I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Peter Wilson, Chairman and CEO. Please go ahead. Good morning, and thank you for joining us for our half-year results call. Joining me on the call today is Sasha Nikolic, our Group President and Managing Director, and Andy Young, our Group CFO. Today we'll start with an overview of the results, followed by a recap of our strategy, and then some operational updates for the half. I'll then pass to Andy who will take us through the results in more detail. We'll finish with the outlook for each region before opening up to Q&A. Please note that all results in this presentation are in Australian dollars unless otherwise stated. The first half has been a challenging one for Reece. Our financial performance reflects the backdrop of macroeconomic headwinds and housing market softness, with group sales down 3% to AUD 4.4 billion. ANZ sales were flat for the half, supported by two bolt-on acquisitions, with modest softening in underlying volumes on last year. US sales were down 5% to $1.6 billion in US dollars, driven by challenging market conditions, ongoing deflation, and increased competitive pressure given the softer trading environment. Group costs, including depreciation and amortization, were up 3.6%, driven by the ongoing investment in the business. Overall, we delivered group EBIT of AUD 305 million for the half, which was down 17%. The board declared an interim dividend of AUD 0.065 per share. So, turning now to recap our strategy. As many of you will know, everything we do is guided by a blueprint. We are inspired by our purpose and values, which we call the Reece Way. Our 2030 vision is to be our trade's most valuable partner, and we're embracing our vision through executing on our three strategic priorities. The first, operational excellence, focuses on the fundamentals of trade distribution. Being the best of the basics is the foundation of our strategy. The second priority is accelerating innovation, which helps us to enhance the customer experience and stay one step ahead of our customers' needs. And finally, investing for profitable growth to build a stronger business for the long term. Together, these three strategic priorities support us to deliver on our customer promise. So now turning to look at the progress we've made during the half. We have made solid progress executing our strategic priorities over the past six months. Our team are crucial to delivering operational excellence, and we continue to invest to build expertise. During the half, we've strengthened our people promise by expanding our Employee Share Purchase Scheme so that it is now available to all team members in both regions. The recent acquisition of Shadowboxer enhances our digital innovation capabilities within the group. And finally, we've continued to invest in our business with 32 new branches delivered in the half through accelerated organic growth and bolt-on acquisitions. Turning now to look at ANZ activity. The Australian network enables a market-leading position and helps us deliver our customer promise. We've continued to expand our network with 14 new branches, and this includes five branches acquired as part of the ReFire acquisition. In the US, we continue to build scale and have accelerated our network expansion with 18 new branches open during the half. A further five to 10 new branches are due to be opened in the second half. We've also completed our rebrand activities with plumbing, bath, kitchen, and HVAC branches now trading as Reece. The Fortiline brand has been retained for our waterworks business. We continue to see a sustainable rate of organic new store openings in the range of 10-15 per year. In line with our long-term strategy, we will continue to assess and pursue both organic and inorganic growth opportunities in the U.S. I'll now pass to Andy Young, who will take us through the financial reviews of the half. Thank you, Peter, and good morning, everyone. Group sales on a constant currency basis were down 3% to $4.4 billion, reflective of the challenging trading environment in both regions. EBITDA was down 10% for the half to $475 million, and EBIT was down 17% to $305 million. As Peter mentioned, group costs, including depreciation and amortization, were up 3.6% for the half. Despite a soft trading environment, we have continued to invest in the business, including two bolt-on acquisitions in ANZ and 32 net new branches across the group. We've also continued to invest in our branch refurbishment program and enhance our core capabilities. As a result, the capex to sales ratio for the half was up 38 basis points to 2.9%. Net profit after tax was down 19% to AUD 181 million, and the group's return on capital ratio decreased by 244 basis points, reflecting softer earnings and increased investment in the business. Moving to the next slide. We continue to navigate a challenging trading environment in ANZ with the backdrop of a subdued housing market. Sales revenue for the half was flat at AUD 1.98 billion, with benefits from M&A activity offsetting the impact of a modest year-on-year volume drop. EBITDA was down 12% to AUD 271 million, and our EBITDA margin decreased by 191 basis points. In line with the second half of FY24, we have continued to see some year-on-year margin compression as we move through the cycle. Cost growth was elevated in the ANZ region during the half, primarily due to investment in the business and annual salary increases. This growth investment positions us for the long term and includes two acquisitions and investment in core capabilities. Excluding incremental investment in growth, ANZ's cost increase for the half was broadly in line with the annual increase in the Wage Price Index to 31st of December. EBIT was down 17% to AUD 193 million, and our EBIT margin decreased by 211 basis points to 9.7%. The high depreciation and amortization charge reflects M&A activity and recent network investment. Now on to the U.S. region. Our U.S. performance reflects ongoing soft market conditions in the Sunbelt region, particularly in the residential new construction sector. On a U.S. dollar basis, sales were down 5% to $1.6 billion, driven by softer year-on-year volumes, ongoing deflation in select commodity-related categories, and increased competitive pressure due to the market slowdown. Despite the soft top-line performance, the region delivered EBITDA of $135 million for the half, with the EBITDA margin broadly flat at 8.5%. This result reflects a strong focus on operational efficiencies in light of volume reductions experienced during the half. EBIT was down 15% to $74 million, and our EBIT margin was down 52 basis points, reflecting the earnings drag from elevated depreciation and amortization as we continue to expand our US network. Turning now to the group's cash flow position. The group generated net operating cash inflows of AUD 256 million for the first half of the FY25 financial year. As we've highlighted, there has been continued focus on investing through the cycle. Capital expenditure increased AUD 14 million, supporting elevated network expansion, US rebrand activities, and regional investments in branch refurbishments and fleet renewal. During the half, the group also deployed AUD 23 million of capital to acquire two bolt-on acquisitions in ANZ. Gross interest expense for the half was AUD 30 million, and based on current drawn debt, we anticipate gross interest in the range of AUD 53 to AUD 63 million for full year FY25. Moving to the balance sheet. Our group net working capital sales ratio for the half was 20%, an increase of 2% on the FY24 year-end position. The key driver of the increase is foreign exchange movements due to the depreciation of the Australian dollar, with net working capital translated at the end-of-period spot rate. Excluding the impact of FX, our working capital to sales ratio was 19%, reflecting seasonal factors and the impact of accelerated network expansion. Our net debt position increased to AUD 646 million, driven by lower net operating cash inflow and increased CapEx and M&A investment during the period. The group's balance sheet remains strong, with sufficient capacity to support the business and provide flexibility for growth as we trade through the cycle. Turning to look at our earnings and return profile. The group has delivered growth in sales, earnings, and return on capital over the past five years. Over the last 12 months, we have seen our performance moderate as housing end markets have softened. Despite the slowdown, we have continued to focus on our long-term investment strategy and disciplined approach to capital management. Continuing to invest through the cycle will ensure we are well placed to support customers as the market recovers and deliver long-term growth for our shareholders. I will now hand back to Peter to recap our approach to capital management. Thank you, Andy. The group has a well-defined capital management framework, and the allocation and deployment of group capital is guided by our capital management priorities and enabling a sustainable long-term growth. Our first priority is to invest in the growth of the business, both organic investments and strategic M&A. Our second priority is to maintain a strong balance sheet, and our third priority is to provide returns to shareholders via ordinary dividends and where surplus free cash flow exists, share buybacks or special dividends. Turning now to the outlook. Starting with the outlook for ANZ, we expect macro headwinds to continue. Australian housing units under construction have continued to trend downward, and we've also seen a softening in alterations and additions as inflation and interest rates continue to weigh on household savings. Movement on interest rates will be the key to improving consumer sentiment within the housing sector, and the recent interest rate cut of 25 basis points will have a positive impact. We do not anticipate a material change to volume settings in the near term. Our second half sales will also be impacted by fewer trading days and the timing of Easter and ANZAC Day this year. Turning now to the U.S. outlook. In the U.S., we do expect the near term to remain challenging as mortgage rates and affordability continue to provide headwinds in our sector. Housing units under construction remain down year on year, and the average 30-year fixed lending rate has not benefited from recent reserve rate cuts. Mortgage rate reduction will be critical for driving a more sustainable growth in the U.S. housing market. Despite the current soft trading environment, we do remain focused on investing to build a business of scale in the U.S., and to support the delivery of our 2030 strategy, we have made some changes to the leadership team, which I'll now talk you through. The current environment is one that Reece has seen before, and while we know the short to medium term will have its challenges, we always look beyond the cycle to protect and grow the business. We are passionate about ensuring the right people are in the right roles, and over the last half, we've taken the opportunity to reset our leadership team. In November, Sasha Nikolic moved to Group President and Managing Director. James Healy has been promoted into the U.S. CEO role after 29 years with Reece, including six years in the U.S. We're also very excited to welcome back Adrian Palumbo as the CEO for Australia and New Zealand after three years working in private equity. We all know Andy Young, who is now a year into his role as the Group CFO. These changes will enable us to leverage deep industry and market knowledge across the group and positions us well to drive long-term value. Turning to the board. In November, I moved into the role of Executive Chair and see what he does best. Spending time in the network with our customers and our people, he will become Chairman Emeritus, a fitting role to recognize his significant contribution of over 55 years. Thanks, Dad. Over the past few months, we've also welcomed new directors, including Sasha as a Managing Director, Ross McEwan as Lead Independent Director, as well as Angela Mentis and Gavin Street. Collectively, these appointments bring commercial and industry experience to the board, and I do look forward to working with management and the board to execute on our strategy. In closing, we remain confident in our long-term approach. In Australia and New Zealand, we have a trusted brand supported by our differentiated customer proposition, and we are building a growing presence in the US. Our business is diversified by geography, by customer and end market, with a focus on the less cyclical R&R segment. We operate in large markets with attractive long-term fundamentals, particularly housing underbuild, population growth, and the ongoing need for infrastructure in both regions, and despite the challenging near term, we remain well capitalized, and we will continue to invest in our business as we manage through the cycle. Thank you. I'll now open the line 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 and two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from the line of Brook Campbell-Craw ford from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Morning, Peter and team. Thanks for taking my questions. Peter, I'd love just to hear a little bit more about the US branch openings in the period, which was really strong. And I guess you're guiding to kind of 20 plus for the year. Should we think about this as a unique year where there's above normal level of branch openings, or will we sort of see this kind of higher than normal level perhaps persist from FY26 onwards? Thanks. Yeah, thanks, Brook. Yes, it is a bit abnormal. So the sustainable rate we see going forward is in that sort of 10-15. So there was some timing issues in terms of there was some delay from the previous year. So it was like a whole lot came at once. So yeah, we see the long-term 10-15, but I mean, as you can see from this year, that we've opened a lot. So the long-term plan remains where it was with a little bit of an aberration this year. Understood. Thanks for clarifying. And then just maybe on the ANZ margin, the first half under a bit of pressure there, softer market, I understand, but it is sort of the softest first half, it looks like, in kind of well over a decade, including prior downturns. So just keen to hear your views there. Has there anything changed with the margin structure in the ANZ business such that going forward, perhaps the even margin range won't be similar to history? Look, I think it's definitely the market is definitely softer, as we've highlighted. I think the business actually has performed pretty well. I think we're definitely holding our own from, I think, from a share perspective. There are, in that, a couple of small acquisitions which build capability, some new capability in the digital space. So there's half of the cost pressures there in the last six months, and the rest is with where wage inflation is. If I'm being hard on ourselves, which we are, maybe there is a little bit of overinvestment in Australia. So we're certainly going to be watching this and maybe managing it in a bit tighter fashion over the next little period. Understood. Thank you very much. I'll pass it on. Thanks, Brooke. Thank you. Your next question comes from Peter Steyn from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Morning, Peter, Sasha, and yeah, appreciate your time. Maybe just a quick question on the U.S. You mentioned the extension of competition in the market, but clearly your confidence to continue, excuse me, to continue investing in your own platform and network is indicative of how you're feeling about the relative proposition you have. Could you talk to us about the competitive context, how you're dealing with what the reception has been of your proposition? Yeah. Can I play that? Yes. Look, the US also, it's funny. It's definitely, I mean, both markets, I mean, housing's definitely in the slow lane. So it's definitely softer, I mean, and that's come off the period that we had with COVID. So you've got that as a backdrop. The competitive part, there is one part that has slightly changed in the waterworks business. So that's our brand is Fortiline. And this probably explains most of the deterioration in our performance. The original founder of Fortiline and the old CEO have teamed up with private equity to start a new competitor, if you like. And unfortunately, they have targeted our business, and they have uplifted 25% of our workforce in six months. So it's definitely been a challenging period for the team over there. There's some, what would I say? Some of the behavior is some of the most unethical that I've ever witnessed. But having said all that, this is not unexpected. And when we did the acquisition, we knew this was a possibility. And I think nothing changes with our strategy. And possibly, if you go past two or three years, this will be better. This will make us a better business. And I think it's important to note, I've been trying to mention this over the last six years, the U.S. is very different to Australia. It's structurally different with competition, with the power of the manufacturers. And I reckon what has happened here with this particular case indicates just how different the U.S. is. And I'll give you this analogy. In Australia, if we've ever bought someone of scale, they see out their non-compete, and then they generally go and happily retire and enjoy the rest of their life. In the U.S., you can buy people out, and then they see out their term, and then they come back at you in a different way. So we are experiencing that, Peter. So that's a big part of what's happened to the U.S., and there's a little bit of deflation and obviously, so that's really that sort of gives some color to what's going on in the U.S. Thanks, Peter. That's really useful, and then, Andy, just a quick question around the mismatch between inventory moves and payables. Could you shed a little more light on that and just how to contemplate that on a go-forward basis as well? Yeah, sure, Peter. Let me help you with that. I think there's a couple of things going on there. When you look at that inventory movement for the period, the majority of that is actually FX-driven. So remember we saw a big drop in the Aussie to US exchange rate as we came into the end of December. So that has really elevated that inventory as we converted over into Aussie. So most of that movement in inventory is really exchange-oriented. The US is actually slightly down on the inventory basis and there's a little bit of seasonal build in ANZ. So that's what's happening on inventory. On payables, when you're comparing to the June position, 30 June actually fell on a weekend. So our payables was elevated, which actually supported a lower working capital position. That actually cleared through at the beginning of this half. So when you actually unpick those two items, Peter, the net working capital position is pretty stable period on period. Thanks, Andy. That's useful. Appreciate it. Thanks, Peter. Thank you. Your next question comes from Lee Power from UBS. Please go ahead. Hi, Peter, Andy, and Sasha. Peter, just on the U.S. profile through the half, if we think about the first quarter, I think you were down 6.5% in U.S. dollars for the half year. You're only down 5%, but there were some moving parts there around weather in the first quarter and then obviously probably a larger store rollout than probably some thought. Can you give us an idea of when those stores rolled out? Were they weighted to some part of the period? And I guess ultimately, I'm just trying to work out if end markets in the U.S. are kind of getting better or are they getting worse as we kind of have gone through the period? Yeah, good. Look, as you can see, it's definitely like it is quite pretty complex to get your head around. It is quite a noisy result. I think they're not getting better or worse. I think they're just, the word, it's almost like it's stuck in a way or frozen, whatever. It's in that part. So we've had the 100 basis points in Fed cuts, but that hasn't translated to mortgage rates. So mortgage rates, in fact, have gone up. So when I was thinking we were going to have some green shoots when we saw the first interest rate cuts, yeah, the mortgage rates are off the 10-year Treasury yield. So you can see what's driving that. And I saw a stat last week where around 80% of mortgages have got under 5%. So you've got a whole lot of people refinance when interest rates are really low. So I guess you just get it. So I guess it's the normalization and getting the expectations. And so that sort of flows through to the R&R market. So housing turnover is at a 30- or 40-year low. And so yeah, you can see why both Australia and the U.S. end markets are a bit slow. So we've just got to work our way through it. So I mean, that's the path that probably anyone new to us. I mean, we are a cyclical business. The building industry traditionally has been cyclical. We're in one of those cycles now. And there's a lot going on. Yep. No, thank you for the color. That's great. Thanks, Peter. And then maybe just to follow up on your answer around waterworks and just the different kind of, I guess, U.S. approach U.S. sellers might have to Australian sellers, does that change your approach around growth in the U.S.? You've still got the 10-15 per year target. Does it mean you try and shift more to kind of organic versus an acquired growth strategy and then maybe just remind us of what that means around margin profiles and ramp-up times and things like that? No, look, the strategy doesn't change. So I mean, I think we're fortunate that we've got I mean, the organic part is the slower, harder, but probably better from a culture perspective. But the strategic, the bolt-on M&A part helps add scale, and you just got to do your due diligence properly, which we do. And so I mean, this was always a risk that we'd identified when we did the acquisition. So we probably would do a few things differently in hindsight. It's always easier. But that sector, that waterworks part, it's been the industry is one that's been built through lots of M&A. And it's definitely part of the U.S. It is a very it's competitive. It's the, what is it, the home of capitalism. And so some of these people are well into their 70s. And so yeah, so look, it's happened a few times. You've just got to get your head around it and take the necessary precautions, but nothing really doesn't change because we've got that's why we're fortunate. We've got both the organic and M&A, so hopefully that gives a bit more color, but certainly, when you're dealing in the fire, the emotions get going for a period, but then you calm down. It's obviously explained to someone. It is like competitive sports, like war, all mixed in one, and so it does get all the juices flowing when these things start happening. Okay. No, thanks for that. Really appreciate the detail you've gone to. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Harry Saunders from E&P. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. Just another follow-up, firstly on the US. Given that that was a very strong sort of store add count in the first half, and you're talking to some more in the second, that implies about a 10% year-on-year tailwind in branches for the second half. So just sort of wondering what sort of benefit we can expect from those store adds in the second half versus perhaps the first half, please. Remember, the new organic stores take two to three years to really come on and mature, and some can take a bit longer. So obviously, that will benefit revenue, but there's a cost structure in setting all that up. So you just got to balance it all out. So I don't know if that helps, Harry. I mean, that's all I mean, we're opening more stores than we normally sort of expected. And then the counter to that is obviously some deflation in some categories and obviously that competitive dynamic in the waterworks business, which we expect to continue. That's really helpful, and sort of related to those comments, given that product deflation, could you just give us a bit more color on if that's sort of a similar headwind expected in the second half and color on the percentage impact and what's driving that? Is that the PVC pipe category we've been hearing about in the industry, and perhaps, is there a margin impact to flag in the second half over the first half with these additional stores you're talking about? It's definitely that PVC part, so that's consistent. Look, the nature of our sector, when things get softer and capacity gets back, you can sometimes get into an overcapacity situation. Therefore, things get more contested. There is definitely some slight risk to the margin in both regions as the softness continues. That's why we've got to manage this carefully. We've seen this so many times before, I guess, not in recent times. You've got to stick to your strategy. You've got to keep investing, do it as leanly as you can. We've obviously got to try and keep building the new capability for the future, which is the data AI piece and digitization. And we've still got to keep building the capabilities that will allow us to compete properly in the U.S. So we're in the midst of that still. So hopefully that answers your question, Harry. No, that's really helpful. Thank you. And final one, please, just on ANZ's sales for the second half. Appreciate the cautious comments. I've had some others out there sort of calling for the bottom of the cycle now, potential sort of recovery from here. With the M&A tailwind again in the second half as well, are you expecting a similarly sort of flat sales performance or maybe some growth to call out? It's a good question. We've had an interest rate cut, which is a positive, but I think we're not out of the woods yet. What we said on the call is that we've actually got the number of trading days against us for the second half. There's about six less trading days in the second half. And the whole timing of Easter Anzac Day will mean the whole building industry will probably go on holiday that week. You've got to take that into account. And we're probably going to need another interest rate cut or two to really impact, so we're getting probably closer to the bottom, but we're probably not sure whether we're there yet and then how long it takes to then start to recover. It could be 12-18 months. Got it. And just to clarify, that impact from the trading days, what sort of percentage impact do you anticipate on the year-on-year for the second half, please? Look, Harry, it's a look, the thing we don't as you know, we don't give guidance. We obviously did the update at the AGM because we were a little way off where consensus was. So that would probably be giving guidance. But the conditions are continuing, but you've got less trading days in the second half. So I'll just let you try and work it out from there. Great. Thank you. Thanks, Harry. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Sam Seow from Citi. Please go ahead. Morning, guys. Thanks for taking the question. Maybe just a quick one on the store rollout in the U.S. Slide 11 there looks like you've moved into a new state up in the Northeast. Am I reading too much into that, or is that a strategic move, I guess, given that's the biggest R&R market up that way? No, it's a don't read too much into it. It was just I've got Sasha here. Do you want to, Sasha, who's just come all the way back from the US? No, no, don't read too much into that. It came with something we did a few years ago, and so it's a very, very, very small presence there, so don't read too much. Okay. That's helpful. And then maybe just, again, following on from some of the deflation commentary, I guess in ANZ, it looks like it's been flat through the period. I mean, just high level, has it gotten any better or worse? And then same again in the US. I think you had moderate deflation at 1Q. And I guess you've talked to PVC, but just high level, directionally how that's going and perhaps any categories outside of PVC that you might be seeing deflation in? It's largely PVC. We're sort of at a reasonable spot in ANZ in terms of the. We're not seeing it, but there is still a risk that that could actually come until we start getting a pickup. So there's definitely a bit more deflation in the U.S. So we're at pretty much equilibrium in the ANZ part. But there's some caveats there. There's a few things to play out. So yeah, so we're not expecting. I'm probably still expecting a little bit more because it's just the nature of the U.S. And ANZ, not in the short term, but in the medium to long term, we do have a new owner of our main competitor. And we're obviously expecting them to be a much better competitor and owner than the previous. So it's going to continue to be. Competition is something you have to get used to. Got it. That's helpful, guys. Thank you very much. Thanks, Sam. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Shaurya Visen from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Good morning, Peter, and Tim. Thanks for taking the questions. Two questions, please, both in the US. Most of my other questions have been answered. Just in the US, start with the first half sales down 5%. Peter, any chance you can help us think through the breakdown between what the underlying like-for-like sales were and what was driven by store additions or M&A, please? And I had a quick follow-up on the margins then. Thanks. It's a good question. But again, there's some parts that we just haven't shared because it's a look, everyone's listening to us on this call. It'd be fair to say like-for-like is down because we've opened new stores. So what I would say, we've definitely lost share in America in this last period. So we're definitely disappointed in the result and the performance of the US. And we're holding our own in Australia. So at this point, we haven't stripped out like-for-like, but it's certainly not where we want it to be. Sure. Thanks, Peter. And just quickly on U.S. margin profile. So if I look at the EBIT margins, look, relatively solid despite revenue down 5%. Just trying to think through what's driving that. Are these just the benefits of scale that you're reaping right now? I think it's, to be honest, I think it's to do with. I mean, Sasha and the team, with all what was going on, I think managed to when you see these things happening, we're very disciplined on the discretionary cost part. So I think they've run that they run that well. And probably it's just depending on where you are in the cycle. I think that they did do that. That's why we've managed that part of it, I think it's been managed pretty well and actually managed, excuse me, better than what we've done in Australia. So yeah, so I think we're doing that part well. It's just that our focus really still is the medium to long term and how we obviously withstand what's going on and continue on building out scale and building out the capabilities that you need to properly compete and win in the U.S. Great. Thanks, Peter. Very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Keith Chau from MST Marquee. Please go ahead. Good morning, gents. First question, and apologies for labeling the point in the U.S., but it seems like a fairly important one to get to the bottom of. There's obviously been a lot of discussion on share in the U.S. and what's happened there. But I guess importantly, on the go forward, are you seeing any signs of that share issue abating? Are we getting a bit more disciplined competition? I mean, private equity doesn't tend to just come through a little bit and stay away. They tend to be fairly persistent. And Peter, you talked about unethical practices in the industry. So can you help us understand what your expectation is of the current landscape and the go forward for U.S. competition? Yeah. Well, yeah, it's a good one. And certainly, we've had lots of discussions. I think it's hard to know. They'll be on the call. So look, there's still another state for them to enter. So in the short term, I think there's still a bit more of the same. In the medium to long term, you've got to, it's then how you compete. And obviously, everybody when you're starting new, you can be aggressive to win business. I mean, you've still got to make sure that's viable and commercial. And so I mean, in the end, it will get rational. It's just that there's a period right now where basically this is a business that's been made up of just really export-aligned people that were part of that team. So yeah, a little bit more to go. But if you see through this, obviously the people that have withstood that, all the onslaught or the offers are staying because they believe in what we're doing with Reece and the investment and the culture and the value. So yeah, in the long term, you've got to believe in the team and the culture. And that normally stands the test of time in business and sport. So obviously, yeah, we're in an interesting time right now. So hopefully that helps. So short term, and I'm talking a lot, short term, more of the same. Medium to long term, let's just see where let's see who wins. Yeah, that's good color. Thanks, Peter. And I guess maybe if we do a bit of a comparison, I don't know if you've got a view on this, but a comparison between plumbing distribution in the U.S. and quality building materials distribution. QXO's been fairly active out there. And I think the most prominent acquisition that they're undertaking at the moment is for Beacon Building Products. But I think for building materials, the consolidation of distribution could be earlier in its, I guess, phase compared to plumbing distribution. Would you agree with that statement, or do you think plumbing is still very early in its stages of consolidation? That's a good look. They're both a pretty fragmented market. So it's, yeah, still, I think early in the, I mean, the leaders still have a much smaller share than what the leaders do in the local market here. So yeah, there's still a lot of independence in each state. So yeah, I think in the building distribution and plumbing, I think, yeah, there's definitely consolidation to happen over the next 10 years. Okay. Thanks, David. And if I can just follow up quickly on Aussie competition, you're talking about investing in the business. Maybe you've overcooked it there a little bit, and that might need to be adjusted going forward. Any particular changes you want to call out for Aussie competition as well, particularly given the changes in ownership of one of your key competitors? Yeah. So I think ultimately, I think we're all going to wrestle with that, yeah, how you the whole data AI piece and those capabilities. So that's for all of us to wrestle with because in all of these newer areas, you can invest a lot, and then it takes you have to. If you don't, you're going to get left behind. And then if you don't do it well, then you don't get the benefit as well. So that's part of our strategy. So yeah, when I say overcooked, it's probably like what we're all wrestling with. We've got all the challenges. I think Jamie Dimon summed it all up really well on that viral video of his or audio where the whole work from home, return to the office, all that leads to it is harder to innovate and get the productivity and the teamwork. So all that has to be solved in the next couple of years. And then in terms of the competition piece, look, the new owners, I know them exceptionally well. So I respect them. The owner actually was an old mentor of mine, and they've got a lot of scale there. They're number one in electrical in this country and in America and Canada. They're number one in plumbing in Canada, number two in plumbing in America. They're number one in electrical in the U.K. So they understand trade distribution. And so they'll roll out their model, which will take some time, and then they'll become a formidable competitor. We know them well. We know their models. And ultimately, we respect them a lot. Thanks, Peter. Appreciate your candor. Thanks, Keith. Thank you. The next question comes from Niraj Shah from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. I know you talked about the U.S. branch openings being sort of abnormally high and slippage from last year. But can you just talk about the experience, I guess, training and staffing up those branches, given it was a big number this period, and that's a key limiting factor at the pace and the fullness of time? Yeah, good question. I think that's why the sustainable rate is the way to go because you've got to obviously develop your people. If you take a shortcut and you open too many stores and you have people who aren't ready to run them, you'll pay a price. The time to break even and profitability will be a lot longer. It's all false economy. We've had these discussions. Sometimes you get councils delaying and you get fire authority. There's a lot of complexity rolling out stores in the U.S. It sometimes will be lumpy, but ultimately, we're aiming for a sustainable rate. Most of that is driven by the ability to develop the people to be able to run these stores and run them successfully and profitably. Your question is the one that is probably the key one and what we debate the most. And ultimately, every time in the past, we've tried to fast track it, we sort of you pay a price. I think it's like life. You've got to do your apprenticeship and do the training properly. Hopefully, that gives some color. Is there any noticeable difference in sort of finding and training folks now versus, say, 18 months ago? No, not really. I don't think so. Maybe a fraction easier, as we've got through COVID. I think it might be. The question is in comparison to what it used to be like 20 or 30 years ago. I mean, it was different then. We didn't have the scale and the professionalism and the brand to attract. So we've got that now. But then you've got other factors. You've got other challenges that I think COVID's created. So you've got a big part of Western world has got used to working on their terms, working from home. And when you're in our industry and you're in stores, you've actually got to be doing the hours. So probably that's the hardest part. And so we've got to work through that with the way we train and our systems and tech to counter all that. Makes sense. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Al Harvey from J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead. Good morning, team. Just one from me. I just want to get a sense of how you're planning to manage tariff exposures over in North America, if you can just give us any insights there. Yeah, I think it's like everybody. You've got to be really adaptable and flexible here. So for the U.S., depending on which sector you're in, you're talking the majority is a lot of it is American-made. So I mean, that's part of going to America. It's diversified our supply chain. So it just gets complex every time, just depending on where they all land. They're obviously all going to, if they do stick, impact their import costs, which will ultimately be borne by the consumer. So unless, so yeah, I think we're in a pretty good spot to navigate it. I reckon we've had. I mean, we had a little bit of experience the first time with Trump. And certainly, I reckon because of what happened with COVID, all of our supply chains got disrupted. There was a lot of change. So, I think I'm pretty comfortable we can navigate that, but there will be some moments where there'll be flux, and you'll, you've just got to keep a pretty cool head in this and just see how it all plays out. So, I think we're in a pretty good spot to manage that where we go with tariffs. Great. Thanks for that. Thanks, Al. Thank you. Next question comes from Andrew Scott from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Good morning, Gents. Can you hear me okay? We can. All clear. Thank you. Sorry, my headphones died right at the inopportune moment. Just wanted to ask one question on your capital management and balance sheet. The steps or the priorities you put there make a lot of sense. But we're sitting there with a pretty comfortable balance sheet, even with a slight tick-up in leverage. You've got a relatively high multiple versus peers, which would mean any acquisition would be accretive. So what's the key that's going to see you step over the line, whether it's with a larger M&A or with a more active capital management, be it special div or buyback? I think the look, the first priority is definitely in the business. So I mean, I think, Andrew, you know we're pretty disciplined. And I mean, it's got to actually strategically work. It's got to work culturally. And every other acquisition doesn't actually deliver what you think it's going to deliver. And there are a lot of work to integrate. So you've got to just weigh all that up. I think where we're lucky, we've got that as a growth opportunity and obviously the organic part. And we've still got capabilities to build in the U.S. We're six years into what we said was a multi-decade story. Probably through COVID, we got ahead of where we thought we were going to be. We're now back to where we probably are. Yeah, and ultimately, everybody's going to have to solve for the whole AI piece. And that takes capital and serious human capital. So yeah, I think yeah, we definitely. The balance sheet's really strong. It's as strong as it's probably ever been, obviously, apart from the last half, but that was more FX. So yeah, we've got flexibility to really go after anything that comes up that stacks up. So yeah, we're definitely. The strategy is really that. Probably should be my last message. Nothing changes. It's very much long term. We're six years in. We've de-risked the American part at the start. We've got some competitive issues now that obviously create a challenge. But ultimately, the strategy is intact, and it's still a multi-decade story. And we've got a great position in Australia that we intend to defend. Thanks, Peter. Just adding a quick one, just exploring the capital management side. Can you just let me know what the franking balance looks like at the moment, maybe in the release, but I haven't had a chance to see it yet? Yeah, good question. I actually need to just check it out. Actually, I think it's still high. The dividend for the half-year, surprisingly, is fully franked, so more than sufficient to continue franking dividends at 100%. Got it. Thank you. Great. Thanks, Andrew. Thank you. Your next question comes from James Casey from Ord Minnett. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning, James. Hi, James. Peter mentioned the break-even time for those new stores that you referred to, the break-even time. Can you just remind me how long it would take for one of those new stores to break even, approximately? We don't like to, as you know, James. I know it's good you're persistent. We don't like to share some of this stuff. It's competitive and confidential, but you are talking in excess of three years before you really start to hit your straps, so sometimes you can get a bit luckier when you get the really right location and you get an excellent manager just hits the ground running, but you're talking some years away, James. Okay. And then just secondly, in the U.S., you just referred to initiatives to offset your inflationary pressure on your cost base. Can you just provide a bit more color around that comment, whether you've got specific programs in place, whether there's a dollar value that you're targeting? Just provide a little bit of help around that comment. To be honest, how I look at it is sometimes it's just very short term. You say you're going to, you've got to be careful you don't actually create confusing messages to your people. You say you want to invest, then it gets a little bit tight, so then you pull back, and then you get all you become all over the place. So I think it was just being more mindful of some of those areas where there's investment required. So we've still got to, it delivers for the short term, but it actually just makes it harder to get to the long term. So you can, we've got, we're a service business. It's a differentiated model, requires investing. You can certainly attack that proposition, but you will pay a price for that in the end. So America, certainly, they had to manage it more tightly, but it might delay them building the capabilities they need to for the future. So it'll end up. They'll pay the price for that in two or three years' time. So I'm very philosophical, but the big part is how you become more productive. And if you want to win and you're trying to innovate, it is very hard if your teams aren't in the office full-time solving problems and creating new solutions. So that's what we're all grappling with. So I know that didn't answer the question, but it's just being Sasha in his team because you know what he's like. He's very disciplined. And because we're a little bit in a different part of our life cycle about what we're trying to solve for, but yeah, they definitely were disciplined for the half. But they needed to be because they've got those other competitive challenges. Okay. Thanks, Peter. You're great. Thanks, James. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Wilson for closing remarks. Great. Okay. Thank you, everyone, for attending for our half-year webcast today. Just a final comment. As we navigate through this softer period, our approach is unchanged, and we focus on our customer proposition and obviously building a stronger business for the longer term. So finally, I just would like to thank the Reece team and all our shareholders for their ongoing support. So thank you, and we'll speak to you all at the full year. Thanks very much. Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disappear.