DFDS Group

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the DFDS full-year report 2025 conference call. I am Maria, the chorus call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in listen-only mode and the conference has been recorded. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session. You can register for questions at any time by pressing star and one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcasting. At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Torben Carlsen, CEO. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning and welcome to DFDS's Q4 and full year 2025 conference call. I am, as usually, joined here by Karin Bosen, our CFO, and Søren Bornholt, our head of IR. Our headline for the annual report is Turning Point Ahead, as our financial performance started to turn around in Q4 2025, and this was followed up by a solid January result. This is reassuring, and the key theme for this call is to take a closer look at the actions implemented that will secure the 2026 progress and turning point. Also reassuring is the high level of customer loyalty we've seen throughout 2025, Our customer satisfaction scores are trending well above industry standards in both ferry and logistics. So with the Turning Points, with the customer loyalty, we have a strong foundation in our network and for our people to navigate DFJS through the challenges we've seen in 2025 and to deliver a different level of financial performance in 2026. Let's start with a closer look at our Turning Points on slide three. Headline, Turning Point Reached, End of Tough 2025, Actions Implemented for 2026 Recovery. And it was indeed a tough 2025. Results were below expectations. Focus areas proved more challenging than expected. We experienced margin pressure across our network from a competitive low-growth market environment. And the inflationary cost pressure post-COVID and war continued through 2025. Our new concession routes start up in Jersey was also slightly more challenging than expected. So on this background, we'll talk about our 2026 expectations. And we do call 2026 a turning point. The actions implemented during 2025 will underpin the change of level in 2026. And let me talk through some of those with the main impacts. Logistics boost projects, we saw a delay of the impact in 2025, especially Q1 and Q2. but gained traction Q3 and Q4, and we'll see the full impact of these actions. On freight ferry pricing general through the system, we have had strong focus during the last couple of months of 2025 to get increases in place. And in the larger areas, Baltic, North Sea channel, we've seen more success with this than in the last couple of years. We have now ramped up the operation in Jersey. All agreements are in place and we'll see the full year impact of this operation. including a full summer season, which will significantly improve our results compared to 2025. In the Mediterranean, throughout 2025, we took various measures, but the real turning point was in September when we launched a new pricing model And at the same time, during Q4, we delivered some of our chartered-in vessels to significantly reduce cost while still being able to serve our customers. And then, of course, in November, we launched our cost reduction program that, when it comes to the people part with 400 positions reduced, was implemented during Q4. Then there's a light blue square here with test turnaround progression. We have seen a lot of actions taken during 25 due to the backdrop of the Turkish economy, the Turkish foreign exchange ratio, the intransparency in the ferry market. The turnaround has been more challenging than expected. We will continue to see benefits or improvements in 26 due to some accounting that we can cover on a different time. It will not show in the P&L necessarily strongly, but cash flow-wise there's another strong improvement versus 25. But all in all, five areas where the actions have been implemented, where the benefits are showing in Q4 and in January, and then one large area of focus as well, but where there's still hard work, of course, in front of us. Turning to page five, Talking a little bit about Q4, competitive market environment continued, flat markets in Northern Europe and the very soft U.K., headwind from inflation reduction policy, good growth continued in Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt, passenger volumes muted. but we managed to increase onboard spending to compensate partly for this. On the three focus areas, the logistics booth projects continued progress as expected. You'll see that in some of the numbers from Karen in a minute. The Mediterranean adaptation worked and we delivered a positive result in Q4 in the ferry business in the Mediterranean. and test turnaround, continued focus on operations, organization, and commercial development. Q4 earnings, the ferry division, underlying results improved, driven by Mediterranean and logistics divisions. Underlying results similarly improved when adjusted for one-offs. cash flow boosted strongly by working capital initiatives and a ferry sale, and we experienced or reported 97 million one-off redundancy costs in connection with our cost savings program. With this, I will on page six hand over to Karen for more details on the numbers.

Thank you Torben, and good morning everyone on the call. I'm going to start with Q4 and then move on to full year numbers. So looking at page six, we're looking at revenue in Q4 2025, where we are more or less flat. That's 1% up. However, organic growth was negative. It was minus 3%. This is driven by, as Torben mentioned, slightly slower passenger markets. We also have a reduction in logistics, which is driven by closure of certain activities in order to improve overall profitability of the area. And then, obviously, we have the revenue increase coming from the Ecol acquisition, which has full quarterly effect in Q4 2025 from Butas, however, slightly offset by the loss of the sale of the Oslo Copenhagen route. So overall, 100 million of revenue, 1%. Moving on to the next page, page 7, our Q4 income statement, just highlighting a few numbers. An EBITDA of $705 million, which is 5% down compared to the same quarter last year. A significant or slightly increase in depreciations, mainly coming from the addition of BU tests, so 9% up on depreciation. which takes us then to an EBIT of minus 62, which is the quarterly EBIT reported today. And then if we move further down in the P&L, you will see that our finance costs compared to same quarter last year was slightly lower, and so was the interest cost. This is driven both by a lower debt, about $1 billion, but $1 billion less in debt, and then also driven by lower floating rates. Moving on to the next page, page 8, where we are comparing the reported EBIT of minus 62 by the two divisions to the underlying actual performance, referring back to Torben's intro about how we see underlying improvements year on year in the two divisions. So if we look at FAERI first, on the top right corner, we have the reported result of FAERI of 50 million. Coming from last year, there's some reductions in the rest of the network, but you also see an underlying improvement in the Mediterranean of 49 million in the quarter, which takes us overall to a level above the earnings of Q4 2024. Similarly, if we look at logistics, reported earnings EBIT of minus 29 versus minus 30 in the same quarter in 2024. However, if we take out the one-offs and EU tests, then we see an underlying improvement of the like-for-like network of 43 million. So again, here an underlying improvement year on year when you compare like-for-like. So overall, these are the signs that indicate that we are reaching the turning point of our challenging performance. Then moving on to full year 2025, now looking at slide 10. Here we see an overall growth in revenue of 4%. This is slightly below, or it is below what we originally guided, but it is still in line with the latest guidance that we came with. It's 4% up due to the addition of EU tests, of course, and then subtracted with the sale of the Oslo Ferries and other adjustments. Organic growth, again, was negative, driven by freight, ferry, and also by logistics, same reasons as I explained for Q4. So, moving on to the next slide, which is our full year income statement, slide 11. Again, highlighting the growth in the revenue of 4 percent, the loss in the EBITDA of 16 percent, down to an EBITDA of 3.7 billion. A depreciation increase of 13%, again, with the addition of B.U. tests, and then we also have the constructive loss of the ferry Finlandia in the beginning of the year, and also here takes a right down. It's offset by a larger income elsewhere in the P&L. Then taking us to the reported EB of 520 today, which is obviously significantly down compared to last year. Same issues on the financing costs, lower than last year, driven by debt reduction and lower floating rates, and then we have some FX losses that goes the other way. Overall, the profit after tax is negative $425 million for the year. If turning to slide 12, looking at the EBIT per division, again, first we compare, of course, to our previous performance, which is the disappointing picture that we knew we are there, but that's in line with the expectations, unfortunately. The route changes and so forth has also impacted overall our performance this year. Overall, Ferry is down with more than 700 million. to an EBIT of $791 million. Logistics is down $243 million to an EBIT of minus 30. Again, this is driven by the BU test, which we have already reported as loss-making, so the existing business is offsetting that loss. And then we have a slight change in the corporate cost, which is mainly due to the redundancy cost that we took in Q4. So that's the bridge from last year to this year's EBIT. Turning to slide 13, the cash flow. If we focus on the full year, then overall a good operating cash flow compared to the decline in earnings that we have. We have operating capex of $1.2 billion offset by a net income from purchase and sale of ferries. We purchased one and sold two, so that has an overall positive impact of $246 million, taking the net capex to just below $1 billion. A free cash flow of 2.3 and then adjusted for acquisitions. we are then at an adjusted free cash flow of $1.2 billion for the year. This is a lot driven by, as we have said also, by our working capital initiatives and obviously of our also discipline in terms of capex spent in the year. Turning to the last page in my section, we are then addressing our capital structure and the development in our capital structure, our debt ratio over the years. Overall, we end 2025 with an equity ratio of 36%. That is up 1% compared to 2024. We have a debt-to-equity ratio of 52 to 48. That is also improved compared to 2024, where the debt was 55 to 45. And then on our debt-to-earnings ratio, our net interest-bearing debt to EBITDA, We are ending the year at 4.1. This is a slight increase compared to in 2024. However, as you will know when you follow the quarters over the course of 2025, we have been higher over the quarters and therefore we are content with at least reducing here by the end of the year and we will reduce further into 2026. The reduction is driven by a decrease in net interest-bearing debt of 1.9 billion compared to 2024, which is partly offsetting the lower earnings in the year. We've also put a little box here showing our expectations for 2026, 2025, and mid-term revision of our target range from 2.5 to 2.3, which we can come back to if necessary. With that, I will leave the word back to Tom.

So moving to green and great place to work on page 16. Our CO2 emissions were further reduced during 2025, trying to basically be quicker in the terminals and spend more time on the water. And of course, investing in fuel reduction initiatives. We further increased the number of environmentally friendly equipment on the land side with trucks and trailers, increased our solar energy production, increased women in management positions, and made significant improvements on our both land side and sea-based safety when measured on lost time injury frequency. So very pleased with that, and ESG continues to be on the agenda of DFDS if anybody were in doubt. Moving to page 18 and 2026 focus areas, sorry 2025 focus areas, we had the Three focus areas, logistics boost projects adapting Mediterranean and turnaround of Turkey and Europe South. Logistics boost projects we already mentioned in Q2 and especially in Q3 that the turning points were met, the focus worked. The adaptation in the Mediterranean we've now seen in Q4. We are making money again in that area and we'll see further significant improvements during 26. And then the one that is slightly delayed is the turnaround of the Turkey and Europe South business. And if we deep dive a little bit into this, The logistics booth projects, we have talked about eight projects that needed turnaround. Seven of those are now profitable and also do well on other metrics. We do have one domestic Danish business that still creates challenges, but with significant improvements versus 24 projects. but not quite there yet. We continue with this model. We will not report necessarily externally as much in 26 about this, but a lot of actions have been taken to make our logistics business a more focused and a less complex business, and we'll continue that work. And internally, the team that runs the booth projects continue to monitor the different entities and move resources according to performance across our network. Mediterranean adaptation showing results on page 20. As you know, there was a new competitive situation from September 24. and markets continues to rebalance and adapt to the new situation. Of course, also taking into account that the Turkish economy is not as strong, growing as strong as it has. What we have done is that on our own corridor, we reduced capacity by three ferries driven through this Mediterranean into a positive EBIT result in Q4, also helped by the new pricing model that was launched in September and that will take further traction in 2026. The market was up by 2%, 2.4% in 2025. driven by especially the ferry market growth as the lower pricing picture converted trailers from road to ferry. For DFDS, the picture is road 49%, and then from the ferry market, we are about two-thirds of the market, and competitors carry the remaining third of the volumes And, of course, the share of the competition on the Trieste market is larger than the overall competitive share of the market. Moving to page 21, not a secret, and we've talked about it a while, the test turnaround progressing at a slower pace than targeted. We've done major network right-sizing tests. We've done major organizational changes and seen improvements from that. But, of course, we need to continuously make sure that the size of our fleet and organization matches the market. Good news is that we see much stronger commercial traction than previously, with a more transparent ferry market re-emerging. but also a more competitive offering in the market is securing that we now start gaining volume, whereas we previously were net losing volumes. Martin Gade, who was both the head of the BU test and part of the EMT, is leaving DFJS And we have worked to find a replacement that soon will be announced externally. Moving to page 23 for outlook and priorities. The outlook of our EBIT reflects the turning point and the underlying turning points that will secure the improvement. On revenue, still a low growth network that we operate in, except for North Africa. So around level on the revenue side, a significant improvement of EBIT from the 520 that Karen went through to a range of 800 to 1100. And the drivers are the ones I talked through before. RPM rate increases across the network, Mediterranean capacity reduction, Jersey full-year impact on the ferry side, and then on logistics, full-year impact from the logistics boost projects and progression on the test turnaround. And then, of course, the cost reduction program that impacts the full group that we launched in November and when it comes at least to the reduction of employees have implemented already. The adjusted free cash flow that was 1.2 billion in 25 will be above zero. And the difference to 25 is that on our working capital, we launched a factoring program in 25. and that we cannot further increase. And we also had some sale of assets that kept our CapEx down. For the positive adjusted free cash flow, despite an EBIT level of 800 to 11 and CapEx of 1,700. So, priorities 26 and 24, continued organic growth focus, and then deliver on these turning points that I've walked through. Strong focus on cash flow, both working capital and capital discipline. Karen is the master of both of those. And then the green transition. We are on track to deliver on our 2030 goals, and with the EU regulatory framework, this is also financially a rewarding thing to do. And then we are committed to continue to deliver on our diversity targets. With this, over for questions.

We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their telephone. You will hear a tone to confirm that you have entered the queue. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Questioners on the phone are requested to disable the loudspeaker mode while asking a question. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question comes from Ulrich Bach from Danske Bank. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning, Torben and Kaan. Thank you for taking my question. The first one is on your guidance and the different building blocks, how you get to the 800 to 1.1 billion DKK in EBIT for 26. So this year you report 520, and you have a cost program which should generate 300 million, which should get us to the lower end of the guidance range. But then you also talk about the price increases that should also have a positive impact. But looking at the deltas, then there will only be maximum of 300 million positive delta from increasing prices in the Mediterranean region and the rest of the logistics business. So please elaborate on if there's anything I've missed in there and why guidance looks as it is.

Thank you for the question, Oleg. I think we have these five primary blocks delivering probably most of them triple-digit impact. If you take one like our savings program and say that's 300 already, then of course it doesn't look very ambitious. Reality is, of course, that part of that $300 million is spent on inflationary pressure and other cost increases around the system. So we think we have come up with an achievable range. Our credibility is maybe a little... low after last year where we we did not deliver the promises so we've spent a little time on this call to explain that the five elements are things that have already happened and where we can already see the end of q4 and also in january that the results are coming in And then we have felt that this range is a prudent level. It is, after all, close to a doubling of our 25 results, at least the upper end of the range. So we are very comfortable with this range and very comfortable that we can deliver it also.

Okay, that's great. Then perhaps if we look a bit further, obviously, 2026 is supposed to be a transition year. So 2027, we should see an additional uplift in earnings. If you can just, again, elaborate a bit on the building blocks, because Tess, obviously, that should improve. But what about the rest of the business? Again, back to the building blocks you also have for 2026. How much more could we hope for for 2027?

If you can quantify, it would be great, but some wording would be... I think it's prudent here in February 26 to talk about 26. And then as we start delivering some quarterly results, we can start to speculate about what then the further uplift in 27 will be. There will be an uplift, obviously, that would be the ambition. We all know that TESS is not where it needs to be. and also the other areas, of course. But for now, I think let's focus on 26 and our ability to deliver on the range we've put out.

Okay, that's fair. Then my final question here is on the ferry MET development. If we go back to Q4 2024, you reported a negative EBIT impact from the increased competition in the region of 225 million. Now this quarter, it's positive by 49. So if I add these two numbers up, I get to a minus 175 million versus before grimality entered the region. If I compare that number to what reported in Q2 last year, then the negative impact from grimality entering, that was 181. So that doesn't seem like a huge improvement in Q4 last year versus Q2 last year. And Q2 last year, that was before your price increases kicked in. So just some flavor on why didn't it improve even more in Q4 versus what you saw in Q2 before the price increases?

Maybe I'm getting slow, but that was a lot of comparison numbers. During Q4, what happened was that the September price increases, or maybe I should say the price model was put in place. Some of the customers, some of the significant customers had commitments already for how 25 pricing should look. So the full impact of that comes from Q1 26. where maybe one customer is still on an old system, but where the rest is now in this new system. Furthermore, it was during Q4, so in October and November, that we re-delivered the last two vessels. So part of the improvement is also to match the demand with the supply in our system. So, you know, you didn't see the full impact in Q4. If that's what you're challenging, we fully agree. You will see further impact as we move forward. But I don't think I hear without a calculator can comment on your comparison then to the Q2. But we can maybe take that offline or you can take that offline with CERN and we can we can dwell into it. But you are right, you've not seen the full impact in Q4 from these initiatives.

Understood. Thank you.

The next question comes from the line of Lars Heindorf from Nordea. Please go ahead.

Yeah, morning. Thank you for taking my questions as well. Follow up on Ulrich's, I won't mention as many numbers perhaps, but As Ulrich pointed out last year, you think you communicated that you made a loss around 200, 250 million in the fourth quarter in Mediterranean. And just to get it clear, the slide eight that you have, which is the bridge, is that an uplift of 49 or is it a positive income of 49 million in the fourth quarter? That's quite a big difference between those two, if it's an uplift or actually a positive EBIT.

49 is an uplift.

Okay, so it's an uplift from minus 250 in Q4 last year?

No, no, no. You have these huge numbers that you float around. I don't recall the 250. We had a significant negative impact Q4 24 versus Q4 23. We did not have a loss of 250 in Q4 24. What's the delta? The delta. And I think the 250 sounds a little bit on the high end. But what we are saying now is with this uplift of 49, Q4 is a positive result in the mid. So we never lost 200 million in a quarter in the mid.

Okay. All right. Thank you for clarifying. And then on logistics. If I can read your slides correctly, then tests have lost around 275 million on a full year, 25. And then, of course, you have these one-off items related here in the fourth quarter. What's this adjustment that you have made? I mean, what should we expect for tests? of an earnings uplift in 26?

As you can see in my slides, we have a slightly lighter blue on that one, on page 3. And this is because the uplift that we are talking about in 26 versus 25 is primarily coming from the five other squares on page three. Test continues to be in a difficult spot. We will show underlying improvements in the operation of also more than a three-digit number in millions. But accounting-wise, some PPA adjustments and others go against us, so we will not see it in the EBIT side. You will see it on the cash flow side we are improving. And that's, of course, not satisfactory. However, we have come up with a guidance for 26 that is very much based on delivering on things that we have already implemented. And that's why we're focusing on the full year impact of Boost, the full year impact of the actions in the BUMED, the freight ferry pricing, the Jersey full year, and the cost reduction program. It's things that we have already done. It's things that we can already see in December and particularly in January that are working. The test is, as you can call it, a sore point. It's a focus area, obviously, but we will not here be able to guarantee an EBIT improvement of any significance over what you referred to there.

Okay. And then just a few housekeeping questions on the CAPEX guidance for 2016. You write in a note that it excludes Gibraltar. If it comes, if it's approved, how much will that be?

240 million.

Danish. Yeah, yeah, of course. And then one of my favorite subjects is on the CGU assumptions. I have to ask you, because you're still assuming a 35% EBIT taker from 26 to 30 in logistics. That's not significant down from what you assumed last year. And given the development that we've seen throughout last year, to me, it just comes across as being, and also now, Torben, you mentioned that we shouldn't expect to see any material improvement in tests. How can you assume an EBIT CAGR of 35% in your CQ for logistics over a five-year period?

I think overall, Lars, it probably merits at some point a conversation also about your other assumptions in what you put out some weeks ago. But overall, we have other areas that improves a lot. As you know, we had a very challenging continent situation in 2025 with the foot and mouth disease and other issues with redundancy cost and so forth. So there is other areas that drives, when you come from a very low, almost negative, right, then There's other areas that drives that growth. We have also done some close down of activities also in our Danish business, if it's right.

And how should I then understand you have a comment on it on page 40 in the annual report? I mean, how should I read that other than there's just massive uncertainty?

In terms of our, are you talking about our impairment disclosures?

Yes.

Yes. But, I mean, we are being quite transparent in our sensitivity analysis as well in the notes, right, that we are where we are in our impairment. We have a more conservative underlying business case lying for the logistics than we had last year. But, obviously, also with the poor performance this year, the headroom is less, and this is why we are disclosing this the way we are.

But on a five-year horizon, Lars, of course, test is also contributing to this CAGR. Now you've asked specifically about 26, right? But Lars, I think it's a good question. It's a fair question. We've obviously spent time with the auditors, with the business, and There is no impairment, and we are confident with the assumptions that have been applied to reach that conclusion. And then we'll just have to, I guess, take it from there as we move forward. Happy to have a more detailed discussion, of course, with you on a different time.

Yeah, I'm sorry to go into the details. It's on the credit ratings. If I haven't recorded correctly, it's scope and then S&P that you use. Only scope. Only scope. Okay, sorry. And there's the dialogue with those. I mean, they're fine with... a two-year period before you get below the three and a half times?

I mean, yes, so far. I mean, we are obviously in a not very frequent but regular dialogue with them, and obviously with the release of our annual report today, we're going to have a new conversation with them. But so far, we are keeping a negative outlook but staying investment-grade.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Lars.

For any further questions, please press star and one on your telephone, star and one. The next question comes from the line of Jakub Glikonski from RBC. Please go ahead.

Hi, hello. Perhaps a more general question, but obviously we had January ferry volumes today as well, and I think it showed some constructive momentum, particularly on the passenger side. perhaps showing growth for the first time since February last year. So I was sort of wondering if you could share any color with us, what do you expect in terms of volume development over this quarter or this year?

Yes, we did send out the general volumes. Of course, in general, if you exclude North Africa and to a certain extent Turkey, where we see some recovery, of course, we are still in a low growth area with Baltics, North Sea channel and on the logistic side. But we have seen some signs of recovery with the, for example, the Swedish manufacturing sectors and Sweden has just historically proven to be quite a good first mover point of things recovering across Europe. And of course, we have a large Sweden exposure. So the volumes that we see look okay. No strong growth, but at least compared to what we had expected, we are seeing the volumes coming. Of course, the weather has been fantastic. has been a little tough, which has meant also some cancellations and stuff, but looking through that, it looks okay. On the passenger side, 2025 was tough in many markets. We compensated by more onboard spending, and there we also expect to see some uplift in... in 2026. But again, with the current economies, it's not going to be game-changing. And that's why in the turning points, we focused a little bit on we're taking out cost, making sure we don't have too much capacity. And this is not just in the Met. This is, of course, also reducing sailings in other markets where we can do it. and then on getting pricing up for freight customers and working even harder on the onboard spend where we have some good momentum also on some of the routes where we haven't seen it before.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

The next question is a follow-up question from Ulrik Bak from Danske Bank. Please go ahead.

Yes, thank you for taking my follow-up questions. Just following up on the impairment testing, in 2024 annual report in the note, it says that if there is a decrease in the annual EBIT of 10.7% per annum between 26 and 29, that, you know, if it was above that, then you should do a write-down of some sorts. And I guess 2025, the original guidance for logistics on EBIT was $300 million. In 2026, it's 50 to 150, which is a decline much higher than the 10%. Obviously, I know that there can be a rebound, but still, it seems just more common because I also see that you have declined or changed the goodwill from logistics section to ferry, whether that has an impact on the way we look at the impairment testing.

Thank you. To answer your last question first, obviously with moving more than a billion from logistics CGU to the ferry freight CGU, there's obviously a billion less on the balance sheet for the logistics CGU. So yes, that has an impact. This is done because the value of the equal acquisition to a large extent sits with both entities, right, to both divisions. So this is to reflect that. So that means that obviously the book value is less. Coming back to your other question, again, as Torben said, we have done our projections. I also mentioned they are more conservative than what we had last year. We have done our testing. We've discussed it with the auditors. We've discussed it with the board, and the conclusion is that there is no impairment.

Understood. The final question here is on your green capex levels. At your CMD back in 2023, you outlined a capex plan, which in some years should reach more than 3 billion per year towards the end of the decade. Just some comments on whether these are still fair numbers to apply or if something has changed.

Well, if I can, you know, maybe Karen can come back on the numbers then, but I think we have obviously had to review our tonnage plan, given our current performance. We've also grown wiser in terms of the green transformation, what is required and what can be handled in different ways. So, we are reworking this. There will still be CAPEX obviously for new buildings, but it may look a little bit differently than, or it will look differently than what you saw in 23. And this will also impact the levels. We can see that we can do some conversions instead of new buildings as one element. But I think we can be a little smarter and give a little more guidance when we get to Q1 or Q2 on this, as we are also reworking this internally at the moment. Karen, I don't know if you want to add anything.

No, but that's exactly right. Obviously, due to the drop in earnings, we have to constantly look at our plan. And then, as our normal planning cycle, we are then... doing an overall update of our longer term now in the coming quarters, and we'll discuss that with the board and so forth before we can start saying anything new about it. But, I mean, our tonnage plan, replacement plan, is, of course, something that we constantly look at, and that includes moving to more greener fuel in the vessels.

Okay, but what I hear is it's probably going to be less than 3 billion in some of those years, if you say you can do it smarter and other ways.

Yes, I think we already mentioned that we've seen that, for example, on the channel that the electrification there is probably going to happen through conversion of existing vessels rather than new buildings. So it will be lower volumes than what you have seen before, lower value, sorry, than you've seen before.

Understood. Thank you so much.

The next question is a follow-up from Lars Heindorf from Nordea. Please go ahead.

Yeah, hi again. Sorry, staying with my favorite subject, which is goodwill. So when you acquired e-call, if I recall it correctly, out of the roughly 1.8 billion that you paid for it, I think most of that was not all but goodwill. Back then, I think that you allocate around 1.2 or 1.1 billion to the ferry division and around 600-ish in the logistics upon the time of the acquisition with the movement of goodwill from logistics into more goodwill into the ferry division. Are there any goodwill left from ECOL in the logistics divisions?

That's the same. The transaction did not happen at year-end. It happened before Q1. that's why that's what i'm referring back to okay sorry when we closed the year the goodwill was last year 2024 the goodwill all the goodwill from the equal acquisition set with logistics okay thank you sorry for that no no but so it's it's it's the same 1.1 billion that that that we had that we had disclosed uh before yeah yeah yeah yes

For any further questions, please press star and 1. Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Torben Carsten for any closing remarks.

Thank you very much. And let me just wrap up. Thank you very much for good participation, good questions. Some of them we may have to, as mentioned, take offline for more details. We've tried to demonstrate that we believe we have actions in place that have already been taken that will produce the results that will support our 2026 guidance. And hopefully we gave you further comfort around that during the call. So thank you very much for joining the call and thank you very much for your questions. Have a continued good day.