Eolus Vind AB (publ)

Welcome to the Aeolus Q2 2025 Earnings Call. For the first part of the conference call, the participants will be in listen-only mode. During the questions and answer session, participants are able to ask questions by dialing pound key 5 on their telephone keypad. Now I will hand the conference over to the speakers, CEO Per Wittelesen and CFO Katharina Persson. Please go ahead.

A warm welcome to this presentation of Eolus results for the second quarter of 2025. Your presenters today will be myself, Pärvi Thorsson, CEO, and Katarina Persson, CFO. Eolus is the leading pure-play developer shaping the future of renewable energy. Please note that we during the second quarter changed the company name from Aeolus Vind to just Aeolus to reflect that our business targets several renewable techniques and energy storage. We are positioned to take advantage of the structural growth in renewable electricity demand resulting from the worldwide electrification and decarbonization trends. We apply our PurePlay business model to create value efficiently in every step of developing our diversified 26 gigawatt portfolio of onshore and offshore wind, solar PV and battery energy storage projects across six different markets. Leading energy investors, PPA off-takers and OEMs trust our 35 years of proven experience executing and optimizing market leading energy assets. I will begin with a walkthrough of the Q2 highlights and give an update on our portfolio. Katarina will follow with a closer look at the financials. And I will then conclude the presentation with our review on the near-term outlook before we move to Q&A. And I'm now turning to page 5 in the presentation. This quarter we delivered 364 million SEK net sales with an operating loss of 74 million SEK. Despite the positive contribution of the PINVA transaction provisions following a decrease expected project margin in the POM project due to a delay caused a loss for the quarter. There are also some negative effects affecting the operating profit but where we have a positive effect in the financial items. EULUS business model leads to large quarter-to-quarter swings in revenues and earnings since transactions are timed to market demand, buyer needs, permitting milestones and grid connections. This means that quarterly estimates are inherently uncertain. And even analysts who know our products well face a challenge in predicting in which specific quarter handover will close or how deals are structured. So annual numbers matter much more. Value creation and financial performance are best measured on a rolling 12-month or longer cycle basis where the effects of timing even out more. So consensus should be read with this in mind and previews provide a useful benchmark but they should not be over interpreted as precise short-term forecasts. Katarina will go into more detail on the numbers later in the presentation. We're moving to page 6, showing our product portfolio that is the core of our value creation, covering more than 26 gigawatts of products diversified across markets, technologies and level of maturity. And we added more than a half a gigawatt of projects during the quarter and made good progress in existing projects overall. And one particularly interesting addition is land secured for battery energy storage in southeastern Sweden. It is an early-stage 100 MW BES positioned in a good connection spot in SE4, which could provide supporting services to the national and regional grid. So we're excited to finally bring our experience in grid scale best projects to the Swedish markets. We move to page 7. So in the second quarter and thereafter, we showed resilience despite soft market conditions regarding new transactions. We sold the 147 megawatt Pinova project to Latvenego. That is our first project in the Latvian market and construction started immediately after the transaction was concluded. After the quarter we also sold the project Fageråsen which is a joint venture with Dalarvind that was sold to OX2. that offloaded significant upcoming grid connection commitments, releasing resources to recycle into further project development. There is a persistently slow market for projects in Northern Europe and therefore PPAs are becoming an increasingly important attractor. Regarding the POM, the project and the delay, the project has reached a degree of completion of 85% at the end of the quarter and therefore the anticipated completion and handover is delayed from Q2 and expected to be completed and handed over during the second half of 2025. The project is fully constructed. As of today, commissioning has been performed. There are some final tests and some final approval from the authorities before we can hand it over. It is like... 200 million euro project when it comes to CAPEX so of course any delays late in the project has an impact on project margins and with negative impact on expected project margin and consequently also Q2 operating profit due to the provisions made but important to emphasize that POM remains a profitable project overall from start to finish. So we have adjusted the remaining expected cash flow contribution down to 10 million US dollars. Regarding refinancing, 550 million seniors secured green bond issue successfully closed despite bond market turbulence during the spring. and in addition to that 175 million SEK revolving credit facility and up to a billion SEK project finance facility signed in this refinancing package. This increases our flexibility and gives us more flexibility flexibility and for taking on our larger portfolio. We turn to page 8. Our progress in the value creation pipeline continued steadily in the second quarter except for the delay of POM. We have almost 1.5 gigawatt of value in mature projects that we aim to realize over the coming three years. Fogelås, Boab and Dollebo, the construction proceeded according to plan. We have made continued progress on securing a PPA for the projects and are in EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATIONS. AND THIS PPA WOULD LOCK IN LONG-TERM REVENUES AND STRENGTHEN THE COMMERCIAL ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE PROJECTS. THE NEXT U.S. BATTERY PROJECT ROCASECA IS PROCEEDING IN LINE WITH PLANS. WE HAVE SECURED EQUIPMENT appropriate clauses handling potential changes in trade tariffs and we have made good progress on negotiating a tolling agreement which is the equivalent to a PPA for a best project. Foggråsen was sold to OX2 after the quarter and OX2 assumes all rights and obligations of the project and will continue development with the support of EULUS and Dalarvind. CAPEX reimbursements and significant additional payments to EULUS are conditional on regulatory approvals and subsequent financial investment decisions from the buyer. We flip to page 9, looking now at the overall portfolio development. We added a net 675 MW to our development portfolio in Q2 with new projects in the US making up the largest part of the increase. Pneuma proceeded to construction and we removed the divested US solar and PV project Centennial Flats from the late stage portfolio but remaining expected revenue from that projects are included in the order backlog. And changes in the portfolio are overall in line with our strategic focus on prioritizing value creation. On page 10, I'll end this section with a look at the progress towards our financial goals for 2025 to 2027. The negative operating profit in Q2 puts us at the 90 million SEK cumulative EBIT. So that's somewhat below the track towards the 2027 total target. Return on equity. is at 19 per cent, measuring the rolling 12 months period, and our equity to asset ratio remains high at 59 per cent. I'll now hand over to our CFO, Katarina Persson, for a walkthrough of the quarter's financials.

Thank you Per and hi everyone joining the call today and I start on page 12. Our net sales for second quarter amounted to 364 million SEK yielding an operating profit of minus 74 million SEK and earnings per share of 1.51 SEK. At the close of the quarter, our equity to asset ratio stood at 59%, and compared to 2024, our sales increased, but our profit decreased in Q2. Turning to page 13, we have some overall guidance to reading our statements, reiterating some points made by Per earlier in the presentation. As a pure play developer, our revenues derive mainly from large product sales. This means key reporting figures can be lumpy and vary widely between reporting periods. EBIT will rise considerably in the quarter of divestment and construction management revenue recognition. and we capitalise project costs on our balance sheet under projects under development, projects under construction and advance payment to suppliers. And project CAPEX for equipment and construction services increase the working capital significantly when we build on our own books. And then working capital is then rapidly reversed when we divest project with high capitalised CAPEX like home in Q1 2025. And our net debt position is similarly affected. It increases with product cash outflow and use of construction credit in products that are under construction, and then decreases as the product debt is either amortized from proceeds or transferred to a new owner when the product is divested. Generally, we advise investors to analyze our business over longer periods, rolling 12 months can capture the full investment and sales cycles. Nevertheless, I'll go through the changes in quarter to quarter numbers for the purpose of clarity. And just remember that this quarter on quarter analysis is not all indicative of a run rate. And on slide 14, we show change in the operating profit between Q1 and Q2 2025. And last quarter, we divested POM at 75% degree of completion. So there was a large and expected decrease in revenue in our second quarter. And underneath this change, revenue recognition from POM and proceeds from PINVA, Share Purchase Agreement, made a positive contribution. And POM revenue recognition contributed with 10% progression in the quarter, going to 85% in total. And correspondingly, the level of cost flowing through our income statement was much lower too compared to Q1. What this change masks is the negative contribution of the provisions made due to the delay to POM and lower expected project margin. But all in all, we reached a negative 74 million SEK operating profit for the second quarter. But on a rolling 12-month basis, the operating profit was 433 million SEK in 42. And next slide, looking at the balance sheet on the asset side, we opened the quarter with total assets amounting to 2,841,000,000 SEK and ended at 2,843,000,000 SEK and that's a minor net increase of 2,000,000 SEK. The changes during quarter to quarter are due mainly to investments in Frågelås, Dollebro and Boa and transfer of Pinnabat to Latvinaga. And projects under construction increased by 325 million SEK. And that's also mostly due to the construction complex. We invested a net of 40 million SEK in development portfolio value creation, even as the Pinova project left the balance sheet. And advanced payments accounts receivable decreased On the equity and liability side of the balance sheet there was a slight net decrease in total equity due to negative operating profit and the refinance increasing current interest bearing liabilities. Accounts payable decreased as we settled CapEx payments in Fogelås dollarbubla and at the end of second quarter our equity to asset ratio mounted to 59%. Turning to cash flow on page 17. Opening cash balance for the quarter was 200 million SEK and closing cash balance was 152 million SEK. Operating profit, tax and interest payments contributed negatively to operating cash flow before changes in working capital. And then investments in Ferrobilås dollar go go contributed to an increase in the working capital per quarter. Net flows from financing activities was dominated by refinancing and bond proceeds and amounted to plus 278 million SEK. but also includes payout of dividends during the quarter of 19 million sector shareholders. Finally, looking at projects under construction on slide 18, home has progressed to 85% degree of completion. P&V has been added at 0% degree of completion following the sale in Q2. And for the PNVAR project, the project management agreement differs somewhat from our usual construction management agreement, mainly that Aeolus does not view any downside construction risk. And PNVAR revenue will therefore be recognized based on predetermined milestones and project management service applied as the project progresses. And then handing it back to Per for a comment on the near-term outlook. Thank you.

Thank you, Katarina. I've now turned to page 20 of the presentation. We will continue to focus on advancing sales for Fogelås dollar bow and bow up since we have a lot of deployed capital into those projects. In total they have a capex of between 1.4 and 1.5 billion SEK. We are making good progress on PPA connected to the projects which will lock in long-term revenue and significantly de-risking operating cash flows. Our late stage Roca Seca best project in Nevada will continue to make progress during Q3 with focus on securing a tolling agreement and to advance the sales process for the project. Of course, in the US, our team is working around the clock to mitigate the delay, complete commissioning and handover of POM to our customer. In the Value Creation Portfolio we will continue to balance investment towards prioritized projects, markets and technologies in line with our business plan. Overall, we will pay close attention to our financial position and optimize sources and uses to current market conditions while aiming to reduce the corporate net debt. Our new construction credit facility opens up opportunities to deploy non-recourse debt in mature construction projects going forward when deemed attractive. Thank you for listening. We will now proceed to Q&A.

If you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key 5 on your telephone keypad. To enter the queue, if you wish to withdraw your question, please dial pound key 6 on your telephone keypad.

Hi, Lara here from ABG. You mentioned that the delay in the POM project, Reduce Your Operating Profit in the quarter, is it possible to quantify the effect of the provisions on EBIT?

According to the report, we expect an overall profit margin of the project of 10 million USD. And we have then accounted for a degree of completion of 85% so far.

Just to clarify, the remaining $10 million you're expecting to be paid out is project margins. It's not reimbursement for project costs.

That is expected remaining cash flow. And since we are accounting for according to the degree of completion method, we have already accounted for 85% of the expected project margin. so we have a larger expected cash flow coming than remaining project margin.

Okay, great, thank you. And just a question on the Dvala by Boalp and Fogelås. When can we expect these to be divested and do you expect to sell the project as a turnkey project since you've already started construction?

Yes, the sales process is ongoing. It's been for quite a while. So that of course shows that the market is soft. All projects are constructed. All of them have now produced their first kilowatt hour of power. So we are of course looking to conclude that transaction as soon as possible during the autumn. which would free up a lot of cash to both reduce our net debt and to give us opportunities to invest in the upcoming pipeline.

Great. Thank you. And a question on Roca Seca. It's a similar project to POM. Should we expect a similar strategy as POM, that you would construct the project and then sell it during or after completion, or how does it seem to be on that side?

We are looking to do an earlier sale to sell project rights, so we're looking to secure non-recourse project finance to and to sell the project much earlier than the POM project with a more limited construction scope for EULUS and to secure the tax equity part of it along with the transaction.

Okay, great. That was all from my end. Thank you very much.

Thanks. The next question comes from Marcus from Privet. Please go ahead.

I think that could be me. Marcus here. Can you hear me? Yes.

So I have plenty of questions. And unless you have plenty of American investors on the line, I prefer to... to both ask the questions in Swedish and the answers in Swedish if possible. Is that okay? Yes. Yes, okay for us. So, om man tittar på då, Rokasäcka, som du nämnde, som den tidigare frågan gällde, kan man se det som en strategisk förändring där ni vill reducera risken med kanske en lägre marginal än att ta på er POM, som då såg väldigt lovande ut med stor vinst, som nu då sjunker ganska dramatiskt eftersom Man kan naturligtvis vara efterklok när det gäller POM eller se att vi som det utvecklades så fick vi inte tillräckligt betalt för risken. Men huvudspåret är ju att

har så asset light affärer som möjligt så att vi är beredda att acceptera en lägre förväntad projektmarginal om den kan vara betydligt mer riskreducerad.

Egentligen ligger strategin kvar som tidigare men i vissa fall, det har ni sagt tidigare, Vissa gånger behöver man ta på sig lite rit för det kanske är värt det och att det finns inga andra alternativ då. Så POEM, det får vi acceptera, det har varit. Om vi tittar på POEM då, är det just att tidslinjen inte riktigt höll och som gjorde att projektet blev mindre lönsamt? Fanns det någon form av strappavgift eller snarare att man inte fick en bonus för att man hann klart till tid? Kan du berätta lite mer om POEM och vad som gick lite snett där nu?

Ja, det är en kombination kan man säga. Det är ungefär 2 miljarder kronor i CAPEX så naturligtvis kapitalkostnaderna är ju stora om det blir förseningar utan att det finns motsvarande intäkter från drift av anläggningen. Det var väl egentligen dels en underleverantör som var EPC-contractor som blev försenad under drifttagande fasen så upptäcktes det en gasläcka på sajten av utsläpp av Någon gas från marken som behövde åtgärdas och som ledde till ett par veckors förseningar där man var tvungen att avbryta de här testerna och det tar ytterligare lite tid att rampa upp igen efter det. Och slutligen några myndighetsgodkännande som har tagit, som har då för drifttagning och slutgodkännande av anläggningen som har tagit längre tid, längre handläggningstider än än förväntat. Till detta kommer då förändringarna när det gäller investment tax credit där vi genom förseningen förlorade en viss uppsida kan man säga.

Många olyckor som vi kanske inte heller kan styra riktigt över. Fageråsen, har ni en känsla för när köparen vill förverkliga det när det kan innebära intäkter för er?

Vi räknar med att kunna erhålla nästa milestone under

senare delen av 2025.

Ja, och vi förväntar oss om allt går bra investeringsbeslut under 2026 och att projektet skulle vara färdigställt under 2027, senare delen.

Men för er del, om jag uppfattar det rätt, så är det största intäkten för projektet för er del skulle kunna komma under slutet av 2025?

Nästa milestone är egentligen återbetalning av våra nedlagda kostnader så det skulle inte ge något större resultat i 2025.

Nästa milestone är 2025 men de stora intäkterna kanske 26 eller 27 snarare. Den hub ni nämnde då på 100 megawatt här i Sverige När kan man tänka sig att det ska kunna komma in i böckerna? Är det som sagt tidigt skede och hur tidigt kan det vara innan det kan bli verklighet? Kommer du att kunna ha någonting som påverkar er treåriga business plan?

Ja, förhoppningsvis det som tidigt skedde, det är en väldigt intressant lokalisering för ett stort batteriprojekt som skulle kunna betyda mycket för elnätet i regionen. Det går generellt sett fortare att utveckla den typen av projekt än om vi ska jämföra med vindprojekt. Så att om projektet utvecklas väl så är det inte omöjligt att det skulle kunna inkluderas i vår, att det är ett tillkommande projekt som skulle kunna inkluderas i den här treåriga affärsplanen.

Jättebra, stort tack.

Om man ser till sliden med 12 som du så fint har visat hur man ligger till mot planen. Nu blir det väldigt ryckigt. Vi med punkt så kanske ni snarare ligger lite efter budgeten än före budget. Känner ni er ändå trygg om att det ni har i pipeline nu skulle kunna göra att ni ligger enligt ledningsplanen då om vi rullar fram fyra kvartal? Eller bör man se det här som någon större form av varning eller att det blir svårare att nå på grund av POM?

Är det här felet?

POM är... vi är nu sex månader in eller åtta månader in på treårsplanen så att det är tidigt att säga naturligtvis på med en översett över treårsperioden begränsad del skulle jag säga men naturligtvis vi ser på Boab, Dollebo, Fågelås att Transaktionsmarknaden är svagare. Man kan naturligtvis förvänta sig att det tar längre tid. Risket påverkar marginaler och vi måste naturligtvis anpassa oss till den marknadssituationen. Se till att hålla nere kostnader och jobar med projektförsäljningar och intäkterna för att möta det här.

Just den svagare svenska marknaden, det är väl något som är välkänt och börsen har tagit höjd för att det är en tuff marknad eftersom aktien har bruterat svagt under längre period trots väldigt starka vinster och rapporter. Hur ser ni då, kan det vara svårt då att Ja, när det gäller just Sverige så stort fokus på projekt i södra Sverige

Fokus på de mest prioriterade projekten och de ligger i södra Sverige och det har varit en strategi sedan lång tid för EU-los i Sverige att ha fokus på projekt i SE3 och SE4, Stockholm, Göteborg och söderut, där behovet av el är störst och där elpriserna är högst och där möjligheterna för tilläggstjänster i elnätet är störst. Där fokuset och prioriteringarna förstärks ytterligare. också åtgärder då att förlänga tillståndstider, igångsättningstider för projekt som inte är topprioriterade nu för att de ska kunna möta när marknaden vänder uppåt. Och naturligtvis fortsatt optimering av projekt för att få ut högre kapacitetsfaktorer när det gäller vindkraft och också Det verkar bli mer och mer vanligt att

man bygger kombinerade projekt. Ligger ni bra till där, positionerade, om det blir fler och fler batterisol- och VIND-projekt tillsammans?

Ja, det skulle jag säga att vi har god potential för det.

Min sista fråga, det är runt aktieåtersköp som ni har mandat enligt stämman sen tidigare, men där så här långt har väl kassan helt inslukats av nya, större utbyggnader för att kunna komma i mål med projekten. Om kan ni göra någon form av skiss eller prognos för kommande 12 månader framåt när det ska vara aktuellt? Vad ser ni behöver komma in i boken eller i kassan för att ni ska känna er bekväma att göra de här aktieåterköpen?

Ja, styrelsen har ju mandatet. Kapitalbindningen i nuläget är ju hög i framförallt Boab, Dollebo, Fogelås som som sagt är nästan en och en halv miljard i total CAPEX och även om vi kan belåna projekten med skuldfinansiering till Nånstans mellan 50 och 60 % så är det substantiella belopp som vinst där. Så jag skulle säga att det är att sälja dem, hämta hem de pengarna och om vi lyckas att då sälja enligt plan, inte dra på stor kapitalbindning i de kommande projekten. Det är det som är nyckeln för styrelsen.

Vilket av de kommande projekten skulle kunna vara det som binder mycket kapital om man tittar på det kommande året? Är ni lättare i kommande projekt eller finns det något som ändå sannolikt kommer att sluka en del av det kapital som frigörs?

Rokka säcka är väl nästa projekt om man kan säga att vi inte skulle lyckats med den strategin att sälja tidigt eller att inte få tillräckligt hög belåning i de pågående bankförhandlingarna så är det väl det som skulle kunna som jag ser som skulle kunna binda kapital.

Rokka säcka, ursäkta, det är din sista fråga igen. Se ni någon påverkan av tarifferna och den tumult som var på grund av Trump här under vår kanten?

Osäkerheten är ju olycklig naturligtvis och svår att planera efter. Just när det gäller Roca Seca så finns det medvetenhet på den amerikanska marknaden av det också. flexibla tullklausuler i både leverantörsavtalen och i det PPAt eller tolling agreement som vi håller på att förhandla fram som ska hålla som inom The next question comes from Orjin Rodian from DNB Carnje. Please go ahead.

Yes, hello everyone. Most of my questions have been answered, but can you elaborate a little bit more on the poem situation? Would you claim that this was very specific to this project, or should we make any read-throughs to other U.S. projects?

What do you think?

It's mainly, of course, the life of a project developer that all risks cannot be so easily put to the investor or other parties. Of course, there are learnings for us. in the management and in our Jewish part of the organization to continue to try to limit these risks. Of course, there are project specific reasons for this, as this gas emission and the delayed final permits, but mainly it is when the project size are that large, like 200 million euro projects, because the interest costs in the late phases easily gets to really large amounts that have impact on the margin.

Okay, thank you. And final question on Fogelås Boa Aptolabo. When do you think production is at full speed and do you think that is the key trigger to get this project sold or is it anything else that could be an obstacle in the process?

Yes, we expect the projects to be in full commercial operation at the end of October, I would say. The key trigger for the sales process is definitely to conclude the pay as produced PPA that is under exclusive negotiation.

okay thank you very much thank you I am the next question comes from Eric Oberg from DNB Carnegie please go ahead I thanks for taking my questions Eric Oberg from DNB Carnegie credit research Following on Örjan's last question there with regards to the three onshore wind parks. If you hold them until completion, what's the remaining project equity that Avalos needs to provide to bring those three wind farms until completion, which you can't draw from the new construction level facility?

With the PPA in place, I would say that we could have like 60% bank debt leverage of the 1.4, 1.5 billion SEK. The remaining is then equity that comes in both in in the form of true equity and the use of the bond proceeds. And we have until today there are roughly 1.2 billion SEK deployed in the accumulated in the two projects. In the three projects, sorry.

But sorry, following up on that one, in the balance sheet we see the book value of projects on the construction, and that is around 600 million, right?

Well, we said what we have deployed so far, that's numbers during August included as well.

And in the balance sheet, it splits between the two lines with different headings.

project under construction and advance payments to suppliers. You should add those two together.

Got it, but with that said, how much project equity do you need to invest to bring them until completion?

From end of July Rough, end of June I mean, 150 million SEK or so.

Something between 150 and 200.

Okay, thanks. Given the somewhat weaker divestment market tied to those projects, do you consider to sort of change your approach here to actually build them on your own books? when those projects seem to be harder than expected to sell? I mean, risks seem to be a bit higher and you're not fully compensated for it. How do you go about that?

It is our general aim to sell earlier to reduce constructing risk, but we also need sometimes to de-risk projects more and to be able to secure the PPAs, for instance. But our general aim is to sell earlier to have investors finance the construction. But the construction facility that we now have gives us the optionality to proceed through construction as well if we deem that a better path.

Okay.

On POM, when did you conclude that the project was about to be delayed?

It was late June, I would say, and the beginning of July when these issues at site appeared.

Okay, thanks. I think this question was asked before, but I didn't grasp the answer. But what was the provision recognized in Q2 related to POM?

We don't announce that direct number.

But we have said that we have a negative result due in Q3. on EBIT level that refers to the PUM project.

So we've adjusted the total expected margin for the project to roughly 10 million US dollars and accounted for 85% of that accumulated until Q2 then and since we have had recognized a higher expected margin in Q2 we had to make those provisions in Q2 so Rough numbers, it has impacted like minus 50 million SEK in Q2.

Okay, thanks. I think you touched upon this as well earlier in the call, but what was the revenue recognition related to PNVA now in Q2?

The full contract, the selling of the shares was accounted for and the remaining to be accounted for is deferred payments connected to that agreement and also the services we will provide under the project management agreement.

Yes, but how much? revenues were recognized in Q2 and what's remaining of the share purchase agreements.

And once again I would say that the full contract has been accounted for the share purchase agreement but we have a couple of deferred payments that will account for smaller parts during 2025 and then when the project reaches operation expected to happen in 2027.

And none of those are possible to quantify in any way.

Rough numbers once again here. We have recognized a project margin of roughly 50 million SEK for the PNVA so far in Q2.

Okay, thanks. And what's the size of the project management agreement tied to PNVA?

The project management agreement compared to the other projects, it is much more limited scope, quite low revenues and very limited risks for us. So the main revenues and project margins will come from additional payments from the share purchase agreement as milestones are achieved.

And the largest one is when the project is completed?

Yes, expected in 2027.

Okay, and the more limited project management agreement scope, should we see that as a template going forward as well? I mean, this contract management agreement has been a great P&L driver historically. Should we see the more limited approach here and, well, less risk as well as the new template, or is this a one-off?

It's another tool in the toolbox suitable for more limited risk exposures. But I expect that we will see both contract structures going forward depending on the risk appetite both on the customer side and on our side. But this Pinova, it's a large project in a very small market in Latvia. The customer is the state-owned utility. So it was definitely a structure that fitted

There are no more questions at this time, so I hand the conference back to the speakers for any written questions and closing comments.

So this is Harald Cavalli Bjorkman, Investor Relations Manager at Eolus. We have a very limited amount of time left on the webcast, so I'd please ask you to get in touch with me via email or by telephone. If you feel that there are any further questions you'd like to ask, I'd be happy to help you resolve those. My contact details are available in the press release and in the report itself. Handing it back to Per here.

Yes, thank you Harald and thank you all for joining the conference call and just wish you all a nice day. Thank you, bye.