通用動力 (GD) 2016 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Q3 2016 General Dynamics earnings conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session.

(Operator Instructions)

As a reminder, today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Ms. Erin Linnihan, Staff Vice President of Investor Relations. Ma'am, you may begin

Thank you, Jessie, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to the General Dynamics third-quarter conference call.

As always, any forward-looking statements made today represent our estimates regarding the Company's outlook. These estimates are subject to some risks and uncertainties. Additional information regarding these factors is contained in the Company's 10-K and 10-Q filings.

With that, I would like to turn the call over to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Phebe Novakovic.

Thanks, Erin. Good morning, all.

As is apparent from our press release, we enjoyed another strong quarter. We reported EPS from continuing operations to $2.40(sic-see press release "$2.48") for fully-diluted share on revenue of $7.73 billion, and income from continuing operations of $767 million. This is $0.20 per share better than the year-ago quarter, and $0.10 per share better than consensus.

Against the year-ago quarter, revenue is down $263 million or 3.3%, operating earnings are up $35 million, a 3.4% increase, and income from continuing operations is up $34 million, a 4.6% increase. This quarter's operating earnings of $1.07 billion reflect a 13.8% operating margin, 90 basis points better than the third-quarter 2015. By the way, this is the eighth consecutive quarter that we've had both operating earnings and EBIT in excess of $1 billion.

Sequentially, revenue is up $66 million, almost 1%. Operating earnings are essentially flat, and operating margin is down 20 basis points. On a year-to-date basis, revenue is off $540 million, a 2.3% decrease.

However, operating margins are up 50 basis points, and earnings from continuing operations are up $54 million, a 2.5% increase. Once again reflecting our emphasis on continuous improvement in operations. Earnings per share from continuing operations are up $0.57 or 8.5% over last year.

I should point out that the entirety of the year-to-date revenue decrease is attributable to aerospace, as we forecasted in January. The defense businesses have actually shown some modest growth year to date.

With respect to cash, we had $389 million of free cash flow from operations in the quarter, that's 51% of net income from continuing operations. We have $1.1 billion year to date, 50% of net income from continuing operations.

In the quarter, we repurchased 2.3 million shares for $348 million, offset in part by the exercise of 1.5 million options. We have purchased approximately 11.2 million shares year to date for about $1.5 billion. This is consistent with our prior guidance that we would repurchase shares and pay dividends and amounts in somewhat in excess of this year's free cash flow, much as we did last year.

As a reminder, in 2015 we had free cash flow of $1.9 billion and spent $4.1 billion or share repurchases and dividends. This year, we have spent $2.2 billion on share repurchases and dividends year to date, compared to a free cash flow of $1.1 billion, a delta of $1.1 billion. We will continue to use our balance sheet prudently and appropriately for the rest of the year.

In short, we are honoring our word in these two years of low cash flow and using our balance sheet to offset lower cash. As you can see from the charts attached to our press release, our very healthy backlog is holding nicely. Once again, there was good contract activity in all segments, with particularly strong quarter intake at Gulfstream.

We ended the quarter with a total backlog for the Company of $62 billion, down modestly from the end of last quarter. Of that amount, $51.4 billion is funded.

Let me say a few words about each of our groups, let me start with aerospace. Aerospace had another very good quarter. Revenue is down $326 million or 13.9% compared to the third quarter of 2015, in line with the production cuts to the 450, 550, and to a lesser extent the 280 that we had previously discussed with you.

Also remember that Q3 2015 was the group's highest-ever revenue quarter. On the other hand, operating earnings increased $11 million or 2.6% to $437 million on an operating margin of 21.7%, a 350 basis-point improvement over the year-ago quarter. This is a real tribute to the operating efficiency of the Gulfstream and Jet Aviation teams.

By the way, this is the ninth consecutive quarter with operating earnings in excess of $400 million. And the highest ever margin for the group. On a sequential basis, the group experienced a $117 million reduction in revenue, 5.5%, but a $3 million improvement in operating earnings on a 140 basis point-improvement in margin.

On a year-to-date basis, revenue is down $571 million or 8.5%. Operating earnings are down $14 million or 1.1%. On a 160 basis-point improvement operating margin.

On this last quarter -- on the call last quarter, we advised that we were quite optimistic regarding order activity in the third quarter, our optimism was well founded. We had strong order intake in the quarter for the group. A 0.9 to 1 book-to-bill measuring in dollar value of orders.

Gulfstream alone was about 1 to 1 on a dollar-value basis and 1.2 to 1 on a number of unit basis. The distribution of these orders is also attractive with the G650 and G650ER leading the way. I can also tell you that our pipeline of prospects grew and our active sales discussions are quite good.

We are again reasonably optimistic about order intake in the fourth quarter and expect it to look much like the third quarter. By the way, this was the strongest discrete third quarter since 2011 for orders. Next, combat systems.

Combat had a very good quarter with revenue of $1.33 billion, operating earnings of $219 million and a really strong 16.5% operating margin. Compared to the third quarter of 2015, revenue is off $15 million, but earnings are up $1 million on a 30 basis-point improvement in margin. On a sequential basis, revenue is up $15 million and operating earnings are flat.

Year to date, revenue is down against 2015 by $198 million or 4.8%. Operating earnings are up $7 million or 1.1% on a 100 basis-point improvement in operating margin. Combat system remains on course for a very good year, and we fully anticipate that their fourth-quarter earnings will see a 30% increase in revenue.

All of our major programs are performing very well in combat. Our cost performance has improved our competitiveness, which positions us well for the future. We continue -- and through the rest of the year, by the way.

We continue to see opportunities for growth both internationally as allied nations continue to see increased emerging threats and domestically, as the US Army and Marine Corps begin to recapitalize their equipment. The Marine group reported revenue of $2.04 billion, a $44 million or 2.1% decrease, compared to the year-ago quarter, however, revenue is up sequentially by $56 million or 2.8%.

Year-to-date revenue has increased by $130 million or 2.2% to $6.2 billion. Operating earnings for the third quarter at $166 million are down by $15 million compared to last year's quarter. The group's operating margins were down 60 basis points in the quarter, as a result of a one-time charge at [bath] on their restart of the DDG 115 and 116 programs.

This charge flows through to the sequential and year-to-date comparisons as well. IS&T. IS&T continues to outperform somewhat our revenue expectations. Revenue of $2.34 billion is up $122 million or 5.5% against last year's quarter, and up $112 million sequentially, also a 5% increase.

Year-to-date revenue of $6.9 billion is up $99 million or 1.5% over the last year. Operating earnings of $256 million are up $37 million or 16.9% compared to the third quarter last year on the strength of a 100 basis-point improvement in operating margin. Sequentially, the story is much the same, operating earnings are up $12 million on a 10.9% operating margin in both quarters.

Year-to-date operating earnings are up $75 million an 11.1% increase on a 90 basis-point improvement in operating margin. This is a very good news story with both revenue and operating margins higher than expected. Really strong performance by IS&T.

So, what does all this mean as far as the year is concerned? Well, stronger-than-expected operating results in the quarter, a lower-than-planned tax rate and modestly lower share count enabled us to increase guidance for the year by $0.05. Our guidance for EPS from continuing operations goes from $9.70 to $9.75.

This late in the year, we anticipate our end-of-year guidance to be pretty close to actual performance. And finally, in closing, as tempting as it is this time of year for some of you to ask about the following year, let me just remind you that we have a planning process in the fall when the businesses get better insight into the upcoming year.

That guidance, which is we give to you in January is grounded in that process, and as a result is full and thorough. So, I don't want to prematurely piecemeal at this juncture. I would now like to turn the call over to our CFO, Jason Aiken.

Thank you, Phebe, and good morning. I'll be brief as I've got just a few things to cover before we start the Q&A period. First, some background on the charge in discontinued operations.

Back in 2013, we settled the 1991 litigation with the US Navy, related to the terminated A-12 aircraft contract in our former tactical military aircraft business, retiring in excess of $1 billion in potential risk to the Company. In connection with that settlement, we provided various forms of consideration to the Navy, including the release of some rights to the potential reimbursement of costs that affected all ships under contract at the time at our main shipyard.

As we've progressed through the shipbuilding process, we've determined that the cost associated with this settlement is greater than the parties anticipated. Therefore, we recognize an $84 million loss net of taxes to adjust the previously recognized settlement value. As we've discussed throughout this year, we are seeing an impact on our financial results from foreign exchange rate volatility.

It's still not material in the aggregate, but it continues to be a slight top line drag on some of our segments, particularly combat systems. As Phebe pointed out, the group's revenue declined by 1.1% when compared to the third quarter of 2015, but had foreign exchange rates, particularly the US dollar to the euro and the Canadian dollar help constant from 2015, the group's sales would have remained steady quarter over quarter.

Moving on to interest expense, the net expense in the quarter was $23 million, similar to the third quarter of 2015. For the full year, we expect net interest expense to be approximately $95 million. In July, we repaid $500 million of maturing debt with cash on hand, and subsequently issued $1 billion of new debt in the quarter.

Despite the net increase in long-term notes our net debt position remains unchanged from the end of the second quarter at approximately $1.6 billion. We finished the quarter with a cash balance of $2.3 billion after deploying over $550 million in share repurchases and dividends in the quarter. We funded our pension plans as expected in the quarter and continue to expect cash pension contributions for 2016 to approximate $200 million.

Our effective tax rate was 26.8% for the quarter, somewhat lower than we expected, as a result of tax benefits through employee stock option exercises and other true-ups associated with the filing of our tax returns. For the full year, we expect an effective tax rate in the high-28% range. Erin, that concludes my remarks, and I'll turn it back over to you for the Q&A.

Thanks, Jason. As a quick reminder, we ask participants to ask only one question so that everyone has a chance to participate. If you have additional questions, please get back into the queue. Chelsea, could you please remind participants how to enter the queue?

Certainly.

(Operator Instructions)

Ron Epstein, Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Good morning. So, Phebe, just a quick question.

I know you don't want to get into much detail on 2017, but if I just rewind a little bit, I think of the past you mentioned a goal, a longer-term goal of getting to double-digit earnings growth. If we think about the margin performance that the Company has done this year, how should we think -- is double-digit a reasonable starting place for 2017 when we think about where earnings could go?

So much for not getting into 2017. Look, we have, as a goal, double-digit growth, but it's too soon for me to tell how 2017 plays out. So, if you want to ask another question, go ahead.

Sure, so, thank you for that. So let's me just follow up on in the quarter you mentioned that sales at Gulfstream were good, and book to bills of 1 or over 1, depending on how you want to measure it.

Orders.

Can you give maybe a little more color on kind of regional distribution, and how 650 was doing? Because, as you know, there's been worry about sales of 650s, that kind of thing.

Yes, so, look, you asked about the regional distribution, and I think it's worth stepping back a moment and talking in the general and then in the specific, and let's start by talking about the market. And let me try to give you some insight into our market.

Let's start with, for example, the Honeywell study, which measures deliveries not orders. Deliveries in the business jet market are down, including somewhat at Gulfstream, right? For the good and valid reasons that we have discussed during our transition, discussed with you previously, during our transition from the 450 and 550 to 650 -- 550 and 600, 500 and 600.

Deliveries, however, are based on retrospective orders, so 12 to 24 months previously. And for Gulfstream, from an order perspective, we have seen and continue to see nice demand. So, it would appear that we have been taking share from others in our space, and as the 500 and 600 enter into service, we really anticipate that we'll continue to take share.

You know, I've been reluctant in the past year or so to get into share discussion, because we really are about, not about share but really about profit, but it would appear that we are indeed taking share. So, I think that understanding where we are positioned today, and how a position going forward will help you. It would also appear, specifically to your question, that we are far less dependent on the Brex countries, and on frankly, any one particular out region outside North America.

And our demand consequently has not been as per debaters stated as others seem to be, so to give you a sense of I think where we stand in the market and how we see it in general, let's dig down a little bit deeper into Gulfstream and let's think about this. So, from a Gulfstream perspective, again, as measured by our sales pipeline and order activity, with respect to demand, both are stable and sufficient to get us through to the new aircraft. You know, I mentioned that third-quarter orders are the strongest since five years, and interestingly, both our fourth-quarter activity today and the pipeline are good.

You know, if we think about Gulfstream more specifically, let me talk to you and just give you a little bit of color, without getting into guidance, this is just color in the most broad sense. The G500 will most certainly make a contribution in 2017, and a significant one in 2018. The amount of the 2017 contribution, of course, will be dependent on the timeliness of the certification.

The 600 should make a contribution in 2018, and a significant contribution in 2019, so why am I confident in talking to you all about this? I will tell you why. It's because the test program for both airplanes are going very well.

The G500 is doing well in tests, and should be certified and entered into service and 2017 as implied, but we just talked about. The 600 will fly this quarter and should be certified and enter into service and all on schedule with some forward bias. You know, thinking about, again, this broadly, our market in Gulfstream in particular, I've always been of the view that a new plane with 50 solid orders before the commencement of initial production has a good start.

Well, the 500 is going to exceed that number, which is quite good, especially when you consider their salesforce has been incentivized to focus on the 450 and 550, then I'll be incentivized to turn their attention toward the 500. So, with respect to used airplanes, some of you have been very concerned about that. Let me talk to you a little bit about where we are in the used market.

We see in the 650 market, I think they are about 19 to 20 airplanes that are up for sale, but as we deconstruct and analyze those potential aircraft, we see maybe 12 to 14 serious sellers, dedicated sellers, so that's well within the 10% of the 200 and some, 203, actually 650s that we have got into service, and we haven't seen any impact this quarter on our new order activity, of our order activity from the used market. And with respect to the 550, you know, the used market is about 7% of the 700 or so aircraft in service, and so we haven't been affected by that either. So, I know that that was rather a soliloquy, but I think it's an -- your question about the distribution of our market I think was particularly -- just gave me an opportunity to talk you guys a little bit more wholesomely about the market, so I hope that helps.

Yes, that does, thank you very much

David Strauss, UBS.

Thank you. Phebe, I guess following up on that, you've talked about Gulfstream EBIT holding flat through this transition period, is that still the official line given the pull forward on the -- it sounds like a bit of a pull forward on the 500 and 600, and with the 450 going out of production?

Well, you're quite right, we said we're going to try, we intended to keep earnings as flat as we could and margins as high as we could during this transition period, just to be a good cyclical, and frankly, so far, I think we've done a pretty good job. We will get into 2017 after we set our production rates and get a little more clarity into the market, but that still remains our goal to give you as high earnings that we possibly can and margins as high as we can.

Okay, quick followup. Marine, how much was the charge of Marine on the quarter.

It's not material.

All right, thank you.

I wanted to mention it to you so you just at least understood what was going on.

Thank you.

Cai von Rumohr, Cowen and Company.

Yes, thank you, Phebe, and congratulations. Terrific performance at Gulfstream.

Thanks, Cai.

Can you explain to me, I mean, for the deliveries that you made, which were pretty much in line where we were guessing, we had less profit by $30 million-plus. So, was it lower R&D, was it supplier payments, was it forfeitures, was its better margins, what got you to a number that strong, and is that likely to repeat in the fourth quarter?

Well, you know, we've talked before. Aerospace margins, and Gulfstream in particular, are variable quarter over quarter, but what you are seeing here, is a result of the Gulfstream team doing a superb job, taking [class] out as their revenue has declined, and they've done a very good job at that.

In the quarter, R&D was somewhat lower, we had some timing issues at jet aviation. I don't anticipate that performance going forward in margins, but they will continue to do quite well.

Okay, thank you very much.

Carter Copeland, Barclays.

Hey, good morning, Phebe and Jason. Just a quick one on how you think about the transition to the 500, 600 from a margin or a cost standpoint, I guess. Clearly, it's come out that you will end the 450 production in 2018, and you just made the comment about the contribution you expect from the 500 and 600 and how that layers in in 2017 and 2018.

But with those aircraft being produced in different facilities, how should we think about the ramp down on the 450, and then eventually the 550 and how that impacts the overall cost structure of the segment? Thanks.

Okay. You know, we've talked last year or so about how we are going to manage the transition as we wind down the 450 and 550, and then bring on the 500 and 600. And the key there is matching the ship set, the wings, the fuselage, the engines, with the number of airplanes that we have left to sell, or left to deliver.

And so far with the 150, for example, we got it spot on, we're on track to get that perfect correlation on the 450 and I expect the same thing on the 550, so I don't anticipate any decrease in margins as a result of our failure to make that transition really comfortable and profitable. That said -- think about it, any time you have a mix shift, which is what Gulfstream is going to have, you're going to have a mix shift as we go from older production, long-running lines, long historic learning curves as we enter and start to produce and deliver 500 and 600, but I will tell you if you look at the 650, by comparison, and let's just use that as our baseline, the 650 margin performance was faster and higher than the 550 before it. So, we've taken -- that means it's coming down its learning curve and we are seeing growth margin expansion earlier than we had ever before.

So, the lessons that we have learned on the 650 we are translating into how we go about the production on the 500 and 600, and that gives me an awful lot of confidence that this team is going to hit the ground running. We may have some margin compression as begin to deliver, we've come down those learning curves, but those -- our ability to come down those learning curves, as we've demonstrated, I believe it's going to go much, much faster.

And remember too, there's a fair amount of commonality between the 500 and 600, so I suspect that the ignition coming down, when we bring that 650 into full -- the 600 into full rate production, is going to be pretty impressive. But I tell you, I like where we are, I like where we are headed, we're moving through this transition period like I told you we were going to do, and we're in good shape for real revenue and earnings growth as we get these two new airplanes into service.

Great. Thanks, Phebe

Sam Pearlstein, Wells Fargo.

Good morning. I wanted to ask you about combat systems.

You made a comment about the sequential growth you're going to see in the fourth quarter, and just to get to your annual guidance, you do need something like a 35% sequential increase. So, can you talk a little bit about what drives that?

Sure. So, the fourth-quarter revenue increase is driven primarily by a couple of things.

The Canadian Mideast order and our AJAX program as they move from engineering and low-rate production in the third quarter into full-rate production in the fourth quarter, so you're going to see some real -- and by the way, we got this, combat has this analyzed and down to a fine level of detail, and we have that growth in our backlog, and we are positioned on both of those programs, so those are going to drive it primarily. But with [pull] also combat tends to have very robust revenue growth in the fourth quarter across the portfolio, and we'll continue to see that in OTS and ELS as well as land systems, so there isn't much ambiguity this late in the year with the group that really understands their products and how they're going to expand and begin to execute.

And if I can follow up a question, just in terms of the other Mideast Abrams order that Congress has been pushing back on, is there a certain timeframe when that has to come in until it starts to affect your production?

I'm not sure why you think they're pushing back on it. Frankly, they approved -- if you're talking about the 100 in September, they approved the 133 M1A2 battle tanks request, so, that's good to go.

Okay. Thank you.

Hunter Keay, Wolfe Research.

Hey, good morning, thank you. Phebe, I'm curious about that comment you made about the salesforce having their incentives change around the new programs flipping to the 500 and 600 from the 450, 550.

Can you help me understand a little bit how, first of all, when that happened, and how material of a change is this in their own lives? Is this like a significant driver of their compensation structure, or is this like a small thing in their bonus? I'm just kind of trying to think about --

Well, look, I'm not going to get into how we -- just to give you a sense, just in general. The case here is that salesforce is incentivized to sell whatever product we at the moment are focused on, and so their bonuses are a significant part of their compensation, and it's up to us to give them the direction of where we're going to have them focus. So, this has been a very effective salesforce, as I think you can see from our order activity.

Sure. Did this just change within the last few months or is this, has it been in there for six, nine months, something like that, or is it just like something has changed, effective at the end of the year?

Well, look, think about it, the 450, we've announced is we're going to -- that line is going to end, not surprisingly, right? Replacement aircraft by definition are going to replace airplanes that are, that we're winding down, and so, and the 550 has continued to have very nice order activity, so we're pretty confident that it's time now to move more robustly to the 500. And let me tell you, even incentivized as they were, as I mentioned in my remarks, they have -- we have sold quite a few, so we're in pretty good shape here.

Thanks a lot.

Howard Rubel, Jefferies.

Hello, Howard.

Hi, Phebe, I'm so inclined to ask a Gulfstream question, but you've answered all.

Go ahead

No, I won't do that. Instead, talk a little bit about information systems and technology, I mean, you've stated that there's been a change and it's sort of taking on a growth profile. Can you elaborate a little bit upon what some of the pillars are that are behind this, and how you'd like to shape it going forward?

All right. Let me kind of take that in two parts, and let's start with our book to bill, because I think that that reflects a lot of different moving parts. In the quarter, we had a book to bill of about 0.08 to 1, and that's solid for this short-cycle business.

And think about it in terms of the last eight quarters, or the last eight of the last 11 quarters for this group have had a 1 to 1 or greater book to bill, which is really quite exceptional in the short term. For short, these highly transactional businesses, so that gives us the platforms of some of those [ignition]. And in terms of where we are focused, on our platform side, we've got a number of growth opportunities across our platform portfolio in our ISR business and space payload market, cyber, payload, market cyber, nuclear weapons and avionics.

So, I like where they are there. On our IT side, we have had nice book to bills, and we have got a number of wins that we've had across the entirety of the portfolio, and I'll tell you, you remember, we also had the census in there, which will be a nice cost-plus award fee program for five years, and we like how that fits into our low-risk cash generating portfolio.

And then going forward, we've got an awful lot of competitions coming up, and we tend to announce those as we win them, or we put them into our backlogs. So, the diving board for that sort of -- for our growth is there in our backlog, and because these businesses have really reduced their cost and increased their competitiveness, their book to bill has been wholesome for quite some time now, and I expect it to be going forward.

And then, actually, I do want as a followup, you know, if you to the flight hours on the G500 you're clearly ahead of schedule. Can you provide us a little bit of an indication of when you think in the first half of 2017 you might get the cert?

I think first half is a touch ambition, but I'll be able to give you in January a lot more clarity, when we get the full certification timeline from the FAA. But I'm very confident we are going to start in 2017.

Thank you.

Doug Harned, Bernstein

Thank you, good morning. I wanted to ask on Marine, on the Ohio class replacement program, because the scale of that program is so large that one would expect it to transform electric boat in the next decade, and particularly if we see Virginia-class stay at two per year. So, when you look at it, can you talk about the general trajectory of revenues and earnings over the next five years as you move toward the first ship? Also, when investments might be needed to really settle electric boat up for the scale of operations that will ultimately be there?

All right. Let me give you a little bit, because this is such a big program, let me give you a little bit of detail on what's going on on the Ohio Replacement. You know, we have been in the -- we have had the design contract now for about five years, and we are proceeding nicely at pace.

As you know, we are the prime contractor for the design, but not the sole contractor, and the prime contractor for the construction. So, our schedule is right on point to start the conception and lead ship in 2021. And I would imagine, well, I expect, that our profile on revenue, between now and 2021 where we will really begin to see the real ignition, will be driven by a couple of things.

One, we'll continue to have further design work on the Ohio and which will begin to ramp down as we get closer and closer, but starting perhaps in 2019, I think we are anticipating 2019, we're likely to have -- see long lead production so we can actually actualize the ship production's construction in 2021. So, as you know, these submarine programs take, require a fair amount of long lead material. And we are doing shortages there on your construction schedule.

So, to give you a sense of where we are on the design, and the component development, where we have proposed a detailed design and actually all the component development design to the Navy earlier this summer. And they'd like to give us an award by the end of the year. And you know what, when you think about these large nationally-strategic programs, one of the most important things that we all get right is that the costs are well understood.

And so one of the things that we have been driving our work the last three years is a bottom-up analysis of the full cost of construction. So, that will be an important element as we work through those costs with the Navy. And once we get some clarity about the schedule and the pace, then we will be able to have more clarity about specifics on that production ramp, because it will all be very public and obvious.

But when you look at electric boat, though, this is, this will really change what the operations look like up there. How do you think about planning for that?

Well, look, I'm sorry you did ask that, my fault. We have begun making the investments over the last five years.

The investments have primarily been funded by the Navy, but we will also and have been putting some of our capital and will continue to, because, look, we invest in minds of business that have high return for us and good returns for us, and this is one of those lines of business. And it is transformative.

You put Ohio on top of Virginia and there's going to be quite a lot of workload, so we have spent the last five years both getting our facilities in place, our design tools are mature, the design to build tools are also very mature, and we need to work, we need to get our workforce, because we're going to have this increase in volume. We're going to bringing in a fair number of green labor.

We have a robust education program in the trade with Rhode Island and Connecticut, and that will provide us the foundation to really be able to start full-rate production on schedule on the Ohio Replacement and continue on Virginia-class. You know, shipbuilding, one of the competitive advantages in shipbuilding is that detail-planning is critical. And that's something that electric boat has excelled at for decades and has demonstrated yet again in the preparation for the Ohio, so we have detailed hiring plans, training plans, CapEx plans, and -- with the Navy, and, of course our design work that we also have lock step with the Navy on. So, this is all about preparing for success, and so far so good.

Okay, great, thanks.

Myles Walton, Deutsche Bank.

Thanks, good morning. First one is a clarification, Phebe.

I think you said that you were going to do repurchase and dividends slightly ahead of your free cash flow. I just want to clarify, maybe I misunderstood, previously it was the percent of the net income and you kind of make up the difference for repurchasing cash flow.

Myles, I think we have used a couple of different terms in the past, we've talked about normalizing versus the lower free cash flow in these couple of years. But I think the key point is we had had a tremendous amount of cash on the balance sheet coming into the past couple of years, a lot of that was timing for a number of things that we've talked about over the past several quarters, and at this point, the key is we're committed to using that balance sheet to again sort of normalizing that free cash flow at a lower level to return that capital

And, look, think about it this way, we have long been talking about these two years of fairly low cash flow. We need to normalize that cash flow and I've met it by a balance sheet, and we've done that. I think about it more like where are we in cash flow, where are we on the balance sheet, and what resources do we have to continue to go buy shares and other investments as needed?

And I think we've manage that pretty prudently. I think about it as where our cash flow is and where our cash deployment, where our cash flow is and what our balance sheet looks like. We've been pretty consistent.

Okay, and the conversion for 2016, you think you can still get close to the 2015 conversion level of 65%?

We'll have to see on that, but we've got plenty of powder in our balance sheet. So, I'll -- there's been no material change from the guidance that we gave you back in January about our cash flow.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Robert Spingarn, Credit Suisse.

Good morning, Phebe, Jason. Hi. On the cash flow, you've had this draw down on the advances in combat systems, on the large contracts you talked about before, the Middle East lab and the AJAX, and you've got the growth in Q4. But does that trend continue next year? Is there any concern that the Middle East customer might slow the intake of deliveries, especially as those cash advances get exhausted and just given lower, the potentially scarcer resources over there?

Well, let's talk about the Middle East for a moment in general. You know, and this particular customer, we have had a 50-year productive relationship with the Kingdom, and the vast preponderance of all of our combat programs are government to government and the contracts have been, products have been fully vetted and supported, and these are -- happen to be products that the customer wants and needs. So, we have seen no indication from the end user customer that there is concern on their part or an intent on their part to change the profile of our deliveries, and, look, we will -- we got these large advances and we've been working those down and then we'll continue to refresh cash flow as we --from these customers as we increase deliveries. And so far, we are in pretty good shape.

Okay, and if I could just ask one more, Phebe. Maybe for Jason, but followup to Doug's question. On this designed release on Columbia, on Ohio Replacement that's upcoming, could, if the timing is there, and the CR doesn't get in the way, could that be an inflow about $700 million-plus of design money to you by the end of the -- before the end of year or maybe early next year?

Look, you know, we will work with the Navy. I haven't planned on and haven't looked at the specific timing of the cash flow with respect to that order, or that contract, because we have the contract signed yet. So, as soon as we get that contract, we'll have real clarity about the timing quarter by quarter of when we can expect the cash associated with that, but there's no way to estimate at moment until that contract is signed.

The reason I ask is it sounds like DoD could be making some kind of decision in early November.

Well, they are, they are making their Milestone B decisions, which is predicated on that submission that we just made on the component, detail design and component design. So, you know, that is a trigger, but once that decision is made then you got a good contract, right?

Fair enough. Thank you

And, Chelsea, I think we have time for one more question.

Jason Gursky, Citi.

A good morning. Phebe, just a quick clarification, I want to make sure I heard you correctly. You said you have got 50 orders on the 500?

No, what I said was that it's been my experience that to have a successful launch of a new airplane, you need to have 50 orders before entry into service, and we're on our way to exceed that amount.

Okay, that's helpful.

Does that help?

Yes, it does, thank you very much. And then, looking out to 2018, you suggested that the 500 will contribute in that year and then meaningfully -- excuse me, in 2017, and meaningfully in 2018. You've also suggested in the past that you've got some delivery spots that are available on the 650 out there in the second quarter of 2018.

I was wondering if you could update us on that. What I'm trying to figure out here, is whether you're going to have enough in the orders on the 650 to hold production flat out there in 2018 or if the plan here is to begin taking production rates down on that and having any hold, from an EBIT perspective, that gets created by the 650 decline and then filled in by the 500? And that's kind of the key to the recipe of holding EBIT flat through these transitions.

Yes, look, what we said all along, is that wonderful word, supper. We'll feather an additional 650, but that production rate during the transition is not sustainable nor healthy, and we would never intend to keep that production rate up.

What we aim for is to keep our backlog on 650s on any of our programs, particularly that one, between 18 months and two years, and we are now at two years again. So, as we think about that, I mean, that order book is there for the -- we've got now two years next available, so that ought to give you a little bit of color on how we intend to think through as we set our deliveries and our delivery schedule.

But I have not set, and we have not set until later in late November or mid-November our production schedule for next year. So, on the fourth-quarter call, I will give you in copious detail what we plan on doing. Okay?

Okay, great, thanks.

Thank you for joining our call today. If you have additional questions, Erin can be reached at 703-876-3583. Have a great day

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This does conclude the program and you may all disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.