Thank you, operator, and welcome to Golar LNG's Q1 twenty twenty five earnings results presentation. My name is Carl Friedrich Stabo, CEO of Golar LNG. And I'm very pleased to be accompanied today by our Chairman, Mr. Tore Oliver Trem, our CFO, Eduardo Marnau and our Chief Technical Officer, Mr. Morton Schong to present this quarter's results. Before we get into the presentation, please note the forward looking statements on Slide two. As normal, we start on Slide three with an overview of Golar today. Golar is now a focused FLNG company. We own three units, of which two is on the water, and one is on the conversion. The key event of the quarter was securing of two twenty year charters one for our FLNG Hilli following the end of our current charter in Cameroon in July, as well as entering into definitive agreements for a twenty year charter for our Mark II FLNG under construction. As announced on our Q4 call, we have now fully LNG shipping with the sale of the Golar Arctic and our sale of the equity stake in Avenir LNG. We currently have a market cap of around $4,000,000,000 a total net debt of shy of 800,000,000 and a fully delivered net debt to EBITDA of around 2.8x.

Our strong cash flow visibility solid balance sheet and market leading position as the only proven provider of FLNG as a service sets the company up for continued attractive FLNG growth. We have three FLNG designs available for growth, and we will elaborate on our growth ambitions as we go through today's presentation. Turning to Slide four. And a focus on Hilli. Is still the best performing FLNG globally. Hilli continued her market leading 100% operational uptime during the quarter. Hilli has now delivered 132 cargoes since contract commencement in 2018, or more than 9,200,000 tons of LNG produced. On May 2, all CPs for her twenty year redeployment in Argentina was concluded and final investment decision was given. This secures $5,700,000,000 of EBITDA backlog commodity upside. We have now designated a dedicated team of project and operations people to the redeployment scope for Hilli's planned vessel upgrades and transit from Cameroon to Argentina to facilitate for twenty years of on-site operations. On Slide five, we focus on our second FLNG, the Gimi, which is in her final stage of commissioning and to start her twenty year charter for BP offshore Mauritania and Senegal. The commencement of operations date will activate the vessel on our P and L statement.

Golar share of the contractual EBITDA is $151,000,000 based on 90% capacity utilization. Any production above such level will translate into a pro rata increase in Golar shares of EBITDA generation by Gimi. Following the commercial reset announced in August, Golar has invoiced $196,000,000 in pre COD payments, from the GTA upstream partners. This amount is recognized on our balance sheet will be amortized over the contract duration. We have now successfully offloaded two LNG cargoes and expect COD to remain on track within this quarter. That should mark the start of the twenty year contract period. The picture on the bottom left is from Thursday last week, where we attended an official state visit by the presidents of Senegal and Mauritania to the GTA Hub, together with senior management from BP Cosmos SMH, and PetroSEN marking the introduction of Senegal and Mauritania as LNG exporting countries. Turning to Slide six for an update on our Mark II FLNG conversion. The conversion of the LNG carrier, Fuji, into 3,500,000 tonnes per annum marked to FLNG is well into construction. During Q1, the Fuji arrived at the shipyard in [indiscernible] The vessel has now been divided in two and skidded onshore.

The liquefaction plant that will be built on a new midship section is well underway. And a significant portion of our long lead items have arrived at the shipyard ready for installation. The project remains on schedule for delivery by year end twenty twenty seven. On May 2, simultaneous with the final investment decision for the FLNG Hilli Charter In Argentina, we entered into definitive agreements for a twenty year charter for the Mark II to operate alongside Hilli in Argentina. The contract is subject to the same CPs as for the Hilli, when we entered into her definitive agreement in July. These CPs include environmental assessment, export license, rigi protection, final investment decision by the partners. All the CPs are expected to be lifted within 2025. And we expect the relevant approvals to benefit from the recent Tilley process. CapEx to EBITDA for the Mark II is around 5.5x before commodity upside for a twenty year charter period. With a further five year extension option in the charterer's favor. On Slide seven, we have visualized these substantial charter developments. On a slide. Our contract backlog now stands at more than sixty years of combined contract backlog across our three FLNGs.

Or in dollar terms, we have an EBITDA backlog of approximately $17,000,000,000 before commodity exposure. The existing fleet is now fully contracted and we are progressing towards our express target to transform into a market leading infrastructure company with attractive commodity In the next section, we will elaborate further on the key attributes of our FLNG charters in Argentina. Turning to the next section and Slide number nine, we illustrate the LNG value chain. And Southern Energy's role in introducing Argentina as an LNG exporting nation. As part of the Argentina deal, Southern Energy has secured fixed price gas sales agreements for twenty years from the upstream partners of Sesa to provide the project with natural gas sourced from the Vaca Muerte onshore field in Argentina. CESA will be responsible to facilitate for a dedicated pipeline to bring the natural gas from the Vaca Muerta to the FLNG location in the Gulf Of San Mateas a distance of about 500 kilometers. This will equate into a fixed pipeline fee to CEFA. CESA will then be responsible for chartering and operating the FLNGs, as well as marketing of the gas. Hence, CESA's responsibilities include all activities to be taken from the Vaca Muerta until LNG is produced and ready for export.

The export point price is referred to as free onboard. The difference between Free Onboard prices and the LNG prices you typically recognize on your screen is the shipping costs from the production site to its destination of consumption. The destination price is referred to as delivery [indiscernible] Or des pricing as highlighted on the slide. As part of the charters, Golar will receive 25% of all achieved LNG prices above $8 MMBtu in FOB price. Hence, when considering the upside element, the applicable methodology is to consider desk prices, less 1 to $2 per MMBtu in shipping costs. In the current market, TTF and JKM spot prices are trading around $12 Hence today, there's a $2 to $3 upside above the $8 threshold, if the project was producing today. Turning to Slide 10 and some of the contract highlights. Both vessels have a twenty year contract term, Hilli will have an annual EBITDA of $285,000,000 and $400,000,000 for the Mark II. OpEx is pass through for both vessels, Both EBITDA tariffs are subject to a CPI adjustment equivalent to 30% of U. S. CPI from year six Both vessels have the same upside element of 25% above $8 FOB, And combined, the two contracts provide Golar with an EBITDA backlog of $13,700,000,000 before the mentioned CPI adjustment and the commodity upside.

Turning to Slide 11. And further elaborating on the commodity upside element of the charters. As explained, Golar will have a 25% upside above 8. For every dollar above, we have an annual EBITDA of around $70,000,000 Over the contract lifetime, that would equivalent to $1,400,000,000 of EBITDA backlog for every dollar achieved pricing is above it. Importantly, this calculation is based on monthly achieved prices. We have also introduced a limited downside element, where Golar give a temporary discount should annual average FOB prices be below 7.5 and down to $6. This is capped at a total exposure of $105,000,000 over two years which is equivalent of $210,000,000 Hence, the total commodity exposure for the contract has a maximum downside $210,000,000 in return for no cap on the upside. If this contract was in place over the course of the last five years, You can see in the table on the bottom right, that we would have meaningful additional EBITDA above the contracted amounts. If you take the extreme example of 2022, the commodity element alone would contribute 1,700,000,000.0 to $2,100,000,000 of additional EBITDA to Golar if the contracts were in place at that time. Even today, if the contracts were operational today, we would see an additional contribution above the contracted amount an additional $250,000,000 So so to summarize this simplistically, for every dollar FOB prices are above 8 Golar makes an additional $70,000,000 of annual EBITDA.

Turning to Slide 12 and a further commodity exposure that's inbuilt into the contracts. Golar is a 10% shareholder in Southern Energy, alongside our upstream partners, Pan American, YPF, Pampa Energia, Harbor Energy. Hence, Golar makes an additional 10% of commodity exposure, This has no downside cap or upside cap. So the true fully aligned shareholder where a $1 change in the gas price impacts Golar's EBITDA generation by around $28,000,000. Hence, if you combine the $70,000,000 upside tariff and the $28,000,000 equity ownership $1 change provides Golar with approximately $100,000,000 of EBITDA upside. This is further illustrated on Page 13, where you can see our EBITDA buildup. Hilli has a base tariff of two eighty five mark two of 400 combined that's six eighty five, The downside element we have is linked to our equity ownership in CESA, and the rest is upside. Every dollar above eight equates to around $100,000,000 Every dollar below is a downside of around 28. We see this as a highly attractive risk reward and also in light of current and future LNG price we expect meaningful additional EBITDA contribution from the commodity element. Turning to slide 14, Contracting in Argentina has historically not been truly without risk.

And we have gone to a great extent to look at risk mitigation, both regulatory and legally in the framework supporting the charters. Some of the highlights include English law for all charters, All payments are made in US dollars. The Malay led government of Argentina has introduced several regulatory frameworks to boost domestic investment in Argentina, And we are pleased to have received the support of both the state and local authorities to achieve the first ever thirty year non interruptible LNG export license in the case of FLNG Hilli. And we have also been accepted to the large investment incentive scheme under the RIGI protection, which was a law introduced last year. The important highlights of the RIGI includes certainty and regulatory stability for the duration of the project, We cannot be subject to any new national, provincial or municipal taxes. And we have full freedom to repatriate repatriate profits, dividends and capital during the life of the contract term. These are the same protections that are the CPs that we will meet for the the mark two charter. Turning to Slide 15, and looking at the global LNG market. And how our CESA contracts are placed in the wider scheme of the markets.

When entering this year, the LNG market stood at around four thirty million tons, where The USA is the largest current producer a 23% market share. More importantly, the significant expected growth in the coming years is driven by volumes out of The U. S. Hence, we want to identify ourselves with projects that are highly competitive versus U. S. Exports. As the marginal producer. If you look on the cost curve on the right hand side, you can see that the delivered price of U. S. Export projects is north of $10 per MMBtu. If we then further elaborate on slide 16, how the recently announced Argentina Golar contracts stack up versus U. S. Liquefaction projects There are some interesting data points to note. First and foremost, the gross tariff that we have achieved is significantly higher than that of recently entered into US liquefaction projects. The EBITDA tariff you typically see in The US is net of OpEx and maintenance costs, hovering around $2 whilst we have secured around $2.45. The CapEx per tonne is currently sitting of around $1,000,000,000 for U. S. Liquefaction projects versus $600,000,000 in the case of the Mark II. Inflation adjustment is typically hovering between 2030% in The US, 30% for our contracts in Argentina.

In addition, there's no commodity upside for US tolling arrangements. Whilst we have the mentioned 25% above $8 of FOB. Hence, what does these characteristics mean? Well, if you have a higher EBITDA tariff and a lower CapEx per ton, you have a higher return on capital employed. Our commodity upside within the tariff provides us with strong upside participation without spot cargo risk. The fixed price gas sales agreement for twenty years provides CESA with a call option on international LNG offtake prices, for twenty years. I think no one knows exactly where the gas price is. But you know it will be volatile. And we are there to capture 25% of monthly volatility. The OpEx pass through combined with our 30 CPI adjustment provides for improved inflation protection versus U. S. Liquefaction projects. Hence, all in all, we believe we compare very favorably to the alternative infrastructure investments within LNG liquefaction. This is further illustrated on Slide 17 starting off with the graph on the far left. You want to have as low as possible CapEx per tonne and as high as possible average tariff in dollars per MMBtu basis. And compared to some of the listed US liquefaction alternatives, we favorable on both measures.

Then you want long term cash flow visibility. We now have twenty year across all of our three assets. Hence that's the remaining average life of our contracts. Lastly, to the far right, we've looked at capital markets pricing on a per on a liquefaction capacity basis. If you take total eV and divide over liquefaction capacity in operation, You can see that Golar is trading at just north of a billion dollars per ton. Whilst our U. S. Colleagues are trading more favorably. If you were to include a fairly significant growth program across all the three companies. You can see that the capital markets pricing further reduces in the case of Golar to shy of $900,000,000 per ton, whilst comparing to our U. S.-listed pairs have a significantly higher pricing. If you were to put that pricing into Golar share price, that would be a very meaningful pickup from our current capital markets pricing. Moving on and turning to business updates on Slide 19. The highlights of the quarter across the BD department is obviously the final investment decision for Hilli. The definitive agreements for the Mark two, However, we continue to see strong progress on further FLNG commercial development There are very few yard slots that can deliver within the 2020s.

And we now see increased attention from the project projects that lost out on the Hilli and the Mark two. We continue to target opportunities with competitive wellhead gas to secure an attractive base tariff with commodity upside participation. We are in detailed commercial conversations across our different vessels designs, Mark one, two and three, And some of these discussions include projects where the charterer may want an equity participation in the FLNG. I'll now hand the call over to our Chief Technical Officer, Mr. Morten Schong, to further elaborate on our service offering and the different designs available for growth. Morning. Good afternoon. In Golar, we have three different FLNG designs, [indiscernible] the MARK two, and the MARK three. These range in LNG liquefaction capacity from around 2,000,000 tonnes per annum up to a maximum of 5,400,000 tonnes per annum. Depends on FLNG configuration. Feed gas properties, and ambient conditions at the site. The Mark I at Sietrum is a highly successful design with two units on the water and a stellar track record for the Hilli during its contract in Cameroon for Perenco. Meanwhile, our first Mark II conversion is progressing well at CMC Raffles, and the EPC contract contains an option agreement for a second vessel.

Our Mark III reflects years of innovative engineering and Samsung Samsung's world leading FLNG track record. Common to all three designs is black and white preco liquefaction technology, enabling Golar to harvest vital lessons learned between FLNG designs. The most important commonality is, however, the input and leadership from Golar's world class projects and operations teams. With Hilli's FID and the signing of definitive agreements, for the Mark II in Argentina, we are now advancing work with our contractors. To confirm updated price and schedule for our FLNG designs. We've also completed ship inspections for potential donor vessels for either a Mark one or a Mark two and we are confident that we can secure a conversion candidate with Fuji's LNG storage capacity or higher at an attractive price. Furthermore, we are in discussions with long lead equipment suppliers for slot reservations or preorders to ensure that lead times for critical equipment will support the overall schedule for our next project. The work we are doing now will enable us to proceed with at least one FLNG EPC award this year and whatever design we choose within the 2020s. With that, I'll hand over to our CFO, Mr. Eduardo Marnau, for the Q1 group results.

Thank you, Morten, and good morning, everyone. I'm pleased to provide an overview of Golar's financial performance for the first quarter of twenty twenty five. Moving to Slide '22. Let's go through some of the key financial highlights of the quarter. We achieved total operating revenues of $63,000,000 FLNG tariffs reaching $73,000,000 in the quarter. Total FLNG tariff in the last twelve months ended in q one reached $336,000,000 We refer to total FLNG tariff to illustrate the total revenues generated from FLNG Healy including realized gains from TTF brand linked fees. In addition to this, Gimi has started to contribute to our cash flows. And as of May 2025, we have invoiced around $196,000,000 of pre COD fees under the commercial reset agreement. Most of which has already been received. This amount is not showing our P and L, is currently being recognized on the balance sheet until COD. Total EBITDA reached $41,000,000 in Q1, largely driven by lower Brent and TTF prices. Total EBITDA for the last twelve months ended in Q1 was $218,000,000 This quarter, we reported net income of $13,000,000 in line with the previous quarter. This figure is inclusive of a total of $32,000,000 of noncash items such as adjustment in the value of embedded TTF and Brent derivatives within the Healy contract.

Well as changes in our interest rate swaps. Our liquidity remains strong with approximately $680,000,000 of cash on hand at quarter end. I'll talk more about this and other initiatives on the financing front in the next slide. Lastly, we're pleased to declare a dividend of €0.25 per share this quarter. With a record date of June 3 and payment scheduled for June 10. So this equates to around a hundred and $5,000,000 per year on a run rate basis. Now turning to Slide 23. We now take a closer look on our debt position. At the end of Q1, we had just under $1,500,000,000 of gross debt.

When adjusted for our 70% stake on Gimi. On an asset level basis, based on the existing $17,000,000,000 EBITDA backlog that Karl spoke about before, our units are still significantly underleveraged. Considering the cash flow visibility beyond 02/1945. With further growth from increased capacity utilization as well as commodity exposure. Last March, we signed a $1,200,000,000 debt facility to refinance the FLNG Gimi with a consortium of leading Chinese leasing companies. This facility features a tenure of twelve years and a seventeen year amortization profile. Upon closing and repayment of the existing debt facility, expect to generate net proceeds of approximately $530,000,000 of which 70% of these proceeds or an amount equivalent to $370,000,000 will be released to us. We are currently working on the remaining closing conditions, includes third party stakeholder approvals, and we expect that closing could take place around summer. In addition to this initiative and to further evaluate and gentlemen, please continue to stand by. Your conference will resume shortly. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, please continue to stand by. Your Okay. I think you you may now hear me back. So if we go back to slides 23, now take a closer look on our debt position.

At the end of q one, we had just under $1,500,000,000 of gross debt. And adjusted for our 70% stake on Gimi. On an asset level basis, based on the existing $17,000,000,000 backlog that Karl mentioned before, our units are still significantly under levered considering the cash flow visibility beyond 02/1945. With further growth from increased capacity utilization and commodity exposure. On March, we signed a $1,200,000,000 debt facility to refinance FLNG Gimi, with a consortium of leading Chinese companies. This facility features a tenure of twelve years and a seventeen year amortization profile. Upon closing and repayment of the existing debt facility, we expect to generate net proceeds of approximately $530,000,000 of which 70% of these proceeds are equivalent to $370,000,000 will be released to us. We are currently working on the remaining closing conditions conditions, including third party stakeholder approvals and expect to close around the summer. In addition to this initiative and to further evaluate that optimization alternative, we have completed the rating process of the company with key rating agencies, allowing us to tap the capital markets in a more efficient way in the future. If we look at Healy, for example, we have an EBITDA back of more than $6,000,000,000 which gives us plenty of room to optimize its financing.

From the current levels of around half a billion dollars. In addition to that, MARK two remains fully unencumbered, and so far we have invested around $700,000,000 of equity in each construction. So moving to Slide 24. We currently maintain a net debt position of around $800,000,000 which is projected to increase to 2,300,000,000.0 upon completion of the Mark II remaining CapEx. By 2028, with Mark II fully operational, our anticipated fully delivered run rate EBITDA is expected to reach $835,000,000 before any further commodity upside. This positions us with a robust leverage ratio of 2.8 times net debt to EBITDA, supported by clear earnings visibility extending through 02/1945. Assuming of conservative five times net debt to EBITDA ratio, and leveraging on our secured long term contracts, The refinancing of our existing debt under optimized terms could potentially unlock over $1,900,000,000 of equity. This move aims to release additional equity accelerating our growth initiatives, including the funding of additional FLNG units. These units are contracted, financing at similar leverage ratios of around five times EBITDA becomes viable. This approach allows us to efficiently recycle capital, facilitating sustainable and self funded expansion. That concludes my update. I'll now hand the call back to our chairman, Thorol of Triumph.

Yep. Hi. I'm not gonna bother you for a long time. It's probably ten years since I've been on one of these calls, but I thought it was useful to just give a little recap. What have happened in this twenty five years since we took over, and also give some credit to the people who have effectively created this company over the last years. I think SeaTankers took over Osprey as a conglomerate in nineteen ninety nine, two thousand. We then turned it into an L and D growth vehicle. We had the ambition that L and D was a high commodity growth. And it seems like we were right because at that time, it was 30 ships. I think today, we have more than 600 Also, the number of journal has increased dramatically in the periods at that time. So you were correct, but you were probably 15 years too early in many ways. And that was part of the problem. We in 02/2001, we decided to go for shipping. People we went to conference, and we would change the market. We will do commodity shipping with spot tonnage. People told me we're crazy, but we need three, four years. [indiscernible] other situation where people followed us I mean, we're effectively 30 people in the same kind of group.

And the return went down. So we said we had to do something else, We then had some good technical experts in the company, developed LNG terminals carriers into terminals. And we met with president in Brazil, and wanted to be independent of Bolivian gas. And then suddenly, became an FSRU company. Good return in the beginning. Same thing happened. Accelerate b b, Livanos, Herg, everybody came after it, and there was no money there either. So in when we came to 2014, a major transformation was necessary. We then worked on the FN and D concepts from 02/2010 However, there was a big dispute between mister Fredriksen and myself. And that led to my departure from sea tankers. We then arranged the buyout of the 1,800,000.0 billion stake from from sea tankers with good support from institution holders. And then went ahead first f l n d order It was a challenging start, but when oil market tipped in 2014. But we got a contract with Perenco on the first vessel, and we also hired the chairman from BP from BG, Frank Shapman, helpful in setting up the second contract, which we then got with Cosmos initially. But which was later concluded with BP.

Then as prices fell in 2014, we also kind of went into the power cycle. With our by Antonelo and a twenty five year power purchase contract. We were actually pretty widely spread at that time. Including the FSRU business, the carrier business, the power business, everything. Then we said, if you're gonna achieve something in this world, we have to focus So we then decided to focus. We divested the coal company. We divested the power station when when LNG prices came up again because the business was not that good any longer. We also divested the kind of the the carriers in cool When the market was strong, we sold it. So we were stuck with some LNG assets, and we had already at that time with what we now have done in the last year, build the largest FLNG company in the world. I'm also proud to say that, Perenco, who are the p who are known us in the l and d business long as which I consider to be the best oil company in the world when it comes to how they run their business. They know us from 02/2012, I think. And I think they've done business with us on the site.

Since 2018. And now they're also our largest shareholder and they also, as of last week, represented on the board. So so then when Carl and the team backlog of $17,000,000,000 spanning over twenty years, is then the board is appointed that the latest deal has resulted in a higher share price. Yeah. To some extent, you probably are.

But it's the same board who are there today who bravely rejected private equity offers pretty close to where we are today. At the time, the order book in this company was only 25% of the of what it is today. Because we knew at that time that we could deliver more value to shareholders over time That say, that said, if you want to run the growth company, you need over time an effectively priced equity. It's crucial to continue the growth And if public investors are unwilling to wait the two years before the strong cash flow comes in, The board is convinced that alternative strategy exists for this company. One possibility, which we are, think, well into with with Eduardo and his team, is to try look at the bond financing structure, which clearly will enhance the equity return in this company. Another one is to look at what came incoming last time. And I think we see some interest rate for it already. The interest private equity having in buying in order backlog was 17,000,000,000 As I said last time, they were close to paying what the share price is today. This time, the order backlog is four times bigger, so I assume the number is significantly higher But but this is not what the board really want.

I think the board wants to continue to build this company. We have confirmation of the MARC two later on this year, which has been told to investors. We also have the possibility of concluding the commitment for vessels four and five within four and also maybe five within this year. We'll see what we or and we're certainly gonna build more. We are undoubtedly having the yellow leader shirt in a in a business set for massive, massive growth. And I think to put it in cyclic terms, we are in a pretty strong breakout. I don't see any competition behind us. And I think if you look into what happened in the FPSO industry, it grew effectively from two units to two hundred and units in forty years. Think we will see a very similar track here. And the reason is the same. It's a lower cost economics to build floating units than it is to build this massive structure we build in the old days on the land based L and D termites. And it provides significant more flexibility when you can move things around You can also take higher political risk by going to countries you couldn't go to with a fixed installation.

My former boss, he told me when I was 13, don't focus solely on money. If you bring the right people together, and you have a good business ID, money will ultimately come to you big time. He started in Viking Cruises twenty five years ago. And today, the company is worth 20,000,000,000. He started from scratch and Torsten probably have a fortune of more than 10,000,000,000 And it was all because he had a good idea and he had great people. It's exciting to have an earnings secured of 2 and a half million dollars a day for the next twenty years starting in 2728. But what is truly motivating me as a chairman in this thing is the massive, massive opportunities we have to grow this company along with some of the best people at least I ever worked together with And I think some of them are extraordinary. If you think, for instance, about the chief executive we have in this company, I would say that he's probably by far up in I think I've probably worked with 40, 50 different people. And it's clearly among the top two, three guys I ever worked with as a chief executive.

Fantastic guy. I think Maranau, great financial mastermind. Know, working strong on the financing. [indiscernible] with continuously putting borders and and trying to come up with innovation. We have Marcus Brown, who was the guy who created the whole Argentinian file, to get the with Calciandro and Antonello. And believable people together. I'm not a guy who operates [indiscernible] have perfect record. Victoria delivered to BP better, if people can do They have processings there. They have a fantastic team as you see on the picture here. On which describes the the whole Golar team. I think it's unbelievable. And I think this, in many ways, forget the $17,000,000,000 in assets. We have the smartest people. We have the same people [indiscernible] the FPSO company, SPM, said that we were going after FLND. They made us die, then they put the cross over it. It will never happen. That's the same unit to in seven years. I've delivered every day production and according to schedule and not had any downtime. I'm super excited by what the Comair but I'm super excited because of the opportunities [indiscernible] the team we have together But the reason why the opportunity is so much better now is effective.

We have $17,000,000,000 in backlog. You have close to a billion to finance the growth going for further. I think when you can find a business everybody hates to kind of wholesale industry these days, but I think the latest statistic from here shows that the electric consumption in this world went up with around 4%. Year on year. After that, effectively, 11% is fossil fuel. And renewables down 2.1% Gas is a major driver with 8%, I think if you are in the gas business, we have a massive growth area ahead of us. And if you can I think we can really do something monumental here? I think we should build assets for twenty year contracts. At five times five times plus EBITDA.

And add on top of that, you have an upside on the equity, which in this case, Argentina, goes to 30%. If gas price takes up, I think you have created something absolutely unique. I don't expect people to see this from day to day. But I think as you go along this story, it will unborn for most of the people. It took off twenty five years to get there, I'm sure it will take twenty five years for us to have any serious competition. In this business as well. I think when major oil companies of the three major oil companies in the world comes to us and say, we can't do this yourself. Are you willing to do it for us? I mean, they said, no. We're gonna do it for ourselves. I'm proud of what we have created. So I leave the back my word back to Carl, and I said, good luck. Look at the situation. Don't judge us day by day. But the company we effectively over the last years have built $1,015,000,000,000 dollar year in order backlog at least give us some credit. Thank you.

Thank you, Thor. Much appreciated for for kind words. I fully echo especially the words around the organization. And it's also nice to know that I can stretch a bit further to to further increase the stake with versus the other CEOs that you've previously encountered. So we will keep working hard on our side. Thank you. So to the final remarks, turning to slide 32. We now have twenty year plus charter on each assets. Obviously, Hilli concluding her contract in July year. And then repositioning to Argentina. Gimi to just about to start up her twenty year contract for VP of for Mauritania and Senegal. And Mark to to conclude her conversion and sail straight to her twenty year charter in in Argentina again. So to highlight, we have more than $17,000,000,000 of EBITDA backlog with significant upside as explained. So for the final slide of the prepared remarks, turning Slide 33 and some of the key milestones and focus that you should expect to see for the rest of the year. Has now concluded her two first LNG cargoes. The third cargo is underway, and COD is expected within q two. We've concluded the FID of the twenty year charter with Southern Energy for Hilli.

With an adjusted EBITDA backlog of 5,700,000,000.0. Dollars We fully sold out of the shipping related assets including Avenir and Golar Arctic and delivered Arctic to her new owners. Some of the remaining actions that you should anticipate and is our target for the remainder of the year is to conclude the refinancing on Gimi, as Eduardo has explained. To conclude the conditions precedent for the twenty year charter for the Mark two, which are the same CPs as we have recently completed for the Hilli. To further target balance sheet optimization on the back of twenty year charters and recycle the capital for attractive FLNG growth units. This concludes our prepared remarks for our Q1 call And I'll now turn the call over to the operator for any questions.

Thank you, 11 again. Once again, please press 11 on your 11 again. For the benefit of all the participants on today's call, please limit yourself to two questions per person. Thank you. We are now going to proceed with our first question. The questions come from the line of Alexander Bidwell from Weber Research and Advisory. Please ask your question.

Good afternoon. I appreciate the time. Could you touch on the overall commercial strategy for offtake on the Argentina projects? Is there a target mix of merchant and contracted volumes that you guys are aiming for?

Sure. So that work will be led by Southern Energy.

Where we are obviously a shareholder and will assist. The target is to have a basket offtake probably between a basket between Brent JKM, and TTF linked, and then some volume left for spot. Interesting part is that there are no LNG exports in this region of the world. And there are some high paying countries very close to Argentina that could boost earnings further. So the idea is to have a combination. Yes.

Alrighty. Thank you for the color. And I guess a quick one again on the Argentina contracts. Is there any sort of, I guess, additional upside on that base charter rate for excess production similar to the Gimi contract?

No. So they have chartered the full capacity So the $6.85 is for the full capacity. Similar to the Gimi, we only guarantee 90% of nameplates. And we capture any excess earnings above the 90% through our shareholding in Southern Energy. Thank you.

Thank you. We are now going to proceed with our next question. The questions come from the line of Sherif El Magabi from BTIG. Please ask your question.

Hey, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions.

Maybe starting with potential future units.

If we're thinking about ordering one by year end, when do we start thinking about ordering the long lead items for another new build? [indiscernible] you know, if we order one this year, what's the delivery timeline look like?

For the mark, one and two, which are both based on conversions, the conversion time is approximately three years. For the Mark III because you start from scratch, you need to add another year. So approximately four years. The reason why we're ramping up the shipyard activity at the moment is to safeguard that three year construction time And at some point, you should expect to see long leads also being included in preparations.

Got it. And then for the Southern Energy JV, just a couple related questions. First, how do we think about the JV's breakeven price for the commodity exposure And do you give through your 10% stake? Do you have any cash obligations for the onshore infrastructure they need to put together?

So we haven't disclosed the breakeven of CESA, but I think it's fair to assume that the downside per participation starts at seven and a half and the upside from eight. So within that region should be a very fair assumption. Keep in mind that both the gas sales agreements and the anticipated pipeline fee will be fixed for the twenty year term. So I don't expect significant changes to that breakeven over time. And, yes, Golar is liable for 10% of the required investments by CESA, However, it's important to highlight that that does not include any of the upstream work. That's only the infrastructure [indiscernible] To facilitate exports. So that's mainly port port infrastructure [indiscernible] a relatively short pipeline connection of 19 kilometers, and the mooring system for the FLNGs, where we are applicable for our Perata share.

Thanks, Carl. I'll I'll turn it over.

Thanks.

We are now going to proceed with our next question. And the questions come from the line of Chris Robertson from Deutsche Bank. Please ask your question.

Hey, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. Guys, obviously, the company just made a major announcement with the FID of the Hilli. And entering into a definitive agreement for the Fuji I think Tore hit on this. But, just wanted to clarify, if the share price kind of stays here at current levels, you know, is the company currently considering strategic alternatives And would that process be made public if that if that's the direction to the board chose to go down?

This is I'll kick it up from management and then throw it in out if if he wants. But in terms of management, we are running the best of our ability and trying to make the best possible decisions. It is our responsibility to also find out where the best bid for the company is That said, our focus is on running the day to day business And then we're obviously open for any outside investors, but we are not actively facing any such bids in terms of management. Our focus is to run the business. When it comes to any strategic that's a board matter and should be, commented on by the board to the extent that they see that necessary. I don't know, Tore, if you have anything to add.

Yeah. I I think we the board has a pretty good idea about the what the current value of our backlog is. We also have a current good idea about the future opportunities we have ahead of us. We think there is significant value here. But if the stock market doesn't appreciate that value over time I think we need to do something. We are here to create value for shareholders We're not there for running a company So from that point of view but but but I wouldn't judge that based on one month's trading or two months trading. I think I think we need to see a structure of time, and I think we need to see the end coming in on the contract on on March 2, which will then be in the second part of the year. And if you don't move the share price in that time, I think the board needs to come together and discuss what to do. But but I think we've we are shareholder friendly. We are big shareholders, a lot of the people in the board, and [indiscernible] I think you do what is necessary. But but I also say that we we rejected a bit last time because we tested it was better to run the But and we a process like that normally starts with some the incoming letters.

You don't go out and sell the company, but I think there is enough interest in the company today from people who who see value in backlog. But my my situation is just that I think the the real company value here today is not necessarily $70,000,000,000 in backlog if that's nice. It's what we can build with that basis and the people we have. And the market position we have. But but to answer answer very clearly, if validation stays low over time, we will do something.

Thank you, Saur. That appreciate the comments there. A little bit more mundane question here for my follow-up. Can you guys clarify around any remaining CapEx associated with Gimi that you spent during the first quarter and second quarter here, ahead of COD And do you expect going back to a previous question, do you expect any CapEx related to CESA to be deployed this year?

Eduardo, do you want to cover that one?

Yeah.

Sure. So when it comes to the remaining CapEx on Gimi, we don't expect any material payments in the second quarter. So I think as alluded to on the call, all revenues that we have received pre COD they have been accounted for in our balance sheet. This equates to around just under $200,000,000. We are nearing COD, and once we we start operations, we will start to see contributions in our p and l from revenues under that contract.

Got it. Thank you.

We are now going to proceed with our next question. The questions come from the line of Frederic Tybwyd from Fernley Securities. Please ask your question.

Thank you so much.

And thank you for a great, great earnings call so far.

My questions revolves around the potential additional units to be ordered in this year or potentially next year. You comment that you consider Mark one, Mark two or potentially also a Mark three just for me to get a feel or for us to get a feel of the differences, the sizes. Can you get a high level overview of the prospective suitable fields For example, how many contract opportunities does a mark one have compared to a mark two? I would assume that the Mark one is much more flexible.

Yeah. That's a relevant question. So first and foremost, all three designs are based on a generic design. It's the same liquefaction methodology. Which means that we will not tailor made for one specific field.

Hence, they can all be redeployed at various different opportunities. But to your point, the larger you go, the more gas reserves and and gas flow is required to fully utilize the vessel.

Hence, therefore, there are, by number, more commercial opportunities for the smaller sizes. And then somewhat fewer for the larger. However, for some of these larger opportunities, You may also need this level of size to make the development economic. So what you should expect to see is that we are right now conversations or negotiations which for all three different designs, And you could see us progressing with more than one chip this year. I think it's also fair to say that there are several people that we have advanced stages of commercial negotiations with that are now left without a liquefier as the Argentinian contracts took both the Hilli and the Mark two and a search there's no available FLNG. And those are obviously the counterparts that we are concentrating on from the commercial side right now.

Yeah. Thank you. And just one follow-up small follow-up on that. You have previously said that you want to just have one unit, call it, on speculative order. That is one unit without a contract. Do you have the same stance now, or are you open to potentially ordering two new vessels without the contract as you did on the Fuji?

So what we've said is that as long as we have visibility for charter we will only have one open. The way we see it now, we think it's extremely likely that the mark two will be fixed in Argentina And there's no coincidence that the definitive agreements on the mark two was signed simultaneous with the final FID on on the Hilli. It's economical for them to utilize both ships in the same area. There are significant operational synergies and further advantages in transporting the gas from the Vaca Muerta 2 site, which benefits from the two ships. Hence, in our view, we believe we can proceed with unit number four without [indiscernible] strategy of maximum one open chip. Even if we plan to or could order up to two vessels this year, we will still commit to our stated strategy of maximum one open ship. That means that one of those ships would effectively be built against contracts. If not both.

Perfect. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

We are now going to proceed with our next question. And the questions come from the line of Peter Hojin from ABG Sundal Collier. Please ask your question.

Good afternoon, guys. A quick clarification to begin with. In terms of the CPI adjustments, I read it as if it's applicable to both, of course, the base EBITDA. And to the to the upside of or to the upside ceiling of $8 per MMBtu. But I also understand to be applicable for the $7.5 and $6 per MMBtu related to the downside potential. Is that correct?

I'm glad we have a clear presentation then, Petit. That's correct.

Thank you so much. And if I may, in as we have the Chairman on the line here, We've already touched upon this, but is it possible to say about what the Board would now perceive to be fair valuation? [indiscernible] the business asset while both stands and knowing about the growth opportunities ahead.

I don't think it's think we have, obviously, in board documents. We kind of go through evaluation assume the different scenarios, but I don't think it's fair to speculate on it. The only thing I would say is I think that should go for anybody who can do accounting should be significantly higher than 37. So but I don't think we'd like to give any kind of guidance on value. Other than saying that that if the undervaluation we have today persist over time, we the board will be forced to to find ways to unlock that value. That could be it could be take all kind of forms. You can I think we have had earlier bids for part of the assets at the kind of good prices we have? So so it can be selling the company. It can be kind of growing the company with different capital structures. But we're not gonna sit and see on an undervaluation over time. We can sit and watch the undervaluation for a month or two or three that that we are patient enough to that. I think it everybody now talks about the two years we have of pain until we effectively get the cash flow turned on.

But I think I've had twenty five year of pain until I'm here, so I know that two years doesn't take me that long, actually. And I think investors in this case should see that what we're trying to do is to build significant value over time, you know, maximize the value short term.

Understood. That's good color. Thank you so much, Yeah.

We are now going to proceed with our next question. And the questions come from the line of Michael Webber from Webber Research. Please ask your question.

Hey, good morning guys. How are you? Good.

Thanks.

I just wanted to follow-up on, on Cessna and specifically the the gas that heading to to both the Hilli and another unit. I know the Hilli's teed up to utilize latent capacity from an existing pipeline network, and then they're looking to build a dedicated pipe. For the other asset.

Is that gas already treated and or does there need to be treatment built for either the Hilli or subsequent assets onshore? [indiscernible] part of of onshore, but Vaca Muerta gas is extremely lean. So it's it's almost very, very little treatment needed, and the necessary treatment facilities more or less in place existing. So that's not an issue.

So the existing treatment is already in place for for the Hilli?

Or for is there is there enough excess treatment capacity to handle additional assets too?

The gas specification of the Vaca Muerte, what we're talking about here is producing lean gas So they will obviously require upstream investment meaning wells that need to be drilled in Vaca Muerta to increase flow. Mhmm. Extremely limited treatment that's required of that gas, and that's part of the attraction to use Vaca Muerta for exports.

Okay. So specifically, the the I'm I'm thinking about the timing of any treatment capacity that you to be built in conjunction with when those charters would start. So do you see that as a significant risk factor for the commencement of those charters?

The pipeline and any associated infrastructure has a construction period of significantly less than two years. We've already spent together with Tesla more than a year on all the planning. So I think we're very well on track. To facilitate that infrastructure.

Great. That's helpful, guys. Thanks for the time. Thank you.

Thank you. In the interest of time, we have time for one last question. And the questions come from the line of Eric Bozzel from Fernley. Please ask your question.

Hey, guys. Congrats on a great quarter.

Just quickly on the capital structure, you mentioned that you're engaging with rating agencies, to get the rating. And that you could look at the bond financing. Should we expect a rate of some benchmark bonds coming out of you guys soon? And also just to follow-up on that, you indicated an asset level financing around five times. Is that something you can look at the corporate level as well?

Eduardo, do you wanna start?

Yeah. Sure. So you're right. So we have started an exercise with rating agencies. To pursue a bond rating. That exercise has been completed. However, any outcome of that rating is still confidential. We could potentially be looking at transactions at the corporate level or alternatively at an asset level basis as So I think we're using that five times as a guidance which takes as a proxy, the same leaseback financing that we have signed for Gimi. Which was done just under six times. So I think we view five times as a as a leverage ratio as a as a conservative assumption of what can be done on the back of this twenty year agreement.

Great. Thanks.

This concludes the question and answer session. I will now hand back to Mr. Charles Stabo for closing remarks.

Thank you all for dialing in and listen to our Q1 presentation. Much appreciated, and we look forward to reconnect during our Q2 presentation. Thanks again, and have a great day.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you all for participating. You may now disconnect your lines. Thank you, and have a great day.