Hello, and a warm welcome to today's broadcast with Minesto, who will be presenting the report for the second quarter of 2026. With us, we have CEO Martin Edlund and CFO Alexander Jancke. Welcome. At the end of the broadcast, we will hold a Q&A session, so if you would like to ask questions, you can do so via the form found to the right of the broadcast. With that said, I hand it over to you guys. I will be back by the time for the Q&A. The floor is yours. Thank you, Elliot. Let's start with our CFO, Alexander Jancke. Yes. Hi, thank you, and hello, everyone. We will start with the financials for the first half of 2026, where I first will go through some key highlights of the profit and loss and then regarding the cash flow before I hand over to Martin again. Starting with profit and loss. Turning to our financial performance for the first half of 2026, we continue to see a positive effect of the cost optimization measures implemented during the past year. Operating loss improved to SEK 15.4 million compared to SEK 20.5 million in the same period last year, representing an improvement of approximately 25%. The total operating expenses decreased by 18% year-on-year from SEK 32.7 million -SEK 26.7 million. Personnel costs were redacted from SEK 21.8 million -SEK 18.0 million as a result of the more focused organization and increased efficiency. Importantly, these improvements have been achieved while maintaining strong technology development, operational achievements in the Faroe Islands, which Martin is going to talk a bit more about later on, and growing commercial activity. Overall, we continue to strengthen the financial foundation of the company while preparing for future commercial deployments. For the next slide, looking at cash flow and financial position. You can just change slide there, Martin. Our strategy remains unchanged. Disciplined investment in activities that advance technology performance and commercial deployment. Operating cash flow improved compared to the same period last year, with cash use in operating activities decreased from SEK 25.1 million -SEK 15.2 million. Investment remained focused and milestone-driven, totaling SEK 14.2 million during the first half of the year, primarily related to technology development and intellectual property. At the end of June, cash and cash equivalents amounted to SEK 38.4 million. Our financial position supports our continued execution of operational and commercial priorities. Then to summarize the first half of 2026, it demonstrates the continued progress in improving operational efficiency, lowering our underlying cost base, and maintaining financial discipline. At the same time, we continue to invest selectively in the activities that create long-term shareholder value and support the commercialization of our technology. With that said, I hand over to you again, Martin. Thank you, Alexander. I will not try to flip a lot of slides in front of you here today. We'll just basically show you one slide from one of the latest press releases on technical performance, then comment on the overall progress from a commercial and financial perspective, and then open up for Q&As. We will, as always, not put a very strict timeline on that. If you have questions, if you have them in Swedish, we'll translate them for the benefit of the international audience. I'll do the best I can to really give you our opinion and view on where we are regarding your questions. First and foremost, I would like to talk a little bit about our successful production over summer here. We've had what we label as an upgraded Dragon 4 power plant installed. We've had it installed basically from in its non-upgraded version over spring. We upgraded it towards beginning of summer and then have been producing electricity over the full summer period on a level and with consistency that is breaking all production records for these kinds of units. What we've been doing and why we're doing this is obviously the general value of demonstrating and building confidence and learning more about fatigue and mean time between failures of the systems, what needs to be observed. General learning around that is an obvious factor in this. A lot of that is already under our belt and with us. We're also doing this because it is a clear request from customers in customer dialogues. SEV for most are very clear to us that they want to see consistent production over time in order to live up to their, let's say, decision criteria that are set around them as a municipality-owned utility. They are very happy with the results that they're seeing over spring, and now even more so over summer. They are not alone. This is an ask in a range of customer dialogues that are ongoing. Even if we have, let's say, the internal tech teams and tech due diligence teams with us on understanding the discrepancy between what we're actually producing and what the machines can give, given small tweaks, that discrepancy is obviously a hurdle for us to reach the serious commercial breakthroughs. This production where we are now is a significant component in the commercial progress as much as it is a technical achievement as such. What is it then that we are showing that is no surprise to Minesto internally, but of value externally? If you see this graph, we are comparing 14 days of production from the previous configuration, the one that we had basically from the beginning with the D4 in yellow bars, and then the upgrade in the blue bars. What is really interesting and most significant from a customer value perspective is what you see in the beginning of this 14-day series. You have two 14-day series with very similar tidal patterns. The dotted lines there show the flow profiles. You are reading on the dotted lines, you are reading on the right-hand side y-axis, where it is meters per second flow. This is the resource. This is the energy in the water that we want to convert. This is obviously what we need to understand at any site and where we are, that if there is energy in the currents, we will have to be able to extract that energy, convert it from tidal flow energy into electricity. The staples you see from 1 to 14 are the daily production from the early yellow machine configuration to the upgraded configuration in blue. From day two to day six here in the beginning, when we have really high flows, this is where you see a huge difference between what we have been able to produce before the upgrade and then after the upgrade. What you can see here is that we can produce consistently over the high flows. This is the result of an upgraded power take-off. The wing of the system generates the energy, and the power take-off should then take care of the energy and bring it back. The third generation, the Dragon Class technology, has been much more efficient in collecting the energy through the wing than the previous Deep Green generations that some of you remember. But the configuration of the power take-off and other components in the system has sort of migrated from the early generation to the next one. But we have over winter and spring here, we have been able to upgrade the generator significantly, so it is more powerful so that we can take care of this energy without running the system too fast. The turbine on board is actually the brake that we want. We want that to slow down the system by being pushed through the water, obviously, because that is where we collect energy. This is a significant difference when it comes to understanding real production and forecast annual yields. It is in these areas where we have the most energy, that is where the difference is the largest. There are other things that can be talked about in this context also. But I think I will leave it at that because that is what the customers really, really appreciate with this. What is good is that we also now continue to produce. We are in production with this unit, and we are working on further improvements. What is interesting now when it comes to looking into, let us say, bottlenecks and what is stopping us from reaching even further is basically related to infrastructure in capacity. Today, the onshore control station with its transformers and inverters, filters onshore, that is the interface to the grid. It is now at full capacity. We've had to upgrade the cooling there and fans in order to really have it to work on its full capacity. We also see that when we're flying in the most aggressive modes, that the foundations then built five, six years ago should have been even stronger than they are. This is on one hand, of course, frustrating, but on the other hand, it's extremely good to acknowledge this because it means that the hydrodynamic performance of energy conversion and energy production with the unit is on a level far beyond what we actually could foresee in the previous generation of products. This obviously migrates to any scale of the Dragon Class technology. With that and with a final comment saying that those upgrades on a little bit more heavier foundation or a drilled and grouted foundation or more capacity in the onshore control station or more capacity in cables, this is obviously not anything related to radical innovation or technical risks. It's just a matter of specifying your system for the capacity it has and not relying on the historic setup, which will be of no issue at all when it comes to delivering the first microgrids and the first arrays or Dragon farms to optimize this. We're extremely happy to be able to share this, both externally and in more detail with our potential customers and in our broad range of customer dialogues. There's been a lot of speculations on trying to read more out of this graph than can be done. It's interesting to see, and there are some really interesting insights externally on this, obviously. But we should be aware now that, as I said, this is electricity to grid. So it's not electricity produced at kite. With the demo configuration, there are a lot of areas here where energy is lost on the way that is absolutely not necessary in a commercial configuration optimized at start. So I think that's enough so far on the production results with the D4 upgrade here. Obviously, I will try to answer questions towards the end also on the technical side. But let's move on then to perhaps questions that are more directly relevant to an investor community than detailed technical stuff. That's related to the strategic goals of Minesto and what investors refer to as sort of the main triggers when it comes to the perception of Minesto's value and our commercial progress. We've talked about two distinct areas. We want to take a first significant order in the form of a serious project investment into an SPV that then can build and order Minesto systems or serious customer involvement in buying microgrid systems. Microgrid that can sound micro, but it's still a size of a deal like that is in the range of SEK 30 million -SEK 50 million. So it's not a micro deal for us by any means, I would say. The other component in this is obviously to strengthen the owner base of Minesto, to really be able to take on large markets, large infrastructure projects from a manufacturing, from a balance sheet perspective, from a technical capability perspective, to get industrial partners, owners in Minesto. We are working extensively in in-depth dialogues relative to both those triggers. We get through the IR mail, we get questions frequently on, "Okay, when will it happen? When will it happen?" I think that I will not try to speculate on that or guess or give you any heads-up on value-changing press releases. That would not be appropriate. I can say that again, the strong electricity production also with the smaller units that we have in now, significant impact on those two triggering strategic areas. We have also a situation where we are seriously involved now in several markets where we actually have to select and prioritize. This is extremely important because this is not about a press release on a first commercial big step. It's about making 100% sure, if possible, that we are aiming in the right direction, that the conditions around this commercial opportunity are the best possible to really prove the commercial viability. So we do not want to end up with a site that is not perfect for a first cost-effective and performance-rich installation. We are looking in-depth into a lot of context now, offering our feasibility studies, and that is quite an interesting and novel area to break new grounds in. We also have, and I've been acquainted now with our new board member from France, Philippe, with a background from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Vestas renewable energy technology side, and much more than that. It's fantastic to have Philippe on board and work with him to meet with his network and broad industrial contacts through Europe. That strengthens Minesto. It further strengthens the focus on these two strategic goals: strengthening the industrial base, reaching large deals. It's also so that those two things go hand in hand. When it comes to looking into strengthening the owner base and to get commercial breakthroughs hands-on, we see that it's often the same actors that take interest in both in project investments and in top co-investments, because they are in the market where this technology can open up an extremely valuable resource. Obviously, they need to secure the long-term endurance, and they want to be involved potentially in the upside of what we're doing. So those activities go hand in hand with many of these actors that we are engaging with. We will get questions on, what about the cash flow situation, and what does it look like? There are several scenarios for Minesto moving forward. It's not meaningful to me to speculate on them. It ranges all the way from a strategic new main owner into the company that will take lead and move this into the global context quickly to a lot of scenarios below that. I can say that most of those scenarios will be to the advantage of us that are current shareholders of Minesto, because also the smaller steps on the commercial side would strengthen the shareholder situation for Minesto and open up new opportunities. What else then? Let me comment on the most important project development, which obviously is what we are doing together with SEV to prepare for the first rollout in the Hestfjord project, as we call it, where the first phase is a 10 MW build-out. Today, when we move this into reality for the years ahead, with a financial closure obviously ahead of us, I would say it is low odds on us being the first actor in the world to create a tidal array, which then will be a Dragon farm. I think that is also an explanation to why the technical progress, the partnerships, the perception around the company is so important for the actors coming in. There is a need of a lead investor. What can trigger this would be grant funding and obviously full commitment from our local partners. Any of these three would be an enough, let us say, trigger to release funding and have us move forward, we believe. For the Hestfjord, it should also be known that the PPA context around this is actually set by legal conditions in the Faroes. The price levels we are talking about here are certain for us, and they are on levels that are equal to subsidized prices in many other markets, which means I would say that with the support of SEV on onshore infrastructure and as a given buyer of the electricity by law, and with the substantial development work we have been doing, and now showing the right production curves and patterns, there is nothing really that needs to be put in place for this project to materialize and get kick started. That question is something we get often. Is there anything missing in this? Well, we need to work on the perception of different types of stakeholders that need to invest. But the reality is that nothing is missing for us to move forward. Okay, some final words on products and technology. The technology is ready. The Dragon 12 is ready. It will be shaped into what we have presented earlier as a Dragon 12X, with some minor tweaks to improve it. But it is the same system that is already verified that will go into these arrays, if there are any doubts on that end. What needs to be upgraded and changed, there are options to this technology that we can, depending on who the investor is. But where we are now, you can say that it is basically some of the infrastructure components that go into an array like this that have not been tested in alignment with our systems because no one has built an array. There is no real tidal array existing anywhere in the world. So there are a few areas where infrastructure needs to be validated in this context. But we are talking about concrete pillars, we are talking about electric components that already exist but need to be customized to this environment. Apart from that, there is no need for more innovation in order to put the shovel in the seabed, I would say. But this is then a question where the discussion around bankability also comes in. We get that a lot. Is the technology bankable now? When does it become bankable? But what does really bankable mean for this sector, and how do you define that? I would say that it is obvious if you look internationally that new renewable energy technologies such as ours, the tidal sector, and others. As long as you have not built arrays 10 MW, 20 MW and run them for several years, conventional bankability is not there. Because we are talking about large, low-risk projects with pension fund money going into it basically to build those enormous infrastructure projects. But it is no doubt that after maybe 6 MW, 8 MW, 10 MW, that there will be substantial debt funding, finance coming in already at the second phase of Hestfjord, the 20 MW that will follow the first phase. And this is because there are actors that are willing to put that finance into this context because they have a strategic agenda around it. Had very interesting meetings with Great British Energy, and we have our dialogues with the European Investment Bank, and there will be several actors of that type that will take that role. So the conventional term of bankability is something we have to be careful with when we move forward in terms of how to fund these projects. Some of those comments that I am making here are answers to questions that we get. We try to be very selective with giving detailed answers to individual shareholders that request answers. But we use these forums to look into the questions we are asked and hope that we are doing an okay job in answering and responding to those questions as well. So my final comment here will also be a reminder that we have been testing now and demonstrating and reconfiguring and working with our technologies for several years, also the Dragon Class. And what resides within Minesto that we are not sharing is a level of technical skill and performance that is far beyond what you see in the actual products that are producing today. And that is a source of value and competitiveness that will be used as we move into the future, but not something that immediately will be put into the different contexts. It is to make the tidal market larger, and it is to increase the distance between our performance levels and competition as we move forward. So as I said, and I will repeat it, I believe that there is no doubt that we are taking the lead in this sector and that the first serious, commercially viable tidal energy farm will be based on Minesto technology and nothing else. So with that, we are open for questions. Thank you so much for that presentation. Can I even stop sharing here, Elliot, so I maybe. Yes. No worries. Yes. There we go. You maybe can put me up on the screen. Yes. You are up on the screen. No worries. People can see me sweating here. Exactly. Well, thank you for that presentation. We open now up for a short Q&A session. As mentioned earlier, if you would like to ask questions, you can do so via the forum function right in the broadcast. The first question reads: based on what you know today, how likely do you think is that there will be a new rights issue this autumn? Would you say the likelihood is high or low? Yeah. People maybe not know, but I am a trained interrogator myself, and these kinds of questions where you are left with two options, it is good tactics, but I will not fall for it. I will not speculate on rights issues. There is obviously a likelihood that there will be rights issues in the future for Minesto. The cash position now is sufficient to what we plan to do and for the year end. But there are a lot of reasons for and against different types of funding. All doors are open, and we are working with all relevant options. Thank you for that. Next question is: has the electricity purchase agreement with SEV been renewed during the summer? If not, what's the future of the collaboration look like? The PPA with SEV is renewed. There is also ongoing discussions on, let's say, with input from us and SEV to the legislators in the Faroes to further strengthen this. It's not easy to comment on that yet, but that is a firm commitment from the Faroese society, and there are even legal clauses that, let's say, requires SEV to offer electricity to novel technologies such as ours. We also have an exclusive relationship with SEV regarding the Hestfjord build-out. I would say that that's one of the areas where we are on really solid ground. Yes. Thank you. The record high electricity production generated by D4 during the summer has been made possible through an upgraded PTO. Can this PTO be used directly for the D12 to achieve a similar increase in energy production, or does it need to be adapted? Well, it needs to be scaled. The same design configuration is fully proven, and it scales well. It's more a matter then of whether we choose to spend resources on such an upgrade. There are also other limitations related to the D12 production performance that are not generator-specific. I'm talking about the bottlenecks on foundations and onshore control stations, and there may be a few other bottlenecks which makes that investment non-rational. But the good thing is that this generator configuration, cost-effective, high-performing with a strong partner is the current, let's say, generator of choice for the build-outs moving forward, also for D12s. Thank you. Earlier this year, you highlighted two important trigger areas for 2026: commercial progress through orders, contracts, and project investments, and changes on the ownership side. Can you give us a clear update on both areas and tell us what you still expect to achieve during 2026? I think that I have commented on those two areas quite a lot during my talk here. Just to repeat, we have substantial dialogues in those areas with multiple actors, and as we communicate, this is the highest priority for us to take the company forward. More than that, I am not willing to speculate on. Thank you. Based on the current cash position, do you expect Minesto to reach the next major commercial milestone without raising additional equity? Again, it is on the same theme there, Elliot. I think that we can move on there. Absolutely. Let's see. Is Dragon 12 technically ready to be included in a commercial Dragon farm order today? If not, what still needs to be demonstrated? Yes. I commented on that as well. The core technology is definitely in place. We will have to upgrade concrete pillars and some of the electrical infrastructure. So on a kite level, yes. On an array level, some customizations and new solutions need to be brought into the picture. With new solutions, I don't mean new to the world, new to the Minesto context. Yes. Thank you. For a typical 10 MW Dragon farm, approximately how much revenue could the project generate for Minesto, and how much project equity would Minesto itself normally need to contribute? When it comes to the financials around the case, I'm not sure what we have published and not, to be honest on that side of it. But we're talking about a level of energy, the price of energy at around EUR 140 MWh. We're talking about price levels above EUR 200 MWh. Depending on the site and a lot of factors, for 10 MW, you will generate somewhere between 20 MW, 30 MW, maybe 35 GWh per year. So then you have to do the math on your own there. It's a substantial cash flow from a 10 MW array with electricity prices that either subsidize to what we talk about. The investment costs. Minesto's upfront approach here is that our contribution should be minimum from a project investment perspective. But obviously, if we find funding sources, EU owners that come in and wants us to push for the first array, there are many actors that will view the first array as a part of product development because it is to demonstrate the real product. It is the systemic product that is really what investors will invest in. So you can see the first 6 MW in that way. But you will have to talk about for a first array, at least EUR 3 million per megawatt in CapEx, everything included, from commissioning to site development, to insurance, to installation, to the hardware and the infrastructure. Yes. Thank you for that. You mentioned that the chart shows energy to grid, not energy at kite, and that. Yep It is still possible to optimize this part. What percentage of improvement would you guess might be possible here? I do not have to guess. I know. But I will not share that with you today. And it has to do with the division between what we can, let us say, change in the system, or that we control, and then the infrastructure around it. But it is significant. Thank you. In Asian markets like Taiwan, Philippines, and Indonesia, what are the main challenges to move to the next steps, finding appropriate partners, securing permits, financial, political, local support, et cetera? Many of them are immature markets. We are there because of the enormous demand, the huge need for new renewable solutions, and because there are other types of funding solutions available that are not available for industrial countries. Obviously, if you take countries like the Philippines and Indonesia, they have in total hundreds of gigawatts of capacity, both for large and small farms. So that is why we are there. But there are limitations in the industrial maturity. There are limitations in infrastructure. Some of them to our advantage. No ports, no technical fleet of work boats always available, which we are learning to adapt to, and we use that to our advantage. So it is important for us to get a few projects going, the shovel on the seabed in these areas, with strong local partners. It is even more important there than elsewhere that we have the major stakeholder with us. I believe that the progress clearly shows that they want to and that there is an interest and that this will happen, especially Indonesia and Taiwan, I would say today. Yes. Thank you. The next question reads, "You have said that the customer engagements have multiplied and that the organization is being adapted to meet customer needs. Are these changes connected to specific customer projects that are already moving towards commercial agreements or investment decisions? It's very much related to the type of resources and assets that we see that different partners and business partners have in different markets. We see that if we can build our operating capacity based on existing installation vessels and bring, let's say, technicians locally to bring them to the Faroe Islands and work together with us, we train them, then we have to send a few of our guys over for commissioning and critical phases and early phase development. But in order to scale this, also to create value for the local stakeholders and investors, we really need a system that is flexible around this. It's also an area where today in Europe, it's very large-scale marine operations with offshore wind and the oil and gas sector. To be fair, it's not very well adopted to the inshore smaller scale needs of the tidal sector for the years ahead. When I say small scale, it's on an energy industry relevant scale. For us, obviously, a EUR 35 million 10 MW project is not an insignificant small scale. It's a very important project for us and for many customers as well. But that's not the kind of marine operational infrastructure assets that are readily available today in Europe. So we need to find partnerships here locally to be able to build this more quickly. Yes In a more effective way. Thank you. Let's see. How will Minesto's kites handle typhoons and earthquakes? Are the kites safe underwater from natural disasters? The forces that will be induced into the kite system with extreme weather or earthquakes are. An earthquake, you can never know what structural integrity damage that will do to the seabed and where the foundation is. But in general, our systems are built to take enormous forces and to take forces that are not always nice and calm and controllable. There are vortexes, and there are bursts of energy in the tidal currents, which means that if there is any system that you can claim being robust to harsh weathers and natural, let's say, disasters like earthquakes, it's Minesto Dragon kites. Yes. It's also dynamic anchoring. It's on a string, which means that if you get a lot of vibrations in the seabed, it will not transfer to the unit, which it will do if you have a seabed-mounted system. The heavier, the worse it might be, actually. Yes. Earlier this year, you completed the advisory work with the EIB on the 10 MW investment case. Is there anything you can share about the key outcomes? Yeah. I would like to say that we passed with the highest grades. We were there to be offered help and consulting, and we got a lot of that. But we also got from the three different consulting firms that were procured and handed to us from EIB, they had to acknowledge that the specifics around tidal is something that they rarely come across, and when they do, they don't see this level of sophistication. So I'd say that our investment cases, they are sanctioned by EIB with the highest grades. That's our take of this collaboration, and we will benefit from that as we move on into different discussions on EU funding, EU loans, and collaboration consortia projects and whatever it might be, and obviously in the shared commercial dialogues as well. Yes. Thank you. What exactly is Minesto working on in Finnmark? Is this a microgrid project or a potential large multi-megawatt Dragon farm? Is there already a customer or power buyer involved, and what is the next concrete milestone? I will not comment on the specifics on Finnmark, but obviously the Norwegian offshore sector is a world leader, and bringing them on board in a context like that locally in Norway to be then multiplied over the world is an achievement that would be very good for us. Let's say there are conflicting trends or circumstances around Finnmark in North Norway. The electricity is extremely cheap. At the same time, there is lack of electricity and there is a need to electrify, for example, the LNG production up there with Melkøya. So there is a need to demonstrate electrification, but there is also a price challenge for us to face if the electricity should be sold on a commercial market. But this is one of 23 areas we are, but I wouldn't say that Finnmark today is a top 10 engagement for Minesto. One of the reasons also why we are in Norway is related to different kinds of funding schemes from EU where Norway is involved, and we have today some stronger options within EU jurisdiction. When I say EU jurisdiction, it's from a funding perspective. I know very well that Norway is not a full member of the European Union. Yes. Thank you for that. Given that the rapid buildup in defense and the growing importance of autonomous underwater systems, do you see any potential dual-use applications for Minesto's core technology beyond power generation? Would Minesto be open to partnerships with defense companies to explore applications such as underwater drones or autonomous marine systems? We are in a situation where some of the solutions we develop from control systems and from working with high-pressure subsea environments, we could obviously venture in a lot of directions. But I think that from my experience and from several similar contexts over many years, I think it would be very dangerous to try to deviate into. Even if it's lucrative and the timing is where it is, I think that is something that you could potentially tease large technology powerhouses with if they want to buy the whole company, that this technology is dual purpose or even more than dual. So that side of it, I think is not what we are working hard on by any means. But we understand the value of technology and technology diversification, obviously. It's actually my old PhD thesis, technology diversification, the title, buried since 100 years back. Energy is also, let's say, if not defense, but it's national security related in many ways. So projects that we're doing in the Arctic region, we're looking into new opportunities in Greenland and in Canada, and there are very interesting connections and potential customers in the defense sector related to that. So that's the strongest connection today, I'd say. Yes. Canada is launching renewable energy projects in huge scale as we speak. In what way is Minesto in Canada and exploring Hudson Bay? Can you repeat it, Elliot? I didn't follow you all the way through there. Yes, no worries. Canada is launching renewable energy projects in huge scale. In what way is Minesto in Canada and exploring Hudson Bay? Hudson Bay, I don't have on the top of my head any specifics on the tidal or ocean current potential in Hudson Bay. In the Bay of Fundy, there is a tidal resource that there have been attempts over the last 20 years to capture but with enormous energy and turbulence and rough conditions. That's an area where we've been a little bit hesitant to move, where others have actually not been able to reach all the way through. But Canada, we're working mainly through the investor side today, and also via the Swedish government, actually, as a part of the dialogues with industry collaboration with Canada. Canada is, if not number one, it's at least one on the top three list of markets in terms of deployment capacity for our technology. It's both large arrays and an enormous amount of microgrids in the non-grid-connected areas in the north, in the east, and in the west. This is something where we're working together with international fish farming companies to look into it. We're working with the First Nation-operated power plants to look into opportunities, and we're working with large Canadian investors to seek ways forward here. I hope, and I expect us to talk much more about Canada for the years ahead than we've done in the past. Yes. Thank you. Have Minesto looked into the options to create some type of financial structure where Minesto and its shareholders, via fresh dedicated capital, could become an investor in a project development company, for example, Drekin, et cetera, thus showing real skin in the game? We're talking about, let's say, hybrid investments. It's not for, let's say, the private investors, the 20,000 shareholders of Minesto. It's more to invite maybe 10 local players, industry, and local pension fund and governments to do it. If there are any more thoughts on that, you could easily send some ideas to the IR mail. We believe that the real value will be on the top co, on the tech level for Minesto. That's where we feel that the risk investments should be put in. So the answer is then probably no to that question when it comes to a broader offer. That is not planned at the moment. Yes. Thank you. We are nearing the end, but we can go with a final question. If we would have this Q&A again 12 months from now, what three concrete achievements would you need to have to happen for you to consider the coming year a commercial success? 12 months ahead. It's obvious that the expectations from our owners and from the board and from the management team, basically anyone around Minesto suppliers, it's that in a 12-month period that we've strengthened our industrial base and that we are moving into some serious build after having sold systems and arrays, microgrids at scale. That's the obvious expectation, and I think it is a fair expectation also. Yes. That was today's last question. So with that, we wrap up the broadcast. A big thank you to Martin and Alexander for presentation and the Q&A, and thank you to all who submitted the questions and tuned in. I wish you all a pleasant rest of the day. Thank you. Thank you, Elliot. Thanks, Alexander.