Hi. Good morning, everyone. I think we are ready to start. First of all, as usual, I am joined by Mike Roberts, our Chief Operating Officer, and Mike is going to cover our operational performance. Also, John Messenger, our Investor Relations Director, and John will update you with regard to our financial performance. Then I will update you in terms of the market, current trading, and synergies, and just set out how I feel that we are well-positioned for the future. Many of you will be aware that Dean Banks, our incoming Chief Executive, has joined us this morning, and also Rebecca Napier, our CFO, and Rebecca started with us at the beginning of August. Welcome to Dean and Rebecca. I would just like to take you through some of our key messages. The market conditions have clearly been challenging. I think we have all seen that play out, particularly since the end of February. Barratt Redrow has delivered a very solid performance over the year, both operationally and financially. I think that performance reflects the strength of our brands, but it also reflects our strategy and the sheer hard work and determination of our teams and our supply chain. The customer is understandably subdued, so we have made tactical decisions to drive sales and proactively manage our cost base so that overall performance has been in line with expectations. The early signs from our Redrow dual and triple-branded sites are encouraging, reinforcing our conviction regarding the multi-branded approach. Our balance sheet remains robust, facilitating an enhanced capital return, which I will talk about shortly. Our focus is now on disciplined execution to deliver the potential we have created through the combination with Redrow and navigate the market as it evolves in FY 2027. Here are some of the operational highlights from the year. First, the integration of Redrow is now complete. We are already seeing the benefits of that reflected in our performance with the good progress on cost synergies and the future benefits from revenue synergy outlets. We have maintained a strong landbank position with 5.2 years of supply. This is a key advantage. This has enabled us to tactically reduce land investment given the increased market uncertainty, but without impacting our near-term growth plans. We completed 17,667 homes, which was towards the top end of our September 2025 guidance range. I would also like to, as ever, highlight some of our externally accredited awards in the period. Our unique record with 17 years as a five-star house builder and 122 NHBC Pride in the Job awards, which is testament to the dedication of our teams across the business, as well as the quality of the training that we provide them and the customer-first culture we maintain across the group. The quality is also reflected in our Trustpilot scores given by our customers, which award all three of our brands the highest rating of excellent. John is going to cover our financial performance in more detail, but just to pull out a few highlights. The adjusted PBT was lower than last year at GBP 572.8 million due to higher net interest costs and lower joint venture profits. Return on capital employed was lower than last year at 9.2%. All of the GBP 100 million cost synergy target was confirmed in the second half with a GBP 73 million benefit in the profit and loss in FY 2026. Finally, we finished the year with a solid net surplus position of GBP 61.4 million, which is net cash adjusted for line creditors. This compares to a net indebtedness position of GBP 37 million last year. Before I hand over to John, I would like to talk you through our capital allocation framework. We have three clear priorities: maintaining a strong balance sheet, investing in our business, and delivering sustainable returns to shareholders. The board regularly reviews the balance between these to ensure that we are well-placed to deliver our strategy. When we look at our balance sheet, we consider not just the year-end position, but the seasonal nature of our business, where average net cash is typically much lower than the year end. We target minimal year-end net indebtedness, which takes account of net cash and line creditors. We are mindful of our building safety obligations, which represents a further significant liability for the business. We also recognize that continuing to invest in the business is critical. That is why leveraging our multi-brand opportunities, which enables us to grow outlet numbers but requires less incremental capital investment, is an important focus for us, and we continue to be very selective on land opportunities. Our updated shareholder return program is also set out here, and I will now take you through the background to that. When it comes to shareholder returns, we have a strong track record of evolving our position, reflecting the macro environment and the views of our shareholders. Over the last 10 years, we have returned nearly GBP 3.5 billion to shareholders, with GBP 1 billion returned through share buyback or special dividends. As we set out in July, with our shares trading at a significant discount to tangible net asset value, we saw an opportunity to increase shareholder returns with a larger buyback. As a result, except for a GBP 0.01 nominal dividend, our ordinary distribution, which is equivalent to 50% of adjusted net earnings, will now be delivered by way of a share buyback, starting with the FY 2026 final distribution. This will be supplemented by an additional buyback of at least GBP 100 million. For FY 2027, the total capital return will be GBP 400 million, with GBP 386 million delivered through a share buyback. I am going to pause there and hand over to Mike, who is going to take you through the operational performance. Thanks, David, and good morning, everyone. Today, as David said, I will be taking you through our operational performance for the year. Starting here with the private reservation mix on slide nine. As you can see, 88% of our private reservations were generated by individual home buyers, with 12% coming from PRS and other multi-unit sales. Our first-time buyer share of reservations remained stable at 30%, and home movers, including those choosing to use our part exchange service, accounted to 48% of reservations, marginally lower than 50% in FY 2025. As you remember from the half year, we have seen a significant increase in the customers using part exchange at 21% of all non-affordable reservations in FY 2026, up 14% in the prior year. This partially reflected a slower market ahead of the November budget, when part exchange provided customers with greater certainty at a time when buyers had real concerns over conveyancing chains. We have also introduced our part exchange capabilities into Redrow in the year. Part exchange has been a highly effective sales tool and one we have used for 55 years. Importantly, it is an alternative, not an additional incentive, and our part exchange stock is very well managed. Of the GBP 228 million value of part exchange properties held on the balance sheet at year-end, all but GBP 22 million have now been sold on. PRS and other multi-unit sales were a similar level to last year. This follows a strengthening the sector of the market in the second half. Finally, the percentage of customers relying on a mortgage remained unchanged at 75%. Turning to completions. We delivered 17,667 homes, an increase of 5% on the performance in FY 2025. Private completions were flat, but affordable completions were up 27%, reflecting the timing of delivery. Overall, they accounted for 22% of the total wholly owned completions. We expect affordable volumes will return to our more normal levels of around 20% of completions in FY 2027. PRS completions were 20% ahead, reflecting the order book strength entering into the year. Joint venture completions were 566, 5.2% ahead of last year. We anticipate this will increase slightly to around 600 units in the current year. In terms of pricing, the wholly owned average selling price was up 2.2% to GBP 351,700. More detail on that is provided in the appendix, but this increase was driven by a combination of product and geographic mix, with a slightly larger average unit size and a greater contribution from regions with higher average selling prices. Based on our matching plots analysis, the majority of our regions saw only minimal underlying price increases, all less than about 1%. Prices in our London division were notably down, consistent with the broader commentary on the London market. Our Southern division also experienced some deflation. Overall, we estimate the underlying selling price deflation was just under 1% for the year. Turning to sales performance on slide 11. The underlying private reservation rate was slightly ahead of the aggregated position in FY 2025 at 0.56 reservations per outlet per week. This good performance was supported by our targeted use of sales incentives to maintain sales momentum in what was a very uncertain macro environment. John will provide more of the details on this shortly. Customers also benefited from an improvement in mortgage product availability. We are seeing greater competition by mortgage lenders and an increase in higher loan-to-value mortgages, which have helped in what remains an affordability challenged market. PRS and other multi-unit sales had an improved second half, and our strong relationships with PRS providers such as Lloyds Living supported our good reservation rate overall. Across the year, we operated from an average of 405 sales outlets, very much in line with our plans and our guidance. The private forward order book at the end of June was lower than last year at 4,570, has provided a solid start to FY 2027. David will cover our view on future sales outlet evolution later in the presentation. Based on our revised average sales outlet guidance at 405 and the encouraging trading performance we have seen in the first 10 weeks of the year, we are confident with the guidance for total completions of between 17,500 and 17,900 in the current year. I wanted to give you a bit more flavor on how our home brands are distributed and how our newest multi-brand developments are performing. Here you can see that the multi-branded outlets account for 44% of the total at the end of the financial year. We are seeing more and more opportunities to create dual-branded combinations, and we now have three triple-branded developments. The trading performance from these has been really encouraging. Over the first 10 weeks of the year, the blended sales rate across our triple-branded developments has been in line with the underlying rate for the whole group. Each development is selling more than 1.5 homes per week, compared to around 0.5 prior to the triple branding. This performance reinforces our conviction in the strength of the multi-brand approach, which enables us to optimize land opportunities. Each development is unique, and maximizing value is driven by pricing in the location, the careful plotting of our homes by brand and house type to deliver value and choice for each customer, whilst maximizing our returns both around margin and return on capital. Of course, it is early days, and this is just a small sample. We have previously talked about potential reservation rates to moderate slightly with the addition of further brand outlets, but this has not been our experience to date. I wanted to say a few words on build cost inflation. This is a challenge for the whole industry and we have not been immune. As you would expect, we continue to see inflationary pressure on the more energy and oil dependent products, such as plastics. But even here, we have been able to negotiate some improvement where suppliers have held their price on the back of volume. Where required, we are tending to agree surcharges with suppliers, which will flex as energy costs move. Other materials worthy of note are timber, which is seeing above average inflation across both engineered and unengineered elements, and blocks and plasterboard, both of which are slightly above the overall average. Importantly, our size and scale are real benefits here, as are the strong relationships we have built up with suppliers over many years. We have guided to 3%-4% inflation for the year, and as you can see on the slide, this is weighted towards materials, which is the greater component of our costs. We do expect labor to be lower compared to given the spared capacity in the industry in a more subdued market, as well as subcontractors desire to lock in future workload. But we can only give guidance on what we are seeing today. Clearly, the macroeconomic backdrop is highly unpredictable, so we will continue to evolve our expectations. Finally, as you are aware, we are really proud of our industry leading credentials around design, build quality, and customer service. These continue to underpin our brands and contribute to our sales resilience in a more challenging market. As David said, we have achieved a five-star rating for customer service in the HBF Survey for the 17th consecutive year. Our site managers have secured an industry-leading total of 122 Pride in the Job awards this year. On that note, I will pass over to John for an update on the financials. Thank you. Thank you, Mike, and good morning, everyone. Today, I will take you through our FY 2026 performance and update on our land bank and on building safety. Here is the overview of our FY 2026 performance. We have set out the three profit measures, adjusted PBT before PPA impact, the adjusted PBT after, and then finally, the statutory reported pre-tax profit after adjusted items. Consistent with the approach adopted at the half year, both adjusted measures are now stated prior to the impact of the non-cash interest charges on legacy property provisions. We also show both the aggregated comparable, which includes Redrow in the 7.5 weeks prior to the acquisition on August 21st back in 2024, and the reported comparables. I will focus on our performance relative to the aggregated performance in FY 2025. I will now take you through the P&L on the next slide. Here on slide 17, we detail profitability and margin performance in more detail. There are several points to highlight. Firstly, the increase in home completions, coupled with an increase in our average selling price, increased revenues to more than GBP 6 billion. However, the adjusted gross margin was lower at 15.3%, giving an adjusted gross profit of GBP 926.6 million. There were three drivers behind the movement. First, we benefited from the growth in completion volumes and higher average selling prices, although we did experience softer underlying pricing, as Mike mentioned. Second, the targeted use of incentives with financial incentives impacting the top line and non-financial incentives such as customer upgrades impacting cost of sales, but both having a negative impact on the gross margin. Third, we experienced underlying build cost inflation across the year of 2% net of procurement synergies. Note, this was closer to 3% in the second half, and this effectively offset the usual benefit of second half completion volume gearing. Adjusted operating profit was slightly ahead at GBP 598.1 million. Revenue growth, the benefit of integration cost synergies, and business as usual cost discipline moderated the year-on-year margin impact to 60 basis points, giving an operating margin of 9.9%. Adjusted finance charges at GBP 31.5 million compared to finance income last year at GBP 4.9 million. This change encompassed lower cash balances, the utilization of our RCF for part of the year, and higher interest rates applied to new land creditors relative to the rates on those that were being settled in the year. Including JV income, PBT before the impact of PPA adjustments was the GBP 572.8 million David mentioned at the start. In summary, we saw good momentum on home completions, the cost synergy benefits of the Redrow integration, as well as our own cost reduction actions coming through to the bottom line. Looking now at the movements in our adjusted operating margin. Aggregated on a pre-PPA basis, this was 10.5% in FY 2025. In FY 2026, we then saw a benefit of 20 basis points due to the gearing of effective higher volume. The combination of softer pricing, underlying build cost inflation, and targeted use of additional non-financial incentives created a negative net impact of 200 basis points. Acquisition related cost synergies added 90 basis points and our business as usual cost reduction actions, including our recruitment freeze as well as reduced performance related pay and one-offs delivered a further 60 basis point benefit. The resulting operating margin before PPA impacts was 9.9% and 9.1% after PPA. The movement in our administrative expenses from GBP 398.5 million last year to the GBP 329.8 million is set out on this slide. You can see the various drivers, but I would highlight firstly the positive impact of acquisition related cost synergies at GBP 37 million there. Below target employee performance pay reduced expenses by GBP 15.3 million and business as usual cost savings mentioned earlier contributed another GBP 14.3 million. We then had GBP 17.3 million of one-off positive items, GBP 10.1 million related to the remeasurement of cost accruals and GBP 7.2 million reflecting a year-on-year decline in internal project activity where internal project teams redeployed on completing the Redrow integration and these internal resources have been deployed back into the operations in FY 2027. In the current year, we expect administrative expenses will move to approximately GBP 360 million, taking account of the absence of the one-off items, underlying cost inflation, residual synergy savings, and assuming a return to on target levels of performance pay. Now to look at our land bank. A slower pace of land acquisition has seen the duration of our owned and controlled land bank move down to 5.2 years at the year end. This remains a strong position and is very consistent with our plans to optimize our capital employed, as David will cover later, and will remain above our medium term target of 4.5 years. Our detailed consented plot to sales outlet ratio sat at 135 at the end of the year and we are looking to ensure our land bank is efficient with sales outlets sized to drive sales over a typical three to four year period. Finally, with 118 strategic land applications covering more than 31,000 plots submitted to local planning authorities, we expect to see significant conversions and drawdowns from our strategic land bank portfolio into our current land bank over the coming years. Now to look at our land bank gross margin and how that's moved over the six months since December. There are three moving parts to flag in terms of the movement. First, we've seen a + 50 basis point impact reflecting the plot mix traded out through completions in the second half of the year at a 14.5% gross margin after PPA impacts. Second, we have had a negative impact of 220 basis points from the flow through of softer pricing, build cost inflation, and incremental sales incentives. Thirdly, a 10 basis point improvement from the modest amount of land plots acquired in the half at a 23% gross margin. These plots were just over 2,800. In combination, the embedded gross margin ended the year 160 basis points lower at 17.3%, relative to the 18.9% reported at the end of December. Improving the embedded gross margin is a clear priority. With little movement on pricing, we have to focus on self-help, which David will come back to later. Turning to legacy building safety, where we have seen little change to the net provision position, but there are some moving parts to flag. Here tabled are the movements on the two portfolios where we recorded a net adjusted item charge of GBP 96.8 million there. In our building safety provision, we have taken a charge of GBP 105 million, covering cost inflation and scope provisions at two active developments. In our reinforced concrete frame provision, we saw a net release of GBP 8.2 million. This included, firstly, the release of a provision on several developments where further investigation concluded remediation works were not required, and an additional provision on one building where additional remediation works were identified. Completing the picture is the unwind of imputed non-cash interest of GBP 40.5 million and the provision utilization of GBP 153.8 million. We ended FY 2026 with a total provision of GBP 1.05 billion, and we expect to spend approximately GBP 300 million in FY 2027 and GBP 450 million in FY 2028 on our direct remediation related works, as well as payments to the Building Safety Fund. Now to cash flow. Here we set out the cash flow bridge and a few points to highlight. First, cash outflows included payments around tax and interest of GBP 84 million, outflows on trade receivables and payables totaling GBP 90 million, and the building safety expenditure, which you have seen already. Second, we saw the reversal of all of our first half construction WIP outflow. So a disciplined performance and an underlying improvement up and above the typical sales cycle and construction seasonality that you would expect from Barratt Redrow. Thirdly, our reduced investment in land unlocked GBP 328 million of cash. Fourth, we increased our investment in JVs at a net GBP 102 million. This encompassed our building investment in the MADE Partnership and our new JV with Places for People, at Gilston in East Hertfordshire. Finally, after the dividend payment of GBP 242 million and share buybacks of GBP 101 million, including taxes, the net movement in cash was broadly flat. We currently anticipate that FY 2027 year-end cash will be between GBP 400 million and GBP 500 million, subject, of course, to any changes in land activity and guidance on that as the year develops. Here is our usual balance sheet breakout. Just a couple of points on this one. You can see our gross land investment reduced by GBP 464 million. Then with land creditors GBP 98 million lower, our net land investment position reduced by GBP 366 million and stood at GBP 3.93 billion. Land creditors funded 15.3% of our land bank. This is below our target range of 20%-25%, and we expect this to remain the case over the coming year as we limit our investment in land. Longer term, it remains a clear intention to manage our land bank more efficiently, including land cost deferral using land creditors. But this will depend on the scale of land buying and the deferral terms available in the land market as we move forward. Finally, I am really pleased that we have been able to announce that we have amended and extended our revolving credit facility with our existing providers. We have increased the RCF from GBP 700 million to GBP 900 million. If you remember, Redrow's old facility of GBP 350 million was canceled at acquisition. We have also now extended this facility to July 2031, with two potential extensions subject to lender approval, which would take the facility through to July 2033. To summarize, our financial performance in the year has been resilient, and that is despite the macro uncertainties faced. Our balance sheet remains strong and the cost synergies from the Redrow acquisition are making a positive impact on performance. Turning to guidance, you will find a detailed slide in the appendices, but I thought it helpful to have the key points here. Finally, on the key movements around cash, up and above the seasonal cash flow movements in our housebuilding operations, we do expect to spend approximately GBP 300 million on legacy property remediation and GBP 340 million settling line creditors. We expect to finish the year with between GBP 400 million and GBP 500 million of net cash, subject to the land market and opportunities. Happy to take questions later, but I will now hand back to David. Thank you. Thanks, John, and thanks to Mike as well. I would like to start this section with an overview of the housing market. I think everyone recognizes that the fundamentals that underpin our market are strong. There is a desperate need for housing across all tenures on a nationwide basis. This should be driving a very active and efficient industry, creating value for all shareholders. However, this year, the macro backdrop has clearly been very challenging, with consumers cautious and interest rates at best expected to remain stable. Home buyers, particularly first-time buyers, face severe affordability challenges, and the industry remains constrained by an under-resourced and unresponsive planning system, combined with excessive red tape, regulation, and taxation. We do welcome the steps that the government has taken to improve the planning policy environment as a whole. In time, we believe that these reforms will enable the industry to operate more efficiently with shorter overall land banks and an ability to accelerate growth. But the pace of delivery so far on the ground has been frustratingly slow. On the demand side, we are doing what we can to support our customers. Mike and John have both touched on how we have deliberately stepped up our incentive levels in the face of increased hurdles for people who are taking out mortgages. We continue to tailor incentives, particularly for first-time buyers and also for key workers. While we believe that more decisive action from government is required to deliver a strong and sustained recovery in the market, this is not how we are planning or operating the business. In the current environment, proactively managing our business is critical. This means delivering cost efficiencies. On the slide, I've set out three key areas of focus. The first is overheads, and here, as you know, we've made good progress. Our administrative expenses for the year came in lower than our original guidance, and it represents a GBP 90 million saving compared to the stand-alone businesses back in FY 2024. We have also just completed a significant project to streamline our house types. The number of house types over the last few years has proliferated, as new policies at both a national and a regional level have required multiple variations of our core ranges, taking the total number of house types just for the Barratt and David Wilson brands to more than 500. This streamlining project will reduce Barratt and David Wilson to under 100 house types, all of which are Future Homes Standard compliant and deliver significant economies in terms of procurement and build time without materially reducing house price choice for customers. As Mike has already set out, we're also benefiting from our size and scale to generate efficiencies throughout our supply chain. Build cost inflation is a challenge for the whole industry, but scale is a clear advantage in purchasing, and our streamlined house type range will deliver benefits for our subcontractors through greater standardization and repeatability, and ultimately should benefit our build costs. Irrespective of today's challenges, these actions will drive plotting and build efficiency, ensuring our build operations are best placed to perform over the long term. Turning to capital employed, as you know, we have been disciplined in terms of our land investment. With just over 3,000 plots approved for purchases in FY 2026, this is net of nearly 5,000 plots which we canceled. We are guiding towards higher levels of approvals in the current year at between 6,000 and 8,000 plots, but only if we see sufficiently attractive opportunities. We have assembled a strong land bank, which gives us the flexibility to manage our investments in more challenging time. At the same time, we're continuing to evaluate our existing land bank for opportunities to rightsize our holdings, driving an improvement in capital employed. We've already made some targeted land sales in FY 2026, which will continue in FY 2027, with potentially some additional land swaps. Finally, we are leveraging opportunities we have across the portfolio to drive multi-branding. This enables us to open new outlets without investing so much capital, which John has already touched on. As we've set out on previous occasions, by working through developments quicker, we can improve our return on capital employed. To give a brief update on our synergy sales outlets, our target, as you know, was to open 45 incremental sales outlets following the Redrow acquisition. 12 of these were launched in FY 2026. A further 18 are due in FY 2027, and the balance of 15 will become active in FY 2028. Identifying opportunities for dual or triple branding is now business as usual for us. We can look at how larger developments can be optimized around both margin and speed of development to improve ROCE. Wrapping this into the broader position on outlets, on this slide you will see that we have held steady in FY 2026. We now anticipate that average outlets will be stable at approximately 405 again in FY 2027. When we last updated in July, we were expecting average outlets for FY 2027 to be around 415. Our divisional teams are still working hard to get these outlets open, but the pace of planning approvals has slowed. Looking forward, these sales outlets will be open in FY 2028, and we will benefit from a strong strategic land position with 118 planning applications pending. The next two years are primarily about using the land we already have, either under our ownership or under our control. To complete the picture on synergies, all GBP 100 million cost synergies were confirmed in the second half, and the cumulative profit and loss impact through to the end of FY 2026 was GBP 73 million, of which GBP 53 million was delivered through administrative expense savings. We would expect most of the outstanding synergies to be delivered in FY 2027, taking the annual profit and loss contribution to approximately GBP 95 million. In summary, the Redrow acquisition has more than delivered on the cost synergies identified at the time of the acquisition. The focus going forward will be on driving our business as usual discipline on costs to ensure that as the cycle evolves, our cost base is optimized around the market in which we operate. Looking at trading since the start of FY 2027, our net private reservation rate is strong given the market backdrop and has benefited from PRS and other multi-unit sales. The underlying private reservation rate was notably resilient. Year-to-date completions were behind last year, but FY 2026 did benefit from some completions delayed from FY 2025 that we outlined at the time. And encouragingly, our forward sales position is up 6%, giving us confidence in our guidance volume for FY 2027. But obviously, the market will remain sensitive to macro uncertainties, as we've talked about. Pulling this all together, we operate in a market with strong fundamentals. Housing is clearly cyclical, but we remain confident that Barratt Redrow is well placed to navigate the current market and capitalize on underlying demand. Fundamental to this are our three high quality and differentiated brands, providing the widest customer reach and allowing us to develop land more effectively and efficiently. Our customer focus has been established by our numerous third-party credentials over the long term. We are the reliable partner of choice across the private and public sector, allowing us to lead and innovate. And finally, we remain financially strong with a robust balance sheet, plenty of liquidity, and that is a key strength in this market, and it will underpin our current shareholder return program. To wrap up, as Barratt Redrow, we are stronger, more efficient, and an agile business that is well placed for the future. Just to pause at that point, I think, as some of you know, I am retiring as Chief Executive of Barratt Redrow next week. I was a bit uncertain about actually saying anything about it at all, but I just thought I would say a few words. Look, it's been a huge privilege for me to be CFO for Barratt Redrow for six years and then Chief Executive for Barratt Redrow for 11 years. It is an absolutely fabulous business, and we've always sought to lead the future of the home building industry. We build fantastic homes. We have amazing people who are really committed, hardworking, and tremendously talented. I think you just need to go out and visit our sites to really get that feel. We also have amazing support from our subcontractors and from our supply chain. I have really wonderful memories of my career in home building. It has been eventful, and in my time as CEO, I've had seven prime ministers, of which I've only met five, but a couple of them weren't there very long. We've had Brexit, and I understand everyone's had these things. It's not unique to me. We've had Brexit, COVID, the war in Ukraine, the conflict in the Middle East, and of course, Scotland qualified for the World Cup. Thank you. Yeah, we did a placing and rights issue within about three months of me starting, and we've made three acquisitions, Oregon, Gladman, and Redrow. Look, I'm hugely proud of everything that the team has achieved over the 17 years. We're 17 years as a five-star house builder. Somebody asked me yesterday if that was connected to the fact that I'd been here 17 years, but just to be clear, that's not connected to the fact that I've been here 17 years. 22 years with more NHBC Pride in the Job awards. I think sometimes we are modest about our achievements as a business. CDP A-rated on carbon, ranked globally in terms of our CDP ranking. As you know, something very close to my heart, we've donated more than GBP 25 million to charity in the last six years. We have set, I know it's hard to believe given current backdrop, but we have set a few annual records for both profit and cash returns. I think we've always understood our place in the community and our place in society. This is my 25th year as a PLC director, and today's presentation, just coincidentally, it wasn't planned this way, is my 50th either half year or full year presentation. When I said that to the team yesterday, they said, "Well, why are you not better at it?" Which I thought was harsh. A very long time ago, when I started as a PLC director, somebody said to me, which is probably one of the best bits of advice I've ever had, is, "Don't spin things to the analysts and the investors, because you're going to come across them again time and again in your career." I've always sought to be transparent, straightforward, consistent, and I think we as a company at Barratt Redrow have always strived to be very clear in terms of our guidance. I count many of you in this room, and I'm sure dialed in, as friends. Even the ones that have published sell notes or have sold shares. We've had some really great times together. But things move on, I'm going to spend more time with Janet, my wife, which she is very worried about, and also my children and my four grandsons. And those of you that play golf know that I'm going to play a lot more golf. I would just like to wish the very best to the board of Barratt Redrow, to Dean, our incoming CEO, and Rebecca, our CFO, and to all of the team. We're now going to move to questions, and I'm going to chair and John is going to compere. Thank you. Okay, Will, do you want to take it away? Thanks. Will Jones from Rothschild & Co Redburn. And congratulations, David, and best of luck. Three questions if I could please. First is just around trading in the year to date. It looks a fairly resilient ex-bulk sales rate, but maybe you could give us some color on how the months have trended, and particularly with that first couple of weeks of September under your belt. Second was around margin. Clearly, no firm guidance for the year ahead as normal, but if there's any of the moving parts perhaps you could comment on. We've got the build cost view. Is there anything on mix to be aware of? And presumably the balance for us all to think around is just where we land on price. And the last one was just around policy. Yesterday, we had the report out on the Help to Buy scheme as was, which concluded fairly favorably. Just wondered what your opinion was on that, and whether you think it changes any of the potential for demand-side support from the new leadership. Thanks. Okay. Thanks, Will. So, I'll pick up in terms of current trading and pick up in terms of policy, and then John will talk through in terms of margin guidance. And I think we'll pick up inflation probably as a later question in terms of topic. Just in terms of trading, look, I think we've always been pretty strict about not starting to disaggregate the current trading period because 10 weeks, it's a relatively short period. But what I would say is, look, we are very pleased in that period and the one thing I would say is that we haven't seen any weakening as we've progressed through that 10-week period. I think from that point of view, that is a positive, is the first point. The second point is I think the regional variations are quite similar, and therefore where affordability is most challenged, particularly in London and the Southeast, the market is difficult and that remains to be the case. But we're very comfortable that when we look at the way that we're trading in terms of private and the way that we've supplemented that with multi-unit sales, then we're comfortable with our full year guidance position and I think we have good visibility on that. In terms of policy, I think two sides to it. I know that we've adjusted our outlet numbers today and we've adjusted them previously. That seems sort of slightly contradictory to be positive about the government position on the supply side. I think if you step back and look at the changes in terms of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill and the national planning policy changes, the framework changes that have been made, they are creating a fundamentally different environment from a planning perspective. Whether you're looking for planning on residential, commercial, retail, whatever, it's a fundamentally different environment. I think our frustration has been more about the speed of change because the act didn't go live until December 2025, and the second iteration of the planning policy framework was not until two weeks ago, three weeks ago. But that is going to bring benefits. The only thing that the government really do need to address is resourcing at a local authority level. So 320 local authorities. You can get your planning ticket, but then you've got to get the 106 agreed, and you've got to get your pre-commencement conditions cleared, and there's a finite resource at a local authority level. On the demand side, we covered it all in the presentation and the announcement, but we strongly believe that the government should put demand-side support in place. We were very pleased to see the publication of the government's report in relation to Help to Buy, which I think was hugely supportive of the Help to Buy program, despite criticism from various quarters that it allowed nearly 400,000 people to buy a home, 300,000 first-time buyers buy a home. Total benefit to the economy was estimated at GBP 25 billion. I know I'm older than all of you in the room, but I benefited from a government support program when I bought my first house, the MIRAS program. The MIRAS program was a massive support program across both new build and second-hand. But if the government want growth, they need us to be building more homes. I'm sure the government are looking at that on the basis that they have a stated growth agenda. Also, I think a growth agenda that isn't just going to be about a particular part of the country, the whole country can benefit from more house building. John, do you want to talk a bit more? Yes. Thanks, David. I guess two or three things. One, on the selling price, a couple of things to flag. First is we obviously had some benefits of mix that we have highlighted in this year. There is a little bit of that still to flow through, so a couple of percentages around mix and geography in terms of the ASP, and that is a positive on the selling price. Second thing to bear in mind on pricing is the affordable, where we are expecting that to move back down towards 20%, so that has an effect in terms of the overall ASP that you will see. Those are the two things I would flag on the selling price movement, and obviously we flagged previously that the underlying pricing in the order book is of the order of 1.4% lower back in July, and that has not really changed. Turning then to think about the margin movements over the year ahead. Sorry, I am going to. Mic too close. Basically, the big item will clearly be build cost inflation, so around the gross margin, and that is for I guess everyone in the room to take a view. Obviously, we have guided to the 3%-4%, but thinking of build cost in total being 60% of revenue should help people think about how that will calibrate through. And obviously, we have guided on the admin expenses when you think about what that does down at the operating level. I think those are the key components there just to bear through. I think that covers it. Thanks, John. Shall we go for Aynsley? Aynsley Lammin from Investec. Just two questions from me. Just on the guidance, obviously very minimal change. It looks like it is more related to site numbers. What is the underlying assumption for underlying sales rates for this year? Is it flat at 0.55? Just given what we are seeing with swap rates and confidence going into the autumn, where is your confidence around that guidance, I guess, or the risks to it? Then second question relates to that, I guess, just on swap rates. How sensitive do you think the underlying sales rate is to interest rate moves? Is it more confidence? If we were to get mortgage rates 25 basis points higher, is that a big impact? Are you seeing any interest rate hikes, mortgage rate hikes at the moment? Thanks. John will pick up in terms of sales rate and outlook on that. I think in terms of the interest rates, I think the issue which we have seen over a long period of time, if you look over two, three decades, I do not think that the issue is about the interest rate per se. I think the issue in consumer confidence is about the certainty of what is going to happen. We came from a position in February where I think a base rate cut at the end of March was 80% likely to happen, and because of the conflict in the Middle East, it did not happen, and I think that dents consumer confidence hugely. Now, there are interest rate increases priced in, and that is clearly pricing into the two-year or the five-year fixes. As I say, I think we have been very encouraged about the reservation levels over the last 10 weeks. It is more about does it play out in the way that people expect it to play out? I think that is what will solidify confidence or will impact confidence. We would obviously prefer that there was no rate increases, but from where we are today, that looks tough, and that is not the way the market is pricing in. We have definitely seen movements. If you look over the last six months, there has been substantial movements in terms of the two-year and the five-year mortgage rates. Just picking up on the reservation rate for the balance of the year, Aynsley. If we look, obviously, the 0.53 underlying for the 10 weeks, if we look at where we will be for the remainder, we need a sales rate of about 0.63-0.64 to meet the midpoint of our guidance range. Now clearly, that is an all-in sales rate, including multi-unit sales as well as the underlying, and we would expect the seasonal movement in the year to occur with the stronger spring selling season. Okay, thanks. Ami? I will work along the row. Thanks. Ami Galla from UBS. Three questions from me. One was on current trading. Given what swap rates currently said, are you seeing any behavioral shifts from institutional investors on the multi-unit sales and the mortgage lenders in terms of how they are looking at potential buyers and assessing the affordability metrics? The second question was on WIP. If you could give us some directional color of how we should think about WIP investment in 2027 and 2028, especially given the sort of outlet guide that you're giving. The last one was just on land availability, and pricing. How are you seeing that end of the market shift? Okay. Thanks, Ami. John will pick up on WIP, and Mike will pick up in terms of land availability and what we're seeing in pricing. I think in terms of multi-unit sales, we need to go back really to the budget in 2025, and bear in mind that in the run-up to the budget in 2025, there was a huge amount of speculation about what was going to happen, ranging from rent controls to stamp duty to mansion tax and so on. It was all a bit of a mess, to be honest. I think what that meant was that the institutional investors backed away from the market, particularly London. But I think generally their appetite softened. Where they were doing deals in the second half of 2025, they were tending to be deals that were at quite substantial discounts. What we've seen in 2026 is, I think, a renewed interest from institutional investors in the market, mainly looking at single family. But I would say there's a higher level of interest in London than we've seen probably over the last two or three years. We work with a number of partners. We've been very public about the fact that we work with Lloyds Living, and they have a big appetite to grow their portfolio, and we see them as being a great partner. We obviously have other partners as well. We said last year that we'd want to do about 5%-10%, and I think that still is our aspiration. We don't really want to be above 10%. We'd prefer not to be below 5% in terms of completions. In terms of mortgage lenders, I would say that generally the mortgage lending environment is continually improving. The regulator has allowed more lending to take place. I think the banks and the lending banks are keen to lend. But the affordability, particularly for first-time buyers, is the main challenge. People who are able to afford. Therefore, for us, for first-time buyers, our lead offer is deposit match. If you have a deposit of 5%, we will match that deposit. I think that is quite a powerful offer, because in a lot of cases, it's allowing first-time buyers to access a 90% loan-to-value, and therefore better affordability than accessing a 95% loan-to-value. John? On work in progress, obviously with the adjusted guidance, when you think about the profile, we're expecting a pretty tight control of WIP this year because there isn't really step-up. Towards the back end of the year, clearly we are looking for outlet growth, so there will be investment going in to get those sites ready and to be up and running. But I think the whole effort inside the group is to really keep a tight lid and control on WIP. I don't see any significant step-up, and clearly there's a big focus internally on driving efficiency and moving that WIP lower if we possibly can. Mike? Land, obviously our intake profile of land is changing, in that we're looking more at our strategic portfolio and trying to make use of that through the planning opportunities that we've got. As David noted, we've got 118 strategic applications live that are going through. That will give us better visibility of land going forward. What it does give us is a bit of flexibility in terms of where we look to buy instant land in the market in a more competitive environment. That land is still coming to the market. We see prices pretty flat, in terms of land coming through. I think there's less bidders. There's more opportunity or more bidders on smaller sites, as you'd expect. But I think where we've got larger sites, our three-brand USP gives us that opportunity to really tackle those and be competitive and economic on those bids. Rebecca? Hi, Rebecca Parker from Goldman. Just wanted to ask a question on build cost inflation. What conversations are you having with suppliers given the more recent spike in energy costs, and what are you assuming in your build cost inflation guidance? Secondly, on the planning challenges that you've cited in terms of that outlet guidance, could you provide more color on those and confidence of growing your outlets into 2028 and 2029? Okay. Thanks, Rebecca. I'll pick up on planning and outlets, and Mike will cover in terms of build cost inflation and what we're seeing generally. I think in terms of outlets, I think the key point is that we have really good visibility. Across our 32 divisions, we've got line by line [crosstalk] [audio distortion] refusal is becoming a less common thing given the planning backdrop. We either get planning or we'll get planning on appeal. I think what it is more to do with is, can we get a planning committee convened? Can we get the 106 signed? Can we then get our pre-commencement conditions agreed? That is more about, I would say, admin rather than points of planning principle. In looking at the portfolio, we feel we are going to see some slippage as we move through FY 2027, hence we've adjusted the guidance slightly on that basis. But it's not about we don't have the outlets, we've got to go out and secure the outlets. We absolutely have the outlets. Yes. On build cost. Probably, it's worth recognizing for the current year, we're already 20% through the year, so we're getting a clearer picture on it on a monthly basis. As we said in the presentation, we have really strong ongoing partnerships and we engage with the supply chain on a regular basis. Our deals aren't done the 1st of January for every material, so they're done through the year. There's regular touch points where we see and we're talking to the supply chain about how that's working and how they see the picture evolving. I think the current assessment takes account of the size of the business. We talk a lot about the buying power that we've got and the relationship. It takes all that into account. I think really positive, we have a really strong group procurement team. We have individual sector managers that are regularly talking to the various supply partners. We are getting regular updates, as I say, from them from a holistic basis about what inflation is looking like. We are really confident on the guidance that we have given. I think it is worth noting, I was with a supplier last night, and we are talking about innovation and how we can manage potential inflation measures around installed costs rather than just pure supply costs. We are working together as a team, as a broader team to try and manage those processes. We have also got, as we always have got, cost initiatives and what have you through the business that will try and offset any inflationary pressures. Overall, we are getting regular updates. We are 20% through the year, and we are really confident with the forecast that we have got at the minute. Zaim, I will come across to the other side here in a moment. Zaim Beekawa, J.P. Morgan. Thanks for taking my questions. The first, maybe to John. I think on slide 21, you presented the land bank gross margin. Just curious to get your thoughts as to the sub 10%, when do you think that could fall off? Maybe just to come back on build cost inflation, I think in the presentation you referenced the fuel surcharges. Any indication as to what the contribution is at? If we were to paint a scenario where maybe those were to come offline, where do you think that 3%-4% build cost inflation falls to? Thank you. Okay. If John, if you pick up in terms of land bank, might you pick up on the surcharges? Yes. So just looking at the land bank, when you look at the part sub 10, are you here thinking about impairments, Zaim? Or are you just looking at this from the profile? Because obviously that is coming through, it is partly geographic, it is partly about the time when the land was acquired. Those are the two big drivers, as well as obviously the way the market has moved since. But from the point of view of those plots coming through, we are expecting those to come through pretty much, they are the more mature plots that will come quicker in the process. They will work through the next 2.5- 3 years. But from the point of view of the 10% gross margin, obviously there is a mix in there. I probably would not go any further in terms of giving you more detail. We expect those to pretty much burn through in the next three years because they tend to be the older plots. Does that help? Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. Okay. On the surcharge, I guess it is worth noting again that it is only one of the areas that we are. It is only one of the tactics that we are employing in terms of trying to manage our overall inflationary pressures. We have put that into place really so that we can be agile around moving prices back down when prices normalize a little bit more. I think what we are seeing, it is difficult to do the 3%-4%. We have taken that view, and that is all rolled into the 3%-4% that we have guided on. We are seeing our supply chain, both labor and material actually, sort of take and absorb some of the price increases that are out there, really to secure workload for the future. And that comes back to our sort of volume and ability to engage and guarantee volume going forward for them. There's a number of items that we're looking at in terms of blending that. It's difficult to ascertain the surcharge, but we forecast that through, and all that's baked into the 3%-4%, as best we can, knowing what we know today. Great. Glynis. Thank you. Glynis Johnson, Jefferies. Two, but there's a few bits in the first one. Standard housing types. Three questions. One, what have you done to the Barratt range? Are you moving at lower pricing, given the speculation that any Help to Buy would be perhaps tied to size of home or number of bedrooms? David Wilson versus Redrow. Are you increasing the differentiation between those with the change in the David Wilson housing type? Three, the proliferation, the 500 was a little bit of a higher number than I would anticipate. I remember the conversation three, four, five years ago when there was proliferation again. How do you stop the proliferation? How are you trying to put in controls to stop that creep that seems to be a three, four year creep? Then the second question, the right sizing of the land bank. Can you talk us a little bit through what actually you're trying to do? Is it that you're trying to reduce the sites that are bigger than 750 units down to speed through? Is it geographical? Is it about product type, that it needs to be fitting the three brand or it's not interesting? Just a little bit of color about that. Okay. Glynis, thanks. I am disappointed, Glynis, that it was not five questions to sign off. Yeah, I was talking briefly about this the other day. One of the first things that we did when I became Chief Exec was to slim down the house type range, and we published information at that time, which was back in 2016. I think two slightly different things. We have very strong controls over the creation and implementation of house types, so the divisions cannot just create house types. The reality is that the national standards and the local standards will require iteration of individual house types. They have got to have perhaps different room sizes, different requirements at a local level. What we have done is we have consolidated all of that, and we have had to adapt the house sizes slightly to ensure that rather than having maybe five iterations that addresses the same point, that we have one iteration that addresses everything on a national basis. That is the first point. Secondly, obviously, we are not consciously trying to reduce house sizes. When we have seen demand side support previously, it has tended to be focused on number of bedrooms. That has been the main restriction. FirstBuy, going back a number of years ago as a demand side mechanism, you could only have one more bedroom than your need, and that was the rules under the scheme. If you are a couple with one child, you could only buy a three bedroom home, and with Help to Buy, that was removed and therefore took away that restriction. I think it is very unlikely that there would be a square footage restriction, I think more a bedroom restriction. David Wilson and Redrow, we have published information historically in terms of the difference in the house sizes. I think we are comfortable with the range. I do not know if you want to comment on that in a moment, Mike. But I think we are comfortable with the differential and the range. I think they are very different homes, both externally and internally. I think we are very comfortable with that. Do you want to just talk a bit more about that, Mike? Yeah. I suppose just to add a bit of clarity on the 500 houses. The 500 houses is 100 houses, five versions of each because of local standards. It is not 500 different houses. They are iterations of, so they have either grown in size for bedroom size or somebody wants larger downstairs toilets, whatever it is. The work that we have done really is to look at those five houses for any particular house type and bring that back to one solution fits all. We now have one house type that fits M4(2), NDSS, Lifetime Homes, and also accommodates the Future Homes Standard. That proliferation will undoubtedly stop for at least four to five years until new regulations come through and what have you. So that clarifies that. I think what we have seen in the difference between the Barratt, and it was focused in Barratt and David Wilson, what we have seen in the Redrow product is because it is generally larger, it accommodates all of those requirements without much change. We have not had to look at the Redrow product in the same way. I think David is absolutely right. If you look at the three brands, actually, they are very different street scenes. They are very different solutions in terms of what the customer choice is providing. We see an absolute brand differential between Redrow and David Wilson as it stands at the minute, and similarly with Barratt and David Wilson. All three different brands. What we have done, I suppose, on the new house types is whilst we have got 100 types, we have got three alternative, four alternative elevations for each type. Again, that will play to local requirements around variations. There will be standard variations that we will control rather than divisional specific elevations that are planning driven. We are confident that we will drive efficiencies around that in terms of not having the number of different house types that we have got to build. We will also, just a final point, we are also sort of MMC ready with the new house types, so there is a bit more standardization in terms of bathroom layouts and the like, so that as and when that comes through in the next two, three, four years, we will be able to drop that in really efficiently. Yeah. Sorry, digressing slightly, but I am allowed to digress. I did once make a point to a government minister some time ago that if it was BMW or Audi, they do not say, "Well, actually, we want this type of BMW in Birmingham, but we will have this type in Manchester." They just kind of smiled and sort of said, "Well, just get on with it." The reality is the iteration of standards at a local level is one of the biggest hurdles that we face. That is not just about sizing, that is also increasingly about the sustainability agenda and decarbonization and so on, whether you need solar panels, et cetera. The government are trying to get more control around that, but it is a big challenge. Whilst we are a standard manufacturing operation, it is at a local level, it is not at a national level. In terms of the land bank, I think when we look at capital allocation, the land bank is the big challenge for all house builders. We can buy bricks. If we want to buy 73 million bricks, we can buy exactly 73 million bricks. But if we want to buy sites that are, say, 300 plots being optimal, we are not going to buy very many sites if we say we are only going to buy between 275 and 325. What we have to do is we have to get the right utilization of the land, and you can approach that in different ways. Clearly, some of our peers would approach that in the way of having a single brand and bringing other house builders onto the site or selling part of the site, so they would do swaps or sales. We've taken the approach over a long period of time that we would rather dual brand, and dual branding with Barratt and David Wilson, I think has been successful. Bringing Redrow in for triple branding. Redrow is at a more premium price point. I would say as a general guide, if we're not at about GBP 400/ sq ft, Redrow won't work in that marketplace. It needs to have that premium price point. But there are plenty of markets in the U.K. where we can get to GBP 400/ sq ft, as Redrow have demonstrated over a long period of time. But you can see from their original footprint that there were certain markets where they were more difficult for them to operate. Triple branding is a real thing. We are on triple-branded sites with other house builders or quadruple-branded sites with other house builders. We think we can get some good optimal mixes there. John highlighted, which we've highlighted before, is looking at that ratio in terms of looking at the way that the land bank is utilized. The efficiency of the land bank ultimately will drive the return on capital employed. We've got to keep pushing for that land bank efficiency. Is right sizing about reducing the number of single branded sites or are right sizing about reducing having to buy bigger sites and reducing down? I think generally buying bigger sites because it's much more difficult to buy sites where you're looking at sites that are, say, less than 150 plots because you bring in all of the market subject to the fact that you would have regional house builders in the marketplace. So clearly, if you're looking at larger sites and that could be 500 plots or 1,000 plots through the MADE Partnership, there's obviously a limited number of house builders that are prepared to deal with land in that scale. Chris, you next door. Morning. Chris Millington at Deutsche. I've got a two-part question on land, first of all, and it really relates to what you think land prices have done over the last couple of years. I see you're talking about intake margins of 23% gross on new land, but obviously the intake price is roughly about 5% less than what you've been putting through the P&L at the moment. Looking back at history, 23% has been quite a tall order for Barratt to hit. I'm really wondering about the rigor there and really the confidence thereon. Next one, sorry to return to current trading, but it does feel as we're approaching autumn, we should probably start seeing a bit of a ramp-up in inquiry levels, visitor levels, as people ready themselves for that seasonal uptick. Has there been any evidence of that at the moment? I'm just wondering about your thoughts on those lead indicators. Okay. I will just pick up on both of those, but I'm going to pass the land pricing bit to John Messenger as well because John has a few stats I know up his sleeve somewhere. I think on current trading, first of all, I said earlier, Chris, we're not going to start disaggregating it, but what I did say is it's not been a position that's got worse. If you look at the 10 weeks, we've seen a position that's been stable or better rather than has been worse, and I think that's very encouraging going into the autumn season. We're obviously measuring it on a year-on-year basis, in terms of our performance. We know that last year it really went south because we got closer and closer to the budget, which I think was late November, and the market just ground to a halt. Our comps are weakening, and therefore, we would expect to see year-on-year improvements arise. Let us see what happens. We have not actually seen a lot of budget speculation this year. I think the government have kept that pretty tight, learned the lesson, and the only two things that they have said publicly are, one, there will be no rent control, and two, there will be no stamp duty changes. The reality is they could do either of them, but at least they have said it is not going to happen and therefore it is dampened down the speculation. There has been no chat about mansion taxes or all sorts of stuff as there were. I think current trading, yeah, we are fine with what we are seeing in September. In terms of land prices, well, land prices are falling. That is factual. I think that land prices never fall as fast as we would like, and typically there is probably about an 18 month lag because the landowner does not want to sell because they believe it should be GBP 1 million an acre or whatever they believe, and we do not want to buy because we do not believe it is GBP 1 million an acre, so there will be a lag. The only other point before I pass over to John would say that we know that we have a lot of land in planning. All the house builders have a lot of land in planning. All the land traders have a lot of land in planning. As we move through 2027 and 2028, there will be a lot of land coming to the market, and that should help from a pricing point of view. Just, Chris, I think you have got some of the data anyway. But if we look at Savills, and you can see it in the back of the deck, so we obviously give you the land index there. It is down about 11% on the national index. Behind it, there are some quite significant moving parts in that Scotland, with its very different planning regime, land values have hardly dropped at all. But if we look at the south of the country, they are down about 17% or 18% cumulatively from the peak, which was back in September 2022. So different moving parts in there. But I think David's point in particular about supply, demand, and how things will look over the next couple of years will be key. As will landowners' views about where the government and where policy is going to go over the longer term, which if the government talks about more affordable, ultimately that will be a tax on land. Landowners should, in theory, look at that and think, well, maybe more sensible to sell today rather than waiting and then finding there is a bigger affordable content in that mix, because it ultimately will come through on land value. Is that Charlie? I am Charlie Campbell from Stifel. Two very quick questions, just clarification. Slide 21, the gross margin plots. Does that include anything at all for new house types? Slide 19 on t he admin costs, the GBP 330 million moving up to GBP 360 million. Is that just basically the absence of one-off benefits in 2026? Do you want to take them both? Yeah, absolutely. In terms of on slide 21, apologies, can you just remind me, sorry. [crosstalk]. So that is the gross margin. Yes. Does it include any? Oh, in terms. No. At the moment, obviously, the land that is coming through, sites that are going into planning effectively with the new house types on them, or if they go in for a revisitation on planning, that would start to feed through. But in terms of the current land bank, the new house types are really flowing through in the next six months and will go into sites then. There is going to be some replotting. We are going to try and introduce these into sites that are already there. The issue will be in terms of phasing, to think about, look, in terms of the sales rate on that site, can we take some of those plots back to get them replotted with new house types? As a general rule, this is going to be rolled out, and will be coming through over the next couple of years in terms of making an impact. Yeah. When we look at the second one on the admin side, obviously GBP 330 million, we are flagging that pre the one-off, the base starting point is GBP 347 million, Charlie. We then have basically an assumption that we are going to have GBP 15 million or thereabouts in terms of the reversal of the bonus kind of cutback that benefited in FY 2026. Inflation will be coming through of the order of GBP 7 million or GBP 8 million. We expect synergies of GBP 7 million or GBP 8 million in the other direction. When you put the various pieces together, we should go from around GBP 347 million, including the one-off that we backed to around GBP 360 million. Okay. Thank you. Lewis at the back. Lewis Roxburgh, Goodbody. My question is just on buyer type. Have you seen any change in behavior there? I think on slide nine you see a slight pickup in mix in terms of part exchange. I think that is quite interesting, so any comments there would be helpful. How does buyer type generally just fit into the context of your dual, triple branded approach? Do first timers always go for the Barratt product, or I imagine it is more nuanced than that. Just any comments on that would be great. You happy to put that on, Mike? Yeah. I suppose through buyer type, the part exchange piece really is around people's ability and confidence in their conveyance chain. That as a reason, it's a really good incentive for us because if somebody comes along and says, "Well, actually, I want your house," if they're not in a position to proceed, we can put them in a position to proceed and they can reserve. Otherwise, they've got to go away and try and sell their product. I think that's the slowness of the market generally, secondhand as well, is driving that PX sort of increase and the sort of popularity of PX through the buyers. Buyer types is interesting, I think between Barratt and David Wilson, because both brands have product through the ranges. David Wilson's slightly larger, but David Wilson has product that is first time buyer as well, then the buyer type is very similar across that. I think Redrow is slightly different. That doesn't really get into the first time buyer. Actually, we'll see less of that going forward, I think, because now we've got the three brands. Redrow won't need to comply with housing mixes and the like, because we'll put Barratt and/or David Wilson into that through a dual brand. So Redrow will naturally go a bit bigger going forward. Lewis, just to add on that, the downsizers are, I think everyone would like downsizers to be a bigger part of the market. But a little bit like first time buyers, when the market's challenging, consumer confidence isn't high, the downsizers can just sit it out. Redrow historically, if you went back to 2021, 2022, Redrow was doing about 40% cash sales, primarily to downsizers. I think a lot of those downsizers are sitting tight just now to see what happens. Likewise, first time buyers can carry on living at home or can continue to rent. So those two parts sit out, which is why I think you end up with some tick up in second time movers and part exchange becomes more important. Just one final thing without overdoing it, but actually the other point when we look at our triple-branded sites, the interesting feature there is that there is almost, I think, a benefit back, for example, to Redrow, where more people are then visiting the site because there are two alternative products there as well. We are actually finding it actually does actually benefit back onto the Redrow brand. Maybe because people didn't feel there was a product that would suit them, and then with the extra product, they go along and think, actually, they go and look at all three, and suddenly they plum for the Redrow. Great. Conscious, I think we are about to finish, but I will hand over. Emily, is it a question or are you picking up on other things? No, I just wanted to say a few words, actually. Yes. I actually asked Clyde to say a few words as well because I was conscious that I was only around for 75% of David's tenure, and Clyde actually remembers Barratt pre-David Thomas, so he might be able to provide a bit more context. But before I hand over to Clyde, I just really wanted to say thank you from all of us. I had a go at working it out yesterday, and I think that if you include all the pre-close calls and all the quarterly calls, you have actually spoken to the analyst community about 100x, which I think also means you probably faced something in the mid-single digit thousands, when it comes to the number of questions. Probably only about a third of those have been about current trading, so. I just, yeah, I wanted to say thank you and thank you for the patience that you have shown us and your openness, and you said that you wanted to be straightforward when you spoke earlier, and I definitely think you will leave with that reputation. Yeah, thank you from all of us. Yeah, I will hand over to Clyde. Thanks, Emily. Thank you. Yeah, as the old man in the sector, I get to do these sort of things. I first remember meeting you back in 2009, I think for a coffee around the corner from the head office in Oxford Circus. I am thinking, "Oh, he has come out of counting Xbox sales, Nintendo, Wii, and Donkey Kong consoles, and God knows what." I am thinking, "How is he going to handle the house building sector? All of it. Yeah. Exactly. To be fair, you joined at a very interesting time. Your predecessor had, I think, politely tapped out after 2006, 2007, 2008. I think a pretty challenging period for Mark. I think all of us in this room, I think would echo Emily's comments about how you have grown into the role. You are clearly one of the most influential and leading people in the sector. You have become a master, a Jedi master even, at handling these meetings, the confidence, the calmness of how you have dealt with all the difficult questions. Even the noddy ones, you have managed to make the asker look good with the question despite asking maybe the most obvious question on the planet. But the other skill has been your ability to duck very deftly those really, really tricky ones where we all would desperately hear the answer, and you slip sort of quietly aside of that. But I think when we look at your commitment to the business, I think it has been phenomenal, no doubt that you have given it 100%. Anybody who sleeps under canvas the number of times that you have done for the charities, the number of Labour Party conferences that you have attended to, I mean, deserves a real badge, I think, in my sense. But I think probably the most impressive thing is the fact that you have been in the industry so long, you have created so much impression that you have now got your own Wikipedia page. And you are up there with the industry greats, whether it is Steve Morgan, Tony Pidgley, Lawrie Barratt, and of course, Greg Fitzgerald. Good. I would like to wish you all the best for your retirement. I am finally, hopefully, going to get a game of golf with you after nagging you for so long. And maybe in some of your other spare time, you might get a chance to go onto that Wikipedia page and embellish it like somebody else has done as well. But David, all the best for retirement, and I am sure you will enjoy it. So thank you very much, mate.