So good afternoon, thank you very much for coming today again. We will follow today the usual program. I will give you the highlight for the quarter just ended and the year then I would hand over to Nick who will do the usual financial review then I come back and I will this time talk about the six large units, their performance and their priorities. And then go through the key elements of our strategy and of course then we will be joined by our colleagues for Q&A. So full year highlights first of all financial performance, our Q4 service revenue declined 3.8%, 4% if you include Italy at 100%. This is really two stories, one is Europe where service revenue declined 8.5% we have to say and we’ll comment we have seen some improving trends in UK and Spain. And then a very good performance in emerging markets 6% with India and 12% Vodacom 5.1, data and the data will be a key topic here. In this quarter, we had improved our fixed broadband performance. Our customer base is now 9.3 million customers, the third largest in Europe and despite some headwinds and some underperformance that we will talk about, we have met our full year guidance both in terms of AOP at £4.9 billion and in terms of free cash flow at £4.8 billion. Key topics for the strategic review that I will call later Vodafone Red 12 million customers in 20 markets some good signs of improvement in churn and MPS 4G now available in 14 markets with again good ARPU and good usage data that we will share with you. Good Enterprise acceleration in our key growth areas Vodafone Global Enterprise and machine-to-machine growth and I would say more growth in the recent quarters than in the average of year which is a good sign. [Further string] has started underway we are accelerating that have been down initial focus has been on India and Germany with common debt and then of course unified communication with the fiber being laid down in Spain, Portugal continuing and actually continuing to the commercial effort now and Italy about to start. On is about to come is expected to be completed in the second quarter and of course just for the records we have closed the U.S. transaction with $85 billion return to shareholders. We then turn to Nick and then getting back for the operation review.

Thanks Vittorio, good afternoon everyone. So firstly, I'd like to take the opportunity to go through financial highlights of the year and then move on to my personal financial priorities for the year ahead. The first point I'd like to point out is that this is a more complicated set of results than normal, given the very basis of preparation and the M&A activity over the course of the year. To keep things simple, I prepared the presentation on a management basis unless otherwise stated which obviously means that we account on a proportionate basis and include five months of the Verizon Wireless profits. So, turning to slide five, the highlights are as follows: Total group revenue declined 3.5% to £43.6 billion year-on-year with group organic service revenue down 4.3%. If you remove the MTR impact, it’s 2%. Our AMAP region continued to perform strongly, growing at 6.1%. However, this was offset by ongoing pressures in Europe. As Vittorio has already highlighted in the first slide, group service revenue in the fourth quarter was down 3.8%, a 1 percentage point improvement in the third quarter which was primarily MTR effect. EBITDA at $12.8 billion gives us an organic margin of 29.4%, down 1.3 percentage points as the impact of revenue declines and increased customer investment in Europe offset improving margins in AMAP. Adjusted operating profit for the period fell 9.4% year-on-year and this includes a £3.2 billion contribution from Verizon Wireless up until the 2nd September. Moving onto the lower half of the income statement on slide six which is presented on a statutory basis, financing costs, which I will take you through in more detail later are little lower than the previous year, primarily due to mark-to-market gains. Tax at 4.4 billion is higher than the prior year and…

So let's now go to first the performance of the six live units. And let me start with probably the two more challenging situation. The first one is clearly Germany. In Germany, we have got what I would call a tough year with some under performance on our side. A marginal improvement as you can see from the chart in the last quarter but quite frankly very marginal. The story in Germany I think is well known by now, we had some network issues in the previous year both in voice and in data, we had also a little bit of an inconsistent commercial strategy very focused on discounting and while our main competitor was focused more on delivering commercial investment, quite frankly also supported by what in those days was a net of priority. And in general there was a reset of the prices that in Germany historically have been high. We are now regaining momentum. First of all as you can see in the bottom part of the chart we are again in positive territory for our contract net adds and we are stabilizing the ARPU decline. In the second half of the last year we have improved network and I have to say not in the eyes of the customers yet but in the actual parameters and metrics we have recovered quality of our network. We have an improved fixed line performance not yet positive but going up as I will show later and of course KDG which in the meantime has come into the family continues to do well. This general situation has created a contraction of our EBITDA margin which is down 3.4 points due to commercial spend that we have increased in the second half. So what are our priorities for Germany, first of…

So, we start here and we go there and then we come back as always.

Hi. It’s Maurice from Barclays. Question around on there is [diplomatic] commercial spend, [exactly] your capital spending in Europe. Are we at a level where we’re at even more catching up from past under spends of previously, should we think about the current [micro] spending as a more normalized level or perhaps as you all look at increasing set further in the March ‘15?

Yes, Maurice, I take this answer because if I give it to Philipp, he would say it’s not enough. But your question same time is easy to answer and difficult to answer. It is obvious that we have invested more in the second part of the year and we have all supported Philipp in his turnaround effort. We were under-spending in Germany clearly; we were a tad under-spending UK, now it’s not the case anymore for both of these things. Are we going to say, we call it what it is. Well, we are making a lot of investment in retail also to take back into our hands more control over commercial spending. So, can I see a future where through online and retail, we start reducing that investment, yes but of course it depends also on what the competitors do. So, the first part of my answer is easy, my answer is yes that increased our commercial spending and we are now competitive, as competitive as the main players. Can we reduce it or can we keep it there? It will depend a lot also on the market.

And the guidance range you’ve given for the March ‘15 year, did that assume an increase in total [site] for the year?

I don't think we really want to be explaining component by component, but I think it's fair to say that we uplifted our spend especially in the second half of the year. And that will have a degree of momentum into the first half as well and of course you are annualizing on the second half.

Yes, let’s go Akhil.

Hi. Akhil, JP Morgan, firstly just continuing on Maurice’s question on the commercial momentum. We have to started to see you mentioned improving contract net ads trends in a couple of markets. I guess what I'm trying to understand here, particularly in the context of the EBITDA guidance you have said, do you feel that we're at a point where excluding all the MTR drags and changes that we have, we're at a point where the underlying momentum at the group really is starting to improve or do you think some of the other points you made around Italy, maybe some re-pricing on Germany, are there other issues that you need to deal with, that we need to factor in here. The second thing was just on your comments around net debt and investments and I guess the importance of dividends. Your leverage is going to be around two times post Ono. And I guess one of the big initiatives over the last 12 months has been doubling up in key markets to strengthening your businesses. I just wondered if it makes sense in that context to consider any sort of portfolio restructuring, maybe reducing exposure to non-core markets so you have ongoing flexibility in the main regions. And I’ll leave it there.

Well, let me give you the second answer and a bit of the first and then I will pass to Philipp for the rest. The answer for your second question is yes. Yes, of course it makes sense to consider non-core market. It’s obvious that when you decide to go deeper in important situations where either you don't want or you cannot go deeper, you should consider alternatives. That does not mean that we have made any decisions on but of course as I said many times, the Board regularly looks at all the situations and we will make whatever appropriate decision we have to make. So there is no secret cow, if this was your equation that we consider in our portfolio outside of the core areas as we have to certainly find them. So the answer to the first question on momentum and these things, let me give, there is one situation which is difficult for us to predict and it’s Italy. Because three months ago I would told you it’s going in the right direction, price phases, blah, blah, blah. Today, I have heard from Philipp and from the CEO of the market that again funding offers, below the [end] offers are being pushed into the market. Telecom Italia has priced their at [€29], which seems a little bit aggressive to me. So we might have to respond now. it’s very then difficult to see what happens to the response, back to the response, will this drag again the market into a chaos or not. But that is the only one that makes a little bit difficult. For the rest, Philipp, you…?

Maybe just add to it, I mean we see some strong improvement on net adds overall and net add trends. That being said, we still have ARPU pressure and as ARPU -- as the re-pricing [washes] through the base, which is mainly in the first half of the year, you’re still [north of start rate]. And thereafter it will really dependent a bit as Vittorio was saying how the market continues to react. We tried in Italy and successfully did sort of repricing of our prepaid space, we repriced more than 3 million customers and so we are trying to do whatever is possible to stay calm and work on improvements.

Can I have a very quick follow up just to that. In Germany do you think initiatives that you have taken so far were sufficient to drive that edge to reflection or do you think there is anything more that you might feel was necessary in market given competitive pricing levels at in moment?

No I think if you at our rate plan portfolio overall I think we have a very competitive rate plan portfolio right now in the market. If you look at our A&R levels we are following very closely competition again with a same objective not to drive but to more follow so if there is possibility to take out our money than we have done so in the past. That’s why we are very cautious there. But I think we have all the plans in place. We now started on the second with our first integration commercial offers, which started quite promising it’s obviously a little bit early to tell, but started very well. We were focusing on cross selling in each other’s basis and we really got the organization, both organizations very excited to sell the respective products. So I think we have all the necessary momentum and element in place now in Germany commercially.

Gents, if you can raise your hands again so I see and I put down, James Britton, yes.

Thanks James with Nomura. Two quick financial questions and a strategic one. Firstly how much will Projects Spring OpEx increase to [news turn] free when the network is fully laid down? Secondly just a twist on Akhil’s momentum question, I would direct it to Nick. So in terms of margin momentum for Vodafone. If you strip out the Project Spring breakeven, strip out synergies from the acquisitions, do you think the underlying business can actually improve margins in the medium term? And then strategic one is really around price increases is being pretty rare in mobile I would say. But the Projects Spring guidance does imply that will turn to pricing power as you make return on this investments. So how do you envisage these price increases being presented to the consumer, is it going to be part of a brand new cycle, obviously can you see it?

This is the easy one. If anything I showed in terms of usage of data, higher packages, possibly reducing the association of the handsets to the price plan and putting more emphasis on the value of the price plan and also more competition among handset manufacturers and device tablet manufacturers and so on keep growing at this space, I would call about our countries not price increase as a customer and getting much more. So and this is what is happening in the UK, this is what is happening in the Netherlands. Now we need to work everywhere I cannot promise you James, but this is where we are doing. There are some interesting sign, I mean India is another interesting one. Nick they are the two questions then we will go to Steven and then Tim.

Yes, I mean just in terms of Project Spring year two, three. If you remember when we came out with the original program those metrics we still stand behind. So we are saying that this year 14-15 we are at half a billion and then we said by year three it would be EBITDA neutral going forward. So I mean you can bridge between the two points. I think in terms of margin momentum as it pick up on the point that Philipp break in. so you look at the second half what we have done, we have suffered from Italy sort of price erosion and also Germany reprising and to some degree Enterprise in the UK. So, these are the three sort of repricings going through, so obviously they would be seen through to the first half of next year as well. So, it is only when you get to the point of the second half, do you start to have a little bit more stabilization, as always pricing stays at the current level and of course A&R spend will have stabilized year-over-year as well. So, I would look to the second half, showing more positive signs in terms of the trajectory on margin.

Stephen, Tim, Justin, Andrew and then I will look at another. I will move that.

So this is Stephen Howard, HSBC. So I have got a question about on German consolidation and guidance. DT has been pretty vocal recently, and criticizing some of the relatives that have been tabled in Germany. And questioning the impact of the concessions that have been offered to the MVNOs. Now given the MVNOs of the one thing that you have particularly called out in that waterfall chart of the EBITDA guidance. What is the risk remitters necessitate your negative impact larger? And sort of a tendon question if you will, I mean currently you are doing an off a lot in terms of investing in Project Spring, it seems only fair that you would be given credit for that by the regulators and Brussels. How are you communicating the fact to them that you are putting your money where your mouth is to preserve, this is an industry that in the past is often being criticized for underinvesting and leaving your opinion short? Thanks

Yes, it's kind of, it's a multidimensional question Stephen. So first of all [Tim Hodges] and his position, Tim is very vocal in this. I think he is right, he is right in saying, but this is more for the previous we think the journalist, he is saying that there is not pointing in allowing consolidation if you then mitigate away the benefit of it which does not makes sense, so I think he is right. I think our choice is not to cut out MVNOs, but not to keep MVNOs who are not willing to pay the full price of the services is the right one, because you avoided direct comparison and direct intermediation. You’ve had us make different choices and they want to give away their 4G 2 gig, 3 gig for whatever €5 that's their choice. But eventually I can guarantee to you, they would be cannibalized by their own MVNOs, which is fine if it's part of their strategy. We are not willing to that. On the other hand good MVNOs who are willing to pay, who say like I have a channel, I have something. I pay a decent discount and I contribute to actually amortizing the infrastructure, those were perfectly find with them. So we have to qualify what we have done. We are not continuing the relations with those who are not willing to pay and that's I think the best commercial response. Brussels. Brussels is in a transition as you know. I think they give us credit for the investment. They don't fully yet understand this point on consolidation. So they don't understand completely that consolidation actually will lead more concentrated investments and therefore to more ability to reinvest in the business and therefore in the end in better services for the customers and (inaudible) we always make is the U.S. and they need some condensing it's going to very crucial to see the new commission, it's not by coincidence that my second last priority for the year that I shared with you is work on regulatory. I will have to spend more of my personal time on that. I think we had Tim and Justin and Andrew and then we'll move there. Yes, and then Robert and then the -- go ahead.

Thanks very much; Tim Boddy at Goldman. My question was around your kind of conviction that this is a trough. I mean you clearly laid out a scenario where there is a number of levers the group are working on to drive the return to growth. But I guess the question I have is just how long will that take, how fast can you turn around customer perception if you got any case studies you can share with us? And then I guess related to your point now about MVNO, is there ever any signs that the signals you are making are being picked? Because I think it’s the typically the other leading mobile player in the market follows your lead who we would say yes this is working, there is going to be a clear differentiation between the leaders and the lag out some quality. And so again, any anecdotes you can share there will be very [assuring]?

I am looking at our Legal Counsel sitting here, I am not so sure how much you want me to go into the second question, right? You have to be very careful. I mean this is a territory where public comments have to be really only about facts that are known. And so I cannot -- what I cannot tell you is that there are different positions and different players, some players are important more long-term oriented players; they have taken senior position to ours, I think from what I see in the market, other clearly not. This is part of what is call free market. What I said before in my early answer I think is a point. In the short-term you always get a benefit from MVNOs because it’s money that flows directly to your bottom line. So if you have a one, two maybe three years horizon, then you would take out the MVNOs of the tariff because it adds and it fits your capacity and you look good. After two, three, four years, customer starts saying you know what I am better off if I take, I don’t know -- I speak about my and not about the others (inaudible) than Vodafone because it is the same service as Vodafone for half the price and then it’s where you start losing traction with your own customers. Now I don’t have two, three years or long-term, short-term orientation, I think company should be run for shareholders forever. Therefore, we made this decision but I cannot comment on what others will do or case studies or things like that because it’s not a territory where I have been taught I should go. The first part is how fast, Nick, you want to have a comment on that. We don’t give long term guidance, so we don’t want to be specific in the numbers. I think you are seeing the numbers, we are gaining 1.5 to 2 percentage points quarter-over-quarter which should be a good indication. Now some situations, as I said in Italy, could take longer, where we see and clearly Italy was one of the places where clearly you could have come back earlier rather than later but it depends a lot on the competition also.

Yes. I think Tim, you’re also saying how committed are you to spring and whether differentiation will start to show and come through in the metrics. And I was giving an example this morning of India where we made a sustained investment for two years in a market of 14 players. And you look at the market now and the top three players are taking 95% of the incremental revenue market share. And I would argue that we have created a two tier market with ourselves and Bharti and to some extent Idea separated from the rest of the market. So I think you can’t build network differentiation because we certainly didn’t have it when we bought the business. And we distanced from the rest and you will see in the results and returns from it now. But we’re big infrastructure company, and we said Project Spring was a seven year payback, so you’ll have to be a long term investor to get those returns.

Justin, and then I have to go there and then I come back for Simon and then we go here again.

Thanks [Tim]. Could you -- maybe this has been answered already in a way. Could you quantify what your revenue [avatar] is from MVNO in Europe and year March ‘14, I guess just ballpark? And how far are we through this decision whether to cut MVNO contracts, have you done it basically or is there more to come?

Nick has indicated a 150 million to 200 million impact next year. I'm not sure we disclose what sort of competitive reasons, exactly the amount by country and by partner.

Is it done pretty much?

It's a reasonable percentage 150 million to 200 million.

Okay. Thank you. Secondly, margins and growth in AMAP, you got M-Pesa; you got data growth; not too much risk from SMS cannibalization, Nick. And this surprises over the next 12 months, because you see revenues accelerating margin expansion and what does M-Pesa do to margins for example, what is data growth due to margins? And against that you are saying that lapping a price increase in India, how much is that a headwind over the next 12 months?

Why don't you pass the question to Serpil with a clear instruction on not meeting specific guidance, so answer qualitatively please.

First of all, during the fiscal year, we have seen AMAP significantly increasing its profit contribution as well as cash contribution. Now AMAP represents about 40% of the total group's cash. So, that's very encouraging to see. And already the total AMAP portfolio is yielding a margin of 31%, which is 16% growth. So, we can already see that there is a very encouraging trend already. And this is coming on the back of couple of things, one of them is there is continued customer growth still in AMAP, which is the first point. So, we have seen a 9% net customer growth in there. Second, we have also effectively increased pricing especially in the bigger markets. One example is definitely India where we have increased the revenue price per minute by 6% across the year and we're also seeing ARPU effect on it. And the third lever is the mix of the customer. So we have really opted a better quality of the mix, so we have seen activity ratios increasing and the data is also picking up, so data growth is 40% growth year-on-year in India. So all of this is going to continue, so I would say the data configuration is still in its early phases, so we should even see a further pick up in the next year ahead. M-Pesa, I think we need to look at this business differently than the core mobile business. And here what’s really important is that loyalty contribution of M-Pesa to the customer base. So we’re seeing the stickiness effect of M-Pesa and that's the big learning already from Kenya and in Tanzania right now M-Pesa is about 20% of our revenue already. In India it’s very early days, but we've already hit 1 million customers. But we need to look at M-Pesa in a different -- with a different view, because it is really generating a commission out of the big transaction and it's yielding immediately to the bottom-line, but you need to look at this as a different business, I would say, but look at the incremental loyalty effect M-Pesa is bringing.

Just finally, I mean you talk about asset disposal, and I guess you say something about Australia and [3G] so I mean could we (inaudible) bigger, I mean people some argue that you can spin off a map. Is it crazy to think about spinning off M-Pesa at some point, I mean are there actually bigger things you could do?

If you listened to what Serpil said, the answer is no, because she said M-Pesa is great, delivers to the bottom-line, requires big volumes of transaction and is great for the loyalty of the customer. So it requires the support of a vast dealership or dealers network and it require and it gives back also in loyalty terms, so why would you spin it off, why would you not get the benefits on one that allows the funding of the other. So the answer is no to M-Pesa. And to AMAP quite frankly it’s another no as a whole because it’s an engine for growth as I said in enterprise not being in India is a disadvantage, in the relationship with the over the top, the Google, the Facebook [has this words], Turkey, India, South Africa are becoming more and more of the topics that Paolo has to deal with and quite frankly we have more and more of a great contribution to the group of five. I don’t perceive that the multiple [argumentary] works very well to be honest. Every time we do the math with the Board we go back always to the same conclusion that the some of the part applies different multiples but in the end you get the way to leverage. And so the answer is no, that does not mean that we are seeing the portfolio of Europe or emerging markets that could not be assets that we are willing to kind of dispose to somebody who believes that there is higher value in their hands. Andrew then definitely need to go there, yes, John and the follow -- yes.

Hi. Can I ask you about your view on the split of equipment storm plans and service plans, the accounting that relates to it and all of that. I mean I guess some of your competitors doing it; in Europe it’s been pushed very, very hard in the U.S. at the moment. The consumer seems to have some attractions to the ability to upgrade a bit faster to have no national contract to have zero down in some cases particularly in the U.S. and on the low headline service price. There is also a sort of financial presentational benefit in terms of earnings and EBITDA drag when you push harder for gross size and obviously that is something that you are doing on planning staying more as you get through Spring. So what I really want to understand is what’s your view on the consumer attractions to that offer or that lower that proposition and also what do you think is only thing in the financial presentational side as well?

Yes, perfect question for Paulo. I would just pick one thing that you said I and the Broad have not came to do things because of the financial representation of things. So I don’t think we are willing to do things for the sake of presenting or embellishing or doing cosmetic stuff to our numbers. So there is a genuine customer advantage, we like to do things but it my internal cost of financing for example is lower than the external cost of financing, why should I take a higher cost just to look better and there are very good notes that have been written on this topic. So yes we are looking into it and we are doing it in some markets, but it must be following the customer not following the cosmetics of it. [Multiple speakers]

Sure. But I think it is really the way we are approaching it because normally you take it from the accounting point of view which is really around, we are doing a lot of work in this space and we are really staffing from the customer perception of what they are buying and what they are locating the valuing between the device and the traffic. Reality is that there is not one answer which fits all the market because very much it depends also in your competitive the dynamics. some markets we are convinced that by splitting, we may be perceived that even if higher price, if our quality is much higher more competitive what we can be perceived if we still bundled, because obviously the total bill is higher. In some markets we still believe that by bundling can call a higher premium, which is really the nature of the discussion, which is based on what the customers perceives, how we can capture more value independently from the accounting. We believe that there is a clear advantage if you split, if you can separate the duration of the contracts of the device from the contract of the traffic, because sometimes we realize that the first customers are negotiate traffic price and simply because they want to have a new device. And this is the reason why more and more in different markets for example Germany recently, for example Spain last year. We are starting to launch the device options and device solutions which already going that direction where basically are an ongoing traffic plan and then you can renew the device on top of it separately. So, not one solutions, but overtime, I think we will see more of this coming on a market by market basis.

Maybe just to add a few elements to it. If you look at the different countries already today, if you take Germany, we do more than 40% at SIM only which is if you want [fronthouse] good contract, because it's really a SIM only base rate and then you get the device separately, we do installments in Italy already today, we do the combination in Czech Republic today, we do a leasing model in Spain. So we have different base on the market needs, different models in the markets today already.

Thank you, Vittorio. Just first of all just to clarify, when you showed the ARPU between 3G and 4G in the UK, was that net or gross of the pay away to the lights of sky and (inaudible).

Net.

:

Are you asking me why would I not consider that?

Well.

The answer is I would.

Right. Can you enlarge upon this please?

No.

Thanks very much.

No, the answer is very simple. I mean of course it is exactly what I said in my comment, I said we have a variety of alternatives, we have proven in a number of European market that the combination of your own build, rent and eventually buy, if you need to buy can be actually affective and from a capital point of view better. Don't forget that in these countries we're already in a thousand rental -- changes, thanks to cable and wireless. So again it's we will consider all possibilities, but I would not like to elaborated at this stage, I don’t believe too much in the preemptive, non-preemptive thing because believe really need to play like the strategic game to its hand, if you do something somebody else would do something else. So you need to think very carefully about all your moves. But clearly we are contemplated all possible moves.

Yes. Hi, it’s Polo Tang from UBS. I just have two questions; the first one is on Spain. If you look at Telefonica, they’ve obviously moved to acquire a Digital Plus or Prisa TV. So, I was wondering in terms of where your thoughts in terms of how this changes the dynamics in terms of the Spanish market. So for example, would you believe Ono will still get wholesale access to Digital Plus’s content? And second question is really just about what you have done in the UK already? You mentioned that things like Sky and Spotify that content has significantly driven data usage but can you remind us in terms of where you are with content deals across the rest of Europe? Thanks.

Isn’t this a good question for I don’t know Paolo or Philipp I mean whatever…

Yes, if you want, I can comment more in general. I think the UK experience is probably our flagship experience, also because we are here in the UK and is one of the most visible ones but actually in fact we already have content partnerships of a similar type in most of our European countries. And by the way we are extending this to some of the emerging markets, the most advanced part of the emerging markets. Music is if you like the easiest one and most visible one with Spotify in most of the places where we can and then also Napster or these are [bigger] is the other one that we are extending with local solutions. Obviously as you can imagine we are having conversation also in other spaces but what you are seeing here in the UK is an experience that we are replicating everywhere else because we really believe that the content here in music in particular are going to be a big driver. On Spain, I think the situation is very specific in a sense that today we have access and consolidation of content in terms of Telefonica, in case it happens, will probably create again a risk of monopoly. And therefore I think from the regulatory point of view, there is a discussion to be -- to have.

Yes. But that will be a bit more -- a big plant. We will not clearly allow Telefonica to buy what they want to buy and not be obliged to wholesale content because that would be a completely unacceptable position from a European legislation point of view. I don’t know about the Spanish one because Spain, they are interpreting their own way. But for sure in Europe that would not go through. Yes. I think we have another couple there and then we start coming back. Yes.

Hi, thanks. It’s Guy Peddy from Macquarie, just a question really for Nick. I just want to get a picture of this guidance profile because essentially if I look at your range, you’re either settling very slow down EBITDA or down 5%, so can you talk about what are the drivers for the differences and variances and how much of that range is dependent on what happens in the second half of your financial year as you start to annualize the reinvestment levels and you start to talk about little bit better hopefully revenue trend, can you just give us a sense of what you are looking at to see whether it would come out towards top or the bottom?

What I would say that there is a number of leads as I think are quite clear with the result ANR et cetera. I mean of course our competitors can increase the level of ANR intensity but I would say is that a reasonable level of intensity now. But I mean I think it goes back to pricing in the marketplace. And if re-pricing goes annualized and then pricing drops again in a number of markets, if price was breakout again in the number of markets, it’s very difficult for us to sort of mitigate all of the downside of the re-pricing in the marketplace regardless of we have to be competitive. And so the bottom line is we see a number of positives whether it’s the net add performance, whether it’s churn coming down, whether it’s data growth, whether it’s enterprise traction with macroeconomic, we see all of these positives breaking overwhelm by re-pricing in market, if the base drops again. So, that would be the delta.

One more that side and then we start coming back to you. Yes.

Yes. Hi, thanks. It’s [Robert from Espirito], thanks. Just (inaudible) have made some proposals, some more helpful than others but on the spectrum side they seem to be talking about 25 year lives. Do you think that's an opportunity for scale operator like yourselves maybe other operators can't afford to pay as much for those extended durations, or is it just more cash out when those spectrum renewals come up in Germany and Italy in the year or so? I mean just going back to the UK, I wonder, were you invited to join the Sky Talk Talk trials up in York on the fiber? Thanks.

Second question for Philipp, because I follow in detail the group but I don’t get to York. It's a level of detail which goes a bit beyond. And 25 years is good, it's I'm not sure I would really bank on the fact that others cannot afford, but it's good, because the longer is the life of the spectrum, the more inclined you are to invest to eventual anticipate investment, to have a long-term view and take away the sense if I have success in the last three years, then I will pay more at the renewal. Now of course I was for eternity, I mean my position with the Vice President was forever. They should be ours and I think they are willing to pay more and that having forever rather than having today. But anything which is longer is better, because it stabilizes the long term view of the industry. Philipp, York?

I haven’t been in York either, I was just looking at Rosemary whether she knows whether it’s been there. But I would assume that it's an assumption so not a fact, I would assume we have not gone there because we don't really have a business yet to represent there, but we are very active observers of what has happened and are supportive if needed. But I don't think we went to York, or we can check.

Fairly (inaudible).

Shall we get back here in the middle and then we go there. Anybody here in the middle? Yes.

It’s John Davies from Santander, just on [burning] outside of the EU, it’s obviously a still very a pleasant experience if you go outside the EU and make a data connection. Clearly you have many assets outside of the area. Is anything technical stopping you from providing sort of on net rooming as a more sensible, but still quite a high rate or you obliged the customer leads the country that there resident tend to roaming across obviously to the host networks?

Paolo?

Well, I think [per asset] was a honestly very important to learn from experience on European side which is what we launched last summer and I think Vittorio shown you the results which are positive for what we are reminded, even if we are not satisfied at all in seeing that we are still at 19%, because that that proposition be taken by 100% to our roamers in Europe and it's actually our real ambition. Based on that experience, we will extend very rapidly to outside the footprint, European footprint more or less with the same logic; none is the same as we can imagine the same price points. And again, as you extend beyond Europe, you have to be obviously cautious of where your own customers go because people from Portugal roam very different places from were Germans and Roman or Italians roam. And based on that mark-to-market, we’ve segmented market and we'll have different areas and zones and obviously our own footprint the Vodafone branded footprint which is more important for (inaudible) and the others is going to be a part of this initiative.

Thanks.

So something is coming. Shall we go here? Yes.

Yes, thank you. James Ratz from New Street. I have two questions please. The first one is just regarding your cost structure. So is this the revenue trends that you see something we hear also from a lot of your other peers, but a lot of your other peers talk more publicly about being very aggressive trying to reduce the cost base to offset some of the revenue pressures. I mean last year you set a £300 million cost reduction target in Europe that you hit, but you don’t seem to have quantified a target for this year. I was wondering if you could help us in kind of thinking around that why haven’t you quantified it, is that something you can exceed this year, just any kind of discussion around what you can do on cost to support margins would be helpful? And then the second question I had was regarding your fixed line strategy in Italy, so you have reiterated the FTTC build to 6.4 million homes Telecom Italia though on their conference call suggested you signed a contingent fibre deal with them and in conversations I had with them indicated they were now no longer expecting you as a result of build out this FTTC network. So maybe the truth lies somewhere halfway in between. So if you just help me to understand what’s going on there? Thank you.

So let me pass the second question to the specialist of Italy, Philipp and I will give you the answer to the first one. We do have a quantification of our reduction targets, but we have said not to communicate externally. To be honest it’s a very practical reason, there are many moving parts, there is Spring, there is change of parameter, there is incoming companies like KDG for the full year like Ono for a part of the year, we felt it to have been incredibly complicated to give a target and then present all the explanations. And Nick and I made the decision that at the end of the day what really matters is EBITDA and cash flow. And so we had internal programs and from time-to-time in countries you see the impact sometimes because of full cost reductions or sometimes because of agreements of things, but we prefer not to complicate too much our reporting in the year where the year-on-year would be very complicated to manage. So we will talk about it as an actual not as a separate target. Philipp, Italy.

Yes. Maybe before that to underline how serious we are about costs, you might have read in the press for example that in Germany we have made a major redundancy voluntary redundancy programs, we have more than 800 in certain FTEs reduction in a very short period of time. So that tells you how serious we are in adopting our cost structure in the different markets to simply reflect the European relatives. Now on the contingent model in Italy which is a German word actually applied now to Italy. We have some limited agreements there with Telecom Italia to some extent, but it is limited in scopes overall so that we are not changing our plan to basically connect 6.4 million homes with FTTC through our own fibre build to FTTC.

(Inaudible).

It will be a sub quantity of the 6.4 million.

The areas where essential we don’t go.

Yes. So it’s still limited in scope, if it becomes more, one day we can substitute more, but that a fewer let’s say cost calculation.

Yes, exactly. At the end of the day, it's a matter if anybody, not that (inaudible) anybody gives fantastic conditions you just say I don't build, if they give you medium conditions you say you know what I build where I can have a very good case and a good market share for me and I use that which is not great but still better than building; and if we give you bad conditions, you just build yourself. So, it's a continuous reassessment of the make versus buy thing. What I think sometimes the incumbents do is to try to slowdown your decision making by often a little bit and hoping that the little bit is enough, the best part of a very well non gain in our industry, so fine.

But the way you should think of it is really it's a costs versus CapEx trade off not more, right.

Yes. Good after noon. It’s (inaudible) Morgan Stanley. And just one broad brush question please, we saw a very interesting deal announced in the U.S. a couple of days ago with AT&T making move for DirecTV, I guess it's interesting at a number of levels, first say the size of the take, it involved I think nearly $50 billion. Secondly, I think a few people surprised by how much paper AT&T used in the acquisition as well. And then thirdly, if you listened to the conference call, an awful lot of chat about video on mobile devices and the needs to own content. Just wondering if you just give us a few, just broad brush comments on whether you see any read across from that deal to Europe? Do you think you need to own your own content or are you happy having content agreements mutual distribution? And lastly on the paper issue, if you were to find any very attractive acquisition opportunities given that your net debt to EBITDA is now two times, would you be happy to look at issuers for any acquisitions as well that you might look at?

Yes. Listen, the AT&T question is very and DirecTV question is a very interesting one. Of course, we’ve been thinking about it and of course there is one element that we fully understand and it is the video for the future. The time horizon could be different by country or could be very different if you own fixed line and if you don't own fixed line and could be very different if you have strong competition from a cable guy or somebody who can't from the TV. What is very interesting for us we are learning from Ono, from KDG and then we will learn from Ono. How important this relationship with content guys is when you are in that business? So my prediction is yes it would be a very important relationship for us. It is -- we still need to be there. Whether in every environment you will need to own or not, I don't know. I think it depends so much, I mean U.S. is very vast; there are areas whether we’ll never get with [U-verse] with [FiOS], there are errors where maybe satellite plus LTE will work. Again there will be a market of technical solutions to deliver video. And I understand very well why for a company like AT&T there could be an appeal but don't ask me to comment on the detail, because I don't understand enough of the market to say it's brilliant move or not. I understand intuitively that content will be important. But whether you really need to own or not, I think we’ll have very different answers also depending on your history a little bit. If you are Rogers in Canada, you can from that and you consider just to mention an example of [my colleague] is now, for him now content is much more important but in our trajectory, we are still probably in a little bit of a different space. Having said that, these things kind of accelerate a lot, so watch, we analyze with a lot of attention. On the second question quite frankly, it’s a theoretical question. So I strongly believe that if you find a good acquisition, you first have to be very, very convinced of the synergies and starting from the cost synergies and going through the revenue synergies and the merit of the acquisition on its own kind of content, then you look at the financing. And if it is very good, you do what you need to do, but it’s a bit of a theoretical question at this stage. Jerry and then -- yes. Sorry.

Hello, it’s Jerry Dellis from Jefferies, two questions please, one on the Project Spring budget. Is it certain that you will spend the whole budget and how do the Project Spring milestones have to sort of turnout if you decide not to spend the whole lot, on what sort of time scale would you make that sort of decision? And then just a question on pricing, you have referred quite a lot to competitor pricing action. And my understanding of Project Spring was that it was intended to at least some extent to separate you from pricing action in the market and to give you a bit of at least relative pricing power. So at what point do you think you will get to the stage where Project Spring is sufficiently complete, you don’t have to respond to every single competitor pricing move?

It’s really two different questions, one -- the first one is we’re going to spend the Spring money under current conditions but let me go back to the earlier question, if tomorrow Telecom Italia or Telefonica or somebody they completely change their position and they say you know what you don’t need to be the at this, you actually can get access to my own thing; I make the investment. We would clearly reevaluate as Philipp said, reevaluate the make versus buy case and we could transform some of the money from CapEx to OpEx or from -- so the intension is to spend it under the current information, the current conditions but we have to retain the flexibility. If Steve will have done some brilliant negotiation and we still concluding some on Project Spring gets a better price as he is partially getting and then what we thought we would have the charge to decide whether we put the saving into more I don’t know from 70,000 to 80,000 for stations or maybe we just say, we just need to stay at 70 and we just pocket the money. So I don’t want to lock myself into something if conditions change, I have to be flexible. On the price move, single price move, my comment was especially in Italy and was specifically on the fact that not one competitor but there seems to be a gain depend euro price point being mentioned in Italy, EUR 6 -- I mean saw EUR 6 to dig private offer which really after the 80 is a 450 or 460 which don’t make any sense now. Those things you have to respond to because otherwise they can take the market down very quickly. But it’s a different think to talk about tactical that’s why I used tactical as opposed to structural. And finally you deserve. Can we go here up please? You still have any question or is gone?

I have a few. The first is for Nick, it’s on cash flow. I thought of your cash flow this year looks to be underpinned by working capital, and going forward as we Project Spring in full fashion probably to think about working capital, how much of the cash flow would be underpinned by that going forward? The second one is for you Vittorio, it’s about dividends, even no [raise] to that for the next couple of years because of Project Spring going to cover the dividend but in the three years’ time hopefully things will get better. So if you can just give us -- you talked about adequate cover, so if you can just put a number what is an adequate cover for dividends going forward? And the third, it's for Philipp, it's about Germany. You've been investing [higher than Deutsche] on LTE, you have the same spectrum holding, actually higher for base station, let's explain the fact that there have been performing particularly better than you in that country, that's something that I would be interested to hear and how you basically fix it, because you said that's now basically going to fix. And fourth if I may, it's on the CGT into [capital game] packs, you changed that assumption from 5 down to 3.6. And I was wondering if that basically is -- the change is triggered by the discussion with IRS or basically apply different sort of assumptions you used for the calculating CGT? Thanks.

Can I suggest, I because mine are both relatively straight forward. So in terms of working capital, I think we have done a good job over the last I'd say 3 years actually in terms of really improving our working capital. I would expect that going forward, the amount of contribution we can make from working capital will diminish, because we have really been systematic at how we have made working capital really work for us as a group. And secondly that capital game, I was very specific on saying that it's tax due to the reorganization, so wasn't capital going game tax yes, due, we had to reorganize that group ahead of the disposal. So there was an element of tax due in the U.S. as corporation and there was an element of tax due in Netherlands which was withholding tax. So why was it lower, was just we had an estimate before and we were able to go through it and it's a very complex process, many steps and throughout the process we've refined it.

(Inaudible).

No.

No.

I’d said the vast majority owed to the U.S. and small amount to Netherlands.

Philipp, do you want to answer about Germany?

Yes. So I think on Germany, the relative performed really in ROIs two things, one I think on the network side for a quite some time we overinvested rural LTE and not enough on the voice side and neglected voice. And we have fixed that in the meantime, so we again call best in voice, so we are again at par here and we get the feedback from our enterprise customers so this topic is fixed. The second one is more on the commercial side, where we were trying to let's say improve our overall margin in Germany, as we said the market needs to cool down. [Deutsche] really ramped up our investment quite significantly, which was somewhere in June 2013. And so, we did not follow straightaway, but we first waited because we thought this would be over after certain period of time, on a temporary nature was not, we followed but obviously we followed them relatively speaking late which is seen on this year's numbers. And on the meantime, the good news is quarter-by-quarter our service revenue is improving again so we have 0. 3% better. As I said the network voice is recovered, our net-adds are positive, even our fixed time is trending in the right direction and our ARPU base is leveling all the time. So we are basically seeing that this things working then.