Good morning. I'd like to introduce Mr. Lorenzo Simonelli, who has been CEO Baker Hughes since the merger with GE Oil & Gas back in 2017. Baker has really transformed itself, with arguably the most diverse business mix in OFS, being a provider of integrated oil products, services, and digital solutions. The company is also an enabler of the energy transition in multiple business lines, with its turbomachinery solutions for carbon capture, LNG, and the emerging hydrogen market. Lorenzo, thank you so much for coming in today. Jay, thank you very much. Good to be here. So the transformation of Baker Hughes has really been remarkable over the years, and I, the way I look at it is each year you've come here, it's sort of been like another step I've watched. I think right after you did the merger, you were here, so we keep seeing this each year. Earlier this year, you kind of simplified the company into kind of two different segments and sort of simplified the structure. Where are we, or where are you in the vision of where you want Baker to be? Is this, is this where you've wanted it to get all along? Is this kind of the, the model that, that you're aspiring to? I'd say we've been on a continuous journey, and really pleased of how we've successfully transformed Baker Hughes into a leading energy technology company. I would say that we're well into it. Still some refining that we're going to be doing as we go forward, and some of you may see the investor presentation we posted this morning, which helps to give some more of that refinement. But over the course of the last few years, we've executed a lot. If you look at the margin improvement, 250 bps over the last four years increase, with only 4% revenue increase. And it's been a steady strategy of really three pillars. The first being transform the core, which is all about driving efficiencies, simplicity, focusing on operational excellence with the customers, service delivery. Last year, we announced $150 million cost out, which was gonna be annualized by the end of 2023. We changed from four product companies into two major segments, and we're executing well on that strategy. So really, that first pillar has been core to the EBITDA growth. Secondly, has been invest for growth, and that's really the opportunity of developing further our digital platform. We announced Cordant and Leucipa, also the new areas of business associated with the oilfield services, the opportunity to bring in some new capabilities with Altus Intervention and continuing to relook the portfolio. And we've done over $1.5 billion of dispositions, and we've been able to weed out some of the lower performing areas, non-core assets. And the third leg has been really the new frontiers. And as you mentioned, we're into hydrogen, we're into CCUS, we're into geothermal, we're looking at clean, integrated power. And you look at this year so far, new energy orders already above $400 million in the first half of the year. That was the target we set out at the beginning of the year for the total year of 2023. Now we've got an estimate of $600 million-$700 million. So, you know, I feel good that we've got the right foundation in place. Made a lot of changes on the leadership team as well. Mm-hmm. which you know. Mm-hmm. Each year we come to this conference, and we sort of teed up what's next. We're gonna continue doing that and progressing as we go forward as Baker Hughes. So one of the things I find fascinating compared, I'm always comparing to the last cycle, but, you know, this cycle, there's almost no two of the, of your peers, nobody's really alike. Everybody has a very clear differentiation in terms of their plan. I'd love to hear kinda how you're thinking about, say, the next kind of 5-8 years, kinda through the end of the decade, energy transition sort of playing through. How is Baker Hughes differentiated from your bigger competitor, your other competitors, excuse me, as we see this evolve, in terms of your business mix? How does Baker set, you know, set itself apart from the others? Well, I think if you look at history, a lot of people would put our peers as in the traditional oil field service players. Mm-hmm. When you look at Baker Hughes, it's very different with the capability that we provide. If you look at a breakdown of our Industrial & Energy Technology, which I think is a distinctive difference between us and the traditional oilfield services, you look at gas technology, equipment, and services. I mean, we play in LNG, and as you've seen, LNG is going through a multi-year upcycle. We see another 65 MTPA this year. We see another 65 MTPA next year, and even after that, another 30-60 for 2025 and 2026. So our ability to play in liquefaction with the gas turbines and the compressors is very differentiated. But then you go on, and you look at the onshore and offshore production, the ability we have on FPSOs, the ability to have power generation and compression on onshore, very different than the other traditional players. And also, that reduces the potential cyclicality and volatility we see within our business. And we also have the Industrial Products, Industrial Solutions. And what we did today in the investor presentation is really give a bit more clarity and transparency to the growth vectors that we see in Industrial Energy Technology. So we took what was really a plethora of different elements- Mm-hmm. of reporting and made it into five categories. You've got the Gas Technology Equipment, Gas Technology Services. We've broken out Climate Technology Solution s now, so you'll be able to see the orders and the revenues really associated with a large part of what you have as new energy, and then the Industrial Products and the Industrial Solutions. So, you know, that's gonna give both internally more efficiencies, give more accountability, much easier to manage, and it's part and parcel the strategy that Ganesh has had now he's in here six months, and really coming to the forefront of his strategy. So Ganesh comes at a very critical time. This is one of the key leadership changes that you've made over the last six months. He comes in a critical stage with, you know, record backlog, and I know execution is important. So what are his goals? What is he trying to accomplish? Like, and, I guess, how are you marking him? And how would you define success in that role for him over the next several years? We've been very clear with the aim of EBITDA margin rate improvements. Mm-hmm. As you look at the IET business, there is no reason why the IET business can't be an upper quartile industrial business performance. If you look at the main mission he has, is by 2025, 2026, get to the 20%+ EBITDA. When you look at the strong backlog we have, as well as the improvements he's making operationally, I feel good he's gonna be able to do that. Also ROIC, above 20% by 2025, 2026. Those are the main key attributes, but beyond that, it's also the way in which we drive rigor of operational excellence within the business, and be able to go through these five categories and show the growth and transparency of how we're executing our strategy into the results that you're able to see. Is there anything structurally that needs to change within IET? Are you satisfied with, I don't know, the footprint, the manufacturing, the processes, or anything, or is he, or is Ganesh kind of going through that now to try to see if anything needs to be changed or updated? I think as we go forward, you know, we like the structure we have. We like the portfolio we have. Is there some refining? That can always be looked at, and that's the next phase he's going into, is really better understanding all the product lines and also seeing which ones may be a non-core. But, I'd say we're there from a structure perspective. Now it's refining it and also continuing to invest in some of the newer technologies, which, again, are really gonna be the growth areas as we go forward into the second half of this decade because of the new energy opportunities with CCUS, with hydrogen- Mm-hmm. and clean integrated power. Is that a different thing altogether from IT? I mean, I know this is new, new, new energy and new technologies, but is that sort of a different skill set internal? It's really not, and, for us, it's very much linked to the engineering expertise that we have. Compressors, turbines, this is technology that goes into the new energy. Mm-hmm. Today, we're already the only company that has 100% ready hydrogen gas turbine. We have CO2 compressors. So all of this is great stuff that goes into the new energy areas. The LNG market, you just mentioned before, another 65 million tons per annum- Yeah ... the rest of this year and next year. I'd love to understand a little bit how you're thinking kind of bigger picture here. A lot of volumes coming on, particularly out of the U.S. over the next several years. How does that... Do those volumes have to come into the market and be absorbed in order to kind of see that second wave coming through? I know you just signed a deal yesterday with Tellurian, so we can talk about that as well. But I just like, love to understand how you're sort of thinking about it. Maybe where does the U.S. fit kind of globally, and does this... Like I said, does this have to be absorbed first before you can see another wave? As you look at the situation and also what's happened over the course of the last few years, and also impacted by Russia and Ukraine conflict, there is a realization that natural gas and LNG is required not just as a transition, but a destination fuel. To be able to have affordability, sustainability, and security of energy, it's vital that natural gas and LNG continue to play a role. I just came in this morning from Singapore, Gastech, which is a large conference associated with gas, which is taking place. We announced a couple of things. First of all, Venture Global- Mm-hmm ...... Framework Agreement, going to 100 MTPA plus, and then Tellurian, as you mentioned, relative to their continued execution of the Driftwood LNG. I can tell you that the pipeline of opportunities that we see in LNG don't stop in 2023, 2024. They continue as you go into 2025 and 2026, and it's an international game, and you're going to have enough demand to be able to absorb the production that's coming on. If you just look at China, China still has a considerable increase that they're planning on LNG being a provider of energy, and there's still a lot of coal that can be displaced. And that's the benefit that you've seen in the US and Europe, being able to reduce the greenhouse gases, and the impact has been thanks to natural gas and also the shift towards LNG. So we see it, continuing to be positive and really going into the latter part of this decade as well. You touched on it before, but outside of LNG, FPSOs, the offshore market are really picking up. You had several orders earlier this year on the FPSO market. Can you just talk about your outlook over the next several years? We're seeing, obviously, a major pickup in offshore work, although there's also FPSOs that probably are half full, that kind of could be reused and whatnot. I'm just curious as to kind of what you're seeing there in terms of incremental FPSO demand. No, definitely, and I think it's an area of our business that's underappreciated, the presence and strong presence we have on onshore and offshore production. You cited FPSOs, and again, in 2022, very successful on the FPSOs. As we look forward, you know, we see 6-7 FPSOs going through every year until the end of the decade. And when you look at the opportunities, Guyana is out there. You saw that ExxonMobil just announced a new FPSO. You've got Suriname, you've got Namibia, you've got Brazil with the pre-salt. So there's a strong tailwind on the FPSO side, but then also on the onshore. When you think about the onshore power generation and also compression that's required, especially in the Middle East and what's happening in the Kingdom, we're continuing to see strong demand and growth as we go forward. So, we're not just, you know, a single-trick pony. We've got number of levers of growth within the IET side of the house, and then also in OFSE. You're guiding orders issued at the high end of the $11.5 billion-$12.5 billion. I think you're saying, if I'm not mistaken, you said you're expecting a similar level next year? Yes. Does this mix change much going forward? Is it still gonna be kind of, and I guess, does that have any, does that really influence financially your EBIT, your margins, or does all of the, whether it's FPSO or LNG or anything else, is it all relatively the same margin? The FPSOs and the LNG, relatively the same margin. As you know, services come through higher. We've always said that, it's about 2x. So as we go forward, though, in particular for 2024 and 2025, you'll consistently see the same type of mix. It's gonna vary with the lumpiness of some of the LNG orders. You know, the 11.5-12.5 excludes a potential big order this year that could come in on LNG. There's lots of opportunities out there, as you know, with Calcasieu Pass, Cheniere, and others. So, we're not factoring a large order in there. But then as you go forward into 2024 and 2025, what's gonna start to come in is also the new energy, and with 600 and 700 this year, again, with the Inflation Reduction Act, other policies, we continue to see that momentum. And the margin rate, again, our EBITDA margin rate target is very clear for 2025, 2026, 20%+. So on the new energy side, I, one of my kind of big takeaways from back in January when we met with you in Italy, you were sort of outlaying all the new energy and multiple different agreements and JVs and partnerships across, I mean, across every. It seems like, I mean, in my view, it looked to me like you basically have kind of lines in a whole bunch of different ponds trying to see what's gonna catch, and then you probably, if something kind of picks up, you'd put more capital into the one area. Am I reading that right? Are you? It, it seems like it's a strategy, kind of spread, putting your chips on a lot of different places, trying to see what works and, and where, and where the demand is coming from. Did I misread that? Yes. I'd say we're a little bit more thoughtful about the way in which we allocate capital and also the way in which we place our bets. new energy, we've broken down into a couple of areas. CCUS. So we believe CCUS is gonna be a driving factor in the short term with regards to reducing CO2 emissions. So you've got to have the capture technology. You've got to have it both pre-combustion, post-combustion. We've taken a view that modular is gonna be very important, and that's where we're focusing, is on modular compact carbon capture, and it blends in well with our oil field services business as well because of the subsurface knowledge, the ability to drill a well, understand the caverns, etc. And it builds in with the compression because you may have to pipe the CO2. So we've been very conscious where we play from a CCS perspective. And of the $400 million of orders that we've seen through the first half in new energy, 50% is CCUS related. Then we've looked at. As you think about hydrogen, we've got a number of plays in hydrogen and also the gas turbine that's 100% ready, but then also new technologies around electrolyzers. Mm-hmm. We're staying away from commodities. Everybody has to remember, hydrogen has been around a long time, and we know how to work with hydrogen. It's now an aspect of efficiencies and bringing down the cost curve. So we're looking at technologies such as Nemesys that enable us to bring down the cost curve on electrolyzers. Mm-hmm. We're active in Neom, we're active with their products on a number of hydrogen products. Then, clean integrated power solutions. Our view is, NET Power is a technology where we're providing the Turbo Expander. It's a very neat technology. It's very much at its starting point, but has the opportunity to be a big game changer. Mm-hmm. Produce 300 MW of clean power generation. Direct air capture, we went into Mosaic. Again, the strategy and the thought process behind it is, there is no way we're going to achieve our net zero goals without direct air capture from the atmosphere. Mosaic is a very good absorbent pellet that enables to bring in, and we think that's gonna be successful. And across geothermal, we've been in geothermal, so we continue to develop the capabilities we have. But I'd say we're very selective because where we want to be is technology differentiated. Mm-hmm. We don't want to be commodity players, so we're going where our history lies and the way in which we develop the LNG market, developing these other markets going forward. It's really—I mean, it's using the equipment and the technology you've developed over the years in the- Right ... traditional oil and gas industry, which you're able to transfer into new markets. Exactly. So it gives us a stronger view of success factor. I'm sure some of them, you know, will be left by the wayside- Okay ... but our confidence level in what we invest in is very high. At some point, are you gonna be looking at, is there M&A in the future, if when this kind of gets to a more mature level in terms of that business? Could, is that possible going forward? ... You know, I'd say our strategy is more organic- Okay. -with technology tuck-ins and small acquisitions as necessary. I think when you look at what we did with Brush last year, what we did with Altus, those are great acquisitions- Mm-hmm. -that add to the portfolio and enhance what we have already. Do we need large-scale M&A? No. But will we be on the lookout for technology differentiation? Mm-hmm. Yes, sure. Okay, that makes a lot of sense. I think one of the biggest transformations we've seen in Baker over the last, say, five years, has been in your OFSE business. You know, Maria Claudia said, Yeah A lot of work. A lot of work. It feels like we're there, though. I mean, it—can we put a mark in this? Is it... Have we hit success? The numbers would seem to indicate that. So don't- that is kind of back to where, where it should be. Don't say that to her. Okay. Because, yes, I would say she's been very successful, and we've been very successful as a team, really executing an OFS strategy to date. Mm-hmm. And as you look at the exit rate at the end of 2022, they'd already been successful in achieving close to the 20% EBITDA, and so every good deed warrants another opportunity, so we put OFE on her as well. Mm-hmm. Now she's executing a similar strategy of really restructuring SPS in particular. So as you look at the areas of well construction, very well positioned, CIM, very well positioned, production solutions, well positioned, and now she's tackling SSPS. So on that SSPS side, is the goal to be smaller but more profitable in that business? Are you, how are you sort of addressing that market? I know you're taking some capacity out and rationalizing some of your facilities there. What's the ultimate goal there? Do you... I mean, is this just about profits and maximizing profits in that business? You have to break down SSPS into its elements, because we've always been strong in flexibles. Mm-hmm. We continue to be strong, and actually have a great order backlog on Flexibles for the upcoming years. Mm-hmm. We've been strong on the, wellheads and done a lot of the, restructuring there. Predominantly, where we need to focus on is the trees, and to your point, that's the rationalization that's taken place. We've reduced capacity by, 40%-50%. We're focusing on certain basins, it be in Asia, Australasia, West Africa, and also some of the East Med, where we've got a strong presence and also where we've got strong customer relationships. And so it is a more refined focus and then margin accretion. And from losing money in SPS, we'll be making money, and we're looking to obviously continue that trend and go up to the high single digit, and then ultimately break into the double digit. But overall, it's all calculated in the guidance that we've given by 2025, OFSE at 20%+ EBITDA. You've targeted cost rationalization. I think that was... a majority of that was in there. How far along are you on that so far? We've made the execution, and now you'll see the benefits. Some of them come through at the end of this year, but majority go into next year. And as you look at the $150 million that we announced last year, $60 million of that was within OFSE. Mm-hmm. On your OFS side, internationally, what's Baker's... Like, where do you differentiate? What's your kind of core strength? Where do you think that you're strongest at on your international OFS business? Is there a particular product line or is there a particular region that you think you're best positioned in? Well, if you look at Baker Hughes, we are more internationally focused than we are in North America. Mm-hmm. As you look at 70% of our activity is international. Strong presence in Middle East, in particular in Saudi Arabia, UAE, strong presence in Latin America, Brazil. And where we differentiate is really in the capabilities around production solutions. We have the chemicals, and we're able to actually marry the elements of chemicals as well as the extraction and the ESPs, et cetera, and ALS, making it beneficial for the customer. As you look at well construction, I think everybody knows the capability we have around rotary steerables, and on the completion side also- Mm-hmm ... we've got some very advanced tools. So the focus for oilfield services has been, again, move away from commoditization, stay focused on what we know and where we can incrementally add value for the customer. When I was in Saudi earlier this year and I visited your facilities, one of the things I was really struck by was a lot of the in-country manufacturing you're doing in Saudi. Can you talk a little bit about that and why that's important? I think you've been talking about something like 70% of your completion tools- Yeah. That's right. You're trying to build in-country. Can you talk about how you got there, and is that going to be replicated in other parts of the Middle East? So it will be replicated in countries where it makes sense. And again, you don't want to be everywhere with everything. You want to make sure that you allocate appropriately. Within the Kingdom, I think many people know localization is very important. There is the aspect of IKTVA, which is a score that they give you, and also our ability to serve the customer base there. So we've had a strategy of investing, localizing, and then supporting with also the nationals of that country. We've set up facilities for completions, but also for ESPs within the Kingdom. But just like we've set up wellheads as well, and we've also set them up in UAE. So depending on the market, we think localization enables us to be better for the customer, service-wise. Mm-hmm. Also, from a cost standpoint, being closer is better. Could you see at some point exporting from Saudi? Does that- We already do. Oh, you do? So, if you look at our drill bits that we've been producing for many years in the Kingdom, we actually export them here to the U.S. Wow! I didn't know that. It's interesting. How are you thinking about kind of international markets, maybe in 2024 and beyond? Like, where— I mean, I'm particularly looking at, say, last cycle and kind of early last cycle, of kind of how we saw this big pickup in spend in the Middle East. Where do you think we are in that? I mean, how do you sort of see the duration of that market? We're in the early innings of what is a longer duration cycle than we've seen before. As you look at this year, again, we see mid-teens on the international side. As you look at next year, we're saying double-digit. When you look at what the customers have said, you go to an ADNOC, and they've already been clear they want to get to 5 million barrels. You go to an Aramco, they want to be at 13 million barrels. You go to Brazil and the activity that they've got offshore and their incremental production. Mexico, what they're targeting. So I think international remains strong, and in particular, with the national oil companies. My last question is kind of regarding the overall structure of the company. A couple of years ago here, you kind of sort of floated the idea of a potential separation at one point of kind of breaking up the two businesses. Where's your head on that today? How, how are you sort of thinking about that business in terms of the OFSE separate from IET? Are you sort of thinking about that still, or is there a timing? How does that- No, there's no timing, and probably I miscommunicated when I said we were evaluating a couple of years ago. It's always good for a company to evaluate. Mm-hmm. What we came to as a firm conclusion is that Baker Hughes is stronger together. There's the opportunity for synergies when you look at it from a customer standpoint, when you look at it from the engineering and technology standpoint, the footprint that we have. There's a lot that we can do to improve the company from within, and a lot of self-help. At this stage, our strategy is clear. The execution we've got to do for 2025 and 2026, the metrics we've got to hit, and we've got the team very much focused on doing that. I'd say we've got the tailwinds which are in our favor, upcycle in upstream, upcycle in LNG, upcycle in onshore, offshore production, and an upcycle in new energy. The portfolio gives us the opportunity to play across all of that. All of that, right. If New Energy is slightly slower, guess what? The other side will be slightly stronger. Right. Right. Excellent sense. Lorenzo, thank you so much. Thank you very much.