Ryman Healthcare Ord

Thank you for standing by and welcome to the Ryman Healthcare half year results briefing. All participants are in a listen only mode. There'll be a presentation followed by a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask a question today, you need to press the start key followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. I would now like to hand the conference over to Ryman Healthcare's Chairman, Dean Hamilton. Please go ahead.

Welcome everybody. I'm Dean Hamilton, Executive Chair of Ryman. We appreciate you dialling in today. There's a lot to cover today, but just before we get into the presentation, I'd like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the passing, sadly, this year of one of our two founders, Kevin Hickman. Kevin, along with John Ryder, founded Ryman 40 years ago and essentially pioneered integrated retirement living and aged care as we know it today. It literally didn't exist before both John and Kevin. Along with others, I was fortunate to attend the service for Kevin at the Christchurch Town Hall. It was certainly humbling to hear of his contribution, not only to our sector, but also to athletics and to his other real passion, and that was horse racing. A great pioneer with an enormous legacy. Certainly, Kevin, a life well lived. With me today in the room is our new CEO, Naomi James, and Rob Woodgate, our CFO. Naomi started with us on the 4th of November. We've purposely left Naomi free in November to travel around the business, to meet our team members, to meet residents, to meet with a number of our stakeholders. As of tomorrow, I will step back to a non-executive chair role, and Naomi will lead the organisation. Given Naomi's recent arrival, Rob and I will present today's result. Naomi will make a few comments at the end, and we'll all be open for Q&A. We've got an hour. We'll present for around 40 minutes and then move to Q&A. I'm also conscious we've got meetings with a number of you over the next week. In terms of the agenda, Rob will cover financials and capital management, and I'll present the balance. A brief snapshot at 30 September, we had 49 open and operating villages, nine of those of which also had a construction element at them included in that 49. We now have over 9,500 retirement village units, over 4,600 aged care beds, and combined we've now got over 2,000 units and beds in Victoria, some 14% of our overall portfolio. We've got a further 4,700 units and beds in our land bank. Just recently tipped past 15,000 residents and over 7,700 team members. Stepping back, we own over 15% of all independent retirement units in New Zealand, and over 10% of all aged care beds in New Zealand. And interestingly, we provide as many patient bed nights annually in New Zealand as the entire hospital system. Whilst we're gonna talk a lot about numbers today, at the heart of Ryman, we are care and resident experience. We provide care good enough for mum and dad. Importantly, as we move through this transition, our residents remain at the centre of everything we do. This year in New Zealand, we're proud to be acknowledged for the first time across three separate cohorts as best in class. We remain a highly trusted brand, thanks to the hard work and compassion provided by our over 7,500 team members. On to a review of the six months to 30 September. Whilst the period hasn't been without challenges, I think we've achieved a lot. I'd like to take you back briefly to March 2023. The company was in discussions with both James Miller and myself to join the board. From the outside, we could see a number of the issues, but we asked the board as part of our due diligence to retain a third party to solicit feedback from investors and analysts, many of you on the call today, on the views of the company. there were three quite confronting common themes. One, there was a loss of confidence in the board. Secondly, there was a loss of confidence in the management team. And thirdly, there was a loss of confidence in the numbers, including the non-GAAP measures. With the support of the whole board, we've set about rebuilding that confidence. In terms of governance and leadership, we've completed the board renewal process, and that will be with Claire retiring at the end of the year, will be set at the 31st of December. We have a new executive team, including Naomi, and all are on a new remuneration structure. In terms of financials, once James and I joined the board, the Audit and Risk Committee commissioned an independent review by PwC of our financial reporting, both relative to the sector, relative to best practice, and also how directors were exercising judgment. This led to a list of key actions we needed to undertake. Unfortunately, these changes take time and energy and capacity of the team, and in the short term create a lot of noise in the numbers. We saw this at the full year result, and we're seeing it again today. I'm pleased to say we're nearer to the end than the start of this process. You will notice a significant impact on our numbers today, also through lower capitalization, and Rob will step through that later. In terms of the highlights, net profit before tax and fair value movements, was a loss of 79.8 million, down 17.8 million on the prior half. Cash flow from existing operations was minus 7.8, down 24.8 million on the first half 24, and cash flow from developments, whilst negative at 44.7, was a significant 132 million better than the comparable period in first half 24. On the consumer and resident reputation front, we talked about the recognitions, It's important to note we've had positive and stable resident MPS across care, serviced and independent living throughout the year. Our MPS for all of those residents remains above 40. In terms of our business improvement, we've done what we said we'd do in our September update. We have new RV unit pricing structure implemented on the 1st of October. And our new services and support structure is in an advanced stage. Obviously more on that later. In aged care, our occupancy in mature care centres stayed high at 96%. There's been movement in the regulatory front. Proposed new legislation in Australia is positive for us. However, the impact will take time as it has been grandfathered at 1st of July 2025 for existing residents. In New Zealand, where the majority of our care beds are, Health New Zealand Te Whare Ora, the review of aged care funding continues. Whilst the sector has limited visibility on that review, we understand there's a potential framework for consultation coming out in coming months. In terms of sales and stock, a key part of today is covering this topic. In what is a relatively tough market, we have had record settlements achieved in the period of 827 auras and $651 million of gross receipts, our highest level in the last three years. Positively, we achieved that whilst we maintained our pricing. Despite this progress with strong first half new deliveries, our stock built up to 12% unoccupied units at the half albeit 45% of these are under contract. On development, we had a good first six months. We've delivered 667 retirement units and aged care beds. We opened three new buildings at James Waddy, Merrin Corbin, and Keith Park in New Zealand. These are all fabulous facilities for our residents. In terms of capital management, our debt ended up $50 million higher at the half year relative to March 2024 at $2.56 billion. And as we've previously advised, we had amendments to our financial comments for testing periods through to March 2026. We've touched on a number of our metrics for the first half. In terms of our retirement unit occupancy, we averaged 87.9% for the period. It slipped slightly as we brought new stock on. Our aged care occupancy across the portfolio was 91.7%, down slightly. The mature was steady at 96%, and the developing was at 59%. Our gross resale margin at 26.6%. was three points lower than what we achieved last year. Whilst we maintained our pricing, our cash resale margin did compress. With two years of flat pricing, mathematically margins per unit and as a percentage will compress. More so in service departments given the shorter tenure. In independent units, two of the nine years are now relatively flat. We're looking forward to markets improving and being able to stop that compression. In terms of total sales of RV units, of the 827, 224 were new, and 603 were resales. Turning to governance and leadership. It's been a period of significant change, with five new directors commencing since June 2023. I'm really pleased with the caliber of directive we've been able to attract across Australasia. The latest addition is Scott Pritchard, known to many of you. He's an experienced public company CEO. He's also an experienced developer, who I'm sure will make a positive contribution as we transition from a construction mindset to a developer's mindset, where we will partner a lot of our design and construction. As previously advised, I'm returning to a non-executive role tomorrow. At that point, all of the board will be considered independent. I'd also like to take the opportunity to thank Claire for her 10 years on the board and stepping into the interim chair role in 2022. In terms of the executive team, we have a new structure, we have a new team, we have a new CEO in Naomi, and we have new remuneration structure. I'm delighted to welcome Naomi as our CEO. Naomi brings a proven track record in transformation and as a successful public company CEO. I'm confident we've got the makings of a high performance leadership team. In terms of business improvement, we've had a big focus over the last six months. We talked to you about it at a high level in May and we provided an update in September. For us, it's been about how do we find the right balance between great care for our residents and great returns for our shareholders. They need to comfortably coexist. Our opportunity overview covered five areas. Our revenue settings, both in retirement and in care, our services and support structure, our new development processes, our existing village performance, our culture and change capability. We then moved to prioritise our efforts more recently into two areas. Firstly, resetting our DMF and weekly fee structures to reflect not only residents staying longer, but also to reflect the fact that the operating costs of our villages had escalated substantially over the last four years through COVID and beyond, whether that's in rates, insurance, electricity or labour. Secondly, we're focused on reorganising our non-village overhead, our support and services team and our non-village expenditure. Our cost per resident had grown materially over time. I'll touch more on these now. In terms of our new pricing structure, you're all well aware of our changes we introduced at the first of October. It's very early days, but so far, approximately 75% of new sales contracts entered into are at 30%, and they've all been achieved at the price list. The majority of the balance of new sales have been at 25%, and we have consistently achieved at least a 5% premium to our price list. In terms of the weekly fees of those new sales, roughly half are electing the fixed weekly option, and approximately half are electing on indexed. Whilst these changes aren't going to have a material impact on our cash over the next couple of years, they will create significant long-term value for shareholders. In terms of new services and support, as we've shared previously, the move to the regional model was, in hindsight, premature for Ryman. With our historical underinvestment in systems, we simply replicated overhead in New Zealand, Australia, and the group. We actually got diseconomies of scale per resident as we expanded. We've now moved to a one Ryman model. We've disbanded the regional overhead. We've reduced layers. And we are setting out new ways of working. We've had a heightened focus on costs, whether that's IT, whether it's our leasing, whether it's our travel, or the like. At the same time, we've been downsizing our in-house DDC function. as we complete existing projects and get ready to transition to an outsourced delivery model for new villages. The reorganisation has been significant and has been challenging for everybody involved. I'd like to express my thanks to all the team as to how they've worked through the process and supported each other. While some have left, a number have taken on new or more senior roles. In terms of financial impact, We've achieved $18 million of annualized savings to date in our gross non-village operating expenses, and that's across employee costs and other costs. One-off costs to date are approximately $10 million, including $6.5 million expensed in the first half. Onto the financials, and I'll now hand over to Rob.

Thanks, Dean. As Dean mentioned earlier, we introduced a number of accounting changes in response to the review. On the changes that we've made to the statements, I acknowledge that they are somewhat tricky to work through. We've tried our best to lay out the changes, and we don't expect this to be the norm. However, to get through the changes, we do need to show a number of restatements. We've made a number of these changes in the past six months, and these are all significant changes with the aim of improving our reporting and transparency, and I'll cover these off in the next few slides. The key changes identified earlier on were the recognition of AURAs with a change in the sale being based on the occupation and recognising available units on the basis that they are practically complete. And the changes Dean highlighted on the business improvement program has led us to revise other areas including resident tenure and changes to the valuation where positions have been reviewed after making changes to our pricing model. In the period, we appointed PwC as our new auditor And whilst the accounts are not formally reviewed or audited, we have been in active discussions with the partner on positions we've taken in today's presentation. Just moving to the metrics, on the cash flow from existing operations, we saw a cash outflow of $7.8 million, down from a $17.1 million inflow last year. This was largely down to changes made to interest capitalisation, which saw an increase to the net cash interest. Capitalisation has been updated to align with active developments, and where we have less activity, it will result in more interest remaining in the operating cash flow. I'll come back to this point later. Cash flow from development activity was an outflow of $44.7 million and an improvement on the first half of 2024 of an outflow of $177.3 million, with lower levels of land acquisitions and lower cost capitalised to development activity. Net debt remains steady at $2.56 billion. IFRS profit before tax and fair value was a loss of $79.8 million from a reported first half loss last year of $17.8 million. And whilst care and village fees increased by 11% and DMF increased by 9%, there are increases in operating expenses and interest costs, and with changes in the rate of capitalisation seeing more costs in total expenses. Moving on to the changes in financial reporting. We've detailed in the financial statements where we've made restatements to prior periods, and on pages 12 to 15 of those interim accounts, we have detailed the restatements and mapped these to this chart, or to this table. First point is operators' interest in the IP, sorry, investment property valuation, which include an adjustment to the accrued DMF, which applied a time-based discount factor. On reviewing this, the position did not get adjusted and should be shown at face value and not be discounted. This change saw us decrease investment property by $235 million and restate prior periods. The recognition of occupancy advances has changed to the point when the resident moves in. It was previously on the signing date of the ORA. This is a key change in aligning revenue recognition to the sector. The adjustment sees a $91 million decrease in the fair value movement with the change in the timing of the recognition, signing being the earlier occupation, and also removes the ORA debtor and corresponding liability. With the occupation date now being the triggering event and settlement normally taking place at the same time, we do not see the ORA resulting in a debtor in the accounts. The treatment of the debtor and liability sees a $515.8 million decrease in both positions, and this will be adjusted or has been adjusted in prior periods. The debtors that do remain now are either where residents have transferred internally and the units have not cash settled, or residents who have been granted possession prior to cash receipt. In this case, there are health related issues supporting this. The third point, development land. This has been classified going forward as investment property. In the past, it was property, plant and equipment. Land is held at fair value as determined by an independent valuation. and capitalised work in progress is held at cost and tested for impairment. The change has the accounts reclassifying the land held for development for $166.4 million and historically impairments for $147.5 million transferring from investment property and fair value movements. And in the period we saw a $28 million decrease through fair value movements with adjustments made to work in progress booked on development sites. Similarly, with development land, assets held for sale mirror the same criteria as for investment property and are held at fair value. Historical expenses relating to assets held for sale are reflected in the fair value movements and adjusted by $63 million. Finally, the expected tenure of residents in both independent and serviced units have increased to nine and four years. Previously, these were seven and three years. The change sees us extend the DMF revenue recognition period to align with the average resident tenure across both unit types. In the period, we saw a reduction in DMF of $1.8 million in the revenue applying the change on residents who took up occupation from 1 April. Moving on to the statutory profit and loss. The profit before tax and fair value movements was a loss of $79.8 million from a reported loss in first half 24 of $17.8 million. As I mentioned earlier, we saw revenue improvements in village and care fees up 11% and DMF up 14% as we opened more facilities through the period. Total expenses lifted by 27% with the underlying changes in operating expenses and finance costs linked to changes we've made in our approach to capitalisation. We no longer take marketing and establishment costs through to the project, and the point we commence capitalisation of costs to the site is when we deem it to be an active development. Working through to net profit after tax, the first half position was a net profit of $94.4 million, down 50%, from $187.1 million. There are two variances in play here. On the fair value movements, these came in at $254.6 million, up on the first half 24 by 113.2, reflecting underlying movements in the valuation and some of the changes I highlighted earlier. I'll come back to these when we go through the investment property slide details. Deferred taxes and expense of $80.4 million versus tax credit in the prior period of 63.5. This was reflecting two elements. a higher expected future taxable DMF following the new price changes, and also changes in New Zealand and Australia resulting in a lower recognition of tax losses. Jumping across to revenue, on aged care and occupancy, our mature villages, we saw occupancy remaining steady at 96.4%, up marginally on last year. When looking at all 43 care centres, we experienced good occupancy within the first half at 91.7%, marginally lower than the same period last year. This difference compared to the mature care performance reflects the opening of three care centres Dean mentioned, Miriam Corbin, James Waddy and Keith Park. Revenue on aged care, this was up 13% to $240.7 million, with revenue per occupied bed up 10% to $2,244 per week. On the retirement village side, we saw growth in village fees in both service departments up 15% and independent units up 21%. The change came from repricing of fixed weekly fees, which have lifted over previous years and prior to the business improvements that Dean mentioned. And this also coincided with opening of the main buildings and the removal of discounts we applied when facilities were not available to residents. Occupied unit days improved by 5% on both unit types. And on a revenue per occupied unit week, we saw a 2% increase in service departments to $827 per week, a 10% increase in independent units to $494 per week. Moving through to the expenses, on operating expenses, we've experienced a 12% increase in employee costs to $247.3 million, up $26 million in the prior period. This aligns with the additional staff supporting the opening of the main buildings, and also including here a general wage increases and one-off costs relating to the share scheme. Buildings and ground expenses have lifted, also linked to the increase in units in the main buildings, and we're experiencing ongoing inflation on rates and insurance. so in total increasing by 24%. Direct selling expenses were up, as was marketing, both by 28%, underpinning recent sales campaign activities and sales incentives to residents. Expenses that were capitalised to projects was down $13.8 million, or 29%. This reflecting a change made not to capitalise operating costs associated with the start-up of a village, and with the non-village expenses as a result of less development activity and associated overhead capitalisation. Our capitalisation policies remain under review as we work through the organisational restructure and through the changes to the build program. Finally, several one-offs are documented totaling $9.9 million with costs linked to the closing out of previous employee share schemes, restructuring costs associated through to September and write downs to inventory. Moving across to the next slide, finance costs. Our interest costs increased by $10.8 million to $92.9 million, reflecting the increase in the debt balance, with borrowings lifting to $2.5 billion, and underlying interest rates, with our average cost of debt at 6.5%. As I mentioned earlier, changes to the capitalisation of interest, with a move to capitalising on active developments, resulting in $21.9 million less capitalised borrowings. The combination of both the interest cost and the capitalisation saw the net finance cost on borrowings jump from $16.4 million to $48.8 million between the two comparative periods. Capitalisation to sites under construction decreased to $25 million, a drop of 29%, reflecting lower work in progress as in-flight sites moved to completion, including the three main buildings. Capitalisation on land bank sites decreased too, dropping to $6.4 million, with no capitalisation taken on the six of the ten greenfield sites and the village extension land holdings, and previously we capitalised interest on all land bank sites. As mentioned earlier, debt increased by 3% to $2.59 billion. Moving through to the cash flow from existing operations, one of our key metrics, whilst this decreased by $24.8 million to negative $7.8 million, we did see some solid results the village operations cash from village operations lifted by 24.2 million dollars to 16.6 million reflecting the growth in care and village fees and this was closely matched to the change in payments to suppliers and employees up 29.6 million dollars we did see a decrease in the amounts of village and technology capex decreasing 5.7 and 7.2 million dollars respectively net cash flow from the resales of ORAs decreased by $7.5 million to $69.6 million, driven by low gross margin on resales. Margins were compressed through the period, and these are largely dependent on unit price inflation. You can find more details on our resale volumes in the appendices. The resale units were up 9% across both countries, and average unit price on resale units remained flat. Non-village cash flow was down $14 million, also impacted by payments to suppliers and employees. And as we mentioned above, with the lower capitalisation of interest, this saw cash interest expense coming through the cash flow from existing operations and interest paid increasing from $20 million to $47.7 million. Moving through to the cash flow from development activity, this improved by $132.6 million to negative $44.7 million on the half. The cash from resident funding dropped by $10.1 million to $250.9 million. Within this, new sale settlements of RRAs dropped by $5.6 million. New sales RRAs were down 5%. with units sold in the second half of 25 being 224 units versus 236 in the prior period. As I mentioned before, the slide in the appendices, slide 49 I think it is, goes into more detail on the volumes of AURAs with the decrease coming through largely in the Australian market. This was partially offset with average unit prices having moved marginally higher on new sales units. and the net position on RADs in aged care beds decreased by $3 million. The significant moves on the development capex. There was a combined improvement of $44 million with lower land acquisitions and also having completed the settlement on Newtown. We also saw a slowdown in spend year on year on the in-flight projects as we made progress through the main village centres. This resulted in a decrease year on year of $67.3 million to $220 million. Capitalised interest was lower than the year-on-year position. As I mentioned before, we reviewed the capitalisation on projects with the criteria being under active development, and this has seen less capitalised costs in the development cash flow with the offset in interest costs in existing operations. Finally, on cash flow, moving to free cash flow, Combining both these positions, we saw free cash flow coming at negative $52.5 million, an improvement on first half 24 of $107.7 million. Moving through to capital management, we made a series of restatements to the positions from the five changes I highlighted earlier in the presentation, and we've shown the restated positions for the prior periods shown on the slide here. There was a transfer of development land from property plant and equipment to investment property, and restatements to investment property with accrued DMF being adjusted for the time discount factor I mentioned earlier. There's reclassifications on assets held for sale, moving these to investment property, adjustments made to the deferred tax asset on the accrued DMF adjustment, and changes to the ORAs and the debt and liability reflected in the trade and other receivables and net occupancy advances. Total equity is up by 74 million to 44.3 billion, and the NTA per share has increased by 22.3 cents to 589.7 cents per share. Net interest-bearing debt has increased marginally on the half, with total debt at 2.56 billion, and gearing remains above 37%, which is outside of our target range of 30% to 35%. On the bank covenants, the interest coverage ratio for September 24 was reported at 1.7 times. This is now reflecting the sales based on occupation and will do so going forward. We continue to operate under the revised ratios that we share with you in September, with the ratio at 1.5 for this half and also for the full year at 31 March 25, and then stepping up to 1.75 times in September next year and two times in March 26th. And in line with previous statements we've made, the company's intending to review the dividend policy in FY26, and as such, there has been no dividend declared for this period. Moving on to investment property. With the changes to accounting treatments, we felt it was necessary to show the restated investment property position. The March 24 position was reported at $10.04 billion. In the restated positions, we've reclassified land from property, plant and equipment to investment property, increasing the balance by $466 million. In parallel, we reclassified held for sale property and also applied the adjustment to the accrued DMF being the time-based discount. This resulted in a restated position of $10.26 billion. In the half, we increased the investment property balance with additions of $259.5 million The fair value movements in the period were a net $280.6 million based on independent value appraisals. The reported position for HIPAA 24 after the restatement and the valuation was $10.79 billion. Moving on to the investment property valuation, as we outlined in the full year, the independent valuation now underpins most of the positions with some of the previous judgments being eliminated from the investment property position. The table on the left hand side takes you through the March to September movements. In March and under our previous recognition policy, we relied on units being subject to an occupancy agreement or contract. This worked on the concept of near complete units. In September, we're using the occupancy as a recognition point and valuations are included on completed, not yet occupied units or stock that can be occupied. And development land and land bank transfers are being held at cost, now being at fair value and subject to the valuers' assessment. On the right-hand side of the slide, we show the valuers' assumptions, highlighting that the valuers have adjusted the unit price inflation in the earlier years, and also the discount rates, to accommodate their assessment of how the new DMF pricing impacts the investment property valuation. And the units included in the fair value valuation total 9,575, with available new sales stock based on a practical completion test. Finally, jumping across to funding and treasury, debt funding remains largely unchanged in its quantum of $3 billion, with drawn debt up $30 million. Post the balance sheet date, we have rolled forward $147 million of facilities with two of the domestic banks. We have no near-term facilities maturing, and all lines are non-current at the end of the year. Our bank group remains very supportive of the actions we've taken over the last three months. We reported a weighted average tenor of 2.7 years, and we'll be looking to work through our annual refinance program prior to the end of the full year, and we expect to restore some tenor at this point. Finally, the fixed rate debt has increased slightly in dollar terms to $1.65 billion, being 64% of the drawn debt. and the weighted average cost of drawn debt is standing at 6.5%, the same as last year. At this point, I'd like to hand you back to Dean.

Thanks, Rob. I need to acknowledge there's been a lot of noise in these numbers as we work hard to improve our financial reporting. I'm confident we're getting near the end of these changes. Let me dive a little deeper into sales and stock. As Rob talked about, We are now recognising our auras on occupation. This is a substantial change for us and brings us in line with the sector. All of our non-GAAP metrics now are based on this, whether that's sales volumes, gross margins, all recognised on occupation. Why have we done that? Much stronger alignment with cash, stronger alignment with our revenue recognition because weekly fees and DMFs start accruing on occupation. reduces our volatility created by cancelled contracts where we would book a sale, then have to back it back out through a cancellation, and also removes the direct judgment on near-complete units. In terms of impact in the half, we've had to restate. With the new method, we have sold 827 occupation rights. Our previous method, it would have been 843, so we're 16 less. In terms of gross margin, it's slightly the other way. Our new method is 11 million higher than the period would have been if we had done it on booked sales. In terms of the bottom part of that right-hand chart, there is a bigger cumulative impact on the non-GAAP metrics as we need to remove the historical recognition of a sale that had not been settled at 31 March, in essence backing out 596 units that had been recognised as a sale but had not been completed at that point. It's important to recognise these are non-GAAP measures and no impact on our IFRS financial statements. There's little alternative than to go through this process as we achieve the transition to cash. We're much more comfortable now that we're recognising our auras on a cash basis. In terms of new sales of auras, in the half we achieved a 2% growth in independent units and we only sold 55 on the service side. We're down 23%. In part, that reflects what's become available. Average unit prices, independence were flat and service were up with reasonable price and performance on our new stock. In terms of resales of Auras, as you can see on the charts, this is predominantly a New Zealand story given the younger age of the Australian portfolio. We'd expect to see over time the orange bars here increase as that portfolio matures further. In terms of volumes, we delivered a strong half. Independent units were up 2%. Service were up 16% as the portfolio matures. Average unit prices were flat despite the challenging market, as I talked about before. However, whilst we are achieving flat prices in this tough environment, that does compress margins. And you're seeing at minus 15% there, that compression has accelerated into the service area given the shorter tenures. In terms of where are we with stock, we delivered 388 new RV stock in the period. We ended up at the end of the period with 182 more unoccupied. Of that, some 164 are new units. All of the growth in our unsold stock is in new serviced apartments. In the top right chart, you will see the impact of delivering the BO1s at Miriam Corbin, James Wattie, and Keith Park. As you're aware, the service departments take two to three years to sell down in these new villages, given we have fewer health issues amongst our initial IA occupants. As you'll see in the resales earlier, once the village is full, that product sits comfortably in our continuum of care. Outside of this category, opening and closing stocks are pretty similar. albeit overall higher than we'd like to be at 12% vacancy, even though 5.5% of that is contracted. We see a real opportunity to turn this into cash as we improve occupancy. Additionally, of the 1,156 available or unoccupied, 166 of those we also own given early payouts. So the gross cash release will be greater. In terms of development, a quick update. We delivered 667 retirement villages and aged care beds in the first half. 79% of those delivery were the three main buildings and 142 independent units. We do need to mark here that we have achieved some significant milestones in the first half. We opened those three main buildings, of themselves are significant exercises in staffing up, in the occupational readiness and testing. The Hubert Opperman Village in Mulgrave opened to its first residents in August. And our Merrin Corbin Village was completed and has been removed from our development pipeline. So we now have nine sites under active construction, with two more expected to be completed in the second half, both at Burt Newton and at James Waddy. We'll update our capital recycling projection on an annual basis, and we'll be doing that again at March. Just now to point out that it is an unusual delivery mix that we've had in the six months. We've got 95% in New Zealand and 80% in service and care. In terms of the New Zealand pipeline, most of that's been covered. As Rob mentioned, Newtown Land settled in September. We're still holding Kaui and Karori sites for sale. We are in discussions on Karori. On the Australian side, post-balance day, delighted to say that Burt Newton opened the B01 building and the village is now completed, a fabulous asset in the portfolio. Quickly over the sites themselves that we had over the course of the year, all 10, Merrim Corbin, as I touched on, is completed. Keith Park, the care facility is filling up well, and we've pushed the button on stages eight and nine. In terms of Patrick Hogan, the townhouses are filling up, albeit fair to say that it is a competitive environment with two other offers nearby. James Water, we opened the B01, which is a great building. We will finish this site and be off it by the end of the financial year. Again, a great facility in the bay. In terms of in Christchurch, the key unlock for us for this village is to deliver the much-delayed B01 in April, May 2026. In terms of North Ward, we're continuing to build our townhouses. We've got concrete in the ground for the main building, which will be two years in construction. Turning to Australia, you'll see that big stage four sitting there at Nellie Melba. We expect to complete that in the middle of the calendar next year. That will complete that site. We had some surplus land to the side. You can't quite see it. It's down the bottom right of that picture. We've now gone unconditional at $9 million after balance date. At Burt Newton, that's a picture of it at 30 September. That's now complete. You can see some diggers, etc. That's now complete and opened on the 18th. The care centre opened on the 18th of November. Hubert Opperman, which is our name given to our new Mulgrave village over there. We've welcomed our first residents. You can see the townhouses in that picture. We expect to get five and six done by the middle of next year, and then we'll be pausing in terms of delivery as we move into the IA towers, which will take some time to bring to market. On Deborah Cheatham, it's predominantly a townhouse village, as you'll see down the Balamarine Peninsula. It's a tough sales market down there right now. Second home land tax is occurring in Victoria, and there's also a pending Airbnb tax, both of which are having an abnormal impact on this peninsula and the Mornington Peninsula. Seeing a wave of houses in both markets, which is challenging for people looking to settle on their houses and move in. That will take some time to clear, but in the meantime, the village is slowly filling. Finally, in terms of outlook, the current environment does remain challenging. Interest rate reductions announced yesterday in New Zealand are positive, but unlikely to have an immediate impact on residential liquidity and pricing. We had been expecting higher second half 25 settlements of new aurors, but with the market staying tougher for longer, we now believe it's more likely that a number of these will roll into FY26, deferring cash. In terms of positive progress being made, we continued on a number of fronts. We have implemented the business improvement changes in two of those five focus areas, which will lower costs now and improve our revenue materially over time. As I mentioned, we have $18 million of annualized savings achieved to date in gross non-village operating expenses on an annualized basis. We're targeting a similar level of savings across the group by the end of FY26. We are delivering our program of main builds, three in the first half and one in the second half. It's critical that we deliver these. It meets our commitments to our residents, it creates continuum of care which helps sustain our occupancy, and overall adds significant value to our villages. In terms of the guidance, in terms of cash flow, we now expect to be negative free cash flow between $50 to $100 million as new settlements are deferred into FY26. The previous guidance had been targeted positive free cash flow. So obviously from a timing perspective that's disappointing, but ultimately the stock is sitting there. In terms of capital expenditure, we expect to spend now $625 to $675 million on total capital expenditure. This is down from the previous $700 to $820 million as we look to delay some of our final stages at in-flight projects as we look to manage stock and capital investment. Our build rate We expect to deliver at the top end of the previously indicated 850 to 950 retirement village units and aged care beds, given the strong delivery in the first half. Before I open to Q&A, I'll hand over to Naomi for a few comments.

Thanks, Dean. It's great to be here in time for our half-year results and have the opportunity to hear from our investors right at the start of my time with Ryman. Over the last three weeks, I've been visiting a number of our villages and offices in New Zealand and Victoria and have been able to see firsthand the passion and commitment our team members have to providing exceptional care for Ryman residents. and the very special communities our staff and residents together create at each of our villages. As Dean has talked to, we are in a period of change for Ryman and a challenging external environment for the property market. I do believe that there is no better time for us to make Ryman a strong, efficient and competitive business that's resilient through the bottom of the cycle and can grow sustainably to meet the future demand that we know is coming as our older population grows. While at the same time keeping what's special and unique to our business, which is putting our residents at the centre of everything we do. And I'm looking forward to working with all of our team and our residents, investors and other stakeholders as we take Ryman forward and continue to build a strong future together.

Great, thanks Naomi. Maybe I'll hand over to the operator now for questions on the phone and then we'll ultimately go to online questions. So back to you.

Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you would like to cancel your request, please press star 2. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question today comes from Ari Decker from Jarden. Please go ahead.

Oh, good morning. First, just thanks for the significant openness and transparency that you guys are showing as you adjust a large number of the approaches from the past. And I'd also just sort of say it's really good to see the benefits coming through from cash flow from existing operations, which are clearly showing some of the challenges in the business that were previously hidden with the underlying profit focus. I'll just start on NTA and a question about the balance sheet and value. I mean, obviously, we've seen it. You need to restate it down again this year. So first, just a question of clarity. The fair value movement that did come through on the restated basis for the half, are you essentially saying this pretty much all arose from the benefits of increasing DMF from 20 to 25 to 30%, albeit with the value of making some negative adjustments for discount rate unit pricing, as you've shown.

I'm happy to have a go at that. Rob, you can follow up. In terms of that RE no, in terms of that increase in valuation, there were a number of things. Obviously, part of it, they both put the 30% in. They then moderated discount rates and growth rates. We had visibility on the New Zealand side, and the net impact from those changes just on the DMF is about net 90 million And given the size of the Australian portfolio, whilst the value didn't lay it out in that way for us, it will be obviously a much smaller part than the 90. So out of the 280, there's a significant amount of just new valuation building into the portfolio as we walk forward.

Yeah, and so, I mean, clearly in the past you would have, and I'm really glad to see you move away from this, would have highlighted realized their value movement went to development margin. It looks like development was negative. But to your point on that Australian visibility, can you just give a bit of a view on how the company and directors would characterize the valuation of managers' interest? And in particular, is it a black box or is it something that you're pretty comfortable that you've got both transparency and granularity on what's driving the value changes?

Yeah, so we get the value of presents to the Audit and Risk Committee. And so, you know, we have time to, they present their valuations, comprehensive reports. We see it per village. You know, it's a detailed by resident calculation area, as you're probably aware. And so, yeah, we have a robust discussion with them. So, yeah, but ultimately it's their valuation, I think. In the past, we could be accused of reaching in. We've been purposely saying that is an independent valuation now. And ultimately, we need to trust that.

Thank you. Just on the interest, and you've been clear, I think, on the changes you've made, but I just want to check my understanding of a few things. So the expensed interest was, I'll use round numbers, about $50 million, so $100 million annualised. You're saying the capitalized interest now is much more aligned with active development. So if I use, say, 6% interest cost on the $100 million of annualized expense, that would give me circa $1.7 billion of debt on which interest is being expensed. There's about 600 units of new stock. That's $500 million, circa $500 million. Land for development, circa $500 million, both of those I understand. interest is being expensed on. So would I be right then in assuming that the remaining $700 million of debt is essentially not backed by either active development, new stock, or land held for development?

There's a lot of numbers you just rolled off the arrow. Can we come back to you on that? I can see where you're going, but I don't want to answer that on the fly.

Yeah, okay. That would be good, because I guess on my math there then, there'd be circa, like I said, $700 million of non-development-backed debt or inventory on the new sales side. Now, I appreciate you also have buyback stock and some other things, but do you have a view yet in terms of the capital structure on what sort of level of debt you think you'd be happy to hold, bearing in mind also that there's probably some further negative recycling that will be added to that 700?

Well, I think, you know, we're a bit over two and a half now. I think, as we've said previously, you know, we've got a plan to, A, make sure going forward that the cash flow from existing operations is positive. So, you know, we're not building that hole bigger, Ari. And, you know, I think we've got some positive signs there in the result pre-interest in terms of the villages are creating positive cash. We think about the changes in DMF and weekly. That will only help that over time. So we think we can start paying down some debt ourselves. We know we need to recycle what is the inflights, and we believe there is significant opportunity to release cash there. Can you see a path to under $2 billion over the next two to three years? We believe we can. So I think that makes us feel a lot more comfortable and under that level. And then we need to think about how we fund new development projects.

Okay, and then final question just on the recycling. And I think I understand why you're going to do an annual update on that. But can you just give any directional guidance on whether the recycling outlook is traveling better or worse? And I guess I'm just sort of pointing to the impact of, it looks like you're sort of indicating new sales is slower, clearly. and also suggesting though that the lower capex is largely timing or deferral related.

Yeah, and I think the cap recycling is a pretty simplified number. There's no time value in that. It's not like it's an MPV. We had signalled we thought the projects were going to be about $500 million still over their life with $600 to come. But we're looking also at overheads and our reorganisation. So it's kind of premature to see where that will fall. But we'll give an update at the full year.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks, Aaron.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Bianca Flutteris from UBS. Please go ahead.

Good morning, guys. Firstly, just following up on Ari's question on the restatement, so in terms of your accounting changes and as a result some restatements, would you say all of these changes now happens or are there any other line items you're looking at or changes we could potentially expect in the future?

Yeah, look, I think you can never say you're kind of done. We've got a new auditor coming in, so we'll have to work through that with them. I think, as Rob signalled, the capitalisation piece is obviously a work in progress. We're taking overhead down. We're slowing our development, but then we're looking to bring development back up. How do we think about capitalisation of overhead in particular? So that's a work in progress piece. In terms of the main outstanding pieces, I would say that's probably the key one for us to land at the full year. But as I say, there's been a lot of change, Bianca, as you say, and we apologise for the kind of noise and the results, but you can't go from A to B without that occurring. So I do think we're nearer the end than the start.

Okay. Yep. That's fair enough. That's helpful. Thank you. And then a couple of questions on Australia. So you mentioned the impact in Victoria on settlements because of the new Texas there. Could you talk a bit about the impact from construction cost inflation in Victoria as it doesn't sound like it is stabilizing in the same way we see in New Zealand? So just wondering if you expect any sort of potential impact from that on your current projects and margins?

Yeah, I think the land tax piece feels, you know, it's more impactful in those regions where people have their second home. So whether you're going down the Mornington side where we don't have enacted development or down the Ellerside where we had the Bellarine. So I think that's really, that impact is quite focused in on Debra Cheatham. So I don't think it's a broad-based Victorian issue whatsoever. In terms of construction, yeah, that's a fair observation. We are seeing the steam coming out on the New Zealand side, but Australia, whilst it's definitely moderated from the COVID period, we're still seeing construction inflation.

Okay, thanks. And then on a different note, it does suggest seem like capital partners are becoming more common in the retirement village and land lease space in Australia. Is that something that has come up in conversation at all for your Australian developments?

No.

No. Okay. And then last question from me. With the board refresh, has the topic of dual listing in Australia come up recently? No.

No, no, I think we're very focused on the here and now. We've got a big transformation underway. We've got new directors. We've got a new CEO. We've got a new leadership team. So I think we've got, as James would say, we've got plenty of wood to chop and a lot of opportunity. Wouldn't discount that in the longer term as our portfolio rebalances over time, I expect, but I don't see that Bianca in the immediate future.

Okay, great. That's helpful. That's all from me. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Aaron Ibbotson from Fawcett Bath. Please go ahead.

Hi there. Good morning. And thanks for the increased transparency, just to reiterate what Ari said. A couple of small questions for me. Firstly, actually, just on maintenance issues. capital or maintenance capex guidance, I think you put out 85 to 95. That's a bit lower than I had in mind. And also what you've done sort of historically, we look at the trend. Is this sort of a one-off for this year with lower IT systems, or is this more of a sort of broad-based review of where you sort of see steady state or whatever inflation-adjusted maintenance capex coming in going forward?

Yeah, I think there's a couple of buckets there, Aaron. I think, you know, in terms of IT, that always tends to be a bit lumpy. You know, if you look back, the prior year, there had been a fair few things coming through in terms of the My Ryman app, et cetera, and some investment in a software package to support our home care business in Australia. but in terms of the village side, I kind of have broadly 55, 60 million in my mind. We know the refurbishment side is averaging 30, 32 million, which is around 30 grand a site on a resale piece. So some years you're going to be slightly under, some years you're going to be slightly over, and it'll probably be dictated more by when we have our next IT project to hand, Aaron. So, yeah, we're kind of dealing with fives and tens there, which I don't think we're doing anything directionally different at this stage.

Okay, thank you. And then just on your cost out, I appreciate you said you've done $18 million sort of on a run rate basis now, I guess, and then targeting another $18 million. for the end of FY26. I must admit that I thought if this is gross numbers, which I assume you're talking to, I thought there potentially could be more. So, you know, is this something you, Naomi, is gonna look at, or do you think this is a relatively definite sort of end result and that there's not much more to cut?

No, I'll hand over to Naomi.

I think, Aaron, it reflects the work to date, which Dean and the team kicked off, obviously, earlier in the year. So clearly that work's ongoing, and our view is going to progress as it develops. So I'd expect that's something that we'll be saying a bit more on at the full year.

Okay, thank you. And then, don't take this the wrong way, But if I look at the management team now, the refresh, obviously a lot of corporate experience and finance experience. If I look at care specifically, do you think, Dean or Naomi, you have people in place that can review the operational efficiency of the care operations more effectively? diligently. Is there anything to do there on the cost to get EBITDA margins back to where they were? Or are we just waiting for the New Zealand government to pay more? Or is there any work ongoing to sort of improve the efficiency of the care operations specifically in village?

Yeah. I think of care in a couple of ways, Aaron. In terms of that whole compliance governance piece, that has always really sat one level below that SET. So we have a very competent person leading a large clinical management team across both countries, and that's largely unchanged. And they've all been in large hospital environments, either in New Zealand and Australia. So I don't think from that perspective the quality governance risk piece has changed in the RE-ORG, because it's always primarily set one level down. In terms of efficiency, I think ultimately the answer to expanding our per bed per day margins will be a combination of revenue. And as you'll see in those New Zealand numbers, you know, we're working hard on care premiums. It's around $25 million for the half, you know, $50 for the full. So, you know, we would have the largest premium book in New Zealand. We think there's continued opportunities there. But, you know, we also, you know, I think the industry without premiums is struggling. And so, you know, I think I will watch with interest, and I'm sure Naomi and the team will in terms of the Te Whata Ora review. But, you know, ultimately I think that's going to move to what you'll see in Australia, which is more user pays rather than, you know, government allocating significantly more to it. So that's on the revenue side. You know, I'm optimistic on that, but it will take time. Otherwise you will see bed closures in New Zealand, particularly in the not-for-profit area, and that's not what the government want to see. So I think there is some tension there. but they do want to see expansion in standard beds, and we're primarily in a larger bed base than that. But I do think we'll benefit from just general funding improvement. And thirdly, in terms of our cost side, yeah, that's definitely something we need to look at. Again, that's that balance between great care and great financial performance. I'm expecting Naomi will have a close and hard look at that with the team. So I think ultimately it'll be a combination of the two. Revenue up and hopefully more efficiency, Aaron. Thank you.

Thank you. Just final very brief question from me. I appreciate you said that it would take, you know, should take two to three years to sell down newly opened service department buildings. I'm just curious, you know, with occupancy being very high in your mature villages, you know, what's the early indications of your newly opened care centers? You know, is there You know, how are they filling up relative to expectations and how long do you think it will take to get the recently opened care centres to reach near or full occupancy?

Yeah, no, good question. They're all improving on a monthly basis. There's a range. You know, Keith Park's filling faster than what we thought. So we invariably progressively open blocks of those. We don't just immediately open 80. So we'll, you know, whatever the number is, we'll progressively do it. So we're opening up faster than what we thought there. Merriam-Corbin is going well as well. Slower at Debrachetum. Again, it's a tougher environment down there. It's a competing market. So I think of work to do on the care centre there. But if you think of it from a portfolio perspective, the mature stuff is sitting at 96. A number of our villages are sitting at 99, 100. So I'm kind of quite comfortable with that piece. And there's really no worrying signs that we'll get the balance of this stuff to 90%.

Okay, thank you. That's it from me.

Thanks, Aaron.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Stephen Ridgewell from Craig's Investment Partners. Please go ahead.

Thanks and good morning. It's good to see pretty solid settlements during the half against a tough backdrop. I'm just wondering with the change in the fee structure from October the 1st, do you think you saw a pull forward in demand during the period, particularly late in the period as residents rushed to beat the price rise that might have benefited trading performance in the first half?

No, I think if anything, we pulled forward probably some sales, Stephen, but all the accounts now are on settlement. So we didn't pull forward a settlement. We would have pulled forward some sales. So the financial cash settlements in the first half won't have been influenced by that. They were things signed up months and months before. We saw some sales contracts pulled earlier as kind of the lead turned into a contract maybe quicker than what it would normally. But yeah, I don't think we benefited. Well, I know we didn't benefit on a cash settled basis in the first half.

Good, that's clear. And I think the data you provided earlier that you're achieving the new DMF structure without discounting prices is encouraging. I guess I just also wanted to check in though. Whether the sales teams have had to offer an increase in non-price incentives to help get sales over the line since the new fee structure has come in. And then just, I guess, some commentary around sales run rates. Are they holding up? post the price changes. The price seems to be holding up, but are you seeing sales run rates hold up at this point? I'm just conscious of the downgrade we've seen, obviously, to second-half expectations today.

Yep. On the incentive side, it's fair to say, and you'd know this as well, I suspect, anecdotally, there are a lot of incentives in the market at the moment. The industry has... brought on stock in New Zealand in particular, a lot of it at the same time, you know, whether that's in Auckland, whether that's at Oriwa, you know, whether that's at Cambridge. So we are seeing people wanting to turn stock into cash. So there are definitely incentives around that. whether that's dollars, whether that's move-in packages, et cetera. So that has stayed high. So it's a bit hard to unbundle. I don't think we've changed materially. We had those anyway. We've still got those now. Certainly our incentives are very much focused on selected stock and turning that into a settlement. I think that's a first point. So it was there anyway, just the markets like that at the moment, Stephen, at this point in the cycle. In terms of our sales run rate, October is invariably quiet for us. It's been building back up. That in part led us to lower our full year cash flow guidance. But by and large, we've got the stock to achieve most of that already and the sales commitments already to achieve that. So it's more that we're just seeing It's harder for longest even, I think. So people just are struggling to sell their own houses. And if you dial back four or five months to say that we thought it would still be like this December, January, February, March, you know, I think, you know, there are a lot of commentators who thought things would be starting to improve by then. And I think in reality, things have probably got tougher since then. So I think it's We've got the stock. I just think it's on that kind of demand settlement side. We've just got a bit more sanguine. So it's a pity it's rolling through the financial year end, but we have got the stock. It'll turn up in FY26. I just think it's stayed harder for longer.

No, that's fair. Maybe just one last one, just a wonderful clarification. As you say, there's a lot of new information out there today for the market to test. But just on the cash, free cash, you get a 50 to 100 mil. That's the updated number for the year. I'm just trying to reconcile just that you've downgraded to a capex to 625 to 675, but you've also upgraded deliveries to the top end of the 850 to 950 range. I'm just trying to reconcile those changes. Are there just some projects that we're going to fall over into the FY26, which you can actually complete before the year end. Is that what's going on? And maybe you're slowing some of the front, the earlier projects. Just interested to understand that dynamic.

It's a very good question, Steve, because we ourselves look at this almost conflict. It looks at that prima facie like the three guidance points are conflicting with each other. So you've got to peel that back. So in terms of the cash flow reduction, that's primarily pulling down the second half settlements. From where we thought we would be to where we're now expecting to be, that's primarily driven the 50 plus more down in free cash flow, which we're hoping will just, well, we'll still have the stock at year end, it'll roll into the next year. In terms of the build, you know, they've achieved it, and we think that, you know, little risk in achieving that full year forecast now, given where we are. And you say, well, how does that coincide with spending less money? I think you've got to look down below that BO1 building stuff, which we're completing into what's happening everywhere else outside of our BO1s. And it's fair to say we're slowing some of those pieces, as we do want to get this new stock down and sold. We just need to balance that capital expenditure, Stephen, with the stock. So it's that layer of stuff that wasn't the B01. We're effectively just slowing down, in particular in places where we've got some stock. For example, in Debra Cheatham.

Yeah, it's very helpful. Thanks, Dan. That's all from me.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Nick Ma from Macquarie. Please go ahead.

Just following on from that, the previous sort of target of deliveries for 26 and 27 combined, will that change given that slowdown or is it just more?

Yeah, no, that's the logical next question, Nick. And I think we continue to look at that build rate. We'll give you an update at the full year. We've certainly slowed some of that development, which I think we'll likely see, unless the markets change, we're all optimistic they change. for the better. We're probably going to see some completions move from 26 to 27, and potentially 27 to 28. If markets improve, we may well bring some of those back faster. But at this stage, we're just being cautious. I think we'll probably see some deferrals.

That's clear. And then in terms of the buybacks, that's still lifting. So one of the topics of discussion was the sort of HUD reviews now being pushed out, which would have possibly kind of mandated some time frame around that. Are you thinking of reviewing your sort of six-month buyback in New Zealand? And if so, do you have an idea of what you might move that out to?

Yeah, that's certainly a topic of conversation which we'd held off pending that HUD review. Right. But as you've seen, they've effectively pushed that down the road, because we were going to be guided by that and see what everyone else was going to do. So it's now going to come back on the table, what do we want to do as of our own right? We have the right to not pay the capital, but to pay interest. And ultimately, the six months is self-imposed. It's not a contractual term. It's a kind of a custom and practice term. So I think it's definitely something we'll look at. It's about $166 million of stock. We now, we've always owned it, but we effectively hold the aura ourselves. So when it comes to new sales, we're very focused on those because the cash impact is the same as a new sale effectively grows into us. So we're watching that. It went up about $12 million last year. year on year, so it's creeping up, it's not drowning us, but I think we will watch that. At the end of the day, we'd probably rather pay interest than pay out the capital sum. So yeah, it's certainly back on the table now that HUD hasn't kind of resolved it for the sector.

Yeah, that's helpful. And then, are you looking at land at all at the moment, or are you pretty reluctant to put any more money in the ground?

Yeah, we've got 10 in the bank now. We've got three held for sale. Well, we're down to two held for sale, being COE in that. So it's not like we're short of land at the moment. I think if we had five in the land bank, we'd probably be more active. But 10 in the land bank, ultimately, I think we'll probably have to recycle some of that if we wanted to buy some new land and go longer. If we start rebuilding back up, the pace is to be determined. But under a lot of that modeling, we've got enough land if we're going to use all those sites to the end of this decade. So, you know, I suspect as Naomi gets feet under the table, you know, they'll be beginning to look at is do you want to recycle some of that 10? Are there better opportunities? Unfortunately, you're buying and selling in the same market and it's, you know, it's tough to move $20 million, $30 million blocks of land.

That's good. And then one last one, just in terms of the stock you have across both new sales and resales, outside of obviously the service departments that have just come online, are there any particular build-ups of IOUs or SAs anywhere else?

No, there's a couple of villages, you know, we've got a bit of a build-up at Deborah Cheatham, which, you know, when we started that, these taxes weren't under on the table, so we've just got a, you know, it's one out of 49 villages, we'll just need to steer up that. It's filling, but it's just filling slowly, and it's not like it's going backwards, we're just going to be more patient across the portfolio. We've got little pockets here and there, but, you know, there's not big, big blocks, Nick, that concern us. You know, when you take a portfolio-wide... View?

No, that's great. Talk to me. Thank you.

Thanks, Nick.

Thank you. Unfortunately, that does conclude our time for phone questions. I'll now hand back to Mr Hamilton to address any online questions.

And there are no online questions, Hayden? Okay, thank you. Hey, I'm conscious we've covered a lot today, everybody. You know, you look through this pack of 60-odd pages, there's just an enormous amount of disclosure, so hopefully that's useful to you all. Obviously, any follow-ups, you can come back to any of us. Probably Hayden in the first instance. There's a couple of follow-ups we need to take up, but we do appreciate your time and look forward to meeting with a number of you over the next couple of days. Thank you very much. Have a good day.