Okay, good morning everybody. My name is Carsten Dybevig, and I'm the Vice President of Communication and Public Affairs. Welcome to a short webinar where Norske Skog's Vice President of Corporate Finance, Even Lund, will present highlights from the last quarter. The CEO and the corporate management are present, and from the management, we have Einar Blaauw, the legal counsel. We have the CFO, Tord Torvund, and we have the Senior Vice President of Commercial, Robert Wood, also present, in addition to the CEO, Geir Drangsland. After the presentation, you will be able to raise questions to the CEO by raising the yellow hand in the Teams. Keep please, please keep your microphones on mute. The word is yours, Even. Thank you, Carsten. So we published our Q1 results this morning. You can find them all on our website, including a webcast where Geir Drangsland goes through the presentation in full. As Carsten mentioned, we will go through a shorter version here on the call before opening up for Q&A. So, then, on the second slide, here you can see a snapshot of Norske Skog. We have now almost 1.6 million tons of publication paper capacity. We will shortly have 760,000 tons of packaging paper or containerboard capacity with the startup of Golbey PM1 in the second half of this year. Our net debt increased somewhat in the quarter. This has already been reduced following receipt of CO2 compensation in Norway and sale of around 100,000 allowances, meaning that net debt, actually at the moment is a bit lower than what you see here. Remaining net CapEx, NOK 400 million and cash of NOK 1.9 billion, total liquidity of NOK 2.3 billion, which includes then our undrawn RCF of EUR 31 million. We're proud to say that once again we received an A- score from the CDP Climate Change. So the highlights for the quarter: earnings, or EBITDA of NOK 76 million in the quarter. This was negatively impacted by mainly two things, NOK 46 million from the Tasman deconsolidation following end of operations at New Zealand, so one-off effect from that deconsolidation, and also a revaluation of our surplus balance of CO2 allowances of NOK 32 million. As of end of Q4, we had around 250,000 allowances on our balance sheet, and during the first quarter these were so reduced valuation due to lower CO2 prices impacting the EBITDA. On the market side, we're seeing positive developments in containerboard demand and resulting also then in a price increase at the end of the quarter, or throughout March of this year. However, further increases are still necessary as several producers still experience prices below production cost. For publication paper markets, the demand is stabilizing following a dramatic decline in demand during 2023, and we are also seeing the market for longer contracts returning. So all in all, some positive signs appearing in the publication paper market. We continue to grow in containerboard. Bruck PM3 increased their deliveries from 29,000 tons in the fourth quarter to now 38,000 tons, and we expect this to continue to grow going forward as the ramp-up curve continues. We hope to achieve around 85% during the second half of 2024. In addition, the biggest milestone of Norske Skog for quite some time is the startup of Golbey PM1 in the second half of this year, which will increase our total production capacity with more than 30%, meaningfully increasing the size of Norske Skog's total operation. So that will be a big milestone for us. On the balance sheet side, we maintain a strong equity ratio of 41%, interest coverage of 11.9 times, and after the quarter we repurchased around EUR 34 million of outstanding bonds, taking down our cash position somewhat. Briefly on the key figures, total productions slightly down, although we increased for most grades. Magazine paper grades increased deliveries and similarly, as mentioned, increased deliveries of containerboard. We had slightly lower deliveries of newsprint in the quarter, mainly due to some unplanned shuts in the quarter, but we hope to be back on track already now from the second quarter on the newsprint side. Total operating income down in the quarter, mainly due to insurance items, which affected the previous quarter, but also a result of lower deliveries and slightly lower prices. EBITDA dramatically down from the previous quarter, mainly as a result of the previous quarter seeing significant contribution from insurance. Pretax profit negative in the quarter, due to several larger, call it non-cash effects relating to energy derivatives, valuation of energy contracts, and other impacts from currency, impacting our euro-denominated debts. Back to containerboard, we continue to ramp up. As mentioned, Golbey PM1 will start in the second half of 2024, following completion of the electrical work at the site. Remaining gross CapEx of around NOK 1 billion, but we expect to receive around NOK 600 million in energy certificates, which will support this. Thus, the remaining net CapEx is around NOK 400 million. Bruck PM3 continues to grow and ramp up in line with plan, and we see excellent product quality and customer feedback from that machine, and we hope for Bruck PM3 to be positive already now in the second quarter in EBITDA. Briefly on Saugbrugs, quite a lot of insurance impacts in the previous quarters, more limited in the first quarter where we recognized NOK 52 million in other operating income and NOK 2 million in other operating expense, thus an EBITDA impact of around NOK 50 million in the quarter. We expect a similar level from property damage insurance over the next three quarters. On the property damage insurance, I think the key thing to mention here is that during the fourth quarter, last year we received a lot of cash from the insurance settlement, but not all of that has been recognized in our income statement. We are working to identify future projects at Saugbrugs, and upon identification of such a project, recognize another NOK 295 million in other operating income, which is a fairly meaningful amount, compared to our income statement. In addition, once we decide to invest in a project and as investment costs accrue, we will receive in cash additional NOK 615 million. Raw materials, quite quickly on that, we see energy prices normalizing, both electricity and natural gas coming down dramatically from the peaks seen in 2021, 2022, and also in 2023. Recycled paper prices are picking up, quite a bit, and access is increasingly challenging. However, we are sourcing quite well at both Golbey and Bruck, and we will reduce, of course, our sourcing of recycled paper at Skogn once we start up the new TMP line at the mill. Spruce pulpwood prices in Norway continue to increase and are at a very high level. This is the situation across most markets for pulpwood and impacts the producers relying on that feedstock. As already mentioned, CO2 prices were down a lot in the quarter, impacting our EBITDA, but we have seen a pickup in the price now, in the beginning of the second quarter, which is positive for us. And we sold, as mentioned, 100,000 allowances a few days ago at around the EUR 70 mark. Publication paper prices stabilizing, although again slightly down now in April, but we have seen a more stable development, at least over the past few months, indicating that prices are at cash cost for quite a few suppliers. The market is still seeing some excess capacity. Recycled containerboard prices, as mentioned, picked up around EUR 60 during March and remained at that level in April. Further price increases are still required, but this was certainly a development in the right direction for us. On the outlook, briefly reiterating the main points: energy costs stabilizing, but pulpwood costs remain. Recycled paper availability is challenging. Publication paper prices remain at low levels as the industry continues to see low utilization. Price increases for containerboard have been implemented, but further increases are required. We expect negative EBITDA from the packaging paper segment in 2024 as Golbey PM1 starts up in the second half, resulting in higher share of fixed costs. However, as mentioned, Bruck PM3 should be positive shortly. We have a significant focus on reducing production costs in this challenging environment and to efficiently increase or reduce our working capital to maintain a competitive position. Again, we maintain a strong liquidity position as investments near completion and debt repayments have started to increase, and we will repay debts for the next few years as well. So I think that's the final slide. Thank you, Even. Good. You're now able to raise questions to the meeting. And I don't see any people asking questions yet, but you have the opportunity to raise questions to either Even or to Geir. Okay, there are no questions. I'll call. Yeah, Cole Hathorn. You're welcome to raise your question. Morning. Thanks for taking the question. Could I just get a little bit of color on what you're seeing in the publication markets at the moment from, either like a restocking perspective or, you know, firstly from a restocking perspective and then secondly from, you talked about production costs being challenged for some of the competitors, but I'm just wondering, is this a big portion of it, the fact that they're operating at low operating rates or is it the fact that we are seeing movements in the waste paper prices and pulp and energy start to come back? You know, what are the drivers of some of the cost pressures on the publication paper side? Yeah. I think Mr. Robert Wood, SVP Commercial, answering the question. Yeah, just to say that I think a lot of the destocking was, of course, done in the early part of 2023 and we've kind of got to a more normal demand development, albeit it's still slightly negative. We've seen good, or better, order books, I think, as, as we mentioned, in publication paper. Yes, people are, of course, having to deal with slightly lower capacity utilization, but I think you're right in terms of the, the cost base is, is, where there's some concern for, for, for the industry. And I think that that's what's holding the prices at the moment. Yes, there was a slight adjustment in April, but as we've said, we're also seeing slightly longer, an appetite for slightly longer contracts now quarterly in, in Germany and then beyond quarterly in some other markets with six months pricing. So that's a sign, I think, that the customers also feel that there's not so much room for the prices to drop further. And then what will happen is if there is significant cost pressures, I think that that will perhaps move the prices up at some point. Is that okay? That's good. And then maybe I could follow up on that just to ask on, you know, you talked about extending customer contracts, but I want to follow that up on logistics and how imports from Canada and other regions and the Red Sea might be impacting your business as well. Well, that's an interesting one because actually the statistics for the first couple of months of imports of paper from Canada, particularly to the UK market, were actually down. So I think it's, it can also be seasonal. I wouldn't put too much emphasis on that. I think it's, they were down. People have picked up some tons from there, but they may ship a little bit more into the second half. I don't see it as a big issue. It's more, you know, normalized. Yeah, if, yeah, maybe that's not what you want. Different because the Canadians are not here or, you know, they are here. It's business as usual. Yeah, then maybe. Sorry, if you allow me, one more on the, maybe switching to the packaging markets. I mean, you're still a small player, ramping up in the containerboard markets. So I'm just interested to see, you know, how have those commercial negotiations been with some of the converters? Have you felt that demand improvement come through? Because I suppose you've been negotiating with those customers as kind of the destockings ended, you know, box demand started to pick up a little bit into 2024 for Golbey. So I'm just wanting to see, you know, how has that kind of small demand improvement helped your negotiations, filling your containerboard machine? And following on from that, do you see any impacts with the, the bigger, wider M&A, that might impact your business? I assume no, but I wanted to ask the question. Yeah. I mean, we've seen slightly more positive demand, and that's obviously us playing a part as, as you say, a small player, but they, we've got a good quality. We've got very, very good delivery logistics in place. So, we're seen as a new player, but we're seen as a player that's going to stay. And obviously, we're waiting for the Golbey startup. So we will find our place there. But when it comes to the larger M&A, I mean, you know yourself that there's a long way until that particular deal is finalized. So everyone will just have to wait and see what happens if indeed it goes through. We're kind of neutral on it, because we are starting up our own production. It's not going to necessarily impact us positively or negatively. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Cole. You have any other questions? No, that's right. I'll get back in the queue. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Johannes Grunselius, you're welcome to raise your questions. Yes, I hope you can hear me. Yes, we can hear you. Oh, perfect, perfect. Yeah. And apologies if I missed this in your presentation, but it would be useful if you could give some color on the market situation for containerboard and the price hike we saw in March. Do you think the market could be ready for any additional price hikes? And if you can give some, some, some light on the operating rates that you foresee in the industry. I think that, yeah, it's Robert again. I, I in terms of further increases, I think that's a bit dependent on what happens with the OCC prices. As we've said, there are producers who are probably underwater with some of the production. And if the OCC was to significantly increase, I think that you would see more appetite for further increases. Any other questions, Johannes? But would you say that the March increase is more reflecting a lot of players being underwater, or is it also because demand is ticking up? Well, a bit of both. I think we couldn't continue with the prices at those levels for much longer, I think, as an industry. And you know, the integrated players have as much to gain as the independent players. So I think it was just a reaction to the fact that you were starting to see some cost pressures on the raw materials. Right. And a slightly better demand because the destocking had taken place last year. It's a bit too early to see how it will go further forward. Okay. If I may, on the second question, which more relates to something different on the Saugbrugs situation and rebuilding that demolished paper machine, I mean, when do you think you're ready with sharing some of your thoughts on that investment project and, you know, because you have alluded to that you don't necessarily will stick to publication paper, right? It's Geir Drangsland here. We have identified the options for the future for the replacement of the damaged machine, Paper Machine 6. And I could not be accurate about when we will launch information about the plans we will, the options we will give priority, but it will be within the second quarter. There will be given and shared information to the market and shareholders about what's going to happen. Okay. Within second quarter. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions from you, Johannes? No, that's fine. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Then I give the word to Martin Melbye. You're welcome. Good morning. You write in the report that the market for longer contracts is returning in publication paper. Could you elaborate on that, please? Well, just that, you know, we've gone from, say, monthly pricing in, in certain, well, particularly newsprint in Germany to quarterly. We've moved to some, six-months contracts in, in, in Scandinavia and, say, the UK. So I think that's a signal that things are, you know, more on the, on the, on the bottom level and that the, the customers also fear that things will, will turn up. So they're wanting to secure a little bit more, at the, the current prices so that they can, you know, budget accordingly going forward. And I think there is this fear a little bit around, particularly in Continental Europe, around what happens with the recovered paper prices and availability. So people are just watching that rather closely. Okay. So that does that mean that you run the risk of locking in a low price at the bottom now, or the opposite? Well, you have to take it into consideration all the different input factors. It's, I don't think that we are risking taking a measured position with those contracts that we've entered into. And at the same time, no one has talked about, you know, prices in Asia. We see those kicking up as well. And sometimes that can be a forerunner of what happens in Europe. So we are being as clever as we can be with taking contracted positions and still giving ourselves flexibility to flex around further changes. If we're locking into one quarter, that's not a significant risk as I see it. I see. Thank you. And the last question on, on fiber costs and pulp wood in Norway. Did you capture the entire increase now in Q1, or is there a spillover effect in Q2 and what you reckon for the second half of the year, please? I think, the, the on the balance sheet at the 1st of January, of course, there were stock with old prices and increase, which we had to absorb in, the renegotiating the sourcing for 2024 is. And I think most of it, it is absorbed in the first quarter, but there could be some, some movements also in second quarter. But most of the price increases has been absorbed in, in, first quarter. So what, in a way, kind of surprises me a little is when normally when you have this substantial price increase, which we have had last two years on pulp wood, the supply should increase because it's more profitable for farmers or wood owners to transfer their forest to money because it's good prices. But this increase of supply hasn't occurred. So that's a little surprising. Okay. Any other questions to you? Any thoughts about the second half of the year on pulp wood? Too early. Too early Too early to say, I think, for the second half pricing. Yeah, too early, too early to say. Okay. Thank you to you, Martin. And then Cole Hathorn has another question. You're welcome. You're on mute, Cole. You have to unmute your. Thanks for taking the follow-up. Just, just a question on the, you know, the recovered paper markets. I'm trying to understand what's driven the, the most recent increase off the bottom. And now I'm wondering if this is increased demand or shipment costs into Asia, where, you know, increasingly they've got a, a recovered fiber problem and they're looking for better quality, including U.S. and European waste paper prices. You know, the U.S. prices have moved up. So I'm just wondering, what do you think in your view is driving the, the increase off the bottom in Europe? Is this kind of export demand pull, or is it underlying demand getting better in the European markets feeding the European mill base across containerboard and some of the publication mills? Thank you. I, I, it's Robert again. I think there is an element, of course, of the exports, but I don't think it's necessarily underlying demand increase in Western Europe. I think it's the fact that there was such a dramatic drop in the demand for publication paper last year that it's actually less fiber available in the system. I mean, you saw dramatic drops in the demand, meaning that the actual usage of the paper was lower last year, and that's feeding into less available for recycling. So it's a combination of some more exports, as you correctly say, towards China where they need fiber, and it's also less available quality in Europe. And there's issues also with some of the sortation where people are not prepared to sort in the same way. So there's a yield impact as well. Thanks very much. That's helpful color. And then, sorry, one last follow-up is the, am I right in thinking that, you know, a higher energy price just in general would be a benefit for Norske Skog because you would be able to have higher CO2 allowance, and you'd have a relatively better cost position? It just as a generalization. Yes, that's correct, Cole. So we have most of our energy, both thermal and power, on either internal supply or long-term contracts. So yes, that would improve our cost position. Thank you. Then I cannot see any others who have raised their hand or asked, who wants to ask any questions. So then I will thank all for participating in this webinar and have a nice day to everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.