Arkema S/Adr

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to our CHEMAS full-year 2024 results conference call. With me today are Marie-Josée Doncion, our CFO, and also the investor relations team. As always, the slides used during this webcast are available on our website, and together with Marie-Josée, we'll be available to answer your question at the end of the presentation, as usual. In 2024, Arkema delivered a solid set of results within the range of the full year guidance we gave a year ago, and in a macroeconomic environment that you perfectly know, which eventually remains challenging throughout the whole year. In this context, our teams demonstrated their commitment and their agility, working actively to manage the short term as best as possible, and also continuing to implement with a high level of execution the major projects which will contribute to accelerate the growth of the company in the future. I know many of you are already focused on 2025 and we'll talk about the outlook later, but it's important to appreciate the robustness of our 2024 performance. We proved again to be among the most resilient in our industry. as the slide number six of the deck shows, and this in very different types of environment. This indeed values the strategic and operational work we have accomplished over the past several years. So here are some key points of last year I'd like to share with you. First of all, the group delivered the growth with an EBITDA of 1.2%. 53 billion euros in 2024, up 2% year-on-year. This result was driven, first of all, by the adhesive solution segment, which has increased its EBITDA by more than 8%, reaching a record high EBITDA margin of 15.1% to be compared with 14% a year ago. This quite encouraging performance was delivered in an overall low-volume environment, like for all our business, reflecting all the work done on the value pricing, the strict management of operations, and also the benefit from recent synergies, including Ashland, which is a good illustration of the one-Archema combined approach, in this case applied on pressure-sensitive adhesives. Secondly, the advanced material segment delivered a robust 20% EBITDA margin with significant improvement potential ahead and primarily supported by the overall good growth of high-performance polymers. The main drivers last year were the innovation and new business development in applications linked to sustainable megatrends, for example, in sports and in batteries, Also, PRAMs promising first full-year contribution and the expansion for more efficient building of fluorospecialties with low emissive impact. On the other hand, performance indices were down, but this was compared to high base last year and impacted by the year before and impacted by a few technical hurdles like the millennium flooding of our site in Lisbon. Concerning cutting solutions to constructed views, downstream activities improved compared to last year, in particular thanks to our strong development in Asia, namely in electronics and industrial cuttings market. But this was offset by upstream acrylics, low cycle condition, which we experienced in Europe and U.S. You have more detail on this segment in the press release and in the slide, and I will be certainly happy to answer any of the questions you may have on the last year's performance. Another highlight of the year was our EBITDA margin, which tended at 16.1%, slightly up compared to last year. This figure illustrates the strength of the specialty materials portfolio we have built over the years, focusing more and more on high-performance, sustainable solutions. It's also the result of our value pricing and our strict discipline on operational costs. Thanks to our cost-cutting initiative, we have been able to offset around half of the inflation, which was rather high last year, in line with our target to achieve €250 million of annualized cost savings, both fixed costs and variable costs, by 2028. has also benefited this year from its well-balanced geographical footprint. Each of our main regions now represents more or less one-third of our sales in Asia, with our fastest-growing region in 2024. So we have reached the balance we wanted to reach, one-third, one-third, one-third. This underlines the acceleration of the group in the most dynamic region, which will be further supported by the progressive contribution of our major growth project, essentially located in Asia and North America. Most of you already have this project well in mind, but as a reminder, we put that list on the slide 11 of the deck, and you will notice that we added the PVDF expansion in the U.S. that we announced yesterday. You may have also some questions. We reviewed several options. as indicated during our 2023 CMD with regard to PVDF in the U.S. And finally, we have decided to take a wise and step-by-step approach to match market development. We start with a 15% capacity increase in our second-largest PVDF site in the world, a high-return project with a limited investment of $20 million U.S., which will enable us to follow the evolution of the demand for innovative PVDF grades, notably in heavy and semiconductor markets. Among these major projects, let me highlight also the ramping up of our Singapore plant for biosource polymer, the new 1233 ZD unit in the U.S. that is starting just right now, the PM acquisition, which should deliver another strong growth in 2025, supported, for example, by the promising development of ultra-thin films for smartphones, and finally, the DAO acquisition, which was closed end of last year, and whose integration so far is starting well. They are all quite attractive from a financial standpoint. They leverage Arkema's differentiated positioning and will be supported for a large part by the Megatrends. As importantly, the cash to fund this project has almost being fully spent as of end of 2024. We made a simulation taking into account the ramping up of this project and the demand dynamic of its region expected in the coming years. And as explained in the slide, we could foresee a further evolution of our geographical footprint in the long run, with North America to represent around 40% of our total sales, Asia and the rest of the world around 35%, which Europe could be diluted to around 25% of our total sales. This measure project will contribute up to more than 400 million euros of additional EBITDA in the next four years, as explained in the slide 10 of the deck. 100 million euros of additional EBITDA being the estimate we confirmed for this year. I also wanted to quickly highlight some of our CSR results, where we made good progress overall in 2024. This is the case for decarbonization, where the group's numerous initiatives to reduce its carbon footprint are paying off, for instance, with the signing of new long-term agreements for renewable energy in China and in the US. We are also well ahead of our 2030 target for scope-free emissions, validated by SBTI, So we have decided to strengthen our mission to 67% reduction by 2030 against 54% previously. Another key priority for Arkebar is, as you know, to further increase diversity among the employees, including the share of women in management positions. On this last element, we have decided to increase the target from 30% to 35% in 2030. back on the speed of our progress in the area so far. As a result of our solid financial performance in 2024 and the most confidence in Arkema's growth prospect, a dividend of 3.60 euros per share will be proposed as the next HGM, up almost 3% compared to last year, and in line with our progressive dividend growth strategy. This also represents a payout ratio of 44%, which is fully in line, as you know, with our long-term targets. I will come back to the outlook at the end of the presentation, but now I would like to hand it over to Marie-Josée, who will review in more detail our Q4 and full year results.

Thank you, Thierry. Let me start with the revenues. Arcana Group sales amounted to €9.5 billion in 2024, quite stable year-on-year. In fact, volumes were up. 2.4%, which corresponds to a volume growth of more than 3% in specialty materials in one hand, and a volume reduction in refrigerant gases in line with the quota reductions in the U.S. and Europe on the other hand. In a context of weak demand, specialty materials benefited from more favorable market trends in sports, packaging, batteries, and energy, while construction stabilized at a low point, and automotive faced several destocking waves. Price effect on sales was a negative 3% in line with the evolution of raw material prices overall. The scope effect at 2% reflected essentially the integration of PI advanced materials. And finally, the currency effect at minus 1% reflected the depreciation relative to euro of several Latin American currencies and the Chinese yuan, while in fact the US dollar remains stable in average for 24 compared to 23. As presented by Thierry, the group EBDA came at 1.53 billion, up 2% year-on-year, and our EBDA margins stood at 16.1%, reflecting our efforts to maintain both the solid pricing and cost discipline. Looking at Q4 specifically, Bostik delivered an EBDA of €91 million, quite resilient pricing in a low-volume environment. Advanced materials delivered 166 million, up 11% year-on-year, mainly driven by high-performance polymers in Asia and by PI advanced materials consolidation. Coating solutions Q4 EBDA was down to 54 million euros, impacted by low cycle margins in upstream acrylics, where downstream activities were stabled. And finally, EBITDA in intermediates was down at 24 million euros versus a high comparison base in refrigerant gases in Q4 last year. Please note that we also recorded two specific one-offs in Q4, namely the cost of acquisition of Dow Adhesives for 15 million euros and the IFRS 2 charge linked to the capital increase reserved to employees for 15 million euros also. Both items were reported as non-recurring items in Q4. Now, back on the full year basis, with recurring depreciation and amortization of €637 million in Q4, including the impact of PI advanced materials consolidations and that of organic project startup, the recurring EBIT amounted to €895 million, and this corresponds to a recurring EBIT margin of 9.4%. A world of non-recurring items, which amounted to €155 million for the year. They included €40 million Singapore startup costs, €30 million related to M&A costs, in particular the acquisition of Dow. Some restructuring charges for roughly €25 million, and various provisions, notably regulatory and environmental yields for €30 million. Financial expenses were stable at €73 million, as well as our average tax rate, which remains stable at broadly 22% of our recurring EBIT. All in all, adjusted net income came in at €616 million, which corresponds to €8.23 per share. Moving on to cash flow, we delivered a recurring cash flow of 419 million euros in 24. This included a spend in capital expenditure for a total of 761 million, in line with our guidance and reflecting the ramp-up of our major CAPEX projects. Looking at 25 and further, the group plans for a lower CAPEX intensity, as you know. We indeed expect an annual CAPEX spend comprised between 650 and €700 million over the period of 2025 to 2028. Working capital remains well controlled. The working capital ratio on annualized sales standing at 13.8%. Free cash flow amounted to €358 million, including a non-recurring outflow of €61 million, linked primarily, as you know, to the startup costs of our Singapore platform, as well as some restructuring costs. Taking into account the net cash outflow of 177 million from the portfolio management operations linked to the acquisition of DAOs laminating adhesives, our camera group net debt stood at 3.2 billion euros, including 700 million of hybrid bonds. The group continues, therefore, to enjoy a strong balance sheet with a net debt to last 12 multi-bid buy ratio of 2.1 times. Thank you for your attention. And I will now hand it over back to Thierry.

Thank you, Marie-Josée, for all this explanation. So now I will comment a little bit on the outlook. So as we say in our press release, the demand at the beginning of 2025 is relatively soft overall. Of course, there are some specific areas like electronics, battery, and sports continuing to be well-oriented. As you know, we have a good indicator in the company, which is the adhesives, and this is quite consistent with what our competitors publish in this area. We see some softness where last year it was really very resilient and very performing in a challenging environment. So our interpretation is that the joke Current geopolitical context with all this discussion around the tariff is driving our customer to wait and see, which will not be long-lasting, but this is what we see in this first quarter. So in this context, we guided an EBITDA level in the first quarter slightly below the performance of last year, as you could see, which If we follow the publication of our peers, including this morning, this compares well to them and confirms our stronger resilience. In the rest of the year, beyond the evolution, the clarification of this tariff topic and the evolution of the macro, we will focus on our setup, as usual, and our project, which is really the DNA of the company. And we will benefit from the progressive ramp-up of our major projects and our specialty materials. We should contribute around 100 million euros of additional EBITDA, which is quite significant. On the other side, the intermediate segment EBITDA is expected to decrease by roughly 30 million euros, mostly reflecting the impact of the quota's reduction in refrigerant. On the full year... will benefit from our balance geographical footprint serving the region from the region. So far what we have seen even in the beginning of the year is that our Asia cells are still dynamic. So this is consistent with this tariff story. This is Europe and U.S. which are lagging. But certainly the fact to be so balanced as Arkema is an advantage in the volatile world of today. Besides, we plan to reinforce our initiatives on our operational costs, as we did last year and the years before, and to continue to strictly manage our working capital. So if we take all these elements into account, so we plan to grow this year in 2025, and to reach a level between 1.53, which is the level of this year, up to 1.67 billion euros. The high point of the range, obviously, assumes a notable improvement of the macroeconomic conditions progressively in the year. In terms of cash flow, we wanted to update you. So we plan to significantly increase our recurring cash flow compared to last year to reach around 600 million euros, driven by lower capex. And year on year, last year was... peak year in terms of capex and we guide it to lower capex in 2025. So driven by lower capex, our EBITDA growth and also a free control of our working capital. In parallel, we continue to implement our 2028 roadmap. We have a lot of projects which need to be executed at the highest level of quality. This will help to develop high-performance specialty materials with this focus on sustainability and innovation to answer our customer needs for less carbon-intensive solutions. So this is what I wanted to comment with regard to the outlook, and thank you for your attention. And together with Marie-Josée, we are ready to answer your questions.

Thank you. If you wish to ask a question over the phone, please press star 1. on your telephone keypad. If you wish to withdraw your question, please press star 2. Again, please press star 1 on your telephone to enter the question queue and wait for your name to be announced. The first question is from Aaron Ciccarelli of Barenberg. Please go ahead.

Hello, good morning. Hello, Terry. Hello, Maria Giuseppe. I have three questions, please. My first one is on your full year 25 guidance, specifically on the lower end of your target. Could you help me understand a little bit the assumption you're making in place? In this scenario, are you still assuming around 100 million contributions from new projects, or is there any assumption from a business unit beside intermediates to decline? The second question is on coating solutions. It would be great if you can help me reconcile a little bit the strength in the downstream business with the weakness in the upstream acrylics. Is this a problem of supply? If this is a problem of supply, where does this come from at this stage? My final one is on the adhesive solutions business. Historically, you have not been very pushy, let's say, on price increases. Raw materials are not declining anymore, but clearly demand remains relatively soft. Would you expect pricing to be down on a year-over-year basis in 2025? Thank you.

Thank you for your question.

I will start with the last one because I'm surprised on your comment on the On price increase, I think on the contrary, we have done very good in value pricing. Certainly, there is an influence of raw materials, but I would like to congratulate our team for the jobs they have done in adhesive value pricing. Don't forget that we started, when we bought Bostik in early 2015, we started with an EBITDA margin of 10%. We are now at 15% of EBITDA margin, and this has come a lot with our ability to pass price increase superior to raw materials and to have an evolution of the product mix, which is very favorable. So, no, I don't support your comment. On the contrary, we do a good job, and hopefully the net pricing in 2025, despite the low, macroeconomics that you should not forget, which influence everyone. I think we expect a net pricing a little bit positive thanks to the work on the product mix on the dynamic pricing adjustment. But at the end, it comes from innovation and differentiation. So this is a starting point. And when I look at the quality of the portfolio in a day-to-day compared to what it has been, I'm very impressed by the job done by the team. So I think it goes in the right direction. On the four-year guidance, I will not comment every element, every point of the range. Obviously, it's clear that you have a little bit of sensitivity of the 100 million, to the macro because 100 million, this is not because you put a capex that you got the EBITDA. This is because you developed yourself and you can supply it from the capex. So obviously the macro has some influence on the project. The important point is that after a growth in 24 that not many of our peers have delivered, that we have delivered, we expect again growth in 25. The magnitude will depend on the evolution of the macro. If the macro remains quite challenging with no clarification of tariffs, etc., it's clear that the U.S. and Europe will suffer more, and we are the one of the guidance. And if the macro is rebounding step by step, as some of you can expect, then maybe you can share your assumption. After, in the chemical industry, two years of soft demand. I think we can go up to 1.67. What we try to do also, whatever the macro, is to focus on our self-help, and we believe that compared to most of our peers, we will again deliver a superior performance versus last year. We believe that with the uncertainty on the macro 150 million euros, the range, I don't know your feeling, but is reasonable. I think and it gives you a good transparency on what we think. On coating solution, I imagine your question is more on the acrylic upstream than on the downstream. Downstream, I think we did well last year. It's clear that we are at the low point of the cycle. On coating solution, as you know, this is the acrylic presence in Europe And the U.S., it's not a matter of supply. Supply has not increased. It's a matter of demand. We have been in a world of low demand, as you know, in 23 and 24, and acrylics have gone down to a low cycle. But we try to stay positive, and we consider it in the midterm as an upside for the company. We know we underperform in acrylics. There is... as something like €100 million plus of EBITDA, which is missing compared to normalized conditions in Europe and the U.S. It will come back one day. The question is when. We don't know with the lack of visibility on the macro, but one day it will come, and then it's an upside that we'll be able to catch. But it's not a matter of supply.

Thank you. Just a clarification. The impact from intermediate is expected 30 million, 3-0, is that correct?

Yes, around 3-0, around.

Okay, thank you very much.

The next question is from Matthew Yates of Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Hey, afternoon, everyone. I had a couple of questions for Marie-José, really. Thank you for breaking down those 155 million of non-recurring items. That was going to be one of my questions. When we look into 2025, can you talk a little bit about what items will still be there next year? Are we done now with the Singapore costs? I guess M&A depends what you do, but things like restructuring, environmental, do those repeat as a normal course of business? And then there's somewhat of a sort of related follow-up. When you talk about 600 million of recurring cash flow, What is the number that your IFRS accounts will actually show this time next year? I think you stopped talking about exceptional capex at the last SIMD. We removed that definition, but again, probably related to those non-recurring items in the P&L. What are the other things that may sort of mean that $600 million of free cash flow number is not exactly what's reported? Thank you.

Thank you, Matthew. So I confirmed that the non-recurring was in particular impacted in 24 by really two large items, which are the startup costs of Singapore site for roughly 40 million euros, as well as the cost of M&A transactions. notably the Dow transaction for overall 30 million euros in PNL. Both items, actually, you find them back in cash. The first one in the non-recurring cash flow, the second one in the M&A cash flow in the transactional cost of transactions cash flow. So I would think, you know, when I go back in history and when I joined, I guess our more historical level of non-recurring recurring is more in the range of 60 million, I would say. So, you know, you can never predict the events that are going to happen, but this would be something that we think makes sense. Looking at the 600 million target of recurring cash flow for next year, I think it's a robust target. It assumes, let's say, you know, the underlying EBITDA we are forecasting. We have, you know, decreased the cap expense as commented by Thierry. We've got, let's say, our usual financial cash out and tax cash out. So, you know, assuming the working capital remains under control, it's, let's say, the normal IFRS cash flow generation.

So in summary, so it's 600 million minus, for the sake of argument, 60 million of exceptional items is the way to think about that.

You could read it like that, yes.

Perfect. Thank you.

The next question is from Tom Rigglesworth of Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. Two questions, if I may. The first one on the new projects and their ramp up. In particular, the PA11 plant post the stop, not the stop, you know, the re-ramp that took place at the end of last year. What's the current sales rate out of that facility versus the expected? I think it's 300 million euros of sales at run rate that we're expecting. Second question, actually, on advanced materials. So can you just give us a kind of a global picture of PVDF? Are you building the new capacity in the U.S. because the incentive pricing is there, or is this a preemptive move ahead of anticipated demand? And the third question is on fluorogases in intermediate form. obviously there's a 30 million euro reset this year, but is there, you know, how can you grow that business? Will the market normalize back to a higher level of its own accord, or will you look to drive growth through pricing different products? Thank you.

Okay, thank you for this question. So with regard to polyamide 11, First of all, we have a nice growth so far. To start to generate EBITDA, we need to go beyond the break-even point of a new big plant. This is why even if the sales increase will be rather significant on the P11, thanks to our innovation in many in many businesses which ask for sustainability, among the 100, this would be one project among 10. So the EBITDA, it's not directly your question, but it was important to mention this, the EBITDA contribution would be, I don't say that you take 10 projects divided by 10 for the 100, They are all in the same kind of order of magnitude, including PA levels. So, in fact, for every one pup of this kind of plant, you have a little bit of disconnect in terms of EBITDA contribution between the cells, which will grow quite significantly, but you need first to reach a breakeven, and then beyond the breakeven, you start to deliver the EBITDA, and so it becomes exponential at a certain point. Okay. So to answer your question on the sales, already the sales rate will show quite a good growth. We say to ramp up 100% on Singapore, it will take five years, okay? But it will not be linear. This means the growth of the first years in order to exceed the breakeven will be more important than the growth of the last years, okay? you take a line error and you put a little bit more weight on the first two years. On advanced materials, it's a very nice project because which will get sort of a two-year payback, first of all. It's not based on a sort of preemptive move, for example, on EV, which is certainly your underlying questions, because... Our growth rate in the U.S. on PVDF over the past 20 years has been about 5%. Okay, so here we have 15%. So if you have a little bit of battery once we start, you see that you can really see rather quickly this new capacity. As a side, the cost for this new capacity compared to what is the benchmark is quite low because we have found a very smart way to increase our capacity without spending too much in capex. So it's quite, let's say, solid in terms of business case. So it's not incentivized. It's not preemptive. It's really on our own. It's quite a good value for what we can produce, completely consistent with the past growth. Okay, so it's quite a nice project. And this is in the spirit of what we say after the capital market day. On the capital market day, it was a time where EV was really expected to go everywhere very quick. Now the picture is different. It will come at a later stage. And we have been able to, after one year, one good year of source, to find a way, step by step, which really fitting well with our understanding of the market without taking any risk. On the fluorogases, in fact, the way you have to look at it is that we have more or less, let's say, stopped our investment for refrigerant as such. This means that all our investment, R&D, CAPEX, in fluorogases is on the for insulation, for batteries, for thermal management, et cetera. So they are in HPP, naturally, because they find really their home there, and they are growing there. So the growth is not small, but by definition, I would say, mechanically, the refrigerant, which is an intermediate, is following the quotas. So the contribution... We remain at a good level, but you will lose a little bit of momentum every year, which is what is happening certainly in 2025. This is why we guided.

Okay, great. Thank you, Terry. Very clear. You're welcome.

The next question is from Tony Jones of Redburn Atlantic. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning, everybody, and thanks for taking my questions. I've got two. Firstly, on growth projects, When you're deciding and budgeting to go ahead with these growth investments, how much visibility do you have on your demand? Are they usually offtake agreements with big customers or is it more speculative? And then secondly, on uses of cash, share price is now trading at book value today and you're not really getting much credit for the growth projects and acquisitions, sadly. Is it now time to rethink about a major stock buyback program, or is that just simply not going to happen? Thank you.

Okay. On the growth project, this is part of the game. I think you need really to predict in a world which is sometimes difficult to predict what what will be the growth in order to deliver the payback expected from this growth project. In fact, you have different kinds of growth projects. The first important thing is to add a portfolio of growth projects. This means some will deliver better than expected, some will deliver lower, at least at the beginning, but all in all, we deliver the trajectory of the portfolio of growth projects which we expected. Then you have different kinds of growth projects. You have like It's serving plenty of end markets. A lot of them are linked to sustainability, so they depend on the geopolitical and macroeconomic context, but it's beyond that. There is a megatrend, which is very strong, where P11 is a unique product, and then we have confidence on the fact that whatever the macro were able to deliver enough growth to sustain this project. So there is a part of better in eCAPEX, but it's far beyond the macro. There are plenty of new business development and innovative projects behind that, and this is why we build our confidence. Now, for example, maybe sports will deliver quicker than expected. Maybe EV vehicles will deliver. It will take more time, et cetera. Now you have a project like the 1233ZD in HFO fluorogases for housing energy efficiency. This is linked to legislation. So it's not depending so much on the macro. It's depending on the evolution of the legislation, which is not for sure. Then a third one is the partnership with Nutrien on HF. It's backward integration. So this means that we know for sure that we will benefit on the integration, because today we buy outside. So all these projects are different rational, but at the end of the day, we have enough visibility, not necessarily on the macro, but on the drivers, in order to make us on the portfolio of project, where we accept that some project will over-deliver, some under-deliver, to deliver altogether what was expected. Different question on the share buyback, and I think I've made sometimes some kind of answer. Our return to shareholders, we have decided that for long, is based mostly on the dividend policy, which is a nice one, as you could see. It has increased very significantly. It represents this year 44% payout, so it's a lot for the company, a company which is still... Driving it goes with significant organic capex. We have plenty of ideas and some button acquisition. So we have two times EBITDA in terms of debt. So obviously there is no place for share buyback and certainly massive share buyback. So this is the way. It's very transparent, very clear, very consistent year after year. Now if we have a disposal as we did, for example, for PMMA, there will be room for share buyback. We did it a few years ago. So there is no taboo, but I think in terms of flexibility with the project we have, we place the card of a dividend, and we certainly don't want to create any step back on this component of Sharmaibat.

Thank you, Thierry. That's very helpful.

The next question is from Chitan Udeshi of J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead.

Yeah, hi, thanks. Actually, my questions are for Marie-Jose. First is, I saw there was a good step up in recurring DNA in Q4. Can you just give any guidance on what you think is the right number to look for in terms of recurring DNA for 2025? The second question was just a clarification on the recurring free cash flow again, just on Matt's point earlier. Can I confirm you don't include the lease costs in that number? So that comes below that recurring cash flow. Is that right?

So, in fact, you know, the IFRS 16 and that is recorded differently in the cash flow statements. So it is not actually per se a cash flow movement of the period reported here. So the 600 million euros free cash flow target do not take into account, let's say, the signature of a 10-year lease, for instance, that would impact the debt. We will only have in the cash flow, let's say, the yearly amount that we pay for the lease in question. Regarding the depreciation and amortization, in fact, we have the various assets that we have invested, and as Thierry mentioned, a number of those projects have been So typically if I look at the Singapore plant, we started the depreciation of the Singapore plant in 2024 and therefore you will have a full year impact in 2025. My expectation is that the depreciation and amortization is actually quite commensurate, you know, with a normative capex level. So I would think that, you know, 650 to 700 million euros being, let's say, the normative capex that we see as a baseline for the company, typically DNA should reach this type of magnitude level in the future. Makes total sense.

Understood. Thank you.

The next question is from Jean-Luc Romain of CIC Market Solutions. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Could you update us on the potential consequences of recently passed legislation on PFAS in France? I guess it's not a lot, but I would like to have a confirmation. Sure.

You have one question or you have another question?

Just one. Okay. Yes, there was a law on PFAS which was adopted in France in February 25. This concerns a sort of ban for PFAS, as you know, is a very large family. So substances in textile, cosmetics, ski wear, so very specific. And we are not at all supplying this kind of market. So for us, there is no impact.

Perfect. Thank you.

The next question is from Joe Hare of UBS. Please go ahead.

Yeah, good morning. Thanks for the presentation. Just had two questions. First of all, sorry, in your comments on the outlook, you mentioned the customers were holding back orders because of the uncertainty around tariffs. Could you give a little bit more details on that and what areas of the business you're seeing that most acutely in? And also just on cost savings, you're obviously targeting the $250 million by 2028. Do you see a need to increase that number going forward just given the current macro environment?

So Geoff, on the first one, geographically... certainly Europe and US. In fact, we had a good start in Asia. So we don't see any influence there. So it's really in these two parts of the world. From a business standpoint, I would say that the superior gross market is still going well. If I take one example, which is PM, for example, in electronics, actually, we have a good start of the year for PM. So it's more, I would say, in the more traditional business, which is a the main part of our business and of the business of chemical, even specialty chemical players. So it's a bit everywhere. And I would say this is why I mentioned the adhesives, because the adhesives is a good, let's say, indicator of what is the world. Because in adhesives, we don't lose market share. We are everywhere. So at the end, at the start of the year, we saw for Bostik. And Bostik, you saw the performance last year in a difficult market. We delivered superbly. So this means that this is why we see that our customers are not ordering as usual. And our interpretation, and maybe you will discuss with other players in the industry, is that if the tariff discussion is creating latency because they don't know. In fact, you order from one region and then you have a tariff. So what do you do? You need to get prepared for a way to do differently. So for me, I would put it on that. With regard to the cost, your question is wise, and it's a good question. Certainly we are trying to continue to work on our initiatives and ideas, and I would not be surprised that we deliver more than what we say. So our message is that don't be worried. We did deliver what we promised at the Capital Market Day, but already if you multiply, extrapolate what we did Last year, for the next year, you will see that we should be above, and we'll continue to find initiatives. But it's true that in our communication, you know, we have different styles of communication. We don't over-communicate on that, but clearly we certainly want to do more than what was announced at the Capital Market Day.

Okay, thank you very much.

The next question is from Laurent Favre of BMP Paribas. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning. Two questions, please. Thierry, the first one on PM. I think you mentioned that you got certifications for North American and European sales. I was wondering if you could talk about in which area in terms of end markets or end products we should be thinking of. That's the first one. And the second one, is on slide 10. I know it's a small difference, but at the Q3 stage, you were telling us that the bridge from 2024 to 2028 would be $440 million, and you added PVDF in the U.S., but you've moved to $400 million-plus. And I'm just wondering if you've made more conservative assumptions, or you just prefer to show us a round number. Thank you.

So, the second question is very easy. In fact, in the previous $440 million, You had the investment for decarbonization in France, which was not a gross capex. And we wanted in this presentation to show where were our gross capex. So we took it out, and which was around 20 million of EBITDA wide for PVDF. It's more 10 million. So in fact, we kept the same guidance. but with lower contribution because, in fact, PVDF, which is part of the work of sand decarbonization, as you know, is contributing less. So, in fact, it's the other way around. We are more aggressive on the guidance. With regard to PME, yes, it was, at least it confirmed what we had in mind. What we see is a rising demand for ultracine, polyimide film, including for smartphones. We see a good momentum. So there are some evolutions in smartphones which are good for PRAM for whatever reason. Because of the specification improvement of smartphone components, you have overheating issues. And for that, you need material like PRAM. So we are very happy about that. And PM is, as you know, a very intensive company. So they put their superior product range. And so this is one of the first reasons. And secondly, we start, but, you know, it takes some time, too, because there is a litigation time for when you go, you extend what you do in Asia to NA and to Europe. And we see a lot of potential with our teams. between Piam and Arkema's team to develop Piam's product in Europe and in NA. But I would say short-term, it's more the contribution of some new trends like this ultrasing theme.

And in Europe and North America, are we also looking at consumer electronics or is it other applications? No, no, it's the same.

Okay, thank you. But it's far beyond electronics. There are plenty of Piam has already in Asia, plenty of industrial... application that they have traditionally and also we are targeting battery which will be in the US and in Europe also.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

The next question is from Jaideep Pandya of Onfield Research. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Firstly is on sort of adhesives, but more broadly in the context of the construction chemicals industry. Theory, a lot of companies in the construction chemicals space, be it in roofing or are targeting now sort of the adhesive space. There's a lot of M&A that is going on on the light side construction space. How do you see the competitive landscape evolving from where you guys sit? Is there more competition, but on the other hand, also more opportunities? for adhesives to penetrate in the construction industry? And what happens with regards to M&A for yourselves? Are there more opportunities or are the multiples actually going up because there are more people willing to invest in this area now? That's my first question. A second question is around the shutdowns that we are hearing on and off, especially from American companies in Europe. How do you see the upstream raw material availability, especially properly on a longer-term basis for Europe? Is that an area of concern, or you see abundant supply and therefore we shouldn't worry about your acrylic assets in Europe? Thanks a lot.

Two good questions.

On the M&A, I would say it's not new. Some players are maybe different, but we have already seen the consolidation in the adhesive landscape, so we participate also to this evolutionary landscape on our product lines. This means the good thing in the adhesives and chemical construction is that you have plenty of product lines, and when you say there is new competitors or different competitors, in fact, we are not necessarily talking at all about the same product. So with regard to the product that we are making, We see a good stability of the big players. What is changing are the small players because you have some consolidation. We participate to the consolidation. You're right to say that roofing is a good opportunity for us to develop, and we are growing every year. It's not only in our construction. It's both in industrial adhesive and construction adhesive, by the way, because it depends where is the application. with the level of the supply chain we are positioned to, and we are positioned on both. So to make the story short, yes, it's an opportunity, the stability of big players on our own products, and the consolidation of the small players, and we participate. In Europe, yes, it's true to say that on the base chemicals, we see more emulsion than in Europe, is a point of attention. We don't think it will be an issue for acrylics. We will watch, but we don't think it's an issue for acrylics. But overall, if you believe, like I believe, that to be strong in specialty chemicals in Europe, you need to have a strong base of intermediates and a base of chemical products. It's an element of attention that we need to follow. Now, Arkema, as you know, you have followed us in 20 years. We are quite pragmatic. We are global players. We will adapt the company to what is sourcing available. Competitiveness is not only sourcing. It's competitiveness of the forcing. We have shown over the past year that we were able to be quite reactive and And basically, unfortunately, you see the evolution of the trend of sales of Arkema in percentage of the total sales. You see it, so it reflects the fact that even if Europe remains quite interesting in the long run, we'll be lower in terms of share in Europe and we'll be bigger in U.S. and in Asia. We have shown that in the past. We continue to show that. This is why we wanted to, let's say, I don't know if it is a guidance, but at least it gives you a forecast of what will be our sales per region in their own ground with 40% in North America and also 30% in Asia. So I think this means that Europe will decrease. It just means that if Europe is stable, because we will increase on the rest, it will continue to get diluted.

Thanks a lot.

The next question is from Ranulf Orr of Citi. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thanks for taking the question, too, please. Firstly, China acrylic spreads seem to have moved quite positively year to date. Is this something you're seeing? And if these spreads are maintained for the rest of the year, can you give an idea of the positive effects? an incremental earnings impact, you could see. And the second one is just on the outlook. Apologies if I missed it, so feel free to skip. But could you expand a little bit more on the Q1 outlook by division and the sequential EBITDA progressions?

Thank you. Okay.

So on the first one, the issues at ATAClinics are a bit better on the start of the year. We certainly don't extrapolate in China for acrylics, what is happening on two months on the full year, as we don't overreact when we see Europe and U.S. on the full year. So I think we try to stay moderate, but it's true that we have some positive. We guided, I think, very precisely on intermediate, around minus 30 million on the full year. So this includes... We'll see what the dynamics in acrylics, what the dynamics in fluoro. We have different scenarios for both of them, but all in all, we believe that 30 million is a good number for the two, but we'll not split between the two. With regard to Q1 by division, I think we already gave enough on the Q1. We'll certainly not do more than... We'll see where... I mean, every month there is a different momentum in each division, so I see what is important is what we say for the Q1 overall with different components. As I mentioned, qualitatively you see Asia better than U.S. and Europe, and by your business line, clearly acrylics and adhesives are lagging more than some others. And then on the polymer, you benefit from some businesses that export electronics. So again, that is changing a little bit every month. What is important is you got a good forecast for the QEON for the full year. I think it's a level of granularity that not everybody is giving to you. So I think we are good in terms of transparency. Thank you.

You're welcome.

This was the last question. I turn back the conference over to the speakers for any closing remarks.

Okay, so I would like to thank all of you for all your questions, which are already very interesting. And as I mentioned at the beginning, the Investoration Team is at your disposal. If you have any further questions, you want to deep dive into questions one topic or another topic. And together with Marie-Josée and the team, we look forward to seeing some of you during the roadshows. Thank you.