MON
#<UNK>, thanks for the question.
As you kind of hinted at, this is a trend that is increasing.
We breed towards that, so as we're looking at new varieties we're breeding for varieties that thrive in higher-density populations.
And then I think the developments with climate and digital agriculture allow us to vary that plant population across a field.
But, <UNK>, if you look right now this coming year or near term, how is it shaping up.
If you look at the year we just finished in 2016 and the year we're going into in 2017, you can clearly see the trend continuing across corn, particularly in North America where planting populations are increasing a bit.
And it's exactly what <UNK> was describing.
That's part of how you drive yield is increasing the plants in the field; you just have to have genetics that work in that environment.
That's starting to happen in South America, not to the extent that it has in North America.
My anticipation is tools like Climate are going to help dramatically in South America to help the farmer better understand the value of increasing seeding populations, because it's counterintuitive.
Sometimes when they are stressed on commodity price and profitability, they look at seed and they want to back off, but that's the worst thing that they can do.
Now I will tell you, some of the data we'll show you in soybeans that there may be opportunities; in some varieties they are being over planted.
Again, I think that's the beauty of the analytical tools that we're developing in Climate.
It isn't always to sell the farmer more; it's to optimize the decisions that they are making to increase the profitability on the farm and I think that sometimes is misunderstood.
It's all about helping them make a better decision.
Sure.
So when we're looking into 2017, we see definitely a return to growth in our Seed and Trait business.
And actually, just stepping back into 2016 ---+ and <UNK> partly covered that ---+ but when you look at 2016, if you just look at corn and soybeans, if you exclude the impact of currency, extremely challenging environment.
We've been able to grow gross profit in both segments, in corn and soybeans, if you exclude the currency.
So there is some really nice momentum that's been building and I think our corn business has shown some very nice resilience there.
If you assume entering into 2017 more stable currencies, we are confident this is a business that's going to be growing in 2017.
And two of the elements you mentioned related to the tailwinds are effectively going to help us continue to grow, but it's really the dynamics of our two blockbusters.
In soybeans, Xtend and Intacta, now that the bases have been set, and in corn, this is ---+ as <UNK> was mentioning, this ability to continue to have some level of germplasm mix lift and some level of share gains.
Now regarding the tailwinds, we see a fairly significant tailwinds in terms of cost of goods when it comes to Xtend, as you mentioned.
So we quoted about $150 million of headwinds this year and we said about two-thirds of those we will be able to recover next year, and this is still absolutely valid.
In terms of corn, we will see the tailwind associated with more production and that's as we mentioned.
However, in corn, we are also seeing some higher costs in Brazil related to commodity price, currency, and a couple of our elements, and we are also upgrading our seed treatments across the board on our corn cost of goods.
So we're not going to see as much tailwind as we were expecting definitely in the corn business, but in soybeans the Xtend-related costs are definitely going to show up.
We've not been looking at the details of our quarters in terms of our prepared remarks.
However, when you look at Q1, the way we are thinking about Q1 is that it should be similar to slightly better than what we saw last year.
<UNK>, thanks for the question.
We've obviously been involved in these discussions.
<UNK>, maybe just some headlines.
Good morning, <UNK>.
I think ---+ let's start with the seed law and then where we go from there.
I think you use the operative word: the draft language for the seed law that included the three years.
We continue to work with the coalition down there and that's a coalition made up of seed companies; trait and technology providers, both from Argentina and outside of Argentina; grain handlers; and interested farm groups to work with the government on the new seed laws.
We pushed back substantially on that.
They are looking for investment in agriculture and that just discourages investment in agriculture.
We've given that feedback and we think that's been well understood, but we'll continue to work with them on that draft language.
In the interim, there is a resolution in place that we can work with that we did this year.
We will continue to work with the government and the coalition to execute that resolution going into next year while we're in conjunction working on the new seed law.
And we will continue to look for better and better integrity in the system.
As it speaks specifically to Xtend, we will continue to hold back on our Xtend technology until we see a system that has a higher level of integrity than what we currently see today.
That can either be a new seed law that's negotiated to a better place or it can be improvements in the system that we already have operating that are satisfactory to the coalition.
So we'll keep working on them, but we're going to hold back Xtend until we are confident it's in a better place.
Good morning, <UNK>; this is <UNK>.
Happy to.
And, by coincidence, I was just in Brazil last week, so fresh on my mind and had the opportunity to talk with a number of folks down there.
So a couple of things.
One, I think first you mentioned Intacta.
We're still finishing out the agreement we had with farmers from a number of years ago when we made the transition, so we are priced the same as we were last year and the feedback from farmers is Intacta continues to deliver phenomenal value in the market.
Anticipation is strong for increased yield ---+ sales, as reflected in the significant pre-pay that we enjoyed this year based on Intacta.
In regards to corn, we took significant double-digit price increases across the corn portfolio.
I look at it as trying to get back some of that loss from currency that we've experienced in the last year or two.
And so far, so good; it's working.
The farmers understand.
We just have to be respectful of their situation and work with them and communicate and so far, so good.
We'll continue that approach as we start looking at safrinha, which will be on top of us right around the corner.
I think the only thing I'd add, Bob, is the impact Intacta has had on insecticide sales there, too.
Growers are seeing great results and they have been a lot more accurate and a lot more careful in their insecticide application, so we're seeing some nice substitution opportunities in the last two seasons.
So answering the second part of the question, yes, this is comparable.
These are comparable numbers.
I mean it's just the balancing between the segments that we tried to represent today in our prepared remarks.
The way we are thinking about those strategic deals is more in terms of important transfers of either IP or, in certain cases, assets, compared to ongoing licensing that we have on our lines and some of our traits.
So it's really ---+ those are more unique in nature and ---+ compared to what we see in our business.
So that's a distinction that we make in terms of the strategic licensing compared to the ongoing licensing that we have commonly.
<UNK>, you're right; you did ask <UNK> the easier of the two questions.
Thanks for that.
It's a $1.6 billion threshold.
The composition of that or the properties that will be sold versus retained hasn't been made public yet, so it's hard for me to comment on that.
But I would go back to my earlier point that compared to the Syngenta deal that never happened; the overlap in this deal is significantly less because there is much smaller overlap in the seed properties.
We'll see how this plays out, <UNK>, but I think as we look at the overlap, or the lack of overlap, I'm encouraged on how the two properties line up.
No, thank you.
<UNK>, thanks very much for the two questions.
I think ---+ taking the last piece first.
As you look at innovation, I think, number one, the need's never been greater.
Number two, I think there's the capacity to accelerate innovation, particularly in the area of digital agriculture and particularly in the area of precision agriculture where we're developing software and where we're using, literally, harvested data to improve decision quality on ---+ decision quality on farm.
So I don't ---+ there's a piece of this I don't think you wait 10 or 20 years; there's a piece of this I think you see very quickly and <UNK> used some of those examples in his prepared remarks.
So I think there will be evidence of that acceleration as you bring these platforms together.
And to <UNK>'s point, I don't think that's increasing cost for the grower; I think it increases efficiency.
It unlocks that extra bushel.
And then it's hard to say on the proxy, but our expectation would be by the end of October.
The merger agreement is already out there, the frequently asked Q&As are out there already, and then the proxy will contain the next tranche of information around the deal and the history on the lead up to the deal.
And I would expect we'll see that around the end of October.
I think what ---+ to your point earlier, time will be the proof of this.
But I think the more that you can bring up in that platform faster, the quicker you build insights for the grower.
If you think back, between Climate and Precision Ag, we're in our third season.
<UNK> talked about 95 million acres, so very, very fast growth.
But it's the quality of the data that you bring in the platform.
The machinery company is now up, all of US distribution now up, and I think when we bring the Bayer crop protection materials up, you just increase the density and the subsequent quality of decision-making.
We've always said that there would be space in that platform for all of our competitors as well, so I think that this will be a broadly-licensed platform.
And then the competitive element of this will be who delivers the best insights and I think Bayer will really help in that.
This is <UNK>.
When you're looking at the 20%-plus growth we are looking at in terms of the soybeans business, it's really ---+ I mean, three different things and all are significant and matter.
The first one is the continuation of Intacta, the growth of Intacta in South America where we are anticipating to be on 45 million to 55 million acres.
So this is a fairly large bucket of the growth we are looking into soybeans.
The second element is related to our Xtend launch in the US, where based on the launch we had or the limited launch we had in 2015 or 2016, we feel very confident that we'll be able to reach the 15 million acres.
And the feedback we get from the field, the demand there is really very strong, so we feel very good about also those 15 million acres.
Then the third element of the growth is what we discussed earlier, which is basically the absence of some of the costs we saw ---+ the launch costs we saw in 2016.
And we were talking about $100 million there.
So these are the three key drivers of the growth in soybeans and that's why we are very confident that we're going to see this 20%-plus growth in our GP in soybeans.
The way we've been thinking of the guidance in general, and as every year, when we enter the year we've got a range of assumptions and currency is definitely one of the assumptions and definitely this is a sensitivity.
The way we are looking at South America currencies right now are ---+ especially the Brazilian real ---+ is fairly favorable.
But this is part of our range of guidance, so definitely this is an element that we've been considering.
So thanks very much for your questions this morning.
Let me just briefly summarize as we try to respect your time.
A big year ahead for Monsanto.
Our plan to return to EPS growth in 2017 is on solid ground and we are now eager, as a team, to get started.
Simply, if you look at the year ahead, we've two priorities: delivering on the operations and the key milestones for the year to deliver that growth, as well as executing on the necessary steps to close the deal with Bayer.
As the year progresses we will look forward to updating you as the process unfolds.
Thanks again for joining us on the call this morning.
All the very best.
