Well, welcome to the Agilyx Market Update on the Cyclyx Reorganization. I'm Ranjeet Bhatia, Chief Executive of Agilyx. Joining me as well today is Bertrand Laroche, our Chief Financial Officer. As a reminder, this meeting is being recorded. So today's call is a market update focused on the reorganization of Cyclyx and what this reset means for Agilyx balance sheet, risk profile, and strategic execution going forward. The headline is quite simple: we are eliminating near-term CapEx and funding risk, decreasing cash needs, and fully redeeming our senior debt, our senior bonds, refocusing the company on profitable European growth, and very importantly, preserving the long-term upside of the U.S. offtake market with ongoing offtake contracts with ExxonMobil. Cyclyx was created three years ago to solve an industry bottleneck: the lack of reliable on-spec plastic recycling feedstock at scale. The platform has made, you know, meaningful progress developing project designs, IP, and sourcing capabilities, and we do remain optimistic about its potential to be a significant player in the advanced recycling industry. The original construct was that Exxon and LyondellBasell would fund the development and construction of the first center, C1, in Houston, and that the second center, C2, planned in Dallas, would incorporate the learnings from C1 to expand capacity. Agilyx did not participate in the funding of C1, but we did raise and reserve approximately $68 million to fund 50% of the second project. As we've disclosed before, the first project, C1, is over budget due to design changes and adjustments since FID in November 2023. And while vendor selection on C2 was close at hand, now we've downselected to two vendors on a turnkey basis, and the forecasted budget for C2 remains, quotes from them, "remains in line with FID." Cyclyx has been holding off on the development of C2 until completion of C1. So that pause has been a hurdle for Agilyx. On an annual basis, we fund approximately $8 million of Cyclyx's operating costs, which is 50% of their annual budget. We incur a further $7 million cap in cash interest expense on the senior-secured bonds, and prolonged uncertainty has certainly been affecting market confidence, and so we're taking steps to remedy this, today. In collaboration with ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell, we've come to an arrangement which significantly strengthens our ability to pursue our strategic goals with what we believe is significantly less risk, and that reorganization has four, you know, four key elements. Firstly, C1 will be transferred to ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell. They will own the asset and invest to complete it. Agilyx will have no further cash exposure on C1. This settles the previously disclosed risk that we may have a material cost exposure on that project. There is no liability moving forward. Secondly, C2 FID will be unwound, and the members will be released from the CapEx commitments to the projects. So Agilyx currently holds U.S. dollars $40 million in escrow related to C2 and has advanced $20 million to Cyclyx for the project. Most of those funds previously advanced will be returned after a reserve for future expenses, and that will allow Agilyx to fully redeem the senior-secured bond, which we expect to do on the 31st of March. We will make a final $1.7 million quarterly interest payment on that senior bond in February, but after that, we do not expect Agilyx to incur any material cash expenses related to Cyclyx. So that May call $54 million bond redemption will be funded fully through the escrowed cash and the cash redistributions returning from Cyclyx. Thirdly, Agilyx will move from 50% to 100% ownership of Cyclyx, including the platform, the IP, the data, design, and the commercial relationships. Fourthly, and very importantly, the offtake agreement with ExxonMobil of 50,000 tons per year will remain in place on substantially the same commercial terms, and as today, and ExxonMobil will have a ROFR on the next 50,000 tons of uncontracted volume. So the offtake contract remains substantially similar, but it will be more flexible, and it will be directly with Agilyx rather than with Cyclyx. So we have the option now to sell additional volumes to third parties more easily or more to ExxonMobil. The increased offtake flexibility gives us also the opportunity to integrate Green Dot and use Green Dot's capabilities to supply ExxonMobil demand, and I'll come back to that in more detail later. That's a synergy which we have not been able to capture previously, and we can now pursue that. So as I mentioned, we are maintaining the offtake opportunity with ExxonMobil in the U.S. on substantially the same terms as already in place, and with that option, we also can add additional volumes. If we use GreenDot to supply this offtake out of Europe, the margin will be higher than previously projected because GreenDot's EPR business in Europe is covering the sourcing costs. If alternatively we proceed to construct a facility in the U.S., which remains our alternative or an option, we will work with investment partners at the project level and leverage design and technical competence at GreenDot to improve that project and facility design, which has already been developed. I would also add that our 100% ownership of Cyclyx adds several advantages. It allows us to be more flexible and efficient in our project finance structures for these projects, in the U.S. It allows us to more quickly expand offerings to others in the industry, and it allows us the flexibility to integrate Cyclyx and Agilyx around capabilities around research and development, feedstock testing, and waste characterization, all functions which have pre-existed at Agilyx and which we licensed into Cyclyx. So we have that capability already in-house and can advance it further with 100% ownership. And lastly, from a strategic perspective, we'll be able to better share expertise between Agilyx and our European investment into GreenDot. GreenDot really has very significant operating experience with mechanical recycling and sorting capabilities. Agilyx brings really deep experience in conversion technology and the chemistry of waste plastic, and to date, it's been more challenging to integrate those functions and capabilities due to differing ownership structures between the two entities. So a lot remains the same. The market opportunity is intact. We see a structural supply shortage in the market for reliable on-spec plastic recycling feedstock. We have long-term supply contracts to deliver this feedstock, both with Exxon continuing in the U.S. and with a variety of U.S. projects or EU projects, excuse me, currently under commissioning or construction. And we're very well positioned between our EU and our U.S. markets across both mechanical and advanced recycling value chains. So that's a lot of what stayed the same. What has changed is we've materially reduced the CapEx and OpEx exposure at Cyclyx without losing the U.S. growth opportunity. We've transferred C1 to our partners and eliminated all cost exposure on that project. We've deferred C2 until C1 is complete, and the financing and timing are appropriate for Agilyx to continue on a more capital-light model to deliver that feedstock. We've moved and are moving to a Europe-first execution strategy to focus on a more profitable and growing European platform, which we're pretty excited about in terms of its potential and what has accomplished even in the last period since we became investors. Value creation has not really materially changed. We continue to focus on near-scale, near-term scale and cash generation in Europe through GreenDot. We continue to work on our styrenics platform to provide a circular pathway for polystyrene recycling, and we will continue to deliver feedstock to Exxon and other parties in the U.S. Turning to GreenDot from a marketing perspective, from a market perspective, PPWR, which is the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulations launched in Europe, came into force in early 2025, really having a profound impact and effect on the EU market opportunity. In 2027, the European Union is going to announce penalties for non-conformance, which is going to further lock in the recycled content requirements under PPWR. As early as this year in the spring, potentially in Germany, they're going to announce regulations for advanced recycling. There are eco-modulation schemes launching in France, and plants are moving forward. But the immediate source of high-quality recycled plastic is mechanical recycling, and that's where GreenDot is positioned and expanding. So the European Union market expansion is where we intend to focus our resources. We will maintain focus on the U.S., but increasing focus on the EU. Since announcing our investment into GreenDot in 2025, we've already seen significant advances. The company acquired Forplast in December, which produces high-quality mechanical recycling granules at at three times the margin of standard mechanical recycling granules. We're working to upgrade the quality of GreenDot's existing mechanical recycling facilities in Germany. The focus is on moving to higher-value mechanical recycling output and meeting while also meeting advanced recycling needs, where those markets are developing and where those plants are coming online. If we look at GreenDot's focus and outlook, we see opportunities to expand our EPR business and its control over increased volumes. We're continuing to optimize and expand our sorting operations at GreenDot. We're upgrading mechanical recycling plants towards higher-end margin, higher-end products, and we're securing long-term feedstock supply agreements with advanced recyclers across Europe. The business generated EUR 12 million in EBITDA in 2025. It has a high visibility on EUR 20 million in 2026 based on contracts already in hand. After closing on the GreenDot investment in 2025, as I mentioned, we did close on an acquisition of a key to high-value mechanical recycling in Italy, and we are evaluating other targets for potential acquisition. The EPR business is the core of the platform. It currently collects 300,000 tons per year of plastic waste and generates a profit for handling that waste. It routes plastic through mechanical recycling channels for additional margin, and it increasingly to advanced recycling channels where margins are higher. In the European Union, we do expect a 20x increase in advanced recycling feedstock demand by 2030. The margins on that feedstock are compelling, and GreenDot's generating circa EUR 100 a ton of margin on the average advanced recycling offtake contracts and truly tremendous profit potential coming from that industry. And we will also focus on moving feedstock to European plants while now also, in addition, looking to supply other OECD countries, including the U.S., as example Exxon, with sourcing from our GreenDot assets in Europe. Looking at 2030 for GreenDot, our ambitions are to move from 300,000 tons of collected plastic today to 752 million tons of plastic within our control by 2030, both through organic growth in our markets and acquisitions of additional EPRs, collection agents, collection systems across the continent. We do see mechanical capacity moving from mechanical recycling feedstock capacity moving from the current 85,000 tons to 325,000 tons per annum, and advanced recycling output capacity moving from the current 25,000 tons to 70,000 tons through the addition of new feedstock supply, capabilities and infrastructure at GreenDot. I would add also that with the addition of the U.S. offtake potential to Exxon, we may further accelerate output capacity as we develop that that business opportunity. And then through a combination of M&A and organic growth, this translates to GreenDot revenues growing from the expected to grow from the current circa EUR 400 million in revenue to over EUR 1 billion in 2030. EBITDA, as I mentioned, was EUR 12 million in 2025, likely over EUR 20 million in 2026, and we project reaching EUR 100 million by 2030 as volumes increase and greater volumes is moving through both our advanced recycling and our mechanical recycling channels. So that the consolidation really allows for greater integration between Agilyx, Cyclyx, and GreenDot and has some really well-defined value creation drivers. In the near term, earnings will be driven by growing volumes under our control in Europe. We expect to see margin expansion through production of higher-quality mechanical recycling feedstock. We'll continue to add high-margin advanced recycling contracts as the projects come online. We are already, as I mentioned, engaged in M&A processes in GreenDot, looking at various targets. And at Agilyx, we'll focus on developing the basis for financing the Dallas, the C2 Circularity Center. We will wait till after the Houston Center is operational and then work with project finance, offtake partners, and strategic partners to bring that project forward, supported by the 10-year offtake agreement we have with Exxon to pick up the volumes from that project. And we'll also be, you know, we also do see that with the restructure and the reorganization, we'll be better able to extract synergies within the group. We're optimizing to route European volumes to the highest value markets, including potentially the U.S. Agilyx has really considerable data analytics and chemistry expertise, and that can really help determine the optimal recycling pathways for what are pretty complex European waste streams. And lastly, as we've mentioned previously, Green Dot really has extensive sourcing capabilities that can support commercialization of our styrenyx, closed-loop solutions for polystyrene recycling. We are already working very collaboratively with GreenDot to pursue opportunities, opportunities in Europe. So to conclude, in the near term, we will complete the integration of Cyclyx assets with Agilyx. We will fully redeem the senior secured bond on March 31st. In 2026, we expect to exceed EUR 20 million of EBITDA at GreenDot and to continue to expand production of high-quality recycling feedstocks and to close on selected M&A to accelerate that platform. Over the medium term, we'll continue to develop the U.S. market opportunity and to develop partnerships to finance both C2 once C1 is operational. The U.S. facility will be supported by offtake to Exxon. And as both of our EU and U.S. initiatives mature, we expect to find opportunities for cross-platform optimization between those assets and those geographies. So to sum up, we're entering 2026 with greatly reduced leverage, very low cash expense, a profitable GreenDot asset that's quickly growing, and a greater flexibility to apply capabilities at both Agilyx and GreenDot to advance both elements and harness synergies across both businesses. The effort to reach here has really obviously required a lot of work and significant change, but we're very optimistic about our current position and pretty excited about what we'll accomplish in 2026. So that concludes my prepared presentation today. We'd be happy to take questions. Agilyx CFO Bertrand Laroche, as I mentioned, is on the call with us, and together we'd be happy to hear any questions you have. Thank you. Can I? Go ahead, Eric. Yeah. So it seems to me that you are basically selling the majority of the, let's call it, the legacy business for approximately zero, but you still keep some liabilities in Texas. So maybe some more details around why you are selling the what used to be the majority of the business until you bought GreenDot shares lately. Yeah. Why wouldn't we characterize it that way? The business consists of IP and project design and offtake agreements. The first project, C1, has never been we were not invested in C1, and we didn't have material economics on that project because we weren't participants as capital investors. So there wasn't an offtake agreement to us that was generated margin. The value has been in the second project. So but by offloading that first one to the through the strategic partners, we do remove any liability associated with having to participate and participate in the cost overruns of that project. But we retain the C2 offtake agreement, which is where all of our margin or most of our margin traditionally has been. So we continue to be able to service and monetize the offtake to Exxon with substantially similar terms and with control of the IP and the project designs and the data that sits at Cyclyx. So from our perspective, we have a more flexible model, the same asset value and the same potential to generate margin. It's not a legacy business. It's still an ongoing business with great, you know, great potential for us. Thank you. Just a little bit on the liquidity, you mentioned or you said before Christmas that you were a bit short of liquidity. You did the convertible bond and got some added liquidity. You're now paying down the secured, the green bond. You still have the convertible bond. Are yours, what sort of, how, for how long are you funded now? Are you in a comfortable situation for 2026 or for first quarter, second quarter? Can you give some more flavor to that aspect? Sure. Yeah. We feel much more comfortable. We have immediate cash visibility through the middle of 2026. Our ongoing cash needs are now dramatically lower and so pretty modest requirements for the balance of the year. We do have the convertible bond framework that's been approved. It can be placed overnight. So we have a pretty high level of comfort that we have visibility there. We always have the opportunity, which we don't want to, as we mentioned before, we don't want to do it. We have monetization capabilities at GreenDot as well. So we're not with the restructure of Cyclyx and the, you know, great reduction in cash expenses, we feel pretty comfortable with our ability to fund 2026. Thank you. Yes, Nick. Sorry. Thanks. What's the ongoing level of OpEx associated with the Cyclyx part of the business? And do you retain any staff or cost base in the U.S., or that's kind of all gone? We won't. By the time that we close towards the end of March, we will have reduced all the costs and expenses at Cyclyx, and we will incorporate the IP data and capabilities into Agilyx, where we already have people who in some ways originated that IP, and now we're going to take it over moving forward. So we don't anticipate any material cost expenses at Cyclyx moving forward. Okay. And the offtake agreement with Exxon for the 15,000 tons per annum, when does that start? Bertrand, do you have the start date on that? It would start in 2027. Okay. And that's to supply into C1? C2. The offtake is for C2. So is C2 definitely being built? So yeah. Sorry. It's, it's just for clarity, we refer to it as C2. It's a new offtake agreement with the equivalent terms of what we had in C2 in terms of the margin, with the additional flexibility that we can supply it out of Europe. We can supply it out of different systems in the U.S., and it's sort of up to us how we want to do it. So the question then becomes, will we build a facility? Will we build it exactly at C2? We could. We could, but we would finance it at the project level rather than with the senior secured bonds the way it was currently structured at Agilyx. I'd see us doing it two ways. Either we build a facility and future facilities in the U.S., finance at the project level, or we will supply out of assets coming out of Europe. Or there could be a combination, meaning we would source waste out of Europe and do final prep and finishing in the U.S. with a much lighter touch in terms of CapEx. But that offtake is a 10-year offtake agreement with Exxon, 50,000 tons committed, and then another 50,000 tons ROFR for them on additional uncontracted volume. So that's a financiable project. We just have to decide whether we want to do it there or we want to do it differently. Okay. So you supply Exxon wherever they put it. That's their business. And you either build something in the U.S. to supply it or you ship from Europe. That's correct. If you ship from Europe, what's the sort of margin on that? In the U.S., actually, U.S. margins or EU margins would actually be better for us because our EPR business out of GreenDot funds the sourcing cost, while in the U.S., you have to rebuild all those sourcing channels. So even though the pricing on the offtake is a similar pricing to what we were getting out of the C2 offtake with Exxon, the delivery cost, if we source it out of Europe, will be lower. Okay. But you don't say roughly what that margin is? Well, Bertrand, we have discussed what the EU margins have been for GreenDot, which is about EUR 100-EUR 150 per ton. I think we have, Bertrand, can we provide some insight on the U.S. per ton margins that we've disclosed? Sure. So I think it's helpful to start by framing what the economics were expected to look like under the prior structure and then see how it translates under the new agreement. Under the original C2 construct, once operating at steady state and delivering 100,000 tons per year of advanced recycling output to ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell, we expected approximately EUR 15 million of annual cash flow to Agilyx. And that was a combination of, like, investment income, royalties, and Agilyx share of the profits retained at Cyclyx level. Under the new arrangement, where the structure is different, it's not cost-plus anymore, we believe we can generate a similar margin on a per-ton basis. We're starting with a EUR 50,000 offtake with room to expand both with ExxonMobil and with additional offtakers. The exact margin will depend a bit on how we service that agreement. Well, the agreement provides Agilyx with flexibility on how that offtake is serviced. As Ranjeet mentioned earlier, if we use GreenDot to supply the offtake, the margin could be higher because the GreenDot EPR business covers some of the sourcing cost. And if we construct a facility in the U.S., we would do so with a project-level investment partner and leveraging the GreenDot expertise, particularly from the plant in Austria. Okay. So Nick, just to give you a specific number that you would see from our offtake agreements, we've announced before that we have roughly EUR 13 million of margin coming out of C2 at 100,000 tons. So from that, those numbers, you can sort of back out rough margins per ton, and we're seeing similar numbers with a revised offtake. Okay. The long-term lease you have still in Dallas-Fort Worth, that was land intended for C2, was it? That was intended for C2 and is non-recourse to Agilyx. So we have optionality there, whether that's the legal entity is in Texas. So our intention is to sublet it, but we don't see a long-term liability to Agilyx given the lease structure. Okay. I don't know if you can, I guess, help us understand. You say you retain the IP from Cyclyx. My understanding was Exxon and LyondellBasell was sort of relying on or benefiting from your IP in the operation of C1 and any other facilities that were built. But now they're going to operate them without you, if I understand correctly. Like, where is the IP then if they don't seem to need you? The IP is sitting at Cyclyx, but it's licensed to C2. What is the IP if the people who were benefiting from it don't seem to need it? Well, the designs have been built, right? The designs, the project designs have been incorporating the capabilities and the feedstock specs and the architecture. So that's being made available on a license that's moving with C1. So they'll have that access to that capability in operating C1. Okay. Could they build another one, or they can't build another one without licensing it from you? They theoretically could, but it's very unlikely that they would do that. That's the business. They don't necessarily want to be in the waste management business. So our expectation would be that they'd be working with us for future offtake. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Thanks for taking my questions. Yeah. Any other questions? We have some questions coming in through the chat if you're able to access that, Ranjeet. Yeah. Let me check. So the first question was, where do we provide some guidance on where we expect the liquidity position to be post-secured bond redemption? So I think I've answered that. You know, we're feeling pretty comfortable with our liquidity through the middle of the year. And from that point forward, relatively low cash needs that we have several mechanisms to fund. Similar question, I guess, Jonas, about the cash funding gaps and cash needs. How much CapEx is needed to reach the EUR 100 million EBITDA? Bertrand, maybe you want to pick that up. EUR 100 million EBITDA target for 2030, the CapEx estimates. Sure. So what we previously disclosed is we think those assets on a standalone basis without any M&A acquisition can generate EUR 50 million of EBITDA by 2030 without any additional capital need. To get to EUR 100 million EBITDA by 2030, there is an additional external growth strategy. So that would require between EUR 100 million and EUR 150 million of additional capital funded through a combination of cash and debt to add that extra EUR 50 million of EBITDA by 2030. It's important to remember this is not upfront CapEx. So capital would be deployed progressively over several years and in line with earnings accretion and balance sheet capacity. We're already seeing EBITDA grow next year above EUR 20 million. There will be, like, some cash available upon the refinancing of the existing debt of GreenDot. So we don't expect all of that capital to be funded through equity. However, we have been in discussion with some financial sponsor interested in deploying capital to execute on that M&A opportunity that we are seeing in the market right now. So as we mentioned earlier, we see EUR 50 million EBITDA coming out of GreenDot in its current trajectory. So the mention Bertrand has about additional CapEX investment would be to accelerate that to the EUR 100 million target. And a follow-up question was to Bertrand, the debt and cash position at GreenDot today? The net debt at GreenDot is around EUR 65 million at year-end, and with an EBITDA of EUR 20 million expected for 2026, that's a very reasonable leverage ratio. As we get towards, you know, the back half of 2026, there should be some opportunity to refinance the debt to provide some capital for that growth strategy. There is a question around the dividend coming from GreenDot. So that's a possibility to distribute dividend. We see right now, like, a very interesting opportunity, in particular on the mechanical recycling front in Europe, with the ability to acquire some very quality assets at, you know, close to equipment value or at a discount to equipment value. So I think, like, we would probably elect to use the cash available to do some value-accretive M&A acquisition rather than pay a dividend. But that's an option that Agilyx and its partner in GreenDot have. Question from Helena. Helena, you asked what went wrong with C1 and what's the progress in fixing it. So, when's commissioning expected? We, you know, C1, as we've talked about in the past, was FID, the first-of-a-kind project, underwent significant changes in engineering to meet ongoing and shifting requirements at ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell. And making changes to a project midstream is always more expensive than speccing it from the beginning. So that really compounded both the delays and the reset as engineering changed. So that is now final. The project designs are in final form, final budgeting, and ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell are moving forward with it. So there's a lot of learnings from that in terms of what we can do at C2 in terms of improved processes. And most of those learnings have now been incorporated into the design. So we're down selected to two vendors in Texas in the U.S. for the Dallas facility. We will delay now, probably choosing one as we decide what to do with that project in terms of timing. But we have pretty good clarity from them on budget and final project engineering. And we can see that the turnkey solutions which they're providing are being bid at roughly similar, materially similar budgets to what we anticipated in the original FID. We don't expect royalties out of the first project. Part of the transaction with ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell, where we take possession of the assets is of the IP. And the opportunity there is that we do not charge a royalty on the first project. Eric had a question. Is it correct? Yes. Thank you. Just, Bertrand, to follow up on your debt to EBITDA. I might have misunderstood, but the way I understood it is you expect a EUR 20 million EBITDA in GreenDot; is that correct? In 2026, we project EUR 20 million of EBITDA. Yeah. But the way I understand it, you only own majority stake in GreenDot, like 47% or something like that? That's correct. The debt of EUR 65 million, is that in GreenDot, or is that in Agilyx? That's the net debt at GreenDot level. That's at GreenDot level. So there's no debt left at Agilyx level? Once we took control once we redeemed the senior bond, there will only be the convertible bonds outstanding in terms of debt. How much is left of that after this transaction? We're not touching the redeemed, the senior secured, the convertible. So that's issue 24 is roughly what's outstanding today. What's the cash position in Agilyx after you pay down the green bond and all other costs related to the transaction? What do you expect the cash position in Agilyx to be? As I mentioned. Agilyx? Agilyx itself, we have funding visibility through the middle of 2026. In numbers, how much is that? Well, it depends a little bit on movements at Cyclyx and movements at Agilyx. So but, you know, that's our that's our. But is it a nine-digit million dollars, or is it more than $10 million, or? Less than $10 million from here to the end to the middle of 2026. Yeah. Okay. So you are in a good spot even without dividends from GreenDot. So you have enough to handle the convertible debt and other costs? We feel pretty comfortable with that because our ongoing operating costs moving forward are going to be fairly, you know, very modest at Agilyx. And we have the ability to place additional convertible bonds if we want to. And we can do that overnight as those have already been approved by the shareholders. And we have opportunities at Styrenyx, which we continue to work on relative to licensing. And lastly, we have, of course, abilities to take value out of GreenDot. So we're very comfortable that we have in that's within our control fully funding the plans. How the structure on the interest rate on the convertible, is that payment in kind, or is it? Payment in kind. It's payment in kind. Payment in kind. Okay. No cash. No cash. Super. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? So I see there's a question about the lease at Cyclyx. So we are leaving cash at Cyclyx as part of the arrangement with ExxonMobil and LyondellBasell to help cover lease cost. Then moving forward, that lease is about EUR 400,000 a month. So the balances there will help cover. And then we'll, of course, be subletting it. So but as I mentioned, it's a non-recourse lease. So we'll have to make a decision over the next months as to whether to maintain it or not. Bertrand, there's a question on maintenance CapEx at GreenDot and expected interest per year. Typical maintenance CapEx at GreenDot is between EUR 3 million-EUR 5 million. The debt is pretty attractively priced at Euribor plus 300, which generate, like, interest around EUR 4 million-EUR 5 million per year. Eric asked. You, there's a question from Eric about sourcing. That's correct. We will not have responsibility for sourcing for C1. Okay. I think that there were no more questions in the chat. I don't see any other hands raised. So thank you all for taking the time today, this morning. And we'd be happy to answer any other questions as they come up. We're always available. And look forward to seeing you soon. Thank you. Thank you.