Welcome, everybody. We're going to give 1 minute for the others if anybody else wants to join, but I think we can start very, very soon.

Why don't we start, actually? Or

let's start.

Let's do it. Guys, preliminary results, usually they're the same or always the same as we published so far.

Quick summary, and Michał will deep dive into details in a second. We are quite satisfied with profitability.

Not that we don't expect to grow more, but the profits go up despite the pretty modest growth on revenues. This is something we did say in the beginning of the year that this year we expect slower dynamics on the net revenues, but we hope to optimize the profits, which is already visible, yes?

Operating profit is 30% here growing year on year, and one of the key drivers is banking. Banking revenues in this case grow also, and operating profit more than doubles.

We think it's not the end. This can continue in terms of very good banking performance, and we want to keep it up that way.

Payment, excluding PPA write-offs, slightly growing, yes? We had some write-offs, clean-up of the past investments finally.

The revenue slows down in traditional old-school business like POS and ATM, but it's offset by independent POS networks sold to the merchants and ECR business, yes? As for e-com and processing, we had some write-offs which hit and slowed down the dynamics.

Overall, we are pretty happy with the organic growth over there. In Turkey, where we had huge pressure that we mentioned because of two customers going in-house—one is finalizing this, second one is in process—we managed to compensate this very much by cost cutting, yes?

Because we had quite big team there, and we successfully are performing this exercise, which turns into reasonably good effect on that market. Dedicated solutions absolutely not satisfactory yet.

We have a slowdown on some of the tunnel, road monitoring projects and shift to Q3, Q4 of these projects, this is impacting the operating profit. PPA and goodwill write-offs, Michał will mention more about it, but this is between operating profit and net profits affecting net profit on €3 million, so that's why the discrepancy in the dynamics between the two lines.

Cash flow, excellent. We don't expect this to get worse, maybe only better, cash conversion very good, and significantly improved the last 12 months, yes?

Transactional business, this e-com drop that I mentioned, also resulting from Turkey and some of the recognition from Middle East and India last year, which we reversed later on in following quarters last year, but this is cleaned, and very nice dynamics of independent POS and processing of physical transactions. This is nicely growing.

Let's look at the numbers. Michał, please.

Let's

let's go to numbers. Our traditional view on numbers.

First two columns, full numbers including hyperinflation, and third and fourth excluding hyperinflation reporting. Here, as we already mentioned, flat on top line, but with change of structure of revenues, growth of own activities by around €8 million with with decline of third-party, resale.

Operating profit excluding hyperinflation is 27%, 30 with hyperinflation as as we commented. Net profit, here it's slightly lower than last year, 4 4% below.

This is mostly due to financial activity. In balance of financial activity is change of balance of financial activity year-over-year is -€3.2 million.

Out of this, 2.1 is write-off of remaining part of goodwill on Indian operations. Now goodwill is is in zero net net value.

Plus restatements of put-call liabilities and earn-outs. Here we had positive impact last year around €1.9 million.

This was first step of restating liabilities related to to India and Dubai. Now this year we don't have this, so net there is €1.4 million lower result.

From positive ones in financial activity, it's €300,000 lower cost of dividends paid to non-controlling interest in case of present ownership method. This is mostly related to IfThenPay, which paid dividend earlier this year in Q1.

On accumulated numbers, there is no this this drop simply here difference between quarters. Taxes, taxes are slightly higher, around €400,000 more taxes simply because of higher operating profit and profit before tax.

When we look at results adjusted for those items which are by definition not not related with with tax, like goodwill write-off and so on, effective tax rate is slightly slightly lower than than in previous previous year. Let's have a look at results now by business units by segments.

Banking, here we have the biggest growth, only growth, top line, €4 million bigger than in 2025. It was delivered by all three business lines which we have in in banking, core solutions, multichannel solutions, and security security portfolio.

The growth is mostly like 65% more or less on own services, implementation, and modifications, and the remaining part, it's recurring SaaS and maintenance revenues. Geographically speaking, growth is mostly in Southeastern Europe, in in Serbia and Croatia as the leading ones, plus in smaller values in Bosnia and Herzegovina, plus in Central Europe, in in Romania.

This growth of revenues was like one-to-one transformed to to operating profit, which which increased €4.1 million versus previous year and reached almost €8 million with profitability of 35%. Dedicated solutions, here flattish revenues.

As already mentioned, we have some cases in road projects where the work was done, but we are not able to to recognize or or we need to create some allowances due to some external factors and delays with with approvals for for some sections of of tunnels or highways. With our strict policies, we we we prefer to to do this way.

Operating profit slightly lower than than in than in previous year in in dedicated solutions. The last line, payment.

Here we have drop of revenues by almost €4 million. In a moment, few words more on which product lines.

Operating profit, which is slightly lower, 600k than previous year, but this includes write-off of assets recognized during purchase price allocation, PPA, for Indian operations. If we exclude this non-cash write-off, which was €1.23 million, there is growth of operating profit by around €700,000.

In in payment, very good quarter, as already mentioned, for ECRs and IPD. Here we have growth of revenues by €1.6 million, and this is this is mostly Western Europe, Spain, plus in Southeastern Europe, Croatia and and Slovenia.

E-commerce and processing, flat year year-over-year. However, here we have drop of revenues in India, India and Dubai, around €1.4 million, which was compensated by increase in Turkey, Portugal, and Spain.

For ATMs and POSs, the drops are related with lower deliveries. In case of ATM business line, it is it is mostly Southeastern Europe, only Southeastern Europe, Croatia, half of this drop, and also Montenegro and and Bosnia.

In case of POS, this traditional POS line, drop of revenues is mostly related with with Western Europe, Spain, where the deliveries of of Android POS terminals were smaller. Let's have a look at geography.

Southeastern Europe, the strongest one, almost €3 million growth of operating profit, mostly in Serbia and Croatia. As I have mentioned, Serbia mostly banking, Croatia it's banking, but also in payment, ECR/IPD business, plus in this case also the dedicated solutions was better than in in previous year.

Smaller growth in Macedonia, in banking and in dedicated solutions, and some slowdown both on revenues and operating profit in Bosnia, and it's related with road projects, which I already mentioned, plus in previous year, this entity, which is responsible for utilities business, they had some project already in Q2, and this year there was no no such project. Central Europe, growth of revenues and operating profit.

This is mostly Romanian banking as as the biggest contributor. Western Europe, we have drop of revenues due to lower deliveries of POS terminals, and also drop of operating profit, which was partially compensated by growth of e-commerce, which what I already commented before.

Turkey, pretty good, growth of revenues and growth of operating projects, visible effect of all these cost reduction actions which we took in Q4 last year and beginning of this this year to address the the loss of two two clients, or maybe not loss, but the fact that they switched transactions to their own own payment gateways. India, Dubai, huge drop of revenues quite significant.

I commented this on the e-com, but flat flat result. If we look at PPA's line, as was third from the bottom, we have drop of result by 700k, and this is related with those write-offs of of PPA assets which I described.

If we exclude this, this cost like regular depreciation cost would be around €1 million, lower than in in previous year. This is something what we should expect for coming coming quarters.

This this was about Q2. Now accumulated view for for two quarters, it is very similar to to to to the one for Q2 only.

As you see, slight growth on on top line, 3% year-over-year. EBITDA, EBIT growth 20%.

The difference is that there is also growth on net profit. Here what is what thanks to what is that in 2025 Q1, there was a loss recognized on sale of subsidiary in Turkey, Mobven.

This year there is no such a event, is it it affects year-over-year dynamics positively. This, and I think this, yeah, this is the biggest the biggest effect.

Taxes, of course, on accumulated data also are higher by €1.3 million, but the same or similar comment as for Q2 only, no growth of effective tax rate. When you look at segments, again, very similar picture.

Big growth of revenues in banking, €6.3 million, and EBIT higher by €5.5 million, also improved profitability from 22 to 32%. Like about contribution by business lines or geographies, exactly the same comment as for Q2 Q2 numbers.

Dedicated solutions, here we have growth of revenues, so a bit different than only Q2, and slight, very very minor, but but increase of operating profit. In payments, drop of drop of revenues and drop of operating profit by 600k.

If we adjust for for write-off, it will be also slight slight increase. When talking about drops of revenues in payment, ATMs and POSs deliveries, exactly the same as in in Q2.

Drop on ATMs is lower than in Q2 only due to some deliveries which were which happened in Q1. E-commerce, here we have drop on accumulated data, and this is due to two things.

One is India and Dubai Q1 2025 was last quarter of high results, there is a drop here year-over-year. Plus in Turkey, Q1 2025, it was also before clients switched transactions.

As one one client already started, or switched transactions partially, and another the second one started the switch later, so that's why we have this this split, this drop year-over-year. ECRs/IPD, very strong and and growing for two quarters.

Short view on countries. Again, very similar picture, the the strongest, Southeastern Europe, more than €5 million higher operating profit.

The growth mostly Serbia, Croatia, and Macedonia, exactly the same as as Q2. Slight decline in in Bosnia.

Central Europe, €1 million higher result, and thanks, and it's the same as in Q2, thanks to Romania and banking. Western Europe, slightly slightly lower.

Also the same comment: growing e-com and and shrinking traditional POS business. Turkey, flat, flattish revenues revenues, but increase of results thanks to those restructuring actions we we've taken, yes?

Middle East and India, here is this clearly visible, this what I what I commented. Huge drop of revenues due to Q1, Q1 '25, and and drop of operating profit by €1.6 million.

This is about result. Let's move to cash flow.

It's very good, as as already Piotr mentioned. €38 million operating cash flow for for two quarters, and this is €13.5 million more than for this in the same period of 2025, significant improvement, with lower investments in infrastructure for outsourcing and own networks, slightly slightly higher expenditures on M&A, but these are not new entities.

These are expenditures for put-call options and and earn-outs, mostly put-call on BS Telecom in Bosnia, this road road business, plus Avera in Slovenia, which is in in payments. When we look at operating cash flow/EBITDA conversion rate, last 12 months, first column, 91% of EBITDA converted to to net operating cash flow.

We believe very good very good level, and and we are satisfied. Current balance sheet, €61 million cash as end of June, it's €13 million lower than end of last year.

We need to remember that end of June, on 30th June, we've paid dividend for 2025, plus of course we had those investments in in M&As which we've done in during this period. Net cash, €26 million, slightly higher than end of the end of last year, and significantly better than than end of Q2 2025.

As you see below, in working capital, drop of receivables, bigger drop of receivables than than drop of liabilities. It's of course of course good.

Slightly increased POC valuation assets, this is related with status of of projects and and realization. We expect more to be closed and invoiced in in second half of the of the year.

This about balance sheet. Let's move to to outlook for '26 and backlog.

Piotr, do you want to take this? Yes, yes.

Backlog, guys, is improving slightly. As mentioned, we do expect a slowdown on the revenue side this year versus past couple of years, even though you can see slight acceleration compared to previous conferences or previous outlooks that we have performed.

It's big in payment, the growth, then the banking, and dedicated solutions, yes? So 8% roughly in payment, slightly below that in the other ones.

We do expect this to grow a little bit still in the second half of the year. In terms of outlook, we do focus on efficiency, on profitability.

We were asked in the morning on the Polish conference where the biggest upsides are. I would say the quick ones, the biggest ones, are on the loss-bringing units, which we try to eliminate.

Only last year, loss-bringing units, business units, generated about €12.5 million losses. I cannot tell you that we will have no loss-bringing units at all, because some of them are on the early-stage investment phases where we want to develop the business and deliberately we subsidize it in the initial phase.

Overall, we do expect a big improvement on that side as well as on not the best contracts that we try to restructure, renegotiate, and improved, yes? People efficiency, observing this, their workload, and time track is another area which we try to squeeze and improve.

We are pretty positive about second half of the year. Yes, the outlook is positive as before with less risk of negative downturn, and also for '27, we have pretty positive initial views, but this we will comment later in the future.

Having said that, I'm open with Michał to your questions. Please, you can write them on chat or you can voice them out.

Let us know if you have any requirements for additional explanations, clarifications, or anything else that you'd like to know. I think we can unmute so people can talk, yes?

Monika, I hope you can do it, huh? Yes,

it's unmuted.

Guys, any questions? I was asked, is profitability of 20 on EBITDA level of moving from above 20 to 30 possible in the near future?

I think it is possible. I'm not saying this year, but '27 should be achievable, yes, or at least moving very much north in terms of this target.

Listen, if there's no more questions, we are inviting you to direct contact. Oh.

"Will it be on the new compensation scheme that is currently discussed at ACP level?" I'd love to, actually.

Yes, I was hoping this would happen in '25 already, but this was a bit delayed by Asseco Poland discussions. We are sort of prepared and ready to do it from '26, yes, unless our supervisors or whatever will stop this.

We are very much happy to have ROIC-based and net revenue growth-based compensation as management. People know about it, it was announced, everybody knows we are moving into this direction.

It's more a matter of formal decision and approval for this decision than organizational readiness. We had one question.

I am not sure if I know what you mean by EBIT floor for ASE. Floor is the lowest level we can have by 20 20 because do I know the EBIT floor for ASE?

Can you specify more what by floor you mean? You can do it on chat, or the lowest EBIT expected.

If it's the lowest EBIT expected, I wouldn't go there, but definitely we expect growth compared to last year, as mentioned before, yes?

I think you unmuted me, right?

Everybody's unmuted.

Just a quick question on that one. Congratulations on the good numbers, and definitely very nice to see how the business is improving on the profitability side.

I'm just quite curious about if you think about the current compensation scheme that's now coming or is discussed at ACP, I was wondering, I know there's some EBIT floor in terms of margin that the business has to achieve so you receive the majority of your bonus. I was wondering, I know that the bonus scheme is not in place yet, that's something to discuss in the general meeting next month.

I was wondering if you already know what's the target for Asseco South Eastern Europe when it comes to EBIT margin floor that the parent company is expecting you to be at?

First, I'm not aware, and second, to be honest, I don't think this is being even discussed because I never heard about a floor level or something like this, yes? I can say internally we are probably overperforming the numbers compared to what we said most probably we'll do, and I never heard any disappointment or concern over this, yes?

Basically for us, the major drive is willingness to do more, get higher and better, and we want to do it actually a bit quicker than maybe assumed. Let's see how it goes.

We are undergoing a major transformation. Out is here, and I hope we'll continue next year, but it will be much more visible next year, yes?

We didn't get any floor on EBIT level. Yes, nothing like this was mentioned.

There is

no minimum EBIT thresholds, right?

No. There isn't.

Actually, the thing which is being disputed is that our variables are much bigger than, for example, TSS or CSI standard, yes, in proportion of the total compensation, yes? The question is how to address this, yes, whether to increase the fixes or to have a different split of share-based payment and cash-based payment in existing variables, something like this, yes?

This is one of the topics being discussed and disputed, yes? That's it.

I hope I answered you roughly, yes? Have I, or?

I appreciate, Piotr. I will just send you the proposal that I've seen, and maybe that helps a little bit what I'm talking about.

We have a formula that is used in TSS, and it's being discussed with Asseco Poland, and we have tested it, looked at it. There's nothing, Michał, that I think would surprise us.

I don't remember any floor topics there, no?

I just have it in front of me, and there's something it's called minimum EBIT threshold. That's what I was relating to.

I know that's the reason why TSS is doing that is usually because they want to make sure that the businesses are not doing everything to just keep growing recurring revenues, but as well to maintain some minimum profitability. That's why they usually have this EBIT threshold.

That's maybe you have it differently sourced in Asseco South Eastern Europe, I don't know. Maybe maybe

maybe this is a nuance just to control because in the formula you have a formula of net revenue growth and also the return on invested capital, they want this this to be compensated by pure revenue growth without having the the ROIC in place, yes? Maybe this is about having this minimum return on invested capital or proportion of EBITDA to to the capital invested to make sure that we don't have a units, business units or operations which just focus on growth, and they are notoriously losing money or or they are inefficient, yes?

Probably this is some safety safety valve or something like this for this this purpose, yes? This is what I would imagine.

Appreciate, Piotr. Guys, good luck.

Yeah.

We have much more questions if you want to stay, because I see they just popped up. Yes?

So, "Have you changed your process for building the M&A pipeline in the past year? If so, how?

How has the pace of signing NDAs or non-binding letters of intent changed?" Actually, look, we focus slightly more.

We didn't stop building the pipeline and looking at the M&As, we continue. Actually, we are strengthening the M&A team now as we talk, and this is in progress.

To be honest, we are putting much more focus on our current operations, current businesses, to have a clean slate, not to have loss-bringing business units, and to have operating managers who can assume responsibility for the future M&As, because one of the major changes which we introduced is that we don't do M&As which would not have an owner of an operating manager who would later assume for restructuring or ongoing business personal portfolio responsibility for this case, yes, and defend it, yes? We want them to have a proper track record of being able to do this, yes, even with their current businesses.

We are making sure on the trainings, on the education, and on the transformation of their existing business that they are prepared for this task. Having said that, it doesn't slow us to build a pipeline or even discuss with some targets that fulfill these conditions that I just mentioned, that have the owner.

Where is the complexity or where might be a slight slowdown? Actually, we are benefiting from some of the framework of TSS for M&As to review the targets and to analyze them with quite detailed scenario analysis and plans forward with executive plans how to do the transformation with these units, and what type of actions you take if it doesn't go the way you really want, or what evidence you have you can do what you plan or evidence from the past.

Preparing this is excellent exercise. We are very happy with this.

It helps us a lot, but is also very labor-intensive and requires from us a lot of preparation and education and preparation. This slowed down the process a little bit, but I think for the good, yes?

We have a couple of companies in the pipeline. I think we might acquire two to three companies this year still, none of them very big.

One of them is bigger, but let's see if this can happen this year. We are undergoing this process I just described.

We plan to accelerate, actually, in for sure '27 and onwards, yes? "Can you give a rough sense of how your process of changes in receivables by contract have changed from what to what, and how much farther can that go?"

Michał will give you more details, but we are tracking more carefully cash flow, and of course when you discuss the client engagement in working capital, we try to minimize working capital and try to have as much prepayments as possible for our contracts, or payments as we go, and to actually eliminate if possible post-contract payments after finishing the contract that we get only paid, yes, both because of cash flow reasons and operating reasons, yes? Michał, would you add anything to this?

No, with the policies for write-offs and so on, there are no changes. We always were very strict, and we keep to be strict here, no changes, just pushing to what you said, Piotr, to prepayments and so on, collecting this after.

Michał introduced tools for people to track it, to evidence it, yes? Now it's more about education and ability to transform this or translate or to renegotiate the relationship with the customers.

As for the conservative approach to receivables and recognition, there is conservative and there is hyperconservative. I think Michał is on this hyper side, I'm on conservative side, but he's deciding here, so that's why sometimes we have a bit of lumping up in the Q3 and Q4, but I appreciate the conservative, because it doesn't run away, and we want to put pressure on our managers not to recognize too quickly and to be happy without having the cash and actually closure of the project following, yes?

"Deferred revenues, it looks like it has improved." Actually, we have not disclosed this data, but I can tell you that no, question, what do you mean by improved?

They increased a bit, yes, but it's somehow, I think, related with receivables where we say let's get upfront money, prepayments, then it becomes deferred revenues, yes? They are slightly higher.

Look, the next questions: "Is the slowdown in revenues a result of cutting or trimming unprofitable areas, business units, products, regions, and can we give examples?" Definitely India, Dubai, it's a cut.

We said it's a waste of our management effort, we have much bigger leverage elsewhere and much more probability to get the cash out of other, but I don't think this had this big impact in the scale of our operations, yes? I would say this is visible slowdown after big growth overall.

One of them is for sure POS and ATM business, which is lower value-added, but this is slowing down, and it had quite big revenues margin-one dynamics, yes? In Spain, we had a couple of years of notorious replacement of the fleet of terminals by our customers to Android terminals, and this phase has been finalized, it slowed down, yes?

What else? Big projects, we had a wave of big core banking replacements and others in the region, now we do more side projects, modifications, improvements, change requests, and channel solutions developments, which also grow as you see in banking, but probably the big, big project type of things has declined a bit.

We see in public administration, we have a big, big market in Serbia, and probably elections this year, they plan elections every year, there is kind of a political turmoil, and in the public there is definitely a slowdown over there, we don't see much happening in this domain, it's pretty much organic slowdown, not us resigning from participating, but also these projects not popping up that much. To cut the long story short, I wouldn't say this is an effect of us resigning from some opportunities or being much more cautious with that.

We are cautious, but this would not be that scale. Michał, any?

Yes. I agree.

It's mostly the drop is POS and ATM deliveries, yes? Plus a bit in dedicated solutions, where we have this road business, which was pretty strong last year, some projects were on the phases when equipment was delivered.

This year, we have drop in this, yes? It's not that we stopped, yes.

We will see in second half of the year, we expect, as I mentioned, very good, but for example, for comparable numbers, we had the utilities billing company and utilities company having an amazing year where they grew from half a million to €13 million EBITDA last year, from '24 to '25. This year, they'll have very nice results, but significantly lower than 13, yes.

You can see there is some wave. The recurring revenue for them is growing, but this professional services business has dropped in this case.

It's, I would say, it's a result of more economic regional cycle, not something happening in a downturn, and it's more customer-related cycle or kind of political cycle locally, but not something I would say that macroeconomic or something resulting from our policy directly. In Turkey, a bit slowdown with this payment, e-commerce, because of these customers going in-house, but there's a lot of small things, but not something that is an effect of us slowing the market expansion because of non-profitable approach.

"Can you give a broader sense of why you have had success with the financial software: new customers, high prices, new modules?" Oh, a good question, tough one, yeah, but I think all of this.

We are expanding the portfolio into channel solutions and trying to push this channel solutions and trying to have a more quality discussion where the value creation is for the customer, not where we imagine, but where the customer sees it, and I can tell you there's an ocean of opportunities there, because the approach of ours to the customer is still very much responsive, not proactive, and I'm absolutely not happy with this, yes? We are pushing that direction.

Second thing is on prices. We are looking at maintenance.

It's a work in progress. Yes, we have started a little bit, I don't think this is finalized.

We have a lot of support, maintenance contracts which were not indexed or inflation indexed only, our customers are two, three times bigger and our maintenance is 20% bigger than 10 years ago, yes? We see that some of the very important, critical solutions for our customers didn't have the proper price carrier to show the weight of the services we provide and the service we provide for the customer to reflect this in the pricing.

That's the second aspect. There's a cost aspect, which also we started, but it's just the beginning.

I think the teams in many cases have grown tremendously, and we are losing some of the efficiency, yes? The time tracking, the efficiency tracking within the team, utilization leaves a lot to wish for, and some measures were already taken, but I said it's initial measures, and I think we can squeeze out much more efficiency, especially with application of AI tools.

There is, again, a lot of opportunities to increase our internal efficiency and profitability on these, yes? A lot of our financial products are very mature products.

We are going with new portfolios, new things, they are less profitable, but the old ones should be more profitable than they are today. Yes, they are very well-tested, matured solutions which deserve higher profitability than we have today.

"Can you please help us to understand the extent to which code is being produced now with AI coding tools, and is the pace of new models different than, say, 18 months ago, and is the price of these new models different: the same, higher, or lower?" I wish to say yes.

I would say we are pushing very much, very aggressively AI adoption in different areas. We see this is happening in kind of individual mode, including in the teams, and people are helping themselves out.

Still, the effect of AI usage is consumed mostly by the users, not by the company. We want to take it over, yes?

I think in many instances, the employees are taking the benefit of releasing themselves from pressure and time, having more free time thanks to the usage of these tools, yes? Now we have different programs and trackings and initiatives how to monetize these initiatives either on a cost side or extra revenue side, yes?

One of the very visible aspects is nobody is asking for extra employment anymore, yes? New employment has stopped, and replacement of leaving employees also pretty much stopped, yes, on engineering side.

This is the side effect, but not monetized enough. We are starting to deploy agents to automate some of the things we are doing, again, beginning of the road.

I'm pretty optimistic in the next year what we can squeeze out of this, but this will require very big discipline on our side and pressure also from the management to achieve this. To cut the long story short, we are in the beginning of the road.

Many people are using it, many people are deploying AI tools. We are not yet efficient in monetizing this ourselves, and this is our target.

"Are you thinking exactly the same of the ATM leasing hardware business that you were 18 months ago? Is there a world where you would no longer have any of the hardware at all on your balance sheet?"

Look, first of all, we will be more disciplined, not that we were not, but we were trying if we had hardware on our balance sheet, we were financing it with debt. Not all of it.

Now, we will finance all of the outsource things with debt, yes? This is back-to-back, it's on the balance sheet, but it's leverage, yes?

That's how we want to offload the capital deployment or kind of pressure on capital utilization unnecessary on us, yes? Still, I would stick that this is being able to outsource, putting it on the balance sheet is one of the more effective ways to increase the stickiness of that business, yes?

We don't want to resign from that, not at all, but we want to be more disciplined in leveraging this business, and which doesn't seem to be any issue, it's more about doing it not partially or not in every second case, but in all the cases and fully. I don't think we have any tool or available tools already.

We have them in place, and we can use them. Right, Michał?

I think this is the approach, if I understood your question properly. Can I imagine there will be no hardware on our balance sheet?

Of course I can imagine. Luckily or unluckily, my imagination is pretty big, yes?

For good and bad. I would say probably it will not be abrupt kind of immediate effect or something like this.

I would expect this to be a result of market trends, yes? We might see that some of these businesses are not attractive enough for us that we resign from performing them.

That's it. That's what can happen, yes?

We are tracking this to what extent we hit our profitability thresholds and others, and where to diversify and where to use our resources elsewhere, yes? If this is stopping to be interesting, then we'll do it.

A good example of this is infrastructure business that in 2010, 2012, this was majority of the business performed by this company. Today, this is absolutely minority, and dropping, and these units, which we call advanced infrastructure services, are in an accelerated mode moving to pure service units, not infrastructure units, and more and more using subcontractors and some others to provide equipment, yes?

This might be the case also here, and we are absolutely happy with this and even supporting this to focus on high-value-added solutions. "Did you already find a solution how leads will be treated between us and TSS, or will you find yourself competing with TSS on leads?"

I don't know if you talk about sales leads or M&A leads, yes? I can answer both.

In sales leads, absolutely we have very little overlap, but also where there is some overlap, this is a competition. On M&A, deal signed between Asseco Poland or actually Adam Góral's foundation and TSS assumes competition on M&A level, yes?

We don't share leads on M&A level. No, we don't.

"Does your ATM business clear a 20% hurdle rate on—" I assume this is, Michał, on profitability level, no? Or...

I think this is the ROIC, question.

If you talk about profitability on EBITDA level...

On ROIC.

On ROIC? You see, well, there is I wouldn't say a trick.

I think it's very fair what we've done, but I owe you an explanation. When we were allocating with Michał, we sat on it, the capital, we got a capital, we have to defend as ASE, yes, on a group level, yes?

We got a certain amount, say, this is your capital, now this is it, get the proper return out of it. We didn't allocate it based on revenues or net revenues to business units, we allocated this based on, let's say, some valuations based on market comparables, stock market comparables for different business units.

What does it mean? It means that high-value-added businesses like banking or e-commerce, they got the biggest load of capital, and their initial starting ROIC is the lowest.

Whereas businesses like ATM were treated very favorably, because we don't believe their growth potential is so big, and the restructuring or value proposition we can build on top of it is huge, we were much more modest with allocating capital to them. What does it mean?

That we are close, we are slightly below 20%, yes, Michał, from what I remember?

It was slightly above,

so... It probably depends which business unit.

This hurdle rate is not an issue here, but to be very honest, this is the reason that I explained earlier, yes? The starting point was pretty favorable for them.

For POS, it was more ambitious in terms of they got a bigger allocation than ATM business, yes? The biggest was for software units and e-com businesses.

I hope I answered. "Can you give us sense, cost-wise, how you are using and paying for the AI tools, and cost savings in particular?

Like, always using the frontier models, using the older models to save the money, using open-source models, or something else?" Good.

Look, basically, I will not say something you haven't read or heard, but now the common opinion is that open-source models are a bit 6 months behind the frontier models. If you see what the frontier models could do half a year ago, the answer is pretty a lot.

There is no necessity to use frontier models unless for very specialized and very sophisticated tools. Of course, we are tracking the cost.

This is completely insignificant for now in our case, the AI spending, we don't see. We are talking a lot about it, evangelizing and training people to beware, because we know already cases from sister companies, other companies, where this is going through the roof if uncontrolled, yes?

Basically, we heavily promote the AI usage, on the other hand, we track the costs. More difficult will be, but we put a lot of focus to track the impact, the effect on business of the AI application, because cost is easy, but what about the basically two areas: new revenues or cost cuts, yes, more efficiency on the cost side?

This is something which we are unhappy with so far, because we think this is not yet properly visualized and monetized by our group. Definitely, we are looking at platforms which will help us to deploy with the use of open source some of the tools, this would be for more agentic AI and agents using, yes, and we are in discussion with them and already deploying some of the initiatives.

As for more software and coding, we are looking at the conditions different group companies have, different TSS including, and seeing if we can benefit of the wholesale pricing if we want to use the frontier models, and open source, which type of gateways we can use for flexibility, elasticity, and security, most importantly, in using them. I don't know if I answered the question partially, probably, but partially.

That's AI, it's difficult to answer precisely. Any more questions?

Please. Anyhow, thanks a lot for them.

This was kind of fun, and very much appreciated that you look at details of all this. Keep your fingers crossed for what we do and where we are heading.

Join us for the ride if you wish to. Oh, we have new information, new?

No, just thank you. We invite you to direct contact if you wish to have a call with us or some additional one-to-one explanations.

We are very much open to this. As you see, no many secrets, unless something is secret, but we try to be pretty open on most of the things, yes?

Thanks. Enjoy I don't know wherever you are, either afternoon or morning, and see you soon.

Thank you. Bye-bye.

Thank you. Bye.