Good day and welcome to the Daqo New Energy fourth quarter 2024 results conference call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star, then one on a touch-tone phone. To withdraw your question, please press star, then two. Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Jessie Zhao. Please go ahead. Hello everyone, I'm Jessie Zhao, the investor relations of Daqo New Energy. Thank you for joining our conference call today. Daqo New Energy just issued its financial results for the fourth quarter of 2024, which can be found on our website at www.dqsolar.com. Today, attending the conference call, we have our Chairman and CEO, Mr. Xiang Xu, our Deputy CEO, Ms. Anita Zhu, our CFO, Mr. Ming Yang, and myself. Mr. Xu is on a business trip now, so he will make a brief introduction followed by Ms. Anita Zhu on our management remarks. Today's call will begin with the updates from Ms. Zhu on management, our market conditions, and the company operations, and then Mr. Yang will discuss the company's financial performance for the quarter and the year. After that, we will open the floor to Q&A from the audience. Before we begin the formal remarks, I would like to remind you that certain statements on today's call, including expected future operational and financial performance and industry growth, are forward-looking statements that are made under the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and these statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties. A number of factors may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement. Further information regarding these and other risks is included in the reports or documents we have filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission. These statements only reflect our current and preliminary view as of today and may be subject to change. Our ability to achieve these projections is subject to risks and uncertainties. All information provided in today's call is as of today, and we undertake no duty to update such information except as required under applicable law. Also, during the call, we will occasionally reference monetary amounts in U.S. dollar terms. Please keep in mind that our functional currency is the Chinese RMB. We offer these translations into U.S. dollars solely for the convenience of the audience. Now, I will turn the call to our Chairman and CEO, Mr. Xiang Xu. [Foreign language]. Hello? [Foreign language]. Okay, hello everyone, this is Xiang Xu, the CEO of Daqo New Energy. We appreciate you joining us for the conference call today. Anita, go ahead. Okay, thank you, Mr. Xu. Hello everyone, this is Anita Zhu. Thank you for joining our conference call today, and I'll now deliver the management remarks on behalf of Mr. Xu. So, in 2024, we faced a challenging market environment with excess capacity in the solar PV industry, leading to sharp price declines across the entire value chain. We proactively managed these difficulties by curtailing polysilicon production to reduce cash burn, particularly in the third and fourth quarters. Nevertheless, we reached an annual polysilicon production volume of 205,000 metric tons in 2024, meeting our guidance of 200,000 metric tons to 210,000 metric tons, which represented an increase of 3.7% year over year compared to 197,831 metric tons in 2023. Our N-type product mix increased significantly from approximately 40% of total production in 2023 to 70% in 2024, and we sold 181,362 metric tons in 2024, ending the year at a reasonable inventory level. Despite solid growth in demand for solar PV products globally, the mismatch between demand and supply drove prices lower in 2024, even below cash cost. Overall, our polysilicon ASPs decreased significantly from $11.48 per kg in 2023 to $5.66 per kg in 2024, and revenue came in at $1 billion compared to $2.3 billion in 2023 as a result of lower ASPs as well as lower sales volumes. As polysilicon ASPs fell below production costs starting in the second quarter of 2024, we recorded a non-cash provision for inventory impairment in expense with a negative gross margin of 20.7% for 2024. Due to the continuous negative gross margin, we recorded a non-cash long-lived assets impairment charge of $175.6 million for the quarter related to our older polysilicon production lines. Despite the losses, Daqo New Energy continued to maintain a strong balance sheet and ample cash reserves. At the end of 2024, the company had a cash balance of $1 billion, short-term investments of $10 million, bank notes receivables of $55 million, and a fixed-term bank deposit balance of $1.1 billion. Overall, the company maintained strong liquidity with a balance of quick assets of $2.2 billion, which can be readily converted to cash if needed. This solid financial position ensures we're well-equipped to navigate the market downturn and remain strategically resilient. On the operational front, during the fourth quarter, the company continued to operate at a lower utilization rate of 40%-50% of our nameplate capacity in light of weak market prices. The total production volume at our two polysilicon facilities for the quarter was 34,236 metric tons, further decreasing from the third quarter by 9,356 metric tons. Meanwhile, we intensified our efforts to reduce inventory, and our sales volume reached 42,191 metric tons in the fourth quarter compared to 42,101 metric tons in the previous quarter. As a result of lower utilization, idle facility-related costs for the quarter was approximately $1.02 per kg, which was primarily related to non-cash depreciation expense. Overall, polysilicon unit production costs edged up 3% sequentially to an average of $6.81 per kilo. However, thanks to our relentless efforts to improve operational efficiency, our cash costs declined further to 5.04 U.S. dollars per kg, a 6% quarter-over-quarter decline compared to $5.34 per kg in the third quarter. Due to the current market pricing environment, we currently expect total polysilicon production volume in the first quarter of 2025 to be approximately 25,000-28,000 metric tons. We plan to maintain a relatively low utilization rate in 2025 until a turning point emerges in the sector. As a result, we currently anticipate full-year production volume in 2025 to be approximately 110,000-140,000 metric tons. Discussions on industry self-regulation measures have been ongoing since the fourth quarter. Meanwhile, the polysilicon market remains sluggish heading into the quarter as downstream customers continue drawing down accumulated inventory and coping with lower wafer capacity utilization rates of approximately 50%. Polysilicon pricing remains stable within the cyclical bottom range of RMB 36-RMB 42 per kg throughout the quarter. In November and December, leading poly producers reduced production to offset the higher hydroelectricity costs during the winter season and to mitigate inventory risks. As such, industry production continued to decline month over month. According to industry statistics, the total production volume in China descended to approximately 100,000 metric tons per month in December, the lowest level in the year. On December 26, polysilicon futures trading officially launched with the initial benchmark price set at RMB 38.6 per kg. Although some prices were quoted higher at RMB 42-RMB 43 per kg, futures trading volume remained small and had limited impact on spot pricing. On a positive note, new solar PV capacity in China reached a record high of 68 GW in December, which was beyond expectations and reinforced market confidence in the resilience of solar PV in the short run and market potential in the medium to long term. Despite the significant challenges resulting from overcapacity in the solar PV industry, we have seen proactive initiatives to restore the industry's healthy development. On December 6, 2024, led by the China Photovoltaic Industry Association, our company, along with other major solar PV manufacturers, have reached consensus that implementing self-discipline would be fundamental to mitigating the irrational competition amid falling prices and heightened global trade pressures. Moreover, the solar PV industry continues to show strong demand prospects. For the year 2024, China's newly installed solar PV capacity grew 28% year over year to 277 GW, which not only hit a record high but also exceeded market expectations. We remain optimistic that as supply adjusts to more rational levels, we'll see a better balance between supply and demand this year. In the long run, as a renewable energy source and one of the lowest cost sources of electricity worldwide, solar power continues to be a key driver of the global energy transition and sustainable development. Looking ahead, Daqo New Energy will capitalize on the long-term growth in the global solar PV market and strengthen its competitive edge by enhancing its higher efficiency N-type technology and optimizing its cost structure through digital transformation and AI adoption. As one of the world's lowest cost producers with the highest quality N-type products, a strong balance sheet, and no financial debt, we believe we're well-positioned to weather the current market downturn and emerge as one of the leaders in the industry to capture future growth, so now, I will turn the call to our CFO, Mr. Ming Yang, who will discuss the company's financial performance for the quarter. Ming, please go ahead. Thank you, Anita, and hello everyone. This is Ming Yang, CFO of Daqo New Energy. We appreciate you joining our earnings conference call today. I will first go over the company's fourth quarter 2024 financial performance, then follow with our full-year 2024 financial results. Revenues were $195.4 million compared to $198.5 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $476.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. The decrease in revenue compared to the third quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a decrease in ASP, mitigated by an increase in sales volume. Gross loss was $65.3 million compared to $60.6 million in the third quarter of 2024 and gross profit of $87.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Gross margin was negative 33% compared to negative 30.5% in the third quarter of 2024 and 18.3% in the fourth quarter of 2023. The decrease in gross margin compared to the third quarter of 2024 was mainly due to the decrease in average selling prices. Selling, general, and administrative expenses were $29.4 million compared to $37.7 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $39 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. SG&A expenses during the fourth quarter of 2024 included $14.9 million in non-cash share-based compensation expense related to the company's share incentive plan compared to $18.9 million in the third quarter of 2024. The company recognized $18.1 million in non-cash expense related to allowance for expected credit loss of receivables in the fourth quarter, mainly due to uncertainty on the recoverability of long-aged receivables. The company recognized $175.6 million in fixed asset impairment loss, mainly related to its older polysilicon production lines in the fourth quarter of 2023, due to the continuous downtrend in the polysilicon selling prices that impaired the recoverability of carrying amounts of these assets. R&D expenses were $0.4 million compared to $0.8 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $3.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. R&D expenses reflect R&D activities that take place during the quarter and can vary from period to period. As a result of the above-mentioned, loss from operations was $300.9 million compared to $98 million in the third quarter of 2024 and income from operations of $83.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Operating margin was negative 154% compared to negative 49% in the third quarter of 2024 and 17.5% in the fourth quarter of 2023. Net loss attributable to Daqo New Energy shareholders was $180 million compared to $60 million in the third quarter of 2024 and net income of $53.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Loss per basic ADS was $2.71 compared to $0.92 in the third quarter of 2024 and income per ADS of $0.76 in the fourth quarter of 2023. Adjusted net loss attributable to Daqo New Energy shareholders, including non-cash share-based compensation costs, was $170.6 million compared to $39.4 million in the third quarter of 2024 and adjusted net income of $74 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Adjusted loss per basic ADS was $2.56 compared to $0.59 in the third quarter of 2024 and adjusted earnings per basic ADS of $1.06 in the fourth quarter of 2023. EBITDA was negative $236 million compared to negative $34 million in the third quarter of 2024 and $128.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. EBITDA margin was negative 121% compared to negative 17% in the third quarter of 2024 and 26.9% in the fourth quarter of 2023. Now, I will go over the company's full-year 2024 financial results. Revenues were $1.03 billion compared to $2.3 billion in 2023. The decrease was primarily due to lower polysilicon average selling prices and further compounded by lower sales volume. Gross loss was $212.9 million compared to gross profit of $920.7 million in 2023. Gross margin was negative 20.7% compared to 39.9% in 2023. The decrease in gross profit was primarily due to lower ASP and inventory impairment. For the year of 2024, the company recorded $81.4 million in inventory impairment expenses compared to $0.5 million in 2023. SG&A expenses were $143.1 million compared to $213.2 million in 2023. The decrease was primarily due to the reduction in non-cash share-based compensation costs related to the company's share incentive plan, which was $72.4 million and $121 million in 2024 and 2023, respectively. The company recognized $175.6 million in fixed asset impairment loss, mainly related to its older polysilicon facilities in 2024. R&D expenses were $4.6 million compared to $10.1 million in 2023, and as a result, the foregoing loss from operations was $564 million compared to income from operations of $783.4 million in 2023. Operating margin was negative 54.8% compared to 33.9% in 2023. Net interest income was $29.4 million compared to $52.3 million in 2023. The decrease in interest income was primarily due to lower cash at bank balance as well as lower bank interest rates. Net loss attributable to Daqo New Energy shareholders was $345 million compared to net income of $429.5 million in 2023. Loss per basic ADS was $5.22 compared to earnings per basic ADS of $5.75 in 2023. Adjusted net loss attributable to Daqo New Energy shareholders was $272.8 million compared to $563 million in 2023. Adjusted loss per basic ADS was $4.12 compared to adjusted earnings per basic ADS of $7.54. EBITDA was negative $338 million compared to $918.6 million in 2023. EBITDA margin was negative 32.9% compared to 39.8% in 2023. Now, on the company's financial condition. As of December 31, 2024, the company had $1.038 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash compared to $853.4 million as of September 30, 2024, and $3.05 billion as of December 31, 2023. As of December 31, 2024, the net receivable balance was CNY 55.2 million compared to CNY 84.5 million as of September 30, 2024, and CNY 116.4 million as of December 31, 2023. Notes receivable balance represent bank notes with maturity within six months. As of December 31, 2024, the balance of fixed term deposits within one year was CNY 1.087 billion compared to CNY 1.215 billion as of September 30, 2024, and none as of December 31, 2023. Now, on the company's cash flows. For the 12 months ended December 31, 2024, net cash used by operating activities was CNY 437.7 million compared to CNY 1.6 billion provided by operating activities in the same period of 2023. The decrease was primarily due to lower revenues and gross margin. For the 12 months ended December 31, 2024, net cash used in investing activities was CNY 1.478 billion compared to CNY 1.196 billion in the same period of 2023. The net cash used in investing activities in 2024 was primarily related to capital expenditures on the company's 5A and 5B polysilicon expansion projects in Baotou City, Inner Mongolia, and purchases of short-term investments and fixed term deposits. For the 12 months ended December 31, 2024, net cash used in financing activities was $47.4 million compared to $795 million in the same period of 2023. Net cash used in financing activities in 2024 was primarily related to $35.8 million in dividend payments made by the company's subsidiary, Xinjiang Daqo, to its minority shareholders. And that concludes our prepared remarks. We will now open the call to Q&A from the audience. Operator, please begin. We will now begin the question and answer session. To ask a question, you may press star, then one on your touch-tone phone. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the key. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, please press star, then two. At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. The first question today comes from Alan Hon with J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks for letting me to ask the questions. I have three questions here. The first question is, I would like to know the reason for the how is the cash spent in fourth quarter last year. On my tally, it seems like we have spent around $0.2 billion cash in fourth quarter. We'd like to have a billing of the breakdown. My second question is, I would like to hear management's thought on the pricing outlook in the next two quarters. And the number three question is, I mean, there's been various news talking about potential policy intervention to suppress the industry capacity to have a supply-side reform. I would like to hear management's thought on this. And thank you. So Alan, hold on. We're going to look at the numbers really quick. Oh, thank you. Okay. Alan, thank you for the questions. Maybe I'll talk about the pricing outlook first before I answer your first question. So I think in the short run, we are likely to see poly prices to increase in the next couple of months, at least before the end of the second quarter of 2025. Like I talked about in the commentary section, starting the fourth quarter of 2024, the industry has initiated several discussions on self-regulation that would potentially cap the overall production volume. So right now, the overall industry utilization rate is roughly around 50% across all. And as a result, based on industry statistics, we have seen domestic poly supply to drop starting from December. So in December, the overall production volume is around 104,000 metric tons. And in January, it has even lowered to 97,000 tons. And while wafer supply in January is only about 45 GW, which is roughly equivalent, or I should say supply is slightly lower than the demand. So we expect supply to be in the range of 90-100K, at least until May, primarily driven by the seasonality effect of hydroelectric power, which will be relatively high during the low rain season up until May. And as of last week, the domestic industry inventory in the poly sector is around 250,000 tons and also about 200,000 at the ingot or wafer manufacturers level. So we believe the poly inventory may remain high throughout 2025, but would reduce gradually in the next few months, leading to a potential poly price upside in the second quarter. Another catalyst to mention for a price uptick is the new regulations that have been talked about, the market reform, which would lead to potential front-loading. In the first quarter, the NDRC and also the National Energy Administration actually released new policies on distributed solar installations and also on the renewable power tariff reform. We would see a distributed solar regulation to take effect on May 1st and also the market-based on-grid pricing to be implemented for all new renewable projects starting from June 1st. We expect to see some potential front-loading, especially because this imposes uncertainty to yields of new projects starting from June 1st. As we see higher, therefore, we expect to see higher visibility in industry inventory depletion and potential uptick in price across the value chain, at least in the first half of 2025. Demand in the second half of 2025 and onward appears to be somewhat more challenging if there are not enough new application scenarios or alternative business models bringing action to determine the new solar project returns. In the midterm to the more longer term, we think that the overall industry utilization would remain around 40%-50%, especially as the corporates are complying to the self-regulation measures to maintain or to promote a more healthy development of the industry. Price would likely linger in the range of RMB 40-45 for N-type and RMB 37-40 for P-type. We see more clear turning points in the industry. I hope that answers your question. So you say 45-50 for N-type is your expectation? For the more midterm. Yep. Up until, I would say, the end, the second half or two till the end of this year. Got it. Yep. So the next question is on the supply-side reform and also the cash consumption in fourth quarter. Okay. I think if you look at cash on consumption, right, so I think about roughly $80 million is related to operations or spent on the operations, and then roughly $40 million is related to the CapEx, and then the remaining is mainly related to changes in the balance sheet items between operating assets and operating liability, so these are the main ones. Oh, got it. Thank you, and the last question I have is, I would like to hear your thoughts on how the government may conduct supply-side reform in our industry. Okay. I think from our understanding is right now, the National Energy Administration and in partnership with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the National Development and Reform Commission, I think combined, they're looking at how to stem the losses within the industry, right? I think previously, they were looking at how would the self-discipline framework would work, and I believe thus far, they're not too pleased with it in terms of the results, so it looks like it might be likely that they might come forth with a certain type of policy. We don't know what that policy looks like yet. I mean, it might be some combination of capping production, some kind of production quota, and I think retiring inefficient capacity or older technology and things like that, so I think we are yet to see what the policy looks like. I believe that's still being discussed and being formed. But it might look like some of their former policies related to this, for example, what had happened in aluminum. Yeah. Got it. And thank you very much for answering my questions. And I'll pass it on. Great. Great. Thank you so much, Alan. The next question comes from Philip Shen with Roth Capital. Please go ahead. Hey, [audio distortion]. There seems to be some issues with Phil's line. The next question comes from Mengwen Wang with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Thanks, Management, for taking my question. So my first question is about the turning point you mentioned. So as Anita said, you expect poly price hike is likely to sustain until end of the second quarter. So what's the exact turning point we are looking for in order to raise our production? Yeah. And also, it would be great if you can elaborate more on the basis that we come to our production target. Is it the so-called production quota assigned to us, or is it simply because we are more bearish on the demand outlook? Thanks. Sure. Thank you, Mengwen, so for your first question, it's very difficult for us to estimate the exact timing of the turning point because in 2024, if we look at the broader picture, the total poly production volume actually reaches 1.82 million metric tons, and the nameplate capacity of every sector on the main value chain has reached, on average, over 1,200 GW. So for poly, the nameplate production capacity of all completed projects, regardless of whether it has been temporarily shut down or never started initial production, actually exceeded 1,400 GW, which is roughly 3.2 million metric tons. That's more than double of demand, and if we look at the outlook for 2025 based on industry forecasts, we see that global demand would actually be in the range of 550 GW-600 GW. And from that, we expect China's solar installation to be in the range of 250 Gw-300 GW, which would be roughly equivalent to 1.4 million-1.6 million metric tons of poly demand. So if we take these numbers into consideration, it's not difficult to see that it will be a somewhat more prolonged cycle to rebalance the current overcapacity or oversupply in our entire industry. So we would either need to see a stronger demand or a more rapid rebalancing in terms of supply. And in terms of our production target, we have decided to maintain a relatively low utilization rate on the backdrop of abiding to the self-regulation measures that have been led by the CPIA, as well as considering our own strategy to cap our cash cost in 2025. Yeah. Sure. Thanks for that. So just to follow up, what's the current utilization rate in our Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia capacity, and since we plan to maintain the utilization rate at a low level for the whole year, will we consider to shut down our Xinjiang base? Because the Inner Mongolia base alone is more than enough, right, to meet the production target. We have decided to open both our Xinjiang and our Inner Mongolia based on our own strategies, of course, because we also have to take into account our employees in both facilities, as well as our obligation in order to fulfill our social responsibility to the community. But I guess you're correct in terms of further lowering our utilization rate, but that will be contingent upon market development. If demand is worse than we expected, then we might consider to further drop our utilization rate. But also considering we need to see the balance between fixed cost, variable cost, and a number of factors before we proceed to lower our utilization rate. Yeah. Sure. That's very clear. Thanks. Thanks for coming. The next question comes from Philip Shen with Roth Capital. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Hopefully, this is better now. Can you hear me okay? Yeah. Now it's great. Yes. Okay. Great. Thanks, Ming. So the audio was a little bit unclear for me earlier. So apologies if some of these questions have been asked. As a follow-up to the first questioner on the supply-side reform, I heard your answer that there could be some kind of policy put in place, but you don't know what it looks like yet. Do you have a sense of the timing of when the policy could be released? Is it soon, or is it maybe much later in the year? Thanks. Obviously, it's uncertain with regard to timing of the policy. China will have its high-level central government committee meeting coming up in early March. We believe, from what we heard, it could be around that time because that's the time when the government announces a lot of their policies, for example, economic policies and government policy. So that's one possible timeline in early March, or it could be later. We don't know yet. Yeah. But all we know is that they are in discussion and they are coordinating. Great, and they would release the supply-side framework for not just poly, right, but also every step in the supply chain. For the entire solar industry. Yes. Yep. Okay. Great. Thanks. And then from a pricing standpoint, I may have missed this, but can you share what kind of pricing you expect for Q1? Should it be similar to Q4? And then do you expect poly pricing to adjust slightly higher as we get into the back half of 2025? What's the cadence of price for polysilicon Q1 through Q4? Thanks. Thank you, Phil. So like I mentioned about in the beginning of the Q&A session, we believe that in the near term, poly prices will somewhat tick up slightly. So N-type will be more on the higher range of the 40 RMB-45 RMB. But going to the second half of the quarter, because we're likely to see some front-loading before June 1st driven by the renewable power curtailment reform and the new policies on distributed solar installation due to the uncertain yield of new projects, the only certainty is to get installed before June 1st. So we believe that we might see a stronger demand in the first half compared to the second half. And hence, overall, in the second half of the year, price for N-type would be in the range of 40 RMB-45 RMB, maybe more on the lower end, and 37 RMB-40 RMB or 27 RMB. Okay. Anita, it was a little bit hard to hear you. Can you speak closer to the microphone? Did you say in the first half it's 40 to 45, and then the back half might be 37 to 38? Yeah. Yeah. That's my credit card. No. So I was saying the first half, it's more on the higher range of 45, but in the second half, we'll be more on the lower range. Okay. Got it, and you're much clearer now. Okay. So yeah. Okay. P-type will be around 37 to 40. But of course, that would also be contingent upon whether there will be additional supply coming out after May. Right. Meaning more production from other players. Yeah. Especially because we're going to the rain season. So the hydroelectricity power tariff would drop significantly compared to where it is right now. Got it. Okay. Thank you. It's much clearer now. Thank you. So okay. So we have a sense for pricing now. We've talked about supply-side reform. What about on the demand side? We've seen some changes recently to the feed-in tariff outlook, and that's going away and with the load growth in China, there seems to be, based on some of my industry sources, there could be an upside surprise to demand. Are you seeing that yet, the potential for that? And if so, how do you expect that to play out through the year? Thanks. So like I talked about previously, we think that based on industry forecasts, we have also seen global demand to be in the range of 550 GW-600 GW. And from that, we expect China's solar installation to be in the range of 250 GW-300 GW. And that would be relatively stable in terms of year-over-year growth compared to 277 GW in 2024, primarily because we think the installation of utility scale has peaked in the short run. We would need to see a more structural reform, either in the grid system or a frequency modulation control to optimize the system, such as the development of energy storage before demand can further boost. For distributed installations, we think that the market-oriented reform poses the biggest uncertainty to the yields of new projects, and hence the pace of installation would slow down after June 4th, before we see more transparency on the regulation, of course. Because although it has been released by NDRC and the NEA for the new regulation, they actually delegated the specific details to provincial levels. We will need to see from that level what the local government, what the specific plans will look like from the provincial levels before the end of 2025. We think that besides the Chinese market, international demand will primarily come from emerging markets. For instance, like Latin America, Middle East, Africa, etc., because they have the big potential for renewable energy due to the rapid growth in electricity demand. For instance, Saudi Arabia's goal is to have renewables account for 50% of energy composition by 2030, so they plan to have a newly installed 20 GW of solar from 2024 onwards. Besides the emerging markets, we think that for the U.S., it will be somewhat stagnant, primarily because after Trump has been elected, he has signed several executive orders, for instance, delaying or suspending the IRA subsidy and also exiting the Paris Agreement. We think that in the U.S., the renewable energy would be pivoted towards supporting the fossil fuel industry. Okay. Thank you for the color, and I'll pass it on. Great. Thanks, Phil. The next question comes from Alan Lau with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Thanks a lot. So I would like to come to some of the details in the financials. So actually, the cash cost of the production in 4Q has lowered to almost RMB 35 per Kg. I would like to know if there's any further room to come down. And the reason of that, because there was some impairment in cost, which brings down the cost, or this 35 RMB per Kg actually fairly reflects the cash cost of the company. Hello, Alan. This is Ming. I would say that the current 35 RMB per Kg is reflective of the company's current cash cost. Okay. I think cash cost reduction comes from a number of points, including better manufacturing efficiency and then cost savings on material procurement. But in particular, right, as we reduce production, I think now the production is primarily focused in our most efficient manufacturing facility, both in Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia. So these have lower electricity usage per unit of production, for example. So I think that's why we saw this cash cost reduction. I think right now, our outlook for Q1 is cash cost should remain at the current level or maybe just slightly lower, but not too much lower. That's our current expectation. I see. That's clear, and another question. I, Oh, sorry. So yeah, I think similar to Q4, maybe just slightly lower than Q4. I see. I see. Another question is in regards to FBR because one of the major peers has also got around 10,000 tons of kind of pilot lines, got the environmental approvals. So we'd like to listen to your views on the technology. And would you also explore into certain lines for FBR? And what's your view on their cash cost of RMB 28? So first of all, it's hard for us to comment on our competitors' cash cost, but I could give more color on our own strategy, of course. So I think that we definitely respect innovation in the industry, but Modified Siemens Process has been refined over decades and has delivered proven cost efficiency, scalability, and high-quality polysilicon, which is critical to meeting our customer specifications. And we have also consistently worked toward further lowering our cost through technology improvements, such as lowering our energy consumption, our silicon powder consumption, etc., so we can position competitively in this cyclical market. And we definitely acknowledge the clear advantage of FBR, which would be lower energy consumption and, I guess, hence lower cost, which makes it easier to get relevant carbon footprint certifications in the future. But we still believe that FBR has its inherent risks, such as its purity challenges. It's still not possible to use 100% FBR in downstream production, so there is a maximum blend percentage when you are trying to produce in the downstream sectors. There's also a challenge associated with hydrogen displacement during the deposition process and also hydrogen retention leading to potential defects or degraded risks, and also, the process instability caused by things like the reactor clogging, maybe the uneven silicon deposition can also lead to increased downtime, but that being said, we're not complacent, so our R&D team and I would like to highlight that we also established our research center in Inner Mongolia last quarter in 2024, which will continue to evaluate all innovations and maybe more on the emerging technologies that could potentially be transformative in the future, including the FBR, in order to assess the long-term viability of different technologies. And I believe that should there be other technologies or FBR that demonstrate clear sustainable advantages without compromising the product quality, we will consider the different process as well. But for now, our strategy remains centered on leveraging our existing strengths, so our operational excellence, our customer trust, and also our financial strength to navigate this market dynamics amid this market down cycle. And this is. Thanks a lot for the detailed answer. So basically, there's no concrete plans in pursuing FBR for now, right? There's no concrete plans, but we are also doing our research, of course. We are keeping an eye on all sorts of technologies that could be potentially transformative in the future. Understood. Another question is, I recall there was a $100 million buyback announced last year. I wonder if when the company thinks it would be appropriate to start the buyback, and is there any consideration in selling down your A-share platform as well in order to fund the buyback in the U.S. platform? So I think for the 100 million share buyback, we are still keeping an eye and closely monitoring the market dynamics. I think, like we mentioned before, we were more conservative and waiting to see when a turning point would emerge. But I think based on the recent news and our assessment of the market environment, we are still closely monitoring when would be a good timing to start repurchasing. But for selling down our A-shares and potentially buying back on the U.S. ADRs to close down this gap in terms of the huge differences in valuation, we have definitely considered such plans. However, after the new regulation rolled out on selling down on A-shares, which was announced in May last year, should your share price be trading below your issue price, which would be 21.49 for us, it's somewhat more difficult to pursue such plans, which is why we announced to extend our selling down back in our lock-up, yes, in January. I see. But I think from an industry perspective, you would still like to see there's a turning point before you commit for the buyback, right? Yes. Yes. Because we think this cycle would somewhat be prolonged as our competitors also have strength in terms of stronger, I guess, shareholder background. And also, we haven't heard things like the calling back the loan. So I think it's still early stage right now, but we're definitely keeping an eye and monitoring the market dynamics and decide when would be the good timing to start repurchasing. My last question is about the 2025 production guidance. It appears to be less than 50% of utilization, right? If you think about the capacity of the company, it's close to 300,000 and seems slightly lower than the numbers out there after the December CPIA meeting. We'd like to know if it is coherent with the supply-side self-discipline initiatives because there's a lower estimated demand in 2025. The production is lower in 2025, but is this basically the number you have in the self-discipline agreement? I think from the self-discipline measures, basically, overall, they would have a quota for the company based on your past shipping volume as well as your nameplate capacity as of now. And that's more like a maximum cap of the level of production that you can produce for the entire year. We haven't heard anything such as punishment associated with producing lower than the quota. And we have actually made our target for 2025 based on our own company strategy while complying to the self-regulation measures. I think our primary goal in 2025 is to maintain a level that would meet our customer demand while capping or reducing our cash cost for an entire year. I see. I see. So basically, it's possible. Could I say that if demand improves, there's a possibility to further increase a bit on the production if the demand really beats expectation? Yes. Yes. That's the guidance as we assess the market conditions right now. But there is a possibility of potentially increasing our utilization rates should the market demand become stronger than we expect. I see. That's very clear. Thanks a lot for taking my question. Great. Thanks, Alan. Thank you. The next question comes from Zihui Hu with CICC. Please go ahead. Thanks, Management. This is Zihui Hu from CICC. My first question is whether we participate in poly futures trading now and how to plan on it? And my second question is, what's the current inventory level of companies? Thanks. Thank you, Zihui. I'll answer the first question and then can answer the second question. In terms of the futures market, in the fourth quarter last year, we've already registered a label for the futures market and obtained relevant approvals. We are among the first batch of manufacturers to be able to participate in the futures market. After the futures market came online in December last year, the registered brands generally quoted above 45 RMB, but the listing price was relatively low at 38.6 RMB when it just opened. I would say it's more of a capital game right now. The main contract, which is the June 2025, has an average daily trading volume of about 10,000 lots, which is not a lot. The overall market pool is still relatively small right now. As it's trading at around 43-44.5, I believe, it has not yet met our expectations. I would say the willingness for us to participate is still relatively weak at the moment. In fact, I believe for other players, I think right now it's more preferable to transact with futures merchants to indirectly exploit the hedging opportunities. That being said, we're definitely monitoring the progress of the market and waiting to see more detailed guidelines on how to participate and see whether it would be a good strategy that fits our overall company strategy to take advantage of the futures hedging. Sure. And on top of. Sure. Okay. Go ahead. So the current sellable inventory for polysilicon for the company is less than 20,000 metric tons per month, and there's a decline of close to 10,000 metric tons compared to the end of last quarter. This is improving rapidly, I would say. Yeah. It's continuing to come down as well. Sure. That's all my questions. Thanks. Great. Thank you. This concludes our question and answer session. I'd like to turn the conference back over to Management for any closing remarks. Thank you, everyone, again, for participating in this conference call. Should you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact us. Thank you and have an awesome day. Goodbye. The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.