CSL Aktie

Good morning, everybody, and welcome to CSL's 2026 Annual General Meeting. Before I commence the formal proceedings of the meeting, we'd like to play a short video showcasing CSL's impact on patients and its commitment to scientific innovation.

[Presentation]

My name is Fiona Mead, I'm the Company Secretary here at CSL Limited. It's a pleasure to welcome you to our 2026 Annual General Meeting. I'm going to run through the procedural aspects of the meeting shortly. I confirm that this meeting is being held in a hybrid format. Thank you to all of you that are here in person, and I welcome everybody who's joining us online. For those here in the room, if there is an emergency, please follow the instructions from the Sofitel staff and listen to the announcements over the PA system. If first-aid is required, please immediately see a Sofitel staff member for assistance.

Today, we will run through each item of business stated in the notice of meeting, after which we will invite questions in the room and online. Shareholders and proxy holders present in the room can ask questions during the meeting by lining up at 1 of the microphones located in the aisles when the chair invites questions. Please advise the Computershare representative of your name and show them your red or green voting card to indicate you are a shareholder or proxy holder. If you are a shareholder or a proxy holder participating online, you can submit a written question by clicking on the messaging tab on the Lumi platform. Type your question in the box towards the top of the page and press the send button. A copy of your submitted questions, along with any written responses from our meeting team can be viewed by selecting my messages.

Written questions can be submitted online at any time during the meeting. If you are online and wish to ask a question verbally, click on the request to speak button in the broadcast window. You'll be prompted to confirm your name and enter the topic of your question. Submit your request and follow the instructions to allow access to your microphone and join the queue. Please note, while you can submit questions from now on, we will not be addressing them until the relevant time in the meeting. If you have any problems at all, please call the AGM hotline number, which is up on your screen now.

I do note that online questions may be moderated for inappropriate language. And if we receive a few questions that are similar, we may combine those questions and answer them together. If the questions are too lengthy, we may need to summarize them in the interest of time.

To allow as many shareholders as possible to participate, we kindly ask that each shareholder limit themselves to no more than 2 questions or comments. If we have time at the end, we will ask shareholders with more questions to come forward. The chair will address some of the questions we received online prior to the AGM, then take questions in the room, followed by written questions from the online platform and then verbal questions from the offline platform.

If you are entitled to vote today, you'll have a red admission card with your voting paper on the reverse. Please mark the appropriate box beside each resolution to indicate how you wish to vote. Proxy holders will also have a summary of proxy votes attached to their admission card, setting out any voting instructions, which must be followed. For any open votes, please mark the appropriate box beside the relevant resolution. Please print your name and sign your voting paper, then lodge it in a ballot box before leaving the meeting. Computershare staff will also collect voting papers at the exits. Voting will close 10 minutes after the meeting end, allowing time to finalize and lodge your voting paper. If you need a hand, please let a Computershare staff member know and they can assist you.

For shareholders joining us online, once voting is declared open, eligible shareholders will see a voting tab appear. Select the tap to view the resolutions and cast your vote by choosing the relevant voting option. Your vote will be recorded automatically. So there's no need to submit or confirm it. You may change your vote at any time before voting closes by selecting a different option for the relevant resolution.

Before we hear from the chair, I draw your attention to the legal notice displayed on the screen behind me. And I'd also like to highlight the Go for Gold lifeblood campaign featuring Australian Olympians and currently running across the country. Plasma supplies are at a record low at the moment, and the campaign is aiming to encourage more donations. Plasma really is the liquid gold in our blood. A new donation is needed every 33 seconds and can be used in 18 different life-saving ways. So if you can find time to donate, please do so at your Red Cross life blood donor center.

Okay. That covers the logistics of our meeting, and I'll now hand over to our Chair, Dr. Brian McNamee.

Thanks, Fiona, and welcome to you all here today. There's a quorum present, and it's my pleasure to open the meeting. I would now like to introduce your Board of Directors and our Company Secretary. To our right, Fiona Mead, which you've already heard from; Mr. Costa Saroukos, who is standing for election at this meeting, you'll have an opportunity to hear from him later this morning. Ms. Elaine Sorg is next; Professor Andrew Cuthbertson; and Alison Watkins at the end. Very good position, Alison. To my left, Mr. Gordon Naylor, who is our Interim Chief Executive and Managing Director, who's also standing at this meeting. And as some of you would have read yesterday, he is also our Chair elect. Ms. Carolyn Hewson, who is standing for reelection at this meeting. You'll also have a chance to hear from Carolyn later in the meeting. She will also take on the role as Senior Independent Director from the 31st of March. Dr. Brian Daniels, Ms. Samantha Lewis and Mr. Cameron Price.

We're fortunate to have such a strong group of directors and our Board. Today, I'll share the Board's perspective on the past year, the actions taken to strengthen CSL and our priorities for the future. I'll then hand over to Gordon, who will provide a detailed review of CSL's performance in 2026 financial year, the progress on our transformation and the outlook for the year ahead. Following Gordon's presentation, we will move to the formal business of the meeting. Finally, as Fiona mentioned, we will take questions from shareholders in the room and online. Voting on all items of the business will be conducted by a poll, and I'm now declaring the poll open. The poll will close 10 minutes after I declare the business of the meeting closed.

Before we move to the formal business of the meeting, I'd like to update you on the 2 previously announced leadership changes for our company. Firstly, we now support of Deborah Waterhouse, as CSL's new CEO and Managing Director last week. Deborah will take on the role on the 1st of February and joined CSL from global HIV specialist, Viiv Healthcare, where she's been CEO for the past decade. Viiv is a joint venture majority owned by GSK with Shionogi as a shareholder, which had sales of EUR 7.7 billion during GSK's 2025 financial year.

The Board was clear that the new CEO must continue the momentum of our commercial performance, renew our pipeline, simplify our operations and Deborah ticks all those boxes. She's an outstanding leader with a proven ability to grow complex biopharmaceutical businesses. She's renewed the franchise at Viiv and has dedicated her degree to improving outcomes for patients and public health. And she knows the United States well, having previously led GSK's vaccine and Primary Care U.S. business. Deborah is also very familiar with Australia, having lived and worked here in Melbourne when she was GSK's General Manager for Australia and New Zealand between 2008 and 2012. In summary, Deborah is a world-class executive who leads to a purpose passion. She combines a strong focus on business performance with a deep understanding of patients, health care systems and access to [indiscernible].

The board was unanimous in its view that she is the right person to lead CSL in this next chapter of growth, and I look forward to welcoming you here to this role next year.

Secondly, yesterday, we announced my intention to retire from the Board and as Chair of CSL on the 31st of March next year. I'll say a brief few words about my time at the great company -- this great company later, but it's been my honor to be part of building something so special. As I mentioned earlier, the Board of Directors undertook a thorough process and have unanimously decided that the best and most qualified person to succeed me as chair is Gordon Naylor. There are a few people who understand this company as well as Gordon and we are fortunate that he will stay on our Board and keep sharing that knowledge and experience.

I want to personally thank Gordon for the passion and drive he has shown since he took over as interim CEO in February. We steadied the ship, built on the strong foundations and positioned the company for further growth. Gordon took on this role during 2026 financial year, which is one of the most challenging periods in CSL's recent history. The Board recognizes the effects of the past 12 months have had on shareholders. We know that your confidence has been tested, and we understand it must be earned back through consistent performance and delivery.

Financial year '26 was a reset for CSL. The company reassessed previous investments and made clear decisions to establish stronger foundations for the future. The Board supported decisive action by the management team, including Gordon's 90-day review. Gordon and the management team have acted with urgency to simplify the organization, sharpen priorities and enhance accountability. The Board is encouraged by the outcomes of those actions, and Gordon will elaborate them on them shortly.

From the Board's perspective, CSL is already a more focused and productive company, capable of converting its scientific commercial and operational strengths into sustainable growth and stronger returns for shareholders.

CSL has operated for more than a century by applying science and expertise to some of the most serious and complex challenges in rare disease and public health. The company retains important strengths. It operates in areas of significant unmet medical need, has leading positions in its core markets and possesses scientific and operational capabilities built over many years. These strengths provide a solid foundation, but they cannot be taken for granted. Markets evolve, competition increases, scientific opportunities change.

As a result, CSL is responding and executing more consistently and the Board has 4 areas of focus. First, CSL must deliver stronger commercial and operational performance. Second, CSL must improve productivity and returns generated from research and development. Innovation remains central to our future, but CSL's investments must be focused on opportunities supported by strong science, strategic relevance to CSL's therapeutic areas and incredible impact for patients. CSL must assess the best science, whether it be developed internally or through careful selected external partnerships. Gordon will give more detail on this shortly.

Thirdly, the company must maintain thoughtful discipline in the allocation of capital. Every significant investment is supported by strong foundations and assessed against our capacity to generate appropriate long-term returns. This applies across research and development, manufacturing, business development and the wider operations of the company. Finally, CSL must translate it strategy into consistent results. The Board has maintained close oversight of the reset and transformation underway across the company. Our role is to ensure that CSL has the right strategy, leadership, governance and risk management in place. The Board is closely monitoring progress and transformation is producing a simpler, more productive company.

Just as CSL must continue to evolve as a company, its Board must also evolve. It's essential that the Board maintains the right mix of skills, experience, diversity of thought, to guide CSL in an increasingly complex global environment, includes expertise in science, medicine, commercial execution, financial management, risk, governance, global markets and the operations of a very large and complex organization.

Several directors are standing for reelection today. Carolyn Hewson is standing for reelection as a director. Carolyn has served on the CSL Board since December 2019 and brings significant experience across financial services, investment markets and governance. Gordon Naylor is standing for election as a director. Before returning to the Board in December 2025, Gordon had a 33-year executive career at CSL across a range of senior roles, including Chief Financial Officer. His knowledge of CSL and the global biotech sector is valuable addition to the Board.

Costa Saroukos is also standing for election as a director. Costa joined the Board in December 2025, following a 25-year career in the pharmaceutical sector, most recently as Chief Financial Officer of Takeda Pharmaceuticals. He has extensive international experience across finance, transformation and global biopharmaceutical industry. You'll have an opportunity to hear from each of the directors standing for election or reelection later in the meeting. The Board believes their collective experience strengthens our ability to oversee CSL strategy, transformation and long-term development. We remain committed to engaging constructively with shareholders, listening careful to their views and ensuring the CSL's remuneration framework supports the long-term interest of the company and its owners.

CSL has confronted issues that needed to be addressed. Its strategic priorities are clearer, the organization already is simpler and more focused. Expectations of execution, investment and productivity have been strengthened. At the heart of the company at 29,000 people who bring CSL's purpose to life every day. On behalf of the Board, I want to thank them for their professionalism, resilience and commitment through this period. We believe the actions taken over the past year have established stronger foundations for CSL's future.

On a personal note, again, I'd like to reiterate how proud I am to serve this organization as both CEO and Chair. It will be with mixed emotions next March, when the time comes to sign off, but I know I leave CSL in the safe hands of Gordon and Deborah and under the steady guidance of the Board. The Board is confident in CSL's underlying strengths and opportunities. We remain committed to overseeing the changes required to realize those opportunities and create sustainable value for shareholders.

Thank you for your support over all these years. So many shareholders have been with the company for the whole journey, and I thank you for that. Gordon will take you through CSL's performance in the 2026 financial year. The actions management have taken and the company's priorities and outlook for the year ahead. Gordon, over to you.

Thank you, Brian. Good morning, everyone. And thank you for joining us today. It is certainly a privilege to address you as interim Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of CSL. As Brian mentioned, I returned to CSL in February this year, after a gap of several years, following more than 3 decades with the company in a variety of leadership roles. Upon my return to the business, I spent considerable time visiting our sites, meeting with employees, speaking with customers and health care professionals, and engaging with investors and other stakeholders. That review reinforced for me that the special culture and extraordinary people we have at CSL unchanged.

CSL possesses exceptional strengths. We operate in leading positions across plasma therapies, influenza vaccines and nephrology. We serve patients with serious and often life-threatening conditions. We have deep scientific expertise, significant manufacturing capabilities and talented people who are deeply committed to our patients, donors and public health.

It was also clear for my engagement that the robust and stable industry structure [ that makes ] underpinning the plasma business was fundamentally unchanged. And that the demand for our plasma products continued to be strong and growing. However, it was also clear to me that we needed to improve execution and focus. The business had become too complex, decision-making has slowed and investment was spread across too many priorities. We needed greater focus, clearer accountability and stronger capital discipline.

The management team's work to address these issues was already underway when I took on the role, and I'm pleased to say that over the last 9 months, we've seen very tangible results. Today, I'll discuss our FY '26 performance, the progress we've made through the transformation and our priorities for the year ahead.

As Brian noted, FY '26 was a successful reset year for CSL. It was a year in which we took decisive action to reposition the company and establish stronger foundations for sustainable growth. Although we completed a number of restructuring initiatives that were already underway, the purpose of the reset was not simply to reduce costs, but to return CSL to sustainable growth that would deliver returns over the long run.

My 90-day review of the business provided a valuable framework. In addition to the restructuring initiatives that were already implied, we did the following: brought the leadership team together to collectively drive the business and the necessary changes. We transparently communicated the challenges and the shareholder perspective to the global organization. We stopped a number of noncore initiatives. We enhanced the organization's financial discipline and understanding of industry economics. We reevaluated many assets on the balance sheet in light of current commercial realities. And we critically evaluated our bearing commercial capability and invested to strengthen our competitiveness. The green shoots that we saw back in May are now translating into market share benefits.

We enhanced the focus on operational excellence in plasma collection and accelerated the operational separation of Seqirus to allow that business to compete more effectively with its innovative influenza vaccine portfolio. We're now seeing that play out in the current Northern Hemisphere season.

Against that backdrop, our underlying business remained resilient. Group revenue was USD 15.8 billion, a decrease of 1%. Underlying net profit after tax, or NPAT, decreased 3% to [indiscernible]. These measures exclude the restructuring costs and impairment-related charges associated with the actions we announced earlier in the year. As a result, on a reported basis, CSL recorded a statutory net loss of USD 2.6 billion.

While this result reflects significant one-off charges taken during the year, it does not change the underlying earnings capacity of the business. Most importantly, CSL continued to generate strong operating cash flow of some USD 3.5 billion. And as a result, we were able to maintain the dividend and completed another major buyback. Cash generation remains one of the company's greatest strengths and provides flexibility to invest in future growth while maintaining a strong balance sheet and returning capital to shareholders.

Across our portfolio, market demand for immunoglobulin therapies remained robust. And we also saw strong uptake of ANDEMBRY and HEMGENIX, demonstrating the value that differentiated innovation can bring to patients and shareholders alike.

While it was clear that more work remained, FY '26 confirmed that the core foundations of the business were strong. We've already made meaningful progress, '26 our transformation program generated USD 176 million of pretax savings, exceeding our target for the year. Those savings were achieved across research and development, commercial and medical affairs and broader operational activities. Importantly, this is not a conventional cost reduction program. Where we identify opportunities capable of generating attractive returns we are reinvesting. That includes strengthening our commercial and medical capabilities and investing in priority development programs. We are becoming more selective with a clear understanding of where CSL has the greatest opportunity to create value.

Looking forward, we expect pretax savings from transformation initiatives to increase to approximately USD 400 million in FY '27 and up to approximately $550 million in FY '28.

Alongside the transformation, we've continued strengthening the operational foundations of the business. In plasma collection, CSL is the industry leader in operational efficiency and productivity, but we continue to seek opportunities for improvement across our collection and manufacturing network. Reliable plasma supply remains critical to supporting long-term growth in our immunoglobulin franchise and meeting increased patient demand.

To underline the importance of our placement network, one of my first actions as interim CEO was to elevate Steve Marlow as Executive Vice President and General Manager for CSL Plasma to the global leadership team. Steve is driving innovation in that space. This is critical for efficiency, our competitiveness and for us to respond quickly to patient needs.

We've also strengthened commercial and medical capabilities throughout the organization. In July of this year, Diego Sacristan was appointed Chief Commercial Officer, with responsibility for leading the Behring and Vifor businesses across commercial and medical. Diego previously ran CSL's U.S. business and help transform the commercial and medical operating model and led the expansion of our U.S. sales force.

In April, Amy Van Buren was promoted to the role of Chief People Officer. Amy joined CSL late last year, and brings a wealth of experience with more than 25 years of human resources leadership experience in diverse industries, including biotech, retail and consulting. These moves demonstrate the depth of talent we have in the company.

Among the important outcomes of FY '26 where our strong cash flows, a disciplined capital allocation and positioning the business for profitable growth. Net debt to EBITDA was 1.8x in FY '26, comfortably within our target range for leverage. A strong balance sheet gives us choices. It allows us to invest in growth opportunities while also continuing to return capital to shareholders, buybacks and dividends. In FY '27, we commenced a further AUD 1.1 billion buyback program.

Research and development remains essential to CSL's future. Our approach is now more focused and productive. The reduction in our fixed costs and overheads enables us to focus on key programs. Our model is evolving to combine deep scientific and clinical capability with targeted external partnerships can accelerate innovation and expand access to promising science. A good example of this is the partnership we announced in late 2025, with Dutch biotech company, VarmX. The partnership is to develop a novel treatment to help restore blood coagulation in patients on Factor Xa anticoagulant, who require urgent surgery or are experiencing severe bleeding.

Another recent example is our partnership with [indiscernible] Therapeutics. This partnership provides access to potential first-in-class treatment for patients with rare kidney and liver diseases as well as supporting our ambition to build a leading nephrology franchise. We will pursue external partnerships within our core therapeutic areas that can complement our internal capabilities and accelerate patient impact. I am looking forward to working with Deborah Waterhouse, who brings special portfolio development capability to the company.

We're also continuing to improve productivity in our manufacturing operations and across our plasma collection network. During the year, we announced the USD 1.5 billion expansion of our manufacturing facility in Kankakee, Illinois. We're currently working through the clinical and regulatory pathways to introduce a higher-yielding process that will allow increased plasma therapeutic supply to patients.

We also returned the Lengnau facility in Switzerland to our global manufacturing network. Our expanded collaboration with Haemonetics and the rollout of its next-generation plasmapheresis platform in our U.S. centers is expected to improve operational efficiency and help support future growth in our plasma business.

I'd also like to briefly touch on our inaugural sustainability report. This important milestone for CSL provides for the first time, a comprehensive set of climate-related disclosures in line with Australia's new reporting requirements. It provides our shareholders and stakeholders with greater transparency about how we identify, assess and manage climate-related risks and opportunities. As a global company with global operations and supply chains, climate change is a business issue that we must take seriously.

FY '27, is a year of focused execution and delivery. I'm pleased to reaffirm guidance based on our progress to date. For the group, we expect revenue to be broadly in line with FY '26, an underlying NPAT to increase by approximately 5% on a constant currency basis. Behring and Seqirus are performing well as expected. We also recognize that FY '27 is a year where Vifor will continue to face challenges from generic competition in the iron portfolio. We expect additional benefits from the transformation program during FY '27 and we'll continue balancing reinvestment in growth opportunities with disciplined financial management. We also expect to maintain strong operating cash flow as we execute the next phase of our capital management program.

Our priorities for the year ahead are clear. We will continue to improve our commercial performance, deliver the next phase of transformation benefits, increase our operational productivity and continue to improve returns from R&D and business development. We'll maintain disciplined capital allocation, generating strong and reliable returns for our shareholders. An important outcome of these priorities is the enabling and elevation of our people and the continued growth of talent in the company.

Our global workforce has proved resilient during this period of significant change, harnessing their talent and energy has been a big part of the turnaround. I'm grateful for their commitment, their passion and their professionalism.

I would also add that it's very high on my personal priorities for this financial year, to affect a smooth CEO to hand over to Deborah followed by my own transition into the Chair role. It is critical that we maintain our momentum. I also want to acknowledge the Australian patients affected by the historical contamination of donated blood. A Senate inquiry is now underway, and CSL will make a submission. I also want to thank our shareholders for their ongoing support, while we've established these stronger foundations for the future. I join Brian in welcoming Deborah Waterhouse to CSL within the timing that we anticipated.

Following a thoughtful transition I'm looking forward to commencing my new role as Chair of the Board and working closely with Deborah. I am very confident that Deborah will be an outstanding global leader who will build upon these foundations to realize the potential of this great company.

Finally, can I just add a personal note on Brian who, as you know, is retiring as Chair. I actually started at CSL a few years before Brian. And so I've worked very closely with him over many years. I think that Brian's background as a medical doctor has driven him to care very deeply about patients and public health. He's also at heart an entrepreneur always thinking about opportunities. He saw potential in CSL and its people and was the architect of CSL gaining its independence from government and then growing to global leadership in plasma therapeutics. The float followed by a string of major acquisitions, including [indiscernible] and Behring established the foundations of CSL today and generated enormous value for shareholders and our medical stakeholders. The Novartis influenza vaccines acquisition was in the same mold and was the foundation of Seqirus and its rapid ascent, to global leadership in that space.

As I became more closely involved in the company again in recent months, it was clear that Brian's passion and accountability for the company remained undimmed. Brian and the Board took steps before my return that made my job easier, recognizing that improvements were needed and initiating a number of changes that I continued. The last few months have made us strong measures. And having the support of Brian and the Board is absolutely critical -- has been absolutely critical, and I am very grateful for that. Thank you.

Thank you, Gordon. We now move on to the formal part of the meeting. The items of business for consideration today are described in the notice of meeting, which I will take as read.

In terms of running the AGM efficiently, we will read through all the items of business set out in the notice of meeting, following which we'll address all shareholder questions at one time. I confirm that I'm holding available undirected proxies in my capacity as Chair of the meeting and will vote all available proxies in favor of the resolutions in Items 2 and 3. The Board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the resolutions in Items 2 and 3 with directors abstaining from making a recommendation in respect of any resolution they have an interest in.

To conduct the poll, I appoint Ms. Christina Piccolo of Computershare Investor Services to act as Returning Officer and Ms. Jen Covelo; and Ms. Katrina Mariani of Deloitte to act as scrutineers. Voting is now open on all resolutions.

We now come to item 1 in the Notice of Meeting, which is to receive and consider the financial statements and the report of the directors and the auditor for the year ended June 30, 2026. The item business does not require shareholder approval. However, shareholders will be given an opportunity to ask questions and make comments on the reports and about the management of the company. Ms. Jen Covelo; and Mr. Andrew Griffis of the company's auditor, Deloitte Touche, are present today and available to answer questions in relation to the conduct of the audit, the preparation and content of the auditor's report, the accounting policy is adopted by the company in relation to the preparation of the financial statements and the orders independence in relation to the conduct of the audit.

Second item of business is the reelection and election of directors. As I mentioned earlier, we have 1 director, Ms. Carolyn Hewson, seeking reelection. Ms. Hewson joined our Board in December 2019 in accordance with our constitution, she is now seeking shareholder reelection. Ms. Hewson's qualifications and expertise that outlined in the notice of meeting. Having reviewed her performance, the Board considers Ms. Hewson to be an independent director and supports her reelection.

We also have 2 directors seeking election today. Mr. Gordon Naylor and Mr. Costa Saroukos, both joined the Board in December 2025. In accordance with our constitution, they are now seeking shareholder election. The qualifications and expertise of Gordon and Costa are outlined in the notice of meeting. Having reviewed their performance, the Board considers Mr. Naylor is a non-independent Executive Director; and Mr. Saroukos to be an independent director, and in both cases, support their election to the Board. Item 2A relates to the reelection of Ms. Carolyn Hewson, I'll now ask Ms. Hewson to address the meeting.

Thanks very much, Brian. Good morning, all shareholders. Today, I stand for reelection as a Nonexecutive Director of CSL. As has been said, I've been a Director since December 2019, which is nearly 7 years. And it's been a real privilege to be part of a company that I followed so closely and admired for well over 30 years. I acknowledge that in the past several years, the company has not met the standards we aspire to, and I restate my focus and commitment to the reset we have made and the firm base it now gives us to carefully allocate capital to grow actively and sustainably.

During my 7 years, I've been a member of the Audit and Risk Committee, the Human Resources and Remuneration Committee and have chaired the Corporate Governance and Nomination Committee. I am always very mindful of the responsibility I have to help guide one of Australia's largest company and global biopharma leader, especially in what is and has been a dynamic and highly competitive industry. My background is as an economist and investment banker. More recently, I've spent more than 30 years as a nonexecutive director across a number of sectors, including energy, resources, property, finance and industrial companies. This has given me insight into strategy, capital management for natural and nonfinancial risks, social value and organizational culture in a constantly changing external environment.

In my role as Chair of our Corporate Governance and Nominations Committee, I've worked closely with my fellow Board members on our CEO and chair succession processes. The transition of our new CEO and Chair will be a priority for CSL over the next 12 to 18 months. And if reelected, I will continue to support these transitions and Board renewal as the Senior Independent Director. And then once that's complete, it will be my intention to retire from the Board.

I look forward to continuing to support the work that CSL does for its patients, for its donors for public health. And I consider it a huge honor and responsibility to be a director of CSL. It's a role I take very seriously. And if reelected, I will continue to work diligently Board members to advance CSL's outstanding contribution to our patients, our people and our shareholders. Thank you.

Thank you, Carolyn. The Board is with Ms. Hewson abstaining, recommends the shareholders vote in favor of the reelection of Ms. Hewson. I refer to the slide behind me shows the details of the proxy position for this resolution. Well then, I will now move to item ask Mr. Naylor to address the meeting and look forward to hearing more from Gordon. Thank you.

Thanks, Brian, and good morning again. As you know, I stand now for election as a Non-Executive Director of CSL. Most of my working life was with CSL over a 33-year period, starting in Australia, and then working in numerous international assignments as CSL grew rapidly to become a global leader in biological pharmaceuticals. I've had numerous functional responsibilities in the company, ranging from engineering, supply chain, IT, M&A and finance [indiscernible] business leadership. I was Chief Financial Officer for 5 years before founding Seqirus and positioning that business for global leadership.

After my retirement from CSL, I took on the role of Chair of Medical Development International, which is a small Australian device/pharmacompany, based in the Eastern suburbs of Melbourne for several years, and I helped to modernize its governance systems and to steer the international expansion of that company. I am a Non-Executive Director of Orica. And I was the Chair of the Audit Committee of that company through a period of change. Orica is also a very global company with an innovation-driven growth strategy. I helped run my family's philanthropic trust, and I'm an active angel investor. In the latter capacity, I served as Nonexecutive Director for [indiscernible] and Melbourne engineering start-up in the cell and gene therapy space.

As a result of these experiences, I'm very familiar with the challenges of running an innovative global company which is listed and based in Australia, ensuring it produces profitable growth whilst managing the risks appropriately. As I mentioned in my earlier remarks, I've been interim CEO and Managing Director of CSL since February. CSL, I believe, is now stable and has returned to strong competitive growth, but much work does remain and the potential of the company is far from realized. I couldn't be more confident in Deborah Waterhouse to realize that potential as CEO. I plan to return to the Board as a Nonexecutive Director on the 1st of February 2027. And I do look forward to using my experience to support Deborah and help her manage -- and her management team as they deliver CSL's next phase of growth. I believe I can make a difference and offer myself for election. Thank you.

Thank you, Gordon. The Board, with Mr. Naylor recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the election of Mr. Naylor.

I refer to the slide behind me, which shows the details of the proxy position for this resolution Congratulations. Go ahead, Gordon. Thank you and well done.

Item 2c relates to the election of Mr. Costa Saroukos. I will now ask Mr. Saroukos to address the meeting. Costa.

Thank you, Brian, and good morning. It's an honor to be addressing you all today. I joined the Board in December 2025 after many years observing CSL with great interest from the outside. Since joining, I have gained an even greater appreciation of CSL's capabilities, the dedication of its people and the opportunities ahead. I've also recognized the challenges we must address to ensure that CSL fulfills its potential for patients and shareholders.

My experience developed over more than 25 years in the global pharmaceutical industry enables me to make a meaningful contribution at this important time. I held a variety of senior roles at companies including Merck & Co and Allergan, where I worked across different geographies, including Switzerland, South Korea, Singapore and Australia. Those experiences gave me a deep understanding of the international pharmaceutical markets, operating complexity and the importance of disciplined financial management. Most recently, I served as Global Chief Financial Officer and a member of the Board of Takeda Pharmaceuticals in Tokyo, a company that also produces plasma-derived therapies like CSL.

I've been immersed in the economics of global plasma supply for many years, and this gives me a unique insight into the critical supply chain that brings these life-saving therapies to patients. My previous experience spans audit, business development, financial planning and tax. And at CSL, I'm a member of the Human Resources and Remuneration Committee as well as the Innovation and Development Committee. Alongside my role as CSO, I serve as Chairman of Tanabe Pharma Corporation and as a Director of Olympus Corporation.

My time working as an executive in global health care makes me acutely aware of the critical roles these companies play in the lives of our patients. I'm completely invested in CSL's work to deliver enduring impact to the patients and to the public health, especially in areas of unmet needs across rare diseases and vaccines. This work is so important. I thank you for your consideration in my election to the CSL Board. Thank you.

Thank you, Costa. Board with Mr. Saroukos abstaining, recommends that the shareholders vote in favor of the election of Mr. Saroukos. I refer to the slide behind me, which shows the details of the proxy position for this resolution. Congratulations Costa.

As we're holding questions until the end of the meeting, I'll now move to item 3. Item 3 of the notice of meeting is an advisory vote to adopt CSL's remuneration report for the financial year 30th of June 2026. To deliver on our patient's promise, and to protect public health, we rely on our people and need to ensure a strong global talent supply. To this end, our executive remuneration framework enables us to attract, engage, retain and suitably -- and retain, suitably talented employees in the various markets in which we operate. This includes competing for talent with larger global companies.

The Board is committed to an executive remuneration framework that links pay to the achievement of CSL's long-term strategy and business objectives. This creates a performance culture that in turn drives long-term shareholder value. Under the Corporations Act, the company is required to include in the Director's report a detailed remuneration report setting out certain prescribed information relating to the directors and executive remuneration. The company is also required to submit this for adoption by resolution of shareholders at the Annual General Meeting.

The vote on this resolution in this item is advisory and does not bind the directors. However, the Board takes the outcome of the vote into consideration when reviewing the remuneration practices and policies of the company. The screen behind me displays details of the proxy position for this resolution. Based on what you can see in the proxy slide before you, the Remuneration Board has very good support from you, our shareholders this year.

As I've mentioned, talent is a critical factor in driving company performance and remuneration is a key component of this. So thank you.

Now that completes all the items of business for today, and we'll now move to shareholder questions. Please remember to cast your votes on each resolution. We now invite shareholder questions. As Fiona noted earlier in terms of order, we will firstly address some of the questions we received prior to the meeting, followed by questions from the floor. Next, we'll address written questions submitted online, noting that written questions may be moderated for appropriate language. Following this, we will hear from shareholders with audio questions from our online platform. Fiona? Thank you very much to those shareholders who took the time to send in questions ahead of the meeting.

Thank you. So the first question we received was from Mr. James Go, who wanted to know what changes CSL has made to ensure that the company has a vision and direction to return to profitable and sustainable growth?

Look, thank you for your question. Gordon has already addressed most of the issues embedded in this -- with this question in his address. I'd have to say all businesses operate in competitive markets and operate with risk and particularly R&D can be and is a risky proposition. We're prioritizing our assets to bring our pipeline where we feel we have real strength and making sure we have multiple options for success. We're also constantly improving our governance for external innovation so that we find and assess the scientific merit market opportunity and the most appropriate partnership structures.

We also had a question from 2 shareholders on what progress has been made on reducing our carbon footprint and that of our suppliers also about balancing executive reward with sustainability targets?

Thank you again. So Gordon has already addressed this in his speech, but I'll note that we continue to reduce our footprint. And this year, we saw an 8% reduction in Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions from year 2020, 2021 base year and 17% reduction year-on-year compared to last year.

On our remuneration structure, it's designed to align accountability for sustainability topics to those that are most able to control the outcomes, which is improving the focus on sustainability and carbon footprint.

And our last pre-submitted question came from Ms. Zoe Johnson, who wanted to know about franking credits on our dividend.

Thank you for the question. CSL is a global organization operating in over 40 countries as more than 93% of our revenues are derived outside Australia. We don't accumulate enough franking credits to allow us to frank dividends for our Australian-based investors. I assure you that if CSL didn't end up with material credits, we would distribute them to shareholders.

Okay. Thank you, Brian. We're now going to turn to questions from the room. I ask that shareholders to come to 1 of the 2 microphones here show their red voting card and clearly tell the Computershare representatives their name.

My question ties to [indiscernible] you outlined the FY '27 guidance in which revenues needed to be flat. Just on when you can comment a little bit more about that [indiscernible] compared to the last year [indiscernible].

Yes. Look, thanks for the question. It's a good one. Because at an aggregate level, you're right, it isn't our long-term plan to run the flat revenue, modest profit growth. And it's really just because we have a mix effect between the different stations units. The substantive part of the company, the core of the company bearing is really doing quite well and is returned to quite strong growth driven by the underlying demand for the products and then all of the measures we've taken operationally and in commercial.

In the case of Seqirus, it's also doing well. You'll all be aware of the I guess, slightly controversial policy fund work in the U.S. around vaccines at the moment, which is creating a headwind for us. But against that headwind, Seqirus driven by the quality of the vaccine portfolio is actually gaining market share and so doing quite well. And our challenging space is before where the -- at least part of that franchise is the iron replacement therapies where we're seeing generic competition come in. And we've had that a bit in Europe for a while and it's now becoming more aggressive in the U.S. So that's actually a headwind. And we've guided, I think, to a 25% reduction in the revenue for Vifor. So that's quite a headwind. So you're seeing that mix effect will play out, which comes up to those aggregate numbers that you mentioned. But thank you for the question.

My name stated is [indiscernible], and I'm a volunteer monitor for the Australian shareholders. It's an association, which represents all retire to shareholders in this country. Today, our hold proxies for about 1 million shares and was about $200 million cash. First of all, may I thank your colleagues, Mr. Cameron Price and Fiona for taking the time in advance of this meeting to discuss some matters about our differences in guidelines.

So I have 2 questions, if that's all right. Shareholders in Australia have become used to paying for some of their overseas misadventures of the companies that they support. We're a combination of [indiscernible] overly optimistic business cases and poor due diligence have led to significant write-downs in 80 years, often very many years later. Really had the write-downs being so large or the time frame so brief as in the Vifor and related products case with [indiscernible]. So for a business purchased in December 2021, the USD 11.7 billion. The write-down we saw last year in the books was $4.9 billion plus a few others associated with that was an astoundingly large back off from that company.

Now partly, the regulatory pressures and generic entrance to their flag products [indiscernible]. We're really strong drum beats in the jungle of the financials in the U.S. and in Europe. And right about the time of the deal, Vifor Switzerland, who was the seller, had settled major generic patent litigation in the U.S. So generic entry was judged by some commentators to be imminent. So my question is, what went wrong with the due diligence and the business case development for this business. And you did mention resets and so on, so what are you actually doing about changing that.

The second question is to the auditor. If you like, I can hold that off or [indiscernible] much simpler question. The accounts recognize a deferred tax asset, and we're all familiar with Swiss tax law. I presume of $853 million for Swiss tax losses. So this is an offset, you can move forward. And I understand that it's now changed from 7 to 10 years forward, so recent changes. So arising from the reduction of the Swiss tax carrying value of the investment in CSL and Vifor. So the question really is, how did the order test for the forecast taxable profits given what I just mentioned about a pretty poor judgment of what Vifor's revenues were going to be in the future, not that long before. So how did they come to that test in their order? And they also made the decision to leave around $300 million unrecognized. So I'd be interested to know how that's done. But thank you.

Look, let me deal with Vifor because it's some ways the -- it's one of the issues we have had to face up to, but there are a basket of activities that were included in the noncash write-downs and partly recognition of some of the cash items as well as we restructured. So we had the Marburg R&D facility. We essentially had overbuilt. These are decisions made a long time ago. We had over build R&D infrastructure. We did now allow ourselves at a flexibility to be able to spend on programs without building too large in infrastructure. So we took the decision essentially to shut down our R&D facility in Marburg. That was an expensive decision, but a correct one.

We had built a biotech facility in Switzerland that we've now brought back onto the balance sheet. And that has also meant we have recognized some implications of the carrying value because historically, the view was it would be necessary for some R&D pipeline programs that did not essentially progress sufficiently well and that also the activity with [indiscernible] on contract manufacturing did not -- the cost structure in Switzerland did not allow that to be as competitive as we'd hoped it to be with them. So there were some non-formatte also dealt with in that 90-day review, which were all new piece of information that we had very recently.

And then we come to both the competitive nature of the market in which Vifor operates. So we have 3 factors that are affecting the revenues this year. And this was the revenue, as Gordon mentioned, is a significant drop of year. It's not just generic competition for the iron franchise. It's actually the way in which products are sold in the U.S. in the dialysis market. It's called TDAPA. We had very good prices for 2 years. Prices dropped dramatically in that market. So we lost probably $100 million of revenue with that product. We also had a regulatory change in Europe with [indiscernible], where the regulator, nothing to do with us, decided that project -- that product should no longer be in the marketplace. That was a product over $100 million for us potentially this year, we thought would grow substantially further.

So beyond the generic competition, we had significant factors that came upon us very recently that we just had to recognize. So you then come to the more -- the underlying essence of the question. So what is new? I don't think the generic competition was a new fact. But arguably, there is more generic competition than yes, we had included the one that is true. We still like the rain nephrology space of Vifor. We do think that's an opportunity for us to grow. Was it our finest hour, making that transaction. No, no. Have we done other excellent transactions in our history, yes.

So what do we do? We can pick up at back and go home. We're a global company. We have to operate globally. We have to learn from those lessons. We have to understand what we got wrong in that analysis, how we can do it better, what this mistakes were made and we made everyone who was involved in the project did their best work. Competition has evolved, anticipated. And so we've addressed these matters. And I think, we have refreshed the Board. We've refreshed management. I think we've done what the company would do when it accepts that Vifor as a business is actually a business we still like. We even still like the [indiscernible] franchise because it's very cash generative. But we recognize the 6% dilution, which is the dilution we did when we raised the capital, essentially has not [indiscernible], which we are desperately unhappy. But there's no point crying over that. We've dealt with it. We're moving on. We're strengthening the business, and we're learning from it. That's what we're doing.

[indiscernible] The good news is I give the Gordon who was Chair [indiscernible]. Now I'm going to tell a story to the [indiscernible] when I first joined CSL good, it's so long ago, I got off of the job [indiscernible] of '89 joined in 1990, a remarkable place coarser debates at the time. But one of the key things is we had some great people there. And I remember when I first joined, I had this lumpy, [indiscernible] head of operation called Charles Guthrie. And he was quite a prickly encouraged, but very knowledgeable in expertise. And he said to me, look, we're building a new plant in [indiscernible]. He said there were 2 people you should watch. He said the person who is managing the projects is Peter Turner. And he said, "I have this young engineer. I just got from [indiscernible] company. He is brilliant. His name's Gordon Naylor. You really should keep your mind for the future. And Peter Turner, by the way, did an incredible job for us ultimately COO and did many things for this a long time. So -- that's why before I now turn to [indiscernible] engineering, Gordon, before he became my financial [indiscernible].

Thank you, Brian, for the surprise, [indiscernible] obviously, to answer your question about [indiscernible] fairly sure the answer to your question is that the tax cost was associated with a partial impairment of the [indiscernible] facility. And so you're right at your understanding of the treatment of it. We continue to operate the facility, which is why there's only a partial impairment to the asset.

[indiscernible]

I note that the new CEO will be based in the U.K. My question is, why is that? How will that work? And do you see the headquarters of this great Australian company remaining in Australia in Elizabeth Street in Melbourne.

Yes. So this is really 2 embedded questions there. One is, will head office always remain in Australia. Yes, it will Elizabeth Street will be our corporate headquarters, and it will be where we do significant research to the company. And of course, we have substantial manufacturing plants here in Australia in both Talabre and Broadmeadows. So, we're still a very Australian company. Having said that, we operate globally. And so therefore, -- when I ran the company, yes, I read it from Australia, although I did move to the U.S. at it for a time, we then moved to a model where operationally, the company was essentially run from the U.S. from a day-to-day operation perspective. And then when you appointed Gordon, and we've found that Gordon experienced a very, very good way, which you might describe, which we're now mirroring with Deborah.

Yes. So just to reiterate Brian's point, the -- I guess, the heart and the corporate headquarters continues to be in Australia. This is incredibly important country for us because of the operating, but also because of the relationship with shareholders and with the, I guess, the broader sort of Australian ecosystem. It's quite an important place for us, for example, for sourcing research activity, for instance, a lot of intellectual property comes out of Australia. But operationally, the vast majority of the workforce and our operations are in the Northern Hemisphere. And so for quite some time, in fact, the operational headquarters of the company have been in the Northern Hemisphere.

What I have found is that as I've run the business because I'm from here as well, my families here. But I've actually spent most of my time running the company in the Northern Hemisphere, split between Europe and the U.S. The -- I've actually base myself to a large degree in the U.K., coincidentally, it happens to be also where Deborah is from. So we know the model will work just fine. The reality is that all of the CSL people spent a lot of time on the road, spent a lot of time on conference calls, and I talked in the strange times at night and day. It's just a result of running a truly global organization. I think it would be tough to do it from down here. It's -- when I'm down here, like, I've been down here for the last 2 or 3 weeks. Yes, been an awful lot of time on call 6 in the morning and finishing very late in the evening just because of the reality of where the bulk of the economic activity occurs. But that doesn't say anything, as Brian said, about the corporate headquarters, that doesn't change.

But I do think we think we see Heathrow, and we have a very important commercial office in Maven, which is actually relatively near Heathrow, works very well from a logistics perspective. We have a large office and a team there in Mayne as well. So it's -- I mean the real is these are very busy jobs, very busy, a lot of travel. But look, we think we think Deborah can base itself there, but she's committed to spending substantial time in Australia and also in the U.S. That's a [indiscernible] job brief.

Chairman, introducing Don Hyatt.

Chairman, I am a long-term shareholder of CSL. I did for the company -- I was the company monitor for ASA for [indiscernible] I speak for myself and maybe the wider shareholder community and lovely to see my old sparring partner, Gordon Naylor there. Welcome back Gordon, we knew you would come back in some capacity or other, and still not giving us our franking credits that we deserve and still organizing share buybacks, so listening to some music coming in today and thinking the song remains the same, if you're a [indiscernible] fan.

Anyway, today, Chairman, I have 2 questions, and I did warn Fiona Mead, that I'm going to sound a little bit grumpy today because when I read your financial year '25 performance, I saw revenue down 1%, underlying NPAT, down 3% reported NPAT a loss of $2.6 billion and cash flow down 1%, all sounded to be going in the wrong direction. And most of us here as investors are looking at share growth. I mean, this is the problem. We do hear about dividends fairly regularly. They're about 2.1%. And if you gross that up, for franking credits, it stays at 2.1%. So we need share growth. And we've just not seen that for a number of years. In fact, they topped out a couple of years ago.

I'm going to crave your indulgence a little bit here. Chairman, I've got a couple of minutes and 2 questions. Firstly, I guess it's true to say there's a sense of de javu here. This is the second time I fair well -- the first time was in 2000, you came back again. So congratulations. I looked back at my notes at the time. And at that time, you've been with CSL or since it went public around about 20 years, and due to accumulated long-term incentives and short-term incentives, and because you're a good lever, we considered that for a while at the ASA and thought, yes, let's give this man all of those incentives. And those incentives added up after 20 years of work to about $10 million, which is interesting to reflect because Gordon is getting that for 1 year's work this year. I'm not suggesting you're not worth at Gordon, and I'm just saying maybe you were worth a little bit more. And it's pretty much an indication of how things have changed over the year.

Our costs or, I suppose, what we call the cost of attracting the best talent in the world has just gone through the roof. And I wonder about that a little bit from time to time.

Secondly -- well, finally, having dealt with CSL for over 8 years, I think it's important for me to say that I have the highest regard for the people I've dealt with. Okay, in terms of their professionalism, the way they behave, the way they've treated me as a person as an ASA member and so forth and so on. And the intellect invariably is right in the top level. And that's why I'm a bit confused as to those results that I spoke to you in a short while ago. And I'm just going to go through a few things. You've heard them before, Chairman. I'm sorry to do this to you. I do apologize. It even pains me to go through these things, but it doesn't pain me as much as the share price hitting $90 in June of this year. That pained me even more. And I'm sure it pained a number of people. However, it's doubled since that time. It was $195 yesterday and hopefully going up.

Okay. So a great deal of work goes into the rem report, and I'm just wondering about the amount of work that goes into the Rem report. Whether it achieves what we wanted to achieve, I don't know, -- we had a, what is euphemistically called a retirement recently. 3 people retired infact. Have they lost bonuses, whether that achieved what we wanted it to achieve. We've heard about Ms. Waterhouse. Hopefully, she matches the expectation. We won't know for a couple of years.

CSL really is like that ocean liner. It is a massive organization. It is incredibly complex and it is very slow the pipeline of products and things like that. 5, 10 years, things like that. They take a long time to get back on track. So good luck, Gordon Naylor, you got a little bit of work ahead of you. It's not done yet.

Okay. just going through a couple of things over the last couple of years. They are very expensive ones, Vifor and CSL112. I know these are in the past that CSL112, we blew up around about $1 billion there. We didn't know what was going to happen until a final bit of Phase II and it mostly fell over. It fell over to the extent where it never got commercialized. And I really think that, that was a problem because I had spoken to our previous CEO, [indiscernible], a number of years before, CSL had always had a really high strike rate. Once we've got things through to Phase III, we had a very, very high level of belief that, that would get through much higher than most other pharmaceutical companies. And yet this one fell over.

And I just wonder how much time effort. It's not just the money, but it's the research capacity that was going into CSL112, that didn't go elsewhere. I don't know where else it would go. We've got Andrew Kathleen over here. He would know, but maybe it might have gone into developing mRNA vaccines or something like that, I don't really know.

Okay. And the second one, of course, we've heard about Vifor. Vifor was bought in 2022 for USD 11.2 billion, and this year, it was written down by an absolute eye-watering $6.6 billion or 56%. So it's written down by nearly AUD 10 billion. That's a huge amount of money, and you have addressed that to a certain extent, Chairman. But I sort of really wondered, I mean, what I write down, I was a bit of a reader of bits and bases, our marks, for example, talks about second-level thinking, Daniel Kanneman, talks about System 2 thinking.

On the surface of it, when I read about it, it sounded absolutely perfect for CSL, a high-end product doesn't cure anything. I hate to say that, but it doesn't cure and it's something that we keep having to provide for the patients to improve their quality of life. Fitted the CSL model, but questions like why was it on sale? What did the vendor know about this that we didn't know. There had to be a bit more intellect put into that about generics and what was coming down the track. I don't know that we actually did what we should have done. You've also mentioned Gordon, I'll call it what it is, the antivaccine [ lunacy ] that's going on in the U.S.A. at the moment. You're a nice guy, you wouldn't call it that, but that's what it is. Hopefully, that gets sorted out in the fullness of time.

We're enough kids die pertussis when the smallpox epidemic takes place, maybe they'll change their mind. We have no control over it. Yes. Okay. And of course, we haven't mentioned too much about our little excursion into China via [indiscernible], okay? Now I knew at the time I've spoken to some people who had dealt with China. I said, be very careful about China. You can invest money there, but getting your money back out is almost impossible. That was always going to be a bit fraud, turned out to be such. So CSL bought into radar for $352 million in 2017. They sold out in 2024 for $185 billion and that was a significant loss. So another little mistake. So I noticed that, as I said, 3 staff have departed and bonuses have been forfeited, but I really wonder whether that only 3 people were responsible for that. I really suspect it was broader.

So my question really -- my first question, sorry, is yes, -- the second one is really short. The first question is, how is it -- we've got a Board that's incredibly talented, huge expertise in a whole range of areas in pharmaceutical area and governance financing, in law and so on. How is it that these sorts of things? I just simply expect better of CSL. That's my simple bottom line. I expect better of CSL. How could these things -- it's not just one thing, a whole series of things taking place over a period of time?

In many ways, is that [indiscernible]. What's the second question? So I could deal with both.

The second one I had to ask Gordon Naylor, February 2020 share price, $330. July '24, it's still $310 June this year, $90 Gordon and yesterday, $194. Can you assure me is not guarantee, but assure me that I should continue holding my CSL shares into the future, and I will be able to buy the car that I deserve or whatever [indiscernible].

Thank you, Don. Thank you very much. And certainly, a rich set of matters you've raised it. The remuneration report is staggeringly demanding for the Board to put together. So I sort of share your sentiment. I do wonder about the value of the effort we have to go into is the law. So that's where we're on that. I mean I think you're well listed mistakes. You don't well list things we've done well. You also don't -- your time frame -- the challenge for shareholders is the time frame is what you're aware of. But the reality is this is a very long-term industry.

So if you look at the 112 decision, the decision to start the Phase III [indiscernible], I think, was 2014 and it took 10 years, partly because of COVID. So although, yes, a nasty result. And once you start these Phase III clinical trials, they're very hard to stop because you're accumulating patients, et cetera. At the time the decision was made, I don't think it's hardly anyone here is too involved on the board. And in essence, it was a reasonable thing to do. What was wrong with 112, I guess you could say it probably was too demanding on the R&D budget. And I think I would share your view as with Gordon, that it lessened our focus on some of the easier, better short-term opportunities in the portfolio. That's true.

But once you start this machine, it keeps going, [indiscernible] to the Vifor Essentially, the before down is about it's still a huge number. But delaying the, we built a manufacturing facility for drugs that essentially as I said before, didn't get through the pipeline and the contract manufacturing strategy didn't work. So that's our real [indiscernible]. I think we can operate it successfully, and that's why we've brought it back and now recognized some of those costs. These are the downside.

Now remember, I started in [indiscernible] the company made USD 4 million. That was our profit and negative cash flow. So yes, I accept -- it's been a very -- we've had volatility. I was there as was Gordon, when the share price went from [ 52% to 11% ] pre-split. You've probably been there as well. So it's not like this is the first time that we've had challenges. But it's not every decision was bad. There's been many fine decisions made in the company. Our cash flow last year, even in a really last year was USD 3.5 billion. We have a strength that Gordon talked about is it is real. But we had to do the reset. And you could say, well, why did we build up too much infrastructure. Well, there really is the corporate plan at the time, and these are long-term position to build up a new R&D facility it takes 8 years. These are long-term decisions. No one, I don't care how [indiscernible]. You're going to get every decision right. We just have to collectively get more right decisions.

And you might -- I think the key lesson for me and Vifor, I mean, yes, of course, we haven't paid them, bloody awful. I mean do you think we are happy. So what is it about that transacting I think it was too big. Looking back, I just don't think we should have done a transaction at large because the risk profile is high. Even though it was only 6% solution to capital, you're risking way more than that 6%. Then we're going to buy those shares back, I think, in the last year, this year and next year. So that's it. But the reality is it's too, too tough. It's too important on your reputation. So I think large transactions are probably too complicated to do it.

And I'm leaving that would be my key lesson do the small tuck-ons, tuck-ins more frequently, where you're taking less risk and you can do more of a portfolio approach. So sure, we've learned that lesson. But we've done pretty well. We did well on GRH, we did well in Animal Health. We did a well in diagnostics. We did well in plasma therapeutics, we did well in flu. Yes, we got one wrong. It's still a good business. So let's not throw the bag with the bathwater. We just accept we've got the timing role. We paid too much. We've accepted that. We're fixing the business, but we like the nephrology space in particular.

So sure, I accept, yes, we didn't do the one recently well. I cannot explain share price volatility today. It's not just CSL. It's everywhere. So I hear you, volatility is a new part of our life, I think, for any company that's publicly listed. It's a combination of the weight of money swinging depending on macro factors where -- and then you've got the cost of capital, interest rates affected. And -- you've got -- and then you have a lot of machine trading. So at the end of the day, it's quite difficult for a retail investor as well as a Board to watch these generations and know what on earth is going on.

But I can assure you, the Board and the senior management have taken to heart the things we didn't do right and have a very clear determination to actually fix what we've done and continue to grow the company, but do it in an intelligent planned way, which includes Gordon, Gordon taking after me, Deborah coming on board, refreshing the senior management and refreshing the Board. It's been very thoughtful I think you'll see the benefits of that over a number of years. And I think that it's a company we're still all mostly invested in being successful. Nothing's changed there. People think it was Hubris that drove us to some of these things. I don't believe it was just judgment. We just overinvested in 112. We probably -- [indiscernible] facility was probably built too early. And Vifor, we clearly got the timing on of the transaction and that's in due diligence from. That is correct.

Competition has changed, regulatory environment change. Nothing is constant, but I can assure you this remains a great company and we're looking to the future with optimism. Thank you.

Chairman introducing Rex Makenzie.

I remember in 2002, you were very sick. And in fact, you would die. And the Chairman of the Board was at your bedside and you are claiming to take over Behring. I think it was at the American [indiscernible] My memory is not always -- and I think imagination still has a place even in a very large company, and I'm pleased to see that Gordon is a person who has some imagination. And I hope that the new company head will also have an imagination, but that's not enough. And you have to have patients as well so to shareholders. And the stock market, you know the [indiscernible] place, and I won't bother you with that. But it is a funny place and it isn't necessarily sensible and yearly results are not everything.

And I have been very impressed with the way you as a leader of a great company, which you helped establish and it was on your imagination and your endeavor and your ability to build [indiscernible].

Do we have any more questions?

Chairman introducing, Stephen Ma.

I just want to say congratulations as well, Brian, on a wonderful career. It's sad to see you going that thank you for all of your service over many years. I'm a team invest member, we're large shareholders in the business. I have -- well, also, I just want to say thank you to both you and today for the transparency and accountability that you've talked about in the presentations the way you've answered the question, it's very helpful for shareholders to get a context from me. So thank you for that.

I do want to just quickly ask a couple of questions about remuneration possibly best for Cameron is our rem share, but whether you feel fit to answer the question. I know we're under a lot of pressure with 2 strikes, and you're probably getting pressure from proxy advisers and others to redesign the plan. The 2 things that I noticed that have changed, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that -- we're firstly proposing to take the $7 million of impairments last year out of the metrics going forward in a fairly quiet way. Perhaps that's because we've got new management coming in, and we don't want to hold them accountable for those past issues. But was that really the best way to do it to remove the $7 billion of impairments from the plan metrics going forward?

What is your other question?

The second question is around the changes to the LTI metrics. So our metrics used to be burning the share growth and return on invested capital. Two excellent metrics that management are largely in control of. We've replaced it with TSR, and there's been lots of discussion today about the share price. Unfortunately, management doesn't get to do much at all about short-term share price movements, and we measure these things on a 12-month basis. So we've seen in the last 12 months, our share price is between $90 and $200. The value of the company hasn't changed that much in the last year. But going forward, that's how we're going to assess LTI for management. So it's something they can get up out of bed every day and control what happens with the short-term share price. So that's my real concern with getting rid of those 2 metrics, and just having it all based around share price going forward?

Look, I mean I think there's no doubt. A lot of work has gone into the whole revised remuneration framework. I mean I think it's fair to say that -- this is a perfect system, by the way. I mean no matter what system we come some critical fine, yes, but there's always the but. So the view was TSR certainly well represents the shareholder experience. It's imperfect, but it's the best proxy for the shareholder experience. That's what you want your long-term intended to do it. Because every other setting, you have the but, I give you an example, return on invested capital my but would be there, well, does that stock management investing in high-returning opportunities down the road. So it's a troubling metric because it partly could reward on investment, and that's sometimes seen in other companies.

So that's -- so ROIC is a complex one. And then the earnings per share, actually -- I actually quite like earning because you have always been a bit of a growth in earnings per share. But again, saying what about share buybacks? What about other things? It's that affects earnings per share. So at the end of the day, a lot of work went into it. I mean no perfect answer to it, but I think we came on balance given the TSR the way we're measuring our relevant competitors is fair. But we've got to revisiting it.

No final decision has been made as to what on a look-forward basis with regard to in-flight stock at the moment for executives. But we do note that many of those executives were nothing to do with the Vifor transaction, all have come on recently, and we've got to be careful. We are in the business of retaining and rewarding executives and it has an ability to essentially make all these things of no value moving forward as well. So no final decision has been made on that, but we're very mindful that we have to show fairness to the executives and trying to get the balance right. That's all.

We're publicly apologize, we've gone and bed lowly to shareholders around Australia, apologizing for the write-downs, which are horrible. I get it. It was awful what we've done. We're going to be determination, moving on. We're growing the business, dealing with issues. We can't keep using the rear vision there. And so that's the concept here. Let's not continue to punish what we've recognized, particularly for all those people who had nothing to do with them.

Sure. Yes, understand that. Maybe the compromise then going forward is to consider the earnings per share metric as part of...

I always like...

Because ultimately, long term, that tends drive share price.

Chairman introducing [indiscernible].

First of all, I'd like to thank you, [indiscernible] and to wish you the very best in your retirement. To Mr. Naylor, thank you very much for coming back. for your stewardship of CSL and a very difficult interregnum and I wish you the very best going forward. I'm going to ask you a question that mixes business and politics, perhaps not a good idea. But I'm interested in the -- your vaccine business. And I want to understand better what have been the headwinds for your vaccine business under the Trump administration? And is CSL well positioned to go forward, should the pundits be right and the midterms flip the congress to the Democrats and have the Senate? And does that give you some upside possibilities with your vaccine business?

Look, thank you for the question, and thank you for the [indiscernible]. I think this year, the die cast for the vaccine market and vaccination rates. We've certainly seen an uptick in disease, whether it even be in Australia or certainly in the U.S., hospitalization, influenza, hospitalization has accelerated. So when will we see the market in volume [indiscernible]. I don't know. We are doing very well, as Gordon said, because we have a very good product portfolio, and we have -- our team has done a great job.

It's not all the administration, to be honest. I mean, there's no doubt the whole COVID vaccination policy had a -- has had an over hang on vaccination in general and public figures recommending vaccination rates. I think it will take a number of years before we get back to normalizing the public accepting experts' advice and dealing with those recommendations. So look, I think I don't see the mid-term elections changing much. Actually, I think we have our reality for the next couple of years. I do think we're doing well in that environment. And I do think the public will eventually become more aware of the benefits of vaccination in flu and other vaccines as well. That would be children's vaccinations, et cetera. So we're in a really interesting time, but we're doing well considering.

Thank you. Very politically, delicate answer. Thank you.

People accuse me of not being politically. I'd say that's not now for I'm known for.

Chairman introducing Peter [indiscernible].

I wasn't going to ask a question this here, but I changed my mind during the discussion. I've decided to ask a question going forward, [indiscernible] we've had our fingers burned a little bit with CSL112 and the recent Vifor acquisition. What concerns me is I don't want to see the results of those 2 makes gun shy in the future. I've noticed that we've started to slowly reduce our spend on research and development. The thing about research and development, as you know, it's a decision to make today, which will affect your business in a decade and beyond. How do we how do we not become gun-shy that we still have enough money in the research and development bucket. So our business can continue to grow in the future?

Thank you. You're absolutely right. The last thing we want to do is to reduce our R&D spend and our ability to develop the portfolio. Having said that, what we've done is we've reduced where we spend in fixed cost in R&D and we're doing -- spending more in partnering. And Gordon talked about 2 of our partnering arrangements with [indiscernible] recently where we bring in Phase II, Phase III ready assets.

So I think what you'll see is a greater blend of externally sourced programs and internally generated programs. Clearly, you've seen in Denbury has done very well for us and growing well. So we are completely committed to continuing to support and grow R&D spend. We need to strengthen the portfolio. And part of the reset was rebalancing internal and external research assets.

Okay. My second question specifically for you, Mr. Chairman. Reflecting on your long career at CSL, what do you think has been the best decision you've made in your long time here. Personally, I think it was [indiscernible] acquisition. But I'll give you the opportunity to reflect on our long career outlook?

Apart from great people, we've got a lot -- had great people because we had a very great set of purpose. So I'd say, first and foremost, our collective sense of purpose as a group of management was really strong at the company, and that really held us in good stead. I'd say the second thing the company really had, when I joined [indiscernible] laboratories, it was a sort of a sad place because it rightly celebrated its history, but struggle to understand what its future looks like. Yet when we look inside the place, we found, as I said, great people and some capabilities, whether it be in cell culture, the [indiscernible] transaction was transformative. We did [indiscernible] in Animal Health were selling the asset to Pfizer. We did both transactions were remarkable for shareholders. And it gave us the confidence as we build out deeper understanding of plasma fractionation and the underlying economics of it, which we also did on the influenza market as well.

We then looked at ways we could do it. So you're right, ZB was a transformative moment. It wasn't -- we certainly we certainly had challenges. As you know, as you heard, you understood with import Navi, share price was great, oversupply the market share deployments, but we had a deep understanding of the economics of the business. And so there's -- so combining [indiscernible] was transformative to the company and then our deep understanding of the economics of the flu market also enabled us to contemplate the Novartis vaccine business.

So I think we've made a lot of really good decisions as a company. It's because we saw opportunities in assets that were unloved and the people and that we spend more time trying to deeply understand the market [indiscernible] how we can add value. I think if we look back at Vifor, we didn't do enough of that quite clearly, our management team followed by the Board, we didn't do enough of that. And that is what we've got to learn. But we haven't lost I think a set of decency venues, optimism and our desire to create great people. Look, we were very impressed with Deborah Waterhouse through all the interviews, really good person. I'm sure you look forward to meeting here next year. She's got the same sense of purpose and I think she'll bring continuing to drive the business, and that's all we all feel. Thanks for your questions.

Well, I've been doing my research on Deborah in the last few days. As one of the original float shareholders, I just wanted to thank you at your last AGM for the work you've done everyone here.

Chairman, introducing [indiscernible] .

I'm a small shareholder. Just want to ask the question. I got a scare in May, where it was $90. And I come here today, I hope to hear some set news. I hear nothing but flat revenue, and it was slightly. My question is, does the management have a conviction or strategy and a plan [indiscernible] enough to restore the sustainable growth CSL used to have. We're saying all the great people here is as such conviction, credible one or a shareholder like me, how can I look forward for such evidence in the coming months. If not today.

Thank you. Thank you for the question. I mean we have our guidance. We have confirmed our guidance. We'll update the market more than life in February at the half year results. There's no lack of conviction in the company. We just -- we are -- as Gordon previously described, this year is a year which Vifor -- the economics of Vifor as such, in revenue that the growth we're seeing in [indiscernible] and the performance of Seqirus is essentially diluted by the Vifor this year stepped out. So we are committed to building our portfolio of products, growing the company, but this isn't a 5-minute exercise. We're not a consumer products company. We don't do a some marketing campaign and we can sell more products. This takes years to do, but we're confident of the underlying business. And I think I have faith, and I'd suggest we'd be well served having said in our ability to sustainably grow the business over the longer term. That's how we get into.

Thank you, shareholders for all those questions. That concludes our questions from the floor. I'll now check with our company's Secretary, whether we have received any questions on right.

Oh, we have many. Our first question comes from Mr. Stephen Butler. Given CSL's FY '26 performance and the shortcomings acknowledged in its annual report, how will the Board ensure executive remuneration is directly linked to measurable improvements in business performance and shareholder returns rather than rewarding management for a recovery from its own past decision.

Look, thank you for the question. It's -- I've dealt with that a little bit before and the question on TSR. We think TSR is a very good metric for long-term incentives, well aligns management with shareholders. And I think that we have -- we're trying to get our remuneration framework that works well for shareholders and works, of course, for the company. And that's the balance that we have. And we'll continue to listen to shareholders on this, but there's no [indiscernible].

Okay. Our next question comes from Antelope Holdings. Dr. McNamee, can you please explain, one, what is the forward strategy for maximum direct to tenure and director refresh criteria selection. And two, how has the Board considered and revised the key skill metrics for directors required in light of the recent significant financial setbacks and the considerable work ahead quite stated by Mr. Naylor in his CEO message?

Well, there's no doubt we've had a significant direct to refresh over the last 2 years. I think nearly more than half of the board are new. And within the next 6 to presumably 18 months, 24 months, there will be 3 new directors. [indiscernible] he'll have to make a decision where he stands again or not. Ms. Hewson also will make a decision whether or not what her tenure will be. So it's quite clear we've significantly refreshed the Board with very, very capable people. I think our policy with regard to tenure generally speaking is when you join the Board, there's an expectation that you'll have 2 or 3 terms of the company, often three, really more, really substantially less than 2, that would be my parameter is in, call it, a policy, but that will be the parameters.

Okay. Our next question comes from Mr. Chris Maxworthy. He's normally in the room with us, but he's online today. He says, Fiona, please read this question completely. At last year's AGM, I asked the Chair if knowing what you know now, would the Vifor acquisition have proceeded. Clearly, hindsight is a wonderful thing. To paraphrase Dr. McNamee, he had measures that CSL's due diligence was not as good as it could have been. Similarly, Brian pointed out that the generic version of Vifor's key product were faster to market than CSL had anticipated. I calculate that had CSL chosen to return capital to shareholders in place of purchasing before, that would equate to [indiscernible] per share bracket FY '23, '24 was almost 500 million shares on issue.

How do we ensure that future follies such as this don't arise, particularly as Vifor appeared as a new initiative as a result of a new Board member appointment at that time. Finally, I wish you well in the future, and that as a retired chair, you perhaps take time to reflect and enjoy this latter phase in your life.

Well, thank you for the kind words at the end. There's only so many moments we can [indiscernible] of Vifor because, as I said before, -- it wasn't our finest acquisition, but it has taken us into areas in which we think we can prosper, particularly rare nephrology. We see the iron franchise. It's a very good cash-generative business. It's a high-quality business and has durability. So we're not going to throw the baby with the bath water, and we're not going to give up trend aspirations for complementary growth.

We've done important business development activities in the last 12 months. We'll be doing more of those. And look, I think, as I mentioned before, particularly the scale of the transaction, I think, was probably the most significant thing you'd need to look at very carefully. I'm sure Gordon would do moving forward. I mean if I look back at my time at the company, the only time where it really done significant transactions that -- put the company at risk was to be frank, at the IPO with we issued $210 million to the common to buy the unfinished [indiscernible] fractionation plant that was using a novel technology called chromatography. Now that was brave. We also issued 23% of our stock to buy CLB -- sorry, [indiscernible] was about 10% for ZLB.

As I said, Vifor was 6% of our stock. I just think the transaction was too large with hindsight and difficult in such a large transaction to have the full gamut of knowledge that we would have preferred to have. So in essence, we've learned from it. I disagree with the term folly, but I do agree with the term it wasn't as far as out. Thank you.

Okay. Our next question comes from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Were we under any pressure from institutional shareholders or proxy advisers to announce the chair succession before today's AGM. What drove the timing to announce it yesterday after proxy voting had closed rather than today. Did we use any external party to assist with handling the chair succession such as a recruitment firm to consider any potential external candidates to become chair?

Look, thanks for the question. I mean, Fiona is excellent on these government things and we were -- it was clear to us that under the [indiscernible] guidelines, if a decision is made for a chair to retire and the new chair elect is made, that's an announceable event and that's what we did.

It's price sensitive.

Price sensitive.

[indiscernible] morning, made the decision and we announced.

That was decision that we felt we should make. It was really -- that was the point of it. And look, I think with regard to my successor, -- he is something that's been on my mind for a long time. Carolyn Hewson is Chair of our Governance Committee. She managed the process extremely well, both for the CEO search and for the Chair Elect position. We looked internationally. But I know, particularly bringing a new CEO like Deborah, who I think is the [indiscernible] is going to do really well. The -- our ability to have Gordon, who is extremely knowledge of the business, and we have a very strong management team, [indiscernible] in finance, other people. Our knowledge of the business today is great. That's a great mix of the old and the new.

And so once we debated that and Gordon was willing to take on this task because it's not always enjoyable, he accepted the medal. We decided to make the decision and move on. And I think it's been well received by certainly all shareholders I mixed with.

Okay. We are standing between us and lunch now. My question is for Brian McNamee. Congratulations on making CSL a worldwide success story and one that I'm proud to be part of. It is fair to say that the last 5 years have been a turbulent time for CSL. Looking back and with the benefit of hindsight, is there anything differently you and CSL would have done over the last 5 years if you had your time again?

Thank you again. Some of the decisions were made more than 5 years ago. The -- we're a very long-term industry, whether it be our infrastructure, whether it be R&D pipeline decisions, they were made a long time ago. So the last 5 years, of course, Vifor is the manner that comes up that you'd reviewed the timing of that transaction. But otherwise, I mean, the way we've -- I think the way we've got about refreshing our management team and the Board has gone extremely well. I think we've had the ability to think about how to best complement external new people with excellent executives have been and people like Gordon as well, and we'll be so lucky to get [indiscernible] very eligible from the competitive to [indiscernible] perspective, we've got brilliant people from the U.S. who've joined the Board.

I think we have done a lot to strengthen the business. And that's why we are confident of the future. And to some degree, you learn most when you make mistakes. It is ugly. It is ugly, it is uncomfortable. It's not nice, but it's the truth. Because you really then have to think long enough, what the heck? What do we do? Why did we do it? How do we go about it? What can we do better? So to some degree, yes, we had a fantastic ride. Shareholders loved this, [indiscernible] and cheering on be clever. The reality is, yes, but we've had a bet. We've had a [indiscernible], we get it. We've noticed. We noticed ourselves. And what have we learned from it? How do we do things better? I think many of these initiatives have been in train now for a year, 1 to 2 years, some of the initiatives that you are now we're talking about. We've understood we needed to change.

Things were not great the way they were going. And I think that's the strength of the company that we are willing to acknowledge when things haven't been done well or we have made mistakes and that we can learn from them. And that, to be frank, is what life is about. I don't care whether it's personal life or corporate life I think that's what we try to do at CSL.

The next question is from Mr. Jon Tianhe would like to know about AI impact.

That's a short topic. Look, for fun, I'm going to turn to Gordon who's much better [indiscernible] than me. Gordon?

Thanks, Brian. Thanks for the question. So obviously, this space is evolving incredibly rapidly. And we, like I'm sure all of you are sort of trying to keep up with what's happening. So the answer to the question next year will be different from this year probably. So I think the sort of 2 angles on this. The first is the broader societal issues, which sort of translate into, if you like, a level of threat to the corporation, particularly on cybersecurity. And I think it's fair to say that from the company's perspective, we're taking that very seriously. And as recently as the last few days, we've seen an emergent seat, for example, which internally saw the company scramble to get to address that within like a matter of hours, like really fast moving to.

And then the other side of it is the more strategic question of the adoption of the technology for the company and again, rapidly moving we expect that ultimately, the technology itself will probably become commoditized. And so there's a question there about the ultimate value to the creatives of the technology [indiscernible] it's a highly competitive space and rapidly evolving.

The -- the other issue is that it's likely that even the adoption of it will become fairly widespread. And so we're looking to try and most thoughtfully adopted technology to CSL's needs. So we're running a program where we're thinking about those questions at the leadership level of the company. We spent quite a bit of time on understanding the technology and then thinking about how it might be applied to the corporation. We do expect it's probably going to be one of the biggest exogenous technology shifts over the next decade. We've got lots of other stuff we're doing, obviously, but this one is coming from our side, which we're very actively thinking about how we apply it to the company.

CSL is quite knowledge intensive. We do a lot of analytics. We think about stuff. We've got, as we've said a few times, a very deep technical capability in multiple spaces. So broadly speaking, AI is probably fairly suitable, but we just need to apply thoughtfully over the strategic horizon.

Okay. We have 1 more question from [indiscernible]. I can assist you with this if you need to. Second and final question from me on AGM process. Why do we use the Lumi system for online questions when our share registry provider Computershare offers a perfectly called online meeting platform, completely online voting, which we haven't offered today. Why the change of venue this year and will you disclose the head count data in the poll results so we can see how many of our shareholders voted for and against the various resolutions today? Did even 2% of shareholders lodged proxy votes and what campaign did you run to get out the vote?

Fiona, you definitely have to answer most of that.

Okay. Question on the Lumi system. We're very risk averse. We have a very good provider that we've used for a few years, and I kind of think of it [indiscernible] fix it. That's not to say Computershare don't offer a wonderful service to CSL. They are very good providers to us. And there is online voting. So Mr. Mayne, you might just need to talk to someone from Lumi about that.

We changed the venue this year because the last venue was booked for our date, so we needed to find a new venue. I think everyone in the room likes this venue.

In terms of how we run our proxy campaign, Cameron and our Head of exec comp and I met with our top 20 to 25 institutional shareholders and engage very thoroughly with them on governance and rev questions. And we also have a Computershare provider, Georgeson, who helped us monitor the voting and see what our shareholders are feeling. So that answers that question.

Mr. Mayne will need to take the question on 2% of shareholders on notice, and we will get back to you separately on that.

Well done, Fiona.

There are no more questions and there are no audio questions.

Thank you. Thank you. So ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our discussion. On all items of today's business, the poll will formally be closed within 10 minutes from when I declare the meeting closed. The votes will then be counted and the results of the poll we've brought it back to me. We also announced that the ASX as soon as practicable following the meeting. For those in the room, I now ask that the Computershare representatives collect the red voting cards or you may place them in the ballot box near exit if you need more time. I now declare the meeting closed. Except for the conduct of the poll. Thanks.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the CSL Limited Full Year Financial Results 2026 Conference Call. [Operator Instructions]

I would now like to hand the conference call over to Michelle Rees, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining CSL's 2026 Full Year Results Presentation. I'm Michelle Rees, Head of Investor Relations. Before we begin, I would like to draw your attention to the important disclaimer on the screen. A copy of this, along with our ASX materials, has been published on the CSL and ASX websites.

With me today are Gordon Naylor, CSL's Interim Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director; Ken Lim, our Chief Financial Officer; and Diego Sacristan, our Chief Commercial Officer. Please note, this briefing is being webcast.

I will now hand over to Gordon.

Thanks, Michelle, and good morning, everyone. Today's call is primarily about our FY '26 full year results and the outlook for FY '27. I'll also give you a broader update on our progress toward a return to profitable sustainable growth. In early May, after 90 days in the role, I shared with you that our financial performance had fallen short of expectations and the rapid diagnosis work undertaken to assess the drivers of that outcome.

I'm pleased to report that in the intervening weeks, we've been able to maintain momentum to stabilize the company's performance, restore the cadence and focus of the leadership team and start to deliver results. Considerable work remains but we are making progress. FY '26 has been a reset year for CSL. The actions that put us back on the path to sustainable growth started well before my appointment and have been delivered with intention and urgency. My observation on this is twofold. The industry structures in which we compete remain robust. And as I traveled around the global business and engaged with staff, it is evident that the CSL culture of capability, commitment and openness remains deeply held.

There is absolute clarity in the global workforce about the task at hand. The leadership team has been key to ensuring that communication with the broader organization has been consistent, open and transparent. The full support of the Board has helped us to move rapidly. The FY '27 planning process included the allocation of accountability to a high level of detail, all supporting CSL's return to profitable growth. We assessed initiatives in play, focusing on the ones that are core to our success and stopping the ones that weren't.

Since I'm not a candidate for the permanent CEO role, I've been able to work with the Board on the process. I'm pleased to say, on behalf of the Board, that the search is progressing to plan, and the Board is impressed with the caliber of talent on our short list. In the interim, my role is to continue to drive the business forward and to give the incoming CEO the strongest possible foundation from which to build. I then expect to return to the Board as a Nonexecutive Director after a suitable transition period.

With that, let's turn to the FY '26 result. I'll take you through the high points and then hand over to Ken to explore the financial details. As a reminder, the numbers I talk to are on a reported basis, and the percentage movements mentioned are on a constant U.S. dollar currency basis, unless otherwise stated. Revenue was $15.8 billion, down 1%. Underlying NPATA was $3.1 billion, down 2%, while underlying NPAT was $2.8 billion, down 3%. As you know, we're returning to NPAT as our core financial profitability measure.

Reported NPAT includes the significant one-off restructuring and impairment charges that Ken will discuss in detail. Within the businesses, Behring revenue declined by 1% at constant currency. Seqirus declined by 8% and Vifor grew by 3%. Underlying demand for immunoglobulin remains robust, ANDEMBRY has performed ahead of our initial expectations and HEMGENIX continues to grow.

Within influenza vaccines, Seqirus was the only global participant to grow seasonal influenza revenue year-on-year despite significant sectoral headwinds. Our transformation program delivered $176 million of savings in FY '26, ahead of the target we set for the year. We selectively reinvest a portion of those savings in commercial and development initiatives where we expect the returns to justify the investment. Cash flow from operations remained strong at $3.5 billion. This supported the completion of the share buyback of around AUD 1 billion, and Ken will talk about a further buyback ahead.

In addition, I'm pleased to announce that we are maintaining the dividend in U.S. dollars. These capital returns are evidence of the underlying robustness of the business.

Turning now to CSL Behring, our largest business. Total revenue was $11.4 billion, which was down 1% against the prior comparable period. Immunoglobulin revenue was broadly flat for the year. The reported outcome was affected by the normalization of U.S. channel inventory that we spoke about in our May update. We now see channel inventory at more appropriate levels. You may recall during the year, we were also cycling the Medicare Part D changes and the loss of the U.K. tender during the first half of FY '25. These created an additional headwind to the year-on-year comparison and contributed to the flat full year Ig result.

The more relevant indicator of current demand is the second half performance. Ig revenue increased 7% on the prior comparable period and 4% on the immediate preceding half. We regard this as an early indicator that the commercial investments we've made in the U.S. are yielding benefits. We're now maintaining patient share in HIZENTRA, which is important as it demonstrates the durability of the franchise. Albumin revenue declined by 17%, principally reflecting cost containment measures and the resulting reduction in market value in China. We're encouraged to see a slowing in the rate of decline in the Chinese albumin market. You can see this reflected in our second half result, which was down 5% compared to the prior comparable period.

We have expanded our geographic footprint in China and our partnership with Baheal, who bring great strengths in the retail channel. We continue to see progress from the commercial investment initiatives in both Ig and albumin. It remains early, and we recognize the need to demonstrate sustained execution, but the direction of travel is improving. Elsewhere in the portfolio, our newer products performed well. ANDEMBRY has had a strong launch and is now available in 19 markets around the world, and HEMGENIX grew by 25%. In perioperative bleeding, competition in the U.S. continues to impact KCENTRA pricing, although we are seeing the rate of decline beginning to moderate.

On portfolio execution, underlying Ig demand remains robust. As I mentioned, our U.S. and China field force investments are beginning to show progress. Albumin volume growth in China has stabilized, although market value remains under pressure. ANDEMBRY has exceeded our initial launch expectations and the Phase III trial for the VarmX candidate has commenced with the first patient expected in the very near future. We also licensed clazakizumab to Eli Lilly for indications other than for cardiovascular events in people with end-stage kidney disease.

That transaction allows the program to benefit from Lilly's development capabilities while enabling CSL to focus its resources on those opportunities where we are best placed to create value. We are aware of a trial evaluating a similar antibody that recently failed its primary endpoint. Given the population differences, we do not view ZEUS results to be necessarily predictive of the outcome of our study, which continues.

Now moving to the operational side of the business. CSL is the global leader in plasma collection. We have a large and highly productive network, deep operational knowledge and a long history of collecting safe, high-quality plasma. This has always been foundational to Behring's success, supporting both margin structure and competitiveness. On my first day as CEO, I appointed Steve Marlow, who heads CSL Plasma, to the global leadership team. This was to ensure that this part of the group received the appropriate focus. Underperforming centers have been closed with plasma collections shifting to more efficient ones.

We are also pursuing the next wave of plasma innovation by reducing unnecessary sources of process variance, reducing unit supply costs and optimizing labor productivity through sophisticated donor scheduling and improved workflows. Better digital engagement with donors is expected to yield more personalized donor communication and improve the donor experience. Given the information-intensive nature of this business, there is fertile ground for AI applications, an area which we are pursuing rigorously.

We have been a leader in driving innovation across the industry. Continuing with that intent, we are transitioning a portion of our U.S. plasma centers to the latest generation Haemonetics plasmapheresis platform. On the manufacturing side, our yield initiatives are progressing. Planning for the Horizon 2 clinical studies continues and construction of the Kankakee Ig facility has commenced.

Turning to CSL Vifor. Revenue was $2.4 billion, an increase of 3%. However, that headline result does not reflect the more recent underlying trajectory of the portfolio. Dialysis revenue grew by 18%, largely as a result of the temporary benefit from Velphoro inclusion in the U.S. TDAPA reimbursement arrangement. Although this arrangement will cease on December 31 this year, we have and will continue to experience an early decline in revenue and margin ahead of that date. Within non-dialysis nephrology, FILSPARI achieved strong patient uptake in its launch markets, while Veltassa grew through new market entry.

The iron portfolio declined by 16% as generic competition intensified in both Europe and the United States. These portfolio dynamics are central to the outlook for Vifor and to the impairments recognized in the result. So I want to take a moment to go into these in more detail. There are significant headwinds facing Vifor. These are structural and will materially affect the earnings profile of the business over FY '27. Injectafer is now competing against generic entrants in the United States. The European iron portfolio has been in this position for over a year now and continues to experience substantial price erosion.

As I mentioned, Velphoro will lose the benefit of TDAPA at the end of calendar 2026, and we believe sales will decline substantially from their recent highs. This is factored into our forward guidance. In addition, the European Commission has adopted the decision to revoke the marketing authorization for TAVNEOS in Europe. While we are disappointed in this decision, we respect the outcome of the regulatory process. Patient care remains our highest priority, and we are working closely with health authorities to provide clear information to patient communities and healthcare providers on next steps.

Taken together, these factors create a considerable portfolio headwind. We are taking mitigating actions. The commercial and medical organizations of Vifor and Behring have been integrated. This has enabled us to combine management structures, remove duplicated regional and country-level activities and deploy resources across the combined portfolio more effectively. We are pursuing growth in FILSPARI and Veltassa, and we are examining the portfolio with a disciplined approach to return on investment. None of these actions eliminate the headwinds, but they do mean that the business is actively adapting its cost structure, commercial model and portfolio priorities.

Turning to CSL Seqirus. Seqirus continues to perform well as a sectoral leader with the innovative product portfolio driving continuing market share gains. Revenue was $2 billion, down 8%, reflecting the nonrecurrence of pre-pandemic sales associated with the avian influenza threat in FY '25. Seasonal influenza revenue increased by 4%. The adjuvanted portfolio grew by 5% and cell culture revenue also grew by 5%. As highlighted earlier, Seqirus was the only global vaccine company to grow seasonal influenza revenue year-on-year.

Since the business was established, it has grown seasonal influenza share in each year through product differentiation, manufacturing capability and focused commercial execution. We're proud of this performance, which reflects a long-term strategy of differentiating the portfolio through cell-based and adjuvanted vaccines, supported by real-world evidence and targeted geographic expansion. The business gained traction in the U.S. integrated delivery network and pediatric segments despite a challenging overall U.S. market.

The final season of standard egg-based Afluria represents another step in the evolution of the portfolio toward enhanced vaccines. The differentiation strategy continues to drive outperformance and market share gains in the United States and Europe. Germany completed a successful first season, and we entered France with enhanced recommendations for FLUAD. We have also secured a PAHO agreement that provides a platform for market and volume expansion in South America.

Our adjuvanted cell-based vaccine, AUJEMFLU, has been approved in the U.K. and received a positive recommendation from the European Medicine Agency's CHMP. The operational separation of Seqirus is now complete, which was achieved on a cost-neutral basis. The business has appropriate operating autonomy while continuing to benefit from selected CSL Group capabilities and governance. We're now comfortable with where Seqirus sits in relation to the group's corporate structure with no plans to undertake a demerger in the near term, although we are preserving optionality for a demerger if it would create incremental shareholder value.

The Tullamarine facility is now open and will support the move toward a fully differentiated portfolio, part of which is the expansion of our cell-based pandemic offering that has already yielded new agreements in Canada, New Zealand and Australia. CSL is increasingly -- sorry, Seqirus is increasingly positioned around differentiated products, targeted customer segments and selected markets where its technology and real-world evidence can support sustainable value.

I'll now hand over to Ken to take you through the financial result in more detail.

Thank you, Gordon, and good morning, everyone. Starting with the financial highlights for FY '26, I'll walk through the P&L, focusing on reported numbers and changes expressed in constant currency. Total revenue for the group was $15.8 billion, down 1%. Gross profit was $8.5 billion, down 2%, and the group operating result was $6.8 billion, down 3%. In research and development, we made strong progress on our restructuring initiatives with R&D expenses down 13% to $1.2 billion, while still investing in attractive development programs such as the VarmX Phase III trial.

General and admin costs were also down by 13%, benefiting from our cost management initiatives and organizational simplification. Net interest was relatively flat with our gearing finishing the year at 1.8x within our target range after executing a share buyback of AUD 1 billion. NPATA before restructuring and impairments was $3.1 billion, down 2%. I'll go into more detail on the restructuring and impairments shortly.

Group underlying NPAT, which is the bottom line earnings metric we will be focusing on going forward, was $2.8 billion, down 3% before restructuring and impairment charges. Our underlying effective tax rate was 19.1%. NPAT on a statutory basis after restructuring and impairments was a loss of $2.6 billion. Cash flow from operations was strong at $3.5 billion, and we maintained our final dividend in U.S. dollars at $1.62 per share, taking the full year dividend to $2.92 per share.

Turning to the next slide. The table provides a bridge from NPATA to underlying NPAT and then to statutory NPAT attributable to CSL shareholders. As I noted earlier, our FY '26 NPATA was $3.1 billion. From NPATA, we deduct the post-tax amortization of acquired intellectual property, which was $322 million in FY '26. We then adjust for the share of amortization that is attributable to noncontrolling interest. That takes us to underlying NPAT attributable to CSL shareholders of $2.8 billion. This reflects the operating performance of the business after IP amortization, but before the restructuring and impairments recognized during FY '26.

To get from underlying NPAT to statutory NPAT, we deduct post-tax restructuring and impairment expenses of $6 billion and then add back the portion of those impairment expenses attributable to noncontrolling interests. This result in statutory NPAT attributable to CSL shareholders of a loss of $2.6 billion.

Turning to the segment results. Behring revenue was $11.4 billion, down 1% at constant currency. Gross profit declined by 2% and gross margin declined by 70 basis points. The gross margin result reflects product and geographic mix, the U.S. Ig channel inventory normalization and continued pressure in albumin. These impacts were partly offset by further improvement in plasma collection costs and manufacturing efficiency. Sales and marketing expense in Behring increased by 8%, reflecting the deliberate commercial investments Gordon discussed, including field force expansion in the U.S. and China and support for ANDEMBRY.

For Vifor, revenue increased by 3%, with gross profit also increasing by 3%. Vifor's operating result increased by 11% as we continue to take out operating costs. I previously foreshadowed that from FY '27 onwards, we'll be updating our segment disclosures, including the separation of Seqirus down to segment EBIT. Although Behring and Vifor have been integrated across commercial and medical affairs, our intention is to continue to report them separately down to gross profit in order to maintain visibility over the distinct revenue and profit drivers of the 2 businesses.

Behring and Vifor will be treated as a single segment for reporting sales and marketing, R&D and general and admin costs.

Turning to Seqirus. Revenue was down 8%, with gross profit down 9% and the operating result down by 12%. While Seqirus' seasonal influenza vaccines revenue was up 4%, its overall result for the year was lower due to the nonrecurring revenue from avian flu sales that were recognized in FY '25. Sales and marketing costs increased by 8%, reflecting the launches into new markets such as Germany and France. We made strong progress on our transformation program. In FY '26, we reported total restructuring costs of $799 million, of which $339 million was cash. We delivered $176 million of savings, ahead of the $100 million target we set for the year. The majority of the savings were generated across R&D, commercial and medical and operations.

In FY '27, we expect incremental savings of approximately $220 million, taking the annualized savings to approximately $400 million and then growing to up to $550 million in FY '28. We're taking a disciplined approach to reinvesting a portion of these savings into high-priority growth opportunities. In FY '26, $30 million was reinvested in commercial initiatives, principally to support execution in Behring. We also invested $50 million in R&D to support the VarmX candidate. In FY '27, we expect to reinvest around half of the incremental savings into commercial initiatives and progressing our clinical development program.

As foreshadowed in May, we are reporting pretax noncash impairments of $5.5 billion in the second half of FY '26, which together with the impairments recorded in the first half, equates to total pretax impairments of $7.1 billion for the full year. The largest component of the second half impairments relates to Vifor, where we have impaired products and goodwill by $4.1 billion. This reflects changing market dynamics, which Gordon has discussed, including increased generic competition, the conclusion of the TDAPA period for Velphoro and the revocation of the marketing authorization for TAVNEOS.

The balance of the second half impairment relates to property, plant and equipment, in particular, our facility in Lengnau, Switzerland. This impairment relates to a portion of the site that had been set up to support third-party contract manufacturing activities. Further detail on the impairment is set out in Appendix C of the investor materials.

Turning to the next slide. We're taking a disciplined approach to how we invest CapEx across our network. In FY '26, our CapEx was $766 million. As can be seen from the chart, our CapEx has come down in recent years, following a period of significant investment as we expanded capacity across the network to meet increasing demand for our products. Moving forward, we expect our CapEx over the medium term to increase, driven by the Horizon 2 investment we're making at our site in Kankakee. For FY '27, we anticipate CapEx to be around $1 billion, plus or minus $100 million.

Moving now to our balance sheet. Our operating cash flow continues to support a strong and flexible balance sheet with capacity to support investment in growth opportunities while also providing cash returns to shareholders. During FY '26, we completed a buyback of AUD 1 billion. And in FY '27, we intend to undertake a further buyback of approximately AUD 1.1 billion. At year-end, net debt-to-EBITDA was 1.8x. We've also maintained the full year dividend in U.S. dollars.

Our capital allocation priorities remain clear. We will support the business through investment in growth opportunities that meet our strict return criteria. We'll continue to maintain a strong balance sheet, targeting net debt-to-EBITDA in a range of 1.5 to 2x. And finally, we'll continue to return excess capital to shareholders where that represents the most attractive use of our cash flow.

I'll now hand back to Gordon to cover the outlook.

Thanks, Ken. FY '26 was a difficult year, and the result includes substantial accounting consequences from past decisions and investments. We've not sought to minimize those issues, but to address them. Considerable work remains, but the company is now simpler and focused on execution. Commercial initiatives in Behring are beginning to show progress, and Seqirus continues to gain share in seasonal influenza vaccines. At the same time, Vifor faces significant and unavoidable portfolio headwinds, and these will continue to affect group growth.

For FY '27, we expect Behring to deliver mid-single-digit revenue growth. Ig is expected to grow in line with the market at mid- to high single-digit rate. The commercial initiatives implemented during FY '26 are expected to support improved execution. We expect continued strong uptake of ANDEMBRY and consistent uptake of HEMGENIX. We also anticipate a modest improvement in Behring's gross margin, driven by plasma cost efficiency, manufacturing initiatives and portfolio mix.

Vifor will face significant headwinds with revenue declining by around 25%. These headwinds include continued generic competition in iron and the conclusion of the Velphoro TDAPA period. With the EU decision to revoke the marketing authorization for TAVNEOS, we have no sales for TAVNEOS in FY '27 guidance. The Vifor cost base is being adjusted accordingly, but the scale of the revenue decline means the business will remain a material headwind to group performance.

For Seqirus, we expect low single-digit revenue growth. The business should benefit from momentum in newer markets and targeted customer segments. Ex-U.S., influenza immunization rates have stabilized and the rate of decline in the U.S. is slowing. At the group level, the transformation program will deliver further cost savings in FY '27. We will reinvest a portion of those savings in opportunities that meet our strict return criteria, principally within the core Behring franchise.

For FY '27, we expect group revenue to be broadly in line with FY '26 on a constant currency basis. We expect NPAT growth, excluding the restructuring and impairment items, of approximately 5% at constant currency. At current exchange rates, we estimate an FY '27 foreign exchange headwind of approximately $50 million should those rates remain unchanged for the balance of the financial year. The Board has authorized a new share buyback of AUD 1.1 billion. The actions taken during FY '26 have reestablished the foundation. Our focus in FY '27 is to maintain momentum and demonstrate measurable progress.

I'll now hand back to Michelle to take your questions.

Thank you, Gordon and Ken. The line is now open for questions to Gordon, Ken and Diego. [Operator Instructions]

I'll now hand over to the operator.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question today comes from David Low from UBS.

If we could just start with the Behring gross margin expectations. Can I get you to talk through a little bit what the drivers are there? I mean one of the observations I'd make is that the one-off contribution was quite a significant benefit in FY '26. And if I could throw into the same question, some commentary about last liter economics given what's happened with albumin, please?

Sure. Thanks, David. It's Ken. So in FY '26, as I mentioned before, the Behring gross margin contracted by about 70 basis points. Underlying that outcome was benefits that we continue to generate with efficiency gains in plasma collection and manufacturing, and that continues into FY '27. Given the top line result that we reported in Behring in FY '26, that's where we had some headwinds, which led to the margin contraction. Looking forward into '27, we'll see the same efficiency benefits continue to play through with the portfolio now supporting some margin growth into '27. Our objective is to gain back roughly the 70 basis points that we lost in FY '26.

In relation to your question about balanced liters, the first comment I'd make is that we are seeing volumes in China albumin siding to stabilize. So that's encouraging. And then ultimately, it's a question of how we are able to balance the mix between Ig and albumin in order to grow margins. And we've taken into account all of those dynamics in the guidance, which we've given today, including the modest gross margin expansion in Behring.

Okay. Look, my other question, just the switch to Haemonetics new equipment, sort of could you give us just a little bit of insight as to why the switch is being made and what it means for the relationship or the current usage of the Rika device, please?

David, it's Gordon. So I guess the context here is the focus upon productivity and efficiency in plasma. And so we have quite a number of initiatives that Steve and I are looking at to drive that, and it's strategically quite important to us. So one of those is the machine. So where we have agreed to -- with Haemonetics to transition a portion of the fleet over to explore that platform as we look for new frontiers to improve -- further improve the productivity of that operation.

Our next question comes from Andrew Goodsall from MST Marquee.

Just switching over to Seqirus, just a bit forward-looking. Obviously, you've got 2 products in the market now, FLUAD and FLUCELVAX. Just trying to understand how you see the landscape just with those 2 products. I think you've taken a bit of price increase, certainly can see that in the U.S. And just with Moderna's recent approvals, just if you can sort of pull that together for your outlook?

We had a bit of trouble understanding.

What were the product that you mentioned? The line is not great.

You want me to repeat a bit slower?

Yes. We'll try our luck. Andrew, just to repeat the question again for us. We just had a poor line, that's all.

Okay. So Seqirus, just forward-looking, you've shrunk down to 2 products, FLUAD and FLUCELVAX. And we can see you've taken a bit of price increase in FLUCELVAX in the U.S. So just trying to understand sort of how you're thinking about that into '27 and just throwing in Moderna into that landscape? Just your outlook there.

So Gordon mentioned our expectation that the business will grow at low single-digit. There is a few key parts within that guidance. So first of all, in the U.S., vaccination rates are still declining, but we do see the rate of decline moderating. So as we look ahead into the current '26, '27 season, our expectation is that vaccination rates will decline by low single-digit, which is considerably slower than where they were a year or 2 ago. As a result of that, the U.S. business, we expect to be broadly flat with the growth being driven by the ex-U.S. markets driven by the initiatives that we've discussed, including the increased penetration into new markets, new enhanced recommendations for FLUAD and the first season of AUJEMFLU in the U.K.

And just a quick one on the -- you obviously had a one-off in this period. We noticed there was a sale, I think it was Novartis buying VarmX, which you've got a stake in. So that presumably will create a one-off benefit in FY '27. Just trying to understand the materiality of that.

I don't think we are calling out any one-off benefits in FY '27, Andrew. We had a one-off benefit in FY '26 as a result of the Eli Lilly transaction. But the underlying growth that Gordon mentioned is driven by the core recurring business.

Our next question comes from David Bailey from Morgan Stanley.

I'm just looking at the guidance commentary again and, obviously, a fairly significant revenue decline coming through for Vifor. Essentially, I'm trying to understand the contribution of that in terms of a drag to group NPAT growth for '27. So maybe some commentary around how you're thinking about gross margin for that particular division or any sort of sense as to what you think the drag of Vifor is on group underlying NPAT growth for fiscal '27?

Well, thanks for the question. So, Gordon mentioned an expectation that the Vifor top line will decline by around 25%. And the market dynamics which drive that are principally price. So we do expect the vast majority of that price decline to also impact the Vifor gross margin. So that needs to be set alongside the growth that we're expecting in Behring and Seqirus. So we've already mentioned the Behring revenue guidance, gross margin expansion for Seqirus, there will be top line growth with broadly flat gross margins. And so at a group level, when we consolidate all of Vifor, you get some offsetting impacts, which is what contributes to the flat overall top line guidance for the group.

The dynamic that I'll highlight as you move down through the P&L is to remind you that a considerable portion of the sales for Vifor are executed through our joint venture, where we have a 55% share. So there's a 45% minority interest in Vifor, which means that when we work through those adjustments down to NPAT, a significant portion of the Vifor sales and margin decline actually accrue to the minority interest.

Yes, that's clear. And maybe just thinking about R&D, you touched on the VarmX candidate, which is interesting in the context of ANDEXXA no longer being in the market. But can you maybe talk to VMX-C001? And then also if there's any potential candidates that have popped up as part of your revised R&D strategy?

Thank you. So we're really pleased with the progress we're making on reshaping the R&D capability, and we are taking costs out of the business while also reinvesting where we see attractive returns. So in FY '26, we did make investments in the VarmX candidate, which is going to shortly start enrolling. In FY '27, we expect R&D for the group to be up a small amount as we continue to make those investments. So there's a number of promising Phase III candidates that we'll be progressing. We spoke about VarmX. I think in Gordon's remarks, he also talked about CSL300, a candidate in end-stage kidney disease that's also in an ongoing Phase III study.

Our next question comes from David Stanton from Jefferies.

Perhaps if I could ask, firstly, in terms of like first half, second half and specifically the trajectory of expected albumin and IG revenues in '27, should we be thinking, given what you've called out and what happened in '26, that first half will look lower compared to second half for both revenue, IG growth and albumin growth?

This is Diego. Thank you for the question. So when we think about the IG prognosis for fiscal year '27, what you see is a continuous performance based on our current momentum. So you've seen half-over-half growth in the second half of fiscal year 2026. And when it comes to albumin, we call that we see the market going back to stable levels of volume growth. So, and with still declining price also, although at a slower rate. So when you think about the half-over-half, I would say a pretty stable first versus second half for IG and potentially a small decline in albumin driven by the China market conditions.

And perhaps one for Ken. Can you give us any kind of guide in FY '27 for acquired IP post-tax? You had that $322 million in FY '26. Can you talk to what you're thinking for FY '27, please?

For which line item?

Acquired IP post-tax.

Okay. So we actually provided some detail in Appendix E around amortization. And I won't go through all the detail now, but you'll see in that supporting slide that amortization for the group, we expect to be lower by around $90 million in FY '27 versus what we reported in FY '26.

Our next question comes from Lyanne Harrison from Bank of America.

Can I come back to IG again? And obviously, as it is mentioned, strong growth in the second half of '26. And I just wanted to understand what's really driven that? Has there been any sort of contract wins that you can call out? And if so, what was the differentiating factor, do you think, in terms of CSL winning those contracts?

This is Diego. So when it comes to IG, we see a pretty consistent situation to the one that we described in May. So what you see is the result of our ongoing investments. Just as a reminder, we did increase our field force footprint in the U.S. We did invest in direct-to-patient, looking for a request of brand. And also as market leaders in the SCIG category, we're investing in increasing diagnosis. So what you see is the momentum that is created by those investments that we've been doing for some time.

And we see, and again, I want to reiterate that the prognosis for fiscal year '27 is based on the current momentum is not expecting any acceleration from today. When it comes to contracts, look, we have a complex portfolio, very diverse. We win and sometimes we lose contracts, but it's part of our renew tender strategy that includes some hedge levers as well. So this is all part of the plan and what we are projecting for fiscal year '27.

Okay. And the second question, can I talk about guidance? I hear what you say about revenue being relatively flat on a constant currency basis. I hear what you're saying about gross margins. So it sounds like that NPAT growth is going to come from operating costs. Can you talk about where you expect some of that cost out to come from? Obviously, you've expected quite a significant transformation initiative gains in that time frame.

I would say thanks, Lyanne. It's Ken. The principal drivers of the earnings growth are actually the growth that we're seeing in Behring and Seqirus. So that is incorporated into the group guidance with some offsets that I mentioned before in relation to Vifor and including the minority interest dynamic that I mentioned before. In addition to that, we are taking further costs out of the business. I mentioned in my presentation that versus fiscal '26, we'll see around another $220 million of costs coming out.

The contributors to that are R&D, plasma collections, manufacturing and commercial, so across a number of different areas of the business. We will be reinvesting about half of that back into growth opportunities. So that will be principally in R&D and commercial. So around $100 million plus being released to the P&L, and that will principally manifest itself in the gross margin line.

Our next question comes from Saul Hadassin from Barrenjoey.

If I can just turn to IG growth, the mid- to high single digits. I'm wondering if you can talk to your expectations around volume versus price versus mix. And I'm particularly interested in understanding what was your plasma collections growth over the last 6 to 9 months to be able to work out what volume growth should look like for IG into FY '27?

Saul, it's Ken. I'll talk about collections and then hand over to Diego to make any additional comments on the commercial side. So in plasma collections, we are both increasing our plasma collections while reducing cost per liter. So this is fundamental to the efficiency strategies that we've had in place for quite some time, and that continues to deliver. We've closed the underperforming centers without seeing a reduction in overall collection volumes. So that's been really pleasing. We will now focus a lot on other initiatives to drive increased efficiency.

So Gordon touched on a little bit of this on the call, but we think there's a lot of opportunity in how we engage with donors using AI to be more sophisticated with how we target donors, moving donors more efficiently through the centers. So all directed towards driving down cost per liter. So that's, I think, on the collection side. Hand over to Diego for any other comments on the top line.

Yes. Thank you, Ken. So in terms of the IG franchise growth, as we mentioned, what we are projecting is growing with the market. So that's a pretty stable dynamic that we see. You asked about the price. We see the market being very robust. The players, kind of, recognizing the value of plasma economics and how this -- the value chain works, and we see the price to be pretty stable. When it comes to -- you also asked about the mix -- it depends on the geography. But if you think about the SCIG versus IVIg, SCIG, we are market leaders. We are clearly kind of following that market growth trend. And in the IVIg space, particularly in some markets, is growing slightly faster than SCIG. So we might see a slightly higher rate on IVIg. But in balance, both of them growing with the market.

Maybe I can follow up because I don't think I've really got an answer to the question, and that is what did your collections grow by over the last 9 months that feed into the FY '27 IG growth assumption? Are you saying that revenue growth effectively matches volume growth for IG in FY '27? The reason I ask is that there's obviously been some questions around oversupply. And I wanted to get a sense of if you've just been collecting at the same rate at which you think your IG will grow into FY '27, i.e., mid- to high single digits. There's a bit of difference between 5% and 10%.

We're collecting the plasma that we need to support the end market demand that Diego mentioned before.

Our next question comes from Steve Wheen from Jarden.

I just was wanting to just touch on IG as well. Was there something that you saw in April that forced you to announce the downgrade of $300 million that didn't quite pan out the way you expected? It just seems to be, ultimately, where you ended up is a much stronger end to the second half that probably wasn't expected at the time of that downgrade. Just trying to understand what changed there.

Steve, it's Ken. So the outcome for IG, I think, is completely consistent with what we called out in May, where we said that IG for the full year is likely to be flat. What we called out in May was an issue with inventory in the channel that we purposely normalized, so to prevent that inventory continuing to accumulate, which is what actually then drove the flat result. So I'll just pause there in case Diego has any additional comments.

No, nothing to add.

Okay. And the second question I had was just with regards to the amortization of IP. You've obviously done significant impairment of the Vifor business, which is what was, that acquisition is what, is where this disclosure came from. Just trying to understand why it's only a $90 million reduction in the amortization of IP when you've impaired it by something like $7.5 billion before tax.

Sure. So thanks for the question, Steve. There's quite a lot of detail in Appendix E to this presentation as well as to the notes to the accounts. So you'll see all of the various assets that have been impaired. Just in relation to your question on what you're drawing out, what you think is a little bit of a surprise, a big part of the impairment is goodwill. So there's a $1.7 billion impairment to the Vifor goodwill. So that's not amortized. So I'll draw that to your attention in case that helps you reconcile the various numbers.

And our next question comes from Davin Thillainathan from Goldman Sachs.

I guess a question on your Behring gross margin. Thinking about the guide for FY '27, where you're essentially guiding to the business being back to where it was in FY '25. And also then thinking about the IG guide where you're guiding to about mid- to high single digit. Now if I think about those moving parts, it would suggest FY '27 and FY '25, the IG business doing the sort of 7% type mark in growth, but you are getting a lot of efficiencies on your cost bases, as you've called out today, but yet your gross margin is back to where it was in FY '25. So if I think about the headwind there, is it largely China that's driving that? Or is there any other drivers we should be considering to give us conviction into the periods beyond FY '27, please?

Thanks, Davin. So you've quickly called out some of the drivers, and I'll add a few comments. So the IG guide for mid- to high single-digit growth underpins the margin. IG, though, is not a high-margin product versus some of the non-plasma products that we have. We also have, as Diego indicated, uncertainty in China with albumin flat to potentially a little bit down. And so the overall guide for the margin enhancement does depend upon those efficiency initiatives that I mentioned previously as well as ongoing growth in some non-plasma products, including ANDEMBRY and HEMGENIX.

Okay. And then maybe a follow-up then on the albumin piece. So the guide is for flat to slightly down, if I'm understanding that right, for FY '27. I guess the question also is about your channel inventory because this comes up a fair bit with discussions with investors. Just your thoughts there, given you have sold a fair bit to a distributor across FY '26. How do we think about any potential implications there from the channels perspective?

This is Diego. Thank you for the question. So in the case of China albumin, as you mentioned, we have the partnership with Baheal Medical on the retail channel, and we continue to promote with our own field force in the hospital channel, very consistent with what we mentioned in May. We're monitoring very closely inventory levels, both in the distributor level, but also with Baheal. We're working with them very closely. And we have it very closely monitored and it's on a very appropriate level. So we don't see any implications of swings in the inventory for fiscal year '27.

Our next question comes from Laura Sutcliffe from Citi.

First is just on your guidance for next year. You've guided to 5% underlying NPAT growth. I realize you're not going to give us guidance for anything after that. But are the activities you're engaged in now designed to eventually push it back up beyond that? And in particular, at what point do you think you can get Vifor to stop being a material headwind and that the performance of the other 2 divisions drive things again? I do realize that not all of Vifor's products pass through the JV mechanics in an identical fashion.

Sure. Thanks, Laura. It's Ken. So Gordon discussed some of the headwinds that we're experiencing in Vifor. Many of those headwinds are the most acute in fiscal '27, but many of them also have some way to play out over the medium term. So we're not giving any further guidance on Vifor for beyond '27. But just to call out that there's an ongoing dynamic that will just have to work its way through.

Okay. And then a second question on your recent news on the need for clinical trials for the Horizon 2 process. I think you mentioned at your Capital Markets Day last year that FDA has said that if the validation data you have in hand had appropriate comparability with the existing process and they would accept it. So has the FDA moved the goalpost? Or is there something that they don't like comparability-wise that has motivated the need for human trials?

It's Ken. I'll take that question. So you referenced the announcement we made a couple of weeks ago about undertaking clinical studies. We remain very excited about Horizon 2 and the potential of that extraction technology to meaningfully increase the yields. We still need to have some further discussions with the relevant regulators on what the design and timing of those clinical studies will look like. And so we need to harmonize the various requirements so that we undertake those studies in the most efficient way. Our intention is that those studies will progress in parallel with the construction of the Horizon 2 facility in Kankakee as well as Broadmeadows in Australia.

Okay. Sorry, I was just trying to understand why you need them at all, because it sounded last year, like, last year you had a plan that you wouldn't require them.

It's just to provide the data that the regulators need around the comparability of the IG that we make with the existing process and the Horizon 2 process.

Our next question comes from Andrew Paine from CLSA.

Just coming back to the Vifor discussion around the gross margin. I believe you said that the cost base is being adjusted materially. Is that the case? And I'm just trying to wonder if there's a bit of an offset here that you can pull through given that the drop in revenue probably passed through to the gross profit fully given that headwind on price rather than volume.

Andrew, it's Ken. Was your question about the cost base in Vifor?

Yes, sorry.

Okay, sure. So I've talked about the revenue and the gross profit impact. The Vifor cost base is something that we are looking at very, very closely. The principal cost there is the commercial and medical capability. We have now integrated those teams with the pre-existing commercial and medical teams within CSL Behring. And what that has allowed us to do, which you see in the numbers for fiscal for FY '26 and we'll continue to see for FY '27, is our ability to invest in commercial initiatives that drive growth, but with minimal impact on the overall commercial spend for the group.

So in FY '26, group commercial spend increased very, very marginally, about 2%, and that includes very, very significant investments that we made in the U.S. and in China and to support growth products such as ANDEMBRY. Looking ahead into '27, we will continue to make similar investments, but the overall commercial spend for the group in '27 should be relatively flat to '26.

Okay. So that comment was more around OpEx as opposed to any reduction you can pull through in gross margin for Vifor?

That's how we're looking to minimize the impact of the Vifor gross margin on overall group profitability, correct.

That's great. And then just another one. You mentioned you've closed underperforming centers without reduction in overall volumes. And I know your previous comments around you collect what you need in terms of demand. I'm just trying to understand where you're sitting at the moment in terms of the supply you have, how you view that kind of ramp-up in demand over the next few years and trying to marry that off between yield gains coming through and requirements for any sort of collection center build-outs? Or are you happy where you are at the moment?

Sure, so I guess just broadly, the whole idea is that the volume of plasma we collect is intended to match the demand that we're forecasting with the obvious delay in the production process and inventory hold and so on. And that's true operationally and also strategically. So it just follows. There's no incentive whatsoever to speculatively collect plasma nor to have a situation where you constrain sales. So we try and get that balance right all the time. And as I say, it's both operationally and strategically. I don't think we see any significant constraints upon our ability to grow the business.

Okay. So I mean, that would imply, I think, that there's some, you can ramp up these collection centers and you're essentially not running at full capacity or collecting the level you think you can if that demand continues to grow.

Yes. As Ken said, we've got quite a number of levers to pull to increase production, but the other objective is to do so efficiently. And so that's a trade-off which we're constantly making.

And our next question comes from Craig Wong-Pan from RBC.

In relation to the Horizon 2 clinical trials, you said you're still in discussions with regulators on what exactly is required. But can you say whether the cost for this could be a material cost? Could you sort of provide any parameters around that?

At the moment, we don't expect a material cost. So we'll be able to absorb that within the normal R&D spend that we are incurring. When we have more certainty on what those trials look like, then we'll come back with more to report. But at the moment, that's as much guidance as we can give.

Okay. And then second question, just there was a comment made earlier that you're seeing IVIg growing faster than SCIG. Just wanted to see to understand that, why that's happening? And also, if you're seeing any competitor effects there given that they've been growing their SCIG revenues quite strongly?

This is Diego. Thank you for the question. So my comment is that we see actually both markets growing at very close rates. My comment was that given that we are a clear market leader with the SCIG, you always have a little bit more room for the product you are not the market leader, and in this case, it's IVIg. So, it's a relative market dynamic one versus the other, but the 2 markets are actually growing very tightly together, and the differences that I'm referring to are pretty marginal.

Our next question comes from Sacha Krien from Evans & Partners.

Just a question on the PP&E write-down, first of all. I'm just wondering if you can share what sort of depreciation benefit that gives you in FY '27?

We don't really anticipate a great deal of depreciation benefit. So depreciation will still increase year-on-year. As I mentioned before, the major impact is on amortization, which you'll see in Appendix E.

Okay. Great. And then second question, just on Behring gross margin. You've given some color on IG and albumin. Just wondering if you can also provide some outlook commentary on some of the key specialty products, probably IDELVION and KCENTRA. And then related to that, within HAE, you're seeing a clear shift, obviously, from HAEGARDA and BERINERT to ANDEMBRY. I'm just wondering what the margin impact is from that shift?

So I'll make some initial comments on margins, and then Diego will fill in on what's happening on the top line. But broadly, the inframarginal plasma products aren't adding to overall gross margin at the moment. So some of those products are declining. We are encouraged that KCENTRA, which has historically been declining. I think we saw about a 17% decline in FY '26. That's starting to moderate. But the inframarginals aren't benefiting gross margin into '27.

Thank you, Ken. And a little bit of the revenue dynamics in this space. So you mentioned hemophilia B with IDELVION. We're very pleased with the durability of the hemophilia B franchise with IDELVION holding leadership in the Factor VIII replacement and with HEMGENIX coming in. We haven't seen a big disruption in this market, and we see it flat for next fiscal year with KCENTRA. Ken mentioned that we see a slower rate of decline. Our job now is to continue to expand the usage of KCENTRA, and we're actually seeing a very nice growth in the accounts that we are contracting KCENTRA in terms of the use of the factor replacement.

With ANDEMBRY, very pleased with the uptake, definitely outperforming benchmarks. And although we obviously see with the new innovation and impact for HAEGARDA, overall, the franchise is growing and the percentage of patients that we see coming off HAEGARDA are kind of balanced with the market share that HAEGARDA has. So, but very pleased with the trajectory of ANDEMBRY, and we see that continuing in '27.

[Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from Christine Trinh from Macquarie.

Just piggybacking off of the previous question on price, where you said current price dynamics are stable. It seems like there are new, a number of new IG products, label expansions across your competitors and potentially some hospitals under pressure with the 340B changes over the next 12 months. Just keen to hear your thoughts on how, I guess, pricing competition may intensify over the medium term, especially in the U.S.

Sure. Happy to take that question. This is Diego. So first, starting with the second part of your question, the 340B dynamics. 340B is a very complex and wide topic, but probably you've heard about the reform that CMS is putting forward in terms of reimbursement. And that reform actually is not material to CSL. And the reason for that is that the first is it doesn't change the price that we sell 340B volume to, but also is looking at the reimbursement to 340B institutions on the outpatient volume that is a small portion of IG 340B volume overall.

In terms of the broader price dynamics, what we see is a market that is robust and a set of players that are recognizing, in the IG space, the value of IG to patients. So we see broadly a flat price, and we see the growth coming from volume moving forward.

And there are no further questions at this time. I'll hand the floor back over to Michelle for closing remarks.

With no further questions, we will now close the meeting. Thank you for your interest in CSL.

That does conclude our conference for today. We thank you for participating. You may now disconnect your lines.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to CSL's Interim CEO 90-day Review and Financial Update. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to Ms. Michelle Rees, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining CSL's Interim CEO 90-day Review and Financial Update. I am Michelle Rees, Head of Investor Relations. Before we begin today, I'd like to draw your attention to the important disclaimer on your screen. A copy of this, along with our ASX materials, have been published on the CSL and ASX websites. With me in Melbourne today is Gordon Naylor, CSL's Interim Chief Executive Officer; and Ken Lim, Chief Financial Officer. Please note, this briefing is being webcast.

I'll now hand over to Gordon.

Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining us this morning. My name is Gordon Naylor, and I'm the Interim CEO and Managing Director of CSL. The purpose of today's call is to brief you on the steps that we are taking toward turning the company around and returning it to profitable growth. We're also providing a nearer-term financial update.

The last 10 weeks have been incredibly intensive, but I've been helped by my own deep experience at CSL, the full support of the Board of Directors and our remarkably resilient and capable people. Recognizing that the organization has been and continues to go through a great deal of change, my first priority was to steady the ship in part by visiting most of our major business sites around the world. I've talked to hundreds of people, led around a dozen town halls and engaged directly with many of our key business partners.

In addition to running the business, my role includes giving the Board the space to choose my successor and for me to actively lay the groundwork for that person's success. The review of the business was very helpful and has given a sound foundation for forward decision-making. In addition, that review was the basis for a comprehensive review of the balance sheet.

Our invested capital is around $32 billion, and it's clear that not all of this is working as hard as it should be. I will take you through the first item here, then Ken will take you through the financials. We'll then open the floor for questions.

We fully recognize that CSL's financial outcomes have fallen short of expectations. In order to turn this situation around, it was important for me to understand what has changed in the last decade or so. I was especially interested in what could be attributed to external factors versus our internal decision-making. Our analysis started with a shareholder view of CSL's financial performance over the last decade. Looking back at least 10 years was important given the long-term nature of this business.

We used the published financial reports and standard analytic tools, supplemented with macroeconomic perspectives of the business, along with analysis of key internal and external events over that period. The look back is complete and is now informing our immediate actions and strategies, including continuing many of the measures that the Board of Directors and the management team had previously initiated. I have no doubt our strategy remains the right one, which is to strengthen our core while investing selectively beyond plasma in logically adjacent spaces.

I must say that when I took on the role, I was worried that the valuable culture of the company may have been damaged in some way. Today, I'm very confident to say that the leadership of the company and the workforce are highly engaged, talented and committed to restoring the company to success. Staff fully understand the broader societal role that the company plays.

I'll talk more about plasma therapeutics, but it is pleasing to see CSL continue to explore growth opportunities within the rare disease space. Recognizing that there is a need for change and that financial outcomes need to be better, it is worth noting that the company is very profitable, has metronomic cash flows and significant financial capacity. I can also see that CSL continues to have evident competitive strengths in plasma collection and influenza vaccines. The core plasma therapeutics industry has continued to grow strongly, driven by underlying demand for the critical therapies and macroeconomic growth.

What is also interesting is that the industry structure is largely unchanged. The names are a little different, but we continue to have a small number of global vertically integrated players, each producing a modest number of fairly biogeneric products from human blood plasma. These players all have cash-sensitive ownership. There have been some alternative therapies for some Ig indications emerge, but new market opportunities have also opened up, such as secondary immune deficiency. This tells me that the unique macroeconomics of the sector are unchanged. The industry is fundamentally structurally stable and growing.

The absence of patent cliffs means that the market structure is highly durable. And as you can see from the data on this slide, considerable runway remains for future growth. The challenge is whether CSL has continued to compete as effectively as it once did and to respond to intra-industry dynamics. The premium of our gross margin structure over competitors suggests that the core is sound, but its decline over time also suggests that we're not as good as we were.

The good news is the changes that we're making are largely to deal with issues that are under our own control rather than external to the business or structural in the markets where we operate.

Turning to our 10-year look back. The red line shows the share price over the decade. That's a familiar story to long-term shareholders. The black line shows earnings per share. It's evident that over the long run, the company has continued to generate significant profit, and this continues to be the case today. It's not on the slide, but free cash performance has also been very strong. This has given the company the opportunity to return surplus cash to shareholders through dividends and buybacks, such as the one we just completed.

The light gray line shows the return on invested capital over that period. ROIC is a reasonable accounting measure of balance sheet productivity and has declined over that time. Putting the pieces together suggests that, firstly, the decline in ROIC has primarily been driven by a growing asset base, some of which has been less productive than anticipated. Ken will talk more about this shortly in the context of the balance sheet impairments. I also expect that we can be more efficient managing our working capital.

Secondly, the failure of several late-stage R&D projects, along with some market share losses in key markets has contributed to a loss of confidence in the growth prospect of the business. There's more to the diagnosis, but this captures the essence and is certainly enough to inform our forward-looking decision-making.

Let me make a couple of high-level comments on our corrective actions. Firstly, we're returning to being more outward-looking, better understanding our patient needs, the evolving science, competition and public health. Secondly, there is no fundamental shift in business strategy. This is primarily about excellence in execution. And thirdly, many of these initiatives were already in flight. In some cases, the heavy lifting has already been done, but the benefit will take time to realize. We are completing these initiatives with urgency.

It is useful, I think, to consider some of these approaches in financial terms. The company generates significant cash flow from operations. Apart from projects that are of a compliance or safety nature, every other use of that cash has to be justified on a risk-adjusted discounted cash flow basis to demonstrate that it is expected to generate returns appropriately above the company's cost of capital.

Surplus cash is then returned to shareholders through dividends and on-market buybacks while maintaining leverage within our published target range. This framework is unchanged from the past, but is very much core to our forward approach as well.

I'd also like to highlight our efficiency measures. It is clear that the company had overbuilt organizational capacity, and this is now being addressed. These changes will be evident in the P&L going forward. In addition, we are very focused on reducing the marginal cost structure of the business, especially in plasma collection and fractionation. This is a core driver of Behring's gross margin structure, and we do see opportunities here that will improve profitability and also competitiveness.

Allocating clear accountability to plasma collection leadership and elevating the operation to report directly to me will accelerate innovation in that part of CSL. An extensive transformation program was announced in August of last year, aimed at simplifying and streamlining the business. I'm pleased to say that very good progress has been made in this program.

To highlight a few points, the R&D organization has been considerably streamlined with a much tighter governance structure built around a strict financial framework in addition to science, medical and commercial insights. Success can never be guaranteed for individual projects, but we are very thoughtful about which horses we back with early signs of success such as VarmX. In addition, the simple reduction of fixed cost will benefit the P&L.

We are very confident about the Horizon 2 program, but are taking a measured approach to capital investment to support the new manufacturing process. Integration of the Behring and Vifor commercial operations is yielding synergies. Both are primarily rare disease franchises. One of the industry changes that the company was slow to respond to was the growing capability gains of our plasma industry competitors as their supply chains became more robust and their product portfolios progressed and in some cases, overtook us. This resulted in market share losses and lower growth.

For example, we are now the third largest Ig player by volume in the U.S., although we do retain global volume leadership. In response to these circumstances, we are making targeted investments in our commercial capabilities, and these are beginning to yield results. The operational separation of Seqirus is now largely complete. This retains flexibility for CSL in terms of a potential demerger when the timing is right and gives Seqirus the direct capability and accountability to continue to drive market share gains and look for growth opportunities. Because there are only modest synergies with the rest of CSL, the separation has not added any incremental costs.

We've increased the focus and accelerated the cadence of the executive leadership team and stopped or deferred a number of in-flight initiatives that were not core to the primary objectives today. I expect that the result of these steps will take some time to flow through the financial accounts, but we are seeing some encouraging early indicators.

As you know, our biggest product in our biggest market is U.S. Ig. Growing market share for the intravenous presentation, PRIVIGEN, has been challenging, and we've been losing share with the subcutaneous presentation, HIZENTRA, following new entrants in that space. This is end market data on the slide, so subject to in-channel inventory movements. The good news is that we're beginning to see the reversal of these trends.

Following some market volatility in the Chinese albumin market, we're also seeing some early traction as we grow a little faster than that market. Profit growth requires expansion within rare diseases beyond the traditional plasma therapies. So it's pleasing to see ANDEMBRY and HEMGENIX going well. Seqirus is the sectoral leader in influenza vaccines. The headwinds from vaccine policies and fatigue after COVID have been challenging, but have afforded an opportunity for Seqirus' innovative product portfolio to shine, driving the market share gains forward. It's a great example of a market rewarding innovation.

Having an orderly leadership transition plan is critical for CSL as we navigate through these changes. In addition to the work that I'm doing as Interim CEO to stabilize the organization and initiate a strong return to growth, part of my role is to give the Board the space to identify and appoint my successor. We suggested at the half year that this process would take about 12 months and is progressing as planned. For the avoidance of doubt, I've chosen not to be a candidate in the process, but I do anticipate that I will return to the Board as a Nonexecutive Director once I have completed a transition to the next CEO.

As a result, along with my fellow Board members, I'm actively involved in the CEO selection process. It also means I will be well placed to support the transition for the new CEO so that it is as smooth as possible. This is critical for business outcomes as well as shareholders and our people. The Board is also actively engaged in Chair succession and is very well aware of the need to maintain strategic momentum and stability as we move through these important leadership changes. It goes without saying how valuable the support of all members of our Board of Directors has been to the leadership team as we've all worked through the many challenges of the past few months.

It is with mixed feelings that I must share with you today Andy Schmeltz's decision to retire from the company at the end of the financial year for personal reasons. Andy is largely responsible for the retooling of the Behring commercial operation in response to the changed competitive environment as well as the integration of the Behring and Vifor commercial and medical affairs functions. We've all enjoyed working with Andy, and I do offer Andy and his family our very best wishes.

I am pleased to advise that Diego Sacristan has been appointed to succeed Andy in this critical role and to continue the important transformation of the operation. Diego comes with an impressive commercial pedigree from Pfizer, having served in numerous senior roles, including as global marketing lead. Since joining CSL in 2024, he has led the international and U.S. Behring commercial operations reporting to Andy. Andy and Diego deserve credit for the green shoots that we're seeing. Diego will now take the good work forward, and Andy will remain available to support Diego through the transition period. Diego has joined us today in Melbourne and is available to answer questions about the commercial operations of Behring and Vifor.

I'll now hand over to Ken to take you through the updated outlook and the impairments.

Thanks, Gordon, and good morning, everyone. The actions we're taking to return CSL to profitable, sustainable growth are the right ones, but the translation to financial benefits will take time to realize. As Gordon mentioned, the transformation program is progressing well and is delivering savings a little ahead of expectations. Although nearing completion of the original plan, we see some further opportunity here, and we'll look to make some more comments on that when we report our full year results.

Fiscal '26 represents a year of 2 very different halves. While CSL Behring was down in the first half, we do expect to see growth in the Behring portfolio for the second half, measured against both the prior corresponding and trailing periods. While encouraging, second half growth will be below the expectations we had in February. At the first half results, we called out ambitious growth expectations for Ig, China albumin and our launch products. Regrettably, those ambitions have not been fully realized.

Let me walk you through the key drivers of the revised guidance we're providing today. In the U.S. Ig market, as you've heard, underlying demand is in line with our expectations of mid- to high single-digit growth, and we are pleased to be seeing market share gains. Since February, however, it has become apparent that we had excess Ig inventory in the channel, causing a disconnect between end customer demand and the sales that CSL reports. While this excess channel inventory has now unwound to normal levels, it has driven a headwind of approximately $300 million in U.S. Ig sales compared to our previous expectations.

In China, we are taking share and market volume for albumin has stabilized. However, the market continues to decline by value. As a result, FY '26 albumin revenue will be around $200 million lower than previous expectations. And finally, there is a further $150 million reduction in revenue from some smaller impacts that have occurred in the time period since our February results announcement. The conflict in the Middle East has resulted in a pause of sales into Iran. We are seeing slower-than-expected growth in HEMGENIX, partly due to a temporary supply challenge, and we continue to see heightened generic competition in the iron market.

Turning to our updated outlook for fiscal year '26. We now expect revenue in constant currency to be around $15.2 billion, down 2% on fiscal year '25. NPATA, excluding restructuring and impairment costs at constant currency will be around $3.1 billion, down 4% on fiscal '25. In addition to a revised constant currency outlook, we're also updating our estimate of foreign currency impacts. Recent geopolitical events are causing heightened FX volatility. Assuming current foreign exchange rates prevail for the remainder of the financial year, our reported revenues would be approximately $400 million higher than the constant currency result and reported NPATA would be approximately $20 million lower than the constant currency result.

Gordon spoke earlier about some less productive assets on our balance sheet. We expect to recognize noncash impairments of around $5 billion in addition to the impairments already taken at the first half. The key drivers of these impairments relate to CSL Vifor intangible assets and selected property, plant and equipment. The Vifor impairments reflect reduced expectations for the business, including the impact of generic competition on the iron portfolio.

We're also reviewing our fixed assets, in particular, the carrying value of facilities that may not be fully utilized. We're working through the details of these impairments, which are likely to be recognized over fiscal year '26 and '27. An update will be provided at the full year results announcement in August.

I'll now hand back to Gordon.

Thanks, Ken. Before we open up for questions, let me just summarize briefly. Our retrospective review was important for us. It gave us clear signposts confirming that the transformation work that our Board of Directors and management team had commenced was important. It also suggested that a thorough balance sheet review was needed. We haven't completed that review work, as Ken mentioned, but the impairments that were discussed are recognition that circumstances have changed materially since major investment decisions were made.

Our green shoots are encouraging, but there is considerable work ahead before our current financial performance can be considered satisfactory and see a sole returns to sustainable profitable growth. I'm confident that this can be achieved. The industry structure is sound. Our people are committed and energized and the operating assets are robust. The application of macroeconomic insight and financial discipline are key, and we will be very focused in our approach. We will deploy CSL's capabilities to generate sufficient profit and cash flow to allow immediate returns to shareholders, along with funds for targeted investments to drive future profit growth. We are making progress and will maintain momentum.

Thank you, Gordon. We'll now move to Q&A. [Operator Instructions] I will now hand over to the operator.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question today comes from David Bailey with Morgan Stanley.

Apologies for that. Just would like to understand a little bit some of the implied second half growth rates coming through. So can you maybe talk a little bit about what you think IG and albumin growth would be on a full year and implied second half basis? And then as we work through the income statement in constant currency, can I just confirm that you're expecting growth for CSL Behring at the gross profit level? There was a comment earlier that you're expecting growth for Behring, just making sure that, that is a gross margin -- a gross profit number, sorry, for the second half.

Sure. Thanks, David. It's Ken. So in relation to your first question on IG, following the updated guidance, we expect IG to be broadly flat from fiscal '26 compared to fiscal '25. So we do see growth in the second half in IG compared to previous corresponding period and the trailing period, so probably in the low single-digit range. Albumin was obviously down quite considerably in the first half, about 27% for the full year, probably down in the mid-teens. So what that would suggest for the second half is a little down versus prior corresponding period and up on the trailing period, just recognizing the softness of the first half results.

For Behring overall, we are seeing the revenue flat to potentially a little down on fiscal '26 -- sorry, fiscal '26 to fiscal '25. We're seeing growth second half compared to the previous corresponding period and the trailing period. We are expecting to see a degradation in the Behring gross margin. So the revenue updates that we communicated today are products that have on balance, a relatively higher margin. And so our current outlook is that the Behring gross margin may fall by around 1% versus '25. And so that's going to affect the gross profit that we report in fiscal '26.

Okay. And just one quick follow-up, if I can. I know there was a lot in there. But just on the IG number, you mentioned there's some disruptions there around channel. Just can you maybe talk a little bit about the -- what you're seeing in the fourth quarter and exit rate expectations into fiscal '27, please?

Sure. I'm going to respond to let Diego talk about what we're seeing. I think I heard, David, you talked about fiscal '27, which we're not in a position to comment about '27 at the moment. But over to Diego.

David, this is Diego. So thanks for the question. When we look at the trend of IG, we continue to see underlying demand that is on the mid- to high single digits. So that's very healthy. And we continue to see half-over-half growth. So we see an acceleration. And as it was kind of part of the remarks, some of that demand acceleration has been muted by the normalization of the channel.

Your next question comes from Dan Hurren with MST Marquee.

Apologies actually on a plane at the moment, so I can't join the call. Look, obvious question, given the CEO chair, an old CEO, an interim CEO, a new CEO about to be appointed, will the Board be in a position to offer investors some continuity in terms of the standing behind these key numbers and impairments so that we can avoid the whiplash of another reset?

So it's Gordon here. So I think there's no doubt that the Board is standing behind the changes. And so we've -- it's -- we've had a lot of engagement with the Board between the executive team and the Board, and they're fully supportive of the changes. The -- which we're making to the business and the reporting and the reviews and so on. The -- and then looking forward, the CEO transition is in flight, going according to plan and is well supported by the Board and obviously by me.

Okay. Look, just a housekeeping question. Could we just talk about -- just for the models, the amortization on the -- and add back the other nontrading items at the bottom of the P&L for FY '26?

Sure. I'll discuss the impairments in more detail. So Gordon referenced his review of the business. And as you'd expect, that also included a review of our balance sheet. As we look at the businesses today, I think you've heard an update on the Behring business. We're seeing second half growth versus the relevant previous periods. And I think Gordon also indicated that the Seqirus business is probably doing a little better than our previous expectations.

In Vifor, we are facing some challenges across both the iron and nephrology parts of that portfolio. So iron, we've spoken previously about the rising impact of generic competition. Iron as a franchise in the first half, if you recall, fell by about 15%. As we look forward, we expect to see an increase in that rate of decline.

On the nephrology side, that has historically been a source of growth in recent periods. One of the major contributors to that was a product called Velphoro, which benefits from a 2-year TDAPA reimbursement framework in the U.S., which ends at the end of this calendar '26. So Velphoro is a product that has already reached its peak contribution in the first half. And so into the second half of this fiscal year and going forward, we expect to see declines in that product, and that contributes to an overall decline in the broader nephrology portfolio. So these are things that we need to assess. We need to look at those forward-looking expectations versus the carrying value of Vifor. Those assets and carrying values were set back in '22 when the business was first acquired. And as a result, we expected to book some impairments.

Right. I guess the question is you've got to NPATA, what's the add-back? I'm trying to get to underlying here.

I'm sorry, could you repeat that question on the impact on NPATA?

So I'm just trying to get a physical number, what is the amort add-back that you're using in your NPATA, guidance that's given today.

Yes. So the guidance that we gave on NPATA was excluding any restructuring and impairment costs. So that will be incremental to that.

Your next question comes from Davin Thillainathan with Goldman Sachs.

Gordon, perhaps a question for you. Your 90-day review, could you perhaps talk to some of the changes that you've actually put through? We can't really see much that's changed on the slide deck. So perhaps some updates from your perspective. And then if you can then tie that into how those changes are helping your IT market share, please?

So I guess the broad comment would be that I've made a number of changes, but they have been much more around focusing the business than wholesale direction changing, and that reflects the fact that the substantive work has already been in flight. And so the restructuring of the R&D group, reduction of infrastructure in that area and just general focusing of the business has all been in flight for some time and it is going quite well.

More narrowly, I'll hand over to Diego perhaps to make some more granular comments about the commercial piece. But just broadly, I think the -- what we've seen over the -- I guess, over that period of the review is that competitors have strengthened their supply chain, so they've been able to be more reliable. In addition to that, they have developed products which have challenged our, I guess, our lead position as an innovator in the space, which has made the competitive pressures that the organization had faced in key markets more difficult. And the organization, I think, has been slow to respond to that.

And so now what we're seeing is this sort of pretty major retooling. We have to -- obviously, we'll increase our investment in that space, but we've also added capability to better understand those markets and to, I guess, more aggressively support the sale of our products, especially in the U.S. I'm not sure whether you want to add anything further to that, Diego.

So thank you, Gordon. I would just kind of -- we talked about the increase in our customer-facing our sales organization in the U.S. we talk about our focus on direct-to-patient communications that we have enhanced beyond the brand into diagnosis that is a clear lever of growth. And also, I will call out the recent enhancements that we've done around analytics that is giving us a very deep understanding on how to focus our efforts in front of our customers. And actually, we have a pretty long pipeline of improvements that are planned for 2027. We see this continuous flow of improvement that we need to continue driving the demand across the different regions.

Maybe just a follow-up, Gordon, as well given your experience with the company. Your comments about competitors getting better with the supply chain, do you sort of feel CSL's cost per liter on the IG front, do you feel like you're still the lowest cost provider here?

Yes is the short answer. And I think it's reflected in the gross margin structure for Behring, which continues to be pretty robust. Obviously, not as good as we'd like. And so I do see opportunities to consolidate and strengthen that advantage. But yes, the short version would be that I think we're starting from a pretty good location.

Your next question comes from David Low with UBS.

If we could just start with pricing environment. I was just trying to understand from your commentary about inventory in the channel and competitors, how much of a price degradation have we seen in key products in, I guess, U.S. and China?

Sure. This is Diego. Thank you for the question. So when we look at the U.S., the adjustment that we're making is related with our increased oversight of the channel beyond the specialty distributors has nothing to do with price. When -- as you know, we have different price points for different channels in the U.S. But when you look at our ASP, our average selling price has been stable in a very tight range, and we see that moving forward.

When we look at China, following the disruption that happened last year in the market, we did see price decline. We've referred to it at around 10% price decline. We do see a continuous price erosion in China but a much lower rate. So we see a stabilization of the price. And at the same time, we see a slight growth of the volume. So we do see signs in China of market coming back to a more stable trend. Obviously, we remain vigilant and ready to react to market conditions.

Okay. And my follow-up, just on the gross margin. So you talked about 100 basis points, Ken, of headwind. Can we walk through the 3 factors that have been outlined, so IG, albumin and other and which of those impacted gross margins? And of course, what we're really trying to understand is the exit gross margin for this year, what are the implications going into next year? I know you don't want to talk about '27, but just understanding the trends there. Is there likely to be a recovery or likely further decline would be helpful, please.

Sure. So I'll ask -- answer the second question first. Our objectives, our strategy continues to be to expand the Behring gross margin. That's obviously not what we're expecting in fiscal '26 because of the headwinds that we have described, the fact that as a result, we're seeing a flat outcome on the Behring revenue line with some degradation in some of the relatively more high-margin products. But going forward, margin expansion is still very much part of our outlook.

In relation to the components that we've discussed today, give you a little bit more detail. So the $300 million IG headwind is in the U.S., and it's principally HIZENTRA. So that has a margin, which is obviously higher than PRIVIGEN and obviously higher than what you see in other parts of the world. So that's a significant contributor to that margin impact.

Secondly, for China albumin, given the pricing that we see in China, it's on the higher end, certainly the highest margin that we have for albumin. So that has an impact as well. And then that final group contains within it, if you recall, HEMGENIX and iron, and they're both high-margin products as well. So back to my earlier point, the drivers that we're seeing with this updated guidance are all relatively high-margin products.

Okay. Just on HIZENTRA. So just trying to understand with the inventory adjustments in the channel, is that one-off in nature? Or effectively, that headwind continues into next year?

Thank you. It is onetime in nature. As I mentioned before, we have developed a much deeper understanding, and we have taken the needed actions to reach the average inventory that supports our underlying demand that continues to grow at mid- to high single digits. Again, this is behind us. I think it was an important step, and now we're very focused on the excellent execution moving forward.

Your next question comes from Lyanne Harrison with Bank of America.

Can I just go back to IG again? You mentioned that the market for IG was balanced in terms of supply and demand. What gives you confidence that, that's the case? We look at one of your peers, they reported their first quarter last week. They've got 15% growth in IG. You're talking about second growth -- second half growth in IG being low single digits. I hear what you're saying about inventory, but our channel checks still suggest that there's a bit of inventory in the market. What sort of -- how many months of normalized purchasing patterns have you seen recently? Can you call out what you saw in third quarter fiscal '26 in terms of IG growth?

Sure. So when we look at the underlying demand, inventory, I think, is pretty consistent across the board. We see numbers normalize over time. So I don't have any concerns when it comes to that underlying growth. When it comes to inventory, look, I cannot comment for our competitors. What I can kind of share with you is that we've completely changed the way that we look at the inventory, particularly in the U.S. We have a much more holistic picture. And we are not considering something that we have not in the past, which is the impact of the 340B contracted pharmacies. This is a dynamic that is not new to the U.S., but it's been growing in the case of IG.

We look across the different layers, and we've been adjusted our inventory for about 4 weeks. And we're now tracking very closely to an average of 6 weeks of inventory at the different levels of channel moving forward. So again, a very deep understanding. We have now a much granular planning, and we are at the level that we think is healthy, and we plan to keep it at this level moving forward.

I might just build on that. Lyanne, you asked some questions to try and understand the growth rates. And so just to remind you that fiscal '25 had quite an unusual skew in IG between first half, second half. And so as I said earlier, while fiscal '26 compared to all of fiscal '25, we expect IG to be broadly flat for the second half of fiscal '26, that explains why we expect to show growth versus both the PCP and the trailing period.

Okay. And can I follow up with just a question on China albumin. Obviously, you're doing a lot of work there. You've got 100 new hospitals that you're selling into. Can you talk a little bit about the distribution arrangements that you have in place? And in terms of that growth in market share for the last 3 months of 0.5%, it feels like it's a lot of effort to get that little bit of share growth. What are your thoughts into fourth quarter? And then what's the expectation for the market? I know you're not talking about or giving guidance to '27, but what's your expectation for the market for the next, I guess, 12 months?

Sure. So -- so let me talk about the arrangements that we have. The way that we're approaching China is a well-proven commercial strategy in China has been done multiple times. We look at the channel and geographical expansion. The geographical expansion in the hospital channel, we're doing it with our own resources and in the retail, which is a much kind of broader set of customers, we're doing it with the partnership of Baheal. With Baheal, we have a set of contracted volumes that we are working with them, and we have a very close partnership.

I understand the share gain seems small. It's been a relatively short period, and these things take time. But again, I think this is a well-proven strategy in China, and we are confident that we'll continue to yield results, and we're looking at an increased pace.

Look, the underlying dynamics that we see in China, as I mentioned before, is return to grow on volume and continuous pressure on price at a much lower rate that we've seen until now. So pretty stable growth from a volume perspective moving forward.

Your next question comes from Saul Hadassin with Barrenjoey.

Just a couple of questions. First one, there was some commentary at the half year about operating costs, particularly general and admin and I think R&D. Any update you can give maybe, Ken, on whether you're still thinking those costs will be similar to what you guided to, in other words, flat G&A. And I think you gave some commentary on R&D as well at the half year.

Sure. So outside of the specific updates that we're giving today, there's no change in the guidance for those other elements that you mentioned. So to reiterate what we said at the first half that for both G&A and R&D, we expect the full year to be roughly 2x the first half. The cost-out programs remains on track. No change in our full year expectations for that.

And can you also previously advised that as we move into FY '27, there's going to be a shift to NPAT from NPATA. Is that still the thought as we move into the next fiscal year?

Yes. So the move to NPAT versus NPATA, that's right, from '27 onwards. There will also be some changes. Gordon mentioned operational separation of Seqirus. So there will also be some changes in our segment notes. So we'll be able to disclose the earnings of the -- Behring and Vifor segment on the one hand and the Seqirus segment on the other hand, down to EBIT.

Your next question comes from David Stanton with Jefferies.

I wonder if I could talk to -- continue to beat the dead horse of IG in the U.S. and talk to why there's been increased inventory in the hospital channel. What are your hospital channel partners collecting more plasma for or more IG for, please?

So just to clarify, the increased inventory in the U.S. is not specific to the hospital channel. It's in our distribution partners that have 2 layers. The first one is the specialty distributors that we've been monitoring for a long time. And the second one is the specialty pharmacies that is kind of one level removed from us. So in the last few months, what we've done is a very deep analysis of at the account level of these channels. And we have observed that over time, inventory has been creeping, particularly in the second layer of the specialty pharmacy and driven by this 340B dynamics.

So now that we have the insights now that we understand in a much deeper level, we think this is the right move to cost correct this and to move forward in our new channel strategy with a healthy level of inventory. So this is not something that is kind of ups and downs. It's gradually creeping in. And given our insights today, we're in a better place to manage it now and leaving it behind and moving forward on an ongoing basis.

Okay. So just a follow-up then. I understand why 340B is requiring more volume. Perhaps you could give me some color around that.

Sure. Thank you. This is one of my favorite topics, 340B. So it's not -- so what is happening is that 340B contracted pharmacies. So these basically are 340B hospitals that contract with specialty pharmacies to deliver 340B volume, okay? The way that this works is that this is not fully transparent to us. This is not reported to us the volume that is going through that. And so we have developed the capability through combining multiple sources to now identify the volume that is going through that channel, and that has uncovered this growing volume over time in this channel.

Again, this is not new to the U.S. has happened in other categories in the past. And what we've seen is lately in the IG category more volume flying through the contracted pharmacy of 340B. So more visibility, greater insights and helps us to manage the inventory appropriately given this dynamic.

Okay. And perhaps I could ask my second question, specifically around the Baheal contract. And I was just wondering if that's -- because I hear different things in the market, whether that's a take-or-pay contract or whether it isn't. And if it is, have we seen them take what they said they were going to take, please?

So yes, we have committed volumes with Baheal and the contract is being executed as planned. And we also have a very close partnership with them making sure that we have the right level of oversight of the execution of that contract.

Your next question comes from Laura Sutcliffe with Citi.

Could we visit the topic of infrastructure overbuild? Could you outline what some of the assumptions were that led to that and how those historical assumptions are linked to today's demand profile for the products it might involve?

Sure. So Gordon's earlier comments about infrastructure build apply to several aspects of the business. And some of these decisions and investments actually go back several years. So they include, for example, investments in Lengnau facility in Switzerland, which commenced in 2014. A little bit after that, we made significant infrastructure investments in R&D facilities around the world, most notably in Germany, in Marburg. We have also expanded capacity across other parts of the business as well, including cell culture and overall manufacturing capacity.

So it reflects manufacturing capacity as well as infrastructure that supports other parts of the business, particularly R&D. As we look at the utilization of that infrastructure today, some of it is underutilized, and we need to work through the implications of that for carrying value.

Okay. And then maybe a second question at a higher level. I know you don't have a crystal ball, but are you confident that the review that you've undertaken has gone into all of the corners of the business thoroughly? Or is there anything else that you feel like we should continue to watch out for?

Yes. Thanks, Laura. We expect it has. That was the idea behind giving, I guess, a headline figure, which is still an estimate, but is intended to address, for example, whether these things are recognized in the current financial year or the next one.

Your next question comes from Steve Wheen with Jarden.

Just wanted to go back to the previous commentary that you made at the interim around cost out. It was a figure of $500 million to $550 million. Has that changed or perhaps more helpful would be that you did issue that guidance with some caveat over what amount the P&L might get to retain versus reinvesting. Can you give us any more color around that because that obviously is fairly meaningful with regards to trying to produce a P&L for this business?

Sure. So just to reiterate some of the comments that I made earlier and then give you some further guidance. So what I said earlier is that when you look forward, particularly as far as fiscal '28, and we think about the $500 million to $550 million of cost savings and what we do with it, we are being very rigorous across our capital allocation priorities.

There was a slide from Gordon where he outlined 3 major priorities. So reinvesting in growth, maintaining balance sheet gearing within a specified band with the expectation that after attributing the right amount of capital to those 2, we'll still generate excess cash, and that will be returned to shareholders.

Now particularly when you're going out to as far as '28, what those reinvestment decisions might be is a forward-looking statement that will depend upon what we see at the time. And this largely relates to the R&D portfolio. So we've made a lot of changes in the R&D function. We've taken a lot of fixed costs out. You'll see that in the R&D expense line, which for fiscal '26 will be less than fiscal '25.

And so for fiscal '26, the majority of those cost savings are being effectively released into the P&L. But we do need to reinvest in growth. And so my expectation is that the R&D line will increase over time as we add more substrate into the clinic, and that will, therefore, use up a portion, but certainly not all of the cost savings that we're intending to take out of the business.

So I would say near-term expectations that the majority of those cost savings will be released to the P&L in the -- more in the medium term. It will depend upon what we do, particularly in R&D, and that includes what we might do in business development. We've been very vocal about the fact that part of our strategy for strengthening the R&D pipeline is through partnerships.

So transactions such as what we did with VarmX, where once we do those deals, we also bring on incremental R&D expense. And so there's obviously a level of uncertainty with our ability to strike those deals, which is why you're not getting a completely precise ratio for me right now about how much of the $550 million will be reinvested versus release to the P&L.

Okay. And second question is a bit of an accounting question. Just curious about the $5 billion impairment that is in addition, I think, to the $1.5 billion from first half, just to confirm that. But secondly, from an impairment perspective, I don't really understand why it's a multistage impairment across 2 years. Like isn't an impairment just as you see it at this point in time?

Could you just clarify that a little bit further? And it would be -- I know you've said that guidance -- all other measures of guidance have been retained, but just would be nice to hear that you still expect to do high single-digit growth in '27 and '28?

Sure. So yes, your first question, the $5 billion is incremental to the $1.5 billion pretax pre-NCI number that we announced at the first half. In relation to the timing of those impairments, so we need to do further analysis. We need to have much more in-depth conversations with our auditors. And in some cases, the drivers of those impairments may not be fully clear or understood at the time we close our accounts in June of 2026.

So for example, the incoming generic competition for iron in the U.S. won't have happened at that point in time. And so assessing what that impact is, is obviously a judgment call where we're looking to get some more data points. And to give you an example, in Europe, the initial price impact was less than what we initially thought. But we have seen generic competition in Venofer in the U.S. where the price competition was fairly aggressive.

And we still to see what the price competition will be for Injectafer, which is the much larger product in the U.S. So from an impairment perspective, you need to have those key assumptions locked down so that you can get the requisite audit sign-offs. And we're just flagging the likelihood that not all of those developments or assumptions may be completely transparent at the time we close the books.

In relation to fiscal '27, on this call, we're focusing on the update for fiscal '26. At this time of the year, as always, we are running through a detailed ground-up budget process that will inform our fiscal '27 expectations. And as we do in the ordinary course, we'd look to provide the market with an update on that at the full year results in August.

Your next question comes from Sacha Krien with Evans & Partners.

A couple more on IG. Ken, your comments suggest that it's sort of a CSL-specific inventory issue and that's now cleared, which -- does that mean we should be thinking about growing in line with end market demand going forward? So if you could comment on that.

And then just related question, I don't think I fully understand why clearing your own inventory backlog is the only issue. We've had pretty consistent feedback that there is excess inventory in the broader U.S. market, including in SCIG. So I'm just wondering if you think that also needs to clear before we can get back to sort of more like end market demand growth?

So again, when we look at our inventory situation has been now cleared, and we see the market and we see our demand growing on the mid- to high single digits, and is also triangulated with market data. As Gordon shared, we have early signs of market stabilization for HIZENTRA and increase for PRIVIGEN. So yes, the idea is to grow with the market in the U.S. IG.

Okay. And then second question, just on HIZENTRA market share. So it's still 55% according to the presentation. I'm just wondering if you think that is sustainable over the medium to long term, given that's now far more competitive space?

So in the current market situation with HIZENTRA, we're not only focusing on market share, but we are also focusing on expanding the market. As we mentioned before, we've done significant efforts around direct-to-patient that is looking into the brand choice and -- but also into diagnosis, particularly in PID. So we do have a set of commercial improvements planned for the second half of the calendar year that should help us to retain this market share.

Obviously, when you are the market leader with a 55% and a lot of competitive -- competitors in the market, that's a situation that takes a lot of effort to sustain, and we are encouraged by the progress we've made and the data showing us an encouraged trend. But again, we don't -- we're not resting on our laurels. We know that there's a lot of work ahead, and we have a steady pipeline of commercial improvements to help us sustaining it.

Your next question comes from Andrew Paine with CLSA.

Just coming back to China albumin, just be good to get a little bit more info here around what you're seeing in terms of pressures over and above what you're expecting at the first half results. Obviously, the hospital channel is somewhat understood, but are you seeing any pressures in the retail market, particularly around pricing?

Yes. So our -- kind of our forecast for the year for China was an increase in volume that we are seeing, but not at the levels that we were anticipating and a plateauing of price erosion. What we see is we do see the volume increase, again, at a lower rate. We do see our market share improvement driven by our commercial efforts, again, at a lower rate than we were hoping for. And we see a price that is continue to erode at a much lower rate than we saw originally.

So our focus now is to continue driving the market share and continue to be responsible in terms of how we price. And we see an opportunity to grow both in the hospital and in the retail channels with our partnership with Baheal. So we remain very vigilant. So China is a market that has been disrupted, and it's a market that changed quickly. We've seen it in the past in this category and in others, but we're ready to react as appropriate.

Okay. Just on that contract with Baheal, that's volume and price that's been agreed, hasn't it?

So there is a range for both. So yes, we are expecting a stable output of that contract, and we are in very close collaborations with Baheal, making sure that we're not -- that we're very attuned to the market dynamics.

Okay. And you're like in line with the expectations for that? Or are you implying here that it's slower start than expected?

It's aligned with expectation. Again, it's relatively soon in the partnership. So we need to keep seeing how things evolve. But we don't have a concern at this point in time, just kind of keep working and keep driving the demand that is needed. But again, it's early in the partnership yet to have a definitive assessment.

Okay. And just -- I'm not sure if you mentioned this before, but the revised HEMGENIX growth. Can you just provide some views around what you had previously and where you are now?

Sure, I'll take that one. So HEMGENIX is still growing. We expect to see good growth for the full year growth in the second half versus both PCP and trailing. So that's ongoing momentum that we called out earlier in the presentation.

Okay. And one last one, if possible. Just can you split out the Middle East conflict impact? It's part of the $150 million, but good to know what that is specifically.

Sorry, can you say that again?

Sorry, you're calling out the Middle East conflict as part of the $150 million revenue. What's that specifically?

So this is shipments into Iran. So we've had to pause those shipments. So there's a loss of revenue as a result. Outside of Iran, we're still shipping.

Okay. So are you able to give a dollar figure for that as part of the $150 million?

Across the 3 parts of that last driver that we called out. So we said there was $150 million across the Middle East and HEMGENIX and Iron, roughly 1/3 that you can attribute to each of those.

Your next question comes from Elizabeth Davies with Bank of America. We'll just move on to the next question. This is from David Low with UBS.

Gordon, maybe one for you. I mean one of the things that's changed in the market most recently is this Egyptian plasma arrangement with European approval of products based on it. My understanding is the price or the cost differential there is pretty substantial. Just wondering what you think of that strategy? And is that something that CSL will consider in the medium term?

Yes, we can't really comment, Dave, on other players. I think from our perspective, we're very focused upon making sure that we collect high-quality, safe plasma at the lowest possible cost. It's sort of -- it's usually the beginning of my conversations with Steve Marlow. And then we exchange things.

The next question comes from Stuart Welch with Alphinity.

Just a few quick questions for each of you. So Ken, is it fair to say -- previously, you guys have had medium-term guidance out there in the market for high single-digit NPATA growth. Is it fair to say that, that is off the table at this point? And then, Gordon, one for you. You talked about Horizon 2 and measured investment into Horizon 2. If you could talk to that. And Diego, sorry, just one for you, so nobody has left out. You talked about growing in line with market in the U.S. So is that right you're happy to grow at system growth in the U.S. and not grow market share? Is that -- have I interpreted that correctly?

I'll take the first one. So we'll provide an update on '27 when we get to August.

Yes. On the measured investment piece, that -- we just we're just having to be thoughtful. We're just being thoughtful that we make our investment decisions, particularly in hard capital as we reach various regulatory and technical milestones.

On the U.S. market growth, so as I mentioned, we want to -- I mean, our plan and we see the dynamics to grow around the market growth. That could be hopefully a little bit higher, but that's kind of the goal. The reality is that this is a market that tends to equilibrium, and we are a big player in this market. So yes, we are planning to grow around the market rate. And again, there is a range on the mid- to high single digits that we will need to show as we move forward, and we are focusing on execution now.

There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Ms. Michelle Rees for closing remarks.

Thank you. With no more questions in the queue, I'll draw the briefing to a close. Thank you for your interest in CSL.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining CSL's results presentation for the first half of the 2026 financial year. I'm Mark Dehring, CSL's Head of Investor Relations. Please note, this briefing is being webcast.

We have a lot to get through today. But as usual, I'd like to draw your attention to the important disclaimer on your screen. A copy of this, along with our other ASX materials, have been published on the CSL and the ASX websites. You will also have seen announcement we made to the ASX yesterday relating to the appointment of Gordon Naylor as Interim Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director. We'll hear from Gordon shortly.

But before we do, I'd like to introduce our other speakers today. With me here in Melbourne is Ken Lim. Ken has been our CFO since October last year. Prior to that, he was our Chief Strategy Officer and has previously led our Seqirus business unit. Also here is Chief Commercial Officer, Andy Schmeltz. Andy joined CSL in 2023 as Executive Vice President, CSL Behring. And last year, his role was expanded to include CSL Vifor. And finally, we have Dave Ross, General Manager and Senior Vice President of CSL Seqirus since 2024. And prior to that, he was the Head of Commercial Operations in North America since 2017.

I'll now hand you over to Gordon for some comments before we get into the detail of the results.

Thanks, Mark, and good morning, everyone. My name is Gordon Naylor. And following the announcement yesterday, I'm CSL's Interim CEO. My main job is to run the business, giving the Board the space to find and appoint a suitable successor. I'll briefly cover my background, but in that respect, I will work to be an experienced set of hands for about a year. Interim does not mean that I'll be taking a back seat. With the support of the Board, I fully intend to drive the company forward. In the short run, we have an ambitious half year ahead of us, and we need to complete the strategic transformation that is now well underway and already delivering value. At the same time, we must deeply examine CSL's journey, especially over the last decade to fully understand the opportunities for improving strategic growth and profitability. As an investor, I'm not prepared to accept that we can't do better, and I see opportunities to do so.

Just to briefly recap on my time with CSL. I have a deep connection to the company over my 33 years as an employee before I was invited to join the CSL Board in December. Along with Brian McNamee and many others, I took CSL from an unloved part of the Australian government to global leadership in plasma therapeutics and then influenza vaccines. We had and continue to have a deep understanding of those industries and the economics that drive them. I was a key player in the globalization of the company and was heavily involved in the major acquisitions that Brian drove to establish CSL Plasma, Behring and Seqirus. I then took CSL Plasma to global leadership and at different times, ran various functions, including the global supply chain and IT. I was Chief Financial Officer through a period of remarkable growth. My last assignment was to build Seqirus into global influenza vaccine leadership. Dave and Ken were key parts of my team.

I'll make a couple of early high-level comments before handing over to Ken. I think that the strategic framework is sound. The challenge is whether we can do better within that framework. I'm very happy with Seqirus. It has used its global product leadership to drive market share gains in an extraordinarily difficult U.S. market, a classic CSL play. The noncash impairments around the Vifor products are allowing us to move forward. The cash flow from the iron franchise and the growth opportunities in nephrology make this an attractive space.

Your focus and my focus will be on bearing. It's a highly attractive growth sector, and we have the right assets. This is where the greatest opportunity lies. CSL remains a strong and consistent cash generator. I'm looking forward to engaging in more depth with our shareholders over the coming weeks and months.

With that, I will hand over to Ken and the rest of the team.

Thanks, Gordon, and good morning, everyone. Before I get into the results for the first half, I'd like to remind you of our strategic framework. The results we're presenting today represent a step in a broader transformation of CSL with the objective of delivering enhanced growth, profitability and shareholder returns. Andy will then provide an update on Behring and Vifor, and Dave will take you through the Seqirus result. I'll then discuss our financials in more detail as well as our guidance for the rest of the 2026 financial year.

Many of you will be familiar with this slide from our Capital Markets Day in November. CSL's growth is underpinned by our leadership in large growing markets with high unmet medical need. We're embedding a relentless focus on cost leadership to deliver profit growth that's faster than revenue growth and generate strong cash flows that enable us to reinvest in the business. I'm confident that this strategy will underpin strong sustainable shareholder value creation over the long run.

Six months ago, we introduced a transformation program to simplify our organization and drive stronger growth. I'm pleased to say we're progressing well and are already seeing significant value creation. I'll speak to some of the key initiatives. Those in white are now complete and those shaded gray are underway.

In terms of portfolio growth opportunities, we're excited about our collaboration with VarmX on a potential new coagulation treatment. And just this week, we entered into an early-stage research collaboration with Memo Therapeutics, focusing on their recombinant polyclonal Ig technology. On the efficiency side, we've rationalized R&D sites and streamlined our corporate functions, resulting in savings that we'll see flow into the P&L this year.

We've integrated Behring and Vifor's commercial and medical functions, eliminating duplicated spend that has facilitated reinvestment in our U.S. and China commercial capabilities. In plasma collection and manufacturing, we've reallocated collections to more efficient centers and are making strong progress on multiple yield enhancement projects.

While we're pleased with our progress so far, there's still a lot of opportunity ahead of us. And as I said earlier, I'm confident we'll see these initiatives translate into strong, sustainable shareholder value creation over the long run.

Turning now to our financial results. While we made strong progress on the transformation program, we're clearly not satisfied with our first half results and we'll be speaking to the initiatives we've implemented to drive stronger growth going forward.

Our first half performance was also adversely impacted by government policy changes and one-off costs associated with our transformation program and asset impairments. I'll get into more detail shortly.

We have a strong balance sheet and cash flows and today are announcing an expansion of our share buyback from $500 million to $750 million.

Looking at our high-level financials on a constant currency basis, group revenue fell by 4% and NPATA declined by 7%. Reported net profit after tax was down 81% after factoring in the one-off costs that I mentioned earlier. Cash flow from operations was $1.3 billion. Looking ahead to the full year, we're maintaining guidance and have an ambitious plan for growth in the second half, driven by Ig, albumin and our newly launched products.

I'll return later in the presentation to discuss our full year results guidance in more detail. With that, I'll hand over to Andy Schmeltz to discuss the performance of the Behring and Vifor businesses.

Thanks, Ken. You see the Behring half year results here. Needless to say, this has been a challenging time for the business. Let me give you some context. Ig sales of PRIVIGEN and HIZENTRA declined relative to a strong comparable period in the first half of fiscal year '25. This performance includes the adverse impacts of IRA Medicare Part D reforms, which crimped Ig sales in the U.S. and the expiration of some contracts internationally, which I've spoken about previously. However, when compared to the trailing 6 months through June 2025, where the comparison is like-for-like relative to Medicare Part D, revenue from Ig increased by 3%.

For albumin, the disruption from policy changes and cost controls in China, which we highlighted at our Annual General Meeting in October, are reflected in the numbers. That said, we've mobilized rapidly to mitigate the impact of these challenges. In fact, we've seen a positive response in the most recent 3 months from the expansion of our hospital field force in China and from our exclusive retail channel partnership announced in early November 2025. I'll talk more about this in a moment.

The performance of Ig and albumin was partially offset by strong growth in other areas, including hemophilia, where we continue to see steady uptake of HEMGENIX. Sales of HEMGENIX grew 16%, backed by positive 5-year data published in the New England Journal of Medicine in December of 2025, which reinforced durable efficacy and safety for HEMGENIX in adults with hemophilia B. And we were very pleased with the strong launch of our new treatment for hereditary angioedema, ANDEMBRY, after it received approval in the U.S. and many international markets during fiscal year '25. ANDEMBRY can eliminate HAE attacks for the majority of patients with once monthly dosing via prefilled auto-injector. Today, less than a year into the launch, more than 1,000 HAE patients globally are now on therapy. With this momentum, ANDEMBRY is poised to become a leading medicine for HAE prophylaxis. Finally, perioperative bleeding, in particular, KCENTRA, continued to be impacted by competitive market dynamics.

I'd now like to dive a little deeper into our Ig franchise and also albumin dynamics in China. Our view is the fundamentals of the Ig market remains strong with significant unmet patient need. We continue to see the market growing consistently in the mid- to high single-digit range over the medium term. This is underpinned by robust growth across core indications like primary and secondary immunodeficiency and CIDP. And importantly, Ig market demand and supply are balanced.

In the coming second half, I believe we will see stronger double-digit CSL Ig portfolio growth now that, one, we have digested the onetime adverse impacts previously mentioned; and two, we anticipate benefiting from commercial investments triggered over the past several months. Specifically, the expansion of our U.S. Ig and hospital sales forces, restarting our U.S. HIZENTRA direct-to-patient marketing campaign and broadening our contracting efforts across targeted accounts in the U.S. and with customers and governments internationally. Early signals are promising from these investments. Our U.S. PRIVIGEN business grew faster than the IVIg market over the last quarter, and our international business, excluding the U.K., is growing in high single digits. All that said, I appreciate this is a show-me story with forward results necessary.

Moving to albumin sales in China. Upon seeing the market decline early in the fiscal year as government policy enforcement ramped up, we rapidly deployed mitigation efforts, which should lead to a stronger performance in the second half. These included expanding our geographic footprint across more provinces, cities and hospitals in China. We are ramping up our commercial presence across 8 must-win provinces and pursuing more than 100 new hospital listings. We also entered into an exclusive partnership with local Chinese distributor, Baheal Medical, focused on the private pay retail segment.

And finally, our medical team is generating fit-to-purpose real-world evidence to demonstrate albumin's important role across diseases while our commercial team is driving on-label demand. I'm confident these measures will see albumin sales in China stabilize, recover and grow in the second half.

Turning now to Vifor. CSL Vifor delivered a strong performance driven by nephrology. Overall, revenue was up double digits at constant currency. However, the iron business fell, having been impacted by generic competition. Nephrology was the standout as sales in the dialysis segment jumped. This was driven by continued strong demand for Velphoro as the full benefit of its inclusion in the TDAPA scheme was realized. Mircera also performed well and continues to be the market leader in the U.S.

Our rare nephrology launch products also reflected robust demand and sales growth, driven by continued uptake of Tavneos in all markets where it's launched, and FILSPARI, which successfully launched in several European markets.

This next slide outlines why we believe nephrology will continue to be a strong contributor to overall performance. Velphoro is benefiting from TDAPA designation that will continue through the end of the calendar year. And our rare nephrology launch products, Tavneos and FILSPARI are well differentiated and performing well in Europe.

As alluded to in the previous slide, iron growth was impacted by the launches of generics and associated price deterioration. Also, we expect to see the impact of the loss of exclusivity of Injectafer in the U.S. in the 2027 financial year. Despite this, there continues to be high unmet medical need for iron, and we believe growth opportunities will come from geographic expansion as well as via market development to grow IV iron penetration into areas such as women's health, cardio and chronic kidney disease.

I'll now hand off to Dave Ross to discuss the results for CSL Seqirus.

Thanks, Andy. As expected, coming into this year, our influenza pandemic business returned to more normalized levels following a nonrecurring H5 outbreak revenue in FY '25. With that, our focus was placed squarely on driving our differentiation strategy in seasonal influenza, where I'm proud to say that we're the only company with year-on-year revenue growth continuing our long-standing track record of growing market share. The breadth of real-world evidence continues to demonstrate the increased effectiveness of our cell-based vaccine flu cell vacs and the benefits of our adjuvant vaccine Fluad. This compelling clinical data, coupled with strong commercial execution, has allowed us to grow share in key U.S. customer segments and to continue the execution of our geo expansion strategy, all of which is designed to drive growth while diversifying our customer base.

Additionally, the opening of our cell-based Tele marine facility allows us to make a full conversion to differentiated vaccines while expanding our pandemic capabilities and offering. Our performance was achieved against the backdrop of a global seasonal influenza market that we project will decline by mid- to high single digits on a value basis. While immunization rates in ex U.S. markets have essentially recovered to pre-pandemic levels, U.S. immunization rates will see a low to mid-single-digit decline this season. While lower demand in the U.S. has put downward pressure on global prices, the most significant impact has occurred in nondifferentiated standard egg-based vaccines to which we are no longer exposed with the forthcoming sunset of our AFLORIA brand. I remain confident that the U.S. immunization rates will recover over the medium term. especially given the significant public health burden we're currently experiencing.

As a reminder, last year marked a 15-year high in influenza disease and is currently trending to be an equally bad or even worse flu season this year. There are at least 20 million cases this season in the U.S. with disease activity still running high. Sadly, pediatric deaths are again on the rise with the overwhelming majority of those deaths occurring in children who were either under or unvaccinated. With the rising burden of disease and recent U.S. policy changes, we're seeing a groundswell of stakeholder momentum building to combat vaccine hesitancy. The most notable being the American Academy of Pediatrics reaffirmation that all children 6 months and above in the U.S. should be immunized.

As I've stated before, the science and the data will ultimately prevail. The public health consequences of influenza are just too big to ignore. So while the current market dynamics are challenging, our differentiation strategy positions us well to continue our trend of outperforming the market. And as U.S. immunization rates recover, it will act as an accelerant for our strategy and growth ambition.

And with that, I'll hand it back to Ken to discuss the financial results in more detail.

Thank you, Dave. I'll start by walking you through the P&L, focusing on our reported numbers and changes in constant currency. Total revenue for the group was $8.3 billion, down 4% and gross profit was $4.6 billion, down 3% and group operating result was $3.8 billion, down 4%. In research and development, we made strong progress on our restructuring initiatives and in fact, are a little ahead of schedule. R&D expense in the first half was $600 million, down 8% for the second half, we expect R&D to be a similar amount as the first half, again, benefiting from our restructuring work. Importantly, we're investing where we see attractive opportunities such as our VMAX candidate, which is scheduled to commence Phase III in the second half. General and admin costs were also down, in this case, by 2%.

We expect G&A costs in the second half to be similar to the first. Net interest expense was down 11% as our balance sheet continues to delever given strong cash flow. NPATA before restructuring and impairments was $1.9 billion, down 7%. I'll go into more detail on the restructuring and impairment costs shortly. Post these one-offs and amortization, net profit after tax was down 81%. Our underlying effective tax rate was 21%. We expect this to be in the range of 18% to 20% for the full year. We continue to deliver strong cash flows of $1.3 billion in the half. We declared an interim dividend of USD 1.30 which is unchanged from the prior comparable period. And finally, a reminder that from fiscal '27, we'll be moving to NPAT rather than NPATA as our core earnings metric.

Turning to the next slide, we presented the operating results for each of our business units. Andy and Dave have already spoken to the sales drivers. For CSL Behring, revenue was down 7% and gross profit down 7%, and the operating result was down 9%. Behring's gross margin improved slightly by 10 basis points, this reflects the positive impact of efficiencies in plasma collection and manufacturing and the growth in HEMGENIX and in Denbury. It also reflects headwinds from Medicare Part D and the sales declines in Albumin and KCENTRA. Medicare Part D alone represents a roughly 100 basis point margin headwind. Seqirus' revenue was down 2% and which is pleasing given the challenging market backdrop Dave spoke about earlier.

However, Seqirus' margins did come under pressure due to pricing in the U.S. geographic mix shift towards lower-priced markets and the noncontinuation of avian flu sales recognized in fiscal '25. Sales and marketing costs for Seqirus were up reflecting launches into new markets such as Germany and France. For Vifor, revenue was up 12%, driven by the strong performance in nephrology and its operating result was up 22% as we continue to leverage the P&L through efficiency gains.

On the next slide is an update on the financial aspects of our transformation program. As a reminder, we're targeting annual cost savings of up to $550 million by fiscal '28 with one-off restructuring costs of $700 million to $770 million. Our plan in fiscal '26 is to deliver $100 million of cost savings. And I'm pleased to say at the half year, we've achieved 60% of that target. In relation to one-off restructuring costs, we're about 2/3 complete. There are 2 areas that account for the bulk of these costs, employee expenses and we rightsized the organization and facility closures and asset write-offs.

Turning to the balance sheet on the next slide. Separate to the restructuring costs that I just discussed, in fiscal year '16 we'll be booking total after-tax impairment of approximately $1.1 billion with $1.05 billion taken in the first half. The impairments principally relates to 3 main areas: first, a write-down relating to our agreement to license self-amplifying mRNA technology. Since entering this agreement in 2022, we've seen a decline in COVID disease burden as well as a significantly more onerous regulatory regime in the U.S., particularly regarding mRNA vaccines. We're also impairing the carrying value of Venofer, our iron sucrose treatment for anemia. The impairment follows the licensure of 3 generic competitors in the U.S. in the latter half of 2025, resulting in reduced future sales expectations. Reduced forecast for Venofer have minimal impacts to the group with Venofer contributing approximately $117 million in sales last fiscal year. Finally, our decision to accelerate investment in Horizon 2 manufacturing capacity has led to the redundancy of some plant property and equipment.

In the second half of this fiscal year, we anticipate an impairment of approximately $70 million post tax relating to Vifor. As we previously noted, before sales have grown significantly following its inclusion in the U.S. TDAPA framework. However, TDAPA inclusion is expected to roll off from December 2026. These impairments are almost entirely noncash. And as I mentioned earlier, have minimal impact on the forward-looking prospects for the group. Our balance sheet remains in a strong position with leverage of 2x at December 2025 after repurchasing approximately USD 400 million of shares in the first half. This has given us the opportunity to expand our existing share buyback program for this year from $500 million to $750 million.

Moving to my final slide. We're maintaining guidance for the full year. We've set out here the drivers of our strong second half ambition and a bridge from our first half results. Starting with our first half group revenue that we announced today, if we simply double this and take off an amount that allows for the expected seasonality in Seqirus, we get a simple annualized revenue figure for the full year. On the right of the waterfall, we've shown the growth expected in the second half. In IG, we expect double-digit second half growth for both PRIVIGEN and HIZENTRA due to our expanded field force in the U.S. direct-to-patient advertising and broaden contracting. For Albumin in China, as you heard earlier, we've already seen positive signs from our expanded commercial footprint across more hospitals and cities supported by our retail partnership with Baheal Medical.

And finally, we expect continued strong momentum in our recently launched products, HEMGENIX and ANDENBRY. We also acknowledge that there will be competitive pressures in other areas of our portfolio such as Ion, KCENTRA and Head and have taken these into account for our full year expectations.

Before handing back to Mark for Q&A, I'd like to make a few closing comments. We have significant untapped potential in this business. While our transformation program is progressing well, there is still much work and many more opportunities ahead of us to enhance growth and shareholder returns. I'm looking forward to working with Gordon to realize that full potential.

With that, I'll now hand over to Mark to coordinate the Q&A.

We'll now move to Q&A. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Andrew Goodsall at MST Marquee.

Just to the ownership of the result and obviously with Gordon as the incoming CEO. There's a propensity in the marketplace to see a new CEO is sort of generally coming in resetting numbers. So just coming -- just asking directly on that ownership. Obviously, Ken's going through it in a bit of detail, but just wanted to hear from Gordon on that. .

Yes, I'm familiar with the model. The -- so yes, a lot bit term no ambiguity. I completely own the situation of the company is in at the moment, and that's a bit of my job is to look for the opportunities that Ken referenced earlier and do something about it.

Okay. And then the second question, just perhaps Andy, just on confidence around second half IG growth. And obviously, we're flown a few contracts, including the -- well, a step-up in your participation in the Aussie import comp contract. Just any more color and detail you're sort of willing to share with us that gives you that confidence in recovery.

Thanks for the question, Andrew. Clearly, we knew that the first half was going to be a challenging period for our IG portfolio. And we faced many headwinds here in the first half and adverse impacts that are going to be predominantly behind us in the second half. The kind of U.S. Medicare Part D reform, that's a few points of growth that were impacted the impact of the lost contracts internationally, which we've worked a lot through, that's another few points of growth. And then there was some choppiness in trade purchases as well.

So with those behind us and the investments that we've made, as I kind of articulated, in our U.S. field force in our direct-to-patient campaign in our broadened contracting platform. Those all have started in recent months to have some momentum. We see, in the U.S., PRIVIGEN is growing faster than the IVIG market. We see HIZENTRA holding share. We see our growth ex U.K. internationally in the high single digits and that will all benefit us in the second half. We think that probably a better barometer is trailing period growth, which was 3% versus the trailing period. And we think that's probably a more appropriate kind of barometer for full year.

Thanks, Andrew. Next question comes from Saul Hadassin at Barrenjoey.

Just first question, sort of cognizant of the pressures for IG now been in the half, but maybe 1 for Andy. KCENTRA, IDELVION, HAEGARDA, effectively all delivering growth well below expectations, at least what the market was looking for. you talk to some of the measures that you're introducing outside of IG specifically that might see some recovery in those particular products?

Sure. Saul. Thanks for the question. Certainly, KCENTRA is predominantly a U.S. story where there was an introduction of a competitor a couple of years ago at a significantly lower price point than KCENTRA. And so we've been competing well. We've actually decelerated the impact -- it's now from a volume perspective in the single digits, but there's a price impact. We've been broadening our contracting approach. We now have a U.S. hospital field force that's promoting not only PRIVIGEN but KCENTRA as well, which is very helpful. And we're being successful with contracts. And actually, our volume growth in contracted accounts is growing in mid-single digits.

But that doesn't take away that the return to growth for KCENTRA is going to take time, and it's going to be predicated upon broadened indications in DOAC reversal and in cardiac surgery, which are coming in the next few years. Just to comment, IDELVION is actually holding its own in hemophilia B quite nicely in the face of 3 new subcutaneous competitors. HAEGARDA also is holding its own lots of innovation in the hereditary angioedema space. And so that was as expected for us, especially with An Denbury performing so well. I think I covered the major products that you mentioned.

And you can ask a quick follow-up, just to the outlook then for the second half gross margin per bearing Clearly, first half, not a bad outcome in terms of some degree of margin expansion. Is second upon to deliver even more margin uplift on the basis of benefits coming through from Ricard.

Saul, it's Ken. I take that question. So as you saw margin in the first half were marginally up, and that reflects a number of positive drivers. So what we're doing in plasma collections, plasma manufacturing and then the growth that we've seen in some of these high-margin products that Andy spoke to, basically, HEMGENIX and in Denbury have been positive to margin. And then there's some -- also some headwinds. So we've seen a decline in albumin. We're seeing a decline in KCENTRA and then also the Part D impact -- we will cycle through those, but they're embedded in the results for this full fiscal year.

So the medium-term outlook for margin is definitely continuing to trend upwards. But for fiscal '26, it will be broadly stable, marginally up, consistent with the first half.

Good. Thanks, Saul. Next question comes from Steve Wheen at Jarden.

It's a bit of a continuation of the gross margin in bearing I mean there's clearly a lot of moving parts here and a lot of headwinds based on some of your high-margin products doing worse than less than expected. I'm just trying to understand what is driving the ability to offset that. So you've called out 100 basis points from Medicare Part D, but what other sort of -- I'm ultimately just trying to quantify the upside to the margin in that half that you're getting through efficiencies and some of the other initiatives you've put in place?

Sure. So I'll expand a little bit. So -- we have a number of operational levers that impact margins. So what we're doing internal to the company, and they're all going quite well. So CPL is trending down -- we've previously spoken about the benefits that we're delivering through Horizon 1 yield improvement that continues to deliver -- we're taking fixed costs out across the network, including in operations, which impacts the gross margin -- some of that because of our supply chain lead times take a mile to manifest in the P&L. So as an example, if you recall, Rice and I know me, were only fully rolled out at the end of fiscal '25, and we don't get a full year impact of those benefits until fiscal '27. So I'd tell you on those internal operational levers, we feel pleased with progress.

And then, of course, there's the product mix. And so that goes back to the topics that we've already discussed. -- and a mixture of drivers here, some tailwinds and some headwinds, which I think Andy has already covered.

Yes. And can I just follow up on that? Clearly, price is a major driver to margin. Could you just talk to some of the pricing dynamics that you've seen in IG in the U.S. specifically and then maybe an albumin as you start to look into some of these into this retail channel?

Yes, I'll take that, Steve. Look, price for IG, particularly in the U.S., prices are relatively stable. We're able to take modest price increases. And then, of course, there's a lot of contracts in the U.S., particularly for IVIG. That being said, in this period, the Medicare Part D impact is purely on price. So you see this negative impact on price, and that's where we capture the Medicare Part D. But that will be behind us as we move into calendar year '26 and going forward.

For albumin, clearly, in China, which is the highest price realization for albumin globally, it will continue to be so even with the cost controls. But we are being thoughtful and modestly taking some price down in order to grow volume because it's a volume play for albumin as we expand geographically, but modest taking price. And around the rest of the world, prices are relatively stable for albumin, but significantly lower than China and the U.S. And so our strategy for albumin is to continue to expand in China, and I think we'll see a nice turnaround in the second half.

Thanks, Steve. Next question comes from Laura Sutcliff at Citi.

Could you please explain a bit more what the phrase broadened contracting approach mean?

I think that's to me, Laura. -- happy to. Look, broadened contracting is our attempt to kind of encapsulate both in the U.S. and internationally, a recognition, particularly with IG that there's opportunities for us to grow volume by being more robust in our contracting approach. In the U.S., there are segments in the hospital segment, in the specialty pharmacy segments and in clinics and we had been a little narrower in our approach historically of where we contract and where we don't. So now we're being much more purposeful. And internationally, of course, 60% of the IG volume goes through tenders. And we've been very thoughtful in improving our capabilities, database analytics, modeling, game theory, so that we can be successful in the tenders that we think are appropriate and that we choose to win. And so that's kind of what the phrase broadened contracting speaks to.

Just a follow-up on that, does that mean you're willing to be a bit more flexible on price? Is that what that is really getting at?

Yes. I think we absolutely are being thoughtful and purposeful -- at the end of the day, there's limited supply for -- and so we want to allocate our limited supply in areas where we think it's appropriate and at the price points that make sense for us, but we also don't want to be predictable. And so that's part of this as well.

Thanks, Laura. Next question comes from Dave Stanton at Jefferies.

Just a modeling question for me. And do you expect revenue growth in albumin in F 26 on F 25, please?

Again, I think that 1 goes to me, Dave. So albumin, the second half is going to be much stronger than the first half, not only because the real impact was in the first 3 months of the year in China. And the investments that we quickly made that I articulated are already starting to pay dividends. And so we're going to see a nice turnaround in the second half. Can we make up for the entire shortfall in the first half of the second half. I think we're going to get close, but I think modest year-over-year decline in albumin in '26 with a return to growth in 27 is probably more appropriate guidance.

Very clear. And my follow-up and 1 for Ken. You have mentioned in F '27 and F '28 that you're looking for high single-digit guidance at NPAT previously. Does that still hold?

Sure. So we obviously need to get through the second half, and we've been speaking a lot about that on this call in relation to the longer-term outlook for '27 and '28 seeing nothing that would lead us to change that outlook. That's always the case at the moment, we're working through the budgets for fiscal '27 and as is normally the case, we'll give more detail on that when we get to the full year result in August.

Next question comes from Lyanne Harrison at Bank of America.

Can I come back to IG. There were some comments in the prepared remarks where you talked about the IT market demand and supply are well balanced. -- that's very different from previous comments where you talk about unmet demand and also in response to Laura's question saying that there's limited supply of IG. So I just wanted to understand, are you seeing different demand supply dynamic in different geographies. Can you talk about the United States versus rest of the world core countries? And then can you also speak to the expanded sales force in the United States, targeting certain accounts? Is that where you're seeing competition. And as a result, you're having to invest more in sales and marketing there.

Thanks for the question, Leanne. So let me try to clarify my comments about the IG market dynamics. First of all, the unmet need for IG is significant and the diseases that IG is used to treat primary and secondary immunodeficiency, CIDP, we see the diagnosis and the utilization of IgE growing high single digits, low double digits. My comments -- and we think that's going to continue for the foreseeable future. That being said, my comments about supply and demand balance were that just about all companies now, the major companies are vertically integrated and are very thoughtful in the amount of plasma that's needed to collect to deliver on looking a couple of years out, the demand projections for IgE. And so we're in an environment that there's sufficient supply generally to meet the projected demands for IgE. And so that's how I refer to a well-balanced market, but growing I mean, absolutely growing and attractive. And in our position as a market leader, we continue to expect to be a market leader. It's growing in the U.S. The demand is growing internationally. We do see the per capita usage of IG is more robust in the U.S., in Australia, -- and in other geographies, right, there's just not as much IgE. So we think the global growth is going to continue.

To your questions about the expanded field forces, I mean, look, we've been very thoughtful but believe that there is an opportunity for bearing to grow faster than the market in IgE over the midterm by ratcheting up our commercial capabilities and infrastructure. And so we created a new hospital focused field force that's promoting PRIVIGEN and KCENTRA at the beginning of this fiscal year. And we also increased the scale of our IgE immunology field force that promotes HIZENTRA and also PRIVIGEN and we think it's just to help us continue not to stay competitive, but to be successful in growing faster than the market over the midterm.

And just a follow-up. If we could come back to KCENTRA. So obviously, if we think back to the December '24 half, that's when you had a contract last year. But since then, we've had 3 halves of, I guess, declining KCENTRA revenue. So I hope that, that would cycle out this half. But you talked about I guess, competition in that space. Can you talk about that a little bit more and what your expectations are for the second half of '26?

Sure. So the KCENTRA dynamic is that the competitor that entered and KCENTRA was the only 4-factor PCC in the U.S. And now there's another competitor. They came in with a price point, I think the average selling price is about 30% below KCENTRA. We've been very thoughtful about where to contract so that this doesn't become -- so that it makes sense for us. But it is fair to say that, I mean, an analog show that it takes several years to reach an equilibrium when there's a market entrant with a price differential like that. And so that's what we're working through.

We're pleased to see that we're winning contracts and that with our broadened portfolio, it also gives us a leg up here to be successful winning contracts. And in those areas where we have contracted volume, we're growing. The 4-factor PCC market is growing in volume, but the revenue of the market has come down, not surprisingly, given this dynamic. And I think we're stabilizing. But I do think a return to growth is going to still be a few years out as we broaden indications.

Next question from David Bailey at Morgan Stanley.

Can you've given some numbers there for the operating expenses R&D and G&A pretty much being the same in the second half, just with the initiatives coming through on the IG side, how should we be thinking about that sales and marketing line for the second half?

So as a percentage of sales for bearing reasonably consistent with the first half, similar with Seqirus percentage of sales not as helpful first half, second half, just given the seasonality, but hopefully, that gives you a sufficient guide.

Yes. No, that's helpful. And then maybe just in terms of the period bleeding segment, obviously, case entry is under a bit of pressure there, but there is some things going on to potentially look at label expansion, similarly with fibrinogen and acquired for benign deficiency. Just maybe talk to us a little bit about where the life cycle management programs are at and then when we could potentially start to think about those -- the benefits from those label expansions coming in into the top line, the gross profit line.

Sure, David, I'll take that one. Look, this space, we think is attractive, and we have a right to win. With KCENTRA, we've got the cardiac surgery life cycle that's underway, and we're working with the FDA on a path forward for DOAC reversal indication for KCENTRA. Those will both take a few years. So we're looking at 2028 fiscal year and beyond. We did get feedback from the FDA on our Riostep expanded label where they had some questions about clinical evidence, and we're working with the FDA to work through to get through that. So we do hope to be able to have an update and to broaden the indication for Riostep fibrinogen. And then, of course, our ArmX partnership which we think will be really great that, that should come online if all goes well in the end of the decade here, 2029, 2030. So it's going to take a little bit of time, but this is a space where CSL certainly is poised not only to compete but to compete successfully and win over time.

Next question comes from Andrew Paine at CLSA.

Just wondering if you have any thoughts around visibility through half 2. just in terms of reaching your NPATA guidance, really just thinking about the October update where the focus is on albumin and flu and less market expectations, Seqirus outperformed and albumin underperformed. Just trying to understand the moving pieces here and keen to know how much clarity you have on underlying trends through to half '26.

So incorporated within our guidance for the full year. Obviously, the dynamics we've seen pan out in the first half. So within that, security collar doing a little bit better than what we thought a few months ago. I think, a solid result for the 12% up, probably unlikely to hold that percentage growth over the full year. And then Andy has spoken to the bearing drivers. So that's all built into the numbers. Happy to elaborate if there's any other further detail you're looking for?

Yes. Just I guess, in terms of visibility that you have for these numbers through the half and I guess, leading into the half, it seems like there was quite a material shift in the last 2 months there versus what we thought was going to happen in October. I guess what happened there? And I guess, what's the confidence in the second half that you're not going to see some moves like you saw in those last 2 months?

Sure. So we've touched on some of that to elaborate. Obviously, with the Seqirus business, there is some inherent uncertainty in U.S. vaccination rates. And we've been pleased to see some stronger late season vaccinations that have obviously then being incorporated into the Seqirus result. With respect to Behring, the progress through the half varied quite considerably. So if you recall, it was at the Annual General Meeting that we spoke about some of the headwinds that we're seeing in China. And I think the team pivoted very quickly to put countermeasures in place and as you've heard from Andy, those countermeasures are having some really tangible positive impact. So I would say the results that we're seeing over the latter part of the half, to us, give us a good indicator of the trend that we expect to see as we move through the second half.

Next question comes from Sacha Krien at Evans & Partners.

Similar vein of questions. to Andrew. I'm just wondering, it looks like the composition of your 2016 guidance has changed. I'm just wondering how much of that is attributable to better performance on costs. Can it sounded like those numbers that you were sort of talking to in the second half well below at least what the market was expecting. Is it just the $100 million saving from the cost-out program in FY '26?

So I'll talk generally about costs. So yes, the $100 million target that we have been working towards for fiscal 2016. We're happy with progress against that target. We are always looking for efficiencies across the group. And so if you look at, for example, our G&A line, I think at the full year result of 1.25 million, we guided to a G&A outcome of about $1 billion in the full year. I think we're going to come under that equally in R&D. I think at the time, we guided to full year outcome of about $1.35. I think we'll be less than that. So we're very, very focused on taking out inefficiencies and unproductive spend. But importantly, where we see opportunities to grow the business, we will do that. And so I mentioned in my opening comments on R&D, we're investing in some exciting candidates where we see the opportunity. So that's the balance that we're making. But yes, there are some nice cost benefits that are flowing into the full year.

Yes. And just on -- sorry, to look at FY '27 a little bit, but you sort of flagged to date falling away for Vifor and we've heard of some regulatory issues around taboos. I'm just wondering what Vifor looks like into '27 given those issues, what the headwinds are from the start.

Sure. So I'll touch on Vifor and then I think we'll get Andy to make some comments with respect to Tania. So before very much 2 different businesses. So with respect to iron, you would have seen that iron declined in the first half. because of the well-known drivers there with loss of exclusivity. So we will see continuing declines in iron. Andy spoke to some of the initiatives we're doing to cataract up. But overall, I think that will net out with a decline in iron. And then, of course, in fiscal '27, we have the impact of the loss of exclusivity for Injectafer.

With respect to the nephrology portfolio, the growth has been very strong in recent periods. A lot of that has been driven by Vifor. And as we've articulated today, you need to be aware that the Vifor TDAPA reimbursement period ends at the end of fiscal '26 -- sorry, at ends at the end of calendar '26 and the way reimbursement works for that channel in the U.S., we would expect to see a significant drop in Vifor revenues from that point in time. So that's going to temper the nephrology growth rates that we expect in Vifor.

And then maybe to just add the rare nephrology portfolio with the launches, Phil Spari, internationally is growing well. Tavnios as well. You mentioned Tavis. And we're aware of the European Medical Authority Article 20 assessment, and we're working with the regulatory authorities following that procedure. So we just have to follow the process and allow that to play out.

Next question comes from Devin Thillainathan.

I guess I just want to understand a little bit more in terms of your sales force changes that you've put through for your IG business. I guess the question really is about having seen the market share loss you've seen across the last 12 months and the change of CEO that you have announced. Just curious to understand perhaps if there were any missteps that were made across that time frame on the commercial execution stage. And then trying to, I guess, understand effectively if that assists you in growing your share again, if you understand the line of questions.

So let me take a stab at addressing some of your questions. Look, we are looking to grow our leadership in Ig not only growing with the market over the midterm, but growing faster than the market. And we see that there's opportunities everywhere. The way to be more successful in the U.S. is through the full range of commercial levers that we're pulling. And some of those include kind of share of voice on the ground -- and so we've expanded our field force in the hospitals. We've expanded our office base field force. And now we're actively promoting both PRIVIGEN and HIZENTRA. We are in the U.S., we have a little bit lower share in IG, IVIG with PRIVIGEN than we do internationally, and we think that there is an opportunity to expand our business. And so that's definitely part of our strategy going forward. That's something that has been well thought out over the last couple of years and will take time to play out, but really pleased to see PRIVIGEN for the first time in a while growing faster than the market, particularly in the important hospital segment in the U.S. recently.

So I think it's just 1 example of our mindset to not rest on our laurels, not expect anything to be given to us, but to resource our teams appropriately to enable us to address the unmet need and to capture more patients with the CSL Ig franchise.

Okay. And then just a follow-up then, maybe a question for Ken, with the Behring gross margin, just thinking about the moving parts there. In the first half, I guess, we had a pretty big headwind with Medicare as you called out 100 bps and the albumin pressure. But I think through the second half of 2016 and those 2 factors kind of fall away. Would you then expect you would have a better margin performance from an accretion perspective in the second half?

Yes. So just to go back to my earlier comments. Thanks for the question that over the full year, we guide to expect margins to be a little bit up -- and so it reflects a lot of different drivers, so I won't repeat everything else that I've said, but there's operational drivers, internal drivers that I think are going well and then we're working through the impact of the product mix shifts on the top line. Overall, medium-term outlook remains for an upward trend, but I think we'll see a slower margin expansion in fiscal '26.

Next question comes from Craig Wong-Pan at RBC.

Within IG, could you just explain the competitive dynamics you're seeing, given you have been underperforming peers like is the field force expansion in response to something your competitors have been doing?

Look, we're proud of our market-leading position in IG globally. And we're always looking for ways to accelerate growth. And we did a thoughtful review and identified opportunities to resource ourselves a little bit more strongly in the U.S. And I think it's not reflective of an acute shift or a competitive approach. It's just a recognition that we're always looking for ways to allocate our resources in the most impactful way to drive the business. And so certainly, that plays out. The U.S. dynamics, as they are in other markets are quite always evolving. The customers, the channels, the level of concentration versus fragmentation. And so this was a purposeful investment. And we're already seeing it pay off, and so that, that will drive further investment.

I mean another example is the direct-to-patient campaign for HIZENTRA where we know that HIZENTRA is the most convenient subcutaneous IG offering for patients and many who are on IVIG or diagnosed with these conditions that HIZENTRA is a better total solution for them. And by going directly to the patients, which is a trident approach in many other disease areas, but had not been done in the IG space before that this is an opportunity to further differentiate ourselves. And of course, for CSL, there's a benefit of having -- expanding our leadership in SIG in the U.S. So I think it's all just thoughtful and smart commercial execution.

Okay. And then just moving to iron that decline. Could you help us understand how much was lost volume or how much was kind of price that you had to -- like price reduction you had to incur to keep the volume?

I can take that one. So I would tell you, overall, the decline is probably about 80% volume, 20% price over the year as a rough guide.

Next question comes from Thomas Wakim at Bell Potter Securities.

Just on the bearing gross margin. So you're expecting, I guess, a bit of a small step-up in FY '26. But longer term, have there been any changes to the longer-term expectations around getting back to bearings kind of pre covered gross margin level?

No change in that longer-term expectation -- as you know, we're not going to put a time on it. But I think what's important is that we'll continue to deliver margin expansion over time. That's a really important metric for us, and we continue to deliver against it.

And then just a second question, please, on IG. Can you give us any update at all about the competitive dynamics within the CIDP indication obviously, some peers in this space have made some pretty significant sales gains with FcRn products. Have you noticed any impact at all of that on your IG products?

The dynamics in CIDP with the introduction of FcRns are aligned with what we represented at Capital Markets Day. We see the vast majority of the utilization being after IG in the second and third-line settings. And so IG continues to be the market-leading standard for first-line utilization. And in fact, we see that for a subset of patients, the benefit risk of FcRns kind of wanes and we see them returning to IgU. So look, it's good for patients to have more options given these are chronic diseases. But I'd say it's -- nothing has changed over the recent 6-month period here.

Next question comes from David Stanton at Jefferies.

Yes. So just a follow-up for me, gentlemen. With the cost savings you're planning to get over the medium term, can you give us some ideas about whether you'll reinvest that -- those cost savings you've outlined? And so what percentage of the total and where potentially might you reinvest?

Sure. So with the cost savings, what we've said before, which remains the case is that we will balance capital allocation between reinvesting in the business to drive growth. And so in the most recent period, I spoke about the reinvestments in commercial. But we need to be satisfied that those reinvestments are going to drive an attractive ROI. And if not, then obviously, those benefits will be released to the P&L with the objective of making sure that we can deliver adequate attractive returns to shareholders over the near, medium and longer term.

In relation to a fixed metric when you look forward, that's not a metric that I can give you because it depends upon the quality of those reinvestment opportunities that come up at the time. So there will be a mix. We are looking to reinvest in growth. But we are also looking to drive P&L leverage. As I mentioned before, gross margin growing faster than revenue and operating margins growing faster than the gross margins and cost-saving initiatives and releasing a significant part of that to the P&L is fundamental to that.

Look, there are no further questions in the queue, so I'll draw the briefing to a close. So thank you for your interest, and goodbye.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us on short notice. My name is Mark Dehring, Head of Investor Relations at CSL. The focus of today's call is CSL's leadership transition, and we appreciate your interest and engagement in this important juncture for the company.

To be clear, we are not addressing financial results during this session. There will be a separate call tomorrow dedicated to our financial performance, where you'll have the opportunity to ask questions regarding CSL's results and outlook. Today, our intention is to provide context and clarity around the leadership change and what it means for CSL.

I'll now hand you over to CSL's Chairman, Dr. Brian McNamee.

Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us on such short notice. Given the importance of the announcement, I wanted you to hear directly from me and have the opportunity to meet Gordon Naylor, who has just been appointed as Interim CEO and Managing Director and will begin in the role tomorrow.

Paul McKenzie will be retiring from the company. On behalf of the Board, I want to sincerely thank Paul for his dedication and service to CSL over the past 7 years, both as CEO and previously Chief Operating Officer. Paul has made a significant contribution to CSL, particularly in optimizing our operations, including significant progress on Horizon 1 and 2, leading global initiatives through challenging times and drove plasma collection volumes to above pre-pandemic levels. He drove the transformation of our R&D reorganization, reducing fixed costs and infrastructure. Under Paul's leadership, CSL launched the first gene therapy for hemophilia B, HEMGENIX, and the launch of our monoclonal antibody for hereditary angioedema and Dembri.

After careful consideration, the Board has determined with Paul that now is the right time for new leadership to continue to drive CSL's strategic transformation and performance. Gordon's proven track record and deep knowledge of CSL's business make him ideally placed to do this while we conduct a global search for our next CEO.

Many of you will know Gordon. He was previously CSL's CFO. During his 33-year tenure with CSL, he played a pivotal role in our rise to global leadership in plasma therapeutics and vaccines. Gordon helped design and build the Broadmeadows facility and then was the first Chief Engineer of that site. He was a key player in the globalization of the company and was heavily involved in all major acquisitions that drove the establishment of CSL Plasma, Behring and Seqirus. Gordon was President of Seqirus, quickly taking from a business that was losing $300 million a year to profitability and market leadership through its differentiated portfolio. He also took CSL to global leadership and at different times, ran the global supply chain and IT.

Anyone who has worked with Gordon will know he is a clear thinker, calm under pressure and leads teams to success. Gordon is fully empowered by the Board and has the mandate to implement any changes necessary to drive the company's performance. Gordon's priorities will be to bring greater focus, accelerate the ongoing strategic transformation and to enhance shareholder value.

At this point, I'd like to hand over to Gordon to introduce himself and share immediate priorities.

Thanks, Brian, and thank you to the Board for your confidence. I'd also add my thanks to Paul for his leadership and commitment over the past 7 years. As Brian said, I have a long association with CSL even before it was listed on the ASX. CSL is a great company with innovative platforms, world-class people as well as differentiated medicines and vaccines that are essential for patients and communities globally. There remains significant unmet medical needs within our therapeutic areas and the broader global community, and we expect the demand for our existing and new treatments and vaccines to grow in the coming years.

Interim does not mean I'll be taking a back seat. My experience at CSL means that I can hit the ground running and ensure we make significant progress in this period. I will be able to help accelerate our transformation while the Board conducts a search for the next CEO and MD. I'll be working closely with the Board and the strong leadership team that Paul has assembled to execute our transformation and drive our strategy forward. I'm looking forward to meeting with many of you over the coming weeks. I'm excited by the challenge ahead. Mark?

Thanks, Gordon. We'll now open the lines up for Q&A. First question we have is from David Low at UBS.

Gordon, just trying to understand, I mean, we've had a lot of updates from CSL through the AGM and then the Capital Markets Day. Are your priorities going to be -- do you expect them to be well aligned with what we've already heard? I mean, are there changes coming? Are there going to be changes to the top-level management do you expect? I mean I guess I'm trying to understand is this a step towards stability or whether we're perhaps going to go through another period of further changes for the business?

David, I can't really comment upon the prior announcements. But I guess the broad point is that the foundations are very sound here. And so my role give the Board the space to select the next CEO, continue with the transformation work that's been going really quite well and which is well directed. And then understand what the journey CSL has been on over the last decade or so has been all about and really explore the opportunities which come with the portfolio we have today and just -- and I think particularly to look to profitable growth from here. So that's broadly the approach. We'll see how we go on all the specifics when we get there.

Next question comes from Laura Sutcliffe at Citi.

Thinking about your search for a CEO. Do you expect to be looking for someone who will pursue a traditional look at CSL for the future? Or are you looking for someone who's going to cast a critical eye over the structure and function of the group? Perhaps you could describe what strengths or other criteria like location and so forth, you're prioritizing in your search?

Look, thanks, Laura, for the question. As you can imagine, the Board is thinking deeply about the attributes that we feel we need for the next 5 and 10 years. And that was really part of the discussion with Paul McKenzie that we felt we'd made excellent progress on the transformation. But in the dynamic markets in which we operate, we need new and broader skills to take us to improved performance commercially and also broaden our pipeline activities. So when we think about the sort of skills we need, we -- the benefit of having Gordon in this interim role is we can take our time to get the best candidate we can find because we have great confidence in Gordon. You couldn't find a better person to do the interim job given his deep understanding of the business and really his track record of performance.

So we're very clear that we're looking for someone who can take the great strengths of this organization. And I can assure you, this is still a very strong organization that generates very strong cash flows as a business. It has significant unmet medical needs in much of its portfolio. So we have -- we believe we have opportunities in the next 3 to 5 years, both from efficiencies through the Horizon 2 program and then portfolio to grow. The attributes, therefore, of the next CEO is someone who can execute after Gordon on this portfolio and assist us in growing consistent with the stable strength we have. So I don't see significant change. It will be a global search. It's clearly somebody who will have had global experience. And the job -- the CSL job is essentially a Northern Hemisphere job with a significant Australian attribute.

Thanks, Laura. Next question comes from Steve Wheen at Jarden.

Thanks, Mark. Just a question for you, Brian. Just at the AGM, it was indicated that the Board gave Paul their full support. And I just wondered what's happened, if anything, between October and now for that to no longer be the case?

Steve, again, if we go back to the AGM, I was crystal clear in my speech, we had a sense of urgency, and we had 5 critical things that we had to work on. If we go back to my speech, some of them were what I'd call operational transformation, but 2 of the others were about commercial performance, execution and portfolio. And when the Board sat down recently and looked at our business and thinking about where we need to go in the future, we, in discussion with Paul, recognized he didn't have the skills that we wanted for the future. And therefore, it really we discussed this question of him, therefore, retiring. And so to some degree, I'd say there were clear signs at the AGM that we had a sense of urgency of getting on with things. And we've made excellent progress, I think, on the transformation, which you'll hear of tomorrow.

But we're impatient as shareholders cannot be happy with the performance because the Board certainly is not happy with the performance as well. So it's our job to return to growth, return to the sort of strength that we believe we have and are recognized by the market and will be reflected in the share price. These things, enhancing shareholder value is central to our thinking of this transition.

Next question comes from Craig Wong-Pan at RBC.

Just wanted to understand like the timing. I mean, just the day before your result, there's a leadership change. I mean, was there any disagreements between Paul and the Board about, I don't know, strategy or just that sort of made his position untenable?

No, I mean -- sorry, excuse me. The rationale for doing it the day before is so that we can announce it. So it doesn't confuse the results presentation tomorrow, that Gordon and Ken and the team will lead that discussion on the performance and the outlook for the rest of the year, et cetera, and that you won't be surprised when Gordon is there, and it's not Paul McKenzie. So the whole idea was to make sure we made this announcement and provide an opportunity for the results -- to focus on the results.

Next question comes from Andrew Goodsall at MST Marquee.

It's sort of first 100-day type question just to Gordon, whether you sort of expect to be in a position to sort of lay out a plan of action, certainly for those sort of near-term execution type plan.

So I've got another 100 days if you're asking this question?

Yes.

Yes, so it's obviously early days. I think I refer back to my earlier comments, I think we're starting from a pretty good place. It's exploring the opportunities and finding out how to drive greater profitability in the company. I think, Andrew, that we're pretty engaged with the investment community and with the analysts and so on. And so you'll continue to get updates. We'll certainly be talking about a lot over the next few weeks. So it will be an ongoing dialogue, I think.

Next question from David Bailey at Morgan Stanley.

You've mentioned some of the opportunities over the medium to longer term under penetration of key markets, operational initiatives. My question is, have you seen anything over the last couple of months that would suggest a significant difference in the growth outlook from here? I know there was some medium-term guidance or '27, '28 EPS guidance of sort of high single-digit growth. Is there anything to suggest that, that growth rate will be materially different? Or is this more of a change to think longer term about the direction of CSL more broadly?

Look, David, I think I'm unaware of those things you're describing. What I can say is do we believe that some of our core products in their portfolios, whether it be immunoglobulin, whether it be hereditary edema, et cetera, those products and they have an opportunity to continue to grow because their unmet medical needs. We see no change in the outlook for those products. I'd say Seqirus has been difficult to predict the market. It's very dynamic. And as you've seen, it is true that it's been quite a complicated year for us on Seqirus. But I'd say the reality is that there's also a lot of influenza disease out there. So our fundamentals haven't changed. And I think the outlook for our core products haven't changed.

Next question comes from Sacha Krien at Evans & Partners.

Look, we've seen the CFO and the CEO depart in, I think, a matter of 4 months. I'm just wondering if there's any other senior executive departures we should be aware of? Or do you feel like you have the right people in place to take the business forward underneath Gordon?

Look, Paul, as we've noted earlier, has done really sterling work. And part of that has been to build a team that I think is strong. So not -- I think the answer would be nothing anticipated.

And look, I'd add to comment that I think that Joy's retirement enabled us to promote someone we had a very high regard for internally to be the CFO. So to some degree, retirements give opportunities in companies as well to promote people, to try new people. Sometimes you go outside and sometimes you do internal appointments. I think I wouldn't overread into this reality. I think that, as Gordon said, Paul has created a strong team. And we're just determined with a sense of urgency to get on with things, to move things faster, to do things better in the marketplace. Yes. So it is a sense of urgency that we share with our shareholders.

Next question from Dave Stanton or David Stanton at Jefferies.

Question for you, Gordon. Look, given you've previously run CSL Plasma and you had a look at it for a little while now, what are the major issues in the collection business that you see now?

Thanks, David. I think it's probably a bit early for me to be doing diagnosis. But I'd just say that we will be looking very closely at all parts of the operation and answering questions like that one. And just more broadly at how we take -- find a pathway forward that fully explores the opportunities that the company has.

Next question comes from Davin Thillainathan at Goldman Sachs.

I guess just a question for you, Gordon, having been successfully turning around the Seqirus business and your time there. When you look at the situation that you are inheriting on an interim basis for the broader business, are there sort of any parallels that you would look at having done the turnaround at Seqirus that you could perhaps lay the groundwork for Behring for, I guess, the ultimate CEO to take over from?

Thanks for the question, Davin. I think maybe a little bit about approach. So the Seqirus turnaround started with building a strong leadership team, and we've got a good start on that. It also started with quite an honest assessment of the situation and clear communication to the organization of the challenges and the opportunities. So at this point, I'd say that will be the same playbook, at least as a starting point.

Next question comes from Saul Hadassin at Barrenjoey.

Just a clarification, I guess, Brian, you mentioned the strength of the team below Gordon. I'm just wondering, does the search for CEO -- does it exclude internal candidates? Are there any internal candidates that you're looking at? Or is this purely an external search?

We definitely look internally as well as externally. And so that's how we see it. But -- and with Gordon, we have the great opportunity, as I said, to take our time, get our brief right and find the best person possible. That -- but there's no doubt that will include looking inside the company as well as externally.

Next question, Steve Wheen from Jarden.

Just a follow-up for you, Gordon. I'm just wondering if there was any scenario where you might accept a full-time role as CEO? And if you've got any views on the demerger of Seqirus given that was your baby.

So you can do endless scenarios. I think the process that Brian outlined is the right one. The company needs to thoughtfully consider all of the different alternatives that they have. Your second question demerger. So look, Seqirus is actually a hell of a good asset. This -- it's got a unique position within influenza as a result of the differentiated portfolio. It's grown market share since inception against much larger competitors and into a volatile at the moment, challenging market, particularly in the U.S. So this organization is doing really well.

Now the opportunity is to maximize the value for CSL shareholders. There's a timing question around that and whether it will be better in the hands of others. But certainly, at the moment, it's quite clear that we should press forward with creating a clear sort of separate operational identity for Seqirus within CSL. That's a sort of no regrets move to maximize the value within CSL's hands and then to maximize the optionality should it make more sense in the hands of others.

Thanks, Steve. We have a question from Sam [indiscernible]. Sam, forgive me if I pronounced your name incorrectly. Sam is from Residents AM. No. We've lost Sam. Next question comes from Sacha Krien at Evans & Partners.

I just thought I'd try with a follow-up. Brian, when you were mentioning some of the positive things that Paul has achieved, you mentioned R&D, restructuring, Horizon 1 and 2, but there wasn't any mention of collections or R. And I'm sure you're aware there was some discussion last week about whether or not CSL might need to go back to speak to Haemonetics. I'm just wondering if you can make any comment on that discussion that was out there last week.

Look, I just didn't want to go through all the good things that Paul did in the press release. But I think that we've done well on plasma. I think Rika is a good -- has been good for us. Gordon -- I mean, we have a great leader in the plasma business that knows Gordon really well. I mean I think there's no doubt Gordon will look carefully at the plasma business, but it is performing well today.

Okay. Thanks, Sacha. We have 2 more questions in the queue. We'll take those, and then we'll close the call. Next question, a further question from Craig Wong-Pan at RBC.

Brian, you mentioned Gordon has the full support of the Board to make changes. I know that Gordon will need a bit of time to review and assess the business. But were there specific areas of change the Board has in mind?

Look, I think the Board are of the view that the transformation program that Paul Mack put in place is the correct one. There's no change in strategy at all. Where we need to focus and get greater execution on is in the product portfolio and in the commercial activities of the company. And so they are the areas that the Board want to complement really the good work -- the great work that's been done to date to put us in a strong position for the next wave of growth. That's what we're intending to do.

Thanks, Greg. And our final question comes from Laura Sutcliffe at Citi.

It's for Brian. The business is obviously undergoing some quite substantial leadership change at the moment. Just wondering if that affects how long you might want to stay in your seat as Chair of the Board.

Look, I'm committed to the company. I was voted, if I recall a bit over a year ago for my -- this term as on the Board. Look, I'm very committed to the company as all the directors, Gordon has our full support. And so I'm certainly very keen to be here to assist in steering the company forward and presumably be involved in the selection of the next CEO as all Board members will be. This won't be just a Brian decision. This will be a Board decision, and we have already a committee that's looking at it. So yes, I mean, this is -- we're all heavily committed and invested in the success of this company, and we're really keen for it to get its performance and the recognition in the share market of that.

Thank you, Laura. We have had one further question pop up, which we'll take that, and then we'll close the meeting. Vic [indiscernible] at Perennial Partners.

So I was just wondering about -- I guess, it goes to strategy. I mean we've talked a bit about execution today, but really, the company seems to be a little bit strategically at risk. So in these discussions, the Board sort of -- and that's a responsibility of the Board. So I'm just wondering where you're going with strategy and whether there's any strategic change as we go forward.

Look, I think as I said, both at the AGM and now, I mean, I think our strategy is clear. We have to extract more value from our existing business portfolio because we have lots of opportunity in the markets in which we operate. We have to continue to invest in life cycle management and product differentiation that I think is a significant priority for the company. We've done well, I think, with the launch of new product recently. So that will be a topic for tomorrow.

There's no change in strategy, but what we need to do is we need to harness the opportunity of what we have, get the efficiencies in the company that we're looking for, get the cost out that we're driven to and build a portfolio of products that are consistent with us operating as a rare disease company as well as, of course, supporting Seqirus, whether it remains in our current portfolio or whether we, at some stage, find a way to -- that our shareholders would benefit from it being separated to them because I am a believer in simplification. I think one of the issues that Paul Mack has had to deal with is the business got too complex and simplification to me, is a key thing we're looking at.

So I don't agree at all. I mean our strategy is clear. I think everyone in the senior leadership understands the strategy. We're about urgency and execution today.

And thank you, Vic, and thank you, ladies and gentlemen. That was our last question. Thank you for joining us. We will, of course, be speaking to many of you again tomorrow regarding CSL's financial performance and outlook. And I'll now draw the meeting to a close.

Hello. I'm Fiona Mead, CSL's Company Secretary. Thank you for joining us for the first session of CSL's 2025 Capital Markets event. Our presentation tonight will start with some remarks from CSL's CEO and Managing Director, Dr. Paul McKenzie, and you will then hear from the General Manager of CSL Securities, Mr. Dave Ross.

Before we get started, I draw your attention to the legal disclaimer, which [indiscernible]. It's now my great pleasure to introduce our CEO, Dr. Paul McKenzie.

Thank you, Fiona. Good evening, everyone, and good morning to those online. It's great to see everyone here in the beautiful city of Chicago. I ran into Paul on the elevator. I was surprised how great the weather is here. But I know many of you traveled a long distance and to be with us here today, and we certainly appreciate that, and we want to acknowledge that because we know that journey is particularly a long one. We look forward to the opportunity to bring you closer to the CSL journey and our leadership team that I have here with me during the meeting as we explain our plans for the future.

I thought I would just take a minute to talk about where we're sitting, the hotel that we're at. It dates back to the 1920s. And actually, the hotel was built at the same time as a children's hospital. The Children's Hospital is called [ Shriner's ] Children's Hospital which has turned into a large network of children's hospitals throughout the U.S. in particular, that serves terminally ill children and supports their families. I always find a little bit of history is interesting to reflect upon a healthcare history for the Shriners in the area.

We will open our event this week with a real focus on CSL Seqirus. And in a minute, I will have a pleasure to welcome Dave Ross to the stage to give you an overview of that business. We understand there's going to be questions about the outlook for this part of the business. given the current market dynamics and our recent announcements, and we look forward into delving into those very specific questions that you have. We also know you're keenly interested in the core business of plasma and its future. and we intend to spend the majority of tomorrow discussing the core business and really getting into what that looks like now and in the future.

So it's my pleasure to welcome Dave to the stage for a look inside CSL Seqirus. Dave will be joined on the stage after his presentation by Ken Lim, our newly appointed Chief Financial Officer, and myself for Q&A. Dave?

All right. Thanks, Paul, for that introduction, and good evening, everybody. CSL Seqirus has been on an incredible journey of growth and market leadership since its inception 10 years ago. And I know that there are some current headwinds that we need to work through, but we need to put those things into proper context. Our business, our strategy and our prospects for growth are very promising.

So with that in mind, let me start by sharing with you the 3 things I'd like you to take away from our discussion this evening. The first is that influenza is a uniquely complex pathogen amongst the vaccine preventable diseases. And in that complexity brings opportunities for strategic differentiation. The second thing is that while there are near-term headwinds, we're confident that we will see a market recovery in the U.S. in the medium term. And the last and most important thing is how Seqirus is uniquely positioned to create value and outperform the market.

Now before I jump into the meat of the discussion, let me give a brief introduction to Seqirus and what sets us apart from the competition. Our incredible journey of growth and leadership is owed to our differentiation strategy. that's built on the balance of having the right vaccine technologies, a unique set of strategic capabilities and by creating the right customer experience for our health care providers that we serve. I am extremely proud of the Seqirus team and how we've created enduring competitive advantage in a very unique part of the vaccine marketplace. This is essentially a just-in-time business for a complex and changing biological product that operates in extreme seasonality.

Now what that strategy has gotten us to date is the following: what you're looking at here is our revenue share in red versus our 2 primary competitors from 2017 when we first executed our differentiation strategy. It shows consistent share growth year-over-year, which was generated through increased volume and by driving value through improved product and customer mix. It's everything that you'd expect from a well-designed and executed differentiation strategy.

Now to fully appreciate the value of our business, you need to understand that the -- what the underlying public health need is that it serves. And as the public health and economic stats on this slide make very clear influenza is not the common cold. It's far from it. This is especially true for the most vulnerable of our populations for whom the consequences could be devastating. It's the high cost of this disease that fundamentally underpins the long-term value and viability of the influenza vaccine market. And it's also the reason there are well-structured immunization programs in all major markets.

So let's take a look first at the demand in the biggest markets outside of the U.S. In all of these markets, immunization rates peaked during the COVID pandemic when flu vaccines were used as a critical tool to protect the health system capacity that was needed to care for COVID patients. Since then, the rates in all of these markets have returned to and stabilized at pre-pandemic levels of between 40% and 70%. The real challenge that we're facing is within the U.S. market where vaccine hesitancy has led to a significant decline in immunization rates.

So like in the other markets, we saw immunization rates peak in the U.S., the first year of that COVID pandemic. However, unlike the other markets, the U.S. is experiencing significant vaccine fatigue that's led to a decline in immunization rate levels far below what was routine prior to the pandemic. Now this immunization rate decline equates to about 60 million fewer people being immunized each year. This is, quite honestly, a staggering number from a public health perspective, one that will not go without real consequences in cost from a public health perspective.

In fact, when you overlay the hospitalization trends, -- what you see is a clear correlation between the reduced immunization rates and the higher disease burden. This past flu season represented the worst influenza season in the past 15 years. So what we know is that disease is rising while immunization rates are declining. What we don't know yet is when that rising burden of disease will trigger the change in behavior that's needed to see immunization rates recover. In the end, we feel very strongly that science and data will prevail and the public health consequences will ultimately be too big to ignore.

Now in times like this, history can often give us a useful perspective. So on my next slide, I'm going to take you back to a period of about 2005 and 10 when there was a significant vaccine hesitancy across the vaccine marketplace, including influenza. Now during this period, influenza rates were hit with 3 challenges. There were behavioral challenges where there was significant miss information that led to an anti-vax movement, which in turn led to low confidence in vaccines. There were structural challenges that limited access for patients to immunization. And there were industrial challenges that resulted in unreliable supply.

But what happened was that the stakeholders across the vaccine market leaned in to solve for these challenges. They were all driven by the common view and understanding that the public health consequences of the approach at that time was resulting in cost and disease burden that was simply too high. So following their collective effort, we saw a nearly doubling of doses administered in the U.S. in the decades that followed. And at that same time, we saw the market value of influenza vaccine grow by nearly fivefold due to the launch of higher valued differentiated vaccines.

In the headwinds we're currently facing, we don't see the structural or industrial challenges that we faced at that time. What we're experiencing are the behavioral challenges caused by this is and disinformation regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness. And like with the last period of vaccine hesitancy, we believe that the science and the data will drive a similar response from stakeholders to take action.

Now in fact, we're beginning to see stakeholders mobilize. We're seeing patient advocacy groups that are implementing more and broader educational and awareness programs. We're seeing medical societies and newly formed advisory groups are taking steps to preserve and promote evidence-based decision-making. And insurers have confirmed their coverage of vaccines based upon their inherent health economic benefits.

And to support these efforts, Seqirus will continue to gather compelling evidence on the benefits of our vaccine, which will do 2 things. It will help health care providers make informed clinical decisions for their patients and should help improve public confidence in vaccines. Now while immunization rate recovery is important to the growth of our business and the overall market, it's only one part of our growth story.

So let me explain what I mean by that. Influenza is a very complex virus. And in that complexity are opportunities to create strategic differentiation in ways that health care providers will value. Flu is one of the most highly variable pathogens for which we immunize. There are multiple circulating strains that are continuously evolving, drifting and shifting so that the attack rates and the virulence could vary from season to season. And the at-risk populations can also vary from year to year. It's a highly seasonal viral activity with 2 prominent disease seasons one in the northern and one in the Southern Hemisphere.

The viral complexity creates a need for a very specialized capability. especially to participate in the higher value enhanced vaccine space we occupy. Now add to this the operational challenges of having to reformulate the vaccine every year to match the circulating strains. It's essentially like launching a new product every year. And this requires a very different kind of manufacturing excellence and agility.

There are also unique supply chain challenges as the vaccines are released on a rolling basis during the immunization season, all without the traditional safety stocks that you'd see with other vaccines. And then there's the fact that our customers, the health care providers execute about 95% of all of their immunizations for flu over a short 12-week period.

Now when you combine all of this complexity, it's essentially a just-in-time business for a very complex biological product that operates, as I said, on an extreme seasonality. At Seqirus, we welcome each of these challenges as opportunities to differentiate Seqirus in ways that create value for the health care providers we serve. In fact, we take a very holistic approach to our differentiation strategy. It's about 3 things. It's about having the right vaccine technology, the right business capabilities and about creating the right customer experience.

I would say that our differentiation strategy is equal parts of each of these 3 things. But I want to take a moment to comment on our customer experience focus because it gives you a little bit of a glimpse into our culture, which I believe underpins a lot of our success. As a flu-focused business, we ground our company's purpose in meeting our customers' needs, the health care providers. We essentially reverse engineer from their vaccine and operational needs to determine where our focus and resources should be directed.

Now let me bring some of these capabilities to life with a few examples of what sets secure us apart from the competition. Let's start with what makes our technology and our portfolio so valuable from a clinical perspective. Now when you look at flu, there are many circulating strains each year is depicted on this graphic. The WHO then selects the strains that they believe will be the most prominent for the upcoming season.

When it comes to a standard egg-based vaccines, the problem is that egg adaptation happens in the manufacturing process. This occurs because you're growing a mammalian virus, one that can infect the human in an Avian egg. And this adaptation will lead to some drift from the selected strain that can cause a standard egg-based vaccine to be less effective. Now to solve this problem in our senior population, we add MF59 adjuvant to our vaccine to make Fluad. This adjuvant is designed to provide a boost to their weakened immune system of that senior population and to provide a greater breadth of protection.

Then for those under 65, we have our cell-based vaccines. That's Flucelvax, which avoids that egg adaptation I just mentioned by creating an exact match to that selected strain and there's a growing compendium of real-world evidence that's showing that Flucelvax is providing better protection than standard egg-based vaccine, especially when there's significant egg adaptation.

And then when we look to the future, we're working on our aTIVc vaccine. That's our adjuvanted trivalent cell-based vaccine. That combines an optimized dose of our adjuvant with an optimized dose of our cell-based antigen to create what we believe has the potential to become the new standard of care for the populations for which it's licensed.

Now let me take a moment to give you an update on where we are with the aTIVc. The Phase III immunogenicity study has been completed and based upon those results, we have already filed for licensure in the U.K. and in the EU with expected approvals at the end of FY '26. And with recent FDA input, we're now in the process of developing the study protocols and plans for the launch in the U.S. and other markets.

Now when you pull together all of this, what you could say is that we are the only flu vaccine manufacturer who could offer a differentiated vaccine for all recommended populations, pediatrics, adults and the senior pop regulation.

Now let me shift gears to another strategic capability that we developed to help shape the markets in which we operate. One of the things that I am most proud of is how we have led the way to elevate the value of real-world evidence in shaping vaccine policy and NITAG recommendations around the world. And by doing so, improving public health while creating new commercial opportunities for Seqirus.

In the past, RCT's randomized clinical trials, were the only basis on which NITAG recommendations were made. This meant that an RCT done 10 or 15 years ago, on a vaccine formulation that is no longer in use for strains that are likely no longer circulating was the definitive statement on a vaccine's effectiveness. Now while RCTs are important, it stands to reason that if we design and implement rigorous real-world evidence studies that are faster and cheaper to execute and could be run over multiple seasons to track the effectiveness against varying strains that we'd be able to provide health care providers with more comprehensive information to inform their clinical decision-making. And that's exactly what we have and we'll continue to do as part of our differentiation strategy.

Now applying this approach to Fluad, we've helped drive preferential recommendations in 19 countries for enhanced vaccines like Fluad. That's raising the standard of care for the target populations. We've also taken the same real-world evidence strategy for flu cell back to demonstrate its benefits versus standard egg-based vaccines in both the pediatric and the adult population. The bottom line is that we're using our flu expertise, we're challenging the status quo on the recommendations are made, and we're thinking differently about what our health care providers need to make better and more informed clinical decisions.

We're shaping the markets in ways that improve public health while creating growth opportunities for our products. We've taken the same market-shaping approach to how we run our pandemic flu business. We've chosen to leverage our flu expertise to help governments improve their pandemic preparedness with a unique business model that has 3 distinct revenue streams. The first is our advanced purchase agreement, what we call APAs, that creates annual recurring revenue streams from reservation fees paid that we received in exchange for a portion of our pandemic vaccine capacity.

The second is if a pandemic is declared, we would then sell those governments the volumes agreed to in those APAs, the first wave of which would generate $3.5 billion in revenue.

The third part of the business model is that we've partnered with those same governments around the world to prepare prepandemic vaccine stockpiles for viruses of concern that are circulating within animals. While this revenue stream is more sporadic, when it does happen, we're ready to respond. For example, during last year's H5 outbreak, Seqirus captured nearly 90% of all of the outbreak demand around the world.

One of the strategic capabilities that enables our pandemic business is our operational excellence within manufacturing, which is the last topic I'd like to share with you before I shift gears to where we see growth in the future. As I've mentioned earlier, the challenges of annual strain changes, coupled with the unique supply chain needed and the condensed manufacturing cycle time creates meaningful opportunities for differentiation.

Our investments to date have strengthened our global footprint, enhanced our capabilities and created the agility needed to serve our Northern and Southern Hemisphere customers while creating the warm base needed to execute our pandemic strategy. When you combine that industrial capability with our customer-focused culture, you create the reliability our customers need to achieve their immunization goals, while also creating the agility needed to take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves, like we did with the H5 outbreak.

This leaves one piece of information I'd like to share with you, and that's where we see our future growth coming from. Now we see different growth drivers across the short and medium term. So let me start in the U.S. where I'd like to highlight 2 near-term opportunities. The first is in the pediatric segment of the market where there is currently utilization of about 30 million to 32 million doses. That represents about $0.5 billion worth of market value. With the benefits I've shared earlier about Flucelvax, we have the only differentiated vaccine that covers the full age range for the pediatric population, which creates an opportunity to take a leading market share position over the coming years.

We have a very similar opportunity within the health system space. That's the hospital system space where we can now offer the only fully differentiated portfolio that covers all age ranges that are cared for in this setting. Then outside of the U.S., geographic expansion remains our key strategy. With recently implemented preferential recommendations for the senior population, we have significant growth opportunities in Germany, France, the Nordics, among others. And as we continue to have success shaping markets and driving preferential recommendations in senior markets, we will continue to expand our international targets.

To support all of these opportunities, we have had a targeted expansion of our sales force to extend our reach and frequency with the top immunizers. What you also need to account for is that most of the market value you see on this slide will grow as we convert it from the standard egg-based vaccine that it is currently to the higher-value differentiated product. In many cases, there's a potential to double the current value of these targets.

Now in the medium term, we will continue to penetrate the markets we serve but we also see the U.S. market recovery as an accelerant to our strategy, bringing new volume to existing customers and creating the opportunity for price appreciation across the broader market. Also, starting in the medium term and continuing into the longer-term horizon, we see the launch of aTIVc as establishing a new standard of care for the patients for which it's designed. The value of aTIVc creates will be created from 3 different things. It will allow us to grow market share while we displace competitive share. It will allow for a premium price based upon its expected health economic benefits, and it will strengthen our portfolio offer for those customers who want different options for different patients.

Now I know I've shared a lot of information with you, but hopefully, it was all in the service of demonstrating those 3 things that I started with. And that is that the uniquely complex influenza market creates opportunities for strategic and lasting differentiation, that the strategy, capabilities and performance of Seqirus sets us apart from the competition and that while the current U.S. market conditions are challenging, there's reason to believe in its recovery and that, that recovery will act as a growth accelerant for our strategy.

So with that, thank you for your attention, and I'd like to invite Paul and Ken to the stage for the Q&A portion of this agenda.

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. We still have some people registering, but we always start our Board meetings on time at CSL. So today will be no exception.

Welcome to CSL's 2025 Annual General Meeting. Before we commence with the formal proceedings of the meeting, we'd like to play you a short video. The video feathers [ Melissa ], who has a hereditary angioedema or HAE patient of ours. Thankfully, [ Melissa ] and many of our other HAE patients can manage their treatment with CSL products.

You can read more about our purpose and how the people and science of CSL save lives and make the lives of our patients better in our annual report, which is on our website or there's some copies outside afterwards.

Thank you, [ Melissa ], for sharing your story with us today.

[Presentation]

My name is Fiona Mead. I'm the Company Secretary here at CSL Limited. It's a pleasure to welcome you all to our 2025 Annual General Meeting, and I do believe we have a full house.

I will run through the procedural aspects of the meeting shortly. This meeting is being held in a hybrid format. Thank you to all of you who've joined us today in person, and we welcome everybody who is joining us online as well.

For those here in the room, in the unlikely event of an emergency, please follow all the instructions from the RACV staff and be attentive to announcements over the PA system. If we do need to evacuate, please calmly use the stairs, which are located next to the lifts. Assembly points are located on either corner of Burke Street or Williams Street. If first aid is needed, please immediately see an RACV staff member for assistance.

Today, we'll run through each item of business stated in the notice of meeting, after which we will invite questions in the room and online. Shareholders and proxy holders present in the room can ask questions during the meeting by lining up at one of the microphones located in the aisles when the Chair invites questions.

Please advise the computer representative of your name and show them your red or green voting card to indicate you are a shareholder or a proxy holder. If you are a shareholder or proxy holder participating online, you can submit a written question by clicking on the messaging tab on the Lumi platform. Type your question in the box towards the top of the page and press the send button.

A copy of your submitted questions, along with any written responses from our meeting team can be viewed by selecting my messages. Written questions can be submitted online at any time during the meeting. If you are online and wish to ask a question verbally, click on the request to speak button in the broadcast window. You'll be prompted to confirm your name and enter the topic of your question. Submit your request and follow the instructions to allow access to your microphone and join the queue.

Please note that while you can submit questions from now on, they will not be addressed until the relevant time in the meeting. If you have any troubles, please call the AGM helpline number, which is up on the screen now.

Online questions may be moderated for inappropriate language. And if we receive a few questions that are similar, we may combine those questions and answer them together. If your questions are too lengthy, we may need to summarize them in the interest of time. To ensure all shareholders in attendance here today have the opportunity to ask questions, we ask that each shareholder restricts themselves to no more than 2 questions or comments. If we have time at the end, we will ask shareholders with more questions to come forward.

The Chair will address some questions that we received prior to today and then take questions in the room, followed by written questions on the online platform and then verbal questions on the online platform. Persons entitled to vote today are all shareholders' representatives, shareholders and attorneys of shareholders and proxy holders who hold red admission cards. On the reverse of your red admission card is your voting paper, please vote by marking a box beside each resolution to indicate how you wish to vote.

Proxy holders have attached to their admission card a summary of proxy votes, which details the voting instructions, if any, for business items. You must vote in accordance with those instructions.

In respect of any open votes, a proxy holder may be entitled to cast, you need to mark a box beside the motion to indicate how you wish to cast your open votes. Please ensure that you print your name where indicated and sign the voting paper. When you have finished filling in your voting paper, please lodge it in a ballot box before leaving the meeting to make sure your vote is counted.

Computershare staff will be positioned at the exits to collect your voting paper when you leave. Voting on all items of business will close 10 minutes after the meeting ends. During which time, you'll have an opportunity to finalize your voting paper and lodge it in the ballot box. Please raise your hand if you need assistance and a Computershare staff member will help you.

For our online shareholders, once we declare voting is open on all items of business, and if you are eligible to vote at this meeting, a new voting tab will appear. Selecting this tab will bring up a list of resolutions and present you with voting options. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. Your vote is automatically recorded. There is no need to press a submit or enter button.

You have the ability to change your vote by selecting a different option on the relevant resolution. You may change your vote at any stage until the time we declare voting closed. Ahead of our opening address from the Chair, I share with you our legal notice on the screen behind me. That covers the logistics of our meeting, and I will now hand over to our Chair, Dr. Brian McNamee.

Thank you, Fiona, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for joining us today. There is a quorum present, and I'm delighted to open the meeting.

I would now like to introduce your Board of Directors. To my right, first of all, Fiona thank you, our Company Secretary, who you have already heard from. Dr. Megan Clark, who will be retiring from our Board at the end of this meeting; Elaine Sorg; and next, Professor Andrew Cuthbertson and Ms. Carolyn Hewson at the far end. To my left, Dr. Paul McKenzie, our Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director. Dr. Brian Daniels, who is standing for election at this meeting, and you'll have an opportunity to hear from Brian later this morning.

Ms. Alison Watkins; Mr. Cameron Price, who is also standing for election and you will have a chance to hear from; Mr. Samantha Lewis and Ms. Marie McDonald, who is also retiring from the Board at the end of today's meeting.

We're fortunate to have such a strong group of Directors of our Board. Voting on all items of business today will be conducted by a poll, and I'm declaring the poll open now. The poll will close 10 minutes after I declare the business of the meeting to be closed.

Before we move to the formal business of the meeting, I'd like to speak about CSL, a business I've been involved with since 1990. It's a business that I like many of you feel great personal affection for and a business that I believe, despite current turbulence has the right strategy and the right people to deliver sustainable and profitable growth. I'll then hand over to CSL's CEO and Managing Director, Dr. Paul McKenzie, who will provide a review of the business and performance for the financial year 2025, progress against our strategy and outlook for financial year '26. We'll then move on to the procedural matters of today's meeting. And finally, as Fiona mentioned, we will take questions from those in the room and online.

As you know, CSL is a leader in plasma-derived therapies, influenza vaccines and iron therapies. We deliver these innovative life-saving medicines to patients in more than 100 years -- 100 countries. We exist to deliver enduring impact to those patients in areas of unmet medical need, helping to boost public health around the world and contributing meaningfully to the communities we serve.

In 2025 financial year, we delivered a USD 3 billion net after-tax profit and declared a final dividend of USD 2.92 a share. I'd like to extend my thanks to Paul and his leadership team and our 29,000 people around the world who help make this happen.

Now our share price has suffered significantly in recent months. It's been very disappointing for us and for you, our shareholders. Let me be clear: Do I believe that our strategy, our IG growth story and our ability to generate strong return remains intact? Yes, I do.

As a company, we've been in these situations before. We've seen periods of growth and face periods of challenge and we come back stronger. The actions we are taking now will position CSL for its next chapter of growth. The reality is that for some time now, CSL has been operating in a way that is too complex, and this has impacted our ability to react decisively to the geopolitical headwinds and to maintain our market leadership position.

It is clear to the Board and Paul the changes must be made rapidly and effectively. Paul and his management team, with the full support of the Board, have identified areas where the business must evolve. These are bold strategic steps to reshape and simplify the business, build our growth and pipeline, reduce costs and improve clinical and commercial execution.

We are charting a path forward, one that builds on our strengths, our history, our strong culture, but also focuses on the market challenges. Specifically, we are implementing an improved commercially driven operating model to bring decisive speed and focus to how we run the business and drive demand for what we sell.

We must invest in internal and external innovation to build our pipeline and are doing so by reducing our fixed cost base. We've also refocused our approach to research and development to make it more productive, more agile and better aligned with long-term innovation goals. We're simplifying our operating model to reduce complexity, transform performance and unlock efficiencies targeting over $500 million in annual pretax cost savings by 2028 financial year.

We're optimizing our global plasma network to meet rising demand, improve our productivity and boosting our agility of our manufacturing to match our yield improvement initiatives.

Finally, we have begun a multiyear capital management program. Starting with a share buyback this financial year, a clear signal of our strong cash flow and balance sheet. I have no doubt that these are the right decisions for CSL. But progress is not linear, success is not distributed evenly and change even positive and urgent change does take time. I understand your frustration. However, Paul and the team's work is not done.

With that, I'll hand over to Paul to present last year's financial outcomes and also talk about some of these matters. Thank you very much for coming.

Thank you, Brian. Good morning to everyone here and online. It is a pleasure to be here with you today to discuss the outlook for your company and our progress against our strategy. These meetings are an important reminder that this is your business and like all engaged shareholders, you have ambitions for it.

I share that ambition. As Brian mentioned, change takes time and progress is not linear. But let me be clear, the fundamentals of your business remains sound. And I am very confident we have the right strategy to deliver CSL's next phase of growth.

I am mindful that you have experienced strong growth and returns over many, many years and your management team remains focused on ensuring the company delivers against that ambition. As I said a moment ago, our core business performance demonstrates our resilience. For the 2025 financial year, revenue was up 5% at constant currency to $15.6 billion. NPATA was up 14% to $3.3 billion. Net profit after tax was up 17% to $3 billion.

CSL Behring continue to power our growth with revenue increasing by 6% at constant currency. Sales of PRIVIGEN, HIZENTRA and albumin all rose with sales of hemophilia growing a robust 13%. For CSL Seqirus, revenue increased 2%, as significantly lower immunization rates in the U.S. were offset by avian flu pandemic response opportunities. And at CSL Vifor, revenue was up 8% as iron sales grew in volume and our nephrology portfolio gained momentum with multiple launches around the world.

As we look to our performance for financial year 2026, I'm pleased to say the majority of the business is tracking to plan. Behring continues to drive the growth of the company with strong fundamentals in our core IG business and the recent successful launch of in ANDEMBRY. Vifor continues to compete well in an evolving iron market, and nephrology is growing to plan.

We are also expanding our clinical and commercial portfolios through strategic business development opportunities, such as our recently announced partnership with VarmX. In the partnership with VarmX, we will develop a first-in-class treatment for patients on Factor Xa inhibitors, who require urgent surgery or are experiencing severe bleeding.

This collaboration not only addresses a significant unmet medical need but strengthens our innovation pipeline and our ambition to deliver enduring patient impact. Our transformation initiatives are also progressing well, and I will discuss those in more detail shortly.

While the majority of the business is performing well, we are seeing 2 factors that impact our results in the first half of the fiscal year. In our Seqirus business, we have seen a greater decline in influenza vaccination rates in the U.S., greater than we expected. This is despite a positive recommendation from the U.S. administration on influenza administration and an unprecedented level of infection impacting public health around the world.

For the current Northern Hemisphere '25-'26 flu season, based on the insurance claims to date, we now expect the vaccination rates to decline by 12% for the overall population in the United States and down almost 14% for the 65 and over population versus last year's vaccination rates.

The 65-plus age segment is where our differentiated product FLUAD has and continues to grow share even with this market downturn. This challenge impacts our forecast, resulting in overall Seqirus revenue for financial year 2026, declining by mid-teens versus our previous outlook of high single digits. In addition, we have seen the recent impact of government cost containment controls in China reducing the demand for albumin.

We are adapting our approach to the supply there, which will limit this impact to the first half of the fiscal year. Given these factors affecting our performance in the first half of the year, we are revising our financial year 2026 revenue growth outlook to 2% to 3% from 4% to 5% previously forecasted. And we've updated our NPATA growth to 4% to 7% reduced from the 7% to 10% originally forecasted. All of these are at constant currency.

Looking ahead to financial years 2027 and 2028, we anticipate that CSL Behring will maintain sustainable and robust growth with strong group cash generation and balance sheet metrics. That said, due to the ongoing uncertainty in the vaccination rates in the United States, while there are some scenarios in which group NPATA may touch double digits, we believe a high single-digit growth is a more appropriate expectation until we see the U.S. influenza vaccination rates improve.

My focus as CEO and that of your management team is taking the right action to deliver growth. The changes we are putting in place will enhance the resiliency of the overall business. Brian is right, these are bold strategic steps to realize the full potential of the company. They are put in place following significant review and analysis.

We had become disproportionately complex, and we are taking steps to simplify and streamline our business. In R&D, we are reducing fixed cost and enhancing efficiency by the reduction of our footprint to 6 global sites and increasing the speed of both translational research into the clinic and clinical trial execution while continuing to pursue life cycle management opportunities to expand our commercial portfolio.

We are bringing the Behring and Vifor commercial and medical capabilities together to improve productivity and reduce duplication. We are also actively reviewing our corporate overheads. These are obviously difficult but necessary decisions to position CSL for the long term. These actions free up more than $500 million in savings by fiscal year 2028, and that savings will allow us to reinvest in our highest priority growth opportunities.

I want to assure you that in the markets we serve, there is strong growth demand for our life-saving medicines. We are moving with urgency to serve more patients, drive innovation across our clinical and commercial portfolios, enhance efficiency and deliver greater shareholder value. We are a global leader in large and growing markets with unmet patient needs, and we have a market-leading IG franchise with attractive and durable growth potential.

Our strong balance sheet and cash flow enables a disciplined capital allocation to deliver growth across the business. We will accelerate profitable growth by expanding our leadership in rare diseases. This will be underpinned by increasing investment in programs to improve diagnosis, awareness and treatment of these rare conditions.

A good example of improving treatments is in hemophilia B. HEMGENIX, which offers a life-changing potential cure for patients suffering with hemophilia B. Our operational excellence will continue to drive reliable supply and cost optimization. Our teams are laser-focused on the end-to-end fundamentals of plasma economics, further reducing collection and processing cost per liter of plasma.

We continue to innovate in our plasma centers now that we've rolled out the Rica plasmapheresis system, and our ongoing Horizon 1 and 2 yield initiatives are and will deliver more benefits. Delivering on our strategy requires exceptional talent. And I have prioritized building a leadership team ready to drive the transformation and to deliver results.

In the past year, we have welcomed Dr. Mary Oates as Chief Operating Officer, leading our push in operational efficiency. Andy Schmeltz was appointed Chief Commercial Officer overseeing the integration of CSL Behring and CSO Vifor, commercial and medical functions to reduce duplication and to unlock new revenue opportunities. And more recently, Ken Lim has been appointed Chief Financial Officer, following the retirement of Joy Linton. I want to thank Joy for her service to the company and recognize Ken's deep institutional knowledge and strong track record with CSL.

Each of these leaders, along with the rest of your management team is charged with turning strategy into action and results. This will require disciplined investment and focus. My role is to ensure everyone at CSL, whoever they are, whatever they do, in every location around the globe, is focused on growth.

In closing, I want to reconfirm our confidence in our core business. As Brian said, CSL has proven its resilience time and time again, and we are taking the disciplined and deliberate steps to strengthen our performance and streamline the company for growth. I share Brian's confidence in CSL's long-term outlook as well as his commitment to accelerating our progress.

A big part of what makes this company unique is our history and our people. More than 29,000 colleagues worldwide impacting the lives of millions of patients around the globe. I will never grow tired of hearing stories how people have helped change the lives of patients battling rare and serious disease, delivering ever better life-saving products to more patients and generating strong returns on our -- your investment is what motivates me.

Thank you, and I will now hand back to Brian.

Thank you, Paul. I want to reiterate the strength of CSL Behring, growth in the immunoglobulin and our new products. However, I would like to address one of the challenges Paul spoke of, specifically the U.S. vaccine market for influenza.

In August, we communicated a well-founded strategic intent to demerge Seqirus through a separate listing on the ASX. At the time of the announcement, the decline in influenza rates was thought to be moderating. The previous flu season had recorded the highest rate of morbidity and mortality in 15 years. And the U.S. government's vaccine advisory panel had endorsed a recommendation that everyone above the age of 6 months should have an annual influenza vaccine.

Today, I wish to reiterate that in the long term, the strategic direction of both CSL and Seqirus is unchanged. Separation continues to be the preferred approach to unlock simplification and focus and sustain long-term growth for each of these businesses. However, our priority is to maximize shareholder value.

Given the heightened volatility in the current U.S. influenza vaccine market, we have concluded that advancing with the previously proposed demerger timing will not fully capture Seqirus value potential. Therefore, we are no longer targeting completion of the demerger in financial year '26.

Timing will be revisited when we're confident that market conditions would support the maximization of shareholder value for you. Tackling these various initiatives requires the right people at the Board level with the right mix of skills and experience to guide our strategy and lead our operations in increasingly complex global environment.

This not only means that traditional skills like risk management, scientific expertise, commercial acumen, but newer skills in the digital and AI arena.

I'm pleased to share some updates about our Board since our last AGM. First, we welcome Dr. Brian Daniels to the Board of Directors from the 1st of December. Brian is based in the United States and brings over 30 years of experience in the pharmaceutical industry, spanning clinical development, medical affairs and the commercialization of medicines. He is a highly credential Director, and we're delighted to have him on the Board.

We also welcomed Mr. Cameron Price, who joined the Board from the 1st of October. Cameron is a highly respected executive with over 30 years' experience, most recently serving as General Counsel and Chief Risk Officer at Australia's Future Fund. He brings deep expertise in global investment, risk management and corporate governance. You'll have the opportunity to hear from both Brian and Cameron later in the meeting, and I'm sure you'll find their insights informative.

It's also my pleasure to announce the appointment of new Directors to our Board. Firstly, Mr. Costa Saroukis, effective from the 1st of December 2025. Costa had a global career in the biopharmaceutical industry and was most recently Global Chief Financial Officer and Board member of Takeda Global, a very large Japanese pharmaceutical company, where he was instrumental part of its transformation. We are fortunate Costa has returned home to Australia, and I'm looking forward to bringing his deep understanding of global pharma and plasma therapeutics to CSL's Board of Directors.

In addition, I'm pleased to announce that Mr. Gordon Naylor has -- will also join the Board effective 1st of December 2025. Gordon was recently announced as a Chair Elect for the demerged Seqirus business. Given the revised demerger time line, Gordon's experience and leadership in the global biopharmaceutical sector will be invaluable. His deep understanding of both CSL and Seqirus operations will greatly benefit the Board, as we continue to advance our long-term strategy.

And finally, I'd like a moment to acknowledge 2 long-serving members of our Board, who will be retiring at the conclusion of today's AGM: Ms. Marie McDonald and Dr. Megan Clark. Marie joined CSL's Board in August 2013 and has brought a wealth of experience across law and medical research. Her deep expertise in financial markets, risk and compliance and corporate governance has been invaluable. Thank you.

Marie has served on both the Audit and Risk Management Committee and the Human Resources and Remuneration Committee, and her thoughtful contributions have helped guide CSL through more than a decade of growth and transformation.

Dr. Megan Clark has been a Director since February 2016, a distinguished career spanning scientific research, health, investment banking, mining. Megan has brought a broad strategic lens and global perspective to the Board. She has served as the Chair of Human Resource and Remuneration Committee and contributed to both Corporate Governance and Nomination Committee as well as the Innovation and Development Committee.

Her leadership and insights have helped shape CSL's innovation agenda and strengthen our Board governance. On behalf of the Board and the entire CSL Committee, I want to sincerely thank you, Marie and Megan for the outstanding service, dedication and lasting impact you've made on the company. We wish them well, the very best next chapters in their lives.

I want to take a moment to talk about our approach to remuneration because it's closely tied to who we are and how we operate, as a unique ASX-listed company. Although our roots are proudly Australian, CSL competes in a global biotechnology market, and many of our senior leaders are based in the United States. That's the reality of our industry. And it means we need to attract and retain world-class talent who can foster innovation, navigate complex science, manufacturing and deliver long-term growth for our shareholders.

Your Board firmly believes that our remuneration framework supports this goal. It's designed to be competitive globally and to bring in the kind of leadership that will take CSL into the next phase of growth. That said, we've engaged with shareholders and acknowledge their concerns. We take their feedback seriously and are reviewing the framework in this light.

This year, it is clear from the votes received that many of our shareholders have voted against the remuneration report. This will trigger a spill resolution, which we'll put to the meeting. We understand the importance of finding the right balance between offering executive remuneration packages that are attractive to top talent and safeguarding the long-term interest of the company and shareholder value. We remain committed to engaging with you on this, and our approach serves both our people and your investment.

Before I conclude, I want to touch on an exciting development of our manufacturing capacity and capability. In the coming months, we'll be officially opening our new influenza vaccine manufacturing facility at Tullamarine. This is a state-of-the-art facility that has taken several years to build in more than $800 million. It will be the Southern Hemisphere's premier cell culture influenza vaccine manufacturing and research center.

Moving Australian vaccine production to Tullamarine also closes a significant chapter in CSL's history, the closure of our facility at Parkville. That site is close to my heart, my days as Chief Executive a while ago and dates back to the founding of the company in 1916. It's a great example of how our company continues to evolve, being true to its roots and always embracing innovation, competition and moving towards our next chapter.

With these new initiatives and capabilities of our people behind us, I'm confident CSL is well positioned to seize our opportunities ahead. Our strategy is clear, and we remain committed to delivering for our patients and for you, our shareholders. Thank you again for your support.

We'll now move on to the formal part of the meeting. The items of business for consideration today are described in the Notice of Meeting, which I'll take as read. In terms of running the AGM efficiently, we'll read through all the items of business set out in our Notice of Meeting, following which we'll address all shareholder questions at one time.

I'm confident that I'm holding available undirected proxies in my capacity as Chair of the meeting and will vote all available proxies in favor of resolutions in Items 2, 3 and 4 and against in resolution of Item 5. The Board recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the resolution Items 2, 3 and 4 and against the resolution in Item 5, with interested Directors abstaining from making a recommendation in respect of any resolution they have an interest in.

To conduct the poll, I appoint Mr. Michael Hutchison of Computershare Services Directors a running officer; and Ms. Genevra Cavallo and Ms. Katrina Marina of Deloitte to act as scrutineers.

Voting is now open on all resolutions. We now come to Item 1 of the Notice of Meeting, which is to receive and consider the financial statements and report of Directors and auditors for the year ended 30th of June 2025. This item does not require shareholder approval. However, shareholders will be given an opportunity to ask questions and make comments on the report and about the management of the company later.

Ms. Cavallo and Mr. [ Griffis ] of the company's orders Deloitte, are also present today and available to answer questions in relation to the conduct of the audit, the preparation and content of the orders report the accounting policies adopted by the company in relation to preparation of accounts and the orders independence in relation to the conduct of the audit.

The second item business is the election of Directors. We have 2 directors seeking election today. Dr. Daniels joined our Board in December 2024 and Mr. Price joined in October 25. In accordance with our constitution, they are now seeking shareholder election. The qualification and expertise of both candidates outlined in the notice of meeting. Having reviewed the performance the Board considers both candies to be independent directors and supports their election. Item 2a relates to the election of Dr. Daniels.

I will now ask Dr. Daniels to address the meeting. Thank you.

Thank you, Brian, and good morning, shareholders. Today, I stand for election as a Non-Executive Director of CSL. I spent my entire professional career on patient care and improving patient outcomes bringing important medicines to patients is the greatest reward to me as a physician is focused on the patient was the reason I became a physician and then trained as a rheumatologist and immunologist in the United States.

I then spent 30 years discovering, developing and bringing to market new medicines that help patients with significant unmet medical needs. I want to continue to contribute this purpose with CSL, a company I have long admired. CSL occupies a unique role in the care of some of our most vulnerable patients, both here in Australia and throughout the world.

CSL has a proud Australian heritage and a track record of delivering for both patients and shareholders. And I share the Board's optimism for the future as the company looks to build on this legacy. I look forward to driving further R&D productivity at CSL from both internally and externally sourced programs.

Good governance in this stewardship are essential to this ambition. The skills I developed over my professional lifetime will complement those of our existing Board members, specifically my work in researching and developing medicines across a wide variety of diseases. And then for a decade, I chaired the R&D Investment Committee for Bristol-Myers Squibb and had oversight on an annual spend in excess of USD 1 billion per year.

I have experience in the regulatory strategy, medical affairs, market access and early commercial efforts, all of which are needed for the successful delivery of our medicines to patients. As a biotech leader, I understand the value of high-performing cross-functional teams and the success of our development programs.

In the last decade, as a partner in a venture capital firm, I've helped lead investments in over a dozen early stage biotech companies. In our shared ecosystem, these companies are a critical engine for new innovation for patients. I believe these skills in the global perspective will be valuable in helping steer CSL through this next phase of our growth and I'm acutely aware of the responsibility involved in serving such a respected and value-led organization, and it will be a privilege to serve on this Board of Directors.

Thank you.

Thank you, Brian. The Board, with Dr. Daniels abstaining, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the election of Dr. Daniels. I refer to the slide behind me, which shows details of the proxy position for this resolution.

Congratulations.

I'll now move to Item 2b and ask Mr. Price to address the meeting.

Thank you, Brian, and good morning, shareholders. Despite that strange expression on my face up there, it's a real privilege and honor to be considered for election to the CSL Board.

I've observed and admired CSL's development and growth into a global leader over the last 20 to 30 years, delivering both important medical outcomes for patients and strong returns for shareholders. To me, CSL is a special organization to be involved with as it is clearly purpose-driven with a values-based culture, is Australian headquartered while being a truly global leader in the sectors it operates in, has a strong focus on long-term growth and shareholder value creation.

In that context and as the company progresses with its current growth and strategic plans, as Paul outlined, I believe that my skills and experience will enable me to complement the Board's governance and oversight role going forward.

Until recently, I was the General Counsel and Chief Risk Officer at Australia's Sovereign Wealth Fund, the Future Fund, for more than 11 years, working closely with the Chair, the Board and their CEO. Future Fund invests more than $300 billion globally across all major asset classes. Through that role, including as acting CEO for about 6 months in 2020 during the COVID crisis and the market crisis around that, I was privileged to regain extensive experience and knowledge of international investment issues, including geopolitical, economic, monetary, market, regulatory and policy issues.

Also, gained experience in risk management, theory and practice; and government and global peer relations. It also gave me a very strong perspective on a listed company and its Board from an institutional investor's point of view. Prior to that, I had a 25-year career at law firm, Allens, where I advised a range of public listed and private companies on domestic and cross-border mergers and acquisitions, equity capital markets and corporate governance matters, including on the ASX listing rules and equity incentive plans.

I'm very mindful of the duties and responsibilities of the role and would work closely with my colleagues to continue a strong focus on the best interest of CSL and its shareholders. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you, Cameron. The Board, with Mr. Price abstaining, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the election of Mr. Price. I refer to the screen behind me, which shows the details of the proxy position for this resolution. Congratulations.

As we're holding questions to the end of the meeting, I'll move to item 3. Item 3 on the Notice of Meeting is an advisory vote to adopt CSL's remuneration report for the financial year ending 30th of June 2025. As I mentioned in my opening address, CSL is likely to receive a second strike on its remuneration report today. To deliver our promise on our promise to patients and to protect public health, we rely on our people and need to ensure a strong global talent supply.

To this end, our executive remuneration framework enables us to attract, engage and retain suitably talented employees in the various markets in which we operate. This includes competing for talent with larger pharmaceutical companies. The Board is committed to an executive remuneration framework that links paid to the achievement of CSL's strategy and business objectives.

This creates a performance culture that, in turn, drives long-term shareholder value. Under the Corporations Act, the company is required to include in the Directors' report a detailed remuneration report setting out certain prescribed information relating to Director and Executive remuneration.

The company is also required to submit this by adoption by resolution of shareholders at the Annual General Meeting here. The vote on this resolution in this item is advisory and does not bind the Directors. However, we take the outcome of the vote into consideration when reviewing practices and policies of the company. The screen behind me details the proxy position for this resolution. Based on what you can see in the proxy slide before you, we have not met the requisite 75% of support for our report this year.

We are disappointed that this will result in CSL receiving a second consecutive strike, which means Item 5, which I'll come to, is a resolution to spill the Board will be put to the meeting. We'll provide further background on Item 5 shortly.

As I mentioned, talent is a critical factor in driving company performance and remuneration is a key component of this. The Board unanimously recommends that shareholders vote in favor in the adoption of the remuneration report.

We now come to Item 4, which seeks approval for the purposes of ASX listing rule 10.14 for the grade of 58,360 performance share units under the company's executive performance and alignment plan to Dr. McKenzie, our Chief Executive and Managing Director.

The Board believes in the interest -- shareholder interest to provide Dr. McKenzie with an equity-based incentive to ensure there is alignment between returns and shareholders. It also considers it's important to obtain shareholder consent to the grant, our performance share units.

The Board with Dr. McKenzie abstaining, recommends that shareholders vote in favor of the grander performance units to him. I refer to the screen behind me, which shows details of the proxy position for this resolution. As the proxy results indicate that CSL has received a second strike on Item 3, the remuneration report, we're now obliged to put Item 5 to the meeting, which is the resolution to spill the Board.

This is an ordinary resolution. If this resolution passed and becomes effective, a special meeting of shareholders known as a Spill Meeting must be held within 90 days. The following Non-Executive Directors will cease to hold office immediately before the end of the Spill Meeting unless they are reelected at the Spill Meeting, myself, Professor Andrew Cuthbertson, Dr. Brian Daniels, Carolyn Hewson, Samantha Lewis, Elaine Sorg and Alison Watkins.

Although Dr. Megan Clark and Ms. Marie McDonald held directorships when the Board passed the resolution for the Director's report for the financial year June 30, they were retired the closure of today's meeting and will not be required to stand for reelection at the Spill Meeting.

As Mr. Cameron Price was elected today's AGM, he will not be required to stand for reelection at the Spill Meeting and as he was not in office at the time of the report was passed. I refer to the slide behind me showing details of the proxy position for this ordinary resolution.

So we passed that hurdle. That completes all the items of business for today, and we'll now move to shareholder questions. And remember, please remember to cast your votes on each resolution.

Okay. I'll get a pen and paper for the questions.

So we give the shareholders in the room a little extra time to submit questions. We're first going to ask some questions that we received from shareholders prior to the meeting. We'll then take written questions from the room and then from questions online. And we also may have some questions. We have a lot of shareholders online today who may ask online questions.

So the first question we have is from Mr. [ Highland ]. His question is, given the acquisition of CSL Vifor and ongoing margin pressures from plasma collection, cost inflation and geopolitical risk, how does management quantify the risk to return on invested capital, ROIC, from these factors?

What specific margin recovery levers are in place? And how is the Board ensuring that capital is deployed only into growth opportunities that make a rigorous ROIC threshold?

Look, thank you for that question. There's a lot of matters embedded in that question, so I'll try and briefly summarize them.

I think that if we look at our underlying business, we really feel the plasma therapeutics, driven by immunoglobulin demand, continues to provide strength to the company. And our ability to compete that market is very strong and will continue to provide returns to shareholders.

The investment in Vifor, we've done -- we've pulled many levers to try and improve the performance from our perspective after the acquisition and that includes growth last year and now integrating the medical and commercial teams, particularly in Europe to further strengthen our capability.

There is no doubt that Vifor took us into areas of great interest to us in the iron area and in nephrology. And we're continuing to look for ways in which we can expand. We have important clinical trials in the area of renal disease that we'll read out late this decade.

I share your concern that we need to find ways that we continue to improve our return on invested capital that we allocate capital fairly and consistently to all the opportunities that we see that we can generate high-quality returns. And one of those things is our ability to buy our own shares back for shareholders that we manage our capital for both our internal investment, whether it be R&D, whether it be manufacturing expenditure, but also returning funds to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks.

So we are absolutely laser-focused and part of our ability to perform is having a great executive team and also continue to build our Board capability. And you've heard from 2 of our excellent new Directors today, and we're bringing on additional Directors -- new Directors shortly. So I think we're well primed for continuing growth, and we share your interest in growing returns and growing our ROIC.

Mr. [ Highland ] had a second question, which was in relation to the demerger. So your answer to this may change in light of today's announcement. Chair, can you please outline in clear detail the Board's view of how the separation would unlock shareholder value including the key value drivers for both the remaining CSL Group and a stand-alone Seqirus entity?

So I think I've probably dealt with the question of the drivers of the RemainCo, which is Behring and Vifor, excellent opportunities as we see in the plasma therapeutics, immunoglobulin portfolio, growth into our nephrology franchise. So we're doing that. The reality is they are very different businesses.

There is no doubt that the Behring plus Vifor business is about rare diseases, it's about high unmet medical need, it's about smaller clinical trials, it's about our ability to source those products and compete effectively and have a highly integrated team focused on that. Seqirus is a very different business. I mean, I love the Seqirus business.

I don't want people to think we're willing to push this away because we don't like the business. We love the business. They have done an amazing job building this business up, differentiating the portfolio in both pediatric and in the over 65 portfolio, generating excellent real-world data and clinical trial data, demonstrating the utility of vaccines, particularly our vaccines.

But there are challenges internationally. Paul spoke of it today. Vaccination rates are a surprise to us. It's true. Did we think, given the declines we've already seen in the last 2 years in the key U.S. market because this really is a U.S. business plus, plus Europe, plus the rest of the world, but it's a really powerful U.S. business.

Did we anticipate that given the severity of the disease last year, the strength of the recommendation of the vaccine and our ability to manufacture these products efficiently and well, did we expect that vaccination rates would drop again another, I don't know, what is 14%, 15%. Remarkable. But it's our reality.

So we can't see the bottom of the U.S. vaccination realities today. It must be coming soon. The disease prevalence is real and strong. Our challenge also is we've made -- people understand why did we have to update our profit for the first half? Because we've made this vaccine, we anticipate we're going to sell it. We haven't. You don't lose what you thought was just merely your manufacturing cost, it's a 100% loss of revenue that flows through to your profit essentially.

So it's a significant swing factor in how we see our business this year in the first half and how we look the next couple of years, it's quite complicated to forecast. We're trying to be very clear about that. So it's a long answer because I wanted to give it. We think the Seqirus team have done an amazing job.

We think they've got a great team. We think they have a great potential. It's just a very different business dealing with a vaccination policy, influenza rates, capability dealing with retail market and retailers in America, dealing with policy, it's a completely different business.

So when we looked at how do we simplify CSL? How do we get back to that gritty determined, focused company? We said we've got to separate these 2 businesses. Trying to create them as one business and integrate, doesn't work. So Paul led this, he's the driver because he knows we want to get back to focus, discipline, and we're still going to do it. We're going to separate the business out.

It will separate and it will leave us, but don't think we're doing it because we think it's not a great business. It is a great business.

Thank you. We have one more pre-submitted question from Mr. [ Williamson ]. Mr. Chairman, the market's reaction to the company's last 2 major earnings announcements has been severe, wiping up billions in shareholder value in single trading days. This suggests a profound loss of confidence in management's forward guidance and strategic narrative.

How does the Board diagnose this clear disconnect between the company's communications and the market's expectations? And what specific oversight mechanisms is the Board implementing to ensure future strategic announcements restore rather than erode investor confidence?

Again, a lot of issues embedded in that. I mean, we know there's choppiness at the moment, geopolitically. We have had to endure a tax -- additional taxes in America called the Inflation Reduction Act was imposed upon our immunoglobulin portfolio in America. So that cut 2% of our growth into this year. It's just an additional tax on companies selling over essentially over $1 billion that's called Part D.

So we have -- we are aware of that. We've recognized also that some of the investments we've made in -- some of the investments we've made over a number of years haven't delivered the sort of returns we're looking for and that would include the 112 trial, would be our Phase III trial. So we know that we have to generate even higher returns from our existing business today.

And Paul is driving that really hard. It's why we have an engineer focused on this stuff every day, how do we extract more value from what we're doing? And that's what we're doing. Because we know we -- some of the optionality we thought we had, had been challenged by geopolitical matters or just challenged by our inability to do the phase -- some of the Phase IIIs that didn't work for us.

And to be frank, some of the infrastructure we're moving on, shareholders have to understand, it's been built up over almost a decade built up a lot of infrastructure to do a very large and complicated trial, the 112 trial globally. We rebuilt the Marburg R&D facility, that decision was made 7, 10 years ago, some of the R&D infrastructure we put together.

And fundamentally, when we looked at R&D productivity, and again, our engineer wanted to look at our productivity. We just weren't productive enough, is the bottom line. And so we just can't say, well, let's just continue what we're doing. So Paul and his team came up with a plan. It's a significant shift for the company, but we are shutting sites. We're changing the way we're operating, we're cutting costs, we're refocusing.

Yes, it's true. Now that's whilst we're still growing, but we've had challenges because of some of these other factors, but this is a growth company. So what can I say about the market? I think the market misunderstood I believe the underlying strength of our plasma business. We're essentially shutting plasma centers, not because our IG portfolio wasn't growing, it's because they were inefficient centers and all the great work Paul and his team have done in the adoption of Rica has meant we had higher yields and more efficiency.

And we're building efficiencies in our manufacturing plants as well. We just didn't need more expensive plasma, so we shut down the sites. Some people saw that as a sign that we lost faith in the sector. So I think over time, when it's clear that the underlying strength of the company remain are what they are and that this year of transition that we're actually orchestrating at the moment, and you, the shareholders, are having to wear the cost, it's an expensive thing for us to reorganize. That is true.

But it's going to deliver value, it's going to deliver higher focus, it's going to deliver simplicity, and I believe it's going to deliver new products and our ability to compete effectively, and therefore, generate higher returns for you.

Will it take time? Yes. Can I predict when the share market responds? No, I can't. I think it's a mug's game. It's a mug's game focusing for us on the share price alone. We have to run the company, Paul and his team superbly. We're going to do what we're going to do. And we believe, given everything we're doing, including the share buybacks, it will one day be reflected in the share price.

How long that takes? I don't think it's a matter of just simple communication that we bring out some glossy PR and that will fix everything. No. It's about what we do, it's about how we deliver and there's a little bit about how we say what we're doing. I accept that in this modern world of highly responsive markets. So that's what we're doing.

Thank you. We will now move to Chair -- 2 questions from people here in the room. I ask that you move to the microphone and please give your name to the Computershare monitor who will read that name out to us.

Thank you, Chairman, introducing [ Mike Croby ] from the Australian Shareholders' Association.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Board. My name is [ Mike Croby ], and as mentioned, I'm a with what is really Australia's retail shareholder sort of support group. Today, I hold proxies for about 1.08 million shares to the value of about $230 million. So I think that makes the 16th largest shareholder on your register.

And look, thank you very much for meeting us in advance, so we could share some of our concerns with you, and that was very productive for us. We note Mr. Chair, the reports of your comments in the press on the unacceptable failures at CSL in R&D and particularly in the D part at the Australian campuses.

You said I believe or was reported that there was something fundamentally wrong with the way R&D is carried out in Victoria. Now we shareholders are used to chairs and CEOs spoking that their people are their greatest asset. So this was a moment of great candidness that we actually appreciate it and it is in keeping with some of your retrenchment programs that you've signaled as well.

But it is rather unusual. So we're interested in what particular performance issues that your review identified with the Australian R&D centers? I mean we will come from this part of the world and some of us have actually been in R&D in the past. And what progress has been made against what you did see with the shortcomings in order to keep the staff First question. go onto my second general question or would you have to stop there?

Look, I'll do a brief answer and then get Paul to comment on. Look -- and to be frank, it's always -- yes, do you look back and say, the R&D challenges within CSL were clear. It was global. And Paul will comment on that. The Australia is part of it though my dream has always been for and Australia to be the center of our excellence and innovation and to drive.

And I was frustrated, we just didn't have enough quality candidates coming out of the pipeline. I probably drifted into territory that is probably not sensible. Do I love some of the cheerleaders for work from home? No, I don't. Do I get very annoyed when I turn to places and there aren't people working there? Yes, I do. So sure, I get a little frustrated. That's a reality. I'll let Paul talk about the -- in more detail what we did and the analysis.

Thank you, Brian, and thanks for the question, and thanks for your support of CSL. It's great to have a chair and a Board who's so passionate about innovation. So 1 thing I want to make sure everybody understands is we are not at all diminished in our goals for innovation. Innovation is the cornerstone of what has made this company and will make this company successful.

Innovation comes in many different shapes for CSL. It comes in new clinical assets as well as life cycle management extension of our commercial portfolio. In both of those categories, our performance over the last several years has diminished and we need to aggressively address both of them equally for our success. Life cycle management has been a key critical attribute of the success of our plasma-derived therapy portfolio, and we need to continue to drive that.

And that doesn't just take R&D. That takes a relationship between research and development and commercial and cutting, as Brian likes to call it, knowledge of the market and knowledge where you can differentiate. So how commercial and research and development work together is extremely important. In terms of the R&D, what I'll call clinical productivity, we have a great example of what I'd love to see more of recently.

We launched in Denbury, developed prior to 2010 in our own labs in Melbourne and recently launched. I need 4 or 5 more in Denburys. And we need to be able to drive the translation of science, both internally and externally developed these preclinical assets. We need to transition them in industry-leading times to the clinic because they are no good until you get them in the clinic, and you're able to see the safety and efficacy profile.

When you look at our clinical trial execution overall, our metrics had slowed. Our clinical protocols became very complex. And we were really burdened by that large clinical trial CSL112, which was 20,000-plus patients. So when I looked with the team at where we were as an organization, we had grown to almost 20 R&D sites. Very hard to be relevant, very hard to be connected to both the ecosystem very hard to optimize your relationship between R&D and commercial when people are spread across 20 sites.

We have gone aggressively after fixed cost. We're reducing our 20 global sites to 3 main hubs with 3 support hubs, a difficult decision, but one that is critical for us to get the speed and urgency to move the portfolio. And we're really looking at how that overall governance happens in terms of how we govern and move medicines through the pipeline to be success.

Thank you very much. And I think the man next to Dr. Daniels will be an interesting asset to the Board on basis of this. So we're looking forward to your contribution and Mr. Price also from the investment process.

So my second general question was: This financial year, CSL sold the plasma collection business in China, about 7 years after acquiring it at a significant loss of USD 167 million or roughly half price you paid for it. Now I also understand that COVID rather than expectedly happen in the interim.

Most large businesses in this country, and we have seen many of them go through the COVID dip and then come back out the other side stronger and more focused. So what went wrong strategically with the business for sounds the right sort of thing, plasma collection business, your car overall all sounds good to shareholders but basically lost a lack of money. And was there a due diligence issue associated with the M&A [indiscernible]

Look, thinking back to my medical days, retrospectoscope was a fine instrument. You always look back I think could you've done better, could you have done better, due diligence in the M&A.? There's no doubt, China is a really important country in a very big country. I'll get Paul to specifically talk about itself, but it's not the simplest place in some ways.

And I agree, it's disappointing. You hate losing money, you hate wasting money. It's true. I mean, but it's not -- when you get to a company our size, it's not going to be the first or last time we do things that you go, that didn't work. Paul?

Yes, I would say our aspiration was to make the same difference in China that we had around the world for plasma-derived proteins, and plasma economics was critical in that evaluation. What we could not do in China that we've been able to do around the rest of the world was get more products that were meaningful commercially. So although albumin was meaningful, we could not get immuglobulin or any of the infra marginals to be meaningful in the China marketplace.

And it just made the economics because the acquisition of plasma cost was on par to global prices, and we couldn't just generate the revenue to drive the economics of plasma. So at some point, it became an economic decision. We love China. We want to be in China. It's an important market. We just can't get the economics to work.

Next question.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [indiscernible].

I'm from We're an ethical share trading platform. We work with retail and institutional investors to engage with ASX-listed companies like CSL, around environmental social and governance issues. Throughout this year, we've been engaging with your company about how the company is considering and managing the risks of gas and how that's being communicated to shareholders.

Gas is fuel characterized as volatile, uncertain and risky Sharp price increases are highly possible as the East Coast gas market here in Australia has predicted a shortfall in supply as early as 2026-'27 in states like Victoria, where our company has a number of manufacturing facilities.

As noted in our company gambling with Gas report, CSL uses burning natural gas, predominantly to generate steam and boilers and heat and electricity and cogeneration units at some manufacturing facilities. I firstly want to acknowledge the company's positive engagement with and our institutional investor partners over the past few months on this issue.

We were pleased to hear about your decarbonization road map and your plans to report further in the 2026 financial year as part of the Australian sustainability reporting standards. We were also pleased with your recognition of the need to keep shareholders informed on the risks of managing operational risks of gas -- excuse me, let me try that again, on the need to keep shareholders informed on your progress in managing operational risks, which include disruptive gas supply and climate risks, hence my presence here today.

So to come to my questions, I have 2 related questions for the Board. Can you expand for shareholders here in the room today and online? How are you thinking about gas, its use, its risks in the context of your business? And what steps did you take to assess the level of risk that reliance on gas poses to the company?

Great. Thank you for the question. And look, we examine risk through what we call our business continuity process. So we look at risk for every part of our operation around the globe. All of our critical utilities, our wastewater treatment plants are key raw materials. And we assess that risk 1 by 1 and look at contingencies, for instance, procurement, making sure we have multiple suppliers.

So as you said, we've been working hard to take a look at gas and its risk when we've done the evaluation with everything else that we have ongoing, particularly here in Australia, we see that risk is low at this point. And so we have to put our resource and then allocate them to the other problems we're trying to solve.

Now that doesn't mean we don't have an aspiration to continue to challenge and look at gas from a sustainability viewpoint and a missions viewpoint, but at this point, with the risk being low, our strategy is focused on other activities that are higher risk for our operation.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [ Joseph Santa Isabel ].

It's more a comment more on asking a question, but I think most of it here a little bit taken it back to we're asking to approve a pay increase from our CEO when most of the actually bleeding, and you mentioned before, we're bleeding and we've been doing that for the last 5 years, which normally when people invest in companies, we invest in the medium to longer term.

We're not asking for a doubling in the last 6 to 12 months. So this is 5 years. We're now pulling money out for our normal retirement and day-to-day living expenses, we're crystallizing our losses. We find it very hard to be able to then approve pay increase for CSL. I would rather see that put aside and say, if you guys can get this business to where it used to be, then maybe in a couple of years' time, we can double that increase and get your money back.

But it's very hard to justify us approve some increases when these things are happening. And I know you mentioned a couple of times, especially twice or once 2 years ago now AGM, Brian, that you can't control the share market. Yes, I agree with you, but you can sometimes try to soften the blow. We get a lot of comments from managed funds, from brokers, from analysts. And whenever there's a negative outlook on CSL, we don't see anybody from CSL timing to refute that.

And so people get the instruction and say, well, if nothing is coming out of CSL, what they're telling is right or wrong, must be right. That's perception. So I don't know whether we've got an expensive high salary marketing team, but it falls in America and it can't come to the fall, surely, we've got other people that can take his place.

Look, thank you for a genuine question because it's clear, it's very frustrating that the share price has gone nowhere for quite a while and it's gone down a lot lately. There's no doubt that true. The company had a very good run for a very long time, that's also true. And so if I just step back, remembering net profit after tax grew 17% last year.

I mean -- so we did what we say we were going to do and we can only repeat that if we deliver on what we say we're going to do now over the next number of years, I believe the share price will reflect that. How we deal with the perception of the market, how we deal with -- are we not communicating well enough, they're all valid observations, questions.

It is something we're reviewing. We believe, Ken, our new CFO, is -- will assist us in that role. Time will tell. Broad shareholders, Ken. So sure, but we are cautiously optimistic that we understand some of those concerns. With regard to the troubles you've got to separate the share price from pay. It's blending 2 different things.

We have to have people paid. I mean you can go to the private equity model because I have some knowledge of that model as well, where they don't pay much pay at all. And the rewards are extraordinary, extraordinary if the companies do well. That isn't the ASX model. That's just not our model.

So our model is to pay people an appropriate pay for their job and that we want people to be appropriately motivated to do their job and be rewarded for the job. We do not believe it or remotely, we overpay our executives. We don't. We think they're a fabulous team, and they are here for the right reason. But comp -- the amount of time we spend on compensation, I might add, is disproportionate and distracting from trying to get on with the business.

It's remarkable. The the positive of it, it does improve and create a lot of shareholder engagement, which is what I like and what Megan Clark did a phenomenal job as Chair of our committee that looks after that. She met with an amazing number of shareholders, spoke them on all the details.

To some degree, we're in this difficult situation that there is a local expectation and there is an international market. It's very hard to reconcile that sometimes, but anyhow, Ken, your job now communicate well and to see if we can do this job better. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [ Anthony David ].

My name is [ Anthony David ], you call me [ Tony ]. I was born with severe hemophilia B and was treated with various CSL products throughout my life. Unfortunately, I'm one of those Australians, one of thousands that were infected with Hep B, Hep C and cytomeglavirus. The infections destroyed my liver. I've had undergone 3 liver transplants in the last 15 years.

And if this liver fails, it's the end of the road for me, they've told me I can't get another one. The Hep C virus was removed from the main blood product that I was on by heat treating it at 80 degrees Celsius for 72 hours. This treatment was commenced in the U.K. in 1985.

Record show that CSL did not introduce this method of treatment until 1993. That's a further 8 years where patients like myself were exposed to this life-threatening virus. When I received this super heat-treated I wanted to add that before we could use this product, we had to use the old stock before we had the new stock and that went on for about 6 months.

So at last year's AGM, you stated that the contaminated blood product issue occurred before your time, records indicate you commenced your role as CFO and Managing Director of CSL in 1990, can you explain to the shareholders why you told them that this predated your tenure? And can you explain what it took CSL a further 8 years to introduce an 80-degree hydrid product

[ Tony ], we understand the issue. I believe last year, if I recall, we were dealing with -- I was dealing with the specifics, possibly wasn't completely clear the specifics of the person who was demonstrating outside as what I was responding to.

With regard to we'd have to go back and look at our records, if available. But I know there's been many inquiries that have looked at this, and we're happy to comment on everything we're doing to try and work with government to ensure clarity and fairness for people.

Yes. Well, with regard to CSL, not leaving patients behind. I feel that there's a second group of hemophilia that I've been, I'm lucky to still be alive, a lot have died and still suffering.

Look, there's no doubt, the viral transmission era predominantly in the '80s, if you accept that, predominantly '80s, yes, terrible time. So -- but anyhow Paul, can you talk about what we now do? p

Yes. Well, first off, we recognized a profound impact for you and many patients around the world and in Australia. But over the past year, we've actively engaged with the government, the Health Ministry, the National Blood Authority, right, to work with them to see how we could address the concerns raised. We've met with patients. We met with the Hemophilia Foundation awards. And we're continuing to work and advocate for the government who is at the time that you referred to, we were a government entity.

And then in 1994, when we were privatized, there was an indemnity done. So we are pulling out. We have a team dedicated to work on this with the government and with the patient organizations, and we will continue to do that.

We've written letters to the government as well. And they've brickwall and basically said that there's no indemnity there. So I don't know what the answer is.

Thank you, Chairman, introducing [ Richard Davis ].

Dr. Brian McNamee, AO Chairman of CSL. Please apologize to the thousands of living and dead Australians and to their families all of whom have suffered because as our company, tragically, imported produced and sold infected blood products. This disaster, Australia's greatest medical disaster, Australia's greatest medical iatrogenic disaster should not have occurred.

There is documented evidence that for years, our company separately secretly, secretly imported high risk commercial plasma, which was infected with hepatitis and AIDS. There is also documented evidence that for years, our company secretly mixed this imported infected commercial plasma with Australian Red Cross voluntary donated plasma.

Dr. McNamee, you're a physician, please apologize to these people.

Thank you, [ Richard ]. There's been a number of inquiries that have looked at this issue.

[indiscernible] rubbish. You know it. This issue came up before the Senate in 1995. And Senate [indiscernible] over and over again trying to get it discussed, but the Senate refused. And this is hindsight, they refused because it might affect CSL share price. There's never been an honest review of this issue. Sorry, but...

You're allowed to Look, I think it's fair to say that there were significant matters that occurred in that period. I think people believe CSL has more influence on government than we do. We work very hard with both the Red Cross now the National Blood Authority with living blood and the government to try and determine what else can be done, and we have people that do that and that's where we are. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [ Kristin Stanley ].

I'm one of the patients who met with CSL this year hemophiliacs. I was, in fact, with hepatitis C. We met with Andrew Douglas, and we asked for Andrea to please use CSL's influence to bring the government and the Red Cross to the table and discuss this matter with actual hemophiliacs victims, not the hemophilia foundation. I've had dealings with the hemophilia foundation. They have said to me that what happened in the U.K. is different to Australia, and that's not the case. We've got the evidence to show it.

Now I run a group called Hemophilia Advocacy Australia. I deal with people who have been infected day after day, people with AIDS, people who have had 3 liver transplants like [ Tony David ]. Now people need to know before [ Tony's ] Life, he was a world champion darts player earning a lot of money touring the way it playing darts. He had that taken away from him because of greed, it was greed that caused this issue.

You did not want to heat treat the products efficiently because you would have lost yield. Losing yield means you lose money. Now we asked CSL to bring those parties together and the response we got was let's have another meeting. And then I was told by Andrea, you're not going to like what we're going to say at the next meeting.

So we didn't attend that meeting. We washed our hands with it. CSL, the private company, may not have had a hand in what happened, but your name is still attached to what happened. You need to do something to help us. We are not going away. We now have mainstream media support. And videos like you showed at the start, where you're showing how the products have helped people, that's amazing.

But I could show you 100 videos of people crying because their families have been killed. We've had families who have been completely wiped out with HIV. Parents who have lost 2 sons. We've had [ Tony David ] who can die any day, you need to do something to help us. We're asking you, we're begging to help us.

Look, I mean the passion and the clarity is clear. And we recognize a profound impact on patients. So we'll take it back. We'll review it.

Speak to victims. Not the hemophilia foundations. They do not represent victims correctly.

Look, I can understand that. Remembering that we are part of a system that included the Red Cross and most particularly Department of Health and the federal government.

You also give research funding to the Hemophilia Foundation. So it's in their best interests do the right thing by CSL.

No, no. That's not -- it's not...

The government funds the hemophilia foundation. It's in their best interests to keep the government to happy. You need to engage with proper victims.

At the end of the day, we also have to engage with the politicians. And I think we'll continue to do that. We'll work with the Minister.

We're doing that as well. We're dealing with Senator Roberts.

That's where the rubber hits the road here. It's a political matter. So we need a political will. We don't even have the authority to do it given what happened when we became a private company. We have no authority to speak on their behalf. That is clear also.

I'm not asking you to speak on the government's behalf, I'm asking you to use your political influence to help victims. You do have political influence.

I will look at it again, Paul and Andrea see what we can do. It's not a lack of awareness, understanding, empathy. We get it. These people are also -- they have many priorities. It's unclear how we make this their priorities.

Their priority so far has been to tell us that what happened in the U.K. didn't happen in Australia. We have said to them, we have the evidence, we'll show it to you. They do not want to see it. They do not want to engage with us. We need someone with some weight behind them to say help these people.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [ Michael Oakley ].

First of all, those 2 previous questions or the people who asked those questions for the the obvious health issues that they and their loved ones are facing. I hear efforts and the ambitions of the Directors today, and I welcome them, of course, but they seem to be very heavy on motherhood statements.

I don't know quite what else you could say to a group of shareholders. But today, if I'm right in saying the share price this morning has dropped by around 18%, down to $178. I just ask you all, can you tell us why this is so? And why the market knows something that the shareholders apparently don't?

Paul, do you want to comment on our outlook state?

Yes. No, in our outlook statement, we're very clear that -- and the 2 factors that we have this year are the vaccination rates in the U.S. and China policy and our which are impacting this year's fiscal year results and...

What's the reaction today, so significant. A massive drop today down to $178 in a share that was $340. Now this is the vaccination and you've carefully avoided dimensioning Kennedy, which I guess is critically correct. But I just wonder why this has all happened on today's meeting, and we are now faced with another massive drop in our shareholdings.

As we know our forecast, as we know the information, we see the data for the vaccination rate albumin we share as real time as possible for those events. Well, we have a legal obligation to make sure the market is informed how the market takes that data and whether it extrapolates that data as if that's an enduring impact is what you might suggest to share price shows, as I said, therefore, we disclose this information, and we we have strategies in place, and we're actively doing them to show growth and performance in the short -- in the medium term.

I believe that will be reflected in the share price. But it's a market that if you are slightly below what they understand you might be, then the share price drops precipitously.

I certainly have today.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman, introducing [indiscernible].

Like a lot of shareholders, I think we're a bit disappointed with the share price. But my question goes to the issue of return on equity because the return on equity since financial year '22 has been around 15%, whereas in the 3 and 4 years prior to that, it had been in the 20s, 30s, I think at 1 stage even in the 40s.

So my question is, does that mean that this is the new normal or are your plans for the next 2 years to get that back into the 20s at least?

Look, thank you for the question. I'll get Paul to comment a bit more on operations. But we own a quality return today, but we certainly want to see it improving. The Vifor acquisition added a lot of our -- to our invested capital is no doubt. The Behring business is earning higher returns. Seqirus, putting vaccination rates to 1 side, is a high-returning asset. Vifor is not. That is true.

So we're trying to do what we can on the Vifor cost side, and we're doing a lot of activity to try and build the portfolio. I mean, we're a big company. So to flip where we are today into 20s and 30s, that's a massive change. So we're rigorously looking at...

Well, that's only recovering what it was 3 years ago.

Yes. That's just fine. So I'm trying to look forward now and except we are where we are. Vifor acquisition was done, and this is our new invested capital base.

Just a follow-up question. I noticed the buyback has been paused for the last 2 weeks. Is there any reason why we paused the buyback?

Yes, we always pause buyback leading into any announcement periods, whether it be the half year results, full year results, AGM. That's just fairly standard practice. You don't want to be -- give the impression that you know something that might -- you're buying the share price on a different set of information.

Wouldn't that be covered by our continuous disclosure requirements?

No, not really. No, it takes -- you have to work it up. Things have to be worked up. There's planning, et cetera, no, so it doesn't.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [indiscernible].

I'm [indiscernible] and I'm a 31 new shareholder in CSL. So I've been coming to a few of these. And I noticed my share increased today, he's another one under 31 years. A couple of questions back to the business.

Before we go on, as far as the share price is concerned, I just quote Warren Buffett's mentor, Benjamin Grain. "in the short term, the market is a voting machine. In the long term, it's a waiting machine." That's my comment on the share price.

Question about debt. In 2019, our net debt was about $3.5 billion. It's slowly crept up to this year, it's about $9.3 billion and it was over $10 billion last year, net debt I'm talking about. Partially do with the Seqirus proposed split.

Am I correct in assuming that after the split, this debt is mainly going to stay with CSL and not the Seqirus and also the level of debt we slowly got a plan to reduce of overall debt.

Thank you for your question. With regard to debt levels, we are looking at deleveraging down the 1.75x EBITDA multiple is sort of where we feel is sort of a reasonable number, so we're coming down to that. But -- and so we're using mainly our cash to buy back shares rather than repay debt. We think that's a more efficient thing for us to do.

Seqirus timetable has now been deferred pending U.S. -- view on the U.S. What we'd say is Seqirus is a really high cash-generative business. You can tolerate some debt. We haven't come to any final conclusion how we'd spread the debt. But in essence, both businesses can tolerate a modest amount of debt, which is what we're talking about.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Introducing [ Rex McKenzie ].

Mr. Chairman, I've been impressed over 20 years, how this company was doing well by doing good. And I thought this is a company that's worth having shares in. So I've invested in it over that period of time. And people have gradually become more demanding of the amount of money they're making out of it. If they could use to it. What did we do this year? It's a very good result.

Financially, the company is doing well, still by doing good, just not so well. So I'm more interested in further developments like, for example, I listened, I don't necessarily get the whole picture, but it looked quite a sensible thing to do.

So look at the research arm and say, well, we've got these skills and here's this company over here that in need of that sort of skill because they're going to take ages to get this product to market. Now it is a good thing to get this product to market if it's a good product.

So my question is, how is it doing?

Which the Denbury or another?

Purchase, I think, for about $1 billion of...

VarmX.

Yes, the VarmX program is actively and we just had actually a very deep meeting with the VarmX team at our King of Prussia site is doing well. We're enrolling for Phase III clinical trials and looking forward to bring it to registration.

Thank you, Chairman. Introducing [ Julian Smith ].

I'll start out by saying I'm actually live because some of the products that your company produced in the past, so thank you. I just wanted to know where CSL is up to with the U.S. administration tariff war? And I know that CSL it's probably impossible to answer. I know CSL has U.S. sites. And I wanted to know if that will help reduce the effect of the -- whatever the tariff rate is threatened.

Paul?

Thank you for the question. Obviously, we're working very closely with the administration. We did file our -- let's call it our 232 filing, which, in fact, details what you just said that if you look at our plasma-derived therapy, our biggest -- all of the product is sourced for the -- from the U.S. We have about 19,000 employees between our plasma network and our plasma fractionation plants. So we believe we're in a good position in terms of the investment in the U.S. and our tariff position.

I just -- I worked in the U.S. a while ago, and I used to think they shouldn't be asking why are things so cheap overseas. They should be asking why are things so expensive in the U.S.

Thank you.

Do we have anyone else who wishes to ask a question? We might -- Mike, we might have hold you, we have a number of questions online. So we'll see how we go.

Okay. Thank you to our online shareholders. The first question comes from the family.

Hello Board, with a 15% decline in share price today, it shows that the market expectations were misaligned to announcements today. what further actions will the Board and exec team need to take to ensure market expectations are aligned to the business performance and such sharp gyrations don't occur going forward.

Yes. So we have opportunity next week. We have our Capital Markets Day, where we meet with investors from around the world where we will go through the details of our strategy. We'll discuss the outlook challenges that we discussed today, but also really take the investors through the overall growth strategy for the mid and long term.

Okay. Another question from that family. The company market cap is now close to AUD 85 billion, which potentially is significantly undervalued to long-term growth prospects. Will the Board choose to increase buybacks to increase shareholder value further.

I mean you're right in one level. Share buybacks are an efficient way of returning capital to shareholders, and we have a multiyear capital program that we have identified. And with lower share price, it's true. We'll be buying more shares back, assuming the share price stays where it is. So this will be an efficient use of capital. It doesn't change our plan, to be honest, whether it's up or down 10% or 20%, we will be buying shares back.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Mr. and Mrs. How is your 29,000 workforce strategy predicting the impact of AI on Australian current and future jobs across the division.

Fortunately, I'll hand it to Paul.

Well, no, AI is going to be a powerful assistant in really making sure that we develop medicines and get them to the patients that need them. We've actually had a very focused approach to AI in terms of how we use it right now as an assistant for our employees. So for instance, we rolled out a new tool in our plasma centers to help the medical supervisors work through evaluations of our donors.

So there's examples, our plant floor where our operators can ask the system questions if they're having a problem. So we're looking at AI as a complement to our great people skill sets as well as introducing new opportunities to understand the biology and the capabilities within our research and development. AI can be a powerful tool for the productivity I talked about earlier in terms of speeding up the clinical translation as well as clinical trial execution.

So -- but we want to be thoughtful on it because it's very easy to do 150 projects versus do a handful of projects very well.

We're going to switch gears now. The next question relates to executive performance. Can the Chair please explain simply how the executive performance process looks?

Look, that's a fine question. I'm actually going to get Megan Clark to answer this because she has done a phenomenal job being Chair of our Remuneration Committee, and we're going to lose her, which we are sad about. So Megan here's your chance.

Thank you very much, Chairman, and thank you as well for the question. First of all, we want to make sure that attracts the absolute best people that we can to be able to do the very things that we do that the Chairman and the CEO have outlined. We also want to make sure that our remuneration aligns with you as shareholders.

So if we just look at the CEO's performance, he has his base salary, which we only asked for a 3% increase this year. his short-term incentive piece, which is aligned to all of the initiatives that you have heard the very strong focus on our operating model, getting our R&D pipeline and our R&D focus more aligned simplifying our organization, optimizing the plasma where the certainly the leading manufacturer in both our quality and everything we do in plasma, making sure that the yield increases are there, the margin increases are coming from our plasma business and very significantly how we manage capital.

And our CEO has done an extraordinary job really lifting out the way we deliver capital and you've seen the strong cash flow returns that we had last year. So that sits in our STI and then in our long-term incentive program, we align fully with shareholders on return on invested capital and earnings per share growth, earnings per share growth, really reflecting directly into the share price.

The way we structure this is also that 87% of our CEO's remuneration is at risk. And that really played out in last -- we had one of our long-term incentive rewards which vested in June of '25. And with the drop in the share price, our CEO was rewarded only at 38% of the value there.

So we structure it. It's a conservative structure. It's a very disciplined structure and it's extremely performance-based. And we straddle the fact that we are in the Australian market. As the Chairman has outlined, we did not provide really ridiculous reward. It really is aligned very much to the performance of the company.

Thank you, Megan. Our next question is an R&D question. The trial, while missing its primary endpoint overall demonstrated a highly statistically significant 31% risk reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events for the subgroup of post-MI patients with LDL cholesterol over 100. This is a powerful signal of efficacy in a well-defined patient population with a high unmet need.

Given this compelling evidence for an internally developed asset, why has the Board decided not to finish the job and commit to a confirmatory trial to bring this potentially life-saving therapy to market.

Paul...

So we looked at detail at those results. And like any clinical trial, you can keep them doing subpopulation analysis and eventually, you'll see perhaps some areas of encouragement. But when you look at that from a commercial market potential, the commercial market potential relative to the expense, it would take to redo additional clinical trials as well as build needed capacity to bring the product to market the math just did not work out.

So although we were intrigued and we published what we saw, we just don't see enough of a commercial market because lots of things have changed in that space since we worked on CSL112 with the introduction of new cardiovascular medicines. So the business case just is not there.

I have 1 more question online from the family. Can you give details regarding CFO, Joy Linton's resignation? She strikes me as a well qualified and capable person.

Look, thank you for the question. I'll ask Paul to comment on Joy's retirement.

Yes. So Joy was -- is and was a great colleague for us at CSL, real team player, and she's decided to retire from the company. And there's a strong succession planning process that the Board runs for all the key executive positions, and we are fortunate to be able to place Ken in succession based on Joy's retirement. We wish Joy and her family the best of success in health, and I know we will continue to see Joy, and she'll be a strong supporter of CSL.

again from the ASA. Just a question on 42% voting against the remuneration report. Can you give us any color as to what the proxy houses concerns were? Because it looks like future earnings, the 87% that Dr. Clark mentioned, they're quite comfortable with because they're not sort of performance raise, but against the rem report.

I think we could all answer this, but again, I'd like Megan to answer this.

I think the Chairman has outlined the disappointment with the share price as a major factor. But just to go into some of the detail that was raised by our shareholders. There was a couple of key points, particularly the in the STI, the short-term incentive. So the issue raised is why did the CEO get 124% when in the short-term incentives when the share price performance has been down.

And really, this comes to that our CEO and the executive are delivering on every 1 of the levers that we need to win in our markets are doing exactly what the Board and the executive have agreed with increase our IG margin lift our plasma yield, have looked at decrease in the cost, the launch, the very successful launch under our CEO of ANDEMBRY.

The flu business, you saw the performance delivering in a very, very challenging environment Vifor with a 14% segment growth. And the focus that you've heard from our CEO on restructuring and refocusing our R&D. So these were the short-term aspects that have been handled very well. The impact, of course, on remuneration has been in the long term incentive, which aligns fully.

So it really is balancing the absolute focus on the things that we need to do future with the reality of the outcome. So that was 1 issue that was raised. One other issue that was raised was sales of CEO shares which I can talk so I'm happy to talk to you offline in more detail on this, but we saw those as meeting our governance guidelines, and we wrote to the proxy adviser and provided additional detail on that.

Chair, I have 1 more question online that's come in from Mr. I apologize that I am unable to attend the AGM in Melbourne. My question knowing what you know now, would the Board have proceeded with the acquisition of Vifor, noting a former member of the Board resigned from the CSL Board to take on the role of Vifor CEO?

Look, I think the Vifor transaction from a strategy perspective still looks fine. There's no doubt we've got the timing wrong. And I think that -- so loss of exclusivity and has come faster for the iron business than we were understood and our due diligence led us to believe. So there are things we could have done better, should have been done better or should have been disclosed to us better. Either way, I think Vifor is a good high-quality complementary business to us, but we did, yes, get our timing wrong on the transaction.

And that is it for questions, Chair.

Thank you. So ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our discussion on all items of business today. The poll will be formally closed within 10 minutes. For when I declare the meeting closed, and the votes will be counted and the results of the poll will be reported back to me and will also be announced on the ASX as it is practicable following the close of the meeting.

For those in the room, I now ask the Computershare representatives collect the red cards, which record the voting instructions on poll. Please forward those red cards at the end of the row so they can be collected. It's also bellbox at the exit room if you need more time.

I now declare the meeting closed, except for the conduct of the poll, which will close in 10 minutes. We will play a year-end view video while you finalize your votes and exit the meeting. Thank you for your attendance.