Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Equinor Conference Call for the First Quarter Results 2019. I know it's been a busy week for reporting, so we'll get straight to business. On the call today, we've got Lars Christian Bacher, CFO who will run through the quarter's results and then we'll open up for Q&A. Also with us are Svein Skeie, Head of Performance Management; and Ørjan Kvelvane, Head of Accounting. With that, I pass straight away to Lars Christian. Thank you.

Thank you, Peter and good morning everybody and thank you for joining us on this first quarter earnings call. Today, Equinor presents solid results across all segments. Adjusted earnings after tax were up year-on-year despite lower commodity prices in the quarter. Oil price increased gradually through the quarter from below $55 per barrel at the end of 2018 to around $70 at the end of first quarter resulting in an average Brent oil price of $63. For the first three months of 2019, we report a strong cash flow from operating activities before tax of $6.5 billion and we reduced the net debt ratio to 19.4%. We continue to deliver strong results because we are realizing on the improvements we have made. Volatility and commodity prices is a clear confirmation of the need for continued cost and capital discipline for operators as well as suppliers. In Equinor, we continue to strive for efficiency in everything we do and use lean principles as our way of working. This is what we mean by an improvement culture. Given our improvements and solid results the Equinor Board has decided a first quarter dividend of $0.26 per share, an increase of 13% from the same quarter of last year. If I move onto the quarterly results in more detail allow me to point out some of the good industrial progress we have achieved in the first quarter. One, we closed the transaction for Rosebank Danske commodities and the new relicense of Shore East Coast U.S. Two, we secured new prospective exploration acreage in Norway, Gulf of Mexico, and Argentina. Three, we formally opened Arkona, the German offshore wind park. And four, we are steadily progressing the development on new projects on the NCS and internationally which we expect to deliver around 3% average annual…

Thank you, Lars Christian. With that, I'll ask the operator to remind people of the procedure for calling in and then we'll go ahead. We have around 45 minutes for questions. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] We'll take our first question from the line of Oswald Clint from Bernstein. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much, Peter. Hello. Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Peter, thank you. Good morning, Lars Christian. Two questions, please. The first one, just on international volumes up strongly. Obviously, Roncador is quite a bit of that, but I'm zooming in on your unconventional business which I think has just hit a kind of volume peak, whether I look at gas or liquids. So, I guess, with price realizations and pipeline capacity issues and some of the parent-child issues you've said you've had yourself within the Eagle Ford, what's happening to really drive that part of the volume pie up to these record highs? And is that tracking your plan or is it coming in a bit better than your production plan? That's the first question please. And then secondly, I was curious looking at Orsted's numbers in Q1, seeing around $400 million of EBIT for offshore wind. I mean, I know they're four or five times bigger than you with wind, but I was wondering, is there any positive contribution yet from your wind portfolio coming up in the corporate segment yet? Thank you.

Well, thank you for your questions. First on the volumes and international volumes. You are right, Roncador contributes this quarter. That was closed midway last year. And when it comes to onshore activities and production in U.S., it is mainly related to gas. And what we see is in all these cases, it's more or less according to plan. On the renewable side, there are contributions, positive for the quarter, but not big numbers, given the size of our business.

Okay. Very good.

Next question, please?

We'll take our next question from the line of Jason Gammel from Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Thanks very much gentlemen. Appreciate the commentary around Johan Sverdrup, but I was hoping you could maybe just address what are the critical path items in front of you to be able to meet that November 1 production start? And then maybe, also, just a second one. Have you seen any changes to the budget yet? Is everything going according to schedule? Or have you even possibly achieved any further cost savings? Thank you.

Well, on Johan Sverdrup, I think perhaps the best way of answering your question is, to rewind -- go back in time a couple of months and say, what is on critical line as sort of what we need definitely to be able to achieve to create really comfort around that startup date beginning of November. And those activities were some of the heavy lift operations that we have finalized. So that was on a critical part. What is remaining then of work related to Johan Sverdrup is a lot of work still to be done, but not sort of really big activities that if not being sort of delivered according to schedule that could set that startup date. But still, beginning in November is our best estimates. On the budget for Johan Sverdrup and the other projects, 24 projects in our project portfolio in execution and we are happy with how that portfolio is progressing. As we said at the Capital Markets Day, we have placed contracts of $100 billion that we are securing more or less, a lot of what we need to do, both on the projects side and maintenance side over the next three years. So we are guiding on $11 billion for this full year. That is because despite some $2.2 billion in CapEx first quarter, we see and expect higher activity levels over the next couple of quarters, including some onshore wells in the U.S. that will come in. So this is the best sort of bottom-up estimate that we are having. And then just also to remind you that when we're saying around $11 billion, it is around $11 billion. It has always been around $11 billion. Yes.

Thanks very much.

Thank you. We'll take our next question from the line of Thomas Adolff, Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Good morning. Two questions for me please. I think you mentioned Tanzania LNG earlier today and I was just wondering what is going on there and whether this project has become a live project? And then you also secondly mentioned that you are also looking at other LNG opportunities aside from Tanzania LNG. So would you say LNG is a gap in your portfolio that you want to fill? And if so, aside from Qatar, anything else you're looking for? Thank you.

On Tanzania LNG, it is a -- very low burn rate related to that project. We matured it sufficiently, so that we have a good understanding and overview of what that project will look like and some early cost estimates even though that there is sort of a high case and a low case since this is very early in the project design phase. And the reason for that is that we needed that to have a solid basis for engaging and having the discussion around establishing the host government agreement. What we are seeing now is that there is progress they are ready, they are counterpart in the Tanzania government to engage and start the negotiations. And we expect those to take time and what I mean by time is I don't have any better estimates and that is partly based on the learning and so far operating in that country. On other LNG opportunities. First, we have a stellar quality project portfolio and execution and we have a very, very, very good non-sanctioned project portfolio with very good economics that you look at it from a breakeven point of view or a returns point of view. So we have a resource base of 20 billion barrels and not distressed. We don't have to buy stuff. Of course, as a company operating in oil and gas, you need to discover or add volumes to sustain that production and production growth, but we have time to be selective and work with different alternatives. LNG is one sort of alley that we are pursuing and looking at that whether we can get more LNG operated volumes into our portfolio whether that is operated by us or non-operator. But it has to make sense from an economic returns point of view. And yes, we have look at different alternatives and screened several projects. But so far have not been able to make it work from a returns point of view. And thereby we are picky and saying that we wait and look for more alternatives, and whether that is in LNG or other projects that remains to be seen. But I think the key takeaway is that whatever we do on acquisitions, it has to make sense. And by that I mean, it has to fit nicely into our projects from a returns point of view, create value for the shareholders.

Great. Thank you.

We'll take our next question from the line of Lydia Rainforth from Barclays. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you and good morning. Two questions from me as well. The first one on the gas market and the Equinor approach contracting. At the gas seminar in February we talked about the idea that over time Equinor would want to transition to shorter-term contracts rather than the mix of long-term and short-term contracts that you currently have. Can you talk us through whether that is still the case given where the gas pricing is at the moment? And just any reflections on the gas pricing as a whole would be helpful. And then the second question was just to come back to Oswald's point on the renewables side. And sort of the amount that you are investing in renewables and whether its from Scatec Solar to be organic and offshore wind side, there is a value to those, but it's actually very difficult for us to assess externally. So at what point do you think it becomes scalable enough to give us more disclosure on that? Thank you.

Well, on the gas market as you correctly point to we have announced that the day ahead, month ahead, the season ahead, and year ahead we are moving away from and it will take time to get more into sort of more of the volumes being short-term pricing. And currently we see this quarter than that the volumes that we saw last year on season ahead, the year ahead prices and these prices had been higher than present. So they're in the money and that contributes nicely. And that's why we are saying that realized gas prices at this quarter for European gas is at par with what we saw last year, but we are still transitioning into the new principal as we announced earlier this year. On the renewable side in many ways it's the same for oil and gas. I mean it has to bring value. Some of our project that are in operations, we have internal rate of return 9% to 10% on an asset basis that is not on a leverage base, but on an asset base return. And we have also said that we expect the CapEx spending to increase going forward, but as it looks it's going to be heavily back-end loaded given that the limited opportunities of good enough projects from a return basis. So, whether this -- when this will be scalable is highly dependent on us succeeding in finding projects that makes sense from a returns point of view.

Thank you.

Thank you. We'll take our next question from the line of Teodor Nilsen from SB1 Market. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. And thanks for taking my questions. First a question on net debt and capital employed ratio, which now has come significantly down on the past few quarters. I guess your guidance from previously still valid that you're looking for keeping net debt to capital employed ratio about 15%. So my question is when is the exact level or what would be the pecking order of use of cash flow? Will be increased divided or increased investments? And my second question is actually related to another question that's been today on Sverdrup and the ramp-up profile. How should we expect ramp-up to 440 in production to happen? Would that be the first month of production or do you expect it to take a year or so? Thank you.

Well, the ramp-up for Phase I Johan Sverdrup we are saying it will take 12 months from production start-up to reach plateau. Then on net debt ratio, we are very happy to see that this has been reduced from 22.2% to 19.4% during the quarter. We have a guided on we want the net debt ratio to be between 15% and 30%. We can live with a net debt ratio about 30% for a period of time, as well as below 15% for a period of time. Having that said, we are also very mindful of a very low net debt ratio. That is a question of how efficient your balance sheet is. So, looking at the numbers before I go into how to prioritize free cash flow or the cash flow. Yes, we have seen a 2.8% reduction in the net debt ratio during the quarter. But then, be mindful that we did not declare dividend this quarter as well as we had $2.2 billion in CapEx – organic CapEx booked for the quarter and expect in both cases those will kick-in with a higher spending over the next couple of quarters. So by that, I'm trying to say it's not automatic that you can take another 2.8% out of the 19.4% and so on going forward. So we are trying to say that, we are a little bit cautious when it comes to how you look at the development on net debt ratio going forward. Can it go down? Yes, with good pricing – commodity pricing definitely. But there are elements that will mean that it's going to be around this level going forward. Then on how to prioritize your capital distribution. One, we still want to strengthen our balance sheet and we also are saying that we…

Okay. Thank you.

We'll take our next question from the line of Biraj Borkhataria from RBC. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. Just one follow-up on European gas. With prices being pretty weak recently, I was a bit surprised the see Troll running at full capacity. I was wondering if you can talk about whether you're considering lowering your production or taking gas -- your flex gas down a bit, especially into the summer months? And then second question is on Danske Commodities which you consolidated in Q1 into the midstream LNG division. I'm assuming that has a positive EBIT contribution but you didn't move your range and guidance. So could you just talk a bit about how you see that contribution going forward? Thank you.

Yes. On European gas prices, it's been weak compared to strong prices for a period of time. And I think in a historical perspective what MMP is telling me is that the current price level is, in historical perspective, perhaps a normal price level. So I think that is just important to bear in mind. But what we have seen is very -- some odd trends in many ways that has been a strong demand for gas and driving up LNG prices during the summer time from China, when they wanted to fill their storage to avoid ending up in a situation related to the previous winter where they were kind of short. And then, we have seen that during this time, it's been both, a mild winter but also a lower demand, meaning that more of the LNG is targeting Europe and then putting some downward pressure on gas prices in Europe. And to counter this, you could say that, there's been also quite steep decline in indigenous production in Europe. Troll was down during 3Q -- in 3Q during -- due to plant maintenance. And I think, yes, Svein, you have anything to add on this?

Yes. On Troll, as you alluded to, we have the production permit of 36 giga, which has decreased significantly over the years. So that means that we are then also optimizing within the production permit. And then we have the flex and also Oseberg as well. And at all times we are evaluating and how long to run it most sufficiently, based on what we see in the market. Then normally when we go into the summer months in May and onwards we often take down production somewhat. And then we have some turnaround, as I said, on business added in the third quarter this year. So then, it's about then optimizing within the production permit of 36 giga for the year.

And then you had a question on Danske Commodities, which came in under very completed. So we have two months in the quarter in our numbers. First, January was, Danske Commodities still not part of the company in many ways. So -- but we see a positive contribution from Danske Commodities. And very hopeful that by this company coming in that we can strengthen their results for MMP. But it's too early to say anything about the guiding range that should influence or impact the guidance range. Svein?

Maybe you could also remind of what we said at the CMU, $80 million for the full year of 2018, was the contribution and that’s spread over four quarters.

Great. Thank you.

We'll take our next question from the line of Jon Rigby from UBS. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you. I don't want to belabor the point, but first question is just is on gas again. Is that, in the quarter it looks to me that you probably traded a record level of volume. It looks also to me that -- I mean, it goes up and down a bit, but the gas results, the gas trading result contributions to MMP was towards the lower end of the range you would expect for a first quarter, which generally is a good quarter. So I just wanted to ask whether -- and this is for Europe -- so I just wanted to ask whether given -- if we assume to TTF and NBP are lower or continue at these kind of levels, up and down for the next 18 months, 24 months. Does that influence the profitability of MMP? Or is the flat price, the absolute price largely relevant to what you can make in trading and margin around gas optimization? And then the second question or request is, can you just do a quick review of highlights, et cetera, on your exploration activities in the first quarter? Thanks.

Yes. So on exploration activity, we completed 11 wells, eight on the NCS and three internationally. We had in total four discoveries, Carcara Northwest in Brazil and then [indiscernible] and Gasper South. And then after closing all the quarter, we also, as a partner, have a discovery in the Blacktip, discovery in the Gulf of Mexico. So spending 1.7 still our best estimate for the full year. And we are still hopeful for our exploration campaign that we have planned for the Bering Sea and some other exploration activities or wells around. On the gas volume and trading side it was 19.6, 16.4 Svein?

Yeah. Normally it's high volumes in the gas sense from NCS then including the LNG at Snøhvit just about 11 Bcm that has been traded. But we also would like to remind you is that normally what you see in the prices that we achieved is that the main results of that go into the BPM segment. And of course we also take positions in the MMP, which impact MMP results. But the gas prices and then inverse gas prices is then mainly impacting the BPM segment and so you see the impact there, and to a lesser extent on the absolute level in MMP, but trading into the MMP segment.

Right. And just if MMP is a standalone can it make -- is where it sits in your guided range of results somewhat independent of what the external absolute flat gas price is? Or is the level of gas price going to be somewhat -- is that going to somewhat determine where results are going to sit while global gas price -- global gas market remain well supplied?

I think it's fair to say that, of course, we normally take advantage of fluctuations in the gas trading and so -- and then realizing prices there into the MMP segment. But in a flat price environment then most of it will be going to the BPM segment.

Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] We'll take our next question from the line of John Olaisen from ABG. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you. First I have to say, Lars, of all the 72 quarters that I have followed Statoil and Equinor this is the shortest and most precise so thanks for that. And I'll try to do the same in my question. One question only. You recently participated in an exploration success in the Gulf of Mexico. Could you tell us about the upcoming wells in the Gulf of Mexico, just update us on the Gulf of Mexico exploration please; what's next?

Well, thank you for the compliment. And then I will be very, very precise. On Blacktip, it's a pologian [ph] well in the western Gulf of Mexico and we are working closely with the operator on this and the assessment of what this might end up being when it comes to the volumes. The drilling is still ongoing. It was still ongoing late April. Yeah.

Maybe another one coming up with the…

…with the monument, well that will come up -- expected them to be spreaded towards the year-end this year, second half.

And then we also have one well in Canada, the Heart well in Canada that – our well has to watch in the North America segment.

Thank you very much.

We'll take our next question from the line of Rob Pulleyn from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you, gentlemen. Two quick follow-ups on cash since it's in vogue. Firstly to what extent will the week gas prices year-to-date impact 2Q results given the lag? Or is there still enough of these longer term contracts from last year since smoothing the way? And the second question is staying with gas prices given the recent volatility. What does Equinor consider the medium to long-term marginal gas price in Europe to be given the increasing globalized nature of gas markets and of course volumes of LNG exports in the U.S.? Thank you.

On the first one, we expect a smoothing as you say when it comes to the effect of the contracts but there's still in the money there. The one is out on long-term last year. On the marginal cost of gas for Europe, Svein?

Yes. What we believe is that we saw some other volumes now coming into the short-term but then see that in the longer term that more demand for gas is then coming. So what we have said in our economic planning assumption is that when we get into the 20s and 24 around $80-ish on the NBP prices is what we disclosed around the CMD.

Okay. And obviously that hasn't -- that thinking hasn't changed given the trends so far?

No.

All right. Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Alwyn Thomas of Exane BNP. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. May I ask on production plans for this year. I know there's a lot of moving parts. But maybe you could tell us what you assume for net volumes for Sverdrup in your 2019 production guidance of flat year-on-year? And sort of in that context as well maybe can you give a little bit more detail on current operations as Aasta Hansteen Mariner and Martin Linge into next year would be helpful. And then just on DPI, it's a pretty solid performance this quarter. Can you maybe just gave you a little bit more color on moving parts regarding the influence of Brazil and Roncador volumes in terms of cash margin and the U.S. onshore as well for the quarter maybe help us try and explain the numbers? Thanks.

Well first of all, I mean we delivered 2,111,000 barrels a day production last year. And the decline on existing portfolio is still around 5%. So that is equal to just north of 100,000 barrels that you have to replace for 2019 to stay flattish. The startup for this quarter was as planned and Aasta Hansteen started up just before the year end has been ramping up and reaches production plateau in February and are currently producing at plateau and nicely with a good regularity. Mariner, we are guiding then that it will startup second half and hopefully in the beginning of second half. And Martin Linge, we see a lot of comments in -- from time to time at least that there is a delay in Martin Linge. When we looked at Martin Linge to take over the operatorship and increase our equity, it was assessed thoroughly and we expected that the production startup for Martin Linge should be Q1 2020 and for us that remains the same and there is no cost changes either to that project. So production guidance on Johan Sverdrup coming onstream and it will ramp up to full plateau in 12 months time from starting up. Yes, it's a good asset and contribute towards the end of the year. But based on all these moving parts as you allude to yourself, we expect that the production for this year will be flattish compared to production last year. And the 2.1 million barrels per day last year was record high production for us. So flattish, still on a record high level.

Thank you.

We'll take our next question from the line of Peter Low from Redburn. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thanks for taking my question. Just one on your non-sanctioned project portfolio. Would you consider that that is currently adequate to organically deliver the 2025 production guidance that you laid out? And then as a follow-up, can you provide any update on the progress towards FID of some of the larger projects in there as I'm thinking of things such as Bay du Nord, Carcara and North Platte? Thanks.

When it comes to the production guiding towards 2025, the sanctioned portfolio will come onstream by 2022 and then we have some other projects on sanction as you say that are progressing according to plan. So we are confident that the guiding of 3% compound annual growth rate from 2019 to 2025 will still hold. And we have sufficient projects in the pipeline to deliver on that production growth and then also production beyond 2025. On Carcara, the final concept select we expect sort of a -- for that to happen for the first FPSO during this quarter with a decision gate in third quarter for this year. Bay du Nord, we reached an agreement with the provincial government, when it comes to the framework for the fiscal terms for that development, we reached that in July last year. And work is ongoing with the development application and benefit plan that we need to provide as part of that application. The benefit plan is – there are some requirements in the agreement with the provincial government, when it comes to local contents. Concept studies are being conducted for the floating production stores and offloading units as well as the subsea, templates, risers and mill scale and flow lines. So those projects are progressing nicely. But also bear in mind that one of our key learning's from the drop in oil price was that don't rush these projects. Take the time you need to deliver good projects, because if you're rush you might start up a couple of months earlier but it will come at a very, very high cost. So take time to do it right and then plan, plan and stick to the plan. I think that is why you see that we are able to sustain a guiding when it comes to capital spending at around $11 billion for the total portfolio.

We'll take our next question from the line of Christopher Copeland from Bank of America. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. And I hope I'm going to be quick too. Can you let us know whether you're actually downgrading your full year CapEx guidance or is the IFRS 16 impact so small on that $11 billion? Quickly wanted to also ask whether the recent May activity pick up we've seen in the U.S. you think is making it easier or more difficult to potentially sell assets out of your portfolio? And lastly, sorry again, on European gas. If I'm assuming that spot prices in the second quarter stay at current levels of around $4.50 are you saying that your pricing means you could actually see a premium in the second quarter? Anymore more color for an idiot like myself would be welcome. Thanks.

On the IFRS 16 and the effect on the CapEx Ørjan. Ørjan Kvelvane: On organic CapEx is not impacted by IFRS 16 so no impact on that. Yeah short answer.

And then on the question of buying or selling assets in U.S. In many ways you could say that the current commodity prices is among the worst we can have from the point of view that it's high enough for everybody to model through and it is not high enough for the M&A market to really kick-off big time like it was before the drop in oil price back in time. Having that said, we see that there are pockets around the globe that the market is hot from a point of view that, it is pricey and part of the U.S. onshore Permian, to be more specific is such a one. We have looked at stuff in the Permian. So surface-wise, it looks nice and it looks to work, but they still need to make sense from a returns point of view so it's too pricey. And then, you had a question on the $4.5 for European for second quarter whether there's an opportunity to – for us given our – where we sit when it comes to the contracts we entered into last year whether that can sort of represent a premium like we saw in the first quarter and that is what we expect, if the price is around what we have seen. But bear in mind that, we are smoothing out this change in how we are going to trade volumes going forward to more short-term prices.

Understood. Thank you very much.

Yeah. Thank you.

We'll take our next question from the line of Anders Holte from Kepler Cheuvreux. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Yeah. Thank you. Congratulations on a strong quarter. Just two questions, if I may. One is on CapEx. Now due to strong cash flow in Q1 you covered 47% of your CapEx is covered for 2019 from your operations. So my question on the CapEx front is how much of the remaining CapEx is contingencies of Johan Sverdrup? And the second question you talked about returns in the renewables segment as one of the key hurdles for you guys to launch your investment into the sector. What I'd like to know is what exactly do you mean has to change in the renewable side for you to see more upside on the returns? So if you could just allow us a bit more on the details on your reasoning for holding back on the renewables investments when we see companies like Enel, they just take what they can, if they sanction enough and returns are fantastic. This is what producers have been waiting for a generation and this kind of it completes a bigger picture you're painting with the low returns and pullback on investment. So what has to change in that sector for you guys pick up the pace? That will be great. Thanks.

So first on Johan Sverdrup. I mean now Phase I and Phase II being sanctioned at the self cost below what Johan Sverdrup Phase I alone were supposed to cost. A stellar project development execution and good collaboration and work by the supplier industry is helping out in making that happen. On the contingency, the remaining contingency on the Johan Sverdrup, Phase I it's not much left. I mean we have more in the beginning and as the time go by and you get more and more clarity and that contingency level has been taken down and that is also partly why you have seen a reduction in estimates historically. So there's not much left. In the renewable space, we have seen a lot of cheap capital seeking infrastructure like returns with -- and accepting then low returns, so that has been -- the way we look at it pushing down the returns in this segment. Now that we see that the subsidies more or less is paving the way and we are being some industry being met with more merging risk, we expect the returns to come somewhat up and also people think that low risk is low return, high risk then should be also wanting high returns. So this -- for this to be sustainable, the renewable space when it comes to offshore wind and -- has to improve. Q – Anders Holte: Okay. When you say it has to improve, what does that actually mean? To be able to be a little bit difficult.

It just means that either you are in -- you go into this and a very, very low returns or no returns at all and whether that is sustainable it's up to you. And in our case we need to see better returns and worthy projects that create better returns for us to be going to invest. Q – Anders Holte: Okay, thanks.

We'll take our last questions from the line of Stephane Foucaud from GMP. Your line is open. Please go ahead. Q – Stephane Foucaud: Yes, morning, thanks for taking my question. So Equinor, quite busy CapEx program for exploration in 2019 and a specific question on what Equinor is doing in Turkey in the Thrace basin. Looking at the Juno, you talk about massive amount of gas something like 20 tcf of resources without going drilling and testing. So I was wondering whether you see that as being as mature as that because that could move the needle even for Equinor. When you think you would know whether the volumes are there or not whether it works or not? And how that would fit with the overall European gas strategy? Thank you.

Well. the work program for the Bernali [ph] and West Thrace license in Turkey consist of several phases. Phase I is the drilling and testing of the [indiscernible] 1 exploration well in the Bernali license. The drilling has been completed and testing is ongoing and it is way too early to conclude on the production potential of this license. We have also completed some 3D seismic for other areas. So drilling and testing one more exploration well will be on -- well that was started in fourth quarter actually 2018. But all in all, it's way too early to conclude on the production potential. The volume in this structure and both have to be in place for this to be of value. For us, it is still value over volume, but we still know that without volume there will be no value. But for this to fly it has to make sense from a returns point of view as for everything else and it will compete with whatever we have obviously in the portfolio. Q – Stephane Foucaud: Thank you.

Thank you, Lars Christian, for the last question. Thank you very much for everybody for participating. We would like deliver our projects on time and indeed it is exactly 12:30 Norwegian time so that keeps our tradition. Thank you everybody for their interest. Of course, any further questions that you have during the call today will be on, please feel free to contact Investor Relations and we will follow up immediately. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you. Bye-bye.

Thank you.