A very good morning, welcome to OHT's second quarter results presentation. I have Tom Jebsen with me, CFO. I'm Torgeir Ramstad, CEO of the company. We will just remind you to read the disclaimer after this presentation, please. The agenda for today is to, as usual, go through the numbers first. We will talk about the operations and contracts, status for the new building contracts and projects. Of course, following the announcement on July 8th, where we are combining with the Subsea 7 renewables business unit. We will dive a little bit into that as well. Then round off with a market and outlook summary. Tom? Thank you, Torgeir. Just a few slides on the results. We posted $17.7 million in top line during the quarter, which was up by more than $6 million from Q1. At the same time, you'll see on the next line that the voyage expenses increased by approximately $2 million. Those two items together gave us a time charter equivalent earnings increasing from $17,600 in Q1 to $22,300 in Q2. Utilization was at the same high level as in Q1, or up three notches, up to 93%. As Torgeir will get onto, the market for our legacy vessels has been tightening and will continue to do so. We had ship operating expenses very stable around $9,200, which was the same figure as in Q1. This gave us an EBITDA that increased from negative $100,000 up to + $3.8 million in Q2. Jumping over depreciation and net financial expenses, the latter was close to zero. We ended up with a net loss of $147,000 or $0.001 per share. If we move on to the balance sheet, the non-current assets increased from $260 million up to $264 million. As you can see at the bottom, we invested $8.4 million during the quarter. You subtract the depreciation, you end up at the $264 million. Bank deposits and cash equivalents was just below $17 million and over current assets of $19 million gave us total assets of $300 million. Book equity was standing at $229 million. We had drawn $22 million under the revolving credit facility of DNB. We had the current liabilities, that is prepaid freight. In the case of the Dogger Bank project, we've already received a couple of $30 million from the field developers. Total current liabilities were standing at $47 million at the end of the quarter. In addition to those on-balance-sheet figures, we make the point that in note 10, we run through the contingent liabilities that we have, which is all related to the two new buildings, Alfa Lift and Vind 1. That was the same as end of first quarter. At the end of the second quarter, $381 million. Far in the third quarter, we paid another $10 million on mission equipment. Today, that figure stands at $371 million. Just a little bit on the financing. As those of you who have been following us for a while know, we announced in connection with the first quarter results that we had come to an agreement with two Norwegian banks and the Norwegian ECA for a $135 million facility that is to handle all of the final installment on the Alfa Lift. With the announcement on July 8th, we made contact with those financial institutions and asked for time out on the final documentation works. As you are aware, Subsea 7, the assets we are going to contribute are to be handed over free of net debt and initially no excess cash. The big point for us in OHT is that they will provide financial support to OHT, soon to be named Seaway 7 ASA, for our company's working capital needs. Basically, future financial expenditures, they are expected to be handled by the operating cash flows of this new combined company. If required, Subsea 7 are committed to support new debt facilities in their new partly owned subsidiary. Little bit on accounting treatment and listing prospects. OHT ASA will be the surviving entity. That is, we will keep the Euronext Growth listing. The company will be renamed to Seaway 7 ASA. From an accounting perspective, it is the renewable business of Subsea 7 that will be deemed to have acquired OHT. That is, it will be accounted for as a reverse takeover. The combination date we aim at having on October 1st. Currently, there is only one item left, and that's one country's competition authorities that need to approve it. We think that is more formality. Going forward, we will have a little bit of an, let's say, peculiar situation when reporting Q3, because that will still only be the current OHT ASA figures you will see. From Q4 reporting, we will show the combined Seaway 7 group. As to listing prospects, Seaway 7 will, as I said, keep its Euronext Growth listing. Oslo Stock Exchange has accepted to consider the second-largest shareholder in OHT, that's Lotus Marine, as part of a free float or free liquidity. From day one, we will start the new Seaway 7, we'll have 14% free float. As to moving on to the main board, it is a requirement from the stock exchange that free float should be increased to minimum 25%. There are some cases where they have accepted just in excess of 20%. Anyway, we will need to sit down with the new management, the new owners, and consider what will be the next steps to qualify for a main board listing. With that, Torgeir, I leave it to you again. Thank you, Tom. Going over to operations and projects and status on the transportation side for the five heavy transportation vessels. As Tom mentioned, utilization has improved from around 90%- 93% in the quarter, and price levels and time charter earnings are coming up as well, as predicted. This is very much down to certain markets coming out of a slump, as well as competitors being more and more busy on some long-term oil and gas projects. With the cost levels in accordance with budget and under full control, we see those improvements in earnings from the transportation fleet that was mentioned, generating the $3.9 million EBITDA that we saw. As a very important factor for us, we made the scrubber investments back in 2019 and 2020. The total payback for that is reaching 100% quite soon. As we speak, we are near that number. Going forward, that will be a very nice feature for us in terms of how we can capitalize on fuel cost savings. Fuel remains part of the lump sums that we offer to clients. As such, we are therefore able to keep the entire saving in the company. At the bottom, there's a graph showing different types of transportation items and assets. We note that the renewable share on a rolling 12-month basis remains above 50%. When it comes to the installation market for wind farms, offshore wind farms, that's of course the markets that are targeted by Alfa Lift and Vind 1. Also to a certain extent by the transportation fleet, where we see a good portion of these projects and other projects asking for long-distance transportation, which our vessels are very suitable for. Unfortunately, none of our target contracts have been awarded in the market yet. That means further delays from the client side, although a few of them are now nearing, in our view, a conclusion phase. I heard a competitor that mentioned that we have talked about imminent contract awards for three quarters now, and that it was due to OHT's perhaps lack of track record in these segments that we hadn't secured any yet. This is, of course, entirely untrue. This company has decades of experience in the relevant segments by the high-caliber people we have recruited into our organization. In addition, the reason, as I just mentioned, for no contract awards so far is that none have simply been awarded yet. I can mention that the same competitor has announced one contract in the last six months, or nine months even. That was a project we never pursued in OHT, so we haven't lost anything either. You see a very solid project portfolio in the pipeline here. Of course, as we track projects by segments, in certain cases, we will offer turbine installation, some cases we will offer foundation installation. Even other cases, we will come in as a subcontractor or a partner to a third party and offer an even broader scope. For these named projects, there are different combinations of these different segments included. What we see is that our focus remains, as before, very much on Northern Europe and with just a handful of exceptions, particularly in the U.S.A. When it comes to operational contracts on the installation segment, it's the Dogger Bank A and B contracts, as we have talked about before, and they continue very much as we mentioned in the previous quarter. We are still in the detailed design phase. We're still developing more and more detailed activities and operations, documenting those, performing risk analysis, risk mitigation activities, and establishing risk registers for these. That's very much part and parcel of this type of project in the current phase that we're in. In addition, there's some procurement activities ongoing for equipment, support equipment, lifting equipment, grillage, sea fastening solutions, and this all continues as per plan. Relationship with the client is excellent, and we are developing this project very much hand-in-hand and together. There are changes on this project, instigated by the client, but we see the value of being close to the client when it comes to finding efficient solutions for those changes. Those are still under discussion. No undesired events or incidents on the project. We will, as previously mentioned, start offshore construction in the third quarter of next year. On the new building side, Alfa Lift, Vind 1. We see a picture here of the main deck of Alfa Lift, where the support cradles for monopiles for Dogger Bank have now been installed, as we can see, the yellow structures. These support cradles are not built or designed for Dogger Bank specifically. They are generic structures that will be used time and again on a multitude of future projects. This is an investment, long-term investment that we make, but will also then contribute to standardizing execution and also cutting costs in the long run. This has been our philosophy for everything else on board Alfa Lift. Otherwise, the shipyard progresses satisfactorily. I think we have certain disciplines with delays, and we are working very closely with the shipyard's management to mitigate those delays. We still see that the shipyard maintains delivery at the end of this year. We believe we may need some more time, and in any case, we will keep the vessel there in Q2, sorry, in Q1 2022, in order to install and hook up the key mission equipment on the vessel's deck, even if that happens after shipyard delivery, formal delivery to us. Otherwise, we have installed the crane in the past period. That's always a major milestone. Crane is a big structure, 3,000-ton crane that also weighs around that same number of tons, and it came on board in three big pieces. In addition, two of the four generator sets on board have been test run successfully, and this means we get power in the vessel for the first time. For Vind 1, of course, we only started that project in Q4 last year, so it hasn't come as far. We are still in detail design. We are progressing well. Two-thirds of documents have been issued for approval, which is according to plan. Most importantly, the focus on reducing dry ship weight, which again increases variable deck load, VDL, is a very key factor for us in this entire development. We have a starting point of 8,750 tonnes. We're now looking at even going beyond 10,000 when we are finished. This is a very important competitive factor. Delivery maintained in the middle of 2023. Okay, I said in the beginning, in the agenda, that we will talk a little bit about this combination with Subsea 7's renewables business. Personally, I have to say this is like a marriage made in heaven. The two companies are extremely complementary. We have very few overlaps. We also share many of the same cultural aspects. Management has extremely good dialogues these days in the integration planning. We're looking very much forward to first October when we can go live and go through all the other activities that we're not allowed to perform right now due to the anti-competition process that's ongoing. Here's a summary of perhaps the main items and the characteristics brought in by each side into the combined Seaway 7 ASA company. On the Subsea 7 side, they have, of course, an extensive track record in renewables and also a big project execution muscle in the sense that they have skilled and experienced people, large organizations to handle complex projects. This is an extremely important element to bring into our market segment. They have market leadership positions in certain segments. I would perhaps pull up the inter-array cable installation segment where they have a world-leading position we claim. They have a global footprint. If Seaway 7 or the renewables business doesn't have an office somewhere, Subsea 7 will, and that Subsea 7 office will support the renewables business. There's a good example in the U.S. where Seaway 7, or the renewables business, has offices on the East Coast with sales and representative people for different functions. The big project execution muscle is in the Subsea 7 office in Houston, supporting the renewables business. This is something they bring in, which we don't have in OHT. Subsea 7 is an investment-grade company with a strong balance sheet, and they have put all of that behind the supporting of the new company. Finally, I touched on it, EPCI capabilities, that's a lot about project management and project execution skills and track record. It's a lot about financial strength. It's also a lot about track record and experience from similar complex execution projects. On the OHT side, we mentioned we have very attractive new builds ongoing. I think the yard prices and the cost for other equipment that we have managed to secure, given excellent timing for our new build contracts, are seen as very attractive in the market and also by Subsea 7. In that, we have demonstrated to the market that we have particularly innovative solutions, especially around the Alfa Lift and the handling of monopile installation, where we take a conveyor belt approach. We tailor-make these things, the equipment, the solutions, the methods, for the long term, for a number of projects coming, and we look beyond, therefore, the next project. We have a particular benefit in being based in Scandinavia, in Oslo, and Denmark, and there are some very key clients in the renewable space that are based around our offices in Oslo and in Vejle, Denmark. I mentioned that we have a complementary situation on the segments that we cover. If there is an overlap, there's on the heavy lifting side and the foundation installation side, where Alfa Lift and two vessels in the Subsea 7 fleet overlap. That happens also to be the segment where we see the biggest bottleneck going forward, so we're not at all concerned about that. This is a strength, not a weakness. Finally, I think in all honesty, OHT has been seen as a lean and agile company, being able to efficiently come to a very mature level with a small organization, relatively speaking, and with light procedures and processes, short decision lines, and being agile when it comes to those decisions. We believe that we can bring that into the other side and perhaps blend that in and get a good balance when we now combine the two companies. Looking very much forward to that. What we see now is then that following combination on the 1st of October, we, as Seaway 7 ASA, will essentially cover all the main aspects of bottom-fixed offshore wind. The segments that we're looking at are foundations, where we cover foundation transportation, foundation installation with three vessels, as mentioned, turbine installation with Vind 1 and potentially future options if and when they are declared. Substation installation, where Seaway 7 comes in with a Seaway Strashnov with a slightly bigger crane. Inter-array cables, where there's two cable layers and a support vessel coming in from Subsea 7, where they are particular specialists in the inter-array cable installation segment. They are also covering export cables to a certain extent, although that's not the main specialty for them. This provides for a very broad offering, an ability to either offer separate segments, T&I, transport and installation, that means, or combining several T&I scopes in different segments, or even building a bridge and combining several of these aspects with an EPCI approach, where we also design, fabricate, and transport the foundations for the wind farm. When it comes to geographic footprint, well, we cover all the main markets, all the main clients out there, and by combining our offices, which we intend to maintain, we again have very few overlaps, and we are able to then be close to the key clients and being active in the markets that we will serve. That includes Northern Europe, U.K., the U.S.A., and Asia. Tom? Yeah. Just a little bit on the merger process. As we both have said, we expect the merger to be completed by the first day of the fourth quarter. Integration planning is going on schedule, save for what we can talk about when it comes to competition issues. As I mentioned, the competition authorities, one left or one to go, which we expect to receive sometime during September. Also, there has, in certain countries, certain European countries, been a legal requirement for employee consultation process. Those have been completed. In the July 8th announcement. It was stated that Subsea 7 would only need a board approval to carry through this transaction, while OHT will need to bring it to the shareholders in an extraordinary general meeting. When it comes to OHT, the two largest shareholders, controlling 76%, have already confirmed that they will support the combination. Effectively, that is just a meeting we have to carry through, but it will definitely be approved. I guess that's the main items, Torgeir, on that one. Yeah. Just rounding off briefly on the markets and the outlook. If we take the transportation side first, as mentioned, we have seen increasing utilization. There's a limit as to how long that can continue to increase because we're already at a very high level, 93%. We see a gradual continued increase in pricing. There will be probably some lumps up and down, but we see it as a more solid market also price-wise going forward, and especially into next year. Gradually increase over the autumn this year as well. This is driven by a material reduction in available capacity in the market, and that is something we have big benefits from going forward. We are bidding a number of wind farm execution projects on the transportation side, for different clients. Mainly we're talking about bringing monopiles and jackets from Asia to Europe, or monopiles from Europe to the U.S.A. These are the main trading routes, you could say, for the long-distance transportation opportunities that we see. We look forward to developing those opportunities further and hopefully announcing good news in the future. Of course, as we saw, the transportation segment is strategically extremely important as foundation fabrication in a larger degree will take place in other regions than the regions where the wind farms are built. Long-distance transportation becomes a key aspect of being able to offer predictable schedules and delivery plans. On the installation side, very much the same picture as we have talked about before. Increasing ambitions from governments here and there, U.S., U.K., Germany, Asia, many places wanting to do more in this segment. The big question that some people have started to ask is what does it take in terms of regulatory processes, in terms of permitting processes, in terms of supply chain capacity, and are there bottlenecks in those? To a large extent, these have not been solved, and therefore, all these need to be worked on. The particular bottleneck that we see in our segment is, of course, as before mentioned, the bottleneck in the availability of suitable and appropriate installation capacity for foundations and turbines. We are extremely well-placed as we come open or get delivery of Vind 1 in time for the lucrative 2024 season and onwards. Looking forward to that, and that's where we are bidding currently, all the tenders. Speaking of which, if a competitor happens to announce a project before us, it may happen because we are going to continue to be disciplined when it comes to pricing. There will be limitations as to how far we are willing to go, and we will just see. I'm not flagging that that's likely, but that could be a reason if it happens. Of course, on October 1st and that week already after October 1st, we will have huge market synergies from the combination with Subsea 7's renewables business unit. We will be able to compare notes, combine our efforts, reduce duplication, and go to the clients and say, "We have offered perhaps in parallel. Here is a combined offer," or, "We go ahead with just one of those offers that we have presented before." That's because we believe that's an even more competitive and better solution for the client. We look forward to those market synergies and getting to go with the new combined entity. That rounds it off for us, and we will go to the Q&A section, see if we can manage the technology for that. Here are questions coming in. There is a comment here. "Great improvement in the quarter. Can you provide some discussion around the current $22.3K per day average day rate for the transportation vessels?" Tom, maybe you can Torgeir said, we have a situation where there's a firming up of that market. Basically, the market we, or let's say the segment that we operate in, contains a couple of 30 vessels in total in the world fleet. We have five. Perhaps after, let's say, LNG train systems and chemical refinery modules have been absent in the market for several years. They are now about to come back into being transported again. We do not have any of those contracts, several of our competitors have. What we've seen during the second quarter and into the third quarter is that a number of our competitors have now been tied up with handling these contracts. Effectively, the number of available spot tonnage has decreased from a couple of 20, as we see it, down to just above 10. That's really the main reason why we see this tightening going on. As a second item, I could also mention, of course, that 2020 was a bad year when it comes to oil prices, as you all know. As late as in November, the Brent crude was standing at something like $45 per barrel, and today it's around $70. That, of course, also means that the segment as such has more business to do also with regard to oil and gas.Yeah. [Break] Sorry about that delay. We had some technical issues seeing the questions here, but now we have clarity as to what has been asked. One question here, how much additional CapEx is expected to be incurred beyond the $381 million in yard commitments to get the two newbuilds into operations? I can start with that. That is an all-inclusive estimate, including variation orders, including mission equipment, including the developments that we see, including mobilization costs, and including getting the vessels to the markets in Europe. Are there big risks of further surprises? Well, it's always risky to be involved in these activities, but we believe that that is a fairly firm view of the situation for Alfa Lift as well as Vind 1. As previously mentioned, for Vind 1, as an example, the yard price is $231 million. The all-in CapEx that we have accounted for in these numbers is $255 to account for exactly those factors I mentioned. Anything to add to that, Tom? I think you should look at that question over, which is a little bit on the same issue. Can you provide some color on the new building contracts? How much flex does the shipyards have to increase prices due to inflation? On that same note, how much competitive advantage is it, in your view, that your acquisition costs for the new building contracts are lower than for the peers? How does that impact your bidding behavior on contracts? In terms of flexibility in the ongoing shipbuilding contracts, there's none. There's no adjustment mechanisms for steel prices or other factors. Those ongoing shipbuilding contracts are firm and fixed and turnkey. No adjustment mechanisms in those. In the options for Vind 1, there is an adjustment mechanism for steel prices, and that will remain open and will be fixed upon contract signing. However, for a jackup, there's not that much steel going into such a unit. The whole point is to build it as light as possible. The potential additional cost in terms of steel cost is rather limited. When it comes to the advantage we have, we have seen some of the oil and gas-related construction vessels built, say 10 to five years ago that are now trading in the offshore wind market, having been built at much, much higher costs. The extreme example is 5x the cost of the pure ship for Alfa Lift. If you take the shipbuilding contract in its own right, that's just under $200 million. There is an example of a competing vessel that was built for 5x that. We understand that those vessels have been depreciated, of course, over a short period, but still there is a much bigger commitment behind those. We have also publicized some comparison numbers for the jackup fleet. We saw that as compared to our $231 million shipbuilding cost and $255 million all-in cost for Vind 1, that competitors have announced recently some other larger newbuildings, which at least in one of those two cases, we have argued that they are perhaps paying more than the additional benefit of the larger number of turbines they can carry. They will have a bigger issue making the same returns. We are happy with what we see due to the timing of our shipbuilding contracts. As to pricing, no, we're not pricing on a cost-plus basis. We're not looking at what the CapEx was and what the depreciation will be and then adding a margin on top of that. We are pricing based on market pricing principles. We're looking at what we think a unit price for a foundation or a turbine should be, what other people's behavior might be, what the competition is, and then we're pricing accordingly. That's three questions in one. There's probably here a critical question about contract awards. "Last quarter you said within September due to when the projects would have to start for clients to keep their schedule. Is within September still a likely due date for some of the contracts?" As I stand here today, there's a handful of contracts that could be placed and awarded in that time period. As we've seen, there are processes on the client side that change, and there are activities that we are not in control over. We will just have to see. Yes, there are a handful of contracts that could be concluded in September. It's frustrating to all of us that it takes so long, but I'm afraid that's part of the nature of this business segment. Let's see. I think we take one more question. "Based on how you see the market outlook for turbine installation vessels, do you find it likely that you will exercise an option for a second new build? If so, when could we expect this to happen?" I think you need to give us a little bit of time after the combination with Subsea 7's renewables business unit. We have an optional structure for the turbine installation vessels with the shipyard. At the same time, we have also stated that we, as OHT, want to see client commitments for the first unit before we go ahead with the secnd unit. I think we will maintain that principle. At least that will be our recommendation. Having said that, we now have one underway. There's a significant benefit of operating two similar vessels in the market in parallel in terms of utilization, in terms of presence in different world regions, in terms of redundancy. We will, of course, take a very close look at that in the new management team in the combined company and then make announcements as appropriate. With that, I think there's no further questions, and we will round off and say thank you for attendance and for your time, and looking forward to seeing you guys sometime in November as well. Thank you. Yes.