I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Martin Nicholas, the Group's CFO. Please go ahead. Good morning to everybody joining today's call. I'm Martin Nicholas, Breville's Group CFO, and it's my pleasure to welcome you to our financial year 2021 results call. I'll start by walking you through the group's trading performance, and then Jim Clayton, our CEO, will provide an operational and strategic update. We'll be talking to the slide pack that was updated on the ASX about 30 minutes ago. Turning to slide three and our headline results. Firstly, sales. We had a remarkable year this year with total sales of nearly AUD 1.2 billion. The accelerated demand we saw in the first half carried on into the second half. Increased consumer demand, driven by both the requirement and the wish to work from home, coupled with our continued geographic expansion, outweighed logistical challenges and a weakening U.S. dollar in the second half to deliver 24.7% sales growth and 37% growth in our key Global Product segment in constant currency. Our gross margins improved year on year as our increased average selling price, driven by improved mix and lower promotional activity, outpaced the headwinds of cost inflation, including increased manufacturing and shipping costs. In FY 2021, the tailwinds more than balanced these inflationary headwinds. As we look to FY 2022, inflationary pressures seem set to continue, and we will take price rises where appropriate to protect our margins. In FY 2021, with core overheads kept in check, we reinvested our operating leverage into the medium-term growth drivers of R&D, marketing, and IT, while still delivering an accelerating absolute profit growth. FY 2021 EBIT grew 24% over normalized FY 2020 EBIT, or 39% over statutory EBIT. We had a couple of accounting policy and estimate changes in the second half, SaaS capitalization and NPD amortization. These two largely offset each other at the EBIT level, so I won't spend much time on these technicalities today, but a full explanation of their impact is included both within the results announcement and notes to the accounts. In terms of cash flow, we ended the year with net cash in line with prior year, despite funding strong business growth and the purchase of Baratza. Our working capital remains below equilibrium by approximately AUD 80 million as delivery challenges, including the Suez Canal blockage, the four-week closure of the Yantian port in China, and inbound port delays suppressed our in-country stock levels and customer deliveries late in the half. With EPS at AUD 0.658, our full-year dividend of AUD 0.265 per share, 100% franked, reflects the Group's previously announced target payout ratio of 40%, designed to encourage our ability to internally fund numerous growth opportunities. In summary, FY 2021 was an operationally challenging but positive year. Sales grew strongly. We reinvested these gains into future growth drivers. Overall, I must say I'm delighted by how our team and processes absorbed the volatility experienced during the year and kept delivering for our retail partners and customers. Turning to slide four, we see key segment performances. Our Global Product segment carried its sales momentum from the first half through to the second half, delivering 37% sales growth for the year on a constant currency basis. The continued working from home reality, even outside of lockdowns, supported broad-based category growth. We continued our strategic geographic expansion even during lockdowns. Our Distribution segment grew at 8.4%, with double-digit growth in the more premium Breville local offering offset by lower growth in Kambrook and Nespresso. Of course, most importantly, the Distribution segment fulfilled its strategic role by delivering AUD 2.4 million in incremental EBIT to reinvest in the Global segment. Turning to slide five. In terms of Global Product sales by geography, all theaters delivered strong double-digit growth with gains across all categories. Working from home reality accelerated growth in all our geographies, with the impact varying with different consumer and retailer experiences as well as lockdown patterns across the key markets. In the Americas, the Group delivered 27.6% constant currency growth, with bricks and mortar retailers largely open by the end of the period but disrupted during the year. The theater was somewhat constrained by deliveries late in the year, but still posted growth comfortably above the long-term average for the geography. We also entered Mexico in the fourth quarter. In EMEA, despite on-off retail lockdown disruption, the region performed well, delivering 58.4% growth. U.K. sales held up across the year, and mainland Europe posted strong growth in both new and existing markets. Our entry into France was completed in quarter one, and Portugal and Italy were added in quarter four. In dollar terms, EMEA's Global Product growth outstripped both the Americas and APAC itself achieved good second half growth of 24%, after a remarkable first half of over 49%, to deliver a full-year constant currency sales growth of 37%. In APAC, retail stayed largely accessible to consumers throughout the year, and the region was supported by nimble supply chain management, with inventory levels almost restored to normal by the end of the period. Nothing special to say about relative gross margins, which remained similar across the key geographies. Jim will cover this more in his section, but it is noteworthy that in the Global Product segment, EMEA is now larger than APAC, and the two together now match the Americas. Turning to page six, funds generation and usage. On this slide, we pictorially show how we reinvested our gains in gross profits while still delivering an accelerating EBIT growth. All the numbers on this chart are showing the movements against a normalized FY 2020, which was AUD 12 million above our statutory EBIT in that year. In FY 2021, sales were strong, and gross margins were boosted by a premiumization of mix and lower promotional spend, more than offsetting inflationary pressure. Overall gross profit dollars grew by AUD 92 million or 29%. With the objective of driving medium-term growth, more than 50% of this incremental gross profit or AUD 49 million was reinvested in go-to-market capability, and specifically our digital offense, in new product development, and in our IT team and corporate platform. This is consistent with our strategy of increasing our investment year on year to enhance our go-to-market effectiveness, to upgrade our new product development capability, and to increase our technology-based competitive advantage. Outside of these three priorities, core overheads and OpEx were well controlled, delivering operating leverage. We did invest in extra customer service heads and supply chain heads. Incremental Baratza overheads were acquired, and the team were awarded bonuses in FY 2021. Outside of these increases, overheads were kept largely flat and overall declined as a percentage of sales. Our resulting EBIT was increased by AUD 26.5 million, growing at 24.1%, an acceleration from the 16.2% in the prior period. We both generated and invested incremental funds while healthily accelerating our bottom line. Turning to slide seven on the balance sheet. Here we see the impact of our below- equilibrium working capital flowing through our reported numbers. Under normal conditions, the group structurally invests in working capital to drive growth. However, despite 24% sales growth, FY 2021 working capital was on a par with the prior year, which itself was low. June 30, 2021, working capital is, as I said before, approximately AUD 80 million below normal or equilibrium levels. Reported inventory levels recovered a little towards the end of the year. However, over a third of this was still on the water by June 30, with in-house or in-warehouse inventory only recovering 10% from the low of June 2020. Our receivables balances actually dipped below prior year, with an excellent improvement in collections and debtor days across the Group, coupled with a weakening U.S. dollar and constrained deliveries at the tail end of the half. Our payables balances largely grew in line with the business. Collectively, this resulted in working capital flat on prior year at about AUD 80 million below equilibrium, with cash about AUD 80 million higher than the norm. This imbalance should unwind during FY 2022, as we aim to rebuild our inventory balances and receivables normalize. Our intangible assets of AUD 230 million grew by AUD 86 million over the prior comparable period due to the acquisition of Baratza in September 2020 and our continued NPD new product development investment. IT capitalization has largely been removed from both this and last year's balance under new SaaS accounting policies. At 30th of June 2021, the Group had a net cash position of AUD 129.9 million, which reflects our above-mentioned equilibrium working capital position. We are planning for a significant rebuild of working capital and cash outflow in FY 2022 as we transition back to a more efficient state. We have adequate cash and debt facilities in place for this planned rebuild. Now finally turning to slide eight. I hope that that unpacking of our reported numbers has been helpful in what I can only describe as an interesting year, and the key messages I'd like you to take away from this year's financial results are firstly, we had a strong sales year with the global working from home trend driving a year of accelerated revenue and gross profits. We used this accelerated gross profit to lean into our key medium-term growth drivers, namely marketing, product development, and IT, while still delivering a 24% increase in EBIT. Outside of these priorities, other costs were well contained, and our working capital and net cash positions are not at equilibrium, and we plan to correct this in FY 2022. With that summary, on that note, I'll now pass to Jim Clayton, our CEO, to provide an operational and strategic update. Thank you, Martin, and good morning to everyone. Turning to slide nine. Now that Martin has covered the results from what was a very dynamic and interesting year, I'm going to summarize our execution in FY 2021, take you through an analytic back testing of our Acceleration Program, and I will end with an update on COVID and the current state of play. Before we get started, I want to touch base on what you won't see. As we have grown, we've become more visible. It appears as though some of our competitors are now copying almost everything we do, both in our go-to-market and product. While we appreciate the attention, there's no point in making things any easier than they need to be. Considering this, I will revert to the reporting approach we used in FY 2016 through FY 2018, meaning I will only disclose things after they have happened. Specifically, you will not see product that is not launched, nor will I discuss geographies on the to-do list. I will report out on these activities once they've occurred. Turning to slide 10. In the first half of FY 2021, I said that COVID had not materially impacted the cadence of our acceleration program execution. I believe the next few slides will support this statement. In FY 2021, we launched three new colors across the range. I'm using the toaster as an example, but these new colors are available across many SKUs. Of particular note is black stainless steel. Given the association between stainless steel and our brand, this one will be interesting to watch. We launched a series of new products across beverage, cooking, and food prep. The Fast Slow GO is a more approachable pressure cooker. The Bambino solidified the bottom of the coffee range, delivering the four elements of cafe- quality coffee in a compact footprint. The Creatista Pro redefined the top of the range for our Nespresso capsule products. The HydroPro and HydroPro Plus deliver commercial quality sous vide performance. The FoodCycler is a product designed to help customers recycle food waste. With the Combi Wave 3 in 1, the Compact Wave, and the Pizzaiolo, we launched the 240-volt versions into Europe and Australia. Turning to slide 11. FY 2021 was an active year for geographic expansion. COVID extended much of the France entry into FY 2021. The EMEA theater followed with both Portugal and Italy, while the Americas went live in Mexico. This was the first year we had two theaters executing geographic expansion simultaneously. All new geographies are performing as expected this early in their life cycle. Turning to slide 12. We acquired an integrated Baratza. Baratza brings a team that extends our coffee expertise, and it delivers a coffee grinding range from entry to light commercial. Baratza is performing exceptionally well post-close. Baratza also gave us the opportunity to test our new corporate platform. Did we design the system to quickly integrate an acquisition? Answer, yes. Baratza transactions are executing 100% on the corporate platform. All that remains is porting their website to our infrastructure. Turning to slide 13. FY 2021 was a busy year for the technology services team. With Canada and Baratza going live on August 1st this month, all that remains is Australia, which we will take live in the second half of FY 2022, as well as any new geographies we enter in FY 2022. With the corporate platform now fully deployed in the Northern Hemisphere, we are well prepared for future acquisitions. While it's a touch too early to tell, the next few years may hold interesting opportunities on this front. Turning to slide 14. In FY 2021, we achieved a few milestones with our acceleration program. Breville, as a whole, crossed the AUD 1 billion revenue mark. In our Global segment, EMEA is now larger than Asia-Pac, and mainland Europe is now bigger than the U.K. While we still have a long way to go, all appears to be heading in the right direction. Turning to slide 15. We've been executing the acceleration program since FY 2017. Enough time has passed for us to analytically back test the success of this program. Slide 16. In FY 2017, I used this framework to describe the acceleration program. Selling more product into a larger market on a scalable platform with a growth-oriented business model. Slide 17. I followed with a slide that showed if we pulled this off, we would create a reinforcing loop which would sustain the acceleration. Slide 18. Typically, when a company adopts a strategy of invest heavily with the promise of a revenue hockey stick years later, EBIT tends to suffer in the early years. While our acceleration program shared the investment characteristics, I made a commitment at the beginning of the program that we would execute the business model transformation without stealing from EBIT. At least on this, we have held our commitment. Not only have we not stolen from EBIT, but we have grown EBIT at an increasing rate over the period we've been executing the acceleration program. Turning to slide 19. As I mentioned when we started the program, public companies typically don't execute business model transformations. Instead, the company is taken private, the business model is fixed, and then it is refloated. Given the strength of Breville's innovation engine, I believed we could fix the plane while it was flying. The core challenge was figuring out how to evolve the business model, moving from spending 8% of net sales on marketing and R&D to 12% as the floor while simultaneously growing EBIT. There are four EBIT-neutral levers you can pull to accomplish this, and we have pulled all of them over the last five years. First is operational efficiency. Find ways to improve productivity in non-growth-related functions and reallocate those savings to marketing and R&D. Second, leverage the Distribution segment as an internal funding mechanism. Turn the segment around so that it grows, and take the incremental EBIT growth and reinvest those dollars into the growth engine of the global segments. Third, create operating leverage in the business as it scales and reinvest the incremental dollars into marketing and R&D. Finally, four, grow the business in constant currency faster than EBIT growth and invest the incremental gross profit dollars into marketing and R&D. The table in the slide shows the relationship between the constant currency growth rate of the Global segment and our annual EBIT growth. While we have not yet achieved our target business model of spending at least 12% of net sales on marketing and R&D, we have made significant progress against this goal using all four EBIT-neutral levers. COVID certainly threw a wrench into the program timing, but I am confident we will get there. Turning to slide 20. Before analytically testing the success of the acceleration program, I want to first set some context. The acceleration program began in earnest in FY 2017. We have three levers we can pull to accelerate the top line. First, investing more into marketing and R&D as a percentage of net sales, which gives us more product and more market. Second, geographic expansion, which is more market. Acquisitions, more product, and maybe more market as the third lever. This slide shows which levers have been in play across each of the three theaters over time. In Asia-Pac, whatever growth it has experienced has come entirely from improving the business model. In the Americas, apart from the non-material acquisition of ChefSteps in FY 2020, the Americas has been solely dependent on increased spending on marketing and R&D through FY 2020. In FY 2021, the Americas entered Mexico at the end of the year, and we acquired Baratza. EMEA initially did not benefit from the business model change, except for the U.K., because we had a distributor-led go-to-market model across the region. In FY 2018, we started the transition to a direct model in Western Europe by entering Germany. As we flipped countries to a direct model, the region was able to leverage the increased investment in marketing and R&D. To summarize, for Asia-Pac and the Americas, any acceleration would come solely from increased spending on marketing and R&D. For EMEA, it would be a mix of geographic expansion and increased spending on marketing and R&D beginning in FY 2018. Turning to slide 21. Looking at Asia-Pac, a theater relying solely on the growth lever of increased spending on marketing and R&D, we see the average annual growth rate of the Global segment has increased from 3.3% during FY 2014 through FY 2016 to 11.1% during FY 2017 through FY 2020. This is a 7.8% increase in the average annual growth rate. At least for Asia-Pac, the historical performance data suggests that our decision to invest more into marketing and R&D has resulted in annual revenue acceleration. You'll notice that while I've included FY 2021 on the slide, I have not used it in the CAGR analysis. FY 2021 is a COVID year, with them precluding from the CAGR analysis. FY 2021 data is COVID-infected data and thus not considered valid for year-over-year analysis. Turning to slide 22. Prior to changing the business model, the Global segment in the Americas was growing at 8.7% in constant currency, the CAGR from 2014 through 2016. As we began incrementally improving the business model year after year, the average annual top-line growth accelerated to 12.3%, the CAGR from 2017 through 2020. This is a 3.6% increase in the annual growth rate for the theater. Looking beneath the numbers, the impact is understated. The FY 2014 through FY 2016 growth in the Americas was driven by Canada coming online. To help you appreciate the magnitude, the U.S. grew 1% in constant currency from FY 2014 through FY 2016. Another data point suggesting the drive to spending 12% of net sales on marketing and R&D is working. Turning to slide 23. With EMEA, we see a much more dramatic change. From FY 2014 through 2017, the period where we were in a distributor-led go-to-market model except for the U.K., the average annual growth rate for the Global segment was -2.1%. It's worth noting that the U.K. was growing during this period. Once we kicked off the transition to a direct model, the tables turned, and we began growing rapidly in the theater. This go-to-market change, coupled with increased investment in marketing and R&D, drove the average annual top-line growth rate from -2.1% to 34.4%. Turning to slide 24. Rolling all three theaters together, from FY 2014 through 2016, the Global segment had an average annual top-line growth rate of 3.1%. Once we started investing more into marketing and R&D and pulling the other growth levers, the average annual growth rate increased to 14.6% across the financial year of FY 2017 through 2020. Turning to slide 25. Focusing on our new geography offense, we can see improvement there as well. In this slide, I'm comparing Breville's entry into the U.K. with Breville's entry into Germany and the other Western European countries. This bar chart starts at the first full year of revenue for each geography. Using our more aggressive approach for entering new geographies, Western Europe has generated more revenue in its third year than the U.K. did in its eighth year. If you look at the CAGR lines for the U.K., you'll see that the U.K. showed the same acceleration pattern as the Americas and Asia-Pac from our decision to invest more into marketing and R&D. Turning to slide 26. Put all of this together, and you get an accelerating business that is improving the geographic diversification of its revenue base. While the Americas has grown at a steady clip from FY 2017 to FY 2021, it now represents 50% of the business, down from 57% in FY 2017. If all theaters continue the current trajectory, this diversification will continue to improve. Turning to slide 27. Looking at the company's performance from FY 2014 through FY 2020, the data thus far supports the following conclusions. First, the strategy of an innovation-driven company migrating its business model to spending more on marketing and R&D is working. Second, geographic expansion is helping to drive the top line and further diversify the revenue base. Third, the more aggressive approach for entering new countries is delivering accelerated performance. Turning to slide 28. Now on to the topic of the day, which is COVID. Slide 29. Before we get to the tactics of COVID, it's worth mentioning that this once- in- a- 100-year pandemic is touching everyone in one way or another. Far, we are thankful that we have not lost a Breville team member to the virus, but we have lost family members. We now find ourselves in a global brag race between vaccine rollouts and the spread of the Delta variant. To repeat commentary from my first half report out, we are not done with COVID. This is a marathon, not a sprint. Assuming the vaccines are successful in significantly reducing the mortality rate of the Delta variant and whatever the next variant will be, FY 2022 looks like it is shaping up to be a transitional year of sorts. We're moving from the entire world being in lockdown to country-specific vaccine rollout cadences with different rates of opening up while still experiencing regional lockdowns. At the macro level, consumers have pent-up savings and economies grow as they open, but as they open, consumers will begin to diversify their spending pattern to include services. It's too early to tell how these countervailing forces will play out for the small domestic appliance market, or how it will play for Breville specifically as we sit on top of a constant currency prior- year profit plus 37% for the Global segment. On the front lines, we are wrestling with everything reported in the news. The U.S. dollar has fallen across all currencies, though it has stabilized as of late. Supplier costs have increased in the way of intermittent part shortages, though so far, we have resolved each instance that has arisen. The global logistics backbone is stretched and erratic as it is impacted by local events, which, coupled with increased demand, drives up transportation prices. Finally, as the Delta variant spreads across the world, the unpredictability of how countries or local regions will respond is on the rise with the potential to further disrupt supply or demand or drive additional delays into logistics. From a Breville perspective, COVID is a tactical ripple in the demand- supply line like Trump's tariffs or Brexit. The primary difference being it is global, a global multi-year phenomenon. We have seen nothing during the COVID period that has had any measurable impact on our go-forward strategy. More products into a larger market on a scalable platform with a growth-oriented business model. To offset some of the net input price increases, net of currency, we will raise price incrementally where appropriate. Our tactical approach to the uncertainty of FY 2022 is a more refined and targeted approach to the offense we ran in FY 2021, which is high-low. High inventory for the high side of planned variance with the goal of overshooting and then selling back to the demand line in the second half while running costs tight as a hedge against the low side of the variance range. As long as actual demand falls within these two high-low goalposts, we will converge our execution across the year to meet the actual demand line. With that, I will now hand back to the moderator who will open the call for questions. Thank you. 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. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. We ask that all participants limit their question to one per turn and if you have any further question you will need to rejoin the queue. Your first question comes from Alexander Mees with Morgans. Please go ahead. Thanks very much. Good morning, Jim and Martin. My one question will be around average selling prices. Martin, you mentioned that they're up on the basis of improved mix and lower promotional activity. I just wondered if you could comment on your experience with like-for-like sales price increases for the same products. Yeah. Just to expand on that. Twenty twenty-one, we didn't take any significant price increases product to product. It was much more about the lower promotional spend. There were a few that flowed through in Australia early in the year, but it was more around less promotional spend rather than an increase in existing prices in FY 2021. Great. Thank you. Your next question comes from Tim Lawson with Macquarie. Please go ahead. Hi, Jim and Martin. Thanks for taking my question. Just on slide six, that EBIT bridge FY 2020, FY 2021, can you just expand on your comments around marketing R&D, IT, and overhead in regard to whether you can sort of talk through what's person and what's pull forward, what's COVID? Just trying to understand those movements, actually, before so we can think about that going forward, please. Yeah. Shall I start with that, Jim? Yeah, go ahead. Of the AUD 49 million looking forward, about AUD 29 million was in marketing or go-to-market and about AUD 10 million and AUD 10 million across tech services and global product. Of the amount that was in marketing, about two-thirds of that was on platforms, experience hubs, content development items that, yes, were pulled forward, but didn't necessarily drive demand in that period. As we move into FY 2022, if we spend about a similar amount on marketing, more of it will be orientated towards demand generation or media in the market. The stuff we pulled forward was about capability development. Okay. That's clear. Thanks. Your next question comes from Apoorv Sehgal with UBS. Please go ahead. Good morning, Jim and Martin. Guys, clearly some continued strong top-line momentum in the second half of the year. Just interested in the outlook commentary for FY 2022. In the slide deck, you talked about the challenges of cycling FY 2021 comps, and consumers likely to shift share of spend to services. Have you actually seen any changes in customer behavior or demand trends over the last couple of months in places like the U.S. and Europe, where vaccination programs are well developed and people are sort of going out to restaurants and pubs? The window that you called is very tight. I think the best I can tell you, we've started 2022 in a solid position. I don't think there's enough data, honestly, to judge it one way or the other. So far we haven't, but I'd just flag it as a thing to watch. Thank you. Your next question comes from Sam Haddad with Bell Potter. Please go ahead. Hi, Jim. Hi, Martin. My question is, in terms of the supply chain, can you talk about what you're seeing now through July and August, and how you plan to build your inventory ahead of the key trading period in Black Friday and Christmas? From memory, you like to plan ahead early, ahead of some of the other global players. I just wanted to see how you're going to have to adjust your strategy given the constraints you're seeing and what you're actually seeing now. Thank you. Sam, we're not adjusting the strategy. You're living with the reality, so to speak. One of the things that Martin talked about was this kind of tail that we saw, a tightening that we saw at the end of this period, and that was basically the Yantian port shutting down for four weeks. That's kind of like pulling on the rope while you're water skiing or something, right? It just created some slack. What we were seeing as we went in, this is March, April, right on plan, we saw April inventory pass the year before, we were up and to the right, then you see this kind of four-week lag. That just pushes everything to the right, so to speak. The orders are there. The good news, if you really break this thing down into its pieces that you have to manage, it's first of all, are you going to get the parts you need? Second, are you going to get them made? Then third, get them on the water and across. The good news for us so far is we have completely managed one and two, and now it's just about putting them on the boat and moving it across. The orders are there, the products are there. Now we just need to move them. It's container rates going up, all this other bit, but we're in the move it stage. Okay. Thank you. Your next question comes from James Casey with Ord Minnett. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning, gentlemen. I just wonder if you could make a comment on potential new geographies for this financial year. Obviously, you added m ultiple territories in FY 2021. Have you got enough on your hands at the moment, or are there plans to add further geographies for FY 2022? I really do the best I can to make sure my team doesn't get bored. If I had them going into new countries in FY 2021 during hard lockdown, you can guess that we will be going into more countries in FY 2022. Okay. I guess your comments earlier with not flagging things to your competition, we'll just see those announced as you, I guess, enter those countries. Is that fair? Exactly. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, gents. Your next question comes from Ben Gilbert with Jarden Australia. Please go ahead. Hello, guys. A question around some of the structural changes we've sort of seen through COVID, and what a few of the global leaders such as yourself are talking to in brands is it seemed like some sort of Nike, Samsung, et cetera, are talking about sort of two big opportunities. One, around online and more direct to consumer, and secondly, around trying to sort of make this more structural in terms of reduced levels of promotional activity. Could talk to those two opportunities for your business in terms of D2C and ability to sort of bank some of the reduced levels of promotional intensity you've been able to do over the last 12 months? We've been working on kind of improving our online execution since FY 2017. There's nothing about COVID that had changed other than our ability to pull some of the to-do list forward into FY 2021, which Martin was talking about, which is pulling, accelerating capability building on the digital offense. In that world, I mean, the good news is we didn't wake up in COVID and say, "My goodness, we should focus on online." We were always doing that, and it's just a function of what we thought was going to be the right answer in the long run anyway. Effectively kind of no change there. On banking the kind of the reduced promotional spend, I mean, effectively that was, if you look at the waterfall chart that Martin showed, that's exactly what we did. Then we took that and reinvested the lion's share of it back into the medium growth drivers. I guess I would say I agree with Nike and Samsung in that way. I mean, that was the advantage of FY 2021 at some level. Do you think you've got to hold onto that looking forward? I know you talked to sort of promotions might need to come back, but do you think you've got to hold on to some of that? Look, the answer is either yes or no. Honestly, I approach it that way, which is, we continue to accelerate supporting digital, and we want our end customers to be able to learn about our products in whatever way they want to. The better we get at that across all the touch points, the better off they are. That's not going to stop anyway. If it turns out that there's some structural event that now all of a sudden consumers are going to stick with more digital, well, great, because we were going to do that whether they do or don't, honestly. Same with the promotional side of the equation. If there isn't a need to promote, then why would you? Kind of at some level, that's effectively what we did for 2021, was stopped it because we were having enough trouble keeping up with demand as it is. We certainly didn't want to accelerate it. To me, promotion is a very tactical thing anyway, and Breville is, in general, not terribly promotive to begin with. There's a couple times a year when we'll do something, we don't do it that often anyway. Within that model, if demand keeps driving itself and we don't need to, we'll still kind of invest in launching products and different things like that. Promotion has never been a really big driver in our top line anyway. I'm not quite sure how much benefit there is to grab for us specifically. That's helpful. Thanks, Jim. Cheers. The next question comes from Apoorv Sehgal with UBS. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my follow-up question. Just a question on the marketing and R&D as a percentage of sales. It looks like in the presentation that you've hit the 12% number in FY 2021. Could you please confirm that? Also, is that likely to go up further in FY 2022 or hold stable? I'll tell you the honest truth, which is we didn't calculate. It's something I should have asked Martin. When COVID started, I said we were not gonna measure that metric. Because given how we spent marketing, it's not the same the way that we spent marketing dollars in 2017, 2018, and 2019. Martin, you may actually know the answer to the question. I never looked because I said I wasn't gonna look at that metric during COVID. It was really when we got on the other side, then we're apples to apples. Martin, I'll hand it back to you if you've got more to add. Not much more to add, Jim. Yeah, Apoorv, I would say nearly, but not quite. We're getting very close to the 12%, but we're not quite there yet. We spent a lot on IT, rolling out the global platform this year, and that's why we've shown that spend as well. On marketing and NPD together, not quite at our 12%, given the 24% sales growth this year, we didn't quite make it. Sure. Thanks. Just to kind of chase off the back of that. For me, it doesn't count. It's great if we got close, but those marketing dollars were not spent the way you would expect them to be spent in a normal year. If we put enough headroom in the business model to do it, that's great. For me, we're not apples to apples. The next question comes from Alexander Mees with Morgans. Please go ahead. Thank you. Just a quick follow-up question. Martin, you mentioned that working capital is about AUD 80 million below equilibrium. I wonder if you could just split that out between inventories and receivables, please. Yeah. They're both a bit down. You can see inventory stepped up towards the end of the year, but a lot of that was still under water rather than in the warehouse. Receivables were particularly low at the end of the period. I would be putting about 50/50, literally. I haven't done the split out for sure, but about 50/50. The inventories we'd like to rebuild higher and receivables naturally will rebuild from a very low position because we had some constrained sales at the end of June. Probably 50/50 or a little bit more inventory and a little bit less receivables. That's very clear. Thank you. Your next question comes from Annabelle Diamond with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Good morning, Jim and Martin. Two quick questions from me. Just firstly, your comment around not announcing geographies or new product launches is interesting. Obviously, our competitors are watching you far more closely now. Aside from that, are you able to talk to how your business might be building more competitive moats, or how you might have to change strategy a little bit, sort of go unnoticed or sort of more strategically enter regions to avoid that attention? Let's see what's the best way to answer that question. I would say we don't need to— I haven't changed anything we're doing because we were naturally heading down that path anyway. It's just playing a rear view game instead of a forward view. It hasn't—h onestly, I'm just thinking about it real time. It's just do more of what we were going to do. To be fair, we're running about as fast as the team can run. I don't really think there's an adjust that we need to make. Okay, fair enough. Just secondly, obviously, you're seeing some cost increases and there's been some challenges sourcing parts. I just wanted to check, are you comfortable sort of with your footprint in terms of where you're sourcing manufactured product, or do you feel like you need to diversify sourcing at all? I know in the past you've said that where you are sourcing, obviously you're comfortable with that. Sort of given recent developments, do you see any sort of need to change that in the future? Yeah. Annabel, I answer that question a little bit like Trump's tariffs, which is when you're in the middle of a COVID-driven ripple, it's kind of rippling all over, and it's moving in random places. I don't know that that drives long-term thinking. It's kind of more just dealing with the short-term, whatever it is, wherever it happened, because it's relatively random in how it's rolling around. We can, over the long term, think about diversification, and that becomes a function of two things, which is one, when do you have enough flow out the front to support multi-site manufacturing? Second then becomes the kind of the longer task of, well, where would you land it and do they have the capability and how do you build the capability and so forth. I think that's a normal thing that happens when companies get bigger, and the question just becomes a function of whether Breville has enough revenue and velocity to support kind of multi-site manufacturing. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Your next question comes from John Hynd with Wilsons. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning, Jim and Martin. Thanks for taking my question. On the new products, perhaps we could talk about the Baratza acquisition. You've said it's performing ahead of expectations and has brought some pretty good expertise to the category. Can we perhaps discuss some of the key learnings you've made so far from that acquisition? Both, I guess, internally and externally, and where you're seeing the main traction and the potential you've got or the plans you've got for the brand in the medium term. You had me all the way until the last question, which is I'm not going to talk about future. Sorry. It's your job to ask, mine to say no. When I think about the learnings, the cool part about it is, and I know I talk about the platform a lot, but it was another opportunity to test the platform. This is the first acquisition we have done where we integrated into the new technology platform, as opposed to the old one. That was the big learning, which is, look, it wasn't a huge company, but you still have to go through all the steps. That tells us that this new corporate platform that we're rolling out is what we thought it was, and that you can fold in acquisitions on a timeline that we expected to be able to do that. I think that's great. I think for the Baratza itself, what I thought was just great is the two founders spent 20 years building an outstanding coffee grinding range from, kind of $100 and whatever, $50, $70, all the way up to almost $1,000 USD. They've got a really nice range, which was something that on the Breville, we have one, kind of two, but basically one. I know we've talked a lot about category thinking and so forth, and what was really great was that with that one transaction, we were able to pull in what I thought was an important piece of the overall offense with a really outstanding team behind it. Great. Thank you very much. Yeah. Your next question comes from Joseph Michael with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Morning, Jim. Morning, Martin. Just had a question on the gross margin outlook, and I think you've sort of partly touched on this, but just trying to understand the sort of cost pressures or the cost headwinds. Will they be fully offset by price increases? Should we expect a flat gross margin into 2022, or will the price increases only partially offset them, so we could actually see gross margins contracting into FY 2022? I'd say, Joseph, that the cost pressures continue to surprise me, especially on the container costs. It just seems to, at the moment, hold no bounds as to where they will go to. We will definitely be looking to recover through price, whether that will exactly balance those cost pressures, some of which are temporary in nature, will depend on how fast and how long they last for. This year, we balanced quite nicely. In fact, we were actually ahead of the equation. The tailwinds were stronger than the headwinds. Looking into next year, the headwinds appear to be growing in momentum, and we'll see what consumers will tolerate and actually take in the marketplace. It's difficult to call at this stage. Suffice to say, it's a very hot topic of conversation and management within the Group. Maybe two things to add, just to put a little bit of context around that. Martin, you can chase this if you want. One important piece to internalize, because I know everybody that's reporting has the same sad story of container costs. Logistics is a relatively small percent of our COGS. First, you need to frame it within what percent of the COGS are we actually wrestling with. The second bit is the function of currency and how that plays through, where in some instances, because of currency movement, that delta kind of can net you out on one country or another. If the currency strengthens by 5% and your inbound costs went by 5%, then you're right where you were. I think you've got to figure out first what's the net impact, and then secondly, what percent of the COGS are you actually dealing with. It's a relatively small percent for us, though obviously if prices go up, they go up, right? Trump's tariffs were much bigger. That's the way to describe it. That was a much bigger beast to wrestle than dealing with incremental costs from a logistics line. Martin, you may want to clean some of that up. Yeah, no, I'd agree with that direction, Jim. In terms of volumes of containers moving across the world, we're not huge. We probably shift around 6,000 or so containers a year in a normal-ish year. Normally you wouldn't find us talking about ocean freight. It wouldn't be a big part of our FOB or COGS at all. Some of the step spot prices we're seeing at the moment are large, and therefore you probably will, this year for one year only, hear us talking a bit about it, Joseph. It's not the biggest number in our P&L by any means. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Your next question comes from Sam Haddad with Bell Potter. Please go ahead. Yeah, thank you. Just one follow-up from me. Can you talk a bit more about acquisition opportunities? You mentioned before vendor expectations may be inflated given where sales are at. What's the update on that front and timing-wise as to whether you think it's the right time to be more active on that front? Thank you. I mean, as I've always said, you never get to decide when somebody's ready to sell at a price you're willing to pay. What I would say is on the sales side of the equation, there's two kinds of sellers. Sellers that appreciate how different the last 12 months have been and effectively off historical trend and can contemplate that within the construct of a transaction, and then the sellers who, whether they actually internalize it, want to pretend that they don't. At least for the second group, I think when you get 12 months down the road and they get to comp it, and the year after that, when they get back on kind of their CAGR line, if you want to call it that, then the gig's up and everybody's reasonable across all the bits and pieces. That's kind of one theory. The second theory becomes, look, this is a tactically challenging environment to work through. It's possible that some might not navigate it very well. In that instance, time is not on their side. I think that may also get some players a bit more interested in finding someone to partner up with. Again, this is all abstraction, we'll see if it comes true. All right. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time, and that does conclude your conference for today. Thank you for participating, and you may now disconnect.