Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to a conference of Ten Square Games summarizing Q4 of 2025. We are all together in full. My name is Andrzej Ilczuk, and I'm the President of the Management Board. Magda Jurewicz, CFO. Janusz Dziemidowicz, CTO. Good afternoon. Last but not least, good afternoon, Nina Grabos, Investor Relations. Moving on to the heart of the matter. 2025 was the turning point for Ten Square Games. We broke the product impasse. A year ago, we talked about how we wanted to do it. We concluded a transformational year, which was a very successful year for us. First of all, we enter the new year with a clear plan. We have an idea for new products. We have a great new product which has been around for less than a year. It premiered in July. We have a great exciting pipeline, and above all, we are confident that as a group, we are capable of creating new games and shaping a new reality. It is something that many companies can be envious of. Moving on, our pillars of operation. We have a turning point, as I have said. We have broken the impasse. Our pillars in the form of Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash are games allowing us to fight for growth. These are the games that finance our development. It's greatly important, and we will fight for every percentage point, for every player. We'll try to do whatever we can to reduce the churn, as these are critical objectives. The games that, however, increase our growth are Wings of Heroes with record bookings in 2025. Trophy Hunter, our latest product, it's been around for around six months. It's the third largest product in terms of revenue. It's a great result we would have never, ever imagined when we looked at the game in July last year. We are investing in new products. We have Trophy Hunter. The gameplay and the business model of the game is going to be put in the direction of Medal Hunter. There are two products which we have not yet announced, but they are going to be the subject of future conferences. Moving on to our pillars, which is Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash. These are games that perform really well. They are stable. They have even recorded some increase in the final quarter of 2025. We are doing whatever we can to increase lifetime value of these games. It's important that a player who has been acquired has remained with us for a few years, that they decide to stay with us for the next five, six, maybe 10 years. All in all, it's PLN millions these games can generate in the years to come. Therefore, we need to do whatever we can to fight for this player, and we can never forget about them. Another prodigy is a slightly forgotten Real Combat Simulator. This game year-to-year has improved its result. It has improved its performance. It was somewhat forgotten. However, it demonstrates that subscription-based games are another important pillar of our operation. Therefore, we are working on Real Combat Simulator, and we want to add another similar game to our portfolio. It demonstrates a lot of potential, which is why we have devoted our effort into the existing as well as the new product. Moving on to Wings of Heroes, this story is very simple. We have had a record-breaking year. In recent months, over the past 12-14 months, we have improved monetization in the game, increasing it twofold. It's a great result, and these results demonstrate the hard work of the product team. It's also reflected in our marketing expenditure and the performance of the game itself. We wouldn't be ourselves if we didn't say that we want this game to perform even better. We want faster changes. We want stronger performance in the next months. This is what we wish for. Trophy Hunter, slightly changing the subject. It's another simple information, great commercial success. First of all, this game was created with younger players in mind. There is no cannibalization between HC and FC, which is good information. This shows that the segment of hunter games is much deeper than we would have ever imagined a few years ago. It also shows that Ten Square Games is capable of creating good games. This game premiered in July and now, as we speak, is the third best-performing title in our portfolio. It's a great result. Additionally, this product is monetizing well right now. We want to further increase its monetization parameters in the next months and quarters. It's a product offering great gameplay. Anyone who has tried this game can testify that it's a great game. It's simply a game you want to play, and it's reflected in our KPIs. Therefore, the gameplay model and the business model of the game is going to be replicated in the future games because it's a really good and a fun game to play. Another example of a new game was going to be the latest, Medal Hunter. As I've said, Medal Hunter is the same business model, the same gameplay in a different setting. The setting is, let's say, a military shooter game. It's a very broad segment. Military games are a very broad segment, and what matters is that the gameplay and the model of Trophy Hunter is tailored for mobile devices. Therefore, we believe this game has a lot of potential to achieve success in the market. Our first marketing tests have confirmed it. We were surprised by the fact that the KPIs of Medal Hunter and Trophy Hunter at the very same time of the test were identical. I'm talking about marginal differences in, within a fraction of a percentage point. This product also had a great interest from the players. Another marketing test is going to be launched in the second quarter this year. As for the future of this title, well, first we have to see the results of our scheduled marketing tests. We are going to test more content, the product will be streamlined, and as we analyze feedback from the players, we'll make subsequent decisions on its release. As of now, if everything comes to plan, we believe it's going to happen in 2026. Allow me to add one more thing. It is not the only game we are currently developing. There are two new unannounced projects, and we are working on them as we speak. In the second quarter of this year, we would expect first marketing tests of these titles. Allow me now to tell you a few words about TSG Store. The store is our platform allowing us to save on around a 30% commission that are charged by Google and Apple. We keep the commission below 10%. This slide demonstrates the share of TSG Store in group bookings. This percentage has decreased slightly, and allow me to explain to you why. First of all, we have the TSG Store in Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash. As Andrzej said, Trophy Hunter's launch was very successful. That's our newest game. This is a success that we are proud of. Naturally, the percentage of TSG Store dropped slightly, even though in Fishing Clash, this percentage is quite stable. Okay. Now, about our activities in this regard. We would like to use new possibilities, and we wouldn't like this percentage to drop even further. What we are doing is we are expanding our store. Now, we are going to call it D2C platform, direct-to-consumer platform, because we have new possibilities. Apart from the possibility of having our own store, I would like to mention one problem. We can advertise the store outside our games, and we can use Facebook, Discord, et cetera, but we cannot advertise it in the games. Last year, there have been decisions from the court in the U.S., and these decisions allowed us to inform players about alternative payment methods in the U.S. in games, and this pertains both to Google and Apple. Good news that I can share with you is the following. At the end of last year, such alternative payment methods were introduced in Fishing Clash. How does it work? When a player buys something, the player is informed that he or she can use an alternative payment method, and these methods are managed by the same suppliers with the fee below 10%, just as with our store, and the player chooses whether he wants or she wants to use the old method or the alternative method. This solution can be proposed in the U.S. to players. We introduced that solution at the end of last year in Fishing Clash, and in January this year, we introduced that in Hunting Clash, and in February this year, we introduced that in Trophy Hunter, and in March this year, we are going to introduce that in Wings of Heroes. Andrzej said some words about our Medal Hunter, our new game, and I'm not going to focus on the premiere of this game with respect to introducing these payment solutions, but afterwards, we would like this solution to be introduced in this game as well. In the U.S., let me remind you, Google and Apple, both these platforms now allow us to inform players about alternative payment methods. The same level of fees is going to apply. Okay. What is going to happen in the future? What we are seeing is that these platforms are slowly opening to alternative payment methods, external stores. Several weeks ago, we received information from Google. All developers received this information, that this year they are going to change their fee structure. The details are not clear yet because these changes require a couple of months to take place. About June this year, this fee structure is going to change in the European Union and in the U.S. I'm talking about bookings done via Google. In the months to come, next countries are going to join in. Even if it's several percent, it's still going to be several percent from all the bookings that are managed by the Google platform. It seems that this percentage is going to increase, and more and more countries are introducing regulations that are conducive favorable to us, so we are going to use every opportunity that we have in order to decrease these fees. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, now let's move on to financial results. Okay. This is a quarter-wise perspective. We meet every quarter, and as you remember, in Q1, 2025, we decided to decrease marketing spend in Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash. That was the end of February. We decided to decrease the spend, and that actually affected the Q1 EBITDA right away. This is because the bookings did not react to the lower marketing spend. That's why we had a higher performance, financial performance. We continued with this decision in the next quarter, so lower marketing spend, thus lower bookings. EBITDA included these two factors, so lower marketing spend, lower bookings. Q3, we have a Trophy Hunter premiere, and we're starting to scale up. The rest of the title preserved the more or less same level. Bookings started to grow slightly, high marketing spend and Adjusted EBITDA follows. Q4, the novelty for you, this is something that we are discussing right now. This is a substantial investment in marketing spend. This is the highest quarter in terms of marketing spend. We are scaling intensively, Trophy Hunter, and bookings are increasing. What we'd like to tell you, and we hope that you understand, is that marketing spend here and now means that bookings are going to grow in the next quarters. Again, marketing spend that is lower translates into lower bookings. Q4, our investment in Trophy Hunter, this investment is going to translate into bookings in the quarters to come. As far as the net profit goes, Q net profit in Q4, the EBITDA is the lowest, but still this level is satisfactory to us because this business success is more important to us than this short-term performance. Now year-on-year, let's see at the entire year. Let's see the yearly results. These were published yesterday. Bookings lower than the year before. This mainly stems from drops in Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash. Trophy Hunter, that is the middle of 2025, so we haven't caught up with the entire year. As far as the costs go, marketing spends, spend is lower compared to the last year. This is because Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash saw a decrease in the marketing spend. Trophy Hunter and this large investment, that is the last couple of months last year, all this with a maintained operational cost discipline, administrative cost, HR cost, all of this results in an annual adjusted EBITDA still being slightly above PLN 98 million. This result might be slightly slower, but we are still satisfied with that because it is still PLN 98 million, and our net profit is PLN 77 million. Why is that? This stems from deferred profit, and this deferred profit is actually recognized in the current quarter. As far as our tax audit goes, nothing has changed. We are waiting for explanations from EU member states and other countries. That's why we still have this element in our statement. What we always want to tell you, and what we hope won't change in the future, is cash and cash equivalent generation. Despite marketing spend and despite scaling of our titles, we generate cash quarter on quarter. In 2025, we paid a record high dividend, PLN 100 million, and still our cash position at the end of the year is PLN 120 million. It is a completely safe level to finance Trophy Hunter marketing spend and other titles, Medal Hunter marketing spend, and other titles as well. This allows us to finance our titles and share our profits with you as our shareholders. Okay. Now let's move on to some additional information. Yesterday, we hope that you noticed, we published, together with financial results. We published information about the extraordinary general meeting called by our supervisory board. Let me focus on three elements connected with our MSOP. Let's move on through these three changes one by one. First of all, we have a target for the second tranche, 2026, 2028. What is this target? We have to have PLN 360 million in order to have 100% of shares allocated under this condition. Why do you think that this target is ambitious? Because we do agree with our supervisory board that this target is ambitious. Let me show you our net growth model of game so that you can understand this better. As you can see, there's been plenty changes in our strategy. Why the change, at least in the MSOP? The most dramatic change is the presence of Trophy Hunter. It's a game that has changed a lot in our perspective of business. It's a game that was launched in July last year. It is more or less six months old. It has the best retention in the group. It has the best conversion. Monetization is at least half as good as in the best performing titles, and we are talking about a product that has been around for around six months. It's a great result. Each of our games draws on our experience. The same goes for marketing. For ten years, Ten Square Games has been operating millions of marketing expenses. In the future, we understand how to make decisions concerning the future of our marketing spending. When we created a model for Trophy Hunter, we wouldn't have expected this game would perform so well. It is seen in gradually increasing marketing expenditure month to month. Despite these vast investments in marketing, we see months-old cohorts that have already paid for themselves. It's really great news. Being confident, drawing on our 10 years worth of experience, being confident that this money spent is a good investment and investing the good gameplay in the investment model of Trophy Hunter, we want more. We are starving for more, and there is blood to be spilled. Given that we are in a much more competitive market than we used to be in 2015 for that matter, where we need to fight stronger for every player. We do not compete with one game. We are competing with an entire host of new games, renowned games, applications, streaming, et cetera. A player which we acquire today is really important because acquiring this player later might cost twice as much. We might never be able to acquire this player if we don't acquire them now. Trophy Hunter has demonstrated this model is really good. If we replicate this model in the following games by creating good games that reach early monetization, and if we increase our marketing expenditure, we believe that we will become a company that wants and is capable of growing. This is why the change. This change shifts the weight from EBITDA, which is concentrating on the past, to revenue. Why does it matter, and why is it good? Because it all aligns our organization and the MSOP with the current situation in the company. As I've said, we've scented blood. We know we have a good product. We want to launch more good product, which is why we have started working on two unannounced titles. We believe that the path we're on is a shift in our paradigm. This is why the change. By offering a few words of comment and smoothly going to the next slide, we need to understand that spending is here and now. Increases or growth will be reflected in the next period. This is the difference between the year 2017 and 2025. Expenditure comes first. Moving back onto the target of PLN 360 million, the management board wants to testify that we understand this is a very ambitious goal which reflects the structural change. We want to be a growth company. We want our products to grow. We want them to be well-received by the market, which is why Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash, they are stable. They are of huge importance because they constitute a vast share of our profit, and we'll fight for them tooth and nail. Growth will be generated by other titles. I'm talking about Wings of Heroes, Trophy Hunter. We are talking about Medal Hunter and any other future game. The target is for three years. If we understand that there is going to be an X number of launches, which are going to cost quite a lot, it has to be reflected in our EBITDA. We are going to invest. We want to be a growth company. We want to be a company which creates long-term value. It's nothing tricky to create a game and then say, "Okay, we didn't succeed." Whenever we launch a game, we want it to be a title that will be played by players for years, therefore, the concentration on long-term growth and value. This is why we have shifted our perspective and why we have changed our objectives. We believe that PLN 360 million is a very good, a very ambitious goal because it allows us to keep our great best titles, and at the same time, add new titles, which will help us to bring our company to a new level. Now, moving smoothly onto the other issues, I want to highlight that this change concerns tranche 2 and 3. It doesn't concern the tranche we've already started for the years 2025 and 2027. The first of the changes is the difference in weight between the market and financial goal. For financial, it used to be 80%-20%, now it's 60%-40%. The market goal is 40%. We want to highlight it, meaning that the share price of TSG has to perform at least 10 percentage point better than the index. We are not talking about growth itself, we are talking about growth in relation to the entire market. Why we have decided to make this change? We believe that what we do in TSG is good in long term. We want to create value irrespective of whether it's a beginning or an end or the middle of a tranche, whether we spend here or now. We want to create long-term value for years. We are presenting this business model to you because we understand it might also be attractive to you. It's to demonstrate that we are serious about our promise of growth. If we perform better than the market, we believe you are going to be satisfied with it. We, on the other hand, the Management Board, product directors, teams working on the product, will also receive a bonus for meeting the target. 40% is a rational measure of our success, and obviously, a lot depends on whether you believe in our company and TSG as a whole. Therefore, we give you agency for the success of the company. There is also a slight modification. We want Adjusted EBITDA to be adjusted for marketing expenditure being recognized in time. What we are trying to demonstrate to you in all these slides is the following thing. For instance, let's take Trophy Hunter as an example. In this game, we spent much more than the game generated in revenue. We are investing here and now. Revenue will be reflected in a later period. Period longer than two to three months. Therefore, the supervisory board has decided that with this ambitious plan for new releases, and in order to make sure that the decisions we make are good long-term, instead of thinking whether we should spend or not, we want to make sure that the target is aligned in the long-term perspective. We want to make sure that marketing expenditure is adjusted over time and is more reflective of our structural revenue. It's just an example. Let's assume we have had a great success in the last year of any given tranche. Game is good, KPIs is great, everything is working. We are very happy with the business result. Well, therefore, we start spending, we spend faster, we spend more, then the revenue begins to flow. Let's say PLN 2.5 million in bookings. What is going to mean for Adjusted EBITDA? That the result is going to be decreased. Is this good in the long term? No. We believe that the long term achieved by means of that is critical, and we know that revenue will follow, meaning that EBITDA for later periods is going to be just similar to the trend. We want to justify that we make our decisions or marketing expenditure in good faith, hoping that they bring the best value in the future. Yesterday was very intense in terms of communications, so now let's move on to our proposal of distributing our dividend. This is our history, and as always, we are a company that generates cash here and now, year on year, quarter on quarter, and we share this profit with you, either as dividend or payback. Last year, PLN 100 million dividend, and also PLN 133 million as buyback. This year, we want to share almost PLN 64 million, so it's 10 PLN per share. It's like 9.5% of dividend yield. This decision is going to be passed on the 21st April by the general meeting. The payment date is the twenty-second of May, 2026. Why this and not other solution? This is because we want to invest in new projects, products. We are a cash-generating company, and we believe that this level is a safe level that actually exceeds our dividend policy. We can give you back this amount of cash. What we preserve and what we generate on a current basis is enough for us to run the business, to scale our products. This is an optimum and rational solution, long-term solution. That's why this is something that we propose to you. Another thing, another information, and we would like you to be aware of that, Rortos that we acquired in 2021, and of course you know that we had an earn-out that depended on the performance of Rortos. This earn-out was paid out at the end of the year to the previous owners. We determined the earn-out from 2021 till the end of 2025, and the last earn-out is going to be paid in the weeks to come in Q2, and it pertains to the performance in 2025. The cash is going to be received by the previous owners, and this is, let's say, the end of the earn-out payments. We are not going to have that anymore in our balance sheet. You might ask about the management of Rortos and previous owners. We would like to tell you that there's going to be a continuity in the management board, and from 2026, the management board now includes employees, long-term employees that have been there for a long time, and they are already the new management board. These individuals have cooperated with us for many years. We have a very good relation. Nothing happens here. We are very comfortable with this change, and we continue our operations as usual. Okay. Nina, the floor is yours now. Okay. Yesterday we published a lot of information, and you can expect further information to come quite soon. At the beginning of April, we will have sales update in Q1 2026. On the 21st of April, we're going to have general and extraordinary meeting of shareholders that were already mentioned, and there's going to be voting on very important issues for the company. On May 11, we are going to publish our financial report Q1 2026. We are going to participate in numerous conferences that are going to take place in May and June. Institutional investors are going to participate, and also individual investors will find something for themselves as well. Please contact us, if you have any questions on these meetings. Thank you. As I understand now, we can move on to Q&A. The presentation was very intense, dense, a lot of information and numerous answers have already been provided to you, to the questions that appeared on the chat. In order not to repeat ourselves and give you more time to be more specific, please ask your questions in the chat. I have some of these questions already here. Most of them have been asked to our CEO, so let's start with Trophy Hunter, because Trophy Hunter is a subject of interest, as I can see, and we have numerous questions about that. Also, I have a request. We have many, many questions, so we would be very grateful to you if you could provide your name and surname, because you know our names and surnames, so please provide your names as well. This will be easier for us when replying to these questions afterwards, after the conference, if we do not have time to address them now. Okay. Let's move on. Trophy Hunter questions. This record high Trophy Hunter budget, PLN 15 million, can you preserve that in the quarters to come, or is it just a one-off situation and a market test? Okay. First of all, we wouldn't like to share information of our forecasts, about our forecasts. What I can tell you is that the level will be like a sweet spot between quarter three and four. These marketing expenditures might be higher. Let me add something here. Marketing spend rose quarter-over-quarter, month-over-month, so we wouldn't like to share too much. What I would like to emphasize is Q1 was a time of scaling up, and we still are scaling. I think this is going to be this level that we have now. What's very important with Trophy Hunter is the following. Please remember that when observing how this product behaves, when observing how players behave, the scaling aims toward return on investment, and it's going to happen, and it's going to be very good. We look at the entire marketing spend for the entire group, and all these products are supposed to have their return on investment at the same time, and the difference is very, very small. Trophy Hunter has the same benchmark as Hunting Clash. Okay. About benchmarks. Q4 and the beginning of 2026, user acquisition expenditure, did you have more, let's say, loose benchmarks compared with Trophy Hunter? No, not at all. Let me emphasize that. We had lower benchmarks in Wings of Heroes because the marketing benchmark was very tense, let's say. We did not feel very comfortable spending more. We waited for the cohort performance, and in Trophy Hunter, the situation was completely different. We cannot talk about prolonging, extending those benchmarks right now. Trophy Hunter, some problems at the beginning of March. Is it the result of increasing CPIs? No. Right now, in the game, we are testing numerous new solutions. That's why the focus on monetization is lower. We are learning a lot of things too. We are testing new modes, new Live Ops, new events. How to say that? Well, we are looking for the best path of developing our monetization. We want to test as fast as possible several new solutions, interesting solutions, so that we know what directions to take in the months to come and quarters to come. I wouldn't say that the pace is lower at this point. Maybe the focus on monetization is lower. In the months to come, this monetization is going to become a focus of our attention. We are halfway right now, and our performance is really good now. In this game, we do not have any monetization. You can buy arms, you can buy other types of equipment, and this is really, really simple. It's a beautiful product. Now we add Live Ops, something that we are really good at. We are adding Live Ops events, we are extending the meta, and we want to deepen the monetization right now. What time in this year marketing expenditure will exceed the money spent on user acquisition? Could it be around the second quarter? Maybe Trophy Hunter is reaching its break-even point. We can't be so direct in answering the question. What we can say, though, is that we do not see whether revenue overlaps with marketing expenditure. We only look whether marketing expenditure is returned. It's not the same perspective. I understand your question. However, from our perspective, what matters is that the assumptions we have made are credible, that they prove fruitful. If the parameters were not right, we simply wouldn't be right in our decisions. We are sure that there will be a return on the investment, but there is no way of telling when exactly. How many people are currently working on developing Trophy Hunter? By how many can the team grow in 2026? Should I move to the slide? We're not planning major increases of the team. These teams are small. The product is not as extensive as a Fishing Clash or Hunting Clash, which means that we are keeping a team of around a dozen people. What is the current share of micro-transactions and commercials in Trophy Hunter's revenue? There aren't many major changes month to month. We are talking about 25%, 27%, 28% of commercials altogether. As a reminder, yes, I'm going to keep repeating, there are no commercials in Sensor Tower. It's only in-app. All commercials need to be added with your fingertip, so to speak. Has anything changed to the benefit or to the detriment of your perspective of Trophy Hunter? Well, rapid increase in marketing expenditure has demonstrated our faith in the product. We begin to see more. The period is longer. We see that the way the product performs is better than the model assumed. Each of our games has assumed a certain model. We wanted to perform within the benchmark of the model. Trophy Hunter beat this model. It was good information because it demonstrated that we could increase marketing expenditure. Although we did increase it, the game still offered a return on investment. There are a few cohorts which have paid for themselves already, which is a really great result. As we look at the game, yes, it has a lot of potential. With every passing month, we have more faith in it because we see how the story of the game unravels. We see how simple this product is at this stage. Therefore, if we add more depth to it, especially its monetization, we can squeeze a lot more out of it. What was the reception of Club Race and Night Hunt in Trophy Hunter? Club Race. It was a really hot topic. There were clans, they took it really seriously. There was even fierce competition between clans. Some players who have spent only a few hours a day playing were removed from their respective clans, so it's a very competitive community. It was very well received. Remember that in Club Race, there was no monetization as such. We are looking only at a small fraction of the community. The reception has been good so far. Monetization parameters look good as well. Of course, we want more. What we are talking about right now are minor tests. We are trying to feel our way to find the best way to grow the product. Let's leave Trophy Hunter aside for a moment and concentrate on some other titles. There is a subject concerning Medal Hunter. Soft launch in the second quarter. What month could you say, probably? Is it going to be soft launched by Ten Square Games or Play Cool Zombie? How much market are you planning to grasp initially? Probably it's going to be launched by Ten Square Games. There is no need to test it in Play Cool Zombie. I would say around May, June. This is the moment where we'd like to run the marketing test on the title. How many markets? We haven't talked about it yet. If I were to tell you something with around 80% of confidence, I would say we would go the same way we did with the second test on Trophy Hunter. That remains to be seen. As you know, you get more hungry as you eat, so we'll have to wait. I would like to underline that the market test for Medal Hunter is not the same as the global launch of Trophy Hunter in July. We're going to test first parameters. This is not a fully released game going full market. You might expect some imperfections, some shortcomings. We want to see how this diversified content is going to affect the players. This is the most important information to remember. I think I can speak about it freely. I'm talking about combining aircraft, ships, and tanks in one game. I think it's going to offer great gameplay. As of now, as we play the game ourselves, we see it's a very interesting title. We want to see what is the feedback of our players. Is Sniper Battle the largest potential competitor of Medal Hunter? Well, we'll have to wait to tell for sure. There are many possible scenarios. If the players like shooting at tanks, perhaps there's going to be a game concentrated on that theme. If they want to shoot planes, it's going to go the other way. Maybe it's going to be similar to World of Tanks, maybe other snipers. It's difficult to say right now who is going to be our top one competitor. That remains to be seen. We are still looking for the best, broadest solution in terms of gameplay. We want to expand this segment. We want to offer a game which is interesting to the widest potential group of players. We don't know where we're going to land yet. Marketing test is going to tell us more about it. I wouldn't be surprised if this marketing test would necessitate another one. We simply have no way of knowing that now. If nothing changes from the perspective of content, we are planning to release this game at the end of this year, and we'll start serious marketing war. Are new unannounced products being based on the same model as Trophy Hunter? Yes and no. 50% yes, 50% no. Two new prototypes, when are you planning to start testing in the market? Is one of them in fishing? Yes, one of them is fishing. The first test has been scheduled for the end of March, the beginning of April. It's a very initial date. Please do not get fixated on that. It's simply a limbless body right now. Are you planning to create undressing card games? I know that such games create good revenue. Well, we compete for mobile games. If Apple saw such a game, they would unleash hell on us. No, we're not planning to do it. How many people in total are working on new projects? By how many people are you planning to increase employment in 2026? As we've tried to say, new prototypes are usually delivered by small, agile teams. These people usually come from other product teams. As we look on our employees, on our headcount, we look where we could use them to the best potential effect. They are great in creating new titles, and if such people are currently unoccupied, we can move them to another title. However, right now, we are not planning to increase our employment only because we are launching new projects. The headcount will remain more or less the same. Okay. Foundations of the group, Fishing Clash, Hunting Clash, the core scenario of rebuild in these models, increasing bookings, decreasing marketing spend. Our teams have a very clear goal, and this goal is very simple. We want to fight for increased profits. We want to keep our players longer with us. These are our two goals for the two projects. That's why we work the way we work, because we do believe that there's space for interesting solutions that we would like to test. Is any team doing better or worse? Well, each team is testing new solutions, and something that comes up in Fishing Clash is being tested in the other title and vice versa. I wouldn't say that one team is doing better or worse. Sometimes both teams are succeeding, sometimes one team is doing better, sometimes the other one is doing better, sometimes both the teams are doing a little bit worse. I wouldn't say that we observe one particular trend. There are several paths, and we do have several interesting ideas backed by data. We'll see how they will go in the months to come and what the players' feedback will be. Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash performance in 2026, what are your expectations? Because the end of last year gave us some hope, but now the dynamics is a bit lower this year. Well, we would like these titles to grow, of course, and this is our goal. We assume that the churn of the current player is lower. That's why we are fighting for that. We want these games to generate very high flows in the years to come, five years, 10 years to come. This is what we are fighting for. We do not want to improve the performance by several hundred thousand PLN in one month. No. We want to work on the foundations of these games, and we want to give people joy so that they keep wanting to play these games. They started their adventure five years ago, and we still want them to continue enjoying these games. Okay. Marketing with two main titles, Hunting Clash, that's one question. There's a very long pause from mid-December to mid-March by AppMagic. There's a very long pause in marketing spend and Fishing Clash. Analyst sources indicate that you have started marketing expenditure with this title, and it seems like this is a marketing offensive. AppMagic is wrong with the data they provide. Marketing expenditure, both in Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash, are similar month by month. Of course, there are some fluctuations, but not very large. The marketing spend is quite stable with both these titles. Okay, so another question pertaining to marketing spend. For marketing for Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash, is addressable marketing pool at the end of its life, let's say? Do you think about the next steps here? Let me tell you this. No, I don't think that the pool is over, especially when you look at Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash. We do have very large organic traffic there. If we exceeded the market potential even three times, we do believe that the organic traffic would be non-existent. However, we do see organic traffic, so people are interested in these titles. It's about pure performance. In order for the marketing in Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash to appear, we need to improve the product so that we can increase our marketing spend. About the products. In Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash, is this remodeling coming to an end? Are you testing the highest paying cohorts or not? Yes. We talked about the very segmentation in the past. Some solutions were concluded, some solutions were implemented, some were not implemented. At the end of the day, how to say that? Well, if you compared the way we develop new features, we provide Live Ops, you would see the evolution of these. Month by month, we learn how to do things better, and this applies to numerous features as well. We introduced many changes in one product or both, but also many changes were introduced only partially. As for segmentation, we see the best performance in the low and mid paying cohorts. About Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash, the results of this restructuring as far as the bookings go with these two titles should be compared to the bookings before marketing spend was lowered before 2025, or should we compare the situation to what was happening after 2025? I don't think I understood that question. Maybe let's put it in some other way. Rebuilding the game, the way players behave, all this is important for us. Of course, there are differences between new players and mature players, but we would like these cohorts to behave in the best way possible for us. Of course, we want the bookings to increase in all of the cohorts. I don't know whether this is the answer to your question. From the perspective of marketing spend, the most important time of players' behavior is the first seven days. If in the first seven days this behavior is positive for us, we know that we can spend more. The percentage that we receive in the first seven days is multiplied by X for each title, and for every title, this X value means something different. Okay, one more question pertaining to the production cycle in your main titles. Is it five weeks? And is it the cycle pertaining to new locations, new fisheries? Do you plan to change this cycle, or is this production cycle or development cycle optimum? We think it's optimum, and indeed, it is five weeks. Okay. Maybe let's move on to Real Combat Simulator. There were plans of supporting Real Combat Simulator with marketing expenditure at the beginning of 2026. Any changes here? I think there's a mistake here. No, we did not plan that. We did not plan to increase marketing spend. We did actually. We did think about marketing tests, but we did not plan any marketing budget. What we wanted is to understand which direction this product should move towards. We believe that this product needs more content, basically, and this is something that we are focusing on right now. The changes in Real Flight Simulator, we believe, could be better, so they can weigh in more. That's why we are not focusing on the marketing spend right now with this title, but we focus on RFS right now. Our team is discovering new things. Our team is delineating their priorities, and these things change week by week. Is Real Combat Simulator or can Real Combat Simulator become one of the main titles of the company like Real Flight Simulator, or is it only an addition? As far as the potential goes, I would not expect that it's going to exceed Real Flight Simulator. About the extent of the potential, I don't know, because there are no competitors in the market, and there are two scenarios. This might be a bad idea, and we'll be the first ones, and the product is going to be comparable to RFS. We're going to see this year probably, which direction we're going to go. Can you say something about KPIs for RCS, the game? Marketing support so far hasn't been seen for this game. Are you planning to launch the game without marketing expenditure? As we look at RFS, marketing is not needed here. The community gathered around these games is so strong that everything happens by word of mouth. This means that game players share information of the games between each other, and this is what we count on. There are many different scenarios. This game could be a standalone product generating similar cash flow to RFS, or it could be an addition to RFS. Let's say, maybe a part of the same application. We'll simply have to wait and see. No matter which way it goes, I think eventually it's going to be good information for RFS. Even if it turns out that it's only an addition to RFS, we will have a much better product on our hands than our competitors, which is great news for RFS itself. It could be a standalone product moving towards the same KPI of RFS, or it could be even better information in that case. Given zero money spent on marketing, can RFS be the most profitable product in your portfolio? Of course, aside Evergreens. Yes. We also have to remember that subscription fees have a lower commission than Google and Apple. However, it depends whether we look at it in percentage terms or in nominal terms, because if depending on the logic, we can adjust our spending in different titles. If we look at it purely business-wise, yes, lower commissions, zero marketing, yes, it's a better product. Real Flight Simulator, what do you think is the chief competitive advantage of the game comparing to Infinite Flight, your chief competitor? It seems like quarter after quarter, RFS is catching up with the competition. Soon it's going to be number one. Congratulations on that. It's similar to Wings of Heroes or RFS. It's month after month of laborious work, sometimes even boredom, but something that is simply necessary. Improving the incremental sections of the game, adding features month after month. This is my intentional way of speaking, just to demonstrate to you how mundane it sometimes is. This low, laborious process is the best recipe for success, and this product has demonstrated exactly that. That's the key to success. One more question concerning Rortos and the earn-out, which also has attracted a lot of attention. From the perspective of time, what is your take on this long earn-out? Have you drawn any conclusions you would like to share? We bought the company in 2021. It was a totally different reality than today. The way we purchased the company, how we defined the value of the company, the standards in the market was totally different, but that was the way we did it. Well, conclusions, we have expanded our portfolio. We have added simulators to our portfolio. We have great performing titles. We have bought something that works in the given price tag. We wouldn't talk about so many products if we had never purchased Rortos. With Rortos, we also bought product know-how. We are working in the segment of games for men, predominantly. The know-how is of great importance. I wouldn't treat this company as an item in the bracket or a spreadsheet, whether we should spend this amount of money or that amount of money. Everything is easy to analyze with a five years hindsight. You could say we could have bought this company for a lower price, but with hindsight, I would have made the same decision. I believe it's a great complementary team, and it simply is in line with our DNA. Thank you. Let's change the subject slightly for a moment. How are you using AI in creating new games? We use it in various fields. Nowadays, you cannot do business without using such tools. We use it to generate graphics, concepts. We use it to translate content. We need to maintain the right level or quality of translation. In some games, you could have seen it's not that easy. We use AI to translate our games, and our quality of translation is really good. It's our internal tool. For the past 6-12 months, we have developed tools for generating code, both for tools and games. For that purpose, we use appropriate tools. We have created a few tools of our own, such as code review, or for instance, controlling the publication of our games. Yes, these are the fields in which we use AI. Thank you. One more question concerning adding TSG Store to Trophy Hunter and Wings of Heroes. When are you planning to do it? The purpose of TSG Store is to optimize the payments that we need to make. One important thing are alternative payment methods. It's an addition to the store. It meets this criteria. It gives an access to direct-to-consumer market, and it was launched in Trophy Hunter in February. Payment optimization is currently taking place in Trophy Hunter. Soon it's going to enter Wings of Heroes. We're going to see how it is made based on this solution. If we decide that we want to add TSG Store as another element of optimizing payments, we're going to launch it, but I cannot talk about specific dates because we don't know it. Most probably, Google is going to decrease its fees, slightly changing the mathematics. As soon as we decide it's profitable, we will do it. First elements of optimization in Trophy Hunter has been made, and soon Wings of Heroes is going to follow. We are shortly wrapping up the conference. There are a few questions. Is increasing marketing expenditure by the company concerning Fishing Clash and, Fishing Clash and Hunting Clash are only the new titles? I would say rather new titles. There are also a question concerning the MSOP that you've mentioned. Is the change in the way that the cost of marketing is recognized be implemented in the financial statement, and has it been agreed with the auditor? Our change of the financial goal for calculating the value of the incentive program is an index devised for this particular purpose. IFRS is IFRS. They did not look at how a goal is defined, but according to IFRS governing the way we do our reports changes nothing. According to IFRS, marketing has to be declared in the moment this expenditure is made. Adjusted EBITDA reported in the statement or the operational result does not concern the change for the purpose of the program. Adjusted marketing EBITDA, that's the word now. It's a factor is going to be calculated in three years' time for a particular tranche. It's only for the purpose of the program. Thank you so much. There's a question concerning acquisition. Is it still the case that companies use high EBITDA multiples to determine their value? Yes, that's the funny reality we're dealing with. There is one more element we have to be wary of. We are also much more picky than we used to be in negotiations. First of all, we want to concentrate on what we believe works right now. We see that new games like Trophy Hunter show that we know what to do. Every acquisition from the perspective of time takes months to fulfillment. A lot of people have to be involved in this process, and these people are simply needed in other places of our company. We have a question about the Evergreen portfolio, Let's Fish and Wild Hunt. Let's Fish is growing gradually, but Wild Hunt is dropping. Why the difference in the performance in these two titles? Please remember that we have had no marketing spend in these two titles for many years. Wild Hunt, well, we have had some problems with bugs, and these bugs also impacted our revenues. After these bugs are fixed, we believe that the performance will improve. Let's Fish, well, we have explained that for some time. We fight for these games. We invest because 10 years after, 15 years after, these games generate stable revenue, and it's really worth fighting for these titles. Okay, the last question. Gacha. Cooking Wars, is this the main title? What are the KPIs of this title, and when will you be scaling it? Yes, that's the newest game. As far as KPIs, they are so-so, and the team is working on improvements. When they improve certain issues, probably scaling is going to begin. If not, the team's going to fight for another product. We'll see how it goes. The team are fighting to find their own Trophy Hunter, and we keep our fingers crossed for them. Thank you so much. That's all. I grouped the recurring questions in the same thematic block. If I omitted some questions, please write us an email, and that's it for now. Thank you so much. Thank you for your attention.