FMC Corporation

Ladies and gentlemen, today's FMC Corporation Conference call is scheduled to begin momentarily. If you should experience difficulties during today's call, please press star, then zero, and an operator will assist you. Thank you for your patience. Your lines will be placed back on music hold until the conference begins. Ladies and gentlemen, good morning and welcome to the second quarter 2019 earnings release call for FMC Corporation. Phone lines will be placed on a listen-only mode throughout the conference. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question and answer period. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to Mr. Michael Worley, Director of Investor Relations for FMC Corporation. Mr. Worley, you may begin.

Thank you and good morning, everyone. Welcome to FMC Corporation's second quarter earnings call. Joining me today are Pierre Brandot, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, Mark Douglas, President and Chief Operating Officer, and Andrew Sandifer, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Pierre will review FMC's second quarter performance and provide the outlook for the rest of 2019. Andrew will provide an overview of select financial results. Mark will then address the long-term sustainable growth for reNASPER and SAS for insect controls. We will then address your questions. The slide presentation that accompanies our results along with our earnings release and 2019 outlook statement are available on our website and the prepared remarks from today's discussion will be made available after the call. Finally, let me remind you that today's presentation and discussion will include forward-looking statements that are subject to various risks and uncertainties concerning specific factors, including but not limited to those factors identified in our press release and in our guidelines with the SEC. Information presented represents our best judgment based on today's information. Actual results may vary based upon these risks and uncertainties. Today's discussion and the supporting materials will include references to adjusted EPS, adjusted EBITDA, adjusted cash from operations and free cash flow, all of which are non-GAAP financial measures. Please note that earnings shall mean adjusted earnings and EBITDA shall mean adjusted EBITDA for all income state references. A reconciliation and definition of these terms as well as other non-GAAP financial terms to which we may refer during today's call are provided on our website. With that, I'll now turn the call over to Pierre.

Thank you, Michael, and good morning, everyone. As you saw in our earnings release, FMC continued to outperform the market as we have for the past seven quarters. We delivered results in line with the forecast and adjusted to specific local conditions in the quarter. Turning to slide three, FMC reported $1.2 billion in second quarter revenue, which reflects a -over-year increase of .5% on the reported basis and 9% organic growth excluding FX headwinds. This increase was mostly driven by strength in Brazil, India, and the MEA. Adjusted company EBITDA was $330 million, an increase of 6% compared to recast financials from last year and $3 million above the midpoint of our guidance. Company EBITDA margins were 28% up -over-year despite $64 million in combined headwinds from raw material costs and foreign currencies. Adjusted EPS was $1.66 in the quarter, an increase of 11% versus recast Q2 2018 and $0.01 above the midpoint of our guidance. The strong -over-year EPS growth was driven by price increase, higher volume, and a lower share count. Moving now to second quarter revenue on slide four. Q2 revenue grew .5% versus prior year, with volume contributing 5% growth and price mixed another 3% growth. This was offset partially by a 4% headwind from FX. Although Q2 is a seasonally smaller quarter of the year in Latin America, sales in that region grew 29% -over-year or 34% organically, continuing the trend from Q1. Drivers include strong revenue growth in Brazil across the portfolio with high demand for applications on cotton and sugarcane and price increases that more than offset the impact of FX on both revenue and earnings. Following such a strong first half in Latin America, it is important to note that we continue to monitor channel inventory levels of FMC products very closely in Brazil. They are at an all-time low for this point in the season. In EMEA, improved market conditions in Russia and Ukraine, good demand in southwest Europe, and new country registrations for sales appear in tech control drove -over-year revenue growth of 4%, organic growth was 10%. In Asia, revenue was down 2% overall but increased 4% organically -over-year. We were especially pleased with the strong performance in India, where our sales grew over 20% driven by growth in early size for sugarcane and the benefits of our new commercial organization structure, which we put in place about a year ago. In North America, revenue was down 2% -over-year as the well-understood weather issues in the choir caused a reduction in demand from raw crop customers. This low demand was offset in part by strong sales of renege-sapir insect control, especially in niche crops in California, and our new fungicide, lucento. Turning to slide five, second quarter EBITDA was $338 million. Price increases in all regions and strong volume demand everywhere but North America combined to more than offset the headwinds from raw material costs and effects, leading growth versus recast results from Q2 2018. Moving to our 2019 outlook on slide six, we are maintaining our guidance for 2019 revenue and EBITDA. We expect full year 2019 revenue to grow 6% at the midpoint or 9% organic growth, excluding the forecasted 3% FX headwind. We expect total company EBITDA to grow 8%. We are increasing our 2019 EPS guidance to a range of $5.68 to $5.88, which represents a gain of 10% at the midpoint over recast 2018. Our EPS guidance now reflects the $200 million of buybacks completed in the first half of 2019, as well as an additional $200 million of buyback anticipated in the second half. We continue to plan to make $400 to $500 million in total share repurchase in 2019, but our EPS guidance reflects the lower end of this range. For the third quarter, we expect revenue to be in the range of $960 to $990 million, which represents -over-year growth of 6% at the midpoint. We are also forecasting EBITDA of $119 million to $210 million in Q3, which would be an increase of 7% -over-year at the midpoint. As expected, the impact from FX will be more muted in the second half of the year. We expect third quarter EPS to be in the range of $0.75 to $0.85, up 13% at the midpoint versus recast results from Q3 2019. The third quarter is a seasonally smallest quarter for FMC, which is in line with the quarterly pattern from 2018, as Q3 is not a high season in any other regions. The healthy growth with forecast is in line with the full year growth expectation, and the Q3 guidance is essentially in line with the prior year period as a percent of annual sales, annual EBITDA, and annual EPS. Guidance for Q4 implies a very strong quarter with sales growth of 7%, EBITDA growth of 17%, and EPS growth of 10%, all at the midpoint of the ranges versus recast Q4 2018 results. Q4 performance will be driven by Latin America. In Brazil, similar to last year, we have already received nearly 70% of the orders needed to deliver our second half forecast. This is giving us a very strong confidence in our ability to deliver our financial targets for the second half. However, we are carefully monitoring the North America market and channel inventories. For 2019, we now expect the overall global crop protection market will be flat on a US dollar basis, down slightly from our previous outlook. We expect Latin America to grow faster in the high single digit, and North America to be weaker down mid single digits. This adjustment in market forecast does not change our overall outlook for FMC's financial outperformance related to the markets. Turning now to a full year EBITDA bridge and revenue drivers on slide 7. A full year cost headwind is higher than our prior forecast, mainly due to increased tariffs in the US and a delayed reopening of a key tolling partner in China. However, strong pricing is now expected to offset over 70% of the $220 million in combined headwinds from cost and effects. Moving to slide 8, we provide the key drivers for EBITDA and revenue growth in Q3 and Q4. Volume growth and price increases are expected to be consistent drivers over revenue and earnings performance. I will now turn the call over to Andrew.

Thanks, Pierre. Let me start this morning with a few specific income statement items. Interest expense for the quarter was $4 million higher than implied by our prior full year guidance due to higher interest rates on foreign borrowings and higher than anticipated commercial paper balances. Interest expense for the full year is now expected to be in the range of $144 to $148 million. The adjusted effective tax rate for the quarter was 15%. We are maintaining our full year tax rate guidance of 14 to 16%. Weighted average diluted shares outstanding for the second quarter was $132.3 million, down nearly 4 million shares versus the prior year period, reflecting the benefit of the $400 million in share repurchases we've made over the past three quarters. Moving on to the balance sheet and cash flow, gross debt as of June 30th was $3.2 billion, up roughly $100 million from the end of March. Gross debt at the trailing 12-month EVIT quarter end was 2.8 times. This is above our targeted leverage of 2.5 times due to the seasonality of our cash flow and the timing of share repurchases. We continue to expect to see leverage drop to 2.5 times or lower for the full year. Turning to slide 9, adjusted cash from operations was negative $174 million in the first half of 2019, below the prior year period. Non-recurring impacts that benefited working capital in the prior year period, as discussed in our last earnings call, remain the largest contributor to the -on-year change. Additionally, cash from operations in the second quarter was also impacted by credit term accommodations made to certain North American customers in light of extreme market conditions, more than half of which have already been paid to us in Q3. We also have higher sales in Latin America and India, where normal terms extend beyond the quarter end. These additional factors will unwind over the following two quarters, and as such, we are maintaining our full year guidance for adjusted cash from operations at -$850 million, with strong operating cash generation in both the third and fourth quarters. Capital investment through mid-year, while lagging the pace implied by our full year guidance, is in line with project schedule. We are maintaining our full year guidance for free cash flow of -$475 million. However, we are currently exploring a few product line acquisitions, as well as certain capital investments to support the rapid growth of our Diamides platform. These opportunities, if pursued, would reduce full year free cash flow somewhat, though they would further reinforce our growth trajectory. We repurchased 2.56 million F&C shares year to date at an average price of $78.11, for a total of approximately $200 million. It is our intent to remain a regular purchaser of F&C shares throughout the year. Though we have not purchased any shares since the quarter end, you should expect that we will make further repurchases during the third and fourth quarters. As Pierre said, we intend to repurchase a total of -$500 million of F&C shares in 2019. I note that our full year EPS guidance reflects the benefit of repurchases at the lower end of this range, in light of the potential additional investment opportunities I just mentioned. And with that, I'll turn the call over to Mark.

Thank you, Andrew. Over the last few months, we've seen numerous published reports discussing our Diamide insecticide portfolio, speculating on the timing of patent expirations and the impact these may have on the long-term profitability and growth of these important active ingredients. I want to take the time today to provide further clarity on not only our patent estate and the timing of key patent milestones, but also on other critical elements that will allow F&C to continue to profitably grow the Diamide franchise well beyond the expiration of key patents. These other critical elements include registration and data protection, commercial strategies, brand recognition, as well as manufacturing and supply chain complexity. Our Diamide portfolio consists of two key molecules, Rhinoxoper and Ciazoper insect controls, with current combined annual revenues of approximately $1.5 billion. It's important to note that Rhinoxoper and Ciazoper are F&C's trademark brand names for the active ingredients Chloranthryliprol and Ciantryliprol. These two molecules are class-leading in terms of performance, combining highly effective low dose rates with fast-acting systemic long residual control. These attributes quickly established Rhinoxoper as the world's leading insect control technology, and we expect it to continue a strong growth trajectory. Moving to slide 11 to begin our discussion of the Diamide patent estate, let me first pause to recognize DuPont. Out of all the quality assets we acquired in 2017, the IP estate and thought that went into building the IP protection of these molecules was extremely well done. Today I will largely confine my comments to Rhinoxoper, though the same comments are generally true for Ciazoper with the extended timelines by 18 months. The Rhinoxoper patent estate is made up of several different patent families, which cover composition of matter, both the active ingredient and certain intermediates, manufacturing processes, both the active ingredients and certain intermediates, formulations, uses and applications. For an Aczoper, we have 21 patent families filed in 76 countries, with a total of 639 granted and pending patents. Together with Ciazoper related patents, we have over 30 patent families and close to 1000 granted and pending patents. Composition of matter patents cover the structure of the molecule and are generally the patents that most observers have focused on. Process patents cover the manufacturing processes for both active ingredients, chloranthroliprol and cyanthroliprol, as well as the key intermediates that are used to make the final products. In the case of Rhinoxoper and Ciazoper, these process patents are extremely important. Chloranthroliprol is a complex molecule to produce. In fact, its production requires 16 separate steps, many of which produce an intermediate that's sole use is in the production of chloranthroliprol. This is very important, as it means there are no other commercial uses for these intermediates and hence no other commercial outlets for them. Importantly, FMC has many of these 16 process steps separately patented. Several of these intermediate process patents run well past the expiration of the composition of matter patents and in some cases stretch all the way to the end of the next decade. Third parties that intend to manufacture and sell generic chloranthroliprol and cyanthroliprol and rely on FMC's product safety data will be required to demonstrate that their product has the same regulatory safety profile as FMC's Rhinoxoper and Ciazoper insect controls. To meet these stringent regulatory requirements for such a difficult to manufacture molecule, the AIs will have to be made the way we're making it, which is protected by FMC process patents. Process patents can also include manufacturing processes that are not currently used, but are alternative ways to manufacture our diamides. We hold patents on several alternate processes, but it is important to note that these alternate processes do not match our diamide impurity profile. Formulation patents cover the use of an active ingredient in specific formulations, while use and application patents cover how the products are used and how they are applied. In addition to the patent estate, various regulatory bodies around the world also offer added protection to the holder of patented molecules in the form of data protection and registration timelines that can extend after the composition or process patents have expired. This means that the patent holder is afforded a further period of exclusive use after the applicable patents have expired. Over the coming slides, I'll show by major country how the patent estate, registration timeline and data protection come together. These highlighted countries currently account for over 70% of our diamide revenue. Turning to slide 12, you can see how we view the entire timeline for Europe. We have two parts of protection. First, we have patent protection for the composition of matter through August 2022 and later in certain EU countries. In addition, and importantly, we have patent protection through December 2025 for key processes that are required to manufacture an exopur. In effect, this means that no one will be able to manufacture or import chloranthroliprol in the EU until December 2025 as they would be infringing our process patents. Second, in Europe, owners of patented active ingredients are also granted exclusive data protection, which for chloranthroliprol effectively means a third party cannot use the FMC data to gain a registration for a period of 13 years after the first registration. In addition, a further two and a half years of data protection will be given at the initial re-registration of the active ingredient. Practically speaking, this means that no one seeking to register chloranthroliprol can use FMC generated data to apply for a registration during the data protection period, which runs through the end of October 2026. A third party can start to generate their own product specific data for registration purposes during this period and after the data protection period has expired, they could then apply for registration, which under EU rules should take 18 months but generally takes two years. This multilayered framework means that we will not see competitive sales of chloranthroliprol until Q2 2027 at the earliest in the EU, unless it is sales of products sourced from or under license from FMC. On slide 13, you can see a similar chart to what we had in the EU with regards to pattern protection but with a different registration process. The US does not have the same type of data protection as in the EU. However, under US pattern law, a third party cannot test or generate data or sell a product in the US prior to pattern expiration. This means that any third party company wishing to gain registration to manufacture and sell chloranthroliprol cannot start the regulatory process until our main process patterns begin expiring in December 2025. At that time, the third party company can apply for a federal registration, which under normal circumstances will take about 12 months. After the federal registration has been granted, a state registration is also needed for each state where the product will be sold. These state registrations normally take an additional six months to be granted. In addition, the third party is legally required to compensate the data holder, in this case FMC, for using FMC's data to gain a registration. This robust pattern protection and regulatory timeline means that we do not expect third party to be able to sell chloranthroliprol in the US until June 2027 at the earliest, unless they are supplied or licensed by FMC. Moving to slide 14, which shows the timeline for two other key countries for diamides, China and India. Similar to other countries we've reviewed, you can see that the AI composition of matter patterns expire in August 2022 and the key process patterns begin expiring in December 2025. In India and China, a third party can start applying for a registration for a product during the timeframe that a molecule has pattern protection. However, in both these countries we have the key manufacturing processes patented, which effectively means that even if the registration is granted, a third party could not start selling competitive chloranthroliprol until Q1 2026 at the earliest. Finally, the last country I will cover is Brazil on slide 15. The pattern timelines for Anaxapur in Brazil are longer than most other countries. The composition of matter pattern on the active ingredient will expire in April 2023 and our key process patterns will begin expiring in August 2026. Under current Brazilian regulatory practices, a third party can apply for a registration before the patterns have expired. However, Brazil has a law protecting the exclusive use of initial registrants' data for a period of time after the initial registration. FMC believes that any company that files for registration during the period of our continued data exclusivity falls foul of this Brazilian law. We have initiated a legal process with the Brazilian regulatory authorities to have FMC's data exclusivity respected. Taking this into account means first competitive sales of chloranthroliprol will not occur before September 2026. Turning to slide 16. The second part of our growth strategy for the diamides is our commercial approach. It should be very clear that we have an airtight pattern coverage for the process of manufacturing the diamides. However, we are also advancing a strategy of allowing others to sell Anaxapur and Ciazapur insect controls as long as they purchase the active ingredient or formulations from FMC and license the trademarks. Selling active ingredients to third parties is a profitable way for us to grow our business as it increases the market reach for the molecule. It is not EBITDA margin dilutive. At a reasonable gross margin, the absence of SG&A expense for FMC means incremental gross margin drops straight to EBITDA. The third party bears all costs related to formulating the active ingredient into a marketable product as well as selling and distributing the product to the customer. As of today, we have commercial agreements already in place or are actively negotiating new agreements with more than 15 companies to supply Anaxapur and Ciazapur on a global or country basis before patent expiration. We are continuing to explore opportunities with additional companies beyond the 15 we already engage with today. The duration of the agreements extends well beyond the patent expiration dates and are exclusive in nature. This means our third party partners will be required to purchase a large majority of their diamond requirements from FMC over the lifetime of the agreement and all their needs prior to the expiration of our process patents. The number of companies where we already have signed supply contracts or have ongoing negotiations demonstrates that many competitors would prefer to partner with us rather than attempt to manufacture a complex product that is highly protected by IP. Our commercial strategy ensures that the diamond technologies will continue to gain share. These new commercial partners will leverage different market access in different geographies and crops with different formulations than FMC has today. These actives will be additive to the overall growth of the FMC diamond franchise. For years past the patent expiration date, FMC will have a growing diamond business with a strong share of the market at the grower level and an even stronger share of the molecule at the manufacturing level. Beyond our significant patent protection commercial strategy, the complexity of manufacturing and scale of economies FMC enjoys are further underappreciated aspects of the long-term strength of the diamides platform. Today, FMC manufactures all the required intermediates in the 16-step process as well as the final renaissance products at our own active ingredient manufacturing plants all via partners under exclusive long-term agreements. For a third party to replicate this complex supply chain and manufacturing network would be a major undertaking with very large capital requirements. In addition, given the know-how we have and the scale of our operations, FMC's manufacturing costs will be substantially lower than any new entrant. This explains why we are confident most companies that want to participate in the formulated diamond market will choose to do so in partnership with FMC. In closing, I hope I have addressed any misperceptions about the long-term sustainable growth of FMC's diamond franchise. Our deep patent estate, proprietary regulatory data, manufacturing scale and knowledge, strong brand recognition, as well as commercial approach will ensure that FMC is the company of choice to supply diamonds to third party partners. This will further ensure that the diamonds franchise continues to be a major driver of value for FMC through the end of the next decade and beyond. And with that, I'll turn the call back to Pierre.

Thank you, Mark, for covering that important topic. To conclude, I'll prepare remarks. FMC delivered another quarter of financial performance despite the challenging ag environment in the U.S. Volume demand and price increases in other regions around the world are continuing to give a strong revenue and EBITDA growth. At the beginning of this month, we successfully launched our new SAP system with a pilot in Brazil. The new system is performing very well. 20% of FMC now operates on the new S4HANA system, and we expect to complete the full implementation in Q2 2020. The Brazil launch is a major milestone in the implementation process, which is giving us strong confidence that we will be able to implement the full system without disrupting our operations. In May, we indicated that we would provide an update on the R&D pipeline on 2D's call, but we felt it more important to dispel misperceptions about our diamond franchise. Rather than squeeze an R&D update into a future earnings call, we will have a more comprehensive and in-depth R&D investor invent in the first half of next year. FMC remains well positioned to help perform the industry, and a focus on crop chemicals and biological products is an advantage. Short-term execution is delivering superior quarterly results, and we are confident that our current portfolio and technology pipeline will deliver longer-term growth. I will now turn the call back to the operator for questions. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question at this time, please press star, then 1 on your telephone keypad. Please limit yourself to one question plus one follow-up question. If you have additional questions, you can jump back in the queue. To withdraw yourself from the queue at any time, press the pound key. We will pause for a moment to compile the Q&A roster. And we will go to the line of Chris Parkinson with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Great, thank you. As we enter 2020, you have a few moving parts on the cost front, including a new baseline for raw materials, just given what is happening in 2019, the SAP which you mentioned. As well as the role for the TSA, among a few others. Can you just update us on your thoughts regarding the setup for the second half and also just into 2020, kind of run rates, et cetera, your general line of sight into these variables and your conviction on your ability to drive margins higher? Thank you.

Sure, Chris. As you know, we had adverse costs and the part of those costs will not be seen next year. So we know we're going to start 2020 with a tailwind from a cost standpoint and also from an FX standpoint. There is also the fact that we are expecting to get out of the TSA with DuPont and set up by Q2 2020, the new S4HANA system. I look at two buckets. The total cost will be the increase in costs we are facing in 2019 will not repeat themselves in 2020, but we will still see only a part of that coming as a tailwind. We have not yet quantified exactly how this will be impacting next year. We know it will be a tailwind, but don't take the entire cost increase into 2020. From a S4HANA implementation and TSA, we still believe that the cost saving on an annual basis will be in the 60 to 100 million dollars a year, but we will only see a fraction of that in 2020 and same thing with not yet quantified. So we have two source of benefits from a cost standpoint, but we're going to need a bit more time, most likely at the Q3 earnings call to give you a more quantified number. The other thing which is positive as we are seeing today and we are pleased with as the cost increase are decreasing in H2 as well as FX, price is sticking quite well. So it's also a third tailwind we will see in 2020. You guys have to give us a bit more time. We are still highly focused on 2019. Those are tailwind for 2020, but we are hoping to quantify that in the next two or three months.

Thank you. And just on the cash generation front, you put some targets out there which are kind of in the stark contrast to the old FMC, but obviously in a good way. Can you just comment on your progress on the cash conversion front in 2019? What else needs to be done in the second half and in the 2021 to kind of further drive that conversion up to a peak level potentially, let's say 80-ish percent. Just any incremental color on the moving parts will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Yes, the cash are in fact, there is not much change on the cash forecast for the year versus what we were expecting. The difference as Andrew said in the prepare remarks was Q2 was not as cash generative as we were hoping because we made the commercial decision to support our customers, distributors and growers in Q2 who are facing tough, very challenging time and gave them some break on the cash collection. A big part of that has been paid as was promised and will be seen in Q3 and Q4. So not much change in terms of the forecast outlook for the year. Maybe a bit more weighted toward Q3, Q4 than we're expecting. Andrew, do you want to add anything?

I think for the current year, I think Pierre's comments are spot on. I do remind everyone that in the first half of last year, we did have some benefits to the working capital that don't repeat related to the DuPont transaction both on inventories and payables as well as a pretty marked step down in past news in Brazil. So that comparison is a bit extreme. I think looking beyond 2019, I do think that long-term 80% conversion of free cash flow from net income is still very much in reach. We do need to see a step down in our legacy in transformation spending, which we anticipate as we move past the S4 HANA implementation and the finalization of the DuPont integration and continue to drive efficiency in working capital, but very much in reach. I think this year's cash flow forecast, as Pierre mentioned, is staying where we are and really does give us the capacity to commit to large return of capital to shareholders both through share repurchases and the dividend and the flexibility to do some incremental investment depending on opportunities through the rest of the year. Thank

you. Next, we'll go to the line of Mark Connolly with Stevens, Inc. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Pierre, every quarter we get questions about whether the diamite growth can continue. I think in addition to the confusion over the patents, there's some misunderstanding about how FMC goes to market with products versus the way the previous owner did. Can you talk about your market penetration and why you're confident about diamite growth?

I think there is not a fundamental difference in the way we go to market versus the previous owner. I think we just have a very different profile in terms of the crops to which we sell and the region of the world to which we sell. So it allows us to keep on penetrating markets which were under-penetrated in the past by DuPont, not because there is as much of a difference of approach and usage, just because of the fact we are a different company and we are benefiting from positioning crops which are very strong crops for an accept pier and sales pier. There is also the fact that as we say in the prepare remark, we keep on getting registration specially for sales pier in multiple countries and that is generating more growth. So when we look at the long term, I would not say that we would continue in the 15 to 25% growth rate of the franchise as we had last year and this year, but a long range plan we would be doing taking us way into the next 10 years looking for a mid-single digit to high single digit growth rate for the diamite is very appropriate. Marc, do you want to add any color to this?

Yeah, I think we are not finished with the sales synergies, so that is where a lot of the growth is coming from. So greater market access,

as I

said for Sayazipur, this year we have had eight new registrations in eight different countries both in Europe and in Africa. We continue to leverage our position with major co-ops and distributors in the south of Latin America in the US and we have our new channel access in India which is a large market for us. So wherever those niche crops are in terms of what I would consider fruit and vegetables, that is where we are seeing continued growth. So you can focus on Asia, you can focus on the south of Europe, you can focus on the south of Latin America and Mexico.

There is a final point, well maybe this point is a bit different from what the previous owner did. Those are the comments made by Marc. We are looking at Rolex Appear and Sayazipur as a great partnering tool with other companies. And as we said, we have partnerships and are negotiating with about 15 companies. We are allowing those companies under some conditions to sell Rolex Appear and Sayazipur in different crops, different parts of the world. So those companies are increasing dramatically market reach and allowing us to grow faster. And that is a very profitable way for us to grow the franchise. It's not at all a bit addictive and it's a tool we intend to use for the years to come. I think our competitors understand well the quality of the patent estate and are very willing to enter into those 10 years contracts or more to partner with FMC on those molecules.

Thanks Pierre. I want to follow up with a question about Brazil. You've obviously been exceptionally strong there and that's been a core strength of FMC for pretty much forever. We're starting to see some big retail players and distribution struggle down there and we've got a major North American retailer talking enthusiastically about that market. If we do see the Brazil ag retail market gradually shift to be more like the US, how is that going to affect you in Brazil and how realistic do you think it is that that happens given the massive differences in market structure down there?

So first let me make a statement. As a large supplier of crop chemicals to the ag market, we like the US structure. We do like to have large buyers, well established companies, public or private or co-ops, which play by the rules of the time and pay in time. So we are not adverse at all to a market outside of the US starting to structure itself more like a US market. It is not, it's good from a cost standpoint, it's good from a cash standpoint, it's good from an operations standpoint. Now I still believe if you look at the size of the growers in Brazil that we will see large distributors at a US model happening, but it's going to take some time. It's a very big market. It's a market where there is a large number of large players who are growers. So to see a market where you go down to five or six or seven large distributors like we have in the US, I don't see that in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, a transition more to what a US market is not a negative for us. Mark? Yeah,

the only thing I would add to that Mark is you've got some extremely large co-ops in the south of Brazil which operate in a very similar way to the US model in terms of scale and breadth of capabilities. So I think in parts of Brazil you already have more of a US type model. I do think the market is consolidating in terms of distribution, URC and acquisitions and roll ups. I think that will continue, but as Pierre said, I think it will take some time to get to where we are in the US for instance. But I do see it going in that direction.

And we don't see that as a negative at all?

No, not at all.

Super helpful. Thank you.

And next we go to the line of Frank Mitch with Fermium Research. Please go ahead.

Thank you so much. And Mark, I appreciate the review of the Huernáxi-Puris as a pure patent protection climate. I obviously mentioned it's a billion five in terms of sales today, so very attractive. I just wanted to drill into one of the comments you made that it would be very capital intensive for someone else to duplicate your supply chain. Can you give us an order of magnitude of what would be involved there in terms of dollars and cents?

Yes, Frank, thanks. Listen, it's complex to do because understand that when you have a process which is 16 steps, which for us is done through a series of partners who are manufacturing some of the intermediates and some of the final steps which are made by us, it is a very, very complex network. You would not imagine somebody building that in a short period of time over a single site. So it would require not only capital spending at the level of the company itself, which intend to, but most likely to find partners to produce some of those intermediates. None of these partners could be the partners we do have today who are in exclusive arrangement with ourselves for the long term. The number is certainly, we have not quantified if somebody would try to replicate all or part of a product, but I'd say for part of the total to see numbers more in the billion range would not be surprising.

All right, that's helpful. Pierre, I believe you mentioned that at this point, here we sit on July 31st, you have 70% of orders already received to meet your second half objectives. I'm just curious, how does that stand in prior years in terms of the percent of orders that you would already have in-house? Is that somewhat typical or is that higher than the normal sort of percentages? It

is the same as last year, which was a very strong year. So I would say the last two years, we reached that 70% number. Usually by this time of the year, we were about 50, 40, 40 to 50%, maybe 40% range at this time of the year. Last year for the first time, we hit the 70% range, which was positive and resulted into a very strong second half. Once again this year, we are the same place. So we view that as a positive versus a normalized year.

We do have a question from the line of PJ Juwakar with Citi. Your line is open.

Hi, good morning. Given the delayed planting, inventory is in the channel, question on that. If I look at your inventories, they are up year over year, so like compared to second quarter of last year. So was there any missed early application that led to inventory increase? And where do we stand about inventories? The reason I'm asking is, couple of years ago, we had this inventory situation in Brazil. It was painful and took some long time to get that inventory down. So how do you compare that situation? Thank you.

Sure. So first of all, let me make a comment. Outside of North America, we are in low to normal level of inventories. So we currently have a situation. Brazil, actually, we have a new process in place, as we said before. I think it's the lowest ever level of inventory in the channel we are having. In other part of the world, we are under a more normal situation. We recognize that there was missed application in North America. We are taking that into account in our forecast for the rest of the year, where we have made plans which are contemplating not selling some product, which will already be in inventory at our customers or in the channel, or we have also accounted for returns. So that's the place where we are facing fundamental difference. I keep watching it. Mark, do you want to say?

Yeah. You know, PJ, the only nuance I would put to what Pierre said about the US is, you know, the US for us is really two core markets, what we call the heartlands, which is the Midwest, mainly row crop business, and then the horseshoe, which stretches all the way from California through the southern states up the East Coast.

I would say where we... ...the US and that part of the business.

Andrew,

when it comes to payments in the US, did you do that last time and what was...

Yeah, I...

...I think it's a good question. ...really just trying to support our... ...and what's been a tough year. No concerns about collect...

...it is not something we've done in the past, or we used to do, it was just exceptional to this, especially in the Midwest, customers...

...on

the

capital expansion in diamites. Just wondering, is that decision a function of sort of your assessment of how much incremental inventory you want to have for your own needs or is it a function of perhaps, as you referenced in the patent discussion, maybe extending some of the license agreements or creating new license agreements with other interested parties or is it a bit of both? And is this a significant capital expenditure? What time period would be over and potentially where would it be located?

The capex increase we are looking at... ...today are simply due to the fact that when we made our capital, three-year capital spend plan when we acquired the DuPont business, as you remember, we were forecasting a high single-digit growth rate for those products. We've been in the 15 to 25% range since the acquisition, so we are getting tight on capacity. Those are not big capacity. It's for part of the chain of manufacturing where we're doing it, especially including some of the intermediates. You're talking about tens of millions of dollars. You're not talking hundreds of millions of dollars for the one which are taking place potentially this year. And as we said before, from a location standpoint, we have a couple of locations, but as we said before, the idea for us is to manufacture as much as we can today outside of China, so those expansion will take place outside of China. It's not huge, but it's necessary to ensure we can keep on growing at the speed at which we are growing.

And if I could just follow up, there's been a lot written recently about armyworm infestation in new geographies. I would assume that is an attractive opportunity for your diamides portfolio. So is that something that you've already contemplated as we think about your long-term growth rate, or would that be incremental?

Yes, it definitely is. The diamides are right at the top of the tree when it comes to impacting fall armyworm. We've seen the growth of this pest in India. We see it in China, and it's now moving through Southeast Asia.

And we've seen it in Australia, and in North America. We've seen it in the United States and in Washington. We've seen it in the United States. We've seen it in the United States,

but we believe there's more upside as this pest becomes more prevalent in South Asia.

Ladies and gentlemen, hi. We would ask that you please limit yourself to one question now. Joel Jackson with BMO Capital Mark.

The pressure down on the market by North America, as we said. So, due to us, if you look at the disproportionate strength of our business versus many companies outside of North America, plus the... We do have a very balanced crop profile with lots of specialty crops. And it could impact other competitors. It is a bit of a headwind, but you know what? We are very well positioned to compensate that, either by going more into specialty crops in North America, or by using the strength of our business in places like Brazil, Latin America, or India. Remember, as we said, we only do 25% of our business in North America. So, all in all, it is balancing out quite well for us.

Next, we go to line of Don Carson with Susquehanna Financial. Please go ahead.

Mark, a question for you on these commercial arrangements. You are negotiating with other parties, you say, out of the 50 now. What is the margin profitability on that? And then, as you bifurcate that into supplying generic AIs post-patent, what is the margin implications for that versus selling your own branded product?

So, Don, we do not obviously give out the margin expectations, but what I put in my prepared remarks were the fact that when we have these agreements and we make these sales, they are not EBITDA dilutive to our overall business. So, when you think about it, they are a highly profitable marketing exercise for us. Now, on a pricing standpoint, again, I am not going to disclose the types of conditions we have in these various contracts, but they are very long-term in nature. And obviously, the prices that we agreed with our third parties allow them to make a more than adequate margin on their sales. So, both parties are compensated for what we are doing in the marketplace. So, the bottom line is these are highly attractive relationships for us and our third-party partners, and they are there for the long term.

Let me quantify a bit by using information we have already shared with you. As you know, we do have, depending upon the quarters, an EBITDA margin for this business in the 27-28%. This EBITDA margin, of course, is driven, and we've said that when we made the acquisition of DuPont with the diamides, which are expected to be north of 30% from the EBITDA margin. That's what we are able, through this process, to protect. So, we are selling this product, the active part, to a partner, and it's

generally not something that we would be able to do. Thank you. Just one last one on the

data. As you know, the data that already exists for these products, and FMC's historical approach to reengineering the chain and finding new manufacturing partners, how should we think about the five- to ten-year opportunity for bringing down the cost of manufacturing and lower market prices, so basically protecting the growth rate and protecting the EBITDA's margin expansion over time?

We have our whole engineering group.

In the world, these molecules are highly valued.

Now, we're growing the

market at the right price. I don't see that changing in the near term at all. So, whatever we get in terms of manufacturing, things over the midterm will stay within FMC.

And we've already done in two years, multiple debottle making, brought new partners into the process. So, we are already actively increasing capacity at very low cost. You've not seen a increase so far in capital spending, despite the fact that we've already increased our capacity in a significant way for the AMI. So, your point is correct. For both Sires Appear and Rolex Appear, we are doing it and intend to continue.

And your range for the year at one.

So, I've been doing that for years now, and I think it's been the same thing year after year, which means usually you start your big project. Lots of your big projects are starting with the beginning of the year when you start with the new capital spending. So, you usually have a process where there is a lot of planning and engineering study, which do not represent a lot of spending, and then it accelerates by the middle of the year when things are already put in place and you start to spend the cash. So, I don't think there is anything abnormal. I must say that 70 or 80% of my years in the industry, I've always seen back and loaded, big engineering product and capital expenditure. I think for next year, today, we've not been yet through the process. We believe we'll have a higher capital spent.

Okay. Yeah, Kevin, the only thing...

That's all the time that we have for the call today. Thank you for a good day.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude... ...for your participation. You may now disconnect.