Good morning, everybody. My name is Gerry Gallagher, one of the consumer team here at Deutsche Bank, on the consumer staples side. It's my very great pleasure to introduce you today to the senior management team of Imperial Brands. On my immediate left is Stefan Bomhard, CEO, and on my right is Lukas Paravicini, CFO. We're gonna conduct this as a fireside chat format, with me asking a series of questions. I'll see if there's anything from the floor. Before we go into the Q&A, Stefan would like to introduce the business with a few words. Stefan. I mean, Gerry, it's a great opportunity to finally meet in person again, yeah? Recognize it's the first time for a face-to-face. Yes. Opportunity to speak with you and then with investors here as part of the Deutsche Bank conference. It's also a great time because we're getting close to the end of our two-year strengthening period of our five-year strategic plan. It's a perfect time to talk about it. Some investors asked us this morning already, how do you feel where you are? I think the exciting thing for us, I'm super happy where we are, because two years in, or one and a half years into the strategy, you now can see the strategy starting to make a meaningful difference to the performance of Imperial and the transformation of Imperial really truly being underway. There are a couple of points I would point out. Number one, we clearly are well on track to fix the performance of our top tobacco markets, yeah? At the half year results that we just very recently published, we're reporting share gains in aggregate by our top five markets, which is a very meaningful departure from being the number one share donor in these markets. At the same time, we're also seeing with the test markets on heated tobacco, and the test market of vaping in the U.S. completing successfully, I think we're also now getting across to the public our commitment to NGP, but in a very different way to the past, reflecting our challenger status as the smallest tobacco company in this field, yes? Very less visible to you, a culture change at Imperial that is a key enabler for our long-term success in our industry is well underway. Finally, that's logically more visible to you, the cash generation, that is a key element of investing in our sector, is now constantly delivering, having allowed us to deleverage the company, very meaningfully since we started a new strategy that shows our commitment to achieving the right levels of capital returns to our shareholders. I stop here, but really happy where we are as part of our five-year strategic plan. Well, that was either a very good start or a very bad start. It's very good because you've answered my first four questions, or very bad 'cause you've answered my first four questions. Anyway, let's see how we go from here. I just wanna pick up on this strengthening phase. 2-year strengthening phase, you're 18 months in plus, you're then gonna go into the acceleration phase. Mm-hmm. Could you just talk to us what that means on the ground, and perhaps, well, from a more visible perspective to a shareholder at least, what it means in terms of growth and earnings, and cash flow for the business? Sure. I think, Gerry, the biggest visible difference is we committed as part of the strengthening phase to deliver a CAGR in that strengthening period of time for our adjusted operating profit of mid-single digit. Gross. Yeah. Which is something that Imperial hasn't achieved in the past. Yeah? Given how well we've gone through our strengthening phase, I feel very confident when you look at the aggregate of the next three years, that we will achieve that mid-single digit adjusted operating profit growth. The benefit for shareholders is gonna come through. Yeah? At the same time, as you talked about capital returns, and kind of capital allocation, it's also very clear we've strengthened the business now in a way that allows us to achieve the capital returns that I think make tobacco overall attractive and should make Imperial very attractive. Yeah? Yeah. I think what shareholders will see, as we complete the strengthening phase, some good delivery at the bottom line of the business, but at the same time, that bottom line growth, and the other action we've put into place will drive a very attractive capital return for our shareholders. Just picking up on that last point, I'll put you slightly on the spot or Lukas slightly on the spot. Could you give us any more color on where the buyback question kicks in? Yes. Sorry, not the buyback question, the buyback itself. Yes. The question's kicked in already, but. I think, yes, you pointed that properly out, you know, that expectation is out there in the market, and I think you should see that in the conjunction of our capital allocation framework, which was launched together with our strategy, and it's an integral part. This is very important. It's an integral part of our strategy, and we look at it as one of the key value drivers. Out of that capital allocation, we have four pillars, which is really important to us that we look at them in conjunction. It is firstly to make sure that we have sustainable business growth, and we invest behind that. That's what we just said we did in the last two years. We also want to make sure that we have a strong balance sheet. That is important for us so that we can then, in a sustainable and meaningful way, return surplus capital. We do that through a progressive dividend. Which is growing 1% this year, and is really considering our underlying business performance, which is important. Also, and this is key, is to come to the share buyback that you alluded to. We are close to that lower end of the leverage that we have pointed out. That leverage is 2-2.5x net debt to EBITDA. We had 2.2 last year, had a strong first half. Cash is coming in strongly, so we're not far away from that. In that sense, you know, we are almost there to complete that capital framework and launch a meaningful and systematic share buyback. Okay, thank you for that answer. I've ended up asking my last question second, and I'll now come back to try and answer my questions in the order I had them, which did have some semblance of rationality to it, believe me. The second question, now the third. I just wanna come back and looking at big picture strategic stuff. Yeah. You've talked about the culture of Imperial. You mentioned it at the half year results and wanting to change the culture. This is very difficult for us, from the outside, to factor in. It's difficult for us to understand. At the same time, we know it's unbelievably important. Can you talk to us about why you think you needed to change the culture, from what to what? Just help us put a little bit more color on what you're doing and what the end game is there. Sure. Gerry is right to say, I think it's one of the more difficult subjects to talk about because there are no numbers or much less numbers in this. I tell you my experience. When I came into the business, and we have an incredible lot of hardworking people inside this company, I wanna be very clear. With an incredible knowledge about the business and the industry. When I did my initial rounds with our employees, but also with our partners and so on, what was striking that our people and our partners all said, "Somewhere we haven't gotten the culture to win." Yeah? I think reality was, we are the smallest company. There are some natural things that a role we should play. We should be the most agile in the industry. We should be the challenger in our industry. That's typically what falls to the smaller players. That is not the behavior we actually had at this point in time. Our people pointed out we were thinking too much in silos, we were too slow to react, and we were too inward-looking. Now as you ask me, what progress have you made? I think, number one, our people have embraced that cultural change in a way that has amazed me, which I think the organization was ready for change. Yeah. What are the signals of it? We've been very deliberate about asking, and talking with our people. What do you think needs changing? We were very deliberate of taking our time to change the purpose and the vision of the company, consulting with lots of people internally and people externally. I think what is exciting now in the cultural change, I think there was for me personally one big thing missing. We're a consumer goods company, and I'm sure we'll talk about NGP down the road. We're building new brands. Yeah. There are completely new consumer behaviors. You can only be successful if you really understand what consumers want. Imperial has been a very successful company in the past. Yeah. It probably wasn't terribly consumer-centric. The industry has changed, and our context has changed, and our role in the industry has changed. The biggest change I would observe very personally, when I entered, the discussion was all about the numbers, and the consumer was always an afterthought. Now, interestingly, many of our discussions now start with the consumer. What would the consumers think about this innovation? What consumers are we attracting to our brands? Yeah. That's a very visible change. I'll give you another example. Virtually in every single board meeting we have with our board of directors, we actually meet with consumers. Haven't had before. We went to some offices where said, "This is the first time a consumer's entered our offices since we remember." Yeah. That's one very visible signal I will give you. Yeah. Our people love it because ultimately they recognize it's the consumer who pays our salary. It's the consumer who actually will give us the right insights, how we can win in the marketplace being the smallest player. Hopefully that gives you some color. If I was to characterize that another way, it's not just the what, i.e., the number at the bottom of the P&L, it's the how. Correct. Because the what is a number, but the how is the value, the multiple, and maybe you can achieve the same number or even a slightly lower number, but the value attached to it is more and therefore the rating of the stock is higher. Correct. Okay. I fully agree. Okay. The only point I would add is what it's all about the number. Yeah. In the next 12 months. Why I feel so excited and saying two years into the strategy, with the progress we've made on the culture, I really feel this is sustainable. Because we will have missteps, as any company will have a misstep, but I believe our ability to pick ourselves up because of the changing culture of the company, I rate that so much higher versus where we would have been two years ago. That raises another question. I've been in and around the Imperial Brands since it spun out of Hanson in 1996, October 1. Yeah. I think I'm right in saying. Maybe one of the things that's changed under your stewardship is a recognition of where the business is, what its competitors are capable of, the competitors' relative size, et cetera. Therefore, you've laid out a strategy. A part of the strategy is focusing on your five main markets, which, for what it's worth, I agree with. Turning that around the other way, the risk is you're concentrating on five markets. Could you talk about the geographic risk and the product risk within those markets as the world is changing and how you think about that? Sure. I make one comment up front because you touched upon it. I literally had one unfair advantage. Yeah. The unfair advantage of coming from outside. Yeah. That all makes it so much easier to challenge the status quo. Yeah. It's so much harder to challenge the status quo when you come from within. Yeah. The second unfair advantage was I have worked for challenger companies before. I've worked for Bacardi, I've worked for Burger King, so I've known what successful challenger companies look like. Yeah. Now, to your question about the focus on the top five markets. I think, A, it's a reflection of a challenger company and a smaller company will have a smaller footprint. Now, reality is I'm super happy with the footprint we have. You know this industry well. If I could pick the markets where you want to be overexposed to have U.S. and Germany on that list, and they are market number one and market number two for us, they are super attractive markets. Yeah. Yes, you have more of a profit concentration in Imperial, but I think it's an attractive profit concentration. The other thing to Lukas, and me and the management team, I think it's inherently an advantage of a challenger company can focus on fewer markets. We could put our hands around five. They represent 70% of our profits. Yeah. That's an inherent advantage that makes us more agile, and we need to take the decisions. If these would be markets that I would be concerned about in a big way, that would be a disadvantage. If you look at these five, these are combined attractive portfolio. I also want to be very clear, and as we're at the early stages of our strategy, we shouldn't forget, one of our strategic pillars is also to accelerate the growth in the remainder of our markets. Now, logically, given our share performance in our top five markets before we started the strategy, a lot of focus and a lot of communication has come on these top five. We shouldn't forget, we're increasingly spending time on our other markets as well. Okay. Before we move perhaps onto the other markets, could you talk a little bit about Germany and Spain, where you've been losing a little bit of share and talk about those two markets? Sure. Very happy. Interesting, I think. When you look at the recent performance of Germany and Spain, it's different. Yeah. Germany, when we laid out a strategy five years ago, two years ago, we clearly said probably the hardest market to turn our share performance around would be Germany. This is the market where we've lost the market share the longest. Yeah. Where we played, reduced our marketing investments in the most aggressive ways before. It's still a very open market where marketing investment still plays a very important role. It was very clear that turning around market share performance in Germany would probably take longer than any of the others. That's a reality now. Yeah? Yeah. I'm not surprised where we are there. I think Spain is different, and it's a good opportunity to explain it. We shouldn't forget, last year, we gained share in Spain by our rejuvenation and focus on our local brands. Brands like Nobel, and Ducados and Fortuna. At the beginning of this year, we increased prices. That was a very deliberate decision. That in reality in Spain, pricing has been very non-existent for a long period of time, which in reality has decreased the attractiveness of the Spanish market. When the opportunity presented itself to increase price in the Spanish markets, we did that. We very deliberately took into account a short-term market share loss for a longer-term gain of the attractiveness of the market. It was a very deliberate choice. Yeah. Okay, can we just follow on from that point on concentration, and look at from a regulatory lens? We've got the debate around menthol in the U.S., and we're now hearing that minimally addictive nicotine levels in cigarettes is coming to the fore again. We've had the proposed paper proposing a lift in the U.K. age to purchase similar to New Zealand. Yeah. Could you talk about how you see the regulatory environment in your key markets as it stands today? Sure. Now, when I came into the industry, I've worked in a regulated industry, in the alcohol industry before. It's very clear this is an industry where regulators will continuously change the environment. Yeah. What I've seen in my two years hasn't been a surprise to me. It's clearly an industry where the ability to operate will be more reduced over time. Yeah. If I look at, and here again, the benefit of focusing on five comes through here as well. If you asked about the U.S., reality is I actually very much appreciate the FDA framework in the U.S. because there are very clear rules about it. Yeah. There is a clear involvement of the industry in the regulation, and there is also a legal process involved. Yeah. Reality is I feel there is a framework that is well understood by all parties involved, that allows a certain level of predictability about the ultimate outcome. As you will know very well, it is a multi-year process to allow all. Yep. The stakeholders to actually have their point of view. I actually applaud what the U.S. has put into place. Yeah. This is our largest market. Therefore, I think it bodes well to have a highly regulated environment with some very clear rules. Yeah. You asked me about the U.K. Here again, what I do appreciate in the U.K. process specifically, it's one of the governments that has clearly embraced the drive or the need of the regulator supporting the industry and society on its move towards NGP. To see in this report, again, a focus on vaping as an avenue for reducing harm, we really appreciate that. Now, on the rest of the proposals, look, there is quite a number of different proposals from age restrictions, excise increases, retailer regulation. Let us see as the government now engages with this and allows us as an industry to engage it, what will be the final outcome. It's a process we're very familiar with. Okay. Which brings me onto a couple of questions around pricing. The first one is, you're the number four player globally. The industry is transitioning from combustibles to reduced-risk products. Historically, the industry has been very disciplined around price increases. To what extent do you need the industry to remain disciplined on price increases, and what are you seeing in the market at present? Yeah, I mean, very logically, very difficult. I mean, this is a highly competitive industry. Yeah. So difficult to comment on pricing in a public forum. Reality is, I think your observation, all I can do is observe history. This is a highly concentrated industry with a high level of pricing discipline of all the players. All I can say, past behaviors would suggest certain behaviors in the future. Again, that is down to the other industry players. We are one of the industry players. All I can observe when I joined this industry, that was one of the things I looked at, and I found that fascinating, the level of rigor and pricing discipline that exists in this industry. I want to be very clear, having had the benefit of working across different consumer goods sectors, I've not seen a sector as competitive as ours. Right. That's an interesting comment in itself. I happen to think the industry will remain disciplined on pricing, but time will tell. One of the ways I could be wrong on that is that for multiple decades, the industry's had positive pricing. That has been probably supported over the last decade, post the financial crisis, around the fact there was no inflation in the world to speak of. Tobacco is a unique category, was able to leverage pricing when everybody else didn't need to. That has now changed, possibly for the medium term in terms of inflation. The drawdown on disposable incomes for the consumer is gonna become much wider than it has historically. Where do you think the industry pricing goes in that background? As I said, I won't speculate what pricing the industry will do. All I can give you, Gerry, is reality is, again, if you're consumer-centric, you have to look at pricing through the lens of consumers. I think the reality is, unfortunately, our consumers or consumers will have to make some hard choices in the next twelve months and potentially longer. The reality is, if you are a smoker, our category is a very important part of your portfolio of products you purchase. The reality is, consumers, smokers have taken price increases in our industry for a long period of time, while in many other categories, they didn't. The way I would look at it is from through the eyes of a consumer. The reality, I think they will make trade-off decisions between buying our category, buying into our category and other categories. The reality is, the relative pricing of our category might actually be more attractive than it would have been in a long period of time because many other categories saw 0%-1% or 2% inflation, then are seeing 7%, 8%, 9%. Okay. I wanna touch on next generation products. I'm gonna quote from your H1 results where you said, "Successful NGP trials underpin further roll-outs." Now, if I think about the history of Imperial, and this is not under your stewardship, so let's just make that clear. The history of Imperial is littered with comments like that haven't really come through. Why is it gonna be different this time? It's different because this comment was made after we've completed very long tests, and test markets, not just one, but several markets for our propositions. That's different. You will find us making these statements only when we have in-market consumer data that validates for Lukas and me and the management team that the consumers appreciate our products, appreciate our marketing, and are prepared to pay the price that we're charging them. That's the difference. And therefore, to a certain extent, let me make this comment. I remember when we rolled out our strategy, we got some critical comments about, "Are you really committed to NGP?" We're absolutely committed. The great news is now with these half-year results, we can give investors and regulators much more visibility about our level of commitment. What's different is we will qualify with consumers our propositions. The reality is, given the rate of growth in NGP, yeah, we have set a time. The exciting piece for me is that if you look across the world, there isn't a perfect solution for NGP out there, so we have time on our side. Now, we're not sitting on our hands, but an important piece was we will now qualify our propositions, the products, the marketing mix, the pricing, before we actually roll it out in a major way. That's the difference. Okay. Stefan, I think it is also, you know, the framework is quite different today, and this is different in the sense that when we have that consumer proposition tested with the consumer, we will only go to a market in a very disciplined way, aligned to our ambition. Which means that you will see us in markets where there is an established market in heated tobacco, for example, you know, around the 10%, where we have a route to market, which allows us to capture an interesting share of that market aligned to our ambition and aligned to our, you know, capability. Therefore, this is a very disciplined but yet meaningful rollout of that NGP business, which is very different from the past in the sense of discipline. Okay. Mm-hmm. Today's about or this session is about you, not about other people. You're an industry with other people in it, and what they do can have an impact on what happens or what you do. Philip Morris International is slated to acquire Swedish Match, which is a transaction I think most people would agree will probably happen. How do you see that transaction impacting your business, particularly in the US, but maybe elsewhere with Swedish Match's products into Philip Morris International's global distribution channels ex the US? Sure. I mean, as you said, the transaction many people think will go through. We probably join that list, but it hasn't gone through. Yeah. It's difficult for me to comment and speculate on what is the likely impact of this acquisition. What I can offer you, Gerry, in simple terms, we've competed with Swedish Match across the world in the last couple of years. The reality is, we compete. Where do we compete with Swedish Match? Whoever is the owner of these assets, yeah. In reality, we compete in the U.S. in mass-market cigars. I think all credit goes to the team, we've become from being the number four player in mass-market cigars to become the number two player in mass-market cigars, and is a key element of our strategy, especially the investments behind our Backwoods brand. I think we feel quite good with the portfolio and the plans we have to compete with a potential new owner of the Swedish Match assets in mass-market cigars. On oral nicotine, you will know very well, in the US, we do not compete. We believe for us, the vaping market is a bigger opportunity at this point in time. We do compete with Swedish Match in oral nicotine in the Nordics, where I think we have happily a good portfolio, have had good market share development. The way we actually look at it is, A, I think two years ago in our capital markets day, we said, if you're consumer-centric, you can only come to one conclusion in NGP, that if you look across the world, consumers are making different choices. What is their preferred option of NGP? There are parts of the world where it's heated tobacco. There's part of the world where it's vaping, and there's part of the world where it's oral nicotine. In my humble opinion, when I look at it, you see the market-leading company embracing the same point of view, making some significant investment to giving themself a much bigger presence in one of the other NGP categories. Okay. I just wanna touch on mass-market cigars, in the U.S. I suspect you make more money out of it than we perhaps realize from the outside, but I'll not expect you to comment on that. Could you comment on how a proposed flavor ban would impact that business? I think it impacts it the same way other flavor bans have impacted. I think reality is from our consumer research, and I've spent a lot of time with our mass-market cigar consumers in the U.S. It's very clear you have consumers who today prefer flavor, but the reality is they prefer the brand first. I think it's fair to say our assessment would be, should the U.S. regulator outlaw flavors in mass-market cigars, we do believe, and the data would suggest that the majority of these consumers would just switch to non-flavored products. I think we have a very strong product portfolio in non-flavored variants on their brands, whether it's Backwoods or Dutch Masters. We do believe the majority of the consumers will switch to the rest of our portfolio. It's a zero-sum game for the industry. Everybody's in the same position. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. An area of the business that historically used to get a lot of focus, a few years ago, but less so for a number of years, but maybe should get a bit more focus now, if the world is heading in a macro direction, a lot of people think it is your fine cut business. Mm-hmm. Could you talk a little bit about how? Sure. Fine cut sits in the portfolio? Yeah. Perhaps how it could be leveraged in the U.S. or not because of excise, all that sort of stuff. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I think we are a consumer-centric business, and therefore we will always look at what the consumer wants, and therefore, where there is an interest, you will probably see us act in that, and you see that in Europe quite well, where that is an integral part of our offering. For some consumers, especially those who look at different price points, it is an interesting proposition. In the U.S., to your point, historically, the consumer had a clear preference to cigarettes. And therefore we have done a lot of actions behind our cigarettes portfolio in the recent past, starting from having more salespeople to promote our brands, but also investing behind Winston and Kool, our more premium segments, and the same thing in our less premium, even deep discount. While we don't promote that segment, it is there because the consumer wants it, and therefore we have an offering for that. You know, we see currently the cigarettes market with a lot of opportunity for us in the US, and so we will focus on that. Okay. Because that's where the consumer is today. Okay. All right. I've got a number of other questions, but before I move on, is there anybody got a question from the floor? Okay. I'll carry on. Could you talk a little bit about the dividend? The interim dividend rose very slightly 1%. We'll work out where the year-end dividend comes when you guys announce it. Well, we won't work it out. We'll be told. Mm-hmm. Yeah. You talk about a progressive dividend policy. Now, progressive can mean various things. Is that an absolute rise? I wouldn't suggest you should match 8% inflation, but a Linking the dividend progression to the underlying business performance. That is really the key essence of this progression. It is linking it to a underlying performance. You will see a progression as we will go forward in accelerating our business, but always tied back to that business performance. Okay. I want to move to ESG. Could you talk a little bit about your interaction with stakeholders? I don't just mean shareholders. Yeah. I mean stakeholders from a wider perspective, in terms of how you feel the business is making progress in breaking down, if that's the right term, the ESG barrier to your story? Yeah. As you talk about different stakeholders, Gerry, I think my number one. Look, The purpose of this company is about forging a path to a healthier future for moments of pleasure and relaxation. Yeah? It is really at the core of us wanting to make a positive difference for our consumers. Yeah? That's at the center. We've made some significant investment also in infrastructure. We brought in our first very senior head of ESG from Unilever, who are clearly recognized in this field in consumer goods as one of the leading companies. There's a real commitment from our side. That commitment, and at the same time, we've invested into a global consumer office, which includes all our efforts on reduced harm. Yeah? It isn't just words. We're really making some very serious investments in this area. Yeah. To your point, we're getting our house in the right place. We talked about the reduced harm efforts that we now have propositions that are properly tested in all three areas of NGP. Yeah. Jörg Biebernick, who is our head of ESG, is now working very hard also on the other elements of ESG, whether that is the environmental impact or societal impact. Yeah. I think what's different, what we're trying to do is now that we've clearly laid out our strategy also with ESG component, we're working on delivering. We made a new commitment to net zero in the last twelve months. The first in our industry of this scale. We're now starting to work the plans internally against it. Now, I think the big question is, as a tobacco company, what can you do? Our observation would be, especially as you now refer to inflation, and the overall shareholder perspective, when Lukas, and me were out on the road on our half year result, I think we see a new level of interest in our industry because I think there is an interest about, you can either put our industry in the bucket, "I don't want to talk with them," or, "I want to be part of the transition journey of this industry." Now, that's why Lukas and me joined this industry because I think there is a unique opportunity for all of us to make a difference. I would see a slight shift in sentiment also on the investor base to actually be part of that journey, which I see as a positive thing. That doesn't mean that will apply to everybody. There is clearly a group of investors who have a very categorical attitude about not engaging with it, and that's fine. Everybody has to make their choices. From the discussions we were having, there is more interest in engaging with the industry on this journey than I would have observed two years ago. Okay. Linking that back to the culture point. I mean, culture is people at the end of the day. Yeah. Linking it to ESG. The question is, does ESG create you problem? This gaining some traction. I want to be very mindful about also management team in the past was very committed. The investment that Imperial made in NGP were driven by that desire to make a difference. Whether they were successful or not, ultimately is always easy to judge afterwards, yeah. The commitment from the organization is there, and I think has made us more attractive to attract the right talent. I'm not sure we would have attracted in the past somebody from Unilever to come in on the ESG area. Okay, I've got one more question. I'll apologize upfront, but it's your fault. My questions have been slightly all over the place, but that's a function of you asking my first four questions in your opening remarks. I'm gonna blame you. My last question is this: I wanna come back to the point around the strengthening phase and the acceleration phase. If I was to characterize that in a slightly different way, was it about the senior team, yourself, your two selves, the people you brought in, changing Imperial? You're 18 months into the two-year change period, if that's the right word, but you're getting close to that phase being over, and it's now moving forward about leveraging what you've done in the first two years. Is that anywhere near right? Yes. Right. At the same time, Gerry, I immediately. You've been long in business, and you've certainly. I. It's not a magic moment. No. On the first of October 2022 about we're all going from strengthening into delivery. Yeah, yeah. There's always gonna be something that needs fine-tuning. I think what is exciting, and I think also from a shareholder perspective, we started off, I still remember in January 2021, talking about the transformation of Imperial, and there were some very big elements that we changed. The ability to sit here with you and for you to judge and looking at our results, what we have achieved, gives me and the team and all Imperial employees the confidence that what we promised to shareholders, what success would look like, should be achievable. Sorry, Gerry. Just to build on that. You know that we will be benefiting from the actions that the team have implemented in the recent past. Yeah. When you look at the acceleration from a more technical point of view, you will see us advance on the operational gearing. You know, our pricing ahead of market volume decrease. You will see the restructuring coming through with GBP 150 million that we have promised per year, where we are well on track. We advised the market of GBP 90 million this year already that we will complete. But also the ongoing reduction of the NGP losses, which last year were GBP 140 million, and it's now closer to GBP 100 million, will be phased out, if not positive by the end of this year. Obviously by us focusing on those top five markets we spoke, we have a better market mix in that sense. There are concrete elements. Yeah. that will actually drive that acceleration in the next phase. I'll end by making a statement. It feels a bit like we talked about culture, but because there is no magic button and the button keeps changing because the world keeps changing, you need the culture of the people to be right. Correct. If I finish with this one, Gerry, I think what is super exciting, when I came into this company, this is a company full of good people. It's also a company that historically has performed well under pressure. We are inherently kind of an organization that has a higher level of agility by our small size. What gives me the excitement is about culture. I see that agility now at work. As the world changes, and if we look at what's happening in the world out there on an inflation basis and a political situation, I've seen that bodes well for Imperial. Great. That's a great point to end. We're slightly over time. Stefan, Lukas, thank you very much for your time. Thank you, guys. Thank you, Gerry.