Good day and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Greif Fiscal Third Quarter 2021 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speakers’ presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Matt Eichmann. Please go ahead.

Thanks, Whitney, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Greif's Third Quarter Fiscal 2021 Earnings Conference Call. This is Matt Eichmann. I'm joined by Pete Watson, Greif's President and Chief Executive Officer; and Larry Hilsheimer, Greif's Chief Financial Officer; Ole Rosgaard, Greif's Chief Operating Officer. We will take questions at the end of today's call. In accordance with Regulation Fair Disclosure, please ask questions regarding issues you consider important because we're prohibited from discussing material nonpublic information with you on an individual basis. Please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up before returning to the queue. Please turn to Slide 2. As a reminder, during today's call, we will make forward-looking statements involving plans, expectations and beliefs related to future events. Actual results could differ materially from those discussed. Additionally, we'll be referencing certain non-GAAP financial measures, and reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP metrics can be found in the appendix of today's presentation. And now, I turn the presentation over to Pete on Slide 3.

Thanks, Matt, and good morning, everyone. We appreciate your interest in Greif and hope that you and your families are staying both safe and healthy during the pandemic. Greif delivered robust third quarter results. We executed the discipline to deliver record quarterly adjusted EBITDA of $238 million and adjusted Class A earnings per share of $1.93, fueled by strong volumes and ongoing strategic pricing actions. We're also increasing our adjusted earnings per share and adjusted free cash flow guidance, reflecting our strong year-to-date results and positive outlook for the remainder of the fiscal year. Finally, in late June, we announced a planned executive leadership transition that will occur next year. Upon my retirement on February 1, 2022, Ole Rosgaard will assume responsibility as Greif's next Chief Executive Officer. Until that time, Ole will serve as Chief Operating Officer and work closely with me and our executive leadership team on this transition. Ole is a servant leader and a proven team builder with a demonstrated commitment to customer service excellence and disciplined operational execution. Those attributes, along with his extensive manufacturing and industrial packaging experience, make him the ideal leader to take Greif forward. Ole, I'd like to ask you to say a few words.

Thanks, Pete, and good day, everyone. It's great to be with you. As Pete mentioned, my name is Ole Rosgaard, and I'm excited and humbled to be named as Greif's next CEO. I look forward to joining these calls in the quarters ahead and to work more closely with all of you in the future. As Head of Global Industrial Packaging, my focus was on driving and delivering the operating and business results that our customers and shareholders expect. As COO, that focus continues across the wider Greif portfolio. And as Pete said, I'm working closely with the executive leadership team on our fiscal 2022 business plan and approaches for the future. With that, I'll turn the presentation back over to Pete on Slide 4.

Thank you, Ole. On Slide 4, the Global Industrial Packaging business delivered outstanding third quarter results. Our global steel drum volumes increased by 8% per day. Our global rigid IBCs and large plastic drum volumes both rose by more than 25% per day. We also saw mid-teens improvement in our filling volumes versus the prior year quarter, with demand accelerating specifically in APAC. Third quarter average selling prices were up across all key global substrates year-over-year due to raw material pass-through arrangements and strategic pricing actions. In North America, which features our most diverse product mix, all of our key substrates recorded low teens volume growth or better versus the prior year, thanks to generally improving industrial conditions. In Latin America, steel drum volumes rose by 15% on a per day basis versus the prior year and benefited from improved industrial trends and a strong agricultural and citrus season. In EMEA, third quarter steel drum and rigid IBC volumes increased by roughly 5% and 28% per day, respectively, with strong improvement across most key end markets. And finally, in APAC, steel drum volumes rose by 7% per day versus the prior year. Demand was solid in China but a little softer in Southeast Asia due to COVID-19-related lockdowns that we continue to monitor across parts of that region. Across GIP, we see little indications of customers rebuilding inventory. Supply chain conditions remain tight, and our team is managing this challenge very well. While we have not experienced any significant raw material shortage, some of our customers have, which has negatively impacted our demand in certain regions. Labor availability is becoming more challenging, which is not unique to Greif and has impacted the productivity of some plants in both GIP and Paper Packaging. These disruptions are not material at the enterprise level, but certainly present operational challenges nonetheless. GIP's key end markets are healthy. We experienced a double-digit performance volume demand year-over-year for both chemicals specialty chemicals and lubricants in most parts of our global portfolio. Volume demand for paints and coatings also strengthened, especially in the U.S. and EMEA. And volume demand for solid food and paste weakened versus the prior year quarter, but this was largely a result of pricing and margin decisions on our part that impacted conical demand in Southern Europe. GIP's stronger volumes and higher average selling prices resulted in higher segment sales and gross profit year-over-year. GIP's third quarter adjusted EBITDA was a record and rose by roughly $62 million due to higher sales, partially reflected by higher SG&A expense, mainly attributable to incentive accruals. The business also benefited from a $9 million operating tax recovery in Brazil and an $8 million FX tailwind. Looking ahead, GIP is off to a solid fourth quarter with August volumes comparable to our trend in July. I'd also like to comment that our thoughts and prayers are with those impacted by Hurricane Ida earlier this week. While the damage from Ida is extensive, at this time and based on what we know, we do not anticipate a material impact on our fiscal '21 results from the storm. I'd ask you to please turn to Slide 5. Paper Packaging's third quarter sales rose by roughly $120 million versus the prior year, attributed to stronger volumes and higher selling prices due to increases in published containerboard and boxboard prices. Adjusted EBITDA rose by roughly $18 million versus the prior year due to higher sales, partially offset by higher transportation and raw material headwinds, including a $24 million OCC drag. SG&A expenses rose year-over-year, primarily due to our incentive accruals. We are actively executing on price increases in response to robust demand and cost inflation. Since early June, we've announced five price increases, including a total of $100 a ton on CRB, $120 a ton in total on URB, and $70 a ton containerboard. As of August, the published indexes recognized $50 a ton on the CRB increases, $50 a ton on the URB increases, and $50 and $60 a ton on linerboard and medium, respectively. Demand in our converting operations remained very strong. Third quarter volumes in CorrChoice, our corrugated sheet feeder system, were up roughly 27% per day versus the prior year and are anticipated to stay strong through the fiscal fourth quarter. Third quarter specialty sales, which include litho-laminate, triple-wall bulk packaging and coatings were up more than 38% versus the prior year. Third quarter tube and core volumes were up nearly 18% per day versus the prior year and accelerated by mid-single digits versus Q2, thanks to improved demand for textiles and protective packaging and continued strength in the film end-market segment. Paper Packaging is off to a solid start in August. Volumes in CorrChoice and our tube and core business are comparable to July's actuals. Similar to my comments about GIP, we do not anticipate damage caused by Hurricane Ida to have a material impact on our Paper Packaging results in Q4. I'd like to now turn it over to our CFO, Larry Hilsheimer.

Thank you, Pete. Good morning, everyone. Please turn to Slide 6 to review our quarterly financial performance. Big picture, it was an outstanding quarter. Third quarter net sales, excluding the impact of foreign exchange, rose 34% versus the prior year quarter due to stronger volumes and higher selling prices and were a record. Adjusted EBITDA rose by $78 million and was also a record. As Pete mentioned, EBITDA results include a $9 million Brazilian tax refund from overpayment of revenue-based taxes to the government that occurred in prior periods and were wrongly levied. That refund reduced SG&A. Keep in mind, our adjusted EBITDA result overcame more than $50 million of combined OCC and incentive headwinds versus the prior year, making our performance that much more impressive. Interest expense fell by roughly $6 million versus the prior year quarter due to lower debt balances, lower interest rates and a lower interest rate tier on our credit facility as a result of our substantial debt repayment. Our third quarter GAAP and non-GAAP tax rate were both 22% and were flat to prior year. Third quarter adjusted Class A earnings per share more than doubled to $1.93 per share. Finally, third quarter adjusted cash flow fell by roughly $43 million versus the prior year. While profitability improved significantly, working capital was a substantial cash use compared to a source in the prior year due to the run-up in raw material prices and corresponding cost increases. That said, our team is executing with discipline in controlling what it can with superb results as trailing fourth quarter working capital as a percentage of sales improved by 190 basis points year-over-year to 10.7%. Please turn to Slide 7 to review our outlook and key modeling assumptions. As Pete mentioned, we are increasing our adjusted earnings per share and adjusted free cash flow guidance, which reflects our strong year-to-date results and positive trajectory for the remainder of fiscal '21. At the midpoint, we anticipate generating Class A earnings per share of $5.20, which is $0.50 per share more than our guide in Q2. This improvement is largely due to stronger volumes and favorable pricing, more than offsetting the additional OCC headwinds we expect to incur for the remainder of fiscal '21. With our anticipated fiscal '21 results, we will have more than doubled earnings per share since 2015 despite COVID-19's negative impact, the closure and/ or divestiture of nearly 90 noncore or suboptimal plants and without any share repurchase benefit. Also keep in mind that we currently have 600,000 more shares outstanding now versus the end of 2015. We now anticipate generating between $335 million and $365 million in adjusted free cash flow, with a bias to the upside of that range. At the midpoint, adjusted flow has improved by $45 million relative to our Q2 guide due to slightly lower capital expenditures, savings, partially offset by higher working capital usage commensurate with our announced price increases to offset cost inflation. Please turn to Slide 8. To employ a consistent three-pronged capital deployment strategy focused on business reinvestment, debt reduction and capital returns, we have executed on an aggressive de-levering plan and repaid $370 million in total debt since Q3 2020. Our compliance leverage ratio improved by nearly a full turn over that time period, and we now anticipate reaching the high end of our targeted leverage ratio range by the fiscal year-end. Given the dramatic improvement in our leverage profile and confidence in strong future cash generation, the Board approved a 4.5% increase to our quarterly dividend effective this year. This is a first step towards a practice of steadily increasing our dividend as we discussed in prior earnings calls. With that, I'll turn the call back to Pete for his closing comments.

Thanks, Larry. If everyone could please turn to Slide 9. I want to personally thank our global Greif team for executing with discipline to deliver outstanding third quarter as we continue to strive towards our vision of being the best in customer service. Looking ahead, we are well positioned to benefit from ongoing strength and improving trends in our key end markets. Our extensive global portfolio, differentiated service capability and sharp focus on operational execution enable us to best serve our customer needs while generating significant shareholder value. Thank you for your interest in Greif. And Whitney, if you could please open the line for questions.

Your first question is from the line of Ghansham Panjabi with Baird.

Congrats, Pete and Ole, on your new roles. I wish you the best in the future. I guess on the Industrial Packaging side and the operating leverage you delivered was quite substantial. Can you give us a little bit more insight into whether there was any sort of mix benefit for that segment? I'm just looking at volumes, which basically reversed the decline from 3Q 2020. So I guess I'm trying to understand what drove the extent of the margin expansion even with cost inflation to the extent you experienced.

Yes. So I'll talk a little bit about the volume and a little bit margin, and Larry can add. But from a volume standpoint, Ghansham, we had some low benchmark comparisons versus prior year. But all of our end markets were very healthy. I think, in our opening comments, the only end segment that we had lower volumes was the solid food business. But that's more relative to the decision we made on price and margin in Southern Europe. Our volumes and all our substrates are strong. The end markets are very healthy. We don't see much change in that going forward. And we continue to execute with discipline and our self-help initiatives that we've talked about. We're very disciplined in our pricing actions, both on executing on pricing for raw materials to our PAMs. We've done a really good job in that business of getting non-raw material increases. I think 55% of our contracts included opening provisions. The teams have done an exceptional job, and we're executing very well operationally and driving a lot of self-help initiatives through a variety of our actions to drive better margins. So we're really pleased and excited. We think there's good upside going into next year. Larry, any other thoughts?

Yes. Ghansham, I take it down to three things. One, we have been meticulous in our approach to staying ahead of inflation, and our teams have executed extremely well. The annual openers that we built into the contracts over the last four to five years have really provided a way to offset those other increasing costs. That's number one. Number two is the execution of the PAMs and making them way more efficient and cutting down the lag period. That has benefited us greatly in a period of highly accelerating raw material costs. And so we've had some nice tailwinds from that. And third is our focus on really getting rid of underperforming operations. I mentioned previously where we were. Well, we're now up to about 79 plants. We've walked away from over $500 million of revenue on low-margin business. That was 2% of EBIT or so. So all of those in mind are what's driven the margin where it is. And we can expect to continue to execute going forward.

Got it. And just for my second question, I know it's early, but any reason why we should not use the back half of this year's EPS run rate at a minimum as a baseline for fiscal year '22 EPS, adjusting for any seasonality? I mean you have a lot of pricing coming through, and volumes seem to be in a good spot. So any reason why that would not be the case?

No.

Your next question is from the line of George Staphos with Bank of America Securities.

Congratulations, Ole and Pete, once again. To start with, can we discuss the cost inflation you experienced this quarter? You mentioned $26 million in terms of OCC, if I heard correctly. What was the year-on-year impact, including OCC, of variable cost pressure during fiscal third quarter inflation and other input costs? Additionally, since you had approximately $20 million from pricing, how does that factor into your assumptions for fiscal fourth quarter regarding year-on-year variable cost inflation, including OCC transport?

Yes, in the paper business, the inflationary impact from the third quarter compared to last year was about $36 million, with $24 million attributed to OCC. The remainder was related to chemicals, adhesives, and similar items. Transportation costs increased by another $13 million due to higher volumes, with an additional $21 million from labor, temp staffing, and extra transport related to core volumes. This represents a significant cost increase in the paper sector. Regarding the GIP aspect, we faced raw material price hikes totaling around $46 million and a currency impact of roughly $8 million. Additionally, manufacturing and transportation costs rose by another $22 million from increased volumes, with inflation in manufacturing and transportation of $10 million. Currently, cold-rolled steel prices are about three times higher than they were a year ago, and resin is experiencing a similar increase.

So I'm sorry, Larry, I didn't quite get that. You said the $46 million in GIP was actually selling price increases?

Yes, that is right. That was broad and nominal price increases. I was reading the wrong line.

I apologize. What I'm trying to convey is that when I look at your guidance and consider the pricing run rate for the fiscal fourth quarter, alongside the other variable cost pressures, it appears that your guidance is rather conservative. It seems to account for about another $50 million in potential cost inflation. I'm not sure if you can elaborate on those specific factors, but any insights would be appreciated. Additionally, I would like to ask about the trends you're observing in terms of volume metrics across the businesses as we enter fiscal four.

Yes. In August, which is the first month of our fiscal fourth quarter, the volume trends we are seeing in the market are very similar to July. The end markets remain healthy, and we expect our volume trends to stay strong. It's important to note that our volume began to recover in the fourth quarter last year following the COVID decline, so the increases this year may not be as significant as those in Q3, but they will still be robust. We are optimistic about the market and demand for our fourth quarter in both PPS and GIP.

And George, I don't have clear data on the raw material component. We do expect that our margin in our GIP business will be slightly lower in Q4 than it was in Q3 because we don't anticipate steel costs going up as much. And so, we'll have a catch-up where pricing indexes did not increase, but we have some higher-cost steel coming into our inventories, but still very healthy margins.

Your next question is from the line of Mark Wilde with BMO Capital Markets.

Pete, I just want to say kind of congratulations to both you and Mike. I can remember six years ago, the Company was in a much tougher situation when you took over, and it's nice to see you kind of getting ready to go out with such strong performance. My questions are really, if you can help us a little bit more on what is left in terms of pricing. You talked about sort of the board price initiatives you have. I'm also just curious in terms of kind of the lag roll-through on tubes and cores and corrugated sheets and converted products. So if you can just help us think about that issue.

Thanks Mark. And I appreciate the kind words. And I've got to tell you, we've got a very deep bench here at Greif, and we've got a great talented team. And I have very, very high belief that we're going to have a great future at Greif. So to your question on what's left of the mill increases, as we said, containerboard is $60 in medium, $50 in liners. And recognize we'll start getting impact in September with full impact by October. So not a full Q4 impact, but it will be accelerating through the quarter. On URB, we have a $50 ton increase that has been recognized. And again, the impact will start in September and be fully realized through October. What's left on URB is we announced $70 on September 13. We fully expect to be recognized as backlogs and demand for that product is very, very strong at this point and don't see any change in the future. On CRB, we announced the $50 and is recognized in two pieces, one in $30 and one in $20. Our recognition or impact will be calendar 2022 due to contracts in that business. We have also announced a $50 a ton increase for August 30 for CRB, and we fully expect that to be recognized as well. Again, business conditions are strong. Our backlogs are long, and we're really bullish on the business.

Okay. Pete, for my second question, I'm just curious about potential investments in the URB business. I mean you've got one really large competitor there. They picked up a very efficient machine in Wisconsin a few years ago. They're rebuilding their main complex down in the southern U.S. So to remain competitive with them as they improve their asset base, do you need to make incremental investments in your system?

Yes. So you make a good point. And our largest competitor has done some investments. And as you know, they have taken a stranded medium machine and converted it to a wider and a very efficient URB machine. But we've got a plan for how we're going to improve our URB system, and it combines both our mill system and our converting capability. We don't see that we're going to have a significant disadvantage in cost in that. I think what's more important is what we do and how we go to market and create a differentiated advantage, high touch from a customer service standpoint that creates value for our customers and grows that business through that customer service differentiation. But we are looking at ways to improve the overall cost structure and footprint of that mill system, and we'll have more to come into 2022.

Okay. And if I could slip just one more. Is it possible to just remind us of sort of the roll-off on the graphic CRB contract?

We won't go into specifics about that, Mark, as it's a matter between us and Graphic, but the rollout will occur through the three different mills sequentially, starting next year and continuing into late 2024.

Your next question is from the line of Adam Josephson with KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Pete and Ole, congratulations and all the best of luck to both of you. Larry, one on GIP, just on your fourth quarter assumption, and then I've a full year question. So you had the two FX benefit, the Brazil benefit. There is seasonality typically in that business, and that profitability is normally lower in Q4 versus Q3. You mentioned that the steel price issue. Can you just help me with what your expectations are for the profitability in that business in 4Q? And then I'm going to again ask a full year-related question.

Adam, I don't have the breakdown of that business for the elements that you just spoke of, so let me just walk through just what we anticipate and what changed from our prior year guidance. I can talk broadly at the factors that are going to impact GIP, which will have lower profitability in the fourth quarter for some of the reasons you mentioned. But we had previously guided to $4.70 a share. We're now up to a midpoint of $5.20. And just roughly, you've got $0.82 of operational improvement that's related to volume and prices, offset by about $0.42 of OCC. Interest expense is a $0.05 lift. Tax is a $0.01 lift. And then we've got other equity earnings and stuff that's roughly $0.04 on the midpoint. There's ranges around all of those. But yes, we won't have more tax refund from Brazil in this current year and likely not in the future, although there's a slight possibility we may get something further down the line. The element of steel cost catch-up, as you're accelerating rapidly, you clearly have some benefit of the inventory that you have already purchased at a lower cost as things accelerate. The curve has started to flatten a bit, although there's been a recent cold-rolled steel cost increase again in the U.S., but the rate of increase has dramatically decreased. And so you'll have some margin squeeze as that plays through the inventory. We don't anticipate relative to the given current economic projections by most economists that there's going to be any kind of dramatic drop in steel cost, which would be the only thing that would really be problematic for us. But we do see a little bit of a squeeze in the margin. And then the seasonality impact that you mentioned clearly plays out in the fourth quarter. So a step down in profitability in the fourth quarter for GIP is a correct assumption on your part.

Looking at the full year, Larry, if we assume your EBITDA in that segment reaches around $450 million, historically, it has been about $300 million per year for the past four years. This indicates a significant increase of 50%. Can you clarify if this seems like an appropriate baseline for next year? The improvement is impressive, and I'm trying to understand if you believe this is the right starting point or if there are temporary factors that might make it less reliable for next year's projections.

Our team has been doing an outstanding job of improving operations. I want to clarify that I previously mentioned 89 facilities closed, but it's actually 79. We have moved away from many unprofitable projects, and now most of what we handle is more profitable due to our focus on customer service and improved margins. While I can't provide specific numbers, the overall assessment is accurate. As steel costs stabilize, we may experience some margin compression. However, we have ongoing self-improvement initiatives and additional capital expenditure projects on blow molders and other operations that will continue to enhance our results. This serves as a solid baseline for your question.

Can you provide an overview of the impact on your revenue in paper packaging next year considering both the announced price increases that have yet to be recognized and those that have been recognized? Additionally, if you assume the 4Q OCC price remains constant throughout next year, what would be the impact of that?

Yes, if we take all that and go with the assumption that Pete and I have of recognition of the last price increases we announced, when you played through OCC at the current level, it's about $180 million lift on the bottom line.

Your next question is from the line of Gabe Hajde with Wells Fargo.

Pete, pleasure working with you. And Ole, I look forward to working with you going forward.

Thanks, Gabe. Appreciate it.

Many questions have been raised, but I want to return to what Adam mentioned. Instead of concentrating on margins, it's important to consider that raw materials can significantly influence those figures. If we look back to the aftermath of the global financial crisis, the EBITDA reached approximately $366 million in 2010. Taking into account the various businesses you have exited, and considering the fiscal 2022 financial objectives you've provided, is there anything about the remaining business that stands out? This could relate to the product mix or geographic considerations that differentiate it from the previous structure, particularly since you've moved away from $500 million in revenue.

Gabe, I'd like to make a few observations. Pete, to give you the broader perspective, we have consistently emphasized our focus on building our plastics and IBC business. This represents a significant structural change in our margin profile, especially as we have moved away from unprofitable business operations. Additionally, we are placing greater emphasis on the end markets we serve. We've shifted from being heavily reliant on chemical companies, especially in the post-financial crisis period you mentioned. These are two major structural shifts that I wanted to highlight. Pete?

We have made significant improvements in the overall structure and leadership of our business. Firstly, we have enhanced our pricing discipline. This year, we have focused on improving our contracts in PAMs, implementing shorter pass-throughs, and addressing non-raw material price increases. More importantly, we have centralized our pricing coordination under Ole Rosgaard, supporting this with robust analytics. This allows us to better understand the global markets, where most of our customers are international. We are now more consistent in our strategy, prioritizing value over volume. We've intentionally moved away from unprofitable business and pursued higher growth markets that offer better profitability. Additionally, GIP has made great strides in customer service. Since 2015, our customer satisfaction index has risen from 57% to over 95%, reflecting our enhanced ability to serve customers globally. As part of our strategic growth initiatives, we are focusing on resin-based products, IBCs, IBC reconditioning, and plastic drums. Five years ago, our product percentage rate was over 60%, and it has now decreased to 51%, with growth concentrated in more profitable and higher-growth areas. Furthermore, we have implemented substantial self-help initiatives. We have closed underperforming shops that were operating at low EBITDA levels, carried out rooftop consolidations to lower fixed costs, and made changes to our SG&A expenses to function more effectively as a global business. Overall, Ole Rosgaard has done a remarkable job of shifting the direction of our business, and we are confident in its sustainability and growth potential. We are very pleased with our current standing and the opportunities that lie ahead.

The other one is on capital allocation. I mean, obviously, you guys kind of bumped the dividend here, and you've talked about that. And you talked about investing in the business on Slide 8. One of the things I think you put in the prior slide deck is kind of your framework for what you kind of filter and think about inorganic or M&A. Can you remind us a little bit, maybe, Larry, as to how you think about M&A, I guess, from a financial standpoint and sort of how does that coincide with the way management is incentivized?

Yes. Thanks, Gabe. Look, we will remain committed to spending the capital needed to make sure that we feed the cash machine we have, meaning we will spend what we should on maintenance capital. I think you'll see us doing more and more around automation given the labor components of things. So highest priority is always making sure that we save and grow what we have. And then we will continue to focus on getting our debt leverage ratio down to where we target. But obviously, we're very close and expect to be there at the end of this fiscal year. So we've talked previously about that we're in the middle of a strategic plan, focusing on wrapping that up by the early part of next year, and then we'll communicate to all of you about what our go-forward look is relative to M&A and that kind of thing. But we also recognize that we are going to be in a situation of really having a lot of excess capital very shortly. And so to the extent that we don't meet our criteria, which that same chart that we showed many years ago around the various return criteria that we have, given the risk of a potential investment we'll continue to apply. And to the extent that we don't find opportunities that fit our appetite, then we'll be returning even more capital to our shareholders.

Gabe, this is Pete. I just want to make one comment on that. So I think we've done a phenomenal job of deleveraging the balance sheet. But I just want to make it clear, regardless of what our debt leverage ratio is, we're going to be really disciplined in our process to capital allocation. I think that's important. We're going to stay true to our strategy and our priorities. So I feel really good about that process that we put in. And again, we're going to have a very, very disciplined approach to how we allocate capital to create the best value for our shareholders.

I appreciate that, gentlemen. There was an initial response to the Caraustar acquisition and questions about timing, so I wanted to refresh how you view it.

At this time, there are no further questions. I will now hand the call back to Matt Eichmann for closing remarks.

All right. Well, thank you very much, and I'd like to thank everybody for their participation today and their questions. I hope you all have a really nice weekend ahead. Take care.

That does conclude today's conference call. Thank you for joining. You may now disconnect.