CL
#The online is interesting because what you see online often is that the share composition is very different.
So for example, in the US, we are the brand share leader online but for example, our Tom's of Maine business has a disproportionately elevated share online, which may trace to the demographics of the consumer.
So you see our shares profiling strongly but sometimes the composition of those shares is very different to what you would see in a brick and mortar account.
Relative to this pricing notion, our price was greater than our volume in this the second quarter for the reasons that I have mentioned.
You will remember our volume is a dollar weighted volume.
So mix is not a factor in the discussion and to repeat what we said to <UNK>, it is our planning, but for this year in total, our growth which will be within the 4% to 7% range, we have been guiding will be more driven towards volume than price on a relative basis to last year.
I am not sure the pricing situation in Europe is unique to us.
If you talk about North America, oftentimes, this traces here to the couponing that you use to put behind your new innovation.
We all have our thoughts and plans in terms of innovation flows which vary by company, but our pricing in North America, we think overall, we get a good organic growth out of it.
It really does trace more to the innovation flow and the couponing that builds trial behind the innovation flow.
Hey, <UNK>.
We simply ---+ no there is not a change.
We simply got behind ourselves.
So for the year, we are still talking about a gross buyback of $1.2 billion to $1.3 billion.
We fell behind frankly in the second quarter, which is the net result of what you see.
Therefore, what you are going to see over the balance of the year is that share repurchase pick up and on a gross basis, it is going to be between $300 million and $400 million a quarter so that we realize the $1.2 billion, $1.3 billion range for the full year.
So we're still holding for the full year and therefore there will be an uptick in the second half of the year to compensate.
Exactly.
Is this Jon or <UNK>.
Thanks, <UNK>.
Latin America is an interesting part of the world.
The shopping consumer in Latin America is perhaps one of the most educated on the planet in terms of the vagaries of foreign-exchange and what that means for a shopping basket.
The steps that we take are entirely driven by the currency, and if you talk qualitatively with consumers in Brazil, for example, they can almost tell you what the price of the goods that they buy are going to be based on the foreign-exchange moves.
I guess the good way to think about it is that our kinds of products, yes you are talking taking pricing, but you are talking taking pricing on an everyday product and at relatively modest levels on top of that.
So it does not affect their loyalty to the brand over time.
They have opportunities in the terms of different sizes that we have to buy at different price points and therefore mitigate the cost impact from a cash outlay point of view which indeed they do do.
But interestingly, they don't even trade down within our portfolio.
So if they are buying the premium end of the Colgate portfolio, they keep buying that.
They don't trade down to perhaps what you might say is a more economical option within our portfolio.
So our kinds of products at the time these economies are going through what they are going through become the affordable luxuries that people continue to put in their shopping basket.
That is the way I would answer it, Jon.
Mix is in.
We have a dollar weighted volume.
So it is in the volume.
It is not separate.
She was looking for a separate contribution, that was our point.
We will get both.
The volume will recover and it will not all be trade up.
Hey, <UNK>.
I was going to ask you to repeat the question because I like hearing 190.
If we just do the traditional roll forward, the prior year gross profit was 58.3%.
We got the benefit of 110 basis points of the pricing.
We had between funding the growth and restructuring, restructuring modest in gross product as you know, 190 basis points favorable.
Material prices were a headwind of 110 basis points.
Nothing in [other] and that gets you to the 60.2% which is the 190 basis points.
Now as we think about that for the balance of the year, first, pleasingly, although these pleasing moments are quickly behind you, but pleasingly, this is the second back-to-back quarter now we have been above 60 in gross margin which as you know was a company goal.
Indeed the second edged slightly up on the first.
But if you look at our gross profit for the first half of the year, it is up 150 basis points.
One and a half points.
As we, as you think about the balance of the year, I guess what we would say is our expectation is that our gross margin increase for the second half of the year will be around the same level as the first half, maybe even a little bit higher.
And the primary driver of that of course is, transaction headwinds will start to lessen as the foreign-exchange comparisons, barring another event in our world, improve year upon year.
We think it is a great idea.
Hey, <UNK>.
I don't think so.
I think whatever we do on Hill's, whatever we have done on Hill's, we are always extremely focused as a matter of strategy on the nutrition the diets provide.
It does not matter whether it is a prescription product, a science product, or even our Ideal Balance product.
I think the thing you might want to read into it is that after we introduced Ideal Balance, we have been through an extensive process of changing the formula composition of our Science Diet product, this the one not recommended or prescribed by a vet, to change the composition of the ingredients in those products to lead with protein and other ingredients that buyers of natural products value.
Thereby, no longer providing them with a reason to walk away from the nutrition of Science Diet because Science Diet doesn't offer them a formula composition that they are looking for.
And that was a significant change that we made to make that piece of the business less vulnerable to a naturals pure play.
Ideal balance is doing okay.
But I would say our major shift has been to make sure from a dietary composition point of view that our core Science Diet business is competitive.
And of course in making that change, have validated the fact that the nutritional benefit that the pet is provided is completely unchanged in making that formula adjustment.
I guess that is the way I would think about it.
And all of the innovation that <UNK> talked about on the perception diet side of you've seen with the weight products, we translate that science, if you will, across Science Diet and even bring it to Ideal Balance, although we would market it in different ways given the different positionings of each of those three segments of the business.
Hey, Steve.
Well, thank you for the simple question.
I think the mix benefit clearly is picked up in gross margin, and I would say it would be between pricing and cost in the gross margin calculation.
Base cost.
Well, thank you ever so much.
Thank you for your interest in the company in these turbulent times and we look forward to updating you all as the year unfolds, and we take the opportunity to thank all of the Colgate folk that work so hard to make this happen.
Thank you very much.
