Welcome to the Paratus Energy Q4 2025 earnings call. There will be a question and answer session after the presentation. You can submit your question by using the button on the bottom of the player. I will now hand you over to the Paratus management. Go ahead. Good day, everyone. Welcome to this fourth quarter and full year 2025 results presentation for Paratus Energy Services Limited. My name is Robert Jensen. I am the CEO of Paratus. Joining me on the call today is Baton Haxhimehmedi, our CFO. Before we begin today's presentation, I would like to remind all participants that some of the statements on this call may involve forward-looking statements. Forward-looking information involves risks and uncertainties by nature that may cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in such statements. I therefore refer you to our latest public filings. 2025 was a strong year for Paratus. We delivered 99% technical fleet utilization for the year. We exceeded our initial full-year financial guidance. We continued to return significant capital to shareholders. For the full year, revenues were $452 million. Adjusted EBITDA increased 4% year-on-year to $261 million. We distributed $0.22 per share each quarter, totaling $144 million in dividends during 2025. In addition, we executed $25 million in share buybacks. Since our IPO in mid-2024, cumulative cash returns to shareholders have now totaling more than $285 million. In the fourth quarter, specifically, revenues were $115 million. Adjusted EBITDA came in at $69 million, and we ended the year with $204 million in cash and $581 million in net debt, reducing our net leverage to 2.2. Importantly, Q4 was characterized by very strong cash collections in Mexico. During the quarter alone, we collected $143 million, bringing total collections in 2025 to $356 million. This level of collection corresponds to roughly one and a half years of revenue and has resulted in a very meaningful year-over-year reduction in our receivable balance in Mexico, down to $199 million at year-end, compared to $347 million at the end of 2024. In 2025, we also simplified the Paratus group structure with the sale of our Archer stake, unlocking $48 million in gross proceeds. Finally, consistent with previous quarters, the board has approved a $0.22 per share dividend for Q4, maintaining our stable distribution policy. Now, let's move over to the quarterly review for each of our two operating entities. We start with our joint venture, Seagems. As usual, figures referred to here are on a 100% basis, unless otherwise stated. Seagems delivered another strong quarter. Q4 revenues of $147 million, EBITDA of $103 million, and technical utilization of 98%. The average day rate increased to approximately $278,000 per day, and at year-end, the backlog stood at approximately $1.3 billion. The modest revenue increase quarter-on-quarter reflects the full fleet operating under new Petrobras contracts, partly offset by some maintenance activity. EBITDA increased meaningfully compared to Q3, partly due to lower reported OpEx. As disclosed, this was mainly driven by a one-off reclassification of withholding taxes from operating expenses to income tax. For the full year, Seagems has now fully rolled into materially higher Petrobras day rates, resulting in strong margin expansion versus 2024. During Q4, the JV distributed $38 million to Paratus, bringing total distributions received in 2025 to $129 million. With only $170 million of debt at the JV level and $1.3 billion of backlog at very attractive margins, Seagems remains a very resilient and high cash-generating platform. Looking ahead, Petrobras recently issued a new PLSV tender for 2027 and 2028 startup, offering four-year contracts. As of now, the expected bid deadline is set for mid-April. We believe Seagems is well positioned to submit a bid for at least one vessel, as the Jade is scheduled to finish its current contract mid-next year. Overall, we believe this is very encouraging news as it reaffirms the very positive outlook for the PLSV market. Over the past few quarters, we have also been evaluating opportunities to expand the Seagems platform and further leverage on the strong operational capabilities the team has built over the years. That work is ongoing, and we see meaningful untapped potential within this platform. As part of these efforts, Seagems recently submitted a commercial proposal in response to a Petrobras tender for the demobilization of flexible lines. This is a scope of work that the JV has performed multiple times under its long-term contracts with Petrobras and is well within the team's operational capabilities. To position ourselves for this opportunity, we have secured access to a third-party vessel that would be deployed should we be awarded the contract. It is too early to comment on potential project economics, as a final award is expected in a couple of months. There is no certainty of success, we see this as an important first step in unlocking more of the platform's potential. We are optimistic that during 2026, we will be able to further develop beyond Seagems, beyond what it is today. Moving over to Fontis Energy, Q4 revenues were $42 million, compared to $55 million in Q3. As we communicated last quarter, Q3 included approximately $12 million of previously unrecognized revenue, which explains most of the sequential variance. Adjusted EBITDA in Q4 was $20 million, compared to $35 million in Q3. Operating expenses increased modestly due to year-end accounting approvals and severance provisions. Technical utilization remained strong at 99.5%, and the average day rate was approximately $114,000 per day. The backlog at quarter end stood at approximately $20 million, reflecting near-term contract roll-offs, partly offset by the short-term Defender extension. On receivables, and as mentioned earlier, we ended Q4 with $199 million outstanding, down from $293 million at the end of Q3. The $143 million collected in Q4 represents a very significant normalization step. Fontis has seen a much more consistent payment pattern since Q4 last year, reflecting a clear improvement compared to the fluctuations experienced previously. Moving over to contracting and the outlook for the fleet. The Oberon completed operations in January and has been warm stacked in anticipation of new work, while the Defender has received a short-term extension of two months. Overall, we are very encouraged by the continued improvement in the global jack-up market, supported by operating and tender activity levels in key regions, particularly in Saudi Arabia and West Africa. While budget-driven delays persist in Mexico, we continue to see structural demand for drilling if production targets are to be met. Recent public statements from the national oil company highlight a 34% year-over-year increase in total CapEx, alongside its objective to increase crude oil production. This would suggest the potential for improved budget availability and activity levels over the medium term. While no assurances can be provided, Fontis remains actively engaged in constructive discussions with its client regarding potential future contracting opportunities. At this stage, we hope to secure contract extensions for the Defender, Courageous, and Intrepid in direct continuation of their existing commitments. If secured, these extensions would maintain utilization for these rigs into the first quarter of 2027 and potentially beyond, on terms broadly in line with their current contracts. Titania and Oberon are both being actively marketed for new work. With the improving momentum in the global jack-up market, we are increasingly encouraged by the outlook for these rigs. We have also received several unsolicited bids and indications of interest and are evaluating potential sale transaction for one or both of these rigs. In parallel, we continue to assess strategic alternatives for the jack-up business as a whole. That process is moving forward, and we expect to conclude our assessment in the near term. At this time, we're not in a position to provide further detail, but we will update the market if and when something materializes. With that, I'll turn it over to Baton to walk you through the financial results in more detail. Thank you, Robert. Now let's start with a quick review of our Q4 results compared to the prior quarter. The net income after tax came in at $20 million, compared to $46 million in Q3. As shown in the top right graph on this slide, there are several reasons for it, which I will walk you through. First, the revenues decreased from $127 million to $150 million, and EBITDA came in at $69 million, compared to $78 million in Q3. Looking at the drivers in Mexico, EBITDA decreased from $35 million to $20 million. As mentioned by Robert previously in Q3, we had $12 million of previously unrecognized revenue, which did not repeat in Q4. we also reported higher OpEx due to year-end accruals for several severance related to Oberon, partly offset by lower Titania running costs. At Seagems, however, EBITDA increased from $45 million to $52 million, which was driven by a revenue increase and lower reported OpEx. As mentioned by Robert, the decrease in OpEx was mainly due to a one-off reclassification of withholding taxes, which was previously reported on OpEx, now under the line, under the income tax line. There were also maintenance activities during the quarter, which offset the re-revenue increase at Seagems. Finally, in Q3, we booked a $13 million gain from the sale of Archer in September, which explains the decrease in other PNL items compared to Q3. In summary, excluding these extra revenues that was booked in Mexico in the last quarter of $12 million and the accounting gain from Archer, the underlying performance remains strong, broadly in line with Q3. Now turning on to full-year results for 2025 compared to 2024. For full year 2025, we report a net income after tax of $75 million, up from $33 million in 2024. As shown in the lower right graph here, there were several drivers behind this improvement, and let me focus on the key ones. Combined segment revenues were $452 million, which was in line with 2024, while EBITDA increased by 4% to $261 million from $252 million last year. Seagems delivered a strong growth in earnings. The EBITDA grew approximately 40% from $120 million to $170 million in 2025. This was driven by timely and efficient completion of the acceptance testing across the fleet and significantly improved day rates from rolling into the new Petrobras contracts, as well as fewer off-hire days compared to 2024. This was partly offset by lower EBITDA at Fontis, which came in at $100 million compared to $144 million in 2024, primarily because Titania has been warm stacked since Q1. Operating costs were also reduced, as you can see here, due to lower corporate G&A, as 2024 year included transaction costs related to the IPO and the issuance of the bonds. In 2025, as mentioned earlier, we also booked a $30 million gain from the Archer sale and did not have a refinancing expenditures that were impacting PNL, purely accounting figures. Furthermore, the income tax expense for 2025 was lower, mainly as a result of reduced income in Mexico. To summarize this as well, we delivered a strong full-year financial results above our initial 2025 guidance, despite that was despite having one asset idle for most of the year. This was obviously achieved through strong operational safe performance at both Fontis and Seagems' disciplined operational spend and solid execution across both companies. Now moving on to page 6, let me walk you through the main cash movements for the quarter and for the full year. At the Paratus consolidated level, meaning Paratus and Fontis, we ended the year with $178 million in cash, which was up from $180 million in Q3. Compared to 2024, our cash position more than doubled. The main factors behind this movement were, first and most important, strong cash collections in Mexico. In Q4 alone, we collected about $144 million, bringing the total collections in 2025 to $356 million, which included the $209 million that we have disclosed earlier, which was from proceeds under the receivables monetization agreement in Q1. During the year, we spent about $14 million in CapEx related to Fontis. In Q4, the JV, the Seagems JV distributed $38 million to Paratus, bringing total distributions from Seagems in 2025 to $129 million. We also received around $3 million in dividends from Archer during the year. As previously disclosed, we monetized Archer, our 24% Archer stake for $48 million in Q3, in September, of which $18 million were used to repay part of the 2026 notes in Q4. Net interest payments were $27 million in Q4 and net $63 million during the year, for the whole year. Finally, we paid cash dividends of $36 million this quarter, which was related to Q3. In total, for 2025, we returned about $168 million to shareholders through cash distributions and share buybacks. After these movements, we ended the quarter with $178 million in cash at Paratus level. On the top of that, our pro rata share of cash in Seagems, in the Seagems JV was $25 million, bringing the group cash position to $204 million at year-end, providing solid liquidity and financial flexibility well into 2026. Turning to page 7, let's look at our capital structure and selected balance sheet items. We closed the quarter with a group cash balance of $204 million and a net debt of $581 million, which is a great improvement from previous years, as you can see here. At year-end, our leverage ratio was 2.2 times EBITDA compared to 2.5 last year. In Mexico, our receivables balance decreased to $199 million at year-end, down from $293 million in Q3, which was driven by the significant collection that we received during the quarter. Including the Q4 collections, we have collected $356 million for the full year, which is a significant improvement from 2024. Of course, we remain actively engaged with the client in Mexico to collect our outstanding receivables, but as before, we continue to plan on the base that delays may persist in the near to medium term. That said, as Robert mentioned, Fontis has seen a much more consistent payment pattern since Q4 last year, since Q4 2025, when the government financial support plan was introduced in Mexico. This is a clear improvement compared to the fluctuations that we have experienced previously. With regards to the 2026 maturity in July, we are carefully evaluating our options, which are also closely linked to the broader strategic assessment of the jack-up business, as discussed earlier. In parallel, we have initiated discussions with several financial institutions to explore refinance alternatives, we have also received inbound interest from capital providers prepared to fully take over the 2026 notes, which reinforces our confidence in available refinancing alternatives. With that, I will hand the word back to Robert. Thank you. Thank you, Baton. To summarize, at Seagems, we have strong visibility through long-term Petrobras contracts and at attractive margins. We are actively working to develop this platform and aim to deliver tangible project, progress during 2026. At Fontis, contracting discussions in Mexico remain ongoing. While near-term visibility is still limited, we see structural demand in the market and hope to secure firm contracts for the 3 smaller rigs in the near term, while continuing to evaluate strategic alternatives for the overall business. Given the lack of firm earnings visibility across the full Fontis fleet, we are not yet in a position to issue full year guidance for Paratus. Regarding the 2026 notes maturity, as already mentioned, we believe we have multiple options available. The ultimate approach will be closely linked to the strategic direction we decide for the jacket business. I think with that, let's move over to Q&A. We will now take your questions. Just as a reminder, you can submit your questions by using the button on the bottom of the player. There's a question about the Seagems, the PSVs. What are your expectations for further contracts for the remaining PSVs, excluding Jade, if these are not bid in the PSV tender? The PSV tender that Petrobras has opened for coming to market with this year, it primarily addresses the rollovers for 2027. We also view this as Petrobras trying to see if there's incremental vessels that can be put into the Brazilian market. Our clear expectation is that Jade will obviously qualify for this tender. The rest of the fleet rolls in 2028, and we firmly believe that there will be another and larger, potentially tender coming to market for 2028. There's a question about our corporate structure. Are you considering moving your registered office location from Bermuda to Cyprus, like Frontline did a couple of years ago? This in order to come under the more favorable Norwegian dividend tax rules for companies within the EU. I think we're always looking to see if we have the most optimal corporate structure, but I think there is a couple of elements. I think we obviously, we're an affiliate company of Frontline, given we share the same address. We obviously need to have a detailed discussion with them to learn their experience from that move. That's one thing. Secondly, I think overall, we are list of shareholders is there's a lot of Norwegian shareholders in there, but they're from multiple jurisdictions. I think this is something we need to look at holistically and decide. It has been something we have considered, but we have not yet concluded on anything. A question about the contracts in Mexico. We have seen smaller players contract their rigs with Pemex at favorable for Pemex terms, but also Borr extend some of the rigs. What has been the cause for delays in your negotiations with Pemex? I think that's an interesting question and we can probably spend some time on that, but I think I'll try to be precise and sort of tell how we see our construct, commercial discussions. I think first of all, we're the only international or non-Mexican contractor facing Pemex directly. As you know, the other company mentioned there has a somewhat different setup in Mexico. But I think if we talk on from our point of view, we know that our old contracts, they clearly stood the test in what was arguably one of the worst drops in activity in Mexico ever seen. This was due to clear restrictions on suspension and termination rights. This may seem trivial, but I think we need to always, as a company, plan for a rainy day and build enough protection to ensure that our assets remain operating, while they're on contract. I think that has been very key for us. We have said that all along. Having the highest day rate on paper will not give you anything if your rigs are not working. For us, that's a key point to have in the contracts. Without talking on behalf of other contractors or speculating what they may or may not have in their contracts, but we have at least seen some suggestions that they have accepted things that clearly we would not be willing to accept. It will take longer to agree contracts with Fontis. We're very focused on ensuring that the contracts meet a high standard that we have for us to sign the contract. I think that probably speaks some, to some part of why it's taken longer. We are in active dialogue. We've been in active dialogue for a while, but there's a back and forth. There's obviously two parties involved, and as we said in our prepared remarks, we are hopeful that we can secure contracts for 3 of the assets over the very near term. I think comparing contracts between the various drilling contractors is very difficult unless you see beyond the day rate. There's a question about the 2026 full year guidance, if we can elaborate more, and what is expected in the near term. I think, as Robert has described here in his presentation, at this point, we cannot provide any financial guidance for 2026, which is depending any activity levels for Fontis for sure. I think the question also is about what can be expected for Q1. I think if you, if you look at our fleet status report, you'll see that most of our rigs are still working, and so the visibility for Q1 should be enough for modeling purposes. Seagems, it's obviously fairly similar to what has been delivered in recent quarters now that all vessels are operating under long-term contracts with Petrobras. I think as Baton said, the full year guidance, there's a range of outcomes that makes us cautious on providing a certain guidance. Hopefully, we will have more visibility in Mexico near term, and then we'll provide a guidance when we report our Q1 numbers. Next question, will you prioritize investment in Seabras or dividends in the end of a partial or full sale of Fontis? I think that really depends on the structure of what we end up with, and we're not gonna speculate too much on this call on what may or may not happen with Fontis. I think if you read our debt indentures, you'll see that there are provisions in there for what happens in the event of selling one of our business lines. As we've always said, we are committed to stable capital returns to shareholders. I think we'll leave it at that for now. We understand there are improved terms regarding suspensions in the Saudi tenders. Do you think Pemex will go along with such suspensions provisions? We're clearly hopeful that we'll come to an agreement on the commercial aspects with our client in Mexico. I don't think we would have provided the updates that we have provided if we didn't think there were some willingness to meet from both parties. Ultimately, let's see where we end up with if we sign the contracts. We've said what's important to us, and I think that is something everyone should take into consideration when if and when we announce something. Will the bond advance discussion be sorted out by Q1 2026? When should we hear more news about that? I presume that it relates to the strategic review we have on our jack-up business. I think clearly we hope to land this as soon as possible. We know that the maturity is coming up, and we've spent some time already, but hopefully we'll conclude in the very near term. As we said in the prepared remarks, we have obviously not just been sitting idle. We have various scenarios that we're working off and in the event or what happens to the maturity and how we deal with it. I think we're ready to execute once we have landed on which one of the scenarios we're going for. Just a reminder, you can submit your question by using the button on the bottom of the player. There's a question, can you share more information about these scenarios you are pondering between and planning to landing on? I think we shared the appropriate or the level of detail that we can share in our prepared remarks. As we said, we've had unsolicited offers on jack-ups, and we have been approached on all of our jack-ups, the full business. Then there's obviously the ultimate scenario that we may end up saying that we wanna maintain the structure as is today. I think those are really the scenarios that we're willing to share with the market today. The question about the PLSV. Are you envisaging the structure of the new PLSV contract as a charter of the third-party vessel? What will be the structure of profit sharing in that case? As I said, we're we cannot share too much about the economic details around this because it's. First of all, it's a tender that has not been decided on yet. As we know, Pemex, sorry, Petrobras, usually they wanna have detailed discussions after a tender has been opened. We have secured a third-party vessel on a time charter if we need that vessel. Could you please elaborate on the conditions, the timeline, and price for new build PLSVs? Well, I think if you want to build a PLSV today, there are yards certainly that would be willing to entertain it. I think the exact sort of delivery schedule and price is a little bit undated because we have had discussions with yards way back. I think we were looking at a timeline of 3 years roughly from when you sign a contract. If you look at pricing, I think that depends on the specification of the vessel and the lay system, whether it's a VLS or an HLS and also the crane capacity on board. I think you're talking from sort of probably mid threes to very high $300 million. Another question about the PLSV market. Are there any M&A opportunities in the PLSV market? It's a difficult market for any larger M&A to happen, given that it's sort of roughly split three ways, right? We have our joint venture, then you have DOFCON Technip in one JV, and you have Subsea 7. I think either us of us would probably be restricted from teaming up with the other. There are vessels outside of Brazil that may be put to work in Brazil. I think you're probably more likely to see if anything happens, you're more likely to see vessel acquisitions rather than large corporate M&As from where we are at right now, at least. A question about Mexico again. Do you think you could get similar commercial terms as Borr got through intermediaries with Pemex, i.e., ensure payments within X days, or is this unlikely with Pemex? I don't know. I didn't have any details or insight into the commercial terms that the Borr have other than what they've said publicly. I think that's strictly a hypothetical question, right? We don't have an intermediary in Mexico. I think it would take some time for us to build something similar to what we see others have in Mexico. If we're operating in Mexico, it's gonna be most likely the way it is today. That's at least how we see the near term. Otherwise, it would be strictly speculations. I think with respect to payment terms, I think we need to appreciate the fact that we've seen significant improvement in regularity from the customer in Mexico, right? We've spoken about that at length already on this call. I think there is a much clearer path to normalization of payments in Mexico, and we obviously hope that that will continue going through this year. If you have any questions, you can submit your question by using the button on the bottom of the player. Thank you for your questions. I will now hand the presentation back to management for any final remarks. Thank you very much. We appreciate the interest, thanks, everyone, for your time. We'll speak next time when we report Q1. Thank you.