Good day and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the GOLA LNG Limited second quarter 2026 webcast and conference call. At this time all participants are in listen only mode. After the speaker's presentation there will be the question and answer session. To ask a question during the session you need to press star 1 1 on your telephone keypad. You will then hear an automatic message advising your hand is raised. To withdraw a question please press star 1 and 1 again. Please be advised that this conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to our first speaker today, Karl Fredrik Staubo, CEO. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator. Good morning and welcome to GOLAR LNG's Q2 2026 earnings results presentation. My name is Karl Fredrik Staubo. I'm the CEO of GOLAR, and I'm accompanied today by our CFO, Eduardo Maranhao, to present this quarter's results. Before we get into the presentation, please note the forward-looking statements on slide two. Starting on slide three, we start with an exciting announcement. Overnight, we signed our fourth FLNG unit, which is another Mark II FLNG to be constructed at CMC Raffles Shipyard in China. That's the same shipyard already constructing our existing Mark II FLNG on order. The fourth FLNG order will deliver within 2029 and be the earliest available FLNG capacity globally. The order has been placed on the back of strong interest from prospective charters, as well as Golar's stated policy of adding additional FLNG capacity once the existing fleet has secured long-term charter commitments. Across Hilly, Gimmi and the Mark II under construction, now named the FLNG Esperanza, Golar has a total EBITDA backlog of $17 billion before commodity upside and before a charter on the fourth FLNG unit. During the quarter, Hilly completed her eight-year contract for Parenko offshore Cameroon with 100% economic uptime for the life of the contract. Gimmi overproduced 15% versus contractual volume and the FLNG Esperanza remains on time and on budgets. As part of the firm order for our fourth FLNG, we have also secured an option for an incremental Mark 2 FLNG with CMC raffles, i.e. an option unit. And today we also announce a letter of intent with C3M Shipyard in Singapore for further incremental growth units utilizing our Mark 1 or Mark 2 design. We will provide further color on our growth ambitions later in the presentation. Our liquidity stands at approximately $1.5 billion, inclusive of the $600 million revolving credit facility secured during Q2. Turning to slide four, we highlight our long-term charter contracts with Healy Gimme and Esperanza, contracted through 2045, and with a total EBITDA backlog of $17 billion before commodity upside and inflationary adjustments. With our fourth FLNG order, we see potential to meaningfully increase our earnings capacity, and we'll now elaborate on that on slide five. Today's announced order marks a 41% increase in GOLAR-controlled liquefaction capacity, increasing our total fleet capacity from 8.6 million tons to more than 12 million tons on a fully delivered basis. Assuming that we can achieve contractual terms in line with those achieved for Esperanza last year, we see potential for a 50% increase in our earnings capacity. Our fourth unit is also expected to bring diversification of our earnings backlog, both with regards to charter counterpart as well as geographical exposure. Today's announced order will also be the world's earliest available liquefaction capacity, at least one to two years ahead of any alternatives. And this, again, will drive charter interest in the units. The incremental options, both on CMC and through the LOI with Citrium, create a replicable model and a capacity to meet some of the demand we see for FLNG deployments. On slide six, we lay out the overview of the FLNG industry by owner. With our fourth order, we now regain the position as the market leading owner of FLNG capacity with number of units at par with ENI, but higher in terms of controlled liquefaction capacity. We expect to see another one to three FLNG orders from the existing owners on this page within the next six to 12 months further building on our thesis that the FLNG market will see similar development to that of the FPSO industry, which started in 1985 and now has grown to more than 250 units globally. Golar maintains the position as the only proven provider of FLNG as a service. Turning to slide seven, We have laid out the same overview of the FLNG units globally, but here divided by the shipyard of construction. As you can clearly see from the slide, Samsung is the market leader for delivery of FLNGs. Wiesen, a shipyard in China, has also built three new builds and continues to actively market new build FLNGs. whilst Hanwha Ocean delivered one unit in 2016 and don't have near-term capacity to add additional units. Two shapeyards on the far right, both Seatrim and CIMC, have only ever built units for Golar and only done conversions. The way we see the market today, we do not expect other players actively pursuing conversion candidates hence they are focused on Samsung or Wiesen. Based on conversations with both shipyards, we believe Samsung is at the very earliest able to deliver incremental capacity, sometime in 2031. We do expect Wiesen to be in prime position to win two large FLNG units in the relatively near future. and then they will also be spoken for well into the 2030s. Hence the way we see the market right now, we believe the only incremental capacity that can be added with relatively near-term delivery is GOLAR conversions at Citrium and CIMC. In addition to yard capacity, we see significant pressure on critical long lead equipment. Equipment like turbines, dual fuel engine, steam generators, and cold boxes see significant competition from other industries, including AI data centers, shipbuilding, and the aircraft industry. Hence, further pressure on these long leads further drives lead times for incremental orders. Therefore, we believe today's announcements, both of a firm order number four, an option for another unit at CIMC, as well as an LOI with Citrium, secures Golar with a growth trajectory to capture market opportunities ahead of competition. We will remain with our policy of only having one open vessel at the time. So as soon as we lock in the contract for number four, we're then likely to proceed at number five, but we have no ambition to overextend. Again, this is furthermore in line with our announced strategy and also strategic review that we are looking at alternatives to accelerate our FLNG growth, and this speaks to that statement. Turning to slide eight and an overview of the LNG industry and what's going on in the market as we see it. The industry is set to grow around 40% between 2026 and 2031. As stated on our Q1 call, the two largest exporters in the world, US and Qatar, are at the same time expected to increase their market share from 40 to 53% of global supply. Hence, as much as we see a growing market, we see very significant increase in supply concentration. Turning to the middle graph, geopolitical events make such concentration with increasing uncertainty for off-takers. The world's second largest exporter of LNG, Qatar, was directly hit in military action during Middle East events. and the Ross Lofven liquefaction plant has estimates that they will be out. We are around 17 million tons out of a total capacity of 88 for at least three to five years. We therefore see a need for the global LNG market to further diversify its supply. This is where we think FLNG will play a vital role and on the graph on the far right, you can see the location of FLNG projects globally. Six of today's exporters would not have been exporters if it weren't for FLNG technology. Where Golar operates, we represent the only export facility that's true for Mauritania, Senegal, it will be true for Argentina and it was true for Cameroon before we left Significant proven gas reserves remain stranded, which creates further opportunities for FLNG-led LNG supply diversification. Turning to Q2 and recent highlights and developments. As stated during the quarter, GIME delivered 15% above its contractual day rate, with the 41st cargo delivered. Hilli ended its eight-year contract in Cameroon with 100% economic uptime since contract startup and 156 cargoes delivered over the eight years. The unit is now in transit to Singapore for modifications ahead of its 20-year contract in Argentina. CESA officially named the Mark II under construction the FLNG Esperanza. We secured a $600 million revolving credit facility. We signed the fourth FLNG order and through the EPC for number four and the LOI with Citrium, we made a pathway to increase the fleet to over seven units. Turning to slide 11 with a focus on Hille. On July 26th, Golar delivered its final cargo under our contract with Perenco Offshore Cameroon. We're extremely proud to see the unit have 100% economic uptime since startup. We're further pleased to see that the redeployment progress as planned. We exited the country and are in transit according to schedule. Once the modification work has completed, we will sail to Argentina where we will start a contract in the second half of next year where we will generate 285 million dollars of annual EBITDA before further commodity offset. On slide 12 we would like to extend our gratitude and thankfulness to our partners SNH and Porenko for solid cooperation over eight years in Cameroon. In addition to LNG Export, the project has created meaningful value to the local economy and people. Golars operations employed more than 100% Cameroonians or more than 40% local content on board the unit. In addition to significant scholarship and courses, we have spent $80 million in local procurement, and generated more than one and a half billion dollars in cash earnings to Cameroonian state interests. We've also voluntarily invested in critical infrastructure in country, such as water holes, street lights, school renovations, new sports centers, et cetera. We're motivated to work together again on potential gas monetizations in Cameroon and hope to be back in the near future. Turning to slide 13 and the GIMI. GIMI continues to produce above contractual levels. During the quarter, we produced 15% above the contracted capacity. That's despite the fact that we are coming into summer months and liquefaction plants are sensitive to both ambient and water temperature. Hence, we're extremely pleased with this performance. We do expect to see continued impact of high temperatures during Q3 before we see improved performance when we enter the winter months. Over the year, we do expect the unit to produce meaningfully above the contractual capacity. Turning to FLNG3, the Esperanza project remains on schedule and on budget. were now 74% complete on the conversion progress with more than 15 million man hours completed without lost time incidents. The unit remains on track for SailAway by year end 27 and to start operations in Argentina in the second half of 28. Today, we've spent around $1.3 billion in cash equity into the conversion project out of a total budget of $2.2 billion. On slide 15, we're also progressing the required infrastructure in Argentina. CESA, our contract counterpart, in which Golar is a 10% shareholder, are now progressing critical infrastructure, including pipeline connections required for the startup, warehouse for operations support, supply boats, feeder vessels, and crew vessel, and we're also marketing the LNG offtake. The first two million tons of the total six has been sold to Securing Energy for Europe and we have now seen multiple offtakers bidding for the next four million tons and we expect more offtake to conclude before year-end. Turning to slide 16, we have now confirmed our final investment decision for our fourth FLNG unit. The unit will be similar to the Esperanza currently under construction. The total capex budget has increased on the back of inflationary pressure in particular for long lead equipment globally. and we have a capex budget now of around 2.45 billion versus around 2.2 billion for the Esperanza. Even with this approximate 10% increase in cost, we see this as highly competitive, both compared to an FLND new build and certainly in relation to The cost inflation observed on other offshore and shipping assets globally in the course of the last two years, which have grown meaningfully more than 10%. We expect significant synergies to be realized from building a repeat design and from having two units with overlapping construction at the same shipyard. We have secured a donor vessel for the conversion. and we are now in advanced discussions for long-term employment for the units. We do not expect to add additional units until we have clear visibility on the long-term charter for the unit now ordered. However, once we do, we turn to slide 17 and we have a very clear path as to how we may grow beyond unit number four. Firstly, the order we placed overnight includes an option for a third Mark II FLNG at CIMC Raffles in Yantai, China. As earlier stated, we've also signed an LOI with Citrium. Citrium is the shipyard that constructed both the Hilly and Gimmi, and also the shipyard that will conduct the Hilly modification work this year and next year. That LOI reserves slot reservations for either a Mark 1 or a Mark 2 design FLNG. In addition to the shipyard capacity, we have secured options for incremental long lead equipment. We have identified and are working to secure additional donor vessels. And we're certainly advancing charter discussions for long-term employment with multiple counterparts. With the agreement signed today, Golar is laying out the groundwork for accelerated FLNG growth in the years to come. I'll now hand the call over to Eduardo to take us through group results.

Thank you, Karl, and good morning, everyone. Moving to slide 19. Q2 was another strong quarter for Golar. With continued operational performance across our FLNG fleets, and a meaningful increase in EBITDA. Total operating revenue was $130 million in the quarter, with FLNG GIME continuing to perform above contractual levels, delivering earnings approximately 15% above contracted base rate during Q2. We also completed the final legacy O&M contract relating to the FSRU Italis LNG, further completing our transition into a pure-play FLNG infrastructure company. EBITDA increased approximately 20% quarter-on-quarter to $127 million, compared to $106 million in Q1, primarily driven by higher commodity-linked earnings from Healy. Healy generated $37 million of commodity-linked earnings during the quarter, compared to $10 million in Q1, demonstrating once again the meaningful commodity upside embedded within our contracted earnings base. Net income was $56 million in the quarter, bringing year-to-date net income to $158 million. And consistent with our capital allocation framework, we have declared another quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share in Q2. Now moving to slide 20. Our balance sheet continues to provide substantial flexibility to fund the next phase of FLNG growth. At quarter end, total cash stood at approximately $900 million, and net interest in bearing debt was approximately $1.8 billion. In July, we further strengthened our liquidity position by closing a new $600 million revolving credit facility, which currently remains undrawn. Including the RCF, we have approximately $1.5 billion of available liquidity. At the same time, we have now equity funded approximately $1.3 billion of the FLNG Herperança conversion leaving significantly embedded financing capacity across our asset base. As illustrated on the right, optimizing the financing of Healy and locking long-term financing for Esperança could release approximately 2.3 billion of incremental liquidity. Discussions on both transactions are advancing. Together with our existing liquidity, operating cash flows, and potential proceeds from asset-level financings, that will provide substantial capacity to fund FLNG No. 4. while preserving balance sheet flexibility for further growth as explained by Karl. The timing in terms of FLNG number four, asset level financing, will ultimately be aligned with each long-term charter and our broader FLNG growth opportunities. Now moving to slide 21. I would like now to spend a moment on this slide here to talk about the commodity link component of our earnings, which has become increasingly relevant given the strengthening LNG price environment. Healy provides a useful demonstration of the value of this structure. Over its eight-year contract in Cameroon, Healy generated over $650 million of commodity-linked earnings before all the hedging proceeds which we achieved during that period. Our contracts in Argentina also give us meaningful upside participation. Under the Healy and Herperança charters, GOLA receives a commodity-linked fee equivalent to 25% of FOB prices above $8 per million BTU, while our 10% ownership in CESA provides additional commodity exposure. As we previously highlighted, every $1 per million BTU above $8 can generate up to approximately $100 million of incremental annual earnings to Golar. Importantly, LNG offtake indices and forward prices have strengthened materially since earlier this year. Based on current and forward pricing, We estimate that this movement could increase the value of our commodity exposure by up to $500 million per year during the first three years of CESA operations. While forward market liquidity naturally reduces further out in the curve, the important point here is that this upside sits on top of our long-term contracted earnings base. If we now turn to slide 22. Now this slide brings the two key components of our model. a highly visible contracted earnings base, and a significant commodity-linked upside. With Gimi, Healy, and Esperanza fully operational, we expected annual run rate EBITDA of approximately $800 million by 2028, before commodity upside and inflation adjustments. If FLNG No. 4 is contracted on terms broadly comparable to Esperanza, annual EBITDA has the potential to increase by approximately 50% to more than $1.2 billion by 2030. and importantly, that remains the base contracted earnings. On top of that, our Healy, Esperanza and CESA exposure provides meaningful participation in LNG prices. At $8 per million BTU, as you see on the graph, we would expect annual EBITDA of more than $1.2 billion. At $10, this increases to $1.4 billion, while at $15, which is the current forward prices for next year, that would imply approximately $1.9 billion in EBITDA at the goal line. And to illustrate the embedded upside potential, if we apply the LNG pricing that we saw in 2022, we would see potential annual EBITDA approaching $4 billion. The key takeaway is that we have a highly visible contracted earnings base capable of exceeding $1.2 billion annually with our FLNG number four, together with substantial additional upside if LNG markets remain strong. Now turning to slide 23, one of the key attractions of FLNG is that it provides buyers with geographically diversified LNG supply while offering very compelling economics to reserve owners. The illustration on the left shows the economics for a 3.5 MTPA Mark II FLNG based on current forward LNG prices. including upstream feedstock gas, the cost of liquefaction, shipping and regas, we estimate an all-in delivered LNG cost of under $8 per million BTU. If you compare that to a one-year forward LNG price of approximately $15 per million BTU, this leaves a very significant margin for the charter. At approximately 90% utilization, a 3.5 MTPA FLNG would deliver around 50 cargoes per year. On these assumptions, that translates into approximately $1.3 billion of annual operating margin for the charter, or around $25 million per cargo. Importantly, these economics come together with the strategic benefits of FLNG. Shorter time to market, access to geographically diversified gas resources, and reduced dependence on a limited number of large onshore LNG supply locations. This combination of attractive economics and supply diversification provides a compelling proposition for prospective FLNG charters. So in summary, Q2 was another strong quarter for us. We continue to deliver operationally. Our contracted earnings base provides significant long-term visibility. Commodity exposure offers substantial upside. And our balance sheet provides the capacity to fund the next phase of FLNG growth. With attractive economics supporting demand for additional units, We believe we are extremely well positioned for the opportunities ahead. So with that, I'll hand the call back to you, Karl.

Thank you, Eduardo. Turning to slide 25 to summarize. Golar is the leading global FLNG player, controlling a fleet of 12.1 million tons per annum. Through our operations to date, we've delivered 100% economic uptime and delivered 197 LNG cargoes. Our backlog stands at 17 billion before commodity upside and inflationary adjustments and with further upside in a potential charter for our fourth FLNG unit announced today. Assuming we can fix that unit in line with our last fixture last year, we have a potential to grow our annual earnings by 50% or to north of 1.2 billion by 2030 before commodity upside and inflationary adjustments. We see that FLNGs is an increasingly relevant source of global energy security and supply diversification. We are strategically positioned for growth and with the announcements today, both with CIMC and Citrium, we're well positioned to capture the market opportunity significantly ahead of any incremental competition from alternative suppliers. We maintain a disciplined capital allocation focused on shareholder returns, and we still have capacity under our share buyback program. We continue our quarterly dividend with significant capacity for further growth as the fleet deliver to the long-term contracts. With that, I'd like to hand the call over to the operator for any questions.

Thank you. Dear participants, as a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one one on the top one keypad and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw a question, please press star one and one again. To ensure everyone has the opportunity to ask the question today, please limit yourself just to two questions at a time. And now we're going to take our first question. And the question comes from John McKay from Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Please ask a question.

Hey, good morning, guys. Thank you for the time and congrats on the fourth vessel announcement. I wanted to pick up on a couple of things you've been talking about. Maybe can you just walk us through the path to commercializing that vessel and signing a customer? And you talked about maybe framing up the economics on the last vessel, but maybe broadly talk about target return profiles in this context.

Hi John, if you follow the sequencing of both our previous speculative orders and our announcements year to date, we have been focused on evolving the chart for opportunities to narrow down the design. We were contemplating either a Mark 1 or Mark 2, but with the visibility we now have, we see the best value proposition to be a Mark 2 order, which is why we ordered that one. We expect then to further narrow down the charter opportunities and to secure a long-term charter for the unit where we maintain sort of a 20-year duration, plus minus, and we remain with our guidance in the five to six times capex to EBITDA sort of range.

And just to clarify, how should we think about kind of the remaining timeline and milestones for us to watch? for signing the customer deal.

There are no standard process for fixing an FLNG because the only ones who've ever done them as a service is Golar and they've all been quite different, to be honest. But the typical first step is a signing of either a term sheet or a framework agreement that sets out the key commercials. Sometimes it's binding, sometimes it's not, but it is certainly a milestone if that's achieved. from there on we will then evolve the term sheet or framework agreement into a full contract and then the third step is typically then to lift all CPs thereafter which are typically regulatory both in terms of export license and the environmental license required and in certain countries which are not yet LNG exporters you also need clarification of the tax regime so three call it key steps, signing of term sheets, signing of definitive contracts, and lastly, lifting of CPs.

All right, that's helpful. And the second question for me, Karl, you mentioned the potential for seven vessels. I understand there's a couple moving pieces here, and the timeline, like you said, can move around. But maybe in a, let's say, a blue sky scenario, how would we think about pace of deployments and being able to get to that fleet of seven?

So first off, it's on the yard capacity side. We have ordered unit number four today. We have an option to do units. We will not commit to that being CMC or CTRIM in that order. But for simplicity, unit number five then with a fixed option at CMC and unit number six and seven at CTRIM. But it may not be that exact sequence. The fifth could be CTRIM and the sixth could be CMC, if you understand. That's what we've already locked in today with the contract signed at CMC and the LOI with Citrium. In terms of sequencing, we remain with our very clearly stated policy that we are not going to have more than one open FLNG at the time. Hence, we're not considering ordering unit number five until we have clear visibility for a long-term contract on the fourth unit. Once that is locked in, we will then proceed with the fifth and will continue to replicate that model as we grow. Once we secure long-term contracts, we will then attach asset level financing to the then de-risked FLNG and recycle that capital into the consequent unit.

All right, that's clear. I appreciate the time. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. and the question comes from Alexander Bidwell from Weber Research and Advisory. Your line is open. Please ask your question.

Morning. Appreciate the time. So with the LOI with C3M covering either a Mark I or a Mark II and then you've got the option for a third Mark II at CIMC, Can you talk us through how you're thinking about shipyard selection for your next unit? Are there any differences between going with one or the other?

So we have spent, we've obviously built two units with Citrium in the past, both of them being Mark 1s. and we are in process of building a Mark II with CMC. Given that that unit is now 74% progress, we feel comfortable ordering the second unit there. So when it comes to the next unit and the yard selection, we are clearly comfortable with both shipyards. So it will come down to price, payment terms and delivery. and to the extent that is relevant, there may be a charter preference for one yard over the other. But in general, it has to do with the price payment terms and delivery. That's the key decision maker. And then if it's mark one, it's very likely to be seed trim anyway.

All right, appreciate the color there. And then just for a quick follow up, can you talk us through the, I guess the delta in budget between the FLNG Esperanza and the second Mark II conversion. I think it's 2.2 versus 2.45 billion.

Yes. So as we said, that's around the 10% increase. That's mainly driven by very significant cost inflation on long lead equipment and also impacted by steel prices and currency fluctuations. but if you look at some of the long leads typically have 40 to 60 percent cost inflation so the fact that the overall unit is call it only up with 10 percent obviously it's still meaningful but we think that it's a testimony to the very significant work that we've done over the course of this year both with regards to long lead items and negotiating with the shipyards. I would also like to highlight that when we say that this is the price, that's the all-in price. Meaning it includes the EPC with the shipyard, it includes crew training, bunkering, and transport from yard site to contract site, and also the mooring system that we anticipate using. So it's delivered cost to site.

All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate the color. I'll turn it back over. Thank you.

Thank you. And now we're going to take our next question. And the question comes from the line of Sharif Al-Makrabi from BTIG. Your line is open. Please ask your question.

Hi. Thanks, and good afternoon. Very simply, what drove the decision to order a Mark II? Is that indicative of where conversations with charters have progressed? Because a quarter ago you guys talked about pretty big range in terms of liquefaction capacity.

You broke up a bit at the end there, but I think we got the question. The primary reason for going with that unit is that's where we see the strongest charter engagement for relatively near-term employment of the unit. It's also where we see the most attractive capex per ton and opex per MMBTU. I think both the economics to the client and the charter interest and the gas reserves in question at the moment. It's the most actively demanded unit we have and therefore we felt comfortable doing that. Also on the back of the solid performance by the shipyard in constructing the Esperanza which is now 74% complete.

Got it. And then for the two to three options that you hold Can you tell us, and I apologize if I missed this, but can you tell us when do these additional options expire and kind of the lead time for those units for when they would hit the water would be helpful?

We don't want to go into details as to exactly when they expire because commercially that's a little bit sensitive and we think we can drive better value with holding that to ourselves for now. In terms of delivery, you're talking around 38 to 40 months subject to which you've heard him all the time.

Very helpful. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. And the question comes from the line of Chris Robertson from Deutsche Bank. Your line is open. Please ask your question.

Thank you, operator. Hello, Karl. Hello, Eduardo. Thanks for taking my questions.

Hi, Chris. Hi, Chris.

Just looking at the next opportunities here, Argentina was unique in the sense it had two FLNG units in one country. Are there any commercial opportunities here as you've FID'd the fourth one that a fifth vessel could go to the same locale in kind of a two-for-one deal or are the commercial opportunities you're looking at more geographically dispersed?

Both. There are places where you can do both. There are people that only want one, but I think To give an example, Argentina took two, but Argentina, if you look at the project with YPF, ENI, and XRG, they're also talking about adding two units there, both of them 6 million tons, so that's another 12. So obviously there's meaningful capacity to significantly boost Argentina. You have other countries like Mozambique, which are now taking two units from ENI. and there are several other countries like that where there's room to put multiple units so the answer is yes we can definitely look at multiple deployments in certain geographies but for us it tends to be easiest to start with one and then build on that but with the option package we now have we can talk to both.

Great. Just as a follow-up, so now that FID has been announced on the fourth unit and a clear pathway here for additional units, can you contextualize this around the strategic review that's still ongoing? And when do you expect that process to be concluded and any updates there?

As we stated in the announcement on the strategic review, the rationale for the strategic review was twofold. One, board and management believes there's a value discrepancy between public market pricing and potential other parties' valuation of the existing business. and the second and at least equally important rationale was to accelerate FLNG growth on the back of the market development that we see. I think today's announcements very clearly point out what we want to achieve in terms of FLNG market acceleration. When it comes to the strategic review, you are right that that is ongoing. And as we've stated in the strategic review press release, we will not give any comments on the review itself, neither the outcome nor the timing, until we have material information to share or the board has decided to call it off. So we expect that to revert to the market with that in due course. But in the interim, we're not giving any specific comments to it.

Got it. If I could ask one follow-up question. Just to reiterate the current guidance around HILI and it going to the yard, is it the same timeline, same budget, CapEx budget for the refurb and redeployment?

I'm not sure if I understood it. So the refurb budget is around $350 million from the day we depart Cameroon, until the day we arrive in Argentina, or well into commission in Argentina.

All right, that's clear. Thank you.

Thank you.

Now we're going to take our next question. And the question comes from the land of Jonas Ahum from Clarksons. Your land is open. Please ask a question.

Hey, Carl. Thank you for taking my question. So I was just wondering about the schedule for the CapEx on the new LNG unit to aim to take delivery of the unit by 2029. And then how should we think about the sequence and timing of the CapEx related to that unit?

Sorry, the CapEx on number four?

Yes.

So the CapEx on number four, is meaningfully improved from the Esperanza. So that's been part of negotiating the yard contract. And to be fair, it is quite offsetting on the 10% cost increase that we have meaningfully lower capital outlays, in particular in the first two years of the construction period, which is the same period of time until the Esperanza is fully operational. So the capex curve have been negotiated substantially lower than that of the Esperanza, but it's still a pay-as-you-go payment terms and not sort of a shipyard fixed installment type or for traditional commercial ships.

If I may, a follow up on the optional units that you have secured or the options that you have secured. Will you start ordering LNG items, those and how far will you be willing to commit to, for example, LNG items on those units for the next couple of years?

So the way it works is when we place the firm orders for unit number four as part of that firm order we then negotiated packages for a potential unit number five for the majority of them at absolutely no incremental cost and some of them at a very very low incremental cost in total for all of them less than a million dollars. That obviously has a time constraint In many cases, that time constraint can be extended. But if you do go and extend the time constraint, you're likely to then get a later delivery slot because there's very significant pressure on these long lead items. But we're pleased to have obtained the options that we have obtained at very limited to no cost incremental to that of the order itself.

Okay. Thank you very much. I hand it over.

Thank you, Jonas.

Thank you. Dear participants, as a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press star, one, one, or your telephone keypad. And now we're going to take our next question. And the question comes from the line of Sunil Sibal from Seaport Global. Your line is open. Please ask your question.

Yeah, hi, good morning and thanks for the time. So I think you touched upon your potential counterparties for the fourth vessel. I was curious, how do you think about geographical as well as credit preferences for the fourth counterparty? Is there something specific we should be looking for as far as especially the credit

It's a good question and to answer it is slightly different. Every time we have these calls we get all of the same questions from investment banks and investors. But this is an open call, so potential charters, shipyards, equipment suppliers and many other people are listening to this call. We weigh our words carefully. We are in advanced charter discussions in several different geographies. Some of them are to NOCs, some of them are to independents, and some of them are to IOCs. Subject to the credit quality of the counterpart, they are likely to demand slightly different contract structures, but that also then comes with at least different perceived risks. Although I believe we have been very successful at structuring around such risks in the past. At the end of the day, an FLNG is paid by the client who buys the offtake gas. And the good thing with LNG is that there are no bad credit buyers. There are typically countries, very big industrial groups, or the world's largest traders that are offtakers there. So subject to where you operate, the contractual protections are the most important. But we do recognize that financeability increases if we charter to sort of IOCs. But then again, as we've previously explained, they are less likely to share commodity upside and so forth. So at the end of the day for us, it's a trade-off. What we look to are economic returns and, of course, equity returns. and then leverage plays a part of that. But at the end of the day, we believe that the market position with the lowest capex per ton in the industry, the best operational performance and the earliest delivery in a world with increasing geopolitical pressure for supply certainty puts us in a very unique position to drive value to Golar and its stakeholders.

Okay, thanks for laying it out. And then one clarification I know with their previous projections for the three vessel case. I think you're ultimately looking at the three to three and half X kind of a leverage once all the three units are up and running. Now that you're looking at a fourth one, should we be thinking about ultimate desired leverage in the same range or do you think you could be a little bit more even aggressive in that range now that you're kind of diversifying the fleet and all that?

You are right, that on a net debt to EBITDA ratio, that's where we are at the moment. As Eduardo explained, there's significant capacity to free up a few billion dollars of liquidity if we re-lever the hilly and add asset level financing on the Esperanza. We've proven in the past with the financing of GIMI in November, December last year, that subject to contract counterpart and contract structure, we have done asset level financing at five and a half times. We don't want to overextend the balance sheet because we want capacity to continue to add attractive growth projects. But as we lock in more EBITDA backlog, we expect the ratio to not meaningfully change. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Dear speakers, to no further questions for today, I would like to hand the conference over to the management team for any closing remarks.

Thank you all for dialing in today. We are very excited with today's announcement and development and we look forward to speak to you again on the future development of the company as we continue to grow within the FLNG space. We wish you all a great day and hope to speak soon. Thank you.