Hello and welcome to the Assemblin Investor Call. Throughout the call, all participants will be in a listen-only mode, and afterwards there will be a question-and-answer session. Please note this call is being recorded. Today I'm pleased to present from Triton, Hans Petter Hjellestad, and Jari Lindholm. From Assemblin and Caverion, Jacob Götzsche, Mats Johansson, and Philip Carlsson. Speakers, please begin your meeting. Good morning. I'm Jari Lindholm from Triton. Welcome to this investor call where we want to present to you our plans on the combination of Assemblin and Caverion. We have the new management team here with us today, and on top of that we have the deal captain representing Triton, Hans Petter Hjellestad, who will start. Hans Petter, please. Thank you, Jari. Good morning, everyone. I wanted to take a moment to open the call saying a brief word from Triton's point of view about the two businesses and the combination. As some of you will have seen in earlier investor presentations, Triton has a long track record for investing into the technical installation subsector across Europe. That track record dates back to 2006 when we made our first investment in NVS, and since then we've also been invested in Bravida, Assemblin, and Unica in Holland. And then now we are very satisfied with having completed the investment in Caverion. The common denominator for all of these businesses is that they are some of our best investments. Under Triton's ownership, the companies have become larger, they've grown their number of employees, and they've become more profitable. On average, the bottom line has increased by more than 3.6x in all of these businesses, and as you can see for Assemblin since 2015, the business has grown its bottom line by more than 8x. These businesses share, from our point of view, many similarities, both in their investment thesis from our point of view as well as the key underlying market drivers. Having invested in the sector for two decades, we have developed, together with the management teams of these businesses, a playbook which is centered around decentralized operating models, which promotes local entrepreneurship, P&L ownership, digitalization, value creative acquisitions, as well as strengthening the agenda in the businesses concerning sustainability. The reason why we like to invest into the technical installation market is that it's a market with strong underlying growth drivers, and for those investors that have followed Assemblin for the last couple of years, you will know some of this. 40% of the energy consumption in Europe comes from buildings and installation and service companies, such as both Assemblin and Caverion, capitalize greatly on the need to address this in society. In addition, the businesses tend to be very resilient through the economic cycle, driven by that the larger groups are very well diversified across different end markets and have high exposure to recurring service contract and renovation markets. The average age of a building in Sweden is around 60 years, and this drives the continuous need for renovation demand, and that drives some of the stability in these companies. That's just some of the megatrends, and Jacob, Mats, and Philip will cover that in more detail, but most importantly, we'll also cover the merger rationale, and I will now hand over to Jacob to cover that. Thank you, HP. Jacob Götzsche speaking here. First of all, what is the rationale behind this merger? We have two very successful companies, Assemblin and Caverion, and when we look at these two companies and mapping out their position geographically, but also from a service and installation point of view, it makes a lot of sense to put them together because it's, first of all, creating a clear market leader in the technical service and installation, especially in Sweden, Norway, and Finland, but also a strong platform in Denmark and in Northern Europe. By putting these two companies together, which you will see on the next slide, is that we will have a well-balanced mix between projects and services, also making the risk of these two companies together more balanced, together with a change in the geographical split, also making the risk, but also the opportunities of this company even better. As we say in the third bullet here, we are really complementing each other to ensure that we can deliver all the lifecycle of a building that HP was also talking about, which gives us tons of opportunities because of the legislation that is in all countries, but also the megatrends with the end users really focusing on the green transition. That turns us into point four, where you can say the strategy and the value creation ambition is the same for the two companies. In all aspects, it's the same ambitions. It's the same customers that we are trying to help to also be more green in the green transition, but also the services and installations that the customer needs to get there. And as you know today, buildings need to be green both from a finance point of view, but also from an end user point of view, which is also in the industry, etc. Then there's, of course, some finances behind. By combining these two companies, Assemblin has been on a journey for the last six years, reaching a very good profitability level. Caverion is coming from behind, also have improved significantly their earnings and are on a good track there. By putting these two companies together, then we are de-risking in our mind this margin journey, and that will be a very good journey ahead. We have been asked, "Is this a cost synergy exercise?" It is not because we believe that the biggest value will come by the service and installation offering we are giving to the customers. However, we are, of course, also seeing some synergies in this, and where we can harvest synergies, it can be on a group, it can be on a national level, it can be on a regional level, or down to unit. We will, of course, do that. But the majority or the main purpose behind this is simply we believe that the market and the megatrends will get this company to grow and be successful, and so on. And if you then look at the next slide, what is it actually that we have now created with the two companies together? Can we take the next slide? Sorry, we have a small technical problem here. Yes, I hope you see the slide with the circle now. What we are saying here, the two companies, what is it we actually want to do? We want to deliver sustainable installations, technical service, and solutions along the lifecycle to help our customers to achieve their goals. So the majority of what we do today is that when you have a building, either it starts from completely scratch or it's a refurbishment, and there we can do all the installation, we can help with the projects. When we have done that, we can also service and maintain the building. So this means when you have a ready-to-go building, we can say, "Shall we help you servicing the building, taking care of all the building automation, all the maintenance, etc.?" But we can also advise them. So if the HVAC system needs to be changed to a lower CO2 emission, then we can change to CO2 gases instead of F gases. So there we can also help with the solutions, and then we can also manage and operate it long-term if the customer wishes to. So by putting Assemblin and Caverion together, we are putting the best from the installation and project business where Assemblin is very strong together with Caverion, where we are very strong in the service and advisory and solution business to become what we said on the previous page, the leading Northern European service and installation provider. Why do we believe it's a perfect fit? If you look at the next page, and here you see the two companies together. If you look in the middle, then you would see that Assemblin is very much centered around Sweden, which, of course, makes Assemblin higher risk in respect of Sweden. If you look at Caverion, it's more centered around Finland. When you then put these two companies together and look at the lower bottom of the middle section in the slide, then you will see it's a well-balanced country split. It's also de-risk the cycles within different countries or within different markets. So we think that this is a very healthy split. If you then go in the upper right corner and then look at the project and service mix, then you would see that Assemblin had a higher proportion of projects, shy of the 60% and 40% of service, and the opposite of Caverion. When we put these two together, we will have around 43% in projects and around 57%, so 40/60. What does that mean for the business case? It means more recurring turnover, more recurring service projects, more recurring ad hoc projects, and extremely strong capabilities and competences within installation and projects. So overall, when you look at this, you should take it as the fundamental of the companies has become stronger. And then you can see on the left side, when you then combine the two companies, there will also be potential for an uplift in the margin going forward to get the margin at the level where Assemblin has been, but also what for Caverion has been a strategic target to continue the uplift in the margin. So that was from my side, and I will hand it over to Mats to explain a little bit about what are the thoughts behind this. Thank you, Jacob. Yeah, if we look a little bit deeper into the complementary strengths of Assemblin and Caverion, they are really strong. Assemblin, with its operational model and large local footprint, especially in the Swedish market, together with some industry-leading margins in both Norway and Sweden, excellence in project management, technical service, green tech, and BMS. And then we have Caverion with an even stronger position within service, and especially within technical facility management where buildings are managed and operated. And successfully, also, Caverion done a good job improving its project business and a lot of expertise within the connectivity of buildings and data analytics. As Jacob alluded, it's strongest in the industry with industry-leading margins in Finland and very scaled within service in Norway and then solid business operations in Germany, Austria, and Denmark together with the Baltics. Customer's perspective, maybe most important of all, we will overall have a broader offering covering the lifecycle of the building, as Jacob described here. This together with the broader geographical coverage and even higher capabilities makes us, I would say, unique in the marketplace. Then finally, not to forget about all of our 22,000 skilled employees. Getting to be one company with one culture with local ownership is really part of the DNA of this new group. We will be able to provide more opportunities and development for our people and continue to be focused that, of course, that everyone gets home to their families in the evening in the same way as they left in the morning because we have a lot of people out there who spend their days in pretty dangerous environments. All these complementary strengths supported by scale and efficiencies within procurement, IT, best practice sharing, brands, performance initiatives, etc. Next slide, please. Now the work starts to merge these two companies. The direction is clear to become best of what we do and be the leading and most profitable group within the industry. Initially getting the companies together here with a new group management, then review and assess the business setup in each of the divisions to utilize efficiencies and synergies based on strengths and profitability, and in the same time, ensuring that we can continue of the ongoing daily business. That's very important. Then continue to perform based on our organizational philosophy and values and relentless focus on operational excellence, grow the business with focus on service, but where, of course, M&A will be as important going forward as it has been, and finally leverage how we differentiate ourselves in the marketplace, where we are standing in the middle of the green transition. So with that, Philip, over to you to frame the new group with numbers. Thank you, Mats. I got to say, this is super exciting when you look at the strength of the group we're building now together. As a result of this merger, we will be the clear market leader in the Nordics bar none. Then again, as you guys know, size in itself is not the focus. We will always prioritize margins over volumes, but local market leadership, the improved network density, will drive margin benefits. And in addition to that, in our strength in the Nordics, we also have a strong foothold now in Germany and Austria and across the Baltics that will allow us further growth opportunities. Super exciting group, and I think it's even better on the next slide here when we look at our margin journey. Both Assemblin and Caverion have experienced strong margin trajectories over the last few years, and the complementary nature of these businesses will allow us to improve our revenue mix, increase the share of service, like Jacob was saying, and also give us a more efficient network density, all of which will contribute to even higher margins here going forward. In addition to this, we have clear synergies across SG&A and purchasing, but on top of that, also commercial opportunities as we leverage our customer base. We're currently reevaluating our long-term margin targets, but it's fair to say that the potential we see in Caverion and us in a combined group is not less than what we've seen in Assemblin. So we're really excited about this. Moving on to some of the more technical stuff here. The legal consummation of the transaction is expected in April. There are no outstanding regulatory approvals necessary, so we expect to be able to close pretty soon. The legal structure of the actual transaction will be Assemblin Group AB, now being renamed Assemblin Caverion Group AB, acquiring the Topco in the Caverion group. And then until the acquisition debt that we then have in the Caverion group is refinanced, Caverion will be a restricted credit group. We will be one group together, but we will be treating the Caverion entities as a restricted credit group. We have an acquisition financing in place here with a tenor of three years, and we can pursue our synergies across commercial, purchasing, and shared functions regardless, but we won't be moving material assets between the groups until after refinancing. And then finally, on the part you've all been waiting for, the pro forma capital structure following the combination. As a direct result of this combination, we will have an EBITDA in excess of EUR 300 million and a leverage ratio of 3.3 times. This is excluding any synergies that will follow from this combination. Following our refinancing, as we discussed previously, we'll be looking for a leverage ratio no higher than what we have on a standalone basis in Assemblin. So that means that we will have an even stronger company here and a much better position. And with all that, over to Q&A. Thank you. If you do wish to ask an audio question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. If you do wish to withdraw your question, you may do so by pressing star 2 to cancel. Once again, please press star 1 to register for a question. There will be a brief pause while questions are being registered. The first question comes from the line of Rosalind Dalton from ICG. Please go ahead. Hello. Good morning. Thanks for hosting this presentation. So if I can just talk about the capital structure that will be the final piece of the puzzle on page 13, am I right to think then that Assemblin will also be refinanced within that combination because I think you've only really mentioned the Caverion debt? Okay. Thank you. All right. Jari, would you like to take that one? Yes. This is Jari Lindholm from Triton. We do not see any need or necessity to take out the current bond in Assemblin that we don't see. Okay. So really, the only thing that we'll see is the refinancing for the Caverion debt? Yes. Okay. Thanks for that clarification. The next question comes from the line of Saul Casadio from M&G PLC. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks for taking my question. It's just really a follow-up from the previous question. Just want to double-check if the future capital structure of the combined entity—I can't see the slide now, but I've seen it—3.3x net leverage combined. You're not looking to take out any dividend when combining the two together and coming to the market. That's the pro forma capital structure we should look at. Again, Jari, I think you should take that one. Yes. This is Jari Lindholm again. As we see it, we will have a pro forma post-combination leverage similar to Assemblin standalone, meaning that this equity bridge that we have put in place will also be partially repaid. Sorry. I'm confused. This Caverion acquisition has been financed with bank debt, EUR 410 million, and in addition, shareholder loans or equity from Triton. We see that when combining these two groups, we can repay part of the shareholder injections for bridging this transaction to bring up the leverage to similar to what we had in Assemblin pre-combination. The capital structure here that I see is not the capital structure that is going to be in the market. It's going to be higher. So, there's going to be more leverage than what is shown on this slide. Yes. Yep. Correct. The reason is simply the capital structure here does not reflect the equity loan that would be partially repaid in the refinancing. Okay. It's a bit confusing, I must say. The second question is on the existing FRNs. They are callable in May. I understand that you technically might not be able to call them now because they can only be called in May, and the transaction is expected to close in April. But given the fact that it's a new entity, it's a different capital structure, why not giving the existing lenders of Assemblin the chance to exit the structure by calling the notes in May? This is Jari again. We have no intention of calling the current notes. This structure is allowed under the current documentation. We will continue with current bond. Then, as we said, we will do a refinancing of the bank loans that we took for this acquisition and the shareholder bridges that is done for this transaction in order to bring the leverage up to similar as we had in Assemblin standalone before this transaction. Okay. And so you're not looking to call them in May, I understand. No. No. Okay. What is the percentage of the equity check in the Caverion deal that will be refinanced in the transaction if you have a number? That is not decided yet. That is not decided yet. Okay. Okay. No. Thank you for clarifying these points. Thank you. We have a follow-up question from Rosalind Dalton from ICG. Please go ahead. Hello, Rosalind. Your line is open. Hi. Sorry about that. I appreciate that you aren't able to give a percentage with regards to the equity check, but could you actually give an actual cash number, i.e., what cash we'll try to have across the two transactions once it's closed? Thank you again, Jari. I suspect that perhaps you could give a picture on what must be the purchase price for Caverion. We start with that. Martin Huth, the equity check for Caverion in total is roughly EUR 1 million, and then part of that is structured as a shareholder bridge to Jari's earlier point. And then that bridge will be taken out when the new company, a new group, is or the bank bridge on the Caverion side of the equation is looked at. We have not yet decided on the exact number or amount how much will be repaid of the bridge that we have put in and how much will stay as equity going forward. That number is not set yet. Okay. So I guess, excuse me, you'll be able to tell us at the time of doing the Caverion refinancing. Is that correct? Excuse me. Could you repeat the question? I suppose when you come to do the refinancing of the Caverion debt, at that point, you will be able to tell us that extreme number? Yes. Yes, of course. Okay. That's great. Thank you. A note, yes, we are still working on the synergies between these two groups. So that is also an important number for us to know when we do the next step. Okay. That's great. Thanks so much. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of David Alty from Arcano. Please go ahead. Hey, Jari. Thanks for calling. A couple more questions. So just to be clear, you say the leverage will be no higher than the standalone basis for Assemblin, which is 4.4 times here. Now, that leverage is going to be based on a pro forma adjusted, synergy-adjusted EBITDA that you come up with for the combined companies. Is that correct, rather than just this 305 number? This is Jari again. Most likely, yes. Okay. And do you have a feel for the size of the synergies or the cost also of creating those synergies? We will rework to these in the next phase. Okay. Okay. Fine. And then I just want to. Sorry. I think it's fair to say when we're talking about synergies, I mean, we will be looking at the hard synergies that we'd be then quantifying as part of a refinancing process. The even larger commercial synergies and sort of the actual, so to say, industrial logic of this combination would not be reflected in that. But I mean, that's really the reason why we're building such a strong group together. Okay. Sure. So it's slightly more conservative than some other transactions you see, I guess, in the high-yield world. In terms of the transaction timeline, what is your expected timeline for this transaction? The bank loans for this transaction, we got them in November, and we have three-year maturity on those. So we are not in a hurry. Right. Sure. But when do you actually expect for Assemblin to close the transaction of purchasing Caverion? That will happen in the beginning of Q2, but that has nothing to do with the refinancing. We can do the refinancing at a later stage because the bank loans can stay in the restricted group until we do a refinancing. Okay. Great. Thanks very much. Once again, ladies and gentlemen, if you do wish to ask an audio question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from the line of Saul Casadio from M&G PLC. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks. Just a quick follow-up on the future capital structure. Will the new notes be pari passu with the existing notes, or are you considering potentially also adding an unsecured layer to the structure? Thank you. This is Jari Lindholm again. As we have done in Assemblin before, we have gone away with quite a conservative capital structure, and we will continue with a conservative capital structure. We do not see that we need any unsecured notes. Okay. Okay. And am I right to correct if I remember correctly the docs, there was a 20% cap on add-backs to EBITDA, which I guess includes synergies. Am I correct to assume that synergies in the deal will be capped at 20% of the combined EBITDA? Yes. For calculating our leverage purposes, yes. Of course, as Philip mentioned here, there will be a lot of synergies also on the sales side, but those will not be counted in. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any more questions? Do we have any further audio questions here? If no more questions, then we will. Jari. We have written questions as well. Okay. Good. So I'll just be reading them off one by one, and we'll see how we get along. So we have Mr. Rob Warburton here. Two related questions. A, how did Assemblin's profitability split between the branches change between 2022, as shown in the offering memorandum page 130 and 2023? And B, what the corresponding structure looks like in Caverion. And thank you, Rob, for the question about our operations. It's not a disclosure we'll be making at this time, but appreciate the interest. And then another question here from Rolf is one question to the Triton representatives. You're not mentioning Habeo Group. What is your view upon the investment compared to Assemblin Caverion? Do you have any plans to combine these investments? So I'll direct that one to HP. Yes. There's no intention to also include Habeo as part of this transaction except in the second fund. Okay. Then we have from Michelle Yama two questions to Triton. One, acquired Assemblin in Fund 4 and Caverion in Fund 5. Would you transfer the two portfolio companies to be owned by the same fund? And then secondly, I understand Triton has Fläkt as another HVAC-related portfolio company. Would it be a strategic sense in combining this? Hans Petter? Yeah. I can cover that. If I take the first one, the new group will be owned by the Fund 4 continuation vehicle and by Fund 5 as co-investors alongside each other. And then on the second one with regards to Fläkt, Fläkt is an industrial manufacturer of HVAC equipment. It's not an insulation company similar to this new group. So there will be no strategic sense in putting the businesses together, and we are not planning to do that. All right. And then we have a second question here from Michelle Yama. Did management Triton have a discussion with regulators on possible market considerations? Are there any remedy assets identified? That process, I can say, is contained. So the regulators have approved the transaction from a competition perspective already last year. And there was a very small remedy consisting of 10-ish people that has been executed already. So there are no further regulatory agreements outstanding. Then we have one from—sorry, if I mispronounce your name—Oussama Semlali. Do you have an idea of the size of the synergies in terms of euro revenue or cost synergies? I know Jari said we will be reverting with an estimate of that, but we will obviously be focusing on the hard synergies for the purposes of EBITDA calculations. But sort of the true synergies and the true strength of our group in terms of commercial will be on top of that and therefore not included in the synergy number for EBITDA calculations. And then we have one from Hardik Makkar. Do you expect to refinance the whole structure? I believe that's been answered. We're not expecting to refinance the whole structure. Then we have another question from Jonathan Waite. Have you had any discussions with rating agencies on where final ratings may land? Obviously, we will be having ongoing discussions with the rating agencies, and we'll be reverting back to you on that. I don't know, Jari, if we have any more color to give at this time. No. Correct. All right. Then we have from Aine McLaughlin. Will there be any equity being put into the business as part of the merger? And Hans Petter or Jari, would you like to comment? Yeah. I think the investment into Caverion is obviously significantly equity-backed, and that equity backing will continue to also exist in the new company. There will be lots of equity at work behind this new company more than what is currently in Assemblin. So a very large equity ticket from a friend to Triton. Then we have another question here from Oussama Semlali. Is the strategy to remain a Nordic champion or to look elsewhere in Europe, organic and inorganic? I mean, we are now the Nordic market leader, but we have a strong foothold in Germany, Austria, as well as the Baltics, and we will continue to be developing that. And then from Owen Fenton a question. What are the current few reasons as to why the Caverion margin is below Assemblin? Well, there are many reasons. I mean, there's a diverse mix out there. I think, in general, the potential for both our companies is very strong, and it's just a question of getting all the way along the journey towards full potential. And then sorry, I'll switch here. Alex McLeod. When you refinance the Caverion debt, will all the debt benefit from the same security package? I believe that's been answered in the sense that we are looking for secured bonds across the entire package. Jari, correct me if there's anything more to add. Then we have a question from Philip Fisher. So Caverion will guarantee the Assemblin bonds post-closing? No, Caverion will not be guaranteeing the Assemblin bonds post-closing since Caverion is a separate credit group. However, they will be part of the overall Assemblin group. And then we have a question from Matt Cottingham. Please do disclose the size of the bridge financing. Jari, do we have that disclosure at this time? The bridge financing bank loans was the EUR 410 million in term loans. And then, as Hans Petter said, we have EUR 1 billion from the equity side at the moment. All right. Obviously, the majority of that equity side will be remaining as equity in the combined group. Strong equity ticket here. Aine McLaughlin again, can you spit out the exact financing of the acquisition of Caverion? How big is the shareholder loan? I think we've discussed that one already. Another one from Oussama Semlali. From a holding perspective, are now the entities transferred to a new entity, or does it remain at a Triton Fund 5? As Hans Petter was saying, it will be co-owned between the two funds here going forward. From Aine McLaughlin again, what multiple did you pay for the Caverion business? Hans Petter, do we have anything to disclose there? I mean, Caverion is a public company, so the multiples are out in the market if you want to have a look at it there. And then I think the details there will come back to in terms of both the capital structure and the equity structure and so on when we come back to the market. And then from Michael Hemmings. Will the gross debt from Caverion be refinanced at the Assemblin Caverion Group AB level? Yes, once we refinance, that will be the effect. Aine McLaughlin, SEK 1 billion or euro you paid for Caverion EV or equity ticket? I believe that's euro. And then we've discussed the split there in terms of equity ticket and bank financing. And then we have one from Jean-René Médori. Hello, will Assemblin bonds be secured by Caverion assets too eventually? I believe we've answered that one already. That will be only post the refinancing. And so then there are separate credit groups. Then one from Eugenia Martinez Verde. What would be the exposure to new builds versus maintenance post-merger? I think the best sort of very sort of top-of-mind answer is looking at the split between service and projects, but then recognizing that projects, which will be around 40% of our combined revenue post-merger, itself includes a lot of renovation. So only partially driven by the new build. I think it's a good job there also, Philip, right, that the Caverion group has less exposure to new build than what Assemblin has as Assemblin, obviously. Yes, that's a fair point. That's one of the things which will allow us to have a greater diversity. The fact that we have a much stronger both maintenance but also operation service portfolio with high recurring revenues within Caverion will add to sort of the better diversification. Jacob, do you want to make a comment? Yeah. Yeah. I was speaking. And also, when we look across the two companies, it's not only new build. We are also in infrastructure. We are in industry. So we are across the piece in different segments that also have different cycles. So often, there could be more investments from the government side in infrastructure. The sustainability and the green transition will not go away despite markets, different segments. And there's also, especially within different segments and booming new build, we are very less exposed to residentials. So overall, we still see, as Hans Petter started with, that the mega trends and the market trends are still very much supporting our business underlying. Could not be more true. Then I managed to get to the next level of questions here. From Abhishek Dhawan, can you confirm on the pro forma capital structure slide, the 3.3x number includes a bank loan piece used for Caverion? Yes, it does include the bank loan piece, but it does not include the equity bridge. So it's not the leverage ratio we will be looking for post-refinancing, as we've discussed. Then Rob Warburton, hi again. Follow up. What do you, Triton, mean differ Habeo from Assemblin Caverion? Assemblin and Caverion are different investments and funds as well. Question from Rob to, I guess, Hans Petter. Would you like to comment on that? Yeah. I can take that. So you're right in the sense that there are different funds. From a Triton point of view, right, we are a relatively big private equity house. The Habeo Group sits within one of our small-cap strategies called Triton Small and Mid Market, TSM for short, whereas the Assemblin and Caverion buyouts, respectively, sit within what we call TMM or Triton Mid Market, a strategy which is focused on larger companies. So that was what I meant when I said that those are in different funds. It's not in different funds. They are in different funds, but they're also in different strategies. That's in reality the big difference. All right. And no one can solve this audio. Will we make the slides available on the website? Yes, we will. Excellent. And then from Matt Cottingham, please, can you confirm that the new debt post-refinancing will have a stronger security package than the existing Assemblin bond, that the existing bond will not have the Caverion asset security as well? Yes, the proposed financing debt structure will be stronger because you've been looking at the combined Assemblin Caverion as a security package for that. And we believe we're building a much stronger group here as a result of this combination. And then one from Marko Moilanen. Can you give some indication as what kind of maturity structure will be after the Caverion loan refinancing? Will the debt maturity be for the FRN on Assemblin? Jari, do we have any color to show at this time? No, because we have not decided yet. So we will be able to look at that. Great. And from Oussama Semlali, what is the pro forma market share of the merged entity? Do you believe there is room for further consolidation in the Nordics or expansion with another player in Europe would be a way? I don't have the pro forma market share with me here at this time, although it's fair to say that we are going to be the leader in the Nordics. There is still a lot of runway for further expansion, both in the Nordics and, as we mentioned, outside in Germany and Austria. The market is huge, right? Yes. So there is definitely a lot of runway for both inorganic and organic expansion. Jacob, would you like to comment further? Just adding to what I said before, the underlying market is also growing. So therefore, there will be a lot of potential. Just staying at the size we are, just to follow the market, then we will still grow and have the ability to consolidate. Thank you, Jacob. Then from Charlotte Lind, will you report on the EU Taxonomy in the 2023 annual reports for both companies? The answer is yes, we will. However, for obvious reasons, those two reports won't be coordinated with each other, as we are reporting two separate companies for 2023. Then from Michelle Yama, what is the reason why sponsor management does not seem to be considering an Assemblin FRN refi? I believe we've discussed that a bit already, especially if the acquisition debt refinancing has a 2-year maturity. I'm keenly aware of FRN coupon is E plus 500. I'd just like to correct there. The acquisition debt refinancing maturity is 3 years. And it's simply for the reasons Jari has already laid out why we'd love to sort of keep the existing structure. Then finally here from Rob Warburton, follow up three on the Habeo case. Does the operating management see Habeo as an interesting acquisition case to expand on the Finnish market, or will you compete in full on a commercial basis? I mean, we are managed as two separate groups, so we will simply treat each other as two separate groups. Absolutely. And then yes, from another. So very much so. That, I believe, is okay. We've got another question coming here. Then no, that's it. That's it. That's it. And with that. Thank you. We will then return in due course when we have more to present. Thank you, Jacob, Mats, Philip, and Hans Petter for presenting this. We thank you, all participants, for today. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. This now concludes our presentation. Thank you all for attending. You may now disconnect.