On one hand, we need to finance the growth, which includes expanding our capacities. Our capital expenditures for assets are expected to reach a peak of up to 700 million euros in 2023, whereas we typically invest around 5% of our revenue. On the other hand, we are dealing with long-term contracts and manufacturing with short-term demand. We have made significant advances in anticipation of these orders. This means we are building inventories to be able to deliver promptly when the orders come in.

Our free cash flow is typically generated in the fourth quarter. In the first three quarters, we make advances. This year has been significantly better than the previous year because we have received customer prepayments or milestone payments. Nevertheless, we usually experience a weak or negative operating cash flow in the first three quarters and then collect all the money in the fourth quarter.

In 2022, we had an operational outflow of funds for the whole year. This year, we have already significantly improved our operational free cash flow. In the first half of 2022, we had an outflow of funds of over 600 million euros. This year, we will generate positive cash flow at the lower end of the 4 to 6% range.

It's related to revenue recognition. Our business is influenced by customers who tend to order and pay for products towards the end of the year.

It used to be the case that some spending occurred at the end of the year. Today, it's more about ordering processes and procedures. Many things go through parliament; contracts have to be negotiated before production begins. This naturally puts us in the second half of the year. That's why we make advances. We see the demand, and we can predict orders well in advance. We want to avoid creating a gap that could negatively impact the security preparedness of individual countries.

Let's start with energy. We have long-term electricity supply contracts, even though our business is not energy-intensive. Inflation affects us in terms of the supply chain. However, our long-term contracts typically include adjustment clauses.

Customers are procurement authorities and thus governments. As a result, we usually don't experience defaults. For long-term contracts, we receive down payments or milestone payments, so we don't see this as a significant risk.

Payment timeliness depends on the countries. We can't precisely predict when payments will be made. There might be slight delays, leading to a significant variation in operational cash flow because the payment is postponed by a few days. We don't have control over that.

That is indeed a challenge. From a business perspective, I don't care whether a payment arrives on December 30th or January 2nd. From an accounting perspective, it obviously makes a difference. But our investors are aware of the situation and can put it into context.

We are a good partner for our customers, delivering technically excellent products, but we don't win every bid. We are, of course, subject to competition.

For the construction of the factory alone, including the land, the amount is approximately 100 million euros. Conversely, our American partners provide us with the necessary technical equipment.

The Ministry of Defense has demanded the participation of German companies. We are constructing the facility in Weeze not only for the 35 German aircraft but for all F-35 planes that are intended for delivery outside the US. We expect to supply a minimum of 400 fuselage midsections. This is a huge order for us. After that, we naturally want to negotiate service contracts. The factory is fully booked for years, if not decades. If not for that, there wouldn't be any justification for us to build a facility in Weeze.

Because it's a simple, fast way to raise that much money in the capital market. Unlike bonds, a prospectus is not required for convertible bonds.

In the end, the pricing is comparable, but there are differences in the balance sheet because the conversion right is shown in equity.

Due to the capital market environment, the Board of Directors and the Supervisory Board opted for the fast route, especially since we expected interest rates to continue rising. Time was also pressing to complete the financing before the year-end financial statements. This also spoke in favor of a convertible bond because it could be completed in January. The Schuldschein market did not offer sufficient options for our needs. Also, considering the volume of 1 billion euros, it was important for us to split the amount into two tranches with different maturities.

No, not at all.

There is currently nothing significant on the horizon, at least nothing I can report on. But, of course, we are interested in European consolidation and regularly explore various targets.

That's not entirely accurate. France is leading the FCAS project, which is the future air combat system, and Germany is leading the MGCS, which is the future armored combat vehicle system. Apart from the MGCS, we have developed the Panther, which can meet immediate needs and is attractive to client countries where the MGCS project is not applicable. Regarding consolidation: I fundamentally believe that there is room for further consolidation in Europe.

For me, maintaining an Investment-Grade rating is an absolute necessity. Even after the Expal acquisition and the debt-financed purchase financing, our Investment-Grade rating remained stable. Moreover, there is still significant leeway in our financial contracts' financial covenant, which relates to the ratio of net debt to EBITDA (Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization).

We have already started the process of selling the small pistons and are currently in talks with various investors. I am confident that we can conclude a deal soon.

In the civilian sector, our goal is to develop new technology fields. Of course, we regularly discuss how to proceed with this sector. However, there are no specific considerations at the moment.

We have two separate IT systems, which worked to our advantage during the cyberattack. However, there are some points of connection and interaction between the two.

Since January of this year, Dagmar Steinert has been the first woman in the three-member board of Rheinmetall. She is responsible for the company's finances. What might feel like a turning point for the defense and automotive conglomerate is not a new experience for Steinert. She was also the first woman in the board of directors of her previous employer, the Mannheim-based lubricant manufacturer Fuchs Petrolub. With responsibility for the company's finances, the 59-year-old holds a prominent position, ensuring that the ambitious promises in the booming defense business are financially viable.

We don't have market synergies. Nevertheless, we collaborate on the technological level. For instance, in the production of hull components in Weeze, we combine our experiences from the military and civilian divisions. Another example is the new production line for Gepard ammunition in Unterlüß, which was designed by the civilian sector.

We are currently divesting the small piston business. The remaining civilian sector is undergoing a technical transformation, and we are confident that it will increase profitability. We'll have to see how it further develops.

No.

No, that doesn't matter. If you look at companies where activist investors have been active, we're always talking about stakes of a few percent. A high stock price is the best protection against activist investors.

The so-called Zeitenwende by Chancellor Olaf Scholz has brought significant changes, both economically and in public perception. The perception has shifted positively, reflected in a substantial increase in the number of job applicants.

There have always been investors who didn't shun defense stocks, and others who would never invest in defense. The acceptance has significantly increased.

The investor circle has not significantly changed since the outbreak of the war. Perhaps the concentration of the top 20 investors has intensified, but Rheinmetall's institutional investors have always been predominantly from the Anglo-Saxon region. Institutional investors make up about 70% of our investors, with the majority coming from the Anglo-Saxon region.