Good morning. This is the Chorus Call conference operator. Welcome, and thank you for joining the ERG fourth quarter 2023 results conference call. As a reminder, all participants are in listen-only mode. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Should anyone need assistance during the conference call, they may signal an operator by pressing star and zero on their telephone. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Paolo Merli. CEO, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Paolo Merli, CEO. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our webcast. Here with me, as usual, is our CFO, Michele Pedemonte, who will later run you through our business performance over the period in more detail. Let's get started with the overview of results in 2023. I'm on page five. Full-year EBITDA closed at EUR 520 million at the very top end of the latest guidance range of 190-520. And basically, in line with our original guidance, the sharp decline in electricity prices coupled with the zeroing of incentive value in Italy resulted in a negative price effect year-over-year of about EUR 90 million, which was more than offset by the contribution of new installed capacity, roughly EUR 70 million, and the better performance on the existing assets for about EUR 50 million, in particular in the fourth quarter characterized by stronger windiness. Costs at the EBITDA level during the period were EUR 12 million against the EUR 5 in full year 2022, but basically concentrated in the fourth quarter of last year, of 2022. Michele will, in a way, elaborate further on those figures in a while. Results at bottom line were very satisfactory because, against a backdrop of our low cost of debt, fully hedged, we enjoyed a high yield on our liquidity thanks to the excellent work done on cash management by our finance department. Over the full year, adjusted net income was EUR 226 million, up 75% year-on-year. Please consider the easy comparison given the windfall taxes paid in 2022. Again, Michele will provide you with more details in a while. CapEx in 2023 amounted to EUR 489 million, slightly below the last guidance due to some delays in construction to be reabsorbed or already reabsorbed in the very few weeks of 2024. CapEx was related to the advancements for assets under construction, both repowering and greenfield projects, in addition to some M&A. Net financial position at the 2023 year end was EUR 1 billion and EUR 445 million, basically in line year on year as cash flow generation, including proceeds from the disposal of the gas pipeline and the absorption of negative fair value on derivatives, balanced the cash outs for CapEx, dividends, share buyback, financial charges, and taxes for a total amount of nearly EUR 800 million. So all in all, I would say resilient economics and solid balance sheet based on which we can confirm easily the dividend at EUR 1 per share. Let's move on. Commenting page number six. 2023, let me say, was also a crucial year for ERG as we finally completed our energy transition and we became a pure renewable and international player. Our strategic transformation was highly recognized by external ESG ratings, which put ERG amongst the top tiers as far as our ESG approach. After the disposal of the CCGT plant, we basically became zero carbon, Scope 1 and 2, paved the way for hitting our net zero target by 2040, including Scope 3. And I would like to remind you that our commitments in this respect have been certified by SBTi. Capital employed now is 100% renewable based on taxonomy. And let me spend a couple of minutes on the achievements, summary of the achievements in 2023 and early 2024. I'm on page number seven. We made significant steps forward in delivering our strategy with major accomplishments, among which the disposal of the CCGT, already said, and our entry in the US market. Let's say both are quite historical events for our group. We inaugurated our first repowering in Sicily with Partinico Monreale and Camporeale. Most of you were there with us. Finally, both plants are up and running. We further consolidated our presence in Spain, U.K., and France. We also started the construction of our first battery storage plant in Sicily, 12.5 MW, which will enter into operation in 2025. This is the first investment in the storage for the group. So in this volatile scenario, we have been able to sign several major PPAs with tier one off-takers, which made our revenues more stable going forward. Thanks to our sound financial conditions, we also launched and completed a buyback program for 3.7 million own shares. Let me give you a little bit of color on the U.S. entry. As I said, an historical move for the group. We believe it's a unique opportunity to increase geographical and technological diversification. We consider this partnership with Apex a major achievement. Apex is a leading player in the renewable space and development with strong know-how and an excellent operation. In addition to the acquisition of an operational portfolio of assets, we have also signed a cooperation agreement for about 1 gigawatt under development at a very advanced stage. Let's see what's going on in the next few months. We tend to see it as a first step in the U.S. I mean the acquisition of the operational portfolio because it's a market that offers interesting growth and return opportunities. Let's see now page nine. The execution we put in over the last three years, a quick summary of what ERG, say, has done in this cycle since we announced a transformation into a pure Wind and Solar player. And here we are now. Through a combination of M&A and organic growth since the end of 2020, we managed to add 1.2 GW of new installed capacity, Wind and Solar, in different geographies. Say another way of looking at it, we basically succeeded, say, in making a big shift from conventional to renewable power in three years' time. So quite a satisfactory execution. Let's move to page 10. Say another pillar of our strategy is our commitment to securing the road to market for our productions. This is becoming particularly important in a time of high volatility and uncertainty about energy prices. In 2023, we signed several major PPA with big names: Luxottica, STMicroelectronics, Telecom, Google. So as you can see, at today, if you sum the other PPA we signed the years before, we can rely on about two terawatt-hours per year or about 30% of our entire portfolio stabilized through long-term contracts with these corporate names. This is an efficient way, say, to reduce exposure to volatility of market prices. Sorry. Page number 11. Here are some more details on our financial structure. As said, we can rely and leverage on a very flexible and efficient balance sheet. We do not have any further refinancing needs till 2025, and our cost of debt is very low thanks to the liability management signed in the past when interest rates were at their minimum. Paradoxically, this high-interest environment boosted our bottom line, as you could see, in 2023, as we paid much less financial charges than normal thanks to high-yield cash management. So from a financial point of view, the storytelling hasn't changed. We have an investment-grade rating from Fitch, and we want to maintain it. In other words, we keep seeking sustainable growth on a financial basis. So return and profitability, say, is more important than volumes from our point of view. And now, Michele to Michele, we'll take you through our 2023 results. Thank you, Paolo. In Q4, electricity market prices have been significantly lower than previous year. This trend has partially influenced our all-in unitary revenues, which are, in any case, mainly dependent on incentive, feed-in schemes, long-term PPAs, and short-term hedging made in the past. In the wind, Italy, for example, unitary revenues are influenced by the value of the incentive on the majority of our assets, which is null in 2023 versus EUR 42 megawatt-hour in 2022 and by the lower market price captured in Q4 2023 compared to Q4 2022. So all in all, unitary revenues declined from EUR 120 megawatt-hour to EUR 106 megawatt-hour. The structure of the Italian green incentive will allow a recovery of the electricity prices below EUR 180 megawatt-hour this year. This will be a positive reversal expected in 2024. In France, most of our assets operate under feed-in scheme without exposure to market prices. In Q4 2023, the captured price is higher than previous year, mainly due to the adjustment of fixed tariff value related to inflation. Please note that in Q4 2022, France has been affected by retroactive application of clawback measures. In Germany, captured price in Q4 is lower than previous year because previous year benefited by the one-way tariff structure that allowed us to capture higher merchant prices. East Europe unitary revenues decreased in Q4, driven by Bulgaria and Poland, mainly due to lower merchant prices. In UK, captured prices mainly reflect our PPA prices and close at EUR 96 MWh in Q4 2023, lower than previous year by EUR 38 MWh when the PPAs have not started yet on our Scotland assets, and they could get higher market prices. Please note that the all-in price does not include revenues from balancing services market. As regards to the Solar all-in unitary revenues, there is an increase of value in Q4 in Italy thanks to a higher hedge prices coupled with the end of the Italian clawback rule that impacted our asset in Q4 2022. In Spain, where our assets have a tariff mechanism that operates as a floor to our revenues, all-in prices are influenced by short-term hedging made in line with our results. Now a focus on production. I'm on page 14. Full-year production reached 6.1 TWh, 1.2 TWh higher than previous year, mainly due to perimeter effect coupled with better weather conditions recorded in most of our countries. Production coming from abroad represents 55% of the group's total production. As regards to Q4, we have in Italy 851 GWh plus 50% year-over-year thanks to better wind conditions compared to Q4 of last year coupled with some perimeter effect related to repowering plants entering into operation in the second half of the year. In France, 435 GWh plus 27% thanks to better wind conditions in comparison to a weak Q4 last year. In Germany, 217 GWh plus 40% again thanks to better wind conditions. In Eastern Europe, 236 GWh plus 47%. A volume that is higher than Q4 2022 thanks to better wind conditions recorded in each country. In U.K. and Nordics, 129 GWh plus 60% thanks to the asset energized by the end of 2022 and early 2023 in Scotland and Sweden. Production in UK is influenced also by remunerated balancing services market in Scotland and grid curtailment in Northern Ireland. Low production in Sweden due to prolonged test and commissioning activities on our Furuby wind farm. In Spain, 57 GWh that more than double year-on-year thanks to the production of the newly acquired or built plant that entered in operation between July and December 2023. In the fourth quarter of the year, we have an overall EBITDA net of clawback equal to EUR 155 million, EUR 44 million higher than the Q4 2022 thanks to better wind conditions and perimeter effect, partially offset by lower market scenario. In Italy, the EBITDA is EUR 81 million, higher than Q4 2022 by EUR 27 million thanks to better weather condition and perimeter effect coming from repowering plants, partially offset by lower captured price driven by the lower value of the incentive that is null in 2023. In France, the EBITDA is EUR 30 million benefiting from better wind condition compared to lower production of Q4 last year. In Germany, the EBITDA is EUR 20 million, lower than previous year due to lower captured price, partially offset by better wind condition. In Eastern Europe, the EBITDA is EUR 11 million, almost aligned to last year with lower sales price that are partially offset by better weather conditions in this area. In UK and Nordics, the EBITDA is higher than Q4 2022 by EUR 10 million, mainly due to perimeter effect. In Spain, the EBITDA is EUR 3 million, higher than Q4 2022 thanks to perimeter effect coming from new acquisitions and better captured price thanks to short-term hedging made in the past. Full-year EBITDA is EUR 520 million, higher than previous year mainly due to perimeter effect and better weather condition, only partially offset by worse market scenario. In 2023, around 45% of EBITDA comes from assets outside of Italy in line with previous year. Let's comment now on investment in the period. In the full year, we invested EUR 489 million, an amount which is lower than the one invested in 2022, EUR 946 million. Last year, the investments were influenced by EUR 610 million of acquisition of wind and solar plants in Italy and U.K. versus EUR 184 million this year for Solar assets in Spain. In addition, in 2023, we made about EUR 286 million of organic CapEx in Wind and Solar, and in particular, EUR 196 million of CapEx in Italy for wind, repowering, and greenfield projects in Sicily, and EUR 70 million related to activities of revamping and repowering of solar assets. Let's now move on to the financials commenting on other items of the profit and loss. In Q4 2023, amortization depreciation at EUR 54 million, lower than previous year as an effect of the lifetime extension projects on French and German assets. Net financial charges at zero versus EUR 7 million in Q4 2022, mainly influenced by increased liquidity remuneration in a scenario of higher interest rate with a debt structure almost completely at very competitive fixed rate. We have a gross debt with a cost of around 1.3%. Tax rate in the quarter is 24%, lower than previous year, which was influenced by contributo straordinario in Italy for a total amount of EUR 19 million. As a result of all of this, the adjusted net profit of the quarter amounts to EUR 77 million, higher than EUR 14 million in Q4 2022. The adjusted net profit of 2023 amounts to EUR 226 million, including EUR 9 million of clawback measure versus EUR 129 million in 2022 that included, again, a series of extraordinary taxes like the extra profit taxes, clawback measure, and contributo straordinario for a total amount of EUR 83 million. In this chart, you can find a summary of effects of the clawback measures and windfall taxes that affect our figures. The impact on EBITDA net profit in Q4 2023 is lower than Q4 2022, mainly related to the sharp electricity prices decrease, and it refers mainly to Eastern Europe and France. In Romania, the government set a compulsory PPA mechanism at the cap price of EUR 90/MWh, which has the same substantial effect of a clawback measure, but it is not reported here of being, technically speaking, a clawback. Comparing net profit net of clawback, we see a substantial increase versus previous year that was heavily affected by Italian windfall profit tax. Finally, let's take a look at the cash flow statement and the net financial position for the full year 2023. The net financial debt closed at EUR 1,445 million, substantially in line with the previous year, driven by a solid cash generation from EBITDA, cash in from ERG Power disposal, and the reduction of market-to-market derivatives on commodities that are substantially zero at the end of the year. These impacts are netted by the already commented investment of the period, EUR 489 million, dividend payment for EUR 154 million, and buyback transaction for EUR 61 million. Thank you again for your attention. I will now hand over to Paolo for his comments on guidance and final remarks. Thanks, Michele. Before commenting on the guidance, let me put it in context. In the last few years, we have grown accustomed to dealing with high uncertainty around energy prices. Recent months have been no exception. Since the last webcast in mid-November 2023, there has been a strong downward trend for both gas and CO2 for all other commodities, I would say, but those two are basically setting out, as you know, the price for electricity in the European markets. As a consequence, electricity prices in recent months have dropped by about EUR 50-60 per MWh, as you can see in the chart, where there are just three countries represented for simplicity, but more or less the same trend happened to all our geographies. In this context, it's difficult to have a clear view on the scenario going forward, and that's why the strategy we are implementing on revenue stabilization about PPA or CFD is extremely important. As you can see in this chart, most of our 2024 production is hedged through a mixture of short-term hedging, long-term PPA, CFD, and among which some are one-way CFD, which basically means they are aware, partially exposed to the market whenever prices are above the guaranteed floor. A significant portion of merchant production is backed by incentives similar to green certificates, the value of which in Italy is inversely correlated to the spot merchant price from the year before. So the less you are gaining maybe this year because the prices are lower, the more you will recover the following year. But I think you got to know our revenue structure, but I also think it was useful to do a quick recap on the matter. In the end, to cut the story short, notwithstanding all these stabilization mechanisms, a portion, though limited, of our portfolio production is still exposed to merchant volatility. That's unavoidable, also considering the intermittent nature of our sources, wind and solar. Let me also give you a little bit of visibility on asset additions we expect in the very short term. Here, you'll find a quick update on assets currently under construction. We still have roughly 359 MW right now under construction with 282 should be completed by year-end, so we can count on a highly sustainable and visible growth. If you add to the, say, assets under construction or the M&A, some we have already done, Falcon in France, and some should come soon in the U.S., you see that we should expect to reach almost 3.9 GW by the end of 2024. So almost 600 MW of new capacity to be added in 2024 and basically all secured as part is in construction and part already contracted. So our journey is continuing with a visible growth despite an uncertain business environment out there. Let me wrap up by looking at the guidance for 2024 in detail. I should mention that EBITDA figures here include the effects of IFRS 16 for about EUR 15 million on the 2024 full year because after conducting a survey on peers, we came to the conclusion that the whole panel is aligned in applying the principle when reporting their accounts. So we believe this format makes our accounts more comparable with others, but nevertheless, we will keep providing you with all the details about those items on EBITDA and on net financial position. The EBITDA, let me also add, guidance reflects the very last trend in electricity prices, so it's very up-to-date, update to today, let's say, and is based on the most recent forward for 2024. Based on that, EBITDA is expected to be within a range of EUR 520 million-EUR 580 million, so a little bit wider range to take into account the volatility of the commodity. And let me also add that the US portfolio is, in this number, consolidated just in the second half of the year. You make a pro forma considering the full year contribution of the U.S. portfolio, which, by the way, is ours because the Lockbox date was in the second part of 2023. The full year guidance should move up in the range of EUR 540 million-EUR 600 million. In 2024, as far as CapEx, we expect to invest roughly EUR 550-600 million, which includes also the cash out for the acquisition in the U.S. and the already done in France. This will translate into a net financial position at the end of the year between EUR 1.775 billion and EUR 1.085 billion at the end of the year. Pending the closing of the U.S. deal and the appointment of the new board in April, I can confirm you that we are currently working on the new business plan, which we expect to present to the financial community and to the market in the coming months, most likely when we publish our first quarter results. So, we are now. Thank you for listening. Thank you for your attention, and we are now ready to take your questions. This is the Chorus Call Conference Operator. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touch-tone telephone. To remove yourself from the question queue, please press star and two. We kindly ask to use handsets when asking questions. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question is from Enrico Bartoli of Mediobanca. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning all and thanks for taking my question. First of all, some clarifications on the guidance. If I understood well, actually, in November, you provided more or less indication of something around EUR 600 million could be reasonable. So the current number is the result mainly of the impact of the new prices on the 20% of your volumes that are exposed merchant. If you confirm that and if you can provide some details. If in the merchant part you also include the volume which are in Italy entitled to get the green certificates because, of course, you have lower wholesale price during 2024, which is going to be partially compensated by higher certificate prices in 2025. Also, some details about the volume assumptions that you have there compared to what you are seeing in the first two months in terms of wind production in the country when you operate. The second question is related to the current guidance for 2026 in the business plan that you have at the moment. I was wondering if the current forward curves are more or less in line with the assumption that you had last year when you presented that plan, if there had been an acceleration of the downward trend or there are significant differences compared to what you were assuming last year, in particular on Italy when we see that the forward price for 2026 is still above EUR 70 per MWh. The last one, if you can give us some visibility on the hedged volumes that you have for 2025 in terms of both volumes and prices? Thank you. Okay. Good morning, Enrico. Good morning, everyone. I must say that first, about the indication of the guidance, yes, I confirm that all the difference is deriving from the strong downward trend that we have seen in the energy price over the last, say, couple of months. I'd like to remind you that during the last webcast, at question, if an indication of EBITDA in the region of EUR 600 million would have made sense, I replied, and I remember very well, yes, it made a lot of sense. But at that time, the forward for electricity were well above 100 EUR/MWh or even 140 EUR/MWh, for instance, in Italy and more or less the same in France and Germany. So consider that the numbers we have provided today about the breakdown of our volumes also includes a component, a portion of production covered by one-way CFD. At that time, the contribution we legitimately expected from those production were above, say, the floor guaranteed by the one-way CFD. The precise number we got in our portfolio is 0.8 TWh covered by one-way CFD. You can simply work out the impact moving EUR 50 in energy prices. EUR 50 multiplied by 0.8 is just for those kind of contracts, the one-way CFD, which we feel to consider hedged, even from a financial point of view, feature the operating agency considers those volumes covered and secured. And the P&L is going to have an effect if the price is at EUR 140 or, like now, below the floor. Right now, we canceled, let's say, the volatility on these kind of volumes because the prices sorry, the prices we are assuming for the guidance are below the floor of these contracts. You can see from the chart, the 2022, the one I just presented, we still have 1.6 more or less terawatt-hour of production exposed to merchant. And let me say, and I think I've been always clear about that, it's unavoidable to maintain a part of our production exposed to market. If not, the risk is to overhedge the production because our production is intermittent. So you can't predict with certainty if wind or sun is there. And if you simply multiply the 1.5 terawatt-hour by the difference in energy prices, you can arrive at a very important number. So that's why I was so confident in November with a completely different price scenario to say, yes, EUR 600 million or even more than that is reasonable. Finally, I confirm, Enrico, that a big part, more than 1 terawatt, out of the 1.6 that we consider exposed to market are covered and backed by the GRIN. GRIN is the name of the Certificati Verdi, green certificates, which formula is the value which, as you know, is calculated through a mathematical formula. So now, we should expect, based on the current forward, that next year, the green certificates will be higher than the current one at EUR 40 - EUR 42 should be in the region of 70. So part of the theoretical downward compared to consensus estimates will be recovered next year thanks to a higher green certificates value. So I hope to have answered. About 2025, I think the precise number, maybe Michele will be more precise about the volume exposed to market. Yeah. Yeah. For 2025, we have a merchant exposure in the region between 2-2.5 TWh. That means that we have already covered 65% of our production. In order to reach our target that is in the region of 80%-85%, we have all the months of this year to cover with short-term hedging the remaining portion of the exposure by the end of 2024 to enter 2025 with the percentage around 80% at least of coverage or hedge production. The average figures for considering all the instruments that we have, so also CFD, PPAs, not only short-term hedging, is between EUR 90-100/MWh. This percentage excludes U.S. contribution that, as you know, as I explained by Paul, is fully covered by PPA, so it's 100% hedged from this aspect. Also, the contribution of the U.S. will allow us to increase our percentage in terms of coverage against the merchant risk. Sorry, I comment on 2026. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead. Enrico, sorry, I forgot to say. Right now, if you look at the forward, there is this kind of backwardation curve with prices going farther down in 2025, 2026. In our scenario or the one we believe in, we expect slightly better prices in the sense that when market approaches the delivery time, we expect this backwardation shape will disappear. We think now the market is overshooting. That's our personal view, overshooting in the downside for energy prices. But please consider that those, especially March, April, May, are months where forward are suffering a little bit because we are in the middle of the winter season, which was not very, say, cold, and a summer season. So we expect volumes and consumptions to recover and then price to stabilize maybe at a better value. But if I have to be more precise, say, yes, depending on the countries where we are because we have different price expectations, but let me say that for 2026, prices are in the region of in a range of EUR 80-100 per MWh. This is the price estimates range. We are basing our expectation for 2025 and 2026. For the time being, but we will see in a couple of months, we expect both from a megawatt point of view, historic capacity point of view, to be perfectly in line with the trajectory of the business plan we have already announced last year and as well for the EBITDA. So we expect, given the additions, the huge additions of megawatts, we expect starting from 2024 because, as you see, roughly 600 MW will be added to our portfolio. We expect to be in line also with the trajectory for the EBITDA. Thank you. Last but not least, please consider, but I already said, that the current guidance for 2024 is just including half-year contribution from the U.S. Thank you very much. Okay. The next question is from Roberto Letizia of Equita. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks a lot for taking my questions. Of course, I remain on guidance. Just wondering if you can give us some more details of what sits behind the low and the high end of the guidance in terms of power prices and production. So actually, what's the scenario that takes you to 520, and what's the scenario that takes you to 580 because this is a very large range? So you can maybe help us to compose this minimum and maximum with underlying assumptions. I had a question also on the debt because the guidance on the debt seems very low. If you can help me to compose the numbers. But you have some EUR 600 million of CapEx. You have some EUR 270 million of acquisition in the US. You paid EUR 140 million dividend, and you have the remaining EUR 40 million from the buyback. This is almost EUR 1 billion, EUR 1.1 billion. But you have an operating of EUR 50 million, EUR 1.1 billion. But you have an operating, so basically, if I only take these two numbers, you should be in the range of EUR 2 billion for the net debt of 2024. But your guidance is significantly below. So I'm wondering if you can help me to understand what's the delta in terms of cash contribution expected to arrive from this year. A very quick clarification on the debt guidance. So I see now your EBITDA includes the IFRS 16 contribution. But I think, if I'm not sure, the debt numbers which you put in the press release do not take into account the IFRS 16. So can you help us reconcile these two differences? Just wondering if the full US contribution expected from the US plan is now, hence, EUR 30 million because now half contributes for EUR 20 million in your guidance. Is it EUR 30 million? Is it EUR 40 million? What's actually the expected full-year contribution of the US plans? And then, please, comment on the new FER X decree. Do we see the first indication on prices, which are in the region of EUR 80/MWh-EUR 85/MWh? Just wondering if this is satisfying for you and if you can tell us what's the potential in terms of megawatts in the hands of ERG to participate in those tenders which have apparently now more attractive prices. Thanks a lot. Sure. I'm going to try to navigate through your many questions. The first one is to explain the range of the EBITDA. Let me say that the central point is very much based on the current, today, more or less, forward price for 2024, which definitely is different country by country. But for sure, it's, let's say, in line with current forward price for 2024. The bottom part of the range, the EUR 520 million, assumes a conservative view that the prices could move down by further 20%, more or less. So we decided to enlarge a little bit the width of the guidance based on the current volatility, which is much higher than it used to be, as you can see from the screen. Let's say this is the answer to your first question. In May, when we will provide the results of the first quarter, we could narrow a little bit, probably, this range. If I may, I can tell you that January and February went quite well, performed well, including the US, which is not in our accounts yet because we have not yet closed the deal waiting for the last clearance. But I'd like to remind you that the contract makes us owner of the cash flow even in the first part of the year because the contract was based on a lockbox date. So just to say that, from my point of view, the better KPI for the EBITDA is the one including also the US for the first part of the year. Yes, I confirm the guidance is including the effect of IFRS 16 because we conducted, during 2023, a survey with other peers in the industry, and we came to the conclusion that after the first years since the publication of the principle, there were different behaviors, some accounting the ordinary numbers, some as a special item. Now, there is a quite big alignment in applying the principle in the P&L. So we came to the conclusion that using including the IFRS 16 made our numbers more comparable with that. But for sure, as said, we will keep providing you and providing the financial community with all the details in order to calculate. In the net financial position, yes, I confirm the guidance. We expect, notwithstanding EUR 600 million of investments, more or less, which includes already the acquisition in the US and also the dividend for more or less EUR 150 million. Thanks to the cash flow, the high cash flow of the company, we expect to close the year with a net debt in the region of EUR 1.8 billion. This number does not include the IFRS 16 effect, which is in the region of EUR 200 million. Yeah. It is detailed in the same slide. You have both figures. So we are going to provide both figures on adjusting net financial position without and without the IFRS 16 and report the net financial position as we are always doing with this figure, just to explain. Sorry, on this very, very last point, just to be 100% sure. So the EUR 600 million CapEx indication for 2024 includes already the US asset acquisition? Yeah. Yes, because, yeah, this may seem low compared to the 600 MW we expect to install in 2024. But please consider that a big portion of those CapEx were already spent in 2023, last year, as advance payments for wind turbines and BOP and other activities. So. You have the detail of the construction expected date, and that is in the first half of the year. So the largest portion of our CapEx for the project in construction has been already spent in 2023. You also asked about the FER X. Yes, we had been waiting for longer for having this first indication. We are still in the middle of the process because this is just a draft. From some point of view, there are positive elements. For instance, the amount of Wind and Solar capacity government expects to install in the next five years because the decree is going to cover 2024-2028. And if you divide the number of megawatts, 16.5 MW for wind and roughly 50 MW for solar, you can come to a number which is 6-7 times higher than the country has installed, at least looking at large-scale plants over the last few years. So this is implying a very, very strong acceleration. In terms of price and the auction are finally independent from a technological point of view, meaning there will be auctions for wind and auctions for PV. The point we are not absolutely happy with is the fact that the price set out for Wind is lower compared to the one for Solar, which is a nonsense. Honestly, let me say, there is no other example across Europe. We think it's a kind of misunderstanding because if you see the table reporting the expected CapEx per megawatt per technology, I mean, the reference investments needed for this kind of technology in the draft is reported that it is almost EUR 1 million for Solar and just EUR 1.3 million for wind. But anybody following the sectors knows that for wind, the capital intensity is much higher in the region of EUR 1.5 million, EUR 1.6 million, or sometimes even EUR 1.7 million, while for solar, it's much lower than EUR 1 million. It's in the region of EUR 600,000, EUR 700,000, EUR 1 million per MW. So I think the assumptions apparently made for working out the reference price are wrong. That's our opinion. But we are working with the ministry and with the department, the technical department of the ministry, to, say, improve this decree. And we remain confident that a better outcome will be released in the next few months. But let's wait. We can't control this, just commenting and giving a constructive view to the decision-makers in order to improve the quality of the decree with a win-win situation in the sense that the target they set out for the country will be reached just if there will be the right conditions. If not, as I always said, we will slow down the investments because the generation capacity of the group is very big. We will divert investments in countries or in areas where the returns are more stable and appealing. So the rule of thumb is value over volume. So we want to reach our order rates, our return in this very volatile market, business environment, not just for the energy prices but also for the interest rates that are still very high. So, Roberto, I hope to have answered the. Oh, yes. On this one, maybe I was more interested in what's the potential for ERG for participating in those tenders, which are a bit more attractive, I would say, now, in capacity, in terms of asset potential. We are still assessing our investments, in particular, the repowering because we got several projects already fully authorized with Autorizzazione Unica, so ready to get started in terms of construction. We are assessing the return of those investments because, as you know, repowering means dismantling an existing asset that could produce for the next 15 years without EUR 1 of investments and to substitute it with a new platform, which requires lots of investments. We are assessing, and it's always been like this, the return of the investment on a differential basis, not in absolute terms. We are working to improve the decree in order to prompt, say, this kind of investments and also to cancel the penalization. The repowering is still subject. You should remember that our price in the auction is discounted by a further 5% because of the Spalma Incentivi rule and regulation that was issued in 2013. So it's a different era. So we think this is totally, I don't know, out of fashion. We are working to cancel this penalization. And whenever we'll be succeeding in doing this and we'll succeed in having a fair remuneration through auction, we will assess our investments. Till there are not these conditions, we prefer to maintain the investments in the pipeline because, as I always said, repowering is like good wine. We can wait, and the return is going to improve. So that's the answer for the time being. But we are working on assessing project by project, monitoring the evolution of the regulatory in Italy and everywhere in Europe. We will provide you and the financial community with more indications during the business plan presentation. Excellent. The next question is from Naish Cui of Barclays. Please go ahead. Good morning, Paolo and Michele. Thank you very much for taking my question. I have two, if that's okay. I'll ask them one by one. The first question, if I'm not wrong, the wind condition year to date, especially in January, February, has been pretty strong. And I wonder, what is your assumption on utilization? Because I remember 2023, in Q2, the wind condition was very weak. Are you assuming a similar wind condition as in 2023, or are you assuming a normalized utilization rate overall across your portfolio? Okay. But see, in 2024, in 2023, actually, the availability of wind during the fourth quarter completely offset the lack of production in the first nine months. So in the end, in particular, in some countries, we had production that came out stronger than the P50. Let's take, for instance, Italy. In the fourth quarter, production were 50% higher than the one recorded in the fourth quarter of 2022 and much higher than our budget for the quarter. But, say, compensating for the lack in the first nine months. When looking at the guidance for 2024, we are a little bit more conservative in terms of production assumption compared to what we had registered in 2023. So, in other words, if the wind in 2024 will blow as much as it did in 2023, results could be better. But we can't say we can't have this kind of certainty. I hope to get the message across. Yes. That's very clear, Paolo. And my second question, if that's okay, I can ask about the chart in slide 22, page 22. And I'm a bit confused with the chart. I just want to get a bit of clarification. On the CFD one-way, that is 0.9 TWh, I'm assuming your floor protection will kick in if power price drops to a certain level. Do we know about that? And can I assume the EUR 520 million guidance is a floor? And also, on that chart, the GRIN part, you have 1.6 TWh there, of which 1.1 is the incentive plan. What is the other 0.5? Do you have a merchant exposure for the other 0.5 TWh? Is that the only merchant exposure you have for 2024? Thank you. And that was my last question. Okay. But see, as I said, out of the 1.9 TWh covered by CFD, roughly 0.8 - and I can confirm it - are based on one-way CFD. And according to our guidance, there is no more risk to those contracts because the merchant price is below the floor guaranteed by those CFD contracts. In other words, a few months ago, we expected those productions to give us an upside compared to the floor of the feed-in tariff or CFD. While now, with lower floor price, they went below the floor. So there is no downside risk. Still, there is an upside risk if the prices rebound and went up going above the floor. For sure, this is an upside we have, but not downside from those kinds of contracts in our guidance. You said correctly, we have more than 1 TWh of production in Italy, which is part of the green bit, the 1.6, that are still enjoying and benefiting from the green certificates in Italy, whose value is worked out through the well-known mathematical formula 180 minus the PUN, so the merchant price registered in the year before. So looking forward, if right now, let's say, the price is 90 EUR, more or less, the forecast for 2024, we'll come to 70 EUR for the green compared to the 40 EUR this year. So just to say that probably EUR 30 million, like for like, I mean, with ceteris paribus, as Latin said, for price scenario. But if price scenario remains flat in 2025, we should have roughly 30 EUR/MWh more for green certificates, which translates into EUR 30 million more. Part of the disappointment, let me say, compared to the market estimates for 2024 will be recovered in 2025 through this mechanism. Thank you, Paolo. Can I just get further clarification on that? Because I did a bridge analysis based on my previous over EUR 600 million EBITDA for 2024 than to the new guidance. I thought the new Italian power price should be around implied in your guidance should be around EUR 80-90. Is that fair? I think so. I think so. Yeah. More or less. More or less, yes. Perfect. Thank you very much. That's very helpful. Thank you. The next question is from Paolo Citi of Intermonte. Please go ahead. Hello. Hello. Good morning, everyone. I have a follow-up question on Wind Italy and, in particular, on green volumes, green incentive volumes. Clearly, this is a quite important issue taking into account the foreign electricity prices and the increasing value of the green incentive around EUR 40 this year and maybe EUR 60-EUR 70, as you said before, for 2025. My question is, can you recap the expected trend in volumes backed by this incentive? It should be around 1.1 TWh this year, almost stable 2025, and then, if I remember correctly, a first step down in 2026 and a second one in 2027. Can you remember your expected volumes evolution for this particular output? Thanks. Thank you, Paolo, for the question. Yes, you are perfectly right. 1.1 in 2024, slightly less in 2025, but more or less stable, above 1 TWh, then going down to 0.8 TWh. And then the big phase-out will be in 2027 with just 0.3 remaining covered by green certificates. Yes, you are right. Okay. Thank you very much. The next question is from Stefano Gamberini of Equita. Please go ahead. Good morning, everybody. Thanks for taking my question. Could I come back to the FER X decree, please? Just to understand, Paolo, what is your view regarding the actual acceleration of investment in Italy considering the rest of the conditions? You are right. The price of wind is too low, probably. So if this price will be improved, all the rest of conditions, I mean, regarding the length of incentives, the volumes granted, and so on, are fine. And so we can expect an actual acceleration of installed capacity or not. The second is regarding solar. The solar price, it is more fair. Do you expect an actual acceleration in this business, and are you interested, eventually, to enter this business? The third, regarding what are the total amount of capacity that you currently have that could be repowered if the decree will be adjusted as you require? Many thanks. Thanks, Stefano. Yes, the target they set out in terms of megawatts are very, very aggressive because I repeated, if you take the number written on the decree, 16.5 for wind and 50 for PV, and you divide it by 5 years, you will reach a number in the region of 12 GW of installed capacity per year. And as I said in many occasions, public occasions, we have to analyze the actual data. And if you take the number in 2023, you will realize that just 1 GW of large-scale plants, less than 500 MW in wind and less than 500 MW in solar, have been installed because the remaining part, 4 GW, roughly, because the total capacity installed in 2023 was 5.7 according to the official data. But more than 4.5 were plants below 10 MW or even below 1 MW. I mean, rooftop plants. We all know that those kinds of developments have been propelled by the super bonus, the 110 fiscal bonus that was available till last year. This bonus is phasing out quickly. We shouldn't expect the same support from this point of view. The objective, it's quite evident from the FER X of the government, is to push now on the large installations. They keep repeating that if you look at other countries such as Ireland, such as the U.K., such as France or Germany, you see that the price for wind allocated through auctions is much higher than the ones awarded for Solar PV. I think in order to reach the targets, especially for wind, the government should revise upwards this value. For Solar, the amount is very big. This is one improvement. An improvement in the regulation is including also the Agri-Solar because Agri-Solar wasn't eligible to participate in the auctions in the previous regulatory framework. Now it is. So this is surely positive. And I think 80 is a quite good price for solar because it's a price based on a pay as produced production. Okay? So that's why I insist the 85 for wind, which has not got the DAC profile in the daily production, is too low on relative terms. So let's see what's going on because still, this is a draft, and it's been well specified. We are working to correct this, let me say, the fact of the current draft. And based on the final one, we will assess our investments. The next question is from Davide Candela of Intesa Sanpaolo. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning, gentlemen. Thank you for taking my question. I just have two. The first one is I would say, more strategic. And I was wondering if you can share a view about the renewables market in Europe. So do you see that despite the declining prices that we observed in the recent months, still, there is room for developing, and the IRR and the projects are in the money? And compared to that, looking at these declining prices and, of course, the interest rates environment, if other regions, meaning the U.S., and then if you can elaborate on the strategic rationale of the U.S., if these regions are becoming much more competitive compared to Europe looking at this scenario. And the second one is just a clarification on the P&L and the results in 2023. You recorded a capital loss on the CCGT sale. I was wondering if you can provide a little bit more color on the nature of this capital loss. Maybe you said before, and I lost it. Thank you. Okay. Let's go through your question in order. Absolutely. We are still absolutely positive on the future for renewable because, let me say, the current negative mood is very much related to the trend in prices, which has nothing to do, in my opinion, with the growth of renewable, yes or no. It's very much related to the fundamentals of demand for gas. So there are now official data that are showing that over the last two years, there has been a demand destruction for gas in the region of 100 billion cubic meters in Europe, so then substituting, basically, a big portion of the Russian gas that we lost. We expect, nevertheless, and this is what all the price scenario providers are saying, we expect the demand to start growing again because the electrification process is ongoing. It's ongoing. Or just, for instance, the artificial intelligence or the software, the data room are requiring a big, big step up in the electricity consumption. So from this point of view, we expect this is just a phase for energy prices. We didn't believe one year ago that prices would have stayed above 200 EUR/MWh. Now, we don't believe prices will go down to 50-60 EUR/MWh. If not, energy transition will definitely stop. But don't forget that the objective of the states, of the government decision-makers, is to combat the climate change. And we can combat the climate change building gas stations or reactivating coal plants. And also, there is a lot of talking about nuclear. We are not against nuclear. Let me be clear on that. But we think to install new nuclear or fresh nuclear capacity will require a lot of time, in particular, in Italy, where it's banned by law. So in the meantime, we think the right ways to keep growing the renewables and working. This is a work the regulators have done to, say, redesign the market because it's evident more and more that those kinds of installations need stability in prices. We are not looking for matched price, but prices that are consistent with the capital intensity required to install the megawatts in wind, in solar, in storage, and so on. And I think this is the next step Europe and each member state will go through in order to find the fixing for the energy transition. If not, the targets will remain targets but will not transform into reality. So we are positive because we expect this improvement in the regulation to come soon. We also expect, honestly, a reduction in interest rates going forward, even though, paradoxically, for ERG, it's been a positive contribution, the one we received from the higher interest rates because we have all our debt hedged at 1.4 cost of debt while the liquidity was invested with a higher yield. But going forward, we expect the cost of debt to start declining because if I come back to the fundamentals and I said - and this is official data—the gas market has lost roughly 100 billion cubic meters. This is partly, just partly, because of the warmer temperature during the last two winters, but in particular, the industrial production. So I think the European Central Bank has to lower the interest rates in order to reactivate the industrial production in major countries in Europe, like in Germany, like in Italy, like in France. So we are moving on step by step, keep growing, and keep delivering solid results. That's our point. And we will assess project by project, taking the final investment decision just and when we have a return which is consistent with our value proposition. U.S., yes. You ask if there are other markets. Say, we announced the entry in the U.S. in December. But let me be honest. We had been working one year on this opportunity. And the ABC of the decision was exactly this: to find the area in the world where the stabilization mechanism, and in the U.S., they are particularly strong through PPA and production tax equity partnership, are supporting the development of renewable. So the U.S. is and will become, according to our analysis, an important stream for our growth. Given the financial resources are limited, we will allocate them based on the return. Each country, each area, each project will provide to our profit and loss and to our balance sheet. That's for sure. So the U.S., it's reasonable to think that it's going to be part of the next business plan, not just the portfolio we currently have but in terms of development. About the CCGT, yes. You read well the profit and loss statements but it was already in our estimates. Absolutely. The capital employed recorded in the balance sheet was more than EUR 300 million. Then the write-off is consistent with the price we sold the asset, which was more in the region of EUR 200 million. I can't remember if it's slightly higher or lower than that, so But it's all included in our. It was already all included in our guidance, estimates, and so on. So I hope. Thank you very much. Yes. Thank you. Thank you to you. Mr. Merli, there are no more questions registered at this time. Okay. Thank you very much for the attention. We'll be speaking soon when presenting the first quarter results in May and likely also the business plan. Thank you very much, and have a nice day. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over. You may disconnect your telephones. Thank you.