Good afternoon. Welcome to Outokumpu's second quarter 2025 result webcast. My name is Ulla Paajanen, and I'm currently in charge of Outokumpu's investor relations. With me today are our speakers, CEO Kati ter Horst and CFO Marc-Simon Schaar. Kati will tell us about the highlights of the quarter, our strategy development, and the outlook. Marc-Simon will concentrate on financials and business areas. Before handing it over to Kati, please let me remind you about our disclaimer since we might make forward-looking statements during the presentation. Please, Kati, the floor is yours. Thank you, Ulla. Hello everyone, and welcome also from my behalf on our Q2 results call. Before I go forward and dive into the result of the Q2, I would like to give a couple of comments on the current trade environment and how it impacts Outokumpu. If we start with the U.S.-EU trade agreement on stainless steel and what does it actually really mean for us, first of all, I would like to start by saying that if you look at our European deliveries, only about 2% of our European deliveries have traditionally been exported to the US. From that perspective, directly to Outokumpu, it's not such a big issue. On the other hand, we are a local player in the Americas, and the tariffs protect our business in the Americas. If you look at it from a European perspective, what the indirect impact is in this very weak demand environment, when we couple that with low-priced ASEAN imports that have increased, and then the European steel industry can't export the way it used to export, that puts pressure on Europe, and it puts really pressure on the capacity utilization that we're having. The indirect impact is bigger. It's still now uncertain what the future exactly will be. We currently, after the trade agreement, have 50% tariffs still on steel and aluminum. There are different voices, maybe a quota system on the way, but I have at least not heard that being confirmed from the U.S. side. We need to follow that and see what happens. On Mexico and the U.S., we are expecting announcements on the deal agreement at some point of time. As you have seen in the press, now almost daily, there are announcements of different agreements between the US and different countries. I would think that the Mexico-U.S. agreement also comes in the coming weeks. There we are, of course, hoping that the tariffs for steel would be lower, or at least that the melted and poured principle would somehow be applied. What we in the end hope is that actually the tariffs would come on U.S.-MCA borders and not between the countries in North America. Maybe still commenting also what's going on in Europe, what is the EU Commission doing as part of the Steel and Metals Action Plan, I think the most important thing right now ongoing is that we are looking at the new safeguard measures that would replace the old ones that expire in any way end of June 2026. That consultation process now is ongoing with a deadline of 18th of August. I think the expectation is that at the latest, somewhere in September, as the Commission has promised, at least we would hear what the new trade measures would be. At the same time, the Commission is looking at CBAM. There are some discussions if we could include some steel-intensive customer segments in the CBAM, and then how do we work with the possible loopholes? We should also hear something before the CBAM Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism comes in force in January 2026. The third one, where we are also actively participating, is creating lead markets in Europe for sustainable steel, environmentally green steel, and that's about defining the environmental criteria that would be used for carbon and stainless steel and the thresholds. There are a lot of important topics on the table, but the outcomes and the timings are uncertain. Therefore, we cannot just wait and kind of see when these measures come in place, but we need to really take our own action in this difficult market environment in Europe. If we then turn to our result and commenting on that, our result improved to EUR 75 million during the second quarter, and the stainless steel deliveries increased by 3% on a group level, 2% in Europe, and 7% in the Americas. As I said, the uncertainty of tariffs and geopolitical tensions actually caused additional uncertainty during the quarter, and we saw this also in the way our customers were reacting to the market conditions. What I'm very happy about, our safety result improved to 1.2 TRIFR rate, and our recycled material content was very high, remaining at 97%. If we look at our short-term cost-saving measures, we are very well on track with that. After the first half of the year, we delivered EUR 29 million when the target has been until now EUR 50 million, and we are increasing it to EUR 60 million. During Q2, we also launched our new growth-focused strategy, Evolve, and I will come back to some comments on that a bit later. As you can see from these pictures, the U.S. steel tariffs have lowered the share of imports to the U.S., and at the same time, especially ASEAN producers have increased their share in Europe. This is exactly what we said earlier would happen with these 50% tariffs. In addition to this, we have a lot of Indonesian slabs coming to Europe. I think the highest volume is probably being now exactly in Q2. This just underlines the importance of having and creating a level playing field for European producers in the steel markets. If we then move forward, I would like to comment a bit on the EBITDA bridge from Q1 to Q2. We went from EUR 49 million to EUR 75 million, and the key contributors here were the higher deliveries and lower raw material cost. We also had some positive impacts from the net of timing and hedging, as well as our cost-saving measures that we've been executing all the time. A comment on ferrochrome. Ferrochrome continues to have a robust result, I would say, but in Q2, the result was driven by a somewhat weaker U.S. dollar, as we all know, and a higher maintenance cost. We've been running this EBITDA run rate improvement program with a target to achieve EUR 350 million by the year end this year. This program was started in the beginning of the phase two strategy, and now comes to an end at the end of this year. If we look at where we are now after Q2, cumulatively we have delivered EUR 328 million of run rate improvements, so we are well on track to reach this EUR 350 million target by the end of the year. Especially commenting on what we delivered during Q2, we delivered EUR 50 million on this program in Q2, and the impact was mainly coming from two businesses: Americas, when it has to do with optimizing our route to the market and yield improvements, and in Europe, it was about our product portfolio optimization so that we could efficiently use our scrap. Let's look at the safety and our safety performance, safety and environmental performance. I'm very, very happy that we are back on track on our safety performance after a bit more difficult Q1. I would say that this cumulative result where we are now after the first half of the year, TRIFR, so Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate of 1.5, it is really a world-class level in the process industry. Of course, the ultimate target is zero; every incident is one too much, but I have to say I'm happy about this performance. Also, as commented earlier, our high recycled material content at 97% is really helping us also to work towards our SPTI targets, and it's also a good thing from a cost perspective. During Q2, we got the reward of being in the 25th place in the Corporate Knights Top 50 list in Europe, and we are advancing very well towards the carbon neutrality regarding our Kemi mine by the end of this year. Commenting a bit on Circle Green, our very green steel product with more than 90% lower emissions, we have now announced a new partnership with Alstom, and there we are delivering our low-emission Circle Green for their newest range of metro cars. This is actually one of, this is our biggest Circle Green deal in the mobility segment. It's a nice way to highlight as well that this is a good area, for instance, trains, where Europe could really develop the lead markets for green steel, for instance, through public procurement. Before I hand over to Marc-Simon, I'd like to very shortly revisit the key messages from our new Evolve strategy that we presented during our Capital Markets Day on 11th of June. As part of the new strategy, we are really targeting on increasing the value of Outokumpu by driving the cost competitive in standard stainless steel, and that goes both for Europe and Americas current business. We are looking for profitable growth in areas where there is a higher growth percentage, where the margins are higher, and there's less cyclicality. That is very much then also about advanced materials and alloys. We have talked about a new technology that absolutely can revolutionize the way we think about metals and how we could produce green metals, and there we are also taking steps forward. Important from a shareholder perspective, we are committed to hold our strong balance sheet, and next to that, we are also focused on the shareholder returns. Maybe one comment on capital allocation. We have classified our businesses either to foundational or transformative, and this guides our capital allocation. In our foundational business, standard stainless steel, we are not looking for growth; we are looking for investments that improve our cost competitiveness, which you can also see is very needed in the European environment. The transformative investments are for growth. If we look at the key initiatives we have announced in the Evolve strategy, we're proceeding well with those. Just as a reminder, on foundational business, standard stainless steel, it's about the Tornio investment, where we are looking at the new annealing and pickling line. It would bring profit improvements in Europe through efficiency, low energy cost in the north, and we would take two lines down in Krefeld in Germany. We are ongoing with the Avesta Efficiency Study, where we're looking at high-nickel alloys and investment in the melt shop, so that's ongoing. We are preparing in the U.S. for the pilot line regarding our new technology and next step in developing it. On Americas growth, I would say it's these two areas: advanced materials and alloys, as well as the new technology, where Americas growth would also be based on going forward when it's beyond the standard stainless steel. I think it's time to discuss the financial position and more details of our different businesses. Marc-Simon, the floor is yours. Thank you, Kati. Good morning, good afternoon everyone, and thank you for joining us today. Given the times of uncertainty, financial resilience continues to remain our top priority. As such, I'm happy to report that our balance sheet strengthened with our leverage ratio improving to 0.8 x from the first quarter. Our net debt improved despite the dividend payment thanks to the conversion of our convertible bond and a reduction in working capital, supporting a positive cash flow during the second quarter. Our liquidity remained on a strong level of EUR 1.1 million, and our CapEx estimate for the full year of EUR 160 million, as communicated earlier, still remains valid. Now, going forward, we will continue with our focus on capital discipline, given the weak market environment we're currently operating in. Let's now have a look at the performance of our business areas. The demand from end users in Europe remained weak across key sectors, with no signs of immediate recovery. The manufacturing PMI improved somewhat in Europe, but still being below 50. Now, when we're looking at the different segments, first starting with construction, be it private infrastructure or industrial projects, it is still a weak environment despite lower interest rate levels, and improvements in that sector are still to come. Also, the demand in the oil and gas and process industry, especially on the chemical industry, is weak due to the uncertainty in outlook, as well as the cyclicality, especially in the oil and gas sector. The demand for automotive and appliances was stable during the second quarter, but still on a low level. In appliances, we saw some demand increase three or four months ago, but that was not sustainable. On a more positive note, the demand related to the energy transition is stronger, same for aerospace, defense, and nuclear projects on a global level. Distributor stock levels have increased, and combined with rising uncertainties, the demand remained low and only limited to immediate needs. At the same time, imports increased, as Kati pointed out, and are on a high level, especially compared to the European demand situation. The low demand and high level of Asian imports have put pressure on prices, which had been notably lower compared to the prior periods. The improved profitability in BA Europe was supported by lower costs, and here especially from the raw material side. Now, let's move on to business area Americas. Like in Europe, the U.S. manufacturing PMI remained below 50, indicating a recessionary industrial environment. However, there had been a trending shift in procurement from imports to domestic producers in the U.S., but as Kati also pointed out, imports into the North American market remain still on a high level, and particularly driven by the Mexican market. Of course, going forward, current tariffs might further support local producers in the U.S. If we then look at the Mexican market, here, the relative weakness still remains, and current tariffs limit its ability to support the U.S. domestic demand. However, a potential trade agreement between the U.S. and Mexico could present an upside opportunity for our Mexican operations. From a market perspective, and compared to prior month, distributor inventory levels increased in June, above year-to-date average levels, especially due to continued weak demand in the U.S., as I pointed out earlier. If we then look at the different segments, we saw that pipe and tube being stronger, supported by infrastructure investments on the one hand side, and also by the oil and gas industry and projects over there, which is then being supported by the U.S. administration. On the other side, weaker sectors include appliances and automotive, primarily driven by lower consumer confidence, higher interest rates, and inflation, and therefore less demand. However, given the shift towards domestic producers, especially the demand for appliances remained on a stable level for us in our business. In addition to higher volumes, our business area Americas' profitability was further supported by lower raw material costs, which were partly offset by lower fixed cost absorption due to the working capital reduction. Now, let's move on to business area ferrochrome. The demand for our low-emission European ferrochrome remained solid. In addition, we learned that producers in Southern Africa continue to report further capacity reductions, which are supporting the overall global supply-demand balance. In total, approximately 3 million tons of capacity now being taken out. In the second quarter, our ferrochrome deliveries increased by 6% quarter-on-quarter. In line with our guidance, the profitability of business area ferrochrome was impacted by higher costs due to the plant maintenance, as well as lower sales prices due to the weaker U.S. dollar. At the same time, and due to the price volatility in the Finnish electricity market, we continued to benefit from the electricity usage optimization. Usually, electricity prices are more stable during the summer months, but due to the various geopolitical events, volatility remained higher during the second quarter than we originally expected. As a critical raw material, ferrochrome is still excluded from the current U.S. tariffs. I think that's very important to note. Yes, with that, let's turn now to a few final remarks on the group's overall financial position. As you can see, we continued our capital discipline during the second quarter and reduced our net debt position by EUR 83 million to a level of EUR 169 million. The reduction was supported by the conversion of our convertible bond and our active working capital management during the quarter. These positive drivers were partly offset by the first dividend payment, which we made in April, with a total cash out of EUR 55 million. With that, I will now hand it over back to you, Kati. Thank you, Marc-Simon. Going forward then... One more back. Thank you, Marc-Simon. Although we expect the planned measures in the European Steel and Metals Action Plan at some point to give more support to the European producers and create that level playing field that we are looking for, as Outokumpu, we cannot rely on it, and therefore we can also not kind of wait. We need to take our own actions and make sure we are improving our cost competitiveness in this weak environment. A couple of comments on that. We have before announced the EUR 50 million short-term cost-saving measures that will come in this year and reported just on the progress on that. That target is now increased to EUR 60 million. Next to that, we also need to take structural measures. We are now in the planning process to come at the EUR 100 million of cost savings that are structural on an annual basis, and that would be in our result latest by the end of 2027. Of course, given the current challenging market environment, especially in Europe, we are going forward with that as quickly as we can once we take the steps and negotiations take place. The focus is covering the whole Outokumpu, but focus clearly is on BA Europe and the group functions. This takes me to our outlook and guidance for Q3. The group stainless steel deliveries in the third quarter are expected to decrease by 5%- 15% compared to the second quarter, mainly in business area Europe due to the seasonality and the market weakness. Meanwhile, the pressure on realized stainless steel prices is expected to continue in Europe during the third quarter. Asian imports to Europe remain high compared to the low demand in the stainless steel market. While in the U.S., we do not see signs of demand recovery yet, the current tariffs are supporting more favorable market conditions for local producers like us. The maintenance breaks in business area Europe are expected to have an impact of up to EUR 10 million negative impact on adjusted EBITDA in the third quarter compared to the second quarter. With the current raw material prices, some raw material-related inventory and metal derivative losses are forecasted to be realized during the third quarter. Therefore, our guidance for Q3 2025 is that the adjusted EBITDA in the third quarter of 2025 is expected to be lower compared to the second quarter. I would say that despite the current challenges, we have a strong foundation for the future. We continue to benefit from being in both the US and Europe, definitely in this current tariff environment and geopolitical situation. We have the strongest balance sheet in the industry, and that gives us resilience in these market conditions. As I said earlier, at some point, the EU Steel and Metals Action Plan has to start providing also some support for European producers. Mainly, we're talking here about the improved safeguard measures. We're talking about CBAM and creating the lead markets for European green steel. Of course, what we are doing ourselves, cost measures you heard about, and we're continuing forward with full speed with our Evolve strategy. We have basically covered our Q2 result presentation, and I would say we are ready to start the Q&A session. Operator, please, let's go ahead. If you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad to enter the queue. If you wish to withdraw your question, please dial pound key six on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Tristan Gresser from BNP Paribas Exane. Please go ahead. Yes, hi. Thank you for taking my questions. I have two. The first one is on Europe. Just looking at the group volume guidance for the group, it would imply that Europe could see volume fall more than 15% in Q3, which could put the volumes actually at a record low level in that environment. If I understood correctly, pricing pressure continuing into Q3, is it possible to see the European division going back into negative EBITDA territory? Thank you, Tristan. As you know, we don't guide on a business area level, but the main reason for the guidance and the deliveries going down is European weakness, so that I can confirm. Is there any type of, putting aside the maintenance cost, is there any other element on the bridge into Q3 regarding the cost side? I think maybe I can take that, Tristan. Yes, just to repeat the elements, we talked about the volumes, and as Kati mentioned, predominantly Europe. We do see the price pressure in the realized prices. The maintenance is related to our Tornio operations, where we also have an ERP rollout in the third quarter and beginning of the fourth quarter. We have talked about the net of timing and hedging elements here as well. We do see further progress on our short-term cost savings and also on other elements, other cost items in here to a certain degree. All right, that's helpful. My second question would be on Americas. There you have the highest shipments figures in a couple of years. You flagged that ASP has moved higher, that you've seen higher demand for domestically produced stainless steel, but you say you don't expect a recovery in H2. I'm trying to put all that together, whether any tailwinds that you saw in Q2, and I know there were some raw material gains, are now weakening. Are you seeing a softening from Q2 to Q3 in the U.S.? Why shouldn't we expect, given all those elements, some better guidance for the business into Q3? Maybe you can add, Marc-Simon, to something, but I would say that basically we see our U.S. business as being robust, and of course the 50% tariffs are supporting that as well. What we meant with the comment is that it's not really like you can say that the Americas market and demand on Americas is really still picking up. We don't see that. Industrial production is still quite low figures. Consumer confidence may be a little bit improved, but we don't really see the biggest sign of picking up the overall demand in the market. From that whole cake, local producers now get a bigger share, I would say. That's kind of supporting our business. Our limitation to do much more is, of course, we can't get that Mexican capacity now to be used for the benefit of the U.S. market with the 50% tariffs. That's the upside that Marc-Simon was referring to if the tariffs between the two countries would change. What we have seen, maybe if I can add here, Tristan, to it, is that in our realized prices, we have seen some increase in the second quarter, impacting apparently also the third quarter. All right, that's clear. Maybe just a quick follow-up. Were there any tariff costs in Q2, and should you expect those tariff costs to increase into Q3? Our tariff costs, no. Sorry, Tristan, just can you rephrase so I understand your question? For instance, the material you sent from Europe to the U.S. or the material you sent from Mexico to the U.S., if you were paying the tariffs, what would have been the amount that you paid in Q2? Given the change starting June of the tariff level in the U.S., if you have any expectation of what that amount could be in Q3? I think I would answer like that, that basically it's the customers who pay the tariff. With the 50% tariffs, basically, we are not really bringing volumes from Mexico to the U.S., and the volumes from Europe are also very low with these tariffs. As we already mentioned in some of the calls earlier, we do not send material volumes from Europe into the U.S. market, nor from Mexico at the moment. That's very clear. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Anssi Raussi from SEB. Please go ahead. Yes, hi all, and thank you for the presentation. A few questions left for me. First, about your adjusted EBITDA in Q2. EBITDA was for these other operating items, it was clearly less negative than in the recent quarter. What was the driver here, and how should we think about this segment in the latter half of this year? Which segment are you referring to, Anssi? Other items, which I think was like -EUR 3 million, and it was -EUR 11 million in Q1, if I remember correctly. Okay, yeah. That relates to our sales activities and our intercompany profit elimination, especially when it comes to our ferrochrome business in here. That's why we had less intercompany eliminations in the second quarter compared to the first quarter. Can you give us any indication about the level in the coming quarters? How should we think about it? Yes, I would say somewhere in the middle of the two quarters, what you have seen so far, I think is a good proxy. Okay, thanks. Welcome. Maybe the next question about this mining mineral tax and the proposed increase in this tax in Finland. Based on your latest discussions with the decision makers, how likely do you see this tax hike will be implemented, or do you feel that politicians have heard your thoughts regarding this matter? Also, maybe the same question regarding the planned cut of aid for electrification in Finland. How do you see this topic? Yes, thank you, Anssi, for the question. I think I'm not going to speculate on the outcome because it's a very political question right now also in Finland. What I can say, what it's about, and we are, of course, discussing this, not only us as Outokumpu, but the whole mining industry in Finland, as increasing tax for mining, kind of a royalty type of a tax, is of course a bit strange in a situation where Finland has a mineral strategy, the EU has a mineral strategy, and we have the only chromium mine in the whole EU, which is also very important for Europe, the defense industry, energy industry, and then of course for steel. I think this comes from the Finnish government having to find sources of tax. There's not been any kind of evaluation of what it would mean, and that's why all of us in the industry are now making the points why the mining industry in Finland cannot carry this kind of tax increase, because it would be increasing the tax from 0.6% to 2.5%, which is four times, basically. In our perspective, also the question is a bit what is the tax based on. Currently, the tax in our case is based on basically on ferrochrome type of a crate and an index, while mining tax should be based then on the ore itself and the ore price. There's a big kind of, yeah, that's kind of a, would say, even a mistake. Those are the topics we are discussing, and we are doing everything we can to influence that decision-making and bring actually the facts to the table. Hopefully that will have a good end. The other thing that you mentioned, the electrification aid that Finnish industry, let's say, electricity-intensive industry has been getting, the whole idea there has been that with the aid that you get to electrify, you also reduce your emissions. Half of the money that you get should go for green transition. You need to show that you invested in something that takes your emissions down and improves your carbon footprint. That's exactly what Outokumpu is doing. Outokumpu's level, that is also EUR 20 million a year. It's sizable, and the mining tax increase could be like EUR 30 million a year. We talk about EUR 50 million. I'm hopeful that we can still influence this, and the mining tax, actually, we have been asked also to give our opinion and arguments, and that's exactly what we are doing. I don't go into speculating what the outcome is, but I'm hopeful that we get some sense in this discussion. Thank you, and I understand your point of view on this one. Maybe last question regarding your cash flow. Marc-Simon mentioned already a couple of things, but if you would summarize like underlying elements going into H2 this year, how should we think about this and possible drivers behind your cash flow? Yes, while we're not guiding or committing on our future cash flow nor net debt position, Anssi, I think fair to say we talked about the maintenance break, which we have in the third quarter of this year and the ERP rollout. This is one element which we should take into consideration when we think about the third quarter in terms of inventories. We do have a couple of one type of cash-out elements from the restructuring programs of the European competitiveness in relation to our new strategy here. That is some single-digit million number over here. We have a legal case in the U.S. for which we have also a labor case, built a provision in our balance sheet. Here, cash-out in the third quarter to be expected in, I would say, lower double-digit number. We gave further confirmation on the CapEx side, and I think these are the main and most important building blocks, together also with the comment I made earlier, that we remain very disciplined on our financial position, basically going forward and then towards the end of the year and going forward. Okay, thank you so much. That's all from me. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Maxime Kogge from ODDO BHF. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning. Two questions on my side on Americas and one on Europe. The first on Americas is regarding the CapEx that Cleveland Cliffs has recently inaugurated in the U.S. for a new bright annealing and pickling line, which will allow them to produce some new or finished NLC. In their comments, they made reference to Outokumpu quite clearly, saying that this line would be used to replace some finished material that is being circumvented to Mexico. I would like to have your view on that and perhaps to give us more color on the extent of this business for Outokumpu right now and what could be the impacts of this new line for your activity in North America. That's the first question. Maybe I'll start by saying that comment was wrong because we are not bringing from Finland or Tornio any material to do what they say. They're referring actually to our Mexican operations where we have a bright and neat line and where we have been bringing certain volumes to our U.S. customers. Like I said, now, of course, that business is on a lower level because of the 50% tariff. Their commenting has not been correct. Okay, a second one on Americas is you have a long-term guidance of EBITDA for the region of EUR 170 million. I was wondering whether we would have a bit of upside now with the price hikes that we've seen on the American marketplace recently. Would it be possible, I mean, when the tariff certainty is over, to possibly increase that guidance? Do you have to pass through some of the price hikes to your partner, ArcelorMittal, and therefore this guidance is set to remain at this level or not meaningfully move? Maybe I'll say one comment and then Marc-Simon can continue. I think what you know, like to have really upside to our kind of long-term result level, what we think we can have in Americas, I think the market demand has to increase in general in Americas. Economic activity, investment, industrial production has to pick up. I think that's a requisite for that. I hand over to Marc-Simon for the comment. I would right now at the moment remain on this EUR 175, what we communicated earlier, given also the inflationary pressure which we see in the U.S. market here as well. Okay, that's clear. Just the last one is on CBAM in Europe. The process appears to be completely stalled, and there are growing doubts whether CBAM can effectively kick in next January. What's your view on that? Do you think it's still possible to imagine scope three being included in CBAM, and that as early as next January 2026? Yeah, I don't dare to speculate what's possible now to be included. I think the EU and the Commission have been quite busy with the agreement with the U.S. until now. Hopefully, now the busyness turns towards the Steel and Metals Action Plan and these items, with the trade measures being the most important. At least with several Commission members, we have discussed the elements we would like to be included in CBAM and that would be important. Also, ensuring that there are no loopholes, kind of circumvention to circumvent CBAM with resource shuffling and that kind of thing. I think we feel like we've been heard. What is the outcome? I think we need to wait now a little bit, but I think it's good that CBAM comes. I would like to see some of our customer segments coming in. I think that would be very good. Okay, that's a thank you. The next question comes from Joni Sandvall from Nordea. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks for the presentation. A couple of questions from my side. I tried to figure out the ferrochrome, you know, underlying profitability levels here. You mentioned that you had some over-optimization gains there, and if we are now adjusting for the higher maintenance, it appears that you were pretty much in line with Q1. Could you give any quantification on these electric gains, what you gained in Q2? Yes, certainly. I would say it's a single mid-single-digit number over here, which we have seen. At the same time, as Kati also pointed out earlier, we also saw on the sales price certain pressure from the U.S. dollar deterioration or weakness in the U.S. dollar. Okay, okay. I think going forward, indeed, it's important to highlight that there is 3 million capacity out of the market now at the moment, and that puts the demand-supply balance in the Western world in a good place for ferrochrome. From Q4? Yeah, sure. Okay. Maybe the second question on this, what you are now planning, this EUR 100 million structural improvement. Could you give any, I know that it's early stages now, but can you give any indication what this requires, some investments, or how you aim to achieve this EUR 100 million cost savings? I would say we can't comment too much because it's, of course, very sensitive as we just now announced it, and we need to take step by step our negotiations and then come with the final decisions. Maybe I can say it's not really something we need to do a lot of investments. That's how I would say it. It's really organizational structures, delayering, looking for the efficiency in our operations, not really requiring investments. That's what I would say. Okay. Maybe lastly, still on the maybe cost levels going forward, the end demand is still sluggish. How is the scrap market looking from your perspective currently? Yes, I mean, I think we commented on our Q2 result that we saw support from decrease in raw material prices. Given the demand situation, which we outlined already earlier, also here, we see further pressure on the raw material cost side. At the same time, looking at what price levels we are currently, very close to what we have seen during COVID times, I think that there is a certain bottom of it as well to be reached. Okay, thanks. That's all from me. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Bastian Synagowitz from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks. Good morning all, and thanks for taking my question. I just have a couple of quick questions, please. Just to double-check on the cost cutting, the EUR 100 million cost improvement target which you put out today, does this include any of the EUR 70 million for the footprint which you announced at the CMD? What it includes is what we are already implementing, and it's about EUR 20 million in our Krefeld plant. That's the only part. Okay, basically EUR 80 million is new in effect. Yeah, the reason is also that if we do the Tornio investment, that would only come after 2027, the full impact, the rest of it. That's why it's not included in this EUR 100 million plan that we need to deliver before end of 2027. Understood. Okay, thank you. Just following up on ferrochrome, you've been describing a pretty supportive environment here driven by these capacity cuts in Africa, which I think are indeed very helpful. What do you expect for the next two quarters out there? Do you think that those dynamics will last? Do you think there will be maybe a bit more headwind towards the end of the year as maybe some of that capacity comes back into the market? What's your view on the ferrochrome market? If you could share that piece. If I say kind of high level of the expectation, I think in general there are some stocks, of course, and inventories also with the South African and Zimbabwean producers. If we look at the demand-supply balance going forward and if this capacity is not coming back on stream, then I think we have a shortage of ferrochrome for the Western world by the end of the year or let's say going forward, the beginning of next year. We see requests coming to our direction. I think the situation towards our order book is quite good. Q3, we need to, of course, remember that ferrochrome is delivered, especially for stainless steel production. Weakness in the stainless steel is also impacting then ferrochrome. In the third quarter, we are probably seeing some support from the fourth quarter going forward. Combined with CBAM, that could be another important data point or trigger point for our demand of ferrochrome. There's a bit of expectation because of CBAM as well that Q4, there might be more purchases done in Q4 before CBAM comes in place in January. Are you generally more confident on the CBAM impact with regards to ferrochrome rather than stainless itself? What's your view on that? At least in the sense that we are the only producer in Europe, so the comparison is to us. Our carbon footprint is 67% lower than the industry average. Yes. Okay, got you. Okay, then very lastly on this strategic process, I guess at the CMD, you talked about a lot of ideas for growth. Are any of these projects already getting closer? Is there any early steer for CapEx next year in 2026? I guess the European market has clearly come under more pressure. At the moment, at least you're not really generating much cash. I'm just wondering whether you would lean to risk-adjust your growth plans here a little bit for the moment and possibly push them out in this uncertain environment, or whether you'd rather go and take your balance sheet and push ahead. I would first say let's go step by step. We don't have the outcome of the Avesta Efficiency Study yet. I think we need to have that outcome first. The second question is what is the timing? What would be, if the outcome is positive, the timing of the investment? Also, regarding Tornio, the annealing and pickling line, we are looking at different options to execute that. Can we get more cost savings than we have even thought about? We are pushing the organization in all areas to look for more savings. That, I think, is one. We will protect also our balance sheet. When it comes to the technology and taking the next step in having our pilot line, that's not a big investment. We definitely will proceed as quickly as we can when we are ready. Okay, understood. Thanks so much for taking my questions. Thank you. The next question comes from Adahna Ekoku from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hi, thank you for taking my question. I've just got a follow-up on the Americas market and on the price hikes that were announced in July. It seems these will have a kind of minimal impact in Q3. I appreciate the uncertainty going into the end of the year. Is it possible these could have an impact in Q4, or is really just a larger demand recovery required first? Thank you. Maybe just to qualify, my comment on prices was on realized prices and more to the second quarter. Given that we do not and cannot give a price outlook going forward, the only thing is what I wanted to say is that we do see, based on the realized prices, also a positive impact in the third quarter. Okay, that's kind of positive in the third quarter and then could trend up in Q4, but clearly a bit early to say. Yeah, once again, Q2 was a smaller impact, and the full impact is then in Q3 going forward. Okay, thank you. The next question comes from Tristan Gresser from BNP Paribas Exane. Please go ahead. Tristan Gresser, BNP Paribas Exane, your line is now unmuted. Please go ahead. Hello, hello. Hi. Can you? Yes. All right. Yeah, we can hear you. Sorry about that. No worries. Thank you for taking the follow-up. Maybe on the safeguard measures, do you think a 40% cut in the quarter is being realistic given your recent conversation with the Commission? When we look at the import situation that you flagged, and it's pretty damaging at the moment, what are the loopholes of the safeguard measures at the moment? Indonesia has some tariffs, the quotas are capped by country. Is it really about volumes, or is it like regardless of how much you cut those quotas, you're still going to see quotes coming from Asia below $2,000 per ton? I'd like to have your thoughts on the safeguard measures and what could happen in mid-September. Yeah, I'm not going to speculate what could happen, but I maybe take two points. One is, of course, that the current quotas are too high compared to the demand that we have in Europe. Those quotas were set at the time where the demand was much higher. If I now talk with the mouth of Eurofer, our industry organization, what we've been discussing with the Commission and proposing is that we should look at the quotas in a way that the import share would not be higher than 15% to ensure that there is a level playing field in Europe and that there's enough capacity utilization because Europe does need its local steel production as well going forward. That is one item. What is the circumvention problem is indeed the fact that everything starts with slab production in China and Indonesia, and then cold rolling, hot rolling, whatever happening in very many different countries. Europe's Commission has not been able to kind of stay ahead of that, the different routes, how the cold rolled material or even hot rolled material comes to Europe. Somehow one would like to have something like melted and poured principle that, you know, where it's been melted, it's really what's tackled. That's not the case right now. These are actually the key areas I think from our point of view to tackle the second version. Okay, that's clear. The last one, I think earlier this month, the European Commission said it was experiencing a decline in metal scrap availability and starting to do some monitoring. That could clearly lead to some sort of scrap export restrictions maybe later this year. What is your position on the topic? Let's say tomorrow there is a scrap export ban or some restriction put in place, what would be the impact for your business? We have been asked also as Outokumpu what do we think about that. At least personally, and as Outokumpu, we have not been a big promoter of restrictions on trade on scrap. I think the key thing to keep scrap in Europe is to continue melting in Europe, to have the demand for the scrap in Europe. If we have weaker environments where there is not enough demand for the European scrap, I would allow the players to also export so that we can keep that business and scrap handling business healthy in Europe because that's also important. If you take the scrap yards out and the handling capacity out, when the demand goes up, you don't have it anymore. We don't have enough scrap processing in Europe. I think that's also important. I think what the Commission is doing, it's about scrap, but it's also about other recycled metals and materials that they want us to utilize more in Europe as there is scarcity on metals in general, looking at where you can buy them. There are certain countries that have actually export restrictions, and they are probably looking at also that maybe there could be then some export restrictions out of Europe to those countries who don't also allow to be exported to Europe. Those are some of the discussions we've heard. No idea if there would be any outcome of that before the end of the year, but monitoring takes place now. It would be positive if it happens. More scrap stays at home, stay on the scrap prices for you use 80%-90% of that for your raw material mix. What would be the potential negative of such policies? No, we have not had problems getting scraps, so that's what I'm trying to say. I don't know. Yes, indeed. Absolutely. We don't see any scarcity right now at the moment. We don't have any problems to procure scrap, and therefore we don't see that. Thank you. The next question comes from Igor Tubic from DNB Carnegie. Please go ahead. Thank you. I just had two follow-ups here. The first one, maybe we can start with. I just wonder, can you comment anything about what you expect in terms of the mix for BA Americas and Europe in Q3 versus Q2? Yeah, we can maybe start there. Yeah, maybe I can take that. We expect the mix to be on a similar level as in Q2. Thank you, very clear. The second question, maybe hard for you to say anything about, but have you seen anything that the imports here in July have started to ease from Asia, or have you started to see any sort of signs either in a positive or negative direction? No, we haven't seen any signs of a decrease in imports, quite the other way around. We have seen now an increase in imports from a level of 23% into Europe to 27% in the second quarter of this year. We were highlighting, I think, and guiding also on the volume side. That is what still continues right now. Okay, that was all from me. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There are no more questions at this time, so I hand the conference back to the speakers. Thank you, everyone, for your active participation and good questions. Hopefully, we were able to, with Marc-Simon, to clarify at least some of them. I think as a concluding note, I think in these market conditions, we delivered a reasonably good Q2, but the market is weak. We have also seasonality, and that's why the guidance of lower for Q3. We do believe in sustainable stainless steel. We do believe in our evolved strategy, and we are going forward with that at the same time making sure that we keep our European business competitive and therefore the restructuring plan what we announced today. I would like to very much thank you all for participating on a sunny day here in Helsinki, and if you still have some vacations left, also wishing you still good vacations and talk to you next time in then our Q3 call. Thank you. Thank you.