Keppel Corp Ltd Ord

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the conference for Capital Limited's first half financial results for 2025. We have on the panel this morning, from your left, Mr. Manjot Singh Mun, CEO Connectivity and CEO M1. Mr. Louis Lim, CEO Real Estate. Ms. Christina Tan, CEO Fund Management and Chief Investment Officer. Mr. Low Chin Hwa, CEO, Mr. Kevin Cheung, CFO, and Ms. Cindy Lin, CEO, Infrastructure. We will begin the session with presentations by CEO Mr. Low Chin Hwa and CFO Mr. Kevin Cheung, followed by the question and answer session. Mr. Low, please.

Good morning. Capital delivered strong results in the first half of 2025. despite a volatile global environment. Underpinned by our timely and impactful transformation into a global asset manager and operator, focused on growing FUM and recurring income with an asset-light strategy. Today, we are recognized as a trusted investment partner with $91 billion in funds under management as at end June 2025. We have also made substantial headway in pivoting to an asset-like model with $7.8 billion in asset monetization announced today. Building on this strong momentum, we are confident of achieving our Vision 2030 interim FUM and asset monetization targets by end 2026. To provide greater clarity on the performance of the new capital, we will be reporting our results excluding a portfolio of non-core assets that are no longer aligned with our strategy and which will be divested over time. The non-core portfolio, which had a carrying value of $14.4 billion as at end June 2025, comprises the legacy offshore and marine assets, residential land bank, selected property developments and investment properties amongst other investments and includes some embedded cash and receivables of $2.9 billion. To be clear, many of these non-core assets are profitable with land banks carried at our historical land cost but they will be separately reported on as they are not part of our business focus, nor do they contribute to New Capital's asset-light model and growing recurring income. Today, the earnings of the New Capital are being funded by only a part of our balance sheet. By reporting the non-core portfolio separately, we aim to provide greater transparency that will enable the market to better assess the progress of the new capital and the returns from our asset-light business as a global asset manager and operator. As we accelerate the growth of new capital, we expect that the market will re-rate our stock price and accord us a growth multiple. In addition, the NAV of the non-core portfolio which we were monetized over time, should also carry further value. In first half 2025, the new capital's net profit surged by about 25% year on year to $431 million, boistered by strong and steady infrastructure earnings and improved contributions from real estate. All segments were profitable during this period, contributing $444 million in recurring income, an increase of 7% year-on-year from $414 million in the first half of 2024. The non-core portfolio incurred a net loss of $53 million in first half 2025 versus a net loss of $41 million in first half 2024. Despite the losses, our all-in net profit for first half 2025 rose 24% year-on-year to $378 million, up from $304 million in first half 2024, underscoring the strength of our core business. In our efforts to drive capital-efficient growth, we achieved an annualized ROE of 15.4% for first half 2025, compared to 13.2% in first half 2024, excluding non-core assets. At the end of June 2025, the net debt to EBITDA of the new capital was 2.4 times. With our asset-light model, the new capital will continue to improve on its ROE and grow our recurring earnings from asset management and operating and maintenance fees as well as other sources of operating income. Monetizing the substantial non-core portfolio, whose carry value is larger than our gross debt, will give us ample opportunity over time to reduce debt, fund growth for the new capital and return capital to shareholders. We will continue to be prudent and nimble in capital management, keeping our operations and costs efficient amidst the volatile landscape. To support our transformation as a global asset manager and operator, we launched Project Lean in late 2024 to streamline how we work and empower our people to focus on what matters. Building on the success of the program, we are now driving further cost optimization outsourcing and digitalization, with some of the savings reinvested into growth areas aligned with Vision 2030, such as building our capabilities to deploy AI at the enterprise level. Through continued streamlining, we have achieved $88 million in recurring annual run rate cost savings, advancing towards our stretch target of $120 million per annum by end 2026. Across CAPL, we are also harnessing digitalization and AI to work better, smarter, and faster, partnering with technology leaders like AWS, OpenAI, and Google to drive meaningful and measurable impact. Our CAPL-wide data lake provides a secure and unified source of trusted information to accelerate decision-making and analysis, and builds on software-as-a-service platforms to achieve greater speed and agility. These efforts have streamlined our processes significantly, reinforcing a culture of doing more with less. The practical use cases of applying AI to our investments, asset management and operating activities have mushroomed. To improve efficiency and speed of adoption, we are churning out agentic AI models from our own AI factory using our proprietary Capital AI Operating System or CAI. In appreciation of the support and confidence of our shareholders, the Board of Directors has approved an interim cash dividend of $0.15 per share for first half 2025. The interim cash dividend, which will be paid to shareholders on 21 August 2025, is the same as last year's interim dividend of $0.15 per share. Reflecting the Board's and Management's confidence in Keppel's growth trajectory and our progress in asset monetisation, we have also announced this morning a $500 million share buyback programme. Shares repurchased under the program will be held as treasury shares, which will be used in part for the annual vesting of employee share plans, as well as currency for future M&A activities, including the satisfaction of our consideration for Phase 2 of the Ammon acquisition come 2028. Shares of capital were tendered as part of the consideration for the acquisition of the first 50% of Ammon in April 2024. These shares were Treasury shares acquired through an earlier share buyback program, which were tendered at a share price of $7.16 but had a cost of approximately $5.80. Earlier this year, we established the Accelerating Monetization Task Force with the aim of optimizing the speed of divestment and exit value of capital's non-core assets. Our intensified efforts have yielded encouraging results. In the year to date, we have announced around $915 million in divestments, including $477 million from real estate assets and investments in India and Vietnam announced yesterday. This brings us to about $7.8 billion in asset monetization announced since October 2020, not including the divestment of operating divisions such as capital offshore and marine. Moving forward, besides accelerating the growth of the new capital, will be laser-focused on monetizing the non-core portfolio, just as we have monetized the $7.8 billion of assets identified earlier in 2020. To this end, I'm pleased to share that we're in the process of negotiating over $500 million worth of real estate and connectivity asset monetization transactions, which we hope to finalize before year-end. This year has been a busy period for our asset management business as we continue to double down on our growth initiatives. In the first six months of the year, we recorded 195 million asset management fees. By the end of June 2025, our FUM reached $91 billion. In the year to date, we have raised about $1.9 billion in equity and completed $6.5 billion worth of acquisitions and divestments across our private and listed vehicles. Our flagship fund strategies for data centers, education assets, and sustainable urban renewal are gaining good traction. Collectively, we have raised FUM of $4.7 billion in the year to date, reinforcing Keppel's brand on the radars of global limited partners. I'm pleased to share that Keppel has been ranked in IPE Real Assets list of top 100 infrastructure managers, emerging as the fourth largest in Asia Pacific and the 23rd largest globally by assets under management. Just last month, we sealed a strategic partnership with AIIB to mobilize up to 1.5 billion U.S. to fund Capel's projects across green and tech-enabled infrastructure and connectivity solutions in Asia-Pacific, solidifying our reputation as a preferred investment and ecosystem partner. In Europe, Amon Capital continues to perform well and contributes meaningfully to Capel's asset management platform. Ammon has made good progress at deploying Fund 5 in promising investments and plans to launch Fund 6 later this year. For financial year 2024, the first year of our acquisition, Ammon recorded a net profit that was 31% higher than what we had projected at the time of acquisition. With a total deal flow pipeline of $39 billion, We see many exciting opportunities ahead for capital to deploy our capital and drive fee generation. Looking ahead, we're likely to enter a more inflationary environment fueled by the effects of tariffs and trade restrictions. Investors are expected to continue favoring asset classes that can provide steady cash flows and which can serve as a hedge against inflation. This will continue to drive demand for alternative real assets, which are underpinned by resilient macro trends, such as the energy transition, digitalization, and the AI wave. In our operating platform, infrastructure continues to be a core and steady pillar for Capo, delivering strong recurring cash flows and contributing to our asset-like model. In first half 2025, net profit from our infrastructure division rose 8% year-on-year to $333 million, while its EBITDA grew 7% to $405 million, despite softer spark spreads. This attests to continued growth in the non-power segment, where we secured new decarbonisation and sustainability contracts and grew long-term supply concessions to $6.8 billion as at end June 2025. Earnings resilience and growth are set to continue with about 1 GW of new power capacity coming online, including the 600 MW Kaposakra co-gen plant in first half 2026, and another potential 3 to 500 MW megawatts of renewable imports from 2028. This will not only expand our earnings, but will also reduce our carbon intensity, reinforcing the infrastructure division as a capital efficient and technology driven growth engine for Keppel. By leveraging Keppel's integrated ecosystem, We are also pushing the boundaries with innovative and sustainable solutions to support the world's growing digital needs. A prime example is our floating data center project. By tapping coastal and offshore spaces, this game-changing solution offers an alternative to land and resource-constrained cities seeking to scale digital infrastructure sustainably. The 25 MW project has recently completed its environmental impact assessment in Singapore and is being committed to a global hyperscaler. Subject to final approvals from the authorities, we expect to start construction later this year and target completion by end 2028. When completed, Keppel's Floating Data Centre project a proprietary asset funded by the Capital Data Center Fund II, will be the first of its kind in Asia-Pacific with a full-scale proof-of-concept for the region. We see strong potential for its replication in Singapore and beyond, especially in markets where land, power and water are limited. I am also pleased to share that significant progress has been achieved in the development of the Bifrost cable system, The cable laying operations are now complete and the cable system is expected to be ready for service by the end of September this year. The significant milestone boisters our track record in delivering large-scale digital infrastructure projects, paving the way for future cable systems to connect more regions and geographies. To conclude, While the external environment is highly volatile, we are on our way to realizing Vision 2030. Keppel today is a highly valued ecosystem partner who brings together capital, capabilities and innovation to deliver strong returns to our shareholders and LPs while contributing to a more sustainable and connected world. We will look to accelerate the growth of the new Keppel and focus on monetizing the non-core portfolio as soon as possible, which we are confident would lead to a further re-rating of capital by the market. When we succeed, the new capital will be a leading global asset manager and operator, focused on fast-growing sectors across sustainability and digital infrastructure, areas experiencing strong tailwinds and where capital is uniquely positioned to lead. With $200 billion in FUM, our earnings will be anchored by strong recurring income from asset management fees and long-term operating contracts. By 2030, the $14.4 billion non-core portfolio should be substantially monetized, providing ample capital for the new capital to grow reduce our debt, and also reward our shareholders. Our asset line model can be expected to deliver an ROE significantly above 15%. CFO's Kevin will now take you through details of the company's financial performance. Kevin.

Thank you, CEO, and a very good morning to all. I shall now take you through Keppel's financial performance. Our net profit for first half 2025 was 378 million, 24% higher than the 304 million for first half 2024. Consequently, annualized ROE was higher at 7.2%. Net debt to EBITDA was lower than last year end, mainly due to higher EBITDA. Free cash outflow was $48 million improved in first half of 2025 from the outflow of $216 million in the prior period mainly due to net cash inflow compared to outflow from operating activities arising from positive working capital changes partly offset by higher net cash use in investing activities Excluding non-core portfolio for divestment, net profit of New Capital was $431 million as compared to $345 million in first half 2024. The non-core portfolio for divestment comprises mainly of legacy offshore and marine assets, residential land banks selected property developments and investment properties hospitality and logistic assets as well as the other non-core investments that are not aligned with capital strategic focus as an asset like global asset manager and operator and which will be divested over time as at end June 2025 the carrying value of non-core portfolio was 14.4 billion 61% or 8.8 billion comprises property related assets 33% or $4.8 billion of legacy offshore and marine assets and 6% or $0.8 billion of investments and others. Included in the $14.4 billion was $2.9 billion of associated cash and receivables. As mentioned by CEO, to provide greater clarity on the performance of new capital, in the next few slides, I will be presenting our financials excluding the effects of the non-core portfolio for divestment. Net profit of new capital increased 25% year-on-year to $431 million. Real estate achieved higher earnings, while infrastructure and connectivity recorded lower profits. Infrastructure continues to be the largest contributor to capital's earnings, followed by real estate and connectivity. Analyzed ROE improved to 15.4% in first half 2025 from 13.2% a year ago. Net debt to EBITDA was 2.4 times as at end June this year, comparable to end December 2024. The increase in net debt due to investments during the period was largely offset by improved EBITDA. In line with our focus on growing recurring income, new capital generated cash inflows from operating activities. Together with divestment proceeds from the non-core portfolio, we reinvested the cash to fund capital calls from sponsor stakes and co-investments, as well as acquisitions, resulting in a free cash outflow of $232 million in the first half of the year. Improved operating income from infrastructure and lower operating loss from real estate were partly offset by lower asset management earnings. translating into recurring income of $444 million, which is 7% higher than the $414 million a year ago. Higher valuation gains were led by higher fair values on investment properties and investments. Divestment gains increased year on year, arising from monetizations from real estate and connectivity. Net loss from corporate activities was $17 million, with net interest income being offset by higher taxes. Moving on to segmental performance. Infrastructure segment recorded a net profit of $346 million in first half 2025, 5% on $90 million lower than the $365 million in first half 2024. Asset management net profit declined as first half 2024 benefited from acquisition fees from Capital Infrastructure Trust's acquisition of a German solar portfolio. and an Australian transportation business, as well as fees from better performance achieved by KIT. This partly offset the divestment fee from KIT's disposal of its interest in the petroleum products import storage facility in the Philippines, as well as lower costs in first half 2025. Stronger operating income was supported by higher contributions from decarbonization and sustainability solutions, as well as sponsor stakes and co-investments. These were partly offset by lower earnings from integrated power business as a result of lower contractor spreads. The segment recorded lower fair value gains from its sponsor stakes in private funds in the first half of 2025. Real estate segment achieved a net profit of $98 million, a significant improvement compared to the net loss of $20 million a year ago. Asset management net profit of $41 million was $22 million higher year-on-year, arising from six months contribution from AMON which was acquired in April last year. Higher management fees following the first closings of two funds in 2024, as well as lower costs. Operating income was $10 million higher year-on-year, mainly due to higher contribution from sponsor stakes and lower interest costs, partly offset by higher losses from the senior living business. The segment recorded valuation gains of $27 million from investment properties and sponsor stakes in first half 2025. In first half 2025, real estate also completed and recorded gains from the partial disposal of Saigon Center Phase 3 in Vietnam. Net profit from connectivity segment of $57 million was 19% or $13 million lower than $70 million in first half 2024. Asset management net profit was slightly higher year on year at $14 million, mainly from higher management fees following the acquisition of two assets by Capital DC REIT and first close of DC Fund 3 both in December 2024. Operating income was marginally lower at $40 million mainly due to lower earnings from M1, partly offset by higher contributions from capital DC REIT. The lower valuation gains from sponsor stakes in private funds and the forfeiture fee paid by M1 were partly offset by higher valuation gains from a data center investment. Net loss from non-core portfolio was $53 million as compared to $41 million in first half 2024. Net loss of legacy O&M assets of $91 million in first half 2025 was mainly due to interest costs attributable to legacy rigs, fair value loss from Citrum shares, and share of loss from an associate, although both recorded much lower losses year on year. As mentioned by CEO, many of the non-core assets are profitable. For first half 2025, the property-related non-core assets registered a net profit of $86 million, mainly driven by gains from divestments in China and Vietnam, which were partly offset by operating and fair value losses on investment properties and losses from development projects. Investment and others recorded net loss of $48 million, mainly from fair value losses on investments, partly offset by gain on the disposal of Computer Generated Solutions Inc. in the United States. With that, we have come to the end of the presentation, and I shall now hand the time back to CEO for the Q&A session. Thank you.

Thanks, Kevin. Maybe for a start, I will invite questions from those who are present here. Yes, Joy? Maybe you can... You can...

say who you are, where you are from. Two questions. First of all on ROE, you previously spoke about a 15% ROE target and I believe that was on a group basis. Now that you have a separate capital to new and old and your new capital is already at 15% or above 15%, What do you think is actually a sort of optimal ROE for the new capital debt portion? First question. Second question is on the old capital or the non-core segment. The NAV, I think, is about $4.7 billion from the account.

how sustainable is that NAV or how realizable is that NAV and once you realize how should we think about return to shareholder for that 4.7 billion thank you so I think the way we think about it is that the ROE for the new capital is not surprising to us that it's already at 15% because it is a very asset like uh model uh particularly uh a lot of these businesses are built organically right uh including our asset management businesses so the roe we would expect to be quite high i think the key focus is not to set another new target for roe but to see how can we achieve even you know a higher roe over time as we monetize the old capital or the non-core because with that we will be able to also fund new growth but at the same time we can also reduce our debt so the ROE going up by itself is not important is the fact that we is accompanied by a reduction of leverage over time and of course part of the ROE improving above over time would be driven by reducing the denominator as we return capital to our shareholders so it's the earnings going up recurring earnings going up and also reducing debt and reducing shareholders equity as we return capital to shareholders now in terms of your second question on the non-core uh yes the nav is i think correct 4.7 but i think significantly uh you know as we return we are going to uh over time monetize this 14.4 which includes about 2.9 billion of cash and receivables that are already embedded So that means that we don't actually have to so-called sell 14.4. We just need to unlock 14.4 minus the 2.9 more or less before the embedded cash and receivables are released. We will be looking to also reduce the debt over time, right? Because as we sell, it's not just releasing the 4.7 billion in NAV, but you will be reducing the debt significantly. I haven't, yeah. Suki? I'm going to read Brendan first. I think he was, yeah. Sorry, we'll come back to you, Joy.

Hey, thanks. Thanks, Yuval. Morning. Brandon from Citi. Just a few questions. The first one on the share buyback. I think basically I want to know how do you intend to execute this 500 million? I think the last thing you did in FY22, you did it on a very consistent day-by-day basis. And back then, the stock was trading below NAV. But I think today, your stock at 873, it's really way above the... So is this going to be a consistent day by day thing again? Or is it going to be when you think that the stock is cheap? If you can share with us your level, then yeah, that's my first question. And the second is related to the final dividend again. Why not higher Egypt dividend or why not lower Gearing? but a shareable estate given where the stock is already trading. That's my second question. The third question is, if you were to look at the 31% jump in AMON's net profit, how much would your EV EBITDA be on your acquisition price and would it impact the acquisition price for the remaining 50%? Thanks.

So maybe I ask Chris to address the third question.

Okay, sure. Hi, Brendan. Morning. On the M1s, actually, because of the 31% increase in profits compared to what we've underwritten, in terms of the multiple, we actually bought 11 times. compared to actually where you see most global managers buying other platforms ranging from 20 to 30 times. So I would say that because we have done our homework well, we have actually set a cap as well for the pricing, both the first tranche as well as the second tranche. I think we have done quite a good job in terms of this acquisition.

So on the share buyback, I think the way to think about it is that we are not just only thinking about returning capital, but also in this instance, this share buyback will be used to fulfill the equity share plan that we have for employees and also to be used as a currency for our future M&A. Immediately, there is a Phase 2 of the AMON acquisition, which would be partly funded like the Phase 1 by shares, and this is due in 2028. So this is something that I think we are very mindful of, and we can see that the first as I mentioned in my remarks opening remarks for the first tranche of 50% last year we tendered the shares to Ammon at I think around 7 something whereas the cost was actually 580 so we think that as we continue to set capital on this new trajectory as I mentioned we expect it to be re-rated And then as we are able to monetize the non-core over time, we will see that we expect the share price to perform. So I think in terms of timing of the share buybacks obviously we're not going to uh be so so transparent but i think this will be something that we will look i mean it's a need so it's not just it's not just a strategy it's just that we need we do need these shares and we are not going to we we prefer not to issue new shares because we think that uh you know that would be dilutive especially where we think capital is going okay I think the circumstances will depend on the market so all I can say is that this is a need for us because we do need these shares and we are prefer to buy from the market rather than to issue new shares and you know we will execute it over time but it is very clear that we do need these shares thanks yeah ask you keep us intention

Hi. Just wanted to check on your $500 million asset monetization plan in discussion. There are $500 million of real estate and connectivity assets. What are the connectivity assets and why is it only $500 million?

Okay. The connectivity asset is not the ones that are being developed so it wouldn't include say for instance the floating data center park I mean the floating data center as an example but this would be a so called an asset a non-core asset in Europe that's held in a balance sheet it's not a very big asset then we also have China lost its

This also includes the China logistics non-core assets that we've held for a long time and they will be monetized very soon.

Okay, thank you. So just curious that in your 14 billion portfolios, you didn't include any connectivity assets?

Maybe I asked Kevin to address that. The connectivity assets are mostly in new core capital. Sorry, in new capital, not in your non-core portfolio.

Thank you. And then just wanted to just check on the updates on connectivity. You know, the pairs and whether you have actually made any traction in promoting or selling the next few pairs and how much is it? Because we already had the numbers that are floated around and it would be good to actually now that you know you have better visibility, you can just tell us the construction cost and or profit for what you can sell for the first two pairs at least?

Because you said that. I think we do look at it not just at individual pairs, we look at the overall project and I think what we've indicated is that we expect the IRR to be about 30%. Maybe just to give you a bit of sense of where the market is now for fiber pairs. Can I invite Ahmad to address it?

Yeah, thanks. So to your question, the RFS, like Chinua mentioned, would be completed by September this year. On sale of further fiber pairs, there is a certain amount of premium that we are expecting because this is one of its kind, fiber pair, that connects to Singapore to the U.S. And we are in advanced talks with multiple either OTT operators or telecom operators who are showing keen interest to look at this fiber pair because, like I said, this is one of its kind that does not touch South China Sea. So we should be able to monetize this very quickly. I can't give you the numbers, unfortunately, but the reality is that this will demand and command a premium over other fiber pairs available in the market. Thank you, Man.

Thank you. I just have one last question on the fair value gain on the measurement of remaining interest in the JV of $138 million. What is that, firstly? I mean, I know that that is actually a rose from the non-core portfolio. So can we just know what is that? And does that actually mean that that's why your overall as a group Core and non-core, even though you have actually monetized about $900 million of assets, your total gain from all these assets is only giving you about $140 million gain. Whether that $138 million has actually offset the gain.

Kevin, you know what I'm talking about. Let me do this. So maybe just to kind of emphasize the point that both Kevin and I made during our remarks. The non-core portfolio is on the basis of that it doesn't fit our business model of the new capital. So actually, many of these non-core assets are actually profitable. Our land bank is still held at historical cost. So the gain from this revaluation arises, I believe, and maybe, Kevin, you can... It's on a project that we announced a sale of 30% interest in Tianjin. where we made a gain from the sale, but because it's still a joint venture, so there is a revaluation of the other 70%. So that's a result because the, and it shows that Even though the market in China is quite challenging, this land bank was probably, let me ask Louis, this was something that we owned how many years ago? Over 20. So it's a very old land that we held at cost. So despite the challenging market environment in China today, we are still able to book again on the sale of the partial sale and also the revaluation gain. So we have a question. Tan Shen, maybe Tan Shen first.

Hi, Shen from Goldman here. First question is on acquisitions. If I look at your cash flow for investing, that has also increased. Can you share a bit more about what are these and also going forward as you monetize, what are the kind of acquisitions that you will look to make on your balance sheet?

Maybe I ask Kevin.

The investments that we invested in the UK was generally, if you recall, we advertised that we bought over Global Marine Group. A large part of that cash outflow was pertaining to that investment.

So the way we have to think about it is that over time we will continue to grow the new capital and this will be in the form of investments into co-investments in funds. We are not going to buy something 100% on our balance sheet. So that means that the cash flow is likely to be outflow for the new capital. At the same time, on the so-called non-core, as we monetize, you will see that the cash inflow will become more positive. So, in a way, the non-core will be used to fund the growth in the new capital. And then, of course, we would expect that there will be a possibility for us to reduce debt overall and also to reward shareholders as we monetize the non-core.

Can you help us to break down $14 billion if you divest it fully? How would you allocate between acquisitions, shareholder return and debt repayment?

You know I can't go there.

Rough sense? Sorry?

Rough sense? Rough sense, no. I think you can see that as we manage. I mean, we're doing it in a very... discipline way so I think even though we see that I think the key for us is to really be laser focused on monetizing this 14.4 then that will give us the opportunity to pay down debt return capital and fund growth I think that's that's key right so it's we got to get that part done correctly and done right

Last question, M1 is under new capital. Are you still open for divestment?

It's under new capital and we are still open.

Thank you. Hi, I'm Zoe from Macquarie. Thank you for the presentation today. I have two questions. First one is on M1, the second one is on your real estate business. Now, for M1, can we just understand what's your strategy for the business here? First of all, if you look at this semi-annualist number, the consumer numbers are still on the decline. And then when you acquired the 700 MHz spectrum, you did two things. First, you took only one band, which seems a little bit inefficient. The second one is that you actually paid in a deferred payment scheme using IMDA's deferred payment option, which charges interest of 4.2%. I think Capos Group's cost of financing is lower and could have just lent this money to M1 to invest. So could you just kind of help us understand what's the long-term strategy for the M1 consumer business? Do you intend to continue investing in it?

I think we all know the telco market in Singapore is under a lot of competitive pressures. Maybe I invite Mun to just give a very broad overview of what we are doing, how we have been able to maintain EBITDA.

Clearly the market is under severe competitive pressure. Four operators and close to seven surviving MVNOs. It's an overcrowded market. And we are seeing a lot of SIM only plans replacing contract plans. And that is why there is a bit of an ARPU dilution as well. We've been able to hold ARPUs to a certain extent, but clearly the market is seeing the decline in ARPU levels. And the mobile business is on a decline for all operators. It's not just us. Having said that, I think the good part that we've done are twofold. One, we've been able to pivot our business towards the enterprise business as well. Our growth is significant. Today almost 50% of our overall revenues come from enterprise. And this is not just Singapore. Singapore is growing. Malaysia is growing. We just acquired a company in Vietnam as well. So we do plan to have a very strong presence in the ICT business in Singapore and in the region. So that contributes to our EBITDA as well. The second thing that we are doing is in terms of cost management. I think, you know, running a business at the ARPU levels that it is today and expected in the next few years is The cost base that we've been running the business at for these many years is not sustainable. So clearly we are working on the cost base and putting that together with our enterprise business, we've been able to hold, in fact not just hold, we've grown our EBITDA by about 3%. So, our EBITDA is steady, our profits are steady. Now, coming back to your 700 megahertz question, I think it's not entirely inefficient to take one lot because as technology evolves, you can do carrier aggregation as well. So, there is an opportunity for us to use 700 megahertz. Why did we take only one lot? Because clearly there is Antenna, a joint venture that we have with StarHub. So, we do see opportunity of us rolling out together and aggregating our spectrums. So, there is the penalty that we paid to return one lot was about 14 million as you would know. So, it is not just our one lot that we look at, we look at the combined availability of spectrum. The other thing is that Singapore, of course, is pretty well covered from a 4G and 5G perspective. 700 came a little too late in Singapore for us to be able to deploy. And in this period, we have gone on and deployed a significant amount of in-building coverage for 500 with our 2100 megahertz spectrum. So both the umbrella coverage of 5G as well as indoor coverage of 5G is pretty well taken care of. So we don't see 700. being that significantly different at this point in time to coverage in Singapore. So therefore, I don't think we are being either inefficient. I think we are being very prudent in the ways that we have to deploy our capital, considering how the market is, because ultimately we can invest only as much as we are able to earn. And I think the market is looking competitive, so we have to make sure that we – we are prudent in the way we invest our capital. So therefore we decided to have only one lot instead of the two lots.

So maybe just to supplement what Man said in response to your question, I think it's also being a, as what Man says, taking a very prudent way of looking at this that we believe that market consolidation is good, it will happen, I believe it's good for the market, good for consumers not just for the telcos but good for consumers and I think we also have to be mindful that you know when it happens we do not know so I think we do need to make sure that we have enough spectrum to meet our requirements and our obligations and then if we are looking at the possibility of you know some divestment in the future then not taking up this so-called progressive payment offered by IMDA is actually we believe is quite smart. I mean this would be a good way to look at this. position ourselves that eventually there's a possibility that it could be monetized. So you don't really want to pay for all of it up front. So I think that's kind of how we look at it. I think maybe to be fair, there are a couple of questions online. So maybe I go to the questions online and then we can circle back. First question was from Alvin Chua of Kai Huat Trading. Alvin says, congratulations on delivering an outstanding set of results this half with strong earnings growth, improving ROE and significant progress in monetization. Does the Board intend to reward shareholders beyond the current payout, perhaps through higher full-year dividends or special dividends in the near term? Well, as Alvin, you know, this is just an interim dividend. The full year, the final dividend will be decided at the end of the year. And I think the board is well aware that dividends is important to many of our shareholders. But we have to balance all of that in mind. What? Our shareholders are looking for, at the same time, the capital needs of capital going forward. So, you know, we'll bear all this in mind. Thank you for your question. Second question is from Derek Tan of DBS. Congrats on winning the global accolades. I'm not sure which global accolades is mentioned. Oh, the IPE. Okay, thank you. In your commentary, Mr Low, you mentioned SGD $39 billion in deal flow. How much of that can be converted to FUM and in which sectors? Infrastructure, DC. So maybe I ask Chris to address this question first.

Yeah, Derek. In terms of the $39 billion of deal flow that we're looking at, I think we have very strong deal flow pipeline in the infrastructure, especially on digital infrastructure and data centers where capital strong operating capabilities are. So you would probably see about at least $15 billion of each, whether it's in infrastructure and digital infrastructure for data centers as well. In terms then, real estate contributes about at least $9 billion in terms of due flow pipeline. So we are seeing actually very strong due flow pipeline in the markets and this is looking good for us.

Derek has a second question. In terms of asset recycling and growth, what is the group's transitioning of capital South Central into a listed platform? I think first and foremost, the building that we're in currently, Keppel Bay Tower, was actually on our balance sheet. But of course, a few years ago, it was sold to Keppel Reed. So it's now part of our FUM. Could this also happen with Keppel South Central? Of course, that's a possibility. But of course, we need to get the leasing up first to stabilize the leasing. So maybe I ask Louis to give a quick update on the progress there.

So we have been getting very good interest in Keppel South Central. We have leased and are in active discussions with about 50% occupancy. So we really look forward to filling up the space soon.

And Derek has one last question. How about possible platform acquisitions, REITs and fund managers in Asia to grow your REITs? And maybe Chris?

Yeah, sure. I think we are always open to looking at more M&A activities, especially after the experience with Amont, where actually I think we bought well and the group integrated really well. And we can see that Amont, through their specialization in terms of real estate PE acquisitions. They have done really well and investors like it and actually they are able to do quite active acquisitions in Europe as well as to actually thinking of starting a new fund, Fund 6 for Edmont. So we are always open to looking at platform acquisitions and whether it's in REITs or fund managers as well. I think we are not just limited to Asia. We are also open to looking at different platforms in Europe as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Chris and Louis. Joe Hsu of DBS Singapore has two questions. First question, are there plans to refinance or redeem the 400 million perpetuals? uh and i think second question also could you provide more details on real estates 100 million dollars of operating profit and 66 million of associate jv while revenue for real estate sales are 94 million maybe i asked uh kevin yeah two questions thanks joe um maybe just on the first question first yes you know that's something that we are

closely monitoring. But maybe just to add on that, we continue to give very, very good support for our funding source, particularly in Singapore. So that's something that we are watching very closely as it relates to answering the question when the time for the professionals become due because of the optionality that we have with the amounts. And then the second question on real estate and breakdown, maybe just to clarify, the operating profit for real estate also includes fair value and divestment gains, right? So the associates that you have identified of 66 million, that includes things like Amon, Capital Reit and SSTEC that are all included in that balance.

Okay, he has a third question. How soon do you think your non-core portfolio can be divested? Understanding that there's significant level of debt relating to these assets. As I've said earlier, our focus really must be on divesting or monetizing this non-core portfolio. And we do expect that by 2030, this non-core portfolio should be substantially monetized.

Hello, this is Rachel Tan from UBS. I have two questions. The first being that management has talked about the share price we're rating. So just to ask, who are the comparables that we should be looking at for both capital and non-capital as it pertains to the different businesses?

Okay, I think for the way we think the market should look at us is as we continue on this path to becoming a growing ourselves into a leading global asset management operator you have to be looking at some of the global peers in the asset management space we are a bit unique we have not just asset management we also have very strong operations as well So whether it's group like Brookfield, KKR, Blackstone, BlackRock. I mean, this would be the group of peers that perhaps the market should look at. And then I think the non-core, there's really no comparable to look at because this will be a portfolio that we will be looking to monetize over time. So it's really about how soon we can monetize and whether we can get good outcomes in terms of the price that we monetize at. So I think that's kind of how I think we should look at it.

Sorry, thank you. My second question is on the connectivity side. So you look at M1 as a monolith. Because on one hand, you said that you are open for divestment. But on the other hand, you talk about focusing on enterprise. And in previous briefings, you've talked about value adding and synergies with the data center portfolio. So how should we look at reconciling all of this? Thank you.

I think you heard from Man, the ICT side is an area that we have continued to grow and we believe that there is a lot of synergies with our data centre business. So when we talk about potentially monetising, we're really looking at the consumer mobile side. But maybe Man, you want to talk a bit about the synergies? Yes, sure.

So one, of course, is a running business. So we have to we have to grow the business. That's our objective. So as much as mobile business is under pressure, you know, we are still trying and fighting hard in that business. So we're not giving up clearly. On the enterprise side is where we see opportunities. So clearly a lot of our management attention, our investments are also going into creating this enterprise business. But it does, apart from just, you know, doing management network business or device as a service business in the ICT space, a lot of solutions that we are doing today in the ICT space is on cloud solutioning. you know, creating hybrid cloud solutions for enterprise, data center modernization work. And we do see that there is a huge amount of synergy that we can derive because at this point in time, all the solutions that we create for enterprises, they need a host. They need a home for their data center operations. So we do see that over a period of time. Some capacity that we create in our data centers can be monetized through enterprise co-locations that our own enterprise business brings to Cabot Data Center. So that's the synergy, that's the pipeline that we are creating. Because today we do see a lot of organizations digitalizing their businesses and looking for either hybrid cloud or multi-cloud solutions. So that's where we do see a synergy between our enterprise business and our data center business. Thank you.

Maybe I take a question. You have one more question before I take the question from you. Go ahead.

so the 14.4 billion that you talked about it's based on what you deem to be the fair value of these assets versus the NIV of 4.7 because you talked about holding them at cost maybe 14.4 is the carrying value of the assets that we have the total assets so it's a mixture as Kim Hoa has alluded to some of these are still carried at cost so the 14.4 you should

measure as you said also in our address earlier on that it's got several components as I've broken down including the 2.9 billion that Chin Hoa has also highlighted in terms of cash okay maybe I move on to take another question from the web this is from Mayang of Morgan Stanley his question capital X non-core assets are still FC free cash flow negative Can you help share the path to positive free cash flow and debt reduction? Also, can you help us understand the annual investment target for 2025? So I think I've covered this earlier, and I think the way we think about it is that the new capital is still growing. So over time, we would expect investments to continue to be made there. But of course, this has to be funded from the monetization or from the non-core investments. and when we monetize the non-core it will be used to reduce our overall debt fund growth in the new capital and also to reward our shareholders. So that's kind of how we look at it and in a way it comes back to the first point that we made that the critical part is really about focusing on the monetization and we have already achieved $7.8 billion from the target that we have set before. you know if you look at whether it is our project lean about sharing our shaving off our costs overhead costs run rate on a run rate basis or its monetization or its fum targets i think we have been quite forthright in terms of setting targets that we share with the market and so far we have been able to hit those targets or we are on our way to hitting those targets so i think this is something that we believe will help the market understand us and also understand the path that we are taking it is a path that you know requires you know if you think about it a few years ago quite a quite a big change so i think it's important to set not just long-term targets but also to set interim milestones which we have done so that you the market can then judge for themselves how well we have done are we on track And I think this monetization is perhaps more important in terms of the timing rather than trying to maximize the profit from the non-core. I think the key is really how quickly we are able to monetize this non-core. Okay, sorry, I want to take one more question. And then I'll come back. Two more questions and then I'll come back to you. In terms of annualized fee to FUM, oh sorry, this is a question from Gula Warden of The Edge. In terms of annualized fee to FUM, is there an optimal ratio? For the REITs and private funds, what is the optimal stake that Capital plans to have? Is there a particular percentage of listed funds versus private funds for your $200 billion target? In terms of sectors, asset management fees and operating services, how would the $200 billion look like in percentage? Maybe Chris, you can...

Hi, Gola. In terms of our annualized fee to FUM, I think if you see the global managers, you would see a range from 40 BIPs to 50 BIPs. So I guess for our modeling, we had used 50 BIPs in terms of a $200 billion target, resulting in a fee of about $1 billion. In terms of the percentage of listed versus private funds, actually right now if you see our composition, it's about two-thirds private funds, one-third listed funds. Going forward, would we have the same percentage? I think about 60-40 would be quite a good number to have. as well. And in terms of our asset management fees versus operating services, how would the $200 billion look like in percentage? For I think you're talking more about the segments, which are the allocation. I think we have said before we don't really allocate. But right now, we would see that the books are quite heavier on the real estate side as we started real estate funds management a bit earlier. But going forward, we would see that essential services and infrastructure, digital infrastructure, data centers are actually one of the hottest sectors, and Capo's really good in this. So we would see probably allocation to, if you may need the kind of allocation, it's probably a third each.

So maybe, Chris, I just try to address this question in a slightly different way. I think we don't look at this as kind of a competing, right? Because actually they are self-reinforcing. Because if we, for instance, on infrastructure, if we have more FUM, it means that we can maybe build more power plants, we can build more waste-to-energy plants, we can do more things, we can own and operate more assets, and as a result, the operating O&M fees, the operating income will also go up. So it's actually not one or the other. Actually, it's actually reinforced. So as the asset management fees go up with the FUM, We would also expect the O&M fees and the operating income from our operating division to also go out, whether it's an infrastructure asset or it's a waste-to-energy asset, power asset, or it is a digital fiber system that we are building. So we can actually generate a flywheel from that. Now let me move on to the next question which I will ask Cindy to address. This is from Mr Pillai from the Business Times. It is mentioned that Keppel expects another potential 300 to 500 MW of renewable power imports from 2028. Could you share more on which markets Keppel will be focusing on for renewable import projects? What opportunities does Keppel see in the broader development of the ASEAN power grid, Cindy?

Thank you, Mr Low. Thank you Mr Pillai. With regards to the importation of renewable We are targeting Indonesia. You would have heard from our earlier media release that we are awarded conditional license to import 300 megawatt of renewable from Indonesia. Beyond that, we also have a conditional approval of up to 1 gigawatt from another ASEAN generating resource. To highlight, these three megawatts will actually translate to an upstream generation capacity of nearly 2 to 2.5 gigawatts of PVs, as well as approximately 5 gigawatt hours of battery. So these are very large-scale renewable generation projects that we have unlocked. The opportunities for ASEAN Power Grid is very promising. You will have heard from our Energy Minister that about 30% of Singapore energy mix by 2030 will be made up of renewable importation. So we see Keppel as a frontrunner in these regards and we will be playing our part to work with regulatory authorities across ASEAN as well as with agencies in Singapore to make this happen. More importantly, it's also unlocking the demand off-taker. As you have heard earlier, throughout the conversation, there's a lot of synergy for us to bring low carbon and renewable power to capture the connectivity space, specifically the high demand for AI data centers. Thank you.

Thank you, Cindy. Okay, Tan Hsieh, maybe start with you.

Hi, my first question is on infra. So as capacity comes on stream 2026, do you expect further pressure in terms of your spark spread? If that's the case, will the decarbonization and also sulfur cogen contribution help to offset the pressure on the operating profit level?

Thank you. Cindy?

Thank you, Sven. When the Kappa Sakura CoGen come on stream first half 2026, which by the way the project team is working very hard to accelerate the commercial operation, so we hope to give positive surprise if the power plant can come on stream earlier. Now, this will expand our generation capacity by nearly 50% from 1.3 gigawatt to 1.9 gigawatt. So you are right, there might be a softening of the spread in the local market. The extraordinary large spread in 2022 has more or less normalized in the past one, two years. But this will be offset, like I said, by our volume expansion, that's number one. And number two, we have also diligently improved the efficiency of our existing fleet. We have completed the high-efficiency upgrade of both of our F-classes in Kepa, Melimao, Khojan. So on a blended basis, I think our generation efficiency and our market share will allow us to continue to deliver strong and predictable growing earnings from our integrated power business.

Thank you. We have a follow-up question.

Sorry if I can squeeze in two questions. First is on the cost saving. If I look at your corporate cost, it's unchanged at $17 million. Where is the cost saving flowing through? And then second is real estate. In terms of the new real estate business, what is actually classified here and how should we think about this business in three years' time?

Kevin, you can take the first question. Sure. Thanks, John. So just on the cost savings, maybe just to explain corporate activities. Corporate activities is actually quite a wide range of expenses that we have. So it's not just on staff costs per se. As it relates to Project Lean and Aroha Chin Hora is guided to, the $88 million savings essentially stems from an exercise that we've done in terms of looking at efficiencies in the organization. It is being tracked in terms of the headcount and the resources that we no longer need when we came together as one capital. and now the second phase is really looking and now that we come together and we look into the future you know what are some of the enhancements that we put in place in terms of automation, digitalization so that is in relation to how we would track those cost savings from a cost perspective I think one way to think about the 17 million that you're comparing is if we hadn't done this savings the number that you'll be seeing today will be a lot higher than what we're reporting from a from a cost perspective i think the other point is that some of these cost savings is on a run rate basis so it may take there might be a left

Because let's say if there is some cost that we incur to achieve that savings, that actually shows up first. But the point is that this is more recurring going forward. And then to Kevin's point, some of this is also reinvested into things like data, AI, etc.

On the real estate front, we have actually reorganized ourselves in line with this concept of new capital. So the real estate team is essentially split into three areas where we focus on. The first is what we describe as supporting our existing funds, particularly for the Keppel Sustainable Urban Renewal Fund, as well as for the Education Fund. And the activities here span from providing technical solutions, sustainability solutions, but also supporting the underwriting, the asset management, including leasing. So we have a team that really focuses on supporting the funds. Then we have teams that really work on incubating businesses that can be future funds. So there's CERN, but beyond CERN, we also have an urban solutions business. So there's a team together, Urban Solutions with Sustainable Urban Renewal. Senior living is an area that we have invested in. As you know, we have acquired the remaining 50% of Watermark in the US, and there's a lot of tailwinds in that business given the demand-supply dynamics. But in Asia as well, we have the Nanjing project, which is filling out nicely. We have about 100 residents now. And we are also looking at contracts in China with the likes of Ping An, where we've signed an agreement. And so that's the second one. And then the third one is we have a very strong retail business in Vietnam. And so on the back of that, we are looking at creating a Vietnam retail fund as well, building on Saigon Center, Estella Place, and then we're going to be launching Hanoi Center soon. So that's the second group. And then the third group would be people who are managing that non-core portfolio. So both in terms of monetization, but also optimization. Actually, Sean's right here, he's leading a project called Springtime for our Spring City project in China, which is really to drive up revenues and manage costs. So we have teams that really focus on the existing portfolio, which we call now non-core, and to get the most value out of it. And that leads to a lot of this cost savings that we're talking about. So I think the real estate division has contributed a lot to that $88 million, and that's by exiting from projects. So for example, the Myanmar hotel that we sold a few years ago, that had a lot of headcount that we were able to separate from. We also more recently got out of the Philippines. So just culling the portfolio will help us to generate value as well as savings.

I see Pei Hua, I think.

Morning, Pei Hua from DBS. I have two questions. First one is on NIFA structure, also in the SACRA plan. I just want to understand how much of the capacity has been contracted? What's the strategy in terms of this contracting? Second question is on dividend payout policy. We used to mention that we intend to pay out maybe 50% to 60% of the core profit. With the new capital, how does that affect our payout going forward?

Maybe Cindy, you want to take the first question on SACRAF?

So, Sucker CoGen is the most efficient state-of-the-art turbine technology that will be planted in Singapore. So, suffice to say, out of our entire generation capacity of 1.9 GW by 2026, we are sufficiently contracted for a large part of this portfolio beyond three years.

I think on the dividend policy, we don't have a dividend policy but we know dividends are important to our shareholders and we've been paying somewhere around $50, $60. In fact, we've been drifting more towards $60 and above. And I think this is really also as we get more visibility on our earnings as they become more recurring versus what it was maybe five, six years ago where a large portion of our earnings are actually very trading-oriented, a bit more volatile. uh we we we are able to then take a view on uh how much uh of the profit we can actually pay out in dividends and we know that dividends are important so all i can say is that you know we will we will always put that in mind but i think the other part is that as we grow the new capital I hope that investors will also see that there's a value in the growth of capital. But ultimately, it's total shareholders' returns. So we're very focused on total shareholders' returns, which includes both dividends and share performance. Yes, Dexter, right?

Can I ask one quick technical question first? On your non-core assets, do you actually have a breakdown of what exactly those assets are?

We know these assets obviously, otherwise there wouldn't be a portfolio. But I think you understand that there is some commercial sensitivity in terms of what we can share. I think we have given you some broad outline.

So on that respect then, I see on page 41, obviously you did give a general breakdown. But most of your residential land bank, for example, is in China. So is it fair to assume that most of the exposure in terms of this $14.4 billion would be in China then?

No, that's not the right assumption because land bank in China has reduced significantly. I think we started divesting our land bank since 2017. So I think at that time we probably had about, in China, over 3.2 billion. 3.1 billion, that's just a residential land bank.

So we have reduced that to 1.1 billion.

So in that case, is there a sense of what's the geographical exposure of that land bank that's going to be there?

Again, I think if you kind of follow our, you'll know that we have land banks in China, in Vietnam, a little bit left in Singapore.

okay um okay uh just a few quick ones uh uh for for louis uh can i ask uh you guys mentioned i think uh that you guys saw further losses in the senior living just want to check can you give us a color or numbers on that uh as well and second one on singapore's resi market uh can you have a sense of what kind of buyer base and what's how what's interest right now for like especially the residential assume most of his luxury residential Thank you for the question.

As you know, we are incubating the business in Asia so we are pushing that to get to profitability. We are trending nicely in terms of the occupancy so we look forward to that becoming profitable soon. But the extended losses was also because we completed the acquisition of the watermark business in the U.S. And we've now installed a new leadership team who are really fixing the sales and marketing initiatives that have been driven. And we're seeing actually very good traction. So we expect that to return to profitability quite soon. As for Singapore, please do announce that we are completely sold out of capital base, so we do not have any units left there. And we are almost 90% sold for 1990. So those are existing projects. So the market continues to be very buoyant. A lot of people tell me Singaporeans have a lot of money, evidently. And we're glad for that, and we hope that to continue to be true, because we look to launch... Plot 6, beginning next year, it will be a high-end residential with incredible feng shui with the water in front of you, the hill behind you, and I'm sure there will be loads of buyers out there going after the 84 units. Very scarce luxury products.

I don't think we want to go that far. It's not relevant to the question. I think maybe you have one more question and then we'll leave the last question to someone.

You mentioned your aspiration to be more like Blacks Moon, Brookview and stuff like that. I'm curious as to they usually publish figures on IRR for example. Is that something you would aspire to publish or be more transparent about in future?

I think just to be accurate, someone asked me which companies would be appropriate as peers and I mentioned some of those names. I think we do believe that what capital brings is somewhat quite unique because we are not just an asset manager but we are very strong in operations and operating income is a very large part of our earnings. So that's kind of one. What was your question again? I think over time we are always looking at how we can provide more information but I think it's more relevant to the people that For instance, when Chris raised new funds, you would expect that the LPs would actually do a very thorough diligence on the funds that we have, the track record. I think that is probably more critical for us, to make sure that the LPs are comfortable with our track record. And so far, we've been getting good traction. We've been able to raise money. I think that's probably more important. Okay, one last question for Brandon. Okay, one more for Siu Kee. She looks so disappointed. So one each, okay? Because we're running a bit short on time.

maybe can you let us know in the non-core portfolio right you mentioned that there's some selected property development projects and investment properties as well so are these assets which we intend to divest into the funds or yeah more details on that I think just squeezing one more again, you mentioned that these are most of the assets here are profitable, when you say profitable, does it mean that just operating standpoint or more including gains as well?

I think, well, first I think profitable meaning that If you look at when the group first bought into those assets, the historical calls, we could be sitting on some gains already. So it's not a collection of non-performing assets, just to be clear. I think one key point I want to make is that this non-core portfolio is a bit like a lockbox. It means that this is it. So we are going to divest. We don't expect this non-core. We expect there's only one direction. The non-core portfolio will be dwindled down over time. That's quite important. I think in terms of whether there's a possibility that they could be divested to a fund or a REIT, it's possible. I mean, if you look at this asset here, KBT, I think if KBT was with us today, uh and is 100 owned by us on the balance sheet then it would be part of the non-corp and then you know the the the progress of kbt we sold it to carry it as i mentioned earlier so then it became from uh non-core into uh into reed which is our core business okay you have the honor of the last question

Sorry, just going back to connectivity. I have to pick. I'll give you two questions. Okay, just on connectivity. How much is the MVNO or wholesale in your consumer business in terms of EBITDA?

You're going to give by percentage.

No, I don't think I can share that number.

Okay, and then the other one is knowing that you are looking at new capital. So you have been asking what is remaining in real estate. So we can assume that, because you remove the development column in your horizontal reporting in legal estate, so meaning there won't be any more, any losses or whatever will go into non-core, right? But the operating is just miraculously zero, this half, although we had extended losses in senior living. Maybe just like give us a bit more, you know, like.

Again, I think, you know, maybe don't try to, I mean, the value of the non-core is, we told you what it was, it has a whole carrying value. And the goal is, our goal is to monetize it.

I'm referring to the operating in

the sponsor states yeah so maybe just to also add on uh i think the way to be it's similar to a question that was asked earlier on the operating side as you know continues to have you know uh fair value and and gains in there for the assets that we have in new capital uh obviously with all the you know some of the senior living assets on engine tools as well right so it just so happens that you're looking at zero because you know what we have for this particular half, kind of offsets, you know, the numbers that we have, which is why operating column is zero. But I think what you've highlighted is also, there's a few questions around, you know, what's non-conceptual. For us, you know, in terms of the numbers that you see in new capital now is squarely, you know, aligned with the strategy that we have in each of these segments. So real estate is no different to others.

For sure. I just wanted to just clarify on the operating, we're just looking at your incubating new business kind of got it things.

Okay. Thank you very much for your time, for attending this briefing. And thank you for those online as well as those that turn up. Thank you very much.