Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us today. As highlighted in our press release, Q3 sales grew by 2.8% organically, and this result stems from mixed regional trends, mainly driven by, on one end, solid growth in the U.S. for a fourth consecutive quarter, supported by clearly low comps and improved sequential depletions. They are slightly improving compared to Q2, but less than expected, and they are still negative, talking about depletion in U.S. In addition, EMEA is back to growth in Q3, driven by both division, cognac and Liqueurs and Spirits .
Last but not least, on the other hand, China is relatively resilient, considering the continued challenging markets and excluding an unfavorable calendar effect due to the shift of Chinese New Year timing, which counts for 3 points in Q3 at group level, i.e., 1 point if you consider the year-to-date, nine months basis. Let me put everything differently. We would have been flattish over nine months, excluding those technical effects. Q3 sales decline breaks down as follows: a volume increase of 8.7% and 5.9% in price-mix effect. Clearly, Q3 sales increased, largely driven by cognac, mostly in EMEA and China, which is impacted by the underperformance of the high-end brands.
Looking at the overall sales performance by region, Americas was up by high single digit over nine months, of which a low to mid single digit growth in the Q3. APAC sales decreased by low double digit over nine months, of which a decrease of low single digit in Q3. This performance is up mid-single digit, excluding the negative calendar, Chinese New Year calendar effect, which is 8 points if you consider that at APAC level. EMEA declined by low single digit over nine months, but with an increase of high single digit in the last quarter. This was the overall sales performance by region at nine months, with a specific touch on the last quarter. Let's do the same thing, at least at nine months value depletions at group level.
In the U.S., value depletion declined by mid-single digit year-on-year over nine months, including a decline of low to mid-single digit in Q3. In China, value depletion were down high teens over nine months year-on-year, including a negative calendar effect in Q3 that waves also in depletions, clearly. In EMEA, value depletion decreased by mid-single digit year-on-year. So what you can say overall after nine months? As a picture, nine months group value depletion fell by mid to high single digit, more or less -7%, -8%, underperforming sell-in trends -1.9%. Why that? Essentially because of the U.S. restocking from a low basis without increasing the level of stock in absolute value. However, the gap has widened compared to the H1. Beyond the U.S. and the calendar effect in China, global, depletion in Q3 were still lacking a bit of momentum.
I'll be back also with some absolute value during Q&A session, I'm sure. To conclude on this first slide, we are confirming our full-year organic guidance. We expect the organic full-year sales to be between stable and up low- single- digit, while we expect organic full-year operating profit to decline between low double and mid-teens. The latter, of course, includes the estimated impact from tariffs in the U.S. and price undertakings in China. So in a nutshell, no changes in guidance compared three months ago.
Now, let's turn to slide 3, in which we can witness nine-month sales that amounted to EUR 735.4 million, representing a year-on-year decrease of EUR 52.3 million or 6.6% on a reported basis. This performance was shaped by the following factors. First, an organic decline of EUR 15.3 million, as said, -1.9%. This performance is split between +4.5% of positive volume effect and -6.4% of price mix. Price mix effect, the combination, is in negative and has been impacted by both price and mix in the same proportion. Second, a negative currency translation impact of EUR 37 million or 4.7% loss, mainly driven by the deterioration, conversionally speaking, of the U.S. dollar, accounted for around EUR 20 million less on top line, and the Chinese RMB for EUR 11.8 million.
Now, let's turn to slide 4 to delve into organic trends by region at group level. Let's start with the Americas, in which organic sales increased by high single digit over nine months, i.e., down more or less low to mid-teens on a six-year basis. Year-on-year performance includes a low double-digit growth in volume, a low single-digit negative price-mix impact, mainly driven by pricing adjustment. In the U.S., specifically inside Americas, sales grew by low single-digit last quarter, driven by both divisions, on the back of a low base of comparison, clearly, but another slight sequential improvement in value depletion, which is positive news, but is not as much as we expected. Improving, nonetheless, but less than expected.
So what does it mean? Down by mid-single-digit year-on-year in nine months, of which down low to mid in Q3. In this context, what happened to inventory level in the U.S.? In monthly coverage, more or less remains around two-four months at the end of Q3. In Canada, sales were up mid- to high single-digit in Q3, underpinned by both divisions. Very balanced picture as well. And LATAM, sales were also up a very strong double-digit in Q3, and there, mostly led by cognac. End of December, Americas accounted for 39% of group sales, up 4 points compared to the previous year.
Now, turning to APAC. Organic sales declined by low-double-digit year-on-year over nine months, but increased compared to 2019-2020 to mid- to high-single-digit. Looking at the volume value equation, the performance was impacted by low- to mid-single-digit volume decline, while the value part was negative at more than mid-single-digits. Why that? Was driven by the underperformance of high-end brands and ranges and increased promotional activity.
In China, sales were down approximately more or less a low double-digit in the last quarter, impacted by the market condition, which remains very challenging, and the strong, I repeat, it's very important, negative Chinese New Year effect. At APAC level, 8 points, I repeat, at 3 points on the Q3 at group level. However, the overall performance is almost flat, excluding this technical effect, benefiting from the return to normal trading condition in travel retail and a very solid Double Eleven festival. Specifically, these events was more or less +15 compared to the previous year. This was selling. Talking about global value depletion, they were down high teens year-on-year. Given the depletion, so are roughly in line with selling trends in nine months, inventory levels remain healthy at the end of December.
Elsewhere in the APAC region, rest of Asia, showed a strong improvement compared to the Q2, posting a very strong double-digit sales growth in the last quarter, mostly led by cognac, Rémy Martin and Louis XIII. End of December, APAC region accounted for 37% of group sales, down 5 points compared to the prior year. Then EMEA region, in which organic sales were down low single digits over nine months, and around high single digits compared six years ago, primarily reflecting a negative value effect. Inside this region, talking about sub-region, third party distributors cluster recorded a mid-single digit sales increase in the last quarter, driven by Germany, Greece, and Romania. Most of the growth came from Cointreau and Metaxa.
U.K. and Nordics, sales were down by high single digit last quarter, which sell-in below sell-out trends due to the high base of comparison in sell-in, and sell-out was positive in a declining market. Benelux and France, sales were up by low single digits in the last quarter, essentially led by France and in both division, cognac and liquor spirits. Last but not least, MI and CIS sales were up by very strong double digits, boosted by the successful launch of Rémy VS in South Africa and Nigeria, which bodes well for next year. This was selling. Talking about value depletion, they declined by mid-single digit year-on-year in nine months. So overall, with this slight disconnection in EMEA in the last quarter, inventory there slightly increased. End of December, the EMEA region accounted for 24% of group sales, up 1 point compared to the previous year.
Now, let's turn to line number five and analyze it by division. Let's start with the queen of the division, which is cognac. Cognac division posted an organic sales decline of 4.3% over nine months, driven nine months by a 5.4% increase in volume and a negative price mix of around 10 points, 9.7. End of December, cognac accounted for 61% of our sales, down 2 points compared to the previous year. What happened there? Let's start with the biggest region inside cognac, which is APAC. Inside APAC, Mainland China, in which sales declined by low double digits in the last quarter, affected by the continued complex market condition and really, as said, the Chinese New Year calendar effect.
Excluding this technical effect, China would have been almost stable, helped by strong performance during 11-11-- Double Eleven festival, in e-commerce, and a return to normal trading condition in travel retail. In this very tough context, and given Mid-Autumn and wedding season were ahead of Chinese New Year, all channels were down compared to the previous year. Elsewhere, Taiwan reported a weak performance, sell-in and depletion. Hong Kong and Macau were up strongly, but helped by positive phasing and some promotion. Overall, nine months value depletion were down by high teens year-on-year. In the rest of Asia, sales were up by very strong double digit in Q3, mostly led by Rémy VSOP and Louis XIII.
Americas. In North America, so U.S. and Canada, cognac sales were up by low single-digit in Q3, underpinned by low base of comparison, a slight sequential improvement and depletion. Talking specifically of the last quarter, Q3, U.S. value depletion, they were down mid- to high single-digit year-on-year on cognac. 12 months value depletion included, less 3 point, a negative price mix effect on depletion of 3 points year-on-year at the end of December, but on a six-year basis, price mix on value depletion remains up double-digits, +10 points. In Latin America, sales were up by triple-digit in Q3, driven by VSOP and Louis XIII. In EMEA, cognac sales grew by high teens in Q3.
U.K. and Norway were down double digit; however, sell-in was impacted, as said, by high base of comparison, while sell-out was back to positive, supported by a more targeted pricing approach, new listing, and remember in a very negative market. Yeah, Europe third-party distributor was flat in Q3, strong improvement versus Q2, helped by the more flexible pricing approach, leading to market share gains. And MI and CIS were clearly up by triple digits, leading the EMEA and cognac progression in the quarter, led by South Africa on the back, on the heels of the Rémy Martin VS recent launch. Finally, Benelux and France were up by mid- to high-single-digit. Lastly, nine months EMEA value depletions were down low double digits year-on-year.
Now, let's turn to line number 6, and the same analysis for the other division, Liqueurs and Spirits. Liqueurs and Spirits division reported a +3.7% organic sales growth in nine months, driven by solid volume increase and +5.7% at a negative price mix effect of -2.1%. End of December, the division of Liqueurs and Spirits accounted for 37% of sales, up 2 points versus the previous year. Now, let's review the division performance by region. Let's start with the Americas, in which North America sales were up by low- to mid-single-digit in the quarter, driven by Cointreau, Botanist, which both delivered positive depletion in Q3 as well in a declining market. Specifically, Cointreau and the Botanist Q3 U.S. value depletion were respectively up by low single digits and low double year-on-year.
Additionally, price mix was down only 2 points compared to last year for the 12-month rolling basis period ending December, but increased by 16 points on a six-year basis. So valorization compared to six years ago in both Sell-In and even more in value depletions, is bigger, is higher on Liqueurs and Spirits compared to cognac. Latin America, sales were down by low single digit in sales in Q3, impacted by price increase in Puerto Rico on Cointreau, and following tariffs and fake alcohol issues in Brazil, in São Paulo. In EMEA, second region by importance for this division, sales were up by mid to high single digit in the last quarter. Breaking sales down further, U.K. was up there by low single digit in Q3, led by Cointreau, Port Charlotte, Octomore, and Telmont.
The quarter benefited from the positive effect linked to the distribution gains. This is particularly the case for The Botanist, from new innovation launches, Cointreau RTDs, and the greater pricing agility. Overall, the U.K. is gaining market share alongside positive sell-out in a declining market. Europe, third-party distributor sales were up, thereby mid- to high-single-digits in the quarter, led by Germany and Greece. As said, overall, we recorded a solid growth from Metaxa and Cointreau. And finally, Benelux and France were up by mid-single-digit in Q3, while MA and CS was down mid-single-digits. This was EMEA. In parallel, nine months value depletions were down by low single digits year-on-year. And then, inside this division, we have APAC.
In which in China, sales were down high single digit in Q3, mostly impacted by Cointreau, which faced aggressive price environment and competition, and in parallel, nine months value depletions were down by low double digits. Rest of Asia was down by low double digits in Q3, impacted clearly by Australia due to phasing and very high comps. We are missing a part of the turnover here, which is the non-group brands, which represents 2% of group sales, and they were stable year-on-year in terms of weight, but they recorded an organic decline of 1.9% in nine months, affected clearly by the performance of the most exposed country, which are Benelux and U.K.
Approaching to the end of the prepared presentation, before switching to the interesting Q&A session, let's now turn to slide number 7, talking about this yearly 2025-2026 guidance. We are today confirming our expectation, both for sales and for operating profit. In more detail, we expect organic sales growth to land between flat and low single-digit increase. At the same time, we expect an organic operating profit decline between low double-digit and mid-teens, so nothing changed compared three months ago. This guidance clearly includes the net impact of tariff, which is estimated this time of the year, at around EUR 25 million net, of which EUR 5 million in China and EUR 20 million in the U.S.
In addition to this organic performance, there are also currency effect, which remains very negative and highly volatile. While our hedging policy helps to mitigate part of the adverse impact, the recent evolution and ongoing evolution of the dollar/RMB leads us to expect on sales between EUR 50 million and EUR 60 million reduction of the turnover on published rates, of which 60% will occur in H2. In operating profits, it is a bit reversed in terms of phasing between EUR 25 million and EUR 30 million negative effect, of which one third should occur in H2. Exchange rate volatility is likely to persist throughout the year, which is why I will continue to keep you updated on a quarterly basis. But please, I like the fact that so far it's not changed compared to three months ago as well.
One final word on our transformation journey. As mentioned in the press release, the program is now effectively underway, starting with the very granular diagnostic phase across the main value creation levels. So what we are talking about? Route to market, number one. Revenue growth management, number two. A&P and procurement, three and four, as well, a more generic, broader review of our cost base and operating model, in line what we share with Franck Marilly at the end of the H1, during end of November presentation. By the end of April, next conference call on Q4, we expect to be in a position to communicate the key strategic priorities that will start to be implemented in the fiscal year 2026, 2027.
Thank you for your attention, and I'm happy to answer to your question. Give me two seconds to drink a little water. Thank you.
If you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad to enter the queue. You are kindly asked to limit yourself to two questions only. The next question comes from Laurence Whyatt from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Morning, Luca. Thanks very much for the questions. A couple from me then, please. Firstly, in the U.S., we've seen reports of some substantial improvements in some of the depletion data, and I appreciate it's a short time period when we look at the weekly Nielsen data, but of course, do you think we should be taking this seriously, or do you think there's some sort of timing effect that perhaps means that these improvements are perhaps erroneous and due to other effects? And then secondly, you may have seen today, there's some reports of some very strong sell-in into the Chinese New Year period in China. Do you think those reports are real? Are you seeing similar effects on your brands going into the Chinese New Year for 2026? Thank you very much.
Thank you so much. So, let's start with the U.S. As said, we are both at the same time, positive and a bit less positive news. Why I'm saying that? We are continually improving that, and we think that we'll continue to improve, to your question. So yes, we are on the right track, but the speed, the magnitude of the improvement is a little bit a deception compared to our expectation. Why that? That we are sleeping and we are not so good. Market is really declining big, in a bigger way compared to our expectation. So even if our performance are not excellent, compared to last year, not positive, and a bit of deception compared to our expectation, the market declined as well.
So in this specific moment, we are performing better globally than competition, which is something which is very important to highlight. So it is not what we expected totally, so a bit of the deception, disappointment, but considering the global environment, we're doing a hell of a job on the field. So kudos to our teams. Chinese New Year dynamics. It is globally, this morning, global good touch, but has just started, so we are relatively optimistic. It is not so far what it seems to be the Chinese New Year campaign of the century. So we have been in a better position before. We are in wait and see with an open attitude by ourselves as well, like the market. So far, so good.
Coming weeks and days are very important, but we are not excessively optimistic, but we are not negative as well. So, a quite balanced attitude still at the beginning with Chinese New Year, and also to manage expectation, it will not be the Chinese New Year of the century, but relatively optimistic.
Thanks. And just on the first question, I was specifically referring to the data we've seen in January in the U.S., some of the extreme improvements in the U.S. Nielsen data. It sounds like you don't think that is a sustained improvement, but.
Yes, but it's very complicated to comment on that because the first--b ut do remember, there is also be a lot of weather, bad condition right now that could impact the second part of demand. So right now, also the depletion on an effective way because there are some problems in many states where there's snow storm, and technically, depletion can be affected by that. It is true that what's happening is helping declining the stock at retail point of sales. Once again, moderate optimism, we are doing a touch better of the competition, still negative. So for us, it's very important, like for everybody, for us even more, because it's tough to have a negative depletion figure since a lot of months.
It is very important also in terms of symbolism to switch to positive land. So relative optimism and cautious, and an overall touch or modest optimism overall for the China and the U.S. That's also the reason why, despite the mathematical negative forks between sell-in, sell-out in the Q3, we are confident so far, at this stage, clearly, to confirm the guidance. Because even if there is this fork, and then we're back on this point, because we have to look that on absolute value, not only in as a percentage, it is clearly not affecting our guidance at this stage.
Super. Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Edward Mundy, from Jefferies. Please go ahead.
Luca, morning. Two questions, please. The first is your comment on, doing a touch better than competition, you know, within China. I think you've historically said in these conference calls that, you know, your, your, your, your mix, i.e., bigger in club and smaller in expo, your, your route to market, i.e., that big direct-to-consumer business and your, your channel exposure, i.e., probably smaller in the traditional on trade, has allowed you to outperform, you know, competition. Could you perhaps talk about, some of those drivers and, you know, if the market starts to improve, should you be one of the first companies to see that improvement? Is my first question.
And then the second is on currency. You know, clearly you're keeping your guidance unchanged for fiscal 2026, but there have been some recent strengthening of the euro versus both the dollar and the Chinese yuan. I know it's probably a little bit too early to start giving guidance for fiscal 2027, but based on what you're seeing on spot prices and what you know about your hedged rates, is it a roughly similar outlook from a percentage standpoint for fiscal 2027 relative to fiscal 2026?
Thank you. So, as said, as you understood, Chinese New Year just started. We are in a very cautious position, but I repeat, it will not be the Chinese New Year of the century, but there's no need at this stage to be negative as well, because some good dynamics are installed. So relative optimism and a clear reactivity on all channels. In terms of channel exposure, I repeat, even if all channels in Q3 were negative in China, including the e-commerce, so we cannot deny that the global confidence of all channels is reduced compared to one year ago. Globally, we are in a position which, with a wave, with a lift of the global situation, we can profit that essentially with e-commerce.
The fact that as you highlight, we are less focused on on-trade, today we are between 5% and 10% on-trade compared to, compared to the other. The fact that we are more direct than others, 1/3 of our all our top line is direct, direct to client, which is no indirect wholesaler or indirect channel framework involved, makes that we should be in position to profit. But as well, we need to look at another element compounded, which should be very important for all our region, for the company as well, which is the needs also to improve the free cash flow conversion as well.
So there is a point that, today is early to, to talk about that, with clearly, a triggering point to be analyzed during June, year, full year presentation, and where with Franck, we will detail the guideline for, for the year 2026, 2027. So, there is some opportunity to grow, and then needs to be profitable, but even more important, a faster cash conversion growth compared to the previous, to the previous habits. In terms of currency, there, as you may have understand, it is really, really crystal ball, because it is very, very early to talk about Forex impact for the next fiscal year. So I understand your point.
Let me share you, where do we stand for next year in terms of coverage. So far, for the 2027, 2026-2027 estimated net currency needs in terms of U.S. dollar and pegged currency, we are more or less covered between 65% and 70%, at more or less $1.16, with 60% of options. So very, a bit costly, but very flexible. This year, we'll be landing between $1.12 and $1.13. So there is a negative hedging impact. I'm not talking about conversion, because this is also influenced by a lot of macroeconomic and macro and geopolitical element that I do not master. I watch them and adjust. I cannot do more than that. For Chinese New Year, which is increased in the weight, so the weight historically it was far bigger.
Now it's 50% of our needs of net currency are U.S. dollar pegged, and 34% is Chinese RMB pegged. So the Chinese Yuan is very important, much more important than the past. We are 60% more or less hedged at 8.4%, with 70% option. This year, the hedging average weighted rate will be between 8% to 8.10%. So once again, in both of them, we need to understand that without being precise in terms of the absolute value, the hedged granted coverage rate for 2026, 2027 will be giving less euro than this year. So let me be clear on that. How much I want, I won't? I don't know.
Which is important also to be taken into account for our EBITDA, including the Forex. Clearly cannot drive the management of the company. We are organically driven, but need to be considered for the free cash flow conversion rate, which I repeat, will be more important. Is already the case, but even more important than in the previous past, as an element to manage the company and the compounders.
Okay, thanks.
I hope it was clear.
The next question comes from Chris Pitcher from Redburn Atlantic. Please go ahead.
Thanks. Good morning, Luca. Two questions, please. Firstly, on your U.S. price mix, you've clearly gone through a big adjustment from where you were, sort of, during the pandemic to, I think, your 10 percentage points still above. I mean, Franck was quite clear on the previous call, that you were gonna be less dogmatic about price. Are you at the level where you're comfortable now, the relative pricing, or do you still see further weakening in price mix, particularly as you're starting - you're seeing the outperformance from Louis XIII? And then secondly, I'm just intrigued by your comment, the specific reference that you're using an external consultant or support from an external consultant in your diagnostic.
Can you sort of explain what it was that you think Rémy was lacking, that you needed a sort of external set of eyes to try and work out the strategy? 'Cause it sounds expensive to me. Thanks.
Thank you. Thank you so much. So let's try, let's start with the business question, and then let's talk about transformation, which is business as well. So, price mix is negative, visible 3 points, declining a bit compared to the previous year to year to date. What this reflects right now, let's explain, and then we talk about the future. Price adjustment to $49.99 on VSOP on most states. Price adjustment XO also, because our XO also, price architecture hold down, fell down a lot. We are not a leader on XO. Clearly, we need to be a follower, reminding that gross margin, even if we don't disclose the absolute figure, with gross margin XO for everybody in the industry.
It is clearly a very strong element. It is every time you are able to increase one case of XO, you increase clearly the accretive impact in cash and profit and loss profile big time. High-end segment and the performance on the 12 months compared to the mix, the revitalization of the VSOP, the resilience of 1738, squeezed a bit, not as an effect, a matter of fact, the weighted average. Negative format sometimes also on Louis XIII, because a limited edition, such a rare cask last year, not replicated. When you have this kind of limited edition can play a role. A lesser extent, talking about cognac specifically, the price reposition of Rémy V.
On top, as a company, you have clearly the overperformance of liqueur spirits compared to cognac. What will happen next year? Are we improving the price mix? It's too early to answer in a very precise way, but we need to understand that the gross margin target, the group level, and clearly also in the U.S, as an important element, target remains. But the fact that we need to improve every year in gross margin, it is not the way the world today is composed. So, we cannot grant that we are able to have the same pricing power of two, three, five years ago.
On that, I'm back to the free cash flow improvement. We need to be a bit more commercial and need to move volumes a bit faster to improve globally, the turnover and the free cash flow conversion. I'm not saying then the future, the profit will fall. I'm not saying that, but free cash flow conversion and profitable, but also liquid growth; it's more a priority now than the past. And the global environment is less keen to absorb price increase. But if you do that, we will then eventually have an impact in volumes in declining complicated market. So, in a nutshell, you cannot model big price increase overall in the future, and more playing on the to improve the gross margin, to adjust it or to limit the fall in mix gain, channel, territory, and new format, new products eventually, improving the speed of the innovation.
Is it unrealistic to consider you might come back into VS?
Never say never to nothing, to anything, but so far, no way on the U.S. No way. Why? I read some of your pre-notes today. I will not drop the name, but when talking about will recognize himself. We cannot consider that VS is a technically positive effect in this moment in year, because every time you do that, you have some dynamics, maybe also cannibalization, and you have to count about that. So doing that, as VS globally, as a name in the U.S., I don't think will happen. But you have witnessed the presentation of Franck Marilly , end of November. I'm not talking about VS, but also a placeholder for a launch of, eventually, new products, clearly for the American market, which a different approach.
So not talking about VS, but I repeat, a more spread, tackling the new segment of market, higher and lower, of the old brands, including, including, including cognac. In the future, I think the name and the codes of the competition face-to-face will change, and everybody will try to get rid of it, launching new concepts, new products, they are able to install new price positioning inside the global category, being more interesting, sometimes, wild in terms of competition. But then, the world of, of, franchisor fighting each other with the same name, I think could be bypassed. One second as I drink a bit of water.
The next question comes from Trevor Stirling, from Bernstein. Please go ahead.
No, n o, sorry. I needed to answer the other question of Chris, the consultant as well. I answer only to the question number one. So the second question, so why going externally? They have a huge, a lot of benchmarks to leverage, yeah, quicker. We need to install a mentality of change and having this kind of example, benchmark, will be very concrete to show what we can do better without denying the values and the things we are doing correctly right now. At the same time, we need teams to be focused on a daily operation because we are running at +10 without any problem, so what the point to lose 1 or 2 point commercially?
So we have to get teams that are there, that teach on the field to try to grab any single bottle. Doing that with the help of the external qualified organization will also limit the focus on these specific projects inside the company. There is, they know all players, so there is a, as you highlighted, we are doing that quite widely, talking about top line, A&P, and also operational footprint. So it is 360 degrees more or less. There is a strong mutation for the way of consumption all around the world. We need to touch point in different ways. So if we don't do that with the specialist, A&P ratio, which is already at 20% for us, risk to increase without having the payout to be measurable.
Needs professional to be able to increase the touch point, at the same time, deliver efficiency and maybe stop doing some other touch point. So we need clearly this help to open our eyes with an additional qualified opinion that will help us decide. And then we will decide. We are quite opinionated. We will not buy everything. We are quite respectful of the history and the tradition, you know that. It is a very strong asset to the group, sometimes can be also considered an element that means that we are maybe sometimes a bit less fast than others, but we are more consistent, maybe. And that's the reason why.
On top, the clear triggering point is to improve top line and turnaround of the company, increasing the capacity to win, to gain market share, volume and value on the market, improve the free cash conversion, free cash flow conversion, without forgetting that even if we are still a bit, we have a strong weight of costs compared to our size today, though remember, we already cut EUR 230 million, more or less 12% our overheads and 9% of the costs. We can do it on a base with already without any specific global restructuring plan on a day-by-day improvement and without any bigger plan, already reset a bit the base. It is enough? No. We can go. We need to go farther.
These are the main reason why we needed to do with an external help, and more than that, an external eye to be able to watch what's happening for us a bit more than the past.
Thank you. Trevor Stirling from Bernstein, your line is open. Please go ahead.
Morning, Luca, and morning, Célia. Two questions on my end, Luca. So first one, returning to China. You mentioned that excluding the Chinese New Year effect, that you thought China was flattish, but presumably that means you've got that easy comp and travel retail, so the other channels, ex travel retail, are still negative or presumably mildly negative on an underlying basis. I just wanted to check if that was the right way to understand it. And the second thing was intrigued, Luca, in your presentation, I think three times you referenced Louis XIII strength, you know, in Asia, ex China, in the U.S., and LATAM. Is this just easy comps, or is there something more in terms of the underlying improvement for Louis XIII ?
Thank you for the question. For your first one, yes, GTR gave some room about to. So, out of the GTR, we are not at the same level of performance, but only for the Q3. If you consider GTR for the nine months compared to this year, and the most important operators are still in double digit negative compared to the previous year. So I expect this to continue, and technically speaking, the same comment for the DS. For me, they are not technical effect. This one are more than a catch up or the normal way of acting. So yes to your question, but still on nine months, it is not accretive. The GTR reopening is still a big negative, big, big negative. So it should be better.
Louis XIII, a bit of momentum, and highlighting that we are there. So Louis XIII, it is clearly not the same, without giving any figures, in the same shape and weight than five, six, seven years ago. But our teams continue to fight and to be able, when we can, to grab a specific market share, even if the global worldwide environment is less keen to this kind of eyesight product. There is a specific market. It is not only a matter of pricing, but there is a bit of momentum that we count to improve, to have an additional positive impact, clearly, in terms of image, and DNA, but even more in terms of our compounders, our financials.
Great. Thank you, Luca.
The next question comes from Pierre Tegnér from Oddo BHF. Please go ahead. Please unmute your microphone and go ahead.
Yeah, hi, Luca, Pierre Tegnér speaking. Thank you for taking my question. I would like to come back on your previous very interesting comments on the adapting the asset rotation equation of the economic model. My question is, how we have to think about the future in term of better balance between the P&L and the balance sheet? What I mean is, have we to think about more asset rotation at the same level of operating margin, or is there much more a kind of trade-off, if I may, in term of margin and asset rotation?
Thank you for your question. Very interesting. Please forgive me because I cannot be totally precise, because as you know, Franck said very clearly, guidance for next year will be should in June, and the whole plan for the future five years will be disclosed later, far later in this calendar year, 2026. But in general speaking, clearly, we need to think of future of the company. We will be a bit less sentimental in terms of in terms of brand asset everything. So DNA is the same, but cold, pragmatic, real compounders, figures, will be even more on the table to be discussed, then the decision will be, at the end, a collective Board of Directors' vision, Franck direction.
But the financial, in point of view, will be increasingly important. And on this point, thank you for your question. You have to put in a scale or weighing the three big elements we have, financially speaking, which is balance sheet, free cash flow, and P&L. All three are very important, but it will be even more skewed towards free cash flow generation, free conversion, progressive balance sheet solid, robust dynamics, increasing the age and balancing long-term asset and liabilities, with a bit of more flexibility inside asset priority rotation. And as a consequence, the profit and loss still remain very important because EBITDA is important compounders of a ratio, clearly, so wouldn't forget it. But more in absolute value than in profit and loss model in percentage base.
Absolute value, absolute cash, absolute EBITDA are more important, the percentage of operating profit compared to the top line. I cannot be more precise than that, sorry.
Very, very useful. Thank you, Luca.
I will take a last question. The next question comes from Tilly Eno , from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Hi. Good morning, Luca. Thank you for taking my questions. The first is on the US. I mean, while, while your depletions and sell-out trends are declining at a similar rate in Q3 as in Q2, the overall spirits market saw quite a sharp deterioration over calendar Q4. Could you just talk a bit about what you're seeing at the wholesaler distributor level in terms of behaviors, and if there's any sort of indirect impact from potential inventory pressures on your plans? And then my second question is on China. You've spoken previously about some heightened promo activity. Just wondering, are those pressures largely within the cognac category, or are you also seeing a bit of price competition from other international spirits categories, like, say, the sort of lower-priced whiskey? Thanks so much.
Sorry, I didn't get the second one clearly, because--
Sorry, just the second question on China, where you've previously mentioned some sort of mixed impact from promo activity. Is that largely concentrated within the overall cognac market or other subcategories? Thanks.
So talking about U.S., depletion in terms of flexibility, we'll try to speed up that switching progressively also the MP mix, more the fast-moving cognac lines. For the Liqueurs and Spirits , we did already part of this job, and is witnessed by the performance. In terms of distribution, clearly situation is not totally set in a very easy way because everybody knows some of the different situation that are happening right now inside the wholesaler footprint. All in all, to improve the depletion U.S. speed, we are switching part of the, as I said, A&P, more on BTL, so less brand awareness and long term and more in the short term. For the China promotional activity, it is a bit spread.
It's not only inside our category, but our category even more. And on that, we are increasing as well, but far less than our competitor. Also, because as was highlighted before, we have one weakness that becomes a strength when talking about promotional activity, which is our exposure to the on-trade, like to 10%, which is low in term of brand awareness in the long term, but protect us a bit in term of promotional depth . In that case, we have many types or forms of promotional support that can be given, not only money, but also tasting bottles and so on, banqueting and so on. We increase our promotional footprint, far less than the competition. It's more general, not only specific for our category.
Thank you very much.
There are no more questions at this time, so I hand the conference back to the speakers for any closing comments.
Thank you so much for your time today. So I would like also to end with the last point. The question was not asked, but it's very important. If you look at the Q3 between sell-in and sell-out dynamics, it seems that sell-in is positive, you know, +2.8%, and depletion negative. So the normal brain reaction is that you are stocking. The answer is many languages, [Foreign language] Because if you consider the absolute value of the depletion is more than EUR 20 million comparable basis compared to the sell-in. So what we have done altogether in the three, four, five, six quarters to rebalance sell-in and sell-out has helped us to land in a very balanced stock equation in absolute value.
Clearly, we have exception state by state, but overall, even if the compound is in percentage level, will show, will tell another story; it is not the case. It is not the case. Q3 was destocking , even if sell-in was increasing and sell-out was decreasing as a percentage, because the base of sell-out was, and it is bigger than base of sell-in.
Thank you so much. Talk again at the end of April, and stay tuned. Ciao, ciao.