Good morning, everyone. Despite a challenging market environment, BCG once again demonstrated the resilience of its business model.

We delivered a solid financial results, with both revenue and EBITDA growing by 7%, while maintaining our industry-leading EBITDA margin of 78%. The significant headwind came from Auto24 business line, where the introduction of the new car tax in Estonia reduced listing volumes.

Excluding this one-off impact, the rest of the group delivered double-digit growth. Looking across our verticals, Real Estate was our strongest performer, growing by impressive 17%.

Jobs & Services also had an excellent year, accelerating from 7% growth in the first half of the year to 11% in the second half of the year, resulting 9% growth for the full year. Automotive remained stable, despite significant volume headwinds, meanwhile our Generalist marketplace continued to deliver a steady growth of 3%.

Given our exceptionally strong balance sheet and attractive market valuations, we significantly accelerated our share buyback program. By mid-June 2026, the company has repurchased over 10% of its issued share capital.

Finally, I am pleased to announce that the board has proposed a final dividend of 3.1 euro cents per share, representing a 19% increase compared to a year ago, subject to shareholder approval at AGM. One of the key indicators we closely monitor is our leadership position relative to our nearest competitors.

I'm pleased to report that our leadership remains exceptionally strong across all major marketplaces, with traffic levels ranging from 5 to more than 60 times those of our closest competitors. Overall, our traffic mix has remained very stable.

The majority of the visitors continue to access our marketplace directly, which reflects the strength of our brand and loyalty of our users. The traffic from GenAI platforms remained negligible.

While this channel is growing, it has primarily shifted traffic away from traditional search engines, while the direct traffic continues to grow. I think this is a very important thing to highlight.

Our people continue to be one of the BCG greatest strengths. In our latest employee engagement survey, more than 95% of employees said they are proud to be part of BCG.

This level of engagement is reflected in our exceptional average employee tenure of 8 years, which is a remarkable for a technology company. We also remained committed to diversity and inclusion.

Our workforce is well-balanced, with almost equal gender split, and women hold 50% of leadership positions. This places BCG among top performers within FTSE 250 for gender and diversity.

Finally, we continued to make a good progress on sustainability. Since 2022, we have reduced our CO2 emissions by 75%, supported by our continued transition to renewable energy, which now accounts for 88% of our total energy consumption.

Now I'll hand over to Lina to speak about finance in more details.

Thank you, Justinas. Morning, everyone.

I will now take you through the financial results in detail, starting with the revenue performance. On the right side, you see total revenue information over the past 2 years by business line.

On the left, the Classifieds revenue, accounting for 91% of group's revenue, and split by business line as well: the B2C revenue, that's business client subscriptions, and C2C customers using self-service, mainly individuals. The group delivered revenue of €88.5 million for the year, a 7% increase on the prior year.

Growth was driven by continued monetization progress across our core Classifieds revenue streams, and last spring we implemented C2C pricing changes across all our major platforms, and these have contributed to performance throughout the entire year, and as in previous years, we introduced B2C pricing and packaging changes from September and October. Artūras will cover the key drivers of growth in more detail later in the presentation, but in summary, Real Estate, representing 29% of group revenue, was again our strongest performing business line, with revenue growing 17% to €26 million.

B2C grew 20% of Real Estate, and C2C grew 12%. Autos, representing 36% of group revenue, and was flat at €31.5 million.

Auto B2C grew 11%, but this was offset by a 9% decline in C2C revenue. Jobs & Services, generating one fifth of the group revenue, grew 9% to €17.4 million, with both B2C and C2C each growing 9%.

Generalist, being 15% of group revenue, and predominantly C2C, grew 3% to €13.6 million. In total, B2C revenue, representing 54% of group revenue, grew 13%, and C2C, representing 37% of group revenue, grew 1%.

The remaining 9% comprises advertising and ancillary revenues, which together were broadly flat at €8.1 million. I'm now turning to cost and profitability.

People costs remain our largest operating expense, representing approximately 14% of group revenue and almost 65% of operating costs before depreciation and amortization at €12.8 million. Programming, development costs are within people costs and handled in-house.

Now the 2% increase reflects three main factors: a growth in headcount, we ended the year with 163 full-time employees, that's 7 full-time employees more than a year ago; annual salary reviews in line with Baltic wage inflation, approximately 10%; and these were significantly offset by performance share plan, PSP, costs decrease. 2026 has €0.3 million costs in relation to PSP, down from €1.9 million in the prior year, thus reflecting performance below the PSP targets.

Marketing costs represent 1.5% of revenue, and the majority of group's traffic is direct, paid search traffic is minimal, and this year we had some targeting marketing expenditure, particularly across social media channels, aimed at younger audiences. IT costs, which is third-party services costs, continue to be 1% of revenue, and other costs, predominantly administrative and data acquisition costs, 5% of revenue.

Our total operating costs, excluding depreciation and amortization, were €19.9 million, an increase of 8% on the prior year. Maybe that previous slide.

EBITDA grew in line with revenue, 7%, to 68.6 million euros. The EBITDA margin was maintained at 78%, unchanged from the prior year.

Below EBITDA, depreciation and amortization decreased 24% to €8.3 million, and the principal driver was a 26% reduction in amortization of acquired intangibles, reflecting the full amortization of customer relationship assets recognized on the 2019 and 2020 acquisitions. This reduction is a reason why operating profit of €60.4 million grew faster than EBITDA, at 13%.

Operating profit, adjusted for the acquired intangibles amortization, grew in line with EBITDA. Now moving to our cash generation, debt, and leverage.

Cash generated from operating activities grew by 5% to €69.9 million, and maintaining our cash conversion ratio at 99%, consistent with recent years and demonstrating the quality of our earnings. After income tax and net interest payments, net cash inflow from operating activities was €60.4 million.

Looking at the net debt bridge, we started the year in near net cash position, with net debt of €4.4 million, and over the course of the year, we drew on new debt facilities to fund accelerated share buybacks program. I will expand on the capital allocation more on a later slide.

In January 2026, we refinance our existing debt facilities. The new arrangement with the bank comprises a €125 million term loan facility, which may be drawn in tranches, and a €20 million revolving credit facility.

At the same time, we repaid in full the €15 million remaining under the previous facility, and by the end of financial year, 73 €73 million had been drawn under the new term loan. Operating cash flows, combined with partial drawings under the new debt facility, funded share repurchases for cancellation totaling almost €77 million, that's a payment amount, and purchases of company's shares to EBT for €3.1 million alongside dividend payments of €18.7 million during the year.

We closed the year with net debt of €46.2 million, representing leverage of 0.7 times EBITDA, up from 0.1 times at the prior year end. Since April 2026, a further €45 million has been drawn to continue the share buyback program, bringing the total dividend drawings under the new facility to €118 million as at the date of this announcement.

The remaining term loan capacity is €7 million, with the full €20 million revolving credit facility remaining undrawn. In this slide, you see the consolidated profit or loss summary.

The revenue, EBITDA, operating profit, and adjusted operating profit have been explained earlier. Before I go to the rest of the lines, the only adjustment to our financial performance metrics is amortization of acquired intangibles with the deferred tax impact.

Starting from net finance costs, it accounted to €1.8 million, a reduction from €2.4 million in prior year. Although interest expense increased in the second half of 2026 following drawings under the new debt facilities, this was more than offset by a lower average debt balance during the first half of the year and also interest income earned on the cash balances.

Profit before tax grew by 15% to €58.6 million, and the effective tax rate increased from 12% to 13%, primarily as a result of corporate income tax rate in Lithuania rising from 15% to 16%. Income tax expense was €7.7 million.

From 2026, the Lithuanian corporate income tax rate increases from 16% to 17%, and following the repayment of historical intercompany funding, the group Estonian operations are now generating distributable profits. Now under the Estonian and Latvian tax regimes, profits are taxed only when distributed.

The group continues to assess capital allocation opportunities, including reinvestment and M&A, and no decision has been made to distribute profit from Estonia or Latvian subsidiaries. If we were to decide to do so in the foreseeable future, we would recognize an immediate one-off tax charge of around €6 million on accumulated profits, and thereafter profits generated in Estonia and Latvia would give rise to an annual deferred tax charge at the applicable rates of 22% and 20% respectively, to the extent they are expected to be distributed.

Accounting profit for the year grew 14%, and adjusted net income, the reference metric used for capital allocation policy, grew 7% to €58.1 million. It adds back the post-tax impact of acquired intangible amortization and the associated deferred tax.

On a per-share basis, adjusted basic EPS grew 9% to 12.3 euro cents, and basic EPS grew 16% to 10.8 euro cents. Both EPS measures grew faster than the net income growth, reflecting the reduction in the weighted average share count resulting from the share buyback and cancellation program.

I will now turn to our capital allocation policy. Now since IPO in 2021, our capital allocation policy has been to return materially all adjusted net income to shareholders, historically through dividends of around 1/3 and the balance through share buybacks and debt repayment.

During the first half of 2026, we became net cash positive. In 2026, the board concluded that the company's share price didn't reflect the underlying fundamentals or long-term prospects, and it considered market concerns regarding the long-term impact of AI to be materially more cautious than our own assessment, and viewed recent trading headwinds as temporary.

Accordingly, we introduced leverage to fund an accelerated share buyback program. The €145 million debt facilities secured in January provided the capacity to execute the strategy.

By year-end, we had repurchased and canceled 7.6% of company's issued share capital, increasing to 10% by mid-June. Now following shareholder approval in May, we intend to continue repurchasing shares, subject to market conditions, available authority, and the group's capital position.

At the September AGM, we expect to seek authority to repurchase up to 15% of the company issued share capital. As always, these authorities represent maximum authority rather than intention to utilize it in full.

Continuation of the accelerated share buyback program beyond the group's existing financing capacity would require additional debt financing, and the board has not established fixed thresholds for either leverage or share price. Capital allocation decisions will continue to be based on information available at the time.

Turning to dividends, the board has also adopted a progressive ordinary dividend policy, and under this policy, the ordinary dividend will grow broadly in line with adjusted net income, while preserving flexibility in the group's broader capital allocation framework. Accordingly, we're recommending a final ordinary dividend of 2.8 euro cents per share, together with a special dividend of 0.3 euro cents per share.

Together, this maintains our distributions for 2026 at approximately 1/3 of adjusted net income, consistent with our previous policy during this transition year. In total, dividends in respect of financial year 2026 would amount to 4.4 euro cents per share, which represents a 16% increase on the total dividend paid versus last year.

Finally, we will continue to evaluate value-creating investment opportunities, including M&A and share buybacks, while maintaining flexibility in how those opportunities are financed. As announced today, this includes the acquisition of CenuBanka.lv, strengthening our data capabilities in the Latvian real estate market.

This concludes the financial section of our presentation, and I will now hand over to Artūras.

Thank you, Lina. I will take over and we'll review our strategic progress across core business lines, dive into KPIs, and provide an overview of key products development.

Real Estate was our clear growth champion this year. Revenue delivered a 17% increase to reach €26 million.

In the B2C segment, the monthly number of brokers grew by 3%, and the number of clients reached a record high of 5.13 thousand. It was primarily driven by small brokers transitioning from C2C customers to become B2C customers.

At the same time, B2C ARPU increased by 16% to now €252. The improvement was supported by pricing packaging changes implemented in autumn.

Besides ARPU growth, these updates were designed to encourage customers to try out a wider scope of our services. They were also underpinned by a data product update from the previously acquired Untu platform.

In the C2C segment, we achieved significant yield improvements. Revenue per listed ad grew by 26% to now €80.

These increases reflect a continued strategic shift toward premium, longer-duration packages. They are now chosen by more than half of our customers.

This shift partly affected an 11% decline in the number of listed ads. The market is hot and properties do sell faster.

Concurrently, active ads declined by 6%. Consequently, transactions required fewer listing extensions that are part of this listed ads metric.

From a market perspective, activity strengthened across the region. This momentum was supported by lower interest rates and improving macro environment.

Total transaction volumes increased by 5% over the past 12 months. Average apartment prices in Baltic cities also rose by 5%.

Lithuania was the main driver of this regional activity. Residential transactions here surged by 12%, and this surge was partly due to anticipatory spending ahead of changes to the national pension system, as in April individuals were allowed to redeem part of their pension savings freely.

Our market leadership remains as strong as ever. KV and City24 combined had a 16 times lead against the number two in Estonia, while in Lithuania Aruodas leads the next competitor by a record 62 times [lead?]

. Our Automotive business delivered a resilient performance.

Revenue remained flat at €31.5 million. While total growth was muted, this headline figure masked a clear divergence between B2C and C2C segments.

In the B2C segment, the average number of dealers declined slightly by 2% from record levels to 3.6 thousand dealers. The decrease was primarily driven by weakened market conditions in Estonia, which accounts for now slightly more than a quarter of our Auto business line.

Conversely, B2C ARPU increased by 13%. This growth was driven by pricing packaging changes implemented in Lithuania during the autumn of '24 and '25.

We strategically postponed B2C pricing adjustment in Estonia to support our customers during a challenging period. However, a package update was introduced there in May 2026, and is already in place.

The C2C segment faced volume headwinds during the period. Listed ads declined by 25%, active ads similarly by 26%.

Despite this inventory pressure, yields improved substantially. Revenue per listed ad rose 22% to €41.

These gains were driven by our April '25 and March '26 price changes. Yield growth was supported by an increased consumer preference for premium, longer-duration listing packages that also include our car history check service, adding to an overall marketplace transparency.

Overall, performance was impacted by two primary external factors. First, the Estonian car tax created a tough year-on-year comparable due to the transaction surge prior to this introduction, and a transaction in the Estonian market dropped by 43% year-on-year.

Second, the region experienced its coldest and longest winter in 30 years. The severe weather disrupted typical C2C activities during January and February.

We provide more detailed monthly charts to illustrate both of these effects in the appendices of this presentation. As a result of these factors, combined car transactions across both markets declined by 11%.

Meanwhile, the average car price continued to grow at 2%. Despite these challenges, we firmly maintain our leading market positions.

Autoplius holds a five times lead near its competitor, while Auto24 holds 28 times lead in their respective markets. Looking forward, it's encouraging to note that trading trends have improved since March 2026.

Our Jobs & Services business line delivered strong growth. Revenue increased by 9% to reach €17.4 million.

Growth was closely mirrored in both B2C segment, Jobs, and C2C segment Services revenue streams. In the B2C segment, Jobs ARPU increased by 8% to €496.

This expansion was supported by targeted price changes. The total number of active employers grew by 1%.

This increase reflects our continued ability to successfully penetrate the long-tail customer segment. The C2C, or Services, segment achieved a 12% increase in active listings.

The momentum was driven by an expanding client base and robust user engagement. While overall volume was healthy, the yield per active ad in Services declined slightly by 3% to €26.

This compression was primarily due to a shift in the mix of service providers on our platforms. Specifically, high-yield building service provider segment experienced a very high demand for them, reducing the need to advertise in this hot market supported by a boom in real estate.

The C2C Service segment saw a 12% increase in active ads, driven by a growing client base and strong engagement. Underlying labor demand remains well-supported by a resilient economy.

This stability is reflected by strong average salary growth of 8%. Finally, CVBankas firmly maintains a five times leadership position over its nearest competitors.

This established market share ensures we remain the primary destination for job seekers and recruiters in Lithuania. Our Generalist business line, which serves as a defensive component of our portfolio, delivered revenue growth of 3% to reach €13.6 million.

We achieved a significant 23% yield improvement on Skelbiu, our largest generalist platform. Consequently, revenue per listed ad increased to €10.

These gains were driven by strategic pricing changes of all value-added services and listing fees. An increased consumer uptake of premium packages also supported it.

These adjustments offset a 13% decline in volume of paid listed ads. The largest share of revenue on Skelbiu originates from vertical categories, such as autos, properties, services, and jobs.

Because of this structure, our own specialized vertical platforms act as its main competitors. Strategically, we are entirely comfortable with users shifting from generalist listings to our dedicated verticals.

Our specialized platforms do provide a superior user experience and unlock higher monetization opportunities. Total inventory, including paid and free, remained highly resilient through the period.

Active ads declined by a minor 2%, remaining very close to last year record levels. Crucially, our active ad counts encompass both paid and free advertisements from customers.

This blended approach ensures our platforms remain the primary destination for organic traffic. It also serves as a powerful competitive moat built on unique content.

Our generalist portals firmly maintain market leadership across the respective regions. Skelbiu stands as the fifth most visited website in Lithuania.

It currently holds a commanding 24 times lead over its nearest competitor. In the Estonian market, Osta maintains a clear two times lead.

Moving from KPIs to our product development, we continue to execute on our strategic aim of investing in fit-for-purpose technology. Our approach to AI focuses on practical tools that reduce user friction and enhance platform efficiency, ensuring our marketplaces remain the definitive starting point for the Baltic population.

At CVBankas, the job seeker onboarding experience was significantly streamlined through the integration of AI-powered CV creation tools. Candidates can now upload existing documents to the platform.

The system automatically parses and populates their profile, removing the friction of starting a job search. This feature has seen a rapid adoption across the user base.

51% of all new CVs are now generated using this method. As a reminder, CVBankas operates strictly as a closed ecosystem.

Candidates maintain internal profiles on the platform rather than relying on external CV documents. The structured results in a highly organized database covering a significant portion of the labor market.

Consequently, this asset provides us with a highly defensible and future-proof data moat. We also meaningfully improved job search functionality on CVBankas through AI-powered synonym matching, job seekers no longer need to know the exact wording of a specific role title they're seeking.

The optimized search engine now actually automatically identifies and displays jobs with similar meanings. On Skelbiu, we launched AI-powered image moderation to enhance platform safety.

The service automatically checks user-uploaded images for prohibited content. Furthermore, it enabled our moderators to review and improve moderation parameters and patterns directly.

On the Automotive segment, we introduced AI-driven automation to the listing process on both Autoplius and Auto24. The system analyzes vehicle images, external technical data, and user descriptions to automatically generate listing details.

It also automatically populates key technical attributes of the vehicle. The automation reduces manual input for sellers, increases data accuracy, and improves search relevance.

In real estate, KV.ee, we introduced new service packages specifically for real estate developers. This initiative marks a shift away from shared broker plans, improving monetization while offering more targeted marketing and analytical tools for them.

The update also groups related listings under their prospective real estate developments. The structural change follows the path of Aruodas, where the developer segment led revenue growth in the past couple of years.

On Aruodas, we launched a new lead generation feature called Request a Viewing. The tool allows potential buyers to submit contact details and preferred viewing times directly through the platform.

By removing the traditional barrier of a phone call, this feature increases total lead volume. Furthermore, it provides the marketplace with deeper insights into the user intent.

Strategically, we are building a comprehensive data layer across our online marketplaces. This goal was furthered by our June 2026 acquisition of Cenu Banka business in Latvia.

It's a leading Latvian real estate data and market analysis platform. Cenu Banka aggregates property transaction data from the registries, listing information, and market reports.

It serves as a key business tool for brokers, appraisers, developers, and financial institutions to assess property values in Latvia. Following our acquisition of Untu in Lithuania last year, Cenu Banka strengthens our proprietary dataset.

It provides the technical foundation for advanced market intelligence features across our footprint. Finally, it provides a structured transactional data required to develop agent-based interfaces in the future.

Thank you, and I'm handing back Justinas to guide you through the outlook.

Thank you, Artūras. The Baltic economies have experienced remarkable growth over the past three decades, driven by a strong export, healthy labor markets, increasing productivity, and vibrant technology sector.

The region also have benefited from a strong public finance, solid credit profile, steadily rising purchasing power. These fundamentals continue to create attractive opportunities for both our customers and BCG.

Looking ahead, we remain optimistic about the economic outlook. In particular, Lithuania, our largest market, where over 70% of the revenue is generated, continues to be one of the strongest performing economies in European Union, providing a solid foundation for our future growth.

The group expects revenue growth of around 10% in 2027, with growth anticipated to be slower in the first half and faster in second half of the year. Real Estate, Auto, and Jobs are expected to be primary growth contributors, while Generalist is expected to remain broadly flat.

Revenue growth outlook reflects confidence in our product pipeline and pricing and packaging changes, but cautious on the inventory trends. We expect the full year margin to be in line with previous medium-term guidance of mid-70s.

Thank you for the listening, and now we are open for the questions. Who's first?

Thanks very much. Alastair Reid from Investec.

Three from me. Firstly, could you talk a little bit more about some of your assumptions for the guidance?

Particularly in the Auto segment, obviously some sort of easier comps Estonian tax situation and also the weather sort of, how much the kind of, if it's become sort of super-normal growth sort of that you might see there sort of contributing to the guidance for this year? Secondly, you just touch a bit more on competition in both I guess Lithuania in Autos and also in sort of Generalist with Vinted and the like.

How do you think about sort of marketing spend potentially going forward? Then lastly, just on sort of data products, how are you sort of thinking in terms of latest launches and rollout, and how you manage the pace of that in the context of any sort of dilutive effect on margins?

Thank you.

All right. I will speak about the guidance and competition, and Artūras can cover the data question.

On the guidance, we feel confident in what's within our own control. This is pricing and packaging.

We already implemented the C2C pricing in spring, and we scheduled to implement the B2C pricing in autumn. We feel that underlying markets, especially in Real Estate, but also increasingly in Automotive, and also in Jobs, is well-supportive for the pricing events.

We will target yield expansion be in line with our previous practices. We have a high expectations on the pricing events.

That's why we're planning the second-half growth to be higher than the first half, because most of these B2C pricing events will contribute to the second half. Where we feel more cautious are on the inventory.

On the inventory, we need to speak separately Automotive, Real Estate. In Automotive, we have two different directions.

In Estonia, the recovery continues, and there we have a positive inventory growth. Far, Automotive business in Estonia recovered probably 70% to 80% of the expected recovery level.

If we compare the number of transactions to a year ago, this number is around 40% month-over-month, but still around 30% below to 2 years ago. We don't expect that to recover fully to 100%, because we think that part of this market will not recover, especially cheap cars, but our expectations that it should reach around 70 85% to 90% of the previous market.

In the Estonian market, we still have around 15 percentage points to go in terms of the recovery. In Lithuania, the dynamics is different.

Lithuania Automotive market is performing very well. Last year, in terms of transactions, it grew 8%.

It's a big increase annually. In Lithuania, we have inventory headwinds, because Lithuanian economy is doing well, purchasing power is increasing, the time to sell a car is decreasing, so that's resulting in the inventory headwinds.

As explained earlier, this is a good timing, good moment for the pricing events, which are scheduled in autumn. In Real Estate, real estate market is doing very well, especially Lithuania, but also Latvia, Estonia.

In Lithuania, we had a record number of transactions last year, and this year we expect even have a higher number. In such a hot market, naturally it's a headwind in terms of the inventory, because the transactions happens very quickly.

Also we implemented in C2C pricing changes, and we significantly increased the penetration of the premium, most expensive package, from roughly 20%, 30% to half of the all choices. This also leads to a lower number of extensions.

That's why we are expecting the headwind in terms of the inventory, but still a very positive environment for the B2C pricing event coming in autumn. Jobs market is continue to do well, this year we expect in Lithuania the salary growth around 8% average salary growth, it's a good environment for the labor market.

The pricing changes are happening also in autumn here, but it's being implemented gradually month-over-month over the next 12 months. We are feeling optimistic and confident in all the three verticals, especially taking into account the pricing events coming in autumn, but where we have a cautiousness is in inventory.

That's explains our guidance. On the competition part, Artūras, would you like to cover the Autoplius, Autogidas dynamics, or I can start?

The

Autoplius has currently five times lead compared to Autogidas. Historically, that's one of the highest lead we have ever had.

When we IPO'd, our lead was three times, and 10 years ago our lead was less than two times. The highest lead we had ever was six times a year ago.

During the last year, Autogidas was much more active in marketing, including the TV advertising, and well, arithmetically, it reduced our lead from six to five times. We are not too concerned on that, because it does not impact our business, our fundamentals.

Considering that Autogidas is owned by the private equity, local private equity, we also think that this increased marketing expenditure will not continue forever. Artūras, would you like to

add? Talking more about the generalist platforms, as competition issue was tapped there, we're still probably repeating ourselves that the segments that are competitive, the home goods and oriented to consumers, makes up a small percentage of Skelbiu's overall revenue.

What we're happy with is that we are maintaining the content on the platform that we have, which is the strategic aim and actually positioned us well. The traffic numbers are healthy, we're not losing anything, and actually gaining in that sense.

There is some natural, let's say, limitations in the consumer segment on these smaller segments in terms of pricing. However, these never were our key revenue drivers.

On data products...

On data and AI-related products, we're following the path which is client-needs based primarily. AI may be as a means to get there rather than target goal itself.

That's how we view it. Strengthening this data layer, which happened before in Autos with the car history and finally with that data pool, we're progressing the same way in Properties, with Untu in Lithuania and now Cenu Banka in Latvia.

Overall, it's doing great. We're happy with the tech stack we have, we don't see it as a limitation.

There's incremental improvements that are required, but it's always been the case. Also the team setup seems good in terms of the know-how and the qualifications they have, no major changes, or not really much changes in the future that we would foresee apart from incremental improvements.

We aim to make this knowledge our core competence, most likely we'll not rely a lot on third-party providers. I'm not talking here about LLMs, but other service providers to fill the gaps.

Now on the cost side, we see that in a very near term these costs will reach probably about a million per year, and majority of that are the people costs, of which the majority are already baked in, meaning that we already have that team in place that makes up the cost. There is naturally some probably token cost involved into that, but we're designing everything this way that it doesn't blow our token budget or anything like that in any meaningful way, and there's direct and very clear ROI model.

I wanted to just a few words also on data expand. We feel that the data layer is really creating a strategic advantage of our platforms.

To give you an example, the car history report we developed one 2 years ago, 1.5 year ago, now 30% of all the listings in Autoplius have the car history report. That's double the amount compared to a year ago.

It's really creating our competitive edge, a competitive advantage, and it's very hard to copy, to replicate, and that's really a defensive moat for us. Same happening and same strategy we have it for the Real Estate, where we invested in Untu last year.

This year, we acquired Cenu Banka. We feel that this is kind of a right strategy to go, and it will improve our marketplaces.

On the cost sides about the data products, we also build those to be profitable, probably not as high profitability as in marketplace products, but still probably 50% plus margin on the data products we sell.

Maybe to add that most recent Cenu Banka acquisition, it's a small business, but it's not a money-burning, it's a profitable business.

Will, you were second.

Hi, it's Will Packer from BNP Paribas. A couple from me.

Coming back on the outlook for the year, one thing that stands out is that you push C2C yield monetization by over 20%. Perhaps understandable in the context of some of the inventory headwinds.

Should we start to worry about the sustainability of that kind of increase? There's some sort of cautionary tales from across your European peers about pushing yield too hard and it having ramifications.

Just how you think about that question. Secondly, could you help us think through what a realistic number for the buyback is this year?

Is it a similar quantum to last year? Is it double?

It's quite a long statement, but I have kind of no idea what buyback number to assume. Just some color there.

Then lastly, the guidance on Generalist sort of stands out for being quite weak, no growth. Could you just remind us what factors have impacted growth for the year ahead, and should they abate from FY 2028?

Thank you.

Maybe I'll start about yields, and Lina will answer the share buybacks, and probably Artūras can cover the Generalist. On the yields, yes, the yields for C2C grew around 20% last year, but even though kind of percentage-wise it might look high, but basically it was like adding some I don't know €5 or €10 to listing, and when you are transacting such a expensive item as Automotive or Real Estate, this doesn't really matters in the end.

I think that whenever we think about the yields in C2C and the possible drop-off rates, we think that we're here kind of looking more or working with the time, because the price sensitivity on the digital products are declining over the time, and the people are more and more eager to spend for and pay for the digital products, and it's not the price itself what's the issue, but more like a people's expectations or people's mentality. I think that every year is positive for us, because people are more and more comfortable paying for the digital products, and the fees they pay are really marginal to the asset values.

I could add maybe a couple of comments. The yield growth, well, it's probably the average of averages, it masks a lot of details behind it.

It doesn't mean that in every segment, in every micro segment, the change was like that. We apply value-based pricing, we adjust for price sensitivity always, in, for example, a cheaper segment.

We monitor drop-off rates, which are intact after the changes. Also this average yield growth is very much affected by the packaging mix, it doesn't mean that all prices grew by 26%, it's that we optimized the pricing structures so that clients themselves chose to pay more.

That proved into the sustainability of it.

That's definitely important to flag that the penetration of our premium most expensive package increased almost doubled, from 20%, 30% to half, and this actually also impact yield growth. Lina, would you like to cover buybacks?

Yes. The statement about capital allocation in the result statement is basically let's say two major messages.

One is accelerated buyback, and the other is moving to dividends growing in line with adjusted net income to have the flexibility to allocate capital based on how we see most value. To answer simply, we don't have a target level of debt, target level of leverage, we don't set a mechanical level as such.

The pace and the scale of buybacks will depend on the market situation, the also additional funding, whether and how much we can get, alternative uses of capital as well. Currently in the end of May, we asked shareholders for 10% authority to buy back BCG's issued share capital, and at the AGM we intend to ask for 15% for the next year.

The board is very much supportive of the share buybacks in accelerated way. Based on the market conditions and all the rest of what I already listed, we'll see where we get.

Maybe just to add that also one of very important task for us is to keep the flexibility and also prudent leverage, we'll be watching that as well.

Maybe just to help us, accelerating the buyback versus what base? H2, full year, nine three months, nine months, one month, just...

Not accelerating, just to clarify, not accelerating from this standpoint, but we accelerated already in 2026. Just to continue accelerated share buybacks, because currently we're in the market buying back based on the safe harbor limits, this is already executed.

The last one was on the Generalist competition,

so... Talking about the competition between our own ecosystem, the setup is, as mentioned, is the way that Generalist is sort of a moat and a feeder as source of customers to the vertical platforms, which are better monetized, and the synergies works well in Services, Jobs, Autos, and Real Estate.

We're comfortable generally with clients moving to more profitable platforms.

Probably the last thing on Generalist to mention that also Generalist also compete in categories, with clothes categories with Vinted. We're also addressing this issue.

Currently we're in the final stage of developing the buy-now functionality on Skelbiu, so that should strengthen the position. Jess, I saw that you were...

Hi. Thank you.

Jess Pok from Peel Hunt. I've just got a couple, please.

The first one, you've given lots of color on the different verticals, but when we think about the overall numbers, outside of Generalist, which segments of verticals can we think about in terms of a higher growth than the group guidance versus lower? Second one is just on costs.

If you look at the costs last year, one of the biggest drivers is added headcounts. Is there anything baked in for this year that we should think about, what kind of growth rates we should think about for the overall costs, and is there anything we should factor in?

Just the final one, Justinas, just on what you've just said about Generalist, when you look at Generalist, you compete also with the likes of Vinted or some of the others, and to my understanding, you only charge on the high-value items, are there any initiatives to grow to support the growth, and actually, could you actually charge for some of the items which you don't charge for right now?

I will answer about the verticals, Lina will cover the costs, and about the Generalist Artūras can cover. On the verticals, we think that Real Estate will be a growth champion again this year, because of very supportive underlying market and then with the pricing actions we are taking, and we took and we're going to take in autumn.

Also, we are optimistic on Jobs, because Jobs have accelerated last year from 7% in H1 to 11% in H2. The market is also very supportive, because this year the salaries predicted to grow 8% average salary growth predicted to grow 8% again, economy is doing well, the labor market looks also very supportive for the job portal to grow.

Automotive is also in a good position to grow, especially taking into account a lower comparables and the recovery of the automotive market in Estonia. Kind of all the three verticals, but probably Real Estate should stand out.

On the costs?

On the costs, reported operating expense fluctuate in the recent years because of PSP mainly, which is performance-driven. It's also prudent to look at the costs before this performance share costs line.

Like this year, the cost was €0.3 million, but the cost is expected to increase next year to normalize, in line with normalizing results. If excluding the PSP costs, the operating cost line is expected to grow in line with historic numbers, and roughly in line with revenue.

Regarding the Generalist, maybe a bit more flavor of how the pricing works on Skelbiu. We monetize the vertical categories, the three that Services, Jobs, Autos, and Property, that's one thing.

For the remaining categories, we monetize business customers, including the semi-professional business customers who are selling something as a means to do business rather than they own things. It doesn't matter the value, it's more this type of structure.

In order to reinitiate the growth in this Generalist segment, however, we're well progressing on the transactional, buy-now functionality that should go live the next year, and it would serve as an nice addition on the current listing revenue we have, rather than replacing it.

Just to this year.

It's already started here, yes. Andrew?

Andrew.

Hey, guys. It's Andrew Ross from Barclays.

I've got three, if that's okay. First one is coming back on AI, and to I guess get a bit more context in terms of how you're thinking about new products into next year, and I guess particularly areas and things like conversational search, tools for your dealers or agents, some of the things that your peers are working on would be helpful to understand where you guys are at on those.

Second one is to clarify where you're at on B2C pricing in Estonia Autos. Did you say in the remarks that you put something through in May?

Apologies if I misunderstood, but that would be helpful to understand what went through and how it feeds into your thinking in the autumn and how much tolerance there is for pricing with dealers in Estonia. Then third question is on M&A.

I guess kind of curious that you've chosen to do a small deal in Latvia, which maybe hasn't been such a focus in the past. How are you kind of thinking about M&A more broadly, and also your kind of views on the Latvian market within that?

Thanks.

I can start with the AI-related initiatives, repeating, let's say, we approach the question from the client-needs based way. We're just seeking for the places where there is friction, and how AI can help solve it, bits here and there are already introduced.

One of the big projects we're working on and also set to go in this year already started is there's many words for it, it's conversational, AI-assisted, AI search, you name it, in many different ways, but it's going to be a focus to get launched in the next year, and we're progressing there well. Sort of we're set up the data processing pipelines, we can basically search not only by what's provided by the seller, but also rely what's visible on the photos, what's visible from the third-party data sources we also have from our data platforms, and combine that to deliver the better results for the customer.

The seeking is to, firstly, make this available within our ecosystems, and if the situation changes somehow, we don't see it right now from the GenAI platforms themselves, so that, let's say, then the absolute majority of work is having these products in place rather than connected them. Actually,

Artūras, the key guy in AI strategy, he's a very good person to talk about it. Mainly also like a general thinking our let's say about the user experience and about the conversational search.

Currently we are in the testing mode in Real Estate, but we are not rushing, we are not kind of pushing it to launch as quickly as possible. For us, it's important that it functions well, and the users are not disappointed with it.

We probably will make the final testing only then we will launch that. Also the thinking is that the current solutions like filter-based search, it's just does the job very, very well, and we don't have a very high expectations that once after launching the conversational search, that suddenly everyone will start using it massively.

It's a spectrum, basically. You have filter-based search in one end and full chat interface on the other.

We're pretty sure and we have evidence from the initiatives that it shows that fully conversational within chat experiences just not what works for customers, either on the platform or either in the LLM tool. However, the filter-based search naturally has some improvements to be made to solve the blind spots, and so we're setting to take best of both worlds, try to improve what's working rather than recreate it.

On

on the B2C in Estonia, we delayed the pricing event a year ago not a year ago, in autumn because it was like a peak of really the most difficult period for for the dealers, and we did implemented it in May this year. The scope of the pricing event was quite minor this time, because we still see that the dealers are price-sensitive, and they are emerging from this crisis, but but they are still, thinking how not to increase their expenditure too much.

It will have a maybe less impact on the revenue growth for Estonia, but Estonia overall is recovering well. It's since January, it's growing double-digit, and and we are happy with the progress.

On the M&A part, on the M&A part, I think that there might be some other add-ons, let's say like like the one we had in Latvia. Because we think that actually, with the especially data products, we're we are strengthening our competitive moat, and and when we do these acquisitions, we always think: can we build internally, how long it will take, and how long it will how much it would cost; or is there existing tool which we can plug in easily?

Far, the the last few acquisitions which we did, Untu and Cenu Banka, which translates into price bank of properties. In our thinking, we're it's it was a cheaper and definitely so much quicker to acquire business and to plug in rather than to build from from scratch.

Just a reminder, in car car history report business, we built it from scratch, and that Artūras did it, led led the project.

Justinas, can I just clarify on B2C Autos in Estonia? Are you still planning to do an increase this autumn as well, or was that in May and now we shouldn't be expecting anything until autumn 2027?

That would be too close, the pricing events, if we were to implement in autumn. No plans for additional changes.

Nothing September 2025, small May 2026, nothing September, autumn, October, September 2026, and then maybe next year.

In Autos Estonia. In Lithuania Autos, scheduled pricing.

Sure. Okay.

Thanks.

Marcus?

Hi. Marcus Diebel, JP Marcus.

Can we actually follow up on Andrew's question on the AI topic? Obviously, we're now 9 months of discussions around that topic.

It seems also what you said today that the focus is more to be better in-house, but to pretty bet on in-house solutions on your own tech team. You highlighted sort of like the traditional way works pretty well.

Obviously it's going to get improved, but in a nutshell doesn't need much. I sit here and I see others buying off-the-shelf solutions from Anthropic, from OpenAI, and these obviously big words.

I'm just sitting here and really struggling to understand what is the difference? Is the difference that you say, okay, we are in a really niche markets, our market shares are proportionately much higher, and therefore we can afford, plus we have a very strong tech team?

What is sort of the argument really to play it a bit differently? That would be maybe the first question.

The second question is then on costs again. You said on the cost base broadly flat, obviously we have the guidance.

What should we think about personal costs, including inflation? We've heard for the market it's what, around 8% or so.

I bet it's maybe at that level for you as well in terms of inflation, and you're hiring as well. What is sort of like a realistic number in terms of personal costs going up?

I can start then. Probably a bit of clarification needed on buying the third-party solutions here.

We're not building our own LLMs or anything like that, and replacing what they can offer with the tools. We're using quite substantially their solutions in our process, it's just that there's no external specialist or external third-party company doing it for us.

For example, way we to develop the agent, we want to have the know-how. This is the core in the upcoming years to have it within the team, rather than relying on the service provider.

In terms of partnership with the LLMs, I wouldn't see that we're doing something differently in this sense.

Is it that, for example, the question then comes, first of all, what we hear, you seem to be pretty relaxed about token costs because your infrastructure allows it that you have a very sophisticated search ways to make it faster by just accessing the data very, very quickly and therefore you don't have this token cost problem?

That's

what it sounds like. That's sort of like what I'm trying to get.

For the context of the marketplace, we see that the core token usage is sort of once per listing, to process it, and then to prepare it to be accessed later, it's more or less fixed thing that we can control. Then there's just different ways how you use the tokens during the search.

We see pathways that actually token cautious if we talk about the search, which is the most adopted thing and has probably the most potential, let's say, risk to blow. At the same time, there's the technology, it's hard to predict which way it's going to go, but we see, let's say, opportunities of this LLM capabilities actually coming today, user devices as well, as introduced in Google and Apple events in the past couple of months, where let's say you can take the cost yourself.

You can use some of the, let's say, user device. It's just one of the possibilities there, but there are numerous methods to put that control.

Also, I would add I think there is a back-end solutions, let's say, and I think that we have progressed quite well here. Just an example, let's say, CV creation with AI help.

You just upload the PDF, and we create a CV. Moderation.

In other areas. I think that we are quite advanced, and we are not lagging behind.

On the other side, the front content and the facing solutions, let's say, a conversational search, I think it's at the moment is still feels overstated, or in fact, when we speak to the peers who have already launched those, they are not working so well, that the usage of those are very tiny, and we kind of initially expect that suddenly people will start using it massively. It's an apartment with bright living room, but in fact, they just type "I want an apartment in center", which is perfectly search through the filters.

Probably in this context, maybe we're slightly behind, but there are no good working solutions yet, and we see it as an advantage, because we might see what others are doing and to learn from those. By the way, once we will launch this conversational search, will be quite advanced, because we'll already have ability to look into the pictures, to understand those, and it will be already quite enhanced.

On the cost base and the personal costs, Lina, would you like to cover?

Maybe slightly repetitive, but in general, people cost is the key part of our costs. All the developments are done in-house by the team.

Also, it's important to look at the costs also separately. PSP costs separately, and then salaries separately.

Again, if PSP costs are expected to normalize, which is going to be in terms of percentage growth higher, the people costs, the salary costs, the total other part of the people cost is expected to grow in line with historic trends, just slightly, the growth is slowing down a little bit because of the wage inflation growth moderating a little bit, as close to 8% is expected for this ongoing year in terms of wage inflation in the Baltics. We see that happening.

This is what brings the cost a little bit down. It's, to reiterate, a key part of the cost, and expected to continue growing in teens, looking without the PSP costs.

Maybe just also to add, quite a big part of our team is IT team, and historically the IT salaries used to grow much quicker even than the market average. It was not unusual to see the IT salaries to grow 15% or annually.

I think now the pressure for IT personnel, for developers, has been reduced.

Hi, it's Giles Thorne from Jefferies. Justinas, what are you looking for from Artūras as COO that you weren't getting from Simonas?

Artūras, we're going to talk about you like you're not here. With Simonas going, who's going to be the GM of Skelbiu now?

We have a GM for Skelbiu already for 2 years. It's a different person.

It's Simonas. Simonas was one of the first employees in a company, and they contributed a lot to the success, and it makes very sad that he's leaving.

Artūras himself, he's IT entrepreneur, 15 years 15 years ago. We acquired the business from him, which he developed, also programmed, sold, expanded.

Multi-skilled. Since then, Artūras he was managing Skelbiu for a year, then Autoplius for 10 years, Aruodas for a few years, and then working as a development director, especially leading IT topics.

I think that his new responsibility definitely will enhance and support our AI organizational transformation. It will definitely become a much higher priority, and I think that, because he was already leading this for more than a year or almost 2 years.

Having this entrepreneurship skills, I think he will be the best person to replace Simonas. Kind of looking historically, he went through all the biggest, most important business divisions, he knows those intimately well.

That was part of our succession planning, because we already kind of identified that 5 years ago probably that in case of Simonas leaving, Artūras is take over.

Just to follow up on Skelbiu, my mistake around Simonas, transactional, why is it taking till next year?

Not next year, this year.

Next financial year, but this calendar year. Yes,

this No.

No, no.

When did you launch Transactional Skelbiu?

We are working on it already for half a year. It's on the final stages, probably to be launched within a month.

For the rest of the summer.

Hi. Pete from Morgan Stanley.

Just a quick one on the yield expansion. Just wanted to kind of elaborate on how much of that is from pricing, how much of that is from products, how much kind of is it from maybe dominance maybe in FY 2026?

Also just a general guide going forward, how should we view the mix between pricing, covenants, and product expansion?

For the B2C customers, the biggest part would be a pricing. Also, added a very strong product update last autumn.

We added a car history reports, and we added a valuation tools for real estate companies. While it's difficult to quantify exactly, but we can say both.

Maybe the bigger part is price changes, because last year already underlying market was doing very well. In C2C segment, probably again, 2/3 was a price, but 1/3 also came from the upsell of the premium package, which grew from 20%, 30% to 50%.

Just trying to give a bit of flavor in the structure of how we selling the products to our business customers. Absolutely mainly bundles.

It's not possible to buy a particular service off the shelf. You choose either good, better, best type of package, so that's why it's a bit more difficult to pinpoint was it the price or was it actually the product, in that sense.

On the separately bought value-added services, the prominent products, it's just worth noting that it's in single digits of our revenue so in B2C. It's not what we rely on, there's not much, let's say, should the reordering happen in the AI age, it's not affecting a lot.

Sean.

Morning, everyone. Sean Kealy from Panmure Liberum.

I've got a couple, if that's okay. I guess, first of all, Justinas, I think it's fair to say that a lot of public market investors are very focused on AI as risk, reward, etc.

I'm interested in your take on how private market investors are thinking about the issue. I know you yourselves will look for opportunities, and I'm sure you're more on the pulse of how some of the private market operators are thinking than maybe some of the rest of us.

Interested to get your take on that. Artūras, a couple for you.

Is it possible to help us disaggregate the impact of selling longer-duration premium products within Real Estate from the ARPU increases? I just want to get a sense for how much of that uplift in yields has been driven by shifting product mix versus price.

Then you referenced that new build has been a bit weaker in Lithuanian real estate than the broker market, just in terms of advertising less. Are you able to give us any color on if there's any mix shifts there?

Then an apology, just another couple, if that's okay. Just on tax and the Estonian Automotive.

You've got a €6 million additional euro tax charge this year should you distribute profits. How should we think about tax rate going forward?

Is it fair to assume that the Estonian business's margin is equal with the group rate? Are there any offsets, etc., just thinking about not necessarily this year, but outer years?

Then finally, just given the profiling on Estonian B2C in Automotive, can you just remind us how big you're expecting Estonian Automotive to be as a percentage of Automotive this year? Apologies for quite so many.

We are only three people and have five questions, so... Probably I can start with private market perceptions about the marketplaces.

I think that, well, it's also quite obvious from our capital allocation policy. We think that public markets overstate the AI risk and AI impact, and overreact.

This is why we kind of accelerating our share buybacks. This is not happening in private markets.

I think private markets are much more confident. Usually, especially when the private equity firms invest in the marketplaces, they do so much more research.

Probably I would dare to say that private equity firms are even more knowledgeable when they're investing, and less, in their opinion, less dependent on, or they are less overreacting. On the impact from the longer duration in Real Estate and pricing, Artūras explained it's difficult to say exactly, but probably 2/3 surprising, 1/3 duration.

That would be,

Just to understanding pretty much the absolute majority of all that price increases were less than the yield growth. What basically happened is shift from the middle package to the highest one, although the highest price didn't change that much.

It depends on platform by platform, but it's the strategy that in the previous years, probably 4, 5 years ago, successfully worked in Auto. In Property, we saw now quite equal distribution between short and long packages.

We're doing the same playbook, moving to the longest ones, making them very attractive, sort of pop corn pricing type of thing. Also, it's a better user experience.

Extension is not something you are willing to sort of underdelivering what you promise. There was a question regarding builders and brokers, probably a bit more connection to the understanding.

In this case, actually, over the past year, the builder segment in Lithuania was performing very, very well. Just lots of inventory, at the same time with lots of demand, off-market and it's actually considering this pension reform, the window, it's not that long, it's not going to be forever, everybody's trying to sell at the same time.

We actually did have revenue increase from builders in both terms of advertising, of value-added services, and in terms of packages, so that's actually worked pretty well. It's been for 3 years already a growth driver in the whole Lithuanian B2C segment.

The builder packages are what we improving in Estonia right now.

Probably that would continue to be next year, because the builders are also have a very deep pockets, and when there are new developments happening, we need to invest more into marketing. We have a high expectations for that segment.

Lina, would you like to cover tax?

Yes, of course. Actually, answering to your question, I think the good reference is the revenue split by country.

Currently we generate 73% of revenue from Lithuania, 25% from Estonia, and 2% from Latvia. Given the margins are quite similar, broadly similar, actually the revenue split could be used as the reference point.

Could you please repeat the question about Estonia Automotive B2C? What was the question there?

I think you said that you did a small B2C pricing round in May, there won't be one this autumn. Just when we're thinking about trying to reflect that through the Automotive division, can you remind us how big the current Estonian Automotive business is as a percentage of the mix?

25% from the total Automotive.

Perfect. Thank you.

Any other questions?

We might have some conference call questions, so, Adam, over to you, please.

Thank you once again for coming. We feel really very privileged every time when we come to London in July to have such a good weather, also Wimbledon and now it's soccer tournament, thank you and...

Football. Football.

Semi-final.