SJM - The J. M. Smucker Company (SJM) Q4 2023 Earnings Call Transcript
2023-06-06 11:31:02 ET
The J. M. Smucker Company (SJM)
Q4 2023 Earnings Conference Call
June 06, 2023, 09:00 AM ET
Company Participants
Aaron Broholm - Vice President, Investor Relations
Mark Smucker - Chair of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
Tucker Marshall - Chief Financial Officer
Conference Call Participants
Andrew Lazar - Barclays
Peter Galbo - Bank of America
Ken Goldman - JPMorgan
Steve Powers - Deutsche Bank
Matt Smith - Stifel
Cody Ross - UBS
Pamela Kaufman - Morgan Stanley
Jason English - Goldman Sachs
Presentation
Operator
Good morning, and welcome to the J. M. Smucker Company's Fiscal 2023 Fourth Quarter Earnings question-and-answer session. This conference call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions]
I'll now turn the conference call over to Aaron Broholm, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.
Aaron Broholm
Good morning, and thank you for joining our fiscal 2023 fourth quarter earnings question-and-answer session. I hope everyone had a chance to review our results as detailed in this morning's press release and management's prepared remarks, which are available on our corporate website at jmsmucker.com. We will also post an audio replay of this call at the conclusion of this morning's Q&A session.
During today's call, we may make forward-looking statements that reflect our current expectations about future plans and performance. These statements rely on assumptions and estimates, and actual results may differ materially due to risks and uncertainties. Additionally, we use non-GAAP results to evaluate performance internally. I encourage you to read the full disclosure concerning forward-looking statements and details on our non-GAAP measures in this morning's press release.
Participating on this call are Mark Smucker, Chair of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Tucker Marshall, Chief Financial Officer.
We will now open up the call for questions. Operator, please queue up the first question.
Question-and-Answer Session
Operator
Thank you. The question-and-answer session will begin at this time. [Operator Instructions] Our first question is coming from Andrew Lazar from Barclays. Your line is now live.
Andrew Lazar
Great. Thanks so much. Good morning, everybody.
Mark Smucker
Morning, Andrew.
Andrew Lazar
Maybe to start off by our math, if we adjust your fiscal '24 guidance for the Jif recall and stranded cost impacts, we come up with underlying EPS growth of about 3% or so at the midpoint. I guess with your expectation for 9% comparable sales growth and gross margin expansion and such, just trying to get a sense of what might be holding back underlying EPS growth in '24 or whether there's understandably some conservatism built in given the still dynamic operating environment overall?
Tucker Marshall
Andrew, good morning. As you've mentioned, we have 9% top line comparable growth that is really underlying 4% organic business growth, along with 3% associated with the Jif peanut butter recall and also 3% associated with requirements under a co-manufacturing agreement associated with the recent Pet divestiture.
As you think of the bottom line, we do see mid-single-digit underlying organic EPS growth. And I think the one difference where your 3% calculation versus our 5% would be factoring in about $0.14 of onetime benefits that impacted FY '23 as we completed the fiscal year.
Andrew Lazar
Got it. And then you mentioned your expectation for volume growth in every segment in fiscal '24. If we exclude the benefit just getting back some of the - from the Jif recall and some of the contract manufacturing that you talked about, would it still be the case that you would expect volume growth in every segment in '24?
Mark Smucker
Correct.
Andrew Lazar
Great. Thank you so much.
Operator
Thank you. Next question today is coming from Peter Galbo from Bank of America. Your line is now live.
Peter Galbo
Hey, guys. Good morning. Thanks for taking the question.
Mark Smucker
Morning.
Peter Galbo
Thank you guys for the bridges on Slide 7 and 8. Maybe we could just circle back on Andrew's question around volume. Again, if you strip out Jif and Pet and maybe you can discuss a little bit around the co-man agreement on Pet. The rest of the portfolio, I think, really only needs to kind of grow volumes low single digits.
It would seem like you could get there on uncrustable alone. So just wanted to unpack that a little bit and see how you're thinking about maybe just that organic piece within the org sales side [ph] on volume?
Tucker Marshall
Yes, you're definitely seeing the benefits of the expansion of uncrustables and the organic growth, as you've mentioned. You're also seeing some volume growth in the coffee portfolio, and then you're seeing continued momentum in the Pet business as well. And then as it relates to the Jif peanut butter product recall, I think we've talked about that enough, so I won't spend much time there.
But I will acknowledge that we do have requirements under the co-manufacturing agreement associated with the Pet divestiture, which is largely reallocating volume between the plants that we retained and the plants that we sold associated with those Pet brands. That will mostly take place in this fiscal year. There will be some additional co-manufacturing volume that will transition into FY '24. But the predominance is really in this fiscal year as we rationalize or reallocate the supply chain and manufacturing network.
Peter Galbo
Okay...
Mark Smucker
Just one correction. I think he meant into fiscal '25.
Tucker Marshall
Correct.
Peter Galbo
Got it. Got it. Okay. No, that's helpful. And then on Slide 8, with the earnings bridge, it looks like your assumptions around cost or, I guess, COGS inflation may actually be slightly deflationary, and I'm sure there's some to unpack there.
But just looking at the implied, I guess, on SD&A, it still seems like that would be relatively prudent or conservative just given kind of the amount of sales that went out the door with the divestiture. And so what's it going to take kind of to get that work down lower, faster just as we kind of bridge the model? Thanks, guys.
Tucker Marshall
As it relates to the cost of product goods sold, we're seeing some rate base favorability in our overall comps environment, but nothing material to suggest anything from a deflationary standpoint. We still live in an inflationary environment in all of its implications.
As it relates to SD&A, on a year-over-year basis, we are seeing the benefit of the divestiture, so down 5. But we are making some material investments across our platform in the form of preproduction expenses associated with the McCalla Alabama facility. We're also seeing some investments in marketing, and we're also seeing some investments in liquid coffee. And then we will continue to address stranded overhead in this fiscal year as it relates to the $0.60 that we acknowledged in our guidance bridge.
Peter Galbo
Great. Thank you.
Operator
Thank you. Next question today is coming from Ken Goldman from JPMorgan. Your line is now live.
Ken Goldman
Hi. Thank you. I wanted to ask a couple of things about stranded costs. First, is there a way for us to kind of think about what the gross stranded costs are versus just the net? And second, what's the best way to think about - and maybe this goes back to Peter's question about how to sort of eliminate some of the SD&A over time. But what's the best way to think about the ultimate sort of net headwind on a run rate basis once the TSA has passed, once your transformation office maybe has found some additional efficiencies. Just trying to think longer term here, what those numbers might be? Thanks.
Tucker Marshall
So Ken, good morning. In the nearer term, we called out a $0.60 impact. If you did the math, it would be roughly an $87 million operating income impact associated to this fiscal year. And really what is occurring is that net impact is total stranded overhead minus - TSA or transition services agreement, income and reimbursement for certain services and activities that's resulting in that $0.60 or approximately $87 million at operating income.
We will look to address this in fiscal year '24. We will see some lingering impacts into fiscal '25. We're not in a position to comment on that as we work through these agreements along with benefits coming out of our transformation office to address stranded overhead. But in the long run, to your long run point, we look to address all stranded overhead costs associated with this divestiture.
Ken Goldman
Okay. Thank you for that. And then just a follow-up. On that $0.60 figure, whatever the gross number is, obviously, it's higher than that. I think many of us were looking for a little bit of a lower gross stranded cost figure. I think just based on maybe what we've seen or heard about in previous divestitures.
Is this - is there something unique that would lead to a stranded cost figure that's this high or maybe many of us, including me, were just kind of mis-modeling that as we think about what a typical stranded cost situation might be?
Tucker Marshall
Ken, there's a couple of considerations. I don't think there's anything unique here. Stranded overhead costs do exist after you divest 20% of your top line. We completed that divestiture at the end of this fiscal year. We do have requirements over the next - this fiscal year and into fiscal year '25 to support these transition services agreements and co-manufacturing agreements. And so we will begin to address that over time in order to relieve the stranded overhead, but we don't see anything abnormal, but there is work to be done.
Ken Goldman
Thank you.
Operator
Thank you. The next question is coming from Steve Powers from Deutsche Bank. Your line is now live.
Steve Powers
Hey, thanks. Following up on the $0.60, just to be clear. So it sounds like you plan to address - we start to address that $0.60 in the year. So I guess as I - as we think about your guidance, does that embed $0.60 or some number less than that? Just how do I think about the progress you aim to make in the fiscal year relative to the static $0.60 you called out in the guidance range.
Tucker Marshall
So good morning, Steve. The $0.60 reflects our best estimate for the impact to this fiscal year that is embedded in our guidance range. And we will work to relieve that over time and to address it as we move beyond this fiscal year, but is our best estimate, as I've noted, and it is reflected in our guidance range.
Steve Powers
Okay. So - okay. So $0.60 reflects the efforts you plan to make to make progress against those costs in the year, and there will be...
Tucker Marshall
Correct...
Steve Powers
Residual into next year – okay, fine. Great. Thank you for that. And then the other question, just maybe you could help us with the 20% organic growth or the net sales growth call for the first quarter. I think that's a good number more than many were modeling consensus overall. Just maybe the moving parts in there, how much is the Jif contribution, how much is underlying? How much is otherwise, that would be helpful. Thank you.
Tucker Marshall
Yes. So as you think about that, what you're really seeing in the first quarter is the impact of the Jif peanut butter product recall. You're also seeing momentum in the coffee portfolio as it laps a soft first quarter from a prior year, and then you're also seeing underlying base business momentum and aspects like uncrustables, among others.
Steve Powers
Okay. Is there any way to bucket that or quantify that last bit, just the underlying assumption in the first quarter versus the comparison and the Jif or...
Tucker Marshall
With respect to Jif, I mean, we've called out that it's a 3-point impact to this fiscal year. It was a 2-point impact to prior fiscal year, and the predominance of that hit us in the first quarter. So I think that would be your largest driver in your model.
Steve Powers
Yes, okay. Thank you for that. I appreciate it.
Operator
Thank you. Next question is coming from Matt Smith from Stifel. Your line is now live.
Matt Smith
Hi, good morning.
Mark Smucker
Morning.
Matt Smith
I want to ask about the level of promotional activity and innovation you anticipate in fiscal '24. We saw a reduction in specific - more specifically promotional activity over the past couple of years across the industry.
You've said you expect a low single-digit contribution from pricing and most of that is carryover benefit. So do you expect a stronger carryover benefit, and that's offset by a resumption of a more normal promotional environment?
Mark Smucker
Matt, it's Mark. Generally speaking, the promotional environment is very similar to pre-pandemic. In other words, we - competitors are behaving pretty much as expected and rationally our customer relationships as we think about promotions and trade spend as one of the levers to affect price and drive both sales and volume. We are not seeing anything out of the ordinary nor are we seeing elevated trade as it relates to historical keeping in mind that different categories behave differently at different times based on their - based on the underlying commodity costs or what have you. But fundamentally, we don't see anything abnormal in the promotional environment.
Matt Smith
Thanks for that, Mark. And maybe if I could just follow-up on the savings from the transformation office. Could you just talk about the sources of savings you expect some benefit to gross margin and SD&A over time? And is there a phasing component to the offset of stranded overhead when we think about the phasing of profit growth through fiscal '24?
Tucker Marshall
So we are seeing the benefits from our transformation office due to the success of our team and employees who have begun working through the [indiscernible] work streams and setting up the various initiatives. And as we've called out today, at EPS level, underlying organic earnings per share growth approximates mid-single digits or about 5%. And what's supporting that 5% year-over-year growth are benefits from our transformation office. And so it's doing what we intended in support of our near-term and long-term growth expectations.
As it relates to the transformation office as well, it will also support us driving initiatives and advancing initiatives to address stranded overhead during this fiscal year and into next fiscal year as well. And that's how we're seeing the benefits from the transformation office today.
Matt Smith
Thank you, Tucker. I'll leave it there and pass it on.
Operator
Thank you. Next question is coming from Cody Ross from UBS. Your line is now live.
Cody Ross
Good morning. Thank you for taking our questions. I just want to go back to the 1Q organic sales guide for it to be up about 20%. Can you give more color here? How does that break down between price and volume? And then any commentary by segment would be helpful because this is much higher than both our and the Street's expectations.
Tucker Marshall
So we're calling out top line growth year-over-year from a comparable basis of 9%. And again, that breaks down 4% underlying base business growth organic, 3% Jif peanut butter product recall and 3% associated with requirements of the co-manufacturing agreement.
When we think about the impact, what you're really seeing is about 7 points or high single digits of volume mix benefit and about 3 points of pricing benefit as well to support that 9% comparable growth.
Cody Ross
And that's for the full year. My question was really...
Tucker Marshall
Correct. That's on a full year basis, correct. And then we called out the first quarter 20 and that's largely driven by - predominantly driven by volume mix, which is associated with the business momentum along with the Jif peanut butter product recall and it has a component of mid-single-digit plus and price.
Cody Ross
Got it. Thank you for that. And then I just want to switch over to a question on coffee here. Can you provide the mix of Arabica versus Robusta coffee in your coffee segment? And in that context, spot price for Robusta coffee is up nearly 20%, philosophically, how do you balance protecting profit dollars and maintaining market share? Do you expect to lean into promotions more going forward? Or will you try to recover margin? Thank you.
Mark Smucker
Hey, Cody, it's Mark. Thanks for the question. I would just remind the group that when we think about our coffee business, we are managing that business for the long term. And as we think about our hedge position and our physical cost as we bring our hedge - convert our hedge position into physical coffee, we plan and hedge to meet our financial plan.
So just acknowledging that the coffee market has been generally volatile, we have seen sequential improvement in our coffee costs, which should continue through this fiscal year. But we do manage for the - when we think about the cost, we do try to manage for the full year, and our coffee business continues to be extremely healthy in all three of our brands.
So we've seen even premium coffee with Dunkin', which is 100% Arabica, returning to growth as we've adjusted and seen pricing - relative price gaps come back in line to more normalized rates. Folgers continues its strong growth trajectory from a net sales perspective. And then Bustelo is the fastest-growing brand in the category.
So really pleased with the coffee performance. We haven't and aren't willing to talk specifically about the split between Robusta and Arabica, but we do, again, manage for the long term and are very confident in our ability to do so over the course of this fiscal year.
Cody Ross
Thank you. I'll pass it on.
Operator
Thank you. Next question is coming from Pamela Kaufman from Morgan Stanley. Your line is now live.
Pamela Kaufman
Hi, good morning.
Mark Smucker
Morning.
Pamela Kaufman
So there's been investor concern about the current dynamics between retailers and suppliers and that retailers may be adopting a harsher stance around pricing. Do you think that this is fair? And how would you characterize the current report between suppliers and retailers? And is anything changing on the margin?
Tucker Marshall
Yes. Pam, our experience with our retailers, we have outstanding relationships with our retail customers. And as we've navigated through over the course of the next - the last couple of years and multiple pricing changes, we have been able to do so effectively and work with them to really pass along those cost increases in a prudent and justified way.
Our categories are very resilient. We have a relatively low incidence of private label in the categories that we participate. And they - and for that reason, they continue to be very important to our retail customers.
But again, we - when we think about any type of negotiations with them, we want to approach those in the spirit of partnership, as well as making sure that we work with them to only pass along what is truly necessary and justified. And then within our own four walls, manage our costs accordingly as well.
Pamela Kaufman
Thank you. And just a follow-up question on your input cost outlook for fiscal '24. What's your overall expectation for cost inflation? And can you talk about your commodity cost coverage? And then related to that, just your outlook for gross margin cadence over the course of the year?
Tucker Marshall
Yes. So Pam, from a big picture standpoint, we are not seeing material inflation or material deflation. We've seen some rate-based improvement in aspects of our cost profile, but largely in whole on a year-over-year basis from an overall inflationary rate base, we're pretty consistent.
As you think about the flow of margins over the balance of the fiscal year or excuse me, over this fiscal year, we will see margin improvement year-over-year on a total company basis, and we will likely begin to see some margins improvement in each of the quarters as we move forward. But they're generally pretty consistent throughout the year.
Pamela Kaufman
Thanks. That's helpful.
Operator
Thank you. Next question is coming from Jason English from Goldman Sachs. Your line is now live.
Jason English
Hey, guys...
Mark Smucker
Hey, Jason...
Jason English
I am on a couple of different phone lines. Okay. A few different questions still on the docket here. Let's pick up where we just left off margin expansion through the year. Based on the very low profitability of the pet divestment, it looks like you should pick up a few 100 basis points of margin right there. A matter of fact, the entirety of your gross margin expansion for next year, it looks like it should be built just simply on that mix dynamic.
Can you confirm and actually go ahead and just quantify what that mixed tailwind is on a gross and EBIT margin - line, please? Thank you.
Tucker Marshall
So we will see margin improvement year-over-year in our pet portfolio associated with the divestiture. But it will also have the implications of a low-margin co-manufacturing agreement which is required for us to support the transition, and we'll also have some of the impact associated with stranded overhead.
So we will see both margin and segment profit improvement, but we won't realize the full benefits until we work through both the stranded overhead and the co-manufacturing agreements.
Jason English
Okay. And I'm surprised to see including co-man inorganic rather than net against divestments. How long do those TSMs last? When should we expect that to, therefore, turn into an organic sales headwind?
Tucker Marshall
So we have called it out specifically. We acknowledge that on a comparable basis, year-over-year growth for this fiscal year would be 9%. Embedded in that is 4% underlying organic business growth, which does not include the co-manufacturing agreement. We then called out approximately 3% associated with the Jif peanut butter product recall and about 3% associated with the co-manufacturing agreement.
As I said previously, we expect the predominance of that volume to begin falling off at the end of this fiscal year because much of it relates to us reallocating volume and brands to facilities that we divested. And so we'll continue to work through that this fiscal year.
Jason English
Okay. And then sticking on Pet. You've cited capacity constraints in cap. It looks like your capacity constraints panel in comparison to the industry at large. And Mars [ph] who seems to have suffered the worst appears to be back a much more firm foot and reflect what we're seeing in Nielsen data [ph] I think their growth was at 42% or something last quad week. This looks like a problem for you in terms of your ability to sustain volume growth as competitors reengage. Are we misinterpreting what we're seeing in the data? Or is this indeed a headwind that you're planning for and assuming for in your guidance?
Mark Smucker
Yes, Jason, it's Mark. As we've talked over the last couple of years, we've been really proud of our team's ability to navigate through sort of pockets of supply disruption. This is no different and it is one of them. And our demand for - Meow Mix is outstripping supply at the moment. So we actually have already begun plans are in place. We're investing in both infrastructure and labor to make sure that we can improve efficiencies and increase our throughput for the long term.
And so we would expect that those dynamics to stay with us here for - through the first half of the year, but we should come out of it after that and be back to a more normalized supply, demand relationship.
Jason English
And these dynamics, are you referring to the big surge we're seeing in competitive activity or your - or I guess I'm confused because I'm asking about competitive activity is - what are the dynamics that you're referring to?
Mark Smucker
I'm just referring to our own internal dynamics to make sure that we're bolstering supply to meet the demand that we're seeing on Meow Mix.
Jason English
Okay. Thank you.
Mark Smucker
Thank you.
Operator
Thank you. Next question is a follow up from Peter Galbo from Bank of America. Your line is now live.
Peter Galbo
Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the follow up. Just one quick one. Can you just comment on the post shares like you have a decent chunk, obviously, that I don't think is any kind of blackout period? So just like what the plan is, what the time line looks like? Thanks very much.
Tucker Marshall
Peter, as a clarification, we did in both March and May, completed a repurchase of 4.7 million shares with the cash proceeds that we received at closing in support of replacing the divested EPS in support of our FY '24 guidance. And as you mentioned, we do have about 5.4 million shares of post common stock and we will, over time, look to exit those shares on an orderly basis that ensures that we ascribe the value that we deserve against those shares. And so we will continue to look through that during our fiscal year.
None of the benefits associated with any contemplated monetization would be embedded in our guidance range at this time. And we would only embed it at that time once we completed any monetization. But again, I think the important takeaway here is that we'll do this on an orderly basis to ensure that we maximize the value of our position to post [ph]
Peter Galbo
Great, thanks.
Operator
Thank you. I'll now turn the conference call back to management to conclude.
Mark Smucker
Thank you, and thank you all for tuning in this morning. Just wanted to reiterate how pleased we are with our performance of the last fourth quarter and the full fiscal year. I mean, the bottom line is our strategy, which we've done an outstanding job of implementing and executing has allowed us to achieve these results, 13 quarters of exceeding expectations. So we're really proud of that.
Obviously, the portfolio reshape participating in very resilient categories and doing what we say we're going to do, investing in our brands and executing with excellence have really supported our success. And all of that comes back ultimately to our employees who are phenomenal and have really put in the work to get it done. And so we are committed to continuing the momentum and providing solid and consistent shareholder returns. So thank you all for your support. Thank you for listening, and I hope you all have a great rest of your day.
Operator
Thank you, everyone. This concludes our conference call for today. Thank you all for participating, and have a nice day. All parties may now disconnect.
For further details see:
The J. M. Smucker Company (SJM) Q4 2023 Earnings Call Transcript