加载中...
共找到 26,249 条相关资讯
One of the most difficult parts of navigating the stock market for investors is the inherent unpredictability. On February 28th, the United States attacked Iran and began Operation “Epic Fury.
Wall Street surged on Tuesday, lifted by speculation about a potential de-escalation in the Middle East conflict that has sent oil prices soaring and fueled fears of global inflation in recent weeks.
Wall Street closed sharply higher on Tuesday, buoyed by growing speculation that the conflict between the United States and Iran could de-escalate, easing pressure on energy markets and global inflation expectations. All three major US indexes rallied after a report indicated that Donald Trump is willing to end the military campaign against Iran even if the Strait of Hormuz remains largely closed.
Comprehensive cross-platform coverage of the U.S. market close on Bloomberg Television, Bloomberg Radio, and YouTube with Bailey Lipschultz, Katie Greifeld, Carol Massar and Tim Stenovec. -------- More on Bloomberg Television and Markets Like this video?
The S&P 500 and Nasdaq now offer quality companies at attractive valuations, making broad US equity exposure compelling for long-term investors. Index heavyweights like NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, and GOOGL have experienced EPS growth and multiple compression, improving margin of safety.
Microsoft, Nvidia, and other Magnificent Seven stocks are cheaper relative to the S&P 500, but investors remain uncertain about the durability of the AI trade.
March saw a huge spike in volatility due to a new regional war in the Middle East, which triggered a huge rally in energy and other commodity prices. Global recession risks may hinge on whether the Strait of Hormuz gets reopened for transit over the next month.
Operator: Good day, and welcome to the Bitfarms Fiscal 2025 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this call is being recorded. I would like to turn the call over to Jennifer Drew-Bear from Bitfarms Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Jennifer Drew-Bear: Thank you, and welcome to Bitfarms Fiscal Year 2025 Conference Call. With me on the call today are Ben Gagnon, Chief Executive Officer and Director; and Jonathan Mir, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, please note this call is being webcast with an accompanying slide presentation. Today's press release and our presentation can be accessed on our website under the Investors section. Turning to Slide 2. I'd like to remind everyone that certain forward-looking statements will be made during the call, and that future results could differ from those implied in this statement. The forward-looking information is based on certain assumptions and is subject to risks and uncertainties. And I invite you to consult Bitfarms 10-K for a complete list. Also, please note that references will be made to certain non-GAAP financial measures, and therefore, may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. We invite listeners to refer to today's press release and our 10-K for definitions of the aforementioned non-GAAP measures and their reconciliations to GAAP measures. Please note that all financial references are denominated in U.S. dollars, unless always noted. And now turning to Slide 3. It is my pleasure to turn over the call to Ben Gagnon, Director and Chief Executive Officer. Ben, the floor is yours. Ben Gagnon: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our fiscal year 2025 earnings call. In 2025, we made a bold decision to walk away from our legacy business, Bitcoin, and build the infrastructure in North America for what comes next, HPC and AI. It was a year of deliberate and consequential transformation with a clear mandate. Secure North American pipeline, strengthen our balance sheet, accelerate site development, and position ourselves to engage customers from a place of operational momentum at the peak of the energy bottleneck constraining the growth of AI. I can say with confidence and pride that we accomplished exactly what we set out to do. The foundation you see today, the capital structure, the sites, the team, the strategy was engineered through deliberate choices, developed with discipline and built to propel us forward. We made foundational changes to reposition the business and made 100% of our focus on North American HPC infrastructure development. No half measures, no compromises and in time, no Bitcoin. We built a new company. And while we are presenting as Bitfarms today, tomorrow marks our beginning as Keel infrastructure. The name says it all. A Keel is the bottom of structural component of a vessel. It's what keeps it stable and moving forward in the right direction regardless of the condition above the water line. It is structural, it is essential, and it is exactly how we see our role in the HPC and infrastructure landscape. We are not here to compete with hyperscalers or neoclouds. We are here to enable them. Our focus is providing the critical and largely invisible foundation that will allow the world's most advanced AI platform to deploy on time and scale without interruption. We expect to close the re-domiciliation and finalize our rebranding efforts tomorrow, April 1, and we'll begin trading under the ticker KEEL, 2 business days after completion of the transaction on the Nasdaq and the TSX. We are entering this new phase from a position of strength. With over 2 gigawatts in our pipeline, Keel is a regional leader with some of the largest power land portfolios in some of the highest demand markets in North America and with robust financial strength to execute against our plan. Our current liquidity is far in excess of the CapEx budgeted to get us through permitting and ultimately to start signing leases, giving the company significant financial flexibility to execute on our strategy. And our strategy is equally as clear. We are designing all of our site and campus developments as either powered shell or co-location facilities. We believe this is where we can deliver the most value to shareholders and serve our potential customers at the speed and to the specifications they need. We were originally exploring in parallel to co-location the potential benefits of pursuing a small amount of GPU as a service at our Washington site, Moses Lake, where due to the lowest cost power for data centers in the country and a relatively smaller footprint, we believe it could be an avenue to drive additional shareholder value. Since our last quarterly call, we have spoken with an increased volume of potential customers. And it's clear from those conversations, the most accretive business model for the site is one of co-location. This is not specific to Moses Lake and applies to all of our other sites as well, where demand is even higher. So we will focus on what we do best, being an infrastructure developer and owner. This plays directly to our core competencies. We are a team of developers united by disciplined action, building cost-effective institutional-grade infrastructure at the pace our customers require. The same capabilities have built our energy platform, speed to market, capital discipline, operational rigor precisely what HPC and AI deployments demand today. This is just the natural extension of what we do best. So with all the pieces in place and with the overwhelming support of our shareholders who voted over 99% in favor of the HPC and AI pivot, the U.S. redomicile and the rebrand. Starting tomorrow, we are Keel infrastructure. Turning to Slide 4. When we sat on our pivot, we developed a 3-year transformation plan, one that as of today, we are nearly halfway through completing. In 2025, we did the intensive foundational work for our transformation, including the Stronghold acquisition, securing more power in Pennsylvania, rebalancing the portfolio to North America, a $588 million raise fully institutional and oversubscribed, our U.S. GAAP transition, New York headquarters and establishing a new executive team. This work is done. With power and land secured in some of the power markets that matter most, a team of internal experts and strategic partners that have built data centers for the largest companies in the world and a balance sheet engineered to see us through 2026, we are well positioned to continue our site development and deliver against the time lines, our prospective hyperscalers and neocloud customers need. 2026 is all about execution. Effective tomorrow, we will have completed our redomiciliation to the United States and officially rebranded as Keel infrastructure. Two major milestones that position the company for the next phase of growth. With that complete, we expect the next significant milestones to come from executing against our development at Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake, where we are moving full steam ahead and working diligently across three simultaneous and active work streams. One, finalizing permits, which we expect to be done in the coming months. Two, continued work on architecture and engineering in line with ongoing customer conversations and requirements. And of course, three, our go-to-market to secure highly financeable leases with investment-grade tenants. Commercialization is well underway. The upcoming milestones investors can expect are completion of preconstruction activities like permitting, progress in customer engagement and ultimately lease execution, which we are confident we can achieve this year and will be major catalysts. 2026 is also the year where we expect to leave Bitcoin and Bitcoin mining behind. While we were probably one of the first miners to commence wind down of our Bitcoin mining exposure to reinvest that capital into infrastructure for HPC and AI, we will be accelerating those efforts in 2026 as site developments progress. 2027 is all about delivery. This is the year when we anticipate that sites would come online, we'd begin delivering megawatts to customers, HPC and AI revenue really begins and we complete our transition to a premier North American HPC and AI infrastructure company. By the end of 2027, we expect Keel will be a proven infrastructure developer and a regional leader across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec, and we will just continue to grow and scale from there in 2028 and beyond to over 2 gigawatts as we execute against our expansion capacity. Turning to Slide 5. In HPC infrastructure, power, location and time lines are everything. We hold something scarce and valuable secured power, land and expansion capacity in Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec. Some of the most in-demand markets with some of the biggest barriers to entry. We know it and so do our potential tenants. Our campuses offer solutions to hyperscalers and neocloud's greatest scaling problems, location, proximity and fiber connectivity to major metro areas and data center clusters solving for latency issues and giving our tenants proximity to their own customers and other data centers. Time lines. Our robust secured power for '26, '27 and with expansion capacity in 2028 is highly coveted in an environment where energy capacity is hard to find and multiyear waitlists are the norms. We create value for tenants by enabling them to deploy years earlier by leasing from us rather than to invest in growing organically. An energy-efficient cool climate, the lower the PUE, the more critical megawatts. Panther Creek is a great example of seeing the hyperscaler and neocloud's appetite at play. While there is a lot of interest in the site last year, inbound customer activity surged after we secured zoning in February. This is not a coincidence. It is the proof point and one that we've been making for the last year, but may still be confusing to some investors. So we'd like to be clear that investment-grade tenants value derisk sites where they can move from lease to revenue fast. The more we advance, the better our leverage. The better our leverage, the better the leases, and the more long-term value we create for shareholders. Turning to Slide 6. It is indisputable that power is the binding constraint for AI infrastructure deployment and will remain so for the coming years. Leading investment banks, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, Guggenheim, Moelis, they've all published extensively on this. And the consensus is clear. New power generation cannot come online fast enough to meet AI demand today, tomorrow or in the next 5 years. This bottleneck is structural, not cyclical. Hyperscalers and neoclouds that used to plan on 12-month horizons are now locking in 24- to 36-month supply chain commitments. Not tied to specific projects, but as platform level agreements and are now actively competing for the power and land to deploy it. While you are probably familiar with this information, here you can see a summary of the five development sites. The power we have secured and in some cases, the incremental power opportunities that make up our 2.2 gigawatt pipeline. Turning to Slide 7. I want to take a moment to put our current valuation context because there is a meaningful disconnect between where we trade today and the value we are positioned to capture as a company. When we analyze our current valuation against our peers, the picture becomes clear, at approximately $1.9 million per available megawatt of secure 2027 capacity, we're trading in the middle of a Bitcoin miner Group, valued at roughly $1.7 million to $2.1 million for 2027 megawatt meaning we are being valued based on having power but not what we are doing with it. For shareholders and bondholders, we see three distinct catalysts, each capable of driving meaningful reratings. The first is obviously lease execution. Across our sector, companies that have signed leases trade at $4 million to $6 million per 27 megawatts, a 2 to 3x premium to where we are today. This is the market's consistent signal driven entirely by lease execution, not facility delivery, not revenue generation, just signed leases. A signed lease secures revenue and financing derisking the developments. The market pays for that with nearly 500 megawatts actively being commercialized today and visibility on permitting across Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses lake, this catalyst is well within reach. The second catalyst and arguably the most powerful for long-term holders is securing our expansion capacity. 2/3 of our 2.2 gigawatt portfolio or approximately 1.5 gigawatts is expansion capacity, which we believe the market is assigning little to no value. While securing these megawatts is a process that will take more time, we believe additional megawatts can be secured in the second half of 2026 requiring very little CapEx while representing significant embedded value as powered land even before a lease is signed or there is a shovel in the ground. The third catalyst is delivering in 2027. Once facilities are derisked through commissioning and begin generating revenue under long-term contracts, the development risk should drop dramatically and the operator valuation numbers become transformational yet again. We are not taking a leap of faith on technology, our ability to see our power or market demand. The tech is here. The power is secured, the sites are advancing, the inbound demand is real, but the market has not yet priced in is the transformation that happens when a developer becomes a counterparty when we move from site advancing to lease executing. This is the main opportunity ahead of us to accelerate permitting, execute leases, secure our expansion capacity and ultimately deliver to our customers. This is how we will create value for our shareholders and bondholders. Turning to Slide 8. Our execution plan is defined by six areas, each supporting our ability to deliver at the pace and scale our future customers require. First, we've secured our deep bench of talent by adding over 60 years of infrastructure and development in over 50 years of data center construction experience combined in just the past few months. People have delivered at scale for the most demanding customers in the world. Jonathan Mir joined as CFO, bringing 25 years of energy infrastructure strategy and project finance expertise. We have also added an SVP of construction and of power, a VP of HPC Operations and Head of permitting to oversee the execution of these critical functions. We've assembled the right team to execute on our vision. Second, we are engaging the right industry leaders as partners, T5, Turner Construction, Corgan, [ WWT ], Vertiv. These firms have built data centers for the world's largest hyperscalers not once but hundreds of times. When customers look at our project partners, which will be available on the new website when it launches tomorrow, they will see that we have also assembled the right partners to ensure better outcomes. Third, we have the capital required to bring our sites to market. As of March 27, 2026, our liquidity stands at $520 million in cash and Bitcoin, which we expect is much more than the CapEx budgeted to get us to a lease at Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Jonathan will go into more detail on our capital position and financing strategy shortly, but the headline is simple. We're well funded and can move fast. Fourth, a disciplined Bitcoin exit. It is clear we are no longer a Bitcoin miner. However, with strong, robust liquidity, we can have a disciplined approach to our exit strategy. We will continue to operate up until the time sites need to be prepared for construction maximizing free cash flow before selling the miners. We will also opportunistically sell Bitcoin into strength to capture and reinvest every dollar we can into HPC and AI infrastructure. Fifth, power assets that cannot be replicated. Our megawatts sit in regions with large barriers to entry, Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec, all have multiple year waitlists. No one is cutting the line. Our 350 megawatts at Panther Creek, 110 megawatts at Sharon and 18 megawatts in Washington were secured before the AI demand wave made these markets highly coveted. This isn't power others can easily replicate giving us competitive edge with high-quality tenants to understand these markets and are hungry for assets like ours, which leads us to our sixth point. In this market, speed to power is what drives value. For our customers, the opportunity cost of delayed deployment is huge. So the priority is getting capacity online as quickly as possible. Every day of delay is lost revenue. As a result, power availability and certainty of delivery are the primary drivers of lease economics. This dynamic has pushed lease rates higher since our Q3 call, exactly as we said it would. The opportunity in front of Keel infrastructure is real. We now have the assets and the team is ready. I'm so proud of what we built in 2025, and I'm confident in what we'll deliver in 2026 and 2027. With that, I'll turn the call over to Jonathan. Jonathan Mir: Thanks, Ben. Turning to Slide 9. I joined the team 5 months ago. My focus has been on sharpening our approach to capital allocation, strengthening our balance sheet and capital structure and ensuring the financing actions support long-term shareholder value creation. I've had a front row of the depth of talent, the operational discipline and the strategic momentum across Bitfarms. I work closely with our operations and development teams both to understand the current trajectory of our assets and to ensure our capital plans are aligned with the opportunities ahead. What stood out to me is the extraordinary potential we have driven by the quality and potential of our sites, a strong balance sheet, the best liquidity position in the company's history and a broad team that's both deeply engaged and committed to excellence. We're moving quickly and with purpose. I'm pleased to be here with you today and discuss the progress we're making. I'll use this time to walk through our performance for fiscal year 2025 and outline our current capital strategy that we believe supports the accretive growth we're targeting for 2026 and beyond. Turning to Slide 10. Before discussing our financials for the quarter, I want to briefly frame the results are presented this quarter. As of Q3 2025, the Paso Pe facility in Paraguay has been classified as held for sale. As a result, all revenues, operating costs and asset balances associated with Paso Pe are treated as discontinued operations in our fiscal year 2025 financials. So when I refer to continuing operations, I am speaking exclusively about our North American platform, the foundation of our transition into HPC and AI infrastructure. With that, revenue for fiscal year 2025 was $229 million, up 72% year-over-year. Operating loss for fiscal year 2025 was $150 million including noncash depreciation of $98 million and $28 million of impairment charges. This compares to an operating loss of $28 million in 2024, which included $102 million of noncash depreciation and $4 million of impairment charges. Net loss for 2025 was $209 million or a $0.38 loss per basic and diluted share compared to a 2024 net loss of $7 million or $0.02 loss per basic and diluted share. The differences between 2024 and 2025 were driven by a number of factors, including change in fair market value of digital assets, primarily due to the decline of Bitcoin prices and realization of gains on disposal of Bitcoin during the year. Two additional items also impacted year-over-year comparability. First, we saw a loss of $68 million, reflecting changes in our derivative assets and liabilities. Second, 2025 impairment charges were $25 million higher than in 2024. For the year, our adjusted EBITDA was $29 million compared to $31 million in 2024. Turning to Slide 11. 2025 was a deliberate year of balance sheet optimization and improvement, providing the foundation for our next phase of growth. We successfully issued an oversubscribed $588 million convertible offering, significantly expanding our liquidity. And in February, we repaid the Macquarie debt facility eliminating legacy debt, simplifying our capital structure and freeing the company from covenants. Each of these supports the pursuit of our HPC infrastructure strategy. The Macquarie facility had been originally used to accelerate development at Panther Creek, funding critical project activities, including long lead time item procurement and substation work. Retiring the facility was a strategic decision, strengthens the balance sheet and gives us the flexibility to secure a more cost-effective financing at either the parent or project level. Our current cash position of $520 million provides the runway to advance Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake through lease execution without accessing capital markets. Though we may do so if attractive opportunities arise that improve our ability to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. Macquarie was an excellent partner, and we appreciate their support so early in our pivot to HPC AI infrastructure. Turning to Slide 12. As we pivot to commercialization of our development sites, we have a clear financial strategy based on three principles. Capital allocation, capital formation and capital structure. Taken together, they are designed to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. First, capital allocation. We deploy capital into projects where the earnings potential exceeds their weighted average cost of capital. We rotate capital from businesses that are noncore or earning less than optimal returns and deploy the capital into higher return investments. Second, capital formation. Our financing strategy is designed to fund our very large growth opportunities while maintaining the liquidity needed for a stable base of operations. We will be opportunistic in our financing execution. We will fund construction of our data center projects using project or parent level bet and project or parent level equity or equity-linked offerings. We're taking a disciplined approach and at this time, are well capitalized to actively commercialize and execute leases across Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Third, capital structure. Our capital structure is designed to capture the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns while also retaining overall corporate flexibility and support growth. Our objective is to operate with a deliberate liquidity strategy in order to enable clear-headed commercial decisions and capital allocation decisions rather than having liquidity drive time lines. Stepping back, our road map is clear. We are building a regionally focused high-growth HPC AI infrastructure platform, grounded in disciplined capital allocation, a strengthened balance sheet and a development cadence that maximizes returns and minimizes risk. We're funded through the key derisking stages, permitting and leasing across Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek and we're entering 2026 with momentum, optionality and a balance sheet engineered for growth. We have the right people, assets, liquidity and strategy and we're well positioned to capture for our shareholders the long-term value potential we have today. With that, I'd like to return the call to Ben for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Jonathan. A little over a year ago, as our team began actively integrating AI into both our business and our daily lives, we came to a realization. This isn't just another technology cycle. It's a paradigm shift. More comparable to the industrial revolution than the Internet revolution. The fundamental measure, productivity capacity is no longer calories or joules, but tokens. This became strikingly clear 2 weeks ago at NVIDIA GTC, where I witnessed hundreds of companies applying AI to everything from straightforward tasks by cleaning and image generation to extraordinary complex applications, including protein folding, cystic simulations and even brain surgery. Walking the conference floor, speaking to the attendees, one thing was unmistakable. We've only begun to scratch the surface of AI's potential. Yet even in these early days, AI is already empowering individuals, communities and companies to accomplish exponentially more. We're witnessing Jevons Paradox unfold simultaneously across every industry, thanks to AI, where improved efficiency can paradoxically drive higher, not lower demand. It is literally never cost less to transform an idea into an action, a product, an image, a refined concept, a service or countless other outlets. The possibilities are truly limitless, and while no one can predict exactly how AI will reshape our future, uncertainty remains. It will require enormous amounts of power. Our 2.2 gigawatts of capacity and strategically position land across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec sit directly in the path of this transformation, and we intend to capitalize on that opportunity for our shareholders. We look forward to the opportunities ahead. With that, I would like to open the call to Q&A. Operator, please go ahead. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from Mike Grondahl with Northland. Mike Grondahl: First question, Ben, you talked about your decision not to go the GPU rental route at Moses Creek. And just the colocation route, could you talk a little about what a couple of the major drivers were that got you to that decision? Ben Gagnon: Yes, it's a great question, Mike. When we first started talking about in Q3, we were always evaluating this alongside with the colocation. We're trying to maximize the value for shareholders. So we're always going to evaluate multiple different business models at our sites. And because they have the lowest cost energy and all these other benefits, we thought it would make a lot of sense. But as we've continued to have increasing amounts of customer conversations for Washington and other sites. It was just really clear to us that the best opportunity for us is to just remain a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner and let these customers who really want these megawatts lease these megawatts. Mike Grondahl: Got it. Got it. And then maybe secondly, you articulated, I'll say, a philosophy a quarter or 2 ago about waiting and waiting on signing a lease as terms were continuing to improve kind of implying you're going to be really patient and wait on a lease. Could you kind of update how you're thinking about that lease execution strategy and the potential timing around it? Ben Gagnon: Yes. Our strategy on lease execution has been consistent. It remains consistent today. Our view is that the best way to maximize value for shareholders is to get the best terms in a lease because that's going to be what is going to be driving our NOI and our multiple. And so when we're looking to sign 10- to 15-year agreements, it's really important for us to take the -- maybe a little bit more time than investors may want us to in order to get better terms for longer. When it looks at what is really driving the value in these lease economics, one of the biggest elements is risk, and we've spoken to this multiple times over the last couple of months. And the biggest risk for most of the people -- to go out there and have conversations and get a lot of interest. And in some cases, you could even sign a lease prior to getting permits. But all of that risk is going to be priced into the agreement, you're going to be locked into it for 10 to 15 years, and that's going to negatively impact the long-term value that we're creating for shareholders. So our strategy has been incredibly consistent. And the benefit for us is that we are operating in high demand markets with high barrier to entry. So it takes a little bit longer to get permits going in Pennsylvania or in Washington than it does in Texas, which is the easiest market in the United States for that. But we believe that drives a lot of extra value because it's way more scarce, it's way harder to acquire and there's just not as much optionality. Operator: Our next question comes from Brett Knoblauch with Cantor Fitzgerald. Brett Knoblauch: Maybe to start, could you maybe just go into detail on what permits at what sites you guys are waiting to receive? Ben Gagnon: So permits is a complicated process, and we are develop -- we're getting permits across multiple sites in multiple jurisdictions. So they all have different rules, different regulations, different time lines, different reviews, different authorities. So it's far too much detail to get into exactly what permits are remaining on all the different sites. But we are continuing to make good progress and kind of -- we're looking at the visibility over the next couple of months. And with what we've had so far with the community engagement success that we've had so far, we think that in the coming months, sometime around the mid- to late summer time. we should be achieving the full permitted status across at least one, if not all of the sites. Brett Knoblauch: And then maybe just on the leasing environment across the different sites that you guys have. I guess we were under the impression that maybe Sharon would be first to go given it's relatively further along. Is that still how you guys are thinking about it? And then in the presentation when you guys kind of list the power pipeline and road map. How much of that is from generation on site that you guys are looking into? And do you have any update on where you guys are with respect to sourcing that generation? Ben Gagnon: Yes, sure. So the -- to answer the second part of your question first, all the power that we're talking about developing for our HPC and AI data centers right now is grid connected. So the two operating power plants that we have at Scrubgrass and Panther Creek. Currently, that math is not in those charts for the secured capacity or the site development plans. But in Scrubgrass particular, we are working to expand the generation capacity there with natural gas. So we've been working to tap into the Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline. We're achieving pretty good results there with the engineering firms. There's still probably another month or two to go before we're getting a clear path forward on the engineering plans. But Scrubgrass is our more of our pipeline site. And so those -- that power generation opportunity is more of a 2028 and 2029 time line. Everything else is grid connected, it's secure today or it's currently active. And sorry, Brett, I'm blanking on the first part of your question, would you mind repeating it? Brett Knoblauch: Yes. Just on maybe the cadence of which sites are -- quicker to go? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So really, that's going to be driven by success on permitting time lines in the customers. So all three of the sites, Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek are all actively in our go-to market right now. Every single one of those has customers engaged under NDA, and they have for quite some time. And so we're continuing to push forward on those conversations and those negotiations. Really, I think what investors should think about with regards to permits, permits are more of a closing condition to a lease, right? They're really not a starting condition to a negotiation. So we have these conversations and these negotiations simultaneously while we're working towards permitting. As permitting gets closer and closer, the negotiations will also get closer and closer in tandem and the first site to get leased is likely to be the first site to be permitted. Operator: Our next question comes from Stephen Glagola with KBW. Stephen Glagola: Just on that last point, if you could clarify the sequencing here between like notice to proceed and lease execution. So in other words, like can you pre-sign leases contingent on notice to proceed? Or is like notice to proceed required before any major customer would commit to a lease? Ben Gagnon: For a customer commit to binding in our view, they're going to want NTP, and that's based on the number of conversations that we are continuing to have and there probably are some customers who would be interested to sign prior to NTP, but those aren't the investment-grade counterparties that we're really seeking to engage with. Stephen Glagola: Okay. And then just one more. How are you thinking about like Vera Rubin hardware availability in '26 and like early '27? And to what extent could that variability in supply influence the timing of lease discussions at your sites? Ben Gagnon: Yes. That's a good question, Stephen. We've been talking about Vera Rubin, I think, since Q3 call because all of our sites are basically coming online in 2027. So we're trying to make sure that they are designed for the highest level of equipment that's coming out in '27 and '28, which is the Vera Rubin. In terms of supply, we haven't seen any impact so far. I understand there's always geopolitical uncertainty in the world that may impact those supply chains. But given that energy is such a huge bottleneck, and it's always been a huge bottleneck on the growth. I don't think that there is going to be a geopolitical situation that's going to make the bottleneck change from energy over to GPUs. So we don't have any expectation right now that, that's going to have any impact on leasing or demand for sites because power is still such an extreme bottleneck. It's hard to imagine what's going to overshadow that geopolitically. Operator: Our next question comes from Michael Donovan with Compass Point. Michael Donovan: Congrats on the progress. Can you provide an update on ESA progress, specifically Panther Creek's ISA to ESA conversion? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So that's a great question, Mike. As investors probably know, we have 350 megawatts secured ESA with PPL. But in addition to that, we also have an ISA that enables us to draw down approximately 60 megawatts from the grid, and that's associated with the existing transmission line and substation for the power plant that we currently have operating. In order to get that converted over, it's really more of a regulatory matter. And so it's hard to put an exact time line as to when those stamps are going to be received, but there's no infrastructure that needs to be built. There's no CapEx that needs to be spent. Really, it's just a matter of getting the regulatory approval to convert a nonfirm service into a firm service, and that would enable us to increase our capacity beyond 350 megawatts to what we probably expect is going to be maybe 400 megawatts or possibly slightly more. We expect this is going to happen this year, but it's hard to put an exact time line on it, given it's a regulatory matter. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Kinstlinger with AGP. Brian Kinstlinger: Last quarter, Ben, you communicated, you expected the GPU as a service and Moses Lake site would be targeted for, I believe, the first quarter for go-live. How are you shifting to co-location change the timing if at all? And my second question is, can you talk about also how the global memory shortage is impacting your site development or changing your near-term needs or planning for lead times? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So two parts to that question. In terms of switching from a GPU as a service to co-location just changing the business model doesn't really impact the development time line. So we don't really see any delay there associated with changing from GPU as a service, just to co-location. Really, it's just a matter of how we want to allocate our capital and how we want to focus the business. When it comes to the memory shortage. As a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner that really is not coming into our calculus very much, mostly that's a customer situation for them to resolve with their own supply chain because we're not the ones investing in the GPUs and the compute and the servers. Operator: Our next question comes from Martin Toner with ATB Cormark Capital Markets. Martin Toner: Good morning. Can you guys elaborate or [indiscernible] can you kind of give us some time line thoughts there? Ben Gagnon: So I'm going to repeat the question because it was a little quiet, just in case nobody else or other people had difficulty hearing. I believe the question was, can you give some time lines as to how we might be able to expand Panther Creek to 500 megawatts and beyond? So in order for us to move beyond the 350-megawatt ESA that we have secured, there's really two sources for expansion. The first is converting over that ISA from non-firm service to firm service that I just spoke to a minute ago. And that's really a regulatory matter that we expect to be resolved sometime this year. It could be tomorrow, it could be a few months from now. And then when it comes to expanding beyond that, what we have to do with that is we have to actually have new power applications. The good thing here is that the utilities are actually looking to invest in new generation in the area. So in this particular instance, and we weren't actually applying for new power. We actually have the utility call us and ask us how much more power we could take on site. Given the bottleneck constraint on power, that was obviously a very welcome call over here at Bitfarms to receive. And it's a pretty unusual one in the industry, but they're looking to scale up generation capacity in the area, specifically to service our site at greater capacity. So this is probably going to be 2 to 3 years time line because there's a lot of process involved with spinning up new generation and building those new transmission lines. But for a lot of our customers, what they really want is the fastest pathway to energization and a clear path to scale over multiple years. And so this really lines up with what the hyperscalers and what the neoclouds are searching for. Martin Toner: That's great. Hopefully, you can hear me better. Can you clarify when you expect to sign your first lease? Ben Gagnon: So I can't get into a specific time line. But in terms of milestones, as I spoke to earlier, it's really about clearing NTP as kind of the last closing condition or last milestone for us to sign a lease. So I think for the investors and the analysts on the call, the important thing to keep track of, especially over the next coming months is the continued progress that we have towards NTP because once NTP is clear, that's basically the last thing standing between us and a signed agreement. Martin Toner: Got it. Great. And last one from me. Can you talk a little bit about why mining exahash in Q4 was at the level that it was at? Ben Gagnon: So we continue to scale back our mining exposure as we continue to focus on our U.S. HPC infrastructure investments. So we haven't made any investments into Bitcoin mining. We're not spending any money on upgrades or new miners, and we're actively working to scale down the fleet and actively working to spin off assets like we have in Paraguay that are not suitable for conversion. So investors should continue to expect our hash rate to continue to trickle down over 2026 as we continue to execute on this transition to HPC and AI. Operator: Our next question comes from Mike Colonnese with H.C. Wainwright & Company. Michael Colonnese: So, Ben, I'm just curious, after securing the remaining permits across the three sites, which sounds like likely to take place in the coming months here, what does the time line look like from a data center construction and delivery standpoint? It sounds like you're pretty optimistic that revenue generation could commence as soon as next year, but any additional color there would be helpful. Ben Gagnon: Yes. I mean, really, this is the year of execution in 2027 is the year of delivery. And so at all three of our projects that we talked about today, Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington, we all expect them to come online and start delivering megawatts and start generating revenue to customers in 2027. We'll continue to provide updates as we go along. And I think once we have cleared NTP and we have signed leases, there's going to be a lot clear visibility that we can provide to investors for each specific project and their specific time lines. Michael Colonnese: Got it. And then back to Bitcoin mining operations, it sounds like you're progressively going to be scaling back hash rate as you bring some of the HPC AI data centers online. I guess what's the best way to think about hash coming offline and kind of flowing through your operating results over the near term here? Ben Gagnon: I'll speak to it at a high level and then maybe I'll pass it off to Jonathan for some further clarity. But right now, the Bitcoin mining remains profitable, but it's not it's not very -- it's marginal. So it's still contributing to the business. But really, it's not the focus of the business. It's not where we're investing our time, it's not where we're investing our efforts. And given that we have been so successful last year in raising capital and strengthening our balance sheet. It's really not super impactful for the developments that we have this year, the operations or the CapEx. So we'll just continue to scale that down, trying to maximize value in the disciplined exit. If it makes more sense to maybe sell some miners a little bit earlier then we might need to in order to begin instruction, we'll evaluate that as we will always do to maximize value for our shareholders. But really, we kind of see this as a pretty minor element of our balance sheet and a minor element of the financial plan for this year. Jonathan, do you want to add anything further? Jonathan Mir: Only that when we think about our liquidity going forward, the strategic objective is to ensure we are well capitalized through the lease process and beyond without the need to raise any new capital in the markets and that takes into account the current state of Bitcoin mining operations. It's not assuming any improvement in the economics there. So our plan is built on conservative assumptions around the status of the Bitcoin market. Operator: Our next question comes from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities. Nick Giles: Good morning, Keel team. In the interim period where Bitcoin mining operations are wound down, but kind of pre-revenue generation on the HPC side, could the generating assets at Panther Creek and Scrubgrass be utilized in any way such as the PJM capacity auction? Ben Gagnon: So those power plants do actually participate in PJM capacity auctions. We've done that for quite some time. And so we do benefit from the capacity payments that we received there. Nick Giles: Got it. Okay. And any order of magnitude of what those could be kind of in the 2026 planning year? Ben Gagnon: So I mean, really, it's -- we've kind of maxed out on the capacity auction payments. They set a ceiling, and that's where the capacity auction payments closed. Nick Giles: Got it. Understood. Maybe one for Jonathan. You've made some progress on the capital structure, but just was hoping for any additional comments you might have on what you're looking for in an initial debt package, how you're seeing term shift and kind of what tools you have at your disposal during construction and kind of post energization. Jonathan Mir: Good question. Thanks, Nick. So our basic approach is to compare and contrast our financing options down at the asset level and upstairs at the parent level. And certainly, one of the things that we've seen in the market that has caught our attention like everyone else, is the tightening of spreads between folks issuing high-yield debt in the market that would seem like quite attractive levels for strong investment-grade counterparties or credit wraps. And those converging towards the levels seen in bank-originated classic construction of project financing. So we'll be -- each of those has its own advantages in terms of simplicity of managing the actual capital once it's raised versus negative carry costs. And as we get closer to a funding point, we'll make the decision as to what seems best for our shareholders in terms of how we decide to finance. I'm sorry, Nick, I was just going to say that the markets for our space and for infrastructure generally seem calm right now. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Dobson with Clear Street. Gregory Pendy: It's Greg Pendy in for Brian Dobson. Just I guess one final one. Just I guess, one final one. Just on the redomiciling to the U.S., are there any implications to costs or structural implications in terms of ownership that we should be aware of as you enter this over the next couple of days? Ben Gagnon: One of the benefits and reasons for the redom is that we will now be eligible for inclusion in indices that require -- want to be a U.S. domiciled company. So for example, we'll be eligible for inclusion in the Russell 1000 and the Russell 3000 as well as for ownership in any other fund who was otherwise limited to the purchase of U.S. securities. We view that as being quite helpful in terms of moving our shareholder base to one that is institutional and long term. There are no other -- there are no cost or flexibility implications in our end. We simply see this as a nice path forward with a lot of benefits for our shareholders. Operator: Our next question comes from Bill Papanastasiou with Chardan Capital Markets. Bill Papanastasiou: Just wanted to touch on the Washington side and decision to shift towards colo. Can you confirm that this won't have any material impact on the purchase commitment that was entered into November? Or is the team considering the shift in development allocation to other sites? Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Bill. No impact on the capital commitments and the equipment we've already purchased for the Washington site by changing business models. In fact, actually, it just helps to reduce the CapEx because we're no longer paying for the compute. Bill Papanastasiou: Understood. And then how should we generally be thinking about maintenance CapEx on existing Bitcoin mining sites as you gradually shift over to AI HPC here? Ben Gagnon: We're not making any investments into the Bitcoin mining sites. Basically, we're just continuing to keep them up and running. And so no further investments are being made in the sites into new sites or into new miners. Operator: Thank you. This concludes the question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Ben Gagnon for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thank you very much, everyone, for joining our call today and really look forward to speaking to you next time as Keel Infrastructure. Have a great day. Operator: Thank you for your participation. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.
Operator: Good day, and welcome to the Bitfarms Fiscal 2025 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this call is being recorded. I would like to turn the call over to Jennifer Drew-Bear from Bitfarms Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Jennifer Drew-Bear: Thank you, and welcome to Bitfarms Fiscal Year 2025 Conference Call. With me on the call today are Ben Gagnon, Chief Executive Officer and Director; and Jonathan Mir, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, please note this call is being webcast with an accompanying slide presentation. Today's press release and our presentation can be accessed on our website under the Investors section. Turning to Slide 2. I'd like to remind everyone that certain forward-looking statements will be made during the call, and that future results could differ from those implied in this statement. The forward-looking information is based on certain assumptions and is subject to risks and uncertainties. And I invite you to consult Bitfarms 10-K for a complete list. Also, please note that references will be made to certain non-GAAP financial measures, and therefore, may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. We invite listeners to refer to today's press release and our 10-K for definitions of the aforementioned non-GAAP measures and their reconciliations to GAAP measures. Please note that all financial references are denominated in U.S. dollars, unless always noted. And now turning to Slide 3. It is my pleasure to turn over the call to Ben Gagnon, Director and Chief Executive Officer. Ben, the floor is yours. Ben Gagnon: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our fiscal year 2025 earnings call. In 2025, we made a bold decision to walk away from our legacy business, Bitcoin, and build the infrastructure in North America for what comes next, HPC and AI. It was a year of deliberate and consequential transformation with a clear mandate. Secure North American pipeline, strengthen our balance sheet, accelerate site development, and position ourselves to engage customers from a place of operational momentum at the peak of the energy bottleneck constraining the growth of AI. I can say with confidence and pride that we accomplished exactly what we set out to do. The foundation you see today, the capital structure, the sites, the team, the strategy was engineered through deliberate choices, developed with discipline and built to propel us forward. We made foundational changes to reposition the business and made 100% of our focus on North American HPC infrastructure development. No half measures, no compromises and in time, no Bitcoin. We built a new company. And while we are presenting as Bitfarms today, tomorrow marks our beginning as Keel infrastructure. The name says it all. A Keel is the bottom of structural component of a vessel. It's what keeps it stable and moving forward in the right direction regardless of the condition above the water line. It is structural, it is essential, and it is exactly how we see our role in the HPC and infrastructure landscape. We are not here to compete with hyperscalers or neoclouds. We are here to enable them. Our focus is providing the critical and largely invisible foundation that will allow the world's most advanced AI platform to deploy on time and scale without interruption. We expect to close the re-domiciliation and finalize our rebranding efforts tomorrow, April 1, and we'll begin trading under the ticker KEEL, 2 business days after completion of the transaction on the Nasdaq and the TSX. We are entering this new phase from a position of strength. With over 2 gigawatts in our pipeline, Keel is a regional leader with some of the largest power land portfolios in some of the highest demand markets in North America and with robust financial strength to execute against our plan. Our current liquidity is far in excess of the CapEx budgeted to get us through permitting and ultimately to start signing leases, giving the company significant financial flexibility to execute on our strategy. And our strategy is equally as clear. We are designing all of our site and campus developments as either powered shell or co-location facilities. We believe this is where we can deliver the most value to shareholders and serve our potential customers at the speed and to the specifications they need. We were originally exploring in parallel to co-location the potential benefits of pursuing a small amount of GPU as a service at our Washington site, Moses Lake, where due to the lowest cost power for data centers in the country and a relatively smaller footprint, we believe it could be an avenue to drive additional shareholder value. Since our last quarterly call, we have spoken with an increased volume of potential customers. And it's clear from those conversations, the most accretive business model for the site is one of co-location. This is not specific to Moses Lake and applies to all of our other sites as well, where demand is even higher. So we will focus on what we do best, being an infrastructure developer and owner. This plays directly to our core competencies. We are a team of developers united by disciplined action, building cost-effective institutional-grade infrastructure at the pace our customers require. The same capabilities have built our energy platform, speed to market, capital discipline, operational rigor precisely what HPC and AI deployments demand today. This is just the natural extension of what we do best. So with all the pieces in place and with the overwhelming support of our shareholders who voted over 99% in favor of the HPC and AI pivot, the U.S. redomicile and the rebrand. Starting tomorrow, we are Keel infrastructure. Turning to Slide 4. When we sat on our pivot, we developed a 3-year transformation plan, one that as of today, we are nearly halfway through completing. In 2025, we did the intensive foundational work for our transformation, including the Stronghold acquisition, securing more power in Pennsylvania, rebalancing the portfolio to North America, a $588 million raise fully institutional and oversubscribed, our U.S. GAAP transition, New York headquarters and establishing a new executive team. This work is done. With power and land secured in some of the power markets that matter most, a team of internal experts and strategic partners that have built data centers for the largest companies in the world and a balance sheet engineered to see us through 2026, we are well positioned to continue our site development and deliver against the time lines, our prospective hyperscalers and neocloud customers need. 2026 is all about execution. Effective tomorrow, we will have completed our redomiciliation to the United States and officially rebranded as Keel infrastructure. Two major milestones that position the company for the next phase of growth. With that complete, we expect the next significant milestones to come from executing against our development at Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake, where we are moving full steam ahead and working diligently across three simultaneous and active work streams. One, finalizing permits, which we expect to be done in the coming months. Two, continued work on architecture and engineering in line with ongoing customer conversations and requirements. And of course, three, our go-to-market to secure highly financeable leases with investment-grade tenants. Commercialization is well underway. The upcoming milestones investors can expect are completion of preconstruction activities like permitting, progress in customer engagement and ultimately lease execution, which we are confident we can achieve this year and will be major catalysts. 2026 is also the year where we expect to leave Bitcoin and Bitcoin mining behind. While we were probably one of the first miners to commence wind down of our Bitcoin mining exposure to reinvest that capital into infrastructure for HPC and AI, we will be accelerating those efforts in 2026 as site developments progress. 2027 is all about delivery. This is the year when we anticipate that sites would come online, we'd begin delivering megawatts to customers, HPC and AI revenue really begins and we complete our transition to a premier North American HPC and AI infrastructure company. By the end of 2027, we expect Keel will be a proven infrastructure developer and a regional leader across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec, and we will just continue to grow and scale from there in 2028 and beyond to over 2 gigawatts as we execute against our expansion capacity. Turning to Slide 5. In HPC infrastructure, power, location and time lines are everything. We hold something scarce and valuable secured power, land and expansion capacity in Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec. Some of the most in-demand markets with some of the biggest barriers to entry. We know it and so do our potential tenants. Our campuses offer solutions to hyperscalers and neocloud's greatest scaling problems, location, proximity and fiber connectivity to major metro areas and data center clusters solving for latency issues and giving our tenants proximity to their own customers and other data centers. Time lines. Our robust secured power for '26, '27 and with expansion capacity in 2028 is highly coveted in an environment where energy capacity is hard to find and multiyear waitlists are the norms. We create value for tenants by enabling them to deploy years earlier by leasing from us rather than to invest in growing organically. An energy-efficient cool climate, the lower the PUE, the more critical megawatts. Panther Creek is a great example of seeing the hyperscaler and neocloud's appetite at play. While there is a lot of interest in the site last year, inbound customer activity surged after we secured zoning in February. This is not a coincidence. It is the proof point and one that we've been making for the last year, but may still be confusing to some investors. So we'd like to be clear that investment-grade tenants value derisk sites where they can move from lease to revenue fast. The more we advance, the better our leverage. The better our leverage, the better the leases, and the more long-term value we create for shareholders. Turning to Slide 6. It is indisputable that power is the binding constraint for AI infrastructure deployment and will remain so for the coming years. Leading investment banks, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, Guggenheim, Moelis, they've all published extensively on this. And the consensus is clear. New power generation cannot come online fast enough to meet AI demand today, tomorrow or in the next 5 years. This bottleneck is structural, not cyclical. Hyperscalers and neoclouds that used to plan on 12-month horizons are now locking in 24- to 36-month supply chain commitments. Not tied to specific projects, but as platform level agreements and are now actively competing for the power and land to deploy it. While you are probably familiar with this information, here you can see a summary of the five development sites. The power we have secured and in some cases, the incremental power opportunities that make up our 2.2 gigawatt pipeline. Turning to Slide 7. I want to take a moment to put our current valuation context because there is a meaningful disconnect between where we trade today and the value we are positioned to capture as a company. When we analyze our current valuation against our peers, the picture becomes clear, at approximately $1.9 million per available megawatt of secure 2027 capacity, we're trading in the middle of a Bitcoin miner Group, valued at roughly $1.7 million to $2.1 million for 2027 megawatt meaning we are being valued based on having power but not what we are doing with it. For shareholders and bondholders, we see three distinct catalysts, each capable of driving meaningful reratings. The first is obviously lease execution. Across our sector, companies that have signed leases trade at $4 million to $6 million per 27 megawatts, a 2 to 3x premium to where we are today. This is the market's consistent signal driven entirely by lease execution, not facility delivery, not revenue generation, just signed leases. A signed lease secures revenue and financing derisking the developments. The market pays for that with nearly 500 megawatts actively being commercialized today and visibility on permitting across Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses lake, this catalyst is well within reach. The second catalyst and arguably the most powerful for long-term holders is securing our expansion capacity. 2/3 of our 2.2 gigawatt portfolio or approximately 1.5 gigawatts is expansion capacity, which we believe the market is assigning little to no value. While securing these megawatts is a process that will take more time, we believe additional megawatts can be secured in the second half of 2026 requiring very little CapEx while representing significant embedded value as powered land even before a lease is signed or there is a shovel in the ground. The third catalyst is delivering in 2027. Once facilities are derisked through commissioning and begin generating revenue under long-term contracts, the development risk should drop dramatically and the operator valuation numbers become transformational yet again. We are not taking a leap of faith on technology, our ability to see our power or market demand. The tech is here. The power is secured, the sites are advancing, the inbound demand is real, but the market has not yet priced in is the transformation that happens when a developer becomes a counterparty when we move from site advancing to lease executing. This is the main opportunity ahead of us to accelerate permitting, execute leases, secure our expansion capacity and ultimately deliver to our customers. This is how we will create value for our shareholders and bondholders. Turning to Slide 8. Our execution plan is defined by six areas, each supporting our ability to deliver at the pace and scale our future customers require. First, we've secured our deep bench of talent by adding over 60 years of infrastructure and development in over 50 years of data center construction experience combined in just the past few months. People have delivered at scale for the most demanding customers in the world. Jonathan Mir joined as CFO, bringing 25 years of energy infrastructure strategy and project finance expertise. We have also added an SVP of construction and of power, a VP of HPC Operations and Head of permitting to oversee the execution of these critical functions. We've assembled the right team to execute on our vision. Second, we are engaging the right industry leaders as partners, T5, Turner Construction, Corgan, [ WWT ], Vertiv. These firms have built data centers for the world's largest hyperscalers not once but hundreds of times. When customers look at our project partners, which will be available on the new website when it launches tomorrow, they will see that we have also assembled the right partners to ensure better outcomes. Third, we have the capital required to bring our sites to market. As of March 27, 2026, our liquidity stands at $520 million in cash and Bitcoin, which we expect is much more than the CapEx budgeted to get us to a lease at Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Jonathan will go into more detail on our capital position and financing strategy shortly, but the headline is simple. We're well funded and can move fast. Fourth, a disciplined Bitcoin exit. It is clear we are no longer a Bitcoin miner. However, with strong, robust liquidity, we can have a disciplined approach to our exit strategy. We will continue to operate up until the time sites need to be prepared for construction maximizing free cash flow before selling the miners. We will also opportunistically sell Bitcoin into strength to capture and reinvest every dollar we can into HPC and AI infrastructure. Fifth, power assets that cannot be replicated. Our megawatts sit in regions with large barriers to entry, Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec, all have multiple year waitlists. No one is cutting the line. Our 350 megawatts at Panther Creek, 110 megawatts at Sharon and 18 megawatts in Washington were secured before the AI demand wave made these markets highly coveted. This isn't power others can easily replicate giving us competitive edge with high-quality tenants to understand these markets and are hungry for assets like ours, which leads us to our sixth point. In this market, speed to power is what drives value. For our customers, the opportunity cost of delayed deployment is huge. So the priority is getting capacity online as quickly as possible. Every day of delay is lost revenue. As a result, power availability and certainty of delivery are the primary drivers of lease economics. This dynamic has pushed lease rates higher since our Q3 call, exactly as we said it would. The opportunity in front of Keel infrastructure is real. We now have the assets and the team is ready. I'm so proud of what we built in 2025, and I'm confident in what we'll deliver in 2026 and 2027. With that, I'll turn the call over to Jonathan. Jonathan Mir: Thanks, Ben. Turning to Slide 9. I joined the team 5 months ago. My focus has been on sharpening our approach to capital allocation, strengthening our balance sheet and capital structure and ensuring the financing actions support long-term shareholder value creation. I've had a front row of the depth of talent, the operational discipline and the strategic momentum across Bitfarms. I work closely with our operations and development teams both to understand the current trajectory of our assets and to ensure our capital plans are aligned with the opportunities ahead. What stood out to me is the extraordinary potential we have driven by the quality and potential of our sites, a strong balance sheet, the best liquidity position in the company's history and a broad team that's both deeply engaged and committed to excellence. We're moving quickly and with purpose. I'm pleased to be here with you today and discuss the progress we're making. I'll use this time to walk through our performance for fiscal year 2025 and outline our current capital strategy that we believe supports the accretive growth we're targeting for 2026 and beyond. Turning to Slide 10. Before discussing our financials for the quarter, I want to briefly frame the results are presented this quarter. As of Q3 2025, the Paso Pe facility in Paraguay has been classified as held for sale. As a result, all revenues, operating costs and asset balances associated with Paso Pe are treated as discontinued operations in our fiscal year 2025 financials. So when I refer to continuing operations, I am speaking exclusively about our North American platform, the foundation of our transition into HPC and AI infrastructure. With that, revenue for fiscal year 2025 was $229 million, up 72% year-over-year. Operating loss for fiscal year 2025 was $150 million including noncash depreciation of $98 million and $28 million of impairment charges. This compares to an operating loss of $28 million in 2024, which included $102 million of noncash depreciation and $4 million of impairment charges. Net loss for 2025 was $209 million or a $0.38 loss per basic and diluted share compared to a 2024 net loss of $7 million or $0.02 loss per basic and diluted share. The differences between 2024 and 2025 were driven by a number of factors, including change in fair market value of digital assets, primarily due to the decline of Bitcoin prices and realization of gains on disposal of Bitcoin during the year. Two additional items also impacted year-over-year comparability. First, we saw a loss of $68 million, reflecting changes in our derivative assets and liabilities. Second, 2025 impairment charges were $25 million higher than in 2024. For the year, our adjusted EBITDA was $29 million compared to $31 million in 2024. Turning to Slide 11. 2025 was a deliberate year of balance sheet optimization and improvement, providing the foundation for our next phase of growth. We successfully issued an oversubscribed $588 million convertible offering, significantly expanding our liquidity. And in February, we repaid the Macquarie debt facility eliminating legacy debt, simplifying our capital structure and freeing the company from covenants. Each of these supports the pursuit of our HPC infrastructure strategy. The Macquarie facility had been originally used to accelerate development at Panther Creek, funding critical project activities, including long lead time item procurement and substation work. Retiring the facility was a strategic decision, strengthens the balance sheet and gives us the flexibility to secure a more cost-effective financing at either the parent or project level. Our current cash position of $520 million provides the runway to advance Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake through lease execution without accessing capital markets. Though we may do so if attractive opportunities arise that improve our ability to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. Macquarie was an excellent partner, and we appreciate their support so early in our pivot to HPC AI infrastructure. Turning to Slide 12. As we pivot to commercialization of our development sites, we have a clear financial strategy based on three principles. Capital allocation, capital formation and capital structure. Taken together, they are designed to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. First, capital allocation. We deploy capital into projects where the earnings potential exceeds their weighted average cost of capital. We rotate capital from businesses that are noncore or earning less than optimal returns and deploy the capital into higher return investments. Second, capital formation. Our financing strategy is designed to fund our very large growth opportunities while maintaining the liquidity needed for a stable base of operations. We will be opportunistic in our financing execution. We will fund construction of our data center projects using project or parent level bet and project or parent level equity or equity-linked offerings. We're taking a disciplined approach and at this time, are well capitalized to actively commercialize and execute leases across Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Third, capital structure. Our capital structure is designed to capture the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns while also retaining overall corporate flexibility and support growth. Our objective is to operate with a deliberate liquidity strategy in order to enable clear-headed commercial decisions and capital allocation decisions rather than having liquidity drive time lines. Stepping back, our road map is clear. We are building a regionally focused high-growth HPC AI infrastructure platform, grounded in disciplined capital allocation, a strengthened balance sheet and a development cadence that maximizes returns and minimizes risk. We're funded through the key derisking stages, permitting and leasing across Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek and we're entering 2026 with momentum, optionality and a balance sheet engineered for growth. We have the right people, assets, liquidity and strategy and we're well positioned to capture for our shareholders the long-term value potential we have today. With that, I'd like to return the call to Ben for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Jonathan. A little over a year ago, as our team began actively integrating AI into both our business and our daily lives, we came to a realization. This isn't just another technology cycle. It's a paradigm shift. More comparable to the industrial revolution than the Internet revolution. The fundamental measure, productivity capacity is no longer calories or joules, but tokens. This became strikingly clear 2 weeks ago at NVIDIA GTC, where I witnessed hundreds of companies applying AI to everything from straightforward tasks by cleaning and image generation to extraordinary complex applications, including protein folding, cystic simulations and even brain surgery. Walking the conference floor, speaking to the attendees, one thing was unmistakable. We've only begun to scratch the surface of AI's potential. Yet even in these early days, AI is already empowering individuals, communities and companies to accomplish exponentially more. We're witnessing Jevons Paradox unfold simultaneously across every industry, thanks to AI, where improved efficiency can paradoxically drive higher, not lower demand. It is literally never cost less to transform an idea into an action, a product, an image, a refined concept, a service or countless other outlets. The possibilities are truly limitless, and while no one can predict exactly how AI will reshape our future, uncertainty remains. It will require enormous amounts of power. Our 2.2 gigawatts of capacity and strategically position land across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec sit directly in the path of this transformation, and we intend to capitalize on that opportunity for our shareholders. We look forward to the opportunities ahead. With that, I would like to open the call to Q&A. Operator, please go ahead. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from Mike Grondahl with Northland. Mike Grondahl: First question, Ben, you talked about your decision not to go the GPU rental route at Moses Creek. And just the colocation route, could you talk a little about what a couple of the major drivers were that got you to that decision? Ben Gagnon: Yes, it's a great question, Mike. When we first started talking about in Q3, we were always evaluating this alongside with the colocation. We're trying to maximize the value for shareholders. So we're always going to evaluate multiple different business models at our sites. And because they have the lowest cost energy and all these other benefits, we thought it would make a lot of sense. But as we've continued to have increasing amounts of customer conversations for Washington and other sites. It was just really clear to us that the best opportunity for us is to just remain a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner and let these customers who really want these megawatts lease these megawatts. Mike Grondahl: Got it. Got it. And then maybe secondly, you articulated, I'll say, a philosophy a quarter or 2 ago about waiting and waiting on signing a lease as terms were continuing to improve kind of implying you're going to be really patient and wait on a lease. Could you kind of update how you're thinking about that lease execution strategy and the potential timing around it? Ben Gagnon: Yes. Our strategy on lease execution has been consistent. It remains consistent today. Our view is that the best way to maximize value for shareholders is to get the best terms in a lease because that's going to be what is going to be driving our NOI and our multiple. And so when we're looking to sign 10- to 15-year agreements, it's really important for us to take the -- maybe a little bit more time than investors may want us to in order to get better terms for longer. When it looks at what is really driving the value in these lease economics, one of the biggest elements is risk, and we've spoken to this multiple times over the last couple of months. And the biggest risk for most of the people -- to go out there and have conversations and get a lot of interest. And in some cases, you could even sign a lease prior to getting permits. But all of that risk is going to be priced into the agreement, you're going to be locked into it for 10 to 15 years, and that's going to negatively impact the long-term value that we're creating for shareholders. So our strategy has been incredibly consistent. And the benefit for us is that we are operating in high demand markets with high barrier to entry. So it takes a little bit longer to get permits going in Pennsylvania or in Washington than it does in Texas, which is the easiest market in the United States for that. But we believe that drives a lot of extra value because it's way more scarce, it's way harder to acquire and there's just not as much optionality. Operator: Our next question comes from Brett Knoblauch with Cantor Fitzgerald. Brett Knoblauch: Maybe to start, could you maybe just go into detail on what permits at what sites you guys are waiting to receive? Ben Gagnon: So permits is a complicated process, and we are develop -- we're getting permits across multiple sites in multiple jurisdictions. So they all have different rules, different regulations, different time lines, different reviews, different authorities. So it's far too much detail to get into exactly what permits are remaining on all the different sites. But we are continuing to make good progress and kind of -- we're looking at the visibility over the next couple of months. And with what we've had so far with the community engagement success that we've had so far, we think that in the coming months, sometime around the mid- to late summer time. we should be achieving the full permitted status across at least one, if not all of the sites. Brett Knoblauch: And then maybe just on the leasing environment across the different sites that you guys have. I guess we were under the impression that maybe Sharon would be first to go given it's relatively further along. Is that still how you guys are thinking about it? And then in the presentation when you guys kind of list the power pipeline and road map. How much of that is from generation on site that you guys are looking into? And do you have any update on where you guys are with respect to sourcing that generation? Ben Gagnon: Yes, sure. So the -- to answer the second part of your question first, all the power that we're talking about developing for our HPC and AI data centers right now is grid connected. So the two operating power plants that we have at Scrubgrass and Panther Creek. Currently, that math is not in those charts for the secured capacity or the site development plans. But in Scrubgrass particular, we are working to expand the generation capacity there with natural gas. So we've been working to tap into the Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline. We're achieving pretty good results there with the engineering firms. There's still probably another month or two to go before we're getting a clear path forward on the engineering plans. But Scrubgrass is our more of our pipeline site. And so those -- that power generation opportunity is more of a 2028 and 2029 time line. Everything else is grid connected, it's secure today or it's currently active. And sorry, Brett, I'm blanking on the first part of your question, would you mind repeating it? Brett Knoblauch: Yes. Just on maybe the cadence of which sites are -- quicker to go? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So really, that's going to be driven by success on permitting time lines in the customers. So all three of the sites, Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek are all actively in our go-to market right now. Every single one of those has customers engaged under NDA, and they have for quite some time. And so we're continuing to push forward on those conversations and those negotiations. Really, I think what investors should think about with regards to permits, permits are more of a closing condition to a lease, right? They're really not a starting condition to a negotiation. So we have these conversations and these negotiations simultaneously while we're working towards permitting. As permitting gets closer and closer, the negotiations will also get closer and closer in tandem and the first site to get leased is likely to be the first site to be permitted. Operator: Our next question comes from Stephen Glagola with KBW. Stephen Glagola: Just on that last point, if you could clarify the sequencing here between like notice to proceed and lease execution. So in other words, like can you pre-sign leases contingent on notice to proceed? Or is like notice to proceed required before any major customer would commit to a lease? Ben Gagnon: For a customer commit to binding in our view, they're going to want NTP, and that's based on the number of conversations that we are continuing to have and there probably are some customers who would be interested to sign prior to NTP, but those aren't the investment-grade counterparties that we're really seeking to engage with. Stephen Glagola: Okay. And then just one more. How are you thinking about like Vera Rubin hardware availability in '26 and like early '27? And to what extent could that variability in supply influence the timing of lease discussions at your sites? Ben Gagnon: Yes. That's a good question, Stephen. We've been talking about Vera Rubin, I think, since Q3 call because all of our sites are basically coming online in 2027. So we're trying to make sure that they are designed for the highest level of equipment that's coming out in '27 and '28, which is the Vera Rubin. In terms of supply, we haven't seen any impact so far. I understand there's always geopolitical uncertainty in the world that may impact those supply chains. But given that energy is such a huge bottleneck, and it's always been a huge bottleneck on the growth. I don't think that there is going to be a geopolitical situation that's going to make the bottleneck change from energy over to GPUs. So we don't have any expectation right now that, that's going to have any impact on leasing or demand for sites because power is still such an extreme bottleneck. It's hard to imagine what's going to overshadow that geopolitically. Operator: Our next question comes from Michael Donovan with Compass Point. Michael Donovan: Congrats on the progress. Can you provide an update on ESA progress, specifically Panther Creek's ISA to ESA conversion? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So that's a great question, Mike. As investors probably know, we have 350 megawatts secured ESA with PPL. But in addition to that, we also have an ISA that enables us to draw down approximately 60 megawatts from the grid, and that's associated with the existing transmission line and substation for the power plant that we currently have operating. In order to get that converted over, it's really more of a regulatory matter. And so it's hard to put an exact time line as to when those stamps are going to be received, but there's no infrastructure that needs to be built. There's no CapEx that needs to be spent. Really, it's just a matter of getting the regulatory approval to convert a nonfirm service into a firm service, and that would enable us to increase our capacity beyond 350 megawatts to what we probably expect is going to be maybe 400 megawatts or possibly slightly more. We expect this is going to happen this year, but it's hard to put an exact time line on it, given it's a regulatory matter. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Kinstlinger with AGP. Brian Kinstlinger: Last quarter, Ben, you communicated, you expected the GPU as a service and Moses Lake site would be targeted for, I believe, the first quarter for go-live. How are you shifting to co-location change the timing if at all? And my second question is, can you talk about also how the global memory shortage is impacting your site development or changing your near-term needs or planning for lead times? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So two parts to that question. In terms of switching from a GPU as a service to co-location just changing the business model doesn't really impact the development time line. So we don't really see any delay there associated with changing from GPU as a service, just to co-location. Really, it's just a matter of how we want to allocate our capital and how we want to focus the business. When it comes to the memory shortage. As a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner that really is not coming into our calculus very much, mostly that's a customer situation for them to resolve with their own supply chain because we're not the ones investing in the GPUs and the compute and the servers. Operator: Our next question comes from Martin Toner with ATB Cormark Capital Markets. Martin Toner: Good morning. Can you guys elaborate or [indiscernible] can you kind of give us some time line thoughts there? Ben Gagnon: So I'm going to repeat the question because it was a little quiet, just in case nobody else or other people had difficulty hearing. I believe the question was, can you give some time lines as to how we might be able to expand Panther Creek to 500 megawatts and beyond? So in order for us to move beyond the 350-megawatt ESA that we have secured, there's really two sources for expansion. The first is converting over that ISA from non-firm service to firm service that I just spoke to a minute ago. And that's really a regulatory matter that we expect to be resolved sometime this year. It could be tomorrow, it could be a few months from now. And then when it comes to expanding beyond that, what we have to do with that is we have to actually have new power applications. The good thing here is that the utilities are actually looking to invest in new generation in the area. So in this particular instance, and we weren't actually applying for new power. We actually have the utility call us and ask us how much more power we could take on site. Given the bottleneck constraint on power, that was obviously a very welcome call over here at Bitfarms to receive. And it's a pretty unusual one in the industry, but they're looking to scale up generation capacity in the area, specifically to service our site at greater capacity. So this is probably going to be 2 to 3 years time line because there's a lot of process involved with spinning up new generation and building those new transmission lines. But for a lot of our customers, what they really want is the fastest pathway to energization and a clear path to scale over multiple years. And so this really lines up with what the hyperscalers and what the neoclouds are searching for. Martin Toner: That's great. Hopefully, you can hear me better. Can you clarify when you expect to sign your first lease? Ben Gagnon: So I can't get into a specific time line. But in terms of milestones, as I spoke to earlier, it's really about clearing NTP as kind of the last closing condition or last milestone for us to sign a lease. So I think for the investors and the analysts on the call, the important thing to keep track of, especially over the next coming months is the continued progress that we have towards NTP because once NTP is clear, that's basically the last thing standing between us and a signed agreement. Martin Toner: Got it. Great. And last one from me. Can you talk a little bit about why mining exahash in Q4 was at the level that it was at? Ben Gagnon: So we continue to scale back our mining exposure as we continue to focus on our U.S. HPC infrastructure investments. So we haven't made any investments into Bitcoin mining. We're not spending any money on upgrades or new miners, and we're actively working to scale down the fleet and actively working to spin off assets like we have in Paraguay that are not suitable for conversion. So investors should continue to expect our hash rate to continue to trickle down over 2026 as we continue to execute on this transition to HPC and AI. Operator: Our next question comes from Mike Colonnese with H.C. Wainwright & Company. Michael Colonnese: So, Ben, I'm just curious, after securing the remaining permits across the three sites, which sounds like likely to take place in the coming months here, what does the time line look like from a data center construction and delivery standpoint? It sounds like you're pretty optimistic that revenue generation could commence as soon as next year, but any additional color there would be helpful. Ben Gagnon: Yes. I mean, really, this is the year of execution in 2027 is the year of delivery. And so at all three of our projects that we talked about today, Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington, we all expect them to come online and start delivering megawatts and start generating revenue to customers in 2027. We'll continue to provide updates as we go along. And I think once we have cleared NTP and we have signed leases, there's going to be a lot clear visibility that we can provide to investors for each specific project and their specific time lines. Michael Colonnese: Got it. And then back to Bitcoin mining operations, it sounds like you're progressively going to be scaling back hash rate as you bring some of the HPC AI data centers online. I guess what's the best way to think about hash coming offline and kind of flowing through your operating results over the near term here? Ben Gagnon: I'll speak to it at a high level and then maybe I'll pass it off to Jonathan for some further clarity. But right now, the Bitcoin mining remains profitable, but it's not it's not very -- it's marginal. So it's still contributing to the business. But really, it's not the focus of the business. It's not where we're investing our time, it's not where we're investing our efforts. And given that we have been so successful last year in raising capital and strengthening our balance sheet. It's really not super impactful for the developments that we have this year, the operations or the CapEx. So we'll just continue to scale that down, trying to maximize value in the disciplined exit. If it makes more sense to maybe sell some miners a little bit earlier then we might need to in order to begin instruction, we'll evaluate that as we will always do to maximize value for our shareholders. But really, we kind of see this as a pretty minor element of our balance sheet and a minor element of the financial plan for this year. Jonathan, do you want to add anything further? Jonathan Mir: Only that when we think about our liquidity going forward, the strategic objective is to ensure we are well capitalized through the lease process and beyond without the need to raise any new capital in the markets and that takes into account the current state of Bitcoin mining operations. It's not assuming any improvement in the economics there. So our plan is built on conservative assumptions around the status of the Bitcoin market. Operator: Our next question comes from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities. Nick Giles: Good morning, Keel team. In the interim period where Bitcoin mining operations are wound down, but kind of pre-revenue generation on the HPC side, could the generating assets at Panther Creek and Scrubgrass be utilized in any way such as the PJM capacity auction? Ben Gagnon: So those power plants do actually participate in PJM capacity auctions. We've done that for quite some time. And so we do benefit from the capacity payments that we received there. Nick Giles: Got it. Okay. And any order of magnitude of what those could be kind of in the 2026 planning year? Ben Gagnon: So I mean, really, it's -- we've kind of maxed out on the capacity auction payments. They set a ceiling, and that's where the capacity auction payments closed. Nick Giles: Got it. Understood. Maybe one for Jonathan. You've made some progress on the capital structure, but just was hoping for any additional comments you might have on what you're looking for in an initial debt package, how you're seeing term shift and kind of what tools you have at your disposal during construction and kind of post energization. Jonathan Mir: Good question. Thanks, Nick. So our basic approach is to compare and contrast our financing options down at the asset level and upstairs at the parent level. And certainly, one of the things that we've seen in the market that has caught our attention like everyone else, is the tightening of spreads between folks issuing high-yield debt in the market that would seem like quite attractive levels for strong investment-grade counterparties or credit wraps. And those converging towards the levels seen in bank-originated classic construction of project financing. So we'll be -- each of those has its own advantages in terms of simplicity of managing the actual capital once it's raised versus negative carry costs. And as we get closer to a funding point, we'll make the decision as to what seems best for our shareholders in terms of how we decide to finance. I'm sorry, Nick, I was just going to say that the markets for our space and for infrastructure generally seem calm right now. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Dobson with Clear Street. Gregory Pendy: It's Greg Pendy in for Brian Dobson. Just I guess one final one. Just I guess, one final one. Just on the redomiciling to the U.S., are there any implications to costs or structural implications in terms of ownership that we should be aware of as you enter this over the next couple of days? Ben Gagnon: One of the benefits and reasons for the redom is that we will now be eligible for inclusion in indices that require -- want to be a U.S. domiciled company. So for example, we'll be eligible for inclusion in the Russell 1000 and the Russell 3000 as well as for ownership in any other fund who was otherwise limited to the purchase of U.S. securities. We view that as being quite helpful in terms of moving our shareholder base to one that is institutional and long term. There are no other -- there are no cost or flexibility implications in our end. We simply see this as a nice path forward with a lot of benefits for our shareholders. Operator: Our next question comes from Bill Papanastasiou with Chardan Capital Markets. Bill Papanastasiou: Just wanted to touch on the Washington side and decision to shift towards colo. Can you confirm that this won't have any material impact on the purchase commitment that was entered into November? Or is the team considering the shift in development allocation to other sites? Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Bill. No impact on the capital commitments and the equipment we've already purchased for the Washington site by changing business models. In fact, actually, it just helps to reduce the CapEx because we're no longer paying for the compute. Bill Papanastasiou: Understood. And then how should we generally be thinking about maintenance CapEx on existing Bitcoin mining sites as you gradually shift over to AI HPC here? Ben Gagnon: We're not making any investments into the Bitcoin mining sites. Basically, we're just continuing to keep them up and running. And so no further investments are being made in the sites into new sites or into new miners. Operator: Thank you. This concludes the question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Ben Gagnon for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thank you very much, everyone, for joining our call today and really look forward to speaking to you next time as Keel Infrastructure. Have a great day. Operator: Thank you for your participation. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.
Operator: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Ceres 2025 Full Year Results Investor Presentation. [Operator Instructions] I'd now like to hand over to the management team, Stuart, Phil, good morning. Philip Caldwell: Good morning, everybody, and thank you for joining us for the 2025 full year results presentation. I'll talk you through an update on the company and the strategy to begin with, and then Stuart will obviously talk you through the financial numbers, and we'll obviously go into Q&A at the end as usual. So at Ceres, we're operating on 3 strategic imperatives. The first one is signing more licensees. So new manufacturing license partners is a key focus for us as a business. The second is once we have those partners, bringing those partners to market. So that's obviously assisting them as they scale up and put in capacity, but also actually helping to stimulate demand, which actually helps pull through the products that we're developing with partners. And the third is obviously technology leadership. We believe we have the best solid oxide technology in the world. We have a single stack platform, which we're actually going to be launching in April. And we need to maintain that technology leadership advantage because that's what our partners come to rely on from Ceres. So over the last 12 months, we've made significant progress on all these activities. The first thing to say is there is an acute need for power driving the commercial interest in our technology right now and particularly for SOFC technology in the wider landscape. As we go into partner progress, in the past 12 months, we signed a new manufacturing license agreement in China with Weichai, our partner. We'll give you a little bit more on that today, but that's going extremely well, extremely rapidly. In Taiwan, Delta is also scaling and starting to produce first prototype products and is also investing significantly in land and facilities to do that scale up as well. In South Korea, a big milestone for us in the past 12 months with Doosan starting production at the factory there, both for SOFC stacks and power systems, and that also generated first royalties for the company in this period. In Japan, our partnership with DENSO on the electrolysis side began production of first hydrogen with JERA and also led to government funding recently with an estimated value of about JPY 35 billion, approximately GBP 165 million to continue the advancement of SOEC technology. Great progress in India with Shell. The megawatt scale electrolysis demonstrated actually exceeded performance expectations, high efficiency but capacity as well. And we're progressing now towards the pressurized systems as well with Thermax and Shell and Thermax developing a new pilot facility for testing of those systems. We also undertook a business transformation plan around those 3 strategic imperatives that we talked about. And we've restructured the business, very much focused on accelerating the commercial opportunities. So after 25 years of developing this technology, we are now at that point of commercialization and the point of first production and scale up. We'll talk more about this business transformation, but there's a cultural change there, but also it's anticipated it will drive cost savings of around 20% this year compared to the 2025 cost base. And we finished the year with a very strong cash position of over GBP 83 million at the end of the period. So again, we'll talk in more detail about financial management in the second half of the presentation. We had some news this morning as well, which is very pleasing, partnership with Centrica here in the U.K. It's fantastic to be able to actually bring this British technology to the U.K. And this really is part of our second pillar of that strategy, which is how do we stimulate demand and how do we bring this technology forward at scale. Centrica, as you all know, FTSE 100 leading energy integration company. The statement there is about a multi-gigawatt opportunity that we see in the U.K., Centrica sees. And that's on this gap that we're seeing as we have more need for electrification. We have a time to power need that's becoming quite acute. And this modular high-efficiency technology can really service that market, both in terms of the data center needs, commercial and industrialization partners as well. So the purpose of this is we're introducing our licensing partner network to Centrica, the whole ecosystem of manufacturing partners. And we will support Centrica in terms of bringing that forward, if you like, acting as their technical advisory arm, helping them to set up this model of how they go to market with this. So that will include our expertise in things like installation, commissioning, remote monitoring, maintenance, recycling, all of those good things that we at Ceres know how to do. The initial focus will be the data center market, commercial customers and industrial power. So that's a fantastic step forward for us today, and we'll have more details on that. We have an upcoming Capital Markets Day on April 15, and we'll be able to provide you with more detail on that and from Centrica as well. But that's just in very exciting development today. I mentioned also the single stack platform. So we're going to launch that also at our Capital Markets Day. One of the things that's unique about Ceres is the solid oxide platform, the same stack, the same cell technology can run in both directions, both for power generation and for green hydrogen. That's an amazing benefit to our partners because as they develop the supply chain, as they scale up, that investment that they're putting into factories now for power generation also has this dual use aspect in the future for hydrogen as well. And as you can see in the chart here, that same stack technology is now going into products, Doosan, Weichai, Delta, but also we're using that on the hydrogen side with partners like DENSO, Thermax, Shell and Delta as well. Just wanted to spend a little bit of time on what we're seeing as the emerging demand for power. Our estimate is we see an opportunity for power generation using solid oxide of around 22 gigawatts by 2030. And we see that market roughly split about 50% the data center opportunity, but also a very significant part in the industrial and commercial applications as well. So around 50-50 kind of split. Geographically, it's an interesting split as well. About 25% of that is the U.S. market, which gets a lot of attention right now. I'm sure you're all covering data center applications in North America. But just under 20% of that is here in Europe as well. And the U.K. is a great market opportunity when you think about we have some of the highest power prices anywhere in the world. This is a market that really lends itself well to this application. And then about 50% of that market we see is Asia, the wider Asian opportunity as well. And with our partnership network, we're able to access all aspects of this market. So our aim here is to really establish the service technology as the industry standard, and we're doing that by embedding it in these global partners that are accessing and servicing these different parts of the market. Why is that becoming a critical factor? Well, today, if you need power generation, you're waiting about 6 to 7 years for a gas turbine. Small modular reactors are also coming down the pipeline, but they're about 7 to 10 years away. And then high-voltage grid connections, 5 to 15 years away. So right now, with this acute need for power generation, behind the meter or on-site generation is becoming a really viable alternative because there just isn't the conventional power generation equipment available. I think it also opens a window for us in terms of the technology today is good enough. It's viable in terms of its lifetime, its performance and its cost to actually enter the market. And as we scale, we anticipate these costs coming down significantly. Just to show you some of the progress that's being made. These are the first units developed by Delta, took a license just under 2 years ago. So this is a Thai power in Taiwan. So you can see here the first prototype units being made using car stacks, but all the systems done by Delta. Delta are fitting out their production as well, and they're on track. Delta is a very exciting partnership for us because when we talk about that data center market, Delta are already very much in that supply chain. I think by market cap now, they're the second or third biggest company in Taiwan after NVIDIA and Fox. And where we fit in is they make solid-state transformers, they make power conditioning, they make UPSs, et cetera. So by adding in the power generation capability of the solid oxide, they're developing a complete offering from fuel in all the way through to power out. And that power out can either be AC power or in the data center application, 800-volt DC. So don't forget that the fuel cell technology is actually generating DC power and the way that you actually combine stacks, you're very close to being able to match up that 800-volt DC power direct from the power generation unit, which is the SOFC. It's fuel flexible. So we run on natural gas today. We can run on biogas. We can run on hydrogen in the future. It lends itself extremely well to things like carbon capture. And also, if you want to, you can capture the heat or convert that heat into cooling through absorption chilling as well. So you have the option to go from low carbon all the way through to zero carbon and also push very high efficiencies. In Delta's case, the same market applications apply. It's microgrids, AI data centers, even for the semiconductor industry and manufacturing in general. So I think this is a really good illustration of how our partners take this technology and put it into a complete offering for these kind of market opportunities. Weichai is an exciting partner for us. We've been working with them on system level for about 7 or 8 years now. Their systems are very impressive, I have to say. And I'm expecting this year, they'll launch their latest system, which is going to be a very impressive unit. We've taken the step with them. We've done the technology transfer. So we signed last November. already, we're going very quickly, and there will be more to come from Weichai this year, but they're probably going, I would say, faster than any of our partners have ever gone before. Doosan factory, I was privileged to go around the factory. I've been a couple of times, but this was in July with Doo-Soon Lee, the CEO of Doosan. First production was there. And when you actually get in there to see the realization, the single piece flow end-to-end, it's about the size of 3 football pitches, semi-clean room, it's an impressive facility. And they've actually fulfilled their first capacity orders in the past few months, and that factory is now up and running. So that's a big, big milestone for us going full circle. So Doosan is the first. We expect Delta starting to come on stream and then Weichai. So we are building out this ecosystem. On the hydrogen side, I think it's been fair to say that over the past 12 months, there's been more headwinds on the hydrogen side. But at the same time, I think that opens up an opportunity for, again, higher efficiency technology like the Ceres technology. And as I mentioned, all of the investments that are going in now are directly applicable on to the hydrogen side of the business. So extremely pleased with our partnership with Shell. We've exceeded expectations there. We've met all the targets that we set. And that's leading on to the pressurized development, which is now underway. So taking this one, which was the first atmospheric SOEC that we did and now actually putting that into a pressurized system that can be scaled to megawatt scale. And we're doing that engineering ourselves to begin with, but then in partnership with Thermax in India who can really drive down cost. And India is one of the big markets that we see for this green hydrogen in the future. So we see green hydrogen, particularly opportunities in China and India as those areas come on stream. We also did this with DENSO very quickly. So similar to the Shell container, DENSO actually deployed this on site within 18 months of actually taking the license, and that's using Ceres' technology. That's putting in hydrogen into a thermal power station to reduce emissions from conventional power generation. And that's unlocked further funding for DENSO as well. So great progress on all aspects of the hydrogen side as well. In terms of where we are as a business, we're building out this ecosystem of partners. And really, our aim is to be the technology provider of choice. So we now have manufacturing in Korea. We're seeing manufacturing being built now in Taiwan. That will come on stream in China as well and with DENSO in Japan. So really strong ecosystem of partners. Shell is more in the end user category, and we can add Centrica to that list of partners today as well for U.K. and Europe. So our aim is embed this technology to become the industry standard. So with that, I'm going to hand over to Stuart to give you the financial update for the past year. Stuart Paynter: Thanks, Phil. Good morning, everyone. I'm just going to take you through a few slides, just to give you a bit of an update on where we are from a financial position and financial planning position and some of the actions we've taken to put ourselves in a strong position to be able to execute the strategy Phil has laid out. So here's the headline numbers you can see. As you all know, the revenues of Ceres are largely dependent on how successful we can be in terms of signing MLAs. We signed Weichai in 2025, but towards the end of the year, we in sufficient time to recognize any revenue at all from that contract. So we're rolling that into 2026. But you can still see that the margins remain high, right? That's the asset-light model we retain, and we have good financial discipline around that. The other thing to note here is cash. We're still very strong on the cash side. You can see that the cash burn in the year was just under GBP 20 million. And like I said, that was without the benefit of having an MLA. So we're pretty efficient now. I believe we've got the optimized cost base, which I'll take you through. And you can see that the restructuring that we've been going through in the last few years has fed through to the cost saving in 2025 from 2024. There's more to come on that, but we'll take you through that and be very clear, we now believe we have an optimized cost base. So the actions we took towards the end of '25 will flow through to '26, but we really do think now we've got the correct team to prosecute the strategy, which we've chosen. So here's just a graphical representation of the revenue and gross profit. Gross profits remain industry-leading with the asset-light model we have. And of course, the success and the health of those are maintained by signing new MLAs, and we retain the confidence that we have the opportunities to keep on chasing that Pillar 1 on Phil strategy of signing new MLAs and be successful in doing that in 2026. So Phil mentioned business transformation earlier, very important to us. We now have that single stack platform commercially viable to get out into the market, and that started in earnest with Doosan with others to follow. And now we need to make sure that we are still innovating. Pillar 3 was keeping a technology lead, very, very important to a licensor. -- and we'll continue to do that with one of the biggest solid oxide expertise pools in the world. But now we believe we've reached a point where we need to just look at the focus of the company and be very, very commercially disciplined, commercially focused and make sure we have the right people in the background, giving the R&D sufficient attention that we have something to license in the future. And we believe during the end of Q4 2025, we've realigned the business to be able to do that. The flow-through of that will be a 20% cost saving in 2026, but all the actions needed to do that have been taken and are now finished. So now we're into a business transformation for this year, which is all about culture, team and making a cohesive unit so we can make sure that we succeed and our teams succeed at the same time. So we -- this is all crystallizing, as Phil said, in the Capital Markets Day where we're launching this single stack platform. We're very proud of it. And hopefully, that will make sense to everyone when they see it, and it's something we can go out and actively -- more actively sell into the marketplace. In terms of the cost base, so this is the optimized cost base we see for the next commercial phase. All the actions we've had to take have been taken. There will be a natural flow through into 2026 of this cost saving, but we are essentially building from here. We've still got a world-class R&D team. They're very focused on the things we need to do to be successful. That's cost down, that's lifetime. And we've strengthened the commercial teams in order that we can make the biggest impact we can on the top line. So we really do think we've got the right team, the right place, the right assets in place to make real success for the next few years. And why are we doing that? Well, you can see that commercial momentum essentially over the last few years has reduced our cash outflows. And we're very clear, we've now got the model of our business. If we can sign MLA on average every 12 months on that sort of cadence, we will be very close to breakeven and cash flow neutral. And that's important. That gives us control of our own destiny without having to rely on the capital markets. And it's building that MLA base so we can become that industry standard that Phil talks about. And why is that important? Well, the end goal for any company that's ultimately a licensing company is to build your royalty streams. As Phil mentioned, we're just at this orange blob stage here today. Doosan has fulfilled their first order at the very end of last year led to our first royalty revenues, a big milestone after 20, 25 years of development of this project. But we need now to push on if we can become the industry standard, essentially have a portfolio effect of many, many partners building, we're really going to be able to build these royalty streams, power first, hydrogen second. As Phil mentioned, this is the same technology, but you can attack 2 markets, one right and acute now and the other coming several years after. So we're in this in order to keep on signing licensing agreements, which we know we can for the next few years, and then it's all about building the royalty base. So we like the model. Every time we make progress with Centrica and partners, we think it reinforces the success we need to have that model. But importantly, we need to show that we're financially disciplined to keep this asset-light model, which we're doing. So with that, I'll hand back to Phil. Philip Caldwell: Yes. Look, I think we have a very clear strategy. I think the steps we took last year put us in an extremely good position with the asset-light model. The 3 priorities for this year remain unchanged. We're working hard on signing new manufacturing licenses. I think we're at an exciting stage now where you'll probably hear more from our partners this year as they're starting to actually scale and launch things, but also helping to drive that demand as per the announcement with Centrica today, that also helps stimulate that demand for our partners as well. And then the single stack technology platform launch is a key milestone for us. We do believe we have the world's best solid oxide technology. And we're now at a point where we can actually bring that forward rapidly to new partners and existing partners to scale both for power first and then for hydrogen as that follows. And we're starting this year with a strong cash position. We have around GBP 45 million of contracted revenue based on existing contracts from today for 2026. So we're in good shape. And I think the market opportunity has probably never been stronger, particularly on the power side. And I think now we need to get on and actually grab that opportunity, and we're well positioned to do so. So with that, I think we'll probably move on to questions. Operator: That's great, Phil. Thank you very much indeed. Before we go to those online, Phil, if it's okay, I'm going to come to the room. If you do have a question, just raise your hand and I'll give you the microphone. Christopher Leonard: Chris Leonard from UBS. Maybe 2 questions from me. And to start with, can we go into Centrica. And obviously, you spoke to the time to power and the need there. You also spoke in the presentation to the evolution of cost and what you see is feasible here. It will be really helpful to get a gauge on where you think your partners when they first push out these fuel cell products, where you think they'll land at on CapEx price and where you think that evolution can get to? Philip Caldwell: Yes. I have to be very careful here because whenever I start forecasting our licensees prices, I get into trouble. But let's just -- if we talk in general terms, the SOFCs that are out there at the moment are available at around $3,500 a kilowatt. If you take that in the U.K. market context, and you look at the spark spread of gas and power, then you can generate power very efficiently in the U.K. I mean, obviously, gas prices are moving around a bit at the moment. So I don't want to be precise on this. But given we pay in the U.K., the highest energy bills probably anywhere in Europe and even worldwide, when we map the U.K. out, when we look at market attractiveness, spark spreads, cost of power, et cetera, the U.K. is right up there, Northern Europe, et cetera. So it's a very significant opportunity. To go back to your question, Chris, we think that we can significantly generate power at a lower cost, even at a relatively high entry-level CapEx compared to turbines and other generation because we're so efficient, because of the OpEx, et cetera, and because of the lifetimes that we can achieve. So we think that there's a big opportunity there in terms of that deployment. And then the thing I would add is I think that kind of level is a starting point because I think what we see is a window that's opened up. So people need power. I think SOFC can now fulfill that power. And as our partners scale, we expect the cost of those SOFC units to come down quite significantly. Christopher Leonard: Yes, that was the second part. And then following up on Centrica. Obviously, you spoke to the contracted revenue for this year at GBP 45 million in the books, but presumably, I don't know, but I presume that maybe didn't include Centrica's potential contribution. Like what should we think about for engineering revenues and consulting fees, et cetera? Philip Caldwell: Yes. Look, the role that we're playing with Centrica is more in the advisory support side. So at the moment, that's going to be fairly modest revenue. So it's not like -- don't think of this like an MLA, they're not an MLA partner. The big value add of Centrica, obviously, we generate some engineering support fees, et cetera, there. But really, it's the deployment of our technologies through our partner network that drives that demand that ultimately drives royalties. That's -- we see them in that Pillar 2 category, not in the Pillar 1. So that's where we see that. So the thing that would really move the needle for us this year is new MLAs. Alex Smith: Alex here from Berenberg. Just a quick one on the next-gen kind of stack technology. You kind of mentioned it in your kind of closing comments. Kind of what the real benefit you think that could have to offer? And is that like a key milestone for the business going forward? And then second one is just kind of a new licensee pipeline, how the discussions are going to kind of bring new people in and new manufacturing products. Philip Caldwell: Okay. So look, the stack launch is the culmination of several years of effort. Over the years, we've increased the cell footprint. We've increased the stack height. There's a lot of focus on the simplicity to manufacture. We will continue to drive that in terms of getting down the actual installed manufacturing CapEx of what it takes to build those factories. But that stack itself represents what we believe to be the building block that all our partners will now scale on. And our technology teams, our R&D teams are really focused on driving cost and lifetime, cost as in the unit cost of stacks, but also the manufacturing cost and then the lifetime of the product. So that's where we see that technology evolving. And I think it's a significant milestone for the company because we've been in that investment mode for quite a while on the core technology and R&D. I think by launching this product now, you can see from the optimized cost base, we've got the right team to keep on innovating around that particular platform. In terms of the pipeline. I think it's grown considerably in the past 12 months. I think we're getting incoming from most of the kind of players that are in the power system market, in particular, because I think that's the acute need that people see. Obviously, we're very strong in Asia, but we're looking at how we build out that ecosystem as well. So it's grown considerably in the past 12 months. I would say on the hydrogen side, it tailed off a bit towards the end of '24, et cetera. But I think the -- as I look at the pipeline now, I would say it's about 70%, 80% driven by the power demand side of things as well. Alexandro da Silva O'Hanlon: Alex O'Hanlon from Panmure Liberum. A couple of questions for me. Firstly, well done on the Centrica deal. I'm interested if you could give some more color on how that came about? And is there scope for similar type deals in the pipeline? And the second question is just on the cultural change. You mentioned a couple of times in the presentation. Clearly, you're shifting towards being more commercial now. How are you tracking that and making sure that the change that you want to see is actually permeating throughout the business? Philip Caldwell: Okay. So on the Centrica deal, I reached out and I saw what was happening in the U.K. we saw the opportunity in the U.K. market. It's like this market if this technology is so good, why are we not deploying it in probably one of the most attractive markets for this in the world. So Centrica was a logical choice for that. One of the biggest LNG importers, they're looking to diversify. They're making investments in small modular -- advanced modular reactors for nuclear, et cetera. And I think once we started talking with Centrica, they saw the same thing that we did, which was this acute need for power, et cetera. So we were very, very much aligned. And so I think they're an excellent partner for us in the U.K. I think the other thing we didn't talk too much about today is not just on the power generation side, but also there is the potential to combine this with nuclear in the future to do hydrogen generation on the back of modular reactors. So there's a lot of good synergies there between the 2 companies. And we're very excited about that partnership. And as part of that process, what I did is with Centrica I took them and they've actually visited our partner factories. So they've been to Korea, been to Taiwan, been to China. And at that point, I think they realized this is real. And I think this is the key thing is the question we get asked time and again is, well, yes, fuel cells have had about fuel cells. Yes, but is it real? Does it really scale? -- aren't they expensive? How long do they last, et cetera? And then you go and you walk around the Doosan factory and it's like, oh, right, got it. This is real. Even before they went into the factory, it's like, okay, we know what you're talking about now. Is there potential to do that with other partners? I don't think we need to in the U.K., but it's an interesting model. We have so if we can stimulate demand and then we can introduce our ecosystem of partners, I think it's pretty powerful. So as part of that commercial discipline in the future, we will probably look to replicate this in maybe in other parts of the world. But in the U.K., it's Centrica. So in terms of the commercial progress, how we're tracking it, et cetera, our Chief Commercial Officer, Filip Smeets, joined us last year. There's a lot of rigor now in terms of the pipeline progress. We put more people in regions. We're just getting better, better and better at it through some discipline as well. And also demand helps. So we're getting incoming, but also people are starting to realize who we are. And I think in the industry, already, we've got a very good reputation. I think people, competitors, they respect our technology. I think the thing that people have always maybe had the question mark on is, well, how does Ceres scale and go to market. And I think that's what we're going to see coming through this year. Lacie Midgley: Lacie Midgley here, Bloomberg Intelligence. Just a couple from me. Stuart, your comment on securing the one partnership every 12 months and that triggering the breakeven point. I mean, clearly, that's the place we need to be to before the royalty scale. But I mean, I'd be interested in both your comments really, but what in your mind is a realistic number there because no doubt the demand is there to have as many MLAs as you can across geographies. But presumably, your current partners won't want that number going too high given the competition that they'll likely face in certain geographies. I mean what kind of number are you thinking there on kind of a longer-term view? Do you have anything around that? I mean... Stuart Paynter: Well, if you look at recent history, we've signed 3 in the last 2 years from the beginning of '24 to the end of -- we have set ourselves up that on an average cadence every 12 months, we will achieve what you said, Lacie, sort of breakeven and cash flow neutrality, right? But that's not exciting for anyone. That's just a stop gap until the royalties come along and it helps us diversify, build a portfolio of clients. We think there's really plenty of room to play. Phil showed a 22 gigawatt solid oxide market by 2030. Even if Bloom have scaled to 3 to 5 gigawatts by that, that's 15% to 20% of the market. There's plenty of room for plenty of people to play with plenty of applications and with a much bigger market coming along later in hydrogen. So we really don't feel like there's downward pressure on this number. It's a case of execution for us, building a pipeline, instilling commercial discipline and executing. These are big agreements. So they're very -- it's difficult to predict. But we believe we've got the right team in place now, led by Filip, as Phil said, with some really, really strong people sort of backing his team up to give us the best chance of executing. It's still difficult to do, but we -- given our recent history and new commercial discipline, we believe we can as -- the short answer to your question is as many as possible. Lacie Midgley: I mean as the royalties are stacking, that makes the commercial proof point easier to sell, right? So that all becomes a lot easier. Philip Caldwell: Yes. I think also, we've done this now 5 or 6 times. So building factories is something that we're getting we're getting pretty good at, but it's a learning curve. The first time you do it, second time you do it, et cetera. So -- but we also -- what's good to see is when you -- when our first licensees came on, they had to take a fairly immature supply chain and scale that as well and equipment builders. So when somebody takes a license, it's not just to the technology, it's to that whole ecosystem of partners. And so new license discussions now are much faster, much easier because in some ways, you'd say, well, okay, this is where you would get equipment builders from. This is your choices in supply chain, et cetera. So we started off with a very European-centric supply chain. And now we've added to that to our partnerships with Doosan, but now with the Taiwanese and the Chinese, we're building out quite a formidable set of supply chain partners as well. So that -- in terms of that credibility, not only do we know how to build factories and help our partners to do that, but we can also introduce them to a whole ecosystem of very willing suppliers as well. Lacie Midgley: That's helpful. And then just lastly, on Weichai, I mean, you talked about them moving very quickly, quickest out of all your partners so far. Just trying to kind of work this out. So how much of that is because maybe of the historical work that you had with the sort of legacy partnership? And how much of that is kind of versus your own kind of technology developments, maybe reducing time frames there or just Weichai's desire to get to market more quickly? Just trying to understand, firstly, how quickly they can get to royalties, but then I guess, the time frames from MLA signing to actually getting to royalties, future partnerships? Philip Caldwell: Yes. So when we're talking to new partners, we kind of give a guidance of less than 3 years. And we're obviously looking to reduce that all the time. But some of that's incompressible in terms of technology transfer, the time it takes just to actually build either greenfield or brownfield factories and equip them. But we roughly talk about that kind of time frame. Now in parallel with that, you've got not just the stack manufacturer, which for us now is becoming more like a blueprint. We can take people around our own facility in the U.K. And like I mentioned, we can -- we've got blueprints of how you build factories, and we've got an ecosystem of partners there. But then they also have to develop the product, the power system product as well. I think we started the relationship with Weichai with a system license, and we've developed that system with them over a number of years. But now what they're doing is very impressive in terms of their own system development. So I think they can go fast because the system level maturity is very good. And then it's that desire to get to market is how quickly you build out that capacity. And I think that's -- that's what's happening extremely fast. It's a fairly typical approach in Asia, in particular in China, but they set incredibly aggressive time frame. So they're looking to obviously reduce that 3 years quite significantly. Christopher Leonard: Just a follow-up on that actually in terms of the royalty outlook and thinking about Delta scaling up this year, the target to be online end of '26. Has that changed at all? Are you still looking at that time frame? And Doosan as well? I mean, how are you feeling about them looking into '26? Obviously, you recognize right at the end of '25, some royalty perhaps, but is there more to come? And how should we look at this year? Philip Caldwell: Yes. Look, I think on this year, fresh royalties are there, but they're still pretty modest. So I don't think it's that material into '26 is our guidance. Yes, Delta is on track, but really, that's going to be like '27 type time frame and then obviously, new partners coming on. So in the near term, we're really focused on the license fees, the engineering services still through 2026 and probably into '27. And then -- but royalties build from that point. So that's how we see it. We're not changing guidance on that really. Unknown Executive: It looks as though we're doing well for much into the room. So we've got a couple online that we might start to tackle. So the first one is regarding the Centrica deal. And given they're based in the U.K., you mentioned that there's going to be revenue from U.K. and Europe. And what is the likely spread for revenue, be it U.K.-centric or more broad? Philip Caldwell: I think that's really one for Centrica to look at. But their presence predominantly, it's U.K. and Ireland as well is a very attractive market. So U.K. and Ireland, and then they're active across Europe as well. But I think initially, our focus is predominantly U.K. and Ireland. Unknown Executive: Another question coming from the supply chain. So given the fact that the technology transfer includes quite a bit of the supply chain upgrades, do we have any concerns for material, rare earth material accessibility or scaling up to match our partners for the supply chain potential constraints that you see in other industries at the moment? Philip Caldwell: No, we don't because the nature of our technology, we use Ceria where the company gets its name from the major rare earth material, which is the most abundant. We're not using Scandia. We're not using where we use other rare earths, we're using very small amounts. So we're not concerned about constraints in any of those kind of materials. Unknown Executive: We also have a question on the pipeline, which is wondering when and if there's opportunity for U.S. partners? And have there been any constraints of why we haven't signed any EU partners either recently? Philip Caldwell: There's no constraints. And look, as and when I can update you on commercial activities, I will, but I can't give specifics on particular opportunities or geographies at this point. I think there is interest in the U.S. I can say that clearly, given the market opportunity there. And yes, that's an area of focus for us as well. Unknown Executive: Switching topics slightly. We've got a question on hydrogen. So wondering if we can -- you can expand upon what the pressurized modules are, those and the balance of plant and how Thermax is looking to scale and what the time lines would be for that? Philip Caldwell: Okay. So the pressurized modules are basically taking the core cell and stack technology, putting them inside a pressure vessel. And the reason you do that is by working with OEM partners like Shell, you save a very significant compression cost even on first stage compression, just a couple of bar makes a big difference. So as we look at hydrogen at a refinery kind of level or in an industrial application like steel or fertilizers, et cetera, it makes a lot of sense to have modules that are pressurized and can be scaled. The reason for the partnership with Thermax is twofold, really. One is they're an EPC, so a contractor -- engineering contractor based in India, which is one of the key markets that we see for green hydrogen. And secondly, compared to European suppliers, et cetera, there's significantly lower cost in terms of the engineering and actually driving the unit cost of these things down. So again, we're always looking at what's the most economically advantageous way to bring this technology to market. And that's why we have the relationship with Thermax. Unknown Executive: Great. And Stuart, I'm conscious you've already touched on it, but we've got a couple of other questions on when we expect theirs to reach profitability or break point even. I'm just wondering if there's anything else you'd like to add to clarify. Stuart Paynter: Yes. I mean -- so hopefully, we've made it clear that if we can achieve a cadence of 1 MLA every 12 months, that's where we get to. These aren't as predictable as sometimes we'd like. But that would be the goal. So the moment we can continually execute the pipeline to MLA every 12 months, that's when we're going to reach that sort of profitability level. But that's not long-term sustainable profitability. That comes when the royalty streams become the dominant player in our revenues, and that's going to be a few years out. So the idea now is to have a cost base where we can maintain a technology advantage, execute the commercial strategy whilst preserving cash. And in the end, that getting new partners on board and pushing the technology forward will drive the royalties in the long term. So we think it's a really viable business strategy as Phil laid out those 3 pillars, both for the short to medium term, and it also benefits the long term when we get to royalties as well. So it's a really nice business strategy we're pursuing. Unknown Executive: Great. The only final question that's come up is regarding RFC and wondering what has happened to that investment? And are we continuing to pursue that technology? Stuart Paynter: Yes. So RFC was something we supported in the middle of the year and bought it into the Ceres Group. We're still looking to give that really, really viable long-term energy storage technology life. And we're pursuing some opportunities to see whether we can get that business funded. And when we got more news, we'll share. Unknown Executive: Great. I think that wraps up everyone. So Phil, I'll hold -- hand back to you for any final comments. Philip Caldwell: Yes, sure. Well, Yes. Thanks, everybody, for your time today. I think that we've got an exciting 2026 ahead of us. The company is extremely well positioned. We have a Capital Markets Day on 15th of April, where you'll hear more from the industrial applications with a guest speaker, hopefully from Centrica attending from that side of things. We'll have our new product launch. And then I think you'll hear more from our existing partners as well this year as they hit some key milestones. So the market opportunity is definitely very live, and we need to capitalize on that opportunity right now. But I think Ceres is extremely well positioned to do so. Operator: That's great, Phil. Thank you very much indeed. We will now redirect investors.
Operator: Good day, and welcome to the Bitfarms Fiscal 2025 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this call is being recorded. I would like to turn the call over to Jennifer Drew-Bear from Bitfarms Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Jennifer Drew-Bear: Thank you, and welcome to Bitfarms Fiscal Year 2025 Conference Call. With me on the call today are Ben Gagnon, Chief Executive Officer and Director; and Jonathan Mir, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, please note this call is being webcast with an accompanying slide presentation. Today's press release and our presentation can be accessed on our website under the Investors section. Turning to Slide 2. I'd like to remind everyone that certain forward-looking statements will be made during the call, and that future results could differ from those implied in this statement. The forward-looking information is based on certain assumptions and is subject to risks and uncertainties. And I invite you to consult Bitfarms 10-K for a complete list. Also, please note that references will be made to certain non-GAAP financial measures, and therefore, may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. We invite listeners to refer to today's press release and our 10-K for definitions of the aforementioned non-GAAP measures and their reconciliations to GAAP measures. Please note that all financial references are denominated in U.S. dollars, unless always noted. And now turning to Slide 3. It is my pleasure to turn over the call to Ben Gagnon, Director and Chief Executive Officer. Ben, the floor is yours. Ben Gagnon: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our fiscal year 2025 earnings call. In 2025, we made a bold decision to walk away from our legacy business, Bitcoin, and build the infrastructure in North America for what comes next, HPC and AI. It was a year of deliberate and consequential transformation with a clear mandate. Secure North American pipeline, strengthen our balance sheet, accelerate site development, and position ourselves to engage customers from a place of operational momentum at the peak of the energy bottleneck constraining the growth of AI. I can say with confidence and pride that we accomplished exactly what we set out to do. The foundation you see today, the capital structure, the sites, the team, the strategy was engineered through deliberate choices, developed with discipline and built to propel us forward. We made foundational changes to reposition the business and made 100% of our focus on North American HPC infrastructure development. No half measures, no compromises and in time, no Bitcoin. We built a new company. And while we are presenting as Bitfarms today, tomorrow marks our beginning as Keel infrastructure. The name says it all. A Keel is the bottom of structural component of a vessel. It's what keeps it stable and moving forward in the right direction regardless of the condition above the water line. It is structural, it is essential, and it is exactly how we see our role in the HPC and infrastructure landscape. We are not here to compete with hyperscalers or neoclouds. We are here to enable them. Our focus is providing the critical and largely invisible foundation that will allow the world's most advanced AI platform to deploy on time and scale without interruption. We expect to close the re-domiciliation and finalize our rebranding efforts tomorrow, April 1, and we'll begin trading under the ticker KEEL, 2 business days after completion of the transaction on the Nasdaq and the TSX. We are entering this new phase from a position of strength. With over 2 gigawatts in our pipeline, Keel is a regional leader with some of the largest power land portfolios in some of the highest demand markets in North America and with robust financial strength to execute against our plan. Our current liquidity is far in excess of the CapEx budgeted to get us through permitting and ultimately to start signing leases, giving the company significant financial flexibility to execute on our strategy. And our strategy is equally as clear. We are designing all of our site and campus developments as either powered shell or co-location facilities. We believe this is where we can deliver the most value to shareholders and serve our potential customers at the speed and to the specifications they need. We were originally exploring in parallel to co-location the potential benefits of pursuing a small amount of GPU as a service at our Washington site, Moses Lake, where due to the lowest cost power for data centers in the country and a relatively smaller footprint, we believe it could be an avenue to drive additional shareholder value. Since our last quarterly call, we have spoken with an increased volume of potential customers. And it's clear from those conversations, the most accretive business model for the site is one of co-location. This is not specific to Moses Lake and applies to all of our other sites as well, where demand is even higher. So we will focus on what we do best, being an infrastructure developer and owner. This plays directly to our core competencies. We are a team of developers united by disciplined action, building cost-effective institutional-grade infrastructure at the pace our customers require. The same capabilities have built our energy platform, speed to market, capital discipline, operational rigor precisely what HPC and AI deployments demand today. This is just the natural extension of what we do best. So with all the pieces in place and with the overwhelming support of our shareholders who voted over 99% in favor of the HPC and AI pivot, the U.S. redomicile and the rebrand. Starting tomorrow, we are Keel infrastructure. Turning to Slide 4. When we sat on our pivot, we developed a 3-year transformation plan, one that as of today, we are nearly halfway through completing. In 2025, we did the intensive foundational work for our transformation, including the Stronghold acquisition, securing more power in Pennsylvania, rebalancing the portfolio to North America, a $588 million raise fully institutional and oversubscribed, our U.S. GAAP transition, New York headquarters and establishing a new executive team. This work is done. With power and land secured in some of the power markets that matter most, a team of internal experts and strategic partners that have built data centers for the largest companies in the world and a balance sheet engineered to see us through 2026, we are well positioned to continue our site development and deliver against the time lines, our prospective hyperscalers and neocloud customers need. 2026 is all about execution. Effective tomorrow, we will have completed our redomiciliation to the United States and officially rebranded as Keel infrastructure. Two major milestones that position the company for the next phase of growth. With that complete, we expect the next significant milestones to come from executing against our development at Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake, where we are moving full steam ahead and working diligently across three simultaneous and active work streams. One, finalizing permits, which we expect to be done in the coming months. Two, continued work on architecture and engineering in line with ongoing customer conversations and requirements. And of course, three, our go-to-market to secure highly financeable leases with investment-grade tenants. Commercialization is well underway. The upcoming milestones investors can expect are completion of preconstruction activities like permitting, progress in customer engagement and ultimately lease execution, which we are confident we can achieve this year and will be major catalysts. 2026 is also the year where we expect to leave Bitcoin and Bitcoin mining behind. While we were probably one of the first miners to commence wind down of our Bitcoin mining exposure to reinvest that capital into infrastructure for HPC and AI, we will be accelerating those efforts in 2026 as site developments progress. 2027 is all about delivery. This is the year when we anticipate that sites would come online, we'd begin delivering megawatts to customers, HPC and AI revenue really begins and we complete our transition to a premier North American HPC and AI infrastructure company. By the end of 2027, we expect Keel will be a proven infrastructure developer and a regional leader across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec, and we will just continue to grow and scale from there in 2028 and beyond to over 2 gigawatts as we execute against our expansion capacity. Turning to Slide 5. In HPC infrastructure, power, location and time lines are everything. We hold something scarce and valuable secured power, land and expansion capacity in Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec. Some of the most in-demand markets with some of the biggest barriers to entry. We know it and so do our potential tenants. Our campuses offer solutions to hyperscalers and neocloud's greatest scaling problems, location, proximity and fiber connectivity to major metro areas and data center clusters solving for latency issues and giving our tenants proximity to their own customers and other data centers. Time lines. Our robust secured power for '26, '27 and with expansion capacity in 2028 is highly coveted in an environment where energy capacity is hard to find and multiyear waitlists are the norms. We create value for tenants by enabling them to deploy years earlier by leasing from us rather than to invest in growing organically. An energy-efficient cool climate, the lower the PUE, the more critical megawatts. Panther Creek is a great example of seeing the hyperscaler and neocloud's appetite at play. While there is a lot of interest in the site last year, inbound customer activity surged after we secured zoning in February. This is not a coincidence. It is the proof point and one that we've been making for the last year, but may still be confusing to some investors. So we'd like to be clear that investment-grade tenants value derisk sites where they can move from lease to revenue fast. The more we advance, the better our leverage. The better our leverage, the better the leases, and the more long-term value we create for shareholders. Turning to Slide 6. It is indisputable that power is the binding constraint for AI infrastructure deployment and will remain so for the coming years. Leading investment banks, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, Guggenheim, Moelis, they've all published extensively on this. And the consensus is clear. New power generation cannot come online fast enough to meet AI demand today, tomorrow or in the next 5 years. This bottleneck is structural, not cyclical. Hyperscalers and neoclouds that used to plan on 12-month horizons are now locking in 24- to 36-month supply chain commitments. Not tied to specific projects, but as platform level agreements and are now actively competing for the power and land to deploy it. While you are probably familiar with this information, here you can see a summary of the five development sites. The power we have secured and in some cases, the incremental power opportunities that make up our 2.2 gigawatt pipeline. Turning to Slide 7. I want to take a moment to put our current valuation context because there is a meaningful disconnect between where we trade today and the value we are positioned to capture as a company. When we analyze our current valuation against our peers, the picture becomes clear, at approximately $1.9 million per available megawatt of secure 2027 capacity, we're trading in the middle of a Bitcoin miner Group, valued at roughly $1.7 million to $2.1 million for 2027 megawatt meaning we are being valued based on having power but not what we are doing with it. For shareholders and bondholders, we see three distinct catalysts, each capable of driving meaningful reratings. The first is obviously lease execution. Across our sector, companies that have signed leases trade at $4 million to $6 million per 27 megawatts, a 2 to 3x premium to where we are today. This is the market's consistent signal driven entirely by lease execution, not facility delivery, not revenue generation, just signed leases. A signed lease secures revenue and financing derisking the developments. The market pays for that with nearly 500 megawatts actively being commercialized today and visibility on permitting across Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses lake, this catalyst is well within reach. The second catalyst and arguably the most powerful for long-term holders is securing our expansion capacity. 2/3 of our 2.2 gigawatt portfolio or approximately 1.5 gigawatts is expansion capacity, which we believe the market is assigning little to no value. While securing these megawatts is a process that will take more time, we believe additional megawatts can be secured in the second half of 2026 requiring very little CapEx while representing significant embedded value as powered land even before a lease is signed or there is a shovel in the ground. The third catalyst is delivering in 2027. Once facilities are derisked through commissioning and begin generating revenue under long-term contracts, the development risk should drop dramatically and the operator valuation numbers become transformational yet again. We are not taking a leap of faith on technology, our ability to see our power or market demand. The tech is here. The power is secured, the sites are advancing, the inbound demand is real, but the market has not yet priced in is the transformation that happens when a developer becomes a counterparty when we move from site advancing to lease executing. This is the main opportunity ahead of us to accelerate permitting, execute leases, secure our expansion capacity and ultimately deliver to our customers. This is how we will create value for our shareholders and bondholders. Turning to Slide 8. Our execution plan is defined by six areas, each supporting our ability to deliver at the pace and scale our future customers require. First, we've secured our deep bench of talent by adding over 60 years of infrastructure and development in over 50 years of data center construction experience combined in just the past few months. People have delivered at scale for the most demanding customers in the world. Jonathan Mir joined as CFO, bringing 25 years of energy infrastructure strategy and project finance expertise. We have also added an SVP of construction and of power, a VP of HPC Operations and Head of permitting to oversee the execution of these critical functions. We've assembled the right team to execute on our vision. Second, we are engaging the right industry leaders as partners, T5, Turner Construction, Corgan, [ WWT ], Vertiv. These firms have built data centers for the world's largest hyperscalers not once but hundreds of times. When customers look at our project partners, which will be available on the new website when it launches tomorrow, they will see that we have also assembled the right partners to ensure better outcomes. Third, we have the capital required to bring our sites to market. As of March 27, 2026, our liquidity stands at $520 million in cash and Bitcoin, which we expect is much more than the CapEx budgeted to get us to a lease at Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Jonathan will go into more detail on our capital position and financing strategy shortly, but the headline is simple. We're well funded and can move fast. Fourth, a disciplined Bitcoin exit. It is clear we are no longer a Bitcoin miner. However, with strong, robust liquidity, we can have a disciplined approach to our exit strategy. We will continue to operate up until the time sites need to be prepared for construction maximizing free cash flow before selling the miners. We will also opportunistically sell Bitcoin into strength to capture and reinvest every dollar we can into HPC and AI infrastructure. Fifth, power assets that cannot be replicated. Our megawatts sit in regions with large barriers to entry, Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec, all have multiple year waitlists. No one is cutting the line. Our 350 megawatts at Panther Creek, 110 megawatts at Sharon and 18 megawatts in Washington were secured before the AI demand wave made these markets highly coveted. This isn't power others can easily replicate giving us competitive edge with high-quality tenants to understand these markets and are hungry for assets like ours, which leads us to our sixth point. In this market, speed to power is what drives value. For our customers, the opportunity cost of delayed deployment is huge. So the priority is getting capacity online as quickly as possible. Every day of delay is lost revenue. As a result, power availability and certainty of delivery are the primary drivers of lease economics. This dynamic has pushed lease rates higher since our Q3 call, exactly as we said it would. The opportunity in front of Keel infrastructure is real. We now have the assets and the team is ready. I'm so proud of what we built in 2025, and I'm confident in what we'll deliver in 2026 and 2027. With that, I'll turn the call over to Jonathan. Jonathan Mir: Thanks, Ben. Turning to Slide 9. I joined the team 5 months ago. My focus has been on sharpening our approach to capital allocation, strengthening our balance sheet and capital structure and ensuring the financing actions support long-term shareholder value creation. I've had a front row of the depth of talent, the operational discipline and the strategic momentum across Bitfarms. I work closely with our operations and development teams both to understand the current trajectory of our assets and to ensure our capital plans are aligned with the opportunities ahead. What stood out to me is the extraordinary potential we have driven by the quality and potential of our sites, a strong balance sheet, the best liquidity position in the company's history and a broad team that's both deeply engaged and committed to excellence. We're moving quickly and with purpose. I'm pleased to be here with you today and discuss the progress we're making. I'll use this time to walk through our performance for fiscal year 2025 and outline our current capital strategy that we believe supports the accretive growth we're targeting for 2026 and beyond. Turning to Slide 10. Before discussing our financials for the quarter, I want to briefly frame the results are presented this quarter. As of Q3 2025, the Paso Pe facility in Paraguay has been classified as held for sale. As a result, all revenues, operating costs and asset balances associated with Paso Pe are treated as discontinued operations in our fiscal year 2025 financials. So when I refer to continuing operations, I am speaking exclusively about our North American platform, the foundation of our transition into HPC and AI infrastructure. With that, revenue for fiscal year 2025 was $229 million, up 72% year-over-year. Operating loss for fiscal year 2025 was $150 million including noncash depreciation of $98 million and $28 million of impairment charges. This compares to an operating loss of $28 million in 2024, which included $102 million of noncash depreciation and $4 million of impairment charges. Net loss for 2025 was $209 million or a $0.38 loss per basic and diluted share compared to a 2024 net loss of $7 million or $0.02 loss per basic and diluted share. The differences between 2024 and 2025 were driven by a number of factors, including change in fair market value of digital assets, primarily due to the decline of Bitcoin prices and realization of gains on disposal of Bitcoin during the year. Two additional items also impacted year-over-year comparability. First, we saw a loss of $68 million, reflecting changes in our derivative assets and liabilities. Second, 2025 impairment charges were $25 million higher than in 2024. For the year, our adjusted EBITDA was $29 million compared to $31 million in 2024. Turning to Slide 11. 2025 was a deliberate year of balance sheet optimization and improvement, providing the foundation for our next phase of growth. We successfully issued an oversubscribed $588 million convertible offering, significantly expanding our liquidity. And in February, we repaid the Macquarie debt facility eliminating legacy debt, simplifying our capital structure and freeing the company from covenants. Each of these supports the pursuit of our HPC infrastructure strategy. The Macquarie facility had been originally used to accelerate development at Panther Creek, funding critical project activities, including long lead time item procurement and substation work. Retiring the facility was a strategic decision, strengthens the balance sheet and gives us the flexibility to secure a more cost-effective financing at either the parent or project level. Our current cash position of $520 million provides the runway to advance Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake through lease execution without accessing capital markets. Though we may do so if attractive opportunities arise that improve our ability to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. Macquarie was an excellent partner, and we appreciate their support so early in our pivot to HPC AI infrastructure. Turning to Slide 12. As we pivot to commercialization of our development sites, we have a clear financial strategy based on three principles. Capital allocation, capital formation and capital structure. Taken together, they are designed to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. First, capital allocation. We deploy capital into projects where the earnings potential exceeds their weighted average cost of capital. We rotate capital from businesses that are noncore or earning less than optimal returns and deploy the capital into higher return investments. Second, capital formation. Our financing strategy is designed to fund our very large growth opportunities while maintaining the liquidity needed for a stable base of operations. We will be opportunistic in our financing execution. We will fund construction of our data center projects using project or parent level bet and project or parent level equity or equity-linked offerings. We're taking a disciplined approach and at this time, are well capitalized to actively commercialize and execute leases across Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Third, capital structure. Our capital structure is designed to capture the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns while also retaining overall corporate flexibility and support growth. Our objective is to operate with a deliberate liquidity strategy in order to enable clear-headed commercial decisions and capital allocation decisions rather than having liquidity drive time lines. Stepping back, our road map is clear. We are building a regionally focused high-growth HPC AI infrastructure platform, grounded in disciplined capital allocation, a strengthened balance sheet and a development cadence that maximizes returns and minimizes risk. We're funded through the key derisking stages, permitting and leasing across Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek and we're entering 2026 with momentum, optionality and a balance sheet engineered for growth. We have the right people, assets, liquidity and strategy and we're well positioned to capture for our shareholders the long-term value potential we have today. With that, I'd like to return the call to Ben for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Jonathan. A little over a year ago, as our team began actively integrating AI into both our business and our daily lives, we came to a realization. This isn't just another technology cycle. It's a paradigm shift. More comparable to the industrial revolution than the Internet revolution. The fundamental measure, productivity capacity is no longer calories or joules, but tokens. This became strikingly clear 2 weeks ago at NVIDIA GTC, where I witnessed hundreds of companies applying AI to everything from straightforward tasks by cleaning and image generation to extraordinary complex applications, including protein folding, cystic simulations and even brain surgery. Walking the conference floor, speaking to the attendees, one thing was unmistakable. We've only begun to scratch the surface of AI's potential. Yet even in these early days, AI is already empowering individuals, communities and companies to accomplish exponentially more. We're witnessing Jevons Paradox unfold simultaneously across every industry, thanks to AI, where improved efficiency can paradoxically drive higher, not lower demand. It is literally never cost less to transform an idea into an action, a product, an image, a refined concept, a service or countless other outlets. The possibilities are truly limitless, and while no one can predict exactly how AI will reshape our future, uncertainty remains. It will require enormous amounts of power. Our 2.2 gigawatts of capacity and strategically position land across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec sit directly in the path of this transformation, and we intend to capitalize on that opportunity for our shareholders. We look forward to the opportunities ahead. With that, I would like to open the call to Q&A. Operator, please go ahead. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from Mike Grondahl with Northland. Mike Grondahl: First question, Ben, you talked about your decision not to go the GPU rental route at Moses Creek. And just the colocation route, could you talk a little about what a couple of the major drivers were that got you to that decision? Ben Gagnon: Yes, it's a great question, Mike. When we first started talking about in Q3, we were always evaluating this alongside with the colocation. We're trying to maximize the value for shareholders. So we're always going to evaluate multiple different business models at our sites. And because they have the lowest cost energy and all these other benefits, we thought it would make a lot of sense. But as we've continued to have increasing amounts of customer conversations for Washington and other sites. It was just really clear to us that the best opportunity for us is to just remain a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner and let these customers who really want these megawatts lease these megawatts. Mike Grondahl: Got it. Got it. And then maybe secondly, you articulated, I'll say, a philosophy a quarter or 2 ago about waiting and waiting on signing a lease as terms were continuing to improve kind of implying you're going to be really patient and wait on a lease. Could you kind of update how you're thinking about that lease execution strategy and the potential timing around it? Ben Gagnon: Yes. Our strategy on lease execution has been consistent. It remains consistent today. Our view is that the best way to maximize value for shareholders is to get the best terms in a lease because that's going to be what is going to be driving our NOI and our multiple. And so when we're looking to sign 10- to 15-year agreements, it's really important for us to take the -- maybe a little bit more time than investors may want us to in order to get better terms for longer. When it looks at what is really driving the value in these lease economics, one of the biggest elements is risk, and we've spoken to this multiple times over the last couple of months. And the biggest risk for most of the people -- to go out there and have conversations and get a lot of interest. And in some cases, you could even sign a lease prior to getting permits. But all of that risk is going to be priced into the agreement, you're going to be locked into it for 10 to 15 years, and that's going to negatively impact the long-term value that we're creating for shareholders. So our strategy has been incredibly consistent. And the benefit for us is that we are operating in high demand markets with high barrier to entry. So it takes a little bit longer to get permits going in Pennsylvania or in Washington than it does in Texas, which is the easiest market in the United States for that. But we believe that drives a lot of extra value because it's way more scarce, it's way harder to acquire and there's just not as much optionality. Operator: Our next question comes from Brett Knoblauch with Cantor Fitzgerald. Brett Knoblauch: Maybe to start, could you maybe just go into detail on what permits at what sites you guys are waiting to receive? Ben Gagnon: So permits is a complicated process, and we are develop -- we're getting permits across multiple sites in multiple jurisdictions. So they all have different rules, different regulations, different time lines, different reviews, different authorities. So it's far too much detail to get into exactly what permits are remaining on all the different sites. But we are continuing to make good progress and kind of -- we're looking at the visibility over the next couple of months. And with what we've had so far with the community engagement success that we've had so far, we think that in the coming months, sometime around the mid- to late summer time. we should be achieving the full permitted status across at least one, if not all of the sites. Brett Knoblauch: And then maybe just on the leasing environment across the different sites that you guys have. I guess we were under the impression that maybe Sharon would be first to go given it's relatively further along. Is that still how you guys are thinking about it? And then in the presentation when you guys kind of list the power pipeline and road map. How much of that is from generation on site that you guys are looking into? And do you have any update on where you guys are with respect to sourcing that generation? Ben Gagnon: Yes, sure. So the -- to answer the second part of your question first, all the power that we're talking about developing for our HPC and AI data centers right now is grid connected. So the two operating power plants that we have at Scrubgrass and Panther Creek. Currently, that math is not in those charts for the secured capacity or the site development plans. But in Scrubgrass particular, we are working to expand the generation capacity there with natural gas. So we've been working to tap into the Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline. We're achieving pretty good results there with the engineering firms. There's still probably another month or two to go before we're getting a clear path forward on the engineering plans. But Scrubgrass is our more of our pipeline site. And so those -- that power generation opportunity is more of a 2028 and 2029 time line. Everything else is grid connected, it's secure today or it's currently active. And sorry, Brett, I'm blanking on the first part of your question, would you mind repeating it? Brett Knoblauch: Yes. Just on maybe the cadence of which sites are -- quicker to go? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So really, that's going to be driven by success on permitting time lines in the customers. So all three of the sites, Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek are all actively in our go-to market right now. Every single one of those has customers engaged under NDA, and they have for quite some time. And so we're continuing to push forward on those conversations and those negotiations. Really, I think what investors should think about with regards to permits, permits are more of a closing condition to a lease, right? They're really not a starting condition to a negotiation. So we have these conversations and these negotiations simultaneously while we're working towards permitting. As permitting gets closer and closer, the negotiations will also get closer and closer in tandem and the first site to get leased is likely to be the first site to be permitted. Operator: Our next question comes from Stephen Glagola with KBW. Stephen Glagola: Just on that last point, if you could clarify the sequencing here between like notice to proceed and lease execution. So in other words, like can you pre-sign leases contingent on notice to proceed? Or is like notice to proceed required before any major customer would commit to a lease? Ben Gagnon: For a customer commit to binding in our view, they're going to want NTP, and that's based on the number of conversations that we are continuing to have and there probably are some customers who would be interested to sign prior to NTP, but those aren't the investment-grade counterparties that we're really seeking to engage with. Stephen Glagola: Okay. And then just one more. How are you thinking about like Vera Rubin hardware availability in '26 and like early '27? And to what extent could that variability in supply influence the timing of lease discussions at your sites? Ben Gagnon: Yes. That's a good question, Stephen. We've been talking about Vera Rubin, I think, since Q3 call because all of our sites are basically coming online in 2027. So we're trying to make sure that they are designed for the highest level of equipment that's coming out in '27 and '28, which is the Vera Rubin. In terms of supply, we haven't seen any impact so far. I understand there's always geopolitical uncertainty in the world that may impact those supply chains. But given that energy is such a huge bottleneck, and it's always been a huge bottleneck on the growth. I don't think that there is going to be a geopolitical situation that's going to make the bottleneck change from energy over to GPUs. So we don't have any expectation right now that, that's going to have any impact on leasing or demand for sites because power is still such an extreme bottleneck. It's hard to imagine what's going to overshadow that geopolitically. Operator: Our next question comes from Michael Donovan with Compass Point. Michael Donovan: Congrats on the progress. Can you provide an update on ESA progress, specifically Panther Creek's ISA to ESA conversion? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So that's a great question, Mike. As investors probably know, we have 350 megawatts secured ESA with PPL. But in addition to that, we also have an ISA that enables us to draw down approximately 60 megawatts from the grid, and that's associated with the existing transmission line and substation for the power plant that we currently have operating. In order to get that converted over, it's really more of a regulatory matter. And so it's hard to put an exact time line as to when those stamps are going to be received, but there's no infrastructure that needs to be built. There's no CapEx that needs to be spent. Really, it's just a matter of getting the regulatory approval to convert a nonfirm service into a firm service, and that would enable us to increase our capacity beyond 350 megawatts to what we probably expect is going to be maybe 400 megawatts or possibly slightly more. We expect this is going to happen this year, but it's hard to put an exact time line on it, given it's a regulatory matter. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Kinstlinger with AGP. Brian Kinstlinger: Last quarter, Ben, you communicated, you expected the GPU as a service and Moses Lake site would be targeted for, I believe, the first quarter for go-live. How are you shifting to co-location change the timing if at all? And my second question is, can you talk about also how the global memory shortage is impacting your site development or changing your near-term needs or planning for lead times? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So two parts to that question. In terms of switching from a GPU as a service to co-location just changing the business model doesn't really impact the development time line. So we don't really see any delay there associated with changing from GPU as a service, just to co-location. Really, it's just a matter of how we want to allocate our capital and how we want to focus the business. When it comes to the memory shortage. As a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner that really is not coming into our calculus very much, mostly that's a customer situation for them to resolve with their own supply chain because we're not the ones investing in the GPUs and the compute and the servers. Operator: Our next question comes from Martin Toner with ATB Cormark Capital Markets. Martin Toner: Good morning. Can you guys elaborate or [indiscernible] can you kind of give us some time line thoughts there? Ben Gagnon: So I'm going to repeat the question because it was a little quiet, just in case nobody else or other people had difficulty hearing. I believe the question was, can you give some time lines as to how we might be able to expand Panther Creek to 500 megawatts and beyond? So in order for us to move beyond the 350-megawatt ESA that we have secured, there's really two sources for expansion. The first is converting over that ISA from non-firm service to firm service that I just spoke to a minute ago. And that's really a regulatory matter that we expect to be resolved sometime this year. It could be tomorrow, it could be a few months from now. And then when it comes to expanding beyond that, what we have to do with that is we have to actually have new power applications. The good thing here is that the utilities are actually looking to invest in new generation in the area. So in this particular instance, and we weren't actually applying for new power. We actually have the utility call us and ask us how much more power we could take on site. Given the bottleneck constraint on power, that was obviously a very welcome call over here at Bitfarms to receive. And it's a pretty unusual one in the industry, but they're looking to scale up generation capacity in the area, specifically to service our site at greater capacity. So this is probably going to be 2 to 3 years time line because there's a lot of process involved with spinning up new generation and building those new transmission lines. But for a lot of our customers, what they really want is the fastest pathway to energization and a clear path to scale over multiple years. And so this really lines up with what the hyperscalers and what the neoclouds are searching for. Martin Toner: That's great. Hopefully, you can hear me better. Can you clarify when you expect to sign your first lease? Ben Gagnon: So I can't get into a specific time line. But in terms of milestones, as I spoke to earlier, it's really about clearing NTP as kind of the last closing condition or last milestone for us to sign a lease. So I think for the investors and the analysts on the call, the important thing to keep track of, especially over the next coming months is the continued progress that we have towards NTP because once NTP is clear, that's basically the last thing standing between us and a signed agreement. Martin Toner: Got it. Great. And last one from me. Can you talk a little bit about why mining exahash in Q4 was at the level that it was at? Ben Gagnon: So we continue to scale back our mining exposure as we continue to focus on our U.S. HPC infrastructure investments. So we haven't made any investments into Bitcoin mining. We're not spending any money on upgrades or new miners, and we're actively working to scale down the fleet and actively working to spin off assets like we have in Paraguay that are not suitable for conversion. So investors should continue to expect our hash rate to continue to trickle down over 2026 as we continue to execute on this transition to HPC and AI. Operator: Our next question comes from Mike Colonnese with H.C. Wainwright & Company. Michael Colonnese: So, Ben, I'm just curious, after securing the remaining permits across the three sites, which sounds like likely to take place in the coming months here, what does the time line look like from a data center construction and delivery standpoint? It sounds like you're pretty optimistic that revenue generation could commence as soon as next year, but any additional color there would be helpful. Ben Gagnon: Yes. I mean, really, this is the year of execution in 2027 is the year of delivery. And so at all three of our projects that we talked about today, Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington, we all expect them to come online and start delivering megawatts and start generating revenue to customers in 2027. We'll continue to provide updates as we go along. And I think once we have cleared NTP and we have signed leases, there's going to be a lot clear visibility that we can provide to investors for each specific project and their specific time lines. Michael Colonnese: Got it. And then back to Bitcoin mining operations, it sounds like you're progressively going to be scaling back hash rate as you bring some of the HPC AI data centers online. I guess what's the best way to think about hash coming offline and kind of flowing through your operating results over the near term here? Ben Gagnon: I'll speak to it at a high level and then maybe I'll pass it off to Jonathan for some further clarity. But right now, the Bitcoin mining remains profitable, but it's not it's not very -- it's marginal. So it's still contributing to the business. But really, it's not the focus of the business. It's not where we're investing our time, it's not where we're investing our efforts. And given that we have been so successful last year in raising capital and strengthening our balance sheet. It's really not super impactful for the developments that we have this year, the operations or the CapEx. So we'll just continue to scale that down, trying to maximize value in the disciplined exit. If it makes more sense to maybe sell some miners a little bit earlier then we might need to in order to begin instruction, we'll evaluate that as we will always do to maximize value for our shareholders. But really, we kind of see this as a pretty minor element of our balance sheet and a minor element of the financial plan for this year. Jonathan, do you want to add anything further? Jonathan Mir: Only that when we think about our liquidity going forward, the strategic objective is to ensure we are well capitalized through the lease process and beyond without the need to raise any new capital in the markets and that takes into account the current state of Bitcoin mining operations. It's not assuming any improvement in the economics there. So our plan is built on conservative assumptions around the status of the Bitcoin market. Operator: Our next question comes from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities. Nick Giles: Good morning, Keel team. In the interim period where Bitcoin mining operations are wound down, but kind of pre-revenue generation on the HPC side, could the generating assets at Panther Creek and Scrubgrass be utilized in any way such as the PJM capacity auction? Ben Gagnon: So those power plants do actually participate in PJM capacity auctions. We've done that for quite some time. And so we do benefit from the capacity payments that we received there. Nick Giles: Got it. Okay. And any order of magnitude of what those could be kind of in the 2026 planning year? Ben Gagnon: So I mean, really, it's -- we've kind of maxed out on the capacity auction payments. They set a ceiling, and that's where the capacity auction payments closed. Nick Giles: Got it. Understood. Maybe one for Jonathan. You've made some progress on the capital structure, but just was hoping for any additional comments you might have on what you're looking for in an initial debt package, how you're seeing term shift and kind of what tools you have at your disposal during construction and kind of post energization. Jonathan Mir: Good question. Thanks, Nick. So our basic approach is to compare and contrast our financing options down at the asset level and upstairs at the parent level. And certainly, one of the things that we've seen in the market that has caught our attention like everyone else, is the tightening of spreads between folks issuing high-yield debt in the market that would seem like quite attractive levels for strong investment-grade counterparties or credit wraps. And those converging towards the levels seen in bank-originated classic construction of project financing. So we'll be -- each of those has its own advantages in terms of simplicity of managing the actual capital once it's raised versus negative carry costs. And as we get closer to a funding point, we'll make the decision as to what seems best for our shareholders in terms of how we decide to finance. I'm sorry, Nick, I was just going to say that the markets for our space and for infrastructure generally seem calm right now. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Dobson with Clear Street. Gregory Pendy: It's Greg Pendy in for Brian Dobson. Just I guess one final one. Just I guess, one final one. Just on the redomiciling to the U.S., are there any implications to costs or structural implications in terms of ownership that we should be aware of as you enter this over the next couple of days? Ben Gagnon: One of the benefits and reasons for the redom is that we will now be eligible for inclusion in indices that require -- want to be a U.S. domiciled company. So for example, we'll be eligible for inclusion in the Russell 1000 and the Russell 3000 as well as for ownership in any other fund who was otherwise limited to the purchase of U.S. securities. We view that as being quite helpful in terms of moving our shareholder base to one that is institutional and long term. There are no other -- there are no cost or flexibility implications in our end. We simply see this as a nice path forward with a lot of benefits for our shareholders. Operator: Our next question comes from Bill Papanastasiou with Chardan Capital Markets. Bill Papanastasiou: Just wanted to touch on the Washington side and decision to shift towards colo. Can you confirm that this won't have any material impact on the purchase commitment that was entered into November? Or is the team considering the shift in development allocation to other sites? Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Bill. No impact on the capital commitments and the equipment we've already purchased for the Washington site by changing business models. In fact, actually, it just helps to reduce the CapEx because we're no longer paying for the compute. Bill Papanastasiou: Understood. And then how should we generally be thinking about maintenance CapEx on existing Bitcoin mining sites as you gradually shift over to AI HPC here? Ben Gagnon: We're not making any investments into the Bitcoin mining sites. Basically, we're just continuing to keep them up and running. And so no further investments are being made in the sites into new sites or into new miners. Operator: Thank you. This concludes the question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Ben Gagnon for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thank you very much, everyone, for joining our call today and really look forward to speaking to you next time as Keel Infrastructure. Have a great day. Operator: Thank you for your participation. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.
Sara Cheung: Good day, everyone. Thank you for joining the online briefing to discuss the First Pacific 2025 Full Year Financial and Operating Results. The results presentation is available on First Pacific's website, www.firstpacific.com under the Investor Relations section Presentation page. This results briefing is being recorded, and the replay will be available on First Pacific website this evening in the Investor Relations section. For participants from the media, please note the Q&A session is open for investors and analysts only. If you would like to ask questions, please contact us when the briefing is finished. Today, we have with us our Executive Director, Mr. Chris Young; our CFO, Mr. Joseph Ng; Associate Director, Mr. John Ryan and Mr. Stanley Yang and other senior executives from the head office of First Pacific. Over to you, John, for the presentation, please. John Ryan: Thank you, Sara. I'll just go through very quickly the First Pacific part of this presentation, then we'll move to the Q&A for you folks. Now let's begin on Page 3 with a quick reminder of some of our major investments, all of which have done pretty well in the course of 2025, and we'll discuss this later on. Now on Page 4, we've got the shape of our gross asset value on December 31, 2025. The gap was about $5.3 billion, Indofood just over 1/3. MPIC valued there at $1.3 billion, the U.S. dollar value of the pesos we paid for it when it was privatized back in the autumn of 2023. We own now about 49.9% of MPIC. You might see there that PLP's valuation has increased to $398 million, and that's because we've put some money into it to help finance the building of a new power plant, which our financial controller, Richard Chan might discuss later if that's of interest to you folks. And then, of course, there's PLDT, our 25% or so owned telephone company. And then there's the Philex Group of companies, which make up just over 10% of our gross asset value. Now let's move on to the earnings for 2025 on Page 5. Turnover was up 2%, a little over $10 billion, higher revenue at Indofood and MPIC. Decline at PLP, PacificLight Power. Contribution from operations reached a record high. I believe like the recurring profit, it's been about 7 years in a row, we've had increases in the previous 5 have been records. Indofood, PLDT, MPIC highest-ever revenues and MPIC delivered their highest-ever earnings as well. Now recurring profit, as I say, it's up a good double-digit, 10% to $740 million, up from about $673 million in 2024. Net profit was up a similar number, 10% to another record high, $661 million. Now to a matter that is dear to the heart of many shareholders. The directors approved a final distribution of HKD 0.14 a share. You folks will vote on that at the AGM. And that brings the full year distribution to HKD 0.27 a share, and that's the highest ever on a per share basis that we have ever paid out. And that, of course, fits under our progressive dividend policy where we're committed to increasing the per share amount of money we distribute to shareholders every year apart from special circumstances. As you can see on the middle chart here on the right-hand side, the increase in recurring profit was driven mostly by MPIC and Indofood, and there were little declines at PLDT and PLP. Head office cash flow, as you can see, we had about HKD $311 million of dividend income, and there are the distributions gone out to you folks. That's the biggest amount of money sent out. And then the net cash interest expense follows. And if you look deeper into this book or want to discuss it later, you'll see that our interest bill is declining along with the interest amount that we're paying. Over on Page 6, a little bit more detail on our cash flow and balance sheet. As you can see here, at the present day, we have no borrowings falling due until September 2027 when our only bond, $350 million becomes due. A $200 million that was due in 2026, as you can see, has been shifted over by 5 years to 2031. Our interest cost is around about 4.6% for the year, and the average maturity is about 3.2 years. And I would guess over the course of the next 12 to 18 months, that 3.2 is going to become a bigger number. Our CFO, Joseph Ng, will discuss that in the Q&A, if you like. Dividend income there on the bottom left shows that we've been consistently over $300 million in recent years. And very important to us is the interest coverage ratio, as you can see, was 4.5x in 2025. That's up from 4x the previous year, and that is well above our comfort level. Though it must be said, we don't have any plans for that number changing anytime soon on account of additional borrowing by us. Now I'll wind up the narrative part of this meeting with a quick look at the reason that many people are invested in First Pacific. As you can see from 2018 to 2025, we've had over a doubling of our profit at First Pacific. I think in 2018, it was around $290 million in recurring profit, and we're up to $740 million in 2025. As you can see, the exchange rates of the rupiah and the peso were down about 11% and 14%, respectively, over that time. And what this does is it illustrates quite vividly the hard currency security of putting your money in First Pacific so that you can secure the gains to be had from the fastest-growing economies in the world, which are described by the IMF over in that bottom right-hand chart, where you can see there's a doubling over the 10 years to 2030 from 2020. Let me actually very quickly go through the main companies. Indofood had record sales, as I said. Core profit was up just 1% to a highest-ever level. Many of you may have attended their investor briefing earlier today. If you haven't, we can discuss some more about their description of their earnings and predictions for the future, many of which we have put into the outlook for 2026. To speak briefly about that, there's an inference you can make that 2026 will be rather better than 2025. But of course, we have that devil in the Middle East conflict, which we don't know how it will affect any of us going forward. We can discuss this later on, if you like, but there's pretty high confidence over at Indofood. Now we're going to flip a few more pages to Metro Pacific, looking at Page 14. Record high earnings, as said before, core profit up 15%. And as you can see in the pie chart, most of it was contributed by the power company, Meralco, which is beginning to see a huge contribution from its still fairly new power generation business. They bought into a very large LNG terminal accompanied by 2 natural gas-fired power plants in Project Chromite. Stanley Yang, who worked on that transaction, can help discuss that later on. It just addresses that generation is going to be a big part of earnings growth at Meralco going forward. The newly listed water company, Meralco, also was a very big contributor to the earnings there. And then the toll roads, their contribution, as you can see, didn't grow so much as illustrated on the bottom left. And that's because we owned -- in part, it's because we owned a little bit less of it than we did earlier. Now let's dash ahead to PLDT, which is the biggest telecommunications firm in the Philippines. Service revenues, record high. EBITDA at a record high and the EBITDA margin still very strong at 52%. Core profit rose 1%, actually a similar number to Indofoods. And it was helped for the first time ever by Maya, which is the 38% owned fintech, which has -- it's the only digital bank in the Philippines, which is both owned by a telecommunications firm and has a banking license. It's a very interesting little company, and it moved into profit for the first time during the course of 2025. And the falling column chart on the bottom right there shows you the usual story. It's data that has been driving earnings growth and fixed line voice, too, in a kind of funny way. There's a big international element there. Now we'll skip past Maya and over to PLP, which had earnings slightly down. Sales were a little bit down as well. Market share is steady at 9.6%. And as you can see, the monthly average electricity prices are down quite a bit from those powerful period of earnings we had in 2023, and that's really the main driver of how their earnings have gone over the past couple of years. Net debt is absolutely negligible at less than SGD 40 million. Now over to Page 27, where Philex Mining, which has been operating Padcal for 6 decades, I think, and it's still going strong for another few years until 2028, I believe. You can see that after 6 decades, the grades of gold and copper there in the blue box, they're rather lower than you might want to see. But if you want to see better turn the page to the Silangan project, which is accelerating towards the opening of commercial operations over the next weeks and months. And you can see that the grades there in the middle box are much, much higher than what we've got going on at Padcal. We're very excited about the prospects for Silangan, and we think it's going to be a good solid contributor to First Pacific going forward and to its parent, Philex. Now I'm going to end the introduction with a quick dash to Page 52, where I would like us all to pay attention to the second line, China Securities Depository and Clearing. They're probably up at this day, close towards 150 million shares. We have now a third brokerage about to start equity research coverage of First Pacific for Mainland investors. And this has been almost entirely due to the efforts of my colleagues, Sara Cheung, who's here 2 seats away. And these new Mainland investors provide much valued liquidity to the share trading in First Pacific, and we welcome them with open arms. That's it for the opening narrative. We can move over to Q&A. Sara Cheung: [Operator Instructions] John Ryan: Jeff, could you unmute and ask your question, please? Ming Jie Kiang: Maybe starting with 2 from me. So it is all about dividends first. So I just want to check, the regular final dividends increased 3% year-on-year, which seems to be a little bit muted compared with what we saw in the past. But separately, you also pay a special dividend with respect to Maynilad's subscription shares. So just trying to check whether the regular dividend growth this time is whether a sign of caution on the outlook or whether we are trying to smooth out the total DPS growth down in the next few years, including the specials. So that's the first one. The second one would be about Indofood payout. I understand the dividend will be decided in the AGM in the next couple of weeks. So just trying to figure out, from your perspective, are you seeing any particular resistance for INDF to raise the dividend payout ratio in the future? John Ryan: Jeff, you know our CFO, Joseph Ng, he'll deal with the first question, and I'll ask our Executive Director, Chris Young, to deal with the second. Hon Pong Ng: Jeff, it's Joseph here. I think your 3% is only focused on the final, if I'm guessing your question correctly because last year's final is 13.5 and this year's final is 14. But in aggregate, if you aggregate the interim and final last year was $0.255 and this year, it's altogether $0.27 because we paid $0.13 for the interim. So there's a 6% growth, which is not the 3%, so it's not insignificant. But if you add back the so-called special distribution we make as a result of the Maynilad IPO, we pay another [ $0.15 ]. So as indicated, I think we have almost 10% growth against last year's 25.5%. So that's broadly in line with the growth in so-called recurring earnings line from last year's $673 million to this year's $740 million. So it's 10% growth in the recurring, which is a key KPI indicator for us. So broadly in line, regular growth -- regular dividend growth or distribution growth is 6%, but all in, it's 10% growth. Now with that $0.27 altogether, I think we are paying altogether about $150 million plus. And that also needs to tie to what we disclosed in the cash flow that for 2025, we have $311 million dividend income. So you can see that it's more than half of the so-called gross dividend line that we are returning to the shareholders even without including the so-called special distribution. And then you have the head office overhead and the like. And remember, Jeff, also starting from 2025 and more heavily in 2026, we need to kind of reinvest some of the money that we have from the dividend from the units and then we invest those money back to PLP to fund its equity requirement for the new gas plant there. So we try to kind of strike the balance as to what we return to shareholders, which is not a small ratio, which is quite a high ratio. If you take out the head office expenses and interest, we are returning more than 70% of free cash to the shareholders and keep a little bit for our reinvestment into the PLP gas plant. So I think that's the kind of macro thinking behind kind of fixing the final dividend at $0.14 per share and making a total of $0.27 regular and then about 10% growth in aggregate, including a special dividend we paid to the shareholders as part of the Maynilad IPO. So that's on the dividend side. On the Indofood dividends, maybe Chris could chip in and give us a bit color on that. Christopher Young: Jeff, I think the -- normally, as I think you're aware, it's a discussion with the management there at Indofood. And generally, it's a fairly constructive discussion. I think we would take into account 2 elements in considering that dividend. So I think if you look at John's presentation or you've seen the Indofood results, the recurring profit growth last year for Indofood was 1%. And the outlook at the moment looks reasonable without too much disruption from what's going on in the Middle East. But obviously, there is a bit of uncertainty. So that would be the context to the discussion, what was the underlying growth last year and what is the outlook. But as you yourself noted, that discussion will happen over the next couple of months. John Ryan: Okay. Now we'll ask Timothy Chau to unmute and ask what he's got to ask. Tak-Hei Chau: I have a couple about Middle East first. First, on Indofood. I understand just now management talked about like how the Middle East impact seems to be minimal on Indofood. But I'm just wondering if there will be any implications on the raw material cost because I think over the past year, there reportedly some kind of a raw material price hike that affected the margin. So I'm just wondering if the Middle East, if extended kind of -- being extended event, would that aggravate? And the second question also about Middle East will be on PLP because if I remember correctly, the electricity price in Singapore could actually be moved as long as the gas price is up. So I'm just wondering if there will be any positive read-through from Middle East on PLP here. Yes. And my last question is on the PLP project. So just wondering if there is a finalized budget on the potential CapEx spend on the project yet. And just now you mentioned about like how we have already been spending some -- investing some in PLP already on that particular project. Just wondering the time line of the entire CapEx and how it will be in the coming 2 to 3 years. John Ryan: Timothy, I'll take a stab at the first one and then Stan will help you with PLP. Indofood told us in their briefing this morning that as far as wheat goes, they've got 3 or 4 months of supply on hand, and they see that it looks like there's globally going to be a good crop of wheat better than the previous year in 2026. So they're not too worried about that. CPO prices are up a bit after rising 10% in 2025 to about IDR 14,100. They're around at the end of the first quarter, IDR 15,000. They are in some not feeling any particular pressure from raw material prices. And as far as the Pinehill businesses in Middle East and North Africa, they have been able to secure their supplies up to now. And there is, as of yet, no particular concern. PLP, Stan? Stanley Yang: Sure. Timothy, just to address your questions on Pacific Light, first on the electricity prices and the impact of the Middle East fuel. And for PLP, it's gas comes from a global supplier, in this case, Shell. And there is some impact in terms of some of the flow in terms of the LNG that's supplied into Singapore, some of the disruption. It's a relatively small portion, a minority. And I would say that at least for the next month plus, there's sufficient supply. But when you get beyond it, there will be some impact in terms of the supply coming in that would typically come from the Middle East. Alternate arrangements are being made. The company as well as other generators who are affected in the market are also in discussions on solutions that would help, including having some of the gas supplied by EMA and being able to run, but also others in terms of the existing contractual arrangements that they can procure in terms of their global supply. And so we think in terms of certainly the near term, there will be less impact. But as the months go by and if this crisis continues, then some of these alternatives on how the balance of gas will be filled in light of the retail contracts for the company will need to be covered. When it comes to the project itself, the project itself is looking at starting in 2029. And so the heavy lifting in terms of the construction and so forth is still to come. And so within this year, there would be an expectation of the notice to proceed, which basically kicks off the formal development and projects. And from there, the piling works and then subsequently over the next couple of years, the balance of the plant. And so that CapEx as we would look at it would be spread across the next few years up until the planned operation date in 2029. Tak-Hei Chau: On PLP, the rise in gas price, if I remember correctly, I think back in 2023, when the gas price is up, we actually have a higher profit because of the nonfuel margin being higher. So I'm just wondering if this case, given -- I mean, given the case is not as bad as like the lack of supply in gas in the end. So I'm just wondering if there will be any positive read-through for PLP in this case or we are still cautious about our outlook? Stanley Yang: I think it's too early to make a call. I think the next couple of months will be critical. I think because the company has a strong position with respect to its retail customers for this year, then there is definitely visibility, but the impact of any supply disruption, not just for our company, PLP, but also for the entire market in Singapore. The question will be the balance of any gas that comes from the affected markets, for instance, Qatar and how that would impact the entire supply. As I mentioned before, that's not the majority of the supply. It's a minority small -- relatively small percentage, but it is one that we are monitoring because that clearly, the supply in aggregate into the market has to balance with what the generation demands will be for running the plants. John Ryan: Any more questions, Jeff? I think Jeff has another question. Jeff, please unmute and ask your question. Ming Jie Kiang: So maybe switching gear a little bit to MPI, just trying to figure out how should we think about maybe the water Maynilad that business in 2026. So just trying to -- if there's any tariff adjustment, can you remind us over there, but if not, I just want to hear your maybe general assessment on MPI's 2026. That's my first question. The second would be just talking about the FP Natural Resources, which we usually do not really focus on. Just trying to understand why the loss contribution diminished in 2025? And is there any one-off events there? John Ryan: Stan? Stanley Yang: Sure. On the question of the -- you're talking mostly on the water, was it? John Ryan: Yes. If we can expect some tariff increases in 2026 following the 10% last year. Stanley Yang: This year, it's going to be more muted than the last year in terms of the tariff impact. There have been following the revision -- the revised concession agreement, a series of adjustments over a few years. Those have had the benefit in terms of the flow into Maynilad and the system. This year, it would be 4% though, is the expectation in terms of the tariff adjustment. And the business itself will continue to grow. The supply of water and the management's efforts to improve that. I think they focused heavily on the non-revenue water, which is the losses in the system and bringing that down to levels that the company has not seen ever since our existence in owning the business. And so for us, that's a big savings that helps improve the cost of the water supply and efficiency in the system. And then the management themselves are focused on continuing to improve that along with the continuation of tariffs as part of their CapEx program, which was agreed as part of the concession agreement that they revised. Those would be the key imperatives to continue to build on that business. John Ryan: Okay. Thank you. And second question. Jeff, you remind us, please? Ming Jie Kiang: Yes, the FP Natural Resources, just trying to figure out what -- why did the loss diminished in 2025 compared with 2024 and just trying to check if there's any one-off events driving the narrow losses or anything happened there? That would be helpful. John Ryan: Chris? Hon Pong Ng: Actually, maybe I could take that. It's Joseph here. Yes, I mean, that operation -- the sugar operation has -- basically has stopped. And then basically, we are laying off all stock and trying to basically sell the residual assets owned by the operation. I mean, previously, the alcohol operation and then we are in discussion of selling this kind of final set of operating asset, refinery asset with certain investors, certain buyer. So with that, actually, the scale of the operation basically stopped. So that's the reason why you see the recurring profit line, there's actually no -- without any significant amount there. But we do make some impairment provision as a result of selling those refinery assets that I mentioned because now we have identified buyer, we're in final discussion with the buyer. So we know that the final selling price of the refinery part is lower than the book value. So there's certain impairment provision mix below the line under the nonrecurring item. But above the line, there's basically no operation anymore, no significant operation. That's why you see there is very little impact to the recurring profit line. Ming Jie Kiang: Just -- I would just want to take the chance to just have one more quick follow-up or just other question. So just I want to hear our plan for refinancing the head office borrowings. So John mentioned we have refinanced the repayable loan in 2026. And just trying to figure out how do we think about the current maybe the head office net debt, cash interest coverage ratio and also our maturities schedule down the next maybe 2 years. Hon Pong Ng: Yes. As mentioned by John, we finished the refinancing of the January 2026 bank loan. We actually signed up the commitment before the end of last year. So we just draw the facility and paid off the bank loan in early January. So that's all done as far as 2026 liability management initiative is concerned. So the next one coming up from this bar chart is the bond, $350 million bond due in September 2027. Now we still have, as of today, maybe 18 months to go. So it's still early, but as part of our usual prudent financial management, we are actively looking into that and talking to a number of banks. We are getting proposals on, say, refinancing the bond with another bond. So we have received quite a number of proposals with different quotes. Now we are not in a rush to say because the whole market is so volatile. You probably understand from the market that actually both the bond investor side and many issuers are actually waiting on the sideline to see how all these Middle East crisis will turn out and how that would affect the interest rate environment in the next 6 to 9 months. And for us, I think the plan is that we have 18 months to go, but we should get ourselves ready probably when we get into the second half of this year. We will probably kind of accelerate a little bit on the preparation process and see what will be the revised kind of terms and pricing that we could get from the different banks. And in parallel, of course, we will try to explore other alternatives like syndicate bank loan if we think that those terms and pricing are more attractive. But of course, I mean bank loans will not give you the tenor that we could get from the bond market, the 7 or 10 years. As you can see from the debt maturity profile here, if you get another 5 years, probably you get into the 2021, 2022 space, which may be a bit clouded. So our preference will be still a bond. For one, the tenor; two is to diversify the credit resources so that we don't 100% rely on the bank financing. So that's the initial thinking because we always try to strike a better balance between the bank credit resources and the bond credit resources. So the preference is to go for a bond if the market is there and if the terms and pricing are palatable to us, but we never say never. We just wait until the whole market comes down a bit and the whole bond market becomes active again. Ming Jie Kiang: Maybe can I have a real quick follow-up? I promise, this is my real quick. So just as of the end of 2025, I think you disclosed 54% of the debt is on a fixed rate basis at the head office level. So is this split some sort of optimal in your opinion? Or should we be targeting more fixed rate borrowings as we think for the next maybe 3 to 5 years, given the volatile interest rate environment, sometimes we rate cut, sometimes the expectations just bounce around. So just trying to figure out the thinking here. Hon Pong Ng: Yes, Jeff, these are difficult questions because the interest rate environment is actually shifting back and talk and sometimes they say, I mean there will be one interest rate cut this year and followed by 2 next year and now they are maybe shifting a little bit, given the fact we will be shifting the position, maybe not 2 rate cuts in 2027, maybe 1. I mean all these are subject to changes since the whole market is so volatile. So with that sort of volatile situation, it's really difficult to say that we should increase the hedge ratio to a higher level or we reduce it. As of now, I think we are quite comfortable with what we have. We're probably 50% thereabout because you can't win all and you will not lose all as of now. That's what I can say for now. John Ryan: Okay. And I believe, Timothy, please unmute and ask your question. Tak-Hei Chau: Yes, sorry. Management, it's me again. Just a really quick one on potential corporate events. I think this year, a lot of different conglomerates have been -- the theme has been capital recycling, unlocking asset values. I'm just wondering, given our very diverse and broad portfolio, are we -- do you have similar stuff that the management is looking to maybe divest some kind of non-core or at least partially divest like an IPO, for example, like a Maynilad kind of thinking to really unlock the asset value and maybe pocket some kind of funds as well. Especially, I think I've read somewhere in the news about potential IPO or list or private placement for Maya. And like back in the days, I think there were also some market chatters about the private placement for MPTC back then to help relieve the financial issues for the total assets. So I'm just wondering is there anything regarding corporate events that the company is thinking about now? Stanley Yang: Certainly, as a holding company, we look at a span of initiatives, both on the M&A side, which you've seen over the last few years and also in terms of capital markets, we raised the example of the Maynilad's IPO. When it comes to, as you pointed out, Maya, it's a business that has improved quite a bit. The growth of both the wallet and then subsequently after that, taking the leadership, both in the merchant acquiring and now in the digital banking side has really pivoted that platform from what was quite small a few years ago to now the leader and continuing to grow rapidly. Whether this is the year that at this time, a listing could be done, I think we would -- management and the shareholders are always reviewing the strategic options. I think actually an interesting similar case was there was the Japanese fintech recently PayPay that just listed earlier this month. And despite the challenges of the market, Iran and so forth, actually, the price held up quite well. So I think it's fair to say that we will continue to monitor if there is an opportunity. Of course, Maya is much smaller than the one that listed in Japan, but its growth and its trajectory are moving in a very positive direction. And so we would see this as a potential as it continues to grow. Really, the question is in terms of timing. And I would say with respect to other portfolio companies and across the group, I think we continue to evaluate how we can improve the positions of them in their respective sectors. And as and when decisions are undertaken to pursue things more formally, then, of course, we will provide more guidance at that point in time. John Ryan: MPTC? Stanley Yang: I think MPTC, at the moment, the business is continue to focus on delivering this year its projects. They have quite a number of projects within the Philippines that are looking to complete. And so that's really been the focus. Also some of the deleveraging efforts of management because of the acquisitions that they've undertaken in the last few years, those are the principal initiatives looking at partners and some capital into the business to help in terms of the debt reduction of the overall roads. And then with that, we continue to also consider whatever strategic opportunities are to further enhance our position as a platform and the shareholders of our roads business. John Ryan: Thank you very much, Stan. As there are no more questions and time is getting on, we'll wind up now beginning with a reminder that we will be visiting fund managers in Europe and North America after Easter holidays. If you would like to see us, please get in touch with me or Sara or my colleague, [ fionachiu@firstpacific.com ]. These meetings have historically been quite worthwhile for the fund managers who see us because we cannot hide our feelings on our face. You'll see us coming in and we'll be feeling really, really good, and that will be important to your perspective towards our company. And now to summarize how we feel and where we think we're going, I turn now to Chris Young, Executive Director. Christopher Young: Okay. Thank you, John, and thank you for joining us on the call today. The results, as you've seen for 2025 were good and a continuation of the trend that we've seen over the last 7 years or so. However, clearly, the outlook in the short to the medium term is somewhat uncertain. However, I think we remain cautiously optimistic that given the nature of our businesses, which I think are quite defensive given the consumer-facing nature of them, that we will be able to shelter the group really from these uncertainties over the next few months or so. So we look forward to updating you again on the half year results, which I think are at the end of August 28. So until then, we will keep you informed on a regular basis. And as John and Stan will be visiting Europe and the U.S., hopefully, you will get a chance to meet with them face-to-face before that. So turn you back to Sara. Sara Cheung: Thanks, Chris. Thanks again for joining today's online briefing, and you may disconnect now. Thank you. John Ryan: Bye-bye.
Operator: Welcome to the 2025 Annual Results Presentation of Singamas Container Holdings Limited. First of all, I'd like to introduce you to our management of the company, Mr. S. S. Teo, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Ms. Winnie Siu, Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer; and Ms. Rebecca Chung, Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer and Company Secretary. Mr. Teo will now present the company's annual results. All the financial figures in the presentation are in U.S. dollars, unless otherwise stated. Mr. Teo, please. Siong Seng Teo: Thank you. Good afternoon, friends, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us this afternoon. We will go through the presentation by looking into Singamas' corporate profile, industry dynamics, financial and business review. As an established container manufacturer, leasing, logistics and depot service provider, we currently operate 5 factories in China. Our total annual capacity is now at about 270,000 TEU of dry freight and ISO specialized container and about combined capacity of 21,000 units of tanks and customized containers. For leasing business, we currently own a fleet of about 180,000 TEU containers. Singamas is also operating 8 container depots across 7 major cities in China and 1 logistic company in Xiamen. This slide shows the ongoing upgrade of our Huizhou and Shanghai manufacturing plant designed to enhance capacity and capability of energy storage system ESS container orders. At Huizhou plant, the upgrade is aimed at boosting overall production capacity. The facility has been equipped with advanced robotic and automation application to meet the rising demand for ESS containers. At our Shanghai plant, we have expanded dedicated production line for high-value customized containers, including Battery Energy Storage System, BESS containers and AI Data Center containers. This has enabled elevated development of our integrated business. In year 2025, annual capacity for customized container at Shanghai plant has increased to 7,200 units. The next 3 slides, Slide 7 to 10, cover our product ranging from traditional dry freight and ISO specialized container to innovate customized container include customer containers for ESS, data center, car racks, housing and more. And we also provide a full range of container solution services. The core product of Singamas' customized container is ESS, energy saving system. This container facilitate efficient electricity storage and release, benefiting users by allowing electricity consumption at lower period. ESS container ensures stability in new energy power generation and are designed to withstand extreme condition for normal operation in challenging environment. Green Tenaga is our wholly owned subsidiary in Singapore, dedicated to accelerating the journey towards net zero emission and carbon neutrality. Through its BESS solution, it form a pivotal element in our commitment to delivering comprehensive green energy solution worldwide. In 2025, Green Tenaga partnered with Singapore A*STAR ARTC to co-develop an analytic power energy management system that enhanced battery health, energy efficiency and intelligent sustainability energy solution for BESS. In our collaborated in a collaboration with the Institute of Technical Education to co-develop an ESS training program for the youth in Singapore. With this program, Singapore Singamas contribute to its ESG goal through fostering new energy talent development, enhancing ESS safety standard and supporting low-carbon economy transition. Next, for our leasing business. Significant growth was recorded for the business this year. By the end of 2025, we own a fleet of about 18,000 TEU leasing containers, 18,000. Singamas is a major operator of 8 container depot in China. We maintain strong tie with key port operators in the countries and foster relationship with major global shipping and leasing company. Our logistics service business focused on enhancing warehousing capability, integrating multimodal transport resources, improving digital operational capabilities for efficiency and collaborating with service provider to expand network coverage. This slide shows Drewry's analysis of global dry freight container production and pricing trend of January 2026. For the year 2025, worldwide dry freight container production was 6.5 million TEU, far exceeding the initial market expectation. However, it has led to significant surplus worldwide. As the market is expected to regulate the surpluses in years to come, Drewry forecast the industry production for the year 2026 will decline sharply to 3.6 million TEU. On pricing, the average price of a 20-foot standard dry freight is expected to reach USD 1,710 for the year 2026, a year-on-year increase of 2.6%. This trend highlights a market transitioning from over production to caution rebalancing. According to Drewry, long-term lease rate for all standard dry freight containers dropped sharply during 4Q 2025, and leasing rates are projected to remain subdued in the next few years. This forecast from Drewry Q1 2026 provide a solid baseline for market stabilization. However, they were made before the major disruption from the Middle East war, including rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope, elevated fuel and insurance costs. These emerging factors or rather disturbing factors may affect short-term leasing rates and recovery trajectory in ways not reflected in the current forecast. That means the war in Middle East have created many issues, and this may affect what we forecasted. This chart shows Singamas' average selling price trend of 20-foot dry freight container and related steel costs over the years. Despite better-than-expected global trade volume and ongoing new container vessel order, U.S. tariff and trade policy continue to create market uncertainty, leading to softer container demand in the second half of 2025. Consequently, the average selling price of 20-foot dry freight container dropped 12% to USD 1,752 in 2025, meanwhile, container steel average cost dropped about 11%. Now let's move on to the financial review section. Revenue decreased by 17% to USD 481.5 million due primarily to soft market demand and overproduction in previous year. Consolidated net profit attributable to owners of the company decreased by 48% to USD 17.4 million. Basic earnings per share was USD 0.0073 for the year compared with USD 0.0143 in 2024. Net asset per share was USD 23.30 as a year of 2025, almost the same as previous year. We have decided a final dividend of HKD 0.02 per share proposed for the year 2025. Together with the interim dividend of HKD 0.03, total dividend for this year was HKD 0.05 per share, representing a payout of about 88%. Let's move on to business review section. First, manufacturing. It shows the performance of our manufacturing and leasing business. This segment achieved revenue of USD 447.8 million, which accounted for about 93% of our total revenue. Segment profit before tax and noncontrolling interest was about USD 18.1 million. This slide shows the breakdown of container units sold under different product categories and accordingly, the respective revenue generated. The table on the left shows that Singamas sold over 147,000 TEU of dry freight container during the year. The pie chart on the right shows that the sales of this dry freight container made up of 57% of the segment revenue compared to 72% in the previous year. For customized container, more than 13,000 units were sold during this year. As global interest in solar energy grows, revenue contributed by our ESS continued to increased drastically from 16% of 2024 to 33% in 2025. Leasing revenue accounted to 8% of the group total revenue during the year. Finance lease Finance lease interest income was USD 4.1 million, up 47% year-on-year, while operating lease income was about USD 15.6 million, up 176% year-on-year. This slide shows the performance of our logistics service business. Its revenue was USD 33.8 million and segment profit before tax and noncontrolling interest was USD 8.7 million. This slide represents our marketing and operating synergy strategy in the years to come. The political and tariff issue between U.S. and other countries, especially following the outbreak of the Middle East war will impact our operating environment. We believe many carriers will once again choose to avoid the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal. While this rerouting could initially stimulate demand in dry freight container market, the current sizable dry freight pool of 55 million TEU is likely to temper the overall impact, leaving demand for dry freight container unpredictable in the first half of 2026. At the same time, the ongoing crude oil crisis is expected to accelerate global transition to new energy infrastructure, which could translate into further growth in market demand for our ESS containers. Faced with unpredictable demand in dry freight container, we maintain strict cost control and cautious capital expenditure. On the maintenance side, our focus remains on enhancing safety and environmental protection of our plants. On the growth side, we invest on high-growth customized container project and automation -- short payback automation initiative. This balanced strategy keep us agile, cost disciplined and well positioned to capture any new opportunities in this challenging market. The following appendices that show our income statement and the data of our factory and depot for your further reference. That concludes my presentation. If you have any questions, Winnie, Rebecca and myself will be happy to answer. Thank you very much. Operator: [Operator Instructions] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] New energy container [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] tank container [indiscernible] ESS. [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] barrier of entry is higher [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Wai Yee Siu: [Foreign Language] renewable energy [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] sustainable energy [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Wai Yee Siu: [Foreign Language] 170 out of 481.. Pui King Chung: [Foreign Language] specialized container [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] weekly service [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] solar farm -- solar energy farm [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Wai Yee Siu: [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Wai Yee Siu: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] finished product like quality [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Wai Yee Siu: [Foreign Language] economies of scale, productivity [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] Singapore, Green Tenaga [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] Unknown Analyst: [Foreign Language] Wai Yee Siu: [Foreign Language] million dollar question [Foreign Language] Siong Seng Teo: [Foreign Language] Bangladesh, Sri Lanka [Foreign Language] it's not free, there's a cost involved. [Foreign Language] Operator: [Foreign Language] Thank you, everyone, for joining. Thank you Mr. Teo, Winnie and Rebecca.
Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Christa, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome you to the TOYO Co Limited Second Half and Full Year Results Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions]. I would now like to turn the conference over to Crocker Coulson, Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Crocker Coulson: Thank you, Christa. Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us to review TOYO's 2025 second half and fiscal year results. This morning, TOYO posted both the earnings release and a related investor presentation to our website and you can find it in the Investor Relations section, investors.toyo-solar.com. With us on the call today are Mr. Onozuka, TOYO's Chief Executive Officer; Raymond Chung, the company's Chief Financial Officer; and Rhone Resch, TOYO's Chief Strategy Officer, whose appointment was announced just this morning. We also have Simon Shi, who will be available during the Q&A portion. After the prepared remarks are concluded, we'd like to open this call up for your questions. But before we begin, I want to make you aware that some statements in this teleconference are forward-looking within the meaning of federal securities laws. Although we believe the statements are reasonable, we can provide no assurance that they will prove to be accurate because they are perspective in nature. During this call, we'll also discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures, such as adjusted net income and adjusted EBITDA. We believe these measures provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our operational performance, by excluding noncash items and onetime charges that may not be indicative of our core business. Please refer to the reconciliation tables in our press release and SEC filings for the most directly comparable GAAP measures. Actual results could differ materially from those we discuss today and therefore, we encourage you to carefully review the most recent report on Form 20-F and other SEC filings for risk factors that could materially impact our results. As I mentioned, the earnings release is available today on our website at investors.toyo-solar.com. With those formalities now out of the way, it's my great pleasure to turn this call over to Onozuka-san, our Chief Executive Officer. Onozuka-san, please go ahead. Takahiko Onozuka: Thank you, Crocker. 2025 was the year of decisive action for TOYO. We doubled our operational scale while navigating one of the most volatile trade environment in decent memory. By strengthening our position as a particularly integrated solution provider, we have built a resilient foundation capable of navigating persistent market headwinds and rapidly shifting regulatory landscape. Our record-breaking revenue of over $427 million, a 142% increase over 2024 is a clear validation of our strategic pivot toward high demand and compliant manufacturing hubs. The primary engine of this growth was the rapid ramp-up of our 4 gigawatt Ethiopia facility, which was completed in October 2025 and is now running at full nameplate capacity. During fiscal year 2025, we successfully shipped 2.3 gigawatts from Ethiopia to our U.S. end customers while an additional 1.9 gigawatts of solar cells were dispatched from our Vietnam facility to international markets. As we entered 2026, Ethiopia has provided our U.S. utility scale customers with high efficiency, policy-compliant solar cell technology and we are on track to deliver 4 gigawatts of solar cell from this facility in the coming year. In the fourth quarter of 2025, we launched commercial operation at our new 1 gigawatt module facility in Houston. Last year, we delivered 249 megawatts of module, inclusive of American-made module and those supplied by our OEM facility overseas. By scaling our domestic module production, while maintaining our global reach, we ensure that TOYO can provide the right mix of products our customers require from the right location with 0 lead time friction. Our intent is to scale up production continuously in 2026 and invest to expand capacity in Houston to 2 gigawatts by 2026. In September 2025, we acquired the well-established VSUN brand from our sister company, a strategic move to streamline and unified TOYO operation by bringing the VSUN plans fully under our umbrella. We have successfully migrated the VSUN sales and marketing team, IP, brand and the certification to TOYO, and we are now innovating all existing customers to become direct customers of TOYO as we complete clarification. Acquiring the VSUN brand has allowed us to accelerate TOYO growth and gives our clients flexibility to choose the sourcing that best fits their individual needs. This acquisition was made without any dilution to TOYO shareholders, while the production assets being with VSUN. Looking ahead, we will continue to work closely with our industry partners to migrate the sourcing of key components to the U.S. wherever possible, further strengthening our supply chain and laying forth our commitment to American manufacturing. I will now turn the call over to our CFO, Rhone Resch, to review our strategy for 2026. Rhone Resch: Thank you, Onozuka-san. It's a great honor to be joining TOYO, and I look forward to meeting our shareholders over the coming months and quarters. As you know, this was a challenging year for many solar companies. To be able to more than double our revenue while dramatically increasing gross margins, EBITDA and adjusted net income validates that TOYO has the right strategy in place, combined with exceptional execution capability. Turning to our strategic road map for 2026. TOYO is entering a phase of significant operational scaling designed to meet the accelerating demand in the U.S. solar market. For the full year 2026, we are initiating shipment guidance of between 5.5 and 5.8 gigawatts for solar cells and 1 to 1.3 gigawatts for solar modules. This growth is supported by a robust order book and a favorable domestic policy environment that continues to prioritize high-efficiency traceable technology. Our primary operational focus for 2026 is maximizing our existing infrastructure. Our Ethiopia cell facility is now positioned to run at full nameplate capacity, providing the high-efficiency solar cells that are the backbone of our utility scale offerings. Simultaneously, our Houston module facility is aggressively ramping up its initial 1 gigawatt of module capacity to meet localized demand. To further solidify our domestic footprint, we plan to add an additional 1 gigawatt of module capacity in Houston during 2026, which will bring our total U.S. module capacity to 2 gigawatts. The next phase of our U.S. expansion involves building out a domestic cell production. We are currently in the final stages of the planning process and anticipate disclosing further details regarding our operational road map in the near future. Financially, we are targeting a 2026 adjusted net income of approximately $90 million to $100 million despite increasing very substantial investments in R&D and technology this year. These costs are a deliberate choice. They align directly with our core commitment to establish a robust technology leadership position within the United States. We aren't just building capacity we are building the IP foundation that will define the next generation of American solar energy. TOYO is now uniquely positioned with the domestic capacity, the traceable supply chain and the technical IP to lead this transition profitably. I will now turn the call over to our CFO, Raymond Chung, to review our financial results. Raymond? Taewoo Chung: Thank you, Rhone. So for full year 2025, revenues were $427 million, representing 142% year-over-year increase from the prior year. This growth was primarily driven by $241 million increase in solar sales and a $7.6 million increase in module sales. For the full year 2025, cost of revenue was $331 million, a 113% increase from $155 million in the prior year. Cost of revenue grew at a slower pace than revenue, driven by a higher mix of sales to U.S. end customers with stronger average selling prices. Gross profit increased by 340% to $96.3 million in 2025, up from $21.9 million in 2024. Gross profit margin expanded to 22.5% from 12.4% in 2024. Margin expansion was driven by a higher proportion of sales to U.S. end customers with stronger pricing. For full year 2025, operating expenses were $37.3 million compared to $30 million in the prior year, representing an increase of 186% year-over-year. Selling and marketing expenses were $5.9 million compared to $1.6 million in 2024. The increase was primarily driven by higher sales commissions in line with revenue growth. General and administrative expenses were $31.4 million an increase from $11.4 million in 2024. The increase was primarily due to $13.7 million in noncash share-based compensation issued to management, directors and consultants. Administrative costs also rose as the company scaled its workforce and infrastructure to support the full activation of our Ethiopia and Texas manufacturing plants. EBITDA was $95.8 million in 2025, representing a 40% increase from $68.2 million in the prior year. This was driven by record shipment volume and enhanced operational scale across our global facilities. Non-GAAP adjusted EBITDA, excluding share-based compensation and changes in fair value of contingent consideration payable to earnout shares was under $110.8 million for 2025, up by 228% compared to $33.8 million for the same period in the prior year. Net income was $37.2 million for 2025 compared to a net income of $40.5 million for the same period last year. Adjusted net income, excluding share-based compensation in 2025 and changes in fair value of contingent consideration payable related to earnout shares in 2024 was $52.2 million compared to $6 million in 2024. Earnings per share basic and diluted was $0.98 compared to earnings per share, basic and diluted of $1.09 in the prior year. Adjusted earnings per share, excluding share-based compensation in 2025 and changes in fair value of contingent consideration payable related to earn-out shares in 2024 was $1.48 per share in 2025 as compared to $0.20 per share in 2024. Turning to our balance sheet. As of December 31, 2025, the company had a $58.9 million in cash and restricted cash in total, compared to $17.2 million as of December 31, 2024. In 2025, TOYO generated cash flow from operations of $133 million with $92 million of CapEx invested across our Ethiopia cell facility and U.S. module operations. This level of cash generation provides us with a strong financial flexibility to invest in continuing to expand our fully integrated production platform in the U.S. as we expand our Made in America for American strategy. For 2026, we expect adjusted net income to reach approximately $90 million to $100 million. With that, we will be happy to address your questions. Operator: [Operator Instructions]. Your first question comes from Amit Dayal with H.C. Wainwright. Amit Dayal: Perhaps a fairly strong performance of '25 and a positive outlook for 2026. Just in the context of gross margins, can you provide any color on how we should think about gross margins now that a share of revenues could potentially come from the U.S. market? Crocker Coulson: [ Saska ], you want to translate that? And then I don't know if Simon or Raymond wants to take that question. Unknown Attendee: [Foreign Language] Takahiko Onozuka: [Interpreted] Right. So we are not currently providing our gross margins hold for the year. But as the Ethiopia facility has come to operate at full capacity and our U.S. factory has come online. We believe that we will be able to continue to achieve very competitive margins in the market. Crocker Coulson: Simon, any color you want to provide on that? Simon Shi: Sure. Thanks, Amit, for the question. I think for 2025, we achieved a cross-border average gross margin around 25%, and we -- we do hope to at least maintain these gross margin across group gross margin level going forward. And also just a remark to our -- like our CEO just mentioned, we don't really provide a breakdown of our gross margin for different markets. But we think our gross margin -- our gross margin level is higher than the overall industry number. And also the numbers we have indicated through our -- either historical number -- historical financials and in the 2026 guidance, they are pre -- they are pre the 45x, meaning the $0.07, 45x supposed to receive from -- for our manufacturing are actually not taken into account in the guidance or in the historical financials. Amit Dayal: Yes, that was I was going to ask about the credits in the U.S. market. So for 2026, will you potentially be receiving credits for the at capacity or potentially 2 gigawatts capacity? Just any color on that would be helpful. Simon Shi: Sure. Actually, we are running cautious on giving out the guidance for our Houston production. As mentioned, we are currently running -- sorry, 1 gigawatt capacity over there. And we are hoping to achieve at least 60% to 70% utilization of the capacity in Houston based on the current nameplate capacity. And the additional 1 gigawatt, as mentioned by our CEO, this is a new investment plan that's happening in progress in our Houston facility. Now we are hoping to see a pilot production for the extra 1 gigawatt from third quarter or latest the fourth quarter of this year. So that could be an actual contribution to the delivery from Houston. However, we are not taking that into account for our guidance for the moment. Amit Dayal: Okay. Understood. And just maybe last one for me. Will you be sort of hosting quarterly earnings call going forward? Or will this be sort of every 6 months? How should investors think about sort of reporting and just engagement with the investor community going forward now that the business is most sums in place to provide a little bit more comment to investors more frequently, I guess? Simon Shi: Yes, sure. Thanks. That's very helpful. Yes, Amit, the short answer is, yes, we are planning to report quarterly from this year. So hopefully, we can get our first quarter number released May of this year. And on a going forward basis, where we will continue to report quarterly starting from this year. Operator: We have no further questions at this time. Crocker, I'd like to turn the conference back over to you. Crocker Coulson: Yes. Let's just give one more chance for people to ask questions, operator. And then if we don't have further, I'll wrap it up. Operator: Absolutely. [Operator Instructions]. We have no questions -- and we have no questions. Crocker Coulson: Great. Thanks, Christa. So we appreciate everyone taking the time to join us on the call today. As you can tell, the whole team is very excited about what's ahead for TOYO in 2026 and in the years beyond. We're also thrilled to have a strengthened management team going into this year with Rhone Resch joining us, and he'll be based primarily in the U.S. So we will be more available to meet with investors going forward. If you have questions you'd like to ask that you didn't have a chance to get to on this call, please reach out to me, and I'm happy to either respond or arrange a follow-up call with management or a visit next time that we have a future trip to the U.S. Thank you, everyone, and have a fantastic day. Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today's call. Thank you for joining, and you may now disconnect.
Operator: Good day, and welcome to the Bitfarms Fiscal 2025 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this call is being recorded. I would like to turn the call over to Jennifer Drew-Bear from Bitfarms Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Jennifer Drew-Bear: Thank you, and welcome to Bitfarms Fiscal Year 2025 Conference Call. With me on the call today are Ben Gagnon, Chief Executive Officer and Director; and Jonathan Mir, Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, please note this call is being webcast with an accompanying slide presentation. Today's press release and our presentation can be accessed on our website under the Investors section. Turning to Slide 2. I'd like to remind everyone that certain forward-looking statements will be made during the call, and that future results could differ from those implied in this statement. The forward-looking information is based on certain assumptions and is subject to risks and uncertainties. And I invite you to consult Bitfarms 10-K for a complete list. Also, please note that references will be made to certain non-GAAP financial measures, and therefore, may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. We invite listeners to refer to today's press release and our 10-K for definitions of the aforementioned non-GAAP measures and their reconciliations to GAAP measures. Please note that all financial references are denominated in U.S. dollars, unless always noted. And now turning to Slide 3. It is my pleasure to turn over the call to Ben Gagnon, Director and Chief Executive Officer. Ben, the floor is yours. Ben Gagnon: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our fiscal year 2025 earnings call. In 2025, we made a bold decision to walk away from our legacy business, Bitcoin, and build the infrastructure in North America for what comes next, HPC and AI. It was a year of deliberate and consequential transformation with a clear mandate. Secure North American pipeline, strengthen our balance sheet, accelerate site development, and position ourselves to engage customers from a place of operational momentum at the peak of the energy bottleneck constraining the growth of AI. I can say with confidence and pride that we accomplished exactly what we set out to do. The foundation you see today, the capital structure, the sites, the team, the strategy was engineered through deliberate choices, developed with discipline and built to propel us forward. We made foundational changes to reposition the business and made 100% of our focus on North American HPC infrastructure development. No half measures, no compromises and in time, no Bitcoin. We built a new company. And while we are presenting as Bitfarms today, tomorrow marks our beginning as Keel infrastructure. The name says it all. A Keel is the bottom of structural component of a vessel. It's what keeps it stable and moving forward in the right direction regardless of the condition above the water line. It is structural, it is essential, and it is exactly how we see our role in the HPC and infrastructure landscape. We are not here to compete with hyperscalers or neoclouds. We are here to enable them. Our focus is providing the critical and largely invisible foundation that will allow the world's most advanced AI platform to deploy on time and scale without interruption. We expect to close the re-domiciliation and finalize our rebranding efforts tomorrow, April 1, and we'll begin trading under the ticker KEEL, 2 business days after completion of the transaction on the Nasdaq and the TSX. We are entering this new phase from a position of strength. With over 2 gigawatts in our pipeline, Keel is a regional leader with some of the largest power land portfolios in some of the highest demand markets in North America and with robust financial strength to execute against our plan. Our current liquidity is far in excess of the CapEx budgeted to get us through permitting and ultimately to start signing leases, giving the company significant financial flexibility to execute on our strategy. And our strategy is equally as clear. We are designing all of our site and campus developments as either powered shell or co-location facilities. We believe this is where we can deliver the most value to shareholders and serve our potential customers at the speed and to the specifications they need. We were originally exploring in parallel to co-location the potential benefits of pursuing a small amount of GPU as a service at our Washington site, Moses Lake, where due to the lowest cost power for data centers in the country and a relatively smaller footprint, we believe it could be an avenue to drive additional shareholder value. Since our last quarterly call, we have spoken with an increased volume of potential customers. And it's clear from those conversations, the most accretive business model for the site is one of co-location. This is not specific to Moses Lake and applies to all of our other sites as well, where demand is even higher. So we will focus on what we do best, being an infrastructure developer and owner. This plays directly to our core competencies. We are a team of developers united by disciplined action, building cost-effective institutional-grade infrastructure at the pace our customers require. The same capabilities have built our energy platform, speed to market, capital discipline, operational rigor precisely what HPC and AI deployments demand today. This is just the natural extension of what we do best. So with all the pieces in place and with the overwhelming support of our shareholders who voted over 99% in favor of the HPC and AI pivot, the U.S. redomicile and the rebrand. Starting tomorrow, we are Keel infrastructure. Turning to Slide 4. When we sat on our pivot, we developed a 3-year transformation plan, one that as of today, we are nearly halfway through completing. In 2025, we did the intensive foundational work for our transformation, including the Stronghold acquisition, securing more power in Pennsylvania, rebalancing the portfolio to North America, a $588 million raise fully institutional and oversubscribed, our U.S. GAAP transition, New York headquarters and establishing a new executive team. This work is done. With power and land secured in some of the power markets that matter most, a team of internal experts and strategic partners that have built data centers for the largest companies in the world and a balance sheet engineered to see us through 2026, we are well positioned to continue our site development and deliver against the time lines, our prospective hyperscalers and neocloud customers need. 2026 is all about execution. Effective tomorrow, we will have completed our redomiciliation to the United States and officially rebranded as Keel infrastructure. Two major milestones that position the company for the next phase of growth. With that complete, we expect the next significant milestones to come from executing against our development at Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake, where we are moving full steam ahead and working diligently across three simultaneous and active work streams. One, finalizing permits, which we expect to be done in the coming months. Two, continued work on architecture and engineering in line with ongoing customer conversations and requirements. And of course, three, our go-to-market to secure highly financeable leases with investment-grade tenants. Commercialization is well underway. The upcoming milestones investors can expect are completion of preconstruction activities like permitting, progress in customer engagement and ultimately lease execution, which we are confident we can achieve this year and will be major catalysts. 2026 is also the year where we expect to leave Bitcoin and Bitcoin mining behind. While we were probably one of the first miners to commence wind down of our Bitcoin mining exposure to reinvest that capital into infrastructure for HPC and AI, we will be accelerating those efforts in 2026 as site developments progress. 2027 is all about delivery. This is the year when we anticipate that sites would come online, we'd begin delivering megawatts to customers, HPC and AI revenue really begins and we complete our transition to a premier North American HPC and AI infrastructure company. By the end of 2027, we expect Keel will be a proven infrastructure developer and a regional leader across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec, and we will just continue to grow and scale from there in 2028 and beyond to over 2 gigawatts as we execute against our expansion capacity. Turning to Slide 5. In HPC infrastructure, power, location and time lines are everything. We hold something scarce and valuable secured power, land and expansion capacity in Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec. Some of the most in-demand markets with some of the biggest barriers to entry. We know it and so do our potential tenants. Our campuses offer solutions to hyperscalers and neocloud's greatest scaling problems, location, proximity and fiber connectivity to major metro areas and data center clusters solving for latency issues and giving our tenants proximity to their own customers and other data centers. Time lines. Our robust secured power for '26, '27 and with expansion capacity in 2028 is highly coveted in an environment where energy capacity is hard to find and multiyear waitlists are the norms. We create value for tenants by enabling them to deploy years earlier by leasing from us rather than to invest in growing organically. An energy-efficient cool climate, the lower the PUE, the more critical megawatts. Panther Creek is a great example of seeing the hyperscaler and neocloud's appetite at play. While there is a lot of interest in the site last year, inbound customer activity surged after we secured zoning in February. This is not a coincidence. It is the proof point and one that we've been making for the last year, but may still be confusing to some investors. So we'd like to be clear that investment-grade tenants value derisk sites where they can move from lease to revenue fast. The more we advance, the better our leverage. The better our leverage, the better the leases, and the more long-term value we create for shareholders. Turning to Slide 6. It is indisputable that power is the binding constraint for AI infrastructure deployment and will remain so for the coming years. Leading investment banks, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Wells Fargo, Guggenheim, Moelis, they've all published extensively on this. And the consensus is clear. New power generation cannot come online fast enough to meet AI demand today, tomorrow or in the next 5 years. This bottleneck is structural, not cyclical. Hyperscalers and neoclouds that used to plan on 12-month horizons are now locking in 24- to 36-month supply chain commitments. Not tied to specific projects, but as platform level agreements and are now actively competing for the power and land to deploy it. While you are probably familiar with this information, here you can see a summary of the five development sites. The power we have secured and in some cases, the incremental power opportunities that make up our 2.2 gigawatt pipeline. Turning to Slide 7. I want to take a moment to put our current valuation context because there is a meaningful disconnect between where we trade today and the value we are positioned to capture as a company. When we analyze our current valuation against our peers, the picture becomes clear, at approximately $1.9 million per available megawatt of secure 2027 capacity, we're trading in the middle of a Bitcoin miner Group, valued at roughly $1.7 million to $2.1 million for 2027 megawatt meaning we are being valued based on having power but not what we are doing with it. For shareholders and bondholders, we see three distinct catalysts, each capable of driving meaningful reratings. The first is obviously lease execution. Across our sector, companies that have signed leases trade at $4 million to $6 million per 27 megawatts, a 2 to 3x premium to where we are today. This is the market's consistent signal driven entirely by lease execution, not facility delivery, not revenue generation, just signed leases. A signed lease secures revenue and financing derisking the developments. The market pays for that with nearly 500 megawatts actively being commercialized today and visibility on permitting across Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses lake, this catalyst is well within reach. The second catalyst and arguably the most powerful for long-term holders is securing our expansion capacity. 2/3 of our 2.2 gigawatt portfolio or approximately 1.5 gigawatts is expansion capacity, which we believe the market is assigning little to no value. While securing these megawatts is a process that will take more time, we believe additional megawatts can be secured in the second half of 2026 requiring very little CapEx while representing significant embedded value as powered land even before a lease is signed or there is a shovel in the ground. The third catalyst is delivering in 2027. Once facilities are derisked through commissioning and begin generating revenue under long-term contracts, the development risk should drop dramatically and the operator valuation numbers become transformational yet again. We are not taking a leap of faith on technology, our ability to see our power or market demand. The tech is here. The power is secured, the sites are advancing, the inbound demand is real, but the market has not yet priced in is the transformation that happens when a developer becomes a counterparty when we move from site advancing to lease executing. This is the main opportunity ahead of us to accelerate permitting, execute leases, secure our expansion capacity and ultimately deliver to our customers. This is how we will create value for our shareholders and bondholders. Turning to Slide 8. Our execution plan is defined by six areas, each supporting our ability to deliver at the pace and scale our future customers require. First, we've secured our deep bench of talent by adding over 60 years of infrastructure and development in over 50 years of data center construction experience combined in just the past few months. People have delivered at scale for the most demanding customers in the world. Jonathan Mir joined as CFO, bringing 25 years of energy infrastructure strategy and project finance expertise. We have also added an SVP of construction and of power, a VP of HPC Operations and Head of permitting to oversee the execution of these critical functions. We've assembled the right team to execute on our vision. Second, we are engaging the right industry leaders as partners, T5, Turner Construction, Corgan, [ WWT ], Vertiv. These firms have built data centers for the world's largest hyperscalers not once but hundreds of times. When customers look at our project partners, which will be available on the new website when it launches tomorrow, they will see that we have also assembled the right partners to ensure better outcomes. Third, we have the capital required to bring our sites to market. As of March 27, 2026, our liquidity stands at $520 million in cash and Bitcoin, which we expect is much more than the CapEx budgeted to get us to a lease at Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Jonathan will go into more detail on our capital position and financing strategy shortly, but the headline is simple. We're well funded and can move fast. Fourth, a disciplined Bitcoin exit. It is clear we are no longer a Bitcoin miner. However, with strong, robust liquidity, we can have a disciplined approach to our exit strategy. We will continue to operate up until the time sites need to be prepared for construction maximizing free cash flow before selling the miners. We will also opportunistically sell Bitcoin into strength to capture and reinvest every dollar we can into HPC and AI infrastructure. Fifth, power assets that cannot be replicated. Our megawatts sit in regions with large barriers to entry, Pennsylvania, Washington State and Quebec, all have multiple year waitlists. No one is cutting the line. Our 350 megawatts at Panther Creek, 110 megawatts at Sharon and 18 megawatts in Washington were secured before the AI demand wave made these markets highly coveted. This isn't power others can easily replicate giving us competitive edge with high-quality tenants to understand these markets and are hungry for assets like ours, which leads us to our sixth point. In this market, speed to power is what drives value. For our customers, the opportunity cost of delayed deployment is huge. So the priority is getting capacity online as quickly as possible. Every day of delay is lost revenue. As a result, power availability and certainty of delivery are the primary drivers of lease economics. This dynamic has pushed lease rates higher since our Q3 call, exactly as we said it would. The opportunity in front of Keel infrastructure is real. We now have the assets and the team is ready. I'm so proud of what we built in 2025, and I'm confident in what we'll deliver in 2026 and 2027. With that, I'll turn the call over to Jonathan. Jonathan Mir: Thanks, Ben. Turning to Slide 9. I joined the team 5 months ago. My focus has been on sharpening our approach to capital allocation, strengthening our balance sheet and capital structure and ensuring the financing actions support long-term shareholder value creation. I've had a front row of the depth of talent, the operational discipline and the strategic momentum across Bitfarms. I work closely with our operations and development teams both to understand the current trajectory of our assets and to ensure our capital plans are aligned with the opportunities ahead. What stood out to me is the extraordinary potential we have driven by the quality and potential of our sites, a strong balance sheet, the best liquidity position in the company's history and a broad team that's both deeply engaged and committed to excellence. We're moving quickly and with purpose. I'm pleased to be here with you today and discuss the progress we're making. I'll use this time to walk through our performance for fiscal year 2025 and outline our current capital strategy that we believe supports the accretive growth we're targeting for 2026 and beyond. Turning to Slide 10. Before discussing our financials for the quarter, I want to briefly frame the results are presented this quarter. As of Q3 2025, the Paso Pe facility in Paraguay has been classified as held for sale. As a result, all revenues, operating costs and asset balances associated with Paso Pe are treated as discontinued operations in our fiscal year 2025 financials. So when I refer to continuing operations, I am speaking exclusively about our North American platform, the foundation of our transition into HPC and AI infrastructure. With that, revenue for fiscal year 2025 was $229 million, up 72% year-over-year. Operating loss for fiscal year 2025 was $150 million including noncash depreciation of $98 million and $28 million of impairment charges. This compares to an operating loss of $28 million in 2024, which included $102 million of noncash depreciation and $4 million of impairment charges. Net loss for 2025 was $209 million or a $0.38 loss per basic and diluted share compared to a 2024 net loss of $7 million or $0.02 loss per basic and diluted share. The differences between 2024 and 2025 were driven by a number of factors, including change in fair market value of digital assets, primarily due to the decline of Bitcoin prices and realization of gains on disposal of Bitcoin during the year. Two additional items also impacted year-over-year comparability. First, we saw a loss of $68 million, reflecting changes in our derivative assets and liabilities. Second, 2025 impairment charges were $25 million higher than in 2024. For the year, our adjusted EBITDA was $29 million compared to $31 million in 2024. Turning to Slide 11. 2025 was a deliberate year of balance sheet optimization and improvement, providing the foundation for our next phase of growth. We successfully issued an oversubscribed $588 million convertible offering, significantly expanding our liquidity. And in February, we repaid the Macquarie debt facility eliminating legacy debt, simplifying our capital structure and freeing the company from covenants. Each of these supports the pursuit of our HPC infrastructure strategy. The Macquarie facility had been originally used to accelerate development at Panther Creek, funding critical project activities, including long lead time item procurement and substation work. Retiring the facility was a strategic decision, strengthens the balance sheet and gives us the flexibility to secure a more cost-effective financing at either the parent or project level. Our current cash position of $520 million provides the runway to advance Panther Creek, Sharon and Moses Lake through lease execution without accessing capital markets. Though we may do so if attractive opportunities arise that improve our ability to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. Macquarie was an excellent partner, and we appreciate their support so early in our pivot to HPC AI infrastructure. Turning to Slide 12. As we pivot to commercialization of our development sites, we have a clear financial strategy based on three principles. Capital allocation, capital formation and capital structure. Taken together, they are designed to deliver the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns. First, capital allocation. We deploy capital into projects where the earnings potential exceeds their weighted average cost of capital. We rotate capital from businesses that are noncore or earning less than optimal returns and deploy the capital into higher return investments. Second, capital formation. Our financing strategy is designed to fund our very large growth opportunities while maintaining the liquidity needed for a stable base of operations. We will be opportunistic in our financing execution. We will fund construction of our data center projects using project or parent level bet and project or parent level equity or equity-linked offerings. We're taking a disciplined approach and at this time, are well capitalized to actively commercialize and execute leases across Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington. Third, capital structure. Our capital structure is designed to capture the best possible long-term risk-adjusted shareholder returns while also retaining overall corporate flexibility and support growth. Our objective is to operate with a deliberate liquidity strategy in order to enable clear-headed commercial decisions and capital allocation decisions rather than having liquidity drive time lines. Stepping back, our road map is clear. We are building a regionally focused high-growth HPC AI infrastructure platform, grounded in disciplined capital allocation, a strengthened balance sheet and a development cadence that maximizes returns and minimizes risk. We're funded through the key derisking stages, permitting and leasing across Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek and we're entering 2026 with momentum, optionality and a balance sheet engineered for growth. We have the right people, assets, liquidity and strategy and we're well positioned to capture for our shareholders the long-term value potential we have today. With that, I'd like to return the call to Ben for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Jonathan. A little over a year ago, as our team began actively integrating AI into both our business and our daily lives, we came to a realization. This isn't just another technology cycle. It's a paradigm shift. More comparable to the industrial revolution than the Internet revolution. The fundamental measure, productivity capacity is no longer calories or joules, but tokens. This became strikingly clear 2 weeks ago at NVIDIA GTC, where I witnessed hundreds of companies applying AI to everything from straightforward tasks by cleaning and image generation to extraordinary complex applications, including protein folding, cystic simulations and even brain surgery. Walking the conference floor, speaking to the attendees, one thing was unmistakable. We've only begun to scratch the surface of AI's potential. Yet even in these early days, AI is already empowering individuals, communities and companies to accomplish exponentially more. We're witnessing Jevons Paradox unfold simultaneously across every industry, thanks to AI, where improved efficiency can paradoxically drive higher, not lower demand. It is literally never cost less to transform an idea into an action, a product, an image, a refined concept, a service or countless other outlets. The possibilities are truly limitless, and while no one can predict exactly how AI will reshape our future, uncertainty remains. It will require enormous amounts of power. Our 2.2 gigawatts of capacity and strategically position land across Pennsylvania, Washington and Quebec sit directly in the path of this transformation, and we intend to capitalize on that opportunity for our shareholders. We look forward to the opportunities ahead. With that, I would like to open the call to Q&A. Operator, please go ahead. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from Mike Grondahl with Northland. Mike Grondahl: First question, Ben, you talked about your decision not to go the GPU rental route at Moses Creek. And just the colocation route, could you talk a little about what a couple of the major drivers were that got you to that decision? Ben Gagnon: Yes, it's a great question, Mike. When we first started talking about in Q3, we were always evaluating this alongside with the colocation. We're trying to maximize the value for shareholders. So we're always going to evaluate multiple different business models at our sites. And because they have the lowest cost energy and all these other benefits, we thought it would make a lot of sense. But as we've continued to have increasing amounts of customer conversations for Washington and other sites. It was just really clear to us that the best opportunity for us is to just remain a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner and let these customers who really want these megawatts lease these megawatts. Mike Grondahl: Got it. Got it. And then maybe secondly, you articulated, I'll say, a philosophy a quarter or 2 ago about waiting and waiting on signing a lease as terms were continuing to improve kind of implying you're going to be really patient and wait on a lease. Could you kind of update how you're thinking about that lease execution strategy and the potential timing around it? Ben Gagnon: Yes. Our strategy on lease execution has been consistent. It remains consistent today. Our view is that the best way to maximize value for shareholders is to get the best terms in a lease because that's going to be what is going to be driving our NOI and our multiple. And so when we're looking to sign 10- to 15-year agreements, it's really important for us to take the -- maybe a little bit more time than investors may want us to in order to get better terms for longer. When it looks at what is really driving the value in these lease economics, one of the biggest elements is risk, and we've spoken to this multiple times over the last couple of months. And the biggest risk for most of the people -- to go out there and have conversations and get a lot of interest. And in some cases, you could even sign a lease prior to getting permits. But all of that risk is going to be priced into the agreement, you're going to be locked into it for 10 to 15 years, and that's going to negatively impact the long-term value that we're creating for shareholders. So our strategy has been incredibly consistent. And the benefit for us is that we are operating in high demand markets with high barrier to entry. So it takes a little bit longer to get permits going in Pennsylvania or in Washington than it does in Texas, which is the easiest market in the United States for that. But we believe that drives a lot of extra value because it's way more scarce, it's way harder to acquire and there's just not as much optionality. Operator: Our next question comes from Brett Knoblauch with Cantor Fitzgerald. Brett Knoblauch: Maybe to start, could you maybe just go into detail on what permits at what sites you guys are waiting to receive? Ben Gagnon: So permits is a complicated process, and we are develop -- we're getting permits across multiple sites in multiple jurisdictions. So they all have different rules, different regulations, different time lines, different reviews, different authorities. So it's far too much detail to get into exactly what permits are remaining on all the different sites. But we are continuing to make good progress and kind of -- we're looking at the visibility over the next couple of months. And with what we've had so far with the community engagement success that we've had so far, we think that in the coming months, sometime around the mid- to late summer time. we should be achieving the full permitted status across at least one, if not all of the sites. Brett Knoblauch: And then maybe just on the leasing environment across the different sites that you guys have. I guess we were under the impression that maybe Sharon would be first to go given it's relatively further along. Is that still how you guys are thinking about it? And then in the presentation when you guys kind of list the power pipeline and road map. How much of that is from generation on site that you guys are looking into? And do you have any update on where you guys are with respect to sourcing that generation? Ben Gagnon: Yes, sure. So the -- to answer the second part of your question first, all the power that we're talking about developing for our HPC and AI data centers right now is grid connected. So the two operating power plants that we have at Scrubgrass and Panther Creek. Currently, that math is not in those charts for the secured capacity or the site development plans. But in Scrubgrass particular, we are working to expand the generation capacity there with natural gas. So we've been working to tap into the Tennessee Natural Gas Pipeline. We're achieving pretty good results there with the engineering firms. There's still probably another month or two to go before we're getting a clear path forward on the engineering plans. But Scrubgrass is our more of our pipeline site. And so those -- that power generation opportunity is more of a 2028 and 2029 time line. Everything else is grid connected, it's secure today or it's currently active. And sorry, Brett, I'm blanking on the first part of your question, would you mind repeating it? Brett Knoblauch: Yes. Just on maybe the cadence of which sites are -- quicker to go? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So really, that's going to be driven by success on permitting time lines in the customers. So all three of the sites, Moses Lake, Sharon and Panther Creek are all actively in our go-to market right now. Every single one of those has customers engaged under NDA, and they have for quite some time. And so we're continuing to push forward on those conversations and those negotiations. Really, I think what investors should think about with regards to permits, permits are more of a closing condition to a lease, right? They're really not a starting condition to a negotiation. So we have these conversations and these negotiations simultaneously while we're working towards permitting. As permitting gets closer and closer, the negotiations will also get closer and closer in tandem and the first site to get leased is likely to be the first site to be permitted. Operator: Our next question comes from Stephen Glagola with KBW. Stephen Glagola: Just on that last point, if you could clarify the sequencing here between like notice to proceed and lease execution. So in other words, like can you pre-sign leases contingent on notice to proceed? Or is like notice to proceed required before any major customer would commit to a lease? Ben Gagnon: For a customer commit to binding in our view, they're going to want NTP, and that's based on the number of conversations that we are continuing to have and there probably are some customers who would be interested to sign prior to NTP, but those aren't the investment-grade counterparties that we're really seeking to engage with. Stephen Glagola: Okay. And then just one more. How are you thinking about like Vera Rubin hardware availability in '26 and like early '27? And to what extent could that variability in supply influence the timing of lease discussions at your sites? Ben Gagnon: Yes. That's a good question, Stephen. We've been talking about Vera Rubin, I think, since Q3 call because all of our sites are basically coming online in 2027. So we're trying to make sure that they are designed for the highest level of equipment that's coming out in '27 and '28, which is the Vera Rubin. In terms of supply, we haven't seen any impact so far. I understand there's always geopolitical uncertainty in the world that may impact those supply chains. But given that energy is such a huge bottleneck, and it's always been a huge bottleneck on the growth. I don't think that there is going to be a geopolitical situation that's going to make the bottleneck change from energy over to GPUs. So we don't have any expectation right now that, that's going to have any impact on leasing or demand for sites because power is still such an extreme bottleneck. It's hard to imagine what's going to overshadow that geopolitically. Operator: Our next question comes from Michael Donovan with Compass Point. Michael Donovan: Congrats on the progress. Can you provide an update on ESA progress, specifically Panther Creek's ISA to ESA conversion? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So that's a great question, Mike. As investors probably know, we have 350 megawatts secured ESA with PPL. But in addition to that, we also have an ISA that enables us to draw down approximately 60 megawatts from the grid, and that's associated with the existing transmission line and substation for the power plant that we currently have operating. In order to get that converted over, it's really more of a regulatory matter. And so it's hard to put an exact time line as to when those stamps are going to be received, but there's no infrastructure that needs to be built. There's no CapEx that needs to be spent. Really, it's just a matter of getting the regulatory approval to convert a nonfirm service into a firm service, and that would enable us to increase our capacity beyond 350 megawatts to what we probably expect is going to be maybe 400 megawatts or possibly slightly more. We expect this is going to happen this year, but it's hard to put an exact time line on it, given it's a regulatory matter. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Kinstlinger with AGP. Brian Kinstlinger: Last quarter, Ben, you communicated, you expected the GPU as a service and Moses Lake site would be targeted for, I believe, the first quarter for go-live. How are you shifting to co-location change the timing if at all? And my second question is, can you talk about also how the global memory shortage is impacting your site development or changing your near-term needs or planning for lead times? Ben Gagnon: Yes. So two parts to that question. In terms of switching from a GPU as a service to co-location just changing the business model doesn't really impact the development time line. So we don't really see any delay there associated with changing from GPU as a service, just to co-location. Really, it's just a matter of how we want to allocate our capital and how we want to focus the business. When it comes to the memory shortage. As a pure-play infrastructure developer and owner that really is not coming into our calculus very much, mostly that's a customer situation for them to resolve with their own supply chain because we're not the ones investing in the GPUs and the compute and the servers. Operator: Our next question comes from Martin Toner with ATB Cormark Capital Markets. Martin Toner: Good morning. Can you guys elaborate or [indiscernible] can you kind of give us some time line thoughts there? Ben Gagnon: So I'm going to repeat the question because it was a little quiet, just in case nobody else or other people had difficulty hearing. I believe the question was, can you give some time lines as to how we might be able to expand Panther Creek to 500 megawatts and beyond? So in order for us to move beyond the 350-megawatt ESA that we have secured, there's really two sources for expansion. The first is converting over that ISA from non-firm service to firm service that I just spoke to a minute ago. And that's really a regulatory matter that we expect to be resolved sometime this year. It could be tomorrow, it could be a few months from now. And then when it comes to expanding beyond that, what we have to do with that is we have to actually have new power applications. The good thing here is that the utilities are actually looking to invest in new generation in the area. So in this particular instance, and we weren't actually applying for new power. We actually have the utility call us and ask us how much more power we could take on site. Given the bottleneck constraint on power, that was obviously a very welcome call over here at Bitfarms to receive. And it's a pretty unusual one in the industry, but they're looking to scale up generation capacity in the area, specifically to service our site at greater capacity. So this is probably going to be 2 to 3 years time line because there's a lot of process involved with spinning up new generation and building those new transmission lines. But for a lot of our customers, what they really want is the fastest pathway to energization and a clear path to scale over multiple years. And so this really lines up with what the hyperscalers and what the neoclouds are searching for. Martin Toner: That's great. Hopefully, you can hear me better. Can you clarify when you expect to sign your first lease? Ben Gagnon: So I can't get into a specific time line. But in terms of milestones, as I spoke to earlier, it's really about clearing NTP as kind of the last closing condition or last milestone for us to sign a lease. So I think for the investors and the analysts on the call, the important thing to keep track of, especially over the next coming months is the continued progress that we have towards NTP because once NTP is clear, that's basically the last thing standing between us and a signed agreement. Martin Toner: Got it. Great. And last one from me. Can you talk a little bit about why mining exahash in Q4 was at the level that it was at? Ben Gagnon: So we continue to scale back our mining exposure as we continue to focus on our U.S. HPC infrastructure investments. So we haven't made any investments into Bitcoin mining. We're not spending any money on upgrades or new miners, and we're actively working to scale down the fleet and actively working to spin off assets like we have in Paraguay that are not suitable for conversion. So investors should continue to expect our hash rate to continue to trickle down over 2026 as we continue to execute on this transition to HPC and AI. Operator: Our next question comes from Mike Colonnese with H.C. Wainwright & Company. Michael Colonnese: So, Ben, I'm just curious, after securing the remaining permits across the three sites, which sounds like likely to take place in the coming months here, what does the time line look like from a data center construction and delivery standpoint? It sounds like you're pretty optimistic that revenue generation could commence as soon as next year, but any additional color there would be helpful. Ben Gagnon: Yes. I mean, really, this is the year of execution in 2027 is the year of delivery. And so at all three of our projects that we talked about today, Panther Creek, Sharon and Washington, we all expect them to come online and start delivering megawatts and start generating revenue to customers in 2027. We'll continue to provide updates as we go along. And I think once we have cleared NTP and we have signed leases, there's going to be a lot clear visibility that we can provide to investors for each specific project and their specific time lines. Michael Colonnese: Got it. And then back to Bitcoin mining operations, it sounds like you're progressively going to be scaling back hash rate as you bring some of the HPC AI data centers online. I guess what's the best way to think about hash coming offline and kind of flowing through your operating results over the near term here? Ben Gagnon: I'll speak to it at a high level and then maybe I'll pass it off to Jonathan for some further clarity. But right now, the Bitcoin mining remains profitable, but it's not it's not very -- it's marginal. So it's still contributing to the business. But really, it's not the focus of the business. It's not where we're investing our time, it's not where we're investing our efforts. And given that we have been so successful last year in raising capital and strengthening our balance sheet. It's really not super impactful for the developments that we have this year, the operations or the CapEx. So we'll just continue to scale that down, trying to maximize value in the disciplined exit. If it makes more sense to maybe sell some miners a little bit earlier then we might need to in order to begin instruction, we'll evaluate that as we will always do to maximize value for our shareholders. But really, we kind of see this as a pretty minor element of our balance sheet and a minor element of the financial plan for this year. Jonathan, do you want to add anything further? Jonathan Mir: Only that when we think about our liquidity going forward, the strategic objective is to ensure we are well capitalized through the lease process and beyond without the need to raise any new capital in the markets and that takes into account the current state of Bitcoin mining operations. It's not assuming any improvement in the economics there. So our plan is built on conservative assumptions around the status of the Bitcoin market. Operator: Our next question comes from Nick Giles with B. Riley Securities. Nick Giles: Good morning, Keel team. In the interim period where Bitcoin mining operations are wound down, but kind of pre-revenue generation on the HPC side, could the generating assets at Panther Creek and Scrubgrass be utilized in any way such as the PJM capacity auction? Ben Gagnon: So those power plants do actually participate in PJM capacity auctions. We've done that for quite some time. And so we do benefit from the capacity payments that we received there. Nick Giles: Got it. Okay. And any order of magnitude of what those could be kind of in the 2026 planning year? Ben Gagnon: So I mean, really, it's -- we've kind of maxed out on the capacity auction payments. They set a ceiling, and that's where the capacity auction payments closed. Nick Giles: Got it. Understood. Maybe one for Jonathan. You've made some progress on the capital structure, but just was hoping for any additional comments you might have on what you're looking for in an initial debt package, how you're seeing term shift and kind of what tools you have at your disposal during construction and kind of post energization. Jonathan Mir: Good question. Thanks, Nick. So our basic approach is to compare and contrast our financing options down at the asset level and upstairs at the parent level. And certainly, one of the things that we've seen in the market that has caught our attention like everyone else, is the tightening of spreads between folks issuing high-yield debt in the market that would seem like quite attractive levels for strong investment-grade counterparties or credit wraps. And those converging towards the levels seen in bank-originated classic construction of project financing. So we'll be -- each of those has its own advantages in terms of simplicity of managing the actual capital once it's raised versus negative carry costs. And as we get closer to a funding point, we'll make the decision as to what seems best for our shareholders in terms of how we decide to finance. I'm sorry, Nick, I was just going to say that the markets for our space and for infrastructure generally seem calm right now. Operator: Our next question comes from Brian Dobson with Clear Street. Gregory Pendy: It's Greg Pendy in for Brian Dobson. Just I guess one final one. Just I guess, one final one. Just on the redomiciling to the U.S., are there any implications to costs or structural implications in terms of ownership that we should be aware of as you enter this over the next couple of days? Ben Gagnon: One of the benefits and reasons for the redom is that we will now be eligible for inclusion in indices that require -- want to be a U.S. domiciled company. So for example, we'll be eligible for inclusion in the Russell 1000 and the Russell 3000 as well as for ownership in any other fund who was otherwise limited to the purchase of U.S. securities. We view that as being quite helpful in terms of moving our shareholder base to one that is institutional and long term. There are no other -- there are no cost or flexibility implications in our end. We simply see this as a nice path forward with a lot of benefits for our shareholders. Operator: Our next question comes from Bill Papanastasiou with Chardan Capital Markets. Bill Papanastasiou: Just wanted to touch on the Washington side and decision to shift towards colo. Can you confirm that this won't have any material impact on the purchase commitment that was entered into November? Or is the team considering the shift in development allocation to other sites? Ben Gagnon: Thanks, Bill. No impact on the capital commitments and the equipment we've already purchased for the Washington site by changing business models. In fact, actually, it just helps to reduce the CapEx because we're no longer paying for the compute. Bill Papanastasiou: Understood. And then how should we generally be thinking about maintenance CapEx on existing Bitcoin mining sites as you gradually shift over to AI HPC here? Ben Gagnon: We're not making any investments into the Bitcoin mining sites. Basically, we're just continuing to keep them up and running. And so no further investments are being made in the sites into new sites or into new miners. Operator: Thank you. This concludes the question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Ben Gagnon for closing remarks. Ben Gagnon: Thank you very much, everyone, for joining our call today and really look forward to speaking to you next time as Keel Infrastructure. Have a great day. Operator: Thank you for your participation. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.
Operator: Good morning, and welcome to JBS Fourth Quarter and the Year of 2025 Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. Any statements eventually made during this conference call in connection with the company's business outlook, projections, operating and financial targets and potential growth should be understood as merely forecast based on the company's management expectations in relation to the future of JBS. Such expectations are highly dependent on the industry and market conditions, and therefore, are subject to change. Present with us today, Gilberto Tomazoni, Global CEO of JBS; Guilherme Cavalcanti, Global CFO of JBS; Wesley Batista Filho, CEO of JBS USA; and Christiane Assis, Investor Relations Director. Now I'll turn the conference over to Gilberto Tomazoni,, Global CEO of JBS. Mr. Tomazoni, you may begin your presentation. Gilberto Tomazoni: Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us today. We closed 2025 with a consistent performance and our continued progress in building a stronger, more efficient company. In the fourth quarter, we recorded a revenue of $23 billion with an EBITDA margin of 17.4%. For the full year, revenue reached $8 billion, a company record with a consolidated EBITDA margin of 7.9%. This scale and the diversity of our multi-protein and multi-geography platform remain our greatest strength, allowing JBS to navigate industry cycles or any disruption while capturing structural growth in protein demand. In both the fourth quarter and the full year, JBS delivered record sales with positive consolidated results, reflecting the resiliency of our global platform. Net income totaled $415 million in the quarter and the $2 billion for the year, representing year-over-year growth of 15%, earnings per share of $1.89 per year. Free cash flow was $990 million in the quarter and $400 million for the year. Return on equity reached 25%, and the return on investment capital was 70%. Our leverage ratio at the end of the fourth quarter was 2.39x in line with our long-term target. We also maintained a very strong debt profile with an average debt maturity of approximately 15 years and average cost of the debt of around 5.7%. No significant maturity in the short term. These strong results reflect our consistent performance in a year marked by a challenging environment in some global protein markets. In the United States, the cattle cycle remains under pressure with a limited supply and high cost. This is expected to continue in the coming quarters. Despite this environment in U.S. beef sector, our global results remained positive reflecting the resilience of our diversifying platforms. Australia was one of the highlights of the year. With a strong EBITDA growth and margin expansion as well as the top line growth of 30% year-over-year in the fourth quarter. Our Australian business benefit from the currently imbalance between global supply and demand of beef. Combining with a strong execution and support solid profitability and reinforce the role of region in balancing our global results. In Brazil, the beef business operates with a historical margin range supported by strong export and steady domestic demand. The fourth quarter was particularly strong with the top line sales growing 26% year-over-year. At the same time, livestock productivity continued to improve. Country recorded highest beef processing volume in its history at around 42 million heads. This reflect a total gain in production and reinforce and Brazil growing role in a global supply. In this context, Friboi delivered solid results. with growth in both export and domestic sales volume increase in key international markets, including Mexico, Europe and United States. While the business also strengthened its presence in Brazil, programs such as Friboi+ continues to deepen client relationship and support growth in the domestic market. At Seara, we continue to advance our strategy and strengthening brands and expanding high value-added products. In recent years, Seara has expanded its portfolio entering new categories and strengthen in connection with the consumers. The business is now one of its strong moment in brand perception supported by innovation, execution, a more differentiated product mix. In the United States, our chicken business continued to benefit from the strong demand in both retail and food service. Pilgrim's delivered volume growth above the industry average in segments such as case ready and the small bird. The big birds segment also improved performance through better yields, mix and cost efficiency. Brand diversification continues to progress and Just Bare surpassed $1 billion in retail sales reflecting the strength of our brand strategy and the significant opportunity we see to capture further growth across our modern high-value prepared foods portfolio. In U.S. Pork business, performance remained stable, and the business closed the year with solid margins, supported by disciplined operation and balance supply and demand. Also, in 2025, we completed the dual-listed process, a milestone at the company's history and became a nice listed company and strengthened our capital market position. Since then, we have seen a clear improvement in how the market values the company. Our trading multiply and expanded reflect greater visibility and investor confidence although we still trade at a discount to our global peers. Liquidity also has increased significantly with average trading volume up approximately 3x compared to the prior listing levels. At the same time, our shareholder base has become more global and diversified. U.S.-based investors now represent nearly 70% of the company free float. Overall, this change reinforced our position in global capital market and support the next phase of growth. Global protein consumption continues to grow, supported by demographic health awareness and demand for balanced diets. JBS is well positioned to meet this demand across markets and channels. Our structure remains clear. We will continue to strengthen our brand, expand our value-added portfolio and develop solutions that make protein more accessible and more convenient everyday life. Thank you again for joining us today. And now I will turn the call over to Guilherme, who will walk through our financial results in more detail. Guilherme Cavalcanti: Thank you, Tomazoni. To the operational and financial highlights of the fourth quarter and fiscal year of 2025. Net sales reached a record of $23 billion in the quarter and $86 billion in 2025. Adjusted EBITDA in IFRS totaled $1.7 billion, which represents a margin of 7.4% in the quarter and $6.8 billion in 2025 with a margin of 7.9%. Adjusted EBITDA in U.S. GAAP totaled $1.5 billion which represents a margin of 6.5% in the quarter and $5.8 billion in 2025 with a margin of 6.7%. Adjusted operating income was $1.1 billion with a margin of 4.7% in IFRS and 4.8% in U.S. GAAP in the fourth quarter. In 2025, adjusted operating income was $4.5 billion in IFRS with a margin of 5.2% and $4.4 billion in U.S. GAAP with a margin of 5.1%. Net income was $415 million in the quarter and an earnings per share of $0.39. For the year, net income was $2 billion and earnings per share of $1.89. Excluding the nonrecurring items, adjusted net income would be $500 million and earnings per share of $0.47 in the quarter and for 2025, $2.2 billion with an earnings per share of $2.10. Finally, return on equity was 25% and return on invested capital was 17%. Free cash flow in fourth quarter 2025 reached $990 million compared to $906 million in the fourth quarter 2024. The main positive drivers were related to the deferred livestock, particularly in U.S. and inventories, reflecting strong revenue growth during the period. Despite an $850 million in working capital consumption in 2025 the cash conversion cycle remained resilient and in line with prior year's levels. For the full year, free cash flow totaled $400 million. When we visited free cash flow breakeven, IFRS EBITDA exercise for 2025, the initial estimate EBITDA to a breakeven level was around $6 billion. However, considering the actual results, the EBITDA breakeven would be approximately $300 million lower. The main difference came from working capital, as mentioned earlier, mainly reflecting the deferred livestock effect and a decrease in inventories. On the other hand, CapEx came in about $100 million above estimates as we executed $1.1 billion in expansion CapEx during the period. We also saw a higher number of biological assets, largely driven by the increasing livestock volumes and prices, while the remaining items came in broadly in line with our estimates. Finally, the higher cash tax paid in 2025 were mainly related to the tax payments associated with the results of 2024. For 2026 and for the purpose of the EBITDA cash flow breakeven exercise, we can assume capital expenditures of $2.4 billion of which $1.3 billion is for expansion and $1.1 billion is for maintenance, interest expenses of $1.15 billion and leasing expenses of $500 million in a consolidated effective tax rate of 25%. Just to highlight, it is still too early to estimate the variation in working capital and biological assets as there are many factors beyond our control. such as grain and lifestyle prices. However, if you consider the same amount of working capital consumption in biological assets of 2025, EBITDA cash flow breakeven would be $5.7 billion, in line with 2025 numbers mentioned above. On Page 24, we present our historical free cash flow breakdown to help analyst forecast. Our leverage ended the year at 2.39x, in line with our long-term target of keeping net debt to EBITDA between 2 and 3x. In 2025, we also strengthened our balance sheet by extending our debt maturity profile, reaching an average debt term of approximately 15 years and an average cost of 5.7%. We have no significant debt maturities until 2031. The coupons of our debt are below treasury until and including 2032 maturities with 32% of our gross debt maturing beyond 2052 and approximately 90% of the total debt is at fixed rates. It's worth mentioning that despite the 8% increase in net debt in the last 3 years, net financial expenses remained at the $1.1 billion per year. Our $3.5 billion in revolving credit lines and $4.8 billion in available cash provides us the flexibility to continue executing our expansion CapEx, value creation products and shareholder returns while maintaining a healthy and robust balance sheet. For this reason and given our strong cash position and leverage, we announced last night, the payment of $1 per share in dividends to be paid in June 17. With that in mind, I would like to turn the operator for a question-and-answer session. Operator: [Operator Instructions] We have our first question from Lucas Ferreira with JPMorgan. Mr. Ferreira, you may go ahead. Lucas Ferreira: I have 2. The first one, if you can give us an update on the business environment for PPC, especially in the U.S., but there were some renovation works at the Russellville plant wondering if those are completed. If operations remain fine, if this could be an issue at all for the quarter as well as any update you see in the market regarding crisis. It seems that we are in an environment of a bit more supply than the first quarter of last year. So if you see how robust is the market and how balanced the market today? And the second question is on the U.S. beef operations. We saw a pretty steep recovery in beef spreads over the last few weeks. So to what you attribute this, obviously, demand remains strong, but there have been some capacity rationalizations in the industry. Any updates on the Greeley situation will also be welcome with regards of what -- how that impacts your business and how you see the market for U.S. beef for now? Gilberto Tomazoni: Lucas, thank you for your question. And I will start here to talk about update in terms of Pilgrim's and after that, Wesley will give us the perspective of beef in U.S. As you mentioned before, we completed the transformation of 3 plants of Pilgrim's already completed it. One, we transformed from big bird to case ready because we have a strong demand in the retails, and this strategy will support the retail growth of the demand of chicken. In the other 2 plants, in reality is not a transformation. It's adequate to produce the raw material for our prepared business. Before we sell -- we sell the breast to the market because we are not able to deliver the appropriate cuts that our prepared food needs. Now we invest in machines and we are not need to sell and buy and rebuy the raw material. Now we deliver direct to our prepared business. This, of course, we catch the margin of the third party I think and we are keep best quality and be able to react quickly in case of the increasing demand. And I understood that as a second point that you mentioned about supply/demand. I can say to you, the demand for chicken meat in U.S. is not just in U.S. It's a global demand is very high across all the chains. And if you take in consideration in U.S. the chicken placement in the beginning of the year, grew around 3% and the price of chicken breast increased in the market. But this shows that a balance in supply and demand because we increased 3%, the placement of chicken and at the price of the breast increased. And if you -- USDA forecast for this year is that it will be 2% growth in chicken supply. If we grow 3% in the price market increase, we can anticipate if the forecast 2% will be a very good year for Pilgrim's in U.S. I think this is 2 components. The verticalization of our raw material production, we get more margins in prepared. In the growth of our prepared business in Pilgrim's Just Bare have a strong demand and we are investing in new factories. We see that this year will be a good year for Pilgrims. Wesley Mendonça Filho: Lucas, fourth quarter was a pretty good quarter given the market conditions on the beef side. It's common knowledge that given the market data that first -- at the beginning here of the first quarter has been really tough, really, really difficult, very challenging. Probably the most challenge we've seen in this industry in a very long time. I don't know if there is any other time that we had such, actually a negative spread for January and February ever. And it seems now that current data shows that March is showing that it's going to be a little bit -- it's going to become better, sharply better than where we were from January and February. But let's see what comes out of that. When we are -- one of the things that has happened in this scenario that we have very low cattle availability and very low processing volumes is that the market has become more volatile than we're used to in this market. You see big fluctuations in cutout, big fluctuations in cattle, more so than what we're used to. So that's just an effect of having such a small volume. If you -- if the volume is a little bit higher, it has a big impact and it's become a little bit more volatile. When it comes to the striking really, it's very difficult to forecast how that a strike would go on. We have a very good deal in front of that local. We actually just did a national deal with 14 other unions in red meat -- 14 other locals from the same union in red meat, and it's a historic union company deal. We have a variable pension plan. That's the first time in forever that the industry has brought back pension, something like that for people when they retire for our team members. So we have a very good deal, actually, even -- I think I would say it's probably one of the most innovative deals that we've had in a long time in this industry. So let's see. We think that we hope this gets resolved as soon as possible. Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, we have Mr. Gustavo Troyano from Itau would like to ask a question. Gustavo Troyano: My first question is on Seara and related to chicken supply here in Brazil. We acknowledge that discussions on the supply side should always be on a relative basis to demand, which seems quite strong at this point. But just wanted to get your updated thoughts on the balance between chicken supply in Brazil, what to expect going forward as we move into the second quarter of 2026, if you guys are expecting the chicken supply increase to outpace demand in a way that we could see some profitability compression going forward. So that would be the first question. And the second one, still on U.S. beef and a follow-up on the first question actually is, would you say that the current balance between slaughtering capacity in the U.S. and demand and cattle availability will imply some capacity adjustments going forward from other players or even from you guys. So what could you say on further capacity adjustments going forward because cattle availability is restricted right now. So just wanted to get your updated thoughts on that as well. Gilberto Tomazoni: Thank you, Gustavo. Talking about chicken in Brazil and Seara and after that Wesley will complement the answer about beef in U.S. When you chicken in Brazil, the balance between supply and demand for chicken is still not very clear to us. In one hand, we have strong and growing international demand and new cases of poultry farming influenza in several countries with culture that produce as a competitor of Brazil. And this could boost demand even further. The other hand, we have 2% to 3% increase the chick placement up to February. This is as a reasonable limit for growth in Brazil. There is some news that chicken breeder stock has increased. In this scenario, it's difficult to predict the unfolding events if production of exceed market capacity. But in this case the industry, the sector, the industry has many of tools to manage this. For example, we can export more fertile eggs, we can reduce the average age of the breeding stock. We can reduce the weight of the birds among others, means that so far, the market is very balanced in the market, and we see a strong demand in the international market. If -- because if you look for the breeders can increase more the volume domestic market, each industry needs to take its own decisions. But they have a lot of ways to manage of this supply because chicken is not still in the farm. It still place it. It is in the genetic I can say -- I can talk to you about what -- in our side, how we are -- what we are doing. We are focused on strengthening our export leadership. We have -- and enriched our value-add mix in domestic market. I think it's the both strategy we have. We have well positioned in international market and well positioned domestic market, and we are at value and be more innovative in terms of the way that you present the product to the consumers. Wesley Mendonça Filho: Gustavo, on the U.S. beef, this question about capacity adjustments, it's very difficult for me to answer about, especially when it's something that's not related to our business directly, right? So it would be a competitor. It's very difficult for me to respond on that. . It's clear that there is more capacity in the U.S. than there is kind of available in the U.S., not too many years ago, 4 years ago, had processed 33 million head, and now we're going to be below 27 million. So we're around 27 million, sorry. So that itself shows that yes, there is excess capacity. Having said that, it's very difficult for me to respond about something that's regarding other companies. Operator: Our next question comes from Lucas Mussi with Morgan Stanley. Lucas Mussi: My first one is related to Brazil beef in Australia. If you could talk to us a bit about how you're thinking about the export environment in the context of Brazil and also Australia eventually reaching the limit of the export quota to China? How are you thinking about how volumes are going to behave, perhaps in the second half of this year? What are you thinking about your options here and potential impact to the business divisions and the second one, one for Guilherme. If you could share more details on derivative lines on your P&L that went a bit lower this quarter, that would be helpful. And also, I know that there's still -- we're still a bit early to talk about concrete working capital expectations for this year. But if you had to evaluate looking at where commodity future is today or grains for livestock. What would be your assessment on working capital potential as things stands today for the year, maybe a little bit below 2025, in line with 2025, if you have any on working capital. Gilberto Tomazoni: Thank you, Lucas, for your question. Let me to separate. I think in Australia and Brazil, that is a different scenario. Australia, we are not seeing any challenge in terms of the -- after the quota of Australia to China because Australia is a strong market demand and has a very strong presence in Japan and Korea and all of the Asian markets and U.S. as well and Europe, then Australia is easy to manage the volume for each one of these markets that we are not really worried about this situation. In Brazil, may be more complicated. But our I will talk related to that. But our Friboi team is very confident that they will be able to deliver in this year 2026, this resulting with the line that the last year. Why we are confident on that. Global demand for protein is high, especially for beef. China's quota, if you talk about -- we are expecting to end by the midyear. And in reality, we don't know how China will manage this volume restriction. I believe that some countries will likely not be able to complete their quotas. But this is -- we cannot speculate, but this is a fact. Regarding this situation, Friboi has developed a new international market, new sales chain and investing heavily in value-added and combined with customer service. An example of this strategy is the program of Friboi+ now I think last week at the supermarket conventional in Rio de Janeiro, Nielsen, you know Nielsen, gave a presentation comparing a store with a regular butcher shop to one with Friboi+ and the results showed that the start with the program has a higher revenue and 40% higher overall sales, not just the butcher area, the overall sales, that it's a strong program to support the growth of our customers. And at the same time, the retailers now face a challenge because they need to improve the quality of the sales in the stores because this shift for more protein, this program, what GLP1 and so on, that is booming the consumption of protein they need to enhance the portfolio in the retail. And in our program is, I think it fits perfect with this trend in the necessity of the supermarket. The other point, I believe in the second half of the year, when the supply of feed lot in Greece, this coinciding with the end of quota of China, which is large -- and we know that China is the largest pork selling channel, the price of cattle will likely be affected. I think this will be correlation because of that we are so confident that we are able to deliver this year and results in line with last year. Guilherme Cavalcanti: So on the derivatives line, what you saw there is any sort of derivatives that's not related to the operations. And the recent volatility in currencies and other commodity prices make this number higher despite we have a very limited VaR for those type of derivatives. Now on the working capital side, so far, what can I say, it's only about the -- what we've seen in the first quarter. So first quarter 2025 we have a slightly lower working capital consumption than in the first quarter of 2024 despite the $200 million higher impact of the deferred livestock. So again, it's too early to say for the whole year. But if considering just the first quarter, we had a little lower consumption of working capital. It doesn't mean a lower cash consumption, given that the operational side is slightly worse. Operator: Our next question comes from Thiago Duarte at BTG. Mr. Duarte? Thiago Duarte: Yes, two follow-up questions going back into U.S. beef and then Seara. Wesley mentioned the strong quarter considering the circumstances that you had. But I'm still wondering what do you believe justifies that performance? I mean, Q-over-Q margin rebound, it's not something typically happens considering the seasonality in Q4 and even looking at the industry cut out spread. So my question, you mentioned the volatility has been something that's even higher than usual and maybe that has something to do with a particularly good quarter in Q4, but if you could elaborate a little bit more on what you think justifies that in this quarter in particular. And a follow-up question on Seara. I think Tomazoni talked a lot about chicken demand and protein demand in general. So my sense is that what really drove this very good margin at the Seara division in the quarter was really related to chicken, fresh chicken in natural chicken exports as opposed to the domestic prepared food portfolio. So my question is really if that understanding is accurate in terms of, again, natural margin versus prepared food margins for Seara in the quarter? Wesley Mendonça Filho: So especially when the market has such a volatility in cattle prices and cut out values it's very possible, especially when you look at just the quarter, right, that you have a quarter that you position yourself really well and other ones that you position yourself a little bit worse. And between quarters, you could have those -- just from a positioning perspective, it could be either have a very good -- look really good or look a lot worse than you expect? And just given this such intense volatility that more than we were expecting, I saw some reports maybe question a little bit about if there was any hedging or derivatives there, there was nothing significant from that perspective. I think it's just when markets are more volatile, and you make position selling out -- selling product upfront and all of that, sometimes you get good position sometimes could get worse. I would -- I think the best way to look at performance is look at overall longer term than just one quarter, one quarter could kind of misleading positive or negative either way in this sort of business, especially with the sort of volatility that we've been having on cutout and cattle price. Yes, that's in that foundation. Gilberto Tomazoni: Thiago, let me make some assessment position about what you said, if the margin, if you understood well, you asked for the margin of prepared foods in domestic market and versus to export chicken -- commodity chicken to international market. If you take just in consideration, the margin, yes, the margin of international chicken was higher than the margin of prepared in domestic market. But say that, we improved the margin of the prepared food and domestic market. If you remind some quarters ago, I mentioned that we are advancing as a process to improve our price management in order to get the real value of the brand in domestic markets. And this is a continuous process. We are now focused on taking the advantage of we have the perception of the brand, we have Seara in the market. The penetration of the brand and the rebuy of the brand from the consumers. And we are strengthening our process in order to get this value. And because of that, we are continuously improving the margin in domestic market. But yes, you are right. If you compare this quarter, the margin of international market for chicken was higher than the margin of prepared in domestic market. Wesley Mendonça Filho: Thiago, just to complement something on beef that I meant to say and I forgot. For sure, this comparison quarter-by-quarter could create some -- a little bit of that when it comes to position, positioning of how you sell forward and how we buy and all of that. But having said that, we are very satisfied with the way we are operating. There are still opportunities for sure. There's things that we're working on. But when we compare our operations, just the things that -- how we are running our plants and how we are running our sales strategy, our procurement strategy, compared to a few years ago, we think we've made a lot of progress, and I think we're doing a lot better than we've been doing in the past. Operator: Next is Isabella Simonato from Bank of America. Isabella Simonato: First, on the working capital for the quarter, right? You mentioned the deferred payment of livestock as well as inventories. Can you just give a little bit more details on the inventory performance and versus where you were expecting, right, when you mentioned in Q3 for the remainder of the year. What changed? And what can -- how can that -- if there is any impact to be postponed or translated into 2026 performance? And second, on Seara, you were mentioning right, Tomazoni, about the margins in Brazil. Can you comment how you're seeing Brazilian consumers behaving in the beginning of the year if there is room to increase a little bit prices and if volumes have picked up, we noticed that retailers were running with lower inventories in the end of 2025, and there was any significant change in behavior in the beginning of the year? And finally, if you could give us a brief overview of how are your grain inventories and how you're seeing feed costs for the remaining of the year? Guilherme Cavalcanti: So on the working capital cycle, Isabella. So every fourth quarter is a quarter that we decrease inventories, and we'll review them in the first quarter. And the same happens to the livestock, which we postponed payments from 1 year to the other. Between 2024 and 2025 and '26 we postponed this year $600 million in livestock. Last year, we had postponed $400 million. So we had a $200 million better impact on the fourth quarter. That will be a $200 million worse impact in the first quarter that I mentioned in the previous question. And that is in the inventory side, the same thing. We are seeing the same level of inventory rebuild that we saw in the last years. Gilberto Tomazoni: Isabella, thank you for your question. When you look for -- we have two separate questions. One is, if I understood well, one is related to the behavior of the consumer and domestic market with Seara. We see that the market starts a little bit weak in the beginning of the year in January but they're back, now we are -- when we look for our sales, we are growing the sales compared to the last year but deep with different mix with a value-add mix growing much faster than the low -- the traditional and low value-added it's difficult to say what is value added or not value-added it's prepared. But say, look, the traditional, they are selling less than the innovation. We have a huge growth in the innovation line with high-protein products, air-fry products designed for air fryers, clean label product, this kind of innovation. They grow much faster than the other ones. But average, when we compare this year with the last year, we are growing, even some challenge and some different chains, but it's growing. But it start as just to be clear, we start very tough, very tough in the beginning and recover. Now we are -- our sale is higher than the last year for prepared. And when you talk about the cost, I think you will talk about grains because there is a lot of consideration. We have different views in terms of corn and soybean meal with these 2 key elements for our feed. In the corn market, we see an upward trend. We should expect higher costs in 2026. And due to -- if you look for reducing the global stock and solid demand, increased crude oil price that boost in ethanol margin as well the cost and availability of fertilizers. U.S. acreage at risk given the soybean ratio. And the second crop in Brazil, in face of some climate risk. That we are, I think, is we expect higher costs for corn. In the soybean mill, we see price stability and do the -- if you look for the crush margin, they are positive and as the crush margin positive, we result in as abundant supply. And in the other part, weak Chinese demand to the tight pork margin in the market. But I think it's for soybean meal, we need to monitor U.S. acreage issue in the biofuel policy. But anyway, our outlook remains bearish. Operator: Our next question comes from Henrique Brustolin with Bradesco. Henrique Brustolin: I have 2. The first on U.S. beef Wesley, if you could comment about the Mexico cattle imports, right? They have been shut for a while now. Maybe this could be a discussion the reopening could be a discussion amid the higher prices in the U.S. So it would be great to hear your thoughts in how relevant that could be in shaping the outlook for 2026 if we saw a reopening of the animal imports from Mexico to the U.S.? That will be the first one. And the second is a quick follow-up on Seara but Seara has been through a very big investment cycle over the past few years. It would be great just to hear how those investments have already ramped up and what would you expect for volume growth into 2026 as probably you complete the ramp of some of those plants? Wesley Mendonça Filho: Henrique, so on Mexico, it's difficult to tell when that's going to reopen. I mean it's very meaningful. It's 1.2 million to 1.5 million head per year. So it's more than the size of a double-shift plant, right. So it's a big bottom and it's very important, especially to the south of the U.S. I mean the USDA is doing -- I mean, it's doing a good job in doing all we can to keep the disease outside of the U.S. They are working on the sterile flies and all of that. And Mexico, obviously, is also trying to get this result as soon as possible. But for me to be able to tell you like I hope that this would get resolved within the year, but I have no way to forecast and to even have an indicator of if that's going to really happen anytime soon. But it's really important is probably the most important short-term change that could happen to this whole beef supply and demand equation. The most relevant in the short term for sure, it's this whole Mexico thing. It's very important, especially for the south of the U.S. But again, it's very difficult for me to tell you a forecast. I hope it opens this year or as soon as possible, but very difficult forecast. Gilberto Tomazoni: Henrique, about the investment of Seara, all of them will be completed this year. And when completed the additional capacity will be around 10%, 13%. I will say 10%, 13%, but can depend on the mix. There's some mix that is less volume, high value, but it depends on that. But you can consider 10%, 13% in terms of volume capacity growth. Operator: Your next question comes from Benjamin Theurer there with Barclays. Benjamin Theurer: Yes. Just following up real quick on the CapEx side. I think you said about $1.4 billion for expansion. I mean, I know there is a lot that Pilgrim's Pride has part of that and share of it with their outlook in terms of CapEx. But could you remind us a little bit about some of the other projects you're currently talking and working around as it relates to capacity expansion aside from what Tomazoni just mentioned on Seara. That would be my first question. I have a quick follow-up as well. Guilherme Cavalcanti: Ben, so basically, the Pilgrim's Pride expansion on the prepared food parts on the rendering facilities, the pork sausage plant in Iowa. But the ones that we announced. Also the Oman project, we also announced a plant in Paraguay. Cactus, Texas, also on the beef side, so everything that we've been announcing. And of course, all these capital expenditures are phased out throughout the years, and that's the portion for 2026. Benjamin Theurer: Okay. Perfect. And then as you kind of like look from just general capital allocation, I mean, obviously you announced the $1 dividend per share in the very large CapEx program. We're seeing a bit more activity right now as it relates to M&A activity within food companies in generally but particularly between European and North American companies. So just wanted to get your latest as to your willingness or the opportunities you might be seeing on growth through M&A, which obviously has always been part of JBS's DNA to grow . Guilherme Cavalcanti: We're always looking at opportunities through our plan everywhere in the world, but there's nothing that we are looking very keen at the moment, and that's the reason that we increased our organic growth because we are not seeing many opportunities on the acquisition front. So I think that I would say there's nothing that we could say that we expect to announce or anything in terms of M&A. So that's why we were -- we increased expansion CapEx, and that's why we are returning capital to the shareholders. And given that our net interest expenses continues to be at the $1.1 billion level, we are very comfortable with this capital allocation. Operator: Our next question comes from Thiago Bortoluci with Goldman Sachs. Thiago Bortoluci: Congrats on the results. I have two follow-ups. The first one this is on volumes, right? Tomazoni, you have been very vocal on the solid momentum for global protein markets. And to be honest, when I look over the last few quarters. Obviously, a lot of debate on the margin cycles, but volumes and top line has been consistently surprising everyone to the upside. And I think it might be a continuous source of upside going forward. It's difficult to break out for us your sales component between volume and pricing. But internally, from a volume perspective, could you please share with us what business unit segments and destinations are the ones that are contributing the most with your growth and which regions make you more excited with the opportunities for 2026. Particularly, if you could also comment on the opportunities in Africa. I know you announced a few things last year. Just an update here, and then I can follow up with my second question. Gilberto Tomazoni: Thiago, thank you for your question. If I understood well, you talk about Seara or you talk over about... Thiago Bortoluci: Volumes. Overall. Gilberto Tomazoni: Okay. Overall. Okay. Overall, we see that the demand, when you say all of the market, it's not just because we try to simplify, but it's the reality. We have a strong demand in Europe. Friboi increased a lot of the sales of red meat in Europe as Seara increased in volumes in Europe. And the demand in chicken in Europe mainly is driven by some influence in some countries. And the demand for beef is because the beef production in Europe decreased. And I think it's not just Brazil, sell more in Europe and Australia sell more. And in Australia and the U.K., now they have a new agreement. And this is -- the demand is -- we are expecting to grow the demand from beef in Europe. The other part, we see demand in all of the Asia. Take China out of this the component of Asia, but all of the Asia, the demand is growing for chicken. And for beef as well, we see the demand and the market -- this is not new markets. We open a lot of new markets, but in traditional markets like Japan, like Korea, we increased the volume from the market. And I believe this is the trend. It's not a trend because price. It's a trend because the demand decrease in the local production decreased, decreased because of the cycles there or because of some disease in the market. We see Middle East now we are facing a war there, but the flow of the product to the market didn't change so far. They changed the logistic of vessels there, the logistics of internal logistics, we need to change port and when you change port, we need to use trucks to deliver the product to the customer. But the flow is still there. The demand is there. Because of this, we are investing in the Middle East, new factory opened some months ago in Jeddah and the investment we have announced in Oman because the demand is strong. The U.S., there is a strong demand for beef as Australia, Brazil, sell a lot streamers and from U.S. When we say a lot more than before, I would not say compared to the production in the matter. Sales compared to what previous forecast. If you look, we are not seeing that one market is the restriction. We see the demand for all of the markets. Even in Brazil, the demand in Brazil for protein is high. Look for what is the -- how Brazil have grown in terms of the number of fed processed in Brazil is amazing. And what is this? This is because the global demand for protein because there is a reason we have been talking before about that. There is a trend it's not a trend, it's a structural change in the demand of the market because of regulatory guidelines in U.S., they change the guidelines and they put -- they need to add more protein to need to go to 1.1 grams per kilo per 1.62 grams per kilo. You can manage how much we need to produce to fulfill this market that we -- that there is a lot of the health habits that for young generation for old generation, there's a new medicine technology, this GLP-1. And combined all of this, the demand is very high, very high. I don't know if I answered your question, Thiago. Thiago Bortoluci: Perfectly, Tomazoni. This is very helpful. On the second one, still talking about the conflict in the Middle East. Obviously, this is an ongoing situation. But could you help us framing the impact so far in your freight expenses -- and by freight, I'm mentioning seaborne freight, but also truck freight in Brazil and maybe a sensitivity of how this could impact your profitability if sustained going forward or how you plan to pass this along? Gilberto Tomazoni: Thiago, I think I just mentioned before, the flow, the product to go to the market didn't change. Didn't change from Brazil. Didn't change from Australia and any of the other markets didn't change. We keep supplying the market. We have -- what we saw the growth -- the cost, we have a contract with the marine agents and they put extra cost because of the risk to navigate in these regions. And this is one of the cost. The second cost is the cost that we need to change the port -- some -- the destination of the product, some destination will change from one port to the other port. And when we change the destination for the different part, we need to have the truck transportation because to there is not -- there is no closer to the customers, then we need to have this cost of transportation. But so far, this -- all of these costs was beared by the market. We not see impact in our results. Thiago Bortoluci: This is also true in Brazil. Tomazoni, with diesel prices. Gilberto Tomazoni: No. In Brazil, we see the increase of price of diesel. And we see that increase in terms of the cost of freight. I talk about the Middle East, but when you look for Brazil, yes, you are right, increase the cost of the freight. I think if the crude oil keep this price and depends on how far the development of this war, I believe that other costs will be increased, the cost of packaging and what is depend on the oil will be increased as a raw material. I think this will be the impact, I think, the fertilizer will be impacted, and then it could be -- then I mentioned before, when they talk about the cost of the corn because the fertilizer will be higher, the availability of fertilizers, maybe the use of fertilizer will be reduced and then the productivity of the crop will be low. But it's -- I believe it's too early to predict. Too early because you don't know how will be the end of this war. I think this is -- I saw this impact in the short term, but could be back if they end the war. I think it would all be back. It is -- I think this is a situation that we are -- how we are looking and act in this situation. Operator: Mr. Benjamin Mayhew from Bank of Montreal would like to ask a question. Benjamin Mayhew: Can you hear me okay? Yes. Gilberto Tomazoni: Yes, good morning. Benjamin Mayhew: So a lot has been covered already, but I'd like to ask a high-level question to begin. So in looking at 2026 versus 2025, just across your global segments, where do you see pockets of improved market fundamentals and where do you see pockets of maybe not so strong fundamentals throughout the year? So we'll start there. Gilberto Tomazoni: Ben, thank you for your question, Ben. I think it's a rule of improvement we've seen in all of our business units because we have a methodology that mapping the gaps. It's a one of the model that we work. All business units need to understand, need to know very well, where is the opportunity to improve, then we call mapping the gaps and when you look -- when you have the budget, we go there and see the gaps, and we forecast in our budget, some gap up in the -- each one of the operation. And it's not just for the business, but -- we got the business because we deploy each one of the process and subdivisions of the business. That is when you look -- if you look it's a huge opportunity we have yet because that new technology, a new way to do the things. We are closing the gap. We open a bigger gap, and this is the way that we see -- or get operational excellence. I think this is the mentality and the mindset for all of the business. But if you go to a structural, we see that Brazil is 1 of that has a huge opportunity for growth in terms of meat, beef in Brazil, I think, is if you compare Brazil and U.S., brazil has more than double of the [indiscernible] than U.S., more than double. And we produce just this year or last year, Brazil produced a little bit more meat than U.S. It means that -- if we are able to get the same productivity in the U.S. or can double the production in Brazil of meat. Then we see Brazil in terms of red meat huge opportunity in the future for growth. But it's not just for growth [indiscernible] all of the protein produced in Brazil is very competitive because we are grain competitive in terms of the cost of the grain. We are very competitive. We have good quality management. And I think it's -- Brazil is one. We see U.S. good opportunity. Chicken U.S. performed so well, and we see that demand in the U.S. for chicken grow before U.S. export a lot of red meat [indiscernible]. Now I think it's a huge chunk of the volume for red meat is [indiscernible] in the market because they start to appreciate the product made by red meat from chicken, say, leg meat. This is I think in U.S. is an opportunity for growth for chicken for pork demand. In U.S., we have -- if you look for the result of our pork business, they are a very consistent results for a long period of time, well managed business. And we see that we can grow in our pork business because U.S. is very competitive to produce chicken and pork. So look, it's difficult for me because I'm booming in all of the markets that we are present. Australia, we see -- we are very excited with the pork business there. We are delivering a great result there. The Australia import -- Australia now import pork meat but Australia export grain. When you export grain, the price of grain is international price, that does not make sense that you export grain in pork meat. You can produce meat there. And we are investing in our pork business, build farms and improving the operation, the productivity of the operation. Then we are so, so excited with the opportunity for Australia. And our salmon business, we have announced an investment to improve more than 50% of our capacity of salmon in Tasmania. So we see Europe. Europe, I think, is an opportunity of our growing chicken, mainly in chicken and value-added. We are excited because we are in a segment, in a sector that is growing. It's a protein. And we -- we have our global platforms that we can easily meet this demand, I think is -- we have a good situation an advantage to take the opportunity and transform this opportunity result to the company. And I think it is -- I don't know if I answered your question . Benjamin Mayhew: Yes, you did. And I really appreciate all the detail. That's very helpful context. So my second and last question would just be around the beef cycles. Just wondering if you're seeing a little bit more progress on U.S. heifer retention. So wondering about that. Also, curious about your thoughts on the durability of the Brazil cycle and then, of course, the Australian cycle. So if you could just kind of summarize that quickly, that would be amazing. Wesley Mendonça Filho: Thank you, Ben. So yes, we are seeing the herd review more actively in Canada. We're seeing that in the dairy business as well in the U.S., which also obviously impacts the overall supply. When I look at the USDA data, it shows that I think we are retaining heifers, but it's relatively slower than we expected. But I think it's -- all the economics are there, everything should be there for us to be doing that. Actually, I have an information that's pretty interesting is the beef cow slaughter in 2025, for full year, we processed 2.3 million head. In 2022 was 3.9 million heads. So we're almost half of what the beef cow slaughter was in 2022. I think those things -- that information is important, and it shows that if it wasn't for -- to keep more females for breeding, we wouldn't see such a sharp decrease in -- it's almost half of what it was in 2022, not too long ago. So I think that there is some information that kind of makes us more optimistic, but obviously, it's lower than we would wish. Gilberto Tomazoni: Then related to Australia, we see we are in the middle of the cycle in Australia. And back to Brazil. Brazil, we see that the reduction of production in terms of the number of cows but the other side, we have a different force. The Brazilian -- if you look Brazilian and compared to U.S., or compared to Brazilian -- cannot need to compare to U.S. You can compare it for the high level of productivity in Brazil producers and the average of Brazil. The average of Brazil, they bring to harvest if at 4 years age in -- but the good producer or the modern farmers. They live 2 years to get the product finished, to get the cattles finished means that at the same time, we have a reduction in the age of the cattles. And this combined with increased a lot of feedlot in Brazil. The feedlot in Brazil was not well developed. Now you can see a lot of feedlots in Brazil. And the other part, we have an improvement in genetic improvement nutrition the Brazilian ethanol, corn ethanol industry, now they deliver good byproduct from the ethanol that is DDG, it is support a lot to grow the growth of improvements in feed. We see that we are -- I think Brazil will be able to manage this situation and postpone the cycle, the cattle cycle, that is normal cattle cycle. Operator: Our next question is from Heather Jones with Heather Jones. You may now go ahead and Mrs. Jones. If you're trying to speak you might be on mute there, Mrs. Jones. For the moment, we'll move on to the next question on the list, which is Leonardo Alencar from XP Investimentos. Mr. Alencar? Leonardo Alencar: I'd like to go -- wanted to talk back to U.S. beef discussion. And then we mentioned many points on the supply side. I wanted to focus probably more on the demand side. So if we can get -- First, a view on the resilience of beef prices. We've been seeing some amazing beef prices in the beginning or even before the spring season. So just to understand if you -- this is this is feasible or even if it's possible for us to expect higher price throughout the next few months. There was an interesting change in choice and select spreads. I don't know if there's any signal that point, if you could provide us with more information. And this discussion on the product of USA label, I understand it's really new. But if you have any early -- any views on that would be interesting as well. And then on the second point, maybe more like an exercise here. I understand that we've been discussing value-added products and processed goods and that U.S. is the main focus for that. But you already have a lot of revenue on that channel. If we split that from the commodity business in U.S., would you say the performance for -- even from the end of 2025 or 2026, maybe better than the commodity business. It is possible to do that exercise? Wesley Mendonça Filho: So demand is -- it remains pretty strong for beef. Obviously, supply is pretty short. But it seems like beef continues to be very resilient. It seems like ground beef is especially ground beef. We've always measured ground beef versus chicken breast versus pork loins. And it seems like the demand for beef in general, just there is -- obviously, there is a little bit of a substitution with other proteins, but the demand for beef stays still remains and remains pretty strong. So we see that going forward. And all these labor requirements and all that, it's something that we're always -- whenever something changes, we discussed with our retailers and see what our customers and see what are the impacts and cost of that. But it's not something that I'm super concerned right now. Leonardo Alencar: Okay, in the value-added products? Wesley Mendonça Filho: Sorry, that value-added question was about which business unit? Sorry, I missed that. Leonardo Alencar: Exactly not related to a business unit. If you could split, remove or suggest value-added products and remove from the commodity business, would you say 2026 is expected to be better or not on that part of the business? Gilberto Tomazoni: Look, our focus is to increase value-added, in brand is the focus that investment, if you look for an investment we have done in the past, we prioritize the value-added product. And because it's we take the advantage of verticalization of the product. And the second 1 is a higher margin and more stable market that value add is one of our priorities. Leonardo Alencar: Okay. And just 1 more follow-up here. On this split up deal that was being discussed in the U.S. government, I understand it's more noise than anything, but any comments here? Wesley Mendonça Filho: It seems like it doesn't have a lot of support in the -- so right now, it's not something that we're concerned about, Leonardo. Operator: We have Mrs. Heather Jones back online, if you would like to go ahead with your question Mrs. Jones. Unknown Analyst: Are you able to hear me now? Gilberto Tomazoni: Now, yes. Operator: Seems we have some connection issues on Mrs. Jones' side, so we'll continue for now with our next question from Guilherme Palhares with Santander. You may go ahead, Mr. Palhares. Guilherme Palhares: Over the last couple of years, one of the main points here of the investment thesis of JBS has been a bit of the geographic diversification, right? And you do report each of the businesses individually in terms of Australia, Brazil, the U.S. I just wonder if you could share a bit what is -- I think U.S. is a good indication there. In terms of the supply to the market, how much of beef meat in the U.S. is being sold through JBS. Do you know a bit how much do your selling today that it's coming from Brazil and Australia? Just to give the point here is a bit of food security, right? So having this geographic diversification, how much you can maintain supply even when the cycle conditions are not there. So if you could give us some color there, I think it would be appreciated. And the second question here, Tomazoni, over the last 2 years, you guys entered in a new protein, which is table eggs, of course, you still have a minority stake on the investment there. But I just want to hear a bit your thoughts going forward with this year behind you? What is your impression there? And how much -- how big is the opportunity there? Wesley Mendonça Filho: Sure. It's very relevant to have access to import meat from the Australia from Brazil when -- especially in periods of time when there is a shortage of beef in the U.S. So that does help, and it's I mean, and obviously, the volumes at Brazil and Australia produce are significant. So it's -- so it's -- there is not -- there isn't a supply problem when it comes to that. Having said that, the U.S. is a very, very, very competitive place in the world, probably one of the most competitive places in the world the American rancher is one of the most -- are among the most capable in the world to produce beef and high-quality beef. And so obviously, the shortage is a situational thing right now, but the U.S. it's a country that doesn't need to import in the long run, it doesn't need to depend on import. It doesn't need to have imports to be able to supply its own demand. It should be able to, in the long run, to be able to have its -- for the domestic production to supply its domestic market and actually be an important exporter of beef, like it's always been. Obviously, in the short term, we have the situation that we're importing a little bit more beef than usual. But -- and it's useful to have that when there is a shortage because the demand is still there. But the U.S. is a very, very productive place and doesn't need -- for beef and it doesn't need doesn't -- in the long run, shouldn't depend on imports. Gilberto Tomazoni: And Guilherme related to table eggs, we are -- we enter in the segment because it's -- we see that the affordability of the protein, so one of the more affordable protein in the market in and we before to enter we study these categories, and we are excited the first impression, the first movement we have done is to buy a company in the U.S. and to -- we are building farms in Brazil, we are excited with the business. This is one of the businesses you want to grow. Guilherme Palhares: Okay, Tomazoni. And just one follow-up there. You guys are also entering in the U.S., right? So what is also out there that you want to do on table eggs that you think it is a relevant market that you can play and make a difference. Gilberto Tomazoni: Look, we just buy this farms in U.S., and we are without I would say that the population of the chick. Now we are populate our farms and we are excited with this. I think is this -- we are on their strategy with both with Mantiqueira because Mantiqueira has the know-how and this accelerate all of our lands in the market. Operator: Our next question comes from Pooran Sharma, you may go ahead -- with Stephens, you may go ahead, Mr. Sharma. Pooran Sharma: Can you hear me okay? Gilberto Tomazoni: Yes. Pooran Sharma: A lot of good content covered. So maybe I could just focus on the first question, maybe just on your U.S. pork business. We've been hearing from U.S. hog producers that they expect disease impacts to be the same, if not worse than last year. I was just wondering if you can kind of share what you've been hearing regarding hog disease pressure in the U.S. and if you would expect that to weigh in on margins in FY '26? Wesley Mendonça Filho: Yes, it could be. And the margin impact -- it's not necessarily that it's -- it depends on how and when it does impact, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's actually a negative impact. It could actually -- we could have a short term -- obviously, we're not expecting disease, and we don't want disease. And we do everything we can not to have them. But in the short term, you actually could have actually a higher -- given a shorter supply, you could actually have a better margin if that happens. Pooran Sharma: Okay. I appreciate the color there. And my follow-up, maybe just wanted to further on some of the comments you made about the listing on the NYSE. You mentioned stock has seen some liquidity and valuation benefits but that you're still expecting to get more. And in the past, you all have talked about, I think, index inclusions and the potential for -- to get into some of those and the timing to get into some of those. So I think as we're looking in FY '26, I was just wondering if you could maybe give us an update on what's out there in terms of inclusion on some of these passive indices? Guilherme Cavalcanti: Okay? So on the multiple side, if you look at our enterprise value EBITDA forward-looking, we are trading higher than we used to trade before the listing. So there was a multiple expansion already, but we still traded at a discount to our peers. One of the reasons is also the index inclusion. There was a research that was sent last -- yesterday from Stephens. Saying that according to what we released on our financial statements in terms of information of revenues and assets breakdown. We should be included in the Russell, which is next June, and it could bring around 14 million shares demand from passive funds. But it's out of our control. We cannot guarantee that but that's what is in the short term. On the longer term, at some point, most likely beginning next year, we will start to find -- to make files of 10-Ks and 10-Qs instead of 6-K in order to be eligible to the S&P family. So then I think 2027. So I think this year, Russell is the plan. Next year, the plan is to be on the S&P family. First on S&P 400. And once we reach it $22.7 billion market cap, that's the threshold for the S&P 500, although, again, it's not in our control. It's their committee decision for shares inclusion. Also worth mentioning that our average daily trading volume is 3x higher what it used to be before the listing. And the Brazilian investors fell to 10% of our free float. And the U.S. investment today, it's already 70% of our free float. Operator: And our next question comes from Ricardo Boiati from Safra. Ricardo Boiati: One. My first question goes to Wesley. I wanted to circle back to the U.S. business. You, in fact, already answered part of my question here, which related to the competitiveness of the U.S. ranchers, right? We are seeing very favorable conditions, right, for a faster herd rebuilding in the U.S. with the beef prices, the cattle prices. My question here would be exactly when you look from the ranchers' perspectives, right, we see some concerns that labor, even succession plans could be an issue for the ranchers longer term. You expressed a very strong positive outlook for the U.S. beef industry, which is very, very good. So I would ask you to elaborate a little further on the drivers for the industry especially from the ranchers' perspective, right? Is there anything that could prevent a more robust business expansion for the ranchers, anything that could be a risk in the horizon? So that would be the first question. And the second one, just more broadly looking at the current market environment. the risk environment globally. Does this situation here of increased volatility could imply an even more conservative approach when it comes to the balance sheet of the company? It's quite clear that the balance sheet is very strong. I mean, in terms of leverage, in terms of debt maturity, you already showed this in details. But the very short term, the current environment, does it imply an even greater conservativeness from your side or nothing relevant so far? Wesley Mendonça Filho: Ricardo yes, there is -- obviously, there is issues that are very relevant, succession is always very relevant, and labor and all that. But at the end of the day, I have a pretty simple view of this. It's the -- and obviously, like interest rates are relevant as well when it comes to herd rebuild, right, because you have to carry more working capital and livestock and all of that. But at the end of the day, I think it's pretty simple. The U.S. has the nature, has the culture, I mean in nature, I mean, like just environment, right, just the natural resources to do it, to have a thriving beef production, it has the culture to do it. It has the infrastructure like no other countries. So at the end of the day, we remain very optimistic about it in the medium long run. Guilherme Cavalcanti: In terms of balance sheet, I think it's worth mentioning that sometimes you should not look at the net debt absolute value itself. But not even on the net debt to EBITDA, I think it's where I mentioned that in the last 3 years, we increased our net debt in 8%. However, financial expenses stayed the same. So through like big management exercises, we've been able to despite increases in net debt to keep the same level of interest expenses. So our capacity of debt repayment didn't change. So as long as we have this comfortable debt capacity repayments, we have no -- not been needed any restrictions in terms of our return to shareholders or our growth given that we have discovered. And also, as I mentioned before, we don't have significant maturities in the next 5 years. which gives a lot of comfort that we don't need to go to the market at any interest rates. Our cash position is also -- we ended the quarter with $4.8 billion which is around $1.5 billion higher than what is our minimum cash given our cash conversion cycle. So again, we have a lot of questions that currently, we don't need to be restricted in any of our initiatives. Operator: Our next question comes from Igor Guedes with Genial. Igor Guedes: Can you hear me? Gilberto Tomazoni: Yes. Igor Guedes: Okay. I would like to talk a little about Seara. Regarding the first part of the question, this quarter, we saw a resumption of shipments to China after several months of suspension due to avian flu last year. I'd like to understand how the resumption went for you guys? The resumption happened around November. So it didn't cover the entire quarter for Q1 '26, should we expect an even stronger quarter in terms of volume? Is this recovery gradual? Or do you believe the full effect has already being captured in 4Q? And the second part of the question, I'd like to understand from the perspective of breaking down the positive impact -- we have volume growth as well as price improvements realized through premiums paid on certain chicken cuts standard for China, such as chicken feet, given the increase in volume, there is also an effect of improved fixed cost dilution. So my question is, if you could break it down a bit, what we saw in terms of margin improvement what influenced it the most? Was it the increase in volume, the price improvement or the fixed cost dilution? Gilberto Tomazoni: Igor, is not a simple answer for you. If you talk about the volume to China, when opened this helped a lot in terms of profitability because we have the best market for chicken wings and for chicken feet is China. Then we increase in terms of -- we -- feed don't produce were not market to deliver all of the production. But then we do open the markets, they improve volume and improve price. And about wings, they improved the price because the value of the wings in China is higher than the other markets, means that we are -- we got part of the benefit because it was in November, I think it was October, November, and now we have got the benefit in the -- in this first quarter of all of the benefit. When you talk about what is important, the cost of dilutions of price, of course, the impact of the feed, it's a huge impact in terms of profitability because these represent 60% of our cost of chicken goes to feed, around 50. This is huge that is more than to get increased the volume to compensate this is, of course, volume compensate but not able to compensate all of these costs. Operator: Our next question comes from Priya Ohri-Gupta with Barclays. Priya Ohri-Gupta: Great. I hope you can hear me. A lot of questions have been asked at this point. I would just like to ask 2, first, around just the capital allocation. You've already announced the $1 dividend per share that's going to be paid in June. That works out roughly to what you've been indicating for some time now around the ability to consistently pay about $1 billion to shareholders. Is that sort of how we should think about the dividend for the entirety of the year? Or is there room to potentially increase that with a second payment later in the year? And then relatedly, how should we think about share repurchases? Just given that you guys did do about $600 million in '25. And then I'll ask my follow-up. Guilherme Cavalcanti: Priya. So at this moment, we are sticking to what we will try to do as long as our leverage ratio allows to have the $1 billion per year in dividends. So I think this $1 billion is what we plan to pay this year. And then depends on how much excess cash or cash flow generations, then we can reevaluate a share repurchase again or not. But that do depend on the cash generation in the next quarters. Priya Ohri-Gupta: Okay. Great. And then I know you're pretty clear just now about not having any maturities in the next 5 years or so, and so you don't have any real need to come to market. But some of your bonds do become callable later this year and into early next year. Is there a scope for you to think about addressing those or consider other liability management? Or is this the rate backdrop that -- or would this rate backdrop not necessarily went? Guilherme Cavalcanti: Now the callable bonds, they have very low interest rates. So it's not worth it. The coupons are below treasury. But there's opportunities to decrease interest rates and extend maturities on the '34 and '33 maturities. So maybe I think -- it could be -- liability management could be targeted on those 2 bonds, '33 and '34 which has high coupons and higher than what we could be issued today at 30 year, for example. Operator: And next, we have Mr. John Baumgartner with Mizuho. John Baumgartner: Two for me on North America. First, on the value-add side. I mean traditionally, there's been a focus on value-add through M&A. More recently, you've gotten involved in CapEx to build the Italian meats business. But I am curious, alternatively, I know you had a relationship with Wendy's. You had done some test marketing of Wendy's burgers last summer. I'm curious what you sort of learned from that test market? And how you think about maybe licensing third-party brands to get those value-added brands in-house in lieu of making expensive acquisitions or even investing to build brands from scratch? Wesley Mendonça Filho: So look, we're looking at we obviously look at every option. For us, greenfield has made more since recently just because of valuations and the price of building some of these things. And actually, some of these businesses that we did greenfields. It's better to do to have a new plant instead of buying old assets. And so that was very specific to those greenfield acquisitions or greenfield projects, sorry. The project we won is what was very interesting was very -- it worked out well, and it's great partners. But it's an option as well, but it's not -- we'll look at that, too. But we've seen that it's not necessarily, as you mentioned, expensive as kind of prohibited to build brands. Look at what we've done at just there, right? It's we never had an the earnings call or Pilgrim's hasn't had an earnings call that they said that they were -- had invested -- the results were good for 1 reason, had a negative impact because we were building brands, right? We build brands as we build the business and it was sustainable in itself. So nowadays is a $1 billion brand. So it's in revenue. So I think it's possible to do those 2 things at the same time. John Baumgartner: Okay. And a follow-up also in North America. Guilherme, I think you mentioned there's really no imminent M&A on the horizon here, but I am curious on the egg industry, seeing where prices are for eggs, I'd imagine there's a fair amount of distressed profitability in the industry. I'm curious, looking at producer capitalization, that business specifically relative to beef, pork, other species, where you've made acquisitions at the down trend -- the down point in the cycle. How do you think about this profitability issue in eggs right now, maybe accelerating your ability to build out and maybe be opportunistic and acquire some assets in eggs. Guilherme Cavalcanti: John. So basically, it all depends on having the opportunity at the asset price. So sometimes it's not related to the current egg price and we're always looking at opportunities. So it's difficult to say and then that's our approach. It has to be an accretive acquisition. Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, there being no further questions, I would like to pass the floor to Mr. Gilberto Tomazoni. Gilberto Tomazoni: I would like to thank everyone for joining us today and all JBS team members for their dedication, the commitment to deliver the results. Let me close with 3 key points. First, though, we delivered record revenue of $86 billion and 13% growth for the prior year, reflecting the strength of, and the consistent of our global platform. Second, return, we continue to operate with a strong capital discipline with return on equity at 25% and return on investment cut out at 17%. Third, earnings per share, EPS reached $1.89, up 15% year-over-year, growing faster than net income and reinforce our focus on shareholder value. As we look ahead, we haven't changed our focus, execution, efficiency and disciplined capital allocation. That is what allowed us to deliver consistent results and build long-term value. Thank you. Operator: This is the end of the conference call held by JBS. Thank you very much for your participation, and have a nice day.
Operator: Good morning, and welcome to the Genel Energy plc investor presentation. [Operator Instructions] The company may not be in a position to answer every question received during the meeting itself. However, the company can review all questions submitted today and publish responses where it's appropriate to do so. Before we begin, I'd like to submit the following poll. And I'd now like to hand you over to Paul Weir, CEO. Good morning, sir. Paul Weir: Good morning. Good morning, everybody. My name is Paul Weir, as you've just heard, I'm the CEO of Genel Energy, and I'm joined as usual by our CFO, Luke Clements. Welcome to our 2025 results presentation. We published our annual report and our full year results last week. And in my statements, then we broadly reiterated the key messages and guidance provided in our January trading statement. Obviously, the big change since January is the security situation in the Middle East, which has resulted in our production effort being temporarily suspended on a precautionary basis since hostilities began almost 4 weeks ago. Understandably, the operator's priority since then has been the safety of its personnel. Steps have been taken, however, to maintain a state of readiness for a prompt restart, but the security situation in the region remains very dynamic and very uncertain. The focus of this presentation then is not to provide you with the Middle East security update, which wouldn't likely add to the understanding you've already had from mainstream media. Instead, we will take you through the key elements of the performance of the company in the last year, the current position of the business and the catalysts and priorities for '26. Luke and I will work through these slides. I think there's 10 or 11 basically. We'll work through those fairly briskly, and then we will be very happy to take any questions that you submit during the course of the presentation. We start with an overview of the business, and this slide pulls together some key metrics to outline the building blocks we now have in place. We ended the year with a daily average working interest production rate of around 17,500 barrels per day. Net 2P reserves of 64 million barrels and a net cash position of $134 million. EBITDAX was $43 million. Our barrels are low cost with a low emissions rate, well -- industry average target rate for 2025, which was 17 kilos per barrel and with world-class operating costs at around $4 a barrel. Even in a year that included significant production disruption at Tawke and continued domestic market pricing, the business has remained resilient, cash generative and well funded and with the potential for very significant value uplift. The key building blocks for that significant value uplift are listed at the foot of this slide. The Tawke PSC, our world-class production asset generating material free cash flow even at domestic sales prices, a significant cash holding of more than $220 million at year-end and about the same right now, ready for deployment and a portfolio with significant organic upside potential from exports resuming, Tawke drilling resuming, Oman appraisal and Somaliland drilling, all of which supports our ultimate objective of getting back to a regular dividend in time. Once we've established some geographical diversity and the further resilience that follows that diversification and repeatable cash. On to the next slide, please. This slide sets out our strategy and strategic objectives in the way that we think about them every day. The 3 familiar boxes on this slide represent our objectives in simple terms, and I've spoken about many times before, so I won't dwell on them too much. Firstly, maintaining a strong balance sheet; secondly, maximizing cash generation from the assets we have, which means investment in Tawke and resuming exports from Kurdistan. And finally, adding some new sources of cash flow in a disciplined and value-accretive manner. That order matters, but we need to do a good job in all 3 of those areas if our eventual aim to return value directly to shareholders in a regular way. Let's move into the detail on the platform now. The world-class characteristics of Tawke are well known, but 2025 again demonstrated the resilience of the combination of the assets and its operator, DNO. If you look at the production graph on the right-hand side of the slide, you can see quite clearly the effect of the drone attacks in Q3 of last year. And thereafter, you can see just how quickly production was restored to a production rate at the [indiscernible] of the year of around 80,000 barrels a day. It's also worth noting that production in the months not impacted by the drone event was actually higher than the 2024 average despite no new wells contributing to that production rate. Drilling restarted then in Q4 of '25. First Tawke well was spudded in December and immediately started delivering results. A second good production well followed in the same month, but the 2026 drilling campaign for which 2 more rigs have been mobilized to site has now been suspended given the security situation. So today, we're in a position where both production operations and the drilling campaign are temporarily suspended, and we remain on standby until such times as the operator determines that it's safe to reestablish a full presence at site and resume activity. We remain close to and very supportive of the operator on that. All that aside, when we talk about Tawke as a world-class asset, we mean 254 million barrels of gross 2P reserves, very low operating costs, low emissions, long reserve life and clear upside from drilling. Right, I'm going to pass you on to Luke now for the next couple of slides. Luke Clements: Thank you, Paul. Good morning. This slide provides the buildup of what we call production business netback. Production business netback is revenue less production asset spend. That's both OpEx and CapEx, less G&A. It tells us what funding our business is generating and making available for capital allocation outside of the Tawke PSC. And you can see that it has been double-digit millions for 2 years in a row now, having been negative in 2023 despite similar levels of revenue. So you can see that we've been working hard on our spend. So what was the income side of that double-digit production business netback made up of last year? Firstly, while Brent averaged $69 a barrel in 2025, our realized price sold was $32 a barrel with all production sold domestically. If we were exporting, we'd expect that realized price to be close to Brent. Secondly, working interest production averaged 17,500 barrels a day, lower year-on-year only because of the drone-related interruption in Q3 that Paul just mentioned. And finally, EBITDAX of $43 million. You can see our underlying EBITDAX is back to more normal levels for domestic sales at around $35 million for the past 3 years now. This underlying number excludes movement on arbitration cost accruals, which negatively impacted '24 and positively impacted '25. So the key point here is that the production business is now delivering consistent double-digit netback even at domestic sales pricing, while still funding all production activity and investment on the Tawke license and so building our balance sheet cash position and available funding. That is the product of Tawke resilience and the discipline we've applied to the business since 2022 in simplifying the portfolio, stopping non-value accretive spend, exiting licenses and reducing cash G&A. Next slide, please. This slide illustrates our balance sheet strength. We finished the year with $224 million of cash, the net cash of $134 million and gross debt of $92 million. Our cash is about the same today as it was at the end of the year, so it's around $225 million. In April last year, we issued a new 5-year bond maturing in 2030, replacing the bond that had been due to mature in October 2025. That issuance was oversubscribed, and we continue to see good support and appetite for our bonds. That issuance has reduced funding risk around delivery on our strategic objectives. This remains a very underleveraged balance sheet with significant headroom to fund investment. That matters because the cash and capacity for further debt provide us with significant optionality. We can fund the appropriate Tawke program, progress our organic growth assets and pursue value-accretive acquisitions without being forced into decisions by capital structure pressure. Next slide, please. This slide shows our primary capital allocation options when we consider the best way to deliver shareholder value. Our first consideration is to maintain the strength of our balance sheet. Then the best place to invest our capital, providing the instant significant returns is the Tawke PSC. Then we think about how best to diversify our cash generation. All 3 building blocks have to be properly managed to establish a sustainable dividend. That means not every potential project will automatically be funded and not every acquisition opportunity will be pursued. Every value creation opportunity has to compete with others within our strategic framework. The Board reviews capital allocation on an ongoing basis, and we take care to remain disciplined. I'll hand back to Paul now to talk about our acquisition strategy. Paul Weir: Thank you, Luke. So look, we want to add resilient cash-generative production or near production assets that reduce our reliance on one asset in one geography. We want something that complements what we already have and supports long-term shareholder value. During 2025, we were very active. We originated, developed and actually bid on a number of opportunities. We were involved in bilateral discussions and in broader processes, too. We've looked at opportunities within our current region and further afield. And to be entirely frank, although it's early days still, 2026 is already shaping up to be as active as 2025 was. Having said all of that, there isn't an abundance of suitable opportunities, and there's a great deal of competition for the good ones that are available. So we continue to diligently scan the deal horizon. We're trying to avoid being distracted by the current unsettling events. Patience and discipline are key. Finally, on this, and again, as we've made clear in previous presentations, we will resist overpaying to get short-term positive market reaction only to find over time that the assets that we buy are unable to deliver the value that we need. We remain very confident that we will secure the right opportunity in time. On to Oman then. On Block 54, the initial activity set did exactly what it needed to do. The reentry and testing of the legacy Batha West-1 discovery well was completed safely ahead of time and under budget. That was a low cost and very useful first step in understanding the block better. Our block is adjacent to the prolific Mukhaizna field, and we are targeting reservoirs that are proven in that neighboring field on another adjacent block, Block 4 and on legacy well logs from Block 54 itself. The immediate focus now is not to rush to a drilling location decision. Instead, we will use the data from Batha West properly to reprocess existing seismic and to acquire new 3D seismic in the most efficient and cost-effective way that we can, so that the joint venture can identify the best locations for the 2 commitment wells that we will now drill on the block. That's the right technical sequence, and it's also the right capital allocation sequence. And based on current planning, we expect those commitment wells to be drilled early in 2027. So Block 54 is exactly the kind of exactly the kind of organic opportunity that we like, modest initial capital outlay, a clear work program, data-led decision-making and meaningful upside if the subsurface case continues to strengthen. And on Somaliland on the next slide. In Somaliland, the opportunity remains for a material discovered resource addition from our existing portfolio, and we've seen steady progress towards drilling the highly prospective Toosan-1 well. Toosan-1 targets best estimate prospective resources of about 650 million barrels across multiple stacked reservoir objectives. As the first mover, the commercial terms are also very attractive, meaning that even a modest discovery would likely be commercial. Of course, wherever we find logistically will benefit from proximity to the Berbera Deep Water Port on the Gulf of Aden. In terms of drilling preparedness, the majority of the civil engineering work is complete and most long lead items are already held in inventory, but we will remain quite measured in how we talk about this. There's still work to do. That work is ongoing, and there is still a need for operational, commercial and geopolitical elements to all come together. The key takeaway for today is one of continued progress towards drilling, while we continue to invest in the well-being of our host communities there to further strengthen our social license to operate. On the next slide, we'll -- we can see -- we can sort of give you a flavor of the work that we carried out last year and through into the first quarter of '26. We've been proactive in the areas of mother child health care, educational facilities and conservation projects. And we've been reactive. Very importantly, we've been reactive in response to the very severe drought conditions that the region is now suffering. Genel has recently distributed around 9 million liters of fresh clean water in the area of our SL10B13 license. Okay. So I think we can wrap up now. This closing slide returns to our 3 strategic pillars. Firstly, maintaining a strong platform. That means protecting the balance sheet, keeping the business efficient and being careful about how we spend our money. Secondly, maximizing cash generation. That means cost consciousness, executing the Tawke drilling program well, pursuing the net amounts that are owed to us and positioning ourselves to participate in exports when the conditions are in place -- when the right conditions are in place. And finally, diversifying production and free cash flow. That means finalizing and executing the right plan for Block 54 and continuing to progress Toosan-1 and Somaliland. Most importantly, it means continuing the disciplined pursuit of value-accretive acquisitions. Those are the building blocks. They're fairly straightforward. They are mutually reinforcing and they remain the right framework for Genel's value delivery. If we execute well, we continue the journey towards a business with resilient cash flows that can support a regular dividend for our shareholders. That's our clear objective, and we are determined to get there. So thank you. That was a relatively brief run through the slides, but I want to thank you for your time this morning. Luke and I will now be happy to take any questions that you might have. Operator: Paul, Luke, thank you both very much for your presentation. [Operator Instructions] Guys, as you can see we received a number of questions throughout today's presentation. Could I please hand back to Luke to read out the questions and give responses where appropriate to do so, and I'll pick up from you at the end. Luke Clements: Thank you. So there's a few questions on security in Kurdistan, Paul, and how quickly we can restart production. I think as you said at the start, we're not really going to comment on security in the Middle East and Kurdistan because it kind of changes all the time. There is a question about once you do restart production, how quickly can you get back to pre-conflict production levels? I think it is worth you answering, Paul. Paul Weir: Well, I think we can get back to preproduction -- pre-conflict production levels very quickly indeed. I mean it's worth pointing out, and there is a little bit of an overlay here into the security question. We've shut down as a precautionary measure. We haven't been targeted, and we haven't suffered any damage during the course of the current conflict, although obviously, there's been quite a lot of ordinance heading into Kurdistan. It's not been headed at us. The point being that when we do sense that the time is right to restart all the equipment there and functional. The operator has been working cleverly to make sure that we maintain a state of readiness. And as soon as we can get boots back on the ground, we can get production away quite quickly. So I'm confident that we can resume production levels pretty quickly within a week or 2 of giving ourselves a green line. Luke Clements: Okay. So staying Kurdistan on exports. We understand that the Tripartite deal has been extended to the end of June. Has Genel approached MNR to join the deal? Paul Weir: The answer to that is no, we have not approached MNR to join the deal. I think we've made our position on the current export arrangements quite clear, but I'll repeat them just now. A number of our peers elected to participate in that arrangement. We chose not to do so. We wanted to make sure that all of the conditions within the deal were on fully before we felt able to commit to that. Primarily amongst those conditions, of course, is the top-up payments that would actually render the participants hold with respect to the PSC. So we would want to see that before we elected to try and join the current arrangements. In the meantime, we would continue to sell our product locally. Luke Clements: And there's a kind of related question, which you've kind of answered, how are other operators being paid through the pipeline. I mean, for me, Paul, that's really for others to comment on. It looks like the first part of that is working okay. But as you alluded to, we -- the top-up payment hasn't been expected yet and hasn't been paid yet, I think, is the right way to think about it. Paul Weir: Agreed. Luke Clements: Are you still a member of APIKUR? Paul Weir: Yes, we are still a member of APIKUR. Obviously, when some of the APIKUR members elected to participate in the export or the arrangements that were in place up until the facility stopped. When some of the APIKUR members elected to participate in that arrangement and others chose not to, APIKUR essentially divided into 2 counts, but APIKUR remains the trade association. It remains the forum where all of the IOCs within Kurdistan can talk together. And we have a directorship there, and we remain a part of APIKUR. Luke Clements: Okay. Moving outside of -- sorry, one more on Kurdistan. Any update on court case costs? Paul Weir: No, there isn't. And next month, our appeal against the award of the other side's costs goes to court, and we're waiting to see the outcome of that appeal before we engage with the authorities on that matter. Luke Clements: Okay. So now as on Kurdistan. How quickly can new assets? And I don't know if that means the organic portfolio or newly acquired assets, but how quickly can new assets meaningfully reduce reliance on Kurdistan? Paul Weir: Well, those new assets, if we're able to secure the kind of asset that we're looking for, those new assets can immediately reduce our reliance in Kurdistan because it's a production asset, then we benefit from a new income stream immediately. So certainly, first prize for us is securing an arrangement that gives us an alternative cash flow as soon as the transaction is completed. As far as the other -- as far as near production assets are concerned, if we were to go down that route, then it would be entirely dependent on the nature of the deal we were considering. I couldn't give a time line on that. Luke Clements: Yes. I'd just add, we've always said we want to do a bigger deal rather than a smaller deal. And you can see the cash pile we have on the balance sheet. And you can assume that an asset we acquire would have debt capacity on it as well. So you can see if you're spending that kind of money, you should be able to achieve some meaningful diversification of your cash generation. I think you probably already answered it, but can you provide an update on Toosan-1 in Somaliland? Any specific milestones before spud? Any specific time line that we want to set out? Paul Weir: No. I think I appreciate there'll be a great deal of curiosity around our progress in Toosan-1 because we talk about it and from an outside-in point of view, it may at times be difficult to see progress, but work does continue, and we are quite active on that front. Engineering work continues and procurement work continues. We've been looking at the market to -- we have most of the long lead items in place, but we've been putting together a project execution plan. We've been putting together a project plan. We've been trying to determine who are the best people to come in and help us manage that drilling campaign. And all of that continues as we speak, and we have people in-house dedicated to that task. And as with all projects of that nature, we have a stage gate process in place. So we will convene with the executive every time we reach a stage gate, and we will convene with the Board every time we reach a stage gate. And we will take a conscious decision to embark on the next stage of the process and be prepared to spend the money that's associated with that particular stage. We can't commit to a particular time line at the moment. As I said in the presentation, a number of commercial, operational and geopolitical pieces of the jigsaw need to fall into place together before we can actually define with certainty when things are going to happen. But work does continue, and we are committed to the cost. Luke Clements: Okay. Back to Oman. What is your estimate of drilling costs concerning the 2 wells in Oman? Paul Weir: Well, the wells are relatively shallow wells, and we're in an area that's well serviced by the oil industry. So services are readily available. We're competitive and they're relatively low cost. I wouldn't want to put a figure right at this moment for the well cost because, of course, that's determined to some extent by precisely where we want to drill, and we haven't determined precisely where we want to drill yet. But what I can repeat is what the cost of this entire project is going to be, and that's around $15 million over a 3-year period to Genel. That obviously started last year. So all the work that's taken place so far has been extremely well planned and very clearly executed and it's below budget. But we're expecting to spend a total of around $15 million over a 3-year period starting last year. Luke Clements: Okay. It looks like we are through the questions. Operator: Thank you both for answering those questions you have from investors. And of course, the company can review all questions submitted today, and we'll publish those responses on the Investor Meet Company platform. Just before redirecting investors to provide you with their feedback, which I know is particularly important to the company. Paul, could I please just ask you for a few closing comments? Paul Weir: Yes. I mean I'll close, first of all, by thanking everybody for taking -- continuing to take an interest in Genel and for taking the time to listen to us talk about our business today. I just want to close basically by reiterating the 3 main points that we wanted to land during the course of this presentation and in fact, in all our recent presentations. The first is that we have a very resilient business, and our strategic priority is to maintain that degree of resilience, protect the balance sheet. The second is to emphasize the extent to which we have potential within the organic portfolio. Oman and Somaliland, both represent very exciting potential value builders for the business, and we continue to push forward with those. But of course, the biggest story and the biggest strategic thrust at the moment is making use of our cash pile. We've been sitting on that quite patient and are waiting for the right deal. But we continue to be very, very active in the M&A space, and we continue to be extremely confident that in time, we are going to find the right deal that's going to allow us to deploy that cash. So thanks, everyone, for your time. Thanks very much for the questions, and we look forward to talking to you with more good news. Operator: Paul, Luke, thank you once again for updating investors today. Could I please ask investors not to close this session as you'll now be automatically redirected to provide your feedback in order that the management team can better understand your views and expectations. This will only take a few moments to complete, and I'm sure it will be greatly valued by the company. On behalf of the management team of Genel Energy plc, we would like to thank you for attending today's presentation, and good morning to you all.
Operator: Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the T1 Energy Fourth Quarter Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Jeffrey Spittel, Executive Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Development. Please go ahead. Jeffrey Spittel: Good morning, and welcome to T1 Energy's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Earnings Conference Call. Before we get started, please turn to Page 2 for our forward-looking statements disclaimer. During today's call, management may make forward-looking statements about our business. These forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. Most of these factors are outside T1's control and are difficult to predict. Additional information about risk factors that could materially affect our business are available in our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and our other filings made with the SEC, all of which are available on the Investor Relations section of our website. Turning to Slide 3. With me today on the call are Dan Barcelo, our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board; Otto Erster Bergesen, our SVP of Project Engineering; Evan Calio, our Chief Financial Officer; and Jaime Gualy, our Chief Operating Officer. With that, I'll turn the call over to Dan. Daniel Barcelo: Thanks, Jeff, and welcome, everyone, to our fourth quarter and full year 2025 earnings call. Our theme for today's call is finishing what we started. 25 was the year we built T1 Foundation. In 2026, we are building our G2_Austin solar cell fab to complete our vertically integrated domestic solar chain in the U.S. market that completely changed on January 1 with the implementation of new federal rules on foreign content and ownership. . Next year, 2027 is the year we intend to deliver a step-change in our ability to generate earnings and cash flow as a U.S. solar leader delivering high domestic content. While we execute these core objectives of our strategy, we also plan to stack additional EBITDA streams through organic and inorganic opportunities. During the fourth quarter and so far in 2026, we have made significant strides to realize this vision. Let's turn to Slide 4 for a review of T1's remarkable progress in the fourth quarter, during which we announced several important milestones and transactions. Building on the extended supply agreement with Hemlock, Corning, we announced the supply partnership with NextPower. Together, these relationships serve as critical building blocks to advance our vision of developing a fully integrated American polysilicon-based solar supply chain. We also executed 2 transactions to fund T1's growth and expansion plans, including a $72 million registered direct common equity offering and a $50 million convertible preferred tranche from certain funds and accounts managed by Encompass Capital Advisors, one of our founding investors. In November, I met with Vice President of J.D. Vance in Washington, D.C. to discuss the resurgence of American energy and advanced manufacturing and our commitment to establishing domestic solar supply chains. As our momentum continued to build, we returned to the capital markets in December with our concurrent common equity and convertible notes offerings, raising combined gross proceeds of $322 million and adding several new institutional investors to T1's capital structure. Capital is and will remain the lifeblood of T1's growth ambitions over the near term. The funding from the December transaction strength in T1's balance sheet position us to begin Phase 1 construction of our G2_Austin solar cell fab. Following the completion of Phase 1, we expect to begin producing high efficiency, high domestic content solar cells by the end of this year with an annual capacity of 2.1 gigawatts. Our successful capital formation initiative and the start of construction at G2 triggered an important commercial milestone when T1 announced a strategic partnership with Treaty Oak Clean Energy, highlighted by a 3-year agreement for T1 to supply 900 megawatts of G1 modules with G2 domestic cells starting in 2027. Also in December, we completed a series of transactions intended to preserve our eligibility for the Section 45x tax credits under the One Big Beautiful bill Act. Importantly, we also validated our ability to monetize the credits by completing our first sale of 45x credits to a U.S. financial institution. As we'll discuss shortly, our team at G1_Dallas continue to demonstrate their world-class capabilities during Q4. And with a factory fully operational demand for merchant volumes bolstered by customers clearing up 45x eligible inventory before year-end, quarterly production and sales surpassed 1 gigawatt for the first time at our state-of-the-art facility. Our busy fourth quarter capped off an impressive year at T1, and we were excited to carry that momentum into 2026. So with that, let's turn to Slide 5 for an update on the business. G2_Austin, our U.S. solar cell fab that is under construction, has been the centerpiece of our business plans from the start of our journey as a U.S. solar company. We believe that demand for domestically manufactured U.S. polysilicon-based solar cells is meaningfully underserved. And while G1 has been our entry point into the U.S. utility scale market, is expected to be the driver of margins, earnings and cash flow. This morning, I am pleased to report that the first phase of construction of G2_Austin is progressing on schedule. April should be a busy month on site as first deal is scheduled to be erected within the next few weeks. While we have deployed meaningful capital to advance construction of G2_Austin, our sales and finance teams have been busy working to secure an additional offtake contract and to line up capital formation options required to achieve full financial close on Phase 1 of G2_Austin. We remain in advanced discussions on both fronts and expect to close funding in April. As Evan will discuss later, we have multiple potential options to fund the first phase of G2, and we plan to select the financing pathway that provides the best balance of cost, speed, structure and quantum for T1 and our investors. Following a successful ramp-up at G1_Dallas, our fully operational 5 gigawatt solar module facility, we achieved records in production and sales in Q4 when we expanded our customer base through merchant sales. As we move through 2026 with the 3 gigawatt on either cost plus or fixed margin offtake contracts, we are seeing higher indicative pricing in the merchant market, and we expect that T1's module production costs will decline. We are maintaining our production and sales targets of 3.1 to 4.2 gigawatts for G1 in 2026, and we are growing increasingly comfortable with our ability to achieve the high end of that to target range. As near-term variables, including a potential Section 232 ruling and second half customer demand post safe harboring deadlines come into clearer focus, we will update investors with more detailed 2026 guidance. T1's profile within the industry continues to rise, yielding attractive opportunities to stack EBITDA and expand our commercial presence within the utility scale and AI development ecosystems. The deal flow we are seeing as a result of companies wanting to partner with T1, and we will continue to evaluate opportunities that fit strategically, culturally and financially with T1's priorities. T1 is an American company focused on building a critical domestic solar supply chain. But we also intend to unlock value from the legacy assets in our European portfolio, which are attracting growing interest from potential partners to support AI infrastructure. Earlier this month, we reported an important step to monetize our Nordic data center asset, the restoration of a 50-megawatt grid allowance in Mo i Rana, Norway. This initial power allowance better positions T1 to accelerate discussions to monetize this asset, and we have an application in the queue for up to 396 megawatts to unlock additional value. All these steps are intended to position T1 to generate meaningfully higher EBITDA in 2027 and beyond as we navigate this bridge year to G2. Let's turn to Slide 6, please. The ramp-up of G1_Dallas kicked into high gear in the fourth quarter, which was punctuated by record production and sales and the delivery of merchant volumes to major new customers. In roughly 1 year, the T1 operations team has taken G1 from initial production to maximum daily run rates over our 5 gigawatt nameplate capacity. With the strong finish to the year, we produced a total of 2.79 gigawatts of solar modules in 2025, meeting our annual production target. This progress reflects the talent and dedication of our people and gives us strong confidence in our ability to build on this momentum in 2026 and beyond. We believe that G1 is poised to generate improved margin performance in 2026. We expect production sales to ramp sequentially throughout the year, and we anticipate that sales and EBITDA will improve each quarter through year-end, based on our contracted delivery schedules and our expectation for reduced overall costs. The project development timelines adjusting to the new supply chain regulations, we are working with customers and anticipate moving some Q1 deliveries into Q2. T1 has 3 gigawatts of G1 modules under contract for 2026. Our supply chain team is sourcing cells through international suppliers who have certified their [ non-FIOC ] status to feed G1 during the bridge period ahead of the anticipated start of production at G2 in Q4 2026. In total, we plan to procure between 3.1 and 4.2 gigawatts of cells through our global vendor network. As we continue to engage with and qualify new cell suppliers to G1, we are growing increasingly confident in our ability to procure high-quality cells closer to the high end of this range. And with that, I'll turn it over to Otto, our SVP of Project Engineering, for an update on the construction of G2_Austin. Otto Erster Bergesen: Thank you, Dan. Let's move to Slide 7. Construction of the first 2.1 gigawatt phase of G2_Austin continues on schedule, and we're advancing towards some exciting milestones over the next several weeks, all sites. As a reminder, we're pursuing a 2-phased approach to reach more than 5 gigawatts of capacity at G2. Phase 1 will be a 2.1 gigawatt fab, which we plan to follow with a second phase of at least 3.2 gigawatts. Following the start of construction in December, our team in close cooperation with Yates Construction as our general contractor has made excellent progress. The G2 sites have been leveled, the building pad is prepared and foundation work has started with concrete works following shortly. We placed the order for structural steel back in November. The first full section is on track for delivery and erection in April, marking a key step towards our goal of producing first cells by the end of 2026. Our design team, together with SSOE engineering as our engineered record has also been working hard and clearing items of our punch list. We're currently at 90% design and have not been the production line equipment design in concert with our turnkey equipment vendor at Laplace. The comprehensive engineering work and planning that we've done over the past 15 months enabled us to start manufacturing of the production line equipment earlier this month, and we expect the equipment to arrive in the U.S. over the summer. With the support of T1's Board of Directors, we have deployed significant cash to reduce the remaining CapEx required to complete Phase 1, which now stands at $350 million. This has enabled us to place orders for critical long-lead items to protect the overall timeline. So the teams are working well together, and we have some major milestones ahead of us in the next several weeks. We look forward to sharing updates from G2 over our social media channels to document this progress. We're excited to bring this flagship U.S. solar cell fab into operation, which is expected to be the engine of T1's cash flow in the fourth quarter of 2026. And now I'll turn the call back over to Dan. Daniel Barcelo: Thanks, Otto. Let's turn to Slide 8. 2025 was a year to build the commercial foundation of T1 as a U.S. solar manufacturing leader, the capabilities our team has demonstrated both at G1 and now during the construction of G2 have been instrumental to the growth in our customer base. Our first major offtake contract for Treaty Oak source G1 modules with G2 cells and our ongoing discussions with additional potential offtake partners and merchant customers. To date, T1 has already sold and delivered modules to some of the largest utilities and developers in the U.S. without sharing names publicly. And while we continue to advance discussions related to additional offtake agreements for integrated G1, G2 modules, we are seeing indications of meaningful merchant demand for both our current G1 modules with international cells and our high domestic content modules in 2027 and beyond. Today, we are in discussions with current and potential customers for nearly 13 gigawatts of merchant sales opportunities in addition to the advanced offtake pursuits that represent more than 10 gigawatts of demand from some of the largest U.S. utilities and developers. When combined with approximately 18 gigawatts of mid-stage pursuits, we have a total opportunity set of 41 gigawatts. And with that, I'll turn the call over to Evan for a review of our financials and an update on our capital formation initiatives. Evan Calio: Thanks, Dan. Please turn to Slide 9. T1 ended 2025 with a much improved liquidity position in a fully ramped factory that hit our production targets. With equity market capitalization that expanded by more than 11x from our 2025 spring lows to the year-end, we're able to raise more than $440 million in the fourth quarter, enabling us to start construction of G2, execute a series of contracts to preserve our 45x compliance and establish a solid financial foundation for our business as we grow in 2026 and beyond. From this position of strength, we've been deploying meaningful cash from our balance sheet to fund critical stages of G2_Austin construction which reduced our remaining capital needed to fully fund Phase 1. In the coming months, we are focused on selecting the optimal solution to achieve full financial close at G2. Our first year T1 was dynamic, and there were a number of moving parts that impacted 2025 EBITDA, much of which we believe were onetime related to the implementation of new OBBBA restrictions before the start of 2026 in account for much of the miss versus guidance. The nonrecurring and unusual items included the following: an accounting classification of $34 million sales commission waiver we received. Although we previously accrued for the savings through the P&L, accounting standards would not let us recognize the reversal of this item on the P&L despite the favorable cash impact. Net sales were $16 million lower than expected from an inventory sale that was tied to changing regulatory restrictions at year-end, where we had to sell into a weak market to retain 45x, given the onetime implementation of OBBBA change. Net sales were $22.7 million lower due to customer offtake true-up. And lastly, in advance of new supply chain restrictions, we incurred $15 million and higher-than-forecasted tariffs on imported sales. Let's move to Slide 10, please. Looking ahead to 2026 and 2027, T1 is well positioned to navigate this bridge year to G2. On production, we're maintaining our guidance of 3.1 to 4.2 gigawatts as we continue to qualify new cell suppliers. We're increasingly confident in our ability to deliver towards the high end of the range in 2026. With 3 gigawatts under contract for 2026, we have solid visibility, but there's some meaningful swing factors that we expect to play out in the near term that will bring the year into clearer focus for T1. Number one, as a large buyer of U.S. polysilicon, the potential for a ruling in a Section 232 case has potential meaningful impact for our merchant capacity pricing in 2026 and beyond. Number two, as we expand our global vendor network of qualified cell suppliers, there may be potential to bring additional volumes. And three, customer safe harboring activity and projected timelines are still adjusting to the new regulatory climate. Our 2026 outlook is underpinned by several important distinctions between our position today and where we were at the start of 2025. number one, with our organization maturing and year-end contract changes, we are moving away from service agreements with Trina, which saved an estimated $30 million to $100 million at a 3 to 5 gigawatt run rate. These arise from the [ dilution ] of the trademark licensing agreement and the inapplicability of sales commission resulting from the [ dilution ] of the [ TLA ]. Number two, we entered 2026 with 3 gigawatts under firm offtake contracts, which is more than double the contract coverage we had in 2025. As a reminder, these contracts include a 1 gigawatt cost-plus contract and a 2 gigawatt fixed margin contract, both which represent superior economics compared to our full year sales mix in 2025. Number three, as Dan mentioned in the commercial update, we are fielding meaningful inbound customer interest for volumes in later 2026 as developers work down inventory and move past July 2026 safe harboring milestones. Number four, G1_Dallas started 2026 fully operational and capable of producing above nameplate capacity. Recall that installations and commissioning activity was ongoing in Q1 through 1H of 2025. So while 2026 represents a bridge to an expected step change in T1's earnings power with G2_Austin, we're confident that 2026 will be a significantly better year for T1 in terms of profitable operations. Within 2026, we're deferring some 1Q deliveries and expect a significant shift in sales volumes from 1Q to 2Q 26 due to customer requests and timelines. The shift does not change our expected 2026 revenue or adjusted EBITDA, only the timing. There are also no changes to our run rate EBITDA projections as we achieve integrated production between G1, G2 as in the table. Now let's move to Slide 11 for an overview on our capital formation initiatives. Following our successful capital raise in the fourth quarter, our finance team has been advancing multiple options to fund the remaining capital required to complete Phase 1 of G2_Austin. While speed is the essence for G2, our strengthened balance sheet has enabled us to prudently evaluate multiple funding pathways to ensure we arrive at the appropriate blend of cost, leverage, structure, duration and the potential for counterparty halo effects. To be clear, we have had opportunities to enter into transactions to fund the first phase of G2, but we have elected to pursue what we believe are more attractive options. With the capital we've already deployed at G2, we've maintained the projected schedule and timeline. So we are now targeting full financial close of the remaining $350 million at G2 in April. Our confidence in our ability to fund this phase of our growth is founded by the transformation in our investor base across T1's capital structure since last summer and the ongoing interest in partnering with T1 from a host of institutions, strategics and lenders. And now I'll turn the call back to Dan. Daniel Barcelo: Thanks, Evan. Let's turn to Slide 12. Elon Musk's recent announcement of its intention to construct 100 gigawatts of U.S. met solar capacity has been the talk of the solar industry in recent weeks. Just last week, he also announced plans to construct Terafab, a $20 billion chip facility here in Austin. While we can't speak for other companies, we believe these announcements have positive implications for the solar industry in general and for T1 specifically. Our North Star at T1 is to invest in American advanced manufacturing and to establish critical domestic supply chains to power AI, electrification and onshoring. Having much larger companies such as Tesla and SpaceX implement a similar playbook here in our home state suggests two things: T1 is on the right path, and the support that Elon's companies are likely to receive in building out domestic manufacturing in Texas should create additional momentum for landmark projects like our G2_Austin solar cell fab. And Elon selection of solar as a central pillar of power generation to support his portfolio company's growth ambitions is a landmark validation of solar as an energy source, potentially creating a rising tide effect for the domestic solar industry. Now let's turn to Slide 13. Our vision of building a fully integrated silicon-based solar supply chain in the U.S. could not be more perfectly aligned with the priorities of this country and the current administration. As shown on Slide 15. In many ways, T1 is setting the standard for reverse technology transfer, bringing cutting-edge solar capabilities back to America. This end-to-end domestic polysilicon solar supply chain will provide scalable, low-cost energy while strengthening American energy independence. By investing in a fully integrated domestic supply chain, T1 supports the U.S. polysilicon industry and ensure solar energy can free up domestically produced natural gas for export to our partners. With U.S. electricity demand surging, optimizing domestic energy resources has never been more critical. Solar-paired storage deployed directly at data centers can insulate consumers from demand-driven price spikes. And as geopolitical risk premium returns to the global energy markets, developing a domestic supply chain becomes essential to keeping energy affordable. Moreover, as AI drives a new wave of electricity demand, solar is the most scalable resource available to help power the next generation of data center infrastructure. By scaling domestic solar, T1 supports both the country's energy needs and the growth of U.S. AI leadership. Turning to Slide 14. Let's conclude with a review of T1's top priorities for 2026. Our priorities continue to evolve as we strengthen the business, but our core objective remains unchanged in building the first fully integrated U.S. polysilicon solar supply chain. To support that, we're focused on the following key initiatives: We're completing our capital formation to achieve full financial close on Phase 1 of G2_Austin and continuing to advance construction on schedule, which will position T1 to produce high domestic content modules at G1_Dallas using domestic polysilicon, wafers, steel frames and solar cells. Once G2 Phase 1 achieves full financial close, we should have visible demand for Phase I that should support offtake commitments and subsequent funding. In parallel, we are taking definitive steps to enhance T1's profitability and capital structure. We're driving efficiencies at G1 Dallas to achieve sustainable profitability and reducing unit cost of production through automation and software upgrades. At the same time, we're optimizing our capital stack, carefully managing leverage cost, complexity and ownership as our business model continues to mature. These efforts position us to deliver stronger returns while maintaining a disciplined, flexible financial foundation. Delivering long-term shareholder value is our ultimate objective as we build T1 into a cash flow engine and a leader in the underserved domestic solar cell market. We're focused on driving EBITDA and cash flow through both organic growth and strategic acquisitions while investing in high-margin opportunities that complement our manufacturing business. As a company, we're proud of what we encompassed in 2025, and we're entering 2026 with strong momentum. More importantly, we are excited for the year ahead as we move closer to our goal of creating the first end-to-end domestic polysilicon solar supply chain in the U.S., a milestone that will both set T1 apart and set a new standard for the industry. And with that, I'll turn it back to Jeff to coordinate the Q&A session. Jeffrey Spittel: Thanks, Dan. Marvin, we're ready to open the line for questions, please. Operator: [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from the line of Philip Shen of ROTH Capital Partners. Philip Shen: First one is just on the remaining base for Phase I. You talked about closing this in April. You've had many other options, but you're waiting for -- or trying to create the right set of and sources of capital. So I just was wondering if you might be able to provide more color on what those alternatives sources might be and what the makeup might look like? And is it earlier in April, later in April? Daniel Barcelo: Yes. Thanks, Phil. We can't give too much color on this. We are confident that it will be in April. As Evan said, we have passed on certain, we'll say, higher-cost options. The state and maturity of the project continues to support this. G2, we made tremendous progress in terms of where we are with PLE equipment starting to come in, in June, July and August. So we're comfortable now in many, many conversations with many, many capital providers. They're seeing that G2 is on track. They have more confidence in what's going on in the market. They see that the G1 asset is working at a production level, albeit at lower EBITDA, which we just went through. But we see the volumes working, and there's more confidence in that base asset. So that's really giving us a lot of comfort in what we're seeing in April. We're committing to April. We're confident that we'll have April. We just can't give too much color for a few reasons there. Evan, would you like to add anything about the funding for G2, which remains $350 million. Evan Calio: Yes. is hard to give you kind of more detail. I think Dan covered it. I mean, look, we want to finance in a way that provides the most flexibility to expand G2, given all sales are through G1 is going to be a holistic type of financing. So that's important to us. And we also believe that future sales price will be above what our still attractive long-term contract offtakes, but there are a significant discount to current and what our expectations are in future. And so we want to maximize kind of our merchant exposure as we move into the year. So I think those are two additional points of color, but yes, it's hard to answer your question, were -- we got 30 days here right now. Philip Shen: Okay. No problem. Shifting over to your customer situation and kind of driving new customers, you guys talked about 2 new customers in the quarter. And you've given a lot on the pipeline. As we get through -- one, can you share who those 2 new large customers are? I think Treaty Oak might be one. And then maybe give some more color on the pipeline and maybe the cadence of additional contracts as we get through the year. Daniel Barcelo: Yes. Treaty Oak did allow for public disclosure of their name. The others prefer confidentiality so we can't talk to that. We remain close on a significant contract. We're confident that we can get that contract through. As you can imagine, there's a lot of work to be done with a new plant in 2025. with the quality in the QA/QC of that plant, which is being demonstrated. We have executed quite a bit a further deep [ FIAC-ing ] and we'll see further deep [ FIAC-ing ] proofing at the end of last year. All of those things are very important aspects for new customers to come in. So we're comfortable more and more increasingly, many more customer visits, much more interaction. As we're building with that as part of the EBITDA growth and moving away from an agency agreement from in the past, building these relationships with these customers now is important. We've had over a dozen very significant customers visiting it. All of them are very pleased with what they're seeing in terms of QA/QC, and many of them are very pleased with the progress we're making on G2. Everyone really wants a high-efficiency TOPcon cell. Everyone really likes the commercial, we'll say, maturity of the TOPcon that we're producing, and there's a lot of comfort there. Philip Shen: Okay. One last one, if I may, and then I'll pass it on. As it relates to the European assets and the recent news there, can you update us on how much cash you could raise from potentially selling those assets and what the timing might be? And possibly, could you finance that asset ahead of time so you can kind of leverage that asset value earlier and maybe take some cash up? Daniel Barcelo: Yes. We're looking at it the way you're looking at it. Those assets are legacy assets. In Norway, we have an already existing powered [ shell ] now with 50 megawatts. We're in the queue for a further 350 to 400 megawatts of power. That secondary power takes longer, but there's a pathway to that. we're active. We've hired [ Pareto ] to start marketing that. We are open to full divestment. We are open to partnership, but we're as -- soon as possible there. I'd say that's moving ready. There's a lot of interest there. That power is 100% uptime and hydroelectric power. In Finland, we are getting close to permitting on a site. This was a legacy industrial site. We took this industrial platform site. We held the option. That option, we're ready to execute that option with building permits to get close to 300 megawatts of power. That will be a brownfield site in an industrial zone. That's the same thing. It's hard to speculate at what prices we will get, but you're looking at pricing in the market right now from anywhere from $0.5 million a megawatt to $1 million in megawatt in terms of power, it's a very robust Nordic market right now, and we are very committed to divesting this as soon as possible and/or partnering to retain upside value. Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Greg Lewis of BTIG. Gregory Lewis: Dan, I was hoping you could talk a little bit about shift in IP to Evervault? And just, I guess, what, last month, there was some talk of, I guess, a CBD on India. Just as we think about that, like does -- how are we thinking about margins? And is that something that we're looking to broaden out beyond Evervault because of the margins I mean the CBD out of India? Daniel Barcelo: Yes. Well, Evervault is a Singaporean entity, and we are licensing from Evervault. I can let Andy touch more about that if it's a specific question on there. In terms of India, we don't we don't have operations in India. I think that India, AD/CVD is only going to make it harder for product to be coming through India to the United States. We have been supportive of AD/CVD cases publicly. We've been supportive of 232 very publicly. We remain optimistic that the U.S. will have a robust 232 across the chain, down to the modules, down to the products. I think that's very important for the profitability of the American solar market. So from those perspectives, we're still hopefully optimistic in terms of what's going to happen there. And Andy, do you want to touch on [ volt ] a bit about our licensing strategy? Andy Munro: Yes. Well, as you said, our license with Evervault, doesn't, in any way, result in tariffs. We're not importing anything. So that's all upside, the solar, 3 tariffs, which helps to level the playing field for U.S. manufacturers. So a core tariffs that will be implemented soon and the 232, so that's all upside and wind at our back. And what we have with Evervault is simply an IP license. And so from our perspective, that's only reducing the risk that we face going forward on the [ FIOC ] front. So further solidifies our position when it comes to compliance. We put a lot of effort into a world-class compliance program. Even without that transaction, we believe we were compliant but it's essentially the suspenders to our belt because we have taken a very conservative approach on [ FIOC ] compliance, and we're confident that we will be. We had a number of strategic transactions at year-end. That was one of them. But if you go down each and everyone of the prongs the [ FIOC ] compliance, equity debt covered to officers IP effective control and material assistance, we feel confident that we're compliant. And early this year, there was a guidance given, and that made it clear that our strategy of procuring [ non-FIOC ] cells would allow us to satisfy the material system cost ratio by providing safe harbors. And so that guidance is good news, And we welcome additional guidance on [ FIOC ] and are confident that we'll -- our world-class compliance program will ensure that we're compliant. Daniel Barcelo: Yes. I think just to close it out, there's been a tremendous amount of safe harboring in '25 that was happening, OBBBA clearly put a lot of volatility into buying and selling. They're going back to 232. There's still pressure from imports from imported modules from Asia or imported poly -- particularly from imported polysilicon from Asia. 232 for level of playing field would be very important from a margin -- from leveling the playing field and enhancing that margin. That still seems to be the key area. I'd say there's a lot of optimism in the market now that developers are hoping to see higher PPA prices rising. Obviously, the conflicts in the Middle East has been a lot of rise of natural gas. Natural gas vis-a-vis solar has been the key competitive. Solar and storage is only more competitive with higher natural gas prices at home. So there does seem to see a lot of tailwinds behind the market. Obviously, the debate between the developers wanting that margin versus the manufacturers getting that margin remains. But again, we're very optimistic that we'll see a 232 strengthen margins for American-made solar. This whole thing we've been doing is about American manufacturing as it is about American energy, and it's very important that we're restoring jobs that we're creating manufacturing jobs, and I think that's very supportive by the administration. Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Sean Milligan of Needham & Company. Sean Milligan: Evan, you went through a little quickly on the call, but I wanted to confirm, did you say that you've reduced the Trina sales and service agreement commitments for 2026 and moving forward? Evan Calio: Yes. I mean there were 23 changes that happened on January or December 31 that deleted one contract that has collateral impact into another, And that would reduce the year-over-year comparison on the fees owed under those agreements. And I gave a range of $30 million to $100 million. And just to be clear, that per year, that -- the low end is 3 gigawatts without a G2 sale. And the high end, 100 plus is 5 gigawatts with the G2 sale to dimension the range. Both those contracts are publicly filed with our deal in December, so you can kind of go through the math otherwise, but that's our -- and it's based on an estimated sales price and EBITDA, so they're estimated kind of amounts. Sean Milligan: Okay. That's coming out of the -- I just want to make sure I'm understanding this correctly. But is that coming out of the G&A line in 2026 if we look at it compared to 2025? Evan Calio: Yes. Yes. I mean, there will be -- I mean, look, I mean SG&A, it was clearly heavy in 2025. It was a ramp-up of a new asset. It was a ramp-up of a new business for T1. And it embeds a growth project, right? And so when you think of the construction of SG&A, there's a large -- and you'll see the 10-K right this evening or after the close, which you can see some of this stuff. But there's a large noncash component in your SG&A, right, that relates to largely carried by the impairment, but there's other noncash stock comp allowance doubtful accounts, other accounts and D&A, depreciation and amortization, that result in a noncash piece of about 33%. And then there's other third-party fees in there, which were 26% of that number in 2025. And that contains those contract fees, largely the commission fee that will not be -- it will be reduced in that number going forward, depending upon volume and the quantum that I mentioned to mention. So long-worded answer, yes. Sean Milligan: Okay. That's great. And then just to kind of circle back up. So that contract, I think, had a fixed margin on the gross margin side, right? Has that changed? Like how should we think about the third-party margin for 2026? Evan Calio: Yes. I mean we have 2 different contracts, right? We have a one 5-year long-term contract that underpins the financing of the asset. That is a cost-plus contract. And then we have a second 1-year contract that's fixed margin at 2 gigawatts. And neither of those contracts -- we executed 9 different contracts in conjunction with the acquisition of the asset, right? And the deletion of the contracts that I mentioned were different than the offtake contracts. So they're not -- they don't impact the contract calculations. So no change in that year-over-year. I mean, but there's a new contract. Operator: This concludes the question-and-answer session. I would like to turn it back to Jeffrey Spittel for closing remarks. Jeffrey Spittel: Thanks, Marvin. Well, thank you all for your attention and participation today. Please feel free to contact us. We will back out on the road in the next few weeks with Dan and Evan. But you know where to find us and look forward to following up with everybody after the call. This will conclude today's call. Operator: Thank you for participating in today's conference. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect.
Operator: Welcome to the earnings call of Aumann AG regarding the full year figures for 2025. The company's CEO, Sebastian Roll; and CFO, Jan-Henrik Pollitt, will guide you through the presentation and the figures shortly, followed by a Q&A session via audio line and chat box. Having said this, I'm handing over to you, Sebastian. Sebastian Roll: Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for the kind introduction. I'm pleased to have you with us today. And for those I haven't met yet, my name is Sebastian Roll, and I'm the CEO of Aumann. So joining me in the call today is our CFO, Jan-Henrik Pollitt. So we really appreciate your time and your interest in Aumann. In the next few minutes, we will guide you through a brief overview of Aumann, the latest developments in our E-mobility and Next Automation business and of course, our financial performance in 2025, where we delivered strong results in a challenging market environment. So let's start with a quick look at our business model. So we design and build high-end fully automated production lines tailored precisely to the needs of our international customers. With decades of experience in automation, industry leaders around the world trust Aumann to deliver innovative solutions. One of our competitive advantages is staying ahead, especially in fast-growing markets, enabling us to quickly provide customized solutions. This is why the automotive market, especially the E-mobility sector remains so attractive to Aumann. In addition, the robotics and automation market is growing rapidly, driven by demographic change, labor shortages and cost pressure. These trends also drive our Next Automation segment, allowing us to use our automation expertise in many industries beyond automotive. So let's take a quick look at Aumann's solutions. So our portfolio ranges from modular solutions and complex process solutions to fully integrated large-scale production solutions. At the modular end, we provide standardized cell systems. They enable our customers to adapt quickly and cost efficiently to changing market demands. Building on this, Aumann designs production lines for more complex processes, including technologies such as winding, coating and testing. The aim is to implement special process steps in the most efficient way. Moreover, Aumann offers fully customized large-scale solutions built to maximum output while ensuring high quality. Thanks to Aumann's wide range of solutions, we can fully support different production strategies of our customers. So this slide here shows how Aumann became a technology leader in E-mobility. Starting from the traditional automotive business, E-mobility was identified as a growth market. Through targeted M&A, Aumann took the first step into E-motor technologies. Building on our know-how, we developed different solutions for the rotor, quickly followed by solutions for the stator and finally, full E-motor assembly. After the E-motor, we leveraged our expertise to develop large-scale production solutions for battery modules and packs. In addition, we introduced our own modular systems, for example, in inverter assembly, but also very useful in the field of Next Automation. Furthermore, we have expanded into converting technology, enabling us to offer, in addition, production solutions for electrode manufacturing. Aumann is a leading provider of turnkey solutions in E-mobility. This illustration here shows the drivetrain of a fully electric car and most of these components can be produced on Aumann production lines. From the outset, we have focused strongly on the E-drive unit. Even today, our customers still use different approaches to stator and rotor design. As a turnkey provider, we offer the latest production solutions for both. Beyond that, we have expanded our portfolio with modular production systems, for example, for electronic components such as sensors or, for example, such as inverters. This enables us to offer flexible and scalable solutions perfectly tailored to each customer's needs. Let me now turn to our battery portfolio. Here, Aumann benefits from its strong position in energy storage. We cover the full range from battery modules and packs to cell-to-X solutions. This expertise allows us to meet customer needs and develop new solutions for next-generation battery technologies. Let's look at the E-mobility market today and in the future. BEV, or battery electric vehicle sales continues to gain traction. In 2025, more than 13.7 million were sold worldwide. So this means a plus of 30% in comparison to 2024. China stays in the lead with 9 million units, but Europe follows with strong growth, reaching more than 2.2 million units with 26% increase compared to 2024, including Germany with an impressive 43% growth. The U.S. market, which currently shows the lowest volume in comparison, remains at least stable at 1.2 million units. By 2030, BEVs are expected to make up 40% of sales by 2035, even 2/3. So overall, rising BEV sales and a more stable geopolitical situation are expected to drive new investments in the near future. So let us now turn to our key commercial focus in 2025. As mentioned earlier, we are expanding beyond the automotive sector and focusing more on industries that need greater efficiency, higher productivity and less manual work. At the same time, rising labor costs and the shortage of skilled workers are accelerating the shift towards automation. In this context, we have moved, as you know, our Next Automation segment from an opportunistic to a strategic approach. This segment focuses on growth industries beyond automotive, such as defense, aerospace and life science. So let's take a closer look. In our Next Automation segment, we have defined 3 strategic growth areas. Aerospace, as you know, is gaining momentum. Demand in civil aviation is rising. Boeing and Airbus are forecasting more than 40,000 new aircraft over the next 20 years. Against this backdrop, Aumann is preparing its reentry into aviation, offering solutions to support production ramp-ups with initial orders already secured in early 2026. At the same time, defense budgets are boosting. Drones combines exactly what we do best: electric motor, battery packs and full system integration, including end-of-line testing just like in E-mobility, same technology, new applications. Therefore, we easily developed integrated drone assembly lines and secured our first orders in 2024 (sic) [ 2025 ]. Besides aerospace and defense, clean tech is also good. Here, Aumann has acquired a double-digit million order in energy infrastructure, delivering flexible assembly and test lines for medium voltage circuit breakers. Finally, life science. So this sector benefits from long-term trends such as an aging population, strong investment levels and attractive margins. In 2025, Aumann entered the pharma market with solutions for producing skin delivered patches and oral thin films. Now I would like to hand over to Jan. Jan-Henrik Pollitt: Yes. Thank you, Sebastian, and also a warm welcome from my side. I would now like to share with you the financial figures of the year 2025. Let me start with a brief overview. We entered the year aware that revenue would face a decline, primarily due to a softer order intake in 2024. At the same time, we remain fully committed to implementing every possible measure to protect our margins and sustain strong profitability. It is also important to highlight, particularly in the automotive sector, that investment behavior continues to be very cautious. This trend is visible across the full spectrum of OEMs and suppliers. Against this backdrop, in 2025, revenue reached EUR 204 million, 35% below the previous year. Profitability remained strong with a double-digit EBITDA margin of 13.8%. Order intake totaled EUR 147 million, down 26% year-over-year. Order backlog decreased from EUR 184 million to EUR 122 million at year-end 2025. And our balance sheet remains robust with a net cash of EUR 148 million. With this foundation, let us now dive into the details. Across segments, we achieved a revenue of EUR 204 million, representing a year-over-year decrease of 35%. The main driver of this decline was the E-mobility segment, where revenue decreased by 37%. Revenue in the Next Automation segment also declined from EUR 53.8 million to EUR 40.2 million, mainly because the prior year included a larger contribution from a major photovoltaic project. For 2025, we had initially expected revenue of approximately EUR 210 million to EUR 230 million. Based on early projections in January, this estimate was refined to EUR 205 million. With the audited figures now available, we ended the year 2025 at EUR 204 million, closely matching this guidance. Looking ahead, we will now turn to the profitability and earnings performance to provide a complete picture of the financial results. Despite the decline in revenue, our profitability remained robust, demonstrating the resilience of our business model. EBITDA came in at EUR 28.2 million, down 21% year-over-year. EBITDA margin increased from 11.5% to 13.8%. This reflects the strong execution, especially in our E-mobility segment. Key drivers of this solid performance include a high-quality and well-diversified order backlog, strict cost discipline across all projects, capacity adjustments aligned with the subdued market environment, and an above-expectation Q4 with some larger E-mobility orders completed ahead of plan. Based on these dynamics, we raised our initial EBITDA margin guidance of 8% to 10% in January to 14%. With the final margin at 13.8%, we outperformed last year by 2.3 percentage points, underlining the operational strength of our segments. With profitability well established, let's now turn to order intake. As already mentioned, the overall investment climate remains challenging. Our business relies on our customers' CapEx, and especially for large-scale projects, long-term forward-looking decisions are essential. Many industries, particularly automotive, are currently not making these kinds of commitments, which affect our markets. However, we are not standing still. Internally, we continue to optimize costs and adjust capacities. Externally, we are actively developing new sales opportunities and pursuing M&A leads. We see clear opportunities to grow, and we are confident these initiatives will deliver value. In 2025, total order intake declined 26% year-over-year to EUR 147.5 million. The Next Automation segment is showing strong progress. Order intake increased 54% year-over-year to EUR 56.5 million. Our sales pipeline is also growing, demonstrating the potential of the Next Automation initiatives to drive future revenue. As a result, total order backlog declined from EUR 184 million at year-end 2024 to EUR 122.2 million at year-end 2025. However, the Next Automation segment continues to gain momentum with its order backlog increasing 39% to EUR 47.9 million. While the overall backlog is below our desired level, both volume and quality of the backlog are solid. And we have, of course, continued to account for this backlog conservatively in our financial statements. Let me now move to the next slide and walk you through the segment figures, starting with the E-mobility segment. In the E-mobility segment, order intake of EUR 91 million is 44% and under the previous year due to the mentioned market conditions. As a result, order backlog decreased by 50% to EUR 74.3 million. At the same time, revenue decreased by 37% to EUR 163.8 million. EBITDA is declining at a slower rate than revenue by minus 21% to EUR 26.6 million, which means a strong margin of 16.2%. In the Next Automation segment, order intake increased year-over-year to EUR 56.5 million as the new positioning is opening new markets. End of 2025, order backlog amounted EUR 47.9 million. Revenue decreased 25% year-over-year to EUR 40.2 million. And the EBITDA margin increased by 2 percentage points to 12.8%, which leads to a total EBITDA of EUR 5.1 million. Before we take a closer look at the balance sheet, let me provide a brief overview of our group cash flow in 2025. Cash flow from operating activities reached EUR 38.4 million, reflecting the strong results for the year and the EUR 50 million reduction in working capital compared to 2024. Importantly, we returned EUR 23.3 million to our shareholders through dividends and the share buyback program, underlining our commitment to delivering value to investors. As a result, cash and cash equivalents, including securities, remain at a record high level of EUR 152.8 million. By the end of December 2025, our balance sheet continues to be in a good shape with an equity ratio of 66.7% and EUR 153 million cash, of which EUR 148 million are net cash. Our financial foundation will continue to allow us to respond flexibly to market opportunities, to drive the expansion of the Next Automation segment, both organically and through M&A activities, and to ensure further shareholder participation through share buybacks and dividends. Following the successful year 2025, we will propose a dividend payment of EUR 0.25 at the AGM, which is a further modest dividend increase compared to the previous years. And of course, we currently have an existing authorization to acquire treasury shares up to 10% of share capital. This provides the company with flexibility to act opportunistically in the market, and at the same time, it ensures that we can continue to participate our shareholders in the company's success. To conclude, we would like to provide our guidance for 2026. We expect a mixed, but well balanced development across our segments. E-mobility revenue is likely to decline due to a lower starting order backlog. In Next Automation, we see continued positive momentum. Overall, the group enters 2026 with an order backlog of EUR 122.2 million. We expect total revenue of around EUR 160 million with an EBITDA margin of 6% to 8%. Our diversified business model provides stability and supports a resilient and profitable year. Let me now hand over to Sebastian again. Sebastian Roll: Yes. Thanks, Jan. So let me briefly summarize. 2025 was a challenging year for Aumann. Revenue dropped to EUR 204 million as investments across the European automotive sector remained weak. So despite these headwinds, we delivered a strong operating performance. We reduced capacity, further increased the flexibility of our cost structure and achieved additional cost savings in project execution. As a result, we reached EUR 28 million EBITDA, achieving an EBITDA margin of 13.8%, a strong indication of improved efficiency and profitability despite lower volumes. Thanks to these, we proposed a dividend of EUR 0.25 per share, continuing to provide an attractive return to our shareholders. Looking ahead to 2026, we are facing a decline in revenues again. Nevertheless, we are targeting a profitable EBITDA margin of 6% to 8%. So also in 2026, as Jan mentioned, our financial position is strong with high liquidity. That clearly sets us apart from most of our competitors and gives us the freedom to shape 2026. Last year, Next Automation developed strongly. This confirms that our diversification is working. Our clear goal is to accelerate this growth, both organically and through M&A. So thank you very much for your attention. We are happy now to take your questions. Operator: [Operator Instructions] What will be recurring revenue after sales services next year and in year 2025? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: Yes. The recurring revenue from after sales and services is approximately 10%. What we see in investment reluctance phases like 2025 and maybe also in '26 that some customers have higher volumes of retrofits of production lines, and this could, as long as the general CapEx is low, give maybe an additional increase on the aftersales side. Operator: How do you view Aumann's competitive position in the European EV ecosystem? And to what extent our increasingly aggressive Chinese entrants reshaping pricing, technology and market share dynamics? Sebastian Roll: Maybe starting the question with the question of competition out of China. So I mean maybe in comparison to other sectors, so we are dealing with China competition, I would say, the last 10 years. So there's nothing new. I also would add that there are not any changes concerning the competition out of China. Our business model is to be the front runner for the first very important, let's say, 1 or 3 lines, especially start of production of new EV is very important, for example, like it was in the new class for BMW. And I mean, in this area, the customer still is buying, let's say, more or less confidence, and this is our business model. So for the fourth, fifth, sixth line, there might be competition out of China. But then normally in normal market conditions, we are already ahead in new projects. Operator: And could you please give us more details on M&A environment and activities in Americas, which can give us inorganic growth? Sebastian Roll: Yes. So M&A, as you know, is an important pillar of our strategy, that's for sure. That's not new. So as we said also in other calls before, so we switched a little bit the direction. So we are now looking especially for targets in the area of Next Automation. That's where we would like to expand our portfolio, and that's clear our target for 2026 to acquire a company in this area. Operator: And the next question is slightly similar. Could you please elaborate further on the target focus, the size, geography and technology? Sebastian Roll: Yes. So geographically, it is still, for sure, the United States. So that's something we would like to enter. Therefore, we need a hub which is close to our technology, maybe a little bit similar. Within the European area, we are more searching, as I said, for additional technology and for additional customer relationships within the Next Automation. So looking in, as we said before, aviation, defense or, for example, life science as well. Operator: And with our large M&A, your capital structure looks rather inefficient and the share price level low. Any further buybacks to be expected? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: So there is no current decision on further buybacks. But as we have shown in the presentation, we have authorization for another 10% buyback of our share capital and we will decide if necessary on that topic. Operator: What is the potential revenue that can be achieved with the current personnel and corporate structure? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: Yes. So we adjusted capacities during 2024 and 2025. We didn't adjust directly on the EUR 160 million revenue guidance, which we have for '26. We still have a bit more capacity in-house so that we can hope for the rebound in order intake and scale up fast again. So if we don't see a positive effect, then of course, we will also use 2026 to further adjust capacities. We will also have the one or other topic in '26 where we see a few adjustments necessary but not larger ones. And as soon as the market rebounds again, that we are able to do like EUR 160 million to maybe EUR 240 million, EUR 250 million revenues again. Operator: You already answered one of the next questions. Have you continued to reduce the number of employees year-to-date? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: Yes. As said, we had some smaller adjustments, not like bigger topics, but small adjustments here and there. So we continue to make some homework, but no big issues. Operator: And there are 2 questions left. Any new strategic industries, markets, or processes that Aumann is looking on? And can you say something about order intake in Q1 and the sales pipeline? Sebastian Roll: Yes. I think what we tried to show in the presentation in a little bit more detail to give to give some ideas in Next Automation. So Next Automation for us is important. For us, it was important, especially that we had this growing market or that we had really acquired one big project, but also some minor projects in the fourth quarter of 2025. So I think you have seen that I think in the middle of the year, we are roughly 20% higher in order intake in Next Automation. After the third quarter, it was roughly 35% higher. And now after the last quarter, overall, we are 55% higher. So that means that the sales pipeline, especially in Next Automation is rising. This takes a little bit of time step by step. But as I said, for us, really important was to have, for example, this big project within the infrastructure area, yes? So in our point of view, a really nice project in the infrastructure, but also in clean tech and also in aviation. So in all these areas, now we have the first projects. In infrastructure, we even have this big project. So this is important for us. And you have to have in mind that, unfortunately, this order intake in Next Automation takes more time than in E-mobility because, as I said, the industry is new. We have the customers that are new or the products are new. And this will take a little bit of time also in 2026. So we will not see the big recovery in the first quarter, but we will see step-by-step a very increasing Next Automation. Operator: Thank you very much. And with an eye on the time, we have the last questions. There are 3 questions in a row, and I will take them one by one. The first is, Aumann reports EUR 12.2 million in securities apparently in the form of bonds. What specific type of bonds are these? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: These are government bonds and corporate bonds, but each with good credit ratings. Operator: And can you provide any information regarding order intake in the first quarter of 2026 broken down by segment? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: Honestly speaking, not yet. Operator: We expect significant working capital effects in cash flow in 2026? Jan-Henrik Pollitt: Yes. We finished the last 2 or 3 years at relatively low working capital levels. So each year, we expected a little bit working capital increases, but managed to hold the working capital at that low level. For '26, from today's perspective, I would see some working capital increases maybe back to a level of 15% to 20% of revenue. Operator: And the last question, can Next Automation reach similar EBITDA margin levels at the currently higher ones of 16% E-mobility? Sebastian Roll: Yes, in general, of course. So we had this high EBITDA margins, especially in E-mobility in 2026 (sic) [ 2025 ]. As said, we finished a project better than expected, which boosted the EBITDA margin end of the year, especially in Q4. For 2026, both segments will be a little bit lower in margins due to the decline in revenue. But in general, we are trying to maintain a good and profitable margin level in both segments. And as we said in the other segments like -- or the other industries like aviation or life sciences, there are also good margins to reach and achieve. Operator: Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the end of today's earnings call. Thank you very much for your interest in the Aumann AG. A big thank you also to you Sebastian and Jan-Henrik for your presentation and your time. Should you have any further questions, ladies and gentlemen, you are always very welcome to place them to Investor Relations. I wish you all a successful day around the world, and handing back over to Sebastian for some final remarks. Sebastian Roll: Yes, I hope that we have shown that Aumann will stay strong also in 2026, in unfortunately another challenging year for our industry, but we are focusing on what we can control. So that means internally, we are continuously optimizing our cost structure, we are building our sales opportunities in Next Automation. And for sure, we have an eye on M&A activities. So thank you very much for your interest.
Operator: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Ceres 2025 Full Year Results Investor Presentation. [Operator Instructions] I'd now like to hand over to the management team, Stuart, Phil, good morning. Philip Caldwell: Good morning, everybody, and thank you for joining us for the 2025 full year results presentation. I'll talk you through an update on the company and the strategy to begin with, and then Stuart will obviously talk you through the financial numbers, and we'll obviously go into Q&A at the end as usual. So at Ceres, we're operating on 3 strategic imperatives. The first one is signing more licensees. So new manufacturing license partners is a key focus for us as a business. The second is once we have those partners, bringing those partners to market. So that's obviously assisting them as they scale up and put in capacity, but also actually helping to stimulate demand, which actually helps pull through the products that we're developing with partners. And the third is obviously technology leadership. We believe we have the best solid oxide technology in the world. We have a single stack platform, which we're actually going to be launching in April. And we need to maintain that technology leadership advantage because that's what our partners come to rely on from Ceres. So over the last 12 months, we've made significant progress on all these activities. The first thing to say is there is an acute need for power driving the commercial interest in our technology right now and particularly for SOFC technology in the wider landscape. As we go into partner progress, in the past 12 months, we signed a new manufacturing license agreement in China with Weichai, our partner. We'll give you a little bit more on that today, but that's going extremely well, extremely rapidly. In Taiwan, Delta is also scaling and starting to produce first prototype products and is also investing significantly in land and facilities to do that scale up as well. In South Korea, a big milestone for us in the past 12 months with Doosan starting production at the factory there, both for SOFC stacks and power systems, and that also generated first royalties for the company in this period. In Japan, our partnership with DENSO on the electrolysis side began production of first hydrogen with JERA and also led to government funding recently with an estimated value of about JPY 35 billion, approximately GBP 165 million to continue the advancement of SOEC technology. Great progress in India with Shell. The megawatt scale electrolysis demonstrated actually exceeded performance expectations, high efficiency but capacity as well. And we're progressing now towards the pressurized systems as well with Thermax and Shell and Thermax developing a new pilot facility for testing of those systems. We also undertook a business transformation plan around those 3 strategic imperatives that we talked about. And we've restructured the business, very much focused on accelerating the commercial opportunities. So after 25 years of developing this technology, we are now at that point of commercialization and the point of first production and scale up. We'll talk more about this business transformation, but there's a cultural change there, but also it's anticipated it will drive cost savings of around 20% this year compared to the 2025 cost base. And we finished the year with a very strong cash position of over GBP 83 million at the end of the period. So again, we'll talk in more detail about financial management in the second half of the presentation. We had some news this morning as well, which is very pleasing, partnership with Centrica here in the U.K. It's fantastic to be able to actually bring this British technology to the U.K. And this really is part of our second pillar of that strategy, which is how do we stimulate demand and how do we bring this technology forward at scale. Centrica, as you all know, FTSE 100 leading energy integration company. The statement there is about a multi-gigawatt opportunity that we see in the U.K., Centrica sees. And that's on this gap that we're seeing as we have more need for electrification. We have a time to power need that's becoming quite acute. And this modular high-efficiency technology can really service that market, both in terms of the data center needs, commercial and industrialization partners as well. So the purpose of this is we're introducing our licensing partner network to Centrica, the whole ecosystem of manufacturing partners. And we will support Centrica in terms of bringing that forward, if you like, acting as their technical advisory arm, helping them to set up this model of how they go to market with this. So that will include our expertise in things like installation, commissioning, remote monitoring, maintenance, recycling, all of those good things that we at Ceres know how to do. The initial focus will be the data center market, commercial customers and industrial power. So that's a fantastic step forward for us today, and we'll have more details on that. We have an upcoming Capital Markets Day on April 15, and we'll be able to provide you with more detail on that and from Centrica as well. But that's just in very exciting development today. I mentioned also the single stack platform. So we're going to launch that also at our Capital Markets Day. One of the things that's unique about Ceres is the solid oxide platform, the same stack, the same cell technology can run in both directions, both for power generation and for green hydrogen. That's an amazing benefit to our partners because as they develop the supply chain, as they scale up, that investment that they're putting into factories now for power generation also has this dual use aspect in the future for hydrogen as well. And as you can see in the chart here, that same stack technology is now going into products, Doosan, Weichai, Delta, but also we're using that on the hydrogen side with partners like DENSO, Thermax, Shell and Delta as well. Just wanted to spend a little bit of time on what we're seeing as the emerging demand for power. Our estimate is we see an opportunity for power generation using solid oxide of around 22 gigawatts by 2030. And we see that market roughly split about 50% the data center opportunity, but also a very significant part in the industrial and commercial applications as well. So around 50-50 kind of split. Geographically, it's an interesting split as well. About 25% of that is the U.S. market, which gets a lot of attention right now. I'm sure you're all covering data center applications in North America. But just under 20% of that is here in Europe as well. And the U.K. is a great market opportunity when you think about we have some of the highest power prices anywhere in the world. This is a market that really lends itself well to this application. And then about 50% of that market we see is Asia, the wider Asian opportunity as well. And with our partnership network, we're able to access all aspects of this market. So our aim here is to really establish the service technology as the industry standard, and we're doing that by embedding it in these global partners that are accessing and servicing these different parts of the market. Why is that becoming a critical factor? Well, today, if you need power generation, you're waiting about 6 to 7 years for a gas turbine. Small modular reactors are also coming down the pipeline, but they're about 7 to 10 years away. And then high-voltage grid connections, 5 to 15 years away. So right now, with this acute need for power generation, behind the meter or on-site generation is becoming a really viable alternative because there just isn't the conventional power generation equipment available. I think it also opens a window for us in terms of the technology today is good enough. It's viable in terms of its lifetime, its performance and its cost to actually enter the market. And as we scale, we anticipate these costs coming down significantly. Just to show you some of the progress that's being made. These are the first units developed by Delta, took a license just under 2 years ago. So this is a Thai power in Taiwan. So you can see here the first prototype units being made using car stacks, but all the systems done by Delta. Delta are fitting out their production as well, and they're on track. Delta is a very exciting partnership for us because when we talk about that data center market, Delta are already very much in that supply chain. I think by market cap now, they're the second or third biggest company in Taiwan after NVIDIA and Fox. And where we fit in is they make solid-state transformers, they make power conditioning, they make UPSs, et cetera. So by adding in the power generation capability of the solid oxide, they're developing a complete offering from fuel in all the way through to power out. And that power out can either be AC power or in the data center application, 800-volt DC. So don't forget that the fuel cell technology is actually generating DC power and the way that you actually combine stacks, you're very close to being able to match up that 800-volt DC power direct from the power generation unit, which is the SOFC. It's fuel flexible. So we run on natural gas today. We can run on biogas. We can run on hydrogen in the future. It lends itself extremely well to things like carbon capture. And also, if you want to, you can capture the heat or convert that heat into cooling through absorption chilling as well. So you have the option to go from low carbon all the way through to zero carbon and also push very high efficiencies. In Delta's case, the same market applications apply. It's microgrids, AI data centers, even for the semiconductor industry and manufacturing in general. So I think this is a really good illustration of how our partners take this technology and put it into a complete offering for these kind of market opportunities. Weichai is an exciting partner for us. We've been working with them on system level for about 7 or 8 years now. Their systems are very impressive, I have to say. And I'm expecting this year, they'll launch their latest system, which is going to be a very impressive unit. We've taken the step with them. We've done the technology transfer. So we signed last November. already, we're going very quickly, and there will be more to come from Weichai this year, but they're probably going, I would say, faster than any of our partners have ever gone before. Doosan factory, I was privileged to go around the factory. I've been a couple of times, but this was in July with Doo-Soon Lee, the CEO of Doosan. First production was there. And when you actually get in there to see the realization, the single piece flow end-to-end, it's about the size of 3 football pitches, semi-clean room, it's an impressive facility. And they've actually fulfilled their first capacity orders in the past few months, and that factory is now up and running. So that's a big, big milestone for us going full circle. So Doosan is the first. We expect Delta starting to come on stream and then Weichai. So we are building out this ecosystem. On the hydrogen side, I think it's been fair to say that over the past 12 months, there's been more headwinds on the hydrogen side. But at the same time, I think that opens up an opportunity for, again, higher efficiency technology like the Ceres technology. And as I mentioned, all of the investments that are going in now are directly applicable on to the hydrogen side of the business. So extremely pleased with our partnership with Shell. We've exceeded expectations there. We've met all the targets that we set. And that's leading on to the pressurized development, which is now underway. So taking this one, which was the first atmospheric SOEC that we did and now actually putting that into a pressurized system that can be scaled to megawatt scale. And we're doing that engineering ourselves to begin with, but then in partnership with Thermax in India who can really drive down cost. And India is one of the big markets that we see for this green hydrogen in the future. So we see green hydrogen, particularly opportunities in China and India as those areas come on stream. We also did this with DENSO very quickly. So similar to the Shell container, DENSO actually deployed this on site within 18 months of actually taking the license, and that's using Ceres' technology. That's putting in hydrogen into a thermal power station to reduce emissions from conventional power generation. And that's unlocked further funding for DENSO as well. So great progress on all aspects of the hydrogen side as well. In terms of where we are as a business, we're building out this ecosystem of partners. And really, our aim is to be the technology provider of choice. So we now have manufacturing in Korea. We're seeing manufacturing being built now in Taiwan. That will come on stream in China as well and with DENSO in Japan. So really strong ecosystem of partners. Shell is more in the end user category, and we can add Centrica to that list of partners today as well for U.K. and Europe. So our aim is embed this technology to become the industry standard. So with that, I'm going to hand over to Stuart to give you the financial update for the past year. Stuart Paynter: Thanks, Phil. Good morning, everyone. I'm just going to take you through a few slides, just to give you a bit of an update on where we are from a financial position and financial planning position and some of the actions we've taken to put ourselves in a strong position to be able to execute the strategy Phil has laid out. So here's the headline numbers you can see. As you all know, the revenues of Ceres are largely dependent on how successful we can be in terms of signing MLAs. We signed Weichai in 2025, but towards the end of the year, we in sufficient time to recognize any revenue at all from that contract. So we're rolling that into 2026. But you can still see that the margins remain high, right? That's the asset-light model we retain, and we have good financial discipline around that. The other thing to note here is cash. We're still very strong on the cash side. You can see that the cash burn in the year was just under GBP 20 million. And like I said, that was without the benefit of having an MLA. So we're pretty efficient now. I believe we've got the optimized cost base, which I'll take you through. And you can see that the restructuring that we've been going through in the last few years has fed through to the cost saving in 2025 from 2024. There's more to come on that, but we'll take you through that and be very clear, we now believe we have an optimized cost base. So the actions we took towards the end of '25 will flow through to '26, but we really do think now we've got the correct team to prosecute the strategy, which we've chosen. So here's just a graphical representation of the revenue and gross profit. Gross profits remain industry-leading with the asset-light model we have. And of course, the success and the health of those are maintained by signing new MLAs, and we retain the confidence that we have the opportunities to keep on chasing that Pillar 1 on Phil strategy of signing new MLAs and be successful in doing that in 2026. So Phil mentioned business transformation earlier, very important to us. We now have that single stack platform commercially viable to get out into the market, and that started in earnest with Doosan with others to follow. And now we need to make sure that we are still innovating. Pillar 3 was keeping a technology lead, very, very important to a licensor. -- and we'll continue to do that with one of the biggest solid oxide expertise pools in the world. But now we believe we've reached a point where we need to just look at the focus of the company and be very, very commercially disciplined, commercially focused and make sure we have the right people in the background, giving the R&D sufficient attention that we have something to license in the future. And we believe during the end of Q4 2025, we've realigned the business to be able to do that. The flow-through of that will be a 20% cost saving in 2026, but all the actions needed to do that have been taken and are now finished. So now we're into a business transformation for this year, which is all about culture, team and making a cohesive unit so we can make sure that we succeed and our teams succeed at the same time. So we -- this is all crystallizing, as Phil said, in the Capital Markets Day where we're launching this single stack platform. We're very proud of it. And hopefully, that will make sense to everyone when they see it, and it's something we can go out and actively -- more actively sell into the marketplace. In terms of the cost base, so this is the optimized cost base we see for the next commercial phase. All the actions we've had to take have been taken. There will be a natural flow through into 2026 of this cost saving, but we are essentially building from here. We've still got a world-class R&D team. They're very focused on the things we need to do to be successful. That's cost down, that's lifetime. And we've strengthened the commercial teams in order that we can make the biggest impact we can on the top line. So we really do think we've got the right team, the right place, the right assets in place to make real success for the next few years. And why are we doing that? Well, you can see that commercial momentum essentially over the last few years has reduced our cash outflows. And we're very clear, we've now got the model of our business. If we can sign MLA on average every 12 months on that sort of cadence, we will be very close to breakeven and cash flow neutral. And that's important. That gives us control of our own destiny without having to rely on the capital markets. And it's building that MLA base so we can become that industry standard that Phil talks about. And why is that important? Well, the end goal for any company that's ultimately a licensing company is to build your royalty streams. As Phil mentioned, we're just at this orange blob stage here today. Doosan has fulfilled their first order at the very end of last year led to our first royalty revenues, a big milestone after 20, 25 years of development of this project. But we need now to push on if we can become the industry standard, essentially have a portfolio effect of many, many partners building, we're really going to be able to build these royalty streams, power first, hydrogen second. As Phil mentioned, this is the same technology, but you can attack 2 markets, one right and acute now and the other coming several years after. So we're in this in order to keep on signing licensing agreements, which we know we can for the next few years, and then it's all about building the royalty base. So we like the model. Every time we make progress with Centrica and partners, we think it reinforces the success we need to have that model. But importantly, we need to show that we're financially disciplined to keep this asset-light model, which we're doing. So with that, I'll hand back to Phil. Philip Caldwell: Yes. Look, I think we have a very clear strategy. I think the steps we took last year put us in an extremely good position with the asset-light model. The 3 priorities for this year remain unchanged. We're working hard on signing new manufacturing licenses. I think we're at an exciting stage now where you'll probably hear more from our partners this year as they're starting to actually scale and launch things, but also helping to drive that demand as per the announcement with Centrica today, that also helps stimulate that demand for our partners as well. And then the single stack technology platform launch is a key milestone for us. We do believe we have the world's best solid oxide technology. And we're now at a point where we can actually bring that forward rapidly to new partners and existing partners to scale both for power first and then for hydrogen as that follows. And we're starting this year with a strong cash position. We have around GBP 45 million of contracted revenue based on existing contracts from today for 2026. So we're in good shape. And I think the market opportunity has probably never been stronger, particularly on the power side. And I think now we need to get on and actually grab that opportunity, and we're well positioned to do so. So with that, I think we'll probably move on to questions. Operator: That's great, Phil. Thank you very much indeed. Before we go to those online, Phil, if it's okay, I'm going to come to the room. If you do have a question, just raise your hand and I'll give you the microphone. Christopher Leonard: Chris Leonard from UBS. Maybe 2 questions from me. And to start with, can we go into Centrica. And obviously, you spoke to the time to power and the need there. You also spoke in the presentation to the evolution of cost and what you see is feasible here. It will be really helpful to get a gauge on where you think your partners when they first push out these fuel cell products, where you think they'll land at on CapEx price and where you think that evolution can get to? Philip Caldwell: Yes. I have to be very careful here because whenever I start forecasting our licensees prices, I get into trouble. But let's just -- if we talk in general terms, the SOFCs that are out there at the moment are available at around $3,500 a kilowatt. If you take that in the U.K. market context, and you look at the spark spread of gas and power, then you can generate power very efficiently in the U.K. I mean, obviously, gas prices are moving around a bit at the moment. So I don't want to be precise on this. But given we pay in the U.K., the highest energy bills probably anywhere in Europe and even worldwide, when we map the U.K. out, when we look at market attractiveness, spark spreads, cost of power, et cetera, the U.K. is right up there, Northern Europe, et cetera. So it's a very significant opportunity. To go back to your question, Chris, we think that we can significantly generate power at a lower cost, even at a relatively high entry-level CapEx compared to turbines and other generation because we're so efficient, because of the OpEx, et cetera, and because of the lifetimes that we can achieve. So we think that there's a big opportunity there in terms of that deployment. And then the thing I would add is I think that kind of level is a starting point because I think what we see is a window that's opened up. So people need power. I think SOFC can now fulfill that power. And as our partners scale, we expect the cost of those SOFC units to come down quite significantly. Christopher Leonard: Yes, that was the second part. And then following up on Centrica. Obviously, you spoke to the contracted revenue for this year at GBP 45 million in the books, but presumably, I don't know, but I presume that maybe didn't include Centrica's potential contribution. Like what should we think about for engineering revenues and consulting fees, et cetera? Philip Caldwell: Yes. Look, the role that we're playing with Centrica is more in the advisory support side. So at the moment, that's going to be fairly modest revenue. So it's not like -- don't think of this like an MLA, they're not an MLA partner. The big value add of Centrica, obviously, we generate some engineering support fees, et cetera, there. But really, it's the deployment of our technologies through our partner network that drives that demand that ultimately drives royalties. That's -- we see them in that Pillar 2 category, not in the Pillar 1. So that's where we see that. So the thing that would really move the needle for us this year is new MLAs. Alex Smith: Alex here from Berenberg. Just a quick one on the next-gen kind of stack technology. You kind of mentioned it in your kind of closing comments. Kind of what the real benefit you think that could have to offer? And is that like a key milestone for the business going forward? And then second one is just kind of a new licensee pipeline, how the discussions are going to kind of bring new people in and new manufacturing products. Philip Caldwell: Okay. So look, the stack launch is the culmination of several years of effort. Over the years, we've increased the cell footprint. We've increased the stack height. There's a lot of focus on the simplicity to manufacture. We will continue to drive that in terms of getting down the actual installed manufacturing CapEx of what it takes to build those factories. But that stack itself represents what we believe to be the building block that all our partners will now scale on. And our technology teams, our R&D teams are really focused on driving cost and lifetime, cost as in the unit cost of stacks, but also the manufacturing cost and then the lifetime of the product. So that's where we see that technology evolving. And I think it's a significant milestone for the company because we've been in that investment mode for quite a while on the core technology and R&D. I think by launching this product now, you can see from the optimized cost base, we've got the right team to keep on innovating around that particular platform. In terms of the pipeline. I think it's grown considerably in the past 12 months. I think we're getting incoming from most of the kind of players that are in the power system market, in particular, because I think that's the acute need that people see. Obviously, we're very strong in Asia, but we're looking at how we build out that ecosystem as well. So it's grown considerably in the past 12 months. I would say on the hydrogen side, it tailed off a bit towards the end of '24, et cetera. But I think the -- as I look at the pipeline now, I would say it's about 70%, 80% driven by the power demand side of things as well. Alexandro da Silva O'Hanlon: Alex O'Hanlon from Panmure Liberum. A couple of questions for me. Firstly, well done on the Centrica deal. I'm interested if you could give some more color on how that came about? And is there scope for similar type deals in the pipeline? And the second question is just on the cultural change. You mentioned a couple of times in the presentation. Clearly, you're shifting towards being more commercial now. How are you tracking that and making sure that the change that you want to see is actually permeating throughout the business? Philip Caldwell: Okay. So on the Centrica deal, I reached out and I saw what was happening in the U.K. we saw the opportunity in the U.K. market. It's like this market if this technology is so good, why are we not deploying it in probably one of the most attractive markets for this in the world. So Centrica was a logical choice for that. One of the biggest LNG importers, they're looking to diversify. They're making investments in small modular -- advanced modular reactors for nuclear, et cetera. And I think once we started talking with Centrica, they saw the same thing that we did, which was this acute need for power, et cetera. So we were very, very much aligned. And so I think they're an excellent partner for us in the U.K. I think the other thing we didn't talk too much about today is not just on the power generation side, but also there is the potential to combine this with nuclear in the future to do hydrogen generation on the back of modular reactors. So there's a lot of good synergies there between the 2 companies. And we're very excited about that partnership. And as part of that process, what I did is with Centrica I took them and they've actually visited our partner factories. So they've been to Korea, been to Taiwan, been to China. And at that point, I think they realized this is real. And I think this is the key thing is the question we get asked time and again is, well, yes, fuel cells have had about fuel cells. Yes, but is it real? Does it really scale? -- aren't they expensive? How long do they last, et cetera? And then you go and you walk around the Doosan factory and it's like, oh, right, got it. This is real. Even before they went into the factory, it's like, okay, we know what you're talking about now. Is there potential to do that with other partners? I don't think we need to in the U.K., but it's an interesting model. We have so if we can stimulate demand and then we can introduce our ecosystem of partners, I think it's pretty powerful. So as part of that commercial discipline in the future, we will probably look to replicate this in maybe in other parts of the world. But in the U.K., it's Centrica. So in terms of the commercial progress, how we're tracking it, et cetera, our Chief Commercial Officer, Filip Smeets, joined us last year. There's a lot of rigor now in terms of the pipeline progress. We put more people in regions. We're just getting better, better and better at it through some discipline as well. And also demand helps. So we're getting incoming, but also people are starting to realize who we are. And I think in the industry, already, we've got a very good reputation. I think people, competitors, they respect our technology. I think the thing that people have always maybe had the question mark on is, well, how does Ceres scale and go to market. And I think that's what we're going to see coming through this year. Lacie Midgley: Lacie Midgley here, Bloomberg Intelligence. Just a couple from me. Stuart, your comment on securing the one partnership every 12 months and that triggering the breakeven point. I mean, clearly, that's the place we need to be to before the royalty scale. But I mean, I'd be interested in both your comments really, but what in your mind is a realistic number there because no doubt the demand is there to have as many MLAs as you can across geographies. But presumably, your current partners won't want that number going too high given the competition that they'll likely face in certain geographies. I mean what kind of number are you thinking there on kind of a longer-term view? Do you have anything around that? I mean... Stuart Paynter: Well, if you look at recent history, we've signed 3 in the last 2 years from the beginning of '24 to the end of -- we have set ourselves up that on an average cadence every 12 months, we will achieve what you said, Lacie, sort of breakeven and cash flow neutrality, right? But that's not exciting for anyone. That's just a stop gap until the royalties come along and it helps us diversify, build a portfolio of clients. We think there's really plenty of room to play. Phil showed a 22 gigawatt solid oxide market by 2030. Even if Bloom have scaled to 3 to 5 gigawatts by that, that's 15% to 20% of the market. There's plenty of room for plenty of people to play with plenty of applications and with a much bigger market coming along later in hydrogen. So we really don't feel like there's downward pressure on this number. It's a case of execution for us, building a pipeline, instilling commercial discipline and executing. These are big agreements. So they're very -- it's difficult to predict. But we believe we've got the right team in place now, led by Filip, as Phil said, with some really, really strong people sort of backing his team up to give us the best chance of executing. It's still difficult to do, but we -- given our recent history and new commercial discipline, we believe we can as -- the short answer to your question is as many as possible. Lacie Midgley: I mean as the royalties are stacking, that makes the commercial proof point easier to sell, right? So that all becomes a lot easier. Philip Caldwell: Yes. I think also, we've done this now 5 or 6 times. So building factories is something that we're getting we're getting pretty good at, but it's a learning curve. The first time you do it, second time you do it, et cetera. So -- but we also -- what's good to see is when you -- when our first licensees came on, they had to take a fairly immature supply chain and scale that as well and equipment builders. So when somebody takes a license, it's not just to the technology, it's to that whole ecosystem of partners. And so new license discussions now are much faster, much easier because in some ways, you'd say, well, okay, this is where you would get equipment builders from. This is your choices in supply chain, et cetera. So we started off with a very European-centric supply chain. And now we've added to that to our partnerships with Doosan, but now with the Taiwanese and the Chinese, we're building out quite a formidable set of supply chain partners as well. So that -- in terms of that credibility, not only do we know how to build factories and help our partners to do that, but we can also introduce them to a whole ecosystem of very willing suppliers as well. Lacie Midgley: That's helpful. And then just lastly, on Weichai, I mean, you talked about them moving very quickly, quickest out of all your partners so far. Just trying to kind of work this out. So how much of that is because maybe of the historical work that you had with the sort of legacy partnership? And how much of that is kind of versus your own kind of technology developments, maybe reducing time frames there or just Weichai's desire to get to market more quickly? Just trying to understand, firstly, how quickly they can get to royalties, but then I guess, the time frames from MLA signing to actually getting to royalties, future partnerships? Philip Caldwell: Yes. So when we're talking to new partners, we kind of give a guidance of less than 3 years. And we're obviously looking to reduce that all the time. But some of that's incompressible in terms of technology transfer, the time it takes just to actually build either greenfield or brownfield factories and equip them. But we roughly talk about that kind of time frame. Now in parallel with that, you've got not just the stack manufacturer, which for us now is becoming more like a blueprint. We can take people around our own facility in the U.K. And like I mentioned, we can -- we've got blueprints of how you build factories, and we've got an ecosystem of partners there. But then they also have to develop the product, the power system product as well. I think we started the relationship with Weichai with a system license, and we've developed that system with them over a number of years. But now what they're doing is very impressive in terms of their own system development. So I think they can go fast because the system level maturity is very good. And then it's that desire to get to market is how quickly you build out that capacity. And I think that's -- that's what's happening extremely fast. It's a fairly typical approach in Asia, in particular in China, but they set incredibly aggressive time frame. So they're looking to obviously reduce that 3 years quite significantly. Christopher Leonard: Just a follow-up on that actually in terms of the royalty outlook and thinking about Delta scaling up this year, the target to be online end of '26. Has that changed at all? Are you still looking at that time frame? And Doosan as well? I mean, how are you feeling about them looking into '26? Obviously, you recognize right at the end of '25, some royalty perhaps, but is there more to come? And how should we look at this year? Philip Caldwell: Yes. Look, I think on this year, fresh royalties are there, but they're still pretty modest. So I don't think it's that material into '26 is our guidance. Yes, Delta is on track, but really, that's going to be like '27 type time frame and then obviously, new partners coming on. So in the near term, we're really focused on the license fees, the engineering services still through 2026 and probably into '27. And then -- but royalties build from that point. So that's how we see it. We're not changing guidance on that really. Unknown Executive: It looks as though we're doing well for much into the room. So we've got a couple online that we might start to tackle. So the first one is regarding the Centrica deal. And given they're based in the U.K., you mentioned that there's going to be revenue from U.K. and Europe. And what is the likely spread for revenue, be it U.K.-centric or more broad? Philip Caldwell: I think that's really one for Centrica to look at. But their presence predominantly, it's U.K. and Ireland as well is a very attractive market. So U.K. and Ireland, and then they're active across Europe as well. But I think initially, our focus is predominantly U.K. and Ireland. Unknown Executive: Another question coming from the supply chain. So given the fact that the technology transfer includes quite a bit of the supply chain upgrades, do we have any concerns for material, rare earth material accessibility or scaling up to match our partners for the supply chain potential constraints that you see in other industries at the moment? Philip Caldwell: No, we don't because the nature of our technology, we use Ceria where the company gets its name from the major rare earth material, which is the most abundant. We're not using Scandia. We're not using where we use other rare earths, we're using very small amounts. So we're not concerned about constraints in any of those kind of materials. Unknown Executive: We also have a question on the pipeline, which is wondering when and if there's opportunity for U.S. partners? And have there been any constraints of why we haven't signed any EU partners either recently? Philip Caldwell: There's no constraints. And look, as and when I can update you on commercial activities, I will, but I can't give specifics on particular opportunities or geographies at this point. I think there is interest in the U.S. I can say that clearly, given the market opportunity there. And yes, that's an area of focus for us as well. Unknown Executive: Switching topics slightly. We've got a question on hydrogen. So wondering if we can -- you can expand upon what the pressurized modules are, those and the balance of plant and how Thermax is looking to scale and what the time lines would be for that? Philip Caldwell: Okay. So the pressurized modules are basically taking the core cell and stack technology, putting them inside a pressure vessel. And the reason you do that is by working with OEM partners like Shell, you save a very significant compression cost even on first stage compression, just a couple of bar makes a big difference. So as we look at hydrogen at a refinery kind of level or in an industrial application like steel or fertilizers, et cetera, it makes a lot of sense to have modules that are pressurized and can be scaled. The reason for the partnership with Thermax is twofold, really. One is they're an EPC, so a contractor -- engineering contractor based in India, which is one of the key markets that we see for green hydrogen. And secondly, compared to European suppliers, et cetera, there's significantly lower cost in terms of the engineering and actually driving the unit cost of these things down. So again, we're always looking at what's the most economically advantageous way to bring this technology to market. And that's why we have the relationship with Thermax. Unknown Executive: Great. And Stuart, I'm conscious you've already touched on it, but we've got a couple of other questions on when we expect theirs to reach profitability or break point even. I'm just wondering if there's anything else you'd like to add to clarify. Stuart Paynter: Yes. I mean -- so hopefully, we've made it clear that if we can achieve a cadence of 1 MLA every 12 months, that's where we get to. These aren't as predictable as sometimes we'd like. But that would be the goal. So the moment we can continually execute the pipeline to MLA every 12 months, that's when we're going to reach that sort of profitability level. But that's not long-term sustainable profitability. That comes when the royalty streams become the dominant player in our revenues, and that's going to be a few years out. So the idea now is to have a cost base where we can maintain a technology advantage, execute the commercial strategy whilst preserving cash. And in the end, that getting new partners on board and pushing the technology forward will drive the royalties in the long term. So we think it's a really viable business strategy as Phil laid out those 3 pillars, both for the short to medium term, and it also benefits the long term when we get to royalties as well. So it's a really nice business strategy we're pursuing. Unknown Executive: Great. The only final question that's come up is regarding RFC and wondering what has happened to that investment? And are we continuing to pursue that technology? Stuart Paynter: Yes. So RFC was something we supported in the middle of the year and bought it into the Ceres Group. We're still looking to give that really, really viable long-term energy storage technology life. And we're pursuing some opportunities to see whether we can get that business funded. And when we got more news, we'll share. Unknown Executive: Great. I think that wraps up everyone. So Phil, I'll hold -- hand back to you for any final comments. Philip Caldwell: Yes, sure. Well, Yes. Thanks, everybody, for your time today. I think that we've got an exciting 2026 ahead of us. The company is extremely well positioned. We have a Capital Markets Day on 15th of April, where you'll hear more from the industrial applications with a guest speaker, hopefully from Centrica attending from that side of things. We'll have our new product launch. And then I think you'll hear more from our existing partners as well this year as they hit some key milestones. So the market opportunity is definitely very live, and we need to capitalize on that opportunity right now. But I think Ceres is extremely well positioned to do so. Operator: That's great, Phil. Thank you very much indeed. We will now redirect investors.