Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the SCOR first quarter 2026 results conference call. Today's call is being recorded. There will be an opportunity to ask questions after the presentation by pressing star and one on your telephone keypad. In order to give all participants a chance to ask questions, we kindly ask you to limit the number of your questions to two. At this time, I would now like to hand the call to Mr. Thomas Fossard. Please go ahead, sir. Good afternoon, and welcome to the SCOR Q1 2026 results conference call. I'm joined on the call today by Thierry Léger, Group CEO, and Philipp Rüede, Group CFO, as well as other COMEX members. Can I please ask you to consider the disclaimer on page two of the presentation? Now I would like to hand over to Thierry. Thank you, Thomas. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for joining us today. I'm glad to announce a strong start to 2026 with continued and disciplined delivery at all levels. The group net income reached EUR 220 million in Q1, corresponding to an annualized return on equity of 21.1%. The solvency ratio increased by 5 percentage points to 220%, driven by strong underlying operating capital generation. All our three businesses contributed to the solid performance. I would like to point out explicitly that this was achieved, including additional opportunistic buffer building of EUR 300 million and precautionary means 100% IBNR base reserving for the Middle East conflict. The impact of the conflict in the Middle East is twofold. One is the direct impact on our business. As mentioned during the Q4 earnings call, war risk is systematically excluded from standard reinsurance treaties. It is one of the very few exclusions that is truly universal regardless of market cycles or conditions. If war risk is covered, exposures are priced for and carried mostly by specialized markets. SCOR's participation in this market is limited and within a strictly controlled framework. The second impact is indirect, related to foreign exchange and inflation in the context of heightened geopolitical tensions. These secondary impacts are monitored and managed as part of our regular processes in pricing, reserving, and ALM. Let me now turn to the P&C renewals in 2026. In a more competitive environment, we have been able to increase the year-to-date premium income by 2.4% whilst limiting the margin deterioration. We continue to focus on our preferred lines of business in line with our strategy to grow profitably and in a diversifying way. The April renewals represent around 12% of our insurance portfolio. We prioritized margin protection and implemented targeted portfolio management actions, including the non-renewal, or resizing of underperforming business. It led to a reduction in premium income but allowed us to maintain the quality of our portfolio, positioning our book for long-term performance. Consequently, the technical results, deteriorated by 0.6 percentage points better than the previous renewals. Looking ahead, we prepare for increased competitive pressure. We will continue to apply underwriting discipline and to focus on our preferred and diversifying lines of business. Our priorities are clear. Capital allocation to the most profitable and diversifying lines, combined with disciplined underwriting. In an environment that becomes increasingly competitive and shaped by macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainty, our teams remain focused on executing the Forward 2026 strategy. This has allowed us to deliver excellent results while continuing to reinforce the resilience of the group. I see SCOR well-placed to make the best out of the current environment and to deliver on the last year of our Forward 2026 strategic plan. Philipp, over to you. Thank you very much, Thierry. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm pleased to present our Q1 2026 results. I will focus on the key highlights for the quarter. All three business activities delivered a strong Q1 2026. Adjusted net income was EUR 220 million, translating into an annualized adjusted ROE of 21.1%, well above our 12% Forward 2026 target. On the P&C side, we delivered a strong ISR of EUR 255 million. Insurance revenues grew by 5.4% at constant FX, driven by a satisfactory set of renewals, although reported growth was impacted by adverse FX effects. The combined ratio stood at an excellent 80.2%, reflecting very strong underlying technical performance. Our nat cat ratio of 4.2% reflects a benign quarter, with the main impact coming from Storm Christine in Portugal. Underlying results are solid, with a 77.7% attritional ratio that includes additional buffer building. It also includes a mid-double-digit IBNR provision related to the Middle East conflict, reflecting a prudent view of potential further developments. We are also satisfied with our Life and Health results this quarter, reflecting our focus to deliver steady quarterly performance for the last five quarters. The ISR stands at EUR 107 million, with all components in line with our expectations, including the CSM amortization rate and the risk adjustment release. The experience variance is also within our expected range of volatility. The Life and Health business delivered EUR 115 million in new business CSM, driven by growth in protection and longevity. We also significantly improved our capital position, with the solvency ratio increasing from 215%- 220%. This was supported by strong net capital generation in Q1, in line with our full year 2026 guidance of 3- 5 points of Solvency II capital generation over the year. This translates into an economic value growth of 7.4% at constant economics. The economic value per share increased to EUR 51 at the end of March 2026. We continue our strategy to improve the resilience of our balance sheet, both on the IFRS 17 and Solvency II. To that end, in this quarter, we added an exceptional amount of EUR 300 million buffer to our P&C best estimate liabilities, which was made possible by an internal capital optimization. To conclude, SCOR's strong first quarter performance and strengthened balance sheet confirms the group's positive outlook. This gives us strong confidence in delivering the Forward 2026 plan. Now over to you, Thomas. Thank you very much, Philipp. On page 21, you will find the forthcoming schedule events. With that, we can now move to the Q&A session. Operator, can we take the first question, please? Thank you. The first question is from Michael Huttner, Berenberg. Thank you very much. I saw these fantastic results, I'm afraid the questions are a little bit on the sideline. You talked about the retrocession benefit. I wonder if you can explain that a little bit. The only thing I noted is if I do the ratio of ceded premiums or ceded revenues to gross premiums, you actually seem to have bought more reinsurance. It's gone up from 26%- 29%, that's my math, that's maybe a bit silly. The other question is own shares. Your share price is lovely, EUR 31 or something. You have this option which expires, I think, in the beginning of June 28. Well, how does that work, please? Thank you. Yeah, thank you. You're absolutely correct in terms of the insurance revenues. In line with what we communicated last year in terms of the change of structure, we moved from non-proportional excess of loss to more of a proportional cover. As a result, you see the cession rate in terms of insurance revenues going up. However, in terms of ISR, and margin ceded, we saw actually improvements in the economics of our retrocession. It, but the retro benefit, I think, also alludes to what's going to the. Of new business CSM. Yes. Yeah. Yes, correct. That is one place where you see it indeed. In the new business CSM, you see that we've spent less margin on the retrocession. There's no number. Okay. No. No number. To your second question, on the option. I think you mentioned June 28. The option expires on the June 9, for your information. Of course, we are well aware of the option and what it represents. All we can say, all I can say is that we will be rational about it, and we will act in the best interest of our shareholders. It's also, I also wanna make it very clear that we do allocate capital to the most attractive areas, and that the option is one of the many options we have at hand, and it's not necessarily the most attractive one at each point in time. Example, Q1, we have privileged balance sheet resilience. What's resilience? Sorry, say that again, Michael. What's resilience? Sorry, I didn't, acoustically, I didn't hear what. Yeah, balance sheet resilience. Balance sheet. That. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Okay. Lovely. Thank you very much. Thank you, Michael. Can we move to the next question, please? The next question is from Shanti Kang, Bank of America. Hi. Yeah, thanks for taking my questions. The first one was just on P&C on the attritional, that was 77.7%. You said that includes an IBNR load for the Middle East and some additional prudence that you've added there. If you strip that out, could you just give us a sense of the year-on-year deterioration in the attritional, excluding that? This kind of feeds into my next question, which was just on discounting, which was a bit higher than I'd expected, given that we had lower cats. It seems like you added on the best estimate liabilities as well. Is that feeding through into the discount impact as well for Q1? Thank you. Yeah. On your first question, the underlying performance is very strong, and the answer to your question is that there's almost zero change compared to the previous quarter. Then your second question on the discounting. Yes. Mechanically by adding these buffer to the best estimate liabilities that mechanically increase the discount, this effect is around, is less than 1 point, but that order of magnitude. Then there's the low nat cat activity that mechanically also improves the discounting. These are the two main factors for this relatively high discounting that we observed this quarter. Okay, thanks. I'm sorry. Just to follow up on that, on the loading, could you let us know, which lines you did add on? I don't think that was casualty, but I presume the sort of longer tail as a result. You mean on the best estimate liabilities? Yeah. It's across the board. Okay. It's IBNR. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Shanti. Can we take the next question, please? The next question is from Andrew Baker, Goldman Sachs. Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. First one, just any views on the pricing outlook into the midyear renewals will be helpful and any thoughts around terms and conditions. I guess, as we're thinking about sort of price and volume trends, should we be anchoring more in what we saw in January or April? Just any thoughts around that topic. Secondly, is there any update on the Covéa arbitration process? I guess relatedly, just coming back to the call option. My understanding on the call option was that there wasn't an adjustment mechanism for the dividends. Was there any thought around excising it prior to the ex-div date that's just gone, or is there any connection with the arbitration process? Thank you. On your first question, Andrew, the outlook for the mid-year renewal, I'd say, remains similar to what we saw at the 1st half of the year. A competitive environment. In this environment, our strategy will remain unchanged. We'll continue to prioritize underwriting discipline. In terms of conditions, you know, what we saw in January and in April is broadly stable, and that's what we expect going forward as well. You know, the market remains competitive, and it will depend on which country, which line of business. You know, we expect very similar trend to what we saw in the 1st half, in the 1st quarter. Regarding the Covéa arbitration, we have you know, it's still the same news, which means no news so far. We expect to see this finalized before the summer. That's with regard to the timing. You made a link to the call option that maybe I got wrong. You asked whether there is somewhat a connection with the call option, we can't see any. You also asked whether theoretically there's a possibility to call the option between now and the ninth of June. That's technically absolutely possible, therefore remains one of the options for us. Again, here, I would like to emphasize that there are other options. Again, in Q1 we have privileged the balance sheet resilience very clearly. I hope I answered your question, Andrew. It was like two and a half questions rolled into one. Yeah. Well, you can't blame me for trying. Thank you. Really helpful. Thank you, Andrew. Can we move to the next question, please? The next question is from Will Hardcastle, UBS. Hey. Afternoon, everyone. Can you just help me with the capital optimization on the internal retro, I think it is? First of all, is this all own funds benefit? And I'm trying to understand how extraordinary this really is or whether there could be some further optimizations, presumably with Philipp coming in, that he could be bringing to the table, looking at it fresh. Second question is somewhat linked. I'm trying to work out whether the 185%-220% optimization range is still something that, you know, management would think about hard or whether it still stands really. And if not, what's causing the pivot, if there has been one? Thank you. On your first question regarding the internal capital optimization, as you centralize capital into the legal entity structure, you get a benefit in Solvency II in form of a reduction of the risk margin. You're right to point out that this is an improvement in your own economic funds. You asked about the outlook. I mean, I can't really predict it. I can only tell you that, of course, you should expect that capital is front and center on my mind, and that of course, we will look at every stone and turn it and see if there's something more to be optimized. I think there is some Philipp effect here, Will. On the solvency optimal range, your question, yes, you're absolutely right, 185% - 220%, that's the optimal range defined for the plan Forward 2026. This is unchanged and will remain. You have probably, in the meantime, understood that for the next plan, capital and cash generation will take an even more prominent position in our thinking. Expect an update on this range when we present the new strategic plan. Thank you. Thank you, Will. Can we take the next question, please? The next question is from Kamran Hossain, JP Morgan. Hi. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one is just coming back to the kind of work you've done on the Solvency II ratio. In terms of the best estimate additions, clearly very welcome increasing resilience there. You mentioned, I think in the commentary that what the EUR 300 million was exceptional. Do you think you'll want to continue to add here? How might that kind of, you know, what that might mean for solvency going forward? 'Cause I think my conclusion from it all is really that, you know, your guidance on capital generation is probably still exceptionally cautious. The second question is on the Life and Health experience variance in the quarter. I mean, you're, you know, well on track for the run rate for the year, you know, on a quarterly basis. Is there anything to read into the EUR 16 million or it's just normal volatility? Thank you. Yes. Maybe on your second question, that's relatively straightforward in terms of this is totally within what we would expect the normal volatility to be in that sense. On your first question, Yeah. I would say, you know, our strategy is to build resilience both in IFRS and in Solvency II, and it has always been. The reason why we felt the need to communicate is just the size of the addition of EUR 300 million, you should take the size of this move to be exceptional. Now, going further, I think we will update you at Investor Day in the context of the next strategic plan on how we intend to build and use buffers. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Kamran. Can we move to the next question, please? The next question is from Ivan Bokhmat, Barclays. Hi. Good afternoon. Thank you very much. I mean, my first question is just a small follow-up on this Solvency II buffer. Can you help me understand the risk adjustment buffer that you've been building under IFRS 17, does that fully translate into solvency, and therefore this EUR 300 million just builds on top of this? Maybe you could try to help us understand what the buffer might be in absolute terms after, you know, since you started building it up, it's probably well over EUR 500 million and then EUR 300 on top. My second question is related to this limit of the price deterioration of 350 basis points to just 60 that you've mentioned, Thierry. It looks very impressive. Maybe you could give a little bit more color on that and think that, would you be able to use similar levers for the June, July renewals? If I can squeeze in one last question, please. How would you characterize the reinsurance demand? Are we seeing any improvements? Because I think some of your peers in Bermuda have been suggesting that cedes are buying more. Just wonder if you could maybe quantify it or give some color how it looks by regions. Thanks. Okay. On your first question, the resilience that we added, the EUR 300 million is really an addition to our Solvency II balance sheet. It's somewhat unrelated to the risk adjustment, where we continue opportunistically, quarter- by -quarter, to build buffers if the performance allows to. On your second question, Ivan, the price change of 3.5 reflects basically the price change for business renewed. One year to the next, on a growth basis. In addition to these price changes, you have to take into account portfolio, underwriting actions, which you could see in the slides there was quite a number of it at April 1st, and the benefit of retrocession as well. When you take all of that together at April 1st, the net margin deterioration it was limited to 0.6 points. When we look at year- to- date, that's, you know, where we see an overall deterioration year to date of 2 points or less. That's really, you know, what you should be focusing on more than the price change. On the reinsurance demand, you asked for also on the reinsurance demand, Ivan, yeah? Jean-Paul? Yeah, sorry. On the reinsurance demand, we do see increased demand from cedants. With the price decreases, you know, there's ability for cedants to keep some of the savings, but also use some of the savings to buy additional reinsurance. We do see this, and most of the additional buying has been, I'd say, at the top of programs, to buy more limit. There is an increase of reinsurance demand, but still today, lower than the amount of capital available from the supply on the reinsurance side. As Jean-Paul was talking, I was thinking about what's the easiest way to explain how we can have a 3.5 point price deterioration but still have only a 0.5 deterioration of the combined ratio. Beyond what Jean-Paul said and the positive retro impact, you should also imagine that the business we let go is obviously a business with high combined ratio. By just letting it go, it has a positive impact on the combined ratio. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you, Ivan. Can we move to the next question, please? The next question is from Iain Pearce at BNP Paribas. Hi. Afternoon, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one's just on the capital generation guidance for the full year. Obviously you've done 5 percentage points. Even if we sort of normalize the positive cap, that still puts you in the range for the full year guidance already. Just want to understand why the sort of implication is for very low capital generation guidance for the remainder of the year. Obviously I'm seeing some seasonality in it, but just trying to understand why we're not, why we shouldn't expect much for the remainder of the year. The second one is just coming back to this point on the call option, because I'm not sure the question was fully answered or I understood the answer. Can you just confirm if there is an adjustment for the dividend in the call option, with the implication being if you are going to call it between now and the, and the strike date, why you wouldn't have called it before going ex-dividend? I just want to understand that 'cause I wasn't entirely clear. Thank you. On the net capital generation, you're right to note that 5 is at the top of a range of 3-5, part of it was the low nat cat activity in the first quarter. We would not change our view on the full year not knowing what the nat cat result would be for the rest of the year. On top, there's always some seasonality in the capital generation anyhow. On your second question, you're correct that there is no adjustment to the dividend, and the fact that it got ex indeed would be considered. Thank you, Iain. Can we move to the next question, please? The next question is from James Shuck, Citi. Yeah, thanks. good afternoon. Many of our questions have been asked, but I had a couple left, if I can. I guess on the call option, I just want to understand the financial logic of what you just said, because if the call option's gonna expire in about a month's time and it's just gone ex div on a very healthy dividend, then you know, for all intents and purposes, it looks like you're not gonna exercise that call option. Were you allowed to sell the call option in the open market? That's the first question. Secondly, you know, my understanding of what's happened in terms of the sort of buffering and the increase in resiliency is that you moved about EUR 200 million out of the risk adjustment into the best estimate liabilities. That's one reason why the risk adjustment's gone down despite the very healthy level of new business. My question kind of is what has that done to the confidence level in each? Because you've been steadily moving up the confidence level on the risk adjustment. I think it was 77.5%-82.5% at full- year 2024. Presumably that's come down. If you've moved EUR 200 million into the best estimate liabilities, what has that done to the confidence level there? Thank you. Yes, in the first quarter we decided that the resilience of our balance sheet was our priority, and it was a conscious decision to not exercise the option and rather put EUR 300 million into our best estimate liabilities. On your second question, yes, you're correct. In increasing the EUR 300 million into the best estimate liabilities, it was compensated by a reduction in the risk adjustment. Which again, was reduced by the amount of buffer that we chose to build in this quarter. In terms of the confidence level, we would evaluate that again at the end of the year, but it's given as a range, and that range is actually decently wide in terms of monetary value. I see. You weren't able to sell the option on the open market, correct? No. I mean, I think, we're not day trading the options, no. Yeah. Not quite what I meant. If there's a value in that call option, it would have made sense to sell it before it went ex-div, wouldn't it? Yes. what I'm trying to say is there are many considerations in that that go into that decision and what you're suggesting is not as easy as you make it sound in the sense of the complexity of it. Okay. All right. Understood. Thank you very much. Thank you, James. Can we move to the next question? The next question is from Darius Satkauskas, KBW. Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. Two questions, please. The first one is, are you able to provide gross written premium growth year on year in the first quarter in both P&C and Life and Health segments? The second question is, would you be able to give us sort of the moving parts for the numerator and denominator in terms of Solvency II? You know, I think the solvency ratio increased by 5 points. What changes did you see on the numerator and then denominator, how many solvency points did the EUR 300 million contribute? Yes. We don't communicate anymore on GWP, so unfortunately we won't be able to answer your first question. On your second question, we would only communicate first half on the split between own funds and SCR. Okay, no problem. Thank you. Thank you, Darius. Can we move to the next question, please? The next question is from Ben Cohen, RBC. Oh, hi there. Good afternoon. I had a couple of questions on the Life and Health division. Could you give us a bit more color about the growth that you saw in the new business CSM? It looks like you're kind of well on track probably to beat the sort of the outlook that you've given there. The second question was just on the negative cash flow in Q1 in the same division. I think you reiterated that you're gonna get to a neutral position for the full year. Could you just talk us through where that delta is going to come from? Thank you. On the new business CSM of Life and Health, we said repeatedly that on the Financial Solutions and Longevity, it's lumpy and therefore it fluctuates from quarter -to- quarter. The good result in terms of CSM was protection and longevity. We were able to transact a significant notional on U.S. longevity, and that was the reason for the good result in new business CSM in Q1. On the cash flow, I would say this is a relatively small number and we would say broadly neutral, and it's in line with expectations and we stick to our commitment of 2026 of reaching a neutral cash flow in Life and Health. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Ben. Can we move to the next question? Next question is from Vinit Malhotra, Mediobanca. Yes. Good afternoon. Thank you. I'll come up with two questions. One is on the April renewals. I mean, it seems that from reading the presentation that your property cat exposure has gone up or property cat premiums went up, about 4.6 points mentioned here. Specialty lines where, you know, where you had all, you know, the diversifying lines seems to be a bit worse. Just curious, you know, most of the cut seems to be in U.S. casualty or casualty and motor. Is that a correct reading, and could you just give a bit of picture on the rationale behind these moves, also in the context of the current conflict in the Middle East? Is there some hope that some of the specialty lines demand improves over time or the next renewals or over the next period of time? That's on the business side. Just, you know, sorry to pardon my ignorance, please, but you know, the EUR 300 million buffer, how should we simply read it? Has there been a benefit to the Solvency II from this EUR 300 million? I mean, how should we easily say that this is the benefit of this number? It's clearly not the, you know, the prudence building you do every quarter as you mentioned. It seems to have affected positively the EOF. How should you like us to read that number, please, if you don't mind clarifying again? Thank you. Vinit, I'll answer your first question. First question. On property CAT, the growth we achieved was mainly out of the U.S., where we still see the price adequacy as attractive, sort of in line with what we saw January 1st. You know, for the Asian renewals, which is another big part of the April 1st renewal on the CAT side, their overall exposures was mainly flat, because the price decreases were reaching basically a level of where price adequacy was, you know, just break even in our view. That's what happened on the property CAT side. On the other lines of business, we did have a significant reduction of U.S. casualty book renewing April 1st. You have to keep in mind that it's a very small renewal, so dominated by just a, let's say, a few renewals, where again, our view of price trends and price increases led us to take some underwriting actions and reduce our exposure to these portfolios. On the specialty lines of business, it was, I'd say very line of business specific and market specific. We saw a growth opportunity on the credit and surety side, mainly coming from India, where we're one of the market leaders of that segment, and we can put through our terms and conditions and our pricing. There we seized attractive opportunities. On the other lines of business, like marine or engineering, the market was more competitive, and there we slightly reduced our portfolio. That's, you know, and that's what you see here is the aggregation of all this together. Which also, Vinit, answers, like, your 2.5 question, whether the Middle East might have an impact on some of the specialty lines. We cannot really see, Jean-Paul, an impact on marine and aviation. Yeah. We're still waiting for it. So far there's been no impact on the April 1st renewals. You know, we'll have to see, you know, as Thierry mentioned, the losses that have that people are forecasting are mainly coming from affirmative war coverage. That market has reacted. The other lines of business not so much yet. Okay. Thank you. Vinit, on your second question, if we had not added this prudence, then the solvency ratio that we would have printed is 225%, right? That means that we for future shocks, we have these 5 points available, and that's why we insist that this improves the resilience of our balance sheet. Indeed. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Vinit. Can we move to the next question, please? Yes. As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star and one on your telephone. The next question is from Michael Huttner, Berenberg. Thank you for the second opportunity. It's just two. One is on life and one is on the CMD. The life growth, I know one of my peers said it was strong, but I'm still thinking it's quite weak 'cause you came from such a high level in the past. When are we going to see the ramp up of growth that we were hoping for? 'Cause I think you were switching from mortality to other lines. Yes. Then the other question is on the CMD. You said the next CMD, when is it, please? On the second question, it's in December 4th. December 4th. Thank you. Beginning of December. Yeah. Sorry, Michael. Sorry to everyone. It seems the date is not yet fixed. Yeah, very beginning of December. Sorry for that. Okay. Mm-hmm. Pilar, over to you for the Life and Health question. On the first question, Michael, yes, our teams remain fully focused on delivering the plan in both protection and non-protection line of businesses, therefore, Longevity and Financial Solutions. Yeah. We've seen that we had a good new business CSM generation, which is coming across all the regions, including protection, and as well, a good success on longevity strategy. You know that Longevity and FinSol are lumpy in nature transactions by definition. In any case, it's difficult to predict execution, but what I can say is that we are very confident by the current pipeline of deals that we have, and we have still three quarters to make it happen. I was just surprised that you mentioned protection, because I thought protection is the bit where you were reducing, and it is actually growing. Protection keeps being a core line of business to us. I can say we are being very selective. We have our preferred line of businesses depending on the different geographies, and we are pricing case by case according to our discipline underwriting policy. You have a good memory, Michael, because when we introduced the new business strategy in Life and Health in 2024, we had, as one measure, a minimum hurdle on the profitability side. We expected as a result of it to lose some of our new business due to that hurdle. Actually, Pilar and other members of the Life and Health team have been fighting tooth and nail to keep the business. We're actually able to keep almost all of that business, which explains why actually on the protection side we have not seen the reduction that we thought we would see. We are actually pleasantly surprised to keep the protection business at higher margin. Most of the growth, however, in the next years will be clearly from longevity and structured solutions. Brilliant. Thank you very much. Thank you, Michael. Can we have the next question, please? That was the last question, so I turn the conference back to you for any closing remarks. Thank you very much, everyone for attending this call. The investor relation team remains available for your follow-up questions. Please do not hesitate to give us a call. As a reminder call, we'll release the Q2 2026 results on the July 30th with a call as usual at 2:00 P.M. CET. With this, we are wishing you a very good afternoon. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over, and you may disconnect your telephones.