Well, over to Koushik. Thank you, Naren. Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening to all those who have joined in. I will begin my presentation with the quarterly performance provided on slide number 29. Our consolidated revenues stood at about INR 55,312 crore, and consolidated EBITDA for the quarter was INR 6,334 crore. The EBITDA margin for the quarter improved by about 300 basis points from 8% in the previous quarter to about 11% in the December quarter, despite the challenging operating environment across geographies and the operating challenges in Netherlands and in the U.K. In India, the margins improved by about 400 basis points to 24% from 20% in the previous quarter. Before moving to the standalone performance, I would like to mention that we have received the sanction for amalgamation of Tata Metaliks Limited and Tinplate Company of India Limited with Tata Steel. Accordingly, the standalone financial statements have been restated from April 1st, 2022 to reflect the merger. With this, the merger process for the five entities have been completed, another two are in the process, as highlighted in slide 24. For the quarter, Tata Steel standalone EBITDA stood at about INR 8,257 crore, which translates to an EBITDA per ton of INR 16,923. If I exclude the FX gain of INR 9 crore, the EBITDA stood at about INR 8,247 crore, and therefore, the corresponding margin has improved from 19% in the previous quarter to 24% in the current quarter. As provided on slide 35, higher realizations as well as improved costs have led to margin expansion. The standalone NR has increased by around INR 1,100 per quarter-on-quarter, while costs have been primarily aided by change in inventories. Within costs, the total raw material costs includes slight increase in coking coal consumption, cost by about $4 per ton, which was offset by lower purchase, including pellets. Further, within material cost, for our ferroalloys division business, there was a non-cash credit of INR 1,000 crore on account of higher valuation of chrome ore inventory, rising on account of increased accrual of royalty charges payable on closing stock, as on 31st of December, due to a significant increase in the government notified rates by around INR 8,000-INR 9,000 per ton. Which, based on the norms for the inventory valuation, gets loaded as part of the closing inventory, even though the payout or the cash payout for such royalty happens only on the actual dispatch. Correspondingly, this leads to an increased accrual of royalty expenses, forming part of the other expense, which you may have noticed. In effect, the above treatment is therefore, profit neutral. The P&L is actually neutral on this, because it's a classification adjustment in line with the norms of inventory valuation as per the applicable, accounting standards and disclosure requirements for financial statements. At Tata Steel Netherlands, the EBITDA loss stood at about INR 117 million, compared to INR 110 million in the second quarter. The delay in startup of the Blast Furnace 6 in IJmuiden has resulted in lower production, which had a significant impact on the recovery of cost and on the product mix. We now expect the Blast Furnace 6 to start by the end of this month or early next month. As shown on slide 37, the drop in revenue per ton of 57 pounds per ton was offset by improvement in cost. Material cost improved by 59 pounds per ton, driven by drop in raw material consumption costs, especially coking coal and decline in purchase of slabs. The conversion cost there was broadly stable, as decline in natural gas spend of 17 pounds per ton was offset by higher employee benefit expenses due to labor agreement. At Tata Steel U.K., the EBITDA loss was GBP 115 million, compared to a loss of GBP 132 million in the second quarter. On per ton basis, the loss was high, lower by about 69 pounds per ton, quarter-on-quarter. The U.K. production was lower than the previous quarter as a result of the production shortfalls arising from the end-of-life conditions of several of its heavy-end assets, has continued to weigh on, weigh in on the U.K. business. As shown in slide 38, the revenue per ton was lower by about 15 pounds per ton, given the subdued market dynamics during a seasonally slower quarter, which is the December quarter. The material cost improved by about 48 pounds per ton, primarily on account of lower consumption of coke and iron ore. The conversion cost increased by about GBP 100 per ton on account of fixed cost due to lower production. Moving to the cash flows. The consolidated operating cash flows for the quarter stood at about INR 7,879 crore, and were primarily driven by cash flow generation in the India business. As Naren mentioned, we are committed to responsible growth in India and have spent about INR 4,715 crore on capital expenditure during the quarter, and about INR 13,357 crores for the first nine months of this financial year. The gross debt has decreased by about INR 1,500 crore to INR 88,230 crore, while the net debt has broadly remained stable at about INR 77,405 crore. The group liquidity remains strong at about INR 23,349 crore. Let me now make a few comments on Tata Steel U.K. announcement that we made last Friday, an extension of what Naren just mentioned.... Over the last few months, we had detailed discussion with the U.K. multi-trade union representative body, which is called the U.K. Steel Committee, and its advisors, in which we carefully considered their endorsed proposal for maintaining a single blast furnace till the year of transition. The company analysis was aligned on all assumptions with the union advisors, and we found that it could not progress on the union plan, as it is neither feasible nor affordable to continue the blast furnace production longer. Further, the company undertook engineering studies that found that the execution of the electric arc furnace in an already operating steel melt shop would be fraught with risk and would result in a suboptimal plant layout, delaying implementation of the EAF plan, and in a way, jeopardizing the proposed transition business transformation program. As a result, we have now proposed to close both the high emission blast furnaces and coke ovens in a phased manner in 2024, as articulated by Naren, and will commence the statutory consultation process about restructuring as we transition to a EAF-based steelmaking at a cost of about GBP 1.25 billion, with GBP 500 million support from the U.K. government. Tata Steel is acutely aware of the impact of its proposal to wind down the heavy end of the Port Talbot on the individuals and the local community associated with our steelworks, and we will meaningfully consult with our employees and work to provide them with a fair, dignified, and considerate outcome. Tata Steel proposes to commit in excess of GBP 130 million to a comprehensive support package for the affected employees. This is in addition to the GBP 100 million funding for the transition board set up by the company, in which the company has contributed GBP 20 million, along with the U.K. and the Welsh government. Tata Steel is committed to ensure sustainability of steelmaking for the long term in Port Talbot, and targets to commission the electric arc furnace in four years. It has already begun engineering, design work, and planning discussions with National Grid for the required infrastructure. We also have a detailed plan to continue to serve our customers through the transition period from our mills by utilizing the imported semi-finished steel. With that, I complete my presentation, and thank you for listening, and I now hand it over to the Q&A moderator. The question and answer session. We will be taking questions on audio and chat. To join the audio questions queue, please mention your full name and email ID in the chat box. Kindly stick to a maximum of two questions per participant, and rejoin the queue should you have a follow-up question. We will unmute your mic so that you can ask your question. To ask questions on chat, please type in your question along with your full name and email ID in the chat box. We will wait for a moment as the queue assembles. The first question is from Ritesh Shah of Investec. Ritesh, please go ahead. This question is pertaining to Tata Steel U.K. A couple of quarters back, you had indicated that the difference in cash cost between blast furnace and electric arc furnace would be GBP 150-GBP 175 per ton. Just wanted to have your thoughts on the number, whether it is the same number, does it also include the carbon cost? That's A. S econdly, we have indicated that we will procure slab, either Netherlands, or strategic suppliers, somewhere else. So the question over here is, how do we look at the inventory and price risk management, given what we have seen in the prior quarters, the steel prices go down, and we had to take a substantial inventory hit? That's a related question. And third, during this transition period, what we understand, the downstream assets will continue to operate. So what is the normalized spread that we can look at over here? Like, is it $70-$80? How should we understand that? So that's the first question. And second question, again, with respect to U.K., there is a statement with sales, wider restructuring of other locations, including CAPL, and need a bit of clarification because there are two numbers pertaining to employee costs, GBP 130 million and GBP 100 million. Is there some sort of escalation over here? If, if at all, it would be great if you could clarify it. I have a couple more, probably I'll join back the queue. Let's just stop over here. So can we take the second part first, and then we can, so because it's much more specific. So what we talked about, the wider restructuring, Ritesh, is the 2,800 people, and the 2,800 people includes, functions, and other sites. So it's not just Port Talbot, it is a wider restructuring means it's not site-related only, it is the wider across the organization. Your point on CAPL is also the point that this will run for this year and potentially will be closed next year. As far as the 130 and 100 is concerned, there are two different parts. The 130, what we have said is, we are... You know, it's important to communicate, properly to the people who are more affected. And therefore, we said, and we have not yet concluded the consultation. In fact, it's just formally starting. So our point is that we have a, we have a corpus, because there were a lot of misperceptions going around, that we have a corpus in excess of GBP 130 million, as part of the compensation for the people who would be affected. And the 100 million is actually a transition board set up by the Welsh government, by the UK government in conjunction with the Welsh government and us, where U.K. government has contributed GBP 80 million, and we have contributed GBP 20 million. And that is to look at a much wider ambit of for the people, community who are affected in terms of retraining, reskilling, how to help them transit in this process. So those are two different things, related in some ways, but it is, has, is addressed differently. So, I think just wanted to clarify this. And, as far as the, cost of differential is concerned, I think our assumptions remain the same, because the business case has not changed, and we, we continue to believe that. Procurement of slabs, I think, it will be a mix of... As you know, that we have said that we will continue to operate the hot strip mill. So it will be a combination of slabs and, coils, and this combination will come primarily from our, system mills, whether it is in India or Netherlands, and other strategic supplies that we are stitching in. And the downstream spreads when we procure slabs, No, just to, just to clarify further. So, so long it is within the system, and so long it is supplied from India or Netherlands or, or, any part of India, that the price risk is eliminated anyway factored in and will get nullified in the consolidated. So that wouldn't be the, impact. For the supplies that we bring in from, outside, yes, that will have the price risk element. Right. And the downstream spreads? So the downstream spreads are actually, their downstreams are different. For example, we have a Zodiac line, which is automotive line. We have a packaging line, which is tinplate. We have got the color-coated lines. So the spreads are different based on the products, but we, we will, as we get into that transition, we'll explain that because we'll give you product-wise spreads applicable for those facilities. Sure. Thank you so much. I'll join back the queue. I have a few more. Thank you. The next question is from Indrajit Agarwal of CLSA. Indrajit, please go ahead. Indrajit, I can't hear you. Hi, can you hear me now? Yeah. Go ahead. Hi. So, my first question is on the India business standalone. So can you help us run through the EBITDA bridge from 2Q to 3Q? Adjusted EBITDA per ton in 2Q was about INR 13,400. From there, we have moved to INR 16,900. So what was the NSR, raw material and other expenses that contributed to it? And what is the outlook for 4Q in terms of all these items? Although Indians have done better because Indians have gained market share from Chinese. There is some... But, Africa overall market has- Can you hear me better now? No, we can hear you, Indrajit, but there's a disturbance behind, so I request you to go on mute. Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. So you wanted the reconciliation between the EBITDA per ton from last quarter to this quarter, right? Yeah, that was his question. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So I think we, if I were to look at it from a NR perspective, the steel NR, while it has increased by about INR 1,100 per ton, if you look at the net of, net effect, it is more around INR 90 per ton from an EBITDA perspective. The coking coal consumption, which has increased by about $4 per ton on a QoQ basis, this has resulted in about INR 390 crore negative, which works out to be about INR 800 per ton on the impact on the EBITDA negative. If I look at the purchase of finished goods and the semi-finished goods, which decreased by almost about INR 400 crore on account of lower purchase of scrap, pellets, other materials, that has resulted in an uplift about INR 800 per ton. The big one was obviously the release. In Q2, there was a release in the finished goods and semi-finished goods steel inventory, which was about INR 570 crore, while in Q3, there is a buildup of about INR 900 crore of inventory, which works out to a quarter-on-quarter swing of about INR 1,500 crore, which results in the cost reduction of about INR 3,000 per ton. And finally, in the quarter two, there was an FX gain of INR 464 crore on account of the loans that we had to Tata Steel Holdings in Singapore of about $4 billion. That has now mostly got converted to equity, so which has just... That gets nullified in a manner, therefore, you have impacts the cost by about INR 945 per ton. So if you add up, add and minus all the numbers that I talked about, you will find there is a INR 2,200 per ton improvement in the EBITDA per ton. Sure. Outlook for next quarter, in the sense, how are you seeing the NR and coking points? Naren, you want to address that? Yeah. So the NRs we expect to be about INR 1,000 lower in India for Q4 compared to Q3, and the coking coal cost to be about $10 higher on a consumption basis for Q4 to Q3. Sure. Thank you. One last question. Can you help us again reconcile the net debt movement from 2Q to 3Q? Right. What was the working capital buildup? Yeah. -both for 3Q and for 9M? So, Q... net debt number was flat, right? Yes. So it is almost about INR 7,000 crore. And we had, if you look at it, we had release in working capital, [audio distortion] on a consolidated basis, and some parts of that was absorbed because of the Netherlands cash utilization because of the losses. So the net of net was the same. There was no major movement as such. The next question is from Amit Dixit of ICICI Securities. Amit, I request you to please go ahead. Sorry, good afternoon, everyone. Am I audible? Yeah. Yes, sir. Great. So, I have two questions. The first one is on the restructuring provisions that we took, particularly for redundancies last quarter, which was to the extent of INR 2,600 crore. So this amount that we have committed so far, 130 million on account of corpus and 20 million further in that [Irish Welsh fund]. So, is there at this point in time any clarity that the total amount that you would be giving out could be higher than that INR 2,600 crore? So the redundancy proposal, sorry, the restructuring amount that we took last time had three components. One first component was provision for the redundancy. There was also mothballing or proposed mothballing of the Hot Strip mill and other facilities, like the caster, et cetera. So it was not one number, it was three numbers. And I think we are, at this point of time, even if before we have started consulting, I think we are within that zone. So I don't see on, on those two fronts, to see. And there are contract termination expenses, which, which is all the long-term contracts which will get terminated. That was also included in that. So I think on a, on a net basis, we still think we will be within that. There may be minor plus, minus, that may happen, but it also depends on where that conversation ends up finally with the unions. It's a little premature, but I think we will not be too off the mark, is what our, at this point of time, the judgment is. Okay. The second question is on Tata Steel Netherlands. Now that relining would be complete by end of this month and possibly the production should start from February. So what kind of production/sales volume we can expect in Q4? And whether, after this relining, there is some efficiency improvement, et cetera, that we see productivity improvement. So any cost benefits that you see going ahead? And also, if you could highlight the similar thing for, as you highlighted for Tata Steel India, that what would be the coking coal cost and realization like in that geography. Sure. So I think, the BF6 relining, as Koushik mentioned, is, pretty much complete. I think the filling of the furnace is starting today, and, the furnace should be, in production next week. So that's the plan. For this quarter, I mean, for Q4, we are basically saying that the volumes will be about 0.5 million tons higher than Q3, of which 0.4 million ton actually will be in, I'm talking of sales, will be higher in India, and 0.1 will be roughly in Europe, which is going to be largely Netherlands. Because we only have two months of production, and, you know, it needs to be converted into finished products which can be sold. But the plan for next year, you know, traditionally, Netherlands has produced around 6, 6 million and 6.1 million tons over the last few years. We want to take it up to at least 6.5 million to 7 million. I think that is what we hope to do once the furnace stabilizes, which we expect it to happen in the next couple of months. So we will give you a guidance separately for next year, and there you will see the improvements that we expect because of this work. Because over the last few years, this furnace has struggled a bit, and now that it is relit, we hope that we'll have a more stable production going forward. As far as the guidance on coking coal is concerned, in Netherlands, the consumption cost is expected to increase by about $18 on consumption basis, and in U.K. by about $11. What about on NRs, sir, net realization? So net realizations for Netherlands, I think it is. Yeah, U.K. is expected to increase by about GBP 40 per ton, because the UK business is a little bit more dependent on spot prices. So as the spot prices go up in Europe, U.K. will see a bit more of the benefit. Netherlands is expected to see a reduction of GBP 14 per ton, largely because Netherlands has a larger share of annual contracts, long-term contracts. And the long-term contracts, which were finalized in November, December, were lower than the long-term contracts of the previous year. So you will see a bit of that impact, which will be offset by spot prices. We are actually watching spot prices closely because... You know, as you know, the spot prices in Europe are going up because of the tensions in Red Sea and Suez Canal, and that is limiting the flow of material from Asia to Europe. So, let's see where that goes. I think, some price increases have been announced. So this is the guidance as of now, but, we wait and see on spot prices. Wonderful. Thanks, and all the best. Thanks. From Ashish Kejriwal of Nuvama. Ashish, please go ahead. Good afternoon, everyone. My question is on the profitability of your Netherlands operation as well as U.K. operation. Because, U.K., our blast furnaces, we are going to close in phases next year, which means that we will continue to bleed before we go into a transition mode. Is there a possibility of giving some sense on the profitability of U.K. operation? And as far as Netherlands also, even after relining, when can we expect it to be EBITDA neutral or profitable? I'll address some of it and hand over to Koushik. So Netherlands, obviously, we expect next year to be profitable. At least, it should be EBITDA plus, and we'll give you some more guidance, you know, as we come with the next quarter's results. But clearly, this, most of this year, or pretty much 10 months of this year, we've operated with 1 blast furnace. We should also keep in mind that a lot of sales this year was of material rolled out of high-cost slabs, which were produced the year before, to keep in stock for the blast furnace relining. And that was produced when coal prices and gas prices were at its highest. So we saw all that flow through in Netherlands over the last 10 months. So this year we are starting, you know, with lower gas prices, lower energy costs, and, coal prices, lower than what it was when we made those slabs. So we expect next year clearly to be better than, this year. This year overall has, not been a good year at all in Netherlands, so it will be positive EBITDA. How much positive and, where will we end up? We'll give you a bit more color at the next quarter's, results. As far as, U.K. is concerned, as also for Netherlands, we should keep in mind that the Q3 spreads, spot spreads, were the lowest in a very, very long time. You know? So it was in that EUR 100- EUR 130 per ton range, you know, whereas our long-term average, we always look at 225. Certainly in UK, while we will have operational challenges even as we start winding down the operations, we also expect the situation to improve as far as the spreads are concerned and as far as gas and electricity prices are concerned. We do expect things to improve a bit in U.K. from that perspective, but there will be restructuring costs, et cetera. I'll let Koushik comment on that. Yeah. Yeah. So, Ashish, I think just to add to what Naren just mentioned, in Netherlands, I think they certainly, as the production ramps up in blast furnaces in Netherlands, as you mentioned, that we're targeting a volume of about 6.5-6.8, maybe 9. I think that is important for us, and I think we will, if the spreads improve with the currently, at least in the short term, we see because of the Red Sea crisis, then we should certainly have an uplift. We are also undertaking a deep transformation program in terms of improvement in our cost position, not just by the volume, but multiple areas, and I think that will also start flowing in, if I look at on a full year basis next year. So I think that is important. I think the most important bit is, compared to this year, next year, from a cash flow point of view, there must be, we should see Netherlands business of ours in the operating cash flow positive. That's going to be critical with very much lower CapEx, because it will be more on sustenance CapEx, not these heavy CapEx that we have seen this year. As far as the U.K. is concerned, I think the way to look at it would be, yes, you are right, that it is a phased closure. And therefore, we would our focus is to actually at least half the losses of next year, of this year into next year. And I think that would be a zone that we will be working on. There will be redundancy costs, et cetera, but as the, I think Amit asked the question, we have provided for it from a profitability point of view. And also in our own plan, the people will move out, will move out in a phased manner. And with that phased manner, the cash flows will also move out, happen in a phased way. So I think that is something that is being worked out. And when we come in with our March numbers, with the final results, we should give you a very specific range of cash flows out, cash outflows next year. But fundamentally, next year will look to be significantly better from our international operations, both in terms of reducing our losses in the U.K. significantly, as well as improving significantly as far as Netherlands is concerned. There will be an impact of CO2, which will impact Netherlands, and that's what we are working on, because there is a tail end effect on the CO2 that comes in because of lower production. But that is being worked on, and how we mitigate that with other measures is the one that we can talk about when we speak about the final results. Yes. So, sir, just to clarify, the cash outflow of the restructuring cost is yet to happen, which we have not taken into account in our cash flows yet? No. And that will happen. That cannot happen till we close the furnaces. Sure. That will happen once we close the furnace in a phased manner, as people move out, the affected people move out, and that's the part of the consultation that we will have. And secondly, Naren, you have mentioned or guided about a $10 increase in coking coal for quarter four, and even in third quarter we saw just $4 increase in coking coal. Whereas when we look at the spot prices, it is much higher, maybe $50-$60 higher. So, are we, you know, is there any change in blend which led to the lower cost for us as compared to industry? Or are we buying from Russia at lower cost, or how we are managing it? Yeah. So I think, firstly, we are not buying from Russia. Secondly, you know, we use a lot of leaner blends. Apart from the PCI, we also use a lot of leaner blends. If you look at the last few quarters, the gap which is there between the leaner blends and the prime coking coal had come close to zero. You know, it went up because of the disturbance of the Ukraine war and multiple impacts of that. So the advantage that we had of using leaner blends, which I think we used quite a bit, we lost for some time. Now we're getting that benefit because the gap is increasing. So that's why, while the prime coking coal prices may have gone up, as you said, the consumption costs of Tata Steel, even last quarter, while we had guided $10-$15, it went up only $3. We are able to manage that cost increase much better because, obviously we have the advantage of using a lot of leaner blends, and the gap between those leaner blends and the prime coking coal has gone up. Thank you so much, and I hope this will continue. Yes, surely it will. I mean, I think at least the gaps are not in my control, but use of leaner blends, yes. But, whether the gap increases or not is, a matter for the markets to decide. From Amit Murarka of Axis Capital. Amit, please go ahead. Yeah. Hi, good afternoon. I hope I'm audible. Just on this in the entry that has happened on the chrome ore valuation, like, I'm just not still not clear on that. And could you just help explain what has happened there? Yeah. So let me explain basic from a basic accounting point of view. So when you have... So there is a royalty, and that royalty actually rates have increased, as I mentioned, by about INR 8,000- INR 9,000. 9,000. That volume is not sold, that is still in our stock. So what happens is, by the accounting standards, you load the inventory with that royalty. So it's inventory debit to change in stock, and that change in stock is actually the credit to the P&L, as you see in part of the materials cost. Now, simultaneously, the royalty expenses are debited because that's the reflection. That is why the other expenses have gone up, and a liability is created. When we actually dispatch the material, then, that is when you pay the royalty, and therefore, that is the time when you do a liability debit on to cash. So that's the sequence. So that's why I said it is neutral to the P&L, because the credit has gone into the material cost and the debit has gone to the royalty expenses. Got it. Besides this, there was no other inventory or related change in the quarter, right? No, not materially. I gave the full reconciliation a little while back, I think, to one of the questions. Yeah, yeah. That's it. Thanks for that. And also, like, on KPO 2, what kind of volume can we expect in FY 2025 to come through? I think as of now, we've guided 0.7 million, but we will, you know, in the next quarter's discussion, we can probably be more precise. Because many of the... From a volume point of view, for instance, the Caster 2 has started, which just started two days back, which gives us an additional volume opportunity. But the blast furnace is close to completion. The physical completion will happen in the next quarter, and you know, we will start the commissioning soon after that. So I think by the time we do the next analyst call, we'll have a more specific guidance. Okay. Just now we're guiding 0.7 million tons. 0.7 for FY 2025, right? That's right. That's right. Okay, thanks. And also, lastly, any, any progress or update on the climate transition plan at TSN? Any discussions that have happened with the government? So there is a lot of discussions going on with the government, but as you know, Netherlands has recently had an election, so we're waiting for the new government to form. Netherlands normally has a coalition government, so it takes a few months after the election for the government to form. But the conversation is going on with the bureaucrats in the government, and we hope to at least agree with the bureaucrats on the way forward and then wait for the political leadership to you know then come on board. Yeah. So we expect over the next six months to take it to some sort of conclusion. Okay, thanks a lot. I'll come back if... Yeah. The next question is from Kirtan Mehta of BOB Caps. Kirtan, please go ahead. ... opportunity. In terms of the U.K. transition, we are seeing a slightly slower path than what we had last year quarter, were discussing. So what would be the impact on the net debt for the company in terms of the, by the FY 2020 end, particularly from the European cash outflow that we will be seeing? And how would that get offset from the Indian cash flow? Any color on that? Yeah. So I think, if I look at it, it's a timing issue. And the timing, honestly, given the way the process works in the U.K., where, if you were to adhere to the spirit of meaningful consultation, you have to give time to the unions to come back with a plan, which they did. We spent time along with them, in terms of reviewing it and then coming to a point where we could - where we had to say that we couldn't progress with it because they said that continue the Blast Furnace 4 till the transition, which is another three or four years, which is not feasible, as I said, non-affordable. So that's the time that we have spent with them, but it gives substance to what we are doing. We didn't do lip service. We are now wanting to progress more formally, that this consultation takes legally a minimum of 45 days. We've been deeply engaged with the unions over the last 4 months, and therefore we want to ensure that we give certainty to this situation. I think it's a quarter change from where we originally envisaged, and we are also ensuring that our sourcing and supply chain systems are robust. Honestly, we cannot talk about it, or we couldn't talk about it very significantly in the market till we actually launch consultation, because our intent becomes more formal as we announce the consultation. So I think there will be, as I said, but, taking all things together, we should be, looking at a substantially or, as I said, halving the losses in the U.K. next year, compared to this year. And moving into positive territory in these, towards the second half of the year, financial year. So that is the way we are organizing ourselves. I think from a net debt point of view, we will... We always focused on ensuring that the net debt remains within the target. So we'll see as to the pace at which the phasing, mainly of the people, goes out, because that is... So the physical shutting down of the furnaces we have already announced. The next phase is in this consultation to look at the phasing of the people. The corpus of what we want to provide to the people has also been kind of put on the table. So the only thing that will remain after this is the phasing and the restructuring cost, and therefore, the contract termination and other operational bits which we will be working on. So I think when we sit in the next meeting, we'll be able to give you a more certain view of the phasing and the consequence impact on the cash flows, on a consolidated basis. Thanks for this color, Koushik. One more question was on the India operations, where we are seeing, again, a bit of delay in terms of bringing up the TSK 2 blast furnace. From our initial envisage of February, March, now probably we are looking at a sort of a September quarter, where we think that the blast furnace will come up. Would you talk us through the moving parts, which is sort of resulting into some of the delays from our earlier expectations? So I think, you know, the physical completion, like I said, is expected to happen next quarter. There was a bit of delay because some of the parts that were coming in for the assembly into the blast furnaces were damaged, and we had to get it repaired. That cost us a few months. So, that is one of the reasons that we had. Otherwise, beyond that, it was more smaller reasons, you know, you know, of different, you know, different elements of the blast furnaces coming together. So, there's no very big reason apart from this specific membrane that got damaged, which we had to use in the blast furnace. So that's what has pushed it, but we are still trying to see how much we can pull back. That's why I said we'll give you better guidance, you know, by the end of the year when we do the next analyst call. Sure. In terms of your guidance on the 0.7 million ton steel production envisaged from the TSK 2, typically we look at sort of blast furnace ramping up to 80% utilization within a year of startup. Yeah. Are we envisaging a bit slower startup in case of TSK 2 than the normal industry now? No. So that's why I said, let's wait for another three months, we'll give you a better guidance. This is, as you know, one of the largest blast furnaces in the world. It's a 5,800 cubic meter blast furnace, so we just want to be a bit careful as we start it and make sure that we do manage the ramp-up well, because it's bigger than anything we've handled in the past, so we just want to be a bit careful, that's all. Sure. Thank you. I'll come back in the queue. Yeah. It's from Alok Deora of Motilal Oswal. Alok, please go ahead. Am I audible? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, so, most of the questions were answered. Just one question I had, if you can comment on the demand scenario in the domestic market, and how are we looking at Q4? Because we are getting sort of mixed signs on the demand side. If you could just comment on that and any price hikes which we are looking to take. Thank you. Sure. So I think the demand has been quite strong actually. As you saw year to date, the steel consumption in India has grown at about 10%-12%. So demand has been strong. Pricing has not reflected that robustness of demand so far. So sometimes when you say there's a mixed view on demand, I think it's driven more by the traders and the distributors, because oftentimes if they have confidence that prices are trending up, they stock up, and if they feel that prices are not so great, they tend to stock down. So that's what drives the demand in some sense at the point of sale level, I mean, from the steel company to the trade. But the consumption-wise, which is going to be a reflection of how the end-use industries are doing, is quite strong. As you... Auto is doing strong, railways continues to invest, infrastructure investments are strong. So when we look at different elements of consuming segments, it's quite strong. The fact that the demand is strong is the reason why even during last quarter, the steel prices in India dropped by maybe 3%-4%, compared to the 7%-8% that it dropped internationally. Right? So the price drop in India has been less than what it has been in the international markets. What has happened is every time the steel prices start going up and international prices are low, there's always a threat of imports, and that acts as a gap, and that is what has happened. What we are waiting to see is, of course, what is the situation in China. Even over the last two to three days, there's been a fair amount of discussion on what they're going to do to revive the economy. Second is, what is their exports going to be? Because last year you had a lot of exports in China because most people expected the Chinese demand to pick up strongly after the COVID restrictions were removed in the early part of last year. That did not happen, but production ramp-ups had happened, and hence all of that found its way to the export markets. But as you will see from the numbers, the Chinese steel industry is not really making money. Their profitability is not great, and hence you've also seen Chinese steel prices go up about $30 in the last during December. So, either the prices have to start moving up or they have to start cutting production at some point in time. So we expect a better balance on Chinese production versus demand this year than we saw last year. So the international prices will have an impact on the prices in the domestic market. That's why we've guided INR 1,000 less on a Q3 average versus Q4 average basis in India. In Europe, spot prices are going up, as I said, for different reasons. But in India, let's wait and see how the Chinese market moves, and maybe we will have clarity only after the Chinese New Year. So it'll take another two, three weeks to have greater clarity. That's all from my side. Thank you so much, sir. Okay. From Satyadeep Jain of Ambit Capital. Satdeep, please go ahead. Yeah. Am I audible? Yeah. Hi, thank you. First question on India, on growth beyond KPO 2. Tata Steel obviously has long-term target of 40 million ton capacity in India. As you look at maybe FY 2027, where can the incremental growth after KPO 2 come? And what kind of ballpark capacity, and is it going to be NINL or something else? And would we look at somewhat similar capital costs as we've seen for KPO 2? That's the first question. Yeah. So I think the most ready part of our plan is actually Neelachal, because that's what we've been working on. We need to do some more work on that, and that's about taking Neelachal from 1 million to about 5 million tons. We have an option, Kalinganagar also, we want to develop a plan so that as we complete the phase two, we can start looking at phase three, because that means you need not decommission the vendors and things like that, and that there are some advantages of that. So we'll explore that. That is about Kalinganagar moving from eight to 13. We are also parallelly looking at the Angul plant, the Meramandali plant, the Bhushan plant, to go from 5 to 6.5 as step one, because to go to 10, you need to acquire some land, et cetera. So all these three are options available with us. Over the next six months, we will come closer to, you know, finalizing them, because we've also changed the way we are doing capital projects. We, you know, are following an FEL approach, which means we go to a much higher level of... We do the engineering first, the detailing first, so that we have a far more precise understanding of cost before we take the board approval. So we are doing that FEL3 work for Neelachal. We will be starting that soon for the Kalinganagar phase three. Work is also going on on the Meramandali plant. So I think the next six months we'll be able to give you a bit more clarity on that. These are the big ones. Of course, there are the smaller ones, you know, going on. So in the next two years, you will of course see the ramp-up of Kalinganagar, and that will give us the additional 5 million tons, and there'll be a bit of increase in volumes in Tata Steel, what was Tata Steel Long Products in the Long Products business, because we're adding a rolling mill in Jamshedpur, which and making some small investments in the steel mill shop in Gamharia, which is Usha Martin plant. That'll give us another 500,000 tons. So, these capacity expansions in Meramandali and NIN would be somewhat similar CapEx costs as KPO 2, or could there be cost inflation versus it? Yeah. So I think, KPO 2, you know, we've, we had a slightly different kind of thing. Nil, Neelachal should be lower simply because it's a long products plant, and so we just need to see how to, work out the optimal CapEx there. That's the work we are doing just now. The Meramandali also should be lower because it is, you're not adding a full-fledged plant. And Kalinganagar also, we should take out the cold rolling mill. You know, that's a significant part of the CapEx. It also we have to... That's about INR 6,000 crore out of the Kalinganagar expansion, phase two. You're not adding cold rolling mills in any of these plants, so you will not have that. So if you look at it at the hot rolling stage, I think, it should be at Kalinganagar levels or lower. Okay. Second question on Europe. Any update on the British Industry Supercharger scheme you did mention. Any update on what's happening? Is the second tranche going to come online in 2025? And also scrap, given you'll require higher quality scrap for producing flat steel, how are you looking at sourcing strategy for that prime scrap? So in Europe, the Supercharger scheme is already legislated, so it's a network cost reduction of about 60%. It was and that's something that the U.K. government has already notified and is going through the subsidy control process, the E.U.'s stated process, not subsidy control process, stated process. And that should be applicable when our EAF is up. The CBAM is also being notified, and the consultation process is underway. So we expect that to be in force, and by the time the EAF is commissioned in 2027. As far as scrap is concerned, we are now working on the U.K. scrap system, understanding the supply chain, looking at some of the opportunities that exist in different forms. So I think we have two years or so to work and set it in place, which also includes infrastructure, which includes also processing facilities. Now, whether that those entities can do it or we have to do it, is the conversations that we will start. What kind of partnerships, alliances or opportunities that we look at, is what we are scanning just now. So it's multiple work streams at this point of time. As we proceed over 2024, in particular, I think a lot of these will become clearer. We also don't want to go ahead of time, but in, in time, but we... It's always good to ensure that that supply chain is secure. There is some work going on, especially in the infrastructure and logistics side, for scrap and for processing of high quality scrap, which will be required. Thank you so much, and over to the next. From Anupam Gupta of IIFL. Anupam, please go ahead. Hello, can you hear me? Yeah. So firstly, if you can give some more clarity on the volume. So you said 0.7 million tons [audio distorted] We lost you. Yeah. So on volumes, you said that, Kalinganagar will contribute 0.7 million tons at this point of time. But overall, what is the volume guidance which you are looking at for India business for next year, apart from the Kalinganagar facility? Samita, do you want to give a number now, or we can do this in the next quarter? Yeah. So, Anupam, as you know, we share annual guidance on volumes, et cetera, in our fourth quarter discussions, because that's when the plan for the year is finalized. So I think I can give you a broad sense, but more specifically, we'll be able to discuss it next quarter. Sure. Okay. And, secondly, on you said that in terms of coal, the benefits is because of the mix, which you have been able to manage better. So what is, if you were to quantify, what is the absolute, let's say, consumption cost, which you are seeing in fourth quarter, when you say that you'll have $11 higher? What is the absolute number which you are looking at? I'll just tell you. It's around 250 levels. Yeah. Okay, so broadly around $50-$60 lower than what you have for the prime mix. Yeah, that's it. Sure. Okay. That's all from my side. Thank you. Because this includes this $250-$255, which Samita is talking about, includes everything from PCI to the prime coal, coal. So it's a full range of coals. Yeah? Okay. Okay, okay. Yeah, that's all from my side. Thank you. From Tarang Agrawal of Old Bridge Capital Management. Tarang, please go ahead. Hello. Hi, am I audible? Yes. Hi, good afternoon. A couple of questions from my side, one on India. You know, if you could give us your met coal mix between, you know, whatever you procure domestically versus pulverized, versus, you know, premium low value versus leaner blends. I mean, a broad split, in terms of what percentage of your overall procurement would be in either of these baskets? Naren, if I could answer that? Yeah. So, Tarang, you know, I think, the mix actually changes quarter by quarter, and it's, it's very dynamic based on the value and use, principles which we follow. So we would really not get into the specific details. I, I don't think that's something which we'd like to share. But it's a very dynamic number, which, you know, just changes quarter by quarter. Okay. I think the only thing I'll add to that is, domestic, our own coal is about 20%, and I mean, what we buy is 80%. Okay. And how does that fallen in terms of pricing? The domestic coal, is it at par with the international coal that we see, or is it captive from our mines? Domestic largely is from our mines, but we also participate in some of the auctions that there are, because we have extra washing capacity. So if we get some coal, from, let's say, one of the coal companies or public sector companies, then we buy that, wash it, and use it. But a large part of it would be through our own mines? Absolutely. Yeah. Okay. Second, you know, how far is the 2.2 million ton CRM and the 6 million ton pellet utilized? So the pellet plant is two lines. One line is already fully commissioned. The second line started two, three months back. So basically, we don't really need both the lines to now operate at full capacity just yet, because you know, once the blast furnace starts, we will need both the lines to operate at full capacity. So our objective is not to buy pellets, so we are not buying pellets. We are hardly buying any pellets. So as the blast furnace ramps up, we will use both the lines available in the pellet plant. As far as the cold rolling mill is concerned, the cold rolling mill, we had scheduled to reach about 50,000-55,000 tons a month by this time, and we are already at that stage, as far as the cold rolling mill is concerned. Okay, last question. You know, there's a newsflash around, you know, U.K. likely to levy carbon tax on imported steel from 2027 onwards. I think there was something that came out on 18th January. How does this development impact transition for Port Talbot? That's actually the one where I mentioned, that the CBAM, the Carbon Border Adjustment Tax, if you are talking about that, which is going to come in 2026, 2026, 2027, because they've been doing the consultation just now, most likely 2027. That actually helps Port Talbot, because, end of the day, any import into, U.K. will have to pay the, carbon tax, whereas, we being the only flat product producer, will then, on an EAF, will be on a significantly low carbon emissions. So therefore, the delta between an imported coil and what we produce from a carbon point of view, potentially, especially from a blast furnace route, will be significant. So that CBAM, as you know, in the E.U., has already started from a recording perspective. 2026, it will start from a taxation perspective. U.K. will be more around in 2026, 2027, so which will be just in time as we commission our facilities. Yeah. So calendar year 2027, sometime first half is how we are probably looking at our commissioning for our EAFs? Yeah, in 2027. I can't say first half or second half at this point of time, but there's also a concurrent stuff which is required, which is the electric grid line, the electricity line, which is what I mentioned, that the National Grid, we are in conversation with, and they have agreed to a 2027. Earlier it was sometime later. So we have now kind of confirmed, and we are working through the process to get the required electricity line into Port Talbot. So that is 2027. So I think some... In the calendar year 2027, certainly we will be there. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Ashish Jain of Macquarie. Ashish, please go ahead. Hello. Hi, good afternoon, everyone. My first question is, you know, for U.K., just to understand the one-time cost better, is it fair to say that today it is GBP 130 + GBP 20 million is the potential one-time cost, if everything pans out the way we are thinking? Yeah. I think we gave that number of INR 200. We took the provisions of around INR +200. Right. So GBP 130 + GBP 20 is the number. GBP 20 is the number, and GBP 130 is the number which we said is we are willing to go beyond GBP 130, depending on the negotiations that happen or the discussions that happen. But GBP 130 is certainly to be factored in. So it could be delta to GBP 130, and depending on the... You know, so it's also you have to look at it holistically and ensure that there is a balance between what we want to derive in terms of timing and the smoothness of this transition, and that's the consideration we'll help to help our colleagues or employees who are- Right. really affected. Yeah. But we don't want to give a precise number now, since we are... Yes. That's part of the discussion. Yeah. Yeah. No, I understand that, sir. Yeah. Sir, but just a continuation of that: so when we say that, you know, whatever is the number of employees who will get impacted, you know, the, the count, the rundown in the count will happen in the next 18 months. So for that period they remain, we will continue to incur the, the existing compensation as well for those employees, right? So it is not that it is starting zero and the end is 18 months later. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. It's, yeah. Phased out. Yeah. So as the phase out happens, people, we expect the people to move on and give. So the key area of that is, and the reason why we mentioned that 18 months, the reason why we mentioned 130, is to bring some certainty to the conversation and the certainty to the process, you know. So people don't assume differently. After all, it's their work, their lives also. So I think it is that which required us, as a responsible, company, to give certainty to, to the way we want to approach this. As you can see, there's a lot of news flow around it, but we want to approach it in a manner which is dignified, which cares for people, and yet gets to the business objective, which has been hurting Tata Steel for some time. Right. Koushik, I understand that, you know, I'm just trying to understand that, you know, given we will be importing steel and serving the U.K. market, in this transition period, and we will also, you know, not see a massive reduction in our fixed cost, is there a chance that, you know, U.K. will continue to bleed from cash flow point of view, at least for the next 12-18 months? So that's why I'm saying it is not that, fixed costs will not get reduced. Fixed costs will be reduced, and that is one of the bigger play that will have, unfold in the next 12 months. In 2025, 2024, 2025, I think the biggest part will be taking out of fixed cost. Because, for example, I'll tell you, when you don't have a line of sight or when you have a definitive line of sight, you don't take, heavy costs, to invest, a heavy cost to undertake, Right. Other than, other than to carry it on till the time it needs to be on a safe basis. So there are many cost takeouts and cash. You know, there was a program, Drive to Save U.K., which has been launched, I think, about eight months back, and that is, that has got every little piece of cost saving embedded into it. So we are very focused in taking out the cost, and we should see the cost takeouts happen, not only just employees, but also in the context of, other overhead costs, other discretionary costs, and so on. So, so that cost takeout will happen. 2024 calendar and 2024-2025 financial year will be the transition year. As we move into 2025, 2026, I think we will have a clear transition model and in parallel, the investment model, and then 2027, we get into the end state. Also, Koushik, I'd like to add here, see, we should also keep in mind, the last 12 months saw some of the highest energy costs, Right. -and, you know, lowest spreads. So- Yes. So we expect energy costs to be lower and the spreads to be higher. That will also help. Right. And sir, just one last question. The volume commitment in U.K., is like, is that like a hard commitment, from our side, or we have an optionality of, you know, based on our market conditions, we have any flexibility on that front? I mean, it's, it's like a binding thing for us, right? No, there's nothing binding. It's the downstream that you want to operate, and you want to operate profitably. So it is effectively the entire volume is based on what the downstream facilities will take and profitably serve the customers that we have already. So that's- So are you talking of the transition or are you talking of the EAF? No, no, the transition. The transition. Sure. Then what Koushik's saying is the right. Yeah, yeah. Got it. Got Got it. Yeah. Because EAF size is committed. That is committed as per our, our agreement with the government and everyone else. I think so engineering-wise, that is the most kind of optimal size that we wanted to build. Yeah. Yes. Got it, sir. Thank you so much. Over the conference to Ms. Samita Shah for the chat questions. Over to you, ma'am. Thanks, Kinshuk. So there are questions on U.K., I think, which we have answered in detail, so I will shift the questions which we have, I think they're largely on India. So the first question is: With regard to TSK 2, what sort of incremental employee cost are we looking at once it's commissioned? In fact, the employee cost per ton will come down, actually. So I don't Yeah. So I think they haven't sort of understood, but maybe we can clarify that we already have employees. Yeah. So I think, you know, Kalinganagar, when you look at it, the plant was originally designed for 6 million tons, which, as we were planning phase two, we decided to take it to 8 million tons. So a lot of our... While Kalinganagar today is, as it is, one of our most cost-efficient plants, because of the way it is configured, the way it is manned, et cetera, it will only get better as you expand, because a lot of the utilities have been designed for, more than 3 million capacity at which we are operating today. So when we are at 8 million, we will be more optimal in terms of a lot of utility costs, labor costs, because it's not that from three to eight, you're going to double the workforce. The workforce in most areas is pretty much in place. So our manpower productivity will improve, our labor cost per ton will reduce, our conversion costs will reduce, as we come to phase two. But Samita can separately give you guidance, which may be more specific. Yeah. I think that's just conceptually for you to understand, and I think that will really address the problem. Yeah. The next question is actually on iron ore self-sufficiency. So what is the level of iron ore self-sufficiency in India? That's 100%. But the question is actually on the pellet plant. Before commissioning of the pellet plant, how much pellet were you buying from outside? Was it a direct purchase, or were we providing iron ore for conversion and paying only conversion charges? Because I think the idea is to understand the amount of savings from the new pellet plant. Yeah. No, I think, I mean, firstly, most of it was at market prices. There were some that we were, the only conversion we were doing is in our own plant, in the Usha Martin plant, what was the acquired Usha Martin plant. But otherwise, pretty much, I would say all the pellets were bought at market prices, so that's why there's a significant saving. I don't remember the number, but clearly we have bought about 2 million tons, 1.5 million-2 million tons, if I remember right. I'm not remembering the exact number. Yeah. Yeah? Yeah. Thank you. The next question is on M&A plans in India. So it says there are ESL Steel assets, I presume this is electrical steel, which they are referring to, that seem to be available, and Tata Steel has been interested in those assets in the past. Would you consider buying this asset? So we were interested in that asset at a point in time, and we didn't have Neelachal. Now that we have Neelachal, I think we have enough opportunity to grow in long products through Neelachal. And we bid for Neelachal partly because there's 2,500 acres of land available for us to expand. So we would focus on growing Neelachal and unlocking the value from Neelachal. Thank you. There is a question on Chinese prices. Do you think Chinese prices will go up significantly given that they are importing cheaper coking coal from Russia compared to Indian manufacturers who are importing Australian coking coal? So that has always been there, and China also has domestic coal available, not of great quality, but they have to import iron ore. Iron ore, as you know, is today in that $130 range. It had gone up to $140. And if you look at the profitability of the industry, they are, you know, struggling. So, you, I think, You know, that's why the hot rolled coil prices, domestic, which had were gone down to $530, is gone up to around $570 levels. We do-- I mean, I think that's why I'll wait for another month or two to see what happens, because more recently we've had the stimulus announcements. How will that impact, the industry, et cetera? Something which you need to wait and watch. But I do believe... I don't see China exporting 90 million tons this year as they did last year. I think, hope that will start coming down because China has stated in the past that they don't want to export so much of steel and leave behind such a big carbon footprint. Because they also have a lot of work going on in China to reduce their carbon footprint, whether it is the steel industry trying to make greener steels, auto industry shifting to EVs. So I do expect that China will really look at 90 million tons into two, that's 180 million tons of carbon left behind, just for export. So that, they will discourage that, I'm sure, at some point in time. But of course, what they are encouraging is exports of cars, exports of capital goods, you know, which is more value addition rather than exporting basic steel. So let's wait and see. I think this year we'll have a better sense. Thank you. With that, we will end the call, answer the chat questions, and we'll end the call. So thank you everyone for your participation, and we look forward to connect with you again next quarter. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.