Goodman Group (GMG) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

[Audio Gap] To my left is Greg Goodman, our Group CEO.

Good morning.

I'm sure you know him pretty well. Our Company Secretary, Carl Bicego.

Good morning.

Followed by independent directors, Belinda Robson.

Good morning.

George Zoghbi.

Good morning.

And then executive director, Anthony Rozic.

Good morning.

And on my far left, independent director, Mark Johnson, who is also chair of our Audit, Risk and Compliance Committee.

Good morning.

Also joining us from New York is Independent Director, Vanessa Liu on the screen; in Hong Kong, Independent Directors, David Collins and Kitty Chung; and in Brussels, Executive Director, Danny Peeters. Chris Green and Hilary Spann are unable to join us for today's AGM due to personal reasons, and they send their apologies. I now declare the meeting open. For those participating online [Audio Gap] This is the 14th consecutive year in which the group has delivered growth in operating profit. Our continued success has been recognized by the market with total securityholder return or total shareholder return for the year of 75%, placing the group within the 10 largest companies on the ASX. Goodman has again demonstrated the ability to be agile and innovative in changing and challenging market conditions. We have continued to successfully execute our strategy as providers of essential infrastructure. Our sophisticated logistics facilities and data centers are critical to supporting the flow of goods and data and services throughout the economy. This has been made possible through our long-term investment in properties, which are strategically located in infill locations in major global cities. However, we believe that our greatest asset is our people. Leveraging the opportunity that our property portfolio provides requires a highly capable and experienced management team. As one of Australia's few successful international companies, particularly in the real estate sector, we know that operating a global business requires an international team of people with strong local relationships and knowledge who can assimilate into the local markets and adopt the group's shares, values and quality standards all the time within their own markets and within their own cultures. Essential to our future success is the ability to motivate and retain our people and align their long-term interest with those of our securityholders. The group has developed market-leading expertise across the globe in planning, design and delivery of specialized digital infrastructure assets. As our business continues to grow and evolve, we need to attract new and highly skilled global talent who can help deliver on our quality service offering and address the challenges and opportunities that the digital economy presents to us. Greg Goodman will talk in greater detail about both the operational and financial performance of the group in his address -- in his CEO address later on. Let me now turn to remuneration. The Board considers remuneration to be an integral component of Goodman's business strategy, aligning long-term performance of the group with pay outcomes for our people. This has been reflected in excellent securityholder returns and pay-for-performance outcomes over very many years. In this context, we are deeply disappointed that proxy advisers this year recommended against approving the remuneration report and the awards to executive directors. I would therefore like to devote some time in my Chairman's address today to explaining our remuneration arrangements. I believe our remuneration strategy has resulted in the group demonstrating significant alignment between employees and securityholder outcomes. Interestingly, one of the proxy advisers has listed Goodman as having the highest pay-for-performance ranking in the top 25 ASX companies, yet continues to recommend against the same remuneration structure that helps deliver these results. The global nature of our business means that it is inappropriate for proxy advisers to primarily use local remuneration comparisons when our largest competitors are U.S. or European. This neglects the complex and global nature of our operations and the competitive market for our employees, particularly given the critical requirements for the large-scale developments that we undertake. Accordingly, the Board takes into account global markets when determining the quantum of awards to our people. The long-term incentive plan has 2 performance metrics: relative total shareholder return with a weighting of 25% and operating profit EPS growth with a weighting of 75%, and this is the most significant metric. The Board spends considerable time in setting the hurdles for EPS growth based on comprehensive business plans and budgets. These reflect execution of the group's strategy while maintaining appropriate risk parameters, both operational and financial, to achieve sustainable long-term growth. The Board has set EPS hurdles for the FY '25 awards, which are both competitive against numerous comparator groups and challenging relative to Board targets, particularly considering the group's long-term focus and the risk metrics employed. Therefore, in the Board's view, the 11% CAGR hurdle, that's compound annual growth rate hurdle for full vesting, which is 2 to 2.5x higher than those estimated for the relevant peer groups and requires an increase in operating profit of over $1.2 billion over the 4-year period of the plan, reflects a significant challenge for management. It also provides strong alignment of our employees with the interests of all securityholders. Certain proxy advisers have also questioned the exclusion of share-based payments from the operating profit calculation. Operating profit is based on cash profit after tax and is the basis on which we have operated our business over many years. It is the primary measure that the market uses to value our securities, and we believe it's the best approach to generate sustainable long-term returns. More importantly, operating profit is directly linked to the impact all employees can have on the earnings of the company, resulting in alignment of employee remuneration and securityholder performance. The success of our remuneration arrangements and the Board's EPS hurdle setting can be seen in the fact that the group has significantly outperformed, and I say this, significantly outperformed our peer groups over 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year horizons. The first graph on the screen shows Goodman's relative TSR outperformance over 1, 3 and 5 years. And the second chart includes our relative TSR outperformance over 10 years, which you can see. It's written here. This is a fantastic result. That's what people think. I believe it. I think it is an excellent result, probably fantastic for old finance guys going a bit far. But the outperformance is truly extraordinary. I believe the market price of Goodman security reflects the level of this outperformance. Now moving to the Board. As the business has evolved, so too has the Board. We have created a contemporary international Board who bring a wealth of diversity in the form of skills, geography, age and gender with all key competencies and focus areas represented. The charts that are now appearing on screen illustrate the Board's composition and diversity. Of the 9 nonexecutive directors, 4 or 44% are female and 5 or 55% are offshore residents. Of our full Board, which includes the 3 executive directors, 33% are female and 58% are located offshore. Danny Peeters and David Collins are both standing for reelection today, and they will address the meeting during the formal business section. Their experience and qualifications are set out in the notice of meeting. I'd also like to acknowledge here our long-serving director, Phillip Pryke, who as foreshadowed at last year's AGM, retired from the Board earlier this year. Phil was instrumental in the formulation of the group's remuneration strategies and to Board deliberations more generally. He helped steward a successful international business with a strong shared culture and long-term focus that is testament to the policies promoted by the Remuneration Committee, which he chaired for many years. And on behalf of the Board, I'd like to thank Phil for his dedication and commitment to the group over his 30 years -- 13 years of service. Essential to the smooth running of a public company is robust corporate governance, which helps maintain and support our reputation, workplace culture, operations and strong financial and ESG results. These comprehensive governance policies, which are integrated into our broader risk management approach, help us meet stakeholder expectations. The Board seeks to achieve the appropriate balance so that risk management and controls do not overwhelm the entrepreneurial flare and innovation that Goodman is renowned for. Goodman has built a sustainable business underpinned by our global portfolio of high-quality industrial real estate, a committed and experienced management team, a proven business model, supportive capital partners and a strong balance sheet. On behalf of the Board, I sincerely thank our people for their commitment and determination in achieving our excellent results in FY '24. And I also extend my gratitude to you, our securityholders, for your ongoing support of Goodman. Before I hand over to Greg Goodman, our CEO, we will show you a short video to highlight Goodman's strategy as providers of essential infrastructure for the digital economy. Thank you very much. [Presentation]

I think I look younger on the screen than I do here.

It's not a bad photo. I think they might have touched it up somewhere.

Good morning, and welcome, everybody. Goodman is a provider of essential infrastructure with our warehouses and data centers supporting the flow and storage of goods and data throughout the economy. The structural drivers of the digital economy are creating significant opportunities for Goodman to develop the infrastructure our customers are seeking. This is supported by the group's strong operating results in FY '24, where we generated robust operating profit, growth and cash flow. Operating profit was over $2 billion, and we grew operating earnings per security by 14%. Importantly, we have continued to generate long-term sustainable results, delivering average operating earnings per share growth of 16% over the last 5 years. We achieved these results while maintaining strong balance sheets and liquidity across the group and partnerships with, importantly, low leverage. The group is keeping distributions steady, enabling profits to be reinvested in the group and support its growth moving forward. We have strong fundamentals across our $80 billion property portfolio. Our focus has remained on logistics and data center opportunities in key cities around the world where barriers to entry are high and supply is very limited. We have strong occupancy. I think it's currently close to 98% with resilient rental growth. Development activity continued throughout the year, and our work in progress is currently at $12.8 billion, which covers both logistics and data center projects. Data centers continue to grow as a portion of our global workbook, now making up over 40% of what we're doing. We have strong development starts in train and should significantly expand assets under management over the coming years, providing solid returns. Data center demand has continued unabated with expectations for it to double over the next 5 years. The group is well positioned to deliver against this demand. We've expanded our global power bank to 5 gigawatts, and we're also evolving our delivery capabilities to offer a range of options. These include powered sites, powered shell and core fully fitted operational solutions, reducing time to market for our customers. The fully fitted operational option would see Goodman provide and maintain the infrastructure required for customers to operate. This is importantly being driven by customer and investor demand for operational assets globally. Our competitive advantage is what we have the sites, power, capability, people track record and commitment to build the infrastructure to accelerate time to market. We believe this will generate significant long-term value for the group. Our partnership platform is expanding and growing organically through Goodman's development pipeline. The performance has been stable in a volatile environment, and we expect significant growth over the long term. In the sustainability space, we're embracing innovation as we look for ways to reduce our environmental impacts and improve social outcomes. We're concentrating on the areas we have the greatest control and potential impact, including procuring and producing renewable power, piloting low-carbon materials and developments and contributing $13.5 million through the Goodman Foundation to build resilient and sustainable communities. Our team is setting up for a strong 2025 with an eye to the future so we can continue to provide long-term sustainable returns. Goodman has a great opportunity to realize the significant embedded value within our business as a result of the quality locations of our properties in the major cities of the world. We can confirm our forecast FY '25 operating earnings growth of 9%, which equates to over $2.2 billion of operating profit and a full year distribution of $0.30 per share. I'd like to thank the Board, the Goodman team, our securityholders as well as all our customers and other stakeholders for your continued support. Thank you, and I'll hand bank to Stephen.

A reminder that securityholder questions will be addressed during the formal business section of today's meetings. Online attendees can ask a written question at any time by selecting the Q&A icon, type your question into the text box. Once you have finished typing, please hit the send button. Please ask your questions concisely. If they are particularly lengthy, they may be summarized in the interest of time. Questions may be moderated to avoid repetition. If you are attending online and would like to ask a question verbally, please follow the instructions written below the broadcast. Securityholders attending in person are also invited to ask questions. If you would like to do so, please approach the microphone stands on the meeting room floor after the Chairman asks for questions in respect of the relevant resolution. For those attending online who have not yet voted, you can vote by pressing the vote icon and all resolutions will be activated with voting options. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. There's no need to hit a submit or enter button as the vote is automatically recorded. You will receive a vote confirmation notification on your screen. You have the ability to change your vote up until the time voting is closed. For securityholders attending in person, you will be asked to cast your vote by placing your voting card in one of the ballot boxes available at the end of the meeting after all the resolutions have been considered.

Well, thank you very much, and thank you, Greg, for that CEO address. So we'll now commence the formal proceedings of the meeting. I intend to answer the questions from those attending in person first, then questions received online. There is an opportunity to ask general questions about the group's operations under the first item of business. You will have an opportunity to ask specific questions in relation to each resolution when those resolutions are formally put to the meeting later on. I'm going to be assisted by one of our senior executives, Alison Brink, in moderating and asking the questions that are submitted online. The first item of business is consideration of the annual report and the accounts of Goodman Limited. I table a copy of the annual report, this annual report here, and I'm sure you've already seen this. Nigel Virgo sitting in the front seat, and Sam Gross of the auditors, KPMG, are available to answer any questions specifically relating to the audit. I'll now respond to any questions in relation to the annual report and the group's operations more generally. So Alison, over to you. Are there any questions?

There are no questions, Mr. Chairman.

There are in the room though. Can we bring the microphone forward?

Mr. Chairman, introducing Wayne Perry.

And as always, thank you for the meeting today and for your time throughout the year and for today's meeting. Just a question on data centers. I'm interested in a sense that I get the sense of the properties that you need. I get that. I get the power requirements. That's fine. But the key bit I don't get is the first word in data centers, which is the data. Without the data, you've just got a center. So my question, particularly as you're a global organization, can you talk to the current and ongoing needs that you have to get data into these data centers the way the technology is changing in terms of transfer rates and all of that sort of thing and just the ongoing issue that you've got in terms of the data that you have to support the data centers?

Thank you for the question. Of course, data centers are highly topical and a major part of our operations going forward. And I'd say at this point that Goodman is formulating its own plans and strategies of how we're going to undertake what is a very exciting and very large development program, which will extend over many years. But I think you said the data. I think what you're actually meaning -- or we should be referring to is our customers. The customers have the data not us. And we are dealing with customers, and that's one of the major considerations that management are focusing on, what are the requirements and needs of our customers, whether it be the large players, Microsoft, AWS, et cetera. And as their needs at the moment in the data centers that we have developed in the past, we've leased them out. We've provided a powered shell. We're now looking at going further up the value chain in that regard. But everything that we are contemplating is based on what our customers are asking for, what they're demanding, what they're looking for. Without customers, you don't have a business. Greg, would you like to just add?

No, I think you know this, Chairman, we're leaving that to Microsoft and Amazon and Oracle and others. All the co-locators are managing those customers as well. So we provide the essential infrastructure being the power of the land and the buildings, then the mechanical and electrical moving forward in those buildings for the customer who then operates it as a data center. What we do, we will service some of the components of that building. But we're certainly not taking care of the data. They're our customers doing that.

I think just as a very general comment, irrespective of the business, whether it's Goodman or anyone else, you really have to focus on your customers, their needs and what their requirements are. And that's clearly what we're doing. I think there's another questioner here. Can we get a microphone for...

Mr. Chairman, introducing Mr. Andrew Giles.

Just a follow-up question in clarification of what the previous person asked. With these data centers, who provides the supercomputing -- who provides the computers that run the data centers?

The customer.

The customer. So you provide the building and other services, but you don't put in the computers there. You provide the space, and the customer has to buy their own equipment to run the operation.

Yes. We provide the infrastructure for the customer to use.

I just wanted some clarification because there is some other things happening in the data center space, where there is a company that's about to float it imminently. And as I understand it, they not only are buying the buildings, but they're also buying the equipment in there, which would be -- which is a different kettle of fish. I'm talking about another [indiscernible] but in your case, you don't get involved with the computing equipment.

No, we don't.

Mr. Chairman, introducing Lewis Gomes.

I'm here, as you know, representing the Australian Shareholders' Association today. Firstly, the ASA congratulates Goodman for another outstanding year. It truly has been an outstanding year of performance. Since the last AGM, the ASX price of GMG's stock has increased by around 75%, no doubt partly due to the excellent financial performance but probably also for the realization that GMG, through its data centers, perhaps has become an AI -- has an AI premium in its security price because of its data centers. Now you've already had 2 questions on data centers, but mine are going to be a bit more specific. In particular, with data centers, we know they're very capital intensive. And we know that they are prodigious consumers of electrical power. Now I understand the powered shell concept. I understand you're not providing the computers. You're not operating them, although you may move down that path in the future. But I think it's just worth reflecting on the scale of the challenge ahead generally in the data center sector. And for example, NEXTDC, which is an ASX-listed developer and operator of data centers in Australia and some other overseas countries, according to its FY '24 accounts, it has 165 megawatts of built capacity with property, plant and equipment valued at just under $4 billion. 165 megawatts, we compare that to 5 gigawatts, which is your ambition, 5,000 megawatts. That's a long way ahead of where NEXTDC currently is in terms of its built capacity. It's already invested nearly $4 billion in plant buildings, equipment, et cetera. The other point I'd make that NEXTDC's revenue from only 60-something megawatts of -- sorry, 86 megawatts of built capacity -- of building capacity rather, only 86 megawatts, they've got revenue of $404 million for the financial year. But their power costs were $95 million, 25% of the revenue effectively went to the providers of power. So my 2 questions are really related to, firstly, capital management. Now you've talked about Microsoft and Amazon and others. They're going to be providing the computers. But nevertheless, there is a huge capital investment required, and there's a huge power requirement required. Now even if your tenants are paying for the electricity, as they probably will be, from terms of Goodman's sustainability reporting, there's going to be a lot of carbon-based emissions associated with that power, which someone's going to have to report on, someone's going to have to try and manage. And I'm interested to know what Goodman's approach is to those 2 aspects, the capital management and the reporting of the power-related issues with regard to emissions.

Lewis, thank you very much for that. And I have to say that your analysis is very, very good. And it kind of describes why people are so excited about the opportunities for Goodman over the next decade or so. I'm not going to comment on NEXTDC or any of the other players in the market. And indeed, I haven't done the analysis about them that you've done yourself. So all I know is a little bit about Goodman. Yes, firstly, about the capital requirements. We've had a major development program for many years, and we've been able to source capital from our partners around the world very effectively. As I think you know, having analyzed us for some years now, that 3 or 4 years ago, we had work in progress of $4 billion. The last 2 or 3 years, it's risen to $13 billion. It's still around that level. We're now currently at $12.8 billion. Data centers have become a larger portion of it as we're now about 40%, possibly going to 50% would be data centers. But we're still talking about at the moment at least a similar quantum of work that we've been dealing with over the last 2 or 3 years. And we've been handling the capital requirements of that very effectively through partnerships, joint ventures and the like around the world. We've got very good relationships with the major pension funds and others in the markets, global pension funds, and we'll continue to do that. Now there may be specialist capital providers for data centers who -- rather than industrial real estate. But I think we're really well placed to do what we've been doing for many years, which is actually using our own balance sheet to a certain extent and then also our capital partners. Now maybe I think over to one of your -- no doubt a later question about dividend policy and so on, which is relevant to this very point, that we have paid $0.30 per security over the last few years. Last year, I think the dividend we paid was about $570 million out of $2 billion -- $2.05 billion of operating profit, which means that we had about $1.6 billion of retained earnings, which is operating profit, which is now -- language is cash profit. And that was plowed back into the businesses around the world into the partnership. So we've maintained, by and large, a 30% interest in the various partnerships around the world. It varies from one partnership to another, but we've used $1.6 billion to maintain that interest. And that's why our dividend policy has been so effective in fueling the growth of the business going forward. So from a capital point of view, I wouldn't minimize the task. God, I have to do the work. There are a lot of people in management today doing the work and raising the capital. But we have very strong relationships. We've got very good capital partners. And indeed, in this space, which is very exciting for data centers, there is a lot of capital available for the right projects. And our job is to provide the right projects, which I'm very confident management will do. In terms of your other point about emissions, yes, that's not just an issue for us. It's an issue for Microsoft, AWS, Google and others and Oracle who are involved, who are the customers. It can become an issue for us. But at this point, all I can say is that we are analyzing our own strategies for data centers going forward. That involves the funding that you talked about before. It involves the people that we need, how we go about it. It also involves how we deal with the emissions. So at this point, it would be premature for me to try and describe to you what our Scope 2 or Scope 3 emissions might be. At the moment, the emissions that we have from our customers who have occupied the powered shell, there are Scope 3 emissions, not Scope 2. So we may end up having Scope 2 emissions. We have to work out how we deal with that. We have a commitment for years of going carbon neutral across the group. But this is a lot of the planning that's going on at the moment. I think there's a question here in the front.

Mr. Chairman, introducing Harold Baskar.

I have 3 interesting comments to make. It's going to be amorous, Mr. Chairman and the Board. I come from Stephen Mayne country, which is Victoria. And Stephen is -- apology for the AGM, but God help you, when the online questions are coming because he's got a few. Second -- by the way, Stephen has stepped down as a municipal counselor for the City of Manningham. Now fake news. I read in the -- is the microphone going okay. Can you hear me? Right. In fake news, what do I read in [ per share tips ]? Sunday Herald Sun in August. Share tips by Chris Haynes, Equity Trustees. What does he suggest about Goodman Group? The property group has delivered double-digit earnings growth for the last 10 years. It has an exciting future ahead. Guess what it recommends? Hold the share. Hold the shares. So I don't know what Goodman Group's got to do for him to recommend you buy the shares. By the way, CBA recommends that sell the shares, they're far too overpriced and the cost of share of CBR just skyrocketed since. Secondly, I asked the Board what percentage of us laggards that request the annual general -- the annual report to be a hard copy. Now I'm very sorry, but I'm one of the very few that requests a hard copy. And one of the reasons is my uncle is going to be 100, he loves reading the annual report of the Macquarie Group and the Goodman Group. And I'll be visiting him in this nursing home and he loves the hard copy. So I noticed that we're going to get a $50 Coles voucher if you opt for getting the annual report online. My response is, I'll give you a check for $50. So I sent a check for $50 to Goodman Group. And they say, keep your check. You'll continue to get your annual report online -- the hard copy. And finally, it's always concerned me what would happen to Managing Director, CEO Greg Goodman. What happens if he falls over by a bus and -- falls in front of a bus. What's going to happen to the company? Now you may have noticed that they've all covered -- the shoes are not exposed. Now at previous AGMs, you can see their shoes. But I've been playing this for several years. Greg wears shoes that are not properly sold. I'm very worried about him slipping over. So Anton, a very close friend of mine, he is in Chinatown in Melbourne at Kmart. And he's a Mr. Fix It. So I'd like to give a gift on behalf of Anton of Mr. Minit, Chinatown Melbourne, the latest anti-slip soles. [indiscernible] They are the Rolls Royce of any slip soles [indiscernible]. That is Rolls Royce. We don't want you to fall over, Greg, because if anything happened to you, God help the company.

I got to say really, really appreciate it because from time to time, I have slipped on the foot path. So thank you very much for keeping me safe.

Well, Howard, that's the best question I've ever had. I thought you were worried about their shoes not being cleaned and you send us back to the [indiscernible] school to have our shoes cleaned. But yes, thanks, Howard. Thanks for coming up from Melbourne. I'm sure Stephen Mayne can speak for himself whenever he comes online. But are there any other questions from the floor?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, there are several -- sorry, from the floor.

From the floor first. No, there aren't. So we can go online.

Online. The first question comes from Mr. Peter Newhouse and Dr. Susan Newhouse. And it is -- is there any plan to move into large residential developments?

If that's the question, the answer is no.

The second question comes from Mr. Stephen Mayne. The gap between the $2.05 billion operating profit and operating cash flow was $860 million in FY '24. Can you explain this and whether it accords with the accounting standards to exclude share-based payments to start from the operating profit number?

Well, welcome to the meeting, Stephen, online. We would like to see you up here. If Howard can make it up here, I'm sure you can as well. But first of all, the cash operating profit, as I said in my speech, is a cash metric. There are timing differences in terms of when you receive cash and when we reflect some of the income in the financial statements. There's also the fact that we reinvest a fair bit of the cash profit into work in progress and into properties. And the way it's reflected in the financial statements doesn't bring that down. So the cash profit there is very close to the operating profit. The cash generated is very close, just timing -- some timing differences and the investment into work in progress. What is the second part of the question, Alison? Share-based payments. Well, that's a different question altogether. And I think I addressed that in my speech, so I don't need to go over that again. But let me just say, once again, it's the same point that the cash -- the operating profit reflects cash subject to timing differences. It's the way the business is managed and run around the world. I think, Stephen, you would agree that if you focus on cash and not on unrealized revaluation gains, which we don't focus on when we're determining our dividend policies and the like, it's a very healthy way to run the business. The financial performance of the group and the financial management of the group is first class, and it's all based around the cash operating profit.

And the third question is from Andrea Walton. And it is, what are Goodman's obligations to protect customer data? And what risks are attached?

Well, we're not a major company with major focus or problems with customers. We're not Woolworths or a retailer or a bank. But we are very concerned about the data we do have, and we have cybersecurity experts. And we have a lot of reports at the Audit, Risk and Compliance Committee as to how this is handled. And so whilst we're not a telco or a bank or a retailer with a large customer -- with a large customer base, we still make sure that our data -- all data is well protected. Alison, there any other questions online?

No further questions on this resolution.

Any more questions from the floor? Well, we've only just started, Howard. There are plenty more resolutions to go. So now we will actually...

Sorry, Mr. Chairman, I've got another question for you. William.

I have 2 questions. The first question is, I just wonder, in the next 5, 10 years, when you see the trend in the last 10 years, there was increased demand for the online business and increase in the warehouse demand. Now I wondered with the current industrial sites of Goodman, are they possible convert it to data center? You mentioned that there's more profit margin and demand in the future. Current sites are convertible to the data centers? And the second question is often that you talked about -- mentioned about the customers. The majority, I believe, is -- you look at the big guys, Amazon and Microsoft. And I wonder, is there any strategy you look at are profitable, look at the current small- to medium-sized demand for data center but also your current client or customer of your industrial site.

Well, firstly, the -- most of the data center opportunities we have are on properties we currently own. So we're not paying large amounts of money for new sites as such. From time to time, I'm sure we probably will. But the big opportunity is to use the sites we have. What we have to do is get the power commitments to those sites. And I think management have shown great expertise over the last 2 or 3 years in acquiring the power we have, as you probably know, something like 5 gigawatts of power, 2.5 already committed and another 2.5 gigawatts of possible or likely commitments from the power authorities around the world. And Lewis from ASA has already described very well what that means in terms of 5 gigawatts. So if we have the power, we also have to have the sites. So we -- if we have the 5 gigawatts, we have the sites. And so that is the exciting opportunity we have going forward. And yes, we're dealing with customers, large and the smaller. With the smaller customers, we tend to go through co-locators who then lease out their space to the smaller customers. But -- so it will be a mixture in all likelihood. Greg, do you want to elaborate on that?

No, no, it's right. I think the important point you made, Mr. Chairman, was around the sites. So we've got the land. It's very valuable. It's all industrial values effectively. It's global. And 5 gigawatts going to the shareholders association comment, yes, it's a big undertaking. And it's a 7- to 10-year undertaking effectively. So if you look at Goodman and you look at our pipeline of opportunity around data centers, it's not a 3-year task. It's a 10-year task, which I think is good for the long-term growth of the business and gives us plenty to focus on. But we also do have a land bank, big industrial land bank, still half of what we're doing is industrial. Effectively, I think Australia has got about $3 billion currently work in progress in industrial for all sorts of customers as well. And we see that being probably more of a story for '26, '27 where we think global economy has probably stabilized a little bit. We'll see what happens in the U.S. running in the next 2 or 3 years about the homegrown economy and their own growth programs. That could create opportunities as well in the U.S. But Australia is very strong, as is Japan. So it will be approach on both.

Thank you, Greg. Another question.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, introducing Enzo Prater.

You have to have that, the voting card.

Following on the quest for power in order to power up the data centers, I understand that Google has signed contract to obtain nuclear power generated from SMRs in 6 years' time, small modular reactors. And the question is, are we in the process of negotiating the supply of nuclear power from small modular reactors anywhere in the world?

Well, it's a very interesting point, isn't it, that Google have embarked on that. But we've got 5 gigawatts of power, none of that's nuclear. We've 2.5 that's committed, 2.5 that we're very confident of obtaining. And so no, it's from different sources, but not nuclear.

It will be from the grid, where, for example, in Paris, there's nuclear power. So it's in the grid, but we're not buying our own nuclear reactors, I think, is the point, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, Google is not buying its own reactors. It's contracted, but it's contracted with the power company.

Yes, you'll find that Google and Microsoft and the others are looking at small modular reactors, particularly for some of their bigger AI campuses. So the machine learning campuses, yes, they have programs to build their own power plants over time in certain countries around the world.

Thank you. Are there any other questions?

No, Mr. Chairman, there are no further questions.

Thanks, Alison. I'll now turn to the formal resolutions set out in the notice of meetings. My fellow directors and I support resolutions 1 to 7. Please note that where open proxies are held by me as Chairman, I intend to vote those proxies in favor of each of resolutions 1 to 7. For transparency and the benefit of the meeting, I'll now present the results of the proxy votes on resolutions 1 to 7. All of the resolutions are proposed as ordinary resolutions and will be approved if passed by more than 50% of the votes cast. However, even if approved, the remuneration report will receive a strike if more than 25% of the votes are cast against. You can see the proxy results on the screen. And as can be seen, with the proxy votes received, which account for 85% of our share register, I expect that resolutions will be passed on the casting of the votes -- of the proxy votes, but there will be a first strike on the remuneration report. As mentioned at the commencement of the meeting, the securityholders participating online, polling has opened and will close at the end of the meeting. And for those who are with us here today, will vote on resolutions 1 to 7 after they have been put to the meeting. As explained in the notice of meetings as a result of the technical nature of holding of Hong Kong securities on the ASX, securityholders cannot vote personally at the meeting in respect of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited resolutions. Rather CHESS depository nominees will vote these interest in accordance with the voting and proxy form directions that they have received prior to 10:00 a.m. on the 12th of November. This applies to resolutions 1, 2b and 3, which are resolutions solely for Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited. In accordance with the Corporations Act and the determinations made under the constitutions, each of today's resolutions will be decided by a poll. So resolution 1, the first resolution for members to consider as an ordinary resolution of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited, is to appoint KPMG as auditors of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited to hold office until the next AGM and the directors be authorized to fix the auditor's remuneration. I now move that resolution 1 be approved, and I'll address any questions from the floor or online. Are there any questions on the floor on this resolution? Not -- Alison, anything online?

There are no online questions, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. So I'll move to the next resolution. The second resolution contains 2 parts, and it's for members to consider as an ordinary resolution the reelection of Danny Peeters as a director of Goodman Limited and the reelection of Danny Peeters as a director of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited. I'd now invite Danny, who's in Belgium this morning -- late evening his time actually, to say a few words in support of his reelection.

Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I've had the pleasure of working for Goodman since 2006 and being director of Goodman Group for the past 11 years. I'm honored today to be standing for reelection to the Goodman Board. I've worked in the property and logistics sector for over 30 years, and I'm a director of a number of Goodman funds management entities, subsidiaries and partnerships in Europe and Brazil, also bringing sight to the Board on business conditions in both of these markets. As part of my role, I oversee Goodman's Brazilian business together with the local management teams and directly responsible for our strategy and sustainable growth of this business. [indiscernible] quality infill logistics sites, coupled with the e-commerce market growing by almost 20% in the second half of '24 is driving demand for modern and efficient space in our markets. The team is using our global experience and relationships, to look at opportunities to add to the digital infrastructure in Brazil. I'm also focused on bringing the same high standards of governance, risk management and sustainability that we apply across all our businesses. I greatly enjoy working for Goodman and contributing as a member of the Board. I believe it's innovative, down to earth and open culture has been a large contributor to its success. With most of the group's earnings now sourced outside of Australia, I believe both my European and international experience provide a different perspective and insight to the team as we continue to grow as a truly global company. If reelected to the Board, I remain committed to acting on your interests and to add value to our business around the world. I'm generally excited by the opportunities that we are presented with and the challenges that this position offers. Thank you.

Daniel, thank you. I now move that resolution 2a and 2b be approved, and I'll address any questions, either from the floor or online. Firstly, on the floor or from the floor, are there any questions? I don't think so. Alison, anything online?

There are no questions, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. So I'll now move to resolution 3. Resolution 3 is for members to consider as an ordinary resolution of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited that David Collins, a director retiring by rotation in accordance with the constitution and listing rules be reelected as a director. I'll now invite David to say a few words in support of his reelection. We haven't -- can we get the sound?

[indiscernible] and nonexecutive director of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited since February 2018, and I'm now seeking reappointment in that position. I spent most of my career in the accounting profession, starting with Pricewaterhouse in London and then spent some 27 years with KPMG in Hong Kong. I was a partner in the audit practice serving clients in Hong Kong and China across many industries and held a number of leadership roles in the firm, the last of which being Head of Risk Management. After retiring from KPMG in 2012, I had performed consulting work on a part-time basis, drawing on my accounting expertise including expert witness work, assisting some NGOs and family estates and serving as an [ INED ]. I am a Hong Kong permanent resident and continue to spend most of my time in Hong Kong. I have a strong knowledge of the local business, regulatory and social and geopolitical environment. My directorship of Goodman Logistics Hong Kong requires that I have good visibility of the affairs of the entire Goodman Group. And I continue to be impressed with the high standards of corporate governance and reporting that I have witnessed through my involvement on the Board. I believe my skills and experience will enable me to continue to make an effective contribution to support the company's continued success and maintaining its high standards of governance and compliance. I commit to performing my duties as an independent nonexecutive director in a diligent, robust and objective manner. I thank you for your continued support.

David, thank you very much. I now move that resolution 3 be approved, and I'll address any questions. I think there's a question here on the floor.

Mr. Chairman, introducing [ Andrew Dulles ].

I've just got a question for information concerning the background of Mr. Peeters. Could I ask, please, what is his nationality or original nationality and also a bit about his professional background qualification and so on?

I think his CV is set out in the annual report in quite a lot of detail. Danny has been -- Danny is a Belgium national and he's located in Belgium. He has an overview of our European operations but also responsible for our Brazil operations. Has a lengthy history. I think he described it himself in his speech, but even more so, if you go to the annual report, you'll see there's a lot of detail there. Are there any other questions?

There are no further questions online, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much. So move to resolution 4, which is for members to consider as an ordinary resolution of Goodman Limited to adopt the remuneration report for 2024. As I mentioned earlier, while more than 50% of the votes are in support of the resolution that's from the proxies that we'd see on the screen before, it will not reach the 75% level and therefore registers as a first strike. A voting exclusion applies to this resolution set out in the notice of meetings. The directors and other key management personnel are not able to vote and will not be voting any of their securities. I now move that resolution 4 that the remuneration report for the year ended 30th of June 2024 be adopted. Questions on this resolution, please. Lewis from the Australian Shareholders' Association.

Mr. Chairman, introducing Lewis Gomes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You spoke a bit about this in your opening address for obvious reasons. Most of us would have seen or read the article in yesterday's financial review. I'd just like to take a minute or 2 to explain the position of the Australian Shareholders' Association and why this year, as we did last year, we're voting for this resolution. Firstly, Mr. Chairman, would like to acknowledge the efforts that you have made in recent years to bring Goodman's remuneration policy back to what we regard as a more acceptable balance between the need for executive incentives while also recognizing securityholder interests. The most significant change we have seen in the -- is the application of face value to the determination of the number of awarded security rights from the so-called fair value approach, which, in our view, was never actually fair to shareholders. Now I don't want to go into the technical details of what's fair value versus face value. But I will note that the number of security awards made has been significantly reduced as the security price has increased and by also changing from fair value to face value, the number of securities has been reduced by a factor of between 2 and 3. And just by way of illustration. And you -- apologize for me always quoting numbers. But in November 2018, the CEO was awarded 1.6 million rights under the fair value approach and another 1.56 million rights in November 2021. By contrast, since those changes to face value have been made, this year's awards are worth for 630,000 rights and an LTI upper limit value of around $22 million for the total maximum possible remuneration under the LTI. And if we add the -- for a CEO, the somewhat modest fixed remuneration of $1.4 million, that gives around $23 million as the possible remuneration based on the current framework. We also note that the CEO receives no STI awards, and that's by his choice. We acknowledge that this is still a high remuneration package compared with most other ASX companies. But then the performance of Goodman has been markedly better than most other ASX companies. Prior to the recent changes made under your chairmanship, the ASA voted consistently against the remuneration report. But last year and now this year, we will support it. We do note that one of the justifications in the past was that the high packages were necessary to retain talented executives who were at risk of leaving Goodman for better packages possibly elsewhere. However, and to no surprise to us, we're pleased to see that Greg is still here. And we think that...

Shoes notwithstanding.

Well, we'll buy him another pair of shoes if that's the problem. And I think all -- if not all of the senior executives are also here. And I think I do recall Greg saying last year, I think if -- I might have misquoted him, but he said something to the effect that he enjoys his job so much. He'd come to work for no remuneration. Now we're not putting that as a resolution. We don't expect that. We don't expect these executives to work for nothing either. But I think it goes to the heart of the, I'll call it, the Goodman culture that the people were incentivized by working for a great company on great projects and with great colleagues. And I think that's what drives this business. Remuneration to my mind, is a reward for effort. It's not the primary motivation. And while some people will think that's a lot than it is, but the results are pretty extraordinary. And we, the securityholders, are the beneficiaries of it. So thank you. Sorry to take a bit of time, but I thought in the context, I better explain why we're voting the way we are.

Well, thank you very much, Lewis. Appreciate the effort you go to for analyzing and explaining just to us as well as to your own shareholders or shareholder base. So I appreciate very much. If I could just -- so there wasn't a question there, but if I could just comment. A lot of what I said in my Chairman's address addresses the question about incentivizing pay-for-performance, aligning the interests of employees with securityholders. And I think that has been achieved for many, many years. I also said in my Chairman's address that we've had 14 years of consecutive profit growth in operating profit since FY 2010. That was probably the first year I was on the Board then, but no doubt the first year after the upsets of the GFC and as a stabilized year. But 14 years beyond that, we've had substantial profit increases. And if I could just quote the numbers there, we had a profit in that year of $310 million. And today, we've got over $2 billion, $2.05 billion. At the time, I think our market capitalization was only -- well, a reasonable amount is $4 billion, but today, our market capitalization is $70 billion. And so extraordinary results have been achieved over time. And they were achieved by management, not by the Board and not by shareholders but by management. So the pay-for-performance that we have here, Greg's remuneration that you referred to, 94% of his potential pay is at risk. The $1.4 million is worth about potentially 5% or 6%. So 94% is at risk if the results are not there, his pay is not there. So I appreciate your comments. So I certainly appreciate your support, particularly since the proxy advisers elsewhere haven't supported us this year, which is very disappointing, particularly given the truly outstanding, I said fantastic results, which I -- in my Chairman's address, but outstanding results this year. And the performance of management, yes, we've retained our senior people. We're also attracting a lot of people to come into the organization. We've got a big development program going forward over the next -- as Greg just said a moment ago, probably a decade, the next 10 years. And we have to attract and retain and incentivize. And I think that's what -- the 3 elements which are remuneration arrangements do. But I appreciate very much your comments. Are there any other questions here in the room before we go online? I think not. Alison, I think there are questions online.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, we've got a question from Stephen Mayne. There's 3 parts to the question. The first is, why do the 3 big global index funds, Vanguard, BlackRock and State Street collectively own more than 25% of the business? How do we engage with them? And what have they done on remuneration voting after their main proxy adviser ISS recommended voting against the remuneration report?

We engage with all of our major shareholders, Stephen. I know management do it regularly. We have the quarterly updates. We have the half yearly results. We have the full year results. And Greg and his team do a lot of work with all of our shareholders, which no doubt sure would include the index funds. I met with about, I think, 14 or 15 of our major shareholders in mid-year. And I met with about 25 of our major shareholders prior to this AGM. I believe those index funds were included in the list of people that I met with, with our Investor Relations manager. So we engage with them, of course. In terms of how they vote on remuneration -- on the rem report, I don't know. I'll have a look at the proxy results probably after the meeting and see what they've done, and then we'll talk about it with the next year again. Do we have any more questions?

There are no further questions on this resolution.

Lewis Gomes, here on the floor.

Just another point of clarification. On the share-based remuneration, I mean, it's my understanding that when rights vest new shares are issued at no cost to securityholders. I'm assuming that's the case.

Yes.

So in terms of cash and we always say cash is king, there's no cost directly to the shareholders in the remuneration arrangements as they stand. The second point I'd make, obviously, if we issue new shares, the earnings per share drops a bit. But again, it's my understanding that the hurdles that the executive team have to work to. That dilution really has to be recaptured before the -- that new awards kick in. So I don't think the securityholders were losing out either on share-based remuneration or on earnings per share dilution. You might just like to confirm that.

I could say yes to both those points, but I think just a little elaboration. But certainly, your observations are 100% correct. There are certain people around the world where the tax rules do not make it possible for us to issue performance rights, and their performance is paid out in cash. But what we then do is we issue equivalent number of shares in the market here. Very small amount, relatively small amount. But at the end of the day, it is all noncash to the company, and you're 100% correct. I'd just add a little bit to your EPS dilution that in the 10-year plan, we test at the end of year 4 and it vests -- 6 years or 7 years from year 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 through the end of year 10. So the shares don't get issued immediately. They get issued over a period of time. However, when the testing occurs at the end of year 4, and we say that Mr. Goodman is going to get the shares, but not this year but next year and the years beyond, we then automatically or immediately include those tested shares in the denominator of the EPS calculation so that dilution already occurs even if the shares haven't been issued. I think that's an important issue. So we don't lap around and wait until the shares are issued to do the calculation. We take into account as soon as the testing occurs.

And just one last point. You talked about a 10-year holding period for these securities. And I understand you've recently reduced that 10 years to 5 years for -- I'll call them the more junior executives. That's probably not the correct term. And I did indicate to you that we actually support that reduction. We felt that the 10-year horizon when it was first announced was somewhat excessive. We know these projects are long duration. And maybe for the very senior executives, that's appropriate. But as we discussed, we also need to keep refreshing the Goodman team. And we have noted that there's a preponderance of miles within the Goodman team for probably historical reasons. We'd like to see more females rising up through the ranks. And maybe some of those older executives -- without wanting to sound like I'm agist, I'm old myself, but maybe some of the older executives should move on at some point in time. They shouldn't be hanging around for 10 years just to collect their last lot of shares.

Well, firstly, Lewis, let me say that we have a very active succession planning program within the group. That's a typical HR function, and that's handled very diligently and has always been. We've been exceptionally good at retaining our senior talent. That's been an excellent result for us and gets reflected in the good performance that we've been talking about before and it also reflected in what we need to achieve going forward. But yes, you're right, and we're very conscious of that. We have a 40-40-20 objective, 40% female, 40% male and 20% whatever, either male or female. That's a standard objective which we embrace. At the moment, we're at about 44%, I think, female throughout the group, but in the senior echelons in the low 30s. But you're correct. At the very senior level, we have a very low female representation. That's something which we're very conscious of. Are there any other questions? If not, Alison, nothing online?

There are no further questions online.

Right. Well, then I'll move on. Thank you. So moving on to resolutions 5, 6 and 7, which each relate to the grant of the performance rights to our 3 executive directors. A voting exclusion applies to these resolutions. And in summary, the executive directors cannot vote their securities on any of these resolutions. Before proceeding at the following resolutions, I note that I propose to conduct the discussions on all 3 of the resolutions once they have been formally put to the meeting. So with your forbearance, I'll just read out the resolutions, put them to the meeting and then open the floor for discussion. So the fifth resolution for the members to consider as an ordinary resolution of each Goodman Limited, Goodman Industrial Trust and Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited is to approve, for all purposes, the grant of 630,000 performance rights to and the acquisition of Goodman Group Securities by Greg Goodman, as described in the explanatory memorandum. And I now move that, that resolution be approved. The next resolution, which is the sixth resolution, is for members to consider a very similar resolution. And I read it out again. For the members to consider as an ordinary resolution of each of Goodman Limited, Goodman Industrial Trust and Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited to approve, for all purposes, a grant of 320,000 performance rights to and the acquisition of Goodman Securities by Danny Peeters, as described in explanatory memorandum. And the seventh resolution for members to consider as an ordinary resolution is for each of Goodman Limited, Goodman Industrial Trust and Goodman Logistics Hong Kong Limited to approve for all purposes the grant of 350,000 performance rights to and the acquisition of Goodman Securities by Anthony Rozic, as described in the explanatory memorandum. I think I forgot to move resolution 6. So I'll move resolution 6 and resolution 7. So I'll now address any questions in relation to these 3 resolutions involving the grant of performance rights to Greg, Danny and Anthony. Any questions from the floor? I think not. Alison, any questions online?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I've got a question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. There's a few parts to it. I'll paraphrase. Goodman's circa 900 employees received $500 million worth of Goodman's stock for their performance in '23, '24. This is all related to the Goodman Chanticleer article. With Greg being the largest recipient, can you comment on whether the scale of these payments are necessary? And can you also comment on whether the numbers quoted by Anthony McDonald in the Chanticleer article are accurate?

I don't have the article in front of me, so I won't do a verification checklist of the article. I think the point that I think Stephen is getting to, we've already covered in my Chairman's address and some of the previous comments, that the share-based payment expense, and Lewis, I think, described it extremely well, share-based payment expense is a below the line item. And there, I have a supporter with that. Yes. She doesn't like the proxy firm. I can tell, but -- or at least their recommendations this year. But seriously, the share-based payment expense is a noncash item. It's below the line. We reflect the dilution in the earnings per share calculations, which Lewis highlighted a moment ago and which I elaborated on. I think that our focus on cash is exceptionally important. It's the way the business is run, all the things I've already said in the -- in my speech earlier on and in some of the questions. So yes, the expense below the line is a large item, partly reflected by the increase in the share price this year, but it's an actuarial calculation, which the accounting standards require us to insert into the financial statements or include in the financial statements. And -- but it's not the way we run the business, and it's not the way we finance the business. We finance the business with cash, the $1.5 billion, $1.6 billion of cash that we retained. We reinvested in the business for future growth, which I've also mentioned previously in. So I think that what the Board has done over many years and continues to do is focus on the cash generation of the business and how we manage our balance sheet going forward. And one thing we haven't mentioned today, which we haven't mentioned at almost every discussion with investors is that we've got a very, very low leverage ratio. Our debt is low. Our ratios -- loan-to-value ratio is below 10%. This has been well reflected and understood by the market. And it's a hallmark of what distinguishes us from most of the other property companies. Are there any other questions online?

Not specifically related to these resolutions, but we've got a few more general questions that have come in.

Right. Okay. Yes, please go ahead.

The first one comes from Andrea Walton. In terms of power, what is your strategy for investigating BESS, best battery energy storage solutions, renewable power solutions?

Greg, would you like to...

If you already have some power solutions in some of our sites around the world, effectively, we're piloting those. And -- but that's for industrial facilities in the main. And we're also very keen, particularly with data centers, to see the grids becoming greener as they are around the world. There is a lot of nuclear, as I spoke about before, that's going in as well, which will give us the opportunity, I think, to get somewhere in regard to clean energy on that front as well.

Thanks. Alison, next question?

And the final one, I believe, is from Mr. Stephen Mayne. And it is, any early thoughts on what a reelected Donald Trump will mean for our business? For instance, if the U.S. corporate tax rate is cut from 21% to 15% as suggested, is that good for us? And what was our experience like -- what was the experience like for Goodman during Trump's first term?

Well, I guess if you look at the 14-year performance that I just talked about and included Mr. Trump's first term, obviously, this is a very topical issue for everybody, not just for Goodman, and it goes well beyond the industrial space or the data center space that we're most -- that we are focused on -- I guess speaking personally, it's not a surprise that the change has happened in the U.S. I don't think it's a real surprise across the board. And I won't try and comment on geopolitical issues and some of the specific issues which may be introduced in the U.S. But the markets have reacted positively. The markets have anticipated this as well. The long-term bond rate though has gone up in recent times, which probably reflects -- I'm certain reflects an expectation that there could be higher inflation if Mr. Trump introduces all the policies that he has suggested. But once again, from a Goodman perspective, we're financed in a way where we're not sensitive to interest rates in that sense that we've got a very great -- we've got a great business, which focuses on essential infrastructure. And that will, I think, bode us very well irrespective what happens with tariffs and other tax changes in the U.S. But I'm sure we all have opinions and possibly fears as what might happen going through the next 3 or 4 years. But I think the issue which I certainly hear from my context around the community here is that we should brace the volatility. Any more questions?

There are no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Well, thank you very much. So now we come to voting. And having put all the resolutions to the meeting, now is the opportunity for those attending in person to vote on them. For those of you in the room with us today, please use the voting card you're given when you registered this morning. If you're participating online and you've not already done so, you can vote by pressing the voting icon on your screen. And the vote on all resolutions will be conducted by way of poll, as I've previously mentioned. I'd now ask all securityholders attending in person to cast their votes for or against each resolution by marking the boxes on the reverse of their voting card. And when you've completed your voting card, please place your poll card in the boxes being circulated around by representatives of Computershare. Computershare is assisting us today with the collection and counting of the votes. [Voting]

We're all done with voting. Collected. I think there's just one over here. Well, thank you very much for voting. And I'll now pause for a moment and confirm that we do have all completed. I think yes. Thank you very much. So I now declare the voting closed. Thank you for your patience. I'm pleased to confirm that resolutions 1 to 7 were passed by the vote on the rem report has registered the first strike, as I have previously mentioned. We'll announce the full details on the voting results to the ASX this afternoon. As there's no other business, I'll now formally declare the meeting closed. But for those of you here in the room with us today, please do join us for some tea and coffee and biscuits in the room outside. But thank you very much for your attendance and more importantly for your support. Thank you.