Thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Deterra Royalties H1 FY2023 Financial Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there'll be a question and answer session. To ask a question during the session, you need to press star one one on your telephone. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I'll now hand the conference over to your 1st speaker today, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Julian Andrews. Thank you. Please go ahead.
Thank you. Good morning and welcome to Deterra Royalties H1 FY2023 results call. I'm Julian Andrews, MD and CEO of Deterra, and I'm joined today by Brendan Ryan, our Chief Financial Officer, and Matthew Schembri, who leads our Investor Relations. I'll begin with some introductory remarks and then Brendan will provide a review of our financial results. Following that, I'll provide some comments on our approach to growth and the outlook in that regard, and we'll then hand back to the operator and open the line for questions. In terms of corporate overview, you'll know that Jason Neal has joined our board during the half. Jason brings very deep experience to networks in minings and metals in North America and globally, and we're very pleased to have him join the company. I'll now start with an overview of the business highlights.
It's been another period of strong performance for Deterra. Our assets continue to perform well and we've reported revenues of AUD 96.4 million for the half, which are once again driven by the performance of the cornerstone royalty we hold over BHP's Mining Area C, which accounted for AUD 96 million dollars of those revenues. Albeit on a much smaller scale, our other producing royalties also had a strong period, and we saw revenues from Doral's mineral sands operations increase following its move to the Yoongarillup Mine last year.
We remain well-positioned for future growth, both organically, where the ramp-up of the South Flank operations continues and is expected to bring mining areas peak production volumes to an annualized run rate of 145 million wet metric tons by mid-calendar 2024, and inorganically, where we have AUD 350 million of undrawn credit facilities available to provide liquidity for future value-accretive investments and transactions. As we continue to prioritize returns to our shareholders, the directors have declared an interim dividend of AUD 0.12 per share, which once again is equal to 100% of net profit after tax. These results highlight the benefits of our royalty business model. High quality, high margin, top line exposure to the resource sector without the same exposure to operating costs, capital costs inflation.
Specifically, we have what we believe to be one of the highest quality public royalties that provides top line exposure to a world-class iron ore operation. The business model is scalable and can generate very high margins, which is illustrated in the EBITDA margins we've reported. We have a focus on returning earnings to shareholders, once again evident in the dividend we've announced today. We have organic growth and a focus on value-accretive investment, and we have a focus on ESG, both in our investment processes and our everyday operations. With that, I'll hand over to Brendan, who will take you through the financial results in more detail.
Thanks, Julian. Good morning, everyone. My task today is again a fairly easy one given the clean and simple set of results. If we can first turn to slide seven, so I can address the financial highlights for the half year period. As you can see, total group revenue for the period amounts to AUD 96 million, and this includes AUD 96 million in revenue from the MAC Royalty, plus circa AUD 400 thousand in revenue from our two smaller mineral sands operations. This AUD 96 million in revenue in turn delivered a healthy AUD 92 million in EBITDA for the period, representing an EBITDA margin of 95%. This is driven largely by the low overhead structure of the royalty business model. Finally, this resulted in NPAT and dividends for the half year period of AUD 63 million.
Based on this, as Julian said, the board have declared a fully frank interim dividend of AUD 0.12 per share. I remind you that this represents 100% of NPAT and confirms our commitment to return surplus cash flows to our shareholders. Moving to slide eight, I would quickly like to discuss the performance of Mining Area C. Overall, you can see from the yellow line on the chart the ongoing ramp-up of BHP's AUD 3.6 billion MAC South Flank expansion. It can be seen that volumes over the past six months have plateaued at just under 30 million tons per quarter, with sales volumes of 58.7 million tons delivered in the half year period.
BHP continue to confirm the South Flank ramp up to full capacity of 80 million tons remains on schedule, with full run rate expected by the end of FY2024. Based on these sales volumes, total MAC Royalty revenue for the half year was AUD 96 million. As a reminder, the annual capacity payment, shown in orange on the chart, is calculated at 30th of June and paid annually at the end of each financial year. On slide nine, we have tried to reflect the simplified illustration of the P&L. What this slide demonstrates is the lean cost structure and transparency of cash flows distributed to shareholders. On the revenue side, as discussed earlier, we show the AUD 96.4 million of revenue from MAC and our smaller mineral sands assets. On the right-hand side of the chart, we show the distribution of these cash flows.
Total costs for the December half year period were AUD 4.9 million. Of this, AUD 4.1 million relates to normal ongoing operating expenses, reflecting the inflation resistant nature of the royalty business model. We have also specifically called out in our accounts AUD 500,000 in the project-based business development costs. This reflects a material increase in BD activity seen in the half year. The remainder of the 4.9 in total cost relates to AUD 0.2 million in D&A. Net tax for the half year of AUD 27.5 million reflects an effective tax rate of close to 30%. This results in net profit after tax of AUD 63.4 million for the period. On slide number 10, we describe the capital management framework with respect to funding new acquisitions.
You will remember in February 2022, we announced that the establishment of AUD 350 million in bilateral credit facilities with the intent to build relationships with five local and international banking groups. These facilities increase our total credit limits from AUD 40 million to AUD 350 million, as well as extended existing maturities to three, four, and five years. We are very pleased with the outcome and timing of these new credit facilities, with the outcome reflecting the underlying quality and low risk nature of the MAC Royalty cash flows. These facilities now provide Deterra with the increased flexibility to act on growth opportunities as the market changes. For context, the net financing cost for the half year period was AUD 648,000. Turning to slide one one, this slide specifically demonstrates our commitment to prioritize shareholder returns.
With the board declaring an interim dividend of AUD 63.4 million, equal to AUD 0.12 per share, which represents a payout of 100% of NPAT for the period. In terms of our capital management framework, you will note that we continue to prioritize shareholder returns, although recognize the intent to invest in growth. We intend to optimize the use of debt for future acquisitions. Specifically, the cash flows from new assets will at least in part, be utilized to pay down debt. We also intend to maintain target leverage within the range of 0%-15% of enterprise value over time to protect the option to act with flexibility when value creative opportunities arise.
Hopefully, you'll recognize from these slides we have worked hard to deliver upon our commitments of, firstly, operating a lean corporate structure, secondly, maintaining conservative and flexible balance sheet, and lastly, of maximizing the return of surplus cash flow to shareholders. The simplicity and scalability of a Deterra business model is unique on the ASX, and our small team will continue to work hard to deliver maximum value to our shareholders. With that, Julian, I'll pass it back to you.
Thank you, Brendan. I'll make some comments on strategy and outlook. Turning to slide 14. In addition to providing our shareholders with access to the cash we're generating from the MAC Royalty, our business model is to generate growth through building a broader portfolio of royalty and streaming assets. Before speaking to inorganic growth, I'd just like to touch on the foundation of our portfolio, the MAC Royalty, both in terms of its quality and organic growth optionality. The quality of the MAC Royalty is very important to us because when we look at successful companies in our sector, they typically have a core of one or a small number of very high-quality assets around which they have built their business. We have a very high-quality core in the MAC Royalty. It's operated by BHP, the world's largest mining company.
It's well positioned on both the cost curve and the quartile emissions intensity curve, and it's a large scale mine with very long life. To put this in context, when South Flank is running at full nameplate capacity, it will represent something in the order of 8% of global seaborne iron ore traded. As well as being a very high-quality platform for inorganic growth, the MAC Royalty still has substantial optionality in its own right. South Flank continues to ramp up, on track to meet nameplate capacity of 145 tons per year by mid-2024 from the reported one one1 in FY2022, as well as longer-term optionality with the additional deposits identified within the royalty area, which you can see in the chart on the right of the slide.
On slide 15, we've set out our approach to inorganic growth, and we've been consistent for some time in talking about our focus in that regard. As I said earlier, we're pursuing a well-established business model that has some very successful exponents, but there's some important differences in our approach. In particular, we focus on areas where we believe we have a competitive advantage. For us, that means, in particular, bulk commodities such as iron ore and fertilizers and base metals, including copper, nickel, and zinc, in geographies with well-developed mining infrastructures, primarily Australia and the Americas. We're also seeing an increasing number of opportunities in the transition metals space.
When I spoke at the full year results last year, I noted that we expected to see an increasing number of opportunities for our business as miners and developers look beyond traditional debt and equity markets for additional sources of funding and t hat has been the case. We have seen a material uplift in the number of opportunities in the last half, and our pipeline continues to expand and is as strong as it has ever been, which is keeping our business development team very busy in screening and evaluating these opportunities. Although the secondary market has been steady, the increase we've seen over the past half has been almost entirely driven by the primary market, and that's the market where we offer capital directly for mine development, balance sheet repair or M&A support.
We believe this is a function of both the efforts we've made to build our network and raise our profile, as well as the need and demand for capital, beyond those traditional sources that I mentioned a moment ago. The AUD 350 million facility that Brendan spoke to, and we put in place last year remains undrawn and provides the liquidity we need to act on these opportunities. It's an important element of our growth platform in supporting our positioning as a preferred counterparty. On the ESG front, we continue to progress our efforts, particularly with respect to our social investment and engagement strategy. To wrap up, we have a compelling investment thesis. Our revenue-based royalties offer shareholders a distinctly lower risk profile when compared to a mining company, and provide significant protection against operating and capital cost inflation.
In that way, we provide investors with a lower risk exposure to one of the core assets of one of the world's best operations in one of the world's best iron ore provinces. By prioritizing returns to shareholders, we provide investors with a unique exposure to income from a high margin investment business with a world-class cornerstone asset. We continue to build growth options, both from the continued ramp up of the South Flank expansion of Mining Area C and from value-focused M&A, as well as those primary investment opportunities that I mentioned. In closing, it's a very straightforward set of half year results, as Brendan said, as you would expect from a very simple and transparent business.
The assets are performing well, generating cash, which we have passed on through an interim dividend of 100% of NPAT. We are very active in assessing opportunities to build growth in addition to the organic growth that still remains in the portfolio. With that, we would be happy to take any questions.
Thank you. As a reminder to ask question, you need to press star one one on your telephone. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. One moment for the first question. The first question comes from the line of Chen Jiang from Bank of America. Please proceed.
Good morning, Julian and Brendan. Just a high level question, please. Would you please share your insights in the royalties M&A space for the commodities you have been looking for in Australia as well as offshore? Thank you.
That's a, it's a fairly broad question, but we'll do our best. Look, as I said, we, you know, the commodities we focused on, you know, we've been pretty consistent, I think from the beginning in talking about a focus outside of precious metals and particularly in the bulk base and battery metal space. We've seen, I mentioned I think in that regard, you know, the bulk, we're seeing opportunities in iron ore and some of the fertilizers. Base metals have been very, very busy and quite competitive. We're seeing an increasing number of opportunities into that transition metal space. You know, I think that it's fair to say that as demand for those metals grows, we're seeing more opportunities coming to market for funding.
Particularly with capital markets, where there have been over the last little while, there's been greater demand for some of those non-traditional sources of capital such as ourselves. As I mentioned here, we're certainly seeing a fairly material increase in the number of opportunities that are coming to us.
I think in the, you know, I think the style of opportunities has changed a bit in the first sort of 18 months of being a public company. I think the markets were in a very different state where equity was freely available and debt was very, very cheap. We saw a lot of the secondary market. What we have noticed of late in the last 10 months or so is, or even more recently as the market has changed, that there is, we are seeing and working a lot more of the primary opportunities where we become a source of funding for new assets.
Right. Thanks, Julian, Brendan. You have been actively looking for opportunities, I guess, but there's nothing at this stage meets your criteria?
We, yeah, certainly we haven't, you know, we haven't made any investments to date. I, you know, we have been very actively looking at, we remain very actively looking at opportunities and when we see the right opportunities that meet those criteria, we feel we're in a very good position to act on them.
All right. Thank you, Julian. Brendan. I'll pass it off. Thanks.
Thank you for the questions. One moment for the next questions. Next up, we have the line from Paul McTaggart from Citi. Please proceed.
Good morning. I just wanted to sort of follow up. You mentioned that there's more primary opportunities at the moment for funding and, you know, how do you think about risk in the sense that you know, if you're doing an in production asset, okay, it's just a kind of a revenue royalty and it's a kind of a low risk thing. But if you're providing funding for a primary, you know, near production, you know, you do take on technical risk, production risk, and then it's quite fundamentally different to having money in an asset like MAC. How do you think about that risk? I mean, it just seems to me that there's sort of fundamentally different things in terms of the risk levels.
Yeah, Paul, you're certainly right. You know, there are different risks that attach to investments at different stage in that development cycle. If you're looking at a producing asset, then you clearly have greater, much greater insight in, you know, into the mine plan and the operational performance of a mine. When you're looking earlier, clearly you do take on some of that technical risk, some of that development risk. You know, I think at the end of the day, the core elements that really drive the returns are gonna be about the deposit and, you know, what's in the ground. Because that's not gonna change. When we look at risk, you know, I think that's where we start on every opportunity we look at, is, you know, what's in the ground? What could this deposit be?
You know, we need, you know, we think about the risk on top of that relating to, you know, the operator, their ability to you know, to deliver a mine plan, their ability to deliver extensions and expansions, or their ability to deliver a project as well, is obviously pretty important. Ultimately, you know, the risks do differ. Those risks will also be reflected in the kind of returns that we would be looking for from an investment. It's not a you know, it's not a single return requirement across all stages of the development. Clearly, that return has to reflect the risk profile.
There is also the opportunity to structure instruments to make sure that they encompass risk or major payments go out in line with sort of when risk is or when risk is reduced.
Can I also follow up? There's been some tax changes in some jurisdictions. For example, Colombia, where royalties are no longer tax deductible. You're seeing any other moves around other jurisdictions, and do you think this sort of poses a risk around royalty financing?
Obviously, one of the things that's been a topic of some discussion in the royalty and streaming space is just the broader tax and your potential for, you know, minimum tax levels to be brought in across various jurisdictions, which perhaps go a little bit to structuring of instruments. Ultimately, we think royalties and streams can provide a different type of capital. You know, it's not just about the straight costs. It's also about the alignment that can be offered with, between capital and owners in terms of that sharing in the performance of a mine.
I think you know, tax may impact on structuring, but ultimately it is a, you know, the fundamental offer of a stream or a royalty is qualitatively different from other sources of capital, and we think there will always be a place for that.
We also, Paul, we also try to focus on jurisdictions where there's a little bit more certainty around the, sort of the rule. Of course, that doesn't mean that they can't change either, and we have seen that in, you know, in first world economies as well. We think about that as we sort of prioritize where we sort of look for opportunities as well.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you for the questions. One moment for the next question. Next question comes from the line of Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey. Please proceed.
Julian, good morning. I might have missed this, just trying to wrap my head around what exactly is it that the projects that you're looking at, you know, what hurdle are they not meeting? Is it the returns hurdle, quality hurdle? I'm just trying to understand, you know, where everything's falling apart. I mean, we've been at this for a couple of years now, we haven't pulled the trigger. I'm just, you know, I might have missed it in one of your earlier answers, just if you could help me understand what it is, it's failing at, you know, that you're not be able to move on any of these opportunities.
Yeah. Morning, Glyn. I think, to put it in some context, as you say, we've been at it for a couple of years, as you put it. I think, you know, we need to recognize that, as Brendan alluded to a little bit earlier, you know, markets have certainly evolved over that period. For the first, let's call it 18 months or so of the business, you know, capital markets were in quite a different space in terms of cost of debt and availability of equity. That ultimately is gonna go to the cost of capital available and our competitiveness as a source of funds.
We've seen that shift over the past few months, and we think that's, you know, put us in a position where we are more competitive. Yeah, in terms of individual projects, you know, they differ. I don't think it's fair to say there's a particular hurdle that is, they're falling on. Every opportunity we look at is different. And, you know, they have their own challenges and, you know, we'll continue to focus on finding the right opportunities for us to invest in.
You know, to your point, Glyn, you know, quality, return, risk are all factors, you know, and different processes have failed for different reasons. You know, and we are focused on being disciplined investors of our, you know, our shareholder capital, and we're trying to make sure that we, you know, that we actually do value-accretive investments. Yeah, they've failed all three of those, you know, and in the, you know, in competitive bidding processes, we've, you know, we've been outbid in certain, in certain opportunities. You know, the bilateral sort of primary opportunities seem to be, sorry, offer a better context within which to invest and create shareholder value, Glyn.
Is it a case that, I mean, you're blessed with, you know, a fantastic royalty? Is it a problem that everything you look at and you stack it up against MAC and it just pales in insignificance? You know, even with an AUD 350 million facility and an opportunity that comes across that you can utilize that facility for, and if you utilize the entire amount, you know, it still seems like it wouldn't move the needle relative to MAC? Is that the problem or is that not how you think about it?
Yeah, look, that's not really how we think about it, Glyn. I think, you know, you know, it's you're right. It is a very large asset. It's, it's a fabulous asset and, you know, it's, you know, to the extent it does drive the kind of thinking you're describing. That's a, that's a good problem to have. You know, that's not how we think about it. I think, you know, we recognize it's gonna take time to build our portfolio, that, you know, it's unlikely we, you know, we certainly aren't out there looking for another MAC. We recognize that, you know, assets of that quality are extremely rare, and just, you know, don't come to market. We, we're not looking for another MAC.
We recognize that we will need to build the portfolio over time. You know, we've said all along, we're gonna be patient and disciplined about it. We're gonna make sure we're making the right investments that are gonna be value accretive rather than adding to the portfolio just for the sake of it. Yeah.
We're not looking for another MAC, but we are looking for opportunities with MAC-like characteristics in terms of, you know, future growth and expansion potential, you know. That's, you know, and that's sort of where we think the sort of what the [offered created in that sort of that option for extension expansion. That's how we think about, that's how we think about sort of a lot of the value that we can create is by buying into opportunities at the, at the right stage, at the right risk profile, where they have that sort of upside potential, which may or may not be through pricing into the, in, into the asking price.
Yeah. Okay. Sorry. Just a final question. I think six months ago when we were on the last results call, two things you sort of said. One, you were pitching more deals versus inbound inquiries. Today, you said, you know, you're getting more inquiries from the sort of battery metal space. I think you used the word the transition metals. You also said six months ago, they're very hard to price because the price series, you know, aren't very liquid. Is that still the case today? You're thinking around those transition metals, you know, like a lithium, because the price is still not very transparent and liquid, that makes it problematic.
I think I said at the time, and it remains the case, that it's not problematic in the sense that it makes it impossible to do. It's just another factor that needs to be taken in. To your question, I mean, we have been, you know, we've been working in building our understanding and our perspective on some of these other commodities in the time since we last spoke six months ago. I think our understanding has certainly advanced quite significantly in our perspective on some of these commodities. I think, you know, you mentioned lithium, obviously, that's getting a lot of press at the moment, and there's a lot of capital flowing in that direction.
Again, you know, just how does that, how does that sort of play out for us as a source of capital competitively? You know, that can be, that can also be an issue for us, our ability to provide capital on a basis that's gonna be value accretive for us, but also, yeah, competitive for the counterparty. You know, when you're in, when you're in very sort of strong commodity markets or, yeah, strong equity valuations, then that could be a little more [physical] .
Okay. That's great.
Yeah.
Sorry, Julian.
I was gonna say, you know, to your earlier point about, you know, mentioned about the pitching and the inbounds. That's still the case. You know, we are seeing more traction when we're pitching. We are seeing strong inbound pipeline as well. It's, you know, I think that's a factor of our efforts in just building the brand and of time and just shoe leather, getting out and meeting people and promoting the company and the offer. Those inbound inquiries now I think are much more in the primary space. I think in the first 12-18 months, we were getting inbound in the secondary space.
As I mentioned sort of in the prepared remarks, although that pipeline's been fairly steady, the real growth we've seen in the past half and particularly the last quarter has been in that primary space.
You know, some part of our job, Glyn, is, you know, like in North America, every CFO has, you know, debt equity and a royalty as part of their sort of arsenal of project funding. Has not been the case in Australia. Historically, you know, it has been debt and very much equity. Part of our job is to get out there and actually explain the benefits of where, you know, a royalty is very much aligned and the cost of a royalty is sort of, you know, competitive against some of the alternatives. Which wasn't the case, by the way, when equity was readily available and debt was very cheap, you know, in our, in the first sort of period of our incarnation, y ou know, we had an unusual market situation versus the normal, more normal market situation, which we're seeing now.
All right. That's very, very clear. Thanks for the color.
Thank you for the questions. One moment for the next questions. The next questions we have the line from Rob Stein from CLSA. Please proceed.
Hi, quick one from me, just a tactical one on income tax paid. Looks like that was higher than what consensus had baked in and there was a decrease in cash and cash equivalents. Is that just a timing difference, half on half, or is that and potentially an accounting versus cash accounting issue that we should expect every every H1?
Yes. It's to your latter point, it's correct, yes. It's a timing difference, you know, and an accounting sort of difference between we pay cash, we pay tax upon sort of receipt of the royalty, which is sort of a month after. We actually accrue on the at the point of earning it, which is at the end of the period. There is a continued difference there and, you know, if the royalties are constant, you know, quarter- over- quarter or half- over- half, that makes no difference. When there's a on the ramp-up phase, you should expect a little bit of difference and maybe need to check. That, I think there was an issue with some of the consensus was more around not, people not necessarily getting that explicitly.
It's probably the only complicated piece in our, in our whole sort of financial statement. I'm sure Matt's sort of happy to work on it with anyone to make sure that we get that right going forward.
Yeah, no problems. Everything else flowed through pretty easily. Just on capacity payments, obviously, they're in their H2 when that's evaluated. Are you getting any guidance from BHP on what the annualized rate will be from South Flank for the end of the year?
The short answer is no. You know, we have access to the same information as the broader market. That being said, is obviously flagged that it's on target for that mid-2024 full ramp up to nameplate.
Cool. That's it.
[crosstalk] Yeah. Sorry, Rob, just to clarify. In terms of that capacity payment, it's not on an annualized rate, it's on an actual 12-month production.
Yeah.
Sorry to be very clear on it. The way the process works is, end of the year, we look back on the 12 months, you know, the July 1 to June 30 of the previous year, what was the actual production at the mine site? How does that compare against the previous year's high watermark? Any difference is AUD 1 million for every 1 million ton difference, and then that resets the high watermark. That's done sort of early July or during the month of July .
That payment comes through and effectively along with the June quarter payment.
The current high watermark is 105 million tons. You know, assuming they get to their sort of their run rate by the end of the year, you know, depending on when that happens, you know, it's all, it's all about the average over the year versus sort of, the average run rate over the year. Getting to their sort of maximum capacity by the end of the year should bode well for the capacity payment, but it's difficult to calculate at this point in time, particularly with the first sort of, two quarters being sort of, just under 30 million tons per quarter.
Yeah, sure. [crosstalk] Sorry, that's what I meant by annual, not annualized. My apologies.
No problems. It's just worth, I think, to be very clear on it. Just in that regard, just to again be very clear, the capacity payment is based off dry tons.
Yeah.
Yeah.
BHP reports wet tons. Thanks, Rob.
Thank you.
Thank you for the questions. Next up, we have the line from Lachlan Shaw from UBS. Please proceed.
Yeah. Good day, guys. It's George Eadis from UBS, actually. My question follows on some of the previous. Is there a possibility your criteria for getting a new royalty stream is too restrictive, which is one of the reasons why we may not have seen another one come to mind? In particular, I'm just looking at the stage category. Is there an opportunity to capitalize on your ability to focus long term and maybe look to fund earlier stage or development projects too?
Yes. I mean, when, in terms of those criteria that we put out, you know, at the end of the day, those are guidelines. They're not hard and fast limits. I think that applies not only to the stage, but also the quantum. We certainly look outside of, you know, we give a sweet spot of AUD 100 million-AUD 300 million. We have certainly looked at opportunities in excess of that, and we've certainly looked at opportunities below that as well. Likewise, with the development stage, I think that there are clearly some benefits from both a sort of a risk evaluation point that we spoke about a little while ago, as well as the cash flow generation.
You know, to your point, there's no question that as we go earlier in the development stage, there are some good quality opportunities out there and we, you know, we will look at them on a case-by-case basis. I think we have our little disclaimer on that chart where we say, we'll look at others on merit.
Yeah.
Good quality opportunities that fall outside of those criteria, we will certainly look at.
Yeah.
Assets that sort of we, as they have like MAC-like characteristics, we'll obviously sort of be able to, you know, think about on a, on a case-by-case basis. You know, we genuinely are looking for those. You know, if you, if you look at the evolution of MAC as a royalty, you know, it wasn't worth much when it was originally drawn. Up until 2004, it still wasn't worth much, you know, then it, sort of the value was created once it's developed and then expanded, that's sort of very much where we look at those things. We can take a longer term horizon on quality assets.
Yep. That's good color. I think that context around what MAC once was is good context, too. Thanks very much.
Yeah, thank you.
Thank you for the questions. As a reminder to ask question, please press star one one on your telephone. No further questions at this time. I would like to hand the conference back to Julian Andrews for closing remarks.
Great. Well, look, thank you, everybody for joining us this morning. We appreciate your interest in the company and are pleased to be able to report a, you know, another strong half of performance. It's a very simple business, but we're always happy to talk about it and promote the story. Thank you very much for your time.
This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.