Well, good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Schroder European Real Estate Investment Trust half-year results. My name's James Lowe. I work in the Schroder Capital sales team. I'm very pleased to be joined in the studio here in London this morning by Jeff O'Dwyer, portfolio manager of the European REIT. Just before we get started, and I hand you over to Jeff for the presentation, a couple of housekeeping pieces. If you'd like to ask us a question as we go along, please do so via the Q&A tab. That should be somewhere on your screen now. You can also now download a copy of the presentation if you want to follow along with us in more detail. For even more detail, you can now download a copy of the half-year results. There's also a separate RNS that's been announced this morning that we'll talk to shortly. With that, I'll hand you over to Jeff for the presentation. Great. Thanks, James, and good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us this morning. Yeah, Jeff O'Dwyer, I'm the Fund Manager of the Schroder European Real Estate Investment Trust. Here this morning to announce an important strategic change for the company together with the half-year results for the period ending 31 March 2026. Many of you would've picked up this morning that the Board and the Investment Manager have announced our intention, subject to shareholder approval, to propose an orderly wind down of the company and return capital to shareholders. Let me start with a little bit of context. The portfolio itself has performed exceptionally well since our IPO in 2015. We've delivered in excess of GBP 80 million back to shareholders since that period. However, the company's relatively small size and limited liquidity has consistently weighed on the share price, resulting in a prolonged 40% discount to NAV. Over recent years, it's become increasingly clear that investors have favored larger listed vehicles, particularly those vehicles that offer better diversification, better cost economies, and better liquidity. Against this backdrop, and despite reviewing sort of multiple options with the board and in particular with the new Chairman, Phil Redding, the Manager and the Board believe that an orderly wind down is in the best interest of shareholders. We are very conscious of the market backdrop and the challenges that we face, so this will be an orderly, phased process. We'll sell assets gradually, and in particular, we'll be focusing on the asset management initiatives in order to not only maximize price but also liquidity for these assets. We think we're really well-placed to manage this process, particularly given we've got the teams on the ground and the specialization on the ground. We've got really strong contacts with not only the broking community, but also with occupiers, investors across our markets. At this stage, we think the process will take up to three years to implement. Obviously, during the period, and we know that dividend is a pretty key component for investors, we'll continue to pay a dividend throughout the process, and as we sell assets, those disposal proceeds will be used to repay debt and then return capital to shareholders. In terms of next steps, obviously we'll be presenting a shareholder circular, with a view to getting investors to vote on the change of the strategy and the Articles of Association, then we'll convene a general meeting, and that's likely to be for the middle of August. We'll update investors in due course. I'll give a little bit more color throughout the presentation around our asset management and around our disposal approach, as we go through the presentation. Obviously, as I touched on earlier, we're announcing together with this, the half-year results. Just to sort of give you a little bit of color, in terms of a summary around those results, we're announcing the continuation of the quarterly dividend for this quarter, which is EUR 0.0148 per share, so therefore giving EUR 0.0296 for the six months, to that 31 March 2026. This is a dividend cover of 93%, which is pretty similar to that that we had at the same time last year. We've continued to maintain a very strong balance sheet, obviously retaining that cash, then also having a modest LTV at around 27%. NAV total return for the period, 0.7%, mainly, I'll come into a bit more detail in a minute, but mainly driven by not only the income side, but we obviously lost a little bit of value, I'll go into more detail, particularly around the office side, where we've lost a bit of value. The update on the French tax. We continue to dispute this with the French tax authorities. We continue to ring-fence this capital, so we're in a position to deal with this if it wasn't to go our way. Obviously we continue to have external advice, where we shouldn't provide for this amount, we, I believe our position is positive around this. Just running through the NAV bridge, we had to make a prior period adjustment. This was to do with historical service charge and some CapEx. Together with that sort of valuation adjustment that I touched on, we've had some positives in terms of some of the re-gearing that we've done, particularly in Rumilly and Stuttgart, where we've seen values increase on the back of that. Equally, we've had some negatives in terms of some vacancy that has occurred in Alkmaar and Cannes. We've announced that in RNSs over the last few months, but that's balanced, in order, in terms of that positive and negative resulting in a fall of about EUR 1.4 million. Obviously some CapEx, primarily resulting with investment in Stuttgart to go with that lease re-gear that we did. Obviously with EPRA earnings and the dividend canceling out that, we end up with a final NAV of EUR 151.3 million for the period ending 31. That results to about EUR 1.152 per share, which is around GBP 1 when you look at the conversion today. In terms of summary of income, as you know, comparing this to the same period 12 months ago, we sold the Frankfurt asset. We've also lost a bit of income with the Alkmaar tenancy, but notwithstanding, income's remaining fairly robust, obviously benefiting from the inflationary impact, positive impact that we've had. Operating expenses have come down primarily due to some of the leasing that we've done in Saint-Cloud. Investment management fees obviously falling on the back of valuations falling. I guess the other point here is where we've been dealing with interest rate increases. It's not a surprise that the net financing costs have increased on the back of that. Obviously, by moving the cash position and ring-fencing and putting in place that bank guarantee for the French tax, we've lost our ability to earn an interest rate on that cash. Hence, the interest received has fallen as a result. Obviously, the net effect is that we have a dividend cover of around 93%, and the fact that we're not at 100% is primarily due to the fact that we sold the Frankfurt asset and we've lost the Alkmaar income, and as we lease that up, we expect to move that back to 100% cover. Continuation of the quarterly dividend, obviously that's something that we've done since we adjusted that dividend back in 2023. That dividend obviously has remained flat, but if you annualize that dividend relative to today's share price, you're getting north of an 8% dividend yield and obviously that 40% discount that I touched on, given where the share price is today. What have we done in terms of over the period? Obviously our focus has been in terms of how do we look at and asset manage to create shareholder returns. I touched on those two significant lease re-gears that we did, one in Germany with re-gearing the State of Baden-Württemberg in Stuttgart and then also extending the lease with the Nestlé on Rumilly. Obviously, we've driven rents by between 18% and 20%, so really positive. Obviously, we're moving our attention to how we're managing the vacancy and some of the re-gears that we have going forward. The KPN situation, I've got a slide later that I'll go in a bit more detail, but we are continuing to work with the municipality about advancing planning, and that should flow through to a positive impact on value and liquidity. We're still thinking through sustainability. We did those sustainability audits a couple of years ago, and the initiatives that come out of that, we're looking to implement as we re-gear leases and make investments that create a return against that capital that we deploy. Obviously, we've spent a lot of time with the Board, and particularly with Phil Redding that I touched on, where we've been reviewing lots of options of what do we do with the company. At the end of the day, it's fallen on the fact that we believe that the best interest for shareholders is to move to that managed wind down. On the portfolio, many of you have seen this slide before. It's fairly diversified. It is 14 assets, but one of the real positives that we are in that sort of sub-EUR 30 million lot size. When we set our stall out, we really focused on three key things. One was to be invested in cities that would grow faster than their domestic economies, and that's faster from a GDP and employment perspective, and a population perspective. Obviously, some of the key cities here being Hamburg, Stuttgart, and Paris, some really strong logistics exposure as well, also the Berlin exposure that we have from a retail perspective. That's the diversification. We've got about 34% exposure to offices, roughly the same in industrial, and circa 12% in retail and the rest in alternatives. To add a little bit more flavor on the Apeldoorn position, we've been running a dual strategy here. Not only have we been trying to find a replacement tenant for KPN, but we've also been working with the municipality. There's really strong interest from them to try and support how we can look at alternate use. You can see this photo here, it probably presents a little bit stronger and without getting ahead of ourselves. That's a potential design and that's something in terms of we're trying to work with the municipality about getting this level of scale that would obviously have a positive impact in terms of value. We're starting to get some interest from developers to take this site. It's a big site. It's 3.5 hectares. It's currently valued by Savills, the independent valuers, at around EUR 10.8 million. That includes the remaining income of around EUR 2.4 million. I've said before that I feel pretty confident that we'll outperform once we sell this asset, that number. Pretty confident that we'll do better than that. Certainly the shift here has moved away from finding a replacement tenant to now actually looking at alternate use given the discussions that we've had with the municipality. In that regard, we're looking to work with an advisor to start marketing this asset. Ideally, we'll get a little bit more planning support before we formally market this, and that will allow developers to really price an element of floor space with a bit more certainty. In terms of other asset management and what we're thinking about to tie in with the strategy that we've come out with today. Obviously, we've been successful with Stuttgart and Rumilly. We need to finish off the works that we've committed to there. Obviously Cannes, this is one where we've had Stellantis, who are looking to depart in September. Interestingly, there's an alternate use angle for this. Again, when we think about some of these assets, the strategy that we have, we've really looked at not only about in-place income, but what do we do with these assets, investing in areas where there's competing demands for uses. Cannes is a very good example of that, we're starting to get some interest here, not only from car showroom operators, but also from grocery, and also from self-storage. That's in terms of thinking about alternate use. That's an angle that we're thinking through. Alkmaar, we continue to work on marketing that to find a new tenant. Equally, we're starting to think through, are there owner-occupiers out there that may take this? Other re-gears that we have throughout the portfolio, obviously to a smaller extent, Utrecht, working with the main tenant, TSC there, about seeing how we can move them to full occupation, and then longer-term, thinking through the Nantes re-gear, trying to bring forward the Rennes re-gear as well. Although that's expiring there as 2030. We're trying to see how we can bring through some of these items now where we can create better value and liquidity. Obviously, as I touched on before earlier, using our teams on the ground where we have that strong local expertise and specialism to create this value. Just on, without going more detail, these are the main leases that we're focused on at the moment, and this a move or a graph in terms of some of those re-gears that we have coming forward and how we're thinking as investment managers to bring those forward and de-risk this expiry and try and create some of that value now and then sell with that longer term income that plays in with a lot of investor demand at the moment. Just on investor demand, I think it's important to set the scene and I know when I last spoke on this seat back in December, we were very much more positive about the sector as to where we were. We had a lot more confidence around sentiment. We started to see a little bit more investor demand. Like a lot of investors, a lot of that positivity was taken away with the recent Middle East impact. For real estate, we really have had that momentum checked. You can see on the left-hand side that investment volumes have really fallen off. For Q1, we're off circa 20%-40%, depending on which region, but relative to the same period of last year. Now, one of the positives is that what we're seeing is that the demand that is happening is at the smaller lot sizes, and thankfully, that's been our focus. We've always really set our stall out to be focused on the sub-EUR 30 million lot size, and that is where most of the exposure or the transaction evidence is happening. For the last quarter, basically 80% of the deals have been in that sub-EUR 30 million lot size. Just trying to then flow that into how is our portfolio valued across the different sectors and trying to give you a bit of a steer around where liquidity is at the moment. If you think about the industrial side, it has always been a very focused and really highly demanded sector across Europe. We've seen good rental growth. That's coming off a little bit, but notwithstanding, we're valued here off a net initial yield of around 6%. That also actually has been diluted due to the Alkmaar vacancy. That's still a very decent premium to where the 10-year risk-free rate is, at around, if you take the average across the three jurisdictions, you're about 3.4%. Interestingly, since I last spoke back in December, the risk-free rate has increased by about 70 basis points. Overall, we've still got a decent premium of around 3.7% relative to that risk-free rate. If you take out the Apeldoorn asset, which is a bit of an outlier, given it's overvalued and the fact that lease is coming to an end, that premium to the risk-free rate is around 2.6%, which is still a decent number. On the office side, I think this is probably the area where we're flagging there's been a bit of a shift in terms of demand. There's not a lot of transaction activity across Europe for offices, particularly for secondary offices. That's where the valuers are having a little bit more of a challenge to try and price that particular sector, and hence the point around liquidity being a weak demand. I'll come on a bit later and I'll talk a bit more detail about the three offices that we have. Retail, we've got the DIY asset in Berlin, continue to be positive about that. Given the long-term income and the fact that we're sitting on 4 hectares of land in a capital city that is undersupplied from a residential point of view. The alternative asset is the KPN that I touched on, where we're now moving to more of a land value approach. Obviously the car showroom and the demand that we're starting to see across multiple uses. That gives us some confidence around being able to dispose of all that. The takeaway here is that we're really positive that we're sitting in lot sizes that are sub EUR 30 million. There continues to be strong demand from an industrial in the living sector, in particular, select retail, also across healthcare, and then actually offices. We're seeing much more polarization. I don't think this will be any surprise to those on this webinar, that we're seeing very much a two-tier approach here, where prime continues to see really strong rental growth and good demand. That's actually the secondary offices where there really is very much a struggle to price that at the moment, particularly given the challenges around, well, how do you price in occupier demand, how do you price where construction costs are going, and that sort of exit value, given investors' appetite for offices at the moment is relatively weak. Just a continuation on the office side and honing in and that occupier comment that I made. We're sort of compared here the 12 months where we were last year and how you can see here where vacancy rates have changed in the sub-markets that were invested. If you think about the southern bend in Paris where our Saint-Cloud asset is, we're starting to see vacancy rates increase now into that higher teens. Notwithstanding, we're seeing good rental growth from a prime perspective, but c ertainly secondary is suffering. I've commented before about the office asset that we have. We're leased off rents here of low EUR 200 a meter. We invested in this asset because of the transport infrastructure that was going to be improved here. That's been delayed now to 2030. We've had some good positivity in terms of leasing up this building, but notwithstanding, we're in a sub-market where vacancy is increasing. That's one of the challenges and the backdrop that we have in terms of managing this particular asset. Thankfully, in Hamburg and Stuttgart, the vacancy levels are not to the same degree. I have said before that Stuttgart is one of the strongest office markets and has the record lowest level of vacancy in the whole of Europe. That is testament, obviously, to how we have been able to re-gear the State of Baden-Württemberg and start to see some rental growth there. Equally in Hamburg, although vacancy is starting to creep up a little bit, rents are still relatively low. Prime rents obviously increasing, and to put it into perspective, we are leased off rents of around EUR 14 per square meter per month. Still a bit of a discount to where prime is. Notwithstanding, we are very much conscious that there still is some occupier headwinds in terms of maintaining that full occupation that we have both in Hamburg and Stuttgart. I guess overall, just how do the valuers reflect this risk, and how does that flow through to how values are presented from a NAV perspective. Obviously, across the portfolio, we have the benefit in Europe here of annual indexation. That is very different to the U.K., where it is typically five yearly to market. As we have seen inflation starting to increase across the regions. We are looking at mid twos over the next couple of years. Rents will continue to grow on the back of that. We are trying to move leases, particularly in Germany, where we have had this hurdle and had to wait for the compounding of inflation before you get your increase. We are trying to move leases as we have done with the State of Baden-Württemberg to annual indexation. That's a key part of our asset management play to try and bring forward that growth in a stronger fashion. On debt, I know I commented that overall, we have been a modest user of leverage across the portfolio. At the moment, gearing levels at around 27%. You see here that we do have some refinancing to do this month. Positive that we are about to sign an extension with the existing lender. This is on the Berlin DIY asset. That will extend that lease. That will also obviously allow us to implement the new strategy that we have. Given this asset is a long-term lease to one of Germany's leading DIY specialists in Hornbach, we think there is going to be strong demand for this particular asset when we look to sell that, e xtending that debt for just over a year ties in well with that strategy. As I touched on, as we sell assets, we will be looking to redeploy or deploy that capital into repaying that debt, and together with obviously making distributions back to shareholders at the right time. Obviously, this is all subject to getting investor approval when we go to the general meeting. Obviously sort of priorities, and the shift has really much been to this new strategy now. Obviously we need to take that to the shareholders in order to commence that orderly wind down. We've got 14 investments in some really strong parts of the European market. We're confident in the majority of the portfolio in our ability to sell those. We are conscious of the market backdrop and the challenges that I've talked about. Hence, that two to three year period in order to allow us to implement the asset management initiatives that we have to maximize that value and liquidity. Income continues to be the priority in re-gearing those leases that I talked about earlier. Those proceeds will be used to repay debt, before we make distributions, and very much the Board is looking to continue, paying a dividend to shareholders, given how important, particularly for private investors and wealth managers that are a key part of our register, and maintain our investment trust status. I think in terms of that two to three years, and I know for some investors that may seem a longer period to be implementing this strategy. I think we are conscious and the Board is conscious of that market backdrop that we're working behind. We're starting to see a little bit of positivity in some of the discussions around the Middle East. That's not completely certain, and it'll take a little bit of a period before that rolls through, and then also before investors start to think through redeploying capital. We know where rates are and, recent increases across, from the ECB. Really once we start seeing rates destabilize, that will give investors a little bit more confidence to come back and enter the real estate sector. To start to see investment volumes start to increase again and give valuers and us a bit more confidence around value and liquidity. We'll be making announcements and updating shareholders, throughout the process. The next point will be to get the circular out to you and the changes to the articles in order to facilitate this change in strategy and then convene that general meeting which, at the moment, will probably likely be for the middle of August. I'll stop there. There's probably a lot to digest. There's quite a bit of material that James touched on that we've announced that's been downloaded. There's probably some questions that are coming in and happy to answer those, James. Thank you. Brilliant. Thanks, Jeff, and thank you everyone for sending in your questions. As Jeff said, we've had quite a few come in. If you'd like to keep sending them in, please do. I'll ask Jeff as we go through. Jeff, maybe just picking up on a couple of the key themes. One that's coming out is, you've just mentioned it there, is the timeline for disposals. I think two to three years is what you've guided to in the RNS. Couple of questions here about what influences that timeline. Is that a set timeline that you're working towards, or could it be shorter, could it be longer? How are you thinking about it? I think we've always been transparent, James, with investors, and being realistic here and understanding the backdrop that we are disposing into. It's challenging. There's certain assets that we've got much more confidence that they're much more liquid and will sell at really strong pricing and relatively quickly. We're conscious that there's some assets that we have to do more asset management on that will not only improve or maintain value, but actually improve the liquidity. I think you've probably picked up that the office side is probably the one sector that's not just what we're facing, but the whole global investor allocation to offices, that there is questions around, well, where values are, and valuers are having difficulty because there's not that evidence in terms of transactions to give them a very clear view around value. There probably is, and there is from an occupier point of view at the prime end. If you think about that secondary, it's much harder, and valuers are really valuing on sentiment. That's probably the area where we need to do more asset management and prepare those assets, those offices, for sale, hence why that two to three-year period to implement. We're obviously conscious also we've got the French tax that we're managing as well. That gives us time to manage that and to not be put into a position where we need to be doing something there. I think that's appropriate to set that timeline of two to three years to not be seen as a forced seller, and actually manage that asset management that we have in our mind. Brilliant. The obvious follow-up question there is what are the assets you think that you can sell more quickly and start returning capital to shareholders? I appreciate you might not be able to give specifics here. It might be commercially sensitive information, but? I mean, I don't. I mean, I think as I said, we're very transparent in the information that we've given investors, and you can think, well, actually, some of the asset management that we've already done, Berlin's a really good example, where there's probably not a lot more that we can do there. Yep. Where you've got long income to Hornbach, you're sitting on 4 hectares in a capital city, I would like to think there's quite a number of investors that would want to be looking at that particular asset. That's a good example. Rumilly's another one where we've done the lease re-gear with Nestlé, we're just finishing off the works that we need to do there. That's probably ripe for selling earlier. Similarly, we have a smaller logistics asset in the Netherlands, in Houten. Again, fantastic covenant in there, really strong location. That's one that certainly would expect to see demand. Those sort of industrial, the alternatives, obviously, I talked about Apeldoorn as well. If we continue to have the good discussions that we are with the municipality towards the end of this year, and if we get, obviously, the support from investors for this strategy, that's another one where I would actually expect that that's an asset there that we could sell sooner rather than later and tap into the demand that we're getting from developers. Again, sort of another follow-up question here that's coming through around the disposal strategy. We've outlined here in the presentation and in the announcements around the intention to sell specific assets over time. The question refers to did we also discuss a whole portfolio sale? What's the pros and cons of both? We did. We went through, and that's one of the options that I sort of talked about, and that I've been working with the Board and in particular with Phil Redding, who's offered his experience and how relevant is he, given he's sort of recently come from running Tritax EuroBox and been through this process. Heavily debated, and one of those options was, well, look, is there an ability to sell the overall portfolio? Yes, there is, and there would be demand, but we think that the pricing in terms of the capital that is there to take the portfolio is much more opportunistic. Private equity, and t heir cost to capital at the moment is much higher. Therefore, the price would be not comparable to what we believe and the Board believes that we could achieve by selling individual assets or grouping a couple of assets together and going through an orderly managed wind down over that two to three-year period. Makes sense. There's a question here which I think we're probably not going to be able to give guidance on because it's specifics around whether you think that you'll be able to achieve NAV in these sales. I don't think you're going to be forecasting potential NAV and distributions at this point. It's too early, but just maybe give a feel for how you're thinking about generating value and how shareholders should expect this process to look from the values that you achieve? I think the valuers are still getting their heads around the Middle East and backdrop that we're dealing with at the moment. I think it's probably fair that some of these values will, we'll come out with June values soon, but some of these values will, particularly for offices, will come off a bit. That's probably the one sector, being a diversified investor, that's the one sector where there is that question mark, just given there's not that evidence for the valuers to work on. Yes, we need to be actively, we are, you take Saint-Cloud as a good example, where we've reduced the vacancy there from sort of high teens to down to about 9%. Continuing to work with our local asset management teams on the ground and our advisors there, our relationships that we have with occupiers in that building, to not only obviously maintain and sort of re-gear those leases, but try and move that vacancy down a bit more. Obviously, the slide earlier that I touched on is that the context of where that asset sits. It's in a sub-market where vacancy is now 16%, so we're outperforming where vacancy is. That's all going to flow through to not necessarily value creation, but certainly, in our mind, improving the liquidity for the asset. That's obviously our biggest asset in the portfolio. I think that is one asset that will probably take a little bit longer to sell. Equally, Stuttgart, we've done the re-gear with the State of Baden-Württemberg. There's another tenant in there that wants to commit, we're in the process of re-gearing that lease to tie in with the State of Baden-Württemberg. Once we've done that's certainly an asset that we could sell sooner. Hamburg is fully leased. We'll be looking to re-gear that multi-tenanted structure that we have there, and then look to sell that. Again, that's probably going to be sort of an 18-month to two-year period. Really, the other assets is as we re-gear, as we finish off some of the works that we want to do and present those assets in their best possible light for a sale. The smaller asset, this is an interesting debate just to share with everyone that the asset that we have in Nantes. Interesting at the moment is the advice we're getting, there seems to be a bit of demand from investors to actually step in and take the leasing risk because of their view on where market rents can go. Actually, that may be one where we think, well, actually, let's not hang around and re-gear that lease in 18 months, two years' time, but actually, if we're getting the right pricing, we might actually think about selling that earlier. They're the things that we're weighing up, and I've been working with the teams and getting their input. We're all on board around, well, how do we maximize value and liquidity to now implement this strategy. The Board has also been out to see the assets. I've taken Phil to see nearly all of the assets, so he's got a really strong understanding of what we're looking to do here and the strategy that we're looking to implement to tie in with this managed wind down. Another good question here around how you're thinking about managing CapEx versus distributions, versus overall cash management during this wind down period. Yeah. I opened up and we've been, I guess, a manager of the corporate pretty prudently, and we've retained that capital of circa EUR 25 million. Obviously, as you sell assets, we'll use some of those proceeds if we need to be investing in the assets to manage that CapEx program. To be honest, the CapEx program's not enormous. It's not as though we're going and doing a redevelopment of KPN to do a residential construction. We're not changing the use like we did many years ago, that successful repositioning that we did in Paris, where we took a EUR 40 million office building, invested EUR 30 million and sold it for EUR 100 million. We're not doing that. There's no other assets that are there to do this. We may think about, say, the asset that we have in Cannes, whereby if we continue to see demand from a self-storage point of view, we may think about it could make sense to invest a couple of million to change the use of that, bring in an operator, and sell with that in place. Equally, we'll weigh that up with actually, do we sell now to potentially a self-storage specialist if we get the right pricing? They're the type of things that we will manage and obviously conscious of what capital that we have and that goes into our decision making. Very much as we sell assets, we'll be conscious of, well, what capital do we need? If we don't need that, obviously that will be used to repay debt or distribute back to shareholders. Yeah. Makes sense. We've answered quite a lot of questions here around the proposal around wind down, which is obviously expected given that news coming out just this morning. If we haven't answered all your questions on that, please do bear with us. I'll come back to some of them. If you think we have missed something, please do send it through and I'll make sure I ask Jeff before we finish. There's just a couple of other areas that I just want to touch on because they are coming up. A couple of questions around French tax. Just is there anything that you could give to shareholders around the timeline that you're expecting on that? Yeah. Look, it's before the French, early start of the litigation process. Without naming other listed vehicles that are facing the same challenge, there is another larger listed company that is a lot further ahead than us, whereby that could create some news. We're waiting for what impact that has. I think the positive here is that we've ring-fenced the capital for that in the event that it wasn't to go our way. Obviously, all our advice is that we shouldn't be providing for this because we have a robust structure, and we have abided to the SIIC requirements from a tax perspective. I can't give any more color other than we continue to dispute this. Certainly as we get more information, we'll advise the shareholders. Certainly, I would like to think over the three years that we'll be in a position to manage that. Brilliant. Thanks for the extra detail. Just a quick question from one of our listeners here on KPN and just around how income is going to be impacted when KPN vacates and potential dividend payments around that? Yeah. We've been very clear for some time about the KPN position, i.e., they represent 20% of our income, so it was always going to have an impact on our dividend cover and potentially dividend. Certainly the Board, and I've made a comment in here, the Board's intention is to continue paying a dividend through this process. We're not giving any direction on what that dividend is, and obviously that dividend will change as we return capital to shareholders over that period as well. What may happen is that the dividend cover losing KPN may fall. If the Board were wanting to continue with the same dividend, and you don't have to be a genius to work that out. Obviously the position slightly changes where if you are selling assets, you can and you will have that capital to be able to pay a dividend going forward, together with the income that we have from the remaining portfolio and obviously touched income being key and how we're re-gearing leases and obviously the inflation benefits that we have, that's helping grow our earnings as well. I can't give any more specifics around what the dividend will be, but all I can say is that the dividend cover will naturally fall as a result of losing KPN. Thank you for that color. Just one macro question that's come through here that's important to touch on, because I think it takes us back into the conversation around making sales and disposals in the portfolio. Question actually refers to the slide you showed volumes coming off around 20%-40%, I think you said. What needs to happen for that to start to turn around again? Obviously, it has implications for the disposal strategy and values that can be achieved going forwards. What's your general feeling and thoughts around what needs to happen there? Yeah, we talk about, obviously this a lot within real estate here and with our investment committee, I think a lot of it at the institutional end, a lot of investors are sitting on their hands at the moment. If you think about, well, actually, alternative risk-free returns are pretty positive. On a risk-adjusted basis, it sort of makes sense for investors to be sitting in gilts or appropriate sovereign risk. Naturally, if rates start to come back and fall again, the focus is then going to come back. Well, actually, real estate is looking attractive again. You can see here the premium, and I'll talk about the 2.6% rather than the 3.7%, because that includes the KPN. But at 2.6%, that's still an attractive premium to where the risk-free rate is. If we start to see that falling, and as you know here, it's increased 70 basis points since I last sat on this sofa six months ago. If that starts to fall again, that premium will head back to 300 basis points. Historically, real estate has traditionally, at the prime end, been around 200 basis points. I think we are valued at a reasonable premium, and I think what needs to happen, we start to see rates falling, we start to see growth coming back. Obviously, we need some of these geopolitical risks to abate, to give investors a bit more confidence, to come back into the real estate market. They're the three or four things that we're thinking through, that would have a positive impact. Obviously, we're at the smaller end in terms of encroaching on private investors, family offices, propcos. Equally, they're probably vehicles that aren't heavily levered, so the interest rate point, probably not to the same degree, it probably lends itself more to, well, how do they think about alternate use on some of these assets? How do they think about transport infrastructure changes or competing demands for uses? Saint-Cloud's a really good point, where the transport infrastructure won't come till 2030 now, so we're selling to an investor that will benefit from that. They're the type of things that are much more micro related to that sort of asset that will probably have a bigger impact, on value and liquidity as well. I think, from a macro point of view, those three or four points that I touched on being around just general geopolitical risks, impact on interest rates, obviously where inflation goes, and obviously our leases provide a natural hedge for that, but also just general economic growth. Also, from an office point of view, how occupiers start to return back to offices. And we're starting to see that slowly, where businesses are appreciating and understanding, well, actually having teams in the office, it creates much more productivity, and that will have a positive impact on the occupation markets for offices. Brilliant. I'm taking you full circle now back towards the announcement around the wind down. One of the questions that's just come through is around, manager incentivization through that period. Just, particularly, in thinking about alignment of the manager to shareholders through the sales process. Can you give a bit of color on that? Yeah. We've made a comment in the announcement that we are in discussions with the Board around changing our investment management to align us in a more appropriate way with this new strategy. That includes aligning senior management team as well. That's something that will be detailed in the circular, for investors to vote on. Brilliant. We'll keep an eye out for that. Maybe just chance for two final questions because we're coming up to time. If you have any other questions, send them in now and I can try and fit them in. This is actually just a more specific question around the Apeldoorn site. Just a point being made around the quality of the housing around the Apeldoorn site, looks to be maybe lower quality. How are developers thinking about price quality of the potential accommodation that could go in there? I don't think it's fair to say that it's low quality. There's some fantastic, new resi development 500 m away. Across the street, is some lower quality. It's medium density, lower quality, yes, but within the greater surrounds, there's some really nice, cross a range of low density to high density residential. It's actually a really nice neighborhood. Now, some of the master planning that the municipality has, and this has actually come from that, is there's this waterway that they're really keen to try and develop from the city center out towards where our site is to promote residential and high-density residential living, and obviously with that, a cross-section of services as well. This is something that the municipality is very keen for this site to be rezoned to cater for this, and hence why we've, I guess, flipped our focus to work with them, and we see better value in that now from an underlying land value perspective. Obviously, I think this photo probably presents it in a really positive way. Whether we get to that or whether a developer gets to that, it's still subject to planning, but that sort of just gives you an indication of the potential scale that could go on this 3.5 hectares. Yeah, I don't think the comment to sort of say it's low-quality residential is fair because there is some much sort of newer development, both from a single sort of residential through to medium-density housing, within sort of 500 m of the site. Brilliant. Maybe just the final question here, there's a couple of similar questions coming through around when first capital distributions might be expected. Clearly, we have to have the shareholders vote first. Yeah. It's too early to give any indication on that, and that's obviously going to be dependent on the sale process as well. That's something, as I touched on, we will be updating shareholders as we go through the process. It's a bit early for me to comment on that specifically. Brilliant. Well, that's all the questions, hopefully we got through all of your individual questions. Thank you very much for sending those in. That's all we've got time for this morning, that just leaves me to say thank you to Jeff for the presentation and answering the questions, and thank you very much to our listeners and shareholders who have dialed in this morning, and thank you very much for your input and questions. We really do appreciate your support for the trust and the questions this morning. Please do keep an eye out on the announcements going forward. There's obviously going to be a circular. There's lots more detail to dive into in the annual report. That leaves me to say thank you for joining, and speak again very soon, I'm sure. Goodbye.