Ascopiave

Investor Presentation • May 24, 2017

ITALIAN INVESTMENT CONFERENCE

Milan, 24th May 2017

i i B O u s n e s s v e r v e w	P 3 a g
G d i i b i t t a s s r u o n	P 2 3 a g
G l a s s a e s	P 3 7 a g
A f i i l d t n n e x e s n a n c a a a :	P 4 9 a g
D i l i s c a m e r	P 1 0 3 a g

Business Overview

→	G b i i i i t t r o p s n e s s a c e s u u v	P 4 a g
→	f K i e y g u r e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 6 a g
→	M k i i i i h t t t t a r e p o s o n n g n e g a s s e c o r	P 7 a g
→	A i G f h D b 3 1 2 0 1 6 t t t s c o p a e r o p s r c r e a s o e c e m e r v u u u … … …	P 8 a g
→	S A i h h l d s c o p a v e a r e o e r s .… … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … … … … …	P 9 a g
→	M i f i i l d i t t t t a n n a n c a a a n c o m e s a e m e n – … … …	P 1 0 a g
→	E B I T D A b k- d b S i B i U i 2 0 0 6 2 0 1 6 t t t r e a o w n y r a e g c u s n e s s n - … … … .… … …	P 1 1 a g
→	2 0 0 6 2 0 1 6 I i i b l d i i b l t t t t t n v e s m e n s n a n g e a n n a n g e a s s e s - … … … … … … …	P 1 2 a g
→	I i i d f i i i i 2 0 0 6 2 0 1 6 t t t n e s m e n s n c o m p a n e s a n r m s a c q s o n s v u -	P 1 3 a g
→	f f M i i i l d b l h d i i l i t t t a n n a n c a a a a a n c e s e e a n n a n c a r a o s –	P 1 4 a g
→	F i i l l i n a n c a e e r a g e c o m p a r s o n v … … .… … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 1 5 a g
→	F i i l d b d f d b t t t n a n c a e a n c o s o e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 1 6 a g
→	D i i d d l i v e n p o c y … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P 1 7 a g
→	D i i d d Y i l d i e n e c o m p a r s o n v … … … … … … … .… … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P 1 8 a g
→	d i i d d l 2 0 1 6 v e n p r o p o s a … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … …	P 1 9 a g
→	S i i d l i t t r a e g c g u e n e s … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P 2 0 a g
→	G A i i f P b i t c q s o n o a s o r o p u u u … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … … … … … …	P 2 1 a g

Ascopiave Group is ^a national player in the down-stream segments of the gas sector. It is ^a major player in the Veneto Region.

	O h l d i i i t t t t t e r n o r e g u a e a c v e s
G I t a s m p o r	S i i I l i ( i l i i d i ) ( A i k f i l ) 3 0, 9 4 % t t t t t n e r g e a a n e n q u a o n s c o p a v e c u r r e n s a e o c a p a : i d l i k ( T P ) i h G f h t t t t t t t s g n e a o n g e r m m p o r a e o r p a y o c o n r a c w a z p r o m o r e f f l 1. 0 b i l l i b i 2 0 2 1. t t s p p o o n c c m e e r s o g a s p e r e a r p o u y u y u S i i I l i l l i d h l i i d b t t t t t t n e r g e a a n e s e s m p o r e g a s o e g a s s a e s c o m p a n e s p a r e c p a e y h h h l d t e s a r e o e r s.
G t a s p r o c u r e m e n i t t a c v e m a n a g e m e n	O f i i i h i d d i l i k d t t t t t p m z a o n o e g a s p r o c u r e m e n p r o c e s s a m e a r e u c n g s u p p y r s s a n t c o s s
S E l i i l t t e c r c y a e s d t o e n c o n s u m e r s	S l f l i i h d t t t t u p p y o e e c r c y o e e n c o n s u m e r s. I I l l i i l k i l l b l l l i b l i d i h t t t t t t t n a y e e c r c y s a e s m a r e w e c o m p e e y e r a s e n e n e x y e a r s. C l b l i h d k i l l d l l t t t t t t t t u s o m e r s c u r r e n y e o n g n g o e p r o e c e m a r e w g r a u a y m o v e o h f k t t e r e e m a r e
C i t o g e n e r a o n H M t t e a a n a g e m e n

(*) Data of the companies consolidated with the equity method are considered pro-quota.

The Group is ^anational player in the gas sector and ^a leading regional player in Veneto.

	Ra k ing n	Gr ou p	Vo l. ( ) sm c	%
	1	Sn am	7, 5 4 2	2 4. 3 %
	2	2 i Re Ga te s	1 8 5, 7	1 6. % 7
	3	He ra	2, 8 7 5	9. 0 %
) *	4	A A 2	1, 8 3 2	5. 9 %
( D	5	Ire n	1, 2 7 1	4. 1 %
E T	6	To En ia sc an a erg	1, 1 2 7	3. 6 %
U B	7	As iav co p e	6 8 3	2. 2 %
I R	8	L ine Gr Ho l d ing a ou p	6 3 9	2. 1 %
T S	9	S. E. Tr. A.	5 4 7	1. 8 %
I D	1 0	Er t og as me	2 0 5	0. 7 %
S	1 1	Ag Ve sm ron a	3 2 7	1. 2 %
A G	1 2	Ac -A sm g am	3 4 5	1. 1 %
F	1 3	Un ion Fe In ion l ter no sa na c a	3 5 3	1. 1 %
O S	1 4	Am b ien te En ia Br ian erg za	3 3 0	1. 1 %
E	1 5	En i erg e	2 9 9	1. 0 %
M U	1 6	Ga R im in i s	2 7 5	0. 9 %
L O	1 7	Do lom i i En ia t erg	2 7 1	0. 9 %
V	1 8	E d iso n	2 7 5	0. 9 %
	1 9	A im ag	2 5 8	0. 8 %
	2 0	A im V ice nz a	2 4 7	0. 8 %
		O he t rs	6, 1 5 5	1 9. 9 %
		To l ta	3 1, 0 0 7	1 0 0. 0 %

	Ra k ing n	Gr ou p	Vo l. ( ) sm c	%
	1	En i	1 2, 6 3 7	2 3. % 7
	2	En l e	0 1 5, 7	1 0. 6 %
	3	E d iso n	6 6 5, 5	1 0. % 5
	4	Ire n	2, 2 2 8	4. 1 %
)	5	He ra	2, 1 0 5	3. 9 %
* (	6	E. On	2, 0 9 1	3. 9 %
D L	7	En ie g	1, 9 2 6	3. 6 %
O	8	Ro l Du h S he l l P lc tc a y	1, 3 5 1	2. 5 %
S S	9	A 2 A	1, 3 3 4	2. % 5
A	1 0	So ia rg en	8 1 4	1. 5 %
G F	1 1	As iav co p e	8 0 1	1. 5 %
O	1 2	Es tra	7 0 1	1. 3 %
S E	1 3	Un og as	6 0 1	1. 1 %
M	1 4	Er t og as me	5 8 5	1. 1 %
U L	1 5	Do lom i i En ia t erg	5 4 7	1. 0 %
O V	1 6	Gr Ax p o ou p	5 2 9	1. 0 %
	1 7	Ga S Sa Na l dg tur s a	5 0 5	0. 9 %
	1 8	Me No d tan o r	3 6 8	0. 7 %
	1 9	Gr L ine Ho l d ing a ou p	3 6 1	0. 7 %
	2 0	Re Ag p ow er	3 3 7	0. 6 %
		O he t rs	1 2, 5 0 3	2 3. 2 %
		To l ta	5 3, 8 1 6	1 0 0. 0 %

(*) 2015 AEEGSI data.

Ascopiave Shareholders (*)

Asco Holding S.p.A. directly controls the capital of Ascopiave S.p.A. (capital stake: 61.562%)

Asco Holding S.p.A. is owned by 90 municipalities mainly located in the province of Treviso (publicshareholders) and ² private companies.

(*) Internal processing of information pursuant to art. 120 TUF (Source: CONSOB website)

2016 MAIN FINANCIAL DATA ACCORDING TO IFRS 11 – INCOME STATEMENT (*)

I N C O M E S T A T E M E N T
	G r o p u	D i i b i t t s r o n u S B U ( ** )	S l s S a e B U ( * )
( ) R e v e nu e s	4 9 7, 6 8 9	1 0 9, 5 4 0	4 9 5, 3 4 8
E B I T D A	9 5, 2 5 5	3 5, 0 2 0	6 0, 2 3 5
E B I T	7 2, 1 3 7	1 7, 1 9 6	5 4, 9 4 0
Ev lua ion f t a o ies i h ( ) t co m p an w i ho d ty t eq m e u	7, 7 5 0	1, 2 3 8	6, 5 1 2
N i t e n c o m e	5 6, 9 4 2

2016 Sales SBU EBITDA (+33.4% YoY)is supported by Euro 11.1 mln positiveone-off related to the optional APRmechanism set by the energy regulator(AEEGSI) (for more details go to pages63-66 of the current presentation)

(-) EBITDA of the company consolidated with the equitymethod: Euro 13.0 mln (distribution companies: Euro 2.8 mln ⁺ sales companies: Euro 10.2 mln)

EBIT of the company consolidated with the equity method: Euro9.0 mln (distribution companies: Euro 1.5 mln ⁺ sales companies: Euro 7.5 mln)

(*) Thousand of Euro; (**) Distribution SBU includes gas distribution, heat management and cogeneration; (***) Sales SBU includes gas sales and electricity sales; (****) Gas distributionSBU and gas sales SBU revenues are represented before elisions.

2006-2016 EBITDA break-down by Strategic Business Unit

( Mil lion f E ) o uro	I N C O M E S T A T E M E N T	G r o u p	D i i b i t t s r o n u S B U	%	S l a e s S B U	%
S 1 IFR 1	E B I T D A	9 5, 3	3 5, 0	3 6, 8 %	6 0, 2	6 3, 2 %
IFR S 1 1	E B I T D A	8 1, 0	5, 3 8	4 4, 2 %	5, 4 2	5 5, 8 %
IFR S 1 1	E B I T D A	7 9, 6	3 5, 4	4 4, 5 %	4 4, 2	5 5, 5 %
IFR S 1	E B I T D A 1 re ted sta	8 6, 3	3 3, 4	3 8, 7 %	5 2, 9	6 1, 3 %
	E B I T D A	1 0 5, 9	3 6, 0	3 4, 0 %	6 9, 9	6 6, 0 %
	E B I T D A	1 0 2, 7	3 3, 9	3 3, 1 %	6 8, 7	6 6, 9 %
	E B I T D A	9 3, 2	3 4, 9	3 4 % 7,	5 8, 3	6 2, 6 %
	E B I T D A	7 8, 0	3 2, 9	4 2, 1 %	4 5, 1	5 7, 9 %
	E B I T D A	6 1, 5	4 1, 6	6 7, 6 %	1 9, 9	3 2, 4 %
	E B I T D A	5 2, 3	3 7, 6	7 1, 8 %	1 4, 8	2 8, 2 %
	E B I T D A	4 6, 5	3 5, 5	6, 4 % 7	1 1, 0	2 3, 6 %
	E B I T D A	4 1, 1	3 9, 9	9 0 % 7,	1, 2	3, 0 %

Gas distribution businessis characterized by stable operating margins.

Increase of the gas sales business operating margins over the last years is due to external growth (acquisition of ⁸ companies) and to higher profitability, mainly thanks to declining gas procurement costs.

2006-2016 Investments in tangible and intangible assets

( Mil lion f E ) o uro	I N V E S T M E N T S	G	D i i t s r r o u p t n e	b i t o n u % k w o r	O h t e r i t t n v e s m e n s	%
IFR S 1 1	I N V E S T M E N T S		2 0, 8 1	9, 9 5 % 7	1, 1	5 %
IFR S 1 1	I N V E S T M E N T S		2 2, 0 2	0, 7 9 4 %	1, 3	6 %
IFR S 1 1	I N V E S T M E N T S		2 1, 1 1	9, 7 9 4 %	1, 3	6 %
S 1 IFR 1 re sta	S S I N V E T M E N T ted		1 8, 9 1	2, 7 6 7 %	6, 2	3 3 %
	S S I N V E T M E N T		2 1, 6 1	4, 9 6 9 %	6, 7	3 1 %
	S S I N V E T M E N T		2 3, 1 1	6, 8 7 3 %	6, 3	2 7 %
	I N V E S T M E N T S		4 1, 8 1	5, 4 3 % 7	2 6, 4	6 3 %
	I N V E S T M E N T S		2 9, 1 1	1, 2 3 8 %	1 7, 9	6 2 %
	S S I N V E T M E N T		2 9, 9 1	3, 8 4 6 %	1 6, 1	5 4 %
	S S I N V E T M E N T		1 9, 2 1	1, 4 6 0 %	7, 7	4 0 %
	S S I N V E T M E N T		1 7, 5 1	2, 2 7 0 %	5, 3	3 0 %
	I N V E S T M E N T S		1 6, 1 7	2, 4 4 % 7	4, 4	2 6 %

The Group investments in tangible and intangible assets over the last 11 years amounts to Euro 262,8 mln and for the most part (64%) concern the development, the maintenance and up-grade of the gas network and of the distribution system. In 2009-2011 thegroup made significant investments in photovoltaic power plants. The photovoltaic business was disposed in 2011.

(*) IPO: ¹² dec 2006

2016 MAIN FINANCIAL DATA ACCORDING TO IFRS 11 – BALANCE SHEET (*)

C S / / B A L A N E H E E T 3 1 1 2 2 0
Ta i b le d in i b le 4 3 0, 0 2 8 ta ts ng an ng as se
Inv in ia 6 8, 3 8 tm ts te 7 es en as so c s
O he f ixe d t ts 2 3, 8 0 8 r as se
Ne k ing i l 1 5, 7 5 4 t w ta or c ap
C T O T A L A P I T A L E M P L O Y E D 5 3 8, 3 2 8
S ha ho l de i 4 4 4, 2 0 9 ty re rs eq u
Ne f ina ia l p i io t t 9 4, 1 1 9 nc os n
S C S T O T A L O U R E 5 3 8, 3 2 8

2016 ASCOPIAVE MAIN FINANCIAL RATIOS

( / Q ) F i i l l N F P E U I T Y n a n c a e v e r a g e	0. 2 1	( / ) D b i N F P E B I T D A t t e c o v e r r a o	0. 9 9

(*) Thousand of Euro

Financial leverage comparison (2015)

( *) F I N A N C I A L R A T I O S	( **) L O C A L U T I L I T I E S ( da ) ta av er ag e	A S C O P I A V E
F i i l l n a n c a e v e r a g e	1, 0 3	0, 2 7
/ D E B I T D A	2, 9 1	1, 4 1

Ascopiavefinancial leverage (0.3) is lower than that of the Italian listed comparables (avg: 1.0).

The low indebtedness level is ^a very positive result in the light of ^a macroeconomic scenario that makes access to credit ^a real challenge, which therefore strengthens the Group's economic andfinancial soundness and enables it to reap the opportunity of carrying out potential extraordinarytransactions in the next years.

(*) Financial leverage is calculated considering the shareholders' equity and the net financial position as of December, 31st 2015; (**) Local utilities considered are the main italian listedlocal utilities: A2A, Hera, Acea and Iren.

EIB Loan

In June 2013 the European Investment Bank (EIB) and Ascopiave signed ^a70 million Euro loan in support of investments to improve and expand gas distribution networks in the Veneto and Lombardy regions.

(*) Data refers to the companies consolidated with the full consolidation method

Dividend payment sustainable with high return to shareholders

Sustainability of the dividend policy:

• pstable cash flow
• pstable business profitability
• pwell-balanced financial structure

Dividend yield at the top of the listed italian utility companies

D I V I D E N D S	5 2 0 1	2 0 1 4	2 0 1 3	2 0 1 2	2 0 1 1	2 0 1 0	2 0 0 9	2 0 0 8	2 0 0 7	2 0 0 6
( ) D iv i de ds d is i bu d T ho d o f Eu tr te n us an ro	3 5. 1 6 2	3 5. 1 6 2	2 8. 1 2 9	2 5. 7 8 5	0	2 3. 4 4 1	2 1. 0 9 7	1 9. 9 2 5	1 9. 8 9 8	1 9. 8 3 3
Gr Ne Inc ( T ho d o f Eu ) t ou p om e us an ro	4 3. 0 1 4	3 5. 5 8 3	3 8. 6 7 8	2 7. 8 6 5	6. 2 6 6	3 1. 1 7 4	2 5. 2 8 8	1 8. 4 5 2	2 1. 7 6 4	1 6. 3 8 1
Pa io t r t y ou a	8 2 %	9 9 %	7 3 %	9 3 %	0 %	7 5 %	8 3 %	1 0 8 %	9 1 %	1 2 1 %
( ) D iv i de d p ha Eu n er s re ro	0, 1 5 0	0, 1 5 0	0, 1 2 0	0, 1 1 0	0, 0 0 0	0, 1 0 0	0, 0 9 0	0, 0 8 5	0, 0 8 5	0, 0 8 5
( *) D iv i de d y ie l d n	7, 0 %	7, 6 %	8, 4 %	9, 2 %	0, 0 %	6, 3 %	5, 8 %	5, 7 %	4, 4 %	4, 0 %

TOTAL DIVIDENDS DISTRIBUTED FROM STOCK EXCHANGE LISTING TO DATE

About Euro 228 mln

/ R O I R O E	2 0 1 5	2 0 1 4	2 0 1 3	2 0 1 2	2 0 1 1	2 0 1 0	2 0 0 9	2 0 0 8	2 0 0 7	2 0 0 6
O ( **) R I	1 2, 2 %	1 1, 1 %	1 4, 4 %	1 3, 1 %	1 1, 8 %	1 1, 7 %	9, 1 %	8, 5 %	7, 1 %	1 0, 4 %
O R E	1 0, 4 %	8, 8 %	9, 7 %	7, 3 %	1, 8 %	8, 3 %	6, 9 %	5, 1 %	5, 9 %	4, 4 %

(*) Dividend yield = dividend per share / average price per share in the year; (**) ROI = EBIT / CI; CI = Net Capital Invested (In 2014 and 2015 investments in associates are excluded)

Dividend Yield comparison (2015)

Dividends distributed by Ascopiave in 2015 are higher than those distributed by the major listedcomparable companies:

(*) Dividend per share / 2015 average price per share

2016 dividend proposal

	D I V I D E N D P R O P O S A L	2 0 1 6
D i i d d d v e n p r o p o s e :	( f ) D iv i de ds d is i bu d T ho d o Eu tr te n us an ro	4 2. 1 9 4
E h ( E l ) 0, 1 8 4 2, 2 r o p e r s a r e r o m n u u	Gr Ne Inc ( T ho d o f Eu ) t ou p om e us an ro	3. 6 3 5 5
D h d 8 h M 2 0 1 7 t t t t e a c m e n a e a y :	Pa io t r t y ou a	7 9 %
R d d h M 9 2 0 1 7 t t e c o r a e a : y	D iv i de d ha ( Eu ) n p er s re ro	0, 1 8 0
P d h M 1 0 2 0 1 7 t t t a y m e n a e : a y	( *) D iv i de d y ie l d n	7, 2 %

(*) Dividend yield = dividend per share / average price per share in the year

The tender

p Ascopiave has been awarded the tender relating to the purchase of shares of Pasubio Group S.p.A., a company operating in the gas gas distribution business in Veneto Region (Northern Italy)

Operation key figures of the target company

• pMunicipalities served: 22
• pGas End Users: about 88.000
• pConcessions deadlines: 2017-2024

Main Financial Data (*)

I N C O M E S T A T E M E N T			B A L A N C E S H E E T
€ / 0 0 0	2 0 1 5	2 0 1 4	€ / 0 0 0	C D E 2 0 1 5
Re ve nu es	1 2, 4 5 5	1 2, 3 2 7	Ca i Ne t ta l In te d p ve s	2 8, 0 1 3
E B I T D A	4, 7 0 9	4, 3 8 3
E B I T	2, 3 1 7	2, 1 2 2	S ha ho l de Eq i ty re rs u	2 1, 0 8 4
Ne inc t om e	1, 5 2 1	7 3 6	( **) Ne F ina ia l Po i ion t t nc s	6, 9 2 9

(*) Estimates drawn by Ascopiave regarding the aggregate figures pertinent to the Group

(**) Net financial indebtedness adjusted to factor in accounts payable relating to fees owed to towns awarding the concessions and falling under pre 2015 fiscal year

Economic Conditions Offered by Ascopiave

• pPrice for of the 100% capital stake of Pasubio Group S.p.A. (equity value) = Euro 16,3 mln
• p Commitment by Pasubio Group to disburse to some towns (awarding the current concessions) a one off supplementary fee = Euro 5.1 mln
• p Commitment by Pasubio Group to disburse to the said towns, commencing 2017, the original concession fees as originally envisaged i.e. prior to the amendments in force between the parties (estimated higher annual fees: Euro 1.6 mln per year)
• p Commitment by Pasubio Group to make an anticipated payment to the said towns corresponding to the annual concessions fees for the years 2017 and 2018

Gas distribution

→	G d i i b i t t t a s s r o n s e c o r u	P a g	2 4
→	G f d i i b i l l k t t a s s r u o n e g a r a m e w o r : … … … … … … … …	P a g	2 5
→	P b l i d f h i i f h i t t t c e n e r s o r e a s s g n n g o e c o n c e s s o n s u	P a g	2 6
→	A i i i i i h d i i b i k t t t t t s c o p a v e p o s o n n g n e g a s s r u o n m a r e	P a g	2 7
→	A i i h d i i b i k t t t t t t s c o p a e s r a e g n e g a s s r o n m a r e v y u	P a g	2 8
→	f f R l i h l l d t t t e g u a o n o e c a o e n e r s	P a g	3 1
→	C i b i d h i d i i b t t t t t t t o m p e n s a o n o e p a o e o g o n g s r o r u u … … …	P a g	3 2
→	C i f f l i V R T d R A B t t t u r r e n a r r e g u a o n : a n	P a g	3 3
→	T i f f l i t a r r e g a o n u … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… .… … … … … …	P a g	3 5
→	S W O T l i G D i i b i S B U t t a n a s s a s s r o n y u –	P a g	3 6

Gas distribution sector: key figures

• pNo. of operators: about 240
• pMunicipalities served: about 7,000
• pVolumes of gas distributed: about 34 billion of standard cubic meters
• pNo. of users served: over 22 million
• pLength of the gas distribution network: over 220.000 km (ownership: 75% of operators)
• pRegulatory asset base (RAB): Euro 15,1 bln

Since 2000 gas distribution operators have been reduced to less than a third.

Currently gas distribution sector is strongly concentrated:

• pabout 50% of RAB (*) is held by Italgas and F2i, the only operators with a national rank
• p about 30% of RAB is held by 14 medium size operators (RAB > Euro 100 mln), with a regional relevance
• pabout 20% of RAB is held by small size operators

(*) Ascopiave valuation.

• p Gas distribution is currently ^a local monopolistic activity managed under concessions granted by municipalities
• pItalian gas distribution sector was liberalized in ²⁰⁰⁰ according to the European Union Rules
• p The law established ^a mechanism of competition for the market: concession must be awarded only through public tenders.
• p The distributor is responsible for the operation, the development and the maintenance of the distribution network (operational expenses and investments), according to the concessional agreementsigned between the operator and the municipality
• p The National Energy Authority (AEEGSI)
• psets the tariffs to be applied to cover the cost of capital and for the operations of the service
• pprovides rules regarding the minimum standard service levels.

• p The distributor gives access to any requiring gas sales company, that has the right to use the network to supply gas to its customers (third party access)

• p In order to improve the economic efficiency of the sector, since ²⁰⁰⁷ the legislation has established that the tenders must be called to assign concessions for the management of the service in wide geographical areas, grouping neighbouring municipalities (Territorial Districts).

• pThe national government constituted ¹⁷⁷ Territorial Districts nationwide
• p Municipalities belonging to ^a single Territorial District must appoint ^a local entity to act as contracting authority for the District
• pThe law established the deadline by which each District Authority must call the tenders.
• p In ²⁰¹¹ the national government issued some decrees establishing the general contents of the call for tenders, that must be fulfilled on the base of the local needs for investments to be defined by the local contracting authority. The standardization was aimed at encouraging competition and assuringtransparency and effectiveness in the tender process..

The current rules governing the incoming tender processes will probably cause ^a furtherrestructuring of the distribution sector.

A significant reduction in the number of operators is expected, as the participation to the publictenders requires to the potential competitors strong financial capability and important economic, organizational and technical skills.

T E R R I T O R I A L S C D I T R I T	Pu b l i d t c e n e r i d d l e a n e	A i G s c o p av e r ou p g a s u s e r s	%	A i G s c o p av e r ou p ( ) k h % t m a r e s a r e
Tr is 2 ev o Tr is 1	M h 2 0 1 7 a rc Ju 2 0 1 7	1 4 1. 1 6 3 7 5. 6 6 4	3 1 % 1 7 %	8 8 % 5 5 %
ev o Ro ig v o	ne Ap i l 2 0 1 8 r	3 9 3 5. 5	8 %	3 6 %
V ic 3 e nz a	S b 2 0 1 7 te e p m e r	2 7. 4 3 1	6 %	2 7 %
Be 1 rg a m o	J 2 0 1 7 a nu a ry	1 4 3 6 5.	3 %	4 2 %
Be 5 rg a m o	M h 2 0 1 7 a rc	1 0 9 1 5.	3 %	3 2 %
Ve ia 2 ne z	J 2 0 1 7 a nu a ry	2 5. 8 9 9	6 %	1 3 %
O he d. t t. r m	2 0 1 6- 2 0 1 8	1 1 4. 2 2 5	2 % 5	n. a.
T l t o a e		4 5 0. 5 2 9	1 0 0 %

Ascopiave positioning in the Territorial Districts constituted by the Government (*)

• p Ascopiave is currently the main operator in ² Territorial Districts (Treviso ² and Treviso 1) with more than 50% market share in terms of end users served. The current end users in these Territorial Districtsamount to over 40% of the total end users served by the Group.
• p Ascopiave currently has ^a remarkable market share in other Minimum Territorial Districts located in Veneto and Lombardy.

(*) 2012 data (pro-quota).

Ascopiave is selecting the Territorial Districts to bid for and is evaluating potential partnerships with other operators, in order to strengthen its position in some geographical areas.

Ascopiave has all the requirements to successfully act in the market:

• it has strong financial capability so it can finance the required investments, by further exploiting the financial leverage
• • It is one of the main operator in Italy, with a long-standing and excellent expertise in the sector and it can assign remarkable organisational and economic resources to competein the tender processes.

Group Ascopiave net financial needs to win new gas distribution concessions:

Standards to evaluate economic and technical offers

• A - Economic offer(maximum score: 28)
• pDiscount on gas distribution tariffs
• pDiscount on prices for other services provided by the distributor to the end users
• p Fee to be paid to municipalities awarding the concession (cap on the fee level: 10% of the capital cost components of VRT (Total Revenues Constraint) = 10% x ( CI x rd + AMM ))
• p Obligation to extend the distribution network (meters of pipes per end users that imply the obligation to connect new potential end-users)
• pInvestments to improve energy efficiency
• B - Offer concerning safety and service quality(maximum score: 27)
• pNetwork inspections in order to prevent gas leaks (percentage of gas network annually checked)
• pPerformance of the emergency service and of the gas odorization service
• pImproving the level of other quality standards set by the Authority
• C - Offer concerning the development and the maintenance of the network(maximum score: 45)
• pAppropriateness of the network operation analysis
• p Investments plan for the extension and the increase of the capacity of the distribution network; the evaluation concerns: the tangible benefits expected by the investment proposed, the accuracy of the technical projects as well as the quantities of new pipes to be made
• pInvestment plan for the maintenance
• pTechnological innovation

In the event that the public tender should not be awarded to Ascopiave, the winner must pay to the Group, as the current owner of the networks, ^a compensation:

• (a) the compensation must be calculated in accordance with the terms of the agreement implementing theconcession or direct award (as the case may be), provided that the agreement is signed beforeFebruary 11th, 2012
• (b) or, if this is not provided for, the compensation must be calculated in accordance with the Guidelinesset by the Ministry of Economic Development (Decree May, 22nd 2014)
• (c) contributions paid by private users in the past for the construction of part of the network must bededucted (valuation of these are in accordance with the tariff regulation) (*)
• (d) whenever the compensation is higher than 110% of the net invested capital remunerated by the tariff system (RAB), the Energy National Authority (i.e. AEEGSI) must verify whether the compensation hasbeen evaluated in accordance with the law
• (e)the organizer of the tender bid must take into account the observations issued by the AEEGSI.

^(*) In the evaluation of RAB contributions paid by private users are currently deducted.

2016 VRT (*) (Gas Distribution Revenues) and 2016 RAB (Net Invested Capital)

2016 VRT (**) = CO + AMM + CI x rd= Euro 66.1 mlnwhere:CO: quota covering management operating costsAMM: quota covering depreciationCI (RAB): net capital invested in distributionrd: real pre-tax rate of return on net investedcapital (~ 6.10%)2016 RAB (***) ⁼ Euro 404.8 mln

(*) Ascopiave 2016 VRT has been approved by Gas, Electricity and Water Authority (AEEGSI) with Resolution n. 145/2017/R/GAS; (**) VRT of the companies consolidated with the full consolidation method ⁼ Euro 60.4 mln ⁺ VRT of the company consolidated with the equity method ⁼ Euro 5.7 mln (pro-quota); (***) RAB of the companies consolidated with the full consolidation method ⁼ Euro 372.9 mln ⁺ RAB of the company consolidated with the equity method ⁼ Euro 31.9 mln (pro-quota).

2016 VRT (*) (Gas Distribution Revenues) and 2016 RAB (Net Invested Capital)

(*) Ascopiave 2016 VRT has been approved by Gas, Electricity and Water Authority (AEEGSI) with Resolution n. 145/2017/R/GAS; (**) VRT of the companies consolidated with the full consolidation method ⁼ Euro 72.0 mln ⁺ VRT of the company consolidated with the equity method ⁼ Euro 5.7 mln (pro-quota); (***) RAB of the companies consolidated with the full consolidation method ⁼ Euro 432.4 mln ⁺ RAB of the company consolidated with the equity method ⁼ Euro 31.9 mln (pro-quota).

Tariff regulation: standard investment costs

National Energy Authority (AEEGSI) announced that starting from 2019 the value of the investmentsconsidered by the tariff system will be not the effective cost but it will be estimated using standard coststo be defined by the AEEGSI. For this reason the regulatory value of the assets will be different fromtheir effective cost.

Resolution is expected to be issued in October 2017.

Tariff regulation for the incoming Territorial District concessions

Difference between Compensation and RAB

At the starting date of the new concession:

• • if the winner of the public tender is the current incumbent operator, the new RAB is equal to theprevious one;
• • if the winner of the public tender is ^a newcomer, the new RAB is equal to the compensation paid bythe newcomer to the outgoing operator.

Compensation at the end date of the minimum territorial district concession

The compensation is calculated as the sum of (a) the value of the stock of capital existing at the start date of the concession, that is equal to the initial compensation properly updated to take into account thedepreciation occurred during the concessional period, and (b) the value of the investments made during the concessional period, calculated as the average between the effective costs of the assets and the regulatory value of the assets.

Strengths

• Dimensional level that allows exploitation of interesting management economies of scale
• Contiguity in gas network, with advantages in terms of operative efficiency
• High network management operative standards
• Part of the local municipalities granting the gas distribution concessions are shareholders of the Group
• Independence by large municipalities
• Current financial leverage

Weakness

We expect that legal framework uncertainty and the timeneeded by municipalities to organize competitive tender procedures will delay the tenders start

Opportunities

• Possibility to achieve critical mass as of aggregative polein Veneto and Lombardy in the utility sector
• Tenders for gas distribution concessions
• Temporary push towards aggregations of companies operating in the sector increase in geographical coverageby expanding the corporate structure

Threats

• Regulatory uncertainty
• Uncertainty on financial needs for the compensations to be paid to outgoing distributors
• Gas concession expiring
• Risk to lose tenders

Contents

Gas sales

→	G l t a s s a e s s e c o r … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P a g	3 8
→	G l d h b t t t t a s s a e s o e n c u s o m e r s : e c u s o m e r a s e … … … … … … … … … … … …	P a g	4 0
→	G l l i i i d i l d t t t a s s e n g p r c e o r e s e n a e n c s o m e r s u	P a g	4 1
→	C M E M i d i h i t n e a o n m e c a n s m x … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P a g	4 3
→	G t t a s p r o c u r e m e n c o s s	P a g	4 4
→	S i i I l i t n e r g e a a n e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P a g	4 6
→	A i i h l b i t t t s c o p a v e s r a e g y n e g a s s a e u s n e s s … … … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P a g	4 7
→	S G S S l i l B U t o a n a s s a s a e s w y –	P a g	4 8

Gas sales sector: key figures

• pNo. of operators in the italian market: over ¹⁶⁰
• p First ¹⁰ operators (volumes of gas sold higher than one billion of standard cubic meters) supplying over 73% of overall consumption to the final market (45,6 billions standard cubic meters on ^a total of 62,4 billlions standard cubic meters)

Since liberalization introduced by Letta decree in the early 2000s, gas sale market has experienced twowell distinct phases:

porganic growth

pconsolidation through company aggregations / mergers and vertical integrations

The current phase of market concentration - that is happening through M&A activities (external growth)and the exit from the market of minor gas sales companies - will cause ^a further reduction in the numberof operators.

• p Since ²⁰⁰⁸ economic crisis continues to affect natural gas demand. Together with the structure and constraints of take or pay contracts it has contributed to create ^a long market
• pDecoupling between gas price and oil gas price is very significant
• p All these factors (decoupling, long market and spot prices) have contributed to considerably raise margins for retail operators not tied by procurement to takeor pay contracts
• pThe difference between tariff component of raw material and real purchase costs has been very high
• p Resolution n. 196/2013 has changed the criteria to define and update the component of the selling price aimed at covering the cost of the raw material that, now refers entirely to the gas spot market (TTF forward prices)
• p Although gradually, extra margins outcoming from the difference between tariff component of row material and real purchase costs will be reduced significantly in the coming years.

External growth (through M&A) becomes again ^a driver of development in the gas market asopposed to the organic growth.

Increase in profitability comes from low gas procurement costs (by entering the mid-streamsegment of the value chain)

• p Ascopiave customer base is constituted for the most part by loyal residential customers (about 60% of the gas volumes sold)
• p Despite gas sales business was completely liberalised in 2003, so that any end consumer may sign ^a supply contract with any gas sales company, the National Energy Authority (AEEGSI) continue toregulate activities to assure that the market works properly and to protect certain categories of customers (residential customers); for these customers, maximum tariff levels are still set.
• p The National Energy Authority announced that from ²⁰¹⁸ it will stop fixing maximum tariff levels, so that supply prices will be set only through the free negotiations occurring in the market.

(*) 2016 data in million of standard cubic meter. Operating data of companies consolidated proportionally are considered pro-quota.

P C M E M C C R Q T C p r + + + =	G R A D T D Q V D G C T V A T + + + + +
C C C M E M R W h l l f t + o e s a e c o s o g a s =	T D G d i i b i i f f t t t a s s r u o n a r =
G Q T i i i l k t t t t t t a s r a n s p o r a o n c o s a n a o n a n e o r v w =	Q V D G i l l t t a s r e a s a e s c o s =
C f G R A D P i h d l t t p r r c e c o m p o n e n s o r e g r a a + u =	G C T G i t t a s c o n s u m p o n a x e s =
i l i f h l i t t t t m p e m e n a o n o e n e w r e g u a o n	V A T V l d d d t a u e a e a x =

Gas selling price to a typical residential end customer (annual consumption: 1,400 scm)

Pr ice t c om p on en	/ s Eu t ro ce n cm	%
C C C M E M R +	2 1, 5 4	3 2 %
Q T	3, 6 9	% 5
Cp G R A D r +	2, 1 7	3 %
T D	6, 8 4	1 0 %
Q V D	5, 0 0	7 %
Pr ice	3 9, 2 4	5 8 %
G C T	1 8, 4 1	2 % 7
V A T	1 0, 3 1	1 % 5
Ta xe s	2 8, 7 2	4 2 %
Pr ice ta xe s +	6 7, 9 6	1 0 0 %
1st O be 20 16 ( Mu cto r	nic ip alit Co lian ) y: ne g o

Average gas pricefor a family with autonomous heating and annual gas consumption of 1,400 scm.

Until 3rdQ 2013: Cost of raw material ⁼ QE; Fixed costs ⁼ QTI+QS+TD+QVD+QCI; Taxes ⁼ GCT+VAT; From 4thQ 2013: Cost of raw material ⁼ CMEM; Fixed costs ⁼ QT+TD+QVD+CCR; Taxes ⁼ GCT+VAT; Other costs: Cpr+GRAD.

The price component covering the wholesale cost of gas set by the Authority for the protected market (CMEM) is currently linked to the European gas spot prices and not to the medium-long term take or paycontracts.

Current regulation provides that the price component is quarterly up-datedand is equal to:

CMEM = Pfor + QT(int) +QT(psv) + QT(mcv)

where:

P(for) ⁼ component price covering the cost of the raw material (energy), calculated as the average of the forward OTC quarterly prices in the Dutch TTF hub occurring in the penultimate month before the reference quarter and published by ICIS-Heren

QT(int)⁼ cost of the gas transport through international pipelines

QT(psv)⁼ cost of the gas transport from the national boundary to the virtual national hub (PSV)

QT(mcv)⁼ other transportation costs

Gas procurement costs

• pGas procurement costs are negotiated on a free market
• pIncumbent shippers have strong market position
• pDeclining gas demand gives economic opportunities to sales companies with loyal customer base

To procure gas for the most stable part of its customers base (residential and small business customers) Ascopiave relies:

• 1) on a long term take or pay contract signed in 2008 by Sinergie Italiane (in liquidation) (current capital stake of Ascopiave: 30.94%).
• 2) on annual contracts stipulated with several shippers for almost all the rest of the clients.

Renegotiation of the long term take or pay contract

• p The economic conditions provided by the contract signed in 2008 with Gazprom have been renegotiated several times in the past
• p Economic conditions need to be renegotiated periodically as the prices become significantly different from the ones prevailing in the market.
• p In the recent past all the main national shippers that signed long term take or pay contracts renegotiated their economic conditions, because the contracted prices became out of the market; due to the economic crisis and the system overcapacity the spot market prices fell dramatically.
• p Renegotiation has likely allowed the national shippers to recover margins on their activities and improve their economics.

Sinergie Italiane is ^a company established in 2008 (*) to create ^a partnership among Italian downstreamenergy companies strongly rooted to local areas and with solid and loyal customer bases.

Sinergie Italiane signed ^a long-term import take or pay (ToP) contract with Gazprom for the supply of 1.0bcm of gas per year up to 2021.

In April 2012 Sinergie Italiane shareholders meeting resolved for the voluntary liquidation of the companyand appointed the liquidators.

The scope of the company during 2012-2014 was limited to import russian gas and to sell it to the salescompanies participated by the shareholders, as well as to manage the agreements, transactions anddisputes relating to the regulation of contractual relations, improved before the liquidation.

^(*) Former shareholders structure included the current shareholders and also Alto Milanese Gestioni Avanzate and Utilità Progetti.

Ascopiave has the possibility to act in the market successfully, taking opportunities from the furtherincoming market liberalization and concentration:

It is one of the main operator in Italy, with an extensive and good expertise in the sector, as well as good standing and reputation

It currently has an important size, that allows it to exploit economies of scale (efficient cost for operations and marketing)

it has a loyal and stable customer base, that makes it an appealing partner for experienced up and mid stream operators

it has strong financial capabilityso it can support external growth by M&A and/or vertical integration.

Ascopiave: actions in the gas sales market

To improve its competitive positioning in the gas sales market, Ascopiave Group intends:

• to grow through M&A (external growth) to compensate the natural loss of gas sales customers in the geographical area where it is the incumbent operator
• to develop the electricity business as ^a tool to retain current gas customer base (cross selling)
• to reduce the cost to serve, through ^a more efficient management of the core operations (billing, back office and front office activities, credit cash, credit recovery, etc)
• to improve the gas supply process by exploiting the competitive advantage of having stable consumption in ^a long gas market

Strengths

• Large end customer base
• High per-capita consumption
• Front offices capillarity
• Efficient customer care service
• Differentiation of offered services (dual fuel)
• Independence by big customers
• Deeply rooted presence in reference geographical area
• Strong local brand reputation
• High degree of customer loyalty

Weakness

Limited diffusion and knowledge of the brand outside of the geographical area where the Group is the current incumbent

Opportunities

• Presence in territory with good development capabilities in the segment of residential customers
• Opportunity to acquire new customers in locations not served by distribution SBU
• Total market 'opening' – Cross selling on customer base

Threats

• Risk exposure connected to gas purchase cost
• Activity partially regulated by the Italian Gas, Electricity and Water Authority, focused on keeping low price levels
• Competition in a fully liberalized market
• Competitive pressure increase and attacks from new entrants
• Entrance and consolidation of foreign groups and major Italian utilities

Annexes: financial data

Annexes: financial data

-FY 2016 financial results

→	F Y 2 0 1 6 l i d d i t t t t c o n s o a e n c o m e s a e m e n … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 5 1 a g.
→	C l i d d b l h 3 1 h D b 2 0 1 6 t t t t o n s o a e a a n c e s e e a e c e m e r … … .… … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 5 2 a g.
→	V l f d i i b d t t o m e s o g a s s r e u u … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P 3 5 a g.
→	V l f l d o u m e s o g a s s o … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 4 5 a g.
→	V l f l i i l d t t o u m e s o e e c r c y s o … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 5 5 a g.
→	R b i d e v e n u e s r g e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … … …	P 5 6 a g.
→	E B I T D A b i d r g e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 5 8 a g.
→	E B I T D A b k d r e a o w n … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… …	P 6 0 a g.
→	G f f d i i b i i t t t a s s r o n a r r e e n e s u v u … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 6 2 a g.
→	G i l r o s s m a r g n o n g a s s a e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … .… … … … … … … … …	P 6 4 a g.
→	A P R h i m e c a n s m … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 6 6 a g.
→	G i l i i l t t r o s s m a r g n o n e e c r c y s a e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 6 8 a g.
→	O h i t t t t e r n e o p e r a n g c o s s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … …	P 6 9 a g.
→	N b f l u m e r o e m p o y e e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 7 1 a g.
→	C l i d d f l t t o n s o a e c o s o p e r s o n n e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … …	P 7 2 a g.
→	C l i d d i l d i t t t o n s o a e c a p a e x p e n u r e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 7 3 a g.
→	f N F i i l P i i d h l t t e n a n c a o s o n a n c a s o w … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 7 4 a g.

-2009-2016 financial comparison

-3M 2017 financial results

ho d f Eu ) us an o ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	C hg	C hg %
Re ve nu es	4 9 6 8 9 7.	5 8 1. 6 5 5	( 8 3. 9 6 6 )	-1 4, 4 %
( Co f ra ) ia ls d c b les t o te s ma r an on su ma w	( ) 2 4 9. 9 1 6	( ) 3 4 6. 4 3 1	9 6. 5 1 6	2 7, 9 % -
( Co ) f s ice t o s erv s	( ) 1 0 7. 5 0 3	( ) 1 1 9. 1 5 1	1 1. 6 4 8	9, 8 % -
( Co f p ) l t o s ers on ne	( ) 2 4. 2 3 3	( ) 2 1. 5 7 3	( ) 2. 6 6 0	1 2, 3 % +
( O ) he ing t t ts r o p era co s	( ) 2 1. 3 7 7	( ) 1 4. 1 0 6	( ) 7. 2 7 1	5 1, 5 % +
O he ing inc t t r o p era om e	5 9 6	5 9 1	5	0, 8 % +
E B I T D A	9 5. 2 5 5	8 0. 9 8 3	1 4. 2 7 1	1 7, 6 % +
( ) De ia ion d a iza ion t t t p rec s a n mo r s	( ) 2 0. 2 2 7	( ) 2 0. 0 2 9	( ) 1 9 8	1, 0 % +
( Pr is ion ) ov s	( ) 2. 8 9 1	( ) 4. 0 0 4	1. 1 1 2	2 7, 8 % -
E B I T	7 2. 1 3 7	5 6. 9 5 0	1 5. 1 8 6	2 6, 7 % +
F ina ia l inc / ( ) nc om e ex p en se s	( ) 5 4 4	( ) 5 1 8	( ) 2 6	5, 0 % +
Ev lua ion f c ies i h n ho d ( *) t t t a ts t a o om p an e ss e me w	0 7. 7 5	4 4 9 7.	3 0 1	4, 0 % +
E B T	7 9. 3 4 3	6 3. 8 8 1	1 5. 4 6 1	2 4, 2 % +
( Inc ) tax om e es	( 2 2. 4 0 1 )	( 1 8. 1 9 ) 5	( 3. 8 8 2 )	2 1, 0 % +
ing f Ea te ta rn s a r xe s	5 6. 9 4 2	4 5. 3 6 2	1 1. 5 7 9	2 5, 5 % +
( Ne los fro d isc inu d o ion ) t t t s m on e p era s	-	-	-	n.a
Ne inc t om e	5 6. 9 4 2	5. 4 3 6 2	5 1 1. 7 9	5, 5 2 % +
( Ne inc f m ino i ies ) t t om e o r	( 3. 3 0 7 )	( 2. 3 4 9 )	( 9 5 8 )	4 0, 8 % +
Ne inc f he Gr t t om e o ou p	5 5 3. 6 3	4 3. 0 1 4	1 0. 6 2 1	2 4, 7 % +

(*) Result of the companies consolidated with net equity consolidation method (data are considered pro-quota): sale companies, Euro 5,4 mln (Euro 5,0 mln in FY 2015); distributioncompanies, Euro 1,2 mln (Euro 1,0 mln in FY 2015); Sinergie Italiane, Euro 1,2 mln (Euro 1,5 mln in FY 2015).

T ho d f Eu ) us an o ro	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 6	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 5	C h g	C h % g
T i b l t ( *) a n g e a s s e s	3 2. 3 6 4	3 4. 9 8 7	( ) 2. 6 2 3	% -7 5 ,
N i b l t t ( *) o n a n g e a s s e s	3 9 7. 6 6 4	3 9 7. 4 1 8	2 4 6	0, 1 % +
I i i t t t ( **) n v e s m e n s n a s s o c a e s	6 8. 3 8 7	6 8. 0 8 7	6 9 5	1, 0 % +
O h f i d t t e r x e a s s e s	2 3. 8 0 8	2 6. 6 9 9	( ) 2. 8 9 1	-1 0, 8 %
F i d t x e a s s e s	5 2 2. 5 7 4	5 2 7. 1 8 2	( ) 4. 6 0 8	-0 9 % ,
O i t t t p e r a n g c u r r e n a s s e s	2 0 1. 9 0 8	2 2 3. 4 8 4	( ) 2 1. 6 5 7	-9 % 7 ,
O ( i l i b i l i i ) t t t p e r a n g c r r e n a e s u	( ) 1 3 8. 0 0 3	( ) 1 6 6. 7 9 6	2 8. 7 9 2	-1 7, 3 %
( O i l i b i l i i ) t t t p e r a n g n o n c u r r e n a e s	( 4 8. 1 1 ) 5	( 4 9. 6 9 8 )	1. 4 6 5	-3 1 % ,
N k i i l t t e o r n g c a p a w	1 5. 5 4 7	6. 9 9 1	8. 6 3 7	1 2 5, 3 % +
T l i l l d t t o a c a p a e m p o y e	5 3 8. 3 2 8	5 3 4. 1 3 7	4. 1 5 5	0, 8 % +
G h h l d i t r o u p s a r e o e r s e q u y	4 3 8. 0 5 5	4 1 5. 2 6 4	2 2. 7 9 1	5, 5 % +
M i i i t n o r e s	6. 1 5 4	4. 8 3 7	1. 2 8 1	2 6, 3 % +
f i i i i N l t t e n a n c a p o s o n	9 4. 1 1 9	1 1 4. 0 3 7	( ) 1 9. 9 1 7	-1 7, 5 %
T l t o a s o u r c e s	5 3 8. 3 2 8	5 3 4. 1 7 3	4. 1 5 5	0, 8 % +

(*) Applying IFRIC ¹² involves categorising the infrastructures under concession from tangible to intangible assets; (**) Value of the associated companies consolidated with net equityconsolidation method: sale companies, Euro 48,0 mln (Euro 47,9 mln as of 31st December 2015); distribution companies, Euro 20,7 mln (Euro 20,2 mln as of 31st December 2015).

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded.

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded.

E B I T D A b k d r e a o w n
C i l i d d i h f l l l i d i t t t o m p a n e s c o n s o a e c o n s o a o n m w u	h d t e o
( T ho d f Eu ) us an o ro

E B I T D A b k d r e a o w n
C i l i d d i h i l i d i h d ( *) t t t t t t o m p a n e s c o n s o a e w n e e q u y c o n s o a o n m e o
( T ho d f Eu ) us an o ro

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	C hg	C hg %
Ta i f fs l ie d les ies to r ap p sa co mp an	4 0 8 5 5.	4. 9 8 1 5	4 2 7	0, 8 % +
Eq l iza ion ( / - ) t t ua a mo un +	6. 0 8 0	6. 9 9 7	( 8 9 9 )	-1 2, 9 %
is i io i f f r ( ) Ga d tr bu t ta A s n r ev en ue s
Co l i da d i h fu l l te t mp an co ns o y w	6 1. 4 8 8	6 1. 9 6 0	( 4 3 ) 7	-0 8 % ,
l i da ion ho d t t co ns o m e

The decrease of gas distribution tariff revenues of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method (- Euro 0,5 mln) is due to:

• 1)change of gas distribution tariffs applied to gas sales companies: ⁺ Euro 0,4 mln;
• 2)equalization amount: - Euro 0,9 mln.

2016 gas distribution tariff revenues include the equalization amount accounted for thepositive difference between the definitive and provisional tariffs related to year 2015 (+ Euro1,2 mln).

( ) T ho d f Eu ( *) us an o ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	C hg	C hg %
( ) Ga d is i bu io i f f r B tr t ta s n r ev en ue s Co l i da d i h n i te t t e ty mp an y co ns o w e q u l i da ion ho d t t co ns o m e	5. 8 0 3	5. 8 3 4	( ) 3 2	5 -0 % ,
Ga d is i bu io i f f r ( A+ B ) tr t ta s n r ev en ue s	6 7. 2 9 0	6 7. 7 9 5	( 5 0 4 )	-0 7 % ,

(*) Economic data before elisions.

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	C hg	C hg %
Re fro les ve nu es m g as sa	3 4 3. 1 2 7	4 1 5. 9 6 2	( ) 7 2. 8 3 5	-1 7, 5 %
( Ga ) ha ts s p urc se co s	( ) 1 8 2. 0 7 9	( ) 2 5 8. 2 8 1	7 6. 2 0 2	-2 9, 5 %
( ) D is i bu io tr t ts n c os	( ) 8 2. 5 3 1	( ) 9 3. 2 9 0	1 0. 7 5 9	-1 1, 5 %
( ) G in les A ro ss m ar g o n g as s a Co l i da d i h fu l l te t m p an y co ns o w l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e	8. 5 1 7 7	6 4. 3 9 1	1 4. 1 2 6	2 1, 9 % +

The increase of gross margin on gas sales of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method, equal to ⁺ Euro 14,1 mln, is due to:

• 1) reduction of the gas purchase cost due to the accounting of the compensation entitled tothe Group for the adhesion to the mechanism for the renegotiation of the long-term gasprocurement agreements in the years 2014-2016 according to the AEEGSI Res. 447/2013/R/gas (- Euro 11,1 mln) (APR);
• 2)higher unit profit margins, in spite of the lower volumes of gas sold.

(*) Economic data before elisions.

In 2013, AEEGSI concluded the review of the economic conditions applicable to protectedcustomers, by adjusting them to the gradual and structural evolution of Italy's gas market, which led to the alignment of tariffs with those prevailing in other European countries.

In order to soften the impact of the afore-mentioned review on operators having long-termprocurement portfolios, regulation AEEGSI (447/2013/R/gas) has envisaged the following:

• support the long-term gas price renegotiation by entering ^a specific CPR component within the general context for defining the new price on the protected market. The goal isthe introduction of ^a compensation payment to offset the dislocation between long-termprocurement prices, pegged to oil and its derivatives, and market rates, those prevailingon spot deals, to support the gradual migration of procurement benchmarks in therenegotiation process;
• guarantee an advantage to the protected customer if, during the mechanism's three-year application period, market prices on the whole turn out to be higher than the average procurement costs of long-term contracts.

Selling firms interested in the APR mechanism enjoyed the option of whether to join ordecline admission.

In 2013, in relation to the Group's gas volumes, AEEGSI had planned the following forAscopiave – in the event of admission:

• ^a total maximum compensation, during the mechanism's three-year application, to the tune of Euro 11,2 million;
• and, in the event of ^a reversal between procurement and spot price, ^a disbursement to end customers up to 3 times the figure that was initially defined: approximately Euro 33,5million.

At the beginning, the Group had resolved to stay out of the APR mechanism, based on proven unfavourable operating conditions, challenging it in the Regional Court of Lombardy(TAR), by requesting ^a suspension.

Subsequently, having obtained the suspension of the regulation and – thanks to technical data collected in the meantime – having evaluated ^a high likelihood of success, themanagement resolved on joining the APR mechanism.

In November 2016, through regulation 649/2016/R/GAS, AEEGSI determined the actual compensation figure in favour of the Group, defining it to the amount of ⁺ Euro 11,1 million.

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	C hg	C hg %
Re fro lec ic i les ty ve nu es m e r sa	9 0. 9 0 5	9 2. 8 1 0	( 2. 2 1 9 )	-2 4 % ,
( E lec ic i ha ) tr ty ts p urc se co s	( 4 8. 9 ) 7 7	( 1. 1 8 1 ) 5	2. 4 0 2	-4 % 7 ,
( ) D is i bu io tr t ts n c os	( ) 3 6. 6 3 3	( ) 3 7. 7 9 6	1. 1 6 3	-3 1 % ,
G in lec ic i les ( A ) tr ty ro ss m ar g o n e s a Co fu l i da d i h l l te t m p an y co ns o w l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e	5. 1 7 8	3. 8 3 3	5 1. 3 4	5, 3 1 % +

The increase of gross margin on electricity sales of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method, equal to ⁺ Euro 1,3 mln, is attributable to the higher unit profit margins, in spite of the lower volumes of electricity sold.

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	2 0 1 6	5 2 0 1	C hg	C hg %
( ) G in lec ic i les B tr ty ro ss m ar g o n e s a Co l i da d i h i te t t e ty m p an y co ns o w ne q u l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e	1. 1 2 9	6 3 9	4 9 0	7 6, 8 % +
G in lec ic i les ( A+ B ) tr ty ro ss m ar g o n e s a	6. 3 0 7	4. 4 1 7	1. 8 3 6	4 1, 1 % +

(*) Economic data before elisions.

0. 3 0 0	2 0. 7 4 1	9. 5 6 0	4 6, 1 % +
) 9 9 5	( ) 4 8. 3 6 9	( ) 7. 6 2 6	1 5, 8 % +
2 3 3 )	( 2 1. 3 ) 5 7	( 2. 6 6 0 )	1 2, 3 % +
9 2 8 )	( 4 9. 2 0 1 )	( 7 2 7 )	1, 5 % +
	5. 4. 9.

Increase of other net operating costs of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method: - Euro 0,7 mln

of which:

• increase of cost of personnel: Euro 2,7 mln;
• increase of margin on energy efficiency tasks management: + Euro 0,3 mln;
• increase of cost for consulting services: Euro 0,7 mln;
• decrease of cost of energy consumptions: + Euro 0,3 mln;
• decrease of gas concession fees: + Euro 0,6 mln;
• decrease of provisions for risks and charges: + Euro 0,5 mln;
• increase of capital loss: - Euro 0,4 mln
• increase of contingent assets: + Euro 1,4 mln.

f ) ho d Eu us an o ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	C hg	C hg %
O he in ( A ) t t o t ts r n e p er a g co s Co fu l i da d i h l l te t m p an y co ns o w l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e	( ) 4 9. 9 2 8	( ) 4 9. 2 0 1	( ) 7 2 7	5 1, % +
( ) O he in B t t o t ts r n e p er a g co s Co l i da d i h i te t t e ty m p an y co ns o w ne q u l i da io ho d t t ( *) co ns o n m e	( ) 8. 2 2 9	( ) 7. 3 4 3	( ) 8 8 6	1 2, 1 % +
O he in ( A+ B ) t t o t ts r n e p er a g co s	( 5 8. 1 5 7 )	( 5 6. 5 4 4 )	( 1. 6 1 3 )	2, 9 % +

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded.

Cost of personnel changes:

• capitalized cost of personnel: - Euro 0,1 mln
• other: + Euro 2,7 mln, of which:
• o + Euro 1,5 mln: compensations for the financial years 2015-2016 related to the long term incentive plan
• o + Euro 0,3 mln: settlement agreement for disputes with former employees
• o + Euro 0,3 mln: provision to pension funds according to the Law n. 125/2015
• o + Euro 0,4 mln: salary increases under the current labor contracts and for salary improvements
• o+ Euro 0,2 mln: other changes

FY 2016 cost of personnel of the companies consolidated with net equity consolidation method (Sinergie Italiane excluded): Euro 3,2 mln (-7,8%).

Consolidated capital expenditures (*)

FY 2016 investments of the companies consolidated with net equity consolidation method(Sinergie Italiane excluded): Euro 1,4 mln (-5,3%).

(*) Excluding network extension in new urbanized areas that according to IAS are considerated as operating costs and not investments. (**) Investments in tangible assets: Euro 1,2 mln; investments in intangible assets: Euro 19,7 mln (excluded realizations of tangible and intangible assets andinvestments in associated).

(*) Dividends distributed to Ascopiave shareholders and third parties (Euro 35,6 mln) net of dividends received by companies consolidated with net equity method (Euro 5,9 mln).

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded.

( ) T ho d f Eu ( *) us an o ro	3 1 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6	3 1 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 5	Va r	Va % r
Lo f ina ia l bo ing ( 1 2 hs ) te t ng rm nc rro w s mo n >	3 4. 4 1 5	4 3. 8 2 9	( 9. 2 8 8 )	-2 1, 2 %
Cu i ion f lon f ina ia l bo ing t p t te rre n os o g rm nc rro w s	9. 2 8 7	9. 6 2 8	( ) 3 4 1	-3 5 % ,
S ho f ina ia l bo ing ( hs ) t te 1 2 t r rm nc rro s mo n w <	4 6. 2 8 8	5 9. 9 3 7	( ) 1 3. 6 4 9	-2 2, 8 %
To l f ina ia l de b ta t nc	9 0. 1 1 6	1 1 3. 3 9 4	( 2 3. 2 7 8 )	-2 0, 5 %
F ixe d bo ing te ra rro w s	-	3 4 2	( 3 4 2 )	-1 0 0, 0 %
F loa ing bo ing t te ra rro w s	9 0. 1 1 6	1 1 3. 0 5 2	( ) 2 2. 9 3 6	-2 0, 3 %

FY 2016 average cost of debt: 0,57% (vs 2015 rate: 0,81%)

(*) Data refers to only companies consolidated with full consolidation method.

Annexes: financial data

-FY 2016 financial results

-2009-2016 financial comparison

→	I t t t n c o m e s a e m e n	P 8 7 a g.
→	B l h t a a n c e s e e	P 7 9 a g.

-3M 2017 financial results

	IFR S 1 1	IFR S 1 1	IFR S 1 1	IFR S 1 1 re sta ted
( T ho d Eu ) us an ro	2 0 1 6	2 0 1 5	2 0 1 4	2 0 1 3	2 0 1 3	2 0 1 2	2 0 1 1	2 0 1 0	2 0 0 9
Re ve nu es	4 9 7. 6 8 9	5 5 5 8 1. 6	5 5. 8 3 0 0	6 6 7. 8 3 7	5 8 4. 3 3 4	1. 0 7 8. 0 3 8	1. 0 9 9. 2 4 1	5 5. 8 8 8 4	5 7 6 4. 1 1
( Co f ra ) st ate ia ls a d c b les o w m r n on su ma ( Co f s ) st ice o erv s ( Co f p ) l st o ers on ne ( Ot he ing ) t sts r o p era co Ot he t ing inc r o p era om e	( ) 2 4 9. 9 1 6 ( ) 1 0 7.5 0 3 ( ) 2 4. 2 3 3 ( ) 2 1. 3 77 5 9 6	( ) 3 4 6. 4 3 1 ( ) 1 1 9. 15 1 ( ) 2 1.5 7 3 ( ) 1 4. 1 0 6 5 9 1	( ) 3 5 9. 3 6 6 ( ) 1 0 7.7 4 0 ( ) 2 2.7 2 6 ( ) 15 9 1 4 3 2	( ) 47 3. 4 6 9 ( ) 7 3. 75 1 ( ) 2 2. 8 2 2 ( ) 1 2. 6 6 6 1. 1 4 6	( ) 5 7 4.5 1 8 ( ) 1 3 3. 4 4 2 ( ) 27 1 9 3 ( ) 1 4. 3 3 7 1. 1 4 8	( ) 7 8 0. 8 2 2 ( ) 15 2. 4 3 4 ( ) 25 4 4 2 ( ) 1 6. 9 5 2 2 47	( ) 8 4 4. 2 6 8 ( ) 1 2 4.5 7 2 ( ) 2 4. 3 2 3 ( ) 1 3. 5 2 2 6 1 2	( ) 6 6 0. 0 3 0 ( ) 8 7.5 2 8 ( ) 2 1. 0 9 1 ( ) 1 0. 2 1 3 9 8 9	( ) 6 17 3 8 4 ( ) 5 8. 8 8 8 ( ) 1 8. 3 77 ( ) 9. 9 3 4 1. 9 7 6
E B I T D A	9 5. 2 5 5	8 0. 9 8 3	7 9. 5 8 5	8 6. 2 7 6	1 0 5. 9 9 2	1 0 2. 6 3 5	9 3. 1 6 9	7 8. 0 0 9	6 1. 5 4 5
( De iat ion d a iza ion ) rt t p rec s a n mo s ( Pro is ion ) s v	( 2 0. 2 27 ) ( 2. 8 9 1 )	( 2 0. 0 2 9 ) ( 4. 0 0 4 )	( 2 0. 0 9 9 ) ( 6. 8 1 9 )	( 1 8. 27 3 ) ( 6. 0 3 9 )	( 2 0. 0 ) 5 7 ( 8. 4 8 ) 5	( 2 2. 1 1 6 ) ( 4 9 1 ) 7.	( 1 9. 0 8 1 ) ( 3 2 ) 7. 7	( 17 4 1 4 ) ( 4. 8 4 1 )	( 1 6. 2 8 3 ) ( 4. 17 4 )
E B I T	7 2. 1 3 7	5 6. 9 5 0	5 2. 6 6 7	6 1. 9 6 4	7 6. 8 7 4	7 3. 0 2 7	6 6. 7 1 7	5 5. 7 5 4	4 1. 0 8 8
F ina ia l inc / ( ) nc om e ex p en se s Ev lua ion f c ies it h e ity ho d t t a o om p an w q u me	( 4 4 ) 5 7.7 5 0	( 1 8 ) 5 7. 4 4 9	( 1.5 9 3 ) 4. 45 3	( 1.5 15 ) 6. 4 6 8	( 3. 9 6 1 ) ( ) 2 6 2	( 6. 9 1 6 ) ( ) 1 1. 0 0 7	( 2.7 9 8 ) ( ) 2 2. 4 25	( 6 ) 7 7 ( ) 7 3 5	( 1. 3 25 ) 4 6 8
E B T	7 9. 3 4 3	6 3. 8 8 1	5 5. 5 2 7	6 6. 9 1 7	7 2. 6 5 1	5 5. 1 0 4	4 1. 4 9 4	5 4. 2 5 3	4 0. 2 3 1
( Inc ) e t om ax es	( ) 2 2. 4 0 1	( ) 1 8. 5 1 9	( ) 1 8. 1 9 4	( ) 25 8 0 7	( ) 3 1.5 4 1	( ) 2 9. 5 0 9	( ) 3 3. 8 7 4	( ) 2 1. 4 0 8	( ) 1 4. 3 4 0
Ea ing fte r ta rn s a xe s	5 6. 9 4 2	4 5. 3 6 2	3 7. 3 3 3	4 1. 1 1 1	4 1. 1 1 1	2 5. 5 9 5	7. 6 2 0	3 2. 8 4 5	2 5. 8 9 1
Ne inc ( los ) fro d isc inu d o ion t t t om e s m on e p era s	-	-	-	( 1 ) 7	( 1 ) 7	4. 3 3 6	6 3 9	-	-
Ne t inc om e	5 6. 9 4 2	4 5. 3 6 2	3 7. 3 3 3	4 1. 0 4 0	4 1. 0 4 0	2 9. 9 3 2	8. 2 5 9	3 2. 8 4 5	2 5. 8 9 1
( ) Ne inc f m ino it ies t om e o r	( ) 3. 3 0 7	( ) 2. 3 4 9	( ) 1.7 5 0	( ) 2. 3 6 1	( ) 2. 3 6 1	( ) 2. 0 6 7	( ) 1. 9 9 3	( ) 1. 6 7 1	( ) 6 0 3
Ne inc f t he Gr t om e o ou p	5 3. 6 3 5	4 3. 0 1 4	3 5. 5 8 3	3 8. 6 8 7	3 8. 6 8 7	2 8 6 5 7.	6. 2 6 6	3 1. 1 4 7	2 5. 2 8 8

	S 1 IFR 1	S 1 IFR 1	S 1 IFR 1	S 1 IFR 1 r est ate d					( *)
( ) T ho d Eu us an ro	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 6	/ / 5 3 1 1 2 2 0 1	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 4	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 3	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 3	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 2	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 1	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 0	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 0 9
Ta i b le ts ng as se No i b le tan ts n g as se	3 2. 3 6 4 3 9 7. 6 6 4	3 4. 9 8 7 3 9 7. 4 1 8	3 6. 6 1 4 3 9 4. 5 3 0	3 7. 8 4 0 3 8 7. 5 0 0	3 9. 2 7 7 4 4 7. 8 9 8	4 0. 5 3 4 4 5 0. 4 5 7	6 1. 9 8 3 4 5 9. 0 4 6	4 3. 8 1 4 4 1 0. 7 6 5	3 2 9. 9 7 0 1 1 4. 5 4 2
Inv in ia tm ts tes es en as so c O he f ixe d a t ts r ss e	6 8. 7 3 8 2 3. 8 0 8	6 8. 0 7 8 2 6. 6 9 9	6 5. 4 5 3 2 9. 5 5 5	7 2. 4 2 1 3 9. 6 8 7	1 4 4. 3 5 1	- 2 9. 8 1 7	- 2 6. 7 4 1	- 1 6. 1 3 3	- 1 5. 4 1 8
F ixe d a ts ss e	5 2 2. 5 4 7	5 2 1 8 2 7.	5 2 6. 1 5 2	5 3 4 4 9 7.	5 3 1. 5 2 7	5 2 0. 8 0 8	5 4 0 7. 7 7	4 0. 1 2 7 7	4 5 9. 9 3 0
Op ing t t a ts era cu rre n ss e ( Op ing l ia b i l i ies ) t t t era cu rre n ( Op ing l ia b i l i ies ) t t t era no n c urr en	2 0 1. 9 0 8 ( ) 1 3 8. 0 0 3 ( 4 8. 1 1 ) 5	2 2 3. 4 8 2 ( ) 1 6 6. 7 9 3 ( 4 9. 6 9 8 )	2 2 9. 0 9 5 ( ) 1 6 2. 5 4 8 ( 3. 3 6 0 ) 5	2 0 4. 0 6 6 ( ) 1 6 0. 2 3 4 ( 4. 9 2 ) 5 7	2 7 5. 8 6 4 ( ) 2 1 1. 9 8 6 ( 6 1. 1 2 6 )	3 6 3. 4 3 6 ( ) 2 6 1. 1 7 5 ( 6 4. 1 2 2 )	3 8 1. 6 8 4 ( ) 2 8 3. 1 9 9 ( 8 2. 4 6 6 )	2 6 1. 1 3 7 ( ) 2 0 8. 9 2 8 ( 4 2 6 ) 7. 5	2 1 1. 7 9 6 ( ) 1 7 8. 0 7 5 ( 4 4. 4 6 8 )
ing i Ne t w k ta l or ca p	1 5. 7 5 4	6. 9 9 1	1 3. 1 8 8	( ) 1 0. 9 6 0	2. 7 5 2	3 8. 1 4 0	1 6. 0 1 9	4. 6 8 3	( ) 1 0. 7 4 7
To l c i l e loy d ta ta ap mp e	5 3 8. 3 2 8	5 3 4. 1 7 3	5 3 9. 3 4 0	5 2 6. 4 8 9	5 3 4. 2 7 8	5 5 8. 9 4 8	5 6 3. 7 8 9	4 7 5. 3 9 5	4 4 9. 1 8 3
i Gr ha ho l de ty ou p s re rs eq u	4 3 8. 0 5 5	4 1 5. 2 6 4	4 0 5. 3 5 7	3 9 7. 6 8 9	3 9 7. 6 8 9	3 8 4. 0 5 3	3 5 7. 8 7 1	3 7 5. 5 3 5	3 6 7. 2 4 5
M ino i ies t r	6. 1 5 4	4. 8 3 7	4. 3 1 0	4. 9 8 9	4. 9 8 9	4. 6 5 7	4. 6 9 6	3. 8 6 6	2. 8 5 1
f Ne t ina ia l p i t ion nc os	9 4. 1 1 9	1 1 4. 0 3 7	1 2 9. 6 7 3	1 2 3. 8 1 0	1 3 1. 6 0 0	1 7 0. 1 3 0	2 0 1. 2 2 1	9 5. 9 9 5	7 9. 0 8 8
To l s ta ou rce s	5 3 8. 3 2 8	5 3 4. 1 3 7	5 3 9. 3 4 0	5 2 6. 4 8 9	5 3 4. 2 8 7	5 5 8. 9 4 8	5 6 3. 8 9 7	4 5. 3 9 5 7	4 4 9. 1 8 3

(*) Data are represented not considering the application of IFRIC 12.

ANNEXES

-FY 2016 financial results

-2009-2016 financial comparison

-3M 2017 financial results

→	3 M 2 0 1 l i d d i 7 t t t t c o n s o a e n c o m e s a e m e n … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 8 1 a g.
→	C l i d d b l h M h, 3 1 2 0 1 t t t t 7 o n s o a e a a n c e s e e a a r c s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P 8 2 a g.
→	V l f d i i b d t t o u m e s o g a s s r u e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … …	P 8 3 a g.
→	V l f l d o u m e s o g a s s o … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 8 4 a g.
→	V l f l i i l d t t o u m e s o e e c r c y s o … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 8 5 a g.
→	R b i d e v e n u e s r g e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … … …	P 8 6 a g.
→	E B I T D A b i d r g e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 8 8 a g.
→	E B I T D A b k d r e a o n w … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… …	P 9 0 a g.
→	G d i i b i i f f t t t a s s r o n a r r e e n e s u v u … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 9 2 a g.
→	G i l r o s s m a r g n o n g a s s a e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … .… … … … … … … … …	P 9 3 a g.
→	G i l i i l t t r o s s m a r g n o n e e c r c y s a e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 9 4 a g.
→	O h i t t t t e r n e o p e r a n g c o s s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … …	P 9 5 a g.
→	N b f l u m e r o e m p o y e e s … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 9 7 a g.
→	C f l i d d l t t o n s o a e c o s o p e r s o n n e … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … .… … … … … …	P 9 8 a g.
→	C l i d d i l d i t t t o n s o a e c a p a e p e n r e s x u … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 9 9 a g.
→	N F i i l P i i d h f l t t e n a n c a o s o n a n c a s o w … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …	P 1 0 0 a g.

ho d f Eu ) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 7 t	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
Re ve nu es	1 9 9. 5 0 3	1 8 2. 5 1 2	1 6. 9 9 1	9, 3 % +
( Co f ra ia ls d c b les ) t o te s w ma r an on su ma	( ) 1 1 3. 4 6 1	( ) 1 0 2. 1 7 7	( ) 1 1. 2 8 4	1 1, 0 % +
( Co f s ) ice t o s erv s	( ) 3 7. 8 6 5	( ) 3 4. 2 6 3	( ) 3. 6 0 2	1 0, 5 % +
( Co f p l ) t o s ers on ne	( ) 5. 9 5 8	( ) 5. 6 7 2	( ) 2 8 7	5, 1 % +
( O he ing ) t t ts r o p era co s	( ) 5. 6 4 4	( ) 4. 4 1 7	( ) 1. 2 2 7	2 7, 8 % +
O he ing inc t t r o p era om e	5 0	2 1	2 9	1 3 4, 3 % +
E B I T D A	3 6. 6 2 5	3 6. 0 0 4	6 2 0	1, 7 % +
( De ia ion d a iza ion ) t t t p rec s a n mo r s	( ) 5. 0 6 3	( ) 5. 0 8 4	2 1	0, 4 % -
( Pr is ion ) ov s	( ) 4 7 8	( ) 6 1 6	1 3 7	2 2, 3 % -
E B I T	3 1. 0 8 3	3 0. 3 0 4	7 7 8	2, 6 % +
F ina ia l inc / ( ) nc om e ex p en se s	( 6 3 )	( 1 1 1 )	4 8	4 3, 2 % -
f c ( *) Ev lua ion ies i h n ho d t t t a ts t a o om p an w e ss e me	3. 7 1 3	3. 5 8 7	1 2 7	3, 5 % +
E B T	3 4. 7 3 3	3 3. 7 8 0	9 5 3	2, 8 % +
( Inc ) tax om e es	( 8. 7 0 3 )	( 9. 6 4 2 )	9 3 9	9, 7 % -
Ne inc t om e	2 6. 0 3 0	2 4. 1 3 8	1. 8 9 2	7, 8 % +
( ) Ne inc f m ino i ies t t om e o r	( ) 1. 4 8 9	( ) 1. 4 8 7	( ) 2	0, 1 % +
Ne inc f he Gr t t om e o ou p	2 4. 5 4 1	2 2. 6 5 1	1. 8 9 0	8, 3 % +

(*) Result of the companies consolidated with net equity consolidation method (data are considered pro-quota): sale companies, Euro 3,4 mln (Euro 3,2 mln in 1stQ 2016); distributioncompanies, Euro 0,0 mln (Euro 0,2 mln in 1stQ 2016); SinergieItaliane, Euro 0,3 mln (Euro 0,1 mln in 1stQ 2016).

f ) T ho d Eu us an o ro	/ / 3 1 0 3 2 0 1 7	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 6	C h g	C h % g
T i b l t ( *) a n g e a s s e s	3 2. 1 6 3	3 2. 3 6 4	( ) 2 0 1	-0 6 % ,
N i b l t t ( *) o n a n g e a s s e s	3 9 1 1 7. 7	3 9 6 6 4 7.	( 4 9 3 )	-0 1 % ,
I i i t t t ( **) n v e s m e n s n a s s o c a e s	7 2. 1 5 0	6 8. 7 3 8	3. 4 1 2	5, 0 % +
O f h i d t t e r x e a s s e s	2 3. 4 4 0	2 3. 8 0 8	( 3 6 9 )	-1 % 5 ,
F i d t e a s s e s x	5 2 4. 9 2 4	5 2 2. 5 4 7	2. 3 5 0	0, 4 % +
O i t t t p e r a n g c r r e n a s s e s u	2 6 1. 5 4 5	2 0 1. 9 0 8	5 9. 6 3 7	2 9, 5 % +
( O i l i b i l i i ) t t t p e r a n g c u r r e n a e s	( ) 2 1 3. 8 4 5	( ) 1 3 8. 0 0 3	( ) 8 1 7 5. 5	4, 8 % 5 +
O ( i l i b i l i i ) t t t p e r a n g n o n c r r e n a e s u	( ) 4 7. 9 5 7	( ) 4 8. 1 5 1	1 9 4	-0 4 % ,
N k i i l t t e w o r n g c a p a	4	5. 5 1 7 4	( 5. 5 ) 1 7 0	-1 0 0, 0 %
T l i l l d t t o a c a p a e m p o e y	5 2 4. 9 2 8	5 3 8. 3 2 8	( 1 3. 4 0 0 )	-2 5 % ,
G h h l d i t r o u p s a r e o e r s e q u y	4 6 1. 6 6 6	4 3 8. 0 5 5	2 3. 6 1 1	5, 4 % +
M i i i t n o r e s	7. 5 2 7	6. 1 5 4	1. 3 7 3	2 2, 3 % +
N f i i l i i t t e n a n c a p o s o n	5 5. 3 5 7	9 4. 1 1 9	( 3 8. 3 8 4 )	-4 0, 8 %
T l t o a s o u r c e s	5 2 4. 9 2 8	5 3 8. 3 2 8	( 1 3. 4 0 0 )	-2 5 % ,

(*) Applying IFRIC ¹² involves categorising the infrastructures under concession from tangible to intangible assets; (**) Value of the associated companies consolidated with net equityconsolidation method: sale companies, Euro 51,4 mln (Euro 48,0 mln as of 31st December 2016); distribution companies, Euro 20,8 mln (Euro 20,7 mln as of 31st December 2016).

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded. Data are considered pro-quota.

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded. Data are considered pro-quota.

( T ho d f Eu ) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 7 t	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	Va r	Va % r
E B I T D A	3 6. 6 2 5	3 6. 0 0 4	6 2 0	1, % 7 +
E B I T D A Sa le -	2 4 1 5. 7	2 9 2 0 7.	( 2. 1 9 ) 7	8 % -7 ,
E B I T D A D is i bu ion tr t -	1 0. 8 8 4	8. 0 8 4	2. 9 9 7	3 4, 6 +
E B I T	3 1. 0 8 3	3 0. 3 0 4	7 7 8	2, 6 % +
E B I T Sa le -	2 4. 6 9 7	2 6. 6 6 5	( 1. 9 6 9 )	4 % -7 ,
E B I T D is i bu ion tr t -	6. 3 8 6	3. 6 3 9	2. 7 4 7	7 5, 5 +

( ) T ho d f Eu us an o ro	Q 1s 2 0 1 7 t	Q 1s 2 0 1 6 t	Va r	Va % r
E B I T D A	5. 8 3 7	6. 1 2 8	( 2 9 1 )	-4 8 % ,
Sa E B I T D A le -	5. 3 5 6	5. 5 1 7	( ) 1 6 1	-2 9 % ,
E B I T D A D is i bu ion tr t -	4 8 1	6 1 1	( 1 3 1 )	-2 1, 4
E B I T	4. 9 3 4	5. 1 0 6	( 1 2 ) 7	-3 4 % ,
Sa E B I T le -	4. 7 4 7	4. 7 9 0	( ) 4 3	-0 9 % ,
E B I T D is i bu ion tr t -	1 8 7	3 1 6	( 1 2 9 )	-4 0, 8

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 7 t	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
Ta i f fs l ie d les ies to r ap p sa co mp an Eq l iza ion ( / - ) t t ua a mo un +	2 1. 1 6 6 ( 6. 1 8 9 )	2 0. 4 0 8 ( 6 ) 5. 5 5	7 5 8 ( 6 2 4 )	3, 7 % + 1 1, 2 % +
is i io i f f r ( ) Ga d tr bu t ta A s n r ev en ue s Co l i da d i h fu l l te t an co ns o w	1 4. 9 7 7	1 4. 8 4 3	1 3 4	9 %
mp y l i da ion ho d t t co ns o m e				0, +

The increase of gas distribution tariff revenues of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method (+ Euro 0,1 mln) is due to:

1)change of gas distribution tariffs applied to gas sales companies: ⁺ Euro 0,8 mln;

2)equalization amount: - Euro 0,6 mln.

T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 t 7	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
( ) Ga d is i bu io i f f r B tr t ta s n r ev en ue s Co l i da d i h n i te t t e ty mp an co ns o e q y w u l i da ion ho d ( **) t t co ns o m e	1. 3 9 1	1. 4 0 6	( 5 ) 1	-1 1 % ,
Ga d is i bu io i f f r ( A+ B ) tr t ta s n r ev en ue s	1 6. 3 6 8	1 6. 2 5 0	1 1 8	0, % 7 +

(*) Economic data before elisions. (**) Data are considered pro-quota.

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 7 t	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
Re fro les ve nu es m g as sa	1 6 1. 1 0 6	1 5 2. 5 9 5	8. 5 1 1	5, 6 % +
Ga ( ha ) ts s p urc se co s	( 9 1. 4 8 0 )	( 8 4. 1 6 2 )	( 3 1 8 ) 7.	8, % 7 +
( D is i bu io ) tr t ts n c os	( ) 3 8. 7 6 9	( ) 3 6. 0 4 1	( ) 2. 7 2 9	7, 6 % +
( ) G in les A ro ss m ar g o n g as s a
Co l i da d i h fu l l te t m p an co ns o y w	3 0. 8 5 7	3 2. 3 9 3	( 1. 5 3 6 )	-4 7 % ,
l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e

The decrease of gross margin on gas sales of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method, equal to - Euro 1,5 mln, is due to lower unit profit margins, in spite of higher volumes of gas sold.

( ) T ho d f Eu ( *) us an o ro	Q 1s t 2 0 1 7	Q 1s t 2 0 1 6	C hg	C hg %
( ) G in les B ro ss m ar g o n g as s a Co l i da d i h i te t t e ty m p an co ns o ne q y w u l i da io ho d t t ( **) co ns o n m e	6. 3 6 2	6. 6 9 4	( 3 3 2 )	-5 0 % ,
G in les ( A+ B ) ro ss m ar g o n g as s a	3 2 1 9 7.	3 9. 0 8 7	( 1. 8 6 ) 7	-4 8 % ,

(*) Economic data before elisions. (**) Data are considered pro-quota.

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 t 7	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
Re fro lec ic i les ty ve nu es m e r sa	2 3. 4 8 9	2 3. 9 2 2	( ) 4 3 3	-1 8 % ,
( E lec ic i ha ) tr ty ts p urc se co s ( D is i bu io ) tr t ts n c os	( ) 1 3. 5 0 9 ( 8. 6 6 ) 5	( ) 1 3. 2 0 2 ( 9. 2 9 ) 7	( ) 3 0 7 6 2 3	2, 3 % + -6 % 7 ,
G in lec ic i les ( A ) tr ty ro ss m ar g o n e s a Co l i da d i h fu l l te t m p an y co ns o w l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e	1. 3 2 5	1. 4 4 1	( ) 1 1 6	-8 1 % ,

The decrease of gross margin on electricity sales of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method, equal to - Euro 0,1 mln, is due to lower unit profit margins, in spite of higher volumes of electricity sold.

( ) T ho d f Eu ( *) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 7 t	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
G in lec ic i les ( B ) tr ty ro ss m ar g o n e s a Co l i da d i h i te t t e ty m p an y co ns o w ne q u l i da io ho d t t ( **) co ns o n m e	2 8 1	1 3 2	1 4 9	1 1 2, 9 % +
in ic i ( ) G lec les A+ B tr ty ro ss m ar g o n e s a	1. 6 0 6	1. 5 7 3	3 3	2, 1 % +

(*) Economic data before elisions. (**) Data are considered pro-quota.

( T ho d f Eu ) us an o ro	1s Q 2 0 1 7 t	1s Q 2 0 1 6 t	C hg	C hg %
O he t r r ev en ue s	1 0. 0 1 8	6. 2 8 2	3. 7 3 6	5 9, 5 % +
O he f r ia ls d ice t ts te r c os o aw m a r an se rv s Co f p l t o s er so nn e	( ) 1 4. 5 9 7 ( ) 5. 9 5 8	( ) 1 3. 2 8 4 ( ) 5. 6 7 2	( ) 1. 3 1 4 ( ) 2 8 7	9, 9 % + 5, 1 % +
O he in ( A ) t t o t ts r n e p er a g co s Co fu l i da d i h l l te t m p an y co ns o w l i da io ho d t t co ns o n m e	( 5 ) 1 0. 3 7	( ) 1 2. 6 7 3	2. 1 3 6	-1 6, 9 %

Decrease of other net operating costs of the companies consolidated with full consolidation method: ⁺ Euro 2,1 mln

of which:

• increase of cost of personnel: Euro 0,3 mln;
• increase of margin on energy efficiency tasks management: + Euro 2,1 mln;
• decrease of cost for consulting services: + Euro 0,3 mln;
• decrease of contingent assets: Euro 0,4 mln;
• increase of CCSE contributions for security incentives: + Euro 0,7 mln;
• increase of advertising costs: Euro 0,3 mln;
• increase of invoice delivery charges: - Euro 0,3 mln;
• other variations: + Euro 0,3 mln.

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded. Data are considered pro-quota.

1stQ 2017 cost of personnel of the companies consolidated with net equity consolidationmethod (Sinergie Italiane excluded): Euro 0,8 mln (+1,2%).

Consolidated capital expenditures (*)

1stQ 2017 investments of the companies consolidated with net equity consolidation method(Sinergie Italiane excluded): Euro 0,2 mln (-4,0%).

(*) Excluding network extension in new urbanized areas that according to IAS are considerated as operating costs and not investments. (**) Investments in tangible assets: Euro 0,4 mln; investments in intangible assets: Euro 4,0 mln (excluded realizations of tangible and intangible assets and investments in associated).

(*) Sinergie Italiane excluded. Data are considered pro-quota.

( T ho d f Eu ) ( *) us an o ro	/ / 3 1 0 3 2 0 1 7	/ / 3 1 1 2 2 0 1 6	Va r	Va % r
Lo f ina ia l bo ing ( hs ) te 1 2 t ng rm nc rro w s mo n >	3 2. 1 3 0	3 4. 5 4 1	( ) 2. 4 1 1	-7 0 % ,
Cu i ion f lon f ina ia l bo ing t p t te rre n os o g rm nc rro s w	9. 9 1 2	9. 2 8 7	6 2 5	6, 7 % +
S f ( ) ho ina ia l bo ing 1 2 hs t te t r rm nc rro s mo n w <	1 1. 5 7 5	4 6. 2 8 8	( ) 3 4. 7 1 3	-7 5, 0 %
To l f ina ia l de b ta t nc	5 3. 6 1 7	9 0. 1 1 6	( 3 6. 4 9 9 )	-4 0, 5 %
F ixe d bo ing te ra rro w s	-	-	-	n.a
F loa ing bo ing t te ra rro s w	5 3. 6 1 7	9 0. 1 1 6	( ) 3 6. 4 9 9	-4 0, 5 %

1stQ 2017 average cost of debt: 0,31% (vs 2016 rate: 0,57%)

(*) Data refers to only companies consolidated with full consolidation method.

Disclaimer

Disclaimer

• This presentation has been prepared by Ascopiave S.p.A. for information purposes only and for use in presentations of the Group's results and strategies.
• For further details on the Ascopiave Group, reference should be made to publicly available information, including the Quarterly Reports and the Annual reports.
• Statements contained in this presentation, particularly the ones regarding any Ascopiave Group possible or assumed future performance, are or may be forward looking statements and in this respect they involve some risks and uncertainties. A number of important factors could cause actual results todiffer materially from those contained in any forward looking statement. Such factors include, but arenot limited to: changes in global economic business, changes in the price of certain commoditiesincluding electricity and gas, the competitive market and regulatory factors. Moreover, forward lookingstatements are currently only at the date they are made.
• Any reference to past performance of the Ascopiave Group shall not be taken as an indication of the future performance.
• This document does not constitute an offer or invitation to purchase or subscribe for any shares and no part of it shall form the basis of or be relied upon in connection with any contract or commitment whatsoever.
• By attending the presentation you agree to be bound by the foregoing terms.