WDP Aktie

Good morning, everybody. For the first time, we are not all together in the same room for an investor call, the proof of our growing European platform. Too much business to do. So we have to spread our spendable time better between clients and investors. Yes, our new 2030 vision announced with the full year results landed very well internally and externally within team WDP, our clients and our investors. It boosted our enthusiasm to build out the EUR 10 billion-plus platform for tomorrow. And yes, we made a perfect start by gathering already new building blocks towards 2030. One, by enforcing our international team and also by assembling on building out in the short term, a new unique land bank from Zwolle to Marseille together with interesting add-on acquisition developments, redevelopments in all our countries.

All of this is fully supported by more and more clients asking to do business with us in more countries. Since my statement, we can now offer solutions from Helsinki to Madrid and Rome. And all of them will be realized step-by-step in the coming quarters, of course, all fitting within our EUR 500 million investment envelope per year. So I can say with confidence that we are seeing a lot of activity in the different business segments we are in, even though we are still living in volatile times. And this is really a big difference versus a year ago. Back then, almost everybody was waiting for more stable times. Today, people are increasingly accepting that volatility is there to stay and that we have to handle with it. And for the short term, Q1, of course, can never deviate really from what we announced 2 months ago with the full year results and the outlook.

So yes, we can, of course, confirm our EUR 1.6 earnings per share guidance for '26. And the most important news of this report is that we replenished the investment pipeline with EUR 140 million new investments consisting of 4 new pre-let developments and an add-on acquisition at an NOI of 6.9%. And so we keep the pipeline in execution at EUR 700 million. And we also signed 100,000 square meters of new leases across the developments and kept the occupancy within the normal foreseen levels of 97% to 98%. So a clean sheet to steer even with all the volatility around this. Time for Q&A. Alexander, the floor is yours.

Good morning, and welcome to the Q&A. [Operator Instructions] We already have the first question in line from Marios. [Operator Instructions]

Great. I've got 2 questions from my side. I'll ask them one by one as mentioned. So firstly, you mentioned this morning that you see demand broadening, you've got larger space requirements selectively coming back to the market. If I look at your leasing volumes and the proportion of leases renewed through Q1, I think this was running lower year-on-year. And of course, we've now got the renewed uncertainty around the conflict. So how are you thinking about leasing volumes through the year? Should we expect an improvement? And are we on track to get to that 90% renewal rate?

First, indeed, demand and the renewal rate is also depending on and can differ from year-to-year on the moment when the renewals will be there. There can be a lot of renewals in the beginning of the year or in the end of the year. But in general, let's say, like we said, we see a lot of activity. There is more and more demand in the smaller spaces, let's say, there, we have already since last year, a normal market, in the market up to 10,000 square meters. As from September, then we have seen new strategic partners and strategic decision-makers coming back to the market because they said, look, we can't wait for more stability. We go for it. We have a vision.

We think that we can also use the moment versus our colleagues who are still hesitating. And now since the beginning of the year, we also see new tenders for bigger spaces. And so more and more, everything is normalizing. I think if we are still missing one thing, then indeed, you can say, okay, there is no economic growth yet. So let's say, the normal daily extra square meters that we have, one, economy goes up. So the cyclical square meters there, let's say, people are still hesitating because yes, economy is not yet retaking. So -- but we are, let's say, confident about the demand and the occupancy.

Very clear. And then just secondly, on country managers now in place across Italy. What are you tracking there in terms of portfolio opportunities to ramp up exposure? And how should we think about the timing of this coming through?

Well, we always said that the new countries are part of our '27-2030 plan, but that we will engage them now in order to prepare the future. And let's say so, we -- and they are just, let's say, engaged. Spain started the 1st of March. Italy starts the 1st of May. But let's say, now we are onboarding them. They will make a plan about the market, about how the competition is handling, about where are the possibilities, the opportunities for us. And so now they have the time to prepare. And then at the right moment, they will come with a development or an acquisition. So let's say, we did it now instead of waiting and having a portfolio, we hire them upfront, but let's say, give them also a little bit time to get and to learn our DNA and to learn the markets and go forward. So it is indeed within the 2030 plan.

The next question is coming from Frederic from Kepler. [Operator Instructions]

I hope you can hear me. Just one question on the renewal on existing lease. I'm not so sure you mentioned at which level of rate these were realized. So can you comment on that? And maybe can you give a comment on the ERV growth on your respective market for Q1? That would be the first question.

Mick, will you take this?

Yes, I'll take that one, Frederic. The lease renewals were done at the ERV, so at levels in line with the spread between contractual rents and ERV and let's say, between 7% and 9%, that was, but we can confirm those ERVs. And then the second part of the question was the ERV trend across the markets was flat, which is also normal with a bit of market volatility. But the good thing is we are capturing the spread.

Yes. The fact that we are now at 7% instead of 10% means that we can capture the potential and then it can go up again.

And then can you maybe comment a bit about -- because you are referring to the fact that you are seeing more appetite for larger units. So to -- can we conclude that for the upcoming months, you should be announcing something relatively large, a bit to the same extent that what you have been announcing in Antwerp, for instance, in your development pipeline?

We have to see -- let's say, we have to stay cautious. But yes, we see people -- we see big demand like indeed, the Antwerp development is a very nice one. I think this is a good example. And yes, of course, it will be not the last one on the contrary. But say, it's too early to say when will it still be before summer the intro. We see much more activities, and there will be very nice things to come in the near future.

The next question is coming from Suraj from Green Street. [Operator Instructions]

Just one question from me. Could you please provide some color on how construction costs are trending in real time across your key developed markets given the conflict in the Middle East? It will be interesting to hear your thoughts on that.

Let's say, it's a combination of 2 factors. First of all, indeed, there is some, let's say, nervosity with our contractors about, yes, those elements of their materials who are, let's say, linked to oil prices like isolation, of course. But on the other hand, there is also not a lot of work. And that is the difference versus, I would say, the post-corona time, then you had indeed prices exploding of materials, and there was a lot of work. And then indeed, the total cost -- of the total construction cost went up. But now, let's say, there was still a downward trend since there was less activity. And yes, there is now -- they are, let's say, thinking, have I still stock?

Can I already reinvoice extra price, they try to, let's say, use those elements. So -- but on the other hand, there is not so many work. So I think today, prices are flat and at a low level. But yes, depending on how long it takes, depending on the problem in the Middle East, there could be for some elements, a little part, higher part, but it's not like -- it's not the same like after COVID. There is still demand -- less demand, so for new buildings so the margins are lower. And I think today, it's compensated and prices will, let's say, at least very well and not a problem to do profitable projects.

The next question is coming from Vivien from Degroof Petercam. [Operator Instructions]

I had a question on the investment market. Just wondering of what you've seen in terms of new assets portfolio put for sales, if there is still, I would say, a new portfolio put on the market since the conflict? Or do you expect some, I would say, lower liquidity and therefore, lower opportunities for you to acquire assets on the market?

I think no, I said the contrary in my intro. There I said that we see a lot of possibilities, a lot of activity that we are negotiating some very interesting acquisitions, let's say, in all the countries. So no, I cannot say that there is less liquidity. On the contrary, let's say, since the beginning of the year and since last year, I think there is more and more liquidity and that didn't stop, let's say, the last month, no. More than enough possibilities for us in all the countries.

Perfect. And then a second question was on the contribution of solar energy. You made some comments in the press release. I just wanted to get a bit more detail there and if you could provide any guidance on what to expect in the future quarters and the contribution to the top line.

Mick, you will take this?

No energy, you mean, Vivien?

Yes.

For the income from energy, we look at the full year number, and then we can still confirm what we have in our budget in the guidance. You can also see the details in the annual report in the order of magnitude of EUR 26 million for the full year.

The next question is coming from Paul May from Barclays. [Operator Instructions]

A couple of quick ones from me. First one on the vacancy rate movement and the disposals you've done. Are the disposals -- the disposals have an impact on that vacancy rate in terms of how they've moved that? Or is that purely just an underlying operational movement? It should be quite a quick one and then I've got a second question.

First of all, on the disposal, no, that didn't have an impact because that disposal already happened of the Belgian side happened in Q4. So in Q1, it was the normal usual movement of tenants and it's fully in tune with our budget and which we guided for at the start of the year that we see a normal occupancy rate in a normalized market of between 97% and 98%. And this small quarterly movement just reflect the usual tenant movements.

Okay. Perfect. And then second one, you mentioned obviously in the opening and the last question about acquisition opportunities definitely being there and I think if anything potentially increasing given higher rates for some of the owners of those assets. How would you look to fund those? I think at the full year, you mentioned if there was a large transaction, you'd happily equity fund it. But obviously, your leverage position has been creeping up. I just wondered how you're thinking about that with these increased opportunities on the acquisition side that you mentioned?

Well, first of all, Paul, I mentioned that we see indeed acquisition opportunities, but that they all fit. I added that clearly, that they all fit within the EUR 500 million investment envelope we have every year. So today, they are perfectly fitting in. But like we mentioned at the full year results, if there is a special extra transaction at a certain moment, then we will investigate it, and we will put it against our cost of capital at that moment. And then, let's say, we can see what we do. But the most important thing is the fact that we have EUR 500 million a year. And let's say, this is as from '27 to 2030, even EUR 2 billion we have during 4 years to invest. And everything today fits perfectly within that EUR 500 million envelope. And if there is more, like we said, then we will investigate it. And if we can create value, we are open to do it. And if not, we will not do it.

And just to check on the create value, is that more an income-led view? Or is it an asset value sort of NAV-led view? I think in the past, you've been more income led, but just to check.

Income-led.

We want to -- our main metric is earnings per share creation and having on all the assets, a solid correct risk-adjusted long-term total return -- property return. That's how we look at it.

The next question is coming from Ana from Morgan Stanley. [Operator Instructions]

My question is on your outlook for market rents, so ERVs. I believe that in the full year results, you mentioned that you were expecting market rental growth to come back in line with inflation and in the long term, maybe above inflation. However, the first quarter, we've had another quarter of flat ERVs roughly, and therefore, your reversionary potential is compressing. So yes, I just wanted to know how are you thinking about this, particularly as with inflation going up, you would probably see a little bit more of this reversionary potential in the absence of ERV growth.

Yes, but that never follows so fast. Yes, there is, again, a little bit more inflation. And so yes, that will be -- and we still believe that ERVs will grow at least for the short term with inflation. But let's say that has to take some time. It's not quarter-on-quarter, we have to see that in -- and indeed that, let's say, the inflation went up just the last month and that, let's say, ERVs are not following month-on-month on that, but that's, let's say, on a yearly basis more you have to look at on a yearly basis and in the longer term. Mick?

Yes, absolutely confirmed.

The next question is coming from John from Kempen. [Operator Instructions]

Just one on the like-for-like rental growth. I noticed it dipped a bit over Q1, but guidance for 2% is still reiterated for the full year. Is there a timing or base effect in here to bring it back to this level? Or do you expect occupancy to really materially improve here?

I think the figure we show is broadly in line with what we guided for at the start of the year. There, we said a like-for-like rental growth expected for the full year around 2%. And we, at that moment, said within indexation will be a bit less than 2% for the full year. We have around 50 basis points coming from reversion, and that would be then partially offset by the impact of temporary vacancies related to tenant movement. So what you see is actually in tune with that guidance.

We also have one question for you, Joost, in the chat coming on cold storage. Can we -- can you give some additional feedback on the exposure to cold storage and the attractiveness that we see in that submarket compared to conventional warehouses?

Well, indeed, it has always been a very interesting segment within our business since indeed, you need to, let's say, you can make better warehouses, there is more equipment in. And then indeed, let's say, in those warehouses, people stay longer and more and more -- let's say, more and more products need to be in cold warehouses and the legislation everywhere in Europe is getting up. So the requirements are indeed more severe. So let's say, more and more goods needs to be in cold storage.

And there is still, let's say, in cold storage, there is less activity and I would say, less buildings available. So there is almost always full occupancy in cold warehouses. Cold, meaning them, let's say, positive between 2 to 4 degrees or around 10 degrees. Of course, then you still have the deep freezers too, also a very interesting segment since indeed, there is less supply in those things, and we are able to develop them and more and more clients are wanting it. So it's a very interesting add-on segment in our business and growing.

[Operator Instructions] In the meantime, also to highlight there are no further questions. Some of them have already been covered, so we can cover them again off-line if need be. And that said, there are no other people in line to ask a question. So I will give the word back to you, Joost, for any concluding remarks.

Okay. Thank you, Alexander. Indeed, we are only 2 months further than the announcement of our new vision and so that cannot deviate. But I think I can just repeat 2 things, indeed that we have a clear ambition towards 2030 with a very clear goal. We want to create a fully integrated EU platform providing total supply chain infrastructure solutions. And above that, and again, based on Q1 and the long term, where we are already building forward, we can say that we are delivering today with a vision for tomorrow. And so above-average growth with a below average risk profile. Thank you all. And we stay, of course, always available for all your further questions about this and about the future towards 2030. Thank you all, and have a good Friday.

Good morning. Wolvertem calling. Welcome team WDP wherever you are in Europe. Welcome also to the readers of the TET and LeKo and of course, welcome to our investor community. And I think we can say it's a good morning with the happy team around me for the Presentation of the full year results, '25. If we look to, let's say, other operations and the operational results, we can say, we delivered again a clean sheet with an EPS of EUR 1.53. It's an underlying growth of 7% year-on-year, an occupancy rate of 97.7%, more than 0.5 million of square meters new leases, a portfolio growing to EUR 9 billion, all backed by a perfect balance sheet with a loan-to-value of 40% and a net debt to EBITDA of 7.5.

And as an [ exam ], we could indeed -- we can also use our balance sheet now as a real value enabler with our new rating, our A3 rating of Moody's, which gives us a top 5 balance sheet within the quoted real estate world in Europe.

And if we look then a little bit close into our operations, we can really say that we did a perfect job. About 550,000 square meters of new leases, we can say that the WDP platform can capture market demand more than our market share. We secured EUR 600 million of new investments at a net initial yield of 6.8%, which means also that we could keep our investment pipeline in execution at a very high level, up EUR 700 million with the same expected net initial yield.

And of course, for all this, the funding is in place. So we can really say that we are in full execution and fully on track to reach our EUR 1.7 EPS target for '27. So yes, indeed, we see the EUR 1.7 in '27 at the horizon, and we are fully on track. Yes, we still have to lease further and to execute our investment pipeline, but we see that most of our new initiatives are already looking beyond '27 and are value creating beyond '27. So this makes that we have to look further and that we are ready to extend our horizon.

So yes, we extend our horizon to 2030 with a clear goal and a clear focus. Our goal is to scale into an integrated EU platform, providing total supply chain infra solutions with our classical focus, delivering above-average growth with below average risk profile.

And this brings us to BLEND&EXTEND2030 as from now so much more than just a financial hedging project, it becomes a real plan, a real plan based on our proven building blocks, yes, built. Yes, there is structural demand and we are able to capture it.

Yes, we will continue to load it with selective acquisitions, new developments in existing and in new markets like Spain and Italy. Yes, we still can further extract value from our internal, from our existing portfolio with indexation, rental growth and active asset management. Yes, we will neutralize further by adding total energy solutions and keep on decarbonizing the logistics supply chain. And yes, of course, we will stay disciplined. What do you want with Mick. Besides me, I have to stay disciplined and create value with risk-adjusted capital allocation. So a proven, scalable, multi-driver model that brings us and let us grow further into the future. Mick?

Yes. Thank you, Joost. Now how does that strategic picture translate into our target setting for BLEND&EXTEND2030. We believe that we can continue the envisaged EPS growth rhythm of our '27 plan and roll forward the attractive plus 6% average growth rate towards 2030 translating into an EPRA EPS of at least EUR 2 by 2030. Also, considering that we already generate a very high recurring cash return on equity of 7%, 8% to start with, even with a minimum portfolio revaluation of just over 1% per year, we believe we are set for double-digit total returns throughout the period of at least 10% per year, measured as NAV growth plus dividends paid.

The key assumption here is that we have a fully internally funded EUR 500 million CapEx per year. Why EUR 500 million? Because that way it is designed to be independent of external equity raisings considering the higher cost of capital versus the past so we can make the 5-year plan fully internally funded, which we believe is a very strong message and attractive.

How can we do that? Well, we have a recurring yearly strengthening of our equity of EUR 250 million to EUR 300 million being a combination of retained earnings, stock dividends and the regular contributions in kind. Hence, that should enable us to achieve that growth and maintain a stable capital structure with net debt to EBITDA staying around 8x and a loan to value around 40%, fully in tune with our top-tier A3 credit rating.

On the next slide, you can see our multi-driver approach at work. As we have been seeing over the last couple of years, we have adapted ourselves to the current environment and a more complex world and the way we create value. And what we try to do is build layers. We have a first layer of internal growth coming from indexation, rent reversion and active asset management initiatives, then we add the impact of external growth, a balanced mix between acquisitions and developments, and we add another layer of our energy investments.

And yes, we can cope with the cost of debt reset, which is manageable and only gradual and for which you can find more details in the remainder of the presentation. But combined -- and that is important, it gives us an average plus 6% throughout 2030, leading to, as you said, above average growth for the below average risk.

Now turning to the outlook for '26. We have an EPRA EPS guidance of EUR 1.60. So that's 5% growth year-on-year with the key underlying assumptions being in tune with the drivers just mentioned, a combination of internal and external growth. And that's important as well, operational and financial KPIs staying strong with occupancy rates above 97% and in line with the long-term average and also with stable leverage metrics.

This figure is also looking robust already now at the start of the year as most of the work has been done, and our teams are now working in full force to get to that finalization of the EUR 1.70 in '27 and are very eager to start the work for the 2030 plan. Joost, over back to you.

Thank you, Mick. So we can say that we are ready to build the platform of tomorrow from a regional leader in the past to a core EUR 10 billion plus European platform, where we can use our scale in order to help our clients with cross-border solutions. We can do it efficient and profitable. And so enabling total returns and indeed, very important for us as a real estate company, this gives us a superior access to capital. And for this growth, we will be supported further by the next-generation of the family, De Pauw, who showed again their long-term commitment as a reference shareholder by appointing 2 new directors in our board.

And besides this, we're also strengthening our Board with more international knowledge. And this is also important in order to become a real European player. So yes, indeed, we are ready for delivering today with a vision for tomorrow. And this all will generate an above-average growth with a below average risk profile. And now I will give the floor to Alexander in order to answer all your questions. But before we do that, we give you just a little overview of some recent real estate projects. See you in a minute.

[Presentation]

[Operator Instructions]

Before we address the questions, maybe the first important one, Joost, what's your take currently on the market?

Indeed, I think the first question of you all is still demand. And there, we can be -- give you -- we can give you a clear answer. But more than 0.5 million of square meters new leases in '25, a normalizing occupancy range between 97% and 98% and a normalizing retention rate around 90%, we can say that demand for logistics real estate in Europe is normalizing from the exceptionally high during the pandemic years towards the multiyear pre-pandemic average with the market balance gradually improving as tenants optimized their inventory and operations and new developments remain disciplined.

Why is the pickup of market demand still depends on consumer spending and business confidence? The last quarter, we really witnessed an improving leasing momentum by our commercial teams. Of course, demand is still more dynamic for smaller and high-end units up to 10,000 square meters, but it is now also selectively extending into larger-sized units, mainly for those clients that are able to take strategic decisions in the still volatile world. And this is an important sign.

And more recently, we even see some cautious, bigger tenders in the market again. Demand is mostly originating from specific sectors, such as food, pharma, e-commerce as well as strong performing companies expanding their market positions. Our commercial platforms remains well positioned to capture that demand. Considering our high-quality portfolio, it's about having the right building at the right location besides, of course, our deep-rooted international network and our flexibility to adopt buildings to meet the client needs.

Looking ahead, the medium- to long-term fundamentals for logistics and industrial real estate remains positive, underpinned by limited land availability, constrained supply and the continued need for more resilient and regionally diversified supply chains. As I said in my intro, a resilient supply chain is not a nice to have, it's essential infrastructure.

Thank you. The first question is coming from Marios Pastou from Bernstein.

Perfect. I do have two from my side, I'll ask one by one. So just firstly, on the capital allocation across our country mix, can you maybe give us an idea of the order of priorities as part of your plan 2030. Will France and Germany be a priority, for example, as that's been your target for the last couple of years. The Germany hasn't really ramped up yet? Or will his be purely opportunity-driven?

We never give that split of our intended capital allocation because the moment we say X, the next day, it will be Y., but so it will be a balanced mix across the geographies and yes, if we can do something more in the new markets, then it's always a plus of course.

So this is not purely opportunistically driven. There's no kind of priority in terms of which market to enter.

Where we can generate the value measured as EPS growth with a good long-term solid total return.

Okay. Very clear. And then just secondly, in terms of the establishing the presence in Spain and Italy, are you looking land bank. Are you looking for existing portfolios with upside potential? And maybe give us idea of how many opportunities you're currently tracking there?

Well, I think there, we will look as to those countries as we did in the past and as we do in every other country. So we will go -- first, let's say, there will be 1 difference. Before we always said, we need first the portfolio and then we go for a team, and I think we learned from Germany, which is, of course, a very difficult country that it is better to have first a country manager than letting them make a plan and then indeed starting it.

So we will first go for country managers, letting them make a plan, and then we will go into the countries with a plan and that will depend on -- and it will always be a combination like in blend. Yes, we will look for existing portfolios. Yes, we will do the developments. And it's all based on with what can we create value that can be with an existing site, with a development, it will always be the combination. That's the reason why our plans are called blend, a combination of internal and external growth.

The next question in line is from Suraj from Green Street.

There's a couple of questions from me, I'll also do it one by one. First one is, I guess you touched on it a little bit, but just on the desire for a presence in Spain and Italy. I appreciate you can't necessarily give any sizing by 2030, and you did touch on your approach. But just taking a step back and thinking higher level, what's kind of drawing you into these markets, what do you really like from a supply and demand perspective?

Well, I think, first of all, we add them to the portfolio because it's logic. We come from the Benelux added France and Germany and then we go down so that we can offer better more international solutions to our clients. That's the first idea. And then for the rest, yes, it will indeed depend on opportunities and possibilities. And yes, it is part of the 2030 plan, but within the capital allocation of the EUR 500 million per year.

Perfect. Very clear. And just a second one, again, it's quite broad just on the Benelux as a whole. I know you mentioned the demand drivers earlier and occupancy has been increasing within your own portfolio. Do you think the vacancy has peaked for a wider market within the Benelux? And what are your thoughts for future rent growth?

Yes. Suraj, maybe just a small add-on on the overall market. So what we basically have seen over 2025 is a bottoming in take-up levels over the first half of 2025. Q3, Q4, that data that is still out, you currently see a quarterly take up in most markets, and that's in our core markets as well as in Romania. When it comes to vacancy, stabilizing between 4.5%, 5%. What you, every now and then, see is when you look at the key figures of country level, you might see an increase in outlier in France, for example, 6% or in Netherlands.

It's around 5%. But when you look through to micro levels, you typically see that, for example, in the Randstad, it's closer to 3.5%. So there, we actually see that the underlying vacancy is also very low.

And as Joost already mentioned, it's also supported by land scarcity, permitting grid connection, which is also creating challenging times to add new space. So that's in terms of the spot vacancy that we see in the existing markets. When you then look at new construction starts, it's also broad-based down with 50%.

Typically, you have closer to 5% of total stock being delivered every year, that's already down to 2.5% as well. And it's also 80% plus pre-let. So that's in terms of vacancy and in terms of rental growth.

Yes, on the market rental growth, we think the most logical picture would be that -- and the logic that in last year was a bit more difficult markets that it stayed flat after years of a very strong increase. The good thing is that we can really achieve those ERVs. And in some cases, we can also improve them by improving further the buildings. And the most logic thing would be when the markets as we expect starts to further recover that ERVs would first grow back in line with inflation. And then afterwards, in the mid- to long term, they would grow with inflation plus given the scarcity element and the importance of having lands and also now more and more power available.

The next in line is Wim from KBC Securities.

Yes. Congrats on your BLEND30 programs, especially in these uncertain times come out with such a long-term view. I also got one question and a small follow-up. My question is really on the internal financing. And I fully understand that you now give an outlook of EUR 500 million CapEx, mainly internally financed. Now although the market I believe is expecting because of your premium [indiscernible] to NPA that you might consider also rating equity.

Now Joost answer to this, and I've heard many times is that, and I think also Mick mentioned that in the presentation, your cost of equity is too high. Recently, you had participated in the Catena issue. So my question really is how much do you see or do you need your cost of equity to decline or your share price to increase before you start thinking of, let's say, becoming a bit more aggressive on raising equity and maybe then growing also faster in certain regions that you've been eyeing or where prices have been too high.

Well, that's something we will not comment on, Wim, because then we start the speculation. We think the most important thing is, Wim, that we can have the internally funded CapEx of EUR 500 million per year and that we can achieve 6% growth to at least EUR 2 per share. And yes, if we see attractive opportunities generating a return above our cost of capital at that moment because cost of capital moves every day, interest rates moves, share price move. And then we will, obviously, when we see an accretive opportunity, we will not hesitate to use our share like we have done in the past when needed. But the most important thing is we can get to the EUR 2 fully internally funded.

And also do not forget that we manage -- do not forget that we manage the capital structure on a forward-looking basis. And so with the EUR 250 million to EUR 300 million of equity coming in each year, already reduces without investments 3% the loan-to-value and 0.5x the net debt to EBITDA. So that's a very strong machine we have going on.

Let me try it another way because I fully appreciate that you want to avoid speculation, but there is now exact speculation on something that might come where you think differently. So as I reiterate it, so you recently participated at Catena. Can you confirm that your cost of equity would be around the same of Catena data that...

But I don't think the link to Catena is really of importance. We supported Catena as a reference shareholder and maintain our 10% strategic stake, and we support the company, which is doing very well. And with respect to WDP and equity raising, I will quote what the famous Belgian politician once said, "we will deal with it when the opportunity arrives and then we will look at what our return on that acquisition is versus our cost of capital at that moment."

And that's what Catena also did. They had a big opportunity, and then they looked at it and then they use -- let's say, based on the opportunity they had, they raised equity in order to make a creative deal. That's it.

Okay. Let's -- just for a short follow-up. You also mentioned contributions in kind. Can you give an indication of what size that could be? Is -- are you thinking EUR 20 million, EUR 30 million, EUR 50 million max or could that be also a bigger size?

No. For the EUR 250 million to EUR 300 million per year, we have around EUR 100 million of retained earnings, EUR 125 million coming from the stock dividend and EUR 70 million, EUR 75 million of contributions in clients like we do each year, around EUR 50 million per year.

The next question is coming from Jamie from [indiscernible].

Congratulations on the results and thanks for the update. I have just one question. What occupancy assumptions are embedded in the 2030 EPS target and how sensitive are these to occupancy falling given you're already operating at high levels today?

Well, what we foresee in the BLEND2030 plan is that the occupancy stays around these levels and above 97%, which is normal and fully in sync with the long-term average.

The next one is coming from Pierre-Emmanuel from Jefferies.

Actually, the first question is a follow-up of the previous one. So on the 2% like-for-like rental growth that you're targeting for 2026, so first one, how much is coming from indexation and reversion on top. And if I'm looking at your 2030 target, what is the average like-for-like rental growth that you took at the main assumption?

Yes. So on the like-for-like breakdown for '26. So you know we have a guidance of like-for-like rental growth this year of around 2%. And the composition is that the inflation component indexation is a bit less than 2%, and then we had 50 basis points through the rent reversion and then minus 50 -- around minus 50 basis points due to the occupancy rate, and that is solely linked to tenants moving in and also a bit of frictional vacancy because yes, we were used to fantastic pandemic years where when a tenant moved out, then the next -- there was the next tenant coming in, and the rent just continued.

Now you have just the normal typically -- typical short void periods like you have in a normal market like in the past and actually going towards that 2030 target, the organic growth we foresaw is pretty much the same as in '26, apart from the occupancy part, of course, and that we can then have inflation plus -- capture inflation plus with 2% average indexation, and we can capture per year around 50 basis points of reversion above indexation. That's the assumption in the 2030 plan.

Okay. That's clear. And my second question is on the vacancy for 2025. What would have been the impact on vacancy if you would have kept the empty assets that you sold at the beginning -- at the end of the year -- of last year. And on top, can we expect more disposals of empty buildings in order to keep the vacancy below 3% in 2026.

The first one, I'll take that one. Joost, the second part, the impact was around 30 basis points.

And concerning, let's say, we are always looking for the best value creation and doing good asset management indeed, normally, we don't sell assets. But sometimes, when it is -- let's say, when you can do an interesting deal, we are always open when, let's say, it creates value for WDP. Like, for example, at the end of last year, there, we could sell -- okay, it was a big unit, but it was a small unit in the bigger port of Liege, where we have, let's say, a very small position where -- we're only the third player on that side.

So there was not -- we had not a lot of power to create value and then we could sell it to the neighbor. An example of a strategic buyer who said, "look, this is probably a once in a lifetime moment. So I'm ready. And I, of course, will have to pay the right price." But when he pays the right price, we said, okay, you can have it and you can buy it instead of renting it and then we could directly reinvest it from local Port, the Port of Liege towards the Port of Paris with a new strategic investment and a new strategic client Seafrigo.

And yes, if we can do similar deals in the futures, we are always open for that, but always with the idea that it has to create value for WDP and not just selling a building because we want to sell something. We don't need to sell anything, but active creative asset management, we are always open. Like I said, sometimes you need to be creative and sometimes also a little bit contrarian.

Understand. And just a quick follow-up. In your 2026 guidance of vacancy below 2%, does it take into account potential disposal of empty buildings? And on top, maybe it would be interesting to guide us through the lease schedule in 2026, how many leases are at risk, how many tenants are -- may leave in 2026?

Yes, we are back at a retention rate at a normal retention rate of 90% and today, from the 10% tenants with a break in '26. There is already, let's say, almost 2/3 are already prolonged. So -- which is more than the -- the long-term average of 50%. And now there are no further, let's say, sellings of buildings foreseen in the plan in order to keep the occupancy high or higher.

The next in line is Francesca from ING.

I have just a couple. The first one is about the assumption that you took about the cost of debt over the 2030 plan? The second one is about the...

One by one.

One by one, please. Yes, for the cost of debt assumption, we took into first for the base rate, the forward interest rate curve. So with Euribor rising from 2% today to a bit less than 3% by 2030 and the swap rate rising from 2.5% to 3%. And then with the margin added, we are below 100 basis points, which is what we currently pay for 5 to 7 years debt. That's the assumption.

That's fine. So I move to the second question. How much of the [ EUR 1 billion ] in investment spending that you have for 2030 is going to be devoted to the Energy division? And what type of hypothesis you took behind this type of investment?

Yes. So the -- for the Energy division, it's a bit less than 10% of the EUR 500 million per year, so around, let's say, EUR 40 million per year and it's composed of the further rollout of our solar panel program and will go to 350-megawatt peak by '27. And there afterwards, we -- it will further grow in line with new development projects. Then secondly, we have the on-site batteries we are installing. And then we also have by commissions, by '29 a big stand-alone battery projects for which we just obtained the grid connection, which you can see on this slide in the green area.

And that's the bulk of those investments. And then we will also add some first pilot projects in EV truck charging in mobility hubs as it is foreseen that our clients will and transport will change towards electrification.

But there, it's too early -- already too early to make bigger assumptions on that because of what is happening now in the world around geopolitics, energy, self-sufficiency. So we believe that, that could come for a later plan. But that is the assumption we took, and you should take into consideration as there's profitability of solar panels then, let's say, 8% IRR, 10%, 15% yield on cost for the battery, it's around 15% IRR and 20% yield on cost. And those elements should bring us to a doubling of the revenue towards EUR 50 million in 2030. So I hope that's sufficient color.

Yes. And then maybe my last question in the development costs, an important part is the [indiscernible] development project, development pipeline. Can you share your feeling about development cost for [indiscernible]? Do you -- do you experience any [indiscernible] about the overall operating...?

Well, we would say that over the last years after COVID, they have declined towards a level which is now broadly stable depending a bit on where you have -- how much work the construction companies have or per project or how big it is, but in general, they are okay and stable.

And we can generate -- we can with those with the current construction cost, we can generate the targeted returns and let's say, the most distinguishing factor to achieve return -- the desired return on a development project is the availability of land, the cost thereof and the availability of power. These are the most important determinants of a development project today, right, Joost?

Yes. But the good thing is that, let's say, we can create value with a combination. It's not only that we need developments to create value or that we only can buy. No, it is the combination. And you can do an acquisition. And based on that acquisition, there can be an extra development. So it's really -- the value is in the combination. It's not about developing or doing acquisitions or entering a new country. No, it is that combination, that blend element, that is really we blend everything and then we can create value. That is the most important future looking.

The next in line is Paul from Barclays.

Thanks for presentation. Just a couple of questions from me. Just first one on the depreciation of the solar and other energy. I think currently running about 45% of the revenue is depreciation, which given there's arguably 0 value on solar panels are used up and batteries are used up. Surely, that is a cost that should be included in your analysis and probably shouldn't be added back when looking at your net debt to EBITDA just rather you're only taking 100% of the positive and 0 of the negative in your debt metrics. So I just wonder your thoughts on that and how that is included and you talked about in your plans?

Yes, it will be reflected in the end in our balance sheet as these investments come in the balance sheet at their fair value as they are for the property. And we believe the income -- the recurring cash income should be included in the EPRA -- in the EPRA earnings and also to take into consideration that the solar panels last a long time in the last 20, 30 years; batteries, 15, 20 years, depending on the intensity of the usage.

But if you use them faster, then the income will have been higher as well. So yes, there is no land component like in the buildings. But yes, buildings are, in essence, also depreciating and we take the view that, that is more a revaluation component, and that will be reflected in the balance sheet rather than in our EPRA earnings.

Okay. I mean it's quite different given the 0 value, but that's fair enough. Just coming back on the leverage question, leverage continues to increase, which is sort of counter to what we're hearing most investors want companies to do. They tend to want leverage to move in the right direction rather than the wrong direction there, which is the way you've been going.

I appreciate your comments around the cost of equity, but have you or the Board considers it -- looking at your company more in the U.S. way, so looking at implied cap rates rather than necessarily a made-up cost of equity, which nobody really knows what the answer is.

And if you compare you to Catena, for example, you're trading pretty much exactly the same implied cap rate and yet you are happy for them to issue equity but not happy to do ourselves other than a payment in kind, which is an issue of equity or a scrip dividend, which is effectively an issue of equity. So just wondering why you have a different view on sort of your equity to Catena or others? And why not looking at it from an implied cap rate basis?

Well, we look at it from an implied earnings yield, so in first price earnings perspective, because that's the metric we need to look at to generate earnings per share growth and then it will simply depend on the opportunities. We will not -- we have not said we won't do it, we said if we don't need it for executing the growth plan, which we believe is a fantastic statement and reassuring also for you, the investors, that it is self-funded to achieve already 6% growth throughout 2030.

And we have said that we have -- when we see attractive opportunities, generating an accretive return above our cost of capital, then we will not hesitate to use the share. That's how we are in it.

And the cost of equity between WDP and Catena, there is a big difference still today. We are at a 7% earnings yield and Catena was at or is at a 5.5%, let's say, cost of equity. So there is still a big difference. And so then indeed, they have a better cost of equity and it was in combination with an opportunity where they could create value. So there, let's say, we followed, and we also say indeed that, that was a good deal and the right moment to do that. But it's really still the difference in cost of equity is still very big, and we are still below the sector average, while price earnings are today at 17 around for our sector, and we are still around 14. So our cost of equity is still higher.

Yes, and we are aware about the comparison you mentioned that we are a bit higher in leverage than our U.S. counterparts, but then on the other hand, we are much lower in a debt-to-EBITDA, which is the metric that matters in a European perspective. And also, we believe that having the A3 rating also gives us somebody to -- as in a story an act of confidence in our balance sheet strength towards the generalist investors and also do note that our balance sheet is still based on values per square meter less than EUR 1,000 on average.

I hear that. I mean, I think, surely, that looking at it from an earnings yield basis, you should adjust for your current cost of debt, which is lower than it than marginal whereas Catena is more in line with marginal costs given the variable exposure. So that's a large reason why they have a lower earnings yield than you do is that their debt is already repriced, whereas your debt will reprice at some point in the future.

Hence the reason looking at on an ungeared or implied cap rate basis where you're basically trading at the same level. Let's say, a U.S. company would be looking at your equity and saying, issue equity every single day because it's cheaper to use your equity to buy assets. The market is overvaluing you on an implied cap rate basis. I think your equity is cheap, by the way. So as a separate point, hence the reason I wanted you to...

We agree to disagree. That's no problem, and we appreciate having exchanging the opinions.

The next in line is Fred from Kepler.

Just a question on my end. Maybe the first one, can you describe a bit the evolution of the ERV in your respective market, please? And how do you see it evolving in 2026 and just to link on that, you described an uptick in leasing momentum, also potentially for larger unit. Do you see more incentive to be given? That's the first question.

I think on the ERV, you answered it. So short term, it was flat. And now as the market starts to pick up again, we believe it will move back in line with indexation and in the mid- to long term inflation plus because of the scarcity element and then on the leasing momentum.

Indeed on incentives, we can say that it is not a matter of pricing, so not a matter of incentives, it's about, am I ready to jump, do I meet that building? Do I can create value? Our clients also have to create value in by renting a building? Can they use it in a positive way and let's say, when they say, if I can use it, then let's say if they pay the price, there are not so many possibilities most of the time in the building they want on the location. So it's not a price discussion on the contrary.

And I would say it would be only a matter of incentives I give for every empty building, 3 months' rent free and if everything would be rented, then I'm a happy man, but it's not the case. It is, am I ready to jump and then people pay the price. And indeed, most of the time, those prices are higher than the tenant who was in before. So everybody accepts the new price levels.

All right. And then the second question on Catena. What has the company brought to WDP excluding dividend since you have this 10% stake? Because it seems that -- I mean, to refer to the question of Paul, but the company trades at a higher multiple than yourself, which means isn't there a better use of your capital allocation today, just wondering?

We believe it's a strategic stake and are very happy with that. The company is performing very well as said, and we are happy with that long-term strategic stake because we could never cover that -- those markets by ourselves, and now we can also offer solutions in other countries through Catena, we can help and reinforce each other. And we recently also did a deal with ...

Indeed. And I think now, I'd say we did that not as a short-term opportunity, but as a long-term partner in order to be able and to become, let's say, a company that can offer solutions, let's say, from Stockholm and soon from Helsinki up to Madrid and Rome. So then we can offer to our clients total solutions on a whole Western Europe.

This is important, and it is over the short-term cycles. And indeed, for example, the deal in Le Havre with Seafrigo, well, that was also, let's say, Seafrigo is a client of Catena before. And so Catena could introduce us and there, we could use the combination of clients, for example. And for us, it's really about long-term helping clients and giving -- being able to give a total solution to our clients and core Western Europe.

All right. And therefore, does it mean that if you find, for instance, like company in the private market, which is active in Spain and in Italy, would you be happy to take a minority stake in order to invest indirectly into the market?

No. That will not be the case.

No, there we really set...

We said we do it by ourselves.

The next question is coming from Steven from ABN.

On a specific question on Le Havre where you added investments. Any comments on the region and more specifically on where we are with permitting for your land there. And we have this project contributing in '27 or in 2030 and adjacent to it, do you see risk on permitting as a result of the coming regional elections.

Dunkerque, yes, there, let's say, we are still waiting for permits. We have had a problem with the permitting time due to a bird like it sometimes happens when their strikes down a bird during the right period, you can do nothing. They have to investigate. So we got a longer option. And normally, but yes, in France, it can take a long time. We will -- we should get the permit, let's say, by the end of the year. So it will take still a long time.

But in the meantime, of course, it is only an option, and we are not owner of the land, so it doesn't cost us anything. But that's just -- there is no specific reason that just the normal procedure in France, it takes 2 year to get your permitting and here due to the bird, then it will be 3 year, but that can also happen, let's say, in the Netherlands or other regions, yes. Permitting is taking time everywhere.

Any potential risk of the local elections, could that be risk in your view?

I think no, not really. I'd say there are always everywhere elections in Europe, there has been elections that are also elections, if I'm right, in the Netherlands and in France. And -- but let's say, logistics is not politically sensitive, it is a strategic sector, the strategic infrastructure.

So let's say, we don't depend on, let's say, the local or more political waves.

And we also invest in industrial zoned land.

And then we have one more question from Alex [indiscernible]. You're currently unmuted. Just for the other questions that are in the activity feat in the chat. As we try to respect the time, it's getting close to 11:00, we'll address them, but we'll reach out to you directly. The floor is yours.

One question on the scrip dividend. What's your assumption in your EPS growth target there?

Yes, that we do it in line with the historical of minimum 50% take-up rate.

All right. Thank you very much. So this currently concludes the Q&A asset. We'll address the other questions in the chat directly. Any concluding remarks, Joost?

Yes, of course. Thank you, Alexander. And to conclude, I can say that indeed, and thanks to our platforms, our strong fundamentals and our DNA of being effective, creative, entrepreneurial. And now and then a little bit contrarian, that DNA that Tony and I created together the last 25 years, well, that DNA makes that we can deliver today with a vision for tomorrow. So we are ready and looking ahead to 2030. Thank you all, and see you soon.

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to our Q3 update. First of all, this quarter will always be marked as the summer of the sudden passing away of our beloved Tony De Pauw, my company compagnon de route. Together as a perfect complementary couple, we built WDP together since the IPO of '99, based on the fundamentals of his father, our founder. I can assure you that together with the family, we will continue to build our European dream, a EUR 10 billion plus core Western European logistics and industrial real estate company with an add-on in Romania, based on our ever-lasting principles: being effective, creative and sometimes a little bit contrarian.

And in order to create our dream, we added the last missing element onto our financing strategy: a full operational EMTN program based on our new updated A3 rating of Moody's and our inaugural green benchmark bond of EUR 500 million with a unique margin of only 80 basis points. Once again, we show that we do not only create value with our assets, but also with our liabilities, and it is not included in our NTA. We are sure that this rating and our EMTN program has not only a value for our debt investors, but also for equity investors, especially the generalists.

Since our new credit rating brings us in the top 5 balance sheets of EU REITs. Special congrats to the long-term discipline of Team Finance. And besides that, of course, we also delivered once again on our promises: a clean sheet across the board. An EPS of EUR 1.15, 5%year-on-year, fully in line with expectations. Full year guidance of EUR 1.53 EPS confirmed. And as mentioned, of course, supported by the unique balance sheet with liquidity and auto financing in place.

And we also continue to demonstrate the strength of our commercial platform in a stable but owned market within a volatile world, probably for longer, and we will have to cope with it. Volatility will be the new normal. We realized 400,000 square meters of new leases signed this year across the existing portfolio, ongoing pipeline and new developments, with an occupancy of 97.4%, slightly higher. With all maturities in '25 resolved, 90% renewed, 10% re-leased or in current vacancy. An investment activity of EUR 475 million, bringing the total investment pipeline in execution to EUR 700 million at a 6.9% NOI yield, 80% -- 83% pre-leased after, of course, the deliveries of the running developments and acquisitions.

So as mentioned this summer, we have now all the building blocks in place to realize #BLEND2027 and confirm our '27 guidance of EUR 1.7 EPS. Almost halfway the 4-year period, we now have to build the house, which means executing and letting. And for those who doubt, let us be clear, #BLEND2027 is not the end. Our ambition is to create profitable growth with strong total return to go far beyond '27, based on the following foundations: the solid long-term fundamentals of the logistics and industrial real estate sector, and by internal value creation, especially through the E in BLEND, extracting value out of the portfolio by the land bank, rent reversion, indexation, occupancy, upgrades and so on.

But now first, time for Q&A with Alexander.

[Operator Instructions] And the first question is coming in from Steven from ABN.

I have several questions on occupier demand. First, a general question, so what do you see happening in occupier demand? And maybe second, to more...

Steven, can you ask them just one by one? Apologies.

Yes, sure. Maybe start with the specific ones. So the news that Amazon will invest EUR 1 billion in the coming 2 years in Belgium. Do you expect that to be in existing assets or expand only in their existing -- or sorry, for the existing assets or in new space? So that's one on Amazon.

Well, on Amazon, I think Belgium is the Benelux, first of all, and indeed, it is across the board in different things. They have some small buildings, which, of course, they will use first. And above that, they will also stay working with partners like bpost and PostNL. So it will be very broadly. And let's say, it will be a little bit everywhere within their total supply in their website, in their infrastructure. But let's say, that is not EUR 1 billion in extra space. I think in the end, if everything is successful, they will need more space, but it will be very broad and it will take some time.

Okay, clear. Then another news item...

In the end, it's always a good sign that a new player because Amazon is almost not active in our region, that let's say, a new player is entering the market.

Yes, very clear. That's good news. Then maybe another news item is that different countries, including the Netherlands, but also France and others want to add additional costs for small e-commerce packages to target the Chinese e-commerce players. Maybe already as of the 1st of January. Do you think that would materially impact demand for logistics warehouses?

No, it will have no impact on the warehouses. Let's say, that can make that some players, but let's say, who are just importing, it can only make the existing European e-commerce business bigger, let's say. So we don't see any negative impact on that.

Clear. And then maybe zooming a bit out just in general, occupier demand. Is it better today than 3 months ago, 6 months ago?

Well, like we said, I think let's look last year after summer. Then everybody came back from holiday and everybody was looking internally, okay, we go towards the end of the cycle. And we go into a little storm or a more heavy period, how can we protect what we have, protect our supply chain. Let's say, everybody looked inside and now since June, let's say, since the summer, now people are indeed, they reorganized, they optimized and now they are ready to look forward again. They look forward again. They are looking how can I optimize further? How can I invest in my supply chain? But of course, they wait for consumer spending to really do and make the decisions, but everybody is looking forward again. And I think this is a big difference versus, let's say, a year ago.

But indeed, we have to wait until consumer spending is really getting up here. And on the contrary, for example, in Romania, you see that consumer spending is growing, and then we can do developments like, for example, action who is there entering that market.

The next question is coming from John from Kempen.

On your credit rating, your latest bond issue demand was quite strong. Like you said, I think it was 80 basis points credit spread. What's the difference in the spread between being A rated and BBB?

The difference between the previous rating, BBB+ is around 5 to 15 basis points and it will be around 50 basis points versus a BBB.

Okay, 5 to 15. And how does it compare to your underwritten cost of debt in your #BLEND2027? I suppose this upgrade to A rating is not necessarily part of the #BLEND2027 plan.

No. But indeed, it will not change the '27 outlook, but indeed, there is a financial cost synergy to be captured because our existing debt. Has a credit spread of around 120 basis points and for an average historical of duration of 7, 8 years. And now we signed based on the A- rating. We did on the A3 rating of Moody's, we did a benchmark bond of 5 years at 80 basis points. So there is some synergy to be captured, but over the horizon of the maturity of the debt, obviously.

It's like a rent reversion. It will come, but it will take time.

Okay. Clear. And just on your commentary, I think in the press release, you're talking about that momentum is healthy for smaller units of up to 10,000 square meters. Would you consider adjusting your pipeline with the product that you're building to capture this demand?

Yes, but it's broadly. It's also in the existing portfolio. It's in the new demand, like, for example, the development in Prinsenhil, which was all more urban high-end logistics spaces, but less than 10,000 square meters. And there, indeed, we feel that, I would say, almost a normal market, but it is in the bigger demand that there is still very selective.

But yes, a lot of our sites are indeed constructed to be able to rent them. Let's say, if we have a 30,000 or 40,000 building -- square meter building, sometimes it's really already foreseen in the building that we can split it up. For example, for sales of 10,000 square meters. So we have always been flexible to, let's say, to capture the demand. I think this is very important that we are, as a company, as a commercial team and with the buildings, very flexible, able to capture the demand of the moment.

A good example is the building of Ericsson, where we had the break of Ericsson just prior to the delivery and for which we were fully indemnified, of course. That was the news of end of last year. But look at that building. It's a top-notch building, 30,000 square meter, and we can split it up in units of 10,000. We can use it for standard logistics operations or for semi-industrial. So that's a good example of how we build multifunctional warehouses.

Okay. Clear. And just as you alluded to the demand for the existing portfolio, you signed 100,000 square meters in Q3. I suppose part of it is also on the existing portfolio. What reversion did you capture on that?

On the -- so that everything is signed at ERV. So it's not a question about price. It's a matter of does that client need to take a decision already? And everything is signed at the ERV. And for the units signed in the existing portfolio, that is consistent with the reversionary, so plus 10%.

The next question is coming from Marios from Bernstein.

I've got 2 questions. I'll ask them one by one. So firstly, as we approach 2026, can you make any comment on the progress with lease renewals for the first part of next year? Or is it are we still a little bit too early?

Well, it's still very early. We just ended '25, let's say, at the end of July, and that's the -- when you close '25 and then you start up '26 in the beginning of September. So let's say, we just started up on that, and we start talking with our clients. But let's say, based on those first client -- on those first talks and conversations with our clients, we expect today that we can keep the normal retention rate around 90%.

And above that, for next year, specifically, there are no large concentrations in our tenants. The largest contracts are around EUR 2 million, so only 0.5% of the rental. And based on that, we have the confidence to keep the minimum 97% occupancy, as mentioned earlier. But of course, it is very early. And indeed, we will be able to give a first real detail and a first real forward-looking in our full year results at the end of January.

That's very clear. And then just secondly, I see there are a couple of projects in the Netherlands that have been delayed to the end of 2027. Is this isolated? Or is there a risk that, that could extend to others as well?

No, that is just linked to the connection with the grid. In the Netherlands, there are -- it's very difficult to get grid connections. And we are, let's say, now in good talks to get the grid connection, but it will take longer. And that's specifically for Schiphol case. So yes, it is a little bit lower, a little bit further, but only due to grid connection.

The next question is coming from Francesca from ING.

I'd like to have your thoughts on Germany because you are halfway to your 2027 plan, and you clearly reiterated your German ambition. We see other companies, other competitors pointing to Italy and Spain as interesting market at the moment for acquisition. Also, you had some time to get familiar with the Nordic markets via Catena that you entered in 2022, 2023. Can you share your thoughts on these markets besides Germany?

The BLEND project that we would, let's say, enlarge the Benelux with France and Germany. So we are fully focusing on those markets. And for the rest, of course, there are a lot of good markets besides that. And within every market, there are good places and less good places, but we focus on our strategy. And indeed, so we cannot comment on, let's say, all the other European companies or European countries, sorry.

But do you see interesting opportunities passing by coming from Italy and Spain, for example, or is something that is totally...

We are concentrating -- Francesca, we are looking to deep. We are making a team in France and now building up a team in Germany. Let's say, we have no people in other countries. So we don't look at those countries. We are fully concentrated on our own operations. And let's say, we don't look at all the other 20 countries in the European Union, where there could be -- there are good things to do everywhere in every market, but we concentrate on ours.

That's fine. I'm asking just because it seems Germany is difficult, not just for you, but also for other players. That's it.

Yes, of course, Germany is difficult, but it's not because it's difficult that we don't have to continue. Romania was also difficult 15 years ago. And the first 10 years, we did 100,000 square meters, but the next 8 years, we went up to 2 million square meters. So you have to continue and to persist in your long-term strategy and even when it's difficult.

And do you think that -- I saw that you opened the office and you had hired a country manager. Do you think you have enough resources to cover such a big investment market?

One by one, we do it. We start at the beginning of the year with one person, the Country Manager in France. In the meantime, we have there a fully equipped team of 7 persons. So there, we are, let's say, in full force. And now, yes, indeed, in Germany, we have only 2 persons, but we started now as from the 1st of September with our Country Manager. And for the moment, he is fully assisted by the Dutch team. So he can do -- he can start up. But yes, we will also, let's say, go for a full team in Germany. And let's say, now we can start. And if I say 2, it is already 3 because we have also already a third person now for Germany. So yes, our country manager will build up his team full by now.

Okay. And do you see the investment market changing over the latest months? Or is the situation seen there to the beginning of the year?

I think the situation in Germany is still the same. It's still very difficult, very difficult because prices stay very high. And we want to grow, but only in a profitable way. We don't go for growth or growth. And yes, with the team, we will come to -- we have a basis, we are building up the team. We have time, and we want to do it in a good way. And in the meantime, we have France.

Yes. And another little question about the pre-letting ratio because I see it seems to be stable compared to Q2. Is that impacted from the summer season? And how do you see this evolving by year-end for, let's say, for the coming months?

Pre-letting in the existing portfolio, in the pipeline.

The pre-letting, I think there is -- the pre-letting stayed the same. And of course, the third quarter is always, let's say, the quarter with the less activities then you finalize, let's say, Q2, the end of July, then August is holiday and then September, you just restart. But okay, because indeed, we are with the same pre-lettings, but we could add a new nice development in Romania. So that's also then it was not a higher pre-lease, but a higher -- with a new pre-let development.

And also, it's difficult to forecast on a quarterly basis. What is important is that we believe in the project. We have confidence in leasing of the projects, and so you should rather see towards the end of the project and everything that we have delivered so far has been fully occupied, fully leased up at delivery. And it's also a very limited portion of that pipeline versus the overall portfolio.

The next question is coming from Vivien from Petercam.

I hope you can hear me. I wanted to have a follow-up question on John regarding the smaller units. I just wanted to understand from your vacancy, how is the share of small units? And to that extent on occupancy, where do you see occupancy going by year-end? I think that you improved it from the low point of Q2 that you referred in the Q2 result. But could we expect further improvement by year-end? I know that your target is 97%, but I would assume that a quarter of letting should improve the overall occupancy by year-end. That's my first question.

Well, let's say, we -- it depends on let's say, it doesn't matter where a client rents. If it is in the occupancy or, let's say, as a new pre-let in the developments. So it will depend on where we can sign things. Yes, we are negotiating different files with different clients, but it's, let's say, difficult to say now if this will be in the existing portfolio in, let's say, in developments ongoing, not let, or in new developments. That's too early and too difficult to foresee.

And on your other question, which is the portion for smaller units and bigger units, that's also, let's say, like we mentioned before, it's very flexible and it can be a whole of 50,000 square meter, can be rented as a DC of 15,000 square meter or can sometimes be leased 3x 5,000 square meters or 10,000 and 5,000. So -- and we can adapt those buildings. That's the flexibility and the power of our commercial platform, we can put an extra wall in it. So there too, it's not -- we cannot say and we can change that depending on the place on how the building is. So it's not that [ 6% ] is smaller units, y% is bigger units. It really can depend.

Okay. Then I have another question on the investment market and the opportunity in value-add or core plus assets. Do you see any increasing competition that could put pressure on price? Is there any sizable portfolio you see on the market? Just feeling about how much opportunity you see currently on the market?

Well, there, let's say, the good thing, we -- of course, we look at the market. We see things happening in the market. And the big advantage for us is that we don't need to do anything. And we can look at it if there is something interesting, complementary value adding to the portfolio, we can do it, but we don't need to do it. We can concentrate on the existing portfolio, the pipeline. So -- but indeed, there are -- but yes, value add that it also has to have a complementary value within your portfolio. But it is a normal competition and not -- that did not change, let's say, versus a year ago. It's the same market.

Okay. Then I have a final one. I'll kind of address everything in the room here as we approach end of the year and that #BLEND2027 is fully secured. You put forward the auto financing capacity to seize additional opportunity beyond this plan. What will happen if you see very large attractive opportunities? Do you think you could raise capital at this stage at these price levels -- share price level, sorry?

I will quote a famous Belgian politician who said, "It's a hypothetical question, and we will deal with it when it comes." But then we will do like we have always done, can we create value? What is the return we can achieve? What is the earnings per share accretion we can achieve? What is the total return we can get on this deal? Is it complementary to the portfolio? What is the marginal cost of capital to fund it based on constant capital structure? That's how we look at it, and then that's how we have always done it with a strict discipline to allocate capital and with a strict discipline on the financial side.

The next question is coming from Suraj from Green Street.

Just a quick couple of questions from me. So the first one is just digging into the 2026 lease expiries a little bit more. I know you gave some color. Is it possible to share what kind of splits are across your markets or maybe asset types if possible? Just any color there? That's the first question.

It's really broad-based and very general, a perfect representation of the portfolio, I would say. And it's also, as you said, in the 40% of leases maturing, it's really scattered across the portfolio of types of buildings and maximum rent in one building of one client is 0.5% of the rental. So it's really very much distributed.

A normal year.

Okay. Perfect. And then the second one, more of a general question. Is it possible you provide some color perhaps on how construction costs are trending real time across your key development markets. If you've got any sort of anecdotal sort of information you share there, that would be very useful.

Let's say, as there is, in general, less new developments, let's say, there is less construction work for the construction companies. So they are all very well willing to build. So if there, I could say that there is a little pressure on the prices, but not that, let's say, will really change the yields of our development yields. But let's say, it's not negative. It's more positive than negative for the moment. But it won't change the NOI yields on developments, or not really.

The next one is coming from Wim from KBC.

I have some additional questions on the project that's now being auctioned or that's being negotiated, which is called the Audi site in Vorst. Maybe first to start off with, can you give kind of a status? Are you in it? Do you expect this to be finalized this year, middle next year? So yes, let's start with that one.

Well, let's say, as you know, when there is a fire, we have to sign NDAs. And of course, we can never comment on running tenders like this one and others since we are, let's say, forbidden to do that due to the signing of NDAs.

Okay. So I know that you signed an NDA, that's already interesting. Now maybe just generally, because you have a big site in the Renault side, the old site. Is there anything general you can say this is either different, whether you are maybe better placed for this one than the other one? So how do the two of them compare? Is that anything you can...

They totally not compare. They are not comparable, Wim. Let's say, Renault Vilvoorde is 20 hectares in the north, and that's fully let. That let's say, there, the factory is closed 25 years ago, and that's fully let. And there, we bought a yielding land bank with, let's say, now after 25 years for the next 25 years, we have to redevelop it and it's an enormous redevelopment potential in time. But in the meantime, we have a 7% income on, let's say, that land bank. So it's a very interesting yielding land bank.

And Audi, that's just -- they are still closing, let's say, the factory. And then you have to restart from 0. And Audi is 3x bigger, and that's 60 hectares. Vilvoorde is north of Brussels and north in Brussels City, the big Brussels region, it's north of that. And Audi is fully within that. So it's fully within Brussels, which is, let's say, also a different dynamic -- dynamism there. And it is, let's say, you buy empty spaces without any rental income. Those are the two big difference between those 2 sites.

Yes. Can I just...

So not comparable.

Yes, yes. And what I was trying to understand about this site, the Audi site is and you explained it well, so there's no rental income. So obviously, prices will be a lot lower because it's not yielding. But then I wonder because it was an operational factory not so long ago, whether if you compare it to other, let's say, real old brownfields, like we visited recently from CTP and also VGP, which have to be completely deconstructed. Can you say about what percentage would have to be deconstructed? Is it a total deconstruction? Or would you be able to use buildings as they are?

Therefore -- let's say, like I said, we signed NDAs, and I don't know the details of the site. But if you look at the location of the site, question is, what will you be able to do there? It's in the middle of Brussels, don't forget it. It's not in the middle of nowhere, let's say, like you have some brownfields. And I think you referred to Germany, where you have some brownfields, let's say, on the country side, this is a brownfield in the middle of Brussels, just the other side for people who sometimes take the Eurostar to Brussels, it's just the other side of Brussels South. So it's in city, it's an inner city location. It's not a brownfield, a big industrial brownfield somewhere in the middle.

Then we have one more person in the queue, which is coming from Frederic from Kepler.

Just a few questions on my side. Maybe the first one, can you comment a bit on the acceleration of the revaluation from appraiser in Q3 versus ETRA?

I don't think Frederic, that is a real acceleration. The underlying it's in absolute terms, it was a bit higher the revaluation, and in total, it was let's say, 0.5% for the first -- plus 0.5% for the first 9 months. But what you see is in terms of trends is that the underlying portfolio has been year-to-date flat in terms of ERV, in terms of yields applied and that what you see is either we had a small minus in Belgium because we had a bit more vacancy in Belgium, but we could do more pluses through active portfolio management by leasing up vacant space, by capturing rent reversion, by doing small upgrades and it's really the plus you see is really through active portfolio management.

Can you comment maybe on the ERV evolution year-on-year in your respective market?

ERV has been year-to-date flat.

And what's your view going forward regarding ERV? Because if you have a flat portfolio valuation, I mean, in terms of yield and flat ERV going forward, is your portfolio in organic terms going to underperform the inflation, I would say?

No, that's something we don't think because if you look at the supply-demand dynamic, that's looking favorable over the long term. Yes, there is a bit lower demand today, but also construction start has slowed down massively. There is still a lot of land scarcity. And we believe that after the strong rise in ERVs over the last couple of years, we have now -- we are going out because of the short-term market backdrop a bit through a stabilization phase in the short term. And then in the midterm in the, let's say, 1 to 2 years, we should -- for the next 1 to 2 years, we think it should grow again in line with inflation. And beyond that, we definitely believe it will grow with inflation plus because of the supply demand dynamics and because of the scarcity element that is at play.

Maybe just 3 small question just on the corporate governance. I'm sorry to ask, but is there any news regarding new member for De Pauw family in the Board?

Well, let's say, there is not news yet, but we can say like we mentioned before that, let's say, Tony will be replaced by somebody of the family by the Annual Shareholders' Meeting in April. And so at that moment, he has to be replaced and he will be replaced and the family is now preparing and is looking internally who will take this role. And let's say, as from the moment that is finalized, we will come with the results. But indeed, they are well preparing it, and he will be replaced by a new family member in April.

Okay. Then a question, you saw probably there was a big deal in the Netherlands, DSV being the seller of a large portfolio for, I think, was close to EUR 300 million plus. Have you looked at the portfolio? And why haven't you made a move if this is the case?

Like I had to say to Wim, when we are looking at the file, we have to sign NDAs. And as having signed an NDA, we cannot comment on running tenders.

Okay. So it's not over just in the race.

I have not, I think me, like you, we have not seen a result in the market. So I think it is not done. It is not finalized yet if I look into the press. But indeed, we have to follow the rules.

No, absolutely. I wonder -- I know too much on that, but just...

It should be not logic for such a building, we should not look at it. Of course, in our -- and that's in our existing markets, we look at every deal and sometimes we go deeper, sometimes we go not deeper. That's the difference between our existing markets and the other 20 markets in Europe.

Okay. Clear. And then maybe a very last one, but that could be a recurring question in the coming quarter as well. But you are obviously becoming bigger and bigger today with the portfolio of EUR 8.5 billion, you want to reach obviously EUR 10 billion at some point in time. I'm just willing to know because in the past, of course, adding EUR 500 million out of a portfolio of EUR 6 billion, EUR 7 billion, EUR 8 billion is relatively consequent. But as you grow, adding only EUR 500 million will not move too much the needle, still a big advancement, but not moving too much the needle.

Just wanted to pick your brain on what you think going forward? And is your current geographical footprint enough to maybe as a plan to grow much more aggressively in the years to come? Long question, sorry.

In any way, the existing markets by adding France and Germany, the market is -- our market is big enough to go above, let's say, the EUR 10 billion. That's what the idea was we go from the Netherlands, from the Benelux and Romania to -- we add France and Germany. So -- and with these 2 new markets, we can easily go above EUR 10 billion, and we don't need any new markets to do that. And indeed, we have an auto financing capacity of EUR 500 million.

This EUR 500 million is what we can already do each year, standard, without impacting our net debt to EBITDA because we have, let's say, round numbers, EUR 100 million of retained earnings, EUR 100 million of scrip dividend and EUR 50 million, give or take, contribution in kind each year, that's EUR 250 million with including leverage, you can already invest around EUR 500 million at the current returns. We invest without impacting your net debt to EBITDA. So that's a very good model.

And also do not forget that, yes, in the past, let's say, for the last 20, 25 years until the start of this growth plan, we were more dependent on volume growth, but with a connotation profitable volume growth, of course. But now as from this plan, and that's what we try to explain over the last 2 years already is that to create further value and value being defined as earnings per share, consistent earnings per share growth and realizing strong total returns on a risk-adjusted basis then you need to blend. That's the slogan of our growth plan is just not because of it, it's because it's actually necessary to create further value in this market with higher cost of capital and with higher cost of capital and with the market going through a normalization phase.

But the good thing is we will then be dependent on not on one driver, but on multiple drivers. We should not only look at what's outside WDP, and yes, that external growth we will continue to do and will be a very important element, preferably pre-lease developments supplemented by value-add acquisitions, but we also need to look at what's in front of us and what's in front of us is a portfolio of more than 8 million square meters, which is under-rented and all of which you can repeating your words extracts more through indexation, rent reversion, sustainability linked upgrades, upgrading of buildings, energy investments. And so it will be a combination of internal and external growth, and that's how we see also the way forward. And this in a bigger geographical market by adding -- having added France and Germany.

But for us, it's not going about going from as fast as possible to EUR 10 billion, EUR 11 billion, EUR 12 billion. No, it's about -- it's not about growth, it's about profitable growth, profitable growth, earnings per share growth.

Absolutely.

And if we finalize this with EUR 9 million, we do it with EUR 9 billion.

Thank you, Frederic. We have 3 more written questions that we will go over to. The first one is coming from [ Shita ] from Deutsche Bank. So as we mentioned, there were 2 projects with a delay due to the congestion of the electricity grid. Is there any further risk that we currently see in the existing pipeline and execution that could have an impact on the timely execution of the overall pipeline?

No, those are the 2. Just those 2 grid connection.

Next question is coming from Nadir from UBS. How confident are we that the occupancy indeed have bottomed out in the second quarter following the 10 bps improvement we saw in Q3. We saw a similar plus 10 bps rise in Q1, which was followed by minus 80 bps in the second quarter.

But I want to add that minus 80 bps in Q2 was largely guided well in advance because last year -- 1 year ago at the Q3 results, we already warned for that because we said that we had some notices in the existing portfolio end of last year in Q3, which are some units falling vacant in Q2 and that would mark the bottom in the occupancy rate. Well, that has happened. And based on, as Joost explained, based on our conversations, which have only now started after summer with clients for '26, we see already the normal retention rate of 90%, and we are confident in our message. We can confirm that message that we see the occupancy rate of 97% having bottomed out at Q2.

And plus 10 basis points are just mathematically. They are just because we added new rented space, we bought something during Q3, and we delivered some projects. So based on those extra buildings fully let, automatically, let's say, your occupancy goes up. So as a matter of fact, it was stable, but the 10 basis points are thanks to acquisitions and finalized developments.

And then we have a final question from Michelle Plick, who is asking whether we see any opportunities as a result of the increasing congestion on European highways from multimodal locations, so along railroads because of tax measures that could be taken by public authorities.

Yes, Michelle. I think everybody still hopes already for more than 20 years that railroad will be the future or at least part of the future, but it stays very difficult. It's not flexible. It's not -- it still stays difficult in Europe. It's not one Europe. And I think today, it still works like so many years on fixed lines on long distances, for example, from Belgium to Italy, through the Alps or from Belgium to Romania. Long-term fixed distances with fixed full trains, and you always need a full train on a fixed distances.

So it will not help congestion, let's say, between Antwerp and Limburg because there, for example, you cannot work with railroads. So yes, it can have a puzzle, but it stays very limited and see the results of Lineas that also it's one of the biggest cargo airlines in Europe, and it stays very, very difficult. I think then there is more to say and there is more flexibility in -- along the water with container terminals along waterways.

And with that said, there are no further questions at this time. So Joost, unless you have any concluding remarks.

Thank you all for listening. And I think we can say that we finalized '25 as promised, and we just started up '26. And let's focus on that, and we will come with the first outlook at our full year results at the end of January. And in the meantime, we will focus on our clients and our operations. But anyhow, our balance sheet is ready for the future.

Thank you, and see you all soon.

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to our H1 update. I'm very pleased to report that WDP delivers once again on its promises, a clean sheet across the board, an EPS of EUR 0.75, plus 6% year-on-year, fully in line with expectations. And the full year guidance of EUR 1.53 can also be confirmed. All of this supported by a strong balance sheet with liquidity and auto financing in place.

We continue to demonstrate the strength of our commercial platform. 300,000 square meters of new leases signed across existing portfolio, ongoing pipeline and new developments and occupancy of 97.3%, even slightly above expectations with all maturities in '25 resolved, 90% renewed and 10% re-leased or in current vacancy rate. So '25 is done. And above that, an investment activity of EUR 440 million, bringing the total investment pipeline in execution to EUR 800 million at an NOI yield of 6.7% and 85% pre-leased.

So now we have all the building blocks in place to realize BLEND27 and confirm our '27 guidance of EUR 1.7. Now we have to build the house with the blocks we have. And this means executing and letting. And even more important, for those who doubt, let us be clear, BLEND27 is not the end. It's not the finish. Our ambitions to create profitable growth with strong total return goes far beyond '27 based on the following foundations: a solid long-term fundamental -- solid long-term fundamentals of the logistics real estate sector and internal value creation, especially to the in blend extracting value out of the portfolio, the land bank, rent reversion, indexation and so on.

But yes, the one million dollar question, is demand still there? And we can confirm absolutely. 300,000 square meters of new leases, a balanced 150,000 per quarter. This proves that there is still demand and more importantly WDP can capture this across all the segments and the countries in the existing portfolio, in the pipeline in execution and in new developments. This in a stabilizing European market with today, of course, still lower than normal activity due to clients postponing decisions. But the good thing is that the European economy is ready to recover and just wait for more clarity on the geopolitical and macroeconomical environment.

As an example, for the first time since quite a long, we see some big new tenders again. And yes, we have also new positive strategic talks with our big clients about their future needs and strategies. The question is, of course, when will they be concluded. But those signs, they are the early birds we like to see. Let's hope that we get clarity on the tariffs soon. But in any way, we are ready to capture that demand. So Alexander, it's now time for Q&A.

[Operator Instructions] We have a first question in line coming from Marios Pasou from Bernstein.

Thank you for the additional comments as well regarding the occupier demand. So taking those comments and also the comments in the release itself, you mentioned current soft demand, cautious decision-making. It feels incrementally weaker compared to your comments for the first quarter. Are you seeing a step change in your discussions with occupiers? And then secondly, your retention rate back in line with prior averages for 2025. Can you maybe comment on how discussions are progressing for 2026? And maybe any risks to maintaining that retention that we should be aware of?

Let's say, on the retention, so there we are up to the normal level again. And we just finalized '25, but it's too early to say something about '26 because, let's say, those discussions just start now. And you can look 6 months ahead. And now everybody finalized '25, and we are just starting discussions with our clients about '26. So -- but there are no signs that, let's say, that fundamentally, there are changing things, but it's too early to say something about that. And indeed, about the demand and the difference between Q1 and Q2, I think there, we are not more cautious. There we said, yes, there was a little bit less activity in Q2. But let's say, we were able as WDP to get the same result as in Q1.

But the difference is that we see, let's say, in the future, we have, again, positive talks with our clients about new consolidations, new opportunities. But of course, everybody waits for the recovery of the European economy. And indeed, their clarity on the tariffs would help that recovery. But let's say, if you compare it to last year, then indeed now everybody is -- there is again positivity in Germany, in France, you feel that European spirit again. But yes, I think there some clarity on the tariffs would help us. And there we wait for the recovery of the European economy.

The next question is coming from Vivien from Degroof Petercam.

A couple of questions, if I may ask them one by one. Just coming back on the demand, I do understand your comment on demand and the 300,000 square meter, but there was quite some driven by Romania. Can you maybe just give a bit of color on your view on the different trends between what you see in Romania versus what you see in Western Europe because in that polarization is increasing. So I just wanted to get your view there.

Let's say, indeed, the spread is very well across -- let's say, it is really about everything in all the countries in the existing portfolio, in the development pipeline in new developments. But yes, let's say, and that was indeed one of the reasons where we went to Romania more than 15 years ago, there is always a complementarity between regions. And yes, there is a complementarity between the regions and Romania is still more in a growing mode. So there, you see some more new developments. And here, you see then rents in the existing portfolio and in the projects in execution.

But let's say, in general, it is well spread over all the countries and all the segments. Segments meaning clients and how big they are. So it's well spread, and there is no real one element jumping out of that portfolio. And let's say -- so no, well spread, but indeed, the European -- the Romanian economy is in, let's say, a different mode and in a different phase of its growth.

Clear. Then moving to the occupancy rate. So indeed, a bit better than what you guided, so slightly above. I also see that you commented that all the leases that were to mature in 2025 were either renewed, relet or part of the lower occupancy rate. Does that mean that you are still confident about improving this ratio by year-end? I think that your guidance assume 97%, but it seems that there is some potential to beat expectation there.

Yes. But let's say, there perhaps indeed the 97% what we mentioned before. But indeed, today, let's say, without, of course, a client going bankrupt or any accident, let's say, there everything is included and the occupancy should stay where she is now.

And it's difficult. We can outperform, but the thing is that we say that there is still unclarity about the direction of the European economy. But therefore, in the short term, we say this is now a floor at 97%, and we feel comfortable in releasing by -- within the next 18 months to be income generating again by '27. And that's the big scheme of things to achieve the EUR 1.70, and that's we feel confident in.

All right. One final question, I leave the floor to the others. Just on your ambition for Germany, I think that with now a team in place, just wanted to get your view, is this -- I would say, the acquisition of a core platform no longer the preferred route? Is there yields too low for that one? And therefore, you're shifting into sourcing like core plus value-add and development. Can you comment maybe on your ambition in Germany because I think that was quite interesting that you have put a team now there.

I think our strategy in Germany is no different than in the other countries. Other country managers, let's say, starts at 1st of September, and he has also a specific development knowledge. So -- and let's say, we are looking to Germany like the other countries. And indeed, we want to create value. And then, let's say, buying at 5 or 5.3, let's say, that is not generating value. So that we don't need. So we have that now with the team, and then we will look indeed value add or with add-on potential or new developments. But let's say, we have time and we want to do it in a value-creative way.

The next question is from John from Vanlanschot Kempen.

Just on the -- you mentioned that you're seeing clients back at the table to talk about strategic investments. So what exactly has changed in their minds? And just how often do they actually talk about tariffs in your discussions? Or is it more about the path to economic recovery?

It's more -- let's say, it's more about economic recovery than tariffs, certainly most of our clients and most of the activities in our portfolio in our, let's say, warehouses is for the European economy and the European distribution more than just the transnational and the transatlantic business. But indeed, let's say, tariffs would, let's say, will give some confidence that -- and some confidence that economy can grow, but it is more, let's say, it is about the recovery of the economy and they are preparing the future. While, let's say, a year ago, everybody was looking and thinking, okay, how will I get, let's say, through the end of the cycle. And now people are preparing the future, saying, okay, this is how we now see our growth.

We want to grow there on specific locations. And let's say, they are looking and talking with us where we can help them. So they are also preparing the future, which was not the case, let's say, during 1 year and which is now recently from, I would say, from June, like on the big logistics conference in Munich in June, their clients starts to talk about the future and the possibilities how we can cooperate together.

Okay. That's clear. Could you also maybe provide some color on what square meter size now we're talking about for these discussions? And what type of customers are essentially you're talking about?

There we are, let's say, talking more today to the 3PLs who are, let's say, where for them, it is also a core business. And on the end users, they are doing first business and then looking for warehouses. This is now, let's say, here we talk -- if we speak about those talks, then it is with the big 3PLs who are preparing the future. And the sizes are, let's say, again, the normal sizes, not only, let's say, I would say, in the 10,000 to 20,000 square meter area, but more around the -- depending on the countries, of course, Belgium is almost there with France. And if you say 50,000 in Belgium, then it is probably even the double in France. But let's say, also again, about the bigger number of square meters, let's say, give or take 50,000 square meters.

I will first cover a few questions from the live chat coming from Frederic Renard from Kepler. Frederic, some of them are already covered on tariffs versus European economy. Just to follow up on his question is reading the press release, it seems that your comment was softer than Q1. Do you still call the H1 as a trough in terms of tenant demand? Or would you revise that comment right now? Appreciating that, of course, there is no crystal ball.

Yes. I think, let's say, it's not more -- the question was?

We are trough in terms of tenant...

I think we are still at the trough, but at that lower level, I think is stabilizing. We are not more negative than Q1. I would say, forward-looking even more positive. But indeed, we are stabilizing and let's say, we did not -- that's the economy stayed in wait notice. So we stay, let's say, at the bottom. But for me, the message was, let's say, and the idea is to give the same -- to say that Q2 was, let's say, the same as Q1, but indeed still at the bottom and indeed now waiting for a recovery. But even, let's say, in a quarter where there was even a little bit less activity, we could be important there was that we could capture the same amount of square meters, and we could realize the same activity, which is also very important.

And he has another follow-up question on tenant demand in terms of we have seen Amazon being more active in the U.K. Anything specific on online players in Europe that you might have seen recently?

I think in general, it's the same. Yes, we also have Amazon signed also a smaller unit in Belgium as a subtenant in one of our existing buildings in Q2. There is also -- so indeed, there are small things, but I would say it's in the same line than the 3PLs. It's not that there is a difference in e-commerce versus other, let's say, physical retailers. But they are also -- they stay active.

Then we have a next live question in the queue from Pierre-Emmanuel from Jefferies.

Can you hear me well?

Yes.

So very quick one to start with. So what has been the reversion achieved in H1?

It was 10% on the new leases. So all new leases within 300,000 square meters have been signed at ERV and that's a combination of rents in the existing pipeline, rents -- new rentals in the -- on the land bank and then the rentals in the existing portfolio. So everything at ERV and where you have a real comparison with before, of course, is with plus 10% for the new leases signed for the vacant ERVs.

On acquisition, so it was reported that you have been shortlisted to acquire the Nest logistics portfolio from the French developer RSM for EUR 330 million and you offered shares to finance the deal. So if you can give us more color on this deal and what proportion of shares have been offered to RSM, it would be useful.

As mentioned earlier, we have to sign NDAs. And I think some parties don't have to sign that because they say all kind of things in journals, but we have to sign NDAs on all files where we are looking at so I cannot comment on any -- on this or any other specific deal. But in general, I can confirm that today, WDP is not looking into detail or negotiating any detail in all of our markets of, let's say, the amounts you mentioned. So those kind of files, we are not negotiating for the moment. That's a clear answer.

Okay. And a follow-up question on your capital allocation. So your LTV is slightly above your target. You have a pipeline to finance, and you are still willing to be dynamic to remain dynamic on acquisitions. So how should we see the debt evolving towards the end of the year and in 2026? And do you think that the current share price is a decent level to raise equity today or not?

First of all, on your target LTV. So our overarching metric is net debt to EBITDA, which we target around 8x. That's the most important metric. And on the LTV, we say it should be structurally whatever happens at all times below 50%, which then in reality translates to that you operate as a company between 35% and 45%. We have said that we have guided for that, that in the execution of the growth plan, it would be broadly capital structure neutral EBITDA with EUR 1 billion investments at the start of the year with -- again, EUR 600 million of equity coming in and EUR 400 million of debt, a bit more debt loaded in the beginning and then equity loaded in the second part.

Where will LTV move from here? Well, actually, the good thing is when you take big picture, the numbers from the investment pipeline, that's EUR 800 million investment pipeline. Costs to come of EUR 650 million. I deduct the battery project, which is only CapEx in '28, then you end up around EUR 600 million of CapEx to be spent in the course of the growth plan from now till end '27. And in that exact same period, we will have the EUR 600 million of retained earnings and scrip dividend coming in, which is then fully equity funded for -- apart from quarterly differences, of course. But the remainder of the growth plan, that EUR 600 million CapEx to finalize is again, is fully equity funded.

And that alone will bring down our LTV by the end of '27 automatically from 7.7x now to 7x and our LTV below 40% and it will then be at the end of this year, LTV should be around 40% and net debt to EBITDA around 7.5x. So that's a bit on where we are headed for. But what is the underlying message is that do not underestimate the size of the balance sheet and the strength of the cash flow because if we each year have EUR 200 million of retained earnings and scrip dividends coming in, plus each year, a couple of smaller contributions in bank like we do already for more than a decade each year, then each year, we have an investment capacity of EUR 500 million without impacting our capital structure. So I think that's a clear answer on the potential. And then there was one last part of the question. Can you repeat that?

Yes. So it was about the level of the current share price. Does it make sense today for you to raise equity if there is a very nice opportunity arising in the market?

Well, I can -- you know that we are always very much focused on good, strong fundamental total returns on each project, generating strong risk-adjusted return and on aggregate, generating earnings per share growth. So we are very conscious of at each moment in the cycle of our cost of capital and our marginal cost of capital, debt and equity combined is now between 5.5% to 6%. So then you know the minimum NOI we need to generate to achieve earnings per share growth. We will report our cost of capital and the capital discipline in allocating.

The next question in line is coming from Steven from ABN.

I have 3 questions on the future investments and developments. So first, to start on the rent potential bridge, do you expect the rent potential to grow materially in H2 or remain flat like this quarter?

So can we take one by one.

Sorry, we'll do one by one.

Your exact question is, will we improve the rent potential in H2?

Yes, indeed.

This is depending on new developments, of course, but that's too early to comment on. It's a dynamic figure, and we update it each quarter and our goal is to continuously replenish what we finalize, and we have also capacity -- balance sheet capacity to grow further.

Okay. And maybe also a second one on the bridge. You added the letting activity potential in the long-term potential. What do you mean exactly with that, so on the right?

Yes. We added that because before, our occupancy rate was at around 99% in the past and now the rental bridge, the big like it's on the slide, the orange blocks are calculated from the starting basis from the contractual rent, which is there. And then so including -- so after deducting, of course, the vacancy and we added that as the potential also that there is also potential now in the portfolio to relet existing vacant space, and that is a theoretical full potential of the portfolio, nothing specifically behind it. It to be mathematically correct. And of course, there is a certain relating assumption in the '27 guidance, which is bringing the occupancy back again where it was at the start of the growth plan.

Okay. Clear. And the last one, do you have any update on the permit in Dunkerque?

No, not specifically. Still wait. We still have to wait and it takes a long time. No specific updates.

Then the next question in line is coming from Suraj from Green Street.

I appreciate your comments on Germany, but you're 1.5 years on from communicating your BLEND 2027 program and your desire to allocate capital towards France and Germany. I understand the dynamics have been different between the 2 leading to acquisitions in France or more acquisitions in France rather. But would you say your hurdle rate has increased for German acquisitions? Or would you say you're less constructive on German fundamentals as a whole? Because I would have thought that the industrial economy is seeing tailwinds given the lifting of the debt break and result an increase in defense and infrastructure spending. Keen to hear your thoughts a bit about the dynamics there, especially between the 2 countries.

Let's say, in a perfect world, we should have invested in both markets, a portfolio up to EUR 500 million, but it went more in France and less in Germany, but that was not intended. It is just because, let's say, the market in France was faster, open and liquid at the right prices and Germany was longer, closed and their prices stays very high. Indeed, I think there is, again, a positivism about Germany and let's say, with the basis we have there, we hope we can participate to that, but it needs to be in a value-accretive way. And we will not buy even when, let's say, the economy or the atmosphere about Germany is more positive than 1 year ago. This does not mean that we will buy a 5% yield. So it's all about value creation. And yes, so we take the opportunity where it comes. But for us, it are the same markets with the same priority.

Then we have a next question in line coming from Ana from Morgan Stanley.

Maybe something a little bit more specific on Germany, even if you have already commented a lot about what's going on there. But recently, in the PMIs, we've seen that manufacturing employment has gone up significantly. And we are hearing companies willing to expand their production capacity in the country. This Made for Germany initiative announced earlier this week. Is that something that you are seeing? And is that something that is reflected already in tenant demand or you are not getting any impact from this yet?

I think the, let's say, the more positive is the higher production in Germany, let's say, therefore, they use, let's say, the idle space in production that was there, there was idle space in production. And if you hire your production, you don't need, let's say, directly more warehouses. It's about the production. It's about throughput in the factory, and there is no impact yet on, let's say, real new demand. It's -- for the moment, it's about throughput in factories. But it is positive in general for the European industry and the German engine, let's say, starts turning again, that's positive for European subcontractors for European. So that will help later on and it will help the European industry. And so then as a second derivative also the European economy.

Now we have a few more questions in the live chat. Many of them have been covered. So I'm just going to focus on those that are not covered just yet. So a question coming from Ashitha from Deutsche Bank. So we commented already on the rental uplifts over the first half, which was plus 10% on re-leasing in the existing portfolio and for new developments or in the ongoing development pipeline that was at ERV. A follow-up question on that was, do we see any softness in the re-leasing rent uplifts going ahead from here on?

No, it's -- everything is at ERV. That's the discussion is not about the price, the discussion is about when does the client sign. And if we can, in this volatile and uncertain climate, still postpone a decision, then we will do it. It's about really converting the clients and getting the signature.

Then another question coming from Frederic from Kepler on the like-for-like, the change from Q1 to Q2, is that purely driven by occupancy rate? And is there any revised guidance on that?

Yes, it's a bit of technical comment, so I'll try to make it clear. So the big picture for the year is that for the full year, we guide for a like-for-like growth of 2%. And there, the building blocks are unchanged versus the start of the year. It is 2.6% indexation, 40 bps coming from the rent reversions we signed last year and then that 3%, minus around 1% for the average drop in occupancy from -- which is consistent with the guidance on occupancy rate, we're making a trough at 97%. So on average, 1% lower, which translates into 2% for the full year. And that is still intact. What you're seeing the difference between like-for-like Q1, which was then a bit softer than Q2, which was a bit better. These are really temporary differences between the quarters in terms of frictional vacancy relating to tenant movement. So yes, it was -- it needed to be allocated, Frederic, to the movements in occupancy. But on average, we will generate like-for-like growth this year of 2%.

Then we have one more question on the marginal cost of financing, which is currently at 2.3% and a 5-year debt maturity. What would be the incremental cost of debt if you were to take new financing?

Well, for a 5-year loan or bond, it would be around 3.25%, let's say, 3.25% or a bit higher.

And there is one more question from Wim from KBC Securities on the pre-letting in the development pipeline. Is that -- does that have anything to do with the brownfields in the pipeline?

Not specifically, Wim. Let's say, the pipeline in execution is a combination of greenfield and brownfield, and there is no difference in pre-letting if it is a brownfield or a greenfield. Let's say, it's just about the location and the moment when the building is ready, but not about if it's green or brownfield.

Yes. The difference is that the pre-lettings were in the buildings which are already there or in finalization and they were less during the course of the development. That's the big difference.

There are currently no other questions in line. So with that said, I will give the word back to you, Joost.

Thank you. And let's say, as concluding remarks, I just want, let's say, to repeat our forward-looking long-term strategic pitch. Yes, we are fully on track to create a EUR 10 billion plus logistic real estate developer and investor in Western Europe with an add-on in complementary Romania, which is, like we said before, it is good for investors, the big safe liquid play in Western Europe and good for our clients where we were able to offer more cross-border solutions. And it's like we mentioned more than once in this call, it's not about growth, but it's about profitable growth.

And yes, we can grow organically, but we want to do it in a profitable way. And today, you have still a very interesting entrance point of a 7.5% earnings yield with a foreseen 15% growth in EPS. And all of this is indeed only possible, thanks to the long-term good fundamentals of the logistics real estate sector, which we always and also wanted to stress in this call. And yes, there is a limited cyclicality in our business as usual, but we can handle that. And we have shown again that we can do that.

But in the meantime and in all the discussions on the geopolitical level, the importance of the worldwide supply chain infrastructure came above every day again. So supply chain is key and will stay key, future-proof within the continentalization and important there even beyond '27. And we go further and we can create value further than '27. Thank you. Enjoy your summer. And if you still have any question afterwards, Alexander is still available to answer all your questions. Thank you, and enjoy the summer.

Thank you.

Bye-bye.