Good morning, everyone here in Amsterdam, the Okura Hotel, for the presentation of the half year results. Also, warm welcome to everyone in the audience of the webcast. Before I go to the, I have to move this, to the presentation, I like to point out to the cautionary note regarding forward-looking statements. We have nice key messages, and we can start with the fact that we delivered a strong set of results, both in the half year and especially in Q2, with an organic growth of 18% in turnover and 67.5% in result. What we see is that Vision Technologies performed very well and Electrification performed very well. The underlying performance is related to high market demand in Vision Technology. What we saw in Automated machinery is that we are still impacted with a lower order intake, and that has mainly to do with geopolitical circumstances, and that led to postponement of orders. I have to mention that we have a very good pipeline of orders and we are looking forward that these orders are coming in in the coming quarters. What we saw is that within Electrification, we had an especially good performance in the Eemshaven, strong improvement in output and also the yield improvements. But also in onshore energy, we saw that there was a very good performance, very high growth rate due to the fact that we have a very good order book there, and also that the installation of the projects of the cable is running at a much more smooth trajectory. The separation process is well on track. Important strategic development within the TKH Group, of course, the separation of the Automation and the Electrification activities. We have come in with a new segmentation to address the pure Electrification activities and then the other activities within Electrification. I believe that helps the transparency and information stream to make the right analysis of our business. What we also did is that we upgraded or replaced the forecast for Electrification into a medium-term guidance. In that medium-term guidance, we upgraded the organic growth, and that has mainly to do with the fact that we see a better performance, higher demand in the onshore Electrification activities. I go in detail now to the half year results, Q2. Especially important to mention, besides all the growth rates here, is the order intake. I believe a very good development of the order intake, more than EUR 500 million. We have to take into account that the order intake in the Automated machinery division was really low. So when that comes back, I believe we are performing really well. What is also good to see that not only the comparison towards 2025 showed very nice growth figures, but also the comparison to Q1 2026 showed a very good performance. The half year performance, I mentioned that we are quite happy with a 40% organic growth. Very nice development of the EBITDA, + 43.5%. We have a stable added value, and a quite high added value. I come back later to that, especially when we look into the separate divisions. What is important to mention here is the innovation rate. It is still a quite high innovation rate. We have seen years where we have been above 20%, but taking into account a very high organic growth, we still keep up with an innovation rate of above 16%. I believe we are doing a quite good job. To remind you that the innovation rate is a really growth engine to gain market share, and I believe we are doing a quite good job there in several areas where we have seen that the market share increased. Also important to mention here is the award we got from EcoVadis. We are, with VMI, in the top 1% of companies in respect of the sustainability rating. Very important building stone for TKH in addressing our market and desires of our customers to be a very sustainable company. Not only sustainable as a company, but also especially sustainable with our technologies that can help our customers to improve their sustainability performance. The separation activities are on track. We made good steps, especially with the preparation for the EGM to get shareholder approval for the proposed separation. We are doing that on a voluntary basis. We are not yet meeting the criteria that it is an obligation, but we consider the views and support of our shareholders as very important for the separation process. I move into the different divisions. I would like to mention here with the vision technologies, especially the high added value, we continue to perform on a very high added value in this activity, which again proves the technology leadership we have here. In that respect, the performance and the rewards we get from our customers to get a good margin. That translated now in the first half year in a return on sales of more than 20%. Very healthy activity, especially also if we look at the order book, which increased substantially. That means also that for the second half year, we are positive in respect of the expectations and the strong order book is a good support there. Automated machinery, I believe still a very good performance. We saw the turnover coming down, was not a surprise based on the order intake, which has been running at a lower pace in the last three, four quarters. As I mentioned before, we see a very good order project pipeline, but postponements by many of our customers. We can come back later if you have more questions about that. The return on sales still at a good level of 16%. It is a cyclical activity, but keeping up the EBIT margin, the return on sales at 16%, I believe, is a very good job. We see here, of course, that the order book came down substantially. We need, in that respect, also additional orders to get our performance also in relation to 2027. What is very good, we did not lose any market share. That is, I believe, a key message here, and that the long-term drivers for the high-end equipment that we have in our portfolio, the need for greater production efficiency, increased sustainability, and especially also the higher levels of automation are really positioning ourselves at the key trends and the technology advantages that we have. Electrification, a very nice step up in the return on sales. We are reporting now especially also the EBITDA margin, which is, let's say, common practice in the cable industry with our peers. There we see a very nice EBITDA margin already of 12.6%. With respect to the medium-term guidance of 19%, there is still headroom for growth, and that will especially happen through the further utilization of the capacity that we have in our hands. What we do also for the first time is split up the turnover for the three areas within the electrification activities. Again, this is the pure electrification activities consisting of four companies in the TKH Group. Very substantial growth within the offshore energy, which confirms the higher utilization rate. Good improvements of the yield in the factories. We solved the majority of the issues. We did several upgrades, and again, that was mainly fine-tuning of the technology to get where we wanted to be. The outlook is also quite positive for the offshore wind. With about 92 tenders we are participating in, with a total demand of more than 14,000 km. Within onshore energy, it is important to mention the EUR 1.4 billion framework agreements that we have signed. We cannot put that into the order book. So the order book is a little bit more than EUR 500 million, but it does not include, of course, the framework agreements. But it gives you a good outlook, a good fundament to value, let's say, what the potential is of the onshore business also for the future. Specialty cables did a quite good job. The German market was really affected with much lower investment levels in the capital goods market, but they still were able to increase the turnover with 2%. With respect to the outlook, we see that the improved operational performance recorded during the first quarters of 2026 are expected to continue in the second half of 2026. For the first time, we report the other business, which consists for about 75% of digitalization activities. We saw a significant organic growth of more than 15%, and a very big step up in the profitability, which is mainly being the contribution of our fiber production activities that are located in China, with a very good performance of demand in the data center business and, of course, all the AI developments that you see where fiber optic is the product to do the data transmission. Also interesting to mention is the demand in the defense business. We saw also a substantial reduction of the cost in the activities. Last year, we closed down the activities of the fiber manufacturing in Holland, moved the capacity to Poland, and that helped us to have a much lower cost base, and that also supported the improvement of the return on sales. The medium-term guidance I already mentioned. We see a small upgrade of the organic turnover, and that is based mainly on the outlook for the medium-voltage and high-voltage cables for the onshore business. What is important to mention here is the last 12 months development of the turnover towards more than EUR 600 million turnover, which is a different reference base as we had when we communicated the targets at the Capital Markets Day in September last year. That was my last slide, and I'd like to hand over to Elling. Thank you, Alexander. Good morning, everyone. It is my pleasure to spend a few minutes on the financials of the first half. First of all, the segmentation. We discussed the segmentation in the Capital Markets Day in September 25, where, of course, the transition from the smart segments which we had in the past towards the automation and electrification segment was applicable. Full year 2025 was still reported under the, what you see here on the left part of the sheet, the Smart Vision, Smart Manufacturing, and Smart Connectivity segments. As of this year, we will be reporting conform the right part of the sheet here, automation, electrification. Also listening to the feedback of some of you, we have grouped all the to-be-divested activities in a segment called Other. Therefore, you have a very clear performance indicator on how the business is running in the automation and electrification segments. Also when you want to compare them to peers. Of course, we do not like that you have a lot of work to do with our reporting segment, but we facilitate this as well. As of this morning, the last three years' KPIs and reporting have been made available on the website of TKH, along the new segmentation as you see here on the right side. So you can update your models accordingly. Basically, the step from the left to the right had to do with the fact that we grouped, as I mentioned earlier, under the segment Others, those elements which are considered to be divested. Digitalization was already in that basket, but as you see, some other smaller activities have been entered into this segment as well. Moving on to the top line and the developments in a geographical way. If you look at the sheet here, Europe still remains roughly 60% of overall revenue. But you see, of course, the Netherlands creeping up a little bit. That is on the back of the high growth of the electrification business, which is very much centered in the Netherlands and some countries around us. A slight increase in Asia. That is on the back of further activities of our vision activities in Asia. North America, a substantial reduction as a share of the total revenue, and that is due to the fact that, especially on the tire building machines, there was less revenue base in North America than it was in the first half of 2025. Looking at the P&L, quite a couple of things, of course, already passed in the presentation of Alexander, but I just want to highlight a few things. If you look at the organic growth in the first half, 14% on top line. We had about EUR 16 million, or 1.9% of revenue in the category of divestments. Alphatronics and Dewetron were divested. They are also, of course, already in the adjusted figures in the Other segment, just to clarify that. If you look at our added value, Alexander mentioned slightly lower than the first half of last year. We have seen that electrification has grown its added value. So that is an important step. And as electrification has become a more important share in the whole, it means that it puts a little bit of pressure on the group added value, despite the fact that that segment, as I mentioned, saw an increase. Then, if you look at the EBITDA, 43.5% increase for the first half organically. I think that's fairly well. Also, operational costs are well under control. So from that point of view, a return on sales at EBITDA at 11.9% is a good level, I think. We had some one-off costs in the first half. As you are all aware, we are in full swing for the separation of electrification. That also brings some one-off expenses in the first half, as well as some of the divestments which we did. In total, EUR 4.5 million. If you look at the line result of associates, the proceeds or the net effect of the divestment of Alphatronics resulted a small EUR 3 million in one-off gain. And on the financial result, we had seen lower interest rates, and a slightly lower average depth compared to the first half last year. That helped a little bit, but foreign exchange effects basically caused the delta between first half 2025 and first half 2026. If you look at our tax rate, just over 24% as a normalized effective tax rate. Also something when you look at your models for 2026, a little bit too, in that same basket, we will probably end. On the balance sheet, of course, working capital is always a big topic. We have not been able, compared to the start of the year, to reduce the working capital as percentage of revenue. It's at 18.3%, and basically in euros, it increased by just over EUR 40 million, and that's in line with the actual growth organically of the group. Despite the fact that it's a slight increase, it has some, I would say, qualitative aspects to this as well. Because due to the fact that the order intake, especially in automated machineries in VMI, has been low, it also means that the down payments have been substantially lower than what we have seen in prior periods. And that is causing, in the end, an increase as a net effect on one side, improvements within some of the working capital items, but the lack of the down payments in the end brings the working capital up compared to where we started the year. And mind you, we, of course, always have a higher working capital at the middle of the year than at the end. And that's also what we are aiming for in 2026. Working capital leads to a further explanation on the net debt. Just over EUR 500 million. According to the bank confidence or leverage rate, we are at 1.8. Substantially different than the 2.6 we were last year. Of course, on the back of the improved results, this is a clear positive development. If you look at some of the main items here, cash flow from operations, you will see it in the next sheet in more detail, about EUR 95 million. But I think also here, the CapEx programs, both in tangibles and intangibles, close to EUR 30 million each in the first half. We expect this to be slightly lower in the second half. And of course, an important ticket as well has been the dividend payout in the second quarter. This leads basically to also the free cash flow as presented here. Also here, on the back of the swing in the working capital, we see that H1 is greatly impacted by the change in working capital. In the end, we end up a conversion of 15% low. But also here, we expect the second half to improve. On the right side, you see again an overview on how working capital ratio developed during the last couple of years. So far, the short explanation. The outlook, and again, I have to be a little bit different than the couple of years before where we had a much more extensive outlook, basically almost going at line item. We are not able to do that. It's not that we don't want, but in the current process we are in, we have a lot of restrictions in terms of guidance going forward as we are in a dual-track process for the electrification activities. So basically, what we say here is that we reiterate our outlook as we communicated during the results of the first quarter, and barring unforeseen circumstances, we expect organic growth in both turnover and adjusted EBITDA in 2026. That's short, I know, but that's all I can do for you at the moment. I think so far, the presentation part, we would like to open up for Q&A, please. Michael. Yep. Who's first? I was. Good morning, Michael Roeg, Degroof Petercam. I have a couple of questions. The first one on the balance sheet. Assets for sale was zero, even though your presentation showed the other category with a couple of activities for disposal, and the separation process may lead to a sale or an IPO or something else. I was a bit puzzled by that. It's not that we are not working on this. We definitely are executing this. But according to IFRS, you have to pass certain hurdles in order to get to this point that it becomes part of the assets held for sale structures. That's not yet meeting those requirements at this point in time. If I'm not mistaken, it should be likely that you sell something within 12 months for IFRS to put it in assets for sale. That applies to other? That's not the only criteria. There are a couple of more. It doesn't mean that we're not meeting the target in terms of timing, but there are some other criteria which make the overall evaluation like that. Okay. Clear. About the margin targets for the two activities. With automation, you are actually already within that range that you desire, even though tire manufacturing is currently experiencing some softness, cyclical softness. When that recovers, you are already above your target range. Why did you not raise it like you did with electrification? I think there are two points. Electrification is a clear moment in the sense that there is a different kind of trajectory on where, let's say, the next steps of electrification will go, and the communication about it. It doesn't mean that automation is in a dull area or whatever you want to call it. It's just the fact that where we currently are, we still have some time left before, let's say, the targets are being aimed for. In that period of time, of course, we will evaluate whether there is a necessary point to upgrade or, let's say, come in with a new target itself. It's not something we have foreseen right now. Once electrification is separated, would it make sense for you to put separate targets on vision systems and tire manufacturing systems? I think that's a very premature statement. Of course, once the separation takes place, for sure there will be communication about the road forward, the strategy, et cetera, of the automation group. That can be moments where these kind of topics will be discussed, but that's too premature at this point in time. Okay. My final question is on the electrification margin. It was 12.6%, and the goal is to reach more than 19%. During the presentation, you mentioned that utilization will be one of the big drivers. I was also wondering, will further efficiency improvements be a big component of that improvement? Is there still a lot of benefits to get from that? Yes, I can confirm that. There are still improvements, especially related to productivity. We did some, especially in that direction, investments in the past few years, and we are taking in the returns on these investments. That helps, of course, to get to a different, let's say, cost conversion in relation to the turnover, and that helps, of course, the bottom line percentage. Suppose that sales would remain flat in the next 12 months, then with efficiency improvements, there is already further margin upside? Yes. Okay. Yes. Clear. That's it. Thank you. Yep. Can I? Okay. Martijn den Drijver for ABN AMRO. My first question is for Alexander. What prompted the CEO change? Can you elaborate a little bit on why you decided, in conjunction obviously with the supervisory board, to lead electrification? I believe that, looking also at my age, that the future for TKH Group is in automation. I believe that there's a very good point to hand over that activity to a new leadership, bring also fresh blood in that area, so I can focus myself completely on the smooth transition of the separation of the electrification activities, which is a very important project and which also requires full attention. Just one follow-up. Does it have anything to do with the potential makeup of the acquirers of electrification, strategic versus private equity mainly? No, that is nice that you say that, but it's purely speculation. We'll see. Digitization is doing well, electrification is doing well. I'm assuming a sale. Let's hypothetically assume that it will be a sale for both units. The use of proceeds within the Capital Markets Day presentation was allocated primarily to shareholder remuneration, and a portion was allocated to continued M&A in automation. You have announced a new CEO. Will that allocation change or will it remain as is? Maybe just to make a small correction. We have mentioned a certain category or priority of deploying proceeds when we look at the capital allocation. Organic growth is the first thing in automation. We also look for a build and buy strategy. Then we have, of course, elements like share buyback dividends and that whole basket. We presented it slightly different, but I think that's important to highlight that. I think at the moment, this is the strategy which we have, this is the strategy we have communicated, this is the strategy we move on. I don't see much change in there. Okay, because normally CapEx and dividend could easily be paid from your free cash flow anyway. I still keep to the set of priorities as a list we work with. I'll move on. On the Eemshaven, how many kilometers did you actually manufacture in the first half? By extension, do you stand by that 600 km for the full year and that EBITA margin above 15% for offshore? As Elling already mentioned, we cannot be too specific on the, let's say, developments of the activities, especially not looking at forward. We are meeting all the customer requirements, and these customer requirements are close to the figure that you just mentioned. Okay. I'll leave it for now. Thank you. Maarten Verbeek, the IDEA!. I'd like to get back to electrification and also your new targets going forward. If I am correct, the base level for electrification is EUR 525 million of 2025 revenues. If I add 9%, you will need to achieve at least EUR 680 million in 2028. If I simply double this year's revenue, you are already roughly at that level. Are you very conservative? You mentioned already onshore energy will do much better, or are you very cautious about your offshore development going forward? Just to make clear, the reference point, the 9%, is starting as of June 30 2026. The reference is EUR 604 million going forward. We have not specifically mentioned 2028. We have mentioned midterm. What is midterm? The next couple of years. Okay. I am a bit surprised about the current pipeline for the inter-array consisting of 92 projects and over 14,000 km, because a while ago you mentioned it was only, between brackets, 11,500 km and 72 projects, more or less. The statement was always that is until 2030, whilst I only see cancellations and postponements. I am a bit puzzled by tremendous upgrade and outlook, whilst the market is showing actually the opposite. Yeah, it is not anymore until 2030. I believe, Jacqueline, it is 2032 that we are looking. That makes the reference base different. But yeah, of course, it is a fantastic outlook that we have. Okay. That is then clear. Lastly for the moment, you have upped the outlook for Electrification, for revenue, and your profitability, but you have not done so for your ROCE, which was between 18% and 23%. What will your ROCE be within this new set of targets? Yeah. That is a good question. I do not want to shy away from answering this. But the ROCE target is a little bit dependent on the final transaction structure and the actual, call it, opening balance sheet, which Electrification will start off with. Not having that level of flexibility where this may go in a target right now, this might be something we will address once the separation has been completed. But in September last year, you had a view about that. Correct. So what has changed in the meanwhile? You can say the actual process gives a little bit more dynamics to this, and the fact that we basically take back the 2028 target into a midterm target also gives a little bit of new flavor to the whole topic, and that is why we want to address it at the proper point in time. And that is once the transaction parameters have been clearly defined and then use that as a base point rather than constantly going back to assumptions which are no longer applicable going forward. Tijs Hollestelle, ING. Also a couple of questions. I do indeed appreciate the breakdown of the numbers, really helpful, especially indeed the revenue categories in the Electrification business. So I had a question about the order book. It is EUR 507 million, and I personally assume that most of that relates to offshore cable projects, because in specialty cables, it is kind of short notice orders, I guess. Well, short notice not really, but it has different dynamics, that is correct. But your assumption is right. Yeah. Then maybe in onshore cable, a few larger orders, but basically the same dynamic. So you have a lot of visibility in offshore cable production in the order book. That is correct. That is correct. In the past, I think you have guided for about EUR 170 million annual turnover in the subsea cable business. Yeah, looking at the first half, you are going to exceed that this year by a mile. Additional upside, let us say, into 2027. If operationally everything is running, what kind of annual sales levels are you calculating with for offshore? What we are calculating with is something which we are not able to disclose. Forward-looking statements related to Electrification in terms of what the second half or even 2027 will be. We have restrictions as we are in the dual-track process. I sympathize with the question you have, but I am not able to help you very much with it. Your assumption about order book is correct, and I think also about, in itself, the production capacities, et cetera, that I can confirm, but not the specific outlook. Okay. That is clear. Then in addition to what Martijn was asking, at what stage of an offshore wind development does a cable manufacturer typically get the order? That is about two years before the installation will be taking place. The installation of the foundations. Yeah. Two years before that. Yeah. You get the order, and then when you start producing? Yeah. Two years before. The order can be even longer before. That can go up to three, four years. But we start, and have the flexibility to start the manufacturing, in most cases, two years before the installation will be executed. Okay. That is helpful. It's a bit strange from the client perspective. Yeah. It is an important mission-critical part of the infrastructure. What we see in general is that the customers like to show headroom in respect of meeting the obligations, and that is nice because we can also then play with the utilization of the plant by moving capacity forward or the other direction to get to the highest utilization and efficiency in the plant. Okay. That's very helpful. One final question for Harm. What is your worst-case scenario for the second half? Because indeed, the order book levels are quite low. I agree that you're managing the costs quite well, but what is a worst-case scenario in terms of further downside in the top line in the second half? Again, a very good question, but since it relates to forward-looking results, we have to state with what we already said on group level, so I cannot be very specific on this. Indeed, order book is going down since the order intake is at a lower pace than our turnover. We still have an order book, so we still have work to go. We also still have time to receive orders and catch up again. But that's all we can say about that. There are no strange elements in the top line of the first half, finalizing projects, a lot of revenue recognition. This kind of underlying trend is visible in the first half numbers of the tire business? No. No funnies? No. Just a very well-managed process, I think. Okay. Yeah. Martijn den Drijver, ABN AMRO again. On the Eemshaven, did Lochem provide any support in H1? If yes, will it continue to provide the support in H2? Well, it's very good that both factories support each other. We have moved also capacity from Eemshaven to the onshore business. That is working out quite well, and also some cables that fit better into the capabilities of Lochem, we are manufacturing in Lochem. Okay. There was already a question about the +19% EBITA margin of electrification, and you mentioned that it was not solely, but mainly due to optimization. What have you baked in in terms of capacity expansion, because you were expanding in high voltage in Lochem, for example. Is that 19% on current scope or including plant expansions? That's including plant expansions. Yes. Okay. How much would that roughly be in terms of percentages? Is that 10%+, 20%+? Again, I come back to- Roughly. -what Elling mentioned, we cannot be specific about the outlook. Okay. Another question for Harm. Can you just talk a little bit more in general terms about developments in terms of Tier 1 versus the Asian players? Because I recognize from the tire manufacturers that they're having a difficult time, but I also know that partly that is due to the fact that the Asian players are gaining market share and building capacity in Europe and other regions. So can you please elaborate a little bit on how that mix is not reflected yet in your order intake? I think the current situation is that the reluctance to firmly place orders is not specifically Tier 1. That is, in general, over the whole industry. You could say there's a whole set of circumstances that create this reluctance. In several areas, the reasons can be different. But in general, high energy cost, high input cost for materials. A lot of the tire elements are synthetic, so based on oil. So the high oil price, the high energy price does not help the customers. All the differences on trade barriers and tariffs, et cetera, makes it also uncertain. In that whole environment, you see in general a reluctance. At the same time, there is need for additional capacity and there is a need to change production technology into new technology to address the change in the demand for different kinds of tires in the world. Whether that is Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, these elements are still there, all the same. It is quite clear that there will be a moment that these projects will have to happen. As Alexander already mentioned, we are not losing any orders to any competition. It is just that the market right now is holding its breath. We expect there will be a moment, and nobody can really predict when that will be, but there will be a moment that these orders will come in. And whether that is from Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3. Well, actually, I think with the portfolio that TKH has to offer, you could say it does not matter where or when or who is going to order what, but it is now just in general a slow market. Understood. And one final question, again, for Harm. You were running VMI Automated Production. You had a vision on your wings. Now you have a new CEO coming in. What will be your role in the new management board? Will that remain the same or is it going to change? So far it will remain the same. But as you say, we are excited to have a new team being formed. And of course, some roles have to be redefined. So we will see. We are excited about that. Understood. Thank you. Mike. Michael. Follow-up question, Michael Roeg, Degroof Petercam. Follow-up question on the question by Tijs about producing a cable starting two years before the client needs it for installation. You mentioned that you can produce so early and that allows you good utilization throughout the entire year. I suppose that means that sometimes you have quite some cable on inventory next to the factory, for which there's a lot of room. Is that on your books as part of inventory, or does the client pay the final installment upon completion and whether it's next to your factory or somewhere else, it's no longer your balance sheet? Exactly. That last remark is the case. We get paid once we do the factory acceptance test, and then the cable is stored at the storage facilities that we have in Eemshaven. Okay. That's reassuring. That's it from my side. Thank you. Trion. Thank you. Hi, Trion from Berenberg. Just one question following up on what Tijs asked about the inter-array cable. That revenue run rate is higher than the revenue you talked about in the past. Why was that? Is that higher than expected volumes, or is the pricing a bit higher, or maybe a better mix? What was the reason? Elling, do you have any? What is also included is, of course, that it's not 100% cable sales. There is also accessories and services, which are part of the revenue stream, as we have seen also in 2025. From that point of view, it's not the only running rate in terms of if you want to convert it into kilometers or things like that. It's a combination of services, accessories, plus the connectivity part. Okay, so the EUR 170 million that we talked about was the pure cable part? No, not fully. That's more with the accessories. Currently, we have some other services part of it as well. Okay, thanks. Maarten Verbeek again, the IDEA!. Could you quantify that as a percentage of offshore energy, what is services, et cetera? We just help you with the split of the activities. But obviously it is a very important contributor to your profitability. Yeah. Bottom line, it does not have a big effect because outsourced activities don't bear the cost you have when you manufacture the products or the services yourself. Okay, then two other ones. Firstly, you received framework contracts totaling EUR 1.4 billion within the onshore energy. For what time frame is this amount? It's going up to 2032. Even a little bit beyond. Let's say it has different end dates, of course, but the last part runs till 2034, out of my head. Okay. Then one for Harm. If you now look at your cost of sales, which came down by roughly EUR 1 million, whilst your revenue declined much more than that. It looks like H2, although you're not willing to give some kind of comment outlook, will decline even further from what we have seen in the first half of this year. What will you be able to manage your cost to your new sales level? Well, first of all, you cannot save yourself into prosperity, as we always say. You cannot manage your cost down at the rate that your profitability remains the same if your revenue drops. But obviously, you can do a lot on your cost saving. That's quite clear. The only point is that we have to look at when are new orders coming in, when is the market going to return, and will we be able to then quickly scale up and pick up again and benefit from a much higher turnover then. It is this fine balance that we're constantly managing. Obviously, you can cut cost right away, but then you will miss out maybe quite quickly on the pickup in the market. That is the balance that we have to look for. You will be able to reduce your cost a bit, but not an awful lot? Oh, obviously you can reduce your cost a lot, but that changes your organization into something that cannot be scaled up again very quickly. Okay. It is highly likely that you will be able to reduce your cost, but looking forward, you will be underutilized. Well, that is particularly a point that we will not comment on. We are doing our best, and I think so far are quite successful in managing our cost. But it is quite clear that if your revenue drops, even if you manage your cost in a very good way, the profitability drops a little. Michael Roeg again. I have a question about the Vision systems activity. I imagine one of the most important components is image sensors, but there is probably some memory chips in there as well, and microcontrollers. Some of these types of chips are going up in price, some are going up exponentially in price. First of all, can you pass on everything to the client? Second of all, was part of that solid organic growth in the first half of the year also price driven next to volume driven? The price-driven effect was limited. You always have price increases and introductions of new products and systems, which you have different pricing and that can support also your margin, depending on what the innovation level is and the USPs you have. What we see is that the scarcity of certain components has not really impacted us a little bit. Also for the second half year, we see at this moment that we will be impacted limited, the impact will be limited, and we can pass on fully the component price increases towards our customers. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Isabel, can we do the Teams questions now, please? Hi, good morning all, and thank you for taking my questions. This is Chase from Kempen. I recognize you can't say much about forward-looking outlooks, but I will try to get a bit more detail on the first half regarding the electrification margin. So obviously a 12.6% EBITDA. Could you sort of break it down a little bit if there was a large margin step-up in the second quarter, or do you think the first quarter and second quarter were broadly similar in terms of margin? That would be my first question. You started yourself with the kind of disclaimer to your question. I'm afraid to have to repeat that a little bit in terms of forward-looking statements. I think what we have mentioned that the operational improvements which we have made in the last couple of quarters, that we believe that will not stop as of the 30th June. So the benefits of that definitely are there. But I will shy away from giving a specific percentage in terms of EBITDA improvement. Yeah, no, that's still helpful. I wanted to touch back on the onshore energy cables. So I know there's been some discussion over the last few quarters about the international expansion there. Could you provide a bit more of an update on that? When do you see that potentially becoming sort of a real growth driver, or is that already, let's say, pushing the organic sales growth as well? Yeah, we see a good development with our position also abroad, internationally and within Europe. Part of the success is already in the order book and also in the turnover. For the medium term, there's very big opportunities. Okay. Final question, going back to Vision. There's been a lot of discussion, obviously from yourselves, but also from peers about implementing AI tools and enhancing functionality and value add for clients there. I'm curious on basically where do you see TKH Vision in terms of the competitive landscape? Do you feel that you're exceeding expectations in terms of AI implementation, or do you see some peers perhaps growing that side of the business faster? Just any commentary around the strategy incorporating AI into Vision, please. Yeah. With respect to, of course, peers, what is going on with peers, we cannot comment. What we can see is that AI is mission critical for the development of the Vision technologies. We already had, a longer time ago, a very strong software play, and that software play has been smoothly transformed in an AI play. We did quite some investments in AI competence center in Amsterdam, and at the same time, we saw that in several companies in the group also further investments have been made into AI. It is difficult to compare with competition, but based on the market share that we see and the opportunities we see, I believe we are doing a quite good job with our position in the AI, with the AI tools. You would argue that you're growing market share, in the first half at least, within Vision? I believe it's difficult to exactly say that we gained market share because the comparison base is difficult. Some of our competitors are in different areas. In general, we see, especially in the defense sector, that we are gaining market share, and I believe it's difficult to comment exactly the market share gains in other segments. Okay. No, it's very helpful. Thank you, Alexander, Elling. Thanks, Chase. Thanks. You have another question? We have another question. Yeah. Good morning. I had three small questions left. The first one is actually on digitalization. You had about a swing of EUR 16 million at the EBITDA line, I think. Can you size a bit how much that came from the pricing, that you point to in the press release, and how that compared to maybe also the volumes out of China and Poland? And of course, you had the benefit of closing a Dutch operation, so a bit of the what I was looking for is a bit of split here, causing the EUR 16 million EBITDA swing. And then within that, how much of your fiber volume is now going into AI data center and defense related demand, please? Maybe if I start with the second part of your question. What we referred to in our press release that basically, the data centers, AI, as well as defense, they are taking up a lot of capacity in the existing market. It is not exactly the same as us deploying into these same two segments. We are very much focused when we talk about our fiber optic-related business on the AI part, and less on the defense. But as these two segments are growing so quickly, it basically means that the whole industry, which has been building up capacity for the telecom industry, is shifting gears towards complete new industries. That shift we have well taken on that transition. So we have a good deployment of the fiber optic portfolio into the data centers. That is driven by the North American market to a big extent. There we have seen that as this massive, let's say, CapEx programs by very big clients in data centers will consume capacity over the next couple of years, that fiber prices have seen a positive move up as capacity for certain fiber types is simply not there. I will shy away from specific margins and fiber prices, but an important part has to do of the improvement you refer to coming out of price improvement, basically margin again. All right. Regarding Vision, actually a bit of a follow-up on Michael's question. I think you pointed to the semiconductor consumer electronics and batteries sort of leading your growth of 12%. Also, APAC, very strong. I guess, these three, let's say end markets, they are quite cyclical and correlated. What are these three combined as a percentage of your Vision sales? They are, I would say, for 3D, more important than for the 2D segment. They are creeping up towards close, not half, but getting close to half of the 3D sales. As I said, less for 2D. Okay. All right, and just final question on bolt-on acquisitions. I think you talked about the prospect of that in automation for some time. Obviously, you have been very busy on the separation process, but is M&A sort of on hold, you would say, until the separation is complete, or would you still pursue a sort of a Vision bolt-on during this process? No, I think, let's say this is part of the strategy. If we are busy or not, we will keep on executing the strategy. This is on the agenda, and this is what we are following through. There is no stoppage due to the fact that we do other things. That is not the way how we execute the strategy. Right. That is it from my side. Thank you. Thank you. Martijn. Two more follow-ups, Martijn den Drijver, ABN AMRO. Can you refresh our memory with regards to net working capital as percentage of sales? Because it used to be that you had a target of 15%-17%. 12%-15%. 12%-15%, I apologize. Is that still applicable after the divestments? I don't recall from the CMD that you actually gave a post-divestment target. Maybe you have, but I just don't remember it anymore. No. We have not given a specific one, but clearly, you see different, let's say, elements of working capital having more impact on the two segments. That's something which definitely will become more clear after the separation itself. Now it is a mixed basket. As I said, we have not taken back to 12%-15%, specifically currently, as Harm already explained, the impact of the order intake. That is a major issue when we look at the working capital level, which is 18% for the group. Okay. My second question is with regards to Vision. You mentioned that a 2D unit has merged its brands. That is possibly the first step. Can we expect more in the second half and into 2027 on the back end? So actual savings on the normal things when you integrate companies. Can you elaborate a little bit on that? Yes, that is ongoing. We mentioned in the Capital Markets Day in September that these steps are being taken. We have, of course, acquired in the last number of years quite a group of companies. From alignment in terms of R&D roadmaps, et cetera, we have taken further steps towards integration of these agenda topics across some of the organizations. That, of course, helps on one side the OpEx level, but clearly it also improves commercial opportunities for the group, and that is also where the benefit can be seen. Would you say that you have already realized a part of it or is the majority still to come? Whether it is the majority or not, we have done steps, but we are not complete. Got it. Thank you. There's also still one follow-up on the offshore wind projects. You probably have seen that in the U.K. in January, there was an allocation round being awarded. I think most of the projects have been won by RWE. Is RWE now actively tendering with TKH on the cables? Is that part of the 92 projects you're mentioning? What do you expect on answer? Sorry? We cannot disclose, of course, specific negotiations with customers. Yeah, but is RWE part of the 92 projects? Because you mentioned 92 projects. I assume that the commercial people of TKH are talking to these companies. I believe I can say yes, yeah. Yeah. But 92 projects, if I basically do a rough rundown of the actual projects out there, yeah, I do not get to that amount. Are you also including Vietnam and Korea, Taiwan? No. We are focusing on Europe, so these are all European projects. I believe at this point of time, there's no Asian project in Taiwan. Could be one or two, but I'm not sure there. But the majority is in Europe, including the U.K. Yeah. The 92 projects also include projects which are years from- Yeah, of course. -from a consent right now. Yeah. But then again, in theory, could you be in a tender with RWE at the moment, or was that already the case, let's say, in 2025? Yeah. It is too specific about the customer, and we have a very high market share. We have a number one position. I believe that gives you already a good reference where we are active. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. No questions anymore. Then I would like to thank you all for the good questions, and also in the webcast of the analyst, and a big thank you for attending this important half year update. For me, it will be the last time I will be presenting the results. Next year you have to cope with my successor. I would like to thank you all for, let's say, your commitment to TKH and especially also the audience and shareholders committed to TKH, and I hope, of course, to see you often again, perhaps in a different role. If it will be an IPO with electrification, I might see you back. If not, then again, a big thank you for your commitment to TKH and the relationship we-