ONTEX.BRONTEX.BRBRU
Loading
Geoffroy Raskin: Good noon, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. I'm Geoff Raskin from IR. I'm pleased to have with us Laurent Nielly, our new CEO; and Geert Peeters, our CFO, to present the 2025 results. Before that, let me remind you of the safe harbor regarding forward-looking statements. I will not read it out loud, but I will assume you will have duly noted it. With that cleared up, Laurent, over to you.
Laurent Nielly: Thanks, Geoff. And before I dive into the results, allow me to say some words about me. First of all, let me share my appreciation for the Board and for our former CEO, Gustavo Calvo Paz, for the trust and the support in this transition. I'm honored to take over and realize the challenges ahead to both rebuild trust fast and to continue to work to unlock the interesting value of Ontex. I joined Ontex 8 years ago to help turn around the just acquired business in Brazil, then moved to Europe with a mission to bring strategic discipline, drive the business back to growth and to rebuild profitability after the inflationary shock in '22. I have a deep understanding of our company, and I share the passion for our purpose, mission and people. We have strong assets, potential, and I take on the assignment with high energy, but obviously also at a time of big disappointment after a challenging '25. As you know, the year did not evolve as we had anticipated at the start of '25, and we had to revise our outlook twice. The final results should be of no surprise to any of you being in line with the outlook we communicated early December. Revenue was 5% lower like-for-like in a challenging market and the adjusted EBITDA came down by 2 percentage points, mainly due to the impact of lower volume. The 10% margin level is still demonstrating resilience of the business in a difficult year. We did better than we anticipated for free cash flow, ending with a negative EUR 25 million. Net debt benefited from the divestment proceeds with lower adjusted EBITDA, our leverage rose to 3.3x. Let me expand a bit on the main elements that drove our results in the year on the next slide. Clearly, our volumes, which are the backbone of our business, did not meet our ambition with 3 key factors. We faced a softer demand in '25, especially in Baby Care. We could not pivot on some of the growing segment as fast as we wanted in the midst of our transformation in Europe that limited temporarily our flexibility, and this was amplified by some disruption in supply that we had discussed in previous quarters. And in North America, we experienced much more repeat decline in our contract manufacturing sales. Against this backdrop, we continue to preserve our competitive position, signing and starting delivery of new contracts, thereby maintaining our positive contract gain and loss balance for the year. We also continue to innovate in all 3 categories and are recognized on our sustainability performance, as illustrated recently with an A score from CDP. Most importantly, we reached some key milestones in our transformation journey. We completed the divestment of our emerging business. Our Belgium footprint work is progressing well. And in North America, we added production line in our North Carolina factory. Before I pass over to Geert on the financial analysis of the year, I'll quickly touch base on the fourth quarter performance. Our revenue came down by 7.6% like-for-like in Q4 versus a strong quarter last year. This is 2% lower than our third quarter of '25 with demand softening further, especially in Baby Care, both in Europe and North America. You can see in the chart that the decrease and the volatility of revenue in the last 8 quarters is mostly linked to our Baby Care business. whereas Adult has consistently grown and in the last quarter, represents 47% of our revenues. The lower volume in Q4 impacted the profitability, especially as we had anticipated growth and the adjusted EBITDA margin, therefore, dropped 3 percentage points versus last year to 9%, which is 2.4 points decline quarter-on-quarter. While Q4 was again below our expectation, it is important for me to stress the many progresses made on our transformation journey, which are strengthening the company and which will bear fruits in the months and years to come. Yet it is equally clear that more is needed to improve back our trajectory. With this, I pass over to Geert for a more detailed analysis on our full year results.
Geert Peeters: Thanks a lot, Laurent, and hello, everyone. In the financial review, I will focus on the full year results and start, of course, with the revenue. On this slide, you will find the full year revenue bridge showing the 5% revenue decrease, which was almost entirely due to the volume decline by EUR 93 million. As Laurent already explained, this was caused mainly by the lower demand for retailer brands in Baby Care and specifically in North America, the decline of contract manufacturing causing Baby Care volumes to drop by 12%. Feminine Care sales volumes were 2% lower, which largely reflects the market trends. We benefited from the continuing growth of the adult care market, albeit with a modest 1% volume growth Reason is that we have a large exposure to the more stable healthcare channel. To capture further growth in the retail channel, we're currently ramping up the capacity. Our sales prices were slightly lower, reflecting the carryover from the lower sales price in '24 as well as some targeted price investments and our product mix improved at the same time and more than compensated for this. ForEx fluctuations had a small negative impact, mostly linked to the depreciation of the British pound, the Australian dollar and especially the U.S. dollar. Let's move now to the adjusted EBITDA bridge on the next slide. On the EBITDA bridge, you can see that EUR 40 million impact of the lower revenue on adjusted EBITDA. It includes also lower absorption of fixed costs. Positive is that our cost transformation journey continues. And this year, we generated EUR 69 million net savings, creating a 5% efficiency gain on our operating base. This encompasses efforts across the organization and includes the first benefits from the Belgium footprint transformation. We could have done more had volumes been higher. These continued efforts compensated most of the cost increases but leaving an EUR 8 million negative net cost impact. Raw materials prices rose by about 4%, mainly driven by higher indices. The impact was across inputs, but especially in packaging, superabsorbent polymers and fluff. Raw material price indices spiked in H1, but came down since, but on average, they're still higher than in '24. Other operating costs rose by about 8%. A large part is linked to inflation of salaries, logistics and other services. some were also caused by the supply chain inefficiencies we faced mainly in the first half of the year, think for example, outage of our Segovia plants. Despite all these challenges in '25, we managed to keep an adjusted EBITDA margin of 10%, which is 2 percentage points lower than last year. How this revenue and margin translates in net profit and also including the divested emerging markets can be seen on the next slide. Adjusted EBITDA -- sorry, adjusted profit from continuing operations was EUR 34 million as compared to EUR 76 million in '24. The decline can be fully explained by the lower adjusted EBITDA. In '25, we had much lower restructuring costs as compared to '24. This represented some EUR 19 million and were mostly noncash caused by impairments of obsolete assets and intangibles. Profits from continuing operations, which includes also the nonrecurring costs, thereby amounted to plus EUR 60 million and is, therefore, more or less in line with '24, which ended at EUR 21 million. As to the emerging markets, we posted EUR 190 million loss for Brazil and Turkey, and this loss is entirely caused by the noncash accounting impact from currency translation reserves. These were accumulated over the many years in the past, and these are recycled through the P&L once the divestment is completed, and this caused EUR 210 million combined loss in '25. But as I repeated already, it's noncash. With the last divestments executed only the core business is left. The result is much stronger -- is a much stronger balance sheet with lower debt, which we will discuss later. Let's now move to the cash flow on the next slide. Here, you'll find the bridge explaining how the adjusted EBITDA of EUR 184 million translates in a free cash flow of minus EUR 25 million. Net working capital changes were largely neutral, with an increase in discontinued operations, offset by an improvement in our core business. That latter core business improved from 5.4% to 5.1% over sales, mainly thanks to lower inventories, lower receivables and higher factoring. We have a EUR 12 million negative impact from employee liability changes as we accrued lower variable remuneration in the EBITDA of '25, which will lead, of course, to lower cash payout in '26. CapEx was EUR 81 million, representing 4.5% of the revenue of our core business and a nonrecurring cash out amounted to EUR 30 million mainly due to the already provisioned Belgium footprint restructuring. This brings the free cash flow before financing to plus EUR 18 million. Cash out related to financing was EUR 43 million, higher than in '24 due to the high-yield bond refinancing and a favorable interest rate swap, which came at maturity end of '24. This brings the free cash flow to equity holders to the minus EUR 25 million, as I told you before. Let me go to the net debt. Our net debt reduced by 6% from EUR 612 million end '24 to EUR 577 million end '25. Apart from the free cash flow, which I explained on the previous slide, we finalized the divestments of the Brazilian and Turkish business, which brought EUR 131 million net proceeds. We, however, had to reclassify EUR 34 million of cash residing in Algeria, dating from the divestment in '24, and it was reclassified as a financial asset. But currently, we're making good progress in repatriating this money. We also had an increase in lease liabilities and some other noncash elements, which amounted to EUR 27 million and relates to future commitments related to the renewal of some real estate leases. Next, we have the share buyback program, which was launched in '24 whereby we acquired 1.5 million shares to cover the future potential option plans with an impact of EUR 11 million in '25. This brings us thus year-on-year to the reduction of net debt by 6% and gross debt by 12%. And just to summarize, if we look at our gross debt, which is EUR 647 million, it's at the right side of the slide, you can see it consists of EUR 145 million of leases, of course, a EUR 400 million of high-yield bonds. And then we have the revolving credit facility, of which we had drawn EUR 100 million, which is a bit more than 1/3 of the total facility. And then before I pass the word back to Laurent, we can have a look at the leverage ratio. And in this graph, you can see the evolution since the end of '22. The net debt you can find in the middle in green and has reduced year-over-year by constantly deleveraging the net debt. The last 12 months adjusted EBITDA, which is at the top in blue, improved consistently year-over-year until the end of '24. In '25, we have the decline because of the challenging year, but also, of course, the scope reduction following the different divestments. In yellow then at the bottom, you find the ratio of both representing the leverage ratio. It improved from 6.4x at the end of 2022 to 3.3x at the end of '23, 2.5x the end of '24, and now we returned back just above 3x at 3.3x at the end of '25. Nevertheless, the balance sheet remains healthy. The leverage ratio remains below the 3.5x covenant, which is a threshold in the RCF, and important to stress is that we have ample liquidity, namely EUR 240 million, which is the cash of EUR 70 million and about 2/3 of the RCF, which is undrawn. The maturity of our debt is extended to at least '29. Now I'm very pleased to pass the word back to Laurent.
Laurent Nielly: Thanks, Geert. After 2 solid years in '23 and '24, '25 was more difficult. So how do we see '26. And I will start with the overall market conditions, that we anticipate to remain pretty similar to '25 overall with low consumer confidence and continued promotional activity by A brands. Yet we equally expect the Adult Care momentum to continue and overall retail brand to remain a compelling consumer proposition with opportunity to grow share. On top of this general setting, the following elements are reflected in our assumptions. We expect birth rates in Europe to drive overall Baby Care demand slightly lower as they did in '25. In North America, worth mentioning that our contract manufacturing current sales level will create a negative comparison in the first half of '26 and especially in the first quarter, whereas you might remember, we had anticipated shipments at the end of Q1 '25 ahead of the trade buyer threats between the U.S. and Mexico. And in the other smaller overseas business that we have, we continue to review our portfolio with targeted exits of unprofitable contracts. So let me now share how this will translate to our ambition for '26 year. We target adjusted EBITDA to improve by 10% as we accelerate our extended cost transformation program throughout the year, and progressively return to more stable operations. This EBITDA improvement will be gradual, starting from a soft first quarter which is expected in line with the fourth quarter of '25, but therefore, lower than the strong first quarter that we had in '25. This improvement is underpinned by overall largely stable revenue for the full year. And here again, you should expect a lower Q1 versus prior years for the reason that I just explained. And then volume growth to pick up in subsequent quarters. We expect free cash flow after financing to be back in positive waters, driven by this higher adjusted EBITDA, lower restructuring charges and a continued effort to drive our working capital down. This, in turn, will lead leverage down to 3x or better by the end of the year. To deliver this plan, our priorities are clear as presented in the next slide. First, resume volume growth. This includes ramping up the existing and newly secured contract as well as the benefit of the additional capacity we have added in Adult. Second, continue our productivity program with an extended cost transformation initiative which includes an adjustment of our organization to our new scope of business. And third, a laser focus on improving cash conversion. In parallel, we started a strategic review with a clear focus on value creation. We want to go fast, whether by improving delivery and speed of our current plan or by adding new elements to create incremental opportunities and we will update you on a regular basis as progress is being made. This closes our prepared remarks. Geert and I are now ready to take your questions.
Geoffroy Raskin: [Operator Instructions] And the first question is coming from Wim Hoste. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Wim Hoste: I have a couple of ones. First one on the U.S. market. How should we think about revenue evolution in '26? You explained the situation with the contract manufacturing drop in preceding quarters. But will this contract manufacturing further drop in '26? How much support can you get from recently signed or started up contracts? Can you offer a little bit of clarity on that as well, please? So that's the first question. The second one is a more general one, pricing versus raw material evolution, if you can elaborate on that as well. And then a third and smaller one is how much CapEx budget have you included in the free cash flow guidance? That would also be helpful.
Laurent Nielly: All right. Thank you, Wim, for your questions. I'll take on the first 2 questions and then Geert will address the third one. So on the U.S. market growth, as you know, we don't provide guidance of expected growth by region, but the dynamic that was described is what you should continue to expect, which is we're continuing to grow on our retail brand business. And yearon-over-year, our contract manufacturing sales in '26 will be lower than the full year '25. Overall, with the 2 blocks, we expect the U.S. to contribute more growth in Europe in '26. That's for your first question. On the second question on pricing versus raw material, we expect stable to slightly positive contribution of raw material in '26 versus '25. And at the same time, we expect that as we have some contract renewal or tenders that we participate to, we might strategically invest on targeted customers to secure our gains. So this is the dynamic that we always have, where we try to remain competitive as we see raw material cost evolution. And on CapEx, I will pass it on to Geert.
Geert Peeters: On CapEx, yes, we keep, in fact, to the guidance we gave several times that at the end of '25, we wanted to go back to a level of 3.5% to 4.5% of CapEx to revenue. So that's what we're heading for and which is sufficient to execute our plans.
Geoffroy Raskin: The next question comes from Karine Elias from Barclays.
Karine Elias: Just going back to your -- the guidance on the full year EBITDA. Obviously, Q1 has been a tough comp. So I understand the decline that you mentioned, which would be similar to Q4. But just as we think through the year, what's your visibility like into Q2? Should we expect the EBITDA improvement to start showing from Q2 onwards? Because on my numbers, if we've got a EUR 50 million decline in Q1, that means a EUR 37 million improvement in Q2 through to Q4 to get to your guidance. Just wondering a little bit how we should think about the of the EBITDA.
Geert Peeters: Thanks Karine, for your question. So the way we look at it and you phrased it well. So we expect Q1 in line with the last quarter of last year of '25 and then indeed, as we said in our guidance, we expect gradual improvements throughout the year. What are the drivers? Of course, there are different elements. First of all, it's the continuous productivity improvement, which we're constantly working on with the cost transformation program which we also had last year, but this year, we project a much more stable year because there was quite some instability coming from external factors that happened, but also the changes we did in our organization. So we have the Belgium footprint reorganization that we were executing that's ending at the end of Q1, so that's finalized, so that will bring a lot more stability. And also in North America, we had an important ramp-up as well in production as in sales and also there, we see much more stability, which will help us to drive that EBITDA growth.
Karine Elias: Great. But just to clarify, so we would expect to start seeing that from Q2 onwards? Or is it going to be more back-ended?
Geert Peeters: From Q2. So it's really throughout, it's step-by-step, quarter-by-quarter.
Geoffroy Raskin: The next question comes from Usama Tariqfrom ABN AMRO ODDO BHF.
Usama Tariq: I just have one set of questions. Could you provide some view on the nonrecurring cash outflow for next year. So this year was around EUR 30 million. So any guidance there or pointer there would be very helpful. And just my second question would be it's a bit more general, but please correct me if I'm wrong, Ontex still has some exposure to Russian assets. Would that also be considered into the strategic review going forward? Or if you could provide any pointers there, that would be really grateful.
Geert Peeters: I take your first question on the nonrecurring. There, as a management, we have always had the intention to decrease our nonrecurring. So we also keep to that intention. That means that based on the plans we have at this moment, we still have about EUR 10 million of the last phase of the footprint in Belgium. So that's the big provision we made in '24 and what we gradually executed over the 1.5 years more or less. So there is EUR 10 million, but it's already in the P&L. So it's a cash out. And based on the current plans we have and the further transformation, we foresee more or less another EUR 10 million.
Laurent Nielly: All right. And Usama, Laurent, I will tackle your second question. Yes, we still have our assets in Russia. You know our Russian business is about 5% of our total revenues. The strategic review is actually a pretty broad exercise where we're going to review where we compete in different categories, different markets and where we should allocate our resources to maximize value creation. And as part of this, if it's relevant to review our position with this market, we will, but it's way too early to preclude any conclusion.
Geoffroy Raskin: [Operator Instructions] The next question comes from Fernand de Boer from Degroof Petercam.
Fernand de Boer: Actually, I have one question. So you're guiding for a lower EBITDA in Q1 versus last year. So that means that on a 12-month basis, your EBITDA also comes down. What is your cash flow outflow expected for Q1 or first half because I think then you still are within the covenants, but if you look at that, then you could be very close. And what happens if you would drop below the -- above the 3.5x?
Geert Peeters: Okay, Fernand. I will answer on that question. Yes, we're not giving guidance by quarter that you know on cash flow. But of course, we are very aware on the quarter-to-quarter. We have a slow onset, a very clear cash focus, so that will be -- it's something not we look at on a quarterly basis. It's on a weekly basis that we're on top of that. As to covenants, you know that we guide to the -- towards the end of the year to go below 3x. That will not be in the first half of the year. But the purpose is to go down. It's also for us, the covenant testing. I want to stress that one. It's always coming at the end of half year. So we feel confident that we are -- yes, we're doing well and we are within the target set.
Fernand de Boer: Okay. Maybe I missed it, but did you give an amount of factoring?
Geert Peeters: Yes, it's in the press release, but I can tell you, of course, it's EUR 185 million.
Fernand de Boer: Yes. Sorry.
Geert Peeters: No sorry. It's normal. You couldn't read everything. That's perfectly normal.
Geoffroy Raskin: The next question comes from Rebecca Clements from JPMorgan.
Rebecca Clements: Can you hear me? .
Geoffroy Raskin: Yes, we hear you well.
Rebecca Clements: Okay. Okay. Great. Just following up on the accounts receivable factoring. You said it was EUR 185 million used at year-end. Is that correct?
Geert Peeters: Yes, that's right.
Rebecca Clements: Okay. I think you had said last year that you expected some working capital pressure because of reduced receivables. It -- and I think that was related to the securitization facility. Could you just talk us through -- is that still the case? Or do you expect there to be some negative impact on the receivables side through at least part of 2026 due to the lower sales? That's my first question.
Geert Peeters: Yes. Good question, Rebecca. But of course, working capital, we look to the total. So it's for us inventory accounts, payable accounts receivable. Factoring at year-end, it was a bit higher than normal because there was quite some invoicing just at the end of the year. So it's a bit accidental. That's also one of the reasons where our free cash flow was somewhat better than the guidance. But for the rest of our accounts payable, yes, you have seen we don't give guidance on revenue, but we expect it to stabilize, and that means that our accounts receivable will be following the same pattern and with a close follow-up, of course, on our DSO. Does it answer your question?
Rebecca Clements: Okay. Sort of. I was just wondering, because of, I guess, reduced -- given who you're selling to and which receivables go into that facility. I just wasn't sure if there would be some sort of temporary potentially negative impact of not being able to submit receivables to that facility that could impact you midyear? .
Geert Peeters: Not really. No, it's -- no, it's normal operation.
Rebecca Clements: Okay. Okay. And then my second question is related to your visibility. So you said things are more stable now. I know last year, one of the challenges in the second half was that circumstances changed more quickly than you could react to and you ended up having some cost absorption issues from a manufacturing perspective. What gives you comfort that you feel the situation is more stable, whether it's North America Baby Care or European Baby Care? What gives you that sort of confidence in it being more stable because it seemed last year that it was quite difficult for you guys to predict kind of where volumes were going and plan accordingly.
Laurent Nielly: Yes, Rebecca, thanks for the question. This is Laurent. I think when we talked about stability here, we were referring to our operations, not necessarily the sales pattern. We fundamentally -- what we're doing to be better prepared because we expect that there will still be some volatility from time to time in our sales, is to improve forecast accuracy and our ability to anticipate with leading indicators that would allow us to adjust our operation and our production ahead of time. And as at the same time, we're going to have less movements of start-up of new lines, relocation of lines from one factory to the other, et cetera, it will be in the context of a more stable operational framework, which will help us to be much more fluid and to create less inefficiency when you have some volatility in the demand pattern.
Rebecca Clements: Okay. That's helpful. Can I get one more question in or no? Is that okay?
Geoffroy Raskin: Yes, sorry.
Rebecca Clements: Do you -- was most of the issues around not being able to react as quickly enough, was that North American Baby Care? Or was that across Baby Care globally for you?
Laurent Nielly: It was across the care on both sides. Proportionately, obviously, it was a bigger impact on the U.S., but Europe also, we observed a change in behavior in the market. And our role is to partner with our customers to help them adapt to that situation. So we saw a much greater promotional activity from a brand in Europe. And we're talking to our key partners to share analysis with them and come up with ideas and proposition for them how best to be competitive in this new market reality to protect their position and for them to win on the marketplace. So on both sides.
Geoffroy Raskin: The next question comes from Charles Eden from UBS. Charles, we are listening.
Charles Eden: Two for me, please. Just firstly, on the EBITDA bridge, that 10% growth, which is what, EUR 17 million, EUR 18 million year-on-year. I hear you flat revenue. So I guess no real drop-through from the top line fluff and other inputs broadly stable, maybe EUR 1 million or EUR 2 million contribution. Is there anything else in the bridge? Or are you basically saying EUR 15 million of cost savings year-on-year gives you the growth? And maybe if that is true, where exactly are the cost savings coming from? Is it headcount reduction? Is it efficiencies? Is it a combination? Any color you could give us there would be appreciated. And then my second question is just on the strategic review and Laurent, firstly, welcome. But secondly, just in terms of expectations on the strategic review, obviously, the business has changed a lot over the last few years. What can we expect you to be focusing on doing a strategic review? I assume there's not change your portfolio top of the list. But what are the areas that are top of that list for that strategic review?
Laurent Nielly: Sure. I'll address quickly your first question on the EBITDA. I think that you're right that our continued productivity will be the key driver of our margin expansion and therefore, EBITDA growth and the second element that you need to keep in mind is mix, we benefit from a favorable mix. So even within stable sales environment, the mix will be a positive contributor. On the building block of this cost productivity, they are the usual suspects in terms of we work with procurement on improving the mix of our suppliers. We work on manufacturing, on the efficiency of our lines. We are doing some re-networking analysis on logistics. We have the design-to-value initiative where we always cost optimize our product, and we're extending that in '26 to also include some adjustments on our organization design to generate additional savings. So those would be the key building blocks. On the strategy review question. It is a pretty broad effort, as you could have read in our press release in January, where we basically are stepping back and are looking at where best to allocate resources, capital to create maximum value for our shareholders, where we have the best chances to win and where it grows. We believe that all our categories have potential. We have already done a huge focused effort to focus on Europe and North America. There is -- both have potential. Yet what we're looking at is the new conditions to compete and how do we tweak, if you want, the formula between the focus on different categories, what it takes to compete and therefore, what is the proper footprint and organization to maximize our cost in order to be able to continue to grow volume in those categories. So a bit long answer to your questions because this is exactly the goal of that effort. And our commitment is that as we progress, we will share our conclusions in our subsequent earnings calls with you.
Geoffroy Raskin: And the next question comes from Maxime Stranart from ING.
Maxime Stranart: Hope you can hear me well. Two questions from my side, if I may. Apologies if it has been asked already. A bit of delay here. So first of all, looking at your EBITDA guidance and the cadence throughout the year, can you elaborate on when do you see inflection point coming in? Based on your guidance, I understand that EBITDA should decline by basically almost 20% in Q1. So just a view on how we should see the work panning out. Second question would be on restructuring. I think you announced previously that you wanted to accelerate savings and productivity improvement there. I think you mentioned EUR 40 million, of which some were to be included in SG&A and some restructuring. Any view you can share on that? That would be helpful.
Geert Peeters: So Maxime, your first question, our EBITDA guidance is that our Q1 is in line with last quarter of '25, and then we see a gradual improvement quarter-by-quarter. Is that answering your question?
Maxime Stranart: Yes, it does. Just want to cross check there. So basically, if I look at last year, Q1 was good, Q2 was bad, Q3 was good. So I just wanted to make sure I understand the phasing of your guidance correctly.
Geert Peeters: Yes. But indeed last year was at a quite volatile pattern. That's not what we expect. And yes, as you have seen, we give guidance on EBITDA. So we're, of course, also focused on revenue. But for us, the productivity improvements are important. The mix improvements, the stability that we've built in the business, and that's what will drive that continuous growth throughout the quarter.
Laurent Nielly: The second question was on restructuring. Maybe Geert, you can add on that as well in terms of what to expect.
Geert Peeters: Yes. So restructuring, linking to what Laurent said before, for us, we have existing plans, which is on one hand a continuation of the plants in the past, but all with new initiatives because we're talking about add-on savings. And in the strategic review, they will look at what extra things they can untap as potential. But in the restructuring plan, which is part of the guidance we give, they -- yes, there's a whole bucket of savings with the restructuring costs that I mentioned before, of still above what we still have to pay on bringing out the Belgium footprint, we still have EUR 10 million of restructuring costs and there's another EUR 10 million we expect this year to execute the existing plans.
Maxime Stranart: Okay. Got it. I apologize, I missed the beginning of the call. I just wanted to clarify then you basically expect a EUR 20 million basically cash outflow from restructuring. Just want to make sure.
Geert Peeters: That's right. That's right. Based on the existing plans.
Geoffroy Raskin: So there are no more questions. So I hand it back over to you, Laurent, for your closing remarks.
Laurent Nielly: All right. Thank you, Geoff. 2025 was a year that did not live up to our expectations. Yet we continued to deliver on our transformation program, and we showed some solid resilience, including in our profitability and in our ability to compete in the marketplace. We remain upbeat on the potential we have in the different markets in which we participate. The strategic review is a needed step to sharpen our trajectory and focus even more on where we can create compelling value and we will share our conclusions and the year progresses. We have very clear priorities set to deliver our '26 plan with a laser focus on financial discipline and cash. We are confident we can start to rebound even in the first part of the year will continue to be subdued. The priorities we shared today are the ones of our close to 5,000 employees who give their best every day, so we deliver great proposition to our customers. They understand the need for us to rebuild trust and to adjust our journey to best reflect the market realities. With that, thank you for joining, and have a great day.
Geoffroy Raskin: This concludes the call. Bye-bye.
Geert Peeters: Bye-bye.