Good morning, and welcome to the Pactiv Evergreen second quarter 2022 earnings conference call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. Should you need assistance, please signal a conference specialist by pressing the star key followed by zero. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. To ask a question, you may press star, then one on your telephone keypad. To withdraw your question, please press star then two. Please note this event is being recorded today. I would now like to turn the conference over to Dhaval Patel. Please go ahead. Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for your interest in Pactiv Evergreen and welcome to our second quarter 2022 earnings call. With me on the call today, we have Michael King, Chief Executive Officer, and Jon Baksht, Chief Financial Officer. Please visit the events section of the company's investor relations website at www.pactivevergreen.com and access the company's supplemental earnings presentation. Management's remarks today should be heard in tandem with reviewing this presentation. Before we begin our formal remarks, I would like to remind everyone that our discussions today will include forward-looking statements, including statements regarding our guidance for 2022. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, and actual results could differ materially from those contemplated by our forward-looking statements. Therefore, you should not put undue reliance on those statements. These statements are also subject to numerous risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from what we expect. We refer all of you to our recent SEC filings, including our most recent annual report on Form 10-K and our upcoming quarterly report on Form 10-Q for a more detailed discussion of those risks. The forward-looking statements we make on this call are based on information available to us as of today's date, and we disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements except as required by law. Lastly, during today's call, we will discuss certain GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures, which we believe can be useful in evaluating our performance. Our non-GAAP measures should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the results prepared in accordance with GAAP, and a reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is available in our earnings release and in the appendix to today's presentation. Unless otherwise stated, all figures discussed during today's call are for continuing operations only. With that, let me turn the call over to Pactiv Evergreen's CEO, Michael King. Mike. Thanks, Dhaval. Good morning, everyone, and welcome. Yesterday, after the market closed, Pactiv Evergreen released its second quarter 2022 results. I'm pleased to report that we had yet another strong quarter as the team continues to focus on and deliver improving business results. Revenues continue to benefit from pricing due to lagged raw material cost pass-throughs, while adjusted EBITDA benefited from the pricing net of higher costs, as well as the benefit from the Fabri-Kal acquisition. We continue to make steady progress across the organization over the past few quarters. While COVID is still something we track, it's not impacting our business as significantly as it has in the past. The labor gap that we had highlighted last year and previously this year has narrowed considerably thanks to the strong efforts across the organization. Finally, our profitability is improving versus last year's depressed levels. All of this is possible because throughout the organization, we continue to drive and embrace a culture of excellence and continued improvement. We also saw better cube efficiencies, improved productivity, and an increase in automation across our warehouses. In general, we are seeing more stable operations across all three segments. At the same time, we are seeing higher raw materials and inflation cost, and we intend to take pricing actions where needed to return profitability to normalized levels. We've also delivered on our broader strategic initiatives as the integration of Fabri-Kal is proceeding ahead of plan. Earlier this week, we also announced the close of the sale of our Asia-based business. The sale of the Asian business allows us to focus on our strong North American business while also enhancing our balance sheet. Finally, I'd like to take a moment to welcome Jon Baksht, our new Chief Financial Officer, to the team. Jon brings with him extensive financial expertise with prior experience as an investment banker, as well as a CFO dealing with the public markets. We look forward to working with him and for all of you to get to know Jon. Let me now turn it over to Jon to walk us through a more detailed review of our financials in the second quarter. Jon? Thanks, Mike. Before I begin my discussion of our financial results, I'd like to take a moment and thank Mike and the broader Pactiv Evergreen team for such a warm welcome to the company. It's exciting to be a part of an organization with a strong values and purpose-driven culture. In my short time at the company, I'm impressed with the strong fundamentals of the business while at the same time having opportunities to continue to build on the company's recent success. For those of you I haven't had the opportunity to meet yet, I'd like to give you a sense of what drew me to Pactiv Evergreen. As a company recently taken public, I find the investment case for Pactiv Evergreen to be compelling and potentially overlooked by the broader market. As most of you on the call today know, it bears reinforcing, we are one of the largest producers of fresh food and beverage packaging in North America with scale and a nationwide footprint to provide a compelling value proposition for our customers, which includes leading market share in several product categories. While we, like everyone, have experienced inflation and supply chain-driven headwinds, the underlying business remains resilient as evidenced by our results this quarter. Our extensive manufacturing, warehousing, and distribution footprint positions us for further growth. We are committed to a more sustainable future, with 64% of our revenues in 2021 coming from products made with recycled, recyclable, or renewable materials. Financially, we remain committed to our dividend policy, which currently provides a yield around 4%. I'm sure my enthusiasm is evident, and I look forward to our continuing dialogue. I'll now move into our financial results. Moving to slide six and touching on our Q2 2022 highlights. As Mike stated, we continue to make steady progress and delivered another strong quarter. Net revenue was $1.64 billion, up 21% versus prior year. Net income was $74 million, with diluted EPS of $0.40. Adjusted EBITDA was $249 million, up 92% versus the prior year quarter, and our free cash flow for the quarter was -$18 million. Moving to slide seven, looking at our year-to-date 2022 financial performance. Net revenue was $3.135 billion versus $2.516 billion in the same period last year, an increase of 25%. The increase was primarily due to pricing pass-throughs and the Fabri-Kal acquisition, which offset volume was down 8%, primarily due to strong sales in the prior period as businesses and restaurants reopened post COVID-19 lockdowns, labor shortages, and the exit of coated groundwood. Adjusted EBITDA was $431 million versus $207 million in the same period last year. The improvement in EBITDA was driven by favorable pricing, net of material costs passed through, improved and more stable operations that Mike referenced earlier, as well as the acquisition of Fabri-Kal. The increase in adjusted EBITDA also includes the benefit related to prior year period costs of $50 million from Winter Storm Uri. Free cash flow was $52 million. Moving to slide nine and a deeper discussion of our Q2 2022 performance. Net revenue was $1.64 billion versus $1.352 billion in the same period last year, an increase of 21%. The increase primarily related to higher price mix due to material costs passed through to customers and pricing actions, plus the acquisition of Fabri-Kal. Volume was down 10%, primarily due to tough comps versus strong sales volume last year, labor challenges, and our exit of the coated groundwood paper business. Adjusted EBITDA was $249 million versus $130 million in the same period last year, an increase of 92%. The increase was primarily due to favorable pricing, net of material costs passed through, and the impact of the Fabri-Kal acquisition, partially offset by higher manufacturing costs, lower sales volume, and higher employee-related and logistics costs. I'd also note that net income benefited from a one-time positive litigation settlement of approximately $15 million in the quarter. This amount is reported in our other income line, but is not included in the calculation of adjusted EBITDA. Free cash flow, defined as net cash flow provided by operating activities less CapEx, was negative $18 million versus $42 million in the same period last year. The negative cash outflow was largely due to a planned build in inventory of $154 million as a needed replenishment following shortages we experienced last year. Our inventories are now at more normalized levels, which allows us to provide improved customer service levels. We do not expect significant inventory builds on a volume basis for the remainder of the year. Moving to slide 10. This slide helps to bridge Q2 year-on-year revenue and adjusted EBITDA. Looking at revenue when compared to Q2 last year, the key drivers of our revenue growth were price mix of $309 million and $121 million from the acquisition of Fabri-Kal, offset by lower volume and FX. For adjusted EBITDA, price mix favorability and a $34 million benefit from the Fabri-Kal acquisition more than offset higher costs and some volume deterioration. Moving to slide 11 and our results by segment for Q2. Our food service segment saw net revenues up 39%, driven by higher pricing to recover COGS increases, as well as the impact from the acquisition of Fabri-Kal, which offset volume was down 9% versus strong prior year sales volume. Adjusted EBITDA for the segment was up $103 million versus the same period last year, primarily due to favorable pricing, net of material costs passed through, and the impact from the acquisition of Fabri-Kal, partially offset by higher manufacturing costs, lower sales volume, and higher employee-related costs. Our food merchandising segment saw net revenues up 14%, driven by favorable pricing, primarily due to higher material costs passed through to customers and pricing actions, partially offset by lower sales volume, primarily due to labor shortages. Adjusted EBITDA for this segment was up 32% versus the same period last year due primarily to favorable pricing, net of material costs passed through, partially offset by higher manufacturing costs and lower sales volume. Our Beverage Merchandising segment saw net revenues up 9%, driven by favorable pricing, primarily due to pricing actions, higher material costs passed through to customers, and favorable product mix, partially offset by lower sales volume, primarily due to our exit from our coated groundwood business. Adjusted EBITDA for the segment was $29 million versus $15 million in 2021. The key drivers were higher pricing, partially offset by higher material, manufacturing, employee, and logistic costs, as well as an $11 million cost due to scheduled annual pulp mill outage. Moving to slide 12. We ended Q2 with $246 million in cash and $4.2 billion in total outstanding debt. As indicated in our press release earlier in the week. We have closed the sale of the Beverage Merchandising business, which will further strengthen our balance sheet. We expect proceeds of approximately $300 million net of estimated working capital adjustments and estimated taxes. Our net debt at the end of Q2 was around $4 billion and around $3.7 billion pro forma for the Asia business sale proceeds. We ended Q2 with a net debt to LTM adjusted EBITDA ratio of 5.3, well below the 7.6 at the end of 2021. We expect our net leverage to be below 5 when we report our third quarter and fourth quarter results. Additionally, we are evaluating other alternatives to further deleverage the balance sheet. I'll now pass it back to Mike for further comments. Thanks, Jon. If I could turn your attention to slide 14. I'll provide a brief update on our ESG progress before my closing remarks. This year, we've put a lot of effort and resource on tracking and improving our performance in the ESG fields. We've implemented a new operational sustainability data management system. This allows us to analyze, report on, and audit our energy, our emissions, our water, and our waste data across the entire enterprise. As we finalize our environmental disclosures for 2021, we are proud to report an 18% Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas emissions reduction between 2015 and 2021. At Pactiv Evergreen, we promote responsible forestry, and we are committed to increasing the use of certified wood and promoting forest certifications. We recently published an updated sustainable forestry policy as well as new goals related to sustainable forestry. As much as we value a sustainable supply chain, we're also committed to support our customers' efforts on their path to a sustainable future. In June, we published our zero waste implementation guide to provide food service operators like recreational venues, stadiums, or colleges, a resource to begin their journey to zero waste. By closing the loop, operators can cut greenhouse gases, manage risk, litter, and pollution, reinvest in resources, all while creating value for their operation. Under our people pillar, we are spending a significant amount of time strengthening our support for our team members' career development. Introducing a new tuition assistance program and updated performance management system, both of these programs are bringing our celebrate people core value to life in ways that are relevant and meaningful for our people. Finally, I couldn't be prouder to celebrate Pactiv Evergreen's first female board chair, LeighAnne Baker. LeighAnne has been a director since our IPO, and we're looking forward to benefiting from her leadership and experience in helping to build more gender equality in boardrooms. To learn more, we invite shareholders to view our latest disclosures and other reports found at investors.pactiv evergreen.com in the ESG section. Now, if I could turn your attention to slide 15. As our results indicate, we are making steady progress on returning our profitability to more normalized levels. As a result of the strong start to the year, we are now expecting our 2022 adjusted EBITDA to be in the $750 million-$770 million range. Additionally, we expect to be free cash flow positive for the remainder of the year following the inventory build the first half of the year. We continue to see improvements in the labor markets. We are now focused on employee training and retention while still finishing filling the open positions we have. As my opening comment stated, we continue to see improvement across all operations. We are, however, still dealing with broader inflationary pressures as well as volatility linked to raw material markets. In addition, we now have the added uncertainty around volume recovery due to the fears of a recession. We believe our portfolio is fairly resilient in recessionary times, but it is prudent to remain cautious in the current environment. Given the timing lag for inflationary cost pass-throughs, we anticipate this quarter will represent our peak EBITDA for the year and would expect more normalized results the next two quarters, particularly given the lower seasonal demand we typically experience in Q4. At this time, I would like to thank all of the Pactiv Evergreen workforce for their continued commitment and hard work. We remain focused on continuing to improve our production capabilities and service to our customers. With that, let us take your questions. Operator? We will now begin the question and answer session. To ask a question, you may press star, then one on your touchtone phone. If you're using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, please press star then two. Please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. You may join the queue if you have more questions. At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. Our first question will come from Arun Viswanathan with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Great. Thanks for taking my question. Congratulations on the progress here and the turnaround. I guess, first question is just on the price cost situation. You know, as you noted, you are still experiencing some raw material inflation and some inflation across other categories. Yet you are, you know, kind of have implemented some pretty, you know, sizable price increases over the last couple quarters. As we kind of lap those, what kind of pricing should we expect going forward? And have you seen any kind of potential elasticity response from your customers? i.e., you know, pivoting away or trading down or what would you kind of describe the environment as? Thanks. Yeah. Thanks, Arun. Our pricing is two key elements. You know, it's our raw materials, as you know, and then what we're calling our cost of living or other non-material related costs. I would tell you, we've made a great deal of progress as it relates to getting customer support, both contractually as well as transactionally on our non-raw material recovery. You see that. I expect that continues throughout the future of this business. You know, our target's 100% recovery in that regard. As you can see, we've demonstrated for the first 2 Qs of this year, you know, that we've been able to get that kind of support. I'd expect that to continue. On the raw side, you know, those are more contractually and index-based recoveries, and those will also, while we've worked to try to tighten those things up, those things are gonna be more what you're used to seeing. You know, each one of our segments has a different lag, and those lags will dictate how the material falls out. We will see the same kind of pricing strength, I think to a lesser degree, given you know, what the raw materials are doing. But on the cost of living side, I expect the strength to continue. Just as a follow-up then, so you know, you noted you know, some volume softness, but that was mainly tough comps. Is that how we should read it? Have you seen you know, potentially any areas of softness, or is it again, just a comp issue, and you expect you know, maybe some volume acceleration next year on those easy comps? How should we think about volumes as well? Thanks. Yeah, good question. Yeah. We are seeing a moderation in some of our food service business in terms of volumes, you know, as we kind of get into Q3 here. In late Q2 even, we saw a little bit. I would tell you in our bev merch business, we can sell every ton we can produce. The demand's still very strong for fiber products. Both our paper and our board products are sold out. That demand does not seem to be softening. On the food merch side, you know, we've largely constrained our own demand with labor challenges. It's difficult to say if anything's moderating there. I will tell you that our assumptions for the back half is we do see some moderation, but most of our products, if not almost all of our segments, are in non-discretionary products. You know, our products are the products people need and use every day. You know, I don't expect a huge fall off in terms of our demand. There will be some moderation and segment shift. We see that in recessionary periods in the past as mobility shifts, but you know, we're well positioned to handle that. Thanks. Our next question will come from Adam Samuelson with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hi. Yes, thanks. Good morning, everyone. Morning. Morning. Morning. I guess the first question may be on continuing on the demand side, and you alluded to some production constraints, and this goes back not just this quarter, but going into the year. What could your volumes have been in the second quarter, if you didn't have those production constraints? I'm just trying to get a sense of, especially the down 9% in food service, what that could have looked like if we then think about underlying demand slowing in the back half. How we think about the external environment versus some of your internal constraints. Yeah. That's difficult. I mean, we made some conscious decisions to exit areas. I mean, you know, you look at coated groundwood volume, setting that aside, you know, rough numbers, you know, was it 1% or 2% of volume that we missed as an opportunity? Maybe. I think the real decision, and one of the things that really constrained our demand and try to position us well for the back half and future Qs was the rebuild of our inventory. We did that, so we weren't constraining the demand. The other thing is it's hard to also give you an answer on that without understanding all our customer inventory levels. We know that those, you know, those things remain fragile. Our customers have not fully rebuilt most of their inventories yet either. It's hard to say. I'm sorry I don't have a real good answer for that, but I'd be guessing if I tried to say it was more than 1% or 2% maybe. Okay. And maybe then you talked about kind of food service demand slowing, I guess, through July and presumably in June and later in the second quarter. Any way to dimensionalize kind of the magnitude there and any specific color by product line or customer type of vertical, whether that's QSR, casual dining, institutional. If you have any visibility to that'd be helpful. Yeah. We're seeing some mobility shift. People are still going to the restaurant, sitting down, eating, taking food out. In fact, we're seeing that kind of trend up a tad. QSR mobility, no secret there. I don't think anybody is missing the plot there that it is slowing. Although for us, it's just been moderate, and I think that's probably the likely trend. Outside of that, you know, there's really not been a large-scale shift for us, and I think some of that's masked by the fact that we're able to now service customers at a higher level within our inventories. Anything that we were missing, we're kinda getting back through better service. Okay. If I could just ask a quick clarifying question. The total company EBITDA bridge for acquisitions, I presume that contribution is all Fabri-Kal. Just wanna confirm that and just the business did, it would seem 28% EBITDA margins in the quarter, if that's the case. Just, is that just price cost being as favorable in that business as it was in your base business? That would moderate 'cause it would look like the nine months since you've owned it have already well exceeded kind of the preceding LTM from when you announced the acquisition last September. Yeah. I think if I understand your question, we are pricing across. You know, we have pricing responsibility, and Fabri-Kal, that business is no different for us. It's, you know, you know, it's representing exactly the same kind of performance that the broader Pactiv business has. Yes, you know, I'd say that the strength is we're well ahead of schedule in terms of the synergies we expected in that business. You know, it's largely integrated. We're already on the same ERP systems. All the footprint and asset synergies and, you know, the other tertiary things that we planned have largely been executed, and so that's flowing through and is a big piece of the strength. I would tell you, pricing generally across the broader business ticked up, and then absolutely that acquisition's been a good thing for us. Okay. I appreciate all that color. I'll pass it on. Thanks. Our next question will come from Kieran de Brun with Mizuho. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. I was just wondering if you could touch a little bit more, and you spoke to it a bit, but on the labor availability and some of those higher manufacturing costs and what you've seen on that front. It seems like you've made a lot of progress, but there's still a little bit of an overhang. You know, how are you thinking about that in the back half of the year, you know, potentially easing? Thank you. Yeah, thanks. Good question. Thanks, Kieran. Yeah, so we have made a lot of progress in labor, and I would tell you that, you know, largely our focus is, you know, retention and making sure that the investments we're making in our labor force, both to train and retain folks, pays off and that labor gap doesn't widen. That's priority one. Hiring the right kind of folks, the folks that, you know, want a long-term path to a better future, all the things that we've done to put in place, you know, a stable work environment that people wanna walk through the doors every day. We're at a point now where we're actually trying to be a bit more selective, and we expect that, you know, while we made big strides to close that labor gap in Q1 and Q2 largely, that we're really focused on getting the right kind of technical talent in our factories. That won't be as fast-paced as it was in Q1 and Q2. Largely, we're where we've constrained only one of our business units, which is our food merch business in terms of labor. You know, we've really focused on fixing that from a headcount. But as far as foot traffic, people applying for jobs, that's not a problem. It's really for us, skilled labor and making sure we do the right thing for the business. Great. That's great color. Then just a really quick one on a follow-up. For the sale of the carton packaging and machinery business in Asia, how should we think about, I guess the magnitude of that impact on sales and profits in the second half or as it rolls off the business? I think you alluded to it quickly. You know, the $300 million from the profits of the sale, we should think about that kind of going towards debt pay down. Is that the right way to be thinking about it? Thank you. Yeah. I think generally that's, you know, we've been pretty clear that, you know, lowering our gearing, dropping our leverage is the priority. Certainly if something presented itself, you know, the other uses that make better sense that would also be de-leveraging or improve our EBITDA, we'd look at that. But right now, our priority is, you know, balance sheet health and paying down the debt. Great. Thank you. Our next question will come from Ghansham Panjabi with Baird. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Good morning. Mike, just going back to your earlier comments on food service and, you know, some of the variability there's a lot of noise from last year and so on through COVID. Right. Where are we in that segment relative to the pre-COVID baseline from a volume standpoint? Do you think the weakness that you're seeing is just a comparability issue because last year, you know, things opened up and there was inventory builds and so on, or is it incremental weakness? Maybe you can just share what customers are sharing with you at this point. Yeah. It's a bit of a mixed bag and a good question, Ghansham. You know, I don't. You know, comps are certainly we did open up strong last year and there was a you know we are feeling a bit of that. I would tell you, the consumer shift makes it difficult to say if we're pre-nineteen. I think there's a bit of a new normal we're starting to see. You know, if I look at it on a like-for-like basis to kind of pre-COVID, I think we're now flat. You know, as a whole, I'd say even across the broader business, we're pretty flat, not just in food service. Food service, I'm pretty confident we're flat. There has been a mix shift, you know, segment to segment. Yeah, the comps last year, you know, weren't representative of a new normal. Got it. Maybe a question for Jon on free cash flow. You know, Jon, can you maybe just update us on some of the cash flow items, CapEx, cash tax, cash interest, just trying to get a sense as to what the cash position looks like coming out of this year. Sure. Happy to. If you take our EBITDA guidance and then just walk it down. CapEx, we're seeing in the range, probably in the $260 million-$270 million area for the year. Interest, as you know, we do have a fair amount of variable rate debt. But just looking at the curve and an estimate is probably around $200 million for the year, somewhere in that area. Taxes, it can have a bit more variability to it, but if you take the first half and just normalize it or annualize it, you're looking in the $160 million area for that. That gets you to a free cash flow for the year, somewhere in the $150 million area. Thank you so much. That's not necessarily guiding to working capital in that area. What I would say is just really focusing on inventory. You know what I did say in the prepared remarks, we're not anticipating any further inventory builds. From that perspective, I would take that number reflects more of a flat working capital. Perfect. Thanks so much. Sure. Our next question will come from Kyle White with Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. Welcome, Jon, and looking forward to working more closely with you. Congrats on a really strong quarter, guys. Thanks, Kyle. I wanted to focus in on the guidance raise. I appreciate the raise. I guess I'm trying to understand is the outlook increase purely driven by the first half performance being better than you expected, and then you kind of kept the second half relatively unchanged from your initial expectations coming into the year? Or just how should we think about that? That's exactly how you should think about it. That's fair. I guess if I follow up on that, then why shouldn't we expect this kind of price cost that you've been realizing over the first half to continue to the second half, given that from our vantage point, it seems like a lot of the input costs have been relatively stable. I mean, obviously energy markets have been a little bit volatile. I can't imagine that pricing is slowing down at all for you. You talked about this quarter being peak EBITDA for the year. Is that just a function of normal seasonality, or is it because of what you see on the horizon as it relates to demand or inflation on the business? Yeah. For us, you know, what you see in raws now largely won't impact. You know, it'll be a Q1 dynamic. We're actually digesting what raws have done in the first half of the year. With the lags on the material side specifically, you've got falling material costs, for instance, on polypropylene. You know, with that falling, we have to pass some of that raw material back to our customers. There's a piece of that that's not indicative of current state. The other side of that is, you're right, you know, we will continue to price through inflation and cost of living adjustments, and so that will remain, like I mentioned earlier. That also said, as I mentioned, you know, we do have non-discretionary products. It's these are products people are gonna use every day. We expect some continued moderation there. I think we're just bringing a balanced look at the forecast. You're right, pricing, we do expect to take the same approach. That seasonality, you know, in the back half of this year and kind of the uncertainty around what's going on economically, you know, we just feel like, you know, we've taken the right look at volumes and we know we've got some pricing givebacks coming on material. Got it. Sounds good. I'll turn it over. Again, if you have a question, please press star then one. Our next question will come from Anthony Pettinari with Citi. Please go ahead. Hi, this is actually Bryan Burgmeier sitting in for Anthony. You know, if you back out the mill outage, Beverage Merchandising EBITDA would have been pretty close to 2019 levels. Do you think that the segment can get back to that $45 million-$50 million EBITDA per quarter range maybe in the second half of 2022 or in the first half of 2023, or is that a little bit too aggressive right now? I think definitely for 2022, that would be too aggressive, just given what we have planned for back half and the fact that we do have an outage in the back half of the year. I would tell you that, you know, I don't think you're off base for that being a future run rate for the business. I'm reluctant to give you kind of a timeline on that. Certainly we're looking at, you know, quarters away, not a year away to get there. Got it. Understandable. Thanks. I would underscore. One last one for Yeah, go ahead. No, no. Go ahead. Yeah, I just would say I'd underscore the fact that we are, you know, with the mill outage, I do believe that we would, if we set the mill outage aside, which was a benefit for the mills. Both of our mills have, you know, done very well in terms of making progress. We are largely stabilized there, so that's why I'm confident telling you that those are the kind of run rates we are targeting to stabilize the business. Got it. Okay, thanks for that. Then last one for me. You know, in the prepared remarks, you mentioned some possible further de-leveraging portfolio moves are being considered. Can you provide any detail on maybe the size or scope of those? Is it a little bit too early? I'm just trying to think, could it be closer in size to the recent Asia Pac sale or, you know, something significantly larger or smaller than that? Maybe it's just too early to tell. It's just too early to tell. Okay, got it. That's it for me. I'll turn it over. Our next question will come from Andy Scheffer with Onex Credi t Partners. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. Can you describe for us the labor fulfillment levels in each of the three business segments, sort of where you've come from, where you are now, and you know, how fully staffed you typically run? I mean, at the height of the pandemic, peak gap in our labor market was north of 20% hourly. On top of that, trying to work backwards and give you a backdrop, I would tell you that normalized pre-pandemic levels, we would kind of range in our vacancy rate for hourly workers between 5% and 10%. Today, we sit here between 9% and 10% vacant. I would tell you segment base wise, our largest exposure is our food merch space. Then after that, we're pretty healthy in both of the other two segments. Okay, thank you for that. In terms of the volume, I thought what I heard you say was that your restocking of inventory ate into the volume that you could deliver. You were purposely dialing it back. I'm not sure how much that was. Was there also some sort of customer optimization anywhere that you were doing in terms of deciding, you know, that that business didn't make sense, and we'd rather just put it into inventory or just move on with various customers? Was that any part of that volume decline? No. For us, we constrained our own demand largely due to not having the right products. We did not constrain demand to the extent we wanted to rebuild inventory. You know, we rebuilt the inventory, so we're not constraining demand. You know, establishing healthy inventories and the right products is a better way to look at that. You know, if a customer needed product and it was there, they got it. We didn't make a decision not to ship our customers based on products that were sitting there. Secondly, you know, I don't see inventory levels and customer rationalizations. It wasn't a strategy we implemented to try to rebuild inventory levels. It was normal course decision-making for us that, you know, whether we rationalize SKUs or customers, it was all done in a normal course type decision-making, not to reestablish inventories or improve certain strategic customers over others. We've largely kept that as a strategy, as, you know, we wanna be there for all of our customers. Was any of that because of lack of material inputs in terms of what products you did not have? Or was it just the world shifted, as I think as you were alluding to, and maybe a new normal and that's what caused the mismatch of what you had versus demand? Yeah. There's bits and bobs that continue to pop up, but they didn't constrain our ability to get product. We, you know, we switched modes. We did things, all heavy lifts to get our materials there. I would tell you on the aluminum side, you know, that's one area where, you know, our aluminum products are suffering due to material availability. That's, you know, a widely known dynamic on a global basis, a pretty good constrained commodity. Thank you. Our next question will come from George Staphos with Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hi, guys. How are you? Thanks for the details and congratulations on the performance. Mike, I just wanna make sure, just a point of clarification. I apologize, maybe I'm the only person who missed it. In the last quarter, did you or did you not constrain your shipments to some customers as you sought to rebuild inventory? Or was your volume what your volume would have been and you were still able to rebuild your inventories? How should I read that? Yeah. You're right, George. You're absolutely right. We did constrain demand to many of our customers in the first quarter and coming out of Q4 because we didn't have the right days of supply and the right products, frankly, on the shelf. Okay. There was a negative effect, even if you don't wanna necessarily quantify it, there was some negative effect on your volume that you otherwise would have reported and the results you would have put up because of that strategy. Would that be fair? Yes. Okay. Appreciate that. If I could, my follow-on question, and it piggybacks a little bit on what Kyle was getting at. As you look back over 2Q, what was the one or two biggest factors that drove performance better than your original expectations? You know, because I think coming out of 1Q, the guardrails were sort of on, hey, performance probably wasn't gonna be that dissimilar from 1Q. You know, again, you did very well and much better than we would have modeled. What were the key factors there that were better than your expectations in 2Q? As we look out to the second half, sure, perhaps we're in a recession, sure, there's inflation, but your pricing and givebacks as polypropylene is now heading lower and other resins are heading lower, usually have a lag too. You're gonna have positive spread for several quarters. If you factor all of that together, all the headwinds that you're seeing, where would your run rate sort of EBITDA be? What would the range be for 3Q? Why wouldn't it be very comparable to what we saw in 2Q? Thank you, and good luck in the quarter. Yeah. Thanks, George. I would tell you the biggest thing is our contractual pass-throughs are working. Our ability to get price and support from our customers on inflationary and raw, as you highlighted very correctly, you know, is one big area where we've you know we saw Q2 strength. The second is our labor recovery is ahead of plan. You know, we expected to drag well into Q3 and potentially into Q4 before we were able to reestablish inventories. We are getting the benefits, and we started getting the benefits of some of that constrained demand being unconstrained through mid to late Q2. We won on that front, despite what the volume story says on a moderation segment by segment. You set coated groundwood aside, which is a large chunk of the volume. Many of our subcategories and mix are favorable for us. That's Q2 kind of in a nutshell, is price and labor recovery. Reestablished inventories to take care of a better mix in demand. On the back half, with what you know, you highlighted polypropylene, we can use that. You know, polypropylene has been falling and we are passing you know, those savings back to the customers. Now, polypropylene flattens out in the back half, which is you know, the assumption, and we kinda don't see that continued strength, it starts to go the other way. We are largely in the mode of passing back versus, you know, enjoying the lag, so to speak. Okay. How big of a step down right now from what you can see? Do we see 3Q versus 2Q, considering the volume decel, perhaps a narrowing of spreads, even though, again, I think there's a lag on when you pass through. Is there any way to put a range on that? Thanks, and good luck in the quarter. This is Jon. I'll just jump in. I mean. Hey, Jon. You can take a look at our guidance and just back into what the EBITDA is for the back half of the year if you're looking for a guidance for that. The only other thing I'd note is that we're expecting Q4 just to be seasonally weak as you look at the remainder of the year forecast for EBITDA. Q3 should be a bit better than Q4. Thanks. I'll turn it over. There are no remaining questions in queue. With that, we will conclude our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Michael King for any closing remarks. I just wanna thank everyone for joining us today. Certainly appreciate the conversation and look forward to further discussions in Q3.