Hello everyone, and welcome to this Q&A session with poLight. I am Joakim Bredahl, CFO of poLight, and I'm joined by our CEO, Øyvind Isaksen. In this Q&A, we will address questions coming in regarding the recently announced strategic investment by Q Tech into poLight. Now, we received a large number of questions, and we will try to cover as many of them as we can during this session. However, if you do want to ask further questions, please send them by email to ir@investorweb.no. Thank you to InvestorWeb for giving us this platform. We assume that those attending this Q&A have read the recent press release and the press releases that came out last week. To give a backdrop to the whole session, I will now give the word to Øyvind for a short introduction. Thank you, Joakim. Yes. This is a very important milestone for the company. It is a little bit the background. We are continuously working towards different customers and partners. One question we often get is a question about overall sustainability, over kind of capability of ramping into high volumes. This is coming specifically for those big players. This is a typical kind of question mark we have to address. For this particular customer, which is named as top-tier consumer electronic OEM, we have been working with this OEM for many years, qualifying all the technology. They, I would say, last, say, six months, more and more dialogue has been related to sourcing, minimizing risk, being able to finance the company throughout to profitability. They also wanted to have one of the key strategic partners to be able to secure supply of TLens and also be able to, kind of say, secure the financing of the company. These were aspects which brought this case to the table. Q Tech and poLight started to discuss how we could kind of find a structure where we could remove these pain points. When it comes to Q Tech, we have been working with Q Tech for many, many years. I have personally known the Chairman and the main shareholder, Roy, for several years, and we have frequent dialogue for other aspects. It turns out that Q Tech was one of the strategic partners of this tier one OEM mentioned in the press release. It came together, and we then agreed to formalize an investment agreement where Q Tech became a significant investor and also enabled them to establish a separate supply chain for TLens so that the customer were kind of secured supply. This manufacturing line will operate in parallel with the existing one, but they wanted to see two up and running sources before they could take a decision to finally decide on using TLens as a product in their end user products. This is a big enabler for that particular OEM. As I said, generally speaking, this is something we are always exposed to by all the big names: security, risk minimizing, guaranteed supply, or able to finance a company throughout to profitability. This deal is answering to all these concerns. That's why I was saying when it's backed by this tier one consumer electronic OEM, this is what we mean by backed. It's something they wanted to see to secure the supply and the company. That was a quick intro to what was the basis for it. Of course, this has been a long process, a challenging process. I would also say that this is something which the company has been trying to facilitate over some time, but we needed to find the right case. We needed to find the right partner. In that sense, I think Q Tech is a great match. The way they think, the way they act, the innovation focus inside the company is quite impressive. This is something good and something which, as I said, would enable us to penetrate many accounts we would never be able to penetrate without this agreement. Okay. Okay, great. We'll just kick off with the questions. Thank you for all the questions. Some of these questions have in part been answered by Øyvind just in this introduction and some in the press release too. We understand that from our perspective, from the inside of the deal, some things can be difficult to understand. We will ask these questions. Since at least Q3 2024, poLight has been exploring strategic investment opportunities. Can you elaborate on the search process? What level of interest did you observe in the market? How challenging was it to identify the right partner? What were the key factors in selecting Q Tech and their agreement to join? As a general comment, we have always been open for strategic alliances. When we talk to customer and customer camera module partners, we have always been open-minded for that under certain terms, which we feel we now have managed to get with Q Tech. This particular case, as I said in the beginning, is basically triggered by an OEM who wanted to like our technology, who want to use it, but wanted some of their key strategic partner on the camera module side to be also a supply source of TLens and also being an investor to kind of secure the company financially. This was not the kind of a search process. This was, you can call it an inborn call, you can say. Exactly. A couple of questions regarding the use of proceeds. How do you intend to allocate the proceeds from the private placement? What proportion is planned for manufacturing capacity, R&D? How much will be reserved for working capital and operational runway? We don't want to comment in detail on this, but of course, as we have raised capital previously, it is basically to further develop the company, both when it comes to portfolio. I mean, as an example, expanding the TLens portfolio, also potentially launch a development program for TWedge, which today has been kind of been running as an R&D program and not a product development program. We would like to look at system solution and, of course, having a strategic partner who now is a camera module supplier. That will certainly ease us to kind of invent on system level. That is kind of the portfolio part of it, which of course costs resources and money and external cost. We have the organization. We have already built a quite, I would say, good organization. We have increased significantly the last years. We need to continue, not necessarily to increase a lot of resources, but we need to be able to finance the activities in the market. It is basically those two. Of course, working capital, but without going into splitting the different krone into those categories. Those are the three basically main areas of user proceeds. Now, given the significant capital injection resulting in close to NOK 400 million in cash, that's also after the subsequent of assuming that will be fully subscribed for. Considering this occurred near the lowest historical market capitalization coupled with the nearly 40% dilution for existing shareholders, does this imply a longer than anticipated timeline for achieving substantial revenues alongside the need for significant ongoing expenditure? Yeah. Good question. Let me just start saying by having this agreement in place will, if anything, I feel improve slash everything else same, will improve slash shorten the time to increasing revenue in the company. Definitely. I can already feel throughout Easter a lot of kind of positive momentum and feedback from customers seeing that this was a really, really smart move for both sides. Now we can trust you in a different way. Of course, regarding timing, I don't need to kind of, I said many times that the big revenues is a few years ahead of us. I said that quite a few times. I still say that that's probably correct. As I said, the likelihood of achieving it has increased significantly by this investment. You can say, yeah, we could have done it at a higher share price. We could have chosen the timing differently. It's not so easy. You go through a process and you just need to carry out that process and conclude when it's possible to conclude. To hit kind of the right timing when it comes to when the share price is the highest, which will be seen from the existing share, will be better, of course, I agree, including myself, but not necessarily easy to control timings like this. These are processes which go over for a long time. It's a relationship which builds over a long time, and it concludes when it concludes. That's what I can say on that. Given what you just said, a second question here. How would you describe today's capital market in Norway, and how does the management view the investment from Q Tech in light of this capital market? I think after we announced this investment agreement, we have received a lot of positive feedback that this is very good news in today's market to raise all the money with such a kind of key partner in the ecosystem. You would, I would think every other capital raise, say, based on the normal tools we have in the financial market, will be extremely much tougher terms and without the strategic dimension. I think this is quite a good result. That is the feedback we get from most of the market. You write in your press release, this transaction has the potential to significantly accelerate scaling. Can you explain what you mean by that? Yeah. Q Tech is one of the, I would say, top camera module integrators in the world. They are, as I said, very innovative. They invest in the future. They are extremely connected with many, many important customers of us and them. I think that there are different dimensions. I think for one, they will, if you think about it, there are camera module partners which will like to use only their own technology. Many of the camera module partners, they have VCM. They are getting more and more vertically integrated. Q Tech also has that. Now Q Tech has invested heavily in the new technology they believe in. They are self-motivated to make sure that poLight becomes successful. They will promote actively the use of TLens where there's a good fit instead of per definition only communicate and sell what they themselves can do being VCM. Now we have suddenly a friend in the ecosystem who is connected to the customers in the ecosystem in a completely different way than we are, of course, being the size they are, being the high volume supplier they are. The market opening for us is increasing a lot. As I said, only during Easter, I was involved in discussions where Q Tech have kind of brought us in to discussions with key players which we haven't been able to attract so far. They bring us in because they now are invested in poLight. That is from the market perspective. As I said in the beginning, the trust in poLight, a small company in Norway, even though we are fantastically good, a small company in Norway running at loss, having kind of share issues on a regular basis to kind of have enough money to keep going. Now they suddenly see that there's somebody there in the cap table, which is actually heavily invested in the company and want to make it successful. They see it from that perspective, financially secured in a way. Another dimension, a third dimension to this is that, of course, the fact that Q Tech is willing to invest in setting up and operating their own TLens assembly and test line by support of with us, of course, it becomes a dual source situation. Customers can see that there is actually two who can supply TLens. Of course, they also see it as a company who actually is a camera module supplier who knows the camera industry by heart, who can have big synergy between having a sample of TLens in their own factory, Q Technology Group factory, which is side by side where they make VCMs or cameras. There is a big synergy there, which is kind of different from what we have today because now we have a completely separate supply chain for the TLens in the Philippines, which will remain, which is important and will remain important, but that is not inside the camera module guy. There are many, many things which I think is extremely important and which will kind of be an element of bringing us quicker to the target. Good. Now a bit onto how the cooperation will work. Given Q Tech's board representation, how will poLight ensure its long-term strategy remains independent and not overly influenced by one single strategic investor? Yeah, that is, you can say, one way of looking at it. Historically, we have been criticized because the board has been board members only being independent and none from the ecosystem. Now we have the opposite. We have two board members, or not have, we will have if everything is approved. We will have two board members from Q Tech, highly experienced guys from the ecosystem. I personally know one of them very well, met him for many, many years, which has all the knowledge and connection we need in that board discussion. That could say, is that influence negative or is it positive? I would say I can only, of course, there can be a situation where we need to discuss things in the board which Q Tech should not be a part of, but there are ways of doing that. Overall, I would say it's a very, very positive strengthening of the board. There are two of seven. Of course, they will have a voice as the other five. It is the board in combination with the management who kind of decide on strategic important topics, but they will have two very much qualified input to those discussions, which I'm really looking forward to. Does the agreement with Q Tech grant them any exclusivity over TLens production or certain market segments? No. There's no, and all the IP will remain in poLight. So poLight will be operating as a Norwegian headquarter company, but publicly listed. So there's no change in that at all. If Q Tech, this is a long question, Nevin, so pay attention. If Q Tech were to cross the 50% ownership threshold in the future, are there any poison pills, change of control clauses, or shareholder protection in place to prevent creeping control without a formal tender offer? Also, the transaction involves changes to the Articles of Association. Can you provide full visibility on these amendments and how they might affect minority shareholders' rights or corporate governance going forward? Okay. I'm not sure I can answer 100% correct to this, but the thing is that if Q Tech buys more shares and they pass one third of the shares in the company, then they are obliged to offer to buy all shares. That is the normal mechanism which is there. You can decide sell or not sell. They maybe get some and they go to 40 and then they have to repeat that offer at 50. Those are kind of the normal rules for that. That happens. I mean, they have to kind of offer to buy all the shares when more than or more than one third. When it comes to the board, was it the board? Yeah, the transaction involves changes to the Articles of Association. Yeah. Yeah. That's good. Yes. That's basically about having two Q Tech. As long as they have, I need to remember, as long as they have more than 25% of the shares in poLight, they are entitled to nominate two board members. In addition, which has been important for us, there are also two in the Articles of Association. It also says that there needs to be minimum two independent. Those independent directors are quite important in a situation where, say, there is an inbound voluntary offer coming from somebody else. That's actually the independent director, which is processing that offer and either recommend or not recommend. Q Tech's board members need to support that. Or they need to offer something similar or better. In a way, they can't block any other transactions. That's what it means. This is something which we did to protect the value and the shareholders so that there is the right dynamic which we would like to maintain. Yeah. Just for the change of Articles of Association, the changes, the two independent board members are required. In order to change that back, you need at least two thirds of the general assembly. Correct. Now, sort of a follow-up question to that previous one. Has Q Tech wanted to take over more than 50% of the ownership in poLight? Group has been very clear throughout this process that they do not want to be the, what should I say, majority shareholder. They would like to keep below that threshold of 1/3. Now, are there any restrictions in the agreement with Q Tech that prevent them from buying more shares in the market and increasing their ownership? You basically answered this. No. They can buy. If they buy one, if at the point they own more than one third, they need to offer to buy all the shares. Yeah. Now, I'll ask this question. With the ambitions once held for poLight's independent success, does it not feel disheartening that a significant part of the company is now potentially moved to China? Does the prospect of a complete takeover of yet another Norwegian company raise even more serious concerns? I think it's a fair question. I think it's important to reflect a little bit about this. Again, I will take the positive view on that. It is extremely tough to be out there alone without having any strategic alliances with strategic partners. As I said, this is not by happening. We have been thinking like that for many years that we need to find somebody in the ecosystem who can support the company to grow big. It is to grow big as a Norwegian company. It is this minority shareholding which is coming in, which we will, of course, from operational perspective, work closely with. I see it as a mean of achieving our targets. Our shareholders and Norway's targets is to make poLight a success. That 30% ownership of Q Tech, which happens to be Chinese, I see more as a big strength than a problem. That is why we did it. That is why we did it. Please keep in mind, if without that muscle, the probability of being successful would have been less. We then, of course, yes, say if it ends up, and now I am speculating, but if it ends up that somebody is kind of wanting to buy poLight and we cannot control that, we are publicly listed, then of course, what we need to make sure is that the value of this company is as high as possible. I think going kind of having this kind of strategic partnership with Q Tech, which will enable so many things from the market perspective, I think the development of the company is in a way such that a potential acquisition will be on completely different terms than it could have been. As I said, that's speculation. Today, soon, we will get a new shareholder if all our shareholders agree of 30%. That will be a tremendous help to develop the company. I do not see it as not building the company. I see definitely this as an extremely important part of exactly doing that, building a successful poLight. Talking of other shareholders, LHH and Investinor have entered into an irrevocable obligation to vote for the proposal. Does this mean that these shareholders cannot sell their shares before the AGM? Correct. A bit around the structure of the subsequent offering. The structure of the issue is such that only existing shareholders can buy shares in the subsequent offering and the rights cannot be sold over the stock exchange. Why did you choose to do it this way? In this structure, like private placement and then subsequent offering, this is the normal way. This is clearly the recommended way. It's only when you do a rights issue, which we did last time, that you use that option as you can sell your rights. In private placement and repair issue after that, this is the way to do it and this is the recommended way. I think this is quick to answer. Will share trading from now on affect the number of subscription rights to be allocated as per X date? You can answer to that, Joakim. The answer is no. We look at the number of the shareholdings as of close to 15th of April. Everything that happens after that is irrelevant to the number of subscription rights and also the carrying out of the subsequent offering. There is this talk of more cooperation between Q Tech and poLight. Will there be employees that move ship from Q Tech to poLight as part of this deal? No, that's not a part of the plan. You can never say never that people want to change job, but that's definitely not a part of the plan. You've talked about this before, Øyvind, but what agreements are in place regarding intellectual property rights for future innovations that may result from the collaboration? Will poLight retain ownership of new IP or will there be joint ownership structures? I think this I can answer more generically, not only related to Q Tech. Generally speaking, when we do something with TLens or TWedge, by default, it will be IP which will remain by poLight. If you go into, say, a customer project where they pay, say, NRE or we do something purpose-made for them and maybe the idea comes from them, that could be different. It could be joint, it could be only customer's IP. This is, generally speaking, not only for Q Tech, but for all people we work with externally, there could be scenarios where you have joint IP or it's a customer IP. Everything, I would say, around the TLens and the TWedge and that kind of core business of poLight is and will remain a poLight IP. Will the planned TLens assembly line be built and owned by poLight, Q Tech, or another third party? In which country will it be located? Will the line be funded by the capital injected into poLight or through other separate investments by Q Tech? The line and the machinery which is needed for that line is invested and owned by Q Tech. The only thing we will have is that we will consign a final test machine. You may remember in the Philippines where we have another assembly line, we are also owning and consigning the final test machine. The final test of a final made TLens is a very important part of the manufacturing process. This is somehow one way of us having some kind of control of the manufacturing process. This machine is consigned from poLight to Q Tech. As far as we understand and as far as it is today, the activity ongoing at Q Tech for establishing TLens assembly and test is at headquarter in Q Tech outside Shanghai. Of course, this can easily be moved to somewhere else for whatever reason, but that's where it started now. Will there be any agreements between poLight and Q Tech regulating, for example, the cooperation between the two companies referred to in the press release? Yeah, I think most likely we will formalize elements of it. That is the only thing which is kind of agreed now is that they will establish a manufacturing line. That could be other cooperation which we would like potentially to formulate, but that is the status of today. Let's see, I'm just reading through. Oh, okay, so you've answered the first part of this question, but the second part. Will the new Q Tech production line be placed in China or the U.S.? And will it be exclusive for the mentioned top-tier U.S. consumer electronics OEM? Good question. The starting point will be outside Shanghai, Q Tech headquarter. That obviously can change, but that is where it is being planned today. The trigger of that line is definitely related to that top-tier consumer electronic OEM. We can, as poLight, approve others also can get supply from that line, but that has to be approved by poLight. What is the risk that Q Tech will restrict other camera module manufacturers and existing customers from using poLight technology in the future? What has been the reaction to the strategic investment agreement with Q Tech from your existing customers and camera module manufacturers? Yeah, I saw one or the other which we have been working on for a long time, liked the LinkedIn post. I think this ecosystem is used to this kind of competing or cooperating. They are very used to that. Sometimes we compete, sometimes we cooperate. No, they cannot. We will continue to serve all camera module partners, definitely, that we have to. We need to have all flexibility there. Also because in a way, very often it is the OEM who decides who they would like to use as a camera module supplier. Here we have full freedom. Could this strategic collaboration potentially be the start of licensing the production of TLens and TWedge from more camera module manufacturers where poLight would primarily be responsible for polymer production and receive a smaller share of the finished modules? We should never say never. I think that the plan for poLight is not to have the majority of the business based on licensing fee. There can be cases where we can discuss that, but as we see today, that's not the base case. It has earlier been commented that camera module manufacturers have a strong power to control pricing and that it has been hard for a component supplier to get its fair share of added value. Is there then an ambition to move into more of a camera module manufacturer? Will this now be possible? If so, will it be poLight or Q Tech that will act as the camera module manufacturer? I guess that's a two-part question. Yeah. I would say that poLight builds up on its own a camera module supply in a big way is unlikely. It has always been unlikely. It can be certain niche markets where the big camera module guys are not interesting to address, where we see the benefit of doing it and then we do it. Then we could do it alone or we could do it together with somebody else, e.g., Q Tech. That was one part of the question. What was the other one? The other one is actually connected to a different question, which is right above it. I'll ask that. poLight is a small component supplier to big camera module manufacturers and OEMs and has been struggling to keep prices on a decent level, as commented by poLight before. Will this now be easier to cope with? Yeah, in a way, you can say potentially yes. You can say, as I said, when and if Q Tech becomes an investor in poLight, they would like poLight to be successful. In that sense, they will be more kind of helpful in those kind of strategic pricing to win business for TLens and poLight, much more than a normal kind of relationship to any camera module player will facilitate in a way. In a way, yes, it will potentially ease that. If a question now comes in from other camera module manufacturers such as Sunny, Foxconn, Truly, OFILM, etc., whether it's possible to make a strategic investment in poLight for them as well, will the agreement with Q Tech be an obstacle to this? I would say that after having this relationship and after having that kind of capital injected into the company, there are no plans for whatever to need more capital. At least there's nothing planned. Of course, things can happen. We need to consider what we should do. What for sure is that if any of the other wants to be an investor in poLight, they can buy shares in the market. Nobody can stop that. Okay, and on now to more of the production line. Regarding the strategic agreement with Q Tech and that your current production line is not operating at full speed today. As I have understood the limitation with the current production line, it is that with the testing and that a new test machine would double the production capacity. Is it necessary at this point to ramp up the production with another production line? Please correct me if my assumptions are wrong. No, you're not completely wrong. You're right about this testing facility is a limiting factor, which can relatively easily be fixed by duplicating machineries. Remember, we are not doing this for short-term increasing capacity. We are doing this investment or agreement and enable Q Tech to manufacture because one top-tier consumer electronic OEM wants to see it like that. It is a market-driven activity and action, not because we today need more capacity. Will the new production line be dedicated to the production of TLens and TWedge components, or will it also handle the assembly of complete camera and display modules? What measures will poLight take to guarantee the current profitability of TLens and TWedge and mitigate the risk of Q Tech absorbing those margins at the complete module level? You partly answered this. Yeah, so what we have agreed so far with Q Tech is they will be enabled to manufacture TLens. There is no agreement related to TWedge. It is TLens. And that TLens will be manufactured at the same place, most likely, where they manufacture camera modules. We will still, as poLight, kind of be the one owning the TLens coming out of that manufacturing line from Q Tech. We need to kind of price the TLens to get the business. I am not sure I fully understand the question, but. I guess the question, but you've answered this, that Q Tech will want poLight to be a success because the second part of what measures will poLight take to guarantee that we retain the profitability in the products that we produce. Yeah. We decide on the pricing of TLens, also the TLens coming out of the factory at Q Tech. TWedge is not a part of the formalized deal because TWedge is a technology platform. That's still not a product. That doesn't mean that we will not cooperate potentially with Q Tech on TWedge, but this is not a part of the, what should I say, the deal where they are allowed to manufacture. Have any partners or development collaborators raised flags about continuing joint projects or integration efforts? Now, the Q Tech, a potential competitor for some, holds a significant equity stake? No, as I said, so far, the market feedback has been positive. As I said, we will continue supporting other projects and other customers which are using other camera module suppliers. We need to support the we would like to do what's best for our end users and end customers. That being Q Tech, being Sunny, being OFILM, we will support them. There's a question I suspect we might get on the quarterly presentation too, which is not long. Following the strategic investment agreement with Q Tech, how does this impact your previous outlook where you have stated that AR/MR market is still under definition, large volumes are some years away, and that near-term NOK 10 million orders are uncertain? I would say that statement is in a way I don't, as I said earlier today, that statement is I feel still correct. No, we're going to soon have, it's next week, we have a quarterly presentation again. You will get the latest update there. I will be talking or also having this deal in mind, of course. What I would say is that I personally feel by doing this, if it gets approved by all of you, we have increased the probability of being successful a lot. That's a good question, a good answer. Q Tech mentions support from a U.S. top-tier consumer electronics OEM. Can you elaborate on whether this is a current design-in partner with defined product plans already involving TLens, or if it is more of a long-term strategic alliance with no clear product plans at this point? I would say that partner we are referring to is, as I said in the beginning, is a partner, an OEM, which we have been working with for many years, kind of qualifying our technology. They want to use our technology from a technic perspective, but they were afraid of moving ahead because of these issues like sustainability of poLight, supply chain risk, etc., ramping capability. There is no commitment from that OEM, but there is kind of, as I said, it's kind of backed by them. This top-tier player, do they work with smartphone-related applications, or is it more aimed at the eyewear market, laptops, etc.? I cannot comment on that. Sorry. Are there any plans to commercialize or co-develop TWedge as a part of this part? You've already answered that, sorry. Has Q Tech or the US top-tier customer been involved in filing or co-developing patents related to TLens or TWedge, either jointly with poLight or independently based on their integration efforts? Q Tech have done that, is it? Yes. As far as. Q Tech, and they're also referring to the OEM. Yeah, okay. When it comes to OEM, I don't have any comments to that. When it comes to Q Tech, I don't think they have done any TLens-related patent as far as I can remember now. It is done in cooperation with us. Yeah. Has either Q Tech or the U.S. top-tier OEM participated in the LBS display solution roadshow that poLight has referred to in earlier quarterly presentations, quarterly updates? No. Okay. A question now that came in live. Is this strategic partnership with Q Tech a possibility for the smartphone vertical to accelerate? Yeah, what should I say? I think that they, of course, they are a big supplier into that market. It will definitely help. It will definitely help. As you know, the technical limitation in our product is still there and will not be removed by this agreement. This agreement will, of course, put us around tables with many of the smartphone players where they already have a relationship and may, in that sense, be a strength and an opportunity. Will Q Tech use their own people for this new line, or does poLight need to hire more people? No, we use existing people, both from headquarter and ACR. Q Tech have added some new resources, yes, and using existing resources. Let me just look at the final live questions that have come in. I think they've all been answered in some way or another. There's one, a bit sort of more general question. Can you shed light on the main positives and negatives around this new collaboration? Yeah, I think I don't think we still understand all aspects, of course. The way I see it is that this is something I worked extremely hard together with my team to achieve, some kind of agreement like this. Why have we done that? Why have we spent so much time and energy to try to find this kind of strategic investor? It's because of, I think, the help we will get from such a relationship seen by the OEMs trust us. They see us being financially viable. They're not afraid that we disappear. They see that we have now an investor who also is able to manufacture TLens, securing the supply chain, enabling dual source. This partner is extremely connected to the ecosystem. They are in all the areas, the highly innovative way of thinking. I know very well the founder myself. I think I can't stress more how important I feel this is and how much it can help us and our existing shareholders to enhance the value of the company. Super important. It's a big validation, guys and ladies. It's a big validation. Somebody coming with this kind of money, investing in poLight, a Norwegian headquarter company listed in Oslo Bros, it's a big validation. Even if you can say many can say, "Yeah, but it's relatively small money for that." Money is money, and it's a lot of money, and it's a huge validation. They strongly believe what poLight can achieve, both when it comes to TLens and potentially the TWedge. The stronger validation and the stronger kind of stamp we cannot get, the stronger help in the marketplace we cannot get. I think that, yeah, I don't know how I could express how positive I think this will be. It's an extremely important milestone for the company, which we have been trying for many years to achieve. On top of that, when now it's actually triggered in a way or backed by a big OEM who wants to use us but didn't dare before such an event happened. Negative things? I should never say never that it cannot be anything negative, but I can't really see a lot of negative things. What should that be? There may be some negative things and a different way from where you're sitting, you may see things differently. I highly respect those who are saying that this is maybe not optimum because we would like to remain 100% Norwegian. There are not, I don't know, investors of this caliber in Norway. I don't know investors which have the knowledge and connection in the ecosystem we are operating in Norway. If you want to be a part of a consumer-based market, they are in China. They are in Asia from the supply chain perspective. Anyway, we will learn. We will step by step develop this relationship. It's not a new relationship, keep in mind. It's a relationship we have had for many years. Personally, I've known Roy for many years. I'm sure there will be maybe difference of opinion and pricing strategy, customer focus, but those will be dealt with in the operational cooperation. There will be two new board members, which I think will add tremendously a lot of competence, which will be difficult to find in Norwegian-based companies. Maybe that was overly positive, but that's how I feel it today. Maybe one day I will add to the negative side, but I can't really see. I feel it's dominating definitely by a lot of positive attributes, I would say. You have also been working very hard to get this deal landed. Yes. Yes, I have, yes. That's hard to go into detail on, but it's been a lot. Supported by many others also in the organization, and definitely both headquarter and in Asia. Yes, it has been tough, but the result is good. We really tried to, I just want to say that we really tried to, and we have been advised by Thomoson and Perreto, and we have really tried hard to get an agreement which we can live with and which also minority shareholders can live with, we feel. Of course, that seen from China and Hong Kong kind of governance structure, it is unusual. What we have managed to agree on is quite good, I would say. Okay? Very good. Very good. I think we're actually through the questions even now. We're also at two minutes to two o'clock, so that's quite good timing. Okay. Super. If you have more questions, send them in to us on InvestorWeb, and we will speak shortly because we will be presenting our Q1 results next week. We look forward to answering more questions and presenting to you then. Yeah, absolutely. As hopefully you have experienced, we are very keen to elaborate and to explain and to facilitate the interaction with the smaller shareholders, and that will continue. As Joakim said, any questions, any interaction you would like to have with us, please, we will try as good as we can to support. Thanks for your time. If you haven't had your question answered, we have received more than 70 questions for this Q&A, so we're very sorry, but do enter them into InvestorWeb, and we'll make sure they get answered. Super. Thank you so much. Thank you all. Bye-bye. Good.