Avio S.p.A. (AVIO) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning. This is the Chorus Call conference operator. Welcome and thank you for joining the Avio First half 2023 Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Giulio Ranzo, CEO. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning to you all and thank you for joining the first half results for Avio. As usual, I will be joined by our CFO, Alessandro Agosti. So if we turn to Page 2, we will go over some highlights with me and focus on the results of first half 2023 and then Alessandro will follow up with a detailed view of financials. Then I will come back to explain to you the expected outlook and the opportunities. So turning to Page 3, what are the main highlights of this first half of 2023? First of all, we reached a record high order backlog and cash and we will talk about it and we slightly improved the revenues and profits compared to the first half of last year. The next Vega launch is scheduled for October 4 so it's coming up very soon and we plan to have another Vega launch by the spring of '24. Vega C is awaiting the completion of the Independent Evaluation Board and also Zefiro 40 testing we had in June and then the return to flight plan will be finalized in a couple of weeks with the Independent Evaluation Board. Vega E successfully reached, preliminary design review was achieved in this semester and we also very recently achieved the testing of the new model of the liquid oxygen methane engine development model 2 of our M-10 engine on ground. Very important success over the last few weeks. As I said at the outset, we reached a record order backlog, which was somewhat announced, but probably came sooner than we had anticipated thanks to the new technology development projects and to an unexpected surge in the tactical propulsion business and related orders. The profitability was improved thanks to a relief largely on the energy costs compared to the first half of last year and partly due to the kickoff of the new accounting development projects. As a result of that, we closed the first half with a record high cash position over EUR 100 million. And as such, all in all we confirm the guidance for the year. Jumping to Page 5 with the focus on the first half. This is a bit of a snapshot of the flight activity we had in the first half. As you know, the Ariane 5 program was completed in July with its last flight and then now we're turning the page to Ariane 6. The European Space Agency recently announced that the Ariane 6 main flight will take place in 2024. As we speak, Ariane 6 is on the launch pad and undergoing testing, which needs to be done ahead of the flight on the main engine. There's another test coming in a few weeks. So all looks like Ariane 6 is in the last portion of the development program getting ready for the maiden flight. The commercial flights will follow after the maiden flight as it was the case for us for Vega E depending on the European Space Agency decisions and evaluation on the successful maiden flight. So as such, the commercial light that will follow the maiden flight will as always be announced by Arianespace. At the moment we do not have precise dates, but that's pretty much the logical sequence. Regarding Vega, as you know, we have a Vega flight coming up now in October and we plan to have another one at the beginning of the year. And then we are awaiting in the next couple of weeks the results of the Independent Enquiry Board of the European Space Agency to determine when to come back to flight with Vega C. And again also for this one, we do not have yet a precise date. We will probably be able to share that with you in 2 to 3 weeks maximum at the completion of this quarter. But in terms of logical sequence after another Vega flight at the beginning of the year, we realistically conduct more testing on the Zefiro 40 and then come back to slide thereafter with Vega C. That's what we are planning for. On Page 6, what are the key achievements of this first half? Well, first of all as we said at the beginning, the successful completion of the preliminary design review of Vega E. This is a key development milestone that enables to define pretty much the configuration of the launcher, which you see here on the left of the page, which features pretty much the same configuration as Vega C except for the last 2 propulsion stages, which will be replaced by a liquid oxygen methane propulsion stage featuring the M-10 engine. Now what's very important to note in conjunction to the achievement of this milestone, which of course is also attached to revenues and profits, is the successful firing of the new version of our M-10 engine. You may recall that last year we tested our first development model successfully for 25x accumulating over 1,300 seconds worth of testing. But this year we have fielded the new version of the same engine in a lighter configuration with enhanced performance and a fully throttleable version. So essentially the version of the engine that enables you to manage the thrust as you go, which is a very important innovative feature that quite frankly is unique for the time being in Europe in terms of demonstration on ground testing. Why are these 2 things are very well connected and important? Because they pave the way for a successful timeline on Vega E implementation. Of course the engine being the key element of this program. Then on Page 7, we also report the successful completion of the critical design review for Space Rider. You may recall that Space Rider is a program in which Avio partners with Thales Alenia to create essentially a space drone. So a reusable small remotely piloted space ship, which is launched aboard Vega, has the ability to perform a long-duration mission and reenter atmosphere by landing on the near state. So the achievement of the critical design review, once again a very important milestone along the development program not only from a technical point of view, but also from an economic and financial point of view, allowed essentially to define all of the subsystems and components and the configuration and allows now to enter into what we call harboring the loop testing. So basically we start to test all systems ahead of time and so in the course of the last part of '23 and '24, Thales Alenia and ourselves will be engaging a number of mechanical, functional and avionic tests to prepare for readiness for maiden flight as early as the second half of 2025. Now this is a unique product that quite frankly not many have around the world. It's the ability to lift a mass to space, to perform certain operations in space, to dock potentially into other objects in space, to perform experiments in space, spend an extended period of time in orbital activities when we enter atmosphere. As you may recall in 2015, we tested the sub-orbital version of Space Rider. We are now really getting much closer to insert full utilization. Then on Page 8, I think another important achievement of the first 6 months was the full completion of the contractual part of the new technology development projects which, as you know, has taken quite some time and it's spread across the [ streams ] as you see, and we reported this to you already in our previous calls. First and foremost, we have a project for almost EUR 200 million for a new Space transportation system prototype leveraging our liquid oxygen methane engine technology. And this is the reason why, as I mentioned before, the good achievement on the readiness of our liquid oxygen methane engine is relevant from this point of view. Now we are obviously engaged on preparing for the composite cryogenic tanks, simplified avionics, a nonpryo technique separation system with lots of additional technologies. But all in all, this is a good interesting object thinking a next-generation launch fully equipped by liquid oxygen methane. In parallel, we have the second project for a high thrust liquid oxygen methane engine 6x the size of the M-10, a 60-ton class engine with a very innovative thermodynamic cycle, we will come on that pretty soon to tell you more about it. And then we also finalized the contract for our new multipurpose green orbital engine. So this is a very small engine dedicated to orbital operations for Space Rider for example, for the upper stage of Vega or for in-orbit servicing operations. Last, but not least, in partnership with Thales Alenia in particular, we will be working on the propulsion system for the in-orbit service module that will also be able to conduct very innovative missions into space. So on Page 9, one by one we try to review all these projects to give you a sense of where we stand with these programs, which will fuel largely the revenues over the next few years for us and associated profits. So it will be an important challenge for us to complete them on time by end of 2026 and make sure we come out of this with a completely new technological portfolio. So first and foremost, what we call the space transportation systems. The idea of having a prototype and demonstrating our liquid oxygen methane launcher and launching it in 2 separate demonstration flights on high altitude sub-orbital trajectories, but to demonstrate the full capability of these technologies, in particular our liquid oxygen methane engine, but also the use of composite cryogenic tank, which is somewhat a novelty especially when using methane as a propellant and moreover using very innovative integrated avionics completely software based as opposed to hardware based. Last, but not least, it will feature a separation system from one stage to the other which will be non-detonic so mainly pneumatic separation systems. So this essentially will prepare the future that goes beyond if you want, Vega C and Vega E. This is an entirely new generation of launches for which we are preparing technologies. On Page 10, the project on and a tender I mentioned before. This is a massive undertaking. It's the attempt to create something that at the moment does not exist meaning a high thrust high specific impulse methane engine, which we will develop on the basis of the knowledge acquired already on the smaller M-10 except that this is 6x bigger so it's a completely different problem set and really requires completely different technologies to achieve the type of efficiency improvement that we target, which is extremely significant in terms also of cost reduction and engine performance. And for this purpose for example, we will be using very innovative materials here. We mentioned for example the use of copper for the combustion chamber, which is entirely 3D printed. Now 3D printed copper is not exactly a state of the art, it's something completely new. We are endeavoring on using this type of technology again as a way to reduce cost and boost performance, but it is one big challenge to do it in the first place. And the timeline of this project has a number of demonstrators and tests to be conducted in the course of '24 and '25 with a target to complete the development program by 2026. On Page 11, we illustrate the third of the 4 technology development programs, which features an orbital engine. This is the small engine you use already while in orbit so this is maybe 3 orders of magnitude less in terms of thrust of the engines we have talked about before. The idea of this engine is to have 2 different engine variants to be used either for the Vega C upper stage and for Space Ride and as a kick stage to deliver small satellites and for in-orbit service missions. The innovative aspect of this engine is that once again it will be entirely 3D printed. So if you see, there are a number of technologies that we use for all of these new technology development projects. So the massive use of 3D printing is one of them. But in this case we will also feature a new use of green propellant. In particular we will strive to use hydrogen peroxide, which is a type of propellant that has never been used so extensively in orbital propulsion systems combined with some other type of fuel. So this will enable once again very much improved efficiency and cost reduction. The last of the 4 projects is a very important partnership with Thales Alenia in particular and with D-Orbit and other Italian partners. It is the idea to create atop the Vega launcher an iOS module, an in-orbit service module. So the idea is essentially to have a propulsion and power system provided by Avio on top of which there will be an avionic and robotic platform developed by Thales Alenia. So this will feature essentially the ability to dock into different objects when in space, to perform operations on existing objects in space and to release them as appropriate. So the target of the project is essentially to perform a number of demonstration missions with this assembly composed of the orbital service and propulsion module developed by Avio, the avionic and robotic platform developed by Thales Alenia and a target object, target spacecraft developed by D-Orbit. So the mission profile which is illustrated here has the objective of separating the targeted space, conducting certain operations over time and then docking to the target again, conducting refueling demonstration operations and then raising it to a different orbit or a different altitude for example and then deorbiting the whole pack once again. So obviously this is something once again that has not exactly been done in the past. So this is the nature of these technology projects to aim high to prepare technologies for business activities that do not exist yet. Now switching to a different subject. On Page 13, we report a recent minority investment in T4i. T4i is an Italian technology company that focuses very much green propellants, in particular on hydrogen peroxide. So we decided to invest in a minority share in this company to essentially broaden our technology portfolio and conduct a part of open innovation to make sure that we really are capable of working in parallel also many different projects. You may recall that when we realized for example that on these technology streams we needed more technological capability last year, we acquired the full capital of TEMIS, a company operating in the avionics business. Well, similarly here we have done a minority investment to make sure we really have a robust and innovative technology partner to endeavor on the various projects. We invested EUR 2.5 million for a 17% share. On Page 14, I'm glad to report a very good start of the P160 motor. As you may recall, the P160 is a slightly longer version of P120, which will feature as much as probably 15 tons more propellant. And this enhanced motor will power both Ariane 6 and Vega C providing additional thrust and therefore additional payload performance. Now this in particular has the ability to meet the needs of certain very demanding customers, but at the same time that of improving performance of Vega C and Ariane 6 in general for any mission. So now in the course of 2024, we will be preparing the first prototypes of the motor and hopefully starting a firing test by the end of the year in our Kourou test bed. So very important feature because with this modification, we can increase competitiveness of both Vega C and Ariane 6. Now if we switch to the defense business on Page 15. This is something that we will want to cover more as we go, recognizing that there is definitely a surge in demand for what we do in the sector. In fact if you look at the left side of this page of Page 15, we report the order intake of the different years since we were listed and that of the first half of this year. And as you can see, the first half of this year has been almost double our highest -- more than double our highest intake in the course of the last few years. This is a trend that we have seen already in the last 18 months or so, but now this is consolidating into something obviously much more significant than we expected. And this is very important because at this point in time, we have 2 products which are ready and qualified, ASTER-30 and CAMM-ER in particular, which can then acquire all the [ sports ] production activities for the years to come. While in parallel, we are also contracting for a number of new developments. One that is noteworthy is the participation to the HYDIS2 consortium for a new endo-atmospheric interceptor. So this is a very forefront long-term innovation activity, which is done in a consortium of industries across Europe with the support of their respective armed forces. So overall this tells you in particular in our relationship with MBDA in Europe, that defense is becoming for us an important complement to our portfolio, which will be much more relevant than it has been in the past. In fact if you look at Page 16, we tried to provide a little bit a development road map. As I said before, we have ASTER and CAMM-ER, which are essentially existing products ready to go in production for which, as you know, we are continuously reporting the acquisition of new orders that will fuel production over the next few years. We also have this longer-term development such as for example TESEO in Italy, it's a sustainer for an anti-ship Navy missile, and then the development of the anti-hypersonic system. So I think all in all, we will be reporting closely on the development of defense. We believe this will add very much in terms of diversifying our portfolio and risk vis-a-vis the other activities on space. And so that's pretty much what I have to report for the first 6 months of 2023. And I will leave it now to Alessandro to present in detail the financials.

Thank you, Giulio. Good morning, everybody. Shall we move to Page 18. We reported our net order backlog for the half year. Order backlog reached the record high level, as Giulio commented before, of almost EUR 1.4 billion driven by order intake of over EUR 0.5 billion mainly for development technologies contract and production activity in defense business. Such a high level order backlog of course provide us a clear visibility in the next few years. The EUR 0.5 billion of order intake is basically made by technology development project of EUR 0.4 million and defense production order of EUR 0.1 million. On Page 19, we reported our revenues. The increase of 18% in revenue compared to previous semesters is also driven by contribution of technology development activities and SaaS production, change in revenue of Vega and Arianespace offset each other with a substable total contribution. The mix between production and development revenue remained stable compared to the previous half year as you can see on the right part of the chart. On Page 20, we reported the basic financials. The pronounced increase in EBITDA compared to the previous semester is mainly attributable to the contribution of high revenue from development defense contract as well as to the lower impact of energy cost as already commented before. Nonrecurring cost increased mainly due to the provision for charges that we made in the 6-month period related to the cost for an additional firing static test of Zefiro 40 engines. Depreciation is substantially unchanged compared to the previous half semester at about EUR 910 million. Therefore, EBIT represents the same underlying rationales as the EBITDA trend as commented before. Positive effect on financial assets resulting from the decrease of financial debt to the European investment bank and the positive contribution from quarterly time deposits and the significant average level of cash in the semester contributed to have a profit before tax substantially in line with previously reported. Net income showed an almost neutral tax burden in the semester among the current and deferred tax against a one-off tax charge that we had in the consolidated company in the semester 2022. On Page 21, we reported the trend of gas price in half year. Could be worthwhile to record that energy cost has an impact on Avio in particular for the cost of the gas that we use to produce steam, which then use in industrial production processes for instance for casting activities and then the cost of electricity for large size business. This slide shows the actual gas price in full year '21, '22 and the actual gas price trend for the first half '23 and expected for the second half '23 based on the energy market authority data. Gas price in the first half of '23 was lower than the first half of '22 and is also lower expected to be stable in the second half compared to the previous year, in particular when we experienced the peak during the summer season in 2022. However, the chart shows that price still remains significantly higher than 2019 levels before the COVID pandemic. In summary, this implied a higher cost on annual basis for us of around EUR 5 million to EUR 6 million compared to recurring cost before the pandemic in 2020. On Page 22, we reported a summary of nonrecurring costs for the half year. Nonrecurring cost increased mainly due to the provision for charges made in the 6-month period relating to the cost for additional firing test of Zefiro 40 engine. And in the first half '22, there was a positive one-off effect as you can see in the chart relating to the cancellation of management incentives plan, the consequent release of the amount that was provided for the date. Net of this effect, nonrecurring cost for the first half '22 would have been about EUR 4.1 million compared to the EUR 5.3 million in the first half so with a difference of about EUR 1 million. In '22 the nonrecurring costs were mainly affected by the extra cost of median flight Vega C while in '23 by the addition of Zefiro 40 firing. On Page 23, we report the main source and uses. Main source and uses show a significant improvement in net working capital principally for advance for development technological contracts and the best contract. The decrease in the provision is mainly due to the utilization for Vega C return to flight cost and program execution cost in line with the provision that we set up, as you may recall, towards the end of 2022. The other allocation are substantially in line without significant effect. We had some more CapEx in the first semester for Vega C P120 cadence improvement, development launchers of Vega family and the new headquarter that we completed this semester. Better than seasonal typically trend of net cash position is principally for positive contribution of working capital. On Page 24, we reported a bridge of net cash position between end of '22 and end of June and the increase is mainly attributable to positive contribution of the working capital for advance from development contracts and defense production contract net of CapEx of the period and movement of provision. I leave back the floor to Giulio for the outlook.

Thank you, Alessandro. Okay. On the outlook for the end of the year on Page 26. Essentially the guidance is confirmed. So we have pretty much the same comments as we had in March when we released the guidance. In terms of net order backlog, you see today a higher figure than even the maximum of this range, but this is because, as we anticipated before, we probably had accumulated orders more rapidly in the first half than we anticipated and by the way, now we will have to boost revenues. So a portion of that will go away. So we think we can stay very well within the range. Revenues are progressing again better than expected. I wouldn't speculate on the possibility to do any better on the revenues. As we said before, we had a fast start in the first 6 months. Again we confirm the same range for revenues. And similarly for EBITDA reported on one side, we are having better than expected energy costs, which are obviously improving the profits. On the other side, we have slightly higher than expected nonrecurring costs. So the 2 things pretty much even out. What is important is that we will continue to strive for a positive net income as we committed to at the beginning of the year knowing that at the end of the day, the bottom line is what matters most. So we don't have much to comment about that. We confirm the guidance. And with this, we pretty much complete the illustration. We leave it to you for questions. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] The first question is from Andrea Bonfa of Banca Akros.

My question is related to the contribution of equity participation, which in the past used to be an important contributor to your profitability and in the last in 2022 and still in the first half is a negative contribution. If you can just briefly update us on the state of the art from Vega C population, which is the main asset within that accounting item? And what shall we expect for the foreseeable future on that line of the profit and loss account? And the second question is more a general one. You confirm your guidance, but that again implies a decline in the adjusted EBITDA for the second half of the year. So is that an element of prudence in your communication with the market? If you can just comment on that.

I will respond to the second question first and then leave the first to Alessandro. No, I think the dynamics on EBITDA just is pretty much timing. So we accumulated a good profit in the first half. We don't believe to overachieve in the second half with the same pace and that's why we believe we stay in the same guidance. Again as I said, we have higher than expected nonrecurring cost. We have lower than expected energy cost. We need to see how these 2 things even out by the end of the year. So I would say within the same range for that reason. And then I'll leave it to Alessandro to answer your first question.

Yes, on equity contribution, Andrea. From equity contribution on the half year, we got the dividends from the nonconsolidated joint venture with Europropulsion that were higher in the previous half year compared to this semester. But also we had a positive contribution from the joint venture with Cogenio and Enel X following the investment that we completed the last year to reduce the effects on energy cost.

The next question is from Martino De Ambroggi of Equita.

I'm sorry to bother you on the Vega C return to flight. But could you elaborate on the steps and your expectations are the best expectation for the return to flight of Vega C? And considering also the Ariane 6 delay, is there any sign of, let's say, delay cancellation now, but the risk of delay or a longer negotiation for the new orders? I know this should be asked Arianespace, but what's your feeling on this?

Okay, Martino. So first of all, let me answer the second question. Ariane 6, as communicated by Arianespace, if I remember correctly is something like 28 flights sold. So they have plenty of orders for the years to come. I believe this is fully booked for a number of years. So today I don't think this is delaying commercial activity, but it's unnecessary to put more business more than what you can actually do in the next few years. So I would say Ariane 6 is fully recovered. And similarly Vega C has a very full order backlog of order magnitude 18 to 19 launches to be done between now and 2027. So there is such a surge in demand in the launch of spacecraft that for the time being the most important thing is to execute not so much to conduct new commercial activity I would say. Now what are the steps for Vega C return to flight? So I cannot speak on the half of the commission. We have to be loyal to our principle of maintaining confidentiality until the Independent Commission releases its recommendations. But it is clear that what we communicated and we are prepared for is that in the meantime while we prepare for the return to flight of Vega C, we will execute another Vega flight in our attempt to fulfill the customer needs and not to slip too much on our execution of the manifest. This is the reason why, as you know, we moved the Vega flight now to October, which was planned to do later in time and now also 1 at the beginning of next year exactly for the same purpose. And as a matter of fact more investigation is needed to complete the conclusions, but this will come in 2 to 3 weeks and of course I expect more investigation and probably testing to be done prior to executing a return flight.

Okay. And still on the implications for the delay. I clearly understand that the backlog is full, but is there any risk of penalty in case of further delay just to be aware of?

Well, not a penalty per se not in most of the cases. The problem is if you delay too much, of course you have to absorb fixed costs because if you fly less, of course we have certain fixed costs that will not be absorbed. Also the portion of the cost that is incurred by Arianespace has a good fixed cost portion that we will have to absorb. Of course we will look for ways to compensate for this effect in many ways by also reducing the costs where we can. In particular once we have agreed with the commission what to do on Vega C, we will try to boost production to prepare for next year and the year after next for flights such that by boosting production, we will try to absorb as much this cost as we possibly can. So we will seek ways of compensating this. But yes, the implication of delay does not have automatically a penalty from customers, it has pretty much a fixed cost absorption issue that needs to be managed.

And what's your storing capacity for the engines? Just to understand if this can continue even if there is a further delay.

This is a good and important question because first of all, we made a call or maybe not. But we had put together in Colleferro an additional building a couple of years ago for storage of Zefiro motors so now rather than 1, we have 2. So we have, let's say, give or take 6 motors that we can stock pretty much, probably even more than that in business we have here. So for the Zefiro motors, we have quite some storage capability. But we also have a storage building in Kourou so-called DPZ. And in the package of activities voted by the last European Space Agency Ministerial Conference, there is also an activity to create an additional storage building in Kourou. This is pretty much needed to increase the flight cadence with the objective to reach 5 to 6 flights per year. So all these efforts are underway to secure more capacity. I don't believe we'll be constrained in the ability to store the Zefiro. A much more complex situation is on the P120. Now we are approaching pretty much the full condition of our current storage capability. At the same time, Ariane Group is constructing a new storage building for the P120s and we will revamp also an existing building where we used to store Ariane 5 motors to stock additional P120s. So on the P120s, more work needs to be done. But quite frankly there is so much in stock that we really don't have to worry about -- we have probably more than 20 in stock in P120 so that will not be a limiting factor of flight. Again on all these aspects, there has been quite some subscription at the European Space Agency Conference. So we will also be supported financially to make this happen.

The next question is from Bruno Permutti of Intesa Sanpaolo.

I have a few questions. One regarding your production capacity for the tactical propulsion. So I'd like to understand if you would be able to accelerate perhaps the speed of production or if we [indiscernible] 30 million and 40 million per year is what you have at Regina and what you can do the best you can do per year. And also on the development activity always in terms of capacity, are you at Regina with the personnel? Should you have to expect an increase in labor cost in the coming years or do you believe that you have the resources to manage for the development projects that you have in the backlog? And then a second question concerning the CapEx. If you can update us on the capital expenditure. So it was perhaps a little bit low in the first half. I would like to understand if the EUR 35 million, EUR 40 million per year is something we will see for the full year and for the next year? And lastly, if you can give us your view. There is a lot of noise I would say on the European space industry on the research for new space product on the possibility of a space war between countries. So I would like to understand your view of what is going on in the European space industry and what is the role you see for Avio in the next 5 years looking at what is going on between the European countries?

Bruno, I will try to go one by one. First of all, production capacity for tactical production. We have to first of all recap what was our history in the past. Well before we were listed, I would say the beginning of the 2000s, mid-2010s; we were manufacturing as many as 300 motors per year give or take. The defense business was more relevant, there was more production activity and for that matter we had put in place production capacity and storage capacity at that level. Then what we observed in the course of from 2015 to now was pretty much a low in production activities for defense and we stayed at level of 60, 70, 80 motors per year. So now going back to 100, 200, 300, even 400 per year is something that we can do without even incurring much of an additional CapEx. You have to keep in mind that some of these customer commitments also contain financial resources for upgrade of production lines and customization of production lines for the products and so on. So this upscale in the active product business should be pretty smooth. In development activity, you are right, we are instead upgrading our capacity quite substantially because as you noted, technology development activity and tactical propulsion production will pretty much be a very important part of what we do in the course of the next 2 to 3 years. For development activities, yes, we are hiring many more resources. We reported we used to be over 1,000 people 3 years ago. At this point in time we are 1,250, rapidly going to 1,300 and many of the additions are in engineering. A few are in industrial operations for technology introduction in production activities, but most of them are in engineering no doubt. And on this, yes, we are making a massive effort for recruiting, training and putting them in the organization because we have so many new technology and product development activities in parallel that I believe this would be fundamental to do. Once again not so much a worry on the labor cost because as you know, all these people that work on development projects are there to determine a profit. So at the end of the day, we have so many orders. Keep in mind that we have a record high order backlog. The more we add people, the more rapidly we will convert the backlog into revenues and into profits. So there is a massive effort on hiring. We have, I would say, significantly increased the size of our human resources department to pretty much attract the best talent and to put in place the right level of incentives for the people to stay with the company, to grow in their career and to have the opportunity to work on these unique projects. I will leave to Alessandro to answer question on the CapEx and I would jump for the time being on your question regarding the European space ports. You are right, there is quite a bit of debate in Europe on launchers. I believe the most relevant thing I notice is that there are so many people who speak that don't know what they're talking about and it's very difficult to understand anything from the commentary. It is clear that the European space port in French Guiana is probably the best you can dream of. It's located optimally around the globe for any type of orbit, polar or equatorial or [ mid-inclination ]. There is no better place to launch. So other alternatives are by definition less optimal than Kourou. And I remind everyone that the space port in Guiana is over 70,000 hectares worth of space so not exactly limited in capacity or in space. So there are a number of pads, but this is not unlimited so there will be a debate on how to best use it, which I believe is conducted by the French space agency who is in charge of this site. As far as Avio is concerned, what do we have? First of all, we have a launch complex for Vega that is assigned to us. It's, as you know, managed by our company Avio Guiana. And then there is Vega EE. Vega E will need to also launch from French Guiana. It's an ESA project so as an ESA project, I expect that it will be supported by the system of European space agencies in the best way to be implemented. The issue is not only the pad, it's also all of the other infrastructure. As Martino was asking before, it's not only a question of having a pad. You have to have storage facilities, integration facilities, warehouses, office buildings. So it is a complex of activities that we need definitely to upgrade, but for which we have been adequately financed by the member states, including France, including Italy and many other countries. So we believe that we are well positioned to secure the assets we need both for Vega C and Vega E and therefore, we will continue on this project successfully. I would leave it to Alessandro to answer on the CapEx.

Yes. For the CapEx on the half year, we had more or less EUR 13 million of CapEx, of which half of our tangible CapEx basically for Vega C cadence improvement in view of the high level of backlog and pipeline of book launches in the future. Intangible assets were basically in the field of Vega E and industrial process improvement. For the year-end, yes, we confirm, Bruno, the range that you mentioned before of around EUR 35 million basically composed of tangible for again Vega C cadence improvement and intangible for development project of Vega E and CapEx for industrial process improvement projects.

[Operator Instructions] The next question is from Carlo Maritano of Intermonte.

I just have a question on net financial position. So you reached the record level of around EUR 100 million. I was wondering if you have anything in mind to utilize this cash in terms of M&A or investments or if you're happy with the fact that now interest rates are high and you can be remunerated for this cash?

Carlo, we have to make a wise use of this money because the largest portion of this is advances from customers. So the first thing we have to do is to flow them down to our suppliers as quickly as we possibly can. In the meantime, of course we will try to extract some return out of the use of cash in the form of through time deposits and things to generate positive financial results. But the main task is to have them flown down to the supply chain.

Yes. Carlo, for the year-end, we expect to close the year with a level of cash that's substantially in line or less than previous year not at the level that we close this year because Giulio said before, because we flow down to our supply chain the advance that we receive. However, we had some positive contribution from quarterly time deposits for the time being, which is this high level of [indiscernible] position.

The next question is from [indiscernible], CGM.

Just a quick question. Any chance to see again dividends from Avio to shareholders in the next future?

Well, Sandro, as you know, the dividend is not our decision per se. It's a proposal of the Board of Directors, which then goes into the shareholders' meeting. Of course in managing the company, Alessandro, myself and the rest of the team is doing the best to grow the profits not for the fun of it, but because we believe our first and most important mission is to remunerate the investors. And the fact that we are ourselves shareholders as managers puts a lot of attention into profit with the aim of delivering a dividend. In our history since we were listed, we always delivered a dividend or conducted share buyback. We have now completed the share buyback. So we believe one of our key priority is to come back and provide the dividend. And then of course the Board of Directors and the shareholders meeting will take the final decision, but our objective is that.

[Operator Instructions] The next question is a follow-up from Martino De Ambroggi, Equita.

The first one is clarity on TESEO potential that you mentioned during the call. I understand is 2025, but just to understand what is the magnitude of the potential upside from this? And talking about your guidance, could you provide what is the embedded gas cost that you have embedded in your full year guidance? I don't know if we take what you present in the slide referring to the gas if it's a reasonable proxy of your cost.

So on TESEO itself, it's early to say what is the expected potential impact on production. But what is quite important about that is that this counter puts us directly in contact with armed forces in preparing a new product. Typically, the cycle from product development to production in defense is very long. It's years, it's not months. But it's very important because with a lot of effort, as you know, we only had our main core product was ASTER with MBDA. Over the last few years we developed CAMM-ER. Now we have 2 products full in the production phase. So if we can have a third one in a few years, this would be fantastic and probably even a fourth and a fifth wouldn't be bad at all. So we believe this will enable to consolidate a little bit the portfolio relying on multiple products and it may be complementary, hard to say by how much.

Yes. On the energy cost, Martino, yes, we closed '22 with considering the peak that we discussed before in the summer time of '22 where the total cost in '22 of about EUR 18 million of energy cost. Now for the '23 based on figures from the first half and expected on the second half based on the energy authority data that we discussed before, we expect a reduction in order of money to EUR 5 million, EUR 6 million in 2023 but even higher, as we said before, the pre-COVID pandemic effect when the costs were significantly lower than now. This is substantially the main figures.

[Operator Instructions] Gentlemen, there are no more questions registered at this time.

Thank you. Thank you very much and have a good day.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over. You may disconnect your telephones. Thank you.