Good evening. This is the conference operator. Welcome. Thank you for joining the GTT Q1 2023 activity update conference call and webcast. As a reminder, all participants are in listen-only mode. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Should anyone need assistance during the conference call, they may signal an operator by pressing star and 0 on their telephone. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Philippe Berterottière, CEO. Please go ahead, sir.
Well, thank you very much. Thank you very much to all of you to join this conference on our Q1 2023 activity. First of all, I would like to talk about our orders and reviews. Core business, we received 26 new orders in this Q1 , and our revenues have amounted to about EUR 80 million, which represents an increase of 17.2% compared to Q1 2022. As far as innovation is concerned, we are for the 4th year in a row, the 1st intermediate size company insurance in terms of patents we've registered. We obtained four new AIPs, Approval in Principle, from the Japanese Classification Society for our latest development projects in alternative fuels.
In fact, about CSR, in March, we've joined the United Nations Global Compact. Talking about the market, in the Q1 , 20.7 million tons per annum have been sanctioned, so it's a very large amount. It's about 5% of the current worldwide energy production. In digital, in the digital sector, we've created a new brand for our digital solutions, Ascenz Marorka. We've obtained new contracts with ship owners related to our predictive maintenance solution called Sloshing Virtual Sensor, and also new contracts for Marorka's smart shipping solutions.
KFTC, the Supreme Court of Korea has rejected our appeal filed in December 2022 against our decision, the decision of the Seoul High Court, which was taken in December last year. Looking at the order book as it is today, we received in this Q1 , 25 energy carrier orders. Now, we have 273 energy carriers in our order book. Never ever, our order book has been that high, which of course is giving us an excellent perspective over the coming years. We received also an order for FLNG that these floating platform producing, extracting gas, liquefying gas and storing energy. There were some produced in the past.
Here we have a new one, and of course it means that some energy carriers will have to go to this platform. Talking about the energy supply, 20.7 million tons per annum sanctioned in the Q1. We consider that more should come. We had the Port Arthur in the Gulf of Mexico for 13 million tons. We had Plaquemines phase two for 7 million tons, and we had the FLNG I was talking about for 0.7 million tons per annum. What we can see that the contracting for new energy quantities is remaining very strong in this Q1 , and is quite balanced between the U.S. and the rest of the world.
Even though we consider and we can see that on this following page that most of the projects which are in the offings for being finally sanctioned in 2023 and 2024 are mainly in the U.S. We can see on on this slide all these projects which have already received a quite significant part of the contracts covering their production.
KFTC, we have been informed last Thursday that the Supreme Court of Korea has rejected the appeal we filed last December against the decision taken by the Seoul High Court. The situation that is that if requested by the Korean shipyards, GTT will have to enter into negotiations in order to separate in whole or in part the technology license and the technical assistance we were providing up to that point in a single contract. Shipyards will have the possibility to select the technical assistance, the engineering services they would like to have. Also the KFTC fine will be significantly reduced.
We paid about EUR 9.5 million in 2020 as a fine, and that would be recomputed and significantly reduced. While the company still considers that its provision of technical assistance and engineering services are essential to ensure the safety and performance of its solutions, and I hope that our standpoint will prevail in the discussions we are going to have. We do not anticipate any significant financial impact in the short or medium term. I will leave the floor to Virginie Aubagnac, the group CFO, for presenting to you the Q1 consolidated revenues.
Thank you, Philippe. Hello, everyone. To comment on GTT's Q1 consolidated revenues. Q1 2023 revenues are standing at EUR 80 million, showing a 17.2% increase. In line with our expectation, EUR 73 million came from new builds royalty, up 19% compared to last year's. Over the Q1 , GTT booked EUR 66.2 million revenue for LNG and Ethane carrier, up 23% versus same period last year. From Q2 2023, numerous vessels will come under construction, so we expect quarterly revenues to significantly pick up, notably in H2 2023. Revenues from FSU show a decline with the delivery of one FSU during the Q1 and a second FSU entering the end of construction phase. LNG fuel revenue surge at EUR 5 million, starting to benefit from the 2021 and 2022 high order book.
Elogen's revenues stand at EUR 1.5 million compared to EUR 0.9 million in Q1 2022. Growth has been limited in Q1, but we expect an acceleration over the year. Services revenue stand at EUR 4.9 million compared to EUR 5.5 million in Q1 2022. This is due to a slowdown in pre-project studies, for which demand is fluctuating by nature and in assistant services for vessels in operations. This leads us to confirm our 2023 targets. In the absence of significant delay, consolidated revenues for 2023 should be in a range of EUR 385 million-EUR 430 million. Consolidated EBITDA should be in the range of EUR 190 million-EUR 235 million.
In line with our long-term dividend policy, we aim at distributing a minimum of 80% of our net income for 2023. I now let Philippe Berterottière, our Chairman and CEO, conclude this presentation.
Thank you very much. Thank you for listening to this presentation. Now we are ready to answer to your questions.
Thank you. This is the conference operator. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. To remove yourself from the question queue, please press star and two. Please pick up the receiver when asking questions. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question is from Jean-Luc Romain with CIC Market Solutions. Please go ahead.
Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my questions. Two questions, if it's possible. On the rejection of the appeal of KFTC, was it a rejection of the receivability of the appeal or a rejection on the base of the difference? Second question, if did you already have some shipyards who has to kind of unbundle the technical assistance and the license agreement? How do you see your approach in terms of pricing both parts separately and continuing to kind of give a quality assurance to your final clients who are the ship owners?
On your first question, as far as we understand the decision, it's on the background, the base of the facts that the Supreme Court has taken its decision. On the point about the shipyards, I think we said that in the past, but in fact, the decision ask us to split our contracts. They don't ask us to reduce our prices. That may be something we could discuss or we could not discuss. That would be a matter of discussion with the shipyards.
For the time being, I would say that, nobody has asked us to, no shipyards have asked us to split our contracts. This is something that, they could do if they wish. They could ask us, if they wish. For the time being, we do not receive any request in that, direction.
Thank you.
The next question is from Kevin Roger with Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good evening. Thanks for taking the time. Sorry for that, Philippe, but I would have to come back on the decision from the KFTC and the TALA agreement. You never wanted to give us some colors on what could be the split between the time, the line, the contract value currently. Is there anything now that you have the decision that you can share with us, what would be the, let's say, worst case scenario, the revenue that will be removed currently from your services and that will be managed by the Korean Yard? That will be the first question, please, if you can provide us anything on that side.
The second one, on the commercial dynamic, it remains relatively impressive, 25 vessel in the Q1 . Based on the discussion that you have currently with potential clients, would you say that this is a run rate that you can hold for the coming quarters or at some time the famous, let's say, slowdown that anyone could expect should really happen at any time? The further question, if I may, is related to the LNG as a fuel. Any update on that side in terms of commercial dynamic also because it has remained relatively muted recently. Do you see an acceleration? What's the trend here, please?
services, once more, we are, we did not, we don't have to reduce our royalties. To give you colors on our technical assistance, we have about 500 lines of deliverables we provide to shipyards. These lines are not associated to a particular price. So, it depends very much on how the discussion will go, whether the yards will like to replace everything, which in my opinion, is probably a little bit extreme, or whether they would like to on some of these deliverables or on the entire part. Price consequences, as I said, we are not obliged, so it's a matter...
's a matter of discussion, it's a matter of discussion. What is important for us is to have a very safe and very reliable way of working, making sure that ships are well built. I am sure that it is the concern of the entire industry, the shipyards, but also the ship owners and the charters. So, as no discussions have been initiated, for me, it is too early to say anything on that, except that I don't see financial consequences in the short to medium terms
On the 25 orders, I would say that after 162 orders in 2022 and 68 orders in 2021, it's a strong flow of orders. Also I can see that through the projects which may be decided and through the renewal plans of several ship owners, I have the feeling that the flow of orders will continue in 2023 and 2024. Well, I could say that we are not going to beat the figures we obtained in 2022, but I'm pretty sure we are going to obtain very decent figures in 2023.
With energy as a fuel, where we said that the very high price that energy has reached in 2022 as a consequence of the crisis between Ukraine and Russia, has had a fairly deterring effect, consequence on some ship owners. Prices are back to normal and people now that there may be some kind of volatility, so they are working on schemes in order to get protected on some hedging scheme in order to be protected. We see that anyway, the market is fairly small for the time being. There is methanol, a kind of competition from methanol, which in our opinion is a bad solution.
We talk about that with ship owners, of course, and for them, it's a kind of a way of not putting all the eggs in the same basket in hedging the technical solutions or the fuel solutions they are choosing for complying with CO2 emission regulations rather than strong choice for methanol, which for the time being is generating more CO2 than LNG. We are still convinced that LNG is the right solution, both in terms of emissions and in terms of prices, and that this solution will finally prevail. We are keeping on, as you could see from the AIPs we obtained in Japan.
We are keeping on working on technical solutions and expanding that to shipyards through their classification societies, that it's the right solution. We are still quite optimistic on this solution.
Okay. Thanks a lot, Florence.
As a reminder, if you wish to register for a question, please press star and one on your telephone. The next question is from Guillaume Delaby, Societe Generale. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good afternoon. Four quite nasty questions in a row. Nasty, but not so nasty. Do not panic. First point, do you still have some further legal options in Korea, or is the case totally settled? First question. Second question, I'm going to try hard. Probably I will not make it, but let's try it. If we assume that the maximum risk, financial risk, let's say, in the medium term could be maybe circa 10% of revenue and maybe circa 5% of EBITDA, is it, I would say, a reasonable proxy? Third question, I would like to come back maybe on the debate, LNG versus methanol.
My perception is that since the beginning of the year that it's not only your perception that ship owners are, I would say, rather structurally rather than conjuncturally turning to methanol versus LNG. I understand it's not your opinion, but what makes you so confident? My fourth question is, are you still very comfortable with the guidance, but non-core revenue were only EUR 6.5 million in Q1. I understand that you expect those non-core revenue to ramp up dramatically in the remaining of the year. However, don't you think that your guidance, at least from the non-core, non-royalty revenue part, might be a little bit ambitious? Thank you.
Okay. On legal options in Korea, we don't have any legal options anymore. The only possibility in the decision is that if we don't agree with the shipyards, we can go to arbitration, which is that is the decision from the KFTC. That's what the KFTC is saying. If you don't agree, you go to arbitration. In a certain way, it's back to our contractual relationship because in our TALA we have, if we have a dispute, we go to arbitration. We never went to arbitration with any current shipyards.
For risk, you mentioned figures, but I would like to say that first of all, for that we should at least be requested to enter into discussions first. Second, we should agree on letting some deliverables going to be provided by shipyards. Third, we should agree on price rebate on the decrease of the amount of royalties for these deliverables that we will not provide anymore. I would not say that the figures you were mentioning is a reasonable proxy of the financial consequences.
Apart from that, I think that our deliverables are very much needed, and I think they are going to continue to be appreciated by the industry. LNG versus methanol, I don't think that methanol is such a good fuel. First of all, for the time being, when it's fossil methanol, it's more expensive, very significantly more expensive, by the way, and generating more CO2 than the HFO, the heavy fuel oil. Far above LNG. More expensive than LNG, more generating more CO2 than heavy fuel oil. It's bad by any aspects. In addition to that, the energy density is lower, so you need a much bigger tank than for LNG.
You lose cargo space. For me, I don't see so much of the merits. At a certain point of time, you may blend your fossil methanol with bio, biomethanol or synthetic methanol. These ones are going to be significantly expensive. They cost quite a lot. If you want to match energy in terms of CO2 emissions, you need to blend your fossil methanol with 45% of bio or synthetic methanol. In terms of prices, you're going to be much higher than much higher than LNG. You can go to a totally bio or e methanol, but here we consider that you're going to be at about or even above the price of eLNG.
In fact, through LNG, you are better in terms of prices and CO2 right now, and you are better, or at least at the same level at the end of the day when everybody will have switched to synthetic fuel. When I say at the end of the day, it's quite far away because you need the facilities, for example, for producing green hydrogen, which, as far as we can see through the hydrogen window, are not yet built or are not yet built in a sensitive dimension.
It's for all these reasons that I don't say that the intent for methanol is something structural, but rather something for hedging bets between various fossil fuels or various fuels. On the fourth question, I would let Virginie to answer to you.
On the guidance, as you can see already, royalties, I mean, today our revenue is mainly of royalties, and we do not give a guidance that's core business and non-core business. You were talking about non-core revenues and if it was below our expectation, which is actually not the case. First, electrolyzers are going to ramp up throughout 2023. Services, it's a small amount of reductions, and it's very hard to predict. In between order and revenue recognition, it's within a very short time period. It doesn't mean that it's done for the year. Actually we have some time.
Studies, we did not book, I mean, recognize as much revenue in terms of studies as same period last year. It can be otherwise, in the quarters to come. That's the same with assistant services for vessel in operation. Hard to predict but it always happen, and from Q1 to the other one, there can be variation. Yes, we do confirm our guidance, and revenue guidance.
The next question is from Matthew Mark with Cambium. Please go ahead.
Hello, good evening. Do you hear me?
Very well.
Okay, thank you. I just have one question. How are you impacted by the current inflation context, I mean, in terms of wage increase? To what extent can you pass it through in your royalties?
Inflation, as you said, most of our costs is, are, salaries. We decided to rebalance our remuneration system and between profit sharing and individual remuneration, which is going to have a cost impact in 2023. We talked about it at the occasion of our 2022 year results in February. It's probably the very right moment to do that in order to increase these salaries at the moment when there is a quite strong inflation. Inflation impact, our royalties are indexed according to the increase of salaries in the French engineering industry.
We could say that, in a certain way, we are edged, we are protected against, wage, inflation, wage increases in France, thanks to this indexation in our contracts.
Okay, thank you very much. It's clear.
The next question is from Jean-François Granjon with Oddo BHF. Please go ahead.
Yes, thank you. Good evening. Two questions on my mind. Regarding the decision in the Korean with the KFTC, do you see any risk to see the same things with the Chinese shipyard? The second question concern the business you have with some Korean or Asian shipyard for the Russia project. You mentioned EUR 24 million for the sales with 6 LNGCs. What's the situation currently? Are there also any risk regarding these six LNGCs?
Okay. Um, so KFTC, we, uh, we don't... You say, you see, uh, uh, our engineering services, uh, our technical assistance is very much needed. And, uh, probably, uh, the discussions will be around that. Uh, the discussions with the shipyards will be around that. Uh, we, we, uh, we are working for forty years with, uh, Korean yards. We still think that, uh, at the page we, uh, improve, uh, our systems, our technical assistance is very much needed. Uh, we are now working with five shipyards in, uh, in China, one for twenty years and, uh, the four others for about a year. Uh, uh, in my opinion, all of them are needing, uh, our technical assistance as Korean yards, uh, are needing our technical assistance.
Anyway, the according to our contract, if we split our we have to provide the same conditions to everybody. If Chinese yards would like to ask for that, they could. Once more, I think we are very much needed. On Russia-Korea situation, we continue to build the six vessels in Korea. It's going on.
Okay, thank you.
The last question is from Jean-Luc Romain with CIC Market Solutions. Please go ahead.
Yes. You mentioned the growth that will accelerate in hydrogen for the rest of the year. We had, like, 69% growth in the Q1 . Should I do I understand correctly that we should expect more growth than that Q1 here?
Okay. Yes, we expect a significantly stronger growth in 2023.
Can you remind us what the other book was at the beginning of the year?
The?
For hydrogen.
The others?
What the other book was for hydrogen at the end of the year, end of 2022? I don't remember if you gave it to me or not.
It was EUR 15 million.
EUR 15 million.
Okay. Thank you very much.
That's fine.
Okay.
Mr. Berterottière, there are no more questions registered at this time.
Okay. Thank you very much. Enjoy your evening.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over and you may disconnect your telephones.