WAM Global Limited (WGB) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Limited Annual General Meeting. This is a hybrid meeting held both online and in person here at the Museum of Sydney. I'd like to acknowledge the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation and pay my respects to elders, past and present. Thank you for joining us and for your continued support of WAM Global. Before we begin, a disclaimer is displayed on the screen, if you can please read that. My name is Geoff Wilson. I'm Chairman of the Board of Directors. And joining me today is my fellow Board members, Kate Thorley and Caesar Bryan. Joining us online is Gabrielle Trainor. At the far left at the end of the table is our moderator. Today, moderating questions is our Head of Finance at Wilson Asset Management, Ophelia Lam. We have in the front seat here, Richard King, a representative from our auditor, Pitcher Partners, who's with us and can address any questions that you have specifically for him. As it is just after 11:45 and a quorum is present, I declare the meeting open. The Notice of Meeting has been circulated to shareholders. And in the absence of any objections, I'll proceed on the basis of the notice be taken as read. I encourage you to read the Chairman's address, which is announced to the exchange. Also, we e-mailed the Chairman's address to shareholders. If anyone didn't get a copy of the -- an e-mail of the Chairman's address, please go on to the Wilson Asset Management website and register for e-mails because this is your company, and we want to make sure we keep you fully informed. Shareholders who have logged into the webinar with your user name and password will have the opportunity to submit questions online and ask audio questions as well as vote on the resolutions. If you're joining online, questions can be submitted at any time. For those that are online and wish to ask a verbal question, an audio question facility is available -- will be available during the meeting. Obviously, for those joining us in person, if you'd like to ask a question, can you please raise your hand and we'll get a microphone to you. Voting today will be conducted by way of a poll on all items of business. I'll now declare -- well, in a minute, I'll declare the voting open. But when I declare it open, I'll also -- just before the closing of the meeting, declare it closed. The -- when I open the voting, then a voting icon will appear on the navigation bar. Simply select the option to cast your vote. And if you change your mind, then select another option. I now declare the voting open on all items of business. And of course, you can vote at any time until the voting closes. The company -- now in terms of -- as I mentioned, the full -- the summary -- the full Chairman's address was lodged with the ASX and e-mail to you. I'll just touch on a few salient points. The company investment portfolio, and this is -- obviously, it's the -- the AGM refers to the period of full year 2024 to June '24. But since June '24, and that's probably a bit more relevant, I'll take you through how the investment portfolio has performed. It's increased about 9.1%, and that's until the end of October, and that's outperforming the MSCI Australian Index by 2.8% which is a solid performance. The profit reserve for the company is now after that outperformance, the solid performance is now up to quite a high figure of $0.783. And we might address this in questions later on, and a lot of people say with the profit reserve, why don't you pay a higher dividend? The profit reserve is an accounting entry. It's when profit is made on a monthly basis. And that doesn't -- and that includes both realized and unrealized profit. And in terms of the tax is only paid because this is WAM Global invests in global equities is there's no flow-through from franking credits from investee companies. So franking is created by tax being paid and tax is only paid when those realized profits -- sorry, when those profits are realized. So there can be a significant mismatch between the actual profit reserve and the amount of franking that can be paid out as fully franked dividends. In terms of franking, the fully franked full year dividend was $0.12. That represents a dividend yield of 5.3% fully franked or a grossed up dividend of -- sorry, of 7.6%. And obviously, everyone will be aware that the dividend being paid is significantly higher than the yield on U.S. equities or the yield on global equities, which are a little over that 1% between that 1% and 2% mark. In terms of -- now I'd like to just move to the formal part of the meeting. There are 5 items of business at the AGM today as set out in the Notice of Meeting. For it to be voted on, the Notice of Meeting and Explanatory Memorandum was circulated to shareholders. And in the absence of any objections, I'll be proceeding on the basis of these items have been taken as read. I note Boardroom are the returning officers for today's meeting, and we'll conduct our polls. I further note that resolution 1 and 4 are subject to voting exclusions as outlined in the Notice of Meeting. The Board recommends approval of Resolution 1 to 3 and recommends voting against Resolution 4. As Chairman, I'll be voting all open votes provided to me For Resolution 1, 2 and 3 and Against Resolution 4. We'll advise the ASX later today as soon as all the results have been determined. You may submit any questions or comments you have on the financial statements and the reports now. The first business -- sorry, the first item of business to receive and consider the Financial Statement and Directors' Report and Auditor's Report for the company for the year ending 30th of June 2024. Now I introduced you earlier to Richard, who's in the front row here from our Auditor, Pitcher Partners, if you have any specific questions for him. Are there any questions online?

Nothing, James.

No. Are there any questions in the room? Yes. Thank you. Thanks, Mark. Great.

What stands out in this financial statement most is the statement -- financial position, statement -- financial position that is Page 44 of the accounts. And those accumulated losses, that is yes, $215 million. It seems that in 2022, when we incurred those losses, we never got the losses back. I was just wondering how was that we never sort of got that money back. The market would have -- has moved up quite significantly since then. And this $215 million is -- seems like an albatross on us. We've incurred that. Have we learned anything from this? Or is this the foray into China that we were trying to do and it was a disaster?

Yes, it's not the foray into China. And yes, I could be -- I don't think we own any Chinese stocks. Well we own one, do we? Okay. But it's actually -- why don't I pass over to -- it's broadly accounting. But Jesse, the Chief Financial Officer of Wilson Asset Management. Jesse, do you want to address that and just take us through definitely how it works?

So just with the profits reserve, in a year where, say, in 2021, where we were positive in the market, we're obviously contributing to the profits reserve. In 2022, when obviously the market was down net negative, you do get accumulated losses there, and we don't offset them against the profits reserve. The main reason for that is to preserve the ability to pay dividends from the years that we've generated profit. We won't recoup the accumulated losses from an accounting entry in the balance sheet that will stay there, but it doesn't mean that we haven't generated performance in 2023 and 2024 that offsets that. It's just an accounting concept between the profits reserve and accumulated losses where you quarantine your profits and you -- in years where there's losses, they go into accumulated losses and they will stay there. So it's just an accounting concept to preserve the ability to pay fully franked dividends down to yourselves as shareholders.

So can those accumulated losses be used somehow? Or is it against any further profits somewhere along the line or?

Well, if we were to -- say, if we had a year where we had $200 million of profits and we put it into accumulated losses, what that would do is that amount in the balance sheet would go to 0. But what would actually that mean is that we wouldn't be able to pay shareholders a fully franked dividend of $200 million. So we wouldn't want to do that from an accounting concept because we want to preserve the ability to maximize our dividend payment down to shareholders. It's just a year where we've had losses. We leave them in that column. We don't need to recoup them. You can, but what that does is limit your future ability to pay dividends.

It's a good question. So broadly, you could have a situation where -- so the company starts with $100 million, so a new company floats, has got $100 million. In the 6 months to December, the portfolio goes up 50%. You don't buy or sell a share. So you're up to $150 million. You put $50 million in the profit reserve. So you got $100 million of shareholders' funds plus $50 million in the profit reserve. Then between December and June, the portfolio goes back down to $100 million. Now -- so then what your balance sheet will be at June 30, a year later, it will be -- you've got $100 million of shareholders' funds. You put $50 million in the profit reserve, but then you got to offset that. So then you'll have $50 million of losses in retained earnings. So it looks like you think, oh, well, I just -- what about the $50 million of losses, but all it was, was a transfer of profits to the profit reserve. Yes. Does that make it as clear as, Mark? Sorry. But we had a question there, yes.

I think I saw in the accounts is like 6 years of future dividends to be paid.

Yes.

Just tell me if I'm wrong with this analysis, but there's franking credits are also part of that. So there must be a lot of franking credit.

No, the franking credits aren't part of that. That's just purely the profit reserve. So the example.

If you pay dividends from them, wouldn't there be franking credits attached?

No. The example I just gave you, we start with $100 million, just all happens within a year. It goes to $150 million. You put $50 million in the profit reserve, then the value of the portfolio comes back down to $100 million. So, then you've got $100 million of shareholders' capital, you've got $50 million in the profit reserve and you got a $50 million loss. You can pay a $50 million dividend. But you've made no money, you've sold no shares. You have no franking.

The company has been paying franked dividend.

Because when we realize a profit, we -- no, I'm just giving you a theoretical. I'm not saying this is like the NTA has been going up. So we've actually made money. And when the part of the portfolio is sold, then if it's a realized profit, then we pay tax. And so then when we pay tax, then we've got the ability to pay a fully franked dividend. So the fact is the profit reserve is there, but if it hasn't been realized, if the portfolio hasn't been realized, then we pay no tax. And so therefore, we can't pay -- there's no franking in there.

Okay. So if the $50 million was realized then tax would be paid and franking credits would arise.

Yes, correct.

So that's -- okay. So of that nearly 6 years of profit reserve, are you saying that, that can't be paid out?

Well, it can be paid out, but it's an unfranked dividend.

That's one of my questions.

Yes, we could -- like we could pay a $0.70-odd unfranked dividend today.

Yes. We've got about 1.5 years of franking as well. So we -- like the profits reserve and the franking, they're linked. They're not 100% correlated. We will have profits reserve, but we manage the franking account separately. So we've currently got sort of 1.5 years dividends locked away franking to keep fully franking those dividends, and we manage the future cash payments to ensure we've got sufficient franking to fully frank those dividends.

Okay. Yes. Well, I guess the point I'm raising is, which a lot of LICs is holding fairly high amounts in the franking account. It doesn't sound like that's the case here, but just urge the Board to get franking credits out quickly as possible.

And before they disappear.

Exactly.

We're all nervous, we're all nervous. Yes. Please?

Darius here, Darius Patrick. So with this example when the company goes up to $150 million, right, then goes down by $50 million. So then we are back at $100 million. What would happen if the company were to close the business at that point of time?

What could happen is we could pay -- so if it was then back at $100 million, you could pay $50 million out as an unfranked dividend and $50 million as return. That's what could happen in that scenario. or you could just do 100% return of capital back.

Okay. Perfect. Crystal clear. We just got another one back there. Profit reserve, it's tricky. It's worthwhile spending a bit of time to understand it.

Mr. Wilson, just going back to that $100 million, that's a huge figure. I'm just wondering, okay, it went up -- the market went up and then it went down. Yes. But how did we get that -- where did that big loss come from? How did...

It's just accounting. In theory...

Which shares did we lose on? I mean I understand the accounting but how do we lose the money?

No, no, no, this isn't us. This is just a hypothetical. But effectively, I mean, to me, this is why no -- no, I can't get on my high horse now, I was going to say taxing unrealized gains. I won't start there. So why don't we take this offline? Yes. I mean we've had a good discussion about it.

Just simply, so in a year where the portfolio is up 10%...

I understand that, I'm just asking which shares did we lose the money on?

So that was just the hypothetical...

We made a huge -- with the accounts, it's a huge loss, how did that occur? And have we learned any lessons from this loss? Are we going to do it again? Or what's going on?

Probably a question we can maybe talk about in the panel. I mean, 2022, the overall market was down as well as the portfolio. So 2022, global markets and obviously, domestic markets were down, our portfolio was also down. So it was a spread across -- we had some shares that went up in value, but we also had some shares that went down in value. So it was the overall portfolio was down, which was obviously a reflection of where the markets were at that point in time as well.

What I'm trying to find out is, was this relating to -- we went into a lot of investments into China and those investments did not go well. Is this the reason why -- and which shares do we lose on? And how come -- we never got the money back. never -- the market never went back up for us.

Maybe we take it offline...

Yes. Okay. The -- and we can -- we're here 12:30 to 1:30, very happy to have general discussions. So let's back to the Financial Report. The -- so that was the questions. Any other questions in the room? Yes. We just need -- okay. So this is the last question on the -- sorry, we can keep taking questions. It doesn't have to be the last. Yes.

6 years profit reserve seems a lot. Would you consider a special dividend?

Potentially. The tough thing is with global equities, our ability to keep getting franking, so is very questionable. So as a Board, you sit here and think, okay, we've got 1.5 years of franking. If the market falls, then we will pay no tax and we'll get no more franking because we don't get the flow-through. So what's the risk. But I know -- but if the portfolio gets realized -- if more of it gets realized, there's more tax paid, because as Jesse is saying, there's a timing difference. Like if we're sitting on -- hypothetically, if we're sitting on 6 years of profit reserve and the ability to pay 6 years of fully franked dividends, then as our friend on franking, then that's far too much. So then a special dividend, it's better off having the franking credits in your hands rather than in the company. So look, good question. Thank you. In terms of -- so there's no resolution on that. Yes?

On the Page 51, with the dividend franking account balance going up from $5.7 million to $13 million. So did we actually sell some shares in a portfolio to generate that?

Yes, yes. Yes. Okay. So Resolution 1 relates to the adoption of the rem report. If anyone has any questions online, please submit them now. Are there any questions in the room on the rem? No. Any questions online? No. The proxies received are on the screen. For the open proxies, which have been granted to the Chair, I'll be voting in favor of the resolution. I now put the motion that the resolution be approved as set out in the Notice of Meeting. Please vote in the room or vote online. Resolution 2 relates to the re-election of Kate Thorley. Kate, would you like to say a few words? Yes, I think you should, who are you?

Just quickly, just in case there's people online that aren't obviously in the room, you've heard multiple times this morning about my background. I mean, prior to joining WAM and being in the Wilson Asset Management team in the last 20 years, I worked in London and Dublin as a chartered accountant. And I guess just following on from what we were saying earlier about Wilson Asset Management and how we've grown over the last 25 years. I mean, not only have we been able to significantly attract really high-quality investors into the team. We've also been able to -- I was reflecting actually during the break, Geoff and I used to write all the communications and we'd sort of -- so we now have, I would say, best-in-class communications and marketing, again, sort of Investor Relations. All of that takes a huge amount of investment and something that we really pride ourselves on. So we always say, make sure you send in your feedback, make sure you send in your questions. If you ever ring the office and no one rings you back, then get my mobile number and let me know because to me, we're managing your capital. So it's incredibly important that we're available to you as a team, the investment team, but also the management team. So thank you.

Thanks, Kate. Any questions online for Kate? Any questions in the room? No. The proxy voting, let's just go through that. All the open proxies that are granted to the Chair, I'll be voting them in favor. I now put the motion that Ms. Kate Thorley be re-elected as set out in the Notice of Meeting. Please vote either in the room or online. Resolution 3. And the proxy is not up there. If we could just put the proxies up. Thank you. That's great. Okay. Resolution 3 relates to the re-election of Caesar Bryan. Caesar, would you like to make a short speech? Actually, why don't we -- maybe -- is that a good one or one of them wasn't working earlier. Do we...

Is this a good one? All right. Thank you, Geoff. I thought I'd just give a short treaties on franking. I really -- I'm delighted to be here with you in person and to be visiting Sydney after 6 years on the Board. As you know, I'm standing for re-election to your Board, and I'm seeking your support. Just a few words about my background. Since 1994, I've been -- worked as a portfolio manager and analyst at Gabelli Asset Management, a New York-based fund management company with about $53 billion under management. And I've covered international equities and precious metal equities. Now in the U.S., international equities means non-U.S. equities. I think here it has a slightly different meaning, meaning non-Australian equities. I began my investment career in London at Samuel Montagu having qualified as a barrister. The bank sent me to the U.S., and that's where actually I stayed and indeed met Geoff in the late 1980s in New York City when he was working for a leading brokerage house. More details of my background are in the explanatory memorandum and in the annual report attached to the notice Of this meeting. In addition to my experience in equity investing, I'd like to highlight my involvement with managing LICs, listed investment companies in the U.S., they're known as closed-end funds. My firm Gabelli manages 14 of these companies with about $12 billion in assets, and I'm actually the co-manager of a couple of them with about $1.3 billion in assets. In summary, I believe my work experience in equity investing and managing LIC investment portfolios is relevant to my ability to represent all shareholders, all of you on the Board of WAM Global and also to play a constructive role in helping your company meet its objectives. So in closing, I ask for your support to continue as a Board member of WAM Global, and thank you for your past support.

They're very professional there Yang, even though he's -- you've been over there too long, Caesar. Well done. That was good. That was good. As any questions online for Caesar? No Stephen Mayne, he's logged off, Stephen? That's good. Any questions in the room for Caesar? Yes, yes. There we are. Lunch time. Okay. Do you have a view on -- we've got a couple of minutes now. How are we going for time?

I think fairly positive outlook. Foreign overseas non-U.S. central banks are adding to their reserves because of the perceived change in the geopolitical structure and the requirement to have an asset that nobody else's liability, which gold is. And many of the gold equities, which is what I'm involved with seem to be quite inexpensive relative to the price of gold. So I think it's a reasonably solid outlook.

Any more questions for Caesar? Yes.

Just to ask in the context, Caesar, of your background being based in the U.S. So you're arguably more familiar or your focus is U.S. law and all of that sort of thing. So my question goes to the fact that this is an Australian instrument, what acts or activities do you have to do to keep up with Australian law and framework and context so that you can do the role that you're doing?

I don't think my role is really one of being an expert in the Australian legal and regulatory framework. I mean rather, I have experience in LICs, my firm does as well. So the overall issue of discount and issuing stock and things like that. And then hopefully, in meetings, I can ask questions about the investment strategy and the portfolio on a quarterly basis and indeed be available in between meetings. So I'm not somebody who is representing you, I think, in terms of the Australian regulatory. Of course, I listen to everything and I go through the training programs.

Thanks, Caesar. I'd like to go and hear you over there at an AGM. He's very good, isn't he? So the proxies -- let's put the proxies up on the screen. Yes, well, that's right. Anyone want to -- you can change your proxies. No. For the open proxies that have been granted to the Chair, I'll be voting them in favor. So I now put the motion that Mr. Caesar Bryan be re-elected as set out in the Notice of Meeting. Obviously, if you're a shareholder or a proxy holder in the room, please vote and anyone online, please vote. Resolution 4 relates to the conditional spill resolution in relation to the company's remuneration report. This resolution 4 will only put to the AGM if at least 25% of the votes validly cast on Resolution 1 are against that. So does that -- we got to keep going? Okay. While there's currently less than 25% of the proxies validly cast on Resolution 1, that's why we got to keep going. The poll is not yet closed and Boardroom has not yet formally counted the votes. Come on boardroom. For abundance of caution, which is us, total abundance of caution, voting instructions on Resolution 4 will also now be collected. However, shareholders should note that shareholder voting on this resolution is subject to and conditional on 25% or more of the votes cast in Resolution 1 -- being cast against Resolution 1. Once the poll is closed and Boardroom has formally counted the votes for Resolution 1, subject to and conditional on 25% or more of the votes cast on the remuneration report Resolution 1 being cast against Resolution 1, to hold an extraordinary General Meeting of WAM Global within 90 days at which, a, all directors in the office when the resolution to approve the directors' report for the financial year ended 30th of June 2024 was passed and who remain in office at the time of the spill meeting cease to hold office immediately before the end of the spill meeting. And b, resolutions to appoint persons to offices that will be vacated immediately before the end of the spill meeting are put to the vote of the spill meeting. You may submit any questions or comments you have on resolution 4 now. Caesar, you might be here for long. So do we have online, do we have any -- no. In the room, do we have? Yes. Please.

How did this motion come on to the board...

The motion came because last year, we had more than -- we had a strike on the rem report.

Did we?

Yes.

Goodness. I must having a sleep during that meeting then, fair enough.

We've got a question up there.

Just a question on the procedural matters. If there isn't a spill -- sorry, if there isn't a second strike, then why is this item on the agenda? Why isn't it withdrawn?

It's because -- just in case, because they haven't been everything -- like we can look at the proxies. We look at the proxies and we're going to do it, but then you just don't know who's not in the room. If I was a betting man, it's highly, highly, highly improbable. Am I allowed to say that? Sorry, our lawyers here. I'm probably not to say that, to say that. So I am a betting man. Sorry. So thank you for that. So could you please -- the proxies are on the screen. There they are. Yes. Well, the problem is a lot of people -- even some people that may be on the Board, I'm not saying that may have voted because you're all used to voting For -- we're used to voting For. And so I don't know if that's a true reflection. But anyway, the votes are the votes. So it doesn't really matter if it's true reflection or not, the votes are the votes. So the -- all the proxies that are open, which have been granted to the Chair, I'll be voting Against. And we've done all the questions. So I note that the Board has recommended that shareholders vote against the resolution. Now I put the motion that the resolution be considered as set out in the Notice of Meeting. Anyone in the room, if you could please vote, anyone online, if you could please vote. I'll now declare the poll closed and formally charge Boardroom to count the votes. As I mentioned earlier, the results will be announced to the ASX when they're ready. Again, I'd like to thank you all as shareholders -- sorry, as there's no more formal business, I declare the AGM closed. I'd like to thank all you shareholders -- Sorry, we have one general business question.

Yes. It's Jess from [indiscernible] Proprietary Limited. And the question was, I noticed that there was a high churn in the portfolio over the last 2 years. Is that driven by the need to generate franking credits? Or is it due to an investment mandate?

Yes. So why don't we get Catriona to answer that, who's the lead PM.

Sure. So in terms of the turnover, it's about 60% and that's really a reflection. Some of the holdings have been in the portfolio for the -- the life of the fund, and it depends if they're research-driven ideas that still fit the process, we don't sell. They haven't hit their valuation targets, whereas if we have individual stocks that have hit levels of valuation, and we can't identify catalysts, then we will sell. There's been a couple of points where we did -- the turnover went up, and that was in Trump's first term, when the tariffs first got announced, we did change a bunch of stocks in the portfolio. And when we had the Fed pivot and then COVID. So there are 3 points in the life of the fund where the turnover has gone up. And other than that, it's been much further down.

Yes. And so the second part of the question is the answer is no about franking.

And just for context, it was actually quite low compared to some of the other portfolios we hold. It was 0.62x in 2023 and 0.44x in 2024.

Well, and that corresponds with the answer.

We've got one more question from Jeremy Tang, and that is, will the Board do right by shareholders and offer a mechanism to exit at NTA? Other LICs have done so. The persistent share price discount to NTA has not gone down in many years.

What was that last bit?

Has not gone away in many years.

Yes. No, that's a fair point. I mean the discount -- our plan is to get to trade at NTA, if not a premium. To me, one thing people forget about listed investment companies versus, say, ETFs or other investment vehicles, they can trade at a discount NTA, which provides -- well, the old Warren Buffett theory, if you're a hamburger manufacturer, what do you want hamburger meat to do? Do you want to go up or down? If you're an investor, you actually want -- you want the discount to become bigger. But let's put that to one side. And the difference between the closed-end fund and the ETF is the closed-end fund can trade at a premium. And we've used -- we mentioned examples earlier for those people that weren't here, like WAM Research, it took us 7 years to get it to trade at NTA. To me, why do people sell? They sell because there's a -- because what they're expecting -- well, either need the cash for something else or what they're expecting, they're not -- it's not -- the company is not delivering on. So if you get -- if everyone who's an investor is happy with the investment, then they -- and the investment is delivering what they want, then they remain as shareholders. If you have all your shareholders not wanting to sell, which we ended up having with WAM Research, you get a situation where WAM Research got to a 58% premium. And that's one of the beauties of the closed-end structure, A, they can trade at discounts, but also they can trade at premiums. In terms of shrinking the size of the closed-end funds, I'd like to -- I'll pass over to Marty McCathie, who's done quite a bit of research on the logic of doing buybacks and whether it works in closed-end funds. I'll give you the conclusion -- it works in operating businesses. It doesn't work in closed-end funds.

You stole my punchline. Thanks Geoff. And look, it's something Jeremy and I have spoken about in the past, but I guess for the benefit of everybody in the room today and those online as well, there is a number of LICs in the market currently conducting buybacks. And as Geoff said, the conclusion is pretty clear, it doesn't work. What you're doing with the buyback is you're bringing into the market short-term demand, which is offsetting some of that supply, but you're shrinking the potential future liquidity of the company, which has follow-on effects. And ultimately, we've got a really strong view that to change the dynamic for a premium and discount, you've got to take away, as Geoff said, take away that supply and generate demand. So with WAM Global, I think we did a phenomenal job last year in reducing that discount. We took it from an 18% discount at the start of the financial year. And at the end of the year, it was around 7%, 8%. So we materially reduced that discount. Obviously, we've got a bit of a way to go. More recently, in the start of this financial year, the discount has widened slightly, but on the back of strong performance. So it's not that the share price has fallen or the NTA has fallen as the share price has lagged the strong performance of the team and it's a bit of that concertina effect. And we see that happen and sometimes just a bit of a lag. So I think we've a firm view that buybacks don't work and confident we can get it to trade at a premium. It does take time. And the inroads we made last year was a great first step. And as a business, we're very committed to getting it to NTA parity, if not a premium over the next couple of years.

Perfect. Why don't I just -- that's a good note to conclude on. Look, thank you for that question. And if there's -- had I closed the meeting? I should have -- well -- Anyway, I'll make sure the meeting -- the voting is closed and the meeting is closed. Thank you very much.