Good morning, everybody, and welcome to our 2025 interim results. I'm here today together with our group CFO, Hannah Nichols and some members of my wider team. I'm really delighted to have announced such an exciting acquisition today as well as solid results despite some market uncertainty. Next slide, please. I'm going to summarize the first half performance before taking you through the deal to acquire OrthoLite, the global leader in insoles.
After that, Hannah will present our financial performance. Then I will give an update on outlook before taking your questions. Next slide please. We have delivered a strong first half, although we saw a deceleration of orders since April, driven by the uncertainty about U. S.
Consumer confidence. In this context, we have continued to gain share in apparel and footwear, and we have delivered a record profit margin of 19.8%, attaining our medium term target in advance. The exit from the North America Yarns business has contributed to the lift in the group margin rate, but we have also delivered strong margin progression in Apparel and Performance Materials. Our growth initiatives continue to deliver. Sales of recycled thread were up 73 year on year and revenue from adjacencies was up 30% year on year.
As we promised, we've also seen a step up in free cash flow generation from $39,000,000 to $54,000,000 Next slide please. Over the past few years, we have developed a clear M and A strategy with a focus on footwear because of its attractive growth and profit potential. We analyzed all the components in the shoe and identified those areas with the most potential. This led to our acquisitions in Structural Components, Textron and Renaflex and the identification of insoles and uppers as the next areas of interest. We've been tracking the most attractive targets for the past eighteen months and built relationships with sellers and management.
And OrthoLite was always at the top of the targets on our list. Next slide please. OrthoLite pioneered the open silane foam technology for insoles, which has a market size today of $700,000,000 This technology provides superior levels of comfort, performance and sustainability targeted at leisure and sport shoes. The penetration of this technology has been steadily growing and currently stands at 23% with further progression ahead. OrthoLite is the clear market leader with 36% share, which has translated into levels of growth and profitability accretive to Coats as a group.
Next slide please. This is an exceptional opportunity to expand our Footwear division and create a super Tier two supplier of critical components. This acquisition will materially enhance our growth profile, and there is a strong strategic fit between both companies, because we serve the same customers, we manufacture in the same countries and we have similar go to market strategies. The transaction will also improve the overall quality of our portfolio, as you can see from the Orphalite numbers below. Orphalite is clearly a premium business with high growth, 8% CAGR since 2019, high margin, 26% EBIT and high cash flow generation, over 90%.
Its market share of 36% proves the strength of their position. Acquisition creates value for shareholders because it makes cost better in terms of growth, profit and free cash flow generation. We also have a good M and A track record and experienced teams to deliver on both sides. Next slide, please. This slide explains more in detail the strategic fit.
We are combining two global leaders with complementary offerings. Our relationships with brands are strong independently and will further strengthen with this deal, which will generate cross selling opportunities. We share the same focus on product quality, sustainability and innovation. The combination will certainly accelerate innovation in polymer technology as we join capabilities. We have also identified substantial cost synergy opportunities of $20,000,000 And this transaction will be accretive to growth margins from day one.
Next slide, please. Step by step, we are building a super Tier two in footwear, a one stop shop supplier to serve the global brands. The Tier two supply chain is very fragmented and brands encourage consolidation to drive better strategic alignment. Tropolyte and Gold will have combined sales in footwear of $700,000,000 and leading positions in three product categories: thread, structural components and insoles. Beyond these components, we are organically entering the upper space with our Proleneweave technology and OrthoLite has developed a disruptive sustainable technology to enter the midsole space called Circle.
This is a technology that we still need to understand better, but can provide further upside. Next slide please. Coats and OrthoLite are complementary businesses. We serve the same customers, manufacturing in same countries and we have an aligned strategy and vision. We have a shared DNA focused on leading with innovation and sustainability and providing the best service from our global footprint.
This combination brings together two highly trusted companies in the footwear industry, combining strength and scale. I will hand over to Hannah now to take you through the financial rationale acquisition.
Thank you. So if we turn to Slide 10, I want to talk about value creation. So we see significant opportunities for value creation, both through joint cost synergies and enhanced growth opportunities. We've identified £20,000,000 of annualized joint costs across three key areas. Firstly, we see benefit through footprint optimization using our combined expertise to drive operational excellence and automation.
Secondly, strategic procurement with a focus on direct and indirect costs. And thirdly, we see opportunity for cost optimization across our support functions supported by a phased ERP implementation. The programme is structured to ensure a focus on commercial delivery and top line growth and will be phased, including ERP migration. We expect to fully realize these synergies by the end of twenty twenty eight, with phasing weighted towards year two and three of the program. And alongside this, as you can see on the right hand side of the slide, we see potential for growth synergies not included in the business case.
And David has touched on some of these earlier. So innovation, as we bring together our expertise in polymer technology cross sell and upsell opportunities and the CIRCOR midsole opportunity. We have experienced management teams on both sides who are excited about the opportunity to drive the integration, and there is good alignment on where we can find synergies between the two organizations. So if we turn to Slide 11, the financial rationale for the transaction is very compelling with attractive returns alongside accelerated delivery of the group financial goals. Firstly, on valuation, at 10 times last twelve months EBITDA, the transaction multiple compares favorably to other deals in the sector, with historic transactions being in the 11 to 12 times range.
The valuation also compares favorably to the 2022 Texan Reniflex deal, which we bought at a similar blended 10 times multiple. However, it is important to note that Autolite is a larger, higher margin business in a faster growing market. The acquisition is EPS accretive to Coats from year one, and importantly, it has the potential for high single digit returns in the medium term. In addition, given the high quality of the business, the margin the deal is margin accretive to the group after an estimated 200 basis points post synergies. Waterlite has similar levels of strong cash generation to our current business, and we have a clear path to deleveraging following the acquisition with net debt to EBITDA falling under 2x by the end of twenty twenty six.
And importantly, we've been very disciplined around both the valuation and also consideration of alternative uses of capital. We've assessed the transaction returns against a share buyback, and we consider the longer term returns potential from this transaction as synergies and growth are delivered to be materially more attracting attractive, even when taking into account the additional time and potential risk involved. We introduced our refreshed financial framework in March, and you can see from the right hand side of slide that this transaction is strongly aligned and will help us accelerate our delivery against these goals. And once we have completed the acquisition, we will review our medium term targets to ensure they fairly reflect our ambitions for the group. So we turn to the following slide.
In terms of our confidence of being able to deliver against our plan, we have a proven track record on M and A. We're supported by a very experienced team, similar to their previous involvement in the Texan and Renaflex acquisitions, which delivered value beyond original estimations. And alongside this, the acquisition will be overseen and supported by David Pascali, our COO and myself, all who have M and A experience. And finally, it's worth drawing out that much of the logic behind the Texon and Renaflex acquisition also applies to OrthoLite. It furthers Coats' position as a global leader in footwear.
We have a clear line of sight to synergy delivery and a pipeline of sustainability focused innovative solutions. So now I'm going to move on to the key financial highlights from the interim results. So if we can turn to Slide 14. Before I start, it's worth noting that the results exclude the North American yarns business, which has been treated as a discontinued operation and therefore excluded from the numbers presented here. I'm pleased to report that the group has delivered a good set of results for the first half.
Revenue was $7.00 £5,000,000 up 2% at constant currency. This result reflected good growth in the first four months, with revenue up by 4% to the April, followed by softening in orders for the final two months of the period due to the general market uncertainty and customer cautiousness arising from the announcement of the increased U. S. Trade tariffs. EBIT was £140,000,000 up 7% at constant currency, reflecting the benefit of mix, price and cost control.
And pleasingly, adjusted EBIT margin increased by 100 basis points to 19.8%, and it has already reached our medium term target range of 19% to 21%. And this good operating performance translated into 4% EPS growth. We've also seen a strong step up in free cash flow, pre dividends of £54,000,000 resulting in net debt at £430,000,000 with leverage of 1.4 times at the end of the half. So if we now turn to the following slide, where I'll provide a little bit more color on the divisional performance. So first of all, apparel.
Revenue was £381,000,000 up 3% on a constant currency basis. This reflected good growth momentum at the start of the year, followed by a slowdown in orders from the April with uncertainty around U. S. Tariffs resulting in more cautious buying patterns from brands. During the period, we were able to hold pricing and achieve a favorable portfolio mix despite pressures arising from increased U.
S. Tariffs. And we also continued to drive procurement efficiencies and to maintain tight cost control. As a result, adjusted EBIT increased by 11% on a constant currency basis to £78,000,000 with margin increasing by 140 basis points to 20.5%. Based on the current market conditions, which remain somewhat uncertain, we expect Q3 trading to be broadly in line with Q2 and with some recovery anticipated in the fourth quarter based on historic patterns of demand correction.
In footwear, revenue increased 1% to £199,000,000 on a constant currency basis. Similar to apparel, footwear saw good momentum in the first four months with 5% revenue growth, but a slowdown in May and June given U. S. Tariff uncertainty. The division continued to deliver positive price and mix benefits with growth in thread and footwear structural components, partially offset by lower market demand for lifestyle structural components.
The division delivered 46,000,000 of EBIT and maintained a strong margin of 24.1%. The margin performance reflects strong commercial delivery and the benefits arising from integration synergies and footprint consolidation alongside prudent cost control. Similar to apparel, given the uncertainty arising from U. Tariffs, we expect Q3 trading for the division to be broadly in line with the second quarter with some recovery anticipated in the fourth quarter. In Performance Materials, revenue declined 2% to £125,000,000 on a constant currency basis.
This reflects previously reported ongoing issues in some U. S. Markets, including destocking in some telecommunication customers. Encouragingly, we entered the second half with a strong order book for Energy, and we expect the division to return to growth during the second half of the year. Adjusted EBIT was up 4% on a constant currency basis at 14,000,000 and EBIT margin increased to 11.1%, a marked step up from the second half of twenty twenty four.
This reflects operational improvements across the division. We've also taken steps to improve the quality of the portfolio with the exit from the non core U. S. Yarns market in Q2 and the closure of the Toluca facility in Mexico in December 2024 to align our operational footprint to market demand. We expect further margin progression in the second half, driven by growth initiatives and further operational improvement projects.
So if we turn to the following slide on income statement, there are a few areas worth highlighting. Exceptional and acquisition related items of £11,000,000 included £1,000,000 of residual costs relating to strategic projects, which are now largely complete and £10,000,000 relating to the amortization of acquisition intangibles. Net finance costs were £18,000,000 slightly higher year on year as a result of The UK pension buy in payments and partially offset by continued good cash management through the period. At 29%, the first half effective tax rate remained well controlled, and we expect the rate to stay at this level for the full year. And we had adjusted EPS of £0.47 driven by the improved trading performance.
And finally, given the strong first half performance and our confidence in the group outlook, we're pleased to declare an interim dividend of £01 an increase of 7.5% compared to the same period last year. So now if we turn to Slide 17 on cash flow and leverage. The group delivered a free cash inflow of £54,000,000 in the period prior to shareholder distributions, a significant step up from the same period last year, reflecting strong overall exceptional cash flows. With a working capital outflow of £31,000,000 we've continued to manage net working capital closely with a focus on inventory without compromising service levels. We also continued our disciplined approach to payables and receivables management during the period.
Capital expenditure was £12,000,000 as we maintained a disciplined approach to investing in growth opportunities, and we anticipate twenty twenty five full year capital expenditure to remain in the 30,000,000 to £40,000,000 range as we continue to invest in support of our growth strategy. At the end of the period, net debt excluding lease liabilities was GBP $430,000,000, representing a pro form a leverage of 1.4x. So I'll now hand back to David to provide the outlook for the rest of the year.
Thank you, Hannah. Turning now to Page 19, which summarizes the outlook. The group's full year outlook remains unchanged and is in line with current market expectations with the balance weighting between the first and the second half trading. We expect to further increase free cash flow in the second half and into 2026. This is all underpinned by the strong operating margin performance.
We remain mindful of the current market uncertainty, including from the dynamic tariff backdrop, but we are confident that we will continue to deliver despite this. Now we are happy to take your questions.
Thank you, David. Our first question comes from Maggie Schooley from Rothschild and Co Redburn. Line is open. Please go ahead.
Good morning, David. Good morning, Hannah. Thank you so much for taking my questions. Congratulations on the acquisition. I guess the first one I would have is, I appreciate deals are slightly like buses and come along and you've known OrthoLite for some time.
But can you give us a little background on the decision and the timing given the uncertain end markets with which we're operating on? Just to understand a little bit better about if it was the seller who came to you or how this came about now?
Yes. Thanks for the question, Maggie. As I mentioned at the beginning, obviously, we've been tracking a set of targets for approximately two years, well before I joined Coach. And we've been very consistent with our M and A strategy of the companies and the areas of interest. So OrthoLite was always at the top of that list.
There's been management engagement for over eighteen months. And there was a process that was initiated by the private equity owner of OrthoLite earlier this year. Obviously, we have been investing already in the relationship quite a bit and we knew the asset pretty well. But since then, we've been able to perform pretty substantial due diligence that has reinforced our conviction. It's been a process that has taken a few months.
And during these months, the performance of OrthoLite has been very strong, in line with their expectations. And obviously, the question I think behind your question is the fact of, okay, there's still uncertainty in the market, so how do we look at this? And this is a point that we've been considering quite in detail. We've looked at the uncertainty, the macro environment and discussed it with the whole Board. And we've taken the view that fundamentally the footwear space is an attractive space in terms of growth and profit potential over the medium term.
And that OrthoLine as the market leader in that space in the technology that is going from low to high penetration is perfectly positioned for growth in the medium term independently of any, I would say, uncertainty or volatility that we may experience in the short term. There's another consideration obviously about the scarcity of the assets. But as Hannah mentioned, we've been very disciplined as well in terms of looking at financial returns considering alternatives such as buybacks as kind of a hurdle rate and looking to clearly exceed materially exceed those returns over the medium to long term.
Yes. Makes a lot of sense. And secondly, this is a small point. And you mentioned that they have I think I'm pronouncing it correctly, the Circle technology. Clearly, it's early stage and the decisions to 5% royalty on future sales.
Could you just tell a little bit more about the technology and why 5% of royalties on sales and not profits and what the thought process is there?
Yes. So Circle is a technology that addresses the midsole space. So it's another adjacency within the athleisure footwear. It's one of the most important components in the shoe. And what OrthoLife has done is develop a technology that is very disruptive from the standpoint of performance and sustainability.
So they are very excited about that technology, and they are very engaged with multiple brands to start launching it shortly. But we consider that there wasn't enough, I would say, certainty about that and we didn't want to therefore value that as part of the deal upfront. Given obviously the fact that they've invested quite heavily on the technology over €30,000,000 and their conviction on the potential, we ended up agreeing to a royalty fee, as you mentioned, of 5% over five years that we think is a sensible way to handle the potential future upside of this technology. So we're quite happy with that arrangement.
Yes. Makes a lot of sense.
Lastly, on the core group, if I could switch gears to that and then I'll pass it on. But very good cost control in apparel by Adrienne in the first half and year on year sequentially the margins were really good there. But can we expect or is there more to come in terms of footwear in terms of further cost control as we move through the year? Or is that something given the integration, it will all be part and parcel of how they're looking at the wider or more enlarged division?
Maggie, it's Hannah here. Think the short answer is yes. So there are as I sort of referenced briefly in my script, there are some projects that we have undertaken in the first half of the year around footprint optimization, which are not associated with OrthoLite, that we will see the benefits of those flow through to footwear margins in the second half alongside the regular cost control. So we would expect to see the margins in footwear sort of increase slightly in the second half. With regard to the apparel margins, the team has done a great job. And they, as we referenced, have benefited from price and mix within the first half. I think we might expect those to sort of moderate slightly in the second half, so there might be a bit of a flip between the two. But yes, very okay to the margin performance in the first half.
Thank you so much. I'll pass it on because I'm sure others have questions. Congratulations, though. Great deal.
Thank you. Thanks, Maggie.
Our next question comes from Charles Hall from Peel Hunt. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Good morning, David. Good morning, Hannah.
Good morning. Good morning.
Replicate what Maggie said. Congratulations on the deal. Just a few questions on OrthoLite. Can you talk a little bit more detail on current trading there just to get a feel of the trends and how they're being impacted by tariffs? And can you talk about the market market share potential to increase it from here and what competitors they're currently pacing into?
Yes. Thanks, Charles. Obviously, their performance in the first half is something we've been tracking during the process quite carefully, trying to understand the potential impact of the macro environment and uncertainty, which we've seen in our numbers in footwear and how it translated to them. They've been performing very strongly. They've grown in the first half at around 15% year on year, which is a very strong performance.
And that is supported by two drivers that they have that are specific to OrthoLite beyond the just kind of the macros of the footwear industry. They are moving from low to high penetration with their technology. As you know, the open cell phone technology is more and more adopted by the footwear brands, and they've managed to extend this technology into additional shoe models across multiple brands. So that's an additional upside that they are seeing. And they've also seen a very good mix evolution as they are moving from flat insoles to molded insoles, which have a substantially higher price.
And they've managed to convert a lot of customers from more entry level to more premium technology. So these two drivers, we've diligence them obviously in big detail, and they've supported a very strong first half performance. But it's fair to say that as part of our, I would say, modeling assumptions for the business, we've taken a very, very cautious view at what will happen in the second half and into next year. So we've clearly not extrapolated that first half performance, and we've taken a substantial contingency or reduction in their numbers for the next eighteen months, but it's been very resilient. With regards to market share potential, I just want to highlight first, obviously, their market share is around 36%, as we've mentioned.
But probably the biggest driver for their growth in the future is continued penetration of open cell phone technology across brands and within the brands across shoe models. And we believe that, that penetration will continue for two reasons. One is consumer pull because consumers value the difference for a relatively incremental cost. But more importantly, because open cell technology is from a sustainability standpoint a step forward compared to the current technology that it replaces. And as a result, brands are also driving the integration to improve on their sustainability journey.
Talking about market share potential, it's going to be continue to be driven by the adoption by the brands that they are in, by the extension of their product into new shoe models. So that's what they are driving plus the upselling that will continue to propel their market share. So we see opportunities as well in that area. I think you asked about competitors. Maybe worth saying this is an industry where Orpholite is by far the largest player.
There's other competitors, but they tend to be smaller than regional. And the number two and number three combined have a market share that we estimate at between 1520% combined. So they are the distant number one player in the open cell foam insole market. I hope that answers.
That's very helpful. And just a quick follow-up. They've got a very broad list of brands that they work with. Is there any concentration in that just get an understanding? And also just a little bit more visibility on the leadership, is the full leadership team coming across?
Yes. So on customer concentration, no, they are not they don't have a substantial customer concentration. Just to give you an idea, they serve over 500 brands. Nike and represent approximately one third of their revenue, which is very reasonable when you look at Nairobi does have in the overall athletic industry. So we concerning.
And the rest, the that those 500 brands that they're selling portfolio actually broader than ours. So if anything, we see opportunities to cross sell because those plans for thirty years, they have deep relationships and we see opportunities to leverage some of those credentials. With regards to the management team, he's basically the founder. He's in The U. But he intends to continue.
He's playing more of an advisory role at this stage. Probably on the day to day, he's got a deep underneath, but he's still very engaged and very excited about the deal and coming with us to execute on the vision. And the management team are experienced high caliber people who are also very excited to join. Think you are saying that through the process, learned that we were obviously the first choice by the management team. And the reason is that they truly the vision of creating the super Tier two and becoming a big player in the footwear industry together.
That's brilliant. Thanks very much.
Thank you, Charles.
Our next question comes from Kevin Fogarty from Deutsche Numis. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Great. Thanks very much. Good morning, everyone, and well done on the transaction. Two questions, if I could, on OrthoLite. If we look at the historic financial performance that you've outlined for the business, just sort of confirming, is that all sort of organic?
Is there anything we should be thinking about in historic numbers to just get a sort of the underlying performance there? And perhaps within that, if you could sort of touch on the 2023 performance, just sort of what can happen, the dynamics there, I think you've outlined. For revenues, that would be quite good to just understand the history. And secondly, if we look at some of the background info on Author Lite, it sort of outlines a number of kind of patterns, I guess, it sort of holds. I just wanted to confirm, presumably, these are in the core business and not significantly weighted towards Circle.
And just a bit more sort of detail on those. Is that all around the kind of open cell technology? Are those sort of key differentiators relative to the competition? But it's just a bit more color on that sort of patent capability would be useful.
Yes. Thanks, Kevin. Let me address maybe your last question. Then I'll turn it over to Hana to talk a little bit about their historical performance, okay? So in terms of patents, actually most of their patents are on the Circle technology, which they've decided and they've taken an approach of protecting through patents.
Their core business, the open cell phone is more protected through trade secrets. It's a business of really formulations and customization of formulations. And they are protecting it through a broad a very large portfolio formulation they've developed over time and capabilities to adjust the chemistry in a very agile way. They have over 400 formulations, which allows them to tweak for every new shoe model in a very fast way, always get kind of the best compromise between cushioning, performance, rebound of the shoe, levels of recycled material content and that is the core of their strength. So yes, most of the patents are more on the Circle side where they've taken a little bit of a different approach.
I'll turn it over to Hannah to talk about the other to answer the other point.
Yes. So just on revenue, your first question was whether the revenue performance is all organic. The answer is yes, it is. In terms of if you look back at that sort of revenue history, they've achieved sort of 8% revenue CAGR from the period 2019 to 2024. And if you look at their sort of performance, the sort of ups and downs are very consistent with our performance in terms of that post COVID stocking, destocking cycle.
So very consistent with the observation actually that their growth rates are stronger driven by this market penetration factor that David's talked through. So and they've had a very good start to 2020 despite the tariff uncertainty, which I think just highlights the driver penetration is sort of giving a resilience to the business from that perspective.
Great. That's really helpful. And I guess, is there any commentary on sort of historic investments in the business and the assets, what sort of rate it might have been running at? I guess, so that there's no sort of incremental sort of capital investment required or just sort of an idea of the historic investment, if that's possible?
Yes. So we've had the opportunity to go around lease some of their sites, and their facilities are well invested. So they're not going to require sort of significant additional investments. It's running sort of very similar to perhaps sort of profile in that sort of 3% of revenue type range. I did sort of touch on the plans that we have around site consolidation.
And plan there is to sort of move to sort of three mega factories in the key geographies in which we both operate. You'll have seen that there's quite a strong overlap in our footprint between China, Vietnam and Indonesia. And that, as the slide indicates, will require some cost investment to realize £20,000,000 of synergies. We're estimating that around £35,000,000 and some of that will be around ERP system implementation. But in terms of sort of the operations, we've been pleased with the level of investment there and the quality of the operation.
Great. Thanks very much for the detail. Well done on the deal. Cheers.
Thanks, Gavin.
Our next question comes from David Farrell from Jefferies. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Good morning, everyone. Thanks very much for taking my questions. The first one, I guess, of relatively basic one, but can you just explain in a bit more detail the attraction of open cell technology against what I think is the alternative EVA? What exactly is the difference? And given it is taking kind of market share, has the financial performance of 8% only consistent, I guess, with what Kote is delivering from its existing footwear business a little bit light?
Could it potentially grow at a faster rate than that?
Yes, good question. So let me tell a little bit more. So open cell technology is a technology that basically kind of is a different chemistry and a different manufacturing process of forming the insoles that keep some air bubbles or air content trapped between the chemistry of the polymers. And through different formulations, basically, they're able to provide different levels of rebound and cushioning, which breathability as well. That's another marked advantage that makes it very appropriate for athleisure and athletic applications.
And that has to be tweaked depending on what type of use the shoe is going to be for. Now this technology has very high levels of penetration in brands like ASICS because obviously those are shoes for runners and that's where the level of penetrations are very high. If you go into more generalist brands like Nike or Adidas, they deployed that technology into more of the premium shoes. But as I mentioned before, through a land and expand type of strategy, OrthoLife have been very successful at continuously expand the penetration of these open cell phone technology into more and more shoe models. And that's the journey they're on, and there's still a lot of runway.
Just to give you an idea, a company like ASICs may be at levels of penetration of the technology around 60%. If you look at more companies like Nike and Adidas, they're still probably in the 15% to 20%. So you see kind of the potential to go further. And not to lose sight of the other big driver, which is sustainability. The technology replaces closed cell phone technology, which is called EVA, that's the acronym, is a technology that has substantial sustainability challenges.
And there's a general push and drive to basically find alternatives to that technology. Open cell phone is a little bit more expensive, but we're talking about components that still represent a relatively very small part of the overall shoe cost. And there's a bigger push from the sustainability angle as well to transition from the EVA technology, which is the current baseline into open cell, which is more sustainable, much more sustainable. Now yes, you're asking a very good question. If our footwear business is targeted to grow at around 8% and Orphalete has, call it, tailwind from technology penetration, yes, theoretically it should be outgrowing the rest of our footwear business.
So yes, that's absolutely correct. Obviously, we've been cautious a little bit in some of our assumption modeling assumptions, but we're very happy with that tailwind relative to our core footwear business. And actually looking at the first half performance, we've seen really the divergence and kind of the outperformance that they have relative to our footwear business because of those extra drivers of growth. So yes, obviously, we have that in mind.
Thanks. And I guess kind of a follow-up from that. As a what is now kind of a super Tier two supplier, how does that change how you go to market with the brands? How does one plus one become 2.5, three? Does Autolite give you kind of extra credibility at the table to help innovate the shoe?
Just trying to work out how some of the parts comes out at a higher value to your customers.
Yes. So a couple of things. The products that we sell into the footwear industry are highly technical. That's why we picked these areas because they also allow good profit levels, right? But they are very technical, technical, whether whether it's it's the trade or the structural components or the insoles.
You cannot have generalist teams kind of going into the customers because they require extreme depth of knowledge and optimization of the solutions to the customers. So the go to market will be very, very product driven, but we're obviously going to leverage the key account relationships that we have with the brands to open doors and promote our broader portfolio. We're very excited by the fact that OrthoLife, again, worked with over 500 brands. Our footwear portfolio is about 300 brands. They address many more brands, maybe some of the smaller brands.
They can open doors to us to bring our the rest of our portfolio. It's fair to say that they have a we have a good a very good, I would say, brand portfolio and relationship with brands, but they have an even better one. So we think we benefit from their brand intimacy. At the Tier one level, we have much better relationships and that's something that they are very keen on because their model is the same as ours. They specify their product with their brands and then they serve locally the Tier 1s.
But because the install is something that you slide into the shoe when it's finished unlike our products that are kind of manufactured into the assembly process or assembled with a shoe, our interaction with the Tier 1s is much deeper. And that's going to be very positive to them because they have some challenges sometimes with compliance, products specified with brands, making sure that the local manufacturers actually adhere to the specifications. And if they need to provide some technical and customer service support, they see our teams on in the local countries serving the Tier 1s and their relationships as a very, very important plus for them in terms of enforcing the specifications. So that's kind of how we look at the commercial angle fit. We're very excited about the technology angle.
We haven't talked about it, but at the end of the day, our structural components business is a polymer business. The insoles is a polymer business. We're bringing together capabilities. We're starting to look at some of the things we're doing on chemistry, some of the things we're doing on combining components. We have carbon plates that are adjacent in the shoe to the insoles.
And we're looking at opportunities to combine those technologies in a more innovative way. So we see, I would say, opportunities in the the technology side as well. And the third one, which is probably the area where we're going to bring the most to them, it's fair to say that they're extremely good in the front end, commercial, product management, etcetera. We are probably better on the operational excellence side. So we see us bringing a lot to them in terms of improvement of their manufacturing processes.
As we go into these kind of large factories at scale, we think they're going to benefit from that a lot. So I actually think we're very complementary in many, many ways. Yes, it's a very good marriage.
Very good. Thank you for answering the question. A Coach conference call wouldn't be a Coach conference call without a question on Performance Materials. Just got a quick one on that. Given kind of you're alluding to a stronger second half driven by energy, can you confirm that is going to typically be a U.
S. Customer served out of your Spanish manufacturing facility? And therefore, is there any risk of tariffs around the delivery of that improvement in the second half?
No. It's really so a couple of things. First, we're very actually, I would say, very happy with the progress in Performance Materials sequentially since the second half. Just to give a few data points, you recall last year, EBIT for Performance Materials was 7% reported with actually a lower level in the second half. And at that point, when we announced those numbers, we also gave the medium term target of 13% to 15% with obviously a lot of, I would say, a lot of people questioning the feasibility of those targets.
Well, now we are in the first half reporting 11.1%. And part of it is true is through the exit from The U. S. German's business that we've executed at pace and with positive cash proceeds. But there's been a lot of initiatives in terms of operational improvements and cost improvements in the last few months, and that's coming through.
So we're very, very happy with that. And you see that already at more than 11%. We you can see line of sight to the 13% to 15% number that we guided. Second half, we'll see further progression in margin. Part of it will come from, again, initiatives that were driven in the first half that are going to deliver results in the second half.
Part of it is from improvement in the mix. We have a strong order book in energy. I mentioned also a few months ago that has been a huge focus area for us in the last few months. We've qualified new products with our Energy customers. We've got a pretty full order book.
Actually, all our sales forecast for the second half in Energy is supported by a firm order book. So it's not kind of go get. And that's accretive to the Performance Materials margins quite substantially. So yes, we feel good about that. Now tariffs is not an issue really because we don't ship into The U.
S. It goes into oil companies, but actually the destination is more other parts of The Americas. Yes, we're not anticipating any issue with tariffs for that business, and we're happy with the trajectory of Performance Materials, including going back to in the second half after quite a few quarters of declining, we're going see Performance Materials grow in the second half.
Our next question comes from Mark Fielding from RBC.
Just a few follow ups. One, a boring one. In terms of the synergy expectations, just how do we think about the time line? Is some of that relatively immediate in terms of its delivery? And then in terms of the acquisition, I suppose, one, can you just help me with following on with the comments about the product being more sustainable?
Is it as simple as because there are pockets of air, so it's using less stuff? Or is there a lot more to this? Could you maybe just give us a bit more information about that and so we can also think about how that market might evolve in the future? And then finally, on that customer penetration side, obviously, given us the five year financials, they look very strong. I am curious if at any point there's been meaningful customer addition.
For example, did they suddenly add like or add the DAS? Or has it been more of a long standing slow build with that sort of customer? You.
So I think at the cost synergy phasing, So first of the key driver of the cost synergies is the site optimization project, where we're creating these three mega factories in Vietnam, China and Indonesia. And we are being very, very mindful that what we don't want to do with that is disrupt the top line growth. And as a result, we are phasing it over three years with the weighting more centered on year two and year three in terms of the synergy delivery. So, just in terms of proportion, it's relatively modest in the first year, a couple of million and then sort of more evenly spread between years two and year three. And that's very intentional to protect the revenue growth line given the success of the business.
And also there's an ERP migration, and again you need to do that in a very controlled way. So it's been very thoughtfully put through from that perspective. So that was the first part of the question.
Yes. On the you're asking about OpenCell versus EVA technology sustainability. There's a market advantage in kind of the components of it's not really because of the air pockets, so to speak. It's more because of the chemistry. It's a better chemistry from an environmental standpoint.
And also, the product has very, very high levels. It can be manufactured with very, very high levels of recycled material. So those are the two main advantages, superior chemistry from an environmental standpoint and very, very high levels of recycled content. With regards to the strong growth we've seen in terms of penetration in the first half, it's really more driven it's not so much new brands. As I mentioned, it's how they are expanding into new shoes, new models within brands that they are already serving.
I gave you the example of companies like Nike and Adidas. They have penetration of maybe 15% to 20% with them. But over time, they are expanding the technology into more models. And that's going to be a flow into the future as we keep driving that across brands.
Our next question comes from Jonathan Mountsie from BNP Paribas. Line is open. Go ahead.
Good morning, everyone. Thanks for fitting me in. A couple of questions. First, on the synergies. Maybe you could also help us understand, you've given different pockets for the synergies, different drivers.
What's the kind of split kind of interested you've got operational management savings, you've got support function savings. I guess that's hard cost reduction and you've also got procurement. So really trying to understand how much of the $20,000,000 is procurement. And then secondly, on synergies, you talk about sources of growth synergies, you don't quantify them. Could you give us some sort of feeling on what the opportunity might be there for cross selling, etcetera, in the future and when we might start to see that in the top line?
And then finally, more to do with recent trading. Obviously, during the most recent quarter, we had the tariff news. You talk a lot about the sort of impact, the uncertainty there. Could you talk more about maybe quantify what you're doing on pricing, whether or not we've basically spun up to what the new normal will be now or whether there's more impact to come in the second half? Just really trying to understand the impact of the tariff environment as we move forward on your business.
Do you want me to go with the cost synergy question, Yes. So just in terms of the breakdown of how does that GBP 20,000,000 breakdown, when it's broadly speaking, about half of it is coming from the site optimization. And then, the between procurement and support function savings, it's roughly fifty-fifty, so '20 five-twenty five, percent each. Is that, and the procurement savings are really derived from they are within Aultholite rather than procurement synergies with the Coats Group because there's not that much crossover in terms of the materials that we buy. But what we have found is they have a very, very fragmented procurement organization at the moment and they are not, taking advantage of, I'm going say, the coach discipline. We have been very, very successful at driving procurement savings, so, that is the sort of the main tenet of the procurement savings.
Does that sort of help you? So roughly 50%, 25%, 25%.
That's correct. Thank you.
Then there was a question around revenue Yes.
Revenue synergies, I think, Han alluded to the key drivers, right, or some of the or the main drivers. We haven't put a figure on those because we still need to kind of get access to more information to quantify them better. But the first thing we'll do is, obviously, they serve 500 brands. We serve 300 brands.
We're going to look at the brands we're not serving and they can bring us into. So that's going to be the first thing. And then obviously, we're going to look mapping kind of the brands that we both serve, who has the best relationship, intimacy and see how we can leverage that to maybe advance our positions. So difficult to kind of put a number around it, but it's a playbook that we've been using also between our thread and our structural components business and we know how to do that. Then probably more medium term, the opportunities are more on the technology side, including Circle.
And obviously, in the first few months, we will spend a good time trying to understand how close it is to commercialization and how the brands are looking at it because that's really a key component of the shoe, the midsole, very strategic for the brands. So we need to have access access to the brands and really understand that. But it's fair to say that the current management team, the offline management team feel very optimistic about the prospects of that technology, which is a substantial step forward in sustainability of that particular part of the shoe. And they are in contact with watchful brands to bring it to the market. And that is a sizable total addressable market, much bigger than the components that we serve because it's a much higher value component in the shoe.
So yes, those are the areas where we could see upside and yes.
The only other one I think is worth talking about is the innovation synergies, so the power of bringing to technical capabilities.
Yes, I mentioned before, we're looking at like things how can we combine maybe I mean apart from accelerating just purely chemistry roadmap, it's more how to combine components. I mentioned the high performance running shoes, there's carbon blades. And they are just literally next to the insole and there's opportunities to combine components. But those are going to be more kind of probably in the medium term type of synergies. Difficult to put a figure there, but probably the biggest question mark is how big or what's behind the circle of technology that looks potentially exciting, but difficult to put a number on it at this stage.
Now yes, you asked about recent trading, what do we see? I think Hannah explained that a little bit before. What we've seen in the last two months is basically what we call cautious ordering. And what that means is brands are taking a view on the future that there's uncertainty in terms of how consumer confidence and consumer demand will evolve, in particular in The U. S.
And they've taken a view to be conservative in ordering, make sure that they protect the inventory so that they don't do excess inventory buildup and at the risk that they are running out of product. And they've told us that, look, if they if they get are it wrong, then they will do what they call chase orders or top up orders, which are orders that come for delivering very, very short time frame during the year. And that's their approach. So we've seen that in Q2. We expect that to continue in Q3.
It's not a sequential decline, but we're staying at the same level of orders. We don't see that kind of going down, but basically it's not going up. So we estimate we will stay at the same level through Q3. And then we've looked at past historical patterns of these type of corrections. And we think in the Q4 time frame, we will see potentially some recovery there.
Yes. So I think Hannah summarized our view on this. We're taking the current outlook, which is aligned with the brand's cautious view on the top line, but we feel very good about the profit and the cash delivery. And the reason, as Hannah explained, is that sequentially from first half to second half, we see further momentum in both Performance Materials as well as the benefits from some of the footprint projects that Hannah alluded in the footwear side. So we think that will help us also underpin our second half numbers.
And we'll continue on to deliver very strong cash. I mean the first half was solid and that will continue to improve in the second half and into 2026. So overall, that's why we're maintaining our outlook.
Thank you. Very clear.
Thanks, Sheldon.
We currently have no further questions. So at this point, I'd like to hand back to David for some closing remarks.
Well, thank you very much for joining today and for the great discussion and questions. I look forward to engaging with you more on these topics in the coming days. Thank you, and have a great day. Thank you.