Good morning, everyone. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. I'm with Margherita. We are finally back in the office on a phased basis, and also Vivek has joined us from a different location. Look, we're looking forward to your questions, and maybe we could have the first person.
Thank you, Nick. The first question comes from Georgios from Citigroup. Georgios, your line is now open.
Yes, good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. I wanted to start maybe with two questions related with the Chinese vendors.
Now, Georgios, I'm going to just stop a second. I should have said, really, we need to be on one question or allow this two, but if we could just do everyone have one so we could get through as many as possible.
Very clear, it will be on one topic. The topic is the Chinese vendors. We've already had decisions in France and the U.K., where the stance is hardening and obviously a delay in the decision in Germany, which I understand now will probably come around September 12 at the earliest. I wanted to ask you, from your perspective, whether that changes any of your planning or your expectations, whether the time frames allowed are long enough. Also in general, whether even without formal bans, whether that changes some of your planning. Linked to that, obviously there is the IPO process going on for the tower company. Does that change at all your thoughts around active sharing in Germany, in the sense that you could share perhaps the cost and processes of replacement with some other player if that would be the case? Thank you.
Look, I'd probably start with if I stand back on the Huawei situation, my view is the U.K. decision was unique to the U.K. because of its geopolitical position, being a member of Five Eyes, its relationship with the U.S., et cetera, the current political, let's say, environment. I do not see it as a automatic translation or simple translation across to Europe. In Europe, each of the member states are currently going through a process on the European 5G toolkit. They're submitting those plans back to the European Commission. They were supposed to have done that by now. A lot of them have been delayed just because of COVID. Those plans are being submitted. What's happening is, by the fall, the European Commission will come out, having seen the plans, with a 5G European certification process.
I think importantly, within the toolkit, they made a distinction between the core and radio, saying radio was less sensitive. As you know, we already made the decision to replace Huawei in the core across Europe over the next four to five years at a cost of EUR 200 million. If I go down to the radio, our stance is always that we want to have vendor diversity. We're operating with the three major vendors today, Ericsson, Nokia, and Huawei, across Europe. What we're saying is we want more diversity, and also we want vendor balancing. We want to ensure that there is a degree of balancing, because what European countries are really focused on is resilience of the network infrastructure, and therefore to not rely on any one vendor. The other aspect is Open RAN and getting Open RAN up and running.
We think we'll have a rural Open RAN ready for 2021, and we're looking to an urban, which is a more complex execution, 2022. We need governments and we need operators to scale this to improve functionality and efficiency going forward. What I'd say is don't do a simple extrapolation. It's not that simple. We're engaged with each of the governments. Good, positive engagement by each country, as an industry as well, not just Vodafone on its own. To the point of Germany on active, we have been engaged. We went through, as we explained to you, the different scenarios. We are doing some active sharing with Deutsche Telekom. We've agreed a reciprocal 1,800 sites. We have 1,800, they have 1,800, that we will do a reciprocal sharing moving forward. That could be phase one. We could look at whether there's opportunity past that.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, our next question, it's coming from Andrew Lee from Goldman Sachs. Andrew, please go ahead.
Good morning, Nick and Margherita. I had a question just based on one of the starkest data points in your release this morning, which is the churn reduction. The question was actually regarding your cost base and just whether you're seeing any evidence of lasting changing consumer behavior coming out of the COVID lockdown. Your churn's down 320 basis points in the quarter. It would be great to hear your thoughts on whether any of this is structural, and how you're seeing physical commission trends as we come out of lockdown. Thank you.
Thank you, Andrew. I think, relative to churn, you may remember what we discussed back in May in terms of our own forecast for the year. If you look back to what we said at the time, we didn't base our outlook
On EBITDA or cash flow guidance on the assumption that there would be a long-lasting hibernation of the industry. We were keen to maintain our commercial momentum. We were seeing potentially some benefits coming through in the lockdown, but we didn't bet on long-lasting effects. I think if I look at what we see in our markets at the moment, we do not see that. What we see is benefits from the lockdown. As soon as the lockdown ends, volumes start to pick up again. If you look at, for example, Southern Europe, after mobile number portability gates have been opened, everyone has been fast off the gate there. As far as we are concerned in this environment, we are, number one, very pleased with our own commercial performance.
If you look at the numbers that we have released, despite the lockdown, we have had a fantastic quarter, for example, on fixed broadband, and even some really good quarters in mobile. We are competing effectively. On the cost front, which was the first part of your question, we do see the benefits of digital coming through. If I look at the execution on cost for the remainder of the year, both on A&R through different mix, more digital, this is structural. We see the benefit of that, but not the volume substantial drop for a long period of time. Also on OpEx, we are guided to at least EUR 400 million of OpEx reduction for another year in Europe, and we are proceeding very well on the execution of that.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Jakob Bluestone from Credit Suisse. Jakob, please go ahead.
Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Hope you're all doing well. Good to see you back in the office. I had a question on the tower EBITDA that you disclosed. Just if you could maybe help us a little bit with the bridge. You previously disclosed about EUR 900 million of EBITDA. It's now closer to EUR 700 million. Obviously, some of that is the reduction in stake in Inwit. I think some other factors explaining some of the difference as well, some accounting differences, some OpEx. Can you maybe just help us understand what is it that's changed, and where is any incremental OpEx coming from? Just helping us bridge the previous tower EBITDA with what you disclosed today. Thank you.
Sure, Jakob. Very important bridge today. Let me take it step by step. In our release, we have communicated EUR 680 million of EBITDA on a proportionate basis for our towers as it stands now. As you know, we intend to contribute our stake into CTIL, our U.K. JV, into the perimeter. Once you do that, you get to call it EUR 740 million, EUR 750 million. You are left with a gap versus the EUR 700 million we talked about previously of around EUR 150 million. This gap is split quite precisely into two parts. The first one is our monetization of Inwit, which, as you know, since we discussed towers for the first time, we have progressed at pace, and I think we have already delivered at quite an attractive valuation. You are left with the residual, call it EUR 80 million for scale.
Under 10% of what was the original EUR 900 million, which is the result of the fact that at the time when we first set out on this project, effectively, we tried to size it on the basis of what were publicly available data. Whatever was out there in terms of prevalent anchor tenant rates in our markets. Fast-forward to today, when the tower company is up and running, effectively, we have been able to go into a great level of detail and establish specific MSAs on a market-by-market basis, and we have set the numbers on the back of this precise review. We have set them in a position which is quite important in terms of balance because it allows, on one end, our markets to be competitive.
On the other end, I think it offers for the tower company a strong baseline to then build on its own growth for the future. This is really the main reason of this EUR 80 million, let me call it organic gap. As you mentioned, there are other smaller factors, probably not worth a lot of conversation. There is a little bit of accounting adjustments that again, we had to do as we went into more details. We have set out the teams. It's effectively the coming to the final framework for the company to operate that has led to these numbers.
Thank you. That's helpful.
Next question comes from Nick Delfas from Redburn. Nick, please go ahead.
Yep. Thanks very much. Can you hear me? Yep. Just one for Vivek, maybe on CTIL. Obviously, the numbers you're talking about in there look rather low in terms of EBITDA. Could you talk a little bit about how you anticipate that changing? Obviously, it's a rather complicated situation given O2 and Virgin with their merger. Thanks very much.
Maybe, Vivek, just to give a perspective on CTIL, if you remember, CTIL was set up on a cost basis. It was not set up as a profit center commercial business, it was just cost plus basis. We've had to go through a process of converting it into a commercial business. We are going through that process as we speak. Obviously, then the announcement of O2 and Liberty. We then re-engaged with both of them to understand the process. They're very supportive of the process. They like the strategic direction we're going. It is very much our intention to roll CTIL as stake to Vantage Towers in due course, and hopefully ahead of any IPO event. Of course, we have to go through that process.
Okay. Thanks very much. Could I just ask a very quick follow-up on physical stores? I just wanted to clarify, is your thinking changing about how quickly those might close?
Well, I think we went out in May, talking about retail stores. In the COVID world, you've seen digital just ramp. Online channels are 50% sales up year-over-year. We are now looking at how do we optimize our retail stores more as part of the overall channel mix, and also indirects as well, what role will indirects play and how much of a mix they are. Yes, I'd say more as an acceleration to, let's say, year one to year three, how are we advancing that estate to the target operating model.
COVID really gave us the opportunity to make a step change from that perspective. If you look at the sales numbers in the quarter, which as I was saying before, have remained strong. They've remained strong with a 50% increase in volumes on our digital channels across Europe, so quite a big difference. We have taken the opportunity also to stay close to our customers through the pandemic with campaigns and what I would call as education tutorials on how to access digital. We believe that some of these changes will actually would be long-lasting, which is why I was saying earlier to Andrew, I think the channel mix is definitely a long-lasting opportunity.
Okay. Thanks very much.
The next question comes from Akhil Dattani from JP Morgan. Akhil, please go ahead.
Yeah. Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Just to follow up really on the revenue performance and outlook. I guess, firstly, on Italy and Spain, there's some pretty good commercial trends in the quarter. Just keen to understand how much of that is a function of COVID and lower activity during the period, and how much do you think is structural and we can extrapolate. Then, I guess linked to that, Margherita, you talked about the three buckets of COVID impact on revenues between roaming, B2B and other. Can you maybe give us a bit of color on how you think about those three buckets as we go forward as well, please? Thanks.
Sorry, Akhil, I missed. I think you were asking about U.K. and Spain?
Yeah. The three buckets and then of roaming, business, how do you think about those three buckets that you've got on your slide?
Yes. In terms of
Those two buckets, the other bit was just I was saying your commercial trends in Spain and Italy have improved.
Sure.
A lot this quarter. I just wondered how much was COVID and lower activity through the lockdown, and then how much can we extrapolate as maybe being more structural improvements?
Sure. If I start from this last question on commercial performance, I think that there is a lot on what you have seen in the quarter that I would argue is our structural positioning. Clearly, the volumes of mobile number portability for both markets stepped down a lot across April and May. As I was saying earlier, as soon as you come to mid-May, beginning of June, and the lift-off of the state of emergency in Spain, you could see the volumes for the market stepping back up again to substantially the levels at which they were pre-COVID, if not slightly higher, where there was even pent-up demand. Within this context, what I think is structural is our competitive positioning. You heard us say this multiple times in the past. We compete effectively in those markets now at all levels.
From the high end to the lower end with our second brand, and this is the position that we have maintained. I think through COVID, if anything, maybe a bit of an advantage from the fact that having good quality, reliable network has been very appreciated at the peak of the lockdowns, but generally speaking, I think it's our positioning. Spain has been growing this quarter, but has been growing for every single consecutive quarter for the last year on both fixed mobile broadband. In Italy, we already guided towards a more neutral mobile number portability numbers, as soon as we left the price increases of six months ago. That's effectively what you see there. In terms of then the revenue blocks. Taking those, maybe also in turn, starting from roaming. Roaming, we have seen some recovery in the volumes starting, I would say, June.
It's intra-European roaming volumes that are catching up because travel restriction on long haul largely remain. Therefore, we see the roaming drag on our revenues, which, as I would say, as expected, to increase further in the coming quarter because we are going towards the peak summer holiday period. I think over time, as travel restriction lift out of Europe, we will see there some recovery and, of course, at some point, roaming will become again, a growth driver. In Enterprise, the second area impacted, we called out projects being suspended or delayed. A bit of weakness in IoT because we are very strong in automotive and there was less car circulation, car sales, and the like. This is actually now starting to recover.
We didn't see significant impact from macro yet on Vodafone Business, probably because the government initiatives have shielded our customers from taking maybe difficult decisions there. I think as we move throughout the year, we may see some of that catching up again. In the Other, you have a mixed bag of things, some positive traffic during lockdowns, particularly in South Africa and Germany, more than offset by some weakness in areas such as prepaid in the smaller market or M-PESA in our international markets in Africa, where the feed-in fees were zero rated.
Overall, I would say if you step back from all these puts and takes, as you have heard, very much the net impact of COVID, in line with what our expectations for the quarter were, and indeed still very much in line with our expectations for the rest of the year, which is why you have heard us reiterating both already the outlook and our free cash flow guidance.
Thanks.
Next question comes from Maurice Patrick from Barclays. Your line is now unmuted.
Hi, guys. Yes, Maurice here. Yeah, just a question from me on Vantage, please. Many tower companies are looking at offering additional services beyond just passive access. Backhaul services, small cells, distributed antennas, even as far as facilitating mobile edge computing and data centers even. Are these in scope of Vodafone or Vantage going forward? Take backhaul, for example. Does Vantage intend to offer backhaul services? Does it currently offer backhaul services to Vodafone or Vodafone control those? Thank you.
Well, Vivek, why don't you give a summary?
Yeah. Thanks for the question, Maurice. Good to hear you. All of the above are in our intent. Services for non-mobile operators, public safety, distributed antenna systems, and at a probably with a longer time span, mobile edge computing, as it's unlikely to be widespread to the geographic extent of a tower co in the initial phases. Definitely on the plan. As regards fiber, it's obviously a need for all the customers of the tower co, so having the ability to offer fiber is a necessity. If you parse the problem, you have sites where Vodafone has fiber, and when there is a wholesale offer in the market, the ability to provide this on a wholesale basis is something that we would obviously do. We will expect more and more fiberization of these sites. As you move towards 5G, you're going to need more bandwidth.
The operators are going to require an increased fiberization of the sites. We do see that there is a lot of scope for increasing the fiberization across some of our geographies. We'll be definitely looking into that.
Great. Thank you.
The next question comes from Emmet Kelly from Morgan Stanley. Emmet, please go ahead.
Yes. Hi, good morning, everybody. Just, yeah, the one question from my side. In the press release, you have called for a new deal with regulators and governments, which will, you say, allow you to invest more and also to make higher returns. Can you maybe say a few words, Nick, about how you would like to see that new deal manifest itself? Is it through a change in competition law? Is it changes in regulation or maybe changes in the likes of net neutrality? Thank you.
Yeah. Morning. I sort of highlighted in the presentation on the far right of this slide around the social contract. I itemized about six or seven policy areas we want to influence because, I want to make it clear, social contracts is a contract, i.e., a two-way flow. We're saying we understand what you want to achieve, as a government. You want connectivity, you want next generation connectivity, 5G, et cetera. You want digitization. You want to create jobs. We want to do all of that, too. What we need is the right framework to be successful as an industry and improve our returns, because our returns are at an unacceptable level. I spent a lot of time highlighting that, and of course, we added it to our recent results to amplify the publication of the return on capital.
I think in the short term, I think there's an opportunity around spectrum. We had a good outcome or a decent outcome, let's say, in Hungary, an okay outcome in Netherlands. We've got Spain and the U.K. that we're engaging, saying, "Could we do different models? Take a different approach?" We're engaging in Italy, in terms of the payment that's due next year, September, I think 2021. Can we do that either deferred or staged payments? How can you support the industry? I'd say governments are now heightened aware of the state of the industry and how critical we are and understand the need to support us, especially because they want 5G rolled out as quickly as possible. I'd say spectrum isn't immediate. There's some things around regulation, whether it's the rules and regulations around deployment, how can you make life easier for us?
Also there's regulation around, let's say, disruptive value players that ride off the back of people that are willing to put hard money down in investment. I think there's increasingly an understanding that we need to earn a return, and that regulation needs to be supportive of pro-investment and innovation. I'd say these are the more immediate ones, and then you can look further out about market structure. Can we have more infrastructure consolidation with doing a lot more sharing going forward versus retail? Making the distinction between the two and, sort of supporting the industry going forward.
Next question comes from James Ratzer from New Street. James, please go ahead.
Yes. Thank you very much indeed. Good morning. Thank you also for all the extra detail you've given around Vantage Towers. I was wondering if I could ask particularly about how you see consolidation in the European tower market, going forward. It's obviously something you've been involved in so far. You've announced another deal in Greece this morning. I was wondering in particular, are there other markets where you see more opportunities to do tower deals with the Vantage portfolio? Is it Vodafone's intention to always keep a longer-term majority in Vantage Towers? How do you see the opening balance sheet of Vantage Towers? Will it have enough balance sheet capacity to go and undertake deals of its own if it wishes to? Thank you.
I will always defer to Margherita on balance sheets. If I was simplifying it, what I would be saying is the primary focus is driving the big organic growth opportunity we have. Vivek was highlighting the various elements that we see in terms of coverage, in terms of densification, third-party tenancies, et cetera. We really see a big opportunity there. He highlights fiber to the site, various other things. I think there's a big organic opportunity. What we would say on top of that is, yes, there will be targeted, disciplined M&A that we will consider. I think Greece was a good example where we felt that was a very healthy development for Vantage Towers. We wanted to take that opportunity. In terms of balance sheet?
I think you have made the perfect summary, clearly. We will always look at opportunities of what I would call disciplined M&A. You have seen the case today with Greece and we will look at our funding options for those. The bulk of the growth will come from the organic progression and just growth in sites and tenants per sites.
Clearly, we've not determined yet level of leverage and where we set the balance sheet. We'll clearly reflect on that on the run-up to the IPO. We would want it to be.
Just to confirm.
We would want it to be efficient, let's say.
Thank you. Just to confirm, it is still your long-term intention to hold a majority in Vantage Towers?
Absolutely. Absolutely.
Great. Thank you.
The reason's very simple. First of all, we think it's a fantastic asset, a strategic asset with a great opportunity to create real value for shareholders. We want our Vodafone shareholders to reap that benefit as well. Secondly, of course, technology, we're in a fast-moving, developing industry. We want to make sure that we have the right flexibility for both Vodafone and Vantage Towers to ensure we can compete going forward.
Great. Thank you.
Next question comes from Usman Ghazi from Berenberg. Usman, please go ahead.
Hello, everyone. Thank you for taking my question. I just had a question around possibly the late order impacts of COVID. I just wanted to ask if you're seeing any changes, in terms of bad debts or request for extension of payment terms increase over the last few weeks since the lockdowns have been lifted, or have things been fairly stable? Thank you.
Sure. I think the summary is things have remained fairly stable. We have not seen any material change in behavior in our business customers. Some requests for suspensions of service here and there during the lockdown phase, but nothing material. I think this is probably due to what I was describing earlier, which is our own customers weren't faced with difficult choices just yet. Things have progressed as normal. We will have to see in the coming quarters if that changes in any shape or form.
Okay. Thank you.
Next question goes to Robert Grindle from Deutsche Bank. Robert, please go ahead.
Thank you. Good morning, everyone. I was looking at your mobile data trends in Europe, your usage growth. It actually accelerated by 12% in Q4, but slowed down by 5% in Q1. I wondered, do you know why that is? Is it because we're all just sending silly memes to each other? Is more of that data going over home broadband Wi-Fi, and is that a material benefit to your network and CapEx? Thanks.
I'm actually caught off guard on this one because we would need to look back into the details with IR. I was looking at the trends of traffic through the lockdowns.
Yeah
linked to revenues, and frankly, I was going to say we have seen the increase that we had originally lasting all the way to the month of June. We can pick it up.
In other words, it peaked and slightly drifted down.
Just slightly, yeah.
I don't remember it materially moving.
I think we need to see if there was something in Q4 that we need to look into or the trend. IR can give you maybe more details later.
Okay. Well, that was my calculation, so I'll follow up on that. Is more of the traffic going over home broadband?
Yes, for sure.
Yeah.
During the lockdown, the biggest peaks we have experienced were in fixed traffic. Yeah, fixed increased much more than mobile because people effectively were working from home. It was interesting also that it was a peak that was lasting throughout the day. We have seen increases in both. Again, my understanding is that in Europe, certainly they are continuing.
I think actually if you decompose it a little bit, there probably is some people using more Wi-Fi, but at the same time, there's a lot of people as we penetrate unlimited plans that are having an exponential growth in mobile and are happy to stay on the mobile network and not the poor Wi-Fi. I would say it's a number of factors. It's probably also business as well, people that are business customers, obviously, at home more.
Okay. Is there a CapEx benefit or headwind or tail?
No.
No. Don't think about anything material from all this.
Okay. Thank you.
Next question comes from Polo Tang at UBS. Polo, please go ahead.
Morning, everyone. Just on a bigger picture question in terms of consolidation. What's your view on the recent European General Court ruling that overturned the EC decision in terms of the O2-3UK merger? Do you think that this will lead to a new wave of consolidation in the sector, and are you detecting any change in terms of a sentiment or attitude from politicians and regulators on the topic?
I think when I reflect on it, I'd say that the ECJ decision itself, in my view, is an incremental positive but not transformational. I do think that the Netherlands decision was really important. If you're a failing operator, being allowed to leave the market and then not have remedies on the other players to create another player. I think that was a very important decision. I add on top of that the COVID environment and the feeling that this is critical national infrastructure, that actually scale is important and earning returns and having rollout, having the right financial environment for operators is important. Therefore, you add all of it together, and then you'd say that I think there's a general acceptance that the European market broadly is highly fragmented with over 40 groups of operators versus a U.S. with three, China with three, India with three, et cetera.
I think there's a feeling that there needs to be better formulas going forward. Now, does that automatically mean there's a stampede for consolidation? I don't necessarily think, but you're seeing infrastructure consolidation led by us taking place and networks coming together. I think the sharing more of network and infrastructure will definitely happen. Then there's a case of what happens with retail brands and what level of competition that is felt necessary in the marketplace that does not hold back investment.
Thanks.
I'd say positive momentum, but not necessarily overnight transformational.
Clear.
Next question comes from David Wright from Bank of America. David, please go ahead.
Yeah. Thank you very much for taking the questions today. Yeah, it's actually a question that follows on from some of your comments on the last question, Nick. In regards to the Netherlands and your current JV there with Liberty, it does feel like Ms. Vestager has, in recent times, talked about the potential for more cross-border deals. As you've said, Europe does look very fragmented versus maybe other major regions. You obviously have the JV with Liberty. I believe there's some optionality around that. One of the options that has been discussed with Liberty Management has been the potential for a cross-border deal with Telenet. I just did wonder whether you would ever be open to such a transaction, perhaps going down to minority stake, as long as the existing dividend upstream leverage agreement was broadly maintained. I wondered if you had any views on that.
Goodness me, that's a very generous photograph you just put up, by the way. 20 years of European telcos have weathered me a little more than that. Thank you.
Yeah, you don't have the COVID beard on that photo. David, I would say that if I stand back, I'm really, really delighted with the performance of our Dutch business. It's been a really successful integration, good growth, a really good performance. Obviously, they've got their results coming after us, so I can't really talk about it. We are really pleased with the delivery under Jeroen, the CEO. We're very happy with the construct of the market. It's an excellent market. We've got a fantastic asset within the market, and we have co-control. I would struggle to see why I would want to give that up for a minority position in a cross-border combination. Clearly, if Mike feels there's something compelling, that's a question more for Mike than it is for me. We're really pleased with where we're at.
We remain a very disciplined investor. Clearly, if people are going to step forward with offers, we would always consider at the board level. At this point in time, we're very delighted with the business and its performance.
Okay. Very clear. Thank you very much.
Next question comes from Adam Fox-Rumley from HSBC. Adam, please go ahead.
Thanks very much. I was wondering if there are any more thoughts on monetizing tower assets at the individual country level, whether there are any processes that are still ongoing there, or if the portfolio is roughly set as is. I suppose looking at the numbers this morning, you can see that 90% of Vantage Towers' revenues are coming from the Vodafone MSA. Would it be right to think about a medium-term target to get that to a lower number, 80%, 85% over time? Thanks.
I'll let Vivek talk about the second part of the question. In terms of monetization, really the only one that could potentially be is the U.K. Do we monetize that? Really, we're focused on the IPO of Vantage Towers. At some point, you have to say, let's focus on that and just move forward with the IPO. That'd be the determination that we might make. It's the only one. Vivek?
Yes. On the second point, yes, we start with a high percentage of our revenues coming in from Vodafone, and that provides the stability with a pre-agreed MSA. It gives a good level of certainty on those revenues. Of course, the management team will be focused on developing other sources of revenue. We haven't put out the targets in this area yet. We're analyzing the market. We're having a dialogue already with several of the operators in the different countries to look at the potential for growth. The clear focus, which will also be translated in the way we drive the company and set its targets, will be the development of revenue sources other than Vodafone. Very clear. No number yet.
Our last question for today comes from Sam McHugh from Exane. Sam, please go ahead.
Thank you very much. I just want on the perimeter of Vantage, if I can, apologies, it's slightly ill-started. If I look at previous slides on towers, I did notice that the number of sites you've got in different places has changed slightly. I wondered if it's because you're maybe, A, not putting all your towers in Vantage, or maybe it's just because you've made a clearer distinction between owned and rented. Vantage has agreed a BTS agreement with the operator in Greece. I think you'd highlighted EUR 150 million-EUR 200 million of growth CapEx Vantage. Is that still the right number when we think about what they could do? Just to follow up on Maurice's question earlier about small cells and fiber, are there any actually being put in, or does Vodafone Group really not have a material amount of these today? Thanks very much.
Vivek, do you want to?
Yes. On the number of towers, there will be the adjustment for the fact that in the scope, you would now have the towers coming in from Wind Hellas. That would be one of the reasons for the fluctuation, was that was not in previous versions. That might be one of the reasons you see the discrepancy. Yes, we have been going through a very detailed inventory of the assets in every country to ensure that we've got the right numbers. The number that we came out with today is our pro forma end of financial year 2020 entry position on the perimeter that we've disclosed. The other question was on fiber. We are not putting in the basket any fiber assets per se.
The option that we're taking is to work on having a wholesale offering that enables operators alongside their rental on the tower to benefit from access to fiber. That's a service offering, but it's not in the assets that are transferred. That's the option we've taken for now.
I think there was a third part on the growth CapEx. We will share much more about all this once we come to our capital market day.
Yes.
and of the IPO. It's together with the funding structure, we will give you more details at a later stage. Today, it was about sharing the current perimeter.
Look, on that, I'd like to thank you all for joining us. As you can see, we've been very busy burning a lot of hours. We need a rest. We'll take a small vacation at some point over the coming month. Look, we all look forward to seeing you in September and beyond at various events and our results. All right. Take care, hope you all have a good and safe summer.