Thank you for standing by. My name is Jordan and I'll be your conference operator today. At this time, I'd like to welcome everyone to the Global Ship Lease Key 2 2026 Earnings Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you'd like to ask a question during this time, simply press star followed by the number 1 on your telephone e-pad. And if you'd like to withdraw your question, press star 1 again. Thank you. I would now like to turn the call over to Thomas Lister, Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. Hello, everyone, and welcome to the Global Ship Lease Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. You can find the slides that accompany today's presentation on our website at www.globalshiplease.com. As usual, slides two and three remind you that today's call may include forward-looking statements that are based on current expectations and assumptions and are, by their nature, inherently uncertain and outside of the company's control. Actual results may differ materially from these forward-looking statements due to many factors, including those described in the safe harbor section of the slide presentation. We would also like to direct your attention to the risk factors section of our most recent annual report on our 2025 Form 20F, which was filed in March 2026. You can find the form on our website or on the SECs. All of our statements are qualified by these and other disclosures in our reports filed with the SEC. We do not undertake any duty to update forward-looking statements. The reconciliations of the non-GAAP financial measures to which we will refer during this call, the most directly comparable measures calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, usually refer to the earnings release that we issued this morning, which is also available. I am joined, as usual today, by our Executive Chairman, George Irukos, and our Chief Financial Officer, Tathos Tsaropoulos. George will begin the call with high-level commentary on GSL and our industry, and then Tathos and I will take you through our recent activity, quarterly results and financials, and the current market environment. After that, we'll be pleased to answer your questions. So, turning now on to slide four, I'll pass the call over to George.

Thank you, Tom. Good morning, afternoon, or evening to all of you joining today. Once again, geopolitical uncertainty and volatility played an outsized role during the second quarter. Our liner customers are doing extraordinary work from day to day and even from hour to hour. Our circumstances change. Supply chains are reorganized and often they are then reorganized again. In addition to the repeated closure and partial reopening of the state of Hormuz, the security situation in the Lower Red Sea and Gulf of Aden has once again taken a step back. On top of that, the reintroduction of road-based tariffs on US imports is likely to contribute to continued supply chain fragmentation and inefficiency as procurement managers, suppliers and other cargo interests adjust their operations and risk management strategies. In short, any one of these factors in isolation would typically be highly significant for our industry, but having all of that at the same time is driving an extraordinary level of demand for additional vessels and capacity on top of that from underlying containerized freight demand, which is itself remaining quite firm. Flexible mid-size and smaller container ships like those in the GSL fleet are the greatest beneficiaries, as evidenced by Liner Company's continued appetite for ships that under more normal circumstances would be considered overage in these size categories. Meanwhile, prudent and selective fleet renewal has always been at the front of our minds. Against the backdrop of this evolving market, we have placed new-built orders for a total of 15 container ships, at attractive prices and de-risk from the outset with multi-year charters attached, and over 75% of the contract cost expected to be captured from the adjusted EBITDA generated by those charters within, on average, the first 25% of the ship's useful lives only. These container ships, which we will speak more on briefly, are best in class, ultra-high refer, latest generation ecoversions, and will replace our aging cash cows, providing us with visible cash flows well into the years ahead. In this supportive demand environment, at the same time as putting in place charter cover for the new builds, we have also locked in additional coverage at attractive rates for various of our existing ships coming open in the market. Our contracted revenues now stand at 3.2 billion over 3.3 years of cover, of which 1.450.000.000 was added during the first half of this year. Our fleet contract coverage is 100% for 2026 and is already at 90% for 2027. Our strong balance sheet and delivering efforts have been reflected in our firm credit ratings and an improved outlook for Moody's, as well as a healthy recently upsized dividend of $2.5 per share annualized. We have been focused on maximizing optionality in these turbulent and unpredictable times. Our Asian U-Build orders represent a continuation of our long-running focus on flexibility, discipline, downside protection and upside potential. These principles guide our actions and have served us well, and we believe that our emphasis on maintaining optionality is an excellent fit for the containership market of today and of tomorrow. With that, I will turn the call over to Tom.

Thank you, George. Hello again, everyone. Please now turn to slide five, where you will see in greater detail our strategic fleet renewal, which consists of both investment in the next generation of cash cows for our fleet and the opportunistic monetization of older non-core assets. To echo George's words, on the new build front, we see our acquisition of 15 mid-size, ultra-high-refer, wide-beam, latest-generation container ships with long-term charters attached as the exact combination of prudent downside protection and attractive upside potential that we look for in any transaction. As highly specified ships in a structurally underbuilt but crucially important segment of the container ship fleet, We see these vessels as best-in-class, flexible, future-proofed, and strong earners going forward. It's worth underlining the fact that more than $1 billion of the $1.3 billion of contract price is covered by contracted EBITDA, expected to be generated by the firm charters in place X-yard over a TEU-weighted average term of 7.1 years, meaning that these new builds are materially de-risked right out of the gate, And essentially, we're covering over three quarters of their aggregate contract price within roughly the first quarter of their collective economic life. And all that with... It's also worth highlighting that several of these new builds include options for the operator to extend the charters at rates more than 25% above those for the initial firm periods, suggesting that the end users share our conviction these ships will continue to be in high demand, valuable, and with significant upside earnings potential well beyond their initial charters. These new build transactions were possible due to our ability to move fast thanks to our discipline and building a fortress balance sheet, and we expect the forward visibility on contracted revenues to support attractive funding alternatives for these assets, which will likely involve a combination of cash from our balance sheet and debt to enhance returns on equity. For modelling purposes, it is important to keep in mind that the contract payments for these new builds are milestone-based and backloaded, with more than half of the contract price not payable until the respective ship is delivered. We also consider the opportunistic monetisation of older assets to be an integral part of fleet renewal. And at the bottom of the slide, you can see that we have sold forward four older, non-core ships during the first half of the year for a total of 65.5 million, with an aggregate gain on book expected to be in the region of 33 million. Added to which, we will continue to benefit from these ships' earnings until they deliver to buyers in scheduled slots ranging between the end of this year and the end of next year. Moving to slide six, we show the structural rationale behind the new building orders and why this was the right time for us to pounce on these opportunities. As we have highlighted for some time, the mid-size and smaller container ship classes have been underbuilt for many years, with a lion's share of investment capital piling into ultra-large ships. That has left a crucially important sub-10,000 TU portion of the global fleet with an advanced age profile. And to illustrate this point, the median age of the oldest quartile by TU capacity within each fleet segment below 10,000 TU ranges from 21 to 28 years, and that's today, which translates to around 24 to 31 years by the time our new builds actually deliver into the space. So, you have an aging global fleet combined with a more limited order book at a time when the value proposition of such flexible assets is proving to be increasingly important and in growing demand from liner operators. Furthermore, with the industry and its regulators now looking less likely to coalesce around a long-term decarbonisation trajectory and rule set any time soon, we see the option value of a... The convergence of these factors together with the commercial terms available to us, our ability to transact on the new builds while de-risking them with charter coverage x-yard, and the aging out of our existing cash cows made these orders a clear and compelling opportunity for us and for our shareholders. We expand further on our rationale for investing in new builds on slide seven. We have a history of being prudent in managing risk through the shipping cycle while capitalizing on upside cyclicality and volatility, particularly in time charter earnings to build value for shareholders. In the chart, you can see how second-hand asset prices, which are the dark blue line, and particularly the time charter rate index, the green line, have both trended and spiked upwards, while the new build price index, the pale blue line, has remained comparatively flat in recent years. In fact, with yard order books essentially full for the next few years, the main factor currently expected to drive new building prices is inflation. So, combining all these considerations, this is a good entry point for new builds, as long as they are in the right size categories, appropriately specified, and de-risked with charters. And with the combination of our fortress balance sheet and strong industry relationships, we have the ability to move quickly and decisively in developing these compelling opportunities. The result is 15 new builds contracted on attractive terms with multi-year charters attached, which lower our average fleet age and crucially increase our cash generation runway as our cash cows begin to age out. In other words, exactly the recipe for low risk risk and high upside potential. On slide eight, you will see our diversified charter portfolio with the chart showing the breakdown of our charter revenues by charterer from our operating fleet for the first half of this year. As of June 30, and to be clear, these figures also include the firm charters from our 15 new goals, we have over $3.2 billion in forward contracted revenues over a 3.3 year of average TEU-weighted contract cover. In 2026, our revenue days are 100% covered, with 90% coverage in 2027. Slide nine, we recap our dynamic capital allocation policy, with which we have navigated both the cyclical nature of our industry and the flock of Black Swan events that have occurred in recent years. We have de-levered to build resilience and create a fortress balance sheet, which in has allowed us to mitigate risk, build equity value and position ourselves to seize opportunities as they arise. This is reflected in our improved credit outlook, our order book of 15 new buildings and the continued return of capital to our shareholders via our annualized dividend of $2.50 per common share. With that, I'll pass the call to Tasos to discuss our financials.

Thank you, Tom. Slide 10 shows our financial highlights through the first half of 2026. I would like to emphasize a few key takeaways. Our financial performance and cash flow have remained very strong. Our cash position at quarter end was $649 million, of which $140 million is restricted. The remainder ensures that we can fully cover our covenants, our working capital needs and manage the potential financial implications of geopolitical disruptions and other macro events in an increasingly unpredictable world. It also provides dry powder both for CAPEX to optimize the commercial value and marketability of our existing fleet and for disciplined investment in fleet renewal when the right opportunities present themselves, including the payment and installments of course for our 15 new buildings. During the second quarter, we were also pleased to put in place a new 55.5 million debt facility with Bank of America, five-year paper, secure against ships we bought with cash at the end of 2025, priced at SOFU plus 140 base points, a good addition to our capital stock. And of course, we continue to pay our compelling dividend. On slide 11, we highlight our ongoing efforts to deliver and de-risk to build resilience and maximize optionality. The graph on the left shows our outstanding debt, which was 915 million at the end of 2022 and we have managed to reduce it to just under 600 million by June 30, 2026, while at the same time, growing our fleet considerably and increasing the number of unencumbered ships. The graph on the right shows the same story of the financial leverage front, but with even great progress, improving from 8.4 times in 2018 to 0.4 times today. Slide 12 further emphasized our commitment to a strong financial platform. The left hand graph shows how we have successfully lowered our borrowing costs from 7.56% in 2018 to 4.43% today, even as base rates have moved higher. And despite an inflationary environment, we have managed to reduce our average daily break-even costs from over 12,000 per ship at the end of 2018 to just over 10,000 per ship today. With that, I will turn the call back over to Tom to discuss the market and our fleet.

Thank you, Tassos. On slide 13, we reiterate our focus on mid-size and smaller container ships, with our fleet ranging from 2,200 TU at the bottom end to a little over 11,000 TU at the top. Vessels in this range are workhorses of the global fleet, predominantly serving the non-mainlane trades that collectively comprise around 75% of total global containerized trade volumes. Very large ships are more or less restricted to the big east-west mainlane trades as they require specialized port infrastructure, deep water berths, and very long terminals to be operationally viable, and equally importantly, huge volumes of cargo to be economically viable. Midsize and smaller container ships, on the other hand, like those in GL's fleet, trade on a truly global basis. And as geopolitical uncertainty has decentralized and fragmented the containerized supply chain beyond China and throughout Southeast Asia, our line of customers have placed a growing priority and value on the commercial and operational flexibility. On slide 14, we provide a snapshot of the choke points currently impacting containerised trade in the Middle East. While we cannot predict how these situations will develop, we can provide some context on how things are playing out for the industry in real time. Starting with the Red Sea and Sewers, through which around 20% of global containerised trade volumes transited before the security situation was disrupted in 2023. Since then, vessels have been forced to reroute around the Cape of Good Hope. This longer, costlier journey has absorbed around 10% of effective containership capacity. And after a brief period of cautious optimism, with some minor operators trialling a return to this transit with selected vessels, the security status has since deteriorated again. So, as with so many things at the moment, it's a watching brief. As for the Strait of Hormuz, the on-again, off-again situation there is both dangerous and unpredictable. Prior to this conflict, about 3% to 4% of containerized trade volumes passed through the Strait in global terms. Now, major hubs and ports within the Persian Gulf are severely constrained. Liner companies are rejigging service networks, and although considerable effort is being put into trying to explore alternative means to reliably flow cargo into and out of the region, it is not proving. These situations are highly dynamic, and their long-term implications for container shipping are unclear, but in the near term, they add layers of complexity and inefficiency for the shipping industry to navigate with seafarer safety. On slide 15, we highlight supply-side and scrapping trends, where little has changed. Idle capacity and scrapping activity both continue to hover near zero. The inefficiencies in the supply chain and subsequent longer voyages have both nearly eliminated slack in the system and kept vessels on the water longer than would otherwise have been expected in a quote-unquote normal environment. Why? Because earnings have remained so attractive. 16 shows the order book. While the order book has certainly grown meaningfully, it remains smaller in the segments upon which GSL is focused. Big ship segments over 10,000 TU, the order book to fleet ratio stands at 55%, which drags the average ratio for the overall fleet order book to 39%. Meantime, the ratio for the midsize and smaller container ship segments relevant to GSL is significantly lower, at around 25%, with delivery spread over the next four years. As I mentioned earlier in the context of our own new build orders, the mid-size and smaller size segments of the global fleet are also aging, such that the corresponding order book is quite closely matched by ships that are, or will shortly become, 25 years or older. Essentially, these ships will be scrapping candidates whenever the market eventually pulls back. If we assume that all vessels over 25 years old were to be strapped through 2030, the net effect would be growth of under 1% for the global fleet. In any case, while charter rates remain strong, we're very happy to lock in charter coverage. If the market were to normalise, on the other hand, to the downside, then we would expect global strapping activity to pick up meaningfully, offsetting fleet growth and potentially also creating counter-cyclical purchase opportunities for owners like us with strong finances and a long-term through-cycle strategy. So it's win-win. On slide 17, we provide a snapshot of the charter market. The right side of the slide shows market rates for term charters, which remain strong, and should be considered alongside our average break-even rates, which stand at just over $10,000 per vessel per day. With that, I will turn the call back to George on slide 18.

Thank you, Tom. To summarize, we continue to focus on maximizing optionality and resilience in a world beset by geopolitical complexity, microeconomic volatility and regulatory uncertainty. Supply chains have decentralized and fragmented, making the operational flexibility offered by GSL's mid-size and smaller ships a priority for our liner customers. We have continued adding charter coverage, which now stands at 3.2 billion, up by over $1 billion on where it stood at the end of the first quarter, thanks largely to the addition of over 15 new bills with charters attached. Our delivering efforts have resulted in a fortress balance sheet and our high operational efficiency and capital allocation discipline have resulted in highly competitive break-even Our prudent selective fleet renewal has seen us monetize older, non-core ships and acquire both second-hand vessels and more recently new builds. But our recipe remains the same – be disciplined, be patient and be nimble. And use the cycle to minimize downside risk and maximize upside potential. And of course, returning capital to shareholders remains a top priority.

Our recently upside dividend now stands at $2.5 per share annualized, which is a dividend yield of about 5.7 percent on the basis of yesterday's close with that we will be very pleased to take your questions as a reminder if you'd like to ask a question in today's call simply press star followed by the number one on your telephone key path your first question comes from the line of omar nokta from clarkson securities your line is live omar nokta your line is now alive you may be muted hi sorry about that it's on mute um the uh yeah so

hi george hi tom thanks for the update a couple of questions uh maybe just first on the uh the investment in the new buildings back in june that you first announced uh you've got 15 of them they come with a large backlog that as you say de-risks the investments in a very big way as you highlight It's interesting, 75% of the cost is earned back in the first 25% of their operable life. Obviously, it's a sizable investment and don't expect you to do more of this, but you do have the flexibility given just how strong your balance sheet is. But I wanted to get a sense from you, how repeatable is this type of business? It's clearly unique and we haven't seen this in the past, but just want to get a sense from you. Is this sort of a one-off that you're really able to capture? or is this sort of like the norm, quote-unquote, in what owners can expect to capture in today's market?

Tom, I'll kick it off and no doubt George and Tassos will add. Yeah, we're delighted with this transaction. As you say, 15 new builds de-risked out of the gate to the tune of 75% of the contract price with the adjusted EBITDA implicit in the contracted charters. Not easy to put together such a deal. So I wouldn't say that it's the quote-unquote new normal, to use your expression, either for us or for the market. Indeed, I would say while obviously we're willing to look at new buildings, as we've just demonstrated, we're not dogmatic on that front either. that we're happy to look at new buildings, existing tonnage, sale and leasebacks, whatever really, as long as the numbers make sense and the risk profile makes sense. So this doesn't mark a departure from our existing strategy. I would say it marks simply an evolution of that same strategy, focusing on minimizing downside risk and maximizing upside potential. But I'll pass the call to George in case he wants to add more to that.

If I may say that by no means such a transaction is available in the market and it's something that it's easy to make. We capitalize on our relationships with our clients and our know-how on designing ships that are not available in the market and that are very particular. and the timing also. We chose to go into the new build market at the time where we felt it is an opportune time achieving relatively good prices. It is the same recipe. Timing is everything in what we look to do in container shipping and we try to time our investments always very carefully, and our first priority is de-risking the transactions that we do. That's what we have always been doing on the second-hand ships, same recipe here.

Yeah, no, it's certainly from your history, you've been very nimble and methodical with your investments, and this is a very good example of that. And maybe just a follow-up, a separate topic. You've forward sold four ships so far. They're all generally older in age. I know it's a bit tricky. It's a nice problem to have in terms of deciding whether to sell these older ships in your fleet or hold them and put them on more charters. But how are you thinking about, say, the dozen or so feeder ships you have left that are built pre-2010? Are those likely to be sold as well on a forward basis maybe, or do you think there's an opportunity to keep fixing them out?

There isn't a sort of a general answer that I can give you on that front, Omar. We effectively run a sort of a hold or divest analysis as we're approaching the end of the charter on any ship. And if it makes sense to sell, in our view, at that particular time, and we think we're going to make more money for shareholders by selling as opposed to by holding the asset, then we will sell, depending upon the opportunities that are available to us at that time. On the other hand, I would say more generally at least, we think that you make more money out of holding and operating a container ship through the cycle than you do by selling it. It's only because these vessels, these four ships that you referred to at the outset of your question were approaching inarguably close to the end of their economic lives that We felt that the option value attached to those vessels, at least for us, was somewhat reduced. And as a result, it made sense to divest them on what we consider the attractive terms. But it's not a general approach. Every transaction, every ship, every investment and divestment, we analyze on its own rights.

Understood. Thank you, Tom. And thanks, George, for your comments. Congratulations on those new buildings. And I'll pass it back to you.

Thank you very much, Omar. As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question, simply press star 1 on your telephone keypad. Your next question comes from the line of Stephanie Moore from Jefferies. Your line is now left.

Good morning. I wanted to follow up on the new buildings as well. You know, to your point, obviously, you know, congrats on locking in those time charter rates on those assets. But I wanted to maybe talk through, you know, how sensitive is the investment case for these new builds around recharter rates after those first contract periods expire? And then I guess what are your underlying market assumptions embedded in this analysis that supports the new build investment? So great to see the first set locked in, but wanted to get your thoughts on kind of even after that, you know, what your underlying outlook is.

Hi, Stephanie. Thanks for the question. So, going back to a point George was making earlier, we focus on risk first, and that drives always our investment analysis. So, we need to get ourselves comfortable that the downside risk is covered and that the upside potential is attractive before we move forward on anything of this nature. So, I think it's significant to say that we're covering off 75% of the contract price of these assets within essentially the first 25% of their respective lives, which means in a cyclical industry such as ours, there is plenty of time to get it right on the upcycle, you know, after they come off their initial charters. And I think while it's impossible to gaze into the future, if you look at various sort of historic rates within the sector, we're certainly assuming follow-on rates below those long-term historic averages in order to drive this as an attractive investment. And the rest is jammed. I think it's also worth pointing out that in the case I think of five of these new builds, the charterers negotiated charter extension options with us on those units. And for those charter extension options, the rates are over 25% higher than for the initial charters. So I think that suggests that the end users are aligned in thinking that these are likely to be in-demand, valuable, high-earning assets, not just for this initial period, but thereafter too.

Oh, yep. Yep, absolutely. Maybe just to follow up, maybe any help you can provide in terms of just, I guess, cadence of cash flows for the new builds as well. That's it for me. Thank you.

You mean in terms of installment payments?

Correct.

Yeah. So, we provide, I think, in the F pages, which you probably haven't had a chance to look at, some fairly granular detail on the stage payments as they materialize. But more broadly speaking, the payments tend to be backloaded, so between 50% and 60% of the contract amount is actually only payable upon delivery of the assets themselves. So you're looking at somewhere between 40% to 50%, which crystallizes as payment obligations in the lead-up to the delivery of the assets, and those payments tend to be linked to certain milestones, such as steel cutting, keel laying, that sort of thing. So the lion's share of the installments are backloaded.

Stephanie, this is Tasos. Tomorrow, probably, it will be the filing of the 6K, and you will see there a breakdown of future commitments by year, if I remember correctly. So we will have these videos.

Thank you.

Thanks, Stephanie. That concludes our question and answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Thomas Lester for closing remarks.

Well, thank you all for joining us, particularly in the middle of the holiday season, and we look forward to reconnecting with you for our third quarter results later in the year many thanks this concludes today's meeting you may now disconnect