and what remains ahead. In 2025, we returned a total of EUR 1 billion to shareholders, comprising EUR 12 million in dividends and EUR 1 billion through our share buyback program. That was a year of a strong capital returns. In 2026, we have committed to returning a minimum amount of EUR 800 million, made up of EUR 500 million in dividends and EUR 300 million in share buybacks. Looking at the execution timeline for the year, the first dividend tranche of EUR 250 million was paid in January 2026 as committed. By the end of March 2026, we had already executed EUR 60 million of the buyback program committed for this year, from the EUR 300 million in total. The second dividend tranche of EUR 250 million will be paid in July 2026, on the 15th of July. The remaining EUR 240 million of our ongoing buyback program will be executed until the end of the year. We are on track. The program is being executed with discipline and precision. In summary, first quarter 2026 was another quarter of a strong organic performance with healthy drivers of demand across our portfolio. Operational transformation and financial discipline are driving strong margin expansion and free cash flow growth as promised. Our equity story remains intact with our leading industrial platform delivering on its premise of highly predictable and secure revenue growth and consolidating the generation of strong returns and value creation for our shareholders. With that, let me hand over to Maria for the Q&A. Thank you so much. Okay. Thank you, Raimon. Thank you, Marco. We're now available to take your questions. Looking at the list, we have Ondrej Cabejsek from UBS to kick off the questions. Hi, everyone. Thank you for the presentation, and thank you for the additional materials also that you sent around yesterday. I wanted to touch upon obviously France, probably as the first question. We now have new color from the consortium, given the revised and seemingly final offer, including that WIG is committing to acquire SFR networks in densely populated areas. I was just wondering if there is an update on the discussions from your point of view, including any kind of further detail on how you are involved in possible synergy and remedy talks with your customers? And when do you expect to be able to kind of provide an update to the market after obviously the deal completes? Second question that I had, if I may, just on the tenancy slide with respect to the U.K. Obviously, you know, you were progressing with the VodafoneThree network integration, and I was wondering, you know, from VodafoneThree's competitors, who are now at a material disadvantage when it comes to the site count in the U.K. Do you see kind of progress in their willingness or plans to bridge that gap? Can we expect an acceleration in tenancies based on that going forward? Is that a blueprint, you think, for some of the potential M&A situations in other countries in the EU? Thank you. Okay. You should know, Ondrej, that you made Vincent Cuvillier, my Chief Strategy Officer, win the bet on the first question because he bet on France, so he won. On France, the situation is finally becoming way more clear, and this is a net positive. The consortium entered in a exclusivity period. They are working on what is a full offer that includes not only a term sheet, but includes an SPA and all the terms of the SPA, which is very positive because the transaction is fairly complicated. It's complicated in the execution. A split of such a size has never been performed before in not only in Europe. It's never been done. It's not obvious from the regulatory standpoint, and it's not obvious in terms of remedies that have to be decided by the regulator in order to approve the deal. To some extent our MSA is super clear and this is a big advantage in the discussion we are having with the consortium. The terms of this MSA are not under question. The driving principle of the MSA that any change in the MSA has to be agreed with us is recognized and agreed by everybody. We want to be cooperative. We've been cooperative in U.K., we've been cooperative in Spain, and we want to be cooperative. There are a lot of ways to be cooperative. As we said many times, the value that we have to bridge with an NPV neutral negotiation is not that big. Which again, is a big advantage. Because more or less we all agree that on what can be the numbers we are talking about. Timing for sitting at the table. Until when the part of the consortium, the buy side and the sell side have not agreed, there is no matter of discussion. We stay in Barcelona and we wait for receiving a call. Which is not true that it means that we're doing nothing. We are working CTOs with CTOs in order to understand where are the overlaps, where we can be useful, what we assume can be the logic of an agreement. But as of today, talking about having a negotiation, there is no negotiation because there is nothing on the table. We agreed that we stay in contact. We stay very much in contact with the buy side. By the way, we are not blocking the operations with SFR because, for example, we continue to make natural development in the Crozon zone, which is something that has been agreed by SFR and by Bouygues because life goes on. So we continue to operate, which is the reason why you see that our growth in France is okay. It's again, it's an indirect indicator that the relation among the parties is okay because otherwise, you know, if you start having problems, you don't work nicely on, on other areas. As we told you, we will inform if there are progresses. I think that if something move, we will be proactive in letting you know. On U.K., it's very interesting. U.K., there is a lot going on, because what is happening is that Vodafone is, with one hand, is optimizing the integration of the two networks. With the other hand, they have to start working on the remedies that they received from CMA. They have to make this double job of becoming more efficient and increasing their presence. This starts to put some pressure on other operators. Allow me not to enter too much in the details, but we see the other operators starting making their own analysis on how they can commercially respond or better technological respond to the network performance increase that VodafoneThree is start to have. Work in progress and keep you posted. Thank you, Marco. The next question comes from Roshan Ranjit from Deutsche Bank. Go ahead, Roshan. Great evening everyone. Thank you for the questions. I've got two, please. Firstly, on the colocation trend, and thanks for the details as always. I appreciate there is seasonality through the year. Coming off the strong 400 gross colocation number in Spain last quarter. Could you perhaps provide us with a bit of color around the trend for the colocations through the year, particularly in Spain, given that the MergeCo is now fully focused on its reconfiguration post the kind of network rationalization? How can we expect that to, I guess, pick up through the year? When should that accelerate? Secondly, and maybe just touching on the previous question, thanks for the detail, Marco. You mentioned that there are no negotiations currently on the table from your side, I guess. Based on what the consortium have said, now they're in this exclusivity period, and we are waiting on this MOU, which should present some kind of details around the synergies. Based on what you said around the MSAs and your strength of the MSA. Should we think that there could be or should be limited synergies or savings from any kind of mobile network overlap or rationalization in France as part of this deal? Thank you. Okay. I take France, and I leave colocation to Raimon. Okay. France. The short answer is, I don't think so. I don't think that having a limited number of overlaps means that the synergies are small. Synergies are also coming from improving the quality of the network, using assets that already exist. The fact that they start relocating SFR sites in order to cover needs of network improvement that the three of them will have, if you want, is somehow a way to make synergies. Alternatively, if the deal didn't happen, they had to make huge CapEx. Decommissioning is always good, not necessarily because you save on towers, but you save on antenna, you save on energy, you save on maintenance, you save on several aspects. As we did in Spain sometime, the good way to work is to decouple what you can do operationally from what will be the financial impact on the operation. It's not necessary true that if you decommission 1,000 antenna, you should have a discount of 1,000 x the price of a one antenna. You can negotiate with the clients several ways. Which is I think a proactive way and intelligent way to be positively a part of this efficiency gain. We want to help our clients to make the efficiency happen. Please don't think that we are against. We are strongly in favor of what is going on. We think that three operators will invest way more than what the four operators were doing on a standalone basis. We are strongly in favor. We will do everything we can in order to allow our client to be successful in this. So on the Spanish colocation, just to highlight first, maybe let's try to remember how colocation was last year in Spain. If you recall, we were always showing the graph of Spain on a quarterly basis. Last year, on the first quarter 2025, we had a churn coming from the MasOrange transaction that was already planned with them. That we managed to then recover between the second but third quarter and mainly fourth quarter, thanks to the entrance of Digi in terms of RAN sharing. That's what brought the big increase at the end of the year. This year, we're expecting a more normalized situation in Spain in the sense that we keep on deploying the rural 5G with some build-to-suit. You have seen that this quarter we have something like 30 build-to-suits. We believe it's gonna continue in this trend, probably increasing a bit in the second half of the year. From the colocation perspective, we believe it's gonna be more or less recurrent, the same colocation we're having now on the upcoming quarters with not big differences. We do not expect to have this big peak at the end of the year coming from the Digi RAN sharing. Thank you, Raimon. Thank you. The next question comes from Akhil Dattani, JPMorgan. Go ahead, Akhil. Hi, good afternoon. Thanks for taking the questions. I've got two as well, please, if I can. The first one was just on disposals. Marco, you talked about the two recent transactions that you've closed. I'm sure you've seen there's been press speculation in regards to you potentially having restarted the Swiss sale process. I'd love to understand whether there's any credibility to these rumors. If there are, what's initiated that change and what you can tell us around, you know, conversation on what's going on? That's the first one. The second one, just to go back to France, but maybe address the question a slightly different way. You mentioned that so far there's been decent conversation, and I guess you're keen to work in a collaborative way with your partners. I guess you're probably also aware, from the sidelines that, we've seen a surprising shift in Italy after consolidation there in regards to what's happening in a way. I'd love to understand, as you look at it from the outside in. What you're thinking around the situation in a way? ow you would compare and contrast that? Yeah. With your situation in France, just to give the market comfort that that is very different. And not something we should be looking at too closely. Thanks a lot. Good. Akhil, happy to hear you. The, I'm sorry, on the first point on Switzerland, as you said, we are talking about press rumors, and the house habit is not to discuss about press rumors. I'm sorry, no, not to give you more color. We always said that if there is the price, we do a deal. If there is not the price, we don't. That's it. Very simple. I would like really to elaborate on your second question because it is very intriguing. I spent last week, three days in Rome just to meet government, to meet the regulator, to meet our client, and to spend time understanding closely what is happening. My strong conviction is that we are talking about a commercial disagreement. The parties of a commercial agreement have a strong disagreement of the terms of their contract. That's it. There is no signal, any signal that there is any regulatory or whatsoever backdrop in this, which seems to me absolutely logic. It's what it should be. I spoke with my client very intensely. We have our renewal in 2030, so it's not something that is beyond the corner. Let me say that we are talking very constructively on what we should do together because the main point in Italy of my client is to understand about spectrum renewal, what is going to be the investment coming with the spectrum renewal, how to improve the permitting, how to improve the operations, blah, blah, and a lot of work to do. I would say that the Italian case, the more I see the Italian case, the more it seems to me a commercial dispute. I'm very sorry to see that a commercial dispute can end in a court. Ultimately, I think that the rule of law is the rule of law. It's important not only for Enel, I would say also for Italy, to show that in a large country, the rule of law has to be respected. That's it. Very as simple as that. I'm sorry I'm not very much in the details of this dispute because I'm the competitor, I cannot tell you more than this. Is it possible that it creates a pandemic effect on France? Look into the interest of the party. I would make it short and say no. I don't see any signal that tells me that this can flow into the French situation. Make it short, no. Great. Thank you. Thank you, Akhil. Okay. Now moving on to the next question from Rohit Modi at Citibank. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity. Some of my questions have already been answered. Just two questions. Firstly, back on France. As the operator recently mentioned, there's been change in structure of the deal now from asset deal to shares deal, which means the entity will be transferred from Altice to consortium. Does that change anything from Cellnex position in terms of there'll be change of control beforehand, before there's a split of asset? Just trying to understand from Cellnex perspective, was there any change that you see? Secondly, you touched upon WINDTRE, and suddenly there is the clause on the WINDTRE contract which has explicitly mentioned that, you know, there could be a pricing negotiation that can happen between - 15% to + 5%. Given you're already in discussion, like if you can give any color around where do you see that ends by 2030? Thank you. Okay. A share deal is mildly better. It's almost the same, it's mildly better for us. In an asset deal, basically you have to decide before where the asset go, and which asset are treated in which way, which makes the preliminary work way more complicated. In a share deal, you transfer the shares and you have more time to work on how to reallocate the assets among the members of the consortium, which makes it mildly better procedurally, I would say. From the legal perspective, it doesn't change absolutely nothing. Our contracts are the same, but if you want to split, you need our consent. If you transfer the shares, you can make it, there is a change of control issue, but there is no problem of splitting the contract. It's mildly easier for us to deal with a share deal than with an asset deal, but not so, not such a big difference. The second question was, you were referring to the WINDTRE contract, correct? Yes, exactly. The renewal on the WINDTRE contract. Okay. The renewal is due in 2030. We are not in a hurry, not on my side and not on Benoit Hanssen side. We have time. The contract is pretty clear, because there is a corridor in which the new price is gonna be set. As always, when you make a corridor, you take the midpoint of the corridor, and it becomes a reference point. What I can tell you, it's a bit early to discuss something that should happen in 2030. From the regulatory perspective, it's absolutely neutral. It's a renewal. It's an all or nothing renewal that has no discussion from the client, no discussion from our side. What I'm really very much, what is very much important for us is that we serve with the maximum quality, which seems to be the case. Happy for my Italian team. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving on. The next question comes from Abhilash Mohapatra at BNP Paribas. Hi. Good evening, everyone, and thanks for taking my questions. I've got two, couple of quick ones, please. Firstly, just on the colocations, and one of your smaller markets, Switzerland, which was mentioned. I mean, this has historically been a market with sort of relatively limited colocation growth, and then you've, I think, previously characterized this as a sort of low growth market. Just wondering what drove the stronger growth in PoPs in Q1? Colocation PoPs and if that is something that we should expect to continue? Secondly, just coming back to your point on the U.K., just a point of clarification, I suppose. If there are no sort of more BTS opportunities, is that something that Cellnex would be able to pursue? Or is there a market share limitation on Cellnex's ability to grow more sites in the U.K.? Thank you. Okay. I take the second first, and then I leave to Raimon for the colocation. On BTS, no, we have no limitation in order to participate eventually to a BTS program. Of course, we have to better understand what are the terms, what is gonna be the process, et cetera. No, technically speaking, we have no particular limitation. If there is a, well, some of our clients who want to go in this direction, we for sure we're going to be happy to participate. U.K. is a market where we would like to invest more. It's a very good market, solid market. I think that the market repair will make it way better than before. Raimon, please. On the second question, just to make sure I realize that I understood. I'm not sure if you were talking just about Switzerland or if you were talking about all the countries? Switzerland. Yeah, that was on Switzerland, Raimon. Thank you. Okay. Switzerland, we have had a good first quarter in terms of colocation. Mainly a lot of POPs coming from IoT. I would say, probably we don't need to expect that significant growth on the next quarters. I would say that the next quarter is gonna be more in line with what we have had in the past in Switzerland, that there is a bit of a smaller growth in the colocations, but it remains the build-to-suit program that we have that will continue over the next quarters. That's great. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to James Ratzer at New Street. Yes. Thank you very much indeed. I had two questions as well. The first one was about thinking about the kind of impact of satellite on your business, because what we've seen recently is people like Amazon Leo, Starlink, start to sign some tower backhaul agreements with MNOs. I was kind of wondering whether is that something you would be open to offering on your towers? I'm kind of trying to think how could that affect your business? I mean, could that actually be additional upside for Cellnex because you would then start to get an additional tenant on the tower in the form of a Starlink or an Amazon Leo dish? The second question I had was just on your broadcast business in Spain. You're indicating that that growth is going to re-accelerate back to inflationary levels from Q2. Could you run us through what the details of the contract renegotiation you did last year there was? How secure is that revenue stream until the kind of next renegotiation? Should that just grow in line with inflation until then? Thank you. Cool. Yeah. On satellite, more than additional revenues from backhauling, which is always possible. We don't see in our countries this happening a lot. But we still have some radio links, so backhauling made using high-capacity radio links. Should it be substituted with satellite links? It's not impossible. It always depends on several condition, not only price, but especially performance. Now, the price of a radio link and the price of a satellite link for backhauling is not very different. Not very big for the time being. What we see is LEO constellation looking for ground stations. A ground station for the LEO constellation is pretty different from the old ones. The old ones were very big dishes because the satellite was in an orbit approximately 700km- 800 km. These are in an orbit which is 450km- 500 km. The kind of a dish used for the dialogue with satellite is completely different. The configuration is different, the density is different, et cetera. We are talking about areas relatively bigger than what we're used to do with a normal tower. We're talking about sort of 2,000 sq m- 3,000 sq m of land, multi-antenna with land control for land control and data transmission. You need a very demanding requirement for energy, for connectivity. We're talking about very, very, very high demand of energy. We assume that in Europe, every constellation should have a sort of a 40 ground station- 50 ground station, at least the big ones. Eutelsat uses a totally different technology, we should not refer to Eutelsat. We are referring to the LEO. This is basically what we are going. Of course, it's priced consistently. We don't price the same as a normal tower. This a big animal. We have an agreement with one constellation. There are some several elements that are under NDA, so I stop here before I say something too much. My CEO is looking to me very badly, so I stop here. On the broadcasting, James, just to give you an idea, we have renewed five years contract with the non-public broadcasters. It's true that in June 2025, licenses were renewed for a longer period, it was 15 years, and contracts are CPI-based. It's very simple. Thank you. If you had a chance, Marco, on the first one, have you got many towers where you have 2,000 sq m-3,000 sq m of land spare? No. Just adjacent to the tower? No. They don't want to be in the same piece of land as a tower because of the access. The perimeter access to this piece of land has to be very strictly monitored. We have to avoid interferences, radio interferences, electromagnetic interferences. It's a totally isolated piece of land. We're happy to do. We already did two. This I can say. We made now three, Simone Battiferri is correct. We made three, we have a pipeline now doing some more. Okay. Thank you. You're very welcome. Thanks, James. Moving on. We've now got Nick Lyall, from Berenberg. Please go ahead, Nick. Hi. Thanks very much. I hope you can hear me. Very well. It was a couple of questions, quick questions please, Marco, if possible. Just coming back to the U.K., you mentioned it's a solid market, way better than before on your expectations. Could you help us on how that growth in the U.K. might be split between VodafoneThree and the remedies? You know, are the remedies enough to keep the VodafoneThree revenue positive and growing and raising it? Or are you reliant on the other operators coming in for the U.K. to grow? Could you just tell us how the consolidation affects it? Secondly, on the contract renewals, there's been a lot of talk of the operators' balance sheets getting stronger. They're gonna get more aggressive because of this, you know, all linked with the INWIT situation. How are you finding the operators' approach to pricing as they renew contracts? Is there any sense the operators want more aggressive cuts to prices at renewals or things as they were before? Thank you. Okay, good. On the U.K., I would say that it's very different the job that VodafoneThree is doing it from what the other operators are doing. VodafoneThree has two hot potato in the hands. One is you have to take two networks, and you have to integrate in making one and to understand every time you have a duplication, what is the better alternative forward-looking. I underline well forward-looking because what we see is that operators, before dismantling something in urban areas, they think it three times, not only one time. Because then the process of building in dense urban areas is not improving in terms of permitting, in terms of time to market, et cetera. Vodafone has a dual need. They have the need of making the two networks being integrated, and then they have to expand their coverage. In the coverage expansion, they have to consider that they have a portion of the country in which they are RAN sharing with VMO2, which adds another element of complexity because in their part of the beacon RAN sharing, they can do basically what they want. In the other part of the RAN sharing, they have to sit and discuss and agree with VMO2. This is Vodafone. We are working a lot with Vodafone because as you know the network of Hutchison 3G U.K. was heavily relying on us. We're working with VodafoneThree in order to design for them the best combination, the best possible combination. What is important is that we have been able to give them a good, a good quantity of flexibility without impacting our revenues, which has been particularly good. The conversation with Everything Everywhere and with the VMO2 is totally different. They have their network, they have to decide to make the decision how to expand their network. EE is totally hands-free and the VMO2 has the topic of Beacon now and to understand what they do in Beacon. It's an interesting puzzle. It's fairly complex, but, we are at the table with the three of them and, it's gonna be very interesting. On the operation approach, you are making a point that, I think it's the big misunderstanding, of the contract renewals. Okay? When an anchor contract is signed, in the anchor contract there is a component which is a clearly a financial component. This financial component is designed over a long period, over a 20-year timeframe. You cannot come after 10 years and say, you know, my balance sheet now is okay, I want to renegotiate, the price. Think about real estate. A part in what you're paying is a mortgage because this is what they did. Over a 20-year period. Can you go after 10 years and say, I'm sorry, I want to rediscuss because my balance sheet is better? I think that the fact that the balance sheet is better is very relevant. It's very relevant because the new build-to-suits are going to be designed possibly with a lower component, with a lower financial component, with a higher industrial component, which is super good. We are 100% okay with this. Sorry, you cannot come and say that the old contracts have to be renewed because because you feel better. I'm happy for you that you feel better. Nick, we have added into the frequently asked questions part two documents. One where you can see all the due date of renewals of our contracts being the first one in 2030 and thereof after 2033 going forward. We have added as well the record of the contract renewals we have had so far. In all of them we have managed to find a way forward that is good for the MNO, that is good for us, and we have managed to close with very good results. That's great. Thank you very much, guys. Thank you. Thanks. Moving on to Andrew Lee at Goldman Sachs. Hi. Good evening, everyone. I just, it's two basically follow-up questions. One, just following on from Akhil's question on Switzerland, I wonder if I could just ask maybe more a hypothetical question around potential deals, but more about the interest levels of private investors in towers. You know, a year, two years ago, we saw private investors swarming around towers, with a low cost of capital and prepared to pay a premium, and then for the last a 1.5, w e haven't really seen anything apart from a pretty low multiple deal in France. Are you seeing a return of interest of private investors or any sign of return of interest of private investors into the space, given the credit backdrops, et cetera? Any sense of the cost of capital having shifted on that front? Just trying to get a sense of is there a bid out there outside of public investors who are obviously weighed down by several structural concerns at the moment. Secondly, I guess people are trying to get to the bottom of around the U.K. and Spain is when will we see evidence that post-consolidation there's, you know, an acceleration in investment in networks and densification? Rather than what's going on now, I think in the past, I think you suggested that we might start to see that densification evidence in 2027. What are you seeing right now that's giving you optimism that we'll start to see that, you know, that acceleration investment? If you've got any sense of timeline, that would be helpful. Thank you. I answer to your question saying that at least there is more optimism in the U.S. If I take what is happening around SBA, Vertical Bridge, et cetera, it seems to me that at least some better sense of humor is there. There is more. I think that some of the big headwinds have been, I don't know. I think, my personal view, they have been overpriced in our share price, and I would say in our sector. There have been. There are headwinds. Yeah, possibly, yes. It has been fairly priced. I think it has been overpriced. When you see the risk premium that a sector like the towers is now facing, I think it's a bit too high. With the lower risk premium, we should be in a different territory with our shares, and this possibly explains why starting from the U.S., where, you know, there are bigger pots of capital, possibly it started from there. Sorry, it's an indirect answer. On U.K., Spain, my base case remain 2027, and not because I'm not working. Believe me that my team is working every single day in order to let it happen before. If you ask me a realistic vision, a realistic vision is that I prefer to keep it as a 2027 event with a potential good surprise if it happens before. It remains for me a 2027 acceleration. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Now David Wright from Bank of America. David, go ahead. Hello, guys. Hopefully you can hear me now. I will make it nice and brief. I guess it is kind of an opposite to James's question about satellite coverage. Marco, do you think generally, I mean, we are seeing standalone 5G rollout across Europe now. Do you think there is really an indoor solution in place right now for the industry? It seems to have been very under-indexed in conversations, certainly with the investor community. Do you think the European telcos have a sufficient indoor coverage solution under standalone 5G? Do you think that could be another wave of potential revenue acceleration for the towers? Thank you. I think that in general terms, Europe is under-invested in 5G, so not only indoor. Take a car, make a road trip, in several countries, U.K., France, Germany, and you discover how many times you are without 5G. Indoor is for sure an issue, but it's not only the indoor. I think that people starts to consider a good 5G coverage as something absolutely needed. You see that, at least, it happens to me. I'm always annoyed when I'm traveling by train, in between Barcelona and Madrid, and my phone is not working properly. This is why, by the way, we decided to make the so-called Vertical Solution Business Unit because you need specialization, you need capital, you need know-how, you need a lot of things. Short, 5G is not enough, macro and micro. On macro, I think that the investment is so big that operator needed to have some, I would say, some tailwind that can come from spectrum renewal. It can come from in market consolidation. It can come just from price uplift. We start seeing some price uplift. Please consider that the GSMA, not Marco, the GSMA said that they think that Europe should make not less than EUR 100 billion of 5G investments in the coming 5 years- 7 years. This is a big number. Second, what we call special coverage. Special coverage, which includes indoor, includes transportation routes. It includes mega concentration places, like football stadium, arena, railway station, airports, et cetera. We have to work on all of these and there is a lot of work coming and a lot of work for my Gianluca, the Head of Vertical Solutions. Yeah, super interesting. Nice to hear from you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Now it's time for the last question. Fernando Cordero from Santander. Go ahead, Fernando. Hello. Thank you for taking my question. It is related with land investments. I would like just to understand for how long do you expect the current EUR 200 million-EUR 250 million per year generate run rate could be, let's say, the standard? In that sense also, if you are seeing any kind of pressure on the returns on land acquisition? Or do you continue to have a compelling returns in the front? Thank you. Oh, thank you. Very good question, especially the second part. How long I expect? As of today, the percentage of our land long-term ownership, call it property, call it long-term prepayment, is still relatively low. We are in a sort of 15% at the end of the year. Maybe less. Let's say possibly something between 13% and 15% at the end of the year. If you ask me what is a reasonable target, it's not gonna be 50%. It's gonna be way less. If we say 25%- 30%, it's reasonable. What we are missing is another 12%-13%. Make, make the math, and you see that the number remains pretty material. If you want to see the other way around, the opportunity for saving is material massive. The increase in EBITDA after leases margin can be still good for several year in a row. The second part of your question is very interesting because I would say that the so-called hostile land aggregators, which are guys who have a pretty predatory attitude of buying the land in order to have unfair profit from this acquisition, is reducing. What is there is there are land aggregators which are doing their job. They have cheap capital, cheap financing. They go in the market. They know that we are good client. We are good risk. At the end, they can invest because we are a good payer. Our strategy is not to enter in a match race in which we pay any number. We don't pay any number. If a deal is convenient, we make the deal. If the deal is not convenient, we sit and we discuss. By the way, we are entering very good agreements with some land aggregators. Why? Exactly because we are a good payer, sometime they like to have big portfolio of land where we are the tenant. We negotiate good price for 10 years, 12 years, 15 years. We sign good agreements. To make a long story short, as of today, our return remains very good. Very good means levered return after tax is way double digit. It's not double digit. It's way double digit. Good. Cool. Until when it's like this, we will continue to be selective and to use our capital. If the condition materially change, we will review the logic, but we are pretty strict in the capital allocation. Last point, which is important. Our people from our Chief Operating Officer now is putting together two concepts, which is land acquisition and MNO consolidation. Don't buy the land of a tower that the day after tomorrow can be at risk. If you see that there is a possibility of an overlap of two towers, think well before you buy the land. Because if the day after tomorrow this tower doesn't exist any longer, then it's a bit embarrassing to make tomato cultivation. Very clear. Okay. Well, I think. Thanks, Marco. Thank you, Fernando. Thank you. See you soon. Okay, I think that's a wrap in terms of questions. Thank you for your attention, and if you need any other support, we're always here. Look forward to speaking to you next quarter. Thank you, everyone. Thank you.