林德集團 (LIN) 2019 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Second Quarter 2019 Linde Earnings Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded.

各位女士、各位先生，大家好，歡迎參加林德（Linde）2019 年第二季財報電話會議。(接線員指示) 提醒各位，本次電話會議將被錄音。

I would now like to turn the conference over to your host, Juan Pelaez, Director of Investor Relations. You may begin.

現在我想把會議交給本次會議主持人——投資人關係總監 Juan Pelaez。您可以開始了。

Thank you, Nicole. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for attending our second quarter earnings call and webcast. This is Juan Pelaez, Head of Investor Relations, and I'm joined this morning by Steve Angel, Chief Executive Officer; and Matt White, Chief Financial Officer.

謝謝你，Nicole。各位早安，感謝各位參加我們第二季財報電話會議與網路直播。我是投資人關係主管 Juan Pelaez，今天早上與我一同出席的有執行長 Steve Angel，以及財務長 Matt White。

Today's presentation materials are available on our website at linde.com in the Investors section. Please read the forward-looking statement disclosure on Page 2 of the slides and note that it applies to all statements made during this teleconference. The reconciliations of the pro forma numbers are in the Appendix to this presentation. Steve and Matt will now give us an update on Linde. We will then be available to answer questions.

今天的簡報資料可於我們網站 linde.com 的「投資人」專區取得。請閱讀投影片第 2 頁的前瞻性陳述揭露，並注意其適用於本次電話會議期間所作的所有陳述。備考（pro forma）數字的調節表載於本簡報的附錄。接下來 Steve 與 Matt 將為我們更新林德的最新情況。之後我們將開放問答。

Let me turn the call over to Steve.

我把電話交給 Steve。

Thank you, Juan. This is our first full quarter operating as one company. As you can see, we posted strong financials and raised guidance again for the full year. I'll come back to our expectations for the second half later.

謝謝你，Juan。這是我們以單一公司運作的第一個完整季度。如各位所見，我們繳出強勁的財務表現，並再次上調全年財測指引。稍後我會再回到我們對下半年的展望。

The sale of gas backlog of $4.7 billion has increased considerably as a result of the ExxonMobil Singapore project added this quarter. The Linde Engineering third-party backlog also remained strong at $5 billion, bringing the total amount of project work to nearly $10 billion. We think a 50-50 relationship between sale of gas and third party is a nice balance. Our focus continues to be on sale of gas, but we certainly want to take advantage of all the good third-party business available to us. The sale of gas project proposal pipeline still has some momentum driven primarily by petrochemical activity in the U.S. but also in Asia.

受本季新增的埃克森美孚（ExxonMobil）新加坡專案帶動，售氣（sale of gas）在手訂單達 47 億美元，顯著增加。林德工程（Linde Engineering）的第三方在手訂單亦維持強勁，達 50 億美元，使專案工作總量接近 100 億美元。我們認為售氣與第三方各占 50% 的結構是很好的平衡。我們的重點仍在售氣，但也確實希望把握所有可得的優質第三方業務機會。售氣專案提案管線仍具一定動能，主要由美國石化活動帶動，同時亞洲也有貢獻。

Some milestones during the quarter. We deployed $1 billion to shareholders between dividends and share buybacks. We completed our squeeze out of the remaining shareholders of Linde AG. We closed on our South Korea divestiture and have reached agreement on one of the Indian divestitures. We now expect the value of our Asia divestitures to be in excess of $1.7 billion, which is higher than originally anticipated.

本季的一些里程碑：我們透過股利與庫藏股回購，合計向股東回饋 10 億美元。我們完成對林德股份公司（Linde AG）剩餘股東的強制收購（squeeze out）。我們完成南韓資產剝離交易交割，並就印度其中一項剝離交易達成協議。我們目前預期亞洲資產剝離的價值將超過 17 億美元，高於原先預期。

We are making good progress on our cost synergies and restructuring initiatives. As expected, the time line is more extended in regions like Europe, where we need to engage the works councils on our restructuring plans. Having said that, discussions continue to be constructive.

我們在成本綜效與重整措施方面進展良好。如預期，在歐洲等地區時程會較長，因為我們需要就重整計畫與工會／員工代表委員會（works councils）進行協商。儘管如此，相關討論仍持續且具建設性。

Integration is going well: The organization is set. Voluntary turnover remains at low levels. There is a high degree of energy and collaboration. The organization is adapting well to an accelerated, operating rhythm. We have early wins we can point to in practically every area. There is a strong pool for best practices, technology and client capabilities. In short, the organization is excited about the potential for our new company.

整合進展順利：組織架構已就位。自願離職率仍維持在低水準。團隊展現高度活力與協作。組織也能良好適應加速的營運節奏。幾乎在每個領域我們都能指出早期成果。我們擁有強大的最佳實務、技術與客戶能力資源庫。總之，組織對新公司的潛力感到振奮。

Regarding the macro going forward, I'm sure you're going to think I'm too cautious, too pessimistic. Maybe I am but this is a scenario that can easily play out. Let's start with Asia. Though a good result in Q2, I see more tepid volume growth going forward. China growth is slowing. The key PMI indicators are sliding. IP has been trending down, and key metrics, such as electricity consumed for industrial production was only 0.5% higher in May. And for the entire economy, electrical consumption was barely over 2%. China is slowing and so is the rest of Asia. The good news is project start-ups will provide some nice lift for us beginning next year.

談到未來的總體環境，我相信你們會覺得我太保守、太悲觀。也許是，但這確實是一個很可能發生的情境。先從亞洲談起。儘管第二季表現不錯，但我認為未來的量成長將更為溫和。中國成長正在放緩。關鍵 PMI 指標正在下滑。工業生產（IP）呈下降趨勢，而一些關鍵指標，例如工業生產用電量在 5 月僅年增 0.5%。就整體經濟而言，用電量年增也僅略高於 2%。中國在放緩，亞洲其他地區亦然。好消息是，專案啟動將自明年起為我們帶來不錯的提振。

Europe. I see weakness across the Eurozone. Industrial production for June was negative 1.3% year-over-year. The fact we serve diverse end markets mitigates against this impact, and we had a good self-help story. But the macro headwinds are clear.

歐洲方面。我看到整個歐元區普遍疲弱。6 月工業生產年減 1.3%。我們服務多元終端市場，有助於緩和影響，而且我們也有良好的自助改善（self-help）故事。但總體逆風相當明顯。

The Americas. Solid quarter in Q2 as pricing and merchant volume growth buoyed results. However, cylinder gases volumes, which primarily serve metal fabrication markets, flatlined in Q2 as hardgoods turned negative. However, pricing continues to be a good story here. After a sluggish start on the year due to a shortage of Venezuela crude, hydrogen volumes are improving as refiners take advantage of favorable margin spreads. Overall, we expect slowing growth with solid price attainment for the remainder of the year.

美洲方面。第二季表現穩健，定價與零售（merchant）銷量成長支撐了業績。然而，鋼瓶氣體（cylinder gases）銷量——主要服務金屬加工市場——在第二季持平，因耐久財（hardgoods）轉為負成長。不過，定價在此仍是亮點。由於委內瑞拉原油短缺導致年初表現疲弱之後，隨著煉油商把握有利的利差，氫氣銷量正在改善。整體而言，我們預期今年剩餘期間成長將放緩，但價格實現（price attainment）仍將穩健。

Obviously, if the underlying global economy does well, we will do well. If it falters, we still have a resilient business model and a strong self-help story to sustain performance. My priorities going forward: best-in-class safety, compliance, sustainability and diversity, driving a successful integration and building a high-performance culture, synergy attainment, cost, CapEx and growth, and implementing best-in-class price management systems and a robust productivity initiative.

顯然，若全球經濟基本面表現良好，我們也會表現良好。若經濟走弱，我們仍有具韌性的商業模式，以及強勁的自助改善（self-help）故事來支撐績效。我接下來的優先事項包括：世界級的安全、法遵、永續與多元；推動成功整合並建立高績效文化；達成綜效；成本、資本支出（CapEx）與成長；以及導入世界級的價格管理系統與強健的生產力提升計畫。

And now I will turn it over to Matt.

接下來我把電話交給 Matt。

Thanks, Steve, and good morning, everyone. Slide 3 provides the second quarter adjusted pro forma results. As a reminder, these figures are modified from U.S. GAAP in 2 ways: First, they are pro forma, which means periods are restated to assume an effective merger date of January 1, 2018, including removal of the regulatory mandated divestitures. Second, figures have been adjusted to exclude items not indicative of ongoing business trends, which primarily relate to purchase price accounting and merger and restructuring-related costs. We believe this format best represents the underlying trends and performance of the combined business. Sales of $7.2 billion are flat with prior year but up 4% sequentially from the first quarter. Unfavorable foreign currency translation reduced sales by 4% from 2018 and 1% from the first quarter. While the U.S. dollar has strengthened to almost every global currency, the major contributors are the Chinese RMB, euro, British pound and Australian dollar. Excluding foreign currency, underlying sales increased 4% from the prior year and 5% from Q1.

謝謝你，Steve，各位早安。投影片第 3 頁提供第二季調整後的備考（pro forma）結果。提醒各位，這些數字相較於美國一般公認會計原則（U.S. GAAP）有兩點調整：第一，它們是備考數字，意即將各期間重述為假設合併生效日為 2018 年 1 月 1 日，並包含剔除監管機關要求的資產剝離影響。第二，數字已調整以排除不代表持續性業務趨勢的項目，主要與收購價格分攤（purchase price accounting）以及合併與重整相關成本有關。我們相信此呈現方式最能反映合併後業務的基本趨勢與表現。銷售額 72 億美元，與去年同期持平，但較第一季季增 4%。不利的外幣換算使銷售額較 2018 年減少 4%，較第一季減少 1%。雖然美元兌幾乎所有全球貨幣都走強，主要影響來源為人民幣、歐元、英鎊與澳幣。若排除外幣因素，基本銷售額較去年同期增加 4%，較第一季增加 5%。

Versus the prior year, we continue to see positive pricing, which is in line with globally weighted inflation of 2.5%. Volumes are also up 2% as project contributions and growth in Asia and U.S. are partially offset by softer conditions across EMEA and South Pacific. Sequentially, volumes are up 4%, primarily due to seasonal effects and higher project billings in engineering. And price increased 1%. As Steve mentioned, price management continues to be an area of intense focus throughout the organization.

相較於前一年，我們持續看到正向的定價表現，與全球加權通膨率 2.5% 一致。銷量亦成長 2%，其中專案貢獻以及亞洲與美國的成長，部分被 EMEA 與南太平洋地區較疲弱的市況所抵銷。就季比而言，銷量成長 4%，主要來自季節性因素以及工程業務較高的專案開立帳單。而價格上升 1%。如 Steve 所提到，價格管理仍是全組織高度聚焦的重點領域。

Operating profit of $1.3 billion improved 6% over prior year and 8% from Q1, and when excluding FX, up 10% and 9%, respectively. Operating margin expanded to 18.4% versus 17.4% in 2018 and 17.7% in the first quarter. Sequentially, we expanded operating margin by 70 basis points as we made good progress toward achieving the stated cost synergies. At this point, we are on track to reach the full annual run rate of $300 million by the end of this quarter, consistent with our merger commitment.

營業利益 13 億美元，較前一年提升 6%，較第一季提升 8%；若排除匯率影響，則分別成長 10% 與 9%。營業利益率擴張至 18.4%，相較 2018 年的 17.4% 與第一季的 17.7%。就季比而言，隨著我們在達成所述成本綜效方面取得良好進展，營業利益率提升 70 個基點。目前我們正按計畫在本季末達成全年 3 億美元的完整年度化運行率，符合我們對合併的承諾。

Aside from the cost synergies, initiatives continue toward identifying and executing further value-creating opportunities in revenue and cost efficiencies. EPS of $1.83 improved 12% from last year or 16% when excluding impacts from foreign currency. The leverage improvement over operating margin is primarily due to lower interest expense, lower tax rate and less shares outstanding. I anticipate net interest to steadily increase each quarter as we deploy the divestiture proceeds and, thus, increase our debt levels. However, effective tax rate should remain around 24% for the full year and share count should steadily decline with the repurchase program activity.

除成本綜效外，我們也持續推動各項計畫，以辨識並執行更多在營收與成本效率方面創造價值的機會。每股盈餘（EPS）為 1.83 美元，較去年提升 12%；若排除外幣影響，則提升 16%。營業利益率帶動的槓桿改善，主要來自利息費用降低、稅率降低以及流通在外股數減少。我預期隨著我們運用出售資產所得款項、因而提高負債水準，淨利息費用將在每一季穩步上升。不過，全年有效稅率應可維持在約 24%，而在庫藏股回購計畫的推動下，股數也應會持續下降。

When comparing to the first quarter, you can see that net income growth of 8% is consistent with the operating profit growth, as interest and tax levels were stable with a moderate decline in share count. Note that EBITDA sequential growth of 3% is slightly less as we further align the presentation format, resulting in a minor reclass between cost lines with no effect to operating profit.

與第一季相比，可以看到淨利成長 8% 與營業利益成長一致，因利息與稅負水準穩定，且股數小幅下降。請注意，EBITDA 季比成長 3% 略低，係因我們進一步調整呈現格式，導致成本科目間有小幅重分類，但對營業利益沒有影響。

On top of delivering solid financial results this quarter, the Linde team secured additional future growth by expanding the sale of gas project backlog to $4.7 billion. As a reminder, this backlog represents estimated CapEx spend for customer projects under construction and secured by long-term contracts that lead to incremental sales and earnings growth. The increase from last quarter is due to the inclusion of a recently signed contract in Singapore, partially offset by smaller start-ups in Asia Pacific.

除本季交出穩健的財務成果外，林德團隊也透過將售氣專案在手訂單（backlog）擴大至 47 億美元，鎖定更多未來成長。提醒一下，該在手訂單代表已簽訂長期合約、正在建造中的客戶專案之預估資本支出（CapEx），並將帶來增量銷售與獲利成長。較上季增加主要是納入近期於新加坡簽署的合約，但部分被亞太地區較小規模的投產專案所抵銷。

In this quarter, we are also introducing a CapEx break down and return on capital metric. We intend to report these prospectively, so investors gain a better understanding of capital deployment and returns, 2 very critical metrics for this industry. The capital investments are broken into 2 categories: project CapEx, which represents spending for the sale of gas project backlog; and base CapEx, which represents everything else, such as replacement, maintenance, cost reduction or smaller growth CapEx that does not qualify for the project backlog. It's important to differentiate between these 2 categories since project CapEx is lumpy, with a high degree of certainty in returns, more akin to acquisitions; whereas base CapEx defines traditional uses, such as asset replacement and organic growth. Sequentially, you can see that project CapEx is up 21%, primarily from project timing and a rising backlog. Note that the $200 million CapEx synergy target will be achieved through better base CapEx efficiency and asset utilization and improved procurement for all capital spending.

本季我們也導入資本支出（CapEx）拆分與資本報酬率指標。我們計畫以未來期間為主進行揭露，讓投資人更了解資本配置與報酬這兩項對本產業至關重要的指標。資本投資分為兩類：專案 CapEx，代表用於售氣專案在手訂單的支出；以及基礎 CapEx，代表其他所有支出，例如汰換、維護、降本，或不符合納入專案在手訂單的小型成長 CapEx。區分這兩類很重要，因為專案 CapEx 具波動性，但報酬確定性高，更類似併購；而基礎 CapEx 則屬傳統用途，例如資產汰換與有機成長。就季比而言，可見專案 CapEx 成長 21%，主要來自專案時點以及在手訂單增加。請注意，2 億美元的 CapEx 綜效目標將透過提升基礎 CapEx 效率與資產利用率，以及改善所有資本支出的採購來達成。

The return on capital metric represents a rolling average of after-tax profit divided by a capital base represented as net debt plus equity. The full reconciliation can be found in the appendix. Note that the initial 10.4% figure is fairly consistent with the average of the 2 predecessor companies prior to the merger.

資本報酬率指標為：稅後利潤的滾動平均，除以以淨負債加上股東權益所代表的資本基礎。完整調節表可見於附錄。請注意，初始的 10.4% 數值與兩家前身公司在合併前的平均水準相當一致。

Second quarter ROC of 10.6% is up 20 basis points in the first quarter, primarily due to higher profit on a stable capital base. Net debt of $11 billion increased about $3 billion from last quarter as expected, primarily due to the $3.2 billion squeeze-out payment. Net debt should continue to rise over the next several quarters as we recapitalize the balance sheet to meet our single A target credit rating.

第二季資本報酬率（ROC）為 10.6%，較第一季上升 20 個基點，主要因在資本基礎穩定下獲利提高。淨負債 110 億美元，較上季如預期增加約 30 億美元，主要因 32 億美元的強制收購（squeeze-out）付款。未來幾季淨負債仍將持續上升，因我們將對資產負債表進行再資本化，以符合我們單 A 目標信用評等。

Please turn to Slide 4 for an update on the full year guidance. Full year 2019 EPS estimate is in the range of $6.95 to $7.18, an increase of 12% to 16% from prior year or 15% to 19% when excluding 3% currency headwind. This range is 3% higher than last quarter due to faster synergy achievement in Q2 and more confidence in our self-help actions looking forward. However, we still anticipate softer volumes in the second half of the year as we are seeing more planned customer outages with demand softening in certain end markets, such as manufacturing. Furthermore, global industrial production levels are leveling out or declining across most countries,which could have negative effects on packaged and merchant volumes. Of course, this is just an assumption at this time, and actual conditions will likely vary. Rest assured, if conditions are better than anticipated, we will not miss any volume growth opportunities, given our breadth of coverage and contractual nature of this business. Also note that while we aren't providing quarterly guidance at this time, I would anticipate Q4 EPS to be slightly better than Q3, given synergy timing.

請翻到投影片 4，了解全年指引更新。2019 全年 EPS 預估區間為 6.95 至 7.18 美元，較前一年增加 12% 至 16%；若排除 3% 的匯率逆風，則增加 15% 至 19%。此區間較上季提高 3%，原因是第二季綜效達成速度更快，且我們對未來自助改善（self-help）措施更具信心。然而，我們仍預期下半年銷量較疲弱，因我們看到更多客戶計畫性停機，且部分終端市場（如製造業）需求轉弱。此外，多數國家的全球工業生產水準正趨於持平或下滑，可能對瓶裝與商用（merchant）銷量造成負面影響。當然，這目前僅為假設，實際情況可能有所不同。請放心，若市況優於預期，憑藉我們廣泛的覆蓋範圍與此業務的合約性質，我們不會錯失任何銷量成長機會。另請注意，雖然我們目前不提供季度指引，但基於綜效時點，我預期第四季 EPS 會略優於第三季。

In summary, if current volume levels remain stable or slightly improve, we would anticipate reaching the upper end or possibly above this guidance range. However, given the current economic environment, we believe it is prudent to remain cautious and manage the business accordingly. Despite these economic uncertainties, we have a unique foundation of synergy and efficiency opportunities, coupled with a secured, industry-leading project backlog to improve the business performance and quality.

總結而言，若目前銷量水準維持穩定或略有改善，我們預期可達成此指引區間的上緣，甚至可能高於上緣。然而，鑑於當前經濟環境，我們認為保持審慎並據此管理業務是較為穩健的作法。儘管存在這些經濟不確定性，我們仍擁有獨特的綜效與效率提升機會，再加上已鎖定、業界領先的專案在手訂單，可用以提升營運表現與品質。

I'd now like to turn the call over to Q&A.

接下來我想把電話會議交給問答環節。

(Operator Instructions) And our first question comes from Nicola Tang from Exane BNP Paribas.

(接線員指示) 我們的第一個問題來自 Exane BNP Paribas 的 Nicola Tang。

The first was on pricing. Obviously, this has been a key focus for you since closing the merger. I was wondering whether you have now managed to fully offset inflation with those price increases, which I think in your prepared remarks, you might have said that you have. And then also how should we think about pricing going forward in a more potentially volatile volume environment?

第一個問題是關於定價。顯然，自合併完成以來，這一直是你們的重點。我想請問，你們是否已透過這些漲價完全抵銷通膨？我想在你們事先準備的講稿中，你們可能有提到已經做到了。另外，在未來銷量環境可能更為波動的情況下，我們應該如何看待後續的定價？

And then the second question was on cash flow. I was wondering whether you could talk a little bit about the moving parts on the operating cash flow because it looks like the conversion worsened a little bit quarter-on-quarter, and I was wondering if you could explain what's driving that and also call off -- call out any one-offs or anything related to restructuring and other. And also remind us of phasing of other sort of exceptional items on cash flow this year.

第二個問題是關於現金流。我想請你們談談營運現金流的變動因素，因為看起來轉換率（conversion）在季比上稍微變差；想請你們說明背後的驅動因素，並指出是否有任何一次性因素，或與重整及其他項目相關的影響。也請提醒我們，今年現金流中其他各類特殊項目的時程分布（phasing）。

All right, so this is Steve. I'm going to take the pricing question, then I'm going to flip it over to Matt to answer the cash flow question. So regarding does pricing equal inflation, I would say in certain parts of the world, the answer is yes. You can see we averaged 2%. Up all, all in the Americas was 3%. We had certain businesses higher than that. And if you go around the world, there's kind of plus/minus around that number. I would say we still have some work to do in terms of making sure that all of our pricing actions at least offset the cost inflation that we've been seeing and will see going forward.

好的，所以我是Steve。我先回答定價的問題，然後再交給Matt回答現金流的問題。關於定價是否等同於通膨，我會說在世界某些地區，答案是肯定的。你可以看到我們平均是2%。整體而言，美洲地區是3%。我們有某些業務高於這個水準。而如果你放眼全球，大致上會在這個數字上下浮動。我會說，我們仍有一些工作要做，以確保我們所有的定價行動至少能抵銷我們已經看到、且未來仍將持續看到的成本通膨。

So that work is not done. I said in my comments, it was one of my key priorities going forward to have a best-in-class price management system. That entails much more than just a price versus a cost inflation number. It's how you manage pricing, contracts, product management, all of that. Matt?

所以這項工作還沒有完成。我在我的評論中提到，未來我的一個關鍵優先事項，是建立同級最佳的價格管理系統。這不僅僅是價格相對於成本通膨的一個數字而已。而是你如何管理定價、合約、產品管理等等。Matt？

Yes. Thanks, Steve. And just to add one thing to Steve's, Nicola, that while we showed 2%, that was a fairly strong 2%. It just happened the way the rounding and footing work that shows us 2%, so as per the comments, that's pretty much right in line with the 2.5% globally weighted inflation.

是的。謝謝你，Steve。另外補充一點給Steve的說法，Nicola，雖然我們呈現的是2%，但那其實是相當強勁的2%。只是因為四捨五入與加總的方式，顯示為2%；因此如同評論所說，這基本上與全球加權2.5%的通膨相當一致。

Regarding the cash flow, I think as you may have alluded to, I think the best way to probably look at this is what is the conversion rate of our adjusted EBITDA to operating cash flow. And we talked a little bit about this in the first quarter as well. And I'll talk to the operating cash flow on a half basis, first half because as you can imagine, there's some parts that move between quarters. So when you look at historically the last 5 years of both predecessor companies, the first half of the year, you tended to see operating cash flow as a percentage of EBITDA at around 70%, 7-0. For the full year, that number was closer to maybe 77%. So as you could imagine, the back half is usually stronger, almost the mid-80s, and the front half is usually around 70%. So I think that's the benchmark we want to look at from a cash conversion ratio, if you want to refer to it that way.

關於現金流，我想如你可能提到的，最好的看法大概是看我們調整後EBITDA轉換為營運現金流的轉換率。我們在第一季也稍微談過這點。我會以半年為基礎來談營運現金流，也就是上半年，因為如你所想，有些項目會在季度之間移動。所以當你回顧過去5年兩家前身公司的歷史，上半年營運現金流占EBITDA的比例通常約為70%，也就是7-0。全年來看，這個數字更接近大約77%。因此你可以想像，下半年通常更強，接近80%中段，而上半年通常約70%。所以我認為，若你要用現金轉換比率來稱呼，這就是我們想要參考的基準。

So looking at our particular numbers, as you know, our adjusted EBITDA for the first half is about $4 billion, and our current operating cash flow year-to-date is about $2.1 billion. So applying that 70%, that would mean we're looking for more like $2.8 billion versus the $2.1 billion, so about $0.7 billion short of where we'd want to be.

那麼看我們自身的數字，如你所知，我們上半年的調整後EBITDA約為40億美元，而我們年初至今的營運現金流約為21億美元。因此套用70%的比例，代表我們應該更接近28億美元，而不是21億美元，也就是比我們希望達到的水準少了約7億美元。

So why are we, right? I think that's the question. One half billion or $0.5 billion is all these one-off merger costs. We've got almost $400 million related to either taxes on gains, costs to do the divestitures, merger cash costs that carried over and some change in control costs that triggered acceleration of retirement benefits. There's another $100 million of restructuring severance related. So those $0.5 billion are really one-off in nature, and that's something that will subside here in the next couple of quarters, especially the merger related, and we'll have a little bit more restructuring in the next probably 18 to 24 months.

那麼為什麼會這樣，對吧？我想這就是問題所在。其中一半，也就是5億美元或0.5 billion，是各種一次性的併購成本。我們有將近4億美元與利得稅、處分資產的成本、延續下來的併購現金成本，以及因控制權變更而觸發退休福利加速的相關成本有關。另外還有1億美元與重組遣散費相關。所以這5億美元本質上確實是一次性的，接下來幾個季度會逐步消退，尤其是併購相關部分；而重組方面，我們在接下來大概18到24個月可能還會有一些。

There's about $100 million what's called contract liabilities, and what that really relates to is last year, our engineering business had significant prepayments from their customer base, which is a good thing. That's them managing the working capital quite well, but we've lapped that. Now they are executing and building some of those projects so that's about $100 million of some unfavorable timing, but that is the nature an EPC-type business.

大約還有1億美元是所謂的合約負債，而這實際上是指去年我們的工程業務從客戶群收到了大量預付款，這是好事。那代表他們在營運資金管理上做得很好，但我們已經跨過了那個基期。現在他們正在執行並建造其中一些專案，所以大約有1億美元屬於一些不利的時點因素，但這就是EPC類型業務的特性。

And the remaining $100 million is some working capital that, frankly, we got to get after. That's something we've got to do better on. We've got a lot of initiatives internally. We're working towards that. So that last $100 million is something that I'm personally focused on, Steve's focused on to kind of get back to the right levels. But I fully expect the second half numbers to start stepping up, especially as we lap a lot of these merger cash payments. And at this point, I see no reason why we're not going to demonstrate the legacy company average of the cash conversion rate from OCF to adjusted EBITDA.

剩下的1億美元是一些營運資金，坦白說，我們必須積極改善。這是我們必須做得更好的地方。我們內部有很多項目在推動。我們正朝那個方向努力。所以最後這1億美元是我個人關注的重點，也是Steve關注的重點，目標是回到正確的水準。但我完全預期下半年的數字會開始上升，尤其是當我們跨過許多這些併購現金支付的基期之後。而就目前而言，我看不出任何理由，會讓我們無法展現傳統公司在營運現金流（OCF）相對於調整後EBITDA的現金轉換率平均水準。

And our next question comes from Duffy Fischer from Barclays.

下一個問題來自Barclays的Duffy Fischer。

Congrats on a good quarter. First question is just can you talk about with more focus on the backlog now as we get into 2020. How does that compare with the start-ups coming out of the backlog, 2020 versus 2019?

恭喜你們交出一個不錯的季度。第一個問題是，隨著我們進入2020年，能否更聚焦談談目前的在手訂單（backlog）。相較於從在手訂單中啟動的專案，2020年相對2019年是怎麼樣的比較？

So Duffy, we have said that this was going to be a fairly tepid year in terms of contributions from large project start-ups, something on order of probably 1%, and I'm going to say 1% sales and EPS. Going forward, certainly the timing of start-ups says we're going to have a stronger 2020 over 2019, so here again, regardless of the macro environment, we do have a stronger backlog contribution in 2020. I would -- I'm looking at something more like a 2% contribution over '19 top and bottom. And then based on the strength of what we have going forward, I'd say probably, through a 2023 kind of time frame because I'm looking at a very big project start-up there, I would look for 2% kind of as an average annual growth rate, top and bottom, going forward. I think that's certainly in the cards. And again, that's compared to 1% this year.

Duffy，我們之前說過，就大型專案啟動對業績的貢獻而言，今年會是相當溫和的一年，大概在1%左右，我指的是銷售與EPS大約1%。往前看，啟動時點顯示2020年會比2019年更強，因此在這裡同樣地，不論總體環境如何，2020年我們確實會有更強的在手訂單貢獻。我會說——我看到的是相較於'19年，上下游（營收與獲利）更像是2%的貢獻。然後基於我們未來在手訂單的強度，我會說大概到2023年這樣的時間範圍，因為我看到那時會有一個非常大的專案啟動，我會把2%視為未來上下游的平均年成長率。我認為這絕對是有機會的。而且再次強調，這是相較於今年的1%。

So if you think about kind of the sales algorithm going forward, we have the macro, the underlying macro very much driven by industrial production. I think that is kind of a more of a questionable number by the day. But on top of that, we expect price management contributions. On top of that, we expect backlog contributions. And at some point, we're going to start to see more noticeable effects from growth synergies. So that's the way we look at it.

所以如果你思考未來的銷售演算法，我們有總體因素，而底層的總體動能很大程度由工業生產所驅動。我認為這個數字每天都變得更不確定。但在此之上，我們預期會有價格管理的貢獻。再往上，我們預期會有在手訂單的貢獻。而在某個時間點，我們將開始看到成長協同效應更明顯的影響。這就是我們看待它的方式。

Terrific. And then one, a little bit more specific. On your hydrogen business, do you see a meaningful impact from IMO 2020?

太好了。接著有一個更具體的問題。關於你們的氫能業務，你們是否看到 IMO 2020 帶來顯著影響？

I would say meaningful in the sense that the Singapore ExxonMobil project in part is predicated based on IMO 2020. Again, where they are positioned in Singapore, marine fuels is a very important end product for them. So I would say that was certainly driven in part by IMO 2020.

我會說有顯著影響，因為新加坡的埃克森美孚專案在某種程度上是以 IMO 2020 為前提所推動的。再者，他們在新加坡的布局中，船用燃料是非常重要的終端產品。所以我會說，這確實在一定程度上是由 IMO 2020 所驅動的。

But aside from that, I've looked at this before, we may have a few projects over a number years, principally in Southeast Asia. But in terms of what we see refiners do to get prepared for this, it looks to me like it's more a case of they have coker capacity or they're adding coker capacity. They're very comfortable operating cokers. They've been doing this for many, many years quite well. Some of them are looking towards more sweet crude feedstocks. Some of them aren't going to do anything. They're going to wait and see how it all plays out, so that's how I'd answer that.

但除此之外，我之前也看過這個議題，我們可能在未來數年會有少數專案，主要在東南亞。不過就我們看到煉油商為此做準備的方式而言，在我看來更像是他們本來就有延遲焦化（coker）產能，或正在新增延遲焦化產能。他們對於操作焦化裝置非常熟悉。他們多年來一直做得很好。其中一些正轉向使用更多低硫原油（sweet crude）作為進料。也有一些不打算做任何事。他們會先觀望事情如何發展，所以我會這樣回答。

And our next question comes from Mike Sison from KeyBanc.

下一個問題來自 KeyBanc 的 Mike Sison。

Stephen, in terms of your outlook, given some of the cautiousness you outlined for the regions, you did 3% volume growth in the first, 2% in the third. Are you kind of seeing 1% to 2% as we enter the second half? Or maybe just give us your thoughts on what volume growth you need to get to the low end as well of your range for this year.

Stephen，就你的展望而言，考量到你對各地區所提到的一些審慎態度，你們第一季做到了 3% 的量成長、第三季 2%。進入下半年時，你們是否大致看到 1% 到 2%？或者請談談，要達到你們今年指引區間的低端，你們需要多少的量成長？

We're actually seeing slower growth coming off of Q2. So you can say at best flat, but we're certainly cautious, as you can tell in my comments. But if you were to look at what would it take to be at the bottom end of the range and of course, you've got to be careful here because I don't know what currencies are going to do. So you have to take that out of the equation. The rest of that is much more controllable. But you would have to be -- I would say we would have to be in the negative, mid-single-digit range to really find ourselves at the bottom end of the range. It's possible. Certainly, things are -- when you woke up this morning, you probably weren't as optimistic as you were last week. But that's kind of the expectations. It's, I'd say at best flat and then certainly on the bottom end of the range, kind of a minus mid-single-digit volume growth rate.

我們其實看到從第二季之後成長放緩。所以你可以說頂多持平，但如你從我的評論中可看出，我們確實很審慎。但如果你要看，落在區間底端需要什麼條件，當然你得小心，因為我不知道匯率會怎麼走。所以你必須把匯率因素排除在外。其餘部分就更可控。但我們必須——我會說我們必須落在負的中個位數區間，才會真的落到區間底端。這是有可能的。當然，情勢是——你今天早上醒來，可能不像上週那麼樂觀。但這大概就是預期。我會說頂多持平；而若在區間底端，則大概是量成長率為負的中個位數。

Okay. And then just in terms of the synergy, you talked about the time lines in Europe a little bit extended, but you've got a lot of early wins or so I guess in a lot of areas. Can you maybe highlight a couple of areas that could do better this year that gives you confidence in the second half?

好的。另外就協同效益而言，你提到歐洲的時程稍微拉長，但你們在很多領域似乎都有不少早期成果。你能否點出幾個今年可能表現更好、讓你對下半年有信心的領域？

Well, I would say when you look at the whole synergy plan as we've been implementing it, certainly in places like Asia, we got off the mark very quickly. Momentum is still building. I think in Americas, we got off the mark pretty quickly. You look at a place like South America, they integrated very quickly. And in the U.S., we've been working, I think, at a satisfactory pace in terms of addressing actions that we knew we could take.

我會說，當你看我們在推動整體協同計畫的執行情況時，像在亞洲，我們確實很快就起步。動能仍在累積。我認為在美洲，我們也很快就起步。你看像南美，他們整合得非常快。而在美國，就我們已知可以採取的行動而言，我認為我們一直以令人滿意的速度在推進。

Europe takes a little bit longer. We knew this coming in. We need to have -- go through the works council process. It's a very detailed process, but I think it's very constructive. We're already taking initial steps with them. We've had a couple of meetings. It's moving forward. I don't have any concerns regarding our ability to do what we need to do, but we certainly need to work through the process and respect the process. And I think that's important, and that's what we're doing. We do have a strong team on the ground in Europe, and I'm confident that as we go forward, we're going to see the synergy attainment. I'm also -- feel confident that we're going to see other areas of the business perform better as well, including price management and including productivity initiatives.

歐洲會花比較長的時間。我們在進來之前就知道這點。我們需要——走完工會／員工代表委員會（works council）的程序。這是一個非常細緻的流程，但我認為也非常具建設性。我們已經和他們採取初步步驟。我們開過幾次會。事情正在往前推進。我對我們完成所需事項的能力沒有任何疑慮，但我們確實需要走完流程並尊重流程。我認為這很重要，而這正是我們在做的。我們在歐洲有一支很強的在地團隊，我有信心隨著我們往前推進，會看到協同效益的達成。我也——有信心會看到業務的其他領域表現更好，包括價格管理以及生產力提升計畫。

And our next question comes from Ben Gorman from UBS.

下一個問題來自瑞銀（UBS）的 Ben Gorman。

Just 2 quick ones for me, if that's okay. First of all, in terms of price competitiveness in the industry, I was just wondering whether you could comment on whether it's changed at all, particularly with the mid-tier peers, post the closure of the merger. And then secondly, just on the exit rate in terms of volumes. I know you gave a little bit of color a minute ago, but any indication as to whether the 2% was a strong or sort of weaker 2%. And maybe particularly in Europe, the areas leading that slight decline that you've seen.

我這邊兩個很快的問題，如果可以的話。首先，就產業的價格競爭力而言，我想請你評論一下，在併購完成後，特別是與中型同業相比，是否有任何變化？第二個是關於出場（exit）時的量的速度（exit rate）。我知道你剛才稍微提到一些，但能否說明那個 2% 是偏強的 2% 還是偏弱的 2%？也許特別是在歐洲，是哪些領域導致你們看到的那個小幅下滑？

Well, I would say with respect to competitiveness, there are strong competitors around the globe. And Europe has strong competitors, China certainly has very strong competitors. We have very strong competitors in the U.S., other parts of the world. So with respect to bidding and winning on new projects and things like that, it's a competitive environment, which is what we expected we would be in. We like, obviously, the capabilities we have and our ability to win with the capabilities that we have. But certainly, it remains a competitive market.

我會說，就競爭力而言，全球各地都有很強的競爭對手。歐洲有很強的競爭對手，中國當然也有非常強的競爭對手。我們在美國以及世界其他地區也有非常強的競爭對手。所以就投標、贏得新專案等而言，這是一個競爭激烈的環境，這也正是我們預期會處於的環境。我們當然看好我們所具備的能力，以及憑藉這些能力取勝的能力。但毫無疑問，市場仍然很競爭。

And can you help me a little bit with your second question? I didn't quite pick that up.

你能再幫我釐清一下你的第二個問題嗎？我沒有完全聽懂。

The second question's really about sort of the exit rate. So you sort of mentioned things getting slightly tougher by the day. I'm just sort of wondering whether the exit rate, particularly in Europe, is sort of already close to maybe down a few percent and on a global basis as well.

第二個問題主要是關於所謂的出場速度（exit rate）。你提到情況每天都稍微更艱難一些。我想知道，特別是在歐洲，出場速度是否已經接近可能下滑幾個百分點，全球也是如此嗎？

Yes. Well, no. I would say -- so exit rate. So as I'm looking at -- look at Europe. For example, the industrial production has been trending down. I think that's going to be the trend going forward. You have, obviously, the prospects of Brexit and the headlines, certainly on the continent, are not all that positive, so I think that is what we are facing going forward.

是的。嗯，不是。我會說——所以，出場速度。就我在看——看歐洲的情況。例如，工業生產一直呈下降趨勢。我認為這將是未來的趨勢。再加上，顯然還有英國脫歐（Brexit）的前景與相關新聞標題，尤其在歐洲大陸，並不那麼正面，所以我認為這就是我們接下來要面對的情況。

With respect to China, obviously the news that has come out says that I think we're going to be in for a tougher road going forward. If I could talk about it market-by-market, it certainly -- I think it's overall, going to be net weaker going forward. The Americas with respect to industrial production, manufacturing has been trending down as well. And so I -- it's not like it's falling off a cliff but it certainly has been a noticeable trend. So that's why I've said before I'm really more optimistic about our ability to manage pricing going forward than I am about the underlying volume fundamentals. And then if you look at a place like South America, where there was a recent positive news with respect to addressing needed pension reforms, it remains to be seen if they're able to really turn the corner with respect to growth, and we'll see. So that's kind of the global summary.

就中國而言，顯然目前傳出的消息顯示，我認為未來我們將面臨更艱難的道路。如果我能按市場逐一來談，確實——我認為整體而言，未來將呈現淨走弱。就美洲而言，工業生產、製造業也一直呈下降趨勢。因此我——並不是說它會斷崖式下滑，但這確實是一個明顯的趨勢。所以這就是我之前說過的原因：相較於基礎的量（volume）面基本面，我對我們未來管理定價的能力更為樂觀。再看像南美這樣的地區，近期在推動必要的退休金改革方面有一些正面消息，但他們是否真能在成長方面扭轉局勢仍有待觀察，我們再看看。以上大致就是全球概況。

And I think, this is Matt, just to add just one point to that. When thinking about volumes, year-over-year on the back half, maybe a little more challenging. You may recall fourth quarter was worse than third quarter. There was a bit of a decline on perspective. So I think, thinking about it sequential might help, I mean as Steve had mentioned, Q2 as a base mark this year, sequentially, we are expecting some decline off of Q2, and I think for modeling -- on that perspective, that might be an easier way to think about it.

我想——我是 Matt，補充一點。在思考出貨量時，下半年同比可能會更具挑戰。你可能記得第四季比第三季更差。從這個角度看，確實有一些下滑。所以我認為，從環比（sequential）的角度來思考可能會有幫助；正如 Steve 提到的，今年以第二季作為基準點，環比來看，我們預期會較第二季有所下滑；我想對建模而言——從這個角度可能更容易理解。

And our next question comes from John McNulty from BMO Capital Markets.

下一個問題來自 BMO Capital Markets 的 John McNulty。

I guess 2 quick ones. Does the macro weakness that you're seeing right now, does that require or facilitate more cost cutting as you kind of look forward beyond just the synergy-related or efficiency-related programs that you've already got in place?

我想問兩個簡短問題。你們目前看到的宏觀疲弱，是否需要或促使你們在展望未來時進一步削減成本——不僅限於你們已經在推進的協同效應或效率提升相關計畫？

The answer, John, to that is yes. I mean as we look at areas that -- we've always had the philosophy that we need to be adjusting to market conditions. We need to be on top of changes that are taking place. That's a philosophy we've had for a long time. We've never really had done much in the way of big programs. I can think of one in maybe 20 years. But yes, in addition to the restructuring initiatives that we had outlined as a result of the merger, I'd also talked about a productivity initiative, which is kind of a continuous improvement, something that's very important for us to have going forward.

John，答案是肯定的。我的意思是，當我們檢視各個領域時——我們一向的理念是必須隨市場狀況調整。我們需要掌握正在發生的變化。這是我們長期以來的理念。我們過去其實很少做那種大型專案。我大概只想到 20 年來可能有過一次。但沒錯，除了我們因併購而提出的重整措施之外，我也談到過一項生產力（productivity）計畫，這有點像持續改善（continuous improvement），是我們未來非常重要的一件事。

But certainly, as we see market conditions change, the expectation is that each geography will adapt, whether it's -- pertains to a merger cost synergy or not that they will be making the necessary adaptations. So that's something that we follow very closely when we do our monthly calls.

但當然，隨著市場狀況變化，我們的預期是各個地區都會做出調整；不論是否——與併購成本協同有關，他們都會進行必要的調整。因此，這是我們在每月電話會議中非常密切追蹤的事項。

Got it. And then I guess with regard to the merchant pricing environment, clearly getting some strength there and recapturing some of the inflation that's been nicking away over the last couple of years. But I guess are you seeing any volumes walking away? Or are you seeing any changes in behavior from your customers? Or is this something more that they're accepting of because of what you would do to get it?

了解。另外，關於散戶（merchant）定價環境，顯然你們在那裡看到一些走強，並且收回過去幾年一直侵蝕的部分通膨影響。但我想問的是，你們是否看到有些量在流失？或你們是否看到客戶行為有任何改變？還是說，因為你們為了達成它所採取的作法，客戶更能接受這件事？

I would say -- and obviously, this is something that not only do we -- are we careful to pay attention to here, but you can imagine at a local level, they are very much sensitive to volume walking away as a result, to perhaps too aggressive a pricing posture. I would say for the most part, I have not seen a loss of volume as a result of too aggressive a posture on price.

我會說——而且顯然，這不只是我們在這裡會謹慎關注的事情；你可以想像在地方層級，他們也非常敏感，擔心因為定價立場可能過於強硬而導致量流失。我會說就大多數情況而言，我沒有看到因為價格立場過於強硬而造成的量流失。

And our next question comes from Peter Clark from Societe Generale.

下一個問題來自法國興業銀行（Societe Generale）的 Peter Clark。

Yes, 3 questions if I can. First one, actually, for Steve again. Price management, you talked about price up in all regions. Would that be all key territories? And I'm thinking here particularly of Australia, where your peer mentioned that pricing for them, at least, was down.

好的，如果可以我有三個問題。第一個其實還是問 Steve。關於價格管理，你提到所有區域價格都上升。那會涵蓋所有主要地區嗎？我特別想到澳洲，你們的同業提到他們那邊至少定價是下降的。

You mentioned Brexit. I guess there's not a tremendous amount you can do about a do-or-die Brexit. It's more about the customers. But what can you prepare for that? Because obviously, it impacts U.K. and continental Europe, pretty significantly.

你提到英國脫歐（Brexit）。我想對於一個成敗攸關的脫歐，你們能做的其實不多。更多是關於客戶。但你們可以為此做哪些準備？因為顯然它對英國以及歐陸影響相當大。

And the third point, probably for Matt. The base CapEx, Matt, is running about 7% of sales. Now Linde always had a much higher maintenance CapEx for various reasons, but one of which was mix and an almost cylinder army or all the cylinders they had. Anyway, they said that was one of the reasons they had much higher maintenance CapEx. Just wondering if there's a structural issue that means that you won't get a base CapEx to where you were but clearly, you will improve on where in the world.

第三點可能問 Matt。Matt，基礎資本支出（CapEx）大約占營收 7%。Linde 一直以來因各種原因維護性資本支出（maintenance CapEx）高得多，其中一個原因是產品組合，以及他們幾乎像是一支鋼瓶大軍——或他們擁有的所有鋼瓶。總之，他們說那是他們維護性資本支出高很多的原因之一。我只是想知道，是否存在某種結構性因素，意味著你們的基礎 CapEx 無法回到你們過去的水準；但顯然，你們會改善到比目前在全球的水準更好。

Okay. Peter, so I -- with respect to, let's say, markets that were unaffected by the merger, and you brought up Australia. Clearly there are others. We found, if I go back in my Praxair days, that we had certain geographies that did a good job with price management, and you can spend a day with them and see they really understood what was going on in the marketplace, what was going on with cost, what was going on with supply and demand and things that needed -- they needed to do to address that.

好的。Peter，所以我——就比如說，對於那些未受併購影響的市場，而你提到了澳洲。顯然還有其他市場。如果我回到我在 Praxair 的時期，我們發現某些地區在價格管理上做得很好；你可以花一天時間跟他們一起看，就會發現他們真的理解市場上發生了什麼、成本發生了什麼、供需發生了什麼，以及他們需要——需要做哪些事情來因應。

And so the whole idea is to make sure that we bring that same rigor, that same discipline, that same competency, that same organizational approach to every corner of the globe. And we have had -- I've had those reviews with Australia. You mentioned Australia, and this is something they have been working on ever since the merger. I expect to see positive results, not only out of Australia but out of many other countries around the world as we continue to build that muscle.

因此，整個想法就是要確保我們把同樣的嚴謹度、同樣的紀律、同樣的能力、同樣的組織方法帶到全球每一個角落。而且我們已經——我也已經和澳洲做過那些檢討。你提到澳洲，這是他們自併購以來一直在努力的事情。隨著我們持續鍛鍊這項能力，我預期不僅澳洲，還有全球許多其他國家都會看到正面成果。

With respect to Brexit, the deindustrialization of the U.K. has been going on for a long time, so Brexit is not the point where that starts to happen. So clearly, that's an effect that we have been feeling for a long time in the U.K. What I think the team has done a great job of and will continue to do a great job of is building out resilient markets, more growth in resilient markets. And I'm thinking of health care, I'm thinking of food and beverage, I'm thinking of a myriad of applications that they have been bringing to the marketplace. So that very much has dampened the effect of the deindustrialization trend. And so I don't expect a big change coming out of Brexit. I certainly don't expect positive growth going forward as a result, but I certainly don't expect a big change.

就英國脫歐而言，英國的去工業化已經進行很長一段時間了，所以脫歐並不是那個趨勢開始發生的時間點。因此很明顯，這個影響我們在英國已經感受很久了。我認為團隊做得很出色、也會持續做得很出色的一點，是打造更具韌性的市場，在更具韌性的市場中推動更多成長。我想到的是醫療保健、食品與飲料，以及他們帶到市場上的各式各樣應用。因此，這確實大幅緩和了去工業化趨勢的影響。所以我不預期脫歐會帶來很大的變化。我當然不預期因此而在未來出現正向成長，但我也不預期會有很大的變化。

And Matt, do you want to answer the base -- or I can answer, and you can answer.

Matt，你想回答基礎——還是我可以回答，然後你再回答。

Yes, sure. Peter, just a couple of things, as you probably know, but just to make clear. Obviously, our base CapEx, as we defined it here, does include small growth. And that can also mean ECOVAR or VPSAs, standard plants as legacy Praxair called them. So to have an apples-to-apples comparison may not be the same across the industry.

是的，當然。Peter，只有幾點，你大概也知道，但我再把它講清楚。很明顯，我們在這裡定義的基礎資本支出（CapEx）確實包含小幅成長。而這也可能意味著ECOVAR或VPSA，舊Praxair所稱的標準工廠。因此，要做同口徑（apples-to-apples）的比較，在整個產業之間可能並不一致。

But to your point when I look at legacy Praxair that had reported this out, we were on a $750 million to $800 million-type year run rate. So just thinking of that in simple terms, if you double that, that would be around $1.5 billion, $1.6 billion a year, if you felt the company size doubled. Right now, the run rate on Q2 is about $1.8 billion. Of the $200 million of CapEx synergies, a large portion of that would be dedicated to this area. This is an area that's getting a lot of focus. You saw sequentially, we had a little bit of a decline, but this is something we're going to keep working at. We tend not to look at it as a percentage of sales. More really, it's a detailed bottoms-up how we look at that internally, what projects we need.

但就你提到的點，當我回頭看舊Praxair過去披露的數據，我們當時的年化水準大約是7.5億到8億美元。所以用簡單方式想，如果公司規模翻倍，把它乘以二，大概就是每年15億、16億美元左右。目前以第二季（Q2）的年化水準來看，大約是18億美元。在2億美元的資本支出協同效益中，有很大一部分會投入在這個領域。這個領域正受到高度關注。你也看到按季來看我們略有下降，但這是我們會持續努力的方向。我們通常不把它當作銷售額的百分比來看。更重要的是，我們內部是用自下而上、非常細緻的方式來看：需要哪些專案。

But I can tell you reliability, as you know, is critical in this industry. That's not something we're going to compromise. But when we look at the other growth or small growth initiatives on things like cylinders, trailers, tanks, given the economic outlook we laid out, that's an area I would see probably less spending going forward. Those spend tend to correlate more to IP. So this is kind of how we'll look at it. But clearly, the CapEx synergies of $200 million, this base CapEx is going to be an area of intense focus.

但我可以告訴你，如你所知，可靠性在這個產業至關重要。這不是我們會妥協的事情。但當我們看其他成長或小幅成長的措施，例如鋼瓶、拖車、儲槽等，考量我們所提出的經濟展望，這是我認為未來可能會減少支出的領域。這些支出往往與IP（工業生產）更相關。所以我們大致會這樣來看。但很明確地，2億美元的資本支出協同效益，這個基礎資本支出將會是高度聚焦的重點。

And our next question comes from Jeff Zekauskas from JPMorgan.

下一個問題來自摩根大通（JPMorgan）的Jeff Zekauskas。

In looking over your pricing in the various regions, if you compare your average prices to the numbers that came out of your competitor in Allentown, your price gains are smaller, particularly in Asia and Europe. What do you make of that?

在檢視你們各地區的定價時，如果把你們的平均價格與你們那家位於Allentown的競爭對手公布的數字相比，你們的漲價幅度較小，尤其是在亞洲和歐洲。你怎麼看這件事？

Well, you have to understand we've been working on pricing for quite some time. So if you go back over a period of time, you would see our price gains have been there year-over-year. You also have to take into consideration that we have -- every competitor has a bit of a different mix. If I look at Europe, we're half packaged gases. So the ability to move through pricing very much is through, I don't know how many -- probably a million transactions or so through those small welders. So that is the mix that we have there.

嗯，你必須了解，我們在定價方面已經努力了相當長一段時間。所以如果你回頭看一段期間，你會看到我們的價格提升是逐年存在的。你也必須考量到，我們——每個競爭對手的組合都不太一樣。以歐洲來看，我們有一半是包裝氣體（packaged gases）。因此，推動價格的能力很大程度上是透過——我不知道有多少——可能約一百萬筆交易，透過那些小型焊接客戶來完成。所以那就是我們在那裡的組合結構。

If we look at Asia, obviously, our mix is a bit different than some of our competitors. We have Australia, which is a very large piece. Australia and China are the 2 largest countries that we have that represent Asia. If I look down beneath the covers, which I think is always important because you've got to keep in mind what we're reporting is an aggregated number. But I can look at China merchant price, and it's 5% year-over-year. So that number is very strong. Again, we've got some work to do across the board to bring everything up to an expectation that we would have. If I were to look at the Americas for example, 3% number, but U.S. merchant is 6%, South America is 5%, packaged is 3%. And then if I were to look at Europe, I'd say it's pretty much -- a pretty strong 2% kind of price increase number.

如果看亞洲，很明顯我們的組合和一些競爭對手有些不同。我們有澳洲，這是一個非常大的組成部分。澳洲和中國是我們在亞洲的兩個最大國家。如果我再往下拆解細項——我認為這總是很重要，因為你必須記住我們報告的是彙總數字。但我可以看中國的商用（merchant）價格，年增是5%。所以那個數字非常強勁。同樣地，我們在各方面仍有一些工作要做，讓所有項目都提升到我們期望的水準。例如看美洲，整體是3%，但美國商用是6%，南美是5%，包裝氣體是3%。然後如果看歐洲，我會說大致上——是一個相當不錯的2%左右的漲價幅度。

But again, it's very much affected by what's going on in mix. And I'll give you another small example of that. If I look at our small business called refrigerants, that number is off quite a bit, and so -- year-over-year. So that all kind of fits into the calculation, but it's quite a bit's driven by mix. But we certainly have a focus on working on every aspect, every channel, every product, every market across the globe.

但同樣地，這很大程度會受到組合變化（mix）影響。我再給你一個小例子。如果我看我們一個叫冷媒（refrigerants）的小型業務，那個數字年對年下降得相當多。所以這些都會納入計算，而其中相當大一部分是由組合所驅動。但我們確實聚焦於在全球每一個面向、每一個通路、每一個產品、每一個市場持續努力。

And Jeff, this is Matt. Just to add one thing to that to Steve's comments. As you can imagine year-over-year, calculating that on the pro forma bottom details, we do our best. But sequential, we tend to look at more intently, just given -- since the merger effective date, really Q1 and Q2. And I think on a sequential basis, you'll find numbers are more comparable. So I just tend to keep that in mind as we look forward.

Jeff，我是Matt。補充Steve的評論再加一點。如你所想像，年對年的計算是以備考（pro forma）的底層細節來做，我們會盡力而為。但就按季（sequential）而言，我們通常會更密切地看，因為——自併購生效日以來，實際上就是第一季和第二季。我認為以按季基礎來看，你會發現數字更具可比性。所以在往前看時，我傾向把這點放在心上。

And then for my follow-up. Your adjusted interest expense was $35 million in the quarter, which I think is about 1% of your net debt. Is there something unusual in the $35 million number? And what's a more normal number, if there is one?

接著是我的追問。你們本季調整後利息費用是3,500萬美元，我認為大約是你們淨負債的1%。這個3,500萬美元的數字有什麼不尋常之處嗎？如果有所謂「較正常」的水準，那會是多少？

Yes, Jeff. This is Matt. So obviously, we have a lot of cash that's earning income that we are managing around the world, so you have interest income that's netting against that. So we are flush with a lot of cash. As we lever up and do more distributions primarily through buybacks, you will start to see a shift and you will see higher net interest but then you'll see lower share count, and that's part of the recapitalization I mentioned in the prepared comments.

是的，Jeff。我是Matt。很明顯，我們在全球管理著大量現金，這些現金會產生收益，所以有利息收入會與之相抵。因此我們手上有非常充裕的現金。隨著我們提高槓桿並進行更多的資金分配（主要透過庫藏股回購），你會開始看到變化：淨利息會更高，但同時你也會看到流通股數下降，而這就是我在事先準備的評論中提到的資本結構重整（recapitalization）的一部分。

And our next question comes from Steve Byrne from Bank of America.

下一個問題來自美國銀行（Bank of America）的Steve Byrne。

Would really like to hear your view on what you've learned most from the integration of these 2 legacy companies with respect to what has surprised you. Anything that you would note that's more favorable than you expected or perhaps more unfavorable?

很想聽聽你們對這兩家前身公司整合過程中學到最多的是什麼，尤其是有哪些讓你們感到意外的地方。有沒有什麼是比你們預期更有利的，或可能更不利的？

Well, this is Steve. I would -- nothing really comes to mind that says this is less favorable than what we had hoped for. I would say as we get into -- for example, Linde Engineering has very strong capabilities, very strong discipline, strong record of project execution. Many people think that it's all large project-driven, but a good 40% or so is very small projects that they execute, day in and day out. So the capabilities, the strengths within that business certainly are obvious.

嗯，我是Steve。我想——目前沒有什麼特別浮現、讓我覺得比我們原先希望的更不利。我會說，當我們深入——例如，Linde Engineering具備非常強的能力、非常強的紀律，以及很強的專案執行紀錄。很多人以為它完全是由大型專案驅動，但其實大約有40%或更多是他們日復一日執行的非常小型專案。所以，該業務內部的能力與優勢確實非常明顯。

As I look at application capabilities, it's a story of where I would say that we've been very strong in things like oxygen, combustion. Linde's been very strong in areas like clean fuels, health care. We both have worked on food and beverage. We both have worked on digitalization. The combined capability is very positive. I would say that certainly, some technologies like cylinder tracking is something that legacy Linde was very much out front with. Specialty gas capability, legacy Praxair had good capabilities, Linde has excellent capabilities. Together, we have a much stronger portfolio. You get into productivity tools, we each develop productivity tools. Praxair, obviously, was very proud of the productivity track record but Linde has excellent capabilities, too. You just put them all together. That's why I said at the beginning that all the employees, the 80-some-thousand employees within the company are very optimistic about the potential of the new company.

當我看應用能力時，我會說這是一個故事：我們在氧氣、燃燒等方面一直非常強。林德在清潔燃料、醫療保健等領域一直非常強。我們雙方都在食品與飲料方面有所投入。我們雙方也都在數位化方面有所投入。合併後的能力非常正面。我會說，當然，有些技術例如鋼瓶追蹤，是過去的林德一直走在最前面的。特種氣體能力方面，過去的普萊克斯有不錯的能力，林德則有非常優秀的能力。合在一起，我們的產品組合強得多。談到生產力工具，我們各自都開發生產力工具。普萊克斯顯然對其生產力的歷史紀錄非常自豪，但林德也同樣具備優秀能力。你只要把它們全部整合在一起。這就是為什麼我一開始說，公司內部八萬多名員工都對新公司的潛力非常樂觀。

And Steve, you mentioned engineering, 40% are small projects. How would you split that roughly $5 billion in backlog between gases and non-gases. Is that shifting one way or the other? And how do you view the value proposition of having both of those skill sets?

Steve，你提到工程業務中有40%是小型專案。你會如何大致把約50億美元的在手訂單在氣體與非氣體之間做分拆？這個比例有往某一邊移動嗎？另外，你如何看待同時擁有這兩種技能組合的價值主張？

Well, if you look at the $5 billion of backlog, I would say that today in that backlog, natural gas processing plants, olefin plants would be probably half or so of that backlog, maybe a little bit more. And then the rest runs the gamut of ASUs and HyCO and also some other small projects that would be part of that backlog number. I think having capabilities around the olefin crackers, there's certain examples that has led to pull-through of ASUs and other industrial gas products as a result of having that upfront project.

嗯，如果你看這50億美元的在手訂單，我會說目前在這個在手訂單中，天然氣處理廠、烯烴工廠大概占一半左右，可能還多一點。其餘則涵蓋空分裝置（ASU）、合成氣/氫氣與一氧化碳（HyCO），以及一些其他小型專案，也都包含在這個在手訂單數字裡。我認為，具備烯烴裂解裝置方面的能力，有一些案例顯示，因為先拿到前端專案，進而帶動了ASU與其他工業氣體產品的延伸銷售（pull-through）。

Clearly, when you're talking about ethane crackers and natural gas plants, the level of -- the level at which you engage the customer is higher, because clearly, there is an interest at the highest levels of the organization with our customers in terms of talking to us about those kinds of projects, because they're very critical to their processes.

很明顯，當你談的是乙烷裂解裝置與天然氣工廠時，你與客戶互動的層級更高，因為很明顯，對我們客戶而言，這類專案對其流程非常關鍵，因此他們組織的最高層也會對與我們討論這些專案有興趣。

So those are certainly positives that I can point to. I can also look at natural gas processing capability and point to where that is a good source of helium, which has been in short supply, continues to be in short supply. So having that upstream capability puts us in a very positive position with respect to capturing helium off of that process. So that's how I would address that.

所以這些當然都是我可以指出的正面因素。我也可以從天然氣處理能力來看，指出它是氦氣的良好來源；氦氣一直供應短缺，而且仍在短缺。因此，擁有這種上游能力，使我們在從該流程中回收氦氣方面處於非常有利的位置。這就是我對此的回應方式。

And our next question comes from David Begleiter from Deutsche Bank.

下一個問題來自德意志銀行的David Begleiter。

Matt and Steve, just on the synergies, what are you targeting in the back half of the year now for -- on the cost synergies?

Matt和Steve，關於協同效益，你們現在對今年下半年成本協同效益的目標是什麼？

Well, I said $225 million was the approximate synergy number. We had a good quarter in Q2, so we made a good dent on that number. Matt has said that we're approaching -- will be at the full run rate, so you're looking at a run rate in Q4 of something like $75 million kind of run rate, so Q3 will probably less than that, should be less than that, and I think that's the right way to think about it.

嗯，我說過約2.25億美元是大致的協同效益數字。我們在第二季表現不錯，所以在這個數字上取得了相當進展。Matt也說過我們正在接近——將會達到完整的運行率（run rate），所以你可以把第四季的運行率想成大約7,500萬美元左右的運行率；因此第三季可能會低於那個水準，應該會低於那個水準，我認為這樣思考是對的。

Very good. And just on the buybacks, how should we think about the cadence of the buybacks in the back half of the year?

很好。另外關於庫藏股回購，我們應該如何看待今年下半年回購的節奏？

David, yes, this is Matt. So as you can see, we are in the market every day as you probably see from some of the reports, and that's something we plan to continue to do, to be a participant every day. And when we find opportunities, we'll obviously take advantage of that. That means that the last few days have been a good example, where there may be macro events completely unrelated to us could be good opportunities to come in and repurchases the stock. But obviously, we have the authority, we have the cash. We're in every day and where there are times to be opportunistic, we will continue to do that.

David，是的，我是Matt。如你所見，我們每天都在市場上，正如你可能從一些報告中看到的那樣，而這也是我們計畫持續做的事：每天都作為市場參與者。當我們發現機會時，當然會加以把握。這表示最近幾天就是一個很好的例子，可能有一些與我們完全無關的宏觀事件，反而成為進場回購股票的好機會。但很明顯，我們有授權，也有現金。我們每天都在市場上，當有可以更具機會性的時點，我們會持續這麼做。

And our next question comes from Laurence Alexander from Jefferies.

下一個問題來自Jefferies的Laurence Alexander。

Just a couple of questions. One is with respect to the softer volume outlook that you flagged, how soft would volumes need to get for you to worry about the cadence of pricing slowing down?

我有幾個問題。第一個是，關於你們提到的較疲弱的出貨量展望，出貨量要疲弱到什麼程度，你們才會擔心定價推進的節奏會放慢？

And secondly, on FX, we normally talk about currency with respect to the translation effects on the P&L. At what point does the backlog get fixed from a currency perspective? That is if you have a large project during 2022, at what point do we pin down the currency that will be used for translation effects going forward?

第二個，關於外匯（FX），我們通常談的是貨幣對損益表（P&L）換算影響。從貨幣角度來看，在手訂單在什麼時點會被「固定」？也就是說，如果你在2022年有一個大型專案，我們在什麼時點會把未來用於換算影響的匯率（或幣別）釘住？

Okay. So I'll just take the first question. I think this is going to be something that we have to look at geography by geography, product by product, market by market in terms of understanding negative volumes and the impact that it can have on pricing. I think it's clear that if you had a substantial drop in volumes and that contributed to a high level of supply versus demand in the marketplace, that could put some downward pressure on pricing. So I think I'd have to look at that in term of where it's going to actually materialize with respect to what it would do. My view is we would still deliver some positive pricing even if it fell to a level like that.

好的。我先回答第一個問題。我認為這會是我們必須按地區、按產品、按市場逐一檢視的事情，以理解負成長的出貨量以及它對定價可能造成的影響。我認為很清楚的是，如果出貨量大幅下滑，導致市場上供給相對需求的水準偏高，那可能會對價格造成一些下行壓力。所以我必須看它實際會在哪裡發生、會如何具體化，才能判斷它會造成什麼影響。我的看法是，即便出貨量下滑到那樣的程度，我們仍然可以實現一些正向的價格貢獻。

Then I'm going to let Matt answer the currency -- how we handle currency and projects we have in the future.

接著我會讓Matt回答貨幣——我們如何處理貨幣以及未來的專案。

Yes, Laurence, so as you know, when we make these investments, they're 15- to 20-year horizons. So throughout that time frame, currencies go up and down. And to account for that, we always embed in our financial analyses a sovereign and currency risk in every country we operate in. So we essentially mandate that the return can recover the known risks within those contracts. And obviously, if you can get upwards of 100% inflation coverage in your escalation, that has a natural balance on devaluations. Because usually, after a devaluation, inflation follows. So these are the mechanisms that we do to recover. Compound inflation on a local basis can often exceed the effects of the foreign currency translation over that same time period. So these are all mechanisms you do when contracting to ensure you get an appropriate return inflation coverage to mitigate against that.

是的，Laurence，如你所知，當我們做這些投資時，都是15到20年的期間。因此在那段期間內，匯率會上上下下。為了反映這點，我們在每一個營運國家的財務分析中，總是會納入主權風險與匯率風險。所以我們基本上要求報酬率能夠在合約中回收那些已知風險。而且很明顯，如果你在價格調整（escalation）條款中能取得高於100%的通膨覆蓋，那對貨幣貶值會形成自然的平衡。因為通常在貶值之後，通膨會跟著出現。所以這些就是我們用來回收的機制。以當地幣別計的複利通膨，往往在同一期間內可能超過外幣換算影響的效果。因此，這些都是你在簽約時會採用的機制，以確保取得適當的報酬與通膨覆蓋，來降低相關風險。

As far as the actual execution itself in procuring equipment, whether it's turbomachinery in Europe or coal boxes in China, et cetera, we may or may not use derivatives on that 1-year, 2-year invoicing exposure. That would be translational -- or transactional, I'm sorry, to your point. So that's more of a derivative decision. But long range, we feel we have very strong contractual and return requirements to offset that.

就實際在採購設備的執行而言，無論是在歐洲的渦輪機械，或是在中國的煤箱等等，針對那 1 年、2 年的開票曝險，我們可能會、也可能不會使用衍生性金融商品。那會是換算性——或是交易性，抱歉，正如你所說。所以那比較屬於衍生性金融商品的決策。但從長期來看，我們認為我們有非常強的合約條款與報酬要求，足以抵銷那部分影響。

I think we have time for one more.

我想我們還有時間再問一題。

And our last question comes from P.J. Juvekar from Citi.

我們最後一個問題來自花旗的 P.J. Juvekar。

You mentioned that IP or Industrial Production is slowing down around the world. How quickly do you see that in your packaged volumes? And you also mentioned that hardgoods turned negative. Is that a historically harbinger of slower industrial activity?

你提到全球的 IP（工業生產）正在放緩。你認為這會多快反映在你們的瓶裝（packaged）銷量上？你也提到耐用品（hardgoods）轉為負成長。這在歷史上是否是工業活動放緩的先行指標？

So I'll just take the last one. So when hardgoods turns negative, and in this case, you see less large equipment, large welding equipment being ordered and so forth, it just says that your customers are becoming more cautious about the outlook going forward. And typically, that would be the first sign. Then you start to see the consumables slow along with the gas volumes. So it's not like it fell 30%. So if you go back in 2009, that's what we saw in the United States. Hardgoods fell 30%. But it did fall to negative territory, which says that it's certainly not a positive indication with respect to growth rates going forward. Not falling off a cliff but it does signal a weakening trend.

那我先回答最後一個。當耐用品轉為負成長時，在這個情況下，你會看到大型設備、例如大型焊接設備的訂單變少等等，這只是表示客戶對未來展望變得更謹慎。而通常那會是第一個訊號。接著你會開始看到耗材與氣體銷量一起放緩。所以並不是說它下滑了 30%。如果你回到 2009 年，那就是我們在美國看到的情況。耐用品下滑了 30%。但這次確實跌到負成長區間，這表示就未來的成長率而言，這當然不是正面的訊號。不至於斷崖式下跌，但確實顯示走弱的趨勢。

Again, I think about cylinder gases as very much tied to industrial production, and I made mention the fact that in Europe, half of our business is packaged gases, so that's very much tied to the manufacturing economy, and you can look at the trends with respect to the Eurozone, with respect to more negative trends on industrial production.

再者，我認為鋼瓶氣體與工業生產高度連動；我也提到在歐洲，我們有一半的業務是瓶裝氣體，因此與製造業景氣高度相關。你可以觀察歐元區的趨勢，工業生產呈現更偏負面的走勢。

And I anticipate the same thing as I look across Asia, that the trend for industrial production has been walking down. The PMI indicators for metals, chemicals has been walking down and, therefore, that just signifies to me that there's going to be some weakness ahead. Manufacturing certainly is weaker in China than it has been. And so therefore, that has a big effect on cylinder gases. But not just cylinder gases. Other products as well.

而我放眼亞洲也預期會是同樣情況：工業生產的趨勢一直在走低。金屬、化學品的 PMI 指標也一直在走低，因此這對我而言意味著未來會有一些疲弱。中國的製造業確實比過去更弱。因此，這對鋼瓶氣體有很大的影響。但不只是鋼瓶氣體。其他產品也是如此。

Okay. And then your energy backlog is roughly half of your total backlog. With energy prices down from peak levels, what does that mean for your future backlog?

好的。另外，你們的能源在手訂單大約占總在手訂單的一半。在能源價格自高點回落的情況下，這對你們未來的在手訂單意味著什麼？

Well, we'll see. But energy prices have been all over the place and, of course, you are talking about oil prices have been bouncing all over the place for the last several years, very volatile. Natural Gases prices have been down and staying down in the U.S. as there is an abundance of shale gas. That's something everybody is very familiar with. If I look at the types of projects that we're working on today, it tells me that there's still a lot of room to go in places like the U.S. Gulf Coast, a lot of chemical activity, but also refinery activity still continues to be very positive.

嗯，我們再看看。但能源價格一直大幅波動；當然，你指的是油價在過去幾年上下震盪，非常不穩定。由於頁岩氣供給充裕，美國的天然氣價格一直偏低且維持在低檔。這是大家都非常熟悉的情況。如果我看我們目前正在推進的專案類型，這告訴我像美國墨西哥灣沿岸這些地方仍有很大的成長空間，化工活動很活躍，同時煉油活動也仍然非常正面。

So the outlook, certainly with respect to the U.S. Gulf Coast, I think is going to be positive and again, more driven by natural gas than anything else. We talked a little bit about the impact of IMO 2020, and there is some impact. Clearly, that's the big Singapore project that we talked about. And there are some other projects that we're working on in Asia, both on the refinery side and also on the chemicals side, not massive, but I think could be significant as we go forward overall in the backlog. So I think it's still pretty positive environment, particularly if you look at the U.S. Gulf Coast.

因此，就美國墨西哥灣沿岸而言，我認為前景會是正面的，而且再次強調，驅動因素主要是天然氣而非其他。我們稍早談到 IMO 2020 的影響，確實有一些影響。很明顯，那就是我們提到的新加坡大型專案。此外，我們在亞洲也還有一些正在推進的專案，涵蓋煉油端與化工端，規模不算巨大，但我認為隨著時間推進，整體在手訂單中可能會變得相當重要。所以我認為環境仍然相當正面，特別是如果你看美國墨西哥灣沿岸。

Thank you. And this does conclude today's question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the call back to Juan Pelaez, Director of Investor Relations, for any further remarks.

謝謝。今天的問答環節到此結束。我想把電話交回給投資人關係總監 Juan Pelaez，請他做進一步的結語。

Nicole, thank you, and thanks, everyone, for participating in today's call. If you have any further questions, feel free to reach out to me directly. Have a great day.

Nicole，謝謝你，也謝謝各位參與今天的電話會議。如果你們還有任何問題，歡迎直接與我聯繫。祝各位有美好的一天。

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

各位女士、先生，感謝各位參與今天的會議。今天的議程到此結束。各位可以掛線。各位，祝有美好的一天。