Roper Technologies, Inc. (ROP) 2022 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good morning. The Roper Technologies conference call will now begin. Today's call is being recorded, (Operator Instructions) And now I'd like to turn the call over to Zack Moxcey, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

各位早安。Roper Technologies 電話會議現在開始。今天的電話會議將被錄音，（接線員指示）現在我想把電話交給投資人關係副總裁 Zack Moxcey。請開始。

Good morning, and thank you all for joining us as we discuss the second quarter financial results for Roper Technologies. Joining me on the call this morning are Neil Hunn, President and Chief Executive Officer; Rob Crisci, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Jason Conley, Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer; and Shannon O'Callaghan, Vice President of Finance.

各位早安，感謝各位加入我們，一同討論 Roper Technologies 第二季財務結果。今天早上與我一同參與電話會議的有：總裁兼執行長 Neil Hunn；執行副總裁兼財務長 Rob Crisci；副總裁兼會計長 Jason Conley；以及財務副總裁 Shannon O'Callaghan。

Earlier this morning, we issued a press release announcing our financial results. The press release also includes replay information for today's call. We prepared slides to accompany today's call, which are available through the webcast and are also available on our website.

今天稍早，我們發布新聞稿公告財務結果。新聞稿亦包含今日電話會議的重播資訊。我們準備了投影片搭配今日電話會議，可透過網路直播取得，也可在我們的網站上查看。

Now if you please turn to Page 2. We begin with our safe harbor statement. During the course of today's call, we will make forward-looking statements which are subject to risks and uncertainties as described on this page, in our press release and in our SEC filings. You should listen to today's call in the context of that information.

現在請翻到第 2 頁。我們先從安全港聲明開始。在今天電話會議過程中，我們將作出前瞻性陳述，這些陳述受本頁、我們的新聞稿以及向 SEC 提交之文件中所述的風險與不確定性影響。您應在該等資訊的脈絡下收聽今天的電話會議。

And now please turn to Page 3. Today, we will discuss our results for the quarter primarily on an adjusted non-GAAP basis. During the quarter, Roper announced an agreement to sell a majority stake in our industrial businesses. Results for these businesses are reported as discontinued operations for all periods presented. Unless otherwise noted, the numbers shown in this presentation are on a continuing operations basis.

接著請翻到第 3 頁。今天我們將主要以調整後的非 GAAP 基礎來討論本季結果。本季期間，Roper 宣布已達成協議，出售我們工業業務的多數股權。這些業務的結果在所呈列的所有期間均列為終止營業。除非另有說明，本簡報所示數字均以持續營業為基礎。

For the second quarter, the difference between our GAAP results and adjusted results consists of the following items: amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets; purchase accounting adjustments to commission expense; income tax restructuring expense associated with the pending sale of our industrial businesses; and lastly, we have adjusted our cash flow statement to exclude the cash taxes paid related to our 2021 divestitures. GAAP requires these payments to be classified as operating cash flow items even though they are related to the divestitures. Reconciliations can be found in our press release and in the appendix of this presentation on our website.

就第二季而言，我們的 GAAP 結果與調整後結果之差異包含以下項目：與併購相關之無形資產攤銷；對佣金費用的購買會計調整；與擬出售工業業務相關的所得稅重組費用；最後，我們已調整現金流量表，以排除與 2021 年資產剝離相關之已支付現金稅款。GAAP 規定即使這些付款與資產剝離相關，仍須分類為營業活動現金流量項目。對帳表可於我們的新聞稿以及本簡報網站版的附錄中查閱。

And now if you please turn to Page 4, I'll hand the call over to Neil. After our prepared remarks, we will take questions from our telephone participants. Neil?

現在請翻到第 4 頁，我將把電話交給 Neil。在我們的準備講稿之後，我們將接受電話與會者提問。Neil？

Thanks, Zack, and good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us. This morning, we'll start by reviewing our second quarter highlights and financial results, then we'll review our segment detail and our increase out for the year, then get to your questions.

謝謝你，Zack，各位早安。感謝各位加入我們。今天早上，我們將先回顧第二季重點與財務結果，接著檢視各事業部門細節以及我們對全年展望的上調，然後回答各位的問題。

Next slide, please. As we turn to Page 5, the main takeaways for today's call are: first, we had another great quarter of operational and financial performance, and we're increasing our outlook for the year; second, during the quarter, we entered into an agreement to divest the majority stake of our industrial businesses; and third, we have north of $7 billion of available M&A firepower.

請看下一張投影片。翻到第 5 頁，今天電話會議的重點結論是：第一，我們又交出一個營運與財務表現都非常出色的季度，並上調全年展望；第二，本季我們達成協議，將工業業務的多數股權進行剝離；第三，我們擁有超過 70 億美元可用於併購的火力。

Looking at the second quarter, we continue to be pleased with the quality of execution across our enterprise. This quarter is characterized by having very strong order activity and solid organic growth of 11%. Of particular importance, our growth was quite broad-based across our 3 segments. Consistent with our commentary during the last several quarters, not only did we grow nicely within the quarter, but the quality of the underlying businesses also improved as we saw our software recurring revenue base grow 12% on an organic basis.

回顧第二季，我們對整個企業的執行品質持續感到滿意。本季特徵是訂單活動非常強勁，且有機成長達 11%。尤其重要的是，我們的成長在三個事業部門中相當廣泛。與過去幾季的評論一致，我們不僅在本季有良好成長，基礎業務的品質也有所提升，因為我們看到軟體經常性收入基礎以有機口徑成長 12%。

In addition to our strong software growth, our product businesses performed very well in the quarter, experiencing very high levels of demand and record levels of backlog. Once we complete the divestiture of the majority interest of our industrial businesses, the quality of our portfolio will be significantly improved across several dimensions. First, we will be meaningfully less cyclical, with about 75% of our portfolio being software and the balance being medical and water products. Second, we'll have higher levels of recurring revenue, with 80% of our software revenue being recurring in nature. Also, a large percentage of our product revenue is reoccurring in nature, such as Neptune's replacement demand and our medical product consumables. And third, we'll be even more asset-light given a vastly improved working capital profile, one that generates significant increasing amount of cash as we continue to grow. And finally, with the closing of our industrial divestiture, which we anticipate will occur later this year, we'll have north of $7 billion of M&A capacity.

除了強勁的軟體成長外，我們的產品業務在本季也表現非常好，需求水準非常高，未交貨訂單（backlog）創下新高。一旦我們完成工業業務多數股權的剝離，我們的投資組合品質將在多個面向顯著提升。第一，我們的景氣循環性將大幅降低，約 75% 的投資組合將為軟體，其餘為醫療與水務產品。第二，我們將擁有更高比例的經常性收入，軟體收入中有 80% 屬於經常性性質。此外，我們相當大比例的產品收入也具有重複性，例如 Neptune 的汰換需求以及我們醫療產品的耗材。第三，隨著營運資金結構大幅改善，我們將更加輕資產，並在持續成長的同時產生顯著且增加的現金。最後，隨著我們預期將於今年稍晚完成工業業務剝離交割，我們將擁有超過 70 億美元的併購能力。

We are very active in the M&A markets, but also remain super patient and highly disciplined to ensure optimal deployment of our available capital. We are confident in our ability to deploy this capital wisely, which in turn will further improve both the quality and scale of our enterprise. We are proud of our operating team for their execution, a very solid quarter. Now let me turn the call to Rob, who will walk through our financial summary. Rob?

我們在併購市場非常積極，但同時也保持高度耐心與嚴格紀律，以確保最佳化運用可用資本。我們對於明智部署這些資本的能力充滿信心，而這也將進一步提升我們企業的品質與規模。我們為營運團隊的執行感到自豪，本季表現非常扎實。現在我把電話交給 Rob，由他帶各位看我們的財務摘要。Rob？

Thanks, Neil. Good morning, everyone. Turning to Page 6. Here, we want to briefly cover our Q2 performance compared to our guidance, including the industrial businesses now reported as part of discontinued operations due to the pending sale. On that apples-to-apples basis, our Q2 DEPS of $3.95 compares quite favorably to our guidance of $3.80 to $3.84, an $0.11 beat at the high end of our guidance. A very strong quarter.

謝謝你，Neil。各位早安。請翻到第 6 頁。在這裡，我們想簡要說明第二季表現相對於我們指引的情況，其中工業業務因待售而已列入終止營業。以可比口徑來看，我們第二季 DEPS 為 3.95 美元，與我們 3.80 至 3.84 美元的指引相比表現相當出色，較指引上緣高出 0.11 美元。本季非常強勁。

Next slide. Turning to Page 7 and covering the Q2 financial highlights. Here, we will review some of the key financial metrics on a continuing operations basis, which is our reporting basis for earnings and guidance moving forward. Total revenue increased 10% to $1.31 billion. Organic revenue increased 11%, with strength across each of our 3 reporting segments. Application Software grew 7% organically as our 2 largest businesses, Deltek and Vertafore, continue to perform very well. Network Software grew 15% led by continued exceptional performance at our freight matching businesses. Finally, our new technology-enabled products segment grew 13% organically, aided by an excellent quarter from Neptune.

下一張投影片。請翻到第 7 頁，說明第二季財務重點。在這裡，我們將以持續營業為基礎回顧一些關鍵財務指標，這也是我們未來盈餘與指引的報導基礎。總營收成長 10% 至 13.1 億美元。有機營收成長 11%，三個報導部門皆呈現強勁表現。應用軟體有機成長 7%，我們兩大業務 Deltek 與 Vertafore 持續表現優異。網路軟體有機成長 15%，主要由我們貨運撮合業務持續卓越的表現所帶動。最後，我們新的科技賦能產品部門有機成長 13%，Neptune 的優異季度表現亦提供助力。

EBITDA margin was 39.3%, resulting in EBITDA increasing 10% to $515 million. DEPS on a continuing ops basis was $3.43, 16% higher than last year. Net working capital is now negative 17% of Q2 annualized revenue as a result of our higher-quality portfolio.

EBITDA 利潤率為 39.3%，使 EBITDA 成長 10% 至 5.15 億美元。以持續營業計，DEPS 為 3.43 美元，較去年成長 16%。由於我們投資組合品質提升，淨營運資金目前為第二季年化營收的負 17%。

Q2 adjusted free cash flow was $252 million, which was 19% below prior year, but still represent a 17% 3-year CAGR versus 2019. Notably, like many technology companies, our cash flow was negatively impacted by the Section 174 R&D capitalization change that took effect for 2022. We paid $49 million in Q2 related to Section 174, and we expect to pay an additional $50 million for Section 174 in the second half. Importantly, this tax law change only impacts the timing of when the taxes are due, and not the overall amount of tax owed or our tax rate.

第二季調整後自由現金流為 2.52 億美元，較去年同期下降 19%，但相較 2019 年仍代表 3 年複合年成長率（CAGR）為 17%。值得注意的是，如同許多科技公司，我們的現金流受到 2022 年生效的《第 174 條》研發費用資本化變更之負面影響。我們在第二季支付了 4,900 萬美元與第 174 條相關的款項，並預期下半年將再支付額外 5,000 萬美元。重要的是，這項稅法變更只影響稅款到期支付的時間點，不影響應繳稅額總額或我們的有效稅率。

Additionally, in the quarter, we made tax payments related to the gains on the 2021 divestitures of TransCore, Zetec and CIVCO Radiotherapy. Per our normal convention, those payments have been adjusted out of our cash flow. Finally, we are very pleased to announce the completion of our new 5-year $3.5 billion revolving credit facility. We are grateful for our bank group and their continued support, and I'd personally like to thank Shannon O'Callaghan sitting next to me for the excellent work in leading the process for Roper.

此外，本季我們也就 2021 年資產剝離 TransCore、Zetec 與 CIVCO Radiotherapy 的處分利益支付了稅款。依照我們一貫的慣例，這些付款已自現金流中調整排除。最後，我們非常高興宣布完成新的 5 年期 35 億美元循環信用額度（revolving credit facility）。我們感謝銀行團的持續支持，我也想特別感謝坐在我旁邊的 Shannon O'Callaghan，在帶領 Roper 完成此流程方面做了非常出色的工作。

So in summary, with a $3 billion cash balance, our new revolver in place and the future proceeds from the closing of our industrial sale later this year, we are very well positioned for meaningful capital deployment. So with that, I'll turn it back over to Neil.

總結而言，憑藉 30 億美元的現金餘額、已到位的新循環信用額度，以及今年稍晚完成工業業務出售交割後的未來款項收入，我們在進行具意義的資本部署方面具備非常有利的條件。那麼，我把電話交回給 Neil。

Thanks, Rob. Congrats to you and your team for upsizing and extending our revolver, especially in these market conditions.

謝謝你，Rob。恭喜你和你的團隊在這樣的市場環境下，成功擴大規模並延長我們的循環信用額度。

As we turn to Page 9, we summarize for you our go-forward portfolio of 26 businesses arrayed across 3 segments: Application Software, Network Software and tech-enabled products. In the 8-K issued a few weeks ago, we provided historical annual and quarterly financial disclosures on this segmented basis. Also for the first time, we're breaking down our revenues by type. As you see, 61% of our total revenue and 82% of our software revenues are recurring or reoccurring in nature. 74% of our total revenues are software related.

請翻到第 9 頁，我們為各位總結未來的投資組合：共 26 項業務，分布於 3 個部門：應用軟體、網路軟體與科技賦能產品。在幾週前發布的 8-K 中，我們已依此分部口徑提供歷史年度與季度財務揭露。此外，我們也首次按收入類型拆分。如各位所見，我們總收入的 61% 以及軟體收入的 82% 具有經常性或重複性性質。我們總收入的 74% 與軟體相關。

For several quarters, we've communicated how the quality of our revenue stream continues to improve. You can see this point well illustrated here. Our 11% organic growth is underpinned by a 12% growth in our software recurring revenue base. Further, you can see the breadth of the growth, growth in software and products. Our strategy for nearly 2 decades now has been to improve the quality of our enterprise, and this is clearly reflected on this page. We cannot be more excited for our future.

在過去幾個季度中，我們持續溝通我們的營收來源品質如何不斷提升。您可以在此清楚看到這一點。我們 11% 的有機成長，是由我們軟體經常性收入基礎 12% 的成長所支撐。此外，您也可以看到成長的廣度——軟體與產品皆有成長。近 20 年來，我們的策略一直是提升企業的品質，而這一點在本頁清楚反映。我們對未來感到無比振奮。

Let's turn to Page 10 and walk through the 2Q highlights for our Application Software segment. Revenues here were $627 million, up 7% on an organic basis and EBITDA margins were 43.1%. Across this segment, we saw recurring revenue which is about 75% of the revenue for this segment increased 8% in the quarter. This recurring revenue growth is enabled by strong customer retention and continued migration to our SaaS delivery models. Across this group of companies, the financial strength was quite broad.

接著請翻到第 10 頁，我們將帶您回顧應用軟體（Application Software）部門第二季的重點。該部門營收為 6.27 億美元，有機基礎年增 7%，EBITDA 利潤率為 43.1%。在此部門中，我們看到經常性收入（約占該部門營收的 75%）在本季成長 8%。這項經常性收入成長，來自強勁的客戶留存以及持續移轉至我們的 SaaS 交付模式。在這一組公司中，財務表現的強勁相當全面。

As we highlight a few businesses, we'll start with Deltek. The Deltek team posted another great quarter of strength across all end market serves, with particular strength in their construction contractor end market. In addition, Deltek continues to gain momentum, driving adoption to their cloud-based product offerings.

在我們點出幾個業務時，先從 Deltek 開始。Deltek 團隊在所有終端市場服務領域再度交出強勁的一季，其中以建築承包商終端市場表現尤為突出。此外，Deltek 持續累積動能，推動客戶採用其雲端產品方案。

Vertafore had an excellent quarter, which was highlighted by strong ARR bookings activity and revenue growth. Also during the quarter, we completed the acquisition of MGA Systems. This tuck-in acquisition enhances Vertafore's ability to compete and win in the managed general agent segment of the property and casualty insurance ecosystem. CliniSys and Data Innovations continue to exhibit strong demand and operational strength. CliniSys continued its market share gains in the U.K.; DI continues to demonstrate product market fit by gaining share of wallet across large health systems and the VA.

Vertafore 本季表現非常出色，亮點包括強勁的 ARR 訂單（bookings）活動與營收成長。此外，本季我們完成了對 MGA Systems 的收購。這項補強型收購（tuck-in acquisition）提升了 Vertafore 在財產與意外險（P&C）保險生態系中，於管理型一般代理人（MGA）細分市場的競爭與勝出能力。CliniSys 與 Data Innovations 仍持續展現強勁需求與營運實力。CliniSys 在英國持續提升市占；DI 則透過在大型醫療體系與退伍軍人事務部（VA）提升錢包份額（share of wallet），持續證明其產品市場契合度（product-market fit）。

Strata continues to be super solid for us. The acquisition of EPSI has been exceedingly strong as Strata has successfully lifted and shifted many EPSI customers to the Strata cloud-based offering. At the same time, Strata continues to improve the legacy EPSI product release and support capability. We remain committed to meeting the EPSI and Strata customers where they are.

Strata 對我們而言仍然非常穩健。EPSI 的收購表現極為強勁，因為 Strata 已成功將許多 EPSI 客戶「lift and shift」至 Strata 的雲端方案。同時，Strata 也持續改善傳統 EPSI 產品的版本發布與支援能力。我們仍致力於在客戶所在之處服務 EPSI 與 Strata 客戶。

Finally, Aderant continues to be a solid performer for Roper, extending their share gains in the large law space. Aderant continues to see an acceleration of SaaS bookings activity, driving substantial increases in the recurring revenue base. Looking to the outlook for the second half of 2022 in this segment. We expect to see mid-single-digit growth for the balance of the year, driven by continued ARR momentum.

最後，Aderant 仍是 Roper 的穩健貢獻者，並在大型律所市場持續擴大市占。Aderant 看到 SaaS 訂單活動加速，帶動經常性收入基礎大幅提升。展望 2022 年下半年本部門的前景，我們預期今年剩餘期間將呈現中個位數成長，主要由持續的 ARR 動能所驅動。

Turning to Page 11. Revenues in the quarter for our Network Software segment were $343 million, up 15% on an organic basis and EBITDA margins were strong at 52%. The 15% organic growth in this segment is underpinned by 19% growth in recurring revenue.

接著請看第 11 頁。本季我們網路軟體（Network Software）部門營收為 3.43 億美元，有機基礎年增 15%，EBITDA 利潤率強勁，達 52%。本部門 15% 的有機成長，是由經常性收入 19% 的成長所支撐。

As we dig into business-specific performance, our U.S. and Canadian freight matching businesses continued to be exceptional. The market conditions while slowing a touch on the carrier side of the network continue to be favorable. During the recent surge in transportation volumes, the market share of the ecosystem represented by the spot market increased as it became easier to transact volumes in the spot market compared to the contracted market. We believe this is a secular trend that DAT will benefit from over a multiyear arc. In addition, DAT continues to do a nice job of increasing revenue per user by both adding features and improving value capture. Finally, over a longer arc planning horizon, our freight matching businesses continue to be well positioned to enable the further digitization of the spot freight market.

進一步看各業務的具體表現，我們在美國與加拿大的貨運媒合業務持續表現卓越。雖然網路中承運端的市場狀況略有降溫，但整體仍然有利。在近期運輸量激增期間，生態系中由即期市場（spot market）所代表的市占提高，因為相較於合約市場（contracted market），在即期市場更容易完成交易量。我們相信這是一個長期結構性趨勢（secular trend），DAT 將在多年期間受益。此外，DAT 也持續透過增加功能並改善價值擷取（value capture），有效提升每位用戶的收入。最後，從更長期的規劃視角來看，我們的貨運媒合業務仍具備良好定位，可推動即期貨運市場進一步數位化。

Moving to Foundry. Our software business that enables live-action filming and computer-generated graphics to be combined in a single frame, continued their recent financial strength. Net retention is north of 110% and ARR grew double digits again. Foundry's success is rooted in their fast-paced innovation capability and favorable long-term market conditions. iTrade, our network food supply chain business and iPipeline, our life insurance SaaS business that tech enables the quoting and underwriting processes, each had solid customer additions, which helped drive strong air of growth in the quarter. Finally, our businesses which focus on alternate site health care, namely skilled nursing, assisted living and home health grew nicely in the quarter despite their customers' growth being constrained by staffing shortages. Proud of the execution here.

接著談 Foundry。我們這項軟體業務可將實景拍攝（live-action filming）與電腦生成圖像（computer-generated graphics）合成於同一畫面中，近期財務表現持續強勁。淨留存率（net retention）超過 110%，ARR 再度呈現雙位數成長。Foundry 的成功根基在於其快速創新能力與有利的長期市場條件。iTrade（我們的網路型食品供應鏈業務）以及 iPipeline（我們的人壽保險 SaaS 業務，透過科技賦能報價與核保流程）各自都有穩健的新增客戶，帶動本季強勁的成長態勢。最後，我們聚焦於替代性照護場域（alternate site health care）的業務——包括專業護理機構、輔助生活與居家照護——本季也有不錯成長，儘管其客戶的成長受到人力短缺所限制。我們為此處的執行表現感到自豪。

Turning to the outlook for the balance of the year. We expect to see mid-single-digit organic growth for this segment, driven by continued recurring revenue momentum and moderating growth for our freight match businesses.

展望今年剩餘期間，我們預期本部門將呈現中個位數的有機成長，主要由持續的經常性收入動能所驅動，同時我們的貨運媒合業務成長將趨於溫和。

As we turn to Page 12, revenues in our tech-enabled products segment were $340 million, up 13% on an organic basis despite the very challenging supply chain environment. EBITDA margins for this segment were 34.9% in the quarter.

接著請看第 12 頁，我們科技賦能產品（tech-enabled products）部門本季營收為 3.40 億美元，在供應鏈環境極具挑戰的情況下，有機基礎仍年增 13%。本部門本季 EBITDA 利潤率為 34.9%。

Let's start with Neptune, which had record orders, revenue and quarter ending backlog. For a few quarters running, Neptune has been able to gain market share by being successful in keeping product lead times at industry-leading terms and releasing new products, both in terms of cellular connectivity and static meter reading technology. As a fun fact, Neptune turns 50 later this quarter and next year will mark our 20-year ownership anniversary, a great run so far with an even better forward view. Congrats, Don, to you and your team for building such a great company.

先從 Neptune 開始，其訂單、營收與季末在手訂單（backlog）皆創下新高。連續幾個季度，Neptune 能夠透過成功維持業界領先的產品交期（lead times）條件並推出新產品來提升市占，新產品涵蓋蜂巢式連線（cellular connectivity）與靜態抄表技術（static meter reading technology）。補充一個有趣的事實：Neptune 將在本季稍晚迎來 50 週年，而明年將是我們持有該公司滿 20 週年——至今是一段很棒的旅程，未來展望更佳。恭喜 Don 以及你的團隊打造出如此優秀的公司。

Verathon, Northern Digital and each of our medical product franchises continue to see very strong ordering activity but were hampered by a variety of supply chain challenges during the quarter. That said, the teams are executing exceptionally well, and we remain confident in our ability to execute through these challenges. Looking over the horizon, each of our medical product businesses are benefactors of secular tailwinds, namely the increased demand for single-use devices and the aging of the population. As it relates to the outlook for the balance of the year, we expect to see high single-digit growth for this segment, underpinned by strong demand and backlog levels, but somewhat constrained by the current supply chain challenges.

Verathon、Northern Digital 以及我們各項醫療產品事業群，持續看到非常強勁的下單活動，但本季受到多項供應鏈挑戰所影響。即便如此，團隊的執行表現依然非常出色，我們也仍對穿越這些挑戰的執行能力充滿信心。放眼未來，我們各項醫療產品業務皆受惠於長期結構性順風（secular tailwinds），包括一次性使用器材需求增加以及人口老化。至於今年剩餘期間的展望，我們預期本部門將呈現高個位數成長，主要由強勁需求與在手訂單水位所支撐，但仍會在一定程度上受到目前供應鏈挑戰的限制。

Now please turn to Page 14, and let's review our updated and increased outlook for the balance of the year. As a reminder, last quarter, we increased our adjusted DEPS guidance to be between $15.50 and $15.75, which included $2.30 from our industrial businesses. Given our agreement to divest our industrial businesses, we are removing the $2.30 from our guidance model going forward. So on a new continuing ops basis, our previous guidance equates to $13.20 to $13.45.

現在請翻到第 14 頁，我們來檢視今年剩餘期間更新且上調的展望。提醒一下，上季我們將調整後 DEPS 指引上調至每股 15.50 至 15.75 美元，其中包含來自我們工業業務的 2.30 美元。鑑於我們已同意出售工業業務，我們將在未來的指引模型中移除這 2.30 美元。因此，在新的持續營運（continuing ops）基礎下，我們先前的指引相當於每股 13.20 至 13.45 美元。

Based on our strong Q2 and second half visibility, we're now increasing our continuing ops guidance to be between $13.46 and $13.62. Embedded in this guidance is full year organic growth of 8% to 9%, again, on a continuing ops basis. As we look to the third quarter, we're establishing DEPS guidance to be in the range of $3.42 and $3.46.

基於我們強勁的第二季表現以及對下半年的能見度，我們現在將持續營運基礎下的指引上調至每股 13.46 至 13.62 美元。此指引內含全年有機成長 8% 至 9%，同樣是以持續營運基礎計算。展望第三季，我們建立的 DEPS 指引區間為每股 3.42 至 3.46 美元。

Now our concluding comments, and we'll get to your questions. As we turn to Page 15, we want to leave you with the same 3 points with which we started: first, we had a strong quarter of performance, and we're increasing the outlook for the full year; second, we took strategic actions to divest a majority stake in our industrial businesses; and third, we have a tremendous amount of M&A firepower north of $7 billion.

接下來是我們的結語，之後我們將回答各位的提問。請看第 15 頁，我們想以與開場相同的三點作結：第一，我們本季表現強勁，並上調全年展望；第二，我們採取策略性行動，出售我們工業業務的多數股權；第三，我們擁有超過 70 億美元、非常充沛的併購火力（M&A firepower）。

As it relates to our strong start, we grew revenues organically 11%; EBITDA, 10%; and DEPS, 16%; and free cash flow has grown 17% on a 3-year compounded basis. We are lifting our full year organic growth in DEPS guidance based on the factors outlined during the call, specifically strong recurring revenue growth and a record demand for our product businesses. Finally, we have reloaded our balance sheet and continue to have a highly active and engaged pipeline of M&A opportunities. We have north of $7 billion of M&A available firepower.

就我們的強勁開局而言，我們的營收有機成長 11%；EBITDA 成長 10%；DEPS 成長 16%；自由現金流則以 3 年複合基礎成長 17%。我們基於本次電話會議中所述因素，上調全年 DEPS 指引中的有機成長，特別是強勁的經常性收入成長以及我們產品業務創紀錄的需求。最後，我們已重新強化資產負債表，並持續擁有高度活躍且投入的併購機會管線。我們可動用的併購火力超過 70 億美元。

As mentioned at the start of today's call, our high levels of activity are equally matched with our patience and discipline, and we remain confident in our ability to deploy this capital to further improve the quality and scale of our enterprise, just as we've done over the past 2 decades. Finally, kudos to Rob and Shannon and the finance team for increasing the size and term of our $3.5 billion revolver.

如同今天電話會議開頭所提到的，我們高度的活動量同時也搭配同等程度的耐心與紀律；我們仍有信心能部署這些資本，進一步提升企業的品質與規模，正如我們在過去 20 年所做的一樣。最後，也要向 Rob、Shannon 以及財務團隊致意，感謝他們提高我們 35 億美元循環信貸（revolver）的額度與期限。

As we turn to your questions, let us remind everyone that our strategy is the same: we compound cash flow by acquiring and growing niche market-leading technology businesses. This is what we've done for over 20 years and will continue to do so. In addition, our value creation and governance model remains unchanged. We operate a portfolio of market-leading businesses and defensible niches. Each of our businesses has high levels of recurring revenue, strong margins and competes based on customer intimacy, which yields highly resilient organic growth rates.

在我們開始回答各位的提問之前，先提醒大家，我們的策略一如既往：透過收購並成長於利基市場、具領導地位的科技企業，來複利化現金流。這是我們 20 多年來一直在做的事，未來也會持續如此。此外，我們的價值創造與公司治理模式也維持不變。我們經營一個由市場領導企業與具防禦性的利基所組成的投資組合。我們每一家企業都具備高比例的經常性收入、強勁的利潤率，並以貼近客戶的方式競爭，從而帶來高度韌性的有機成長率。

We operate a highly decentralized operational structure that focuses on long-term business building. Our culture sets a very high bar for performance and focuses on continually improving. We are all paid to grow, which reinforces our culture of transparency, nimbleness and humility. Finally, we redeployed the vast majority of our capital to acquire the next great business. We do this with a centralized corporate resource team in a highly disciplined, thoughtful and analytical manner. This strategy, unchanged, delivers compounded and superior long-term shareholder value.

我們採取高度分權的營運架構，專注於長期的事業打造。我們的文化對績效設下非常高的標準，並著重持續改善。我們所有人的薪酬都與成長掛鉤，這也強化了我們透明、敏捷與謙遜的文化。最後，我們將絕大多數資本重新部署，用於收購下一家卓越的企業。我們透過一個集中的企業資源團隊，以高度紀律、周全且分析導向的方式來執行。這項不變的策略，能為股東帶來長期複利且優於同業的價值。

So thanks for joining us this morning. And with that, let's open it up to your questions.

感謝各位今天早上加入我們。那麼，接下來就開放各位提問。

(Operator Instructions) And the first question comes from Deane Dray with RBC Capital Markets.

（接線員指示）第一個問題來自 RBC Capital Markets 的 Deane Dray。

Congrats on the first earnings report under the new look, Roper.

恭喜 Roper 以全新面貌發布第一份財報。

Thank you. Thank you.

謝謝，謝謝。

If we could start, I really like the new breakout on revenue on Page 9 as well as Page 19 in the appendix, which shows you the same information broken out by segment. How do you expect that mix to change over the next couple of years, especially in the conversion and migration to SaaS?

如果可以先從這裡開始，我很喜歡你們在第 9 頁以及附錄第 19 頁對營收的新拆分方式，附錄那頁也把相同資訊按部門拆分呈現。你們預期未來幾年這個組合會如何變化，特別是在轉換與遷移到 SaaS 的過程中？

Yes, Deane. So really, the -- in the recurring line, that 54% line on Page 9, embedded in that line is both the on-premise maintenance and the SaaS. And so the migration will happen inside of that line. Now what we'll see is it'll -- as that happens, we get an uplift from the on-prem maintenance to the SaaS because you're delivering more value, and so you'll see sort of a long-term multi-multiyear tailwind in that line, but it happens and the conversion happens within that singular line.

是的，Deane。其實——在經常性那一行，也就是第 9 頁的 54% 那一行，裡面同時包含了地端（on-premise）維護以及 SaaS。因此，遷移會在那一行之內發生。接下來我們會看到的是——隨著遷移發生，從地端維護轉到 SaaS 會帶來提升，因為你提供了更多價值，所以你會在那一行看到一個長期、跨多年的順風；但這個轉換與遷移，都是在同一條線裡面完成的。

Okay, that's helpful. And then for Rob, look, we're all kind of calibrating the Section 174 and the impact, and I'm glad you added that one sentence that says it doesn't change the total amount, it just changed the timing of the tax payments. Just clarify how that plays out for the course of the year and the comps for next year. And then is there -- on the working capital, that negative 17%, is that the new run rate based upon the new earnings and mix for Roper going forward? And is there still upside to that?

好的，這很有幫助。接著問 Rob：我們都在校準第 174 條（Section 174）及其影響，我也很高興你們加了那句話，說它不改變總額，只是改變稅款支付的時間點。能否再釐清一下這在今年內會如何展開，以及對明年的比較基期會是什麼樣子？另外，在營運資金方面，那個負 17%——這是否會是 Roper 未來在新的獲利與組合之下的新的常態水準？還有沒有進一步改善的空間？

Yes, yes. So on working capital, yes. I mean the 17% is the run rate. I think there is upside, right? We expect to grow these software businesses. As they continue to grow, they'll generate more cash and working capital should get more negative over time. Yes, on 174, it is -- it will be a total $100 million headwind for this year. So it's basically around $25 million a quarter we paid.

是的，是的。先談營運資金：是的，我的意思是，17% 就是目前的常態水準。我認為還有上行空間，對吧？我們預期這些軟體業務會持續成長。隨著它們持續成長，會產生更多現金，而營運資金隨時間推移應該會變得更為負值。至於 174，是——今年總計會有 1 億美元的逆風。所以基本上大約是每季支付 2,500 萬美元。

As you know, we make 2 tax payments in the second quarter, that's why it was $49 million in the quarter. Yes. So obviously, there's been a lot said about this. The law could change at some point, and then we'd get that money back. So it's really just -- you look at the same deductions over time, but certainly, now you have to wait for the deductions basically.

如你所知，我們在第二季會支付兩筆稅款，所以本季是 4,900 萬美元。是的。顯然，外界對此已經談了很多。法律未來某個時間點可能會改變，屆時我們會把那筆錢拿回來。所以這真的只是——你從長期來看仍是相同的扣除額，但現在你基本上必須等待才能享有扣除。

And the next question comes from Christopher Glynn with Oppenheimer.

下一個問題來自 Oppenheimer 的 Christopher Glynn。

So I wanted to talk about the new segment a little bit in the medical products. Talk -- seeing if you could break out some of the supply chain impacts on margins, the revenue gating aspect and any abnormal kind of levels of backlog, how you'd characterize that, how to think about it.

我想談談新的部門，特別是醫療產品。想請你們拆解一下供應鏈對利潤率的影響、對營收形成瓶頸（gating）的部分，以及是否存在任何不尋常的積壓訂單水準；你們會如何描述這些狀況，以及應該如何看待？

Yes. So the performance was very good. So we're certainly, like everyone else who sells products, have some supply chain issues. I mean backlog is, I think, double if you look where we are this year versus the same time last year. So there's plenty of opportunity to continue to grow the revenue. A little bit of margin impact. We think that gets a little bit better in the second half. I think our business has done a great job of pushing through price. And so that takes some time to start to sell the products at a higher price versus the cost. So I think that's a little bit better over time. But everyone is managing it really, really well. So we feel really good about our operations.

是的。整體表現非常好。所以我們當然——就像所有銷售產品的公司一樣——確實有一些供應鏈問題。我的意思是，如果你比較今年與去年同一時間點，我認為積壓訂單大概是翻倍的。因此在營收持續成長方面有很大的機會。利潤率有一些影響。我們認為下半年會好轉一些。我覺得我們的團隊在推動漲價方面做得很好。而從成本上升到以更高價格賣出產品，需要一些時間才能反映出來。所以我認為隨時間推移會改善一些。但大家都管理得非常、非常好。因此我們對營運狀況感到很有信心。

Okay. And for a follow-up, if you look at Slide 12, the tech-enabled products, the EBITDA margins are down about 5.5 points Q2 this year versus 2020 second quarter. Just can you talk just conceptually about that bridge, what that gap represents?

好的。追問一下，如果看第 12 張投影片，科技賦能產品（tech-enabled products）的 EBITDA 利潤率，相較於 2020 年第二季，今年第二季大約下降了 5.5 個百分點。能否從概念上談談這個差距的橋接，這個缺口代表什麼？

Yes. So 2020 was an outlier because of the big Verathon quarter with the -- in the heart of COVID. So that's when Verathon had that just extremely strong growth as we're trying to fight the virus. And so I think probably '19 is a little bit more normalized from a margin standpoint. But we do think that those margins should tick up over time.

是的。所以 2020 年是個離群值，因為 Verathon 在 COVID 最嚴峻的時期有一個非常強勁的季度。也就是說，當時 Verathon 出現了極為強勁的成長，因為我們正努力對抗病毒。因此我認為從利潤率角度來看，2019 年可能更接近常態。不過我們確實認為，這些利潤率會隨時間推移而逐步上升。

And the next question comes from Scott Davis with Melius.

下一個問題來自 Melius 的 Scott Davis。

I wanted to talk a little bit about price. Is there -- I imagine the price escalators in the SaaS. Is it -- is there some sort of basis like CPI? Is it half a CPI? I mean can you give us just a little bit color there, how you think how price gets passed through and those things?

我想談談定價。SaaS 裡應該有價格調整條款（price escalators）。它——是否會以 CPI 之類作為基準？是 CPI 的一半？你能否提供一些背景說明，讓我們了解你們如何把價格轉嫁出去，以及相關機制？

Yes. So there's -- and price -- if you're -- obviously, you're specifically talking about software. I mean there's -- the way you sort of capture price and value capture in software is a little bit different than the product. So in the software, you're right, for all that subscription and maintenance is generally tied to a CPI plus a touch which is -- so we're able to see price.

是的。關於——定價——如果你——你顯然是在談軟體。我的意思是，在軟體中，你捕捉價格與價值（value capture）的方式，和產品業務有點不同。在軟體方面，你說得對，所有訂閱與維護費通常會與 CPI 再加一點點掛鉤，因此——我們能夠看到價格的提升。

The other thing that's just also just naturally embedded in the software business is price. I mean it's a part of the growth algorithm in each and every year. The customers are used to taking price. And it's -- and obviously, with inflation, interest rates higher, then there'll be a little bit more price. The offset to that is the cost structure in the software businesses increase through increasing labor wages, but it happens over a longer arc of time, and it's less spiky than what you see in the product businesses. So naturally, as the pipeline of that is you get a nice matchup of the increase of labor cost with the pricing on the software part of our business.

另外一點是，軟體業務本身也自然內嵌了定價。我是說，這是每一年成長算法的一部分。客戶也習慣接受漲價。而且——顯然在通膨、利率更高的環境下，漲價幅度會稍微多一些。與此相對的是，軟體業務的成本結構會因勞動薪資上升而增加，但這是在較長的時間弧線上發生，波動也不像產品業務那麼尖銳。因此自然地，整體管線的結果是：你會看到勞動成本上升與我們軟體業務定價之間有一個不錯的匹配。

And is there a difference in kind of pricing when you think about recurring versus nonrecurring? It's kind of Dean's question. I was a little confused in your answer, and maybe just because I only had one cup of coffee. But is there a difference -- I mean, you mentioned you kind of add more value and you get a little bit more price, but go back and talk to me like I'm 3-year old.

那麼，當你們思考經常性與非經常性收入時，定價上會有差異嗎？這有點像 Dean 的問題。我對你剛才的回答有點困惑，也許只是因為我只喝了一杯咖啡。但是否有差異——我的意思是，你提到你們增加更多價值，然後可以多收一點價格；但請回頭用跟我像 3 歲小孩說話那樣的方式跟我講一次。

Okay. So apologies if I was confusing. So there's 2 issues we're talking about. So on price, on software; if you're a well-run software company, you're taking price on both the cost of the software in a perpetual world and the maintenance on that. So you move them up in tandem, where you don't end up in sort of a challenging thing that some software companies do that ends up being a bad thing is they only take price up on the maintenance and not the initial software. Our companies take them up in tandem, so they stay together. So that's the pricing point.

好的。如果我剛才講得讓你困惑，先說聲抱歉。我們其實在談兩件事。第一是軟體的定價：如果你是一家經營良好的軟體公司，你會在「永久授權（perpetual）」模式下的軟體售價，以及其維護費上都進行漲價。你會同步調升兩者，避免落入某些軟體公司會遇到、而且最後會變成壞事的情況：只提高維護費的價格，卻不提高初始軟體的價格。我們的公司會同步調升，讓兩者保持一致。這就是定價的部分。

Dean's point was asking about what's the relationship between on-premise maintenance, which we get paid once we deliver the perpetual software and SaaS and the SaaS shift. And so as we migrate or "lift and shift" a customer from on-premise to our cloud, as you're doing that, you're delivering more value, not only hosting the application and all the security, you're also delivering the most recent versions or keeping them on the most recent version so they get to take advantage of the most recent features. And you're just generally eliminating sort of the headaches of running the software for the client. Because of that value bundle of SaaS, you are able to capture more value. Oftentimes, 2x on a recurring basis or a touch more. So it's -- that's about the value proposition of moving to the cloud versus your straight question of what happens in a price increase environment for the software.

Dean 的重點是在問：本地端維護（我們在交付永久授權軟體後一次性收費）與 SaaS 以及 SaaS 轉型之間的關係是什麼。因此，當我們把客戶從本地端遷移或「lift and shift」到我們的雲端時，在這個過程中，我們提供了更多價值：不僅是代管應用程式與所有安全性，我們也提供最新版本，或讓他們維持在最新版本上，讓他們能享用最新功能。整體而言，我們也替客戶消除自行運行軟體的各種麻煩。因為 SaaS 這個價值組合，你就能捕捉更多價值；很多時候，在經常性收入基礎上可達 2 倍，或略高一些。所以——這是在談移轉到雲端的價值主張，而不是你直接問的：在軟體處於漲價環境時會發生什麼事。

And just to give you a sense, we're roughly 75% subscription and 25% in maintenance today. So we're still -- we're already largely in the cloud. There's roughly $200 million of license revenue that would go away over time and convert to that subscription revenue that Neil mentioned. But as you know with us, that's a long period of time, driven by the customers. And so it's a really good story, I think, on the recurring revenue line.

再讓你有個概念：我們目前大約 75% 是訂閱、25% 是維護。所以我們仍然——我們其實已經很大程度在雲端了。大約有 2 億美元的授權收入會隨時間推移而消失，並轉換成 Neil 提到的那種訂閱收入。但如你所知，對我們而言這是一段很長的時間，取決於客戶。因此我認為，這在經常性收入這條線上是一個非常好的故事。

And the next question comes from Joe Giordano with Cowen.

下一個問題來自 Cowen 的 Joe Giordano。

So now you've gone through the GICS code change and all this. I'm just curious, Neil, Rob, what's your initial kind of conversations were with the new cohort of investors that you'll likely talk to now? And what were some of the things that maybe some initial pushback you're getting from them, some things that they like and how have those discussions kind of overall have gone so far?

你們現在已經走過 GICS 代碼變更等等。我只是好奇，Neil、Rob，你們與現在可能會開始接觸的新一批投資人，初步對話大概是什麼樣子？他們有哪些可能的初步反對意見、有哪些他們喜歡的點？到目前為止，整體討論進展如何？

Yes. I would say the GICS code change, it's not like this light switch that's happened or all of a sudden, every conversation we're having with the buy-side is a different person. In fact, it's quite the opposite. I mean it's a slow evolutionary sort of change here. We've been to a singular software conference where we had half a dozen conversations. They were generally the same conversation we have with our legacy shareholder base, which is what's your business model, what's your flywheel and what are the risks, what's the durability and quite similar. A little bit -- a little discussion, obviously, on growth, a little bit on the cash flow dynamics of the business, a little bit of the business model mix between recurring, nonrecurring, but they're the same questions really.

是的。我會說，GICS 代碼變更並不是像打開電燈開關那樣，突然之間我們與買方的每一場對話都換成不同的人。事實上恰恰相反。這是一個緩慢、演進式的變化。我們去過一場單一的軟體會議，進行了半打左右的對話；內容大致上與我們和既有股東基礎的對話相同：你的商業模式是什麼？你的飛輪是什麼？風險是什麼？耐久性如何？都很類似。當然會多一點——會有一些關於成長的討論，一些關於企業現金流動態的討論，一些關於商業模式中經常性與非經常性組合的討論，但基本上就是同樣的問題。

Now I was just saying a lot of excitement, right? Because I think as we said at that conference, we were at intra-quarter that we're the fourth largest application software company, I think, in the S&P 500. And a lot of these analysts are just getting to know us, and I think they're really excited when they look at our past and our future prospects. So we're excited to expand to a new shareholder race while, of course, also making sure that our current shareholder base is continually happy with their investment in Roper.

我剛才是說，大家非常興奮，對吧？因為我想我們在那場會議上也提到，我們在季中時點是標普 500 裡第四大的應用軟體公司。我認為很多分析師才剛開始認識我們，而當他們看我們的過去與未來前景時，會非常興奮。所以我們很期待擴展到新的股東族群；同時，當然也要確保我們現有的股東基礎持續對他們在 Roper 的投資感到滿意。

So when you think about M&A, does the divestment like is there a step change function that happened internally with CRI that makes finding new companies that clear the threshold harder? I'm guessing just mathematically taking out the industrial businesses, make CRI higher or more negative or however you want to look at it. And then like maybe you could have slotted in a business that previously could have improved the profile of Roper, but maybe now that business might not meet the threshold. Is that accurate? Or is it just not material enough to worry about?

所以當你們思考併購（M&A）時，這次剝離是否在內部對 CRI 造成了某種「階躍式」變化，讓找到能達到門檻的新公司變得更難？我猜從數學上來看，把工業業務拿掉會讓 CRI 變得更高或更負——或你想怎麼看都行。然後也許以前你可以把某個業務納入，來改善 Roper 的輪廓，但現在那個業務可能不再符合門檻。這樣理解對嗎？還是其實影響不大，不用擔心？

It's not material enough to worry about, but let me tell you why. I mean the -- for essentially my entire almost 11 years I've been here, we've looked at the same cohort of targets, which are wonderful asset-light software businesses. And that's the cohort we're looking at now, right? So it's just -- it's not about becoming even more asset-light once yours is asset-light. As we are, it's about staying as asset-light as we are. That's why the universe of targets is plentiful.

影響不大，不需要擔心，但我告訴你原因。我的意思是——基本上在我在這裡將近 11 年的整段期間，我們看的都是同一批標的：很棒的輕資產軟體企業。而這也是我們現在在看的那一批，對吧？所以這不是在於當你已經是輕資產之後，還要變得「更」輕資產；像我們這樣已經很輕資產了，重點是維持我們現在的輕資產程度。這也是為什麼標的宇宙很充足。

And the next question comes from Allison Poliniak with Wells Fargo.

下一個問題來自 Wells Fargo 的 Allison Poliniak。

On that Network Software business, understanding that freight matching sort of the growth and sort of the moderation there, could you maybe talk to the balance of the businesses in that segment in terms of the overall combined? Is it mid- to high single-digit growth? I'm just trying to understand the impact that the freight match had on it.

關於那個 Network Software 業務，理解到貨運撮合的成長以及那裡的放緩，你能否談談該分部中其他業務的整體合併表現？是中到高個位數成長嗎？我只是想了解貨運撮合對它的影響有多大。

Yes. Most of the businesses in that segment are normally sort of mid-single-digit organic businesses that occasionally do higher than that, very rarely do lower than that. And so I think as you get into the second half of the year, those are sort of doing what they do, and then you just have a little bit of moderation in the freight matching growth.

是的。該分部的大多數業務通常是中個位數的有機成長，有時會高於那個水準，很少會低於那個水準。所以我認為當你進入下半年時，那些業務大致上就是在做它們一貫會做的事，而你只是看到貨運撮合的成長稍微放緩一些。

Got it. And then just kind of pulling on to that last M&A question. Certainly, the software is a focus in terms of M&A. What about tech-enabled products? Is there anything you guys are kind of looking at so we may be clear that hurdle? Or is it sort of off the table there at this point?

了解。然後延續剛才那個 M&A 問題。當然，軟體在併購上是重點。那科技賦能產品（tech-enabled products）呢？你們是否也在看一些可能跨過門檻的標的？還是目前這一塊基本上不在考慮範圍內？

No. It's definitely not off the table. It has not been off the table. We just haven't actioned anything there in quite a while. So if it's an asset-light tech-enabled product than a business that is a leader in a small market, the competitive forces are stable, sort of all of our criteria, then it's definitely something we would look at.

不，絕對不算不在考慮範圍內。它一直都在考慮範圍內。我們只是有一段時間沒有在那方面採取行動。所以如果是一個輕資產的科技賦能產品——而且該企業在一個小市場中是領導者、競爭力量穩定，並且符合我們所有的標準——那絕對是我們會看的。

And the next question comes from Julian Mitchell with Barclays.

下一個問題來自 Barclays 的 Julian Mitchell。

Maybe I just wanted to ask a couple of questions on the software business. First off, in terms of freight match, help us understand the cyclicality of that business. There's been a lot of scare stories about freight recessions all year long in the U.S. How should we expect that business to perform in that type of macro? And I guess NSS has enjoyed fantastic operating leverage. We see the margins going up to the low 50s in Q2. What's the risk to that sort of incremental margin, if you like, from freight match rolling? And then any color in Application Software about the license business? Again, there were some questions after the SAP update earlier this week.

我想就軟體業務問幾個問題。首先，關於貨運撮合，請幫我們理解這個業務的景氣循環性。今年以來美國一直有很多關於貨運衰退的驚悚說法。在那種總體環境下，你們預期這個業務會如何表現？另外我想 NSS 享有非常出色的營運槓桿，我們看到第二季毛利率（或利潤率）上升到 50% 出頭。若貨運撮合回落，對那種你所謂的增量利潤率風險有多大？最後，應用軟體方面，授權業務有什麼補充說明嗎？本週稍早 SAP 更新之後又出現了一些問題。

So let me take the DAT one and the Application Software license one, and I'll let Rob talk about the margins, if that's okay, in NSS. So first on DAT, DAT grew through the 2019 freight recession. There's -- but it has been just spectacular the last couple of years at DAT for two reasons. There's certainly a cyclical tailwind it's had, there's also a secular tailwind that it's enjoyed. The secular tailwind endures. That's why the business is able to sort of grow through in '19. And principally, in summary version, that secular tailwind is that the spot freight markets are just a more liquid, less -- easier to transact end market today than it was 2 years, 3 years, 5 years ago. So you see that the spot market, market share of the total freight increasing over this time mark, and that's been a benefactor of DAT and its customers, and that's going to continue. As DAT in the market, it will continue, period, but then it may accelerate over the next 5-plus years as we further tech-enable the broker's business model, right?

那我先回答 DAT 的部分以及應用軟體永久授權的部分，然後如果可以的話，我讓 Rob 來談 NSS 的利潤率。先談 DAT：DAT 在 2019 年的貨運衰退期間仍然成長。當然——但過去幾年 DAT 的表現非常亮眼，原因有兩個：它確實受惠於景氣循環的順風，同時也享有結構性的順風。結構性順風仍然存在。這也是為什麼該業務在 2019 年仍能成長。簡而言之，那個結構性順風主要是：即期貨運市場（spot freight markets）如今比 2 年、3 年、5 年前更具流動性、交易更不——更容易成交的終端市場。因此你會看到即期市場在整體貨運中的市佔率隨時間提高，這一直讓 DAT 及其客戶受益，而且會持續下去。DAT 在市場中的趨勢會持續，句點；而且在未來 5 年以上，當我們進一步以科技賦能經紀商的商業模式時，它甚至可能加速，對吧？

As it relates to the license -- excuse me, the perpetual license activity in application software, it's solid orders in the first half and in the quarter. I think we're maybe modestly different than like an SAP because our price points are much, much lower, right? I mean our -- something like that. So we're not -- these are -- we're important and we're sizable for our customers. But these are -- our price points, I mean, a big deal for us is a $1 million, $2 million, $3 million deal, not multiples of that. So Rob, do you want to...

至於授權——不好意思，我是說，應用軟體中的永久授權活動，上半年以及本季的訂單都很穩健。我想我們可能跟 SAP 這類公司有些微不同，因為我們的價格點低很多很多，對吧？我的意思是，我們——大概是那樣。所以我們不是——這些——對客戶而言我們很重要、規模也不小。但我們的價格點——我的意思是，對我們來說一筆 100 萬、200 萬、300 萬美元的交易就是大案子，而不是那個數字的好幾倍。所以 Rob，你要不要……

Yes. And then on the margins, I would not be concerned that margins would take a step backwards as growth were to slow there. I mean these are businesses that sort of all have those structural EBITDA margins in that 50%-plus range. And so I'd expect that to continue even if growth were to slow a little.

是的。而且就利潤率而言，我不會擔心在那邊成長放緩時利潤率會倒退一步。我的意思是，這些業務基本上都有結構性的 EBITDA 利潤率，約在 50% 以上的區間。因此，即使成長稍微放緩，我也預期這種水準會持續。

That's helpful. And then maybe sort of following up more for Rob this line. Just you have announced this big divestment, you've got restated numbers out there. How should we think about any changes from here around or changes in the sort of go-forward run rate for things like tax rate in the P&L? Maybe corporate costs and then kind of free cash flow conversion. Any changes in those 3 metrics as we look at the sort of new go-forward Roper?

這很有幫助。接著可能沿著這條線再追問 Rob 一下。你們已宣布這筆大型剝離，也已公布重述後的數字。那我們應該如何看待從現在起在損益表（P&L）中像是稅率的任何變化或未來常態化（run rate）的變化？也許還包括公司費用，以及自由現金流轉換率。當我們看新的、未來的 Roper 時，這 3 個指標會有任何變化嗎？

Yes. There shouldn't be any meaningful changes in terms of tax rate. I think in terms of conversion, I mean, clearly, there's a lot of noise around cash taxes this year as we've been talking about, and that's sort of part of the price to pay also when you do these transactions that we think are the best thing to do for the company in the long term. So I think if you look forward to next year and beyond, I mean, our free cash flow conversion should be at the levels it's been historically and probably a little bit better because we have even more negative working capital. Just better quality portfolio, less cyclicality. And so I think the cash flow conversion should get a little bit better over time. And corporate, yes. I mean, I think the run rate that you see now sort of for continuing ops is the right run rate moving forward.

是的。就稅率而言，不應該有任何重大的變化。我想在轉換率方面，我的意思是，很明顯地，正如我們一直在談的，今年現金稅（cash taxes）有很多雜訊；而且當你做這些我們認為對公司長期最有利的交易時，這也算是必須付出的部分代價。所以我認為，如果你看明年及以後，我們的自由現金流轉換率應該會回到歷史水準，甚至可能更好一些，因為我們會有更多的負營運資金。投資組合品質更好、景氣循環性更低。因此我認為，現金流轉換率隨時間推移應該會略為改善。至於公司費用，是的。我想你現在看到的持續營運（continuing ops）的常態化水準，就是未來前進的正確常態化水準。

And the next question comes from Steve Tusa with JPMorgan.

下一個問題來自 JPMorgan 的 Steve Tusa。

Just a question on the cash. I know you guys don't guide on cash, but usually it gets on kind of an underlying basis, seasonally better in the third and the fourth. Anything changed from that perspective? And any kind of color on how you'd expect it to kind of bounce back here in the third and the fourth from second quarter levels? It's a little bit lumpy in the first and second quarter putting cash...

想問一下現金。我知道你們不提供現金方面的指引，但通常在第三季和第四季，從某種底層基礎來看，季節性會更好。從這個角度看有任何改變嗎？另外，能否談談你們預期第三季和第四季會如何從第二季的水準反彈？第一季和第二季的現金有點起伏，把現金……

Yes, I think that's right. So seasonally, fourth quarter is always our best working capital quarter because that's when you're getting a lot of the renewals in software. So we would expect working capital to be a pretty good guy in the second half. And we sort of talked about the cash tax situation. And I think everything else is performing really well to generate a lot of cash.

是的，我想你說得對。所以就季節性而言，第四季一向是我們營運資金表現最好的季度，因為那時候軟體會有大量續約。因此我們預期下半年營運資金會是相當好的助力。我們也談過現金稅的情況。我想其他一切的表現都非常好，能產生大量現金。

Okay. And then on the revenue side, when you think about your recurring, is there on the accounting there in 606, do you book a percentage of those deals, the 3-year, 5-year type of deals? Do you book a percentage of those upfront as per the 606 accounting? I know you have different businesses in there, so maybe they behave differently from an accounting perspective. But is there an element of that in the revenue there?

好的。那在營收面，當你思考你們的經常性收入時，在 606 的會計處理上，像 3 年、5 年期這類合約，你們會依 606 在一開始先認列其中一部分嗎？我知道你們裡面有不同的業務，所以在會計角度可能表現不同。但營收裡是否有這樣的元素？

Yes. Steve, this is Jason Conley. A lot of the term licenses, there's a portion of that, that does get recognized upfront. So multiyear term licenses is very small for us. Only a couple of businesses have that. And then our perpetual licenses are also booked upfront as part of 606, a portion of it.

是的。Steve，我是 Jason Conley。很多定期授權（term licenses）確實有一部分會在一開始就認列。所以多年度定期授權對我們來說占比很小，只有少數幾個業務有。然後我們的永久授權（perpetual licenses）也會依 606 在一開始入帳其中一部分。

And the next question comes from Joe Ritchie with Goldman Sachs.

下一個問題來自 Goldman Sachs 的 Joe Ritchie。

Maybe just the first question on this new portfolio going forward. How do I think about like the right long-term organic growth rate for this business over time? I think we've historically kind of thought about your legacy businesses kind of like somewhere in that 4% to 5% type organic growth rate. I'm just wondering if this business is going to achieve healthier growth longer term.

也許先問第一個問題，關於這個未來的新投資組合。長期來看，這個業務合理的長期內生成長率應該怎麼看？我想我們過去對你們的傳統業務的看法大概是 4% 到 5% 左右的內生成長率。我只是想知道，這個業務在長期是否能達到更健康的成長。

So it's -- when we did the -- announced the transaction with the industrial and process businesses, we showed a chart that showed the long-term growth rate -- historical long-term growth rate of the go-forward portfolio is about 6%. So that's where we would expect that's the baseline, and then obviously, we work every day to try to make that better. But right now, that we would sort of say 6% to the new norm.

所以——當我們宣布與工業與流程業務的那筆交易時，我們展示了一張圖表，顯示未來投資組合的長期成長率——歷史長期成長率大約是 6%。因此我們預期那會是基準；當然，我們每天都在努力讓它更好。但就目前而言，我們會把 6% 視為新的常態。

Okay. Got it. That's helpful. And then I guess this whole conversion from on-prem to your SaaS business, it seems like you guys are well on your way there. I'm just curious like how much is that kind of like added to the growth rate in recent years? And then that extra, call it, I don't know if it's an additional 20% to 25% that you are expected to convert, how do we think about that as kind of like an added benefit that you'll continue to see in the coming years?

好的，了解。這很有幫助。那我想，這整個從地端（on-prem）轉向你們 SaaS 業務的轉換，看起來你們進展順利。我只是好奇，近年來這大概為成長率增加了多少？另外，剩下那額外的——我不知道是不是還有額外 20% 到 25% 預期要轉換——我們應該如何看待這點，作為你們未來幾年會持續看到的額外好處？

Yes. It's been, as we said for a while, it's been a modest growth driver. And just to go through it for a minute, there's the good guy and there's a bad guy, right? So the bad guy is if you're in a year where you're selling a perpetual deal, let's say it's a $1 million deal. You booked the vast majority of that revenue in that year. If that deal converts to a subscription or a SaaS deal, maybe that's -- I mean, maybe that's priced at, I don't know, $300,000 a year, plus or minus. So in that end year, there's a $700,000 bad guy between the upfront license versus the SaaS, and that's assuming you booked the SaaS deal on January 1.

是的。正如我們講了一段時間，它一直是溫和的成長驅動因素。我稍微說明一下，這裡有「好的一面」也有「壞的一面」，對吧？壞的一面是，如果你在某一年賣出一筆永久授權的交易，假設是 100 萬美元，你在那一年會認列絕大部分的營收。如果那筆交易轉成訂閱或 SaaS 交易，可能——我的意思是，可能定價大概每年 30 萬美元上下。所以在那個當年度，前置授權與 SaaS 之間就會有 70 萬美元的「壞的一面」，而且這還是假設你在 1 月 1 日就把 SaaS 交易入帳。

So there's a little bit of bad guy when that happens. But what is overwhelmed to that for us to a slight net positive is the lifting and shifting of our large installed base of maintenance customers. So as you take the -- in this same example, if you have a cohort of customers paying you $300,000 a year, you're going to lift and shift them into the cloud in the plus or minus $600,000 a year. So you get that and that nets out to be a slight good guy. We've gotten many years of that dynamic. Even if I had to guess, it's 7 to 10 years of that dynamic because we're not forcing our customers to migrate. We're very much in the posture of meeting our customers where they are relative to wanting to do this. And that's why it will take a while to do it.

所以當這種情況發生時，會有一點「壞的一面」。但對我們而言，能壓過它、使淨效果略為正向的是：把我們龐大的既有維護（maintenance）客戶基礎做 lift-and-shift。也就是說，在同樣的例子裡，如果你有一群客戶每年付你 30 萬美元，你會把他們 lift-and-shift 到雲端，變成每年大約 60 萬美元上下。你得到這個之後，淨下來就會是略微的「好的一面」。我們已經有很多年都在經歷這種動態。即使要我猜，這種動態可能會持續 7 到 10 年，因為我們並沒有強迫客戶遷移。我們的姿態非常是去配合客戶在想做這件事時所處的位置。這也是為什麼它需要一段時間。

Yes. I'll just add that every business is on a different sort of phase of this journey, right? I mean many businesses we have been SaaS in the very beginning, and they're always 100% SaaS. Other businesses were mainly on-prem like an Aderant. That's really the one business we haven't talked about, where really their customers are really starting to move to the cloud. Deltek has been a mix over time. Most of the rest of the businesses are really kind of already SaaS, at least several businesses that we bought the last 4 or 5 years.

是的。我再補充一下，每個業務在這段旅程中的階段都不同，對吧？我的意思是，我們有很多業務從一開始就是 SaaS，而且一直都是 100% SaaS。其他業務原本主要是地端，例如 Aderant。那其實是我們還沒怎麼談到的一個業務，他們的客戶現在真的開始往雲端移動。Deltek 隨時間推移一直是混合型。其餘大多數業務其實已經相當偏 SaaS，至少是我們過去 4、5 年收購的幾個業務。

The next question comes from Jeff Sprague with Vertical Research.

下一個問題來自 Vertical Research 的 Jeff Sprague。

I guess as we're transitioning to software, I'll just ask an annoying industrial question. Just going back to the deal itself and the structure, there are some additional detail on that 8-K, obviously, that wasn't -- certainly wasn't clear to me at the time the deal was announced. And what's still not clear to me is what the back end might look like for you guys on this deal, right? With CD&R paying $829 million for 51% of the equity, and then with new debt on the deal of 1.950 billion, I mean, it looks like the enterprise value is $3.6 billion and 11x multiple, right? If you guys have taken 2.6 out upfront, it's very unclear how we think about the back end.

我想既然我們正在轉向軟體，我就問一個惱人的工業問題。回到這筆交易本身與其結構，在那份 8-K 裡顯然有一些額外細節，這在交易宣布當時——至少對我來說——當然並不清楚。而我現在仍不清楚的是，這筆交易對你們而言後端（back end）可能會是什麼樣子，對吧？CD&R 以 8.29 億美元買下 51% 的股權，然後交易上還有 19.50 億的新債務，我的意思是，看起來企業價值是 36 億美元、約 11 倍倍數，對吧？如果你們已經先拿了 26 億的前端（upfront）對價，那後端要怎麼看就非常不清楚。

Yes. So the way that we would think about it, I'll just -- I'll put it through the lens of our new partner, right? So by the way, the math just went through, we would say it's correct, right? And so it was that $3.5 billion, $3.6 billion is the enterprise value upfront. That's 11x this year, 13.5x last year. In terms of EBITDA, more like in that 13 range if you look over the last 5 years, given the cyclicality. We, too, so the amount of capital that CD&R put in is basically equal to our amount of capital still in the business. CD&R's business model is to drive a 3x-plus money-on-money return over their investment horizon. So if we and they are successful, then you get a triple of our stub of equity, right? It's sort of a framing of how to think that. So maybe there's a couple of billion, plus or minus, of upside in addition to getting the liquidity on the $800 million or $900 million that we have there. So call it, $2.5 billion to $3 billion on the back end if, underscore and capitalize, if things go successful over the next 5-or-so years.

是的。所以我們看待這件事的方式，我就——我會透過我們新合作夥伴的視角來說明，對吧？順帶一提，數學算下來，我們會說這是正確的，對吧？因此，前端的企業價值是35億美元、36億美元。以今年來看是11倍，以去年來看是13.5倍。就EBITDA而言，若考量景氣循環、回看過去5年，大概更接近13倍左右。我們也是如此，CD&R投入的資本金額，基本上等同於我們目前仍留在該業務中的資本。CD&R的商業模式是在其投資期間推動超過3倍的投入資金回報（money-on-money return）。所以如果我們和他們都成功，那麼你就會看到我們那一小段股權（stub of equity）變成三倍，對吧？這算是一種思考框架。因此，除了我們在那裡的8億或9億美元所獲得的流動性之外，可能還有正負幾十億美元的上行空間。所以可以說，如果——我強調並大寫，如果未來大約5年左右進展順利，後端大概是25億到30億美元。

Is that based on the premise that they actively do other things with the business? For example, other M&A in the business? And wouldn't that dilute you? Or would you participate in kind of incremental investments in the business to get it ready for eventual sale?

這是基於他們會積極對該業務做其他事情的前提嗎？例如在該業務中進行其他併購（M&A）？那不會稀釋你們嗎？還是你們會參與某種增量投資，讓該業務為最終出售做好準備？

Yes. So we're totally aligned -- two questions in there, right? So the implied is around the growth thesis of the company. So we're completely aligned with our partner on the growth thesis. It centers on continuing to invest in the organic growth that we've been doing with these businesses for the last 4-or-so years and then building it at sort of a capital deployment or M&A flywheel, a repeatable flywheel.

是的。所以我們完全一致——你這裡有兩個問題，對吧？隱含的問題是關於公司的成長論點。我們與合作夥伴在成長論點上完全一致。核心在於持續投入我們過去大約4年在這些業務上所做的有機成長投資，然後把它打造為一種資本部署或併購（M&A）的飛輪，一個可重複運作的飛輪。

There's -- without getting into the details of how the company is going to execute that because it's still very much being formed, but at the highest level, this is a -- one, it's a cash-generative asset, right? So the goal for all of us is to run a levered asset and use that leverage in the cash generation as a primary source of funding so you don't have a dilutive effect. If there is a transaction where CD&R is going to kick in equity, then we have the option to consider that. And we'll make that a deal-by-deal sort of decision. We think it's in the best interest of our shareholders. And so yes, there could be a little bit of dilution, but that dilution is sort of somewhat factored into the math that I gave you before.

在不深入公司將如何執行的細節——因為這仍在成形中——但在最高層次上，這是——第一，它是一項能產生現金的資產，對吧？因此我們所有人的目標，是經營一個有槓桿的資產，並把槓桿與現金產生能力作為主要資金來源，這樣就不會產生稀釋效應。如果有一筆交易需要CD&R投入股權，那我們有選擇權去考慮是否參與。我們會逐案（deal-by-deal）做決定。我們認為這符合股東的最佳利益。所以是的，可能會有一點稀釋，但這種稀釋在我先前給你的計算中已經某種程度上納入考量。

And the next question comes from Rob Mason with Baird.

下一個問題來自Baird的Rob Mason。

Just first, a technical question around the guidance. So the core growth guidance for the year is 8% to 9%. Did that change versus where it would have been on an apples-to-apples basis 3 months ago?

首先，一個關於指引的技術性問題。今年核心成長指引是8%到9%。相較於3個月前在同口徑（apples-to-apples basis）下，這有變化嗎？

I would say slightly higher, maybe like 0.5% or so. But I mean it's -- I think we are 7% to 9% in our last guide and the businesses we divested were slightly higher. Those go away, and we've raised to 8% to 9%. So I think it's a little bit of a net raise, but not by a lot.

我會說略高一些，大概高0.5%左右。但我的意思是——我想我們上一次的指引是7%到9%，而我們剝離的那些業務略高一些。那些不再計入後，我們把指引提高到8%到9%。所以我認為淨額上是小幅上調，但幅度不大。

Would you -- where would you slot that increase within the segments, the 3 segments now?

你會——你會把這個上調歸因到哪個部門？現在的三個部門之中。

So I'd say the biggest business that has a better outlook is Neptune. They're just doing incredibly well, as we said in the prepared remarks in their second half, given their backlog, given their ability to execute and deliver to their customers. It looks really, really strong. So that's really the one I think that's gotten quite a bit better. Everything else I'd say is about the same as we had it 3 months ago.

我會說展望改善最多、而且也是最大的一個業務是Neptune。他們表現非常出色，正如我們在準備好的發言中提到的，下半年在手訂單（backlog）以及其執行與交付客戶的能力都很強。看起來非常、非常強勁。所以我認為這一塊確實改善了不少。其他部分我會說大致與3個月前差不多。

And the next question comes from Alex Blanton with Clear Harbor Asset Management.

下一個問題來自Clear Harbor Asset Management的Alex Blanton。

Yes. I just wanted to look at this $2.30 for a minute. What was that in the first quarter?

是的。我想先看一下這個2.30美元。第一季是多少？

Yes. It was about $0.50 in the first quarter and, what, $0.52 in the second quarter.

是的。第一季大約是0.50美元，然後第二季是——多少——0.52美元。

And then what is your guidance for that for the third quarter?

那第三季你們對這個的指引是多少？

So we're not guiding it by quarter, right, because it's in disc ops, but it's $2.30 for the full year. So generally, the fourth quarter is the best quarter for those businesses given the cyclicality in the oil and gas markets.

所以我們不按季度提供指引，對吧，因為它在終止經營（disc ops）裡，但全年是2.30美元。一般而言，第四季是那些業務表現最好的季度，因為油氣市場具有景氣循環性。

Yes. Well, the thing was I was trying to work out what the total would have been with that in there for the rest of the year by quarter. But I guess I can do it with what you just said. I'd like to talk about the future, and the future is acquisitions, of course. How does that look now? What's the pipeline like? How far are you along in putting the work to $7 billion? What are you working on? What kinds of things are you working on? Just give us some color on that because I think that really is what is going to give investors confidence.

是的。嗯，我是想把它按季度拆開，算出今年剩下時間如果把那個包含進去，總額會是多少。但我想我可以用你剛才說的來算。我想談談未來，而未來當然是併購。現在看起來如何？管線（pipeline）如何？你們在把工作推進到70億美元這件事上進展到哪一步？你們在做什麼？在看哪些類型的標的？請給我們一些色彩（color），因為我認為那才是真正能讓投資人建立信心的部分。

I appreciate the question and the opportunity to address it. So it's been a very above-average level of activity really for this year. Obviously, we've not posted anything of size, just a couple of small tuck-ins. We're being -- while we have $7 billion, we're continuing to be just ridiculously selective as we've always been. We run this sort of -- we have our criteria. We stay committed to the criteria. There's a lot of analytics, there's a tremendous amount of discipline and a ton of patience. And the reason we have that posture is we're making decisions to put companies in the portfolio, which we view as a forever thing. And so every deal matters, everyone's got to be right and everyone has got to meet the criteria. And so -- but we're super busy, and we'll continue to sort of keep this posture and to grow the quality and the scale of the enterprise. But we -- there's no timetable on that. We're just going to -- we're going to do the right deal at the time in which it presents itself.

感謝你的提問，也謝謝你給我們機會回應。就今年而言，活動量確實非常活躍，遠高於平均水準。顯然，我們還沒有宣布任何大型交易，只有幾筆小型補強式收購（tuck-ins）。雖然我們有70億美元，但我們仍然——一如既往——極度挑剔。我們有一套標準。我們堅持這些標準。有大量的分析、極高的紀律，以及非常多的耐心。我們之所以採取這種姿態，是因為我們是在做把公司放進投資組合的決策，而我們把這視為永久持有（forever thing）。因此每一筆交易都很重要，每一筆都必須正確，每一筆都必須符合標準。所以——但我們非常忙，而且會持續維持這種姿態，提升企業的品質與規模。不過我們——沒有時間表。我們只會——在交易出現的時候做正確的交易。

But do you think that you'll be able to do some this year?

但你認為今年你們能做成一些交易嗎？

We would like to be -- we would like to do it. But again, there's no timetable. There's no clock ticking in the back of mind or this team, or our Board's head about we have to get x dollars deployed by x date. So I think that leads to bad decision-making, but it's an active market. So the odds are we'll get something done this year, but we'll just have to see how it goes.

我們希望——我們希望能做成。但再說一次，沒有時間表。我們腦海裡、這個團隊或董事會的腦海裡，都沒有一個倒數計時器說我們必須在某個日期前部署多少資金。我認為那會導致糟糕的決策。不過市場很活躍，所以今年完成一些交易的機率不低，但我們得看看進展如何。

Yes. Yes, just we're very active working on a lot of different projects like we always are. So we're certainly very active.

是的。是的，我們一如既往非常積極，正在推進許多不同的專案。所以我們確實非常活躍。

And just characterize the pipeline of how many businesses are available compared with the past. And what are the prices like compared with the past and so on?

那請描述一下管線：可供選擇的企業數量相較於過去如何？價格相較於過去如何？等等。

Yes. So I mentioned it's -- we never want to quantify the number of deals either by number or dollar size in a pipeline. We think it's -- for us, is it sufficient or not. And so it's clearly sufficient. I said at the beginning of your question, it's been an above-average level of activity for this year. Valuations, hey, it's high-quality assets are still highly priced. I mean that's a bit of the reason why we're being patient. And we'll just -- we believe that market comes to us over time, and so we remain patient for the right company with the right characteristics at the right price.

是的。所以我提過，我們從不想用數量或金額去量化管線裡的交易。我們關心的是：對我們而言是否足夠。因此很明顯是足夠的。我在你問題一開始就說過，今年的活動水準高於平均。估值方面，嘿，高品質資產仍然價格很高。我的意思是，這也是我們保持耐心的部分原因。我們會——我們相信市場會隨時間向我們靠攏，因此我們會保持耐心，等待在合適價格下、具備合適特徵的合適公司。

And this concludes our question-and-answer session. I would now like to turn the call back over to Zack Moxcey for any closing remarks.

我們的問答環節到此結束。現在我想把電話交回給Zack Moxcey，請他做結語。

Thank you, everyone, for joining us today. We look forward to speaking with you during our next earnings call.

感謝各位今天加入我們。我們期待在下一次財報電話會議中與各位交流。

Thank you. This concludes today's presentation. Thank you for dialing in, and you may now disconnect your lines.

謝謝。今天的簡報到此結束。感謝撥入參與，您現在可以掛斷線路。