Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. We welcome all of you to our conference call this morning. The underlying presentation for the call has been published this morning on our website. Today, we released the statement for the first three months of the financial year 2025-26. We are going to present the highlights of this period and will also revisit our two-year group earnings guidance for the business year 2025-26, which is unchanged. Following the presentation, we are going to answer your questions. The recording of this call will be available on our homepage shortly after the call. Now, let me hand over to our CFO, Dr. Stephan Meeder.
Thank you, Matthieu and Andreas, for the introduction, so ladies and gentlemen, also a warm welcome to all of you from my side, and thank you very much for your interest in Südzucker. First of all, please let me give you a brief update on some personal and organizational changes within Südzucker. Starting end of June, we have a new corporate structure, and this led to some personal changes, and that's why I would like to introduce to you Andreas Rothe, which is our new head of investor relations.
And we have, for example, merged the two functions, finance and investor relations, under the lead of Slav Delić, Corporate Director Finance, and our colleague, Nikolai Baltruschat, which we have known or know for years, and which did a tremendous job here in investor relations, has moved over to another very important function, which is being Corporate Director for Strategy and M&A. And so, in this transition phase, Nikolai and his team are also helping in the background to guarantee and organize a good transition to the new team. We are very much looking forward to do this together with the same quality that we have done in the past. And so, there's no material change. Just the purpose has changed, but there will be the same approach to investor relations as we have done successfully with Nikolai and team over the years.
I want to also express my gratitude to Nikolai and his team for this tremendous work in investor relations over the last years. So, going forward, as mentioned, I would like to give you a brief overview about the business performance in the first three months of fiscal 25-26 and the details about our confirmed earnings guidance for fiscal for the full year 25-26. So, let's start on page five, please. Here, you can see that the Q1 performance was weak. Yeah, we have to admit that. So, it was already communicated on the 11th of April that Q1 performance was not able or was expected not to be able to match with the previous year's numbers. And this has been confirmed in line with our expectations. So, after three months, we have reached the following numbers.
You can see on top of the slide, group revenues came in at EUR 2.2 billion, significantly below previous year's levels. When it comes to EBITDA, also group EBITDA was significantly down by 58% to EUR 96 million, and group operating results only reached EUR 22 million versus EUR 155 million in Q1 of 2024-25 fiscal year. Unfortunately, also cash flow decreased from EUR 178 million to EUR 36 million, and so, finally, we came out with an EPS after three months at minus EUR 18 against plus EUR 36 last year. Net financial debt at end of May, so end of Q1, came in at EUR 116 million above prior year's level and EUR 101 million against the end of financial year 2024-25, which, as you know, is end of February 2025, so now, let's have a look on the segmental business performance on page six.
And here, I would like to start with the group revenues already mentioned. So, group revenues came in significantly below previous year's levels. As you can see in the segmental split, the revenues have declined in the sugar segment, in special products segment, in CropEnergies segment, and starch segment, so in four out of five segments. But also to note positively, it has risen moderately in the food segment. When it comes to the operating profit, you can see the operating group result decreased, was mainly driven by the sugar, but also was below prior year in special products, CropEnergies, and starch segments. And you can see in the figures that even in sugar and CropEnergies segment, we are even in a loss situation in the first three months of this fiscal.
But positively to note, the food segment had a good development and has shown an increase in operating profit. So let's move on within the segmental information to segment sugar. You can find that on page eight. And first of all, let me please revisit the view on the global sugar market because this is important for the price development. And here, most recently, in its July 2025 estimate of the global sugar balance for the 2024-25 sugar marketing year, S&P Global Commodity Insights forecast a deficit of 4.7 million tons. So this is positive, should be supportive for the price development. And just this reminder, the sugar marketing year, when I talk about sugar marketing year, this is always the period starting 1st of October ending end of September. So we just discussed the sugar marketing year 2024-25.
So this is the period between 1st of October 2024 until 30th of September 2025. So this deficit is driven by declining production, in particular in India and Brazil, and a rising consumption. So this is also positive to note. If you have a short look on the gray bars, you will see that over the years, sugar consumption worldwide is still slightly growing with an anchor of approximately 1 to 2%. For the upcoming sugar marketing year starting 1st of October 2025, so sugar marketing year 25-26, S&P Global projects a surplus of 2.9 million tons based on increased production, mainly in India and Thailand, and also a continued growth consumption. So for sure, this is a prediction of a surplus. It's not positive for the price development, but nevertheless, it's important to note that for 25-26, there's still time to go. It's weather markets.
A lot of things can change, but for the time being, for the upcoming 2025-2026 sugar marketing year, there is predicted a surplus of 2.9 million tons. So this has effects on the world market prices. So if we have the world market prices for sugar was around EUR 500 per ton at the beginning of our 2025-2026 fiscal year, then it initially rose to approximately EUR 520. So this positive upward trend was fully in line with our expectations. But then this was against our initial expectations. The sugar world market price declined in the meantime to about EUR 420 per ton. And at the end of May 2025, the world market price stood at EUR 422 per ton. So this starts from the world sugar market. Let's have a look on the E.U. market. You will find this on page nine.
Here, for the upcoming sugar marketing year 25-26, so starting 1st of October, the E.U. Commission and analysts expect a significant decline in cultivation area. This should be supportive for the prices. Based on this, production, including even glucose, is forecast to decrease to 15.7 million after 17.1 million tons in prior sugar marketing years. This decrease in production forecast should be supportive for prices. As a result of this balance, the E.U. is expected to become, in return, a net importer of sugar. An important issue is for us always to monitor closely the situation on Ukraine because, as we have discussed over the last conference calls, the significant price decrease that we have seen over the last fiscal, that was also mainly due to the imports from Ukraine. What is so the current situation?
Here, in early June 2025, the quota for duty-free sugar imports from Ukraine was reduced to the original levels set in the 2014 association agreement. That means to around 20,000 tons per year, and this regulation will remain in place until a new agreement is reached, so that means specifically for the period between June 5, 2025, and December 31, 2025, Ukraine can only export maximum 1,700 tons of sugar duty-free to the EU, so this is not significant in volume, so this is a positive news for the rest of this calendar year, but discussions with Ukraine are ongoing, and recent news that we have seen, or that you could also read in the press, that there's a new agreement under discussion.
And here, for this new agreement, which will start 1st of January 2026, here, the E.U. Commission has proposed a quota of 100,000 tons to bring here to the Ukraine, so five times the current volumes. And as you can understand, we are fully opposed to this proposal. It's not with not being solidary with Ukraine, but this is additional volumes that are not needed for the European market. And Ukraine has always been traditionally exporting their volumes to, let's say, Africa and other countries like Asia and then some Arab countries. So we should support Ukraine in doing those exports, but those Ukraine volumes are not needed on the European market. But the further development has to be monitored closely to what extent this will influence the E.U. market, and the respective pricing has to be seen. So let's continue with the numbers in the sugar segment.
You can find that on page 10, so here's the overview of revenues, EBITDA, depreciation, operating results, so after three months, revenues in the sugar segment came in significantly below previous year's level. Prices in E.U. fell more and more sharply over the course of the previous fiscal year, which we have already discussed, and they continued to drop slightly further at the beginning of the new fiscal 25-26. We expect sugar prices to increase. As I just said, this is linked to the fact with the reduced acreage and the harvesting prospect, and we expect prices to increase in the new sugar marketing year starting October 1st of October 2025. When it comes to operating result, you see a loss of 56 million EUR, so the operating profit or the operating result, let's say it's negative, shows a strong decline.
During the first quarter of 25-26 fiscal, the sugar segment recorded an operating loss of EUR 56 million compared to a positive of EUR 59 million in corresponding prior period. The significant decline in results was mainly caused by the sharp downturn in prices, which could not be absorbed by lower manufacturing costs in the 24 campaign. Let's move on to page 11. Here you can find an overview on the segment special products. Also here in the table, you can find revenues, EBITDA, depreciation, operating result over the course of the last three months. You can see that after three months, revenues in the special product segment decreased moderately. This was mainly due to the disposal of the dressing and sauces business in the U.S., which was sold by Freiberger in Q2 of prior year fiscal 24-25. You can also see a decline in operating result.
Here, the operating result decreased significantly. This development is due to rising production costs, which we could not fully pass on to our customers. Following special product segment, let's move on to crop energy segments, which you can find on page 12. Here you can see after three months, revenues in the crop energy segment were down significantly. Also, the decrease is due to significantly lower prices for ethanol, as well as the co-products for food and animal feed products. Volumes also decreased compared to prior year's levels due to scheduled maintenance. Coming to operating result, you can see here, unfortunately, CropE nergies had to account for a loss in the first three months. So operating result was also significantly lower than last year.
The key factors here for the decrease in result are the already mentioned sales price volumes going down, which were both lower than the previous year. In addition, we had higher net raw material costs, which led to negative operating results in the first quarter of 2025-26 fiscal. You can see here minus EUR 5 million. Looking ahead, maintenance shutdowns are expected to weigh on operating earnings until mid-July 2025. After CropEnergies segment, let's move on to the starch segment. You will find it on page 13. Here you can see that after three months, revenues in starch segment also declined, this time slightly to EUR 245 million due to slightly lower prices and volumes. Those slightly lower prices and volumes also led to a decrease in the operating result.
You can see that starch segment finally turned out with an operating profit of 3 million EUR in the first three months. And this was, as I said, due to slightly lower prices and volumes, as well also as to higher raw material costs. On the positive side, here in this reporting period, we benefited from insurance compensation related to the flood damage in Pischelsdorf, Austria, in autumn 2024. You remember for sure the really strong and negative figures of this tremendous flooding that we had in Pischelsdorf with the tremendous work of the team to get the plants back on track. And in Q1 this year, we received this insurance compensation. Let's move on finally to the food segment. You will find the food segment on page 14. So this is the positive development in Q1 of this year.
You can see that both on revenue side as also in operating profit, we see here an increase. When it comes first with revenues, you can see that we have here a moderate increase from EUR 415 million to EUR 444 million in the current year, and this development is particularly due to good volumes and prices in both fruit preparations and fruit juice concentrates. Operating result came out at EUR 36 million after 27, so here is an increase, and the margin of fruit preparations was substantially increased, as I said, due to good volumes and pricing. The earnings contribution from fruit juice concentrates also improved due to a higher margin. Let's move on after operating profit and view on the five segments what is the remainder of the profit and loss. You will find this on page 16 and 17. I start on page 16.
Here you can see that after three months, the result from restructuring of special items amounted to minus EUR 23 million versus EUR 2 million in prior previous year's period. This was largely attributable to the sugar segment in the context of the closure of the plants in Warmsen and Leopoldsdorf. The result from companies' consolidated equity was derived from starch segment in total to minus EUR 6 million. Looking to the financial result, you can see minus EUR 32 million above previous period. In this EUR 32 million net financial result, negative, the major part is the net interest expense amounting to EUR 27 million. The remainder is the other financial result of minus EUR 5 million linked to exchange rate changes with context of the foreign currency loans of non-EU companies. Let's continue on page 17.
Here we can have a look on taxes on income and earnings per share. Taxes on income came in at +EUR 4 million compared to -EUR 38 million in the same period last year. This is based on earnings before taxes of -EUR 39 million versus +EUR 132 million in Q1 2024-25. So finally, as already stated, earnings per share came in at -EUR 0.18 against +EUR 0.36 in the prior year's period. Let's continue with the balance sheet items and the other KPIs. So starting with cash flow, working capital, and investments. You will find this on page 19. On page 19, we start with the cash flow statement.
You can see at the top of the list that due to the decline in operating profit, cash flow decreased also significantly in the reporting period to EUR 36 million after EUR 178 million in the prior year period. When it comes to working capital, we see here an increase. So this increased by EUR 44 million after an EUR 114 million inflow in Q1 of last year. And this development was due in particular to the sale of sugar inventories and the offsetting big payments. Investments are pretty stable. In the first three months, we have reached EUR 150 million in investment in CapEx against EUR 130 million last year.
Having a look on the financing side, in May 2025, Südzucker, we have successfully issued a new EUR 700 million hybrid bond via our Dutch subsidiary, Südzucker International Finance B.V., to refinance the existing hybrid bond, also worth EUR 700 million, which was issued 20 years ago in summer of 2005. And this issue is reflected here in the increase and decrease in stakes held by the subsidiaries of respectively capital buyback. So this effect is in here. When it comes to the increase, the increase is minus 277. And this is due to the pro rata repayment of the 2005 hybrid bond as part of the buyback offer, which serves as a component of equity. And full repayment of the old bond was made on June 30, 2025 as part of the notice of termination.
The decrease that you can see of EUR 693 million was attributable to the new bond, as just explained in May 25 issuance. So the decrease is issued to that after deduction of the cost with a nominal of 700. Coming to the balance sheet, you will find that on page 21, no significant changes. So I'm pretty short on that. So key issue is net financial debt came out at EUR 1.755 billion. And equity ratio is pretty stable and at a good level still at 43%. So coming to the outlook for fiscal 25-26, you will find this on the pages 23 to 25. I start on page 23. Here you can see the group guidance and the segmental information. So for fiscal 25-26, we expect Südzucker Group revenues to come in between EUR 8.7 million and EUR 9.2 million. So this is unchanged.
Also, operating profit on a group level is unchanged at EUR 150 million-EUR 300 million operating profit. So let's have a look on the development. So in view of the full 25-26 financial year, we had already anticipated that the first quarter would be comparatively weak. So this is confirmed as of today, but fully in line with our view on this quarter and the months before. So therefore, our outlook for the operating result remains unchanged within the previously communicated range of EUR 150 million-EUR 300 million. So this is unchanged. Yesterday, we communicated to the capital market through an ad hoc announcement that our expectations for the second quarter are lower than in Q2 of last year. However, we still confirm our full year outlook remains unchanged. So coming to the full year outlook in the segmental information, we have a starting with sugar.
For sugar, we see operating result in a range between minus EUR 100 million to minus EUR 200 million. In the special products segment, here the operating result is expected to come in moderately below previous year's level. And as I said, we had some changes in the segmental information. There's a change in prospects for CropEnergies segment. Due to weaker revenues and shutdown-related costs in the CropEnergies segment, the operating result is now expected to come in significantly below prior year level. And a significant decline in operating result is also anticipated. This is also new for the starch segment. For both CropEnergies and starch segment, this is below our initial guidance. On the contrast, or on the positive side, there is a better view on the food segment.
After a very strong performance of the food segment in 2024-25, we expect that despite rising costs, the operating result remains stable in the food segment, which we previously forecasted to be significantly below the prior year. In a nutshell, we confirm our full year guidance with an operating profit for the group between 150 and 300. This view is unchanged for sugar. We see a not-so-strong development in CropEnergies and starch segment, but a better development in food as previously forecasted. That means after these intersegmental changes, all in all, our Südzucker group guidance remains unchanged. On page 24, let's have a look on the remainder of our financial KPIs within our outlook for 2025-26. You can see all of this is unchanged, but you can see on this slide.
For EBITDA, we expect EBITDA to come in between 525 and 675 million EUR. For depreciation, we foresee that it's on previous year's level. CapEx is to be expected to be below prior year's level. All of this, as I said, is unchanged to our initial full year guidance. Same is true for the remainder of our KPIs. When it comes to capital employed, this is still expected to remain on the same level as in prior years. Whereas on ROCE, given the decrease in operating profit, we foresee a ROCE significantly below prior year. Net financial debt should develop positively for the remainder of 2025-26 fiscal. It is expected to come in below 2024-25 number. The ratio of net financial debt to cash flow, as well as our equity ratio, are expected to remain stable.
All of this is also unchanged compared to our initial guidance. So, ladies and gentlemen, coming to an end, you have seen, and you know us for years, so volatility is a key element of our business. We know that. It is an ongoing challenge for sure, especially in our core sugar business. What we see, and we have also seen this over the last period, the market reacts very sensitively to factors such as production levels or demand and the supply situation in Europe and the weather conditions, harvesting conditions. Unfortunately, this was the case in the previous financial year, where the decline in prices was followed by significant profit and earnings in our sugar segment. Unfortunately, this development has continued into the first quarter, as well as to the second quarter, as we have announced yesterday.
Positively to be noted that our non-sugar business continues to be a stabilizing factor and generates a total around 60% of our group's revenue. This demonstrates that despite various external factors and the volatility that we cannot exclude, our company is now significantly more resilient and better positioned than it was just some years ago. We are in a transformation process. We want to strengthen, all of us, our strategic ethical plans. We are in a transformation process positively. It's clear this requires also strong leadership. In this context, I'm very pleased, or we are very pleased to announce the appointment of Dr. Theresa von Fugler to the executive board. You have already read this in our press release. This is dated July 3rd, and we have communicated. Teresa's joining Südzucker.
With her commitment to sustainability and transformation, also with her strong expertise in consumer markets and leadership experience, she will greatly enrich and advance our company. That having been said, let's also have a look at what we have done recently on the refinancing schedule. You will have seen that in January, we have successfully placed a EUR 500 million corporate bond, refinancing the bond maturing in November 2025. As said in the, or as we have seen in the cash flow statement, we have in May this year took further steps to modernize our financing structure with refinancing of the EUR 700 million hybrid bonds. And what we also did successfully is we increased our syndicated loan with 12 of our core banks, summing up to EUR 800 million. So this shows a strong commitment and the confidence from the capital markets.
In total, we have successfully refinanced a total of EUR 2 billion, ensuring a solid financing structure of Südzucker going forward. As such, we consider ourselves being well prepared for the challenges ahead and remain confident in our ability to proactively shape the future. Thank you very much to all of you for your attention. Together with Andreas, I'm now happy to take your questions. Thank you so far.
We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their telephone. You will hear a tone to confirm that you have entered the queue. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Questioners on the phone are requested to disable the loudspeaker mode and eventually turn off the volume from the webcast while asking a question.
Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question comes from the line of Daniel Vaughan from HSBC. Please go ahead, sir.
Good morning. Thank you for taking the question. Would you be able to provide a bit of an update as to how the weaker dollar is impacting your group revenues? Secondly, could you provide a bit more context as to the market tightening thesis? Because there's conflicting sources out there, and based on some of the analysis I've done, it seems unlikely that there's going to be the material tightening, and some of the guidance you've provided does look a little bit towards the optimistic point, even at the sort of mid to low range of the EBITDA range, and then thirdly, are you fully committed to paying the current expected dividend as per consensus?
Just given that you're, even with the working capital inflow you're expecting, you're probably going to be burning a couple of hundred million EUR of cash this year. Thank you.
I can start with the, I didn't fully get the second question, so I will come back to it. I can start with the weaker U.S. dollar. So the main effect of the weaker dollar makes, for example, import pressure on the ethanol side. So ethanol is predominantly, the main currency for ethanol is the U.S. dollar. That means the U.S. dollar makes, translated to you, the imports more attractive. So this is a negatively weighing factor on the import side. The second question, I didn't fully get my answer. Did you get the question?
I think it was related to the expected quantities for the sugar market. Is that correct?
You said something about tightening, but I really didn't fully get the question. Yeah. The second question, please.
I've done a fair bit of work on the sugar cycle, and I can't really get to some of the tightening thesis that you seem to be presenting. And as such, it feels like the EBITDA, sorry, the guidance for EBITDA is still too high. Can you maybe tell me what I might be missing? Because it seems to be delayed quarter on quarter. And again, I don't really get the acreage math to map up with what you're saying. Thank you.
Okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I can do that. Again, the question, what do you mean by tightening? You mean reduced sugar prices or the negative sentiment on the sugar prices? That's the background of your question.
Basically, tightening is lower supply, higher price.
Lower supply. Okay, okay. Okay.
The lower supply, this is linked in, this is an issue for Europe, so in Europe, we have decreased the acreage. That means the planting which starts in March has been reduced significantly, so there are less, in Europe, there are less sugar beets being set in March. Yeah, and that means just given this lower acreage here, which is for the Südzucker group, approximately we have decreased acreage by 15%. And if you look into official figures from Standard & Poor's, for example, when it comes to the cultivation area of sugar beets in Europe for this campaign, which will start in September, the average is -10% in Europe. That means if there are two ways going forward, so what we already know is a decreased acreage.
And that going forward, that means if the yields on these acreages are on average like last year, then the availability of sugar is roughly 10% lower. If in addition, and this is base case for our assumptions for the pricing, if there will be drought in a really very hot summer going over the next two months, and this is if you look into the meteorology, artificial AI systems or in the predictions, so 75% probability is for a very hot and dry summer. And this would mean that the yields of sugar beets and that they could suffer from this drop. And this would lead, given the, let's say, roughly 10% decrease in acreage on top of a difficult harvest or cultivation situation for the next, let's say, two months going forward, this would lead to a lower, much lower availability of sugar in Europe.
This should be supportive for the price. That is what we have factored in our forecast for sugar. For sure, if there will be massive rainfalls or always the change between good rainfalls, good sunny days, cold evenings, or cold nights, then also the beet can develop positively. This is not our base case assumptions. We foresee rather a difficult summer weather conditions. There's no guarantee on that. I just explained this is our base case assumptions. We will have to see by the end of August, starting of September, how finally that is two months to come will have been. Then we can have a clearer look on the harvesting situation and that means the availability of sugar. In our base case scenario, we foresee a difficult supply situation for sugar for this campaign 2025. Thank you. Just lastly on the.
Third question is on dividend.
Go ahead. Yeah.
So our dividend proposal, we will have our general assembly next week. So the dividend proposal is EUR 0.20. So this is clearly below prior years, a number which was at EUR 0.90. And this takes into consideration the overall framework that we are. We have an increase of net financial debt. The prospects for our forecast are, let's say, moderate. In this context, we also decreased the dividend because we have so many measures in the group where we say we need to be prudent and we need to be conservative. And that's also why we have proposed to the general assembly a dividend of, let's say, only EUR 0.20.
Thank you.
Welcome.
The next question comes from the line of Karine Elias from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thanks for taking my questions, and thanks for the presentation.
A few have been answered already, but just going back to your guidance, obviously, yesterday you mentioned that Q2 would be significantly lower year on year. Just wondering whether this has been in line with what you had expected in terms of the shape of the overall earnings progression for the year. And then secondly, obviously, given the weaker Q2, have you identified any further cost cutting? I know you've mentioned comments on cost being lower in Q1, but just wondering if there's any new initiatives that you're thinking of rolling out given, obviously, the weaker H1. Thank you.
Yeah. All in all, yesterday's announcement was fully in line with our full year guidance, which we have seen from the very beginning. From the very beginning, we had been clear that Q1 and Q2 should be difficult or, let's say, challenging compared to prior year, clearly below.
We foresee an increase or a turning point in Q3 and Q4. So, Q2 this announcement yesterday, it's a little bit mathematically given the development of Q1 and Q2 last year and our full year guidance with an increase that we see in the second half of the year. So it was for us not new, but it's the MAR regulation that we have to respect. As soon as you are aware, that Q2 we always have to compare quarter- to- quarter. And that's the background of this announcement yesterday, but it was fully in line with our full year expectations. And this is also meaning the measures that we have put into place, they are in execution. There's nothing additional or special. So let's say we are fully in line with our expectations for this year.
So the overall trend is Q1 and Q2 and the turning point in Q3 and Q4. Yeah, yeah. For the initiatives that we started, we are fully in line. We are in the midst of executing those initiatives, yeah. And for the full year, we anticipate measures to account for a high double-digit million amount. This is approximately 50% within AGRANA, 50% within Südzucker. So we are fully on track on the measures.
Great. Thank you.
Thank you.
We now have a question from the line of Oliver Schwarz from Warburg Research. Please go ahead.
Oliver, we can't hear you.
Sorry for that.
Oh, okay. No, you're all right.
I still was on mute. Sorry for that. So good morning, gentlemen. Thank you for taking my questions. A couple of things to unpack here. Firstly, Mr.
Meeder, you said you are not in favor of the planned new agreement with Ukraine. You said those 100,000 tons are not needed in the European market. However, on the other side, your slide on page nine clearly implies that the E.U. will become an import market this fiscal year, and imports are needed. So basically, what you're saying is imports are needed, but not from Ukraine because, I guess, of the lower price points they have. But overall, imports are required. Would that be a fair assessment?
Yeah, Oliver, that's a fair point. Maybe I haven't been fully clear on that. So my major concern is this. I did also an interview in Bloomberg. So what we need, okay, imports is clear. If we are in a deficit situation, we need imports. That's clear. But we also strive for we need a level playing field for competition.
When imports are to be allowed or are to come into the EU, we require that those imports respect the same sustainability criteria that we do. As I said also with Bloomberg in the interview, there really we have many, many, many restrictions for sustainability when it comes to the usage of plant protection, when it comes to, I don't know the English word, [audio distortion] That means additional measures to increase the quality of the soils and insect protections. We do all of that. I do not want to be misunderstood. I'm also fully in favor of sustainable farming and sustainable European farming and agriculture, respecting biodiversity and water and fertilizers. That is fully clear.
But this means if we then, in contrast, allow imports to come into the EU, I really urge politicians to care for that this is on the same level playing field. And we cannot accept that agricultural imports come to the EU, which do not really respect those restrictions, but they are positive. Then we do in European agricultural projects, they have a much better, let's say, sustainability quality than a lot of the imports have. And that's what I'm opposed. It's better to say like this. It's not particularly Ukraine. It is this level playing field that we need and this fair competition when it comes to sustainability criteria of agricultural products being imported into the EU. Yeah. Thank you for this question. This needed to be clarified. Thank you. Yeah.
Fair enough. Thank you for that. Very clear. Second question is on CropEnergies.
As you're an intimate, let's say, viewer of that situation, obviously, with your background within Südzucker and especially within CropEnergies, can you help me out with what's happening there, especially in the U.K.? I mean, we heard that the U.K. struck an agreement with the U.S. that allows for the tariff-free or next-to-tariff-free import of U.S. ethanol into the U.K. market, which basically may or may not wipe out the U.K. bioethanol production due to the much lower prices the U.S. can offer than the domestic production in the U.K.
Is there a mechanism that would enable those volumes also to be transferred at low prices to the EU, or is there a trade barrier in place that would prevent those volumes that are imported in the U.K. just to use the U.K. as a transfer point and then find their way into the E.U. and disrupt the E.U. market as well? That would be my second question.
Fair question. This agreement is still not yet ratified, so it's still under discussions, but the outline that's known so far is exactly as you have said, is 1.4 million cubic meters of duty-free import to the UK. Related to, we will have a negative impact, as we have already communicated, to the entire U.K. ethanol industry. That's clear. When it comes to your particular question whether these volumes may be redirected or re-exported to the EU, no, this is not possible.
So because we have clearly, we have the Herkunftsregeln, country of origin rules, and this would mean this is not possible to redispatch those volumes duty-free to the E.U. This is not the case. But at the end, nevertheless, this agreement per se is also weighing, let's say, on the sentiment. So because now people see there could be a risk of U.S. ethanol coming in duty-free, to my mind and to my knowledge, it's absolutely not the case. But the E.U. Commission has communicated so far that they want to do the opposite, yeah. So they have indicated that if there would not be a sound trade deal or agreement with the US, they would be ready to increase the duties on ethanol from the US. Whether this will be true, we will have to see.
I mean, I read this morning that there is a 50% duty on Brazil. So it's really, really very, very volatile, all of the duty discussions. And we have to see day by day what is really finally coming into place. But let's say all these discussions, per se, they are weighing on the sentiment because you really do not know what at the end of the day will be decided, effective what. Sometimes even things that are discussed, they are taken back. So it is, we are in a really uncertain situation when it comes to all of these tariff regimes and duty-free regimes. But in a nutshell, to answer your question, no, U.S. duty-free ethanol to the U.K. cannot be redispatched to Europe without duty.
Thank you. And my third question would be on specialties.
You stated that if a price increase, so a production price increases, input cost increases, that were yet not passed on to customers. Can you elaborate on what is causing those delays, whether you feel comfortable that you will achieve a full passing on of the related higher costs, or will you have to digest some of that cost because your customers are unwilling to take them on? And if so, is that a structural problem you face as you deliver your goods to a highly consolidated industry, or is there another thing, a myth that prevents you from, let's say, being more in form of a price setter than a price taker? That would be my third question.
I mean, in a summary, there is nothing extraordinary in this. It's normal cycles. It's depending the discussions with our customers are ongoing, and it's normal purchasing-selling discussions with customers.
We, on our side, we have increase in cost, yeah. And we discuss with customers that we need to increase prices. And then it depends on particular markets. And in some cases, you are able to pass on the higher cost via the prices. In some other competing situations, you are not. So there's nothing special. I would say this is normal cycles when it comes to cost increases, price pressures. We have still in Europe, let's say, a little bit a recessive moment. So also when you talk to customers, everybody is fighting for price decreases. And so it's normal course of business. But in a nutshell, for the specialty segment, we see on the one side the cost increases that we have. On the other side, we do not see ourselves fully able to pass this on to customers.
And that's why operating profit should reduce in the segment as a whole. But there's a difference in between the different product categories.
Thank you very much for that.
Welcome.
We now have a question from the line of Hartmut Moers from Matillion Research. Please go ahead.
Yes, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I would start with the outlook. And looking at your sales guidance for the individual divisions, you have decreased, as you said, your guidance for Crop Energies and also for starch. And remaining within your framework and the percentage changes that you have dedicated to the words moderate and so on, I would come to some, let's say, EUR 90 million reduction in your Crop Energies sales expectations, some, yeah, 60, 70 million on the starch side. So we're looking at a level of EUR 150 million reduction.
Here, in contrast to operating profit, your fruit expectation has not increased. Assuming that so far your expectation was about the midpoint of your sales, of your group sales guidance, would that imply that given those changes in crop and starch, we are now looking at the low side of your guidance? We're rather looking at the EUR 78.8 million rather than the midpoint or even the high side. Is that the right way of viewing it?
No, I cannot confirm. I mean, we do not open up individually all those five segments. We do that for sure because it is the most important one. For the other ones, there are some fluctuations. Your calculation of around EUR 100 million reduction, I cannot confirm. We are still around midpoint. We can say we are, let's say, slightly below midpoint, but around midpoint, yeah.
But it's clearly, I mean, if we would lose midpoint, it would be the need for changing the 150-300 guidance range. So we are slightly below midpoint.
Okay. But what would be then? I mean, you haven't changed the indications for the other segments. But if you lower to some extent, not talking numbers now, but you lower to some extent crop and starch, what would be the segments that you see a little bit better in order to compensate for those negative changes? So what do you see? So probably fruit could be better than you've expected, but probably not as much better to increase your guidance here. Yeah.
Hartmut, I cannot be more precise than that. So we see a weaker development in CropE nergies and starch and a better development in fruit.
All this leads to the fact that from the group guidance, this can be maintained unchanged, being slightly below midpoint.
Okay. The same also holds true for the operating side. Here you're saying the increase in fruit compensates the decrease in special products and CropE nergies. Is that also correct? That would imply because the increase in fruit on a million EUR basis is not that extraordinarily high, that would imply that though you're expecting a decrease in CropE nergies and starch, you're not expecting any of the two divisions to fall into the red for the full year. Can you confirm that?
Yeah, we can confirm.
Okay. Perfect. Thank you very much. The second thing would be on sugar. I am pretty much aware that already two of my colleagues have already asked a bit into the same direction.
But I would also come back to the point of your reasoning for the price increase. I've understood the argument of the decrease in acreage. I've understood the argument of a potential dry summer. But what is the reason that you've shown us that on the world market, it is currently expected that we have an oversupply situation? And you have also shown us for the European Union that imports are needed. And looking at the chart you've presented, there's even, yeah, the amount of imports plus the production are superior than the consumption. What is the reason that not too much imports could come into the European market? And I'm not talking about quality here. It could be a volume effect that too much of the worldwide overproduction could come into the European Union and prevent that base case in your calculation of material price increase in October. Yeah.
I mean, a lot has already been said, so I will be short on that, so according to the sugar price, the main effect is this reduction in acreage, yeah? The deficit situation, and you said the crisis right now, we are in a deficit situation both on the world market and on the European market. Also, our base case assumption, as I explained, is to foresee a dry and hot summer, and there is what we have not yet discussed. There's the risk of the diseases, yeah, from the Cercospora and others. When it comes to the key issue, that's what we have not yet discussed. The key issue is to what extent imports are needed. If only low volumes of imports are needed, they can come in via duty-free regimes. With some LDC countries, we would have the right to import on a duty-free level into the E.U., yeah?
But this is limited in volumes. If there's an additional need for imports, then the CXL quota numbers come in or imports. This goes approximately up to, and this is EUR 100 per ton import. So then it's world market price plus EUR 100 per ton duty. And if this contingent, this volume, they are also limited in number. If additional volumes would be needed on the European market, then they have to bear the full duty. And the full duty is at EUR 400 per ton, roughly. And that means if we are, really the question is whether we are in a, let's say, low deficit situation, then this would not have a material impact on prices. But if we would be in a significant deficit situation, then full duty kicks in, which would lead to really strongly and quickly increasing prices.
And this is what we assume for Q3, Q4.
Okay. That's.
But still to be seen. As I said, this is our assumptions. We need to see how really, at the end of the day, the weather conditions will be in July and August. This is the key element for the volumes, the harvesting situations, the volumes, and then the pricing.
Okay. Thank you very much. That was a very important clarification. Last point would be on crop. And I don't know whether you have done the calculation, but what you were saying was that the results in the first quarter were negatively impacted by the scheduled maintenance, but also by a number of technical issues. And this is also going to last into the second quarter. What I see is that with ethanol prices around EUR 600, but wheat prices falling below 200, there should be a positive development.
So my question would be, first of all, are you in a position that you benefit from the price decrease on the wheat side? And so that you should have, on an underlying basis, a positive trend here. Also, in the first quarter, my calculation would be that it should have been positive, excluding those factors. And can you give us an indication of what those extraordinary factors? So the maintenance not being extraordinary, but only happening usually in one quarter, and the technical issues, how much that would have cost, and if you would have been positive if you had a normal quarter, which one would expect at least in the third or fourth quarter then. Yeah.
Yeah. So for CropEnergies, my view on that has not changed. So the overall picture for CropEnergies is the market dimensions or the market factors, they're fully in line.
There is a strong need for biofuels. We won't be able to meet the CO2 reduction target thereafter without biofuels, so this is fully in line. That's also what we can see if you look into the numbers of consumption of ethanol. This increases year by year, so I have the numbers in front of me. In 2023, the consumption was 10.5 million cubic meters, 2024, 10.9, 11.1, and 2025, and this is expected to grow to 11.4 million cubic meters in the E.U. in 2026, so the market dynamics, they are fully okay, yeah, and this is also what I've been stating here for, let's say, 10 years. Electromobility will not ramp up, and I said this 10 years ago, and I continue to say this. We need really, for the existing car fleet, we need biofuels, and this is fully, fully, fully in line.
So the demand side is pretty okay. When it comes to your question, you're right. Wheat prices are going down. So there's a good harvesting condition. There also has been less volatility on the grain prices in the current fiscal, and the trend is downward. And also, we believe this trend to be continued. And as we do our normal hedging procedures within CropEnergies, so the overall approach to hedging and risk management has not changed. So we do step-by-step hedging the grain volumes, but there is still a significant volume of grains not yet hedged. So in this context, yes, CropEnergies benefits from lower grain prices going forward. And roughly one-third is still open. So there will be a positive effect, but we have not yet so far seen in the initial guidance. This partly compensates for the lower prices that we have seen so far.
So this is a mitigating factor. You're fully right.
Okay. And you would prefer not to relate to the impact of the maintenance and the technical issues?
We had maintenance, yeah. And this maintenance led to that we had a lower production, yeah, and lower sales volumes correspondingly because also typically what we produce, we also sell. So if there's lower production, there's lower sales. But it's not the main factor. So there has been maintenance. There's a slow reduction in sales in Q1, but we are looking to a steady development going forward through Q3, Q4.
Now, the question was, would you be prepared to give a very rough indication? Would you have produced a positive result if you didn't have the technical issues and the maintenance in that quarter? That would be the question.
Yeah. Maybe close to zero, but the main effect is the prices.
Yeah. Okay. Fine. That's perfect. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
The next question comes from the line of Jonathan Lutz from [guess] Verizon Fund. Please go ahead, sir.
Good morning. I think that was for me, Jonathan Lutz from.
Can you talk a little bit louder? We cannot hear you fully. Sorry. We cannot hear you.
Yeah, sure. Let me.
That's better.
Okay. Is that better?
That's better. Yeah.
Thank you. Good morning. Obviously, a lot of yeah, obviously, a lot of tough questions this morning. Thank you for attempting to answer them as best as you can. And I appreciate that the key takeaway here is that it's an extremely volatile cycle, and currently, it's a down cycle. So you're obviously doing your best to manage that. The question, I guess, is with regards to the international sugar prices and dollar is my first question.
What is the impact of the weaker dollar? What is the proportion of revenues which are coming from which are linked to the international sugar prices? And then just looking at the charts on world prices, basically, it seems that the international sugar price is a leading indicator. I appreciate you touched on tariffs for the excess supply coming into the E.U. just now. I just want to clarify that point. There's basically three questions or two-part question. One, given the international sugar prices are clearly a leading indicator for E.U. prices, and they've continued to decline, what gives you the confidence again that the prices are worrying about in the E.U., especially when you mention around the uncertainty around the Ukraine supply, which you just kind of reclarified? We can go with that to begin with. Let's keep it a one-part question. Keep it simple.
Maybe I have not fully understood all of your questions, and a lot has already been said, but I will try. And if there's additional need for information, please come back. You said it's a volatile cycle. Yes. You asked on the impact of U.S. dollar. So as such, we are not too much exposed to sales to the U.S. For sure, we have inbound business. For example, at Freiberger, we have a piece of business which is producing in the U.S. for the U.S. There are some imports. But as such, we are not as a group, we are not so dependent on the U.S. It's an important business, but it's not significant for the entire group.
The weaker dollar affects us when it comes to the import pressure and the pricing into the EU, particularly for ethanol, because given the FOB Houston quotation translated into Euro, this is much weaker. So this is an effect, but I have already explained that. The tariff situation, as I said, this is changing day by day. So far, we are not much exposed to that besides U.S.-U.K. deals. So there are, for example, in the food segment, some deliveries of food preparation from Mexico to the U.S. But the teams have done a tremendous job. So a lot of volumes needed. They had been imported into the U.S. prior to the tax regime being set up. And that means, for the time being, we do not see ourselves too much concerned besides this U.S.-U.K. deal on ethanol. And on Ukraine, I also explained.
The pre-war quota was 20,000 tons. This is close to not being significant. This 20,000 is allowed 7 out of 12 months from July to December this year. The discussion for 1st of October 2026 is 100,000 tons. Here, we are opposed. As we discussed, it's yeah, on the volume side, but also on the level playing field.
Just to clarify, so the E.U. sugar prices, reference prices of May was around 540 EUR per ton, which is kind of close to what you've used as an input, but the international price is closer to 300 EUR per ton.
The world market is roughly 410 or 420 EUR per ton currently. That's the world market price translated into Europe.
White sugar. European Commission.
Maybe on raw sugar. So the difference between raw sugar and white sugar is approximately 100 EUR per ton, yeah, because you need the refining cost. So the differentiator between raw sugar and white sugar is roughly 100 EUR.
Got it. Okay. Thanks. And then just lastly, clarify basically we're betting on a just want to make sure I answered that. So we're betting on, or we're hoping on, according to your AI intelligence, basically that we're going to have a very hot summer and that yields will be lower, basically reducing the supply in addition to the reduced acreage that you guys have done and hoping for the prices to recover next year. Okay. Got it. Understood. All right. Thanks very much. Appreciate that. Good luck.
Thank you. You're welcome.
We now have a question from the line of David Sahil from [guess] Verizon Fund. Please go ahead, sir. Hello.
My question is around the second half of the year, do you see customer pricing in your specialty products business to kind of flow through to the financials? Or when do you see this flowing into your numbers going forward? This is linear over the entire year. So many discussions with customers are right now. So this will keep in the course of the year. Okay. And my second question is around your cost-cutting program. I believe it's around 200 million EUR. When do you see that ramping up? Again, do you see some impact this year, or is it going to be more next year? And are there any upfront costs associated with that?
Yeah. So Südzucker Group, we have, as you said, and what we already discussed last time. So we started a couple of substantial cost-saving initiatives, yeah.
And those measures, they will start materializing in 2025, 2026. So for 2025, 2026 fiscal, we assume a high double-digit million EUR amount, which is half at Südzucker, half at AGRANA. So what we did last year, we closed two factories in Austria and Czech Republic and one refinery at AGRANA. And the programs that we have for Switzerland, we call this program OPTIMUM. And for AGRANA, this program is called Horizon Program, part of the level strategy. And over the next, let's say, three to four years, we start with a double-digit million EUR savings this year, and this should amount up to 200 million EUR over the next three to four years. You're right. That's what you have asked. Yes, I can confirm.
We have a follow-up question from the line of Oliver Schwarz from Warburg Research. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Thank you for taking my question.
Firstly, on CropEnergies, I think a lot of your current CapEx is earmarked for the, let's say, prolonging the value chain of CropEnergies, meaning that you want to enter the market of chemical compounds based on the bioethanol production. Could you give us an update? Is that up to schedule at the moment? When will production start? Are there the respective contracts of customers in place, or are they still in negotiation, especially in the light of the decline in the oil price, especially compared to when you announced the project to now? That would be my first question. The second question is a bit more, let's say, theoretical, I guess. I mean, a lot of your fluctuations in earnings over the last 10 years were due to the volatile price of sugar, obviously.
However, your problem, from my perspective at least, is that when sugar prices were high and earnings were high, they were not high enough to compensate for the tough parts of the cycle. So over the cycle, you didn't earn, let's say, that much money or a decent return on investment or on equity. Is that to continue even in the light of your restructuring program, or will you need some structural changes in the market as well? So let's say in a blue-sky scenario, what would you be wishing for? For changes in regulation, for changes in market consolidation, or from some other sources that would help you achieve over the cycle a higher return? That would be my second question.
Okay. I start with CropEnergies.
So here, when it comes to the ramping up of the plant at Zeitz location for ethyl acetate, and here we are fully in line. There's no change to our prior communications. The startup operation is planned for summer 2026, and CapEx is around EUR 160 million. We are still in customer talks, but the feedback still is very, very positive. There is a need for green products which are fossil-free. As I communicated also last time, ethyl acetate is a product for those who do not know this. I'm a little bit more exhaustive on that. This is a liquid. This is going into nail polish, nail polish remover. It is really many. It goes into paints, into many, many applications. So far, this product is only available quasi-fossil.
And we are in talks with many customers who said, "Yeah, this is exactly what we need. We are committed to sustainability. We want to have a green product. We want a CO2-friendly product." And so there's no change. We are optimistically looking to closing the construction of the site and then starting up. It's nothing new. And I'm fully convinced we need green carbohydrates. We need green bio-based chemicals. And we have a long-term perspective. Even if right now there are some discussions on reducing target sustainability, it started with the Trump administration. For me, this is a short-term downtick. The overall trend, the need for CO2-friendly products is there, will be there. And we are committed to that, and we will continue to do as planned. And we are not going below our ambitions.
When it comes to the quarterly development, what you asked, and you said, from your point of view, our problems would be these developments. I would say we do not have problems. For us, it's really challenges. And the challenge is volatility of the business. But we know this. And we have the volatility in sugar, which is our key topic today. So our focus is to get a speedy return to the positive within the sugar segment. One key element is pricing. And the other one is really those cost measures. And then what is really positive this time, we have really a speedy reaction within the group, for example, when it came to the reduction of our acreage. So all the measures are fully clear. We are in execution. As I said, it's not a general problem. It's a challenge, and we need to do our homework.
And then it will be better next year.
Yeah. But I mean, if you look back, let's say, for the last 10 years, I think the high point of your sugar result was close to EUR 1 billion, and the low point was minus EUR 300 million. You can't really mend that by, let's say, EUR 100 million of cost-cutting. Obviously, that improves your cost situation, but nevertheless, that will only help to dampen a bit the volatility. What you need, perhaps, is, let's say, on average, a higher price of sugar over the cycle to help you earn a lot of money in the upcycle at times and not to lose as much as in the past in the tough cycle part. I think that's the key here. And what will be needed to achieve that?
I mean, yeah, you're fully right. I mean, the bigger leverage is the pricing.
Nevertheless, we need to work on our cost basis. That's clear. But it's clear the main factor is the pricing. And then to have solid prices in the EU, we need to manage volume. And we cannot be in a surplus situation in Europe. But this is the volatility and the unwavering kind of nature. You will have to see the harvesting conditions. But you're fully right. The key issue is pricing. But nevertheless, we need to do our homework at the same time and speedy reaction.
Okay. Thank you very much for that.
As a reminder, if you wish to register for a question, please press star and one on your telephone. We now have a question from the line of Sidhu Sharda from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Sidhu, we can't hear you.
Mr. Sharda, your line is now open. You may go ahead with your question.
It seems not to be working. But if you have additional questions, you can hand them also in by writing. You have our contact address to Andreas. And we are also if it's a technical issue, you can hand it also by writing.
Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Andreas for any closing remarks.
Thank you very much, Matilde. I'd also like to thank everyone for participating in this call and for your questions, of course. We hope you will always also be joining our virtual annual shareholder meeting next week, July 17th, Thursday. And we wish you a great rest of the day. Stay safe and see you soon. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. Goodbye.