Okay, good morning. So I'm Olivier Bohuon. I'm the Chief Executive Officer of Smith & Nephew and I welcome you to our presentation of the second quarter results 2011. I will speak about our achievements for the second quarter and then to Adrian for the Q2 numbers. When Adrian is finished, I will come back and discuss my observations in finance about Smith & Nephew, our industry for my first months here. So I'll then talk about the changes I intend to make to better focus our resources to deliver value for our customers and for our shareholders. As usual, we'll take questions at the end of the formal presentation. So despite the difficult environment, we've had another strong quarter of revenue growth. Overall, our revenues were up and underlying 5% to just over $1 billion. It's another good performance as our market conditions remain soft. Once again, Orthopaedic Reconstruction generative revenue growth at above the market rate. The highlight remains our U.S. franchise, which grew 10%, compared to the U.S. market gross of minus 3%. Stromile [ph] is now consistently delivering the good growth going forward. We'll now be challenging the team to beat it from here. Endoscopy grew 5%. In the U.S., our gross rate was higher than for some quarters. Within Europe, we're now seeing the impact of austerity measures more clearly in our numbers. Despite the difficult environment in Europe, Advanced Wound Management was our fastest-growing business. Our growth continues at above the market trade in the large part due to our negative pressure when therapy product range, which will continue to expand. The trade profit margin was 21.9%, and Adrian will talk to you through the details behind this, including some nonrecurring factors. Adjusted earnings per share were $0.181, an increase of 6% benefiting from…

Thank you, Olivier, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. If you can turn firstly to Slide -- I think it's 9. Yes, 9, and the income statement. Revenue in the quarter was $1.077 billion. As Olivier mentioned, this represents 5% underlying sales growth after adjusting for exchange rates on quarter 2 last year. We had one fewer sales to end quarter 2 this year. And last year, growth in average daily sales was therefore about 1% higher. Trading profit in the quarter was $236 million, an underlying reduction of 3%. Reported trading margin of 21.9% was 160 basis points lower than quarter 2 last year. This margin was slightly lower than we had expected. The main drivers of this reduction were in cost of sales, to principally to a somewhat higher growth in lower margin sales than we had expected and to the normal quarter-by-quarter variation in SG&A spend with a small bunch in the regular greater expenditures. This quarterly falling margin does not impact our intention to deliver a broadly constant margin in medium term at around 24%. You'll hear from Olivier in a few moments about the sharpening of our focus both on growth areas and on achieving significant available efficiencies to fuel that growth. Interest costs are down on last year, mainly reflecting our lower debt. Moving to the next slide, Slide 10, and moving further down the income statement. The tax rate for quarter 2 is 30.8%. The rate we continue to expect for the full year is 60 basis points lower than quarter 2 last year. EPSA in quarter 2 were $0.181, an increase of 5.8%. This is higher than the trading profit growth, principally due to the weaker dollar. Turning to the next slide, Slide 11, and an analysis of revenue by business segment.…

Okay. Well, Adrian, thank you. I would now like to talk to you as to my observations and findings about Smith & Nephew and our industry. Whenever a company gets a new CEO, there's a lot of speculations about what is going to change, what does he want to do, what could change the strategy. I do believe, I do not believe in change for change's sake. When I make changes is because we see our anticipated changes in our environment, customer, markets, competitions and we need to address this to be successful. However, I come here as a fresh pair of eyes. As people keep pointing out of me, I am the first non-internal CEO appointed in Smith & Nephew, in Smith & Nephew's 150 years of history. And certainly the first French one. No doubt a challenge. That means I can bring all my experience to this great company without any preconceived ideas. Much were still the same, the values, performance, innovation, trust, the customer focus, the need for innovation, importance of quality people. But what is clear is that we are operating in an increasingly changing environment and we have accepted this, and we are adapting to it. Over the next few slides, I'm going to take you to all those things and what I've seen at Smith & Nephew and [indiscernible] the challenges we face and the ambitious agenda I setting to Smith & Nephew's future direction. So as confirmed in my first month at Smith & Nephew, well, the IR visit time. As you may expect, I've been in visiting all the largest site in the U.K., in the U.S., in Europe, in Asia. And I've met all the senior management team and many of the employees around the globe to discuss the markets, to…

Well, let me start first with growth. Again, there's no one market. There's one word, the street markets. You have the established markets and that common scenes you find in the established market our price pressure, government issue, strong economic issues and the market. I can summarize it. It's in the low single digits. And will remain this way. I don't foresee any big bump on these markets. And here, the name of the game is not to surf on the market because there's no market. So the name of the game, as you have seen here is to bring innovation, be more efficient and gain market share. That's what we are doing actually. And that's what we're going to focus on. And that's what I want the management to focus on. Second type of markets, here you can start from the growth. At the same time, you'll also have to capture share and these are the emerging markets. They are BRIC market, plus maybe Mexico, South Korea, Turkey, whatever. But again, we have decided to focus on 4 geographies and not on 8 or 9 just to be sure that we have enough resources to invest there. And we are not diluting our efforts. So here, it's I think a question of surfing plus getting share and being strong and find the right investment. And I think innovations also, but the right innovation and the right portfolio. Because again, if you want to be strong in the emerging market, it's not just be strong by launching high-tech at the low price and deteriorate the margin. It is having the right cost of good, the right price and then make a profitable growth in the emerging market, which is what we want to do. And see, you have a bunch…

I have 3 questions. Firstly on the new strategic framework, I'm just curious why you think it's necessary to make some changes. Smith & Nephew's done well in Orthopaedic. You are outgrowing the market, you're doing well in Endoscopy and also in Wound Care. So why the need to make changes today? I'm concerned about what happened when previous management changes were made with Orthopaedic recon and trauma. There were changes. And even after 4 to 5 years only then were some of these things corrected. I would say they probably failed initially so why make these changes? Question #2 is for Adrian. On the EBIT margin guidance for 2011. Based on the simple math. You sort of need a meaningful improvement in the second half. Why is the second half better than the first half when you're highlighting increased pressure in Europe from austerity, pricing pressure and so forth? And then the third question is for the year again on the longer-term EBIT margin thoughts. You've made some comments about making more investments and some changes. Is it fair to say that you think margins will be flat longer term or do you think longer term margins can go up at Smith & Nephew with all these changes that you're proposing?

Well, let the third be the first one then [indiscernible] will come back on the EBIT question. Why do we change? That's a good question. We change because we are in peace, okay? That's means that, first one, it's the right time to change. I mean there is no -- nothing wrong. We do well, as you're mentioning. We have the right management and we also believe that the market is changing totally. And what I've seen coming here is not enough focus and started to use more where focus or that's exactly what I found. So people were going a little bit everywhere. And I wanted to have the top managers responsible and accountable for some specific markets. So that's why we have addressed the Wound and New Surgical Devices division in the established market and create something else, to avoid dispersion. I think it's important to talk about the why did we unite Ortho and Endo? Well, you're right, they do well, they do well. But what you don't see from mix and rewards is the duplication of efforts, duplication of processes, the fact that we are very often common customers and we are seen by 2 different people who do not talk to each other. So this is something which is not something you can see when you are not inside. And I tell you, this is very, very obvious. And making these guys together will definitely help to save a lot, to be more efficient, to be more productive, and to certainly divert some resources to do something else.

Yes, the first question, Michael, why do we expect margins to be stronger in the second half than the first half. I think the answer is three-fold. One is seasonality. If you look -- absent last year when we had the BlueSky adjustments in the first half which will not repeat this year, which of course is the second reason. And then thirdly, there was some bunching of irregular costs which we highlighted. Small but meaningful in quality which we don't expect to get one for the rest of the year. Those are the 3 reasons.

And the medium-term margin?

Well, yes, I'd love to improve it. But I think if we keep it flat this will be a good achievement, which is what we want to do and what we want to fund with the price erosion we have in the market. With the issue facing the market. So we're driving for some of these [indiscernible]. We have a number of things to see, to do as you have seen. I mean, R&D investment. I mean, this year again, we invest a lot in the R&D business. I mean, I told you I want to inject $300 million in R&D in the next 5 years. This year, we are making new investments in the bio materials, very significant. We have all these emerging market investments to realize. So you know what? I think it's pretty good use of the money to prepare the future and invest in these businesses.

Nav Malik from Matrix. Just a couple of quick questions. On the R&D spend, the ortho industry has remained so stubbornly around 4%, 5% sales in terms of R&D. Absolute spend compared to, say, pharma [ph] is more in the 15% range and pharma [ph] has obviously not necessarily had those productivity gains. But with the spend going up, one of the things you said I think at the full year results was that you were looking to try and get products to the market through the R&D engine, which would reduce complexities or cost at the operating theater level for example and improve clinical outcomes. So you make the reason to use the approximately [ph] competitive in an environment more compelling. How can you sort of elaborate on that to us for us to try and understand why that R&D investment is really justified? Because at the end of the day all the orthopaedic plays have the same option. They can all increase their R&D spend likewise. And on PECO [ph], which looks like a pretty good product, it seems to me that if you're trying to get the aspirations into the BRIC economy with some of your product lines, PECO [ph] might be well-suited given presumably the better margins, the simpler cost and distribution, the lower level of support you need. And if you look at some of the countries like India and the [indiscernible] region, Diabetes is pretty much barreling. So it must be a market you should be addressing.

Second part of it, yes, you're right. I mean this is definitely a big market for Wound and certainly opportunities for PECO [ph]. I do agree with you. Coming back on your first question on the R&D, well actually, yes, you're right. It's more 5%, 6% R&D on sales in India to our business. By the way, we are spending 3.8% R&D on the service with this $151 million. So we are not exactly at the level we want to be. We have additional investment to do. We have to refill some money for some money for this Emerging Market portfolio. We have to inject in the very materials and some new opportunities. So I do believe we need to put more money in R&D. And you know, again, let's be serious on this one. I mean, the growth is coming from where? It's not just coming from -- take the Wound, the Wound portfolio. The wound portfolio is not the gross driver of the company. Advanced Wound Management, because of the innovation is just driving this gross to 8%. So if you do not bring this innovations and adapt it... [Technical Difficulty]

So what was your question again?

[indiscernible] R&D spend. This when we show the obviously [indiscernible] full year results. I think you talked about really trying to target innovation through reducing operating procedural times and getting better clinical outcomes, or that's the way you get market share. So in terms of the R&D spend, how do you sort of develop, deliver on that ambition? And what type of products would come through and where would the pressure points be in terms of the margins as well in the medium term?

I think that one of the things I've discovered here is that despite the fact we have a number of re-innovation, I was not very impressed by the process of selecting the innovations. So obviously, we have great innovations but, you know, I do think and I think Adrian shares that, but there is a way to look at the portfolio and choose the right investment in terms of NPV. Here it was more I have a good product that something's nice. But then how do we prioritize that? While -- actually, we are working now with the NPVs. We look at the model. We work with risk adjustment, we look at the fixed sales, we look at the risk we have in the price reimbursement and we find the least of 10 priorities, which for us are the best for the corporation. So this is the way we are going to work now. More priorities, more focus, more productivity or so. And again, [indiscernible] of R&D money for the innovation market, which was not at this stage established. And again, why not? it was not because people were not willing to go there. It was because the focus was more on the big markets. Nobody was asking for it. And that's why having someone focusing on the emerging market, telling this is what winning in the emerging market. This is what you are going to deliver within this referenced environment will change the game.

Several questions, if I can. One, on the Endo-Ortho combination. Can you talk a little bit about how the roles of the sales reps will change going forward? Will they cross out, will they not? How are you thinking about getting better efficiency out of them that you've been talking about, at least in concept? The second about emerging markets, and again thinking about the sales force. Since you're not separating the business necessarily by business line, will every rep sell every product? Or how are you thinking about organizing that business? And lastly, the R&D approaching [indiscernible] investment. A lot of your competitors, a lot of your peers, when they go into emerging markets the approach they take is instead bringing out some of the older product portfolios to get that cost of manufacturing advantage that you discussed. So how is your approach going to be different and what really are you thinking about when we say developing products specifically for emerging markets?

Okay, going back to the last point, which is the Emerging Market portfolio. You have two ways of dealing with that. You have to either acquire a local manufacturer of products in the specific market and potentially export them actually in other places, which is, one, at low cost but good quality, [indiscernible] Smith & Nephew, which is something that's absolutely critical. It is not because it's not the high end of the Tech that you do not want to have quality. I think that's very important. And second one is to work with our own engineers on developing specific products for these emerging markets. But then, the problem, the cost of manufacturing is that we cannot do that in very high cost places. That we have to be localized potentially to make them at low-cost and then the right pricing in the market. Sales force, second point in the emerging market. If I've mentioned the focus of the management, I've never said that sales force will be the same. It will not be the same. Potentially it can be the same Ortho-Endo because the target, they're after the same customers. But on the [indiscernible] different. One, you have some nurses, you have some pharmacies, it's not all the same product nor is in distribution channel. So sales force is something that we're going to address locally according to the market specificity, because they are different in India, in China, in Brazil. So we're going to work on this. The efficiency -- you are terrible, Veronika, because you asked me the question before the meeting, and my answer was, "I don't know." I mean, putting together under one management, the Ortho and Endo, yes we will have in many places, common customers and some reps can call the same surgeon. That's fine. But it's not general, and so it will be again a case-per-case work that we have to do depending on the country, depending on the type of customers we have, depending on the system and so on and so forth. So I cannot answer to you now. But that's something we're going to look at very specifically. But that comes back again to my point on sales force efficiency and productivity. Adrian, you want to add something?

No, I think that's right. This is not about putting sales forces [indiscernible]. That's a complete misunderstanding of this reorganization, if that's in your mind. David Adlington - JP Morgan Chase & Co: Dave Adlington from JPMorgan. A couple of questions. Firstly, one of the headwinds you faced in the quarter on the margins at least has been from mix. I was wondering if your could give us some greater color on that and the expectations going forward, giving the sources of your growth would appear to be having the same sort of mixed headwinds. I mean the greater growth coming from potentially lower margin areas? And second, for Adrian, the reporting lines going forward, are we going to get 4 sets of sales numbers and 4 sets of trending profit numbers? And it would seem to me that that's going to be very concentrated in the Advanced Surgical Systems. Can you comment to that?

Yes, okay. In terms of the headwinds on margins, where are they coming from and will they continue, yes, essentially, we had faster growth in -- some products were slightly lower. Gross margin for VERILAST and VISIONAIRE in particular and in similar geographies. Will they continue? Yes, they probably will. What does that mean? It means efficiencies need to match it, so that's the way it is, David. It's a good news problem, frankly, the high growth. So absolutely, we accept that. Absolutely, that's taken into account as we have our forward-looking views on our margin. In terms of the reporting lines going forward, we haven't finally settled on what it will look like, David, frankly. Although I repeat what I said in the prepared presentation. That we won't change anything until next year. We will maintain. [Audio Gap] attention to maintain visibility on the top line. So we won't stop distinguishing minimal invasive or Endo sales from -- Trauma sales from Reconstructive sales. As you go down the P&L, that will be more challenging, frankly, because part of the purpose of this is to manage them jointly. So exactly what the content of it is, don't know. We will develop that over the next couple of quarters. And I'll share it with you on the [indiscernible]. Just how many segments we'll report is also -- we'll just have to wait and see because [indiscernible] quite small. So exactly what that will look like, we'll work out over the next couple of quarters.

Martin Wales UBS. Firstly, given this pressure to emerging markets, what do you need to beef up your compliance organization to make sure that you're compliant with U.S. regulations for operating international markets given how important that market is to you still? Secondly, given that you've had a look at Negative Pressure Wound Therapy, you'd like to put some sort of long-term potential enrollment that Adrian's been somewhat reluctant over the years. And finally, how can you advance with management organization in the U.S.? Clearly, Negative Pressure Wound Therapy is being more successful excluding that. The U.S. still looks like an outlier in terms of performance. And how do you improve the broader advance would management in the U.S. in particular?

Okay, let start with the Q1 and the compliance in emerging markets. Again, we have one way of operating in the world. It's not 2 or 3 ways, we operate in the similar in the U.S., in Europe in the emerging markets. Compliance is absolutely critical. We have 17 compliance officers in the company working on this. We're setting with the development of the American market increases [indiscernible] of compliance officers in the business. But I tell you, there is no 2 ways of looking at compliance there is one way, which is being compliant. That's pretty simple.

We're as one on this. It's clearly going to be big, but we're absolutely not putting a number out. It's going fantastically.

You can make easy calculation by the way. If you take the gross and what has been announced in the past, it's pretty easy...

Martin doesn't just want the sales now. He wants the sales going forward. They're going to be big, Martin.

You can extrapolate also. No. I'd say it's a big part of the business and it definitely the growth of this that we do not want to forecast on this [indiscernible] forecast.

Martin, you're right. The growth in the U.S. of our Wound business by NPWT. The growth excluding that has been for a significant period and still is pretty modest. I mean, pretty much flat. And that is a disappointment for us. It's been a disappointment for some time. Frankly, the focus on getting NPWT to grow has been the right place to focus in the recent past because the potential. Because you just got us to agree is or say is very substantial. As that gets significantly bigger and significantly better established, yes, we would expect to see the rest of the Wound business come back into something. It was a growing organization. But just at the moment the priority is quite likely on reaping the benefits of that NPWT investment.

Tom Jones from Berenberg. Two questions. Firstly on European austerity pressure, this is really the first quarter we've seen it wash over into your Arthroscopy business. I was just wondering how you are feeling that manifesting itself? And the Ortho business, it's been a fairly level mix of price mix and volume and Wound seems to be mainly price in the less-advanced parts of your Advanced Wound Management business. So I just wondered how that splits falls out in Arthroscopy, particularly in Europe. And the second question, a more general one. I just wondered if the events of the last few weeks have caused you to reassess your thoughts about how much and when you might be deploying some capital? I suppose, if I'm being cheeky, I'm asking about the buyback.

Buyback, there's no plan to buy back. I think that's a pretty simple answer.

In which the follow-up question is, why not? Your stock's cheaper that it ever has been. Your balance sheet is as unlevered as it has been. Debt for you is still reasonably cheap. Why isn't it a serious consideration?

Yes. I mean the answer is, you heard Olivier talking about the role of inorganic as well as organic growth. We believe having a strong balance sheet at the moment is right thing to do for shareholders. You see opportunities, both smaller technology-oriented ones, smaller geographic ones and potentially slightly bigger ones in the Wound and Minimally Invasive joint area. And that's the reason. It's as simple as that, Tom. Clearly, in 2 years time, it's proved that there haven't been opportunities that make sense for shareholders then clearly, we're going to looking again. But just at the moment, that really...

You got the best part of $1 billion of available liquidity. You're throwing off free cash to a couple of $100 million a quarter. Are you trying to tell us that you can see $1 billion plus, plus the cash flow of acquisition opportunities out there? Or you're just being super conservative given what's going on in the wider market?

We can see significant -- we have a significant number of opportunities. We firmly believe that a strong balance sheet is the right thing to have for now. Again, if it turns out, the big opportunities turn out not to crystallize and not be there, then we [indiscernible] it. But just for the moment, that seems to us the right place and the right thing to be doing for shareholders.

And on the austerity?

On the first question, yes, you're quite right. This is the first quarter where we've seen in our Endoscopy business significant impact in Europe from the austerity measures. It is mainly not price, it is mainly mix and volume waiting this type stuff around Europe. And mix -- and a willingness to trade up and some degree of trading down. We're not seeing any fact that applies to all our businesses. [indiscernible] but the it is the case that we're not seeing significant changes in the like-for-like pricing pressure. I mean it's there but it remains modest.

It's there and will remain. It doesn't change.

Justin Smith, MF Global. Just to go back to the buyback question again, sorry to have to go back to it. Buying back stock is obviously a good investment so couldn't you share, gentlemen, both of your thoughts with regards to the acquisitions criteria that you've both got, how those might change going forward, just so we can understand why returns on acquisitions are going to be better than buying back the shares?

Sure. I mean, fundamentally 2 criteria. One is strategic fit, one is financial. And the strategic fit, you've heard a bit about and maybe Olivier would like to expand on that in a second. In terms of financial criteria, discipline is absolutely important to us. We haven't done that many acquisitions, but those that we have done and have looked at, we apply a range of financial criteria. The single most important to us is return on capital in year 3, cash-on-cash return on capital. Dilution accretion, we're going to play all sorts of games in that when you got interest rates as they are now. So that our pre-criteria. It's not the only measure but it's the single most important financial measure, I would say.

Coming back on, I think that's consistent with we discussed also. I mean exactly this criteria is absolutely clear. Regarding the strategic intent, which is I also believe the important -- I believe in size in the Wound Management, so I think that in Advanced Wound can be bigger, much bigger, will help. I believe the potential in the Minimally Invasive surgery is huge. And I do believe it's definitely an area of focus for us. And so those 2 fields are keeping us busy. Yes, sir?

Thank you very much. I was going a variation on the same theme as the last 2 questions, really. When you describe the business as you saw it, you mentioned consolidation in industry #2 sort of quite high priority. Yet when you gave the list of things you were going to do. You then mentioned more M&A, and that was almost the last night. So you've sort of described a dash of growth on the one hand. Yet do you really believe you have the critical mass in a consolidating industry to do it? And shouldn't M&A be higher on the list? And is it really higher on the list one way or another?

Well, coming back on my first point which was the consolidation in the industry. I was referring at the consequence of this for us in terms of share voice. We are fighting against bigger players investing more money in that sort of terms in specific area. And so it means for us that it's a stretch. So which means that we, I guess, we invest more SG&A and that's so we can do [indiscernible] and be more conductive with resources. We inject the money where it should be or be more efficient. And also being bigger, which is [indiscernible] part of the game, which is why I'm mentioning consolidation as a key strategic intent for the company. So I don't know if I answer your question but I don't think it's…

I suspect another variance to the question is, do we think that we are too small to prosper in the new world in reconstructive surgery implants.

That's the corollary.

Well, I don't want to suspect that was going to be -- no, we absolutely don't. Is it necessary to do, to merge in Reconstructive to survive, we'll thrive in the [indiscernible]. We do not believe that to be the case at all. Period.

We believe again innovation, which is the driver. If you look at the statistics of who has spent money and what level of money has been spent in this industry in the past. I think it's what we have spent, we are extremely productive and [indiscernible]. I think this is the driver of the growth. It's one part of the solution. Then you can have innovations and be bad on the market, which is something different. So I think we have to both integrate both. But size, you know, it's a fact. I mean, we have a different market now. We have different players. We are bigger to spend more so we must do everything.

I have 3 questions. The first question is regarding your management teams in your established markets. Do you now know who those teams would be? And a follow-up from that is with the combination of Ortho and Endo. How smooth do you expect that process to be? Do you expect to see some disruptions from that and how long do you think that would say? The second question is with regarding to your investments in emerging markets. You gave us some targets for what you expect the BRIC countries to deliver. Can also provide some indications on the international markets? And then the final question is on your Knee business. Certainly, fantastic performance there. However, a number of your competitors are also coming out with products that have differentiated Smith & Nephew. Can you give us some sense of how much of your Knee outperformance is coming from VISIONAIRE versus VERILAST? Clearly, VERILAST has would be far as is that of VISIONAIRE, number competitive threats there.

Okay, let me start with the 4 first questions and the first one agent going to get. So establish market management first question. Yes, we have now announced the 2 heads of the established markets and the division so Advanced Wound Management based in the U.K. And Mike who is based in Dover running the Memphis facilities Endo and Ortho facilities. So this is announced and this is official. Will it be a smooth process? Yes, I do hope it will be a smooth process. We're now preparing the second line of management which will be announced early September basically. And we are very smooth process ongoing, so I do not expect any business disruption. This has been since the beginning, the target no business disruption, the opposite making it better and smoother. Investment in emerging markets versus investment in the international market. So investment in emerging markets. I cannot give you a figure. I gave you want to be at these high times bigger in 2015 but your questions were about the rest of the markets I tell you, I do believe we'll do better. Was an about it -- if you exclude India and China, I think it's about $350 million.

Less than $300 million in.

It's less than $300 million in international arena is pretty good at seeing double-digit compound almost so I do believe we have a slight improvement of this due to the focus of this management and improvement of the distribution channels and efficiency. Yes, I do believe so.

On your 19th question, essentially I think what is driving the Knee growth frankly probably both VISIONAIRE and are less our major competitors to that Knee growth. Wouldn't necessarily agree with you that VISIONAIRE is winnable yes of course number there is a comment on, but as said before, we see a whole area either instruments or potentially ultimately being a very for to want as we head into the future. I think that's it. Thank you.