Christopher Kuplent: Thank you. Good afternoon. Just one each, if I may. Wael, maybe you can tell us where your, as you call it, 10 quarter sprint So far, it’s frustrating you. Where have you not made progress as you would have hoped? I appreciate it’s early on asking you that question, but if you can give us a bit of color, and maybe, my particular hobby horse, your experience from, what you did in Pakistan, is that a model that you’re hoping to roll out elsewhere, when you think about cutting the tail in your retail network? And one for you. I’m really sorry, Sinead, but I do, have trouble, calculating a 42% CFFO payout, ratio on 2023. It seems like you’re giving yourself a lot of credit for working capital inflows, et cetera. So, is it fair to assume that the underlying payout ratio is significantly higher, once you go below the CFFO headline? And that to me would be a very bullish interpretation, going forward when working capital changes perhaps go the other way.
Wael Sawan: Thanks, Chris. Let me cover the first one and then, have Sinead cover the second one. Look. I think, I just outlined earlier, Chris, the strong confidence I have, but also humility to recognize indeed we are early in the journey. What are the frustrations? Let me sort of provide a couple of maybe live examples rather than just talk theoretically. So, one of the things that gives me confidence. Well, let me step back. What we are doing well clearly on the cost reduction side is the portfolio. And we are moving maybe I’ll pick up your retail question there. We are looking at every option for those tail markets or for those tail assets to be able to monetize them or shift the structures around them, shift them into trademark license agreements or the like to really make sure that our capital employed and our energies and our focus are on the right areas.
So, we will continue to do that. The real focus, and we always do the hard yards, come from the structural cost reductions. And there, we are really making progress in a number of areas. I’ll give you one simple one, but I think is iconic in the bigger scheme of things. Our asset managers have, historically had some 1,800 standards that they need to be complying by. So, we spent time last year really focused on how do we simplify those standards and we have reduced that requirement by 70% while still living up to all of our safety and reliability expectations. But that’s down from 1,800 to 500 standards. Now I wish we could do that in a week. I wish we could do that in a month, but that takes work because we really need to go back and de bureaucratize a lot of the activities we have.
I wish it could be faster, but there are other areas, where I look and say, actually, teams are getting it. Places like the Gulf of Mexico, I talked about their record production. I would also reference how they are being able to, for example, challenge the way they do work, reducing their overall people movements offshore by some 35%, allowing us to reduce our demand on helicopters by 50%. Just small examples of where you see the momentum starting to build. I’m sure I speak on Sinead’s behalf as well. Both of us would love to see that to go even faster. But we also recognize we have to take an entire organization along and some of it is unpacking things, which we have ingrained into our business for a long, long time. This is a transformational journey, which is both exciting, but also, of course, one that is going to take its time.
Sinead?
Sinead Gorman: In terms of the question of just your point on the calculation of the payout ratio, we actually haven’t changed it year-on-year. As you know, if you look back at the previous year, ’22 where we had actually working capital outflows and quite substantial ones as well, we calculated on the back of that. When we looked at it in ’23 where we had inflows, we looked at that. So, working capital, you’re right, does vary with us. It goes in and out, across the period, but we keep it pretty consistent. What I’m probably more interested in, regardless of how I calculated is just simply put, am I giving a compelling return to my share shareholders or not. I think with $23 billion across the year, we have definitely done exactly that in terms of that mix.
I hope we can look through that to continue to regardless of the working capital. So, like the working capital inflow this quarter or not. I’m still looking through it to be able to say, ”Do I have confidence in the future cash flows of the company to be able to continue to distribute, which is why the $3.5 billion”? Hopefully, you’ll see that tight range that I mentioned before in that track record coming through. Happy to work the details of the calculation with you through IR at any point. Thanks.
Wael Sawan: Luke, let’s go to the next question, please.
Operator: Our next caller is Martijn Rats from Morgan Stanley.
Martijn Rats: Hi. Hello. I’ve got two, if I may. If you look at sort of the 4Q results and also the full year 2023 results, I have a question about sort of trading and optimization. Because previously, you have indicated that trading and optimization is sort of a 2% to 4% points of uplift to return on capital for the company at large. But sort of backing this out is always, it’s tremendously difficult. But it looks to me like in 2023, it was either at or possibly even above that range. I was wondering, if that is in indeed the case. The reason why I’m asking is that, if it is indeed the case has become it is a very, very large share of the company’s sort of overall earnings. The other one I wanted to ask is about the disposal of, onshore Nigeria. If you could say, a few words on how that might impact sort of earnings cash flow sort of going forward. What are the implications of that, that we should take into account from a from a modeling perspective?
Sinead Gorman: You wanna take both?
