Thank you very much, and good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the presentation of the half-year results of Regional REIT for the period ending 30th of June 2026. It is my intention this afternoon to take you through the results for 2026, and then spend a bit more time updating you on what we are witnessing in the marketplace and our continued progress that has been made towards our strategic goals.

As mentioned earlier, Q&A we will deal with at the end, and if you can submit your questions, we'll try and get through as many of them as possible. If I may now introduce this afternoon's team from Regional REIT's manager, ESR [Europe?]

, I'm Stephen Inglis, Chief Executive Officer, and also on the call this afternoon, Simon Marriott, Property Fund Manager, and Adam Dickinson, Investor Relations Manager. After another six months of political and economic change and instability, I think we are almost back to where we have been many times before over the course of the last few years.

Turmoil both in the UK and internationally given the host of events currently ongoing, and that undoubtedly has impacted business confidence and impacted the real estate market, both in terms of energy and also in terms of interest rate movements. Political turmoil in the UK with yet another new Prime Minister, six in 10 years, and Europe-wide with disenfranchised voters and the rise of the far right.

This background impacts the UK economy, either directly in the case of increased energy costs, or more subtly, but also, as I said, impacting business confidence. The vital part of business confidence in growing the economy and creating jobs, which has in turn an impact on the requirement for physical space.

A backdrop of uncertainty and continuing headwinds. However, against this backdrop, we are making steady progress in reducing the company's debt, selling non-performing, underperforming assets, and leasing up space marginally ahead of the expiries and breaks being exercised.

Despite all of this, I think the company is making good progress and has made good progress over the course of the past six months. Adam, if you can take me to slide three, thank you.

A quick summary of the 2026 half-year highlights. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, whilst things are undoubtedly difficult and the leasing market remains slightly subdued, we have nonetheless undertaken 26 new lettings, delivering £1.9 million in new rental income and delivering a £700,000 annualized saving in reductions to void costs.

We're making good progress on sales, with £21.5 million of sales completed in the period, and these were on vacant or partly vacant assets, and this has allowed us to reduce debt and reduce void costs, accretive to income. We further reduced LTV, which now sits at 38.5% through repayment from those sales proceeds.

Finally, of course, we've delivered a fully covered 4p dividend, in line with our target of 8p for the full year 2026. Slide four, please, Adam.

Just looking at the key highlights. Our strategy to reposition the portfolio continues.

We remain committed to creating a high-quality, income-focused portfolio with targeted value-add opportunities. The portfolio value currently stands at £526.7 million, down as a result of sales and a small 1.3% valuation reduction.

EPRA occupancy is mildly down. This may look at first counterintuitive given the leasing activity that I was just commenting on and the sale of vacant units.

This is mainly due to CapEx projects completing and coming back into the EPRA numbers, it's very much a timing issue. Actual occupancy has improved over 2% over the period.

CapEx in the period, at £1.4 million, looks low. This is mainly as a result of the significant letting that we have undertaken in the period where we anticipated expending £5 million of CapEx.

However, as part of the deal, the tenant is now undertaking that. We will obviously commit that CapEx elsewhere in the portfolio to improve the overall quality of the portfolio and consequently the income.

You're on track to do £10 million per annum, which is our previously stated estimate. Earnings per share in line with our estimate, allowing us to fully cover the 4p per share dividend for the half year.

LTV, as mentioned in my opening remarks, down. Gross borrowings have decreased to £243.8 million, just due to those sales and the paydown of debt.

Slide five, please, Adam. The strategic sales program continues, and the rationale obviously for sale, to reduce debt in advance of the refinancing in December '27 and December '28 facilities.

A little bit more detail on which to follow. To reduce costs associated with non-core and non-performing assets.

Attempting to sell the non-performing, non-income-producing assets, which we were successful in the first six months. The sales program continues with a further two sales completed post period-end for £4.3 million, and there are a further 11 assets either contracted, in solicitors' hands, or in late sales negotiations, i.e.

where we've agreed terms, accounting for a further circa £32 million of potential proceeds. In total then, assuming the sales complete before the year-end, we could well be selling around £58 million, in line with our previous guidance of £50 to £60 million of sales for the full year.

Slide six, please, Adam. Thank you.

Portfolio repositioning for long-term growth. If we look at the average rent, average rent continues to grow.

Yields, as you'll see on the right-hand side, have effectively remained static since June '25, over the last three periods. That kind of suggests that the valuation market certainly has stabilized and that we may well be now at the bottom of the market, all things being equal.

We continue to see average rents creeping up. Offices, the vast majority of our portfolio, almost 90% by value.

Obviously, the lettings there in terms of what we've previously discussed, but clearly the one big letting, £1.1 million of income across two buildings in Nottingham. That's the annualized rent.

That's not the income for 2026 given rent-free periods. That was the annualized rent over the 10-year life of that letting.

Average requirements in the market increasing. We are seeing some upscaling of several tenants to our benefit in some cases, but obviously to our detriment in others where we have lost tenants where they have moved to bigger buildings.

Rent collection remains strong, 99.7% in the period to date. That will ultimately become 100%.

That 0.3% is just an issue of timing and when those rents are collected. You'll see the full-year figure there, 100%.

Slide seven, please. Just looking at obviously the map of the UK showing our assets distributed across the main regions and major conurbations of the UK.

One or two highlights there. Obviously, 1 and 2 Newstead Court is the letting of the first six months, almost 150,000 square feet on a 20-year lease with a 10-year break and producing over £1 million of annualized rent, with the tenant undertaking, as I mentioned earlier, £5 million of CapEx works that we had originally looked to undertake on their behalf, but much better result for us not having to expend the capital, but still achieving £1 million rent on a 10-year lease term certain.

Linford Wood Business Park, again, rents improving there, previous rents at £18 up now to £22.50. Thorpe Park Leeds, likewise, we're seeing good rental growth, now at £24 a square foot on the latest letting there.

Progress being made across the portfolio and in different regions. Next slide, please.

A quick look at the portfolio segmentation. Many of you remember, we've actually locked the assets in terms of the segmentation 18 months ago.

Clearly, assets do change in terms of where they should be, and a classic example of that in the value-add, you'll see that building above, which is one of the Newstead Court buildings. Clearly, that is no longer value-add.

We had looked to demolish these buildings to make way for high-quality industrial. Clearly, we've now done a letting, and that will move effectively to core, albeit to allow us to compare like-for-like the assets are frozen in each box.

We've made good inroads to the sales program. Sales down to roughly £30 million by value, 5.6% of the portfolio.

Value-add there at £55 million, as I say, distorted slightly by that one asset, but we'll talk more on value-add later in the presentation. CapEx to core and then core.

If you like, the buildings on the right, the value-add and sales, buildings we would look to sell in due course, and the CapEx and to core and core, those assets we want to retain for further income growth. Next slide, please.

Now looking at the trends for regional offices in respect of the supply and demand. In this slide, the supply side.

Supply remains constrained and is probably going to constrain further as time moves on. When you look at the bottom right slide there, or the bottom right box, construction start for regional offices at lowest level in over a decade.

That is indicative of the development market as a whole, but office market specifically. The costs of ground-up construction these days have grown substantially, as a consequence of which really, unless it's pre-let to achieve rents of between £50 and £60, which is what you require to achieve to justify development, as I say, I think we'll see very little in the way of new starts over the course of the next few years.

On the right-hand side there, obviously, is the supply. We're seeing delivery of just under 1.5 million square feet in 2027, of schemes obviously commenced several years ago.

2028 falls away dramatically, and then when you look at 2029, '30, '31, almost no new supply coming to the market at that point. I think that will constrain the market further as we continue to lose buildings to alternative uses and for demolition of non-core, poorer quality, Grade C, D, and E buildings.

I think we will continue to see supply very much constrained. Slide 11.

Looking at demand, then. That's the supply side.

We are going to see a constrained supply and indeed diminishing overall supply in the regional office markets. Therefore, what about demand?

Demand is holding up. I've talked about a subdued leasing market.

It is. It's taking much longer to get deals over the line.

However, there still are requirements out there from many, many companies, but decision-making and determining timelines for when that initial interest becomes income, i.e. the buildings are actually leased and then become income-producing, becoming increasingly difficult.

There are requirements. There is demand, but the time taken for that to flow through into actual lettings is quite considerable.

Because of that constrained supply and that continued demand, we are continuing to see rental value growth. The data there, UK offices saw rental value growth of 4.7% in the year to June, compared to city at 3.6%.

Across our portfolio, we're achieving on average 3% above ERV, and of course, ERV has been increased over the course of the last couple of years in line with the market. Rental growth is there, which kind of supports my thesis that supply is restricted and demand continues.

We expect to see that rental growth continue and indeed increase ahead of the 2030 date for EPC requirements A and B coming into force. The take-up figures there in the bottom right-hand corner.

Slide 12, please. Just looking at a couple of case studies.

This is a Brutalist architect building, but internally provides very, very good quality accommodation. The majority of this building is let to Global Banking School.

We have one vacant floor which we have agreed terms with Global Banking School to take. In fact, terms have been agreed for almost 15 months, but for a number of reasons due to Global Banking School's internal requirements and indeed requirement from building warrant to change some of the fabric of the building to meet and satisfy their requirements for a single occupier, this deal is only now coming to fruition.

We expect to announce the final letting here in the next few weeks, taking this building to 100% let and of investment grade. Next slide, please.

We talked earlier about value-add and potential change of use assets. We have undertaken 15 feasibility studies and taken many of these assets through first-stage planning and for initiatives for change of use where the change of use values add value to the building compared to current holding cost.

We will now see some of these assets coming to market over the course of the next few months, demonstrating that the value-add element and that increase in value from alternative use does actually pay off and increase values quite substantially. Watch this space in terms of some of these properties coming to market with the benefit of support for PBSA, for residential to sell and residential to let on the whole, but other uses include hospitals, industrial, and a host of others.

Next slide, please. The largest value-add potential asset in the portfolio, Central Park, New Lane, Leeds.

This has been a long battle with the local authority. This was originally safeguarded as part of the HS2 proposals, and of course, they were canceled a couple of years ago, HS2 no longer happening.

Therefore, one would have imagined that this would have been released from safeguarding. However, the local authority and local MPs have managed to retain the safeguarding for potential mass transit, Leeds mass transit system.

We have been battling with the local authority and Department of Transport to say, "Well, that wasn't the intention of legislation for HS2. The safeguarding is in connection with HS2 only and should not apply in respect of the mass transit."

Moving forward, some good news. The Department of Transport have now confirmed that this will not be required for the mass transit system, and indeed, that our arguments on safeguarding hold water, and this will be released from safeguarding imminently.

We are waiting for the documentation to be signed, but the safeguarding will be released. As part of that, that has allowed us to agree a new long-term reversionary lease with Asda on the front portion of this site as they use the industrial unit for their national training center, very important part of their business with, of course, their headquarters across the road.

That has been agreed, a much higher rent, and will kick on from the expiry in 2028 for a further period of 10 years. Good news there.

Again, that is in the process of being documented, and that releases then the rear element of the site to go through the planning process for residential. We anticipate that that will be high-density residential, and of course, south side of Leeds and the South Bank has been significant a part of Leeds still showing significant improvement and significant development, and we anticipate, as I say, achieving a high-density scheme on the rear site, at which time we will sell to residential developers.

Another change of use, 1 and 2 Newstead Court, obviously featuring a lot in this presentation given the scale of letting. Clearly, we're not going to be demolishing this for industrial anymore.

It's now a core hold offering potentially 20-year income. That just kind of is indicative of what's happening in the marketplace just now.

I talked about constrained supply earlier. The constrained supply is forcing tenants to perhaps be a little bit more imaginative.

For example, in this case, the tenant, Glenair, a US defense and electronics company, required to upscale. There was nothing in the region suitable for them, and therefore, in terms of ready-made space, and therefore, they had to be a little bit more imaginative and say, "Well, fine.

We'll take what is fundamentally two good buildings in this business park and then undertake the works to create this space that we require for our staff." We've seen this on a few occasions over the course of the last 6, 12 months where constrained markets are forcing tenants to look elsewhere, not necessarily in terms of geographic locations because they want to retain their existing staff, but more specifically on the types of buildings they're prepared to occupy and upgrade.

I think this will become a feature of the market moving forward. Thanks, Adam.

ESG remains very, very important in the minds of occupiers and of course us as responsible landlords. We still are very much focused on ESG to deliver sustainability and cost savings.

EPCs, the Energy Performance Certificates, legislation still not through, but everybody expects that by 2030, the legislation will be that all buildings are required to be EPC A or B. Actually, to a degree, it doesn't really matter about the legislation because companies themselves are taking it upon themselves, as part of their own ESG requirements.

The vast majority of requirements, barring several outliers, are all for EPC A and B. Vital that we provide that quality of space.

We are, as you'll see, making good inroads. Just over 61% of our portfolio now conforms.

Of the rest, 26% is EPC C with an identified route to upgrading and improving those buildings to EPC A or B. The vast majority of the D and Es and belows will be sold as part of the sales program moving forward.

I think worth of note, we've mentioned this many times before, but the market hasn't responded as quickly as it should have done to creating EPC A and B. Currently only 19% of UK commercial buildings, that includes industrial, UK commercial buildings meets the requirement.

In the office markets, they vary city to city, region to region, but if I take Leeds and Manchester as example, those markets are roughly 25% conforming. Now if we look at that in the context of occupation, last occupied numbers are from December '24, we're awaiting the December '25 numbers to be confirmed, but roughly 81.6% of the regional office market was occupied at that point in time.

81.6% occupation with only 25% of buildings conforming, you can understand why we're enthused and indeed believe that we'll see rental growth for those better quality buildings. More of the market chasing fewer buildings or a small part of the market that's conforming.

We expect to see substantial rental growth over the office market where it's offering Grade A accommodation and EPC A and B. Elsewhere on ESG, we're continuing the rollout of our 4D smart technology.

This is effectively the smart technology for identifying energy usage and where we can find cost savings. We've installed this system across 45 sites so far, and that's producing £190,000 of savings to Regional REIT over and above those savings that the tenants themselves are receiving.

Those £190,000 of savings are direct savings to the REIT, not to the occupiers. Solar continues to be installed, installation completed now in 17 sites, 14 of which are energy-producing and roughly 880,000 kilowatt hours being produced from those 14 sites.

We'll continue that rollout over the course of the coming years. Just looking at the income overview.

This is the EPRA earnings H1 2025 versus H1 2026. Effectively running through the bridge, looking at the earnings, looking at rental and property income, obviously down 5.7 million in terms of sales, and mostly that income from sales as well as expiries and lease breaks.

Looking at costs, admin costs, financial income, and finance expenses, coming to the £6.8 million of EPRA earnings June 2026. Next slide, Adam, please.

Then evaluation, obviously, December '25, there's the disposals, £20.8 million of net of cost disposals, 21.5 gross. Acquisitions obviously none in the period.

The gain and loss of disposal properties, £2.1 million. CapEx 1.4, and the valuation change there, that 1.3% reflecting £7.1 million due to income differentials.

Then the current valuation of £526.7 million. Then just looking at balance sheet overview, again, summarizing effectively the two slides that we've just run through, looking at that NAV at £305.8 million in the far right-hand corner.

Moving on to debt. We have debt expiries in December '28 and December, sorry, December '27 and December '28.

If I can deal firstly with the Scottish Widows and Aviva debt in December '27, we are obviously very much focused on that, and the majority of sales that have been undertaken in the first half and indeed will be undertaken in the second half are focused on that specific facility. That will mean selling some income, but that income is where we've identified further risks down the line.

For example, we will be selling and indeed are under offer to sell a large building where we know the tenant will vacate in 15 months' time. The leasing market in that specific location is thin, and therefore, we're de-risking by selling now.

Then people say, "Well, why are you selling and who's buying?" We're selling to an operator who holds various assets in the same location, there's an element of local knowledge and marriage value for them.

That will be refi'd alongside the Scottish Widows facility in December '28. We're in discussions both with our incumbent debt providers, and Scottish Widows are there to refinance both facilities, and also with other lenders outwith Scottish Widows.

We want some competitive tension, but I think the answer will be if we can refinance with Scottish Widows, it would be sensible to do so, because they'll give us the benefit of the current pricing to the expiry of those facilities. Current pricing to December '27 in respect of that facility, and indeed current pricing to December '28 on that element.

With the sales, we expect to be refinancing at roughly £100 million of debt, and that refinancing will, on current pricing, be 3% above current level, just over 6% all-in costs. Whilst we're also looking at the RBS, Bank of Scotland, and Santander facility, that was a facility we entered into a year or so ago, and it's a three-year facility with the option of two further one-year extensions.

We've already made the application for the one-year extension from December '28, and that's currently at credit with the banks, and we anticipate receiving that very shortly. The Widows facility, if we refinance with them, is likely to be for seven years, with an external party maybe five years.

That would then allow us some breathing space in terms of the expiries out until the first one June '29. The sales program effectively will continue, but only on non-core assets.

We will have dealt with the bank facilities, we will have reduced LTV to somewhere around 35% by the year-end on current sales, and indeed, we will have no banking facilities to deal with until Santander June '29. A reminder of our strategic priorities.

Driving income. How do we do that?

We increase occupancy and rental growth across the portfolio. Strengthening the core portfolio and continuing to improve EPC ratings, vital in obtaining the tenants and the quality tenants that have requirements in the marketplace.

They will, as I mentioned earlier, only commit to Grade A space and EPC ratings of A and B moving forward. We're committed to reducing debt through targeted disposals.

That continues, and we're well on our way to achieving our target by the year-end. Committed to fully covered dividend.

We are fully covered for the half year and will be at the full year. Pursue opportunities to add value ahead of disposals.

That's the value-add element of the portfolio, and again, making good progress with those assets. Next, Adam, please.

To sum up really, we've now taken you through the H1 results for the company. We're very hopeful that the insight and immediate outlook in relation to the supply and demand dynamics also appeal to you.

We do believe that the supply and demand dynamics over the short term offer the regional office UK market a very opportune time to show rental growth, and by showing rental growth, show value improvement. With interest rates stabilizing, we don't expect to see huge growth in terms of value by yield compression.

However, we can drive value by improving the quality and quantity of the rent. Yet again, we seem to be in a period of instability, but we can deal with what's in front of us, which is our portfolio and the UK markets.

That brings us to the end of the formal part of the presentation, and now very happy to take any questions.

Thank you, Lily. Thank you, Stephen.

We might start with the first question that was submitted earlier today. Can you give an update on the Leeds development, please?

What is the legal position, and has that been settled?

I think I probably touched on this in terms of the presentation. Clearly, it is an important asset, and I can understand why the question has come in.

I think I mentioned we have been in discussions with Department of Transport, who have responsibility for this site. Although it's Leeds City Council in terms of area, and Leeds City Council would normally be the planning authority, in the case where a site's effectively blighted, safeguarded, it's actually Department of Transport that has the authority.

We have now had confirmation that they will release this site. Took a lot of negotiation and fighting.

We sat alongside Asda. Asda threatened to relocate from Leeds City Centre because their car park was also part of this exercise, which has also been released.

I'm pleased to say we will hopefully document that in the coming weeks. We will be submitting first-stage planning inquiries over the course of the next couple of weeks.

We're already to go with that, and that will start the process in terms of planning. I also mentioned the Asda situation.

Asda are keen to continue to occupy the front area of this, and we'll take a 10-year reversionary lease at an increased rent. Again, we'll hopefully announce that in the coming weeks.

All tied together obviously as part of the exercise.

Thank you, Stephen. A question on the cash position of the company.

Approximately £39 million of unrestricted cash reported at 30th of June 2026. Of that, how much represents service charge moneys, tenant deposits, rent received in advance, or other working capital amounts that cannot realistically be used for permanent debt repayment?

What amount does management regard as genuinely surplus deployable cash after allowing for operational liquidity and committed CapEx?

Good question, long question. Let me try and deal with it in component parts.

In terms of service charge moneys and tenant deposits, zero. That clearly is not our money.

That is the tenants' moneys. None of that is in the £39 million.

Rent received in advance, yes, a small proportion. Clearly, we accept or collect our rents quarterly in advance.

I guess the easiest way to deal with this in cash terms, we retain a cash buffer of £10 million. An element of restricted cash, £1.8 million currently, and that's restricted by the banking facilities, but will be released as and when we meet the requirements of each individual facility.

That sum varies substantially. It was almost zero at December 2025, and June '25, I think we're at £3 or £4 million.

That number varies substantially, but that will be released. Then the remainder really is committed and proposed CapEx projects and normal operating activities costs.

All of the money has a purpose and is identified. True surplus, i.e.

where we don't have a purpose for it, very little. Obviously the cash buffer of £10 million we retain as an insurance policy effectively for any unknown matters that crop up.

Thank you, Stephen. Then a couple of questions on occupancy.

Firstly, core portfolio occupancy fell from 86% down in December '25 to 82% at June '26, while overall occupancy is 74.3%. What caused the decline in core occupancy, and what occupancy level does management expect for both the core and total portfolio at December '26 and '27?

Then another one is more when you think you will achieve occupancy at 80% plus level?

Okay. The main reason for that fall in core occupancy is we have sold some income.

Now we clearly want to target the non-performing assets and the assets where that we have substantial hold costs, i.e. the vacant assets, and we've done a good job in the first six months of doing that.

I mentioned earlier £700,000 of savings, which comes from those sales. However, we have sold some income, so that is really the main part, along with some lease expiries not renewing and some breaks being exercised in normal course of events.

We gained £1.9 million of rent, but lost £1.8 million of rent from those lease expiries and breaks being exercised. That's the main reason for the fall in that core element.

In terms of occupancy levels by the year-end and by the end of '27, '26 rather, we are looking at 84% occupancy by the end of '26, and that will come from driving rents in terms of increased occupancy of our buildings and selling vacants. That's really where we're targeting.

So 80% figure plus is going to come into force, probably beginning of '27. Sorry, beginning of '28.

We're keen to progress with the leasing up activity. We have over 200,000 square feet of space that has been refurbished where there is strong interest, but converting that interest, I think I mentioned earlier, subdued, converting that interest to actual lettings and income does take some time.

We're not the only company witnessing that. It seems to be across all markets, not just offices.

Thank you. Then a couple of questions on the debt position.

Bearing in mind the £240 million we currently have in debt, the £103 million Scottish Widows and Aviva facility matures in December '27 and currently has an LTV of 47%. What level of debt and LTV does management expect immediately before refinancing, and what refinancing interest rate or range is currently being expected or assumed?

Again, I think I probably covered this in the presentation. Level of debt, we expect it to be £100 million between the two Scottish Widows facilities, so that's combining the December '27 expiry and the December '28 expiry.

45% is the figure that Widows requires to get to. When we've been speaking to other banks, it ranges between 40% and 45%, but 45% seems a relatively comfortable figure for most of the banks.

Therefore, clearly, we need to get the current LTV of 47.3% down, thus the sales. So £100 million, 45% LTV, and the cost will be almost certainly 3% above where we are currently, early 6%s.

We have seen a lot of movement over the course of the last couple of weeks just in terms of the five-year rate on which debt is priced, I guess it'll depend where rates sit when it comes to finalizing the loan documentation. We are anticipating that will be in place by the end of Q1 next year, and the rationale for that is clearly the audit will be undertaken at that point as part of the full-year results exercise, and we don't want material uncertainty clause in our accounts given that debt will then be within 12 months or expiring within 12 months.

I think that's the long and short of it. I think it's highly likely that we will refinance with Scottish Widows.

Thank you, Stephen. A similar question on the debt.

What LTV are we actually targeting?

We've indicated levels of debt previously as to be mid 30 30%s, i.e., 35%. We'll be at 35% by the year-end assuming the sales that we have contracted and anticipate will complete happen.

That 35% level, the board seemed relatively comfortable with. There's various thoughts in terms of should we be targeting 30%, should we be targeting lower?

Certainly, it will naturally come down if we improve the quality and value of the portfolio. Indeed, as we continue to sell non-performing assets, you'd expect that 35 to drift down.

At the moment, the board seemed comfortable, and the company seems comfortable at 35% LTV.

Thanks, Stephen. Then more of a general question on the management structure.

I realize that you have to paint the picture as rosy, but the markets don't seem to recognize. That's as long as the long-term investors have suffered high management charges, falling dividends, and stagnant, if not falling, share price.

What is the board doing to encourage the markets, and how is the turnaround to avoid long-term shareholders from exiting?

Yeah. The management fees have reduced substantially as well.

Management fees obviously were originally just based on NAV and rental. As that NAV came down and rents came down, management fees also have been reduced substantially.

The board did renegotiate the management contract a year or so ago, which obviously announced to the market, which then split the investment management fee between NAV and share price, very much aligning the interests of the manager alongside the interests of the shareholders. That alignment is probably right and proper, but reduces fee income even further for managers.

Are they high costs? High in proportion to what?

Clearly, it's a complicated portfolio to run, I would argue that the management fees are not particularly high when you look at internalized costs, and certainly salary levels of our company are far substantially below those of internalized PLCs. We continue to fight hard.

I also am a large shareholder, as most people know, my interests are aligned both as a manager and as a shareholder. We continue to drive forward our program.

We haven't been in complete control of our own destiny given falling values and pressure from banks. I think that will be far released come 2027 when we have refi'd, we have reduced debt to a far more comfortable level, and we begin to see some meaningful inroads into the net income position, i.e.

getting rid of some of those void costs. Management continue to work hard day by day.

Is the market tough? Of course it is.

Has been really since COVID. I actually am seeing light at the end of this tunnel.

Sales program going well, reducing overall indebtedness, giving us control over our own destiny back, and we will see that growth come through in terms of supply-demand. As long as demand holds, doesn't have to improve, as long as it holds and supply continues to contract, then you'll see our portfolio continue to increase occupancy.

Thanks, Stephen. On a similar vein in terms of supply and demand in the market of office stock, how long is it likely to take for the excess office stock supply to be absorbed?

Yeah. Excess office supply is mostly of buildings that are no longer fit for purpose and need a lot of construction, a lot of refurb costs.

Refurb and new build is difficult given the construction market. I talked about the development market earlier.

With values effectively flatlining and costs increasing, then it makes development and indeed refurbishment increasingly difficult to justify. Bit of a double-edged sword.

Our valuations have been hit very, very hard over the course of the last few years post-COVID as the occupier market shrunk and now is increasing again as companies who downsized substantially post-COVID are now increasing the amount of space that they require to bring people back into the office. I think looking ahead, the surplus stock that's out there, i.e.

that 20% of unoccupied space, is mostly of Grade C, D, E buildings, not fit for purpose. Many of the buildings occupied will fall into the same category as tenancies come to an end or tenants are able to exercise break options.

They will look to upgrade space. The answer to that is that there's very little Grade A accommodation conforming to EPC A and B available, which will drive rents, but it also will mean that hopefully our renewal rates will remain stronger as tenants won't have options to relocate.

I'm hoping of a double-edged approach for us: one in terms of leasing up the space that we've refurbished, and secondly, in respect of retaining tenants in existing accommodation. I think renewal rates will increase as well as new lettings.

Thanks, Stephen. More of a general question in terms of strategy.

Value-adds come at the bottom of the strategic list, selling assets at the top roughly. Is this an opportunity, and I suppose when do we see the selling going to stop?

The sales for refi will stop at the end of this year. Thereon forward, it will be good rational reasoning why we're selling.

We'll be selling because we don't see a future in a specific asset. We don't think it will perform in terms of rental growth because it may be wrong type of asset, wrong location, and/or risks to us in terms of refurb costs going forward.

We'll be back to selling for strategic reasons post the year-end. Selling will stop?

No, because as assets become let or vacant, we may well sell for the reason that we get an offer that's substantially ahead of current holding value and it makes sense to do that. That's what we've always done.

We've always turned the portfolio where there's a profit to take or to minimize forthcoming risks. That will continue.

In terms of sales for refi, that part will complete the end of this year.

Thank you. I think the last question, which has been sent by a couple of people: in terms of the refi bank facilities go up across board, what impact will that have on the dividend?

The intention is to hold the dividend at a similar levels in the next year or so. The reason for that, is showing a small increase, I think, in terms of broker's forecasts, consensus forecasts for '27.

The 8, I think 8.2p or so. The reason for that is we recognize the increased costs.

To put in context, if you are to refi at £100 million at a 3% higher rate, then it's £3 million per annum additional interest costs. Now we need to offset that cost by increasing the sales of vacant properties and therefore reducing our void costs.

Obviously we've done £700,000 in the first six months of this year. Also by letting up space of currently vacant accommodation.

For those that have listened to me many times before, for every £1 of rent is £1.80 to £2 to the bottom line given those very high vacancy void costs of service charge, insurance, and of course the interest charges. We have a plan.

We'll offset those costs. We'll try and hold the dividend as best we can, but we can do that within the existing parameters of where we are.

Will have an impact on dividend? No, we're hoping not.

We should still be able to make our 8p plus dividend.

Thanks, Stephen. I think that's all the questions today.

I hand back to Lily now.

I think we've covered quite a lot over this afternoon. This is really just a six-month update as all half-year results are.

We will provide more detail at the full year as to where we sit. We anticipate making all of our strategic targets, which will allow us to continue to pay that dividend, and then hopefully, as markets begin to improve and as we drive income forward, we can then look to increase that dividend year-on-year post next year, '28 onwards.

Thank you all for attending. I think we have made very good inroads.

We're getting towards the end of that strategic repositioning of the portfolio, and therefore, I'm pleased that we're at this stage. We'll get there hopefully by the year-end, and then drive the company forward into 2027, '28, and beyond.

Thank you very much for paying attention today.