Welcome everybody. We're going to give one minute for the others, if anybody else wants to join, I think we can start very soon. Why don't we start, actually? Let's do it. Let's do it. Guys, preliminary results, usually they're the same or always the same as we published so far. A quick summary, Michał will deep dive into details in a second, we have a very, not very, but we are quite satisfied with profitability. Not that we don't expect to grow more, the profits go up despite the pretty modest growth on revenues. This is something we did say in the beginning of the year, that this year we expect slower dynamics on the net revenues, we hope to optimize the profits, which is already visible. Operating profit is 30% here, growing year-on-year, one of the key drivers is banking. Banking revenues, in this case, grow also operating profit more than doubles. We think it's not the end. This can continue in terms of very good banking performance, we want to keep it up that way. Payment, excluding PPA write-off, slightly growing. We had some write-offs, cleanup of the past investments finally. The revenue slows down in traditional old school business like POS and ATM, it's offset by independent POS networks sold to the merchants and ECR business. As for e-com and processing, we had some write-ups, which hit and slowed down the dynamics, overall, we are pretty happy with the organic growth over there. In Turkey, where we had a huge pressure, as we mentioned, because of two customers going in-house. One is finalizing this, second big customers. Second one is in process. We managed to compensate this very much by cost-cutting. Because we had quite a big team there and we successfully are performing this exercise, which turns into reasonably good effect on that market. Dedicated Solutions, absolutely not satisfactory yet. We have a slowdown on some of the tunnel road monitoring projects and shift to Q3- Q4 of these projects, so this is impacting the operating profit. PPA and goodwill write-offs, Michał will mention more about it, but this is between operating profit and net profits affecting net profit on EUR 3 million. That's why the discrepancy in the dynamics between the two lines. Cash flow, excellent. We don't expect this to get worse, maybe only better. Cash conversion, very good and significantly improved the last 12 months. Yes. Transactional business, this e-com drop that I mentioned, also resulting from Turkey and some of the recognition from Middle East and India last year, which we reversed later on in following quarters last year. This is cleaned and very nice dynamics of independent POS and processing of physical transactions. This is nicely growing. Let's look at the numbers. Michał, please. Let's go to numbers. Our traditional view on numbers, first two columns, full numbers, including hyperinflation, and third and fourth, excluding hyperinflation reporting. Here, as we already mentioned, flat on top- line, but with change of structure of revenues, growth of own activities, by around EUR 8 million, with decline of third- party, so resell. Operating profit, excluding hyperinflation, is 27%, 30% with hyperinflation, as we commented. Net profit, here it's slightly lower than last year, 4% below, and this is mostly due to financial activity. Balance of financial activity, change of balance of financial activity year-over-year is EUR -3.2 million. Out of this, EUR 2.1 million is write-off of remaining part of goodwill on Indian operations. Now goodwill is in zero net value. Plus restatements of put call liabilities and earnouts. Here we had positive impact last year, around EUR 1.9 million. This was first step of restating liabilities related to India and Dubai. This year, we don't have this, net, there is EUR 1.4 million lower result. From positive ones in financial activity, it's EUR 300,000 lower cost of dividends paid to non-controlling interests in case of present ownership interest. This is mostly related to ifthenpay, which paid dividend earlier this year in Q1. On accumulated numbers, there is now this drop simply here, difference between quarters. Taxes are slightly higher, around EUR 400,000 more taxes. This is simply because of higher operating profit and profit before tax. When we look at results adjusted for those items, which are by definition not related with tax, like goodwill write-off and so on, effective tax rate is slightly lower than in previous year. Let's have a look at results by business units, by segment. Banking. Here we have the biggest growth, or only growth, top- line EUR 4 million, bigger than in 2025. It was delivered by all three business lines which we have in Banking. Core Solutions, Multichannel Solutions and Security Portfolio. The growth is mostly, like 65%, more or less, on services implementation and modifications, and the remaining part, it's recurring SaaS and maintenance revenues. Geographically speaking, growth is mostly in Southeastern Europe, in Serbia and Croatia as the leading ones, plus in smaller values in Bosnia and Herzegovina, plus in Central Europe in Romania. This growth of revenues was 1:1 transformed to operating profit, which increased EUR 4.1 million versus previous year and reached almost EUR 8 million with profitability of 35%. Dedicated Solutions. Here, flattish revenues. As already mentioned, we have some cases in road projects where the work was done, but we are not able to recognize or we need to create some allowances due to some external factors and delays with approvals for some sections of tunnels or highways. With our strict policies, we prefer to do this way. Operating profit slightly lower than in previous year in Dedicated Solutions. The last line, Payment. Here we have drop of revenues by almost EUR 4 million. In a moment, few words more on which product lines. Operating profit, which is slightly lower, EUR 600,000, than previous year, but this includes write-off of assets recognized during Purchase Price Allocations or PPA for Indian operations. If we exclude this non-cash write-off, which was EUR 1.23 million, there is growth of operating profit by around EUR 700,000. In Payment, very good quarter, as already mentioned, for ECRs and IPD. Here we have growth of revenues by EUR 1.6 million. This is mostly Western Europe, Spain, plus in Southeastern Europe, Croatia and Slovenia. E-commerce and processing, flat year-over-year. However, here we have drop of revenues in India and Dubai, around EUR 1.4 million, which was compensated by increase in Turkey, Portugal and Spain. For ATMs and POSs, the drops are related with lower deliveries. In case of ATM business line, it's mostly Southeastern Europe, only Southeastern Europe, Croatia, half of this drop, and to also Montenegro and Bosnia. In case of POS, this traditional POS line, drop of revenues is mostly related with Western Europe, Spain, where the deliveries of Android POS terminals were small. Let's have a look at geographies. Southeastern Europe, the strongest one, almost EUR 3 million growth of operating profit, mostly in Serbia and Croatia. As I have mentioned, Serbia, mostly Banking. Croatia is Banking, but also in Payment, ECR, IPD business. Plus, in this case, also Dedicated Solutions was better than in previous year. Smaller growth in Macedonia, in Banking and in Dedicated Solutions. Some slowdown both on revenues and operating profit in Bosnia, and this is related with road projects, which I already mentioned. Plus, in previous year, this entity which is responsible for utilities business, they had some project already in Q2, and this year there was no such project. Central Europe. In growth of revenues and operating profit, this is mostly Romanian Banking as the biggest contributor. Western Europe, we have drop of revenues due to lower deliveries of POS terminals and also drop of operating profit, which was partially compensated by growth of e-commerce, which what I already commented before. Turkey, pretty good growth of revenues and growth of operating profit. Visible effect of this cost reduction actions which we took in Q4 last year and beginning of this year, to address the loss to clients, or maybe not loss, but the fact that they switched transactions to their own payment gateways. India Dubai, here drop of revenues quite significant. I commented this on the e-com, but flat result. If we look at PPA line, as was third from the bottom, we have drop of result by EUR 700,000, and this is related with those write-offs of PPA assets, which I described. If we exclude this cost, like regular depreciation cost, would be around EUR 1 million, so lower than in previous year. This is something what we should expect for coming quarters. This was about Q2, and now cumulated view for two quarters. It is very similar to the one for Q2 only. As you see, slight growth on top- line, 3% year-over-year. EBIT growth 20%. The difference is that there is also growth on net profit. Here, thanks to what, is that in 2025 Q1, there was a loss recognized on sale of subsidiary in Turkey, Mobven. This year, there is no such event, so it affects year-over-year dynamics positively. I think, yeah, this is the biggest effect. Taxes, of course, on cumulated data also are higher by EUR 1.3 million, but the same or similar comment as for Q2, only no growth of effective tax rate. When you look at segments, again, very similar picture. Big growth of revenues in Banking Solutions, EUR 6.3 million, and EBIT higher by EUR 5.5 million. Also improved profitability from 22%-32%. About contribution by business lines or geographies, exactly the same comment as for Q2 numbers. Dedicated Solutions, here we have a growth of revenues, so a bit different than only Q2, and slight, very, very minor, but increase of operating profit. In Payments, drop of revenues and drop of operating profit by EUR 600,000. If we adjust for write-off, it will be also slight increase. When talking about drops of revenues in Payment, ATMs and POS deliveries, exactly the same as in Q2. Drop on ATMs is lower than in Q2, only due to some deliveries which happened in Q1. E-commerce, here we have drop on cumulated data, this is due to two things. One is India and Dubai Q1 2025 was last quarter of high results, so there is a drop year-over-year. Plus in Turkey Q1 2025, it was also before clients switched transactions. One client already started or switched transactions partially, but the second one started the switch later. This is why we have this drop year-over-year. ECRs IPD, very strong and growing for two quarters. A short view on countries. Again, very similar picture. The strongest, South Eastern Europe, more than EUR 5 million higher operating profit. The growth mostly Serbia, Croatia, and Macedonia, so exactly the same as Q2. Slight decline in Bosnia. Central Europe, EUR 1 million higher result. It's the same as in Q2, thanks to Romania and Banking. Western Europe, slightly lower. Also the same comment, growing e-com and shrinking traditional POS business. Turkey, flattish revenues, but increase of results thanks to those restructuring actions we've taken. Middle East and India, here is this clearly visible, this what I commented. Huge drop of revenues due to Q1 2025 and drop of operating profit by EUR 1.6 million. This is about result. Let's move to cash flow. It's very good. As already Piotr mentioned, EUR 38 million operating cash flow for two quarters. This is EUR 13.5 million more than in the same period of 2025, so significant improvement with lower investments in infrastructure for outsourcing and own networks. Slightly higher expenditures on M&A. These are not new entities. These are expenditures for put call options and earn-outs, mostly put call on BS Telecom in Bosnia, so this road business, plus Avera in Slovenia, which is in Payments. When we look at operating cash flow, EBITDA conversion rate last 12 months, so first column, 91% of EBITDA converted to net operating cash flows. We believe very good level and we are satisfied. Current balance sheet, EUR 61 million cash as end of June, so it's EUR 13 million lower than end of last year. We need to remember that end of June, on 30 June, we've paid dividend for 2025. Plus, of course, we had those investments in M&As which we have done during this period. Net cash, EUR 26 million, so slightly higher than end of last year and significantly better than end of Q2 2025. You see below in working capital, drop of receivables, bigger drop of receivables than drop of liabilities. This is, of course, good. Slightly increased POC valuation assets. This is related with status of projects and realization. We expect more to be closed and invoiced in second half of the year. This about balance sheet. Let's move to outlook for 2026 and backlog. Piotr, do you want to take this? Backlog, guys, is improving slightly. Mentioned, we do expect a slowdown on the revenue side this year versus past couple of years, even though you can see slight acceleration compared to previous conferences or previous outlooks that we have performed. It's big in Payten, the growth, than the Banking Solutions and Dedicated Solutions. 8% roughly in Payten, slightly below that in the other ones. We do expect this to grow a little bit still in the second half of the year. In terms of outlook, we do focus on efficiency, on profitability. We were asked in the morning on the Polish conference, where the biggest upsides are. I would say the quick ones, the biggest ones are on the loss-bringing units, which we try to eliminate. Only last year, loss-bringing units and business units generated about EUR 12.5 million losses. I cannot tell you that we will have no loss-bringing units at all, because some of them are on the early stage investment phases, where we want to develop the business and deliberately, we subsidize it in the initial phase. Overall, we do expect a big improvement on that side as well as on not the best contracts that we try to restructure and negotiate and improve. People efficiency, observing this, their workload and time track is another area which we try to squeeze and improve. We are pretty positive about second half of the year. The outlook is positive as before, with less risk of negative outturn. Also for 2027, we have pretty positive initial views, but this we will comment later in the future. Having said that, I'm open with Michał to your questions. Please, you can write them on chat or you can voice them out. Let us know if you have any requirements for additional explanations, clarifications, or anything else that you would like to know. I think we can unmute so people can talk. Monika, I hope you can do that. It's unmuted. Guys, any questions? I was asked, is profitability of 20% on EBITDA level of moving from above 20%- 30% possible in the near future? I think it is possible. I'm not saying this year, but 2027 should be achievable. Or at least moving very much north in terms of this target. If there's no more questions, we are inviting you to direct contact. Will you be on the new compensation scheme that is currently discussed at ACP level? I'd love to, actually. I was hoping this would happen in 2025 already, but this was a bit delayed by Asseco Poland discussion. We are sort of prepared and ready to do it from 2026. Unless our supervisors or whatever will stop this. We are very much happy to have ROIC-based and net revenue growth-based compensation. As management, people know about it. It was announced. Everybody knows we are moving into this direction, so it's more a matter of formal decision and approval for this decision than organizational readiness. We had one question. I am not sure if I know what you mean by EBIT floor for us. Floor is the lowest level we can have by 2020, because do I know the EBIT floor for us? Can you specify more what by floor you mean? You can do it on chat or the lowest EBIT expected, if it's the lowest EBIT expected, I wouldn't go there. Definitely we expect growth compared to last year as mentioned before. I think you unmuted me, right? Everybody unmuted. Just a quick question on that one. First of all, congratulations on the good numbers and definitely very nice to see how the business is improving on the profitability side. I'm just quite curious about, if you think about the current compensation scheme that's now coming or is discussed at ACP. I was wondering, I know there is some EBIT floor in terms of margin that the business has to achieve, you receive the majority of your bonus. I was wondering, I know that the bonus scheme is not in place yet. That's something to discuss in the General Meeting next month. I was wondering if you already know what's the target for Asseco South Eastern Europe when it comes to EBIT margin floor that the parent company is expecting you to be at. First, I'm not aware, and second, to be honest, I don't think this is being even discussed, because I never heard about a floor level or something like this. Yes. I can say internally we are probably over-performing the numbers compared to what we said most probably we'll do, and I never heard any disappointment or concern over this. Yes. Basically for us, the major drive is willingness to do more and get higher and better, and we want to do it actually a bit quicker than maybe assumed. Let's see how it goes. We are undergoing a major transformation now this year, and I hope we'll continue next year, but it will be much more visible next year. Yes. We didn't get any floor on EBIT level. Yes. Nothing like this was mentioned. As for the new compensation scheme. Okay. There's no minimum EBIT thresholds, right? No. Okay. No. No, there isn't. Actually, the thing which is being disputed is that our variables are much bigger than, for example, TSS or CSI standard in proportion of the total compensation. Yes. The question is how to address this. Yes. Whether to increase the fixes or to have a different split of share-based payment and cash-based payment in existing variables, something like this. Yes. Okay. This is one of the topics being discussed and disputed. Yes. That's it. I hope I answered you right, roughly. Yes. I appreciate it, Piotr. I will just send you the proposal that I've seen, and maybe that helps a little bit what I'm talking about. We have a formula that is used in TSS. It's being discussed with Asseco Poland. We have tested it, looked at it. There's nothing, Michał, that I think would surprise us, but I don't remember any floor topics there, no. Yeah, just have it in front of me now. There is something that's called minimum EBIT thresholds. That's what I was relating to. I know that the reason why TSS is doing that is usually because they want to make sure that the businesses are not doing everything to just keep growing recurring revenues, but as well to maintain some minimum profitability. That's why they usually have this EBIT threshold. Yeah, maybe you have it differently solved in Asseco South Eastern Europe. I have no idea. Maybe this is a nuisance just to control, because in the formula you have a formula of net revenue growth and also the return on invested capital. They don't want this to be compensated by pure revenue growth without having the ROIC in place. Yes. Maybe this is about having this minimum return on invested capital or proportion of EBITDA to the capital invested to make sure that we don't have units, business units or operations which just focus on growth and they are notoriously losing money or they are inefficient. Yes. Probably this is some safety valve or something like this for this purpose. Yes. This is what I would imagine. I appreciate it, Piotr. Guys, good luck. We have much more questions if you want to stay, because I see they just popped up. Yes. Have you changed your process for building the M&A pipeline in the past year? If so, how has the pace of signing NDAs or non-binding letters of intent changed? Well, actually, look, we focus slightly more. We didn't stop building the pipeline and looking at the M&As, we continue. Actually, we are strengthening the M&A team now as we talk, and this is in progress. But to be honest, we are putting much more focus on our current operations, current businesses to give us a clean slate, not to have loss-bringing business units, and to have operating managers who can take assumed responsibility for the future M&As. One of the major changes which we introduced is that we don't do M&As which would not have an owner of an operating manager who would later assume for restructuring or ongoing business, personal portfolio responsibility for this case, yes, and defend it. Yes? We want them to have a proper track record of being able to do this, yes, even with their current businesses. We are making sure on the trainings, on the education, and on the transformation of their existing business, that they are prepared for this task. Having said that, it doesn't slow us to build the pipeline or even discuss with some targets that fulfill these conditions that I just mentioned, that have the owner. Where is the complexity or where might be a slight slowdown? Actually, we are benefiting from some of the framework of TSS for M&As to review the targets and to analyze them with quite detailed scenario analysis and plans forward with executive plans, how to do the transformation with these units and what type of actions you take if it doesn't go the way you really want, or what evidence you have you can do what you plan, or evidence from the past. Preparing this is excellent exercise. We are very happy with this. It helps us a lot, but it's also very labor-intensive and requires from us a lot of preparation and education. This slowed down the process a little bit, but I think for the good. Yes. We have a couple of companies in the pipeline. I think we might acquire two to three companies this year still. None of them very big. Okay, one of them is bigger, but let's see if this can happen this year. We are undergoing this process I just described. We plan to accelerate actually in fiscal 2027 and onwards. Yes. Can you give a rough sense of how your process of changes in receivables by contract have changed from what to what, and how much farther can that go? Well, Michał will give you more details, but we are very carefully tracking, more carefully cash flow and of course, when you discuss the capital engagement and working capital, we try to minimize working capital and try to have as much prepayments as possible for our contracts or payments as we go and to actually eliminate, if possible, post-contract payments after finishing the contract that we get only paid. Yes. Both because of cash flow reasons and operating reasons. Yes. Michał, would you add anything to this? No. With the policies for write-offs and so on, there are no changes. We always were very strict, and we keep to be strict here, no changes. Just pushing through what you said, Piotr, to earlier, to prepayments and so on, collections. Michał introduced tools for people to track it, to evidence it. Yes. Now it's more about education and ability to transform this or translate or to renegotiate the relationship with the customers. As for the conservative approach to receivables and recognition, there is conservative and there is hyper-conservative. I think Michał is on this hyper side. I'm on conservative side, but he's deciding here. That's why sometimes we have a bit of lumping up in the Q3 and Q4. I appreciate the conservative because it doesn't run away, and we want to put pressure on our managers not to recognize too quickly and to be happy without having the cash and actually closure of the project following. Yes. Deferred revenues, it looks like it has improved. Actually, we have not disclosed this data, but I can tell you that no. Question, what do you mean by improved? They increased a bit. Yes. It's somehow, I think, related with receivables, where we say let's get upfront money, prepayments, then it becomes deferred revenues. Yes. Yeah, they are slightly higher. Look, the next question is the slowdown in revenues a result of cutting or trimming unprofitable areas, business units, products, regions, and can we give examples? Definitely India, Dubai, it's a cut. We said it's a waste of our management effort to try to. We have much bigger leverage elsewhere and much more probability to get the cash out of there. I don't think this had this big impact in the scale of our operations. Yes. I would say this is something visible, slowdown after big growth overall. One of them is for sure POS and ATM business, which is lower evaluated, but this is slowing down, and it had quite big revenues in margin, one dynamics. Yes. In Spain, we had a couple of years of notorious replacement of the fleet of terminals by our customers to Android terminals, and this phase has been finalized, it slowed down. Yes. What else? Big projects. We had a wave of big core bankings replacements and others in the region, now we do more site projects, modifications, improvements, change requests, and Channel solutions developments, which also grow as you see in banking, probably the big project type of things has declined a bit. We see in public administration, we have a big market in Serbia and probably elections this year. They plan elections every year. There is a political turmoil, and in the public, there is definitely a slowdown over there. We don't see much happening in this domain. It's pretty much organic slowdown, not us resigning from participating, but also these projects not popping up that much. To cut the long story short, I wouldn't say this is an effect of us resigning from some opportunities or being much more cautious with that. We are cautious, but this would not be that scale, Michał. Yes. You would- I agree. It's mostly like the drop is POS and ATM deliveries, yes. Plus a bit in Dedicated Solutions where we have this road business, which was pretty strong last year. Some projects were on the phases when equipment was delivered. This year we have DROP INDEX. Yes. It's not that we stopped. Yes. We will see in second half of the year. We expect, as I mentioned, very good, but for example, for comparable numbers, we had the utilities billing company and utilities company having an amazing year where they grew from EUR 500,000- EUR 13 million EBITDA from 2024 to 2025. This year, they will have very nice results, but significantly lower than EUR 13 million. Yes. You can see there is some wave. The recurring revenue for them is growing, but this professional services business has dropped in that case. I would say it's a result of more economic regional cycle, not something happening in a downturn, and it's more customer-related cycle or kind of political cycle locally, but not something I would say that macroeconomics or something resulting from our policy directly. In Turkey, a bit slowdown with this payment e-commerce because of these customers going in-house. There's a lot of small things, but not something that is an effect of us slowing the market expansion because of non-profitable approach. Can you give a broader sense of why you had success with the financial software, new customers, high prices, new modules? Good question. Tough one, yeah, I think all of this. We are expanding the portfolio into channel solutions and trying to push these channel solutions and trying to have a more quality discussion where the value creation is for the customer, not where we imagine, but where the customer sees it. I can tell you there's an ocean of opportunities here, there, because the approach of ours to the customer is still very much responsive, not proactive. I'm absolutely not happy with this. Yes. We are pushing that direction. Second thing is on prices. We are looking at maintenance. It's a work in progress. Yes. We started a little bit. I don't think this is finalized. We have a lot of support maintenance contracts which were not index or inflation index only. Our customers are 2x-3x bigger, and our maintenance is 20% bigger than 10 years ago. Yes. We see that some of the very important critical solutions for our customers didn't get the proper price carrier to show the weight of the services we provide and the service we provide for the customer to reflect this in the pricing. That's the second aspect. There's a cost aspect, which also we've started, but it's just the beginning. I think the teams, in many cases, have grown tremendously, and we are losing some of the efficiency as the time tracking, the efficiency tracking within the team utilization leaves a lot to wish for. Some measures were already taken, but I said it's initial measures, and I think we can squeeze out much more efficiency, especially with application of AI tools. There is, again, a lot of opportunities to increase our internal efficiency and profitability on these. Yes. A lot of our financial products are very mature products. We are going with new portfolios, new things. They are less profitable, but the old ones should be more profitable than they are today. Yes, they are very well-tested, matured solutions which deserve higher profitability than we have today. Can you please help us to understand the extent to which code is being produced now with AI coding tools? And is the pace of new models different than, say, 18 months ago? And is the price of these new models different, the same, higher, or lower? Well, I wish to say yes. I would say we are pushing very much, very aggressively AI adoption in different areas. We see this is happening in kind of individual mode, including in the teams, and people are helping themself out. Still, the effect of AI usage is consumed mostly by the users, not by the company. We want to take it over. Yes. I think in many instances, the employees are taking the benefit of releasing themselves from pressure and time, having more free time thanks to the usage of these tools. Yes. Now we have different programs and trackings and initiatives how to monetize these initiatives, either on a cost side or extra revenue side. Yes. One of the very visible aspects is nobody is asking for extra employment anymore. Yes. New employment has stopped and replacement of leaving employees also pretty much stopped, yes, on engineering side. This is the side effect, but not monetizing enough. We are starting to deploy agents to automate some of the things we are doing. Again, beginning of the road. I'm pretty optimistic in the next year what we can squeeze out of this. This will require very big discipline on our side and pressure also from the management to achieve this. To cut the long story short, we are in the beginning of the road. Many people are using it, many people are deploying AI tools. We are not yet efficient in monetizing this ourselves, and this is our target. Are you thinking exactly the same of the ATM leasing hardware business that you were 18 months ago? Is there a world where you would no longer have any of the hardware at all on your balance sheet? First of all, we will be more disciplined. Not that we were not, but we were trying. If we had hardware on our balance sheet, we were financing it with debt. Not all of it. Now we will finance all of the outsourced things with debt. This is back-to-back, like it's on the balance sheet, but it's leverage. That's how we want to offload the capital deployment or kind of pressure on capital utilization unnecessary on us. Still, I would stick that this is being able to outsource. Putting it on the balance sheet is one of the more effective ways to increase the stickiness of that business. We don't want to resign from that, not at all, but we want to be more disciplined in leveraging this business, and which doesn't seem to be any issue. It's more about doing it in not partially or not in every second case, but in all the cases and fully, and I don't think we have any tool or available tools already. We have them in place, and we can use them, right? We have to. I think this is the approach, if I understood your question properly. Can I imagine there will be no hardware on our balance sheet? Of course, I can imagine. Luckily or unluckily, my imagination is pretty big. For good and bad. I would say probably it will not be abrupt, kind of immediate effect or something like this. I would expect this to be a result of market trends. We might see that some of these businesses are not attractive enough for us, that we resign from performing them. That's it. That's what can happen. We are tracking this to what extent we hit our profitability thresholds and others, and where to diversify and where to use our resources elsewhere. If this is stopping to be interesting, then we'll do it. A good example of this is infrastructure business that in 2010, 2012, this was majority of the business performed by this company. Today, this is absolutely minority, and it's dropping these units, which we call advanced infrastructure services, are in an accelerated mode, moving to pure service units, not infrastructure units. More and more using subcontractors or some others to provide equipment. This might be the case also here, and we are absolutely happy with this and even supporting this to focus on high value-added solutions. Did you already find a solution how leads will be treated between us and TSS, or will you find yourself competing with TSS on leads? I don't know if you're talking about sales leads or M&A leads. Yes. I can answer both. In sales leads, absolutely, we have very little overlap, but also where there is some overlap, this is a competition. On M&A deal signed between Asseco Poland or actually Adam Góral's foundation and TSS assumes competition on M&A level. Yes. We don't share leads on M&A level. No, we don't. Does your ATM business clear a 20% hurdle rate on profitability level, no? Or I think this is the idea of question. If you talk about profitability on EBITDA level. Oh, ROIC. We are on ROIC. You see, well, there is, I wouldn't say a trick, I think it's very fair what we've done, but I owe you an explanation. When we were allocating with Michał, we settled the capital. We got a capital we have to defend as ASEE. Yes. On a group level. Yes. We got a certain amount, say this is your capital now. This is it. Get the proper return out of it. We didn't allocate it based on revenues or net revenues to business units. We allocated this based on, let's say, some valuations based on market comparables, stock market comparables for different business units. What does it mean? It means that high-valuated businesses like Banking or e-commerce, they got the biggest load of capital, and their initial starting ROIC is the lowest. Businesses like ATM were treated very favorably because we don't believe their growth potential is so big, and the restructuring or value proposition we can build on top of it is huge, so we were much more modest with allocating capital to them. What does it mean? That we are close, we are slightly below 20%. Yes, Michał, from what I remember. It is slightly above. Okay. It probably depends which business unit, but this hurdle rate is not an issue here. To be very honest, this is the reason that I explained earlier. Yes, the starting point was pretty favorable for them. For POS, it was more ambitious, in terms of they got a bigger allocation than ATM business. Yes. The biggest was for software units and e-com businesses. I hope I answered. Can you give us sense cost-wise how you are using and paying for the AI tools and cost savings in particular? Like always using the frontier models, using the older models to save the money, using open source models or something else? Good. Look, basically, I will not say something you haven't read or heard, but now the common opinion is that open source models are a bit six months behind the frontier models. If you see what the frontier models could do half a year ago, the answer is pretty a lot. There is no necessity to use frontier models unless for very specialized and very sophisticated tools. Of course, we are tracking the cost. This is completely insignificant for now in our case, the AI spending. We don't see, but we are talking a lot about it, evangelizing and training people to beware, because we know already cases from sister companies, other companies, where this is going through the roof if uncontrolled. Yes. Basically, we heavily promote the AI usage. On the other hand, we track the cost, and more difficult will be that we put a lot of focus to track the impact or the effect on business of the AI application, because cost is easy. What about the basically two areas, new revenues or cost cuts? Yes. More efficiency on the cost side. This is something which we are unhappy with so far because we think this is not yet properly visualized and monetized by our group. Definitely we are looking at platforms which will help us to deploy with the use of open source some of the tools. This would be for more agentic AI and agents using. We are in discussion with them and already deploying some of the initiatives. As for more software and coding, we are looking at the conditions different group companies have, different TSS including, and seeing if we can benefit of the wholesale pricing if we want to use the frontier models and open source, which type of gateways we can use for flexibility, elasticity, and security, most importantly, in using them. I don't know if I answered the question partially, probably, but partially. That's AI, so it's difficult to answer precisely. Any more questions? Please. Well, anyhow, thanks a lot for them. This was kind of fun and very much appreciated that you look at details of all this. Keep your fingers crossed for what we do and where we are heading and join us for the ride if you wish to. We are inviting you for the direct calls or Oh, we have new information. You? No. Just thank you. We invite you to direct contact if you wish to have a call with us or some additional 1:1 explanations. We are very much open to this. As you see, not many secrets unless something is secret, but we try to be pretty open on most of the things, yes. Thanks. Enjoy the, I don't know, wherever you are, either afternoon or morning, and see you soon. Thank you. Bye-bye. Thank you. Bye.