Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Parker Hannifin conference call and webcast to discuss the completed acquisition of Meggitt PLC. At this time, all participants are in a listen only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question and answer session. To ask the question during the session, you will need to press star one one on your telephone. I would now like to hand the conference over to the speaker for today, CFO Todd Leombruno. You may begin. Thank you, Tawanda. Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining our webcast today. We are so excited to be able to update everyone on the closing of Parker's acquisition of Meggitt PLC. As Tawanda said, this is Todd Leombruno, Chief Financial Officer speaking, and I am joined today by Tom Williams, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Our discussion today will address forward projections for the Meggitt acquisition and the Aircraft Wheel and Brake Division divestiture only. We will refer to non-GAAP financial measures. Slide two provides details to our disclosure statement in these areas. Actual results may differ from our projections due to uncertainties listed in these forward-looking statements and detailed in our SEC filings. Reconciliations for all the non-GAAP measures along with this presentation have been made available under the investors section at parker.com and will remain available for one year. Today, our agenda begins with Tom welcoming the Meggitt team to Parker, detailing the secular growth opportunities we see in aerospace, and describing how Meggitt complements our overall portfolio. He will also touch on our proven track record of achieving synergies, highlight the commitments we've made to the U.K., and talk about our path to expanding EBITDA margins. I will give an overview of the transaction details and provide color to the additions and subtractions to our forecast for the remaining nine months of our fiscal year, 2023. It is important to note today, since we are so close to the end of our quarter, we are not commenting on our initial FY 2023 guidance for the legacy company that we just issued in August. We're simply highlighting the addition of Meggitt and the divestiture of Aircraft Wheel and Brake, from the date of close, through the remainder of our fiscal year 2023. Tom's gonna close this presentation today, just explaining the compelling value this acquisition creates for shareholders. Then Tom and I will take any questions that anyone has, on the materials we cover today. With that, Tom, I'll turn it over to you and ask everyone to refer to slide three. Thank you, Todd, and welcome everybody to the call. Really glad that you could join us today. It's an exciting time as we welcome the Meggitt team joining Parker. Two great companies being put together. Given that the acquisition announcement was in August of last year, we thought it'd be good to have a dedicated investor call to update everybody on the acquisition. As you can see from the illustration we've got on slide three, we're ready for takeoff, and we have takeoff. Acquisition closed September 12, and we've had day one celebrations at Meggitt facilities around the world, which you can see on slide four. Just some sample pictures from the day one celebrations. We had Parker executives at every site to welcome the Meggitt team. Really, on behalf of myself and the entire leadership team, a warm welcome to all the Meggitt team members around the world. We are so happy to have you part of the team. Great pictures. I was at one of them and very exciting times, very energizing for everybody. If you go to slide five, kind of want to take you back to what we talked about at Investor Day in March, the four secular trends and how they're gonna positively impact Parker going forward. You see them in the picture there, aerospace, digital, electrification, and clean technology. Obviously, Meggitt further strengthens our aerospace position. These secular trends, in combination with the portfolio transformation the company's done over the last years and the Win Strategy changes, are really the key enablers to that new goal we put on growth of 4%-6% organic growth over the cycle. On slide six, wanted to give you a little bit more insights into why we like the long-term growth dynamics of aerospace. It's really the first two circles on the left, the 19,000 and the 77%, are all indicators, statistics that support long-term commercial OEM growth over the next 10-20 years. The 3.8% is the revenue per passenger kilometer growth over the next 20 years. That's an indicator of commercial MRO activity being strong over this period of time. We've got the F-35 in service, and it's early days of spares and repair activity, and we're projecting repair activity increase by a factor of four over the next decade. A lot of really good statistics to back up the positive trends we feel about aerospace. Put that in combination with Meggitt, and you really got a strong aerospace business going forward. On slide seven, it really kind of illustrates the transformation of the portfolio. Over the last years, if you start with FY 2015, we have strategically reshaped the portfolio to double the size of aerospace, filtration, and engineered materials. You can see there as we bracketed them from $5 billion-$10 billion of the portfolio. This will further enhance our resilience over the cycle and increase organic growth. With Meggitt, there's a portion of that business, composites and seals, that is really better aligned with our Engineered Materials business. In our Engineered Materials business, they are the best owner and home for these type of technologies. They have the expertise in material sciences and the processes that go into producing these products. They serve today a variety of end markets, including aerospace. The rest of Meggitt will go into the Aerospace reporting segment. Todd will give you the splits between as far as where Meggitt goes, X% of the Aerospace, North America, International later in the presentation. If I just call your attention down to the FY 2023 guide pie, you see Filtration & Engineered Materials is $5.6 billion. Just, we haven't really disclosed this in the past, but just so you get a feel, of that $5.6 billion, about $850 million of that is predominantly Engineered Materials goes into supporting aerospace applications. We've got aerospace as a segment we report separately, but there's other technologies that we have, predominantly Filtration & Engineered Materials, that support that industry as well. If you go to slide eight, it's really the combination of portfolio changes that are on the prior slide, those secular trends that I started with, it's gonna create a profound shift in our sales mix. If you look at it from an illustrative standpoint at FY 2027, we'll have approximately 85% of the company that will either be long cycle or will be tied to industrial aftermarket. That's a significant mix shift, and it gives us additional confidence as to why we're gonna grow differently in the future. If you go to slide nine, just to refresh everybody, so why Meggitt? Why do we wanna acquire Meggitt? Well, first of all, it's a company we've admired for a long time, and it really creates a powerful combination. The very first bullet is kind of the sweet spot of acquisitions, where you understand the customers, you understand the end markets, in this case in aerospace. You're on premier programs, but you're on there with complementary technologies to your existing portfolio. Second bullet, I have a pie chart to illustrate this. We're gonna be increasing the aftermarket mix by 500 basis points. Obviously, a more resilient top line and margin enhancement. As we've gotten to know the team through due diligence and the integration planning, of course, today with about two weeks of ownership, this is a very good cultural fit. Similar heritage and values and, great people, highly engaged. We're poised to benefit on the commercial aerospace recovery, but also the military business will do well. As I think we all recognize, we live in a more dangerous world, and military investments are gonna happen in the future, probably at a quicker pace than they have had in the past. Both companies equally focused on sustainable aviation, and that's a good thing. We'll be able to create incremental value from our customers technologies. Then we're gonna have a very compelling value proposition for customers, a stronger bill of material, the ability to solve more problems for customers and create additional customer value. If you add all these up, we're gonna drive significant shareholder value as well, which we'll get into when I show the synergies momentarily. If you go to slide 10, this is Meggitt's sales profile. On the left-hand side is a pie chart of sales by application. I'm not gonna go through all these because I'm gonna cover some of the product and technologies in more detail in subsequent slides. On the left-hand side, the one comment I did wanna make, 'cause I'm not gonna cover it later, is on that energy and power generation. In power gen, they do sensors, pressure and temperature sensors for the turbine. On the energy side, it'd be heat exchangers, primarily in LNG and regasification, which is obviously an attractive space given the world's needs for LNG, especially in areas that lack stable natural gas flow. On the right-hand side is sales by customer geography. You can see significant sales in North America, but makes our aerospace business more global than it has been in the past, but very well balanced across the various platforms and applications. If you go to slide 11, I mentioned earlier on about that aftermarket mix going up 500 basis points. On the left-hand side is legacy Parker Aerospace, so the 36% aftermarket. Meggitt is 46% aftermarket, so 1,000 basis points higher. When you do the combination, it will be at approximately 41%. Again, this aftermarket mix shift is gonna drive a more resilient top line and, better margins as well. If you go to slide 12, I have two slides where I'm gonna walk through both on the airframe and on the engine side, a little bit about Meggitt's, products and technologies. I'm gonna provide a little bit of color, and not to make people aerospace engineers, but to help, I think, illustrate what they do. Just to orientate you to the slide, Parker's in blue. I'm not gonna cover that because that's currently what you should already know. Then Meggitt's in green. Starting kind of in the upper left, top of the page, fire protection and safety. That'd be smoke and fire detection sensors, and then fire suppression primarily for the engine, the APU, and the cargo compartment. Avionics and sensors would be for secondary flight controls. Sensors, a variety of applications on pressure, ice detection, aircraft position as examples. Door seals would be pretty much what you might think it is, the main door and the landing gear door. Fuel tanks and bladders, self-explanatory. Braking systems, obviously a very important part of the company, both at the component level as well as the system level. They make nose and main wheels. They have carbon, steel, and electric brakes. On the system side, they do the control system. They do brake control valves, anti-skid valves, as well as brake temperature monitoring. In the electric power, a couple examples. They have electric-driven generators. Think of that as for power for avionics, lighting, and actuation. Then they've got AC/DC converters, as most of the equipment on board uses DC. If you go to slide 13, same process on the engine side. Again, Parker in blue, Meggitt in green. Start kind of in the middle of the page, upper right on sensors. This would be primarily vibration monitoring just to make sure the engine is in balance. Fire protection, this would be for detection and suppression, similar to the airframe side. The composite you see there, this is engine inlet anti-icing, so these are electrically heated composites to help prevent icing. The sealing applications are primarily the interface between the heat exchanger and the ductwork that'd be in the core. Thermal management would be heat exchangers to cool the engine oil. Then on the valve side, these would be bleed air anti-icing, and then engine control valves as part of the portfolio. I think another way to illustrate it is on slide 14, and you've seen us do this before. Now we didn't list all of Parker's existing capabilities. We really started with what Meggitt brings, and just to illustrate whether there's any overlap there. This, again, this comes back to the highly complementary nature of the acquisition. Again, to me, this is a sweet spot. When you add technologies that are complementary on top of customers and markets you know well, it creates a very compelling value proposition for your customers. Now on braking, you know, you're familiar that we sold our braking business, so we're a hollow dot there. We're excited to have Meggitt braking system join the company. Strong sensor portfolio that I illustrated some of that on the prior slides, safety systems. On the engine valves, you see dots for both Parker and Meggitt, but there's different actuation technologies utilized for them. Parker's primarily fuel hydraulic actuators, so you're using high pressure fuel to actuate the valves. For the most part, on Meggitt's technologies, it's primarily pneumatic. Electric power with some of the electric capabilities I mentioned on the airframe. Then a bigger thermal management offering, primarily heat exchangers, that helps us. Obviously, in a more electric, hotter applications, having thermal management is a strong offering. A much broader offering, in addition to add the legacy Parker technologies to help solve problems for our customers. Go to slide 15, a little bit about the approach and how we're gonna capture synergies. It's gonna be a very similar approach and structure that's been so effective in the last three acquisitions. This is where we take leaders from Meggitt and leaders from Parker, put them on either value creation synergy teams or the functional integration teams. Think of the typical functions, finance, IT, supply chain, et cetera, and then the value creation teams around those areas we think that are the most synergistic. Approximately 20-plus teams that are engaged. We've got a very robust, you know, we've done a lot of these, so we have a very robust program management and operating cadence around this, and we've got a great track record. You've seen our track record on either beating the synergy targets or hitting them sooner. Obviously, either one of those would be a great outcome for the business. A very structured and deliberate process to drive value. Speaking of the synergies on slide 16. Oops, sorry, that's the next slide after that. Slide 16, I wanted to try to give you a little bit more comfort and understanding about the regulatory commitments that we made to the United Kingdom. Maybe just to step back for a second for maybe people that aren't familiar with why we had engaged in that process. U.K. government, probably about a year before we actually started approaching Meggitt, put into law an approval process that had to factor in economic and national security considerations in addition to the normal antitrust reviews whenever you had a foreign company buy a U.K. asset. I wanna characterize this list, which I'm gonna go through here momentarily, that first, this is a very natural, logical list of commitments that we'd make, and we would've done regardless of whether there was government involvement or not. Second, this is in no way limits our ability to generate synergies. Let me just walk through a couple of these and give you some illustrations. First one, maintaining Meggitt's Ansty Park Center of Excellence. This is a center excellence where the Meggitt team consolidated some facilities and kind of created a center of excellence around brakes. Not the only place to do brakes, but a center of excellence for brakes in the U.K. MRO services for the EMEA region, and then heat exchangers. We'll continue that. It's a great facility. Retaining existing U.K technical capabilities, which we would've, things like brakes, heat exchangers, additive, composites, sensing, and avionics. On the people count, that third bullet down, maintain approximately 1,400 U.K technical jobs and increase apprentices by 20%. Let me start with the technical jobs. Without getting real detail on it, just think of that as manufacturing, people count, labor there, and R&D engineers. To help give you some backdrop, that 1,400 represents about 60% of the U.K people count. We have ample room to do the things we think might be appropriate for how we structure Meggitt in the U.K. The apprentices is just good and smart to do, and this is what we're doing around the world. As you look at succession planning for our talented team members in the factories, we need to have a stronger apprentice program, so we're happy to invest in that and increase that over this period of time. We're gonna increase the U.K R&D spend. That's about GBP 6 million over the next five years, so that's a relatively nominal amount, and we're happy to do that and continue to invest about two-thirds of that in sustainable initiatives. When you look at our portfolio of innovation as well as Meggitt's, they're all geared to these kind of things, you know, lightweighting, more efficient applications, reducing emissions, improving fuel efficiencies. They're all doing sustainable activities, so this is an easy lift because it's a natural part of what we do. Next bullet down, uphold existing U.K government contracts. Of course, we would do that. We always do that. We honor the contracts we have with the governments. On the climate side is very much similar to what we do today. They're a little bit earlier on their 50% target. We're at 2030, they're at 2025, but they're aligned to hitting that number. Our net zero for the company was 2040, they were at 2050. Very similar approach to trying to show incremental improvements and a long-term vision of getting to carbon neutral. Really, this list of commitments is gonna drive and help us in tandem drive long-term value creation. We're very comfortable with this list, and you should be comfortable with it as well. Again, what I was referring to now on the synergies, slide 17. Take the left-hand side first, just to orientate you to the page. Synergies are in blue by fiscal year between FY 2023 and FY 2026. The cumulative cost to achieve is in gold, as you can see there going out over the same time period. We're starting off at approximately 20% EBITDA margin. This is our projection, our estimate for this year. Think of it as the base business plus that $60 million of synergies you see in the blue bar. Then the synergies we're gonna do over this period of time, taking us to about 30% EBITDA margin. Now on the right-hand side, let me give you a little bit of color as to how we're gonna achieve it. Think of it really as it's the Win Strategy, overall, the overarching business system, driving synergies and operational excellence. The Meggitt business system is very similar to the Win Strategy. I would just characterize it as earlier days and probably closer to the original Win Strategy as far as where it was. Really the upside is the transformation that you saw with Parker as we went from the original Win Strategy to Win 2.0 and Win 3.0, and you saw the margin enhancement and the EPS enhancement that I've showed you over the years. We expect the same kind of leverage as we introduce the Meggitt team, and they evolve to Win Strategy 3.0. Now, if I just take you through some of these boxes that you see on the right-hand side, you know, safety, lean, Kaizen, high performance teams, that's what that HPT acronym is, simplification. Let me start with simplification. Simplification will be a big driver. You're familiar with our simplification approach. It's structure, organization design, it's 80/20, so that revenue complexity, and it's simplify design. Those will be the four key elements. They will be a big driver of synergies. Our brand at Kaizen is really those first four words. It's safety, lean, performance teams with Kaizen, and that's how we create step changes in quality and productivity and safety for our team members. The other part I would say before leaving this quadrant is that if I compare the two companies, legacy Parker is more decentralized. I think we're gonna obviously do that across the entire company. We believe in that. We like to drive ownership to the lowest levels we can in the company. We like that intimacy with the P&L, that intimacy with customers. The one thing I think we're gonna see is that we're gonna be creating the ability, that ownership mentality to unleash lots of ideas that the Meggitt team has by giving them the authority and empowering them to drive the things that they see and make decisions faster. We're gonna encourage that. We're looking forward to that. If you move to the right, SG&A, the way I would just summarize it to help you get to the impact here, Meggitt is in the low 20s when you think about as SG&A as% of sales, and Parker's in the mid-teens. You've got lots of opportunity to improve the SG&A structure. Think of this as being very LORD-like, and comparing to our prior acquisition with LORD, where this is a more SG&A versus a footprint. That takes me to the footprint optimization. There'll be relatively minor footprint opportunities here. Remember, these are complementary technologies, not a lot of overlap at the plant sites. Obviously, we'll look at, you know, potential to co-locate sales offices if that's obvious, and there might be some minor footprint optimization, but that's relatively small. Remember, CLARCOR was a large footprint optimization. Again, when you look at degree of risk, it's a lot easier to do Win Strategy, SG&A, supply chain things versus footprint. That's what we have with this acquisition, a lower risk profile, those type of synergies. Then lastly, supply chain. We'll be looking to optimize the supply chain, comparing pricing, terms and conditions, looking at direct, indirect materials as well as logistics. If I just would summarize the whole approach, anytime we look at an acquisition, it's taking the best of Meggitt and the best of Parker so that one plus one equals three, and bringing everybody. 'Cause you think about the Win Strategy, it's a suite of best practices both inside and outside the company, and we're open to great ideas wherever they happen to originate. We feel good about this roadmap. With that, I'll turn it over to Todd to give you more details. Thanks, Tom. I share your excitement. This is really a transformational transaction for us. I'm looking forward to getting into it. I'm gonna start on slide 18, and just really, I wanna reiterate the commitment we have to our fiscal policy. We have a gross debt to EBITDA target of 2x. There is no change to that fiscal policy. Obviously, we've used our capacity now on the last 3 transactions. Meggitt will be the fourth. These have been transformational transactions for the company. They have helped us grow. They've increased our margins. They've generated cash for us. We've used our discipline and our cash flow generation to quickly delever after these transactions. If you look at our strong cash flow profile today, we have basically achieved a 2x reduction in the leverage post-close in about a 2-year period after each of these last 3 transactions. With the performance of the company, we're very confident that we can do that again with the Meggitt transaction. We're not speaking to gross debt to EBITDA at close simply because we don't want to mention EBITDA for the quarter. We will give you more color on that, obviously, when we close Q1 in November. Very confident in our ability to delever quickly. If you look at slide 19, I'm just gonna give some details on the transaction. Obviously, everyone knows we announced this last August. The total consideration has not changed. It's $8.9 billion. That essentially is the transaction price. Since last August, and this is something that we're extremely proud of, we have already allocated $1.8 billion of cash from our cash flow generation towards the purchase price. New financing for the transaction is $7.1 billion. That's the new finance debt is $7.1 billion. About 50% of that, half of that is serviceable, and it allows us for easy, flexible repayment. We're very focused on doing that right now. I think everyone knows the $2 billion term loan that we announced a while ago. We did draw on that in September. That is essentially the only incremental debt that we've had since the June report. We will have about $1.5 billion of commercial paper that will also be flexible. That makes up the $3.5 billion-dollar flexible amount. The $3.6 billion of bonds, those are the bonds that we issued in June. Those are not new bonds. Those are bonds that we issued in advance of a payment. Those are split into three tranches, a 2-year bond, a 5-year bond, and a 7-year bond. Again, those were already issued in June for the Meggitt transaction. Looking today, obviously rates have changed significantly. Our all-in weighted average interest rate for all of this financing is still only 3.9%. That is very similar to what we've done in prior deals, and we feel comfortable with that. That is current rating as of today. About, like I said, half of that is serviceable flexible payment, and the rest is longer term, but you can see the longest term we have set out is 7 years. We've also assumed approximately $1 billion of Meggitt debt. We've talked about that before. That's about $900 million in debt that Meggitt had, and then the remaining difference is just the recognition of some capital leases from a GAAP standpoint. Then lastly on this slide, I just want to reiterate that our current debt ratings have been maintained at Baa1, BBB+, and of course, A2/P2 for our commercial paper. Company's in strong financial shape and ready to continue to focus on paying down debt. If you go to slide 20, slide 20 is what we're providing for a preliminary forecast. This is for the Meggitt acquisition and the Aircraft Wheel and Brake divestiture. If you remember, our initial guide that we just issued in August, we did include what we defined as the committed interest expense for Meggitt in Q1. That was really the bonds that we issued and the commercial paper that was outstanding. That did not include the $2 billion term loan that was drawn later in the month of September. We did include a full year of Aircraft Wheel and Brake because that was contingent on closing Meggitt. All of these numbers presented on this slide are really incremental to what we just announced in August. First, if you look at the yellow shaded column, this is the forecast we have for Meggitt. That's from the date of close through the end of our FY 2023. That's basically a little over nine months of activity. We see sales to be about $1.8 billion. Adjusted segment operating income is forecasted to be $300 million. That incremental interest expense, that is for the term loan and for Q2, Q3, and Q4 of our fiscal year. That is expected to be $225 million. That's for the nine-month period. If you're looking for a full year of interest, you would add that $42 million that we guided to originally to the $225 that's listed on this slide. What is powerful here is on an adjusted basis, EPS in the stub year, the nine months that we will own Meggitt, it will add $0.45 to our earnings per share. Very happy with that. We have had a number of questions throughout this entire period on what the first 12 months of Meggitt would look like, so we are providing that information. That's the blue shaded columns on this page. That is the first 12 months, so that obviously reaches into Q1 of our FY 2024. It's really just there for informational purposes. You can see, in the first 12 months, we expect $0.80 of EPS accretion for adding Meggitt. We are guiding and forecasting $0.45 for our fiscal year FY 2023. Tom mentioned earlier, I just wanna clarify, the majority of this Meggitt activity will be reported in our Aerospace Systems segment. You can see on the slide here, 82% will be reported in Aerospace, 14% will be reported in Industrial North America, and 4% will be reported in the Diversified International and Industrial segments. One last thing on this slide, in respect to Aircraft Wheel and Brake, I had mentioned before, we did include this in our FY 2023 guidance. Now that the divestiture is closed, we are removing that from our forecast. What we've done here is we've laid out the nine months looking forward that we would have guided for in FY 2023 that we were moving from our forecast. Sales are approximately $55 million. Adjusted segment operating income was expected to be about $21 million, and EPS was expected to be $0.12. All of that was reported in the Aerospace Systems segment. I just wanna summarize the nine months of Meggitt, that $0.45 needs to be netted against the $0.12 of Wheel and Brake, and that's really what we're adding to our FY 2023 forecast. That's what I had on just financial transaction details and guidance. With that, I'll ask you to move to slide 21, and I'll turn it back to Tom. Just one last slide to wrap things up before we open it up to Q&A. A compelling value creation for our shareholders. EPS accretion in FY 2023, Todd illustrated that. $300 million of synergies by FY 2026. High single-digit ROIC, I'm referring to the deal ROIC in year 5 with continued expansion. Our goal as a total company is to drive ROIC to 15% overall. Think of this as the base business plus Meggitt. That's a top quartile ROIC number. This is a strategic capital deployment, reshaping the portfolio, aligning us to secular trends to drive long-term shareholder value. Our dividend policy is not changing. We're gonna continue to break those records of annual dividend increases, as well as keep it in that strike zone of 30%-35% of net income in our 5-year average payout. We're committed to a strong balance sheet. We're committed to investment grade credit. We're gonna rapidly deleverage with our strong cash flow in the same way that you've seen us do in the past. With that, I'm gonna turn it back to Tawanda to open things up for Q&A. Thank you. As a reminder to ask the question, you will need to press star one one on your telephone. That's star one one to ask the question. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question comes from the line of Jamie Cook with Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Hi, good morning and congratulations. I guess my first question, Tom, you know, now that we're sitting, you know, over a year from when you announced the deals, can you talk about the conversations you're having with your customers and the potential, you know, for revenue synergies if you're feeling any more optimistic there? You know, my second question, can you just talk to understanding you laid out the cost to achieve and the cost synergy targets. Assuming the macro were to weaken, how do you think of the earnings resilience of the Meggitt, of Meggitt and/or could you accelerate some of the cost, you know, cost opportunities that you have if the macro were to weaken? Thank you. Jamie, it's Tom. From a customer standpoint, customers have been very positive. I think one of the things that they like is the opportunity for, hopefully, you know, they know our operational excellence, they know our track record on quality and delivery, and that I think they're looking for us to be able to help things as we look at the total company. We're gonna obviously try to do that working together as a joint team. On the revenue synergies, we did not put any in. As you probably are aware, these are all cost synergies only. Clearly, we will take a look at by account, you know, what is the best way to approach an account? How do we create the most value? We've not quantified those, but, you know, there's always synergies on the top line, whether it's in the aftermarket, servicing the aftermarket or on the OEM side. They'll just be longer term, and we don't count on them because we wanna hurdle this on a cost side only. On the cost to achieve, I think, you know, the advantage here, we're buying a property that's recovering from a COVID decline, and obviously COVID impacted the aerospace industry harder than the industrial portion of the company. I think while this macro could weaken, I think that, we're in good shape to see, you know, there's no real debate on whether aerospace is gonna improve. It's a question just related to the trajectory. I feel very good about that. I think that synergy walk will be very resilient to whatever happens in the macro standpoint, so I'm confident we could deliver that whatever happens in the macro. As far as pulling in cost to achieve, it'll really be not so much driven by the macro. It'd be more driven by our knowledge of the business and getting really at that simplification initiative, creating the right structure, right talents, right organization design, all those kind of things. As soon as we're comfortable jointly, both in Meggitt and the Parker team as to what that looks like, we'll do that regardless of what happens with the macro environment. Okay, thanks. Congrats. Thanks, Jamie. Thank you. Please stand by for our next question. Our next question comes from Andrew Obin with Bank of America. Your line is open. Hi, yes, good morning. Good morning, Andrew. Just, I guess I'll have two questions for you. The first one, if you look at Meggitt's inventory turns, they've been a bit below Parker quite consistently. The question is just generally, between just structurally low inventory turns and supply chain issues specific to aerospace, what's the near-term ability to release working capital from Meggitt? Longer term, what's the opportunity to bring Meggitt's inventory turns more in line with Parker's average? Andrew, it's Tom. Yes, over time, we would like to do that, and I think we feel very comfortable with having their working capital match our working capital. What I would say first is I would try to have it match Parker Aerospace's working capital, and then we'll try to get the whole thing to the total Parker's coverage. Doing lean Kaizen supply chain, I think their supply chain, they've experienced about the same kind of challenges that we have, so I wouldn't necessarily say that they're better or worse on that. You know, what we've seen typically as we do the Parker lean system, is we see improvements in inventory, we see improvements in on-time delivery. We'll free up working capital. We do pretty good on receivables. As you know, that's a strength of the company. We'll look at their terms and conditions for all their payables. Yes, from a cash flow standpoint, we're looking to move the working capital closer to Parker. This, you know, when we gave you the guidance on cash flow for our FY 2027, that 16% free cash flow target, that included Meggitt. We- Gotcha. You know, that's our goal, and that's a top priority goal including Meggitt. Thank you. By the way, Andrew, welcome back to the call. It's nice. Yeah. Welcome back. To have you back. Thank you. No, it's good to be back. Just a follow-up question on your payout ratio. Just looking at the basic accretion over the next several years, you know, I think you've grown dividends low teens over the past several years. If you look at the accretion, your dividend can easily grow quite a bit above that for a number of years. Just thinking about Meggitt accretion, is that the right way to think about the basic math? Andrew, it's Tom again. Yes. You know, without me committing to a number, you know, it's gonna keep pace. As you can see between this and what we'll do with the base business, and you can look at our FY 2027 targets, and, you know, we're pretty good about our say-do ratio when we lay out a five-year target about delivering them, that you would expect our dividend growth rate to be at a faster clip than what it's been. It'll keep pace, and as net income grows, so will the dividends. I think our shareholders can. That's one thing they can rest assured. Hey, Andrew Obin, I would just add to what Tom Williams said there. You know, if you go back to our Investor Day, we did all of those targets that include Meggitt. If you remember that dividend slide, we did account for that, staying within that 30%-35% of five-year net income. Yep. That's just doing basic math. Thank you very much, and congratulations. Thanks. Thank you. Please stand by for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Joseph O'Dea with Wells Fargo. Your line is open. Hi, good morning and congrats. I first wanted to ask about the first nine months and the first twelve months. It looks like kind of implies, I think around $0.35 in fiscal Q1 2024. Just, you know, looking for, I guess, a little bit of color on that step up in the run rate from what we see in the first nine months to what would be a pretty good starting point when you get a year out. Yeah, Joe, that's exactly right. That's the math that we see there. Obviously, volume is a big piece of that. You know, we're just 11 days into ownership, so there's obviously a lot of good work being done, a lot of moving pieces on getting all that information in there. A big piece of it's volume. The other piece of it is synergies start to kind of roll in as we get out into that period. That's really the big pieces of it. Interest will probably be a little bit less based on rates today just as we continue to pay down that, so we see a little bit of upside there as well. It's basically volume. It's, you know, efficiency improvements and then little synergies as well. Is that volume just as you sort of fully ramp, it's stuff that's in backlog, or is it more tied to kind of anticipation of recovery trajectory? Well, you know, the aerospace business, one of the reasons we like it is very long cycle, so not as much movement in the industrial side of the business, and this is the best look that we have, working with our Meggitt team members and our aerospace team members. That's what I would speak to on the volume. Okay. Just a clarification question, Tom. I think you said that, or Todd, I think you said that you would have the interest rates were set, like, as of today, basically. Just wanted to confirm exchange rates as well, just given a lot of the movement we're seeing in those environments as well. Yeah, obviously, the rates have been extremely volatile. I would say we've used a current rate. I wouldn't say the rate today. I think we were using about a 1.8 rate, but obviously much more current than what we gave. 0.08. Yeah, 0.08. Much more current than what we did when we gave initial guidance. Same thing for the exchange. I guess it's like 20% GBP. I'm sorry. What was that, Joe? Oh, I was just talking exchange rates as well. I think the appendix shows like 20% exposure to GBP. Just wanted to confirm that. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. What we were trying to show in the Those were pretty similar. What we were trying to show in the appendix, Joe, was just looking at the revenue profile of the Meggitt business, 70% of their sales are invoiced in U.S. dollars, and 20% of it is in the pound. Got it. Thanks a lot. Yep. Thank you. Thank you. Please stand by for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jeffrey Sprague with Vertical Research Partners. Your line is open. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Congrats. Hey, Tom, thanks for walking through kind of the synergies the way you did. I just wonder if we could kinda drill down in that a little bit, you know, given you know, until you own these things, you really can't get into them that deeply. It sounds like based on what you said on SG&A and probably some educated guesses you could make on supply chain and a little bit on footprint that maybe you have, like, very, very clear visibility on maybe half the synergies, and kind of in the other half comes into applying lean and simplification and the like. Is that the way to think about it? I know your confidence level in those actions is high, but is that the way to think about it? How does that stack up relative to kind of bringing, you know, other deals into the fold and trying to capture synergies? Yeah, Jeff, it's Tom. I don't know if I would, you know, I don't wanna necessarily get into what percent of it, you know, is a given of the walk to the 300. I would just say the three areas, SG&A, the Win Strategy elements, you know, simplification, safety, lean, et cetera, supply chain, those would be the three big elements. It's the Win Strategy in general. If you just, I would take it back to my characterization of Meggitt around their business system being similar, more similar to the original Win Strategy. You saw the lift in margins we got as we did 2.0 and 3.0. Obviously, that kinda combines all three of these things. That's why we've got confidence. You know, some of it requires more work. You could do the math on the SG&A at low 20s% into the mid-teens% and figure out what that number is. The rest of it requires a little bit more action. I feel very good about the synergy profile. I wouldn't characterize it as easy, but it has a lot less risk associated with it. Anything we have to close factories and move products and do all those kind of things, you add your risk complications dramatically. I think just as we move to a more decentralized structure, I think the Meggitt team is got, as I'm trying to characterize it, we're gonna unleash a lot of the ideas that they have, and that's, you know, things that will be baked into this plan as well. Thank you. Maybe for Todd, just on your interest expense guide, just trying to understand how much deleveraging is in the guide, right? If I, $285 million of interest expense at 3.9% would imply kinda $7.3 billion of debt, right? You're starting at $8.1 billion, so it kind of implies you're maybe paying down $800 million in this forecast. You can kinda get halfway there on wheels and brakes. Is that directionally the way to think about it? Or, you know, what is really kinda the deleveraging plan out of the gate? Yeah, Jeff, obviously, we're committed to the dividend, we're committed to CapEx, we're committed to our 10b5-1 program. 100% of the remaining cash flow generated will be used to pay down the debt. That's what we've got in our plan, and that's what we're committing to. Great. Thank you guys. Appreciate it. Thank you. Please stand by for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of David Raso with Evercore. Your line is open. Hi. Thank you. Two quick questions. First, further on the deleveraging, when I look at LORD, right, being more of an SG&A cost save, but CLARCOR a little slower with the footprint decisions. Of course, the macro environment also can dictate, you know, how you allocate your funds. Is it fair to say, when we look at the historical deleveraging timeframe for those two acquisitions, this should be a little bit closer to the LORD timeframe than CLARCOR, especially given the cost savings are more SG&A like LORD? Is that a fair generalization? Yeah, David, this is Todd. I agree with you. LORD and both Exotic, we did a little faster than what we did with CLARCOR, but it's really because the company's bigger. Our EBITDA margins have expanded, our cash flow generation dollars have expanded, so there's just more capacity that we have to allocate to that. So I would agree with your comment. It's more like the latter than CLARCOR. On Meggitt with the R&D spend that they've had, the maybe a little bit below industry average, in your forecast, do you have a step up in the R&D for Meggitt, you know, just to kinda win and take advantage of the platform for more content wins? David, it's Tom. I wouldn't characterize them as being below. Their number I've got is 4.7% of sales is what they had in R&D, and we've been in that 3%-3.5%. It really depends on what you decide to go bid on. It's all, in aerospace, it's all about portfolio management and what technologies you wanna develop, what programs you wanna go after. I think when I look at it longer term, and obviously we'll support whatever's there in the near term, you know, the combined business, total aerospace business is probably in that 3%-4% range longer term. If they have opportunities that are exciting, we'll clearly go above that. You've seen, you know, historically we were as high as in the low teens, so we'd never hesitate to go after the right things, and we won't hesitate, if the right, target was presented here. But I think, you know, the next period of time, I think it's gonna kinda evolve to that 3%-4%. Okay, that's interesting. I remember there's moments where you have aggressively gone after platforms, and as you said, your R&D in aerospace has been a lot higher than 3%-4%, high single-digit%, even higher. Where is your R&D run rate right now, legacy Parker? It's in the 3%-3.5% range. It is 3.5 right now. Okay. Right. Really appreciate it. Part of the difference, David, is that, you know, there's a lot. You think about the super cycle in aerospace has really started probably about 15 years or so. There was development into almost every airframe and development almost every engine platform. There's a lot less of that development. It's much more targeted. What we're working on is kind of component technologies. We're trying to anticipate where the puck is being shot to. That's where our investment is going. Obviously, we'll invest in like the new helicopter programs and those type of things as they come up, but just a lot less airframe and engine development that's happened over the last decade or so. Yeah, I mean, the reason that's all important is if you have $0.65 of accretion in the first 12 months, right, the -$80, say, $15 for the air brake, just the incremental synergies from, say, $75 million the first year to get up to $300 million, the accretion is well over $2 just from sort of the synergy story in near term. Whatever growth you look at for aerospace the next couple of years, which I think generally people are kind of constructive on how aerospace is going to grow, you don't see it as a heavy spend to serve that cycle. I mean, that was the genesis of the question. I think you. Yeah. You've characterized it perfectly. That's exactly how I would say it. Okay. Terrific. Thank you so much. Hey, David, thanks for joining us today. I know you're double booked. We appreciate it. Yeah. Thanks. Thank you. Please stand by for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Mig Dobre with Baird. Your line is open. Thank you. Good morning, congrats. Tom, I wanted to go back to your comment on synergies again. You know, you talked about SG&A, bringing SG&A down at Meggitt somewhere in the mid-teens. You know, looking at Parker, you guys are right around 10% of sales. Is frankly 10% an achievable target longer term? Related to this, when I'm looking at the Aircraft Wheel and Brake divestiture, the margins here were quite impressive, right? I mean, 38% by my math. I'm curious, beyond the synergies that you've outlined here, as you think about Meggitt longer term, can Meggitt get anywhere close to where Aircraft Wheel and Brake margins currently are? Mig, it's Tom. Good question. On the SG&A, I'm quoting you more of an internal SG&A, because what you see publicly is how we characterize this externally. I'm factoring in the SG&A that really kind of sits in the divisions, and that's how we look at it. It's just the total SG&A that the business. That's where we're at. We're at mid-teens. That's the number that's really more, a more reflective number. On Wheel and Brake, what you can't do is take our Wheel and Brake business because they're not 100% Wheel and Brake. They have a lot of other technologies that they do. The Wheel and Brake business is highly profitable. We would certainly be comparing notes to make sure, you know, our memory of our old Wheel and Brake business and their Wheel and Brake business get into comparable margins. You can't extrapolate the two because, you know, they're making a lot of other technologies besides just Wheel and Brake. Yeah, that's what I was getting at. If there was a difference between this portion of the business and everything else that Meggitt was doing. My follow-up, maybe this one is for Todd. I appreciate the breakdown here, revenue by currency, but I'm wondering if there's a way to think about the transactional exposure that Meggitt might have, how much manufacturing is happening, maybe in the U.K., Europe, and is there a benefit to margin given some of the changes and effects that we've seen? You know, Mig, we're still learning. It's just been 11 days since we've had ownership, so we're going through that. It's pretty reflective of the way the sales is listed. If you look at where their facility is at, you know, it'll all be reported in local currency. I might push that one to maybe November until I feel a little bit more comfortable with it, but we think it matches up pretty closely to what we're showing here on slide 24. Yeah. Mig, it's Tom. Just in general, about 60% of our plants are in the U.S. Okay. That's helpful. Thank you. Thank you. You know what, Tawanda, I think we have time for probably one more question if there's someone in the queue. Sure. Our final question comes from the line of Julian Mitchell with Barclays. One moment. Hi, good morning. Thanks for squeezing me in. Maybe just the first question around that sort of revenue assumption. You've got the $2.4 billion of first 12-month sales at Meggitt. Hasn't really been any discussion, I think, yet on the sort of assumptions of organic growth within that, you know, what's going on commercial versus military, you know, what's assumed around pace of supply chain constraint easing, you know, within that number. Maybe starting off with any color there, please. Julian, it's Tom. In general, our organic growth assumption is low to mid-teens for if I took Meggitt by itself. Really the makeup of that, it would be. I'll contrast a little bit to legacy aerospace. Very similar on the commercial OEM, mid-teens. The military OEM, they did not do the same level of pull-ins that we did. Our whole supply chain and the customers we did a bunch of pulling, so we are negative on military OEM. They're positive around the 10% range. The big difference is their commercial MRO is around double legacy Parker. We were kind of mid-single digits to high single digits, and they're in that mid-teens, and that really is kind of the recovery. Two things, recovery on brakes and just more exposure they have on the A320. The military MRO, they're a little bit lighter than ours. We have a little stronger connection to the depots and obviously we're gonna try to do that for the combined business as well. That'll be a walk through the four segments. That's very helpful. Thank you. Just my follow-up around that, adjusted sort of segment profit on slide 20. You know, you've got that $300 million number for the nine months. You know, historically, Meggitt always had kind of higher operating margins in the calendar second half of the year than the first, and then it would sort of step down and then go back up the following second half. You know, is that roughly how we should think about, you know, the cadence of that $300 million for Parker? Or is there something different going on just, you know, post-acquisition and that type of thing? Just trying to understand how much of the $300 million is the second half of your fiscal year versus the first. Yeah. Yeah, Julian, this is Todd. You know, we work with the Meggitt team members to build this forecast. You know, it's been done in a very similar methodology to what they've done before. You know, I have not seen any differences in the way those numbers would be generated just because you know, now it's reporting under Parker, so probably have more to come on that, soon. That's great. Thank you. Yep. I'll now turn the call back over to Todd for closing remarks. Okay, thanks, Tawanda. Thanks to everyone for joining us today. Like I said at the beginning of the call, we're very excited to get to this point. We're excited to share more with you as we learn more. A special welcome to all of the new Meggitt team members. We're really excited to have you on board. This is really all we had today. This concludes our webcast. Thanks for your support. Thanks for your interest in Parker. As usual, Robin and Jeff will be here today if you need any further clarifications on anything that we covered. Have a great afternoon. Thanks all. Thanks. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.