Hi, everyone, and thank you for attending Kambi's 2021 Virtual Capital Markets Day. My name is Nina Öhlund, and I work as Senior Vice President, Investor Relations here at Kambi. The agenda for today is that we will hear our CEO and co-founder, Kristian Nylén, talking about our strong position in the market and why Kambi, as our model, is perfectly positioned to capitalize on future global opportunities. We'll hear our COO, Erik Lögdberg, explain our core platform focus and the benefits to our partners and end users and how the Kambi platform has been developed to provide global solutions to local problems. We'll have a short break before Cecilia Wachtmeister, EVP Business and Group Functions, will talk about regulations of sports betting and explain why we are only in the early phase of our global expansion. She will also talk about the exciting opportunities that await in the near future. Then our CFO, David Kenyon, will talk about potential total addressable market by region and explain how this potentially could affect our revenue. He will also talk about how our strong balance sheet allows for flexibility, and particularly for M&A opportunities, and what kind of targets that would be in suit with Kambi. In the end, we will have time for questions, so please submit your questions to the chat box to the right. We will try to answer as many questions as possible, but if you still have anything that you would like to know, please feel free to contact me after this event. You can find my contact details on the web page. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that some statements we make during this presentation may be forward-looking statements, and these are subject to risk and uncertainties that should not be relied upon as statements of historical facts. We accordingly also assume no responsibility for updating any forward-looking statements made as part of this presentation. We are not making any financial forecasts or giving specific guidance as to future performance, and a full disclaimer will be included in this PowerPoint presentation and uploaded later today. Now, I want you to welcome our CEO and Co-founder, Kristian Nylén, to the stage. Over to you, Kristian. Hello, pleasure to see so many people joining us today. Very happy. I will start talking a little bit about the history of Kambi and where we are today. Kambi started in 2010. The big reason why we started was that we felt, even as one of the leading operators working at Kindred at that time, sports betting was becoming too big and too hard to do in-house for even one of the largest operators in Europe. The journey started in 2010, where we took us four years to feel strong enough to go independent and list at the Nasdaq in Stockholm. That was in 2014, almost seven years exactly at this point of a year. Now we have operator turnover of more than 10 times the number we had in beginning of 2014. I think we've been on a very exciting journey. We currently have over 900 employees in seven different countries. We have more than 30 partners, and more than 5 million active player accounts. I think we'll talk a lot about that going forward, what it means to have a network of so many different end users from all over the world. Our revenues in 2020 was EUR 117.7 million, and we currently have a cash balance of EUR 78 million. I think we will touch a little bit on that later on in the presentation as well. I think there is a few things we really want to stress throughout this whole presentation. The first of that is our fantastic technology and the know-how we have of how to operate in sports betting. We will talk, especially in David's presentation later on how scalable our model is and how well we show that during 2020. Finally, or not finally, Cecilia will talk quite a lot about the potential we have, not only in the U.S., which has been a great success story for us over the last couple of years, but also Latin America, Asia, and what we see happening in Europe again. Let's start talking a little bit about this. Currently, we are active in 35 regulated markets, and this has been growing rapidly. As I said, we have 10 times the handle from our operators now compared to in 2014. Currently, we think our current global total addressable market, since we are only working in regulated markets, is less than EUR 20 billion. As we'll show you later on here, we think that will be somewhere between EUR 44 billion and EUR 63 billion by 2026. Sports betting, as one of our technicians said, is one of the most complex piece of enterprise and end-user software imaginable. You can think about it in so many different terms, but just imagine that what we are doing is trying to transform pictures on different sporting events in real time to probabilities that our end users are betting on. Quite a significant part of these end users actually make a living out of betting. To do this in a really strong and good way is a very fundamental core of our business. It's about managing a great entertaining product for most of all our end users, but at the same time, protect our operators from customers who are able to beat the sports books around the world. Our superior technology and know-how. We will, throughout this presentation, focus on 3 core areas, and that's where we see we will have the biggest impact in the future. It's the areas where we don't see any value for operators to differentiate. First, technology. As I said, it's super complex to work with sports betting. First of all, we have to be operational 24/7 every single day. If you compare that to a stock exchange, for instance, who also are very heavy on transactions, they have service windows every single night and on weekends. We don't have that luxury. On a monthly basis, we handle roughly half a billion transactions, or most it's new prices putting up on the site. We manage roughly 5 million-10 million bets placed and settled every single day. It's quite a heavy difference in the load between a big day like a Super Bowl or what we'll see in a few weeks time, a Euro final, or what it is on a normal Monday or Tuesday. That's also something we have to cater for. Finally, on the technical side, we have to cater for very different regulatory requirements. The second part is risk management, and I would say this is an area we have a lot of experience, and we are great at it. One thing that many think it's an advantage to manage risk on an individual operator basis, I would say it's absolutely not. With our network, we can use information between different operators and different regions around the world to create the best possible knowledge advantage for our traders. As I told you before, we have roughly 5 million active player accounts to look at. Don't forget, as I said, there is a lot of players out there making a living out of sports betting. It's a very fine balance between creating the best possible product with high payouts, with high potential stakes, with an offering covering everything down to player props and things like betting on the next pitch in baseball, and at the same time, cater for making sure that the professional punters who can focus on one sport or one league don't beat us so much. Finally, regulation. I think we have been proving, especially in the U.S., we are consistently first to market. In very many states around the U.S., we have been the first ones to launch. We took the first bet together with DraftKings in New Jersey after PASPA. We have a more or less an unblemished compliance record around the world. We are very good at making sure that the products we are offering in the different regulations are compliant. It's a big difference. In New Jersey, for instance, you're not allowed to offer college sports for colleges from New Jersey or matches played in New Jersey. Whereas in Sweden, you're not allowed to bet on under 18 events. It's different in every single of these 45 different regulations we are active around, and we have to have 1 offer per region. Finally, I would say we are a leader in sports integrity. We are very often reporting issues we see, but more importantly, I think we are very good at not offering events that we beforehand believe could be suspicious. Now, I will talk a little bit about proprietary model or vertical integration that has been very popular within the industry to talk about lately, and the advantages of an outsourced model. Of course, if you are big enough, it can always be valued to do it in-house. bet365, they are big enough. They are on a yearly basis doing roughly EUR 4 billion in GGR at the moment. Still, I would say we can probably offer them a cheaper sports betting product than they are able doing at this moment. That is not really the reason to do it in-house. bet365 also have one of the greatest sports betting products in the industry, and I would say they were a big reason for Kambi to even start back in 2010. We've been playing catch up for more than 10 years now. We're getting closer and closer, they are also developing every single year, and they can spend more money than we cannot at the moment. It is a tough task to beat out the best, but it's definitely what we are looking at doing. You can look at different industries across the world. Apple, an enormous company, and they still outsource key components in their phones, for instance. TSMC are doing their semiconductors. It's a close cooperation. I think Apple has a big say in what they are doing, but still, they understand that they're probably better off with having a supplier rather than doing everything in-house. Another example is BBC, who is more or less outsourcing all of their technology to distribute their content across the world. Why are we doing this? One of the reasons is it's cheaper. Ericsson actually bought the BBC in-house solution many years ago. We are keeping Ericsson as a supplier because it's cheaper and Ericsson is able to do it better than they would have been able to do in-house. Same goes for Boeing. They are outsourcing maybe one of the most important components of an airplane I would imagine. The motors could be done by Rolls-Royce or by GM. They're not building the whole plane themselves. I think you can take this to pretty much every industry in the world. You don't do everything in-house. What can we say about vertical integration? Some arguments I hear from analysts is that, if operators become big enough, they have to do it in-house to save costs. I don't really see why. Kambi has a very scalable solution. Of course, we would find a pricing model that suits a very large operator. As I said, I think we would be very happy to have Bet365 as a customer, and they could find a cheaper solution even if they do EUR 4 billion in GGR. Cost is definitely not the reason for making it in-house. Look at the product instead. As I said, we have been playing catch up with Bet365 for 10 years. If you start with an inferior product to what we or Bet365 have, it will be very expensive for you to try to catch up, and it's certainly no guarantee for success. In the meantime, if you have an inferior product and you lack the expertise to get it there, I can promise you that the top line of the revenues will suffer. You can also look at other things. If you have a very high fixed cost base for doing sports betting in-house, you always have a risk. Look at what happened during COVID when almost all the revenues disappeared. As an operator using us as a supplier, they don't have that risk. What I'm trying to say here is that there is not any good reason to vertically integrate unless you have one of the best technologies in the industry. Let's think about our position then, and I think Erik will talk more about this later on. I don't think Kambi is in a situation where we believe that we should do everything in-house. Already now, we are using a lot of third parties, especially for getting the data from the arenas into us. We have data suppliers such as Sportradar, Betgenius, and IMG supplying us data so we can provide the rest of the service to our operators. We're also looking at integrating for our operators different niche specialists. I think this is probably something we will look at expanding Kambi's network with even further in the future. Lastly, and most importantly maybe here, we also build a service that gives our operators the possibility to do themselves or with other suppliers their own front-end solutions. In the end, what we and everyone else in every single industry is trying to do is to do what we're great at and source other services to create the best proposition at a lower cost base. What does success look like for us if we look into the future? I think you can see two different things here. First, you can see Tier 1 operators realizing that in order to compete long term, they must leverage the benefits of the Kambi model. It doesn't have to be Kambi that you have to use, that kind of supplier, but I'm pretty sure that most operators, if you're not one of the absolute largest, you have to outsource. The other route, and that is probably the path we have been to assume for, and I think the logic that we'll be for the near future as well, is that Tier 1s that remains vertically integrated, they get an inferior product and are overtaken by emerging operators who leverage outsourced models. That has been very apparent in Europe over the last decade, that more and more of the old large operators don't really have the chance to compete anymore. Kambi's business is built on four strategic pillars. First of all, a strong compliant core platform. Us delivering, especially on the regulatory, financial, and technical security and stability. I think Erik Lögdberg will spend the most of his time on this area. Also differentiation and empowerment, making it able for every single of our operators and partners to feel that they can express their respective brands in the best possible way. The power of a network we have, it gives us unique possibility to leverage on the data we have and enhance the product and service. Finally, as we really proved last year, we have a highly scalable business model, and signing new customers or partners is to a very low extra cost. With that, I leave it over to Erik Lögdberg to take you through the technology. Thanks. Hi, everyone. My name is Erik Lögdberg, and I'm a COO here at Kambi. In my role, I head up the departments of Kambi that are involved in creating our product from the trading organization to engineering and to analytics. This session will naturally be a lot about the product, and I will focus on how we see that our product grow and where it fits in the future sports betting market. This is our starting point for today. For the first years of Kambi, we worked to establish a new model, the model of outsourcing as a viable option in the market to create the sports book. In the last years, this model has really proven itself, I think it's safe to say. You can see the efficiency both in our customers results as well as, of course, in our own balance sheet. We now have, across the globe, many operators that in partnership with us, are going head-to-head with the leading B2C sportsbooks, such as bet365, which Kristian mentioned, and they do this at a lower cost. Despite this, however, outsourcing as a model has yet not established itself as the obvious choice on how to do sports betting. This is, of course, where Kambi wants to take it and where we think we can take it. I will give a perspective from the product about why we believe outsourcing the way that Kambi does it has a lot more to give in the sportsbook market, and I will focus this discussion specifically around scalability benefits on one hand and operator differentiation and control requirements on the other hand. To break it down then, this is what I plan to go through, three areas. First, we'll touch on what different types of outsourcing models there are, and specifically which one it is that Kambi applies. We will then break down the sportsbook into its component parts and look at the scalability and differentiation possibilities in each one of them. Finally, we go through how Kambi propose to deliver its service in the market in the future. Outsourcing, it's often talked about in its broadest sense, but there are very big differences between different ways of outsourcing. To start with, just to clarify exactly what type of outsourcing it is that Kambi's product is supposed to deliver and has been the plan in the past since 2010, and I think always will be the plan. In the simplest form, I guess you could say you have 2 types of outsourcing models. Either you outsource to acquire a capability that you don't have within your organization to perform specific tasks for your business only. Here you're quite likely to pay a premium on this type of outsourcing, as opposed to if you were to build up this capability yourself. This is probably normally a good option if it is a temporary activities you need help with or non-core tasks. The other option here of outsourcing, then you instead outsource because someone else has created a product that shares investments and network effects from many other customers, and you couldn't possibly for both financial reasons and time to market reasons, create that same level of product only for your own business. It is obviously option two here, which is the outsourcing model that Kambi pursues with the intent of creating much more for our customers at a lower cost. The prerequisite, we should say, for this type of outsourcing to work well is that there are significant areas of the customer's business that does not directly benefit from bespoke solutions. We will dig deeper into this soon. To start talking about bespoke solutions versus scalable solutions, a simple model of a sports betting operation would look something like this. At the bottom here you have your technical infrastructure, the hosting, the data centers, and now more and more the cloud. On top of this is what we refer to as the sportsbook platform. This is not to be confused with operator's player account management system, which is something else. This is the sports betting domain with the structure of all the betting markets and the bet placement engine. This is the enabler for any sports betting activity really hooks onto, from end-user features to risk management to regulatory fitness. This platform then integrates with other parts, most notably the odds and the betting markets on one hand and the user interface or the betting app on the other hand. Finally, the operator then drives retention and acquisition to their site through its brand and marketing. It is interesting then to put these different areas into another context. When we assess our own product's fit in the market, a diagram like this is helpful for us. Since much of what we do is based on a scalable solution, we need to understand exactly where that scalability is relevant for our customers and at the same time where such scalable solutions might face challenges in the market. On the vertical axis here, we grade the sportsbook parts on its scalability benefits, and on the horizontal, we grade them on the value they would enjoy from differentiation and uniqueness. Theory here being that when possibilities to increase to bring something unique to the end users beyond just high performance and precision, when they increase, then the benefits of scalability, they decrease. On the contrary, when the ability to compete only is driven by high performance and precision in your solution, then the benefits of scalability, they greatly increase. Let's take it from the top left corner here. The hosting of the IT infrastructure in the cloud is maybe the most clean example of type of scalable outsourcing. Here you really have no end user differentiation to consider once the cloud, like Amazon's, has reached a high level of maturity. You're looking purely for performance and cost efficiency in that solution. What you get back, of course, is focus. You get back the ability to focus on other more important and more unique areas of your business. Moving over to the sportsbook platform then. This is then the core part of the sportsbook operation. It's a domain that enables creation of bet offers, regulatory compliance, technical stability, and the secure risk management. As with the hosting, this is not the area you're looking to differentiate in towards your end users. That is just not the same thing as differentiation. Like with the cloud, the elements in the sportsbook platform is again about precision and high performance. Good here looks like no technical, no financial, no regulatory problems or limitations. If someone can solve that, again, like Amazon has done with the cloud, you cannot add much more value to your business in this area. That's why we would argue that the scalability benefits of a sportsbook platform part of the sportsbook operation sits far up to the left corner here. Moving on to the odds and markets, this is a bit more tricky. They do have huge scalability benefits. On the whole, the difference between all the sportsbooks around the world in terms of odds and bet offers is actually not that big. You can definitely argue why there's good scalability benefits in one party solving that for many. It is also the heart of the end user's product that is an operator give to the end user, and it sits closer to your marketing strategy. The needs for differentiation here are subtly different compared to the platform elements. Finally, the user interface, the brand, and the marketing, I think, probably speaks for itself. This is the operator's direct channel to the end users. Although user interface technology is becoming rather expensive to do well, the value of tailoring this to your specific business in a highly competitive market is indeed very high. What's the point of this? It's not necessarily to say that a single operator themselves couldn't be best in the world in any of these areas. With enough time, expertise, and money, maybe they could. We're asking the question how that ever could be the best strategy to try to focus being best on all these areas, when you can focus on the areas that sits closer to your specific business, the bespoke needs. An operator could, in theory, build a better cloud than Amazon possibly, but they would likely have to put all of their marketing product money into that venture, and they probably would fail in the end because they don't have the same funding, the same expertise as Amazon have. Importantly, they would get very little benefits from tailoring such solution to their specific business because, again, the results here are not measured on the bespoke business, it is measured on sheer performance. Yeah, of course, Kambi, we want to make the claim that there are certain elements of the sportsbook that are not very far away from that Amazon example, most notably that the sportsbook platform, and that every EUR 1 an operator puts into those type of highly scalable areas is almost the same cost because inevitably, in 3 or 5 years from now, someone with a scalable, a specialized model will have done that far better at a far lower cost and at a far lower price. To dig a bit deeper into the sportsbook platform, the activities within that area is for us by far the biggest cost drivers in the whole sports betting operation. I'm sure it is for any big regulated sports betting is the costs that are growing the fastest. They're driven by regulatory requirements, structural changes to the product, new ways of creating the product, which is changing the platform, such as new data, new AI, and of course, increased load on your operation. Back in 2010, if you compare in the picture, which I should say is only illustrative here, the sportsbook operation back in 2010 was relatively quite simple dotcom operation, and you could back then spend most of your sportsbook budget on producing the odds from bet offers, this has drastically changed the past 10 years. The production of the sportsbook has become so complex and so costly that only delivering sort of the bare minimum to operate safely is a major challenge. Because of regulatory changes, the number of different set of offerings that Kambi needs to maintain and guarantee regulatory compliance has exploded, and this has required a transformation at the core of the platform. That's one example of how regulatory requirements drives big cost increase and complexity in the platform. In a similar fashion, on the end user product side, you're seeing the same thing, how changes there starts to require much more from the sportsbook platform. Example here being a Bet Builder or in-event combinations, as it's also called, that came around a few years ago where we started to allow for combination not only between different sports events but actually within the same event. What that meant was that when everything is combinable, capabilities cannot be set beforehand, and we need to distribute them instead on demand, in real-time to the end users everywhere in the world. This is, I think, a classic job for a strong, powerful platform to create that infrastructure that can handle that type of distribution and that the algorithms can hook onto. These are a few examples. There are many more of these type of challenges that the platform, the core of the sportsbook is going through. These challenges are very painful, and for us, for everyone in the industry, specifically we, for us, we like them because they are super scalable and they are global. Every time something like this comes along, it greatly strengthens Kambi's proposition of delivering a scalable solution. To sum up, for years, the whole industry has been bogged down in the same challenges across regulatory security, financial security, risk management, and technical security, stability and distribution. All these activities are more or less only about, again, precision and performance, not about differentiation or fit to your specific strategy or business. Kambi believes that with our scalable model, our focus, our network data and experience, we can continue to create solutions to these problems that allows for our operators to compete far more effectively. To finish off then, I want to talk about how we can build on what we have, use experiences from the last years, do some tweaks to our model to find an even better position for our product in the market going forward. We think it will come down to mainly two things. We can further modularize our solution to even better match up with the scalability and the differentiation needs that we now have identified in the market. While doing so, we can also prepare ourselves for, I think one of the big changes that will come within sports betting, which is the introduction of far richer sport data and AI. For us, this starts by stripping down the sportsbook platform to its core, both technically and organizationally, and start investing even more in this part with the ambition of making it the obvious way to compete for almost any operator in the future. To have a platform that is ahead of both geographic scaling and product innovation is probably unheard of in this industry. In all honesty, we have some way to go here as well, but we are quite convinced that with the limited scope that we're giving ourselves and the focus and the model of scalability, this is actually very possible. It's difficult to see how anyone could be in a stronger position than Kambi to actually achieve creating that platform. If we do this well, it has the potential of being the platform that enables a large part of the industry to operate and drive unique innovation on top. On top of this platform, we are creating a collaboration interface for efficiently packaging the sports betting experience to the end user. Mainly this packaging is about creating the actual betting apps, but it's also about adapting and tweaking the offering and odds to fit unique marketing strategies and campaigns. It will be fully separated from the platform element to allow for different types of expertise at both ends and again, focus, which we think is absolutely key to be successful in any area here. Kambi third parties and operators, they will use this interface and communicate with the core platform in the same way and on the same conditions when they drive the creation of user experiences. Finally, we're also for the first time, opening up the platform on the back end through a data and pricing interface where Kambi and others will be able to inject content into this platform. Historically, this is something we have said no to before, but now we see that it's the right time to go this way for a few reasons. We think, again, separating concerns here, from the platform, separating odds and data from our platform will be very beneficial on both ends. It will help us to create an even better platform with a more clear interface. We want to open up this to third parties to be able to help us deliver on part of the offering. We believe that there will be several niche players in the third-party segment that will have unique capabilities to create something really good for specific leagues or sports that we can add on to our service. This is also a way to meet the differentiation needs that we saw were needed in the odds and market production, as well as allowing us internally probably to put an even higher focus on the key sports for us. The rationale for this is also to prepare us and the platform again for what's coming in the world of data. With the AI cameras, the sports data is predicted in a few years to become much richer, and this will enable a different type of offering and algorithms. To leverage this, you need to already now organizationally and technically start optimizing your setup. To conclude my part here, we believe that this model as a whole allows us to better than any other solution on the market, allow the industry to reap both the benefits of scalability where possible and while driving for differentiation and innovation where that is needed. We also believe that this strategy gives Kambi many interesting options. For instance, like we said before, we could in some areas limit our own scope and take help from others in odds production to get an even higher focus on higher investments into key sports and our core platform. It also opens up for very interesting M&A opportunities for us, both on the back-end side as well as on the front-end side. With this type of setup, we'd be ready to, with ease, integrate a range of interesting companies that can contribute to the sports betting experience all the way from, excuse me, odds producers to UI specialists to personalization and recommendation engines. I will leave you with those thoughts about the future. Thank you very much for listening to me. We're going to now take a 15-minute break. We'll see you back here at 4:05 CET. Thank you. Welcome back, everyone. I hope you enjoyed your coffee break and that you now are filled with energy and expectations because we have a very exciting hour ahead of us. We will briefly touch on the journey that Kambi has made up until now, but more importantly, we will take you through the vast majority of opportunities that we see lies ahead of us, and also put that into figures. As is the saying, money talks. Let me first introduce myself. My name is Cecilia Wachtmeister, and I am the Executive Vice President of Business and Group Functions. That encompasses Kambi's sales and commercial function, our marketing and communication function, the peoples function, and the strategy function. Let's reflect a little bit back to how the Kambi position was 5 years ago, back in 2016. We were present in 11 regulated markets, and we had about 400,000 active unique players on our network. As you can see, we were predominantly present only in Europe and with some major gaps in Europe as well. If we fast-forward to where we are today. Today, as you can see, we are present in 35 regulated markets, more than three times as many as back in 2016. If you look at the number of active unique players, we have over five million on our network today, and that is more than 10 times what we had back in 2016. I think that illustrates how much that can change in a relatively short period of time and also shows the success that Kambi has had during these years. Apart from further European expansion, we are now also present in South Africa, where we have partnered with Sun International, the clear leader of that region. If we move westwards, we also have a strong presence in Colombia with 2 leading operators, putting us in a clear market-leading position. Just recently, we have also launched in Argentina in a smaller province, which I will touch upon later. Of course, we have the U.S., where a lot of focus has been for the last 3 years, and where Kambi has been able to create a very strong foothold. Let's dig a little bit deeper into the U.S. It was a groundbreaking decision that the Supreme Court made back in May 2018 when PASPA was repealed, and the ban on sports betting was removed. Prior to that, sports betting had only broadly been available in Nevada. During the last 3 years, states have been given the opportunities to regulate on a state-by-state basis. We now see approximately half of the states that have moved over to regulated sports betting. Kambi during this time, we have been launching in 14 states. U.S. was always a major opportunity for Kambi, and we had our eyes on the United States well before the repeal of PASPA. I think now that we have demonstrated our excellence. There is no one else that can match our success in rolling out sportsbooks across the country. Our success was firstly demonstrated when we took the first legal online wager in New Jersey in August 2018. Since then, we have proven repeatedly that this was not pure luck or coincidence. We can now proudly claim market first in 10 states of the United States. This is, in fact, not only doing it for one customer. In many of the states, we are launching several customers at the same time. Michigan is a good example, where we launched 4 customers in the same day. There is actually no other company that has launched more online sportsbook than Kambi in the U.S., and we power also more retail sportsbook than anyone else outside of Nevada. We can ask ourselves, how has this been possible and what has been the secret recipe? First of all, we have a long experience in Europe, and with that, we were part of managing the shift from dotcom to.country, which meant that we were ready for this state-by-state approach that the U.S. took and with different regulatory requirements and also the requirements that puts on us as a company, but also on our technology. Kambi was built for this, the patchwork approach to regulation and to reduce the barriers for operators to enter the market. We know what it takes, and we know also that we have a technology that can cater for it. That, we believe, is one of the success factors. Another one is actually that Kambi, unlike many of our peers, have constantly, consistently avoided the temptation to move and operate in markets where sports betting has been forbidden. We have a very clean track record, and we also put a pride into the fact that we are a listed company with transparent ownership and we have, like I said, a very clean track record. This is also something that we believe has gained the trust by prospective partners and by regulators, which in turn has resulted in that we have been able to obtain the necessary licenses in a relatively fast and easy way. In fact, we believe that our total addressable market actually increases with increased regulations. While for other parties, it might reduce this for those who do not have the technology or expertise or experience to operate in regulated markets. What this slide also shows is that we only scratched the surface. As we can see on the map, there are still many states yet to become regulated. I will touch upon that a little bit later. In terms of the states where we are already launched, they are only in their infancy. It is very early stages, and we still see a huge growth potential. If you take New Jersey, for example, they were first to launch after PASPA. Still, even though they have been in operation for three years now, they are still growing and just recently overtook Nevada as being the biggest sports betting market in the U.S. This is the kind of growth that we are looking forward to in the states such as Illinois, Michigan, and Colorado. If you take into account that New Jersey is actually not one of the biggest states in the U.S., thinking about New York, California, and Florida, they are all 2-3 times bigger than New Jersey. That gives us some idea about the scope of the opportunity that lies ahead of us. On top of that, we also see a huge potential in in-play gaming. U.S. has still not fully adopted in-play gaming, which we, based on our experience, know has a massive potential. In-play gaming being one of Kambi's core competencies, we of course, are very excited about that potential. If we should summarize, we still see that there's a huge potential to leverage in the U.S., and it's threefold. First of all, the ongoing growth in the already launched states. The additional growth potential that in-play gaming for further adoption of that can generate, and of course, the potential in the yet-to-be-regulated states. If we should look at the states to become regulated, first of all, regulation has already passed in 22 states. That means not completely, but close to half of the states, but the majority is still left. If we look at another interesting aspect, the population that today have access to regulated sports betting, it is actually only a third today that has access to that. The bulk is still ahead of us. Another very interesting aspect is that among those states that are yet to regulate, there are a lot of wealthy states, and there are also many states that have the presence of a strong college or professional sports team. Based on our experience, that is a very strong indicator on how big the potential can be. Very exciting times ahead. For the next 6 to 12 months, we believe that New York online, Ohio, Arizona, and Florida will become regulated markets. We believe also that we have a very good position with our existing partners, but also prospective partners in all of these states. Particularly Ohio, we believe, have the potential of becoming a top five market when it comes to sports betting, and in particular with our partners. In the near future, we are, of course, monitoring the development in New York. We will obviously follow and support our existing partners in their ambition in New York. In the communication released by the regulators and in the conversation that we have had with them, it also appears that we are meeting their definition of a wagering platform. We are hopeful of being part of the New York market once it launched in about six months time. If we look a little bit further ahead, two to three years ahead, we also see the states of Texas and California to become regulated. That, taking into the size of these states, represent a tremendous opportunity. Worthwhile mentioning is also Nevada, which of course, has had regulated sports betting long time, even before the repeal of PASPA. It is obviously a huge market, but the quality of the sports betting is not at all on par with the post-PASPA markets. Here we see an opportunity to revolutionize both on-property and online with our more modern solution, including bring your own device. Our plan for next year is to launch our sportsbook in Nevada and modernize the way that players are placing a bet. By that, we believe that we have a shot at taking a material part of the market. In summary, the potential in existing market is still extremely exciting for us, and that coupled with the markets yet to be regulated means that from our perspective, we believe that we have only scratched the surface what we see is possible for us in the United States. It is not only in the United States that we see exciting opportunities. We also see fantastic opportunities across the globe. Already today, Kambi is a global player. We are present in six continents. We are managing a lot of different regulatory and compliance requirements, and we are eagerly looking forward to what new regulation can bring in terms of opportunities. As I said before, we see that regulation creates an opportunity for us, while for other players, it might represent a threat or a hurdle. Let's start with looking into the rest of the Americas. North of the U.S., we find Canada. At present in Canada, only parlays are allowed. They are only offered by provincial monopolies. Things have been moving. A bill is in progress to regulate single wagering. With that also opens up for in-play gaming, which is a core competence of Kambi. That, together with liberalization of the market, allowing more operators to enter, will for sure transform the Canadian market. An appealing factor for us is the sporting profile in Canada, where we see American sports and ice hockey being the leading sports. That is simply a great product fit for Kambi. We of course, think that we have a great product across all sports. With our Swedish roots, we have an outstanding hockey offering, which we have invested in for a long time and which we believe have the potential to lead the market. We are really excited to bring the Kambi product to the Canadian market, allowing bettors to place single wagering, to experience in-play gaming, and to enjoy our top-of-the-range hockey product. Regulatory-wise, it looks like Ontario, the largest province of Canada, will be passing regulation by Q4 this year. With our current and prospective partners, we believe that we have a good chance of establishing ourselves as a market leader. Furthermore, we are also very excited to be part of the Canadian Gaming Association, who we have worked with and helped in their interactions with the regulators in order to establish a sensible regulation. This is something that we are keen on doing wherever we go because it enables us to form strong relationships with regulators across the world. If we move south to South America, as I said before, here we already have a fantastic experience. We are the number 1 in Colombia, and we just recently entered Argentina. Let's start with Argentina. It is a passionate, sports-loving country, and they are about to regulate, and likewise the U.S., they are taking it on a province-by-province way. So far, we are live in a smaller province called Misiones. We are obviously looking forward to further approved regulations in more provinces, and in particular, of course, in the Buenos Aires area. We believe that this will happen during the next coming 1 to 2 years, and we believe also that we have already fantastic partners lined up together with potential new ones that will enable us to make the most of the Argentinian opportunity. If we move north of Argentina, we find maybe the jewel of the crown in South America. Brazil, having a population of more than 200 million, which in itself represents a huge opportunity. Like Argentina, they are probably the most passionate sports-loving country you can possibly think of. They are not new to sports betting. It's been going on in the gray market, but they are now in the process to regulate, and we expect the regulations to be published very soon, at least in Q3. That would allow sports betting to be up and running by 2022 and onwards. Once again, what is particularly appealing with Brazil is that we see soccer and tennis becoming the predominantly largest sports. In Kambi, once again, we have a great product in all sports, but with our European roots, these are 2 sports where we have developed and where we're offering very deep and sophisticated offering for a long period of time. Which means that we believe that from day 1, we would have a very appealing offer, which has the potential of becoming the market-leading, and to no really or very small development cost. Apart from Argentina and Brazil, we see movements in other countries. Peru, Chile, and Panama are all going ahead with regulations. The potential in South America is looking very promising. Let's move on to Europe. Europe is by far the most mature region in terms of regulated sports betting, but we believe that we still see great opportunities here. We see a different scenario because the maturity of the market means that technology that was built for yesterday, no longer really fits its purpose. There has been a lot of changes in the industry the past years. Sports have changed, broadcasting has changed, access to data has changed, technology has changed, and sports betting in itself has changed, like Erik was touching on before, what the bettors want to do and the way they want to place their bets. On top of that, regulation has changed. In some countries, we've seen regulation being introduced for the first time, while in others, we have seen re-regulation with more stringent approach to sports betting, with then, of course, new regulatory requirements. Combining all these factors means that the world looks a lot different today than it used to be 20 years ago when many companies built their technologies. We are having conversations with many companies today who are reevaluating their current approach to their technology. Some have reached a technical debt where it no longer makes sense from a financial perspective to continue on the same path. Others have simply reached the end of their technology cycle, where they see that a switch is necessary in order to stay competitive. You can say that we are facing a second wave in Europe, and we feel that we are well-positioned to benefit from this and to support these companies to maintain their competitiveness and to comply to new regulatory requirements. Maybe not immediately, but we anticipate the same technology cycle in other parts of the world when they are facing maturity and when they are facing problems with obsolete technology and being unable to keep up with competition and with regulatory compliance. Although Europe is a very highly regulated market, there are still some exceptions, and two of the major ones is, of course, Netherlands and Germany. Netherlands will go live with their new regulation in Q3, and you might have seen that we have partnered with JVH Gaming, the largest land-based casino group in the country. Likewise, Germany. German regulation will go live next quarter, and that, of course, also opens up new opportunities for us. Now, let's move into Asia. Asia, of course, is a huge or a big region, and our focus here today will not go beyond India and Japan. That is not saying that there might be other opportunities, and of course, China would be the big prize, but we're not going to sit here today and say that China will regulate in the next coming 5 years. Two countries where we see are moving in the right direction and that we see a realistic prospect to regulate in the coming years is Japan and India. 1 common driving force for these 2 countries is the pandemic that we all have been living through the last one and a half years. Across the globe, we've seen increased interest and quicker handling of regulations due to the financial impact that the pandemic has had on our economies, and of course, the potential of increased tax revenues that regulated sports betting can bring. This is probably one of the contributing factor to the movements we see in India and Japan. Japan already today offers a limited form of sports betting as a football parlay pool product. Recently, we have seen relaxed approach towards this industry, and recently, land-based casinos were allowed in Japan for the first time. Rumors now claim that politicians are open to regulate at least football and baseball, with 2024 referenced as a possible live date. The discussions in India has been going on for a longer period than in Japan. Apart from the COVID effect, another driving force in India is they wish to reduce corruption and match-fixing by bringing betting out into the light. The rollout in India will possibly or probably be by a state-by-state basis, which should narrow the field and suit us perfectly based on our experience. If we summarize this, the picture could look a lot different in 2026, and we are confident that we have what it takes and that we have proven that we have what it takes to fully leverage and capitalize on these opportunities. What are the assets that we believe that we have that will enable this? What makes us believe that we are so super well-positioned to capitalize on these opportunities? Well, first of all, our expertise in compliance. Kambi was already from the start built for a fragmented approach to regulation, and I think our record underlines our ability in this area. There is no coincidence that we've been quicker to launch in most of the markets where we've been entering, and there's no reason that the same story should continue in the future. We believe that whatever regulation we will face from Brazil, India, Japan, or other territories, it is unlikely that we haven't been faced and handled those already. What can be cumbersome for many players to comply with different regulatory requirements can actually represent an advantage and an opportunity for Kambi. Furthermore, we do have a global product. We are already today a global provider. We have partners across the world, and we also have a quality product covering most of the sports available across the globe. Covering almost all sports, we feel very confident that from day one, when we enter into new regulated market, we will be able to deliver a product that matches or exceeds our partners' expectations and the end users' expectations, regardless of location. I took Brazil before as an example. Soccer and tennis will be the biggest sports in Brazil, which is today already very much the bread and butter for Kambi. This will enable us from day one with little product development to come with a market-leading product to new markets. There is nothing like a global monopoly in this industry, but to a certain extent, we can almost claim to have a monopoly of being global, and we currently do not really see any other player that can match our current track record. Kambi's model for success. Well, as I've touched upon before, we have a very good track record. We've been fast to comply to new regulatory requirements, and we've been fast to obtain necessary licenses. That means that we can set our partners up for an early and quick launch, and thereby set them up for success, because time to market is of the essence in this industry. On top of that, our model also allows our partners the ability to differentiate on top of our product on our platform. They can have built their own front-end, they can express their brand as they wish, and they can differentiate the offering with the means of our price differentiation capabilities. That means that they can become the sportsbook that they want to be. This model of success is also the most efficient model, we believe. Operators can focus on what they need to focus on, such as establishing themselves in the market, building up their brand, acquiring new customers, retaining the ones they have, instead of spending costly and timely efforts that is needed to develop, operate, and maintain a Tier 1 sportsbook. Finally, our growing global network. As Kambi grows, we, our network, gets stronger. If we would expand into Brazil, that will actually be of benefit for all our current partners. Sports betting is a data-driven industry, and the more data our network processes, the better product and service we will be able to provide. Prospective partners are always keen to know the benefits that they will be receiving by being part of the Kambi network. It is the really key selling point for us, but it's also the core of the Kambi service because it allows us to continuously iterate and improve our offering. In summary, we know what it takes. We've done it in Europe, we've done it in the U.S., we're doing it right now in South America. From our perspective, we are super excited about the opportunities that we see lie ahead of us. We believe that we are extremely well-positioned to leverage on this and further establish our world market leadership. Simply put, we are confident that we have a bright future ahead of us. With this, please let me hand over to our CFO, David Kenyon, who will walk you through our view on these exciting opportunities from a financial perspective. Thank you, Cecilia. My name is David Kenyon, Kambi CFO. Today, I'm going to talk you through how we see our addressable market developing in the coming years, how our business model is set up to optimize our financial performance and our competitive positioning, and how our balance sheet can accelerate our growth opportunities. We'll start with the addressable market, and here I'm going to look at the four regions that Cecilia talked through. When I talk numbers, these are based on various sources. External, that's Vixio and H2GC, and also internal assessments where we've looked at GDP and the size of betting markets in various more mature jurisdictions as factors when we've made these assessments. All the numbers I talk about are going to be for 2026 and all the numbers will be in EUR. Let's start with the United States. It's a market where we've had great success since the repeal of PASPA. We have a proven track record of launches across multiple states and locations, and we've had partnerships with market-leading multi-state operators, including Penn National Gaming, DraftKings, Churchill Downs, and Rush Street Interactive. We have a high-quality product tailored to the retail and online channels that we serve in the U.S. It's a market where regulatory and technical compliance are key. Each state has different demanding requirements, and we can handle them thanks to our corporate, technical, and operating infrastructure. We've been first to market in many states, and the security and speed of delivery has been key to our operators' success. There are currently 22 regulated states, of which we're live in 14. I pick out 3 here as being the ones with the largest potential that we see for sports betting GGR by 2026. We believe Illinois can be a $1 billion GGR sports betting market by 2026. Pennsylvania can be a EUR 900 million GGR market, and New Jersey, EUR 700 million. Looking at the next phase of regulation, the standout state in terms of size is New York, at EUR 1.5 billion GGR potential in our estimation. Ohio can be a sports betting market of EUR 700 million, and Arizona, EUR 400 million. Looking further ahead, there's some major states which we believe will regulate in the coming years. California could be the biggest, in our estimation, at EUR 2.7 billion sports betting GGR by 2026. Texas, which could be EUR 1.7 billion, and Florida, EUR 1.1 billion. All in all, we think the total addressable market in the U.S. for us by 2026 is in the range of EUR 15 billion-EUR 20 billion. Moving to the rest of the Americas. Here, there's some significant territories which are in the process of regulating or likely to regulate soon. We've powered operator success with the example of Betplay becoming a market leader in Colombia, and we have a strong product fit to the region. Our ability to handle regulatory compliance positions us very well, as we can handle the different legislation in every country, and even in some countries which have different legislation in different territories. Looking at the individual markets, we think Canada can be a EUR 2.1 billion sports betting GGR market by 2026. We think Brazil can be EUR 2 billion in sports betting GGR. Argentina, EUR 1 billion. Colombia, EUR 700 million. Bringing the addressable market to this region by 2026 in the range of EUR 4 billion-7 billion. As Cecilia mentioned, Asia is a market with huge potential. It's currently almost entirely unregulated. Our global track record of selling and delivering to customers entering new markets gives us confidence to succeed in this market. Our product's already a strong fit and can be easily adapted further to local requirements if we need. As Cecilia mentioned, the two major markets that we see regulating in the coming years are India, which we believe can become a EUR 2.5 billion GGR sports betting market, and Japan, a EUR 5.5 billion market potentially. Bringing this region by 2026 to a range of EUR 7 billion-EUR 10 billion in GGR. Lastly, Europe. Europe's obviously a mature market, highly fragmented, with a vast number of operators, many targeting their own individual territories. We've got a history of working with major European operators, for example, Kindred, LeoVegas, ATG, the Belgian National Lottery, and Napoleon Games, and we're seeing them grow faster than the market. We obviously have a strong product fit to Europe, and our regulatory compliance strength means we can handle the different regulations in each territory. We see future growth coming from those existing customers, but also from new regulations in Germany and other new signings. The current addressable market is around EUR 15 billion. By 2026, this can be in the range of EUR 18 billion-EUR 26 billion. Pulling together those four regions, if our assumptions are correct and if the U.S. reaches $15 billion-$20 billion, we believe the rest of the Americas can be EUR 4 billion-EUR 7 billion, Asia, EUR 7 billion-EUR 10 billion, and Europe, EUR 18 billion-EUR 26 billion. On that basis, this would give a potential global addressable market EUR 44 billion-EUR 63 billion by 2026. We believe 15% is a potential market share which is achievable on a global basis. That number will obviously vary quite significantly region by region, depending on the fragmentation and maturity of the region. We believe, given that most of the growth in the addressable market will be in regulated markets, that we're so well-positioned in that sphere that growing to 15% of the global market is achievable. This would mean potential operator GGR by 2026 of EUR 6.6 billion-EUR 9.5 billion. From that number, when arriving at our revenue potential, we make assumptions on gaming taxes, which will be different by every jurisdiction and where we make a number of assumptions, and also marketing deductibles, where we'll have different deals in place for deductions from GGR with different operators. We also make assumptions on the commission rate percentage that we'll achieve, and this will vary, of course, depending on the customer mix, the size, the location of the customers. Typically, the larger the customer, the lower the commission rates that we offer. If all these assumptions come to pass, if we can achieve 15% market share, then revenue for Kambi 2026 would, in that case, be in the region of EUR 400 million-EUR 600 million. Turning to the business model. Here, I'm going to talk about the scalability that's inherent in our model. I'm going to talk about where we spend our money, how we've built a moat to the competition, and the financial and strategic perspectives that support the outsourcing model. I'll start with scalability. This has been an underlying principle within Kambi since the day we started the company, the basis on which we built the company, really. We do things once for the benefit of all operators, and this underpins all areas of the business. In terms of product development, all our technical enhancements and the work on the platform is done once for the benefit of all the operators. We don't do bespoke elements for individual operators. Instead, we enable our partners to build on their front end to tailor the product to their requirements. In terms of trading risk management, we set the probabilities for the odds once, and that drives the odds for all operators. They can then use our price differentiation tools to set the payback to suit their own marketing campaigns or strategies. In terms of technical infrastructure, where possible, we try to use one set of servers and infrastructure in any given jurisdiction. In terms of regulatory compliance, we get licensed for the benefit of all our operators, and we take the necessary compliance steps for all of them. This principle enables the large part of our cost base to be fixed and not linked to the number of customers or to the level of revenues we have. On that basis, we've seen costs grow steadily over the years. In the last five years, it's been an average of 17% annual growth rate in costs as we continue to invest in our product and build a moat to the competition. However, as the revenues grow, so does the operating margin, and we saw this in particular last year. As we look forward, with the huge potential we have with a growing addressable market, our financial prospects have therefore never been brighter. Where are we spending our costs? A large part's on staff, so in IT development, which I'll expand on more. In IT operations, to ensure the smooth running of our product delivery. In analytics, where they're working on quant modeling to enhance our trading systems. In sales, account management, marketing, and corporate roles. We have costs for the supply of data on live events, and we have office costs for our eight offices in seven countries, as well as other corporate and advisory costs. In terms of IT development, the largest part of our spend is on the areas Erik talked about, where we enhance the platform and the product for our operators. We also have IT spend on channel enhancement, where we're tailoring the product for specific requirements of our retail and online channels we service. In terms of market expansion, we tailor our platform, our reporting, our infrastructure, and our product for new regulations. We carry out integrations for new customers to get them live as soon as possible after we sign a contract. As you understand, these are all key revenue drivers, all these areas of spend optimize our ability to take advantage of this growing addressable market. How about the competitive moat we keep talking about? Well, we have over 20 years' experience building and running a world-class sports book. This gives us a huge competitive edge. We make significant continuous capital investment into our product development and infrastructure. The more we spend, the harder it is to compete with it or to build a product in-house to anywhere near the same level. We have massive experience and know-how. Twenty years running a world-class sports book gives us a big advantage, smoothly adapting to new customer requirements and evolutions in the market. We have best-in-class regulatory and technical compliance in a highly complex, growing regulatory landscape. The more experience we have and the more we invest, the harder that is for others to replicate. Overall, we're building really high barriers to entry in terms of cost and complexity. The moat to alternative options, be they B2B or in-house solutions, is widening all the time. I want to talk to our perspective on outsourcing. I know we've heard it a few times today, but there's some very strong arguments in favor of the outsourcing model. Simply put, insourcing runs the risk of an inferior product with a high fixed cost base. Outsourcing enables our partners to focus on their core strengths, marketing, interacting with their customers, and tailoring our product to their end users. Our partners benefit from our continuous investment and our experience. Our variable cost structure aligns the cost of the sports book with their profitability on sports. A really good example of this was last year with the pandemic, which halted the sporting calendar. Those with an in-house product had a huge fixed cost with no revenues coming in. With the outsource model, our operators had minimal costs until the calendar resumed. We handle all the elements of regulatory and technical compliance, which is costly, complex, and critical to get right. Our flexibility and track record of speed to market enables our operators to move seamlessly into new markets. All of this positions our partners perfectly to capitalize on new market opportunities and to deliver growth. I want to touch on our strong balance sheet, which gives us the flexibility and ability to accelerate our success with M&A. At the end of March, we had over EUR 70 million net cash and a cash inflow in Q1 alone of EUR 17 million. We had a very healthy equity to assets ratio of 75%, and we have firepower to issue new shares with a current value of up to EUR 120 million of shares that we could potentially issue for M&A purposes. What are the target areas we could be looking at? Firstly, complementary products. These would be products that naturally sit alongside a sportsbook offering for the operators, something like virtual sports. Secondly, anything which can enhance our offering. These would be odds-related products which can improve the service, the quality, or the breadth of the offering. For example, sharper pricing or a wider range of more interesting markets offered by companies which specialize in certain sports. Companies with artificial intelligence capabilities or automation capabilities. They could add efficiency to our trading processes. Finally, player account management systems, which could really support our commercial opportunities, whether we're buyers who are looking for a single provider. I think all of these areas could support our exciting growth plans. I really want to reiterate the investment case in Kambi. Firstly, our superior technology and know-how are critical in the costly, complex world of regulated sports betting. Our highly scalable model is both operationally efficient and built to deliver growth in our operating margins as revenues increase. A huge increase in our addressable market from global regulation means we have exceptional growth potential. Thank you for listening. I'm going to pass you back to Gerard, who's going to compare our Q&A session. Please feel free to give us any questions you have. Hello, and thanks for the update and thanks for all the presentations today. My name is Gerard Starkey. I'm the SVP of Marketing and Communications here at Kambi. To end this capital market today, as David said, I'll be putting your questions to the executive management team. Again, if you do have any questions, we'll do our best to get to them. We might not get through all of them, but there's a chat functionality on the right side of your screen. If you pop your questions into there, like I said, I'll do my best to get to them shortly. Just to note, before you start typing away, we will not be taking any questions on our Q2 performance. I'm afraid you'll have to wait another 1 month for our Q2 report for those. To kick us off, we've got a few questions through already. If we can start with you here, Kristian Nylén. You've made a great case today for the outsourcing model. What do you see as the drivers to some choosing vertical integration, particularly in the U.S.? Earlier on you mentioned that cost shouldn't be a factor, so what is driving this? I think to the large extent, and I heard that question very many times from investors and analysts as well, that they believe that it will be essential to do it in-house to deliver cost. I just think that's a misunderstanding. I don't think people realize how expensive it is to operate a sportsbook in a good way, and the benefits you can draw of doing it the way we have presented it today. I think that is probably the biggest misunderstanding. I think you also hear arguments about having control over the product to be able to develop quicker. The same thing again, if you try to do it in-house, you will compete on your resources on other things, with your other verticals or your own PAM solution. On top of that, you're very likely starting on a worse product than Kambi. You will have to play catch up for a very long time as well. Okay. I suppose leading on from that, you mentioned earlier in your presentation about there being 2 potential routes to success. At what point would you expect to see the shift towards the outsource model from particularly tier 1s? What do you need to do, or what does Kambi need to do in order to quicken the pace of that change? Very good question. If you had asked me a long time ago, I would have believed that we would already be there, at least in Europe. I think in the rest of the world, it will be much quicker in many cases because operators don't have a platform to start with. In Europe, most large operators at the moment built an in-house platform very long ago, because there was not an outsourcing alternative really until Kambi came along around 2007. I would have thought it would have gone much faster than it has. What to do to increase the pace? I think the better we are, the faster we can move towards the next generation of sports betting. It will become more and more inevitable for operators to change. Okay. Staying with you, Kristian, you mentioned there about potential differences in markets. Someone's asked if you see any difference between the approach of European operators and U.S. operators with regards to owning their own technology. Apparently, there's a CEO from another B2B supplier recently that suggested the top 10 operators in the U.S. over the next 10 years would own their own technology in-house. That was his belief. What are your thoughts on that and your general thoughts on any differences you see between that kind of desire to own technology between those operators in the different continents? I think it's two different. In Europe, as I said, many have already been there, done that, and have struggled with their own technology or are struggling with their own technology. Whereas in the U.S. None, except the ones who is coming from Europe have experienced how complex it is to operate sports betting. I believe it's a very big underestimation in what Kambi is doing, and I think that will change over time. Okay. This is probably one for you, Erik. You've given a good picture today of the opportunities ahead and what you need to do to succeed, and you've spoken about what you're trying to achieve with your future platform. With this success would come extra load on that platform. Is development of your platform with this in mind, the extra load and stability, is that something you're taking into consideration? Yeah, for sure. I'd say it's probably the first thing we take into consideration when we talk about the platform and what it's supposed to deliver. That is, as the requirements on it from regulation, from product gets more diverse and more complex, that is what you always need to secure probably before anything else, especially the type of service we deliver to the market. That is at the very core of it, to be able to guarantee both that technical security and stability as well as the regulatory. Okay, great. Thank you. David, coming to you, got a couple of questions I think that are more in your lane. How should we think about the OpEx investment required to achieve the product leadership you're seeking through to 2026? Of the cost areas, what are the most and least scalable? Yeah, good question. As I mentioned during my presentation, we've been running fairly steadily, and it's averaged around 17% cost growth. I think we're not putting out a forecast today, but I don't think we see the future as too dissimilar from the past in that respect, in terms of OpEx. We've talked a lot of new markets today, so you've seen exciting revenue potential for Asia, for LATAM, for North America, and that does drive cost to some degree, but nothing that completely shakes up our cost forecast going forward. We do spend this because it drives revenue opportunities, be it on Erik's side, developing the platform and work new ways to drive revenue through the technology or through these entrances to new markets. Yeah, I think most of our costs are scalable. We try not to do things that aren't scalable, honestly. Okay, thank you. Like I said, second question to you, David, is around the market share estimation that you gave today of 15% global market share in 2026. Can you sort of give some color on roughly where you think that is today, and then how do you expect us to get to that 15% figure in the future? Today we're around 7% market share, and that number is to a very high degree driven by what we've done in Europe. We've got around 5% market share in Europe, which is, like I mentioned, a really fragmented market. It's a great number, but it's single digits because of that fragmentation. Already we've seen in the U.S., so even if we take out DraftKings, who are moving away from our platform even taking them away, we still have around approximately 20% market share in the U.S. I think that kind of level is a much better proxy when we look at these, the growth in regulated markets going forward, be it South America, Canada, Asia. Given that the growth in the addressable market is coming from regulated markets where we really feel well-positioned. I think that's on that basis that we think we can get up to that kind of 15% potentially. Great. Thank you very much. Kristian, back to you, please. I've got a question here on esports betting. How relevant is esports betting in the market today? How competitive is Kambi's offering? Looking further into the future, how are we positioning ourselves for growth in this product area? It's not huge at the moment. I would say it's single-digit revenues, best case scenario. We saw a peak up, of course, during COVID, especially actually on not what we would call traditional esports, but on more FIFA and basketball-related games. However, this is very early, especially since it's not regulated in the U.S. Cecilia talked about Asia before, where esports is much, much more popular. I think esports will have quite a big place in sports betting in the future. It will probably take some time. I wouldn't say our offering at the moment is great, but it's, I think, good enough for where we are at the moment. It's certainly a place where we're looking at investments. When Erik talked about the data, the pricing interface, and places where we could look at actually looking on other suppliers to support us here, I think this is a great place as well. Okay. Thank you. The questions are really starting to pile in now. We've got a few questions here on DraftKings. Obviously, the contract comes to an end at the end of September, and there's various questions on this, but to basically wrap it into one, how do we expect that to impact the business moving forward? To start with, but now you can pretty much back calculate that it comes to 20%-30% of our revenues. I think, of course, it hurts our revenues short term, but much more exciting for us is the potential in the growth of the addressable market. Yeah, there will be a short-term hit to the revenues from that loss, but for us, we're really about maximizing the potential in all these, U.S., but also globally. Such an exciting point in Kambi's life right now. Yeah, we shall move on from it. Indeed. Okay. Erik, a question for you here, really pointed towards your presentation. What was the reasoning behind changing your software architecture to open up the back end? Yeah, I think I went through a few of the reasons, and they were both, I guess, internal and external. One reason was that we, just for internal reasons, we wanted to separate the odds creation from the actual platform, for both those areas to be able to evolve more efficiently, more freely. We wanted to create a clean and clear interface between the odds and the rest of the platform to let our internal quant departments and trading units be focused on just one task, which essentially is identifying and assessing the right probabilities. Together with that, we saw the potential that if we go this route, we are going to be able to open up the same interface, also externally with third parties. At the time, we saw that, like we said, that the data is probably going to change quite a lot. It's going to be much richer. You are going to be able to create automation algorithms in a very different way in the future compared to what you're doing today. Possibly even down to not even a sport, even down to each league is going to be quite a big undertaking to create those models. We saw a great opportunity to actually say that, well, give us that option. We don't necessarily need to do all these things in-house. We can prepare our platform, so we're ready to take and use niche specialists. If someone can do this better than anyone else in the market, why not let them onto the Kambi platform in that case? Yeah. Thank you. This is potentially a question for you, Kristian Nylén. It's a question on the competition. If you think about operators that are committed to outsourcing, what capabilities do our competitors have that are seeing us not win those deals? What reasons would be behind the fact that Kambi don't win those deals? I would say, first of all, price. We are quite expensive compared to competition. If you only look at the revenue share, you may go somewhere else. If you actually look at the revenues before revenue share, I think we convince most operators looking for outsourced solution that we are the best option. Another reason, often in the U.S., I would say companies like IGT and Scientific Games, they have a relationship with many casino operators already. They have been buying their slot machines for many, many years. That sometimes makes it tough for us to get the operators to understand and listen to our proposition. That is probably the two biggest reasons. If you really want to have only one supplier, us not providing a player account management system can also be a reason. Having said all of that, we winning a vast majority of the deals we actually are pitching for. I still very, very pleased with what we have done both in the U.S. and in other areas. Yeah, I was going to say sort of because other companies are winning deals, it don't necessarily mean that we've lost them as we don't pitch for every single deal on the table. We'll be quite selective. Is that right? Exactly. David, coming over to you. Question on numbers. Given your fixed cost base and a graph on your slides into revenue and OpEx growth, that implies operating margins could grow further from what we reported in Q1 2021. Is that a fair assumption? Yeah. I mean, to start with, that graph was only an illustration. That wasn't fair. Don't get your rules out to try and measure the levels of margin. Yes, it is a fair assumption that margins can grow from where we are. Like I said, we will keep growing the cost base, but it's for a reason, and it's to drive revenue. With that growing addressable market, absolutely, revenues can go up, and that will drive up margins if that's the case. Yeah, it can go up. Awesome. Thank you. Kristian, I know you've spoken about this 2 times before at least. I have a question here on any plans to relist, whether in Stockholm or in the U.S. or anywhere else for that matter? I think, first of all, what we try to present here is a very exciting outlook on the future, and I think that is our main focus. Having said that, we also see what everyone else is seeing, that the valuation in the U.S. on similar companies is much, much higher than Kambi at the moment. It's definitely something we are looking at and considering. First and foremost, I would say that the focus is on growing revenues and profits. Secondly, we will also look at strategic options like listing in U.S. Okay, thank you. A question for you, Cecilia. Kristian there mentioned and talked about kind of the growth opportunities in front of us. How prepared is Kambi internally for this growth? Are we operationally ready for the growth that we're going to see over the next few years? Yeah, I think so. I mean, we are continuously working on refining, adapting, and further evolving all our internal processes and also investing in supporting tools in order to make sure that we are running our operation in the most efficient way. Of course, coupled to that, we have been growing both geographically and also in the number of headcounts during the last couple of years, and we also see that continuing going further. In particular, geographical expansion, I think we have quite a good track record. We have offices in seven locations, and I mean, the recent office we established was in Philadelphia. It was a quite smooth journey to do that. I think we have a very good office there with very good colleagues. We've been able to recruit good, competent employees there. Talent is always a scarce resource, and that is also affecting us across all the offices. I think many companies find themselves in the same and similar situation. We are working a lot with our culture, with our employer branding. The good news is that we have in our internal surveys, we have a very high scoring on our employees saying that they would recommend Kambi as a great place to work. We also do find a lot of our employees through recommendations from our current employees. That is a great place to work. It is always challenging for a company to grow in the pace that we have been and that we are doing now. I think I feel very confident, and it is on our map. We're discussing it constantly in the management team, and we understand that that is something that we need to work with continuously. Great. Thank you. Erik, coming to you. A question here: as more U.S. states go live with online sports betting, what does the tech stack complexity and cost look like operating in 15 market states versus, say, 30 to 40 market states in the future? A few things. Specifically, each state and each country in the world will have their limitations on what type of offering you can have. That means that for us, we need to create a unique offering that we secure that it is compliant and according to the regulation in every state. Of course, the more of those, the more complexity you introduce. The task for us is to, as high degree as possible, do this with data and automation also in this area. Specifically in the U.S., not so much in the rest of the world, there is a requirement in most states with on-prem technology to have in the states. That also can, if you don't have the system set up in the right way, can introduce huge complexity to be able to scale across the many states. Great. Staying with you, Erik. Question here about what are our plans for integrating video streaming events, et cetera, of the data, and your ability to offer its operators, if they can develop this themselves? The sound went a bit bad there. Was it about integrating video streams? Yeah, that's correct. Yeah. Okay. That's actually something we do and have done for a very long time, that most of our operators, it is us doing the integration with the likes of Sportradar, and IMG, and Perform, and whoever has these streaming rights can be actually technically integrate this, and then we operate that product on behalf of the operators. It's up to the operators to enrich the front-end around it, something that you would have done lately. It is out of the box through our solution to actually, if you sign a contract, it will be a commercial deal with the rights owner, that we can slide that through the platform. Cool. Thank you. Kristian, looking at countries such as Brazil and Canada, we've posted some attractive TAMS today, according to this person here. How advanced are our plans to enter these markets? Are we having discussions with potential prospects and even suppliers to be able to roll out as soon as these markets open up? Yeah. Normally, in most markets, you don't really win contracts until the regulation is set. It has happened a few times, normally, no operator wants to do a deal until there is actually a regulation set. We are definitely in discussions with many different potential operators both in Canada and Brazil. I have great hopes for winning deals there. As I said, nothing will happen until the regulation is much, much clearer than now. Okay. Thank you. I suppose kind of connected to this, in our M&A comments, it was indicated that we're possibly looking at a platform acquisition. There's a question here, might that be specific to a particular geography like South America or Asia, or would this also include the U.S.? I think I wouldn't say a player account management system is the highest priority for us in any ways. If a right opportunity showed itself, we would be interested. One of the reasons that we have never acted on it before is that we would like to have one player account management system that actually worked worldwide. So far, we have been able to move so much faster than any platform, and therefore, we have needed to partner with different player account management systems for different operators. Okay. Thank you. I'm smiling here as someone's tried to ask a question that might catch us out, but I'll pose it nonetheless. Can you give us some information on how the contract renewal process works, and how much visibility do you have here, where the client looks to leave and then is ready to leave, and isn't ready to leave by the time their contract actually expires? Yeah, just any insight on to the contract renewal process, basically. First of all, it's very, very uncommon, I think, in any industry for services like ours that you don't have a deal in place well in advance of a contract expiring. That's certainly the case. We have had a lot of the operators renewing throughout the years, and it's very, very seldom that that is not done 6-12 months before the contract is running out. Okay. Thank you. Maybe one for you, David, here, or anyone who can answer, but maybe one for you because it's part of your presentation. What size approximately is Kambi looking at in terms of size of acquisitions for Kambi? What kind of size of acquisitions are we looking at? I think honestly, we're pretty flexible. You saw that strong cash balance, no debt on the balance sheet, no EUR 70 million net cash. That's why with the shares over 120 million. I think honestly, we're being entirely opportunistic. Whether that's one or more smaller ones or even potentially a larger one, we'll assess each one on its merit. Yeah, can't really say more on that. Okay, fine. Perhaps one for, or definitely one for you, Erik. In your slides, you appear to have separated odds and trading from the core platform. What are the benefits for Kambi and its partners by doing this? Yeah. As I mentioned it earlier, one benefit is that we believe the challenge of creating these algorithms, so that the probabilities is going to become a pretty big one. We want you to be able to specialize on that, not to be worried about anything else in the sportsbook operation. That is one advantage. Of course, another advantage is that then, of course, a third party can do that, trusting that what then hits the platform, the risk management, the technical security, and the regulatory security is all taken care of by Kambi and sort of protected in that sense. Okay, great. Back to you, David, and back to Q&A. Hot topic of conversation on these questions. Given that Kambi shares remain relatively undervalued today, and given today's revenue estimations, although I don't think they're estimations, I'm curious why we would use shares to fund a potential acquisition. Is there a possibility to use cash instead? Yeah. First of all, I'd say that it wasn't a forecast. It was a lot of assumptions, and if they all happen, then that's what it could mean for revenues. Yeah, absolutely. Of course, there's a chance to use cash. As long as we're not getting much return from the banks on the cash, absolutely, using cash. We don't need necessarily that much cash in the bank. Yeah, cash or shares, it's just different ways of doing it. It's just more firepower for us. Yeah, cash is a possibility. Okay. I think all the questions are all the time we have now. We've had half hour for Q&A, so that just leaves me to thank everyone for tuning in to watch this, whether it's live or on playback, and it will be made available on playback shortly. I'd like to thank our executive management team for their terrific presentations. Also, we'll be making the presentation deck available on kambi.com shortly, so make sure you get hold of that. Hope to see you all for our Q2 reports on the 23rd of July. Okay, thanks very much, everyone. Thank you. Thank you.