Good morning and welcome to our earnings call of G.U.D's Results for the Six Months Ended 31st December 2020. I'm Graeme Whickman, G.U.D's Managing Director and CEO, and I'm here with Martin Fraser, the company's Chief Financial Officer. As a matter of housekeeping, we'll have to have time at the end of the call for questions and discussion, so please hold your questions until then. A recording of this call, along with the presentation material, will be available later on G.U.D's website. We'll start the call by running through the overall summary of the group performance in H1 and briefly review the COVID-19 situation, then provide commentary on both our automotive and water businesses. I'll then hand over to Martin to cover the financial results in a little bit more detail, and then we'll conclude with our outlook for the remainder of the financial year before the Q and A. Before we start with results, it seems appropriate to reflect on the continuing global COVID-19 pandemic. In the material, we touch on the COVID-19 impact to our businesses, as you would expect. I'd like to say thanks to our employees in such a challenging time, particularly a large thank you to the health and safety teams who've continued through H1 to help us keep safe. Finally, I'd like to acknowledge our leadership team, who have displayed great resilience to lead the business in a positive commercial manner, and yet in an an employee-centric way. In our FY 2020 year-end call, we mentioned the impact seen would suggest that we've been very fortunate in relative terms, and the ensuing six months since then have done nothing to disprove this thought. We do recognize there are many who have been profoundly affected, our thoughts and best wishes again go out to those people and businesses. For clarity's sake today in our webcast and in our released information, we will speak about statutory results. We have also included pre-AASB 16 result information in the appendix to ensure all our stakeholders have a clear view of the accurate like-for-like comparison data. Let's turn to the H1 highlights on slide three. Importantly, the safety and wellbeing of our employees remain firmly in our sights, we continue to be nimble in protecting our people and yet remaining operational, which is a strong outcome. In the first six months of FY 2021, I think we've continued to demonstrate our relative resilience when you consider the wider business context. We delivered organic revenue growth approaching 11%, and that took our group revenue to just over AUD 250 million. That revenue grew off the back of a very strong automotive result and volume, which was really a story of domestic demand with some impacts on our export volume. That same muted theme of export was seen more so in the Davey result, where export markets suffered through much of H1. Our underlying EBIT was up just over 17.5% to just a smidgen over AUD 52 million. Now, in FY 2020, we spoke about a year of consolidation, and we were working through step change in FX and domestic cost inflation and customer agreements, price rises, other supply cost downs, and we expected that to play out through the year. That's critical when you reflect on H1 as those operational fitness efforts flow through into the result as largely planned. We did see some mix changes and substantial freight costs rolling into the GP margin. The EBIT to sales margin expanded with the flow-through of operational fitness and positive operating leverage driven by that volume. It wasn't all plain sailing, though, as we saw far greater COVID impacts at Davey with the plant disruption due to the lockdowns impacting our manufacturing variances and the products we could produce relative to what the market requires. Our cash conversion was slightly better than our plan, although we expected it to improve from prior year, and we also got a bit of extra tailwind from payment cadence from one or two of our customers. We were excited to announce the acquisition of the ACAD group in November, and a successful capital raise was completed. Our balance sheet is nicely positioned and I think really does provide great flexibility to take on further acquisitions such as the Australian Clutch Services business, ACS, that we announced as fresh as yesterday. That's an acquisition that's very much in line with the programmatic auto parts segment approach we informed our investors at the October 2019 investor day. Finally, we were also pleased to be able to provide an interim dividend to our shareholders, AUD 0.25 per share. That reflects a payout ratio of 76% of the underlying NPAT, excluding the JobKeeper receipts. Before we go into the segment results a little deeper, we wanted to update our investors on the COVID-related impacts. This next slide provides some insight into the financial impacts in the first half's results. COVID certainly interrupted sea freight reliability and container availability, and many suppliers are facing challenges with record order backlogs. This is requiring intense engagement with suppliers and sea freight providers to juggle our needs and wants against the available capacity. Consequently, we are experiencing extended forward order lead times and in a period of heightened demand. This is resulting in the need for air freight at frankly unprecedented levels with associated cost penalties. Container and freight rates have escalated considerably outside of air freight. While the bulk of our needs are addressed under our contract, we are having to freight some containers on spot rates given the strong demand situation. Discussions with freight lines are pointing towards a considerable risk in the contracted rates in FY 2022. In the period, a number of salary reductions were applied to KMPs and senior leaders of the group and board to also help offset the financial impacts of COVID. It should also be noted that any of the JobKeeper receipts were excluded from the calculation for incentive calculations in FY 2020 for KMP and senior leaders, and we didn't pay any bonuses to KMPs. More importantly, that approach is being repeated in FY 2021, notwithstanding the additional operational costs that are additionally rolling through due to COVID. The operational level, Davey, was significantly impacted by the extended lockdown of the Melbourne facility, and it resulted in both lost sales and reduced overhead recovery throughout the period. In addition, Davey's had to really move to multiple shifts more recently to address their current order backlog. The automotive businesses also incurred cost penalties running their distribution facilities under social distancing guidelines, which we saw come through in split overtime and in penalty rate costs, and they pulled through the half. As previously noted, we did receive the AUD 2.8 million in JobKeeper receipts after several, but not all, businesses qualified for JobKeeper. That said, we managed to keep our workforce both safe and intact with no redundancies, where some of our competitors and even customers chose to decrease their workforce. Overall, the employee care programs and employee financial assistance support programs we provided, such as the special COVID leave, along with the operational costs of COVID-19, has meant that the government receipts have been more than absorbed. Finally, we do expect to see higher inventory levels in H2, and we will track the sales mix closely in H2 and expect perhaps some export demand to roll through, which does benefit in most cases from a margin point of view. Right. Well, let's take a closer look at our automotive segment results on slide five. The revenue grew by just over 13%. That was largely universal across all the auto BUs coming through in both service and repair product. The underlying EBIT of close to AUD 52.5 million was an increase by a pretty decent 21% or AUD 9 or so million, with a fairly consistent D&A. Pleasingly, the margin improved in auto by about 160-ish basis points. Our work on operational fitness flowed through into H1. JobKeeper is in that margin outcome, but this was easily netted out with the varying employee care and financial support programs and obviously the COVID-related operating costs. Of interest in H1, FX didn't play a strong factor in the year-over-year performance, and our previously discussed efforts on the five business fundamentals kept up a good tempo, especially around product cycle planning and operational fitness. On slide six, we give a quick snapshot of some of the noteworthy highlights in H1 by the businesses. Ryco delivered a strong level of revenue growth, it came from a robust ongoing reseller demand. It was unrelated to the prior restocking. We were proud to receive recognition again from the AFR Most Innovative Company Awards, where we placed fifth in our category. Finally, our product release efforts were really pleasing, which I guess is also a reflection of the approach we took across all our BUs last year, when we didn't stop our PD and cataloging tempo. Our other filtration company, Wesfil, experienced strong growth in the first 6 months, equally felt in both filtration and their newer products. As previously stated, we firmly believe that Wesfil's brand proposition, that sort of focus on value orientation in terms of products, has continued to play well in H1. Iron grip, excellent first half. Strong growth, a nice balance of more of the traditional box products, so fuel pumps and the like, but also a noticeable pickup in the demand for its repair and reman services. Which, by the way, seems to be, frankly, getting broader in terms of the addressable market. We're now moving into heavy-duty trucks coming through for reman and repair work. IMG continued the trend in innovation, through some grant support, they actually launched this week a hybrid battery refurbishment program, which is very encouraging. Moving to slide seven, BWI. They delivered some strong growth as well. Of note, we saw OEM channels in truck and caravan really come on strongly. You might have seen in some of the comments there that our retail-orientated products grew, you've certainly seen that from some of our reseller customers. Though, we don't have a huge volume of the retail-centric products. We were especially proud to be selected as the new Jayco supplier of power management products in its RV caravan alliance, which was very encouraging. At the same time, BWI was a BU that really needed to work hard on its inventory position. Certainly, we ran far leaner than we would certainly find acceptable in terms of inventory. This has resulted in heightened air freight and general freight costs for them specifically. Both AAG and DBA experienced strong domestic demand driving their growth. Although DBA found export sales slightly weaker than desired, AAG found itself in a similar situation to BWI in terms of stock. However, they've done well. They've been balancing some significant change management challenges with their AAG profit improvement plan. That's about the integration of AAG into Ryco co-location. That all remains on track. Now, I'd like to pivot a little bit and give you a quick update on some recent automotive trends on slide eight. I think it seems fitting to pause, give an update on the industry we serve after 2020 concluded and as that data starts to filter out. Starting with new vehicle sales in 2020, we saw a drop in the size of the industry. Hardly unexpected. We did however, see a lift in Q4, calendar year that is, around a circa 8% increase, and this actually flowed into January. I think the numbers were somewhere in the region of 10% to 11%. EVs or electric vehicles in the broadest context, meaning battery electric and plug-in and standard HEVs, they recorded a total sales of around 67,000 across the total industry, probably about 6.7% of all sales, of light duty that is. When you peel back that data, you do see that almost all those EVs, upwards of 98%, are actually HEVs and PHEVs. Those powertrains all retain a nice powertrain. The other trend that continued was the increase of the sales of SUVs and pickups, which now combine, is around three-quarters of total sales and certainly at record levels. These all flow into the car park, which over time remains certainly a net positive for the existing and newer BUs in G.U.D, who all over-index in parts to SUVs and pickups. I mentioned the car park, obviously. That's where our bread and butter really resides as opposed to new vehicle sales. Let's move, when we go to the next slide, and you can sort of see some of the dynamics at the end of 2020. What we see is the Australian car park approaching sort of 19 million units. It grew by about 2%. That growth has continued to be expected through the next four or five years. Although we serve potentially all those vehicles, we know our addressable market is the five year plus, which also grew in 2020 and at a faster pace than the general car park. That five year plus is forecasted to grow to upwards of about 15.5 million by 2025. Finally, we are also seeing the increasing in the average fleet age, meaning that less cars are likely being scrapped and all those will potentially require repair or maintenance. Okay. I want to touch on the acquisitions in H1 and also one announced literally yesterday. We finally took the keys of ACAD. That is what we call internally is G.U.D four-wheel drive and commercial vehicle accessories. G4CVA for short, but that is an internal name really. It's very early days, the strong strategic rationale of that four-wheel drive thematic with such a diversity of customers and ultimately delivering an EPS accretive result is clearly why we're enthused, let alone the new vehicle and the car park dynamics that I've just gone through that will all strongly play into the lap of G4CVA. On the next slide, we talk about what we announced yesterday. We announced the purchase of Australian Clutch Services, ACS, a leading manufacturer and importer of clutch components, primarily in Australia and New Zealand, although they do export to both Europe and the U.S.A., and who, as an aside, happen to share much of the same export distribution base as DBA, one of our existing businesses. ACS will be led by Gideon Segal, who currently leads DBA. Both those businesses are going to form a friction division, and as many of the industry experts will know that frankly, brake and clutch go hand in hand. In fact, DBA started out decades ago as actually a brake and clutch business. ACS hasn't got a customer bigger than probably around 15% of its revenue, so it's pretty diverse. As part of our DD, we completed bespoke brand research, and it continued to really reinforce that and confirm that it's a leading brand and with a very strong trusted product, which is very much in line with our acquisition criteria in terms of how we view businesses and products. Purchase price at AUD 32 million, pretty attractive multiple at 5.6 based on the FY normalized EBIT levels. As the slide states, you can see it on screen now, that it's EPS accretive. Although we haven't baked any synergies into that assessment, that statement around EPS accretion, we actually think there are some natural opportunities that exist given my comments around sort of brake and clutch. To finish the auto section, I'd like to stop for just one second on slide 12, where we show the revised split of G.U.D automotive revenue derived from ICE and non-ICE. Since 2018, we've been growing our non-ICE revenue. It's gone from 54%, and that'll move on to what will now be acquisition adjusted to about 60%. Of course, this move continues our desire to shift the split over the next five to seven years well in advance of any material change in the car park. That allows us to further embrace the new automotive aftermarket servicing EVs. That will eventually arrive. Let's move to our water results at Davey. Davey reported a revenue growth of just over 2%, but with a decline in underlying EBIT of AUD 2.4 million, and that was all due to volume and cost pressures. It's accurate to say that COVID really impacted Davey significantly compared to any other business in our G.U.D portfolio. Davey's exports to many of its regions in the Pacific, Indian Ocean faltered as their economies were impacted by tourism collapse. Export to Middle East and Europe were also soft due to a combination of COVID-related supply and demand issues. The Australian business actually grew well, and the New Zealand business showed some resilience, but these were both in the more sort of traditional pump in a box type products. Pretty much all of our aqua modular water treatment project work continued to be essentially on like a furlough in terms of customers like hospitals and other businesses that remain concerned about any capital expenditure in the short term. We had to substantially idle the Melbourne factory during that very latest and extended lockdown, essentially the prohibition of non-essential manufacturing resulted in overhead recovery gaps and impacted supply during the European pool season. I mean, basically, we had the situation meaning that we had to work within the guidance of the Victorian government naturally, that meant that we could only produce items like home pressure systems or commercial pumps, not swimming pool pumps or not spa pool pumps. We still remain confident in the medium-term growth potential at Davey. We are seeing some more encouraging signs in H2, where, as an example, we have a European pool order bank at the beginning of January, about two to two and a half times higher than the average year. Okay, well, let's cover off the key financial information, and I'll ask Martin to take over and drive us. Thanks, Martin. Thank you very much, Graeme. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It's a pleasure to speak to you today. I'm going to start us on slide 15, which pretty much reflects much of what Graeme's spoken about. I will call out a few points, however. First one being FX impacts. A number of you will wonder whether they were significant or not. Year-on-year, the FX impacts were not materially different given the hedging we had in place, and also the chance to top up a little bit along the way. The result is really a question of revenue mix and overhead control. Graeme has spoken to the mix already, so I'm not going to labor that. Costs were tightly controlled. We had a number of cash preservation actions running through the half without standing down staff, given our COVID-19 approach to supporting staff. The 11% rebound in revenue really flowed through the EBITDA, EBIT and underlying EBIT, notwithstanding the mix changes, which were a result of the change in demand patterns as the economy started to rebound. We booked AUD 1.8 million in operating costs and most of those are revealed on slide 16. The bulk of that being AUD 1.2 million, which was expected and related to the closure of the manufacturing activity of AA Gaskets, switching to import model and merging the back offices, which Graeme spoke to earlier. That'll improve operational efficiency and lower costs considerably. The bulk of the remaining one-off costs really related to the due diligence and other work around the acquisition of G4 CVA. The interim dividend was kept constant in cents per share, notwithstanding the Q2 issue of shares to support the G4 CVA acquisition, which did not contribute in the half. The cash paid out or that will be paid out shortly to support the interim dividend is a cash outflow increase of 8% on the prior comparable period, and the board feels this is a financially prudent decision at this point. The dividend represents a payout ratio of 76% of underlying NPAT if you exclude JobKeeper. I'm now going to bring you to slide 17, where we show the working capital balances for the half year and to the lower right, we do that again, isolating out the working capital was acquired through G4 CVA of AUD 12.4 million. Once you do that, working capital is similar to the prior comparable period, is up approximately AUD 3 million on the June balances, which is a really strong result given the sales uplift. The increased sales has also seen an increase in stock turn velocity, particularly in the second quarter. With an associated uplift in creditors, which has really helped some of the debtor growth coming from the higher sales and the slightly higher inventory holds. We also benefited from some customers settling earlier. That was to the tune of them contracted. Therefore, we collected AUD 4 million, which we were fully expecting to collect in July. Just moving on to page 18, you can see that pull through in the free cash flow and the cash conversion, which really exceeded expectations. Looking forward to second half, we think that cash conversion rate will abate. We'll see some be unwind if the AUD 4 million of early settlement by some customers normalize. We'll also start to see the first parts of the CapEx we called out with the G4 CVA acquisition pull through. Depending on the velocity and timing of inventory turns, we may see the credited balance moderate a little bit. The combination of those three will really pull our cash conversion back towards the year-end as best we can anticipate it right now. Moving on to slide 19, we really look at our net debt position. It's, sorry, decreased by AUD 32 million from the prior comparable period. The largest movements of that, of course, were the G4 CVA acquisition of AUD 65.7 million, if you exclude the acquired cash. Of course, we raised AUD 74.9 million net of costs from the share placement and share purchase plan to support that acquisition. At December 31st, we had approximately AUD 100 million of facilities that were undrawn, including a short-term unaccessed COVID-19 response plan line of AUD 22.5 Million, which will not renew at year-end. In the coming months, we'll also pay AUD 32 million for the ACS. It still leaves us a considerable sum for further bolt-on acquisitions. Our leverage will remain modest, and we have a very supportive panel of financiers. In short, we are really well-placed to fund further acquisitions. I'm going to hand you back to Graeme, who will take you through the trading update and outlook. Thanks, Martin. We conclude the presentation with a few reflections on trading and our outlook for the remainder of the year. We had expected to potentially see demand moderate in later Q2 or early Q3. We've experienced a small decrease, but the early flash of January shows consistent sales that we've seen in the first six months. A pretty decent performance in January. We continue to believe that there are some clear COVID tailwinds and headwinds in the context of the auto aftermarket. We're firmly in the belief that it positions G.U.D in that relatively positive position. The domestic tourism, the public transport situation, increased used car volume, a frugal mindset with the customers, none of those factors have changed in our minds over the last six months. Thankfully, we're seeing miles traveled return to pre-COVID-19 levels, which is a critical determinant in demand as well as we would know. In terms of water, we do expect some further sales growth, particularly from some of our export markets, along with the continuation of the domestic demand. Importantly, without the circa three or so months of significant factory idling in H1, we see a lift in the efficiency of the factory variance as a real benefit to roll through. Across all the businesses, we do need to recognize the ongoing COVID operational costs that won't trail away, along with, I think, a growing inbound logistics cost, which we'll see in a large degree through H2. All said, though, if we assumed no further restrictions on mobility or fiscal cliff scenarios emerge, that EBIT forecast for the full year, including our two new acquisitions and their component parts, should be in the range of AUD 95 million-AUD 100 million, and cash conversion in that 80%-85% range, which we have guided previously before. Okay. That concludes the presentation results. I will now hand you over to the moderator, who can coordinate the questions that may come through. Over to you, Kelly. Thank you, Graeme. At this time, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. When you ask your question, can you please take your phone off hands-free, pick up and hold your handset so we can all hear your questions clearly. Your first question comes from Tom Godfrey with UBS. Please go ahead. Good morning, Graeme and Martin. Thanks for taking my questions. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Yes. Thanks, guys. Maybe just first one from me. I'm keen to start with the guidance of AUD 95 million- AUD 100 million of underlying EBIT. If you just look at the AUD 52 million you've delivered in the first half and then add the incremental acquisition tailwinds, some FX helping as well, and hopefully an improved Davey performance in the second half, you can very quickly get to the top end or plus of the range. I'm just keen to understand what we should be thinking about in terms of the offsets. Is it really just acceleration in freight costs? How conservative have you been around second half automotive sales growth? Good question, Tom. Look, we debated naturally internally as to whether we put forward guidance. We haven't in previous times because it has been so difficult to try rationalize what's going on in the market. Naturally, for the first time when we bring forward guidance, we're going to be cautious about our view because there's still a lot of moving pieces. I would say, our guidance of AUD 95 million-AUD 100 million is a cautious level of guidance. Having said that, though, there are some things that do continue to flow through. Yes, there are some operating costs that will continue. Some of those, I think, will increase a little bit because we'll get the full half impact of, frankly, some of the freight and the like, certainly. I think it's not unrealistic to suggest that demand will moderate a little bit more. You've seen a moderation, as an example, when we came forward at our AGM. We talked about around 16 in auto. We're now calling out 13 and a bit. We might see that moderate a tiny bit. Some of that acquired revenue you talk of obviously comes at a lower margin position. Look, I think to summarize, yes, there are some physicals that roll through for the remainder of the year that you need to take note of, and obviously we don't have JobKeeper repeating naturally. At the same time, I would characterize our guidance as cautious guidance because obviously there are still a lot of moving pieces. Got it. No, it is very clear. Maybe just to follow on from that. You noted the 16% you called out at the AGM for the first quarter suggests a 10% in the second quarter. Just keen to understand the exit rate and where the aftermarket is running as of January. Is it at high single-digit level now? Is that how we should be thinking about it? Look, I think January was a very good month. Without doubt. It was a better month, frankly, than December. When we talked to now, obviously triangulating through to other public domain information we provided, which obviously is at the equity raise, we talked about what was happening through the months of October. Month to month, it's very difficult to give you a sense of trend because the number of selling days change from month to month. We talked at the time of equity raise around a certain number, but that particular month, there were two less selling days. Whereas the month of January, there's pretty much a static number. I would characterize the current rate as pretty strong if I looked at January alone. I do expect at some point that the 16s and the 17s we've seen in the past to moderate to something more realistic. It's just a matter of when, and I think that's the AUD 64,000 question. Not that we're asking, but some others are as well, because at the end of the day, there is a net positive gain out of COVID-19 for us, as horrible as that sounds at a macro level. We do see the benefit, and we expect that to carry through. It's just about how do we forecast that and how do we represent that in guidance? Yeah, sure. No, just to add to that, I think it probably hasn't come through clearly enough so far this morning around the exports. It is in the supply. The exports by DBA, and we'll expect the same thing with ACS, have really been quite choppy month-on-month. You can have a quieter month on exports, which we saw in December, and then a really strong month in exports in January. It's very hard to get a consistent pattern of sales into Europe and the U.S. right now. That's why, in some respects, you are right in saying, perhaps we've been a little bit cautious. We are mindful of those things. As you've called out, Q2, if you take H1 minus Q1 growth, obviously Q2 is quite a bit softer. I think all those things have played into our mind in giving that guidance. Good. Thanks, guys. Maybe just last one from me. Can I just ask around pricing, how should we be thinking about price increases across the auto portfolio into second half 2021? Through the good efforts of the team in each of the BUs, as you know, we've been working on those operational fitness elements. One of those was pricing, and we obviously pulled those through, and we're seeing some of the benefit roll through into H1. I think there is a reasonably tight pricing environment, although we are seeing a little bit roll through. I think that in terms of factoring through your view, you should be guided that we don't see a lot of inflation in our pricing, certainly in the short term. Tom, I'd just add to that. What we are seeing, this is probably no surprise, and you might be getting this with clients in other sectors. Probably the best part of five years now, in terms of the supplier-customer relationship, the customers have probably had a bit of a whip hand with suppliers on pricing and have been able to bat away price increases because volumes have been growing. Most factories in the world have got the opposite problem right now. They've got more demand than supply. A lot of those people are trying to respond to supply by expanding factories, getting more shifts. We do see some near-term cost pressures coming through on some of the supply costs. That'll probably be one of the things that would play into if we did move on price in H2, it would be in response to that. That's some trends that have really sort of come across a number of our different businesses in the last four to six weeks, and we expect that will be more of a dialogue that will play through on the cost side and then later on in the half, how do we take price forward, whether it's at the end of this half or at the beginning of the first half of next year. Those sorts of things have also been playing in our mind in terms of forming guidance. Understood. That's great. Thanks for taking my questions. Your next question comes from Matthew Nicholas with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Morning, guys. Well done on the result. Thanks for taking my questions. First one is just on currency. Now, I think you noted there's not a huge amount of currency benefit in the first half. Could we just get an update as to what the currency situation looks like in the second half, and what your hedge rate looks like into FY 2022, and how does any potential currency tailwind you've got coming in 2022 compare to the freight cost rises you've got? I'll take that, Graeme. We were expecting this half year to be at AUD 0.68. It's probably come out closer to AUD 0.69. Some of that was just the greater volume. Some of that was the fact that some of our suppliers pushed to cash. We settled on the currency, which then meant that, and that's why the financing cost went up. We lost on the physical cash while we're sitting on that because of the longer payment time, picked it up on the spot on the COGS. That's why there's a bit over AUD 1 million in financing costs, and you've seen that benefit roll through. Compared to last year-over-year, there was a slight FX gain, but it's in the hundreds of thousands. Not a material amount. Second half of this year, we probably see that sort of AUD 0.68, AUD 0.69 with our hedges rolling out to see the AUD 0.69, hopefully towards AUD 0.70. Depends on how much we have to buy in excess of what we've predicted. We're about to hedge for the first half of FY 2022, Matt. We're just working on that now. We'll probably try and lock that away at these sorts of exchange rates. That does take a little bit of pressure away from price up next year. It would absorb some of that freight upside. We do import across the group about 2,000 containers a year. Freight rates have gone up considerably. That could be a pretty big number. That'll be a little bit of a tailwind for that, as well as the supply cost ups. All in all, really, I see that playing out more in FY 2022 than in FY 2021, Matt. Right. Just to be clear, you're looking at an average rate for 2022 of somewhere between 76 and 77. You do the hedge right now? We'll probably move to hedge the first half of FY 2022 pretty quickly. At this point, not look to hedge the whole year at this time out, but certainly the first half. Okay, cool. Thanks. On the acquisition you made last time, I think you've quoted an FY 2020 number. Is there any reason to believe that the business you've acquired doesn't show similar organic growth rates to what you're seeing in your overall portfolio into 2021? Matt, I think that obviously we haven't taken the keys yet until March 1st. I think that it's fair to say that we would expect the FY 2021 number to be an improvement on FY 2020. Obviously, the multiple becomes even more compelling. The closeness of the actual forecast right this second, I would say there or thereabouts in terms of some of the growth that we're seeing. Okay. Just the last one on just on further acquisitions. As you point out, your balance sheet's in pretty good nick. I think post that deal, you're probably only geared about 1.2x. How's the environment looking for acquisitions, and is the incremental dollar of capital likely to go, I know you're talking about non-ICE components, but is it into four-wheel drive components, or is it into other areas? In October 2019, when we took investors and yourself through our acquisition thoughts, we talked about a more of a programmatic approach, right? We spoke about segments that we don't currently play in and where perhaps we would have priority. There are other segments that we don't currently play in beyond four-wheel drive, and commercial vehicle accessories. It's safe to say that we do see upside in the four-wheel drive, and there are a number of opportunities in that space, that sort of thematic. With equal gusto, we are looking at some of the other segments we don't plan to round out the portfolio, and there are some very attractive, well-run, great branded companies sitting in Australia, a lot of those bolt on in nature. I would say with equal energy, probably both sides of the coin in terms of the question you've asked, both four-wheel drive, but also some of the other segments we identified in that October 2019. Look, we've got unused lines of about just shy of AUD 100 million. We're not, as we've said, and you've seen obviously in what we put out yesterday, the multiples are not accelerating with any concern. We continue quiet in the background to have those conversations. The ACS conversation, as an example, has lasted upwards of 18 months. That's a good snapshot of sometimes how we're nurturing that relationship and bringing it to fruition. Great. That's all from me. Thanks, guys. Your next question comes from Russell Gill with JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. Couple of questions. Apologies if I missed it, but just to get clarity on the first question Matt asked around, I guess, moving into FY 2022, the benefit you're going to get on FX on gross margin relative to the uplift in rates. You haven't really given, I think, as you've upped significantly your contracted rates now, but I presume we can still assume movement of FX hedge at AUD 0.76, AUD 0.77 plus your expected FY 2022 rate contracted numbers. You're still expecting some, I guess, margin improvement in FY 2022 on those two variables? I think the short answer would be yes directly to your question, there are a few other things flowing through there. Every AUD 0.01 to us is generally in the sort of the AUD 1 million increment in terms of EBIT. As Martin touched on right at the end of his comment, there will be a supplier relationship discussion that will take place, and we're expecting to see some supplier cost ups. You might see a little bit of the air freight abate, but maybe not certainly in the first part of 2022. You're certainly gonna see the contracted rates go up, and that will be substantial. The benefit of some of that exchange, I think, will be repatriated to some of our supply base. You won't get the full impact of that AUD 0.76 or AUD 0. 77. Great. Thanks for the clarity. Martin, secondly, I couldn't find it in the accounts, the rebates. It doesn't seem to be split out now. Could you talk through, I guess, the rebates that were paid in the first half? You see I've kind of back followed through the cash flow statement, we don't get the divisional breakdown. Can you give us some feel for how the rebates moved in the first half this year? Whether you'll be disclosing that going forward? I'll deal with the second question first. Thanks, Russell. We're not gonna disclose it going forward. Simply put, it's the commercial backlash you get from customers looking at the average and then having conversation about that they're trailing the average doesn't add shareholder value. We think it's a nuisance. We communicate with you when there are major changes in trading terms. We feel that keeps you sufficiently informed. It doesn't put bullets in the guns of clients who want to use that information against us. That's point one. That's why we made the change. Point two, really, this sixth month, there have been no changes in rebate range of significance. The rebates have just tracked with the volumes, for those rebates that are. In some cases, a client might have just a very simple volume rebate. In some, they may have a two-legged rebate with a lower, with initial rebate and then a volume rebate if they get over the trigger levels. Those that got over the trigger levels, we accrue for those. Really, the rebate movement this year, this period on the prior six months was a function of volume and not much else, Russell. I would add that with equal attention around the sensitivity of commercial information, that's why you're also seeing as flagged and signaled to the investors, us pushing down a more accurate reflection of the corporate costs into both water and automotive to have a more realistic auto margin view of the world, trying to really true up how the business is really run. Yeah. We called out the amount for that on slide five for automotive, AUD 1.7 million. On the water slide 13, we called out AUD 400,000 going there as well. Really, as Graeme said, and that's based on the current time cost work done specifically to support those businesses. Otherwise, you get [3/8] needless profit envy. Sure. Just on the announced acquisition yesterday, I guess the multiple you acquired it for looks certainly very compelling, versus your current trading multiple. Was there something a bit different about this business? I noticed that the management of the business is inherited by DBA. Was there a management change or a family selling out? Then secondly, just on the nature of this business, and excuse my ignorance of understanding the clutch market, but should we be thinking of it more like a, I guess, an AA Gaskets in terms of the profitability can be a bit more cyclical in nature, relative to, say, either Ryco or Wesfil? Just some dynamics around that process. The founder of that business is exiting, and this is his succession plan. We know that founder, Brenton Jordan, very well, and as I said, we've been in conversations for actually just over 18 months. Almost actually just after I started. It's part of his exit plan for all the typical reasons that founders look to exit. We retain all the key management, which is very encouraging because they're actually well tenured and well respected in the industry. We just ask our current DBA leader to actually manage both those businesses as a friction division because, as I said earlier on, brake and clutch go hand in hand. You go to a workshop, often it's a brake and clutch type workshop. The knowledge base held with that leader and Gideon is quite high in both parts of the business. It's just a natural way forward to actually run those two businesses. That's the first question, and sorry, Russ, could you repeat the second part of the question? Understanding the profile of the profitability business. Is it a bit more cyclical in nature? You called out gaskets sort of outperformed because of the hobby market came back or people had time to work on their cars and need to replace a gasket. Is it similar with the clutch market? If we look through, I guess, is it a smooth type earnings and demand profile you might see on a filter market, or is it a bit more cyclical in nature in terms of its- It's not prone to something that's abnormal in terms of its demand, nor is it directly seasonal. At the end of the day, it's about replacement clutch components. It's a repair outcome, not a service outcome in most cases. It's really down to the number of vehicles rolling around their age and their incidence rate in terms of clutch repair. The other piece, though, is that the manual clutch market in this market is of a certain size, but what we're also seeing is for those who are more technically-minded, in recent times, dual clutch transmissions have rolled into the market. And these are essentially manual transmissions that essentially mimic automotive transmissions. They're called DCTs and DSGs and PDKs, depending on which brand. They actually also have clutch plates and friction material. They actually transact at somewhere in the region of three to four times the wholesale revenue than the traditional clutch component. The market's morphing a little bit, but to the advantage of ACS, of course, it exports. While we didn't detail the specifics of the percentage, it would probably represent anywhere between 8% and 12% of its business in rough terms as export into Europe and certainly Europe, where the market there is somewhere in the region of 80% of all vehicles sold there are manuals and DCTs. Hopefully that gives you a bit more of a flavor. I think you can add to that, Graeme, that it's similar to DBA in that they're very well represented at the performance end, whether that's upgrading for track cars or people that want to upgrade four-wheel drives for towing, et cetera. That's a large part of what they export rather than the standard clutch. Their percentage of exports is approximately half what DBA is. They're less down the track on the maturity of their export market, and that provides an encouraging potential pathway for growth beyond the replacement of a standard clutch. Great. Just a final question. You flagged the CapEx in the back of the Amotiv business coming in. Can you just talk through the one-offs or restructuring charges you're expecting to book in the second half? We're pretty much done for now. There will be a little dribble through the remainder of the gasket site as we fully close that. I'm really anticipating less than AUD 500,000, and there might be a few bits and bobs around the place, but not expecting anything that's of significance. We're not expecting significant restructuring costs in regards to G4 CVA as well. We called out the CapEx there in the acquisition. That had two elements. One was an IT platform upgrade, which we're very busy on implementing now, and a lot of that essentially to get them up to our IT security levels. The security level work's been done. We expect one of the businesses to migrate to one of our ERP systems in the course of the next 12 months. We're working on what is a right manufacturing strategy, which is the bulk of the amount that we called out on the CapEx. Probably we could see some of that filter through. I'm fully expecting somewhere in the order of AUD 1 million, AUD 1.5 million to pull through of what was closed when we acquired G4 CVA to pull through this financial year. The rest will pull through, quite frankly, when we feel we've got the right manufacturing strategy and therefore what we need to invest in and where and so forth. Great. Thanks guys. Your next question comes from Sam Teeger with Citi. Please go ahead. Hi guys. First question, what proportion of COGS is freight? Nothing really jumps to mind when I cut across all the businesses, Sam. What I would say is we bring in 2,000 containers a year. Our contracted freight rates on just the container leg of it were coming off at a tariff rate around about AUD 600. I wouldn't be surprised to see that treble. A number of the big shipping lines that are even saying we're currently in a buying agreement with a number of other public companies in Australia. Together, we buy close on 20,000 containers. A large number of the freight companies have been saying they're not even sure whether they wanted these contracted rates for next year. We don't have clarity about where those contracted rates will land. You could see it going upwards of AUD 1,000 a container. You work that out, that's AUD 2 million. Air freight. One of the nice things that's happened with COVID in terms of demand is we've seen a pivot into some areas that have been a little bit quieter, particularly the caravan space and some of the four-wheel drive accessories and BWI. We've been, quite frankly, scrambling to keep up with demand, which has required us to pivot air freight. We've had some months where we've been having an air freight bill of AUD 300,000 when we might have otherwise had it at AUD 30 or so. It's a bit hard to call it out, Sam, but hopefully that gives you a bit of sense of bookends that we're thinking about. Yeah, thanks, Martin. Given in the outlook slide, it says you're negotiating container rates now for next year. It's fair to assume, right, that you don't expect these container issues to be resolved by the middle of this year? Just wondering, based on all the people you speak to in the industry, when do you think this issue is resolved? I'd hope that by Q4 we have some clarity. I think reason will come in. There's not only the container freight issues. You've got challenges with the spring of demand post-COVID-19 means that even the companies that rent you the containers say, "Hang on a minute, I can get a lot better yield renting this container going to the U.S. than Australia." That's still playing out. The shipping companies have taken some capacity off. We get what we call blank sailings, which is we book in containers on a ship for Friday next week, and then the day before they say it's not sailing. Now you've got a decision. Do you push that out to the next available sailing, three weeks' time? Do you put it on spot and pay the excess to get it to where you need to get it? I would hope to think that by April, May, we see some greater clarity. I think it would be foolhardy to assume that we definitely will. Yeah. I don't know if you've got a different view, Graeme? I think at the end of the day, the cadence of those contract negotiations, we'll have a firmer view probably May, June. That's the normal cadence. As Martin's pointed out, we expect to see a considerable rise. I think the other thing that sits alongside the contracted position is just the air freight burden at the moment. That will abate at some point. We've chosen very carefully to ensure our DIFOT is better than our competitors because we're going to steal share. In most cases, we hope to hold some of that share, not in all cases, and that will result in payback in the medium term. I think that the air freight, probably once we get through Chinese New Year, because obviously that's a pretty challenging period for freight and supply. As we sort of exit, get to the end of this financial year, I'm hoping to start to see the air freight starting to improve as we then move into the first quarter and certainly into the second quarter of 2022. Given that the inventory is at record levels compared to previous years, should that mean that a lot of these freight cost headwinds actually get delayed? The inventory is up by circa AUD 4 million on a base of just over 110. We're not actually seeing a huge inventory increase in relative terms, although we think we're running lean, certainly, and we are pushing for more inventory. The message we're giving our leadership group is that Martin and I are quite happy to go long on inventory in the short to medium term because I think inventory is going to be king. I think that's one of the reasons we've had some of the growth, is we've been rolling the dice and making sure, A, firstly, we didn't cut inventory through the horrible part of COVID-19 last year, but also maintaining a strong tempo. I think, and we have guided in the information presented to you, that we do expect inventory to increase. That's greater than where we are now. What that number is, hard to project right this second, but by the time we get to the year end, we're certainly going to be in a stronger inventory position. That comes with those associated costs I spoke of. Got it. Last one, just the marketing and selling costs, they're down about 8%. What's driving that, and how should we think about that going forward? How sustainable is the reduction? Marketing and sales costs are down to just over, well, actually just under 9%. Having said that, though, the product development, whilst not necessarily stated everywhere in the numbers, they're up by probably 15%, 16%, because we're firmly of the view that we're going to get some share and traction because we didn't slow down product, and we didn't do that in the first half either. I think some of that will continue in terms of your direct question around marketing and sales. Some of that will abate as we return more to a normal operating pattern. I would expect our marketing and sales costs to be slightly lower than our more recent run rates before COVID-19. I think we found a more efficient way into the market as well. I'm not sure that the need, other than to continue to support our brands, but we're taking cautious decisions on how much money we want to invest in certain parts. That's why I say product development is up quite significantly. I think the other thing to add there, Graeme, is our sales force has been working virtually, so the traditional travel and related costs are up there. Also trade shows, the old physical trade shows where we put up a stand that cost you AUD 300,000, et cetera. None of that has occurred. We have switched to a virtual trade show. We've actually pioneered that across the aftermarket, and that's a hell of a lot cheaper. It'll be interesting to see it coming up the other side of that. What is the new normal? Certainly, we called out cash conservation. Some of those third-party marketing and selling related costs were a focal point there of reduction. All right, cool. Thanks, guys. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Your next question comes from Ash Chandra with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon, gentlemen. Just a couple of quick ones from me, if that's okay. You mentioned export demand was impacted in auto and Davey, and apologies if this was already asked. Do you have a sense of how much this might have taken off your numbers in the period? Right off the top of my head, Ash, no, because that's not the way we run the business. Certainly, for Davey, that was considerable. We over-index in market share in the Pacific Island region, the Indian Ocean Island region, where a lot of our product goes into resorts for swimming pools, for water treatment, for all of that, which has been close to dead. In some of those countries, you've got currency controls and central banks struggling to have enough dollars to support imports. The Middle East, obviously, oil prices have been pretty low of late. That pretty quickly flows through to residential development, where we tend to over-index again as well. The factory closed down in Davey meant that because new builds on swimming pools weren't essential, it meant we not only had the cost increase, but we missed some of the export volume because there is a stocking window in Europe. It was very considerable for Davey. It wasn't impactful for some of the automotive businesses, but Davey bore the brunt of those impacts. Way to characterize it, Ash, is that sizable for Davey, marginal for auto. Okay, terrific. Thank you. The growth that you've experienced in both your divisions, would you categorize the growth you've experienced as you think you've done better than the market or in line or worse? Again, could you perhaps elaborate as to where you might have taken share or lost share in the period? Well, that's a very hard question to answer, Ash, on the basis that there is no peak body information. Obviously, we're one of the first to go, so we don't get to compare and contrast with even some of our listed customers. We do have some public domain information and recent updates from some of our customers that might suggest if we were to break down their retail versus their trade performance, and we look really at the trade performance, not the retail performance, that would be the best indicator as to how we're performing, and that seems relatively positive for us. We certainly feel that we're getting our fair share and more of the growth. That's really very anecdotal in nature from an automotive point of view. From a Davey point of view, I can only talk to the Australian and New Zealand market because that's where we've seen some resilience. Peak body information is not easy to come by, but the very latest information that came through in the IBIS would suggest that the market has been a little bit static, in fact, potentially down two or three points. Davey has shown some growth in Australia beyond obviously the overall data result of 2%. Probably there's a swing of anywhere between five and seven points between what we think the market's doing in Australia and New Zealand and Davey versus what Davey's doing in terms of its growth. That's probably the best way we can give you a feel for it, Ash. Okay. Terrific. Can I ask on the ACS acquisition you've used in your guidance, you assume it contributes for four months in the second half. That's obviously going to settle in the next few weeks. Are there any sort of major DD or preconditions or regulatory/finance approvals that need to be cleared, or is it pretty much at a stage of just handing over a check? Very clean situation, Ash. As I said, Martin and Bob Patterson, our GM of acquisition, and a number of the team members have been working on this for quite some period of time. We know the business very well, both at a business level and a personal level. The DD was very clean, very straightforward and no significant preconditions at all. We expect that to complete very swiftly. Brilliant. Thank you. I'll ask, just squeeze in one more, if that's okay. You obviously expect synergies from both of these acquisitions. Is there anything you can sort of at least qualitatively talk to in terms of will it take three years to kind of extract the full potential of synergies? Are there things that can start to come through fairly quickly? When would we start to notice that you are getting more than just a pro forma integration of numbers? Sure. We'll see some benefits early on just because of the management structure we've chosen to take in terms of the costs associated and how we're going to run it. I would say in the medium term, but not when I say medium term three years down the line, but maybe the next year to 18 months, I think we'll see benefit in our distribution approach. I mentioned earlier on that even at an export level, DBA and ACS literally share almost exactly the same international distribution footprint, same 3PLs and the like. They have, ACS that is, has a very extensive distribution network across Australia, and there are immediate opportunities in that regard, not dissimilar to what we've been doing with DBA and IMG. Recently, we folded those two businesses and pulled out of a 3PL to save some costs for DBA. Again, recently we reduced the 3PL cost of DBA in Sydney. I think we'll see a few things in that regard. I think there are some other more natural synergies that exist as distinct from some of the other businesses we run. How they go to market from a marketing point of view and also some of their product development because that friction synergy is quite large in terms of the operational commonality. Okay, terrific. Thanks, Graeme. Thanks, Martin. Your next question comes from Mitch Sonogan with Macquarie. Please go ahead. Hi, Graeme. Hi, Martin. Thanks for taking the questions. Just a quick one first up, again, on guidance. Looking at the AUD 95 million-AUD 100 million, just wondering, what do the lower and upper bounds imply for second half automotive revenue versus the first half on an absolute basis? You've seen a strong January already, so just trying to understand what your expectations are over the rest of the second half. Thanks. Yeah. Thanks, Mitch. As we said earlier, we are taking a cautious view. We do expect, as I said earlier on, we do expect at some point to see some moderation in automotive. We haven't seen it thus far. We've seen a slow moderation given what we communicated at the AGM and then subsequent in the equity raising. You've seen it come off from 16 to 13. We do have a point of view that perhaps we see some moderation for the last part of the year. In the bounds we gave, I think the lower end is probably deeply conservative, let's be honest. The upper end is probably cautious, and that's how I'd probably characterize it. The reality for us is we have been reticent to give guidance because it's been so hard to arbiter what's going on, and it doesn't take much for that to move around. We felt it was valuable to give some level of guidance, but I would attend that with a word in terms of caution as to how we're viewing the market. We're very keen to make sure that we deliver what we say we deliver. Credibility and reliability are kind of important to us. I don't see the automotive part of our business tanking, if that's perhaps where your thoughts are going. There may be some moderation. At the same time, the acquisition revenue that we will take on board in the second half, which does come at a lower margin, that's already well documented. I think that's probably the best way to characterize it. Yep. Perfect. Thank you. Just a quick one on New Zealand. The auto growth over there has been lagging Australia over the last 6 months. I think it was up 10% versus 13 in Australia. Do you see any catch up occurring in the second half? Maybe just a quick update on the market dynamics that you're seeing over there and looking into the next six to 12 months. Thanks. It's been a little bit more choppy than Australia. In some months we've seen some big surges, some months we've seen it pretty flat. It's a very hard one to get our head around. Again, in January, we saw a very strong performance in New Zealand. I don't suspect that at the end of the day there will be an unusual difference in the growth that we've seen historically between the two countries. It might normalize a little bit. It might come back a tiny bit. The market, as we've said in the past, is very different. Whilst our businesses serve it in the same way, there is a frugal nature to that market that's different. Therefore, there's a bit of a different revenue position in some instances as well. We're seeing a lot of choppiness is probably the best qualitative comment I can give you, Mitch. Yeah, thanks, Graeme. Just finally, for Martin, just on the underlying unallocated cost of AUD 2.2 million, can you talk about what we should expect second half, and is that level sustainable into FY 2022? Just also wrap that into the higher corporate recharge of AUD 1.7 million for the auto division. Can you sort of talk through all those moving parts? Thanks. Look, we kind of will see that sort of AUD 1.7 million in the second half as well for auto. Don't expect that to change considerably for auto or water. The corporate overhead you've got now is probably going to repeat in the second half, depending on how much third-party costs we have to do on M&A. Of course, this year is up on last year if you add it all back together. Because last year, KMPs and a lot of senior people did not, none of us in holdings got an STI last year, for example. Whereas this year, with the results that are up, we are accruing that and probably accruing it closer towards the top levels than the bottom levels. It may get to be a little bit higher depending on where we end up with the incentives for the full year. Clearly, with the results being up, we'd like to think that there's a few crumbs for Graeme and I and the rest of the team there at the end of the year. Yeah. Thanks, mate. Hope so. Just so final one, just looking at Davey, do you have any further considerations about potential divestment there? At what point does it make sense? Are there still decent synergies you're getting from, whether it be that freight logistics or insurances, et cetera, that mean it does make more sense to keep it in the portfolio? Yeah, I think we still see, and I said it earlier, in the medium term, we see upside for Davey. We're a year and a half into some work there. Some of that has been proven quite successful, but it doesn't have the benefit of getting shown or manifesting itself as well as we'd like, given the issues of the manufacturing variance and the idling. I mean, that's just brutal. You've got your plant essentially idled for half the half, so to speak. Naturally, divesting of that business right now would just be asinine in terms of what would we get for it. At the end of the day, it's more important to us in terms of what it can deliver in the future. It also provides a different vertical in the portfolio that might be defensive in different times in terms of the cyclic nature. That's something we have, and the board has held a view, and we won't move off from. Yes, we continue to get the synergies, but really our efforts are around what we've taken you through in previous times around how we expect to unlock value in Davey. Okay. Thanks, Graeme. Thanks, Martin. Your next question comes from Anna Guan with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Morning, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just two quick ones, please. Apologies if these questions have been asked previously. Just firstly, can you guys give some color around your view for inventory level in the industry at the moment? Graeme, would you like to take that? Could you actually repeat that? Because you locked in and I'm not quite sure. Something about the inventory. Please repeat that, Anna. Yeah, man. I was just asking about your feel for the inventory level in the industry at the moment. My apologies. The inventory level in the general industry I think is certainly low. Again, anecdotally, we are seeing some of our competitors operate in DIFOTs of, in some cases as low as 50, but 60s and 70s. We're better than that, thankfully. I certainly think that the level of inventory across the industry has gone through a pretty lean period. It's starting to bounce back, certainly for those companies who are willing to invest and at the end of the day, have to pay a little bit more to get the inventory here to ensure that when somebody walks into a Repco or a Burson's, that your product's on the shelf. Certainly, feedback from our customers would tell us that they've been going through a lean period and they've been desperate for supply. Yeah. I think we can add to that also, Graeme, because we have feedback from the supplier side. Our suppliers supply people, typically not in Australia because we want a pretty exclusive relationship. Around the world, the demand level has spiked. We've been having to have discussions with our suppliers around what we want versus what they can supply. Now, we've got very, very strong supplier relationships. We know our relationships are proper with suppliers, so we're navigating our way through. We can't get 100% of what we want all the time, and we're having to set priorities. Sometimes that means when you want 100 widgets, you've got to take 50 in this shipment and 50 later on, which does deliver some efficiency as well, but we're managing our way through. I think if you're a customer at the lower price or yield end, we do know from some of our factories, they are walking away from the customers that were marginally profitable or distinctly less profitable or giving them less priority. Anecdotally, it would suggest that from both the grain side and the supply side, that the industry remains pretty challenged globally. Fortunate that pre-COVID-19, we were working on those five business fundamentals, one of those was supply surety. Some of the actions we took pre-COVID-19, whether that's a financial interest in our biggest filtration supplier, as an example, or a few other things, that's borne good results through this period. Our level of prioritization has been strong beyond the normal strength we have with our relationships. They're decades old in most of the cases with our suppliers. We put that supplier surety fundamental in place more so actually to protect ourselves against what was going to be a burgeoning Chinese aftermarket and making sure that we remained high on the priority level as those suppliers had the potential to shift their supply domestically. That's been an added benefit, not because we forecast COVID-19, but because we could see what was going to happen in the China aftermarket as well. Yeah. That makes sense. Just secondly, there was a comment in your preso. I think the wording is something like, "The Wesfil brand value proposition is well positioned as government stimulus unwinds." If I'm reading that correctly, does that suggest that some of the premium brands, i.e., Ryco, et cetera, they're outperforming the more value-focused brands across your auto portfolio at the moment? No. We don't disclose specifically the growth rates of some of our businesses that sit in those good, better, best categories. We're seeing decent growth or strong growth in both those stratifications. We just feel that if, and again, it's a bit hard to forecast, but if some of that stimulus unwinds, then that business still remains as a very strong proposition, if indeed, the better or the best or probably the best starts to taper off. To us, it's just another strong and nice defensive part of the stratification we play in. Yeah. Okay. That makes sense. Thanks, guys. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Wichkman for closing remarks. Okay. Thanks, Kelly. Well, the board and the leadership team, we're very pleased with the performance of the business in H1. Clearly, the headline is all around the strong auto performance, and we've talked about that today. We've given the guidance, which we haven't been doing in recent times. I guess the word there is it's a cautious guidance. At the same time, we remain, I think, very confident in the markets we're serving, in the performance in H2 and ongoing, notwithstanding the fact that there are some operational costs that will continue to come through. Naturally, we remain very focused on any challenges that arise through further COVID-related things like mobility restrictions and the like. Certainly, we remain confident. Again, thanks to our employees and also thanks for those who took time to attend today. Looking forward to the smaller group discussions. Thank you.