Yeah, let's kick off, I guess. Good afternoon and welcome, everyone, to a meeting with the MAS management team, post their FY 2021 results. Just representing MAS, we have Martin Slabbert, Irina Grigore, Dan Petrișor, and Leon Allison. We also have the MAS Chairman on call, Werner Alberts. Just note, everyone will be muted and the meeting is being recorded. To ask a question, please use the chat box, or raise your hand and I can unmute you. Otherwise, I'll drop my email address in the chat box, which you can also use. With that, I now hand over to Martin and Irina. Thank you. Cheers. Thank you, Ridwaan. We have published an updated company profile and highlights of the results on the company website. Investors are encouraged to review these disclosures in detail. Irina and I will be speaking without referring to the presentation specifically, and we'll take some questions after the presentation. The great set of results delivered for the 2021 financial year is a consequence of a journey that started in 2016. This journey was accelerated from November 2019, when we took over the management of MAS. In 2016, when MAS started investing in Central and Eastern Europe, it was a much smaller company with exposure to assets in Western Europe. By November 2019, approximately half of a significantly enlarged balance sheet was invested in Central and Eastern Europe, in assets that experienced exceptional high growth in rentals since acquisition, and with further high rental growth potential with the balance of the assets in Western Europe, those investments and assets with very limited growth potential. The company had approximately 30 staff, most doing accounting, with all of its property and asset management outsourced to third parties. The Western European investments diluted the effect of the Central and Eastern European growth on earnings. We agreed to take on the management of MAS in November 2019 with the aim, overwhelmingly agreed to by shareholders, to transform MAS into a company that, one, as a CEE business only. Two, has the ability to manage its investments in Central and Eastern Europe without reliance on third parties. Three, has the capacity to grow this business. Our ambition was to create a platform that would leave MAS in a position to deliver exceptional returns for shareholders, and with the potential to significantly outperform its peers in the medium to long term. We thought that we would need three years to achieve this. I am very proud to say that despite the challenges that COVID-19 threw our way, we have achieved our objectives, and I am confident that Victor and I are in a position to step down and hand over to a management team that has the knowhow and motivation to use the platform created for MAS to outperform its peers and deliver outstanding shareholders returns over the next five years. I am reminding you of what was achieved since November 2019. MAS's corporate structure was simplified and restructured for its Central and Eastern European focus. Operations were streamlined. Prime Kapital's former property and asset management team was integrated, and more staff was hired in Central and Eastern Europe, with the result that MAS has more than 200 full-time staff with a fully integrated in-house asset and property management function. MAS's listed securities portfolio was restructured. Most of MAS's Western European assets were disposed of. Around EUR 435 million worth of above book values. All MAS's Central and Eastern European properties, as well as operational properties in DJV, were certified as sustainable buildings, leaving MAS very well positioned from an ESG investment ranking perspective. MAS, despite its relative small size, obtained respectable inaugural credit ratings from Moody's and Fitch, and MAS issued a EUR 300 million unsecured five-year euro bond. All of this whilst we successfully navigated COVID. The result is that MAS is liquid and has an existing asset base and exposure to developments that should ensure, provided that the consumption growth that we expect in our markets materializes, to outperform in a spectacular way over the next few years. The company reinstituted dividends at 100% payout ratio and intends to maintain this for the foreseeable future. A note of caution. The pandemic is not yet over. It concerns us that vaccination rates in the group's markets are low compared to Western European averages. It is likely that further coronavirus related trading restrictions and social distancing measures will be imposed over the course of the 2022 financial year, causing volatility potentially in short-term results. We are ready for disruption, and we don't think that this will cause a change in dividend policy. Why do we say this? The business has returned to significant profitability with EUR 104 million of adjusted earnings for 2021 compared to last year's COVID-19 induced EUR 39 million loss. We have effectively dealt with the COVID-19 fallout in our markets and in our business. In our main market, Romania, GDP per capita is higher than pre-pandemic levels and consumption has recovered. Most encouragingly, tenants turnovers at MAS' Romanian commercial assets have generally been higher than 2019 trading levels for the six months to 30 June 2021. Cash collection rates are satisfactory and sales related to residential developments in the DJV remain strong. Further COVID-19 disruptions are not expected to negatively impact longer term earnings targets. Here is what we aim to achieve over the next five years. Annual like-for-like net rental growth of at least 4% on Central and Eastern European retail assets from a normalized post-COVID-19 base. Improvement to occupancy rates for the current Central and Eastern European retail assets to 99%. The completion in the DJV of commercial developments to the cost of approximately EUR 600 million at a weighted initial net yield of more than 9%. Residential sales and deliveries by the Development Joint Venture of approximately EUR 200 million per annum by the 2026 financial year at net after-tax margin of approximately 20%. Over the course of the next two financial years, direct acquisitions of high quality Central and Eastern European based commercial assets to the value of at least EUR 200 million, and an investment grade credit rating by the end of the 2026 financial year at the latest. These targets, including the investment grade credit rating, are achievable with the current capital base. In other words, without the need to issue more shares while maintaining a full payout to shareholders of distributable earnings and maintaining our self-imposed conservative debt limitations. Despite distributable earnings and dividend payments per share growth not being our sole focus, as you recall, our sole focus is on total returns, we are aware it forms an integral part of maximizing shareholders' returns, and that is important to property investors. Achieving these targets should lead to the company generating significant and outstanding growth in annual distributable earnings and in dividends per share. I've spoken a lot about the future. This should not overshadow the very impressive results achieved during the 2021 financial year. Irina will deal with this during the balance of the presentation. We hope to be introducing Irina later in the year when we are able to travel again to South Africa. Thank you, Irina. Thank you, Martin. Adjusted distributable earnings is EUR 0.0593 per share for the financial year. Tangible net asset value per share is of EUR 1.24 per share. These were driven by four main items. First, continuing strong operational performance of retail properties in Central and Eastern Europe, especially our Romanian open air malls, as Romania was least affected by closures and restrictions, combined with high rental and service charge collections within the context of the ongoing pandemic. Second, the second successful opening of a retail development during the pandemic. I'm talking about Sepsi Value Centre in Sfântu Gheorghe, Romania during March 2021. This new center, as well as Dâmbovița Mall in Târgoviște, Romania, opened in August 2020, also during the pandemic, have continued to trade very well. Third, because of these operational performances, valuations of assets have improved. Last, the group's restructured listed securities portfolio also performed well. The excellent progress with two strategically important matters weighed negatively on earnings for the period. This is the excellent progress with the sales in Western Europe and the bond issue. These two initiatives, even if their implementation weigh negatively on short-term performance, play a significant part in positioning the business for future growth. From an operational perspective, in CEE, tenant sales improved by 7% compared to the same period in 2019, before the pandemic. This is significant. As usual, open-air malls, with a 12% increase, did outstanding, and enclosed malls was on par with 2019. Compared to the same period in 2020, MAS' CEE tenant sales have improved by 23%. These improvements in sales, compared to 2019, were achieved despite like-for-like footfall in CEE being 85% of footfall in 2019. Collections were 98% of invoices. I know that MAS' initiative to also publish a pro forma collection rate seems to confuse some. I remind you that the pro forma collection rate compares a 98% collection of invoices to what invoices would have been if we were not in a pandemic. Due to COVID, we have granted waivers and discounts to struggling tenants. If you compare the impact on GLA, published on page four of the company profile, which is available on our website, to pro forma collection rate, you will notice a strong correlation. The excellent 87% pro forma collection rate achieved simply represents the business cash collection as compared to pre-pandemic rental entitlements. In other words, it shows the short-term disruption to the business in terms of cash collections. This should not be confused with the 98% collection rate, which is best in class. We are very encouraged as well with rent reversions being positive. On EUR 2.7 million worth of contract expiries, new base rent levels have improved by 1.2%. Rent reversions remained positive throughout the pandemic, while occupancy remained stable. MAS had access to more than EUR 424 million in liquidity at 30th of June 2021. This is an extremely well position for the company. Just a second. Perfect. Thanks, team. I'm going to start with some questions opening up to the floor. Great. Just from my side, just to get the ball rolling, occupancy of 93.2% reported. Has that improved since the letting of CCC in Dâmbovița Mall since June? How has that been performing, and has there been any improvement in the occupancy level? Who's taking that question? Is it Irina or Dan? I will. In terms of occupancy, we have a very clear asset management plan to improve occupancy in the medium term up to 99%. Yes. I think, Irina, it's also important to keep in mind that I think there are two areas as far as the improvement of occupancy is concerned. The first is that there are low-hanging fruit. You will recall that we're in the process of refurbishing the mall in Alba Iulia, and that is the asset with the lowest occupancy. It's below 90%. The other is that, the moment the refurbishment completes, which is expected by October this year, we would expect occupancy to improve there, and that will improve occupancy, obviously, in the rest of the portfolio. As far as developments are concerned, developments will have lower occupancy for the time being in the leisure segment of the business, because that is the area that was most affected by the pandemic to date. As we get out the pandemic and leisure tenants start to trade better, which is already the case, we expect that vacancy in the new developments will also follow. Perfect. I'm guessing the next question will be around tenant sales. Are you seeing the rate of growth as sustainable in the next three months, given what we perceive possibly as pent-up demand? Do you think that can be flowing through into the first half of 2022? Well, it's hard to say, and I'll let my colleagues jump in. Consumption has recovered to pre-pandemic levels in our markets. GDP is higher than what it was pre-pandemic. We do expect high growth in our markets. This is why we have retail assets, and this is also why we're doing residential developments. We haven't seen a slowdown in July and August. The same trading patterns that we observed from May, when all of our centers opened and people became used to moving more freely, has been the case since then. We can also mention that since June, there haven't been any strict lockdowns in our market so far. We haven't seen evidence of declining sales. Good. With regards to the operations in Bulgaria, I see the collection rates there have lagged other regions. Any reason as to why, and possibly recovery soon? Just a short clarification first. I think you may be referring to the pro forma collection rate. Yeah. As I mentioned a bit earlier, we track two indicators. First is the cash collection rate, which refers to collections of invoiced rents, and pro forma collection rates, which is a performance indicator during the pandemic. This pro forma collection rate reviews or measures the impact of waivers, discounts granted to tenants during the pandemic. Our pro forma collection rate of 87%, and I believe that's what you are referring to as well in respect of Bulgaria, encompasses the strict lockdowns that Bulgaria has went through in January, March, and April of 2021. In Bulgaria, on a cash collection rate of invoiced amounts, we are on par with other CEE countries, over 97%. In fact, Ridwaan, if you and the readers or the viewers, shall we say, of this broadcast, look at page four of the company results, you will notice that we show the impact on trading as an impact on GLA at the top of the slide, and then we show the pro forma collection rate at the bottom. You'll notice there is a very strong correlation between trading restrictions and the pro forma collection rate. You will notice, for instance, that when we had loads of closures, for instance, in April, the unrestricted open GLA was around 82%, and at that point, the pro forma collection rate went to about 80%. Really what happens is the pro forma collection rate at full collection just basically shows you to what extent the GLA was affected by the pandemic restrictions. One more question from me. Regarding the disposal program, which has been successful or extremely successful. Firstly, who's been the buyers of these assets, as well as the premium to book that you guys achieved, does that not bring into account maybe, do you think the valuations of your current European assets are conservative? Thank you, Ridwaan. No, we do not think they're conservative. What we think happened is the fact that the disposals were a result of a very well-structured disposal process, combined with very favorable monetary policy from the European institutions. In respect of the buyers of these assets, these are varied. It ranges from large institutions to even private individuals for some of the smaller assets. Dan, if you look at the assets that are remaining on the book, potential to sell those assets, if you had to provide some timeframe, what you're looking at? We have a few left. What we can say is that we have asset management initiatives for Flensburg Galerie. We are starting these initiatives. However, Flensburg Galerie will be sold opportunistically even before these initiatives are finalized. What we can also mention is the fact that the Adagio Hotel in Edinburgh, Scotland, will go on the market in September, considering the fact that Scotland is moving out of pandemic restrictions. Just a follow-up question on the disposal. At the moment, you've got about EUR 27 million of realization costs that are estimated. It's reduced by about EUR 25 million. Do you see further reduction in that number? It really depends on how successful the initiatives are on Flensburg, and also it depends on what pricing we can achieve on the hotel in Scotland. However, I think that that number is quite accurate and is our best estimate, considering the information we have now. Perfect. I see we have a hand up by Alexandre. You can unmute your mic. Hello. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Hey. Thank you very much for the presentation, congrats for these results. Really impressive, despite these tough times, unfortunately. I had a few questions. I just wanted to re-clarify, in terms of the assets you have for disposal, how much is that, roughly about EUR 200 million, which is left to be sold? Is it mainly the Western European assets, or it's less or more? So- Go ahead, sorry. As of 30th of June, we did indeed have EUR 231 million worth of Western European assets. To date, one of those properties, worth EUR 85 million, has already been completed. It had been contracted to be sold prior to 30th of June. We are now left only with EUR 127 million worth of assets, meaning the Flensburg Galerie asset, the Adagio Hotel, a small retail asset in Germany, and two pieces of land in U.K. Yeah. Page 17 of the presentation makes that quite clear. There are detailed notes there that the property that was contracted to be sold at the end of the financial year hasn't, in the meantime, been transferred. You can see the information there in detail. Got it. Thanks so much. The cash is not on balance sheet yet, that EUR 85 million. Got it. Not on 30 June. Yes. Got it. Yeah. The loans you have, are they mainly related to the Western European assets, or are they secured on that and therefore they will go away once you sell these assets? Or no, they are related to other? Yes. The only secured loans that we have left at 30th of June refer to Western European assets within MAS, and there is some secured loans in respect of the Development Joint Venture. If you are referring to our proportionate accounts, there is still some secured debt on the DJV side. Other than that, the bonds proceeds are unsecured. That proportional debt would be around EUR 30 million-EUR 40 million, not more than that, no? Yes. Well, it's in the numbers. On the 31st of June, 2021, you'll see liabilities in the DJV of EUR 12.4 million. That's massive, 40% of the liabilities. Fantastic. Sorry, just a last accounting question on that front. I see that on your balance sheet, you consolidate the full preference shares you have, like the full 247, while in the presentation you only show 60% of that, even though you own 100% of these preference shares. Why is that? MAS also owns 40% of the development joint venture. MAS owns 40% of the ordinary share capital of the development joint venture, however, provides 100% of the preference shares. To avoid double counting. Yes. On consolidation, we only see 60% of the preference shares. On consolidation on a proportionate basis, I mean. On IFRS, you will see 100%. In terms of economic benefit, you have the full preference shares, you own the full preference shares, and you also have 40%. Yes. Isn't it a bit conservative to only show the 60% on the presentation? Well, it's an accounting matter. If you proportionally consolidate, you would eliminate on consolidation 40% of the assets of the vehicle in which you invested because you have 40% of the ordinary shares. If you look at it from an IFRS perspective, the equity account, which you only show the net position. This is all accounting. Economically, you're absolutely right. MAS has 100% of the benefit of the preference shares and 40% of the ordinary shares after the preference share has been taken into account from economic perspective. Thanks so much. Last question, and then I'll leave it to the other investors. You're having a lot of cash in balance sheet. Can you give us a feel about what's your acquisition timeline? How much you think you're likely to spend in the next 12-24 months, and what's your leverage strategy? How fast you think your leverage likely to increase? What are the key parameters, which you use to show the bottom holders? Maybe I should respond to that question. We have a few things to take into consideration. Obviously, from an efficiency perspective, we would like to invest cash as soon as possible, provided that we invest it in sensible assets that we're convinced we can get good growth out of. We also want to grow the balance sheet to investment grade status as soon as we can. That's another pressure point from an investment perspective. At the same time, given that we're still in quite uncertain times, we're not rushing unnecessarily. We've set ourselves a target to invest at least EUR 150 million this financial year, which we're in at the moment. If we find, and we are looking at many potential acquisitions, if we find better acquisitions or more acquisitions, we will invest more and faster. Great, in terms of leverage, what's your I know you want to get to the high grade, you want to grow significantly, but to which extent are you willing to take more leverage? We're very conservative when it comes to debt. We have a self-imposed limitation. We don't want to have debt in excess of 7 x net rental income or in excess of 40% on an LTV basis. We will strictly keep to those limits, I don't think we wouldn't want to get too close to those limitations. Got it. Thanks a lot. Thanks, Alexandre. Next question from Jared Houston on the chat. Given the opportunity set, why move to 100% payout ratio? We understand that our investors have been keen for a dividend. We wanted to thank them for their patience. We had initially refused to pay dividends for a while, until we were in a position to ensure that MAS was able to cover its liabilities. We have since managed to achieve quite a lot of objectives, and even more so during the last financial year. We, or the board, has believed that this to be the most appropriate method of rewarding our shareholders for their patience. Yeah. Let me add to that. There are a number of considerations, and there will always be debate around this issue, and we appreciate that there are many different views. We are able to achieve all of our objectives with the current capital base and whilst maintaining a full payout. If that's the case, unless there are compelling other investments, we would be inclined to distribute a dividend. We will not hesitate, I think this is important to note, to cut the dividend if we consider it necessary. If we think that our ability to achieve an investment-grade credit rating is at risk, if we think that there are very good investment opportunities that we cannot otherwise fund by, for instance, selling lower-performing assets, or taking on more debt within our self-imposed gearing limitations, then we will also consider cutting dividends. Another potential possibility, if the share price reduces significantly, we may use distributable income to buy back shares. Talking about buying back shares, looking at your listed portfolio, the allocation to NEPI Rockcastle, what's the reason behind that instead of buying back MAS shares? I think considering our target of achieving an investment-grade rating and basically growing our asset base, it's always an option to also buy back shares. Also, we need to consider reducing the dividend in this case. Considering the investment case on NEPI and considering the results that it has produced, we believe this was the best use of the capital. Ridwaan, well, I think it's important that We think that share buybacks, shrinking the balance sheet whilst we're in the process of attempting to get to an investment-grade credit rating is not an option. We can't shrink the balance sheet at this point. If we're going to do this, we will do it with money that is earmarked for distributions, but not money that's earmarked for investment. The investment in NEPI Rockcastle, for now it's just you're getting a better return in a listed stock. That money potentially would be earmarked for developments going forward. Am I right? Yes. The share price of NEPI Rockcastle at the time when we decided to acquire shares, we thought was very attractive relative to the set of facts that was available to us. I don't think that we are saying that we should look as to how well the investment did with hindsight. That's not relevant. At the time, given what we knew about our markets and the trading in our markets, we thought that the shares were very attractively priced, and consequently, it made sense for us to acquire the shares at the time, whilst we were selling down the Unibail-Rodamco-Westfield and Klépierre shares that we owned. Then just coming back to the cash on the balance sheet, EUR 291 million. It's a large amount. I'm guessing that's after the issue of the five-year bond. What was the reason for issuing the bond before being investment-grade? What's the thinking behind that, given the strong balance sheet MAS already has? This is a question of who came first, whether the chicken or the egg. We did need access to debt capital markets in order to achieve scale. The bond market was in a good place when we decided to issue the bonds. It provided us with the opportunity to do so even prior to being investment-grade. We need to be mindful of the fact that in CEE, the secured bank debt market is quite limited and it is very competitive, let's say. Access to additional capital on the debt capital markets provide us with easier access to other sources of financing in order to achieve growth targets. Yes. I can only reiterate this, that access to debt, even at conservative levels, is important to build scale and bank debt markets in Central and Eastern Europe are just too fragmented and too small for us to be building scale relying on secured finance only. Okay. coming back to the talks of acquisitions, board target of EUR 150 million in 2022. Martin, our previous discussion we had at the previous results, was a lot of capital in the region. Opportunities weren't as many. Has environment changed? Let's say, on the timeframe to deploy this capital, at what yields? Can you give us some insight into that? Well, you asked me, I don't think that it's in our interest to discuss our thinking around acquisitions in a public forum, because there's not only investors that dial into these calls. We prefer to keep our thinking around investments and pricing to ourselves. There is opportunities that you guys are seeing. We're not going to answer the question. That is what you say. On the residential sales, EUR 200 million per annum of residential sales by 2026 achievable. Can you talk to us about the residential market in Eastern Europe? Yes. We wouldn't target something that we don't believe is achievable. We also don't target things that are not ambitious. It's certainly not a walk in the park, but we've set out on course to build a substantial residential business four years ago. We've made good progress. We'll be delivering our first units in the next few months, so we're very excited about that. We've got two other projects under construction now as well, with some added pipeline. There's probably more to come from a pipeline perspective. It's important, again, to mention that this is an incremental approach, so our development approach and the development vehicle is not to have commitments to construct things that we haven't started construction. We essentially have options on land, and we have the ability to phase and carry on with constructions as our sales are progressing. We'll manage risk from that perspective carefully. It's a build to sell model, not a build to rent. Am I right? Correct. It's a build to sell model. We think this is the trend in our market. J ust touching on the residential question again. Maybe you can just add to it. Could you perhaps share your latest views on the size of the residential development opportunity over the next five to 10 years? Maybe to ask differently, will MAS become a residential fund? MAS doesn't develop residential property, first of all. Yeah, I think there are a few things there. MAS is an investor in a development vehicle, a funding vehicle, which is jointly owned with Prime Kapital. MAS is not a developer. MAS is also not a fund. It's a company that manages assets. That's a fine point. Don't want to put too fine a point on it. MAS is not a developer. The development vehicle is one. I think that there is an enormous opportunity, potentially, for residential development in our part of the world. We have 20 million people, a lot of old communist buildings, and a population with growing income and growing consumption power that is looking to upgrade and improve their living spaces. There is quite an opportunity, but you're quite right, residential development is not the same as commercial development. It's also not the same as managing commercial assets. These are different disciplines and require different specializations. More of an interesting question here. Regarding the three-year mandate, just can you explain why stepping down in March rather than in November 2022? Werner is online, so if Werner needs to answer. Yeah. Just hand him the mic. This is appropriate for the Chairman to answer this question. Yeah. Good afternoon to everybody. It's great to be part of a presentation where such good results are being presented. Regarding the question, when we brought Martin and Victor in, there was a very clear mandate to help to restructure our group in line with the new strategy. Despite all the challenges we've had with COVID-19, they've absolutely excelled and delivered this much sooner than what we anticipated. By and large, the work that we needed them to help us reset the group strategy has now been done. At the same time, they've also been incredible in building a succession line of management that can drive the business forward. We've taken all of this into account, together with concerns that there have been from time to time regarding the conflicts of interest that may arise. Despite the way the board is managing it very effectively, it is always something that we take into account. Taking into account that they've by and large fulfilled on their mandate and that we have good, strong management in place now, the board felt it appropriate to accelerate the plans. Martin still has a lot to do between now and the end of March. We are confident that we will have the right management in place by the time that Martin wants to move and focus back more onto the Prime Kapital duties. Werner, with regards to the disposal of the remaining Western European assets, given that Martin is looking to step down in March, do you see any risk in those disposals, or how has the board thought about those? Fortunately, we're not dependent on Martin alone for that disposal process. There is an incredibly strong team that deals with it. That team gives regular feedback to the board, so we don't see risk linked to the acceleration of the succession plans. With regards to the exclusivity arrangement, now that Victor and Martin are stepping down, do Prime Kapital and MAS have an exclusivity arrangement regarding developments and acquisitions going forward? Nothing has changed in that regard. Just to remind the shareholders, and guys on the call at the moment, exclusivity arrangement is still in place. Yes. The development joint venture agreement, which predated on the November 2019 transaction, included an exclusivity clause between MAS and Prime Kapital until 2025. That has not changed as following the transaction, and will not change following the stepping down of Martin and Victor. With regards to management having shares in MAS, can they now sell their consideration in shares? Or can they sell their shares in MAS? None of those arrangements have been changed. Yes. Let me remind you then. There was a lockup that applies to the shares that we issued in November of 2019, a three-year lockup. That doesn't change. The fact that Victor is stepping off the board as an executive now, and I will step off as an executive, say, by March of next year, doesn't impact the lockup of the shares as such. In fact, you might have noticed in announcements during the year that they've actually invested more now in the group. It's certainly not a concern that they are running away. No. In fact, they're slightly nervous, if anything. No, I'm kidding. We're very comfortable and confident in our colleagues. We know each other very well, and we're confident that the team of more than 200 people that are managing MAS, the asset management team are superb. In our view, the best team in our part of the world. We're happy investors and looking forward to great returns in the years to come. Then with regards to the cost to the new management, because I remember initially, Martin, you were working for free. How will that impact the cost structure of the business going forward? Well, they're in the cost structure anyway. We're not adding anybody, and we had, in any event, a succession plan. It's not like the new executives could step in only at the end of the period, when Victor and I would've left originally in November of next year. We don't think there's any additional cost as such. In the previous announcement, Martin, with you stepping down, potentially being, if requested, to be a board member, is that still in play, whether non-exec or chairman? Martin will most certainly be invited to remain as a non-executive director. That's not changing. Will Martin accept? Yes, of course, I will. Until the shareholders feel that I should rather not be on the board because of potential conflicts of interest. That's kidding. I'm kidding. Probably not appropriate. Yeah. A question coming through with regards to MAS buying assets, will that be out of the DJV or within MAS's balance sheet? Well, if MAS acquires property, it will search for most appropriate acquisition targets in order to maximize shareholder value. Of course, the DJV itself is subject to a different governance structure. MAS may approach the DJV management to attempt to acquire some of their assets. Should there not be sufficient acquisition targets on the market. I think it's important, we've made this point before, and perhaps, I'll make the point anyway. There's no question of management of MAS deciding to do something rather than the DJV. It's not how the structure is set up. The DJV is a separate vehicle with its own governing structure, and MAS and the DJV take decisions independent of each other. MAS is an investor in the DJV. The DJV is set up primarily to develop assets. It is able to acquire assets also for redevelopment purposes. As you would've noted, and now I'm speaking not on behalf of the DJV, but given the announcement as to what the targets are for developments in the DJV, EUR 600 million worth of commercial developments at cost, plus residential sales to the value of around EUR 200 million per annum by 2026. I think one could conclude from that safely that the intention is to use the capital of the DJV for development purposes. Thanks. On the chat box, Alexandra asking a few more questions. Why did receivables increase so much in the second half of 2021? I will answer that, of course. When we look at receivables on a proportionate basis, we will see quite fast where the increase comes from. I would like to remind that by 31st of December 2020, MAS had agreed on a number of share purchase agreements for sales of Western European assets. A significant part of the increase in receivables refers to receivables due to transactions completed to 30th of June 2021. Mostly in respect of U.K. properties, Langley and North Street Quarter, part of which will be collected at a later date. Some of those U.K. properties in simpler, non-accountant language, are sold in installments, and there are payments that are still due on those sales. With regards to NRI, it's been a bit weaker in the second half compared to the first. Why is that? Shall we expect some softening going forward on a recovery, or recovery? In total, NRI would have decreased in the second part of the year due to the fact that transactions which had been concluded prior to December have completed in the six-month period to 30th of June. We would be missing some of the NRI coming from Western European assets that have been disposed during this period. Yes. I think what I would advise shareholders to do is have a look at the proportion of the accounts. You would expect that net rental income in CEE will continue to grow. It also has been the case in the last six months, if you compare six months to six months results. Net rental income in Central and Eastern Europe is up. That's a combination of improved rental income. We have noted that passing rent increased. On top of this, there are developments that completed. That will continue to be the case. Western Europe will phase out eventually to zero in the next two years, as the rest of the business grows. I have seen the comment as well in respect of like for like, net of disposals and so on. We would have seen as well that in the second part of the financial year has been affected by stricter lockdowns in Poland and Bulgaria. This had an effect on actual NRI, of course. Question from Simon: What would MAS' tax rate be on a normalized basis? Can- I'm not sure I understand the question. What tax rate on a normalized basis mean? There are detailed notes in the- Financial statements financial statements calculating the effective tax rate of the group. I suggest you have a look there. Exactly. With regards to the timing of the preference share drawdown, what's your thinking around that? Maybe can you give us a sense of how you will deploy capital if you see acquisitions and developments? Is it firstly your listed portfolio? Is it cash? From MAS' perspective, we have a commitment to the DJV to invest in preference shares as and when the DJV requests it. This is limited to EUR 120 million on a 12-month basis. As and when the DJV requests additional funding through preference shares, then MAS is committed to offer this. We do keep this in mind when we do our cash management, of course. It is not MAS' prerogative to discuss how the DJV invests that capital once it has it. Sure. If you could give us some timing or to an amount that's expected to be drawn down in the next year? It would be a maximum of EUR 120 million. Where do you see leverage moving to in 2021, moving to in 2022, I guess, FY 2022? That would be dependent on our successful acquisition program, of course. We would be seeing a further, an even further decrease in LTV, which effectively now to date would be having reached 4% from 13% with the completion of New Beer House asset. This would further decrease as and when we sell down on remaining Western European assets. As we deploy capital, we would see the investment property increasing, therefore the leverage increasing as well. What is the reason for the reduced margin on the residential developments? Is there further risk to the downside? Well, first, there isn't any reduced margin on residential developments. I presume what happens is that the person who asked the question read that we have a 20% minimum after-tax target for residential developments, which compares to the development pipeline margin figures, which are pre-tax. That could be the reason for the question. No, the answer is we're not expecting a reduction in margin. The 20% net after-tax margin is the minimum margin that we aim to achieve with residential developments. Can you talk about the Silk District development? It has been on hold for a while now, but I see permitting has been approved. Yes. How is tenant demand developing, especially within the office buildings? When COVID became part of our reality in March of last year, we put the office development on hold, and we focused on residential development for Silk District. In the meantime, we were working on permitting, which came significantly later than what we expected. It's been quite a frustrating process from a permitting perspective, but that's part of the development business. We have the ability on that site to do 100% residential or mixed use. In other words, part residential and part office. The residential demand is exceptionally strong. We had more than 300 reservations even before we got the permitting, and we opened sales only in late February this year. Only since late February were clients able to make reservations, and as I said, we had had more than 300 residential sales reservations by then. We started converting those to sales contracts post-permitting. You've seen more than 180 contracts have been converted from reservations to actual firm sales contracts in the meantime. We will be speaking to office tenants in the months to come. We're not in a particular rush to start the office development. If there's demand at acceptable levels, we will do some office development. If there isn't, we will simply fill the site with residential development, which is ample demand for. With regards to reaching the target of being investment grade rated by 2026. Besides size, what are the other major criteria that you need to meet? Size is the main criteria that needs to be met. As long as we keep our very strong operational covenants in check, as well as our strong balance sheet position and liquidity profile, even less than it currently is. Achieving the size target should be sufficient. The size target is $2 billion, whereas we are now at EUR 1.3 billion. Yes. Just to add to that, 2026 is the longest. In other words, we want to get there before 2026, if we're able to do that. We want to get there by 2026 latest. That is the target that we put out. Just to get to the $2 billion, besides the board's target of EUR 150 million in 2022, you still need to develop another additional about EUR 150 million-EUR 200 million of acquisitions. Are you seeing that many opportunities in CEE? It's a combination of factors which gets you to EUR 2 billion. Sorry, $2 billion balance sheet. Yes. This includes completed developments of commercial assets, as well as the current assets, as well as acquisitions, as well as the growth in asset values that you achieve over the period, depending on how successfully you manage the assets and how successfully you pick acquisitions. We think that if we achieve the targets that have been set out over this period, the combination of those factors or a different combination will lead us to a balance sheet size of around $2 billion by that point at the latest. If there's slower growth or we have fewer acquisitions or we don't secure the developments that we're looking for, we won't achieve that, and then we'll have to acquire more assets. Like any other thing, this is the strategy, these are the targets, and as our circumstances change, we may have to adopt our strategy accordingly. What is the current shareholding of PKM Associates in MAS? Prime Kapital and its associates. Prime Kapital and its associates, yes. Including the development joint venture and Prime Kapital shareholders. That would be around 21% of MAS. This is, as mentioned by our Chairman earlier, bodes well for the future as one of our most significant shareholders is also very invested in the business. A follow-up question on that. Would you be increasing that yield? That is not something that I can answer. Yes. We could ask the same question of many shareholders at this meeting. I don't think this is an appropriate subject for discussion at a presentation. Just a few on the chat. Would you also be raising a new bond in 2022 in case you see more acquisition opportunities? It is a possibility, yes. Martin already answered the question by mentioning that circumstances may change. We will adapt to the circumstances. Last question, what is the minimum liquidity you would keep on the balance sheet? We would keep sufficient amounts of liquidity, both on the balance sheet as well as off balance sheet, through unsecured committed facilities, in order to cover existing liabilities and any commitments to the development joint venture. Perfect. Thanks. Doesn't seem we have any more questions. I think looking at the time, we can end it. Thank you to the MAS management team, and thank you to all those that have dialed in. Enjoy the rest of your day. Bye. Thank you very much, everyone. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Bye-bye.