Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. To continue with your call, operator. Welcome, thank you for joining the Aegean Airlines conference call to present and discuss the first half 2019 financial results. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Eftichios Vassilakis, Chairman. Mr. Vassilakis, you may now proceed.
Yes, hello, good afternoon, everybody, welcome to our quarter two and H1 results for 2019. Let me say at the onset that we think we have just released a very positive set of results for this year, set for the first half of the year, set against a backdrop of a slowdown of the European economy. At the same time, for the first time in the last five years, six years, a slowdown in arrivals to Greece, tourism arrivals to Greece. Within that environment, the company has achieved to produce 14% more revenue using essentially the same fleet of aircraft as last year. We have no additions to our fleet during the first half of 2019. The reason for this is because, as you know, we've entered the agreement to purchase the Neo aircraft, and the first of them will arrive in 2020.
This is very much a transition year, a year where we have emphasized trying to increase our amount of activity, especially in the second quarter, basically by flying earlier or building up our schedule earlier to international destinations with a dual objective of extending the tourism season or supporting the extension of the tourism season to Greece, at the same time, of course, increasing our utilization. This effort has been successful one. This is the reason that we were able to produce 12% more ASKs in the second quarter. More importantly than that, 20% more revenue in the second quarter.
Through the performance of the second quarter, which was higher in terms of all the important metrics, EBITDA, earnings before tax, and earnings after tax, we've managed to turn around the direction of the first six months of the year and have a small improvement on the bottom line result of H1 2019, reversing the lag we had in the first quarter and making up for two very important, let's say, burdens that we had to overtake. One was that we were hedged at a significantly higher fuel rate this year than we were hedged at last year, which had a significant impact on fuel costs.
2, the fact that this was the first year that we had to apply IFRS 16, and therefore, the front loading of interest on our leases has added a EUR 4 million burden to our comparative results, which is why we've mentioned also in the press release that absent that effect, the delta in the results would have been significantly higher. The second quarter of the year has brought basically all the KPIs of the company back to a positive direction. Revenue per available seat kilometer is trending positively. This is again, a very different picture than what we've seen, more or less in most European carriers' results due to the slowdown of the economy.
Utilization of aircraft has gone up, load factor of the aircraft has gone up, even yield, which is more difficult than last because it doesn't get positively influenced by load factor, is up despite the fact that we have this year, from the beginning of the year, essentially the first year since we bought Olympic in Greece in the end of 2013, that we face competition essentially in all of our domestic network. At the same time, capacity of foreign carriers, third party carriers to our country also up, particularly so in Athens, but also overall. Low-cost carriers continue to increase their capacity to Greece. We were not at all out of focus in terms of where these carriers have emphasized their presence. As a result, we believe that the efforts and the outcome of the first six months is very positive.
A few more details about how that happened. Naturally, all of our investment was once again directed towards our international network. It is there that you have the most significant increases of activity, traffic, and revenue. For the second quarter, indeed, the international passenger count was up by 16%, for the first half at 12%, while at the same time, domestic traffic was more or less constant, bringing the average to, sorry, hang on, 9%?
9%.
9% for the first half and 10% for the second quarter. In terms of what we did within the network, again, Athens was the focus of most of our development effort. We were particularly intent on growing our share and traffic in routes up to two hours from Athens, but we also started some of the longer routes, both from Athens and from the regions, and converted some of our charter activity to longer routes to increase utilization as well. If we try to put things together, what happened in the first half of the year, and particularly in the second quarter, to bring the improved results. We started flying earlier with the same fleet, no change in aircraft. We started building up our route capacity for international earlier on, so in April and May instead of mid-June as typical.
This entailed a risk of, yes, of course, increased utilization, but possibly fare dilution or revenue dilution, which actually didn't happen. I think hopefully we'll see in the third quarter also a benefit from the carryover of starting some of these flights earlier. Now, a word of caution. While you see a very significant increase of revenue in the first half and particularly on the second quarter, don't expect that same direction, not the same direction, but those same absolute values or same trends in quarter three. Why? Because simply our level of utilization every year in quarter three is high. The degree to which it could have been further increased is marginal, and therefore, while we have significant increases of revenue due to improved utilization on the fleet in Q2, you should not expect that in Q3 as the improvement in utilization can only be marginal.
Nevertheless, I guess, as I said earlier on, against the backdrop of a more difficult year for Greek tourism, these results are quite positive. Especially since we had to overcome a cost from the point of view of fuel that on a like-for-like operational basis, translated to $12 million in H1. Our revenue growth was strong enough to overcome those $12 million of rate related effects to our results. Another EUR 4 million that came from the IFRS 16 application and another EUR 2 million more or less that came from the interest of the bonds that we undertook, the EUR 200 million, which is basically the proceeds are still sitting very much in our banks. We haven't invested it.
As you know, we had announced when we launched the bond that it's effectively the use of these proceeds for PDPs would start mid-2020 and proceed basically in 2021, 2022. Against a total hit of about EUR 15 million to EUR 17 million on our statement from things that were basically set at the beginning of the year, the improvement of revenue was strong enough to overcome all that, both in the second quarter and overall in the first half. I'm going to leave it there and turn it over to you for questions so we can get more specific to the points that I mentioned or within your interest that were not covered in my opening statement. Thank you.
The first question comes from the line of Brazos. This time, that is with Eurobank Equities. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hello there, and thank you for taking my questions. Yeah, firstly on the revenue side, you delivered a 6% increase in yield in the second quarter, despite having grown your offered seats by 9%. You talk about increasing utilization. Just wondering, in the press release you referred to a positive evolution of the third quarter. You talk about marginal improvement of utilization in Q3. Just simply, does this mean that in Q3 we should anticipate also improved load factors as in the second quarter? From a yield perspective, we should anticipate something more moderate from a yield perspective, please.
Okay.
That's the first question. I will let you respond. I think it's better.
Once again, to avoid confusion, the difference between Q2 and Q3 is going to be on how many more ASKs, how many more flights could have been generated, will have been generated, will be generated, and the difference is going to be much less. The growth in ASKs and offered capacity is going to be much less. Why? Because simply the growth in Q2 does not come from fleet, it comes from utilization. Utilization is so high in summer that you cannot increase utilization very much. You should expect more or less half the ASKs that were there as a plus on Q1 and Q2 to be there on Q3. It's going to be something between 4.5 and 6% increase in ASKs if memory serves well.
The delta, when I mentioned the revenue, was referring to the fact that we would not have 12% increase in ASK again to go after a similar increase. Without wanting to be too specific about a quarter that is not yet complete, we will not have a shortfall in terms of load factor relative to last year. We will be more or less at the same levels, maybe some marginal improvements, and we think there will be also marginal changes left or right in the yield. All these three things point to a revenue growth that's going to be positive again, but lower in terms of nominal numbers simply because the delta in flying and the delta in ASK is significantly less.
Okay. That was quite thorough. Thank you so much for the clarification. A couple of other questions, if I may please. On the cost side, just wondering, there was an uptick in admin costs in Q2. Just wondering whether there was any one-off element in there. Thirdly, could you just tell us the extent to which your hedging strategy might change in the light of the spike in oil prices following the Saudi Arabia attacks, please?
Let me go at the end, because it's simpler. I believe we are 79% or 80% hedged for the remainder of the year.
79%.
For 2019, we are already at basically 80% for the remainder of 2019, September, October, November, December, on average, around 80% hedged. No, we will not rush to change that 80% to 100%, simply because we don't think it's prudent to go over 80%. For next year, I believe we're a little bit over 50% already, 54%, I believe is the level to which we are hedged on the fuel for next year. No, we will not rush to increase this at today's increased levels. I'm not going to make any predictions about oil. We will continue buying, but we always buy when the market is steadier, away from big spikes. Obviously we're not going to increase our positions for next year at these next few days until the market calms down again and settles at whichever levels it chooses to settle.
I think as a personal view, we always hedge fuel because it's prudent to hedge fuel. I think the least concern that airlines have going forward is really the price of fuel in the sense that there are many more negatives that point in the direction of fuel in terms of demand, in terms of climate change, in terms of potential, let's say, ultimate fuels from different industries, not aviation, not at this stage. We don't think there's going to be significant pressure coming from there. The challenges, I think, for airlines come from the side of demand growth, this is what has been reflected also, I believe, in this year's results in Europe.
That's it. I just ask the technical question about the admin cost in Q2.
I don't know which line you refer to as admin cost. The line that we published in our condensed, let's say, statement of the press release as other operating expenses.
Yeah, this is what I was, yeah.
I believe that's two, three points higher than the ASK growth. This comes mostly from IT related investments that we're trying to upgrade different parts of our commercial or technical capacity through software systems. I think that's what's there. It's not a significant delta over our ASK, so.
Sure. Okay. Thank you so much.
The next question comes to the line of Evangelos Charatsis with BETA Securities. Please go ahead.
Yes, hello. Good evening. I have two questions regarding your new deliveries. If there has been any outflow regarding prepayments for the ordering of the new fleet? My second question relates to the full year effect for 2009 of the IFRS 16 implementation. Would we expect a similar charge of the same magnitude of EUR 4 million in the second half as well, or we're done with the EUR 4 million already recorded in the interim? Thank you.
I'll go again in reverse. No, actually, I'll go natural flow here. We have already incurred EUR 68 million of pre-delivery payments for the Airbuses, and we are done for this year. This money was paid either last year or this year. Next year, the bill for pre-delivery payments for Airbuses will be EUR 45 million, for 2020. I hope that answers your question with regards to aircraft.
There has not been any change on the time schedule of the deliveries?
Marginal ones. Yes. There are production changes that we get notified by Airbus for a delay of one month or two months or things like that, but it does not change the balance of the cash flows or something drastic. What it does is it creates a requirement for us to keep for next year two, three aircraft extra from the old fleet to manage the exact delivery time of the new aircraft. That is, let's say, some kind of transition cost, because when you're not exactly sure when aircraft will arrive you need to have another aircraft around to cover the work. Other than that, there is no significant uncertainty or an effect from that uncertainty.
Yes.
With regards to IFRS 16, there are two effects possible. One effect is the front loading of the interest, and that's proportional to time. The EUR 4 million for six months, yes, it will be another EUR 4 million for the other six months, because this is front loading of interest. It's marginally different in the second six months, but it's not important. The second possibility of effect from IFRS 16 comes from valuing, marking to market, the dollar-based forward obligations of the leases. There was no such effect in the first six months of the year, simply because the US dollar at the opening of the year and on the 30th of June was basically at the same level. These EUR 400 million more or less, that we have exposure in forward lease obligations, do get valued every quarter. If there is a change, now we get valued every quarter.
If there is a change between the 30th of June, which was 1.1360, 1.1370, and let's say, for instance, the dollar closes to what it is today, 1.1070, something like that, then that will bring a charge from valuation. This second charge did not exist in the first six months simply because there was no valuation delta. Of course, that valuation delta can be positive or negative. In a way, it's not really part of operating results at all because all it does is instead of showing the delta in the cost when you pay the lease, you show it when it's valued. You just bring it in advance. There's no real change in net problem operating results. It's not a capital item, of course, either.
Okay. That's very helpful and clear. Thank you.
The next question comes on the line of Achal Kumar with HSBC. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Hi. Thank you. I just wanted to understand a few things. One is about the revenue environment. Generally, you mentioned that of course, there is a weakness due to uncertainty around Germany and other parts of EU. How that has impacted the demand and how you foresee the demand going ahead and the overall revenue environment, if you could please explain on that or discuss on that.
The reference that I made was not related to our particular revenue dynamics. It was actually, as you see, it's not even reflected on the yields or the RASK of the first six months, which are actually positive. I was making a reference more to what we see left and right happening in Europe. In the case of our blended route network, I would say that if I were to take an average for the international network, I would say that the trend is somewhere negative, somewhere positive, but overall, more or less stable. Where we have improvement, we have improvement because we have shifted capacity towards routes that have shown an improved result.
If there is an improved revenue performance, it's not because the average fare has gone up, but it's because the mix of fares, the mix of revenues, adjusted by where we place our capacity, has helped us to improve things. That's number 1. Number 2, in the domestic market, we had a situation from basically, I would say, September last year until March of this year, where fares yields were dropping month by month. Why? Relative to a year before. Because the competitor that we mainly compete against now, a small local company, had been entering routes during 2018, and therefore 2018, in the beginning, we were competitive in a few routes, and by the end, in many routes. The benchmark for comparison was changing, and this cycle was effectively complete, went full circle by one year from March.
From April and on, in the domestic network, because now we are comparing against, let's say, apples with apples on the same more or less competitive sphere, our yield has shown some improvement. I would say that if I take Q2, which is the main driver of our results, and to some degree what shows us what's coming forward, the effect in international network is just rebalancing capacity to more profitable routes without real change of average fare or yield. In the domestic network, while we started the year significantly lower than last year, it has averaged out as competition has stabilized, and now we're seeing some losses. Is that adequate for you?
Yeah, I think that's very clear. While we are discussing about the revenue environment, it would also be helpful if you could please let us know about if the revenue environment or the demand has stayed strong in business class and economy class, or in which of the classes you are finding the demand remains strong. Why I'm just questioning generally because I've been getting this bit of response that the corporates are cutting the budgets. Have you seen that impacting the business class demand or that is not the case with Aegean?
Well, the difference with Aegean is that this business class is a very small percentage of the revenue. Unfortunately, a very small percentage of the passengers. If anything, we have a small, very negligible increase in the amount of penetration of business to the total. That is driven also by some programs that we have where people are bidding for business class or upgrades are offered with certain discounted rates. Overall, I can clearly tell you there is no negative trend to business. There is a small positive trend, driven by first being in a low-level start with, second, by some of the programs or bidding last minute or upgrading of some cost. None of these things will have a significant effect on what we're doing. Unfortunately, as you may recall from previous discussions as well, we are predominantly leisure, and therefore these are small numbers.
Right. Perfect. The other thing I wanted to understand about the recent news regarding the airport's privatization. Looks like the government wants to privatize quite a lot of regional airports, including the Athens one. How do you see that? Would that impact your cost, and then how do you see that impacting the overall demand and the business environment for the airlines?
Well, the Athens Airport has essentially been privatized since day one, 2001 when it operated. It's always been managed by the 45% of the privately held part. Athens Airport today is 55% government owned and 45% privately owned. As a part of the shareholders agreement, even before the concession began back in 2001, the private side had the management. In effective terms, it's always been private, and it's always been quite expensive. Twice as expensive as the other airports of Greece, whether they are now private or still state owned. Therefore, there is no risk of increased cost from Athens Airport. As a matter of fact, we would have expected in the past that the extension that was purchased by Athens Airport could have led to a significant reduction of unitary costs. It did not. There was a marginal only reduction of parking landing fees.
The overall, let's say, might have gone down from the beginning of June by, let's call it 4%. This is offset by some increases in the regional airports that were recently privatized about two, three years ago. We have, and we're looking towards more or less a neutral environment with pluses and minuses that are not going to make a big delta on a unit level here in Greece, at least. Looking out as far as I can, let's say until the end of 2020. There are some discounts in some places, some increase on the others, definitely no potential increase from what we refer to as privatization to Athens International Airport.
What it means is that the government will sell from the remaining 55% another 30%, but effectively assuming the buyer is not the same consortium who's running it now, that other 30% will not have the management. Nothing much will change. The only thing that will change is the Greek government will put some more money on its annual revenues from privatizations.
Right. That same applies to other airports also as you said that the government is privatizing some of the regional airports.
No, it does not. Listen. Greece has got 39 airports. Today, 14 plus one, Athens, 15 are privatized. The only significant airport that is not privatized yet is the airport of Heraklion, where the government has agreed and voted into law a contract, a build, operate, and transfer contract, to build a new airport on the south of the prefecture of Heraklion in Kasteli. That airport will probably be operational in 2025, '26. The change, any potential change of cost refers then to the 2026 time period, more or less. The other airports, the 23 small airports that have not been privatized, have a completely negligible effect on our total cost structure. To give you an idea, Athens, Heraklion, and the 14 that have been privatized already would represent 90% plus of our Greek activity.
Fair enough. The other thing I wanted to understand about the dividend policy, given that the recent uncertainty has increased. I mean, of course, you've been saying that you will maintain the dividend for the next couple of years, but then now, given that, I mean, of course, there's a lot of uncertainty around the business in generally in Europe and EU. You are doing CapEx also. Do you think you will maintain the dividend policy or is there any change in the dividend policy do you see?
I think we will maintain the same policy as % of earnings after tax distributed. We have no reason to change that. That I can tell you today. Of course, that is a % of earnings after tax, as I said, so they will always be related to how profitable we are in a given year. The cash flow situation of the company, actually, I would say right now is much more positive than ever before. We took the risk or the decision to issue a bond, as you know, substantially before we needed the material funds for predelivery costs to secure the availability of these funds at the appropriate time and to be able to negotiate with alternate financing parties more efficiently. We have sustained the cost of paying interest faster than we should because we certainly did not need the money at the time.
I think the overall cash flow, both in terms of operating cash flow and in terms of cash availability is very secure. The percentage of our earnings that will go out as dividends will not change. What remains to be seen, of course, like every year, is exactly what the earnings will be.
Okay, perfect. Thank you. I have two more questions, and I am so sorry for the long list of questions. I have just last two questions. One, I want to understand about the capacity and fleet plan. I think at the start of the year, you mentioned that in terms of number of seats, you might achieve capacity growth of about 4%. Now in the first half, I think you reported 8% increase in the number of seats. What sort of capacity growth are you looking at for the full year? Second, I wanted to understand about the cost outlook. You have mentioned that you are planning to sort of reduce aircraft operating costs. If you could please elaborate on that point. Thank you so much, and sorry for the long questions.
No, no problem at all. As I said earlier on, we had an increase of 12% of ASK in the second quarter.
Is it nine?
Yeah, 9% of ASK in the first half. I said earlier on that Q3 should be more or less at half that growth rate of the second quarter, so around 5%-6%. The last quarter probably is going to be around 7% or 8% in ASK. That should lead to a year to end up somewhere between 6% and 7.5%, I think, in terms of ASK. Seats should be probably just a little bit under that because we do have an extension of stage length by 1.5% more or less. In terms of capacity, that's the question that I can give you. In terms of other costs, well, as I said, we are pretty much hedged on fuel. We are also around 60%, 67% hedged on U.S. dollar.
For this year?
For this year, yes. 67% hedged on U.S. dollar for the rest of the year. I don't expect a big difference from there other than the valuation issues as I discussed earlier on. That is a valuation issue, not an operating cost issue. I don't see something material changing in our unitary cost level other than to say, of course, in the summer when we fly more, our cost per ASK is lower simply because our utilization is higher and the lease cost, the personnel cost is amortized with more production. Other than that, I don't see any particular movements different than what you have seen already.
You have mentioned that you were planning to reduce aircraft operating costs. What does that point refer to then?
The reduction operating cost was referred to the period of receiving the new aircraft and beyond. You might recall that in our previous call for the year, I said that the improvements from arriving aircraft was first to a very low level start to appear in 2020, but mostly it should be from the second half of 2021 and on when we will then by that time have at least 14, 15 aircraft in our fleet. Since the first aircraft that we are receiving is coming essentially in 2020, certainly there can be no unitary savings in fuel or maintenance or increased capacity that will lower the cost per seat coming from that direction. That is completely related to the new aircraft arrival.
I believe I'm certain that this is what I have mentioned as a sort of a two, three, four-year perspective, and I have just actually even given you some expectations of when it would start.
Great. Perfect. Thank you so much.
Welcome.
The next question comes from the line of Jakub Caithaml with Wood & Co. Please go ahead.
Hey, thanks for taking my question. This is Jakub Caithaml from Wood & Co. I have two. First one to follow up on Kumar with regards to competition and if it's possible to present the outlook as it stands for the remainder of this year and perhaps the beginning of next one. Are there kind of more parties looking at Greece? How do you think that the competitive landscape is going to evolve looking forward? The second question relates to ATC capacity. I mean, how are the delays and the EU compensation under EU rules comparing with last year so far?
Yes, thank you. As far as competition goes, I think you know very well that the carrier that has more significantly than anybody else added competitive capacity in Greece over the last five, six years is Ryanair. Ryanair again this year has shown a significant increase of seats towards our country. For international capacity towards Greece has grown, I believe in excess of 15%. The overall capacity to Greece, including domestic, have grown marginally because basically they took out capacity from domestic and shifted it to international. Since the number of seat count is up and the average stage length is up, that means that they are continuing to invest towards our country. easyJet has been more or less constant with very small increase in the last few years.
Wizz, who made the foray into Greece a couple of years back, took a step back a little bit this year because some of the routes didn't work out. Lufthansa and Air France as groups are growing towards Greece primarily through Transavia and Eurowings. This year for Lufthansa Group, less than the year before, Transavia has been more aggressive and Air France has been more aggressive through Transavia. The competitive environment to Athens and for this winter from competitive parties seems to be about 5%-6% increase relative to the year before, which is indeed lower in terms of increase of capacity than what we're seeing for next year for winter, which was more like 15% relative to the winter of 2017.
Looking into the winter, it looks like a more benign growth, but it's still growth of capacity, so it's definitely not anybody pulling anything back from the competition. We aim to get a little market share back. We tend to differentiate our growth rate less than our competitors because we are so Greek focused, and therefore we have a more constant or a more consistent, probably is a better word, towards growth. Competition, while growing at a lower pace than the last two years, is still growing in international. In domestic, there are today two Greek airlines, SKY express and Astra Airlines domestically, and also Volotea that has joined the Greek domestic market since last year. The capacity that they are putting in is being offset with the capacity that Ryanair has taken out.
In some routes, we might actually have a reduction in competitive capacity this winter. Overall, for the year, it's going to be round about zero. How is 2020 going to look like? It's too early to tell, considering that everybody that is significant in Europe, Ryanair, easyJet, Wizz Air, and of course the three large network airline groups, Lufthansa, Air France and BA, IAG, are all here. We don't expect any big changes. I would say that the only trends in the last two, three years have been for the large network carriers to also add direct connections to some of the larger island destinations. The main investment has been from the point of view of network carriers that are connecting their hubs to some of the, let's say, larger islands with their proper mainline brands.
Lufthansa in some cases, or BA in some cases, or Air France in some cases, and more frequently with their low-cost brands, Eurowings, Vueling, and Transavia. The low-cost carriers have been through a policy of expansion to Greece the last five, six years. It's mitigating some. We have grown a lot, but it's still there. Domestic is stable to negative in terms of competitive capacity growth.
Excellent. Thank you. Thank you very much for this. Perhaps in terms of the delays.
Sorry. My apologies. Well, ATC delays have been the biggest problem that we have faced this year. This time the origin of the ATC delays was not so much the European airspace, it was more local issues with the capacity of the Athens approach airspace, which is the area around our hub. There has been a particular problem since from mid-June, which was more or less rectified by the second half of August, which referred to having inadequate capacity at midday between 12 and 4 o'clock for incoming flights, causing a chain of delays and a very negative effect to us as a hub carrier based out of Athens.
This is partially due to yield staffing and organizational problems for Greek ATC, partly due to some, let's call it political maneuvering that takes place by elements of state workers and state agencies when changes of government take place. In any case, we have been working very hard to push both sides of government, the workers, the organizational elements, to invest in new hires for next year and invest in additional equipment. After all, they're only investing with the money that airlines such as ourselves are paying. This is a very much self-financed process that actually leaves a surplus for the Greek state, they are obliged to invest that surplus in the improvement of the ATC. This is very much what we have been pushing them to do based on the experience of this summer.
We see some promising signs in that direction, will take some time. From the point of view of costs, yeah, maybe we will have about a couple of EUR million of extra costs for the whole year relative to the year before due to hotel overnight, 261 compensations, and whatnot. This cost, this additional EUR 2 million is minuscule relative to the disturbance and disruption of the actual flow of business, fatigue of our staff, and of course, the decreased satisfaction level of our customers, which for us, is a paramount issue and the one on which this airline has been based from day one. We are working very hard, and we have seen some first results from positive response from the state.
We will continue to lobby very aggressively to ensure that next summer will not have the characteristics that the July and early August period had, which were not only negative for us, but also, of course, for other carriers flying to Athens and, of course, for the perception of the tourism product of Greece.
Understood. Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, there are no further questions at this time. I will now turn the conference over to Mr. Vassilakis for any closing comments. Thank you.
Thank you all for attending our first half results conference. As I said, I want to close on a positive note, just like we opened on a positive note. The increase of revenues and the satisfactory increase of utilization and employment stretching our season without cost to our yields has allowed us to overcome the overhang of the additional fuel cost and the IFRS 16 effect is promising for the continuation of the year. This was better than expectations, especially within a year that, as I said, we have slowed down arrivals in Greece. I look forward to the completion of the third quarter, which is the one that, of course, every year shapes our results. Hopefully have this dynamic to some degree, even a lower degree from the point of view of revenue increase, translate to very positive third quarter and full-year results.
Thank you very much for your attendance and see you soon.