LABL
#Sorry, free cash flow we've been pretty consistent and we think it's going to be around the $60 million mark given that we do have a couple of years of slightly CapEx towards the higher end of our 5% range.
And the outlier was 2015 and we sort of tried to highlight that there were some timing benefits associated with the bond interest.
So 2015 is the outlier and $60 million is infinitely doable for us.
It will jump around quarter to quarter also based on the bond payments and interest payments which are twice per year.
But $60 million is what we have in our model.
Sure.
We are highlighting them.
People can model them as they wish but we highlight them.
The businesses we have could continue to infinity without those costs.
They are one-off related to those specific acquisitions.
In addition to that, they are a little bit higher this year because of the nature of two of the acquisitions that we did.
So the Southeast Asian acquisition was an on-market.
We bought a public company listed on the Malaysian exchange.
And there is a significantly ---+ which has five locations, so it's a very good transaction for us, gave us a very good footprint but certainly very complex vis-a-vis other acquisitions.
And so there was a lot higher cost in due diligence and also the acquisition process that we went through.
The second one was a larger acquisition or a medium-size acquisition, sorry, in Bordeaux France and again that was a very complicated process.
So typically the acquisition costs are not that high and I think that it helps investors by giving them that information, calling that out specifically.
And you can model that however you like but I think it is valuable and we've been asked to provide that information in the past.
So that's why we call it out and why it was so high this year.
Yes, we do.
The price was modestly positive net.
So as <UNK> said most of it is volume in the main but it really wasn't a big delta either way.
Sure.
It wasn't in the press release but <UNK> did comment on it.
So I'm sure he's happy to comment again.
It should be but it is a higher CapEx year.
So net-net I think that $60 million-plus is a good number.
That's a good question.
Our auditor is probably on the line sort of cringing right now.
But our account was officially signed on Tuesday but we fully expect to have remediated the material weakness in FY16.
On Tuesday.
There was a little bit of translation risk in terms of the Mexican peso and also the Aussie dollar.
But the translation risk in the quarter was still pretty modest at as you said 3% combined versus say 5% for the year.
So it's $0.01 in the quarter, the translation risk which is a combination of Aussie dollar and Mexican pesos.
Yes, it's all timing.
I mean the work is happening in relation to our end-of-year accounts right now.
So there are costs in April and May in relation to the finalizing the audit and all of those things that essentially will be booked in Q1 of FY17.
So there will be, it will be a little bit higher basically the run rate in Q1.
Not really.
No.
Sorry, I think the quantification is that we still feel pretty comfortable with the 9% SG&A for the year.
It will be a little bit lumpy in specific quarters.
If you think about the numbers for the quarter and the number for the year being roughly the same, so talk about the year specifically, we had a number of presses in jurisdictions that are difficult to hedge.
And so the majority of that primarily relates to CapEx payments.
So to the extent that we from time to time do have CapEx payments, equipment and purchases, in jurisdictions that are difficult to hedge there may be some exposure.
It's unusual then to have that occur when there is a movement in the currencies.
So Mexico and Argentina are examples of that and so we can't predict whether we will have those in the future.
We do our best to mitigate those, but from time to time they occur but it is pretty unusual for us.
Yes.
No, not in that.
In the low 3s.
