So, hello, everybody, and welcome to MJ Gleeson's half year results presentation for the six months to December 25. I'm delighted to be joined by colleagues this morning, of course, by Stefan, but also, with us are Guy Gusterson, the MD of Gleeson Land, Scott Stothard, Divisional Chair for Gleeson Homes, and also Simon Topliss, Gleeson Homes' Chief Operating Officer. We'll follow the normal format. I'll give you a quick overview. Stefan will talk you through the numbers, and then I'll come back and talk a little bit more about strategy, and outlook, and then we'll be happy to take your questions. So, autumn really was, as everybody knows, the autumn selling season turned into a bit of a damp bonfire night. And against that backdrop of dire budget headlines, we were quite pleased with what I'd characterize as a robust performance in a subdued market. 848 homes was up about 6% on the prior year, and our net res rate was actually up 9%. Still sub 0.5%, which is very frustrating to me, as you might imagine. But against that backdrop, I guess we would take 0.48%. Really pleased to see our partnerships, fledgling partnerships business starting to generate its first revenue and profits. And we are making progress on site openings, although, as ever, constrained by a difficult planning environment. A big stride forward on Project Transform. I'll talk about that this morning, but we have moved to the second phase of that restructure to complete the fundamental operating restructure. And as I say, I'll talk about that in a moment. And of course, it's all about, and Transform is all about, rebuilding margin, and I'll talk about some of the risks and opportunities in that regard. Turning to Gleeson Land, and we really are seeing increased momentum in that business, and it's great to see that that's as a direct consequence of the strategy that Guy's put in place. We're pleased with three, I suppose, fairly modest transactions, but three transactions in the first half, and I will just call out one landmark transaction in Gleeson Land, which is the sale of the first site that has been acquired since Guy joined the business, a lovely site in Chipping Norton in Oxfordshire. That is frankly remarkable in a Strategic Land business, to have a turnaround of less than three years, I think, Guy, from promo to sale. I'm not saying that we're gonna hold them to that for every other site that they've acquired, but it is really a hell of an achievement. We signed four new promotion agreements in the period. We have a number in the pipeline, and on a quite astonishing 15 planning applications submitted by Gleeson Land in the six months. Really pleasing then to see the portfolio growing both in quantity, but also in quality. So then turning to the big question of the moment, so how's the second half started? Well, I think the phrase is cautiously encouraged. We're seeing an open market sales rate at 0.55%. I'd like it to be more, if I'm honest. This time last year, we were seeing 0.79%. As you're aware, as we all found out, we suspected, in fact, I remember saying it, we suspected that that had something to do with the stamp duty changes, and indeed, that proved to be the case. But nonetheless, we're not seeing the same strength of uptick that we were this time last year. However, it is an improvement. We need that to continue to strengthen and to be sustained. Heaven forbid that it falls off, just like it did last year. Price increases, well, holding tentatively, we put through an increase of 2.5% on the 1st of January. That's held to an average of about 1.7%, which is modestly encouraging. Nonetheless, we are still giving away 4.5% on incentives. I think there's a little bit of an opportunity there, and I'll talk about that. The backdrop is good. Mortgage availability is strong, and interest rates coming down, as we know. Importantly, we are continuing to forecast further multi-unit sales, and that market as well, slightly tentative, and I'll talk about that. We are still seeing good interest in future partnerships, transactions, and again, I think every reason to be pleased that we took Gleeson into that part of the market, a couple of years ago, and we're starting to see the benefit of that. So to outlook, and that's, I guess, what the market is focused on this morning. So our open market sales rate, as I said, has improved. It's 0.55%. We'd like it to be, we'd like it to be stronger than that. So we need it to continue improving, and we need it to be sustained. Clearly, if the open market rate is weak, then we all run to the, you know, if you like, the safety valve of the bulk market, and we have done quite well in that market. I think it's fair to say that that market is feeling a little softer than it was. And so, you've got the double whammy there of if the open market sales rate proves to be weaker, then you're looking to more bulk, and if that market is weaker, then you've got an exponential hit to margin there. And the RPs are not yet back in that market in any numbers. We are talking to those guys, but then not expecting funding under the Continuous Market Engagement Program until April, and the strategic funding is even later in the year. And those margin risks clearly persist. As I said, buyers continue to need incentives. Selling price increases still not quite keeping pace with residual build cost inflation. And we are the regulatory headwinds continue to persist. There is still that presumption at government that whatever they throw at us, "Don't worry, guys, the land will absorb it," and viability, an increasing issue across the country. And so it's for those reasons, frankly, I consider it would be rash for me to stand here and say, "Don't worry, guys, we are going to stand by, and we're going to deliver the guidance that we have." And for that reason, we're saying, "Well, we can deliver the guidance that we have, but an awful lot depends on what happens over the next few weeks." And we will undertake to come back and tell you about the next few weeks in April. At that point, I will pause, and I'll let Stefan tell you about the last six months. Thank you, Graham. So, the first half really was a tough market, and our performance I would characterize as really robust. We grew revenue in both divisions, and at a group level, delivered 9.6% higher revenue. Group operating profit was 17.6% lower, and I will take you through the divisional results on the following slides. Interest costs were GBP 700,000 higher at GBP 2.2 million, and that reflects higher borrowings during the first half compared to the first half last year. Excluding the additional GBP 300,000 of exceptional costs, the group therefore delivered GBP 2 million of profit before tax. Now, to Gleeson Homes, they grew their revenue 5.9%, and that was through a combination of higher selling prices and higher volumes. The division delivered its first completions to its partners, 37 plots completed. It also delivered significantly higher bulk than last year. So the first half last year, we delivered 95 private bulk. This year, it was 190. So those average selling prices, they were, on a reported basis, up 2.5%. Underlying selling prices, that's on a like-for-like basis, were up 1.7%, and a richer bed and site mix contributed to the other increase in reported selling prices. Now, gross profit was higher, driven by that higher volume. Gross profit was 4% higher at GBP 33.4 million. You'll notice that gross margin as a percentage of turnover was lower, 19.8%. That reflects the additional bulk sales that we completed during the first half, extended prelims as sites, slower-selling sites continued to extend, so the fixed costs on those increased. Continued use of incentives, while we did grow gross, gross selling prices, we continued to need to offer incentives, which averaged about 4.5%, and the build cost inflation marginally exceeded that underlying selling price increase. Now, on overheads, overhead costs were GBP 3.4 million higher compared to the prior half year, and let me break that down. Pay inflation averaged about 3.2%. We had the impact of National Insurance, of course, which went up in April 2025. We invested more in IT systems, and in particular in cybersecurity. Compared to the prior half year, there was a different level of accruals for bonuses and share-based payments. So the higher volume drove higher gross profit, GBP 1.3 million higher, but that was more than offset by the relatively higher overhead costs. So, Gleeson Homes, forgive me, reported a lower operating profit of GBP 7 million. Now, the forward order book actually grew quite strongly. It was from quite a low base, but we grew the forward order book by 64% and to 978 plots. So the biggest growth in partnerships, so we had a very successful 12 months, particularly the last six months, at growing our partnership forward orders, from 105 to 382 forward orders. Bulk, which is mostly private bulk, those went up by 36, and very, very pleasingly, we saw our open market forward orders increase compared to December last year by 20% to 416. Now, Gleeson Land. So Gleeson Land had a really busy first half on site completions. They completed three site sales. There were no sales in the first half last year. That generated GBP 2 million of gross profit. We increased provisions on WIP by GBP 700,000, which meant we actually reported a gross profit of GBP 1.3 million. Overheads were a little bit higher, but with that higher gross profit, it means the loss that we book in the first half reduced to GBP 600,000. And remember, Gleeson Land is, within the year, quite a lumpy business, and we typically see a very low performance in the first half and a very strong second half. Now, turning to the balance sheet. Inventories increased by GBP 46 million to GBP 416.7 million. Gleeson Homes grew its inventory by GBP 31 million, and if I point to the land WIP, that increased through the purchase of over 2,300 plots on 17 sites during the last 12 months, at an average cost for those purchases of GBP 17,800. And in Gleeson Land, whose inventory increased by GBP 15 million over the last 12 months, as Graham said, they had a really busy period. They submitted 15 planning applications, and we had all of the associated costs with the quite busy activity ahead of and at the point of submitting a planning application. I would highlight and remind you that the Gleeson Land WIP includes a significant amount of WIP on an owned site that we've conditionally sold, that we expect to complete the sale of by the end of the financial year, and that would correspondingly reduce the WIP quite significantly by the end of this year. Other liabilities includes much higher trade creditors, but that's compared to what was quite a low level of trade creditors 12 months ago, and is broadly in line with where we were at the start of the year, at June 2025. Land creditors were higher, and they were over 10% of land asset value, and that reflects a few larger sites that we've bought over the last 12 months, particularly in the last six months, and on deferred terms, so we had higher land creditors. So turning to cash flow. Operating cash outflow, typical in the first half, is an outflow. That was GBP 11.7 million, lower than the first half of last year. And that was due to Gleeson Land, swinging from a net cash outflow, which it was in the first half of last year, to quite a strong operating cash inflow this year. Higher average borrowings, as I mentioned earlier, increased our interest cost, and therefore our cash interest payments were GBP 500,000 higher at GBP 1.6 million. Our CapEx was higher, again, against a relatively low first half. We opened more show homes and sales arenas in this first half than last year. As a result, in the six months, we had a cash outflow of GBP 6.6 million, and that resulted in slightly higher opening net debt of GBP 22.5 million. So on dividends, the board is declaring an interim dividend of 4p. That's unchanged from the interim dividend last half year. That dividend will be paid on the 7th of April to shareholders on the register at the close of business on the 6th of March. Thank you, and I'll hand you back to Graham. Thanks, Stefan. So turning to first to Gleeson Homes. I don't know how many times I've stood here and talked to you about a cautious market environment. We have a cautious market environment. The buyers are clearly there. We know that, so this isn't post GFC. If you look... In fact, if you look at the ONS residential transactions for last year, they're at a normal level. There is not, you know, we're not at a sort of diabolical subdued level in the wider market. Now, there are all sorts of other dynamics in there. We know there's an overhang in the secondhand market, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, and if you're looking at a transaction to sell a home, it's quite difficult. But the buyers therefore are there. And we have a more benign, but or an increasingly benign backdrop, in my view. So you have the affordability graphs are improving. We've had several years of wage growth outpacing house price inflation. We've got the base rate gradually trending down, and we've got a very strong mortgage market environment, as you can see, more well-priced, high LTV products available than you can shake a stick at. But... But what we're lacking is confidence, and it's really, that means it's really, it does make each sale hard work. It means that our pricing, our incentives, our appearance of our stock, et cetera, has to be absolutely spot on. We basically have to do the hard work and convince our customers of the benefits of buying a beautiful Gleeson home. Project Transform then. Impossible to overstate the importance of this to Gleeson Homes for the future. I'm really pleased with the way that the changes that we announced in July have settled down. Scott, sparing his blushes, has made a great start, and equally, Simon doing really well in his role. So I'm much more confident in the leadership of the homes business, and the relish, if you like, with which the leadership has set about those changes and the way the organization has received those changes, has given us, has emboldened us to move perhaps more quickly than we were going to, to the second phase of that restructure, which we announced in January, and that completes the operating restructure for Gleeson Homes. And just briefly, what have we done? So we've moved to a single division, as you're aware, with six regions. You know that we combined two of those regions, Greater Manchester, Merseyside, and Cumbria, into a single leadership team back in the summer. We've taken the decision to actually push that a bit further. We're not closing either region, but we are taking Greater Manchester, Merseyside, down to effectively a skeleton team, comprising customer care to look after the homes, but also importantly, land, while we rebuild the pipeline in that region and get to a kind of critical mass, which will then justify a full development team and a full region in that important, important area for us. So structure-wise, what have we done? The changes we've made affect land, customer care, marketing and finance. That land change, really very important, and it's a move away from the old Gleeson model. And it's a big move for the organization because land was bought centrally, reported centrally, and then handed over to the regions. It was a big change we knew we needed to make. We've now made that change. It's settling well, so our land directors report to their regional managing directors and work with their regional teams, and that's a critical step. If you think about that moment of, if you have a central land team and they hand over the site to the regional team, then magically, you lose 2% or 3% of margin, and in a growing, strong market, that may get washed under the carpet and lost here and there. But in reality, what you need is one team owning that site from selection to bid right through to delivery, and that will just work better for us, so a really important move. Customer care, moving to a much more recognized model whereby the site team will hand over the unit defect-free after eight weeks. It benefits our customers. It's a much cleaner, clearer system for them, but more importantly, it actually benefits our site teams because they can concentrate on building quality homes, which is what they need to do, and that will help with pace of build, which has been an issue for Gleeson. We're routing our marketing business partners to report into their region, not into center. We've got a great team at center. We're not changing what they do, but we're just taking out some of the friction so that the regions can be precise and agile in what they need from marketing, and we'll get that response much more effectively. And we're also taking the step of bringing our finance business partners into region to report to their regional managing director. So you now have a complete regional team, which is led by a strong regional managing director, and it's reasonable now to say to those guys, "Okay, I need you to take the ownership, responsibility, and accountability for your business." It really does feel like a better controlled, more grown-up business. Turning to those regional teams, we have made a number of changes at regional managing director level and indeed in the functional directors. We do have it is simple, straightforward to say that we have much stronger regional leadership in the business now. We have taken the opportunity to tighten the belt on overheads a little further as part of that process, and that will run to about no more than 25 heads, but important that we keep that as lean as we can. We know that our overhead, larger than it should be for the number of units that we produce, and we have to leverage that and grow into that overhead. And that's actually an opportunity for us, going forward. That will generate exceptional costs in this second half. The cash costs, the people costs, are not exceeding GBP 1.5 million, and there will be some costs in writing off some old land assets, mostly pre-development costs of up to GBP 3 million, in Greater Manchester. And that's in Greater Manchester, of course. The cost savings, we expect to be about GBP 1 million on an annualized basis. But stepping back, as I say, really importantly for me, the organization is completely transformed, is pretty much unrecognizable from the Gleeson Homes that we would have had even this time last year. I think we've got the right structure and process in place, and I'm sure we've got the right people in place, and I'm excited for what that can deliver going forward. And important then, when I talk about the challenges in margin, my biggest confidence around restoring our margin is Project Transform. I need those regional teams to be able to take ownership and perform, both in terms of the appraisal when right from bid appraisal through to build and commercial control, and that's what we, that's what we need to see. That's what I'm confident we will see. But just breaking down those margin challenges, they'll be familiar to you, but I've already touched on build cost inflation continues. Even though it's low single, low single digits, I think we're about 2.7% in that first half. But you know, labor costs really do increase. And so although it's not at a ridiculous level, it's very difficult when house price inflation is so constrained. Also, the curse of extended prelims when you're selling slower than you planned, and those regulatory headwinds, and additional tax costs add, continue to add to the burden. There's an item there, improving subcontractor base. I won't take too long on that this morning, but that's an elective cost, if you like. Why are we doing that? Why are you doing that, Graham? We need, in order to be able to build, at the pace that we require, we need to improve our subcontractor base. The key one is our groundworkers. It was the old Gleeson badge of honor that we only use labor-only groundworkers. That can probably work for you at building a few hundred units, but actually, it rapidly becomes a false economy when you're trying to build at volume. What you get with supply and fixed groundworkers is a greater pace, a better quality, and greater reliability. That's not a comment on all labor-only groundworkers everywhere. It's as you try to use more and more to, to grow at pace, you're going, you're not going to get the quality and pace that you need. Now, that switch will add on roughly 2.5% to the cost of those groundworks on your appraisal, and that hits our margin. "So why are you doing it, Graham?" Well, I'm doing it because it's the right thing for the business, for today, also for the medium and the longer term. And I firmly believe it will actually save us money, as, as we, as we grow and as we get the reliability and quality in the delivery. Bulk sales continue. Stefan's touched on it. They will always, of course, continue to put downward pressure on your margin. But there are mitigations, and we're not just lying there and taking it. And that's all about, and I've talked to you about this before, the potential in sales. So I mentioned the January price increases. That's encouraging. Really important that we're right on that, and as we, particularly as we bring these newer sites on, we make sure we're not underpricing them in the market. And there is, as we start to get any sort of recovery, huge potential in incentives and extras. And as you can see, incentives currently running at 4.5%. Back in 2022, they were less than 1%. And of course, incentives steal from extras, 'cause you're giving it away instead of selling it. In 2022, we were doing nearly 2% of extras, which is quite strong on a, you know, on Gleeson Homes, given that we sell at the affordable end. We're currently doing 1%, if we're lucky. The improving sales rate is absolutely key. It's key to both of those, and it also is key to constraining those extended prelims. Can't underestimate the small sustained improvements in effective demand can have an exponential effect on margin. So of course, sales and marketing, therefore, you won't be surprised, is a huge focus for us, and we're not sitting around waiting for the market to come to us. You're aware, I think I've talked about this every time I've stood in front of you. It was clear to me that Gleeson needed to improve, to up its game on sales. I'm pleased that we now generally sell at or around the same rate as the HBF. We used to be materially below the HBF rate. I still believe we can do better, but I don't want to. I I believe that our product and our where we are in the country, we should actually be above that average, and we're really trying to get after that. But I'll just draw out three quick points on here that we're specifically focusing on at the moment. So that point around bringing marketing into the regions, I think that will improve our edge. Incentives is an interesting one. I think we've got lazy. Scott and I have discussed this. As what happens with PPI, with carpets and curtains, as units come up to be complete and they're going into stock, people say, "Well, actually, to sell that, I'm gonna, I'm gonna put some PPI in there." Now, what they should then do is remember they've got that PPI, and that should reduce what we call the dealer margin, the 5% that they're able to give away. I think we've got lazy about that recovery. Scott's done some quite, quite granular work on that. So I think there's an opportunity there for us to tighten up today, and we're right on that. And the third area where very excited about, actually, is Part Exchange. I will credit Scott with pushing for this and Simon for delivering this in a record three weeks in the run-up to Christmas to have it ready for the first of January. We've always had Part Ex. We had an outsourced product, so the offers were derisory, and nobody used it. And we've brought it in-house, taken out the middleman, so we can make much more realistic offers to our customers. It's working really well already. Fear not, we've all seen how that can go wrong. So for sure, Scott and I have know exactly how this needs to work. We're being very disciplined around the type of units we can take on, the proportion it can represent of the selling price, and the prices we will offer. We're also restricting the balance sheet commitment any one region can have at any one time. So we're under control, but it's working well for us. Turning to site openings and getting hold of sites, planning, in a short sentence, remains the biggest single impediment to Gleeson's ability to grow our business in the in into the opportunity that we know we have. We did purchase nine sites in the first half. I'm reasonably happy with that, but the opportunity is larger. The planning environment remains tough. You can see from the chart. I don't need to give you the detail on that, but as you know, just look at that stat in the last bullet, some 43 sites awaiting planning. I do think that Transform will help us here. When your land is being promoted by the regional team, I think that gives you an edge in terms of your timetable and your focus. So it will be better, but that might buy us a month in 24, 25, 26 months. We are not gonna solve the planning, however good we are, we're not gonna solve planning on our own. We've had a good start to the year. We've had five consents since the beginning of January, and one of those, the largest ever for Gleeson Homes, which was 600 units in Spilsby, in Lincolnshire. So pace of site openings obviously very closely related. Reasonably happy with nine sites opened in the first half, one more than last year. We're aiming to open eight sites in the second half. But the key is that we get to that steady rhythm of an average 10 net new sites annually, and that's what we're targeting for FY 2027. Importantly, on sales, we opened seven outlets in the first half, but absolutely critical that we hit that 12 new outlets in the second half. That's really key to getting our sales, to getting the sales that we need in H2. Gleeson Partnerships, as I say, I'm upbeat and really pleased with the progress that they're making in what's been a difficult market, really, since we set up that partnerships team, so well done to them. The housing associations definitely back in negotiation. We're seeing really, really good interest. They actually need their pocket money to be delivered. PRS investors are still definitely remaining active. We signed three new agreements in the first half, and we're discussing. So we currently now have eight sites under development, and we have discussions progressing on a further 11. So we continue to target that 20% of our business in partnerships. Turning to Gleeson Land, as I said, really pleasing that the momentum is building, and it's a clear and direct result of the strategy that Guy set around that presence on the ground in three regions, the Southern Region, the Western Region, and Northern Home Counties, and that helps with. It really does help us with building our relationships, our networks in those regions, and convincing vendors that we understand their market. Market remains, I would say, strong for our prime sites. We're still getting a good list of bids and bidders, but I wouldn't say it's an ebullient market. We won't have kind of four of the majors wrestling with each other at the top of the list. It's a bit more gentlemanly than that at the moment, which means that transactions are undoubtedly taking longer to get over the line. It's a market when your buyer can afford to take that bit longer over his or her due diligence. And interestingly, we're seeing quite a few bids conditional on getting the RP deal sorted in the background, and that's a direct consequence of what I was just saying about the RP market. We're still investing in our market-leading research and data analytics capabilities. Really impressive what those guys get up to, and that helps us both in site finding, in winning the bids, sitting in front of the vendors, and indeed, sitting in front of planners to get the consent over the line. Still very disciplined about our criteria and our hurdle rates. We're currently, I think, turning away about 95%, Guy, of the sites that we're offered. But pleased with a win rate. When we actually commit to... We decide to bid, we're winning about a third of the bids that we make, and that's that means that the portfolio is growing steadily and strongly, both in quantity and in quality, and importantly, continuing to maintain that 100% customer satisfaction score. So a really busy period in Gleeson Land. As I said, we sold three sites. I would remind you, we continue to grind through with the technical approval on the large options site. And I'm still hoping that we'll get that done by June, but the pace of negotiations would try the patience of a saint, I have to say. Nonetheless, we'll keep you updated on that progress. We signed four new promos in the first half. We're targeting a further 10 in the second half. That record 15 planning applications, that would be a record for Gleeson Land in any 12-month period, never mind a six-month period. And I can't let them yet go off for a lie down 'cause they're still working feverishly. So, yeah, as I say, good progress in Gleeson Land, and really feverish activity. So turning to the summary, as I said, a robust performance in a subdued market, in Gleeson Homes. Cautiously encouraged by the signs of recovering demand, but importantly, it's just too early to tell if that will continue to improve and be sustained. And we do need to see that stronger market, both to get the sales rate up and to support a margin recovery. So our current market expectations remain achievable, but the reality is that the market we're facing into, for the reasons I've described, risks a lower outturn, and it would be foolish of me to stand here and say, "Oh, I can absolutely stand by that. I know what's gonna happen over the next eight weeks, so stand on me, we'll deliver those, deliver those results." So, as one of your number elegantly put it this morning, we are keeping our powder dry. We will undertake to come back in April with a bit more knowledge and tell you and give you better guidance. But importantly, probably for me, much more importantly, we are well positioned now, in both businesses, for the future and to deliver our strategy. Project Transform is delivering a better Gleeson Homes business. We have the right structure, and we have the right people. And in Gleeson Land, as I've described, the right strategy and absolutely seeing the momentum and primed for growth, and outperformance. So we are confident that the group's in a very strong position to deliver on our exciting objectives. At that point, I will... that brings the presentation to a close. And I'll be pleased to take any questions. Mr. Kearsey, very swift with you. Sorry to interrupt. Costas is technical. Oh, that's very frustrating. Sorry. Okay. Good. Thank you, Scott. But let's take your questions, and I do apologize to anyone online if there's been a problem with the slides, forgive me. Adrian, sorry. Morning. Adrian Kearsey, Panmure Gordon. Changing the strategy, going much more regional, in terms of land and land costs, I've noticed, within your land, the plot cost has gone from GBP 14 to GBP 17. As you change to a more regional approach, do you think that that's gonna change as the buyers think more about sort of the detail of delivery? Hang on, sorry. You're talking about land within Gleeson Homes? Within Gleeson Homes. Yeah. So, we have, I mean, in essence, we have looked at our land buying strategy, and that's actually a key part of putting the responsibility for land into the regions, frankly, where it belongs. So we have bought one or two slightly shorter term sites, i.e., closer to achieving their planning, either with some sort of consent. That's actually a really important balance within the business. I think it's fair to say there was too much effectively strategic land that we had. So great future for the business, but, you know, we need to iron out some of that lumpiness, so we need land that we can get on and develop. And of course, where there's greater certainty around the planning, your average plot cost is going to be higher. We maintain the same hurdles, because, of course, a lot of the hard work's done and a lot of the risk is taken out. But that means that when you look at the straight, what you're paying per plot, well, that number's going to be higher. Now, you shouldn't confuse that, Gleeson Homes is moving away from being, you know, the provider of affordable homes. We're not suddenly diving in and competing with Redrow for really fancy land next to the railway station. We are still targeting our affordable product, but we're leavening the mix of our land portfolio to improve the short-term land. Next question. Aynsley, morning. Thanks. Morning, Aynsley Lammin from Investec. Just two from me. First of all, on the kind of market expectations you still see as being achievable, is that both in terms of completions, or are you talking about just PBT? I mean, presumably, you could do some bulk sales if you, you know, the open market is not as good as you'd like it to be in the spring selling season. Just some guidance, a bit more on that. And then secondly, on the... Just for clarification, on slide 23, the average number of sites-... This is probably me just being stupid, but the kind of where you've got build sites not actively selling, and then the sales outlets, should we read that, that the 26, 27 number, where it goes from 67 to 71, that's the average sites you expect to be selling from during that year? Or actually, is it going from 57 to 55, and at that point, you'd have kind of 16 under build, you know, build, but not selling? Just trying to work that out a bit. I'm gonna. I'll take the first one. I'm gonna pass the second one 'cause these are Stefan's coloring pencils, not mine. But, just on your, on your, first question around, market expectations. So, I mean, a number of factors in play, Aynsley. So, yes, completions, of course, and, don't forget that the, the expectations that we set, that, that were in the market were unchanged from, June or July, I think, was, was when, when we last changed that forecast. We've, as I said before, we had no autumn selling season, so we go into the, second half with, with more to do. And so, as I said, on the... and, you know, back in January, we're, we're very dependent on, a, a strong spring selling season. We may yet get a strong spring selling season. We were idly debating this morning, what would we be saying if we were now seeing a 0.79% sales rate rather than a 0.55% sales rate? That confidence is so fragile, it would just be silly of me to try to predict what that sales rate's gonna be. So completions absolutely is a critical element of that. And then, the bulk, obviously, we've been quite good at that. We've found some good investors, and of course, our numbers are not that high, so we're not looking to shift thousands in bulk. And we had for the discounts we were attaining in the first half. I'm probably not allowed to say this, but we've seen bulk deals with discounts as low as sort of 6%, 7%, 6%-7%, and probably a range in the first half. I'm gonna say 6%-15% on our bulk. That market's softening, and I've noticed one or two others have said the same thing. So it does depend on us finding the buyers and then agreeing a deal that we're content to take. But, I mean, there are some gouging numbers out there. As we're fortunate that we, you know, we're looking to do whatever the number comes out at. But if you're looking to do 200, you're not having to accept the sort of pricing that some are, if you're looking to do 1,000. But it is a challenging market. So, and both of those go to your middle point around margin and profits, i.e., you know, what will we be, what open market will we be landing? What bulk will we need, and therefore, what will be the impact on that margin? So all of those variables in play. Does that answer the question, Aynsley? Yeah. Thank you. Stefan, do you want to? Our average sale sites for the first half were 58. We think they're gonna be about 56 average in the second half, so we'll be selling on average for the year, about 57 sites. That's broadly where we had expected to be, maybe a little bit, point something of a site on average, lower. With the slower opening of build sites, which is driven by what has become a tougher planning environment in the North and the Midlands, this, the pace of sale site openings, has changed a little bit. So we do think we're gonna open more sale sites next year than we will close sites, so we'll end the year with more sites. At the moment, we're estimating that we'll actually end up with eight more sale sites at the end of next year than the end of this year. But the timing of site opening and closing means that next year is likely to be a couple of sites on average, low. We'll be selling on a couple of sites, average, lower than this year. So the 57 this year will look more like 55 last year. That's a lower number than we were expecting. And let me give you a stat that one of my colleagues pulled together, came from some Glenigan and ONS data. If we look at the residential planning permissions that were granted during 2025, in the North of England and the Midlands, they're 27% down on 2024. 27% fewer residential planning consents granted in the north of England, England and the Midlands. In the south, it's only 10%. Still down 10%. I mean, a shocking statistic. So planning has. And now we've got 43 sites in the planning system, and they are all working their way through, and they're closer to the end than they were six months ago. So we have perhaps greater visibility on the timing of those sites opening. So we're quite reasonably confident on these site opening numbers, which is why I'm giving you a probably firmer steer than I have done in the past. So expect to be selling on slightly fewer sites next year, which means we're gonna be doing probably more bulk unless we see a strong recovery in open market demand. But then the following year, actually, the timing of this means that the following year, the number of average sale sites will be significantly higher. ... Alastair? Yeah, sorry, just one question following on from that comment. 27% down in the north, that was planning permissions, was it? Planning consents granted by local- Okay, that's okay. ... authorities on residential sites. Yep, yep. Yeah. But 10% in the south, just about every trade mag, news story, suggests it's harder to get planning permission in the south than the north. Can you try and square that? Any view? I can't actually. Alastair, it's a stat. I mean, if Stefan's got the stat wrong, I'm sorry, but that's what the data seems to be telling us, but I'm not going to speculate why. Actually, yeah. I mean, there's no doubt that planning has not improved in the North and Midlands. Yeah. It's taking longer to get planning through, and Section 106 is taking longer. And those numbers have been reported by various, by Savills, by HBF. You know, planning is tougher. I was trying to make a point between how much tougher it's been in the North and the Midlands than the South. Yeah. Actually, in Gleeson Land, I don't think they feel as if planning has gotten as bad as it has in Gleeson Homes, which is a southern business compared to a Northern Midlands business. While I'm on the mic, can you provide a bit more of a qualitative view of what's happening with the PRS investors and the RPs? The RPs have definitely been wanting to do it, but have been funds constrained, and the PRS investors seems to see the economic outlook cost of debt has been an issue. But can you just have a very quick round up on what direction of travel are we in just right now? So, a positive, Alastair, is. I, you know, it would be very quick. I do stress, you know, it's a we are a fledgling partnerships business. We've worked very hard on building our reputation and building our relationships. I'm delighted with the feedback we're getting from our customers. No secrets, Lloyds Living, Home Group, Castles & Coasts. So that is going, that is going well. But so we don't need thousands of PRS and, you know, and registered provider purchases to move the dial. And so we're very happy with the interest that we're seeing. And as I said, I think we've got 11, you know, deals under negotiation now. Whether they all happen, but, you know, it's a good level for us. But basically, are they ready to jump? Yeah. Are they? Yeah. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Caroline. Thank you. Caroline de La Soujeole from Singer Capital Markets. Just coming back to planning, which clearly is still very an issue right now. The planning bill, infrastructure bill, got royal assent in December. Do you feel that can make a difference? And if so, how quickly can it unlock, unblock what you're seeing? I mean, so I could moan for hours, Caroline. Look, the planning, just like the NPPF reform that we saw was very positive. I think the thrust of the new NPPF consultation is positive, but it's not gonna massively move the needle. And the Planning and Infrastructure Act has some great ideas, actually, around simplification of the process, albeit, and I'm not a specialist in the way laws are drafted, but I understand that that has created the primary legislation for delegated authorities. It hasn't actually put the delegated authorities in place. A more cynical person than me might say, maybe they're waiting till after the local elections before they do that. But so creating the conditions and generally improved, but it's not going to move the dial on the complexity and the regulations and the lack of resource that hold up planning consents and Section 106 agreements in local authorities. And that's what really constrains Gleeson Homes' ability to get the permissions we need to open the sites to grow the business. Very good. Clyde. Clyde Lewis with Peel Hunt. Grand finale. Just building it up. Slide 37, the... It's tucked away in the appendix, but the cheaper to buy than rent one. I mean, this has been, I suppose, this way round for a while. Is it that deposit issue that is the biggest stumbling block, or do you think there's something else stopping those renters from converting into buyers? Wow, it's a great question. I'm gonna let Stefan answer or give his view as well, because he studies this data a lot. But I'll give you my... I mean, my sense is that the deposit for a Gleeson Home is not the biggest stumbling block out there right now. For me, it is about confidence more than affordability or deposit. But Stefan, what's your- ... That's a great question, because I do think it's quite odd that we've got an increasingly affordable housing market where— please pore over the appendices, and if you'd like more, I can send you more. Yeah. Well, all of the metrics, all of the factors suggest we should be in a very, very strong market. So it is significantly cheaper to buy than rent. For first-time buyers, particularly in the North and the Midlands, the proportion of their take-home pay that is spent on mortgage payments is the same as it's been for the last 30 years. The savings rates are the highest since pre-COVID. So everything points to a really strong market. I don't think it's deposit. I think there's a fundamental intangible that's missing at the moment, and that's confidence. And it's the confidence to make that decision, that buy decision. Now, it's interesting if you look at our KPIs. We've seen a really strong increase in web traffic. So, you know, up significantly on the last three months, up significantly on the last three months of last year. I think that the demand is building. The confidence just isn't there. So I— There may be some elements of deposit, certainly for those looking at more expensive homes than the high quality, highly affordable Gleeson Homes. I think it comes down to the C word, confidence. Is it politics or the weather? Oh, Lord, we could be all day, John, on what it actually is. Somebody said to me the other day, "Let's just hope England win the World Cup." Who knows? Who knows? But I, you know, in seriousness, when you read the January, the traditional January articles on how's the year going to go, I'm not in the camp where a lot of the economists went, which was, "Woe is me, we're baked in for another really bad year." Echo what Stefan's just said, the fundamentals are there. Personal balance sheets, not necessarily mine, but most personal balance sheets are in a decent shape. Savings rate is high. Allegedly, consumer confidence is generally picking up. So I think the conditions are there, and as we know from previous cycles, it can. Once it starts to pick up, it can pick up quite quickly. I'm not forecasting that, but I'm not writing it off. We've got some questions online. Hi, yes. The first one is, could you move the slides, Graham? We have one from Matt Hayes from Cavendish. Hello, Matt. He asks: What are your full-year working capital expectations following the land division inflow in the first half? Gosh. Like, yes, please. So, so we've got we've got elevated working capital in Gleeson Land. It's driven by two things. One of them I think will remain elevated, and that's that we've invested significantly in WIP on sites that are progressing quite well through to a planning submission. So, you know, planning submission activity drives expenditure. So I think we'll see it more elevated than in previous years. And of course, we are growing the portfolio, and to sign up a promotion agreement, you do pay a, I'm gonna say, relatively modest sign-on fee with your landowner, plus all legals. So I think there'll be an elevated level compared to previous years. But there's an additional element, which is about GBP 8 million. That's the value of a site that we purchased that has been back-to-back conditionally sold, that we would expect to be sold this year, and therefore, the balance at June 2026 will be reduced by that amount. Brilliant. Thank you very much. We have no more questions from the webcast. I'd like to hand back for some closing remarks. Yeah. Charlie. On the front. So I just think about the... Sorry, Charlie Campbell at Stifel. Just to think about the gross margin in homes in the second half. I'm guessing you've kept 1.7% of the house price increase, so that probably just about covers build costs. You've then got presumably more volumes in the second half going through the fixed site overheads. So should we think of the kind of the gross margin in the first half being a kind of low point, and it moves on from there, or am I missing something? I'd certainly like to think so. I think I wouldn't want to say to you, expect a really strong recovery in gross margin percentages in the second half. I think this, the 0.55% open market sales rate is weaker than we were expecting, certainly a lot weaker than we saw last year. That weakness feeds through into the inability to get strong gross price increases to reduce incentives. While there is still build cost inflation, and there are lots of things that are driving build cost inflation, then, you know, we are likely to see, I think, until we see a strong recovery in open market demand, we're likely to see margins not recover strongly. I think some of the forecasts I've seen this morning essentially anticipate a 0.2%-0.4% recovery in H2 margins to get to about a 20% full-year gross margin. Thereafter, I would be quite surprised if we didn't see some margin recovery coming from there in future years. If that Yeah, it's very helpful. Probably enough answer. Yep. Very good. Well, on the basis that there are no more questions, thank you for those questions. Always a good discussion. Thank you for coming. I know it's a busy morning for all of you. I gather some- Mm. There was another company, well, I don't know. Really good to see you. Many thanks, and bring things to a close.