Operator: I am Lorenzo, the Chorus Call operator. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in listen-only mode and the conference is being recorded. For operator assistance, please press star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it is my pleasure to hand over to Sud Sivaji, CEO. Please go ahead, sir.
Sud Sivaji: Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for being with us today. To give you enough time for your questions, as always, we released our Q3 2026 results, regulatory filings, and performance presentation earlier today, together with our management podcast. With those materials available, we are, as always, pleased to open the floor directly to the Q&A. My colleague, Nicolas Changeur, and I are pleased to start today's discussions with you. Operator, please open the lines.
Operator: Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question comes from the line of Tristan Gresser from BNP Paribas. Please go ahead.
Tristan Gresser: Yes, hi. Thank you for taking my questions. The first one is on the European outlook for stainless. One of your peers just said that they expected destocking to end sometime in H1 2027. So it feels like this inventory overhang has been a bit greater than what we anticipated. Is that also your view that this is going to be a relatively slow process, and then we need to be cautious in any sorts of, let's say, volume, margin, price recovery in Europe for, let's say, the near term? That would be my first question.
Sud Sivaji: Hi, Tristan. Thanks for that question. Allow me to answer that question in three parts. The first thing is, Tristan, we have been saying this, and sometimes it has been considered a bit too conservative compared to the market, but our realistic view has been that for the past six quarters, there is no underlying demand change in Europe. Fundamentally, during the year, because of TRQs, there might have been some restocking and some destocking if necessary, but that doesn't change our picture on the macros for Europe. Our guidance and our utilization estimates have always assumed for 2026 from the beginning, and we've been very clear about that, no underlying demand improvement.
Sud Sivaji: Now, to your question about someone saying that there's going to be destocking, I would say that seen probably in their view, that could be, but for us, this is just in the realm of regular market movement when there is no underlying demand. In the first half, there was probably some stock buildup as people speculatively built some inventories, and they're releasing it. To your question, going forward on the outlook on volumes and prices, I wanted to say that starting July, we are seeing, as you probably have also, PMI improvements across several countries in Europe, notably probably except France and in some cases Italy. This has not translated into demand. Again, I am not comparing apparent demand, which others talk about. I'm talking about real demand. That, we believe, is because consumers are in the current economic volatility in a wait-and-see mode.
Sud Sivaji: For us, there are two demand triggers. One is an improvement in the interest and credit rate situation. The current turbulence post-AI, stocks moving around is not helping. This should basically, for us, help on interest rate stability, and household consumers and construction improve their demand. The second trigger, the most obvious one, is, of course, signals from the Iran conflict. When that subsides and there is a solution, we feel that there is going to be a direct impact on all of us in the industrial value chain on our own costs, but also the customer demand improving. So, the indicators we look at, PMIs, improving since June, July, at a very slow pace, and not by large magnitudes, but still improving. Not yet translated into order book.
Sud Sivaji: The other indicator we do continue to look at in Europe is household savings, and these have also developed positively, meaning there are more household savings. This also means for us there is pent-up demand. Our view going into 2027 is that when these triggers activate, European demand should pick up.
Tristan Gresser: Okay. That is helpful. Would you be able to quantify the demand decline then in underlying demand for this year in Europe? Because it must have been a pretty to stop this kind of recovery despite the trade measures that were put in place. I just wanted to confirm as well with the EUR 200 per ton margin improvement you targeted from the trade measures. Does that mean the EUR 125 per ton left are still kind of demand dependent? Lastly, attached to that, is the demand recovery you expect in Europe also dependent on the expansion of quota CBAM to downstream? I know there is a lot of question within one, but any color on all those themes would be great.
Sud Sivaji: No, it is fantastic because these are the exact things which occupy us as well, right? Let us go one by one. You have asked three questions. The first one is that there is no real underlying demand weakening. Our view has been very clear since August 2025, which is more than a year. The demand has been pretty low and at a low level. Stable, not becoming worse. The real demand has been the same. What probably you heard qualified from other market players as weakening demand is probably the stocking and restocking, which for us remains in the range of a normal industrial activity inside the year. So we do not see a demand weakening. Okay?
Sud Sivaji: The second thing, that is why we say when we guide to our Q4 numbers also, we always say that the effect from the energy costs is basically for us the more significant effect on the bottom line, so to speak. The second question you did ask was on our guidance on how this margin improvement from TRQ measures has changed and what is the trigger for the remaining 125. So I want to confirm again, the metal margin, which is probably for us the delta between the finished prices and the raw material basket price, has been constant at EUR 75 per ton improved compared prior to the pre-TRQ period. The 125, yes, as we said, the 200 is over the cycle, will definitely come with the demand pickups. But it is an over-the-cycle number, right? So it will come with the demand pickup.
Sud Sivaji: And we see this based on the fact how the utilizations are developing. We see this based on the fact that today domestic players are determining the European market. There is no import influence on the European market. So a demand pickup based on those two triggers I mentioned is going to have the effect. The last one you mentioned, which is there going to be a demand dynamic based on CBAM being extended to downstream? Yes, but for us, it is not even a 2026 or a 2027 issue. It is a structural issue which needs to be done, primarily because for us, the de-industrialization of Europe will happen when we just do such reforms on one part of the supply chain instead of the entire supply chain. So it is not a demand trigger or a driver in a quarter or two quarters.
Tristan Gresser: Okay.
Sud Sivaji: But it is absolutely necessary. Yeah.
Tristan Gresser: All right. That is clear. Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from the line of Tommaso Castello from Jefferies. Please go ahead.
Tommaso Castello: Good afternoon. Thanks for the time. Yes, I have a couple of questions. The first is on your CapEx deferral. My understanding is that the deferral is related to weaker activity in Europe. I wanted to ask whether that EUR 25 million is simply being deferred into 2027, or have some projects actually been canceled or resized? Could you also remind us what the delayed CapEx was primarily related to, and whether there was any EBITDA improvement that you previously expected from these projects that is consequently also being pushed out as well?
Nicolas Changeur: Hi, Thomas. Nicolas speaking. There is no cancellation of project. The cut of EUR 25 million is, as we have always explained, when there is a lower activity, there is less need of sustenance CapEx. It's basically a reflex of the lower activity that we see, and there is no impact going forward.
Tommaso Castello: Okay, that's clear. Thanks for that. I have another one. This is related to the energy headwind, the EUR 20 million, which you said is primarily related to Europe, obviously. I just wanted to clarify whether we should assume that the majority sits within European Stainless, broadly the same perimeter benefiting from the EUR 75 a ton trade defense improvement. I'm just trying to make a sensitivity around the per ton impact, just to see going forward what the impact could be. Thank you.
Nicolas Changeur: Yes, it's exactly that. The majority of the EUR 20 million energy impact are sitting within the European perimeter, and especially Stainless Europe, okay? Because on some other perimeter, as you know, we have energy surcharge.
Tommaso Castello: That is clear. Thank you very much.
Operator: The next question comes from the line of Krishan Agarwal from Citigroup. Please go ahead.
Krishan Agarwal: Hi. Thanks a lot for taking my question. First question for probably Sud. I mean, if we take into account the current status of the European market and also the markets in US, particularly the Universal and the Brazilian market, how should we think about the earnings bridge for 2027? I mean, the one which does not have much of the qualification or dependence on the market and you are comfortable with. The reason for asking this question is, I mean, we look at the consensus expectation for 2027 at EUR 700 million or north of EUR 700 million. How comfortable you are with those expectation, and what are the key drivers for the whole of the next year? The second question probably for Nicolas, as in what is the net debt outlook for 2027 as such?
Sud Sivaji: So, Krishan, as you know, we do not give guidelines and guidances for the next year, primarily also because there are so many moving parts. But broadly, fundamentally, if you look at it, starting out of last year, we have three components. Component number one is our self-help. That we have guided very clearly, and we are absolutely sure it will come. And just for reminding you, it is 339 last year, we finished the year with. The second component is energy. We have said it is a EUR 20 million hit per year, sorry, per quarter, right? If it continues like this. And the third component is the trade defense. And the trade defense, we have confirmed EUR 75, and we have said another EUR 125 is yet to come when demand picks up.
Sud Sivaji: And I think those variables can give you enough factors to model that number for next year, based on what you think, because you obviously will have much more inputs on how the economy is going to evolve and scenario modeling, where you can plug that in. Then you will see that we are done now with three quarters, right, this year. We are today EUR 325 million in EBITDA for the first nine months of this year as Aperam. You have these factors. You can plug in the different scenarios, when the war gets over, what is the energy impact, when do you see the macro economy based on city scenarios, and I am sure you can come up with different variables. Compared to the consensus out there, I cannot speak to the number 700, which you mentioned, but these are our factors.
Sud Sivaji: And I want to remind that our explicit guidance to the market is that our target is to reach EUR 700 million, and with an upcycle in the market, EUR 800 million by the end of 2028. And we are not changing this guidance.
Krishan Agarwal: Okay. Okay, that is very clear.
Sud Sivaji: On the debt, I will let Nicolas answer.
Nicolas Changeur: Yes. Krishan, so on the net debt, as you know, we have reached in Q3 basically the same level of net debt as what we had end of Q4 last year. For Q4, we see a working capital release that will enable us to make, let's say, half of the way that we want to do on the decrease of our net debt. So very clearly, end of 2026, we will be lower than end of 2025 in term of net debt. Sud, just explain what is our target for 2028. EUR 700 million to EUR 800 million, and as you know, we want to be end of 2027 at a ratio of basically 1x EBITDA. So I think it gives a very clear sense of what is our target for the net financial debt by the end of 2027.
Krishan Agarwal: Understand. Then quick follow-up for Sud. An energy cost headwind, EUR 20 million was the headwind for Q3, and then assuming EUR 20 million is also the headwind for Q4. Then going forward, in the Q1 and the Q2, probably that headwind should come down, theoretically.
Sud Sivaji: I hope theoretically it comes down, Krishan, right? But we said that EUR 20 million. No, but just on the numbers, the EUR 20 million headwind which we said is full run rate Q4. There was a ramp-up, obviously, because you have volume sitting in inventories which came from even prior to the war, depending on how long the supply chain is, right? So there was a proportional impact in Q3, but the EUR 20 million impact is per quarter, starting Q4, every quarter. The EUR 20 million coming down depends on scenario planning on how the Iran conflict happens, what the oil consumption is, and what the natural gas storages in Europe are, so to speak. But our guidance clearly is this EUR 20 million hit per quarter.
Krishan Agarwal: Okay. Okay, thanks a lot.
Sud Sivaji: Thank you, man.
Operator: The next question comes from the line of Adahna Ekoku from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Adahna Ekoku: Hi, good afternoon. Thank you for taking my question. I have got one left. So on utilization, could you help us understand where utilization in Europe stands currently, and maybe what your order book is suggesting this could look like in Q1? This could be relative to the 7% to 10% uplift that you have previously referred to as a result of the trade measures. Thank you.
Sud Sivaji: Right, Adahna. So, basically, we finished Q2 with the 7% uplift. Q3, obviously, utilization was lower just because the shipments are low. Now, we have to see and understand that Q4 is also a quarter in which basically you lose close to 15 days, 20 days because of Christmas, right? Because that has traditionally been the case. So, on a normalized basis, this uplift is still there. The one thing is fundamentally, we do see, and as I answered Tristan earlier, customers, despite there being underlying improvement in PMI, in a wait-and-watch mode. When that will translate to demand, that depends on the macro scenario. But underlying utilization, that 7% uplift, I should say that it is rather 7% now than the upper end of the range we mentioned, 10%, is still there.
Sud Sivaji: That is the part which is contributing to the EUR 75 margin uplift which we had spoken about, helping us to also mitigate part of these energy impacts.
Adahna Ekoku: That is clear, thank you. Can I just clarify, the base for the 7% is from about 66% in 2025?
Sud Sivaji: 65. Yeah, 65%, 66%. That is where we come from, yes. Your question on Q1, I apologize, I failed to mention. You had asked this question on Q1, right? On Q1, we are probably the last ones to ask in the market because, as you know, 70% of our volumes go through our own distribution business, which means that our order book is fundamentally a max of, in a current demand scenario, one month. So, our visibility for 70% of our order book is towards the end of this quarter, so to speak, right? Other players who do not have a distribution division and sell to external market may have probably a longer visibility.
Adahna Ekoku: That is understood. Thank you very much.
Operator: The next question comes from the line of Maxime Kogge from Oddo. Please go ahead.
Maxime Kogge: Good afternoon. Nicolas, just one question and one observation. It is about energy costs. Actually, we should at least expect now you to be able to pass through this higher energy cost to your clients. This is more or less a situation prevailing in carbon steel, plus Asian imports also affected by higher energy costs. As I said, the marginal price on the market, I mean, this should elevate the cost curve and allow you to pass this through. Why is that not the case according to you? If this higher energy cost prevails, will there be a time when you persist, or will there be a time when you can pass them through?
Sud Sivaji: That is a lot of questions hidden in one, Maxime, but I will take it one by one, right? First of all, let us start with the comparison to carbon. The comparison to carbon does not have this energy cost because they are coal and coke-based, so to speak, so their primary energy supply comes from that. I do not know how the margin of cost increase on energy there has been, but I am absolutely sure that it is not very similar to electricity and natural gas, which is happening in the stainless steel sector. So, I do not think that is comparable, and I will defer that to the carbon steel colleagues. In terms of pricing and energy cost pass-through, everything is possible if the underlying demand is strong.
Sud Sivaji: Like again, I sometimes sound like a repeated broken record, since mid last year, we have been very clear that the underlying demand is absent in Europe, and we are looking at demand triggers, so to speak. Until such a demand environment happens, such a pass-through is highly improbable. Secondly, imports are not setting the price after TRQ. I have already answered to Tristan that primarily it is a domestic players market. As you have probably seen, the quotas in Q3 were not even fully utilized, so they are not setting the price floor, right? It is domestic players who are actually setting the price, right? Aperam, as you have seen for the last three quarters, is putting value on the profitability of our volumes in Europe, and that you see reflected in our EBITDA.
Sud Sivaji: And as a result, we are making sure we can sell only profitable volumes at profitable prices and margins in this energy cost environment. Can we pass through these energy costs? Yes, if demand picks up. There is no relation to imports. It is purely a domestic player discussion.
Maxime Kogge: Okay. No, that is helpful. I will stop there. Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from the line of Bastian Synagowitz from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.
Bastian Synagowitz: Yeah. Hey, good afternoon, and thanks for taking my questions. My first one is on the performance in Europe in Q4, and apologies if that has been answered. I think you sort of answered it in maybe an indirect way, but within, I guess, the guidance for stainless overall being down in Q4, how does Europe perform? I guess volume is probably improving, but I think you are signaling that the overall spreads are still basically stable, so overall, Europe is still up in that bridge for a down quarter. Is that correct?
Sud Sivaji: Look, there are three factors, right? One is the stainless volumes are picking up, but at the same time, on an EBITDA basis, we have clearly said that the EUR 75 improvement from trade has kind of been squeezed out by energy, right? Those are the two factors with respect to Europe. While volumes may pick up, the EBITDA per ton margins have come down considerably just because of the fact that energy costs have significantly squeezed out. Thank God for TRQs, the EUR 75 per ton are still there, and they are helping us mitigate a lot of these losses, right? Most importantly, the third factor is that Brazil enters the seasonality, which is summer, right? Even Brazilians need summer.
Sud Sivaji: What happens there is that, as you know, our Brazilian market has an EBITDA comparable, if not better than even the North American players for our Stainless & Electrical segment, and then this profitable business goes into a seasonal reduction that has a bigger impact on our Stainless & Electrical segment compared to Europe, which has been at low profitability levels. I just want to remind you, Bastian, to start with, the baseline for us is Aperam, the most profitable stainless player in Europe, EUR 64 per ton EBITDA last year for Europe. That is the baseline, and then you add those factors. To answer your equation for Q4, Stainless & Electrical segment's profitability goes down because there is no valuation effect, there are no nickel effects, nothing, primarily because of these three factors.
Sud Sivaji: Volume of Europe goes up, volume of Brazil goes down, profitable Brazil goes down, more profitable Brazil goes down, and Europe profitability gets squeezed due to energy costs.
Bastian Synagowitz: Okay, got you. Thanks. Maybe just staying on Brazil with my second question. Can you maybe give us a quick update on the market post-elections? I guess it is still early, but are you seeing any change here? Then also, I guess we have been asking that before, but is there any sense that the Brazilian government could still be doing a little bit more for you as it is currently doing on the carbon steel side?
Sud Sivaji: No, but I didn't understand the second part, but I'll come back to it. It is indeed early days after the election, but for us, the positive news, as we mentioned in the podcast, or Nicolas mentioned it in a section on trade defense on Stainless & Electrical, that Brazil's kind of there is a continuity in the government which has been very supportive on the trade defense side. In Brazil, the good thing is that carbon and stainless go to trade defense hand in hand, so it is the same and similar measures. They've been supportive, and I think in case of Brazil, the underlying demand was stable. There has been some slight weakening around the election times, but fundamentally, we don't see any structural change there in the demand situation.
Sud Sivaji: Are you talking about one oil and gas project or one pipe, paper, and pulp project with 2,000 tons or 3,000 tons being moved from one quarter to another? That's for us in the magnitude of a rounding error.
Bastian Synagowitz: Okay. The second part was about trade. I guess you touched on that briefly, but is there, I guess, on the carbon steel side, we're still seeing a further step up in trade protection? I was just wondering what the latest here is on the stainless steel side. Is there more coming as well on trade protection?
Sud Sivaji: Well, we are discussing several cases, right? But the point is that for us specifically, most of the trade protection cases for Brazil are in place. There's an anti-dumping on hot roll, which is being discussed. But fundamentally, in terms of trade, we feel that in Brazil, similar to Europe, the next structural step to take is to include downstream players because imports in the form of downstream products bypass trade and in case of Europe, CBAM rules, right? So that is for us the big ticket which we will work with the government together with the carbon teams.
Bastian Synagowitz: Okay. Very clear. Thank you.
Operator: As a reminder, if you wish to register for a question, please press star and one on your telephone. Next question is a follow-up question from the line of Tristan Gresser from BNP Paribas. Please go ahead.
Tristan Gresser: Yes. Thank you for taking the follow-up. Just how meaningful can this waste shipment regulation coming up in Europe be for you? I know we might have discussed it in the past, but it is getting closer, and you are a recycler of scrap, but you are also a big user of scrap. What is your view? What would be the kind of best-case scenario and potential impact on your business? Thank you.
Sud Sivaji: Sure, Tristan. I think it is an important question for us because of the fact that the scrap market for stainless in Europe is a market in which there is a lot of speculation and scrap gets exported out of Europe whenever they find that the scrap price in Europe sometimes goes down. For us, the waste shipment regulation is a very important piece of regulation because we feel that scrap is a strategic raw material, and both as a recycler and a stainless producer, it is absolutely clear for us to eliminate the speculators in the market who keep scrap not competitive for European industrial users. Okay? Fundamentally, we are working together with the commission because we feel that there are loopholes by which there might be some circumvention of scrap going through OECD countries.
Sud Sivaji: As you know that the current principle of the proposal is that it can be exported only to OECD countries, scrap, right, as part of the waste shipment regulation. The commission is going through the process, and when this waste shipment regulation is introduced, we do believe that we will, as an industrial value chain, starting from scrap collection till industrial producers, eliminate speculators in the market. That means more value. For Aperam, being the only stainless player with its own recycling division, we do not care if the value is captured on the scrap side of the business or on the stainless side of the business, but we ultimately believe that this value will be captured when the speculators leave the market following waste shipment regulation.
Tristan Gresser: Okay. That is clear. Would you have an idea of how much of scrap exports are going to non-OECD countries at the moment?
Sud Sivaji: Look, this is something, it is a very important question because it often gets thrown in a lot of dramatic discussions on press. The actual volume is probably, we are talking about 50,000 to 100,000 tons. Okay. But it is not just the volume, it is the fact that when scrap starts getting competitive for the industrial value chain, the small guys collecting the scraps do not benefit. The people who clean up and blend the scrap do not benefit. There are a couple of traders who jump in, speculators, and they actually export 10,000 tons just to keep the price of scrap uncompetitive. The people who take the profits are not the people in the scrap value chain. So neither our recycling business nor our suppliers and the stainless players.
Sud Sivaji: It is the people who end up actually speculating on this 10,000, 20,000 tons at a time and shipping these products to non-OECD countries, right. One thing. The second thing is, for us, it is fundamental, and you can understand how perverse this is, that we take a low-carbon raw material out of Europe, export it to a country which is dumping high-carbon stainless on us, and they turn around and sell low-carbon stainless to us, bypassing CBAM rules, which means the industry in Europe is de-industrialized because fundamentally you are depriving it of low-carbon raw material. That is the secondary effect with the ETS and the CBAM as you go through. The primary effect is the fact that these small volumes basically put immediately an accelerator on the competitiveness of raw materials inside Europe.
Sud Sivaji: And that is the reason we support waste shipment regulation, and we believe for the entire industry, it is a better deal that we share any value between us and the scrap collectors and the entire scrap value chain instead of a few traders profiting by sending it abroad.
Tristan Gresser: Okay. Very interesting. Thank you.
Operator: We have a follow-up question from the line of Maxime Kogge from Oddo. Please go ahead.
Maxime Kogge: Yeah, thanks for taking this last question. It is on Alloys & Specialties. You are talking about very buoyant end markets, expanding order book, but you are still tracking there below last year, at least on a 9-months basis on EBITDA. In the past year, you had said that Alloys & Specialties without Universal should make about EUR 100 million of EBITDA. Universal should add EUR 60 million based on the historical results, and you have the first EUR 9 million of synergies that should be delivered this year. So this should lead us to somewhere close to EUR 170 million in 2026. And you are very far from this amount, so what am I missing there?
Sud Sivaji: Maxime, your numbers are all correct, but these were actually given as a clear guidance for 2028. It was a three-year plan, our synergies. At the same time, we also said that of the EUR 100 million target for our Alloys & Specialties segment, we have been clearly guiding since Q4 of last year on oil and gas weakness.
Sud Sivaji: We said Universal this year, we are not at the full run rate. We said the EUR 65 million will be a full run rate for Universal when the Boeing supply chain picks up and runs. We have said the Boeing supply chain is not picking up and running. In Q2, we said the first time we see an upside on the aerospace outlook from the Boeing supply chain was for the H1 of 2027. We have been clear about that. I am afraid, I think in this case, compared to the first nine months of 2026, you will see that in the delta you see between the nine months of 2025 and nine months of 2026 is purely the oil and gas weakness. We have clearly guided to that.
Maxime Kogge: Okay. The EUR 170 million, actually that should be even more, no? Because synergies from-
Sud Sivaji: Exactly, it is EUR 25 million. Yes, it is EUR 25 million. Exactly.
Maxime Kogge: Yes, yes.
Sud Sivaji: So that is why I am saying. So our guided number is when oil and gas is working full, when LNG is working full, our Alloys & Specialties business prior to Universal acquisition, again, should be EUR 100 million. Additionally, there is a EUR 65 million benefit from a full run rate of Universal after Boeing ramp up. Plus, there is a synergy of EUR 25 million, which we have guided over five years. This, and we have not changed this guidance, and we will stick to that. What we have said is that there is a weakness in oil and gas, and we have been guiding that, and that is the reason for the delta you see between the two nine-month numbers.
Maxime Kogge: Okay. I think Acerinox was mentioning some green shoots of recovery in oil and gas. Are you witnessing the same?
Sud Sivaji: We are in a different. We supply a different product to oil and gas compared to them. We are more late cycle. We do not see it yet. I am sorry there, I cannot give you more color on their product segment. But in terms of oil and gas, our order books continue to be weak. The war has been going on for eight months, and I mean, there are three areas in the whole world where oil and gas continues to work. In Brazil, where we see demand continuing and our local team supplies there. In the Middle East, where we have seen significant issues. And of course, in the Scandinavian Norway region, where things are stable, right? So the biggest demand has always come for us from Middle East. There, for eight months, we have not seen activity.
Maxime Kogge: Okay, no, because we finished.
Sud Sivaji: I am not contradicting what the colleagues from Acerinox say. I am just saying that in oil and gas also, we are later cycle than them, so from our product profile. So could be that for us, the order book visibility comes later. But right now, we are not seeing anything.
Maxime Kogge: Okay, but that is it for you. Thanks.
Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Sud Sivaji for any closing remarks.
Sud Sivaji: Thank you very much for attending and participating in our Q3 call today. Despite market headwinds, 2026 is shaping up to be a landmark year in Aperam's transformation. We look forward to discussing this transformation at our Capital Markets Day on 18 November in Paris. Thank you for your continued support as we keep moving forward together. As always, our investor relations team is available to connect with you and address any further inquiries. Please do not hesitate to reach out to us. Have a fantastic start to the Christmas and holiday season with your loved ones. Thank you.
Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus Call, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your line. Goodbye.
