Brambles Ltd Ord

Good morning, everyone. I'd like to welcome you to Bramble's full year results presentation for FY24. I'll start this morning by presenting an overview of our performance for the year, provide further details on our newly announced capital management initiatives and our revised investor value proposition. Then I'll touch on the operating environment, update on our transformation programme and outlook for FY25 before handing over to Joaquin for a detailed review of our financials. Beginning on slide three and our highlights for the year, in FY24, our performance was strong across all aspects of the business. The financial results delivered on our investor value proposition were sales revenue growth of 7%, significant operating leverage, and a material improvement in free cash flow generation. Underlying profit growth of 17% and free cash flow before dividends of US$882.8 million were both ahead of our FY24 guidance. This reflected ongoing commercial discipline to recover the cost to serve and structural improvements in asset efficiency during the year. These results underpinned the 30% uplift in total dividends, which increased to 34 US cents per share in FY24 and resulted in a dividend yield of 3%. I'm equally proud of the improvements we've made to our business fundamentals through our transformation program. These achievements strengthen our competitive advantage and value creation potential into the future and include significant improvements to our customer experience in all regions, translating to increases in net promoter scores, the reinforcement of our leading sustainability credentials as we progress towards our FY25 sustainability targets, and a step change in the capital intensity of our business, which has led to the decision to undertake capital management initiatives in FY25. Turning to slide four. Before I talk about the FY24 operating environment and performance, I'd like to go through our newly announced capital management initiatives and our revised investor value proposition over the next two slides. The improvement in the capital intensity of our business is evident in the material increase in our free cash flow generation and the expectation of this continuing into FY25. Combined with the current leverage position of 1.12 times net debt to EBITDA, this improvement has led to the two capital management initiatives we have announced today. The first being to increase the target dividend payout range from 45% to 60% currently to 50% to 70% from FY25. This dividend policy provides flexibility and creates a strong link between the performance of the business over time and annual cash returns to our shareholders. Our second initiative is an on-market share buyback of up to US$500 million in FY25, subject to market conditions. Both of these initiatives are aligned with the capital allocation framework, which now forms part of our investor value proposition outlined on slide five. Most of you will be familiar with the left-hand side of this graphic, which articulates the value creation model of our business. This centres on our circular share and reuse model that leverages our network advantage and expertise to achieve operational and asset efficiencies that in turn generate free cash flow we can use to fund growth and shareholder returns. With the structural increase in free cash flow generation, we have embedded our capital allocation framework into our investor value proposition, which seeks to maximise shareholder value through an active and disciplined approach to allocating capital. Under this framework, we will continue to prioritise reinvestment in the business to fund growth and initiatives that optimise and transform our operations. These investments are expected to consistently deliver annual revenue growth in the mid single digits with operating leverage and strong cash flow generation. When assessing growth options, we will consider both organic and inorganic opportunities. However, given our leading market position in all regions, we expect inorganic growth initiatives to be limited and we will maintain a disciplined approach to evaluating such opportunities. Maintaining a strong balance sheet continues to be a priority and we have set a medium term net debt to EBITDA target of between 1.5 to 2 times. We believe this is a prudent and optimal level of leverage for our business, which also supports our investment grade credit rating. After funding reinvestment in the business and maintaining a strong balance sheet, we will focus on shareholder returns. firstly through sustainable dividends in line with our revised policy, and secondly through the deployment of surplus capital to optimise our capital structure and create incremental shareholder value. This strategy has led to our decision today to undertake an on-market buyback in FY25. By allocating capital in accordance with this framework, we expect to deliver total value for shareholders in excess of 10% per annum while maintaining group ROCE in the high teens. Moving to the next slide and back to the FY24 operating environment. Our FY24 results were delivered in markedly different operating conditions to those experienced over the last few years. This included inventory optimisation across retailer and manufacturer supply chains in Europe and North America, which we now believe to be largely complete. During the year, the overall rate of input cost inflation moderated from the extraordinary highs of the last few years. This was reflected in lumber and fuel deflation in all markets and lower transport costs in the US. the capital cost of new pallets has also fallen 15% on the prior year, although it remains higher than historic levels. While these dynamics saw the rate of price growth moderate from prior year levels, we continue to exercise commercial discipline and took price in the year to recover cost-to-serve increases, largely related to labour inflation, which persisted in all markets. Inventory optimization contributed to more efficient pallet dynamics, primarily due to widespread pallet availability increases across the industry, as retailers and manufacturers reduced pallet balances to near pre-COVID levels in Europe and North America. This led to 12 million pallets returning back to our network in these markets. Combined with our ongoing efforts in asset efficiency, this supported the significant improvement in pallet cycle times and loss rates within customer supply chains in FY24. These more efficient pallet dynamics materially improved our capital efficiency with 15 million fewer new pallet purchases during the year. Importantly, the capital efficiency benefits are materially higher than the increase in operating costs associated with higher pallet returns and recoveries. With improving pallet availability, our business was able to pursue and win new business during the year. However, dual sourcing initiatives by some larger customers offset contributions from new contract wins in the period. while declining whitewood prices delayed the decision to convert to pooling by some prospective customers. In addition to weak macroeconomic conditions and the impact of inventory optimization, these factors limited our volume growth in the year. Turning to the next slide. The progress we've made with transformation has been critical in creating stability and increasing our resilience in this evolving operating landscape. Among our key achievements have been those directly benefiting our customers. These include improving service levels and investing in the quality of our pool to reinforce the fundamentals of our customer value proposition. Delivering on these core elements of our proposition has been a key driver of the improvement to our customer metrics, including Net Promoter Score, which increased materially across all regions. Our teams remain focused on improving the customer experience through faster resolution of customer queries, adding digital capabilities such as real-time delivery notifications to our customer portals, and leveraging our evolving data analytics capability to progressively roll out proactive ordering. Our automation investments are delivering cost savings whilst also improving the efficiency, quality, and safety performance across our operations. Importantly, they have added critical capacity across our network, which enabled us to absorb the high volume of pallet returns from inventory optimization and continue delivering for our customers. Through structural changes made to how we collect, repair and incentivise the efficient use of our assets, we recovered and salvaged an additional 16 million pallets in FY24. This is a substantial improvement on the strong result of 10 million pallets achieved in FY23. These processes and commercial terms are now embedded across the business and crucially underpin our confidence in the structural improvements we have made to asset efficiency and free cash flow generation. As we optimize the performance of our business, we're also reinvesting to shape the brambles of the future through our digital transformation. our data analytics capabilities are now an integral part of our organization, and we continue to test, learn, and adapt our approach to deploying and extracting value from different asset tracking technologies. You will see some of our achievements outlined in the slide, but the key thing I want to highlight is that our digital capabilities have been a critical enabler of our customer, commercial, and asset productivity achievements this year. At our investor day in September, we will take the opportunity to detail the ways in which our digital transformation has improved our business, the value it has created and how it is setting us up for future success. Turning to our transformation scorecard on the next slide, you'll see many of our metrics are complete while others are progressing and remain on track. This has supported the business and been a key driver of our financial and operational success over the last few years. However, adverse operating conditions have impacted the progress on some metrics, and we continue to implement various initiatives to address those shortfalls. In customer, Joaquin will cover our volume performance in more detail, so I'll move straight to product quality. Here, the defects per million pallets improved by 10% against the FY20 baseline, but this remains 3% behind target. There are plans in place to improve controls in a number of plants to deliver the appropriate pallet quality to customers. Despite the benefits from pallet durability initiatives, pallets have spent an extended period in the supply chain, leading to higher damage rates in FY24. As a result, we've been challenged on our target to reduce the pallet damage ratio by 75 basis points year on year through FY25. However, we expect ongoing durability initiatives and improving cycle times to support efforts to reduce damage rate. Finally, looking at business excellence, we've continued to make progress towards our target of at least 40% of women in management roles. with female representation now at 37.5%. This represents a six-point improvement since FY21. However, we are tracking below target and have strategies in place to hire, retain and engage female employees to progress towards achieving our target. The next slide outlines the pathways to achieve our FY25 target of reducing uncompensated pallet losses by 30% and implementing automated repair processes across our service centres. Starting with uncompensated pallet losses, you can see the significant improvement achieved this year, which is also the first reduction in uncompensated losses since FY16. This improvement was driven by greater pallet availability, leading to lower unauthorised reuse and loss rates, as well as asset efficiency initiatives that increased collections and shortened cycle times. Notwithstanding these improvements, we are currently tracking below the target, but our strong exit rate in the second half of FY24 and continued benefits from asset productivity initiatives underpin our expectation of achieving this target by the end of FY25. Moving to automation, our FY25 target for automated repair installations across the network was revised from 70 to 50 sites in FY23, following a site-by-site return assessment and exercising capital allocation discipline. We implemented eight automated repair processes in FY24 and expect to implement 36 by the end of FY25. However, we continue to invest in other efficiency and supply chain initiatives to compensate for the returns not generated from the sites where automated repair process is no longer being pursued. Moving to slide 10, which outlines some of our sustainability achievements for the year. During FY24, we made considerable progress against our FY25 sustainability targets, moving ever closer towards our ambitious regenerative vision. We are proud to operate a circular business that supports the reduction of emissions in thousands of customer supply chains across the world. In FY24, working with our customers and partners, we collectively removed 1.9 megatons of CO2 emissions. Decarbonizing our own supply chain also remains a core focus for our low carbon operations. Across our entire value chain, representing scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, we have achieved a 7.9% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions against FY23 and a 15% reduction on our FY20 baseline. We continue to track ahead of the glide path to deliver our 2030 science-based target and 2040 net-zero target. Our strong safety culture was demonstrated again in FY24 as we reduced our injury frequency rate by nearly 24%, marking our fifth continuous year of reduction. Through our community initiatives, we have contributed a total value of US$9.4 million back to the communities where we operate. This includes volunteering leave for employees, financial donation and in-kind support, including through our support of food bank organisations, which facilitated meals for 20.6 million people facing food insecurity in FY24. It is a huge credit to our sustainability programme and the employees who work to support it that we have continued to be recognised for our efforts and strengthen our leadership in sustainability. This year, we advanced to number two in Corporate Night's Global 100 list and were ranked fourth in Time Magazine's inaugural list of the world's most sustainable companies. Moving to slide 11 and our FY25 outlook. For the year ahead, we expect sales revenue growth of between 4% and 6% at constant currency. Our expectation for underlying profit growth is between 8% to 11% at constant currency. Both these figures sit firmly within our investor value proposition. Free cash flow before dividends is expected to be between $750 and $850 million, supporting the increased dividend payout range and on-market share buyback I outlined earlier. I would now like to hand over to Joaquin to run you through the financials, as well as provide further information on the considerations that underpin our FY25 outlook.

Thanks, Graeme, and good morning, everyone. Before diving into the detail of our FY24 financial results, I wanted to touch on the key drivers of the year-on-year performance, which will be reoccurring themes as we move through the slides. As Graeme mentioned, we continue to focus on commercial discipline and aligning our pricing with the cost to serve. With ongoing cost to serve increases in FY24, we delivered a new price realisation of 3%, which was consistent throughout the year and continued in the fourth quarter. Importantly, this alignment includes all the work we have done to link pricing to asset productivity in order to incentivise the efficient use of our assets across customer supply chains. This link, combined with other asset productivity initiatives and the improvement in overall market conditions, has led to a $105 million or a 37% decrease in our IPEP expense in FY24. which reflects the progress we made in reducing uncompensated pallet losses and in increasing asset compensations. Linked to this is the 10-point improvement in the pulling capex to sales ratio to 13% in FY24, in line with our guidance. Our ongoing commercial discipline combined with improvements in asset efficiency contributed to the 1.8 percentage point increase in growth profit margins this year and the 385 million increase in free cash flow before dividends. As Graeme outlined, the structural improvements we have made to the business delivered total value creation for shareholders of over 10%. Turning to slide 14 and an overview of our full year results. I will outline our sales and underlying profit performance in more detail shortly, but wanted to take the opportunity on this slide to highlight the key things to know about our profit after tax and EPS performance. Profit after tax from continuing operations increased 17% in line with operating profit and included an 11% increase in net financing costs, which reflects the full-year impact of the eight-year €500 million green bond issued in March 2023 and higher discount rates on lease renewals and extensions. The effective tax rate of 30.5% increased from 30.1% in FY23, mainly due to the full-year impact of the UK tax rate increase from 1 April 2023. Profit after tax included a non-cash hyperinflation charge of $8.4 million, which relates to our operations in Turkey, Argentina and Zimbabwe. This charge reflects a revised approach to accounting for hyperinflation following an annual review of our accounting policies and to align with market practices. The FY23 comparatives have been restated accordingly. Appendix 3 provides specific details about our revised approach, but at a high level, the inflationary impacts on non-monetary net assets, which was previously recognised in the P&L, will now be recognised in equity on our balance sheet, along with the FX impacts on all net assets. The inflationary impacts on monetary net assets and P&L items will continue being recognised in the P&L, and this is what the $8.4 million charge relates to. Looking at group revenue growth in more detail on slide 15. Group sales revenue increased 7% driven by price realisation. This included a four percentage point rollover contribution from prior year pricing actions and in-year price realisation of 3%. Current year pricing included mixed impacts associated with the link between customer pricing and asset efficiency metrics. With the improvements in asset efficiency, we have seen lower contributions from pricing mechanisms linked to cycle times and loss rates in customer supply chains where these metrics improved. Like-for-like volumes in the period were flat and included a one-point adverse impact linked to inventory optimisation in North America and Europe. Excluding the impact of inventory optimisation, like-for-like volumes increased 1%, as growth from existing customers in Australia and US pallets businesses more than offset lower pallet volumes in Europe due to softening consumer demand. Net new business growth in the period was also flat, as the contribution from new contract wins in most markets was offset by the factors Graeme outlined earlier. Pleasingly, we saw an improvement in fourth quarter volumes as we cycled through the impacts of inventory optimisation, dual sourcing having moderated in the second half, and whitewood prices stabilising with some very early signs of increases in certain markets. These factors inform our expectation of positive volume growth in FY25. Turning to slide 16 and group underlying profit, which increased 17% in the year. As you can see, the sales contribution to profit of $403 million combined with the material reduction in IPEP offset cost increases associated with inflation, higher pallet return rates and investments in transformation initiatives. North American surcharge income decreased $38 million in line with moderating market prices for lumber, fuel and transport in this region. Combined plant and transport costs increased by $163 million and included inflationary impacts of approximately $65 million, primarily due to rising labour costs, which were partly offset by deflation in lumber, fuel and US transport costs. The balance of the plant and transport cost increase related to investment in both pallet quality and customer experience initiatives, as well as repair, handling, storage and transport costs linked to inventory optimisation. These cost increases were partly offset by automation and operational efficiencies. Depreciation increased $46 million, largely driven by the impact of pallet price inflation on the value of assets added to the pool over the preceding 12 months. Other cost increases of $48 million reflect overhead wage inflation and headcount increases to support growth and the delivery of overall transformation benefits. These costs were partly offset by higher asset compensations. Lastly, shaping our future transformation costs increased $21 million as higher ongoing corporate transformation costs, including investments in digital, asset productivity and customer service initiatives, were offset by a $23 million reduction in short-term transformation costs, which concluded in the prior year. Turning to asset efficiency on slide 17 and the significant improvement in our pooling cap extra sales ratio, which reduced 10 points in the year, driven by 15 million fewer pallet purchases, lumber deflation and the impact of higher revenue in the year. The 15 million reduction in the number of pallet purchases resulted in a $436 million decrease in pooling capital expenditure. Pleasingly, 8 million fewer pallet purchases in the year reflected a step change in the capital intensity of our business as we recovered more pallets through asset efficiency initiatives. The balance relates to the benefit of utilising 7 of the 12 million pallets returned through inventory optimisation. The residual 5 million pallets remain in storage in North America and are expected to deliver capital expenditure benefits in FY25. The impact of lumber deflation reduced our capital expenditure in the year by approximately $150 million. Inventory optimisation reduced the pooling capex to sales ratio by two points. Excluding this benefit, the FY24 pooling capital expenditure was approximately 15%. Turning to free cash flow, we delivered $883 million of free cash flow before dividends, an increase of $385 million on the prior year. The key driver of this increase was the $523 million reduction in cash capital expenditure outlined earlier. The combined movements in working capital and other cash flow items decreased $199 million and included the reversal of FY23 timing benefits of $90 million, with the balance of the decrease primarily due to movements in deferred revenue and non-cash adjustments, mainly relating to asset disposals. Cash flow from discontinued operations declined $37 million on the prior year comparative, which benefited from the $41.5 million final settlement from First Reserve. The $108 million increase in financing costs and tax was largely driven by additional tax payments due to increased profit and higher Australian tax instalments. Moving to slide 19. As noted earlier, a number of one-off items impacted free cash flow. Invention optimisation resulted in CAPEX benefits of $160 million relating to approximately 7 million pallets which were utilised in the period to support business demands. This benefit was partly offset by the reversal of FY23 timing benefits of approximately $90 million. Adjusting for these items, normalised FY24 free cash flow before dividends was $813 million. Turning to slide 20 and our segment performance, starting with the results for CHEP Americas. The Americas segment delivered sales revenue growth of 6%, reflecting both in-year pricing and rollover contributions of pricing actions taken in FY23. Volumes were flat as growth in Canada and Latin America was offset by the impact of inventory optimisation on like-for-like volumes in the US. Underlying profit increased 23% and margin increased 2.6 percentage points. Profit growth reflected pricing and commercial initiatives, operational efficiencies and asset efficiency benefits driving lower IPEP. This was partly offset by additional costs associated with higher pallet returns, including additional storage costs, lower surcharge income and increased investments in asset productivity and other transformation initiatives. Return on capital invested improved 3.1 percentage points, driven by increased earnings, partly offset by a 5% increase in average invested capital, which reflects the addition of higher price pallets to the pool compared to the value of assets written off. Turning to the revenue profile of the US pallets business on slide 21. Sales revenue for the US pallet business increased 7%, reflecting price realisation with a three percentage point contribution from in-year pricing actions and rollover contributions from prior year, delivering four percentage points of growth. Like-for-like volumes in the period were flat due to inventory optimisation. Excluding this impact, like-for-like volumes increased 1%, reflecting growth in produce, beverage and protein sectors. Briefly covering historical like-for-like volumes. FY22 and FY23 included the impact of pallet availability challenges, while FY21 benefited from COVID-19 related demand increases. Net new business volumes in the period were flat as modest customer wins, largely small and medium enterprises, were offset by some volume loss due to dual sourcing, primarily in half one, whitewood price deflation delaying pooling conversions and rollover impacts of prior year losses. In line with my comments on quarter four group volume performance, US volumes for the fourth quarter increased 1% with modest organic growth and net new business wins. Turning to the EMEA region on slide 22. Chip EMEA delivered sales revenue growth of 7%, driven by price growth of 7%, as volumes remained in line with FY23, reflecting inventory optimisation and softening consumer demand in the European pallet business. Underlying profit increased 15%, with margins improving by 1.8 percentage points. This was primarily driven by sales flow through to profit, transport and automation efficiencies and higher pallet compensations, which offset increases associated with labour inflation, costs associated with higher pallet return rates and additional investments to support asset productivity and transformation initiatives. ROSI in their period improved 3.1 percentage points, reflecting the strong profit growth and improved capital efficiency, including the benefit of image optimisation and asset productivity improvements, driving fewer pallet purchases. CHEP APAC delivered sales revenue growth of 9%, including price growth of 6%, driven by both current and prior year pricing actions, and volume growth of 3%, mainly with existing customers in Australia, driven by improved pallet circulation in FY24. Underlying profit increased 5% on a strong prior year comparative, which included one-off insurance proceeds of $8 million. Excluding prior year one-offs, underlying profit growth of 10%, reflected sales growth and higher pallet compensations, partly offset by costs associated with improved pallet circulation in Australia and inflation. ROSI decreased 0.9 percentage points, or when excluding one-offs, ROSI increased 0.6 points on the prior year. Profit growth in the period adjusted for the one-off proceeds more than offset the 8% increase in ACI, which included the impact of pallet purchases in FY23 and FY24 to service customer demand, and higher lease costs including new property leases taken out in the period. I will now take you through the corporate segment on slide 24. Overall costs in the corporate segment increased $29 million, largely due to a $21 million increase in shaping our future spend. The increase includes an additional $32 million investment to support the digital transformation, largely relating to additional headcount in asset digitisation and data analytics. Investments in other transformation activities increased $11 million, mainly relating to customer experience initiatives and transformation delivery. These increases were offset by a $23 million reduction in short-term transformation costs, which concluded in FY23. Other corporate costs increased $8 million, reflecting labour-related cost increases, including wage inflation. Turning now to our group guidance for FY25. We expect sales revenue growth between 4% and 6%, with a balanced contribution from both price and volume. Underlying profit growth of 8% to 11% includes expansion in the EMEA, APAC and group profit margins. America's margins are expected to remain in line with FY24 as we continue to invest in customer and other transformation initiatives. At a group level, benefits from supply chain initiatives are expected to be partly offset by incremental spend relating to customer experience and quality initiatives. Surcharge income is expected to be broadly in line with FY24 levels, and we expect to see further improvements on the IPEP expense, reflecting continued improvements in asset efficiency. However, the benefit of lower pallet losses is expected to be partly offset by higher unit costs of pallets written off. Shaping our future spend in FY25 is expected to increase to approximately $150 million, which includes approximately $110 million relating to digital spend to support data analytics capabilities and the smart asset strategy. Moving to slide 26. In FY25, we expect to deliver $750 to $850 million in free cash flow before dividends, with pooling capex to sales of approximately 13% to 15%, which includes the benefit of utilising 5 million pallets currently in storage in North America at the end of FY24. Non-pulling capital expenditure is expected to increase $130 million, which includes an additional $70 million relating to incremental digital investments, as well as additional supply chain investments relating to automation, pallet durability and network optimisation. FY25 ROSI is expected to improve by approximately one percentage point from FY24 levels. In summary, we are pleased with our performance this year, which reflects fundamental improvements across all aspects of our business. We exit FY24 with improved momentum in key areas of the business that provide us confidence in our FY25 outlook. The structural improvements we have made to free cash flow generation combined with our strong financial position has led to us announcing capital management initiatives in FY25. These initiatives are aligned with our active approach to shareholder value creation, which underpins our investor value proposition. I will now hand over to the operator for Q&A.

Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star 2. If you're on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Andre from here with UBS. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning. My first question is about the free cash flow outlook into next year. And I appreciate the normalisation adjustments that you've presented on slide 19 for FY24. But as we look into the guidance of 750 to 850 next year, just wondering if you could talk through some of the you know, moving parts there, midpoint of 800 is roughly in line with that normalised number that you present to 24. But am I right in saying that there's still going to be some CapEx benefits from the, you know, the 5 million remaining pallets in FY24, but at the same time you're spending more on non-pooling? Just wondering if you could talk through some of the moving parts I get from 24 to 25. Thanks.

Yeah, thanks, Andre, and good morning. Just covering off that question really about the cash flow forecast for next year. I think we've given that guidance range of 13 to 15 percentage points of sales. And you're right, there's 5 million of inventory optimisation pallets that we will use in FY25. So the way I look at that is if you were to normalise that 14%, then it's running at about 15.5%, which is obviously still below the target we had at Invest Today in 2021 when we said 17%. And then the other comment you made is exactly right. So our non-higher capex spend in FY25, we've guided to up $130 million. So that is a continuation of automation spend and also digital spend.

Okay, and then my other question is specifically around the March expansion. We can see in FY24, the lower IPEP spending was a strong driver of that margin expansion. You've called it out as one part of the story for FY25, the operating leverage that you've guided for there. But maybe you could help us understand how significant a part of the margin story is IPEP going to be in FY25 or is IPEP now at a sustainable level if we are comparing it to sales?

I think there's still an opportunity in asset efficiency and IPEP. What you see heading into FY25 is that we still expect to reduce the number of units on an uncompensated loss basis, but obviously the average cost of pallets that will be written off increases, obviously, as we cycle the period of high lumber inflation. So you should expect to still see a benefit from IPEP, but it won't be anywhere near as big as the benefit that we've had in FY24. I think then what you see driving our operating leverage next year is really operational efficiencies in supply chain. And you'll see also that we've guided to overheads being flat year on year, excluding shaping our future. So again, you can see that sort of cost management, productivity and efficiency that we're driving to drive leverage while we continue a disciplined approach to recovery of cost to serve. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Andre.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Matt Ryan with Barron Jelly. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Just coming back to comments on CapEx, I think within the Shaping Our Future comments, you were talking about 16 million pallets salvaged up from 10 million the year before. So how does that sort of feed into your CapEx expectations? And, I mean, do you think that that 16 million was, including anything one-off in nature, or you think that's a reasonable number to sort of think about moving forward?

Yeah, I think as we move forward, we still see an opportunity to improve that number through asset recovery and go to market. And I think as you touched on, Matt, the benefits that we're getting through digital, both data analytics and the data that we get from continuous and targeted diagnostics or the GPS units that help us track pallets, we still see further runway on that. It's just a more gradual progression than it has been up until now.

Okay, that's helpful. And you made a comment that the fourth quarter volumes in the US were up 1%. That's obviously a decent improvement in what you've been tracking at. So can you just help us to understand what was going on in that quarter? How does that look within your guidance for next year?

Yeah, Matt. What we were trying to help there with is obviously you can see that we're guiding to volume growth in FY25. And so as we've got to that fourth quarter in the US, we're cycling periods of destocking. So like for like growth improves. And then also we're seeing positive net new business wins as we obviously cycle the rollover losses from the year before. So how we look at it is that we've got good volume momentum both in the US and across the group as we head into FY25.

Got it. And can I just clarify the IPAP guidance, just coming back to the question a minute ago. So the second half was a big improvement on the first half. Are you sort of suggesting there's another improvement on the second half, or are you just simply saying that you'll have a year-on-year improvement in 25 versus 24?

Matt, I'd say the full year is what we're guiding to rather than the half. So obviously you saw a significant improvement in the second half. that will flow through into the first half. So year on year, for the full year, you should expect an improvement in IPET.

Got it. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Justin Barrett with CLSA. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. Congrats on the results. I just wanted to ask, you made a comment in your presentation just around the competitive dynamic, very consistent with what you sort of highlighted in the first half, but just wanted to understand more broadly, has that competitive dynamic, is it increasing in its intensity, is it easing, or is it sort of flat compared to where it was six months ago?

So I would say overall we'd say there's not much change, but I think there are a couple of things which are moving perhaps in a slightly more favorable direction for us. So I think we call some of these out. One is we're seeing a sort of slightly lower intensity of customers wanting to switch to dual sourcing. We saw a lot more of that in the first half of 24, saw a lot less in the second half. So we're hoping that's sort of becoming less of an issue. And similarly, we're seeing signs that the whitewood price in the U.S. in particular has declined. It certainly has stabilised and might be now moving slightly in the upwards direction, which will help a little bit with the conversion rate from people using whitewood moving to pooled. So both of those things are helpful. But when we look at the rest of the competitive landscape in terms of the other pooling competitors, I don't think there's any change really since six months ago. It's competitive, but it's not irrational. So I think it's a situation normal from that perspective.

Fantastic. Thank you very much. And then the other one I just wanted to ask, I think you sort of guided more to around 13 to 14 million pallet returns for FY24 and you ended up only getting 12 million pallets back. Is that due to, I guess, surprises in the uplift in volumes in the fourth quarter or just trying to understand why you got slightly less pallets back than what you were anticipating?

Yeah, Justin, as you know, forecasting is a challenging thing, and in particularly, you know, inventory optimisation. So it was based on the best information we had at the time. And look, we were slightly wrong. We got slightly less pallets back. I think the big benefit for us is that we've done a lot of work over the last couple of years to manage our CapEx purchasing. So we're able to flex up and down to allow for the quantities that come back. So it was just a question that we saw slightly less pallets come back.

Not a problem. Thank you very much.

Thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Anthony Longo with J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead.

Good morning, Graeme. Good morning, Joachim. Just wanted to ask a question on pricing. Again, that was extremely strong throughout the year and ultimately you got 3% realisation for its new contract structure during the year. I mean, how are you sort of thinking now about cost to serve and the pricing outlook going forward given that you have really sort of spoken to commercial discipline a number of times on this call thus far.

I think what we're seeing is that there is still labour inflation pretty much everywhere around the world, and it's sort of in that mid-single digits, I guess, roughly, roughly. So we still think that the costs to serve are... driven largely by that. And as a result, and particularly some of it we get through a contractual mechanism anyway, we should be making sure that we recover that. I mean, having said that, as we know, the environment for our customers and the retailers is pretty tough out there at the moment. And I think what is incumbent on us then is to start upping our game on our own productivity and our own operational excellence, making sure that we're not letting overheads run away themselves. So I think there's a bit of self-help we have to do too. But to the extent that the cost to serve does increase through things like labour, we are still aiming to recover that. And as you saw in the FY24 numbers, we have been doing that through this year from that in-year pricing. That is largely driven by cost to serve being increasing due to labour. So I think, again, we don't see much change going forward based on that sort of information.

That's great. And just a follow-up, again, on the pulling capex to sales ratio. So you've, on the call thus far, you've really highlighted step change a number of times thus far in terms of your cash flows and what that looks like going forward and in the context of the pallets that have come back. I mean, how are you thinking about this business now going forward from a free cash flow after dividends perspective? And then even that Roki target that you've given for next year, I mean, that's well north of what you've generated historically, right? on an increased investment base. I mean, how are you sort of thinking about all those dynamics together going forward?

Yeah, I think as you've touched on, we feel that we've sort of made a structural change in terms of asset productivity and efficiency. And I think, you know, to the earlier question around pricing, I think one of the things that we've done really well is align our pricing mechanism to asset efficiency in terms of losses and cycle time. So, you know, I think you can see our cash flow performance in FY24 and what we're guiding to FY25. So, you know, subject to operating conditions, et cetera, that's... we're comfortable in terms of our free cash flow going forward. I think the other thing, you know, that for me gives us confidence is, one, you can see the improvement, obviously, in IPEP and in CapEx to sales. But I think also what's really helpful is, you know, the progress that we've made on asset productivity is literally hundreds and hundreds of initiatives. So it's not dependent on one initiative. So hence, you know, if one initiative under-delivers, then there's a range of other initiatives that help us over-deliver. So... I think, again, just reiterating that at that 2021 investor day, we thought the run rate for CapExter sales was about 17%. And now we're confident that it's below that number.

I think the sort of broader message we're trying to get across here is that, and given the institutional history with Brambles, everyone knows that we have this history of doing a couple of years of good stuff and then it goes a bit backwards. We're really confident now that we've made changes in the business model to make the business much more resilient. And that is manifesting itself in the cash flow generation. And that was always... The challenge that was always the target was to get the cash generation up. And we were sort of highlighting a year ago we thought we were getting there. But because of the history, we wanted to at least do a couple of years in a row. I think what you're hearing us now say is the combination of actually delivering the second year. and going out with the capital management initiatives, that should be a signal that we are much more confident that we have changed the business for the better in terms of the fundamentals. And I think that's what we're trying to get across without getting too triumphant about it, because clearly two years is only two years. But, yeah, that's where I think we are. And it's driven, as Joaquin said. by a host of projects and initiatives, a lot of them driven by data analytics and digital, but a lot of them driven by more normal things like more trucks and more people on the ground. So it's a whole combination across a whole scope of different technologies and actions, and that's what gives us the confidence, I think, that this is a sustainable change that we're seeing. Thanks very much. I appreciate it. Thanks. Thanks.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Owen Birrell with RBC. Please go ahead.

Yeah, thanks, guys. Sorry to, I guess, linger on on this point, but second half 24 IPEP to sales looks like it fell down to roughly about 1.4%. Now, that's... Assuming my calculations are correct, that's well below historic levels of around 2% to 3%. I just wanted to understand... Is that driven principally by the reduction in absolute losses, or is there a material shift in the uncompensated to compensated ratio of those losses? And then I guess a question, I guess, back to Andre's point around how sustainable is that 1.4% into FY25?

Yeah, thanks, Owen. I think just touching on a couple of your questions there, it's both a combination of losing less pallets, and obviously that's the first prize and that's what we strive for, and then where pallets are lost, then being compensated for those. So the improvement in IPEP is a combination of both of those. And then what I would say is, you know... Is it more skewed to one or the other? Sorry, can I just ask, is it skewed to one or the other? Um... Reduction in losses is where it's skewed, but we have done a better job, obviously, in compensations as well. OK, thank you. And then I think, you know... I'd be a little careful on your percentage in halves. It depends on timing of audits at customers, et cetera, et cetera. So the way I look at it, and we don't use this metric internally, but I know a lot of you do, which is if you look at FY23, IPEP is a percentage of sales that was at 4.7%. Then if you look at FY24, we're at 2.8%. And then if you go back historically, a period when I had hair, it was at about 2%, right? So for me, what that tells us is, yes, we've made a significant improvement, but over time, we still have an opportunity for further improvement to hopefully get back to that 2% number.

That's excellent. And just another question, if I may. One line in the slide pack talks about commercial solutions signed with two digital customer solutions. Just wondering... Can you give us a bit of color around what those customer solutions are? Are they external customer solutions? And is that different from, I guess, the core business?

Yeah, so what we plan to do is give you a lot more color when we get to the investor day, but let me briefly say what it is. It's not our traditional business in the extent that it's not about renting a pallet. It's about digitizing pallets for an existing customer, but doing it in a way which gives them much more, more insight as to what's going on with the flow of products on the pallet so that they can intervene much more quickly and, for example, extend shelf life. So it is a new type of business for us. It's one which is clearly solving problems that our customers are having where there's a value destruction. Therefore, it's a real value creation opportunity for our customer. and they're happy to share some of that value that's created with us. And it's a relatively low-cost solution for us because it's about us utilizing the data that's coming from the pallets and the sophisticated trackers. So that's what it is. We'll tell you a lot more about it when we get to the investor day. But I think it's very exciting. It's very small at the moment, so we don't want to get ahead of ourselves, but it's one of those areas where – I think we can grow the business, and it's one where it's not cannibalizing our existing business. So it really is a new add-on, but, again, early days. And this is something, again, that we – this is exactly the thing that we talked about in the investor day in September 21, where we had an idea. It was something interesting. We put a page marker in for the cost, but we didn't know what the benefit was. So this is the very early signs that it's an interesting area to develop further, but we'll talk about it more in a few weeks' time. Thank you.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Jacob Koukanis with Jarden Australia. Please go ahead.

Evening, Graeme. Evening, Joaquin. Can you just talk through the volume growth in the fourth quarter? I think your commentary at the third quarter trading update was that you expected volume growth in line with your customers. We've seen a lot of the FMCG brands report pretty decent re-acceleration in volume growth, maybe as some of their own pricing pressure and pass-through rolls off. Can you just talk to, firstly, the shape of that in the fourth quarter and then how we expect that to move through fiscal 25, please?

Yeah, no problem, Jacob, and good evening to you. As we touched on, obviously, as you cycle that period of inventory optimisation from the prior year, then you see a recovery in like-for-like volumes. And to your point about, you know, let's say other manufacturers, et cetera, for example, if you look at US Nielsen, our US volumes are tracking relatively close to those Nielsen numbers for consumer products in the US. And so as you look out to FY25, what we expect is that you'll see growth in like-for-like volume And we'll also see an improvement in net new wins. You know, we've had a very strong new business pipeline, but obviously historically low whitewood prices have delayed conversions. And so we see that, you know, early signs of whitewood pricing at least being flat and starting to increase in some markets. So that gives us also confidence that our rate of conversion should improve as we head to FY25. So how I look at it is, you know, Revenue next year is much more in, revenue growth is much more in line with our investor value proposition where we've said, you know, one to two points from like-for-like or existing customer growth, one to two points from net new business and pricing of around two to three.

Awesome. Thanks for the extra colour there, Wukim. Just one for Graeme. Noticing in the LTI framework moving forward that there's been a large step up in those ROKI gates. I think it's probably adjusting more symbolic with where the business is at. But can you just give us a sense? It doesn't look as though those sales CAGRs have changed much, but the ROKI gates have. I think consistent with what you're acknowledging today is that the business is generating good free cash flow, maybe sustainably good. Can you just talk us through your discussions or some of the shape just around those ROKI targets as well, please?

Yes, I think, as ever, when it comes to LTI targets, when you've had a couple of years of doing really well, then there's the natural requirement to stretch a bit further. So there's an element of, yeah, we have done well, therefore we need to make sure there's stretch in those targets, otherwise people are going to start... whether the targets are too soft. But I think if you go back to it in a more sort of technical way, the revenue one hasn't changed, even though I think it's going to be a bit tough over the next year or so to get to the upper end of those limits. But I think that's fair enough, because if you look at the longer term, then those revenue targets are in line with investor value props, so we should stick to those. The ROCE one is an interesting one because I think what we're doing now is because of the much more structural improvement in free cash flow and the ability to exercise capital discipline, then in theory your ROCE is going to keep going up. But I think we've got to be a little careful that this doesn't then encourage us not to invest in longer-term projects like digital where the payback might be a little longer than three years or whatever it would be to – to keep on improving the ROSI. So I think where we've ended up is that trying to balance that need for a stretching target, but recognising that in the medium term, we should be investing a little bit more in things like digital. And therefore, one would be very wary if ROSI kept on increasing and extrapolating over a five or six year period, because I think then we should be rightly trying to defend why we're not investing more in the business for the longer term. And that's kind of where we got to. And I think I'm very comfortable with where those grids are, you know, in terms of setting a stretching target but not being ridiculous.

Yeah, thanks, Graham. I appreciate that the press and maybe some of the financial advisors have a different opinion on this. But is there anything that we should read to your lack of appetite for inorganic growth? Is that flagging maybe to the market today that Luscombe's, not of interest, despite the press reports?

I mean, I wouldn't read too much specific in that. I mean, I think the broader context is around inorganic is there isn't much we can do. I mean, if you look at our market shares in most countries around the world, there isn't much we can do. And the one that you've quoted is about the only one that We would be silly not to look at, but at the same time, I think we've been very clear over the last 12 months or so, whenever it has come up in the press, that we're not going to do anything that is going to compromise the, I hope, well... now well-embedded view that we exercise capital discipline. And I think that for us is first and foremost. And I think the other way of looking at it is by announcing the capital management initiatives, you do that because you take a view out into the future and you look at your balance sheet strength and the cash flow you aim to generate and the things that you know you've got to invest in for organic growth and things like digital, and you make a decision based on that. And that doesn't mean we can't do a deal if we needed to or wanted to, but that doesn't mean we're doing it either. I think you've just got to look at it on that basis. And I think the most important element is, you can rely on us to exercise capital discipline like we did with Costco plastic pallets. The same, I think, would be with any inorganic M&A opportunity. We know that that's what our investors are expecting of us. So we absolutely don't want to compromise that.

Thanks, guys. Great result.

Thanks. Thank you. Your next question comes from Anthony Mulder with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Good morning all. If I can get back to IPEP, probably the most questions I've ever had on IPEP. I just want to understand the very strong result in that second half at 45.9. Are you telling us that that's the new norm on a half-on-half basis because it's a very strong improvement? for FY25 that you would be looking into, or is there a little bit of increase? It's certainly not going anywhere near back to that first half 24 result, but is that 46 million of IPEP effectively the new norm for, as we think about half on half for FY25, please?

Yeah, so I think, Anthony, just going back to something I said to one of the earlier questions, again, I think looking half on half is not necessarily the right way to look at it because of timing of what it can change year on year. Instead, you know, if you want to look at it in line with how others have been, which is that percentage of sales, what we're expecting is, you know, you're at 4.7 in FY23 this year, it's at 2.8, then you should expect a small decline in that percentage heading into FY25 or for FY25, Anthony.

Right, I understand that things will go up from that second half 24 level, but still down on whether... where they totaled for FY24.

Maybe if I help you, Anthony, at a different way to look at this. I think included in the slide pack, you have the glide path on uncompensated losses. If you look at the progress that we've made, obviously, this year, and then our commitment was to get to that 30% reduction. So you can see from that slide that we still expect a reduction in the number of lost units, but as I said earlier, that's obviously going to be partly offset by the increase in the cost of pallets that we write off. So that might be another way to help guide you to the FY25...

right okay and it sounds like it's skewed not so much towards the compensation levels from customers but am i right in thinking that that's an accounting change so you might not have received the full benefit of that that compensated higher compensated loss levels through fy 24 and there's the potential benefit through 25

No, look, Anthony, it's not about accounting. For me, you know, the first prize for us is to not lose assets, you know, be able to pass those benefits on to customers. So that's what we always do. And then if we've lost, you know, if we have suffered a loss, then to be compensated. So I think, as I said earlier, the majority of the IPEP improvement has come from a reduction in losses, but there has been some increase in compensation. And just so I cover it off, you know, there's been no change in the IPED methodology for over five years. I think it's a lot longer than five years, but in the time I've been with the business, it's a bit over five. So, again, we're very consistent in our accounting methodologies.

Okay. Question for Graham, if I could. Appreciate you're on the board, the business delivering. Return on invested capital of over 20%. How do you think about that buyback as opposed to using that capital, some of that capital for greater organic growth? Appreciate that you've got 5 million pallet surplus in the US, but thinking more broadly around the world, how do you balance that decision between buying back stock or investing harder for a 20% return?

Yeah, I mean, I think when we look at the priorities, we always look at the organic growth opportunities first. And that will be not just about growing volumes. It will be about investing in things like automation, investing in digital. So it's the things that can give us operational cost benefits as well as as top line growth. So I think that's so we go through the process and that will always be as maxed out as we think is possible. as reasonable and as doable with the resources we've got. And the areas where I think we do look a little bit more now are can we go fast on some of these digital initiatives? I think we'll talk about around digital customer solutions. That might be somewhere we can go faster. And that is absolutely front and center when we discuss these things at the board. Then when you've exhausted all those opportunities, you start looking at what you do in terms of the capital management ones. And that's kind of where we got to. And I think just because I think I've seen a few comments around the 500, you know, can't we do more than that? Does that send any signals? I think just to be really clear, the 500 is largely driven by the fact that we can only buy a certain number of shares based on previous volumes of trading, and we can't trade in closed periods. And that is kind of where we get to the numbers. I don't think anyone should read anything more than that into that number. But in terms of order of priority, as I said, the first one is always what can we do to optimize organic growth first.

Understood. And lastly, Africa, the net new winds that you talk of in the U.S., are you starting to see those coming from the whitewood conversion as opposed to other pullers?

Yeah, I mean, I think that's, again, where we're focusing. But I think there might be a few opportunities with some customers who are currently all on red pallets, thinking about maybe doing a little bit of dual sourcing as well. So we're hoping a bit of that might come back in our favor. But the majority of this is all around converting the whitewood back into pooled. Very good.

Thank you.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Sam Stow with Citi. Please go ahead.

Morning, guys. Congrats on the results. Just wanted to ask on EMEA there, it looks like they had almost an 800 basis point sequential improvement there in volumes, kind of fourth quarter on third quarter. I just wanted to check, one, is that correct? And two, just maybe help us understand the drivers. Is it the underlying markets that strong, you know, net new wings, or was there an impact there? in the PCP from an accounting adjustment.

Yeah, so thanks, Sam. I think, again, similar dynamics in EMEA and Europe, as we've talked about earlier, that obviously we're cycling a period of destocking, and so we had a softer quarter four last year, so you see that improvement in volumes. So that's one of the drivers of the improved volume performance.

OK, so the market's that strong? There was no kind of... adjustment in the PCP at all?

No. So, you know, again, no adjustments to the numbers. Again, I think what you've just got to think about is you're cycling a period of destocking. So that, you know, we've talked about that in Europe, obviously, you know, there's at least a one point impact from that impact of destocking.

Got it. Got it. And then America is surprising. There appears to have materially increased as well in the fourth quarter. Just want to get some colour there, help us understand the key drivers on that inflection. And if you'd call out, I guess, anything to suggest that isn't the right exit rate into FY25.

I think we might need to just take that away, Anthony. From our perspective, you know, pricing, again, that in-year price realisation has been pretty consistent within the period. It may be something to do with the comparative, but we've talked about that sort of at a group level and applies as you look at Europe around about that 3% in-year pricing. So that's the sort of number. But sometimes it's about cycling particular contracts in particular years, but that's how I think about it, Sam.

That's helpful. Congrats on the result, guys. Thanks, Sam.

Much appreciated.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Cameron McDonald with E&P. Please go ahead.

Good morning. So to start with the capital management framework, Graeme, if I can. And then, so if we think about what you've said so far with the pro forma gearing at 1.35, I think you've said, you know, inclusive of that buyback. And then the guidance that you've given already does look like you'll continue to de-gear into FY25. How do we think about the ongoing likelihood of capital management as leverage continues to fall?

So I'm going to have to give you the very unhelpful answer, which is this is a board decision which we will discuss this time each year and then announce this time each year what the plans are for the following year. Now, I think it's fair to say that if we are continuing... with this level of free cash flow and aren't seeing any significant incremental opportunities for organic growth or any other sort of growth, then clearly there are only two places we can get that cash to. It's either going to be more dividends or it will be more buybacks. What I always prefer doing is if we can do a mixture of the two, but that just depends on where we are at any given point in the process. I think the reason we wanted to put the capital management framework into the investor value prop is to at least give the signal that that is now something that we are considering every single year going forwards, but we don't know what the answer is going to be every single year. So I think one can draw one's own mathematical conclusions from those gearing limits and where we are now, but at the same time... you would expect us to be reasonably prudent too and not sort of go absolutely bang up to the max every time we can, just because life is very uncertain, markets are very volatile at the moment, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. So it probably doesn't help you too much, but it might give you a bit more flavour around where we're with how we're thinking about it.

Yeah, thank you. And then just in terms of the outlook, yeah, you've got 400 and 500 basis points worth of margin expansion embedded in the outlook. How do we, so traditionally that's sort of been closer to, you know, two to three. As we roll forward into FY26, should we be expecting that that leverage comes back down into that normal range?

Cameron, I'm going to borrow one of Graeme's lines if I can. I'm going to be unhelpful here and say, look, we really only give FY25 guidance. But I think obviously we've got an investor day coming up and we'll give you a bit more colour as to post FY25, you know, the shape of both profit growth and investments and cash flow. So if maybe we can hold that one over to investor day.

Yeah, okay, because, I mean, clearly you did previously have, you know, sort of goalposts out there from the last Investor Day as well.

Yeah, and I think, you know, a couple of things. As you said, we had some goalposts out there. And again, you know, we are committed to our investor value proposition, which says over the medium term, you know, we will deliver operating leverage.

Okay, and then sort of last question just on the outlook there. You are guiding to some volume growth, but you're expecting it to be second half weighted. What gives you the confidence that that second half is going to come through relative to your caution around the first half?

So I think that second half weighting was in relation to net new business wins, and that's based on really just the environment. One, as we see whitewood prices, our view is we'll increase throughout FY25, so that will help the conversion rate of white to pooled pallets. And then for light volumes, we're obviously going to cycle destocking throughout the year.

No, no, I get the destocking thing. So how long does a normal, on average, does it take to contract someone from Whitewood to Poole? Because what I'm trying to get to is, are these conversations that you are going to convert in the second half, are these conversations that are currently underway or are these conversations that are yet to commence? Yes.

Yeah, I'd say probably a combination of both. So we have a very strong pipeline and it takes time to convert and that really depends on an individual customer. So for small to medium enterprises, sometimes it takes a long time to build a relationship with customers. That's why forecasting is particularly challenging in this area. But I think what gives me comfort about that is we do have a very strong new business pipeline in Europe and the US in particular. And so it's a combination of existing customers who are going to expand lanes and convert their whitewood to pooled and then also SMEs that we will convert.

Just as an extension of that, Joachim, while I've got the floor, how many salespeople do you actually employ?

Look, I think, again... you know, we've got a range of commercial people and it is difficult in terms of where you want to draw that line, right? So we have people who visit customers. We've got a customer service team. You've got asset protection people and productivity people. So I think, you know, what I would say is, and it's a variety of selling techniques. It's one, a combination of people. You also, you know, we have my chair. So how I would look at it is that one of the real benefits from the transformation program is that we're investing in key areas of the business. One, improving customer service, growing the value proposition as Graham talked about in digital. So I think you've got to look at it a bit more than just, you know, number of people on the street when you think about our opportunity to just grow a new business.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Scott Ryle with Remore Equity Research. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you very much. I have a question. This one is hopefully relatively easy. In terms of... Obviously, you've had to purchase fewer pallets this year for the reasons that you've well discussed. I'm wondering, do you expect still to get many pallets back over the course of the next 12 months? And in terms of the pallets that you're... ..that you are... purchasing and building, you know, virgin pallets. Are you having any issues around availability, please?

So, coming to your first question, Scott, you might just need to remind me. Sorry, I just lost my train of thought there. Your question was already... No, that's all right.

I do it all the time. Are you expecting... You had 12 million or so pallets come back this year. Are you expecting, you know, many... to come back over the next 12 months, or is that kind of done now?

Yeah, certainly in Europe and the US, what we're saying is that we think that's largely complete. Probably the only market where we're expecting a little bit more destocking is in Australia.

Mm-hmm.

And then, you know, I think we're not struggling for access to new pallets. I think just what's really pleasing across the business is the improvements in asset productivity, you know, cycle times, reduction in loss rates means that we're needing to purchase less pallets than we have in the past.

Yeah. No, no, I get that. But in terms of the ones you do have to purchase, I mean, there's been some talk about lumber mills struggling financially and things like that, you're not having any problem with capacity of lumber mills to deliver what you do need, which is admittedly less than what you have needed.

Absolutely not. And I think if you remember also some of the deals we did four or five years ago, particularly in the U.S., have put us in quite an attractive position in terms of priority with those mills. And the flip side of it is we're supporting those mills by giving them some guaranteed volumes. So we don't anticipate any problems there. Okay, good.

And then the second question, this is probably for you, Graeme. I mean, you have over the last few years, even though there's more to go, as you say, the step change in asset efficiency, cash flow, et cetera, has been extraordinary, if I can put it that way. But what do you think is a customer noticing that's different from CHEP at the minute? And maybe over the next two or three years, what are you hoping the customers notice? I get you talked a little bit about scratching the surface on digital solutions, but I'm more meaning just in terms of the core offering that CHEP gives to your customer base. What are you hoping that they notice already and what do you think they'll notice over the next two or three years?

So I think what they have noticed already, and you can see it in the NPS scores, is that we're delivering on time better. Now, you could argue that some of that has been because there are more pallets available, and I think that would be a fair comment. But what we're seeing is that we are going beyond that now, and our focus on delivery in full-on time is absolutely making a difference now. So I think that's one thing. And at the most basic level, what our customers want is to get the pallet they ordered, where they ordered it, when they ordered it, and in a fit state to be used. I mean, it's not much more complicated than that. So I think the focus on delivery. There's a focus on quality, which, again, we're seeing the feedback from customers, both directly and indirectly, from people who go out and do surveys in various markets, that people are now noticing that our quality is good. I think there's a challenge ahead there, which is as more and more manufacturers, and particularly retailers, go to automated DCs, there is a quality of palette that's required to ensure ensure it works seamlessly in an automated environment. And we're working really hard on trying to make sure that that is something we can deliver. I think then there's the bit addressing the stuff, which has always been a bugbear with Brambles around the ease of doing business. So we're spending a lot of effort into things like MyChep and to delivering a much more seamless experience for our customers. and trying to help them as well, so proactive ordering and giving them more insight as to what is going on in the markets so that they can manage their supply chains better. That is beginning to start having some traction, giving people advanced notice of when we're coming to pick pallets up or when we're going to deliver them. We're beginning to see that actually start flowing through into some of the metrics. I think we can go a lot further than that, and this is where some of the things that we are doing experimenting with in terms of getting away with the audit process and just completely doing away with all that cost and time and effort to verify who's got which pallets where. That is something that if we can get that to work, it's going to be really exciting. And we will be in a unique position to deliver that for customers compared to anybody else. So I think there's still a lot of stuff to do. And you're right, it's not just the digital customer solutions, the sort of, you know, the bolt-on really exciting stuff. This is also going to change, I think if we get it right, the way that people see the pallet providers and the pallet business of the future changing. I think on top of that, if you can start giving more insights and helping them reduce waste generally and make the supply chains more efficient. Great. And we're also putting a lot more focus on showing our customers how using our pallets can help them with their sustainability targets. So showing them that it can actually. and reduce emissions and help them too. That's something we've always known is important, but we've not really gone on the front foot as hard showing why we can help more than anybody else because of our sustainability credentials. So I think there's a lot of exciting stuff to come on the customer piece. Okay, great.

Thank you. That's all I had.

Thanks, Scott.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Ian Miles with Macquarie Research. Please go ahead.

Thank you. I'll be very brief. Just on the shaping our future transformation costs and capex, how long do you sort of see those being sustained or are they going to actually only get these permanent sort of costs given technology tends to only have a life of circa three to four years?

Thanks, Ian. Look, I think as we get to invest today, we'll give you a bit more of a shape of the outlook in terms of, certainly as Graeme's touched on quite a bit today, from a digital perspective, we see there's obviously, you know, depending on the success of some of the pilots that are underway, obviously continued investment in that area. And then you're right, some of the initiatives that were part of the transformation are more becoming BAU or business as normal, as Graeme, I think, touched on. you know, they've become embedded in the business and the way we do business today. But also, you know, there still is investment to go into customer service and improving our interactions with customers. So I think that's something we'll give you more of a flavour for at Invest Today.

Okay. Thank you.

So, everybody, thanks very much for your questions. I'm sure we'll be seeing some of you in the next couple of days and or investor. They look forward to that. But as I say, we're very, very proud of these results. Really happy with the progress on the transformation program and how it's translating into this much more resilient and structurally better business demonstrated by the cash flow and the capital management initiatives. So really look forward to seeing you over the coming days and weeks. Thanks a lot.