Castellum, Inc.

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this presentation of Catalum's Q4 report. From our side, it's myself, Christoffer Svendek, Acting CFO, and Paul Alsian, CEO. There will be a Q&A session in the end of the webcast, and if you'd like to ask a question by phone, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad and ask your question. So let's start. Please go ahead, Paul.

Thank you, Kristoffer, and thank you to all that are phoning in. I would like to start with saying that I've been here for almost six months, and I've got a very warm welcome from all of our staff. I'm very thankful for that. But also from shareholders that have reached out with questions. challenging questions, but also very good advice. And I hope that will continue going forward because that's something that actually makes Castellum better being challenged by our shareholders. I really appreciate that. And the focus for us the past six months has been back to basics, the sort of the new strategy of Castellum. And the focus is crystal clear, our target is to deliver a 10% return on equity over the business cycle. So that's really been what we've been working on for the past six months. It's all about taking away things that are not relevant, that are unnecessary. It's all about leasing, decreasing our vacancy rate, increasing our occupancy rate. And it's about cost control, reducing our costs both in administration but also in our operations. And we have also gone through our portfolio. to see which properties are winners that we can keep in the long term and properties that are struggling a bit more where we either have to change our business plan or we actually have to leave them to someone else who has other ideas or other visions for the future than we have. But that has been really the focus for the past six months, and we call that back to basics. So one of the things we've done, which I mentioned, was decreasing costs. And unfortunately, we were in a situation where we had a bit of a too big of a costume, which led to staff reduction, unfortunately, during the autumn, where 30 people had to leave Castellum. and that costed us around 40 million Swedish crowns during the fourth quarter. We believe though that the savings will be roughly the same amount going forward due to that action. One of the key things for us is having room to maneuver when it comes to the portfolio, freedom to change the portfolio. Without that freedom or without that room to maneuver, it will practically be impossible for us to reach 10% return on equity. And we had some writings or conditions in our bond agreements, which we addressed in the end of last year. It's called cessation of business, which sort of limited our room to maneuver. So we asked the bondholders if we could change those conditions, terms and conditions. And most of them agreed to that in December. But that also came in with a cost of roughly 30 million Swedish crowns. And that's also something that is in the report we are talking about today. Property values are down 2.5 billion last year and 1 billion in the fourth quarter. And the main reason for the value changes are changes of expectations of future cash flow, which is mainly due to changes in long-term vacancy and rental prices or rental levels. And in the fourth quarter, 1 billion Swedish crown in value changes, negative value changes. It's mainly Kista, half a billion. Kista is a small proportion of our portfolio. It's well known in Sweden, I would say. It's often written about it in the newspaper. And we have roughly 130,000 square meters in Kista. And it's around 2% of our portfolio. But it's struggling a bit with vacancy. And that's one of the challenges we have within our portfolio. And Finland, we have also changed sort of the expected long-term vacancy, which has led to a reduction in property value of roughly 200 million Swedish francs. Net leasing for the year was negative 140 million Swedish crowns. Most of the negative event was actually in the first quarter when net leasing was down 184 million Swedish crowns. And that was mainly two events. It was Boost down in Malmö and the bankruptcy of Northvolt. Since then, the quarters two, three, and four has actually been positive, but not as positive as the negative events of the first quarter. So net leasing, 140 million negative. Many people obviously ask if we can see a turnaround. We obviously hope so, but our focus is leasing, leasing, leasing. Time will tell if there has been a turnaround or not. One of the things we've launched now, actually in January, is what we call Castellum Business School. We believe that we need to raise the awareness within the company on how to understand the strategy, for example, but also to increase efficiency in the property management, in project management, and in leadership and things related to the Castellum business. So we launched the Castellum Business School in January. All staff will get a relevant education given their occupation. But also 150 people have been selected to do the Castellum Business School MBA, including calculation, leadership training, and so on and so forth. And we believe that that will be a positive contribution to our aim to reach 10% return on equity. And my final point here is, in the intro is the fact that the board is proposing share buybacks instead of dividend and that's in line with our new policy for capital distribution and we think that's a that is a wise thing to do today when the share price is where it is in relation to the net asset value we can actually skip the go to the next slide and just give you background on Castell we are listed company obviously we have property value of roughly 137 billion where most of it is in major cities in Sweden, Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö and we also have a strong presence in regional cities, growing cities like Örebro, Jönköping and Västerås. And we have a portfolio also in Helsinki, Finland, roughly 6 billion Swedish and 5 billion in Copenhagen. And then we have a pretty significant stake in a Norwegian company, Office Company listed, where we have almost 38% of the shares. 5.3 million square meters and the yearly contracted rent of 9.3 billion and high sustainability focus.

Yes, thank you. So summarizing the full year 2025 and comparing it with the same period last year, it is negatively affected by mainly divestments and higher vacancies. That is shown in sort of all of the results figures on this page. In addition to that and as Paul mentioned negative value changes of the properties 2.5 billion for the full year and 1.1 billion for the fourth quarter, minus 1.8 percent for the full year. This all summarizing gives a return on equity of 1.2 percent which of course is Much lower than our target of 10%. Net leasing, Paul also mentioned, minus 140, very negative one in the first quarter, and then three quarters after that, positive ones in the fourth quarter, plus 26 million. occupancy is fairly stable 89.8 percent roughly the same as the last quarter and we have during the year invested quite a lot 4.4 billion combination of investing in our properties is the make most of it and in addition to that we also made some acquisitions during 2025. Paul mentioned a few one-offs, and we have a couple of one-offs in Q4, isolated, both positive ones and negative ones, and we will try to go through all of them during this fall. Looking at it in more detail, in the like-for-like portfolio, income increased by 26 million, that is 0.3%. index contributed with 140 million but it's done offset by higher vacancies of 190 million then we have one of the first one-offs which is 58 million one-off relating to a reversal of accrued annuity for the north vault So that's a difficult one, we took the full net leasing, negative net leasing in Q1, but then now in Q4, we sort of concluded the final parts of the rental agreement with the bankruptcy estates, and then we had So no cash effect, but an accrued one that we reversed during Q4. So that was a positive 58 million in Q4. Direct property costs, like for like, increased by 58 million, corresponding to 2.7%. We have a mild winter. Now we're talking Q4, not what we have seen after Q4, but in Q4, a mild winter. The cost for heating and snow removal was actually decreased compared to last year. But then we have, that was offset by some higher rental losses. And we're also doing Q4 isolated, took a couple of larger wasted projects or projects that we are not expecting to go through anymore. So one of that one recorded under maintenance in Q4. Central administration and property administration in total increased by 54 million. And here we have another one-off, Paul mentioned it, approximately 40 million of those 54 million is one-off relating to the staff reduction and head office reorganization. and we can go to the next slide please so looking at the leasing renegotiations of 279 million that is 11% of the total leased stock up for renegotiation. Fairly the same rent as before, decrease of 0.1%, so very flat, but quite low volume of the total stock up for renegotiation and the very large bulk of it 62 percent or 1.6 billion is actually just prolonged at the same terms as before. That is something I think is very much worth mentioning. Net leasing we have been talking about already and here we also have the figures in the graph up to the right showing that as mentioned the very big part of it was a negative one in Q1 and the very big part of that was the North World Bankruptcy and then we have three positive quarters not big figures Property values, we have been through most of the figures already actually. So 1.1 billion down in Q4. Stockholm stands for 0.9 of that and Finland 0.2. And as Paul mentioned, of the Stockholm 0.9 billion down, 0.5 billion is related to Shista. valuation yield fairly flat one one pips up from from last quarter but you know what 5.64 fairly stable I think we take the next slide there Looking at the financial highlights and our funding situation, overall the funding markets where we are present, i.e. the banking market, the CIEC bond market, the Euro bond market, as well as the hybrid market are. All very favorable at the moment, I would say. Very good market conditions, credit margins at good levels and very much liquidity in all of the markets. Current spreads in the domestic or the SEC market is some 80-bit for 3-year money, some 110-150 for 5-year money. banks offer us typically five year money 110 to 130 bps also at good levels good volumes I would say that most of them or maybe all of them would like to increase their positions that's very good and during q4 isolated we did not actually do that many Funding actions, we made one bond, one billion SEK, 122 BIPs, 5.25 years. Bought back some bonds at the same time. And then, as Paul mentioned earlier, we made this constant solicitation. Overall, we got the results that we were expecting. So that's good. average interest rates 3.1 stable compared to the last year actually down a little bit since the year before and we see potential for actually reducing this a little bit going forward and also on the financing side we have a couple of one-offs Together, they are approximately 50 million. As Paul mentioned, 30 of them are connected to this consent solicitation. And then we have an additional approximately 20 for refinancing and early redemption, both coupled to loans and to bonds. Quite a large one-off in the financial side. I know that this slide we have our financial key ratios very stable I would say small changes compared to most workers loan to value of 36.5 percent iso 3.2 good headroom to our policy and we have ftb policy of 40 percent icr policy of three times so you would have the room there At the beginning of this year, S&P confirmed our triple B flat with stable outlook. That's about what has happened on the rating side. Net maturity is still stable, 4.3 years. We are quite happy with our funding situation and our QH's ability. And I hand it over to you, Paul.

Yeah, one of the things which we are very good at, I would say, in Castellum, it's the reduction of energy consumption within our property. So last year, we actually reduced the energy consumption in our portfolio with almost 7%. And that's one of the things I really like about Castellum is this but then also from a sustainability perspective. So that's something to be very proud of. 58% of our portfolio is sustainability certified, and we actually have 24% of our electricity itself generated. So high level of sustainability within Castellan, something to be proud of.

Super, so if you like to ask a question by phone, please dial pound key five on the telephone keypad and ask a question. And the first question comes from Jan E. at Kepler.

Okay, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I actually have four of them and I start with The sentiment on the rental market, office market, have you seen any change in Q1 compared to Q4?

Reluctant to speculate, and it's very early actually in the quarter to say anything about that. When I speak with the staff in the offices, I can say they still say that it's a challenging market. So our only focus is to do whatever we can to reduce vacancy.

Okay. Next question. You had a net lifting figure for the full year of minus 140 million. And I'm just a little bit confused.

asking about the overhang into 2026 how much how much of this 140 million has already hit the pnl we actually don't have a specific figure on that one i mean typically there is a lag as you know and in this case it's it's very much so we got a big portion as you know in q1 was the north boston they have and actually paid run for the full year 2025 not all of the volume but quite a lot of it and that is coming in with full effect on the 26th but we don't have that okay no no exactly okay

And bringing down vacancies, you know, how 10%, and I'm just looking at some kind of time frame here. When, at what point in time would you get down to 5%? Have you any time frame there?

That's an impossible question to answer, and it's, We are not doing that type of forecast, but as I think I mentioned that in the Q3 report, we know that it will probably be a bit worse before it becomes better in relating to the previous question. But we are not making a forecast when it comes to vacancy ratios.

Okay. And my last question regards the one of the 40 million. And where is it recorded? Is it all in central administration, or is it split some other lines?

It's a split between central administration and property administration.

Yeah, and the ratio there between them.

I don't have that ratio. I can come back to that.

Okay. Thanks for taking my questions. Thank you.

and the next question last mobile sd well thank you and good morning part of your back to basics strategy is to i quote divest non-core assets So far, since the role of CEO, Paul, you haven't done that much. I think there was some $300 million completed in Q4, and you announced through a press release an additional $500 million, which in the context of a portfolio of $137 billion is not that much. And then you also mentioned that you made some changes to your bond terms in the fourth quarter. My first question is, is there anything now –

holding you back from finding significant divestments no i wouldn't say so the transaction market is quite vivid i would say kristoffer mentioned that the market for lending money is very favorable right now so it's a huge interest actually in making transactions in the property world and you see we have lots of people reaching out to see to find a deal. But nowadays, if I may reminisce of how it was 30 years ago, transactions went much faster than they do today. The due diligence phase in making transactions are so much more due diligence, so to say. So even if I wish that we had a higher pace, that's not how the business works nowadays. But I can assure you that we are doing everything to reach this target of a high transaction.

Okay, my second and final question is, What is a non-core asset in your portfolio?

To be quite honest, I never ever used the word core or non-core. So I never said that. Our core assets are the ones we have, I would say. Some of them are perhaps giving too low rate of return. given our expectations of the future. So our core assets are actually commercial real estate in Sweden. It might be hotels, it might be offices, it might be logistics or light warehouses and so on and so forth. So I never actually use the words core or non-core. So we are more, let's say, looking at what we believe that they can give us in return going forward. and those who are helping us in reaching our target, that's our core assets. That's not office, that's not that, that's not this. So that's how we're thinking about that.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you Lars. Next question from Nadir at UBS.

Hi, good morning. Can you hear me clearly?

Yes, yes.

Wonderful. Thank you both for taking my questions. I've got a few and I'll ask them one by one if that's okay. So firstly, you're saying on your capital distribution, you are now allocating your full distribution to buybacks rather than dividends. And I think, Paul, you mentioned, quote unquote, simple mathematics in your presentation. So if there is a simple way to split it, then is you're thinking that if you're trading at a discount, you then do buybacks. And if you're trading at a premium or closer to that, you're doing dividends, or is there a more nuanced way that you're looking at the distribution policy going forward? It isn't really that simple.

I would say it's really that simple, even if you can make it a bit more complicated. But now the discount is quite big, right? It's 32%, 33%, and then you don't have to think about it that much. But once, and hopefully when that gap closes, we have to have a deeper discussion when it's time to switch to dividend from share buyback.

got okay and quick follow-up to that as well what is your exact execution plan on the buybacks through the year so I know it's 1.2 billion kroner it isn't a small proportion of your market cap so how do you propose you perform the buybacks this year our thinking is that we should wait until after the AGM we think that we should adapt the financial results for 2025 either

it's a part of that results that we are distributing to our shareholders so we we will wait until 8 p.m and we will come back with details after that okay got it very clear thank you my second question is I won't be using the word core and uncle as Paul mentioned but looking at some pain points in the portfolio such as a Shestan Finland where

you've taken more substantial write-downs and values and also they have elevated vacancies. What is your thinking on these regions and generally your focus on trying to become more Sweden-centric? I think that's something you mentioned in your Q3 report.

More Sweden-centric, I wouldn't write that. I would say continue. We are already Swedish-centric, so that is not a change, I would say. Well, Shista, it's a small proportion of our portfolio. It's very well known in Sweden. That's why we highlight it. It's struggling. It has been struggling for a long time. We are picking our brains, finding a way to reduce latency and make a turnaround. And I would be quite honest to say that that's not an easy nut to crack, but we are really working on that. We can see 22% in our portfolio, probably inches, perhaps more than 30%. So it's a challenging market. But again, small proportion of our portfolio, and again, we are really, Picking our brains, trying to figure out how to make a turnaround, at least for our properties in Kista. Finland, yeah, it's also a challenging market, just as it has been in Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmö, and Copenhagen, and to some extent also in Oslo. Again, we are also trying there to find ways to reduce vacancy and keeping rent levels just as we do for Kista.

That's very clear, thank you. My third question is then moving to a different part of the Nordic region, ENKRA and your stake there. I think you mentioned that it's a fairly attractive market in Norway at the moment, despite the swap rates being slightly higher, inflation is more elevated relative to, say, Sweden and Finland. So what is your thinking on the ENKRA stake going into this year? I know there was an increase in the stake in Q1 last year, so are there any thoughts on this? I really like Entra.

Entra is a great, great company. I think Estella can probably learn quite a bit from Entra. So I appreciate the cooperation we have with Entra. Obviously, it's not an optimum situation, I think, where we have the stake we have. Balder has its stake it has. It's a low free flow for other shareholders. So perhaps it's not the best long-term solution. don't have any answers to the long-term solution today not at all but what one should say is that the entry is performing quite well so it's not hurting us in any way having that stake in in entra because it's it's a good company they have a nice portfolio nice management and so it's not not something that is dragging us down not at all the contrary actually

Okay, very clear. And my final question is, on your recent leasing of the Infinity Building in Hagerstaden, I know there's been some talk in the press of who the tenant may be, but could you provide some more details potentially on the yields, the rent levels, and more generally the discussions you've been having on letting? Are they with large tenants and public companies, or are they increasingly with smaller companies and potentially SMEs?

Actually, we cannot elaborate at all. We sent out the information we can send out, and that's been requested from the tenant. But we will disclose more when they have either used or not used the option to reduce the number of square meters they will have. And then we will provide you with more information. But obviously, we're very happy that Ericsson has selected or building infinity, it would be a great building and I think Ericsson will have a nice time sitting there in Hagastan in our building.

Okay, exactly. And just to follow up on the size of maybe the tenants that you're speaking to more generally in the markets for lettings, are they larger tenants and companies or do you think that the general size of these companies is more skewed to SMEs?

Our portfolio is a broad palette of very different type of buildings. We just don't have office. We have other type of buildings as well. So we have everything from very small tenants making components to whatever, industrial. And we have office, small offices and big offices. So we are speaking to a very broad palette of Swedish businesses.

Okay, that's very clear. Thank you.

Thank you. Next question, Adrian from Deutsche Bank.

Good morning, both. Basically, I have two questions. The first one is on the consent solicitation process for your bonds. As you mentioned, you got approval from majority of your bondholders. However, there is still one particular bond, the 29th, which actually has even more constraining language compared to the other ones, which hasn't received consent. Hence, I was wondering what you intend to do with this particular bond because I guess the 2026 in any case is due in the very short term.

So what we mean when we say that we have better flexibility now is of course that the volume outstanding that is having this language is much lower. Should we in the future sometime have transactions on the table, then we will manage that at that point in time.

Okay, so you may at some point, you know, revisit the consent vis-a-vis this bond when you sell the assets.

Yeah, exactly. I mean, we will have a look at that at that point in time.

Okay, thank you. And my second question is about the hybrid. I was wondering what and when you intend to do regarding the non-code 26.

I mean, we are, first of all, very happy with our hybrid. It's, as you know, running with the 3.125% coupon, which is, of course, that very good level. So we are happy about that. And, you know, I mean, we like the instrument. We like the levels we have today and do not want to speculate about regarding the hybrid.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. The next question from Barclays.

Thank you for taking my question. I have a couple of follow-ups on what you just said regarding the consent solicitation. With the 26 and the 29s together, that's roughly 30% of all your bonds outstanding. So clearly that is not giving you the amount of flexibility that you suggested. So if I could ask what was driving the timing of the consent solicitation that you did last year if you have not lined up any specific action immediately? And the second question is regarding your hybrid. The hybrid language, of course, doesn't have the same kind of constraints, but I was wondering if there's anything that would potentially require consent solicitation as well.

To the first question, back to the transaction market and the transaction. It's also that transactions takes time. So going into transactions, it's very helpful with better visibility of our situation. So that is probably the answer to the first question. And now we think that we have that flexibility. I mean, the results were on what we were expecting. So, we are happy about that. The 26th, I mean, that's very close. It's coming up now in September, I think it is.

Thank you. And regarding the hybrids?

Sorry, I didn't get the question.

And regarding the hybrids, is there any language in there or impede your future, you know, change in portfolio?

No, no language in the hybrid was unaware of, no.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you. So next question from John at Kampan.

Hi, good morning. Just on the net letting, are you seeing any differences between geographies and asset classes in terms of terminations as well as leasing?

I think in general what one can say is that the market that has been struggling in the downturn that they have been experiencing is, first of all, office and in major cities, in bigger cities. And then we have had a softer downturn in regional cities where it has perhaps not been a downturn. So offices in major cities like Stockholm and Gothenburg and Malmö and Copenhagen and Helsinki is struggling a bit more than we can see in regional cities.

And the positive turn in Q3 and Q4, is that skewed to any specific as a clause or geography?

Could you repeat the question?

So that net letting turn positive in Q3 and Q4, is that driven by any specific region or specific as a clause?

No.

And you mentioned that you're looking into improving the occupancy in more challenging markets. So what ways are you seeing in the first look into that? And is it easily solved with, say, CapEx, or does it even make sense to invest CapEx into these more structurally challenging buildings?

I think it's very difficult to answer generally what to do. It has to be case by case. In some cases, it makes sense to upgrade the unit and adapt it to the wishes of the tenant. In other cases, it might be even a discount. In other cases, it's just answering faster than we've done historically. So it's very different, and you have to look at it on a case-by-case basis. But what we've said is that we have to be more flexible, we have to be faster, and we have to really listen in to what the clients are wishing for so that we can grab the clients that are out there before our competitors can grab them.

And just maybe to ask it differently, do you see the capex spend in, say, 26, 27 to be higher than 24, 25?

Reluctant to speculate, but I would say it probably would be around the same level as this year.

Okay, that's clear. Thank you.

Thank you. Next question, Paul May, Barclays.

Hi, guys. Thanks for the presentation. I've got three questions, two are linked, so I'll ask those together. You've obviously mentioned your focus on leasing, leasing, leasing. I just wondered what your view is on sort of rental value per square meter, i.e., are you focused purely on reducing vacancy, in which case you'll allow rent concessions, lower rents to come through, or are you focused on rent per square meter? in which case you'll happily have a higher vacancy holding out for that higher rent. So just to get a sense there. And then linked to that, can you give us some color on where your current portfolio rental income sits versus market rent? If all your tenants left and you re-let all of your assets today, would that be at a higher or lower rent than you've currently got in the portfolio today? assuming that there were tenants available for that. I've got another question, but I shall ask in a second. Thanks.

Very good questions. If I may answer the second one first. It's a difficult one, but I appreciate the question. And it has to be booked a bit on the speculation side from my side. But I would say that we probably would reach roughly the same level as we have today. If every one of our tenants left, we would have some premises that would be rented on a high level, some on a lower level, but on average, roughly about where we are today. And the first one, could you repeat that one?

Yeah, it's just looking and thinking how you think about leasing, which is the focus. Is it just reducing vacancy and therefore you get rent concessions? Or is it we're focused on the rental level in which case we'll live with higher vacancy?

It's completely dependent on actually the market and sort of the demand in the market. In some markets, we really have to give concessions, lower the rent to get a tenant instead of having cash flow and not having cash flow. But in other markets, it's better to wait because we know that there's demand there and we write a lease contract over five or seven years and we don't want to lock in a too low rent level, obviously. So again, boring answer, understand that, but it's really on case by case, depending actually on the particular building we are looking at. It's not dependent on the particular market or asset class. It's really on case by case. And that's one of the things we've really been talking about here since back to basics, that we really need to have a smart thinking about every premises we have within the portfolio.

Yeah, I mean, similar to what we're seeing in other markets. As you say, it's very asset-specific, not necessarily market or sub-market specific. Just the final one, you mentioned Entra's not hurting, but just looking at their reporting, vacancy's been increasing, and its earnings yield is much lower than your earnings yield. So you could argue that capital would be better spent selling Entra and basically buying back your shares. You announced, obviously, the share buyback today. I just wondered how you think about that and where the comment around ENTRA is not hurting us, it's benefiting us, when actually if you look at the numbers, you could argue the opposite, that it would be better to rotate that capital elsewhere. Thanks.

I would agree to some extent to what you're saying, that we could probably, if we had the cash, use it wisely as well, not just having it in ENTRA. Entra is also in the market where demand has fallen a bit compared to as it was before, but not as much perhaps as in Stockholm or Copenhagen. So I was tilting more towards that when I said that Entra is not hurting us at least.

Okay. So the underlying market is a bit better positioned than some of Europe.

Yes.

Okay. Perfect.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you. Next question, James from Green Street.

Good morning. You mentioned some one-off costs associated with cancelling projects. Would you possibly be able to let me know if the number of projects cancelled was higher than usual? Maybe what the nature of these projects was? how much capex was associated with this, and then maybe how or why you made the decision to cancel these projects.

I mean, that was on the stage once. That is, of course, something that we are always doing, sort of going through actually every quarter, but then, of course, sometimes you put it more on a spot, not any specific areas or... So more business as usual, but a little bit higher than usual.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Next question. .

Thank you. Morning. I have two follow-ups on the transaction market comment you made earlier, Paul, where you alluded to a relatively strong market along the sort of back of cheap financing. So the first one is, are you able to call out any specific segments in your current portfolio which might be up for sale and where you believe interest would be high in the market? And secondly, looking at the transaction market and the interest And your decision to do share buybacks today, do you believe it is possible to find acquisitions of decent volume or size in the direct market which are more attractive than your own share at this moment? Thanks.

Thank you. I think the transaction market, as I said, it's driven now by a lot of funding being available to low spreads. So that's the main driver. But also, I think there's been a couple of years where companies have not done that many transactions. And that's also driven up demand a bit. They see potential now for restructuring their portfolios. If there are any specific parts of our portfolio which has extra interest from potential buyers, I can't really say that at this stage, actually. No, we have lots of discussions with people, and it's a broad palette of different types of discussions, I would say. And now I have to ask you to repeat the other questions.

Yes, sure. So the second one is, on the back of your decision to do share buybacks and the current discount NAV and the transaction market today, do you believe it is possible to find acquisitions in the direct market which are more attractive than your own share?

Possible, but difficult. That's good enough. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Fredrik. That was actually the last question for today. So thank you all for listening. Have a great day.