Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the PostNL Q3 2022 analyst call. At this moment, all participants are in a listen-only mode, and after the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Now, I would like to hand over the conference call to Mr. Jochem van de Laarschot, Director Communications and Investor Relations at PostNL. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you, operator. Good morning. Thank you for joining to all. With me here in the room are Herna Verhagen and Pim Berendsen of our board of management to go through the presentation, which should be on your screen, and you can also find on our website to be followed by Q&A. Pim, over to you. Thank you, Jochem, and good morning to all of you. Let's start with the first slide with our key takeaways, and obviously, these key elements were already flagged on the twenty-first of October when we released the trading update. It's clear that macroeconomic conditions have deteriorated further since our Q2 half year results in August, and driven basically by two main drivers. All-time high inflation levels and at the same time, consumer confidence being very low has had put pressure on our consumer spending and as such, on growth expectations for our e-commerce business. Obviously, the higher inflation rates have pushed up even more than at half year numbers, the organic cost increases that we have to absorb. As a consequence, volumes at parcels were below expectations, domestic growth of around 1%, overall -1.1%, driven by a decline in cross-border. Mail volumes were in line with expectations, being 9.3% down on reported levels, and roughly speaking, 7.5%, 7.6% down if you correct for the non-recurring COVID in Q3 2021. The free cash flow performance obviously reflects a step down in normalized EBIT, as well as negative working capital phasing. In other words, we've had settlements on bilateral terminal dues that were settled in the third quarter and will not repeat itself in that sense in the fourth quarter. We're continuing making progress with our ESG objectives with a 23% carbon efficiency improvement since full year 2021, and we continue to accelerate our digital transformation program. Negotiations on the collective labor agreements for PostNL and Saturday deliverers is well underway. If we then go to the next slide, and there's obviously a few highlights that you might have seen, that indicate that there's less spending on products, and there's also a fair amount of uncertainty on the volume development on the e-commerce front. It's also clearly the case that our customers find it very difficult at this point in time to predict where volume will go. We do expect that this challenging and uncertain environment is to continue for the next quarters to come, and that's also why it's very difficult at this point in time to give a precise view on volume development for the remainder of the year. Nevertheless, we do expect a significant peak period. A ramp-up is already starting, and more or less the same volumes as last year is our current expectation. As said, uncertainty is large. Let's move to the other element there. This previous slide really talked about consumer spending and the drivers behind it. The next slide, which is slide four, talks about the unprecedented inflation that cannot be absorbed within the year by regular price increases. It's the bridge that you've seen before, at least until the EUR 100 million assumed total organic cost increases that were reported on the 8th of August. There's two components of additional organic cost increases. One that actually impacts the bottom line, which is roughly speaking EUR 10 million additional for the collective labor agreement negotiations. The other EUR 25 million organic cost increases is for cross-border activities that were in the previous quarters, reported in several other buckets. We basically have taken that out just to really show the overall organic cost increases that we have to carry. The last element does not change, does not impact the bottom line expectations. If you then look at regular price increases, you end up with a gap of, roughly speaking, EUR 80 million that we cannot offset in year through price measures. That's obviously the reason that we've taken several mitigating actions to compensate at least as much as we can part of this. I'll get back to those in a few slides later on. If we then look at slide five, although it's obviously a Q3 report, I thought it was wise to spend a bit of time on the year-to-date parcels performance, and that's slide five. Obviously you see a big volume impact, because of the drivers we just discussed, a positive price mix, but obviously not enough to absorb the organic costs that are EUR 47 million year to date within the parcel segment. Volume dependent cost is basically countering part of the volume loss. Other cost, EUR 3 million includes scaling operations, and a big element is the other cost development here as well, and you've seen that back in each of the quarterly reports. We also see comparison to last year, a big step down in Belgium, big step down in logistics, and also Spring is still not performing better than last year. That basically leads to the year-to-date performance of parcels of EUR 32 million. Obviously, please be aware that if you compare it with last year, you need to correct, roughly speaking, EUR 40 million for the non-recurring COVID effect. Slide six talks about all measures that we're currently taking to secure the financial position of PostNL and to secure the balance sheet as much as we can. There's operational measures that are really focused on scaling the operations with the latest views on volumes. We have to do that in a very tight labor market, so that restricts us a little bit, but we at the same time need to ensure the flexibility for peak season so that we can safeguard the consumer and customer service levels that we've agreed. We're continuously optimizing our routes, staffing and fleet optimization, and obviously we continue with the cost saving programs at Mail in the Netherlands that are a bit back-end loaded within the year. If you talk about additional cost measures, they are much more related to kind of the indirect or overhead costs of the group, both at group level as well as at parcel level. Already briefly talked about the balance sheet. It's not only that we look at mitigating measures on the P&L side, but also really on the balance sheet elements like CapEx leases, but also working capital management. Active yield management continues to be in place, so we try to find optimizations within the agreements that we have. But more importantly, this will be a key element for contract negotiations that are currently ongoing for 2023. On slide seven, you'll find the quarters. For Q4, we expect a significant step up in performance in comparison to Q3 obviously. We do expect, as I said, roughly speaking, the same amount of volume in parcels as last year. We're very much prepared for the peak days with, roughly speaking, 2x the normal volume per parcels. Well, inflationary cost elements will continue to impact the fourth quarter. As I said, cost savings in Mail in the Netherlands are back-end loaded. We do not see currently, nor do we expect a significant improvement in the cross-border space. Slide eight talks about the strategy. We've not, while considering all the mitigating actions and measures we just talked about, we've not changed our strategy, nor do we plan to do so. Obviously, we think about, well, where do we smartly place certain investments, and that are related- Please enter your conference dial and PIN, and press pound when finished. The PIN you entered is not valid. Please enter your conference dial and PIN, and press pound when finished. Please enter your conference dial and PIN, and press- In other results, you see higher costs for international mail and also including their negative FX effects, relating to the higher SDR rates than originally budgeted for, which brings the normalized EBIT at -1 for the quarter. On slide 14, we'll look at the cash flow. Obviously, the bridge starts with the -20 normalized EBIT bridge, EUR 37 million of D&A, EUR 36 million of CapEx in the quarter. We've reduced the CapEx levels for the entire year to bring it more in line with volume development. You see a significantly higher than last year change in working capital, which is in part related to the terminal dues settlements in this year. The other elements are more or less in line with last year. There's a tax refund in 2022 that makes it a positive +5 in the quarter, bringing it in total to -EUR 49 million. On slide 15, you'll see the balance sheet. Our cash position decreased in the quarter, which is obviously related to, in part, the business performance, but also in relation to the payout of the interim dividends of roughly EUR 50 million that was paid in August. All in all, that impacts our adjusted net debt position quite significantly. If you compare the adjusted net debt of the end of 2021 towards the position for October 1st, you see a deterioration of, well, close to EUR 400 million, which is obviously very significant, in part relation to the share buyback program, to the dividends paid, but also the lower cash as a consequence of lower results in this unprecedented time. We're doing everything we can to keep this balance sheet strong and to make sure that we try to not exceed the 2x adjusted EBITDA as our leverage ratio. That's also why we take mitigating actions in the level of CapEx, the level of lease additions that we add, as well as our working capital position. We go to slide 16. Well, as discussed, in this challenging environment with record high levels of inflation and lower consumer confidence, weak global trade and no signs of an improvement, it's really difficult to be precise in what to expect. Because of that, we just take all necessary measures to mitigate these consequences as much as we can to keep a focus on our competitive position and executing our strategy. At the same time, making sure that our balance sheet stays strong. That is what we aim for. We're heading now towards a very busy peak season, in any event, very busy. We're well prepared for that to deliver twice as many parcels as on a regular day. To make sure that we're able to fulfill the requirements for our consumers and customers, at the same time. That concludes the introduction presentation, so I think we can now move on, Jochem, to the Q&A part of this. Yes. morning's call. Thank you. Pim, a brief problem with audio we had during slide eight via the webcast. We will make sure that you can hear that back in the replay and also read it back in the transcript. Apologies for that. Operator, please start the Q&A. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, you will need to press star one and one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Your first question comes from the line of Frank Claassen. Please ask your question. Yes. Good morning, all. Frank Claassen of Degroof Petercam. Two questions, please. First of all, last year in the summer, you have highlighted new targets, 2024 targets, some revenue targets and also some additional growth CapEx of EUR 450 million. How should we now look at these 2024 targets, given the new environment? Secondly, you assume flat volumes for parcels in Q4. What do you base that assumption on? Can you elaborate on that? What have you seen so far in the quarter? What if there will be a decline? Can you adjust your cost base still or could you elaborate on that, please? Thank you. Thank you, Frank, for your questions. Last year summer, we introduced a perspective on 2024 on the back of a step-up in investments. We wanted to indicate obviously what the benefit was going to be on that step-up in investments, and those did relate to our Digital Next program, as well as on more investments in parcels, given the volume expectations at that point in time. Clearly, we've now seen very, very different market circumstances within 2022. I also try to say that it's not easy to predict volumes from today onwards to the end of the year, let alone that I now can already say something about 2023 and 2024. What is obviously clear is that kind of the baseline has moved significantly away from us. The expected outcome in volumes for 2022 will be significantly different than we did expect at the time that we introduced that perspective on 2024, and growth rates might also have slowed down given the specific markets and circumstances that we talked about. More precise, I cannot be at this point in time, given the high level of uncertainty and the big spread in potential volume scenarios, that we're looking at. That comes back to your second question. Flat volumes for parcels, where do you base that on, and what is kinda the progress so far within the quarter? Yeah. As said, there's a level of uncertainty around those volume expectations. It's a function of what our customers tell us. It's a function of our own data analytics on the trend lines that we do see. That is basically indicating, roughly speaking, more or less the same volumes as a fourth quarter last year. That then requires a pretty significant step up from September volumes towards October, and I think in the dailies and the weeklies, we do see that step up in absolute volume. That is at least a sign that is positive in relation to that flatline volume expectation. Okay. Now, the second part of that second question was, what if this is not reality and you come up short in terms of volume, can you then still do something in terms of cost? I think the fair answer is not really that much anymore. We are in this tight labor market. We've in preparation of the peak period, done whatever we can to optimize the cost base. Given this volume expectation, we've locked in transport routes, we've optimized the routing matrix between the depots, and we've taken on board the people that we think we need to make sure that we deliver the service our customers want. If it becomes significantly off, then it will have positive or negative financial consequences. The cost base will not move much, in the fourth quarter anymore. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. We will take our next question. It is from the line of Marc Zwartsenburg from ING. Please ask your question. Yes, thank you, operator, for passing me on. A couple of questions from my side. First, Pim, to clarify, you mentioned an additional organic cost increase up to EUR 10 million related to the CLA increase. Are you referring to the current CLA negotiations that are running and that when you reach an agreement will be backward-looking? Can you explain maybe where that EUR 10 million refers to and how this exactly works as from which date that this then would come in? That's my first question. Then on the cost savings, 'cause I recall at Q2 that these cost savings, particularly Mail NL, were back-end loaded. Can you give us a bit of a feel for what kind of cost saving we should expect in the Mail NL division for Q4? Then a question on Spring and logistics. You mentioned cross-border not seeing much of a recovery. If I take your flowchart and look at what you've been performing last year, it must have been loss-making in Q3. But yeah, it was only slightly profitable in the first half. Would it also still be loss-making, Spring and logistics, in for the full year of 2022 since there is no recovery there? Can you share a bit what the performance is of that business and also how you can, 'cause it's a broken model, how do you see that developing forward if things stay stable? Would you then easily be able to shed some cost and be able to report positive numbers there? On your balance sheet, obviously, we don't know exactly where we will come out for the full year, otherwise we would have an outlook. What if you would come in? Do you still expect the leverage ratio, so the net debt to EBITDA, to remain below 2x? If not, would that have any impact on your dividend or on your share buyback program? Those were my questions. All right. Thank you, Mark. First question related to the EUR 10 million in the organic cost bridge, that is basically the step-up in cost that we do expect in the current collective labor agreement negotiations. They're obviously driven by higher inflation rates, have well required us to step up the increased percentages that we currently assume, and that has had within the year this effect. That is indeed assuming a retroactive effect until April 1st of this year, which was the kind of the termination date of the previous collective labor agreement. That is point one. On the Spring and logistics part, I think we need to detail that out a bit further. It's not only Spring and logistics, it's other kind other results, also includes Belgium, for instance. Spring is not loss-making. Spring will not be loss-making full year either. There is definitely significant downsides in the transportation components of other businesses. Our transport business suffers from higher organic cost increases and lower volumes as well. Our logistics business basically missed a home and garden season. We talked about that before, and also saw a deterioration margin development, and Belgium is loss-making at this point in time, as a consequence of lower volume expectations, higher organic costs, as well. It's a combination of those elements that make this loss such a big step down year to date of -EUR 62 million. Logistics is a combination of different businesses. Some are doing okay. As I said, the parts of the business that are related to transportation are suffering from the same market dynamics as our domestic parcels business is. If we talk about the balance sheet, then Pim, can I go back to this one? If you take it all together, 'cause I know it's a lot of moving parts, if you take Spring and logistics plus other all together, would it still be profitable for the full year? Get a feel for- If you take it all together, probably not. Okay. Yeah. As I said, Spring will be. Yeah. On the balance sheet, we're obviously aiming to stay below the two. That is what we're aiming for. We think we can get there assuming the parcel volumes come in, as we just said, roughly speaking, at the level of last year. Then obviously it also assumes that kind of the mail performance, if you talk about Christmas cards, comes in accordance with expectations. As I said, if I had a number, I would have been as transparent as I've been in the past to put it on sheet. We're aiming to get to an adjusted net debt over EBITDA not exceeding the two. That's also why the mitigating actions are not only focused on the P&L, but as much on the balance sheet. I skipped one of your questions that was related to the cost savings being back-end loaded in mail. Roughly speaking, I would say that in the fourth quarter, an additional, let's say, EUR 8 million-EUR 10 million of cost savings need to be realized. That's a function of very many different projects and not one single thing. We're quite comfortable that we'll get there. Some of the initiatives, Mark, which we introduced in 2022 are back-end loaded, so they will get in more cost savings in the later part of the year. Did we lose connection? Yeah. Operator, next question, please. Of course. Thank you. We will take our next question. The question comes from the line of Marco Limite from Barclays. Please ask your question. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. My first question is about one of your slides where you mentioned that you are aiming to move on your own payroll about 50% of the workforce. I think in the past you have mentioned at the moment about 70% of the parcel deliveries are outsourced. Since there is a small change in the strategy there, can you just clarify why are you changing that? You know, what has changed compared to the past that is making you slightly adjusting your strategy there? My second question is again on the balance sheet and your target of 2x net EBITDA. I was just wondering what in your view, to what extent in your view you can trim CapEx. For example, if I look at, you know, the CapEx numbers in 2017, 2018, 2019, the run rate was about EUR 60 million-EUR 70 million of CapEx. You are clearly, you know, in the past you put out a target of a much higher CapEx. I'm just wondering how much of the future CapEx is already committed. If you think in a, let's say, low single-digit volume growth scenario, you can trim CapEx as much as to, you know, going back to the sort of maintenance CapEx, therefore EUR 70 million-EUR 80 million. Still on this angle, I would say, clearly, you know, you're in the past when you have paid out your dividend about historically about 40% of the dividend was a share dividend and therefore wasn't a cash outflow. When we think about, you know, if you want to keep your current dividend policy as sustainable, I guess you need to achieve a full free cash flow coverage of your dividends. I'm just wondering what when you do your budgeting plan and your, you know, free cash flow forecast, are you assuming the dividend to be paid out fully cash or you assume, you know, still that the 40%- 60% historical proportion hold up? Just to understand what you think about the free cash flow coverage of the dividend in the future. Thank you. I'll take your first question on the workforce within our parcel or e-commerce segment. We did indeed change our policy. What we also did say is that this policy change will take quite some years to move the percentage of own parcel drivers up to around 40%-50%. The reason why we want to change is to create over time a more sustainable workforce and then sustainable meant in a few ways, sustainable in the sense that we do want to have grip on a certain part of our network. Secondly, when it comes to sustainability CO2 emission, it helps us in the speed of CO2 emission reduction to have our own people with own fleet. We do think that moving forward with the changes that we also want to start working with bigger delivery partners. We do think that it will help us creating a more sustainable workforce and a more sustainable network going forward. As said, it will take time and it is not done overnight. That's what we also said when we communicated beginning or end of August. I think the second question on the balance sheet we move over to Pim. Yeah. Thank you for your questions, Marco. On the balance sheet, well, we can trim down CapEx to some extent, obviously, because that's also what we indicated before. If we look at lower volume expectations and we've got a longer planning horizon, we can adjust particularly the network expansion CapEx to that volume scenario. Also we've done that within the year 2022 already, because in the beginning we were anticipating CapEx levels of roughly speaking around about EUR 160 million mark. While today we do not expect it to be more than EUR 120 million-EUR 130 million by the end of the year. To go back to kind of the, what you call the normal maintenance levels of EUR 70 million-EUR 80 million, that will probably be too much. Also, given the fact that, as we said, we'll continue with executing on our strategic plans that requires investments in Digital Next, that does require investments in sustainability. Going back to that level is not really what we have in mind. Obviously we'll tune the level of investments for 2023 once we have the top line forecast at that level of volume growth to make sure, and that comes back to your third component, that we try to aim for a free cash flow that is enough to at least pay for the cash dividends of it. Preferably, obviously more, but at least the cash component of it. Obviously, that has never been based on a 100% cash dividend. Your 40%-60% has changed over the last couple of periods also because of the fact that we have a bigger shareholder that takes cash, and not shares. That kind of shifted already to, I think, roughly speaking, 55% cash, 45% shares. On that relative balance, we seek to get to a free cash flow level that is sufficient to sustain that. As said, it all starts with volume expectations for 2023. At this point in time, that's just too early. We're working on various scenarios, but it's just too early to say something more about that. Very clear. Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one and one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from the line of Henk Slotboom from the IDEA!. Please ask your question. Good morning. Thanks for the presentation, Pim and Herna, and thanks for taking my questions. I've got a few left. You want me to do it straight all together, or can I take them one by one? Whatever, whatever you prefer. If you wanna do it step by step, also fine. If you want to shoot them first, I'll try to remember them, and otherwise you just need to remind me. Do them by turn. First of all, this is the time of year that the tariff negotiations take place in parcels for the larger clients. What is your first take? Do you feel there is sufficient room to absorb the cost inflation you will undoubtedly experience next year as well? The fuel prices are remaining high. There's an increase in the minimum wage, in the legal minimum wage, as of January. Undoubtedly other costs will increase as well. What is your first take of what you're seeing at this point in time? Yeah, a good question, but at the same time a delicate question, because obviously that is the comparative, sensitive part of all of this. Let's say my take is that, we talked about different type of contracts. There's contracts with fixed indexation parameters in it, and those will materialize. Maybe not for 100% indexation given the height of it, but at least a very, very significant part. Then there's a few contract renegotiations of bigger clients, and there we obviously need to be aware of the competitive position as well. There it's all about moving smartly and carefully to strike the best possible balance in not losing market share in a market with a little bit of overcapacity, and at the same time cover as much of the organic cost increases that you quite rightly pointed out, just to mitigate the impact, on our P&L. We're doing both. I will see undoubtedly higher, price mix consequences and price increases than over the last couple of years. Now, how much of the organic cost increase can actually be sheltered because of that? That is part of the current negotiations. Clients do understand that costs have moved up, but at the same time, they're in the same marketplace, right? They also see lower consumer spending hitting their P&L. That leads to a tension in the value chain. That's also why you need to be smart on trying to find alternative ways to also find efficiency improvements that can help you bridging the gap together with your clients as well a bit. Okay. In the press release, Herna already mentioned that the economic headwinds are likely to sustain for some quarters to come. Now the fourth quarter, you already said I've basically locked in the capacity I need, I expect to need, and there's very little you can do. Traditionally, the first quarter of the year is a seasonally weak quarter. Can we expect, given the fact that you're obviously experiencing difficult times, or more difficult, more challenging times ahead, that you will bring down the cost further, that you can bring down the cost further going into 2023? Will the measures that we can find on the first page of the press release be sufficient, or does it will it take more than just that? Well, if, let's say, talking about the first quarter of 2023, yes, the cost will come down not because we've locked in those volumes as part of our peak process for this couple of months. [We have not locked in for Q1 2023]. That is one. Whether or not the mitigating actions will be enough, that is a function of volume expectations going forward. If not, we'll take additional measures to compensate as much as we can. Mm-hmm. Okay. Staying with parcels. A couple of weeks ago in the call concerning the Trading update. Sorry? Concerning the trading update. The trading update. Yeah, well, trading update. Proper warning. It was a bit of both. Let me put it that way. You have currently 400 APMs installed in the Netherlands. Now, in the fantastic city of Wijk bij Duurstede, we already have two Albert Heijns and two Budbee locker boxes. It's not the first place in the world where the Budbees and whatever focus on when putting APMs. How do you see the competitive environment from that side? You already mentioned we see a bit of overcapacity in the market or a number of new kids on the block. Budbee will merge with Instabox. DHL has already said that they will come with a new proposition concerning letterbox parcels. Can you give me some more color how you look at it, and what it could mean for you going into 2023? Yeah. I think the market of the APLs is an important market. We indeed will come to around 600 probably by the end of the year on APLs, and our aim is to have 1,500 in 2024. These are not the big amounts when it comes to CapEx. I have to be very clear. Mm-hmm. On the other side, when you think about 1,500 APL, or parcel lockers, that probably, if you fill them very efficient, is probably 3%-4% or 4%-5% of your total parcel volume. Mm-hmm. It's absolutely not the case that via those lockers you can help the market to big amounts. That's not what it is. Mm-hmm. We do think that those parcel lockers are important for a few reasons. The first one is that, you have to be at strategic places. What we try to do, at least in this year, where we, of course place the first 600 is to take those, what we call strategic positions. I think that's one. Secondly, those APLs are placed also in the neighborhoods of retail locations, which are in many of the, peak season moments during the year do not have enough storage capacity. For us, it also helps in periods where, it is very busy to have a certain overflow from a retail stores to those, APLs. We do think that when it comes to convenience for customers, at least some of our customers, that APL or parcel locker is important. On the other hand, the parcel lockers will have of course a totally different position in our view, in our future delivery network than it has, for example, in Poland, where InPost is huge. That has to do with the size of the country, the density of the country, but also the fact that we already have delivery networks which are efficient, and which of course are very dense. In that sense, it will have a different position than in other countries, but in our view, it is strategically important. As said, it's not the big amount when it comes to investments. If I may add on this, Henk, let's say, I think it is also clear that also these competitors are in a different market dynamic than they envisioned. In other words, they did have business models that were really focused on growth and growth only at the expense of cash flow, so to speak. Also they need to manage their cash runway and their balance sheet better in this market environment. It's not to say that they will continue with the pace of rolling them out as quickly as they've done so prior to these changes in market circumstances. Does that also apply for the Amazons and bol.coms of this world? Because Amazon has a hub in Amsterdam, they have a hub in Rotterdam, they have a hub recently opened in Antwerp. I mean, if you can take parcels from Waalwijk into Belgium, then you can surely take parcels from Antwerp into the south of the Netherlands as well. I know, I'm aware that Amazon is not your biggest client. It's something that will more affect your German colleagues. Bol is a large client, and bol has also a deal via its parent company, Albert Heijn, with Budbee slash Instabox, because the two will merge. It's not only parcel lockers, but Budbee has a bicycle network. Cycloon is a bicycle network. They cover over 80 cities already. How do you see that insourcing trend? Is that something that will play a role going into 2023, or is that something that might play on a somewhat longer period because the sluggish growth is pushing everybody to postpone a little bit of its plans? I would not compare Amazon to bol, to be honest, so Amazon has worldwide, a clear strategy when it comes to delivery, and that is that in dense areas, they do the delivery themselves. That's what you have seen them doing, of course, in the Netherlands, also in the period when they still had very small amounts of volume. Mm-hmm. I assume that they will continue that to expand and to fill their network. When it comes to bicycle delivery, it is, of course, as it was when we had, of course, Instabox, but also Coolblue have their own delivery. In our view, it is part of the delivery market going forward, that there are certain parts or certain elements in that market, that are done by companies themselves or by different companies who offer different solutions. In our assumptions, we take into account the fact that when we think about this market, it will not all be a market which is next day or where you need to have a dense network in all parts of the Netherlands. That's one. Secondly, if you think about the big amounts of volume that needs to be distributed and delivered, therefore you need also different tools than only bicycles. Let's be clear about that as well. It's, of course, an element in the market, but it will not be the biggest element in the market. That's second. Thirdly, we do think that these companies are hit by the fact that, of course, they see their growth disappearing at this moment in time, and therefore, I think they have different worries when it comes to investments, CapEx, et cetera, et cetera, than investing in expanding their cycle networks. I've got two very small questions left on mail. First of all, how many Christmas cards did PostNL handle last year? Do you have a ballpark figure? Is it something like 120 million or so? By far not, but we stopped giving numbers already quite some years ago, Henk. By far not. Okay. The last question is, in the presentation, we can see that the mix in mail improved. What caused that? Because last year was still positively impacted by the COVID mail, albeit less, of course, than in the first couple of quarters. What caused the improvement of the mix in mail? Partly, the fact that of course there was a little bit less of direct mail, et cetera, so the low-priced goods. Partly, it's the development of letterbox parcels. There are a few elements which helped, of course, the development of that price together with where possible, we added, of course, fuel surcharges, et cetera. Okay. Well, thanks for all the answers and, thanks for allowing me all those questions. Super. Thank you. No problem. Thank you. We will take our next question. The question comes from the line of Stefano Toffano from ABN AMRO - ODDO BHF. Please ask your question. Yes, good morning, everybody. Thank you for the answers so far. Very quickly, again, a question on the balance sheet, because clearly the fourth quarter is important, but if we take a back-of-the-envelope calculation, and we assume the next quarter to be the same as last year, we will have PostNL very close to the 2.0 on net debt to EBITDA. That would then be the starting point for, excuse me, next year. Again, not so much flexibility. Maybe a question regarding this at some point. Obviously, there is the trade-off between CapEx and higher investment, or in this case, lower investment and the dividend payouts. You obviously don't want to have this discussion every quarter. You will want to have some flexibility. At some point, when does, you know, lower costs and lower CapEx start to hurt future growth? This is the first question. The second question is also maybe in terms exactly this, what you see in terms of competition, because some of the competitor have been aggressively continuing to invest, and you don't want your competitive position soon to erode. I don't know if you can maybe comment a little bit on that as well. Maybe a third question is again, specific on the parcel machines, because we have seen at some places that higher costs of two-door have driven increased adoption of APMs. I don't know if in that sense is something that might hurt you going forward. Thank you. Okay. Well, I think your first point, let's say, your calculation shows that we're gonna be close to the 2, and well, let's say close is in a way, let's say the right way to look at it. It's gonna be close towards that number based on the expectations that we have. As said, we aim to keep it below the 2. It will not be significantly below the 2 on the back of your assumptions. That is absolutely right. How that will then subsequently evolve during 2023 is obviously a function of the volume and EBIT expectations, and then the relevant components that bring EBIT, EBITDA to cash flow, right? At this point in time, we just don't know what the top line's gonna be, and we'll base the levels of investment and working capital requirements on those very different volume scenarios that we'll look at. By the time that it is fourth quarter, we have these analysis behind us, and then I certainly can say a bit more on it than I can do today, given, as said, the fair amount of uncertainty on volume developments going forward. Obviously, we'll try to make sure that we further improve on the 2x adjusted EBITDA and leverage ratio. That's what we're aiming for. The function, basically the answer on the question, what if you have too little flexibility, will you then basically surrender your longer term e-commerce growth expectations by taking out too much of investments that could deteriorate your competitive position? Obviously, that is not what we plan for. We wanna keep the competitive position as competitive as we currently are. That's also why on one of the earlier questions of Marco, I said, we'll not go back to the roughly speaking EUR 70 million-EUR 80 million maintenance CapEx only. Because at the end of the day, although hit by very, very complex market circumstances, we do expect e-commerce to continue to grow on the back of online penetration growing market share from offline, and over time, with lower inflation rates, consumer spending will at some point in time come back and reinforce the growth through online penetration as well. Indeed, we need to strike a careful balance between short-term performance, short-term balance sheet requirements, as well as long-term growth expectations that we continue to expect will be there. To what extent, you need to be a bit patient, I'm afraid, because there, we need the volume scenarios and the indication of how much quarters of this, more we need to expect. On the APL, I think Herna tried to explain it is strategically relevant, but it's really a small part of overall volumes that we carry. I don't think it will move the needle in terms of efficiency, volume being delivered through an APL or investment levels in comparison to the other drivers of the business. I think what plays a role as well in the Netherlands is that price differences between APL delivery and door-to-door delivery are almost nil, and that is because of the density of the amount of parcels we deliver. All right. Okay, I think that sums up our call for analysts around the Q3 results. Thank you for joining us. If you have any further questions, you know where to find the IR team. As I said already, the replay and transcript of this call will be available soon on our website. Thanks and see you next time. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.