Good morning, everybody. Welcome to our Results Presentation. I hope you enjoyed the videos. Today, we'll follow the usual order. I will give you the highlight of the announcement, Nick will go through the financial reviews and then I will come back with some update on our strategy and progress on strategy, and then we go into Q&A. And as always, I'm asking you to keep the questions to one and I'm sure it will be one. So, first half, I have to say we had a good start of the year, 1.7% organic service revenue growth, which is really 2.6% ex-regulation. We have got good growth and this is coming from both fixed and mobile, and from most of the markets. 13% growth in EBITDA, it's really 9.3% underlying once you adjust to a number of things, with margin at 32% or probably 31-point-something. Nick will cover all the details about our profitability. But again, very solid profitability. Free cash flow, €1.3 billion, up €1.4 billion from last year. This is a pre-spectrum number coming, of course, from higher EBITDA and working capital. And finally, the board this morning has announced a 2.1% increase in the interim dividend, €4.84. This is consistent with our progressive dividend policy. As a result of all of this, we're raising today our full-year guidance. I will not waste a lot of time on the summary of the strategic progress, but I can say and I will go more in detail in my second part of my presentation. I would say we keep working on the same differentiators, with good success on customer experience excellence, 19 over 21 market leading. Good mobile networks, both voice and data, especially voice, but also both voice and data. And we continue to deploy on fixed – our…

Thank you, Vittorio. Good morning, everyone. So, as Vittorio already highlighted, our financial performance in the first half of the year was very strong, and I was particularly pleased with the broad-based nature demonstrated (10:45) operational leverage. In May, I highlighted that we faced two extraordinary impacts during the fiscal year. First, a material drag from EU roaming regulation and, second, a boost from the commercial decision to follow the UK market practice adopting handset financing. At that time, we had expected these two impacts to be broadly similar and offsetting. But in the first half of the year, we ended up with more handset financing and a positive from visitor revenues. Combined with the two large UK regulatory settlements, this contributed to an even stronger performance in the first half. Therefore, I will refer to our underlying EBITDA and EBIT performance excluding these items rather than our organic headline results as we really need to understand the real trends. Moving to the headline numbers on the left of the chart in green, our organic service revenue grew 1.7%, combined with reduction in our absolute operating cost delivered a 9.3% underlying organic EBITDA growth. With the rate of increase in D&A expenses now moderating post the end of Project Spring and normalization of CapEx, we delivered a 36% underlying EBIT growth. On the right-hand chart, you see how our EBIT margins have inflected from the lows in FY 2015, at the start of the Project Spring, investment phase now back to around 10%, with further improvement to come given our focus on operational leverage. As you are aware, each year, there are a number of non-cash items that impact our reported earnings. In order to present a clearer picture of our earnings performance, we adjust for these items as you…

Good. So, let's have a look at how the strategy is progressing. Always useful to start with the customers, what the customers say. As you can see, we continue to lead in consumer NPS, actually a little bit more than the same quarter of last year. Here the good news is that not only we are leading in 19 out of 21 markets, but I'm happy to say that we have improved our position in 15. We have improved the absolute score in 15 and we have increased the gap in 12. So, good on consumer. We continue to be good and solid on Enterprise, where we lead in 19 out of 20 markets. And I have to say the key measures that we look at for assessing how good is our infrastructure, how good is our support, continue to give good results. 91% of our mobile data sessions are above 3 megabit per second. We are offering speeds of 1 gigabit per second in four markets, and of course, we want to extend to all the other markets where we can. We have a good penetration of our digital app, which is very important. I will cover about it later in my presentation. And we have two-thirds of contacts with the customers that are resolved at the first level. This is not fantastic. The fantastic one is the countries which are already at 70%, 80%. So, we want to push everywhere, everybody there. This remains the key thing that we look at in judging our strategy, how happy are the customers with our service. Let me now cover the three areas of mobile, convergence and Enterprise to see how our progress is there. And in mobile data monetization, I would like to cover both the revenue and the cost…

And here, I need to remind you two things. One, one question each, please. Yeah, let's start, Maurice, Simon (57:13), Akhil, and then we go back there. Yeah?

Yeah. Hi, it's Maurice from Barclays. So, only a distribution question. You've talked a lot up in the presentation about changing the distribution mix and more digital interactions, decreasing impacts on indirect channels and so on. Have you seen much mix – so much (57:37) change in that so far this year? I see freenet (57:41) is still delivering very strong growth in Germany, for example. It feels like in markets like the UK and Germany, there's still a very strong reliance on the indirect sector. So, have you seen much change in that this period and how quickly should we except to see a change in the coming periods? Thank you.

We have reduced, in Germany, our reliance on the indirect channel. As you correctly say, it is still very important, and we are not going to take it to zero, of course. But the reality is that economics from indirect channel, especially in Germany, are not very good. So, it's not that we are ideologically against working with partners. But if the partners take too much money to do the thing that we can do our ourselves in our own shops or even better digitally, over time, this is going to be the trend. I think Germany now is the place where we have is less than half, but it's still the highest. Then, we have Italy for different reasons. There is a lot of indirect, but it's a different type of indirect. It's more a fragmented indirect. And then, in other markets, quite frankly, we have reduced considerably. And I think this is the trend in the market. Sometimes competitors don't follow, so you have to a little bit play, but it's not an ideological position. It's just driven by NPV and return on investment considerations. And my sense is it's going to continue with Digital. Simon – Simon, (59:02), Akhil?

(59:07-59:33)

Yeah.

Maybe a way of sort of explaining is to look at our EBITDA performance underlying in the first half, because I think it really says the story. So, you've got the 9.3% underlying EBITDA growth. That's €600 million. Of this €600 million, operating cost reduction in absolute is €100 million. And then basically, you've got a 50% split between more-for-more, ARPU actions, et cetera. So, Spain is a good example where you saw the – this quarter a full quarter's worth of the pricing action that we took in the previous quarter. And then, the other half, I would say, is more base growth, primarily driven by fixed, but also a contribution from mobile.

Polo?

Yeah. Hi, it's Polo Tang from UBS. Just a bigger picture question really, just about EU regulation going forward, because we obviously had some push-back recently from the European Parliament against a move towards deregulation in return for investment in infrastructure. Separately, we're also seeing a move towards regulation of cable. So, what's your view in terms of how things will evolve ultimately and the impact on Vodafone?

Yeah. It's a very good question, Polo, but it will require a separate conference on it. I have here my briefing. I was counting over the weekend when I was preparing, we have 10 key issues that are being debated, and finding a graphical way to represent who spends for what is almost impossible. You need a multidimensional thing. The reality is that most of the proposals of the Commission, we are in agreement with, and we think they are good. There's only one that we have slightly different opinion. And we think that the balance between competition and investment and protection of customers and protection of financial, I would say, health of the industry is pretty good at the Commission level. Parliament is halfway there, and we will know by Q2 next year probably where it goes, especially on this concept of joint dominance and collective power that we are spending a lot of time – I am personally spending a lot of time explaining to them why they're going in a way which, in our view, is not positive. And the Council, i.e., the countries are a little bit depending on the issue either here or there, and it's sometimes more difficult to get agreement there, because they represent more national interest. We think that the line of the Commission is the right one, and we are supporting the line of Commission on almost all issues. And I'm moderately optimistic that we will get out of this process most of the things right. When I say most, I don't expect, for example, on the spectrum life that it's going to be extended as much as we thought, let's say, eight or nine months ago, for example. But on the other topics, I think some balance will be found, and the Commission interprets probably the best – the most pro-industry vision. Stephen? Yeah, Stephen and John? Thank you. (01:02:51).

Thanks. Yeah, Stephen Howard at HSBC. I was just wondering, following on from your announcement of the collaboration with CityFibre, and obviously, you've got the Gigabit Investment Plan in Germany. Just given that you're therefore sort of placing bets on FTTP, it's interesting to see in the release that you're also calling out the success of the GigaCube product in Germany. And so, I was just wondering, to what extent had you considered fixed wireless access solutions as your route to market in places like the UK and more widely in Germany? And why did you wind up rejecting that in favor of going with a more FTTP rate, because obviously it's a slightly different from, say, the U.S. carriers?

Yeah. No, no. Okay, this is clearly inspired by the U.S. – the continuing saga on U.S. fixed wireless access as a 5G concept. Let me try to simplify things. First of all, what is the GigaCube? What is the need for a, let me say, wireless access that you see in normal situations? It's second homes. It's working in multiple locations. It's having some kind of a known permanent secondary, I would say, location where you need to get high-speed broadband. That's the thing. It has to be in a not super highly dense area, because if everybody gets that in a super highly dense area, then you need a lot of spectrum. Hence, it can be a replacement for a fiber. But again, it depends on the place, it depends on the circumstances. So, it's a great product. We will probably roll it out in many more markets, but it's not the ultimate solution for highly populated areas. For highly populated areas, at the end of the day, fiber will be the most efficient way, the best way to deliver broadband in the future. The U.S. 5G story is really a story of not very densely populated areas, places where you can put an antenna on your roof or outside of your window without a big problem and cabinets that are very close to the neighborhood which you want to serve, which could work in Europe somewhere. We are looking at it. And not later than two nights ago or three nights ago, I was discussing with one of the major vendors about this. But it is a very, very specific solution for, say, I don't know, I always say Sardinia (01:05:30) or a place where you don't have a density, which allows the build out – the efficient build out of fiber. Yeah, John, Akhil, Robert (01:05:39)?

Thank you. It's John Karidis here from Numis. I just wanted to ask about India, just some information, please. I just sort of wondered whether you could expand on what's left to be done there in terms of the Idea deal and whether, at this stage, at the end of 2017, you're able to refine a little bit your estimate of when the deal might close.

Listen, we had good progress and it was frankly quicker than what we thought in certain aspects. But we still have to get DoT approval and we still have to get the court actually approving the merger scheme. So, those are the two most important things. There is still maybe a RBI, something application for the ownership, but that's a relatively minor thing. But those are the two things that are still to be done. We still expect them to happen in 2018, and we cannot give you – yeah, I don't know, midyear. And then, don't ask me mid calendar or mid financial, because I will play between the two. So, I would say somewhere, so we don't know. I think last year, we said September 2018 or kind of...

Yeah, 12 to 18 months.

Yeah, 12 to 18 months. 12 to 18 months leads to September 2018 really. So, that's what is the status today. Yeah, Akhil?

Yeah. Hi. Just a question, I guess, just broadly on fixed line strategy. Both of you have gone through today some of the interesting deals you've announced in the last few months in a number of your markets. Obviously, fixed line is a big growth tailwind for you as a business. It's very high return on capital in terms of the new initiatives. So, I just want an update in terms of how are you thinking on the overall build versus buy. It's always been case-by-case. But does it at all shift the way you're thinking, given the deals you've managed to sign here? And also, I guess linked to that, it was partly linked to the earlier question from Polo, the joint dominance kind of debate, has there been anything new around that and how are you feeling on that relative to what you told us back at the Investor Day in Italy. Thanks.

Yeah. I can only say that, by definition, the strategy on fixed has to be country-by-country. It has to be country-by-country because the way it works, because the infrastructures available are different, because the cost of building in certain areas in Portugal, in Spain is completely different than the cost of building in Central London. This morning, I read that we might use the sewage system in London, which by the way is what they also do in Spain. And in some places, you can put fiber on the poles, and in other places, the poles fall apart, fall down if you put them. So, it is so local that it has to be a case-by-case, a country-by-country analysis, and sometimes even within a country, it's also region-by-region, point number one. Point number two, it also depends a lot on the strategy of the incumbents. Incumbents tend to resist and tend to say, I do it but it's for me only, and if it's for you, it's very high price. Quite frankly, we have demonstrated country after country after country that this is a strategy that eventually leads to more competition, and we are very happy to have that chance to exploit new competition, to then realign the prices to a good commercial level. So, it has to be country-by-country because it depends on physical constraints and also competitive behaviors that are different by country. What I'm happy with today is that, I know that there was, two, three years ago – three, four years ago, skepticism about the ability to deliver this strategy. It's actually becoming real and the numbers show it. So, we think that we have been successful without having to invest massive amounts. Now, an M&A opportunity arise, of course, we will look at it, because of course it's make versus buy, and we will look at what is the time and the return that we can expect from M&A. On joint dominance, I spent a day in Brussels talking to all the kind of relevant proponents of it. I have to say they have concerns that I don't share, and most importantly, there needs to be a methodology to define what is the joint dominance risk. It seems to me that today, the real problem in most places is to create competition to the usual formal monopolies we use (01:10:07) who controls the fiber. So, for me, the idea of creating joint dominance in the moment where Vodafone actually is bringing more competition to the system and Liberty also, to be fair, I think is – would be wrong. So, our position is, wait, tell me which problem you're trying to solve. If there's no problem, just allow competition to flourish. Yes, I don't remember who I said was the next. Robert (01:10:35) maybe.

Yeah. A point of clarification first on the CityFibre question. Do you have to book the liability to CityFibre on your balance sheet for that transaction? And my question (01:10:51) my question is about handset financing. You mentioned that that is increasing. It's offset by better roaming, but that's increasing as an effect. Is that a multi-market thing? Is that UK? And what's driving that? Is it iPhone-related? Is it people stopping moving to SIM-only, for example? Thanks.

So, fairly straightforward, in terms of CityFibre, it's a wholesale arrangement. So, there's a contractual obligation in terms of minimum commitment, but it's not like we are internalizing that CapEx. It's a wholesale arrangement. I would say in terms of UK handset financing, it's building just through sheer volumes. It's not to do with iPhone at all. If anything, when you look at iPhone volumes, this phase, I wouldn't call them particularly strong relative to previous cycles. So, I would say this is more to do with demand in the marketplace. As Vittorio has said, the UK has been really improving performance. It's commercially on the front foot. Therefore, volumes are rising.

But let me take the broader side of your question, is handset financing and installments a good thing or a bad thing? And I do believe that it is intrinsically a good thing, because this makes customers think, do I need to change a phone, do I want to get the new iPhone X. If they do, great. If they don't, what's the next best thing they can do, maybe I can increase my allowance, maybe I can put my dog and my car and my whatever on my plan, maybe I can get a higher, whatever, fiber broadband. So, it separates more clearly a telecom broadband connection type of decision from a harder decision, and the beauty is that this is happening, not by coincidence, when we are investing in customer relationship with the CXX program, we're investing in network with the Spring program, and we're trying to digitize the experience as best as we can. This will have a positive impact on commissions, subsidies, and in general, commercial cost. And it's starting to show. It will take time, but it's starting to show. Yes, I think let's go there. Yeah, James (01:13:06)?

Yes, thank you. (01:13:09) wider ranging question about Germany in general. It looks like relative to expectations, that was one of the ones that beat expectations most significantly. It's your biggest market. So, I was just wondering if you could talk a bit about how you see that market developing for you over the next 6 to 12 months. In the past, you've talked about indirect competition being aggressive. Maybe you're suggesting that's now a little bit less so. What's happened with United Internet potentially migrating some of the MVNO away? Are you picking up share from O2 Deutschland at the moment on contract adds? So, kind of a broader-reaching question on how you see Germany over the next 6 to 12 months, please.

James (01:13:50), I'm optimistic on Germany. Otherwise, we wouldn't be putting €2 billion extra money in Germany. I think Germany has a good market structure, and credit goes, if we are honest, to both us and Deutsche. There's two players who are doing fully integrated and in a wise way convergence. We are serving customers – corporate customers in a, I would say, disciplined way, and we clearly are the quality providers of the market. I was comparing last night the pricing levels of Deutsche versus us. We are a little bit cheaper on the service and they are a little bit cheaper on the handsets. So, it's hard to really say. But we are clearly competing on quality. We are competing on innovation. We are competing on branding. And we are, I think, competing as Vodafone well, as the numbers show. Then, there is another part of the market which we tend to defend through second brands and other stuff, otelo and Congstar (01:14:51) and other stuff, which is more in the hands of other players. And my assessment is that wholesaling and MVNO-ing your own network in the long-term does not strengthen the operation. We have to see what will happen in Italy, which is another market where the number three is playing the same game and the results don't seem to be particularly good. It doesn't surprise me, because when you give away too much your own infrastructure and your own service for a price which is not in line with the market, customers eventually switch. So, convergence is intelligent. There are richer higher end bundles now include the Vodafone Pass, Deutsche includes the, what they call, the Binge On German thing, which is fine, because again it goes in the direction of creating a better experience and then you manage the cost implication of it. And so, I am optimistic about the structure of the market, provided that both us and Deutsche continue to run – to be run in a disciplined way.

Yeah. I'd just say, just to build on that, the fixed in terms of the quality mix of the gross adds, in terms of higher speed 60% on the 2 megabits per second product and above is a good mix. And Enterprise was historically very challenging, has improved, as a market environment (01:16:14).

Andrew (01:16:16), then we come back here in the middle.

Yeah. I just wondered if you could talk about how much of your digital cost savings you think you actually get to keep? Are there markets in which everyone else is doing this and you think that the benefits is just going to be passed through to the customer in lower prices like we've seen in previous cost cutting examples, or is there a reason why Vodafone is going to be better able to deliver substantial cost savings than its peers in each market? And then just as an add-on question on that, what can the regulator do to get in the way of the returns enhancing moves you're making?

Yeah. Let me take the first (01:16:59), but I give you the answer that I like to believe in, because I have to believe in that answer. Digital cost savings come – I mean, there's a part that comes anyhow, but they don't come with very deep transformations and very radical changes of organizations and technology infrastructures. I like to believe that Vodafone will do it by and is doing it by contaminating in a much quicker and much deeper way each operating unit. The examples I gave and, here, we have Johan, we are again seen by the partner markets that pay a fee for Vodafone to be part of the club as source of technology expertise. So, they ask me, (01:17:49), but they want to see a lot of Johan now because the introduction of digital layers, because Massive MIMO, because smart CapEx allocation is becoming the name of the game. We have many, of course. We can learn from Italy, learn from UK, and very quickly put them, on the other day I was in Newbury, there was a Spanish team kind of learning. And so, we can really do that probably quicker than others. It doesn't mean that we do it better than others. So, hopefully, we'll also do it better, but quicker we should. Will this be competed away? That is a revenue question. And my comment related to Germany, about Italy is we see number three players typically giving away more, but not necessarily getting much more in terms of financial performance, at least if I compare the recent announcement, I'm not really impressed by (01:18:38), which means that at some point there will be a squeeze on that. Different story with the low-cost providers, very low-cost providers, the MÁSMÓVIL, (01:18:49) Italy. Those we need to counter in the market with very focused initiatives, because these guys will come unfortunately with good conditions that they got from the others. And so, we will need to be very focused, which is why having agility, having the extra layer (01:19:03) is very important because we need to be able to roll out fast in every market to hammer the new entrants (01:19:09). But this flexibility is what I think will make us a little bit better. The second part of your question?

Just on – how can the regulator stop your gains? And just to your point...

The regulators clearly are signaling that they don't like markets to go to three. They – as soon as they go to three, they recreate a four. So, that to me is already the answer, the joint dominance is clearly a possible risk that we are signing off. But honestly, the rest which is left is international calls, which is not big for us at least, it's bigger for the fixed guys, for the traditional fixed guys. There could be something on content renewals and these things, but there's not a huge amount left apart from spectrum, spectrum can be expensive, but. Yeah, David?

Yes. David Wright from Bank of America. One question, kind of spanning two markets, but it's essentially the JVs. You've increased the cash distribution or I should say the JV has in the Netherlands. And that's come with a credit downgrade, I believe over the last 24 hours. It does feel like you're clearly then willing to run a higher gearing, but actually, I guess, my question is more about India. Since you've announced the deal, you obviously announced the leverage on the full-year 2016 EBITDA, which clearly full-year 2017 is a very, very different level. So, we're talking 5 times cost leverage. The MTR decision's arguably – the termination rate decisions, they've just probably gone against your expectations I would have thought. So, what I'm trying to understand is the need for more capital in that business, it feels like you're struggling a little bit on the CapEx side, Bharti is certainly attacking you, and that's a very essential cost of business in India. So what's the potential for that JV needing more capital is ultimately my question.

Yeah. I mean, the answer is it's too early to say. Because if you stand back, as Vittorio has said in his summary for India, I mean, Jio started charging at the start of the fiscal year, July, put prices up. September, put prices up. Who knows what happens in the next quarter and the next quarter. So, they're putting prices up quite significantly, I mean, the last one at the half-year was 15%, 20%. So, the material increase is going on. On top of that, we're definitely seeing traffic flow from the value players exiting the market to the other players and we're taking our reasonable share. So, yes, I understand the MTRs is a drag in the second half, but we've got some fundamentals that are starting to improve. And if you cast your memory all the way back to when there was a 14-player price war going on seven-odd years ago, yes, it went down and then it came back very quickly as well with price increases. So, I think, firstly, the market's showing some promise. So, I'd say, secondly, don't forget 80% of the share (01:22:06) is to the government for spectrum payment, of which they're already talking about rescheduling from 10 years to 16 years. So, we'll have to see that re-profiling go on. We're working very hard on the towers. So, I think we landed I think a good deal for us on the orphan towers. We're now working on the Indus options and we're progressing those. So, I think the answer is, well, we've still got, who knows, anywhere between nine months, 12 months that we'll have to run to close out the deal, we're being very active and we're aware of needing to have the right capital structure when we go in. But there's a lot happening in the market as well.

Yeah, I do remember...

Can I just – you mentioned Netherlands. I mean, and what is common to both of these is very sizable synergies. So – and both of them have a lot of infrastructure. So, if you think about it, India has got its spectrum, big network; in Netherlands, we already had national cable build, national 4G. So, a lot of the infrastructure's in the ground here, and therefore the synergies have a big leverage effect from both of these which allowed us to talk very highly leverage.

So there – then Nick (01:23:20), you had a question? No? Yes, and then Andrew and then we go back to Jerry (01:23:22)?

Hi there. (01:23:28) from RBC. A quick one on the scale of the UK in terms of CityFibre and that deal you just announced. Phase one of that is for 1 million homes passed, with phase two we have 5 million. Is that an automatic flow through from phase one to phase two, or are there any certain conditions you need to meet to do that? And secondly, within that, obviously the size of that 5 million homes passed is determined by the sort of 42 cities that are currently in. Would you have any aspiration to go beyond that, say, the top sort of 100 cities and much more 5 million homes, or is that dependent on Openreach's response?

You have the answer. It's very difficult for us to say today where we want to go, because as I said, our strategy is a very iterative strategy. You would develop an option, you exploit the option, you see whether you have an alternative and you keep going. So, we'll look at the first million, decision to go to 5 million will depend on how things go. If Openreach insist in saying we need to raise wholesale prices because we need to invest, I think they're creating room in the market for CityFibre and for others, by the way, because the more they insist on that strategy, the more room there would be for other entrepreneurs to do like whatever. Deutsche Glasfaser in Germany or other initiatives of that kind. If Openreach change, they change their stance and they change their conditions, then, of course, it will depend on the levels. So, it's difficult to answer that question. In fixed unfortunately it's not like in mobile where you say, I do this and I will do it and in three years is done, you have to change along the way. Nick?

It's right. All the terms from the 1 million to the 5 million (01:25:16).

Nick and Andrew (01:25:18) then, and then Jerry and then we come back. Spyros Nicholas Delfas - Redburn (Europe) Ltd.: Yeah, thanks. Nick Delfas from Redburn. It's another difficult-to-answer question which is about this issue of the lower-priced entities in each market. So, you've got quite a nice structural improvement here with the MNOs consolidating and many of the MVNOs being under pressure, but you still have the MÁSMÓVILs, the Iliads in Italy, the (01:25:43). So, what I'm not quite clear on is how you strategize around how much oxygen to give those guys or to allow them, or put another way, how can you be confident that your customers on the main brand are actually a little bit sloppier than you might like. They might just actually take the price cut at some stage. So, is there anything you can tell us about NPS, about how you strategize about that, because very often in telecoms, everything can look good until suddenly everyone starts to churn down to the lower price?

I can tell you what we are doing in Spain or in Italy, which are the two markets where we have one live case and one to-be case. First of all, look at the market prices, I mean, if you look at the promotions that are available in Italy today, I mean, 20 gig €10, 32 gig €10, 30 gigs, I mean, it's already a market which is incredibly low in terms of opportunity. So, there's – the real bottom end of the market is already kind of followed (01:26:52) in a very aggressive and very, I'd say, promotional way, which does not mean that nothing will happen there, but I'm not so sure how much oxygen is really left. What we do in the higher end of the market, again, through advanced IT systems, we analyze customers. We analyze inclinations. We analyze the reason for growing. And, for example, in Italy, we have covered already more than 1.5 million of – sorry, 1 million, not 1.5 million, we would be a 1.5 million by then – customers that – for analytical reasons we know that they have some pain points or some reasons potentially to go. And then we intervene and we change conditions to those. But we change one by one by one. So, it's an incredibly sophisticated (01:27:37) you see all these maps and then you go down (01:27:41) get to Nick and say Nick means this. So, you immunize the high-end by removing the higher end – by removing the pain points. You do more convergence, so you offer converge, we launched in Italy one converge product at I think relatively aggressive price because it's a good price with mobile and with a Vodafone Pass included. Some of them you lock them in family, some of them you give them more, some of them you compete with (01:28:10). And then eventually you can also consider other brands or second brands or some brands, which again have to cost nothing. And hence, again, the agility and the importance of having these engines. There's no single answer, I would say. In Spain, Lowi is clearly going after MÁSMÓVIL, because we need to respond. Spyros Nicholas Delfas - Redburn (Europe) Ltd.: (01:28:34) market share of SIMs or revenue that you want to maintain in each market, because, I guess, in Spain, maybe your market share – well, actually this quarter might be okay, but you've ceded some market share over the last couple of years in Spain I think.

In Spain, we ceded some market share, us and Telefónica, to the second brand of Orange and MÁSMÓVIL. It's interesting that if you look at the first, the main brand of Orange, actually they're not doing particularly well. This is the problem. When these guys start doing – enabling other guys, you suffer. We are going into this more articulated set of responses everywhere. I don't have a target. I think it's good to – I mean, you don't kill anybody in the business. You allow everybody to survive. But it's good to leave as little oxygen as possible, so that eventually sanity has to come back into the market. Andrew, (01:29:30) Jerry, I think we have two more. Can we get the microphone here to the right please or push the button and speak.

Sorry. Just in terms of a longer-term question around 5G, and I guess that's now coming on to your investment horizon. Is there an opportunity do you think to get ahead of the curve in 5G and perhaps do some things that either the wireline incumbent might not choose to do, or three or four might not be able to afford to do. Can you achieve some lasting differentiation that way? And if so, can it be done within the existing CapEx envelope that you have?

Listen, the 5G topic is a complicated one, because when people ask me this question, first of all, be assured that we talk to every single possible person everywhere in the planet who knows anything about it, whether this is Chinese people or manufacturers, or Americans, or whatever, Koreans, everybody who pretends to be ahead on 5G. Somebody in this room, (01:30:47) myself, Nick, we are in content with. So, I think it's hard to see a single strategy to be first because you need to align spectrum, technology and devices. Probably the area where you will see earlier implementation of 5G will be IoT and maybe in the areas of smart cities, maybe in the areas of industrial IoT, depending on whom you talk to. I don't think that for consumer normal use there will be a particular reason to really rush ahead, what you can do with 4.5G is very good. Now, that does not mean that, for example, in Milan, because of the tender conditions, we are not already experimenting, and I will probably say a few things more in Barcelona in February about it with very advanced solutions. But I don't believe that other than segments or pieces of it, it's going to be really worth trying to be first in 2018 or 2019. Different thing to say how much of 5G we can use to reduce our cost, increase our capacity and go in the monetization, the right part of my chair, which Johan believes very strongly on and you can talk to Johan after, because that is a serious reduction of cost versus 4.5G. But there's more capacity and cost really than – more than that. Augmented reality maybe, but how long will it take again? So, I don't think that for consumer applications you are talking about much earlier than 2020, 2021.

And just, I mean, is there anything on the preplanning side where it makes sense to do further densification or other activities – or are there other activities to do?

No, it makes sense to – of course, it makes sense to have the network readiness, it makes sense to get transmission in the high capacity, high traffic side brought up to fiber. We have this target of 95%. We are on the way there. It makes sense, of course, to prepare the platforms that will deliver the services, IoT in particular earlier, because in any case, we are – I mean, as we say, the reason why we launch consumer IoT in November 2017 is not really for what we are going to do in 2018 or 2019, but it is to prepare a strong platform for the next following 10 years. So, all those things we're doing, so it's more platforms, it's more enablers, and then in the meantime, talk to whoever in the world is doing the different pieces so that we can apply the best one. And we might be first in one city or in one country, but I'm not sure I see a generalized consumer early adoption.

Okay. Good morning. It's Jerry Dellis from Jefferies. I've got a question mainly on Italy, please. In the context of the UK, you described how the joint venture with CityFibre is logical approach to keeping Openreach's feet to the fire in terms of their pricing strategy and their fiber ambition. And I wondered whether the Vodafone strategy on Italian fiber is similarly open-minded as you think about the potential sources of supply going forward, be it Telecom Italia or Enel. And then within the Enel coverage area currently, which is, I suppose, no longer particularly trivial, are you actively switching existing Vodafone fixed broadband customers across from indirect wholesale access from Telecom Italia onto the new Enel network. Are there any practical economic constraints to switching customers over quickly?

Let me start from the end of your question, the answer to your question is yes, we're switching customers, and no, there's no constraints. Actually it's an obligation, contractual obligation that we have with them. And so, whenever the lines are made available to us, we see who is there and we switch. And then going back, the answer to the question is, yes, I mean, we don't have any ideological resistance to working with any incumbent. And sometimes, if they give us good conditions and they work in a transparent and completely neutral way, we're very happy to work with them. The problem is that most of them, they get there only when there is a real threat. And now, there is a real threat everywhere. So, if I were the parliament or the commission, I would celebrate (01:35:31) Vodafone, because thanks to (01:35:33) Vodafone, there is competition in Italy, in Germany, in Spain, in the UK now, in Portugal, in Greece, in Ireland and on and on and on. So, it is not an ideological thing, we just want to get good conditions and good prices. So, happy to consider. Do we have one more, or we close it here? We close it here?

I would like to thank you very much. I would like to reiterate, good half, very solid strategic process and increased guidance to reflect all of that. But most importantly, the future is exciting really.