Kelsian Group Limited (KLS) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Kelsian Group Limited First Half FY '25 Results Briefing. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Clint Feuerherdt, Managing Director and Group CEO. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Rachel. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the first half results presentation for Kelsian Group Limited for the 6 months ended 31 December 2024. I'm Clint Feuerherdt, Managing Director and Group CEO, and I'm joined this morning by Andrew Muir, Group CFO; and Graeme Legh, CEO of All Aboard America Holdings or AAAHI. As announced back in November, Graeme will be taking over the role of Group CEO on the 1st of April this year. At the AGM in October 2024, we announced a detailed review of our capital management and allocation framework. And today, we are announcing the outcome of that review as well as specific targets that comprise our capital management and allocation framework. Firstly, however, I'll provide an overview of the results. Then I'll hand over to Andrew for a detailed review of the financials on a divisional basis. Graeme will speak to AAAHI's performance as well as the strategy and outlook. I'll then take some time to step through our capital management and allocation framework before presenting the growth strategy and outlook for the group. So we want to get through today, and I want to start with a summary of what I believe are the key takeaways over on Slide 4. Overall, the first half FY '25 results were in line with expectations, noting the specific areas of mobilization and ramp-up in the business, and, as we flagged at the full year results last year, the corresponding second half skew to earnings. There are several reasons for our confidence in the second half, including a full period of Bankstown Rail Replacement services, only 3 months of which falls in this half; further efficiencies to be delivered out of our Sydney bus contracts; continued ramp-up of our 2 industrial clients in the United States; and, of course, the usual seasonality of the U.S.A. business with an approximate 45-55 split due to the more extensive holiday periods that fall in the first half. Based on our forecast for the second half, we are today reiterating our guidance for the full year FY '25 of underlying EBITDA of between $283 million and $295 million. Similarly, our CapEx program is progressing on plan and on budget and consistent with guidance provided at the full year results. Andrew will provide more detail on this progress later in the presentation. We've also completed the capital management and allocation framework and set out all clear targets defined for the group. Firstly, we're making a modest adjustment to our target dividend payout ratio that was previously 50% to 70% of underlying NPATA to a new target of 40% to 60% of underlying NPATA. Secondly, we are targeting leverage of between 2.0 and 2.5x underlying EBITDA pre-AASB 16 and excluding SPV earnings and associated debt, and we forecast that Kelsian will be within this range by the end of FY '26. As for CapEx, we have done a very deep analysis on future CapEx spend, and we are targeting net sustaining CapEx of approximately $85 million over the investment cycle. And for return on invested capital, we are targeting 200 basis points above our pretax weighted average cost of capital over the medium term. With this framework, we will seek to appropriately balance opportunity with risk while retaining flexibility to take advantage of attractive future organic and inorganic growth opportunities and to significantly grow return on invested capital in the medium term with management remuneration and incentives to be aligned with these outcomes. The portfolio review is progressing well, and the capital management and allocation framework will be an important lens to apply to the portfolio review. Already, we have secured a sale and leaseback of less strategic depot assets in West Australia to deliver proceeds of a little over $20 million. We are close to the end of our peak investment period and with the contracted business underpinning our continued performance and cash flow generation, we are maintaining our interim dividend at the same level as last year. Now turning to the overview of the first half results on Slide 5. The first half FY '25 results for the 6 months 31 December 2024. Revenue grew by an impressive $89.1 million half-on-half to $1.07 billion, a 9% increase, reflecting the full period contribution from our Western Sydney bus contracts, which began in August and October 2023; indexation across the contract portfolio, being Australia and Singapore; and fair increases in Marine & Tourism. Growth also came from Swan Transit and the Bankstown Rail Replacement contract in Sydney. Underlying EBITDA was up 1.3% on the prior corresponding period to $132.2 million. This modest growth takes in the effect of lower industrial contract activity in the U.S., which has since ramped up, and Graeme will talk to that later. It also reflects the contribution of the Western Sydney bus contracts that commenced at a low margin and also the ongoing underperformance of our largest contract in Sydney, Region 6. Margin compression was also experienced in Marine & Tourism with a softer domestic market in K'gari and suspension of services in Darwin associated with 2 vessels out of service for most of the half. There were, of course, a number of areas of improvement, including stronger performance in Singapore and ongoing strong performance across our marine transport links to iconic island destinations. Depreciation and interest were in line with expectation, reflecting the higher capital program. NPATA was down 7.8% to $39.7 million for the half. As the second half earnings uplift plays out, more of that benefit will flow to the bottom line. Depreciation and interest are both on track to align with guidance provided at the full year results. As we are now cycling out of the first year of the new Sydney contracts, our cash conversion is reverting to very strong levels, and this half it was 93%. Once again, it's worth highlighting that nearly 90% of our contracted revenue -- of our revenue is derived from contracted and nondiscretionary sources and the benefit of the indexation on that contract base is evident in the result. Turning now to the operational and strategic overview for the half on Slide 6. Our Australian bus business transit systems, mobilized an impressive new contract in a challenging market environment. 60 new buses were acquired and 140 new drivers trained and the project was delivered on time and on budget. Whilst training and mobilization ran throughout the half, operations only commenced at the end of September, contributing only 3 months of benefit to the result. Region 6 in Sydney, our largest contract, continued to underperform the rest of the portfolio and a number of new cost base efficiency projects are running to assist with improving its performance ahead of the 30 June 2026 expiry date. The new Western Sydney contracts ticked over a 1-year anniversary during the half, and it was pleasing to see the Western Australian business resecure a new 10-year contract to operate the capital-light Bunbury & Busselton bus services contract. Turning to the international business and All Aboard America Holdings Limited. We had a good performance, which was unfortunately impacted by the contractor on an industrial and construction project filing for bankruptcy in May 2024. Since then, the contract was transferred to another construction company, and the contract is continuing to ramp back up, albeit not yet back to the previous peak levels. Pleasingly, there is now another project ramping up alongside it. Again, there was good news in renewals at All Aboard America with the renewal and expansion of the capital-light Bustang contract with the Colorado Department of Transportation. We've added 50 new employees, a brand-new training facility and 25 new motor coaches, all government funded to service the 40 new routes and doubled our revenue miles under this agreement. We also renewed our contract in Jersey, securing $260 million of revenue over 10 years. We were disappointed not to renew the Guernsey contract, and we've made adjustments to the U.K. management team to reflect the smaller business as we seek to maintain that business on a cost-neutral basis whilst it is in its growth phase. For SeaLink Marine & Tourism, the half was characterized by a shift in the tourism market. K'gari experienced softness from the domestic tourism market, while Captain Cook Sydney benefited from the slow recovery of inbound international tourism. A highlight was the construction progress on the delivery of 4 new vessels. One has been delivered in Southeast Queensland region, and the other one is scheduled for delivery midway through the year and a similar time to the new Kangaroo Island vessels for our new 25-year exclusive contract to run services to the island. Whilst we suffered some operational suspensions in the Northern Territory attributed to vessel availability, SeaLink did renew its contract to operate the Mandorah and Tiwi Island services on more favorable terms for a further 5 years. As part of our detailed review of our capital management and allocation framework, we've undertaken to evaluate our portfolio against the framework to identify potential opportunities to improve returns and optimize the overall composition of the group's portfolio of businesses and assets. Consistent with these objectives and our commitment to improve returns and optimize the portfolio, we recently sold 3 depots in Western Australia, which will realize total proceeds of $20.3 million. As part of the sale, we secured the use of these 3 sites through appropriate long-term leases. And as you know, Graeme takes over the group CEO role in April this year, and we are progressing on the recruitment process for his replacement in the United States. Turning now to safety on Slide 7, which continues to be a top priority across all areas of our business. Our goal is to reduce our injury rates by at least 10% year-on-year. I'm pleased to report that the results in both of our injury measures of lost time injury frequency rate and total reportable injury frequency rate are both ahead of target for the first half of FY '25. On top of a full set of successful safety campaigns, a key highlight during the period was the rollout of our national HSEQ Management System, which following implementation in Australia will be expanded globally. This marks a significant step in strengthening our safety, health, environment and quality standards across the business. This system will drive consistency, improve risk management and reinforce our commitment to a world-class safety culture, supporting our people and enhancing operational excellence. I should now hand over to Andrew to run through the results in more detail.

Thanks, Clint, and good morning, everyone. Kelsian has delivered a solid financial result for the 6-month period ended 31 December backed by contracted and nondiscretionary earnings that represent more than 90% of total revenue in this result. We continue to experience challenging economic conditions, both domestically and globally, and this has resulted in softer tourism demand. The results reflect the benefit of the cost indexation mechanisms that exist in the majority of our Australian bus contracts, where payments from government are adjusted either monthly or annually to take into account movements in the cost base. These adjustments relate to monthly changes in terminal gate price of fuel, annual wage price index increases for salaries and wages and CPI increases for all other general operating expenses. I'll now step through the results in a little more detail over the next few slides. Slide 9 provides a high-level comparison of the first half results compared to the prior year. The revenue increase of nearly $90 million was achieved through a combination of the indexation mechanisms I mentioned earlier, the full year period of the new contract region in Western Sydney, fare increases across the Marine & Tourism business and the Bankstown Rail Replacement project in Sydney, which started in September. While underlying EBITDA increased slightly compared to the prior year, there were several operational challenges and business performance issues which impacted the reported EBITDA contribution and margin. The performance from our Region 6 operations deteriorated during the period and continued to be our most challenging contract. As outlined at the AGM, at K'gari, we experienced some softness in domestic tourism demand. And in Darwin, we suffered service disruptions from the loss of 2 vessels, 1 cyclone related and one due to a fire. This reduced earnings capacity from this operation and the impact was compounded by the insurance excesses we absorbed as a self-insured operator of the vessels. Finally, the recommencement and ramp-up of services for an industrial client in the U.S.A., while on track, was well below the prior year run rate from a comparative perspective. On the flip side, the remainder of the portfolio performed either in line with or better than expectation, and Clint has touched on several of the operational highlights and contract renewals and wins during the period, which have contributed to the result. Higher interest compared to the prior year reflects high levels of borrowings supporting the CapEx program and higher line fees associated with our larger unsecured borrowing limits. From a tax perspective, the relatively low effective tax rate of 19.8% was driven by the ongoing benefits associated with marine training incentives and relatively lower international tax rates. The business performance issues and a higher interest resulted in underlying net profit after tax before amortization down 7.8% to $39.7 million. There were several one-off abnormal or significant items incurred during the half, which combined totaled $3.5 million on a pretax basis. These related to acquisition and due diligence costs and a property-related cost relating to the unsuccessful Melbourne bus franchise tender. The EPSA reduction is impacted by higher depreciation and interest in the period and the skew of earnings to the second half. We've maintained a fully franked interim dividend of $0.08 per share, which is the same as last year, and we continue to offer a dividend reinvestment plan for shareholders, but with no discount. Statutory net profit after tax for the period was $20.1 million compared to $28.1 million last year. To the cash flow on Slide 10. The business continues to generate strong operating cash flows. Gross operating cash flow of $108.7 million was a record and the cash conversion was 93% in the period. During the half, we invested a net $112.7 million in new and replacement assets, including vessels, buses, motor coaches and land and building. All of this is in line with our previously announced capital program and guidance. At period end, we finished with cash of $131.3 million. Slide 11 provides a summary of the balance sheet. The main changes to the balance sheet during the period relate to the assets acquired as part of the capital program and the accounting changes in right-of-use asset and liability associated with the Hoxton Park bus depot in Sydney, which we acquired and was previously leased. In the materials today, we're providing improved disclosure around the buildup of our leverage calculation, and we will continue to do this moving forward. From a leverage perspective, we finished the half with pro forma leverage at 3.2x, excluding SPV government-backed contracted assets, and all bank covenants are comfortably met. We continue to hold government-backed contracted assets on our balance sheet, which haven't yet moved into a ring-fenced SPV structure. We anticipate they will move into the SPV structure at the next contract renewal date. But excluding these from our leverage calculation, leverage reduces to 3x. Finally, leverage is forecast to be below 2.5x by the end of FY '26, driven by higher earnings and cash generation and a significantly lower capital investment program. Turning now to Slide 12, which provides an overview of capital expenditure. As foreshadowed previously, FY '25 is a year of record investment in the business. This reflects the increased scale of the business and continuing to refresh the asset base to underpin growth. It includes expenditure on the 2 new vessels and land site infrastructure for the Kangaroo Island service, the acquisition of the Hoxton Park bus depot in Sydney, the purchase of 60 new buses for the Bankstown Rail Replacement project. Full year CapEx guidance for FY '25 remains unchanged at $185 million. Looking forward in FY '26, we do not have any major vessel replacements or builds, so there will be a significant step down in CapEx from this year's record levels. We anticipate net sustaining CapEx in FY '26 to be less than $85 million. Over the next few slides, I'll provide some comments on the individual divisional performances from both the financial and operational perspective. Starting with the Australian bus division on Slide 14. A key highlight for the period was the successful commencement of Bankstown Rail in Sydney with 60 new buses and an impressive 140 drivers recruited, trained and deployed on time and on budget. Balancing the encouraging contributions from the Bankstown Rail Replacement service, several factors affected performance of the bus division during the period, including delays in service changes, mobilization costs of Bankstown Rail, delays in the delivery of government-owned and funded replacement buses, congestion-related challenges and penalties for on-time running from an operational performance perspective and higher accident rates due to increased traffic congestion and new drivers. A comprehensive recovery plan is now in place, and I'm pleased to report we've started to see the benefits of this in the January results. On top of the Bunbury & Busselton renewals that Clint mentioned earlier, our National Resources and Charter team continues to work with clients to renew and expand our existing contracts. During the period, Grand Touring secured additional work in the resources sector in the Northern Territory, and Go West began a 4-year contract with the Western Australian Country Health Service and secured a 2-year contract extension with BHP. Horizons West expanded its operations initially in Perth education transport sector with 8 new contracts starting in early 2025, 2 with the government and 6 with private schools. Turning to Slide 15, the International Bus segment. In Singapore, the business secured a number of new service routes and commenced operating from the new Tengah Bus Interchange, which is an expansion in scope of our Bulim contract. Offsetting this was the high levels of absenteeism that has persisted due to legislative changes to labor conditions. This impacted our on-road performance and ultimately resulted in lost mileage, lower performance incentives and higher driver costs. Operationally, the business is receiving performance incentives, albeit still at continued low levels. In February this year, we completed the small acquisition of Huyton Travel, a regional bus operator in Liverpool. Huyton Travel provides us with access to buses, drivers, a leasehold depot and a training school. The total consideration paid is approximately GBP 1 million and includes a deferred earn-out component. The priority and focus of the U.K. team is now on the upcoming tenders in Liverpool. And we are confident this acquisition will further strengthen our relationship with that regional U.K. government client. Graeme will now provide an update on AAAHI's performance during the period.

Thanks, Andrew, and good morning, everyone. Slide 16 sets out some of the highlights of what has been achieved at AAAHI since the Kelsian acquisition in June 2023. With the successful integration now behind us, we have continued to invest in the business to position it as a platform for Kelsian's ongoing growth in North America. For the first half of FY '25, overall, AAAHI performed in line with expectations. The period was characterized by successful contract renewals and existing contract growth, with this growth somewhat offset by softening conditions in some markets for our more discretionary charter services and headwinds from service level reductions under certain material contracts. Specifically, employee shuttle operations for our tech clients in California were impacted by service reductions over the half as these clients continue to right-size operations to match their changed workforce dynamics. On the positive side, the reduction in service levels did stabilize towards the end of the period. Secondly, a key construction sector client went through a bankruptcy and restructuring process over the course of 2024, significantly reducing the services delivered at a major construction project. As can be seen in the chart on the right, this process began to impact AAAHI services in the final month of 2024 financial year and continued to be a headwind through this period. This contract has now been novated to a new contractor with service levels rebounding over the period. And as shown in the chart, by the end of the half, the 2 contracts operated by AAAHI have returned to similar service levels as what was being delivered prior to the bankruptcy process. Importantly, both contracts continue to ramp up service levels, and we expect this to continue for the remainder of FY '25. During the half, AAAHI continued its impressive track record of contract renewal with all expiring contracts successfully renewed. These include the renewal of the expanded Colorado Department of Transport Bustang contract and the noticeable award for a renewed up to 20-year contract to deliver a flagship electric bus program for the State of California at Hearst Castle. Moving to Slide 17. This slide sets out the outlook for AAAHI for the remainder of FY '25. A key area of focus during my time at AAAHI has been to ensure the business is set up to capitalize on the growth that we see in the North American market. This has meant we have continued to invest in the AAAHI platform, including in its people, its assets and its systems to position the business to take advantage of the growth opportunities it has in front of it. For the second half of FY '25, AAAHI will see benefit from the natural seasonality of our charter operations with the second half being the stronger period for this more discretionary side of the business. On the contracted side of our operations and as highlighted on the previous slide, the ongoing ramp-up at our existing industrial and construction sector projects will drive improved earnings for the remainder of FY '25. We're also seeing heightened activity from new projects in this sector with potential new projects seeking final investment decision approvals. In addition, AAAHI has an active contract pipeline across other resources sector operations and with new tech and health care clients. Finally, in a fragmented market like we see in the U.S., sensible acquisition opportunities continue to be explored with both small and attractive bolt-on acquisitions that complement and strengthen our existing operations and more strategic opportunities that would expand the geographic footprint of AAAHI. And with that, I'll hand back to Andrew to continue to run through the divisional performance with the Marine & Tourism overview.

Thanks, Graeme. Results for the Marine & Tourism division were mixed. Several markets continue to see good levels of activity and growth, Southeast Queensland, Whitsundays, Gladstone and Townsville in particular, but others like K'gari experienced lower levels of visitation and occupancy. The increase in passenger carries reported is primarily due to the Brisbane Ferries operation and a $0.50 passenger fare. This is a gross cost contract with no fare box risk, similar to our Australian bus contracts. A number of fare increases were implemented throughout the half, along with several dynamic pricing initiatives, which have delivered improved returns. More increases are scheduled for the second half, which should deliver improved margins there. During the period, domestic outbound travel exceeded pre-COVID levels and currently continues to climb faster than the return of international inbound travel. The K'gari business experienced reduced occupancy compared to the prior corresponding period, but room rate and revenue per occupied room was relatively stable. The launch of the Illumina light show in October was a success with over 5,000 tickets sold since October, and it is expected to support increased visitation to the island as it gains greater awareness. We're starting to see evidence of this in group bookings into FY '26 as it is included on travel itineraries of travel agents. In the Northern Territory, we extended the services funding agreements with the Northern Territory government for ferry services from Darwin to Mandorah and Darwin to the Tiwi Islands for 5 years. The half was impacted by the total loss of 2 ferries and the insurance excesses I mentioned earlier as a self-insured operator. The construction of the new 2 Kangaroo Island vessels and work to upgrade the landing infrastructure progressed well during the period and remain on time and on budget, and their anticipated delivery and completion is scheduled for mid-2025. A new Gladstone vessel was delivered during the period to support the recently secured 10-year contract. And in January, the first of 2 new Southern Moreton Bay Island vessels were delivered. The remaining vessel is anticipated to be delivered in July or August. These new vessels provide increased capacity and will deliver improved operational performance to the services operated in the region. To Slide 19. This slide provides a recap of some of the key benefits from the new Kangaroo Island vessels that are currently under construction. These new vessels will operate for the duration of the new contract with little or no additional capital needed to be deployed over the life of this new 25-year exclusive license. The new larger vessels will more than double anchor vehicle meterage capacity as well as a 50% more low carrying capacity per year and a 20% increase in annual passenger capacity. The improvement in access with drive-through facilities, greater redundancy and improved maneuverability are anticipated to support an increased number of trips per week throughout the year as well as improved fuel efficiency and lower emission. Finally, corporate costs on Slide 20. During the period, we appointed Cognizant Technology Solutions, a systems integrator, to implement Workday, a consolidated platform to manage our global finance and human resources function. By consolidating finance and HR onto a single integrated platform, we anticipate enhanced operational efficiencies, data accuracy and informed decision-making while driving innovation and cost savings. The software will be replacing a number of redundant and legacy systems across the whole business. The cost to implement Workday over the next 3-year period are estimated to be approximately $21 million. Accounting standards do not allow for these costs to be capitalized and amortized over the expected life of the new system, so they'll need to be expensed as incurred. The project to replace and consolidate our finance and HR systems is about to commence, and the project has extensive oversight and governance from the whole executive team and Board. I'll now hand to Clint to talk about the capital management and allocation framework.

Thank you, Graeme and Andrew. Now turning to Slide 22, our capital management and allocation framework. At the AGM in October, we confirmed we were examining our capital management and allocation framework. And today, we are announcing the outcome of that review. The core objectives of the framework are as follows: to guide future investment decision-making, to maintain a capital position that retains ample operational flexibility and to significantly grow return on invested capital in the medium term, thereby maximizing shareholder value. We will utilize the framework as a tool to guide our ongoing work relating to the portfolio review and aim to provide an update at or before full year results. However, you would have seen that we have already identified some less strategic bus depot sites in Western Australia and progressed with the sale and leaseback of these properties, which will deliver a little over $20 million in proceeds. In addition to the outcome of this review as it relates to the growing return on invested capital, it's also intended that management incentives and remuneration will be aligned to that outcome. Slide 23 articulates our capital management and allocation framework. We thought about our framework as a cash flow waterfall beginning with operating cash flows and have outlined our targets for each of the elements that flows from there by priority. The information on this slide is supported by a very detailed work undertaken by management and our advisers that takes into account our existing assets and future ambitions, our jurisdictional differences and I believe appropriately strikes the right balance between managing risk and opportunity, enabling the company to be flexible enough to take advantage of opportunity and maximizing returns to shareholders. I will walk through each element of the framework in the following slides, but I will draw your attention to the culmination of the framework, which is our target to achieve an increase in group return on invested capital to be at least 200 basis points above our pretax WACC over the medium term. Firstly, over to Slide 24, net sustaining CapEx. Our business invests in very long-life assets, and as such, in order to get a sense for the through-the-cycle sustaining CapEx, we have conducted an in-depth analysis of the future replacement and maintenance CapEx requirements to service the existing asset base and operations. We have defined this as sustaining CapEx, net of any asset disposal proceeds from assets being replaced. Over an illustrative 30-year through-the-cycle period, we estimate that Kelsian will spend $85 million on net sustaining CapEx per annum on a nominal basis. On the right-hand side, we have laid out the historical net sustaining CapEx spend and have identified that the average over FY '24 and forecast '25 is roughly $95 million. These being the years that included a full contribution by [ Bankstown ]. The remaining CapEx spend over the historical period has been growth CapEx or investment relating to land and building infrastructure. Whilst the through-the-cycle average sustaining CapEx spend is estimated to be $85 million, the forecast FY '26 sustaining CapEx spend is less than $85 million. Moving to Slide 25. It's worth spending a moment to discuss the various attributes of each of the Kelsian divisions to provide some context to the various aspects of the capital management allocation framework. Our businesses have very different capital requirements, owing to the contract structures, but also different operating structures. Investors would be familiar with the operating contracts in Australian bus that see Kelsian operate government-owned assets, where the capital burden falls directly to our government clients. The lower capital requirement is also coupled with 0 bare box risk in the system. And hence, the lower capital requirement, long-term contracted nature and low revenue risk translates to minimal to no capital requirement and a corresponding lower targeted return and cost of capital associated with these operations. In contrast, by way of a different example, the tourism assets that sit in our Marine & Tourism segment are often not supported by contracted revenue and rely on the tourism market to support revenue. The assets are owned by Kelsian, and there is a tangible capital requirement. The cost of capital for these assets and associated returns are therefore targeted to be higher. As a result of these different characteristics, we target unique investment returns for each business to reflect the relative risk and capital intensity of the business unit and operations. We have illustrated the makeup of our portfolio group pretax WACC with its constituent elements on the right-hand side of this page. Turning to Slide 26 to cover the preferred approach to assessing leverage. As a result of the capital framework review, we measured up the various ways that key stakeholders are viewing our leverage and sought to narrow the view with a single methodology that is clear and easily calculated. It is to take into account our nonrecourse SPV debt, which is separable on our balance sheet, and associated SPV earnings, which will be provided moving forward. To establish a consistent baseline moving forward, Kelsian will present its group leverage as pre-AASB 16 net debt, excluding the SPV debt, divided by pre-AASB 16 EBITDA, excluding the impact of SPV earnings. SPV debt is nonrecourse to Kelsian and backed directly by the assets held in the SPV and government undertakings. Kelsian will provide the information at each reporting period to calculate its net debt under this definition. Financial leverage for the period ending 31 December 2024 under the new definition was 3.2x. The key difference between this methodology and that used in the past is the inclusion of the government-backed assets and debt that is owned by Kelsian outside of the SPV structure. This amounted to $51.7 million at 31 December 2024. And if this amount was removed in the calculation, it would lower the ratio to 3x EBITDA. As part of the capital management framework announced today, Kelsian has formally included a target leverage range of 2.0 to 2.5x EBITDA. Historically, Kelsian has delevered after periods of heightened CapEx to sit within or below the target range. For the current period of heightened capital investment, we expect to have reached peak leverage and anticipate being within the target range by the end of FY '26. On to Slide 27 to briefly touch on the change to dividend policy. In light of the significant investment in growth opportunities currently underway and the potential for future growth opportunities to be evaluated, we consider it prudent to modestly reduce Kelsian's target dividend payout range from 50% to 70% of underlying NPATA to 40% to 60% of underlying NPATA. Whilst the change in dividend policy affords the business more flexibility, we currently intend to maintain the FY '25 dividend per share in line with FY '24 and we'll be paying a dividend of $0.08 per share for the first half of the FY '25 period. And to round out this section and the capital management allocation framework on Slide 28, a clear target for return on invested capital. As previously mentioned, we are targeting group ROIC to be at least 200 basis points above pretax WACC over the medium term. We have provided our ROIC performance on the right-hand side of this page and a breakdown of the calculations in the appendix. We expect recent investment activity to lead to a slight reduction in FY '25 ROIC. However, we believe that these investments and assets will support ROIC expansion over the medium and longer term. Furthermore, in evaluating individual growth capital investments in each business, we will target ROIC levels greater than the pretax WACC of that business after 3 full years and inclusive of synergies. Of course, ROIC will be combined with other important factors when assessing acquisitions with strategic alignment and earnings per share accretion, 2 obvious complementary elements. The culmination of our work on the capital management and allocation framework into a clear target of delivering ROIC of 200 basis points above pretax WACC sets the path for driving performance out of our existing portfolio as one element of assessment of our businesses in the portfolio review and clearly articulates the requirement for future growth opportunities. Moving on now to growth and outlook. With the capital management and allocation framework in place, Kelsian is well placed to focus on the near-term objectives of optimizing the portfolio against this framework and continue to pursue a disciplined growth strategy. The first step was to lay out a clear framework to optimize the balance sheet, guide investment and maximize returns for shareholders. Secondly, our portfolio review is continuing and will naturally have a focus on mapping our assets to the future direction and capital management and allocation framework. It will also have a strong focus on operational excellence to drive improved returns from existing assets, where asset utilization, yield management and capacity maximization will be pursued. As part of this, overheads will sensibly be reduced. Underperforming assets or those that may not align with our plans for the future will be divested. The portfolio review is underway, and we expect to update the market on its progress at or before full year results. Thirdly, we are going to ensure that we optimize the returns from our recent CapEx investments. We have made significant investments in Kangaroo Island's ferries and land facilities, Southeast Queensland ferries, the Bankstown bus fleet and motor coaches in the United States, and we have plans in place to capture incremental revenue and margins that will flow from these investments. Fourth, we will play to our core strength and pursue organic opportunities for growth. Existing market positions will be leveraged to pursue sensible growth in these regions with a preference for capital-light opportunities. And fifth, we will selectively pursue investments that meet our target returns and bring strategic advantage. We expect these to be expansion, bolt-on and infill investments and acquisitions that capitalize on our existing footprint and geographies, which, by their nature, generate attractive returns. And overarching all of these objectives will be a focus on maintaining our leverage within the stated range and adherence to the capital management and allocation framework. And so turning to the outlook on Slide 31. As flagged at the full year results last year, we expect a stronger second half result compared to the first half based on a number of known important factors. Firstly, Kelsian will benefit from a full period contribution from the Bankstown Rail Replacement contract. 3 months of operations plus mobilization costs fell into the first half, and we benefit from 6 months of operations and no further start-up costs in the second half. Secondly, Graeme has illustrated the rapid ramp-up of our industrial contracts in the United States, and that ramp is expected to continue to a point above historical levels in the second half. Thirdly, there are several major efficiency projects running in Sydney to target efficiencies that are on offer with the new Western Sydney bus contracts as well as cost-out programs running in Region 6 to drive more substantial cost base improvement ahead of this contract retender and the contract expiry in June 2026. Fourth is the ongoing work to drive better yield and take advantage of the growing parts of Marine & Tourism portfolio, combined with the ongoing trading improvements we are already seeing in other parts of the portfolio, including Singapore. Also, late in the second half, we will see the completion of our investments in the Kangaroo Island and Southeast Queensland vessels and infrastructure and the start of a finance and HR system upgrade. For the full year, we reiterate our guidance for underlying EBITDA expected to be between $283 million and $295 million. And for FY '26, we expect net sustaining CapEx to be less than $85 million, and we have no new vessels planned for FY '26. Now before we finish, I want to revisit some of the Kelsian key investment highlights. So after a lot of information on Slide 32, I would like to remind investors of what we believe make up the Kelsian investment proposition. Our business is diversified not only by business type, but also by geography, transport mode and customer type. We are fortunate in our exposure to some extremely large, exciting and growing economies. Our strong reputation has supported our ability to both win and renew contracts through multiple contract generations. We have an excellent track record of organic and inorganic growth, and there are multiple examples of where we have exercised discipline in this area. Our incumbent positions and contract exclusivity support resilient margins and allow natural hedging of our cost base. Several very tangible and obvious macro trends underpin growth across our business. Our contracts are long term with quality, low-risk counterparties, ensuring our revenues are predictable, and we have an excellent and highly qualified management team. This makes Kelsian a diversified global business with a strong track record of growth, underpinned by highly defensive long-term service contracts with highly creditworthy counterparties. I'll now hand back to Rachel to open up the line to any questions.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Aryan Norozi from Barrenjoey.

Just first one for me. I mean you've reiterated all your interest, D&A guidance that you provided in August. Just on the net interest cost guidance -- or, sorry, the gross interest cost guidance. So first half '25, your gross interest expense was $33 million and your guidance is for $59 million for the full year. So it implies the second half is $26 million. I just struggle to see how you get that half-on-half production even with the rate cut. Can you just run us through the thinking there on the interest cost, please?

Yes, Aryan. So we'll have some lower debt levels. We will have the savings around interest costs with the rate cut. And our guidance was around net interest. We've also reduced some of the facilities that we have. So we're not paying line fees on those available facilities, both performance bonds and unsecured debt lines.

So sorry, the $59 million of -- interest expense of $59 million, that's net finance costs and net of interest revenue. Is that right?

That's right.

Okay. And then just in terms of AAAHI, I think in the FY '24 results you called out the AAAHI impact in terms of the contract that ramped down to be about $1 million a month in the U.S.A., and that was about a 3-month impact. What was the impact in the first half of '25? Like maybe just quantifying that EBITDA headwind. And then maybe into second half '25 with the ramp-up, what would the headwind be? Just to get an idea around sort of getting conviction on the second half skew, please.

I think what we can review -- obviously, we don't want to break down line by line this cost base and profitability of various contracts. I think the -- what I would point you to is the graph that Graeme went through, which shows the actual bus numbers. So that was the purpose of that graph, to clearly illustrate where you can see the impact and quantify that impact in the second half of '24. And the extent of that impact through the course of FY '25 was obviously significant in the first couple of months. But fortunately, by the end of the half, we were kind of back to where we were before the bankruptcy process commenced.

Okay. And then just last one, Aussie Bus margin. So 11% this half. It was 12% in the second half of '24. So quite a big step down. I appreciate -- I mean you've had in the region big issues. Like how do we think about second half '25 margins? Is there any seasonality in the margins half-on-half or just assume the current base moving forward of 11%, please?

Well, firstly, there's not a lot of seasonality in the margin. I think Andrew called out some of the contributing factors to the cost base there with respect to repairs and maintenance, congestion over time, contract penalties relating to on-time running. So there were some additional costs kind of running through there that were higher than the previous half. As you can rightly see, the margin there decreased slightly. There's cost-out programs running across Sydney. Typically, this is generally just a Sydney-related thing. And so our expectation is that margin goes north. And the cost-out programs that we had running through the half, we're seeing the benefit of those in the January results. So the expectation is the margin is not going any lower than that. There's improvement in it.

Sorry, the margins are not going any lower than the 11% and potential improvement.

Yes, potential improvement in the second half. Yes.

The next question comes from Benjamin Jones from JPMorgan.

Just on the ROIC target you've spoken to, 200 basis points ahead of WACC. Can you just talk us through what you're assuming internally for that WACC number? And how you're seeing that trajectory of getting to that sort of medium-term target? And what you define, therefore, timing-wise as medium term?

Yes, Ben, probably an anticipated question. And obviously, we're not disclosing what the WACC is. And you would know, as well as anybody, that the WACC kind of changes from time to time. So giving an estimate at any point in time is difficult from a continuous disclosure perspective. But obviously, the 2 elements that move there is the WACC itself and the return on invested capital. So through the course of the portfolio review, yes, we'll be looking at increasing the operational excellence of the business to drive a greater return of the assets that we do have and also assessing the businesses and the assets within the portfolio to determine if they are perpetually underperforming or underperforming to a point that is not contributing to that margin above the WACC, then they are the ones that will be considered, obviously, for divestment.

Yes, it makes sense. And would it be fair to say over the last few years that ROIC hasn't been reaching what we've got internally as WACC?

Yes. Look, we've been quite transparent, I suppose, about where the return on invested capital is. So again, you can go back and make your own assessment of the WACC. And certainly, there's enough data points out there for that. But you can see where the periods of investment have resulted in a movement in the return on capital as the capital base has decreased. But similarly, you can see how it recovers post acquisition as the growth against those assets comes through. So what we expect, as I said in the speech, is that the ongoing investment this year will probably see a slight further deterioration or a fall in the return on invested capital through the course of FY '25. But we expect, obviously, then -- as the balance sheet bounces back, the capital program comes down and the earnings increase, then, obviously, that return on invested capital will increase into future years.

Yes. Perfect. Makes sense. And then just you've provided previous depreciation guidance at the last result of $117 million annually. Just clarify what we're expecting this year? And then post the sale and leaseback of those WA depots, how we should think about the D&A contribution from those leasebacks for '25 and '26?

Yes, I think, there's no material change from the impact of that sale and leaseback, and the depreciation guidance of $117 million remain.

Perfect. And then just one final question on driver vacancies in [indiscernible], most pronounced in Sydney. Can you quantify how many vacancies you've had through the half and where that sits now versus the PCP? And where that sits relative to what you consider a normal level?

We don't have any driver vacancies of any sort of material in nature. There's no structural issue with availability of drivers anywhere in the portfolio. So that's not an impact.

The next question is from Cameron McDonald from E&P.

Can I just go back to the ROIC versus WACC question? So I mean, there's lots of other companies that do actually tell us what their WACC targets are or ROIC targets are. But when you roll forward in 3 years' time and you say -- you come out and you say you've met your ROIC target being 200 basis points higher than the WACC, how are we actually supposed to know?

Yes. Well, obviously, there's going to be a point of time where the WACC calculation will be transparent at a point in time when the measurement is made, Cam. So I also mentioned that management remuneration and incentives will also be linked to this. So at a fair minimum through the remuneration report and a measurement against the achievement of these objectives, both the return on invested capital and the WACC will need to be disclosed at that time for the purposes of that calculation. And the expectation at this point in time is it will be an average WACC over the measurement period. So you're right, like at a point in time, that will become clear. I mean the other contributing factor here is we're in the midst of a portfolio review, where the rebalancing of the portfolio will inevitably result in a shift of some of the business weightings. So the slide in the deck on the divisional targeted returns inevitably is going to move around a little bit as we kind of address things on an asset-by-asset basis. So again, another point as to move the numbers around a little bit.

Okay. And then just on AAAHI, like I appreciate you pointed to that graph with the buses and the performance level. But if we look at the revenues that are in the accounts, they're down over 10% on a sequential basis from the second half. And yet you're saying that there was only a partial impact as you started to improve. So what's going to -- how do we think about the second half revenue skew or seasonality in that business, noting that the $186 million is effectively flat on the PCP and you did $207 million in the second half of last year?

I mean I think the -- there are 2 factors at play there. The first one is there is some inherent seasonality mainly on the charter side of the business, where we see a better second half performance versus first half. And that really aligns with the holiday period and the number of months or quiet months in each of those 6-month periods, with additional effectively 2 months in the first half versus the second half. So I think there is some inherent seasonality that needs to be taken into consideration when we look at revenues in this period versus the prior period. And then the second big impact is what's highlighted in the chart in terms of the industrial and construction contracts. You can see a pretty material impact on our service levels at that contract over the period, dropping to essentially 50% of what they were at the start of the period -- at the start of this period, and then rebounding over the 6 months to get back to where we were or close to where we were by December. So all going well, if that trend continues, then that will lead to a significant recovery in both revenues and earnings as we move into the second half of FY '25.

Okay. Just a last question. The timing on Liverpool, that sort of looks imminent given -- I think it's a 4-year contract out to 2029. So when do we expect some news on that?

We expect the tender to be released over the next couple of months, Cam, and then we'll have another details. I'm expecting that we have 3- or 4-month response period, and then results kind of 3 or 4 months after that.

Okay. So effective -- we should get something almost by the end of this financial year.

I don't think we'll have results by the end of the financial year. I'd imagine that we've submitted it would be probably by the end of the financial year, but the timing is up in the air. The government is out procuring assets to feed into that process right now. So I guess the timing is largely with them.

The next question is from Owen Birrell from RBC.

Just some questions. I guess the main question on the International Bus business. I just want to sort of read out a few numbers here and just get a better sense from you guys actually to what happened under the hood. Your tax carried number went up by 18%, flat kilometers. Revenue only went up by 4%, and your EBITDA was down 11%. So can you give us a sense, I guess, what happened from the yield side of things within that business? And then, obviously, costs were blowing out to a degree that the EBITDA went massively negative. So I just wanted to get a sense as to what you were seeing on the ground.

So I'll start with tax. So look, on all of these contracts in international, there's no fare box risk and they're gross cost type arrangements. But the main driver of the increase in passenger numbers -- and that number is reported on a calendar year basis, so it's not a half -- is Singapore in terms of increased ridership in the Singapore area with more people coming back onto the network.

Yes. And then -- I mean, AAAHI is probably the main driver of some of the trends you see there in terms of revenue and EBITDA. And it goes back primarily to the industrial, construction sector client that we were speaking about. That was a very significant contributor in terms of the EBITDA margin. So clearly, a fall in the service levels at that contract had an overall impact on the margin that we delivered at AAAHI. So despite revenues being relatively flat, EBITDA was down versus the prior period.

Okay. Understood. And I guess just a question with regards to this new finance, HR system that you're deploying over the next 3 years. You called out a $21 million OpEx cost associated with that. Now to me, that sounds like a very big cost on a $60 million per year NPAT base. I just want to get a sense of what cost savings you're expecting to accrue from this new system and over what sort of time frame?

Yes. I mean, we've identified that in the business case. So I mean, the licensing costs going forward is on a neutral basis really in terms of the system that it's replacing. So we've got a number of old legacy systems throughout the business that aren't supported and so neutral from that perspective. And in terms of the roll out and integration. It's a global business. To roll out a finance and HR system across such a big portfolio is a significant cost. As I've mentioned, ordinarily -- previously, you would have capitalized this cost and amortized it over 10 years or so, but accounting standards don't allow for that. So we've called it out. And we've got very detailed plans in terms of the buildup and the timing of those costs for the roll out. And we'll continue to report against the progress and the benefits and synergies, which will flow in multiple areas in terms of access to data, decision -- assisting in decision-making at a local level. We anticipate efficiencies in terms of processing. So some of our systems are very old, very manual, a lot of manual intervention required, so a reduction in head count. So there's a big shopping list of opportunities and synergies that this project will drive.

And just in terms of your ROIC over WACC calculations, am I correct in saying you're taking the costs below the line because it's all OpEx and one-off, but you're taking those benefits above the line?

Yes.

The next question is from Tim Piper from UBS.

Just on the AAAHI business, what's the right go-forward EBITDA margin do you think for that business now? And what have you built into your ROIC 200 basis points above WACC assumption on AAAHI at the EBITDA margin line?

Yes, I think that clearly once we get past this period and the impacts of the downturn in the construction -- the construction project, we'll see a rebound to some extent of the EBITDA margin. That's going to be offset to some degree as we look out in the medium term as the mix does change a little bit within AAAHI. Since Kelsian took ownership, the overall contribution on the contracted side of the portfolio versus the charter side has gone up. I think when we acquired the business, it was sort of pretty close to 50-50. Now the mix is more like 60-40. And generally, those contracted earnings come at a lower margin than we see in the charter operations. So that will over time [Technical Difficulty] these changes bring down sort of the mix overall margin. And then on top of that, there are some specific factors at play which are also a bit of a headwind when you're just looking at the margin, but a positive for the business as a whole. One example of that is one of the contracts that we operate in the construction sector, we now also are in control of providing car parking for the employees. We essentially outsource the car parking side of it. So making effectively a very small margin on that component, even though 100% of that revenue is flowing into our P&L. So things like that are probably going to bring down or weigh on the EBITDA margin for AAAHI versus prior periods, but are a positive for -- actually a positive for the business moving forward. So I think in the short term, we'll definitely see a rebound from what we saw in this 6-month period as we sort out the issues at that contract. But then over the medium term, fairly flat, maybe a slight decline given the change in mix and some of the other specific factors at play which are impacting the overall margin.

Okay. Got it. So I mean, versus original expectations, lower EBITDA margin, but higher CapEx and higher depreciation.

Higher revenue as well. So there's revenue coming in -- additional revenue coming in from new contracts or growing contracts, plus different aspects of the contracts that probably aren't or not contributing at the same margin level as the business was when we acquired it.

Got it. And just around seasonality for AAAHI. I think previously you talked to 45-55 sort of type 1H, 2H kind of skews, and that's driven more by the discretionary and chartering side of the market. Did I hear in the call comments that you kind of were saying that some of that charter market and more cyclical part of the market had sort of softened more recently? And if that's the case, can we actually expect the same degree or reasonable seasonality to the second half this year in AAAHI?

Yes, there will still be seasonality because the fundamentals of what drives that business and drives that seasonality hasn't changed. So there will certainly be that seasonality there. And the 55-45 is probably fairly accurate. The bigger factor at play in terms of bringing that number close together is the change in mix and having more contracted business relative to charter business. So as we continue to grow the contractor side as a percentage of revenue versus charter, the seasonality becomes less of an impact. But there is certainly going to be a seasonality impact as we move into the second half of this financial year.

Got it. Just one last one on Ausbus. Just for the second half, I think -- did you say margin won't be less than 11%? I mean the second half would have probably assumed that EBITDA margin should be a fair bit stronger just given you only had Bankstown bus for a few months and that has start-up costs, so you get a full 6 months at a higher margin in the second half. Shouldn't EBITDA margin be higher than 11.2% in 2H?

Yes, I think that's what I probably said, Tim. But putting a floor on it, it's certainly going to be north for H2.

The next question is from Allan Franklin from Canaccord.

Just perhaps on the Marine business. Apologies if this has been stepped through already. But just wanted to sort of talk through the pricing initiatives given the increase in direct costs. To what extent were there any one-off items in the direct costs, firstly? And then secondly, to what extent have you already pulled the price lever? Or can you further pull the price lever to help cover off on those headwinds?

Yes. So there's a number of pricing initiatives that are running across the board. They're principally targeted at the more island destinations that have certainly not experienced any sort of softness as a result of kind of the shift in domestic tourism to the more offshore. So they continue to be kind of rolled out. And we have a number of locations where further roll outs of that will occur across the period between February and April. So most certainly pricing will track. The other thing that's of note for the second half for Marine & Tourism is the vessel issues that we had in the Northern Territory that Andrew highlighted. Obviously, we carried a cost base up there and didn't generate a lot of earnings because of the 2 vessels that were out of action. We had subcontractors in and a lot of R&M. So that all kind of springs back in the second half. Similarly, we've got the benefit now of the Red Cat operation in the week, Sundays. So that will benefit from the tourism rebound in this half now. And if that's kind of annualized, it would have -- kind of just come out 12 months. So yes, there will be some further kind of revenue uplift across the portfolio. And on the cost base -- there was a bit of extra R&M in there, as I highlighted, but just kind of the standard wage increases, nothing too much out of step.

The next question is from Brian Han from Morningstar.

I didn't quite catch what you said, but did you say something like the maintainable earnings base for AAAHI is now lower than what you were thinking before due to mix changes? Is that what you said?

No, I think it's more the margin. So the revenue has gone up, but there's probably been a slight reduction in overall margin due to change in mix and a change in some of the contracts that we have. But on line, actually not going down.

Right. Can I just ask a direct question on that then? Is there any chance for earnings there to end up sort of flat for the full year?

At AAAHI?

Yes.

I think it's going to be down year-on-year given the impact that we've seen.

Right. Okay. And Graeme, are you worried about your exposure to the tech sector in the U.S. because it seems pretty volatile the way they do things?

I mean, I'm not worried. I think if you're going to be in the tech sector, the clients we have are the ones you want to have, and they're generally very, very good clients and have delivered for the business over a very long period. Clearly, there's been extreme volatility in that sector as we've gone through COVID and the recovery, and we're sort of on the tail end of that and feeling the effects of it. But my view is we've gone through the worst of it and those things will stabilize. It might not go back to the days of exponential growth that we saw or the business saw pre-COVID, but I think -- it's a business that I think is a good one to be in and we're pretty comfortable being in it.

Okay. And my last question is, under your new way of calculating leverage, you said Kelsian remains well under covenant limits. What are those covenants? And are they calculated on the same basis with respect to all those SPV adjustments?

Brian, there's similarities, but the covenant calculation is more favorable in terms of the adjustments and add backs. We don't disclose what they are, but we're very comfortable in terms of where we're positioned and where those covenants are.

The next question is from Jason Palmer from Taylor Collison.

Graeme, first one is for you. In respect to the U.S. business and that industrial and construction client that you referred to, at what point does that contract from a manpower perspective in your best estimate start to fall away? And what confidence do you have that your current run rate or your March peak can be held and for how long?

Yes, probably 2 parts to that, Jason. I don't think any clear guidance has been given by the construction or the owner of that plant as to when the revised construction schedule will end. But the indications we have is there's going to be at least a 2-year extension from where we thought that project was going to be. So I think that project is going to continue for the medium term for sure. In terms of getting back to the March peak, there's probably 2 parts to that. I think it's probably unlikely that, that specific project gets back to where it was in March for a whole bunch of reasons. That's not necessarily a bad thing for us because it means that the overall time line for the project gets extended. But for us, the difference between March and now is the ramp-up in the other contract. So at March, that contract is in its very early stages. We're only operating a limited number of buses. That project is now close to a year further down the road, and we're seeing a significant ramp-up in the number of buses we're operating for that second contract. So overall, we expect our service levels across the 2 contracts to go well north of what we were achieving back in March prior to the bankruptcy.

Yes. But at what level does it kind of hold? Does it kind of -- does it hold for 6 months and then taper back? I'm trying to get a sense on what that sustainable base might look like for AAAHI and if you do need to keep winning other LNG workflows in the next sort of 6 to 12 months to keep it at the same level?

Yes. Definitely I think so in the next 6 to 12 months. Clearly, they're project-specific contracts. So ultimately, we need to find other work as they wind down. But our expectation is these projects are both growing over the next 6 to 12 months and we're not going to see any tapering at either of them over that time frame.

Okay. My second question also for you was around where you see the broader AAAHI business now ex these industrial, construction clients that you referred to? And what size it could get to in an organic sense?

Yes. I mean I'm still very positive about the business as a whole. In terms of organic growth, there's probably 2 sides to that. One is the charter side of our operations. Now organic growth out of those businesses is relatively minor, I suppose. Ups and downs are more driven by the economic environment and market -- how each of the individual markets are performing. So leading to some ups and downs over time with some gradual growth. The sort of step change of growth in those charter markets really requires moving into new geographies, either through organically investing in assets and putting them in a new city or through acquisitions. So without doing that, I'm not expecting massive growth out of the charter side of the business. Where the real growth opportunities are for step change in organic growth is on the contracting side of the business. Now as we've seen through the impact of this bankruptcy process, some of these contracts are very significant and can have material impact on the overall performance of AAAHI, and winning new contracts should hopefully have a material positive step change impact in terms of organic growth. But there's also other contracts that we're chasing in other sectors that likewise can sort of materially step change the growth profile at AAAHI in other sectors providing employee-self services. So I think that contracted side is where we're going to see material organic growth. And it's probably why that mix that we were talking about previously continues to move or skew towards more contracted services versus charter services.

Yes, that should improve the margin, though, really. That shouldn't -- materially. But I guess the heart of what I'm trying to get at -- I'm sorry for laboring on this point, is that they are quite profitable contracts in their own right. And obviously, through this period, we've seen the impacts of that profit variations as they wind down. And so I'm just trying to work out like if the current run rate in the second half is really a sustainable run rate for a number of periods for this business to grow off or whether there's going to be movements up and down in any one period as these contracts kind of roll off, which I agree are very hard to predict?

Yes. I mean, I agree very hard. I think the [ correct ] thing would be we're not expecting any roll-off in the next 12 to 24 months out of the contracts that we have. So we're certainly not seeing any impact over that time frame. Looking beyond that, clearly, as these projects -- the contracts that we have wind down, we need to find alternate use for those assets and hopefully win new contracts to continue that growth over the longer term. But we're not expecting or seeing any change on the downside in the next 12 to 24 months.

And just a last question. It's not trying to be loaded, but somewhat [indiscernible]. The GBP 1 million investment in Liverpool, it's not really a lot. I get it probably gives you a beachhead. But are you really seeing as a credible operator, a low-risk operator to transition those contracts? Or is it better use of time just to exit that market in general? And quite frankly, probably exit Singapore and deploy that capital into the U.S.? That's my last question.

I'll take that one. So to -- yes, talking about organic growth. I mean, Graeme was talking about in the U.S. And you've obviously focused on organic growth. United Kingdom and Singapore are 2 very exciting geographies for organic growth. Let's take the easy one in Singapore. I mean, we continue to be the best-performing operator in Singapore from an on-road kind of performance perspective. So -- and we're not of the market share that limits our growth in Singapore. So that's a game where we continue to bid and put our best foot forward whilst we're waiting for big step change contract renewals. In the meantime, we're getting allocated a lot of additional new services, and we've just taken on the operations of a new interchange in Singapore. So I think it's not right to give up an opportunity where we have completely capital-light organic growth available to us in a geography and we are highly regarded. So to the question of whether we should exit Singapore then, absolutely not. And we're doing quite the opposite in the U.K. We're investing in the U.K. very modestly. Obviously, we're very mindful of the cost base in the U.K. And as I said in the speech, we've wound back some of the overheads there to keep that business the right size, but still aiming to go after organic growth. The small, very modest acquisition in Liverpool is actually the third largest operator in the Liverpool region. It's a very concentrated market. And you can see by the numbers that we've kind of disclosed, it's a pretty modest acquisition through a geographic footprint. And the training school that we get with that acquisition actually trains a lot of drivers in the city for the competitors also. So we're bringing a geographic presence and overcoming some of the risk measures that were explained to us out of the Manchester process. So we're very tactically, but in a very measured and disciplined way positioning ourselves for further success in that tendering. And I think we've got every chance of success. That's why we're there and that's why we're doing.

The next question is a follow-up from Aryan Norozi from Barrenjoey.

Sorry, 2 things. One is just on the CapEx. So last time you spoke, for FY '26, you mentioned it's $100 million. Now you're saying it's less than $85 million maintenance. So if we're trying to figure out what the actual total CapEx envelope is for FY '26, like what would that number be relative to your prior guidance, please?

So firstly, a very detailed piece of work is being done to kind of quantify the CapEx over a very long period of time on an asset-by-asset basis. And so the CapEx that we're talking about here is sustaining CapEx or vessel, vehicle replacement or maintenance CapEx. So that's the focus. Any additional CapEx over and above that will come with a contract win. So we're not saying that -- we're obviously pursuing growth and pursuing contracts, but any additional CapEx over and above that guidance would be attached to a new contract and new wins.

Okay. So AAAHI, the aim is -- and maybe before that, just the aim for AAAHI EBITDA -- once the LNG impact normalizes, what's -- I mean, previously you talked about the aim to grow AAAHI 10% per annum on EBITDA year-on-year. Is that still achievable for the business?

Yes. I mean, I think it is once we take out some of the impacts that we're seeing at the moment. There's still plenty of opportunities for strong growth in that business. And I think we're confident to deliver...

Yes. So growing 10% per annum at AAAHI, does that mean the CapEx will be more than $85 million because that 10% incorporates contract wins? And so we should -- if we're thinking about AAAHI growing 10% in FY '26, for example, CapEx should be higher than $85 million because you're actually winning contracts? Or is 10% just with the current bus fleet getting maintained? Yes.

I mean, I think to hit the 10%, we don't have to sort of [indiscernible]. But in terms of the specific CapEx, no, we don't anticipate, bar anything new coming along, that will push up CapEx higher than what's in the press for FY '26. So if there was additional CapEx for FY '26, it would come with a new contract.

Okay. And you said AAAHI EBITDA will be down year-on-year in FY '25. Is that in Aussie dollar terms?

In U.S. dollars. It's hard to guess what the U.S. dollar impact is going to be for FY '25. But certainly, U.S. is going to -- it's likely it will be down.

There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Feuerherdt for closing remarks.

Thanks, Rachel. Thanks, everybody, for joining this morning. I know there was a lot of information delivered. So hopefully, everybody can go away and digest that. But I do appreciate all the questions that came through. So thanks again for joining, and good morning.

Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.