Very good. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to MJ Gleeson's Results Presentation for the Year to June 2025. I'm here, of course, with Stefan Allanson, CFO, and also the senior leadership team is here. Guy Gusterson, MD of Gleeson Land, you know, and Andy Davis, the Deputy Managing Director of the Northern Division, you also have met before. Welcome to Scott Stoddart, who joins us from Vistry as the Deputy Managing Director of Central, and also a welcome in his new role to Simon, who you have met before, but now Chief Operating Officer for Gleeson Homes. I was actually going to have as my start with my first slide as I did the leadership day that we had last month with a nice picture of the FA Cup and the Community Shield attractively draped in their red and blue ribbons. I remembered at least two of you are Liverpool fans. Given that you get to write the match reports, I thought shy of that. FY 2025 was in the end a bit of a dull year, a bit of a pickup that we all saw in the spring, nothing to write home about. Against that backdrop, I was pleased that we sold more homes and at a higher average selling price, which was encouraging. More encouraging was our net res rate, which was up at 0.53 across the year, and that was up by 20% on the prior year. Actually, in the second half, I think we were at 0.64, and that was up by 28% on the prior year. We were clearly doing something right. The result of that is that we come into the current year with a really improved forward order book. It's something like 845 units, £159 million, very encouraging. A good year in partnerships with four transactions concluded, and in fact, another two since the year end, and a good deal flow coming through. We have made, I think, really good progress in addressing some of those operational challenges which we mentioned in June and July, and I'll obviously talk about in a few minutes' time. Great year in Gleeson Land, seven transactions in the period, but I'm actually more pleased by the progress that Guy and the team are making with the strategic restructure and the growing portfolio, and we'll spend a bit of time on that. We come into the year with eight sites with a planning consent, and we have actually already made our first site sale in July. Profitability clearly lower than it should have been, lower than we were hoping. That's all to do with margin compression in Gleeson Homes. Some of that, to be fair, is a sector-wide issue. When you have a long, prolonged period of weak demand and flat pricing, eventually cost issues, whether they're inflation or other issues which arise from time to time on site, they're going to hit you. They can't be absorbed. You feel every bump in the road. Some of this undoubtedly was Gleeson specific. Stefan will take you through the actual bridge in the margin in a few minutes' time. It's pretty clear to me that the business was less mature than I thought when I joined. We made some early changes. We took the overhead down from the nine regions to six, and we standardized. We improved our standardization in a lot of areas: in process, in structures, in product, in customer service, and so on. It became pretty clear to me that during FY 2024, I could see that there were some more fundamental weaknesses, if you like, some process weakness and some poor procedural compliance that was undermining our operating effectiveness and weakening our commercial control. This wasn't always and everywhere, but sufficient to cause us those cost overrun and margin challenges. That was exacerbated by some further historic issues which required rectification in the year. As I say, Stefan will break those out for you. It was pretty clear to me that we needed to address this a bit more drastically, a bit more fundamentally. If we're going to successfully transition this business from the very large small business that I've talked about before, that Gleeson was, into a small large business with controls, systems, people that we can rely on to be confident as we grow, then we needed to address this a bit more fundamentally. In about a year ago, just under a year ago now, I initiated Project Transform, which you're all familiar with that name. I took initially a small group of our brightest and best from around the group and supplemented that with a couple of trusted external consultants just to challenge our thinking and ensure our objectivity. We've deliberated those recommendations and thoughts back and forth, and then we've moved, we've acted decisively and quickly to implement those changes, some in the spring and a lot more, as you're aware, in June. I'm really pleased, I have to say, with the early signs. We are starting to see the benefit of those changes. What have we done? We've strengthened the leadership at both divisional and at regional level. We've standardized our reporting. We're increasing our visibility and our accountability with standard and sharper reporting, and crucially, shorter lines of reporting and communication. We're pushing hard to inculcate a culture of responsibility and ownership at regions so that our regional leadership teams are behaving more like business leaders and not just managers reporting the news up the line. Importantly, that standardized reporting is also creating greater visibility of our agreed group controls and standards. That's really where Simon's role fits into the piece. We've also taken the opportunity to combine our leadership teams in the Northwest, in our Cumbria and Greater Manchester regions. We remain fully committed to growing those both as independent regions. They both have great prospects for us, but it makes sense just to leverage that overhead better until we get them both up to critical mass. All of this is designed to lay a strong foundation so that Gleeson Homes can look forward to its growth with confidence in its systems, its people, its controls, and deliver on that growth opportunity that we see in front of us. We've got a clear, very clear idea of the areas that we need to focus on going forward. We need to properly embed the changes under Project Transform. We still have some amendments we want to make to our land buying to optimize that process. Critically, we need to make sure that we're laser-focused on getting our sites open. I'll talk about that in a bit. We're enhancing the house-type portfolio in response to the demand that we see, and we're working hard on our partnerships strategy, which, as I say, is doing really well. Of course, in all of this, we're maintaining that, for me, exciting and unique proposition of building homes, affordable, high-quality homes for those people that need them most. Just looking at how we're doing today, I'd say it's still a market that's lacking conviction, but it is stable. You've seen what the press are saying. You're seeing what the RICS are saying, press articles, and indeed what other developers are telling you about the market. It's not strong, but there are customers there very definitely for homes that are well located, well presented, and well priced. The onus is on us as a team to make sure that that's exactly what we're delivering. It really is a market you've heard me talk before about that rewards hard work. It rewards a granular focus, site by site, and indeed plot by plot. Against that, I think we're doing pretty well. We're looking at a sales rate since the beginning of the year of 0.54, which is up 8% on what we were achieving in the prior year. Customers need persuading. They need a deal. We're still using incentives, but not at an increased or an alarming level. We're still below 5% on our incentives. At that point, I will sit down, hand you over to Stefan to take you through the numbers. Stefan. Thank you, Graham. We grew group revenue by 5.9% during the year to £365.8 million. That revenue growth was driven by both divisions growing their top line. Divisional operating performance at the bottom line was mixed, and I'll take you through the divisional performance on the next few pages. Just to highlight a few points on the group income statement, group overheads were unchanged at £3.9 million. We did incur £1.3 million worth of exceptional costs for the Gleeson Homes reorganization that we announced. The numbers in this statement are all before those exceptional costs. Group operating profits were lower at £25.4 million, and that was driven by lower profits. Gleeson Homes being significantly, but not fully offset by a strong performance in Gleeson Land. Interest costs reduced slightly, and that was driven by lower interest rates and lower average borrowings. As a result, PBT was 11.7% lower. Sorry, a little premature with my clicking here. 11.7% lower at £21.9 million. Tax rates are a little higher, but still below the headline rate of 25%. We didn't incur any RPDT. You'll all remember that, Residential Property Developers Tax, because the threshold wasn't triggered, £25 million profit threshold. As a result, EPS was 12.7% lower at GBX 28.9. Now, turning to the divisional results, Gleeson Homes volumes, we delivered volume growth, 1.2%. The mix of sales improved, actually. Open market completions were up 11.4%, 1,588 homes sold. Multi-unit sales were lower at 205 completions. Average selling price was up 4.3% on a reported basis. It was due to a richer bed mix and a little bit of a regional mix and a small underlying selling price increase of 0.6%. We got gross price increases. I think they were about 1.7% offset by higher incentives. As a result, and including the sale of a surplus site during the year for £1.2 million, revenue increased by 5.8% in Gleeson Homes to £348.2 million. Gross profit was 9% lower due to the margin pressures that Graham mentioned. I will take you through a margin bridge in a few more slides. Overhead costs were very well managed during the year, well controlled. They increased by 1.6%. We did reduce headcount, which offset the inflationary pay increases that were incurred during the year. As a percentage of turnover, they reduced by 0.6%- 14.4%. As a result, operating profit before exceptionals reduced by 26.4% to £22.3 million. Operating margin reduced to 6.4% with a lower ROKI at 8.7%. I am going to take you through that reduction in operating margin. The gross margin reduced by 340 basis points. You can see that build cost inflation was really the most significant impact, but we had some other contributory reductions. Build costs were 2.7% higher over the year. That took 1.9% off the margin. We did achieve some underlying selling price increases. During the year, for the purpose of this bridge, I refer to underlying selling prices on reservations, which are relevant for margin recognition. They were only up 0.3% during the year. Gross prices increased on reservations by about 1%, but incentives were higher still during the year. We talked in June and July about legacy costs. We did incur some further legacy site costs, about £2.2 million. That impacted margin by 0.6%. These operational issues that Graham talked about had a further impact on margin of 0.9%. In addition to that, to support a strongly improved sales rate, we improved the specification on plots during the year. That is typically now, not typically in all plots. We offer now a standard turf fence and an outside tap. That has an extra cost and a few other things that had an extra cost that impacted margin by 0.4%. That strong improvement in our overhead efficiency, 0.6%, offset some of that, but did not fully offset the margin reduction. As a result of our strong improvement in sales rate, we did increase the forward order book, and it was up very pleasingly 51% at the end of the year. It was driven by the new partnership agreements. We entered into four new partnership agreements during the year, and we increased our open market forward orders by 10%, driven by that 20% increase in open market reservation rates during the year. Now on to Gleeson Land. Gleeson Land is really starting to fire on all cylinders, and it had a much, much better year. They completed seven transactions. Five of those were straightforward promotion agreements. One was a swap of interests that we had on joint venture agreements, and one was the sale of an option agreement. Gross profit more than doubled to £11.1 million, and overheads increased by £1 million- £4.1 million, reflecting the investment that we made in the year. Investment in business, we increased headcount. We opened a small office in Bristol. Of course, with that strong performance comes a little more of an incentive to our senior employees. As a result, operating profit more than tripled to £7 million, delivering, I think, a rather healthy return on capital of 17.4%. Now, turning to the balance sheet, the group inventories increased by £35.6 million during the year. Gleeson Homes increased land width by £20.7 million. That reflects site purchases during the year at a higher average selling price. The average cost of the sites that we purchased was £18,600 per plot. That's higher than the average cost last year, which was around about £15,000. We charged through cost of sales quite a lot of low-cost land at around about £12,900. The impact was that the average cost per plot in the balance sheet now is higher at £15,300 per plot, up from the £12,800. It still remains significantly below 10% of selling price. Still very, very low. Build was flat, up marginally at £214.7 million. Average width at the end of the year was higher at £3.2 million, up from the £2.7 million we had at the end of the previous year. That reflects the build cost increases, build cost inflation, and significant infrastructure investment on a number of sites, a number of new sites that we'll be delivering this year, didn't deliver last year. Gleeson Land increased width by £14.3 million in total. That reflects the cost of delivering those additional promotion agreements. Most significantly, the purchase of one site for £6.9 million. That was a one-off purchase connected to the option agreement that we signed and connected to the large transaction that we expect to complete this year. We referred to one particular large site that we're expected to complete this year. Other assets increased by £12 million, driven mostly by the deferred receipts in Gleeson Land. Land creditors in Gleeson Homes increased to £13.6 million. Still relatively low. We still tend to pay largely on purchase. With some of those larger site purchases during the year, we had a few more deferred payables. Other liabilities were almost £20 million, driven by deferred payables in Gleeson Land, plus deferred income on the partnership agreements that were signed up to the end of June, five partnership agreements. With net assets of around about £200 million, a net debt of only £800,000, we have a very strong balance sheet. Finally, to dividends. We are declaring a final dividend of £0.07 per share. That will bring to £0.11 per share the total dividend for the year. That is unchanged on last year. That dividend will be covered or is covered by earnings 2.6x. That is below the group-stated dividend policy where earnings will cover dividends between 3x and 5x. We are quite confident in suspending that policy for this dividend. That policy does remain. That is our policy. We wish to thank those shareholders that have stayed with us and have confidence in us, and we want to demonstrate our confidence in our medium-term outlook. Thank you, and I will hand you back to Graham. Thanks, Stefan. Very good. Looking at our operations and strategy, starting first with Gleeson Homes, just a quick capture of how I see the market right now. As I've said, lacking conviction is probably the best way I can describe it. We saw the base rate cuts in May and August. We didn't really get the bounce that you'd normally hope for from the fizz of positive headlines. Mortgage availability and affordability is there. That's not really the challenge. That third bullet, consumer confidence, is definitely still fragile. Whilst inflation is generally, I mean, coming down, coming under control, if you disaggregate the elements there, food price inflation and energy price inflation is still pretty strong. Those are important for consumer perception. They're the big two that they see on a regular basis. Of course, we've got a lot of siren headlines around potential tax increases, particularly property tax increases coming out of the budget. We now know that that's going to persist right through to the end of November, which is pretty much unhelpful for our autumn selling season. Selling prices are steady. We are pushing them where we can, and in many places, they're holding. We are, as I said before, continuing to use incentives, although not at an alarming level. Housing associations are still sitting on the sidelines, really pleased with the £39 billion that the Chancellor announced in the comprehensive spending review. It is real money, in my view, but it has yet to fully filter through to hit the streets in terms of deals. The housing associations telling us, or the ones that we talked to telling us, kind of would expect that money to start translating into deals in the spring. What that means is, whilst the PRS investors do absolutely remain active, the competition in the market is soggy, and that means that the pricing is pretty aggressive out there. The planning environment remains tough. As you know, we're very upbeat about the big changes to the framework that were made early in the Parliament, and already Guy's team is seeing the benefit of those changes. Although the current noise around increasing regulations and potential additional costs is unhelpful, shall we say. The really key point is that down in the trenches, getting a ticket so that Scott and Andy can start putting a spade in the ground, that's as tough as ever. We put that down to the continuing challenge of resourcing in local planning departments. Overall, a pretty challenging environment and difficult for me standing here now to say, I can see an early catalyst for a significant recovery. As I said, it's a market that we can absolutely work with, and we're doing it. It's a stable market, and we're able to make our sales. That's how I would characterize it. I showed you this just now. These are our areas. We're very clear on our areas of focus for Gleeson Homes for the current year, but also setting the position to deliver on our strategy as we go forward. We need to further embed Project Transform. There are still some tweaks we need to make on our land process from bid to build. Critically, site openings, absolutely vital that we focus on that. I'm going to take you through each of these points just briefly now. Turning into our land pipeline, Stefan's already mentioned, we've continued to buy land. It's still a very competitive market out there. Pleased to see our pipeline increasing to 19,600 units. As Stefan said, still with an average land cost per plot below £16,000, which is great. We're also, I would say, sharpening the focus for our land teams. A couple of things to mention there. We are looking to slightly push up the proportion of land that we buy in faster-selling suburban areas. For that, we're looking at improving our density, and there's some elements of the design of product which will assist with that. I'll talk about that in a moment. We're also tightening our hurdle rates to better align our hurdles with the planning status of the land that we're appraising. Build and sale sites. It's pleasing that during the year just finished, FY 2025, we opened both more build sites and selling sites at a better rate than in FY 2024. The average number of sites is actually lower because we also closed a number of older sites. Stepping back, more importantly, the number of sites that we're currently building and selling from is lower than we'd planned, lower than I'd hoped and anticipated. That's what we really need to get after. I suppose the biggest reason for that slower progress is the planning system. There's no hiding from that. We have to work as hard as we can on that. There are things we can do. It's important as well that we look at our own process, that we make sure we're as up to date as we can with getting those being ready to clear those planning conditions as soon as we get that ticket. Then making sure that our own processes don't slow us up between getting the ticket and getting on site. That's an area that Simon, Scott, and Andy are really looking very hard at right now. We're having a great year, making great progress in partnerships. Helen and the team are doing a really good job in building both our book of business and our reputation. We signed four transactions in the year, as I said, and a further two since the year end. Behind that, in fact, the second one since the year end was 6:00 P.M. last night. Can you imagine Stefan's face when I said, "Stefan, we've got to change the presentation"? It's got to be in there, hasn't it? We have multiple deals that are under negotiation. We're maintaining our approach of dealing with a select group, a small select group of partners that we know we can rely on, who share our values and our aspirations. We continue to target a level of around 20% of the business in that diversified revenue stream, and we're working towards that. Importantly, we don't have to force the pace, and that shields us from having to be price takers, from having to accept some of the more aggressive pricing that we can see out there in the markets at the moment that I alluded to earlier. As I've said, we're responding to some changes in demand and opportunity that we're seeing in the marketplace. That's why we're expanding our portfolio in response to that. We're seeing some demand for larger units. Who knew that Gleeson would build five-bedroom homes? The demand is out there, and as you can see, we've got some very elegant units designed in response to that. We're continuing with the Gleeson tradition of our roll call of house types being small villages in Ireland. I can think of one investor in particular who will be delighted with the intriguingly named Castledermot. There we go. We're also expanding our range at the smaller end of our properties. We now have some one-bedroom units that we can plot. These are going to be really important to us in that push into slightly more suburban locations where we need the density and we need the flexibility and agility of product to make sure that we're competitive in those bids. We're seeing good success as well with that thrust of widening the demographic of our customers and making sure our marketing is as broad as it possibly can be. As you can see, we're very happy to welcome you on a Gleeson site, whether you're 19 or 91. You've seen this slide before. It's really important that, as I say, Gleeson is committed to this identity which underpins our market opportunity of building homes for those who need affordable quality homes for those who need the most and maintaining that couple on the national living wage, being able to buy a material proportion of the homes on any of our sites. A couple of things I would draw your attention to on this slide. Our home is very much affordable for low-income buyers, and they are still seeing real income growth, but it is at a lower rate than so that real growth is at a lower rate than when I stood here a year ago and probably the year before that. That goes to wage increases are slowing. I noticed there was another survey out this morning that said exactly that. That point around inflation, core inflation is still pushing on. Our customers are still aware of that cost of living pinch. I would just mention the bottom bullet there. We're a significant piece of work for us in transitioning away from our previous independent in-house survey across to the NHBC HBF survey. It's a bigger piece of work than you might imagine. We expect when our first results are published for the current calendar year, which will be in March 2026, we expect to be at four star. We are seeing both our survey response rate and our scores improve, and we are absolutely focused and targeted on achieving five star for the calendar year 2026. Just to remind you, we remain excited by and convinced by the opportunity to take this business to 3,000 homes per annum in the medium term. You've seen this before, but just looking at that column on the right, how do we get there? If we get ourselves to 100 sites and a sales rate of 0.6 per site per week, that takes us to our 3,000 homes. The point of emphasizing that is that 0.6 is only just above the 0.57, which was the completion rate that we achieved in the year just gone. This target is not based on riding the crest of some phenomenal market recovery. It's all about that second point, which is making sure we get our build sites open. That should be in our control, he said, mindful of the planning system. It is something that we can affect, we can control. If we deliver on those build site openings, we will deliver this target. Turning to Gleeson Land, absolutely primed for growth. You heard the excitement in Stefan's voice, and that's not something you hear very often, if I'm honest. The guys are doing a great job in delivering this strategy. That is really all about the regional focus that Guy was talking about from day one. It's about really exploiting our unique capability in data research and analytics. It's about a laser focus on the experience for our customers and our wider stakeholders. We're having, as I say, the success that is bringing means that we are seeing more and better opportunities. We're improving the quality of our bids, and we're improving our win rate. Those benefits are very definitely beginning to be realized. As you can see, our bid rate has increased. Our win rate has doubled, now up at about a third of the bids that we make. Really importantly, this hasn't come from reducing our criteria or our hurdle rates. We still put in the bin something like nine out of 10 of the bids that we see. The effect is the portfolio is growing and growing in quality. Just to pick out one stat, in the year, we completed seven transactions, and effectively, that covered 1,200 units. We acquired some 13 new promotion agreements covering 2,700 units. You can see that really does underline the point that I'm making about the quality and quantity of the portfolio. Really importantly, as I say, a strong focus. You can feel it when you walk into the business. A really strong focus on our stakeholders and our customers. That brings those additional opportunities. The agents community is talking about Gleeson Land in very positive terms. We're often winning bids when we're not the highest bidder. All of that means that there's steam coming out of the engine room in planning. The guys are working hard and working very effectively. You know that we touched on earlier, we are seeing the benefit of the new NPPF. The Billericay site that we sold in June was the country's first grey belt site. We're pleased to submit six applications in the year just gone. Get this, we're anticipating submitting up to, I think, 18 applications in the first half alone in the current year. As I say, steam coming out the engine room. We were pleased with seven consents in the year, and we come into the current year with eight consents. The position as we go into FY 2026 is encouraging. We have planning consent for all except one of the sites that we're proposing to sell during the year, which is a much stronger position than we were in at this time last year. I would just caution that among those sites is one where we have our planning permission. We have our agreed buyer. In fact, they've already signed an option on the site and can't wait to get on there. We're waiting for one regulatory clearance from the local authority, which we're anticipating soon. Should that hit some unexpected delay, that will derail our profit targets because it's a large site. If that slips into July, we will feel the bump. I'm just cautioning it's not what we expect to happen. We are expecting one landmark moment, which is a sale of a site in Oxfordshire, which if it happens, will be the first site that we've actually acquired, I think, Guy, since you took the reins, which will be a landmark moment for Gleeson Land. Actually, lightning quick. Sadly, as of course, you're all aware, strategic land doesn't normally turn around in two years. We'll keep reminding Guy of that one. In summary, after what I'd characterize as a bit of a bruising period, Project Transform is already delivering a more disciplined business in Gleeson Homes, and I'm excited by what we're seeing from that. We've got a clear set of focuses to deliver on the growth that we foresee. I'm really confident that that reorganization is going to ensure effective delivery and start to rebuild those margins. Gleeson Land, as you've heard, absolutely primed for growth and outperformance. We've got a strengthened portfolio, and the future growth opportunities in that business are increasingly secure within that portfolio. I anticipate that the current year will be in line with our expectations, and we remain really well placed for the significant growth that we anticipate from FY 2027. At that point, thank you for listening, and we'll be pleased to take your questions. Goodness me, Mr. Housen, straight off the blocks. I haven't even sat down, Mark. Go for it. Oh, there's a microphone coming. Thanks, sir. Can you hear that? Mark Housen from Target Capital. Firstly, it's on Gleeson Homes. You said that the land buying needs to be optimized. Just trying to, how does that marry in terms of you're looking at faster selling suburban areas, and that land tends to be more competitive to buy. Yet at the same time, you're tightening your hurdle rate. How do you marry those two is the first question. The second question, by the way, I've got the microphone. Just on a simple question on Gleeson Land. You said that pipeline supports growth from 2027. Are you implying that the ROKI for 2026 is similar to what it's been for the year just gone before moving upwards in the following year? Thank you. Let me deal with good questions, Mark. Let me deal with the second one first because that's an easy yes. This year should be broadly aligned to last, and then we can start to see things picking up thereafter. Coming back to what we're doing with land buying in homes, I think I was, in terms of optimization, talking about our process from basically from bid to build. We have changed that quite significantly under Transform, and I just want to make sure those changes are embedded. That's really about getting strong regional ownership of the terms on which we bid and buy that land, which was slightly more separate under the old system. You asked about selling, about acquiring more land in suburban areas. I really don't want the room to run away with the view that Gleeson is charging off, you know, and we're going to start building high-rise in central Manchester. That's not the case. If I step back and look at the portfolio, it's like I want more of a blend. I don't want us to be edged out, if you like, further and further to the boundaries to slower selling sites on the east coast of Yorkshire. Actually, Yorkshire's only got on the east coast, so that was tautology. We want to blend. This goes to the density points I was describing, that if you persist with the low densities that previously characterized Gleeson and are still absolutely appropriate in Lincolnshire and Cumbria and lots of locations we build, if you confine yourself to that, then you will simply be uncompetitive in those more suburban locations, which are, let's face it, Gleeson heartland. We just need to be a little bit more agile. It's about the balance in the portfolio, not transforming the portfolio. Thank you. Harry Goldberg. You talked, Stefan, about the margin headwind from increasing some of the plots' specifications in the year. Is that going to be the new normal in terms of that spec? Should we think about that being a margin headwind lingering? Do you start buying land on increased average land cost per plot sort of basis? Good question. I mean, you know, are we still going to, are we forever going to turf fence and put an outside tap and things like that in our standard plot spec? I suspect yes. We've costed that into our site valuations, and when we bid for land now, we fully cost that in. Where do I see the big margin recovery? Because whilst we have new sites at higher margin, they haven't suffered from some of these legacy issues that some of our older sites have. Actually, what will really drive margin is when we're able to start reducing the incentives, and we can get some really strong underlying selling price increases. As I say, at the moment, incentives are running at about 4.7% of the selling price, just under 5%. Slightly higher in the second half than the first half. The last couple of months, they're about unchanged. A few years ago, our average incentives were running at less than 1%. When we get back to a position where we don't have to incentivize customers with cash and non-cash incentives, we will see then some significant step up in margin. That's really what's going to drive, I think, for all households, what's going to drive the biggest part of the margin recovery. Ayn sley, morning. Morning. I think three for me, actually. On the planning, obviously, this year, low number of sites. When you look into FY 2027, what's the trigger to the expectation you get more sites through? Is it just the legislation comes through? You're seeing positive movement on a longer-term view from what government are trying to do. Any color around that? Two straightforward ones, I think. On the land sale, the land business, you said there's one significant potential sale with a technical issue to resolve. How big is that relative to the £7 million or whatever you expect for this year? Is it half, third? On the homes business, any land sales you expect in that business for FY 2026 as well? Very good. The FY 2027, actually, that's just our pipeline, Aynsley. We've got good, as you know, we've got a strong land bank and good visibility of our timetable, properly caveated with the number of months we expect for letters to pass back and forth. We have clear visibility of the sites that we're anticipating bringing through, obviously, in the current year and into 2027 and a good number beyond that. The risk there is not whether we get the sites, it's when we get the planning. That really is all about, you know, we sit there, we go through this at least monthly, and we're trying to get good visibility from the guys. Do you get the odd curveball? I'm not going to give you examples now, but I could. You know, how on earth are we here? That's another three months we've lost. Across the piece, we just need to make sure that we're doing our level best to get those through. That's the planning piece. No, I'm not factoring in that suddenly the whole north of England is going to have another, however many planning offices, and they're all going to start turning in their planning consents tomorrow. These are all based on what we're currently experiencing. You can still get further disappointments from that if you see what I mean. That's the risk. The land, a technical issue. Basically, what that is, Stefan alluded to it. Normally, Gleeson Land does not acquire land, but we have some in the portfolio, we have some historic options. This is a site, obviously, Guy and I and the team had decisions to make around whether, you know, are we confident to exercise that option? What the team cleverly did was to secure the buyer and exchange a sale option in the same breath as exercising the purchase option so that I didn't have to sit in front of the board and explain to them why Gleeson Land was suddenly becoming the biggest landowner in the south of England. We've got the sale locked in. The challenge, you won't believe it, the planning permission has been around for quite a while on that site. Am I allowed to say, the road regs have flipping changed since it was written. We've got our solution, but obviously, then that's got to go through the local authority to sign off the new. I know more about deflections and roundabouts, Aynsley, than I ever dreamt possible. We'll get that. We should get that sorted in plenty of time. The option, we exercise the site we sold this year. If it slips into next year, I think that's probably half the gross profit for the year. That's the risk I'm flagging because it won't be a huge failure. It won't be Gleeson Land's gone to pot. It'll be no, XYZ local authority took an early Christmas holiday. Hopefully, that's what you were driving at on that point. Gleeson Homes land sales, I think there is a small one. Small site sale. We don't typically have many land sales, but all the house builders will optimize their portfolio and they'll find they have maybe a bit too much land here and not enough there. They'll swap or they'll sell a site. We had a small site in East Yorkshire, which we sold. It was actually sold in the first half. We did report it at the interims, but we didn't have any other sale in the second half. Having said that, you do have full transparency. At this time last year, we didn't anticipate the land sale that then didn't happen. You know where we have an embarrassment of riches, you're always open to negotiation. That's how these things work. It's not selling the family silver. It's just balancing out the portfolio. Hi, Greg. Yeah, morning. Greg Bolton from Singer Capital Markets. Just three for me, please. Firstly, just on the timing of land sales within Gleeson Land. Just thinking about what the H1, H2 split might look like there. The next two are just on partnerships. On the two that you've signed in the year to date, given the more competitive pricing environment, have you had to offer greater discounts to those providers? Related to that, how does that influence the pipeline of partnerships and the timing of those landing this year? Okay, thanks, Greg. I'm going to just check with Stefan that I'm right on the timing of the... Was that a specific, or was it just, are we more second half weighted? I guess the first half, the first finish was quite the way. Yes, you're absolutely right. If everything lands as it's written in the plan today, then we'll have a better first half than we did last year and a better first half, second half split. I still think because the large one that we were talking about just now is going to be second half, it'll still be first half, second half weighted. The really important thing, Greg, you know, and I have to look, as Guy does all of the time, at managing this business optimally and over kind of three and five years, you know, a strat land business on a six month by six month is very difficult. I'm guiding. We guide as best we can on where we think things will land. What I can say, importantly, the underlying portfolio is in much better shape than it was when Guy joined and indeed when I joined. Better quantity, better quality. The visibility of that plan is improving. We come into this year with more consents than we did last year, but not all of them. The nirvana is to have all of them, but we're all bar one this year, and plus, of course, that technical approval. I expect that we will have a better first half and a better balanced H1 and H2. Please don't quote me back at that if I sit here with them. We have got one. We've got one in the bag that we did in July. Partnerships, yeah, no is the answer. We've got a good pipeline, but that point I made around not having to force the pace and working with partners that we know and trust. We are shielded from the hailstorm of some really aggressive pricing that we can see out there. We are selective about who we'll deal with. The two that we've just concluded, obviously, I'd like them to be, we'd always like to get more, but we are very happy with the lower price that they're paying. Charlie, morning. Yeah, it's morning. It's Charlie Campbell at Stifel. Just a couple of questions. The first one's really about sites. If I look back to your chart about site openings, there's an average of 69 sites in the 2027 financial year. You're opening sort of 20- 30 this year and next. That would imply, I don't know, roughly 2/3 of the sites in 2027 will be new sites, which I guess have inbuilt higher margins and also probably higher sales rates. Is that the right way of thinking about that? I guess sales rates, Charlie, will always be market dependent. I wouldn't say there's a, you know, that the sales rate is necessarily higher on the newer sites, but certainly the margin should be cleaner, yes. Although some of those have been in the portfolio for a while, I'm not going to sit here and say they're all 5% better than what we're currently building. Yes, I think as a general trend, those will have better margins. Stefan, do you want to? Yeah, I mean, definitely better margins. Although, remember, we suffered 2.7% build cost inflation over the year. That doesn't just come off existing sites. It'll come off future sites because it's now 2.7% more expensive to build on those sites. Revenues are essentially 0.3% higher. There's been, you know, those new sites are at lower margins than we would have expected a year ago, but they are still higher margin than current sites. I would, at the danger of repeating myself, say real margin recovery in this industry will come when confidence returns. The industry is selling at a decent sales rate and is no longer having to incentivize customers. As a consequence of that, extras will increase. Therefore, you will see strong margin recovery. We will see margin recovery anyway because those sites are at higher margin. The real recovery will come when the sector recovers, when demand recovers. Thanks, George. This was a sort of corollary then. Is build cost inflation and how you'd see that in the, I suppose, in the FY 2026 financial year and any general comments around materials and labor? I've looked at some of the other recent announcements, and everybody's using the same phrase, kind of low single- digit. I'm not going to be a pundit today and predict what's going to happen. I'm quite happy to trot out that same low single digit. We don't see huge pressure at the moment, is probably what I would say. I think that will come if we were to see a strong recovery in house building volumes. We will start to see that, particularly on labor rates, as you would expect. Actually, we don't see any pressure at the moment. Any excessive pressure? Groundworkers and RICS are very alert to sales rates. Thank you. Morning, Sam Cullen from Peel Hunt. I've just got one, really. If we go to the 3,000 unit ambition, how should we think about the balance sheet evolving to hit that target? What do you need to put in the ground in terms of WIPs from here? Can you release land from your land bank, or do you need to maintain the land bank year length going forward? Do you want to take that one? Yeah. First of all, I'd say we don't have a land bank. We have a land pipeline. Half of that pipeline is conditionally purchased. We don't own it yet. We have, I think, 11 sites that we own not yet build active. I would actually point to the £3.2 million average build width per site, which is higher, significantly higher than it was a year ago, £2.7 million. I would look at this. I would expect that £3.2 million to fall as an average because this year at June 2025, we had a number of large sites that we'd put significant infrastructure investment in, and so the average was higher. I would expect it to fall and then settle down and increase with inflation, if you like. Now, the average land cost per plot is increasing. You've seen that every year, and it's probably increasing more. It is increasing more than inflation, but it is still relatively low. I don't think we're going to, we're not going to get to a traditional house builder position where land costs 20%, 25%, can be 30% of selling price. It will remain below 10%, and it'll take some time to get to 10%. Can we manage that growth to a medium-term trajectory of a target of 3,000 units and not burn cash? Absolutely, we can. I would just add one small qualification. This year, we expect Gleeson Land to be very strongly cash generative. I do expect a little bit further investment in working capital in Gleeson Homes and Gleeson Homes actually to have maybe a slight negative operating cash flow this year. It had a very strong operating cash flow in the year we just reported. Thereafter, I would expect Gleeson Land to get back to the typical way in which it grows, which is whilst growing at double-digit volumes, opening significantly more sites, it will generate operating cash flow. Okay, I don't think there are any more questions in the room. Do we have any questions online, please? Yep, we've got a couple of questions for the webcast. The first question from Andy Murphy at Edison Research: Restructuring, what were the biggest surprises to the upside and downside of the initiative? Sorry, what were the, say that again? The biggest surprises to the upside and downsides of the initiative? I don't think there, I think it wasn't so much surprise. This was, if you like, a situation that I saw evolving over that kind of first 12, 18 months that I was there. Stefan and I and the team had discussed it. I think that we would, it was just that realization that actually the standardization that we'd put in place needed to be underpinned with something a little more fundamental. As I say, there was a bit of process weakness, a bit of lack of procedural discipline, and probably insufficient consequence for that lack of discipline. It just needed a bit of tightening on the ropes, some stronger leadership, which I think we've definitely got in place. An evolving perception, if you like, of what we needed to do. We've been on with that now for a year, and I'm much happier with, if I look at the ship today, than I would have been this time last year. Great, thank you. We have no further questions to the webcast, so I'll hand over to you for any closing remarks. Great. There's clearly no questions in the room. Thanks very much for your time, and I will look forward to having a coffee with you in a moment. Many thanks, all.