Okay. Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to this Fifax 2022 Annual Results Call. Very great to have all of you online. Let's start then. My name is Samppa Ruohtula, and I'm the CEO of Fifax. On the call we also have Linda, our CFO. We have also Tapio Pesola, who at the end will facilitate the Q&A session. The agenda for today is, of course, to cover the 2022 numbers, which we released earlier today, in addition to those, then go a bit through what happened in 2022 in terms of operations and the figures. A couple of looks ahead, how the market looks, and then our updated targets that we published on Friday actually already. As well as some notes on the proposals we are making to the annual general meeting, which was also convened by the board already on Friday. At the end, let's summarize and have a discussion on any questions that may arise. First to introduce those who are maybe not that familiar with Fifax, just as a reminder who we are. Fifax is established originally already in 2012, and that the practical construction work for the first facility started in 2014. And what we do in the factory on Eckerö in Åland, which you see in the picture on the right-hand side, is that we farm rainbow trout in a very extremely sustainable manner. That sustainable manner is a recirculating aquaculture system, RAS, as the principle is called. Our implementation of it is what we call ultra-intensive, with which we mean that we have taken the general principle of RAS to its pretty much extreme in terms of how intensively we recirculate and then also clean the water to absolutely minimize then the harmful effects to the environment. The first factory, again on the picture, is in Eckerö, Åland, on the westernmost shorelines of the whole Finland. 15,000 square meter building hosts then equipment and process capability to farm 3,200 tons of fish, and that is the live weight. That's the kind of nominal technical capacity. The sustainability is really at the core of everything that Fifax does and actually has been the idea since the start when the whole project began. As one landmark milestone last year for Fifax was that in the spring, we in February received the ASC certification for our farm. We were at that time the first ASC certified farm overall in Finland and Sweden and the Baltic states, so kind of the inner Baltics. Now we have actually luckily two more in Finland also, but we were the first one one year ago. We are listed on First North since October 2021. Then of course, the big event that we will focus much in the later slides on is the key unfortunate event of last year that we got infected by the IHN virus in June, which completely stopped our production, after which we have completed the sanitation process. The fifth slide. Currently are then in a period of the factory being completely empty and dry. The so-called dry period. Let's then go to the actual contents. If we look back at 2022, it was quite eventful, one can say. In the spring, we were on high speed approaching our targets and put many steps in place in preparation for the full output that we were aiming for and in many ways verified the concept overall. We had the biomass, the fish stock on track to reach the full level. With that then also on track to reach the full output production. We had already then been able to maintain a steady and stable delivery and harvest level of 10,000 kilos per week since September 2021. Were then on the brink of rapidly expanding that as the biomass batches enabling large volumes came to mature, approached the mature size so that we would have reached the full level of roughly 50,000 kilos per week. We got the ASC certification. We invested a lot in sales and marketing to strengthen the approach and put in place all elements of how to run it. We expanded our customer base and channel base and delivered fish with very good feedback then also from the customers and were really on the brink of being where we had planned to be. Unfortunately in June, we got confirmation that we had been infected with the IHN virus in the factory. That was on the 22nd of June when we got the note of that. That started actually a complete refocus of what Fifax was doing for the second half. The focus was fully on handling this IHN situation and after first then emptying the factory of fish, meaning harvesting what was possible and then culling and destroying the rest under the supervision of the Finnish Food Authority. We had an extreme focus then on this actual sanitation project, which was quite, quite a heavy process, one can say. The steps basically were that in July, August, first facility was emptied of fish totally. There was still quite a long period of planning. The whole process of sanitizing a big RAS facility is still not, there's not very much experience of that yet since large scale RAS facilities are not very many in the world still. Hence it took a while to find the right plan. This was done led by the Finnish Food Authority, in very near collaboration of course with us. The plan was confirmed in October, we started the works in the mid of October. This sanitation process, actually concrete works continued until a bit over mid-January. On the 20th this year, we then could announce that now we actually have completed the concrete works on that cleaning process. Now we are in this stage of what is noted here as a dry period. The law mandates still a six-week period after all the cleaning has been done, when the facility is completely empty and in our case then also fully dry. After that, it's considered then to be safe to gradually start using the facility for what it is intended. This overall, the sanitation project has been quite extensive, as noted, and we have also put out company announcements every now and then that how this is advancing. One of the key aspects here is of course the economic view and according to the Finnish law, actually the Finnish government and Finnish Food Authority bear quite the big part of the costs of situations like this where the disease is of the kind that it is required by law to be exterminated from the facility or overall its spread is supposed to be kept as impossible as possible. The direct costs of both the culling phase and then the actual sanitation project have been borne by the Finnish Food Authority. Fifax has then delivered services to a large part of those works. There's been also other suppliers then who have provided specific elements to these projects. Fifax invoicing of these direct works has been EUR 0.9 million in total. In addition to that, again, as stipulated by the law, we have been entitled then to seek compensation for the fish that was culled in the process. That amounted then to EUR 1.6 million, which we received in compensation for that. All in all, that's EUR 2.5 million that we received from the Finnish government. The sums are of course explained also by the, or they indicate that this is not really a normal Friday cleaning at the house. This has been an industrial cleaning operation of a production facility which are quite extensive and just as a couple of metrics, we have 5 km of piping that has been cleaned, for example. The total surface corresponding to roughly seven football or soccer fields has then been cleaned with the combination of mechanical and chemical solutions as then defined in the plan. All in all, we managed to execute on this project, even if it's outside what we are actually there for as a company, in a very, very precise and fast way and could execute the project on time and with the good quality level. That has been also very, very valuable learning. What was interesting here, and it's noted here on the slide, is that this allowed us actually to do a real-life in-depth review of the facilities, processes and technology on a level that you normally cannot really do. We could verify different plans and concepts and ideas and see for ourselves elements that many at the factory only have seen then in drawings or kind of from the outside. This has been very valuable and that way also then has deepened our knowledge of the, not only our own facility, but of the RAS method overall and areas where you can then develop onwards. Definitely even if we would have preferred not to do this project in the first place, it has then provided us with valuable learnings and insights for helping us then when we continuously improve the process and business. After this dry period, we as noted, are then again able to really start doing what we are supposed to be doing and want to be doing, and that's farming fish in the facility and, after the dry period ends, we do some tests and preparations and then sometimes in latest, in early or early April, if not a bit earlier, we can start hatching again in our hatching and fingerling area and then gradually take different elements from the factory in use. If we spend a few moments on the really core and key question that has been on our minds and most of the people who we have discussed with outside as well over this past a bit more than half a year, is that what actually was the source of this IHN virus and what are we doing in order to preempt a similar situation in the future? If we first look a bit about the source, which is very interesting, is that the Finnish Food Authority has driven the epidemiology study. It started immediately after the incident or the finding. That has been going on for quite some time. Very many areas have been sort of analyzed and the key finding there is that an absolute positive confirmation that this was the source has not been able to be identified or confirmed. However, quite many areas have been excluded for being the specific source in our case. If you start with the virus itself, genetic sequencing shows that it's identical with the strain that is still today active in Denmark. There was actually an outbreak again last spring from April onwards, several farms or and places in Denmark were diagnosed with IHN and the strain is the same one. It's also identical with the one that was found on the completely other side of Åland in sea cage farms in the summer of 2021. Then looking at what more has been done, there's a very long list of analysis. The key likely, of course, immediate channels to investigate are the biological sources. In our case, the main ones have been eggs that we have purchased from the outside to start the whole process. We have had two suppliers. Both of those farms and suppliers have been investigated and tested and they have been negative, so they have not been the direct source. Same goes with fingerling suppliers. We've had two of them as well during last year and same thing. The facilities themselves have been cleaned. If you look locally, the water, the facilities water intake, the tests made outside our facility in the sea area have not yielded positive results. Then the fact which is mentioned here on the right-hand side that actually our hatchery and fingerling units remained virus-free throughout this whole event. Our sort of water is, has been first used there. Those kind of together show that the water intake has not been the source. The local water bodies have not been the source. There's a list of areas related to then transporting material, feed material, equipment and so forth. Then of course movement of people in and out of the facility. Also animals that might roam and pass areas that could be the source of a local transmission specifically. These have all also been gone quite extensively through logistics, cars, routes, which car has been used for what and what time, both internationally and locally and so forth. Kind of a clear indication that this is the specific root cause has not been possible to identify. Based of all this analysis combined, we have of course used it as a base and this slide tries to a bit indicate now this thinking that those four circles that are more shaded are less likely vectors where the IHN virus would have come from. These, non-shaded one that are related to more kind of direct logistics are maybe slightly more likely. Hence with all these learnings combined then with our earlier plans to sort of steadily improve the factory also in terms of growth and performance, we have then listed quite clear and detailed list of actions and improvements that we intend to implement at the facility in order to reduce the risk of contamination in the future. Also if something undesired gets into the facility, limit its scope. Also some actions to make sure that if something unwanted would be at the facility, we further limit the risk that would actually then contaminate the outside. The IHN virus is of course kind of a lead thing or the, I mean as being one of these dangerous categories that are really causing then a full sanitation. The same impacts also, actions also impact other unwanted thing, the kind of less dangerous diseases or just disturbances in terms of process imbalance or something like that. What this action basically then consist of is that there are water treatment improvements, increased. We have already been cleaning and disinfecting the incoming water, but we increased that intensity pre-facility. Sanitation practices overall, making sure and building kind of more gates, so to say, for anything that enters the facility in addition to the quite good level we had previously. Inside the facility, key leading idea is that what we call here compartmentalization. The idea is that we already know that the hatchery and fingerling area remained virus-free and that has been its completely own entity with everything from starting from water to how people move in and out has been very sort of separate. Now we increased the number of compartments in the facility where this same principle applies. We divide it basically to a larger number than previously separate compartments that are fully isolated in terms of all axes, so to say. Technical process and technical process upgrades or upgrades to the technical process are on the list, impacting water quality and many other aspects. Then overall the sanitation practices and ways of working when it comes that's noted. We know that our factory and our processes have been on a very good level earlier, but we take it through these actions still to a kind of a bit higher level. Then the same thing then post-facility, some additional security there that in case something happens, we can still put some extra limitation there to prohibit unwanted elements to escape basically mainly through water treatment improvements. Then if we look in numbers, these are the same numbers we have then of course published earlier today in the release. This will come also then in the actual annual results. All in all, the revenue for 2022 was on the same level as the year before, slightly higher. The interesting or key thing there to note is that we had actually sales only during the period January to August before the last fish was taken out from the facility. It means that what we spoke about the first half, ramp up and increasing sales and so forth. That's also visible there. We generated the same level roughly of revenue in a shorter time. Then also what you can see if you look at the last row here on the page, produced fish in tons. That same or slightly higher revenue came with the lower amount of fish, which means that the price evolution was or development was quite positive during last year. That is partly attributable to market conditions. There was, as everybody has known who bought fish from the stores last spring, the prices went quite up, but also to our own quality and how we managed to sort of increase the share of fish for which we got kind of a higher price. Otherwise the numbers are quite clear here. What is not of course normal is this other operating income of EUR 2.4 million which is related to this payments and compensation from the Finnish government. The number 2.4 is here for the period of 2022. The total number is slightly higher because there's been invoicing still on this year's side for the whole project. Maybe that's enough to note about the numbers. If we look a little bit ahead, what we now then are looking at. We are as mentioned now then preparing for a restart. The first question obviously then is that is there a market and is it the case to restart? That has not changed at all. On the contrary, the market view looks even maybe stronger than earlier for this type of activity. First of all, the demand for fish is driven by clear mega trends. Supported by those very familiar things to everybody. The combination of a growing population and the urgency to find solutions to feed people in an environmentally friendly way. The climate change is here a very, very central element. More and more on the agenda of all players. Fish being a not only climate friendly alternative to red meat, but it's also culturally already established, which is a key thing that people don't have to actively choose to eat the salmonid instead of a sort of a wagyu beef. They are in the kind of same category if you go to a restaurant or to a shop. It's not a sort of trade-off. That's an important supporting driver. Also the health part. The constantly aging population, especially in the Western world, drives the need for increased intake of healthy food and salmonids are a very good source of that. These drive the demand. Then if we look a bit on the market size from another perspective. This left-hand side maps a bit the animal protein markets globally. The total production of animal proteins is roughly 500 million tons globally. The share of aquaculture of that, meaning then farmed, actively farmed fish, is 90 million tons. If you take all fish, both caught and farmed, it's roughly 150 million tons, but the aquaculture is 90 million. Then the small pink ball there is actually the farmed salmonids. Half of that 3 million tons is farmed in Norway and half of it rest or elsewhere. The big second and third are then the Scotland area and South America on the West Coast side. Here you get a bit grasp of the picture. If the, if the red meat in total is 350 million and the salmonids is 3 million, so basically if the conversion that people move from red meat to more sustainable and healthy choices goes even partially. The, let's say 10% of meat eaters change to salmonids, which are readily globally available and accepted as the sort of global common and good fish, that already increases tenfold the salmonid market, just as a kind of simple calculation. There is a clear room on the market, and it's visible also in actually all predictions of the demand growth, which is that totally the demand growth is roughly 5% annually currently, but the sources are limited. The wild captures, they don't exist. The stocks have collapsed due to overfishing and then environmental risks impact them even more. In conventional aquaculture, there is still growth, but the growth is slowing and there's limited opportunity for growing more due to environmental concerns. Both due to what the impact of the farming is for the outside, but also the changing environment impacts the farming and increases the risks and costs there. That combined also with regulatory constraints. For example, in Norway, which is the largest farmer, there's been a quite big change here during the past months since the government last fall announced a new so-called resource tax, an additional tax on all fish farming, which sort of has. Is still a bit in preparation in terms of details, but the big picture is that it changes the cost and profitability picture of the sort of the industry and these type of elements and actions impact further this potential to actually grow in the traditional way. Still, the demand is larger and the view in the aquaculture industry globally is that the gap must mainly be filled with new technologies, of which plant-based farming is the one, and then the other one is to go offshore far out to the oceans instead of coastal farming, which requires quite big and heavy equipment and investments. All in all, the market demand, and potential even for the long term onwards is in our view such that it supports us restarting the Eckerö facility and then continuing with our growth plans even further. It's not only the market that we see that is there. There's actually during the past year, several indicators that basically make the case for our way of doing things even stronger. From the left there is the demand. There's also the capacity view on that globally in many, many places, there are activities ongoing and projects ongoing to build land-based and specifically RAS facilities on all continents and many, many projects ongoing. During past year, there's been a lot of very, very unwanted challenges, in terms of the war and, then consequences, inflation, energy costs everything but, one consequence of those is that, all countries and, all players have been. There's been a heightened awareness of the relevance of, food supply security, and specifically the local national food supply security. That also supports these type of cases. The fish wellbeing and the challenges with the traditional fisheries and then also fish farming have been, on the agenda here in Finland quite recently. There has been, again, new angles report or in both newspapers and then for example in the TV as well. The national Yle's investigative journalists had, or reporting had made a program of the some health and fish wellbeing challenges with the classic farming in Norway. These are raising on the agenda. Then overall, the awareness of the environmental challenges has been like as if everybody knows much on the agenda. We have also gained new insights then on the benefits here. We have focused during last year, among other things, also actually on calculating and analyzing and going through the environmental footprint and handprint of our operation in its previous mode, and then what we plan now for the restart. The exact detailed finalization of the calculation is still ongoing, but what we have learned there and got then insights that are quite exciting actually is that we have known before that the eutrophication impacts of phosphorus and nitrogen exhaust is on extremely low level compared to conventional methods. Now we start also seeing that actually the climate impact or the CO2 impact is lower than with the conventional farming, which we hadn't maybe realized earlier. This is There is more and more insight that there are clear environmental benefits to do things in this way. Part of those are related also then to these side streams that we have been talking about long time. We generate these fish side streams, slaughter waste and so forth. Then the big volume comes from the sludge that we collect. For example, these, and they have been a key part of the thinking all the time, but the case for actually getting these into circulation and utilizing has also been strengthened actually last year. It's a bit linked also to this national supply security and for example, for fertilizers, where again, the international situation has impacted both the cost and availability of valuable nutrients. Getting those into circulation and efficiency has gotten more and more attention during past year. All in all, we see that there is a lot of potential going forward with the method and specifically our ultra-intensive solution. Now then combining the where we come from and what we intend to do, the board of Fifax has now on last Friday also then decided on updated targets for us. And reflecting the situation where we are, we had earlier the target to by mid of last year, reach the full production capacity of the first factory in Eckerö. As we have gone through and know from before, that didn't happen. That target was then postponed immediately also because we knew that this doesn't happen. Now we have reflected this restart plan and situation with the new targets and then actually formulated them then this way. The very concretely, the short-term target for us is to, during this year, get the facility up and running. We start logically first with the hatchery and fingerling unit and drive it up to full capacity. Of our three grow out units which we have in parallel, we then target to reach the point that we have the first one up and running during this year. In parallel of ramping up and driving up the sort of farming, not sort of, but driving up the farming, we implement increased investments to increased biosecurity and performance in these units that along the way that we start them. In addition, what we have had in our plans earlier also, but they were maybe targeting a bit longer term because the focus was until last year for the ramp up. We also intend to start commercializing the knowhow that we have established, including the latest learnings from last year in the shape of launching an advisory and licensing business around this. The intention is to get moving on that already now then this year in parallel with restarting the farming. The next midterm is not so far away. That's the next year, 2024. Then the objective is to continue driving up the production so that we get to the point of full production of the Eckerö facility during 2024, which means 3,200 tons live weight fish production on an annual level, kind of that rate. In parallel, we continue with this investment plan in improved biosecurity and performance in the remaining units so that those investments are made always on time so that they then support the fish growth in the area that is being used. Of course also in the slaughterhouse then towards the end of that period so that we as efficiently as possible can harvest all the volumes. There are improvements in that also planned. Then in long term, basically not a large change. We see that the long term plan is to by 2030 to have expanded the capacity with new production facilities, and then also have expanded this advisory and licensing business so that in total the revenue exceeds EUR 125 million at that period of time with the profitability of 25% EBITDA. The earlier target here was EUR 100 million revenue. This has been raised a bit and there are clear indicators and motivations why we have raised it slightly upwards, partly related to the market view and the opportunities that we see. The capacity demand for this industry globally is quite big with all the projects that are planned or being planned out or are in preparation and discussion. We see that there is a clear demand for more capacity, and as we are one of the pioneers in the field and already have come this far, it's quite natural that we continue then on the expansion path. That's the long term up to 2030. First, we focus on this 2023 and 2024. In practice then what it means in terms of financing, we announced on Friday in the company announcements that the board has proposed to the AGM now as the first step by a rights offering of approximately EUR 5 million. The AGM note this came also out Friday night and there was the board's proposal in more detail. This EUR 5 million financing is mainly then focusing on the short more term targets of 2020 through 2023. That includes then both the investments and the actual ramping up of the operations to the target points that are there in 2023. Then to complete the whole restart program, which spans then 2023 and 2024, additional financing is needed. Here, as we said in the announcement as well, we estimate presently that the additional financing need is roughly EUR 10 million. We in parallel here then continue to work on various solutions to find the best one then to go on with that at a later point. The long term is still under planning, so not worth going into more breakdown on that at this point. It costs quite much to build a facility, so each of them of course needs their specific financing. That is then for the longer term. In very concrete terms then to repeat still what was in the announcement on Friday on the operational restart first financing round is this EUR 5 million rights issue, let's say it's actually during spring and summer, but of course continues still in the fall, for the EUR 5 million rights issue. Then in addition, we at the same time seek to aim to convert certain debts in the balance sheet to shares also in a separate directed issue that is proposed. As noted in the notice to the AGM, we have now a selection of larger shareholders together representing 62% have already committed to support the proposals in the AGM. What this restart apart of reaching the targets of restarting operations then means in terms of these activities that we use the investment funds here for, its biosecurity and resilience driving elements. It also impacts productivity and performance and ultimately then profitability. We have also on the agenda investments and solutions to improve energy efficiency also looking at that then at the various energy sources. We are using only green energy now as well, but we are then looking at investing partially also in own production capacity, but then also in efficiency solutions to really make sure that the energy usage in the factory and in the production is as efficiently put together and everything that is possible to reuse also in terms of energy is done so. The fourth bucket is related to the sludge and side stream utilization. Basically question of investing in solutions so that we can refine those further ourselves to drive up the value and secure as efficiently as possible that the valuable parts come to good use in the next place. Of course, there's all these four boxes are related to this whole restart program, but the focus here in short and midterm is on these two leftmost most ones then more maybe midterm for these gray ones. Then to round up the whole thing, this IHN and virus mitigation or risk mitigation and the biosecurity hence is of course the focus. It's very good to understand also that it's not in any way separate. All the measures that improve the biosecurity, they also improve the overall performance of the facility. Many of the actions we had actually in plans even without the IHN. That over time we would have sort of implemented step-by-step gradual improvements to the process. It kind of points or builds a sort of three-prong arrow, so to say that when we do actions to biosecurity and productivity and then sustainability, they actually all contribute to the same target, that the factory works so that the performance is high and efficient. There is better resilience, and there is at the same time less environmental impact and higher level of sustainability and ultimately also profitability. With those words, I have gone through what I had planned to say, and then I'd like to open the floor for Q&A, and then then we can hear what you have to say. Here I'd then like to call Tapio Pesola to take the lead and facilitate the discussion. Thank you, Samppa. Thank you for the presentation. As said, I will now be facilitating the Q&A session. Before we begin, just reminding all the viewers that you can still ask questions by using the chat tool available on the webinar website. We've already received a number of questions, so without further ado, let's get started. The first question comes from Pauli Lohi, the analyst from Inderes. How much CapEx is needed for the planned improvement investments? Thanks, Pauli. It's, it's an obvious question. It's, it's roughly so that this total budget that we have put there is split 50/50 or half and half to CapEx and then OpEx. Of the OpEx operational part, of course a quite big part goes actually to invest into the working capital and the stock, because that's what we do, that we build up the fish stock. That's roughly the rough split. Okay. The second question from Pauli. Could you elaborate how these investments would improve the operational efficiency of Eckerö facility? n the previous slide highlighted a bit that what they are related to, so all of these investments, they impact how the water flows are handled, how the water is treated. They impact how the fish feeding works in as efficient way as possible. They impact the temperature balances and the process stability. While bringing in biosecurity as one target or improved biosecurity, they also bring in these type of elements and all of those are really the core parameters for efficiency and profitability as well. The better the fish grows, the more stable it grows. The better we get the feed to the right place instead of to the wrong place, the more efficient it is and the lower mortality we get through these stable conditions and wellbeing of the fish. Again, the more efficient the operation goes. If you look at those gray bubbles on the earlier slide, energy efficiency and side streams, they are maybe less directly impacting the actual farming, but they impact the efficiency of the production and profitability, because they reduce costs to energy and to the treatment of these side streams. Actually even in the side stream, the target is actually to even make them a revenue source, which they have not been so far. Thank you, Samppa. Our third question from Pauli and the final so far from him. When ramping up fish production, are you relying mainly on your own hatchery, or will you buy fingerlings to complement the fish stock? This is a very central question, and if you return to that slide about the possible sources, this has been one of the key areas. We are even more stronger focusing on our own hatching and fingerling production. The base plan is kind of built on that we are able to use only our own production. If we don't want to fully say that we would not use fingerlings from the outside. However, if we use fingerlings from the outside, they have to be from a source that is absolutely secure. Even if in this last year's situation, both our fingerling sources have been as such, tested and several times and seem to be completely clean, we see that there is a risk in the logistics part, even if we haven't been able to find a sort of, confirmed. Provided that the whole chain is 100% safe, then we could use fingerlings from the outside if such were available. Very much we are focusing on the own hatchery and fingerling unit and making several improvements in that area as well, including increasing slightly its capacity in addition to biosecurity and so forth. Thank you. Maybe actually, another question just came in, is related to the ASC certificate that you have received. Actually regarding the supply of fingerlings and eggs. Does the certificate somehow make it more difficult for you to source eggs or fingerlings? In a way it impacts this, because there is a requirement obviously that if we, I mean, the end product has to be, the chain of custody has to be unbroken. It means that it needs to be ASC from start to finish, and it means, I mean, eggs are not covered yet by that. Eggs you can use from, provided that they fill a certain short list of requirements, then you can use them and it still is ASC. If the fingerling is larger than 10 grams, then actually for the end product to be ASC, the fingerling farm also needs to be ASC certified. This also sort of provides a certain constraint. There are not endlessly even potential candidates out there. An additional question from Esa regarding the same topic. Are these suppliers available elsewhere than Denmark? Yes. Actually the second okay, meaning the ASC, they are less frequent, but there are ASC certified players in many places. It's a bit more complex. Say that the brief answer is that it's quite, there's not that many ASC certified fingerling producers out there. There are fingerling producers in other places, but ASC is a limiting factor definitely. Denmark is, once you brought up that topic, and I was when answering earlier this Pauli's question about the fingerling. We are, we have been using fingerlings from Denmark. Our supplier there has been clean from the virus. Nothing has been able to be confirmed on the route. As the situation with IHN and specifically Denmark is at the moment quite concerning, it means that there is a quite big question mark on supply from there. Okay. Let's take another topic in between. Verner Järvinen has asked a couple of questions regarding the virus incident. First question, why was it not possible to limit the virus damage to only a small part of the facility? Again, an excellent question, which we have asked ourselves. The challenge with the virus is that first of all, virologically is that the testing, it takes longer time to be sure. What happened last June was that we noted in the first week of June, I think roughly the 6th of June, we over the week and we noticed elevated mortality in the facility. It started first in one part, but quickly we saw it in all places. It was not consistent in all tanks. It was a bit different here and there, but anyhow, on overall, quite much elevated mortality. We immediately took to sort of remedying actions that we always do when there's something suspicious going on. Adjusting this and adjusting that, adding kind of extra oxygen and things that you would do in a way comparable that you go to sort of emergency room to hospital and you can do something immediately. We started going through that, what the root cause can be, and we couldn't find it. In those first actions always we also send samples to be tested by the Food Authority. Quite quickly you get the bacteria results and some other diseases. In this case, we took actually two weeks. We had to gone through several technical challenges, everything pretty much, and didn't find a specific cause. All these earlier disease tests were negative. Only we received after two weeks the IHN virus test, which was positive. In that time, the virus had been able to spread already because before we knew that there is a virus, and even earlier, I mean it spreads quite quickly when it does. This is something I guess everybody in the world has learned over the past few years, unfortunately, that viruses can be quite nasty sort of creatures in this sense. However, as noted, we managed to keep it completely out from the hatchery and fingerling area, so in that sense it was limited. An additional question regarding the possible future incidents. How significant would you estimate that the probability of similar incidents is going forward? We see that it is very low. It is not zero, but with these insights and learnings from this and the actions that we take, it is definitely much lower because again, I mean, I'm a bit repeating myself, but we know that we managed to keep it out from the hatchery and fingerling area. Already by implementing exactly the same procedures in several other areas and extending the, how would you say, safety perimeter, both physically and mentally even a bit further outside the actual factory, we sort of can do a lot of things. Hence we are confident that the likelihood is lower. Thank you. Actually I could add one thing actually still to this and then the previous one, which is good to understand is that these diseases, we are not talking only about IHN. There are many diseases, many of them are kind of less harmful and easier to contain, but any disease is unwanted because if it spreads in the facility, it impacts the growth and at the minimum we maybe lose some biomass and some fish that you don't want to because we want to keep them happy. There is also a certain distinction between this which is more than on the administrative level. These specific diseases like IHN, it's according to EU legislation, a disease that you have to combat by law. That means that there are some sort of, that the measures might be then in that sense, more drastic, for one disease than another. Thank you for the clarification. A question, at this point, I would like to remind the viewers that we have a couple of questions awaiting, but if you still have questions now, is still a good time to post some more. With that, Bjørn Nyland had a question regarding the AGM and the proposals. You mentioned in the earlier company release that Fifax's shareholders holding approximately 62% of the shares and votes have irrevocably undertaken to attend the AGM and to vote in favor of the proposed authorization. What about the rest? Do you still wait for answers from them, or did they not accept? No. Yes. Good question. This is, this is sort of a short, shorter list of just the selection of our largest shareholders, which we had contacted for this. There is not a long list that would not have accepted at all. Thank you. Go ahead. I was just saying that of course then the discussions here, once we come closer to the actual event, if the AGM finally then accepts the proposal, then we can start the actual sort of sales work then of course to discuss that how the investors actually take it. Yes. Maybe another question regarding the proposal, from a financial angle. How much does the proposed funding for this first phase cost per a share? For an old share, is the question directly. That we can't say exactly right now because what we have now proposed, or the board has proposed, is the maximum number of shares in this issue. The final, of course, provided that this proposal goes through, the final price will be determined later. We can't yet really comment the exact figures on that. Okay. We will get back to that later once- once the information is available. Then the final question currently from Esa regarding future longer term aspirations in terms of revenue. What proportion of the revenue by 2030 would you estimate to come from fish farming and how much from consulting or other sources? We have not an exact split on that we could communicate, but the other sources is clearly the minority. The main part is intended to be in this fish farming. We are starting this advising and licensing now only, and of course, the first steps are modest baby steps. This industry is growing very sort of, with big steps, and there's a lot of projects, lot of funding and the fundament for why we see that there is a value in what we know is that it's quite, well, not easy, but it's, let's say it's possible for you if you decide to build a operation like this to get the technology and the construction, and I mean, building factories is not in that sense sort of a unique thing. When you come to the point that you are starting the operations and ramping them up and then running them, there are extremely few, just a handful of large scale RASes in the world who have done it, and we are one of them. Every case is a bit different and because there are different environments and different parameters. Everybody will face similar challenges on the way with the different flavors and hopefully some at least don't get all challenges that we have had. There is a very high need and actually requirement for people to get support from somewhere so that you actually can complete your project. That gives us kind of a base to already now in the discussions that there are, that there is a clear demand and seeing the just ongoing plans for how much capacity is planned around the world, even only part of it ever gets completed, it gives a quite big area to target with this type of activity. It can be significant, like we say in the objectives, but we haven't put an exact split on that yet. I can say as much that the intention is that it's a small part of the whole. I know I didn't answer exactly, but this is what I can answer. Thank you for the elaboration. One new question from Bjørn Nyland. How would you compare the situation for Fifax now, to the situation after the first fish death in 2021? Sorry, can you repeat the last part compared to? The incident in 2021, with the oxygen and before the listing. It's, it's much, quite much different in the sense that what we now have is that we know since last spring that from our perspective, this works. We, we were almost there, and we sold the fish. We got good price for it and people liked the, liked the fish and, and we have that whole chain in place and, and we have kind of, verified that, that this works on that level. We get the fish out, and we can sell it and so forth. In 2021, we were still at the situation that, that we were, we were clearly earlier in the ramp up, even if the, you know, biomass levels and, and output were not that different, but completely different picture in that sense. Also the actions we made then. The oxygen incident was, again, it was completely external. Not completely, but I mean, it was not related to the fish farming and such. It was a technical and human error related to logistics that caused it. That we were able to fix. We know that a similar incident now would be very, very unlikely because we have processes in place that just isn't very likely. That has helped also us to prepare for other things, including then what we did in the spring and including readiness to handle the sanitation last fall as a project and also the ASC certification with everything it entailed. The whole company is kind of a different level. Both the listing and then the ASC are actually quality systems, and both of those have been put in place after the oxygen incident also. we are all in all in a completely different level. Of course, we are in a different position that after the oxygen incident, we still had fish quite much, and we could continue almost immediately because it was just a question of a few tanks just in the wrong size that forced the production break. Since September 2021, we delivered steady amounts of fish. That we cannot do now because we have to start from scratch. That is then different maybe in a negative way. maybe that's my quick thoughts on that. Actually, that was a very good question. thank you for that. Thank you. Before we conclude, maybe one final question from me. In January, you, in the release, you mentioned that the objective is now to start hatching eggs, as planned by April. Could you elaborate a bit, what will be happening at the facility or at Fifax more broadly during the next months of spring? Yeah. Well, now what happens is that we are, as said, in the middle of this dry period, started twentieth of January. That takes us pretty exactly to the turn of February, March, when that is over. Actually, it's very close to the AGM date. That six weeks. And during this dry period, It's quite silent on the factory, but not completely. We have technical guys doing maintenance work and preparations already on some elements in the specifically in the hatchery and so forth area. Quite small staff on site. Then when we come to March, we start to finalize the preparations for the hatchery as the first hatchery and fingerling area. There is a series of improvements for that. We make them there in parallel. What date exactly we feel confident that we can take in the eggs. First ones will still be precise. We have actually preliminary or shipment of them coming already on the March side. Let's see how we then are ready. Then it starts from there. Then we go gradually onwards so that these preparatory or investments and upgrades we make along the fish flow, so to say that there's always the changes and updates are made when the fish needs it in that part and so on. Thank you. Also staffing of course is linked to this. We have unfortunately now over the sort of turn of the year, we had change negotiations and here earlier in January then reduced our staff with both temporary layoffs and actually also terminations, which is very unfortunate because the staff has been excellent throughout the way. This is how it has now been. Thank you. With that, there are no more questions and lines. With that, let's conclude this Q&A session for today. On my behalf, I would like to thank all the viewers for their questions and active participation, and I will hand over to Samppa for any final remarks. Thank you, Tapio. I'd just like to thank everybody for joining and for the very good questions and then just wish you a really nice winter Monday afternoon, and let's speak again next time.