I will now hand the conference over to Jeff Siemon, Vice President, Investor Relations and Corporate Finance. Jeff, please go ahead. Thank you, Samantha. Good morning to everyone. Thanks for joining us today for our live Q&A session on our Q4 and full year fiscal 2026 results. I hope you all had time to review our press release, listen to the prepared remarks, and view our presentation materials, which we made available this morning on our investor relations website. It's important to note that in our Q&A session, we may make forward-looking statements that are based on management's current views and assumptions. Please refer to this morning's press release for factors that could impact forward-looking statements and for reconciliations of non-GAAP information, which may be discussed on today's call. I'm here with Jeff Harmening, our Chairman and CEO, Dana McNabb, our COO, and Kofi Bruce, our CFO. Let me turn it over to Jeff for some opening remarks. Thanks, Jeff. Good morning, everybody. Before we get going today, I thought I'd provide a brief summary of some of the main messages for today, really how we finished fiscal 2026, then where General Mills is headed in fiscal 2027. Recall, as we entered fiscal 2026, we made a bold decision to reinvest in remarkability. Most importantly, I think, was in adjusting our base prices across a meaningful part of our portfolio to strengthen the fundamentals of our business. We certainly encountered some challenges this past fiscal year, including a more difficult consumer backdrop that impacted the pace and the cost of the volume improvement, as well as some specific headwinds on a couple of key businesses, namely Totino's and Wilderness. I can confidently say that we exit the year with a stronger foundation, with encouraging improvements in household penetration and base volume and innovation that gives us confidence as we look to the path ahead, specifically to FY 2027. I'm equally confident that fiscal 2027 will be a better year for General Mills, and our priorities for the coming year, I think are quite clear. First, we're focused on improving our top-line growth by driving a step change in the remarkability of our brands. Also importantly, with our base price investments behind us, we're shifting our focus more toward innovation and renovation to packaging and brand communication that deliver the benefits that matter most to today's consumers, supported by stronger price mix, with a heavy emphasis on mix from premium innovation, price pack architecture, to tra de efficiency. Whether it's Cheerios or Blue Buffalo or Häagen-Dazs or Annie's, we have really good plans going into fiscal 2027 to meet consumers where they are on the brands and benefits that deliver to their needs. Second, as we accelerate and expand our enterprise transformation efforts to drive greater speed and efficiency and flexibility across our business, we expect to deliver $3 billion in cumulative cost savings over the four years through fiscal 2030, primarily through our Holistic Margin Management Productivity Program and our Global Transformation Initiative. We're expecting $750 million to be delivered in fiscal 2027. These savings are critical to help offset inflation, to fund our growth investments, and support stronger earnings and cash flow over time. Third, we will stay disciplined on capital allocation. Our focus is on driving cash flow, working on leverage, and restoring profitable growth over time. While fiscal 2027 will include elevated inflation and some mechanical headwinds, we believe the combination of stronger brand remarkability, sharper execution, and a more aggressive productivity agenda positions us to build momentum and create sustainable shareholder value over the long term. With that, operator, can you go ahead and let's get started on Q&A. Excellent. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. Please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. A reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one to raise your hand, and to withdraw your question, press star one again. We ask that you pick up your handset when asking a question to allow for optimum sound quality. If you are muted locally, please remember to unmute your device. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Your first question comes from the line of Max Gumport with BNP Paribas. Max, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hey, thanks very much for the question. To start off, it seems like FY 2027 represents a big pivot from price-based investments in FY 2026 to innovation and renovation-based investments focusing on offering consumers better for you attributes in FY 2027. Can you talk about some of the learnings that informed this shift and your level of confidence that it will deliver the results you're expecting? Thank you very much. Yeah, Max. This is Jeff Harmening. Let me take that one. I would say we always felt like we would be pivoting based on where we started last year. Recall last year, I talked about it kind of being a two-step process. The first thing we had to do was to get our base pricing back in line. Not necessarily equal competition or anything like that, but really making sure we were under key price cliffs and price thresholds. The job to do last year when we talked about remarkability was really about value. We have effectively done that. That's kind of only the first step in a two-step process to get us back to profitable organic volume growth. The second step really is with that foundation behind us, and it worked as we thought it would work, is to make sure now it allows the rest of our marketing to work even better. Dana and her team have done a really nice job improving brand communications and packaging and price mix and new product innovation, renovation. All those things work a lot better when you get your base pricing. Yes, it's a pivot from what we did, what we talked about last year, but that's only because we did the work last year. I'm really glad that we did it. We increased household penetration for the first time in a number of years. We increased our pound share in NAR. We were competitive in the other three segments. The work we're doing this year, honestly, we can only do it because of the work that we had done last year, and I'm pleased with how we have done that, and even more pleased with the innovation we have coming out ahead of us. Great. Just as a follow-up, last year, like others in the industry, you saw your fiscal year get dented a bit by changes in the macro environment. Specifically, consumers during the middle of the fiscal year started to demonstrate an increased propensity to wait to buy product on promotion. I'm wondering, one, have you seen that behavior dissipate? Two, what's the level of flexibility that you've embedded in your outlook for FY 2027 for other such unexpected changes in consumer behavior? Thanks very much. I'll leave it there. Well, why don't I take that question. Good morning, Max. Thanks for that. What we are anticipating is that as we go into this new fiscal year, the consumer is going to continue to be pressured. We do expect to see them continue to change their behavior because of that. Being more deliberate in how and where they shop, buying more on promotion and less on everyday prices, making trade-offs between pack sizes and channels, all with value at the forefront. Actually, as we exited our Q4, we saw categories slow down by about one point. As we go into this fiscal year, we're not anticipating that to change. We expect the current consumer and category backdrop will continue. Even as we say that, we know that consumers are still willing to pay for benefits that matter most to them. Think functional nutrition, bold flavors, et cetera. For me, this really reinforces the importance of our focus on remarkability. When we do that well, like on Cheerios Protein or renovated Chex Mix snacks or Tastefuls and Tiki Cat offerings, we can unlock growth even in this more challenging consumer environment. Again, as we look ahead, our assumption is the consumer will remain pressured, and we'll stay focused on the levers that we can control. Okay, thanks very much. Your next question comes from the line of Peter Grom with UBS. Peter, your line is open. Please go ahead. Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. I kind of wanted to start with maybe a bigger picture question and just ask on the category outlook. It just feels like we've been talking about growth below long-term trends for a while. As you think about what you're seeing from a category standpoint, do you continue to view this as simply cyclical dynamics? Or as these trends continue, is there maybe some view that long-term category growth rates may not be as applicable moving forward? Yeah, let me take that one. This is Jeff. There are some trends that we know are long-term in nature. Things are kind of undeniable. I think about demographics, for example, and 55+ consumer base growing or increasing Hispanic population in the U.S. or pet humanization, which 25 years in is probably a trend. There are things like that that are everlasting. There are other things that are certainly cyclical in nature. Consumers have always cared about things like their food tasting good and being good for them and value and convenience, but those definitions change over time. E-commerce is kind of the new convenience. We know consumers care a lot about value, which is why the base pricing worked so well last year. They care about health, and now it's really all about protein. The question is, how long will all of these things last? The answer is really kind of unknowable in a volatile environment. What we do know, though, is that our focus this coming year on driving improved organic growth and doing it profitably is the right path. I have confidence in our plans. Dana mentioned Cheerios Protein, and that's off to a great start. She talked about Tiki Cat, which really is about pet humanization, which is growing quite nicely as well. She also talked about bold flavored Chex Mix, which is doing well. All those things that she talked about really resonate with today's consumers and kind of where we are. What it looks like over time, we will see, but our focus is squarely over the next 12 months and continuing to make progress using remarkability. That's really helpful. Just maybe just some perspective on the phasing of organic sales growth. You mentioned below in the first quarter, any way to put some guardrails on how much below the full year guidance you would expect to start the year? Just any thoughts on how you see that evolving as we progress through the year as well. Thank you. Sure. This is Kofi. Let me just start by saying I'm probably not going to satisfy your question because I don't want to get too much more specific and get in the habit of providing quarterly guidance. Other than just reiterate what we said in our prepared remarks. We would expect the shipment timing headwinds on pet to continue into Q1. We would expect some reversal on North America Retail as we step into Q1. Those will have both top and bottom line implications, obviously, versus expectations. As a reminder, we divested yogurt this end of June last fiscal year, so FY 2026. That'll be a comparison headwind, along with the fact that we would expect our cost savings, i.e., the impact of inflation net of all of our cost savings initiatives to be negative and progressively improve as we move through Q2 and into Q3 in the back half. Other than that, I wouldn't get too much more specific. Great. Thanks so much. That's a run. You bet. Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Lazar with Barclays. Andrew, your line is open. Please go ahead. Great. Thanks so much. Good morning, everybody. Jeff, I was wondering, I guess what should our expectations be around both volume share and value share as we move through this year? I know that the transfer from volume to value share is really the key point in a lot of the work that you did last year around the price points and such. Trying to get a better sense of what your expectation is so we can track that in the market data and whatnot as we move forward. Thanks so much. Yeah, I think for us, Andrew, you're right. This past year, we focused on volume shar e in NAR, I would say. We focused on dollar share in the other three segments, but in NAR, we focused on pound share because of the pricing actions that we took. Having those largely behind us as we enter this new year, our goal is going to be to make sure that we're competitive across dollar share, across all four of our segments. That doesn't mean we completely abandon what we do with pounds. There's always a mix, and I like to say we like to stay in the middle of the boat, and I think the same would hold true on pound and dollar share as we enter this year. It's not as if we're abandoning one and looking at the other. Our job is to do both, is continue to grow household penetration and generate the price mix we're looking for so that we're competitive on a dollar basis. As we look at this year, we want to make sure whether it's in NAR or whether it's in PED or food service or international, that we're competitive on a dollar basis, and that doesn't mean we'll completely abandon what we think of pounds. The job to do really is as we pivot to the innovation we have, the renovation and the price mix, which is heavily focused on mix, really what we're looking for dollar competitiveness. Got it. Specific to NAR, on dollar share, as you think about where some of the share weakness has gone, it doesn't seem like private label is that big a factor in this. It's more just by looking at what the other options are, some of these smaller insurgent players and things of that nature. As you diagnose where some of that share has gone, all the work you're doing this year to step up the remarkability work to try and counter that, how do you see that dynamic playing out and h ow the work you're doing can address that more fully? Thank you. Hi, Andrew. Thank you for the question. As I look at NAR and think about remarkability, when we were sitting here on this call last year, from a share perspective, we had seen private label get stronger in pretty much all of our categories. They were stealing share, we also saw small brands stealing share, and we were squarely in the middle and had to take action in order to become more competitive. As we diagnosed where we were struggling the most, it was really on affordability and value. That's why in fiscal 2026, we focused on remarkability with most of our investment on price. We saw it work. That was about fixing our base volume. Sitting here last year, we were looking at base volume, which is our most profitable volume. It was down about 10%. Now we're entering the year with our base volume where we invested on price up about 1%, and we have household penetration growth. We are entering this fiscal year with a much stronger foundation. Now it is all about ma king sure that we are delivering the benefits that consumers are willing to pay for. Making a significant step up in innovation, in renovation, in packaging, in terms of format and functionality, which will allow us to get a modest improvement in price mix, an emphasis on that is on mix. That it will be a difference maker in terms of our ability to improve dollar share performance. I'm confident that we will see improved organic sales results in NAR as we go into next year. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Tom Palmer with JP Morgan. Tom, your line is open. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for the question. Maybe I could move off the sales line a little bit and ask on the cost savings, the $3 billion in planned savings over the next four years. I think elements of the savings that were laid out were maybe already in place, although maybe not fully quantified. Could you maybe provide a little bit of detail on what pieces such as HMM were underway and maybe to an extent already embedded in your expectations versus the pieces that are new and we should look to ramp up over the next four years? Thank you. Thanks for the question. I think as we talk about transformation, we have to start first with reminding everyone that our primary goal is to restore profitable organic sales growth. All of our cost saving efforts are in service to that goal. When you look at the $3 billion, we have approximately $2 billion of that's expected to come from HMM, and that really is at a rate consistent with what we've delivered over the past few years. HMM is a really strong capability our commercial teams lead. It's about understanding what the consumer values and putting back in what they do value and taking out what they don't value. That's something that's been consistent over the years. The other billion is expected to come from the acceleration that we've talked about from our Global Transformation Initiative and other cost-saving actions. That's really about improving our end-to-end business processes and identifying new ways of working when you think about new tools, technology, operating models to be more agile. One of those areas that we talked about on the prepared remarks that we're thinking about is our supply chain transformation. I really want to emphasize that our supply chain is truly, I think, the best in food. Very good at what they do. Our supply chain was also built for a different time, a little bit lower volume. We've seen that we need faster innovation, more packaging flexibility. It's really about thinking, how do we reimagine the supply chain for the future so that we can get at profitable growth? We are still really in the early phases of this design, so we don't have more to share, but we will come back and share more as we get more details. Thanks for that detail, Dana. I also wanted to ask on cost inflation expectations. It is a dynamic environment, obviously, on the fuel side. How did you, I guess, make your assumptions here just on how the year progresses from an inflation standpoint, how you're assuming kind of fuel costs look, and then how much visibility versus given hedges and things like that versus assumptions are embedded in that 4%-5%? Thanks. Sure. This is Kofi. Just to give some perspective, our inflation outlook of 4% to 5% assumes about $100 a barrel on oil on the uncovered portion of the year, and conversion costs based on a lagging PPI. We're covered about eight to nine months out, so the uncovered portion of the year is relatively small. We're fairly locked in. What I would say is that as we work our way through the year, we would expect that any meaningful change in oil on its own would fall within that range of our guidance, just given the amount that we've got covered through the year. Okay. Thank you. You bet. Your next question comes from the line of David Palmer with Evercore ISI. David, your line is open. Please go ahead. Great. Thank you. Just to follow up on your previous comments on dollar market share trend, which you anticipate improving in fiscal 2027, any more specifics you can offer on that? What sort of dollar category growth do you think will happen this year? Do you anticipate Mills starting to grow in line with the category by the end of the fiscal year? Is that what's baked into your guidance? I have a follow-up. Thank you for the question. I don't think that I will predict dollar share on all of our categories. That would probably get me into trouble. As we said in our prepared remarks, we're assuming our categories will track roughly in line with FY 2026. For NAR, that's roughly flat in dollars. We expect to deliver improved NAR retail sales performance with a combination of remarkability. We do think that we'll see some modest price mix, because remember, price mix was a real headwind for us this year. That will help us from a dollar share perspective. Then again, this modest price mix is going to be driven entirely by mix, and with packaging formats, innovation, renovation. I also think when you look at our dollar share performance for NAR, you can miss the fact that Totino's was a real problem for us this year. We just didn't execute the way that we need to or at our standard. We had a price pack architecture conversion that wasn't great. We didn't have the innovation that we needed to. So going into fiscal 2027, we've improved almost every lever of remarkability. We have a strong merchandising now that we've got this price pack architecture fixed. We have really good innovation. Think Blasted Totino's Rolls, Ultimate Pizza that's doing really well. Then in the frozen segment, we see Asian snacks and Mexican snacks growing really well. We're launching an Old El Paso frozen snack. We have Wanchai Ferry that is coming over. So I feel like we've diagnosed that business well. We're already seeing improvement into June. Now, four weeks is not necessarily a trend, but we've improved our hot snacks trend by a point and our pizza trend by almost five points. Just stabilizing that business alone, we're not going to turn it around overnight, but stabilizing that alone is going to have a big impact on our dollar share performance. Thanks for all that. I'll ask you one more tough one. You guys are really good on consumer insights. I was just seeing some data that showed that very low-income consumers, let's call it the under $50,000 crowd, was actually spending more on at-home food. It was decent dollar growth because they're trading down from restaurants. Then the over $100,000, which might be the upper third, they were also spending more on at home because they were trading into higher priced, often smaller brands, protein centric, whatever the wellness news of the day. The middle of the third is a little bit more compressed because they're making choices all over the place, restaurants and at home. I wonder how you think about your consumer. Where are the trends by income cohort today, and where do you see the improvement coming in 2027 and beyond? Thank you. Thanks for the question. When you look at at-home eating consumption, we see that in the last quarter pretty stable. It's at 86%. We didn't see it move around. We did see the middle-lower income households eat a little bit more at home and spend a little bit more on staples, so think cooking from home, but nothing significant. Again, I'll come back to when you have brands as big as ours, you have a wide consumer base that you have to serve. You have to make sure that your everyday shelf price is right, that you have opening price points that are easier for lower income households to access, that it's done with packaging innovation, and then also for the larger families, that you have large packs that deliver value. What we're being really smart about is making sure that we understand how stressed the consumer is going into this fiscal year, that we don't take that for granted, and that we make sure that we're bringing the right value. As you said, there is a portion of the economy in this K economy that will spend more. We've got to make sure that we have the benefits, and the new products and the renovations they're willing to spend against. That is functional nutrition, bold flavors. We're bringing a significant amount of new product innovation. Think the example of Cheerios Protein that we had this year in almost every category. Our humanization trend in pet will continue, and cats are on fire. Cat growth is on fire. Tiki Cat and our BLUE Tastefuls and our BLUE Wilderness cat we think will continue to perform. To me, it is about understanding exactly where the consumer is, not underestimating how stressed they are, and making sure we have the benefits in the right places to deliver for them. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Peter Galbo with Bank of America. Peter, your line is open. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys. Thanks for the questions. Dana, in your prepared remarks, you talked about it a bit on the call today, you spent a lot of time on innovation and renovation, and I think we would all agree that that is probably the right next move to improve product quality or attributes. Obviously that comes at a cost. If we just think about the cost associated with innovation and renovation against what you've announced, probably more incremental cost savings from an HMM perspective. Can you help us bridge how those two ideas can kind of coexist within General Mills? We often think of the HMM cost savings coming from the cost line that you're obviously boosting on products. Any kind of further clarity there would be helpful. Well, good morning, Peter. Why don't I start with that question and then Kofi can do a follow-up. I think it comes back to what I talked about from an HMM perspective. This is led by our commercial teams. It's really about making sure that we understand what the consumer values and is willing to pay for, and what they don't value and taking that out. If we start with the consumer, it allows you to have benefits that you launch that they're willing to pay for, and you can manage margins appropriately. For example, our Cheerios Protein was a benefit that consumers were willing to pay for, and we were able to premium price that to the core and offset the cost of that innovation and renovation. That is really our focus going into next fiscal year is what are consumers willing to pay for? We're going to see a little bit of price mix appreciation, and the majority of that will be mix. Then, of course, as we always do with HMM, the teams will focus on what are things they don't value and take it out accordingly in order to make sure that we can reinvest that back into the things they do value. That is our approach. It's been consistent over a number of years, and it won't change going into next fiscal year. I would just add from a sort of annual financial modeling perspective, we would expect every year to see some significant portion of reinvestment back in the product, either through renovation, new product innovation with costs. To the extent that those costs come in, we're relying by and large, heavily on HMM. In fact, the genesis of our HMM discipline was all about being able to reinvest back in the business, both in product as well as marketing, messaging and other ideas to drive growth. Fundamentally, this is the step-up that we're seeing last FY 2026, this fiscal year that we're expecting in FY 2027, all contained within our sort of normal gearing of HMM. We can comfortably cover it, even with a little bit of the step-up in inflation pressure. Great. Thanks for that, Kofi. Maybe if I could just follow up there and to Tom's question around inflation, your HMM numbers for this year, the 4-5 kind of matching the inflation number. I guess, on a like for like basis in 2027, if we're kind of ignoring the 53rd week, are you thinking about just gross margins as being relatively flat for the year? I know you've given kind of the sales and operating profit ranges for the year, but if we're just trying to bridge kind of from gross down to operating, is that the right way we should think about it? Well, I would expect a modestly less pressure on gross margin than operating margin. I think given the shape of the P&L, there would be some modest pressure on gross margin. Okay. Thanks very much, guys. Your next question comes from the line of Matt Smith with Stifel. Matt, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi, thank you. Kofi, a follow-up question on the cost outlook. When we think about the 4%-5% net inflation, can you clarify if that includes any tariff refunds and your expectation for timing around that? Sure, Matt. It does include expectations for tariff refunds. I think as a reminder, our biggest tariff exposure is on steel and aluminum. Those tariffs are still in place and not subject to refunds. We are and have been realizing some modest amount of tariff refunds that have frankly been somewhat immaterial. I would not expect a material contribution that we'd be talking about on a go-forward basis for fiscal 2027. Thank you. As a follow-up, going back to the discussion around the expectations for organic sales, how do you think about the gating factors for getting back to positive growth for the year at the high end of your range? Is that dependent more on your initiatives around innovation and renovation and driving favorable mix, or would you kind of weight that more heavily towards the overall category performance as we move through the year? Thank you. I would say the former more than the latter. Our expectation would be that if we're in the more upper end, more favorable end of our range, that we would see better price mix accretion and less volume pressure from the places where we're expecting that appreciation. All things equal, we view that as largely within our control and somewhat independent of category development. Appreciate it. I'll pass it on. Thank you. You bet. Your next question comes from the line of Chris Carey with Wells Fargo Securities. Chris, your line is open. Please go ahead. Thank you so much. The context around the improvement in market share, realizing you certainly don't want to be overly specific, which makes complete sense. I wonder if you could just contextualize the relative importance of improving share trends in Totino's and improving Wilderness dog feeding. You called out in the prepared remarks that these businesses were pretty material impacts on pound volume declines. When you think about the outlook in these two businesses, specifically relative to the rest of your portfolio, again, maybe just a bit of context on how important share gains are here and some more detail on expectations. Yeah, look, I appreciate that. I think this is, like, the third question we have on market share, as I think about it's an and. We need to improve the things that haven't been working as well, I think Dana was pretty clear on that in Totino's and Wilderness. Totino's was a bigger challenge, by the way, than Wilderness, just due to the absolute size of the business. Getting that more stable will be helpful. It's a matter of doing those things. Even more importantly, I think, is doubling down on the things that are working. Dana talked about Tiki Cat and cat food, which is working. Love Made Fresh, which is up 80% in the last quarter from where it was before, continuing to improve that. Cheerios Protein, which I think is now a $100 million business for us, doubling down on that and Cheerios Granola and kind of getting that back to growth. For me, our ability to get back to growth and improve share is kind of an and. It is improving the things that we needed to improve, like Totino's and Wilderness, doubling down on the things that are working. I would also say our international business, which has returned to growth, specifically the Häagen-Dazs business, which has done well there. That's how we think about it, is really doubling down on both sides of the equation. I think we can do both, we certainly have the plans to do both. It is now up for us to execute. I think importantly, we stated this before, we're not anticipating an improved consumer environment or improved category environment. We're going to make our own success this year, we're confident that we can do that. Okay. All right, thanks. The follow-up is just around pet. Consumption trends have been okay, certainly better than reported results in certain quarters. The inventory volatility has been a kind of, it happens here and there, right, intermittently. I realize some of that has to do with channel and specific retailers. Is there some visib ility in the smoothing out of this inventory volatility? I know that it's going to remain a dynamic in fiscal Q1, and I think the guidance implies that it's going to get better. I just ask in the context of the business has actually been improving better in the consumption data than what we've seen if we kind of smooth out recent quarter averages. I just wonder if there's some visibility and a narrowing of this inventory gap over time and maybe a bit more context on why it's lasted as long as it has. Thank you. Yeah, thanks for the question. We are pleased with our pet performance. We finished the year with retail sales up 1%, growing share on our Life Protection Formula on our cat businesses, and obviously, we've seen a significant improvement in Love Made Fresh. As it comes to our retail sales versus our inventory or our sell-in, as we've dug deeper, as you mentioned, we've seen a consistent headwind from customer mix, with our fastest-growing customers, think e-com and mass, carrying significantly less inventory than our traditional customers. This was really the key component of the two-point gap between our organic sales and our retail sales in Q4. For the full year, our channel sales, as I said, were up 1%, but organic sales lagged about four points. We think it's prudent as we go into next year to assume a low single-digit headwind from the retail inventory in FY 2027, with customer mix being the contributing key factor. Okay. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Rob Dickerson with BTIG. Rob, your line is open. Please go ahead. Great. Thanks so much. Maybe I can just try to recap and summarize a little bit on the organic sales outlook for the year. Just kind of given all the comments already stated. Just like Jeff said, focus on dollar share. Price mix is supposed to be more of a contributor. Flat category assumption better than Q1, I guess is a little bit below algo for the year. The guide's still actually down year-over-year. When we wrap all that up and then we frankly combine it just the dynamic of trying to figure out what's working and what consumers want and shifting the mix some and maybe going a little bit more premium. Is it kind of fair to one, I guess, just frankly assume, obviously, volumes will still be down for the year and I don't hear any commentary around maybe turning positive in the back half. Maybe that's just a function of this is the year where you say we're kind of just shifting that mix to get to a point such that we can actually grow the volumes later. In some of our core brands, there might still be a little bit more volume contraction necessary to find that base. When we get into 2028, yes, the hope here, along with the cost savings, is for the volume to come back. I don't know if all that makes sense, but a lot in there. Thank you so much. Yeah. There's a lot in there. You summarized a lot of what we're doing, so I appreciate that. I would kind of back it up to the first principle, which is, our job is to improve our organic sales trajectory and to do that profitably. That's really the job. That's what we're looking to do. All of the things you just mentioned are in service to that, as well as the transformation that we also discussed. For us, we made improvements in household penetration and our base business this year. The next step in that evolution is really to improve the trajectory of our organic sales and then do it profitably. That's what we're looking to do this year against a backdrop of a consumer environment which we still think will be stressed this year. I think it's really important to reiterate, which I think I've done, but to reiterate that we're not expecting that environment to improve. That's the main objective, and we feel confident that we can hit that objective. To the extent that that leads to even better things in 2028, we'll leave that for another day. The job to do this year is to improve upon what we had last year, and we feel like we have the plans in place to do that, both on the sales line and HMM as well as the transformation. Okay. Fair enough. Then maybe just a very easy question. You clearly have made a fair amount of portfolio adjustments over the past, call it three, five years. Heard a lot of commentary about excess cash would go to deleverage. Kind of just where you sit now, would you say, like, we feel great about the portfolio, don't foresee anything else kind of in the near term? Are you still looking at certain parts of the portfolio strategically? Thanks. No, that's a very fair question, and I'm glad you asked. First of all, we're very proud of our portfolio shaping over the last number of years, and we think we've been effective at it. We know we've been disciplined at it. So whether that's additions like Blue Buffalo or Tiki, or whether that's divestitures like yogurt or what we've announced with Brazil or our Häagen-Dazs shops, we've been very disciplined on both sides of the acquisitions and divestitures. We have an always-on capability when it comes to M&A. We haven't really changed how we think about M&A or, in that sense, how we think about capital allocation. What I would say is that our focus really now is squarely on organic sales growth and doing it profitably. To that extent, and as you look at the balance sheet and where we are, our bar for M&A is going to be very high and specifically on the acquisition front. While we haven't changed how we think about it, the bar for portfolio shaping is high. Our number one priority is getting back to organic sales growth and doing that profitably. All right, super. Thanks, Jeff. All right. Thank you. We have reached the end of the Q&A session. Jeff Siemon for closing remarks, go ahead. Yeah. Thank you, Samantha. I appreciate everyone's good discussion this morning. Thanks for the engagement. I know we didn't quite get to everyone's questions, so please don't hesitate to reach out for any follow-ups. Wish everybody a great summer. Go US National team today, and we'll talk to you all soon. Thank you very much. This concludes today's call. Thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.