Good afternoon and welcome to Shearwater's Q2 2025 presentation, and we appreciate that you're joining us on this Friday afternoon. My name is Irene Waage Basili, and I'm the CEO of Shearwater, and joining me here today is our CFO, Andreas Hveding Aubert. Here's today's agenda, and I will start off with the main takeaways of the quarter before going into the operations. Andreas will then go through the financial update before I then return to the outlook and a brief summary. After the presentation, we will open up for questions in a separate session where we will take the call-in participants first and then the submitted written questions afterwards. As always, please note the disclaimer. Let us start with the key takeaways in this quarter. After what was a strong Q1 with high fleet utilization, acquisition activity declined during the Q1, which was in line with our expectations and also what we communicated in Q1. This impacted the financials of the quarter and resulted in an EBITDA of $12 million, significantly down from the previous quarter. We still delivered a robust fleet utilization of 78%, supported by projects starting in the earlier periods with vessels rolling off contracts towards the quarter end. We also executed on our disciplined growth strategy within multi-client and completed the data acquisition for the second season at the Pelotas Basin in Brazil with strong operations. This is one of the most promising regions for exploration in the world at the moment, and we are gradually expanding our multi-client library here with strong industry support, we're happy to report. I'm also pleased that in June we were awarded a 3D contract by TotalEnergies in São Tomé and Príncipe off the coast of West Africa. This is the first contract that was awarded under the previously announced three-year capacity reservation agreement with Total, which you will recall is an industry first with a major E&P company. At quarter end, the backlog stood at $319 million, and recently announced contract awards are encouraging. However, year-to-date order intake has admittedly been muted, and we continue to experience low visibility as clients remain cautious in the current uncertain investment environment. We therefore expect to see sideways markets continue what we've also seen over the past years, although as is normal in this industry with quarterly variations. With this backdrop, we remain focused on optimizing operations and financial performance, which is why we've implemented measures to increase balance sheet resilience and free up liquidity in response to the expected activity levels in the coming periods. Andreas will, of course, give more details on these initiatives later, but what I can say from a high level is that these initiatives are aligning the organization to the activity levels that we expect and that they are also in line with Shearwater's strategy from the outset designed to absorb the inherent short-term volatility of the seismic industry. Moving over to the operational update. As anticipated, we had a limited number of contracts awarded for the Northern Hemisphere summer season, which led to a decrease in streamer acquisition activity in the quarter. We operated an average of 8.1 active vessels, which was down from nine in the previous quarter as we stacked one vessel early in the quarter. Streamer activity was focused on contract acquisition in India and in Brazil, while one vessel was allocated to multi-client, the previously mentioned Pelotas Phase 2, which supported utilization in the quarter. In the OBN segment, we had two active crews, which included a six-month 4D survey for ExxonMobil in Guyana and the Pearl Tasman platform working on consecutive contracts in West Africa. The left row I'll come back to later. Turning to multi-client, Shearwater has over time and in a capital-efficient manner developed a strategic position within multi-client, and we've done this as a natural extension to our business following the principle of a strategy to obtain access to the full market being proprietary or multi-client. When we completed the second season of data acquisition in the Pelotas Basin in Brazil this quarter, we have acquired approximately 10,000 sq km of data in this exciting region. We're experiencing strong industry support and interest for this data. The basin has natural geological ties to Namibia's Orange Basin, where we have successfully also demonstrated the potential of our strategy. Let me reiterate, though, that we do not intend to replicate the historical multi-client investment company strategies of building and investing into large data libraries, but we make focus investments in areas where we see that the risk-reward balance fits our fleet and broader proprietary business. As we see it and position for, converted contracts are at the core basically a contract survey but executed in multi-client mode with most of the funding coming from one client. It still means that you need to adapt to manage the permitting and other aspects of the multi-client model, but essentially that the margins are calculated more as proprietary business with naturally therefore limited late sales potential. We're also selectively doing multi-client projects with strategic partners to share risks and enhance efficiency through optimized utilization. Looking ahead on the commercial update, we will have two active OBN crews in Q3, and this week, we also announced two new OBN contracts for the Shearwater Tasman platform, one for ExxonMobil in Angola and the other with Tullow Oil in Ghana, and the latter will be the first deepwater OBN project offshore in the country. These will extend the continuous operation of our one-of-a-kind Tasman Pearl platform into almost two years since her launch. This is quite impressive. I'd like to emphasize in an industry context, and admittedly, we are quite proud of what we're able to achieve as it clearly reflects the efficiency gains offered by our in-house developed node technology, the Pearl, in combination with our special purpose converted node handling and source vessel, the Tasman. On the streamer activity, we have in August acquired a 4D survey for Equinor in the Norwegian Sea as well as the earlier mentioned contract for TotalEnergies off the coast of West Africa. I then hand over the word to Andreas for a financial update. Thank you, Irene. We had revenue of $134 million in Q2, which is down 38% from the same quarter of last year on the back of the lower utilization and more vessels operating in source mode on dual-vessel contracts. This also impacted the quarterly EBITDA, which ended at $12 million and gave an EBITDA margin of 9%. For the first half of the year, revenue was $323 million, which is only slightly behind last year, and EBITDA was $70 million in this first half compared to $95 million of last year. As we see, EBITDA naturally fluctuates in line with varying activity levels and vessel utilizations from quarter to quarter, and it's therefore important to look at several quarters together rather than only focusing on one quarter in isolation. On the segments, marine acquisition was the largest driver contributing with $20 million of EBITDA, and we clearly see a large step down from what we saw in Q2 of last year. We had zero contribution from multi-client this quarter, but segment EBITDA will increase as revenues are recognized in coming periods with data being delivered to clients. Specifically, we are expecting significant multi-client revenue during the second half of 2025, although with some timing uncertainty on quarterly distribution. We also see that there is a small portion of EBITDA from our software processing and imaging business, which is an important part of our offering, even though contributions are small on figures. In the other segment, we have SG&A and R&D costs, which were slightly reduced from what we saw in Q2 of 2024. Moving over to the cash flow, you see to the left the development in our cash position from the end of Q1 2025 to the end of Q2. As covered on the previous slide, EBITDA contribution was of $12 million. Then we had maintenance CapEx in the quarter of $4 million and multi-client investments of $9 million related to the second season in Pelotas, as mentioned by Irene. Net cash outflow from financing was $34 million, mainly reflecting repayment of debt and interest costs. There were some changes in working capital and other items, which in total led to a cash position of $48 million at the end of Q2, down by $42 million from the previous quarter. If we add on top of that the undrawn amount of our credit facility, we had $68 million in free liquidity at the end of Q2. On free cash flow, this ended at negative $9 million for the quarter. For the first half of 2025, free cash flow was $36 million, which is an improvement from negative $30 million in the same period of last year. Free cash flow also naturally fluctuates in line with varying activity and working capital changes as vessels and equipment will mobilize to execute projects. Turning to our balance sheet, we start off with our leverage ratio in the top left, which is calculated as net debt over EBITDA in the last 12 months. Following the soft cash generation in the quarter, the leverage ratio increased to 4.1 at the end of Q2, up from 2.6 three months earlier. Net interest-bearing debt is calculated, as you see, to the bottom right and stood at $546 million at the end of Q2. This also gave an equity ratio of 40% at the end of Q2, which is slightly down from the three months earlier. Looking quickly at our debt structure on the top right, we have paid an installment of $12.5 million on the bank debt since the previous quarter. Note that we agreed with our bank to postpone two installments originally scheduled in 2025 to January of 2027, which I will cover shortly. Considering we expect the overall market to move sideways into the next year, we have taken steps to conserve capital and adapt the organization, and several of these measures are yielding immediate effects. Firstly, this includes the mentioned postponed bank installment, yielding effects of $25 million already in the second half of 2025. Secondly, we have amended our bank agreement to reflect that certain customer receivables are included as free liquidity in the covenant calculations, and this gives up to $20 million in effect. This relates to work for tier one clients with low credit risk, which locks up working capital due to the payment terms that they require. In addition, we have reduced non-business critical growth and maintenance CapEx expected to yield $15 to 20 million in effect compared to a normalized CapEx spend as indicated during the bond placement. Adding general cost reductions of around $10 million related to organizational adaptations, we expect to free up more than $60 million in liquidity over the coming 12 months. And in parallel, we are, as always, evaluating our long-term capacity against market developments. And this does include potential sale of vessels for use in other offshore markets, and we are progressing dialogues with potential buyers. Any divestments that we do will be made with an aim to optimizing swing capacity and further strengthening the group's balance sheet. With that, I will hand the word back to you, Irene, for the outlook and concluding remarks. Thank you. Thank you, Andreas. For Q3, we expect marine acquisition activity to be broadly in line with Q2. On multi-client, we're expecting a significant contribution during the second half of the year as data is processed and delivered to clients, although with some timing uncertainty on the specific quarter. Planning for potential multi-client surveys is currently ongoing, and we maintain a disciplined and focused multi-client strategy with clear return requirements, and we're gradually increasing activity in a disciplined manner. Our backlog at end August sits around $330 million, including the minimum guaranteed vessel month from TotalEnergies and the recently awarded contracts that we have announced. We are strengthening our position within OBN, as demonstrated by the recent encouraging contract awards and what I refer to as almost two-year continuous utilization for the Tasman Pearl platform. Still, overall award activity has been low. The tender graph on the right partly shows this. However, please note that it shows the last 12 months' development in new tenders, and even if it drops off, the actual tender pipeline will include projects that came to market more than 12 months ago and that have yet to be awarded. Looking ahead, there's still low visibility as clients remain cautious and with no clear indications of a step change seen as of yet in the market, and we therefore expect the flattish trend seen over the past few years to continue into next year. To conclude, Q2 was affected by decreased streamer activity as anticipated and communicated by us in Q1. We have taken steps to increase balance sheet resilience and free up liquidity, which means that we are aligning the organization to expected activity, and we are positioning for a continued sideways market into next year. Longer term, though, we expect demand for marine seismic to increase, and it may happen sooner than one can see at the moment, and we are ready to scale with demand from a fully invested data acquisition platform. Then we're ready for the Q&A, and I hand the word over to the operator. As we have no questions in the queue at the moment, I'll hand it back to the speakers for any written questions. Thank you. First question from the web: Is Shearwater thinking of diversification in terms of area of operation as technology evolves? Yes, and we had a similar question in Q1 onto this. We are working quite extensively on the CCS market, and over the recent years, we have had a, and still do, have a fairly solid market position. The challenge, however, is that the overall market has not come at the speed that one anticipated a few years back, but it is an interesting market as such and will be an absolute must-win battle for the decarbonization of many industries. So it's more a matter of pace than whether it's going to, whether it's going to happen or not. Wind or high-res, we've also spent quite a bit of time exploring. However, given the current headwinds of the wind markets, driven of course by policies in the US, we do not expect there to be a lot of activity in that market also in the short term. Of course, we're constantly exploring whether there are new potential avenues where we can apply our assets and our technologies, but for the time being, we are naturally quite exposed or have a single market exposure. But it's important to say, though, that as we started out, when we started the company back in 2016, we were a pure-play acquisition company in the streamer space, and we have diversified into the OBN space, which you heard from the presentation, with quite good success, and we are also now building up an interesting position in the multi-client space. So although it's in a single market as such, we are tapping into different sub-markets in that core market as such. Thank you. Next question: Are you able to tell us what Oceanic Vega is doing offshore West Africa? We are not in a position to reveal that as of yet. We expect to be able to do so within, yeah, hopefully not within long, and we'll of course come to the market with that information as soon as we're in a position to. Thank you. Next question: With the recent announcement of three vessels exiting the seismic market, how do you see the vessel supply and market balance now, and how will this affect the market going forward? We see relatively little or no impact from those decisions, given that all three vessels were not currently in our core market to begin with. Thank you. At the Q1 presentation, you expressed that you thought the streamer vessel activity would pick up in Q4. It seems that has not materialized. Is that a correct interpretation? We still expect that we will see higher streamer activity during the winter than what we saw, have seen over the summer quarters. That remains the case, but it is also the case that we had some expectations on projects that, yeah, were expected to be carried out during the winter, whether it's current uncertainty on whether that will happen now or a bit later. I would say still expectation of an increased activity, but yeah, with some uncertainty on some projects. Next question: Why are you reactivating a vessel for a one-month contract when the market outlook continues to be uncertain? Good question, but we had very good reasons to do so, and as you will have recalled, we've talked about a more disciplined or more scrutiny linked to vessel stackings, meaning quicker stacking decisions when we see that the market does not support continuous operation, and also more stringent reactivation decisions the other way around. We had stacked the Conquer, which is the vessel in question here, late last year. The reason for reactivating her in this instance was that there was an immediate need or short-term need for a client, particularly linked to the technology that is on the Conquer and also with a pressed timeline, which in short made it a commercially sensible decision for us to reactivate her. Thank you. Could you please elaborate on how you will improve balance sheet? As we talked about in the presentation, we have initiated several measures to improve liquidity and by that also balance sheet. That has been through a change in terms of when we will pay two installments, so we are deferring two installments from the second half of 2025 to early 2027. It's through focus on reducing CapEx and pushing as much CapEx out in time as possible. It's through reducing fixed costs and costs that we can, yeah, get down to the lowest possible level while supporting ongoing operations. We have also talked about working on potential vessel sales, which would give us proceeds that could then be used to strengthen balance sheet. We have several various ongoing initiatives that will improve balance sheet. Thank you. Next question is regarding vessel divestments. Can you say how you are working with vessel divestments? It's been mentioned as a possibility over some time now, but given the weakened market outlook, is this a more relevant topic now than ever? Yes, it is. We have, as correctly stated, mentioned this possibility for the last few quarters, and I think we have changed our wording around it from sort of being open to more expressing that we are in active dialogues. And so it's definitely something that is maturing and that becomes even more relevant. I saw there was a different question also on vessel divestment. Maybe we can take that at the same time. Yes. What do you consider the value per ship on the stacked fleet to be, or which prices do you need to achieve to consider selling a ship? If we did say exactly where the level was that we would accept, then that would probably not be the best for our negotiation with potential buyers. But I could say that we did sell a vessel in late 2023 that was sold for $12 million. That was a vessel that was least sort of valuable in our fleet. It was never operated as a streamer vessel, and it had a significant potential cost in order to operate in our market. And I would say that sort of gives an indication on what we achieved for a lower value vessel. But I don't think I want to go into specifics on exactly how much above that is the asking price for the next vessel in line. I would say that we have to accept that if we are going to sell vessels out of the market, the price will reflect a conversion candidate rather than reflecting the value of a streamer vessel as it is in our ownership. Thank you. Next question: Please comment on status and difference of cold stacking versus warm stacking of unused vessels? Yeah. So a vessel that is cold stacked will have a very low cost related to it. We have sort of, it's alongside, and we have turned off engines and gone through conservation process. It will have a monthly cost in the region of $50,000. So it's quite low on cost, and it will not be included in the utilization number. So it won't be counted as an active vessel, and it won't be then either forming part of the utilization percentage number. A warm stacked vessel will be a vessel where we have people on board. We have not gone through that conservation process. It means that the vessel can come out even quicker to meet demand. It will be with a significantly higher cost, and it will be counted as an active vessel, and it will then also bring the utilization percentage number down for that reporting period. Thank you. Next question: I guess it's a bit early to say something about 2026 for now. However, Brent averaged about $77 per barrel in H2 2024, the budgeting period for 2024. What oil price level do you think is needed to see improvements in the seismic market in 2026? Yeah, it is a bit early to say, and it will be extremely interesting to see now in October when the oil company or energy companies are putting their budgets together and what they will be communicating. As we said, we expect that we will be having a similar flattish market going into 2026. It is actually very difficult to predict at the moment, and we don't see any clear signs of that there will be a significant uptick or trigger points that should indicate that there will be a change to the current environment that we see, which is of course linked to the overall uncertainty on all kinds of investments at the moment. Back to the oil price, it's hard to say again, but I think the oil companies at the moment not necessarily are just looking at where does the oil price sit in the mid-60s or does it sit in the mid-70s or above. It's more the overall investment certainty and at what point they become more certain about the future, the near-term future, so that they can actually put their investments forward. And I think that that may impact more than their investments going into seismic, but just investments in general. And that's also what we're seeing on the economic, also on the global economic uncertainty that investments made in all different sectors are uncertain at the moment, and the same would go for the energy companies. Thank you. Could you please share some more insights in multi-client segment and the potential revenue and EBITDA contribution for the coming quarters? We don't talk in detail about expectations, but we are saying in the report that we expect there to be a significant revenue and thereby also a significant EBITDA coming from the multi-client segments in the coming quarters, but we haven't and will not put a number on that. It's promising in terms of what we think will happen, but what we also see is that it's very binary, whether it does happen at one point in time or a different point in time, so trying to be precise on that would be, yeah, it would be very difficult. Thank you. Two questions in one. Do you expect to see a working capital release in Q3? And furthermore, there seems to have been a negative product mix in Q2 with more vessels working on lower margin work. Where do you expect this to trend in Q3? What we have said in the report is that on the acquisition side, we see similar overall activity level in Q3 as we do in Q2, and sort of without going into all of those details, that also reflects on the mix of activity between various modes, and that probably also feeds into the comment around working capital. From that, you can derive that we don't expect a large working capital impact in Q3. However, one side to that could be if we are indeed recognizing significant multi-client revenues towards the end of the quarter. It could be that that is only paid in Q4, and that could increase working capital slightly in Q3 before being reduced again in Q4. Thank you. A follow-up question on cold stacked versus warm stacked vessels. How many vessels are cold stacked and warm stacked currently? And can you share some insights in the operating cost of a warm stacked vessel? So when we have eight active vessels as we did for the most part of Q2, that means that we have 15 cold stacked vessels in that quarter on average because the total fleet is 23. In that quarter, we had between zero and two warm stacked vessels where those days where they were warm stacked or idle contributed to the 22% non-utilized time in the quarter above the 78% that we reported as utilization. Was there a different part of that? Cost. The cost of a warm stacked vessel. That will depend on where you are in the world, but I would say that it will typically sit somewhere between $500,000 and 1 million for a month. Thank you. That was the last question identified from the web, so I will hand the word back to the operator if there's any questions, live questions. Thank you. As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press five star on your telephone keypad. We'll have a brief pause while any questions being registered. We have one question in the queue, and the first question is from the line of John Olaisen from ABG. Please go ahead, your line will now be unmuted. Yeah, thank you for taking my question. It's not an important question, but there's no other questions, so I thought I'll take the opportunity. A little bit on the towed streamer contract side, given the lack of activity at the moment, do you see any price pressure, negative price pressure? Hi, John. We see that the margin development remains stable, also as we anticipated in Q1. As you will recall, we've seen a negative drop the previous quarters, the second half of last year, but it has sort of leveled out now, and it's still at an okay level. Do you think we have managed to secure more work if we lower prices somewhat? Actually, no, because this is not a price-sensitive market as such that if you lower your prices, then more clients will be wanting to acquire seismic. So yes, maybe we would take an occasional job here or there from our competitor and vice versa. But I think, as we've said before, and we have been for many years as we have consolidated the supply side, extremely disciplined when it comes to our margins. We believe that that will remain extremely critical for the industry going forward. That is also why we are being continued to be, despite the fact that the market is challenging, very disciplined on the capacity that we actually put into the market. Then a little bit on the costs. I understand that you laid off about 150 people during Q2. I wonder what the cost base that you had as reported of Q2, how much is that likely to come down over the next couple of quarters, please? I think a big part of the cost base will be dependent on where we operate, how many active vessels, etc. So you probably won't be able to read it directly out of the numbers, but what we can say is that fixed costs of an employee in Shearwater would typically be all in, including all social taxes, etc., quite close to $100,000 on average. So that gives you a number of around $15 million. I would add, though, that a significant part of these employees are offshore, and you will then see a cost saving, of course, when activity level is low. But if activity level picks up again, it's not a cost that goes away independent of activity level, but it does reduce fixed costs. Do you have contingency plans for potentially cutting even more costs? Would that be possible? I guess if you just ramped up activity, I guess, but. Yeah, of course, the big drivers will be, as you say, the number of active vessels and being prudent when it comes to, and quite critical in our assessment when it comes to keeping vessels warm stacked versus cold stacked. That's an area that has a significant impact on cost. So that will, of course, continue to be the focus. In addition to that, we will, as you would expect, continue to look at ways where we can work more efficiently and see even more cost optimization, but as natural also, we have started this process by looking at quickest targets where we can see an actual impact on cost, and yeah, so yes, we will continue to focus on it, but I don't think it's likely that we will be able to see similar kinds of effects added to what we already have achieved. But is that? And may I ask you have the. If I can add to that, John, that of course, any company should at regular intervals be revisiting its cost base and its ways of working. So you can cut your cost base by only 100%, and then there's no more business left. But you can actually make huge and quite significant improvements by adjusting the way you're working. So that will be very much in addition to, of course, that we're looking at more onshore departments and headcount as well, but it's really in achieving efficiencies in the way that we work that we see a much greater potential. On that note, you have this streamer and seismic equipment factory in Asia. I don't remember right now whereabouts it is. What's the status of that? Do you plan to continue to have that, or would it be more efficient to outsource that part of the business? It's in Penang, Malaysia, and fortunately, the benefit and why we have the factory out there is that the cost base is significantly lower than what you would have in any European country any day of the week. We are, of course, looking at that as well, but the reality is that the activities that are being performed out there, they're building, they're producing our own technologies, including the Pearl nodes as well as IsoMetrix streamers, and they're also supporting the maintenance and repair of our existing activity, so it is a very integrated part of our overall operations and probably limited potential in outsourcing that. My final question or subject I would like to discuss a little bit more is we discussed the streamer side thoroughly, but the OBN business, some of your competitors are claiming that the activity level is sliding and also experiencing significant price pressure for the OBN business. Could you tell us a little bit what you see, and maybe in particular on the last two contracts that you announced, were they done at old margins or were they done at significantly lower margins, for example? To start, we never comment on specific margins or pricing, but they were done at levels that we are very satisfied with. And there are also, as you know, in this business that some percentage points on the margins means less than actually achieving continuous utilization, which is what we're achieving in these two contracts on the Tasman Pearl platform. We totally agree with what our peers are saying is that it is a fragmented and competitive market generally. Therefore, we have also by design not really in several of these bigger contracts that have been out there, we've essentially not bid to win because we believe that the risk-reward is simply not acceptable. And that's in certain markets. And then we have had a very prioritized, targeted strategy on winning the work where our current platform in Tasman Pearl actually makes a difference to the client and brings efficiencies to the various clients that we've been working with. Then, of course, we have currently also a project that we're doing for ExxonMobil in Guyana with a leased kit both on the node side and on the vessel side, which is also at levels that we are satisfied with. But in general, I agree with comments made by peers, flattish market, and because of its fragmented nature, also quite competitive. So you think it's flattish? I heard comments that saying it's going down. The OBN market, that is. Yeah, but these things go in, yeah, so I and maybe because our peers are working in these very competitive regions, they more have their finger on the pulse in these markets. We have experienced that we now have two years of continuous utilization on the Tasman. So that says a lot. So we've been able to win the work that we've actually targeted to win. Yeah, that's good. Well, thanks. And hopefully the market will improve. It seems like it's pretty tough, but at some point we'll come back, I'm sure. Anyway, thanks a lot for taking my questions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, John. As we have no further questions in the queue, I'll hand it back to the speakers. Thank you. And I think it's a nice segue, the comment from John. It's a challenging market. Fortunately, we that have been operating in this business for a number of years, we're used to the cyclicality and the volatility within the quarters. And we also know that this market tends to shift quite quickly. And in the meantime, one needs to do all the necessary steps to make sure that we maintain a sensible business. So on that note, I thank you all for listening in on this Friday and wish you a very nice weekend in a bit. Thanks.