In the Q&A box that you have in Zoom, or you can raise your hand and ask your questions verbally. If you type in your questions during the call, we'll see them when we get to the Q&A session. Please do ahead of us getting there if you want to ask a question. I think the attendee list is done and everyone connected. With that, I will then hand over to our CEO, Vladislav Suglobov. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our third quarter results call. We obviously have also Stefan, our CFO, with us today. Let's begin by giving you a brief overview of this morning's report. We are pleased with the quarter's overall performance. In USD, revenue increased 0.2% sequentially in comparison to Q2. This is. It's been a while since it happened when we had sequential revenue growth. The change of the trend is attributed to product improvements that we made in Q1 and Q2 and the gradual expansion of user acquisition spend, which was made possible thanks to these improvements in our products, namely in Sherlock. Sherlock was the highlight of the quarter, achieving 5.6% growth sequentially in USD terms. Year- over- year, over the last three quarters, it went from - 7.3% in Q1 to - 3.5% in Q2, and then to + 7.9, almost 8% in Q3 in USD terms. With the positive changes that we've made to the game in Q1 and Q2, we were able to increase profitable user acquisition spend. Our new management and marketing helped bring energy to this process. Now the game seems to be on the trajectory for at least moderate growth. The game accounts for about 29% of our net revenue. It's one of our three pillars of our revenue generation. This is a welcome change that should help our top-line dynamic. If we look at the other two pillars of our portfolio and revenue generation, Jewel's family of games had a stable performance quarter to quarter, but it declined year- over- year. Hidden City was down 5.2% sequentially in the quarter and down 14.1% year- over- year. Not as good performance as Sherlock, but again, we did the changes, successful changes on Sherlock, and so we were able to expand user acquisition there. The dynamic of the game has changed. Now we have to work on the other two pillars of our revenue generation to try to achieve the same. Our actively managed portfolio of games together increased 2.6% sequentially in USD terms. This positive dynamic of Sherlock, which is quite strong, actually shines through a more mediocre performance of the rest of the portfolio. Now that we have made these improvements to Sherlock, we will, of course, turn our attention to Jewel's family of games and Hidden City to try and use the lessons that we've learned on Sherlock to try and improve the dynamic of these two other games. Hopefully, it will help us turn around the trend in our top line. In other news, monthly average gross revenue per paying user was at a new record of $70.8. Again, during the quarter, one of the tools that we used to turn around the performance of the top line is user acquisition. We increased UA spend in the quarter to 21% compared to 19% in the previous quarter and also 19% a year ago in Q3. If you look at how our user acquisition spend was evolving over the last few quarters, we kind of hit a minimum outside of our, or very close to the bottom bracket of the range we previously communicated. From there, with the help of the changes and the new management and the marketing and adding new advertising channels, we started increasing the spend. We went all the way up to 21%, which is very close to the upper bracket of the previously communicated range, 17%-22%. During the fourth quarter, we think that we will have to go outside of that range, but probably not higher than 25% of revenue. Most likely not higher than 25% of revenue. Our goal is to continue this momentum and expand user acquisition to invest profitably in the growth of the portfolio revenue through existing and new games, and primarily Sherlock, in order to turn around the top-line dynamic. The gross margin reached a record 71.2% in the quarter, up from 68.8% last year thanks to the continued success of G5 Store. We remain debt-free and continue to have strong, solid cash flow, and something we are very proud of. Now let's take a closer look at G5 Store, which continues to show remarkable growth. As you know, one of the key advantages of G5 Store is lower payment processing fees, which are in the low single digits. That is quite a contrast to the 12%-30% fees typically charged by third-party application stores. The cost efficiency directly contributes to our improved profitability and the expansion of our gross margin. G5 Store is our third largest source of revenue. During the quarter, it accounted for 24.7%, so almost a quarter of total net revenue of the company, up significantly from 17.1% last year. It is a great milestone for us. When When we launched G5 Store some five years ago, I do not think we really thought it would be responsible for the quarter of all revenue generation in the company. Yet here we are, and it continues to grow quite substantially. Gross revenue growth in USD terms was 30% year- over- year in G5 Store and 6% sequentially. In addition to the G5 Store, we have also seen steady growth in our web shop. Web shop is a module that allows our players on mobile platforms to pay directly to G5 through their browser, through our payment processing, which obviously dramatically lowers the payment processing fee because mobile application stores charge the highest processing fees. During the quarter, the revenue flowing through web shop accounted for 3% of total net revenue from mobile platforms, an improvement compared to 2.6% in Q2. We believe and we are optimistic that this percentage can continue to increase in the coming quarter, boosting our gross margin further, in addition to the effect that we're getting from G5 Store. Last quarter, we mentioned that G5 Store will start to scale its revenue by licensing and distributing third-party games that are more successful on mobile platforms. We have signed a few of these deals, and we aim to release the first game from other developers on G5 Store before the end of the year. This will bring much-desired incremental revenue to mobile game developers while further expanding the reach and scale of G5 Store operations. Now, G5 Store is 25% of our business. It is at a size where its strong continued growth may start positively affecting the overall top-line dynamic and help us with the plan to turn the situation over to growth, obviously. Now, let's look in a bit more detail on the quarter leading up to a record gross margin. Owned games accounted for over 73% of net revenue, and active owned games accounted for 66% of total net revenue, up from 63% last year. Gross margin reached a record high of 71.2%, up from 68.8% a year ago, primarily, as we discussed, due to the continued growth of G5 Store and with some help from the G5 Web Shop. Monthly average gross revenue per paying user reached a new all-time high of $70.8. This is compared to last year's figure of $64.9. This continued growth of this particular key metric reflects the continued trend for the improvement of the underlying quality of the audience. We are in a situation where a relatively small number of high-paying users, high-paying players in key countries, drives a substantial part of the revenue, while acquiring other types of players in other countries is not economically justified. The overall player numbers therefore decline. As long as that gold cohort remains with us, as long as we can refill it with user acquisition and retain them for a long enough period of time, the fundamentals of the company will be healthy. In the future, you may see a situation where there is actually growth in revenue, but the audience metrics are still trending down. That would not be something abnormal. G5 Store is another factor which affects these numbers because generally in G5 Store, we have higher paying players compared to mobile and overall smaller player numbers than on mobile to generate the same amount of revenue. As G5 Store continues to become a larger and larger part of our revenue, the overall user numbers shrink. Again, this really doesn't mean that there is anything wrong as long as we have our golden cohort of users and we know how to find them and we know how to retain them and we know how to monetize them. As you remember, in free-to-play games, there's only a small number of people that actually play for the experience. Now let's look at the operating profit for the quarter on the next slide. Operating profit for the period came in at SEK 12.6 million compared to SEK 22.9 million last year. This resulted in an EBIT margin of 5.5%, down from last year. The lower EBIT was only marginally impacted by foreign exchange revaluations. More importantly, we have deployed more capital into user acquisition during the quarter, which increased, as I mentioned, two percentage points compared to both previous quarter and as well as compared to last year. This obviously had a negative impact on EBIT. However, as mentioned before, the positive changes we've made to Sherlock have made it possible to expand profitable user acquisition from lower levels and turn around the game's revenue performance. The long-term vision here is that as long as we can continue to acquire users profitably and increase the acquisition of users profitably, it does make sense for us, obviously, to do that. We will grow back gradually to a higher profitability through that, through increasing our top line. Also, with the trends in the G5 Store and G5 Web Shop, we'll also see in the future the expansion of the gross margin. It's been happening very reliably over the quarters, which will also help us restore profitability eventually once we have fixed the top-line trend situation. During the quarter, the net capitalization impact on earnings was SEK 0.6 million compared to SEK -5.4 million last year. Now let's turn to talk about our cash position. Capitalization impact on cash flow was SEK -23.2 million, less than SEK 25.5 million last year. The movement of working capital was negative SEK 1.7 million compared to positive SEK 27.2 million last year. Total cash flow during the third quarter was SEK 10.4 million, down from SEK 53.3 million last year. Total cash at the end of the period stood at a strong SEK 247 million, despite the buybacks of SEK 8.4 million that we made during the quarter. Let's move on to the final slide and discuss some final thoughts on the outlook from here. We will continue to implement our core strategy of improving the metrics of our active games, of our existing revenue pillars, which will make expanding profitable UA possible in order to turn around the trend of the revenue of these pillar games and through that, our portfolio. We also see positive momentum going into the seasonally strong Q4 and Q1. Hopefully, we'll have some help from that. In Q4, because of this, we may go as high as 25% of UA reinvestment from gross revenue. The increase will help us optimize for growth while maintaining profitability. That's the aim. As we have said before, we will notify the market when we venture out of the range of 17%-22% of UA to gross revenue, which is what we now plan on doing. That is why we are communicating it clearly. During the quarter, we made 14 iterations on several games in our new game pipeline. Among notable developments, there was a discontinuation of one game after it failed to reach sufficient metrics, while another game passed early soft launch with promising metrics. This new game is moving forward to more advanced stages in the funnel, and we look forward to seeing further development of this concept in the next quarter. Twilight Land is now in the late-stage soft launch phase. We have achieved very good early metrics and good mid-term metrics in this game, but we need more work on the long-term metrics, and we need more observation of these long-term metrics and a few more tests. At this stage of soft launch, tests take a little bit more time because you have to wait for the players to get to the point which you are trying to measure. We expect that over the next several months, we will gradually increase user acquisition in Twilight Land while still doing some more tests and doing some iterations on the game. This increase in Twilight Land is another reason why we think we will go to a higher level of user acquisition expenses in Q4. Through our recent initiative to expand the G5 Store with the distribution of third-party games on the platform, we have made agreements to bring third-party games to G5 Store. The teams are actively working on preparing their games for release on G5 Store, and the first release, as I mentioned, is set to happen before the end of the year. As I mentioned again, both the size of G5 Store and its speed of expansion will continue to have a positive effect on our top-line dynamic. Now the store is much bigger, so it will be much easier for this effect to sort of shine through the overall revenue mix to the top-line dynamic. G5 Store growth and also growth of the flow of payments from mobile users through G5 Web Shop will continue to help us boost our gross margin. We will, of course, continue to focus on operational efficiencies in development and marketing, including continued integration of generative AI where it makes sense. It actually makes sense. Tools are getting better. Throughout all of this, we maintain strong financial discipline. We continue to generate solid cash flow and maintain a strong net cash position, which gives us the flexibility to execute on strategic initiatives that will strengthen the foundation for future growth. I would like to end the presentation by thanking you for following G5 and also thanking the whole G5 team for their outstanding efforts in delivering this quarter's result. This concludes our presentation, and let's open the call for questions, which I think we already have. Yes. I will just repeat, if you want to raise a question verbally, you raise your hand. We have two already, and we'll get back to that in a minute. You can also ask questions in the Q&A box that Ulla has also done already. We'll get back to that one as well. I will start by inviting Simon Jönsson from ABG to ask his question. Simon, go ahead. Hello, guys h ope you can hear me. I want to first off revisit the UA spending and the guidance you provided for Q4. Of course, very interesting. I understand that the increase in Q3 was mainly Sherlock, but the further increase you expect in Q4, is that also Sherlock primarily, you think, or is it primarily other active games? Because, yeah, you said Twilight Land needs more time, so that shouldn't be the main UA driver. I think at least. Please correct me if I'm wrong. That is right. The primary driver will be Sherlock. Number two is likely going to be Hidden City because the games are quite close in terms of the genre and the mechanics. We have tried, so to speak, transferring some of the successful things that we've done on Sherlock to Hidden City, and the game is quite responsive to that. We expect that this will continue, and we will be able to spend more on user acquisition in Hidden City. It is more difficult with Jewels Family of Games, Jewels of Rome specifically. Our experiments on transferring our findings from Sherlock to Jewels of Rome did not really work out. Over the next few months, we will be trying different approaches. It may or may not have effect on Q4 user acquisition, probably not. It's a short period of time until the end of the year. A little bit is Twilight Land. We don't know exactly how much, but we felt that it would be prudent to communicate that we might be exceeding the range. We basically do not want to be held back in Q4 by the 22% or having to deliver exactly 22%. As we said, we will communicate if we think that we will exceed the range, and we think we will exceed the range for these reasons. All right. Thank you for that. Follow up on that. Since you have made changes to Sherlock earlier this year that sort of prompted this growth, have you already done similar changes to Hidden City? Is that correctly? It's in early stages. The report covers Q3, so we discussed mostly Q3. It's quite straightforward that if you have fixed one hidden object game, you might actually be able to fix another hidden object game as well. It's natural to think that we would try to do that, and. We We have some encouraging signs. All right. Makes sense. Just on a final note on new releases, since you said you need some more time on Twilight Land. Should we still view Twilight Land as sort of the main upcoming game, you think, or are there others that have sort of caught up? Or yeah, what's the net-to-mount look coming quarters? Yeah, it is the most complete and the most ready of the new games. Another game that was probably the second by completeness was discontinued during the quarter due to not having reached the metrics. And then the two other games, one of them already successfully passed through the initial soft launch stages with great results. I would say unprecedented results for us. So we are quite optimistic about this game, but it is still in the early development stages. With regard to Twilight Land potential or the potential of other games that are in earlier stages, again, it is hard to say. We try to only allow the games that have a chance of scaling to certain benchmarks that we have of meaningful monthly revenue. In that sense, Twilight still, we have not given up hope on this game. It has some really good things going about it, but we have to work more on certain longer-term metrics. That is the situation, and we will find out in the next few months, I think. All right. Thank you so much for that. That is all for me. Thank you, Simon. Thank you, Simon. There we go. There we have Hjalmar. We have one in Q&A. Yeah, go ahead. From Redeye. There we go. Hjalmar, go ahead. Thank you. Maybe just a first quick follow-up on Twilight. Would you say that, I mean, there is a small chance that the game is not being launched or that it is rather a thing about when it is being launched? That is a great question. I think there is still some chance that it will not be launched. It always exists, I think, until we are totally happy about the metrics. I would say, to be totally honest, I think there is still a chance that it will not be launched. Also, I think that so far we have achieved really good results with the game on the early and medium-term LTV progression. There is also a very good chance that we will resolve the rest and it will be launched. We will have to wait and find out. I am also not the person actively hands-on working in the game. I know the overall situation and what is good and what is holding up, but it is difficult for me, not being on the team, to know exactly the chances or how they feel about that. If you work on games for a long period of time, you always get attached to games. So. I reserve the right to say, "Well, this is not good enough." Or if we cannot reach the metrics that we think we should be reaching, and it takes too much time. At the same time, I still, part of me believes the team can turn this around, and we will find out which reality is going to happen. Okay. With your new guidance, so to say, for UA in Q4, I guess it's difficult to say how Topline will respond in the short term. Other than that, would you say that you aim to remain stable in terms of other OpEx and so on, just to get some flavor on what to expect in terms of EBIT margin in the short term? Yes, I think we are quite stable in terms of OpEx and other parameters from quarter to quarter. I think there are no big changes that are expected. Right. Also regarding the launch of third-party games, I think this was asked in Q2 as well, but have you decided how you will report this? Will it be similar to your own games in terms of gross margin, UA, and so on? Just to understand how it will look financially. I guess it's a small impact in Q4, but if you can give some information and update on that. Yeah, it's probably a small impact in Q4, but yes, we'll be reporting exactly the same way that we report on our existing games. All right. Also regarding this kind of new UA approach and more focused on higher-paying users, are these kind of players that are coming from other games, or is it like a growing user base overall? Is that something you can have any insight to? This is the way I think about it, and we're discovering more about our user, about this golden cohort, so to speak. This is the audience that sometimes has been with us for a very long time and played several games. Sometimes this is the audience that we have acquired relatively recently. The key differentiator for us is that the person not only plays the game for a long period of time, but they also fall into this schedule of repeated purchases that are aligned with their play cycle or every week or every couple of weeks. Some people wait for very special deals and then buy in bulk. Some other people are more like impulse buyers. In the end, one uniting characteristic is that they can afford to pay in these games. It's not that much money, by the way, taken on a per-week or per-month basis. They seem to be okay and happily doing that for quite a long period of time. The way our games are structured is that you can enjoy them for years. I mean, these users, they're mainly from the United States and Western Europe. This is where there is a highest concentration of them. This is also where it is quite difficult to acquire organic traffic, right? Because these are highly valued users, and advertisers of the whole world are after them, whether on PC or on mobile platforms. If you look at other countries with lower value per user, we sometimes get an influx of people from countries where historically, we cannot really find these gold cohort users. These players may not be as engaged or they make payments, but those are relatively small. They inflate our user numbers and user metrics without bringing any substantial contribution to the company's revenue. I think the overall situation in the mobile marketing ecosystem is that it evolves towards fully valuing the user, right, for the product that can justify paying for that user and making profit on them. We can justify paying and be competitive in the market and paying for these users, and then turn a healthy profit on them. We cannot actually justify buying in cheaper geographies, at least for now. In many cheaper geographies, the users are way cheaper there, but they also do not fall into this pattern, so they do not recoup the investment. Naturally, we skew towards buying fewer but more valuable and profitable users. I guess in the countries where our games do not work as well, then those users are better sold, so to speak, to some other business that can extract better profit from them, right? That is the way, I think, the ecosystem evolves. It is natural that when we go from the times of receiving a lot of big numbers of users in early days of mobile gaming, that over time, we are sort of looking at consolidating the user base towards the type of users that actually is driving the revenue of the company. At least this is the view from my perspective, looking at how mobile marketing is evolving. Yeah, and then if we look at the demographics of these users, again, we discussed the countries, but they are predominantly female players of age 35+ or even higher, depending on the platform. We tend to have even more pronounced characteristics on G5 Store, where these tend to be players and payers who are even older and are even more skew even more female, right. Also, can you give some—I mean, you indicated that 25% of UA for Q4 and that you will be in the higher end of your range. Is that kind of an indication for 2026 as well, or will you change depending on how you perform in the coming quarters? I would say that if it works out and the aim here is to kind of bottom out now, right, and then to grow out from here. We'd be happy to keep UA spend at that level if we can be certain that we are driving the growth that will make us profitable eventually. I would rather not be reducing that. On the other hand, if we feel that we are unable to deploy this much capital in Q4 for whatever reason, be it the market or the fact that we weren't able to continue improving the characteristics of games, then it will be good news for the margin in the short term, but this would also mean that maybe long-term, it's not the best thing in the long run, right? Because the way out of here is expanding the acquisition that is fundamentally profitable and that will drive the increase in the top line. Got it. And also a final one, I forgot if you can give any information on these third-party games. Are those games that are already available on other platforms, or is it completely new games? Yeah, those are games that already exist, that exist on mobile, that make good enough money there. And the developers are looking to make incremental revenue. And we believe that they can make good incremental revenue that makes sense for them to port these games over to G5 Store. The good thing here is that the timeline of bringing this game to G5 Store is way, way shorter than developing a game from scratch, which can last years. In this case, we are talking months. And then it's not as capital-intensive, obviously, compared to creating a game from scratch and from zero. We look forward to the first releases. Again, G5 Store continues growing. We see we are achieving amazing results, like 25%. For For our games, on average, 25% of revenue is coming from G5 Store. Any developer out there would like to generate 25% extra incremental revenue, right? Wouldn't they? Even if this extra 25% are shared with a distributor, it's still an amazing deal in the market where it's difficult to find new users. It's difficult to find growth. All this incremental revenue basically becomes also your incremental margin. I think it's a great opportunity for the developers and for us. Again, first games are coming to G5 Store relatively quickly, so we'll see how it works out. We're optimistic. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Hjalmar. Thank you, Hjalmar. All right. I repeat, if you want to ask a question, you can either do it in the Q&A box, or you can raise your hand and ask them verbally. We have two questions on now. They're popping into the Q&A box. We have three now. Oh, we have three. Okay. Let's start from the top. Ule is asking, "Sales and marketing, excluding user acquisition, decreased to SEK 9.7 million from 15. Why did the cost come down? Is the new lower level the new normal? We should expect to continue going forward. Stefan, can you remind me, does that increase, does that line include the staff also? Yes. It does. Yeah. User acquisition expenses went up year- over-y ear, 19% to 21%. In absolute terms, I think they actually declined by 7% or so, right? Because the revenue is smaller. User acquisition was larger last year, not as a percentage of revenue, but as an absolute number, at least in SEK. That's what I saw on the first page. I think it was -7%. Stefan, correct me if I'm wrong. Another important thing that has changed year- over- year is that we've done the right sizing of marketing. Somewhere between Q1 and Q3. I think we've finished with that this year. Obviously, the company has seen times where we were much larger, so we needed more people to manage this complexity. With the decline of Topline over several years, we thought that it's a good time to right-size marketing and also with the change of management to sort of make it more efficient, more focused, more energetic. I think it worked out. Given the results in Q3. That basically explains the numbers, right? Stefan, am I missing anything? I can only concur with that. Those changes that Vlad mentioned on kind of right-sizing the team occurred primarily in Q1 and Q2. We saw some effect in Q2, but the full effect is kind of seen in Q3. That's why it's kind of on a lower run rate. I think, yeah, you should expect these levels rather than anything else going forward. That's right. Okay. Let's move on to the next one. This is from Erik. The question is, "On the G5 Store, obviously, gross margins are favorable, but do you see any difference in KPIs versus the traditional platforms in terms of user retention or pool or other?" Yes, we do. I think we mentioned, but the metrics of G5 Store across the board are way better than on mobile platforms. We have higher revenue per user. Even the difference in the processing fee does not explain the difference. The gross amount is also higher. We retain a larger portion of that. We see higher retention rates as well. Those are two main things for us, right? How much people are paying, the average check, and how well they are retained by the game. That's why we are deriving quite a substantial revenue from G5 Store, having a substantially smaller number of people actually playing through G5 Store. There seems to be a double effect here. There's obviously some selection effect where we feel that, and we can track that some users who are very loyal to G5 games, they may begin playing on other platforms, but eventually they will settle on G5 Store. We make sure to incentivize players. To transition to G5 Store as much as we can, because it makes sense for us to have this direct connection to the player. Not everyone does it, but people who do it, they seem to be the most trusting and the most loyal customers of the company. Therefore, it's natural that they sort of inflate the overall metrics. There also seems to be conversion of our earlier users into G5 Store by means of ways that we cannot even track. We just noticed that players were playing some time ago on other platforms and some other games, and then they have decided to try and download from G5 Store. We also see people, we also see new players converting to G5 Store. Another thing that we see is that even accounting for that, the metrics still seem to be higher. This is where we continue to have the explanation, is that our games, the type of games that we make, these very high-quality, high-resolution games with a lot of stuff happening on the screen, they appeal to older demographic and older demographic or more mature demographic, however you put it. They, on average, prefer to enjoy this game on a large screen. It's a more premium feeling. You have more justification for spending money. You enjoy it way more. This is really large screens is really where our games shine and where they are really competitive as an experience compared to games made for mobile with the scale down, well, let's use the word primitive, more primitive graphics. It's really a different experience on a large screen. We think that this premium effect explains the difference in monetization and retention as well. The next question is, you mentioned in the report that Jewels family of games likely needs six-eight months to refresh the product. Is this something that is required before you can scale away for the franchise? Nothing will prevent us from trying to scale away for the franchise in the meantime. The effect of that would be most pronounced if we were able to implement the changes in the game that will improve the metrics. One of the challenges that we have is that in order to be able to conduct multiple tests and measurements, you need enough users and you need enough players. With this trend towards a smaller number of high-paying players, we need larger cohorts of these to make conclusive decisions whether or not the change in the game was positive. I would just say that we will be able to do these changes, iterations in a more educated and faster way if we had enough inflow of new users. We might actually increase user acquisition spend on these games sort of ahead of the improvements in our efforts to make the iterations and have measurable results faster. Okay. We have the next question from Ule again. "If you release a game on G5 Store, will you own the customer data? Will the gamer be able to transfer progress to mobile, or will he or she lose progress if he or she switched to mobile?" Look, we're getting into the details of our contracts with the developers. I wouldn't like to do that. They're confidential. We obviously are thinking about these questions, and we're trying to make a fair deal here, which would make sense for us as the party bringing users to the table, but as well to the developer. Their main interest is incremental revenue, really, not user data. That's the way I see this should work. We try to align the agreements in accordance with these principles. Once again, I think if you think of smaller developers, it's great to have that business, but it's also not so great in the sense that you are very dependent on Apple or Google or any distribution stores, but you're also very dependent on advertising companies. Incremental revenue is very hard to find. They really want that incremental revenue, and we can give it to them. I think that's an important point in the discussion when we have it with them. The next question is, "Is the company focused on releasing in the U.S. and Europe, or are there any plans to translate and release current and future games to Asia, Japan, and China?" First of all, all our games are localized in Japanese and in Mandarin and Cantonese, so they're not unavailable there. They are available. Historically, we had some big successes in Japan. Unfortunately, we were not able to replicate them later on. We are working on bringing our games to China. Hopefully, there will be some announcements in the coming quarters, but there's not much that I can say now. Yeah, that's the end of the list. No more hands, no more questions. I think that's it. I think that's it. Okay. All right. Vladislav, any final remarks before we wrap up? No, just thank you, everyone, for spending your morning with us. Thank you for following G5. We'll talk soon. Thank you all. Thank you. Bye. Bye.