Ladies and gentlemen, good day, and welcome to Suzlon Energy Limited Q4 FY 2024 earnings conference call, hosted by ICICI Securities. During this call, the company management may make certain statements which reflect their outlook for the future, or which could be constituted as forward-looking statements. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are associated with uncertainties and risks, as fully detailed in their annual report, which may cause the actual results to differ. Hence, the statements must be reviewed in conjunction with the risk that the company faces. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during the conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star then zero on your touchtone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Mohit Kumar from ICICI Securities. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thanks, Seema. Good evening. On behalf of ICICI Securities Limited, I would like to welcome you all for the Q4 FY2024 and FY2024 earnings conference call of Suzlon Energy Limited. From the management, we have with us Mr. J.P. Chalasani, Group CEO, Mr. Himanshu Mody, Group CFO. We'll begin with the opening remarks, followed by a Q&A session. To be fair to others, we request each participant to ask not more than two or three questions. Over to you, sir. Thank you, Mohit. Good evening to each one of you. Thank you for joining us on our Q4 FY 2024 earnings call. I hope you had an opportunity to review our results and investor presentation. We will now share with you an overview of the industry, and we will walk you through our Q4 FY 2024 and full year performance. We will then take your questions. FY 2024 has been a remarkable year, with standard performance across financial and operational parameters. Largest ever order book of 3.3 GW, with a strong pipeline, provides Suzlon with a strong revenue visibility. This includes the order book of 2.9 GW as on 31 March 2024, plus 402 MW of order announced in May. This is a well-diversified and healthy order book. Our endeavor will remain to pursue quality orders with a higher value and better margins. Coming to the sector, India's wind installation also saw a quantum jump after years of impasse. Wind installations for India for FY 2024 broke the ceiling to register 3.3 GW installations, the highest post FY 2017. Globally, India ranks fourth in total wind installations, with 46 GW of installed onshore wind as of March 2024. In this, Suzlon installation registered more than 75% year-on-year growth to 882 MW in the year of FY 2024. In the current scenario, wind plays a crucial role in energy transition, as growth of Indian renewable depends upon wind installations. That's because the industry has seen the transition from hybrid to round-the-clock, and has moved to firm and dispatchable renewable energy. FDRE tenders, whether it is for the peak or the load following tenders, is solidifying wind position in India's energy transition. These kinds of tenders require very high share of wind to meet the transition profile. Our O&M business continues to do well with over 13.7 GW capacity in India. On energy storage, performance has also been encouraging and continuing to grow, but. Continued growth of the wind sector will further promote energy storage business, as a major revenue comes from supplier of wind components. With strong fundamentals and 29 years of strong track record, we firmly believe Suzlon is now well positioned to leverage the market opportunity arising from energy transition. With this, I now ask Himanshu to take us through the financial performance. Thank you, J.P. sir, and, good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I will be using slide number 16-23 of our investor presentation, which has now been uploaded on our website, www.suzlon.com, as a reference point for my discussion during this presentation. FY 2024 has seen us register robust improvement in all our key parameters, and our fundamentals have strengthened with a focus on the bottom line. We have made deliveries of 710 MW, which is 7% higher as compared to FY 2023. Despite which, an EBITDA growth of 24% as compared to last year, has been registered, and a PAT, before exceptional item, has grown by 428% as compared to FY 2023. All of this is a result of several initiatives that have been taken by the company over the last, in the last financial year, which include margin improvements, cost optimization, and lower interest cost as a result of repayment of the entire debt. Similarly, on Q4 FY 2024 performance, the PAT, before exceptional items, has seen a staggering YoY growth of 413% from INR 68 crore in FY 2023 to INR 281 crore in FY 2024. On the P&L account, renewed focus on the bottom line has resulted in a revenue of INR 6,497 crore, with a contribution margin of 36%. EBITDA and PAT before exceptional items have been highest that the company has ever reported in the last seven financial years. Consolidated EBITDA has been reported at INR 1,029 crore, with PAT before exceptional items at INR 714 crore for FY 2024. We are pleased to report our balance sheet as of March 24th, 2024 demonstrates a very strong position of strength with a consolidated net worth of INR 3,920 crore, whereas the net cash position of the company as of March 2024 stands at INR 1,148 crore. I would like to summarize that the last one year for the company has been a year of financial turnaround. I would also like to reiterate that Suzlon has never been in such a strong footing as it is today, with a fortified financial position and optimized cost structure, largest ever order book with a strong pipeline in discussion, a completely geared up supply chain to meet the order book demand, regaining confidence of all our stakeholders, and a strong management team with a enthusiastic zeal to deliver on all the performance parameters. With that, I'd like to conclude my presentation, and we can open the floor for Q&A that the callers may have. Thank you. Thank you very much. We will now begin with the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. Thank you. We take the first question from the line of Sumit Kishore from Axis Capital. Please go ahead, sir. Good evening, and thanks for taking my questions. The first one is, could you spell out the contribution margin in FY 2024 for WTG and the fixed expenses in the WTG business for FY 2024? The contribution margin, Sumit, for FY 2024 in the WTG division is about 19.5%, whereas, the fixed expenses, as we've been saying earlier, is close to about INR 600 crore. So our break-even point, as we've been advising in all our earlier meetings and calls, remains pretty much unchanged. 19.5% is a brilliant, you know, performance. So is this sort of sustainable level or, you know, because we've spoken about maybe 16%, 17% levels earlier. So, Sumit, there are two or three factors that we need to keep in mind as we enter this financial year. You know, number one, we are seeing some early hardening of commodity prices, like aluminum, copper. There are certain logistical challenges given the routes in Red Sea, so there might be, you know, some slight increases in costs. Also, you know, we are, as we deliver in FY 2025, we are now moving to a completely S144 model, as you guys are aware. So, for FY 2025, because even our suppliers have, you know, built up capacity recently, you know, there will be certain cost compulsions, and therefore, the COGS will be under pressure for us. Having said that, you know, we of course continue to maintain mid-teens guidance, and the management endeavor would be to deliver an optimized contribution margin. But very difficult to comment whether the 19.5% is sustainable or not. But we should be there and thereabout, you know, in the 15%-20% range. Got it. Given your net cash at the end of fourth quarter at INR 11.5 billion, what should we read into the interest expense being higher than the other income? So the interest expense specifically in Q4, you know, as you know, in late December, we announced financial working capital tie-up with REC Limited. And as a result of that tie-up, there was a one-time processing fees that was paid to REC in early January. So to the tune of about INR 11 crore, a one-time processing fee for the working capital tie-up has been booked as expense in this quarter. And of course, in addition to that, a lot of LCs and bank guarantees have been issued to our customers and vendors, which has resulted in increase in the interest costs as compared to Q3. Got it. Last question: for your EPC order book, could you speak about how many footprints for installing wind turbines would you have in control, where land and evacuation are in place, and maybe on similar lines for your non-EPC order book? Thank you. Yeah. See, our EPC is current, in the current order book, it is 1/3 and 2/3. One-third is EPC and 2/3 i s non-EPC projects. On the EPC portion, evacuation, in the sense, the grid connectivity we don't control because that's in the scope of the client. As far as the land is concerned, obviously, it's a critical area. Even last year, one of the reasons why the country which could see the only 3.5 GW is the land challenges. I'm not going to say it's going to be easy, but with the work what we have done in the last year, we expect that to be, you know, that the H1 it will be little more easy, and then we'll continue to work towards that. And also, as we mentioned earlier, this may not immediately help, but on the developmental route, what we're taking into other states, which was what we are preparing for towards the end of this year as well as next year, that we want to remove the land issue as far as our EPC projects are concerned. And the non-EPC portion, we keep track of what's happening there, on a continuous basis. Land would continue to be a challenge, and it's a question of being managed from time to time. So with those challenges is what we'll deliver. Thank you, and wish you all the best. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. The next question is from the line of Parth Jain from Nivesh India Investment Advisory. Please go ahead, sir. Hello, sir. Congrats on good set of numbers! Sir, can you give us a broad idea on expected wind installations for FY2025, and what kind of market share can we expect out of that Suzlon would be holding? It's your guess as well as my guess. But our expectation, if you remember, in FY 2024, we have always been saying anywhere between 3.5-4 GW. And our expectation for FY 2025 is it could be anywhere up to 5 GW, between 4.5-5 GW. And normally, you know, like, our always claim was that market share is a different figure than what we expect to do, but we have been always in the range of 25%-30% in the market share. If you look at this year, our market share has been 27%. So we would- Right. Okay. Sir, thank you so much. We move to the next question, please. Sure, sir. The next question is from the line of Mr. Rohit Kumar from Motilal Oswal. Please go ahead, sir. Mr. Rohit, your line is in the talk mode, sir. Please go ahead with your question. Mr. Rohit, your line is in the talk mode, sir, please go ahead with your question. As there's no response from the current questioner's line, we move on to the next question. The next question is from the line of Subhadip Mitra from Nuvama. Please go ahead, sir. Good afternoon, sir, and thank you for the opportunity. So while you have given us a sense of the market share, I just wanted to understand that from an order inflow perspective, assuming that you are maintaining that 25%-30% market share, where do you see the market size going? Because our understanding is that there is probably 8-10 GW of just pure wind projects, including FDRE, RTC, et cetera, which would have probably got bidded out in FY 2024. So hopefully, all of those will probably start seeing ordering in the next few months. And then there is also, you know, on top of that, a large C&I market. So if I have to, let's say, look at the overall TAM for, let's say, the next 2-3 years, how would you look at it? So the engine for the business is the orders and the projects, which will actually drive how much we will achieve. And the second thing, as I mentioned in my opening comments, currently, because most of the bids are either RTC or FDRE bids, how much wind capacity gets added would decide how much is RE capacity going to get added in the country. That's the first point. Yes, you're right. Even if you look at even the current year, in the first four months, there's almost about 12 GW of bids awarded. I think 11.2 GW, 11.8 GW. Everything is RTC or hybrid or FDRE, which has an involvement of... Our calculation is about more than 8 GW of that would be the wind component. Not about 11 GW, but installed capacity we're talking about. You can't match the bid capacity, because in FDRE you buy it. And there is another 5 GW where the bids are submitted, and reverse auction, where it has to happen. Another, the 10 GW is where bids are announced. There is a huge amount of pipeline, 27 GW, what we talked today, and C&I market. And, as you know that, you know, our share in C&I market is, even the current order book is, more than 50%, 56% or so. Others will not be a constraint. As a country, how much we're going to do each of the year, because market share for me is little misleading, because how much are we prepared is what we should do. But market share might be very high if country has smaller capacity, and our market share will be, you know, between 25%-30%, if country is doing a larger capacity. Expectation this year is that there are figures being talked today in the beginning of the year, anywhere between 5-7 GW. Different people are talking different numbers. Even 7 GW number is also out there. But our expectation is that we feel that looking at on the ground constraints at the beginning of the year, obviously, we will keep reviewing and revising it quarter-to-quarter basis, would be about 5 GW this year. Having said that, now the government has come in, and in fact, the central government started working towards the land issues and ROW issues to be resolved. Okay? So they're saying that now we will get in, because they are also realizing now unless wind moves, RE will not move. With that, we expect that this 5 GW or 6, whatever it happens this year, would reach about 7-8 GW next year, FY 2026. And we should reasonably assume that 9-10 GW is what we should reach a level in FY 2027. That's, that's our, our fee. Understood. So these numbers that you're talking about are in terms of actual execution or installation of capacities, correct, sir? Commissioned capacity on the ground. Commissioned capacity on the ground. Right. So if I were to look at the number that you just said, that by FY 2027, we may look at a 9-10 GW kind of installation on ground, then that means that the ordering for that 9-10 GW will probably happen in the current fiscal, in FY 2025, right? We are able to assume that some part of it will also move to next year, but yes. Understood. And so this 9-10 GW number that you're mentioning would be primarily the auction-based capacity, so the C&I piece will be on top of this? No, no. I'm talking about our capacity as a country to commission, how much we're going to commission. Irrespective of C&I or the utility PPA-based one, I'm talking about as a country, how much wind capacity we have. I'm not differentiating between the two. I understand. I understand, sir. Perfect, sir. Thank you for answering my question. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Manoj from Virtusa Consulting Private Limited. Please go ahead, sir. Good evening, everybody. Congratulations on the good set of numbers. Thank you. You know, it's really, you know, good to see the numbers, you know, when you see from now, -INR 1,100 to the cash flow, +INR 1,100. You know, it really sounds, you know, great sense of numbers. So wish you all the very best for the coming, coming year. I just have one, just one question, sir. So currently, to see the order book, we have around 3.3 GW. So when are we expecting to deliver the 3.3 GW? So currently, as we just now spoke before this, the orders are now becoming the longer term. These 3.3, currently what we have is meant for FY 2025 and FY 2026. On paper today, what is happening today, we also need to realize is that when contract gets awarded, they get awarded for a particular year, but then things are moving because the connectivity is getting delayed or something else is getting delayed, the clients are moving the schedule. So therefore, there is a blur in order versus actual schedule and order versus in reality what is happening. Therefore, that you will also see is this, this order book keep increasing in future. That's what Himanshu said, that, you know, there, we are in a discussion for so many orders. This will be for predominantly currently what we have is for FY 2025 and FY 2026. But having said that, some more orders might come for FY 2025 as well, even this year. And the orders which will come in again would be for FY 2026, 2027, because this is- it's just a constantly moving scenario. And what we are also doing is just looking at this uncertainty of the projects, we are actually saying that, okay, we will build a buffer of 15%-20% additional order intake for each compared to capacity. I understand, sir. Yeah. Just wanted to understand- Actually, the reason why last year we could have done more, was purely because the reason was that some of the clients moved the deliveries from last year to this year because the connectivity getting delayed or their transmission line which connects from the substation to the things are getting delayed. So therefore, we are seeing this on the ground. We... I think we're still, as a sector, struggling to move up the, you know, the numbers. While we have a 45% growth moving from 2.2 GW to 3.2 GW in a year, which is a good movement, compared to, the, you know, 25% between FY 2022 and FY 2023. From 25% growth rate, we moved to the 45% growth rate, and in fact, we moved from 10% in FY 2023 to 75%. We are all moving forward, but I think we're still work in progress. Yeah, I got it, sir. Totally understand. Yeah. Just one more question regarding the challenges, you know, we have in the underground space. What are the company's vision on it, and how are you going to face those challenges in the upcoming year? Can you just please repeat, because there's some, I'm sorry to interrupt. Mr. Manoj, are you connected on your earphones, sir? I would request you to please switch to your handset. Okay. Is my voice clear now? Yeah, it's clear. Okay. So what are the challenges, you know, we have down the line, sir, you know, to understand about the, how the organization is going to face that in the upcoming years? See, various business challenges will always remain. Only thing is what you foresee and what you get prepared. Our biggest challenge was the debt, which we solved in this year. Second biggest challenge was working capital non-availability, so we solved that issue, working capital non-availability now. We are starting the year with, we never started the year with such of an order book, so we resolve that issue of an order book. Above all, what is important is organization capability to deliver. So last year, we spent significant amount of time of centering the organization at the leadership level. So whatever we could do, we have done it. But the challenge is on the ground, what is going to happen with connectivity, the land, and the clients would continue to be there. Those things, as and when come, you need to be prepared as an organization to respond and then see how best you can mitigate on this. But internally, whatever we could envisage, in fact, in FY 2024 was our year of consolidation, creating a launchpad for the future, that we have done it. But having said that, will we not face challenges? We will continue to face challenges in external world. And another important thing is that we also, ramp up was important for us, 3 MW new turbine we launched. So we, we smoothly ramped up, and you know, turbines are out there, supplied more than 100 MW, and they're, some of the capacity is commissioned, they're all operating well. So before that initial, last year at least, we had that new turbine coming, new model coming in ramp up, and, how will it behave once it's commissioned? Those things are also over for us now. Thank you, sir. Thank you once again. Thanks. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Ketan Jain from Avendus Spark. Please go ahead, sir. Good evening, sir. Am I audible? Yes, sir. Yes, you are. Yes. Sir, what is your guidance on deliveries in FY25? I think, Ketan, obviously, we cannot provide any guidance, and, you know, we have followed that practice earlier, and we continue to follow that. As, J.P.C. has said earlier, you know, we believe that in FY 2025, installations on ground will be around 5 GW. And, you know, Suzlon market share historically has been what it is, you know, that's for you, you to see. You know, will we be able to continue with our market share, strengthen it, lose it, that is something I think, you know, we leave each individual investor to, to solve. Understood. Understood. That's the only guidance we can provide. Understood. Understood. Also, my next question is, what is, what can be the margin difference in EPC orders and non-EPC orders? So again, we don't provide yet the street aspect of the margin difference between EPC and non-EPC orders. We're only giving the consolidated WTG division, as I said earlier on the call. Okay. And any improvement we can expect in O&M margin? I think currently it was at 40%. So, when we maintained always that O&M margin will continue, around, you know, this vicinity, of course, few basis points here and there. But, I don't think, improvement in O&M margins should be expected. We've always maintained that O&M, you know, for the next few years, I would say one or two years, would be a secular growth on the top line. Because, the nature of the business is such that, there is a three-year free O&M period for the installation. Understood. So by the time the revenue really takes off, you know, it's when sizable fleets only come into billing. It may take another year or two, for you know, the whole history to catch up. So I don't think any margin improvement or significant top-line improvement on O&M should be expected. Understood. My last question is, what is the utilization factor we can expect in the 5 MW turbine and all the other lower classes? Like, how different is it? We don't have a 5 MW turbine. Sorry, the 3 MW, sorry. So the current, our order book is significantly for 3 MW. And as you were given in the presentation, 3 MW order book is 82% share. No, no, I mean, in the wind turbine, the CUF plant utilization factor. That would vary from site to site. Site to site. I, sir. Site to site. So, you know, wind is very specific to the site. But basically, what we do is that when we offer, for the same site, we offer 3 MW or 2 MW, obviously we give the option to them for both. And of course, the kilowatt-hour remains the same for both. Because 2 MW, if cost out is done- Understood. As Himanshu was explaining earlier, 3 MW, being the first year of operations, the cost would be a little higher even for us and for vendors. Whereas 2 MW is done for quite some time, and, you know, most are amortized. So with that, the cost per kWh, I'm not talking about the price of the turbine, cost per kWh today, 2 MW and 3 MW is the same, at a, at a given site. Understood. Sorry, eight seconds please, one last question. So, is there any challenges in transmission capacity creation in India? And if yes, then which area is it? Challenges with transmission capacity, not capacity, but coming on time, would always remain as an issue, because otherwise, today, the transmission network planning is significantly improved compared to, let's say, my younger days of two to three decades back. The amount of planning work they've done on the CTU grids. The challenges what we're facing is that timeline shifts, you know, like by three months or six months, sometimes. Moving the timeline in terms of when that is available is one shifting. And the second challenge what we've seen, which we've now given the feedback to MNRE, is that the solar and wind. Because solar, you know, the moment any CTU is announced, it's easy for solar to go and book the capacity. For wind, you know, you always need one and up to two years of a wind data in a particular place. So therefore, by the time wind potentially is established, the CTU capacity is booked for solar. So therefore, how do we solve this issue? So there are two things which are now being discussed, is that the ministry agreed in principle to see that we can create a capacity, a great capacity in exclusively the wind zones and give in reserve for the wind, capacity. And second, we are also now looking at, the probability of, wherever the solar is installed in such cases, purely the solar, is there a way that, you know, we can dig out the wind capacity there? Because transmission exists there, we don't need to increase the transmission capacity. Just add the wind capacity in the places where the solar is already there, depending upon, you know, land being available there, depending on the wind potential, but there could be some unblocking of the transmission capacity for wind. Understood, sir. Thank you. Very, very good. Thank you. Before we take the next question, a reminder to all the participants. If you wish to join the question queue, you may press star and one on your touchtone telephone. The next question is from the line of Ravi Vadaga, an individual investor. Please go ahead, sir. Yeah. Hi, good evening. Again, congratulations on a remarkable year. Thank you. The first question is, just want to understand, our manufacturing paradigm, right? Say, our S144 model for a client A and client B, will they be different? I mean, are we engineer to order, configure to order, made to order? What kind of a paradigm, are they? And the second question is, I mean, say, what is the path... Now we are at around 270 MW, right? 170 was last quarter, 270 now. What is the path to, say, 750? Because that's when the, our, new order intake and your, ability to execute, they will start matching. And, I mean, frankly the order books looks good because our rate of execution is lower than that, so it will keep on ballooning. So if you can just give a little bit of color in terms of what would be the core constraint to move from the present run rate to, say, I'm just putting a 750 MW just to have some observed. Yeah. On the, on the first point, the, each model is, specific design, and each manufacturer's model is specific design, but thereafter, the turbine remains constant with respect of which site in India is installing, as long as in India, okay? If, if this turbine has to be installed somewhere else in a different wind regime, there could be some, re-engineering to be done. But for India, if you bought a 3 MW model, it is the same 3 MW for client A, client B, client C, client D. It won't change. You don't need any modifications client-wise. That's the question number one. Question number two is that, as I mentioned earlier, the main engine for supply is orders to be there, and secondly is the project execution, because projects is what will give you how much offtake will happen. Supply is not a constraint, okay? Especially now with our working capital and orders are available. The... How much can we deliver? Is it 750? Is it 500? Is it 300? It all depends upon the readiness of the projects to take. And what we are expecting is that the gradually, it won't happen immediately. We expect that in couple of quarters, that would improve. It may not happen immediately, but I think the offtake of projects would improve. Orders is not an issue, but offtake of project readiness will improve. And I don't want to put a number to it, but I can only say it will change in the, in the next few quarters to come. Okay. So I mean, just a little follow-up on that. The, the constraint—I mean, good that it'll change. The constraints which are in place is not in purview, right? I'm assuming manufacturing capacity would not be a constraint. So, but in last quarter call and few in the past, you mentioned the whole EPC capacity could be a constraint. So what, what is in our purview, which is something which you guys are looking at in terms of improving, so that when, as and when the things happen, we are ready? Yeah. First of all, if you look at current order book, one-third is EPC and two-thirds is non-EPC. In case of non-EPC, the project progress we can't completely control. Maybe our scope is only turbine supply and erection, or just the turbine supply and supervision. So we will not have a control on whether their land is available, their foundations are ready, their fabrication system is done, their transmission system is not done. We have no control, except we keep tracking, because that has an impact on our delivery. We can definitely work on EPC, where we have the full control. There, your point is absolutely valid. And in fact, right now, our strategy is that because we are seeing these challenges outside, we should actually try to improve our EPC, more, move more towards EPC, so that we can control the uncontrollables. Even today, obviously, having said that, even we are facing some constraints in terms of EPC, because advanced action on the land was not taken in the earlier years because of various reasons what they've done. The difference what we are doing right now, which, in fact, won't come this year fully, maybe in the last quarter and then the next year onwards it will come, is we are going for what is called a development contract first with the client. So a client says that, "Okay, I want to develop 500 or 700 or 1,000 MW in this particular area." We say that, "Okay, let's finalize all the commercial." I will first issue—I'll issue everything, but I'll give you an NTP for the development. So the... What we have done for, to help that, is that we have gone ahead in places like Rajasthan and AP, and we are now trying to enlarge to other states. We have rights, exclusive rights to develop wind projects for a geographical area. So in Rajasthan, we have about 2.7-2.8 GW. In AP, we have more than 3 GW. We have a right to develop, and once we have the clients who are saying that, "Okay, I want to set up here," we go ahead and start acquiring the land in advance. And we don't get our working capital get stuck in the land because we are giving it to us. And then the, for them also, project sunset treaty will go away because land is being done here. That model is what we're working on and, but that model, significant impact you will see in FY 2026 and FY 2027, on FY 2026 onwards, and subsequently, maybe every single year. That's what we're, we're working on right now, and which is very, very important we feel, because the country's capacity addition, I'm not saying it wrongly, capacity addition would significantly depend upon how much we do. In, when you say FY 2017 was the highest we did last time, after that, we did the highest now. FY 2017 was our highest, and in, now this year, is after that, we are the highest again, for us. So therefore, when we achieve that and, you know, sector also moves up. So we understand that, and, being the leaders, we need to shape that, how much can we, wind capacity can get added. These are some of the steps what we're doing today. But you will see that impact of that maybe in the last quarter, but significantly in FY 2026 onwards. We appreciate the intent, sir. Thank you. Thank you. We take the next question from the line of Mr. Maulik, an individual investor. Please go ahead, sir. [audio distortion] Not very clear, please. Your voice is not very clear. [audio distortion] Amount of holding at this point. Any plans to increase the holding? You know, as company management, you know, we cannot comment on the same. You know, it is something that the promoters and the family has to decide. But as management, we can not really comment on the same. [audio distortion] Maulik, we are really struggling to hear you, so, you know, I really cannot understand your question. Maulik, sir, I would request you to please switch to your handset if you are on a speakerphone. No, I'm... it's... I'll ask the question again, so. Okay. As part of the merger plan - Are you able to hear me now? Yeah, yeah. Clear. So as part of the merger plan, which is in talks or which is in the proposal at this point, right? So one, can we hear one point which is mentioned in the proposal is like, it will, it is one of the criteria to participate in the PSU bids. So are we also planning to participate going forward as individual contributor, individual bidder? Or is it, like, even for the executor or a vendor, we need to have certain conditions? How is it? No, no, this is what we are talking right now is participation in projects, whether it's the supply of the projects for the PSUs, not for develop, not for as an investor in the projects. Okay. Like a NTPC develops huge capacity. Earlier, we were not getting qualified because of our network issues, and this merger would help. And in fact, even today, as we speak as well, the companies will get qualified, and we started actually bidding for some assets. Okay. So just one last question from my side. Because in the previous question you have answered that, by FY 2027, you might have around 10 GW of capacity to be commissioned on the ground, right? But we are also talking about having just above 100 gigawatts commissioned by 30. So is it possible, considering we just have 40 at this point, and we are just looking at 10 gigawatts itself only in after 3 years or so. So, in the last 3 years, are we going to execute a large number of orders or how is it at this point? Because it doesn't match up with what we are talking, because we are talking about 10 GW for quite some years now, year-on-year execution of 10 GW, the commissioning of 10 GW, right? But it has still not happened, and we are still targeting on the... But in all the CTTs or all of the data points we are talking, we are still targeting around 100 GW. So how is this planned at this point? If you can provide some details around it, it will be helpful. At the macro level, the government of India and then especially CEA said that to meet the demand of 2030, the least cost option needs 100 GW of wind turbines. So therefore, as a country, we are targeting to reach 100 GW of installed capacity by 2030. That's a target which country is working towards. Okay. Okay. In reality, do you think it is possible, considering the current reality on the ground? ... See, the question is, suppose let's say that we reach about 9-10 by 2027, FY 2027. FY 2027, FY 2028, FY 2029, and FY 2030, which then can give you anywhere between, you know, 35-40 GW, right? Then we have FY 2025 and FY 2026. We may not completely hit 100, but it's not something which is not reachable. So let's assume that this year and next year, we do about 10 million GW, another 40 GW. So 46 + 50, we, we're close to that number. Okay, thank you. That's it from my side. Thank you very much. Thank you. We take the next question from the line of Abhishek Datta from Anand Rathi Shares and Stock Brokers. Please go ahead, sir. Yeah. Hello, sir. I just wanted to know, like, now that we are net worth positive, what are our plans to tender aggressively for the PSU projects? We already bid and continue to bid. And, so now- Nothing I would call an aggressive bid, because we never call any bid as an aggressive. As I mentioned in my opening comments, we are looking at getting the orders which, which add value to our, bottom line, so therefore we will continue to do that. It is whether with respect of public sector or here. Public sector, India was, not on our canvas because of our network issues, but now as we move ahead, yes, that is an area which we will participate. And, in fact, we have also been, getting requests from large public sectors saying that, you know, asking us to participate as well, because otherwise their growth is getting curtailed. Okay. I only, I only correct the word "aggressive," but we are not participating. So, and secondly, sir, can you just elaborate on this co-development of projects for the land to circumvent the land concern? It's nothing but in simplistic way, can the land development happen much earlier than actual project schedule? Okay. This was a model which Suzlon was known earlier years, where we used to have the land, we used to connect it even it was an STU model before FY 2017. And therefore, we used... In fact, those years we used to get the orders in the same year, complete the orders in the same year, deliver the orders in the same year. That situation changed now when it became a CTU, and we are also not spending so much of money on the land. What we are now trying to do, even it's a concern not just for us, even a concern for the investors, because projects are getting delayed, land not being there, whether we do EPC or they do EPC themselves, taking the EPC from us. So therefore, there are large number of the investors whose long-term plans are saying that can we work in a manner that we will decide the execution of orders much in advance? If an order would be placed, but what we have to start with an NTP for the development first, so that we can acquire the land, keep that ready. Land in the sense, when we talk about land, land with the pathways. Keep it ready, and then project schedule will be much faster. Even it's good for them because their IDT gets saved and, you know, good for everybody, and certainly it will come down. That's a model which is win-win for us, as well as win-win for them. We are facilitating that by actually having these exclusive rights in some of the states. You mentioned about you have access in Rajasthan of 2.7 GW and AP 3 GW. Yeah. We have an authorization from the government, saying that in this geographical area, you have an exclusive rights to developing projects, nobody else can develop. When you say land, it also come with- Sorry, sorry. That, that is because they are not giving us anything. They're giving us because looking at the possibility that, during we are setting up manufacturing facilities in these states, and those are getting revised, so there is an employment there. In the project phase, there is an employment, and second thing is we, every single project we do, we do the service business for 25 years of the project. So there is an employment potential when we work there. So therefore, that is what, what they're looking at, and they're trying to give us these exclusive rights. It's a win-win for the state and us. Sorry. And when you say land, does it also come with pre-planned transmission evacuation facility? We are actually looking... See, obviously, when you ask for the rights for a geographical area, then we need to define within that area. Obviously, we do that based on historical land wind data what we have. Otherwise, we can't go for any land that the government wants to give. And second is based on the plan of CTUs, which the grid connections that Power Grid has announced and in the pipeline to announce. That is the basis. It's done based on that. Okay. Sir, can you just elaborate once more on the, like, the transmission access for the solar project? Because they are commissioned faster, they have faster access to the grid. Whereas, for wind, you need one and a half years of data to get access. So what is government thinking about that? So, say the once, let's say, substation is announced in a location A, solar doesn't need to think much. They can straightaway ask for a connectivity, because solar can be set up in most parts of the country. You know, it doesn't need to be site specific. Whereas for wind to set up in that area, you have to have a wind data, whether that site is suitable for wind or not. So by the time you have that data, that substation is full. So therefore, there is an issue becoming that, you know, by the time we say that this particular area has a good wind potential, whatever the CTUs are there in the near, they are getting filled up fast. So now the government has asked us to say, ask the players to say that where is the highest wind potential site, we will plan the CTUs there. And they are also thinking of saying that in these areas, we would basically try to restrict the connectivity for wind. That is in the work in progress with Government of India. And the second one, what I said is that wherever the solar is already connected today, commissioned today, the same areas are going to open up under the same substation, because substation, the transmission capacity is already there. They are thinking of, it's again, a discussion between the parties and the, MNRE, even in the latest meeting of, secretary. They are open to the idea of coming up with a bid connected to those substations, so if anybody wants to come and set up a wind capacity here, because you don't need to develop grid and you don't need to develop substation. How much of it is feasible? It may not be in every single solar place it will be feasible because land wind is perfect, but it will unlock certain transmission capacity for wind. Okay. And so, secondly, on the timelines, like, we have two-thirds non-EPC projects and one-third is EPC. What kind of execution timelines we are looking for in both of them? Okay. The, we don't prefer anything. Basically, we look at what is on the table and what is could we take it. If, if there is more demand for EPC, we'll take more. In the case of EPC, the timelines are different because it also includes the land and BoP. In case of, simple supply, we can do it in a shorter time period. Time period is varying, but time period will match with respect to the project execution schedule. Okay. In case of a non-EPC, that they will say that my project is going to get ready by this time, this is how I want the supply. Then obviously we look at our manufacturing timelines, what we committed to various people. Then we say, "This is how we can supply." Then there's a matchmaking happens, and we sign a contract with respect to the schedule. In case of EPC, obviously, because we know how this project is going to shape up in terms of the land and BoP, because which we control, we give them the schedule, saying, "This is how we can develop this project." And there are discussions and happens. Obviously, the EPC schedules are longer than the supply schedules. For these EPC projects, we will also like to them to be in the case of where you have already got this access. Not necessary. Not necessary. Not necessary. Anywhere we do. Okay, sir. Thank you so much, sir. Thank you. Before we take the next question, a reminder to all the participants, if you wish to ask a question, you may please press star and one on your touchtone telephone. The next question is from the line of Rajesh VC, an individual investor. Please go ahead, sir. Rajesh sir, your line is in the talk mode. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah. Can you hear me? Yes, sir. Yeah. So just, yeah, thank you for the opportunity. And also, I think the results for Q4 are quite good compared to previous years, so congratulations to that. Yeah. So just couple of questions. One is, you know, how about the offshore wind projects? So is it coming in on how we can show some perspective on that part compared to the, you know, the regular wind projects that you already get in? And that will be the first, first part. And the second question will be on the Green Hydrogen, you know, mission. So how, how that is going on? For the Green Hydrogen, how, how you see as on the future part, you know, how it is getting implemented from, from your end? Yeah. Thank you. These are the two questions. Yeah. On offshore, the government of India is working towards developing offshore projects. But as I said earlier, that there are challenges with respect to the tariff for offshore in India, because the, our generation difference between onshore to offshore is not significant. PLFs don't go up that high, but the cost goes up. So therefore, the cost of generation is very high. But still to get into an offshore, the government of India announced the first 1,000 megawatts they will do with VGF, between Tamil Nadu and Gujarat. And they're also now come up with a bid for the offshore, the seabed allocation, where bidders who win can go and do the exploration and see whether it's feasible, and then, you know, go ahead with the project. But there, at this stage, wherever the seabed is there, the policy is that they don't give any PPAs. They will only give you the rights to develop the project, and thereafter they'll also provide the evacuation up to the, you know, the underground, and thereafter, wherever you want to take the power through using the central grid, and where you, whom you want to sell, at what price you want to sell, it's all to you. There are some risks. Offshore would happen at some point of time, but I don't think it's going to be the significant needle mover immediately, because any offshore project, even today, to start, it won't be, you know, not ready for next 5-6 years before you execute the project. Okay. Yeah, that's on offshore. We'll discuss about the second question. What was the second? Green hydrogen. Ah, green hydrogen. Our expectation is that, as we said that today, the C&I segment is significantly increasing to change their captive requirement as a to green renewable energy. That would continue for next 2-3 years. Our expectation is that green hydrogen demand for renewable energy would pick up in the, in the next 2-3 years, not immediate one... There are projects being announced, but really to take off on the ground financial delivery, maybe not in the next 2-3 years. So by the time the current C&I demand, which is the captive requirements for the existing industry, starts seeing downward trend, is where we expect that hydrogen would pick up. That's why our assumption is that C&I demand will continue to be there for the next 5-6 years. So just one added question on the same thing. So do you feel that you have enough capacity, suppose the green hydrogen comes in or kicks in, you know, the project kicks in? Because I think that is going to be a huge change around for that. Yeah, yeah. Please give some thoughts on that. Yeah. Thank you. Now, Green Hydrogen is, as far as we are concerned, we will only supply the Green Hydrogen project will also have a renewable energy project. The Green Hydrogen is nothing but doing the development, producing the hydrogen using renewable energy. Yeah. Wherever the green hydrogen is there, they would also ask for the certain portion of renewable energy to be built in order to meet the round-the-clock requirement. Sure. So we will actually supply the wind turbines, like whatever we are supplying today for the C&I customers, for the captive consumption, is what it will be for the green hydrogen. It's no different. And the volumes, whatever will be coming, it will be actually foresee the volumes for the 2-3 years ahead would be significantly higher. We'll ramp up our manufacturing capacity as required to meet the demand. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Yeah, and, all the best. Thank you. Thank you, sir. We'll take the next question from the line of Subhadip Mitra from Nuvama. Please go ahead. Thank you for the follow-up opportunity. My first question is with regard to the EPC opportunity that exists. So you did mention that hopefully by FY 2027, we may look at the overall TAM growing to about 9-10 GW. Within that, how much do you foresee being the EPC part? What proportion of it, ballpark? First of all, when I said 9-10 GW is a sector, it is not Suzlon. I hope I'm clear on that. Of course, sir, that is the overall, market size, correct? Yeah. So our, obviously, entire 9-10 GW has to be EPC. And it could be state EPC, it could be fund EPC. It all depends upon the investors' need, whether they want to give a turnkey EPC to somebody like us, or they will say that we will do our own development and then, do the BOP ourselves and, or give it to some third party. That portion will only be substantial. We don't know how the shape of will happen. I can only comment upon current order book, what we have, as I said, that one-third is EPC, two-third is non-EPC. But how it will shape up as moving ahead? But I said our aim and objective is to keep increasing EPC, because if they have a land, our, our EPC will improve. So this, through this developmental route, we are trying to increase the EPC portion of our order book, because then we have a control on the project. Understood, sir. Understood that point. Just, you know, if I may rephrase my question in a different way. What I'm trying to get to is that my understanding is a large portion of the TAM today is either a C&I market or probably PSUs or other players who probably don't have their own EPC capabilities. So clearly that portion of the market will need a turnkey service provider like yourself. So I was just trying to get a guesstimate of to how large that piece of the pie can be. Even if you look at today, current year, okay, when we have commissioned 3,500, 3,200, 3.2 GW, 3-5, 3 to EPC side, our market share is 27%. Okay? There are other people who are actually developing, commissioning those projects. So there are capabilities available today. May not be a turnkey OEM. Turnkey OEM doesn't exist today, other than us. But there, you know, people are trying to do is that, you know, break into different packages, give electrical to somebody, give land to somebody, but there are problems in integrating the project. Those issues are facing, that's one of the reasons why capacity addition is not happening to the extent it should happen. Based on that experience, it all depends upon how, what the investor wants to do. If he's that, you know, safest is to go and give a turnkey to Suzlon, because there are nobody who takes turnkey today, other than us. Correct. Correct. Understood. Understood. And then secondly, in terms of competition, do you see a lot of competitive intensity coming in from some of the larger MNC players, whether it's, you know, Vestas, Envision or otherwise? And can that become a threat for us later on in terms of them trying to eat into our market share? I don't think so, when the pie is increasing to 9-10 GW. Obviously, I don't think, we are even dreaming that we can deliver 9-10 GW in FY 2027. So there is going to be a significant capacity for everybody. And then the, on the, price point of it, I think we are definitely cheaper than the European suppliers. And whatever you say with Envision and others, that even today they are there in the market aggressively, but you can see our market share in terms of orders. We have our own, set of customers, especially in the C&I segment. So, so simplest way to answer, we don't see a competition pressure in the next two years. Understood, sir. Thank you so much. That answers my question. Thank you, sir. We'll take the next question from the line of Ravi Vadaga, an individual investor. Please go ahead, sir. Yeah, just a follow-up on the competition intensity. What would be our market share on the O&M side? I understand from the installation side, it's 27%-28%. What would be on the O&M side? And, the second question is, I understand from news reports that Siemens Gamesa is on the block. Any color, I mean, you may not want to talk about the specific competitor, but just what would, what would its impact be on, for us to get new business in O&M side, which they were handling, or any, anything that you might want to comment? If, as far as the market share of O&M is concerned, fundamentally, every single machine we sell, we only sell with the condition that there has to be a service contract. Okay? So therefore, whatever we are delivering is what keeps on increasing our number. So, so therefore, whatever is our market share in terms of COD, let's say 27% market share, that much is, would keep increasing in our O&M business. And O&M business today, obviously we have the largest market share, that is because otherwise everybody has, much lesser capacity, even 15 GW of, that means what we are operating. As far as the Siemens Gamesa, I really don't want to comment, but on the multi-brand acquisition, not commenting on any specific manufacturer. You know that we started getting into that area, but we're going in a very cautious manner. Today, we have about 220 MW we are operating today. Most part of it is we acquired during this year. But we want to take, look at them, stabilize, before we actually expand in a significant way as far as the creeping acquisition is concerned. Let's see how things shape up for this in the future. But multi-brand is definitely, yes, is one which is a way for us to increase our market share in O&M. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, we take that, we take that as the last question for the day. I would now like to hand the conference over to the management for closing comments. Thank you, everyone, for participating in today's call. Of course, our details, results, and our presentation are available on our website, and our investor relations team is available for any further follow-up queries and interactions that you may have. Thank you for joining, and have a great weekend. Bye. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. On behalf of ICICI Securities, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.