For the next presentation, we've got Cooper Standard with us, and we're pleased to have the CEO and CFO. We have Jeffrey Edwards and Jonathan Banas with us. Thank you. Good to be here. Thank you so much for taking the time. Good to see everybody. Good to be here. Maybe just diving right into it, we will just recap second quarter results for the investors. You guys reported last week a solid set of results on the top line, and we saw some compression on the EBITDA margin. I just wanted to recap just some highlights of what were some of the one-time items you guys saw in the second quarter, and how was overall production tracking, and how should we think about just the drivers of the results? Yeah, I think as we looked at the second quarter results, clearly impacted for us was basically an inflation quarter. We actually suggested it would be at the end of the first quarter because oil prices impact our company in a big way. Every $1 a barrel of oil up is $450,000 of EBITDA, up or down. Our business plan for the year was at $65, and the average price of oil in the second quarter was over $90. Obviously a big impact. If you are just keeping it real simple, if you look at the impact that the commodities had, in addition to a little bit of tariff, it was around an $18 million hit to the quarter. If you add the $18 million onto the $53 million that we reported, we are probably ahead of everything that people said, but there is not much we can do about that. The good news is we have indexed contracts with our customers. Effective July 1st, the price increases for oil went from $65 per barrel to, call it, low $90 per barrel, and we began to recover the monies in the third quarter that we gave away in the second. Assuming the conflict is over at some point in time here in the third quarter, we would recover most of what we inherited by the end of the year. Probably a little bit would spill over into the first quarter of next year as well. But I am done predicting the end to the Middle East conflict, so I will just leave it at that. No, makes sense. I think just stretching it from there, the second half walk, because you guys are looking at the guidance. You tightened a little bit of the range, but largely unchanged, and it implies a steep ramp-up in the margin level from here. Is that more along the confidence of how much you've taken in net recovery still now in the month of July? Or maybe just some new underlying assumptions that you've taken for oil prices, just some of the puts and takes there? How much conservatism, if any, is baked into it to go to the lower high end of the range? Yeah, I think start with the good news. I think our top line is basically what we've expected it would be for the first half of the year and is tracking as well. There's always puts and takes with volume and mix in our industry. There was a little bit of put and take in the first half. There'll probably be some of that in the second half. But I would use the word stable when I talk about the business, really in all the regions. So that's the good news. The intent with the second half guidance that we put out there is, in essence, we would recover virtually all of the inflation that hit us in the second quarter. We would recover all that in the third and then some into the fourth, and that's the reason for the increase. If you go back and look at the business over the last three years and you look at the-- We ended last year just under-- our margins, anyway, or have expanded every year. We're at just under 12% in 2025. We're tracking above that this year. Our 2030 projections are 15%. So if you draw a line from 2023 - 2030, we're still right on that line. Obviously, you have virtually no volume uptick in those numbers. It's basically a flat 90 million units between now and 2030, is what the forecasting folks are saying. So that's what's in our numbers. If there's volume upside, then the numbers get better. In addition to that, we'll triple our return on invested capital over the course of the next three years. We were 7% last year. So you can do the math by the time we get to 2028. We feel very positive about the health and the trajectory of the company. In fact, by 2030, we expect it to be about $3.8 billion on the top line. So up $1 billion from 2025 - 2030, all organic growth. So a lot of positives going on, and we feel very good about the cost base, the pricing that's been established in the world, and the indexing agreements that we have that allow us to really defend ourselves through times like this. Historically, that hasn't been the case. But with these new contracts, and for the first time, we put those in effect July 1st, and it's working. It just doesn't feel like that when you look at the quarterly result. But the overall health of the business is very good. No, makes sense. Just double-tapping on the raw mats piece. Given just the correlation over there, how much of this is a direct headwind that you guys face in terms of the raw mats that you procure, material costs, and how much would be an indirect effect of just freight or any reimbursements you have to give to Tier 2s or 3s? Can you size us? You give some numbers on the correlation, right? Like for every barrel of oil. What is the assumption that you guys have taken in the latest guidance on an oil price range? Because we have had other companies, like rubber companies, tire companies, and all, also going through a similar dynamic there with a lot of swing. Just walk us through those pieces. Yeah. Our assumption in the guidance is basically we are going to recover what it cost us in the second quarter. We will recover that in the third and the fourth. If there is continued inflation headwinds in the third, then you obviously recover that with that same quarter lag. Assuming that the price of oil remains below our current $92, we should be fine. There is fluctuations, as you know, in the past 30 days, that I think it has been the range is something like $77 -$ 97. There is still a lot of volatility there. The way the indexes work, you just take an average for the quarter. That becomes your new price point. Let us see how it plays out. Do you want to talk about the rest, Jon? Other inflation and some of those costs that were embedded in the total gap for the quarter? Yeah. It's not just an oil story for us. About 70% of what we incurred in Q2 was oil-based inflationary pressures. In our Fluid Handling business, we also procure metals, namely stainless steel and aluminum inputs, which there was about $3 million worth or about 30% of our commodity inflation in the quarter as well. Good news there is we also have indexed contracts with our customers to recover most of that. Similar quarterly lag, and we'll get most of that back by the end of this year, we expect. But the whole geopolitical environment is making all costs high. You think transportation costs, utility bills are rising as well. Those aren't necessarily directly indexable. If there's shocks in the system, we can approach the customers to go back and recover some of that. Normally, we offset that with our own purchasing and manufacturing lean initiatives from a cost-saving standpoint to cover off any of the "normal inflationary pressures." Right. Just moving on to just the customer profile concentration and the kind of OEMs that you guys have partnered with. More than half of your business comes from the Detroit Three. You've got a couple more OEMs, like top five would go up to 65%-70%. How do you think that mix has changed over time, and is there room for that to change going ahead? Just given that having these outsized exposures would mean that you guys would see some cadence swings when it comes to a Novelis kind of a situation or a platform change for GM in the fourth quarter. Just wanted to get your thoughts there of how you're thinking about that? Yeah. I'll just back up to, the industry is 90 million units globally, and kind of projected to hang around that number for the next four or five years. So how I think about that is 10 years ago, 75% of the revenue for the company was the North American manufacturers. Today it's closer to 50%. I think going forward, as the China auto industry continues to grow, today it's roughly 30% of the global market. That clearly means that if you're not diversifying with the China market, then I think you probably are going to end up with an extreme amount of business. Call it your entire market is tied up in 70% if you're not with the China customers. In our case, we're very pleased that it's our fastest-growing region, our fastest-growing customer base. Not just for the China domestic, but as they grow share globally, we're very excited to be part of their export supply base. Today, as an example, let's just say they're right around 28 million units of production in China. About 40% of that is being exported this year. I'm sure that will vary in years to come. The other thing that's happening is we're also part of their plans as they build factories in Europe and other places in Southeast Asia. We are going to be supplying them the product that we supply everybody. I tend to think about it going forward. Every vehicle that's produced, so those 90 million units require every part we make. We ought to be able to figure out how to thrive in an environment where there's 90 million units produced, and we produce everything that those 90 million units need. I think we'll carve out our fair share. We'll continue to balance appropriately in all regions of the world. The other thing that's changed over the past 10 years, as we sit here today, we are profitable in every single region in the world. We have very clear hurdle rates for our prices with every customer along every product line, or we don't take the business. That's the reason we have returned to a level of profitability and why our projections over the next five years continue to show significant organic growth. The final point I would make there is with our business, this year we'll book $400+ million of net new business. All of that will launch over the next few years. About every six years, we're building out programs and new ones are replacing them. For three straight years, our net new business margins exceed the products that they're replacing. When we put together a five-year outlook like we have through 2030, you can go out to 2029. By the end of this year, we'll have 80%+ of our 2029 revenue already booked. We feel pretty solid about the forecast. We don't control volume and mix. We don't control conflicts from a geopolitical point of view. But what we can control, we're managing pretty well. Makes sense. While we're on the China piece, on both the fronts, one, I think you guys have disclosed 15% of the revenue comes from the Asia Pacific market. Have you sized how much is coming in from China? Within that, any mix of foreign versus domestic OEMs? And also 20% of the market is exports. I think this earning season, almost all these suppliers were talking about how exposed they are to some of these export platforms. So, any granularity there on how you're thinking about it? Also on the new business bookings number of $400 million, how much of that is with Chinese OEMs or maybe domestics and -- Yeah. -- when would that materially weave into the numbers in the latter half of the decade? Yeah, I'll start with the last part first. So of the $400+ million that we'll book this year, I think we're suggesting externally that 20% of that is tied to the China manufacturers, to answer your question. And if you look at our Fluid Handling business and our Sealing Systems business, I think this year that number is kind of split in half. Half of it is new business for sealing, half of it's new business for fluid. The dynamic that's really important for our Fluid Handling business is this shift that's taking place from the ICE powertrains to battery and to hybrid. If you compare, just as a simple baseline, if you look at, let's just assume 90 million units today were all ICE. They're not, but it helps my story. 90 million units were ICE. If 15% become electric vehicles, then our Fluid Handling business content per vehicle goes up 20%. Let's say 50% of the market by 2035 will be electric or hybrid, s ame 90 million units. But half of the market will generate somewhere between a 20% and a 50% content per vehicle upside for our Cooper Fluid Handling business. So it's a really interesting dynamic that's taking place across the world as they shift to, call it a balanced portfolio of hybrid and electric vehicles. And if we don't book one more vehicle, our content still goes up 20% - 50% with the Fluid Handling business. So I think that's also a way that we are "insulating" or in some way creating a business model that will stand the test of time within the portfolios. Doesn't matter what powertrain goes in it, every vehicle still needs every part that we're producing. Of course, a fuel line in an electric vehicle, that goes away, but the content that I gave you of 20% up is net of fuel lines coming out. It's a really good story for us. It's a great growth story. The other thing I will say to all of you, because most of us own vehicles, I would think, and if you think about the critical nature of what we produce, if you have a sealing system and you take your car through the car wash and you get wet, you're probably never buying another one of those vehicles. If you park one in your garage or in your driveway at night and you end up with something on the ground that's not supposed to be there, you're probably never buying one of those vehicles. That's why we get all the business. Because especially in the case of the Chinese domestics that are trying to build a quality brand globally, they don't want to take a chance that either one of those events is going to create a customer dissatisfier that will be very difficult to overcome with new brands. Again, I think that's one of the reasons why we're being chosen and trusted with our innovation, with our quality, with our engineering, with our global footprint. The ability to deliver products that are critical to customer satisfaction is very high, and so we're proud of that history, and we're certainly proud of the existing relationships we've had for 60 years, but looking forward to the next 60 and building additional relationships with the new automakers. Just then on Europe, right, 1/4 of the business comes from Europe. For you guys, a continued theme that we've heard from suppliers, more so now, is just the imports that they're facing from just these Chinese domestics. Not all of it is EVs. Half of the exports that China's still doing is on ICE platforms. Are you seeing any pressures over there from these legacy relationships, German luxury, Volkswagen, all of these brands in Europe? How are you thinking about balancing the portfolio to be more level to these Chinese who are gaining more share in that region? Yeah. Again, we're talking about the same 90 million units, just with some variation associated with it. So, obviously, as market share shifts, which is what you're referring to, it's still 90 million units. Our job is to work with each of our customers to make sure that we are providing the innovation, the competitive cost, the high level of execution. So whether they're making 100,000 units or whether they're making 500,000 units, it has to work. We clearly recognize that there's probably going to be some consolidation across the customer base. There, without a doubt, will be sharing of engineering or design specifications, I think, to help even further simplify what's going on today with the specifications that are required in Europe versus Asia versus North America and other places around the world. Again, I think the customers that we've been doing business with trust us that we can deliver high-quality product, help them with their overall efficiencies, help them with their overall cost targets. I'm convinced that there's a way to grow and grow profitably regardless of what that consolidation looks like. Because, again, we're talking about 90 million- 100 million units. Stay focused there is how we think about it. The number of OEMs are going to shrink, the number of suppliers, I think, will shrink over that same period of time. So that consolidation, I think, will actually help those that are coming at it from a position of strength, and we think we are. Okay. I will just open it up to the audience as well in the middle. If anyone has a question, you can raise your hand. While they think of a question, we will just continue on the next one. Yeah, sure. Just on BEV platforms, the three biggest customers that you have exposure to, they have obviously announced very publicly their plans for ICE to be here for longer. A lot of the new platforms, which you guys are level to as well, are going to be there for longer to become products. V8s coming back, new model year launches. Just how are you thinking about this next leg of electrification investments, if any, that you guys have to make? The majority of your products are agnostic as it is, but is there any change in planning processes when you are bidding for EV platforms versus ICE? How would you think about that going ahead, just given the headwind that we had just taken in the last couple of years? Again, I think it is important to talk about what is changing and what is not changing. Europe is still going on the same trek to EV and hybrid. China, the same. What you are talking about is what is happening in the North American market. That is 16 million units of the 90 million. So that is the proper perspective. What we see happening in North America, while EV is not going to develop as fast as originally planned, hybrid is probably going to develop even faster. For our Sealing Systems business, same. For our Fluid Handling business, that means our content per vehicle for every hybrid goes up around 50%. At least for those, let us just say there is 30% by 2035 of a combination of hybrid and EVs in that 16 million unit market. I hope it was higher. But in that 16 million unit market, sealing, nothing changes. Fluid, the content goes up 50%. I think it's still a very good story. Of course, we invested a lot in some EV programs that were canceled. I think because of the relationships we have with our customers, and clearly the North American customers have been very fair, in my opinion, of how they have paid for sunk costs on programs that were canceled. Now we're all moving on to the hybrid technologies and looking forward. I know I'm looking forward to that. I think as consumers, we're probably all looking forward to that. Makes sense. Just on the cost outs and just the initiatives that you guys have taken over there. It's been a great story of almost $100 million of costs coming out every year in the last five or six years. Wanted to understand just how much room there is going ahead on that initiative? How much is coming in from these new AI initiatives that -- Yeah. -- you guys are launching? Also across which divisions, maybe some on procurement, sourcing, SG&A, back office, all of those kinds of buckets. Sure. I'll talk about those in two different buckets. The first bucket would be what we would all refer to as VAVE, which as new vehicles launch and new systems from the supply base go into those vehicles, and they last for five or six years in production, there's always opportunity to continue to improve upon what was launched. We learn more, scale changes over time, and there's an opportunity to always take costs out. I think that as part of a process improvement going forward will look kind of like it's always looked. What I think will change, and you mentioned, we went from 12.5% SG&A four years ago, and we're operating at a 7% SG&A today on a larger company. Now if we fast-forward to 2030 and those strategic objectives that I talked about last year for 2030, our revenue is $3.8 billion. Up $1 billion between today and 2030, all organic. If you think about a 7% SG&A company today on $2.8 billion, the way life usually works is the accountants go onto the spreadsheet, and they would say, "Okay, now 7% of $3.8 billion in 2030." I don't think so. I think the opportunity for companies like ours to find ways to grow and do it at today's cost base and not continue to stack the type of costs into an organization that have traditionally come with, be it engineering costs, be it program management, be it any function you want to talk about. We have amazing systems, amazing manual systems today, operated by the best people in the world. I would like to think that we can use AI with that same group of people doing the same thing a lot faster and a lot better four or five years from now. Imagine if you could hold your cost base today where they are and have $1 billion in additional revenue with the same people doing the same type of processes, only utilizing AI. That's how I think about it. We just launched a major initiative, and we are like most. I think we are up to 1,000 agents today, helping people do their jobs. I am excited because we spent $1 billion on our IT systems the last 10 years, and we have a wall-to-wall ERP that's second to none, and it provides us all kinds of data to measure what we do and how we do it. Now, all of a sudden, we have the opportunity to build an AI operating system of our own, maybe, and get after the costs of how we are operating the company. The people that are doing it today will be able to use those tools to do it better tomorrow. I am excited about that. I think it will become the largest cost-reduction opportunity in our company's history, probably in most companies' history. I am excited how we are going to do that. We are going to do it the right way. If our customers can't feel it and our income statement and balance sheet can't see it, then we are probably going to do something else. That's our focus, is to drive AI tools that are going to help the stakeholders of the company understand how much better we are than we used to be. Faster, better quality, speed to market, doing things that our customers want us to do, only a lot faster and a lot better. Right. Maybe this one's for Jon. Please. You take a break. Maybe just on de-leveraging and capital allocation as a topic, how are you thinking about a target range that you guys want to get to in terms of net debt to EBITDA? I think net leverage is just shy of 5 x on adjusted EBITDA. Just when should we see any potential of capital returns for shareholders and any other opportunities that you guys are seeing in organic or inorganic? Anything. Yeah, sure. Earlier, Jeff touched on our ROIC trajectory, and where we think we're going to triple the return on invested capital in the next three years. Incredibly confident about that trajectory, but going into that calculation is obviously discipline spend on capital. Our first and foremost area of spend from a capital allocation standpoint is winning and launching new business on behalf of our customers. So think customer-owned tools that we manufacture on their behalf and their own capital, specialty finishing or other equipment to launch that business. That won't change. In fact, we were very disciplined over the last couple of years, below 2% of sales. We see that growing to about 2%-3% of sales for the next several years, as we've got this pipeline of over $700 million of net new business that we've won in the last couple of years. That is first and foremost. To get back to that ROIC journey, clearly, there is going to be a significant increase in profitability that will help the net leverage ratio, back to your question, but also free cash flow generation. That disciplined spend and approach not only on capital but on working capital and other areas of the business that we think there is further opportunities for us to improve will help both the numerator and the denominator when you are thinking about the net leverage calculation. We have already been talking publicly about our trajectory to get down below 2 x net leverage by the end of 2027. We left last year at 4.5x. So significant improvement both in profitability but also in building cash on the balance sheet. After that amount of time, our senior notes have a non-call two provision, which we are still 18 months away from. Whether we are building that cash or eventually utilizing it to ultimately de-lever, that is the trajectory we are on. Over the next three to four years, it just improves that much more from there on out. Oh, thank you. The next question we can probably go to is non-automotive-- Okay. -- adjacencies. I think that is an interesting area, key theme again, like this earning season and in the last. I think the grand majority of your business is still light vehicles, like 96%, 97%. Are there some opportunities that you guys are trying to capitalize on? Any early conversations with certain customers on just utilizing the same capacity and existing products into just other adjacent end markets? Yeah, we have three business divisions, if you will. Our Sealing Systems business, our Fluid Handling business, and what we call our Industrial and Specialty Group. That is the non-automotive arm, if you will. It's a small business, $100 million or so top line. We would like to see that business double over the course of the next five years as well. That would come from non-automotive opportunities. Without boring you, it's the same things that most people have probably talked to you about, right? If there's an opportunity with data centers, if there's an opportunity, because they all get seals, they all have a lot of fluid management going on within those. We are looking at that. We have opportunities to build some prototypes and do some tests with the end users there. I don't know if that'll result in what you just said, but like most, we're looking at that, and we have a platform to actually do it within our Industrial and Specialty Group. Time will tell. Otherwise, it'll be a $3.8 billion company when I'm sitting here and talking to you in 2030. There's plenty of work to be done over the course of the next several years in executing that, because most of it's already booked or will be booked by the end of this year. It's plenty to keep us busy, and I think it'll continue to drive the type of value that our shareholders and me personally are looking forward to. Right. With that, we're up on time. Please thank me in joining Jeffrey and Jonathan for their time today. Thanks very much. Thank you. Thanks all.