Thank you, Amera. Good morning, all.

The new Keppel delivered strong results in the first half of 2026 amidst a highly volatile global environment. Despite geopolitical tensions, the demand for sustainable digital and energy infrastructure continues to rise with accelerating AI adoption.

With our integrated ecosystem spanning capital, digital infrastructure, and power, Keppel is well positioned to capture opportunities in this growing market. The new Keppel delivered net profit of $530 million in the first half of 2026, up 25% year on year.

This was driven by strong contributions from sponsor stakes and co-investments, as well as higher recurring income from asset management and our operating platform. We also made significant progress on our two strategic priorities.

We surpassed our end-2026 target of $100 billion funds under management ahead of schedule, reaching $106 billion in July. In addition, we announced about $1.7 billion of asset monetization year to date, on track towards our full-year target of $2 to $3 billion.

We also achieved key operating milestones across digital and energy infrastructure with Bifrost fully commercialized, while the Keppel Sakra Cogen Plant, Singapore's first hydrogen-compatible and most advanced power plant, has commenced operations. Both assets are now contributing to Keppel's growing base of recurring income.

In first half 2026, our recurring income expanded by 13% year on year to $467 million. Starting from first half 2026, we will separately disclose profit contributions from our sponsor stakes and co-investments, or SSCI, to provide greater clarity on the new Keppel's performance.

The new reporting approach mirrors our business model where profits are earned as an asset manager, as a co-investor in our funds, REITs, and trusts alongside our LPs and unit holders, and as an operator. Beyond aligning our interests with those of our LPs, SSCI also provides an important source of earnings and cash flow for the company.

In first half 2026, profit from SSCI increased significantly to $175 million compared to $18 million in first half 2025. As our FUM expands, SSCI will become an increasingly significant pillar of the new Keppel's earnings and growth.

In the first half of 2026, the non-core portfolio recorded a net loss of $375 million, due mainly to impairments taken for our legacy rigs, interest costs attributable to the legacy rigs, as well as depreciation and amortization adjustments with the termination of the M1 telco sale. Including these accounting losses, the company's overall net profit for the period was $155 million.

Importantly, our financial position continues to strengthen. Our free cash flow swung from an outflow of $48 million in the first half of 2025 to an inflow of $570 million.

The new Keppel's annualized return on equity improved to 15% in first half 2026 compared to 14.7% in first half 2025, while the net debt to EBITDA remained steady at 1.5x. Across Keppel, AI is increasingly embedded into our investment, asset management, and operating activities.

This, coupled with continued streamlining, has contributed to over $100 million in recurring annual run rate cost savings. We are also using AI to improve our value proposition to our customers and LPs, expand revenue opportunities, and look for new profit pools.

Reflecting confidence in the company's progress, the board has declared an interim cash dividend of 15 cents per share for first half 2026, unchanged from a year ago, which will be paid out on the 21st of August 2026. We have made good progress in the monetization of non-core assets.

The rig transaction announced earlier this week is significant. We have secured a US$1.5 billion commitment from our LP, Apollo, to the Keppel Offshore Fund, creating a clear pathway to monetize up to $3.7 billion of legacy rigs while expanding our FUM and fee income.

The divestment of the first six operational rigs is expected to generate cash proceeds of about $611 million this year. As the remaining four rigs are completed, they can be divested to the fund, unlocking another approximately $1.3 billion in cash over 2027 and 2028.

This will not only improve our gearing, but also increase funds for higher-return opportunities and to reward our shareholders. As at end June 2026, we had completed and realized monetization of non-core assets of approximately $560 million, a portion of which would fund special dividends for the full year.

At the same time, the gross asset value of the non-core portfolio, including M1's telco business, was $13.7 billion. These figures do not yet reflect the transactions announced in July.

In the first half of 2026, we generated $200 million of asset management fees. We also completed $3.1 billion of acquisitions and another $2.4 billion of divestments across our private funds and listed vehicles.

As at end July, we achieved $106 billion in FUM, surpassing our $100 billion target for 2026. This marks an important inflection point in Keppel's growth as a global asset manager and operator.

With greater scale, a stronger track record, and a growing investor confidence, we are well positioned to accelerate the growth of our asset management business. Keppel's integrated digital infrastructure ecosystem has become an increasingly important differentiator in our fundraising efforts, supporting our next phase of growth.

With deep cross-value-chain operating expertise, we can originate differentiated assets, create alphas through operations, and offer our LPs access to compelling investment opportunities supported by our private funds and listed evergreen real estate and infrastructure trusts. In our power business, the new 600-megawatt Keppel Sakra Cogen Plant commenced operations smoothly at the end of May, increasing our generation capacity by 45%.

Its first-month earnings helped to offset softer spark spread and cost impact from the Middle East conflict in the first half 2026, contributing towards the 9% year-on-year EBITDA growth for the power business. We're also developing a pipeline of proprietary energy transition and infrastructure projects across the low-carbon hydrogen and ammonia value chains, as well as the importation of up to 1 gigawatt of low-carbon energy into Singapore.

Keppel's integrated capabilities in energy, cooling, and water have enabled the planting of new AI-ready hyperscale data centers such as Keppel DC SGP 9 and our innovative floating data center. They will also empower us to originate and develop the next generation of digital infrastructure projects.

Following the commercialization of all five Bifrost fiber pairs, we are advancing discussions with joint-build partners and selecting landing sites for two possible new subsea cable systems linking Singapore to the Middle East and Japan. We expect to take a decision on these projects by year end.

Our asset-light approach extends beyond digital infrastructure. Hanoi Centre, our first retail mall in Vietnam's capital, is one such example.

Through a master lease arrangement, we reposition the property through active asset and retail management, leveraging our deep operating expertise in Vietnam to earn a recurring profit from rents. We continue to explore opportunities for consolidation in M1, for M1, which we believe is needed for Singapore's telco sector.

Based on what we have observed in the region, operators that have undergone consolidation have typically seen a 10% to 15% ARPU uplift, leading to more sustainable markets. In the meantime, we are focused on strengthening M1's performance to maximize its strategic value in any future industry consolidation.

A three-year business plan has been established to raise productivity and structurally reset M1's cost base. This will strengthen M1's profitability and competitiveness while maintaining resilience, cybersecurity, and customer experience.

Our initiatives are expected to deliver an annual run rate cost savings of $70 million by 2028. Year to date, we have achieved cost savings of $4 million per annum, and aim to reach $10 million per annum by the end of 2026.

To conclude, the progress we have made reflects the strength of new Keppel. We have bolstered our earnings, expanded our asset management business to $106 billion in FUM, delivered landmark assets like the Sakra Cogen Plant and Bifrost, and established a clear pathway to monetize the legacy rigs.

As a global asset manager and operator, we have demonstrated that we are increasingly bringing together capital, operating capabilities, and proprietary investment opportunities to create value for our LPs, shareholders, and customers. Looking ahead, as demand for power and digital infrastructure accelerates, Keppel's integrated ecosystem positions us well to capture these opportunities and power our next phase of growth.

Our CFO, Kevin, will now take you through details of the company's financial performance.

Thank you, CEO, and a very good morning to all. I shall now take you through Keppel's financial performance.

While new Keppel performed well, our net profit for first half 2026 was $155 million, 59% lower than the $378 million for first half 2025, due to results from the non-core portfolio, which I will elaborate later. Consequently, annualized ROE decreased to 3.6% from 7.2% in first half 2025.

Net debt to EBITDA increased to 6.7 times as at end June 2026 from 5.8 times as at end December 2025. Free cash inflow was $570 million in first half 2026 compared to an outflow of $48 million in first half 2025.

This was underpinned by strong cash inflow from investing activities, with higher divestment proceeds received during the first half of this year. This was partly offset by lower cash inflows from operating activities as a result of higher working capital requirements.

Excluding non-core portfolio for divestment, new Keppel delivered profit of $530 million, 25% higher than the $424 million recorded in first half 2025. I will first cover non-core portfolio for divestment before presenting the financials of new Keppel to provide greater clarity on our performance, excluding the effects of non-core portfolio for divestment.

Net loss from non-core portfolio for divestment was $375 million in first half 2026. Net loss from legacy offshore and marine assets was $278 million.

As announced earlier this week, we have put in place a program to progressively monetize up to 10 legacy rigs through a new private fund, Keppel Offshore Fund. This marks a further milestone in our transformation as it establishes a clear pathway for the progressive monetization of our legacy rigs, while improving gearing and unlocking capital for reinvestment and to reward shareholders.

Arising from this, we have recognized an accounting loss of $165 million from the impairment of 13 legacy rig assets, including recycling of foreign currency translation loss to profit and loss, net of write-backs in cost provisions. The impairment was based on the group's assessment of the recoverable amounts of the rigs, taking into account the monetization program through Keppel Offshore Fund of up to 10 rigs announced earlier this week and the business plans of the fund.

The remaining loss on legacy O&M assets was due to interest costs attributable to legacy rigs and expected credit loss recognized on receivables from KrisEnergy, partly offset by gains on Seatrium shares which have been fully divested. Net loss from property-related non-core assets was $32 million, mainly from operating losses on investment properties and fair value loss on investments, partly offset by net fair value gain on investment properties.

The first half of 2025 benefited from gains related to divestments in China and Vietnam. Investments, M1 telco, and others recorded net loss of $65 million.

This was mainly due to the release of financial year 2025 suspended depreciation and amortization following the termination of M1 telco divestment, where M1 ceased to be classified as a disposal group held for sale, as well as fair value losses on investments. Moving to new Keppel.

New Keppel performed well, with net profit increase of 25% year on year to $530 million. Excluding the loss from dividend in specie of Keppel REIT units, otherwise known as DIS loss, all three segments were profitable, with higher earnings from Infrastructure and Connectivity.

Annualized ROE increased to 15% from 14.7% a year ago. Net debt to EBITDA was 1.4 times as at end June 2026, unchanged from end December 2025.

Free cash inflow was $244 million in the first half of 2026, compared to an outflow of $179 million in the same period last year. In line with growing recurring income, new Keppel generated healthy cash inflows from operating activities.

Divestments and dividends received were reinvested to fund investments in sponsor stakes and capital expenditure. As mentioned by CEO earlier, starting from this reporting period, we will separately disclose profit contributions from our sponsor stakes and co-investments, or SSCI, to provide greater clarity on new Keppel's performance as an asset manager and operator.

At the same time, we continue to provide the breakdown between recurring operational earnings and market- or event-driven valuation and divestment profits. Supported by stable performance from asset management and higher contributions from operations, recurring income rose 13% to $467 million from $414 million a year ago.

Our fund management and investment platforms achieved net profit of $247 million, more than double first half 2025, led by stronger contributions from SSCI. As a result of lower divestment and revaluation gains, net profit from operating platform was lower at $349 million.

Moving on to our segmental performance. Infrastructure segment achieved strong earnings, with a net profit of $538 million, 55% higher than the $346 million a year ago.

Asset Management net profit was higher than the prior year, mainly from higher asset management fee revenue and acquisition fees, partly offset by higher costs and the absence of divestment fees. Profit contributions from SSCI rose significantly to $178 million, underpinned by gains from the disposal of a partial stake in Keppel Merlimau Cogen plant and our interest in 800 Super Holdings, as well as higher distribution from Keppel Infrastructure Trust.

This was partly offset by fair value loss from co-investments. Infrastructure Division earnings grew to $339 million, supported by better performance from our integrated power as well as decarbonization and sustainable solutions businesses.

Keppel Sakra Cogen plant commenced commercial operations at the end of May and contributed positively to offset the softer spark spreads and cost impact from the Middle East conflict in first half 2026. Real Estate segment recorded a net loss of $19 million in the first half of 2026, compared to a net profit of $98 million in the previous year.

Excluding the DIS loss, the segment would have been profitable at $32 million. Asset Management net profit was lower at $36 million, mainly due to lower contributions from Aermont, arising from the change in Fund V fee basis as it reaches the end of its investment period, as well as higher costs.

This was partly offset by divestment fees and higher asset management fee revenues following acquisitions by Keppel REIT and fundraising by Keppel Education Asset Fund II. Net loss from sponsor stakes and co-investments was largely due to losses from dividend in specie of Keppel REIT units.

Real Estate Division recognized lower year-on-year earnings, mainly due to the absence of gain from the partial disposal of Saigon Centre Phase 3 that was recognized in first half 2025, lower fair value gains on investment properties, and lower share of profits from SSTEC. Net profit from Connectivity segment was $77 million, 54% higher than the $50 million a year ago.

The increase in Asset Management net profit reflected higher asset management fee revenue following acquisitions by Keppel DC REIT and funds raised by Keppel Data Centre Fund II, partly offset by higher costs. Profit contributions from SSCI tripled from $18 million to $55 million, underpinned by gains from the customer commitments secured for the third and fourth fiber pairs of the Bifrost Cable System and higher contributions from Keppel DC REIT.

This was partly offset by fair value losses from private funds. We expect to recognize gains from the fifth committed fiber pair when it is handed over to the customer in second half of 2026.

Operating Division's earnings were lower as the first half of 2025 had benefited from valuation gains from a data center investment. This was partly offset by higher year-on-year contributions from the Technology Solutions business, as well as higher fees from data center project management and network operations and maintenance activities.

With that, we have come to the end of the presentation, and I shall hand the time back to CEO for the Q&A session. Thank you.

Thank you, Kevin. We'll move to Q&A.

I see the first hand raised quite quickly from Mervin. Please, Mervin from JPM.

Hi, Mervin from JPM. Good morning, Chin Hua and team.

Many congratulations to you this morning. Many wins in the first half: superb FUM growth, Sakra commencing, legacy rigs.

Looks like you are shedding the view that Keppel is a conglomerate, you now becoming a global asset manager. Perhaps you didn't even need to sell M1 this year.

Need to or don't need to?

You hit your $2 to $3 billion, then you don't need M1.

Okay.

Maybe a few questions. Obviously the Infra segment has done quite well considering the lower spark spreads.

Maybe can you disclose the growth that you're seeing within the decarbonization business in the first half? In the first half, were you forced to or sought elevated gas from SLNG, and would this continue into the second half?

Perhaps your thoughts in terms of spark spreads, difference between long-term contracts as you renew them and the shorter one-, three-year contracts? That's all from me.

Thanks. Yeah.

Thank you, Mervin. I will ask my colleague Cindy to address these three questions.

Thank you, CEO. Hi, good morning, Mervin.

First question regarding the decarb and sustainable solutions performance in first half. I think you have read that the total revenue under long-term contract has grown to $8 billion to be delivered in the next 10 years or so.

Such contracts are very interesting because it gives us visibility of the recurring income, and these contracts are also indexed against inflation. The first half DSS performance year on year has grown slightly.

The second question about the replacement gas: yes, you would have also read that there is a force majeure declared by the upstream supplier. In the month of April, we did source for replacement gas.

Notwithstanding, we have very resilient gas supply infrastructure within Singapore. We work very closely with our customer, regulator, as well as upstream supplier to ensure that our piped natural gas remain resilient in supply, that's number one.

Number two, our fuel backup strategy continue to be intact and robust. The timely commencement of Sakra Cogen has more than offset the cost impact of this replacement gas.

Your third question about spark spread. I think it is known that we have seen normalizing of spread that was grossly escalated back in 2022 and 2023.

Having said that, it is not very instructive to just look at short-term movement in the spark spread because it will continue to be volatile. What our integrated power business is focused on is really securing predictable and healthy long-term contract that will provide that income visibility for the entire 1.9 gigawatt of installed generation capacity.

Thank you.

Can I check the second half? Do you have to source slightly more elevated gas prices for SLNG or even the force majeure conditions?

Thanks.

As of now, the answer is no. We didn't crystallize any sourcing of replacement gas at elevated level for second half.

I think, to be fair, the situation is still quite fluid, but at this point in time, the answer is no. Rachael from UBS, and then after that, Brandon.

Hi. Good morning.

Thanks for hearing my questions. I have a couple.

First, if we look at slide 30, in terms of the power portfolio mix, how much capacity have you contracted? Can we say that it is the full 1.9 gigawatts that has been contracted out?

How would you account for redundancy? That's the first question.

Maybe we go one question at a time,

huh? Because

the question quite long. Cindy.

Thank you, Rachael. For the Singapore power market, there is obligatory reserve margin that's required from the installed capacity.

Whilst we have 1.9 gigawatt of installed generation capacity, not all will be fully contracted because of the regulatory obligation for reserve margin. Suffice to say, we have our own view of our generation strategy.

We are fully contracted for Sakra Cogen 2026 and 2027. On a portfolio basis, we are healthily contracted with a certain buffer to capture some volatility opportunities when it arises.

Thank you.

Thank you for that. The next question I have is that if you look at slide 58, you lay out a definition of SSCI, so that is very helpful.

Thank you for including that. There is a bit that says that SSCI includes funds that are 100% owned by Keppel.

Could I know which funds are still 100% owned by Keppel?

I think

maybe when we refer to 100% funds owned by Keppel are those where we are still fundraising,

as a cross.

We include those as part of our SSCI distribution disclosure as we have articulated in the definitions.

For the SSCI, results we have seen is not 100% there's no 100% funds owned by Keppel. It's just I think as a glossary, they just included in part of the accounting definition.

Thanks for that. Thanks for the clarification.

Because the net profit contribution from SSCI presents that based on the underlying income stream, if the Rigco gets put in the SSCI, does this mean that the underlying losses get reflected there as well?

The current losses that we've taken, the impairments, still stays at non-core. When the six rigs go in, we will receive 50% in cash.

The other 50% is still held by Keppel in the fund, going forward, it will be accounted under the new Keppel, or under SSCI.

Thanks for that. I'll go back to the queue.

Brandon first, then...

Hey, good morning. Morning, Chin Hua and team.

Brandon here from Citi. Just three questions.

The first one is, I think during the M1 termination briefing, you mentioned that you had to bring forward some divestments that was slated for next year and year after. With the Rigco sale, does it mean that you don't have to do that anymore?

Just to get the context on that remarks previously. That's my first question.

The second question is on the KOF fund. I think when you look at page 17 of the financials, there's quite a pretty comprehensive explanation of of fixed asset value, including this range of US$80 million to $612 million of asset value changes.

Can you sort of share share with us what that really means? Also the sensitivity analysis where it says that if the deployment is delayed by 12 months, there's going to be impairment of $390 million.

What what does that really mean? Yeah.

Thanks.

On your first, I'll ask Kevin to respond to the second question. On the first question, short answer is no.

I think we are constantly looking to monetize the non-core portfolio. We have set a hard target of 2030 to substantially monetize the non-core portfolio, but there's nothing to stop us from doing it earlier if we can.

Of course, by giving ourselves more time will allow us to crystallize this monetization at the appropriate valuation. It doesn't mean that if we have a chance to do it earlier, we wouldn't take it lah.

I think the key is that we are very focused on new Keppel and growing new Keppel, but we also know that we are also required to take care of business as far as monetization of the non-core portfolio.

Hi, Brandon. I think if you're referring to page 17, that's the disclosure around our approach to value those rigs.

As we all know, the rigs are valued on a value-in-use basis. What actually happens, basically, is we'll go out to industry experts to get rates, and then we get another independent party to calculate the values for these rigs.

These notes just serves to basically explain to stakeholders on how we go about doing it. For example, to your point where we refer to kind of sale values, the business plans of the fund actually has considerations for sale at a certain point in time, we had to bake that into our valuation approach, right?

Then the other part that you mentioned about if schedule delays by 12 months, there'll be impact of it, well, that goes into the value-in-use calculation as to arrive at the value that we carry in our books for the uncompleted ones.

Basically, it's laid out in the F4 and 720 for the remaining four rigs, does it mean that... Then basically the announcement you mentioned that the remaining four rigs will be sold upon completion.

Does it mean that if there's a delay, there's a potential impairment of $390 million?

Only if there is a delay, but we are starting off the constructions for those rigs. It's basically the model requires you to assume that there is a sensitivity to it, but we're not planning for any delays simply because we have a path forward now for those rigs as an option for the uncompleted rigs.

I think the other thing to bear in mind is that because these are all projections, it's very dependent on the market conditions. Our belief and the belief of Apollo as a LP in the fund is that the rig market, as we mentioned, is on the mend.

It may still take time for the rates, the day rates, and the value to reflect the underlying fundamentals, but the fundamentals are improving day by day. I think that's really...

The assumptions can also change over time. The basic thesis is that this gives us a chance to partially monetize our stake, but we can still also take advantage of any potential, which we believe will happen, improvement in the rig market.

Sorry, I think Joy first. Yeah.

Thank you for the opportunity. A few questions from me.

Just in terms of asset management, as asset management business, you've had significant fundraising in July. How should we think about deployment going forward and then associated fees that will come through?

First half, I think fee increases still sort of lagging behind fundraising, so that's my first question. A second question on non-core assets, the rig impairments.

Going forward, are we still going to see more? There is one element on interest associated with the portfolio.

We still carry the main part of the rigs. Will we still have more interest to be impaired for the forward financial period?

Thank you.

Chris, you want to answer that first?

Sure. Hi, good morning.

In terms of our asset management, I think like we said, I think Chin Hua has mentioned earlier, it's a significant inflection point for us in terms of asset management business. I think because of the strong track record that we have actually shown to investors, whether it's in the sale of our data centers, the sale of Bifrost, the infrastructure as well, 800 Super, I think the strong track record actually attests really well to and position Keppel really well in terms of a global asset manager and operator.

In terms of deployment, I think they are all working on the different transactions. There's a lot of transactions that we're looking at in the digital infrastructure space.

I think as we have earlier alluded to, we have to make decisions on after Bifrost, we have two more likely cable systems that we are looking at. We have to make decisions on that.

We also have significant infrastructure, renewable energy projects that we are looking at. These are all coming to a place.

That in terms of deployments, I think the team is working hard to look at this. I think for the fees that you'll be expecting, I think you can look at the fund raised, which is 13 and a half billion, and you can use the annualized fee rate to roughly compute the kind of increased in fees in 92 of fees.

Yeah.

Maybe just to add to what Chris has just said. Significant part of the FUM raised, the 13-point-something billion, was done in July, it actually falls outside the first half accounting period.

You would expect that the fees will start to kick in in the second half. Now, your question is on

rigs, huh? Legacy

rigs

in the future.

Unfortunately, we can't forecast impairments. As I mentioned earlier, the belief is that the market is improving.

At the same time, there is this exercise that we have to take every six months to test for impairment. We can't forecast the impairment.

As I mentioned earlier, the rig fundamentals are improving. As far as the interest cost is concerned, the six rigs that have been monetized when it's completed monetized into the fund, then they will be deconsolidated from our balance sheet.

At least part of the interest cost for the rigs would then not be a factor. Sorry, I gotta go back to Tan Xuan first, and then...

Can't hear you.

After Tan Xuan is Mayank, sorry. Yeah.

Hi, morning. My first question is on FUM growth.

I note that in the slides opportunistic M&A was highlighted. Can you briefly talk about how do you assess whether an acquisition is of a strategic fit and what other financial considerations that you would think about?

Sure. Hey, hi, Xuan.

In terms of our FUM growth, I think, as we said, we are always looking out for good M&A opportunities. Besides just a platform increasing our FUM and in terms of our asset management platform, we're also looking at M&As whether it's for infrastructure deals, for digital, for our Connectivity divisions as well.

There are always a lot of platforms out there for sale, and the funds are actually able to participate in such platforms acquisitions. The M&A activities are quite broad-based, besides looking at just Keppel Limited, we are also looking at it from deals perspective for the various funds that we have.

Yeah.

Thank you. Second question is on non-core portfolio for divestment.

I think there is a $2.4 billion of cash and receivables. Can you break it up into cash and receivable and explain why is this included and at what point will they actually be unwound?

Maybe I ask Kevin to address.

Sure. Hi, Xuan.

I don't have the immediate detailed breakdown of cash and receivables. Maybe just to answer your question what those represent.

If you think about the non-core portfolio for divestment, the way we disclose it is gross asset value. Now included in some of these are basically cash that are associated with these assets.

To give you an example, and we've made this statement before: the cost required for us to complete the remaining completed rigs are sitting as part of this $2.4 billion because they are in non-core portfolio for divestment, which is why we've always said that in order for us to complete these rigs, we won't be pumping any more cash in there because the cash is in there. Now the other parts of the cash and receivables are in some of our property projects.

For example, if they still continue to run, there's the receivables there. All of these basically will wash out once we divest them, when the cash are utilized for each lot, if they need to be utilized to realize the value, the excesses will then come back once we monetize those assets.

Thank you. Just one last question on KOF.

I see that there's actually a guaranteed return on the fund. Can you share if the guaranteed return is above or below what the current asset yield is?

I'm trying to understand are there any scenarios whereby there will be recourse to Keppel or you actually need to recognize a loss beyond your 50% stake?

Sure. Currently, the yield that Apollo will receive will be roughly matched by the day rates that we look at.

Which means that we don't believe there'll be a scenario where currently, we don't believe that's a scenario where there'll be a recourse to Keppel. We get Mayank, and then I will go to the online.

Then I think James and then Siew Khee. Okay.

Siew Khee looks a bit unhappy. Hi,

yeah, thank you. My first question was on LNG sourcing.

Now that the power plant started up and obviously you have a bit more on the City Energy as well, can you just talk to us about the long-term LNG sourcing portfolio that you have and how it kind of fans out over the next three one to three years, how we are thinking about the geographies and diversification of the LNG portfolio?

Cindy. Yeah.

Hi, thanks, CEO. Hi, morning, Mayank.

From the Singapore context, future long-term LNG sourcing will be via Gasco. Specific to Keppel Infrastructure Division, our gas supply portfolio to your question, for the next one to three years has already been spoken for.

Whatever that we require for our generation capacity will be fulfilled through our existing pipe natural gas contract as well as our existing LNG contract. In fact, we were very diligent in extending our PNG contract term even pre-crisis.

That part give us a pretty resilient and cost-competitive fuel supply for the next one to three years.

I think just a follow-up on that because for the next one or two years, can we kind of think about most of the contracts being now cost-plus incrementally for you because there is still one year, there are around 8% to 10% of the contracts which are expiring over the next one year? How you're kind of thinking about the contract renegotiations around that, what you're seeing in the market?

I think in terms of the power plans that's available in the market, there's either the fuel pass-through or index against commodities, in this case Brent, or it could be fixed price contract. In this case, we'll then do our own diligent hedging.

This wouldn't change in the context of having Gasco. The pricing plan is still out there, either fixed or fuel cost pass-through.

Okay. The second question was more on Aermont Fund VI and the $13 billion overall that you kind of raised in the second quarter.

If you can give us broad strokes in terms of where will you deploy that capital, how you're thinking about it, more at the Aermont level as well as the sovereign wealth fund that you've kind of raised capital from, where do you see over the next few years this deployed in which parts? I think

maybe for the Aermont fund, just to be clear, it is for Europe, you'll be deployed in Europe. The fees are earned on a committed basis, which means that the deployment, the pace of deployment will actually not affect the asset management fees.

You basically charge fees based on committed capital. As the fund raise, they're not fully closed yet, they have a first closing.

As the fund raise continue, then you would expect that the asset management fees that they attract will grow as well. On the second question, maybe I ask

Chris,

on the sovereign wealth fund, right?

On the sovereign wealth fund, actually, even though they have given us a very strong FUM, about $3.3 billion, part of it is allocated to our flagship funds, you'll go into our Connectivity, data center funds, you'll go into our infrastructure funds. Those funds also attract fees on a committed basis.

Then there are also separate pots that's available for us to do direct co-investments, we will also earn fees on those funds deployed directly. Yeah.

My last question was on the balance sheet. There has been a big increase in working capital in the first half this year.

Is it largely driven by infrastructure because of LNG prices and start-up of the power plant, or is it something else that we should look at?

Maybe Kevin.

Our working capital changes comes from different parts. Infra is one of them, but we also have areas like for M1 and Keppel Technology Solutions that are part of that working capital, I think that's main driver for the increase in working capital requirements.

I think coming back to the whole working capital requirement, if you look at what I've said earlier on our free cash flows, we're still generating pretty healthy free cash flows from both operating and investing activities. They are all within the expectations around how those businesses are growing.

I don't think we're seeing any abnormal increases in working capital requirements across the businesses that we have. Okay.

Thank you. I'll go to the online, a couple of questions.

Thanks. Thank you for being very patient.

First question is from Alexander Han of Yeon Global, Singapore: "What is the utilization rate of Sakra Cogen for the one-month contribution and what is the ramp-up schedule?" I think you've heard from Cindy that it's fully committed other than for the spinning reserves.

The next question from the same gentleman: "For SSCI, what drove the increase of Infra operational net profit from $7 to $27, I guess that's million? What is the split between base fees and any performance-driven fees?

How much of the FUM is equity versus debt?" Kevin?

Yeah. Thanks for the question, Alexander.

In terms of the increase of the Infra operational net profit, it's driven mainly by higher distributions from Keppel Infrastructure Trust, lower interest, and also higher returns from a private fund. As it relates to split between base and performance fees, I don't think we disclose that.

We don't give that. I think generally, performance fees are still a small proportion of our base fees, but of course we would expect that this will continue to grow as the funds mature over time.

Then

the last question around if you're asking about leverage, our FUM is on a gross asset value basis. On a portfolio basis, it will not exceed more than 60% on the leverage.

Next question is from Tom Taylor of Infrastructure Investor in Australia: "What key updates can you share on Keppel Infrastructure Fund and on Keppel Data Centre Fund II?" Chris?

Yeah. I think

on Keppel Infrastructure Fund, I think we have actually invested our first deal in Global Marine, which is a subsea cable-laying vessels company, and I think the business is doing really well because of the number of marine cables that is laid not only by Keppel, but by a lot of telcos and a lot of hyperscalers. That business is doing really beyond our expectations, we like that.

We like the full ecosystem, as we said. Whenever we invest, we look at the whole ecosystem and where there are essential services, a monopolistic criteria.

I think that's where we like in terms of our infrastructure play. For data centers, I think there's huge interest in the funds as well by investors, largely because of AI, that's what you are seeing in AI as well as the demands from whether it's inference and training and all that, requirements by hyperscalers.

I think we are doing deals now in South Korea as well. We are also looking at deals in Japan, and so we are actually quite focused in the key markets of Singapore, Australia, where we announced a 720-megawatt power land, as well as places in Japan and South Korea.

For Data Centre Fund II, our target fund size is $2 billion US, and we should be getting very close to that, if not exceeding that. Okay.

I think the next question is from the same gentleman: "Is Keppel Infrastructure Fund beginning to look beyond Asia for opportunities?" Christina just explained that GMG...

If so, what triggered this change? I think maybe you want to...

I guess for infrastructure, it's very hard to just closet it within specific geographies because like cables, it's actually global. Like even Bifrost, it was from the US through Guam to Singapore, you cannot really labor it like it's an Asia infrastructure fund because it's actually quite global.

Our cable-laying vessels are also very global because GMG also works very much in the Atlantic zone, where they have very long-term, good contracts with the telcos. It's a bit difficult for us to lock it up in terms of infrastructure fund that is just Asia-related.

Yeah.

Maybe now I switch back to the people that are present here. James.

Hi. James [unclear], CLSA.

There's been a few questions on the $13.5 billion fund raise, and you've provided some color on where some of that's come from with Aermont and the SWF fund. Are you able to provide any more color on that?

Because it is a big number. The other question that I had is just how much of the fee card for that $13.5 billion can you earn on a committed basis?

I think roughly so far it's just those two funds that you talked about.

Okay. I think for Aermont is, like Chin Hua has said, it's actually if you take the 13 and a half, it's about approximately 45% of it is for the Aermont fund, and that is really on a committed basis.

On the sovereign wealth fund itself, as we said, parts of it is allocated to the data center fund as well as the infrastructure fund, those are also on committed basis. As mentioned earlier, it's about 3.3 out of the 13 and a half billion raised, so that will be the percentage roughly that you can use.

I think the KOF fund is also...

For KOF fund, actually, very interesting. You get upfront fees because we are advise restructuring, as well as ongoing asset management fees, which is based of typically 2% of the committed capital.

One more if I may. If you look at the write-down for the rigs this period, how much of that was allocated to rigs 10 to 13?

We don't give the breakdown, but I think earlier this week when we announced the sale of the first six rigs into the fund, we did give a number, and I think it's just below $100 million. Yeah.

Now we've announced this number, which includes that number, and the total is 165.

Thank you.

I'm back to Siew Khee, and then later back to Rachael.

Thank you. For Rigco, what is the average day rate that you assume for the semis, high-spec JU, and can-do?

We don't disclose that.

Can we use the market rate?

Market rate, you must understand, ours is a bareboat charter, the market rate, if you're referring to market rate, you still have to figure out what to back out from the operation. We typically don't take the operating risk.

All right. Thanks.

Do you need to find charters for the four rigs before you sell or start construction, and who is helping you to find charters?

Maybe I refer to Cindy, who's been quite actively helping us do this.

For the rigs, we have seen very active inquiry in the course of last four quarters. In fact, the last two quarters have intensified short lists of potential charterer to support their tendering campaign.

That is why we are very cautiously optimistic in terms of restarting the completion of the advanced spec offshore rigs, in particular the drillships and potentially in sequence the semis for harsh environment.

Thanks. Just on Infra, without Sakra, just to confirm that without even Sakra, your original plan, the operating profit has actually grown?

That's correct.

That's quite impressive.

Thank you.

That's nice. Not a question, it's a compliment.

Out of the 49% that's due for renewal, the one to three, what's the proportion of those before second half 2024?

Second half what? 2024?

Before.

Before, yeah.

I don't have the breakdown immediately, but suffice to say, arising from the recent Middle East crisis, we do see a window of opportunity to recontract some of this. In first half, we managed to grab some, and then we saw some window of opportunity upcoming in the second half this year.

Yeah.

Those that were one to three years, they had actually started to even talk to you in recent times? Okay.

Maybe I should put it the other way also: we are also actively prospecting some of such customer to help de-risk their contracts expiry. It is mutual, not just them coming to us, but we are also actively seeking out some of our portfolio customer, in particular those that are high-value or high-volume.

Got it. Thanks.

I just have one more question on Infra. I know that you say that it's fully committed.

Can we assume that PLF is really normalized from day one?

Yes. Actually, this is a very good showcase of the Keppel Infra's integrated power's capability.

Even during the testing and commissioning phase, this arise right at the peak of the Middle East crisis. Because we have our existing in-house O&M team that we harness to support the testing and commissioning, we managed to not only bring the plant on stream on target in May, what we saw is the entire performance in June and almost the whole of July has been on point in terms of availability, in terms of heat rates, and I think we are very happy with the chosen technology and the execution to date.

Thanks. I just have one last question before I jump back to the queue on asset monetization.

Assuming today is the 31st of December, and then you have realized your $611 million in rigs, your total realized divestment would have been $1.17 billion, correct?

That's correct.

Now we went back to 30th of June, what are the assets that you actually are quite confident to realize and complete from now until end-2026 to reach realized and complete $2 billion?

Sure. I can't give you the projections.

I think we are working on a few things. I think there are also some assets that we have announced earlier, and they are not completed yet.

When they are completed in the second half, they will also be added to this pot lah, which you are trying to figure out what the special dividend is, I presume. There will be some transactions that we work on where it will be quite straightforward, that means the time from the announcement to the completion is quite short.

There will be some that might take a few months because of some regulatory approval, just like for the six rigs that you just mentioned. Some new ones coming in, but they may be quite fast to close, then some may actually drag out till a bit longer.

What other assets other than the four rigs?

You're talking about the new ones,

huh?

You're talking about end-2026.

Correct.

The four rigs definitely would not likely go in

by

end-2026.

Talking about beyond the four rigs.

Beyond the four rigs, there will be others lah. Other things lah, but I can't tell you what it is.

It's not disclosed. Rachael first, yeah.

Hi. Just to clarify on the total monetization and how much you're paying out, right?

The last result you said that you'll be paying out on gross value of monetization. However, for Rigco, you are talking about monetization based on $611 million, which is realized.

Is it correct that it is gross value of monetization that is realized, instead of gross value full stop?

Yes, realized in cash.

Maybe let's say hypothetically, one day you are able to monetize M1 for the same value of what Simba paid, but in this case, it may only be in 50% cash and 50% in non-cash payments. Am I right to conclude that if that is the case, then you will only be paying out of the 50% that is paid in cash and not the entire value of the monetization?

That's correct.

Thank you.

Maybe just to make sure that it's absolutely clear: if the initial transaction is 50% cash and 50% shares, then the 50% cash, that's what the special dividend will be based on. Later on, if the next 50% theoretically is encashed, then the special dividend will still accrue on that 50%.

Thanks for that. Because I guess I'm just trying to understand how much when you talk about your total monetization, how we are able to kind of calculate the exact amount, the exact basis of how you will pay your 10% to 15%, yeah.

I hope this is quite clear. I think our definition of non-core is already fixed.

We don't intend to have more non-core. What that means is that that number over time as we monetize, the special dividend will be based on that.

Sorry, Dexter.

Hi, good morning. I'll just ask what I have time.

On the Real Estate side, the core portfolio, there were some losses. Can I understand where did it come from?

Sorry, say that again. There were some losses in the core?

Core. Yeah.

On

the Real Estate side.

DIS,

the DIS.

Oh, okay. Because of the Keppel REIT distribution in specie.

Oh, sorry, no, in the non-core portfolio, right?

Non-core.

The losses in the...

The difference between last year and this year for the non-core was we were able to recognize Saigon Centre Phase 3, as well as fair value gains from 1 Paramount, as well as some remeasurement gain from our waterpark business. Is that what you mean?

Non-core portfolio. I 1-2.

It's

I 1-2?

Oh, okay.

There's some losses on I 1-2, right, when we sell?

We have operating losses for some of our existing assets still, that are running assets, our investment property assets.

Oh, okay. Thanks.

Thanks for clarifying that. Second one, on the private funds, I just want to understand, vintage is a bit old.

I'm just wondering, is there any funds that are coming to the end of its fund life? Because, sorry if I didn't see, but you don't disclose the fund life duration for your funds, right?

The fund life typically is about 8 to 10 years. The earlier real estate funds it's at the end of their fund lives, probably only more of our flagship funds, and then for real estate, Fund IV.

Fund III, we have actually divested most of it. Yeah.

This is part and parcel of the cycle of closed-end funds. The older funds over time will run off, and then you have new funds coming in.

Sorry, on the Apollo deal, I'm just wondering, can you talk about color on how it came about? Was it a part of a bidding process?

Was it it came to you with wanting to buy the rigs or what was the conversation like?

It's a bilateral deal. A lot of our transactions are bilateral.

When we bought Aermont was also bilateral, no process involved.

Okay. Last one is on the what Xian asked just now about the performance guarantee for the Apollo deal is.

Is that something that you guys would do going forward, and do you have a number as to what that performance guarantee is? We don't.

Not all the funds that we do, in fact most of the funds we do don't have that feature. In this instance, there is obviously positive expectations for the future, but the investor also has some downside protection.

In terms of upside, this is quite typical when you give some downside protection, we also get more of the upside. It's a trade-off lah.

Okay. That's all for me.

Thank you.

Quite a few more questions. Maybe starting with Xuan first, and then Brandon, and then Siew Khee.

Hi, thank you. First question is on Connectivity.

Can you share what are the key drivers of the revenue? The $600-over million is quite a lot, but operating profit is only $30 million.

What's the best way to forecast this segment going forward? Second question is on the segmental breakdown.

I see that interest income and interest expense is quite high within corporate activities and also non-core, but it gets eliminated. Can you share how are the debt allocated between the segments?

Thank you.

Maybe the first question I ask Mann to address this.

Sure. If you look at Connectivity business, Xuan, there are multiple elements to it.

If you look at the subsea cable business, the revenue that operating division gets is the O&M revenue over 25 years. That and then clearly our cost for that business increase over a period of time because as the cable gets older, it requires more maintenance till we sign up another new cable, and then we start propping up the O&M revenues.

The other one is our Keppel Technology Solutions business, which is extremely top-line driven because it's a combination of a system integrator as well as a solution provider and, to some extent, even reseller of licenses. The challenge in that business is that while we get good top lines, we have to find ways to improve our margins.

The good part is that we have started creating a plan to increase our margins significantly in that business as well. Our margins have improved more than 30% over last year this year alone, because what we have started to do is to create centers of excellence and revenue pools in high-cost countries and our distribution and delivery hubs in low-cost countries.

That arbitrage helps us get higher margins in the business. That activity has already started.

We have, for example, our digital delivery centers in Vietnam and Malaysia, while our COEs, centers of excellence, for cybersecurity, for cloud migration, AI solutions, they all sit in Singapore. When we do this, it helps us improve our margins.

Over a period of time, you will see margins improving. Of course, it is not the same level of margins as telecom businesses, but it is a business which can grow in margins and in top line quite significantly over a period of time.

Second question, Kevin.

Yeah. Xuan, just on the elimination that you see, it's essentially that we have cross-borrowings within the group, right?

Naturally, those will be eliminated out when we report the interest between the two segments.

Brandon.

Yeah. Just three quick questions.

The first one, are you okay to share the Aermont's FUM, like I think it was $24 billion three years ago when you first bought it, where we are today? That's the first one.

The second one with regards to the China IPs in Shanghai and Beijing, any way of working some magic around there, or doing some C-REITs, or are you looking to raise local funds? That's the second question.

The third one is with regards to M1. The $70 million cost savings, how much of a EBITDA margin improvement would that imply?

Also, given that it's a three-year plan, does it mean that three years you are not really looking to sell it? Thanks.

On

Aermont, right? On Aermont, I think we said that the FUM is about $24 billion in the past, and if you add on the new fundraise, so that will increase it quite substantially to about a shade below $30 billion.

Yeah.

On the IPs that we have, which includes both China and Singapore, Keppel South Central, we are in the process of leasing them up. I think once they are leased up, then we'll be exploring different opportunities.

For China assets, I think at least for now, clearly, there are various options, as you mentioned: China REIT, etc., and also a China-for-China, there are some funds that we see, insurance companies, etc., they are looking for such assets, and we'll continue to explore that. Your third question is on M1, right?

On the margin. You want to address the margin?

Sure. The $70 million is a run rate by '28 that we are planning for.

Like I think Chin Hua shared initially, we are looking at $10 million this year alone. We don't share exact EBITDA numbers, but we are expecting our exit of 2027 to be significantly higher than exit of 2026 EBITDA.

Then of course, we have the advantage of that exit the full year of 2028. So $10 million this year fully realized, and then it will be $70 million by '27.

Now it's a three-year plan. After three years, what happens, very difficult for me to speculate, but it is a business which will require a lean machine to run this business in Singapore unless, like we've been sharing, unless there's a consolidation that happens that props up opportunities for ARPU improvement and maybe more cost synergies that can be derived out of consolidation.

I think it's kind of a playbook that we have done before with when KOM was with us, and we were going through that terrible period a few years before we monetized or before we spun it off. As you recall, we also did a lot of cost structuring, and essentially if you can do that, then you will end up with a better value proposition when we exit.

Short answer is, we have a plan, but it doesn't mean that we have to wait until the execution of the plan. I think you can start to see the tangible benefits of that, and that can factor into any potential discussion.

Sorry, we got Siew Khee right next.

Thank you. Just on Infra, are you still targeting for 30% year-on-year growth for DSS?

Cindy. Yes.

I think the DSS growth has been quite interesting. Instead of targeting 30% year-on-year growth, we want to focus on the book-to-build.

We are leveraging a lot on AI to generate leads and generate proposal, including that of underwriting some of performance obligation and assets optimization. We are seeing very interesting realized benefits of using AI from the EBITDA margin uplift point of view.

I think the way to look at the DSS business is asset-light, is very scalable, and we have visibility of the long-term contract when executed. These are very high operating leverage business, and there's no barrier to scaling regionally as well as broader context.

The more we scale, the more operating leverage we get, and I thought this is something that we are very excited about.

Thanks. Just on Infra also, there's maybe just now, Kevin, you had actually explained why is there an increase in operational raw in investing for infrastructure SSCI, that it's $27 million, from $7 to $27.

What's that?

Higher distribution from KIT, from one of our private funds, and lower interest costs.

Thanks. Then just on Connectivity, what's your plan for the subsea cable beyond the fifth pair?

How do you cushion the potential teeth in 2027 if there's any on the capital gains from selling of the fiber pairs?

I think ultimately, right, what you see is that this fiber pairs, the basic business model is as we build them, usually we'll do it with a fund. We will have co-investments, and then over time, we will take our share of the gains.

More importantly, after the sale of the fiber pair, as we have then secured a 25-year O&M contract. In this case, for Bifrost, the total of this five fiber pair, the contract value over the 25 years is about a billion Singapore dollars.

That's kind of the recurring income that we will see lah, right?

What I meant is do you have any more targets for such?

There will be targets, but you will know that it won't be done in 2027 because the sale of the pair, it will take time, right? You have to build the pair before you can sell them.

Then last question, just on the $10 million cost savings that you are focusing to optimize in M1, can we just flow through to profit, and then whether it has actually started in first half, or can we just expect $10 million in second half?

Most of it will flow through.

It will flow

through the

100% flow.

The $10 million hasn't kicked in yet?

About $4 million has already been realized.

Thank you.

She's down into the numbers. You pass us the model, we will help you.

Mervin first, and then I will stop, and then we will go back to the online, and then I'll come back again. Mervin, please.

Just in terms of the fund management business, Chris mentioned that the sovereign wealth fund is participating or putting money into existing funds. Are there plans to upsize your existing funds in the second half beyond this sovereign wealth fund at this point in time?

On M1, obviously you're hoping to realize that $70 million over the next 3 years. In terms of restructuring costs, are you able to disclose what will be the restructuring costs on annual basis over the next 3 years?

For M1 itself, how is the ARPU performance in the first half, and subscribers, are we seeing stabilization or we still seeing a drop-off going forward? In terms of M1 potential disposal hopefully in the next 1 to 2 years, what's the process here?

Do we need to reach out to regulators first or are you already having discussions with potential parties? Thanks.

Maybe, Chris, you want to just do Aermont first?

Aermont,

she was asking your question, but you had a...

Upsize your

existing funds

beyond the sovereign wealth fund.

Beyond the sovereign wealth... I guess we are happy to take in investors as they come, because our fundraising have not ended yet.

From what we are seeing that there are good interest, continuing interest in the various funds that we have, whether it's in real estate strategies, whether it's with Aermont, I think there are more sign-ups coming. The DC actually, we didn't include in the numbers, but yesterday there was another investor that just signed up as well.

Quite similar patterns that we're seeing across whether it's our education funds and infrastructure funds, we will announce the good news as it comes. Thank you for your interest.

Mann, you want to deal with some of the questions on M1?

Two questions. One on restructuring cost.

I think the $70 million that we are talking about is including restructuring cost, if at all. That's your first question.

On ARPU and base, look, the market continues to be very aggressive. I don't see any uplift in the ARPU at this point in time, but we are hoping, and we are seeing some early signs of things bottoming out.

In fact, at M1, we are now looking to increase our base because of the plans and the products that we are going to be launching, much simplified, much easier customer experience products that we're looking at. Market continues to be very aggressive, I think, but there is only that much it can go down to, and there is bottoming out that we do see happening now to a certain extent.

On the regulators, I guess, when when the deal was we were not able to proceed with the deal, it was quite clear, at least to us, that it was not because the regulator had some issues on consolidation. I don't see that that being an issue in terms of getting regulator regulatory approval.

At the same time, I would say that when we do enter into a transaction, if we if we enter into a transaction, and we would want to make sure that, it will likely go through lah. Because, we thought that that the first one will go through.

This time, second time round, I don't think we the optionality for us to not proceed is is is not we have to make sure that it will go through lah, if you understand what I'm saying. Let's go to some of the questions online.

This is from Joel of DBS. He has a total of two questions.

First question is on: "Recurring income is disclosed at $467 million and SSCI separately at $175 million. How much of the SSCI sits on the recurring bucket versus event-driven?"

Kevin?

Thanks, CEO. Hi, Joel.

The answer is $48 million, and it's available on slide 19. If you look at slide 19, and that's what we said also that for SSCI, we have also broken it up between operational and valuation and event-driven, you will be able to identify that number on slide 19 of the deck.

Second question: "Of your $106 billion FUM, what percentage of that is fee-paying FUM?"

Sure. In terms of our FUM, whenever we raise funds, we always charge fees, I would consider that as 100%.

Yeah.

Next question is from Lee Sock Ling of NA in Singapore. First question: "You have exceeded your FUM target ahead of schedule.

What do you think is the biggest constraint to growing to $150 billion FUM over the next few years? Is it fundraising demand, availability of investable assets, or execution capacity?"

Actually, our target is $200, but I don't know why she put 150.

Give me some discount. Can I lower my target?

Thanks for asking. I think as we shared earlier, there's a lot of interest from LPs subscribing to the funds, I think because of Keppel's operational capabilities.

Like we said earlier, the digital infrastructure projects, whether it's the cable systems that we're looking at, the renewables that we're working through with Cindy's, I think these are projects which investors are very interested in, partly because of Keppel's operating capabilities. Also for real estate, I think because of our sustainable urban renewal solutions, I think those created a lot of values for investors.

Because of all that, I think I'm really helped by the good works of my colleagues as well in terms of our operational capabilities. We do see that fundraising will continue to grow in interest and demand, we are not too concerned about that.

In terms of investable assets, as we said, Keppel not only do bilateral deals, but actually we are able to create a lot of our own deals through the help of our operational divisions. That will actually create a pool of investable products with cash flows for investors.

Nevertheless, as we said, we always tell the team we should be very rigorous in terms of our underwriting, we have to be very diligent and still maintain good execution in terms of making sure that the numbers make the returns that our investors are looking for.

I guess maybe just to supplement what Chris has said. We do see that we have started this flywheel on the asset management side that is also supplemented by the flywheel on the operation side.

We think that the growth in FUM will grow, we are at an inflection point lah, we think that this will continue. Then of course over time, we will also opportunistically look at potential acquisition, but it must make sense to us.

There must be a strategic fit. I think that's all I wanted to say.

Now, there's a second question that she has which I'll answer quite quickly, because we're coming to the end. I will ask for maybe one more questions from the floor.

Her second question from Lee Sock Ling is: "Free cash flow improved significantly while leverage increased. How should investor think about net debt over the next few years as monetizations continue?"

Over time, as the monetization continues, we would expect the net debt to be brought down. I think we see monetization as a way for us to improve our leverage, also to invest in new Keppel, and of course lastly, to reward our shareholders.

Okay. Anyone for the last question?

Please, Mervin.

Just on share buybacks. I won't ask you whether share price is undervalued.

Are there plans to upsize the share the quantum of share buybacks from here given the success of new Keppel, or you're saving capital for acquisitions instead?

I think the the shares that we do the share buybacks, the shares that we have bought back have been used for our internal share plan, but we have also used it when we did the Aermont acquisition. There is a second tranche coming in 2028.

We can we can either use cash or we can also use shares or we can issue new shares, right? If if I think there are some we're going to use our shares to So it's either we buy from the market, keep it as treasury shares, and then use it, or we can also issue a new shares.

We will have to kind of factor all that in and then decide, what's the best way forward. Currently, we still have some dry powder from this $500 million, I think let's focus on that first.

All right. Thank you very much for your attention and spending time with us, and have a great day ahead.

Thank you.