Spark New Zealand Ltd Ord

Good day and thank you for standing by. Welcome to Spark New Zealand FY25 results. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question and answer session. To ask a question during the session, you'll need to press star 1 and 1 on your telephone keypad. You will then hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. To withdraw your question, please press star 11 again. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, CEO, Jolie Hudson. Please go ahead.

Kia ora koutou koutou. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today for SPARC's four-year results for the year ended 30 June 2025. This morning I'm going to provide an overview of our results and then going to hand over to our CFO, Stuart Taylor, to speak to our financial performance in more detail before we move to Q&A. FY25 was a challenging year for SPARC with demand impacted by materially lower customer spending and a tougher economic environment. We acknowledge, however, that not all of the challenges we faced were beyond our control and as we outlined in our half-year results back in February, we've implemented a significant transformation program to improve our performance. We finished FY25 with an updated EBITDAI CapEx dividend guidance. We've made good progress against our transformation priorities. Recognizing how much has changed since 2023 when we last set our strategy, we also set a new five-year plan, which we'll provide a summary of today and then share in more detail at our Investor Day on September 11th. As we reviewed strategy, the board has also undertaken a review of our capital management settings to support sustainable shareholder value creation over the longer term. I'll start with an overview of our FY25 result as outlined on slide four. To clarify our reported and adjusted results, our reported revenue in EBITDAI covers SPARC's continuing operations, which means we've separated out the results of the data centre business, which is now classified as discontinuing operations. Adjusted numbers include the results of the data centre business, remove the $71 million gain on the sale from the Connecta divestment, the $53 million of transformation costs in FY25 and the $26 million impact of the government's changes to tax depreciation rules in FY24. I will speak to our adjusted numbers now as they provide the best like-for-like year-on-year performance comparisons. Adjusted revenue declined 4.2% to $3.7 billion, driven by IT and mobile and the continued decline of legacy voice. Adjusted EBITDAI declined 8.9% to $1.06 billion. This is driven by lower IT services project activity, the mixed shift from private to public cloud, legacy voice decline and supply cost inflation offset by significant reduction in labour costs as part of our transformation programme. Adjusted impact declined 33.6% to $227 million due to low EBITDA and high depreciation amortisation costs. Free cash flow remained steady at $330 million as we moved to reduce CAPEX by 17.2% to $429 million to offset the earnings decline. The Board has declared an FNH2 25 dividend of $0.125 per share, bringing the total FY25 dividend to $0.25 per share, in line with updated guidance. Turning now to the action we've taken to improve performance, which is summarised on slide five. We shared our four transformation priorities at our AGM last year and we've made good progress against each of these. We have refocused SPARC on our core business of connectivity and we're seeing improved momentum in mobile as we enter FY26. We have reviewed and simplified our portfolio by divesting non-core assets and reshaping our enterprise and government division. We have delivered material cost savings in our second half and entered new technology partnerships. And we've realised value for our data centre assets while creating a long-term growth option. I'm going to talk to each of these priorities shortly. As we've focused on transforming our business, we've also brought forward the reset of our strategy. SPAC 30 takes a long-term view recognising the scale and pace of technology change that is reshaping customer expectations, ways of working, and the products and services we offer. This longer timeframe provides a shelter to clarity around Spark's strategic priorities and where we will invest to differentiate ourselves from competitors. We are refocusing Spark from a broader digital services ambition to our core business of connectivity. With our data center transaction providing clarity on funding of the development pipeline, our capital allocation will be prioritized to our core and will continue to build a scalable cost base through partnerships and AI. By focusing our investment on what matters most to our customers, our network and customer experiences, we will give our customers more reason to keep choosing Spark and create a performance-driven culture, a customer-focused culture. Ultimately, this will drive stable annuity-like returns for our shareholders. To illustrate the strategic choice, we have outlined the primacy of connectivity at Spark on slide seven. This includes mobile and broadband and consumer and then a broader range of connectivity products and business such as managed data and networks, IoT and collaboration. In FY25, connectivity contributed 70% of our revenue and 80% of our gross margin. This is why our connectivity performance has been the focus of our transformation program. It remains our priority for investment in the years ahead. Within connectivity, mobile is our absolute focus. In FY25, total mobile service revenues declined 2.3%, as we saw greater levels of price competition in key segments, and due to the non-recurring impact of insurance and consumers. To understand our mobile performance, it's important to break it down into its three component parts. Consumer and SME pay monthly is our most important segment, characterised by premium customers and accounting for most half of our base. In FY25, ARPUs in this segment reduced 0.6%, primarily due to the removal of Spark's owned mobile insurance product, which will not recur in FY26. If we remove that impact, ARPU was up around 3% in the second half compared to the same period last year, demonstrating the underlying momentum we have in this important part of the market. Consumer prepaid is characterised by more value-seeking customers and high levels of price competition. In a low-spend environment, This intensified in FY25, and SPAC connections declined 5.2% in H1. This connection declined stabilised in H2. A December plan refresh in price increases supported ARPU, which increased 0.7%. In enterprise and government, connections rebased during FY25 as workforces were reduced, which flowed through to lower mobile fleets. Positively, this decline started stabilising in the second half and the rate of ARPU decline also slowed. Despite this, the competitive market conditions remain. We do not expect a material improvement in the ENG ARPU performance in the near term. Moving to overall mobile performance as outlined on slide 9, original market estimates from IDC suggest the total market growth would be around 3% in FY25. However, actual growth landed at about 1.2%. We've seen more positive momentum in the second half with the market at 1.9% compared to a flat-off one. Looking at how Spark has performed over the same time period, our total mobile service revenues grew 1.5%. This led to a small share decline of 0.4% over that second half. Positively, our market share stabilised in the fourth quarter and its growth in the market also improved. We remain the market leader by some distance in mobile. Turning now to slide 10 and the momentum we're building into FY26. So within consumer pay monthly, we expect ongoing ARPU growth through our August price increases, new product development, and as we cycle out of the impact of the removal of insurance in FY25. In consumer prepaid, we're doing more to compete, using both our Spark and Skinny Rands to grow overall value. From Q4, we've upweighted our competitive response, and we're seeing this flow through to acquisition rates. And while connections declined in half one, This started to stabilise in half two, and performance in this segment remains the focus in the year ahead. In enterprise and government, as the rate of mobile fleet reduction has stabilised, we remain focused on customer retention and competing on more than price to mitigate ARPU impacts. Throughout the year, we retained more than 95% of our top 50 customers and continue to win new business, with another 7,000 connections being onboarded in the first quarter of FY26. So turning now to our broader connectivity performance in IT, while broadband connections declined 3.8% in the competitive market, revenue declined stabilised to largely following a 2.3% decline in the first half. Across the balance of the connectivity portfolio, we saw ongoing decline in legacy products with invoice and managed data and networks as customers migrate to more modern services, while collaboration and IoT continued to grow, with IoT reaching around 2.4 million connections. In IT services, we saw cloud revenues continue to grow off the back of strong public cloud growth, while this mixed shift from private cloud put ongoing pressure on margins, and in IT services, revenue was down 7.7% due to lower market demand, driven by some of the technology deferrals. Turning now to the review we've completed of our non-core assets, which is outlined on slide 12. As you'll be aware, we divested our stake in Mobile Tower's business, Connextra, in the first half, which delivered $309 million in net proceeds and valued the business on a consistent basis with the previous New Zealand Mobile Tower EBIT dime articles. These proceeds have been used to reduce net debt and will be partially returned to shareholders through the H225 dividend. We also divested our 10% stake in HTAIL, with $47 million in proceeds received in July 2025. This reflected a 45% premium to the upper end of the independent valuation range, and the proceeds will be used to reduce net debt. Within the enterprise and government, we integrated subsidiaries, CCL, Curious and Spark, divested our digital island business and undertook product portfolio simplification in relevant areas. We have also commenced a process to introduce new investors to our MATA subsidiary. Overall, our intention has been to maximize the value of these non-core but high-quality and valuable assets for our shareholders to further strengthen our balance sheet and to enable us to recycle capital back into our core connectivity business. I'm now going to speak to our expanded cost reduction program, starting with a new technology delivery model we introduced in the second half. So when we looked at our global peers, many had already moved to new partnership models in their network and IT business. Their experience showed that a partnership model would not only enable greater efficiency, but also create better customer experiences by tapping into considerable investments these companies make into new products, services, and technology. Our new model includes 4K partnerships, Nokia in the network, Infosys in HPE and IT, and Microsoft in cloud. Each partnership enables us to accelerate our use of new technologies for better customer experiences while delivering our operations more efficiently. I want to acknowledge that undertaking a transformation of this scale has brought significant change for our people. It is never easy to make changes that impact our teams, and we don't do so lightly. But in a changing market, we've had to make tough but necessary choices to adapt to changing demand and put Spark in a stronger position in the years ahead. We've also continued to invest in our AI capability, which has grown significantly over many years. Slide 14, we've called out some of the ways we're using AI and our focus for FY26. The AI tools we are implementing are improving the productivity of our people by providing rapid access to information and reducing some manual work that can be automated. For our customers, AI is delivering tangible benefits such as shorter wait times through our customer call centre as our AI assistants answer around 20,000 team questions a month and reduce queries to back office teams by 60%. AI is also supporting better network experiences with faster identification and resolution of network issues for our customers. With the acceleration of Agentech AI and the capability of our global partners, we'll continue to expand this capability to underpin both cost and experience improvements in FY26. Our technology delivery model and AI investment have both supported our expanded cost reduction program, which is outlined on slide 15. At the first half, we disclosed a combined labour and OPEX cost reduction target of 80 to 100 million when comparing to the second half of FY24 to the second half of FY25. This was put in place to address the high fixed cost of business that has structurally changed and inflationary pressure we've seen in some OPEX lines like network support and computer costs. We delivered 85 million in cost reductions in H225 compared to H224. This includes a $61 million year-on-year reduction in labour costs, $4 million in other OPEX costs, and $20 million in product costs. When we shared this target at the half, we had envisioned the network and IT cost reductions where Chief through partnership model would benefit mostly in OPEX. However, as you can see, some of that has landed in product costs. We've also set out the net labour and other OPEX cost reduction targets for FY26 on this slide. In FY26, we're targeting a net labour reduction in the range of 30 to 50 million and other OPECs to stay broadly fat as the annualised labour and partnership benefits flow through from FY25. We see additional benefits from further simplification. This is offset by severances associated with these changes, salary inflation and changes in capitalisation rates and new costs from outsourcing models and normal inflationary pressures in areas like software. We'll also be investing additionally in marketing, to remain competitive in the market and to support our growth. From H2, we'll also be deconsolidating DC costs of $10 million, which we've highlighted on the cause of change chart for completeness. We remain on track to deliver overall annualized cost savings of $110 to $140 million by the end of FY27. Before I move to our data center strategy, we've summarized our ongoing sustainability performance on slide 16. While our underlying electricity use declined 4.9%, the rising national grid emissions factor contributed to an 11% increase in Scope 1 and 2 emissions year on year. We remain committed to our FY30 science-based reduction target, and our new renewable energy partnership will decouple our reported electricity emissions from the national grid factor in the years ahead. To this end, we were pleased to see generation commence at Genesis Energy's Lauriston Solar Farm in Q3, We also continue to support more New Zealanders to participate in the digital world with over 34,000 households now connected with Skinny Jump. So turning now to our data centre strategy, as you would have seen last week, we reached agreement to sell a 75% stake in our data centre business to Pacific Equity Partners. This secures a funding pathway for a development pipeline and values the business at up to $705 million, representing an FY25 pro forma EBITS multiple of 30.8 times, which compares favorably to similar transactions. Importantly, this enables Spark to realize value for our data center assets in the short term, while also continuing to participate in this growing market through our 25% retained stake, creating further value for our shareholders over the longer term. We expect to receive initial proceeds of around $486 million at completion, with additional deferred cash proceeds of up to $98 million contingent on achievement of performance-based objectives by the end of calendar 2027. This brings the total potential benefits to around $583 million if the full earn-out is achieved. We'll use the proceeds to reduce group debt. This will also enable us to focus our capital investment behind our core connectivity business. DCCo will be established as a standalone entity with its own board and management team, and debt financing facilities, which are non-recourse to SPARC. This means our future annual capital contribution is expected to be modest. In H126, we expect to spend $50 to $70 million of CAPEX prior to the assumed transaction completion date. And I'm now going to hand over to Stuart to talk you through our capital management reset and the detailed financial performance.

Thank you very much, Jolie, and I'm going to start by – and good morning, everyone. So I'm going to start with the capital management reset, which is outlined on slides 22 and 23 of the results pack. So in the context of our new five-year strategy, the board has also reviewed our capital management settings and done that with three clear goals – Maintaining financial strength, ensuring an appropriate return from our spending and investment and delivering sustainable shareholder returns are those three clear goals. So firstly, to do that, we remain focused on a strong balance sheet. And within that, we are targeting metrics consistent with our current credit rating. Any investments or M&A we undertake for growth will need to meet our hurdle rates, specifically being NPV positive. and with a return on invested capital, or ROIC, that is greater than our own cost of capital. We've also introduced new definitions of CapEx. So this is to replace the current definitions, the new definitions being business as usual, or BAU, and strategic CapEx. So BAU CapEx now includes all capital investment in our core business, with the exception of Spectrum. And as a practical example, the 5G standalone investments that we have made would be included here going forward. Strategic CapEx includes all capital investment outside the core business. So going forward in FY25, the clear example here would be our data centre business. Now, this then feeds into changes to our dividend policy. which is designed to support a sustainable dividend paid out of free cash flow. We've introduced a new definition of free cash flow, which now includes changes in working capital and BAU capital expenditure, which is used to operate the core business. The exclusion from this is spectrum and strategic capex. Finally, the payout ratio has been updated to 70% to 100%, and this is to provide flexibility if needed in the future. Now, in that context, as you'd have seen, we have our FY26 guidance includes a 100% payout of free cash flow in FY26. Finally, in relation to the capital management reset in slides 22 and 23, you'll also note that the dividend reinvestment plan will be utilised when appropriate. But this has been suspended for the moment, given the anticipated receipt of proceeds from the data centre transaction and subsequent reduction in net debt that's expected to come from the completion and settlement of that transaction. So after the capital management reset, I'm going to move on to talk to the results summary. So this covers slides 25 and 26. Now, Jolie's already talked to many of the key numbers on slide 25, but I'm just going to pull out a few more points of interest. The first piece to note is that the reported columns for both FY24 and FY25 that we've shown here exclude the data centre business, which has been classified as at 30 June 2025 as a discontinuing operation. Now, the FY24-5 reported numbers do include the CONNECSA gain on sale of $71 million and the $53 million worth of transformation costs incurred during the year. Acknowledging that there's some complexity with the removal of the discontinuing operation, a reconciliation from reported to adjusted figures is included in the appendix of the presentation. Now, returning to the numbers, what we can see is that on a reported basis, revenue and other gains of $3,725 million and EBITDA of $1053 million were $95 million and $88 million lower respectively than their FY24 numbers. Our financing costs increased in FY25 as the average net debt was higher, which offset lower effective interest rates. Our tax expense declined in FY25 compared to the previous year, which was due – this was due to a combination of factors, lower earnings, the non-taxable gain on the Connexa transaction, and a $26 million of additional tax incurred in FY24 in relation to the government's changes to tax depreciation rules on buildings. Just moving, shifting across the adjusted results, the additional points to call out are the The fact that the effective tax rate is actually very similar year on year, and CapEx as a proportion of revenue returned to 11.6% in FY25, in line with our target of 10% to 12%. Having talked collectively to slides 25 and 26, I'm going to move on and talk to the capital expenditure slide on 27. Now, you'll see here that CapEx of FY25 $429 million reported in FY25 is $89 million or 17.2% lower than what was reported in FY24, excluding the FY24 spectrum spend. This reflects a proactive reduction in CapEx in line with the lower reported earnings. Now, maintenance CapEx of $350 million was similar to last year, reflecting that continued focus on investment in the fixed and mobile networks to support greater resilience, network coverage and capacity. Now, we continue to be disciplined around what we spend and we'll continue to focus on investing in our core connectivity business aligned with the SPK30 strategy that Jolie talked to. And this will mean that our CapEx to revenue will remain at that 10% to 12% per annum ratio. Finally, and as part of the capital management reset and talking to those changes in CapEx definitions, you'll see on the far right bar of the chart, we've split the $429 million of FY25 CapEx based on the new classifications. What this means is... is that the 51 million spent on the 5G network, which was previously considered growth CapEx, is now incorporated in our new definition of BAU CapEx. The only amount, therefore, included in the strategic CapEx category is the 28 million of spend on the data centre business. Now, turning to slide 28, free cash flow for FY25, and this was based on our previous definition, came in at $330 million. This was in line with FY24. This reflected lower EBITDA in FY25, largely offset by the lower cash capex number. Now, acknowledging that we're moving to a new definition of free cash flow, at the bottom of the table, we have shown a reconciliation of free cash flow under the previous definition to the new definition. And that new definition will be used as the basis of calculating the dividend in future years. Highlighting those changes, free cash flow will now be considered after the cash effect of changes in working capital and BAU CapEx, as opposed to the maintenance CapEx definition we'd used previously. Thinking in practical terms, this means that all CapEx other than spectrum and strategic CapEx would therefore be captured when making that free cash flow calculation. Now, moving on to slide 29, which is on debt and dividends. Slide 29 shows that net debt X leases reduced in the second half of FY25 by approximately 300 million to 1.475 billion due to the net proceeds from the Connexa sale. Now, with the inclusion of lease liabilities and applying the standard and pause methodology, the net debt to EBITDA ratio at 30 June was 2.2 times. With the HTAL sale completing in July and the expected completion of the data center transaction later in the calendar year, we would expect that net debt to EBITDA ratio to decline by around half a turn or 0.5 times. This highlights our focus on strengthening the balance sheet and targeting those metrics that are consistent with our current credit rating. The bar on the far right of the chart also shows that based on the successful completion and settlement of the data transaction, the net debt level before leases would be expected to be just over $1 billion. On the dividends, as Jolie previously mentioned, the final dividend for FY25 will be 12.5 cents per share, bringing the total dividend for the year to 25 cents per share. This is underpinned by the free cash flow generated by the business in the year, as well as some of the proceeds from the Connects to Sale. And with that, I'll hand back to Jolie to talk to the strategy section.

Thanks, Stuart. I'm now going to share an overview of our new FY30 strategy. Our ambition over the next five years is it's better with Spark, whether it's the returns we deliver to our shareholders, our network performance, our customer experiences, or the workplace culture we create with our people. We want it to be better with Spark. Capital allocation will be prioritised to our core connectivity segments, covering mobile, broadband and business connectivity, such as fixed networks, collaboration and IoT. In adjacent segments such as cloud and IT service management, we will simplify and optimize the services we provide, transition legacy products to more modern solutions and leverage greater levels of AI and automation and our new global partnerships to improve both customer experiences and efficiency. We'll continue to invest in delivering a reliable and trusted network that is there when it matters for our customers. We're adding satellite to mobile services in 2026. and we can leverage the lead we have on our 5G standalone investment to bring new capabilities and monetisation opportunities to the market. Our focus on productivity continues in our multi-year programme, lifting our cost, discipline and efficiency as we leverage new technologies, partnerships and further simplify our business. With this new focus, our ambition is to deliver stable annuity-like returns with predictable free cash flow and growing dividends for our shareholders over time. This information we've provided today is really just a summary to provide a shelter for clarity over our future focus. We'll provide further detail and the opportunity for discussion at Investor Day to be held on the 11th of September. I'm now going to pass back to Stuart to cover Outlook and Guidance.

Thank you, Jolie. So, finally, we come to Guidance, and this is on Guidance for FY26, and so this is on slide 37. So, given the potential changes both to the... both for the business with the sale of the data centres and some changes to the way we define capex and free cash flow. There is a little bit going on on this slide, so I will take a bit of time to explain it. Now, the first column provides the results achieved in FY25 according to the metrics we've historically used. The next column over shows FY26 guidance on the basis that the data center business is owned 100% through the entire year. So this would be the best representation of a like-for-like basis to the actual FY25 results. Now, under this scenario, we'd expect EBITDAI to be between $1,020 to $1,080 million. We'd expect BAU CapEx to be between 380 and 410 million free cash flow to be between 290 and 330 million and the dividend to reflect a hundred percent payout of free cash flow now having talked to that column the last column is the on the far right is what we would anticipate to be the most likely scenario This is prepared on the basis that the data centre transaction completes on 31 December 2025 and our 25% stake in that data centre business from that point onwards would then be accounted for as associate earnings. Hence, a half year of EBITDA from the data centre business would not be consolidated into our reported results. This therefore reduces the EBITDA guidance range to $1010 to $1070 million. Noting, however, that our guidance here does not include the benefit of any gain on sale realised from the sale of that data centre business. Now, BAU CapEx remains the same at $380 to $410 million, but it's important to notice that the data centre CapEx is forecast to be $50 to $70 million, as we referred to before, there is a certain amount of capex committed to as part of the transaction, which is expected to be incurred in the first half of FY26. Free cash flow is expected to be $290 to $330 million, as lower EBITDA is offset by reduced cash interest costs from having low overall debt levels post-transactions. And once again, this means that the forecast dividend also would reflect a 100% payout of free cash flow. Now, with that, I will return to you, Jolie, to summarise some of the key points from today's presentation.

Thanks, Stuart. To summarise FY25, it has been a challenging year. We take full responsibility for our performance and have been focusing on delivering a significant transformation program to turn this around. As we work to improve outcomes in the short term, we've also reset both business strategy and capital management settings to ensure we are delivering value for shareholders over the longer term. We move into this next strategy phase with strong foundations. We are the market leader in mobile and broadband. Our customer satisfaction has increased five years running, and we have the most reliable mobile network and the widest coverage experience in the country. We have renewed determination to deliver more for our customers, our people, and our shareholders. And with that, I'd now like to hand back to the moderator to facilitate the Q&A session now. Thank you.

Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star 1 and 1 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 1 and 1 again. Please stand by as we compile the Q&A roster. First question comes from a line of Khan Hanan from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Morning, guys. I had three pleas. I'll just ask them all in a row if that's right. Just firstly, the dividend, you obviously set that target payout ratio sort of 70% to 100% sort of starting at 100%. Let's talk about the decision to start at 100% next year. So it's how we get comfort. The 26 dividend will be the trough. I mean, earnings are going backwards a little bit, at least in the guidance. And you don't really have any room to move higher, say, in FY27, should you need to. So just interested in that sort of thinking. Secondly, you did used to be a bit more specific around your mobile revenue growth expectations sort of for the year ahead. Just any comments you can make there around how you're seeing FY26. And lastly, ROIC, 8.7% this year. I think about the SPARC30 strategy. I mean, what sort of ROIC are you targeting by the end of that program as compared to the 10% Telstra is targeting in their own T30 program? Cheers.

Okay, thank you. What we might do is, do you want to kick off your dividend and then I'll pick up the other two on mobile growth and the ROIC?

So the payout ratio setting of 70 to 100 is, I mean, that's a policy setting and we've made a capital management reset and the idea around the policy settings and providing yourself with a bit of breadth is that that gives you, you want something that lasts you for the long term and provides you with some flexibility and I think in that context, then, it's really important that we do guide to a payout ratio for the next year. In this case, as you say, we've guided to 100%, and that's on the basis that we consider with the data center transaction and other things going on that we are well-placed to manage to our sort of broader capital management settings, including the net debt to EBITDA ratio. Janie, do you want to...?

The only thing I'd also add to that, obviously it's been a challenging economic environment this year, and next year we set out a guidance that sees stabilisation in that performance as we look forward. We'd expect to see growing, earning some free cash flow as a result of that to the point of being at the top end of that, and dividends growing over time. The next question was on mobile growth. And so in terms of setting that for FY26, really expecting around 1% growth ahead. Within that, we've got consumer and SME August pricing changes that have gone through, further acquisition and retention driving that base growth ahead. Offsetting that, you have the enterprise and government rate of RP decline stabilising, and with some of the new wins that we've had, that base coming on board. So it's a mixture of those different factors in terms of still a tougher economic environment out there, but the pricing we've taken really helping to drive that growth within it and still expecting to see competition and pricing around that enterprise and government APU. The last one, I think, was in relation to ROIC. So 8.7% was the ROIC for this year, and if we look forward to that FY30, what we're targeting is 11% to 13%. I think you suggested that Telstra's was at 10%, so that's the focus we have ahead.

Awesome.

Thanks, guys.

Thank you. Just a moment for our next question, please. Next, we have Antro Rokosvi from EMP. Please go ahead.

Hi, Jolly. Hi, Stuart.

My first question is around mobile. So you mentioned those price increases which should be supportive from the 1st of August. I wonder if you can quantify what sort of ARPU benefit you expect to see specifically from the paid monthly price increases. And if you can comment what you've seen so far in terms of churn post that increase. I know it's really early days. I think we're only three weeks in. But how are you thinking about that impact over the course of the year?

If you look at... The price increases, they range from $2 to $5 across that pay monthly base. And within that, we haven't seen significant churn off the back of that price increase. You're right, it's only three weeks in, but it is on the bill. So it gets announced a few months out before it. So that's what we're expecting in relation to that RP growth.

Is it the case, obviously, One New Zealand went earlier this year as well. You've got pretty similar pricing to them. Is that part of the factor to a degree still seem pretty competitive at the low end? What is the sort of dynamic you're seeing in the market?

I think from a marketplace, we're all investing heavily in our networks and therefore our data is continuing to grow. It's something that we need to make sure that we are getting an appropriate return for the services that we're selling. I can only really talk to our intent around pricing, but certainly that's about making sure that we are making sure that we can support the investment that we make. And I certainly think from a consumer's perspective, as you mentioned, others have taken price and expect to see that occur.

Okay, great. And then I've got another one on the guidance. So given the improvement in mobile, which you've just spoken about, and then the benefits, of the cost reduction program. Is there a reason why the midpoint of 26 guidance, and I'm taking the guidance including the data centre portfolio to compare on a like-for-like basis, but is there a reason why that midpoint is for a slight decline? Are there perhaps some other building blocks that we need to take into account or is there a level of conservatism that you're building into that guidance?

I think if you think about the guidance ahead, we're still in a fairly challenged economy. When you say there's a slight difference, I think if you take the midpoint of the guidance range, it's 1.0, 4.0. If you take where we were, where we finished 25 at 1.0, 6.0, plus take out DCs for half a year, you're broadly within $7 to $10 million on a billion dollars. I'm not – isn't a material difference. When you think more broadly, mobile growth, yes, optics and cost savings, we still have voice legacy decline that will occur. and some of the other sunset products. So really your productivity and cost efficiency is offsetting some of those changes that you see and some of those legacy revenues while we look to be able to grow.

Okay, great. And final one from me. I'm just wondering if you can talk to what were the key factors that drove the decision to sell down a 75% interest in the data centre portfolio. I know you've previously spoken about only selling a minority interest or circa 50%. I mean, was it the price? You got a better outcome? Was it, you know, the opportunity for capex reduction, asset level debt? What were the sort of key factors which drive that?

I mean, we looked at a range of factors around the transaction and the office that we had and the structures. And I think what we're really pleased about is we'll have a well-funded standalone organisation where we are able to realise value in the short term for what we have already created, but also have an opportunity to participate in a growing market ahead through that well-funded organisation. So from our perspective, it creates the opportunity for value creation now, but also in the longer term as well. And so that's really what influenced our decision. And if you think about the significant pipeline that's going to be built out over time, that means, as I said, the structure's well-funded, but it also means that the core connectivity business can also be well-funded as well in terms of we have a priority of our funding going towards that.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Wade Gardner from Craig's Investment Partners. Please go ahead.

Hi there. Just a few questions from me. First of all, on the dividend policy, I just want to revisit that question before around the range. What are the circumstances that would see you pay that around the bottom of the range? I assume it's all around gearing. Is there anything else?

Is this, you're talking to, so when you say that as in the lower end of the payout ratio way, so 70%. I mean, it may be that you want to provide yourself with some cash flow flexibility in future years. There may be some upcoming investment that you want to make. I think all we're trying to achieve is set something that, what we're trying to achieve there is set a policy and more broadly a capital management framework that endures for the longer term.

Okay.

Can you, just in terms of the numbers that you've outlined, I think on slide 22, how much do you assume for working capital changes? I wouldn't have thought there would be much generally, or is there scope for that within that range that you've given?

I mean, we've had a pretty, we have been pretty focused on working capital and would continue to focus, and we will continue to focus on On working capital, I mean, there's obviously a relative degree to which it can benefit there. I think you will always have a baseline level. But, no, I mean, we would always have a broader objective to manage our working capital as efficiently as possible, and I think we can always do more there. But it's not going to be tens of millions of dollars, if you know what I mean.

Right, okay. So we're talking sub-10 here, generally.

Obviously, Wade, if it's more around how does the free cash over time from 25 under the new to the 20, I don't know if that's your question, but obviously there's things like some of the interest cost reduction from lower debt and things like that as well. Tax and lease.

Yeah, I guess I'm just looking at it from, you know, you are paying 100% next year. You know, there's not... There's not significant growth forecast, say, for 27 and 28. Therefore, I'm just trying to understand the risk that, you know, we go into those years and suddenly the payout slips below 100% in that dividend, you know, at the moment. The guidance sort of implies sort of 15 to 17 cents the next year. But if we did it at 70%, suddenly, you know, it's more like 12 cents.

I'm just trying to get some comfort that we are going to have more of a baseline around... I think from a clarity point of view, what we are going to do is a 100% payout next year of the free cash. If you're looking at what are the things that can influence the free cash, there's a component, obviously EBITDA, CAPEX, but the tax cash, the interest, changes in working capital, we just talked about, small improvements across that, and lower interest costs as our debt comes down. So all of those things are considered, and if we think ahead... where we see dividend growth is more from free cash flow growth over time.

Just in terms of the gearing settings, I mean, it's 1.1 times on a pre and frisk basis and 1.7 using the S&P metric. You have talked in the past about trying to get some leeway or some movement within that S&P setting. Any update on that?

I mean, I think the focus right now is we're at net debt to EBITDA of 2.2, and following the completion settlement of the data centre transaction, that gives us a 0.5 benefit, which gets us back into the expected range, which aligns with our current credit rating. So, I mean, that's the focus right now.

Right, so nothing in terms of changing the credit rating, if you like. In other words, others with the same credit rating have a higher number.

I mean, that would be... I mean, we're always... We'll obviously talk to S&P... as we would, you know, in the usual context over the next sort of couple of weeks. And, I mean, that's always part of the conversation we have. But, I mean, ultimately, that is their decision. Yeah. Okay. I mean, they've got some length to explain why it is like it is.

Just shifting tack a little bit. Slide 10, you talk about, you know, good disclosure there around the split between seats. in enterprise and government and consumer SME. The comments around decline stabilising for the enterprise and SME, can you just sort of clarify, when you say decline stabilising, does that mean it's still in decline but at a stable level, or there is no decline?

I think in enterprise and government, what we're talking about there is, if you look at the connections, what we've seen is some slight improvement in the second half of the base, and with New Business 1, over the last part of 25 and still to come on to the connection base in 26, in the first quarter of 26, we'd expect to see some growth in that. If you look at ARPU, there is still a lot of competitive pressure on that. We've had 12 months, I guess, of that in this financial year, and we expect to see some still as it rolls through broader in the enterprise space. So stabilisation of the base from where we saw a lot of sleep reduction, workforce reduction across enterprise and government, that's stabilising. ARPU is still competitive, perhaps moderating a little, but not materially different from where we've been.

At an absolute dollar level, or just because the decline was more like 12.5%, you know, are we still going to see that level of decline, or are you talking about more that it's stabilising at the dollar level?

I think if you think about decline levels, you'd be seeing less than 12% decline, but you'd still be seeing decline to the point of ARPUs declining and running through the base. Connections will be growing. So you're probably more looking at a 7% to 9% type range versus a 12% previously.

Okay. And is there a big difference between government and enterprise in that? In other words, government spending has sort of stabilised and we're not seeing declines there. And I guess that goes into IT services as well.

I think when you think about government in terms of the connection side of that, yes, the workforce changes, well, the ones that have been implemented over the last year have stabilised more. The pricing side of that, is as you flow through more of the enterprise book and it comes up for renewal because obviously there's contracted customers that sit in there and so that's the part of which you still see some pricing pressure through 26. Okay.

Thanks for that.

Okay. Thanks, Wade.

Thank you.

Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone keypad and wait for your name to be announced.

Just a moment for our next question, please. Next, we have Ari Decker from Jarden. Please go ahead.

Oh, good. Yeah, good morning. Thanks. Just firstly on cloud procurement and IT services, which you sort of signaled out as being sort of outside of the core connectivity business, 20% gross margin, 20% of gross margin dollars Are you in a position where you have a very clear idea of what its EBITDA contribution is to the business and then also sort of related to that, what you've invested in capital in that business through the cycle, so what the invested capital base is, taking M&A, IT investment and sort of working capital investment into account?

Yeah, look, so if you think about the EBITDA margins, Globally, they sort of sit in the – for IT and cloud, they sit in around about the 8% to 12%, so our EBITDA margins are more in the 15% to 20% within that. In terms of the capital invested or M&A and things like that, that's largely been around our cloud businesses, which are more associated with the data centers component. Roy could obviously sit lower than our existing core connectivity business within that, but when you think about the shift in EBITDAI. I don't have a ROIC number by division to give you, but it is lower, obviously, than the overall ROIC.

Yeah, and then you've made some observations around it being a more fragmented competitive environment. You've also referred to changing mix and demand impacting profitability. So are you sort of suggesting that within Spark 30 that you are open to considering divestment of some of these businesses in the right market conditions? Or is your simplification and optimisation all still within Spark?

I think overall we'll always look at our portfolio and make choices around where we're seeing the market shifts and the earnings that we can gain off those certain assets. So yes, we will be doing some facilitation work regardless, but we would also consider over time whether that was an appropriate opportunity.

So then within that right target, I think you referred to of 10% to 13% sort of medium term, let's say at the midpoint, is that on a like-for-like basis, you know, the business as it stands today, or does it assume some exits?

No, it's more on a like for like that 11 to 13 is what we're giving. So it doesn't, I haven't, you know, we haven't laid out particularly, as I said, because at the moment the focus is on the simplification of those businesses and over that period that might change. But if it did, we would obviously provide clear guidance around that.

And does it refer to, does it include cost out beyond what you've sized at this point through to FY27?

Yes, it would.

Yeah, okay. Some more costs out. Cool.

Then just on broadband... I mean, in broad terms, well, I'm not going to get into the overall... This is probably more a discussion for Strategy Day, but in broad terms, you'd be looking at that sort of single-digit top-line growth, drivers and mobile, IoT. You've got some offset in terms of your voice and those more sunset material businesses, and then looking at productivity efficiencies to help generate that smaller single-digit growth in EBITDA over time.

Thank you. Just turning to broadband, I mean, that was definitely a step up in connection losses. You've talked to the competitive situation there, but then also, you know, for the first time we saw fixed wireless connection losses. Can you just sort of talk about what you're seeing in fixed wireless and then also You know, you have talked about wanting to retain critical mass in broadband and obviously you remain a meaningful player, but are you going to continue to push ARPU premium and be happy with sort of ongoing sort of low single digit connection losses? You know, what's happening in fixed wireless given it's important to gross margin?

So I think the two things around fixed wireless ahead in terms is as the 5G network continues to roll out and we have greater population coverage. We also have the spectrum required. We'd look to continue to grow that. Also, the opportunity to bundle, more so with mobile, we see as an opportunity to continue to grow it. So we think that Wallaceville band will continue to play a bigger role. So no, we don't want to accept losses in that part of the market. Saying that, it's still a very competitive market, as we've touched on. You know, there are many, many competitors in this space. So It's a combination of making sure that we are growing our margin, retaining base, and leveraging the network that we are building out. And so that's the combination of where we see the opportunity for further 5G wireless broadband growth. And also, as you see, the modems come out at a better pricing as well. We think there's opportunity there.

Just in terms of, you know, Chorus has got a 100 megabit home starter product and now is actually proposing to bring an even lower price product in at 40 megabits down. Like Are you going to use fixed wireless to continue to compete against that? Are you going to sort of embrace those products? Can you just sort of talk a little bit about that? Sorry, you finish, Ari, and then I'll... I guess just whether that's going to put downwards pressure on your five fixed wireless pricing, if that is going to be the strategy to push that one forward.

I mean, we operate in competitive markets, so we're always going to have to look at the mix of price, the product offering, the broader experience we can deliver across that. So in saying that, we want to make sure that we're offering the widest choice of products for our customers that make sense. So we're going to have to look at all of those levers to help deliver on the overall experience for our customers. And we also know products that are bought together, or more than one product bought together, It helps to retain our customers for a longer period of time, so it's important that we have a wide range of that. So we'll be assessing each of those elements, pricing, the offers that we put out there, the product innovation that's happening, whether it's in fixed or wireless, and how does that line up with what our customers are looking for.

Yeah, and then just last one from me, and as you know, this has been a recurring theme, but just on MATA, I mean, obviously still have no visibility there. So I guess just the first question, are you willing to sort of talk about what the investment you're making on an annualised basis is into that subsidiary? And then I guess sort of related to it, How, you know, because I guess you've sort of put up the signal now some time ago that it's non-core. Like, are you confident that the investment that you're ongoing making in that business, you know, ahead of, you know, bringing in a partner or exiting it, is going to be offset by the proceeds for continuing to hold it through to that period?

So the markets of matter and work... working and are continuing to mature, and we've obviously seen some customers coming on board in relation to that. The overall investment is small in comparison to our overall business. We have noted that we are in an investment process and looking to attract other investors, and I think we'll have more to say when we're further down that process. Our focus for this last six months has really been on the transformation of the broader business, particularly in terms of the work we've done on divestments, the ongoing operating model changes and the partnerships we've put in place. So matter is an important part of that broader portfolio and what we are looking to do in terms of the signal that we have given in relation to looking for investors. We have an advisor appointed and we're working on that. So that's probably all I have to say right now.

Okay, thanks. What the fuck? I think it got cut off.

I'm still in the queue. There's nothing on the line.

Who's there?

Sorry, we just can't quite hear you. Who's there on the call? Have you got a question?

Oh, hello. Oh, sorry, I just cut off for a second.

Oh, great. This is you now? Perfect.

Yes. Sorry about that. A bit of technical difficulties, but just a few questions. One was on the direct product costs. You called out a 20 mil reduction. In second half 25, we saw sort of over 30 mil sequential step down in mobile and cloud direct costs. Could you just help me confirm sort of the two numbers? Was the direct product costs reduction that you called out mostly for mobile cloud, or was there any other factors to call out impacting sort of direct costs in half two? And then just following on from that, I think compared to the original cost-out announcement, less in other, bit more in product costs. So going into FY26, I mean, there's going to be further labour cost reductions flowing into 26, but just how do you think about the scope for further cost reductions in the direct costs as well as the other cost bucket as well? Those are my questions. Thanks.

Okay. So in the first part around the... Direct costs, I think you touched on cloud and mobile. So cloud was an area where some of those product costs were reduced and therefore showed up in the gross margin component. Mobile has a small amount of some cost savings there as well within that. If you look forward to 26, what we've tried, or the target for 26 has tried to sort of lay out that complete view across both labour and optics and some of the things that both have cost in related to them but also cost out. We will always continue to be looking at our direct costs as well. Rather than lay out, it's more challenging to go to point to point because obviously you have volume related things and many other things happening up in the product cost area. So we haven't specifically called that out, but that doesn't mean that we aren't focused and have always been focused on how we continue to reduce cost in that space.

Thank you. Just a moment for our next question, please.

Next, we have Aaron Abston from 4CIFBAR. Please go ahead.

Hi there. Thank you for taking my question. I've got sort of two questions, and the first one, Jolie, is just on these technology partnerships which you have laid out. I'm just curious to understand what the sort of medium term cost implications from these are. How are they structured? Is it primarily variable and, you know, is there a fixed cost component that's accelerating through time? Is there any sort of guidance or insights you can give us on how these are structured from, you know, costs for SPARC perspective?

In general, these are longer-term contracts, so we have a clear view around the costs that will and the benefits that accrue over a period of time, and so therefore have both immediate savings and savings ongoing and how technology affects that as well, so innovation and things that might happen with AI. Microsoft is a slightly different one in terms of it goes more to the borrowing rate we have for cloud products that we purchase not only for our customers but also for our own use of public cloud as well. So within that, so those cost benefits are clearly laid out and set over a period of time for those sort of the IT CHPE emphasis and in your Nokia type arrangements so we understand what that looks like over that period and has been considered when we think about the the longer-term cost savings and or costs in related to those partnerships.

I appreciate that. But if I'm talking about gross costs, so what you're paying to these partners effectively, is there some sort of inflation type?

We have agreed rates with what that will look like over the time, and it has a combination. I'm not going to go into things that are commercially sensitive, But if you stand back from it, you obviously have some implications around there may be cost increases to certain things, but there are also productivity targets that are included as part of that. So that's why I've got to say we understand the cost benefit that will come over a period of years off the back of that, and it's very much linked to the contract.

Okay. Second question, just on CapEx going forward, you know, this 10% to 12% BAU, sort of medium term type targets that you laid out. If I think about your partnership agreements, you know, you sold the tar assets, you know, selling the data center assets, is there any scenario where this comes in a bit below or, you know, it seems a little bit high for me if I think, you know, if I take the midpoint of that given all the changes you're doing or simplifications you're doing to your If I think about BAU, particularly 5Gs, you know, largely built out in a couple of years, you know, is there a scenario where it comes in below or why is it maintained at this level?

Well, I think if you look at our 10 to 12, when you benchmark this internationally, we'd be sitting very strongly and partnerships are quite consistent across our international peers as well. I think in our capital spend, mobile continues to form a significant amount of that investment, and whether that's rolling out a new G, moving to a standalone core, or continuing to roll out capacity, that'll always be part of that. Your IT systems and things that support your ongoing, sustaining your way of doing things, your customer experiences are also an important part within that. And then we have our own fixed network, optical transport network, We do invest in cable capacity. So I think you'd probably be more at the top end or the low end of that range of 10 to 12, but not outside that range.

Okay. That was it for me. Thank you.

Thanks, Aaron. Thank you. Just a reminder, to ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone keypad and wait for your name to be announced. Thank you.

Our next question comes from Phil Campbell from UBS. Please go ahead.

Yeah, morning, Charlie and Stuart. Just a few from me. I just noticed in the Telstra result that they sold a 75% stake in Versant, their IT services business, to Infosys. And I suppose, so you look at that transaction, it's quite interesting. The valuation was quite good. I also noticed today, in terms of the disclosure, you have changed the disclosure slightly, you know, splitting it between connectivity and non-connectivity, which is, I think, consistent with your SPARC 30 strategy. So I suppose when I put those two together, I kind of look at it and then also, you know, your response to Ari's question about the lower return on capital, you kind of look at it and go, well, wouldn't it make sense to maybe follow what Telstra's doing and maybe reduce the reliance on services and actually, you know, what you're saying here today is you're focusing more on connectivity?

Yeah, look, I think as I spoke to before, we'll always look at the portfolio and determine whether we are the best owner of those assets based on the market positions you have and the maturity within those markets. So at the moment, our focus is on simplifying and exiting legacy products within that. That's not to say if the right opportunity existed that we wouldn't consider looking at like we do at any asset that we own.

Great. Awesome. The second one is just on the dividend policy, just exploring that a little bit more. Because, again, if I look at the forecast for 26, or even first half 26, we're going to get down to the A-minus credit rating threshold at 1.7. If we take on board the return on capital target, improving over time, what is the dividend policy in relation to the fact that if you start becoming undergeared, because at the moment you're just talking about a payout ratio of 70% to 100%, what happens if that ratio 1.7 goes below 1.5 over the SPARC 30 strategy? What is the dividend policy and how does it deal with that type of situation?

Yeah, hi, Phil. I mean, so it seems getting to an under-gated state seems a way away. So I think to get to the point where... You know, we've still got the data center to transaction to settle, so that's got a 0.5 times benefit on our debt to EBITDA. So, yeah, if that happens and 3112 HTAL proceeds come in, then I think how we would potentially think about it if we did end up in that situation is we may differentiate between an ordinary and special dividend and potentially apply or return some of those proceeds to shareholders that way should that situation arise.

Great. I suppose just being a little bit of a spark train spotter in terms of previous presentations, you've always mentioned an A-minus credit rating. I suppose interesting today, you talk about the current rating. You don't actually mention the A-minus at all. So, again, that was, you know, I suppose not only was my question in relation to being undergeared, I suppose the question comes back as, you know, is the A-minus the actual right credit rating, similar to Wade's comments?

Well, I think we've been clear in the presentation that we're looking to align with our current credit rating.

Yeah, yeah. Just the last question for me is just I suppose obviously a lot of change in terms of headcount through the business. I suppose five years ago there was a lot of talk at Spark of moving to an agile type structure. What's happening to the agile structure under this Spark 30 plan? Is that kind of being unwound and we kind of go back to more traditional structure or what's happening with the agile structure?

Agile, there isn't a change in that approach. We use it in parts of the business where it makes most sense in terms of whether that's product design or how we think about that. Yes, we are a smaller organisation as we've adapted to what's happening in the economy, but there isn't any change in terms of how we think about Agile and the use of that within the organisation.

Okay, great. That's all for me.

Thank you. Thank you for all the questions. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.