Good morning. Welcome to this call with focus on our new financial reporting. My name is Stig Frederiksen, Head of Investor Relations, and I'm joined here today with Jesper Høybye, our head of Account and Tax, and of course, also Julia Rasmussen from Investor Relations. The purpose of this call is, of course, to give you some kind of, I would say, education around the changes we've made. This is of course only focusing on the financial historical numbers for 2017. We sent out last night, together with the stock release, also key figures operationally and financially. I hope you had a chance to go through those numbers.
I'll start on the first page where we, as we stated at the CMD back in February, we're now changing the reporting structure. Just briefly, some of the key points for this. The first, we are no longer a conglomerate. We are now focusing on becoming globally integrated container logistics. Therefore, this is a natural step on that journey to now operate and report as one company with one bottom line. This new segmentation should support this strategic direction to become this and it also towards our goal and target to become less dependent on freight rates.
We hope, of course, by giving you the information now, that you will have a much better insight into the development, and the journey that we have stated will take, let's say 3-5 years. It will be implemented from Q1 2018, and that means from the 17th of May when we do our Q1 report, that will be based on the new structure. If you go to the next slide, what are we changing? If we start out, we have now introduced an Ocean segment, and that consists of the liner activities in Maersk Line and Hamburg Süd, as well as eight strategic transshipment hubs from APM Terminals.
As we said before, those hubs are of extremely high importance to the network, and by that also to the unit cost of the Ocean segment. That's why we find it more appropriate to integrate that into the Ocean segment. We are also creating a logistics service segment, and that consists from now on of all our inland services across Damco, what was in Maersk Line, APM Terminals, and others before, and I'll come back to more details on that. That is, of course, a key growth area for the company going forward. The third segment is our terminals and towage, and that consists of the APM Terminals gateway terminals. Only the ones that are no longer related to hubs. They are all, as mentioned, in the Ocean segment.
Of course, as we know from before, the Svitzer towage activities, nothing has changed to that activity. The fourth is our Manufacturing & Others segment, and that consists, of course, mainly of Maersk Container Industry and then other businesses. I will come back to what businesses we have included into that. Outside those four, but still connected to our strategy, we're also making a change to the way we do our operating cash flow. We have decided to move our net financial payments that was included in cash flow from operation before. They will from Q1 be part of investment dividends and cash flow from financing.
We believe that will give you a much better insight and reflect much better the cash flow generation of the operating businesses. As you know, we have introduced cash conversion as a very important thing going forward. Also, of course, accompany our current capital structure, where we currently still bear a lot of debts that are related to our discontinuations and by that also finance expenses. It's very, very important to highlight on this slide that this change will have no impact on our guidance for 2018, as they will of course also not change the consolidated numbers that we have reported for APMM before. On page four, a more illustrative way of telling what I tried to say before about what the changes we've made.
If we start off with ocean, to the left, you can see we have Maersk Line ocean business, and that consists of Maersk Line and our sub-brands, MCC, Seago, and Sealand. It also includes Hamburg Süd, including Aliança. As you can see from the note, also still inland services that we have not yet separated out of Hamburg Süd. The strategic hubs, as mentioned, that are part of the integrated network. The Logistics & Services, Damco as is today and what we reported last year. We have included inland haulage from Maersk Line. We have included trade finance, other services, also a part of Maersk Line before. Container inland services that before belonged under APM Terminals.
From other businesses, we have included Maersk Aviation Star Air, and that is our logistics air cargo service operating for UPS. The third one, terminal towage. As mentioned, port activities and some landside because those are still related to carriers and then Svitzer as it is today. The fourth one, as mentioned, Maersk Container Industry, also Maersk Oil Trading that before belonged on the other business unallocated eliminations. Also Höegh Autoliners and others. The fifth one you can say is now unallocated and, in compared to before, this is now only more or less a cost center. There are no operational businesses involved in that segment or that part anymore.
If I take the next one, now we have changed the financial reporting structure b ut it's also very important as part of our strategy and what we've said before, that we are going through a transformation. It's very, very important here that you as external people can follow what are the key transformation indicators that we internally are looking at through that transformation. To the upper corner on the left side, we have mentioned four of them. Growth, higher revenue growth in Ocean, a very important one to create this more balanced company. Of course, synergies from T&L and Hamburg Süd. As we have stated before, we are still expecting synergies of up to $600 million from T&L, and between $350 million and $400 million in 2019 from Hamburg Süd.
Of course, cash conversion. That is also the reason I've mentioned why we are changing our definition of cash from operations to make it a more clean number. Finally, as part of our capital discipline, of course, also gross CapEx will be a very important transformation indicator for the company. Besides that, the normal key financial metrics, revenue, EBITDA, underlying profit as we have guided on, cash flow for various activities, and of course, also net interest-bearing debt. On each of the segments, we have also defined some key operational metrics, and there will be additional as we move along. From a starting point, as you know from before, loaded volumes, loaded freight rate, unit cost on a fixed bunker, and of course, a new one, hub productivity.
As mentioned, with the hubs being a very important part of the integrated network in Ocean, by giving you hub productivity, we also measure how well are we integrating, of course, our Ocean business with our hubs, and that of course should have an impact on our unit cost. In Logistics & Services, besides of course we give revenue and EBITDA, we have also included now gross profit and, as other peers in logistics, EBIT conversion, meaning how well do we convert gross profit into EBIT. In Terminals & Towage, for now we have terminal volumes, we have a terminal revenue per move and terminal unit cost. As you can see from the slide, it's on an equity weighted basis that we do these kinds of calculations, meaning that we have taken, of course, associate and joint ventures into those numbers.
On page six, a more, I would say, consolidated way of looking at the changes. If you look to the left side, APMM, no changes. We had a revenue of $30.945 billion in 2017, and that's still the number and nothing has changed. We also had an EBITDA of $3.532 billion, and that's also the same number. If you look at Maersk Line, we had a revenue of $24.299 billion before. We have excluded mention or changed segmentation around inland and trade finance, and we have added APM Terminals. That net-net gives you a reduction in revenue of $2.276 billion. We end at a revenue of $22.023 billion.
On the EBITDA line, we had 2.624 before, and now we have added from these adjustments and changes, $163 million to that EBITDA number. We end at a bit of a higher EBITDA of 2.77 before. On Damco, where we have added both inland trade finance and container inland services, and that together gives you an increase in revenue of $3.1 billion and with an EBITDA of $143 million, which now under new segment means that our logistics service business in total will have a revenue of nearly $5.8 billion and an EBITDA of $139 million. APM Terminals, where we have made adjustments, yes, the hub terminals and the container inland services.
We have added the Svitzer or the towage business, which means that we have reduced revenue by $658 million and EBITDA by $65 million. That gives you, combined with Svitzer, a terminals and towage business with a revenue just around $3.5 billion and an EBITDA of $639 million. Then I move to Maersk Container Industry, where we have included other businesses and that is of course mainly the Höegh Autoliners and our Maersk Oil Trading business and t hat in combination gives you a higher revenue of $674 million with a higher EBITDA of $86 million.
At the end, you can see that our before other unallocated eliminations that number has now increased and the reason for that being of course that we have taken out those businesses that had a positive income at and positive revenue. So now you have a more clear, I would say, cost center to the right. If you go to page seven, just briefly, you can see again in a different way our revenue and EBITDA for each of the businesses. You can see based on 2017 that Ocean accounts for around 71% of the APMM revenue. Of course, also you can see the margin development for each of these businesses based on 2017.
I just will spend a couple minutes on each of the four main segments. As mentioned, we have sent out all the detailed numbers, so you should have them. I think, of course, it's important to highlight here that when you look at 2017 and each quarter, on the other revenue, that's where we have included the hub activities from APMT. It's also important to highlight here that our freight revenue for 2017, of course, is reduced due to the fact that both inland haulage and other services, trade finance, were included in the reported freight revenue and in our loaded freight rate. Adjusting for that, our 2017 loaded freight rate was now $1,788 from before reported $2,005.
At the same time, of course, we also reduced the cost attached to that activity t hat means that our unit costs on a fixed bunker are now reduced by around $223 per FEU to $1,752, up against $1,975 before. That also means, of course, that now you are with the freight revenue, looking at what is real Ocean, with very small impact from, of course, still the inland part of Hamburg Süd. Moving to Logistics & Services. As mentioned, we have increased, of course, the revenue.
As I already went through those numbers, maybe important to tell you that about $142 million in revenue have been added from the Maersk Aviation Star Air as part of the air cargo logistic services. It's also important to highlight here that the volume and revenue data for AFC and SCM are identical with the previous disclosed numbers for Damco. As you can see from the data we sent out, we have also included revenue for inland haulage and container inland services, so you can make those calculations going forward. On page 10, Terminals and Towage. As mentioned in here, Svitzer are included as it is. Of course, we have already given you numbers for 2017 that are identical.
As mentioned, we have moved, of course, now everything are based on equity-weighted numbers. It may be important to highlight here that when you look at the results from Joint Ventures and Associates, it has changed a bit from the reported number under APMT, the reasons being that first of all, we have added around $8 million from Svitzer. Then we have, as we stated under the note, there are three terminals that are hubs that were included under Associates and Joint Ventures before. Of course, the financials from those three have been moved into Ocean. So that's the reason for the deviation on result from Joint Ventures and Associates from the 2017 number you knew from before. Then finally, Manufacturing and Others.
Yeah, of course, predominantly related to NCI, but also as mentioned, both through Höegh Autoliners and Maersk Oil Trading are included in that number b ut else nothing has changed around NCI. Those were the words related to the presentation. I think we should now open up for Q&A, if you have any questions. Please, operator.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you do have a question for the speakers, please press zero one on your telephone keypad now. The first question is from the line of Edward Stanford from HSBC. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Good morning. Two questions, please. On the Logistics & Services side, you give the ocean volumes, which at first glance seem to be different from the ocean volumes in Damco. Can you explain why that is? Secondly, looking at the transfers, and looking at APM Terminals, and Svitzer, if you strip out the Svitzer addition from the APM Terminals elimination, it looks as if the remaining APM Terminals that you've taken out were significantly loss-making. Is that right, or have I got my sums wrong?
Yeah. Thank you for the questions. If I take the first one around ocean volumes, nothing had changed on the overall volume numbers. We have made some restatement or changes under each quarter, but nothing has changed on the accumulated numbers for the year. Regarding the APMT Svitzer question, I don't think I got it 100%. You can say if you look at the. Of course, first, if it's under the Joint Venture Associate, be aware, of course, that there we included impairments last year. They were taken partly under Associate Joint Ventures. That is the reason why we also reported under the old segmentation a negative result in Joint Venture Associates in 2017.
Right. Just coming back to the ocean volume side, and I'll go back and check the numbers. For example, in Q1, for the full year, I've got 771,000 TEUs from Damco, and you're reporting 664, for example.
Yeah, let me go back and get back to you with the adjustments there. Because overall, I would say there shouldn't be any major assumptions. I can say when I look at the report we gave you and we had 664,448 on ocean volumes. That's in our full year report.
Okay. I'll get back to that.
And that's exactly the same number that we are now giving you.
Okay.
On page 42 in the annual report.
Okay.
Again, there might be some adjustment per quarter, but I know that, but not on a full year number.
Next question is from the line of Dan Togo from Handelsbanken. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Hi, yes. Hello, and good morning. A question on Ocean. Stig, is it any way possible also to give, so to say, the gross effects here? We need to know exactly how to, you know, calibrate our models so that for instance, we get the gross inland trade finance impact from revenue, and the gross from hub and terminals on revenue and EBITDA, and for so to say, also the rest of the adjustments that we need to make in our models.
Thank you, Dan. I would say, first of all, we will of course in our Q1 report disclose more details on each of them, that is, in our planning. Of course, we have taken this decision not to disclose, I would say, individual services like trade finance and so on. There will be, I would say more details coming in our you know Q1 report for 2017.
For now we need to settle with the net effects, I guess.
Yeah. That is for now what we have. Of course you can say that if you look at the changes in, again, in other revenue, the terminal hub effect goes into other revenue. We have given you other revenue restated, and the changes we made on inland and on trade finance were part of the freight rate revenue. You should be able to take the other revenue under the old 2017, and then based on the new number and the baseline, the expectation, then you should be able to calculate. The difference on other revenue is predominantly related to the hub that we have included in Ocean.
Mm-hmm. Yeah. Right. Then you give us a lot of key indicators, but how will you going forward so to say measure yourself on your Ocean part of the business? I mean, I'm just referring back to your old 5% EBIT margin premium. How will you going forward measure yourself relatively to peers?
Of course, a very good point, and something that, of course we are considering right now and also, something I can promise you that we will, over the coming quarters, give more flavor on how will we measure ourselves. Of course now it's EBITDA, and a lot of things gonna happen with, as you may have seen already in logistics peers with the IFRS 16 adjustment that people have started to do, which again, makes maybe EBIT a bit more difficult to use. I can promise you that we are, we will disclose, over one of the next coming quarters, how will we benchmark ourselves up against industry, and up against what we find is relevant way of doing this.
Because we definitely, you know, still have a very important measure still to perform well, as we've done in the past. But again also with the coming back to the EBIT margin, you know, it is very difficult because if you look at the way people treat M&A, where we have, as you can see in our 2017 report, include a lot of PPR having a huge impact on EBIT level, where other peers have made less, and take more on goodwill without any amortizations t hat of course really create a very mixed picture, when you compare EBIT to EBIT.
I can promise, Dan, we will return with the clear statement around where do we want to belong when it comes to each of our businesses, both also in logistics and of course also in internal talks.
Sounds good. Thanks, Stig.
Next question is from the line of Neil Glynn from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Well, good morning, everybody. If I could ask firstly, following on from the last question. Looking towards the new logistics division, I guess you could look at it as Damco's revenues have kind of doubled, including the new features previously within Ocean but t hat also presents a challenge to understand what's really going on from a quarterly perspective. From what we've seen here in the presentation, are you just going to be talking about top line in isolation, perhaps with some volume components? Or will you provide additional disclosure to help us understand how the diverse aspects within the top line within logistics are developing?
Well, thank you, Neil, for a very relevant question. Well, there's no doubt that, you know, first of all, the drivers for this business going forward will be gross profit and EBIT conversion. I think that is very fair to say. That is what other peers are benchmarked up against. Of course, where we have some work to do from here. No doubt about that. We will also, and that's also the reason why we've given you some of these other data on air freight, inland haulage, and so on. We will give you these numbers every quarter, meaning volumes, development and for other businesses like container inland and so on, revenue.
Of course, go deep into each of these segments. You should see this as, yes, it's true that a lot of this is just Damco, but this is of course also part of an operational model changing now, where we still have a brand called Damco, but as we are moving forward in integrating our services, they should be seen as, of course, services across the integrated company.
Understood. Just a follow on, you've obviously given us 2017 data, which will allow us to then appreciate the year-on-year trend. Will you ever give us anything before 2017 to help us understand a little bit more of a trend? If not, for example, how do you best pitch how growth develops, for example, beyond 2018 within, for example, logistics and services? 'Cause I think something that people will need to understand is a decent trend developing because when we're stuck with one-year trends potentially, I think it's gonna prompt a lot of questions.
Yeah. I have to disappoint you here. The base case will be 2017 and the numbers we've given today. I would say when we look at these numbers, and again, yes, Hamburg Süd of course will have an impact on the numbers into 2018, and are only included with one month, as you know, in Q4 2017 in Ocean. Else, so there, of course, there will be some I would say, extra impact going forward. But when we look at the numbers for example, logistics services, I would say yes, there are of course some cyber impact. That is the only thing I think is fair to mention here that came in in Q4 and particularly in Q...
Also in Q4 2017, that had an impact on, let's call it Damco, harder relatively than anything else. I would say if you look at the remaining quarters, I don't think there's any, I would say, big changes or movements in those numbers that you cannot use for more going forward predictions. It will be those numbers that we are giving today that will be the baseline for. Of course, as mentioned before, we will give as much commenting as we can on the development each quarter from now on up against 2017.
Understood. Thanks, Stig.
Next question is from the line of Casper Blom from ABG Sundal Collier. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Yeah, thanks a lot. Two small things here. When your current CEOs took over the lead, we also started getting some additional fragmentation on rates and volumes down on trade routes. Will you sort of be updating that to also reflect these changes?
Yes, we will. There will be no changes neither to our rate and our the data around volumes. They will still be disclosed on East, West, North, South, and Intra, and of course accumulated.
Okay. We will start getting that from Q1?
Yes, that will be included in Q1.
Okay. Then just a little nitty-gritty one, because in Ocean you also state there's one line called Other Revenue. If I take the very simple approach and just multiply volumes with freight rate, I get a sort of a revenue number for let's call it the container shipping business. And then if I deduct that from the full revenue within Ocean, I get an other revenue that's slightly lower than what you're writing here. Are there some sort of eliminations or something that is missing, or should that eventually add up?
First of all, Casper, be aware that this is of course recognized revenue where we are talking about loaded volume and rates. That means there are particularly in 2017 at the beginning of the year there were quite big differences between the loaded, you could say loaded revenue and the recognized revenue. Over time that is more stable, but there were some, I would say, timing issues. Otherwise, no, it should be still taking our old other revenue that we have disclosed every quarter. The difference between that and the number we are giving today is more or less only the hub terminal external business.
Okay. Thanks a lot, Stig.
Next question is from the line of Lars Heindorff from SEB. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Yes, morning. Also a few questions from me. Firstly, regarding the movement of the inland services from Hamburg Süd, which, if I understood you correctly, is still in the Ocean part. When will that be moved?
Yes, we're working on that. As you know, we are integrating the company and also the whole accounting financial platform for Hamburg Süd. I would say before the end of the year, 2018, we should be able to separate out the inland services. We still will keep Aliança as a part of ocean because that is like our Seago, that is still seen as, I know it's close to trucks, but still it's on the water, and therefore, we keep it as an ocean business.
Okay. Just to be clear, the historical quarterly numbers that you've been giving us yesterday evening and also in the slides here, Hamburg Süd are included in those, is that correct?
Only in the Q4 2017 number. That is with one month, December.
Okay. All right. I'll just, with that explains the difference from what you've been reporting in terms of volumes earlier and what you have now, which is actually higher, which I couldn't really understand. The last thing is regarding the invested capital. Will you disclose that by division as well?
No. The plan is not to give that number. We are of course maintaining our clear target saying that this group should generate a return on invested capital above 8.5% over the cycle. That is of course on an integrated APM basis. We will give you, as you can see, gross CapEx for each of them, but we will measure still our return based on the total invested capital.
Just a follow-up on that. Is that because you don't any longer measure the individual divisions on return on invested capital? Or since you don't disclose these numbers, or how do you measure them internally, how the performance is in different divisions?
I would say we definitely, on the asset-heavy businesses, I think it's fair to say that return on invested capital is still very important. It's maybe less important in a Logistics & Services business. I would say we're working over the coming quarters with new metrics, updated metrics that are even more linked to the strategic direction. We will return to you with more of these when these have been decided. I can assure we still look at return on invested capital in both Ocean and, of course, in Terminals & Towage.
Okay. All right. Thank you.
Next question is from the line of Dominic Edridge from UBS. Please go ahead. Your line is open.
Thank you very much. Good morning. Just a couple from me. Firstly, you've given a lot of disclosure on the revenue side of things. Can you just say how you'll be disclosing things on costs on a segmental basis as well? The second question is there any change to how management's going to be incentivized based on maybe either the changes to the way the cash flow is disclosed or any of these other divisional changes? Thank you very much.
To take the last question first, you know, in our annual report, we have included, and also in our remuneration part, what are some of the key drivers that we are, you know, top management are remunerated from. Of course, there's a close link between some of the strategic drivers, transformation drivers, and of course that remuneration, and that goes for more than the top management. That goes for a significant part of the leader team in Maersk today. So there's a close link between these things.
Then on costs, I would say, yeah, we still give you of course, if I start from Ocean, you will still have a unit cost on a fixed and floating bunker that will still be part of the disclosure and a very important one. We likely also will give you at least, you know, currencies and other things is something of course we are working on to disclose more on that we have not done in the past. I know that has been of a big irritation to the market. We'll try to help you as much as we can on that front.
When you look at our Logistics & Services businesses, the fact we now give you a gross profit that gives you, that means you can, and we give you total revenue, that means you can calculate variable cost. We are also giving you EBITDA, and we're giving you EBIT conversion. That means you can also calculate both the SG&A cost, but also of course the depreciation down to EBIT. That's one of the versions where you can still make EBIT if you want to. In the Terminals & Towage business, well, first of all, we have, as mentioned, cost per move in the terminal business, so you can see how we develop on that also with the revenue side.
Of course we will also give you EBITDA. I think we have covered, and a lot of these cost metrics are the same. I think where we have given you more is on the Logistics & Services compared to in the old days where you only had an EBITDA number.
Yeah. I suppose it's more. Yeah, as you alluded to earlier on with the logistics, is the more the difference between the fixed and variable costs, as I'm sure you appreciate, there's big differences between what goes on in the terminals business, what goes on in the old liner business, now the ocean business, in terms of what drops down to the bottom line. It's more of a case of rather than just saying, "Well, this is what the unit costs are doing," it's more understanding, well, you've got different elements within the costs that are doing different things and are driven by, for instance, fleet capacity or volume. I'm just wondering how much clarity we'll be getting on those different sort of inputs there.
No doubt that, you know, we are, of course, capacity and these things are also important, as part of utilization, and so on. I think it's fair to say that at this stage we will not give you individual cost elements in between the variable and the fixed costs, but we'll try to build bridges where we can. Of course, that's also part of, again, the operational key KPIs we have in Ocean today. For now, we have not decided to disclose down to a single cost element.
Okay. Well, thanks very much anyway.
Next question is from the line of Johan Eliason from Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Yeah, hi. Just a few of the minor details. Just confirm that the loaded freight rate you talk about is actually the same that you have always reported it, and we're not exactly coordinated with the revenues recognized in the quarter. Is that correct? Hello?
No. Hello? Yeah, sorry. There shouldn't be any. No, there's not any differences in the way we define loaded volumes.
As we did it in the past. You can see the numbers are 10.939 million TEUs on loaded volumes for 2017, including one month of Hamburg Süd. I think when you look at our, remember, when you look at our spreadsheet we sent out and the financial report, we have a Maersk Line separate number that is lower. In our full year report, we gave Hamburg Süd as one number, and then we gave Maersk Line as one number. When you accumulate those two, they should give you the same 10.939 FEU.
Good. Then just a minor question on tax. I mean, on the division, you are not giving us that detail anymore, and there's a mixture here of tonnage taxes and normal profitability taxes. How do you suggest we should model the tax going forward?
I think first of all, you're definitely right that when you look at the ocean business, the tax element there is of course relatively low when it comes to the normal corporate tax because it is, as you correctly said, included in our tonnage taxation. You can say, well, before, when hubs were in APMT, we had to make internal agreements also from a transfer pricing point of view, and so on. That should give you more clarity. The fact that the oil business, of course, is gone now, at least from continuing businesses and now also closed on the Maersk Oil, of course, that means that our tax level on corporate tax level, of course, will be much lower.
Particularly also now where Ocean that accounts for most of the profitability for now, of course, has a much lower tax rate. I would say we will come back to you with, as part of also Q1, with more guidance on what effective tax rate you should look at going forward.
Okay. Excellent. Thank you.
The next question is from the line of Patrick Creuset from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead, your line is open.
Hi, Stig. Just a few housekeeping items. Just again, to add to divisional disclosures, I mean, will you be giving operating cash flow data going forward, given your focus on cash conversion now?
Per division, you mean?
Yeah, yeah.
By segment? Well, we're looking into it, that we might down the road do so you don't, so you both have the growth CapEx before acquisitions and divestments.
Yep.
Then you can make free cash flow per segment. Of course, also what is important to follow the cash conversion. One thing is to have EBITDA, but what's more important, of course, also is how much of that goes to cash flow. It's something we will implement also as KPIs on both DSO and DPO, are of course very important in logistics. It's something that we will add at a later stage.
Okay. On Hamburg Süd, just, do you think it's fair to assume that the reporting changes won't have a significant effect on the rate revenue and EBITDA data you gave at the CMD?
You know, when we integrate Hamburg Süd, as we mentioned at the CMD, it will increase the average rate, also.
No, sure. I mean, as a result of the..
At the same time, our unit costs will also go up. It follows the plan, or the communication we did at the CMD.
Yeah, of course. I meant more as a result of the reporting changes today. I mean, for example, inland revenues, I mean, are they, you know, a similar proportion, as in, Maersk Line?
I have to say that for now we do not have full overview of the inland impact. It's something people are working hard to separate out. For now I think I'll have to come back to you or to the market at a later stage with more information as soon as we have separated out 100%. Of course, also we are confident with the separation we've made on the numbers.
Okay. Is there anything we should read into the order you present the divisions now? I mean, in the past, sometimes in Maersk it's been relatively significant when you've changed the order of the divisions, and now you present logistics even though it's smaller ahead of the terminals. Does that mean maybe that your growth focus. Your focus on growth is gonna be more in that division versus terminals, or it's just a coincidence?
I would say, well, we have put them together or in line after revenue size. But of course, fair to say, in the same sentence that as you know, we have said many times, we are not gonna invest in new terminals. We have a pipeline of five projects, and we are still working on these. We have also stated clearly that one of the growth patterns will be integrated services, logistics services.
Okay.
From that, of course, you can also read that that is an important part of the strategy, as we've said, several times.
Okay. Just the last one, I mean, the eliminations line is now quite big in terms of EBITDA, differences of groups. Can you just elaborate on some of the main items in there?
No, I would say it, of course, overhead cost, it includes, as you know, other things around that. I don't think there's any specific things I'll go into. It should, of course, you know, be more stable. We had the problem before that we had, as mentioned, companies that had profit and that made it a bit more fluctuations in the numbers. I'm not gonna go into details around each of these different parts.
Okay. Thanks very much.
There are currently no further questions registered, so I'll hand the call back to the speaker. Please go ahead.
Well, thank you very much for participating in this call. We hope it's given a bit of flavor and help. I know there's a lot of number crunching that had to take place and I'm sorry for that. We hope of course that over time we have created a more transparent company for you and also something that will be easier for you to follow, as mentioned, our strategy and initiatives we are taking. We definitely look forward to see and listen to you again on the 17th of May when we distribute our Q1 numbers. Thank you very much and have a good day.