Eutelsat Communications

Welcome to the UTELSNA third quarter and nine months 2024 and 25 revenues call. My name is Alan and I'll be your coordinator for today's event. Please note this call is being recorded and for the duration your lines will be on listen only. However, you will have the opportunity to ask questions at the end. This can be done by pressing star 1 on your telephone keypad. If you require assistance at any time, please press star zero and you'll be connected to an operator. I'll now hand you over to your host, Christophe Caudelier, to begin today's conference. Thank you.

Hello, everyone. Welcome and thank you for joining us today for UTELSAT's third quarter 24-25 revenues presentation. I'm Christophe Caudelier, Group CFO, and I'm joined today by Joanna Darlington, Chief Communications and Investor Relations Officer. On today's agenda, we will cover recent highlights, Q3 performance, and outlook and financial objectives. Let's start with the highlights. Third quarter revenues of the four operating verticals, i.e. excluding other revenues, stood at €300.6 million. They were down 2.2% on a like-for-like basis. of the four operating verticals for the first nine months were up 1.8% on a like-for-like basis. Connectivity applications continue to see double-digit growth on the back of LEO-enabled solutions. With all this, we confirm all our full-year 24-25 financial objectives. Let's turn specifically to the Q3 performance. First, as a reminder, all commentary is on a like-for-like basis, i.e. at constant currency and parameter. Total revenues for the third quarter stood at 300 million euros, down 1.9% on a like-for-like basis. They reflected, first, a 7 million euro positive currency effect, and second, a 1 million euro negative swing in other revenues, mainly from hedging. Excluding other revenues, revenues of the four operating verticals were down 2.2% on a like-for-like basis. Let's look at revenues in more detail. Video representing 50% of revenues stood at €152 million, a decline of 6.4%. Fixed connectivity revenues representing 20% of the group total, rose 1% to €60 million. Government services, 17% of revenues, stood at €50 million, a rise of 10.2%. Mobile connectivity revenues, representing 13% of the group total, stood at €40 million, down 2.7%. I will come back to this. Let's start with video. Third quarter video revenues amounted to €152 million, down 6.4% year-on-year, are in line with the broader market trend. On a quarter-quarter basis, revenues were down 4.8%, reflecting the linearization of revenue recognition on certain contracts in Q2. On the commercial front, UTALSAT renewed a video capacity agreement with its long-standing partner, ATSS, in the MENA region. UTALSAT also expanded its services for professional video, committing significant new resources at the flagship Hotbird constellation at 13°E. Elsewhere, UTALSAT renewed its partnership with UAE-based content distribution specialist for satellite contribution services across the Middle East and North Africa, extending capacity leased on UTELSAT-21B and UTELSAT-70B. Let's move and have a word on Russia. UTELSAT is implementing EU Regulation 269-2014 concerning the denial of resources to Russian entities which, since March 2025, is being applied to selected media groups by the French regulator ARCOM. Following the recent removal of two channels, STS and Canal 5, belonging to JSC National Media Group, UTELSAT is in the process of removing further channels controlled by this company, as well as those controlled by VJTRK from UTELSAT capacity. At this stage, the impact on the group's revenue of the removal of these channels is being estimated at around 16 million euros on an annualized basis and a similar amount at the EBITDA level prior to any mitigation measures. Due to the timing, this action has a very limited impact on UTSAT's objective for fiscal year 2024-2025. As a reminder, UTEL says financial objectives exclude the impact of sanctions imposed on Russian customers by external authorities. Moving to connectivity, third quarter fixed connectivity revenues stood at 59.7 million euros, up 0.8% year on year. They mainly reflected on the one hand the continued growth of LEO enabled connectivity solutions and On the other, the more challenging conditions for geo-enabled consumer broadband in Europe, and notably the cessation of revenue recognition from a specific customer on the CONNECT VHTS satellites. Quarter on quarter, revenues were down 7.3%, reflecting a one-off impact from catch-up revenues from a Leo customer in Q2, as well as the above-mentioned cessation of revenue recognition from a GEO customer. On the commercial front, the transfer of UTELSAT connect capacity to the African market has been completed. Take-up of the additional capacity has been dynamic, notably with the multi-year partnership with Orange for connectivity in Africa and the Middle East. Elsewhere, UTELSAT and INTERSAT inked a new multi-year agreement for KU capacity on UTELSAT 7C for the delivery of fixed data services over Central and Eastern Africa and renewed their existing capacity contracts on UTELSAT 7TB. The two companies are in discussions aimed at adding LEO capacity for East Africa. Third quarter government services revenues stood at 49.5 million euros up 10.2% year-on-year. This mainly reflected the growth of LEO-enabled solutions revenues, as well as increased demand from non-US governments. Quarter on quarter, revenues were down 4.2%, notably due to slowdown in geo-activities. The spring 2025 renewal campaign with US Department of Defense resulted in an estimated renewal rate of less than 50%, below the high rates of previous quarters. It reflects the change in the new presidential administration geographic prioritization for the Defense Department, with the additional context of efforts to cut government spending overall. In particular, it embarks a non-renewal of a single sizable contract. Excluding this one-off, the renewal rate would have been close to 70%. Third quarter mobile connectivity revenues stood at 39.7 million euros, down 2.7% year-on-year, reflecting lower TO revenues, partly offset by growing demand for LEO-based solutions. Quarter-on-quarter, revenues were up 14.3%, underpinned by ramp-up on LEO. On the commercial front, UTELSAT confirmed the traction of LEO-enabled services for commercial and business aviation, with over 100 certified NT9 installations already completed, out of a backlog close to 1,000 aircrafts, and the first aircraft now in service. In addition to its GEO offering, Eutelsat is delivering multi-orbit connectivity through key partners such as Intelsat, Hughes, Panasonic, and GoGo. Air Canada became the first airline to deploy the multi-orbit GeoLeo service through Intelsat. Separately, Eutelsat signed a multi-year, multi-million dollar extension of its capacity agreement with Panasonic on Eutelsat 10B. and the deployment of CONNECT VHTS capacity for the mobility market is also progressing well, notably with a new multi-year, multi-million dollar agreement with Turksat for KA-band services. Both showcase the ongoing pertinence of a state-of-the-art TO capacity to deliver high-quality, cost-effective in-flight connectivity services. Moving now to the backlog. The backlog at the end of March stood at 3.6 billion euros versus 3.9 billion euros a year ago and 3.7 billion euros at the end of December 2024, reflecting its natural erosion, especially in the video segment in the absence of major renewals. It was equivalent to three times fiscal year 2024 revenues with connectivity representing 57% of total. Let's now turn to the outlook. On the back of the performance of the first nine months, we confirm our objectives for the full year 2024-25 of operating vertical revenues around the same level as fiscal year 2024. and adjusted EBITDA margin slightly below the level of Fiscal Year 2024. Elsewhere, gross capital expenditure in Fiscal Year 2024-25 remains expected in a range between 500 and 600 million euros. UTELSAT also continues to target leverage of around three times in the medium term and continues to work actively on the financing plan in line with its strategic roadmap and its leverage objective. With that, I would like to thank you for your attention, and together with Joanna, we are now ready to take your questions and to answer your questions.

Thank you. If you'd like to ask a question or make a contribution on today's call, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, please press star 2. You will be advised when to ask your question. We will take our first question from Roshan Ranjit, Dutch Bank. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Oh, evening, everyone. Thanks for the questions. I've got three, please. On the government renewal rate, where you say less than 50%, it's possible to get a sense of is there a scope for further resizing? You mentioned this single sizable contract. Are there other types of contracts of that nature within your base? And just to confirm that government, U.S. government revenues is around 60, 65% of overall government revenues of the group, please. Secondly, within video, you're flagging the 16 million annualized impact from Russia. Again, is that So you mean all Russian channels are removed from your base, or is there scope for that number to potentially be higher if you have to switch off further channels? And lastly, last quarter, you mentioned you were working on a financing plan. I don't see an update in the release today. I assume that is still something which you're working on. But anything you could say on that front and any progress would be very helpful. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks, Roshan. So for your question, So starting with the first one on the renewal weight on the government. And I guess your question was related to the percentage that the US government was representing in the total. So the proportion of the US government is decreasing. And it's, I would say, roughly between 50% to 60%. The reason why it's decreasing is also because With the development of the LEO activity, we also have a lot of appetite from other governments, and we see a significant increase of our business with governments other than the US governments. the US government side I mean we don't see any dramatic change of the of the business again for this quarter or for this for the spring session it's really rated to one specific contract with the US government I mean as we see I mean we With the change in the US presidential strategy and the cost-cutting plan, we see some changes but no major impact on our business.

Just to add one thing. I mean, in terms of timing, those renegotiations took place just at the time or just after the start of the new US administration. So there was, as you know, right at the beginning of the administration, there was a lot of pressure on departments to cut costs. And so we think that the... The unusually low renewal rate was, if you like, partly a knee-jerk reaction to that impetus. I think your other question, and it's why we singled this out, there's one contract that wasn't renewed that represents around half of the delta between the type of renewal rate we would normally see and the renewal rate that we just reported. So to answer your question, Roshan, no, it's unusual. I mean, generally the renewals tend to be made up of smaller contracts, and it's unusual to have one that's that chunky and has that big an impact.

on this your second question related to russia um no it it i mean the the channels that we uh we uh that we are removing or we will be will be removing from the uh from our satellites um are um not all the channels or the business with Russia, it's a few tens of channels that we are removing. And they are really related to two specific groups that are in the list of our comms. And it takes us also some time to identify all the channels that are belonging to those two groups, to those two media groups. And that's the reason why it takes a bit of time, too, because we need to really identify those channels that are really belonging to those two companies.

Yeah, just to add, in case it's not clear, so up till now the sanctions that we've complied with have been on specific channels and those have been identified by ARCOM and the reason behind taking them down is because of the content, the nature of the content of those channels. I would say that the ARCOM has now, since March, so in the past couple of weeks, it's now expanded the scope of how it imposes sanctions. and it's expanded it to cover not just specific channels because of the content, but actually companies, content producers, who are part of a list of companies in Russia where the French government has decided to freeze or deprive them of assets, if you like. So it's more complicated because instead of Archon just sending us a list and saying, right, you need to bring down this, this, and this, what they're saying is you have to stop broadcasting the content which is provided to our customers, which are still Tricolor and MTV+. which are provided by these companies. And so we have to identify those ourselves, and that's what's taking longer. But we expect it to be completed by, I would say, the end of June.

On the financing plan, so coming back, as we mentioned, in February for our H1 results, We continue to work actively on the financing plan in order to take into consideration and to cover our strategic roadmap as well as our medium-term target of leverage ratio around three times. In this context and as we speak, we are in active discussions, I would say, with potential capital providers and we are assessing various solutions. And this is what I can say at this point. And as we mentioned back in February, and we will come back to the market as soon as we have a clear action plan.

That's very helpful, guys. Thank you. If I could just follow up on the first question, the renewal rate that will impact your fiscal year 26 numbers, is that the right way to think about it in terms of the timing and the lag effect?

Well, it will impact from Q4 of this year. And then, yes, it will impact into full year 26.

Thank you. But it's been embedded also for year 24, 25 at this point, so it doesn't change anything in our guidance.

Yeah, I think the other point to make is, as Christophe said, that the proportion of the U.S. DOD within our government services revenues is obviously proportionately a lot less than it has been in recent years.

Got it. Thank you. We will take our next question from Stefan Beersend. Although, BHF, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, I've got three, if that's possible. The first one is regarding the financing planning, and I fully understand that you're not in a position to say too much for sure about it, but let me try to push my luck a little bit there. I'd like to understand how much... credit export can be a solution there. So I guess my question is, how much, theoretically, do you think you can cover of your future investment plans thanks to credit export, either at the French level or at the European level? And do you feel you have a strong case to be in a position to obtain these credit exports? My second question is, regarding the order book that is down. I mean, you just mentioned that you're getting a lot of interest from other governments than the U.S. governments. So, you know, are you currently in discussion indeed with, you know, some governments about future contracts? And do you think that they can be quite sizable? You know, anything you could say about that? And finally, it's a question I asked already and I'd be very interested to have an answer, but do you have an idea of how much of the current OneWeb or the book is not yet activated and therefore contributing to the revenues? Thank you.

Okay, thanks, Stéphane. On the first question related to ECAs, I mean, we are already working very actively on ECAs. As you know, we have communicated that we had contracted with Airbus. for an additional batch of 100 satellites. And clearly we are in the process to, we are discussing with the ECA agencies in order to be able to include those in the scheme. I need to mention that we already have some ECAs. I mean, at the OneWeb level, we already have ECA contracts and financing with India Exim Bank on one side. So how much do we think that we can... This is really depending on the future investment and on those investments. But all in all, I would think that we can plan between... 50% and 70%, well, I would say 50% to 70% of the investment being part of the SEA financing plan. And yes, we believe that we have a strong case with this. It will obviously depend on several factors. First of all, I mean, who are the providers of the industry for those future investments? being on the satellite side, but also on the launchers. So clearly, this needs to be taken into consideration. But overall, for both, again, satellites and launchers, because we've already done it, we think that we have a very strong case for the ECA financing. We are just in our discussion with the different agencies. I mean, we really are in the heart of this program. Moving to the government question, I mean, we have, I would say, a lot of discussion with different governments. I mean, as you clearly know, with the current geopolitics. There are many interests from many countries. I mean, starting with the European countries, but not only. I mean, I would say many non-aligned or countries seeking for alternative solutions or non-American, non-Chinese solutions for this type of service. And clearly, there are a lot of interests Having said that, it's clear that it will take some time. We are in processes that need to go through a lot of administrations and approvals. So definitely, again, we are really confident that the market is significantly increasing for the many reasons that you know, but it will be a progressive increase and it will take a bit of time to really convert into real business. But as we see, I mean, we already have some significant contracts. As I just mentioned before, I mean, we were a few years ago or even not so long ago, US governments represented the vast majority of our government business. I mean, today, you know, we have a significant increase of other governments into this. Johanna, you want to add something? And the last question is related to the OneWeb order book and how much of this has been activated. The question is, I would say, I mean, obviously, this is going not to be, you know, it's then the monthly revenues, but I would say around between 170 and 200 million euros that have been from the current order book that it's translated into monthly revenues.

Thank you. That's very helpful. And just a quick follow-up regarding credit export. Obviously, Iris Square is also, I guess, even if that's at the European level, that would also be eligible to credit export, I would guess, but at the European level in terms of financing.

Well, you mean our investment into Iowa Square, right?

Yes.

I mean, yeah, it's a different scheme, but it would be eligible. But could be, I mean, again, depending on the provider, it would either be, I would say, regular ECA or strategic operations. but in both cases, they are very similar.

That's all very clear. Thank you very much.

We will take our next question from Ben Rickett, New Street Research. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hi, Christoph and Joanna. Thanks for the questions. I have two. The first one, just to follow up on that ECA discussion, Do you think ECA financing, is that sufficient, do you think? Or are you also looking to raise equity capital, for example? And if so, how much equity capital do you think you would need to raise? And then the second question, just around Iris Squared, I think there's still quite a lot of skepticism around the commercial revenues. projections for Iris Square, the 6.5 billion. Do you think there's any prospect of the European Union committing more of the revenues for that project so that you're less reliant on commercial revenues? Thank you.

Okay, so clearly, for the first question, then, clearly, ECA are not going to be sufficient to cover the needs. I mean, for many reasons. First, because of the capacity. And secondly, because it won't solve, as we said, I mean, our medium-term target is to go back to a leverage ratio around three times. And clearly, ECA... are accounted as debt, definitely. So if it's only ECA, I mean, this would solve the issue of liquidity and the capacity of financing our investment needs. But obviously, in that case, I'm not sure that we would have a strong case with ECA because the structure of the balance sheet of the company wouldn't be sufficient. So clearly ECG is one of the, it's one part of the financing plan for sure. but it's not the sole part. And clearly, in our financing plan, we are clearly looking, as I mentioned, for capital investors. It's too early, I think, for me to disclose any type of range or amount in what we are seeking for as a reinforcement of our balancing structure, but I can say that it's a significant amount. On the second question, Iris Square, maybe just to come back quickly on what is Iris Square and how it is managed. I mean, clearly it's a multi-orbit constellation. Within this multi-orbit constellation, there is a dedicated European payload, which is not what the operators are going to sell. Next to this, I would say, specific payload for the European community, there is a commercial payload. of which the new one will be for UTENSAT to commercialize and to manage. Having said that, do we have significant prospect? I mean, we are talking, first of all, we are talking I remind you that IRISquare is due in 2030, so it's quite a long time away from now. And for us, IRISquare would be the commercial side that will replace the current generation of our satellites. So it would be the continuation of one, the current business and continuation growth of the current business that will be covered by IR2. Having said that, do we have a potential also to cover some of this capacity through European I mean, being requirements or needs from the European states, I would say certainly yes. It's not a commitment from the different states of Europe as of today in the Iris Square project, but there are obviously, as I said before, a lot of discussions with different governments European, but also non-European governments. And there is quite a lot of appetite for this. So we are confident to develop the government business, including with Iris Square and before Iris Square.

Thank you. That's really helpful.

And if the demand doesn't emerge for that commercial capacity, do you think the European Union would be prepared to commit some of that revenue?

I think it's far too early to discuss that. I mean, you know, as Christoph said, we have a billion euro backlog on OneWeb. The Leo proportion of Iris Squared will basically equate to the continuation of OneWeb. which means that in any case, when it gets launched, which is not till the early part of the next decade, it will, in effect, it will already be de-risked by the business which is already on OneWeb. But yeah, I mean, I think, you know, it's far too early to talk about what the, you know, if the demand isn't what it is, that the EU will commit further at this point. I mean, you know, I would also remind you if you look at the, you know, if you look at NovaSpace or if you look at any other of the agencies that, you know, that forecast growth in our sector, I mean, the growth in demand for non-geostationary capacity is huge. So, you know, there's absolutely no reason for us to suppose that demand won't be there. I mean, you know, if people didn't think demand for Leo was there, then we wouldn't be building OneWeb, Amazon wouldn't be building Copa, and you wouldn't have other low orbit constellations. So that's clearly where the demand is for the sector.

Okay, understood. Thank you both.

We will take our next question from Alexander Peter. Bernstein, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Yes, good afternoon to both of you, and thank you very much for taking my question. I would have a few. So the first one is, can you or are you willing to provide additional details or any color on the reasons behind the change in Utah South leadership? That will be my first one, and then I have a couple of follow-ups.

Thank you.

um nothing real to to comment uh on this one uh alexander what what the the only thing the only thing i can say is the uh it's clear that um we are we are in this situation or you know we are we are now uh utasat um is is facing a different challenge. I mean, compared to, you know, we went through the telecom pivot first. Then we had all the PMI or the one web integration and the development of the start of the development of the Rio business. And we are now moving a bit in terms of our environment, and clearly we now need to go for a significant financing. It's a new era that is opening. Eva has been with us for three and a half years now, And she brought a lot of things to the company. I mean, she really brought into life the Telecom Pivot. And she also developed the merge and the integration with OneWeb. And this is, I think, the only thing I can comment. I don't know if, Joe, you want to add something?

No, I don't think there's anything we can add, to be honest. I mean, you've seen a lot of speculation amongst yourselves as well as the press on what might be the reasons for that change, but we have no comment to make.

Okay, that's helpful nonetheless. Thank you very much. My second question is related to the government verticals. I'd like to understand what will be the midterm effects of the geopolitical decoupling between the U.S. and Europe. You've mentioned that demand from the U.S. DOD is lower, and that's partly reflecting these changes. I don't know if you agree with that, but it seems that that's a little bit the case. At the same time, you have a pivot towards more business in Europe being the only non-U.S.-controlled alternative for European governments. So that's probably a tailwind and I'd like to know how this will play out. Should we now expect more growth as a rule in government or should we be more moderate given the potential headwind as your DoD revenue is likely to go lower as a portion of total release?

I think as we said, I mean, you know, the DOD is far lower than it used to be. As you know, I mean, you know, there was a point five years ago when it was 70, 80 percent. So now it's much lower. I mean, you know, I think, I mean, it's difficult, you know, as we said earlier, I mean, this specific renewal coincided just with the, you know, the start of the new administration and, you know, just with the, you know, when Doge was at full speed and, you know, there are lots of people kind of looking around to cut costs. And so, you know, I mean, it's difficult to, see how it will pan out. We think it might be a bit of a knee-jerk reaction and that future campaigns may go back to a more normal rate. But at the moment, obviously, like in a lot of industries that are affected, by the you know the actions of the new US administration it's a bit difficult to know so you know not not much visibility on that I think you know I would say two things though I mean you know that the first is is obviously and as you known as we've communicated before there's obviously there's a lot of interest coming from Europe and and that will take a bit of time to materialize, but we certainly, and I think other operators have said the same thing, we certainly think that interest is there. But it's not only European. We've seen a lot of interest, funnily enough, from Canada, from Canadian institutions as well, for different reasons, but related to the same the same core. I mean, you know, we've mentioned in the past, you know, we've got quite a big contract with Taiwan because, you know, they don't want to be reliant on a U.S. operator. So I think all of that remains. And of course, you know, the other thing, I think more broadly, which is positive, is what's going on now, what's gone on with Ukraine. And now what's going on in the political sphere is really showing that satellite capacity and space have become a much more strategic, I'd say a central strategic part of the toolkit when it comes to sovereignty and defense. So, I mean, yes, the specific actions of the U.S., are a bit difficult to, you know, to kind of fathom in the short term. But I think generally speaking, we're still very confident about the government business.

And just as a follow-up to that, isn't it the case that there's also a migration to Leo services in government and therefore the US will naturally pivot to exclusively Starlink, I suppose, for the time being, whereas Europeans will go to you? Is that what's going to happen? I mean, how quick is the migration to Leo for government services?

Well, I mean, you know, like everything. I mean, there's, you know, there's definitely, there's a migration to Leo. We, you know, we've, I mean, I, you know, I don't think that's specific to government. I think, you know, even with the, you know, even with U.S. companies, it's not certain that anybody wants to be dependent on a monopoly. So I think that holds. I mean, all of these people, particularly in government where you need a high level of security, in some cases guaranteed minimum service levels, then it's quite possible that they will use several providers for backup. So, yeah, I mean, you know, I don't think that I would say anything specific about government migrating to LEO. There are still government, you know, things like troop welfare and other, there are still other applications which can still be served by GEO.

Okay, thank you. And just a last point on Iris Squared. Can you give us an idea how much of the total LEO capacity that that will be built is going to be sellable commercial capacity for you and how much is going to stay with the EU. And as a part of that question, I understand that SCS has access to the Leo iris square capacity as well. They say they will commercialize 10% of it, if I'm not wrong. Is there any reciprocation with your access to their MEO capacity? Are these squads part of the capacities that have any interest to you at all, or do you see no point in it?

Thanks. First to answer your question, Alexander, there are two different capacities, and the European capacity is quite small, actually, because of the business cases, the applications. So the vast majority... of the capacity is the commercial capacity and it's a capacity that is bigger than the current available capacity with our current constellation one second yes you are right ses has access to part or a small part of the leo capacity as well as we could have access to a small part of the Mio capacity. I mean, it's a bit early at this point to... to really position ourselves whether we are going to use or not the MIU capacity but I mean really our focus is you know to be a multi-orbit provider essentially combining LEO and GEO and anyway MIU would be if it was to happen it would be a very small part of the business.

Okay. That's very clear. Thank you very much. That was all I had. Thank you.

We will take our final question from Wolfgang Felix. Saria, your line is open. Please go ahead.

Yes. Hi. Thank you. I'll make a thought then. I was going to ask, your Department of Defense sort of remaining contracts making up, I understand, now approximately 50%, 60% of your government services division. What's the average duration on these contracts from here on? I have absolutely no idea. Would it be one year, three years, five years? then could you just tell me one more time the rush out timing, why does it have no effect on 2025 or 2025, 26? And can you, my third question would be, what is your geoconstellation only, geoconstellation capacity utilization right now? Is there any way that I can calculate that? And my fourth and final question, Can you tell us a bit more about your Leo business right now, i.e. OneWeb, and what is roughly, I guess, revenue in the various segments for the third quarter? Thank you.

Maybe just like we answered on Russia first, the reason why it has no or very limited impact There is a small impact. As you know, we have already removed two channels from our satellites. But these impacts are negligible compared to our business. And this is the reason why we say there is no significant impact for this year. And again, we are only talking of a couple of months or three months for the remaining part of the year because our fiscal year will end. at the end of June. So it's only a couple of months or three months impact. And second, the full year impact, when we mentioned the 16 million euros full year impact, I mean, then we are talking also of further channels that should be removed. And as Joanna mentioned before, I mean, there is a a process of identifying the channels that are really impacted by the sanctions. And this is why also it takes a bit more time to do so. And as such, the expected impact for this fiscal year 25 is nil or very limited.

Okay, thank you.

So on the U.S. DOD, I mean, the contracts vary in length, but a lot of them, so there are two renewal seasons. There's the fall and the spring. I mean, typically, without going into a lot of detail, typically the way it works with the procurement is that they sign a kind of, a five-year framework agreement, but within that framework agreement, they have the possibility to renew or they confirm on an annual basis. In fact, the only thing that we take into the backlog, for example, for those contracts is a year. But we can, I mean, I think probably be easier if we took that question offline. And similarly, for your questions about can we speak about OneWeb, yes. Specifically on figures, we don't break out OneWeb. We don't report OneWeb separately from the group. But if you want to go into more, if you want to have a more detailed chat about OneWeb, I suggest I'll ping you after this call, and then we can do that offline if that's okay with you.

Oh, fantastic. Yes, absolutely. And then I think the geocapacity utilization, I'm also happy to take that offline.

No, no, I mean, geocapacity, it varies. I mean, we don't provide a fill rate. It varies. I mean, we don't provide the fill rate because it's not actually a very helpful indicator because it's more the value than the volume. I mean, it just depends. There are video satellites. where the capacity utilization is still very high, so, you know, probably above 75, 80%. And there are some geo-connectivity satellites where the utilization rate is, or some of the older satellites, I would say, the utilization rate is lower. I mean, if you take something like quantum, the utilization rate is very high. Some of the older connectivity satellites would be lower than that, maybe 50%.

All right. Okay, well, that's it for me for today. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Wolfgang.

That is all the time we have for question and answer session for today. So I'll now hand you back to your host for closing remarks.

Okay, thank you very much for your attention. and now we will meet next time for our full year results at the beginning of august so with that we wish you a very nice evening and and talk to you very soon thank you bye-bye thank you for joining today's call you may now disconnect