Half year results briefing. I'm joined this morning by our CEO and Managing Director, Mauro Neves, and our Chief Financial Officer, Paul Victor. The materials we'll be covering today have been lodged with the Australian Securities Exchange and can be found on the ASX and Incitec Pivot Limited's websites. At the end of the presentation, we'll have time for questions, and an audio recording of this presentation will also be available on the company's website. I'd like to draw your attention to the disclaimer found on slide two and on slide three. Before we move into the main presentation, I'd like to start with an acknowledgment of country. I'd like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land we are coming to you from today, the Wurundjeri peoples of the Eastern Kulin Nation. I pay my respects to the elders past, present, and emerging. Thank you. Now I'd like to hand over to Mauro. Thank you, Geoff. Good morning, and welcome, everyone. It's a privilege to be here today presenting my first half-year results for IPL, following my appointment as CEO in January. During my first few months, I have been meeting customers, employees, and stakeholders across our two great businesses. The feedback has been important to help understand our customers' vision for the resources sector and how we win as a global explosives player. I've also been meeting with our fertilizers team and gaining insights on the business. This brings me to our announcement today on the fertilizers sale process. I'm really pleased to share that we have advanced negotiations on the potential sale of our fertilizers business with our prospective buyer, Pupuk Kaltim, or PKT. This is one of the largest fertilizers producers in Asia, and should the sale go ahead, is well-placed to continue and grow IPF's operation. I'll detail more during the presentation. It's in the context of our sale progress that I will cover the key areas outlined here on Slide 6. As always, we'll start with safety, our number one priority. I'll then provide you with a snapshot of our business performance during the first half and explain the leadership team's key areas of focus. I will present the progress we made on strategic initiatives and technology innovation, and how we are focusing on transforming Dyno Nobel into a truly global business that can reach its full value. Paul will then take you through our group financial performance and outlook before we turn to Q&A. Now, turning to safety on Slide 7, please. Zero Harm has always been a priority throughout my career, and I have been impressed by the commitment to safety from our people. Our teams care for each other. In February, we lost a much-loved colleague in a fatal incident on a public road. We were very sadly reminded why the commitment to Zero Harm is so important. Our colleague was traveling between Mount Isa and Phosphate Hill, and her passing was deeply felt across our business. We are committed to preventing such a tragedy from ever happening again, and our response include a global safety stand down. Looking more broadly at our Zero Harm metrics, we are disappointed with our rate of recordable injuries. It's unacceptable for our people and their families. At 106, which includes the fatal road incident, this number is above our 0.8 target for financial year 2024. Our leaders are continuing to take significant actions as part of our Safety Breakthrough campaign. This includes being more visible in the field and increased focus on risk management and critical control verifications. Pleasingly, for the third year running, we continue to have no significant environmental incidents, and our process safety incidents are also down on the same time last year. Looking now at our first half result on the next slide. Our statutory result after tax, including individually material items, was a loss of AUD 148 million, primarily related to the non-cash payment of our fertilizers business. We had strong underlying earnings growth across Dyno Nobel globally and in the Fertilizers Distribution business. We delivered record first half underlying earnings at the Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific, which was up impressive 59%. It was also a record for our Fertilizer Distribution business, which grew 125%. Underlying earnings at our Dyno Nobel Americas business was up 22%. Our headline results reflect changes to our asset portfolio following the sale of Waggaman and closure of Gibson Island. As a result of these changes, EBITDA was AUD 425 million, down 41% on last year. But after rebasing for these items and movements in commodity and exchange rate, underlying earnings were up 18%, with growth in all customer-facing businesses. We're really proud of these high-quality earnings, which is a testament to the disciplined strategy execution of our teams. In Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific, record growth in the first half was driven by customer uptake of our premium technology and successful recontracting with customers. We've been talking to you about this for some time, and the team's hard work is delivering to our numbers. The Dyno Nobel Americas business delivered the underlying earnings growth on the back of improved margins, driven by strong cost control and pricing discipline. The record half results in the Fert distribution business was due to strong customer demand and disciplined supply chain risk management. The team did an excellent job in effectively capturing the demand, improving market share, and meeting the needs of our valued customers. I will address the issues at Phosphate Hill later in this presentation. Our group results underpin our ability to pay an interim dividend of AUD 0.043 per share. This is consistent with our capital allocation framework, and Paul will explain more when he talks through the financial results. We remain committed to the previously announced AUD 900 million market buyback, which we expect to commence after we reach a conclusion for the sale process. I will now turn to the delivery of our strategy across Dyno Nobel and IPF. Dyno Nobel Americas delivered an EBIT of $62 million. This excludes Waggaman following our sales, and is up on the same time last year. In the explosives business, EBIT margin was almost 12%, also solid increase on previous year. We have also grown our earnings in LATAM, where we have a strong Chile-based customer partnership, driven by our premium emulsion and blasting technology. A five-year contract with a global miner has made us the sole provider in North America and expands our supply of explosives, technology, and services across more sites. The strength of our customer partnerships is driving these new and continued business opportunities, and I want to recognize the work of Braden Lusk and his team for the great results and progress. Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific delivered record first half earnings of AUD 180 million, up AUD 29 million on the same time last year. The business delivered an impressive EBIT margin just over 15%. It's a fantastic result and a credit to Greg Hayne's leadership, who, with the DNAP team, are working hard to achieve yet another record in the second half, building on the momentum of our contract renewals. As we grow the revenues of our leading-edge in technology, we help our key customers realize greater value on their drill, drill to mill processes. For example, it was a commitment to invest in the new technologies and ramping up our decarbonization efforts that secured a long-term agreement with Fortescue in Western Australia. Our industry-leading products and technology solutions secured a long-term contract extension with BMA in Queensland. Just an example of our Moranbah contract renewals plan, continuing to progress very well. Pleasingly, Titanobel continues to perform well and deliver to the acquisition business case. The business has a strong future and provide us with a platform to grow by following our customers in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. I would also like to acknowledge Scott Bowman and his talented leadership team for the record first half earnings in the Fert Distribution business. Improving the performance of Phosphate Hill have been the focus on the manufacturing side of the business. The Phosphate Hill Reliability Task Force, which was established last year, has provided dedicated focus and external expertise to help drive sustainable performance of this very important asset. This produce high-quality fertilizers for growers all over Australia. Shareholders would be interested on my first impressions joining the business and areas of focus. Since I started in January, my priority has been on visiting as many of our operations and customer sites as possible, seeking to gain a full picture of how the business works, and importantly, to get to know the people on the frontline. It's been a phenomenal listening and learning tool, and included visits to our operations in Phosphate Hill, Mount Isa, Moranbah, Gibson Island, Helidon, Geelong, Mount Thorley, Kalgoorlie, Cheyenne, Salt Lake, Simsbury, and La Serena in Chile. I've been able to see firsthand what we do well, but also where we can do better and where our potential lies. I have just confirmed my excitement on how much opportunity there is. We have an exciting opportunity to transform Dyno Nobel into a truly global premium explosives business by building on our rich history and legacy. The focus for the fertilizers business will be managing the business for separation and addressing manufacturing issues. Importantly, our leaders and our people are focused on running the business safely, managing our sustainability footprint, and crucially, delivering to our customers. Starting with how we are adjusting our portfolio. As I mentioned, and as this slide outlines, we have advanced negotiations with PKT, a prospective buyer that is well-placed to continue and grow IPF's operations. They are one of the largest urea, ammonia, and NPK fertilizer producers in Asia, with strong global footprint and an existing supply chain into Australia. The next steps are to complete a binding agreement and then necessary regulatory approvals. We are working productively with PKT, who intends to continue supplying fertilizers to the Australian market, support the retention of the IPF workforce, and grow the business. The process is taking some time, and that's been due to the complexities of the transaction. We understand that our shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders are keen to see an outcome. Our team is focused on achieving appropriate value for the IPF business and concluding the process as soon as possible. We expect to start our previously announced on-market buyback program after the conclusion of this process. Looking now at our second area of focus, delivering customer-centric technology. Our technology solutions are giving us competitive advantage and driving margin uplift. These solutions put the customer at the center, drive safety, sustainability, and productivity benefits at their sites. Our digital solution, NobelFire, is designed to provide easy integration with existing customer systems and give them the flexibility to select their fit-for-purpose hardware and sensors. But we're not resting on our laurels. Rob Rounsley and his impressive technology team are safeguarding our technology future by accelerating product development. Our innovation pipeline has six projects already at the launch stage, 14 more coming at the end of financial year 2025, 31 additional initiatives under development. Converting our MPU fleets to renewable energy and investigating the use of biofuel-based explosives are a couple of examples of such initiatives. This brings me to our technology in action at Dyno Nobel. As you can see in Slide 15, over the last four years, we had continued growth in our premium emulsions and electronic detonators. Customers are recognizing the value of our technology, working with us to continue to innovate, and as a result, we are winning new business across our global platform. A great example of this is Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific's agreement extension with Fortescue, which included an innovative, safe, and green technology alliance. In the Americas, the use of our premium technology drove $58 million in value to a global mining customer. Technology, including our Delta E method, helped the mine site significantly improve productivity and fragmentation. Looking to the core, let's now talk about our commercial and operational transformation. We have started work on transforming Dyno Nobel to realize its full value and achieve a substantial step change in return on invested capital. We are leaving no stone unturned in taking a whole of business approach. We're completely reviewing our operational model, aiming for commercial and operational excellence. We are looking at everything, from how we source our materials, price our products with discipline, manage customer relationships, and our workforce capability. We are also focused on effective spend and how we invest capital in target organic growth opportunities, including LATAM and EMEA. It's about putting our energy into the core things we do well, but at a faster and more effective pace. We are well advanced into the scoping phase of transformation, and we will announce next steps at our September Investor Day, with implementation starting soon after. Stable and safe operations release management time to grow and improve the business. Improving manufacturing reliability has been a focus of our capital investment as we look to optimize returns. It's a credit to Stef Di Nicolo and her team that we've recorded really pleasing year-on-year improvements across all of our plants. The exception is Phosphate Hill, and Steph and the broader reliability task force have been working very hard to address these issues. In the month prior to the Cyclone Kirrily floods in February, the plant achieved record production for a January month. Thanks to the business continuity planning by our IPF team, we were well prepared for the flood and able to mitigate and manage the impacts quickly and safely. As per our February update, the plant's production outlook for FY 2024 remains 730,000-770,000 tons. Moving now to the actions we are taking to achieve our net zero 2050 ambition. We continue to make good progress in our decarbonization pathway. As shown in the picture, in April, we officially opened Moranbah's AUD 20 million abatement project. The project provides a 7% reduction in IPL's operational scope one and two greenhouse gas emissions. Sunil Malhotra, who has really been driving our decarbonization efforts, led the team. A similar project at LOMO plant is set to be installed in 2025. This will reduce IPL's greenhouse gas by a further 19%. I want to talk now about my final but critical area of focus: our people, our culture, and capability. The high quality and enthusiasm of our people has been clear to me during my extensive site visits across the business. Thanks for making me feel welcome. Our people want to be part of a high-performing culture aligned to our values. You can see some of these here on this slide, including Zero Harm, delivering on our promises, serving our customers, and continuous improvement. This will help drive our Dyno Nobel transformation. Safety, safety remains our number one priority, and the foundation to everything we do. Led by Rob Milne, we're investing in our people, developing their capability with the skills needed to execute our strategy. We are also addressing frontline skill shortages, thinking outside the box by recruiting diverse talent, new to industry, and transferable skills. Our values are the foundation that underpins our high-performing culture. I'll now hand over to CFO, Paul Victor, to take you through our group financial results. Thank you, Mauro, and good morning to everyone on the call today. I'll start by taking you through the first half results, first, on a statutory basis, and then, secondly, on a normalized basis. Slide 24 shows you how our group's statutory result include the impact of the major restructuring in our asset portfolio during the half year. We reported EBIT, excluding individually material items, of AUD 249 million, which was down from the prior period, mainly due to the sale of Waggaman. The loss reported on an after-tax basis includes IMIs of a negative AUD 312 million, with the impairment of the fertilizer business partially offset by the gain on the sale, on Waggaman. The impairment of the fertilizers was due to a range of factors, including the lower DAP long-term prices and the increased delivered gas cost at Phosphate Hill. Further details of these IMIs are summarized at the end of the presentation pack. Turning to the cash flow and capital investment, as you know, this is a critical point of the year, where our working capital usually builds up. I'm very pleased with our performance in delivering year-on-year improvement in our operating cash flow. Our capital expenditure, excluding WALA, of AUD 181 million, is 14% lower than the previous period, but it is in line with the full year expectations. Please note that the prior period included turnarounds in the DNA business, which were not repeated in the current half. We really remain laser-focused on improving our return on invested capital, and our ROIC, including goodwill, of 5.1%, is down mainly due to the lower fertilizer earnings. We do recognize that this is not where we wanted to be, and we are of the belief that the Dyno Nobel Transformation Program, which Mauro spoke about, will have a significant uplift in EBIT and ROIC over the next 12-24 months. As I said before, everything we do is focused on maximizing returns to our shareholders. Our delivery of a strong underlying earnings growth has enabled us to announce a AUD 0.043 per share interim dividend, which represents a 51% payout ratio. This takes our total dividend per share for the period to AUD 0.145 per share when you include the dividend component of the capital return we completed in February. I will talk more or all about our capital management program later during the presentation. A more meaningful representation of the underlying performance of our business is shown on Slide 25. This slide shows our results on a normalized basis, which excludes the impact of the GI closure, the Waggaman sale, and commodity and FX movements. I'm really proud to say that the group delivered solid underlying earnings growth in all of our customer-facing businesses. This included record first half EBIT in the Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific business, and a record first half EBIT for the fertilizer distribution business. Congratulations to all those teams involved in delivering this performance. It was really a fantastic job that highlights the strength of our business we have. In our Dyno Nobel business, the Dyno Nobel Americas normalized earnings grew at 22%, while our Asia Pacific business delivered an impressive 59% growth. In total, the Dyno Nobel business delivered normalized earnings growth of 35%, benefiting from the strong customer growth, improved pricing, and continued technology take-up. Our fertilizer distribution business had an excellent half and really got on top of the challenge of managing fertilizer supply chains in a complex and dynamic environment. We have been very diligently managing our overheads during the first half of this year, and this has come through in a pleasing 12% improvement in corporate costs versus the prior period. However, the group's cash fixed costs increased by 5.9%, and this is above inflation and is currently under review as part of our Dyno Nobel Transformation program and cost optimization actions in the fertilizer business. Further details will be provided at our Investor Day in September, later this year. Moving on now, and in the next slide, I'll take you through some of the key points about our cash fixed cost, working capital, and our approach to capital allocation. On Slide 26, you can see the increase in our cash fixed cost, which is part reflect our business growth, but also shows the impact of higher cost inflation. Where we had some above inflation cost increases, much of this relates to additional maintenance costs at Phosphate Hill and Moranbah. We have focused on mitigating these cost increases by passing through costs and implementing savings initiatives, but there is still much more to do, and we can do here. A key focus of the current Dyno Nobel Transformation initiative that we are working on is to appropriately reset the cost base, so we drive appropriate returns on a sustainable business into the future. And as I've mentioned, we plan to realize this over the next 12-24 months. I very much look forward to providing you more details on this at our Investor Day in September as I've said. Our initial results show great potential for meaningful improvement in our cost base on a go-forward basis. On Slide 27, you can see the year-on-year movement in working capital. The unwind of overall levels of working capital really reflects the lower commodity price environment. Over the past year, we've introduced several business improvement actions that delivered many benefits in optimizing our working capital investment. We have made a decision to increase our working capital levels temporarily in areas of business growth or managing our strategic stock levels appropriately. We acknowledge that year two, we still have more to do to address the relative levels of working capital in the business. In addition to what I've said before, the Dyno Nobel transformation project will also be instrumental in delivering better working capital outcomes and improving returns for the business. The next slide outlines the investments we are making to drive growth and quality of our earnings for the future. Our capital expenditure is continuously being reviewed to deliver the most optimal level of spend to ensure long-term asset reliability and delivering the best ROIC for all of our assets. Our expected level of sustenance expenditure in financial year 2024 of AUD 180 million-AUD 200 million is in line with previous expectations. We expect turnaround capital to be in a range of AUD 30 million-AUD 40 million this year, down from our previous expectation of AUD 50 million-AUD 60 million, and this is really due to changes in the timing and scope of some of our turnaround spend in financial year 2025. Our total sustainability CapEx is expected to be approximately AUD 23 million in financial year 2024, and this is supporting our pathway to deliver 2030 emissions reductions and is associated with the four key projects, decarbonization projects, which we spoke to you before. I'm also really pleased to share that we have completed the installation of the tertiary abatement nitrous oxide at Moranbah in March. This will reduce our scope one emissions by about 200,000 tons or about 7% of our total, underpinning our short-term target of 5% by 2025. Sustenance capital is aligned to our capital asset management plans, which aims to balance returns, as well as ensuring sustainable throughput at our manufacturing facilities. The next slides provide a great snapshot of how we are prioritizing delivery of sustainable returns to our shareholders under our capital allocation framework. As you know, in February, we delivered the AUD 500 million pro rata capital return, which was the equivalent of AUD 0.26 per share. As I mentioned earlier, we announced today the AUD 0.043 per share unfranked dividend. As Mauro highlighted earlier, because the fertilizer sale progress is progressing, the previously announced AUD 900 million on-market share buyback program for now remains on hold. I really look forward to being able to get this program started as soon as possible because it really represents an equivalent of AUD 0.46 per share or 16% of our market capital at current prices. So in total, we have a capital return program in excess of AUD 0.76 per share or 27% of our current market capital. Finally, I'll update you on our outlook for the year. In many ways, our outlook remains broadly the same as what we have expected when we spoke to you in November at our financial year 2023 results release. Our Dyno Nobel Americas business is performing really well, and we are expecting margin improvement and customer growth to drive EBIT growth to mid to high single digits. We expect DNA's year to have a second half skew to earnings as we benefit from the seasonal uptick in Q&C volumes. In our Dyno Nobel Asia Pacific business, we expected to deliver record earnings this year with a recontracting of the portfolio nearly substantially completed. In fertilizers, our production expectation at Phosphate Hill are unchanged, and the plant has already delivered some encouraging results early in the second half of this financial year. Finally, for our distribution business, we expect to achieve attractive market share gains and deliver a strong full-year result. Overall, we think the group is going to deliver continued underlying EBIT growth in the second half, and I look forward to updating you on our progress later this year. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. With that, I will hand back now to Mauro. Thanks, Paul, for the presentation and for all your great work in delivering the first half. Before we turn to Q&A, I just wanted to remind you what I think to be an exciting future and growth potential. Our customer-centric, service-driven approach positions us well for stronger earnings growth. In our fertilizer business, we'll manage the distribution network to deliver margin and market share growth while staying focused on progressing the potential sale. In our explosives business, growth will continue across quarry and construction and future-facing materials. As I explained earlier, our industry-leading technology is securing new contracts and providing customers with easy-to-use innovations. The Titanobel business allows us to grow in the new jurisdictions, servicing our global mining customers in EMEA. Today, I've shared the margin growth across Dyno Nobel, including recontracting in Australia, leveraging our premium technology and services. We will transform Dyno Nobel's operating model strategically, earning the right to grow and optimizing capital. In summary, I'm impressed with the capability of our people, our leading-edge technology, and the vision and leadership of our customers in the resources and agricultural sectors. We're well positioned to deliver a very competitive investment return for our shareholders. We will now open for Q&A. Operator, over to you. 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're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Reinhardt van der Walt with Bank of America. Please go ahead. Good morning, Mauro and Paul. And Mauro, congratulations on the appointment. I've just got a question about, you know, some of the points you mentioned around the transformation strategy, specifically the LATAM and EMEA growth outlook. Can you give us a sense of just how accessible the global AN supply chain actually is? I'm presuming that if you're gonna be growing into LATAM and EMEA, it's probably gonna be without native AN capacity in country. I mean, how do you envisage sort of breaking into those markets in as a first instance? Thanks for the question, Ryan. You are right. What is exciting about those markets is that our belief is that we can lean on our technology services and high technology initiation systems without necessarily be relying on a nitrogen footprint. The market is really based on traded tons primarily, and that just reduced the barriers of entry and our competitiveness in those markets. We have had some recent success stories, some of those that will become public in a few months, where I'm really confident that we can, using our technology, using our high-quality services to our customers, to build on that. But you're right, we will do that in a very capital light way. Got it. No, that's very clear. Thank you. And maybe just on the, on the US explosives business, I mean, if we strip out the effects of WALA there, it looks like EBIT per ton is still, you know, very much below where it was back in FY 2018, especially in, in real terms, and the ROIC is still lagging. And, I mean, that's happening despite the fact that you've got a pretty quick recontracting cycle in the U.S. Can you just give us a sense of what's, what's holding back the earnings in that U.S. explosives business? And I think what's the main lever that you need to pull over the next, sort of from now to FY 2026, in order to, to unlock earnings there? Hi, Reinhardt, Paul here. I'll address your question. We actually believe, last year when we spoke to you, that the team was tasked to do two things. The team was tasked to ensure that the whole recontracting process, in terms of the catch-up on price pass-through, has been done and complete with customers, and we can confirm today that has been done. Secondly, Braden and the team was very much focused on cost optimization and, not transformation, but optimization in the business. Again, if you look at the cost structure, we can confirm that that has been done. I will say that if you compare our margin against anyone's margin per ton, in North America, which is a very highly competitive market, our margin still remains quite superior. I think it's very important to note as well that the earnings usually in this business are skewed between the first half and the second half, and on an annualized basis, our take is that volumes will and margins will increase in this business and relative to the competitor group in North America, be superior. So we still believe that in this competitive market, we do see, you know, margins actually growing through all of these actions. If we break it down in the Q&C business, which was a bit under pressure, we do see a full recovery of that in the second half and a full restoration of margin and catch-up. I will say that's probably one of the areas that we could have done better. In the metals and mining sector, the team has done really exceptional, and the margins has grown there, quite a bit, so compliments there. And at the end of the day, you know, the coal will always be the defensive play, and us relative to others, we're actually doing pretty well in the coal sector. But it is a declining sector, and the margins are shrinking. On balance, long story short, we do believe that our margins on a per ton basis is superior, but in the second half, we do position ourselves much better. Based on April's result, which was quite strong, and quite delivered ahead of our expectations by the team, we feel quite upbeat that we will deliver this earnings skew and earnings coming through in the second half. Good. Thanks very much. I'll pass it on. Thank you. Your next question comes from Daniel Kang with CLSA. Please go ahead. Good morning, Mauro, and good morning, Paul. Just wanted to ask this, firstly on PKT. Obviously, negotiations have been very protracted. W ondering if you can shed some light on the complexities and how you've managed to progress with these issues? And just along the PKT, in terms of FIRB approval process, how advanced have discussions been with FIRB? Thanks for your question, Daniel, and let me start by your second question. The FIRB progress will start when we have a material transaction, which at this point, we still don't have. And PKT is well aware of the necessary steps they need to take to obtain regulatory approval. We have constant and very fruitful conversations with authorities in Australia, and we have been in close coordination with PKT to make sure that when and if we have a transaction, they will be able to prosecute the necessary regulatory approvals. In regards to the transaction itself, we appreciate that it's been a long process, and that's much to do with some of the risk factors of the business that are well known by the market. I have to say, we have been, throughout this process, very disciplined in pursuing full value to our shareholders, and I think the announcement of today is just a step on the right direction. The direction of travel of separating this business and trying to realize full value for our divestment is underway, and I'm confident that this is a step in the right direction. Thanks, Mauro. Should the sale proceed and be completed, how should we expect the proceeds to be deployed? Well, thanks, thanks for the question. We are not at liberty at this time to kind of to say exactly how it would be, but let me, in terms of our framework, just give you a sense of the way that we broadly think about it. In terms of the our capital allocation framework, once we sell ferts, we have to have a look and see what debt level can we actually introduce and maintain and sustain in the in the dyno business. Based on our initial analysis, there would be a portion of the proceeds that needs to go towards a debt reduction, and one can expect some form of repayment of of debt. Exactly what that level is, we're still in discussions with the board to determine that, but I will say, you know, from a net debt to EBITDA level, we would like to continue with our 1.5x net debt to EBITDA as a guideline in how we want to manage the balance sheet on a go-forward basis. So reducing the debt that matches the earnings in the remaining Dyno business would kind of culminate and support the 1.5 x. In terms of the remainder of the proceeds, usually what we will do is we'll compare the, you know, growth opportunities that we may have compared to any potential share buyback or other forms of return to shareholders, and whatever the base return is for shareholders, we'll make that decision. We again are in the process of evaluating the base options for shareholders, and that would be presented to the board on the sales confirmation, and then only the board will make a decision. But it's very much aligned to balancing returns, do the base returns to shareholders based on the capital allocation framework, but I think you can expect that we will need to pay some debt back to get to and to achieve that 1.5 x net debt to EBITDA. Thank you, Paul. Thanks, Mauro. Pass round. Thank you. Your next question comes from Brooke Campbell-Crawford with Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. It's just the first one around the cash flow. Appreciate there are some investments going on in growth areas of the business, but can you just talk to the second half? Would you expect a working capital release or cash inflow in the second half of FY 2024, in order of the magnitude similar to what the investment's been in the first half, or how should we think about that? Hi, Brooke. Paul here. Good question. Yeah, usually when, when one look at our working capital, we are very much alive to the fact that most of the working capital increases were in two areas. The one, the most significant build-up, and I actually looked at it last night again, is in the fertilizer business. If one look in terms of inventory, if one look in terms of debtors, that's where the most significant, and also creditors, that's where the most significant increase occurred. We are quite comfortable that the kind of the increases in the working capital is matched by the supply and demand model by the distribution team in the placement of the product at a, you know, advantageous margin to customers. So we feel quite comfortable that the increase in working capital will culminate in a high profit realization for the first business. So it kind of makes sense to invest in working capital because you're gonna make a lot of money in the second half. So we feel quite comfortable. The planting season looks quite great, and I think we're really set up in our distribution business for success, but it does take a bit of an investment in working capital. So I will say 95% of the... 90%-95% of the increase in working capital and the build relates to that and the culminating impact on cash flow. I will say that on the explosives side, we have made decisions to actually increase the working capital, especially in the growth nodes, such as Asia Pacific. We know that by closer examination, you will see that as the business top line is growing, we do need to, we don't get exactly the same favorable terms on debtor payments, for example, in our Asia Pacific, you know, excluding Australia. So the mix thereof sometimes creates the impression that we are increasing our working capital, and rightly so, but it is to make more money. The margins in those areas are quite significant compared to, you know, the base margins that we see in Australia. And it is because there's very capital light options, and the go-to market strategy is quite robust. So again, the increase in working capital has a significant payback.... The last bit is that we have actually looked at our strategic stock, and there's an aspect which we believe we need to manage more closely in North America, where we want to actually keep more, high levels of strategic stock pertaining to TNT, in our North American business. It kind of makes sense, and for that reason, we did make the decision to carry much higher levels of stock for TNT in our business because we believe that it's quite important for the business sustainability. Standing back, we do anticipate a significant unlock in the second half, but hopefully you will understand the business rationale for the build-up and the work down of working capital between the first half and the second half. That's really helpful. Thank you. And second question for me, just with respect to the timing of recontracting in, in Australia in particular, can you just sort of help frame up for us what volume is being renegotiated in the second half, FY 2024? I really, I'm trying to understand how much benefit we should think about flowing through into FY 2025, just given the timing of that as it progresses through this financial year. Thanks. Yeah, also good question. Safe to say, and I think also in terms of Mauro's point is, we feel quite upbeat about our recontracting strategy thus far. As you know, a lot of negotiations takes place before the announcement takes place. You know, that's just the nature of the beast. You know, the contract work and the documentation work and approval processes usually takes, a fair amount of time. But I think where we stand now, Brooke, is we feel quite comfortable that most of the negotiation have been completed. So, a very significant, more than significant amount, and I will say 80% +, of our book has effectively been, you know, kind of already renegotiated in terms of terms, but there would be a lagging impact in terms of when we can announce it. Last time we spoke to you, we kinda said BMA is in train, and it's gonna be a quite lucrative contract, the same with FMG. And as you probably can see, those volumes are up, not only in terms of absolute volumes with the customer, but in terms of also the amount of technical services that we place with the customer. That's also been quite up significant. And we don't see anything different with the remainder of the book. How will the benefit realize, and when will it realize? I think it's safe to say that we have said for DNAP that you can expect record earnings to the peak levels that we've realized before, meaning that AUD 200 million to AUD 210 million dollars. We, for the excluding Titanobel, we kind of said that's the level which we guided you towards, and we feel like we will go above that level. Which I think underpins Greg's and the team's efforts in terms of delivering this result. So there's also already a fair amount of delivery happening this year because the base level would be higher than the 200 to 210 of EBIT. Of course, the full realization will happen in financial 25, because most of the contracts will then be signed, and the full benefit will roll on. So, mid year, mid-financial year 2025, 12 months from now, is where we believe we will reach the peak point in terms of full benefit realization from a run rate perspective. And from there onwards, you can expect, we actually will operate at those peak levels. So do we expect a further step up in earnings next year if you normalize for the turnaround in DNAP? Absolutely, yes. Because there are, you know, one or two big contracts that fully need to run over a 12-month period, and that realizing in our EBIT. Financial 2025 would be full run rate achievement this time next year, and then 2026 would be, let's say, the full capturing of the value over a 12-month period. Thanks, Paul. Thank you. Your next question comes from Richard Johnson with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Thanks very much. Mauro, can I just ask you a question on your slide on Dyno's transformation, which I think was Slide 17, and particularly I'd like to zero in on the commercial excellence point you make. I just wondered if you could give me a better sense of where you feel that's lagged over the last few years, or if you think about what actually you need to improve with regard to the business' commercial excellence? Thanks for the question, Richard. It's about discipline and understanding the value that we generate with our products with our customers. We win when we have a conversation about value, and we win when we are recognized by the technical services we provide and the quality of our innovation, and that's what we're trying to do, and the cases where that Paul just highlighted in Australia are critical in that regard. The commercial discipline is to do with making sure that our assets are returning the right level of return on invested capital. We are an asset-intensive business, and we need to have our fair returns from the investment of our shareholders. As Paul said, we have been very pleased with the recontracting, but there's still work to do. There's still work to do in terms of making sure that each of our nitrogen plants and the initiation system plants are returned to satisfactory return on invested capital levels. As Paul said, at 5%, we are nowhere near satisfied. But also, having a conversation that drives value creation to our customers so that we stay away from being commoditized as a commodity supplier, but also, being recognized more and more as a solutions. So the commercial discipline has to do with looking at return on invested capital in every deal we do, but also doing that through generating value to our customers. That's very helpful. I'm also just really trying to understand, what do you actually have to change to improve it? Look, it's to embed ourselves in our customers. As a former customer myself, I have to tell you that the more you have technical teams embedded in the business of our customers, the better we understand what drives success for them. Some mines are driven by fragmentation because they're very hard rock. If we can do blast outcomes, they are more productive. They can save millions of dollars in comminution on their downstream milling processes. And we have many cases where we successfully managed to show our customers that by using our Delta E solutions, they can get much superior results. So rather than discussing the next cent into the ammonium nitrate cost, it's really about trying to sell products and services that will maximize Drill to Mill outcomes. We have the teams, we have the capability. Have we been successful to transform what I will loosely call new form contracts to its full extent? Absolutely not. So this transition from old form, more traditional commoditized contracts into what I'm loosely calling new form contracts, is underway, and I'm very excited with the prospects. That's very helpful. Thanks. And then just finally, maybe for Paul. In Dyno, North America, Paul, it was obviously a big contribution from manufacturing reliability in the half. Can you remind me whether there was a... I've just forgotten whether there was an issue in the first half of last year that generated the change? And so, in effect, I'm sort of asking as well, what happens in the second half with regard to that? Yeah, so last year, in terms, Richard, I just wanna make sure I understand your question correct. So, let me try to play it back. We have seen on Cheyenne as well as for LOMO, just on the explosive side, that reliability has been quite, quite significantly high on a run rate perspective. And, I'm pretty sure that Cheyenne has had some, some issues last year. I know St. Helens also had a but that's it on the Ag and IC business. So if you talk DNA, Ag and IC was probably the, the largest impact. You will recall that they had that compressor trip on the, you know, on the compressor unit last year, and it was round about 55 days that they were off, and that was ultimately round about a $20 million EBIT impact for the Ag and IC business. But on the explosive side, it is these marginal improvements in the reliability for Cheyenne that I think is, you know, half year on half year for us, net positive. That's perfect. Thank you very much. That's it from me. Thank you. Your next question comes from James Wilson with Jarden Australia. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. Just a couple from me. Firstly, are you able to talk us through which specific regions in Australia you saw most of the net new business and contract wins for in explosives over the half? Look, we have announced the ones that are completed, so I prefer not to comment what is essentially commercial in confidence. But we have natural markets where we are most successful. Our commodities don't like to move too far from the natural influence zones from their plants, so that's not too surprising in any of the announcements that we expect to do in the East Coast. On the West Coast, Fortescue and some of our underground mining customers, especially in gold, we have been quite successful in growing that market, and we see some more potential there. But to be honest, we've been very disciplined to play on what's the natural supply chain where we're most competitive. Right. And just two more from me. On the impairment of the fertilizers business to a value of around AUD 1.1 billion, are you able to just run us through how that value sits relative to the tax base for the business, which I think you've previously spoken to as being maybe closer to AUD 700 million for fertz? Yeah. So basically, you're 100% right. The impairment of the business, the way that we usually apply it at this point in time is on the value in use basis. You know, every six months, we have to update our assumptions. And as we've mentioned, you know, our long-term assumptions of DAP prices, as well as, I will say, mostly the impact of increased gas prices, resulted in us to actually make this write down to roughly AUD 1.1 billion. If I look in terms of the tax base, that was more or less around about AUD 700 million. You're 100% right. So that's still where we kind of sit. So there's a delta between, let's say, carrying amount and book and tax value of around about $300 million-$400 million still. Great. That makes sense, guys. And then, so just one more from me. You've guided to a AUD 30 million step down in the cost of gas supply issues at Phosphate Hill for 2024 relative to 2023. How is progress going on bringing that gas cost down further heading into 2025 now? Well, as we said, you know, I think the quite important thing about the gas position is, it's quite dependent on how much gas we ultimately receive from PWC. At this point in time, we cannot and is not at liberty to discuss the what kind of all the efforts is between PWC and ENI in ensuring that, you know, the gas field is, you know, brought back to its full potential. We are aware in our discussions that we had with PWC that they take the matter seriously, that they as much as us want the natural flow of gas to the full contracted volumes to come to go to all of their customers. We do remain hopeful that towards the end of the year, this calendar year, PWC would be in a position to give us an update, you know, of how strong and how much gas would be delivered to us. Now, of course, that makes a significant impact on our cost position for Phosphate Hill. Failing which, meaning that we need to continue to source gas from the open market, then ultimately that would ultimately have a higher cost impact on an annualized basis. But I think it would be totally premature at this point in time for us to say how much that would be for financial 2025. I think closer to our results release in November, I think we would be in a much better position to update you on what that position would be. And hopefully, you can understand the commercial sensitivity of these discussions. But, I'm quite comfortable with Sunil and the team doing everything possible, not only to maintain great relationships with PWC, but to ensure that all actions are taken to ensure that we get our rightful supply, you know, from the counterparty. So more to come in the months, but at this point in time, I think you have to allow us to update you on 2024 and later on 2025. Great. Thank you, team. Thank you. Your next question comes from Owen Birrell with RBC. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys. Just a couple of questions from me, really are just around your capital position. Assuming the ferts business is sold, I just want, firstly, just wanted to understand why the current buyback remains on hold, if you are positioning that business for a cash sale. And then the second question, I guess, is around opportunities to deploy capital. I mean, you've talked about organic growth opportunities. I just wanted to understand, you talked about the technology platform, 31 projects. Just wondering how many of those actually need capital to fully deploy. A re there any inorganic growth opportunities out there? Are there any businesses that are complementary to your existing footprint that you would consider looking to acquire if you have the capital to deploy? Yeah. Well, thanks for such a valid question. So ultimately, we will probably need to give you an update once the sale of fertilizers is now finally confirmed. What does it actually mean in terms of our capital spend rate for the Dyno Nobel business on a go-forward basis? How much of that would be, you know, kind of taken up and consumed and as part of sustenance capital, and what would be allocated to what we will call order one or order two, which is just usually our organic and inorganic investments that we plan to make. So at this point in time, I think that the guidance that we provide still stands for financial 2024. We do believe, to the second part of your question, is that we are prioritizing capital allocation towards technology development, especially, with our go-to-market strategy. You know, those projects that we did say is in the pipeline, they're fully funded, and they are part of the guidance that we provide to the market. And so, Rob Rounsley do know that he, you know, kind of what his budget is, what he can spend it on, and it is really linked to the strategic, plan that he has in bringing those, those projects to, to fruition. So we will not, you know, kind of, reprioritize capital away, especially from that. To the last part of your question, to say how much goes into organic and how much goes into inorganic, I guess we do look at balancing the portfolio, and we do believe that organic usually carries a lower risk profile. You know, it's usually in lower kind of increments that we need to spend it. So there's a strong pipeline and a strong competition in the group for organic projects, especially projects below AUD 20 million-AUD 50 million, which we will regard organically as bigger-sized projects. So, but we do allocate capital because they're usually capital light, they've got high pay, payback periods, and they do make our return rates. When it comes to inorganic, I think, we are still evaluating the suite of inorganic acquisitions. We're still very keen, and we still do through our joint ventures, typically in North America, making investments, small investments. They're usually between AUD 10 million-AUD 20 million to acquire new businesses and to increase the service offering and value offering of those, those businesses. So we keep on making those type of investments. We don't have any problem to do so. But when it comes to your more sizable investments, I think you always have to make a decision strategically, whether they make sense, whether they make sense for you at that point in time, and whether your balance sheet can actually afford it. So there's a lot of work that we're busy doing it, and in at the Investor Day and Mauro, I think we'll provide a better sense to the market of how do we plan to install and grow the Dyno Nobel explosive business through organic, inorganic investments. If I may build on Paul's, Owen, thanks for the question. Really, it's an opportunity to reaffirm that the big game in town for us for the next period of time is really transformation. That's our ticket to play. Obviously, we have an obligation to shareholders, and we work very closely with the board to monitor any opportunities that may be available. But what's in the radar right now, and our commitment's really through transformation, get the level of earnings to a point where potentially we will win the right to grow the business inorganically. But for the time being, you should expect the real focus and bandwidth of the team will be consumed by delivering on these very exciting transformation we have ahead of us. That's great. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Nathan Riley with UBS. Please go ahead. Morning, gents. Just an extension, I guess, to that transformation focus which you have over the short to medium term, but can I get an update on the Saudi TAN plant study? And I guess, Mauro, I guess longer term, just your views more generally in terms of adding AN capacity to the market at, you know, at this point in the pricing cycle. Look, this is fair to say, Nathan, it's in very early stage and I don't think there is any updates to do other than what we've done late last year. This remains an interesting opportunity, and we'll always look in that through the lenses of return on invested capital. There's obviously geographic advantage, some opportunities in terms of the cost of gas and being a back-to-gas opportunity, and we are looking at that on its merits. The counterparties are very engaging and very clear on our expectations on return on capital, if you were to progress, but still a very early stage. We are reconfirming the opportunities, looking at the economic drivers, and you should expect us to be nothing but disciplined. If you were to ever deploy capital in a nitrogen plant, then we would be looking to superior returns. Okay, understood. And final question, just in terms of when a lot of focus, obviously, around the portfolio in the nature of the fertilizers divestment. But outside of fertilizers, are there any opportunities for adjustments to the portfolio? And I guess I'm just looking for more around the US, Ag, and IC business. Yeah, most definitely. We have said in the past that we are quite keen on reshaping the portfolio in the U.S. on the Ag and IC business. That will kind of require us to... Well, that did require us to actually make a strategic review of the St. Helens facility. We will probably need to update the market soon on the outcome of those actions. So that would be typically an asset that we don't see as part of our strategic portfolio on a go-forward basis. And then the last bit from an Ag and IC perspective is to say, you know, do you really need to have 100% ownership in Cheyenne, for example, because it is a split asset. It still currently produces more than a significant amount of AN for the explosive market, but there is a component that is as Ag and IC market component, and we probably need to kind of think about what does that mean for us. So yeah, definitely, Nathan, we are very much alert to the fact to keep the explosive business in North America, very puristic explosives, and reshape the portfolio so it kind of meet that strategic objective. Perfect. Thanks for the update. Thank you. Your next question comes from John Purtell with Macquarie. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning, Mauro and Paul. Just a quick question for Paul, if I can. Just regarding the Waggaman sale proceeds, there's AUD 1 billion in the cash flow. Is the tax paid on that still to come? I think you previously indicated AUD 600 million of tax paid, and if you can just remind us what the timing of that might be. Yeah. As a responsible taxpayer, it's painful to see those big numbers flowing from your bank account. It's definitely still two tranches of tax payments still to come. If I'm not wrong, I think in September is the one, and then the other one is towards the end of the calendar year. So let's say 2024 calendar year, most of the tax on Waggaman needs to be paid. But you know what? It's a amount that you and I can probably retire 20 times on. So it's a big amount, John. Okay. So about $600 million, was that sort of the I think that was what we guided at the time. That's right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Niraj Shah with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys. Maybe just another one on working capital from me. I understand the volatility and the seasonality in fertilizers working capital, but over the last five years, even in explosives, there's been a step change as a percentage of sales as well. So just wondering, A, how much of that is, do you think, addressable through the transformation program? And B, to the extent that it is structural, do you think you're, you know, pricing an adequate sort of return on working capital currently? Yeah, it's, that's exactly the million-dollar question I've actually asked of, the CFO, CFOs in those two businesses. Actually, so just, just a couple of, bullet points there. You're 100% correct. I mean, let's, let's just split the two businesses up. The DNAP business is the one that probably has the most significant increase in working capital. Deon Louw, CFO, has really done a great analysis, for me to actually answer exactly your question: are we getting the rightful returns on these investments? And then secondly is: where are they and what can we do about them? And do they correspond to, the increase in earnings and margin that, we see? You know, and we can share more in our one-on-one discussions, you know, kind of the, the details thereof. But safe to say, if you think about DNAP, the Australian business has actually held their working capital levels for the past four or five years and actually have improved actually on, in, in real terms. And that's the big part of our business, that really fundamentally on working capital is, has very optimized, through the working capital processes and managed working capital quite well. Where we have seen the increases in working capital was, again, in, in Indonesia as well as in Turkey. And usually, the difference between those markets are, is that the cash cycles are longer. Debtors do take more time to pay, that's the reality of the beast. And ultimately, we are trying to optimize it, but it will always be different to what you have in Australia. So if you compare it over the past four or five years, of course, but then also look at the top line increase in revenue and what those businesses kind of contribute in terms of revenue increase relative to the capital investment that you needed to make. The last one I will say that's still work in progress is Titanobel. So Titanobel, again, you know, also from a working capital perspective, was a big investment in working capital. We know that we're still integrating that business, and we did say, you know, the business's full benefits will realize only two years from now. You can assume that there's a bit of a disparity in working capital to turnover levels, for the Titanobel business and create some skew, in working capital investments if you look at DNAP as a whole. But we are under no illusion that we need to get that level down of working capital for Titanobel as we grow the business, and we know that, you know, there's great opportunities in Africa and in Europe to grow that business forward, and the results do show it. So I fully, you know, agree with you that, you know, here's the reasons why it increases, but, we've got the right attention to detail to it, and the business transformation will primarily focus on, on, supply chain efficiency and optimization, and through that, we will unlock some further benefits on working capital. But where we stand today, the working capital investment is more than significantly returning and yielding benefits for us. It's just the ratio and the mix that differs. In the U.S., I will say that there has been an increase, but the increase has mostly been in strategic stock for us in the business. And nothing really to be concerned about, although the similar processes we're following there to optimize the supply chains. We believe that there's optimization there, specifically in the logistical side of the business, and through that, we do believe that we can leverage better payment terms as well as, you know, some slight improvements in inventory that will kind of reset the base there. But DNAP ex Australia is probably where our biggest focus will go into in optimizing working capital. Understood. Thanks for the color. And secondly, and apologies if I missed this, but what is the duration of, I guess, the new contracts, that you're writing now? I'm just wondering what the cadence of recontracting will be after we're finished with this round. It's quite a variety. So, in Australia, usually we have a couple of big contracts. You know, definitely not similar to that in the U.S. So in Australia, you can usually expect a three-to-four-year cycle of recontracting. Some of those contracts are five years, some of those contracts are three years, but with the option to roll it for another year or two. So I will say on average, the Australian contract book is more kind of towards, say, average 3.5-four years. When one looks in terms of the Americas, the data book is, of course, or the customer book is actually much more widespread, and you will find a continuous rolling of contracts, you know, every year, as contracts are coming up for renewal. So you don't see these spikes that you usually do in Australia. There, the average length of the contract is kind of highly dependent on the sector. Usually, your coal contracts are between three-five years. Your Q&C contract can be one-three years, and your metals and mining contracts can be usually between two-four years. So it really depends on the customer, but I will say on average, metals and mining, three years, Q&C, probably average two years, and coal, probably 3.5 years in America. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Simon Mawhinney with Allan Gray Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. I just wanted to clarify the difference between Slides 9 and 25 for Dyno Nobel Americas. I understand that in Slide 9, EBIT excludes Waggaman, and in 25 it includes Waggaman. But I'm curious what happens to the 25% economic interest of Waggaman you retain. Is that included in Slide 9, in the AUD 95 million? Yes, it is, Simon. So the offtake agreement, we always said would form part of the kind of the DNA earnings on a go-forward basis. It would be the, the benefit of offtake agreement, less the amortization of the intangible asset over 25 years. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Anthony Longo with JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning, everyone. Just a quick one from me with respect to the turnaround schedule that you have. So you flagged AUD 30 million-AUD 40 million for FY 2024 as a spend, but you've got two turnarounds next year. Can you perhaps remind us as to what the expected impact of that is in 2025, please? We haven't really kind of given updated guidance in terms of what that will mean at in terms of the impact on production volumes. Safe to say that... Again, just to remind you that the spend that we have for financial 2024 would be more your long lead items, so that's spending ahead of, you know, the turnaround taking place for next year. We're still in the process of, specifically Moranbah, to focus on the optimization of how long the turnaround should be. You know, how are we gonna contract volumes to supply customers and ultimately defining the net impact on the bottom line. But it is gonna be a total turnaround for Moranbah, and usually, these turnarounds extend over weeks. So there would be some significant impact on your production volumes. I would use the previous turnaround as a proxy in terms of how much volumes kind of were, you know, gonna forego as a part of the turnaround. But again, I just want to caution you that there are some actions by the teams to see how they can actually make up that loss in volume during the latter parts of the year. So when we update our results in September and November, during the Investor Day and during the results, we'll probably provide you more color. We're definitely in the midst of evaluating the capital, the length, the scope, so it would be quite difficult for us really kind of to venture a view there. And the other one is in St. Helens, and again, there we will just also provide you with an update if we retain an interest in that asset on a go-forward basis. Fantastic. No, I appreciate that. And another question from me, just with respect to working capital. So, just following on from some of those previous questions, how do you ultimately, like, when you're thinking about the return on working capital, how do you ultimately expect the earnings to translate to cash? And I guess potentially with the sale of Ferts, how do you expect this business to operate from a cash conversion perspective? Yeah, it's such a good question. We're quite hard on the business in terms of, you know... So ultimately, I think the attention to detail is to say: how do you optimize the individual elements of working capital, such as, you know, how much inventory it costs you carry in stock, what your, you know, security stock levels? You have to agree that with the customer. And of course, you know, you need to optimize those things. That's where the devil lies in the detail. We are very much attuned to, you know, what value lockup sits in those, in those aspects, but customers do too want to have security of supply, in terms of the contract. The same goes for debtors, and the same goes for creditors to kind of see how you really kind of optimize those, those payment terms. So the teams are quite heavily involved in that. But standing back, the working capital investment plus the capital investment on a contract is brought to our capital panel. There we do evaluate the IRR and payback for, you know, for working capital, and the investment i n the customer. I can assure you that most of these investments carry IRRs far in excess of our, you know, WACC times 1.3 criteria, and with payback terms, you know, quite short, you know, between one and two years. So we're quite comfortable that with a focus on working capital, the cash cycle targets that we put out to the business, and year-on-year typically, they differ between DNA and DNAP. But we like to achieve at least cash cycle conversions at the DNAP of 80%+, and 70%+ for DNA. So those are broadly, you know, cash conversion cycles. And they usually mirror base performance over the past couple of years. So that's the targets that we put out to the business. That's perfect. Thanks, Paul. And sorry, final one from me. A lot of... You've discussed a lot about the transformation in Dyno Nobel at the minute. I mean, how would you assess success of those initiatives? I mean, what are you sort of thinking in terms of return on capital targets, sort of through the cycle from here, you know, once the portfolio is ultimately simplified, if the pending transaction does go through? Yeah. I would say, and I would like Mauro to also, you know, kind of weigh in on this. As you can imagine, we are in the midst of the process of quantifying those initiatives. As I've said yesterday to the board, when we provided the board with an update, is that you can think about the transformation program as one that's very significantly capital light. So that's where we focus on initiatives that is based on improvements in business process, us doing our jobs better, and us structuring, you know, kind of the organization in such a way that we have better go-to-market strategies and just better ways of delivering the service. Those don't really require quite a significant amount of capital. Yes, there are improvements in systems that we need to make that will probably require some form of form of investment. And yes, you know, if we want to grow in LATAM, we accept that there would be some investment that we need to make in terms of growing our footprint there on an organic and inorganic basis. But we do feel quite comfortable from a transformation project perspective, this will kind of significantly increase the top line, meaning the earnings before interest and taxes and after, relative to the capital investment. And while we kind of say that we're not only targeting the increase in earnings, but also commensurate increase in return on invested capital, because it is so capital light. Mauro, I'm not sure if you would like to add a little bit more in terms of our focus and diligence in evaluating these initiatives. Look, we will come back to you in September, and we are very excited with the prospect of seeing you all face-to-face in Salt Lake. This will be an opportunity to give you much more detail. And we're working with the team to not only give you detail in terms of numbers in a spreadsheet, but hopefully giving you some anecdotal evidence of the progress that we made to date. I will very clearly use the word ambition here, but we would like to see a double-digit return in our capital. This is an ambition. We're not happy where we are, and we have lots of work to do. But I have no hesitation to say that everything that I've seen in the business in my first three months just increased my confidence on our ability to do that, not only because of the assets, the technology we have, but the quality of our leadership team. So look, we're not in a position to put numbers. We would if we, if we have had that level of granularity. We'll come back to you in September, hopefully with a much greater level of detail and examples of what, what are the things we do to transform the business. That's fantastic, Mauro. Thanks, Mauro, and Paul, and team. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Neves for closing remarks. Look, thanks for spending the time and your interest in IPL. It's really reassuring to deliver such strong underlying results. Look forward to meeting you all on the road as myself and Paul go collect some more frequent flyer miles. And for those of you that are joining us in September, looking forward to face-to-face. Have a safe day. That does conclude our call.