Thank you. Welcome everyone to this Q2 2023 report from OX2. Today, we will tell you about a quarter with high activity level, more projects permitted and in sales process than ever before, and in more geographies and in more technologies than ever before. Also about a strong customer demand. We will also touch upon the underlying market, which is giving us somewhat more complex sales processes, but in all, a good and solid base for further growth, and also, reiteration of our targets for both the year and the five-year period ahead. With that, we kick off, and you can flip directly to page. I'm presenting today. Together with me is Johan. The agenda will be divided by me starting with highlights and portfolio updates. Johan will take you through a financial review, and we aim to end with market and outlook in some 30 minutes, and then have good and ample time for Q&A. We will make sure to have all questions responded to when we're done. We kick it off. Next page, please. You can see that OX2 is increasing total portfolio this quarter up to 45 GW, by including also Australia in the portfolio. We have good coverage across Europe now. The technologies we work with, you recognize as onshore and offshore wind, solar, and energy storage. The portfolio in development is fairly stable at 32 GW from last quarter, but the total portfolio is up somewhat when we also include projects under construction, the TTM, and the sold megawatts with milestone payments to come. Sales ending at a record SEK 8.2 billion last 12 months. That is a doubling compared to the LTM figures 2 years ago when we first listed. We remain at a strong 11.7% operating margin last 12 months. Return on capital employed also above the 25% targets. To date, we have about 11.1 GW of sold projects from OX2, whereas of close to 4 GW has been taken to construction. Next page, please. If we double-click a bit on the second quarter that just ended, the development portfolio stops at about 32.5 GW. We have seen quite a lot of activity in the portfolio, whereas the Galatea-Galene project on the West Coast of Sweden was approved by the Swedish government. We have acquired a 1.2 GW portfolio in Finland, onshore wind, and we have also completed and integrated the operations of ESCO Pacific of some 1.4 GW in Australia. We completed sales of about 3 GW. Majority of that is the offshore wind project, 3 sites off the west coast of Finland, done on similar terms to what we did in Sweden last year, Ingka Investments being the off-taker. We also completed our first sale in Italy, which is, for those of you who are initiated in the business, a very big milestone. First construction start marks the start of a very active period for OX2 in a country, and this time it was Italy, Europe's third-largest electricity market. We did so at a very profitable and valuable structure. Slightly different structure than what we've done in the last couple of quarters, but not a completely new structure. We will double-click a bit on that later on. It is, as you know, not booked in the quarter, but it is contracted and agreed upon. Construction had good progress. We're now managing about 1.2 GW of projects in construction. We will take you through those as well. No handovers during the period and no significant events either, in that portfolio. Our technical and commercial management continue to grow, 4.6 GW of asset under management currently, mainly driven by including the 500 MW of solar projects that came with the ESCO acquisition. As you can see here, very active, very active quarter from an OX2 perspective, and also there's been a lot of activity in the underlying market. Next page, please. This is a page we have on our quarterly webcasts, demonstrating the different stages, early, mid, and late stage, and the technology splits. As you can see, the late stage is growing from 2.1 to 2.4 GW, a fairly stable mid stage, and some growth as well in early stage. The construction portfolio also fairly stable, but bit more growth in the TCM, technical commercial management phase. I can also reiterate that the mid stage, 2-5 years to sale, when you look at the solar sites, they are slightly faster moving through these different phases than onshore wind. All that we are capitalizing already in early and mid stage on our offshore projects with the business model that we have, where we sell off projects or we divest part of the portfolio in an earlier stage. It's the onshore wind that is typically going all the way through late stage before sold, according to these phases. Somewhat of a difference between the technologies that I think is important for you to be aware of. Moving on, next page, please. The development portfolio is moving on a quarterly basis. We sold 3 GW and took then 3 GW out of the portfolio. We also had a downward reduction based on that we got parts of the Galatea-Galene project offshore of the West Coast in Sweden permitted, and we then took out the remaining part as this was not permitted. We've added about 400 MW of greenfield, and on top of that, we have, through acquisitions, I mentioned ESCO, I mentioned a project in Finland of 1.2, standing for most of these 3.1 GW. Although large volumes have gone out of the portfolio, large volumes have been included. To the right, you see the split between the markets. I think in this, fairly volatile, macro sentiment, we benefit from having a strong portfolio, diversified over markets with different underlying drivers. This is continuing to increase. Sweden, now being about 1/3 of the portfolio only, is, in our opinion, a strong capacity of OX2. You also see that there is more diversity in terms of technology split. We have both onshore, offshore, and solar, representing fairly equal parts of the volume, which is also a strength. Energy storage is growing. We are not including yet all of our ambitions in hydrogen, but you are aware that we are working quite a bit in hydrogen as well. We will come back to that once those becomes a bit more mature. Next page, please. Looking at some of the projects we can highlight from the quarter, Finland has been an important market for us. It's a very, yeah, for predictable markets. We have, to date, still not lost any permit processes in Finland. We see good visibility in the portfolio, and we had some good examples from first half as well, when we had significant permits granted ahead of schedule. This gives us also more confidence into growing the onshore portfolio, this time by a partnership with local developer, Tuulialfa, with some 1.2 GW of onshore wind. When it comes to offshore wind, we have a good working relationship with Ingka Investments. We ran a competitive process, and they were the most competitive party to that sales structure. We presented earlier in the quarter. It closed end of the quarter, after having gone through the competition approval in Europe. We got similar payment milestones to what we had. Slightly lower because of the Finnish electricity market being a bit lower than the Swedish SE 4. All in all, a very similar structure, which makes up good foundation for further partnerships with Ingka Investments. As I mentioned, Italy is also a very important market in Europe, the third largest electricity market, set for significant growth, significant ambitions, and good both wind and solar conditions. We're growing our team, and we're growing our portfolio there. It's very rewarding to now see that we can come to construction start. We did this on a forward sale structure, meaning that the project's underlying contract is very similar to a construction that we typically do. It stays on OX2's books until the project has been taken into full operation, and then handed over to our customer, Glennmont Partners, in this case. Meaning that it will be booked in 2024, and none of the margins will be coming through our PNL until then. We acquired those project rights in 2022, we were able now to reach construction start less than 12 months later, showing we can, in fairly complex market conditions, still reach projects start or construction start with good valuations, and we attracted a lot of potential buyers through that sales process. Value was in line with what we expected, and we were able to achieve a strong margin expectation on this structure as well. This will be booked in 2024 when the project is ready and good to go. Next page, please. This is a new page we don't typically have, but now we're moving into the second half of the year. We have said that most of our projects will be sold second half of the year, and we with this want to just demonstrate that we have a very good visibility. We have more permitted projects and in sales processes than ever before. Good underlying attention and demand from these projects, and a very diversified portfolio when it comes to both geographies, but also technologies. Attracting a lot of interest from an SE 3 project that we have in sales. We have several projects on onshore wind in Finland, and you know, these are our core markets with good track record of reaching good values. Same with Poland, where we both have wind and solar in sales processes. In France, we are just finalizing the realization phase of our first projects. It's a new market for us. We've been there quite a while, and the portfolio has matured and ready to be sold now. The same goes with Spain, where we also are divesting our first project rights right now. In Romania, we have worked a while with some significant project rights that are now being matured. The underlying market is attracting a lot of interest. Return requirements are slightly higher, which is, which is positive, that this market can give higher yields than some of the more classical European markets. We are progressing very well with both the financing structures and the PPA structures for the Romanian markets. We have the first project in Australia, already ready to be sold. We're also expecting, as we said in relation to the acquisition, that Australia will contribute positively already in 2024. We see good traction on that portfolio overall, and first project is already in the market. All in all, good visibility on the year. We're reiterating that, second half will be an important, yeah, part of the year and will contribute with the absolute majority of the revenue and margin. We see good visibility, and by this, we try to demonstrate a bit more insight for the market into what projects, what markets we are working on. Looking at the next page, we have about 1.2 GW on the construction, including then the first project in Italy. Some of you may have seen that Siemens Gamesa have reported some issues with their latest platform. We have three projects using that platform, and we expect a slight delay on two of them. We have been cautious and expect to move Niinimäki and Riberget in Finland, respectively Sweden, to 2025 from 2024. As we have seen over the last 2 years, where several project has been prone to be a bit delayed, this has had no or little impact on our financial situation. The contracts are solid. We do not see that we have any on this delay. With that, the next page, hand it over to Johan for a financial review. Thank you, Paul. Hello, everyone. We can move on to the next slide, please. Right. As you said, Paul, there is a lot of things happening across OX2, and it's hard to sort of describe all of those things when only looking at historical numbers, but I'll do my best. Also reflecting a bit on the 2 years now as a listed company, I think we've been able to put ourselves in a very good position for the time to come in terms of the expansion that we have undertaken, and that has been part of the historical numbers now being established in 11 markets with a good portfolio in all of these markets. Also markets with a bit of a different dynamics to them, if we look on individual basis, which I think is good. Now, also, when there are different market conditions, but the one common denominator that there is a strong underlying demand for our product, more need for electricity, and we have competitive technologies that we're working with in these markets. I think a very solid position and positive outlook for the time to come, which is also reflected in our financial targets. If we zoom in and look on this quarter, Q2, obviously from a financial perspective, the quarter very much characterized by the offshore activities. Once again, with the transaction that we did, in Finland now, the farm-down strategy that we have for early-stage development, I think good proof of us being able to create good value also in early-stage development. Also the permit that we got from the Swedish Government, also being the first company ever to receive a permit, if we disregard state-owned Swedish companies. I think that is also really a quality stamp and a good stamp for us when it comes to our offshore activities going forward. Megawatts sold, the bulk then coming from the farm-down in Finland, and then a small part with the first transaction that we did in Italy, and really completing that full cycle of now also having a project under construction is important for us. I think this, we've learned a lot and will bring a lot of new good opportunities for us with the remaining part of the Italian portfolio that we have. Looking at the gross profit coming in in line with Q2 last year, and when we look at operating income, quite a big decrease there, but very much based on the strategy that we have in terms of the expansion that we are undertaking. Significant efforts and resources going into our offshore development, growing our overall development expense, where offshore is the main part of that, with more than 50% if we compare to Q2 last year. Now when we have completed the Australian acquisition, quite a big increase in personnel expenses, growing with 40% on a quarter-over-quarter basis when we compare to Q2. LTM figures, the longer trends, I think a bit more reflective of the underlying performance that we see in the business. The megawatts sold, obviously very much characterized by the new, 2 offshore transactions that we've done during the last, 12 months, and a gross profit growth of some SEK 600 million, over the last year, and operating income, and margin coming in a bit above our financial target of 10%. Return on capital employed, a key measure for us, and, as we also now are deploying more capital in, our project, portfolio, this is, of high importance for us to continue to be diligent here and make sure that we have a good asset turnover. I think the transaction that we did, now in Italy is a good proof of that. It's a project that we acquired, about 12 months ago, now also being able to complete the sale of that transaction. Return on capital employed a bit above our financial target of 25%. Moving on to the next slide, please. No surprises here. For those of you who attend our earnings calls, volatility continued to be the theme on a quarterly basis. The big net sales growth, this quarter very much being driven by the activities in the construction portfolio. If we look at the operating income and compare that to Q2 last year, we had two very profitable projects in Poland that we sold, which really drove up the operating margin, last Q2. This will continue to be also the theme for the remaining part of the year. We are not zooming in on quarterly, individual quarters, but rather, working to maximize value over time, for our projects. Moving on to the next slide, please. A bit longer time series in terms of the growth that we're seeing. Net sales, when we compare to where we ended last year, 2022, the bulk of this growth is coming from the construction sales, where we went into this year, with a bigger portfolio based on the growth that we've seen in project sales earlier. If we compare a bit back to 2021, 2020, then, the sales growth very much, driven by a combination of the increase in project sales, the construction portfolio, as a result of that, as well as a growing asset management business. Looking at the profit development, gross margin standing at 27%. I think this is also. We tend to get a lot of questions on this, and I think that's fair. With the increases that we as well are experiencing in terms of the input variables, that we have going into our projects, we're still able to come out with good profitability on the projects that we do bring to sales. Moving on to the next slide, please. Solid financial position, this is a good position to be in, especially when markets are a bit more turbulent in some places. Acting from a solid financial position is also something that caters for us to be flexible and cater for different customer needs. I think, again, the transaction that we did in Italy was a good, is a good example of that, where we could see that the value that we got from Glennmont, by also offering to take on the financing of this project, still bearing in mind our return on capital employed that we wanna see, it really was value maximizing for us. When we look at investments in project portfolio in the quarter, obviously a big portfolio in our core market, Finland, a transaction that we did, but here, I think there will be more opportunities for us to come and a good position to act from. In terms of net working capital and the significant decrease in cash flow in the quarter, hopefully, that didn't come as a surprise to anyone. We spent quite a lot of time on that in our Q1 report, explaining that the negative working capital that we had in the construction portfolio, standing at some -30%, end of Q1, was a bit unusual, and this is a normalization now that we're seeing coming out or ending this quarter at -10%. More in the middle of the range, that where we typically tend to be, between 0% and -20%. The other significant cash outflow was the acquisition of ESCO Pacific, that we paid by our own cash means. Moving on to the next slide, please. Project acquisitions. It is a good mix that we're seeing now, also, including the Australian acquisition in these figures, 5.3 GW, that we have acquired during the last 12 months. It's a good division across markets and technologies, and I think this is also tying a bit back to what Paul said in terms of what we have ongoing in terms of sales. This is very much a result of this diversification strategy that we've had with the 11 markets that we're now operating from, with a good portfolio in all these markets. Italy was sort of first out of the newer markets, but there is definitely more to come based on also these acquisitions that we've done during the last couple of years. In terms of investments, a bit above the SEK 800 million that we've guided in terms of where we see acquisition pace being for the coming years. If we move on to the next slide, I'm touching a bit upon this also in the planning assumptions in the report, where we see that the 2023, most likely, with the opportunities that we see, we will continue to be around some of the LTM pace that we're seeing now, a bit above SEK 800 million. We will continue to do the investments needed in order to bring our portfolio, and develop the different technologies in our different markets, to make those investments also during the remaining part of the year. In terms of the sales processes and outlook there, we're acting from a very good position. We have a lot of different projects out in the market. There is a strong demand for projects, I think our product, being able to cater for different customer needs, really having the smorgasbord in terms of offtake, in terms of doing permit sales, in terms of doing EPC, in terms of doing construction on our own books, and handling the financing, is a very good product portfolio to be able to offer in our different markets. Promising outlook. Handing it back to you, Paul. If we jump to the next slide. Thank you, Johan. I will round it off with a couple of comments on the market and outlook. Next slide, please. We can conclude the second quarter by saying that we had a very active quarter. The acquisition of ESCO has been very successful, and integration is ongoing. We sold offshore and onshore to both significant products into different markets during the quarter, totaling 3 GW. We also received a first permit in our offshore portfolio. A lot of milestones and new ground paved during the quarter. On remaining parts of 2023, we continue, as Johan said, on acquisitions, but also quite a bit on greenfield development, because this is a very long-term growth that we see ahead of us. We see that we have an opportunity to strengthen our position in existing markets. We showed it first half this year with more than 4 GW of additions through acquisitions in existing markets. We also are now starting to build a stronger position in Australia through our ESCO, which is now being rebranded OX2 Australia. Of course, the majority of focus will continue to be on closing all of our ongoing sales assets. We then reiterate that we have good visibility. We stick with our targets and guidance for the year and the 5-year period. With that said, we can move to Q&A. Next page, please. Handing it back to the operator. Morning, Olof. We can start by commenting on that. The complexity in the project to some sales, to some extent, derives from that we are looking to capture maximum value. We could have stayed with simpler sales processes, but at a compressed potential value. We see that we continue to seek to value maximize, and then we do not see a compression when it comes to the overall value of the projects. This derives quite a bit from the outlook being very positive on the cost of electricity in the market. On that, we see also that CapEx is starting to normalize and in some technology even going down. We are positive that we will remain with a good margin on our sales in the coming period, and are able to use our balance sheet to create even further value in the portfolio. I think the reluctance in the past has not maybe come from that we have not wanted to do it, but we haven't maybe needed to do it in order to value maximize. Remember, the capital markets day when we pushed a bit further on the return on capital employed targets, we stayed true to that, despite now using the balance sheet a bit more actively. We will continue to value maximize. We will recycle the capital in order to reach those type of targets that we have put forward. But the toolbox is, of course, valuable to have in order to reach a combination of both the growth, profitability and the growth and profitability targets that we have. I see that we will continue to use the balance sheet in order to value maximize, but there is no kind of clear tendency to that this is now what we're going to do. The majority of that addition in late stage came from the Australian acquisition. As Paul said there. We have not moved, for instance, the permitted offshore project just yet, because there are a couple of permits still remaining, but that is not yet moved. That is still in mid. The milestone payment, yes. All right. Yep. Thank you. Good. What actions you're taking to increase the value of the project development portfolio. And then also following up on an earlier comment about capital costs. You said that CapEx in some areas was falling. I wonder if you'd be specific, is that solar? And more generally, about the technology, when you look across the portfolio at the moment, and you look into the rest of the year, where do you typically see the best risk-adjusted returns by region and technology? I mean, you've mentioned Romania and Italy quite a number of times. Are those now particular spots alongside developing Australia? Um. Sure. Sorry. The first question was to Paul: could you please expand a bit on the value maximization in the project development portfolio? Moving away from simple sales to more complex, what does that entail? The second was related to, where are currently, you know, in the medium-term outlook, the best risk-adjusted returns when you think by technology or region? Good. I heard them loud and clear, and I will try to respond. If you first look at the sales processes, we talk about the complexity compared to maybe the last 2, 3 years, when a lot of the parties that were involved in the sales auctions that we run came from traditional investment houses, very kind of used to running transactions, underwriting the full equity, taking the PPA risk, and the debt financing risk, for instance, on their books. That particular group has been maybe more than others, affected by the general rates of debt that has come up. What we now see is that we work more actively with utilities and industrials and other type of strategic investors. On top of that, we cater for offtake agreements to a larger extent. Both in Italy, Romania, Spain, we have actually procured and arranged the PPAs for the projects that were typically, or that we've seen some tendencies in the last couple of years, but that has been desired to be done by the buy side. On top of that, we can utilize, which also was the comment Olof made, our balance sheet to create room for buyers that cannot finance the construction according to their mandate. Looking at the Italian project, we were able to reach a better valuation using and tap into a customer pool that did not have the capacity to finance the construction themselves. By that, we can kind of de-risk it slightly in the eyes of the customer by using our funds to construct it. We have the same underlying construction risk, meaning that we have our contractors, already, procured. We have the agreed sales price once we come into full operation of the site. We have the PPA in place. All of those, kind of it's a more finalized package, so to say. I think that those two, or three examples of what we can do now, being a larger entity, catering more for buyers slightly further down the value chain to come into the product, is something we use. We can maximize the value on the project. I go down to the other two questions, if that was answered to the first. Really helpful. Thank you. Yes. Yep. Looking at the CapEx, so that would be, not the capital cost, but the capital expenditure, so or, kind of cost of constructing the sites. We've seen a stabilization of wind CapEx, so the OEMs are starting to kind of stabilize and even kind of come slightly down compared to Q4. We also see a quite significant drop in panels in PV. I think you mentioned solar PV as the main driver for reducing CapEx, and that is a correct observation. Also, also on other technologies, we see that in our, as demand from other industries are coming down, we also see that, for instance, the balance of plant, like construction services, et cetera, are coming down or stabilizing. That was your second question. Is that okay? Yeah. Yes, thank you. Yes, the third was on technologies and geographies with risk-adjusted return. I think you can kind of see that there is a very diverse pool. There is a lot of capital seeking to participate in the energy transition. Well, some are very much, kind of, geographical focused, but others are more value seeking. We are able to offer higher returns on the project in Romania, for instance. The project in Italy came with a kind of a more packaged envelope. So I can't really kind of say that there is an optimum for us. We see large pools of capital seeking the slightly higher returns that you can get from markets that are, have a higher... Or maybe you can say that they have a bit of a lower financial credit rate risk or credit rating, meaning that the government bonds are traded higher, and hence, you can also expect higher returns on infrastructure investments in these regions. That's a very attractive pool of capital for a lot of transition and infra investors. We also have the classical investors in, both in offshore, in kind of Western European regions, with fairly low return requirements and long return horizons. Remember that these are 40-year plus return risks that they are placing on the project, meaning that they are not 1-to-1 evaluated with short-term fixed income instruments. We are also seeing that the long-term fixed income instruments have dropped over the last quarter. We do see different pools of capital seeking different tools of risk or pools of risk adjustment, risk-adjusted investments, and we are able to cater for multiple of these. Thank you, Paul. can I just ask another question about technology and how technology development impacts your risk profile? You highlighted the three projects in Finland and Sweden relating to the recent contracts you have with 5X or SGRE, the SG, whatever it is, 6.6-170. Yeah. Maybe on that specifically, how does the lengthening of delivery timelines from your supplier, or potentially the early failure rates of technology or the decline in AEP due to adaptation of technology in early stage, how does that affect your construction profile, construction revenues, and future potential earnings? Maybe I can comment on that. Okay. With the contractual setup that we have, and we've looked into this, I think Siemens is also very much looking into this themselves. I think after summer here, we'll come back a bit more with how they see it. From our perspective, it's more a shift in time in how we see these projects play out. What I mean with shift in time is some of the margin from these projects will, with the delay that they are now foreseeing, will be postponed into the future. That will, of course, impact slightly than the margin that we envisioned from these two projects in 2024 now being pushed into 2025. The overall profitability for these projects remains the same as we see it. Yeah, the second question on maybe credibility of applying new technologies, that's what we've been doing for the last 20 years. We have not observed any deviations from the Siemens product line. Historically, we operate about 50 sites with Siemens turbines, and they are producing well in line with expectations. I don't see any major kind of technology risk perceived to increase from buy side or investor side due to these comments. It's more about aligning new production facilities to cater for new turbines. Yeah, that's something that I expect will be solved very fairly rapidly. The absolute majority of what is being sold from Siemens Gamesa now, it's coming from these 2 platforms or this platform that they now have a bit of issues with. That's being fixed, and we have a good dialogue with C-level management at Siemens Gamesa, being an important customer for them. Yes. two further follow-ups. Sorry, I'll then step away. Just how should we think about the probability of achieving the permitting on the Finnish projects that you sold down initially with quite a low price per megawatt, but with a very large potential income stream related to a post-permitting approval? I'm just sort of thinking about how to adapt or think about the permitting on the Finnish offshore contracts. My last would relate to Australia and ESCO, or now OX2 Australia. How do you see the potential to expand the onshore wind portfolio or the solar portfolio? Thanks. Okay, I'll cover this quickly so others can ask as well. Probability adjusted in Finland, we have approval from the armed forces in Finland, which is a major stopping block for other developers in the Baltic Sea. I would say we bet, and Ingka has reviewed this as well, and we bet on good and high probability of achieving permitting for these projects. Looking at OX2 Australia, part of the business case is definitely to expand. We're moving senior staff down to Australia with experience in wind, adding to the team, and recruiting as well. This is part of our expectation for growth in Australia. What we liked about the position that this developer had, with good experience from solar, but also experienced team in wind, but not yet a portfolio in wind. We see good expectations on that and part of the ongoing business there. Thanks for your patience. Great. As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please dial star five on your telephone keypad. There are no more phone questions at this time. I hand the conference back to the speakers for any written questions and closing comments. Yes, we have a couple of questions on the web. The first one here is: how are your project investment prices developing currently in the face of rising interest rates? Are you seeing an acceleration in permitting? Good questions. I think we covered the first by earlier questions on when it comes to pricing. We're working to maximize the value, and the price levels we are achieving is still very competitive and in line with our expectations previously. When it comes to accelerating permitting, no, we're not seeing that in general. In Sitges, there's been a bit of a speeding up on some technologies. You can remember Spain coming in with quite a lot of volume permitted during early this year, and also on offshore, we got big volumes permitted in Sweden. Some positive signals, but in general, it is still a very big... It's the kind of the lacking element of the transition is still to speed up the permitting. This is to some extent our advantage, given that we now do have a record high amount of permitted projects in several markets and several technologies. The value of the permitting still seems to be significant. The final question here relates to grid connection, whether we are seeing delays in some regions. No, we have not seen any significant grid delays, outside of the normal delays that we've had over the last 10 years. That's all. If that was the final question, maybe I can just round it off. The next question comes from William Mackie from Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead. Thank you for the follow-up. I just use the time if it's, if it's there. Absolutely. Thank you. My, my first question comes to what you're observing with regard to offtake prices or, you know, basically CFD or auction prices. We've seen an increase in Germany on the agreed cap level of pricing. In contrast, we've seen Vattenfall withdrawing from the UK offshore projects on the basis that the offtake prices don't make the economics work at the moment due to capital cost inflation. My question is, when you look across your onshore or offshore markets, how do you see the offtake pricing on the projects developing? Is it enough to certainly make some of the offshore contracts still attractive on an economic basis? Excellent. I was waiting for that question. Thanks for, thanks for asking it. Well, starting by, in general, our view is CFD or PPA offtake prices are typically derived from the long-term forecast, and forecasts have gone up over the last 2 years. I think, without having participated in the very competitive U.S. and U.K. offshore tenders, I think they were not factoring in, the CapEx and the inflation or WACC that has increased over the last just even over the last 12 months. In addition to that, the land leases or the seabed leases paid in these regions are substantial. When it comes to our own offshore development, those are not made in regions where you have fixed the pricing historically, or you have these kind of significant seabed paid. When we run numbers on offshore sites now, we see good profitability in them, also demonstrated by the acquisition that was done in the quarter by Ingka, running their numbers and seeing and coming to good values of the development. I think there's a pretty big discrepancy right now with some markets that has really gone to maximize the seabed lease to the state, that may actually come back and bite them. As we saw, you mentioned Vattenfall, you also have examples from Iberdrola, Ørsted, etcetera, not completing and instead kind of pulling out of agreed positions over the last couple of years. At the same time, you see TotalEnergies and BP bidding zero prices for the German offshore auction. I think we're in a very good position with our portfolio being much more market-oriented than what some of the of the previous mentioned sites and markets have been. Also, when it comes to capturing the the the applicable current market prices of energy, which is a large driver of the CapEx and even inflation today. I think it's important to balance these and not lock them in. What we see, I mentioned that we've secured PPAs in multiple markets just over the last couple of months, is that in general, they are at completely different levels now than what you had 2, 3 years back, or even 4 years back, when prices and expectations of prices were very low. We do have a European in transition, a European market in transition. Everyone knows that it's going to be more costly to consume electricity because of the scarcity of production assets. We are building a new asset base, but the consumers will need to pay for that. That, I think, is trickling down to a large extent. The large consumers are signing PPAs at higher levels because they start to see that volatility is hurting them, price levels are hurting them, and the price levels that we can achieve on current prices or in current markets are profitable or catering for very profitable construction. It's important to not kind of have a too big of a lag when you start to lock in different components that makes your break business case. Thanks. If I sort of crudely summarize that, certainly in onshore, you can achieve your target ROCEs on projects with the current financing condition, with the PPAs or offtake prices you're agreeing at the current technology or capital costs. I'm thinking onshore wind, specifically. The increased prices that your technology providers had to make to mitigate their losses, you can absorb and still make sufficient returns to meet your corporate objectives? Yes, correct. Perfect. Thank you. We have one minute left of the call. Will, if you have one spare question, feel free to shoot. Otherwise, you're, as always, welcome to reach out to Henrik or head of IR if you have follow-up questions. We'll try to cater for answering during the day, or as soon as possible, but there will be some vacation next week, I hope, that will be allowed to the IR function. Otherwise, we will come back as soon as possible. Thank you all for a good and interesting discussion this hour. With that, we wish you a good weekend and a good rest of the summer.