Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us this afternoon to discuss the results of the first quarter of the crop year 2026/2027. On page 3, these are the main topics that we will discuss today.

We will start with financial highlights, we will talk about margins per product, we will talk about the developments through the quarter and over the year, we will talk about corn processing, we will talk about the main markets of the company, sugar, ethanol, and finally, our debt position and how we stood at the end of the quarter. The first quarter of the 2026/2027 crop year had an important impact on sugar prices.

Quarter-over-quarter, there was a 25.7% drop. Last year, in the same period, the the base had high prices, it was the best prices we had last last half year.

R$4,100 per ton. Last month it was the opposite.

We anticipated shipments in the first quarter, and so the average fixed price or hedged price was much worse than the than all of the other hedges going forward. Therefore, this comparison was 25% lower, and this had an impact on the EBIT and EBITDA margins, as you can tell from the financial highlights.

Moreover, this quarter had, relevant rainfall in June, and this affected the entire industry with many downtime, and this impacted TRS. Naturally, then impacted the whole operation, and this hurt the agricultural yield and also our efficiency, and this also had an impact on our fixed cost.

Summarizing, there is a drop in the EBITDA margin down to 8%. It went from 17.8% to 8%, and our cash income went from R$147 million and it's there was a drop of R$9 million.

In the case of ethanol, price drop was not so significant given the fact that we were able to anticipate ethanol sales in the first 15 days of April when prices were not so low, and then when prices came down in the 45 remaining days of the quarter, the average price was not so bad. However, there was a major impact in sales, which was down by 23% vis-a-vis the previous quarter, and this certainly had an impact on our sales volume, and this impacted admin expenses and also was reflected in the company's profitability level.

Next, we have the margins per product. In the case of sugarcane, we start from a significant drop in margins, mainly due to the average price.

As previously mentioned, our cash cost was down by 9%. Part of that is due to a slight cost reduction and also due to Conセcana.

All in all, the margin was, minus 4. The margin is 1.9%.

Cost was down, and so price was down as well. Whenever we talk about product margins, we are only referring to the sugarcane business.

Sugar and sugarcane ethanol. I do not have corn-based ethanol, but we will look at those figures during the coming slides.

Once we add both of them, the the result is almost 5% in the equivalent cash cost. How do we calculate cash cost for the year?

How do we calculate that estimate of cash cost for the year? This is an important question because some of the reports that I read on the sell side from our initial estimate of, drop in the year, the first quarter accounted for almost an irrelevant part of this drop.

I just want to make, it's because I just want to clarify how we do that. Our cost estimate for the year is based on the production volume of TRS, which is usually our guidance.

There we have a an initial production guidance, and this year, this guidance was 23.7 million tons of sugarcane that we expected to produce with a TRS, total recoverable sugar, of 3.3 million. This assumes a TRS of 142 kilograms of TRS.

Based on this produced TRS, I have a cost associated to that production. This cost involves labor, diesel fuel, fertilizers.

All of the agricultural inputs. Also, the operation operation capex, which is the guidance capex that we disclose at the beginning of the year, the crop year.

Earlier this year, we said it was something close to R$2 billion in terms of maintenance capex. What could change in terms of my unit cost for the year?

The first thing that can change is whether, if my cost increases nominally be, capex or operation. The information that I have today is that this cost might be even slightly lower from what we are anticipating.

Labor costs is within the plan. The diesel fuel cost was up and now it's down.

It will even be nominally lower than the estimates. The same thing goes for inputs.

Meaning that we are within our estimates and within the plan. However, the effect of this very strong El Niño could probably, reflect on our TRS.

I was anticipating total TRS within the guidance and the number would be very close to 11%. If I grow a little bit more than that, if El Niño remains very strong, my cost per TRS will be higher.

This is monitored on a day-to-day basis. We will learn more about it by the end of the crop season in November.

I think this year the the crop will be extended a bit more because there will be a few days of, crop slowdown or shutdown. This is pretty much how we calculate the TRS cost.

I think in our last call our estimate was in the range of 7% to 8% less in terms of cost. The number today is about 4% lower given all of the impacts from TRS, lower TRS and also combined with what we see today.

Therefore, today we believe that we will have more cane. The cane volume will be higher than we anticipated.

It should reach more than 24 million tons, meaning that all the investments in capex in, sugarcane crops and adjustments through throughout the past few years is now bearing fruits. However, TRS will be lower because of El Niño.

It's very likely that this lower TRS, especially now in the months of July and August. Cane is quite high.

The volume is is large, but it's very watery. If you have a spike in TRS, because that's indeed is when you produce more sugar.

In these months, we see that the industry is producing less sugar. All of the estimates for sugarcane production, just, to anticipate the discussion that we may have when we come to speak about hedging, all of our sugar sugarcane production estimates in the Center-South region that we had a few months ago, I think this expectations should be reviewed and the numbers should be lower because TRS is dropping quite fast, and it's very unlikely that TRS will be able to recover.

It will be we will have a lower TRS because of El Niño. It's hard to estimate the volume, but I think that, the margins will be worse.

I believe that sugar prices have recovered a bit in the past few weeks based on this expectations coming from Brazil. Also given the fact that we had heavy rainfall, and also this this has to do with the sustainability of the business.

As you can tell, if you look at São Martinho's reported costs for the first quarter with realized prices, this is before financial expenses, certainly. We have a 5% negative margin for sugarcane.

This cannot be sustainable. We also believe that we find ourselves in the first quartile of operating efficiency.

Therefore, it's not reasonable to believe that sugar prices will be in the range of 13 to 14 cents. This number has to be much closer to 18 in order for us to continue investing and maintaining our sugarcane crops.

Now, moving on. Now we talk about our corn processing operation.

It's moving quite well. Quarter-on-quarter, there was a drop in EBIT and EBITDA, mostly due to ethanol prices that was a bit diluted and also sales volume.

The margins were sustained. As a reminder, we didn't have, in the case of ethanol, any impact in terms of buying chips.

This P&L, in this P&L we reported cost zero. EBIT EBIT margin is mostly due to drop in revenue because I sold less ethanol when compared to the previous quarter and also at a lower price.

Prices of corn were also lower quarter-over-quarter, which helped, maintain the margin. If you look at the phase 2 schedule for corn-based ethanol, it's moving according to plan.

I think the plant will start ramping up next year, and we will start producing something in the midst of May or June. Now, our hedged position.

In June, our hedge position for the crop year is 554 million tons, and this is with an average price of 15.78. Price per ton will be would be very close to R$2,000 per ton with hedged exchange rate and spot as well.

For the following crop year, we only had 20,000 tons hedged. If we separate '26 and '27, we we weren't too hedged when you look at March of 2027, which is the longer view.

This price increase that we saw in the past week is good because maybe we can take advantage of having numbers closer to 16 to 17 cents, and this can help the average price of the crop year. For next crop year, this rebounding price is important.

Certainly, we anticipated hedging of the 20,000 tons with that improvement in price, but not that much. It's still very far from that 20% to 30%.

We understand that there we had the effects of the El Niño, there is also the issue of, the business sustainability, meaning that we still have a lot to look at before we make a decision whether we will accelerate or not the sugar hedges. Speaking about the mix, it's very clear today when we look at, hydrous spot in the market and spot sugar in the market, premium is much higher for sugar.

The the main question is how much how much sugar how much more sugar you can you can produce given the fact that the sugarcane currently has a much lower TRS. That is the big question mark that we have from now until the end of the crop year.

The ethanol market now, ethanol market, the market is very dysfunctional, I I would say. Since early April, ethanol prices were down a lot for many given reasons.

Let's say, I think one of the main reasons has to do with production volume. There was an increase in, corn-based ethanol going from 9 to 11 billion liters, 3 3 billion liters more in the market.

There is also sugarcane-based ethanol hitting the market because of the the larger sugarcane crop. The question now is, we knew prices were coming down, but the question is how come consumption hasn't reacted yet?

Price was down from R$3 to 2.1, ESALQ prices. There was a decline of around 30% to 35%.

Parity is close to 61%. At this level of parity of 61%, we should see a response from the Otto cycle in the range of 32% to 33% of of cars consuming ethanol.

We are realizing that this is not happening. We think it's just a matter of time because it takes a bit longer.

This already happened in previous years. Two, three years ago, there was a significant drop in prices.

In the last quarter, there was a sudden drop in prices, there was no demand. It took some time until demand picked up.

Our strategy now, since we have a lot of ethanol in our mills, we are storing whatever we can then attempt to sell it when prices are a bit better and when consumption picks up because consumption is still low. This is the idea.

We are talking to associations, UNICA and [UNEM?] , they are advertising a lot.

They are advertising in several media outlets. We are pursuing many different strategies, you will see ads in in different outlets.

We want consumers to go back to ethanol. As for the international market, we don't have a big window for exports.

Therefore, we will rather look at the domestic market for now. Finally, our debt position, just to conclude.

Debt was R$5.2 billion, 5% increase when compared to March. It's R$248 million of increase.

The main items that impacted debt was working capital, inventories, predominantly ethanol that we are holding back, and our corn-based ethanol plant that is included in our capex. Despite the fact that this was more this was a a quarter with with more difficulties, we were able to post cash generation.

If you if you look at the numbers, we sold hydrous ethanol, and as I said in previous calls, we are producing more hydrous ethanol because cash generation is better. We anticipated sugar sales to improve our cash cycle with these sales, so much so that we were able to generate cash.

Our liquidity level is very good, almost R$5 billion. We don't have any relevant maturities in the next 2 years, and net debt to EBITDA ratio is around 1.6 times net debt over EBITDA.

These were my initial comments, and now I'll open the floor for questions. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Vicchiato. It's very good to talk to you and thank you for taking my questions.

I have two questions. My first question is about this crop year's guidance.

I understand you did not review it yet. I just want to get a better understanding of your initial comments.

TRS, given the rainfall volume, as I understand, there is a risk of not growing that 3% of unit TRS. You also said that you have more available sugarcane, and I also understand all of the difficulties brought about by the El Niño phenomena.

Do you see any room for you to go above the guidance limit considering sugarcane crushing or whether it's still very challenging if you look at your current crushing levels so far? This is my first question.

My second question is just a clarification. You mentioned that unit cost is 4% lower with a lower TRS.

This 4%, was that a reference based on what you had in the first quarter, or it is the new expectation for the year considering that TRS is now lower? I just wanted clarification about that point.

Good afternoon, and thank you for your question. I'll start with your last question.

4% vis-a-vis the closing of last year. We thought that it would be 7%, but now we are saying that it could reach 4%.

Now, as for our guidance, we didn't review the guidance because there are still a lot of moving parts at play. We have more sugarcane, lower TRS.

We don't know whether we will be able to crush all this cane. If we can crush all this sugarcane, you have lower TRS, but you would have more product.

I think it's very unlikely that we'll be able to crush all of this sugarcane. Unless the crop year will be very stretched, very long, and I would have to count on my good luck with the rainfall thing because I can hope for less rain.

For now, it's still too soon to tell. We are approximately 6% below our budget estimate.

If we reach 6, I'll be able to give you a better estimate, a better idea.

It's very clear, Vicchiato. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Felipe, for taking my question. I also have two questions.

I think my first question is about ethanol. At the beginning of the crop season, ethanol was more profitable than sugar and the mix was more towards ethanol.

As you said it yourself, you talked about your hedge position, that you increased hedging, sugar hedge. Maybe my question has to do with your mix.

When you look at the remainder of the crop season, and could we say that this crop season will be more sugar than ethanol in the mix? You should see a more positive sugar position and the worsening of the ethanol side.

How do you see that possibility? The second point, even thinking in more structural terms for the industry, because I think now it's a very challenging time considering that you have cost pressure, low prices, and very uncertain climate landscape.

The whole industry is struggling, and there is a big player who is in the midst of a reorganization process. My question is whether you believe this consolidation process will be accelerated given that now people are going through more difficulties.

How do you see that even in terms of consolidation, margins, returns? Maybe this would be a point of inflection for the industry that maybe should be taken into consideration.

What is your view about that? Thank you.

To answer your first question, I think speaking about the mix, it has more to do with the fact that if the mills can produce more sugar than ethanol. The volume of sugarcane is higher today than what the mills can produce, and there is also the issue of availability of crushing days.

What will happen from now on is, okay, it's dry, can you crush, then the mill will try to process as much sugarcane as possible and it will produce as much as they can. I will say that with the current TRS we cannot have a max of sugar mix because TRS is very low.

Therefore, efficiency levels are much lower. Of course, that if the premium is 25% for sugar, and with the current volume of ethanol and stock and prices where they stand, whoever can do more will do more.

The question is, is it possible? I think from what we are seeing, it's not possible.

They won't be able to produce a lot more sugar. The level will be much lower than the initial estimates, about 2 million below the current estimates.

We still have some time ahead of us. If we look at the estimates of a super El Niño and a lot of rainfall, and if this is confirmed, just forget about it, we won't have all that sugar.

Therefore, the speed at which sugar prices increased, that may not occur, but it will certainly depend on the volume of rain. Now, speaking about the industry's consolidation, to answer your second question, whether we will see further consolidation of this industry, taking into account the financial situation of some of the players, I think that's very unlikely.

I don't think that's going to happen. In practical terms, the fact that I consolidate a mill or buy another plant, this is not going to make me more efficient.

That's a lesson that I think everybody already learned, but learned the hard way. I can crush more, but am I more efficient?

Not necessarily. You might have a little bit more efficiency if you buy a sugar crop right adjacent to yours.

You cannot add a lot more labor per hectare. You have to increase yield per hectare.

You shouldn't add more industry to that. Then you may have some synergies and increase yield a bit.

In this case, consolidation would make some sense. General consolidation with big players buying, no, I don't see that scenario.

That's very clear. Thank you very much.

Thank you for taking my question. Felipe, I just want some help here because we talked in the past that you expected this crop season to occur very strong, and that's why ethanol prices fell very quickly, even more than we expected, because you sold in April and then you started to hold your sales a bit.

Looking at the numbers of the sector, inventory levels are higher than the historical numbers. May and June, there was the impact of crushing because of rainfall and this probably corrected that inventory level.

What is your reading given this scenario? Do you expect any catching up?

Do you think that inventory levels will be above historical levels? Do you see any potential reversal between sugar and alcohol in the mix?

Maybe in the intercrop period, you would have price pressures. Going on the opposite direction, is there any given price level that would allow you to carry over ethanol prices?

You said something in the past, maybe you talked about why is it taking too long for demand to pick up even though parity is very low in several regions. I just want to understand your strategy a bit better.

Leo, thank you for your question. I think speaking about ethanol, inventories will go down, but not too much due to production dynamics, but more related to consumption dynamics.

As I explained in a previous slide, today in June, parity was 61%, and this is an average for Brazil because in some other regions of Brazil parity was lower than that. Consumption is not even picking up, it's still in very low levels if you look at the historical series of the Otto cycle.

It's difficult for us to understand it sometimes. There are some clues: a lot of noise, a lot of misinformation, people saying that ethanol is bad for the engine of the car.

A lot of misinformation, a lot of noise, and also the government saying that they would put some exemptions in the gasoline price, and then people thought that in Brazil we had the cheapest gas prices, and people started consuming more gasoline. There were lots of noises in the market, and it's difficult for us to keep track of everything.

The fact is that prices are very low, consumption for reason A or B hasn't gained traction, we are not seeing anything happening, and this is totally an outlier because when parity was low in the past, consumption would react promptly. The inventory can only be lower once we realize that consumption is getting stronger.

Otherwise, our inventory levels will be higher. At any given price, you think that the situation would be reversed?

I cannot say anything. I cannot give you that answer.

Thank you.

Hi, Felipe. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, everyone. I have two questions because most of my questions were answered.

I have a very practical question. First, when do you start buying corn to expand Boa Vista's capacity that will start up in the second half of next year just so I can think about working capital dynamics?

When should I start seeing your corn inventory growing in addition to what you need for your current plant and the corn that you will crush next? Second question is how much of the inventory you can carry over thinking about ethanol?

Linking with the previous discussion, if you're carrying over your inventory to the next crop season, how much you can carry that through even considering the fact that it's difficult to migrate everything to sugar because of climate issues and many other reasons?

Thiago, thank you. I can carry approximately 500,000 cubic meters of ethanol, considering my static capacity, the tanks.

I should start buying corn in the next intercrop window because the plant starts operating in June of next year.

Clear. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Felipe, and thank you for your time. My first question is also very short.

Thinking about the mid-range and the mix, I think in the next crop seasons we may see the same scenario. My question is if you do not make any adjustments to your crushing capacity, there may be an adjustment in your mix capacity.

In the past, I remember you had the capacity to invest more in your sugar mix. What are the necessary conditions for you to introduce a sugar plant at Boa Vista to increase the sugar mix in your current plants, even thinking about a scenario where sugar will pay off better and ethanol will still be under pressure in the next coming seasons?

Then my second question is about the monetization of tax credits. You were accruing tax credits in a more significant way.

If you look back 2023, the recoverable line went from R$0.4 million to almost R$1.2 billion. The question is how do you see the schedule of tax credit utilization?

Whether you were preparing yourselves to the tax reform. I know that you have a small exposure, but how are you getting prepared to face that reform?

Matheus, I think that when it comes to sugar mix and investments in sugar mix in São Paulo, and I'm not only speaking about São Martinho mills, but most mills in São Paulo, as much as we know, and we conducted a very deep study, there is no other investment that can bring quick returns that would lead us to adjust the mix and produce more ethanol. All the adjustments were made in the last cycle, 2021/2022, when sugar prices hit 21, 22 cents.

That's where we made investments at the São Martinho mill and Santa Cruz as well. Much so that these three mills, São Martinho, Santa Cruz, Iracema, all put together, these are all mills in São Paulo, they could have up to 65%, 66% of sugar, depending on the days of crop year/TRS.

Is it impossible to do more than that? No, it's not impossible.

You could also produce up to 80% of sugar, and technically, the difference, which is what they call the remainder that would then be turned into ethanol, but to invest and make 80% of sugar, that difference between 66% and 80%, that requires extremely high capex and ends won't meet. You would have to have 27 and pay off in five to six years.

This would involve making many changes, change of the boilers, the pit. It's very similar to all of the other mills in São Paulo.

This is about São Paulo. Now, let's look at Goiás.

Now, in Goiás, things are different and maybe there might be some similarities when compared to other mills in the region. In Goiás, there is a tax benefit.

It was given back when everybody invested in ethanol, and this was 2006, 2007. This benefit is extended until 2032.

We looked at making a sugar plant in the region when sugar reached 83 cents, but at that time, the ends wouldn't meet for many reasons, and among them, logistics. It was too expensive to take the sugar to the port.

Capex was extremely high. The fiscal benefit you would lose because you and sugar could be at 25 cents for many years, for you to hit a balance.

It would take a long time. It would be very hard to make an investment in sugar that will lead us to change the mix, including in the Midwest region.

Maybe after 2032 that may be an option. When the tax benefit or the fiscal benefit is removed, maybe we can revisit that, but not before 2032.

I think it's very unlikely for anyone to do that. Back in 2022 we would make that investment, but the cost of capital was different.

Today, if you consider the current cost of capital, it's very difficult for you to succeed or to make ends meet. About the tax credit, the problem with tax credit, it's taking a longer time.

Speaking about Boa Vista, you have ICMS. Since you have that fiscal benefit, we just had our corn plant, and we accumulated a bit more tax credits because I am producing more corn, and those credits were accumulated in this 2-year period.

We might change Boa Vista's mix to produce more hydrous, and we also think that in the next 3 years we might be distributing or using up all the credits or the surplus of ICMS that we got from that additional ethanol.

That's very clear. I just have another follow-up about PIS and COFINS credits that is also accumulated.

That was an important result, R$48 million.

About PIS and COFINS, that was something that in the quarter we calculated that, and at the end, we had to draw an average, and maybe the additional this quarter, that's why it grew a bit, but it should go back to normal. PIS and COFINS is much easier because, yeah, it's easier to use it.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for taking my question. I would like to go back to cost distribution of that 4% drop.

I understand that this is still based of our yield and production, also looking at the results of the first quarter. The message that I got from your yield results and also the fact that crushing days were impacted means that, in fact, we could see a scenario with lower dilution.

I just want to understand if that makes sense. Now, about the ethanol dynamics, I remember that in 2024 we went through a very similar situation.

The war was over, gas prices were down, and the ethanol parity in an oversupply scenario, was running for a few quarters of around 60%. My question is whether you see this low parity lingering longer and how do you see the carryover dynamics if the mindset is still to think that you should focus on the intercrop period?

How is your decision-making process given this backdrop with lower parity lasting for a longer period of time?

Hi, Isabella. Good afternoon.

When it comes to this dilution, in fact, what I said is that we expected higher dilution when the crop year started because we were expecting a high sugarcane volume and higher TRS, so much so that we would grow about 11% to 12% in terms of product with a very good crop year and very efficient, without any interruptions. Now when you have a crop year with many interruptions and you have to move the harvesting front from one place to another, rain is in the [Varginhas?]

region, let's move people to [Pradópolis?] , or let's relocate them to another region.

With that, you lose efficiency, and this efficiency loss eats up your cost, and with that, you lose that additional 12% of yield, and that cost reduction that you anticipated is eaten up. Having said that, what do we currently have?

Now we have more cane with higher cane volume, I have a lower TRS, and I also have more inefficiencies because of this stop-and-go due to climate issues, something that is out of my control. Since I cannot control and I don't know how this will continue going forward, it's very difficult for me to say whether this will go to 5 or 3 in terms of cost reductions.

What I know now is that my nominal number, my diesel cost is not going to go up too much, and my labor cost is not going to go up a lot. If I am more inefficient and I can extract less product, my indicator TRS per hectare will be a bit worse.

That's what I meant with my comment. São Martinho's plants today, the industrial plant and the size of our agricultural fleet, we have the best plants that can give a quick response to this current dynamics of the crop season.

We can be very efficient very quickly, unlike other mills, because the fact that you stop and go all the time, it takes longer for these other mills to start over again. That leads me to believe that this, at the end of the day, will have an impact on TRS production in general, and in turn, this will impact sugarcane given what we see today.

Today, August 11, our TRS level is something that we used to see in October when it was much wetter, when there was more water, let's say. Today is very difficult to say whether it will be -4% or -3% because of all of the reasons I already listed.

Ethanol carryover, that's a difficult question. If parity remains low and if consumption reacts, maybe it's the same answer I gave Matheus.

That's a very strategic and commercial decision of the company. At first, we understand that at a certain point we will need to sell.

It's hard to say when. If we look historically, we know, it's been 3 months that we see parity at 60%.

It shouldn't be at this level for more 3 to 4 months. Therefore, we think that there should be a recovery.

Maybe until 2 weeks ago we were really worried with sugar prices. Oh my god, what's going to happen?

Sugar will be forever low. Now the parity with ethanol will be like this forever.

We tend to perpetuate the tragedy. If we have a lot of corn ethanol, people say corn ethanol will grow forever.

They forget to say that they have to plant the tree, otherwise, you have no biomass. Ethanol, it's worse than what we anticipated earlier in the crop year.

We knew that there was supply, but we didn't think that there was no demand, we're just trying to figure out how to deal with that. We trust that demand will be resumed sooner than later.

Thank you for taking my questions. When we look at the increase of crushing in this quarter, it's slightly below, and I think this has an effect of the margin.

Also, there is the calendar effect. I just want to separate the variables.

I just want to see what you're projecting going forward and whether you had any difficulties and whether that should be compensated going forward. I just want to understand the pace of the hedging.

If you think that sugar prices will go back to normal levels, when do you think it will make more sense for the industry to hedge itself given your cash cost and the difference between you and your peers? What do you think you have in terms of hedging from now on?

Thank you.

I don't know, Bruno, if I understood all of your questions, but please correct me if I'm wrong. The first question, you're saying that the pace of the first quarter is slightly lower than the pace for the year.

That's what I said at the beginning of the call. We were estimating that crushing was growing like 8%, but I'm just increasing by 4%.

That's because there was a lot of rain in June. We have enough sugarcane to crush, even more than my guidance estimate, it was 3,700, but the issue is whether we will have enough dry days to crush.

Our estimate is that we would crush until mid-November. That may be extended a bit if it's dry, and then we can crush the entire sugarcane.

With cane, you cannot say, okay, we estimated a guidance to crush X, and then we will crush X divided by 4. It pretty much depends on the crop year days.

Some quarters we crush more, others less. This year in particular, we have this relevant effect from El Niño.

At the end of the day, if we have cane, we will crush as much as possible, but I cannot tell you how much.

Can you repeat, please? Oh, it's about hedge.

At what price level you think that people will start accelerating the hedge considering higher levels?

I think they started to hedge before we did. There is a time when the industry cannot afford just to look at the cost.

The price is right there on the screen. Prices might be dropping, I was losing 4, -4, now it's -10, but we don't have that information.

I have two follow-ups. First, on ethanol, do you believe that the industry is doing just like you?

They are carrying a lot of inventory because we hear some feedback saying since cost of capital is too high, some companies are in financial difficulties. They're producing more, but they are selling rather than holding on the inventory.

They're doing everything in the short run. If you think that is true, maybe in the intercrop things will be better.

Do you think that there will be a consumption of this inventory at a given point? Speaking about corn-based ethanol, is there any way of getting protected against El Niño, especially in the state of Goiás, because that's a region that may face a more severe El Niño, and this would impact the second corn crop season if you somehow can protect yourself?

Thank you for the questions. We're already buying corn, and even buying through contracts to protect ourselves.

We also see that even if Goiás is up by a lot, there are other regions that have a lot of volume. It will also depend on soybean crops, because if it is too late, it will impact corn.

This involves bilateral contracts with growers.

If you protect it through the stock exchange or commodities exchange, that's not a perfect hedging. Also, ethanol, it is true, I've heard that before.

We do have an advantage because our cost of capital is basically CDI. We can carry a bit more.

Every time we have to make a decision, we have to do all the calculations. In the case of sugar, it was easy because it was hedged, the decision was just to wait a bit more or to have a carry in US dollars or not.

We decided to put the money where it was best. In the case of ethanol, there is a major difference there.

Let's carry as much as we can, and then we see growers with a very tight cash position, they're selling at whatever price they can. In the case of corn-based ethanol, I think people invest in corn warehouses rather than ethanol.

They are not investing in ethanol tanks, just corn silos. They increase production, and then whatever they produce, they sell.

Then things get out of hand. Corn ethanol, whatever is produced is sold.

Let's see. Ethanol is something that I hope next quarter I will have a better story to tell you.

Thank you.

Thank you all for joining us today, and we are certainly available to answer any further questions. Have a very nice evening.