I guess, we had a little bit, technical problem, so I'll kick off again. Welcome to the first quarter of 2025 ORLEN Group results. We are here together with Magdalena Bartoś, company CFO. We just finished an hour ago press conference, so this is gonna be a little bit shorter version of our, of the presentation. Later on, we kindly ask you to join our Q&A session. Please, as usual, raise your hand. We're gonna be giving you the opportunity to answer questions, by order you, you raise your hands. We are here together with Przemek Wasilewski, Head of Strategic Finance, Konrad Włodarczyk, Marcin Piechota from IR team. My name is Jakub Frejlich, I'm heading Investor Relations. Well, I'll hand over to Magda to kick off with the presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Jakub. Thank you, team, and hello, welcome everyone to our first quarter results. As typically, and as Jakub introduced, I will first guide you through a summary of of our financial operational results. We will summarize with an outlook and, and stress test results, and we will follow up with questions, towards the end of our today's meeting. But before we kick off and dive into the numbers, I'd like to use the opportunity to flag that this is the first results presentation that we report according to the new segment structure. We introduced our new segment structure with the strategy presentation back in January, but this is the first financial reporting according to the new structure. Obviously, all the comparables have been restated, so that you've got, so that we've got an apples-to-apples comparison here, in our reporting. But the key feature, and the reason I'm mentioning this, is that the first quarter results will actually help me illustrate why the new segmental structure matters. It will speak to the resilience of the business model, the integration of the business model, and how the diversified business model supported our performance through quite a volatile period of the first quarter of 2025. But let's talk about numbers first. It's worth a broad and general statement that the first quarter of 2025 was a successful quarter, both in terms of operational and financial performance, a quarter that actually fulfilled our expectations, met our expectations. When it comes to sales revenues, we reported almost PLN 74 billion of sales revenues. That's PLN 9 billion lower than last year, but what's more critical is that it didn't impact the profitability of the business. We delivered PLN 11.6 billion of EBITDA LIFO, that's a 40%, representing a 40% increase compared to last year. But coming back to the sales revenues, a few most critical elements impacting, namely, macroeconomic environment. The petrochemical margins, the refining margins, both came significantly lower than last year, impacting revenues in refining. We also noted lower spreads on the sales of gas in wholesale, in supply business, that impacted our revenues as well. Volumes came lower, in particular in the Downstream segment and Consumer a nd Products, that got to some extent compensated by higher sales of gas in our supply business and higher distribution volumes in our Energy business. When it comes to profitability, as mentioned, PLN 11.6 billion EBITDA, even though we operated in a tougher macroeconomic environment this year compared to the first quarter of 2024. Key contribution to that growth coming from the Energy business, that's a growth of PLN 0.6 billion and PLN 4.3 billion of EBITDA delivered in total. Consumers and Products business also significantly improved. But a significant, a very material impact to our profitability in the first quarter of this year is discontinuation of the gas windfall charge. In 2024, we still were obliged to contribute to the support regime for the consumers of gas and electricity. That is no longer in place, and as such, we don't have that charge in the P&L, in the cost base of 2025. Cash generation came really strong, with EBITDA converting into cash, and lower cash tied in working capital, lower financing of working capital required, and we generated almost PLN 4 billion or approximately PLN 4 billion more from operations. Free cash flow came strong as well, with PLN 9 billion of free cash flow, and net debt stood at around zero, as we ended up the quarter with PLN 1.2 billion of net cash position. We'll talk about our leverage and financial position later on in the presentation as well... Now let's move on to take a quick glimpse on the macroeconomic environment. We can see the key indicators, global indicators on the page here, but I will try to put them into context. So let's start with Upstream and Supply first. The upstream part of our business was largely supported by increasing prices of gas. Gas prices in the first quarter of this year came 54% higher than last year. To some extent, that effect got diluted by lower crude oil prices. Crude oil prices came at 9% lower. But given the fact that the vast majority of our upstream production is gas, upstream business obviously contributed from higher commodity prices in that space. There is a negative effect on the segment, though. Our supply business, due to higher costs of gas acquisition and lower sales prices in the market, managed to realize lower spreads, and there is a significant impact on the supply business of higher gas prices. We'll take a closer look later. Downstream segment obviously impacted by normalizing refining margins. Refining margins, though, still at a very healthy levels. In the first quarter of this year, $8.7 per barrel, significantly lower than the same period last year. And as such, Downstream refining business impacted by that effect. Petrochemical margins also lower than for the same period last year. This time, the effect is 31%, and that has got a significant impact on the petrochemical margins and business results. In general, petrochemical business is still under significant amounts of pressure coming from cheaper volumes of products delivered of from the Middle East, the U.S, to some extent from Asia as well, considering certain products. Energy business operated in a softer environment with electricity prices significantly higher by 38% compared to the comparable quarter of last year. But what's worth mentioning is that we still have got those limitations in place imposing a ceiling on the prices of electricity to consumers, and that has got an impact on our Consumers and Products business. Let's move on, and firstly, take a broader look at the EBITDA. Two charts that you can see on this page. The upper chart presents the EBITDA contribution, so which part of the business contributed most to the total EBITDA of the group for the quarter. Obviously, or clearly, two segments stand out here: Upstream and Supply, and Energy contributing most to the results of the full group, of the whole group. The lower chart represents the increase or decrease change compared to last year. Let's go and to just simply anchor the key business drivers that drove the change for the quarter. For the Upstream and Supply business, three things to remember: One is discontinuation of the gas windfall charge. Secondly, higher gas supply volumes. And thirdly, lower spreads or tighter spreads delivered or realized on that gas supply. For the Downstream segment, again, three key business drivers to notice here. Firstly, lower refining and petrochemical margins. Secondly, lower volumes. We'll talk about the operational performance of the Downstream business in a moment. And thirdly, continuing pressure and continuing really difficult macro environments in macro end market environment in the petrochemicals business. Energy change or Energy EBITDA change quarter one to quarter one last year, driven primarily by the distribution business with significant growth in the distribution of gas in general, but both electricity and gas delivered higher distribution volumes. And then Consumers and Products, just one clarification here or a reminder. Starting from 2025, we combine all sales to the end consumers, be it fuels, conventional fuels, or any alternative fuels, gas, and electricity sales to end consumers in the Consumers and Product segment. The improvement in the EBITDA delivered by the segment is driven here to a large extent by gas supplies to end consumers, supported by increasing volumes. Now, let's deep dive into the four segments and operational and financial performance. We will start with Upstream and Supply. Upstream and Supply segment, the largest contributor to the group's EBITDA for the first quarter, delivered PLN 5.4 billion of EBITDA. That's up by PLN 2.7 billion. We present the numbers here by geographies. So you'll see EBITDA delivered by the Polish Upstream business, Polish Upstream business abroad, international, and wholesale trading/supply of gas. And few things to note and kind of keep in mind. Again, another reminder, three-quarters of our Upstream production is gas production, and a quarter is crude oil production. That's got some significance, specifically in the first quarter of 2025 as gas prices went up and crude oil prices went down, so there is different sensitivity to commodities volatility. All in all, we produced on average 210 kboe's a day in the first quarter. That's down by 4%, but that's due to a natural depletion of resources, but also slight near-the disruption that coming from 2024. When it comes to the results, Polish Upstream business delivered PLN 2.2 billion of EBITDA, with key drivers coming from higher gas prices on the Polish exchange, but also mentioned ease of regulatory ease, namely lack of that gas windfall charge. When it comes to international Upstream, PLN 2.7 billion of EBITDA delivered, with key business drivers being increase in gas prices on TTF specifically, to some extent compensated by negative impact of Polish zloty strengthening against the Norwegian crown. When it comes to wholesale business, the supply business, we delivered more than PLN 6 billion EBITDA less, and in general, slightly north of PLN 400 million of EBITDA generated. With the change driven by lower, tighter spreads to the largest extent. There is some effect of negative hedging impact, some effect of the settlement of PPAs specifically impacting the comparables. But the business matter to observe here, that's lower realized sales prices of gas with higher quotations of gas, allowing for tighter spreads. And now, one more... We'll talk about investments later. Let's move on to the Downstream segment. Downstream segment, as mentioned, the significant amount of pressure coming both from the market and macroeconomic environment. But speaking about real numbers, we delivered PLN 1.2 billion of EBITDA. That's down by PLN 1.1 billion, compared to last year, with both segments noting a decline in the EBITDA, EBITDA delivered. Refining segment but still, a positive result of PLN 1.5 billion, lower compared to last year, due to mentioned decline in refining margins. More than 40% of refining margins declined compared to the previous quarter or to the first quarter of the previous year. We also had lower sales volumes. In particular, diesel sales volumes came lower by 8% compared to the comparable period, and that comes from three main drivers. First of all, we observed lower demand in the markets. There is also increased activity of our competition. And, thirdly, we had some planned outages of our hydrocracking unit, and as such, lower yields of diesel in the first quarter of 2025. We, in general, had lower crude oil throughput, but that's due to plant outages in Płock and Litvínov refineries. Now, moving on to petrochemicals. Petrochemicals are in the red with PLN 400 loss on the EBITDA level, and that loss coming from a number of reasons, but the most significant being market environment and macroeconomic environment. We already mentioned at least three times that petrochemical margins were lower by a third, but we also recorded lower sales volumes on pretty much every product group within the petrochemicals business. A few to mention here is fertilizers, a decline of 16%. That's due to restructuring of Spolana plant, and some unplanned outages in Anwil. We also had lower sales of PTA by a third, and polyolefins, polymers, by 9%. That's due to due to outages in or lower availability of our units. Polish zloty becoming Polish zloty strengthening, or in this case a general trend of stronger euro to US dollar also impacted negatively the segment results. We sell petrochemicals mostly in euros, and that's that's why there is a negative impact on the bottom line of petrochemicals business. And then let's move on to Energy. In our case, Energy business, specifically in the first quarter, over 80% of the business delivered by the distribution. So it's fair to say that it's distribution that drives any change in the business results. And we indeed had a very strong quarter for the distribution business, with both volumes and tariffs coming in stronger than the comparable period of last year. Specifically, gas volumes came higher by 8%, and that is associated to a much tougher winter this year compared to the previous year, with average temperatures being lower. Same impact drove our heating result improvement, with heating delivering PLN 145 million EBITDA more for the Energy segment. Weather and hydrology that were the business drivers or those were the business drivers that actually were a burden for the renewables generation in the first quarter with significantly weaker wind generation. And hydro generation, we delivered lower EBITDA for renewables by PLN 79 million compared to last year, even though we grow capacity or we have constantly grown capacity over the last year. We had 0.5 gigawatts of installed capacity more in the first quarter, and still quite a significant impact of negative weather conditions for the renewables generation. Let's move on to the Consumers and Products business. And again, C onsumers and Products now is a combination of fuels, electricity sales to end consumers, and gas sales to end consumers. We delivered PLN 1.2 billion of EBITDA for the segment, and that's that came half half from fuels and from other Energy sources or Energy products. Results for the fuel retail business came strong, a very solid set of results in all of our markets. In Poland, we managed to maintain the profitability for fuels, with improved profitability for shop sales. We improved fuel margins in Germany and Lithuania. We also improved shop sales in the Czech Republic. When it comes to Energy and gas retail sales, I already mentioned that it's the gas that's the superhero here delivering much higher results driven by volumes and better sales efficiency. And now CapEx. I have some more comments than typically on the CapEx page here, just to give you a bit of more flavor of what actually is going on, when, if for, for, each in particular, key project here. But let's start from the numbers first. PLN 6.2 billion of CapEx, delivered in the first quarter, and that's very much in line, with the progress, that we observed in the previous years. So roughly, 18% of, that CapEx spent compared to the forecast. Therefore, we maintain the forecast. Given, the progress of, of our key projects, and a general, progress for the group, we maintain our CapEx forecast at PLN 35 billion for the year, with roughly three quarters, allocated to, the growth projects. Now, for the particular segments. In Upstream and Supply, there are two groups of projects that we currently focus on, exploration projects and production projects. When it comes to exploration, in the first quarter, we put particular focus on the Tomcat and Kongeørn projects. Those came unsuccessful, and were classified as negatives. And as such, they might impact, that result may impact, the full year forecast, as we had PLN 1 billion allocated to those projects in our budgets. We might wish to reallocate those to M&A projects or inorganic growth, should there be a new opportunity. If not, we will carry on with the organic growth. We noted that during our strategic presentation, that we will strive to be flexible, to respond to our CapEx allocation needs, whether organic or inorganic growth. This seems to be a very practical case of that approach. Then, for a successful exploration project, I should mention E-Prospect. That's a successful exploration with roughly 3-7 million barrels of crude identified. And we expect to see production coming in and support the results. When it comes to production projects, our key focus is on Fenris and Midgard also, and we are progressing with the construction process for the seabed platforms. Talking about Downstream segment investment, two large investments that normally gather attention. The first one is the New Chemistry project, and a few updates on the New Chemistry project. When it comes to the ISBL, so inside battery limit, the key units of the new installation. We have progressed as planned with the EPC contractors. What we are focusing on here is agreeing on the new time plan, agreeing on some technical issues, some financial issues as well. There are negotiations ongoing with the EPC contractors, and that's the key focus on the ISBL. When it comes to OSBL, the infrastructure, supporting infrastructure for the ISBL unit, we have significantly accelerated progress in the first quarter with the key focus on integrated time plans for all of the projects here. And now the focus is on putting in place amendments with our contractors so that we've got it sealed what we agreed when it comes to time plans and scope. Another significant project in the Downstream segment is Bottom of the Barrel, so the hydrocracking unit in Mažeikiai, Lithuania. Just a reminder, that's a EUR 1 billion scale investment, and we are progressing as planned. So we've accelerated it after a restoration, let's put it this way, or revisiting the scope and contractual conditions with our EPC partner last year. We've managed to accelerate the progress and there are significant milestones that were accomplished in the first quarter. One more thing to mention, we delivered the visbreaking unit in Płock. That's already online and contributing to the results of our Płock refining business in the second quarter. For the Energy segment, most critical or significant projects, obviously our offshore generation, offshore wind farms, with Baltic Power progressing significantly. We're currently installing or preparing for turbine installation. And, as mentioned in our communication, we opened the maintenance base in Łeba just the day before yesterday. And when it comes to Baltic East, that's another project, that's the neighboring project to Baltic Power. 1 GW of installed capacity in offshore wind generation, and we are progressing with permitting, specifically environmental permitting, and we are in dialogue when it comes to with suppliers, when it comes to sourcing strategy, making sure that we that we maximize local content for the project going forward. And CCGTs in Ostrołęka and Grudziądz, both progressing significantly with major milestones being delivered in the first quarter and expected in the coming quarters. We expect to allocate roughly PLN 600 million to both those units this year, and just a reminder, 1.3 GW of installed capacity, gas-fired, for both of those units. Let's move on. There are three more pages. One is a summary, and then we will start looking forward. So a summary of our financial position, and there are few things here I'd like to mention. Firstly, and something that, I'm really proud to share with everyone, just yesterday, we got a confirmation from Moody's, of our, rating. It's the A3 Stable Outlook rating, and I think the best testament to our diversified, and, resilient business model that I spoke about at the very beginning of our, presentation. And then, just on the financial standing, a few numbers to keep in mind. We finished the quarter with PLN 1.2 billion of net cash. That's significant deleveraging compared to the end of 2024. But to keep in mind, with the dividend payment and our CapEx plans progressing, we will turn into net debts or during the year, as we progress in the year. However, the head start is probably easier and softer than even we anticipated internally. When it comes to the tenor and the maturity profile, we've got a very comfortable maturity profile with average maturity being 2029. With the January US dollar debt issuance bond issuance, we managed to extend the average maturity by one year. Again, a comforting place to be as, as obviously the structure of debt, the maturity profile, is one of our key concerns when thinking about potential financing and refinancing risks and preparing the funding strategy for the group. But also a few messages that I would like to leave with you relate to cash flow generation and how we manage cash flow generation, or some update on internal work when it comes to optimizing cost of funding and optimizing working capital funding. This is one of the priorities for the team, as we progress in the year. With very basic justification. There is value and optimization we can deliver in, working fund, working capital funding, financing, that will allow us to have access to a very flexible and a very efficient, funding from, either our suppliers or, financial institutions supporting our working capital funding, having a positive effect on our leverage and having a positive effect on the cost of funding as well. On the other hand, and or another thing I'd like to mention here is, CO2 allowances and our hedging against, the CO2 EUAs, prices and volatility here. Obviously, fundamental strategy to, to, fundamental strategy in order to hedge against the volatility of CO2 is to decarbonize, but that's a very long-term strategy. In the short term, we also have got strategies in place that help us manage that financial risk, and we've got a very active strategy that requires us to hedge against the EUA volatility prices. We are currently fully hedged until 2026, until the end of 2026. That's excluding, obviously, the allowances required for the electricity production. And now, as I mentioned, few remarks and comments related to outlook. I'll start with the outlook. So, on this page, a few comments, more our opinions and statements, what we expect each segment to deliver, what we expect to drive each segment's results in 2025 compared to 2024. Upstream and Supply is probably the key segment to observe here, especially given the volatility of the first quarter. We definitely expect the volatility to continue. We see trends supporting the results of the segment. Obviously no gas windfall charge and relatively higher gas prices that supported the business results in the first quarter. We still see positive spread between Henry Hub and TTF supporting the results of the business. Having said that, though, three months ago, that spread was wider. It's tightened and as such we would like to notice that risk of a potentially less benefit coming from LNG trading than we could have expected at the beginning of the year. When it comes to Downstream segment, obviously, something to observe here is, refining margins and petrochemicals margins. But for performance, we also need to be aware of any LIFO effects that might come, from lower, crude oil prices. No surprising trends or no changes in the trends related to other segments, so Energy and Consumers and Products. And as such, I think it's fair to confirm that we feel relatively comfortable, with the analysts' consensus for the year. We see some downside risk, specifically coming from the Upstream and Supply segment. But all in all, we believe we are really well positioned, to deliver on the results, on the expected results for the year. And there's one more thing we prepared for you today. Again, given the volatility and lots of questions that we received, both internally and from our external stakeholders, we performed stress testing of our results for the year. You can see the set of the macro assumptions at the very bottom of the page. So we decided to stress test specifically the TTF gas prices down to 35 EUR per megawatt hour, Brent Crude oil to $65 per barrel, and Henry Hub to 22 EUR per megawatt hour, so a tighter spread, as I mentioned, that we started seeing. And then, and I'm happy to confirm that given that set of macro assumptions, we estimate our EBITDA to be within the expected range for the analysts' consensus. That speaks to clearly to the resilience and to the diversified value of our business. We expect CapEx to be PLN 35 billion or south of PLN 35 billion, given the variances on the upstream exploration as I summarized in the investment page. And we also shared with you a very simplified framework that will guide our thinking about the dividends and returns to shareholders. There are three key factors that we analyze: the business results, the leverage, and the secured financing. And as of now, we are happy with the performance delivered. We're aware of the risks going forward, but according to the stress test performed, the group is expected to deliver on the operational performance expected and on the financial performance expected. Our leverage came really strong for the end of the first quarter, and we've got good visibility going forward on what's required, and on the cash generation profile. Therefore, that also confirms the strength of the balance sheet and financing has been secured. We've got good structure of funding, and we are also comfortable to confirm on that particular parameter that drives our dividend decisions. So as you can see on the page, we believe the group is currently in the position to confirm that dividend according to the policy that drove our decisions also for the dividend proposal for 2025. With that, I think it's high time to move on to the Q&A session. Thank you so much for your patience and, and presence, and I look forward to connecting with you, with you during the Q&A session. Thank you very much, Magda. I'll be handing over to you, and gladly, I saw, within 10 seconds, six hands raised, the first being Piotr from Citi. So please, go ahead first. Morning, it's Piotr Dzieciołowski from Citi. I have a couple of questions. So first of all, I wanted to ask you about your... You said you are, like, at the end of the year, you were saying you are guiding to a flat EBITDA of PLN 35 billion. Now you say you are comfortable with PLN 30.6 billion, but can you say a little bit like, feeling comfortable means there is an upside to this number, or you are spot on on how you think about, like, how much that can deviate from the actual number when you get to the full year? And second question: can you say roughly, 'cause it's a very... I find it very difficult, like, what's the group sensitivity to the gas prices if you accommodate all of the impact that you see through the upstream power as well as the trading segment? That's something that I think there's a quite a big positive leverage to gas prices, so the environment is deteriorating, but I just wanted to understand how you thinking about it in terms of the numbers around it. Final question I would ask is, there were some articles about the Energa from mainly local political parties. So I just wanted to understand at what time frame we could expect some of the decisions from your time around the Energa as an asset and what is your thinking about the asset overall? Let me start with the guidance, Piotr, and hi, good seeing you. Let me start with the guidance. As you've probably noticed, we avoid talking about particular numbers when it comes to our expectation about the future. So we would rather guide you to certain trends, we would rather guide you to performance indicators, and we would comment on your analysts' expectations and modeling results. And that's, and you're indeed right. In February, we spoke about EBITDA expected rather flattish, but never really spoke about a particular number. We currently, we delivered a very strong year. We see some downside risks, but when we think about your consensus of 37, we would probably say maybe if there is more a deviation from your consensus, I'd rather think there is a slight downside risk than an upside potential from the 37 that you've got in your consensus. But all in all, we feel comfortable as to the materiality of the number. And then, talking about gas prices and sensitivities, we're working on some more disclosure, so just be patient and bear with us. We will come with, hopefully soon, with some more disclosure when with this regard. But again, a little bit zooming out from the numbers, thinking about where and how we are sensitive, there is clearly a benefit to the upstream business when gas prices quotations go up, and there is pressure on the supply and wholesales trading spreads. We saw that in the results of the first quarter of 2025. Gas is a significant input into our Downstream cost base as well. So, higher prices tend to pressure the results of the Downstream segment, while lower prices support the results of the D ownstream segment. Same goes with the electricity, depending on the electricity prices and gas impacting electricity prices, obviously, but higher prices might mean there is an effect on the spreads realized on conventional electricity generation in this case. So all in all, you need this integrated approach. The largest impact is clearly for the Upstream and Supply business, but there is some hedging, natural hedging, coming from the operational or natural synergies coming from the operational segments as well. When it comes to numbers and sensitivities, we're hearing the desire, the need coming from you, and working internally to provide you with some more disclosure. Kuba will be on top of that in the next few weeks or months. And now, when it comes to Energa, what time frame? And Energa is an asset, and I think we need some more strategic view here than process view. Energa clearly is a key component of our Energy business. We benefit from stable distribution of a stable business of distribution of electricity that provides a really good base for cash generation and results of the group's consolidated results. So now, and clearly there is a super strategic component of that distribution assets with Energa business. We also have got know-how and the general Energy business expertise coming from Energa that contributes to our strategic views and strategic approach of our Energy business, and Energy is a key component of the strategy. When you think about our strategy and where we see value coming, we see value coming from that integrated ecosystem of the four segments, synergistically supporting each other and us maximizing value from upstream and downstream in order to invest into sustainable business model in Energy. And clearly, there is a significant role for Energa to play in there. And obviously, you're speaking to an unusual situation of Energa being itself a listed business, and us still having minority shareholders there. We see that more as a process matter than strategic matter, and we will come with answers and solutions in due course. Okay, thank you very much. I turn the call over to the others. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you, Piotr. Krzysztof Kozieł, over to you. Hello, everyone. Thank you for the presentations. Congratulations on the strong set of results. I have three questions, if I may. The first question would be on update about Venture Global, about both of those agreements, Plaquemines and Calcasieu Pass. What's going on here? I mean, have you received, like, the first shipments, or what's going on with the second one? And the second question would be about that acquisition in midstream in the U.S. If you could elaborate a little bit more, how does it fit into your strategy? How could you integrate that with your Polish assets? I mean, is it like a fire sale, and you just, you're just using that opportunity or, or, you... It's a kind of well-thought decision to just go abroad, and to go more into, like, the U.S. market. The second question would be about CapEx in Baltic Sea project. How much of that CapEx has already been committed? Thank you. All right, I'll start with VG. We've got the first shipment delivered, so that's a tick. We finally have good volumes coming from Venture Global. Another shipment, another cargo is on its way. We've got a schedule of cargoes agreed towards the end of the year. That's on the operational front. There's also a legal front of our relationship, and we are in a legal dispute waiting for the arbitration proceedings at the beginning of 2026. So this is where we are with VG. Midstream acquisition, and again, I think I will a little bit zoom out and talk not really about midstream acquisition, but about our Upstream and Supply strategy. So in our strategy, we mentioned that Upstream and Supply, Security of Supply, and using our gas assets expertise to transition from, coal-fired, economy or market into, low and zero-emission economy, or electricity generation in the future, that's our role as a, as a primary gas supplier into the Polish market. And as such, we want to diversify sources of gas supplies. So we've got Poland as a source of gas supply, Norway, and, we've got some volumes, that, that we are flexible, supplying. And some of those volumes, we are looking into the American market, not only for the LNG supplies, but also to have a stronger foothold there, in order to control, longer value chain simply, or more parts of the value chain. We've been looking into some midstream assets over the last few months. That work is still ongoing, so it's a bit premature to comment on any M&A activities. But when it comes to your question, whether it's an opportunistic deal, I'd like to reiterate now strongly. There is a very strong strategic rationale for any of that transaction. Obviously, whether we end up acquiring any midstream assets or not, that we shall see, but the strategy... but the rationale is purely strategic, not opportunistic, and it's more about controlling longer value chain. When it comes to CapEx in the Baltic Sea, we've got two projects. One is in the development phase, construction phase. That's Baltic Power, and that's north of PLN 4 billion of CapEx. And another one is Baltic East. But on particular numbers and budgets, I think I will need to ask our IR team to follow up with you on that... on the commitments. Basically, with the Baltic Power, we're done with CapEx. This is a non-consolidated, non-recourse SPV financing. Mm-hmm. Our share in equity has already been spent and topped the required levels. The rest of the capital outlays from the Baltic Power is divided on the SPV level, so therefore, it's not consolidated in our CapEx. Yeah, but I was just asking about, you know, the commitment. I mean, if there is any risk of cost, like increasing over time or, you know, at some point. Yeah. Like- No, no risk. No risk for the Baltic Power project that we would need to share. We obviously monitor the CapEx spending and any risks associated. Nothing on that front yet. Okay. Thank you. Right. Thank you, Krzysztof. Next, Anna, please, from UBS. Thank you very much for taking my question. I have several. First will be a follow-up regarding this EBITDA consensus number that you put on the slide 14. And you mentioned that you are comfortable with the magnitude of the numbers. Are you comfortable in the stress scenario or both, like, in base case and stress scenario? And if it's with the stress scenario, how much would be the upside given your base case scenario? That would be my first question. The second question would be around your thinking for M&A for this year, and maybe longer term, if we see this heightened volatility in global markets, do you see any, like, downside risk to the numbers that you were flagging during the strategy event? Can we see some lower M&A activity, or vice versa, you see, very interesting opportunities and would like to spend more? The final question would be around the working capital, as you flagged, in prepared remarks that it's an important point, for the cash management. Do you expect any further improvements on that side this year? Thank you. Anna, on the EBITDA, there's clearly... I think there is no easy answer in terms of numbers, right? So when you think about our base case, we take the results of the first quarter, we've got our expectations that we also reported on the previous page and some key trends. All of that kind of points to the EBITDA consensus as we have it. But then on the stress case scenario, we've got other parameters, but then when you think about the results, one offsets the other. So there is there's probably more of a risks or downsides, risks as you mentioned in the stress test result scenario, of course. But again, the downside risks are compensated or, the downside effects are compensated and netted off, with the upside opportunities. So even that, that's exactly about the resilience of the business model. That's exactly in the current market scenario, exactly how diversity supports us and how the integration of the segments support us. When it comes to the M&A, volatility is definitely difficult when it comes to M&A decision-making. Just as a reminder, our key areas of M&A activity currently is the upstream segment, and renewables expansion. And we've got really very strict expectations from our M&A projects related to our hurdle rates. So when we see a large volatility, we might need to apply higher risk factors, and that might impact the returns and our decision-making. We currently progress well with all our projects, so there is nothing I would need to flag when it comes to downside risk to capital outlays or M&A outlays, other than Norway upstream exploration project that I already mentioned. Therefore, I would expect the M&A projects to come in and support our expansion, but as you know, with the M&As, you never know when they happen, so very difficult to give a precise comment as to the impact on 2025. And working capital improvements, we've got a vast base of receivables and liabilities that we are looking into when it comes to improvements in funding and how we can support those. Working with our banks right now, being a bit more creative than in the past. In the past, Orlen was rather very conservative when it comes to working capital funding, and used their own balance sheet to fund working capital or our own balance sheet. We are much more progressive, as to say, right now, discussing with our suppliers and discussing with the banks, on the different instruments that can support our working capital funding. I'd rather not comment on the magnitude, but I would expect that to be visible going forward in the next quarters. Thank you. The next in line is Łukasz from Bank Ochrony Środowiska. Please, Łukasz, the floor is yours. ... Yes, hello. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. I got a few questions. The first one is about the H-Oil unit. When is it coming online, and what is your estimate for the annual contribution of EBITDA for this unit, given current refining macro? That's the first one. Second, could you comment on the supply of Arabian crude oil on the market? Recently, Saudi Arabia had made threats that it may expand production if other OPEC countries continue cheating, and could you... Well, do you see the additional supply, or what, what is your comment on it? The third question is regarding your new segment reporting. Are you still willing to provide cost by type for each segment, in the future? Thank you. Of course, H-Oil startup is ongoing. We've got some difficulties in that process, but those are, as technicians tell me, quite typical to that unit. It's a very complicated unit when it comes to operation and, in particular, startup. So it takes a while, and there are numerous iterations. We expect that to take a couple of months longer, roughly, and sometime in the summer to have the unit online. The EBITDA contribution, that's obviously there is obviously a positive contribution coming from the H-Oil unit as it improves yields and improves the supply of diesel, and it all depends on the cracks for diesel, the profitability of the installation. But to give you some indication, I think the insurance received last year is a good indication of the profitability of the unit. So we would normally receive the lost income from the insurers, and I think that's what I would look into when thinking about the contribution for H-Oil. Arabian crude oil supply, as we are largely contracted when it comes to Arabian crude oil supply. We don't really benefit or face the downside of any spot market disruptions. I find it difficult to comment what might happen and how it may impact. Obviously, we've seen OPEC increasing outputs in the past few weeks and months, and how that impacted prices, so we're also benefiting from that. But on the kind of demand and products flow, I find it myself difficult to comment. So what matters most for us is the security of that supply and operational efficiency then of operating the business. Segment reporting, when it comes to the details of segment reporting, I think we will try to accommodate to any reasonable expectations from you guys. So if there is merit in supplying other cost structures, cost by type, we can work with our financial reporting teams and work out a solution to deliver that information to you. Yeah, just to briefly confirm, we're working on tracking back and apply it to new segments, and we'll be in the next probably, no, not more than two months, sitting together with you on a workshop on that. In the meantime, checking on you, with you guys, on the targeted disclosure, where we can and what's meaningful. Also, we incorporated already a large number of your, of your input you requested in the Excel file we shared in the very morning. This is not everything, but this is definitely something. We'll be working on that further on. Okay. Thank you very much. Could I have a follow-up on the Arabian crude, on your contracts? Just to understand correctly, do you have any exposure to wider different, to improving differentials on the spot market? If... I don't know how your contracts work, but could you just give us some kind of indicator? Is it any helpful when- Yeah, we- the spot market improves? So we obviously do not work on the fixed price of crude. There is a particular strategy when it comes to contracted volumes versus spot and how the pricing formulas work. But I think that's as much as I can disclose. Okay. Okay, thank you. Tomasz, Santander. Please, the floor is yours. Hello. Tomasz Kurowski, Santander. Just two questions. Sure. First one is a follow-up on working capital. Do I understand it correctly that you plan to take some of the funding, of working capital off your balance sheet? That way, you will, you will show an improvement. That's correct. That's one of the initiatives, yeah. Can you comment anything about the magnitude of this move? ... I think it's a bit too early for that. We are currently in the procurement processes with the financial institutions and with suppliers agreeing on particular volumes and prices. And I think it would make more sense to talk about what we actually deliver than on the current planning. Thank you. And one more question on the projects which you have currently under construction, the organic projects. What kind of contribution to EBITDA would you expect from all these projects in 2026 and 2027 at current market conditions? I think hurdle rates are a very good indicator on the returns, minimum returns that we expect. So when you think about projects in the upstream business, we expect returns in excess of 10%. So that's the low teens is the minimum to think about when we talk about the upstream business investment. When it comes to Downstream business, obviously, the two largest projects are very difficult to comment when it comes to returns, so the New Chemistry and bottom of the barrel, both projects being written off, and more of a legacy projects that we try to minimize potential losses and find ways to improve efficiency of the project and any indication or any visibility on returns in the future. But as of today, we see rather negative scenario with the investments written off. When it comes to Energy, our minimum expected hurdle rate for the renewables project is 7%, the 9%, and, or, the hurdle rate is 7%-9%, depending on the pollution factor. So depending whether the project contributes to emissions or contributes to lowering emissions or increases emissions. So something south of 10% as a minimum, what we expect from renewables investment. When it comes to Energy gas-fired, that's a project that increases emissions. So, and that's a conventional business, the business in the maximizing value bucket of the investment projects, and as such, we would expect a minimum teens or low teens, minimum low teens of returns on those projects. So that's the way to think about it, using our disclosure, using our hurdle rates, and thinking where and how... where we allocate capital. That's the way to think about returns. Thank you. All right, so we'll now hand over to Ricardo from Morgan Stanley, please. Hi, thanks for taking my question. First question is on CapEx. If we look at the first quarter, the running rate is way lower than your guidance for the year. So how should we think about CapEx for the remaining quarters, or where should we see peak CapEx in 2025? And then, going back on to some of your comments about the full year and what you see on consensus estimates and your expectations on CapEx as well, would you approach your dividend payment from the same lens that you did it last year than going for the payout on the operational cash flow? Or, given just how many uncertainties that you see on the market, would you need to be a bit more cautious and go for the deep gas based on your strategic payment? Thank you. Because when it comes to run rates, it is absolutely typical in our business and for the types of investments that we undertake that the run rate for the first quarter tends to be lower, so it's not linear progress rate. You would normally have got more work done in the second and third quarter simply because of the weather conditions allowing for more of the groundwork to be delivered. And then also in the fourth quarter, typically, internal processes generate much more documentation that allows us to also account for those CapEx projects. So absolutely normal thing for CapEx run rate to be lower than the linear 25% you'd expect in the first quarter of the year. The downside risk for CapEx is the $1 billion of Norway's upstream investment that I mentioned, related to the negative effect of Tomcat and Kranager. Apologies, I'm not really- Konger ... fluent in Norwegian. Kongeørn. Kongeørn. Okay, those two exploration. But other than that, we've got confirmation from our business teams that they would strive to deliver on the forecasted. When it comes to the dividend, that's exactly to your point, how are we going to arrive at the decision? I think that our simplified framework clearly confirms that if we were to decide today about the dividend, we would propose exactly as we proposed in February. So up to 25% of operating cash flows, less cost of funding, depending, of course, doing all of the benchmarking exercise to our peers, to alternative investments, what our shareholders expect as well. So that's an additional always consideration. We do not make those decisions only based on balance sheets and only based on the results. So there is also this kind of whole universe that we need to make sure we reasonably fit. But if we were to decide today, we would go for the same approach as in February. And that's how we would like to work throughout the year, providing you visibility as well, and some confidence when it comes to our decision-making with regards to dividends. Okay, thank you. Michał, last but not least, I guess, Trigon, please. Hi, thank you. I have two questions. The first one about Anwil. Is the new line at Anwil already operational? When is full capacity utilization expected? Is positive EBITDA expected on the new volumes in the second half of this year? Right. The new fertilizers line is a bit of a troubled child, I have to say. And that startup has been delayed. We are currently in the startup phase as well. There is a lot of work that the team has been through together with the contractor. There is a final startup schedule prepared and approved, and we expect that work to be delivered over the next few weeks. Given our experience of the past, I'm a bit, let's say, uncomfortable committing to a particular date, but we do all have high hopes that we will finally go online at full capacity with on-spec product over the summer. Okay, thank you. And the second one, should we expect a reversal of the positive net working capital effect from the visible in the first quarter this year? Or is this an adjustment to lower oil and gas prices? Yeah. I think two elements to observe here, or to watch. One is the commodity prices. So clearly what drove the improvement of working capital in the first quarter, one was kind of internal and controlled. That's EBITDA cash conversion. The other one was a bit uncontrolled. That's the commodities price decline, and the impact on inventories. Should that reverse, we might need more cash to be tied into working capital, in particular, inventories. But if the prices remain on a relatively stable level, we should be able to carry on with the positive effects. And another thing to observe is us delivering on our expectations and on our promises when it comes to working capital improvements that I mentioned earlier. Thank you. We have two more people to ask questions. However, I would like to kindly post a mark here, 3-5 minutes, no more. So there will be a curfew. Curfew? In a couple of hours... In a couple of minutes. So Gustavo, please go ahead. Gustavo, you're on mute, I think. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. So I was thinking here about a couple of the questions. You were mentioning that, you know, in a stress case scenario, you would still think you would manage to deliver EBITDA that would be, like, in line with consensus, even if oil prices go average $65 per barrel. And you mentioned some positive, like, upside factors that would be able to offset the negative impact of lower oil prices. Would you mind elaborating on these factors? That would be very helpful. Thank you. As far as, like, segments, et cetera. Yeah. So, let's walk line by line. For the Upstream and Supply, the key thing to remember is that there is some sort of internal hedge. So lower gas prices lower the effect on the upstream, but then widen the spreads on the supply of gas in Poland. So that's the natural hedge. That's the offsetting mechanism. Then, when it comes to Downstream, lower crude oil price is not as critical as the levels of cracks on gasoline and diesel. Diesel, in particular, that's the most important one, 'cause the refining margin, model refining margin is what really drives results here. So that's the thing to observe. Of course, lower cost of input then drives profitability or supports profitability for the whole value chain.... When gas goes lower, it also lowers the cost base of our Downstream segment. It lowers the cost base for the electricity segment. The key variable here, the key unknown, is what drives the electricity price. What is the spread on the electricity generation that we can deliver? There are certain elements of our results or building up our results that are not dependent or insensitive to the commodities volatility, and that's the distribution business. A reminder, 80% of the PLN 4.3 billion of our EBITDA is actually distribution business-driven, so it's not dependent on the volatility of prices. That's the way to look at it. Thank you very much. That is very helpful. And, last question, if I may: like, are you expecting to raise more debt into this year, or do you think you are already fully funded with the internal resources, existing cash- Yeah. And, more free cash flow that you're planning to generate this year? It seems like you already are, but I'm just trying to understand your funding plans. Thank you. No, our funding plan- Of course, potentially raising that, if you could also elaborate whether you're coming to the market. Thanks. Yeah. Our funding plans are obviously not driven by a single quarter. We look way into the future, to make sure that we can react to, market conditions, to, to supply of funding for particular instruments that we are looking into. That's a much more complicated picture, than at a given point in time, the levels of cash that we've got in our bank accounts. So while it is comfortable to be where we are, we know, that 2025 is expected to be free cash flow negative. We know that we need to take up more debt in order to build the cost curve and the maturity, the profile. So yes, there are certain projects that we are working on right now in terms of funding, some of a more bilateral nature, some of the market nature, but given these are market transactions, it's a bit too early to comment. We will comment when we, when we announce the deal. But there is, quite a bit of work, ongoing, with our treasury teams right now in order to make sure that we've got the right structure, both in terms of maturities and in terms of currencies, for our funding strategy going forward. And then the perspective is so much longer than just a quarter. That's very clear. Thank you very much. And now, final, and then we will be closing the Q&A session. Dariusz Nawrot, please. You are muted. You are still muted. Hello. I have a question regarding Energa. What is the WACC for Energa in distribution segment for 2025? Mm-hmm. Let me just quickly take a look into, 'Cause that's one of the very few questions about the particular number that I've got a very precise answer to. It's almost 11% on the regulated asset base of PLN 17.7 billion. Okay. Thank you. All right. In this case, thank you so much, everyone, for joining us for the first quarter of 2025. Team, thank you so much for helping us for preparing this event and, and our communication. Wish you a good day, a good rest of the day. It was a pleasure to meet you again. Thanks a lot. Not much to add. Thank you very much for participation. I hope you enjoyed a little bit better quality, technically speaking, because we did some changes. You may have been hearing squeezing tables, which is due to the more better microphones, but still, thank you very much for this quarter participation. Please reach out to us if you need a follow-up. We are at your disposal, if not, we forward to see you at Q2 in August. Thank you. Thank you.