This call for the full year 2020 financial result of Prysmian Group. Okay, let's start with page two. Sorry, three. The priorities we choose for 2020. 2020, as you know, has been a very peculiar year due to COVID issue. We decided since the beginning, on the basis of the experience coming from our Chinese affiliate, that the first priority was to protect the people. Protecting the people, we were going to protect the business. That has been, for the entire year, the main direction of our action. Chapter one, we decided to protect the people. Obviously, the customers, too. Secondly, we protected the business protecting the people, because if there are no people available, there is no capacity to satisfy the demand of the market. Vice versa, having a quite good, sustainable output of the factories due to the protection of the people, we have been able to follow and to protect our customer needs. At the end, we have been able to keep the on-time delivery on the orders of our customers over 94%. That is not the top, but considering the very difficult season we have been through, I can recognize to the team that they did a pretty good job. Other than that, we have worked a lot innovating to build our future, and that has been mostly on the HVDC technologies. Developing P-Laser and the XLPE for the 525 kV HVDC. The high depth three-core and single core submarine cable, able to be installed over 3,000 m depth for the single core. For the three core is around about 1,000 m. In term of fibers, the FlexRibbon, and the Sirocco Extreme, that with the 180 micron fiber, has been reaching a density of fibers per square millimeter that is extremely high. Overall, we have been working on these chapters, and the result, moving to page four, have been EUR 10 billion sales, with an organic growth, negative unfortunately, for 8.3%, but with a sequential improvement. In Q4, the decline has dropped to 4.8%. The same in telecom. We have had a year with the first half very low, especially the second quarter. That has been the quarter most impacted by the pandemic problem, and going to recover in Q3 and Q4. Q4, anyway, has been still 4%-5% organic decline. The adjusted EBITDA, other than this is, suffer or can be recovered by the cost efficiency actions we implemented since the beginning. We have seen in January 2020, we have seen the pandemic, the virus coming. We started implementing all the actions in order to mitigate, as much as possible, the effect of the pandemic on the company. Consequently, being more or less able to limit the effect of the pandemic on the business. The result at the end of the story has been that adjusted EBITDA closed at EUR 840 million, with more or less the same margin of the previous year, 8.4% versus, if I'm not wrong, 8.7%. Because we protected the margins. We lost, at the end, 8% of the turnover because it is what it is. We have impacted very seriously, especially in the second half, by the Forex for EUR 32 million. The exchange rate, especially of U.S. dollar, that for us is a very important chapter, has been pretty heavy. In two years, if I'm not wrong, we are around about EUR 60 million Forex effect. Free cash flow. Once the pandemic came, we have been starting to protect the cash. Protect the cash means not to give the products to customers, if not under a certain reasonable guarantee to get the money at the end of the game. That's one of the reasons why our free cash flow has been very high at EUR 487 million. You have seen along the year that the free cash flow was pretty good, pretty sound every quarter. We have been able to close out EUR 487 million with a net debt slightly below EUR 2 billion. The result has been really good. The free cash flow at the end is the real outcome of a company. The problem is that obviously, with the EBITDA contracting by over EUR 100 million, the free cash flow has been unfortunately suffering a bit. Otherwise, it would have been much higher, at about EUR 600 million. Let's flip to Page six. Page five, sorry. Page five, the financial highlights. Sales from EUR 11,520 million in 2019 to EUR 10,016 million. A significant drop, minus 10.3% organic decline due to COVID, obviously. Adjusted EBITDA, that's more or less kept the same EBITDA margin from 8.7% down to 8.4%, with sales that vice versa, scaled down significantly from EUR 1,007 million to EUR 840 million. Very significant reduction of the sales with keeping more or less the margin. That has been obtained with an extraordinary effort on the fixed costs, on the variable costs, on all the items that we were able to control in our hands. On the financial side, we have obtained a significant reduction of the working capital from EUR 749 million December 2019 to EUR 432 million, which is 4.3% of the sales. It is a very outstanding percentage of working capital on sales. Unfortunately, the working capital, it is possible to reduce, but not forever. The goal you see now is becoming to keep it stable. The financial debt, as a consequence, has dropped roughly EUR 200 million, slightly less, after having distributed anyway EUR 50 million of dividends to the shareholders. Consequently, net financial debt from EUR 2.14 billion went down to EUR 1.986 billion. Let's flip to Page seven. The organic growth by geography. As you can see from the chart, it is very clear that the second quarter has been the most impacted by the pandemic. In all the regions except Asia Pac, that has been impacted in the first quarter. You see that the total group has been seriously impacted in the second quarter with a -17% organic growth. After a first quarter with 5.4%, driven mostly by the Asia Pac, by China. China dropped significantly, very significantly in the first quarter and then recovered. The other regions, more or less, have followed the trend with a second quarter very, very heavy. You see that Latin America, that is relatively sizable, -27.3% in the second quarter. Going to recover quite quickly in the following two quarters. North America, -14% in the second quarter, with a very good first quarter with +3.3%. Started to worsen the performance. The pandemic was affecting even North America more heavily. Let's move to Page eight, the trend of the EBITDA by business. Projects. Projects went down from EUR 1.8 billion to EUR 1.4 billion. A -20.6% organic decline. A significant reduction because of under saturation of extruded capacity affecting submarine business. The HV land has been suffering the production and installation limitation due to the COVID effect, especially in half one, and has been recovering in the fourth quarter. The energy, E&I, pretty stable with a -7.5% in the full year. An organic decline driven mostly by E&I and partially offsetted by Power Distribution, especially North America, because in North America, the renewable business has been pretty good in the first three quarters, let me say. Same profitability, you see 5.8%, with a reduction of 7.5% of the sales from EUR 5.3 billion to EUR 4.7 billion, and consequently, an EBITDA that scaled down from EUR 308 million to EUR 275 million. Industrial network component, more or less on the same trend, but reduced by 7% organic decline. It's an organic decline of 7%, from EUR 2.5 billion to EUR 2.25 billion, with a slightly scaling down margin from 7.9% to 7.4%. Overall, from EUR 196 million to EUR 166 million, losing EUR 30 million EBITDA. What is good and what is not? Renewable and elevators have been pretty good, at least more than stable. Whereas automotive, as you know, oil and gas, and avio, have suffered a lot the pandemic effect. Last but not least, telecom. EUR 1.6 billion sales in 2019. That became EUR 1.4 billion short, with an organic decline of 14.1%. Here, the organic decline has been significant. The problem is the optical cable, that in Q4 has accelerated, meaning that the telecommunication cables, the optical cables, are increasing in term of demand, in term of volumes, keeping a very low level of prices. Sequential improvement in the optical cable. We took a lot of cost efficiency. We have to add the effect of YOFC that has scaled down from EUR 22 million to EUR 14 million. You may remember that some years ago, the effect of YOFC on our P&L was around about EUR 50 million. Now we are talking about EUR 14. Consequently, the reduction for YOFC impact has been pretty significant. Overall, a very difficult year. Fortunately, thanks to the actions taken by the company. From the cash point of view, very positive, because the companies can bail out because of cash, not only because of EBIT or EBITDA. Let's flip to page 10 and have a brief look at the trading update for E&I. You see in the graph that the total group is getting a trading update February year-to-date that is positive compared, obviously, to the February last year. Overall, with North America, that is for the time being below the previous year, simply because the previous year, North America was going very well, especially on power distribution. This year is going reasonably well, but not as well as last year. EMEA is recovering, is suffering, has been suffering in the first half of the year, as well as APAC. APAC has been terrible in the first half of the year. Today, the trading update is telling us that the total group is recovering in terms of volumes. Not extremely high, but consistently better than the previous year in the first quarter. Let's have a look of the EBITDA and the margins by geography, flipping to page 11. EMEA moved from EUR 6 billion 200 roughly to EUR 5 billion 344, with an organic decline of 8.9%. The margins went down one point from 7.9% to 6.9%. Consequently, the EBITDA scaled down for EUR 491 million in 2019 to EUR 370 million in 2020. EUR 120 million out of the total are coming from Europe, from EMEA, let's say. North America sales went down 6.5% from EUR 3.4 billion to EUR 3 billion and EUR 84 million, improving the margin. Consequently, EBITDA has been stable. North America has been enjoying a very good power distribution trend and the overhead. The margins have been driven by the very strong push on the cost side. Latin America. Latin America has been one of the region mostly suffering the pandemic, with an organic decline of 10.4% and a margin decline of two points from 10.9% to 8.8%. Overall, the EBITDA went down from EUR 102 million to EUR 68 million. The region has been heavily affected in Q2 with a better recovery in the second half that is giving a positive direction in the second half, especially because the organic growth in Q4 has been quite good. Last but not least, Asia Pac. Asia Pac moved the sales from EUR 961 to EUR 813 with an organic decline of 10.1%. Obviously, the weight of Asia Pac is limited in our global numbers. We are seeing a slight recovery in the Q4. From the margin point of view, you see that from 6.5%, the margins went down to 6%. Asia Pac doesn't change our numbers, but it's a sign. Finally, let's go to page 14. Let's flip the page. Page 13, the outlook. The outlook for 2021 is EUR 870-EUR 940. Obviously, the outlook is not a certain, it's an expectation. I believe that the upper side of the range is achievable as we used to achieve every year. We have to consider that next year there are a lot of uncertainties, and that's the reason for the EUR 870. The lower part of the guidance is taking into consideration that there are a lot of uncertainties in the speed of recovery of the economies, in the speed of the COVID leaving our economy. You see from the arrows that Projects is expected to grow, not extremely. Energy is expected to recover significantly. Telecom, unfortunately, whereas we have clear signs in the last quarter, but even in the first quarter, last quarter of last year, of a significant recovery of the volumes. Prices are still under pressure, we have to take it into consideration, especially for the coming tenders. Last but not least, the Forex are not at all helping us, because we expect an effect of Forex negative for at least EUR 20 million, EUR 25 million this year, because we are into the year. Page 15, let me give you an update on the climate ambition and the targets the board has approved today. I would like to give the floor to Cristina. Cristina is the responsible for ESG inside the company, and she's the best to communicate to you which are our targets. Thank you. Thank you very much, Valerio. Good afternoon to all of you. We are proud to announce today Prysmian climate change ambition and targets. We set carbon reduction targets which are aligned with Science Based Targets initiative. We signed the Business Ambition Commitment Letter consistent with the 1.5 degree containment. We set net zero targets. We set a net zero year between 2035 and 2040 for Scope 1 and 2 emissions, and by 2050 for Scope 3 emissions. We set interim targets, which are consistent with these ambitions, a reduction of 46% of emissions for Scope 1 and 2 by 2030, and by 14% on Scope 3 by 2030. We are very focused and committed also for an early achievement of this target. Our main focus is on the scope we can directly influence. Scope 1 and 2, our target is to decarbonize 80% of our carbon footprint on Scope 1 and 2. Covering all our global operations, 130 sites, all the plants plus the R&D centers. We are focusing, of course, on reducing the diesel emissions and also on phasing out SF6 gas. This will entail approximately EUR 100 million CapEx in the next 10 years. We are very committed, very focused, and with big ambition in mind. Valerio, I lend you over again the presentation. Thank you. [Jasmine, you know that we don't like too much the show. We took the choice to be at the forefront of the ESG, especially the environmental, and we are going to act in that direction. Obviously, Scope 3 is pretty difficult because it's not totally in our hands. For sure, we are going to do whatever we can do inside our ability, our possibility. Okay. Finally, shareholder value. We are proposing to the board, and the board has approved it, a dividend per share of EUR 0.5 per share, increasing the traditional EUR 0.42, EUR 0.43 that last year has been reduced a little bit because of the COVID issue. In that sense, we are going to propose a EUR 0.5 per share, 2.3% dividend yield. I believe that, as you know, I have a lot of shares. A lot of my assets are in the Prysmian Group shares, and I'm very happy because our shares, other than distribute a certain dividend every year, have the possibility and are able to grow. I hope that will continue for the next years. If you look at the TSR of our share, in 2020 has been 37.1%. Since the IPO, 155.5. Consequently, as a shareholder, I'm reasonably happy. Thank you very much. I leave the floor to Francesco for the profit and loss statement and the financial details. Thank you, Valerio, and good evening to everybody. Starting from the snapshot of the profit and loss statement, as Valerio said, sales closed very near to the EUR 10 billion level, with an organic decline of 10%, approximately 8% excluding projects. What is very good is, as Valerio remarked, a quite consistent and promising recovery catch-up of our volumes and sales, starting in particular from the third quarter across, I would say, all the regions and across all the businesses. Of course, more robust in some regions and businesses, a little bit more subdued in others, but in general, the catch-up trend is pretty promising and evident everywhere. In terms of adjusted EBITDA, as Valerio said, we delivered the pretty high part of the range of the guidance we updated after the COVID outbreak with the publishing of our half one results last July 2020, EUR 840 million. We did that despite a very heavy Forex impact, which materialized as you clearly see in the box top right on this slide, which materialized in the second half of the year, which was particularly heavy in the fourth quarter. Out of the EUR 32 million negative Forex effect, EUR 29 million in the second half, out of which EUR 17 million in the fourth quarter. Let me clearly say that we gave guidance end of July, we didn't certainly expect a EUR 32 million negative Forex. We expected more a Forex negative impact in the region of EUR 20. Without this very heavy impact, I think we would even potentially exceeded the EUR 850 million. Of course, Forex is part of the game, it's part of the business. It's something we have to deal with. Our EBITDA reported also benefited from a drop of EBITDA adjustments, in particular of restructuring cost. You see bottom right, in the little box bottom right, that restructuring costs dropped from over EUR 80 million in 2019 to EUR 32 million in 2020. This is the result of the completion, substantially, of the integration after General Cable acquisition. In particular, also the part regarding the industrial footprint. EBIT was impacted by some asset impairment. Part of that was already taken in half one, related to a specific region, South Europe, which was, by the way, the region by far, or one of the region by far, mostly impacted by the pandemic. Another share of asset impairment. We thought it was prudent and wise to take in the fourth quarter for a total amount of EUR 68 million. I would say pretty in line with what expected. A major boost to net income came from the very good drop of financial charges. The major cut from EUR 125 million to EUR 101 million. I will elaborate a little bit better on this. Tax rate was also reasonably low at 31%. Of course, it's always high, but considering also the drop of the profit before tax that we experienced in some geographies and which normally inflates the tax rate, I think is a pretty good achievement in terms of tax rate. A net income related to group shareholders closed at EUR 178. Of course, down due to lower operating profitability to asset impairment as I said. In the end, a pretty solid result. In terms of EBITDA, if you focus the box top right, you clearly see that the fourth quarter discounted pretty much the heavy Forex effect. I have to say that the energy trend, which apparently looks a little bit weaker in the fourth quarter, is not weaker at all. I would say that the only difference compared to Q3 is the very heavy Forex effect, which impacted the comparison with the prior year. Pretty good, the development that Valerio also highlighted on the telecom side. You see that the fourth quarter is the first quarter where the telecom EBITDA is above the level of last year. By the way, also in this case impacted by Forex pretty significantly. Let me flip to the following page. Just to comment very quickly the major drop of financial charges, which comes from net interest expenses, which closed to EUR 77 million, pretty in line with the indication I have given, I believe already with the half one 2020 results. Driven by the very robust cash flow generated in 2020, and also by the very low leverage that we managed to achieve, to reach at 2020, beginning of the year. Which benefited most of the year in terms of low margin grid and low financing contract pricing. The other piece of major drop of financial charges is related with the hedging costs, which were reduced pretty much in some geographies, particularly expensive from hedging necessary to do business. Like, for instance, Turkey, just to mention an example. I switch to the balance sheet to comment the very robust performance achieved on working capital, down by an amount in excess of EUR 300 million from EUR 750 approximately to EUR 432. This was the real boost of our free cash flow in 2020, which reached a record level, as Valerio already highlighted. Generally speaking, I would say that half of this reduction of working capital results from a strong improvement of working capital in projects, which is mainly driven by the major inflows coming from order intake down payments. Starting from the German Corridor, not only, for a very significant amount. The other part is related to the non-project business, I'm particularly happy to mention here, the achievement of a reduction in receivable overdue by a very material amount of EUR 70 million-EUR 80 million in a very tough and challenging environment. Not a given at all. The other part of the working capital reduction is less relevant because it's a non-monetary component, mainly related with the deflationary effect of Forex, once again. The net financial debt decreased by almost EUR 200 million. Very good with a leverage which is only slightly in excess of 2x in terms of net financial debt on adjusted EBITDA. Cash flow. This chart, as usual, 2021 is bridging the opening debt 2020 with the year-end debt 2020. The EUR 2.14 billion with EUR 1,986 million. The EUR 375 million free cash flow mentioned in the slide includes the EUR 112 million of antitrust disbursements, most of which related to the well-known payment of the EU antitrust fine, which was done in December. This brings it back to the number that Valerio mentioned of EUR 487 million. Of course, the big boost, which unfortunately will not be there for 2021, is coming from the working capital reduction, EUR 259 million negative, or decrease of working capital in 2020. On the other hand, I think that 2021 will benefit from lower restructuring costs that in 2020 were still pretty material. We also need to recover some CapEx projects, which were quite contained in 2020 and which some of them were postponed in 2021. Of course, within a very reasonable amount with these two components of restructuring and CapEx, which will broadly offset each other in 2021. In principle, to explain very clearly the guidance of the cash flow that Valerio mentioned, the well-known EUR 300 million ±20%, we should simply think, starting from the EUR 487, considering the lack of boost coming from working capital reduction and assuming a neutrality, a stability of working capital for 2021, a broad compensation of CapEx and restructuring costs and of course, the challenge, which is, let me say, reaching at least the midpoint of our EBITDA guidance, which will drive an improvement of cash flow. In principle, this EUR 300 million free cash flow is consistent with a target of net debt year-end 2021, which will be around EUR 1.9 billion, possibly even a bit lower than EUR 1.9 billion. Very important that we will keep de-leveraging and of course, targeting an improvement of EBITDA, we should reach a significantly lower level year-end 2021 compared to year-end 2020. Last but not least, I thought it was wise to update on the maturity and on the new, let me say, maturity schedule of our debt. Following the issuance of the equity link, the zero coupon bond that we executed beginning of January. You see that our average maturity increased very significantly, almost up to four years, 3.8 years to be exact. Which puts us in a pretty comfortable situation, both in terms of deadlines that we have to finance, and also in terms of very abundant liquidity, which gives us confidence also to face a still pretty uncertain and difficult environment. The first deadline, which is coming that we, of course, deal with in the second half of this year is the refinancing of the straight non-convertible euro bond for EUR 750 million. It's something where we are absolutely comfortable and confident to deal with. Very good. I think I'm over with my presentation. We can move on with the Q&A session. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, as a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star and one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press the hash key. Once again, please press star and one if you wish to ask a question. Your first question today comes from the line of Lucie A. Carrier from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Good afternoon, gentlemen. Good afternoon, Cristina. Thanks for taking my question. I have four actually today I was hoping to ask, and to go one at a time. The first one was around the bridge for 2021. I see that on your qualitative guidance, you've guided for telco to be down. I just want to try to understand the message here, because we've seen the performance improving in the second half, especially from a profitability standpoint, where it looks like you've been able to very largely offset, I would say, the pressure you see both on volume and on price. I'm trying to understand why you are not expecting to be able to renew that type of performance next year, or rather this year in 2021. Hi, Lucie. Valerio speaking. Thank you for your question. I try to give you a answer that have a sense. The real problem here is that volumes are coming. Are coming strongly from North America, not from Europe. The problem are the prices, because contracts are going to be renewed now in the first quarter mostly, with a significantly lower price than the previous year, the previous contracts. That's the reason for the not pleasant expectations we have on the telecom business. A lot of volumes, not at all a recovery in the price. Consequently, the prices will be under pressure, creating unexpected slowdown in the global performance of telecom. In addition to it, obviously, we have to take into consideration our contribution or our participation to YOFC, that we don't have any very clear guidance on it, but we expect nothing to be better than 2020. If Valerio may add one quick elaboration on this comment. North America volume and prices are good. It's actually in Europe where we suffer, despite the strong recovery or rebound in volume, we continue suffer the price deterioration. The combined effect of these two geographical areas, that telecom overall is largely declining in 2021. With this differentiation between the two regions. Sorry, this is Massimo speak. Sorry. Yes. Thank you, Massimo. That's helpful. The second question I had was around the backlog. You ending the year with a EUR three and a half billion backlog on the project business. I was hoping you could help us understand a little bit, how we should think about this backlog in terms of execution for 2021 and beyond. I was a bit surprised by the drop of revenue you had in the fourth quarter, which seems quite outsized versus what you had experienced during the rest of the year. And also, an update on maybe a new project to come, I think, there were a couple of project which were expected to be awarded even at the end of last year and for which we still haven't heard much. Okay. Projects. The backlog is big, I agree. The problem is that two out of EUR 3.5 billion are the German Corridors, EUR 1.3 billion. The German Corridors are going to start from the summer 2021, the execution, consequently, the recognition of the revenues. In the second half, we see an improvement, but not in the first half. Moreover, we have a lack of backlog in term of extruded cables somewhere. EuroAsia, obviously, is the main expected projects to come, as foreseen reality. The conflict between the 525 and the 400 kV DC is going to be in favor of 525. The 525 DC submarine, no one has yet homologated. Consequently, the delay for the execution of the problem will be not minor, and we have to deal with it. In few words, means that the project will not be for 2021. If I may add, Massimo, again, on a good note, the order intake in 2021 of the market is very strong and bullish, and we believe that we will land good projects in 2021 to close this gap that we are in the extruded footprint. As Valerio said, this will benefit more 2022 than 2021. The market is there, and we're going to compete for this order intake. If you like the expectations, the market is expected to ramp up at EUR 7 billion. Everyone is happy. We too, but we want to have the order in hand to realize it. We still have a gap in the saturation of the HV submarine extruded. Understood. My question related to that in project is around offshore wind in the U.S. It seems that the Vineyard is able to come through. I remember that initially, when you was awarded, and that was a while ago, before the regulatory delays, you were present on that contract. I just wanted to know, what was the status now for you on the Vineyard, and if you're also seeing now a potential acceleration in regulatory approval in the U.S. for offshore winds, that could maybe lead you to have to add capacity at Prysmian. Lucie, if it's true, as they say, that the regulatory body in U.S. has approved the Vineyard, we should receive the notice to proceed before year-end, and consequently, will not have maybe significant effect, if not in the last quarter, but is a first very good starting point. I'm quite sure that it's going to happen. Sorry, you said you're quite sure or not quite sure? Quite sure it's going to happen. We have been suffering almost two years with Vineyard and other projects that have been postponed by the administration. Now seems that the administration finally has taken the decision to take off. Valerio, Hakan speaking. If I may add, the first approval has been given. The final approval is going to come very soon, what we are also receiving from the customer. The third quarter, we have a great expectation that the project is going to go forward. It is the first project that the government is focusing on, in giving the green light, and the news are positive. There is a significant likelihood that the project is going to go forward this fourth quarter. Thank you, Hakan. Thank you. Do you think it will accelerate approval in offshore wind in the U.S., or do you think it's going to continue to be slow until we have several projects kind of on stream? Hakan, I leave to you the floor. Yeah. Thank you. I have to tell you that, of course, the changes in the political environment in the U.S. has given a big thrust into the project of the wind farms in the U.S. There are already many projects that have been tendered in terms of licensing on the West Coast and also on the East Coast. The majority is on the East Coast, also California has plans to expand, and has already opened up discussions of two gigawatts from the very beginning in the U.S. There is a list of significant projects. The Vineyard is not the only one. Currently, there are already about three gigawatts, I can say, already assigned to different developers. This year, we expect that the first start is going to be with the approval of the Vineyard. We are seeing also positive news from the BOEM inside the U.S. The pipeline is relatively strong. We are, let's say, talking to the developers, being part of these projects. We do not see the same struggles that were in the past, because there are high targets also inside the United States to improve also the carbon emission reduction. There is a significant policy change. We do not expect that these are going to be significant delays as we saw in the past. We are relatively optimistic, I can say. Lastly, if I may ask on the U.S. still, can you comment maybe on your view regarding T&D investment on the land side this time around, on the back of the issue we have seen in Texas a couple of weeks ago? Do you expect that this is going to trigger more momentum in T&D investment in the U.S.? If so, can you remind us your market position in this market in the U.S.? Hakan. Valerio, this is more on the land side, but knowing the U.S., I would like to answer as well here. The Texas situation has created significant, let's say, power outages, as you know. Utilities have been in significant difficulties, which caused also, administrative, managerial issues inside the utilities, as you may have seen. Through my experience and also what we see and what we talk also to our customers, the undergrounding is going to be a significant, let's say, step that the utilities are going to take. In short term, definitely there are going to be some repairs and improvements on the overhead lines and also in the undergrounding. There are, in the pipeline, significant DC projects that have been planned for a long time but have never come to the conclusion, competing with the overhead lines. We see that these DC projects and also AC undergrounding are going to be in acceleration. This is what we see also, what we receive also from our customers as indication. Lucie, if I may add, Massimo speaking. We will see some improvements on this topic of underground, although we know that since years, we have seen in the U.S., outages happen in California for fires, in Texas and so on. The undergrounding cost in comparison to the overhead lines is a big call, is a big challenge. I think that we will see a stronger leap in demand in the underground cables once the onshore business became more effective, more popular in the U.S. We're probably close to see this happening, thanks to Biden administration and to the Biden's stimulus and incentives for renewable sources. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Monica Bosio from Intesa Sanpaolo. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. Just a follow-up on the energy project. I understood that a higher contribution will occur in the second part of the year due to the start of the execution in the German Corridor. As for the extruded in the submarines, when do you expect the negative impact of the under-saturation of extruded capacity might reverse? Should we assume the second part of the year? In relation to the energy projects, do you have any update on the EuroAsia Interconnector? This is for the energy project. Skipping to the telecom, obviously there is still a strong pricing pressure in Europe. Do you have any update on the timing for the outcome of the European Commission investigation in relation to potential anti-dumping tariffs? Do you expect that the introduction of anti-dumping tariffs might materially reverse your outlook in Telecom business, maybe driving an upside rather than a downside? Just a follow-up. The downside, I understood that it will be on the absolute level. What about the margins? Last but not least, from the financial side, for Francesco, can you just give us an idea of the copper impact on the working capital and a rough indication for the expected CapEx in 2021? Thank you very much. Thank you, Monica. Valerio speaking. First of all, what about the projects and extruded shortfall in backlog? We are working on it. Obviously, there is always a window for the projects. I believe that in the second quarter, we are going to receive new orders that will fill the capacity for extruded cables, but mostly starting from next year. This year is difficult to see something effective in the backlog. EuroAsia Interconnector, as not foreseen but unfortunately expected, has been postponed because Crete-Attica is 525 kV. The Crete Cyprus. Cyprus. The other part of the link. Cyprus. Cyprus. They would like to have a 525 in order not to have a double station, power station, transformer station in Crete. The project originally was 400 kV, but 400 kV doesn't match with the 525 of Crete Peloponnese. That's the reason for the re-tendering. The re-tendering will come probably next year, this year, sorry, for execution a little bit late. At this stage, having no one, the technology of 525 submarine yet, moreover, has to be 525 DC submarine at 3,000 m, that will not be an easy task. We need much more time in order to develop it. We were ready for the 400 kV DC 3,000 m. We are not yet ready. No one is ready for the 525. Okay. Needs some time. Can I add something, Valerio? Of course. Just to complete. Thank you. Valerio explained very well, the conflict that is in the project that created a delay. We are going to have the quotation in March, April timeframe of this year, we knew, for the 500 kV. The first step is that the European Commission has to define which technology is to be chosen and the budget of the project. We are expecting that until end of April, the discussions in the European Commission is going to be finalized, and the tender evaluation is going to be on the 525 kV. Definitely the 400 kV was a project that we could do, to complete, in an earlier stage. This is going to create further development requirements, which definitely is going to affect the completion of the project, at least, one or two years later than the 400, that we were thinking. Okay. However, still we are, let's say, in the development and also in the discussions. We hope that we are going to be part of this project. On the AC extruded side, there are many different projects that are currently under tendering, and we are expecting during the year, as also Massimo said, that we are going to be part of these awards. However, we are showing already an improvement, as in the guidance, Valerio shows that project is going to improve for the coming year. It will very much depend on also the execution and the permits of these projects if they can be anticipated to make that happen. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay, Monica, let's move to the question for Telecom. I believe that Philippe is on the line. Yes, I'm on the line, Valerio. I will answer that one. Would you, Philippe, give an answer to Monica? Yes. Hello, Monica. Hello. The anti-dumping process that is ongoing should lead to a decision, let's say, between May and October this year. Of course, we don't know what kind of decision it will be. I would say if there is any impact of the anti-dumping process in Europe, I expect it more to be about 2022 than 20 21. I would define it as about stopping the bleeding in 2022, more than completely eliminating the price pressure in 2021, of course. It is essentially set to make Europe not anymore a systematic target for very aggressive pricing, because North America is protected, China is protected, Japan is protected, Korea is protected, Europe is not yet protected. That's the point. I think I expect an effect in 2022, still, there are also non-Chinese competitors. I think we are going to go back if the decision is the one I hope it will be. We are going to go back to a more level playing field, which doesn't mean there is no competition anymore. I would look more towards China to understand whether the prices could rebound or not, because in reality, all this is due to the excess of capacity in China, and it depends very much on the Chinese 5G plan that is going to be launched very soon. If the Chinese plan goes strongly, then we could see a change in the price trend worldwide. At the end of the day, do you expect a deterioration in the margins of the telecom business in 2021 and not only a decrease at the absolute value? I would say that, yes, our margin is going to be under pressure. We are more exposed to Europe than most of our American or Chinese competitors. Europe saw the price pressure coming with a certain delay due to long-term contracts and to the de-stocking effect that we have seen in the last years. I expect my margins to be under pressure, although we continue our work on the cost. If you look at 2020, actually, if you eliminate the effect of YOFC and you eliminate the effect of Forex, the telecom margin in% was pretty stable compared to 2019. Yes, correct. We were quite able to offset the price pressure with cost actions despite the COVID situation. I expect 2021 to be under pressure, and then the time to fully implement the cost reduction measures. I expect, of course, to come back to that sort of level later in the year and 2022. This is my view today, if you want. Okay. Thank you. For your last question, Monica, I would like to leave the floor to Francesco to comment on the copper impact. Yes. Thank you, Monica, for your question. You are right pointing out that the sharp increase of the copper price will definitely have an impact on our working capital, 2021. We are talking of an increase of 35% or 40% in copper price in the last six months. As always, when you have this kind of increases taking place in the last part of, in this case, 2020, the effect are to be seen in 2021. I think with this, we create pressure on working capital and cash flow, and by the way, it's something that we have really taken into account in our guidance. I think that with this level of copper, if is added to stabilize for the entire year, I would quantify an impact of at least $50, $70 million, even $80 million on our working capital. Okay. This will make it not easy to keep working capital stable because, we will start with a minus, to recover. I think that we will have an opportunity, in any case, to improve our stock level and reduce the days of inventory. For the simple reason that with the recovery of the volume that we are seeing, this should be feasible. As the stock level was in absolute terms, not high, of course, year end, but in terms of days of inventory increased a bit on the effect of lower volume. With the volume rebounds and with the volume recovery that we're seeing now, we should be able to optimize the level of our stock and recover, and work to recover this material copper impact that I was mentioning. That, of course, is a challenge. It would have been better to stay on a more stable copper price, but I think it's manageable, and we will deal with that. You also mentioned that you were also asking for a CapEx indication. Well, CapEx will definitely be a bit higher than in 2020. I would say approximately $50 million, just to give a sharp cut number. Financially, I believe that this higher CapEx, which is in the end not higher CapEx in itself, is only a recovery of some postponement of CapEx that we did in 2020, also for physical reasons. It was physically very difficult to execute all the industrial CapEx in the plants. Financially, I think that we can be pretty confident that this higher CapEx will be offset by lower restructuring charges. These components will be quite neutral on our cash flow for 2021. Perfect. Very clear. I hope it's clear, Monica. Thanks. Very clear. Thank you, Francesco. Thank to all. Thanks, Monica. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of David Barker from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. I've just got a couple. Firstly, on capital allocation, there's been some comments in the press from you about potentially looking at a new acquisition in the U.S. Obviously, one of your major peers is talking about doing a lot of acquisitions. How are you thinking about the capital allocation process for the group going forward, more generally? My second question is a bit more of a general one. You're obviously taking delivery of the Leonardo da Vinci ship this year. How should we think that impacts the projects division in terms of margins and commercial capabilities? Is there any kind of midterm margin uplift from having this ship? Thank you. Okay. David, thank you very much for your questions. Capital allocation. First of all, you have to have the capital. We have the capital, otherwise you are not able to allocate anything. We have the capital. We can allocate. We have been talking about the desire to look at acquisition in the next, let's say, one to two years. Possibly in North America. Why? North America is a market that we have seen is pretty sound. It is a good market. It is a market where it is important to be relevant for customers. We are, and we would like to be more relevant for our customers. The problem is to find the proper target at an acceptable value. We are working on it, as soon as we are going to have a more clear view, we will let you know. The second question, I'm sorry, I missed part of the question. Leonardo da Vinci, the new ship will improve our margins going forward, giving us a competitive-. No. The Leonardo da Vinci will not improve our margins. The Leonardo da Vinci will let us to execute a little bit better, the big projects that are not any more in the scope of the Giulio Verne. Giulio Verne is going to retire, let me say, by the year end. The Leonardo da Vinci is going to be fully in charge by July this year. Did I answer to your question? Fantastic. No, thank you. Thank you, Valerio. That's all I have. You're welcome. Back in the queue. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Max Yates from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Thank you. Just my first question, sticking on projects. I just wanted to think about the ramp-up of revenues over the next couple of years, rather than just 2021. Am I thinking about it in the right way, that if the business today is about EUR 1.4 billion. About half of that is from submarines, a bit more than EUR 700 million. If we see this business go back to full utilization, should we expect another, say, EUR 300 million on the submarine side to take that back to EUR 1 billion? Then another, say, EUR 350 million from the SuedLink project to get us to a sort of EUR 2 billion revenue number in total, EUR 2 billion and EUR 50 million for the energy projects business by 2022. Is that still realistic, or is that something we're not considering in terms of where revenues for this business can go? Okay. One step at a time. First of all, the submarine. We are very keen in getting new orders for the extruded capacity we have. We have capacity available, we have not been able to fill this capacity, and we hope to be able to do it during the second half of 2021. That's in order to be ready with 2022 at full capacity. Confirming billion. Confirming, consequently, the billion you were mentioning. Okay. Can you repeat the second question? Yeah. When we think about the German Corridors projects, which are obviously zero contribution of revenue today, I assume that kind of in 2022, we should be running at around EUR 360 million contribution from those, which is EUR 1.8 billion over five years at EUR 360 per year. Is that, again, still a fair assumption? Max, that makes sense because the German Corridors are going to start July 2021. Will not be full year, will not be full speed, but for sure, second half 2021 and the entire 2022 and 2023 will be at full running rate for the German Corridors. Okay. Your idea of EUR 300 million makes sense. I guess my second question is just then kind of how we think about margins in the backlog, because obviously this year and next year will be Viking Link. We'll also have the German Corridor projects being a big contributor to revenues. Should we be thinking about margins going back to that sort of 15% level? Is kind of the 13% level more realistic of the shape of the backlog? I'm just trying to understand what a normalized margin would look like for this business at EUR 2 billion. Do you prefer an honest answer or a marketing answer? I'll take the honest answer, please. The honest is that to fill the capacity for HV submarine extruded, we have to react to the aggressivity of our competitors. Finished. What does it mean? That the margins may be under pressure. We do not intend at all to give up on our position on the submarine. Okay. Maybe just a final, third question. You mentioned when talking about Telecom that part of the effect we're now seeing is contracts that you're signing today being lower margin, and that will put the business under pressure. I just wanted to understand how much of your kind of revenues today reflect the lower prices, so are maybe driven by spot markets, and how much of it is driven by contract that still needs to feed through and reflect those margins. Where would margins be if the full business today reflected the pricing environment, I guess is my question. Let me be very clear, as ever. It's true that our margins are going to be under pressure, at least in the first part of the year, because we are moving from contracts that were at a higher margins, higher prices, to contracts that for the fibers are suffering with the decline of the price of the fibers. We used to have quite long-term contracts that have been protected our margins till now. Now, and I mean in the first half of 2021, we are going to renew part of this contract, and most probably, we are going to be obliged to give up some margins in order to keep our position. I do not see our ability to compensate the decline of the prices that we have seen in the fibers with the cost. Partly, we are doing everything is possible, but obviously partly will go into our P&L. That's the reason for the scaling down arrow we put in the telecom forecast. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. Thank you to you, Max. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Akash Gupta from JP Morgan. Please go ahead, your line is open. Yes. Hi, good afternoon, Valerio, Cristina, and Francesco. I have a couple of things to discuss. The first one is on projects. Clearly, when we look at you are still struggling with lack of capacity utilization, where you still have some capacity that is available while your competitors are talking about increasing capacity, and one of them has even announced further investments on top of what they were doing already. Even if I look at your slide number 22, clearly you are a lot more positive on outlook for subsea and all. Maybe the question I have for you is that, given you are already having some capacity issues in terms of underutilization, at what stage you will go for investments? Also to add to that point, do you need to have a factory in the U.S. to qualify for some of the projects? Not the initial ones, but the later ones, if there would be any local content requirement. Okay, Akash. Thank you for the question. It's clear that our decision to move towards a more determinate action to saturate our capacity is due to the fact that some of our competitors are ready or have been ready to give up prices and consequently margins for volumes. They are thinking, or they are acting, expanding the capacity, and now [Non-English content]. The game is over. We don't want to get eroded our market share and our position in that market. Reason why we are ready to fight on the margins and on the prices if needed. Finish. The party is over. We are the leader of the market, and we wanted to confirm our leadership. If that means to reduce our margins, we have to react on the cost side. I do not intend to give up on our market position in this segment. Maybe if I ask a follow-up on that. If you look at your slide 22, and if you look at the orders historically and what we expect from 2020 to 2030 onwards, I think it looks like everybody in industry would need to increase capacity. If I may ask, what would be the trigger for you to consider capacity expansion, and would that be greenfield, or do you have scope for brownfield investment as well? Then also if you can answer? Akash the question on U.S. Akash. Thank you. Listen, to be very clear, from the capacity point of view, we may not need to increase the capacity. If the market is moving towards U.S., and I hope, and I think that will happen, obviously staying in Europe only will not be an advantage, and we have to react. Yesterday, in my trip in Dakar, I was debating with Andrea Pirondini, our CEO North America now, about the possibility to transform one of our factories in U.S. into a submarine plant. That will happen, for sure. If the market for offshore wind will take off as expected in U.S., we will be there to serve our customers. Don't worry. It will be a quite significant investment that obviously will be more or less significant in terms of millions, depending on the fact that it's going to be a greenfield or a transformation of one of the existing plants. If I may add, Valerio, one more thing. Akash. I just want to tell you that we have the biggest capacity in the market. From our perspective, it is not necessary to add more capacity compared to our competitors. Their decision to go and enlarge their capacity is, as Valerio said, based on lower margin business, and for future expectations, and not, let's say, the reality which is in the market. It is not that the market is completely, as of today, in a saturation mode. There are good opportunities in the future, and we will follow the opportunities, but we will not invest before the market is going to depart. On the other hand, we should also compare always the incremental capacity that they are putting versus our capacity, which is relatively bigger than theirs. Thank you. My next question is on more medium-term performance. Clearly, if you look at the group on a three, four-year view, I think it's pretty clear that High Voltage projects would be a growth driver for earnings, given you have support from SuedLink, and also once this capacity being saturated, your earnings will go up. Maybe if you can help me understand that outside of projects, what would be the driver for improvement in performance? Is there any self-help that you can come out and grow your earnings? Will the earnings growth in rest of the business would be depending on what sort of top-line growth you may see in the next few years? Akash, Massimo speaking. As we said, high voltage we covered. Telecom, we are going to expand our capacity and follow the growth of the market in North America, which is where we don't see price pressure and also where we don't see any sort of volume decline actually, which is strong market opportunity. As far as the other segment, we are going to leverage on the rebound of the market. Coming out from COVID season, we see strong growth in E&I, in Power Distribution, in T&I, in industrial cables. Those are the segments which we are building our growth in 2021, and waiting for the additional growth coming 2022 from energy products. That is our plan for 2021. We are leveraging the footprint, we are leveraging the portfolio, we are leveraging the strong customer relationship. We already seen in quarter one this year, the stronger growth in our volumes, as we've seen from our presentation, before in the E&I market, but also in industrial cables and so on. This is where we're going to count, we're going to bank for 2021 growth, short term, midterm growth in the business. Mostly in energy sub-segments. Thank you. My final quick one is on if you can comment on what you have seen in terms of trading in the past few months of the year? In terms of trading? Yeah. How the trading has been in the past couple of months of 2021? As we said, we are seeing volume back to the level of 2019 in energy products, so in E&I and in industrial. Of course, there is some pressure also there in terms of cost inflations. We have also been working on strong efficiency actions in 2021. We see volume already running at the level of 2019 pre-COVID. This is positive and that's why we are confident that the energy products division will outpace 2020, and will reach a similar level to 2019 in terms of profitability. The level of the volumes is good, is improving. Going back hopefully to 2019. The problem is the inflation of raw materials that we have to pass to the market. That will take three to six months as usual. The hysteresis process that absorb in between of one quarter and two quarters before to be completed. It's also foreseen to give an upside when the raw material will go down, if will happen, and the prices will not follow immediately. It depends of the appetite of the competitors. For our business, the raw material at a high, stable level is the best solution, including copper. Thank you. You're welcome, Akash. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Daniela Costa from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Oh, hi. Thank you. Good afternoon. I have three as well. I wanted to start on following up on a point you mentioned you were interested in maybe consolidation in North America. Wondering if you could give us some colors on which areas in terms of end markets are more interesting. You know, you're here Nexans said, industrial and telecom, for example, are areas they consider divesting, wondering which end markets are more attractive in your view. Daniela, this is Massimo. We are looking at options to grow in North America and consolidate other players. As Valerio said, we have to identify the targets. The proper targets. The proper targets, from a product portfolio point of view and from an accessibility point of view. We believe that we want the targets for us in terms of business segments are power distribution or industrial cables. These are the two areas where we might enjoy from a consolidation in the American market, leveraging on our scale already wide, but becoming even stronger across all the customer base. We are not thinking yet any sort of telecom opportunity in North America. Daniela, the problem is that our debt is scaling down, but is still almost EUR 2 billion. Consequently, we have to look at the targets in 18 months to go, not tomorrow morning. Okay. Very clear. You're welcome. My second question is more, sort of like on the project business. We know that, for you copper is the perfect pass through, but for your customers, I guess it is not, and they have seen very significant copper price increases. Do you think this at some point can kind of impact timelines and cause delays on the project side of the business as customers might wait for a more favorable copper price than when they had signed the contract? Daniela, my opinion is that in the project business, the copper value is not an issue. It's a really automatic pass-through. Needs of some time. The problem is vice versa, on the more competitive market. The PD and the T&I, obviously, have, vice versa, the hysteresis I was mentioning before in term of pass-through. Needs over some time in order to convince the customer that there is no other way. Daniela, you were worried about customer making different decisions or delaying projects. I don't think this will be considered by customers. Projects have a longer lead time, a longer development time. Copper has never been hindering their decision for making or not making projects. I don't see this happening in the energy project business, that the high copper will hamper the activity of customers. No. Assuming that the copper is going to be something like 20%, 30% of the value of the cable. That is not the value of the project. The change of copper price will not kill the project. I see. Okay. Thank you. That's clear. Then just a follow-up. I know you labored on this point a bit, but maybe I didn't understand the reply completely. On 2021, capacity utilization on high voltage, where are you going to be? How big is the problem of underutilization? On summary. Okay. High voltage is fully saturated. Obviously, with German Corridors, especially. The high voltage land is even oversaturated. The submarine high voltage extruded is vice versa, 20%, 30% free. We are going to saturate it. The Vineyard, if really is going to take off by the last quarter, it will change the picture in the last quarter of the year. We have to create the backlog for next year. All right. Understood. Thank you very much. You're welcome. You're welcome. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Alessandro Tortora from Mediobanca. Please go ahead, your line is open. Yes, hi. Good evening. I have, let's say, four question, if I may. The first one is on the telecom. If understood well, first of all, you talk about the deadline for the anti-dumping investigation, let's say, in maybe May or maybe October, if I understood well. The question is related to, let's say, China. If you can give us an update on the recent tenders in China, if you have observed any price stabilization or price improvement, considering the collapsing prices we saw last year. This is the first question. The second question is on projects. Considering all the factors you mentioned in this presentation, can you help me to understand where is the EBITDA recovery coming from? Sorry, Alessandro. I missed the question on projects. Can you repeat? On projects, I saw the, let's say, the arrow on the positive side. Considering all the topics we are discussing, I understood that probably this year you will have more installation, thanks to providing. Just to understand which sort of improvement, okay, you are expecting on the project side, considering that you need to fill also the underutilized capacity on the extruded side. This is the question on projects, because at the end, you expect, let's say, positive EBITDA delta on project. The third question is on, just let's say, the technicality. First of all, in your tax rate expectation for this year, considering the extremely low level you got in 2020. Financial charges, just a clarification on IFRS 16. I saw a sort of add-on on the bridge on IFRS 16. If you can give me an idea of what happened on this item. Thanks. Hey, Alessandro. Let's take the first question. The first question is on the anti-dumping. It's clear that the anti-dumping procedure is going forward, slowly, because we are Europeans, and we are not so fast and decisive as the Chinese have been able to introduce their anti-dumping tax. The tender in China have been not improving yet, but not declining anymore. That's a very first very good step. Meaning that no one, even in China, has any more the power to drop the prices without losing further money. In a certain sense, it seems that the fiber price in China has reached the bottom. We have seen a very modest recovery in the fiber price in the market. I don't know if Philippe has something more detailed to add. Yes, hello, Alessandro. I could say that in the last China Telecom tender, at the end of last year, we saw prices that were higher compared to the prices of China Mobile. China Telecom is smaller than China Mobile, so the impact on the average price is lower, but still, I think we can say that the prices in China are stabilizing. Now we have to wait for the next China Mobile bid tender, that is going to come in the coming months, to see what the real trend is. I would expect it not to be down anymore, at least to stabilize, I would say, because it's clear that the Chinese industry is suffering very much from this. Just look at the results of YOFC. I think it's clear. It's obvious that there is an end to always reducing prices, even in China. It seems to me that we are close to it. Okay. Alessandro, if I can answer to your questions on projects. As you have seen from the arrow, the arrow is an upside, is not extremely strong. Why? We have foreseen an improvement of the HV land, thanks to the second half 2021 upside coming from German Corridors. At the same time, we have a modest improvement of the submarine because of the increase of activity on submarine. Even if we, as I already said, we have a 20%, roughly, of capacity for excluded that is free, is unsaturated. I know. Nobody knows what's going to happen in the next quarters. Maybe that we are going to be able to saturate quicker than expected. Depends of the number of tenders that are coming into the market, because in the second half of 2020, we have not seen a significant tender coming into the market. No one has seen it. Okay, thanks. You are welcome. There are two questions for Francesco. Yes. Francesco, would you like to answer to the questions, please? Yes, absolutely. Ciao, Alessandro. I start quickly with tax rate. I think a good realistic view is to have a tax rate for 2021, maybe a few points above 2020, that as you highlighted, was particularly low. I would say a range of maybe 31%, 33%, 34%, something like this. Okay. This we should benefit, by the way, of the rebounds of some geographies in terms of profitability and profit before tax, in particular in Europe, where we are seeing the rebounds of volume and the recovery of profitability from the low level of the central part of 2020. This normally benefits tax rate pretty much. In terms of financial charges, I think we will have a slight increase. I would quantify in the region of EUR 5 million. For a number of reason. First of all, we are starting the 2021 year with a leverage above 2.1x in terms of debt on EBITDA, whereas beginning of 2020, we were slightly below two. This makes a few million difference in terms of impact due to our margin on the financing. You have seen the transaction that we have done on the equity-linked bond, with the issuance of EUR 760 million and with a partial buyback of the existing convertible bond for EUR 260. This creates, in 2021, an overlapping of two instruments, providing a lot of liquidity, which is not remunerated brilliantly by the market now. We thought it was wise to pay this bill of a few million more interest expenses in view of profiting and getting advantage of the exceptionally good condition equity-linked market. It was a tactical move, where we need to affect an overlapping of the two instruments, at least partially in 2021, which is triggering a slightly higher financial charge, but nothing really material. Your technical question on IFRS 16. This becomes from the way IFRS 16 is treated in the cash flow statement. As you know, IFRS 16 is basically converting the monetary costs that before IFRS 16, were related to leasing contracts. Were monetary costs affecting negatively our EBITDA since before IFRS 16 adoption, is converting these monetary costs into depreciation. I'm trying to simplify that. Of course, by doing that, is boosting the EBITDA and the free cash flow, is having a positive impact on the free cash flow. Is treating these monetary costs as installments in loans. Basically, it's treating leasing, financial and operating leasing, as loans. When these leasings are due for renewal, these renewals, of course, are increasing the debt. There is a kind of natural compensation between a higher free cash flow, the adoption of IFRS 16 is triggering, but a component which is not the cash flow of renewal and new rollover, basically of operating and financial leasing, which is increasing the level of debt. This bridge, you will consistently see this impact in the bridge for the coming year in the region of EUR 16 million, just to quantify. Okay, Francesco. Sorry, because the line was not, let's say, perfect. Coming back to the financial charges, you are telling me that maybe EUR 110 million is, let's say, a fair assumption for you considering all the factors? Correct. Maybe a bit less, I would say 105, something like that. Okay, got you. Thank you. We will now take our next question. Your next question comes from the line of Sean McLoughlin from HSBC. Please go ahead, your line is open. Thank you. Good afternoon, and thanks for taking my questions. Firstly, on Telecom. You said you worked on cost in 2020, so that ex YOFC and ex FX, the Telecom margin was stable in 2020. Can I just understand what is the magnitude of price pressure in 2021 over 2020? Can we expect to see a good 300 basis points-400 basis points of margin pressure ex YOFC and FX? Just to understand the degree of pricing pressure that you're seeing in Europe on fiber this year. Probably the better person to answer to the question is Philippe. I give you just a wide picture. Fibers were more or less at $9, $10 per kilometer. Today, in the Chinese market, are at EUR 4. Consequently, representing fibers usually 40% of the value of the cable. If this 40% has become half of the value, may means that the reduction of the price overall in the cable may be for sure two digits. In the range of 10% and 20%. Philippe, I gave a wrong picture? Let's say a blunt picture, because the prices on the spot market reached indeed $9- $10, but it was not our average case. The second point is that, of course, as everybody knows, our optical business is approximately half our Telecom business, because we also have the enterprise side, the copper side, and the specialties. I would say a few percent in the worst case, yes. I think we can maintain the fact that, in previous calls, many of you will recall that we were always talking about 12% as a kind of a worst case. I would maintain that view today. I think it could be a few percent margin. It depends also on the volume we get in these same tenders we are talking about. The margin could be better with less volume or could be a bit worse with more volume, giving us more room to improve the efficiencies. We are currently in a few important tenders process, we need to understand where they will land before we have a better view. I think we will be able to answer much better to your question in three months from now in our next conference call. Anyway, Sean, Valerio speaking. I would remind you that the Telecom business has proven to be very fast going down, but also very fast going up. The question is, the demand is growing. It may be the case that six months, one year from now, are we going to be in shortage again? Who knows? The Telecom market, differently from Energy, is extremely quick, going up and going down. Has gone down. Maybe that he's preparing himself for a rebound. That's the hope. Very clear. Thank you. My second question is going back to slide 22. It's fascinating to see what looks like a clear structural change in market size. I think we've been talking about this for some time, and thank you for providing this 10-year view that we can anchor our thoughts around. My question is really about the regional mix, because obviously, this has been really a European market. As we move to this new level of seven-ish billion already in 2020, is this still all Europe? If I look out then to 2027, 2030, how is that mix changing on your assumptions? Thank you. It's a quite difficult answer for your question. Of course, the market is growing. It's growing even significantly, until we don't see the tenders in the market, so to speak, are expectations. I cannot be committed for results based on expectations only. It's better to be patient, to prepare ourselves, and we are basically ready. Before to see the effect in the P&L, we need time. I believe at least one year, because in 2021 and 2022, a lot of big tenders should come into reality, and that's the reason why the market is going to ramp up from the EUR 2.5 billion to the EUR 7 billion. For the time being, there are a lot of constraints yet. Okay, very good. Thank you. You're welcome, Sean. Thank you. Your next question comes from Gabriele Gambarova from Banca Akros. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Yes. Good afternoon, and thanks for taking my questions. Only two. The first one is on the free cash flow guidance. You have this EUR 300 million ±20%, which is a pretty, let's say, wide range. I was wondering, what are, let's say, the biggest and most important moving parts behind this pretty wide range for free cash flow? The second one was still on M&A. I'm sorry, I understand you are just in a very early stage, I was wondering if you have in mind what you could do. If you have bolt-on acquisitions or something bigger in mind, possibly if you have an idea what could be the commitment, the firepower you could commit on this M&A. Thanks. Okay. On the free cash flow, I leave the floor to Francesco. That for sure better than me on it. Hi, Gabriele. Francesco speaking. Very good question. Thanks a lot. I believe we have two main moving parts. One refers back to a question that, I think, Monica Bosio asked, and which is related to the impact, structural or less structural impact on 2021 of the copper price. Which is very uncertain because it's an easy assumption to assume that the copper price remain at $9,000 a ton. Behind this, of course, the challenge to offset any impact, as I was explaining, with an improvement of the stock level in terms of days of inventory, which is not easy, which is certainly feasible, but is something to be done. That's the first moving part. The second moving part has certainly to do with the project business, is related with the order take, with the order awards. This doesn't mean that we are not confident we have very good order intake and order awards, Valerio and the colleagues have been pretty clear, on our commitment to establish our leadership and to maintain our market position. The timing and the actual awards in terms of months and quarters of the projects and the related down payments, of course, can easily shift from one year to the other. These are amounts of tens and tens of millions for each project. This explain the reason why we prefer to have a pretty high range in terms of free cash flow. Of course, as usual, we hope to be from midpoint up, let me say, yeah. That's obviously our very clear target. Okay. Thank you. Gabriele, about the acquisitions. Of course, we are looking at many multiple opportunity. It is too early because a bolt-on significant acquisition, similar to General Cable, we even don't have the balance sheet to manage it. As you know, we don't like to increase too much our leverage, taking risks for the future. We have to look at medium size or even little size acquisitions, but creating a flow of transactions that can create something more solid for the future. That's the area into which we are looking for. It's too early, really. Okay, many thanks. Be patient as we are. Okay. Many thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Roberto Campana from Amundi. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hi, good evening. I would like to know, is it possible, please, to have an idea of the size of the project, EuroAsia, or EuroAfrica, as you want to call it, both in terms of maybe cables and installation? EuroAsia is an over EUR 1 billion project size in cable and installation. That's more or less the expected size. If it's going to be really 525, maybe higher, maybe lower. Probably it would be higher. The way to go for the technological approval is definitely longer. I understand the customer. As I said, they have Crete-Peloponnese, that is 525 MI. Why not the Crete Cyprus not to be the same or similar in term of tension? Frankly speaking, the MI for our knowhow is very heavy and very difficult to be laid at 2,000 m. The extruded would be better, no one has, today, an homologated or even near to be homologated 525 DC extruded. There is need of time for developing the product. Perfect. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. We have one further question, and the question comes from Alessandro Tortora from Mediobanca. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Yes. Thanks. Sorry, quick follow-up on Telecom, because we discussed a lot about margin. Probably on Philippe, can you tell me what is your expectation on the demand side, also considering that probably you will care about, let's say, mix considering that demand is not so bad? Sorry, Alessandro. I didn't really get your question. Can you repeat? Yes. The question is on the volume, considering the price trend we already discussed. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. No. I believe the volume is going to be back to growth in 2021, in a relatively strong way. That's what we see today. There is a rebound in volume in the market, as Valerio said earlier. I think we can say that the destocking effect that we've been talking about for many months now seems to be over. The COVID effect is an uncertainty, of course, but I think the volumes are back and we are going to be back to growth in terms of volume. Let's say high single digits, I would say, in terms of volume, that doesn't mean at all that we will have the organic growth at the same level, of course, because it depends on the price pressure. The price pressure, as we said, is going to be very significant. As I said earlier, I think if you ask the question again in three months from now, we'll have a much better view. We are currently too much inside the tendering processes. There's a lot of things I don't know yet for the year.