Maybe I should start saying some words about the new appointment of Christoffer as being the new CEO. He's not responsible for the last quarter results. I think I'm much more responsible for that one than he is. Regardless, I'm extremely happy that he has accepted the appointment. I've got to know him during the last three, four, five months, and I think he's very well-equipped and has a very good background, both as being a CFO but also being very active and with an international background in real estate, which is exactly what we need and what we would like to have moving forward. We have also had the opportunity to discuss the future strategies of Catella, which I think to be aligned on that one is the key issue. I think that has been part of the problem historically, that we have not really had a clear strategy of how we believe we could create values for our shareholders over time. I think that's really what we have spent time on, and also for Christoffer to get to know the organization and the pros and cons in the various operations. They are very diversified or very dispersed, whatever the word is. They're different at least, and they also have different business models, which we have to not necessarily align with each other, but we have to adapt to it, and we have to maneuver it in a certain way. I think we are very aligned on the future strategy. It has been a great advantage for both of us, I think, to have these kind of discussions at the same time as we are making some kind of, I wouldn't call it drastic or dramatic changes, but we are doing organizational changes at least. I think the future will be more of the question is how could we capitalize on the European platform that we have within Catella? Very few companies have such a platform. The question is how could we drive more profits and drive more values out of that? I think one word is that we need to be more proactive and looking for the projects. By projects, I don't mean new developments. I refer more to anything which is any kind of new initiative is a project, so don't misunderstand me. Also how to connect with the various people in the organization to create more direct values out of their own creativity, et cetera. Okay. With that said, I welcome Christoffer. Thank you very much. I think the first page which I promised to talk a little bit about is this. You are quite familiar to that one. I don't think there are any dramatic changes. The result is not extremely good. It could have been worse. Don't forget that within the Corporate Finance outside the Nordic, the market has dropped by more than 50% or at least 50%. Even if France and Germany are doing very poor, it's at least partly due to the market condition. IPM, we will come back to. The assets under management have, so to say, I would say it's stable. It has decreased in IPM, and it has increased in the other operations. I think I rest my case now for once. Yeah. All right. Thank you, Johan, and thank you for the kind words. I'm very excited to, at some point this spring, take over as CEO of Catella. I think, as Johan said, we are in a fantastic position to continue to develop our European platform. If we turn to page three, talk about the results for the fourth quarter, which, as Johan said, was somewhat of a disappointment but not without promise underneath, and we'll talk about that a little bit. If you look at Q4, it was modest on the bottom line, especially when we compare it to Q3, which was spectacular. Our business, I don't think, should be measured on quarterly results, but long-term trajectory and increased assets and profitability. Just bear that in mind as you evaluate the business. We can always do better, and we will do our best. The AUM ended the year at about SEK 130 billion. All these numbers are in Swedish kronor, which represented a drop of SEK 5.9 billion during the quarter. Systematic funds, which we'll refer to it as IPM since the sale of our mutual funds business, we really only have IPM in that segment. Had another challenging quarter. They lost SEK 5 billion of assets, while our Property Investment Management group or segment, they actually grew by SEK 4 billion if we do not account for translation differences. We suffered a little bit from the weakening euro. The underlying growth was pretty strong due to capital inflow primarily in our U.K. asset management platform and our German property funds. We delivered net revenues. What was the total income after assignment expenses and commissions of SEK 476 million, which unfortunately is SEK 169 million or 26% lower than Q4 last year. That is adjusted for the sale of our mutual fund operations. IPM's continued capital outflow of SEK 5 billion down to now SEK 14.2 billion at the end of the year, and lack of performance fees in that business contributed SEK 97 million to that income drop. That naturally has a significant impact on the group's results, and it's something that we work very closely with that team on turning that around. Corporate Finance net revenues were down SEK 41 million or 15% versus last year, in the same period last year. Good news there though is that Sweden delivered an excellent quarter, up close to SEK 30 million or 70% on the back of just generally strong performance across the board and also several large transactions. We're very proud that Catella was ranked number one in Sweden on the sell-side advisory side, hopefully we can learn from what these guys are doing, and translate that across Europe. Continental Europe, though, had a more challenging quarter. As Johan said, it's been a rough few months with lockdowns and even though we had some pipeline, some deals fell through and some deals were delayed. We're standing here towards the end of February not knowing when that's going to change. We're working as hard as ever and keeping that pipeline warm. Property Investment Management net revenues were in line with last year, although we had less variable revenues this quarter compared to last year. That's a little bit one of the things you have to look at on a longer-term perspective. Our fixed fees keep growing with our asset base, which is really what we primarily look at when we look at our Property Investment Management segments. Our operating costs were SEK 68 million or 13% lower than last year. Again, adjusted for mutual funds. It is mainly driven by lower variable salaries, performance related in Systematic Funds and Corporate Finance. We also had some savings, especially related to the fact that we don't travel. We don't go to Paris, and we try to use technology as effectively as we can to stay effective. We had some headwinds on the cost side, partly from a couple of smaller goodwill write-offs of older investments and some increased consulting costs. Although there, we believe we get a good return there from restructuring and transaction advice. All in all, our operating income was SEK 23 million in the quarter, which is slightly disappointing. We're confident that our underlying performance, primarily in Property Investment Management, remains strong. We are, of course, addressing the areas where we've had some recent weakness. If you look at the bottom of the short P&L there, we wrote down the value of our loan portfolio by SEK 16 million to reflect changes in the cash flow profile. We feel very comfortable where we are now. We had some further negative impacts from the weakening euro, where a lot of our assets and loan receivables are euro-denominated. On a positive note, at the bottom, we were able to restructure our German ownership to lower our effective tax rate. In total, Catella reports a loss of SEK 32 million from remaining operations in the quarter. However, Catella Bank, which is being wind down, actually contributed positively this quarter with SEK 25 million. Our total net loss amounts to SEK 7 million. I think that the bank is now in a position where we feel comfortable with the provision and the reserve level for every remaining cost to wind that down and we'll take it from there. If we turn together to page four, cover the balance sheet as of December 31st. I want to point out that this is from our remaining operations, which then excludes Catella Bank. We have rough guideline. There's another SEK 400 million of assets and equity, and a little bit less in cash, if you want to look at the group's total consolidated position. As you know, we report this as a disposal group held for sale, and without it, our group total assets were about SEK 3.7 billion, and with the bank, about SEK 4.1 billion consequently. Don't want to point out too much on this slide, you can see the continued focus on Principal Investments can be seen in the SEK 720 million of assets in property development projects, which has increased even more from last quarter, primarily from additional investments in our Danish residential development called Kaktus, and our logistics project in Norrköping here in Sweden. Our liquidity remains strong with close to SEK 1.5 billion of cash and cash equivalents, and our solidity is above 40%. We spoke about this, for those of you who joined us in the third quarter. While we're happy with our liquidity position, it should be noted that not all of the SEK 1.5 is immediately available for investments as a large portion is held in our daughter companies. If you see on the graph for cash, the dark shaded part of the bar is what's effectively immediately available in our holding companies. Out of the SEK 1.5 billion, about SEK 500 million is immediately available at the parent company level at year-end, where about the same amount is sitting in our daughter companies. There will be some dividends, of course, coming our way, and the rest is sitting either in smaller restricted assets for regulatory purposes or in minorities. Once the banking license is returned, and we hope to achieve this wind down at the first half of this year, we expect to increase incrementally above what's listed here, our cash balance by approximately SEK 350 million over time. Some is available, will be made available immediately, and some will come when we can dispose of certain assets. We go to page five. We turn to our segments, and we start with Corporate Finance for the quarter. As we'd mentioned, both Johan and I, Corporate Finance net revenues were down. They were down SEK 41 million or 15% versus last year, which in the context of a 47% year-over-year drop in the overall market, excluding the U.K., where we're not really present, you could consider that respectable. We're, of course, not satisfied. We always want to beat the market, and we did so in Sweden. France and Germany are large markets for us, very large markets, and we did underperform our expectations, and that's something we're working very heavily on. The quarter in Sweden, which was up SEK 30 million, as I said, in net revenues, was also supported by three very large transactions with Norrmalm, Haga Gruppen, and Stenhus, which I think, and Johan, I think we both agree that we want to do more of those types of transactions and continue to move up the value chain in advisory business. For continental Europe, it was a challenging quarter. We can't hide from that. We had further lockdowns and deal delays impacting our performance. France was down SEK 45 million net revenues, which is 29% year-over-year. Again, in the context of the market, not too bad, but it's not at all what we want to deliver. On a good note there, our residential advisory segment continued to deliver very strong results in France, which is what we're trying to build upon and get our core platform back on track. Germany and to some part Denmark was a real challenge. Germany has struggled for most of 2020. We have an increased focus to support the team to turn this around for 2021. Germany is a tough advisory market. We're going to have a big task on our hands to turn this around this year. It's one of our main focus areas. I would like to move to page six to talk about Property Investment Management. Sometimes I'll refer to this as PIM maybe, just because that's how we talk about it. Our property investment segment grew, as I mentioned, by SEK 4 billion in the quarter if we adjust for currency translation effects, and really thanks to strong capital inflow in our U.K. asset management platform and our German property funds. Of course, looking at the euro translation, we look like we're flat, and this is our key growth engine, and of course, we don't want that to look flat, and we expect that to grow. We still think that our capital inflow was solid, not quite what we were hoping for, but it's good. APAM, our U.K. platform, added about SEK 2 billion from new shopping center mandates, and that business is trying to broaden its product offering, and it's trying to broaden the value chain, which we're very positive, and we're trying to support them any way we can. Our German funds grew by about SEK 2.5 billion across several funds. None really to point out, but I want to highlight that growth is still net of some material dispositions that we had in one of our residential funds. We added another SEK 500 million in our hospitality business by a great mandate for the Holiday Inn in Clichy, in Paris. That's one of the segments where there might be some more opportunities given the current situation. PIM, or Property Investment Management, delivered another solid operating profit of SEK 29 million. Not quite where we want it to be, but maybe solid given the state of the quarter in general terms. This is driven, which we should keep pointing out, by continued strength in fixed fees. We also had some acquisitions where we do get fees, and especially in our specialist and Dutch residential funds. We got some variable fees or revenues from sales within the European residential fund. This is where we'll see most of our growth coming, and where we've put a lot of focus on our management time at the moment. You guys probably have seen, during January, we sold our entire stake in our asset management business in France. This has, since the fourth quarter, reduced our AUM by about SEK 15 billion, just shy of that, and generated a profit of SEK 122 million, which will come in Q1. Obviously, we're not in the business of reducing our asset base, and we are actively looking for the next opportunity to relaunch our asset management business in France to get a great new partnership going. On page seven, we cover Equity Hedged and Fixed Income Funds, which effectively now is IPM Systematic Macro. This is a tough situation. We can't hide from it, and we're deeply involved with it at group level. There's been real headwinds, both on an industry level. Our performance has not necessarily been worse than our peers, even the largest peers in this segment worldwide. This past year, 2020, has been anything but predictable. Our products here are based on predicting outcomes for macro events, and has been extremely successful in the past few years. It has not worked well for us this year, and we've had continued capital outflows, and we're down to about SEK 14 billion of assets now, and has been a relatively weak fund performance. I mentioned earlier, we're down SEK 97 million year-over-year in income. Anyone involved in this industry knows that it's pretty hard to turn around this type of trend, but it's clearly not impossible or beyond us. The board and the leadership team at IPM are working aggressively to develop new factors better suited to today's environment. Short-term test results by no means a certainty, they are promising, and we're hopeful that fundraising should be successful in the coming year. This is a longer turnaround. We have taken some tough but necessary measures to adjust the cost base to this new situation, we remain very engaged at the board level to drive the necessary changes. We'll keep updating the investor community. On page eight, we talk about our Principal Investments. We talked about these at length before, this is an area where we have increased focus. We've continued to invest, as I mentioned earlier, in our ongoing projects. I think more importantly maybe, is that we're seeing an increased pipeline of potential projects. None that have generated any concrete transactions in the last couple of months, but we have a solid pipeline that we're working with towards 2021, and I think we look at it with some optimism. We move to page nine, and hand it over to Johan if you want, or I'll continue. I'm on a roll. Okay. It's just strategically, that's why I didn't want to cover the Principal Investments in too much detail, because really that is a way for us to invest some capital. It really isn't about being a developer or a real estate management company. It's about unlocking more potential for the broader group, that's what we want to talk about on page nine and 10, which we've highlighted before, nine, 10, 11, which we highlighted before in the third quarter. Johan and I will talk about it a little bit together. We switch to page nine. Okay. I think in order to unlock the potentials, I think we generally need cash. I know that cash is pretty good. If we would include the bank cash, we would have close to SEK 2 billion, but it's not really 100% true because as Christoffer said, part of that money is locked into some daughter companies. Regardless, we have potential to grow and to initiate new projects, and to create joint efforts in the group, and that's what we see, and that's what we push, and there will be a lot of new investments coming along, where we will sometimes invest with 5% of the capital and sometimes maybe initially 95%. I think the fundamental reason why we're going in this direction is that we believe we could earn much more. We could have a better business model to have better margins, especially if we could initiate new investments and find the co-investors along with us while we are driving the project. That's what we are trying to do. I think all our projects on page number eight, and we are now on number nine, but all the projects on number eight are going according to our expectations or better. We are very confident about them. I think we have a pretty good or very good pipeline. It's more a matter of what we are capable of managing and how we could build the internal competence to manage the various projects. It is a matter of us investing and also making additional fees within the group by using the different daughter companies in the total value added, or in the value chain. I don't know if you would like to continue. Yeah That's what it's all about. If we go to page number 10, I think maybe This one, most of you have probably seen it before, but I think that we, wide to the left, it shows that we are primarily in the core segment and with residential and a little bit of offices, while I think that we're going a little bit more into the, I don't know if you should call it opportunistic or value add, but we should move into new segments of the market where we believe that over time the fees could be substantially higher. That's how we would like to drive the business model in the future. I think we are behind time, so I don't think I could add very much more than that. I think we've covered most of the things on the last page, and we want to make sure that we, in my rambling, everyone has time to ask questions. Yeah. It's been a challenging quarter, but I think the underlying trends are still good and what we're doing is focusing on growing on our strengths and addressing the two or three areas where we're having some challenges. We open it up for questions from the audience. Thank you. If you do wish to ask a question, please press zero one on your telephone keypad. If you wish to withdraw your question, you may do so by pressing zero to the cancel. We have a question from the line of Patrik Brattelius from ABG. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning. Thank you. Yeah, a couple of questions from my part. If I start with the IPM and Systematic Funds, we have seen a negative operating profit now for three quarters in a row. What is the run rate with the fixed revenue versus fixed cost on this AUM base? Do you need to increase the AUM base a lot in order to turn a profit? Can you just reduce cost and still being able to achieve a positive operating profit result in this segment? Thank you, Patrik. It's a very valid question, and it's a complicated one. When you're in the asset management business, there's no simple way to save costs to get you out of trouble. You have to do both, and that's the challenge. As you know, we don't give forecasts, but you can do the math on the current asset base multiplied by our fixed fee ratio, compare that to our current cost base, and you can see that 2021 is going to be a bit challenging. We're doing everything we can to reduce costs without disrupting the operations. We need to have a first-class product to sell. That takes some time and investment, but we're trying to cut wherever we can. Focus, I think is the keyword. Focus our operations on the right products and the right factors and selling those. You can do the math. You know that we can't just save our way out of this one. We're going to have to turn this around. Okay, fair enough. I turn over to the Property Investment Management segment. You were able to achieve an operating margin of 21% if you look at the full year 2020. That is a very strong quarter, but this was also helped by the Grand Central transaction, for example. If you were to remove extraordinary revenues, what would the margin be on more of a run rate for this segment on a normalized level? Can you help us with that, please? Yeah, I don't think there's one answer to that. Obviously, performance-related fees are part of our normal business. They are however very choppy. They come in a quarter and then nothing happens for another five quarters. We get some smaller ones as we did in this fourth quarter. We look at our underlying fixed fees to fixed costs and try to make sure that we have that covered and then work with as much as upside as possible. The variable fees are not unpredictable, but it's the performance fees that you're talking about when you really close out a big transaction. Do we consider that run rate or not? Is this part of our business? I think what we have to do and what we can do, and we can get back to you if you want, with maybe looking at the last 8-12 quarters, and fix the variable split out. That I think is the easiest way. I think if you're looking at a full year of 21%, that's higher than what our run rate would be without an extraordinary transaction, however you define that. Although this quarter, you can see the 2020 at 12% in the fourth quarter and 2019 at 10%. In 2019, we had a bit more of variable fees coming in, but we have since grown our fixed fee generation. Is that a standard quarter? Not too far from it, but we believe that we on an annual basis should have a bit more upside from variable fees. I know that's not a super simple and straightforward answer, but that's how we look at it, slightly a bit over the longer term. Okay. Yeah, what you mentioned there with the fixed fees versus fixed cost, yeah, that would be lovely if you could provide that historically as well, so we get more transparency and get the right expectations going forward. Looking into the Principal Investments, which if any of these projects in the property development projects ready for an exit mode, so to speak, in the coming 12 months or are they still being evaluated and worked on? Well, I think the first answer is they're all being worked on, and they're all being evaluated. As you know, we don't have quarterly targets that we have to meet or set. We operate on a premise of delivering maximum returns at the right time. I think there's some likelihood that at least maybe one of these could be realized in 2021. Some of the ones at Sachsen and Düsseldorf are bigger in scope and have several generations of them. We'll see if there's going to be something on the shorter term, but that's harder to predict. That's a bit of a longer-term project, I think. Kaktus and Norrköping are more in the, let's say, 12- 24 month timeframe. Okay. Yeah, very helpful. Then if I turn over to this transaction you did in France with the Property Asset Management. You write there in the CEO comments in the beginning of the report, that you are looking to come back to that market. How does that market look like? What can we expect in terms if you were to do an M&A transaction in that market? Are you looking for the same kind of asset on a management base, or would you want to have an even stronger asset on a management base in that market? How does the price level look like? Should we expect similar price level as the transaction where you sold the Property Asset Management here in the first quarter? I don't know if I should answer that, but I guess our intention is more to have a startup with someone who have done it before like we did in the past. I shouldn't say that we have serious discussions, but we have approaches by different individuals who would like to start up together with Catella AB. It's also a strategic decision a little bit how we deal with CREAG, which is the German operation working in the commercial space more than residential, and to what extent should we just have an asset management operation, to what extent should we set up new funds, and should that be done in separate units in France, or should that be done from the CREAG end? There are some strategic decisions which would refer to the situation in France and Germany and the continental Europe. It's a big market for us, Patrik, I think the values today in the market are no cheaper than how we sold. We have to be very careful if we're looking at M&A, which is trickier. We have been arguably, at least, even more successful when we grow our own partnerships, although it takes a little bit more time. It's an important market for us. Great. Is there any other market geographically that you see untapped potential here? Fundamentally, if we are capable of growing in Germany, France, and England or Great Britain, I think that for 80% of our market is I think we are happy. If we could grow by 10%, 15%, 20% in our asset management in those markets, I think that is big enough target for us. Of course, there are some other big markets, but it's a little bit premature to look at that. We are growing in Spain. I think we have a decent profitable operation. It was loss-making for many years, but today it's making money. I think we have some initiatives in Scandinavia as well. The big markets for us are primarily Germany, France, and England. Okay. Thank you. We should try to double in those markets instead of maybe spreading around in a lot of new. We have to be a little bit more I shouldn't call it the DCM market, but we should be more in the capital market than they did that right today, depending on how you define the capital market. Yeah. Thank you so much. Just a final question here from my part then. You mentioned some extraordinary items in the P&L. Can you specify them? You mentioned the write-downs of the loan portfolio and a SEK 8 million goodwill impairment. I just want to make sure that I got all of them. If you can specify them, please. Yeah. No, I think there are three- 70 million of tax. Well, that was earlier. Yeah. That's right. Okay. Patrik, you'll find them all in the actual report, but the loan write-down was SEK 16 million. Yeah. The currency, the euro effects, I don't have on the top of my head, but it should have been around just over SEK 20 million. We had a deferred tax asset write-up in the quarter of SEK 20 million. We had a write-down of SEK 70 million earlier in the year. On a net basis, if you look at our annual tax rate, you have basically a deferred tax asset impact of SEK 50 million negative for 2020, looking at our overall tax rates. Our reported tax rate is over 50% for 2020, but if you adjust for those, it'll be 37%. The goodwill write-down, we had one of our older asset management investments in the Nordic region was written down by SEK 8 million, and we had some acquired system infrastructure in our IPM Systematic Macro that is no longer utilized of SEK 3 million. Those were the bigger ones. Perfect. Thanks so much. No problem. We have one more question from the line of Henrik Alveskog from Redeye. Please go ahead. Okay. Gentlemen, do you hear me? We can hear you well, Henrik. How are you? All right, great. I'm fine, thank you. My first question is a little bit of a follow-up question on the performance fee discussion regarding PIM. When the mandate ends in APAM, typically or potentially you get some performance fees. Could you maybe give us an idea of when They have several mandates, but is the rate of ending mandates stable, or is it increasing? Could you say something about that so we have an idea of what to expect there? Sure. I think on a macro level, as we are growing our portfolio, and it's not terribly mature yet, I think a lot of them are further out into the future. That doesn't mean you couldn't realize quicker if you do an extremely good job or your customer wants to be more optimistic. I think we're in the growth phase, that's what's most important to us, to continue to build value. As I mentioned earlier, we're not in the market of delivering to quarterly expectations, it's about maximizing the value for our investors. We don't forecast or predict or announce underlying values. What I can assure you is that we're building it up to maximize it long term, as you know, this segment is not new, it's a growing part of our business. Therefore, I would not, with the exception of a few of our funds that have a little bit of maturity, expect all too much in the coming 12 months, unless it's a unique situation where we have a great mandate to exit. All right. Okay, thanks. I don't know if you have any comment on that, Johan. Yeah. It's also a question how you define performance fee. We have that discussion internally, how to define it, because part of the funds are actually set up in order to make money out of performance fees. Performance fees is not only over performance when it comes to returns. We have defined performance fees as acquisition fees and disposal fees, which I think various companies assess that differently. We have said that they are part of performance fees. Actually, that is a very big part of the revenues in those funds. That's how the typical German funds operate. Maybe 50% of our funds do have performance fees, which I consider performance fees, which is a certain return over a certain hurdle. That's not only the kind of performance fees that we encounter or take into consideration here. It's a mixture of many things. I would say that the fixed is much better than what Christoffer or what we disclose here. That's how I see it, but we know that some of our competitors have a different definition of it. We have adapted to what some companies are doing in the market. I think, Henrik, what we're going to do and try to do is increase our transparency, but we have to have the right definition that we all feel comfortable with. We have three components, really, fixed, variable, and performance. Performance is what you were relating to, and that's broadly on exit. Variable can be acquisition, disposal, could be lending, could be CapEx, investment fees. It could be a number of things which you have along the whole cycle. It's an ongoing discussion here on how to report it, because we know the peer group is complex, and we don't want to send the wrong signals that we're much better or much worse than anyone else. That's going to be a continuing discussion on how we disclose that. I think from a performance fee, which is exit-based, specifically with a young portfolio, most of those will be a little bit out into the future. All right. Yeah. Thanks. Okay. Well, another one regarding PIM. You mentioned in your previous report, the Q3, that you're reviewing Germany in order to capitalize on your strong position, et cetera. Is that basically what you're describing here, or is this something that's still ongoing and more coming in terms of communicating what you're doing? I think for now, this is still an internal matter. We think we have more potential in maybe some German funds where we think we can be more aggressive on new segments, new capital. That's where we're trying to realign ourselves from group level. That's still an internal discussion and not something that's done very quickly. Clearly, it's a focus area. Like Johan said earlier, if we grow our big markets, that's not half the battle. It's a big part of the battle. Yeah. Okay. On IPM, you are in the process of launching a new fund, correct? Well, we're launching several new products. Okay funds will be disclosed if they go out to market. Okay. Is there a timeline here that you would like to share with us, or? I don't think there are any secrets. I think that in the past, I was disclosing that we have in the Systematic Macro, there are several components or products. Yeah. We have launched a new commodity product. It was launched in the beginning of January. It's now included, but it could also be used as a carve-out and where we could attract, so to say, money only for the commodity product. We have launched during last year, a somewhat changed FX product. We did implement a new emerging market, debt market product, which maybe it's not a new product, but it's a new part of the product. We are working at the time with a new short-term trading product, which also could be used as a carve-out and used as a separate product for anyone who would like to have a short-term product, which is quite attractive in the market. They have generally over-performed compared to maybe the more systematic products, but it will be part of the systematic product because we have been missing that part. Whether it's a new product, a new fund, or just a separate account, however, we work with different kinds of structures, so it's not a fund, but we have the ambition to attract more money to these new initiatives that we have been working with for quite a time. Right. Okay, thanks. Just finally, you are introducing a new incentive program with, and I'm referring to the Catella warrants. Is it your ambition to include a large number of employees or not? Yeah. Are you talking about the option scheme that we made a decision of in December? Is that the one you're referring to, or what? Yes. Okay. No, I think that my feelings at least about that is that people should be incentivized on the level which they could really have a big impact on, which means that most people are incentivized in the structures where they are working. There are disadvantages with that, which means that it doesn't maybe incentivize people to collaborate to the full extent. There are pros and cons with everything. Generally, the options that we have, that we decided on will be given or will be sold because they are sold on market conditions. You could always argue whether it's a big benefit or not, or any benefit, but because we sell them based on the Black-Scholes model, so they are market priced. They will be on the group level. Yeah. We have a lot of incentives for, so to say, shareholder structures in the various companies, which is also part of the problem that we face in Catella because we are being taxed on every corporate level that it's difficult for us to use deferred tax losses in certain operations due to the fact that we have partners in many operations. It's true. There are pros and cons with that as well. Yeah. Well, thank you. That was all for me then. Thanks. Thank you, Henrik. As there are no further questions, I'll hand back for closing remarks. Okay. As we started saying, it was not a good quarter. I think we can do better. I think just utilizing our cash, we'll hopefully provide much better numbers. We believe that we could create very good returns, and not only on direct investments but also, so to say, connecting our money with other individuals or other entities' money will create growth and returns. That's the challenge that we are working with. I'm quite optimistic. I think we have done some, I shouldn't call it dramatic, but we have, on the group level, I think a lot of new people are coming in and some are leaving us for different reasons, and I think we will be much more focused in the property market and our competence in the property market will dramatically improve on the group level, which I'm sure will have a big impact over time. I'm very optimistic. I shouldn't say that I'm happy to leave, but I'm optimistic about leaving. All right. That was it for us this morning. We appreciate your time, and thanks for listening.