Welcome to the ArcelorMittal first quarter 2024 conference call. I'm Moritz, the conference call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in a listen-only mode, and the conference is being recorded. The presentation will be followed by a question-and-answer session. You can register for questions at any time by pressing star and one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Daniel Fairclough, Vice President, IR. Please go ahead, sir. Great. Thank you, Moritz. Good afternoon, everyone. This is Daniel Fairclough from the ArcelorMittal Investor Relations team. Thank you very much for joining this call to discuss our performance for the first quarter 2024. Leading today's call will be our Group CFO, Mr. Genuino Christino. Before we begin today's call, I would like to mention a few housekeeping items. As usual, we will not be going through the results presentation, which we published this morning on our website. However, I do want to draw your attention to the disclaimers on slide number 2 of that presentation. As normal, Genuino will make opening remarks before moving directly to the Q&A session. So if you would like to ask a question, then please press star one on your keypad to join that queue. Over to you, Genuino. will keep my remarks brief and focus on three topics: safety, our strong financial performance, and the positive outlook for our business. Beginning with safety. Across ArcelorMittal, our people are galvanized to improve safety and achieve our goals of being a fatality-free organization as quickly as we can. The third-party safety audit, which started at the end of December, is now well underway and on target to be completed in September. We believe and expect this to make valuable recommendations that, combined with the considerable efforts already underway, will enable us to deliver the safety results we are striving for. Moving to our financial performance. As expected, our results in the first quarter improved, following the end of the destocking that had impacted on recent quarters. The first quarter saw a 5% improvement in our shipments and a positive price cost effect, particularly in North America. I believe our EBITDA of $2 billion for this quarter is the highest in our industry. If I look at the last four quarters, we have generated EBITDA of $8.5 billion and adjusted net income of $4.7 billion. Our performance reflects the positive actions we have taken to optimize our business and high-grade our asset portfolio. Over the past four quarters, we have invested $1.6 billion in our strategic growth CapEx. We have led the market in offering the widest portfolio of green steel products, and we have returned the equivalent of 8% of our current market cap to shareholders through dividends and buybacks. Moving to the positive outlook for our business. We continue to forecast higher steel consumption this year in our core markets. Our envelope of strategic investments are running to plan. We will be commissioning the new high added value capacity in Brazil soon. Likewise, our new 1 GW renewable energy project in India will begin production-producing electricity in June. In total, the projects within our strategic envelope are expected to add $1.8 billion to our EBITDA, and of course, will meaningfully add to our free cash flow capacity also. Our process of portfolio optimization also supports my positive outlook. Having exited Italy and Kazakhstan last quarter, we have now also fully exited our stake in ArcelorMittal. At the same time, we have agreed to purchase a significant minority stake in Vallourec, increasing our exposure to premium downstream products. With 80% of its EBITDA in the Americas and a focus on supporting energy transition, Vallourec is well aligned with our strategy, and it's interesting even in a minority position. To conclude my remarks, our performance continues to provide evidence that ArcelorMittal can deliver value through all aspects of the steel cycle. We are investing in high return projects, several of which will be concluded as we move through 2024. We are making clear strategic progress, high-grading our asset portfolio, and investing for higher future profitability, and our buybacks are compounding the benefits for our shareholders. With that, Daniel and I will be ready to take your questions. Great. Thank you, Genuino. We will take the first question from Patrick at Bank of America. Go ahead, Patrick. Thanks very much. I've got two questions, please. The first one is just the $1.8 billion from in EBITDA from the strategic envelope CapEx. How should we think about the phasing of that? I know, I know a lot of the projects are sort of starting up this year. When will we see the majority of that impact? I know sort of run rates, 2026, 25, 26, but, you know, this year, next year, and, and 2026, what's the phasing like? And then the second question, please, just the idea behind buying the stake in Vallourec. I mean, how would you answer the- The question is, does it make sense for a listed company to have a, you know, significant but minority stake in another listed company when investors can allocate that or do that themselves? So what's the thinking behind that stake? Thank you. Yeah, sure, Patrick. Thank you. So let me start with the first question, the EBITDA, the $1.8 billion. So as you know, we are about to complete and as I said in my opening remarks, so the first two projects that we're gonna be completing is the cold mill expansion, Vega expansion in Brazil and the renewable project in India. And then by the end of the year, we should be completing all the projects as well. So out of the $1.8 billion, and this is something that I believe we also discussed in the previous, our previous call. We already have the benefits of the hot strip mill that we implemented, developed in Mexico, right? So what is left to be added to our profitability is about $1.5 billion. This year, because we're gonna be in ramp-up phase, you're not gonna see really a significant improvement in 2024. Still some contribution from the two projects that we're gonna be completing now in the first half. Then moving forward in 2025, we will start to see a meaningful contribution from these projects. We believe that out of the $1.5 billion still to be captured, you're gonna see something in the range of $500 million, and then another $500 million on top in 2025-2026. What is left to be captured then in 2025 and onwards is basically as we complete the expansion of the first expansion of India and the Monlevade project. So that's how we are seeing the phasing of the EBITDA. To your second point on Vallourec, your second question, Patrick. Vallourec is a company that we have been following now for some time. It's a company that is, as I said at the beginning, it's primarily present in the region in the Americas. It's a region that is core to ArcelorMittal, and they are involved. They want to grow also in the new energy transition. So it's something that we believe fits very well with our strategy. They are exposed to markets. They will give exposure to different markets. So that's why we are very excited, and we saw an opportunity here with the exit of Apollo. So we bought 28%, and we are in the process of buying 28% without paying any premium. So that's in a nutshell, how we are seeing this development. Thanks. Could I ask one clarification quickly? So the uplift that comes from India, when you say, you know, the additional uplift, is that the net income contribution from India, because that's what's included in group EBITDA or Indian EBITDA? If you know what I mean. Yeah, absolutely. That's right. So that's for the JV, as we have discussed extensively as well, it's really the net income, our share of the net income of these JVs that we are adding to our EBITDA definition, Patrick. Okay. Thank you very much. Got it. Thank you. Great, thanks. So we'll move on to the next question, please, from Andrew at UBS. Hi, gents. Thanks for taking questions. We had a big CapEx hike from one of your major competitors in Europe, which I think surprised most of the market. Given the inflation we've seen in CapEx more broadly, but also with like lengthening order books for DRI and EAF equipment, how do you still think about that original $10 billion figure that you talked about spending by 2030 on decarbonization? Is there any update around that? And, you know, should we, should we be adding on, some sort of inflationary adjustment to that? That's my first question. Thank you. Hi, Andrew. Andrew, as we discussed, we also touched on this point in our previous call. I mean, we—you know where we are with our process, with our plans, so not a lot has really changed compared to what we discussed in Q4. We are proceeding with the engineering phase of our projects in Europe and in Canada. We still believe that the $10 billion is a good number for us to keep in mind. Of course, as we complete the engineering, we will know more about the overall CapEx, will give us a higher precision. But our focus, of course, is to make sure that we can stay within this envelope that we have, right? So we are looking at how we can reengineer some of this project. So at this point in time, the $10 billion remains our best number. And I would not really read too much into, or try to compare what we are trying to do with competition in this case. I think there are differences in scope, as well. So I think we are. We believe that we are on target here to stay within the limits that we have set for ourselves. Understood. Just on the former ACIS division, could you talk us through what, you know, the dynamics being quarter on quarter? I mean, after taking out the Kazakhstan loss-making part, could you give us a ballpark for where the EBITDA sat in that division? You know, I know it's, it's obviously included in Others now, but, what, you know, was that still significantly negative or close to breakeven? Give us an idea as to, you know, how that EBITDA are made? You're just on mute, Genuino. Sorry, I can hear you now, actually, but you were on mute for a second. Okay. Sorry. So Andrew, so our performance has improved in Ukraine and South Africa. South Africa, I'm sure you can see their own release. Ukraine, I think the developments that we have seen, they are positive. We have recently, now in April, started a second blast furnace. We are running the mining operations now at a higher capacity. We are actually getting closer to 80%. So the business that sits in segment orders was a bit neutral in quarter one, so an improvement as we were negative in Q4. And the negative that you see this quarter in segment orders is coming primarily from stock margin eliminations, right? Without the stock margin eliminations, you would be seeing a better number there. So I think we are pleased with the evolution, quote unquote, for CIS and it looks okay as the business continues to evolve. I think we're gonna be, or we are hopeful to be, to see EBITDA continue to improve in Ukraine. Excellent. Okay, thanks very much. Thanks, Andy. So we'll move now to Tom at Barclays. Go ahead, Tom. Hi, hi, Daniel. Hi, Genuino. Thanks for taking our questions. First one, Genuino, normally you give a very helpful breakdown just into Q2 for the sort of building blocks region by region. If you wouldn't mind doing that again, just sort of pricing, volumes, raw materials, just sort of broad trends across North America, Brazil, Europe, and, and maybe India, please. That's the first one. Sure. Tom, I will ask Daniel to give us an overview there. Great. Thanks, Genuino. So yeah, I think when we look at the second quarter, I think the overall picture is very similar to the picture that we see for EBITDA in this first quarter. But there are, of course, some moving parts within that picture. So, I think the key themes across the segments, looking at North America, obviously we will see the impact of recent price movements, but you're gonna see relative stability there in terms of volumes. Brazil, we will see higher volumes, so that will help to offset price impacts there. I think dynamics in Europe, we will see the benefit of lower costs coming through, relatively stable pricing and volumes in Europe. And then, of course, on mining, it really depends where iron ore prices settle for the quarter. But we should see an improvement in volumes from our mining segment, driven by Liberia. So to reiterate, I think the overall picture, very similar to the EBITDA picture for the first quarter, but some moving parts within the different segments. Understood. Very clear. Thank you. And then just a second question. You obviously printed net debt at $4.8 billion. You know, if we start factoring the Vallourec payment, which I guess is second half of the year, that's sort of close to $6 billion pro forma. Could you just remind us, the $7 billion net debt target, is that a hard ceiling or is it a sort of year-end target? Are any covenants attached to that number? And as a result, you know, if you do start pushing towards $7 billion net debt, would you rule out further M&A until you de-lever back down? Thank you. Yeah, Tom. So I think it's important also to see that the increase of net debt in Q1 is very seasonal, Tom. As you, as you, I'm sure you saw, I mean, a significant investment in working capital, $1.7 billion. That's basically so despite the share buybacks that we completed, I think it would be relatively flat if it wasn't, of course, for the investment in working capital, which is something good. It shows that we could increase volumes, prices, et cetera. So things being normal, our expectation would be for the investments in working capital to reverse. We will see, of course, where we finally are at the end of the last quarter of the year in terms of prices, volumes, but things being equal, we would expect that to reverse. That should continue then to leave us with the operational performance of the business. So our expectation is for the business to continue to generate good levels of free cash flow. The $7 billion, I think we discussed that already, also in the past. I think it was an important target for the company when we were in the leveraging process. Today, our focus is more on making sure that we retain our investment-grade rating, so that we keep what we have, which is a strong balance sheet that provide us the flexibility that we need to continue to execute our projects, our strategy, regardless of where we are in the cycle. So that's how we are seeing the $7 billion number, Tom. I hope that clarifies. Okay, that's very clear. Thank you. I'll turn it back. Great. Thanks, Tom. So we'll move now to Bastian at Deutsche Bank. Yeah, thanks, and, good, good afternoon, everyone. So I've got a couple of questions. Maybe the first one is on the JV segment, which I think performed quite strongly and was obviously up $60 million. Yet, I guess the only two drivers which are giving us decline by the same number, which suggests that the stronger performance was either driven by items below EBITDA in India, Calvert or by VAMA or any of the other units. So, could you maybe give us a little bit more color on this and what the drivers were behind this? And also whether there was anything below EBITDA. And then also, are there any items to keep in mind for the second quarter and onwards? That's my first question. Yeah. So Bastian, you're right. So I mean, of course, we saw some decline in India. We saw an improvement in Calvert. But we, as you know, we have a number of other JVs, and some of our JVs in Europe improved, also in line with the improvement that you see in our division, in European division. Also, JVs in North America also improving. So, the decline that we saw in India... And you're also right, that there is a little bit less income tax also in India, deferred income tax, but that is not really the main driver. The offset is really coming from the other JVs that we expect will continue to perform well as we move into the second quarter. Okay, perfect. Very clear. Thanks for that. Then, my next question is coming back on the strategic projects. And you already singled out a couple of them, which are starting up this year. It's obviously quite a few. So I'm wondering, are there any ramp-up costs in the second half, which we should be keeping in mind? Well, I think net-net, the projects that we're gonna be starting now, they will add some EBITDA, Bastian. As I said, it's not gonna be so significant in the first half because of the ramp-up, but net-net, we would expect to see a small positive in the second half of 2024. Okay, understood. And then just lastly, also coming back on working capital, do you expect to be done with the seasonal working capital build after the $1.7 billion, which you've been building up in Q1? Or is there still more to go on that seasonal working capital cycle? Well, as, as you know, Bastian, it's always difficult to predict quarterly movements, right? But based on the visibility that I have today, yes, we would expect a small release already in quarter two. And then as, as we discuss, as and as we know, Q4 is typically the quarter where we release also part of the seasonality of the working capital. So that's, that's how we are seeing it. Okay, perfect. Thanks, Gino, you know. Great. Thanks, Bastian. So we'll move now to Tristan at BNP. Yes. Hi, thank you for taking my questions. The first one is just a quick follow-up on European decarbonization. Could you give us a sense when we should expect the update on the strategy in Europe? And I assume it's tied to the publication of the climate report. And I think you touched on that you're doing the engineering, so then could we expect some change in the scope, maybe some projects you first announced maybe will not go through, or could that be really kind of different type of projects moving around in that publication? Yeah, Justin. So yeah, you're right, Justin. So we are in the process of completing our engineering, which we expect to complete by the end of this year. At the same time, our intention is also to publish our new climate report, where we're gonna be providing them a complete update of the initiatives. In between, of course, we continue to be engaged with the various governments in Europe, trying to get some more visibility in terms of availability and costs of power, costs of hydrogen, potentially, which is going to be also important in the decision-making process. So I think it would be premature now to talk about change. We are not really changing what we have announced. And this process is continuing, and I'm sure we're gonna be in a better position to update all of you later as we complete the engineering and also some of the other discussions that are ongoing. All right. That's clear. Thank you. And my second question is on U.S. growth. First, maybe on the new Calvert NGO line, is there a reason there you decided not to invest with your current JV partner in Alabama? And is the goal now moving forward to really consolidate those growth opportunities rather than have them on the JV side? And also maybe a quick follow-up to that, the new DRI plant in Texas you're looking at, or the new EAF, what is the timeline to make those decisions to invest? Regarding the DRI growth, I think some of your peers, when they looked at Metallics project in the U.S., they've been able to secure large DOE funding, which you've been able to acquire for the NGO line. But I was wondering if you were also in discussion for some subsidies there. Thank you. Sure. On the first part of your question, the electrical steel projects, I think this is really part of our broader strategy, Justin. So as you know, we have a project also in Europe, Mardyck, where we are also investing. And it's just important for our franchise business that we are capable of providing services to the market where we have our customers, the OEMs. So this is really an ArcelorMittal strategy, and that's why you see us doing it on our own. In terms of timing of the projects, I mean, our intention, we are all very busy proceeding with in some cases, pre-feasibility, feasibility studies. As soon as we are in a position to move ahead and we have the sign-off from our board, then we're gonna be updating everyone. I think at this point, we just wanted to highlight what we have keeping us busy at the moment. And we are very excited about the prospects of proceeding with some of these projects. Great. Thanks, Justin. So we'll move now to a question from Max at Oddo. Yeah, good afternoon. So my first question is on the outlook. So you confirmed your outlook for steel demand for the full year, and it's quite a relief because some forecasters have lowered the forecast on their own. But at the same time, your comments in the presentation are a bit subdued. Yes, so is it fair to assume that you now think you will be rather in the low end of this guidance, rather than in the mid or in the top range? I mean, things have changed, obviously, for the past two months. Can you comment on that? You wanna take this one, Daniel? Sure. Thanks, Hermino. So I think you're right. We haven't made any change to our demand forecasts for the year. And you know, neither are we signaling any sort of movement within the ranges that we provided at the beginning of the year. So I think generally, so far, things are panning out per our expectation. I think if you recall, a big feature of last year was destocking, particularly in the second half of the year. So, a lot of the year-on-year growth that we anticipate in 2024 is a function of us not expecting a repeat of the destock that occurred in 2023. And why do we have that belief? Why do we have that conviction? It's really because the inventories in the system right now are clearly very low, and that's particularly the case in Europe. So, you know, within our forecasts, what we're not doing is making very strong projections in terms of a real demand improvement. It's much more a function of no repeat of the destocking. And it's really, in our view, 2025 and heading into 2025 that we should really anticipate a stronger impact from a recovery in real economic activity. Okay, understood. Second question is on the potential new tariffs in Brazil. There's a plan by the government to create a system of quotas and add 25% rates beyond those quotas. Do you think it's a game changer, or it doesn't really make a difference for you at this stage, as it's proposed? Yeah, sure. It's... Of course, it's something new. We are still studying the announcement. We clearly see as a positive. At this point, it's difficult to say whether we're gonna see meaningful improvements in terms of financial improvements, at least. But I think it's an important signal to the market that the government is watching the level of imports. It's concerned about the level of imports in the country. So I would see that more as a signal at this point, and we'll see what is the impact that it will have on the overall level of imports in the country. For sure, this is not gonna really be visible in the next couple of months, at least. But I think importers will be a little bit more concerned as we get close to the levels, to the quota levels. So I think that's how we are seeing it. Okay, and just the last one is on Liberia. You're still coping with some rail issues there. So, can you provide an update on where the solution is and when you expect it to be solved? And at the end of the day, I mean, isn't that a big risk on your expansion program there? I mean, if you are not able to ship what you produce? Yeah ..given that you have huge ambitions by the end of this year, actually. Yeah, the challenges are today primarily with the rail. Unfortunately, we had collapse of a bridge, which is now being fixed. So we are back, and we can again transfer the materials from the mine to the port. It impact us significantly in quarter one, as you can see in our overall volumes. We will see already a good improvement in the second quarter. We are investing to fix some of the issues, structural issues that we had in the past with the rail, so that should be done, and should not have any impact really on our expansion. We continue on track to finish the first phase of the project by the end of this year. So that is unchanged. Okay. Thank you. Great, thanks, so we'll move now to a question from Timna at Wolfe Research. Oh, hey, thanks for taking my question. Wanted to just ask particularly about Calvert, a couple items. One is that we were hearing from some of the domestic consumers that Calvert was having some operational problems, and we're just wondering if you can provide an update on, and any progress there, is causing some consternation among people we talk to. Separately, if it were the case that Nippon would need to divest in order to, you know, meet CFIUS requirements, is ArcelorMittal interested in taking over the remaining stake? And just the, I guess the final question is, any more detail on NGO opportunities, how that's progressing, how you're seeing that project would be great. Thanks. Yeah, sure. So on the operational issues in Calvert, I think that's correct. You know, we did face some operational issues with our cold rolled mill in Calvert during the quarter. We believe that this has been resolved now, so we are in dialogue with our customers, and it should be, we should see improvements as we speak. Second point of your question regarding... So first of all, I think it's very difficult to comment on the whole process, but should Nippon be forced to divest, then of course, we are buyers. We would be the natural buyer of this stake. And regarding NGO, really, I don't really have much. We don't, we don't comment on M&A. Okay, so- Um, perhaps- Mm-hmm? Sorry, maybe I misheard you. Was it the new electrical steels project that you were referencing in your question, or was I mistaken? Correct. It was not Anglo, it was NGO. NGO- Oh, oh! Is the non-grain-oriented? Yeah. Got it. Yeah. Yeah, sure. So sorry, can you repeat then your question? What was your point? Oh, sure. I just wanted more detail on the cadence of the ramp-up or the, you know, discussions with customers. Anything more you can provide on the non-grain-oriented expansion plans? Yeah. We all, I mean, so first of all, I think we were excited by the fact that we got the, of course, the confirmation from the DOE. So we have the tax credits, which is an important part of the overall project. And as I said, we are now in the process of running our engineering as well, so that we can advance the project, and then we can take to our board. And then as soon as we are ready, we will provide more details in terms of timing, and execution. As we know with the grants, so we have a four years timeline that we have to complete this project to be able to secure the grants. So I think we have this deadline. It's a little bit yet far away, but I think it puts even more pressure on all of us now to the analysis of the project. Okay. Helpful. Thank you. Thanks, Timna. We'll move now to Cole at Jefferies. Hi, and thanks for taking my question. I'd just like some color on the moving parts in the India JV into the second quarter. You talked about the benefits of, you know, the returns from the energy projects, but, you know, what are the other moving parts on India? And then, just to follow up on, you know, how you see scrap pricing developing from here, and maybe just talk about Europe as in the US separately. Thank you. Yeah. India, I think it's good to see the performance of our JV in India, and thanks for asking the question. And if you see in Q1 and for the first time, it's visible that we are making good progress with the bottleneck of our production. In India, you can see that we were running at higher levels at about 8 million tons, which we expect to continue at that run rate. And so prices in India, so we don't really expect the realized price in India, we don't really expect a lot of change. In Q1, we saw more exports from India, so in Q2 we would expect to see more volumes directed to the domestic market, which is also good news. And then, our facility is also buying coal in the seaborne market. So as we know, coal prices have come down, so that should also help. So that's what we are seeing in terms of the moving parts. In terms of scrap, I think scrap has been relatively low and we are not really anticipating significant change at this point. I think you had a third point, Daniel. I don't know if you got that one? No, I would appreciate a repeat of that third point as well. Cole? No, I was just asking the difference in scrap between the US and Europe, if you have got any differing views on scrap between those two regions. Well, no, not really. I mean, what you tend to see, the scrap market, it typically, it's an international market. So typically, you tend to see maybe with some delays, but you tend to see. Of course, it can be different depending on grades, but typically the more common grades, you're gonna see prices moving more or less in line. So, my comment on the scrap was, is applicable in U.S. and Europe as well. Thank you. Great. Thanks, Cole. So we'll move now to Moses at J.P. Morgan. Can you hear me well? Yes, we can. Thanks. Okay. Thank you for taking my question. So the first one, just on guidance, specifically for Europe. Obviously, you've retained the guidance there, but in your comments, you do mention still no restocking activity. And if we look year to date, apparent consumption is tracking in Europe, well below your guidance. So just really wanted to understand, I guess, what you think can at least improve here in Europe towards meeting even the low end of your guidance, if you're already actually seeing some levels of restocking, as has been reported recently. And then within that, just you commented again on China steel exports. Just what are your expectations for China steel exports into the second half of the year? Sure. So I think maybe our analysis differs from your analysis, Moses, 'cause I don't think we would share your conclusion that apparent demand year to date is lower year on year. I think as we move through this year, obviously, I repeat the earlier comments that we're just not expecting a repeat of the destock that weighed on apparent demand in 2023. So our overall assumption is that real demand is relatively stable year on year. But because there's no repeat of the destock, therefore, apparent demand will be higher this year than last, and of course, it's apparent demand which drives our shipments. And then in terms of China exports, obviously, they are elevated. They are back to the sort of highs that we've seen historically. So I think what we see domestically is a picture of demand, which is being impacted by very weak domestic construction, however, strong infrastructure. So those two factors are really cancelling each other out. So overall demand in China is moving sideways. It's not growing, but neither is it overall declining. However, production is very elevated, so that's placing pressure on the domestic supply-demand balance, therefore, pricing spreads domestically are very weak. That's unsustainable because when you look at the statistics and some of the published data, it shows a domestic industry where the majority of participants are loss-making. So at some point, we would naturally expect either a voluntary reductions in production or the government to step in and force production discipline. So we would expect change and that those domestic losses not sustained. So this level of exports, therefore, is not something that we would anticipate being a longer-term dynamic. But it is fair to say that you know, you know, that is having an impact on global market conditions. The fact that China, a loss-making steel industry, is exporting such large quantities of steel, is good sort of evidence of unfair trade. That material is subsidized. It's been dumped into core markets, and it just reinforces the requirement for trade action to defend our core markets against those unfair trade actions. Thank you so much for the clarification then, 'cause if I... If I was just to add a follow-up, obviously, we've seen a response from the likes of Brazil, the US, against excess China steel exports. What do you think here Europe is missing or unable to do to also protect steel producers here from these volumes? Yeah. So it's obviously we in Europe do benefit from some quotas. So we have a degree of protection in place compared to you know that period back in 2015, 2016, where Europe had no such protections in place. But I think you can certainly ask the questions around is there sufficient protection? Could protection go further? And you know and of course fundamentally because CBAM isn't yet being we're just in that transition phase of CBAM we are still exposed to high carbon imports coming in to Europe without having to face the same cost that domestically produced tonnes face. I think we can all agree that there are further actions that could be taken or could be accelerated. We will continue to lobby for that. Thank you very much. And then just finally, if I may, just on Vallourec, investor feedback from our end or in our experience has really questioned the rationale between a minority stake versus, you know, buying back your own shares at perhaps an even cheaper multiple. So could you please just clarify the push-pull here between buying back shares versus a minority stake elsewhere? Of course, this is, you know, considering you have still bought 35% of stock since September 2020. But what is the rationale between that number even being even higher? We have be en saying very consistently is what is important for us is to achieve the right balance. And what we mean by that is that our goal is to continue to develop the business, the ArcelorMittal business, and at the same time, reward our shareholders. And I think that's exactly what we have been doing with the M&A, with the strategic growth projects. And Vallourec fits well with this side of the equation. And then, of course, we have the return to shareholders, and as you said, 35%, we have already done, and by the time we complete the existing program, we will be, of course, depending on the share price, but most likely we're gonna be very close to 40%. So I think that's we are pleased with that because we want, you know, from a couple of years from now, look back and see that we have improved the profile of the business, that we have improved our capacity to generate EBITDA, generate free cash flow, and at the same time reward our shareholders. So that's how we look at it. It's not that we are doing one at the detriment of the other. We are trying to do both in a balanced way. Understood. Thank you. Great, thanks. So we'll move now to last couple of questions, first from Miles at UBS. Great, thanks. Thanks a lot. Just maybe on a couple of follow-ups from previous questions. On the buyback, should we assume that this is gonna continue? I mean, you'll finish the current program, get to 40%, and then we should assume that there'll be another similar program down the line. Is there kind of every intention from sort of management and the family to continue the buyback, kind of not just over the next sort of 12, 18 months, but for the next kind of 2, 3, 4+ years? That's the first question. Sure, Miles. I think what is important here, Miles, is to understand that our policies is going to continue, right? We have a very clear capital allocation policy, and you know very well, it's 50% of free cash goes to shareholders, 50%, or minimum 50%, I should say, goes to shareholder, and 50% can be retained by the business. So the policy is not changing. And we have all the intentions, of course, to complete the existing program by the timeline that we have outlined at the beginning. We remain confident that the business will continue to generate free cash flow. So as a result then, to your point, when we complete this program, and to the extent that we'll continue to apply this policy, then I think, as investors, shareholders, you should have confidence that the company will continue to transfer 50% of, of free cash, to shareholders. How we do it, buybacks, more dividend, this is, of course, something to be discussed later with the board, but the fundamental, point is that 50% or minimum 50% of the free cash will be, returned to shareholders. Okay, that's helpful. And then just on Vallourec, can you remind us, so completion second half, and then the lockup kind of clicks in. Is it for 6 months after completion? So if there was an opportunity to take control, then you have melted it. Is it 6 months after or 12 months after the completion? Yeah, completion, we expect to complete the transaction most likely in quarter three. And as we said, we're very comfortable with our position. It's an important, we're gonna be the reference shareholder of Vallourec. We are happy with the minority position here. So that's how we are seeing it, Miles. Okay. But are you allowed—you're not allowed to buy for a certain period of time, isn't it, after the deal completes? Is that the right way of thinking about as well? ... Well, there is, you have, in France, as you know, you have, a number of regulations. You have to pre-announce your intentions for the next nine months, which we did, so in our press release. Okay, thank you. And maybe just on Ukraine as well. Obviously, at some point there's gonna be a lot of demand for steel. Could you just, I mean, maybe with the plant as it stands at the moment, kind of give us a sense as to whether it can be fully ramped up over the next 12 months? And, yeah, as we hopefully get to the end of the war, I mean, what sort of potential for sort of steel demand could you see, and how will that be supplied as we look to the medium term? Yeah. Well, we are already seeing some improvements in the demand, domestic demand in, in Ukraine. That's why we have restarted the second furnace. So we're gonna be running now and, and for most of the second quarter, at about, I would say 45%-50% of capacity. I think we have the conditions to ramp up as and when, we see conditions to do that. Right now, one of the big challenges that we face in Ukraine is availability of power, as we all know why. So that's today, the main constraint that, we hope that, of course, the Ukrainian government will, continue to work to, to restore. And the potential sort of longer term, once the market or once the war hopefully comes to an end, I mean, what sort of demand do you reckon there could be in terms of the rebuild requirement? Have you done the kind of sums on that? Yeah. Look, I don't really have a number, Miles, but I think, I mean, it's easy to conclude, right, that there will be a... The demand will be very significant. And I think we're gonna be, of course, in a good position to, as we are, a key player in that market, to supply the domestic market. But we know unfortunately, the demand for steel in, unfortunately for the country, of course, will be very high. But I don't have a number really to provide to you at this point. Okay. Thank you. I think just the other thing that is worth reinforcing is that we do have the ability, once the domestic demand is there, to return to full capacity. So, none of our capabilities have been impacted. Okay. Thank you. So we move now to a question from Max at Oddo. So I guess a follow-up from Max at Oddo. Yeah, just to follow up indeed on Vallourec. Do you see some potential for synergies despite holding just less than 30% of shares? And yeah, somehow you've already bid for that. But if you like so much Vallourec, why not acquire 100% of it? Max, I think we have addressed the stake and the fact that we are happy with the 28%, right? And it's at the end of the day, it's all about capital allocation, as we have been discussing. Regarding synergies, of course, it's early days. It's early, premature to talk about or try to quantify synergies. But for sure, once we complete the transaction, we will engage and try to understand potential synergies between the two groups. But of course, we're gonna be, it will need to be a win-win for the different company shareholders. But I'm sure we're gonna be assessing that. I can give you an example where we already work together in Brazil. Vallourec has a pelletizing in Brazil, and we use it as through a toll agreement. So we get about, we send our iron ore and get pellets, pay a fee, tolling fee. So that's just an example. So I'm sure we, we're gonna be discussing possibilities. But again, provided that it is good for both companies and shareholders. Okay. Thank you. Great. So we have one more question, Moritz, which is another follow-up from Tristan at BNP. Yes, hi. Just a quick one on XCarb, the volumes there. I had this number in my mind, around 600,000 tons of volumes you were expecting before, but I'm not sure if that's still accurate. And you mentioned you did 230,000, so kind of a bit of a gap there. So does that mean there is a demand is a bit slower than what you expected first, or it just maybe there is a difference between certificate-based volumes and more, let's say, pure form of low-carbon steel? And also you mentioned some interest outside Europe, so I was curious to which geographies you refer to. Thank you. Yeah, thanks. Let me answer this question. So you're right. Last year we did 230,000 tons of XCarb sales, and we're anticipating that to double this year. So I don't think we're too far away from those projections. I think where we've seen a good traction over the past 12 months has been within the XCarb recycled and renewably produced. So that's our materials that are scrap-based that are renewable power-based that have a good low levels of CO2 intensity. We're now offering a very broad base of those materials. So lots of different product categories satisfying demand from many different end user segments. So, that is being driven, you know, being driven by auto, it's being driven by construction segments. We can produce both flat and long products. If you look at our release today, Aditya was referencing in his quote Sestao, where we're... That's a key pillar of our XCarb offering in Europe. So, I think the key message from us is that we are very much leading the market in terms of green steel products via the XCarb brand. We have the widest portfolio in the marketplace, and customer demand is good. It's across the different end customer segments. Also, it's not limited by the different geographies. So, some exciting developments there. And yeah, we'll look forward to updating you on progress as we move through this year. All right. Thank you. Great. So I'll hand back to you, Genuino. That was our last question, so any concluding remarks on for me? So I want to reiterate my messages from the beginning of the call. Firstly, the whole ArcelorMittal organization is galvanized to improve safety performance. Secondly, our results continue to demonstrate structural improvements, and there is more to come. We have been investing in a portfolio of high return projects that will support high EBITDA and cash flow, and our ongoing buybacks are compounding the value, creating benefits to our shareholders. If you need anything further, please, do reach out to Daniel and his team. With that, I will conclude this call. Stay safe and keep those around you safe as well. Thank you.