Sonova Holding AG

Good afternoon here in lovely Stefan. Unfortunately, not the best weather, but hopefully enough to share on information. One welcome to the people on the call, on the dial-in. I'm here together with Matthias Dullmann, our interim CFO, to guide you through the presentation. You already had a chance to see, but I know more importantly to have enough time for Q&A at the end. Thomas will come up and explain the process on the Q&A when we get there. If we can move on to briefly the disclaimer, I hope everybody took note. Are you clicking or am I clicking? Look, this is not the first time I'm here, but I didn't check out where the clicker is. Standard disclaimer, please take note. Obviously, the fiscal year 2024-25... The last time we were able to share in that breadth and depth our numbers is exactly half a year ago. Lots have happened. And I'm very proud to present on everybody who works with us at Sunova the results of the last half year. Because when I look at it overall, I think it's A, good results, and B, it's a good tee-up into the next fiscal year. Although I think we all have taken note that there are some bumps in the world with regard to macroeconomics, but I think we're in a good position to handle those from a capability perspective, but also from an economical setup for the year. So on the highest level, when you look at the numbers, the way we have looked at them, we have been able to produce solid growth and particularly proud to see market share gains across all four businesses, which is... Holding market share gains at the places where we had them in the first half year and improving towards market share gains in two of the businesses where we weren't. Good growth on the hearing instrument side relative to the market. Audiological key and CH nicely picking up growth versus first half year. I'll unpack a little bit where that comes from. And our cochlear implants business particular, when you look on the system side, which is really the new patients choosing AB for life with a nice market share growth from the instrument side. Looking on the main driver on the product side, given the size of the business, continued strong response from customers to Infineon Sphere. Focus is obviously now more on how do you see that in the numbers versus what is KPI A, B, and C of a product launch. I'll have a couple of comments there. But we hear the continued strong feedback on the significant improvement in noisy environments. We have very positive feedback on the product overall. And I think it is the main reasons why we see in hearing instruments good growth rates. And it also contributed to the audiological care because it's easier for our retail colleagues to put the strong product like this in front of customers. I think there was a second big question mark in the room after the first half year, which was, are you able to step up your profitability so that you get for the year to good place? And some of you have rightfully poked around the number. We explained our logical bridge. Now it's easier to say we did. We have seen a step up in basis points first half to second and EBITDA adjusted by 600 basis points. That's higher than normal between first half, second half. And we were able to realize a 130 basis points in EBITDA margin year over year for the second half year. And I'll cover some of the elements as I go through the presentation. The second half indicated that we did not get a number when we came out of the first half year Having seen some revenue weakness, particularly in audiological care, having seen some areas in the optics in general where we didn't like the momentum in a negative way for the financials with too much optics growth, we have embarked on some structural changes, which ultimately you don't see in the numbers. except for the restructuring cost, because when you start them in Q3, they materialize or the actions mainly implemented Q4. So it just mathematically gives you a far better jump off point from the OPEX structure. So we share the 40 million because that's the number you should have in mind as that's what we have structurally taken out of the OPEX and sets us up for this year. We'll talk about it when we get the guidance. A point we dislike, but one we want to be open and frank about it, I started to talk first about it in early February, is the market in this Q4, our Q4, so January, February, March, has slowed down relative to what it was before. It was already slower than normal. at a 4% growth, but we've seen the global market go to two-ish, predominantly driven by the US. Again, we'll get there. Very important for us to continue to win market share in such an environment, very important for us to have the right cost structure so that we can deliver a good EBITDA growth, even if the market is weaker. And that's what you're seeing here. I think the sum of the parts, meaningful market share momentum, more to come through more product launches and more continued good execution and a relatively better cost structure. Ultimately, we look at this being a good setup for the year, hence our confidence in putting, I think, a good guidance forward. On the numbers you click through, highlight numbers here, 7.6% in local currency for the full year, EBITDA 7.4%. Again, significant change from first half to second. The product launches last year allow us to this year continue on the journey with that kind of technology. So expect some more product launches to happen this year. We will not go in more detail because we don't want to share too much with the outside world. And from an outlook perspective, 5% to 9% on the top line against a more muted market. So continuing market share gains in a meaningful way. Outlook for EBITDA is a complex one. I have a page later on. But if you want to think from your own kind of consensus thinking, you have to take the smaller number because we're making a change on how we want to adjust or de facto not adjust as much as we've done in the years before. So the like for like number is an 11 to 15 to be super blunt and transparent, which still I think is a good point. Margin expansion between 5 to 9 and 11 to 15. The rest indicates that we plan less restructuring in the upcoming year. Now, going into the individual businesses, it's always a little dangerous. We have so many slides that I can't voice everything over on every slide. Otherwise, you hear it three times. But cliff note version hearing instruments, 8.5% growth for the year. That was a 7 in the first half, is a 9.8 in the second. If you take in that we had a slower market in Q4, you see a good lift here, predominantly driven by Sphere and Infineo coming into the different markets. Keep in mind, it's not yet in the Veterans Affairs, at least in these numbers. It is starting off 1st of May, so it is a good guy for the new fiscal year. Audiological care, 8.1 in the second half at a decreasing organic, inorganic, so an increasing organic site. That is driven by the work we did with regard to being more focused and better on the lead generation. I have an extra page on that, but I think we're seeing consistently now a run rate in that order of magnitude over the last couple of months. So we feel good about the ability to deliver that. Consumer hearing. Market was negative in first half, slightly positive in second. There's other things happening, how we got to the double digit. I'll comment on that, but a nice return from a slightly negative into a double digit in the second half year. Cochlear implants a little slower, but that's predominantly coming out of the upgrade side. We have launched the Marvel processor four years ago, and we're getting to the end of that returns order, this upgrade cycle, and we're starting to get into negative territory. So this was all carried by system sales, which were up for the year 16.3%, which I think is a pretty strong number. Again, I will unpack a little bit. So hopefully clear from here, all businesses except for CI stepped up. Puts the eye keeping a very nice growth rate on the instrument side throughout the whole year. Going into the hearing instrument segment, probably interesting to look at the numbers. Growth side you have seen. If you look on the EBITDA, the second half year was 16.2%. increase in EBITDA versus prior year. So you see the lift, particularly in the hearing instruments in the audiological care site, given their size. You can see the different growth rates here. I think the only one which is an incremental information on the chart, the margin expansion here was 140 basis points versus prior year. Looking on hearing instruments, not so much new on the chart. Probably only, again, the numbers. I go to the product launch site. I don't want to go as specific as we do two months after launch because then we don't have financials. So we're trying to explain to you what we think. But at the end, I think the financials show the good progression of the hearing instruments business. On the consumer response, it continues to be at a very, very high rate with regard to the high satisfaction and the strong advocacy of the consumer. That number is pretty much in line with what we did see soon after the launch, so no degradation there. From a commercial success side, the only thing I want to share, not exact numbers, but if I look at units deals for Infineosphere, After eight months, this is a significantly higher number than all of the other three launches before, so it's larger than Lumity, Paradise, and Marvel. We always look at all three. The ASP lift is higher. And the first purchase rate, meaning how many customers at any point of time after the launch have started to buy the new product, is better than all other three launches before. So we've seen a faster pickup towards the Infineosphere technology than the Lumity, the Paradise, and the Marvel. Very positive customer satisfaction of the consumers. So we see continued positive helping us drive, no change in the run rates, no change in the customer feedback. Therefore, I think good platforms for the foreseeable future. Talked about the dynamic first to second half year on the top line. Talked about lead generation being a focus. I'll get to that on the next page. And on the structural improvements, I think there's more detail here when we talk about what did we do to get the growth side, particularly the same store, organic growth side into better shape. No magic. But good work of the team to focus the advertising spend and be more thoughtful that first, we don't drive it up in one month, drive it down in the other. In retail, you need a consistency. We would all agree to it, but you need to do this across 3,600 stores. So you need to have a good focus on that. We're pushing the envelope where we can generate leads and lead channels which are less costly than others. The most expensive is digital. You obviously need it if you don't get a lead otherwise, but we continue to work on getting more access to ENTs, to have more local events, bring people to the store. That's the main focus here, but I think with Oliver now in the lead since nine months, who's a new management board member for the business, who has 15 years with the company and knows the ropes, I see more systematic approach to doing this with a concept globally and then making sure every country follows the same logic on the lead generation side. The second big block for him was the structural cost improvements. Again, no magic, but we had opportunities to streamline and not so large, but still larger than needed team on the headquarters side. which they did pretty quickly. By the way, for the ones here in Stefa, we had an office in Steinhausen. We now moved the colleagues here. because that also gives more proximity, and perhaps it's okay to do that for the first five years of a new business unit, but by now we believe it's better to have more proximity between the AC business and the hearing instruments, but it also saves some money. We have in the countries, country organizations where the team went through and said, where can we make streamlining efforts? And then we went through and identified the stores where the volume was not sufficient to feed the store, but it was close enough to another store. So that's kind of the simple things we did ultimately led to a reduction of the OPEX run rate at 40 million. And we also had a more stable lead flow and a nicely growing lead flow, although still a lot of money spent on the leads. That is a consequence of the market dynamic right now. I think in a market where the market is not growing as much at the end, there's more people competing for the same leads. So Our best countermeasure is getting better and more efficient in the lead. Sometimes they go up if the market's going the wrong direction. Consumer hearing business, not so much news to report. I think the number helps from a return to a nice growth year, clearly driven by our what we call premium audio segment. There we have two main product categories. They make up 60% of the total revenue of consumer hearing business, one is the true wireless earbuds, the other one is the Bluetooth headband. We have a particular focus right now on the Bluetooth headband. That's because that market is more attractive. There is continued efforts going on in how we further improve the gross profit. It's not a thing we can do in a year. In some moments, this has something to do with supplier changes or we're insourcing repairs or whatever, but we're making good progress on that agenda. If it comes to Bluetooth headband, we haven't shared that as much, but our biggest revenue component is actually the Bluetooth headband segment. We have AudioFi, which makes up about 20% of our revenue, but this one here is larger than that. Our lead product is Momentum 4. It's been launched two years ago, a little bit further behind, even longer. It's still going very strongly based on its unique capabilities. One of them is sound quality. The other one is the battery life. What is helping us there is a significant change in purchasing behavior of consumers over the last three years. The true wireless segment has gone to flat or negative territory market, and more and more consumers are comfortable to run around with those for the whole day or on the street or whatever else. So this segment here has doubled as a market segment in the last three years. You can see that must have been 20% growth rate. Fortunately, we have a higher market share closer to our audiophile home base than True Wireless. We obviously do both. This is also a product where we have more gross profit than in the True Wireless segment, which is more commonplace. higher competitive intensity, if you want to call it that way. Launched the Momentum 4. We have adapted a strategy where we continuously refresh. You see even certain brandings or certain attachments to different characters which sell in certain markets really well. That's an easy way to get a little bit lift in a channel. We have also refreshed They lower the momentum for the two lower priced here. So that's how we're keeping the product alive until we come out with a new one. But this is a big, big help for this whole Bluetooth headband for cross-profit moves as well as growth. Cochlear implants said most of the words about it. You can see the numbers here. I would say particularly on the system sales side, 14.6 second half, 16.3 for the full year. That's a really good number. Keep in mind, we have not launched a new product. We introduced remote a year ago. That does help us. I would also say that customers are very comfortable by now with the quality of our product. Most of you will remember, unfortunately, three years ago, we had a few corrective actions. That is more and more out of the minds of the customers, which is really important. And you can see on the segment profitability, we were able to gain 180 basis points. I would say still opportunity, but it's a good number relative to the year before. One highlight I wanted to bring to consumer cochlear implants is not product. That wasn't a big thing changing. So how do you get to the number? One of the things is a continued good progress on the collaboration between our audiological key and our hearing instrument side. And that's the first time we share these numbers as broadly, I would say. But by now, and you can see a nice step up year over year. We get in North America, where we work closely, particularly with the hearing instruments colleagues, and where we have built a provider network, which ultimately are audiologists, independents, who, if a patient would benefit from a cochlear implant because the hearing aid isn't good enough anymore for the loss of performance of the ear. uh we collaborate with the independents and by now about 38 of all of the leads we need for implants come to us from a direct to consumer approach in the hearing instruments partners in germany where we have a big retail footprint by now 35 of all of the recipients who get implants from us do come out of our own retail a lot of work involved. You always think this is easy. Why don't you do that right away? Let me tell you, you need to spend still a lot of work where somebody needs to go through the database, you need to talk to the patient. Normally you have to talk to them more than once. So you need to find a way between the hearing care professional who wants to sell hearing aids and the help of advanced bionics coming to the store. And then also compliantly, every country has different regulations. So it takes a while to put an engine like this together. The team is working on this since many years, but we're getting more and more into a place where this becomes a more and more relevant part of the revenue we're able to capitalize on. And then I would say it's number two in retail as the number one in wholesale in the world. It's probably a strategic advantage for us. But this was clearly one of the reasons why we have so good systems growth. Remote was another one. But that was helping us and is well in place and will continue to be used. Briefly, ESG, you had a chance to read the material. It is very important to us. Therefore, there's a big report which some people in your organizations will take a deep look on. We make continued good progress on the ecological side. We're on track to the science-based targets we have committed to on the scope one, two, three emission targets. We're making good progress bringing more hearing care to people, and we have committed to certain numbers who are in middle-income countries. We're making good progress on the social side. You can see our rankings are very proud, but don't stand still on how positively we're seen relative to peer groups and medical device companies from an ESG perspective. With that, I want to invite Matthias up for the financial information, and then I'll come back for the guidance.

Thank you, Ant. So first of all, I'm very happy to be here. For those of you who don't know me, Matthias Dörmann, Interim CFO here at Sunova. So let's, after the good things Ant talked about, look a little bit more into detail into the figures. Let's start with some financial highlights. Ant already mentioned 7.6% growth in sales. In Swiss franc, 6.6%. So the ethics headwind was 1%, but well within our guidance. On profitability, strong pickup in the second half year, bringing us to 7.4%. Growth of EBITDA in local currency. And the growth in the second half was 16%. Earnings per share also increased to about 11%, and we also saw a strong cash flow improve compared to last year. Our net debt to EBITDA ratio is well within our target range with 1.2, significantly improved to last year, and we get to some balance sheet figures also later on. So let's start with the sales. I will not, or we'll try not to repeat everything on set. Overall strong sales results, 7.6%, growing in every businesses, picking up in the second half year, which you also see 6% growth in the first half year and an age to 9.2% growth and an ethics headwind of one percentage growth. And you also see from the 7.6%, 6.4 comes from organic growth. The gross margin, we have improved by 30 bps in local currency. And then we have a headwind from FX 0.2, so 20 bps. So in total, it's relatively stable with a slight improvement. There were some headwinds, there were some tailwinds. What were the headwinds? Some ASP pressure on older platforms. But there were also some tailwinds. For example, the lift of the ASP aren't already mentioned in the newer platform. improvement in reliability, bringing down the service costs, and obviously also some productivity gains, also driven by higher volumes in the second half. And also when you look here, the first half, second half, first half, we were at 71.9%, second half, 72.9%. Also here you see an improvement, and obviously we want to continue that positive trend. On the OPEX, we were growing 8.4% in OPEX. Obviously, that's larger than the sales. So we also mentioned that already. We had some targeted cost initiatives. We have some more structural cost initiatives. So we are bringing down the OPEX growth from above 10%. down to 6.2% in the second half. So there you see already a significant improvement, which is also on top of the accelerated sales in the second half, the other driver why the profitability has gone up in the second half significantly. You see the R&D relatively stable, also due to the fact that we have now concluded to develop two platforms. Sales and marketing going up by 9.6%, driven by more sales activities, by lead generation, by feet on the street, but also by acquisitions, obviously, in the audiological care business. And G&A up 11%, driven by higher IT investments, by some non-recurring benefits in the prior year, but also by rising labor costs around the world. EBITDA, we mentioned already 7.4% up. I think very relevant. I know it was an onslaught already, but if you look at the H1 compared to H2, H1, we had a margin of 18.2%. In H2, we are at 24%, so 580 bps improvement. And I think this is a very strong result in EBITDA in the second half, bringing us then to the 7.4% growth for the full year. 58 million adjustments. We will get to that later, but mainly driven by restructuring, which will bring us in a better position for next year, which is also helping us for the margin expansion you will see in our outlook. Here you see the adjustment. I think you're used to that slide. On the first two buckets, transaction integration, litigation, this is lower than last year. Seven and a half in transaction integration. This is mainly for the bolt-on acquisition, so to integrate them. Litigation, this is the Medell case in the cochlear implants. So I think there is no surprise. It's a little bit lower. Restructuring, this is higher than we originally communicated. We on purpose did that to bring us in a better position for the future. It's mainly driven in the audiological care business, but also to ramp up in production in Mexico, which will both help us and then some other structural improvements contributing to the 44 million. And then we have, again, the impact on the EPS on the tax reform. If you go on the cash flow side, our cash flow, operational free cash flow going up by 7.2% from 539 to 578, despite a 20 million headwind on ethics. Where does it come from? Improved, obviously, profit. Then less additional consumption of the working capital, despite having invested 10 million more in CapEx. So overall, I think also on the cash flow side, pretty good achievement. Let's look at some balance sheets, KPIs, DSO, unchanged, DPO improved. That's also contributing to the picture before. So we actively worked on payment terms with our vendors, with our suppliers, bringing the DPO up. On inventory, relatively stable, improved compared to September where we were at 180 days. Now we're at 175, but still three days more than a year ago. However, we also tactically and strategically use that to build up certain inventory in case of certain trade disruptions. Getting to a ROSI, which is improving by 30 bps. Also here we have about 50 bps of negative ethics headwinds. So without that, we would be more on the range of 80 bps improvement. And driven by a lower net debt, the leverage ratio going down to 1.2, well within the range where we want to be of 1 to 1.5. Let's look at total share and return strategy. You're very used to that slide, you know that. That's also a good sign. So we reconfirm our TSR strategy. I think that's good news. That's important for you. Let me still repeat it. First of all, we invest the money into acquisitions. We regularly do bold on acquisitions, 70 to 100 million per annum. Last year we did 77 million, but we are also able to do strategy and technology acquisitions whenever they arise. And secondly, we are paying an attractive dividend, about 40% payout ratio. We now propose for the last fiscal to increase the dividend to 440 compared to 430 last year. And then we want to have an healthy balance sheet. For us, this means a target net debt EBITDA ratio of 1 to 1.5. We are now well within that with 1.2. And then last but not least, obviously, we are investing in share buybacks. We just concluded a program 22 to 25. We don't foresee a share buyback in the first half of the year because, first of all, we will pay out the dividend in the first half, which will bring our leverage a little bit up. And then also due to the current market uncertainties, we will not foresee a share buyback in the first half years. With that, I hope I could give you some more insight into the financials. Handing over to Arndt to talk about the future. Thank you, Matthias.

So first one, nothing has changed on the strategy. It's the same chart. We go down the same pathway. I think as long as we're able to grow above market and produce on bottom line, we're probably on the right track. We also go through the process every year. in many different conversations, board management, deeper in your organization, we think that's the right direction. I will not voice over in detail. I want to get back to the slightly confusing changes in how we are guiding. And I want to be explicit. Some of the room have asked me over the last two years, why do you not get to a more simple model? in which you're not showing the restructuring all of the time as I'm surprised and you have to deduct it, right? So we understand the ask. And I think from a more conceptual level, I think we have learned in the last years two things. First, we find continued opportunity, particularly in a world where there's changes and you have to adjust your structure. Five years ago, we would have probably said we believe there's X and not a lot more, but we now have found continued things we can do and we also have the need to do them, partially because we need to change our footprint. and be more agile and be probably more regional, hence Mexico and other things. But at the same time, we also have a constant friend with a Swiss franc, which creates consistently some headaches for us. So in that regard, we're moving mentally to structural improvements are with us, sometimes a little lower, sometimes a little higher, but... Therefore, ultimately, you can argue, hey, as part of doing business and you need to factor this in and that's what we're doing here. But we're now getting to the transition, which needs to be explained. Go forward. We will talk about normalized and that's what we're guiding. And normalized includes things like integration after an acquisition, things we couldn't foresee at that point. It will include legal items and litigation, which is hard to predict. But everything we do on restructuring, we are having enough insight coming into the year that we can budget with it. Therefore, we budget for it and we include it in the normalized guidance and we give you an indication of it. Now, in the transition year, we obviously have adjusted. You have a consensus against adjusted and we have a guidance against adjusted and now we're changing. Therefore, this year is going to be a little bit more complex and you need to follow us. We're guiding on normalized. That includes a certain assumption, which is on the guidance sheet on how much restructuring we have factored in. But we're committed to the normalized guidance. And the restructuring we have to handle. So that's the transition here. I hope that's clear. Gets us the complexity on the next page. There's two EBITDA numbers. But see that as a. recognizing the reality that this is with us. I think that's fair in a changing environment in an FX which seems to be a consistent headache. Sometimes it's minus three, sometimes minus four. At the end, we as a company simply have to be more productive and driving more productivity. That's the answer I can give to FX. With that, I come to the guidance side. I'm sure people have reread the material. We don't have a crystal ball on market, but we need a basis for the guidance. So how did we get to how we think about market as an underlying for the budget and the top line build up? Very simple. We did two things. And this is our best estimate for the year. And there's lots of things which are happening from consumer confidence, people introducing tariffs and whatever else happens in life. But the last quarter, Globally was a little bit lower than 2% driven by the US being lower. Secondarily, when we looked at 2021 and we looked very carefully in the curves, we had a compression down to 1 to 3 for a period and then it bounced back. In 2021, it's very hard to say what is a comparable, but at least have a comparable 2021. People did see higher inflation. That's what consumers expect right now. It's not there, but they're expecting it. So that may have an impact. And there was concerns on GDP and others. That was about the number at that time at the low point. Our market has not gone down 2021 more than that. But we said the right approach for our guidance is we assume one, two, three. It's a likely outcome. It's not the only. You could be better. You could be worse. But that's the underpinning of this guidance. From there, you can look to the top line on the basis of that market growth. And by the way, in consumer hearing business, we assume a little bit less positive market because consumer confidence in the younger population is a little bit more heavy on the consumer devices. With that in mind, we have a guidance from 5% to 9%. That's obviously what is our guidance. But you can see that we do expect a meaningful market share growth for the full year. Where is that coming from? We have good lift still in Ingeniosphere. Keep in mind that only came to the market, let's say, at midpoint last year. So first half year, I have a good guy there. There's good news on the Veterans Affairs where the contract has been renewed. We have opportunities with new launches. I will not share details, but with new launches in the summer. And we do believe that the improvements we made on the audiological clear side particularly are sustainable from a lead generation perspective. With that, we are confident in the market share gain we're indicating here. Wanted to be explicit on the normalization. Excluding restructuring, we're normally in the 10 to 15 million. Just assumed that in the numbers. And then we have mentally baked in 25 million restructuring costs stepping down from 44. But there's still opportunities for chasing an AC in another place. We still need to finish some stuff. So that's just the planning assumption. I think in the order of magnitude is the right number. So that then leads to the guidance on the EBITDA in the adjusted to being 11 to 15, if we would adjust out restructuring in last year and this year. If we don't adjust for the restructuring, it would be a 14 to 18, obviously benefiting, and that's where the delta comes from that the restructuring causes stepping down. But you can see that even for the adjusted over the like for like, you have a good margin expansion on the EBITDA. We're confident in that because of the work we've done on the cost structure. But that's where our head is from a guidance perspective. With that, I think Thomas is going to help us on guiding through how we get to Q&A. And I'll ask Matthias to join me.

So we start the Q&A now. I will go a little bit back and forth between people on the phone and people here in the room, and I suggest we start with a couple of questions in the room.

Two questions, one and one. Thanks for taking my question. This is Maya. I would like to start with your guidance to unpack that a bit. I guess if we look at 25-26, we should anticipate positive pricing impact in the first half of the year that is normalizing or slowing down in the second half of the year. Could you confirm that? Also, have you baked anything in for a full return to Costco in the guidance? And then lastly, what kind of positive benefit from a pure pricing perspective do you anticipate to see in the VA contract? Thank you.

So on the pricing side, we're having a slight positive in the first half year, but probably more flattish in the second. What we have seen in the second half year, and Matthias indicated a little bit, we got good price increase on the Infineon Sphere, but given channel mix, but also general price pressure on the older product, we didn't have a lot of ASP lift. So in that regard, we're more muted on the pricing expectation, but don't expect a significant increase on price. On the large customer market, No white smoke. We are in a position to share, but given the positive reception and the feedback we get on the pilots, we have baked in because we see a high likelihood that we're returning to that channel to all stores. But again, not definitive and nothing I can share as a definitive, but it's based into the guidance here, which does help because from the 1 to 3 to getting to the 5 to 9, you need some bridge items. This is one of the bridge items. And then on the VA side, I cannot comment on price as a specific number, but it's a meaningful price increase because VA only does price increases every five years. So in reality, it's kind of the pent-up price increase of the last five years. I think you will be able to see that when numbers from everyone are published after the first or second months and you can see the revenue in the unit volume, they show both. But it is a meaningful lift because it's a five-year time horizon.

May I just quickly follow up on the pricing answer? Maybe I'm completely wrong, but I thought part of the reason why your ASP uplift in the second half wasn't as pronounced was due to the fact that the US market was down. And you have that kind of mixed impact from a geographic perspective. What are you baking in as a market growth for the US to say that there shouldn't be a, not a dramatic, meaningful, horrendous price impact in H1, but it should still be kind of noticeable on growth.

I think the other way around, because given the way we read kindly consumer confidence, The consumer confidence has been significantly larger in the U.S. Obviously, we only talk about a curve over three months, so we all can have an opinion how fast things get out. But right now, the market which is most muted is the U.S., the market where I see the biggest drop in consumer confidence and the significant expectation on inflation on the consumer side is U.S. Therefore, the base is under the 1 to 3. is that the U.S. is over proportionally hit by a slowdown than Europe. Europe right now in numbers is actually in Q4 where it was before. So all of the compression you see right now in the Q4 numbers is only U.S. And it was only a quarter. So, yes, if it gets to normal, the last quarter would be better. But right now I have to assume the first and the second and the third may be worse. So we have a negative ASP currently in the numbers from a geomix, assuming that the U.S. is more muted than Europe. So that's all underlying in that ASP discussion.

Also on the U.S. weakness, can you comment a bit about April? I mean, we all know the statistic in February and March, down double digit, and the momentum in the U.S. and also... how it developed now early May and also to the US on your own experience in your own retail, was it more the first time buyer who was reluctant or was it the replacement buyer who you know, where is the hearing aid a year longer or whatever? That would be interesting.

First question. So April was the return to positive growth in the commercial channel. We had the most negative in February. We still had negative. This is market in March. And then April returned to low single to mid single digit positive growth. You can see the volatility. So we're all in the same boat, having a hard time reading the curve. But if you take the average of the three, it's kind of a minus four-ish, minus five-ish. And so we don't want to jump on, there was one good month, right? In the retail, we see a similar pattern as in 2021. We are able with a right, unfortunately, high investment on lead generation to bring new people to the category, but people are starting to delay. Keep in mind, 50% of the volume are people who are buying for the second time. There's nothing changing dramatically in their life if they buy it six months later, right? And I think that's the dynamic you're seeing. And if only 10% of the renewals are pushing out, you have a 5% market drop, right? But it's exactly the same behavior we're seeing in our retail than 2021.

And second question, thanks. You mentioned the press release weaker and anticipated market conditions in EMEA. What was exactly, was that UK or what was the reason for EMEA?

EMEA is from a market perspective, pretty similar than before. When I look at the Q4 numbers, Germany was in okay territory. It wasn't great in the year before. So that's why I say it's comparable. I think UK was in a good position. I think France is still low, but slightly positive. I think if you would ask me about the next couple of quarters, I would put a little bit of a concern into if there's a global economy slowdown, eventually that has an impact on Europe. But for now, the run rate, as I said before, is pretty much in line with the run rates before. France, we assume, will pick up some given the renewals of people who got first time to the category. Need to see when that starts at a meaningful number.

Thank you. Operator, I would suggest we take a couple of questions from the line. Can you give the first question?

Sure. The first question from the phone comes from Hassan Al-Wakil from Barclays. Please go ahead.

Hi, good afternoon, and thank you for taking my questions. I have three, please. Firstly, if I can follow up on the top line guide and some of the rich items that you mentioned and in getting you from the 1% to 3% market growth to your guidance. What are the others outside of Costco? And how do you think about your guide split by region and by business segment? And if you see any meaningful differentiation, I guess presumably there is some in the U.S. Secondly, if I can ask on margins and the key levers you have on the cost side this year, given meaningful margin expansion of around 90 basis points at the midpoint that you expect, and then also around phasing, given comps get tougher and competitor launches may impact price as well, and any tariff assumption that you have for the consumer business embedded in guidance. And then thirdly, on audiological care, quite a meaningful improvement, H1 to H2, on the back of, in part, improved lead generation. How are you thinking about the benefits of this flowing into this year and the sustainability here? Thank you.

Hassan, thanks for the questions. So on the top line first, if I think by different businesses, clearly with the positives in the bridge mainly coming from AGI, AGI should be over proportionally growing to the fleet average. What are the bridge items? We talked about VA. It is a meaningful lift coming out of price, but we also expect some market share gain given that the sphere will be available or is available since a week. Clearly, there is the assumption that we get back to a large customer in the US, which is a bridge item. The new products we launch in the fall or early fall will be a meaningful contribution from a growth perspective. And then in the first half year, last year, we didn't have the infiniosphere in the first half, so there's an element there. But overall, AGI will be a key driver for growth. On the audiological care side, I believe we have properly reflected the needs for the lead generation cost. in the budget. Therefore, we're able to fund the continuation of what we've done in the last six months from a steady stream of lead generation. Therefore, I think there's a good guy first half year, you know, that was low. And then we get into more difficult comps, but we're able to generate more leads. From a cost phasing perspective, There is a benefit in the first half year towards the EBITDA and also in the cost side. You've seen Matthias share the first half last year was double digit. The second half was more on the sixth. We also are coming in with that 40 percent, 40 million better run rate. So clearly the first half year against the comp base will be significant. better on the cost step up than the second half. But also in the second half, I think the structural improvements will allow us to move at a careful OPEX level, which we also want to keep a close eye on given that we have volatility and we don't know exactly where the market is going. From a tariffs perspective, there's two lanes where we have to think about tariffs at Sonova. It's not on the hearing instruments or the audiological care. But it is a cochlear implants to China because we manufacture in the U.S. And secondarily, it is some of the consumer hearing business from which some of the products come from China. Some come from other Asian countries at lower current tariffs. We never exactly know what the rate is today. We don't know what it is in a week, apparently. But in general, we have factored in for the cochlear implant business and the consumer hearing business, the mitigations we're able to do right now where we shift some product manufacturing where we can shift it. And otherwise we have factored in that when we're running out of inventory and we have a couple of months, our mindset is we're not selling a product at a loss. Therefore, we've taken an appropriate number of revenue for both businesses in those two geographies, CI in China, consumer hearing business in the U.S. out of the P&L, and would forego with that the gross profit we would have without tariffs. So that's the way we model, but that is reflected. So if the tariffs stay where they are today, That's baked into the guidance, and that is today's tariff rates and on the two swim lanes, consumer hearing business to the U.S. and advanced bionics to China. You can say it's a conservative approach, but then I wouldn't know what otherwise to do because sometimes it goes up, sometimes it goes down. But in case these tariffs change, the picture would change, hopefully to the better.

No, that's super helpful. Are you able to quantify what you think the net and gross amount would be? Yes.

Yeah, if you look at the businesses, right, the two together make 15% of our revenue. Probably in both cases, you're talking about 20% or out of magnitude U.S. business for Sennheiser, probably 15% for China and AB. I think you can work the math from there. But what we have done is we have not factored in tariffs. We don't intend to pay such high tariffs. We have factored in that the revenue of the gross profit is not planned with us. Excellent, thank you. You're welcome.

Operator, next question from the line, please.

The next question comes from Hugo Solved from . Please go ahead.

Hi, hello, thanks for taking my questions. I have three, please. First, can you walk us through the phasing of margin through the year, given all of the moving parts? Second, you called out new launches in the summer. Just a semantic question here, but what qualifies as a new launch? Is it a new form factor, an upgrade of the existing platform, or a new platform? And lastly, can you maybe please walk us through the thoughts and the process which led to the external IR, both for CEO and CFO rather than internal promotions? Thank you.

Thank you, Hugo. On the phasing, I'm not in a good position to give an exact number. But if I go through what I said before, I think clearly the jump off point is softer for first half than second half year. So you would expect for somewhat more positive EBITDA development. I think from the pricing effects and revenue effects, expect not a significant difference first half to second. If you look at the absolute amount, we will have some product launches in the fall, as I said, that will help a little bit. Otherwise, we have a normal degradation. So it really comes more out of what is a more normal first half to second half year ratio for us, given that we have corrected the cost structure and we have a a higher volume but also a better cost structure coming into the year. From the launch perspective, what does qualify a launch? If we use the term launch, You would think about not a new form factor if it comes to a product like the Infinio or the Sphere. You would think about that additional functionality comes to the party. Very similar to the discussions we had with a Marvel 1.0 and a Marvel 2.0. We were able to bring some additional functionality, which allows us to hopefully get higher on the stack ranking of the audiologists because they look at this and say, this is better and this is something new, right? So expect that one. There's one larger form factor which is missing on the table, which we wanted to launch last year, which we have not been able because we needed to take a step back on the development side, which is in the category of the IPEs. so we will be able to launch an ite in a rechargeable version as we had unfortunately already shared half a year ago nine months ago we're still working on that and we're making good progress to be in a position that we now have what we need from a quality perspective So one form factor, which is a meaningful one, because that's a significant part of the ITR business. The other one, call it mentally an inferior tool, which also impacts the sphere because the sphere is on top of the inferior. Now, on the external hire, you asked for the process and the question internal and external. So first, we... We do work actively to building talent from within. You have to grow the talent through different assignments and different parts of the organization. You've seen two internal promotions last year when we promoted Lelika to run consumer hearing business after the tragic accident of Martin. And then when Christopher left, you've seen an internal promotion of Oliver Lux into the leadership of the audiological care. That was based on us having worked with them over five, six, seven years through different assignments to grow in scope and scale. That is what our standard process and our aspiration is. If you then get to a place, and sometimes these are people like Lelika and Oliver, who, by the way, are both 15 years with the company. Sometimes you land somebody who is two or three years in one role and then ready for the next step. We make those attempts. If both of those don't lead you to the place where you say that person is really, truly ready, and I always use the term, if you have the key, would you give it to the person? Because everybody tells me everybody is ready and everybody is great, but you need to change perspective. Would I feel comfortable to give any of our talents, and we have many good talents and they're growing in the organization, but would I give them the keys to the CEO role right now? Unfortunately, I have failed in seven years to be at the place where I would say one of them is truly ready. I think we have some who can get there. But you need to then change the perspective with all the good work you're doing on growing talent from within that you say, okay, am I ready to do this now? So in both cases, unfortunately, we were not in that position. So what is the process we go through? We tend to use one of the best headhunters. We do use different ones to keep a little bit competition, and some have certain skills in certain fields. We have them create a short list and a long list, and then we go through. At the end of the day, on these positions, I think on the CFO position, the lead was with me together with the HR leader. But obviously in very close alignment, and if I look at the number of people who have interviewed LOD and other candidates, it was more board members than MBs. Because at the end of the day, the CFO is a very pronounced position, but reporting is to me, so I was a hiring manager. I was closely with Roland Dickelmann, with Robert Schwery as the chair of the board. Also with Gilbert as the incoming chair. And in the CEO situation, that changes a little bit because ultimately hiring manager is a chair. And so in that regard, you have to assume that Gilbert is the hiring manager for Eric. We went through a diligent process. In the process for each MB member and also other levels, we do assessments with external parties on cultural fit. But at the end, it's a broad funnel together with a strong headhunter. It's assessment of the candidates through our interviews and others, and ultimately a choice between the talents we have at our perusal.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome. I would suggest we switch to the room. In the interest of time, I just would like to ask you to limit yourself to two questions, please. Is there any questions in the room?

Hello, it's Urs Kunz from Research Partners. I have one question regarding your positive outlook on your market share gains. That's implied in your forward-looking statement. Don't you see any kind of slowdown of market share gains since competitors started with new products in the last two or three months? Is there anything to see? Then I have a question on Sphere and Infineon in general. What are the return rates, reliability? Are you happy with them? And then the question on this leverage from sales growth to growth in normalized APTA, that's quite considerable, is that user pricing is not really the issue. It is mostly because the overproportional growth of the hearing business or also costs that you can lower a lot.

So on the market share gains due to other people launching product, we see a continued good pickup Even last month with Infinio Sphere in the markets where we're selling it from a market share perspective, we acknowledge that other people have launched product. Honestly speaking, I also think that Infinio is a very strong product and I think the Sphere has a unique capability for people who are often in noisy environments so i also would say from a functionality perspective i'm confident relative to those new entrants but we see it also the data right what's my quote-unquote cushion i know that the middle of the year we're going to have an improvement to the existing product. So anyone needs to have at least that improvement or more to start to turn the tide against us. That's a simple way of thinking about it. We still need to be very focused. We need to do good commercial execution, but from a product perspective, I think we're in as good position as I have seen. And I'm here seven years, nine months after the launch of a major platform with what I see from a market share. And secondly, what I know we can do with the next step. The second question was? On the return rate of Sphere. On the return rate? The return rates on Sphere and Infineo are better, meaning lower than the platforms before. in two ways the one if you mean return rate for repairs that were better were currently about 11 better in our reliability or 10 better for the total fleet that is coming from the newer products the second one Also, when it comes to people giving the product back after having worn it for four weeks, we also are particular in the sphere and the better territory. I can just extract from there that we're fine. Obviously, we always want to push reliability even more, but there's not a significant concern. There's a little bit of a noise here in the market because with the connector change we made, there is some issues around it. It's not... very significant from an impact against the product. It is a necessary fix which will come this summer into the full installed base. It's nothing we need to change on the existing products to connect on the receiver now, but no concern and improved numbers in reliability, but also in the return rate during that or after the trial phase. The leverage to the profitability I think the easiest way to think about it is to take the 40 million we shared on the structural improvement on the OPEX alone, that's 5% EBITDA, right? So if we run at that volume growth, then we can invest in some OPEX in the right places. But if you are growing at a 7% at this type of gross profit, yes, there's also slight positive from a mix if hearing instruments grows more than the rest, but then add on top the benefit out of the restructuring, which is the 5%, right? And then you start to get comfortable as much as the number looks high, right? But I think you should also expect us that if we decide to pay for restructuring and do the hard work that you see that somewhere in the guidance.

Operator, let's go to the next question from the line.

The next question from the phone comes from Veronica Dubajova from CT. Please go ahead.

Thank you, guys. Thank you, guys. Good afternoon, and thanks for taking my questions. Hopefully you can hear me. I have three, please. Actually, I'll keep it to two because I know Thomas asked for two. I'll keep it to two. My first one is just going back to your assumptions about the embedded share gains and just trying to decompose, I guess, if we look at the delta between what you expect to grow versus your market expectations, can you maybe, even if you don't give us the hundreds of basis points for each of the things that you have out there, but maybe list them from, most to least important? So is Costco the most important? Is the VA the most important? If you can decompose that for us just to give us a little bit of flavor, to give us a sense for how achievable the guide is. That would be my first question. And then my second question is on the 2.0 for Infineo and SPHERE. unusual to see an upgrade to a platform in such a short time frame especially one that's performing so well so maybe um if you can talk through some of the motivations for doing that already this summer as opposed to in let's say another six to 12 months thank you so much hi veronica thank you um so if you put it in four buckets there's a va there's a large

customer we assume to get back into then there's product launch impact for the second half of the year and there's market that are actually interestingly similar sizes now not exactly but if you would ask me now i need to stack rank i would say the new products a little bit more and then A large customer and the VA is about the same. The market's probably a little lower. But it's that order of magnitude. They're all four relevant in the bridge. That's why we raise them. But similar size. Now, in general, we have come to the conclusion many years ago. And we've done it in Marvel. We've done it in Paradise. We have not been able to do it in Lumity for technical reasons that if we can do an improvement to the product without very significant R&D efforts and very significant validation and verification regulatory efforts, the better way in our industry would be you do a lot of hard work every two years, validation, verification, and development. But if certain functionality can be improved, but it's meaningful to the customer or the consumer, and you do it with a low effort, you should go do that. Because we know having something new every year is better, but comes the question, what's the investment, right? And so in today's world, Also the type of software technologies we're using. There is an opportunity to touch the software without touching any hardware. I will not share a lot more, otherwise my friendly competitors would know exactly what I'm doing. But in general, it's just possible with not too high of an R&D and validation verification effort. And then it's relevant and meaningful economically. I would advise everybody to try to do that every year because, honestly speaking, you need to be at the top of the list with a hearing care professional, right? And having something new always is a draw. Understood.

Understood. Thank you so much and all the best.

Thank you. Thanks, Veronica, for sticking to two questions. We take the next question from the line.

The next question comes from Robert Davies from Work on Stanley. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking my question. I was just wondering if you could drill a little bit more, firstly, into the French market development and your expectations over the year. And then secondly, just in terms of some of the sort of tariff mitigation strategies you're taking, just wondering if you could provide us a bit more color, exactly whether you would consider moving any production sites around or doing anything kind of, I guess, more extensive from the kind of manufacturing or supply chain standpoint. Thank you.

Thanks, Robert. On the French market, as I said, the first quarter was still kind of low single digit. I think our expectation is, again, a little bit crystal ball reading, but we do think it's going to go to the mid single, fortunate to high single digit in the second half of our fiscal. I think it's going to be an S curve because even if the people got their hearing aid exactly four years ago, if they have one, it doesn't mean they come back on the first day. That was different at the beginning of the change in reimbursement because many people had nothing and they were knowing something's coming, right? So it's a more smooth curve. We also see that there is a meaningful number of hearing aids where nobody in the four years ever came back for service. There's always the risk with free of charge goods that people come at the end, they're not adopting, right? So there's an element where there's a little bit of an over-representation of that initial growth. Not all of that led to true penetration in terms of usage. And we think only the ones come back who actually used it, right? But in general, we think it's going to be somewhere mid single to high single digit as a market evolving over the next couple of quarters. On the tariff side, I think In a world in which right now on two swim lanes you're in a 100% plus tariff, I think first nothing helps except for saying right now I don't sell. we are increasing where it's relevant prices and where we think we can, where the tariffs are not at the same zip code. So there's pricing actions in certain areas where the products come from different geographies. From a footprint perspective, I think you can't overreact and say, just because there's a tariff which came yesterday, I changed my total supply chain strategy. Now, the good news is we were on a journey either way. And you remember the reason why we get into Mexico is we're Asia-based with our manufacturing for the hearing instruments. And we continue to build up Mexico that has a different relationship to the United States than China or Vietnam. It's good for logistics costs, but it's also good for being efficient. more balanced in your manufacturing capability. So we accelerate that. By the way, there's a good guy on the back end of that. We also have said we are going to use Mexico for cochlear implants. So we will end up in a world in which we have cochlear implants, not just from the US, but also from Mexico that may be long term a good guy towards China. Right. But we continue those. We accelerate those. Now, there is one other switch you can use if you have a product manufactured by a third party. Most large third parties have more than one manufacturing site. So the one we're currently doing and it will help and does help on the consumer hearing business is if somebody has China-based manufacturing, they have Indonesia as an example, and we only get from China, we're working on switching that we get some of the volume out of Indonesia, right? So that's an item you can do in three to six months. If it comes to Cochlear from the U.S. to Mexico, the manufacturing is easy. The registration takes longer. But in general, we're only going in directions we either way wanted to do. We wanted to be broader than just China for the consumer hearing business. And, yes, we wanted to be in Mexico. If all of that doesn't place, we're in a better position.

Can we have the next question? Yeah, thank you. You're welcome.

Yes, sure. The next question comes from Oliver Metzger from OdoBHF. Please go ahead.

Yes, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. First one is on your Bodum acquisitions. So, there seems to be some higher competitive dynamics, so in particular, the overall market is weaker, more players try to compensate that with stronger M and A. So can you make a comment how purchase multiples have progressed over the past year? Second question is on the cochlear implant market dynamics. So by now we see only the numbers of cochlear. So can you make a comment about also your volume price mix? Because that helps us to understand the dynamics better. Thank you very much.

Oliver, thank you. On the purchase multiples, I think I would look at them right now. Our interpretation is rather steady. It's clearly not a significant spike anywhere. Obviously, there can be one target asset, which for good reason, somebody is particularly excited about. Multiples are higher when you have 100 point of sales versus five. Some markets are meaningfully higher, one on the higher side, you would find France as an example, while other markets like Brazil or even the U.S. are lower. But we don't see a dramatic change there. I think we're thoughtful. Where does it make sense to add through a bolt-on? Where do we have the right, let's say, also organic momentum right now? Secondarily, we are interested to over time do more green fields, but from a purchase price, not a significant change there. On the cochlear implant side, most of our growth comes out of volume. There are some markets where we can get some price increase. But in general, you are, A, the customers attached to reimbursement. So it's a little harder than in a private pay environment. And then in some markets, it's also in long-term contracts, US GPOs and IDNs take a bigger role in the negotiation of these contracts. So think more, it's predominantly volume and some price. There is obviously a significant mixed shifts depending on are we delivering more to Saudi Arabia or the US, but from a big picture, it's predominantly volume, some price.

Okay, great. Thank you. And all the best for Chitra.

Thank you. So we'll move back to the room.

Thank you. Two very short questions from my side. You have announced restructuring costs of 25, around 25 million for this year. Could you tell us what kind of cost savings you would anticipate to come through for the next year? And the second question, Arndt, is, I'm not sure if you can comment on that, but would Aura costs be regarded a functionality or is that... not, you know, because you said like the upgrade would include new functionalities. And I'm just trying to understand whether AuraCast is regarded as a functionality. Thank you.

So on the restructuring We normally like projects where the ratio between the cost and the pay and the run rate improvement when you're talking OpEx is one to one or better. I think on supply chain matters, it may be a little bit more heavy because you often have CapEx elements and significant investments to do, right? So if you work from there, you're probably, a first starting point of the conversation should be similar restructuring equals run rate. You may have certain projects when you do a particular country like France, then that's obviously different, but you have other countries, right? So that tends to be a good rule of thumb for projects. AuraCast, first AuraCast, Our products have, at least on the chip side, the ability or our cost as well as MFA. Right now, MFA is enabled. I think the question behind the question, no, that is not the only thing I'm talking about.

I think we move. Let's move to the line and then we'll have another question in the room.

The next question from the phone comes from Nils Granholm-Leth from Carnegie. Please go ahead.

Thank you. First question on M&A. Could you specify the effect on M&A on your guidance for the coming year and more specifically outline the organic growth then? Secondly, could you talk about the proposed staff reductions coming up in the VA. It seems like they have all received letters and there will be some kind of resolution here in June. What are your expectations as to the stability within the VA clinics? We are hearing all kinds of worrisome stories right now, but I would like to hear your version of the situation. Thank you.

Thank you, Niels. On the M&A side, you have a good predictor. You see how much capital we deployed last year. It's obviously at least half of the year of benefits. And you can see our run rate. We were around, I think, 77 million in capital deployment for bolt-ons. If you assume say a two to two and a half times revenue valuation, you can see it's a little bit below a percent on the group level. Now, I don't know if the big thing would happen right now. I'm not aware about the big thing. So just plan with that one and it's a good starting point. So you can see most of the growth has to come out of organic. On the VA side, there is a, Clear, I think also loud commitment of the US administration that the frontline staff at the VA is held where they have it. That's also what we have seen so far. I think from all we can tell, the hearing care professionals are not in a territory in which there's discussions about wanting to have less of them. There is no hiring policy in place since fall of last year. Need to see how that evolves, but at least explicitly frontline staff like hearing care professionals are not counted mentally into the reduction numbers which are floating around. And that's what we've seen. We've also seen, and I need to say a positive here on the customer and the hearing care professionals, From all we can do, we can see they are, despite maybe concerns and noise, as you can imagine, if there's change on organizations, the hearing care professionals take care about the patients every day. They take this very serious and very personal. They may not like the noise, but in general, we see them fitting every day.

Can we have the next question? Oh, thank you.

The next question comes from David Edlington from JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Some of the questions, most have been asked already, but maybe just on the cochlear side, I just wondered how you're feeling about growth given firstly, competitor launches, and secondly, I'd like to get your thoughts on the recent CDC cuts to the early hearing detection intervention team. Just wondering if you're expecting any impacts on pediatric screening. And the second one, Just on below the line items, get some guidance on both financial income and tax, and particularly your wording around tax reform. Thank you. It's yours.

We found one for you. On the cochlear implants, I think obviously we observe with carefulness the product launches from competitors. I think with all due respect, the Medell one is not one which worries us a lot, given the functionality, but also the place where they play in the market. On the cochlear side, I think it's not so clear to us yet on how much of an impact there is. We still feel good about us continuing to have good growth, given that part of our growth comes also out of expanding the people we connect who are adults waiting for treatment. cochlear implant opportunity will be explained to them. But I think we need to see how strong the cochlear product is and how much it impacts in the marketplace. On the CDC, that is actually from the importance of the program in general for pediatric patients that the screening is stopped as a funded program. How much impact does it have on the revenue side? I think That's less of a concern for us because, A, the pediatric segment is not so big on the hearing aids relative to the total revenue. On the cochlear implant, I think eventually people figure out that there's no hearing even without a screening. Unfortunately, they would find it out probably six months later, which is not good for the brain development. So in that regard, sad to see. I don't think that's relevant for Sonova's total revenues.

On the financial income, so it's been increasing from 23 million to 40, so quite significantly. That's mainly due to additional hedging costs, but also FX results, so hedging cost, hedge result, and some non-recurring benefits, which we had in the prior year. On the tax, we are ending at 16.1%, which is actually a little bit below than what we expected. We expected 18%. This is due to some possibility to release some provisions because we have better than expected tax audit results. But of course, if you compare it to last year, we see a significant increase, but this is due to the global minimum tax. This is also as expected. And we are now, last year, we had a positive impact by the buildup of the DTA.

We'll move back to the room.

Quick one on managed care. Did you make into the guidance any share loss after the comeback of your bigger Danish competitor or?

Yeah, we have. I think it's fair to assume if a company like Demand comes back to managed care that there will be some impact. So I think we have reflected what we think is and to be expected curve.

but you didn't profit a lot last year because you're not so strong or?

No, we profited particular in that large customer. We have a good relationship there. One positive there is we're the private label provider. So that is a resilient part in that business, which doesn't go away as long as you're the private label provider. But otherwise we had some profit in the managed care. I think that will over time bounce back. I don't think it will be as black and white than they say we don't list you anymore. But I think you will see some correction back to a more normal market share over the next couple of quarters.

One quick one last. The sphere window for VA is OK for November or?

The sphere is in VA since last week.

Is it OK?

Because the contracts were all renewed. You can see it's published. So all manufacturers have got contract renewals. And with it, the introduction of a dual chip price category, which is where the sphere is falling. So that's why we expect the increase I talked about on VA coming from price and share gain. But the sphere is now in VA since one and a half weeks.

Great. Congrats and all the best as well.

Thank you.

Operator, let's move to the phone line again.

The next question comes from Shubhanji Gupta from HSBC. Please go ahead.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. So my first question is on the consumer business. Some of your peers have indicated softness in the end markets. Could you give some color in the geographies? Did you see more growth? and also the growth in your Q3 versus Q4. And second, just on your one to 3% growth in global hearing care, could you give a breakup of volume versus ASP? Thank you.

Thank you. We've seen softness on the consumer hearing business in line with also what we see on the hearing aids in the U.S. That also started somewhere in the February timeframe. We don't see a significant difference in our growth rates, but there's also product launch differences in the prior year. So I would venture to guess if I clean for those, there's probably a slowdown in the U.S. in the consumer hearing business. As you heard us say, we plan with a relatively low number there either way based on our assumptions on the tariff side. So I think we're on an okay position there from a guidance perspective. On the one to 3%, I think the market is probably not dissimilar to what I said about ourselves. I think at the end, the growth has to come from a unit volume perspective. I think if the market is in ASP flat, then in the B2B, so on the wholesale side, then that's perhaps a good outcome. I think there's quite some competitive intensity. Different on the retail side, so our audiological care, we do assume that the independents as well as the large retailers are able and have to realize price. I think one of the reasons is they're sitting all, including us, on significant OPEC structures. And so at the end, the inflation is not easily countermeasured on the retail side. But we do believe that everybody goes up low single digit or so on price on the retail side.

You're welcome. So the last question comes from the room.

It's a short question regarding the expected growth in cochlear implants. In system sales, they were up quite a lot. I guess that can't go forever on. Then the question would be processor launch. Is that something we can think about in the next few quarters?

So we're not planning with the same growth rate as we had in the strong year last year as we go forward. On the other hand, I would say, given that we're not the largest player in the market, we should have still growth potentially if we execute well, because he said it can't go far. It could go. I'm not standing with it at the same number. On the processor side, we have not factored in the processor launch in this year, and I think that's a good base assumption.

So that concludes the Q&A. Any final remarks? Thank you.

thank you for the questions i i just want to go back to the first page i think we're happy and proud that we could land for the second half year where we did i'm sure there were some people were scratching a little bit they had after last first half year because we didn't know how the infinity is landing we knew better than you i hope it's compelling enough in the market share gains and the growth rates also good to see the ac coming back We do think we're in a good position from the momentum perspective and the work we've done on the cost structure perspective. We hope, obviously, for a better outcome on market growth, but I think we put it at a place where it's a prudent way to plan the year. And with that, we feel good about the guidance we gave as much as we had some good questions about it. Thank you.