Earnings call transcript: Polaris Renewable Q1 2025 revenue misses forecast

Polaris Renewable Energy Inc reported its Q1 2025 earnings, revealing a slight revenue miss with $20.3 million against the forecasted $20.67 million. The company recorded a net loss of $10.4 million due to one-time finance costs. According to InvestingPro data, the company maintains impressive gross profit margins of 84.79%, demonstrating strong operational efficiency. Despite these challenges, Polaris Renewable’s stock price remained stable at $11.97, indicating a neutral market reaction as investors assess the company’s strategic focus on future projects, particularly in battery storage.

Key Takeaways

• Revenue for Q1 2025 was $20.3 million, slightly below expectations.
• Adjusted EBITDA increased significantly to $15 million.
• The stock price remained unchanged, reflecting cautious investor sentiment.
• The company is focusing on a major battery storage project in Puerto Rico.
• Polaris Renewable maintains a strong cash position with $91 million on hand. InvestingPro data reveals a robust current ratio of 6.76, indicating excellent liquidity, while offering an attractive dividend yield of 6.91%. For detailed insights into Polaris Renewable’s financial health and growth potential, investors can access the comprehensive Pro Research Report, which provides expert analysis and actionable intelligence for smarter investment decisions.

Company Performance

Polaris Renewable Energy’s performance in Q1 2025 showed mixed results. While the company managed to increase its adjusted EBITDA significantly to $15 million, the slight revenue miss and a net loss of $10.4 million highlighted ongoing financial challenges. The company’s strategic initiatives, particularly in battery storage, are crucial to its future growth prospects.

Financial Highlights

• Revenue: $20.3 million, down from $20.6 million in Q1 2024.
• Net Loss: $10.4 million, primarily due to one-time finance costs.
• Adjusted EBITDA: $15 million, up from $5.7 million in Q1 2024.
• Net Cash from Operating Activities: $11.8 million, up from $8.7 million.
• Quarterly Dividend: $0.15 per share, payable on May 23.

Market Reaction

Despite the revenue miss, Polaris Renewable’s stock price remained stable at $11.97. InvestingPro analysis suggests the stock is currently undervalued, with analyst targets ranging from $14.45 to $22.53. This stability suggests that investors are cautiously optimistic about the company’s future projects, particularly the battery storage initiatives, which could drive future growth. The stock trades closer to its 52-week low of $7.75, indicating market caution, though analysts maintain a strong buy consensus.

Outlook & Guidance

Polaris Renewable is concentrating on its ASAP battery program in Puerto Rico, with plans for an 80 MW battery storage project. The project, with an estimated gross CapEx of $70 million and net CapEx of $50 million after ITC credits, is expected to generate $15 million in EBITDA. The company targets signing a contract by mid-June 2025, with a potential 12-month timeline to commercial operation.

Executive Commentary

CEO Mark highlighted the strategic importance of the battery storage project, stating, "We definitely like that a lot." He also noted the potential to increase leverage for the right projects, saying, "You could probably get me from four times debt to EBITDA to maybe four and a half."

Risks and Challenges

• Continued financial losses could impact investor confidence.
• High debt levels may limit future investment opportunities.
• Regulatory challenges in new markets could affect project timelines.
• Potential tariff impacts on the Puerto Rico project need careful management.
• Market saturation in certain regions could limit growth potential.

Q&A

During the earnings call, analysts inquired about potential tariff impacts on the Puerto Rico project and operational risk management for new acquisitions. The company also addressed its share buyback strategy and regulatory challenges in multiple jurisdictions.

Full transcript - Polaris Renewable Energy Inc (PIF) Q1 2025:

Conference Operator: Please note this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your hosts, Anton and Mark. The floor is yours.

Anton, Executive/CFO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Thank you. Good morning everyone and welcome to our first quarter earnings call for Polaris Renewable Energy. In addition to our press releases issued earlier today, you can find our financial statements, MD and A on both SEDAR plus and on our corporate website at polarisrei.com. Unless noted otherwise, all amounts referred to are denominated in U. S.

Dollars. I’d also like to remind you that comments made during this call may include forward looking statements within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation regarding the future performance of Polaris and its subsidiaries. These statements are current expectations and as such are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations. These risks and uncertainties include the factors discussed in the company’s annual information form for the year ended 12/31/2024. I am joined this morning, as always, by Mark.

At this time I will walk through our financial highlights. Power generation. Consolidated power production for the quarter was 216,344 megawatt hours versus 213,434 megawatt hours for the same period in 2024. For Nicaragua in the first quarter of twenty twenty five, production was one hundred and fourteen thousand four and twenty four MWh, marginally lower compared to the same period last year. Consolidated production in Peru for the three months ended March 31 was in line with the comparative period in ’24.

At our Dominican Republic One solar facility, we produced 16,083 MWh in the three months ended March 31 compared to 14,530 MWh in the same period last year. For Ecuador, in the first quarter of twenty twenty five, average production of 11,999 megawatt hours eclipsed the same period last year, which totaled 10,223 megawatt hours. In Panama, Vista Hermosa Solar Park production of 5,433 MWh was marginally lower than the same period last year at 6,130 MWh. And finally, production for Punta Lima since 03/03/2025 the acquisition date was 3,558 megawatt hours. Revenue.

Revenue for the quarter was $20,300,000 during the three months ending March 31 compared to $20,600,000 last year. Net earnings. There was a net loss for the quarter, 10,400,000.0, owing principally to one time finance costs incurred around the pay down of four loans compared to net earnings of 4,400,000 Q1 20 20 four. Adjusted EBITDA of $15,000,000 for the quarter compared to $5,700,000 for the same period last year. Cash generation.

Net cash from operating activities for the quarter was $11,800,000 higher than the $8,700,000 for the same period last year. Net cash used in our investing activities for the three months ending March 31 was $14,700,000 compared to $1,300,000 in the same period in 2024. Principal use of funds was around the acquisition of Punta Lima Wind Farm in Puerto Rico. And finally, net cash used in finance activities for the quarter ended March 31 is higher than the compared period last year, reflecting the early debt payments of the four credit facilities totaling $120,600,000 including $114,000,000 of principal and $6,400,000 of accrued interest and prepayment penalties. Finally, I’d like to highlight that we have already announced we will be paying a quarterly dividend on May 23 of $0.15 a share to shareholders of record on May 12.

With that, I’ll turn the call over to Mark who will elaborate on Polaris’ first quarter results as well as on current business matters.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: So I’ll just comment first starting on Nicaragua from an operations perspective. In terms of the steam units, they were flat to actually slightly up quarter over quarter. Whereas the binary unit was down, I would say that the there was some unplanned downtime which resulted in approximately 12 to 1,500 megawatt hours less. So the change from Q4 to Q1 was 100% related to binary unit downtime, not a resource issue. Those issues resolved and we do not expect them to continue for the remainder of the year.

For Peru, similar issues. Would say again, the resource in Peru has been very strong. We’re in the rainy season, it continues and resource was very good. We did have some unplanned downtime at Ocho De Augusto to fix some bearings and just given the resource is actually stronger than normal, it just came with a lot of of, well, sediment or more than sediment in the intake and that was about 4,000 megawatt hours effect on Ocho De Gusto, but again, resource quite strong. I would say the rest of the production for the group was in line, some was up, some was down, the Doctor was up given the panel replacement program.

Ecuador was a little bit higher, panel was a little bit lower, that’s all purely resource driven. And then the comments on Punta Lima would just be that it was only twenty eight days of consolidation in the numbers, so there’s really not much to read into that. I would say that the actual production of the facility in Q1 was 16,150 megawatt hours, which would have been slightly above budget for the quarter, obviously we didn’t consolidate it, but Q1 was tracking actually a little bit higher than what budget is based on what we were targeting for that facility which is great. In terms of the balance sheet there is a lot of noise in accordance because of the repayment. Raised the bond in Q4 but we repaid all of the debt in Q1 but I just say the most important thing is that so we’ve ended up now with debt of about $225,000,000 is the important number and cash on hand of $91,000,000 so we are well cast up grow the business.

So very strong balance sheet. And really where we focused, I would say right now, number one focus is the ASAP battery program in Puerto Rico. It’s by far and away the top of the list for us in terms of our return profile and in terms of quality of contract profile. So I had mentioned on the last call that we would have an update and we continue to progress. I would say that the targeted signing on their end that they’ve put down is mid June.

So I’ll say sixty to seventy five days because they always take a little bit longer than we want. But we’re doing weekly calls with them. We back and forth on contract drafts. My hope is that by sort of our Q2, we signed the contract and can report and give, I would say a few more specifics on the actual, call it CapEx and return. But for the high level sketches is that what we’re aiming for right now is an 80 megawatt battery times four hours.

And the way that the payment stream works is it’s $16,000 per megawatt of capacity per month and now that is assuming you get an ITC credit which we do believe we will still get that and that would take your so the gross capex the way it works is we’re estimating right now about $70,000,000 but that’s before any ITC grants which are likely going to be in the 15,000,000 to $20,000,000 range so that is call it, a net CapEx of $50,000,000 So we definitely have cash on hand to fund that. If we did sign at the end of or in June, end of second quarter, we could still see, realistically a twelve month time frame to COD. So that’s the timing we’re looking at. When you run through the math, you’ll see that in terms of oh, it’s also worth mentioning that several of the key cost items for that are actually paid for by the off taker, the biggest one being insurance. So the revenue line is going to be very close to the EBITDA line, given that we already have an operating facility there.

We do think that the EBITDA margin should be very high, especially when your insurance cost is a pass through to the off taker. So really, I would say in terms of our capital right now, the plan would be to earmark it for that. And we’ll know in the next two months. Again, when you do the numbers of net CapEx of 50, we’re looking at, that’s assuming ITC, should be about $15,000,000 of EBITDA on that. It’s a twenty year contract as to pure capacity payments.

We definitely like that a lot. And we do, as always, have a pipeline of acquisitions. I would say the return profile on those has improved in these markets. However, I would still say the gap between what we think we’re looking at with the ASAP program and what we think we can get on these operating acquisitions is still big enough that it dictates that we’re going to prioritize the ASAP. However, we can definitely switch gears if for whatever reason those ratios get tighter.

And I would also say that we do think with the bond that we could tap into more capital for an acquisition of, call it, operating assets, which pretty much everything we’re looking at on that side are operating assets on the acquisition side. So I think in terms of increasing the size of the bond, as long as it’s for call it operating assets, think that’d a good use of proceeds and I think we could look to that. So I do see a combination of those two things as being very feasible in the next six to nine months and that’s really going to be the focus on growth in the next six to twelve months. Then lastly, I’ll mention that in the quarter we purchased 26,000 shares on the NCIB. Year to date we’re at 38,000.

I think we’ve done sort of 90,000 since we started. Small numbers, but we’re going to continue to chip away at these prices. Targeting, I would say, anywhere from 1,500,000.0 to $2,000,000 a year would be really what we’re looking for. And now if the shares, I would say if they went down, we would increase that number in terms of putting more capital to work. But I don’t think we’re going to go too much given, I would say, the opportunities that we have facing us.

We want to make sure that we have enough capital to execute on those opportunities. With that, we can open it up for questions.

Conference Operator: Thank you very much. We’ll be conducting our question and answer Thank you very much. Your first question is coming from Rupert Merer of National Bank. Rupert, your line is live.

Rupert Merer, Analyst, National Bank: Hi. Good morning, gentlemen.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Good morning, David. Good morning.

Rupert Merer, Analyst, National Bank: If I can start with Puerto Rico. So, given that a lot of the cash you have on the balance sheet has come from debt, so we do understand then that that net CapEx of 50,000,000, you wouldn’t look to put any more debt on that asset at at this time.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Correct. Not at this time. No.

Rupert Merer, Analyst, National Bank: Okay. And and can you walk us through how tariffs or any trade restrictions are going to impact investment in Puerto Rico or how it might create some uncertainty for that project?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yeah. So if it was today, for sure, and likely there’s going to be some tariffs. I would say if you were to split the CapEx, when we look at it about 70% plus or minus 5% is the containers with the batteries. So the bulk of your CapEx, but not all of it, but take 70%, that would be tariff now, it’s going to have a tariff, or likely to. And so on $70,000,000 so let’s take 50,000,000 of the 70,000,000 would call it is at risk for the most part.

Even some of the 20 is, but we don’t think that you know, we think we can maneuver on the 20 in terms of the balance of plan and find, call it, local suppliers. But on the 50, you really are looking at China, I would say. And so the conversations we’re having though is about including essentially a pass through clause on the, let’s call it 70% of the pass or sort of the CapEx. So I suggest that the signals and the conversations are very good in terms of their need for this product. Two weeks ago there was a massive blackout there.

They’re having issues with their old generating units and so all signs are saying that they want, need the product and so they’re willing to essentially take on tariff risk to get this going. So we don’t have that sort of sign in the contract yet, but it’s for sure being added. So from a return profile, we don’t see any changes. The only issue then becomes what’s the capital requirement to get to the finish line. So that’s where we’re at.

I would hope and expect that by the time we’re getting to sort of putting anything on a boat that there is a little bit more clarity as to, you know, exactly what we’re looking at.

Rupert Merer, Analyst, National Bank: Are there any tariff scenarios where the project would not go forward, say tariffs over 100%? I know it’s a fairly dynamic situation, but does this does this go ahead in any case?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: In any case, I would say no, but I’ll give you some numbers. So I get the 16,000 per megawatt per month. Right? Let’s just call that a zero tariff world, although there was already some tariffs in that number, but just to to keep it simple, call that the zero tariff world and, again, assume the 70%. If there was a 100% tariff, that 16 would go basically to about twenty five, twenty six.

I can tell you that twelve, eighteen months ago, they approved several battery projects with that price, with the $26,000 price. And the reason is when they did their math, battery prices were just that higher. In other words, they’ve come down that much. So we don’t have a price yet as to what’s their top. But they were willing to accept 26,000 12 to 18 months ago.

And so I do think that 100% tariff, we’re still in the market.

Rupert Merer, Analyst, National Bank: Okay. And just a follow-up then on battery costs. So battery costs have come down. You have some markets like the Dominican that wouldn’t have tariffs. How is your kind of two plan shaping up?

Is the economics on that must look look pretty good, and I I know you had some curtailments there recently. Does does that project still go forward? Is that still a priority?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Well, I would tell you we are absolutely reinforcing to them that we offered them a proposal, call it, six weeks ago in terms of what we would do in terms of a price for the energy, call it the extra energy that we would be willing to only supply between, let’s say, six and 12PM at night. And then as of two weeks ago, we have reiterated to them that we’re more than likely going to be able to do better than that based on the tariff situation, everything that’s happening. So we do think that we can sharpen that and we’re just trying to we’re trying to get we’re trying to get the economic response on that. So that’s what we’re waiting for. You know, everything for sure points to batteries and exactly what we’re doing.

I think they’re just they just wanna make sure that that that they don’t set any precedence with us that they’re not gonna apply to the whole market.

Rupert Merer, Analyst, National Bank: Okay. Very good. I’ll leave it there. Thank you.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Thanks.

Conference Operator: Thank you very much. Your next question is coming from Nick Boychuk of Cormark Securities. Nick, your line is live.

Nick Boychuk, Analyst, Cormark Securities: Thanks. Good morning, guys. In Puerto Rico, I know, obviously, Mark, you’re taking advantage of the existing interconnect. But with returns so robust on these battery energy storage projects, are you finding opportunities or looking at ways to add more than just this one project?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yeah. I would say we have quite a list of interested parties out, and it runs the spectrum of a developer that’s got a site that is ideal for another battery project to some battery projects, believe it not, that are already approved, but they’re looking for the capital, as well as a couple of operating projects with great PPAs that are looking. So I would say that it’s all of the above there, for sure.

Nick Boychuk, Analyst, Cormark Securities: Okay. And if we’re thinking of the development of the existing asset, these others and to Rupert’s question about the incremental debt, what would be the upper range of the leverage profile you’d be comfortable going towards?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: I think now the nice thing in Puerto Rico is with all of those contracts given us the capacity payments, I. E. There’s no resource risk on our side, just pure operations. I would say if we’re layering in that, you could probably get me from four times debt to EBITDA to maybe four and a half. If it wasn’t those type of contracts, I would say we’d be looking at four times is the right number.

But I think with that contract profile, you could probably push that up to four and a half.

Nick Boychuk, Analyst, Cormark Securities: Okay. Got it. And given that robust return profile and the fact that it is no technology risk capacity payment, is there an opportunity or a reason to look at technologies other than traditional lithium battery energy storage solutions? Could you start to look at other things like compressed air, concentrated solar, anything else?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yes, and I would say the blackout they had there two weeks ago, the compressed air would have been actually a very welcome technology because of the spinning reserve that they provide the grid. It would have helped them out. I would still say we’re on the cusp of bankability for some of these things, but we’re not there yet. Okay. Got it.

Thank you. But in the medium term, for sure. And I would say that I don’t think it’s going to be 100% lithium. But in the next twelve months, I think it will be 100% lithium. Okay.

Makes sense. Appreciate it.

Conference Operator: Thank you very much. Your next question is coming from Daniel Magda of Raymond James.

Daniel Magda, Analyst, Raymond James: Mark, you mentioned the drop in Q1 being related to the binary unit. Just wondering when we can expect the binary units to be back up to full capacity.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yeah, it is. We performed some maintenance back when we did major maintenance on the turbines, the steam turbines last year, but we had to do more, which was not planned. But it’s done, and we took the downtime, and that was the big cause for the discrepancy between Q4 numbers and Q1 numbers. But that’s done. Got it.

You

Daniel Magda, Analyst, Raymond James: mentioned in the past that as far as returns to shareholders are concerned, it seemed like the dividend was your preferred method. I guess, the the activity on the NCIB this quarter, has your thinking shifted? Or are there plans to use both tools?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: So I would say, which really isn’t that it’s shifted as much as The better way to enunciate it is that returning capital to shareholders is or the ways in which we do, I would say, is share price dependent. So we didn’t think that after closing Frutalanga, but more importantly getting the bond done, that our shares would be where they are. So at these, what we think are depressed values, to us it makes more sense to pick up some stock, great investment, whereas increasing a dividend, that just doesn’t seem like you’re going to get paid for it. So yeah, it’s price dependent, I would say. So here so I would say, assuming we’re in anywhere near this band, then it’s more NCIB and not dividend increases.

Got it.

Daniel Magda, Analyst, Raymond James: That’s helpful. Thanks, gents.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you very much. Our next question is coming from Patrick O’Donnell, who’s a private investor. Patrick, your line is live.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Great. Thank you. Good morning, everybody. For taking my In terms of operational risk, how do you guys go about diligencing or developing the ops team for potential acquisitions?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Well, we operate all of our plants. So from an operations perspective, we have, I think, over 100 employees that are dedicated to operations. So they are always involved in the diligence. Just as an aside for Punta Lima, though, it is a little different in that Vestas, which is a turbine manufacturer, they do have the operations there for the turbines themselves between the turbines and call it the interconnect, I. E.

Balance of plant, that is us. But so that plant is, I would say, much less in terms of our own operational staffing and resourcing that we need to do. But so it’s that operational team that is, I would say, involved in the daily operations diligence. Whereas in terms of, I would say, resource, that tends to be outsourced engineering firms that

Nick Boychuk, Analyst, Cormark Securities: we get to help us

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: with that.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: And then legal, it’s always speak local legal counsel.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Okay. Yeah, that’s helpful. Yeah, I’m referring more to the operations and maintenance team on the ground once the plant is operational. So it sounds like PR is, really, Vestas contract maintenance in terms of other potential acquisitions. I mean, you do you do you plan to sort of acquire the staff, or do you typically bring in new people that would run the plant?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: It’s going to be a combination, but our model is, to the extent we can, operational staff are employees of the company. In the wind, wind projects do tend to have more of an outsource at least for the turbines. But for the other generation types of solar, hydro, geo, we’re going to want to have our own employees running that. Whether we assume all the current employees or whether we put some of our own in or a mix, it all depends. Depends on how we think the quality of the staff is, clearly.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Does Vestas have any sort of performance alignment in their agreement?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yeah. Yeah. They have to pay for bonuses that are based based on actual delivery production. And there’s penalties based on if there’s if the availability is lower than certain thresholds.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Okay. Great. I guess with an expanding portfolio, new jurisdictions that you’re acquiring and looking at, what’s the biggest challenge for you to managing multiple assets abroad? And how do you how do you go about

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yeah. I I would say it’s not it’s probably not what you’d expect. I would say the operational side of it is not the hardest part of it because we find that we have a lot of that experience and we don’t have issues finding qualified people in these markets and it’s a relatively good paying job. I would say, believe it or not, on the accounting and payable side, which is a little bit more of a head office burden, but that’s not complicated, I would say. That’s just you know, how much staffing you need.

And probably the more complicated thing is just that every every single country we operate in, the regulatory framework is different, and that’s the harder part.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Okay. So, yeah, matter of figuring out what that is and navigating that. Once you

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: do this is why that when when I mentioned local legal counsel, there’s always several firms that have relationship with the government entities. They focus on the energy sector, and so you need them because they understand all of the rules and how different they are. So that’s really critical. But it’s all doable, I would say. Mhmm.

Got

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: it. Final question on the NCIB daily buyback volumes. Any reason why they’re so low, like, buying 200 shares or even 500 or a thousand? I mean, it just it almost seems cost prohibitive to buy at such a low volume. Anything you can say about that?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Well, wouldn’t say it’s cost prohibitive, but it’s pretty easy to pick up stock, whether it’s 500 or 1,000. Just think we’re targeting, as I said, just a couple million dollars, which is about 1,000 shares a day, maybe a little bit higher. But for a small company like ours and with a project like the battery at Punta Lima, so that’s $70,000,000 The ITC comes on the back of that. You don’t get that upfront. And if there’s tariffs, you could have an extra 10,000,000 20 million dollars 30 million dollars And that’s well in excess of 20% IRR, unlevered.

So you start going crazy on the NCIB, then we need to come back and raise capital. To me, that just doesn’t make sense, not in these markets.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Sure. Yeah. I guess my question to clarify was, know, you know the price per share is at a point where you want to buy back. Why why wouldn’t you buy, you know, more shares at a time per day knowing, like, yeah, I you you’re gonna buy 20,000 shares at at this price? Yeah.

Because daily volume limit?

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Yeah. I would just suggest that every time somebody is worried they can’t pick up an amount of stock, they always can. And so we would rather be in the market every day than literally do it in two days or three days and be done with it. So I think us having even if it’s small, with having something in the market every day is a better way to go. I mean, we could debate this, but that’s just what we’re going to do.

Patrick O’Donnell, Private Investor: Okay. Thanks for your response. That’s all I got.

Mark, Executive/CEO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Thank you.

Conference Operator: Thank you very much. Well, we appear to have reached the end of our question and answer session. I’ll now hand back over to Anton and Marc for any closing comments.

Anton, Executive/CFO, Polaris Renewable Energy: Just thanks everyone for joining today. Have a great day.

Conference Operator: Thank you very much. That does conclude today’s conference. You may disconnect your phone lines at this time and have a wonderful Thank you for your participation.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.