Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Sartorius and Sartorius Stedim Biotech conference call on the Q1 2024 results. I'm Moritz, your conference call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in a listen-only mode, and the conference is being recorded. The presentation will be followed by a question and answer session. You can register for questions at any time by pressing star and one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Dr. Joachim Kreuzburg. Please go ahead. Thank you very much, and good day, good morning, good afternoon also from my side here. Together with my colleagues, Florian Funck, our new CFO, and René Fáber, CEO of Sartorius Stedim Biotech, I will now walk you through our presentation for the Q1 results of Sartorius, as well as Sartorius Stedim Biotech. I think it's fair to say that the results of the first quarter of this year show a mixed picture. That is mostly because of the very different levels of order intake and sales revenue at the beginning of, last year as a comparison, because of the very, strong dynamics and unsynchronized development of order intake and sales revenue, during 2022 and 2023. It's also because of quite some different regional trends and influencing factors, and these have also different effects on the different product segments of Sartorius, and you will see this in a minute, also in more detail. We would nevertheless say that the results largely are within the expectations. We expected a rather slow start into the year. We are rather expecting a moderate first half of the year. Order intake is up by almost 10%, whereas sales revenue, because of the much stronger prior year numbers, is down by roughly 7.5%. Book-to-bill ratio is slightly above one, as we have seen it again being the case at the end of last year. In the fourth quarter, we have seen that first time since a while, so we see a continuation of this positive dynamics. As I already said, the dynamics vary quite significantly across regions and customers, and as I also said, across the different product segments. By regions, and again, you will see this in more detail, you can say that order intake is the strongest for both divisions in the Americas and by far the weakest for China. If we take this as a separate market, as this is really relevant to have a dedicated look on that. For sales also, say, China is showing the weakest numbers, pretty much as expected, I would say. This also has some effect on the different developments on the product segment dimension. What is very positive is that order intake is significantly up for the recurring business, so mostly consumables, and that is the case for both divisions. Whereas we are seeing a muted investment activity by customers pretty much across the board, again, the strongest in China, but also in other regions. And that has led to a relatively low order intake for our equipment and instruments. We do see, and that is, again, quite positive and very encouraging, a strong business dynamics in our business for advanced therapy solutions, which is, as you know, one key strategic focus area in our Bioprocess Solutions division in particular, so significantly above average dynamics in this segment. We consider the profitability to be on a positive, robust level. It's above the pre-pandemic level. I think we shouldn't forget this, maybe as one benchmark as well. It's above the level of end of last year. Nevertheless, it's a little bit below the Q1 of last year, as sales revenue has been higher at that time, as already said. And we think that the ongoing efficiency programs will increasingly contribute during the year to further strengthen our profitability performance. Overall, as we already elaborated during our last calls, we consider the market fundamentals intact. I think that is very much what other players in the industry, I think, confirm also constantly, be it on our, on the customer side or be it other life science tool providers. We clearly all see China being still weak, and we definitely still see also an above average market volatility and of course, some geopolitical uncertainties, which make it more challenging than usually maybe to make very granular guidances or give very granular guidances on the timeline. But nevertheless, we consider our guidance, and our plan for 2024 being intact, and that's why we confirm it. So with that, I would like to hand over to Florian. Yeah, thank you very much, Joachim. Good afternoon, and welcome also from my side to our quarterly call. I'm happy to walk you through our quarterly performance, and as you know, this is my first Sartorius quarterly call as I have officially started as CFO, April first. So, ... I'm hoping to meet many of you, in person in approximately four weeks when we're gonna have our Capital Markets Day here, mid-May in Göttingen. Well, let's have a look at the key financial figures. Overall, I would say that the key financials mirror our recovery curve that we are in. So please remember, Q1 2023 was marked by quite low order intake, while sales were still on a quite high level. So we see order intake being up against Q1 2023, while sales are still down, on quite high comps. Looking at profitability, I think the figures show that Sartorius has worked well on addressing the cost structures. On -9% on sales, the decline in the underlying EBITDA was only 14%, so the margin is at a satisfying 28.6, which is 150 basis points below prior year Q1, but, and this has to be noticed, 160 basis points above Q4 2023. And so I think on the back of the assumed increased positive market dynamics, we are well positioned to reach our profitability guidance of slightly more than 30%. Looking at EPS, we see, as expected, the impact of the increased debt level after the Polyplus acquisition that closed, as you know, in Q3 last year. Let's have a look into the regions. The pattern that we saw in the group, sales down while order intake up, is visible across the board, except for the APAC region. So let me start with APAC. In APAC, order intake is also down, but driven only by China. If you exclude China, APAC is on order intake up, mid-single digit, which is encouraging. And as you can see on the last bullet, the BPS division can compensate the China effect, while LPS order intake is, of course, heavily impacted, where China plays a more important role in this division. In the Americas, we saw 9% sales decline, EMEA down -4%. On the other hand, the recovery in order intake is also more pronounced in Americas, while order intake in EMEA is only up 7% versus America, +25%. Looking at our sales performance against Q4 last year, something that you will be also looking into, we are slightly down overall. But looking at the front-running consumables or recurring business, which is the majority of our Sartorius business, sales are up high single digits versus Q4 2023. Also order intake is up in that comparison. Let's move to the bioprocess division. Sales are down 8% if you adjust for currency and M&A effects. But in my perspective, there are some encouraging signs that also Joachim mentioned. The order intake growth is visible in all regions, healthy growth here of 15%. And the recurring business is coming back with a mid-single-digit sales growth over a good Q4. Looking at underlying EBITDA, the figure is down like sales, but margin is holding up quite well with almost 30%, and this is driven by positive mix effects, so the consumable share is increasing. And of course, we've also done adjustments in the cost base, where we took out a EUR low double-digit million amount in Q1, with more to come over the course of the year. Let's have a look at LPS. In LPS, we see order intake and sales still in negative territory. The negative order intake situation is very much a function of the weak China business that is still not recovering, in contrast to all other regions. Please remember, this China business in LPS dropped as of Q2 2023, so we are looking still in Q1 at quite high comps. But looking at the overall dynamic, I have to say we're satisfied with the LPS performance, as we saw positive sales and order intake performance versus Q4 of last year. Underlying EBITDA went down, the margin down by 230 basis points, of course, on the back of lower sales and also some mix effects, but we are constantly adjusting here the cost base. Let's look at the other key figures that lead to cash flow. So performance below EBITDA, and was already talking about underlying EBITDA. Looking then at extraordinary items, they are in the same ballpark as prior year. The main part of that is, reorganization costs, which includes redundancy costs, and, I can tell you we are not, finished yet there. So, this is, of course, a focus point. The financial result is, as expected, down on the higher debt that we have on balance after the, Polyplus acquisition, that closed in Q3 last year. The underlying net profits reduction, of course, is driven by lower EBITDA and also the financial results. That brings me to operating cash flow, which is one of my favorite reporting lines. It is significantly down EUR 157 million, and there are three main reasons for that. The largest effects come from the tax side. We had an unusual pattern of our tax payments, which led to a payment of approximately EUR 70 million that happened in a different quarter than in the last reporting season. Second effect, of course, is lower EBITDA, and the third effect comes from the fact that we used our factoring lines less in Q1 versus the prior quarters. Be sure that we will be working thoroughly in the next months to get our cash performance up, and the focus here will be on inventory, which reduced roughly EUR 10 million under the year-end 2023 figure. Now a comment on CapEx. CapEx in absolute terms is stable against prior year. CapEx ratio is above guidance, which is 13%, as we are expecting, of course, increased sales over the course of the year. So this is rather an timing to come to the overall guidance. Moving on to balance sheets. Non-current assets are almost unchanged. Nothing to comment on. The equity ratio is up as a result of the capital measures that we've taken in February 2024, where we got one billion additional cash in. It was EUR 992 million, to be precise. And the net debt is reduced accordingly, including the cash flow effect that I explained in the prior chart. Net debt to EBITDA, also nicely down to 4.4 x, and for year end, we are expecting this ratio to be slightly above 3, as a combination of the increased EBITDA versus prior year and of course, also improved net working capital metrics. And speaking of year ends, this brings me then to guidance. You have seen the guidance is unchanged to the one that we published with our annual report, as Q1 was broadly in line with our internal expectations. So I won't read it out line by line, but would rather hand over to my colleague, René, to talk about SSB. Thank you, Florian, and hello, everyone. Good morning, good afternoon. So let's move to the SSB Q1 results. Again, overall, the first three months showed the projected continued recovery. However, we have seen quite a mixed dynamics across our portfolio and regions. In the first quarter, SSB recorded an increase in order intake of almost 14% in constant currencies to EUR 676 million, with growth coming from all regions except China. Order volume was slightly above sales revenue in the first three months of 2024, which stood at EUR 667 million, down 6.7% in constant currencies. With ongoing inventory reductions on the part of customers' business with consumables has been recovering since end of the third quarter of 2023. You remember, we have seen in, especially in quarter three last year, a ramp up in orders for consumables that continued in Q4. And we have seen in the Q1 now, 2024, a strong double-digit order intake growth compared to previous year for that part of our portfolio. And also a positive trend versus relatively strong Q4 last year. So quite happy with the development here. In addition, it is really encouraging to see that the business with cell and gene therapy customers in our advanced therapy unit or portfolio, which is a major strategic focus point for us. We closed a major milestone acquisition last year, Polyplus, in that segment. That business has continued to perform strongly, encouraging quarter here. On the other hand, customer investment into hardware and systems remain muted in Q1, especially China and to some extent also in Europe, which significantly dent our equipment business in this first quarter. So again, consumables recovering well, advanced therapy is very, very encouraging quarter, equipment soft in Q1, sales decline against relatively strong previous year. In terms of profitability, we achieved a robust EBITDA margin. We expect that our ongoing efficiency programs we are running since already last year should deliver further benefits as the year unfolds. Here, underlying EBITDA was at EUR 191 million in the first three months. With positive product mix effects, Florian commented on that, and cost-based adjustments partially compensating the negative volume development. The margin, EBITDA margin, reached 28.6% for the SSB group. Moving to the regional view, from a regional perspective, also quite mixed picture here. We have seen normalizations of demand in all business regions except China. Americas leading in order intake growth being up by almost 30% versus the first quarter of previous year. Sales revenue declined by 8.6% on strong comps in that region. EMEA recording an increase in order intake by nearly 9%, with sales revenue still down by 3.8%. Asia Pacific order intake increased by 3.2% in constant currencies. Outside China, we recorded double-digit growth. The continued market weakness in China led also to a decline in sales revenue by 8.8%. Korea and rest of Asia showed both positive sales development. Moving to the next chart, the operating cash flow was influenced mainly by phasing effects, very much in line with what Florian already explained for the Sartorius AG group. I don't gonna repeat that. Underlying net profit was EUR 84 million compared to EUR 131 million in the first quarter of 2023, mainly due to lower earnings. Net operating cash flow totaled EUR 55 million. Cash flow from operating, from investing, sorry, from investing activities, EUR 109 million, slightly below first quarter of 2023. The CapEx ratio was 16.4% and slightly elevated on the lower sales revenue compared to the previous year's Q1. On the key financial indicators, again, at a sound level, reflecting the recent capital increase of EUR 1.2 billion successfully completed at the beginning of February this year, leading to equity ratio increase to 45.8%. Net debt down to EUR 2.494 million, resulting in reduced ratio of net debt to underlying EBITDA of 3.3 by the end of this quarter or the quarter one. We remain focused on strong cash generation, inventory reductions, cost measures to further drive the deleveraging to slightly below 2.5 by end of the year. That brings me now to the full year guidance. We are expecting profitable growth with a moderate first half of the year. Consolidated group sales revenue is projected to increase by mid- to high-single-digit percent range, including contribution of around two percentage points from Polyplus. In terms of profitability, anticipate an increase in the underlying EBITDA margin to more than 30%. The above-average profitability of Polyplus slightly has positive effects on margin development expected. CapEx ratio around 13%, and as I mentioned, the net debt to underlying EBITDA is likely below 2.5. So with that, back to Joachim. Thank you very much, René. I think we can directly jump to Q&A, essentially, so I think the lines are open now. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we will begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. You will hear a tone to confirm that you have entered the queue. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Questioners on the phone are requested to use only handsets and eventually turn off the volume from the webcast. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. One moment for the first question, please. The first question comes from Vineet Agarwal from Citi. Please go ahead. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Great. So, just two questions. So one, I was just wondering if you can talk about the cadence of the order book development through the remainder of the year. Two, the Q2 bioprocessing order intake has been typically weak sequentially and even third quarter. I mean, given this sequential dynamics, how do you see that order book developing throughout the year? And then just on the equipment order intake, I wanted to see whether there were any orders which have been deferred to later part of the year. Thank you. Not 100% sure whether we got your first question right, because the line was a little bit broken, I think. But I think you were asking for the order intake dynamics during the remainder of the year. And yeah, as I think explained also before, we see this positive trend, particularly regarding recurring revenues and therefore mainly consumables. We expect that to continuously build up. I think as we discussed already earlier this year, when we were publishing our results of previous year, we would consider the destocking customers to be largely completed, but maybe not really finished. We still see some pockets of excess inventories at some customers, so therefore we still have some dynamics in that regard, that an increasing number of customers are getting back to their usual ordering patterns, and that is what we expect to continue to build up. And that is on consumables, which is, yeah, again, probably the most relevant part of our business and also, of course, in regards to profitability, really the most important product segment. When it comes to the non-recurring revenues and equipment, instruments, and the like, then we would also expect an improvement in the course of the year, as both Florian and René explained. We are seeing really a muted investment sentiment at customers at the moment. Again, we mentioned China, where this is really quite very much pronounced, but also in the other regions, and we would expect a recovering recovery from that end as well. So we would expect an increasing dynamic in the further course of the year regarding order intake. And then, of course, on the back of that, and with not much delay, when it comes to consumables and with a little bit of more time, but also not too much, with the non-recurring revenues or the equipment. On order intake push outs, you know, it plays a certain role. We do see this, that there are some push outs from one quarter to the other. We wouldn't consider that to be a massive factor at the moment. All right. Thank you. The next question comes from Matthew Weston from UBS. Please go ahead. Thank you. A couple of questions from me, please. The first is regarding the split between equipment and consumables in the first quarter. If you can just give us some indication of the revenue split, that would be helpful. And, Joachim, if you can confirm, I think what you're saying is that within the consumables business in BPS, there was quarter-on-quarter order growth. Can you confirm that I've got that correct? And if that is the case, and I assume that was low- to mid-single-digit, I think that suggests that equipment orders were down more than 20%. If that, again, if you could confirm those numbers, that would be helpful. I guess the question really is, what gives you the confidence that you're gonna see that equipment step up if your customers remain very cautious about spending their money, and if China remains highly uncertain because of the BioSecure Act? Is it that you think that the growth we're gonna see for the second half of the year is fully driven by consumables, or you are expecting a rebound in that equipment demand? Yeah. So, thank you for, for your questions. So on the split, what we are seeing is that – and maybe I go back a second. We usually have a split in our BPS business around 75% recurring, 25% non-recurring. And we have seen it, I think we were talking about that a couple of times during next last year. We have seen the recurring portion being below 70% in the course of last year, and we rather had a stronger proportion in on the non-recurring side. Mostly because the reduction of inventories at customers, of course, impacted the consumables or the recurring business and not the non-recurring, the instruments business. So what we are seeing now that we are moving back to the levels that we have seen before, so it's getting into this direction, pretty much. To your second question, consumables growth quarter-on-quarter, whether I would confirm that? Yes, and yes, right. In contrast to that, the non-recurring business was down on the order side, quite significantly, as you rightly said. I would say, fourth quarter of last year was also not too bad in regards to order intake there. So, when we make this comparison, it was also a more on the strong side comes, but nevertheless, in comparison to that, yes, you're right, it's quite a bit down. And, to your third question regarding what we expect for the second half of the year within the environment that we are in. I would say, and you rightly again highlighted muted investment activities at the moment in China and other factors. However, I think we should also not forget about the increasing activities of a number of customers regarding capacity expansions. You know, think of larger transactions in the CDMO space. Consider also continuous and continued programs of massive capacity investments by large players in the industry. Some of those programs are maybe still a little bit more heavy on the, let's say, infrastructural side, but will impact then also equipment, instruments, and such. And, therefore, we consider that, in the course of 2024, those underlying trends, and again, we are talking about visible investments by numerous customers, will increasingly play a role. So, on your hypothesis that our expectation for the second half of the year would only be built on our expectation for the consumables business, I would say, yeah, we are expecting a strong consumables business, but not only. We also expect a recovery on the instrument side. Thank you. If I could just jump in with one quick follow-up, Joachim. Now, where you are today in April, do you have more visibility or less visibility on your guidance for the full year than you had when you set it in January? Do you, you know, for you, is the outlook the same, or does this slow down, or at least what investors see as a slowdown in equipment orders, add further uncertainty? Yeah. So I mean, of course, on the one hand, clearly, the further you move on during the year, the more visibility you get into some extent. Yeah, that's clear. On the other hand, as we always say, and I think others as well, and you see this in many places, in many industries at the moment, of course, we do have also quite some uncertainty. And therefore, but nevertheless, if we, you know, would forget for all of that, then, of course, we do have more visibility now than two, three months ago. But still, in comparison to, you know, visibilities and whatever stabilities that we are used to pre-pandemic, we are not yet there. Thank you very much. The next question comes from Richard Vosser from J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks for taking my questions. Just a follow-up on the consumables order development, more on a year-over-year basis. Could you give us a flavor for the growth of consumable orders in BPS last quarter for fourth quarter 2023 and the first quarter 2024? That would be helpful. And then secondly, I think as well as China weakness, there was pointed to in terms of equipment orders, that Europe was somewhat soft in terms of equipment orders. Could you just give us some color in terms of the types of customers, the types of where that's coming from and what's underlying that reluctance? Is it that, you know, that they've over-ordered equipment in the past or that they've ramped up their facilities substantially in the past, and those aren't full, so they're waiting for new manufacturing lines to go in and pausing that, or just some color and thoughts there would be useful. Thanks very much. Maybe I take the question number one, consumables. Order intake development, so as I could hear that, you're asking about the development Q1 2024 versus the previous year. Q4. versus Q4- No, no, sorry. Sorry, versus... Sorry, sorry, René. Versus Q1 2023 year-on-year, and also for the fourth quarter versus the fourth- Yeah. Fourth quarter of 2022. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Year-over-year. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, all right. Let's start with the year-on-year development. Again, as we said, as I mentioned, a strong double-digit growth we have seen in consumables order intake, leading by region, with North America the strongest growth recorded there, followed by Europe and then Asia outside China. In China here, still no visible recovery in consumables, not surprising as we have expected. Now, quarter-on-quarter, we have seen increase in orders in consumables in the Q1 2024 versus Q4 2023. We are not at that level, of course, as we have seen that Q3 and Q4 last year. Overall, that was quite a strong growth ramp-up. And now we are more in the, yeah, kind of lower single-digit increase in orders, consumables in quarter by quarter. I maybe then in addition to, to that, regarding your second aspect, why there is a weakness on the equipment investments at the moment, and in how far, or what you know kind of customer activities is behind that? Clearly, there has been a lot of investment into additional capacities over the last couple of years... very, very significantly in China indeed, but also in other regions, we have seen significant capacity investments. And I think we spoke about that also end of January, that we indeed have the situation currently that there is some idle capacity at many places. But, and that's really, yeah, quite special, but you know, to a lesser-- with a lesser volatility, we have seen that also before. At the same time, there are still significant capacity expansions being planned. And here, what is an important factor is indeed that we will see the number of new drugs being approved, and therefore, additional capacities will be needed. A lot of approved drugs will continue to grow as well, simply because of larger patient population. So we indeed have this maybe a little bit paradox situation at the moment, that there is idle capacity, and therefore, on average or in total, there is still not much capacity expansion that is affecting us as an instrument supplier. But going forward, we expect that to come back, given the overall dynamics in the market. So that's basically the background for this stronger or this delayed activity, this delayed yeah recovery, if you wish, on the equipment side. Thanks. The next question comes from Odysseas Manesiotis from Berenberg. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks for taking my questions. First of all, a follow-up from your answer to Matty's question earlier, specifically on the BioSecure Act. Is this part of the hesitancy on spending for some of your Chinese customer? And, if that's the case, would you expect this to turn to pent-up demand as these capacity investments are instead carried out by your Western clients time? And secondly, also a follow-up from your answer on a few of the previous questions. So does the Novo Nordisk deal have any implications to your business? We've had some of your higher lead time peers already seeing some increasing orders from pharma, as a result, to make sure capacities are available for the future. Have you seen this pick up on your side as well? Thanks. Yeah. So, I would say the net effect of the BioSecure Act is still a little bit hard to predict, to be honest. There will be different dynamics, exactly as you described. And yeah, but the net effect, I would say, it's a bit too early to really make any quantitative predictions here. But there will be some shift going on between investments in different countries, for sure. And on the second questions, I guess, you know that we never make very specific comments on business relationships with single customers, but we would not expect any of those transactions that have been agreed upon during the last couple of weeks and months to have a significant impact on our business. So, and we shouldn't forget, the one that you mentioned will be - won't be closed too soon, so no effect that we should expect here very soon. Thanks, Joachim. And a quick follow-up on René. I'm gonna rephrase the question asked earlier on the consumables and equipment split. Is it a fair estimate if I say that your sales in Q1 were at around, let's say, 70 consumables, 30 equipment, while from Q3 to Q4, that was more like 60, 40? Is that a reasonable way to think about it? Yeah. Yeah, thanks for that question. It's very fair to assume that we are moving from that, yeah, let's say 60/40 ratio in sales consumables to equipment now, more to 70/30. Yeah. All clear. Thank you very much. The next question comes from Oliver Reinberg, from Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead. Thanks so much for taking my question. The first one is also on the kind of bioprocess equipment part. So I guess this was obviously driving the kind of perceived order softness. So can you just talk a little bit more about the nature of this kind of equipment business? So to what share of this equipment business is related to capacity expansions, I guess a majority of it, and what share is related to replacement demand for equipment? And any kind of color, what kind of mix have you seen in the order intake in 2023, and what was the kind of equipment share? That would be question number one. Secondly, just on China, if we leave the equipment part out, can you just talk to what is the kind of sequential development for consumable orders in China? Is this deteriorating further or is it stabilizing? And do you have any kind of color, like, when it kind of end of the destocking may be reached in China? And then thirdly, just on the guidance, I mean, do you still consider the kind of full range of your guidance as feasible, or is it more likely that we now should rather point to the low end rather than the high end? Thank you. Thanks for the questions. I take the first one on equipment, nature of the equipment business. Maybe starting with, like, we are looking at the equipment business, first of all, larger projects like you ask, you know, capacity expansion, how much is related to capacity expansions where, yeah, we would call it, like, what integrated solutions projects are about. We are serving, this is the area where we've seen less projects, not only Q1 but already last year also. And yeah, that's related to what Joachim described in some parts. We still see over capacities very much, pronounced in China, but some other regions as well. So the larger capacity expansions in use facilities, less dynamics here. Then, maybe looking into the equipment portfolio, we see rather muted dynamics in upstream, like bioreactors. But on the other side, quite positive, strong dynamics in downstream separation systems, mostly driven by innovative chromatography systems we have now in our portfolio. So also a bit mixed picture regarding the portfolio. What we also see is customers, and that goes back to the cash consciousness, you know, protection of cash. We see customers rather going, and that's specifically in upstream buying rather smaller benchtop bioreactors instead of larger automated bioreactor systems as well. So the logic is visible as well here. I hope I could give a bit more color into the portfolios and of the equipment. Yeah, let me take the question regarding China looking or China consumables or recurring business from a group perspective. What we see that the sales that we are doing in China and the current business is flat this quarter versus Q4 last year. We also see that the development, if we look on the quarter on quarter performance in 2023, has been extremely volatile. If you're taking, for example, the performance of the second half of the year, this has been negative in the low single digit- low double digit range, and is now, as I said, flat. Okay. Yeah, and then on guidance, yeah, I have to say, I don't have much to add to what we already have said regarding the guidance. Maybe the only additional comment would be that the Q1 was regarding sales, pretty much the highest comps, whereas at the same time, we are expecting an increasing dynamic on the demand side by our customers. So and therefore, we consider the guidance to be realistic. Perfect. And can I just follow up? So the, what is your share of recurring business or replacement business within the equipment business? Can we say, like, 75% of this, 25% is capacity expansion and 25% is really, like, replacement of existing production lines? Yeah, probably not, not very much replacements, mostly it's expansions, obviously. Okay, understood. And any kind of color when destocking in China may end on consumables? I think this is why I gave you the sales figures, running from a negative performance in the second half of 2023 now to a flattish performance in Q1, quarter-on-quarter. Okay, thanks so much. The next question comes from Solvet from BNP Paribas Exane. Please go ahead. Hi. Hello, thanks for taking my questions. I have a couple of follow-ups. First on profitability for 2024 as the mix will rebalance probably into H2 with a bit more instrument. How comfortable are you with the profitability guides for the year? Second is on order intake. Can you maybe give us the number for order intake, excluding the scope effect or excluding Polyplus, which you consolidated in Q4 and in Q1? Just wanted to have a clear view on what the underlying organic order intake growth. And just to clarify, Joachim, on your earlier comment, do you expect this destocking to be fully resolved by year-end, or we could see a tail of this destocking still in early 2025? Thank you. Yeah, let me take the first part of the question regarding the profitability guidance. So, we feel comfortable with our guidance of slightly above 30%. And why is that? ...On the one hand side, I think there is, we are currently already at a quite robust level, close to the 30%, with 28.6%. And, no doubt, we are all expecting, a stronger second half of the year, with the development, productive development then to start, in the next quarter. That is number one. Number two is, we're seeing that, we have more sales dynamics, on the consumable side, which come, with, with higher margins, versus, equipment. So this is also, chipping in positively, into, guidance. And, thirdly, seeing simply the kind of, structural alignment measures that we are taking. We've seen already some effects in Q1, but there's more to come, in, in quarter two to four. Yeah, and then maybe, second question, the orders development, and the, and the Polyplus effect on it. I think we give the number for sales revenue, and there we say it's three percentage points, inorganic. And that's pretty much also the number for order intake. And the third question, whether we expect the destocking to be completed, by the end of 2024. Yeah, we would clearly say so. Our view is that, it's very far advanced. Just would like to remind you that we have seen the low point of our order intake and book-to-bill ratio around mid of last year. Seen an improvement here since we clearly would. As just described, that is particularly the case for the consumables, which have been subject to stocking and then destocking. So what we see at the moment regarding our view and what we hear from customers is really the, like, the back end of this destocking initiatives by customers. As said before, there are some customers, some pockets of excess inventory levels that customers still, but it should decreasingly have an impact on the demand development. Thank you. The next question comes from Ed Ridley-Day, from Redburn Atlantic. Please, go ahead. Good afternoon. Thank you. A follow-up on China. First of all, could you remind us, if you can, of the quarterly phasing of Chinese growth in the bioprocessing business in the first quarter and second quarter last year, obviously in the back of the last stimulus program? And related to that, do you have a comment on report of a new stimulus program announced last month, with further detail announced in recent weeks from the Chinese government, and what benefit, if any, that could have on demand later in the year in China? Thank you. So please correct me if I'm wrong. I understood the question that you were asking about the quarter-on-quarter sequential dynamics in the BPS China business. Is that correct? Yes. Last year, exactly. Last year. Yeah. So, and what I said for the group is, is in a way, also true for BPS. We've seen quarter-on-quarter throughout the year negative developments in BPS China, with that negative development rather developing in sales. So, going down to a small double-digit negative number. And in Q1 we have been able to record even a slight increase in China. In sales. Yes. So maybe then on the third question on the stimulus. As you said, it's like four weeks old or so that it has been announced. Again, I would say a bit too early to really see this materializing, therefore difficult to factor that in. But in general, I would say, and I think we discussed this also in our previous calls, we have seen that a number of activities by Chinese policymakers during the last couple of quarters has indeed, and I guess very much unintentionally, dampened the demand in our sector. One factor was price regulations on innovative pharmaceuticals, et cetera. And you can see that such restrictions are partially lifted already, so that there is a reaction... by the policymakers in China, because they indeed have a high interest to help such sectors to get back to more healthy and sustainable development paths. And it's unchanged the case that the healthcare sector and the biopharmaceutical and life science sector, in particular, is part of the, also the current five-year plan in China. So we definitely would expect that measures will be taken, that then also will see material effect and such stimulus program, which obviously is targeting not only on the healthcare sector, but also on others, will also probably contribute to that. But again, quantification, definitely too early to do anything like that. No, I understand, but thank you for that. Just a very quick financial follow-up. Clear guidance on the first quarter, if you could give us any further color on where we should expect full year financial costs to settle, that would be helpful. Could you repeat the question, please? Yeah, just regarding the run rate. Should we regard the first quarter run rate in terms of net financial costs as about right for the remaining quarters? Or was there anything in there that was a bit more of a one-off? Yeah, of course, there's a one-off in Q1, as we had roughly two months with the kind of year-end net debt amount. So, for March, we have then reduced our net debt by EUR 1 billion. And of course, you should take roughly 4% interest costs on the net debt that you see at the end of quarter one going forward. Thank you. That's helpful. The next question comes from Oliver Metzger, from Oddo BHF. Please go ahead. Good afternoon. Thanks a lot for taking my questions. The first one is on equipment order intake. So, you highlighted in one of the previous answers that you see also some more investments by pharma in H2 for instruments, which is supportive. Equipment at the end is not equipment there, and I assume that all the BPS-related equipment basically drives the more attractive consumables business, than some other equipment. So can you go with us through the dynamics, if really the BPS-related equipments remain weak, to which extent does this create weaker prospects for consumables in the foreseeable time? Second question is about the recovery momentum. To which extent do you observe some smaller baskets, like only a three-month equipment order, versus in the past, you oversaw a six months, equipment order before? So are there more orders in absolute terms, but just smaller basket sizes? And the last question is on M&A, about potential opportunities. For years, we saw a lot of M&A in smaller scale, then basically with this also your acquisition of Polyplus. Would you agree that the consolidation in the whole bioprocess solution market has already digested all the relevant smaller players, and now with Polyplus, you've entered a new phase of targets which are more in the billion EUR level? Thank you very much. Thank you for your questions. Quite, quite different subjects that you are addressing, but happy to answer them. Maybe first on equipment, and I just start with it because then René will add some color. You know, we make these comments for both divisions, first of all. And when we talk about equipment and instruments, mostly then for our Lab division, we are talking about, for example, analytical instruments like live-cell imaging systems and such. And such instruments are standard instruments. So, and that is already answering maybe a little bit for LPS, your second part of that question, whether we would talk about what you, I think, call smaller baskets of instruments, et cetera. Also, I think the lead times that then are attached or related to such orders. The lead times for even though these are really high tech, very high-performing instruments, are not very long. So, be it, again, live cell imaging systems, be it the protein analytical systems that we have in our portfolio or even, our CellS elector, all those products don't have such long lead times, and we have relative low investment activities by customers. Here we are talking also to quite some extent about smaller biotech firms that are placing such orders, but of course, of course, also larger research-oriented pharmaceutical companies, et cetera. So that's on that, and then maybe on the nature of the BPS equipment- Mm-hmm. - and both, you know, sizes as well as in how far consumables are attached, maybe René, you answer that. Mm-hmm. So,.. BPS equipment, as I mentioned, what we see this year is rather less larger projects on equipment as such, the mix of those which are then pulling in consumables later, I think that's not really changing. We see still additions of equipment, single use, including bioreactors, downstream equipment, which use then consumables later. No real shifts there. On the size of orders, as I mentioned, tendency is rather first of all, less large projects. So this goes to more single or few equipments per project. Second, as I also explained, customers tend to spend less on the large tickets equipment. I mentioned the highly automated bioreactors with, I don't know, above EUR 1 million price tag, rather going to smaller benchtop type of instrument. The trend, yeah, the trend or what we've seen at least, Q1 is this rather smaller orders. Okay, maybe then on the third question on M&A. I think you're right, there has been quite a bit of consolidation going on in the life sciences industry over the last couple of years. However, I would say particularly the very sizable players in the industry have changed their owners over the last, you could also say over the last decade or even a little bit more when this really started. So therefore, I guess there will be now maybe some mid-size transactions. Of course, you can never exclude also really large transactions to take place at some point, but I guess there won't be very many. However, for Sartorius, it's really the case that we are very much oriented and focused on adding innovative technologies to our product portfolio so that we can make our offering even more relevant to customers. Relevant means relevant to help them to reduce the drug development times, as well as the costs for manufacturing drugs. Here, of course, we have a specific focus on innovative drug modalities, because here our customers are facing very specific and challenging pain points to really make step improvements regarding, again, development times as well as manufacturing costs. So that is very much our focus. Here, I would say it's also fair to say there are not that many sizable innovative companies that would fit into this scheme and pattern that we are focusing on. Therefore, I would say, it's quite well possible that future M&A of Sartorius will be again, as often in the past, also rather address smaller and not too sizable targets. But again, of course, it always depends also on maybe opportunities that we are not yet aware of, but nevertheless, the tendency is more into the direction that I just described. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you very much. The next question comes from Sezgi, from HSBC. Please go ahead. Hi, thanks for the presentation and taking my questions. I will have three, please. So, first of all, about the sources of weakness that you mentioned from Europe in your press release. Can you maybe elaborate on that? Is it just BPS? Is it LPS as well? And within the LPS, if you look into the order weakness, what's the contribution from bioanalytics versus the typical PS products there? My second question is on the cash flows. You mentioned, thank you for that, that there was a tax shift causing quite a diversion in the first quarter tax income. Do you expect that to correct in the quarters coming - quarters going forward, or is that a correction of past shifts? And my last question is on the order dynamics from the US. We see that U.S. has been stronger, especially on the BPS side. Do you see any of that additional demand coming from the shift caused by the BioSecure Act and the recent shifts in the CDMO market? Thank you. Yeah, let me take your... What was it? Your third question regarding cash flow. There was a tax shift, not to be corrected in the upcoming quarters, but from Q4 to Q1. In other words, shouldn't play any such role. Going forward. Going forward. Exactly, yeah. And then for your first and your third question, maybe the third, first. ... Again, BioSecure Act, we would not consider to have played any role yet in our numbers. When we, you know, when we made the comment at the beginning, that we are seeing these different dynamics regarding order intake, sales, regions, and product segments, then this, as said, has quite to some extent to do with different comps also, because we have seen a certain effect also kicking in to different degrees at different times last year. And clearly, we have seen a weakness in North America regarding funding of small biotech firms, yeah, relatively early already of last, in, during last year. And we do see quite some recovery here. We do see that gradually investments are coming back, yet not on the level that we have seen before, but we see some positive trend here. And Europe, I would say, is a bit in between. As said before, U.S., the strongest for both divisions and also for LPS. I guess you were asking for LPS. Whereas China is the weakest, and then EMEA, a little bit in between. And then between the different type of instruments, I think that was your question also. Mm-hmm. Yes, of course, the more high-priced, high-performing instruments, like, again, live-cell imaging systems would be one example, as this is really a high-performing product in our portfolio, and a very good product and very well-recognized product in our portfolio. Then, of course, these are a little bit more affected when research-oriented customers have maybe some constraints at the moment, whereas more standard instruments are less affected from such constraints. So therefore, that is indeed a bit the case. Yeah, so and, but that, again, is a little bit independent from the region, yeah. Because I think you were connecting this aspect a bit to Europe. I wouldn't say that this has a particular impact on the European business. It's just a little bit the effect across the board. That would be my, my answer to your first question, and then the other two, I think we answered already. The next question comes from Thibault Boutherin, from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Hello, thank you. Just a couple of questions. The first one on M&A, just if you could comment on your appetite to return to deal-making today. Would you be ready to act on an opportunity in 2024, or is business development more of a story for 2025 and beyond? And my second question is just a bit more conceptual on your emerging cell and gene business. So when we think about more traditional biologics, like antibodies, they obviously require the production of large amount of drugs on a regular basis, on a recurring basis, so it's easy to understand the implication for your business. But when we are thinking about cell and gene, I imagine we are working more with kind of smaller volumes of consumables. So on paper, it looks like maybe less recurring revenues. The goal of gene therapy is kind of one and done. So as we see these modalities moving from development to commercial stage, how should we think about what it means for your recurring revenue stream? Maybe I start with that question regarding cell and gene therapies. Thank you for that. So, we are looking at cell and gene therapies, of course, new modalities, young, immature market, maybe too early to know, have a clear picture about how the real future will look like. What we can say is that, the sheer number of drugs being developed is significant, representing almost one third of new drugs in development, biologics of biologic nature. That shows that there is a significant interest and investment by our customers in that innovative field. The volumes are rather small. That's correct. That speaks for use of single-use technologies. Number of batches will be higher per patient. Batches will be, we see more and more. We, when in terms of approval of drugs and scaling up, I think that follows more or less the same logic as, monoclonal antibodies with, yeah, significant increase in consumption and, and, of, especially then consumables or critical materials, media. And, and so we have, we have built portfolio of, last years, you know, to the point of, one- off cure. Still, we'll need to see that. I think there's a huge number of patient or untreatable yet today, diseases which will enlarge the market as such. ... and how that will really look like in terms of recurring batches per drug, yet to be seen. I think the indicators are overall quite positive, not only on the side of size of the pipeline, as I mentioned, but approvals which are happening quite encouraging. Yeah, and then M&A appetite, as you, as you, I think, phrased it. So indeed, as we have said, when we were launching our capital measures early February of this year, we said we, we thought and think, so think, it's reasonable to have the strategic flexibility and ability to potentially move forward if there is an attractive opportunity that fits into the scheme that I described a minute ago. And we do see quite the potential that such opportunities will arise and become really potentially relevant in the course of this year. At the same time, I clearly would like to say, don't expect anything to be, you know, announced by us within the near future. It's really about being prepared. There are effective innovation out there in the market. We are, as always, very actively observing what's going on and have a clear strategy to consider those and analyze those. So not necessarily anything that will be only more relevant in 2025, as you ask. But of course, I can only also not exclude that it only might materialize back then. But again, I think it's important, given the dynamic times we are in, that we have this strategic flexibility. Thank you. The next question comes from James Vane-Tempest from Jefferies International Limited. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, thanks for taking my questions, two if I can, please. Firstly, just on destocking of consumables. I mean, products all have various shelf lives, so across your portfolio, since we started to see this, initial over ordering, has all of that stock expired, or do you still have SKUs with much longer shelf lives, which may still be elevated inventory levels? So where do you see excess stocking MLDs related to specific SKUs? Related to that, what is the latest feedback from your customers where they will ultimately land? Is it still sort of at pre-COVID levels or perhaps kind of above that, just given some safety stock, given political uncertainties? And then my final question is just on guidance and your confidence, given the visibility on your different segments. So, just to clarify, just from some of the earlier questions, is this based on consumables driving growth and mix, and so less on the non-recurring revenues to meet your margin targets? Or do you have visibility that equipment orders should also be picking up, which is critical to meet your guidance? Thank you. Thank you for the question. I take the first two questions. First, you were asking on consumables, destocking, any differences in different SKUs by- with different shelf lives. I would say maybe too early to say. Some signs we see in the direction of shorter shelf life consumables picking up faster than the others, so that would fit to that logic. But again, it's still bit of unsynchronized development and timing too early, but the direction is going to the shorter shelf life consumables picking up faster. Stock levels pre-pandemic now what we've seen is also changing to be honest, but how customers been looking at. So when the destocking started, we have referred more like, maybe going back to pre-pandemic level, maybe a bit higher, with the experience of broken and strained supply chains. That changed then to, you know, at the levels as pre-pandemic, and then we have seen at some customers pushing those down, and still continues to, in some cases, see that, you know, working on the working capital on the customer side then. So, like a trend going to optimizing the inventories down to the, maybe slightly even on average below the pre-pandemic levels. Yeah, and then maybe on guidance, but before I comment on that, just to add what René said, and to maybe avoid misunderstandings here, we would consider that clearly the main driver for the recovery of orders in the consumables sector is that our customers have used those products and not so much the shelf life expiry. It might have played an additional role here and there, and that is what René said with this certain indication, but we should clearly say, by far, the majority has just been used. So, and then on guidance, we... As said before, I guess it's difficult to add to our perspective on that, and that we consider a continuous recovery of the demand for the orders for consumables as such, that we also expect a gradual recovery of orders for the equipment. It's also, I think, discussed before, what kind of equipment we are talking about, and that this plays a role in both divisions. Of course, the gross margins and also the incremental gross margins and the incremental profit contribution is quite significantly higher for consumables, and therefore, in that sense, also more relevant for our overall margin. Also given the fact that the consumables or the recurring business is significantly larger than our non-recurring business. So that's clear, but also our non-recurring business, equipment business, contributes positively to our margin. Also, a recovery in that business also contributes positively to our margin development. So it's not the case that our margin guidance is only based on any expectation on the consumable side. Plus, and Florian elaborated on that during the presentation already, we are a part of the robust profitability that we have shown here for Q1 is based also on an improved cost base. Those measures that we are implementing, continuously implementing here, will contribute to an increasing degree over the course of the year. So this is another factor our margin guidance is based on. That's very clear. Thank you. The next question comes from Charles Pitman from Barclays. Please go ahead. Hi, thank you very much for taking my questions. A few from me. Just one quick clarification. Can we just go back and just confirm that the BPS Q-on-Q consumables growth in Q1 2024 was low single-digit growth, including the benefit of Polyplus, please? And then just as a second kind of clarification related to the M&A outlook, could, as you are considering further innovative opportunities, but also continue to progress with cost savings and following the recent equity raise, can you confirm that you're not considering any further equity raises to address your debt, and you're happy with your current leverage targets? And then just one more in terms of the impact of China and BioSecure Act. Can you just confirm what proportion of sales China accounted for in Q1? And also just in terms of the kind of durability of your FY 2024 guidance, what you are assuming in terms of the Chinese recovery and what is in there for any potential impact from the BioSecure Act, that continues to move through the market and has any potential impact on your end market demand? Thank you very much. I take the first one. I'm speaking, so sequential quarter-over-quarter growth consumables, yes, confirm, single-digit growth, including Polyplus. Low single-digit. Yes, and regarding the leverage targets, yes, we're still feeling comfortable with a net debt to EBITDA of 3, slightly above 3, so to say. Yes. Without any additional capital measures being planned? Yes, without any additional capital measures being planned. Then, the sales revenue contribution by China in Q1 of 2024 has been. Let me take a look here. A little bit more than 7%, which is lower than the number for full year 2023, which is not no surprise, given all the comments I think that we have made, and it has been in the lower teens territory in 2022. So that, I think, gives you a feeling for the impact of the decline of business in China. On the outlook here, as we said before, we do expect a stabilization and recovery of the Chinese business. We would not allocate any portion of our expectation here to the BioSecure Act on the one hand, and any measures by the Chinese policymakers or so. So I think that will be difficult, but given the dynamic also that we have seen in the course of last year, I think we referred to that a little bit earlier during our call here today, where in around the middle of last year, really, the deterioration of the demand in China has accelerated. We definitely will also see these sides, that we are expecting some stabilization and recovery going forward, that we also will see significantly lighter comps. We shouldn't forget that, yeah. So we expect a certain growth contribution from China going forward this year. Yes. ... Thank you so much. The next question comes from Falko Friedrichs from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Thank you for taking my questions. Firstly, I'm looking for a little bit more clarification on the Q1 order intake in BPS. When I go back to the Q4 call at the end of January, in the Q&A section, you had indicated that the order intake in BPS should be up sequentially in the first quarter. It now ended up being down by 6%, so that's roughly a EUR 50 million delta. And I'm still struggling to understand what could have happened in February and March that explains this significant delta versus your statements at the end of January. Maybe you could help me understand whether, I don't know, the equipment business fell off a cliff in March. A little bit more color here would be very helpful. Then secondly, when going back over the last few years, your Q2 order intake in BPS was often lower than the Q1 order intake. So is this something we should also expect this year, meaning that the Q2 BPS order intake could be down, or should we expect this to be up? And then my last question is, just a bit more color on your visibility on the equipment orders picking up again in the second half. Can you give us a little bit more comfort on what you're basing these expectations on? Is that coming from discussions with customers? Are customers already indicating to you that they plan to order again in the second half? Because what we've seen before is that sort of a lower investment appetite, that can be pretty sticky and easily last for a few quarters. So maybe you can give us a bit more comfort there as well. Thank you. Yeah. Sure. Maybe first, if I may start and then René will also add to that. So, first of all, I guess we are talking order intake here. At least that is my understanding. And order intake by BPS is up by around 15% for Q1. And it's right. It's not up versus Q4 of last year. But, I would also say what we tried to bring across, at the end of—or for the, for the dynamics of, the end of last year, was that we have seen a very strong recovery quarter on quarter towards the end of last year, Q3 versus Q2, Q4 versus Q3, and that we would not expect this to happen to the exact same extent. But indeed, you're right. The orders that we were expecting for the non-recurring business, i.e. instruments, were relatively low towards the, let's say, second half of the first quarter. We do have, and René will elaborate on that a little bit more. We do have a healthy funnel, but we definitely see that customers are rather delaying their decisions regarding such investments quite a bit. And maybe just before, again, I hand over to René, I mean, we will not make any specific guidance here for single quarters. We believe... I mean, we've never done that. We believe that will be really very difficult. But again, as you always said, indeed, first half of the year, we consider to be rather moderate. And we confirm the full year's guidance, but it's, you know, to make a specific guidance here about the second quarter, I think would be maybe a bit too ambitious. If I add to that, Joachim mentioned pipeline looks good for equipment. So looking ahead, we have Q2 more or less in the books for equipment orders. Q3, Q4 pipeline looks quite solid, but yet again, need to see how much pushouts we will see. We've seen also that in the pipeline sales funnel, opportunities are there, but becomes difficult, more difficult towards the end and closing, for the mentioned reason of customers then, you know, preserving cash, pushing out the decisions or delaying the decisions to later a point in time. So still, some way to go. Again, Q2 well in books and rest, quite solid outlook. Okay, thank you. And given you have Q2 in the books, you would point us to a little bit of an improvement again over Q1. Is that fair? With -- it's maybe too early to say. Again, we don't want to comment on this yet, providing a quarterly guidance here. Okay, got it. Thank you. The next question comes from Dylan van Haaften, from Stifel. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks for taking my questions. So just one, I might say, just on the efficiency initiatives and some of the work that was flagged that you're doing. I just wanted to understand if some of this is incremental, that you've decided over the past couple of months? O r this was already planned based on sort of the outlook you guys gave here earlier? Thank you. Yeah, of course, when we did our guidance, we had certain plans for the efficiency initiatives, including a ramp up. What we're seeing currently that we are targeting more than we had in the budget. Okay, so nothing incremental on these initiatives? You're not expanding them or anything? Pardon me, once again, please. Sorry. So nothing incremental here. You're not expanding these initiatives per se, based on sort of the market backdrop you're seeing? We are adjusting those initiatives in some areas, as it's always the case when you are executing such measures, that you continuously adjust. And if things are implementing well, then one gets also sometimes more ambitious, and that is what we are doing. But in principle, we have defined those initiatives and the areas where we wanted to reduce, for example, headcount in certain functions, have been identified before, and some other of such measures as well. For example, we have set ourselves a target regarding procurement, and as it goes, yeah, then you find certain pockets where you think, "Well, maybe you can achieve even more." So some readjustment, and the tendency is that we are getting a little bit more ambitious here. Yeah. But in principle, they have been defined before. Excellent. Thanks so much. The next question comes from Charlie Haywood, from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Yeah, thanks for taking my questions. I just wanted to add on an earlier question. When you said bioprocess order intake grew 15% quarter-on-quarter in third quarter and fourth quarter, did you see equipment orders growing or declining in those quarters? And so was your recurring side growth above or below 15%? Thank you. Give us a second. Yeah, so quarter three to quarter four growth last year, right? Yeah. Correct, and second quarter to third quarter. Yeah. Yeah, so on equipment, I think Joachim mentioned that quarter four was rather a strong quarter on equipment. So there was a growth quarter three to quarter four in equipment, as well as there was a growth in consumables. Yes. So it's a bit lumpy, this business by nature, and it's been also lumpy last year. Yeah, as René said, there has been growth towards the end of the year in the equipment business as well. Now, as described, a slower start into this year, yeah, with the expectation that we will see some increase in that part of our business going forward. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Dr. Joachim Kreuzburg, for any closing remarks. Yeah, thank you very much, everyone. I have to say, it was yeah, I appreciate a lot all the questions that you have asked us and given us the opportunity, therefore, to also add some additional color and granularity to what we have reported anyway. As said at the very beginning of this call, it's a very mixed picture because of some different dynamics and very different comps. Very much late in the nature of yeah, the back end of this very much disrupted situation in the course of the corona pandemic. So once again, thank you very much for the discussion. Take care. Talk to you in three months the latest. Bye-bye. Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now concluded and you may disconnect. Thank you for joining, and have a pleasant day. Goodbye.