Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Investec Trading Update. All participants are currently in listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity to ask questions later during the conference. I would now like to hand the conference over to Fani Titi. Please go ahead.
Good morning. This is Fani Titi, Group Chief Executive of Investec. I'm joined this morning by Nishlan Samujh, Group Financial Director. A number of our executives are also on the call and will be happy to answer any questions on their area of the business. We would all like to welcome you and thank you for taking the time to join us this morning on this conference call to discuss our pre-closed trading update for the six months ending 30 September 2020. The comparability of the first half of 2021 to the prior period has been impacted by the economic effects of COVID-19. This will be our second set of results that has been impacted by COVID-19 and this time for the full period under review. The business proved resilient in a period characterized by stringent lockdowns in the first quarter, followed by the gradual reopening of the economies.
The year GDP contractions and volatile financial markets negatively impacted revenues. Investec's capital and liquidity ratios remained robust and are expected to be stable. Provisions for expected credit losses are expected to remain elevated in the period under review. Net asset value per share is expected to increase. Costs were well managed. The business is well-positioned to support its clients through this challenging environment. We will continue to ensure the safety and wellbeing of our people and the integrity of our balance sheet. I would now like to give you a brief overview of the key points of our announcement before opening the call for questions. The operating environment, as I've said, in both the U.K. and South Africa, have been characterized by reduced economic activity and increased market volatility as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns.
The first half of the year has seen lower average interest rates, reduced client activity, and a 22% depreciation of the average rate against the pound sterling compared to the prior period. The wealth and investment businesses reported net inflows and growth in funds under management. The specialist banking businesses have seen good client acquisitions in both geographies. The corporate lending businesses experienced reduced lending activity. The private banking franchise remained resilient, reporting loan book growth since year-end. Operating income remained under pressure given the operating environment and unfavorable market conditions for investment income and hedging of structured products. Operating costs were reduced year- on- year as a result of the group's increased focus on controllable expenditure. The prior period contained a full six-month contribution from Ninety One, previously Investec Asset Management, which was de-merged in March this year.
Additionally, as I have indicated, the prior period was not impacted by the effects of COVID-19, which emerged in the last quarter of the 2020 financial year. The group's continuing operations adjusted operating profit is expected to be 50%-60% behind the prior period, where the adjusted operating profit was reported at GBP 276.3 million. Adjusted earnings per share is expected to be 53%-63% behind first half 2020, where the adjusted EPS was reported as GBP 0.224. As far as the balance sheet is concerned, capital and surplus ratios remain sound, ahead of internal targets and regulatory requirements. The group's cash and near cash at 31 August 2020 was GBP 12.9 billion, representing about 30% of customer deposits. The group expects elevated levels of credit losses, as indicated in the full-year results announced in May, mainly driven by forward-looking macroeconomic scenarios.
Following increased impairments, including a COVID-19 overlay raised in the last quarter of the 2020 financial year, the annualized credit loss ratio is expected to be between 47 basis points and 54 basis points. The comparable numbers for first half 2020 was 23 basis points, for the full financial year 2020, 52 basis points. Strategically, we have continued to simplify and focus the business as we had announced at the CMD presentation in February 2018, and at a number of the presentations that followed thereafter, results presentations, that is. In the U.K., we have further enhanced efficiencies by more closely integrating business-enabling functions. This means we are proposing a reduction in the U.K. bank's London-based headcount of approximately 210 roles or 13% of headcount. The strategy was set prior to COVID-19, the crisis has also increased the focus on containing and reducing costs.
We expect this to have a neutral financial impact in the current financial year, with associated savings in the U.K. bank taking effect in the next financial year. The changes to the U.K. bank are in line with our overarching goal of achieving sustainable growth for the long term. I would like to conclude by saying that despite the volatile and uncertain times, our franchises remain resilient, and we are confident about the long-term potential of the group. I wish to thank my colleagues for their dedication to our clients and to the communities around us. I will now hand back to the moderator and take any questions you might have. Thank you.
Thank you very much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, if you do wish to ask a question, please press star and then one on your touchtone phone or on the keypad on your screen. If you are using a speakerphone, please lift the handset before pressing the buttons. You will hear a confirmation tone that you have joined the queue. If you wish to withdraw your question, please press star and then two to remove yourself from the queue. Our first question is from Christopher Steward of Ninety One. Please go ahead.
Good morning, Fani. Thanks very much for the time. Nishlan, to you too. Hope you guys are well. Just a quick one from my side. Apologies if it is included in the text. I haven't actually managed to get through everything just yet. Can you give us a quick sense of what is driving the difference between adjusted and basic EPS over the period, please? It looks like it's somewhere around GBP 0.02 a share.
Yeah, Chris. I think it's the standard differences. It's really earnings per share includes the amortization and impairment of any goodwill. That's not a material difference. It's really the amortization of intangibles. In fact, you have a strange accounting treatment. Our Ninety One investment, which is treated as an associate, we are required to amortize the intangible component of that investment. If anything, we're reducing the carrying value of Ninety One due to accounting. It's really a strange accounting treatment.
Okay. All right, great. Thanks. Thanks a lot.
Thanks, Chris.
Thank you. The next question is from [Diana Mwanvidya] of RisCura. Please go ahead.
Hello. Good morning, Fani. Just one question from me. In the U.K., the percentage of clients on payment holidays is pretty much at the same level as your peak. I'd just like to confirm the first thing, when you're talking about peak period, when was your peak? On the composition of the clients, is it still the same clients who took a payment holiday at the peak, and then they're extending their payment holidays? It's just a percentage, and then you've got turnover of clients who are asking for your payment holidays. On the same in South Africa, the percentage has pretty much, you're now at a quarter of the clients who initially took payment relief. Could you add some color on what's driven the fast recovery in South Africa? The second question is on credit loss ratios.
You've given us an annualized rate. I'd just like to understand, is most of this coming from H1, or you add more impairments at the end of the year when you're reporting next year? Yeah. Thank you.
Okay. Let me just deal with this question of relief granted to our clients. Clearly, in the first quarter that we are reporting on, being from April to June, we had very strict lockdowns. In South Africa, for instance, we were at level 5 and there was very little economic activity. In fact, we saw at that time, activity as measured, for instance, by point of sale, being as low as 30% compared to last year. From around May, June, we began to see some relaxation of those lockdowns and activity improved. At the moment, we are probably seeing activity, again, as measured by point of sale activity, at 80%-90% of last year. The peak occurred in the first quarter of the year. In both economies, we are seeing an increase in activity, leading to the reduction.
I'm going to ask Ruth to give you some specifics on her book in the U.K., then we can address the South African side of it as well. Ruth?
Thanks, Fani.
Ruth is the executive of the bank in the U.K. I forgot to introduce her. I assume that everybody knows Ruth Leas.
Hi. Good morning, everybody. Hello, Diana. Exactly as Fani mentioned, that is what we have seen, which was the peak really in the first quarter of our financial year when lockdown was most severe. We certainly have seen some positive outcomes as people come to the end of their payment holiday periods, actually moving towards back to normal servicing. We have seen that across different areas of our book, particularly in our small ticket asset finance business, where a number of the companies, many, actually the large majority of them coming off payment holidays, are actually back to normal servicing. We are seeing encouraging signs through that. As you point out, still running at relatively similar overall levels of payment holidays as we sit today. Thank you.
Thank you, [audio distortion]. Yeah, thank you, Ruth. In South Africa, we obviously are seeing our clients going back into a level of activity, allowing them to get going with their businesses. We need to try and separate two types of relief. There are obviously government schemes that are in place, and there are relief programs that banks would offer in the normal course. While we have seen a [audio distortion] of government schemes, we have seen both for Investec and for other banks in the country, a level of support for clients that has enabled clients to continue to operate. Nishlan, do you want to take the question on impairments?
Yeah. Experience, I think, firstly to note is that impairments are raised on a forward-looking basis. We have factored in our anticipated economic environment that we face, and we had gone through a very similar exercise at the end of March last year. Our impairment loss ratio for the first half of last year was about 23 basis points, which was obviously a COVID-free environment, but still a weak economic environment that I think was tantamount to the quality of the book. We peaked in this period at about 74 basis points, in the second half of last year, with a full year average of 52 basis points. We are currently guiding to a credit loss ratio of 47 basis points- 54 basis points. I think one thing that is very important to note is that our book has been significantly reshaped.
Our experience in the financial crisis or where we picked up a much higher level of impairments and losses on areas such as vacant land, leisure developments, and developmental type property, those exposures have significantly reduced, from a balance sheet perspective. The other differential in terms of market is the type and client that we deal with. We, obviously, given the nature of Investec's business, do not have a significant exposure to unsecured retail credit. As we've guided, the credit loss ratio of between 47 basis points and 54 basis points is elevated to our normal levels. That is our experience and provisioning on a full basis, based on our half-year outlook.
As I said in my script, we had our first taste of COVID in our March full-year results. This is the second take that we have had to make, and this time around we were impacted for the full period. Thanks, Nishlan, for taking the call. Any other questions?
Yes, sir. Our next question is from [Nick Klicher] of Signal Asset Management. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thank you for taking my call. I don't have a great internet line, so I hope you can hear me.
Yeah, we can hear you clearly. Please go ahead.
Okay, great. My question is about hidden assets. We have a share price. It's barely above ZAR 28 today. I think Ninety One must make up about the left end of that. I've also got your investment in Investec Property Fund lying around there, which is quite difficult to value given all the accounting that goes around that. The other assets that I'm not sure about are preference share funds and possibly private equity funds and things like that. Let's start at Ninety One. I don't think the market is recognizing that value as it lies in Investec at the moment. Can you talk about what your strategy is with regard to Ninety One? I think it also creates an overhang on the Ninety One share price all the time, that no one seems to know what your position is.
When you come to disclosing your financials, can you give us some type of intrinsic value calculation so guys who don't spend a lot of time on your company can just get a feel for where the different assets are and how much they are worth?
Okay, let me take the question on Ninety One. We de-merged Ninety One in March. We hold a 25% position. I'm aggregating both Limited and PLC. We are very happy with that investment. A quality investment run by a great management team. At the moment, we have no plans to realize that investment. Obviously, the lockup period that we have around Ninety One, I think, has come and gone. We don't have a restriction around the investment and the holding, but we are very happy with the investment, and we have no plan at the moment to sell it. We are hopeful that the investment will continue to perform. Just addressing your overall question, which is a question around how the market values the business.
Firstly, we do agree with you that if you look to some of the parts, that the value is much higher than the market is recognizing. Banks are in a challenging environment, and I think there is generally an understanding that until we see a better trajectory for the economies of the world, and that trajectory will be dependent on what happens with the virus, there will be an expectation of higher impairments in banks, and therefore bank valuations are likely to remain muted. In the South African and U.K. environment where we operate, I think you do have banks trading at significant discounts to their net asset value and their tangible net asset value. The environment and the neighborhood in which we are implies that there will be a level of discount.
I think as far as Investec is concerned, we obviously have a strategy of simplifying and focusing the business. We have indicated in 2018 CMD that we are committed as a management team to improve fundamentally the performance of the business in the long term. Obviously, COVID-19 and the dislocations that arise as a consequence of that means that in the short term, you have to deal with the fallout of COVID-19. Our efforts to improve performance, to make sure that in the long term we can earn returns that are in excess of the cost of capital remain. We have indicated in this result that our efforts at managing the cost base have been quite successful, this following a number of changes we have made to our strategy.
I think we will put rank on the board and leave the valuation to you as our shareholders in the market.
Nick, a final point. Just a follow-up. I think we do take up your challenge around probably enhancing some of the disclosure. We will continue to implement.
Just to push back a little bit. Ninety One, I agree with you, is a good operation. I can buy that on the stock market. I don't need you guys to invest in that for me. The market doesn't seem to give you any value for it. It's not getting any value for your Ninety One investment.
Yeah, I think you put that.
What is your strategy with regard to your 25% holding in Investec Property Fund? It makes your accounts very complicated because now that gets consolidated. I'll need an accounting genius to unwind the whole thing and to figure out what the valuation of your business is. Again, that investment has just made life very difficult for me, and I don't think the market gives you any value for it. Assets in there with the same problem, the same issues.
Nick, just to go back to Ninety One and to your challenge. We were quite clear when Hendrik and myself took over the running of the business, that we will look to simplify the business, to focus it, and to run it as best we can. On the banking side, we committed to trying, and we are on course to achieving returns that are in excess of the cost of capital. Obviously not in this environment, but as we normalize back to an environment that is reasonable. We said at the time that we will retain a stake in Ninety One that would enable us, first, to support the new listing. Second, we said that as we distributed a substantial majority of our holding, we wanted to retain a stake that would give us a cushion, a capital cushion.
You will know that when we relisted our security at the time, we had indicated that we wanted to place 10% of the stake of the 25% that we hold. Market conditions were particularly unfavorable. We were not under pressure to sell, we decided we would not be selling. I think if we had been under pressure to sell, we probably would have had to sell at circa GBP 1.45-GBP 1.50. We didn't do that because we are not destroyers of value, so we held on to our stake. A piece of the 25% was always meant to bolster our capital, given that we distributed a portion of the value that we have and cash flows that we would have had as a banking group. Capital, one. Second, supporting the business. As I say, over time, we will make appropriate decisions around that investment.
We're happy at the moment with the investment and its performance. Secondly, we are in a process of significantly enhancing our disclosure. We absolutely agree with you that there's a level of complexity in the disclosure. We have a team inside of the business that is looking at how we can simplify our disclosure. One of the things we are doing is separating the investment piece. For instance, Ninety One, IEP, and one or other into an investment piece that you can look at separately and value separately, in addition to the underlying franchises in the business. That work is underway. Hopefully, as this year.
Okay. Thank you very much.
[audio distortion].
I think that includes disclosure.
Thank you.
Thank you. The next question is from [Bongkoli Ogogo] of Bank of America Securities. Please go ahead.
Good morning, Fani. Thanks for your time today. Two questions from my side.
Hi, guys. I guess, how long do you see the credit loss potentially being elevated? Do you think you've reached the peak of what, 74 basis points in second half? 54 is a full year annualized for the first half. Do you think you're going to stay at those levels for the full year and then potentially gradually reduce to your normalized levels, probably what, between 20- 30 basis points by 2022 financial year? I think that's the first question. The second question is, could you elaborate on the negative, I think it was the negative equity adjustments that the banks recognized. I guess my understanding is that obviously you've had a dislocation in the markets, but a lot of that was by the end of March or a lot of the troughs were the end of March.
I would have expected that to be booked in 2H of last year. Again, just clarifying in terms of what's driving that to continue to be negative in the first half this year, we started from April. Thanks very much.
Clearly, the outlook on levels of impairment is dependent on an economic outlook. We run IFRS 9 model with the number of scenarios that we have to consider. Depending on what economic scenarios you come up with, you could give a sense of what impairments could do. We gave a guidance that we expect that we will be at levels similar to the second half of last year. We remain with that guidance now, given the economic outlook that we have. If there's an improved economic outlook or accelerating economic outlook, that guidance will change. I'm not able to give you a sense of where we think our impairments may peak or improve to in the next year or two, simply given the uncertainty in the environment.
Our business model, as Nishlan indicated, is quite a resilient one given the clients that we serve, both on the corporate banking side, the private banking side. We have very strong wealth businesses in South Africa and the U.K. as we indicated, we've seen net flows in this period. We have strong businesses that are very resilient in markets that are like this, just given the nature of the clients that we serve. Given the changes we've made to the business mix, as Nishlan said, 10 years ago, we had big exposure to properties and to certain types of properties that are higher risk. Our book is much more diversified now. We think the risk is well appreciated by the management teams. Nishlan, do you want to talk to that?
From an investment perspective, I think, a couple of key points. Number one is our associate income, particularly from our IEP portfolio, which does have exposure to the industrial services that experienced an extreme slowdown in activity between April, May, and June. Therefore, we've seen lower equity accounted income in this period. Secondly, through the property exposures, we are seeing a reduction in valuations, particularly on the South African asset portfolio. That's really what's being factored in this current period.
Perfect. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you. The next question is from Shane Watkins of All Weather. Please go ahead.
Fani, thank you very much for the call.
Hi, Shane.
Yeah.
Yeah.
If you don't mind, I'd like to join the discussion on the group structure because.
I do want to applaud you, I think, on a good operating result in difficult conditions. It's very evident that you guys are doing a lot of very difficult work. I feel like you guys are doing the hard stuff and leaving For example, right-sizing businesses, cutting costs, retrenching staff. Those are very hard things to do. Yet the real problem with Investec is its suboptimal group structure, which the fact is the market doesn't like it and it doesn't reflect your value properly. I guess the main issue is Ninety One because that would be the biggest number in the valuation. I think that you say that you're there to support Ninety One, but I mean, quite frankly, they don't need your help at all. You need their help by placing that stake and unlocking the value for yourself.
I guess what I'm really saying is that it feels like, I read your report that you produced.
It's important that they do, yeah.
Yes. I think you really are doing the right things operationally, and those are very hard things to do. The things that are much easier to do, like restructuring the group in a way that it's easy to understand and easy to value, you're leaving left undone. I guess I don't have a question. I just really have an observation that you're unlikely to be properly valued by the market until you give the market a structure that analysts and investors like. I think it's very evident to me that presently, the market doesn't like your structure. We just encourage you to think about that. Also, congratulations on the hard operational stuff that you have done.
Shane, thank you for recognizing the hard work that has been done. Obviously, when you lose colleagues, as part of the process of improving how the business serves clients and also how the business can operate more effectively, that is hard work and it's difficult. I think we understand the challenge, and we relish the challenge as a management team. We think we have a platform that is particularly well-positioned, and we will continue on the operational side to make the changes that we think are important to make and will improve online performance. We've already acknowledged that we can improve significantly our disclosures, and we are hard working at that, and that should help a little bit. With respect to the overall structure, if you are also referring to the DLC.
At the time we did a strategic review around simplification, we did ask the question around the DLC and whether we could unwind the DLC. That option is not available to us today for a number of reasons, including regulatory reasons and reasons of strategy. We've looked quite hard, Hendrik, myself, and the board at the time, as to how we could simplify the business structure. As I say, now we're working at improving performance operationally, and we're looking to enhance disclosure. We will continue to do what is right for the business in the long term, and hopefully that value can be recognized as we go forward.
No, thank you. I don't think the dual listing structure is really an issue. I think largely the issue is the fact that so much of your value is embedded in your sharing in Ninety One. I guess what I'm saying is that if you were to sell or unbundle your Ninety One shares, it's hard for me to see that your business would trade at ZAR 17 ex the Ninety One stake. I think it would be value unlocking to unbundle that stake, because I think it would make the residual value of your group very evident. I think, as I think earlier caller mentioned, I think that the current structure is bad for you and it's bad for Ninety One, because for Ninety One, it's seen as a continuous overhang, and for you, it obscures the value in Investec itself.
We understand the complexity, Shane, we appreciate your concern around it. As a board and executive management team, we needed to balance the needs to have a simpler structure that places value in the hands of shareholders. We distributed 55% of Ninety One. As trade-off, because we were, to some extent, as part of our overall capital considerations, the cash flow coming from Ninety One was helpful. As a trade-off, by giving away to our shareholders through a distribution, which we were excited about, 55%, we were clear that we intended to bolster the capital of the remaining business, the cushion. When you go through these types of environments, capital sufficiency is really important.
I think the decision at the time, to think of 10% of the 25% being placed for purposes of bolstering the overall capital of the business, particularly for purposes of the U.K. business as we are improving its performance. The S.A. business generates excess capital, as you know. That was the strategic decision for us. Give the majority of the stake to our shareholders, retain a cushion for capital, 10% of it we had said we would place. As I said, we are happy with that investment as is. We understand the concerns. Those were factored in at the time we decided to distribute the 55%. The option was to keep the group together, which we thought was not the right option. This is an option that we chose, which has placed value in the hands of shareholders.
We've heard your concerns around us holding Ninety One. Thanks, Shane.
Okay. No, I really appreciate that. I don't want to labor the point. I just think you're stuck in a halfway house that no one likes. Thank you very much for hearing me.
Pleasure.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, just again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star and then one. The next question is from Edward Bottomley of REDD Intelligence. Please go ahead.
Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Just a quick question from me. Thank you. Hi. Just a quick question from me on the U.K. bank, the reduction of the London-based headcount. I wonder if you could just reiterate the rationale for that, as well as just tell me how far along does that need to? Can you give me an indication of what desks will be affected? Thank you very much.
Okay. Let me just go through the rationale again. As we indicated in our announcement, this is not a knee-jerk reaction to the current conditions. We started two years ago with the process of simplification, starting off with the biggest activity we could take, being that of demerging the asset management business. We dealt with subscale operations like Click & Invest that we didn't think would make it over a 5- 10 year period. We then pulled out of asset management in Northern Ireland because, again, we thought that was subscale. We reduced risk.
Wealth.
Wealth, sorry. Nishlan is next to me. This is the wealth management business in Ireland. Thanks, Nish. Then we reduced the risk that we had in the Hong Kong portfolio that we wrote down at the end of last year. Within the U.K. business, the rationale for the restructure is that we want to have a simpler way of reaching out to our clients and most of the job losses will be in the business enabling area of the bank, where we had a lot of duplication between private bank and the corporate bank. We, as part of our efficiency drive, making a number of those duplicative roles redundant as we move forward. That is part of the overall process of improving performance and improving our ability to serve clients. Clearly, right around the group, we always have an eye for improvement and achievement.
For instance, on an ongoing basis, last year we made some changes in S.A. in the [audio distortion] side of it. We made some changes in IFD in terms of efficiencies and some small restructure. This obviously is a bigger restructure. We remain, as a team, vigilant to look for efficiencies and to look for better ways to serve our clients. The rationale is being closer to our clients on the front end and rationalizing at the back end and eliminating duplications. The one element of it is also that between bank and wealth in the U.K. from a back office perspective, particularly around technology, there are savings we can make there. That would be the totality of the impact on the business and our thinking around being closer to clients in the front end and at the back end, being much more efficient.
Does that answer your question, Edward?
Yes. Thank you very much. That's all.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, a final reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star and then one now. We'll pause a moment to see if we have any further questions.
Okay. I'm just pausing for one more question. This has been a very interactive session, which we appreciate. As I said, we understand the concerns that the market has around certain aspects of our business. Needless to say, as I said earlier, we relish the challenge of taking this great platform forward and getting to a point where we can generate returns in excess of our cost of capital. The environment we're in, at least for the next year or two, maybe three, is a COVID-19-affected environment, which obviously is quite challenging. We relish the opportunity to take it forward. Any last question?
We do have a follow-up question from [Nick Klicher]. Please go ahead.
Thanks, Fani. I'm going to push this point a little bit harder because you are talking about you want to beat your cost of capital. If we look at the accounting equation, asset equals equity plus liability. Obviously, I want the management team to look at the asset and to see what kind of yield they can get from the asset. I want the management team to look at the liability and make sure that liability, the cost of debt is not too high. Then when it comes to the equity portion of that equation, you said earlier on today that, oh, that's up to the market. We're not involved with that. It's an external variable, which I disagree with.
If you want to beat your cost of capital, one of the strategies is to actually lower your cost of capital and not to throw up your hands in the air when it comes to the cost of equity and say, well, that's the market's job. Maybe it is actually management's job to make sure that the equity, that you got cheap access to equity or that your equity is properly valued by the market. Do you still think it's fair for the management team to say cost of equity is an external variable, we're not going to do anything about it's up to the market to figure that one out? I don't think that's the right approach.
I don't want to go into a [audio distortion].
Nick.
You should be driving to bring down your cost of capital as well.
Nick, I think going into a theoretical discussion about the cost of capital is something we can do outside of the forum. Let's just say that we do believe that when we go through the activities that we are going through at the moment, operationally and strategically, as I indicated, the South African business generates more capital than we need. Let me put it that way. We have always thought about ways to make our capital much more efficient. The efficiency of capital, we will look at, the right level of capital, we will look at. We have in the past talked about what we can do around capital and the structure of the assets.
One of the things that Richard has committed to doing in South Africa is to reshape and reduce the size of our investment portfolio, because that is where some of the drag on returns come from. I would be happy to take the discussion further with you outside of the forum. Thank you for your challenge, which we acknowledge and accept. I propose we take it further outside of this forum [audio distortion].
Okay, thanks.
Sorry?
Yeah. No, I thought your last comment was encouraging about addressing that investment portfolio, where you see the.
Look at this one.
I 100% agree with that. Thank you for your time.
Thank you very much. As I said, we can engage with you directly on your questions and your thoughts. Needless to say, as a management team, we have looked at this issue around our balance sheet, the structure of it, the returns that we want to generate. In the end, we run the business for the long term, and we want to invest to make the platform even more valuable. As I said earlier, we have to put runs on the board as we go, and we are quite confident that we have a great platform with great people, and we relish the challenge and the opportunity. Thank you very much for your attendance, for your interest, for your questions, and for your challenge.
Thank you very much. Gentlemen, we have no further questions?
I think that was the last question. Did we not agree?
That was the last question, sir.
Let me just remind you in closing that we will be releasing our half-year results on the 19th of November. Clearly, we will be in a better position to give you more detail around the results, and we look forward to further engagement with you at that time. Thank you so very much.
Thank you very much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, that then concludes this conference. You may now disconnect your lines.