Good morning, and welcome to the Underdog shareholder seminar for IG Group. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question and answer session. Further instructions will follow at that time. I would like to remind all participants that this call is being recorded. I will now hand over to Breon Corcoran, CEO, to begin the presentation. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon, folks, and thank you for joining us. Jeremy Levine here on my left, Co-Founder and CEO of Underdog, and Clifford Abrahams, IG Group CFO on my right, join me today. We announced the Underdog acquisition at the end of July, and I recognize that it's incumbent on me to explain clearly the conviction I have, and that we have, that the Underdog acquisition will create real value for you, my fellow shareholders. In a few minutes, we'll take you inside the business and later take questions. Before we do that, I'd like to briefly comment on IG's Q3 trading statement issued last week. I'm more convinced than ever of the business that we're building. As I said in July 2024, we needed to close product gaps and simplify our propositions to grow active customers sustainably. In Q3, organic active customer growth was 17% year-on-year. In July 2025, we announced measures to increase revenue retention in our over-the-counter business. Since implementation, over-the-counter revenue retention has averaged 80% through the end of Q3 2026. We're pleased with this, and we see the potential to increase it further over time. Q3 results themselves were disappointing, reflecting customer positioning in the period, although consistent with our modeling of possible outcomes. Our model is working as expected, and I remain convinced it will deliver better returns over the long term. This slide, which you've seen before, summarizes why we're doing this transaction. Underdog gets us into a high-growth adjacent category spanning daily fantasy sports, prediction markets, and more. Prediction markets are growing quickly, led by sport, and Underdog is built and designed for sport. Underdog performed well in Q3, heading into its busiest quarter of the year, which includes more of the NFL season and the start of the NBA season. The business has strong momentum, and I remain convinced that Underdog will accelerate IG's scale and growth profile. With that, let's start with a short video introducing the company, and after that, Jeremy will take you inside the business that he has built. [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] [Presentation] I'm really excited to be doing this, my first one of these public market events. I'm looking forward to the feedback after. Hopefully, I can help answer your questions and give you some context on Underdog and why we're so excited about our performance and the opportunity ahead. I'm going to take you through a bit of our history, how we win with product, and our results here to date. I'll make sure to answer the questions we've heard most since announcing our deal. How do we succeed in a competitive environment, how we capture margin, and how we're well set up for the regulatory developments to come. One thing to keep in mind as we go, at its core, Underdog has been built for fans to express their opinions on sports. We've always had the view that it's our job to handle the underlying regulatory complexity gracefully so that the customers can express the opinions they want. Today, I'm excited to show you how we've done that. First, our team. There's two things I talk about every company all-hands, people and product, to the point where the company is definitely sick of hearing me say it. I'm very proud of the team we have at Underdog. My background quickly, I sold my first company, StarStreet, to DraftKings in 2014, my second, Draft to Flutter, in 2017, and that's where I met Breon. At StarStreet, we had built the first Pick'em fantasy game. At Draft, we built the first mobile draft game, both games we now offer at Underdog. At Underdog, we were the first to offer peer-to-peer Pick'em, and later the first sports operator to put prediction markets in our app. A few key folks to highlight on the team. Nick Lundgren, our chief legal officer, led the first self-certification of sports event contracts while at Crypto.com. His doing so largely created the sports prediction markets category. Will Twinn led risk and trading for FanDuel and now runs our market maker. My Co-Founder, Brandon, is the best product mind I've ever worked with. We've got an amazing team of innovators, domain experts, and we've leaned aggressively into AI across the business, especially in how we develop software, and we've seen our velocity improve massively as a result. Through our first six years, we were the fastest growing sports gaming company in U.S. history. Net revenue grew from $9 million in 2021 to $441 million in 2025. We grew fast, even though we were limited in what we could offer by the regulatory frameworks we operated under. Our core product was a fantasy game called Pick'em. In Pick'em, customers pick how players will perform for set stats. They must always pick multiple players from multiple teams. That is what makes it fit under the fantasy sports regulatory framework. There are no game outcomes or team options at all, and they have no ability to make just a single selection. They had no ability. With Pick'em, we were able to offer about a third of the experience sports fans want in about two-thirds of the states. It was enough for us to grow extremely fast, especially in the states without legal sports betting, but there was more our customers wanted. You can see on this slide some examples of what our customers could do in the fantasy regulatory framework versus what is available via online sports betting. In sports betting, customers can pick a team, a single player, players and teams together, players all from the same team, all things we couldn't offer. That is, until prediction markets. Once sports event contracts became possible, it was clear we could offer a better product to our customers, especially in the key states like California, Texas, and Georgia. We ran at it. In 10 months, we have moved through three structures, a technology partnership with Crypto.com, our FCM connected to Kalshi, and our own full stack exchange, UDX, which we launched in July. Each step improved the product for our customers and improved our economics. We have now got the full stack of necessary pieces, all three of the critical U.S. derivative licenses, an FCM, DCM, and a DCO. We are the only sports first operator live with all three. Owning the full stack allows us to offer the best customer experience and capture structurally higher margins. A key piece of our offering is our proprietary orchestration layer. Via the orchestration layer, we are able to route customer orders depending on where the order is and where it is made, depending on what the order is, where it is made, all in service of providing the best experience to our customers. You can see here how owning the full stack and having the orchestration layer shows up for our customers. All those entry types from a few slides up that our customers couldn't do earlier with us, now they can. Singles, combos of any kind, players all from the same team, a single player. Really any opinion they want to express, now they can. The orchestration layer is the plumbing. It handles the regulatory complexity, so the customer never has to think about it. It all sits in a seamless single app with one account and one wallet. A customer in California used to have player picks only. Now they have players, teams, singles, combos, and everything just works. The full offering in almost every state. Now that we have the core experience nailed, we get to focus more on net new innovation. Since we announced the deal just over two months ago on July 30th, we have launched two new games, Crash and Rips. This month, we are launching Supercharge, a new market type we think our customers will love. Games are driving more and more of our activity, and they are a great example of our product velocity and how it is a key driver of our success. Just like the core experience, everything we offer is seamless in the same app. Hopefully, you can see we've consistently innovated across regulatory frameworks. We started offering single player fantasy. We then built Champions, the first peer-to-peer picking game, to help satisfy some regulator concerns. We launched sports betting under the state regulatory framework, but then when prediction markets came, we quickly sprinted towards the opportunity. Operating as a technology service provider, an FCM, and now a full stack exchange leveraging our DCM and DCO. Our product ability and velocity is a massive advantage in our ability to navigate uncertain regulatory environments. There is, of course, uncertainty with prediction markets. We believe the uncertainty is likely to be largely resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court, and we think the final resolution is quite likely to come next year. There are two directions of travel, and we're well prepared no matter the direction. If federal oversight holds as is, you've seen how we're set up in that direction. If the Supreme Court defers authority to the states, there's different variations to what could happen, but we'd largely go back to the setup that made us the fastest growing revenue company in the category through our first six years. Because of the way we've built our product, any change in the regulatory environment will be seamless for our customers. They'll be in the same app, same account and wallet, same core experience. In our key states, it's just a question of which markets are available to them. Do they have team markets? Or if there are no sports prediction markets, only player markets. We look forward to the clarity, the sooner the better. 2026 has been a year of transformation for us. Last NFL season, prediction markets reset what could be offered to sports fans across the U.S. We put our heads down this off season and spent the first part of the year rebuilding our product, as you've seen. Given the product transition we had to make, we deliberately slowed investment, taking marketing spend down over 30% year to date. We wanted to make sure we were back to having what we believe is the best product for our customers before spending more aggressively on marketing. The signals from month one of NFL season are very strong, and we're confident that, again, we have the best product for our core customers. Customers are engaging more. Handle per customer is up 165% year over year in Q3. Average deposits per customer are up 109% in that same period. Net revenue in our slowest quarter of the year, Q3, was $105 million, up 118% year on year. Handle grew even faster and monthly actives grew 13%. I do just want to caveat, the year-over-year revenue growth in Q3 benefited in part by the sporting calendar, as we had some World Cup in Q3, and by us lapping an unusually bad margin period at the end of last Q3. Also worth pointing out, our business does have variance and volatility tied to sports results. Our results are impacted by the outcomes of games and player performance. So when there are unusually high-scoring games or favorites consistently win, we see it in our results. But over time, we have a lot of confidence in our trading ability and our structural edge. Given the product transition we just made and the KPIs we're seeing, we're feeling great about accelerating customer growth as we head into the most exciting sports calendar of the year, with NBA season starting in just a few weeks and NFL a month into its season. To close, Underdog is the fastest-growing sports gaming company through our first six years, with over 5.5 million deposited customers. We're the only sports-first operator live with an active FCM, DCM, and DCO. We offer nearly 100% of the sports experience in almost every state in one seamless app. Our revenue is well-diversified, and we're well set up to succeed under any likely regulatory outcome. We now head into our biggest quarter of the year with the best product we've ever had. With that, I'll hand it over to Clifford. Thanks, Jeremy. Let me remind you of the financial highlights. We're comfortable the acquisition will deliver strong returns for IG, in line with our M&A framework. The TAM is large and growing. You've seen how Underdog has delivered very strong revenue growth. We believe that Underdog can succeed in different regulatory scenarios. We're excited about the prospects for the business. Finally, the transaction is structured to incentivize the team to deliver. Underdog more than doubles IG's U.S. revenue and increases U.S. monthly active customers more than tenfold. On a combined basis, the U.S. contributes 41% of revenue, up from 19% now. Underdog also diversifies IG's revenues by product, which we expect to reduce short-term variability as Underdog's revenue streams are largely uncorrelated with IG's. Following the transaction, prediction markets and DFS would represent 27% of combined group revenues, so IG relies less on any one single product. In summary, the transaction brings strong strategic and financial benefits. It accelerates IG's growth, diversifies our products, and meets our return targets. Next, a reminder on structure. The $1.1 billion up front reflects the enterprise value for 100% of Underdog at closing, or 2.4 times net revenue for the 12 months to June 2026. IG will settle the equity value in two parts, 60% through the issue of 24.1 million new IG shares, a number fixed on the 30th of July, 2026. To be clear, the number of shares we are issuing does not change with the IG share price. The remaining 40% will be paid in cash, funded initially through a bridge facility. On top of that, an earn-out tied to 2026 revenue achieved of up to $200 million. Separately, there's a management incentive plan which sits outside the purchase price. It rewards eligible employees when Underdog delivers 2028 and 2029 EBITDA targets, and Underdog's own earnings will fund it. The earn-out and the management incentive plan pay out only as Underdog delivers. We'll now have plenty of time to answer your questions. Just a reminder that IG has another capital markets event on October the 22nd focused on IG's existing businesses. The three of us are available now to answer all your questions regarding Underdog. With that, I'll ask the Operator to open us up to questions. Thank you. We will now start the Q&A. If you are dialed into the call and wish to ask a question, please use the raise hand function at the bottom of your Zoom screen. Our first question comes from Ian White from Autonomous Research. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Ian, please unmute your line to ask your question. Please go ahead. Hello? Hey, Ian. Yes, you're online. Please go ahead. Hi there. Slight confusion because my name's not Ian, but thank you very much for the opportunity to ask a question. It's Haley Tam from UBS. Could I ask a couple, please? Firstly, thank you very much for laying out. Let me understand, regardless of whether this is a UDX or Crypto or Kalshi ultimate venue for trading, the user doesn't see any difference in the app. If I can confirm that's true, then I guess the second question is, when we look at the data you publish, we can see that the UDX portion has grown from, say, around 50% of your volumes two weeks ago to now over 75%. I just wondered what your vision is, Jeremy, for where the percentage should land. When you say structurally higher margins from owning the whole stack, could you give us any more color on that, please? Yeah, of course. Thank you for the question, Haley. So your first question was, does the customer see any difference? They do know what venue their trade is executed on, but the core UX, the core flow is the same no matter the venue. That's a really important part of the orchestration layer and the product we've built, is it's totally seamless for the customer to express their opinions. It's something we're really proud of. I think your second question was a comment on UDX's growth, and we have seen UDX scaling up nicely since we have launched it, so we're really excited about that. But no specific guidance on the right mix. The mix is ultimately around what provides the best experience for the customers and ultimately the best economics. So we're going to let the data continue to drive us in real-time on that. Thank you. Is there any comment on the structurally higher margins you get from owning the whole stack? Yeah. If you think about a brokered trade versus a trade that executes across every lever, there's ability for economics at every lever. Because we have every single lever there's the ability to capture more economics. We're not giving specific guidance or details on the margin at each level. Haley, if I may add to that, because the technology is in-house and the licenses are in-house, we have greater flexibility and critically also the ability to change things more quickly than we might in a slightly different world. We believe that the economics, the net customer economics, will benefit from some of the ancillary products we offer around this, which is the point Jeremy Levine was making about diversification. So to your first question, customer behavior will determine the end mix of prediction versus DFS, but we are almost agnostic to that over time. As we broaden the product range around the core stack, we believe we will evidence better retention and better economics per customer. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question is from Ian White from Autonomous Research. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Hopefully you can hear me okay. It is actually Ian White this time. Three questions, please, if I can. To Jeremy Levine, please. Simply, what most excites you about the combination with IG Group? What does IG bring that improves Underdog, in your opinion, please? Secondly, can you talk a bit about your experience running a commercial sportsbook, which I think Underdog did for a little while. How much cross-selling did you see at that time during the period you ran that offering? Obviously, you would've had a broader suite of products, at least for some customers. Did they start doing more with you and move away from other sportsbook providers? That's question two. Lastly, can you help me understand, what makes you confident you can sustainably internalize volumes onto your own exchange when there are established liquid markets for some of the products that you might want to offer? Can you just help me understand that, please? I'm thinking around basically best execution on the last point. Interested in thoughts there. Thank you. Yeah, for sure. Thank you, Ian. Glad we finally got you. Let me start with your first question, just what makes me most excited about IG. I think there's some gating factors when we decided we wanted to team up, and then there's a few key pieces. The gating factors obviously are the belief in the team, Breon Corcoran and Clifford Abrahams, the business led by Michael Healy, Andy Biggs, Sarah on the compliance and legal side has been a great partner already for us. Just seeing the caliber of the people, the culture, the team there is building, gave us a lot of belief in IG and the business, which obviously if we're going to be part of the business, we want to really believe in it. That's a big part of it. That's kind of the gating factor. Really, a big part of what drives, I think, the reason this makes a lot of sense is we believe in this coming convergence. Actually, it was Breon who first shared the vision with me a while ago of the convergence of the different ways a customer can express opinions, not just in sports, but we've got sports as our DNA on one side, and obviously IG's business as another DNA in the financial markets almost on the other side. It's very clear there's this coming convergence that I think we as a combined company are really well-positioned for, and it's going to be a really big opportunity we talk more about over the next couple of years. That was a big driver. The question you asked about when we operated a licensed sportsbook in America. I think it's worth sharing a bit of what our strategy was when we operated mostly under the state regulatory framework. Our strategy largely was use our product, use the Pick'em product to acquire customers, of course, across the country, but really focused on the states without sports betting. About 40% of the country doesn't have legal online sports betting. That's big states like California, Texas, Georgia. In those states, we were the best legal way for a customer to express their opinions on sports, and as a result, we had tremendous growth in those states. There was always the belief that over time, states that didn't have legal sports betting would legalize sports betting. Our strategy always was to then offer that in a seamless experience, all in the same app, where the customer effectively, not much changes for them except they now have more markets. They now have teams and some of the restrictions that they had to do or they had to stay within the fantasy regulatory framework, those restrictions are all gone. Now they can do anything they want. That was the strategy. When we launched sportsbook in the one state we did in North Carolina, we obviously saw a ton of cross-sell because we didn't have to move a customer from one app to another, from one account or one wallet to another. We didn't have to move them at all. We just were able to put more markets there and take away restrictions. Customers kept on doing largely the same things with more options, and a lot of them cross-sold into what was then OSB, because in that case, we turned off Fantasy and it all became OSB. If you think about our customer history, what they do in Fantasy, it always has to be multiple players, so it's very similar to what in sports betting is considered a parlay. We had, in sports betting, I believe the highest parlay mix across the category, because that's what our customers were used to doing in our app, and that's really what our interface was built for. We've seen a very similar thing if you think about the same strategy. We've now got to deploy that with prediction markets. In our app in California, customers went from before last September, it was only players, now to having players and teams. All the restrictions that were there in fantasy sports removed from them, and now they can express whatever opinions they want, and we're seeing that show up obviously in our data. I think your third question was around how are we confident in our ability to have volume on the exchange and execute trades on the exchange. It is about the customers and what the customers want to do. What is offered across prediction markets, currently the markets themselves are largely commodities. A big part of the markets are single, certainly are. Then you can think about combos as more bespoke. But really, again, it is about the customer, owning the relationship with the customer, and what that customer wants to do, which is express an opinion on sports, right? It is not for them about what venue do they execute on, what regulatory framework is that under. It is about, "Hey, are the Patriots" I am a Patriots fan, so I am going to use them in references all the time. Are the Patriots going to win today, and how are their players going to do? But just to build on that, Ian, as you know, some of us have experience from the Betfair Exchange days. While important, liquidity is very important, liquidity does not necessarily predetermine success. So we think there will be multiple exchanges. To the specific question about best execution, without just going back to what Jeremy said, we obviously have considerable experience of operating in regulated financial markets where things like best execution are core to the product offer. So I think as this market evolves over the coming months and years, we will bring some capabilities to the table to bolster the incredible customer centricity and product velocity that Underdog brings. Thanks for that. Can I follow up just briefly on the final point? Is it about what customers want to do, or is it about what is required by regulation, basically? Can customers say, "Look, I want to execute on Underdog" or do they just sort of hand you a position and say, "I want the best price for that"? Then you have to kind of work out the answer to that, whether it is internal or third party. Then just on the point that you made, Breon, am I hearing correctly that you are really talking about here about offering proprietary liquidity, your own market making basically to boost on own venue? Is that where this is likely to go? Yeah. To be clear, the customer does know, it's there in the text, what venue their trade is ultimately going to execute on. A customer is not coming into Underdog saying, "I want to execute on UDX. I want this to be Fantasy. I want this to be on a different platform." They're coming in and saying, "I want this combination I want, or I want this single, the Patriots to win that I want." Of course, they're going to want the best price at the amount they want for that. That's what our orchestration layer does seamlessly behind the scenes, so they don't have to think about it. Again, it's about the opinion the customer wants to express. We handle everything gracefully below the scenes, and it's a huge part of the value stack for us and the value we built in the product. On the liquidity part, as we bring on more and more market makers, obviously there's growing liquidity. We've got a lot of customers that as well provide the liquidity into the platform. It can be dangerous to be seduced by all the similarities, but I think there's a probable end state here where customers express, to use Jeremy Levine's words, customers express opinions, and they get filled through a selection of exchanges, where there are a varying mix of market makers depending on what customers are expressing an opinion on. That resonates a bit with putting the sportsbook on top of the exchange at Betfair, where we were able to offer different product to differentiate ourselves from sportsbooks and to differentiate ourselves from exchanges because we had product flexibility and promotional flexibility that people who just operate in one reg stack or one tech stack don't have. In terms of the opportunity for IG, whilst these are enormous markets, we can transform the prospects for IG shareholders by just being an active, growing, profitable part of them. I do think this is not going to be winner take all. I think there will be multiple winners in the coming years. Thanks a lot. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question is from Jordan Bender from Citizens. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Hey, everyone. Thanks for the question here. I maybe want to start on the customer acquisition. You guys sort of talked on it, Jeremy. With the products that you are now adding to the platform, we think the Crash product, pack Rips. Are you seeing customers that you are acquiring from those specific categories, maybe less sports-minded customers coming onto the platform, or is it still the main funnel here coming from what was legacy DFS, going into PM, and then into those smaller product offerings? On the second one, I think you guys just touched on it a little bit. If we can elaborate a little bit more around the promos or the financial incentives. You own the whole stack. In theory, that could allow you to freely give more money or customer incentives towards your customers and retain more of the economics in the long run. Jeremy, can you just talk about the strategy there and maybe the advantage that gives you versus your peers? Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for the question. Thank you for tuning in, Jordan Bender. First question was on what we're seeing in the early data for customer acquisition for our new games products. Look, we've only had a month with the games for the most part, so not ready to share a lot of data yet. You asked about cross-sell specifically, and we are seeing really nice signs of cross-sell both ways. We've got a lot to develop, a lot to learn on that. Your second question, I think, was just about the optionality and the opportunity we have by owning the full stack, and it's obviously a really key part of what our strategy has been and what sets us up for success is the full stack and the seamless integration of payment methods, promo mechanics. Again, the ability for the customer to simply want to express an opinion and have that executed best for them. Then obviously in owning each of the vertical pieces of it. We've got so much flexibility to be able to provide the best customer experience and as I obviously talked about in the presentation, our North Star always is how can we offer the best experience possible to the most customers? We think as long as we follow that North Star, it will continue to drive us, obviously, to the economic rewards as a result. Just to build on that, Jordan, we expect customers to come in through all of these different top-of-funnel devices. We see customers come in through the Rips packs, which you'll probably know is a very fast-growing adjacent category in the U.S. We also see customers migrate and change their behaviors who started in a daily fantasy background. We also see customers coming from states where daily fantasy previously wasn't a thing. I think the trick to maximize value creation in the coming years will be to really understand the unit economics for customers coming in through different parts of the funnel, who then will cross-sell to varying degrees to other parts of the business. You referenced promos in particular. Doing that properly, cognizant of regulatory constraints as and when they evolve, I think will be part of the way we'll capture value for shareholders and maximize the experience for customers in the coming years. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question is from Ben Bathurst from RBC Capital Markets. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Afternoon. Hopefully you can hear me okay. Great. I was wondering if you could just talk a bit more about your vision for the business in the more adverse scenario for prediction markets, so scenario B. Am I right in saying that you envisage opening back up into DFS products in those states where you have recently surrendered licenses? Also, if the US Supreme Court does ultimately rule against sports prediction markets, might you consider moving into regulated gambling to broaden your target market? If not, why not? Thank you. I will take the second one. Jeremy Levine will take the first one. It is too early to say what will happen at the US Supreme Court. Since we announced the deal on, I think, the night of July 30th, there has been an awful lot of news, legal and political. We were expecting a lot of noise. There has been plenty. Probably one of the things that has changed since July 30th is the split court decision looks like that will be an accelerant to getting to a US Supreme Court judgment. Probably end state certainty is coming sooner than probably we might have anticipated. I think that is a good thing. Jeremy Levine, I think, is now going to talk to the flexibility of the product and the team. I think it is too early to judge yet. I think irrespective of the US Supreme Court outcome, we will have a customer base, he's referenced 5 million depositing customers already, of young, typically 20 - 40, typically male people that are interested in sport that we know are also trading on other asset classes. But guessing what will happen at the Supreme Court and what we will do thereafter, other than hoping to remind people that we have considerable optionality, I think it's just too early to say what the end state will be. Do you want to take the first question about DFS? Yeah, for sure, Ben. I'll take your question kind of as what do you do if the Supreme Court does defer authority back to the states? Your question, I've kind of answered it. Yes, we'll shift more of our flow, or predominantly all of our sports flow back to the fantasy sports, the DFS regulatory framework. You asked about the states that we recently surrendered licenses in. Let me just explain that. We surrendered licenses in seven states recently. We did that because in conversation with those regulators, those regulators are not fans of prediction markets, and if we wanted to offer prediction markets, they would have preferred, or we would have preferred given the relationship, that we're not also offering fantasy in those states. Six of those seven states, we did not offer the core Pick'em game that I've taken you through in this presentation. We only offered our Drafts game. While we love the Drafts product and the community that comes with it is a very low immaterial piece of our revenue mix. When surrendering six of those states, it was essentially no revenue surrendered if we have to go back to fantasy if prediction markets go away. There's one other state where we have a lot of confidence that if prediction markets go away and we want to reenter that state, there is a fast path to doing so. So that's on the fantasy side. As Breon articulated, we've built a new capability recently, obviously, with our exchange, and there is a lot that can be offered on that exchange via prediction markets and other asset classes if and when, or even without, sports prediction markets going away in either outcome. That is something over time we obviously will develop. We're also, as shared in the presentation, now able to spend a lot more of our time and energy on new games and experiences, as we really feel good about our core product offering. So that will continue, and we'll continue to develop more resident games there that give us more ways to acquire customers, retain customers, engage customers, monetize those customers, and obviously help diversify our revenue. Then you asked, would we go into regulated OSB? That's absolutely a question that we'll answer and evaluate, and we certainly have the capabilities to do so if that's what's best for our business. Again, we feel really well set up for any outcome, and we certainly like the uncertainty, or the limbo to get answered sooner than later because we feel really good about either path for ourselves. Thank you for that. Thank you. Our next question is from David McCann from Deutsche Bank. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Yeah. Morning. Good afternoon indeed, everyone. A few questions from my side. A couple on the numbers, if that's okay. The first one, if we add up the Q1 and Q3 revenues, giving us $3.5 million, and you said that Q4 is typically a third of the revenues historically, and that implies you will get to maybe $5.33 million for the full year, which puts you right on the cutoff for the earn-out. Is that how you see things? How likely is an acceleration in Q4 in order that you achieve the earn-out? That's the first question. Then thinking about the $400 million and $700 million EBITDA implied by the management incentive plan payouts, what kind of revenue growth do you need from this year to actually get to those points? I guess what gives you the confidence that you might be able to do that? I appreciate that's the very upper end, but what kind of revenue does the business actually need to deliver to get there? Then, final one really from me on this, how much of the growth to get there comes from new products to the existing customer base versus customer growth? Where is that growth really going to come from? Thank you. Jeremy, I am going to try and take those. Clifford, I am going to let you take the middle one, I think. Yeah. The third one, I appreciate people would like to model the business. This business is young and rapidly changing in a rapidly changing legal and political world as well. Without oversimplifying, I think Jeremy's job and what Jeremy's success and his team's success to date is to navigate customer demand by building great product. That gives us confidence that almost irrespective of the product mix, to your third question, that we can build a business together that delights customers and retains them in the medium term. To go back to the first question, which I think was about the likelihood of hitting the earn-out. We correctly used the phrase that Q4 last year was more than a third of revenues. I actually think it was closer to 40% of revenues last year, but last year was also a high growth year, and we thought it might be sensible to call out that tempering that optimism about Q4 seems wise. We have looked at other public companies, as you can, to see their sports mix, and Q4 is the most important quarter for most of these American sports-focused businesses. The NFL is three weeks old at the end of September. The NBA starts, I think, on October 20th. This is the critical time in the year and the seasonality, even speaking as a former bookmaker, the seasonality of the sporting calendar in the U.S. is something to behold. Your middle question, which I am going to pass to Clifford, was about, in some ways, the likelihood of addressing the earn-out. You can get there many ways, and Jeremy and indeed his colleagues have got there in one way. We think about it in similar but different ways. Clifford will frame it in a way that perhaps is tidiest for you. But I look at the TAM of the listed U.S. sportsbook businesses, FanDuel and DraftKings, let us call that $7.5 billion. They are the vast majority of the market, probably 80%, but they are only in 30 states. Then you layer on top of that daily fantasy prediction markets and some of the other ancillary products. So you have obviously got an enormous TAM and are growing quickly. This team, year to date, despite extraordinary change in the business, have grown at 30% year on year. I think they should have confidence to back themselves to grow at a similar kind of rate to that, which should get them deep into the money. Yeah. Do you want to be a bit more specific, or would you rather not? Well, I think we've guided- Somewhat around what we think revenue growth can be. We said that it would accelerate IG Group's growth, and that we expect at least double digit medium term from IG Group. We're looking to Underdog to accelerate IG Group's growth. I think in terms of modeling, we collectively felt that an earn-out in this year made sense as the business is building its revenue and customer base. That next year is an opportunity for the business to really scale and accelerate, and then having alignment around EBITDA kind of makes sense. It gives the business enough time and the team enough time to deliver good margins and profitability. It aligns, let's say, the Underdog team with IG Group more broadly and shareholders in particular. If you look at some of the consensus and some of the models out there, I'm sure you've done your own model. You can see that some of the sell side have modeled 20%+ revenue. That's a bit lower than what the team have delivered over the last few years. And margins in the sort of high teens. And I guess those sell side analysts have looked at other comparables and peers. And I think when you model that out, that gets you okay returns, maybe not quite double digits and a little bit south of the EBITDA numbers that we've targeted the team to deliver. Does that give you a bit of a framing? I am highly confident you can run your own models to do the sort of revenue growth versus margin optimization to see where that gets you. But it's really impressive how aligned and motivated the team have been. We've got to know the team well through the transaction in the last few months, and we're looking forward to delivering. Thanks. Thank you. Our next question is from Alex Bowers from KBW. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Hi. So two questions, if I may. Can you hear me? Yes. Please go ahead. I have two questions. Just firstly, can you talk about the marketing strategy for the business and in terms of how you think about customer acquisition costs and the marketing ramp up over the next few quarters? Then just secondly, the point that was made around IG Group's overall double-digit growth aspirations, which I guess includes Underdog. Could you just confirm whether the revenue retention point for IG Group, how material that is to that aspiration? Or was that excluded from that double-digit aspiration? Thanks. Thanks, Alex. I would take the marketing one second. Do you want to take the retention one first? Yes. You saw our trading statement last week, and we were disappointed with Q3 retention at around 70%. We also reconfirmed our medium-term guidance because we feel that we know that retention can be volatile within any particular quarter, but we're comfortable in our risk management approach. We're looking to improve it over time, of course, but we don't think they're necessarily related. We reconfirmed our medium-term guidance reflective of that risk management approach. I think it's important that we understand our medium-term guidance is just that, not a commitment or a guidance in any one year, and it's subject to market conditions, and will move higher and lower accordingly. Clearly, we expect more volatility around retention in any one quarter than in any one year. We maintain that guidance, and clearly, that's one thing that we'll talk about at our event on October 22nd, where we'll talk about the future prospects of the business, including Underdog. We do feel, as we indicated at the end of July, that Underdog's growth rate will accelerate the overall growth of the group. Cool. Thanks, Clifford. Alex, you asked about marketing and our marketing strategy, and I think obviously a handful of pieces to this. We very much view Underdog as, I think you could tell from your presentation, as a product-led company, and we view marketing very much through the lens of product-led growth. Historically, over a third of our customers have come from directly attributed referrals from other customers playing on Underdog. We do a lot to build an experience that people want to play with their friends, share with their friends, and do so. That's always a focus. Also, an experience that people enjoy, have fun with, leads to that virality. We have a real philosophy in marketing of our job is to show and make sports more fun. It's to be part of the sports moment in a way that enhances the experience for our customers. Our marketing, as you can imagine, is very seasonal, right? It's very based around the sports calendar, the key sporting events, the key sporting moments. You'll see that in the summer, it's at a lot lower when football season picks up. Starts, it picks up when NBA season adds in, is when it really accelerates. We're now obviously heading into the most important and biggest piece of the year by far. You'll see hopefully more and more, especially if you're in the U.S., you'll see more and more of Underdog, our brand, our campaigns, some of the really fun creative things we do. We've got a team we call the Rascals that kind of does guerrilla marketing and the key there is to really know sports. We always say we know ball as kind of a principle of our marketing to know sports and make sure we show up in the sports moments and in a way that make it more fun for our customers. We've done that in a bunch of ways to date. I'm sure you can see or hopefully have seen some of the ways that we've kind of cut through with marketing messages that often don't cost much money at all but make us really part of a key moment. There's hopefully a lot more of that to come as well. If I may just to build on that, I think one of the places, it's a crowded market in the U.S. You've got some of the prediction market businesses that are about everything rather than sports. You've got some of the legacy online sports brands that customer research suggests have become a little dated. There's Underdog, maybe there's PrizePicks. But one of the areas where Jeremy Levine's colleagues have been most keen to get support from us is just on how you scale marketing through the year and in a somewhat crowded market. One of the things we're very proud of, or I'm very proud of at IG Group over the last couple of years is, as we've run the business more efficiently to fund marketing, the returns on that have been very encouraging as well. I think that's one of the IP synergies that we hope to be able to mutually support each other over the coming years. Thank you. Thank you. As a gentle reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please use the raise hand function at the bottom of your Zoom screen. Our next question comes from Haley Tam from UBS. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Thank you very much. Sorry for coming back for a second pass. Could I just follow up on some of the questions you've already had? In terms of the different regulatory scenarios that you highlighted, I guess the simple question is, how quickly do you think you could pivot from prediction markets back to, say, daily fantasy sports? Then there's a second question, actually, more about Q3 that you've just done, the $110 million of revenue. Can you give us any more color on how much of that came from daily fantasy sports versus prediction markets? Perhaps within prediction markets, how important to your revenue line the different types of trades are, so parlays versus single game or player contracts? That'd be interesting. Thank you. Thanks, Haley. Apologies, I think I called you Heidi earlier. So on the Q3 revenue mix, I don't think we're going to disclose the specific revenue mix. On the regulatory, how quickly could we pivot if something changed? If that change happened right now, I'd make a phone call and probably certainly within 30 minutes, our app would be working under that new regulatory framework. We've built the app seamlessly for that with the orchestration layer. It's something as we navigated different kind of state environments, we often had to have different configurations in different states. So it's something our product back end and as a result, obviously the front end is well built for. So it's a real kind of key of the orchestration layer, the seamless single app and the whole strategy is how quickly we can pivot to any effective outcome. Hayley, to add to that, I think mixed questions, I understand the rationale behind them, but they're going to change enormously over the coming few months. I think that's probable based on, Jeremy and I sat down and looked at the product pipeline for the next three months, a few times over the last few days, and that's going to change things. Plus how effective we are at spending marketing dollars, even on a geographical basis, will change mix as well. So I really think that level of granularity is unhelpful, and that the big picture is just a little bit more helpful for right now. Whilst he says he can change things in 30 minutes, that is true. We were astonished at how quickly they could launch the exchange. The fact that I think in the end you were four days late, the fact that anything could be four days late and that they would feel slightly aggrieved about that when I am more accustomed to things being slower and later. Part of the complexity here is we do not know the end state. We think the end state will be some kind of hybrid. We think there will probably be some kind of local taxation. We have as many of the tools as we can envisage built in-house, controllable by us, with the ability to flex, not in the way that kids use the word flex, but with the ability to pivot probably more quickly than any of the large legacy orgs. With a history not just of daily fantasy, but also as a regulated OSB, admittedly in only one state. We think that we are uniquely qualified. We feel that we should take a certain amount of comfort from that and that we are close to uniquely qualified to compete irrespective of the regulatory end state. Maybe it is not 30 minutes, but it should be as fast as anyone out there. It is. Maybe it is 30 minutes. It is. Thank you. I really appreciate the full answer to that question. If I can be cheeky and just ask one more. You said you expect the end state to be some kind of hybrid. Can I just confirm that that was absolutely the case when the deal was originally struck? Yeah. We have been talking for a very long time. I think it is improbable. This is a personal view, but I think it is highly improbable that someone can put lightning back into a bottle. Having spent a lot of time in the U.S., the prediction markets has caught a zeitgeist in maybe the way that Crypto did a number of years ago. I do not see how this goes away. But equally, as ever, one should follow the money and I think that will lead to some kind of taxation somewhere. I think that is the highly likely end state. But that is a personal view. I cannot read the minds of the US Supreme Court judges. They will ultimately determine. That is very kind. Thank you. Thank you. Our final question is from David McCann from Deutsche Bank. Please unmute your line and ask your question. Hey there. Yeah, thanks for taking my follow-up questions like Haley. A couple more if that is okay. Just wanted to follow up actually on Haley's question around the mix, but I appreciate you have kind of given an answer to this. But I think where perhaps some of us are a bit nervous, you articulated this when you announced the deal, that the revenue margins you would get from some of the new products like prediction are lower than what you get from the legacy book. As the business does continue to transition, which you obviously hope for, what are the risks that particularly, as you know, you are on the public market, people are going to look at the quarterly numbers, rightly or wrongly, that we do see some revenue headwinds quarter on quarter or even year on year as that transition goes through. How are you thinking about managing that messaging risk? That is the first question. On the deal more broadly, to what extent, Breon, is this a defensive deal because concerns you might have about the long-term growth of the existing group businesses and the risk of prediction markets increasingly become ways for your existing customers to express their opinions on financial markets versus some of the other reasons you have articulated well for doing this deal. How much of that played into your mind when you were doing the deal? Then, I guess finally, probably again one for Breon, how are you going to keep Jeremy and his team at IG beyond 2029, given, let us say, the history of moving on? You want me to start with the mix and then you take the final two? No, you do the final one. You do the final one. Cool. Why might you stay? Jeremy- Jeremy is a lot younger than he looks, and he has lots and lots of runway ahead of him. Actually, he has successfully built three startups, and I think you meet the caliber of his team, and I really mean it. I am very proud of the caliber of the team we are building at IG, but the caliber of the people at Underdog is enormously exciting. I think if we can find a way, and I believe we can, if we can find a way for Jeremy to deliver on his customers' desires and his ambitions within IG, first and foremost in sports, I would hope that there is I do not think we are in any way opportunity constrained by the group, and I think there will be more than enough opportunity for Jeremy and Brandon and the rest of his team over time, but maybe he should address that at the end. To go back, the first question was margin, yeah? Yeah. So guidance, maybe I was a little casual. A number of our shareholders were shareholders in Betfair or Paddy Power or Flutter, or indeed, some of them are still shareholders in Flutter. We felt that there was a reasonably good read across the FanDuel business from UK shareholders. Perhaps then, and there was some debate about this internally, so kudos to Martin for trying to make me do more of this. Perhaps I could have focused more on the seasonality and just helping people build the sports model so they would understand the Underdog revenue mix over time. So that's a gap that perhaps I could have done a better job on back in July. I think the margin issue is interesting, but not as defining of the outcome as people might think. The prediction markets, specifically Polymarket and Kalshi, are both private companies. They are talking up their notional traded volume with great gusto and great effect. If one goes even superficially into kind of just the Twitter sphere about how people are talking about this, it's hard to substantiate exactly what the economic value of some of that notional is. Closer to public company terminology is handle, which we've used in the slide to reflect the actual dollars that customers are staking, and then ultimately we get to a revenue or net gaming revenue. I think the key metric here is NGR, is net gaming revenue. Handle will go up over time, and indeed notional and prediction market exchanges. If people have 100 leg parlay, a $1 bet can have a notional into the thousands or even tens of thousands. So we think you have to look at revenue. Now frustratingly, right now, we're the only public company that's talking about revenue. Currently, I think Robinhood have done in the past and will talk about revenue from prediction markets over time. But reconciling the difference between notional handle and revenue is tricky, and we will work with shareholders and sell side to best understand that as time passes. Those conversations are already underway. We've got work to do, but I think shareholders will understand the complexity of modeling this and giving the right guidance on this because of where you anchor in terms of what stage of the revenue line or the notional handle revenue line. To your second question, which is kind of the strategically interesting one, was this defensive? If you go back two and a half years at IG, we were effectively seen as a bet on a mono product, an old U.K. legacy product, over-the-counter CFDs, and largely we're a U.K. play. That was very much the case before tastytrade. There was some concern with shareholders about the concentration associated with being as U.K.-centric and a CFD or spread betting centric. You might remember the budget last year, the kind of relief rally after the budget showed just, I think there was a 10% rally in the share price, which showed just how concerned shareholders were about our exposure to regulatory or political events in the U.K. Since the summer of 2024, so just after I joined, we talked about filling out product gaps. Then by the summer of 2025, we were talking about adjacencies. We have wanted to diversify this business for the good of our shareholders. We wanted to get into a brand and product suite and a regulatory suite that resonates with the younger customer base. I think prediction markets in the U.S. fits very well there. I think Michael Healy will do I am very excited about the job Michael Healy will do on the 22nd of talking people through the growing momentum in the core IG business, and how that is also led by product and marketing and the cultural change that he is orchestrating. I think even in addition to the progress we are making at IG, the opportunity on a sensible deal structure on what we think is a sensible price to get our shareholders exposure, to give our shareholders exposure to as faster growing customer base and revenue and profit stream as prediction markets in the U.S. We think that is something we are very excited about, and we think in time our shareholders will be increasingly excited about as well. Do you want to build on that, or are we good? I think it was good. One comment I will make, we had this discussion obviously in the process through the announcement of the transaction. We have engaged with the team around trading since then. I am really satisfied, frankly, with the shareholder value orientation, the discipline around marketing that the team shows. That we have the same conversations around tax and LTVs and so on. Ultimately, we will need to deliver revenue, and we will need to deliver EBITDA. That is how we have incentivized the team, and we will be pleased to pay out as and when the team deliver on those stretching targets. Yeah. David, just to build on the first part you asked around just the mix. We very much view it as our job to continue to offer more and more to our customers so that they can engage more, and that is something we obviously focus a lot on, as Breon mentioned, and rightfully so. The focus on handle and obviously the focus on net revenue that comes from that. We are really excited about the handle growth we are seeing as our customers are able to engage more and more. Now, of course, the margin is not always going to go up as handle growth is going through the roof. If you ask us, hey, do we want 3X the handle at half the margin? Of course, we do. That is a trade we will take every day. There is obviously a balance in what we offer and how we offer it. It's something we're really thoughtful about. But we're really keen to just keep on offering more and more we can to our customers, and I think you can track that and handle over time. Then you asked what keeps us here in the long term, and obviously the deal structure has plenty of incentive for us to really drive this business and drive growth over the next few years. But look, I think the important part always is that the team we have that we're having fun, and we have an uncapped opportunity to do this. I can say that I'm having some of the most fun I've ever had as there's so much in front of us, so much to build, such an amazing time, and the sizzle reel at the very jump of this hopefully captured that. That's what it feels like at our company, and we're all having a really good time doing this. So long as that's the case, I want to be doing this forever. Thanks, Jeremy. I think we're going to wrap up. Nothing like the enthusiasm of a founder in his 30s to make me feel like an old man. So Jeremy, thank you for that, and thank you to our shareholders in the sell side for joining us. The business gives us access to a large, fast-growing TAM. The team are executing well, and they're heading into their busiest quarter with real momentum. I'm very excited about what comes next. For our IG business, we will do a strategy update on October 22. We'll talk about the progress we're making in the core business. We'll address some of the other questions that have come up in recent months. We appreciate your time today. We look forward to talking to you some more on the 22nd. Thank you all.