Good morning, everyone. Despite a challenging market environment, BCG once again demonstrated the resilience of its business model. We delivered a solid financial result with both revenue and EBITDA growing by 7%, while maintaining our industry-leading EBITDA margin of 78%. The significant headwind came from Auto24 business line, where the introduction of the new car tax in Estonia reduced listing volumes. Excluding this one-off impact, the rest of the group delivered double-digit growth. Looking across our verticals, real estate was our strongest performer, growing by impressive 17%. Jobs and services also had an excellent year, accelerating from 7% growth in the first half of the year to 11% in the second half of the year, resulting 9% growth for the full year. Automotive remained stable despite significant volume headwinds. Meanwhile, our generalist marketplace continued to deliver a steady growth of 3%. Given our exceptionally strong balance sheet and attractive market valuations, we significantly accelerated our share buyback program. By mid-June 2026, the company has repurchased over 10% of its issued share capital. I am pleased to announce that the board has proposed a final dividend of EUR 0.031 per share, representing a 19% increase compared to a year ago, subject to shareholder approval at AGM. One of the key indicators we closely monitor is our leadership position related to our nearest competitors. I am pleased to report that our leadership remains exceptionally strong across all major marketplaces, with traffic levels ranging from five to more than 60 times those of our closest competitors. Overall, our traffic mix has remained very stable. The majority of the visitors continue to access our marketplace directly, which reflects the strength of our brands and loyalty of our users. The traffic from Gen AI platforms remain negligible. While this channel is growing, it has primarily shifted traffic away from traditional search engines while the direct traffic continues to grow. I think this is a very important thing to highlight. Our people continue to be one of the BCG greatest strengths. In our latest employee engagement survey, more than 95% of employees said they are proud to be part of BCG. This level of engagement is reflected in our exceptional average employee tenure of eight years, which is remarkable for a technology company. We also remain committed to diversity and inclusion. Our workforce is well-balanced, with almost equal gender split, and women hold 50% of leadership positions. This places BCG among top performers within FTSE 250 for gender and diversity. We continue to make a good progress on sustainability. Since 2022, we have reduced our CO2 emissions by 75%, supported by our continued transition to renewable energy, which now accounts for 88% of our total energy consumption. I will hand over to Lina to speak about finance in more details. Thank you, Justinas. Morning, everyone. I will now take you through the financial results in detail, starting with the revenue performance. On the right side, you see total revenue information over the past two years, by business line. On the left, the classifieds revenue accounting for 91% of group's revenue and split by business line as well. The B2C revenue, that is business plan subscriptions and C2C customers using self-service, mainly individuals. The group delivered revenue of EUR 88.5 million for the year, a 7% increase on the prior year. Growth was driven by continued monetization progress across our four classifieds revenue streams. Last spring, we implemented C2C pricing changes across all our major platforms, and these have contributed to performance throughout the entire year. As in previous years, we introduced B2C pricing and packaging changes from September and October. Artūras will cover the key drivers of growth in more detail later in the presentation, but in summary, real estate representing 29% of group revenue was again our strongest performing business line, with revenue growing 17% to EUR 26 million. B2C grew 20% of real estate and C2C grew 12%. Autos representing 36% of group revenue was flat at EUR 31.5 million. Auto B2C grew 11%, but this was offset by a 9% decline in C2C revenue. Jobs and services generating 1/5 of the group revenue grew 9% to EUR 17.4 million, with both B2C and C2C each growing 9%. Generalist being 15% of group revenue and predominantly C2C grew 3% to EUR 13.6 million. In total, B2C revenue, representing 54% of group revenue, grew 13%, and C2C, representing 37% of group revenue, grew 1%. The remaining 9% comprises advertising and ancillary revenues, which together were broadly flat at EUR 8.1 million. I am now turning to cost and profitability. People costs remain our largest operating expense, representing approximately 14% of group revenue and almost 65% of operating costs before depreciation and amortization at EUR 12.8 million. Programming development costs are within people costs and handled in-house. The 2% increase reflects three main factors. A growth in headcount. We ended the year with 163 full-time employees. That is seven full-time employees more than a year ago. Annual salary reviews in line with Baltic wage inflation, approximately 10%. These were significantly offset by performance share plan, PSP costs decrease. 2026 has EUR 0.3 million costs in relation to PSP, down from EUR 1.9 million in the prior year. That is reflecting performance below the PSP targets. Marketing costs represent 1.5% of revenue, and the majority of groups traffic is direct. Paid search traffic is minimal, and this year we had some targeting marketing expenditure, particularly across social media channels aimed at younger audiences. IT costs, which is third-party services costs, continue to be 1% of revenue, and other costs, predominantly administrative and data acquisition costs, 5% of revenue. Our total operating costs, excluding depreciation and amortization, were EUR 19.9 million, an increase of 8% on the prior year. Maybe back to the previous slide. EBITDA grew in line with revenue 7% to EUR 68.6 million. The EBITDA margin was maintained at 78%, unchanged from the prior year. Below EBITDA, depreciation and amortization decreased 24% to EUR 8.3 million, and the principal driver was a 26% reduction in amortization of acquired intangibles, reflecting the full amortization of customer relationship assets recognized on the 2019 and 2020 acquisitions. This reduction is a reason why operating profit of EUR 60.4 million grew faster than EBITDA at 13%. Operating profit, adjusted for the acquired intangibles amortization, grew in line with EBITDA. Moving to our cash generation, debt and leverage. Cash generated from operating activities grew by 5% to EUR 69.9 million, maintaining our cash conversion ratio at 99%, consistent with recent years and demonstrating the quality of our earnings. After income tax and net interest payments, net cash inflow from operating activities was EUR 60.4 million. Looking at the net debt bridge, we started the year in a near net cash position with net debt of EUR 4.4 million. Over the course of the year, we drew on new debt facilities to fund accelerated share buybacks program. I will expand on the capital allocation more on a later slide. In January 2026, we refinanced our existing debt facilities. The new arrangement with the bank comprises a EUR 125 million term loan facility, which may be drawn in tranches, and a EUR 20 million revolving credit facility. At the same time, we repaid in full the EUR 15 million remaining under the previous facility. By the end of financial year, EUR 73 million had been drawn under the new term loan. Our operating cash flows, combined with partial drawings under the new debt facility, funded share purchases for cancellation, totaling almost EUR 77 million. That's the payment amount. Purchases of company shares to EBT for EUR 3.1 million, alongside dividend payments of EUR 18.7 million during the year. We closed the year with net debt of EUR 46.2 million, representing leverage of 0.7 x EBITDA, up from 0.1 x at the prior year-end. Since April 2026, a further EUR 45 million has been drawn to continue the share buyback program, bringing the total dividend drawings under the new facility to EUR 118 million, as at the date of this announcement. The remaining term loan capacity is EUR 7 million, with the full EUR 20 million revolving credit facility remaining undrawn. In this slide, you see the consolidated profit or loss summary. The revenue, EBITDA, operating profit, and adjusted operating profit had been explained earlier. Before I go through the rest of the lines, the only adjustment to our financial performance metrics is amortization of acquired intangibles with the deferred tax impact. Starting from net finance costs, it accounted to EUR 1.8 million, a reduction from EUR 2.4 million in prior year. Although interest expense increased in the second half of 2026 following drawings under the new debt facilities, this was more than offset by a lower average debt balance during the first half of the year and also interest income earned on the cash balances. Profit before tax grew by 15% to EUR 58.6 million. The effective tax rate increased from 12%-13%. Primarily as a result of corporate income tax rate in Lithuania rising from 15%-16%. Income tax expense was EUR 7.7 million. From 2026, the Lithuanian corporate income tax rate increases from 16%-17%. Following the repayment of historical intercompany funding, the group Estonian operations are now generating distributable profits. Now, under the Estonian and Latvian tax regimes, profits are taxed only when distributed. The group continues to assess capital allocation opportunities, including reinvestment and M&A. No decision has been made to distribute profit from Estonia or Latvian subsidiaries. But if we were to decide to do so in the foreseeable future, we would recognize an immediate one-off tax charge of around EUR 6 million on accumulated profits. Thereafter, profits generated in Estonia and Latvia would give rise to an annual deferred tax charge at the applicable rates of 22% and 20%, respectively, to the extent they are expected to be distributed. Accounting profit for the year grew 14%. Adjusted net income, the reference metric used to our capital allocation policy, grew 7% to EUR 58.1 million. It adds back the post-tax impact of acquired intangible amortization and the associated deferred tax. On a per share basis, adjusted basic EPS grew 9% to EUR 0.123, and basic EPS grew 16% to EUR 0.108. Both EPS measures grew faster than the net income growth, reflecting the reduction in the weighted average share count resulting from the share buyback and cancellation program. I will now turn to our capital allocation policy. Since IPO in 2021, our capital allocation policy has been to return materially all adjusted net income to shareholders, historically through dividends of around one-third, and the balance through share buybacks and debt repayment. During the first half of 2026, we became net cash positive. In 2026, the board concluded that the company's share price didn't reflect the underlying fundamentals or long-term prospects. It considered market concerns regarding the long-term impact of AI to be materially more cautious than our own assessment and viewed recent trading headwinds as temporary. Accordingly, we introduced leverage to fund an accelerated share buyback program. The EUR 145 million debt facilities secured in January provided the capacity to execute the strategy. By year-end, we had repurchased and canceled 7.6% of company's issued share capital, increasing to 10% by mid-June. Following shareholder approval in May, we intend to continue repurchasing shares subject to market conditions, available authority, and the group's capital position. At the September AGM, we expect to seek authority to repurchase up to 15% of the company-issued share capital. As always, these authorities represent maximum authority rather than intention to utilize it in full. Continuation of the accelerated share buyback program beyond the group's existing financing capacity would require additional debt financing. The board has not established fixed thresholds for either leverage or share price. Capital allocation decisions will continue to be based on information available at the time. Turning to dividends, the board has also adopted a progressive ordinary dividend policy. Under this policy, the ordinary dividend will go broadly in line with adjusted net income while preserving flexibility in the group's broader capital allocation framework. Accordingly, we're recommending a final ordinary dividend of EUR 0.028 per share, together with a special dividend of EUR 0.003 per share. Together, this maintains our distributions for 2026 at approximately one-third of adjusted net income, consistent with our previous policy during this transition year. In total, dividends in respect of financial year 2026 would amount to EUR 0.044 per share, which represents a 16% increase on the total dividend paid versus last year. Finally, we will continue to evaluate value-creating investment opportunities, including M&A and share buybacks, while maintaining flexibility in how those opportunities are financed. As announced today, this includes the acquisition of Cenu Banka, strengthening our data capabilities in the Latvian real estate market. This concludes the financial section of our presentation, and I will now hand over to Artūras. Thank you, Lina. I will take over, we'll review our strategic progress across core business lines, dive into the KPIs, and provide an overview of key product development. Real estate was our clear growth champion this year. Revenue delivered a 17% increase to reach EUR 26 million. In the B2C segment, the monthly number of brokers grew by 3%, and the number of clients reached a record high of 5,300. It was primarily driven by small brokers transitioning from C2C customers to become B2C customers. At the time, B2C ARPU increased by 16% to now EUR 252. The improvement was supported by price and packaging changes implemented in autumn. Besides ARPU growth, these updates were designed to encourage customers to use a wider scope and try out a wider scope of our services. They were also underpinned by a data product update from the previously acquired Untu platform. In the C2C segment, we achieved significant yield improvements. Revenue per listed ad grew by 26%, now EUR 80. These increases reflect a continued strategic shift toward premium longer duration packages. They are now chosen by more than half of our customers. This shift partly affected an 11% decline in the number of listed ads. The market is hot and properties do sell faster. Concurrently, active ads declined by 6%. Sequentially, transactions required fewer listing extensions that are part of this listed ads metric. From a market perspective, activities strengthened across the region. This momentum was supported by lower interest rates and improving macro environment. Total transaction volumes increased by 5% over the past 12 months. Average apartment prices in both the capital cities also rose by 5%. Lithuania was the main driver of this regional activity. Residential transactions here surged by 12%. This surge was partly due to anticipatory spending ahead of changes to the national pension system, as in April, individuals were allowed to redeem part of their pension savings freely. Our market leadership remains as strong as ever. KV and C24 combined had a 16 times lead against the number two in Estonia, while in Lithuania, Aruodas leads the next competitor by a record 62 times that. Our automotive business delivered a resilient performance. Revenue remained flat at EUR 31.5 million. While total growth was muted, this headline figure masks a clear divergence between B2C and C2C segments. In the B2C segment, the average number of dealers declined slightly by 2% from record levels to 3,600 dealers. The decrease was primarily driven by weakened market conditions in Estonia, which accounts for now slightly more than a quarter of our auto business line. Conversely, B2C ARPU increased by 13%. This growth was driven by price and packaging changes implementing in Lithuania during the autumn of 2024 and 2025. We strategically postponed B2C pricing adjustment in Estonia to support our customers during a challenging period. However, the package update was introduced there in May 2026 and is already in place. The C2C segment faced volume headwinds during the period. Listed ads declined by 25%, active ads similarly by 26%. Despite this inventory pressure, yields improved substantially. Revenue per listed ad rose to 22% to EUR 41. These gains were driven by our April 2025 and March 2026 price changes. Yield growth was supported by an increased consumer preference for premium longer duration listing packages that we intend to upsell that also include our car history check service, adding to an overall marketplace transparency. Overall performance was impacted by two primary external factors. First, the Estonian car tax created a tough year-over-year comparable due to the transaction surge prior to this introduction. The transaction in the Estonian market dropped by 43% year-over-year. Second, the region experienced its coldest and longest winter in 30 years. The severe weather disrupted typical C2C activities during January and February. We provide more detailed monthly charts to illustrate both of these effects in the appendices of this presentation. As a result of these factors, combined car transactions across both markets declined by 11%. Meanwhile, the average car price continues to grow at a moderately at 2%. Despite these challenges, we firmly maintain our leading market positions. Autoplius holds a five times lead over its nearest competitor, while Auto24 holds 28 times lead in their respective markets. Looking forward, it's encouraging to note that trading trends have improved since March 2026. Our jobs and services business line delivered strong growth. Revenue increased by 9% to reach EUR 17.4 million. Growth was closely mirrored in both B2C segment jobs and C2C segment services revenue streams. In the B2C segment, jobs ARPU increased by 8% to EUR 496. This expansion was supported by targeted price changes. The total number of active employers grew by 1%. This increase reflects our continued ability to successfully penetrate the long-tail customer segment. The C2C or services segment achieved a 12% increase in active listings. The momentum was driven by an expanding client base and robust user engagement. While overall volume was healthy, the yield per active ad in services declined slightly by 3% to EUR 26. This compression was primarily due to a shift in the mix of service providers on our platforms. Specifically, a high yield building service provider segment experienced a very high demand for them, reducing the need to advertise in this hot market, supported by a boom in real estate. The C2C service segment saw a 12% increase in active ads driven by a growing client base and strong engagement. While volume was healthy, the yield per active ad and services declines like Oh, sorry, I repeated myself. Underlying labor demand remains well supported by a resilient economy. The stability is reflected by strong average salary growth of 8%. Finally, CVbankas firmly maintains a five times leadership position over its nearest competitor. This established market share ensures we remain the primary destination for job seekers and recruiters in Lithuania. Our generalist business line, which serves as a defensive component of our portfolio, delivered revenue growth of 3% to reach EUR 13.6 million. We achieved a significant 23% yield improvement on Skelbiu, our largest generalist platform. Consequentially, revenue per listed ad increased to EUR 10. These gains were driven by strategic pricing changes of both value-added services and listing fees. An increased consumer uptake of premium packages also supported it. These adjustments offset a 13% decline in volume of paid listed ads. The largest share of revenue on Skelbiu originates from vertical categories such as autos, properties, services and jobs. Because of the structure, our own specialized vertical platforms act as its main competitors. Strategically, we're entirely comfortable with users shifting from general listings to our dedicated verticals. Our specialized platforms do provide a superior user experience and unlock higher monetization opportunities. Total inventory including paid and free remained highly resilient for the period. Active ads declined by a minor 2%, remaining very close to the last year record levels. Crucially, our active ad counts encompass both paid and free advertisements from customers. This blended approach ensures our platforms remain the primary destination for organic traffic. It also serves as a powerful competitive moat built on unique content. Our generalist portals firmly maintain market leadership across their respective regions. Skelbiu stands as the fifth most visited website in Lithuania. It currently holds a commanding 24 times lead over its nearest competitor. In the Estonian market, Osta maintained a clear two times Moving from KPIs to our product development, we continue to execute on our strategic aim of investing in fit-for-purpose technology. Our approach to AI focuses on practical tools that reduce user friction and enhance platform efficiency, ensuring our marketplaces remain the definitive starting point for the Baltic population. At CVbankas, the job seeker onboarding experience was significantly streamlined through the integration of AI-powered CV creation tools. Candidates can now upload existing documents to the platform. The system automatically parses and populates their profile, removing the friction of starting a job search. This feature has seen a rapid adoption across the user base. 51% of all new CVs are now generated using this method. As a reminder, CVbankas operates strictly as a closed ecosystem. Candidates maintain internal profiles on the platform rather than relying on external CV documents. The structure results in a highly organized database covering a significant portion of the labor market. Consequentially, this asset provides us with a highly defensible and future-proof data moat. We also meaningfully improved job search functionality on CVbankas through AI-powered synonym matching, so job seekers no longer need to know the exact wording of the specific role title they're seeking. The optimized search engine now actually automatically identifies and displays jobs with similar meanings. On Skelbiu, we launched AI-powered image moderation to enhance platform safety. The service automatically checks user uploaded images for prohibited content. Furthermore, it enabled our moderators to review and improve moderation parameters and patterns directly. On the automotive segment, we introduced AI-driven automation to the listing process on both Autoplius and Auto24. The system analyzes vehicle images, external technical data and user descriptions to automatically generate listing details. It also automatically populates key technical attributes of the vehicle. The automation reduces manual input for sellers, increases data accuracy, and improves search relevance. In real estate, KV.ee, we introduced new service packages specifically for real estate developers. This initiative marks the shift away from shared broker plans, improving monetization while offering more targeted marketing and analytical tools for them. The update also groups related listings under their prospective real estate developments. The structural change follows the path of Aruodas, where developer segment led revenue growth in the past couple of years. On Aruodas, we launched a new lead generation feature called Request a Viewing. The tool allows potential buyers to submit contact details and preferred viewing times directly through the platform. By removing the traditional barrier of a phone call, this feature increases total lead volume. Furthermore, it provides the marketplace with deeper insights into the user intent. Strategically, we are building a comprehensive data layer across our online marketplaces. This goal was furthered by our June 2026 acquisition of Cenu Banka business in Latvia. It is a leading Latvian real estate data and market analysis platform. Cenu Banka aggregates property transaction data from the registries, listing information, and market reports. It serves as a key business tool for brokers, appraisers, developers, and financial institutions to assess property values in Latvia. Following our acquisition of Untu in Lithuania last year, Cenu Banka strengthens our proprietary dataset. It provides the technical foundation for advanced market intelligence features across our footprint, and finally, it provides a structured transactional data required to develop agent-based interfaces in the future. Thank you, and I am handing back to Justinas to guide you through the outlook. Thank you, Artūras. The Baltic economies have experienced remarkable growth over the past three decades, driven by strong export, healthy labor markets, increasing productivity, and a vibrant technology sector. The region also have benefited from a strong public finance, solid credit profile, and steadily rising purchasing power. These fundamentals continue to create attractive opportunities for both our customers and BCG. Looking ahead, we remain optimistic about the economic outlook. In particular, Lithuania, our largest market, where over 70% of the revenue is generated, continues to be one of the strongest performing economies in European Union, providing a solid foundation for our future growth. The group expects revenue growth of around 10% in 2027, with growth anticipated to be slower in the first half and faster in the second half of the year. Real estate, auto, and jobs are expected to be primary growth contributors, while generalist is expected to remain broadly flat. Revenue growth outlook reflects confidence in our product pipeline and pricing and packaging changes, but cautious on the inventory trend. We expect the full year margin to be in line with previous medium-term guidance of mid-70s. Thank you for the listening, and now we are open for the questions. Who is first? Tom. Thanks very much. Alastair Reid from Investec. Three from me. Firstly, could you talk a little bit more about some of your assumptions for the guidance? Particularly in the auto segment, obviously, some easier comps given the Estonian tax situation and also the weather, how much the kind of, if that's a term, super normal growth that you might see there contributing to the guidance for this year. Secondly, could you just touch a bit more on competition, in both, I guess, Lithuanian autos and also in generalist with Vinted and the like. How do you think about marketing spends potentially, going forward? Lastly, just on data products, how are you thinking in terms of latest launches and rollout, about how you manage the pace of that in the context of any dilutive effect on margins? Thank you. All right. I will speak about the guidance and competition, and Arturas can cover the data question. On the guidance, we feel confident in what's within our own control. This is our pricing and then packaging. We already implemented the C2C pricing in spring, and we scheduled to implement the B2C pricing in autumn. We feel that underlying markets, especially in real estate, but also increasingly in automotive and also in jobs, is well supportive for the pricing events. We will target yield expansion year in line with our previous practices. We have high expectations on the pricing events. That's why we are planning the second half growth to be higher than the first half, because most of this B2C pricing event will contribute to the second half. Where we feel more cautious are on the inventory. On the inventory, we need to speak separately automotive, real estate. In automotive, we have two different directions. In Estonia, the recovery continues, and there we have a positive inventory growth. So far, automotive business in Estonia recovered probably 70%-80% of the expected recovery level. If we compare the number of transactions to a year ago, this number is around 40% month-over-month, but still around 30% below to two years ago. We don't expect that to recover fully to 100%, because we think that part of this market will not recover, especially cheap cars. Our expectation is that it should reach around 70%, 85%-90% of the previous market. In Estonia market, we still have around 15 percentage points to go in terms of the recovery. In Lithuania, the dynamics is different. Lithuania and automotive markets performing very well. Last year in terms of the transactions, it grew 8%. It's a big increase annually. In Lithuania, we have inventory headwinds because Lithuanian economy is doing well, purchasing power is increasing, the time to sell a car is decreasing. That's resulting in the inventory headwinds. As explained earlier, this is a good timing, good moment for the pricing events which are scheduled in autumn. In real estate, real estate market is doing very well, especially Lithuania, but also Latvia, Estonia. In Lithuania, we had a record number of transactions last year. This year we expect even have a higher number. In such a hot market, naturally, there's a headwind in terms of inventory because the transactions happens very quickly. Also we implemented in C2C pricing changes, and we significantly increased the penetration of the premium, most expensive package from roughly 20%-30% to half of the all choices. This also leads to a lower number of extensions. That's why we are expecting the headwind in terms of the inventory, but still a very positive environment for the B2C pricing event coming in autumn. The jobs market is continuing to do well. This year we expect in Lithuania the salary growth around 8% average salary growth. It's a good environment for the labor market. The pricing changes are happening also in autumn here, but it's being implemented gradually month-over-month over the next 12 months. We are feeling optimistic and confident in all the three verticals, especially taking into account the pricing events coming in autumn. Where we have a cautiousness is in inventory. That explains our guidance. On the competition part, Artūras, would you like to cover the Autoplius, Autogidas dynamics? Or I can start, Maybe you can give. I can. Autoplius has currently a five times lead compared to Autogidas. Historically, that's one of the highest lead we have ever had. When we IPO-ed, our lead was three times, and 10 years ago, our lead was less than two times. The highest lead we had ever was six times a year ago. During the last year, Autogidas was much more active in marketing, including the TV advertising, and well, arithmetically it reduced our lead from six to five times. We are not too concerned on that because it does not impact our business, our fundamentals and considering that Autogidas is owned by the local private equity, we also think that this increased marketing spend here will not continue forever. Would you like that? Probably talking more about the general business platforms as the competition issue was back there. We're still probably repeating ourselves that the segments that are competitive, the home goods and oriented to consumers makes up a small percentage of Skelbiu overall revenue. What we're happy with is that we are maintaining the content on the platform that we have, which is the strategic aim and actually positioned as well. The traffic numbers are healthy. We're not losing anything and actually gaining in that sense. There is some natural, let's say, limitations in the consumer segment on these smaller segments in terms of pricing. However, it's never where our key revenue drivers. On data and data product. On data and AI-related products, we're following the pathway which is client needs based primarily. AI may be as a means to get there rather than of the goal itself, but that's how we view it. We're strengthening this data layer, which happened before in Autos with the car history and finally our plan data pool. We're progressing the same way in properties with Untu in Lithuania and Cenu Banka in Latvia and overall viewing slate. We're happy with the tech stack we have. We don't see it as a limitation. There's incremental improvements that are required, but it's always been the case. Also the team setup seems good in terms of the know-how and the qualifications they have. No major changes or not really much changes in the future that we would foresee apart from incremental improvements. We aim to make this knowledge our competence, most likely we'll not rely a lot on third-party providers. I'm not talking here about the LLMs, but other service providers to fill the gaps. On the cost side, we see that in a very near term these costs will reach probably about EUR 1 million per year, and majority of that are the people costs, of which the majority are already baked in, meaning that we already have that team in place that makes up the cost. There is naturally some probably token cost involved into that, but we are designing everything this way that it doesn't blow our token budget or anything like that in any meaningful way, unless there's direct and very clear ROI problem. I wanted to just a few words also on data to expand. We feel that the data layer is really creating a strategic advantage of our platforms. To give you example, the car history report we developed one and a half year ago. 30% of all the listings in Autoplius have the car history report. That's double the amount compared to one year ago. It's really creating our competitive edge and competitive advantage and it's very hard to copy, to replicate, and that's really a defensive mode for us. Same happening and same strategy we have for the real estate, where we invested in Untu last year. This year we acquired the Cenu Banka. We feel that this is kind of a right strategy to go and it will improve our marketplace. On the cost sides about the data products, we also build those to be profitable. Probably not as high profitability as in marketplace products, but still probably 50% plus margin on the data products we sell. Maybe before Kevin, most reasons in bank acquisitions, it's the small business, it's not that money burning is a profitability business. Will, your word, second. Hi, it's Will Packer from BNP Paribas. A couple from me. Coming back on the outlook for the year, one thing that stands out is that you push C2C yield monetization by over 20% in the year gone, perhaps understandable in the context of some of the inventory headwinds. Should we start to worry about the sustainability of that kind of increase? There's some sort of cautionary tales from across your European peers about pushing yield too hard and it having ramifications. Just how you think about that question. Secondly, could you help us think through what a realistic number for the buyback is this year? Is it a similar quantum to last year? Is it double? This is quite a long statement, I have kind of no idea what buyback number to assume. Just some color there. Lastly, the guidance on generalists sort of stands out for being quite weak, no growth. Could you just remind us what factors have impacted growth the year ahead and should they abate from FY 2028? Thank you. Maybe I'll start about yields. We'll answer the share buybacks and then probably Artūras can cover the generalist. On the yields, yes, the yields for C2C grew around 20% last year. Even though kind of percentage wise it might look high, basically, it was like adding some, I don't know, five years or 10 years to the listing. When you're transacting such an expensive item as automotive or real estate, this really matters in the end. I think that whenever we think about the yields in C2C and the possible drop off rates. We think that we are here kind of looking more for working with the time because the price institute on the digital products are declining over the time and people are more and more eager to spend for and pay for the digital products. It's not the price itself what's the issue, but more like people's expectations or people's mentality. I think that every year it's positive for us because people are more and more comfortable paying for the digital products. The fees they pay are really marginal to the asset values. I could maybe a couple of comments. The yield growth, well, it's in probably the average of averages, so it masks a lot of details behind it. It doesn't mean that in every segment, in every micro segment, the change was like that. We apply value-based pricing, so we adjust for price sensitivity always in the, for example, a cheaper segment. We monitor drop-off rates which are intact after the changes. This average yield growth is very much affected by the package mix. It doesn't mean that all prices grew by 26%. It's that we optimized the pricing structure so that clients themselves chose to pay more, that improving to the sustainability of the company. That's definitely important to flag that the penetration of our premium, most expensive package increased, almost doubled from 20%-30% to half, this actually also impact the yield growth. Lina, would you like to cover buybacks? Yes. The statement about capital allocation in the result statement is basically, let's say, two major messages. One is accelerated buyback, and the other is moving to dividends growing in line with adjusted net income, to have the flexibility to allocate capital based on how we see most value. To answer simply, we don't have a target level of debt, target level of leverage. We don't set a mechanical level as such. The pace and the scale of buybacks will depend on the market situation, also additional funding, whether and how much we can get alternative users of capital as well. Currently in the end of May, we asked shareholders for 10% authority to buy back BCG's issued share capital. At the AGM, we intend to ask for 15% for the next year. The board is very much supportive of the share buybacks in accelerated way. Based on the market conditions and all the rest of that I already listed, we'll see where we get. The last one. Maybe just to add that also one of very important for us is to keep the flexibility and also prudent leverage. We'll be watching that as well. Maybe just help us accelerating the buyback versus what base, H2, full year, three months, nine months, one month? Not accelerating, just to clarify, not accelerating from this standpoint, but we accelerated already in 2026. Just to continue accelerated share buybacks, because currently we're in the market buying back based on the statutory limits. This is already executed. The last one was on the generalist competition. Just talking about the competition between our own ecosystem. The setup is, as mentioned, is the way that generalist is sort of a moat and a feeder as of course of customers to the vertical platforms which are better monetized. The synergies works well in services, jobs, autos, and real estate. We're comfortable generally with clients moving to the more expensive platforms more available. Probably the last thing on generalist to mention that also generalists also compete in categories, let's say clothes categories with Vinted. We are also addressing this issue. Currently, we are in the final stage of developing the buy now functionality on Skelbiu. That should strengthen the positions. Jess, I saw that you were Hi. Thank you. Jess Pok from Peel Hunt. I've just got a couple, please. The first one on, you've given lots of color on the different verticals, but when we think about the overall numbers outside of generalists, which segments or verticals can we think about in terms of higher growth than the group guidance versus lower? Second one is just on costs. If you look at the costs last year, one of the biggest drivers is added headcount. Is there anything baked in for this year that we should think about? What kind of growth rates we should think about for the overall cost, and is there anything we should factor in? Just the final one, just in terms of what you've just said about generalist. When you look at generalists, you compete also with the likes of Vinted or some of the others. To my understanding, you only charge on the high value items. Are there any initiatives to grow in terms of to support the growth and actually could you actually charge for some of the items which you don't charge for right now? I will answer about the verticals. Lina will cover the costs and about the generalists that Artūras can cover. On the verticals, we think that the real estate will be a growth champion again this year because of very supportive underlying market and then the pricing actions we are taking, we took and we're going to take in the autumn. Also, we are optimistic on jobs because jobs have accelerated last year from 7% in H1 to 11% in H2. The market is also very supportive because this year the average salary predicted to grow 8% again. The economy is doing well. The labor market looks also very supportive for the job portal to grow. Automotive is also in a good position to grow, especially taking into account the lower comparables The recovery of the automotive market in Estonia. Kind of all the three verticals, but probably real estate should stand out. On the costs? On the costs, reported the operating expense fluctuate in the recent years because of PSP mainly, which is performance driven. It is also prudent to look at the cost before this performance share cost line. This year the cost was EUR 0.3 million, the cost is expected to increase next year just to normalize in line with normalizing the results. If excluding the PSP costs, operating cost line is expected to grow in line with historic numbers and roughly in line with revenue. Regarding the generalist, maybe a bit more flavor of how the pricing works on Skelbiu. We monetize the vertical categories for the three that service the jobs, autos, and property. That is one thing. For the remaining categories, we monetize business customers, including the semi-professional business customer who are selling something as a means to do business rather than their own things. It does not matter on the value, it is more this type of structure. In order to reinitiate the growth in this generalist segment, however, we are well progressing on the transactional buy now functionality that should go live next year, and it would serve as a nice addition on the current listing revenue we have rather than replacing it. Just this year. It is already signed this year, yes. Andrew. Hey, guys. It's Andrew here from Barclays. I've got three, if that's okay. First one's coming back on AI, sorry, and to, I guess, get a bit more context in terms of how you're thinking about new products into next year, and I guess particularly areas and things like conversational search tools for your dealers or agents. Some of the things that your peers are working on would be helpful to understand where you guys are at on those. Second one is to clarify where you're at on B2C pricing in Estonia autos. Did you say in the prepared remarks that you'd put something through in May? Apologies if I misunderstood. That would be helpful to understand what went through and then how it feeds into your thinking in the autumn and how much tolerance there is for pricing with dealers in Estonia. Third question is on M&A. I guess kind of curious that you've chosen to do a small deal in Latvia, which maybe hasn't been such a focus in the past. How are you kind of thinking about M&A more broadly and also kind of views on the Latvian market within that? Thanks. I'd like to start with the AI related initiatives. Repeating, let's say we approach the question from the client needs based way. We're just seeking for the places where there is friction and how AI can help solve it. Bits there and there already introduced, that one of the big projects we're working on and also set to go in this year already started, is there's many more conversational AI assisted, AI search, you name it, in many different ways. It's going to be the focus to get launched the next year, and we're progressing there well. Sort of we're set up the data processing pipelines so we can basically search not only by what's provided by the seller, but also rely what's visible in the photos, what's visible from the third party data sources we also have from our data platforms, and combine that to deliver the better results for the customer. The seeking is to firstly make this available within our systems and if the situation changes somehow, we don't see right now from the Gen AI platforms themselves. Let's say then the absolute majority of work is having these products in place rather than connecting them. Artūras Saur the key guy in AI strategies. He's a very good person to talk about it. Mainly also like a general thinking, let's say about the user experience and about the conversational search. Currently we are in the testing mode in real estate. We are not rushing, we are not kind of pushing it to launch as quickly as possible. For us, it's important that it functions well and the users are not disappointed with it. We probably will make the final testing, only then we will launch that. Also the thinking is that the current solutions like filter-based search, it just does the job very well. We don't have very high expectations that once after launching the conversational search that suddenly everyone will start using it massively. It's a spectrum. Basically, you have filter-based search on one end and full chat interface on the other. We're pretty sure, and the evidence from the initiatives at Peel shows that fully conversational within chat experience is just not what works for customers, either on the platform or either in the LLM tool. However, the filter-based search naturally has some improvements to be made to follow the blind spots. We're setting to take best of both worlds, actually try to improve what's working rather than recreate it. On the B2C in Estonia, we delayed the pricing event a year ago. Not a year ago, in autumn, because it was like a peak of the really the most difficult period for the dealers, we did implement it in May this year. The scope of the pricing event was quite minor this time, because we still see that the dealers are price sensitive and they're emerging from this crisis, but they are still thinking how not to increase their expenditure too much. It will have maybe less impact on the revenue growth for Estonia. Estonia overall is recovering well. Since January, it's growing double digit and we're happy with the progress. On the M&A part, I think that there might be some other add-ons, let's say like the one we had in Latvia. We think that actually with especially data products, we are strengthening our competitive mode and when we do these acquisitions, we always think, can we build internally? How long it will take and how much it would cost? Or is there existing tool which we can plug in easily? Far the last few acquisitions which we did, Untu and Cenu Banka, which translates into price bank of properties. In our thinking where it was a cheaper and technically so much quicker to acquire a business and to plug in rather than to build from scratch. Just a reminder, in car history report business, we build it from scratch. In fact, Artūras did it, led the project. Justinas, can I just clarify on B2C autos in Estonia, are you still planning to do an increase this autumn as well, or was that it in May and now we should not be expecting anything to autumn 2027? That would be to close the pricing events if we were to implement in autumn. No plans for additional changes. Okay. Nothing September 2025, small May 2026, nothing September, October, September, I mean, think through to next year. Yeah. In autos Estonia. In Lithuania, autos is scheduled pricing event. Sure. Okay, thanks. Marcus? Yeah. Hi, Marcus Stewart, JP Morgan. Can we actually follow up on Andrew's question on the AI topic? Obviously we had now nine months of discussions around this topic. It seems also what you said today, that the focus is more to be better in-house, but to really bet on in-house solutions on your own tech team. You highlighted sort of like the traditional way works pretty well. Yeah, obviously it's going to get improved, but in a nutshell, doesn't need much. I sit here and I see others buying off-the-shelf solutions from Anthropic, from OpenAI. I mean, these are obviously big words and I'm just sitting here and really struggling to understand what is the difference. Is the difference that you say, "Okay, we are in a really niche markets, our market shares are proportionately much higher and therefore we can afford, plus we have a very strong tech team." What is sort of the argument really to play it a bit differently? The second question is then on costs again. They said on the cost base broadly flat, obviously we have the guidance, but what should we think about personal cost, including inflation? You've heard for the market it's what, around 8% or so. I bet it's maybe at that level for you as well in terms of inflation and your hiring as well. So what is sort of like a realistic number in terms of personal costs going up? Artūras. Yeah, I can start then. Regarding the bit, probably a bit of clarification needed on buying the third party solution here. We're not building our LLMs or anything like that and replacing what they can offer with the tools. We are reusing quite substantially their solutions in our own process. It's just that there's no external specialist or external third party company doing it for us. For example, were we to develop the agent, we want to have the know-how, this is for in the upcoming years to have it within the team rather than relying on the service provider. I wouldn't say there is, in terms of partnership with the LLMs, I wouldn't say that we're doing something differently in this sense. No. Is it if, for example, the question then comes because what we hear, you seem to be pretty relaxed about open costs because your infrastructure allows it, that you have to provide very sophisticated search? Better ways to make it faster by just accessing your data very, very quickly. Therefore you don't have this token cost problem. Yeah by the sounds of it. That's sort of where I'm trying to get. Mm-hmm. In the context of the marketplace, we see that the core token usage is sort of once per listing to process it, and then to prepare it to be accessed later. It's more or less fixed thing that we can control. There's just different ways how you use the tokens during the search. We see pathways that are actually token cautious. If we talk about the search, because it's the most adopted thing and has probably the most potential, let's say, risk to go. At the same time, there's the technology, well, it's hard to predict which way it's going to go, but we see let's say opportunities of these LLM capabilities actually coming to the user devices as well as introduced in Google and Apple events in the past couple of months, where I think if some tokens you can pick up data cost yourself, you can use some of the, let's say, user devices. It's just one of the possibilities there, but there are numerous methods to put that in play. Also, I would add, I think there is a backend solutions, let's say, and I think that we have progressed quite well here. Just an example, let's say a CV creation with AI help. You just upload the PDF and we create a CV. Moderation, many other areas. I think that we are quite advanced, and we are not lagging behind. On the other side, the front-end facing solutions, let's say a conversational search. I think at the moment it still feels overstated or in fact, when we speak to the peers who have already launched those, they are not working so well. The usage of those are very tiny and we kind of initially expect that suddenly people will start looking for apartment with bright living room. In fact they just type, "I want an apartment in center," which is perfectly searched through the filters. Probably in this context maybe we're slightly behind, but there are no good working solutions yet. We see it as an advantage because we might see what others are doing and to learn from those. By the way, once we will launch this conversational search, we'll be quite advanced because we'll already have ability to look into the pictures, to understand those, and it will be already quite enhanced. On the cost base and personal costs. Lina, would you like to cover? Maybe slightly repetitive, but in general the people cost is the key part of our costs. All the developments are done in-house by the team. Also again, it's important to look at the costs also separately. PSP costs separately and then salaries separately. Again, if PSP costs are expected to normalize, which is going to be in terms of percentage growth higher, the people cost, the salary cost, the total other part of the people cost is expected to grow in line with historic trends. Just slightly, the growth is slowing down a little bit because of the wage inflation growth moderating a little bit as close to 8% is expected for this ongoing year in terms of wage inflation in the Baltics. We see that happening. This is what brings the cost a little bit down, but to reiterate, it's a key part of the cost and expected to continue going in routines looking without the PSP costs. Maybe just also to add quite a big part of our team is IT team, historically the IT salaries used to grow much quicker even than the market average. It was not unusual to see the IT salaries grow 15% annually. I think now the pressure for IT personnel, for developers has been reduced. Thanks. Giles Thorne, from Jefferies. Justinas, what are you looking for from Artūras as COO that you weren't getting from Simonas? Artūras, we're going to talk about you like you're not here. With Simonas going, who's going to be the GM of Skelbiu now? We have a GM for Skelbiu already for two years. It is a different person. It is not with us. Simonas was one of the first employees in the company and definitely contributed a lot to the success. It is very sad that he is leaving. Artūras himself, he is an IT entrepreneur. 15 years ago, we acquired the business from him, which he developed, also programmed, sold, expanded, and multi-skilled. Since then, Artūras, he was managing Skelbiu for a year, then Autoplius for 10 years, Aruodas for a few years, and then working as a development director, especially leading IT topics. I think that currently, his new responsibility definitely will enhance and support our AI organizational transformation. It will definitely become a much higher priority, and I think that because he was already leading both for more than a year or almost two years. Having this entrepreneurship skills, I think he will be just an excellent person, the best person to replace Simonas. Looking historically, he went through all the biggest, most important business divisions. He knows those intimately well, and that was part of our succession planning because we already kind of identified that Artūras five years ago, probably that in case of Simonas leaving, Artūras is now. Just to follow up on Skelbiu, my mistake around Simonas. Transactional, why is it taking till next year? Not next year, this year. Okay, next financial year, but this calendar year. This No. No, no. When are you going to launch- Transactional Skelbiu. We are working on it already for half a year. It's on the final stages, probably to be launched within a month. For the rest of the summer. David Morgan Stanley. Just a quick one on the yield expansion ones. When I kind of elaborate on how much of that is from pricing, how much is different product, how much of that is it from maybe dominance, maybe in FY 2026? Also just as a general guide going forward, how should we view the mix between pricing components and products, et cetera? For the B2C customers, the biggest part would be pricing. Also added a very strong product update last autumn. We added car history reports and we added evaluation tools for real estate companies. While it's difficult to quantify exactly, we can say both, but maybe bigger part is price changes because last year already underlying market was doing very well. In C2C segment, probably again, two-thirds was the price, but one-third also came from the upsell of the premium package, which grew from 20%, 30% to 50%. Just adding a bit of flavor with the structure of how we're selling the products to our business customers are absolutely mainly bundles. It's not possible to buy any particular service off the shelf. You choose either good, better, best type of package. That's why it's a bit more difficult to pinpoint was it the price or was it actually the product in a sense. On the separately bought value-added services or prominent products, it's just worth noting that it's in single digits of our revenue, so in B2C. It's not what we rely on. There's not much, let's say, should the reordering happen in the AI age, it's not affecting a lot. Sean. Morning, everyone. Sean Kealy from Panmure Liberum. I've got a couple if that's okay. I guess first of all, you've seen this, I think it's fair to say that a lot of public market investors are very focused on AI as risk reward, et cetera. I'm interested in your take on how private market investors are thinking about the issue. I know you yourselves will look for opportunities, and I'm sure you're more on the pulse of how some of the private market operators are thinking than maybe some of the rest of us. Interested to get your take on that. Artūras, a couple for you. Is it possible to help us disaggregate the impact of selling longer duration premium products within real estate from the ARPU increases? I just want to get a sense for how much of that uplift in yields has been driven by shift in product mix versus price. You referenced that new build has been a bit weaker in Lithuanian real estate than the broker market, and just in terms of advertising less. Are you able to give us any color on if there's any mix shifts there? An apologies for this, another couple if that's okay. Just on tax and the Estonian automotive. You've got a EUR 6 million additional tax charge this year, should you distribute profits. How should we think about tax rate going forward? Is it fair to assume that the Estonian business' margin is equal with the group rates, are there any offsets, et cetera? Just thinking about not necessarily this year, but other outer years. Finally, just given the profiling on Estonian B2C in automotive, can you just remind us how big you're expecting Estonian automotive to be as a percentage of automotive this year? Apologies for quite so many. We are only three people and have five questions. Okay. Probably I can start with private market perceptions about the marketplaces. I think that, well, it's also quite obvious from our capital allocation policy. We think that public markets overstate the AI risk and AI impact and overreact. This is why we're accelerating our share buybacks, and this is not happening in private markets. I think private markets are much more confident and usually, especially when the private equity firms invest in the marketplace, they do so much more research. Probably I would dare to say that private equity firms are even more knowledgeable when we are investments and their opinion less dependent on or they are less overreacting. On the impact from the longer duration in real estate and pricing, Artūras explained it's difficult to say exactly, but probably two-thirds of pricing, one-third duration. That would be you know. Just to understanding pretty much the absolute majority of the direct price increases were less than the yield growth. What basically happened is shift from the middle package to the highest one, although the highest price didn't change that much. It depends on platform by platform, but it's the strategy that in the previous years, probably four, five years ago, successfully worked in Auto. In property we saw now quite equal distribution between short and long packages and we're doing the same playbook, moving to the longest ones, making them very attractive sort of popcorn pricing type of thing. Also it's a better user experience. Extension is not something you're willing to burn on. It's sort of under delivery of what you promised. There was a question regarding builders and brokers. Probably a bit more connection to the understanding in this case. Actually, over the past year, the builder segment in Lithuania was performing very well. There is lots of inventory. At the same time with lots of demand, so there is off market and it is actually considering this pension reform the window. It is not that long, it is not going to be forever. Everybody is trying to sell at the same time. We actually did have revenue increase from builders in both terms of advertising or value-added services and in terms of packages. That is actually worked pretty well and it has been for three years already a growth driver in the whole Lithuanian B2C segment and the builder packages are what we are improving in Estonia right now. Probably that would continue to be next year because the builders also have very deep pockets and when there are new developments happening, we need to invest more into marketing. We have high expectations for that segment. Lina, would you like to cover it? Yes, of course. Actually answering to your question, I think the good reference is the revenue split by country. Currently we generate 73% of revenue from Lithuania, 25% from Estonia, and 2% from Latvia. Given the margins are quite broadly similar, actually this, the revenue split could be used as the reference point. Could you please repeat the question about Estonia automotive B2C? What was the question there? Yeah. I think you've said that you did a small B2C pricing round in May. There won't be one this autumn. Just when we're thinking about trying to reflect that through the automotive division, can you remind us how big the current Estonian automotive business is as a percentage of the mix? 25% from the total automotive. Perfect. Thank you. Any other questions? We might have some conference call questions. Adam, over to you, please. Thank you. If you'd like to ask a question via the telephone today, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad now. Final call for phone questions, star one. Nothing my side, back to you. Cool. Thank you once again for coming. We feel really very privileged every time when we come to London in July to have such good weather. Also Wimbledon and now it's a soccer tournament, thank you and- Football. Everyone.