Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining and welcome to our 2025 half-year results analyst call. Today, our CEO, Bernd Stahli, accompanied by our CFO, Elke Snijder, will comment on the results presentation published on our website this morning. At the end of the call, you will have the opportunity to ask questions. For now, I would like to hand over to our CEO, Bernd Stahli. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for dialing in. Let's dive straight into the presentation. Just as a quick reminder, slide four defines our clear strategic priorities: Amsterdam Specialist and selectively elsewhere, so not exclusively, but predominantly into Amsterdam. Sector smart. We would not shy away from other sectors if the opportunity does arise, but think mostly in terms of the internal opportunity that we have with respect to converting offices to residential. Customer first, very simple. Without customers, there is no business. They're front and center in all of what we do to make sure that we deliver the product of the future. Sustainability leader. Sometimes we don't shout enough about it, but we're ahead of the game, and it does make a difference in all elements of our business. Growth. We are small yet ambitious. We love to take the next step and scale, and we want to do that together with our shareholders. We know that we need to keep them happy along the way. No, we're not going to grow at any price, but it's an ambition that we do have because we recognize that size does make a difference in this market. Slide five shows the main KPIs. I'll highlight a few because they'll come back in the rest of the presentation. We have a small increase in vacancy in the first half with 5.9%. Part of it is strategic, specifically relating to HNK Health Havens in Amsterdam, where we're going to do an upgrade of the ground floor. Part of it is just one or two buildings where we have an increase in vacancy over the period. On a gross rent, they're up 4.7%, which is a good increase, especially if you take into account that indexation over the period was running at just about 2%. The LTV is up to 34.5% due to CapEx and a small negative revaluation of the portfolio of 2.7% that Elke will elaborate on later. Sustainability-wise, we remain at a very high level, but there hasn't been really much change over the period. Slide seven shows the map of our assets. More than half of our assets are located in Amsterdam. We're happy about that. There were no acquisitions or disposals in the first half. There is still ongoing asset rotation. We are planning to sell our one remaining asset in Hoofddorp and two remaining assets in Eindhoven. Those two should release over EUR 40 million of capital coming back into the business to reinvest on new acquisitions or our development program. Slide eight. We've got some very good news on Vitrum. It's taken a while, but we're finally there. In May, we concluded the process to obtain the environmental permit for the redevelopment, which was the last part of an authorization process we needed to be able to start the project. We are now working with a building contractor to finalize the details of the project and to finalize the terms on which the project will take place financially. We're aiming for a start of the project in the first half of next year. Once completed, this will be one of the best assets in the NSI portfolio, further expand our Amsterdam footprint, and drive profitable growth in terms of EPS and NAV. Once we've finalized the details with the contractors, we will communicate the financials of this project in more detail. Slide nine shows a new render of the southwest corner of the building, and you can see, this actually does look very good for the market in today's context. Slide ten, just a brief update. We don't typically talk about individual buildings that much, but in this specific case, it is worthwhile to mention. End of last year, we acquired Sypesteyn in Utrecht. We bought it with 74% of the space left. The presentation shows we're now at 88%. That's the end of June number. Per August, it will be 94%. We're leasing the space 5% above what the incoming contracts were at the time of acquisition. There is one unit left that is explaining the 6% vacancy. That's on the sixth floor. The space has been refurbished, and that should be let up in the coming months. Over the same period, the building has gone from a C label to an A+ label. We're very happy about that as well. It's been at minimal cost, less than EUR 1,000 to get there. All in all, we're very pleased with the acquisition and the progress since. At this time, central Utrecht is proving to be one of the most dynamic leasing markets in the Netherlands. If you go to the back of this presentation on slide 35, we actually show that rental growth in Pararius Utrecht has kept up in line with prime rental growth in Amsterdam since 2010, cementing the position of Utrecht as the second most important office market in the Netherlands. Slide 11. We show our plans for Vivaldi. We're cutting that back just under 9,000 sq m of office space in August. Those of you who attended the Capital Markets Day presentation in 2022 will remember back then that we had a plan for a longer-term redevelopment of this asset to make this space better and more attractive, and genuinely future-proof. That plan does remain a realistic option, but we have decided that for now, it's best to keep running the assets for income over the coming years as the plans aren't finished. We have to take into account and consider the time and capital commitments that we have for our other projects. We can't do everything in one go. We have already Alexanderpoort project underway. Vitrum is coming up. We also have potentially Well House to consider as well, which is next door. For now, we're just running it for income. The space we'll get back is in reasonable shape, and we plan to spend some money on it, probably less than EUR 1 million, before bringing it back onto the markets. Given the quality of the space that we're getting back, we're optimistic on leasing, but it will take some time to lease out this volume in its entirety, especially if you take into account that it will likely be and is very likely to be a multi-lease building with flexible contracts. We'll keep the flexibility ourselves with respect to our future plans, but don't expect those plans to happen in the coming three, four years. It's a longer-term, medium to longer-term plan still. Slide 12 shows that we have a strong track record on leasing, one that we are proud of, and one that gives us the confidence that we can handle any upcoming vacancies such as Vivaldi at this point in time. Slide 13 offers you some new data that we're presenting for the first time. We have been for some time tracking actual physical occupancy in our buildings. It's something that we continue to roll out in our portfolio, adding more buildings every time. The process to track the data is fully automated, but it's taken us some time to clean the raw data and translate it into relevant information that is both insightful and ready to be interpreted. We're only at the start of building up our own history in terms of data, so it's hard for us to draw too many conclusions at this point in time. If you look at the data, you see some relevant numbers in terms of physical occupancy over time, but also how it sort of decided over the weeks. Generally, the belief is that in the Netherlands, pre-COVID, the physical occupancy for offices was about 70%- 75%, with Wednesdays and Fridays relatively quiet days. Our data suggests occupancy levels have been improving a bit over the past 12 months, but they continue to throw pre-COVID assumptions. Thursday is the busiest day of the week. Tuesday, slightly disappointing. Friday, the quietest day of the week. That can't be much of a surprise. We appreciate that some of you may want to read into this data that tenants in our portfolio still have a need to right-size as the space is not being used efficiently. Perhaps. Right-sizing is indeed an ongoing feature in the market, as been since COVID, and may continue for a few more years. In multi-tenant buildings, we have proven to be able to manage this rather efficiently, as we show in our vacancy data. Our vacancy is fully under control. As long as you own the right buildings with the right product offering, there's always replacement demand for space that does come back. This is exactly why our in-house flex office platform, HNK, and bringing services beyond the HNK portfolio is so important for us and for our customers. It allows us to cater to evolving demand patterns, like hybrid work, with scalable, high-quality solutions where people want to work. It's a great example of how our integrated approach helps us to remain responsive and efficient while creating long-term value for our shareholders. Slide 14 is my last slide before I hand it over to Elke, and it's a slide that we've shown before and continue to repeat as it encapsulates very clearly what we've achieved over the years. We continue to grow rents well ahead of inflation. Like-for-like gross rental income has outpaced CPI since 2019. New leases are signed at materially higher levels, confirming the reversionary potential in our portfolio and the attractiveness of our locations. With that, I would like to hand it to Elke. Thanks, Bernd. Okay, let's now first have a look at our valuation. As you noticed, it's down with 2.7%. Notable is that for this round, we have moved to a new group of appraisers, namely Savills, who is a complete newcomer, and Cushman on a different set of assets. As said, revaluation in total was slightly negative. Of course, you're sort of curious how we interpret that, but I think it's hard still to interpret in a market where transaction liquidity remains very limited. Especially for a new group of appraisers, it's hard to assess value. I understand that with limited liquidity in the transaction market, you might take a bit of a conservative view. On this slide on the left, as you are accustomed to, you can see the euro amount and the split between the positive and the negative revaluation. On the right, we show in number of assets exactly the same positive and negative revaluations. Interestingly, you can see that it is exactly the same number on positive revaluation, 17 over the first half, and it was also 17 over 2024. Those are not the same assets for the vast majority. We're still quite positive because we still see positive valuations coming in. As said in the context, as I just mentioned, we sort of have a neutral view on this. Moving to the next slide, sustainability. For us, one of our core pillars of our strategy, we continue our leadership in the industry with respect to this topic. We see continued strong performance on, for example, GRESB and also BREEAM. Our strong focus is on improving energy usage of our assets. As we think that together with CO2 impact, this is the most important contributor to our sustainability journey. On the top right, you can see EPC score. The vast majority is in A or better, and only three assets in total are still below that. While we're performing so well there, it's something we look at. For us, we're more interested in actual kilowatt-hour per square meter performance. Today, on the left, you can see our performance is far ahead of the pathway set for Paris Proof, even though our path towards the goal will not be linear. Some investments create bigger impacts than others. There are also other factors that influence year-on-year performance, like the weather, but also how your tenants go about it. That points me towards another point I want to make. It's not just the asset performance that we're looking at, but we also try to guide our tenants in energy, durable, sustainable behavior by giving them insight and perhaps even some tips where we can. Moving to a new slide that you haven't seen of us before. As such, we don't only look at our kilowatt-hour per square meter usage, but also at CO2 as a key metric next to energy intensity. This adds a little bit more depth to one of the reasons why we've set an ambitious goal to reduce energy in our portfolio. We want to highlight here the link with carbon emissions. The Paris Climate Agreement aims to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius. To meet this goal, the real estate industry must reach roughly 0 kg of CO2 emissions per square meter by 2050. That's all the way on the right. Reaching this goal, I think that's sort of the main message of this slide. It depends on two key factors. It's our portfolio's energy intensity, but also the decarbonization of the electricity grid. While we are committed to reducing our energy intensity as much as financially feasible, achieving full alignment with the Paris targets also requires a significant drop in grid-related emissions, a factor, unfortunately, largely outside of our control. That is why we focus on what we can influence directly, improving the energy efficiency of our assets. In fact, as said on the previous slide, we're outperforming current energy intensity targets and will continue aligning with that pathway towards 2035. Okay. Moving to the next slide. Diving into some numbers now. I think these are all familiar slides to you. Just, of course, interesting to look at the update of the numbers. First, EPRA earnings. Here you see the rundown from GRI to NRI to EPRA earnings. I think two things to point out, quite similar to last time we talked, is that costs are still well in check, as you can see in operating costs, but also in the administrative costs. We can also see corporate income tax with a direct rate of 5.5%. That's the $1.1 million you see on the slide. That's well within our guidance that we've given you from 5%- 7%. Now looking at a couple of waterfalls, the first rundown is earnings per share, $0.91 in the first half of last year towards $0.99 the first half of this year. What are the big buckets that explain the difference? From left to right, the $0.03 acquisition is Sypesteyn coming in as per December. We're starting to see its positive impact, even a little bit trending ahead of our own predictions, as Bernd already mentioned. The next big one is the disposals. As you know, we disposed of three assets last year, Laanderpoort all the way at the beginning of the year, but then both Binnenhof and Stellenhorst in Eindhoven in the second half of the year, leading to the $0.06 impact in the first half. GRI, like for like, that's the biggie, shows the impact of lower lease incentives, indexation, and managing our vacancy. Moving to the right, you see some smaller impacts, and I think the last one that I want to mention, but that's something that you can link to the previous slide as well, is our corporate income tax. We're moving from $1.1 million this year, versus the $0.5 million last year, is $0.6 million difference, and that exactly comes down to $0.03 negative impact. To simply put, we're paying a little bit more corporate income tax, but again, well within the guidance that we've given you. On to the next slide, NTA per share. This shows the bridge of NTA, net tangible asset value per share, from end of 2024 to end of this first half of 2025. Going again from left to right, the $0.82 that you see was the payout that we did in May as the final dividend over 2024. The $0.99 is the EPS performance over the first half of the year that we talked about on the previous slide. The $1.47 is an indirect impact, and that's the translation of the revaluations that we've seen. Which ones are, I think, sort of noticeable? Maybe the deferred tax relates to an increase of the deferred tax asset as a result of the negative revaluations. That's linked. The effect of the stock dividend that we did in May here is $0.26. Simply put, the denominator of NTA per share has increased, this leading to a lower outcome. This all results in a decrease of NTA per share over this half year of EUR 1.39. Now, something that I am, of course, especially proud of is that we have on the next slide looking at the loan facility that we have, our syndicated loan. We've been able to extend this quite successfully with ABN AMRO, Rabo, ING, and Belfius. We've extended the loan facility to 2030 with two one-year extension options. The total facility remains the same with $50 million in a term loan and $300 million in an RCF, keeping all our loans fully unsecured, so providing full flexibility on our loan book. Commercial terms were such that we've been able to keep our average cost of debt stable at 2.9%. Very happy with that outcome. On the right side of this slide, you can see that we have linked it to sustainability as well. For us, really important because this is a key pillar of our strategy. It was important for the banks. I think we found each other quite well. It can also lead to a benefit on our interest rate. If we don't perform well, actually, we'll be paying a little bit more on our loan facility. It's a mechanism in place of four key sustainability metrics that are important to us. Two more slides on the financials to go, so bear with me. As a direct consequence of being able to extend our facility, you can see on the top right of this slide the average maturity that has increased from 3.5 years to 4.2 years. That looks quite healthy. On the left, you can see nicely how now our term loan and the RCF are put in 2030 instead of 2026. You can also see here that the part that we have currently drawn from our RCF facility of EUR 300 million is EUR 70 million. What's up next for treasury activities? We're keeping an eye on the EUR 40 million private placement that expires end of January 2026. We are mindful that this fixed rate private placement was agreed in times of negative base rates. Renewing it at this point in time would make our average finance cost go up by a small step, but it will go up a little bit. That's what's notable on this slide. Moving to the last one, we keep a keen eye on our balance sheet KPIs. On the left-hand side of this slide, you can see that our cost of debt is remaining stable, as well as our ICR interest coverage ratio. LTV on the top right is low, still at 35.5%, 34.5%. That's all impact of the negative revaluation. If you've done the calculation, if you would take out the negative revaluation, our LTV would be less with 2024 at 33.9%. On the bottom right, net debt to EBITDA has improved, and that's on the back of a higher EBITDA. So far for the financial metrics. I'm giving it back to Bernd for the outlook for the rest of the year. Thank you, Elke. The economic environment is okay, but not much better than okay. We are living in a more uncertain world than we did maybe expect six months ago. By and large, what we see is that the larger tenants are sort of holding back on decision-making, but smaller tenants continue to do their business as is. We don't really see much of an issue. If we specifically work out the elements of our strategy and see what is going to happen for the remainder of this year, as we mentioned before, we're selling Hoofddorp and Eindhoven. That should be completed before year end. Sector smart, we're continuing to look at the opportunity to convert office to residential space in our own portfolio. We have a pilot that we are creating full turnkey offering of office assets in our portfolio that is going to continue to expand. So far, it's working out quite well. We are going to deliver HNK Rotterdam Alexander by year-end this year. That will be a Paris Proof building, high quality, that I think will be very well received by the market on completion. Growth, if we look at Vitrum, which is obviously what is going to attract quite a bit of attention in our portfolio in the second half, as we prepare for that, that will be a great addition to our portfolio over the years to come. Our guidance, we've maintained it within the range of EUR 2.05- EUR 2.15. There's a little bit of dilution as a result of the stock dividend that we issued in the first half. Otherwise, there is no real major change in our portfolio that would warrant a different number than what we were sort of internally penciling for. We're actually genuinely optimistic about the outlook of our business, and we are happy to answer your questions. I'm handing it back to Martijn for the Q&A. Thank you, Bernd. We'll be continuing with the Q&A now. Sandra, you can give the instructions for the Q&A. Thank you. To ask a question, please press star one one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one and one again. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Once again, to ask a question, please press star one and one. Okay, I will be handing over the first question to Vincent Koppmair from Deg roof Petercam. Yes. Good morning, everybody. Thank you very much for taking my questions. Congrats on the solid operational results in H1. I just had maybe two questions or three questions for you. Mainly looking at the, of course, you mentioned already the change in the valuators, and there was now the devaluation and the lack of transactions. Do you see any other reasons in the slowdown of the market? I would argue that over the last quarters, it was seen as more of a bottoming out. Now the new revaluation might come as a surprise. you want to take all the questions first, or do you want to address them one by one? I could go one by one if it's okay for you. Okay, do you want to do it? Yeah. What we're noticing with our group evaluation, I think that sort of has remained the same versus the last group that we had, is that we still seem to have discussions about all of the investments that we do in sustainability and how that translates into value. Still, the assessment of our HNK locations, which is by now nine locations that we're looking at, is a bit difficult. I think one of the big ones that we're finishing up by the end of the year is our HNK location new at Rotterdam Alexander, where we're doing a very large EUR 20 million refurbishment. Of course, we have some comparables within our own portfolio. My personal opinion there is that there was a little bit of a conservative view, more as show first, and then we come in with a good value approach. I don't try to read too much into this. I'm, of course, also curious at how our colleague companies, real estate investors, will show their values. I'm not concerned when I look at this. Okay. Clear. Thank you very much. I will have one question on your newest, newest acquisition last year because, of course, you highlighted in one of your slides, and you mentioned that, of course, you had very strong leasing and strong rental growth. What do you see as the medium-term strategy for this asset and for potentially your other assets? Vivaldi you already mentioned, of course, just more of a picture of this asset, for example. You mean Sypesteyn in Utrecht? Yeah. If you look at the building, you can see it's older. It's a 1970s building. At some point in time, you will require to do more of an investment into this building. In a market where prime rents in Utrecht are EUR 300 + we are renting out at EUR 200. It tells you that it's not the same quality because the location is great, but you're not attracting the premium rents that are achievable in that market. To be able to achieve those, you need to make much more of an investment. Given that we have plans coming up for Vitrum, we have other plans. Given how long it typically takes to get projects to start, you should work on the assumption that this is going to be rented out for at least the next seven or eight years before a project is likely to happen on this spot. It could either be a refurbishment or a complete teardown and new build office tower going up. We do know that we can add significant sq m on that plot if and when we were to do so. Work on the assumption this is going to be an income-producing, higher yielding asset for the time to come. Okay. Clear. Thank you very much. I have only, okay, I have two more questions, maybe. I'll leave the floor. In terms of reversion potential, you mentioned in the press release that this year you have more or less 11% reversion potential, but you don't assume to be able to capture everything. What is your more or less assumption? Are you able to capture 80%, 90% of this, or maybe lower amounts? It will be less. Part of it is related to Vivaldi, where there is a higher rent likely in the market versus the departing rent of spaces that left the building. The reality is that when you start with an occupancy of zero, you're not capturing it very quickly. It just takes time to lease up that building. Secondly, there is a lease where actually the renewal date is end of this year. Yes, formally, it is part of the reversion of this year, but if it happens, it's actually going to happen to some extent next year. There are some other minor elements. Part of it is Utrecht, where the failure tells us that the ERP is over EUR 300 a square meter, Sypesteyn, but we're actually leasing it out at EUR 200. Yes, we can lease it out at EUR 300, but it requires so much CapEx that for us, that doesn't make a lot of sense to invest that at this point in time. Actually, that number is, I wouldn't, it's not misleading. It is what it is coming out of the data. That's why we highlighted in the document ourselves. We're not going to capture much of it this year. Clear. Clear. Maybe my final question was that at the press conference for the full-year results, you mentioned that in the case of the market slowing down and deals not materializing, you would consider doing SBBs again. Has your position changed on this topic, given the current circumstances? You always look at managing your balance sheet throughout time. Clearly, a small change is that we've restarted the issuance of stock dividend. That's actually doing the opposite. Now we know that Vitrum can go ahead, and we need the capital to invest into that project. You can see on a projected basis that our LTV will increase a little bit. It doesn't make a lot of sense to continue the buyback. If anything, if we look for new acquisitions, you also have to allow for some balance sheet capacity to do that. No, for now, don't expect any further buybacks for the time to come. Great. Thank you. That's all from my side. Thank you for your answers. Thank you, Vincent. The next caller will be Roy Külter from ABN AMRO. Morning, everybody. Just one technical question from my side because I was also looking into the valuations. On page 25 in the EPRA yield calculation, I can see that the estimated purchaser costs are up quite substantially year to date by almost EUR 18 million, despite having basically a little bit lower valuations. The percentage-wise is now 13.4% or a 200 basis points increase from the December calculation. Can you please elaborate on that? Show me the number, and let's have a try. Slide page. Page 25. The allowance for estimated purchaser cost is now EUR 126 million, and it used to be EUR 108 million in December. I need to look into that and come back to you specifically on that number because it's not something that relates clearly to anything that I have in my head at this point in time. Give us a call. Give me a bit of time to figure out exactly what happened there, but I can't tell you right now straight away. Okay. Thank you. Maybe then a second question on Vitrum. In the past, at the Capital Markets Day indeed in 2022, we have sort of guided on EUR 110 million of CapEx, and the yield, at least the blended yield for Amsterdam development pipeline, of a little bit over 6%. Are these numbers still in the ballpark of your estimates for this project? I think yield-wise, that is probably just about correct, yes, on a net basis. Not gross yield, but net. In terms of CapEx, we'll give you more detail later. We're now, the question here is how we look at the leasehold element of it. We haven't made a decision yet how to treat the leasehold in this specific project. It may make a difference between ending up with a total cost of over EUR 100 million or below EUR 100 million. We'll give you the details in the full-year results next year. That should be somewhere end of January. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Roy. The next question will be from Kai Klose from Berenberg. Hi, Kai. I was a bit late. Hi, morning. I was a bit late to the call, and of course, I forgot the budgets or the investments you plan to spend into Vitrum. Could you give a bit more detail how much this could be? The second one, you had a lease retention rate of about 65% in H1. What can we expect maybe for the full year? Talking to the fairies in 2026, what are your estimates? I heard the first question, which is how much we're going to spend on Vivaldi in the second half. Our number internally is about EUR 700,000, and that is basically dealing with just upgrading bits and bobs of that building to be able to lease it out. The space that we're getting back actually is in very decent shape. That's not going to cost us a significant amount of money, but we did allow on the upfront for some costs to be made to make the space attractive enough for reloading into the market. The second question, I'm not entirely sure I heard it correctly. Can you please repeat it? Yes, sorry. It was on the lease retention rate you had in H1. If I saw correctly, it was 65%. Is this a number you would expect also for the full year or looking already maybe into the 2026 leases? Is it just in our kind of normal level that about two-thirds of leases will be extended by tenants, or would you expect that to change, maybe going higher again? I'm still struggling to hear. Just to make sure, you're talking about the rental growth potential in the portfolio for the second half. Sorry. What's the lease retention rate, the tenant retention rate? Oh, tenant retention. We have a number of, actually, the retention for our multi-tenant portfolio is always around 70%- 80% over the next coming year. We have got a number of single-tenant buildings where the lease is coming to maturity. It's always a binary part of the, so that's harder to judge. For now, I wouldn't see a major reason for concern there. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Kai. I can see that there are no further callers in the Q&A queue. We see another one pop up. This is Mifil Feraykut from ING. Good morning. Thank you for the presentation, and thank you for taking my questions. I have two. I will ask them one by one. The first one is, do you have any updates on the Well House development? You stated you'd be looking at multiple ways to de-risk the project. Could you elaborate on it? Yes, we can. Ever since we sold Landeport at the beginning of last year to ING, we've been looking at recycling this project and see whether or not it's going to be feasible from an economic point of view. That is an ongoing process, and we should hope to have more clarity in the second half. Expect more of a detailed update on that in the full-year results at the end of this year. Okay. Great. The second question, as you mentioned in the press release, is to be open to a contribution in kind. Could you provide any comments on that and maybe also specific views on growing through a joint venture structure? Thank you. Fair question. That sentence is in there. It's actually not that we're sort of trying to pre-signal that anything is upcoming, so be ready for it. It's actually also a signal to the direct market that we're willing to have the conversation about these types of deals. In a market where we said there is very limited liquidity for some sellers, it may well be an option to look at this. We're signaling that we're open to engage. We've seen some of our peers do this, and it can make sense in certain cases to do the deals on that basis. Joint ventures are possible. It's something that we've looked at. May well happen. Also, if you think about the potential for residential conversion in our own portfolio, residential is a slightly different skill set. We may have the plot, but we may not necessarily be the developer of that plot. We'll see how that sort of evolves over the coming period. Again, if there's something, that's something more likely to be a next year's thing than this year. Okay, that's clear. Thank you. Thank you. Again, the Q&A queue is empty. I'd like to request you a final time to either join the Q&A queue or else we will call it a day and finalize the presentation. Okay, no more further joiners. This is where we end the presentation. Thank you for joining. If you have any further questions, please feel free to reach out to me. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now.