CTLT
#Well, in terms of the cash taxes for the year, that $42 million to $46 million range ---+ we'd be thinking about the lower side of that, given the results of the third quarter.
But the cash tax figure would not be ---+ we wouldn't be proposing a new range for that.
So we, on a regular basis, do what we can within the bounds of international tax laws to optimize our global tax position.
That is an ongoing effort at the company, and that has largely gone through smaller magnitude initiatives here and there.
There's no big bang kind of outcome that would dramatically change things for Catalent in the absence of any significant merger and acquisition activity.
I think that's part of the answer.
So you are correct in that compliance costs which have generally been increasing for pharma services companies like Catalent are comprising an increasing portion of our overall SG&A, but specific issues regarding Beinheim certainly impacted the numbers for the quarter, as well as the second quarter and the year to date numbers.
We also had some significant M&A activity in the quarter that shows up in our reported numbers.
We adjust it out.
This is M&A spending that the company did for deals which did not close.
As everybody knows, we're very actively ---+ we're very active in our search for acquisition candidates in our space and we are very active in the quarter, expenditures did go out although no closed deals in the third quarter.
These were deals where we were looking at acquisition targets as we the acquirer.
I would estimate something a little higher, <UNK>.
I think it's 30% to 31%, would be an effective tax rate ETR for long-range planning purposes.
Yes.
So this is <UNK>.
I would tell you that if you asked this question three months ago, we believed that the facility would be more or less coming up to its previous revenue in EBITDA generating capacity.
After the six-month closure and the remediations that we had to put in place into the facility, basically zero tolerance for any malintent and so forth, and some of the business continuity plans that we put in place to move certain products out at the request of customers will pretty much ensure that the revenue and EBITDA generation capability of Beinheim will be lower than prior to the November 13, 2015 suspension.
Some of those business continuity requests by our customers will keep ---+ are keeping the products within the Catalent network but no longer at the Beinheim facility.
We're not giving you the exact details because we're still in the process of working that out for FY17, especially as we see the ramp of the facility coming up, but we're certain that it will be lower both our revenue and EBITDA net, yet not precised.
The mix actually has been pretty constant with regards to our Rx and OTC products.
I would say they generally range anywhere from 35 to 55 in a given year - that's what I've seen and it's been pretty consistent.
We are seeing some very strong VMS growth that is contributing to those numbers, but overall we're just seeing positive momentum I would say across the board and we're operating in a pretty robust marketplace.
I think the number of projects that we have now within the company is north of 700.
Which is, you know, significantly up over several years back, so the good news is we're not seeing a mix down, I would say, in our NPIs because the relative value still is in the OTC and Rx space and those have been a very strong base, really good projects there.
We're seeing somewhat higher BMS projects but because they are relatively lower value they don't mix us down, if you will.
The long way of saying that, we feel very good about the mix and have a strong amount of Rx and OTC projects coming out and in the pipeline.
<UNK> here again.
This has not had an impact with regards to customer retention.
We have had individual customers who have wanted to move their products outside of Beinheim as we went through an extended period of that shut-down.
But generally in the dosage forms that we operate in, we have very, very sticky customers so we don't ---+ there's not a customer switching issue that we're having here or customer retention issue.
There are individual products at the site that on a go-forward basis, customers have decided that the work necessary to get them restarted in the facility was not a good payback compared to the performance of those products.
And that was a very small number, if you will, just actually a few.
So the bigger issue here obviously is the six-month suspension and the financial impact of the company and then some stack-out situations for our customers, that's in immediate effect.
But I would say no long-term retention issues for our customers.
The other thing I'll note, this is one of 11 softgel sites, so what our customers appreciated was we did have opportunities to move these products to other of our softgel sites which also makes Catalent a natural choice given the fact that there are risks operating in this highly regulated space.
I would say that as we survey the landscape of potential opportunities multiples in the industry are high.
We are pretty disciplined buyers and we are looking for acquisitions that can add value we are ---+ our screening criteria includes like return on invested capital which create high hurdles, these things but metrics like.
(music) (technical difficulties).
