Hello, and welcome to the first quarter 2021 results call. Throughout the call, all participants will be in a listen-only mode, and afterwards, there will be a question and answer session. Today, I'm pleased to present Gerard Paulides, member of the executive board and CFO. Please go ahead with your meeting. Yes, thank you. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Vopak's first quarter interim update. I will present a few prepared remarks over the next 20 minutes and update you on the developments this quarter. We've also published the analyst presentation on the website, which you have access to. Today we have a busy day. We have our annual AGM. We will manage the meeting to meet our commitments that are following this analyst call. Thank you for making time. We will make time for you as well, best to our ability. Before I start, I have to point to the disclaimer content of the forward-looking statement, which you have available. Read it carefully. Then we go on to the meeting. Let's go to the key messages. Slide number three. First quarter 2021 was impacted by the additional cost of the Texas winter storm. Notwithstanding, we still improved the outlook for growth project contributions in 2021. During the first quarter, we continued the financial performance and improved occupancy rates of our portfolio compared to last year in a continued volatile market. EBITDA for the first quarter amounted to EUR 200 million. This is an increase of EUR 10 million or 5% year-on-year if we eliminate the negative currency translation effects that were building up in the course of last year. The increase of EUR 10 million also reflects new contributions from growth projects and, as I said, the negative industry impact of the Texas winter storm impacting chemical supplies, not only in the region of Gulf of Mexico, but worldwide supply chains. Results from joint ventures, including currency movement effects, were lower compared to the same period last year. EBITDA performance was supported by our cost initiative, and the savings are tracking well. Costs for the first quarter were EUR 149 million, which is below 2020 levels and considerably below our cost outlook of EUR 615 million for the full year 2021. Towards the end of 2020, we experienced a gradual pickup in volumes and chemical throughput levels. However, in Q1, the chemical market was disrupted by events in the Gulf of Mexico. Oil performance was broadly stable. Our proportional occupancy rate, reflecting our economic interest in our ventures and subsidiaries, for the first quarter reached 89%, reflecting improved demand for industrial services and some reduced rented capacity, mainly in the Netherlands. Our net profit was EUR 73 million, reflecting an earnings per share of EUR 0.58. The cash dividend of €1.20 will be paid on the 29th of April, following a positive confirmation later today in the annual shareholder meeting. Our financial framework and capital allocation priorities are unchanged. This quarter, we started operations of the Vopak Moda Houston Gas Terminal. This is a great step forward which has been in the making for a long period, and we now look forward to the contribution of Moda Houston. Initially, we will start up with some small gas bullet-type storage tanks, and the large ammonia tank is expected to start in Q3. New capacity expansions in Mexico and the Netherlands were delivered during the quarter and there is some capacity still remaining on those assets, and we look forward to the contribution throughout the remainder of this year and years to come. This led to a total capacity for Vopak of 35.7 million cubic meters at the end of the first quarter. Total capacity is subject to the continued investment in the portfolio, and as you know, the composition has changed significantly in the last two years. Over Q2 and Q3 this year, we expect to start up the Greenfield industrial terminal in Jinzhou, China, with an initial capacity of 290,000 cubic meters. Growth projects, in general, are progressing very well this year, and we've improved the outlook for growth project contributions in 2021 to the higher end of the range that we indicated earlier at the end of Q4 last year. The range of EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million. We now expect to be at the higher end of that range for this year, 2021. Let's move to the comparison of Q1 this year to Q4 last year. As I said, the start of the year was impacted by the discontinuities in the industry manufacturing base in the Gulf of Mexico due to the extreme weather conditions. This has a negative impact of approximately EUR 5 million in our EBITDA performance of this quarter, and that is a mix between revenue and cost. The effect of the Texas winter storm was felt beyond the Gulf of Mexico in other regions and caused short supply of product with high chemical product prices and short product supply chains. Moving to Asia and the Middle East now. Performance reflected the improvement post the one-off negative accounting adjustment we experienced in Q4. Our industrial terminal, PT2SB, which is a valuable asset in our portfolio of assets, has a solid commercial performance in Q1 2021. Our client that sits behind the terminal is progressing with commissioning, starting up, et cetera, of its facility throughout the year. LNG and China performance have been broadly stable this quarter. The performance of the LNG division reflects resilient performance of the portfolio. In LNG, after 10 years of continuous and safe operations, Gate terminal in Rotterdam in the Netherlands will start its major maintenance turnaround to ensure we continue to deliver best-in-class service for its customers. The maintenance work has been planned for a long period and will be executed over a period of approximately one month, starting the 15th of June 2021. This means there's an impact on our operations for a short period of time, which has been well-planned between the asset and the customers. Europe and Africa performance mirrors less rented capacity, mainly in the Netherlands, with lower occupancy in chemicals in Botlek and to some extent, also in oil. Performance in Americas was negatively impacted by the Texas events, the winter storm. The portfolio delivered a return on average capital employed of 10.3%, reflecting also some of the commissioning of the new assets that come into the mix. Turning to divisional performance trends. We expect that the effects of the chemicals supply chain interruption will phase out during the second and third quarter of this year and the remainder of the year. Supply chains over the world will reestablish itself, and therefore supply will be better matched to demand. Performance of PT2SB in Asia and Middle East recovered from the negative volatility we experienced in the last quarter of 2020 during the first quarter. Europe and Africa occupancy remained impacted by less rented capacity, mainly in the Netherlands, with lower occupancy in chemicals and in oil. The China and North Asia division continued to benefit from market opportunities driven by supply chain uncertainties. The performance of Europe and Africa reflect the new portfolio after divestments, operational MOT 2020 capacity, and an upswing in occupancy in the oil segment. LNG occupancy rates remain strong and in line with the nature of the long-term take-or-pay commitments. Let's look at investments. We aim to create value by allocating capital to attractive growth projects and remain capital disciplined. In the last years, we have announced and delivered a significant number of projects focused on growing our portfolio and reestablishing the EBITDA momentum post divestments of late 2019, early 2020. For 2021, growth investments remain to be targeted in the range of EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million. Year to date, we've invested EUR 71 million, including equity contributions to joint ventures. Guidance for sustaining services and IT, CapEx remains unchanged. We expect to spend annually EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million in IT and complete the rollout of Vopak's digital terminal management system by the end of 2022 or early 2023. Moving on to portfolio positioning. We continue to make significant steps in our portfolio to create long-term value. We've chosen for a portfolio with a focus on gas and industrial terminals, and our aim is to add new energy and feedstocks in that mix. Current funnel of opportunity support our belief that we are making the right choices and creating momentum to allocate capital into new energy as well. We continue to transform the portfolio and improve the quality of the EBITDA, and our company will move towards more sustainable forms of energy and feedstocks. We are excited by future prospects and are committed to continue investing in growth and divest where that's opportune. Our aim is to allocate the majority of our growth investments to industrial gas and new energy infrastructure. Our positive views on chemicals have not changed, and our new growth investments in oil infrastructure are expected to be reduced, and will be mostly targeted towards strengthening the hub positions. In Q4 2020, we announced the acquisition of the Dow assets in the Gulf of Mexico. That contract is now up and running and starting to contribute to earnings in the course of 2021. Strategy execution. Moving on to our industrial terminal and new energy developments. During the quarter, we had good progress with greenfield industrial terminal construction. We closed 2020. The Dow acquisition that I mentioned. We're also making good progress, as I mentioned already in this opening remarks, with Jinzhou in China. Later in the year, we expect to take an FID on another industrial terminal in China. We expect the industrial terminal in Gulf of Mexico, Corpus Christi, to start its operations this year. Moving on to slide nine. There you see an exciting new development, and this is all about capital allocation and not about revenue. I mean that for the left-hand side of this slide, the hydrogen-bromine flow battery. As we have previously mentioned, Vopak will play an important role in facilitating the energy transition. We are uniquely positioned because our existing infrastructure plays well into the requirements of the new infrastructure. Vopak has entered into a joint ambition with Elestor to scale up the capacity of hydrogen-bromine flow batteries in a period of two years, and then further develop it to industrial scale. The first efforts, the first pilot, will be looking at a storage of 200 kilowatt hours and a power of 100 kilowatt hours, or sorry, kilowatt. That's relatively small, but we will scale up towards 500 and 3,000 kilowatt hours over a period of two years if we're successful. The first effort, if you imagine how big is that trial or pilot, is a 40-foot container. It just gives you some dimensions. Moving on. To the right-hand side of the slide. In the third quarter of 2020, we have approximately 9,000 cubic meters of pressurized LPG storage capacity brought into operations in Vlissingen, matching the growing interest and market commitment for additional pressurized storage capacity. Our broad expertise in handling pressurized liquid gases is very useful for any potential hydrogen storage in the future. Turning to proportional information. As we've pointed out, we have more and more interest into joint ventures, which means that the reported consolidated EBITDA and the proportional EBITDA, which reflects our economic interest across all our assets, start to look different. You see the delta between the consolidated EBITDA of EUR 200 and the proportional EBITDA of EUR 246. The EUR 246, of course, is our economic interest. Our proportional occupancy was 89% in the first quarter and reflect good performance of the joint venture oil terminals and continued strong performance of our joint venture gas and industrial terminals. Let me now turn to looking ahead. New contributions from growth projects to replace EBITDA from divested terminals in 2019 and 2020 are expected to be at the higher end of our range for additional EBITDA in 2021, the range of EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million. Of course, this will be subject to market conditions and currency movements. We expect to manage the cost base, including additional cost for new growth projects, to be managed below the range of EUR 615 million that we mentioned earlier. Good momentum on projects, good momentum on cost. We confirm our ambition to allocate growth capital of EUR 300 million-EUR 350 million, in the coming years, as I said already, the majority of our investments will be towards the categories indicated on the slide. Let me summarize the key messages. We've proven to be able to adapt to the changing business dynamics of 2020 and manage well the volatility in the beginning of 2021. We've grown our EBITDA by 5% compared to a year ago, and occupancy has improved. Also last year, in the full year, we've grown our EBITDA relative to the year proceeding. Vopak is proving robust in its financial performance and committed to its strategy, which is in full execution. To support that, we will watch our costs, and we will manage that below what we thought was possible when we set the target for 2021. That target was EUR 615, including the new assets we expect to come in below that. With that, I want to move quickly to Q&A. Again, we have a full day. We've allocated ample time, we hope, for Q&A and look forward to discussing the results with you today. Operator, if you could open the lines, then we can take some questions. Thank you. If you do wish to ask a question, please press 01 on your telephone keypad. If you wish to withdraw your question, you may do so by pressing 02 to cancel. Our first question comes from the line of Thomas Adolph. Please go ahead. Morning, Gerard. A few questions from me, please. Firstly, on CapEx, just comparing your presentation from 1Q versus the presentation from the full-year results, the bar looks a bit lower. I was just wondering what has changed from when you present the full Q results, or whether it was just kind of a mistake in the presentation. Just to clarify on that. Secondly, just on the occupancy rate for subsidiaries, it's come off to 88% from 90%. Presumably, it's a function of the oil contracts rolling over. Just wondering what the outlook is for the rest of the year. Yes, there's a bit more volatility, clearly the shape of the curve doesn't look anywhere as good as last year. What's the potential range of outcomes that you see? Then maybe finally, just on the throughput business, you've highlighted chemicals remains a bit difficult, and perhaps the industry is bringing forward maintenance to take benefit from the plants being already shut in. Obviously, that has an impact on your business in the U.S., but shouldn't that benefit your business outside of the U.S.? Just trying to kind of better understand the dynamics there as well. Thank you. Thank you, Thomas. The investment question, that was not deliberate. You've looked clearly more closely at the slide than we intended. There's not supposed to be a subtle or explicit change to that slide at all, nor to the message. The EUR 300 million-EUR 350 million is what we aspire to. Most of that is in motion. There's an element of opportunistic investment, of course, where things may happen or may not happen. That's mostly when you negotiate on certain assets in M&A situations. M&A, you know how we mean M&A is not company M&A, but it's asset M&A. That I would have given you exactly the same response at Q4. There's no daylight in that at all. Apologies if we didn't quite reflect that on the slide. That was not intentional. On the occupancy, the occupancy has done well compared to a year ago. Compared to Q4, you see a little tailing off. I would hope and expect that we can have a more normalized year in 2021, where we can see some of that restore itself again and have a more normal fluctuation of occupancy. What you see particularly, which has not been very helpful in the occupancy, is the item I've mentioned before, which is the utilization of the Panama assets that I was not very optimistic on that in Q4, and that hasn't changed. We're fighting hard to create that market, to get the proper permits from the government to boost that business. It's hard work. There I'm not spotting a momentum change yet, despite our efforts. The rest of occupancy, I think, is more normal. We hope, obviously, to get some support out of the chemicals market. When I say we hope, that's the bit we don't control. How active that market is in its throughput. Last year was, for clear reasons, not good for throughput. This year looked to start to be better, was interrupted with the events in Gulf of Mexico. We hope that unfolds or reverses over the quarters to come and, across 2021 and 2022. See that chemicals activity in the world is reestablishing itself. The problem is mostly the tightness of the supply into the demand. If you have tight supply, then it is absorbed immediately into demand, which means that infrastructure and storage is less in demand relative to when that supply reestablishes itself. To an extent, you're right, you would expect, okay, maybe you get the alternative flows of products from the Middle East, in particular, into Europe, for instance, to create some additional activity. You have to realize that 70% of the ethylene capacity in the Gulf of Mexico was taken out. Now, that is not, from a supply point of view, into the supply tightness, something you just eliminate worldwide by rediverting some flow. I think the chemicals industry was quite jubilant in the prices that they experienced in Q1, at least for those that were up and running. If you're not up and running, you cannot enjoy those prices. The prices as such don't influence us that much in Vopak. What we need is the molecules, the activity, and the absolute prices don't impact us on the quarterly performance. It does influence us in the long run in terms of chemicals investments. If the chemicals companies do well, then over time, that will trigger investments for us. Yes, it should restore that throughput. The timing is a bit difficult to read. I would say 2021, 2022, that should come back, hopefully quicker. We deal with that. There's nothing more I think you asked, so I think I answered all the questions, Thomas. Yep. Thank you very much. Thank you, Thomas. The next question comes from the line of David Kerstens. Please go ahead. Good morning, Gerard. Three quick questions, please. You highlighted the drivers for the impact on occupancy rates in Europe and Africa. I was wondering, what is the reason that occupancy came down in Asia, Middle East? I think you said two points on a proportionate basis. Is it still being held back by capacity out of service for maintenance, and when do you expect that that will come back on the market? Second question is around the impact of the maintenance at the Gate terminal. Can you quantify the EBITDA impact of that terminal being out of service for about a month? Then finally, did I understand correctly that the Dow acquisition did not yet contribute to earnings in the first quarter? Thanks very much. Yeah. Thank you. Let me first deal with Gate. The Gate has been planned for a long time. As you can imagine, the LNG facility here in the Netherlands, has been operating uninterrupted for a period of 10 years, and at a certain moment, you have to do your maintenance. This has been coordinated in great detail with the customers. The effect of the shutdown will play out over Q2 and Q3. We will not give specific guidance on that effect. In terms of supply, clients have obviously been planning for this for a long time, so alternative arrangements will have been made by them as appropriate. We don't specify an EBITDA number, David, on that. Singapore or Far East, Fujairah was a little bit lower on the occupancy. We saw a little bit lower occupancy in Pakistan. We saw a little bit lower in Singapore, all relative to Q4. Compared to a year ago, it's all a lot better. Singapore is still working its way through. What the points that we highlighted in 2020, and the other bits and pieces are normal market movements, I would qualify them. Hopefully, over time, Singapore brings that occupancy a bit up. In Europe, you have the same effect of a slightly lower occupancy that was mainly in Europoort and in Botlek. It's a combination of some normal market movement and shutdowns. Europoort is expected to have the majority of its shutdown and maintenance activity in the first half, and then have better availability in the second half of this year. What else did you ask? Can you remind me? The Dow acquisition. Oh, yeah. The contribution of the Dow acquisition. The Dow acquisition across Q4 and Q1 had a modest contribution. The buildup, more relevantly across the entire, EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million. As I said, we are confident we can get to the high end of that. Is more back-end loaded than front-end loaded. You have a lighter contribution of project contributions in Q1 than we look forward to in the remainder of the year. That will play out over the remainder of the year. The South African market is still building up. It's doing well asset-wise, in line with the market that we've seen in South Africa. The asset is doing well, but it's ramping up in its earnings potential. Same for the Dow, same for other projects in the portfolio. As I said, its contribution is building up and more in the second half or even third quarters than in the first quarter. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Thank you, David. The next question comes from the line of Luca von Bi. Please go ahead. Yes. First of all, I have a question on the oil market, if you can comment on the dynamics there at the moment. My second question is still on the Gate terminal. I understand that you don't want to give a specific guidance on the impact, can you talk us a bit through the mechanics? You said that customers are prepared. Does that mean that they will schedule their throughputs in such a way that the month that the terminal is offline will have a limited impact on revenues? Should we interpret it differently? Are there any costs that will be expensed during this month of maintenance that we should take into account? How does it work? Yeah. On oil dynamics first. Oil market is, the contango is limited at the moment to jet. The whole point of backwardation and contango, I think is less relevant than it used to be in the past. It's still, to an extent relevant, but less relevant. The oil markets in general are behaving in a more normalized manner now. Production, of course, was completely taken by surprise by the demand falling away massively last year, in a short period of time. Production adjusted, so supply adjusted, and now demand is coming back, and then supply will adjust back into that. The oil prices have been, in the second half of last year, when oil prices already were switching to backwardation. In fact, the irony, of course, is that the oil prices continued to rise when the market was in backwardation. Sometimes these pricing dynamics are difficult to explain. At least the perceptions of it. What we look at is a more normalized market. The only one that is in contango is the jet. The jet will obviously adjust to people in the world traveling again, or not. That if the world can move to a more normalized and more welcome future than what we experienced in 2020, the sooner the better, of course, for everybody. It doesn't preoccupy us at the moment disproportionately, compared to the attention it was getting a year ago. We're very pleased with the fact that we've gotten to better occupancy across the portfolio. If you look at Gate, what I said has been planned for a long time. That means that you need to do the engineering, of course, and the planning of all the activities. The clients, the customers of ours, they need to make their arrangements to manage their supply and demand flows of the product. The terminal itself is not available for one month. That effect will be spread out over the two quarters. There will be some expensing. I'm not commenting on revenues and I'm not commenting on EBITDA, but it's clear that the facility is not available for four months and that effect will be spread out over Q2 and Q3. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Thijs Berkelder. Please go ahead. Good morning, everyone. First question is on LNG, the temp on all your newly planned projects. I think meanwhile we have seen 7 or 8 pre-announcements of projects you are working upon. Also this quarter it seems no progress in these four projects. Can you explain what is happening there and whether we maybe even risk write-downs when these projects do not come to the market? Second question is on guidance. You were quoted company talking with investors who want to make a return and want to see that the company has an ambition to reach certain financial targets. We're not seeing those financial targets. The market is not seeing them. When can we expect clearer guidance? Then third, this may be more a remark or a question on behalf of a client of mine. Can you maybe give some clarity on how Board's discussions are going on, let's say the share price of Vopak being flat for, let's say, 10 years in a row, despite all the pre-announcing changes, new projects, et cetera. Okay. Thanks, Thijs. Let's first talk about LNG. The LNG portfolio is developing well. We now have four assets in the portfolio. We are planning on projects and spending time and effort on Germany, China. We've mentioned Hong Kong before. We've mentioned the LNG data center linked development with Keppel in Singapore. All those projects are progressing. They are progressing at their own speed. Germany, the main issue in Germany is the whole permitting discussion in Germany. The commercial side is quite healthy. From a supply into the Northwest European market, it's a very attractive proposition. We are continuing to spend money developing that asset, more than we would normally do pre-FID. You're right there. We have been highlighting it for some time, but we're not deviating from the path. We continue to develop it and the competition has actually folded. There was, at a certain moment, a competitor, one or two sites, they have folded. I think everybody's now banking on the success of Germany LNG, by Vopak, which is a joint venture effort again. In terms of China LNG, it's a new facility on an existing site of Vopak. It plays to our strengths. It has everything going for it. It has a new partner, which is the local demand aggregator. We are continuing to build or design the facility. The jetties have, best I remember, but I didn't check it recently, but the jetties have been made ready. Also there, you need to tidy up on some of the permits and the regulatory issues. Again, it's progressing well. It's also same as Germany, hard work. You need to take 1,000 steps and we're taking them step by step. Hong Kong is an LNG import facility, which is exactly well-positioned in the energy mix ambition of Hong Kong. From that point of view, it's an attractive proposition. It will be an import facility with a floating storage and an offshore buoy to connect to the shore. The point there is to finalize the commercial negotiations, and that is a binary thing. It either happens or it doesn't happen, the commercial negotiation. It looks attractive, it looks good, but a deal is never done till it is done. The advantage of Hong Kong is we're not spending money on it like China or Germany. From that point of view, the fact that Hong Kong is a bit more binary is not an issue. It's still looking good. Singapore is progressing well with Keppel. Then we've made two announcements on South Africa and on Australia, and they are very early days. They are made together with interested parties to develop that. There's little money involved on a relative scale, and therefore not a concern. I'm not concerned about the fact that it's costing us money. Yeah, of course I am, but I think the business proposition is okay, and the risk reward is okay, Thijs. On the reflections on the share price, of course, that is not a thing that we would comment on. However, we obviously have noted that share price has not done well recently. It's in a way disappointing because if you look at the EBITDA momentum, the proportional EBITDA, the robustness of the portfolio, our credentials in new energy as additional path into the future, it's all fully in line with our strategy. The operational momentum is good. The cash flow momentum is good. The balance sheet is in good shape. We're paying dividends. Last year, we've bought back some shares. Sometimes it's maybe a bit puzzling for us why the market does what the market does. It plays a bit on your point on guidance. We are certainly not going to entertain guidance on a quarterly basis. I think that is a distraction which is not adding any value for that short moment that it is relevant. We manage the company on short-term performance. We will be held accountable each quarter and each year. We give guidance on our return ambitions, 10%-15% on capital employed, our added EBITDA from growth, EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million, our cost ambition. You can take a view on that. Where it is more difficult is market conditions. We've seen extreme volatility last year in foreign exchange and in oil. I think if we look through that, particularly foreign exchange, I think the results of the company are good. I will not say very good, because if I would say very good, then I would dismiss the fact that we believe they could be better. The results could be better if we had not held back on the projects last year due to the global difficulty to deliver projects and supply chains that were not functioning on the construction side. The foreign exchange has just not helped us. On that account, I say they are good. The company's extremely healthy. We have a compelling strategy. There's no other company comparable to us across the space. We're the global leader in industrial terminals. We are one of the few companies that can actually, in our space, talk about new energy with credentials. I'll let the market decide whether that combination of distribution of dividends, dividend stability, growth of the portfolio, strengthening the EBITDA and the strategy is appealing or not. I share the fact that the share price is, in my view, disappointing relative to the quality of the company, and I have full confidence in the quality of the company. Now, that also answers implicitly your request on guidance. The things we control, we give guidance on. The things we don't control, foreign exchange and volatility in markets, would make it extremely difficult to have a sensible discussion about the guidance. We are still not going to give more guidance than what we give at the moment. If you say we don't give guidance, literally that is true on EBITDA. If you look at the component parts, I think we do give a fair bit. Sorry to interrupt, as a board, you discuss with each other, and you make decisions with each other, and you must have an ambition where you want to stand in three to five years from now. Let's look at 2025, Vopak, where do you want to stand? What kind of assuming normalized market, assuming flat Forex, and we all know that Forex is volatile. That's for all the companies we cover. If Forex changes, yeah, the market will understand that you change that long-term guidance. To me, it's absolutely not feasible where do you want to stand as a company in 2025, with what kind of financial returns, with what kind of capital employed. That's simply what I mean, and that's, I think, what investors need. Only if you as an infrastructure company make clear where you want to stand in 5 years or 10 years from now, whatever, also financially, then in my view, investors will be willing to follow or not follow you, but then at least it's clear where we as, or where the shareholders can keep you as board accountable too. Okay, noted. Thijs, I've given you my response, but I've noted your input. I think the longer-term ambition is a fair point. If we can stay away from quarterly or annually and pull it over to a longer horizon, I have sympathy for that, and we do discuss that. Leave that thought with us, and we'll see what that brings. Thanks. We have one more question from the line of Quirijn Mulder. Please go ahead. Yeah, good morning. Can you hear me? Yes, Quirijn. Good morning. Yeah, good morning, everyone. My questions are focused on expansion. First of all, can you give me an idea about the expansion impact in the first quarter? The second is, you have raised your guidance for the expansion, EUR 30 million-EUR 50 million to the high end of that range. What's the reason? In my view, if I look at the tables, then it looks like there's some delay here and there, maybe slightly, but maybe in Botlek, maybe in Corpus Christi. That does not contribute, and the lockdowns are not over. That means also a risk of delay. Can you maybe update us on the situation on these projects and why you are raising your guidance in this respect? Yeah. The contribution in the first quarter was about EUR 5 million, maybe a little bit more, EUR 5-7, thereabout. Relatively light compared to what we expect in the remainder of the year and building up. That is relative to Q1 2020. If you take the range of EUR 30-50, when we set the range, Quirijn, late last year at the Q4 results, we of course already took a few on the factors that you mentioned. We have de-risked some of that in our progress, and therefore are more confident than we expressed at the end of Q4 with a conservative EUR 30-50 range, and we're moving that up. I'm not saying that the factors you mention are not factors in the market, but relative to how we assess those in Q4, we are confident that we can safely move up the range. Okay. Then with regard to your cost level, let me say from some to below EUR 615. Yeah. As I am well informed, that does include the expansion. Your running rate at 149 indicates 600. Is that the calculation? 600 underlying plus 10 related to the further expansion? Is that the correct idea? Yeah, the idea is correct. I don't comment on the exact numbers, otherwise, I would have given you an exact number. Yes, the logic is absolutely correct, and we are totally on top of our costs, with more even focus than we anticipated at the start of the year. It's proving to be productive, and we will have a payout on that, I hope. Do you see more opportunities in cost containment or not in the coming months? Yes, we do. It's an aggregate of all opportunities that are being scrutinized constantly. It's across a wide range of activities. The only thing that doesn't work is the utilities. The utilities last year was extremely low because of the prevailing commodity prices. Now we, like everybody, are faced with utility bills that are higher than a year ago. In aggregate, almost all the costs are pointing in the right direction. What could even be better if we had lower utilities and regretfully in some places, the port authorities also decide it's a good moment to increase their rates or their real estate taxes. That is very unfortunate. Certainly, when business should be promoted, they decide exactly the opposite, which is unfortunate and, I would say, shortsighted, but that is reality. Okay. My final question, if I'm allowed. On the effect of the winter storm in Texas, there's a direct effect in the U.S. and indirect too. Did you calculate the complete impact on your business of the winter storm in the first quarter, and maybe some impact on the second quarter? No. What we did is we Well, no and yes. What we did is we assessed it at approximately 6 million, which is the combination of, let's say, the core business and some cost effects. When I say core business, I mean the revenues. Some cost effects. That 6 million is a Gulf of Mexico area number. It's not a worldwide number. Worldwide, I don't think it was a plus or a minus for us. It just meant that products came from a different source, i.e., our customers sourced from different locations, if they needed to find different supply points. Europe, for instance, the one who responded to Europe is the Middle East. If you look at, for instance, the styrene market, the majority of styrene in Europe comes from the U.S. It comes from Houston, and it comes from Baton Rouge. Imports from Saudi are only 14%. I'm talking the ARA region, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Antwerp. If you have this interruption from the U.S., you will see that people like the Middle East will start ramping up a bit. As it happens, this is exactly the period where we are starting up our styrene facility in the Botlek. If you now have a market that is dislocated, that's tough. That's a tough place to start. That doesn't help. We didn't put a number on the rest of the world. Okay, sir. Thank you. Okay. It's going well, I think. Is there any other question? There are no further questions. I'll hand it back for closing remarks. Okay. Thank you all. What resonates with me is the continued question about guidance. The rest is, I think, more easy to handle, almost, the movements in the quarter and the outlook. As I said, we call it a good but slow start of the year. We've grown our business again by 5%. Our initial first small steps in new energy are now becoming reality. The portfolio is showing a more robust composition of EBITDA, i.e., we've replaced the EBITDA of assets that we thought would not create long-term shareholder value, additionally, with higher quality EBITDA. The ambition of the company over the quarter and over the year to stay away from that, but into a translation, as Thijs made the point, I do think is fair. We have that, of course. We always hesitate on it, but we will consider it because I think Thijs made the point very eloquently, but it's not an easy point. Leave it with us. Again, we will think about it. Thank you for attending. Thank you for taking the time, and talk to you soon. This concludes our conference call. Thank you all for attending. You may now disconnect your lines.