In previous year. So let's have a look more detailed analysis in the quarterly comparison. We start by comparing Q4 operating result of SEK 2.4 billion with Q3 SEK 4.4 billion. The drop of SEK 2.6 billion, and as you can see from the graph, the biggest impact was with prices. All divisions had lower prices in Q4 compared to Q3. Biggest impact coming from Europe division and Americas, which both were contributing slightly below SEK 1 billion negative impact, while Special Steel division was still holding prices slightly better, and the impact was less than SEK 400 million. Volume was 19 kilotons lower, and this was coming mainly from the Special Steel division, as already commented. Variable cost, Nordic Mills had lower raw material and energy cost, and they were contributing positively, while the scrap and alloys in Americas was slightly higher during Q4. Fixed cost, negative impact, but that was mainly due to the more extensive maintenance activities during Q4 compared to Q3. We had maintenance activities in Oxelösund, Mobile, and Raahe Strip Mill. And on top of that, smaller maintenance activities in other sites. Also to bear in mind that Q3 is seasonally lower when it comes to personnel cost. That is the holiday season, and Q4, that's more normal quarter when it comes to personnel related cost. Minor impact of the effects related to balance sheet revalued items, and the capacity utilization also giving a negative impact with lower production, which was then again mainly related to the annual maintenance outages. We were also running a bit lower pace to keep the inventory levels in good control for year-end. The other in this graph is related to insurance compensation in US, which was actually related to the incident during 2022 with the burn through in the furnace. Then if we compare Q4 2023 versus previous year, the drop is SEK 1.4 billion, and again, fairly similar graph as previous slide. Biggest impact coming from the prices. On average, prices were 10% lower during 2023 than 2022. The biggest impact coming from a division Americas with over SEK 1 billion negative impact. Europe division, slightly less than negative SEK 1 billion impact, and again, Special Steels division holding prices better than other steel divisions. Also Ruukki Construction and Tibnor had lower prices. Volume deviation, 11 kilotons, again, related to Special Steels, and also in this comparison, the raw material in Nordic Mills and energy cost was lower than the previous year, and scrap cost was slightly higher. Fixed cost higher. We had more extensive maintenance during 2023 compared to previous year, and also personnel costs slightly higher with index increases. Also, transformation office-related costs were slightly higher. Minor impact with the effects and the capacity utilization in this graph, actually positive impact. We had higher production in Q4 2023. Just to remind that 2022, we had the blast furnace repair in Raahe. The other similarly related to the insurance compensation. If we then have a look at the cash flow performance table comparing year-on-year quarters and full year, and maybe just to pick some things from Q4. First of all, of course, stating that the good performance with working capital, targets set in the divisions to reduce the inventories. The targets were met, good performance by the organization. The acquisition of shares and operations was related to Stålshoppen in Örebro, acquisition done by Tibnor, and the contribution to affiliated companies was related to HYBRIT. And on a separate line item, you can see the purchase of own shares, which is then related to the share buyback program we started at the end of October. Briefly comparing full year performance, lower earnings were well supported by the positive impact in the working capital. Other is related to purchases of CO2 emission allowances. Previous year, we were swapping forward, and this year we were purchasing more of the allowances. Strategic investments slightly lower than previous year, but this is not related to any delays in the projects, rather the timing of the costs. We were indicating that we would be spending SEK 5 billion CapEx this year, but we turned out to spend only SEK 4.5 billion, but these costs will be moved forward to next year, and as in the report stating, we estimate to spend SEK 5.5 billion next year. Dividend paid close to SEK 9 billion, and the purchases of own shares, as already commented, related to share buyback program, and the net cash flow performance was close to SEK 6 billion, which is then leading to net cash position, SEK 18.2 billion. The frame set for the share buyback program was SEK 2.5 billion, and we will continue the program during Q1, and we will finalize it before the coming AGM in April. And the idea is to propose to renew the mandate for the share buyback program also next year. The dividend proposal is 5 SEK per share, and this would mean around SEK 5 billion payout in the second quarter this year. Raw material view, iron ore, as well as coking coal prices, were increasing during Q4, as did the scrap price, picking up towards year-end, leveling out in January. And the outlook for Q1 is that the cost of consumption when it comes to raw materials is somewhat higher. And I will end my part with this maintenance cost estimate updated for this year. The difference compared to 2023 is that we will have more extensive maintenance in Americas at the Montpelier mill. Last year, we had the maintenance in Mobile mill, but this year it will be in Montpelier, and a bit more extensive maintenance in Luleå coming summer. But otherwise, fairly similar timing-wise and plan-wise with maintenance this year, as was last year. And then I give it back to Martin. Thank you, Leena. So looking into the near-term future and the coming quarter or Q1, when we look at the market, we see that the underlying demand is fairly stable, with two exceptions. We expect, or I would say that construction is also stable, but on weak levels, especially in the Nordic region. But heavy transport in Europe, slowing down from very high levels, slowing down a bit, positive in U.S. for rail cars and vessels. Automotive, signs of a slowdown in car demand in Europe, but structurally growing advanced high-strength steel markets, and as said, are into new platforms, into new OEMs, ramping up in front of fossil-free and zero deliveries. Construction machinery, more mixed pictures, strong demand and stable demand in North America, slightly weaker in Europe and China. Material handling, stable demand, mining, recycling, energy, very good demand for wind power and other renewables, especially in the U.S., which is, of course, a very important segment. And then the swing factors, service centers, I would say neutral underlying, but potential for some restocking in Q1 compared to Q4. So when we sum it up, we expect to see seasonal improvement, which we typically see in Q1, both for Europe and Special Steels. And Q4 were, as Leena mentioned, impacted by planned maintenance. We will have no planned maintenance in Q1, and we guide for significantly higher shipments in Special Steels, higher in Europe and Americas, and somewhat lower prices in the three steel divisions. And the market prices, or the spot prices, started to increase again, end of Q4, end of December, and we will have some delays, as always, in that, because we only sell on quarterly prices, half-year prices, and yearly prices. So we will have some delay, but, the market prices will, impact, the realized prices with a certain delay, as said, typically, between a half and, quarter and one quarter. So if we sum it up, I would say that, 2023 was a good year, good level of earnings. Q4, planned maintenance and, and weaker European market continued to generate strong cash flows. Cash conversion, which is one of the internal, KPIs, came out very good at 107%. We continue with a share buyback program, and as Leena said, the board will propose to the AGM to pay out SEK 5 krona per share in dividend, which is exactly 40% or around 40%, according to our financial targets. We continue to lead the green transition into fossil-free steel. All required permits in place for the Oxelösund transformation, also now the power allocation in place for Luleå, and we continue to see strong demand for SSAB Zero, actually stronger demand than we were hoping for, so that's very positive as well. So all in all, we close a good year and good performance, and we continue to focus very much on low point pro-profit, becoming more and more flexible, more and more agile when it comes to cost, continue to develop the product mix into more stable products, and that work is far from over, and we will continue to work with that as continuous improvements. And that will, in relative terms, continue to strengthen SSAB. So with that, Per. Thank you. Thank you, Martin and Leena, for the presentations. And now we can open up for the Q&A. And before that, I just remind people it's perfectly okay to ask more than one question, but please state them one at a time to make the process run a bit smoother here. So by that, I will ask the operator now to present the instructions. So operator, please? ... Thank you so much. Dear participants, as a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one one on your telephone and wait for a name to be announced. To withdraw a question, please press star one one again. Please stand by, we'll compile your Q&A roster. This will take a few moments. Now we're going to take our first question, and it comes from line of Adrian Gilani from ABG Sundal Collier. Your line is open, please ask your question. Yeah, hi. A couple of questions from my end. I guess, first of all, I want to start in Europe, with, I think most of us expected a negative operating profit here, and you surprised us on the upside, but looking into Q1 with somewhat lower prices, but on the other hand, higher volumes and no maintenance, do you expect that that profitability can be maintained in Europe into Q1 as well? Well, as you said, we, we guide for volume and prices, and that's what we guide for. But, we saw that, spot prices in Europe started to move upwards, towards the end of Q4. And then, as I said, we will have, as always, some lag. You saw that on the downside, you also see that on the upside. So we have a certain lag in the PNL, due to that we are selling, the majority of the volumes on quarterly contracts. Okay, I understand. Then, a bit more of a long-term question. Also, I know you don't guide for CapEx more than one year ahead, but given that you are now going to be taking the investment decision for the first mini mill at some point this year, can you say anything about whether we will start seeing much of that CapEx already in 2025, or are we talking sort of 2026 and beyond for that? Let's come back to that guidance when we are ready to take the decision. But we are lining up now to get the preconditions in place to be able to take that decision during 2024. So, so far, so good, and one important step was, of course, the power allocation in Luleå. But another very important step, even though we have already taken the decision, was, of course, the final decision for the power line in Oxelösund as well. So, so far, so good, would be the conclusion. Okay, I understand. A final one from my end as well. With, you know, following strong cash flow now in Q4, you once again go below sort of the lower end of that gearing target that you set up. And given that you have the mandate, I believe, to buy back SEK 5 billion in shares, is there any reason you chose to sort of not increase that, the ongoing program that you have right now? No, but we took the decision of the Q3 when we were breaching the financial targets, and now we're aiming to pay out around SEK 5 billion as well. So you should expect us to stick to the financial targets and act accordingly. And as Leena said, the board is planning to ask the AGM for another mandate, or prolonged mandate, and I guess we will try to do that most of the years or every year. So I think we have the instruments to tackle the balance sheet if and when it becomes too strong. Okay, thank you. That was all from me. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. Just give us a moment. The question comes from the line of Alain Gabriel from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Please ask a question. Yes, good morning, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. I have three of them. Firstly, what are the pricing in the Americas? The price outlook seems to be a bit out of sync with the prices reported in Platts by Platts. How can we reconcile the divergence there, and can you give us some color on the near-term market dynamics? And in the US, you've clearly elaborate, elaborated in the medium to long term, but how are you seeing it in the short term, given the lower lead times? That's the first question. Thanks, Martin. No, but I think we are positive to the U.S. plate market, and if anything, I mean, prices are spot prices are moving up a bit now from very high levels. So we are positive both short term, mid-term, and long term. And as a market leader, I think we have benefited, of course, from the strong underlying demand. And then, of course, one important part is this SSAB Zero steel that we are now shipping and producing in the U.S. and the huge interest for that. And that is also helping us to grow market presence, grow interest from new and existing customers, of course, and that is very positive, both short, mid, and long term. Thank you. My second question is slightly longer term. I guess LKAB has taken over the implementation of HYBRIT. It's true that you have access to technology, but why this sudden change in strategy there? And how can you ensure that you get your fair share of the economics when it comes to securing green sponge iron, when your largest shareholder is sitting on the other end of the bargaining table? No, but as you know, HYBRIT is a joint venture together with LKAB and Vattenfall. And we said from the beginning that we will optimize the synergies within the value chain and share the synergies in a good way. And it makes a lot of sense for LKAB to build a pilot plant up by their mine in Gällivare, and we will get the volumes from that pilot plant. So, I'm not worried about that, so I think for SSAB and for the joint venture, it's a very positive thing. Thank you. Last, quick question is on the insurance payment in the Americas. Can you reiterate how much you said was the insurance payment in Q4? It was around SEK 200 million. Thank you very much. That's all I have. Thanks. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. Just give us a moment. The next question comes from the line of Krishan Agarwal from Citi. Your line is open, please ask a question. ... Hi, thanks a lot for taking my question. I actually, if I can, the first one is on Europe. So I mean, the, the volumes in the Q4 was better, and then you're guiding for significant increase in the Q1 as well. Can you walk us through which of the industries that are contributing to the positive outlook on the volumes? And then, have you taken the possible restocking into your guidance for the Q1? Q4 is always, and especially I would say the second part of December, is always hard to predict. Typically what you see, if spot prices are moving down, apparent consumption or apparent demand is very slow during the second half of December. If spot prices are moving, and companies are typically restocking, and typically you see restocking in Q4, but if prices are moving down, you see more pronounced. Now spot prices started to move up towards the later part of Q4 or second half of December, from very low levels, but still, and then you typically don't see that, call it, destocking or as pronounced as when prices are moving down. So it was more the effect of that, the apparent demand, slightly better than we feared. Understand. And the second question is on the specialty, where, I mean, the guidance, medium-term guidance is 1.5 million tons. Prices are still holding better. In 2023, you are running at 1.3, and probably some of the volumes will come back up in 2024. So does it sound kind of a positive thing for the pricing, given that the mix will get better and then the spot is still holding well? Is that a fair way to look at the specialty pricing dynamics? Sorry, Christian, we did not fully catch you there. Were you asking about the second quarter prices or? Specialty. In general, I guess. Special Steels for the second quarter. Or in general. No, in general. The pricing. In general. Pricing mechanism. No, but I mean, Special Steels prices for Special Steels products are much more stable over the business cycle than any other prices, and I think that is visible if you compare 2023 to 2022. And then there is always, of course, a mix within Special Steels. I mean, typically, we have stronger prices on stock sales than direct mill. If you take Hardox 500 Tuf, the prices are much higher than for Hardox 450 and so on. And so it's a mix within there as well. But overall, the prices and the margins are much more stable and should be much more stable over the business cycle. Then, of course, when we see a slowdown in Europe, you, you can see some volumes, or you can see a volume drop, which is fairly typical, but that usually comes back. And if you look at Special Steels long term, we have, since 2000, been able to grow the volumes with 7%-8% per year on average. Not every year, but some years, slightly more, some years, slightly lower. So it is volume-wise, still volatile, but slightly volatile. But the overall trend is 7%-8%, and that is what we are expecting as well, going forward, as an average or around that number, with more and more, call it, stable margins and stable prices. So that's the whole business model, and that's also an important part when we talk about mix shift in our product portfolio. So every kilo we can have into 500 Tuf will make a huge difference compared to other kilos or other volumes. Understand. And then the third and the final question is on the timing of the buyback. So just a clarification from my side. You have the approval for the 10%, while the SEK 2.5 billion is almost like 5%, something like that. So, once you finish the SEK 2.5 billion buyback, should we assume that the next round of the buyback will automatically get started, or you will have to have mid-quarter announcement or something like that? No, but you should expect us to finalize the buyback program of SEK 2.5 billion. And why did we choose SEK 2.5 billion? It was a combination of things. I mean, we are sticking to our financial targets, and we want to give you confidence in that we are sticking to the financial targets. And, then also, there are limitations, how many shares you can buy, all the traded volumes, and, and the traded volumes are typically a little bit lower in December and so on. So SEK 2.5 billion until the, the next AGM, was, a good number, that we will, execute on. And then I said the board is planning to ask the AGM for a renewed mandate, and if they get that, we will come back if and when we launch the next share buyback program. So no drama, it's fairly, I would say, straightforward, at least from my point of view. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yes, understand. Okay, thanks a lot. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question, and the question comes from line of Johannes Grunselius from DNB. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Yes, hi, everyone. It's Johannes here. A few questions. My first question is on your comments about significant better volumes for special steel Q1 versus Q4. You can elaborate a little bit what's behind this, any particular end segment, or is it more about the inventory cycle? And, and also perhaps if you can give us some idea what you mean, because significant is, I guess, more than 10% up, right? ... Oh, that's the definition we have. And I mean, it's seasonality, it's, we don't have any, maintenance outages. We had it both in, in Mobile in Q4, and we had it in, in, Oxelösund. So I would say the underlying trend is definitely there. As I said, we, we expect the underlying trend to continue with, call it 5%-8% growth over time per year, will differ between quarters, will differ between years, but, we see no reason to doubt the underlying trend, and, and, that's what we expect, and that's what we see on the market. And then we are guiding for the volumes in, in, in Q1, but it's a combination of seasonality, strong, good underlying demand, and, no maintenance outages, at the special steel mills. Okay, got you. Then I have a question on advanced high-strength steel. Apologies if you said this before, but I might have missed it, but could you remind us about the share you had of AHSS steel in the fourth quarter, and how you see this, this ratio is developing? Because you're heavily alluding to good growth there. Maybe, Per, you have the- Yeah, Johannes, you can see in the slide the total shipments for the year, and those are fairly stable over the quarters. And we can, we can come back also with the number, but that will give you an idea of roughly how much. If you divide it by four, you roughly also what- Sure, sure, sure. So what we see when it comes now, we are launching a number of new grades and new products for these advanced high-strength martensitic steels. We have also invested in capacity in the continuous annealing line in Borlänge that we are ramping up. And I said, this SSAB Zero on the fossil-free journey and the partnerships with big OEMs has also helped us into new platforms. So we are quite positive when it comes to the development of automotive volumes. Mm. in the coming years. On the zero products, that's my final question, actually. I think you said here in the presentation, 50,000 tons delivered this year. How do you see that for the next few years? And maybe more emphasis on 2024, and if you can remind us about the premium, if that has changed compared to what you've indicated before. No, we have the same premium. The problem we have, or the problem, the challenge we have is, the bottlenecks are biocoal and biogas, and to get enough of that. The demand is clearly there, and I'm really happy that we managed to do 50,000 tons with a target of producing at least 40,000 tons. I've said to the American organization that we should do whatever we can to increase the volumes, because the market and the interest is definitely there. So, and- Mm-hmm. Now we are, to be honest, allocating volumes to customers, unfortunately. We are working hard with biocoal and biogas and to get the preconditions in place. As we have said before, we invested a year ago in Montpelier, quite a lot in order to be able to do this. So it has been actually, the interest has been beyond my expectations, which is positive. Okay, interesting. But how much can you actually make practically of this product? As I said, it will actually depend on volumes of biocoal and biogas, and we are working hard with that. Okay. Okay, thank you. Because I said, I mean, we are taking a very hardcore definition, so it's 0.0 kilo carbon dioxide per kilo steel, no mass balancing, no allocation. So this is the way we have defined it and the way our customers and partners like to see it. Mm. Thanks. Thank you. Now we're proceeding to the next question. The next question comes from line of Patrick Mann from Bank of America. Your line is open, please ask your question. Good day, Martin, Leena, Per. Thank you very much for the presentation. I just wanted to ask about the Nordic transformation plan now. Am I right that with the power allocation at Luleå now, that's probably the preference for which one gets invested in first? I seem to remember that was the preference, but possibly power allocation meant you might have to go for Raahe first. Is that not an issue anymore? Is it now fully up to just the economics of the investment case as to which one goes first? That's my first question. Thank you. That's a very correct description. Now we have the preconditions in place, with the exception of, of course, environmental permits, but that is... work is ongoing both in Finland, for Raahe and for Luleå. So we wanted to have them standing at the same starting line. So we will be able to take the best financial decision. I mean, look at the RFEs, look at the payback, look at the internal rate of return and what makes most sense. And that stage, as you said, we have reached now during Q1, so that's very positive. So now we will be able to take that decision during 2024, how we sequence, which one we actually start with. And that's positive. That was not the case last time we met. Then we knew that we wouldn't. The formal answer was that we didn't have any power allocation for Luleå. Now, that's in place. Okay, great. Thank you for that. And then the second question is just, can you remind us with HYBRIT, how the contribution will work from the JV partners, and when you would expect to de- ... put anything in basically, and what, what do you think that could be? Thanks very much. No, but as Leena said, during Q4, I think we paid- Twenty million. 20 million or something as contribution into HYBRIT, and we are continue to running these pilot trials and developing it, sending in patent applications and so on, and learning more and more day by day. Quite interesting findings in this very important R&D project. But the good thing is that we are not just doing R&D, we are actually using also, as you know, the volumes coming out from the pilot plant to produce pure fossil-free steel and shipping that to customers like Volvo, Volvo Cars and others, so they can start to prototype and even do low serial productions of fossil-free or equipment produced by fossil-free steel. So it has been really, really a positive development so far. Okay, so just so I'm 100% clear: so with LKAB deciding to build up the plant next to the mine, that's on their balance sheet, on their books, there's no capital call on SSAB, is that right? That's not the current plan, no. Okay. Thank you. Got it. Thanks very much. But the volumes will go to SSAB. Yes. Mm. Yeah. Yeah. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes from line of Andrew Jones from UBS. Your line is open, please ask your question. Hello, hi. Just as a follow-up on the earlier question about US plate lead times, I mean, clearly, they're pretty low at the moment. I'm wondering what your expectations are for the demand pickup you would expect to see from some of this IRA spending. I mean, I'm guessing not much about it in the current demand stats, but, you know, could you give us an idea for what sort of demand uplift you expect through 2024? And, you know, how we should see that phased and, like, what? When do you expect to see that pickup in demand really coming through? Thanks. No, but as I tried to explain in my presentation, my part of the presentation, we see a combination of things. I mean, Inflation Reduction Act is favoring infrastructure and energy. It will be bridges, it will be wind tower, it will be offshore wind, it will be a lot of other areas that are smack in the middle of the plate market. And that in combination with the requirements of not only produced in Americas, but also melted in Americas, leads us to believe that it's far from impossible that we will see the U.S. plate market coming back to historical peak levels of around 10 million tons, and that's what we are expecting to see in the coming years. When exactly that happens and how this will be faced quarter by quarter is, of course, impossible, but we have a strong belief in the North American plate market. And just, but nearer term, do you expect some further deterioration in spot prices in the coming months, potentially before that demand- What— -comes through? ... what we see right now is spot prices moving up into Q1, and we are also guiding for higher volumes in Q1, and that's what we are guiding for. And as said, I mean, the spot prices started to move up late Q4, and that's why we have a bit of a delay in the PNL, which we typically have. But apart from that, no drama at all on the market. And we need to remember that if you compare plate prices and plate margins spot on spot, they are moving up from high levels. Mm. Our capacity utilization has been, if you compare with the overall North American steel market, it has been quite good in relative terms. Okay. Now that's clear. Thank you. Thank you. One important- Now we can take the next- Repeating myself. Coming back to that once again, and with the risk of repeating myself, one driver on top of Inflation Reduction Act and all the others is, of course, the launch of SSAB Zero and the huge interest of SSAB Zero also in the North American market. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes from line of Christian Kopfer from Handelsbanken. Your line is open, please ask a question. All right, thanks for that. Just a few questions from my side. Firstly, on the balance sheet, I can see in the balance sheet that, I mean, you have an exceptionally strong net cash position, obviously, but you still carry some SEK 6 billion in long-term debt. What's your thoughts about that? It's, I mean, should SSAB take that down significantly. I guess, you have to pay a lot of interest on that. No, but, we have a positive financial net, as you see. But, I mean, we have decided that it is prudent for us to have as one example, a sustainability linked bond that is appreciated, by the market and by investors and so on. And you could always, of course, argue about that. Do we really need to carry any gross debt at all with the balance sheet? But that is decision, and we think it is important, and that helps us also, in discussions with investors and so on. And it seemed like a positive thing. But of course, we have a strong balance sheet, and we are not yet mentally used to that being a problem. But we are trying to be clear and try to stick to our financial targets, and that's why we launched a share buyback program. That's why the board is also proposing a dividend according to the financial target. So you should expect us to stay true to the financial targets and act accordingly. And then we just want to make sure that we have all possibilities to do that. ... Yeah. All right, then on the realized prices in Europe was definitely better than I expected here, and I think you said it as well, it- There is all, you know that, Christian, it's always a slight delay, and it's hard to predict exactly how that delay comes. But when prices are moving down, they are slightly slower to move down in our PNL and, and vice versa, and that's what we saw, I guess, in Q4, in Europe, and that what we are-- that's what we are guiding for in Q1 as well. Mm-hmm, mm. That delay factor, which is typically half a quarter or a quarter. Yeah. And then for special, I mean, maybe one follow-up on special steels, my inter- or my feeling is that, this area continues to call it out before when it comes to prices versus your, you know, guidance or, you know, expectations or... Is that fair or, to say that? Or, or, or is it that, you know... Yeah, because previously you have said that i- in your guidance, you are not, you are not including mix. And, and as I remember, Martin, you, you always talk about that, that you should al- more or less always continue to improve mix over time, not quarter over quarter- Yeah ... but over time. That, that, that- Is that, is that also what we are seeing now, to be honest? No, but that is what we are seeing over time. And I said, I mean, there is a—if you take one of the, I would say, many very promising products that are now ramping up, Hardox 500 Tuf, of course, the prices are higher than for a Hardox 450. Still, Hardox 450 is an excellent product, but Hardox 500 Tuf is something completely different, with good, very good bendability, very good weldability. We can, compared to Hardox 450, maybe decrease the weight with another 30, 40% or up to 40%. We can decrease spendings, we can decrease. So there is a huge difference. I mean, of course, when you sell thinner—thin, thinner and thinner, and more and more high-performing plates, there will be, call it, less tons than compared to standard products. But, but the profitability per ton is, very different. And, of course, the stability or, or, or the volatility is much, much lower. So that's the day-to-day work that you're referring to, and that's, what we internally call when we focus on low to- low point profit. Mix improvement, cost efficiency, capital efficiency, we, we, as said, we measure cash conversion and so on. And, and it's a, I wouldn't call it a daily struggle, but we call it continuous improvements. Try to do things slightly better today than yesterday, slightly better this week than last week, and that's a never-ending story, and we are far from done and still see potential. And that's what you will gradually see, not huge differences quarter by quarter, and sometimes we will see, might see a slight backlash. As said, we have been able to grow the special steel volumes with 7%-8% for now more than 20 years, and we expect to do that over time. Mm-hmm. Then, of course, we need to invest, and we need to do the bottlenecking and so on. So, but that comes with it. Yeah. All right. That's good. Finally, from Leena, I see that you, you know, managed to release a lot of working capital for 2023. Of course, you tied up a lot in 2022. But on the point where you are now, call it rolling 4 quarters or whatever, do you see continued potential to, you know, take out working capital, or will it be tough from here? Well, quarter one usually is the season when we are also restocking. To mention that we also- Yeah, not quarter one, Leena. I did... Just talking about over time, I mean, not quarter one, I understand, but, you know, over time. Over time, of course, we want to improve, as Martin already said, that continuous improvement. But if we compare now the outcome in Q or in 2023 and then plans going forward, for sure, still try to push, push, push the improvement through. But, just to comment that Q1 is usually the one, the quarter when we are- Yeah ... we are also restocking, and this- Yeah ... is going higher up, so it will have an impact in the accounts payable or the receivables. So we don't see the performance to continue on the Q4 level. No, but- Yeah. No, no, no, of course. But I just looked at the amount you tied up in capital in 2022 was more than SEK 8 billion. Yeah. You freed some capital of SEK 4.8 billion in 2023. That was just, you know... Should you be able to, you know, return to the level that you were by end of 2021 when it comes to working capital? Over time. Over time, yeah. Yes, definitely. But, I mean, we, we need to remember that 2022, the war in Ukraine started- Yeah ... and all of a sudden, we had to find new sources- Yeah ... for PCI coal, for a lot of other things. And in that turbulence, in the beginning, we did what we thought was right at that time, and I still think it was the right decision. We had to qualify new product, new materials. We had to buy from new vendors. We had to buy more than we needed. And then, as we have talked about during 2022 and 2023, it takes some time to sweat it out. But, and the cash conversion for 2023 was 107%. You should not expect us to have cash conversion above 100%, but we should be becoming better and better when it comes to working capital efficiency. And then, of course, the big shift will be when we have the mini mills up and running, because then we will be able to release a lot of working capital- Mm-hmm ... work in progress and so on. So, but it is, as Leena said, part of the continuous improvements. Yeah, got it. Thank you very much. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes from the line of Bastian Synagowitz from Deutsche Bank. Your line is open. Please ask your question. ... Yeah, hi, and good morning all, and thanks for taking my questions as well here. I just have two quick follow-ups actually. The first one is on the pricing dynamics in Europe. I guess, Martin, you've been outperforming your own pricing guidance in Europe quite a few times in a meaningful way over the last few quarters. I guess you've been talking about these pricing lags, but would you say that I guess in the context of the current price dynamics in the spot market, I guess also given the fact that usually automotive is actually one of the very strong sectors in the first quarter, that your pricing guidance for Q1 may again be a little bit on the conservative side? That is my first question. I mean, we are guiding, as said, not about mix. We are guiding about prices and what we expect, what we see and what we expect to see in the order book. But, of course, we, as said, we expect to continue to see good demand for our automotive products, and they are not standard products, they are niche products, advanced high-strength steels. So, then how that exactly will play out in Q1 or a single month or a single quarter is, of course, hard to predict, but over time you should see that effect. Mm-hmm. Okay. I guess most of your peers would see typically, like a seasonally lower fourth quarter in auto and then like a pretty strong pickup actually into Q1. But you say that is difficult for you to say at this point? No, but we are guiding for a seasonally stronger quarter in Q1 compared to Q4, volume-wise. Okay. Then, as said, we have a certain lag when it comes to prices, when they are realized in the PNL compared to where the spot market, prices are moving. But we also need to remember that in Q4 we were-- I mean, if you take into account the average cost, marginal cost for emission rights, we were, and, and that is typically for a standard Euro- for average European producer, is around EUR 200 per ton with the current, emission prices. Then we were at, just above EUR 400 per ton or so for hot-rolled coils, which is typically, or historically at least, has been around the rock bottom prices. Mm-hmm. Okay, all right. And then my second question is just on the timing for the decision for Raahe and Luleå. I think last quarter you said that you expect the feasibility study, at least for Raahe, I guess, to conclude in the first quarter. Could you give us a bit more color on like when you actually expect to decide on whether you go ahead with Raahe or Luleå? I mean, is this something which you basically have in mind for the first half, maybe second quarter or rather later this year? No, but I think we have said that during the first half of 2024, and we still stick to that. So, so no updates. I mean, we are working with the feasibility studies for both Raahe and Luleå. And I said, what is new compared to when we met last quarter is that now the preconditions, with the exception of the environmental permits, both for Raahe and Luleå, are in place. We know that we have power allocation, we will have a power line in place in both Raahe and Luleå in time, so to say. So, it's ongoing work and no changes. So, so- Okay, thank you. I mean, as, as I said before, we wanted to have them standing at the same starting line and then look at the calculations and sequence them in the best possible way for SSAB long term. Okay, great. Thanks. Thank you. Now we're taking our next question, and the question comes through line of Tristan Gresser from BNP Paribas Exane. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Yes, hi. Thank you for taking the question. Just, two quick follow-up, and, and maybe I missed that, but I saw your guidance for CapEx for next year. Well, this year, SEK 5.5. But, could you- can you provide the total cash needs for the year, including interest and taxes? Yeah, we didn't include a slide, Tristan, but we said also, I mean, you have the CapEx, and then Leena, we don't expect anything on interest, really. No ... plus or minus. Minus. And then we have the tax, and that will depend on the result. So you have the CapEx need, and then you have some tax payment. That's what we looked at. Right. Nothing specific to flag there. Okay. No. And, my second question is on the Special Steels business again. So yeah, the, the volume miss. Could you discuss more precisely the, the demand trends you're seeing by end markets, notably the mining segment? And just wanted to confirm then, then with you, with, with the volume, the starting point you will have, do you view the 7-8% volume growth as still a likely scenario for this year? But yeah, first, maybe a bit of color on, on, on the demand by end market, given the, the weakness you flagged. No, but we saw a weaker demand, apparent, in Europe during Q4 and during the second half. We see other regions with stronger demand, but on overall, the underlying demand is increasing. I mean, the interest of gaining productivity with lower weight, higher payload, less fuel consumption, and so on, is definitely there, even maybe more pronounced than historically. And then on top of that, the possibilities when we can start to produce fossil-free and zero steel in Oxelösund, 2026, also gives a lot of possibilities. And these partnerships with big blue chip companies, big OEMs, using also a lot of Q&T, is positive. So, I'm saying that we, when we look into it, we see no-... reason at all to doubt that we will continue to grow over time in the same, I would say, phase, or the same pace, with the same pace as we have seen historically. Then that can differ one year compared to another, the previous year, or one quarter compared to a previous quarter, but the underlying trends are definitely there. And we are not working with a static product portfolio either, and that's why I'm talking about 500 Tuf, which is a fairly new product out that is ramping up on the market. It has been there for a couple of years, but it always takes time to ramp it up, but now we see possibilities. We see, unfortunately, you can say from a, another perspective, we see, volume interest for, for Armox, and, and armored plate growing around the world. So, the structural underlying demand is definitely there. And, and then when, when we can introduce new and, and more advanced products, and products where we are clearly unique, like the Hardox 500 Tuf, globally, that also help, helps the growth. And then, of course, we need to match that with deeper bottlenecking and further investments, and we have been investing quite a lot in, in Mobile to take up capacity. So, so it is, in that sense, an iterative, development, but goes hand in hand. And, we don't want to have... I mean, w-we will, we will continue to grow capabilities and capacity in line with, how we are building the market. Okay. No, that's clear. Maybe a quick follow-up then, just to clarify. So, you're not seeing that weaker demand in Europe, you know, further deteriorating into entering 2024. Is that correct? Is it stable or does it- No, but I think- Weaker point? Apparent demand is, of course, so dependent on a lot of other things. I'm talking more- Yeah ... about the underlying or real demand and the growth of real demand. Apparent demand will be impacted by, geopolitical turbulence, by, problems with freights, not being able to use the Suez Canal, and so on. So, so that, that will be ups and downs. It will be, dependent on weather conditions, a lot of other things. But I'm more talking about the structural underlying demand growth, and there we haven't changed our mind. We are still very positive. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question, and it comes from line of Moses Ola from JP Morgan. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Hi, everyone. Thank you for taking my question. I just have two questions here, please. I'll take them one at a time. So first one, again, it's also just on the pricing outlook. Obviously, your guidance here in Europe is a bit more cautious, but I just wanted to actually more discuss on the overall pricing power that you see here in Europe. You've talked about how you see potential demand risks from ongoing geopolitical tensions, specifically at the Red Sea, but do you actually also see that that perhaps can contribute to lower supply here in Europe due to lower imports? And in that scenario, do you believe that the pricing power here in Europe can be strong despite weaker demand? That's my first question. For standard strip in Europe, we don't have any pricing power, to be honest. We follow the general price trend. Then the power we have is to continue to improve the mix. So we are following the market price development when it comes to strip in Europe, and that is typically led by ArcelorMittal and others. And then, of course, that pricing power is, of course, dependent on, as you said, import volumes and things like that. So I don't have a clear answer to your question, but our pricing power for strip in Europe is very limited. And then in the Nordic region, we have somewhat of a pricing power due to proximity, due to quality, and so on. Northern Europe, or call it the Nordics, is still a reflection of the general price in Europe. But as said, I mean, the prices bottom out at levels that has at least historically been trough levels, because you have to nowadays also add the marginal cost of emission rights, because there is no steel company in Europe having 100% or all-free allocations covering 100% of the production capacity. And that's why we also saw a weak quarter like Q4 this year and Q4 2023 and also Q4 2022, we saw companies idling blast furnaces. Thank you for that. And then the other question I had was just into your AGM. Obviously, you've already talked about seeking a mandate for share buyback, but also with the ongoing progress at Oxelösund with FID due at Raahe and Luleå and, you know, the opportunity to bring low CO2 steel volumes to market, do you view now it could be the right time to further strengthen the links between your CO2 emissions targets with executive compensation? Is this something that you will also be looking to present to shareholders at the AGM? That's already implemented in the long-term incentive program. So there we have targets, not only on TSR and relative TSR, but also on volumes of SSAB Zero. ... Okay, but anything in terms of guiding towards the actual CO2 reduction targets themselves or more on the volume side? No, it's more about the volumes. I mean, we know the CO2 reduction, we will take away roughly 1.5 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions in Sweden, 2026, and then when we do the first mini mill, we will take away another, is it 2.5 or something, 1 million tons? So that's, I mean, that is, what we have promised to execute, and then finally we will take away, well, 10 million tons, of carbon dioxide emissions that we are emitting. So in the LTI program, the way it's structured, it's one component, call it... I wouldn't call it an ESG component, but, call it a sustainability component, and it's the volume of SSAB Zero. Okay, understood. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes through line of Cole Hathorn from Jefferies. Your line is open, please ask your question. Morning. Thanks for taking my question. Just like to get some color on what you're seeing in your auto contract negotiations for 2024. And then following up on the last question regarding shipping impact into Europe, you know, do you see any impact from the shipping potentially supporting prices or as another derivative, potentially supporting your customers looking at getting more safety stocks or kind of building some of their supply chains for steel at all? Thank you. The second part, I think, what we see is, we clearly see, I would call it for more—I wouldn't say only standard products, but for more standardized products, we see more and more regional supply, and a bigger interest, since the COVID, since the war in Ukraine, since the turbulence in the world. We see more and more interest of regional supply in Europe and other parts of the world. In the U.S., it's pretty obvious with this demand of melted in America. So the import is still visible but is, I would say, less and less of a factor. And then the first question. Sorry, Cole, can you repeat the first question? I'm just wanting to know any color you can provide on your- Okay ... your annual auto contract negotiations. No, but we don't guide for that. We guide for the coming quarter. But what we are into, I mean, we are gradually growing the number of platforms and as I said, the number of OEMs where we are in, and that's why we expect the volumes to continue to grow in a decent way the coming years. But commenting, we don't comment on what do you call it, price negotiations, and we just comment on realized prices the coming quarter. Thank you. And then maybe just one follow-up. I mean, on the demand for SSAB Zero, am I right to assume that the majority of that customer demand is from the auto end market, or are there other areas that are seeing the pull-through demand for SSAB Zero? Thank you. No, but our guess was that both for fossil-free and zero would be mainly Europe and only automotive. Now, during Q4, I think, or beginning of Q1, we saw the first building built in the Nordics out of fossil-free steel. So construction is definitely very interested. Heavy transport, lifting, wind towers, I said. So if anything has surprised us in a positive way, it has been a huge interest from many regions and many segments that we didn't really put into our call it calculations. So it's much broader than automotive, but a strong interest from automotive, definitely. But I mean, if you take even onwards one example, building now wind towers out of SSAB Zero, you see rail cars and tank cars built out of SSAB Zero. You see construction equipment built out of SSAB Zero. You even start to see now bridge contracts asking for fossil-free steel or SSAB Zero. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our last question for today, and it comes from the line of Andrew Jones from UBS. Your line is open, please ask a question. Hi, just, just to follow up on the Red Sea issues. I mean, you didn't comment on the sort of impact on the overall market, which I guess is probably a margin positive. But, in terms of your, your costs with shipments out of Europe and, you know, in terms of sea freight, can you just remind us what, approximately what your, what your costs were in the fourth quarter or maybe in 2023 overall, in terms of sort of international sea freight? And if you have any sort of guidance around some cost pressure that you could see on the business coming from that issue in the near term. Thank you. I don't have a figure to give for the sea freight cost regarding last year, but for sure, if we comment that, of course, these Suez Canal challenges is also impacting our cost when we import the raw material from Australia. But we don't, we don't have now figures to give related to- Mm-hmm ... freight cost or estimates even. But of course, we are impacted as anyone else. Yes. Mm-hmm. Sure. Understood. Okay, thank you. Thank you. There are no further questions. I would now like to hand the conference over to our speakers for any closing remarks. Okay, thank you very much. So this, we can conclude the conference today. Thank you, Diana. Thank you, Martin. Thank you, the audience. Thank you for listening in. A lot of good questions, but thank you for us, and we wish you a nice day. Thank you. Thank you.