Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the WPP 2020 Interim Results Conference Call and Webcast. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to hand the conference over to WPP CEO, Mr. Mark Read. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you very much, operator, and good morning to everyone. Welcome to WPP’s interim results call for 2020. I’m here in Sea Containers with John Rogers, our CFO; and Peregrine Riviere, heads up our Investor Relations committee. We’ll take you through the numbers. On Page 2, we should all just take the time to read our Safe Harbor statement and then move on to Page 3, our agenda today. So I’ll briefly take you through the highlights of our results in the first-half, and then John will take you through the financial performance of the company before we come back to an update on the business and how we see it and then some time for people to ask questions. On Page 4. Look, I think, if we had to describe the first-half, I think we would say that we had a resilient performance in what, no doubt, been a challenging environment. It’s clear that COVID-19 had a significant impact on WPP as it has had on business and on society as a whole. And we shouldn’t forget the impact on people’s lives and the people who has lost their life as a result. But turning to our business in the first-half, we saw like-for-like revenue less pass-through costs down 9.5% in the first-half. I’d say that May was the toughest month and we really started the year positively with growth outside of Greater China of 0.4%, but overall results minus 0.6%. In March, we started to see the impact of COVID-19 in a really kind of a half a month impact minus 7.9% and then a decline of 15.1% in the second quarter. And we’ll come on to that. But I think, I’d say, it’s significantly better than perhaps we had anticipated. And then a gradual recovery of minus…

So thank you, Mark. Good morning to everyone. I’m going to take you through the first-half results for 2020. So turning to Slide 6 and starting with the headline income statement. So revenue less pass-through costs down 10.2% on a reported basis, down 9.5% on a like-for-like basis, obviously, reflecting the impact of COVID-19, particularly in the second quarter. Disposals account for 0.8% reduction in revenue, less pass-through costs and with currency being 0.1% favorable, all of which has delivered an operating profit of £382 million, down 38.1% year-on-year, with associate income down £15 million as the benefit of the Kantar investment is offset by COVID-19-related downsides. That delivered a PBIT for the year of £382 million, down 39.6%, with net finance costs down year-on-year to £106 million, obviously, reflecting an improvement in our net debt position that Mark just referred to. That’s delivered a profit before tax of £276 million. And with tax at 23.1%, broadly in line with the same figure last year, delivering a profit after-tax of £212 million. Deducting non-controlling interest delivers profit attributable to shareholders of £191 million and our diluted earnings per share figure of 15.4p. Worth highlighting that our operating margin for the first-half was 8.2%, down 0.3 percentage points year-on-year, but better than the market was expected. So moving on now to the reconciliation of our headline operating profit to our reported operating profit. So you see here the headline operating profit, £382 million I’ve just made reference to, obviously, taking account of the goodwill impairment charge of £2.5 billion that I’ll come on to in a second in more detail; amortization, impairment of intangibles and also the investment write-down of associates, which is largely Imagina at £210 million, £220 million in total, and then reflecting restructuring and transformation costs, which relate…

Great. Thanks very much, John. And I would say that, I think, our financial results do reflect a tremendous amount of hard work by our people and, particularly, our finance people around the world and discipline in how we manage the business. I’ll try to give everyone a little bit more color to what we’ve seen in the first-half, and then talk maybe about some of the implications for how we see the strategic opportunities for WPP. So turning to Page 23. I think the first point to make is that, we have not stood still. And during the lockdown, we’ve continued to make really a solid progress on our strategy, and that our turnaround does remain on track. If you look at the new vision and offer that we set out for WPP, I think, that’s been very much validated by the trends that we’ve seen in the market. Our strong performance in digital media and in commerce and indeed in marketing technology reflects that, as does our new business performance and greater retention of existing clients that have no doubt been reviewed over the first six months of the year. In terms of our focus on creativity, which, as you know, has been a big emphasis for us. We have continued to hire new creative talent. Walter Geer has joined us at VMLY&R in New York. And we’ve had an excellent creative team in Ogilvy New York a couple of months ago to strengthen our creative work there. And I think really across our agencies, particularly in North America, we have been able to attract excellent creative talent, which I think reflects renewed emphasis on the quality of the work that we’ve been able to demonstrate and commitment to creative excellence really across the company. I can’t underestimate…

Thank you, sir. [Operator Instructions] We will now take our first question from the line of Tom Singlehurst from Citi. Please go ahead.

Hi, Tom.

Hi. Good morning. Thank you very much for taking the question, and thanks for doing the call. Yes, I just wanted to go back on that theme of the current environment accelerating changes, because obviously early in the presentation you mentioned within global integrated agencies, we’ve seen GroupM underperform the broader group. And that feels like a sort of new development. Historically, media has always somewhat outperformed. I suppose I hear the point you’re making about it’s just being naturally more exposed to media spend. But how – what line of sight do we have that will sort of revert to being a sort of outperformer within GIA? And how comfortable are you that there isn’t no – a sort of negative acceleration happening there that will have a longer-term impact? So that was the first question. Second question, very briefly on the cost saves. Great that it’s the top end of the £700 million figure, and obviously even better that you’re going to retain some of that. But I’m just interested, worried about whether that constrains your ability to rebound next year when recovery becomes broader base? And then the final question on the reinitiation of the dividend, which is obviously helpful. I’m just interested why – it’s the £120 million or so, you’re going to be returning by the dividend. Why didn’t you just fire up the buyback? Because surely you get more bang for the – for your buck out of that and it’s more sort of temporary and flexible. I’m just intrigued why you chose the dividend over the buyback given the shares are what they are? Thank you.

Well, I’ll take the first question and John can take the last two, and I’ll add anything so I won’t need to. No, I think I’m very comfortable with the strategic performance of our media business. And I think maybe instead of saying GroupM underperform, we may wish to think about as GroupM as most impacted. I mean, clearly, that business is most linked to advertising expenditure. And sure, in the second quarter, in some markets, ad spend was down as much as 30% or 40%. In the United States, advertising spend was down 22%. I think, in the UK, it was closer to 40% in the second book. So I think in that context, it’s not surprising that GroupM was most impacted. But I think just as your analysts that follow media companies would expect advertise spend to bounce back more quickly. I think that we’ll see the rebound in GroupM the other way. So I don’t think we have any particular strategic concerns. I think, it’s naturally just an impact of what we would expect. And I think, more broadly in our business model, the fact that we have a blended business model that’s less linked to advertising spend has made our revenues less volatile, which I think, again, demonstrates sort of the strength, if you like, of our business model. John?

And, Tom, just in relation to your question around cost savings, potentially constraining our ability to rebound next year, I think, far from it actually. We’ve been very careful about the blend of our cost savings. Obviously, some of those cost savings are temporary in nature. So things like freezing on new hires or delaying salary increases or indeed reduction in our freelancers. Some of the cost savings are more permanent in nature in terms of some of the severances that we’ve announced. But we’ve tried to get a blend between those two buckets right in order to ensure that, number one, we’re right sizing the business for the new world going forwards. But equally, we’ve got the flexibility to bring back resource, particularly, for example, freelance resource as and when the market starts to recover. So we’re very, very comfortable that we can respond to the market as and when it starts to recover in terms of our ability to resource. Of course, some of the savings that we’ve announced are, we think, are permanent in nature and I think reflect a change in the ways of working going forward. So if you look at things like our travel expenses and our hotel expenses and some of our staff costs, you will very much see going forward that we will not return to the same level of travel or the same level of hotel expenditure and there’ll be long-term cost savings that will be available. And we’ve sort of given an estimate those at around £200 million or so, so they will be permanent savings. To be absolutely clear, though, they do not reflect what I’ve talked about in the past, which is more structural savings in the context of things like, for example, long-term rent savings, for example,…

That’s very clear. And one final question. Is there any inference from the level you’ve selected for where the sort of full dividend will come back out as and when?

No, not at all. I mean, we made the interim dividend on the basis of, as I’ve just described, confidence in our performance over the next six months or so. And the fact that it’s eminently affordable given our liquidity. But I would not read anything whatsoever into interpolating from that interim dividend what our ultimate dividend policy may or may not be. That is something that we will definitively come back to at our Capital Markets Day towards the back-end of this financial year.

Very clear. Thank you.

Thanks, Tom.

Thank you. Our next question is from Julien Roch from Barclays. Please go ahead.

Hi, Julien.

Yes. Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. The first one is on the cost savings. So upper end £200 million will be permanent. £200 million equates to 184 basis points of 2019 margin. Your margin target was around 15%. Should we add the whole 1.8 to that? Or are those gross savings, then you will reinvest somewhere else? And if you reinvest somewhere else, can we have an idea of how much of the 184 basis points we should keep? That’s my first question. The second one is coming back on Page 29, you’re highlighting e-commerce as one of your strengths. Would it be possible to have an idea of how much that represents as a percentage of net sales approximately in either 2019 or an estimate for for 2020? That’s my second question. And then the last one is the £2.5 billion a goodwill impairment. Does it create tax loss carryforward? And if yes, how much? Thank you.

I’ll let John do the first and the third. On e-commerce, clearly, it’s difficult to identify specific e-commerce projects, and we’re not organized around those four areas. But we’ve done some work, and we believe it’s around 8% of our net sales generated from the e-commerce area. John, you want to talk about cost savings and…

Yes. So just, Julien, in response to your question on cost savings, your math is impeccable. So all else being equal, you will see that fall through. But, of course, the big caveat there is all else being equal and that may or may not necessarily be the case. We will come back to this at our Capital Markets Day when we hope to be able to set out in more detail as a consequence of an update through the strategy, what the future financial targets and projections for the business are going to be going forward. I think it’s fair to say at this stage, though, that all else equal, we will see that benefit flow through the bottom line. Now we need to go through the detail and obviously talk about where we might want to invest that or whether we let it drop through. So I wouldn’t want to be too prescriptive at this point. But the math is right and the benefit is clearly there on a permanent basis. As I said already, that doesn’t – that benefit doesn’t reflect further upside in relation to why might describe as more structural cost savings. This is very much taking out costs on a BAU basis. We’re going to update the market towards the end of this year on the more structural cost savings. In relation to the £2.5 billion impairment, that’s a non-tax item, so that won’t create a tax loss carryforward to be clear.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next question is from the line of Matti Littunen from Bernstein. Please go ahead.

Hi, Matti.

Good morning. Within your online media business during COVID-19, do you see any shift between open exchange programmatic and the more closed walled garden platforms like Facebook? The other question, speaking of Facebook, how do you see the impact of their IDFA changes on your online media business? Thank you.

Yes. So I think the – broadly speaking, I’d say, we see – we’ve seen continued growth in spend on Facebook and Google and probably a little bit more resilience there than we have on the exchanges. I think on the Facebook front, we’re going to have to see how that works through. But I would expect that, if they’re limited in their ability to use data, then that will naturally impact the spend that goes through those platforms, if not in terms of volume of impressions, certainly in terms of value, and they’re talking about sort of the data list impressions or when you lose the data signal, the value of an impression declines by 40% to 50%. So I think we would see some reduction in absolute spend. The question is where – how and where one would divert that spend to and where it would go, and what Facebook will do in other ways? I would say, generally, we are moving to a world where we do rely less on cookies and where we are targeting media in different ways and increasingly building powers to have our own source of data around media, increasingly moving to contextual targeting. I wanted to be very much like traditional media. We’ll look at the content of the page and decide what message to serve on the content of the page, and increasingly understanding how we take clients’ own first-party data and activate that in a secure way and privacy-compliant way on media channels. So I think that it’s a sort of moving feast. And net-net, the sort of interaction between the platforms and the competitiveness of that is going to drive how spend. But I don’t think one can sort of take a linear inference from those changes to how spend will flow.

Very helpful. Thank you.

Our next question is from Richard Eary from UBS. Please go ahead.

Hi, Richard.

Hi, Richard.

Yes. Good morning. Thanks very much for taking the call. Sort of three questions. Firstly, just I think you provided some detailed, obviously, breakdowns in terms of how things are trended through first quarter, second quarter and in July. And it seems that from looking at the numbers in the appendices, China and Russia had sort of deteriorated in July, whereas all other markets you had presented had actually got better. I’m just trying to understand, is there anything in that? And is that the reason why you’re probably a bit more cautious around not changing full-year expectations and where the market sits today? That’s the first sign. The second question was more about top 200 clients versus smaller clients and whether you could give us a little bit more color in terms of what the top 200 clients represent of the total revenues? And whether there’s any signs of recovering the smaller clients which are significantly underperforming the bigger client sets? And then just lastly, on the cost side. I know John, you’re going to come back at the Capital Markets Day. But I think when you hosted the analyst session a couple of months ago, you seem pretty optimistic about back office and middle office and even sort of front office savings. I just don’t know whether you can share any more color in terms of what you – what’s happened in the last two months as you evolved your thoughts?

Okay. So I’ll tackle the client question, and John can talk about the outlook and cost. But I think our top 200 clients are 64% of our revenue. So it’s a pretty representative mix of large organizations. I would say that given the nature of those businesses, they tend to sit inside categories like healthcare, technology, consumer packaged goods, so they tend to sit in the more resilient categories. And the other – if you were a restaurant chain or relatively smaller business, they sit in the other sites. So I think I would take from it that they’ve been more resilient. Actually, if you go back three or four years ago, somebody said we were losing share from our largest clients, if you remember, versus WPO overall. So I think we are reassured with continued spend from our largest clients. But yes, it’s about 64% of our spend. So it’s a pretty representative sample of the business overall, John.

And Richard…

So Mark, I was going to say, just if you look at the improvements in trends into July, is that mainly driven by the top 200 clients? Or basically other categories coming back or smaller clients coming back into the fold?

To be – I haven’t looked at that, but we can get back to you on that.

Sorry, John.

Yes. Rich, just in relation to your question on sort of China and Russia, you are right to highlight that those two markets do seem to be sort of bucking the trend, so to speak, in terms of recovery coming through in July. But I’d make the following observation. First, it’s very dangerous and we shared July numbers with you. But it’s a month worth of data. It’s certainly encouraging. And indeed, we saw just to sort of throw a little bit of color on the performance in the second quarter. May was our worst month and we saw improvements come through in June and then further improvements coming through in July. So overall, we feel positive about the direction of travel. I think if you look at China, just specifically, first and foremost, the number for Q2, the minus, I think, 3.1 it was, is flattered by some one-off adjustments. And actually, if you stripped out as one of the adjustments for net sales, then you’d probably be at an underlying rate of about somewhere between minus 10 and minus 15. And indeed, if you look to July, where we’re down 18%, we came – it’s up against a very tough compared to last year where we were up 9%, 10%. So, again, I think if you look at the underlying rate coming through for China for the second-half, I’m expecting to be around minus 10%, maybe a little bit better. So I’m really comfortable with the direction of travel moving in the right direction for China. And then in – specifically in relation to Russia again, it’s a relatively small market for us. And I wouldn’t – I’ve gone into the details of those numbers. I wouldn’t read much into that at all. But to your broader point…

Thanks. Just – John, just on that latter, not to obviously probe into actual numbers, which you may give out later in the year. But if you look at the categories that you’ve mentioned, where do you think is the biggest opportunity now? Is that property?

I wouldn’t want to get drawn on that because of the inferences that you might make from it. So yes, let us do the detail work. Teams are working hard now to pull all those numbers together, and we’ll update you on the detail of that when we come back to market in November, December.

Very clear. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next question is from Matthew Walker from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Hi, Matthew.

Hi, guys. Can you hear me, okay?

Yes.

Yes.

Okay. Yes, congratulations on the result. I’ve got two questions. The first is on revenue improvement. I mean, I guess, obviously, none of us know what’s going to happen in H2. But given you’ve set out your cost saving targets, how would you characterize the drop through if revenue did improve from what you’re expecting? So let’s say, for every £100 of improvement in revenue, how much of that will drop through to the operating profit line? And then the second question is on the – obviously, you do the Capital Markets Day on the structural cost savings. But with the structural cost savings, do you think that there will be cost to achieve those savings? And will you put those into operating profit line? Or will you take those as exceptionals? Those are the two questions.

All right. John…

Yes. Thanks. Thanks, Matthew. So in relation to your first question how much of any future revenue improvement will drop through to the bottom line? What we sort of roughly set a target and I’ve talked about this before. We set the teams an overall target to try and offset 50% of any net sales decline in the form of cost savings. And that’s the target that we set our teams. Now, the reality is, as we’ve exited the first-half, we’ve been doing a little bit better than that, sort of 60 or so, north of 60%. So that’s encouraging. And let’s see whether we can maintain that momentum through into the second-half. But as a guide, I think, it’s somewhere between 50% and 60% of any net sales decline, we would hope to be able to offset in terms of cost savings, that should give you some indications as to the drop through. And in relation to structural cost savings, will that incur any one-off costs? It’s possible, yes, for sure. And so, for example, if we’re investing in shared service systems and so forth, that will indeed require further investment. Other areas, I just made mention to property costs, there may be some sort of early exit costs from some leases. But I think I see where we get to, but there will – there won’t be any any other one-off costs. I think some of the procurement savings, I think, will not require one-off costs. So it’ll be a little bit of a blend of both. But we’ll set that out very clearly when we come back to the market in November, December in terms of what we think the cost savings are, the timings of those cost savings on an annual – on a year-on-year basis, and also, if there’s any one-off costs associated with having to deliver those savings.

Okay. I just want to quickly follow-up on the first one. I get what you’re saying about, you want to maybe offset the revenue drop this year by 50% or 60%. But isn’t the issue that you’ve actually given already an absolute number for cost savings, and therefore, any incremental revenue improvements should actually drop through, as I remind you, on to the operating profit?

You’re right. I mean, the assumption there is though in your math is that the cost savings are static versus the top line. Of course, the reality is that’s not the case. And so, yes, you’re right on the margin. And any – the way it works is any improvement in revenue, above and beyond our forecast, will generally drop through at a higher rate in the 50% or 60%, because what happens in Brexit is you sweat the assets slightly. The resources, the people are slightly harder. So you tend to get a better drop through. And so, for example, in June and July, we did deliver better net sales than we were forecasting the cost savings were delivered. And so we saw most of the upside versus our forecast drop through into profitability. What I’m trying to give you though, when I talk about the sort of 60% – 50%, 60% is just a rough guide on – if you wanted to forecast the numbers forward, a rough guide as to what the actual overall drop through will look like, which will be sort of 50% to 60%. But you’re absolutely right on the margin, generally speaking, any upside does drop through a little bit quicker. And again, we might expect as we start – one of the things I’m very keen to do is, as we start to see recovery come through next year, as we start to recover from COVID-19, the big challenge that we’ll have, of course, is to hold on to as many of those cost savings as possible. Now, we’ve been very clear that we think that there’s around £200 million that we will hold on to on a permanent basis. But in theory, there’s another £600 million that will come back into our P&L. And, of course, the task there is how do we delay that £600 coming back into the P&L as much as possible. And, of course, yes, they will be – we’ll try and make those savings as sticky as possible. So we’ll try and work our business hard as we go through next year as we start to recover, to try and hold on to as much of those savings as possible. But it’s inevitable that all costs in some way is a combination of fixed and variable and some are more variable than others. And inevitably, as we start to recover, we will see costs coming back in. But rest assured, we’ll hold on to as much as we possibly can. Hopefully, that gives you a little bit of a flavor. I don’t know whether that answered your question or not.

Yes. I think yes. Yes, I’ll leave it as of now. Thanks.

Okay. Thanks, Matthew.

Thank you. Our next question is from Patrick Wellington from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Hi, Patrick.

Yes. Good morning, everybody.

Good morning.

All right. And not to hop on about the £200 million. But on Slide 15, you’ll see that the savings will be permanently retained when we’ve returned to the 2019 net sales levels. So just want to check what that the implication of that statement is? Does that imply that if net sales don’t returns 2019 that you might retain more than the £200 million? So what’s the relationship that you’re trying to hit there? The second question, because we must have three is what’s going to make you turn the share buyback back on? I mean, you can see your financial situation at the half year. You’ve got your forecast for the full-year. You’ve just paid an interim dividend. I mean, are you going to sit there when you get a good revenue number in August or September and say, “Well, now I feel more confident in my forecast, I’d turn it on now.” What’s going to be the trigger, I guess, is the question? And then my third one is more for Mark. And I think it’s part of Julien’s question earlier on. You described 8% of your business as being an e-commerce. If you take those four sort of growth segments that you describe, comms and experience and commerce and tech, I think, they’re overall about 25%, 30% of their total. So I guess, the question is, this depiction of acceleration in e-commerce and digital, do we have the traditional analog decline on the other side? And how does WPP navigate that process? Is it all incremental? Is it partly substitutional? Is there a risk that you – I mean, people think you have assets, if you like, towards legacy businesses. How does that be managed?

So why don’t I – why don’t we start there and then [indiscernible] similar questions, we’ll talk about the…

Okay. So just in response to your first question, obviously, if we see – what we’re trying to say here, it’s an oversimplification of our cost base. But what we’re saying is the £800 million of savings, the £200 million is sort of fixed or permanent and £600 million is variable. Now, it’s never quite that black and white, as you, I’m sure, appreciate. But – so in other words, ads on net sales do return back to 2019 levels. And by the way, we do anticipate that happening at some point, those costs – £600 million of those costs will come back in. At any point in time, if our net sales numbers are less than the 2019 level, then clearly, we will have the – what we call the permanent savings is £200 million-plus, an element of the £600 million will still be available to us on the grounds that they are variable saving. So, that’s the way I would look at it, frankly. It’s – as I said, it’s an oversimplification on the way our business works, because not all costs are fully fixed, not all costs are fully variable. But hopefully, that gives you a little bit of a flavor. In relation to your second question on the trigger for share buybacks, I think, it’s simply a question of we need to be – we need to recognize that we are not through COVID-19 by any shot at the moment. There remain uncertainty out there. And I think for me, the key trigger that we would look to before we reinstate the share buyback is having visibility of our performance over the next 12 to 18 months. Now, there’s no question that the visibility of our performance has improved from where it was three or four months ago, when there was a huge uncertainty as to the impact of COVID-19. We’ve now traveled through these three or four months. We’ve delivered a stronger performance than expected. We’ve been pleased with our performance over that time, but we are not through the impact of this pandemic, not least of which, perhaps some of the longer-term economic impacts of COVID-19 on consumer and consumer spend and consumer confidence. And so I think until we are – until we’ve got better line of sight over 12 to 18 months, we won’t be reinstating the share buyback. When do I think that’s going to happen? I think it’s too premature to say at this point. I don’t think it will be before our Capital Markets Day and it may not be even at our Capital Markets Day. So I think let’s just wait and see how we perform over the coming months or so and the extent to which we can have visibility into the future before we reinstate that share buyback.

All right. On your question about growth, I think, the first thing to say is, firstly, we see growth in all four areas of communications, experience, commerce and technology. We may see slightly stronger growth in experience, commerce and technology, but the communication business we do see continuing to grow. But I think within it, there is, as you point out, that shift between from analog to digital within communications, which is sort of by definition more pronounced there than it is in other areas. I think the second observation I’d make is, it’s not as simple as saying that WPP didn’t grow historically, because the analog portion was declining faster than the digital portion. The challenges we face were around the way we will organize the complexity of our organization. The fact that our analog and digital capabilities weren’t integrated, the performance and quality, historically, of our businesses in the United States and lack of growth in the U.S., and those are all issues that we’ve been working on making pretty good progress on in the last two years. So I think that we will, in a steady state, see growth. Our goal will be to see growth in all four areas of our business. You can’t run a business, where you have a long run potential for it is to decline. And so we’re really organizing the whole company to grow. Does that help understand where we’re going?

That’s good. Thank you.

Well, I think our clients need service. Clearly, the online portion of the business is growing more quickly. But I think our clients need service. No one lives in a – even my eight-year old son doesn’t live in a digital-only world that he’d like to try to do. So I think that we do live in a – in an omni-channel world. Clearly, the pandemic has increased the shift to digital. But I think as we’ve seen through the integration of VMLY&R, the fact that it grew in the first-half of the year that we can integrate our capabilities to grow in the world in which we live.

That is great. I mean, I suppose the – so it’s too simple a narrative, if you like to do the digital analog acquisition. Do you think you’ve got the weighting of your people right to people naturally transition across from dealing with TV and stuff like that into the digital markets? Or do you need a bigger shift in the balance of your people at some stage?

Clearly, we need to continue to shift. Clearly, we need to train our people and equip them for the skills that we need for the future. But I think if you were to sit through a client presentation, or if you were to sit through the meetings that we have, it’s not Mad Men. We’re not sitting there, taking about 30-second television ads. When we help Ford launch the new Bronco through the – not just a primarily online launch, but when dealers were closed, that work was totally digitally focused. When we help our clients launch films where – when cinemas, movie theaters are closed and clearly, we’re driving people to online platforms. We’ve done a lot of work in the commerce area, helping clients – for sales of liquor stores in the U.S., there’s 60 liquor stores. In two weeks, we spun up a curbside delivery platform for a company that had no e-commerce presence whatsoever. So I think the work that we do is a blend and clearly, television advertising or videos, as they call it today, they are important part of what we do. And in a way, it’s a shame that we show you films on these presentations, because you take away, that’s what we do, but it’s in many ways the best way to encompass the work. But I’d say, we have a very, very broad range of skills. And I think that our people, the average age of some of the workers for WPP is less than 30. They don’t hark back to the 1980s luckily.

Okay. Well, true social good in the curbside liquor delivery. Thank you.

Our next question for today is from Sarah Simon from Berenberg. Please go ahead.

Hi, Sarah.

Yes, morning. I’ve just got one question, actually. And it was really you’ve made comments in the release about sort of thinking about capital allocation and kind of suggesting that your dividend policy is going to be reviewed. And I’m just wondering, if you think given the shifts we’ve seen and the acceleration and what was happening already, do you – is there anything you can say in terms of whether you feel like, you need to shift more towards M&A, now you’ve got the balance sheet in good shape? Or if you can do this more organically? Just anything you can say in terms of what you mean by those comments? Thanks.

I don’t think now. I think, we’ll come back to you in November on that.

Okay, thanks.

Anything else?

There are no further questions at this time. I would now hand the call back over to Mark Read for further closing comments.

Thank you. Thank you very much, operator. So I think just to summarize, I think, we had – it has been a challenging six months for the company, but we haven’t stood still. We’ve made significant progress against our strategic objectives, and I think demonstrated the resilience of our business model, the strength of our relationships with our clients. And I just put on the record, thanks to all our people who have worked hard in extremely challenging circumstances to deliver to our clients and, in particular, to look out for each other and time has not been easy. So thank you all for listening, and we’ll see you, I guess, for the quarterly results later in a couple of months time.

Thank you very much, sir. That will conclude today’s conference call. Thank you for your participation, ladies and gentlemen. You may not disconnect.