Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Arkema Results Conference Call. I will now hand over to Thierry Le Hénaff, CEO. Sir, please go ahead. Thank you very much. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Arkema's Q2 2021 Results Conference Call. With me today are Marie-José, our CFO, and the investor relations team. As always, you will be able to download a set of slides used during this webcast from our website, and together with Marie-José, we'll be happy to answer your question at the end of the presentation. After an already strong start of the year, we are very pleased with the way this second quarter has developed. Actually, we consider this quarter to be another significant milestone in the development of the company, consolidating all the growth ingredients which were steadily implemented over the past years. Market dynamics stayed very well-oriented, with a combination of strong underlying growth and tight supply chains. On top of that, we benefited from a clear acceleration in the demand for sustainable solutions and from the strength of our innovation pipeline. We really took advantage of our unique positioning in high-performance materials, the demand for which will definitely continue to expand on the back of powerful megatrends like climate change, resource scarcity, urbanization, and clean mobility. In the first half, we have many very exciting examples of high-growth application, such as battery, but there are many others, and this will continue over the coming months and years. Our performance was therefore excellent this quarter, with an EBITDA of EUR 478 million, up 67% year-on-year, despite a negative combined scope and currency effects of around EUR 30 million. EBITDA margin reached a record level of 20%. Just as importantly, the EBITDA was well above the pre-COVID level of Q2 2019. This reflects also the soundness of our decisions made during 2020 not to cut R&D investment and CapEx project, and this now allows us to capitalize on our recent capacity additions and to capture the growth. We are strongly encouraged by the quality of this performance. Importantly, it was driven by all segments, each of them showing strong EBITDA progression, supported by high volumes and robust pricing power. With volumes up almost 20% compared to last year and 3.5% above 2019 levels, Specialty Materials, which now represents around 85% of our sales, led the growth. In the continuity of Q1, underlying demand was still very solid in most of the group's end market. As I said just before, we also benefited from the accelerating contribution of new development driven by sustainable innovation in attractive and promising areas like battery, bio-based material, 3D printing, engineering adhesives, or eco-friendly paints. As you certainly know, the raw materials environment was quite challenging this quarter. This is part and parcel of the economic recovery. We faced a sharp increase of input costs, including energy and logistics, which will continue in Q3. Thanks to our pricing actions, we managed to completely offset this negative impact at group level, including in our most downstream businesses. Of course, there are nuances depending on activities and geographies, but the net impact was neutral to positive in all the segments of the group. At Bostik, pricing versus raw materials net impact was neutral, which is quite an achievement given the context. It is highly positive in Coating Solutions, benefiting from good pricing power in the downstream businesses, as well as tight market conditions in the acrylic chain. This pricing action will continue in Q3, so that despite further significant increases in input costs, the net pricing impact will be again at least neutral for Q3 for the group. Our Specialty Materials EBITDA reached EUR 417 million, almost 40% above Q2 2019 pre-COVID levels, back on track with our 2024 ambition. The EBITDA margin was also excellent despite the raw materials inflation. High Performance Polymers and Coating Solutions achieving a historically high performance above 20%, while Bostik delivered on its promise and reached 14.3%, despite the dilutive mechanical effect of price increases of around 50 basis points. This is in line with Bostik's confirmed objective of 14% for the full year, despite the ongoing challenge of raw materials. Intermediates showed also a strong progression year-on-year, despite a negative scope effect linked to the PMMA disposal on the back of more favorable market conditions. Given this strong set of results and the dynamics of the market, we remain rather positive on the outlook, even if we stay attentive and agile with regard to the evolution of both the public health situation and the difficult raw material environment. Please also note that last year H2 already showed a good recovery, so the base of comparison will be higher than in H1. On the qualitative front, I would like to shed some light on several development and project, which reinforce our commitment to sustainability and strengthen our positioning in high-performance materials in line with our 2024 ambition. Firstly, I wanted to highlight some examples of our eco-friendly innovation. As I said before, the demand for sustainable solution is accelerating, driven by mega trends, we are ideally positioned to benefit from it. Our high-performance material are a good example with our PVDF in batteries serving clean mobility or bio-based polyamide 11 used not only in transportation to replace metal parts and reduce energy consumption, but also in customers' eyewear for its ease of design. In construction, we have developed low VOC powder coatings, mainly for automotive application. Our new eco-friendly adhesive solution for insulated glass sealants. All this is really very exciting for the coming month and years. We also recently announced two new organic projects supporting our commitment to sustainability, the supply of 1233zd, which is part of the new generation of fluoro specialties with minimal emission impact, and the launch of our new renewable PVDF grades for battery, which will allow an almost 20% climate change impact reduction using a residue of wood pulp manufacturing as a source of carbon. In parallel, we are significantly progressing with the construction of our two major CapEx project, also directed to our sustainability. We have launched the final phase of our integrated bio-factory in Singapore for polyamide 11, and we are on track to start mid-2022. The production of HF in the U.S. from an innovative process allowing to reduce CO2 emissions by 20 times compared to the traditional process. Last and not least, on the M&A side, as you know, we finalized in Q2 the PMMA disposal ahead of an already ambitious schedule. We also made a few bolt-on acquisition and equity investment in Specialty Materials to strengthen our positioning. For example, in the circular economy with the acquisition of Agiplast, which is a leader in the regeneration of high-performance polymer and which was an historical partner of Arkema in recycling operations. We reinforce our Adhesive segment with two bolt-on acquisitions in the start of the year. We also took minority stake in innovative company like recently Verkor to accelerate our battery strategy in Europe or ERPRO 3D to extend our expertise in 3D printing. As you could see, a very positive quarter. I will now hand it over to Marie-José, will comment then on the outlook at the end of the presentation. Thank you, Thierry. Let's review some financial metrics together, starting with the sales bridge. At EUR 2.4 billion, sales are up 26% on year. In organic terms, they grew 35% versus the second quarter of 2020, and 12% versus the pre-COVID quarter two 2019 level. Relative to last year, organic growth was evenly split between volume growth and price effect. Relative to 2019, the 12% organic growth is split between 3% volume growth and 9% price. From a regional perspective, Europe and Asia were particularly strong, with North America a little below, partly due to some raw material shortages constraining growth. The strong price effect is linked to our actions to increase prices in the face of a much higher input cost. We also benefited from favorable conditions in the acrylics chain in all three regions. There is a -4.5% perimeter effect in the quarter versus 2020, which is attributable to divestment of Functional Polyolefins last year and the sale of PMMA in May of this year, with some offsets from the acquisitions that we made in Specialty Materials. When comparing to 2019, this perimeter effect is only 2%, as ArrMaz integration only took place in July 2019. Currencies also had an adverse effect on sales in second quarter to the tune of -4.2%. The same effect applies when compared to 2020 or 2019, since it comes mainly from the stronger euro versus U.S. dollar, which stands basically at around 120 in second quarter 2021 versus 110 in second quarter 2020 or 2019. Turnover growth allowed Arkema to achieve a very strong 67% growth in quarter two EBITDA to EUR 478 million. Looking at it in the different segments. We are first in Bostik, an achievement of EUR 82 million EBITDA, up 64% year-on-year, and by more than 15% relative to the second quarter 2019. Adhesives benefited from strong volumes in construction, do-it-yourself, and industrial markets, as well as from the integration of acquisitions and price increases in the face of higher raw materials. The EBITDA margin was a strong 14.3%, fully in line with our full year target that we confirm at 14% for 2021. Advanced Materials EBITDA is up over 40% year-on-year and up 25% versus second quarter 2019, and EBITDA margin is at a record level of 24.4%. High Performance Polymers had a very strong quarter indeed, with volumes boosted by accelerating demand in most end markets, including construction, batteries, electronics, consumer goods, and transportation. Performance Additives were less dynamic given the decline in oil and gas and a high comparison base in animal nutrition, detergency, and disinfection applications. EBITDA of Coating Solutions of EUR 457 million is much higher than last year and even than the second quarter 2019 level, which was at EUR 91 million. This is driven by higher volumes across all major markets, including decorative paints, 3D printing, and industrial coatings, with an acceleration of the trend toward eco-friendly offerings such as powder coatings and water-based paints. We also implemented price increases to reflect higher raw material and energy costs. The price versus raw materials impact was clearly positive for the segment overall, as we benefited from favorable conditions in the acrylics chain for activities that are not integrated downstream. For the more merchant part of it. Finally, Intermediates EBITDA grew 32% to EUR 87 million, in spite of the negative perimeter impact from the divestment of PMMA and Functional Polyolefins. The segment benefited from good market conditions in acrylics, in Asia in particular. With depreciation and amortization at EUR 133 million, recurring EBIT came to EUR 345 million versus the EUR 144 million in second quarter 2020, and the EBIT margin stood at 14.4%, which is up almost 8% versus last year. After the particular year linked to COVID in 2020, our performance this year places our return on capital employed back above our long-term target of 10%. Non-recurring items amount to a positive EUR 732 million. This mainly reflects the pre-tax capital gain of nearly EUR 950 million linked to the sale of PMMA, and also includes PPE amortization, one-off charges, and restructuring expenses. Financial results stands at -EUR 13 million, thanks notably to the benefits of refinancing our bonds at lower rates and lower interest rate coming from the debt swap into U.S. dollar. At EUR 218 million, the tax charge includes the tax linked to the capital gain on the sale of PMMA that will be mostly disbursed in the second half of 2021, and also reflects improving profitability. In the first half, the recurring effective tax rate came to 20% of recurring EBIT, which is a bit lower than last year's level of 22%, thanks to a more favorable geographic split of profits. Q2 adjusted net income was nearly multiplied by three to EUR 267 million, which corresponds to EUR 3.5 per share. Moving on to cash flow and net debt, I would like to flag first that in order to facilitate comparability of the cash performance indicators, we have defined a recurring cash flow metric that excludes actually the positive variance on working capital coming from the tax liability on disposals. This recurring cash flow amounted to EUR 245 million in Q2 2021, versus EUR 284 million in Q2 2020. The year-on-year variance includes first, the increased cash generated from our operations, consistent with our improved profitability. Second, the working capital rebuild in the context of higher volumes and higher raw material prices. I'd like to flag that the working capital ratio on annualized sales, excluding PMMA activity now, stands at a very low level, just below 12%, versus 16.5% of sales last year. This is well below our normative level, which would be more around 14% of sales for a normative working capital ratio. We would therefore expect this working capital level to rise in second half as we rebuild some inventories in a continued price inflation context. Capital expenditure totaled EUR 157 million in the quarter versus EUR 122 last year, partly reflecting higher exceptional CapEx of EUR 64 million in Q2. This is as a result of the acceleration in the construction of the polyamide 11 plant in Singapore and the Nutrien project in the U.S. Total recurring and exceptional capital expenditure is still expected to amount to around EUR 750 million this year. Second quarter free cash flow amounts to EUR 330 million, including a non-recurring amount of EUR 132 million due to the timing of tax disbursements linked to the PMMA sale. The net debt at end of June 2021 amounts to EUR 1.3 billion. That includes EUR 700 million of hybrid bonds. The net debt also includes the totality of the EUR 300 million commitment linked to the share buyback program that we launched in May. Our balance sheet remains extremely solid, with a net debt to EBITDA ratio at 0.9x. Thank you for your attention. I'll now hand it over to Thierry for more. Thank you, Marie-José, for your explanations. Again, we were very pleased by the result of the first half, which reflects the increasing strength of our portfolio. The positive dynamics that we saw in H1 are continuing, with good demand across a majority of our end markets. Our Specialty Materials in particular, will continue to strongly benefit from our sustainable innovation drive and recent capacity expansions we made to leverage the accelerating demand linked to global megatrends. We are also keeping a close eye on the evolution of the public health situation and raw materials inflation. This is why we remain nimble, and in particular, ready to further increase prices when needed. Our raw materials index will continue to increase materially in Q3, but we have demonstrated, as you know, our pricing power so far this year, and I am quite confident that we will at least neutralize their impact in H2. Given the strength of our first half results and our confidence in the unique quality of our portfolio and of our growth levels, we decided to raise, for the second time this year, our full year 2021 guidance for Specialty Materials, which, as you know now, constitutes the vast majority of our scope. We now expect Specialty Materials EBITDA to increase by around 30% year-on-year in 2021, at constant scope and currency, versus +20% announced when we raised guidance at the Q1 results publication in May, and +10% when we gave the original guidance in February. This would mean a very robust H2 for Specialty Materials with an EBITDA slightly above H2 2019, despite a negative currency impact of around EUR 30 million. All in all, this means that for the group, we expect an EBITDA of around EUR 1.4 billion in 2021. At constant currency, our EBITDA would then be close to the 2019 and 2018 levels for the whole group, despite the disposal of Functional Polyolefins and PMMA for eight months, and the significant decline in Fluorogases contribution over the period. With a much better mix and also much lower debt. It was the whole aim of our new vision for the company, which we announced last year in April, and this is very value creative for our shareholders. Beyond delivering on our financial results, we'll continue to execute our strategy, accelerating innovation and new development in megatrend, continuing bolt-on acquisition in Specialty Materials, implementing the strategic review in Fluorogases, and above all, making further progress on our policy of corporate social responsibility to which our employees are fully committed. I thank you very much for your attention, and we are now together with Marie-José, ready to answer the question you may have. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you wish to ask a question, please press zero one on your telephone keypad. We have a first question from Matthew Yates from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, Thierry and Marie. Good morning Matthew. Couple questions. The first one around standing by your margin guidance for Bostik this year. Forgive me, it's a bit unfair. We've obviously spent the last week hearing from AkzoNobel and some of the coating companies that they are not able to fully protect their margins this year. Is there something inherently different about the adhesive business model or its raw material basket, or should we more see this as a function of how Arkema itself is executing? The second question may be around the materials margin. I think Marie said that's a record 24%, and obviously higher than 2019. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think your midterm guidance is 22%. Are we looking at perhaps a seasonal peak in profitability for this business? There's some sort of startup cost coming into the company next year with Singapore? Again, the way you're executing, are you trending above that mid 22% midterm guidance that you've previously talked about? Okay. Thank you for your question, Matthew. Overall, the good thing, I think it's important that we can raise a debate about this figure or that figure. What is very important, thank you for recognizing that, is that this semester and this quarter and even the full year guidance, let's say, confirm that we are really fully on track for 2024 ambition. You can take all businesses, all parameters. We are really confirming, this is the fruit, the benefit of our strategy and the execution. Thank you for mentioning execution. I think we execute very well the strategy, which is value creative. We are really fully on track. This second quarter is demonstrating that pretty much. With regard the adhesive, it's very difficult to compare businesses which are not the same, I will not comment for the paint company, which are partner and customer of ours. On the adhesive, clearly, as you mentioned, the raw material challenge is a big one for two reasons. The first one is the value in absolute value to compensate raw material, which are increasing far more than what everybody was expecting at the beginning of the year. Also, when you are able to compensate the absolute value of the impact of raw material, you are by definition a dilutive impact on the margin because you divide the same number by a number which are the top line, which is higher because it's inflated by the pricing increase that we pass to our customers. Despite of that, we maintain, we confirm our EBITDA margin target of 14% for the whole year. Far we are above that, but as you know, the last quarter is always lower because you have December months, and even in the second quarter, you have the August month. Normally you have a seasonality which make our margin percentage lower in the second part of the year. As you know, in the first quarter, we benefited from a delayed impact of raw material. Overall, we confirm our 14%, which would be quite an achievement in this inflated context of raw material. We remain confident to make the story short on this, let's say, demanding target. The good thing of it is that if we deliver this target, we will be very well positioned to deliver the 16% for 2024 for Bostik, knowing that the current raw material environment is not completely normalized and it is above the norm. If we deliver the 14% in December month, this give us a good hope for the longer term. I think your question was on Advanced Materials? Yeah. Clearly, we are more than in line with our long-term target, which is good. Can we do more? We will see. I think let us first deliver what we have promised, which is, I think again, very demanding, but we are really more than on track. It is coming, Matthew, I would say with sort of acceleration of our HPP growth coming both from PVDF and from long chain polyamide. I would say PVDF with clearly battery, but also other market. It's not only battery story, but we are clearly very well positioned for battery. It's more than that. We see in electronics, in coatings, in the short coating, some very good areas of growth supported by sustainability and this new world again. On polyamide, particularly polyamide 11, which is one of our star product. It's amazing to see that in fact, difficulty with polymer is that some of them are not well positioned for this clean mobility, and some are well positioned. Polyamide 11, beyond all this incredible prospect in biosourced polymers, in sport shoes, we could quote plenty of new businesses accelerating. On top of that, with regard clean mobility and automotive, it's a fact that this polymer is particularly well positioned. We sell more, for example, poly 11 in automotive, in electrical vehicles, significantly more than we were selling in thermal vehicles. It's quite a good element. To make the story short, strong quarter in HPP, which is supporting the whole Advanced Materials. Quite good hopes for the long term. We are very well positioned to deliver at least what we have promised for the 2024 ambition, which was already very demanding. Thank you, Thierry. Execution, as we mentioned, is key. Thank you. Next question from Emmanuel Matot from ODDO BHF. Sir, please go ahead. Hello, Thierry, Marie-José. Hello, Emmanuel. Investor relation team. Hello. Several questions for me, please. First, do you think the recovery is too strong? Meaning that it's going to be difficult for Arkema to further increase your EBITDA in 2022, notably in H1 due to this very high basis of comparison of this year. Second, do you face some shortages of some raw materials which could impact your H2? Are you well protected against that risk? I have also a question about corporate cost this year. What shall we expect? Because those costs have doubled in Q2, maybe it's related to the PMMA disposal. Maybe a question about acquisitions. We have seen several bolt-ons since the beginning of the COVID crisis. Do you remain confident to achieve also some mid-size deals? Do you have some opportunities in the pipe? Thank you. Okay, Emmanuel. Different elements. Maybe Marie-José will answer corporate cost if you want. You want to do it now or at the end, or? Yeah, I can actually quickly confirm that corporate costs are coming back, let's say, to pre-COVID levels. Despite we are not fully recovering in terms of traveling, but let's say most of the marketing, advertising, and events are back on track to support, in fact, the volume recovery that we are facing. The second aspect is we have, clearly, some initiatives in terms of digital that we want to accelerate and contribute to this trend. For this year, I'm targeting, let's say, to be at the level of 2019 corporate cost overall. Thank you, Marie-José. This confirms that. We recognize that. We have never been last year the company which has cut more cost. We cut a lot. We have always had in mind to make sure that the company was really positioned for the growth. We are now entering, as we mentioned several times, a new area of growth for Arkema, organic growth. You know how we are strict on cost, but sometimes you need to spend money because you believe that you're really on the right wave for growing. It is okay for Arkema. It is okay in Adhesives, it is okay in HPP, it is okay in Coating Solutions, where sometimes, and we had discussion in the past, the potential of growth has been underestimated, including profitability improvement. We are in this very nice period, and we should not be underestimated and recognize really because we feel it good from this growth standpoint, and sometimes you need to put some cost, and this is what we are doing. Thank you, Marie-José, for confirming that we go back to 2019 level, but maybe with a mix of cost, which is more oriented towards growth and modernization of the company, which is good. With regard to recovery, it's interesting what you say because sometimes we get the question, are we becoming cautious for the second semester? We have to show what the right question, but no, I think at the same time you need to be positive, but also to recognize that trees do not rise to the sky. I think we are fully on track with our 2024 target, which is good. We deliver very solid 2021 result above what everybody had in mind. It's great. It's fantastic. It doesn't mean that you need to think that you need to recognize after that the different element of the performance. In fact, you have two faces of the coin of the recovery. You have strong demand, but at the same time, raw material is a challenge. When I say raw material, it's also supply chain constraint that we need to manage. This supply chain constraint that you are mentioning, including shortages of raw material, we got them already in the Q2, and they will be there also in the Q3 and certainly in Q4. You have a combination of different elements. Some are supporting you, like growth, and some are challenges, like raw material shortages that you are mentioning, and I think we are good at managing that. It helps us also on some value chain like acrylics, okay, and some other value chain, it's more on a sticking point. We have a combination of different elements, but overall, it's positive for the company. I confirm that we are fully on track, which was not obvious because we got the COVID in the middle of announcing our long-term target of 2024. Don't forget that. Despite that, we are fully on track with this 2024. This means we completely swallow and more than swallow the crisis level, and we are able to rebound more than others because we are uniquely positioned in this megatrend. This is positive, but positive doesn't mean that trees rise to the sky. Everybody has to be at the same time confident, positive, but realistic. On- Acquisition acquisition, because I think I answered the first 2 at the same time, no? Yes, you're right. Yeah. Thank you. Yes. I can go to acquisition. Acquisition, certainly I will not comment since we are in the pipeline by definition. No, I think we stand what we say. Some have bought on, we have good ideas on small ones, and there will be new ones which will be announced in this year. When we have possibility, some bigger deals let's say, intermediate size and maybe one big size in the next three years. Nothing is different from what we have said so far. As you know, half of our growth will come from acquisition, and it's still the pattern that we are expecting. Nothing new on this side. We are determined to make acquisition as part of our growth on top of the organic growth, which, as I mentioned, is going in the right direction. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. Next question from Mubasher Chaudhry from Citi. Sir, please go ahead. Hi, Thierry. Hello, Mubasher. Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. Coming back to your comments on the Bostik margins. It seems like you're doing quite well with the price increases to offset the raw materials in 2021. Looking further out, should raw materials normalize, should we expect the pricing to decline as that happens? Are you expecting to hold on to the pricing as the raw materials come off, let's say, for example, in 2022, therefore presenting a margin expansion opportunity looking further out? Second question is also a bit of a follow-up on the M&A side of things. I think when you did ArrMaz, you said that was kind of the very, very high end of the bolt-on size that you'd be looking at. Is that still valid, or are you prepared, given the PMMA proceeds and given where the balance sheet stands today, you're willing to look at something around the EUR 1 billion mark or something around the bigger size for acquisitions, obviously, if it matches with your criteria and was in line with your strategy. Is that something that would be on the cards, or would you completely write that off just because of the size? Thank you. Okay, Mubasher. On the last one, you will tell me if I answer because I'm not sure I caught the whole question, but I will try to do it. First of all, we have to manage first by step. It was, I think, the nature of the initial question at the beginning of the question session. On Bostik, we are glad so far to have offset raw material and beyond that, to maintain the percentage of margin at the level of the guidance that we gave you. We have another challenge, not only us, but all specialty chemicals or materials company, which is coming with the Q3 because there is a new wave of raw materials. For the time being, before talking about normalizing, everybody has to be aware that there is another wave of raw material which would come. As we say, despite of that, for Bostik for the full year, we maintain our 14% objective of this year, which is quite a strong objective. After that, when the raw material will normalize, you will get some normalization of pricing by definition. You cannot ask whatever business to offset raw material increase, which are quite significant and just to keep it for yourself. This means you are not at all customer focused. No, I think there will be some normalization. It is true that an environment for a downstream business like adhesive is always more challenging when raw material go up, especially significantly, than when they go down. It means that if we are able to deliver the 14% margin for Bostik this year, it certainly put us, it was my message, in good position, quite in good position for the 16% for 2024. It reinforce our, I would say, our guidance. It's important that you appreciate the work that Bostik has to do to deliver the 14% in this kind of environment. We were very pleased by the Q2, and now we move to the Q3. With regard to M&A, we are open by definition to larger acquisition to the extent that the opportunity makes sense. There is no religion on that. I think we are opportunistic on acquisition. Our bread and butter are bolt-on acquisitions, small size. We know it's nearly statistic. We have a large number of possibilities, and from time to time, let's say three to five times a year, we deliver some. After that, if you go down the list, we are open to medium size ones. For example, we had Den Braven a few years ago, which was medium size, I would say. They don't come every year. Let's say we plan to make, let's say two of them up until 2024. Okay? We have the financial flexibility to make a bigger one, but we'll do it only if from a strategic standpoint and value creation, it makes sense. This, it's impossible to say it for sure because it depends on opportunity and it would be a mistake to say I want to do it. For the sake of it, we do it because it makes sense and we are at the same time determined but also patient because it depends really on opportunity. We have the financial flexibility, but the financial flexibility is not enough. It has to make sense from strategic standpoint and from a value creation standpoint. We gave you, I think, our track record on acquisition since the start of Arkema, and you have seen how much value we can create. It was on a total of EUR 4 billion, I think. We are really strict on what we buy. At the same time, I think, we have proven that we were able to create value with acquisition. If there are opportunities, we will look at them. I cannot be more specific as you can imagine, but I try to answer as best as I could to your question, Mubasher. Thank you very much. That's already very helpful. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Next question from Daniel Chung from Redburn. Sir, please go ahead. Hi, Thierry. Hi, Marie-José. Hi, Daniel. Yeah. Firstly, well done on the impressive results. Just two from me. First off was how do you view the development of the supply tightness in acrylics that given plants are ramping back up, and what are your assumptions here on potential normalization? Maybe we can touch on the sustainability of demand as well in Coating Solutions, especially with painted coatings. Secondly was, you touched earlier on High Performance Polymers. It'd be really helpful to get a picture on how big the growth was for PVDF and maybe in PA11, whether that was due to new customer wins or market share gains. That'd be very helpful. Thanks. I will start with the last question and go backward. On the PVDF and polyamide 11, yes, the growth was especially good in PVDF, as you know, because the battery segment is growing very well. It's beyond that. I would say the supply chain is tight, and we have a lot of innovation. We are, let's say PVDF on average is growing 7% a year. If I take the average of the two years because 2020 is not sufficiently meaningful as a reference. I would say if you take 2019 and 2021, so far we are above this 7%, with the acceleration in batteries, which is good, and this is why you have seen some new investment in PVDF recently, and we'll continue to invest in this, where we are in pretty good shape. As expected when we publish the Capital Markes Day, it's really our sustainability innovation, which is there. On polyamide 11, in fact, we grow quite well with regard to 2020. In fact, up until we have the Singapore plant, we are limited in capacity, so it's tight, and we'll get back. We are significantly above 2020, but we go back to the level of 2018, 2019, but with a better mix. This means that more and more we are focusing on niches. You can see that in the pricing also, and because we can add really a lot of value in a niche, like for example, sport shoes is quite a good example, but I could name, or in medical, or I could name even in some application for automotive but related to clean mobility. High pricing businesses because you have a lot of innovation behind that. The mix is evolving in a very positive way. In terms of volume themselves, we don't have flexibility so far up until we have the Singapore plant. The Singapore plant, we can really at the right moment from our standpoint, and then we can talk again about growing. Different pattern for PVDF and polyamide 11, but polyamide 11 should join PVDF once we have the Singapore plant starting. With regard to Coating Solutions or sustainability of demand in Coating Solutions, I would say the Q2 level, you have some restocking, but not only for us, for our customers, for our competitors. It's true. Don't think that the growth in volume that we enjoy will stay forever. I think the growth will stay quite robust for a simple reason, is that with this European Green Deal, this new habits of consumption, people renovating their house, we believe that the demand for construction-related business will stay good for the second semester and for the next years. With this stimulus package, which come on stream in Europe and U.S. You have plenty of elements which we believe should support this kind of businesses, Coating Solutions, also Adhesives. They are more or less in the same area. Don't extrapolate second quarter, which was absolutely outstanding. Consider that we are positive for the second semester and the coming years on this acrylic demand. On this Coating Solutions demand, with a lot of innovation in low VOC, powder resin for powder coating, powder paint. This new type of demand is really accelerating, supported by sustainability and this Green Deal. With regard to the acrylic value chain, I think you mentioned also the monomer part. Clearly, we benefit from. This is also the beauty of the portfolio. You have to appreciate that. We have different elements on our portfolio between the Adhesives, which have a pattern, Advanced Materials, which is another pattern, and then we have a third pattern with Coating Solutions. In an environment of tight raw material, I would say that Bostik, even if they resist well, is suffering more. On the other side, Coating Solutions is enjoying more this kind of a pattern. You have to look at the whole group performance, which is really more and more resilient because of this quite complementary pattern. With regard to acrylics, again, don't extrapolate the, let's say, the margin support that we get in Q2 forever. It will certainly normalize more with all capacity being on stream on the second semester, but it will stay at a good level without extrapolating the condition of the Q2, but it will stay at quite a good level. I think what is very good, and I will take advantage of your question to extrapolate a little bit the answer. What is good really on the Q2, on the Q1, and on the full year, what we will deliver on the full year is that is not the contribution of one element. It's really the contribution of different element, different business units, nearly at equal levels. We are very pleased about that because it's a very balanced development of the year, not only compared to 2020, but also compared to 2019 and compared to 2018. For us, what is very important that you have in mind is that we build a long-term project. It's not a matter of one quarter or one semester or one year. What is very important is to deliver ongoingly, and this is what we are doing, thanks to this portfolio reshaping. Great. Thanks, Thierry. Thank you, Mubasher. Daniel. Daniel. Sorry. Thank you, Daniel. Thanks. Other question? Thank you. Next question, Alex Stewart from Barclays. Sir, please go ahead. Hello, Alex. Hi there. I think I heard you say that the raw material. Alex, we cannot hear you. Sorry. The sound is very weak. Okay. Sorry for that. Is that better? Yeah. Yeah, it's better. Yeah. Sorry. I think I heard you said the raw material net pricing balance in Adhesives in the second quarter was neutral. I just wanted to confirm if that's correct. If it is correct, can you comment on whether you think that the second half will also be neutral or whether you'll see some absolute earnings lost because of the raw pricing balance? That'd be very helpful. Thank you. Just in Adhesives rather than the group. Okay. As we mentioned, we confirm first the 14% because we have some question on that, on the 14% EBITDA margin target for the full year. Clearly, the raw material escalation is significant, but we confirm that we should be, if not very close to compensating the whole raw material in absolute terms. Because of that, you have a dilution on the margin percentage. This means that we would have done better, in fact, than the guidance in a normal environment, which is quite an achievement. You have some dilution of the percentage. In value, we should be at par or close even in the second semester, but which mean a lot of effort, as you can imagine. That's great. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Next question, Sam P erry from Credit Suisse. Sir, please go ahead. Sam. Sam. Sam? Okay. We don't hear the sound. Sorry. I'm ready to answer the question, but I need to have the question. Next question is from Jaideep Pandya from On Field Research. Please go ahead. Jaideep. Thank you. I give you the question, Thierry, if you're ready to answer. First question is really. Yeah, I'm ready. First question is really around your project with Nutrien, where you're taking a different route to the fluoropolymer chemistry. Could you just give us a little bit more information around the HFCs route? In terms of just patenting this technology or just sort of getting some exclusivity around this technology, how exclusive is it for you versus with Nutrien? Because I'm reading that there's also some projects in China which are using HFCs route rather than HF route. Do you think in the future this will be the way to sort of manufacture sustainable fluorochemicals? If you can give us some color on how much you're going to use within PVDF versus your new, low GWP gases, like 1234yf or 1233zd. That's my first question. The second question is really around M&A. Obviously, DSM went to Covestro and recently Allnex has also gone to Asian player. Both those multiples were not significantly punchy, 10x-12x. What is your view around resin assets these days? Was there a particular reason why you, again, chose not to go for Allnex? How is your own portfolio developing, especially with regards to water-based coatings versus solvent-based coatings in that regard? Thanks a lot. Congrats on getting Thierry Pilenko on your board, but don't let him take all the credit. Okay. Thank you very much for the two comments and question. With regard to Nutrien, I will not do it too technically because we have many people listening, and I want to make sure that everybody understand what we are talking about. In fact, you have basically the traditional route where you start from the mine. You have the fluorspar, which is a mineral, the stone. You extract it from the mine. With that, you treat this to make an HF. You treat this mineral in a traditional with an oven, inside an oven, and et cetera. This process consume a lot of energy, as you can imagine, at the two stages. Is a strong emitter of CO2. It's a traditional process which is used, I would say, in more than the vast majority. It's nearly the process, I would say. The process that we have been working on, I would not say it's not necessarily exclusive, but I think at the end of the day, you will not have many companies using it just because you need to find the right place to implement it. The beauty of this process is that you use a by-product, which is a Nutrien process. You don't add any emission of CO2. It's incredibly favorable because you don't have the emission of the CO2 coming from the mining extraction. On top of that, you don't have the production of HF, which is coming from your own process, which emit, again, CO2. You use, in a positive way, just by-product. You don't add any CO2 on top of that. From this standpoint, it's very elegant. It's true that in Asia you have some comparable processes which have been implemented. Again, it's a very large minority of these processes. I think in the U.S., we will be the only one. Now in China, we use more traditional processes. We cannot use it everywhere and will not spend this amount of money everywhere. Otherwise, you will then question us on our capital employed. We try to find the right balance when it makes sense. Clearly in the U.S., for different reasons, which is competitiveness, safety of security of supply and sustainability footprint is very, very good. We are very pleased about this new process. With regard to M&A, this is not because you have things to be sold that we will buy everything. I think in Coating, we have already a very good size. We are one of the strong leader worldwide. We are very happy about our portfolio, which has been built over years. I would say, it was normal. For many years, we have been challenged on the profitability of the segment. You start to see that we were right about the potential of the segment in terms of profitability. I think sustainability footprint is really very good compared to some other actors. I think we have a good portfolio that we'll continue to improve, but we will do it through bolt-on acquisition, and we don't plan to make major acquisition in the Coating Solutions segment. Even if you will recognize that the multiple which has been, I think it was 12x for the big acquisition that you have mentioned. The multiples that you have seen on Coating Solutions clearly reflect the value of our Coating Solutions segment as such. I hope that you will appreciate that when you make some of the parts. I think our strategy on Coating Solutions, it is the same. We want to make bolt-on acquisition, and we'll find some good ones which will reinforce both our technology, geographical footprint, and create value for our shareholders. We are not chasing the big target. Great. Thanks a lot, Thierry. You're welcome. Thank you. We have the next question from Sam P erry from Credit Suisse. Sir, please go ahead. Hi, can you hear me now? Yes, it's okay. It's okay. Hello. Great. Just two basic questions on PVDF, please. Prices in China have significantly increased from EV demand. Can you give an indication of your PVDF capacity and how much of that is sold into China? Is your entire capacity of high enough quality to be supplied into batteries? Apologies if I've missed it, what were the capacity expansion plans over the next few years here, please? Thanks. Okay. Obviously, I will not give you the detail, which our competitors would love to know. Okay. I will not give how much is in EV, how much is in China. The only thing that I can say is that for many years, we are one of the worldwide leader, if not the worldwide leader in PVDF. We are very strong technology speaking. We have traditional businesses which are behaving very well, and on top of that now we have the battery which is accelerating the demand. We are really well-positioned for that. We benefited as one of element of the growth of HPP, which is itself one element of the Advanced Materials growth. Okay. After that, you can make your own assumption of how much PVDF is contributing. You have some interesting note which has been published recently by some of your colleagues. You can also benefit from it. I would say that it's really one of the elements. We must have in our sustainability innovation, we must have maybe 12 staff. PVDF for battery is one of the 12 staff. It's fantastic that we are positioned there. We have some other, which are also very good. Now, as I mentioned, our base plan for PVDF growth was 7% a year. We think we should do more than that now. We try to have a capacity extension which make us, let's say, in position to follow this kind of growth. 7% in the past. It will certainly be almost 10% in the coming years. This year is far more than that, even if we don't disclose it. We are in good shape. You have seen sequentially several investment in PVDF in the recent. You can take the announcement which we have published, and it give you a good idea of what we can do. Sorry, I cannot do that. I cannot disclose you confidential information. We disclose to nobody. That other people will love to have, but it's one of the bright spot inside Arkema. Others. Fortunately, we have, as I mentioned, 10 of them at least inside Arkema. Great. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. Next question from Geoff Haire from UBS. Sir, please go ahead. Hi. Good morning. Most of my questions have been asked. I just wanted to have one last one. When I look at your implied guidance for the second half of this year, clearly it's below the level of EBITDA for the second half of last year. You already said that some of that is to do with currency. EUR 30 million, I think you said. I'm assuming also that we have contribution from PMMA in the second half of last year. Could you possibly tell us what the amount of EBITDA for PMMA was in the second half of last year? First of all, I'm sorry, please, you can check with Beatrice. We not do it in front of everybody. Our guidance for the H2 for this year is significantly above last year, first of all. Okay. Secondly, what we said and what I said is that we will be slightly above 2019. I remember the discussion we had at the beginning of the year, where the question was how much time it will take for us to go back to 2019. What we say is that not only we deliver the fantastic H1, but on top of that, we confirm that we'll get a quite a robust H2, and it's a guidance. After that, it's your duty and if you want to put more, you put more. It's up to you. If you're even more confident than us, this mean that there is upside and everybody will be happy. The guidance that we gave, which is very robust, means that for the H2, we'll be certainly well above 2020 despite exchange rate. On top of that, we'll be slightly above 2019 despite on Specialty Materials. I am on Specialty Materials. Despite the exchange rate, which we valued around EUR 30 million. Overall, it's what I would call, after a very strong H1, quite a robust H2, which is very good. Which, and I would also make this note, it's true that the more you are good on H1, the more when you look at the difference with the full year, you can get the impression that we are more conservative on H2. You have to appreciate H1. When you look at the full-year guidance, which is very important, this is why we wanted to mention it, what we say is that for the full year, we should be around EUR 1.4 billion. If you make the calculation at constant currency. Thank you for asking the question because it allow me to explain it very clearly. At constant currency, this would mean that we would be back close to 2019 for the full group. 2019 and also 2018, which was the record ever, but with a difference, which is quite significant, is that PMMA has disappeared for eight months. Functional Polyolefins has disappeared for 12 months. Fluorogases, which was, as you remember, and it was weighing down on our EBITDA multiple, was fantastic in 2018, and we have lost on the Fluorogases. It's with a lower contribution of Fluorogases, which means that we'll be at par, at constant rate with what was 2019 and 2018, but with a far better mix of Specialties. On top of that, it's not just that, it's with a level of debt. Despite share buyback, where we are EUR 300 million in the debt of today, despite of that, we have a level of debt which is significantly below what it was at that time. You have a comparable result, a far better portfolio with the transformation that we have implemented, far more Specialty, far more resilient, higher margin. On top of that, you have far less debt. I think in terms of value creation for shareholders, it's quite significant. We are far from what you have just described, which is 2021 H2 guidance is below 2020. It's not true. If you look really in detail, I encourage you to discuss with Beatrice and Peter, they will be really happy to discuss with you. It's quite a very robust guidance, not only H2, but you have also to look at the full year. Maybe I could finish also with that. We are building certainly, and you know how focused we are on delivering quarter by quarter and the full year. You should not forget the fact that we are building also a company for the long term. Very solid, very resilient, on very robust feet, this is also what we are doing. Quarter by quarter is important. Full year, I think, is more important. Certainly, the way we develop our ability to deliver for 2024 year by year is very important for you because it's really the execution of the strategy that we have announced. We are very proud of that because in fact, we go back to record level, but with far better portfolio again and far lower debt. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Next question from Andreas Heine from Stifel. Please go ahead. Thanks. Sorry, Andreas. Yeah. Just, what I propose is that because we've run out of time, maybe I take, again, a couple of questions, and with pleasure, and maybe we stop there. Certainly, Beatrice and Peter and myself, if needed, and Marie-José, we'll be able to take a question separately afterwards in the afternoon. Okay? Yeah. Thanks for the opportunity to be the last. Thanks. You're welcome. I start with few chemicals. Could you outline a little bit what you expect as trends sequentially going into the second half? As nutrition demand and the refinery part doing? That is the first one. Second, you were talking about a new wave in raw material price increases. Part of that with the acrylics, as far as I can see it, at least on average, Q3 seems to be even better in U.S. and Europe if it comes to acrylic margins. I would like to have your thoughts on that. Last, Asia. At first, I think I missed to congratulate you on buying the second half of the site for EUR 70 million in 2019, so sorry for that. Asia, yeah, we are looking for a partner. At least that was what I was taking from the strategic targets. Isn't that now the right time to look for a partner as the market is very balanced and margins are attractive? What was the last question? Sorry, Andreas. Whether you now would think that it is a good time to find a partner for the Asian acquisitions. Okay. Many questions. I would say, first of all, thank you for the comment on our investment in acrylics in China, because we could have mentioned that, but we did not do it. It's clear that the second tranche that we bought at a very discounted price, in the context of today, payback is incredible. I think even in a strategy of pure Specialty that we have, you can see that what we have done on some Intermediates like acrylic in China, we benefit from it, and it's a strong cash generation that we can reemploy in our Specialty. Thank you for the comment. Is that the right time to find a partner? I would say yes and no. First of all, we believe that even if there will still be some volatility in acrylics in China, market condition in the mid-run should stay rather good in China. We have some time to discuss, and we can continue to develop the profitability there. As you know, we have, in terms of disposal program or deconsolidation program to make it larger, our priority now is to look at our fluor gas. It doesn't mean that we cannot manage two things at the same time is just that we have always managed acquisition and disposal sequentially, and it has been very good for our ability to execute, to integrate on top of all the rest. We have contacts. It's not a bad time to develop contacts. I agree with you. Does it mean that it's necessarily the right time to execute the partnership? We listen to the market anyway, and our strategy is clear on that. You were wise to mention this point through your question. I think you had a point on the animal nutrition demand in H2, and also refining. We are more in the Thiochemicals segment. Yeah. Our feeling, to be frank, on Thioc hemicals, it has been okay, solid, but not the bright star of the first semester. Looking ahead in the second semester, it seems to us that refining is getting better, and I think it was one of your question. Animal nutrition should be okay, we don't expect necessary, let's say, neutral, I would say, for the second semester. We are a little bit attentive to the development of the health situation in Malaysia. You see that the COVID is again strong there. Depending on that, you can have some constraint about the production for our customers and for ourselves. We monitor that very closely. I would say beyond that, I would say more neutral on the second semester for animal nutrition and positive on the refining, especially with biorefining. This is what is interesting. It's not only Asia, but also U.S., where biorefinery is developing and is good for our products. Did I check with my team if I answer the question, the local question? That one was great. The last one was, yeah, acrylic matching. Thank you. How I see that, as I mentioned, there is tail here for the coming quarters. I have no doubt about that. I would say that Q2 is a peak. It's certainly a peak because what you have seen on supply chain, the fact that the world as a whole is constrained in terms of materials, and you know it yourself. You can read it in the newspaper, certainly. Acrylic is a little bit in the same context. We benefit from it in the Q2, and I would not call that normal condition. You can have some normalization, but still staying at a good level. I have no worry there, but this is what I mentioned, I think Q2 is fantastic. Don't extrapolate the kind of growth in Q2 on everything forever. It doesn't work like that. We remain confident, and our results will continue to be robust overall. It's my conclusion, fully in line with our ambition for 2024. The team is really quite excited, motivated by the quality of the result of Q2, confident on the H2 and for the coming years. What is important for me, it will be my last words, macro is one thing, and we appreciate when macro is better. What is very important is what you do structurally, and I think the opportunities coming from sustainability is mega trend for a company like Arkema, which has spent so much time, energy, resources to get positioned, is very exciting. It's my conclusion. Thank you for your attention, and I wish you all a nice summer and nice vacation for the one who took them now. Thank you. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes the conference call. Thank you all for your part. You may now disconnect.