Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Bekaert's H1 2026 results presentation. Thank you for joining us today.

Before we begin, as usual, let me draw your attention to the safe harbor statement. This presentation that we will run through today contains forward-looking statements.

These statements reflect current views of management regarding future events and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Bekaert provides the information in this presentation as of its date and does not undertake any obligation to update these forward-looking statements contained in it in light of new information, future events, or otherwise.

We also do not claim any liability for statements made or published by third parties, and Bekaert will not undertake any obligation to correct such data published by third parties in relation to this or any other publication issued by the company. With this, I now hand over to Olivier Biebuyck, our new CEO.

Thank you, Dries. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us.

As many of this is my first earnings call as CEO of Bekaert, and I'm pleased to have the opportunity to engage with our investors and analysts for the first time. I look forward to building an open and constructive dialogue with all of you.

I will start with a few reflections from my first two months at Bekaert and the key highlights from the first half. Seppo, our CFO, will then take you through the financials and operational review in more details.

After that, I will come back to discuss how we are building on a stronger foundation created in recent years, and we will then close with the full-year outlook before opening the call for questions. Before turning to our first half results, I would like to share a few reflections from my first months with the company.

What attracted me to Bekaert was a combination of strong fundamentals and untapped potential. This is a company with a long history of innovation, deep engineering expertise, and global leadership positions.

At the same time, I believe the business is at an important moment in shaping its next phase of development. What I found in my first months is a company that has delivered strong results in a period characterized by low industrial growth and external geopolitical shocks.

The company sustained its profitability at higher level, strengthened its balance sheet, generated strong cash flows, and improved returns. Bekaert also took some preliminary steps to simplify its portfolio, including divesting some commoditized businesses at attractive multiples.

Footprint and cost-saving actions made the company leaner, creating a strong foundation for the future. What is clear to me is that the next chapter should increasingly be focused on organic and inorganic growth, preferably on engineered solutions for our key customers rather than just engineered products.

Since joining Bekaert, I'm meeting employees, customers, and other key stakeholders across our businesses and regions to understand Bekaert's strengths and improvement needs and, more importantly, to understand where opportunities exist to create differentiated value. This process helps me and the board to assess how our portfolio should evolve in order to simplify the company over time and further strengthen it.

Bekaert has improved itself in recent years into a stronger and more resilient company. We have unique engineering capabilities, strong customer relationships, and many differentiated positions in markets supported by long-term trends.

My mandate and my ambition is to build on that foundation and accelerate our transformation journey towards profitable growth and a higher-value enterprise. My objective is also to ensure that the quality of this company, the strength of its capabilities, and the potential of its portfolio are fully reflected in how Bekaert is understood by the market.

This will require clear strategic choices, strong execution, and a more focused direction of where Bekaert is heading towards and how it creates long-term shareholder value. I'm excited about the opportunity ahead, and I look forward to working with our teams to shape the company's next phase in its long, successful history.

With that, let us turn to our first half performance. In the first half of 2026, Bekaert demonstrated agility in a volatile environment.

The Middle East conflict led to inflationary pressure and supply chain disruptions, but our teams reacted quickly through commercial discipline, regional sourcing, and by staying close to our customers. While inflation pass-through mechanisms come with a time lag and some temporary margin pressure, they continue to protect profitability.

At the same time, we captured attractive growth in some of our key markets. We secured new data centers projects in sustainable construction, we increased our share of wallet with key customers in power and data transmission, and we renewed long-term supply agreements with major elevator manufacturers.

We were also capable of capturing the strong demand from Asian tire manufacturer in tire cords. Despite the challenging backdrop, we maintained an EBITU margin above 8%, demonstrating the resilience of our business model.

Finally, our balance sheet remains strong with a leverage of just 0.8 times. These financial strengths support our disciplined capital allocation approach, including the €1.90 dividend paid in May and the ongoing €200 million share buyback program.

Overall, our H1 results demonstrate both the agility of our business and our ability to capture growth opportunities. Seppo will now take you through the H1 2026 results in more details.

Thank you, Olivier. Looking at the first half '26 sales bridge now first.

On a like-for-like basis, which exclude portfolio changes and foreign exchange impacts, we delivered actually 4% volume growth driven by capturing volumes from Asian tire manufacturers, continued strong momentum in power and data transmission, and growth in high value-added applications in sustainable construction. This was offset by unfavorable regional and product mix impacts.

In RR, Rubber Reinforcement, the demand shift towards Asia from Europe is weighting on mix and prices. In SWS, some high-end European transmission projects were delayed, but the team was able to capture other transmission projects, however, for more mature applications.

In Ropes business in BBRG, customer project delays and some operational challenges affected our deliveries. Also, part of price and mix effects are inflation pass-through mechanism related in the regions where it is relevant, but that comes with a time lag and some temporary margin pressure.

Overall, the solid volume growth enabled us to fully offset these headwinds and deliver stable like-for-like sales performance in the first half. Now turning to profitability.

EBITU margin remained resilient at 8.3% despite the inflationary pressure from the Middle East conflict and some operational issues in BBRG. The main headwind was the unfavorable price mix, as already discussed and mentioned in the sales bridge, reflecting the regional shift in RR, project delays and mix effects in SWS, and the time lag in passing through higher input and logistics costs.

These effects were broadly offset thanks to volume growth of 4%, input cost absorption thanks to high plant utilization in RR across Asia, and continued overhead discipline. The operational challenges in BBRG have impacted both sales and conversion cash costs in the business.

Let me now go through the business units, and I start with Rubber Reinforcement. Rubber Reinforcement delivered solid volume growth, with 6% higher volumes, confirming our strong market position.

Demand was particularly strong from tire manufacturers in China, India, and Southeast Asia. We captured strong demand from Chinese tire makers, and there is good traction with Chinese tire makers in ultra-tensile tire cords because these products are meeting customer needs on performance and durability, especially for EV vehicles and not just for EV passenger cars, but also for EV buses and trucks.

This is increasing business for us in China. At the same time, the regional demand shift had a margin impact.

Volumes were strongly in Asia, while Europe and North America were softer, and competitive pricing pressure remained. The margin decline was partly mitigated by high plant utilization in Asia, improving cost absorption.

Our joint venture in Brazil in Rubber Reinforcement delivered €65 million sales, which, as a reminder, are not included in our consolidated sales figures. Next, moving to Steel Wire Solutions, where we delivered 3% like-for-like sales growth supported by higher volumes, primarily in power and data transmission.

We increased share of wallet with key customers in North America, confirming the strength of our customer relationships and product offering. Margins were impacted by the time lag of tariff pass-through mechanisms and its dilutive effect as it increases sales, but not absolute margin in euros, and a less favorable sales mix in Europe in the first half.

In Europe, some higher-end European transmission projects were delayed and replaced by other transmission projects, however, for more mature applications. Order books for armoring cables in power and data transmission remain strong, especially in North America, providing a good basis for the second half.

Our joint venture in SWS in Brazil delivered €350 million sales, which, as a reminder, also are not included in our consolidated sales. Next, let me cover our Ropes business, BBRG.

They had a challenging first half. Geopolitical uncertainty continued to pressure steel ropes demand, where the order book was low at the start of the year.

In synthetic ropes, there were delays in deepwater mooring projects. We also continued to face operational challenges in steel ropes in the US and UK.

Turnaround actions are being deployed in the plants to improve. Order intake improved during the first half, and the order book supports higher deliveries in the second half both in steel ropes and synthetic ropes.

Advanced cords performed strongly in BBRG, supported by increased hoisting cord demand and timing. Finally, let me cover Specialty businesses.

Specialty businesses delivered a strong profitability improvement, with EBIT up 77% compared with first half of '25, the margin increasing to 12.6%. Sustainable construction captured strong growth in US data center projects and improved product mix across regions.

The data center wins demonstrate the value of Dramix, helping faster construction while using less steel and concrete. For this data center application, using our Dramix steel fibers enables contractors to complete building construction three to six weeks faster versus traditional reinforcement.

Other specialty segments also improved profitability through pricing discipline, footprint optimization, and cost savings actions while maintaining product leadership in areas such as porous transport layers for green hydrogen. Having now moved to income statement.

Looking at income statement, sales were €1.86 billion, and underlying EBIT was €155 million. The reduction in underlying EBIT reflects the price and mix impacts, pass-through timing, and operational effects we had discussed earlier.

Reported EBIT increased from €150 million to €135 million [sic], supported by lower level of one-off items compared with the first half of last year. Tax rate was 31%.

However, in mid-term, our effective tax rate should be closer to 25%. Result for the period to shareholders increased to €94 million, and basic EPS, earnings per share, increased to €1.93, while underlying EPS was €2.33.

Key message is that underlying operational performance remained resilient while reported profitability benefited from lower one-off charges. Let me next turn to working capital and cash flow.

Operating working capital increased to €656 million. The increase versus end of 2025 reflects higher inventory and receivables from a low year-end base, partly offset by higher trade payables.

Some of the increase in inventories has been driven to mitigate risks related to the inflationary and supply chain pressures from the Middle East conflict. Compared with first half of '25, working capital increase was due to the Bridgestone plant acquisition and currency effects.

On a like-for-like basis, the working capital decreased slightly versus first half of '25 and reflects the typical working capital seasonality. Also, I want to remind that actually our working capital was record low end of last year, which obviously has an effect on the free cash flow that I will comment next.

Free cash flow was €55 million, impacted by the mentioned working capital increase versus end of '25. We still target and continue to work on working capital to end the year at a level closer to the end of 2025 level.

We reduced capital expenditure in the first half and will continue to apply strict capital discipline in the second half. Net debt was €367 million, with the leverage at 0.8 times.

The increase in leverage versus end of '25 is linked to the effects of acquisitions, share buybacks, and higher working capital. With this, I will hand back to you, Olivier, please.

Thank you, Seppo. I will now explain why I believe Bekaert has a stronger foundation today and how we can build from that foundation towards the next phase.

The starting point is the work that has been done in the recent years. Bekaert has already taken important actions to strengthen its performance, including, as I said earlier, footprint optimization, overhead cost reductions, operational efficiency improvements, and first steps in portfolio reshaping through exits from more commoditized activities in steel wire solutions at attractive multiples.

These actions have reduced the cost base, improved operating leverage, sharpened customer focus, and made the company more agile when external shocks like the ones that we are going through occur. It was visible during the tariff shocks and again in H1 with the Middle East crisis.

The point is not that external environment has become easier; it has not. The point is that Bekaert has become better equipped to respond to it.

The operational resilience is also visible in the financial profile. Financial profile has improved materially compared with the pre-COVID period: average free cash flow improved significantly and leverage reduced materially.

It reflects the cumulative effect of stronger execution, operational discipline, and portfolio actions. This matters because a strong balance sheet gives us strategic flexibility: flexibility to invest in the business, flexibility to support shareholder returns, and flexibility to pursue disciplined growth opportunities where they meet our strategic and financial criteria.

We will continue to be disciplined. Growth matters, but value creation comes first.

Let me now give a few examples of where we see some attractive opportunities for growth. We have attractive growth opportunities across mission-critical applications where Bekaert's expertise in material transformation, coating, and engineering creates differentiation.

In construction, we are successfully capturing growth in data centers. The customer value proposition here is very tangible: faster construction, reduced material intensity, improved durability, and lower CO2 emissions.

In power and data transmission, we are increasing share of wallet with key customers in markets supported by electrification and connectivity needs. This market is growing strongly, especially in North America where there is significant investment in grid expansion and modernization.

We also have strong process expertise and engineering and innovation capabilities to develop advanced materials and solutions. We are looking at opportunities in markets where technical differentiation supports profitable growth.

To summarize, solid operational excellence work was done, which made the business more resilient, and the financial position offers opportunities to invest. Operational excellence remains fundamental.

We will continue to keep costs under control. We will continue to further optimize the footprint and to manage the working capital.

The next phase is to redirect the portfolio towards growth. Based on my first impressions, I have a few hypotheses that I'm testing.

First, I think we can better partner with some of our very exciting existing customers. We have strong engineering and technical capabilities.

We offer to them some products that are actually a piece of their puzzle, and I do believe that some of them would welcome us leveraging our application expertise and engineering capabilities to solve some of their pain points and become a stronger partner to develop final solutions. Secondly, we are looking at those, as I said, we have a vast portfolio, we are looking at the areas where we believe there will be momentum, whether it's by capturing share of wallet of the customer or by secular trends, and figure out how we can accelerate some of our efforts to double down on those secular trends and customer relationship.

Third, we will look at compounding those efforts, compounding organic growth through targeted acquisitions in structurally attractive markets where that combination of Bekaert expertise and the one of the acquired business can unlock new growth potentials and value creation. The key message is that we want to reshape the portfolio towards a more valuable enterprise.

The groundwork is fully ongoing as we speak, and in the coming months, we will clarify progressively the roadmap. The transformation journey has started.

Let me now close with our full-year outlook and key messages for the rest of the year. In summary, Bekaert delivered disciplined H1 performance.

The Middle East-related inflation and logistics disruptions created obviously pressure that we did not anticipate going into the year, but pass-through mechanism, local manufacturing, and commercial discipline helped protect our profitability. We managed to capture volume growth in attractive areas.

RR grew volumes in Asia, which proves the attractiveness of their technologies; SWS grew in power and data transmission; and sustainable construction really captured distinctiveness in data centers opportunities. Profitability remained robust with EBITU margin above 8% despite unfavorable mix, pass-through timing effects, and some operational challenges in BBRG.

For full year 2026, amid continued geopolitical uncertainty, we expect like-for-like sales to be similar to full year 2025 and EBITU margins to be slightly below full year 2025, broadly consistent with our previous outlook when the impact of pass-through on the margin is taken into account. H2 2026, we expect continued recovery in sustainable construction, higher deliveries in rope and power and data transmission wires.

We don't expect to see major changes in rubber reinforcement and non-transmission wires. In short, we remain focused on disciplined execution, cost control, portfolio-focused and profitable growth.

We definitely have still a lot of work to do, particularly on growth and portfolio, but the foundation is solid and the ambition is clear. Thank you very much for your attention, and we will now be open for questions.

Yes, thank you, and good morning. I have a couple of questions.

First one would be on Rubber Reinforcement. If I can clarify the market situation there.

There has been additional competition in the form of Zenith that entered the markets. Can you maybe just elaborate a little bit on, yeah, how you're tackling that, what kind of pressure it's putting on prices, how much filler volumes you still have in that business, and then overall the capacity utilization in both Asia and the other regions in Rubber Reinforcement.

A bit more clarity on that would be my first question. The second one would be on BBRG.

Can you maybe clarify a little bit the operational challenges that you mentioned, and also whether there's going to provide any drag in the remainder of the year? Those are the questions.

Thank you.

Seppo, let me give it a try and keep me honest. On your first question on Rubber Reinforcement, it's a little bit of a mixed situation.

If you look at some of our customers in Europe, which are traditional key customers, we can see that they are under pressure. Some of them, I think, have officially reported, and you can see that the market has not been as strong as they expected.

As we are their privileged partner, obviously, their condition impacts us, and so we didn't see a lot of growth in our core European markets. That's the challenge that we face.

It's really not us; it's more them. Our futures are a little bit linked.

Therefore, what we did successfully is balance that with capturing some growth opportunities in Asia. I think it's a little bit of a good news because, as you said, we have some fierce competitor emerging in Asia, but we are able to win in their regions, which is an encouraging sign.

It shows that our technologies and value proposition and what we bring to the market still has differentiation and attractive value to them. Having said that, though, there is actually a big difference in cost of factors between Europe today and Asia on the steel price, on raw material, and that affects basically our industry and puts some pressure, let's say, in Europe in RR for sure, but I would say in steel products generally speaking.

If you take those dynamic and if you definitely consider what you said, which is, let's say, that new competitor emerging, and then you look at what we are able to do, I think it gives me some confidence that we have distinctiveness and technologies and that we can fight some good fights.

I would add that you have to remember that we are present in China ourselves. We have strong footprint in China, we can also benefit from lower wire rod prices in China, lower energy costs, lower labor costs, and that, of course, helps us to compete against the Chinese companies.

On top of that, we continue to focus on innovation, customer product segmentation, quality, and supply reliability that gives us competitive advantage compared to our competition. We are go-to supplier when it comes to high-performing products.

Of course, our strategy to keep plants running full speed in Asia, especially in China, bring fixed cost absorption benefits that also helps us to mitigate against the margin pressure. Then in

your second questions on BBRG, I think it was actually disappointing, to be honest. We have more than 60 plants.

The good news is that, actually, the majority of the footprint is very strong and doing very well, which you can imagine it's not easy, but proved also that Bekaert has strong operational excellence. BBRG has not delivered to our expectations, there is definitely a lot of attention and focus on getting there.

The other thing I want to add on BBRG is that when we started the year, going into H1, the order book was depleted. What you see in the results is the combination not just of the operational challenge, but also on the fact that in H1, basically the order book was slow.

The good news is that the order book is filling up and that gives us at least more momentum going into H2 for that business. We still have some homework to do.

I won't hide it. We have some homework to do on the operational side, and obviously I do believe that because it's contained to a few locations, by mobilizing the right way, we'll get it where it needs to be.

Understood, clear. Thank you, and all the best in the job.

Thank you.

Yes, good morning, gentlemen. Coming back on the operational issues at BBRG.

Because try to push it a bit further, could you quantify this effect and let's say, when do you think it will be solved? Could you, yeah, come back on that?

Then secondly, more general question on the competitive environment given, let's say, the increased logistical costs. Do you already see that some Asian competitors are struggling more with the higher logistical costs and how are you dealing with this yourself?

Thank you.

Frank, the second one, I'll give you the first one. On your second questions on the freight cost, yeah, it's not a black-and-white, exactly as you describe.

On the negative, obviously, we have inflation and it impacts us and we need to pass it along, and so that requires obviously mobilization on our side and some efforts with our customers. On the positive, if I may call it that way, CBAM and some of the freight tariffs and so forth should give us a little bit of, don't want to call it advantage, it's maybe too strong of a word, but that shouldn't be negative for us because we have very strong regional footprint.

Obviously, we are very strong in Europe as well. That gives us a little bit of reminding our key customers that we are actually a solid partner in their core geographies, that we are actually probably the only company that has got all those local manufacturing abilities, and therefore they can rely on us and the resilience of our supply chain in time of crisis like we are under.

I think that actually some of our key customers realize that. We obviously are reminding them that we are resilient and local and can manage through.

That's why it's kind of a little bit of a black-and-white situation where there are definitely challenges we have to address ourselves, but the strength of our footprint is understood as being a strength.

Relating to operational issues in the Ropes business in BBRG, this is, of course, something that has been going on for some time, and like Olivier said, it's very disappointing that we have not been able to fix the issues over the time. Now we have set up a team to look into it and working on the turnaround projects that have been deployed to fix the problems and issues.

To put it into perspective, and if you look at the volume reduction, volumes were down some 7% in BBRG year-on-year, it's partly because of the project delays of the customers due to various reasons, which is typical for the project businesses, as we know unfortunately, and then our operational issues. Roughly, I would say it's roughly 50-50 between those two when it comes to operational issues and customer project delays.

When do you think it could be solved? Is this a matter of months or quarters?

Could you elaborate on that?

We have been working already for some time fixing the issues, and every once in a while they pop up. Like said, we have now deployed very strong approach there with turnaround projects as we talk.

Of course, we do our best to fix the issues ASAP because we have strong order books, and that's the key now for the restart delivery in the second half, that we are able to run machinery smoothly and deliver the volumes that we have in the order books. We are confident we can fix it, but time will show and we do the best we can to be able to now deliver the better order books that we have.

The short answer, my expectation is that by end of the year, we would have a step-change improvement. I think it takes a few months, but now we have all hands on deck.

I think we have deployed with all our best people. Some of those issues are being resolved as we speak.

It's always hard in manufacturing to say exactly a precise date because we don't know what we don't know, but from my experience, I would say end of the year, majority should be behind us.

That's clear. Thank you very much.

Hey, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions.

First question would be on the specialty business. Obviously, the margins improved quite nicely there from 7.1% to 12.6% in the first half.

Is it fair to assume that it's mainly on the back of the data centers, and the flooring in data centers, considering that the remainder doesn't really seem like a fundamental change? That would be my first question.

The second question would be on Rubber Reinforcements again. In China, volumes are up on exports and there's an increased mix tilt towards the premium tires, yet the margins are somewhat under pressure.

We read in the financial newspapers that Chinese players are taking sort of part of the tariffs on their P&L. Isn't part of the margin pressure an absorption of the tariffs on your exports?

Because I wouldn't understand why Bekaert would be immune to this trend if the competition is, as you say, increasing. Thank you for taking my questions.

Let me try to answer, but Seppo might need to jump in. On your first question on sustainable construction, there is definitely a big EBIT improvement.

It's not only the data center on the EBIT. Frankly, the team has really worked on several levers across their footprint to improve a few things.

The growth, the volume and revenue growth, the top-line growth is in majority, not exclusively, but in majority coming from really very strong wins in data centers in the US. We are actually quite excited about it.

Not that it will last forever, but we are excited about it because we were qualified by one of the hyperscaler, and then actually the word spread out, to speak, in the industry, and now we are actually becoming more and more of a reference in that industry, which is exciting. The main reason is that the product really helps them to accelerate their project.

The data center in the US have the particularity to be flat, they basically in the US have plenty of space, they don't need to go in different floors. They just put a big flooring, and Dramix really helps them to go not only faster, which is their key advantage, but also to have one big slab without the joints and have a much better flooring.

We are spec'd in and we can see that we are getting traction, and therefore we expect to continue to benefit from that. In Europe, it's a little bit different because the data center are actually built by general contractors, and it's much more fragmented.

Obviously, we are trying to leverage the good things that we have done in the US to show in Europe that we could be a key advantage as well, but it's more fragmented, you need to work through many more hoops and talk to many more general contractors, architects, and so forth to be considered. I do believe there is something there.

That's how we see sustainable construction. Maybe Seppo can give you more details on the EBIT improvement, but my take is that the majority of the very nice top line is coming from an acceleration on Dramix, in particular in the US, that gives us also a little bit of confidence and case reference or case success stories to bring to the rest of the world.

Then the EBIT is really worked not only in flooring, but there is also good things going on in tunneling and other parts of the portfolio in sustainable construction. Overall, actually, the team did very well, and by the way, if they are listening, I want to thank them again because they were definitely part of our success, and I know that they are fired up to continue to perform.

On your second question—

If I may add on specialties, also let's not forget energy transition, where also we have a clear profitability improvement thanks to the restructuring that we did last year. We consolidated our hydrogen business footprint.

Production from Belgium was moved to China, and that is also paying off, especially if you look at the profitability line. Profitability improvement is, I would say, roughly 50-50 coming from construction and energy transition, mainly hydrogen business.

It's pretty widely coming from various parts of the specialty business.

Good point, and thank you also to the energy transition team because they actually did a great job.

Before we switch to the next question, maybe can I have a small follow-up? I was just wondering, it seems to me like you did a large project in H1 on the Dramix side.

Is there a similar project lined up for H2 or 2027, just to know sort of the timeline of these orders?

There's good momentum that continues in data center business, especially in US. It's booming, and we are increasing our market share there, I think it's fair to say that we see rather positive prospects there.

It was not one project, it's—

Exactly, that's a good point. Actually, data center projects by size are typically smaller than big industrial flooring projects like in automotive industry.

Actually, it's a good point, it's several projects.

Then the second question was on RR. The

competition.

Fundamentally, you're right that the Chinese players, both locally and through exports, are basically not paying too much attention to their own profitability, which frankly we find disturbing, but it is what it is. If you look at what we know, they are not overly profitable, so that put definitely pressure, no question about it, pricing pressure.

We won local sales in China, and we supplied those obviously with our plants in China, some of the volume wins that we had are in China, and we are profitable. Obviously, we are not in the non-for-profit; we are profitable, and we don't sell something unprofitable.

It's just that the profitability of what we sell in Asia is lower than what it is in Europe. There is really, as we shifted volume in Asia versus what we had in Europe, the profitability is not like-for-like; it's lower in Asia.

Seppo, you want to add?

No, no, that's correct. When it comes to your question on tariff-related cost pass-through and how Chinese are tackling that, of course, there are various ways that they are sort of trying to manage it compared to us, but we have been very strong when it comes to pushing through both inflation and tariff-related additional costs towards our margins and margin development.

Like said, with our offering and strong position in the market, we have been doing, I would say, a good job there to already.

Absorbing all the tariff barriers, in my mind, it's not sustainable for everyone. I'm not sure what is their strategy, but not making money, I don't know how long they can sustain that.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you, operator. I have two questions, although the first one is in several parts, and I'll do them one by one.

I'm still puzzled by the developments in RR. For the last 3, 4, 5 years, you have tried to sign strategic long-term agreements with your key customers, and you've said that you've had good progress on that development.

How is it then possible, and I understand that the tire manufacturers are under pressure, that was to be expected given the OEM volumes, but I don't understand how those strategic long-term agreements have not protected you more than apparently is now happening? That would be question one.

The second one is, if you report 6% volume growth and you have softness in North America and Europe, it means that your Asian business did more than that 6% volume. How is that possible given that you already had very high utilization in your Chinese operations?

Secondly, if you had those high utilization levels, why can't you be more picky, which is something that you've done in the past, which has supported your EBIT margins? I don't understand that either.

My third question is, we've had now, and you've said it yourself, we've had the impact of CBAM and smart, and that has led to higher steel prices in Europe, which are difficult to pass on. Have those wire rod prices now stabilized, do you think?

Do you see that, or is there still volatility or is it still going up? Those were my three questions for RR, please.

They are all valid and sharp questions. Let me try to answer them, but Seppo, you'll need to jump in as well.

Let me start with your second one. The Asian business grew, and you're absolutely right, it grew actually quite a bit, more than 6%.

You are right on that. The second question that you had is you said, "Well, your plants are high utilization.

How did you do it?" Actually, we did it.

We continued to basically push output, and we were able to do it, they had even higher utilization. Which then begs your comment about why can we not be more picky, and actually I agree with you.

I think that now that we are really at a very good level of utilization, I'm asking the same question to our team, and I think we have an opportunity to be a little bit more picky. It's a fine balance because you don't know exactly, don't forget you get tenders and so forth, and so if you miss it, you miss it as well.

Our team is cautioning me because I asked them the same question, and they definitely want to have the benefit and not lose it. Conceptually, I would agree with you, and I ask the same question to our team, and that's how at least we are going into H2.

That was your first question. The long-term agreement, that's also a valid question, but it's clear that there is no guarantee for price endlessly.

Also, those customers are under pressure. Their volume is not trending in the right direction, it's hard for us to grow with them, quite the opposite.

You have the effect of price pressure, while the cost, by the way, as you can imagine, is going up. I would say in other businesses, our ability to fully pass through is higher than what is it in RR.

It's a fine balance because of their context. If they were growing and they were eager to get more volume from us, I think the dynamic would be different.

Here we have a dynamic where they are not growing, they are under pressure, they want their suppliers to be part of the solutions, they are asking concessions. We are a partner to them, we understand their context.

It's a very different dynamic. The good news is that we are playing it as well as we can, and our product matters to them, it's a fine balance.

That's what I would say on your first question.

On this long-term contracts and your question, doesn't they protect us? Yes, they do.

The challenge is that even if we keep our share of wallet as agreed and as it is, but if they continue to lose volume and market share to new comers, new market players, especially from China, of course, that means that our volume also goes down even if we keep our market share of the big five. I think that's the challenge.

It's not the contract structure or contract itself. Then the key then when it comes to volumes in China is that when we need to compensate the volume reduction from the big five customers where we have this long-term contracts, is that how do we manage our customer product portfolio?

Because there are, as customers also in China, elsewhere in the world who are appreciate and willing to pay for the good quality, reliability, performance of the product. That is, of course, that then we need to segment the market continuously and go for volumes from those customers, not only from those who can give you big volumes, but no money.

That's the fine balance that the team is working on.

Understood. On the CBAM, smart, and the wire rod prices, please?

Let me try a few things, but they are different answers. On CBAM and smart, it's not completely clear that everybody has digested the cost.

We believe there are a few suppliers from Asia that might not realize that at some point they'll have to pay for it. Back to the previous discussions we had with one of your colleagues, we see some exports from Asia that I don't think are completely sustainable from a price standpoint because they don't seem to fully reflect yet, let's say, the adjustment on the cost, and so they absorb it, they digest it, but I really question how long they can do that.

Don't forget that they will have to pay some of those costs later, and so are they really provisioning for it? That's not clear.

In my mind, the dust has not completely settled. It's not completely clear to us.

That's one answer. The second answer is, go ahead.

Maybe I answer your question or?

You actually have, but if you want to add to it, please do. No,

the second question was you said, "Hey, are prices going up or stable going forward?" Currently, let's say they have stabilized at this stage.

We still expect a small inflationary effect, but I expect that the majority is behind us. Having said that, though, I hate to say that to you because I have zero control on what's going on in the world, and it could be that tomorrow there is something else going on, and therefore what I've just said to you is not valid.

What we are seeing today is that more stabilization and the majority of the inflation seems to be behind. Again, I'm nervous to say that because I've not read the geopolitics always correctly in my career.

No,

I appreciate that. I'll move on to my second question, and this one is for you, Olivier.

If you first look at slide 20, the stronger foundation slide, I'm sorry for being a little bit blunt here, but I went back to the 2023 CMD presentation, and quite frankly, the points that you mentioned are quite similar to the strategy that was outlined at the time. My question is, what do you feel you can do differently this time around?

Because the previous strategy was also about partnering with clients, operational excellence, finding pockets of growth, and doing M&A. It seems as though slide 20 seems to suggest that you're going to do exactly the same.

A couple of things. First, no, maybe slide 20 is not clear, and I apologize for it, but slide 20 is not a strategy, meaning that I'm currently visiting and meeting customers, meeting our different sites.

I gave myself 100 days, and an agreement with the board, really get to know the business before, let's say, making strategic move. I'm not ready for prime time in terms of deciding or announcing strategic move.

Page 20 is definitely not, let's say, the strategy going forward. The strategy is being developed as we speak, and it's not ready yet.

That's the first comment. What I wanted to try to say in slide 20, and maybe you're right, maybe it's the same message that you have heard before, is that there are a lot of fundamentals that have improved in the business that gives us ability to do things going forward.

That's what I was trying to say in page 20, but maybe it was not clear and I was confusing. That's what I want to tell you.

Now, what will be different? That's a good question.

Obviously, proof will be in the pudding. What I can tell you is that obviously execution will be key.

It's not that there hasn't been good ideas in the past, but it's one thing to have good ideas, the second thing is to execute them. I think we will see probably a stronger focus on execution once we agree on the strategy, which is, again, not the case yet.

The strategy is being developed, but not finalized and firmed up yet. Execution will definitely be key in driving things forward.

The second thing, and maybe it's not new as well, is that I think that the board and I realize, and the leadership team, that there is a lot of complexity in the portfolio, a lot of product lines. On one hand, you can say it provides diversification and opportunities, which is true, but on the other hand, it's a lot, and simplifying maybe or focusing on a few key areas where we can really do that differentiation will be critical.

I don't know whether I answer your question, but definitely— Yes, you have. I apologize if page 20 was confusing.

It's really not the strategy. No, no, no.

I also realize that you've been in the job relatively short, I fully understand that you take the 100 days, you do your research, and then you come up with the strategy. It seemed as though it was some sort of blueprint.

I appreciate your comments, and it sounds promising, the remarks about reducing the complexity in the portfolio and the product line. All the best from my side there.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Hi, good morning, and thank you for taking my question. I wanted a follow-up on BBRG.

You expect a strong second half. Could your customers request delivery postponement in H2?

Is it possible that we will see more delays? Also, is there a specific geography driving these delayed projects in BBRG?

Also maybe if you can give us a rough number of how many projects have been delayed for BBRG?

Like I said earlier, when it comes to this effect of delays and operational issues, it's roughly 50-50 when it comes to volume effect that we saw versus first half of last year. It's not really specific for one region only.

Project business, there are unfortunately delays. It's part of the nature of the business, it's not relating to necessarily, maybe somewhat relating to issues in Middle East, but I would not overplay that as a reason for the delays.

That's more to answer by our customers how and what is the reason for their project delays. As it is project business, difficult for us to comment on our customers' behalf how their projects develop during the coming months or second half of the year.

I think the positive thing is that we have strong order books, and that should give us confidence that there's good potential for a good second half. Delays are not structural; they are normal business-related ongoing issues that relate to project business.

It's

all relative also. In my mind, H1 was not where it need to be, and I expect H2 to be better.

I think we have, as Seppo said, some order books that are stronger, we have something to work on. There is also buckets of BBRG, by the way, and cords that are doing quite well.

It's not that everything was challenging; there are definitely some good things. A-cord actually had a very strong H1.

It's smaller, but they did well. Definitely, it's an area that we have to control better and do better in H2.

Thank you. Maybe also another question.

Can you break down your inventory increase between raw materials and finished goods, and what kind of finished good is in the inventory right now, and how is that changed since last year? Also, what are the divisions that are related to this inventory increase?

Without going too much into details because it can be quite complex topic and we can spend long time on that, but I think there are a couple drivers. The main thing relates to, for instance, wire rod supply issues and supply security.

We have been building some excess stock to ensure smooth operational running because there have been some issues with the wire rod supplies both in Europe and US, as an example. That's, I would say, the main reason.

As a business area, it's mainly, I would say, probably in SWS business, but also affected in other ones. Then when it comes to finished goods stocks, some increase there, but nothing short of dramatic.

I would say it's more related to wire rod supply security. Also a bit playing with the safety stock and hedging our position there for the second half.

Thank you.

Yes, good morning. Thanks for taking my question.

Also a couple from me. Mr.

Biebuyck, I appreciate it's early days, but do you see the balance of the next phase of Bekaert as an internal self-help story or an M&A-driven story? In that respect, what's your view on capital allocation with acquisition multiples likely well above Bekaert's current trading multiple?

Then on divestments, are there any sacred cows in the portfolio in terms of businesses that you could divest? For instance, I've noted that RR now has its own management team.

Is that to be seen as a prelude to a carve-out? Then last one, may have missed it in the earnings material, but can you provide the quantum of corporate costs that have been reallocated to each business unit?

That can be done by an email, and it doesn't have to be here in the call. Thanks.

Let me take them one by one. Your first question was the balance between organic and inorganic, if I remember correctly.

I don't know today the split between what will be organic, inorganic. I just don't know.

What I can tell you is that the ambition and the discussion with the leadership team and the board is that it will be a balance. We hope the ambition is to be able to do both organic and inorganic.

On the inorganic side, obviously, I think that Bekaert has always been disciplined, and so it's going to be a little bit of also a fine balance between what we can and what we want to pay and so forth. The last thing that you want is to overly overpay.

It's all relative, obviously, but obviously it's about shareholder value and value creation. That's how we will think about it.

I think in an organic, the only thing that I would add to it before putting the caveat that it's too early and so therefore take everything with a grain of salt, but conceptually I would say that there are two ways to think about inorganic. There is what I would call string of pearls, meaning that we take some of the platforms and business line that we like, and as we build our organic momentum with some of our internal initiatives, we complement those initiatives by a string of acquisitions that help us expand our capabilities or accelerate some of the things we want to do.

That's one way to think about it and that we will think about. There is another way, and the two are not mutually exclusive, by the way, it could be complementary.

Another way, which is to acquire in areas where we still have what we call a parenting advantage, but that enables us to enter a market or a product line or an industry that we frankly are completely underrepresented into today and where we decide that we want to invest for the long term of Bekaert. That's how we are talking about it internally and with the board.

I'm still using my grain of salt, that it's way too early for me to tell you, and no decision, it's still early days and we are just thinking about it and seeing where we can go with that. That's on your first question.

The second question that is linked to that, and we'll see, future will tell, but I've asked explicitly to the board before joining whether there were sacred cows. I had really the opportunity, which was I think very good, to spend quality time with each of the board members, one-on-one.

I asked the same question to each of them, and the answer was no, there is no sacred cow. There is really a strong willingness to do what's right for the company and look forward, not backwards.

That's how I felt. Time will tell, but that's how I feel about it.

Then you had a question on corporate costs that I really leave for Seppo.

Thanks, Olivier.

An easy one.

It's actually visible if you look at the tables that were attached to the report, it's in the region of €35 million, 3-5. It's about 1 percentage point on average on the margin of the BUs.

Understood. That's clear.

Thank you.

Okay. I really want to thank you for being on the call, for your interest in Bekaert, and for your good questions.

As I said, I'm really looking forward to working for all stakeholders, and I'm eager obviously to make sure that what we do is creating value. That's for me the name of the game.

I really appreciate also your suggestions, your pointed questions. You look at it also from your angle and multiple areas, and I think that your input and your questions are actually welcome.

I'm actually pretty direct myself, I'm professional and direct, and so I welcome direct questions, and I think it's all good. Thank you very much for all your time and questions, and looking forward to meeting you in person in the near future.