Cellnex Telecom, S.A. (CLNX) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Juan Gaitan, Director of Investor Relations, and I would like to thank you all for joining us today for our Q1 2024 Results Conference Call. Apologies for the delay, but we had some technical difficulties. Today, I'm joined by our CEO, Marco Patuano; and our CFO, Raimon Trias, who will discuss the main highlights of the period, and then we will open the line for your questions. [Operator Instructions] Without further ado, over to you Marco.

Thank you, Juan Jose. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you so much for your time today. Sorry again for the delay. The platform is a little bit bizarre today, and we have some problem in hearing the line. So I'll start commenting on our business performance. We are once again providing solid results this quarter, proving the resilience of our business model and aligning all the levels of our organization toward our public commitments. So this quarter has been marked by an excellent commercial performance and a consistent operational execution, with PoPs increasing close to 11% compared to last year, around 7% on PoP equivalent. Just as a reminder, we are providing you both physical PoP and equivalent PoP. Organic revenues, excluding from our numbers, mainly the impact from change of perimeter resulting from the remedy process in France, well, organic revenues increased 7.5%. Organic EBITDA after lease, increased 11.1%, and our recurring levered free cash flow increased by 14.4%. Finally, our free cash flow reached EUR 103 million, benefiting from EUR 152 million received in this quarter in the context of the second tranche of the French remedies. So we are on track to meet all our short- and medium-term targets we have recently shared with you at the Capital Markets Day. Moving to the financial strategy and capital allocation. Just a quick reminder of our priorities set out at our recent Capital Markets Day, which we reiterate a long-term leverage target of between 5x and 6x net debt to EBITDA, which we believe we can achieve by 2025. Having obtained our investment-grade rating by S&P much earlier than originally planned, we confirm an unconditional commitment to maintain this credit rating level both by S&P and Fitch. From a leveraging perspective, we're making remarkable progress, thanks to the disposal of the sites in France, our agreement in the Nordics and our recently announced exit from Ireland. Disclosure process is on track. We presented all the documents and the relevant documents to the antitrust, and leverage will be reduced by EUR 971 million when that's completed and paid. Despite having already reached full investment-grade status, we continue to assess strategic options for our portfolio of assets, and we can confirm that the Austria sale process remains on track with nonbinding offers expected very soon. Please note that an early shareholder distribution in the form, for example, of a share buyback could be considered following the disposal, subject to our leverage target and our operating commitment. Finally, as you have seen in our investor materials, we have started to report, providing a more granular level of detail in terms of organic growth, business line, geography and uses of CapEx, and we hope this will allow you to better understand the performance of our key value drivers. Having said these, I will now hand over to our CFO. Raimon, floor is yours.

Thank you, Marco. Good afternoon, everyone. We will now provide a few additional remarks from the period and the financial strategy. This has been another quarter of excellent commercial performance, with organic PoPs growing at close to 11% compared to the same period last year. Remember that we are starting to report physical PoPs which, in our view, provides a better reflection of the addressable market and our commercial efforts. This growth is due to the progress made on our business programs in France, Italy and Poland and colocation PoPs generated mainly in Italy and Portugal, with the rest of our markets showing a steady performance. Total growth linked new colocations has reached a strong 7.5% this period, while build-to-suit has grown 3%. Revenue increased 7% compared to the same period last year; our adjusted EBITDA also grew 7%; our EBITDA after leases, 9%; and our recurring levered free cash flow, 14%. When excluding the impact from the change of perimeter that Marco mentioned, our numbers, our revenues increased 7.5%; our EBITDA, 9%; and our EBITDA after leases, 11%. If we now move to Slides 8 and 9, we are providing here, as anticipated at our Capital Markets Day, our organic revenue bridge for the period as well as individual performance of our different business lines. So as you can see, if we take our contribution to revenues from inflation, colocation and build-to-suit, our organic revenues grew 7.5% compared to the same period last year. And going into the specific performance of our business, the towers segment grew organically 6.6%; fiber, connectivity and housing services is growing 24%; DAS, small cells and RAN grew 21%; and broadcast increased 2%. Just a quick clarification on the average revenue per tower, which takes tower revenues expressed on an annual basis as per the last 12 months ended the last day of the reporting period. Our free cash flow has reached EUR 103 million, around EUR 240 million more than the same period last year, mainly due to the EUR 152 million that we have received in the context of the remedies process in France, as was supported by improved recurring levered free cash flow to date. Free cash flow is expected to reach between EUR 250 million and EUR 350 million this year compared to the EUR 150 million generated in 2023. And one factor that determines our ability to generate this metric is CapEx. So we believe it is important to continue giving you visibility on our different CapEx requirements. Maintenance CapEx is expected to remain below the 4% on total revenues, excluding the pass-throughs, and expansion CapEx should stay below the EUR 500 million in the year '24. Our expected build-to-suit CapEx is around EUR 1.3 billion in the year 2024, not considering the remedies. Going forward, our free cash flow generation will further accelerate as we are near the end of our build-to-suit programs, and this will underpin our rapid deleveraging and will give us the regional flexibility to improve shareholder returns, as we mentioned in the Capital Markets Day. Moving to Slide 10, we are illustrating our commitment with our previous lease efficiency plan whilst underpinning the message we conveyed at the recent Capital Markets Day in terms of the importance for us to properly manage our main cost item. So our program remains on track and we continue to actively pursue efficiency measures in order to ensure a limited impact on our cash flow from brand increases in a large perimeter. Finally, let's take a look at our debt maturities profile on Slide 12. As you can see, there are no maturities left in 2024 as they were repaid in January. Potential additional disposals may be partially used to repay variable debt in 2025, which today has a high associated cost as these lines are linked to Euribor. And we also might consider new debt issuance at fixed cost in the short term with the same objectives. It seems that in the current environment, interest rates are likely to remain higher for longer but we have a robust and well-designed capital structure, which prevent us from assuming higher interest expenses. As you'll recall, 75% of our debt is fixed, short-term maturities are already being managed, so our average cost of debt will only marginally increased in the next few years. With this, we remain now at your disposal to answer any questions. Thanks very much.

Thank you so much, Raimon. First question comes from Akhil Dattani from JPMorgan.

Can you hear me?

We can. Please go ahead.

Great. Yes, so I have a couple of questions, please. The first one is just a big picture question around share price at the moment. And I guess the question is that, if we look year-to-date, it looks like interest rates are still very much -- I'm just wondering how do you think about that? What sort of levers you would have to be comfortable with that? I guess one of the topics we have obviously is between public and private market valuations. You're obviously successfully selling assets like Ireland. I know you've talked about Austria -- if we think about it broadly, how do you think about what sort of assets you may or may not be -- maybe give us a bit of color. But I guess the important question is it does seem to pass -- interest rate sensitivity. And then the second question is just on... [Technical Difficulty]

Sorry, again, this is Juan. I'm terribly sorry. We are really struggling to hear you. I mean we are still having technical issues just like the beginning of the session. We don't really know how to continue this session because we can't really hear you. I mean the connection is just horrible because of the provider. It would be better for you to send me an e-mail. I mean we don't want to cancel the session. So I don't know if you guys can send me your questions, and I will try to repeat your questions, and we will try to answer it, if that's okay, just to try to give continuity to this Q&A session. We will try to do this in different way. But we are trying to be respectful of your time, so we will try our best, okay? So Andrew, based on your e-mail, Marco, a question for you. When is the earliest you could start the buyback if you sell Austria, 2025 or before? And also, if you can give us a sense as to the number of bidders for this Austrian process.

Good. To be very honest with you, I think that's the answer, if we can do before 2025, is we're going to make a [ raise ] with the rating agencies, and we will try to give full visibility to the rating agencies on the status of the process of the closing of the Irish antitrust procedure. And based on this, as soon as it will be made available, we will start using the cash that should be in excess of our stricter needs for keeping under control. In terms of bidders, so please allow me to keep this a little bit confidential, but there is good interest both from industrial players and from financial players.

Thank you, Marco. I'm coming back to Akhil's question, which I have received. So the share price of tower companies in developed world, they have been down 10%, 20%. How do you think about what you can do to decouple this interest rate sensitivity? Can you accelerate broader asset sales? And if so, what assets should you sell and why? And what else can you do beyond that?

Well, everybody knows that our share price is so linked to the interest rate. So there is a big question, by the way. We are making regression analysis if we are more linked to the U.S. dollar bond or to the bond of some euro-denominated interest. It's unclear because basically, it's unproven. Normally, it wouldn't be a problem because Europe follows euro rates, follow U.S. dollar rates, but it's unproven. And if, in any moment, there's decoupling between the euro rates and the Fed rates. We are honestly very curious to see if all our revenues in Europe, being almost everything euro-denominated, it's important to understand then what we can do. We are still fairly sensitive to leverage. So we have to continue. We have to perform. We have to make the process. To switch to your questions, yes, we are assessing our portfolio. As we said at the Capital Markets Day, making a portfolio assessment is not a once-upon-a-time event, so we are doing it periodically. There are business lines that we are asking ourselves if they can contribute or if they are giving us a return on invested capital long term that we expected, and this is something that we are analyzing in this moment. You know me well, Akhil, I prefer to do the things well one at a time. So in this moment, we are making the process for Austria. It's not a mystery that we are looking to the evolution of Poland. The evolution of Poland, that is, we have a potential opportunity to consolidate the active market in Poland. If this would be the case, it would be appropriate for us to welcome a coinvestor who can work with us. This can turn into some capital repatriation. So there are many projects, so we are working. Our strategy department and our finance department are working together on this.

Thank you, Marco. And Akhil, your second question was around the LandCo, if you can give us an update on our progress and how you think about what we will be spending this year and midterm on land acquisitions.

The progress is fine. So we are creating the LandCo. By the way, we confirm that the LandCo will be a Spanish entity because our tax due diligence was okay. So Spain is fully efficient for placing the LandCo. We are starting to evaluate if it could be appropriate to transfer existing portfolios into the newly created LandCo or not. This depends very much on the tax efficiency of this process. So in terms of how much we are willing to spend, I leave it to Raimon.

Yes, for this year, we are looking more or less, in terms of land acquisition, around EUR 115 million, EUR 120 million. And as you know, we also have the efficiency CapEx. But more or less, it will be around EUR 60 million.

So this is the very base case. As you know, I never made a mystery that I would like to increase this number. But when you start increasing your volumes, it's important also to have the machine working appropriately. So I would be very happy if we can increase this number by 40%, 50%, but I think it's not realistic that you should expect more than this.

Thank you, Marco. I have one follow-up from Andrew Lee on the Irish still. When do you expect the Irish antitrust to complete the process and the cash to come in?

It's very much depending there on a couple of factors. One, it depends if the process will go to Phase 2 or if it is going to be close to Phase I. So let's be pessimistic. So let's make the worst case scenario. The worst case scenario is it goes to Phase 2. And if it goes to Phase 2, it should be around year-end maximum, beginning of the next year. So a Phase 2 process that should last sort of 9 months. We filed in March, so it should drive us to the year-end, more or less. So this is the worst case, a Phase 2.

Okay. We have another question from Maurice Patrick from Barclays. Are we seeing any sign of Portugal organic growth slowing because today, we have a new entrant, which is DG. And wondering how long we should be expecting this outsized growth maybe to continue.

Well, in this moment, we have still some part of the request to be delivered. So we have another portion of this organic growth to come. But we assume that it's mostly a 2024 portfolio. And then it will tend to normalize in terms of growth because the program of DG possibly will be completed in Portugal.

Thank you. I have three questions from Jakob, which I believe Jakob, most of them have been covered because you're asking about Austria. Poland has already been covered by Marco and also our acquisition strategy. But maybe incrementally, in terms of valuation for the Austrian process, if maybe we might be expecting a lower price because of fewer network buyers of this asset, so valuation expectations around that.

You have to consider that in Ireland, we got honestly a very good price because the buyer had also industrial synergies which, by the way, drove us to the antitrust filing that we're making. So given the fact that the Austrian market is much more consolidated than the Irish market, which was more fragmented, we don't expect significant possibility that existing tower operators can successfully bid and pass through an antitrust process in Austria. It would be quite complex. And this drive our base case to a more prudent valuation. So we will see.

Perfect. So we have questions from Luigi Minerva from HSBC. He's asking about the PoP execution in Italy that we are still in progress. But if it is not sustainable, what can we expect for PoPs going forward, in the coming quarters? And also in Spain, what is the impact on the MASMOVIL-Orange [ on bidders ]? Any potential in business coming from DG also in Spain?

Okay. Thank you, Luigi. So let's start from Italy. Well, the Italian delivery is mostly linked to a RAN sharing program that one of our core clients Wind Tre has put in place with another MNO. This is, again, a 2024 project. It's fairly material in numbers, as you saw, but it's mostly 2024 project. And then it will go to natural densification, as you can imagine. Spain, well, the Spanish case is super interesting. The MAS-Orange creation is raising many questions from the network standpoint because there are at least 2 factors that have to be considered. Factor number one is that the network quality, so please don't take as being offensive with anyone, the network quality of MASMOVIL was not at the standard of the network quality of Orange. But on the other side, the network quality of Orange is not capable to receive the entire customer base of MASMOVIL. So what is clear is that MAS-Orange should make a fairly, I don't want to say complicated, but sell big projects of network redesign. In doing this, we are talking with the MAS-Orange CTO in order to understand how we can support them in making efficiency in the periphery of the network where the network can be optimized. Possibly, there are sites and antenna, both from MASMOVIL and Orange, and it's not necessarily to have both, but to densify the network where the density of the clients is higher. There is a big question mark. You know that Orange had a RAN sharing with Vodafone in the so-called jumping network. The territory of Spain was divided in 2 areas. Let's make a proxy, the coastline was covered by Orange with the exception of Catalonia. And Catalonia and the inner land was covered by Vodafone with their network. Also Vodafone passed through a change of control or BT is passing through a change of control. And so the future evolution of this joint venture is in a delicate moment because of all the changes at the proprietary level. Once again, we have a very strong MSA. Everybody knows, our client knows, we know. But what we want to do as we are doing in other countries is not to defend the revenues by the strength of the contract, but we want to defend the revenues because our clients are happy. DG, it's unclear what DG is going to do. There are two parts that are almost sure. One is that they are not going to make a nationwide network. So the vast majority of the coverage will be through a RAN sharing. And the second is that in order to keep the frequencies, they have to use the frequencies, otherwise, they lose the frequencies. So this means that they will do some RAN sharing and some new in-placement. As you know, we have a very easy channel of conversation with DG. So we are discussing with them. The only thing I can tell you is that the final decision has not been made by our clients, but we are very happy to support them in negative work at convenient conditions for everybody.

Perfect. Luigi is also asking about efficiencies beyond what we have already shown in the market, if maybe we are thinking about additional efficiencies around operations, if have quantified any potential scope and in which countries we could operate better what we already have?

Yes, we are working in several areas. Just to mention some, maintenance is an area of work. IT is very important because some processes can be significantly improved by automatization, which not only drives down the personnel but makes the entire process leaner. So we have started from the big countries as normal. In this moment, the 4 countries that we have under scrutiny are in this order, France, England, Italy, Spain. So those are the countries where we have started concrete analysis in order to understand if we can do better. And it's important because those countries have many points of similarities. So a solution that can work in Italy possibly works also in Spain and in France, so we can replicate the best solution. Have we quantified? Yes, it's something that Raimon, our CFO, is in the process. So we are working for 2024 numbers that are relatively small, as you can easily imagine. But it can be an upside on our plan going forward.

Perfect. And the last question from Luigi, coming back to Austria and the potential proceeds, how are we thinking on the trade-offs between a share buyback or a special dividend or deleveraging?

Well, if it is true that higher for longer is the rule of the game, it seems that there is very little that can beat a share buyback in this moment in terms of value creation. If the share price stays "depressed" because I think that, from the industrial perspective, you see that we are performing very good. We are accelerating on every front. Honestly, I'm very happy of the response of the entire company. So the share price is basically dominated by this financial component. So I would say we are not to forget that we have to delever because our sensitivity to interest rates remain high. But in this moment, I would say that market conditions seems to give a more likelihood to share buyback than other use of resources.

We have one question from Roshan Ranjit from Deutsche bank. You may recall that at the Capital Markets Day, we were improving the deferred payment associated with OMTEL, our first transaction in Portugal as traditional debt in order to make that more comparable with the methodology used by credit agencies. Is there potential that we also have to include the Nordic call option?

No. Sorry, I cannot add anything. The answer is short.

We have two questions from Georgios Ierodiaconou from Citi. Are there options beyond Austria that you may be considering or interest expressed by other parties? Or will we see likely the last major disposal at this point? So in fact, beyond Austria, we are considering more disposals.

As I told you before, I can't call it a disposal, but we are actively working on Poland. And I don't know what you think, but Poland is big. So it's a big operation with a huge perspective, forward-looking, both in terms of passive infrastructure because Poland should be more densified, not under densified. There is a quite significant lack of coverage when you go out of the major cities. And there is the RAN component, both in terms of existing relation with Klucz and the possibility of having a partnership also with Play. So this is a big project. It is something that we're looking at. Is there interest? Yes, there is interest. So we are working with some counterparty who could be focused on this. But we are looking to other possibilities, but since it's still on our desk, I would prefer not to enter into the details. I think we demonstrated fairly consistently that we are open-minded in rotating our investment capital every time the industrial strategy meets with the financial strategy. So yes, we are working more on other projects, but please allow us to keep it in the kitchen.

Perfect. We have two questions from Uzman Ghazi from Berenberg. Would you do a buyback before getting to your latest target by 5, 6, 7? And the second one is can you give us some insights into the return on capital employed benchmarking by country that you mentioned, if that has started internally.

The answer to your first question is my commitment is to stay investment grade. Then if I have a great opportunity to buy back shares and to stay investment grade, not staying in 5 to 6 but staying investment grade, believe me I'll take it. Just today, we announced that also Board members are going to buy shares. So at this price, we should buy shares. We should buy more shares. So my strong commitment and the commitment of the Board and the entire management team is it has been so painful to go back to investment grade. We want to stay investment grade. But if going to 5 to 6, takes me 6 months more, okay, it takes me 6 months more, but we will take the opportunity so that we will see the floor. Sorry, can you repeat the second question?

Our internal exercise on return on capital employed by country.

It's a very interesting exercise because what is very clear is that countries, where our deployment project is more mature, have a very nice return on invested capital. Let me say, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, so the countries with good market where we already had time to push the tenancy ratio up, it's evident that the return on invested capital is already well above our weighted average cost of capital. There are countries that are still a work in progress. The champion of the work in progress in our case is France. We are still working a lot on BTS. We are working on fiber. Nobody is asking out of why the fiber increased 25%. It's increased 25% because finally, the invested capital starts to turn into revenues. So this is very good. But France asks for more time. So it's so evident, the more the project is mature, the more we are doing good in terms of return on invested capital. There is a good correlation with the health of the market. So the healthier markets with higher ARPU support better the possibility for the tower operators to have good returns.

Thank you. We have received three questions from Ondrej Cabejsek from UBS. I really can see that most of them have been covered. If not, please correct me and send me an e-mail. But I think that there's a new one within your questions, which is Iliad is now a shareholder in Tele2, and Iliad likes to sell towers. Is this an opportunity to consolidate Sweden?

Today, when we talk with Iliad we are talking about other countries, existing countries. In particular, France, Poland are the main argument of our conversation. It's a matter of fact that Iliad is fairly open-minded vis-a-vis passive infrastructure. But please don't forget that the market structure in Sweden is terribly complicated because there are several joint ventures that have been created in the time between different operators, and unwinding the joint venture is always a fairly complicated exercise. So did you already start talking? No, we didn't. Do you think that Iliad can be open-minded? Normally, they are. Do you think that Sweden is going to be an easy exercise to unwind all the joint venture? No, I don't think so. So we will keep monitoring, but I don't see something happening very much in short term. So short term, I think that there is not so many channels to consolidate.

And on other potential consolidation opportunities, Fernando Abril-Martorell from Alantra is asking considering how fragmented our core market is in Spain, what role we would like to play.

We will consolidate Spain as a matter of fact. I don't think that the question is if, the question is when and how. Obviously, American Tower invested a very significant amount in Spain in their acquisition of the tower from Telefonica. So my base case is that American Tower will be a long-term player. And we are here since ever. This is our home market, and we know it very well. But I think that you are right, I think that the Spanish tower market is 4 tower operators. And in a while, there would be more towers operated than operators, which means that this is something that possibly is going to happen. Then I ask myself if this will be a game of combination or a game of someone exiting from the market. I don't exclude that it could be a combination game.

We have three questions from Ottavio Adorisio from Bernstein. First one is majority of the growth CapEx is driven by power allocation CapEx as Cellnex needs to reinforce a stable operated connection with a grid. For the towers 14-plus in years, how many have been upgraded to support multi-tenancy? And how many still needs to be upgraded and by which time frame?

Well, we started making the upgrade, let's say, mostly a couple of years ago. If you go back to 3 years ago, possibly is when it started. The numbers were relatively modest. And then it started 2 years ago, which means 2021, 2022. And 2023 has been an important year. So the count is fairly simple because using a big average number, let's say, that reinforcing the tower can cost more or less between EUR 25,000 and EUR 30,000. So 1,000 towers is EUR 25 million. So it means that in a busy year, we make 10,000 towers. Now it's not true that all the towers need to be reinforced. The newly built were already by design and multi-tenant in their configuration. Well, it's true that some of the new equipments are a bit heavier, a bit bigger, but let's say that we consider that something between 1/2 and 2/3 of the tower portfolio, for sure, will require reinforcement in case of multi-tenancy. And the rest, it would be very much case by case. So to make a long story short, what do I expect? I expect that this number will decrease. It will not disappear. It will plateau in a number that possibly means sort of 3,000, 4,000, 5,000 towers per year as a plateau. And the speed of going there depends very much on the speed of our success in increasing the tenancy rate. So if we are very good in increasing the tenancy rate without RAN sharing, it means that 2 times out of 3, you have to make something on the tower. So hope I gave you the drivers of your thinking.

And two final questions from Ottavio. Any updates that we can provide on the CTIL contract renewal? And also coming back to Austria, if maybe a JV with an existing tower corp would be an option to be considered.

Okay. The first question, the contract is on the table of a very kind gentleman who seems to have a little bit of problem with the pencil. So the contract we've been working, the contract is basically designed, defined, agreed on other terms. And so we are just waiting our counterparties, our clients to sign. So it's very advanced. And on Austria, well, our plan A, you know very well. But you know very well that we would never make a sale for a non-accretive price, which doesn't seem to be the case. But if by any chance, we end with a price which is not going to be accretive, we will start scratching the heads. For the time being, we are not looking for a plan B.

Perfect. One question from Fabio Pavan from Mediobanca. Any impact from the announcement between Vodafone and Swisscom in Italy? And also, would you be tempted to say that this impact is maybe lower numbers, at the same time, a more healthy industry will report higher infra investment in the interim.

The impact on us is between modest and nil. So it's two operators that make a lot of sense what they did. Unfortunately, what they did is not making the market much healthier. So I think that the second part of your question for me is a bit optimistic that the market with this deal, with the Swisscom-Vodafone deal, could be considered repaired. I think that the market will continue to have 4 big guys in the same room, and they have to try to accommodate all of them in the same room. It's clear that the relative position of Vodafone now, which was very good on mobile and performing not as good in the fixed has improved. Vice versa for Fastweb, very good in the fixed, not so performing on the mobile. So the combo makes a very powerful player in Italy. But the guy in the room remains 4.

We have one question from Emmet Kelly from Morgan Stanley. Vodafone is selling their operations in Spain and Italy. The question is, does the fact that these 2 businesses will be under a new non-Vodafone policy presenting opportunities, to some extent?

The limit for Cellnex in Italy is the anti-trust. But the Italian market is in the infra. It's a two-player market, Cellnex and INWIT. Combined, I think we have 95% of the market. Yes, it's very much possible that Swisscom-Voda can look for some densification using also our site and not only the INWIT site. It is possible. But I wouldn't say that this will change the dynamic of the market. In Spain, I'm extremely curious because the disposal in Spain is very different. In Italy, they sold to an industrial player. In Spain, their partner is a very smart financial operator. So it is possible. I go to the point that Fabio was making 1 second ago, it's possible that the attitude of the new owner of the previous Vodafone asset could be not the same. Traditionally, Swisscom is fairly capital intense, and the declaration that the buyer in Spain made was for rationalization, optimization and savings. So it seems that the two approach are not really the same.

And also, when do you expect to see 5G as a material driver in our top line organic growth? And on fiber to the tower, do you believe that it's a bottleneck? Are we seeing more deployment of fiber to the sites?

We said very clearly that fiber to the site, for us, is something interesting, but we don't see in massive scale. Of course, we are happy to make it if the conditions are okay, but we're not going to bring the fiber, making 20 kilometers provision. So ultimately, we are talking about sort of 5,000 additional sites that we see as eligible to fiber projects directly delivered by Cellnex. Even if I'm wrong by 100%, it's not [ 5% ], so what I want to tell you is that it's not going to be massive deployment. Is this a bottleneck for 5G? Yes and no, because the new high-performance radio links redialing for the calling part is quite good and progressively more and more efficient in terms of energy consumption. So I think that calling, of course, it's something extremely important for the 5G deployment. But I don't think it's really a bottleneck. I think that the health of the market is the real bottleneck. If you look at the market with the most advanced 5G penetration, most of them are 3-player markets, Switzerland, Netherlands, so 3-player markets. If you go to markets where there are 4 players, it's taken more time, but it will arrive. I don't know how to apologize. Believe me, it's incredibly embarrassing to us. But ultimately, possibly, we covered all.

You've obviously been productive. Thank you so much for your flexibility and for your questions. I want to believe that we've covered the majority of the questions that you have sent us. If that has not been the case, obviously, the IR team will be at your disposal to continue catching up and providing you with more details.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, everyone.

Thank you very much.