Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Second Quarter 2012 Cummins Inc. Earnings Conference Call. My name is Jasmin, and I'll be your coordinator for today. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded for replay purposes. I would now like to turn the presentation over to your host for today's conference to Mr. Mark A. Smith, Executive Director, Investor Relations. You may begin.

Thank you, Jasmine, and good morning, everyone, and welcome to our teleconference today to discuss Cummins' results for the second quarter of 2012. Participating with me today are Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Tom Linebarger; our Chief Financial Officer, Pat Ward; and Vice President and President of our Engine business, Rich Freeland. We will all be available for your questions at the end of the teleconference. Before we start, please note that some of the information that you will hear or be given today will consist of forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such statements express our forecasts, expectations, hopes, beliefs and intentions on strategies regarding the future. Our actual future results could differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements because of a number of risks and uncertainties. More information regarding such risks and uncertainties is available in the forward-looking disclosure statement in the slide deck and our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, particularly the Risk Factors section of our most recently filed annual report on Form 10-K and any subsequently filed quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. During the course of this call, we will be discussing certain non-GAAP financial measures, and we refer you to our website for the reconciliation of those measures to GAAP financials. Our press release with the copy of the financial statements and a copy of today's webcast presentation are available on our website at www.cummins.com under the heading of Investors and Media. With that out of the way, we'll begin with our Chairman and CEO, Tom Linebarger.

Thank you, Mark. Good morning, everyone. I will summarize our second quarter results and talk about our key markets. Pat will then take you through more details of our second quarter performance and provide an update on our full year guidance. We delivered strong profitability in the second quarter despite the challenging economic environment and continued investment in new products and growth initiatives. Revenues for the second quarter were $4.45 billion, a decrease of 4% from the second quarter of 2011. Excluding the impact of currency movements and divestitures, revenues were flat year-over-year. Second quarter EBIT was $663 million, a decrease of $44 million or 6% compared to the second quarter of 2011, excluding gains related to business divestitures. EBIT percent for the quarter was 14.9%, the second highest in the company's history. Gross margin at 27.2% set a new record for the company, reflecting continued progress in driving productivity and lowering product coverage costs. For the second half of 2012, revenues increased by 5% -- sorry, for the first half of 2012, revenues increased by 5% over last year, and our EBIT percent increased from 14.6% to 14.8%. We delivered incremental EBIT margins of 19.4%, very close to our long-term targets despite the lower-than-anticipated revenue growth. As previously announced, we now expect full year revenues to be flat with 2011, a reduction from our previous guidance of 10% growth in revenues. Continued weakness in some international markets, particularly in Brazil and China, coupled with slowing orders in the U.S. truck, oil and gas and Power Generation, have caused us to lower our outlook. I will talk further about our outlook for a number of these markets, and we have included a supplementary slide in today's earnings release presentation that quantified the change in revenue guidance by business segment and…

Thank you, Tom, and good morning, everyone. Second quarter revenues were $4.45 billion, a decrease of 4% from a year ago. Sales in North America were up 12% over the prior year, driven by strong demand from on-highway and construction markets while outside of North America, sales were down 16% as a result of weaker demand in several markets, most notably China, Brazil and Europe. Compared to the first quarter, sales were flat. We experienced low demand in the heavy- and medium-duty truck markets in North America and Brazil and the construction market in China, offset by higher revenues in Power Generation, with the first quarter typically a seasonal low point. Gross margins were a record 27.2% of sales, up from 25.9% last year despite the lower sales revenues. The improvement over the prior year was driven by manufacturing productivity improvements, price realization, lower warranty and material cost, along with a more favorable product mix. Gross margins also improved compared to the first quarter despite flat revenue as a result of productivity improvements, lower warranty cost and product mix. Selling, admin and research and development costs were up $54 million from last year and were $18 million higher than the previous quarter. The growth in spending was driven primarily by the search and development for new products. And we've also been investing in distribution network and IT infrastructure. Joint venture income of $104 million was 11% lower than a year ago and on par with the previous quarter. Year-over-year, more contributions from joint ventures in China and in India were partially offset by an improvement in North American distributors. Sequentially, joint venture contribution was relatively flat. Second quarter EBIT was $663 million or 14.9% of sales compared to the 15.2% we reported last year, excluding gains related to business divestitures.…

Thanks, Pat. We do have plenty of time for questions. [Operator Instructions] Operator, we're now ready for our first question. Jasmin?

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Jerry Revich with Goldman Sachs.

Can you gentlemen say more about the actions you've taken to adjust the cost structure? Are we talking SG&A or production reductions and which businesses are impacted most?

Well, let me start with that one, Jerry. We've taken actions across the business. But I think it's really important to point out that the critical growth initiatives that we've talked about for some time now, we're not going to cut back on those. So they're really important to the long-term future profitability of the company, and they're kind of sacred. We are cutting back around areas such as travel, and we are looking to reduce the rate of hiring in some areas. We will freeze it in other areas across the company. But it's important we find the right balance of continuing to invest for growth while at the same time managing spending prudently across the company, across all 4 business segments and the corporate areas.

I would just add, Jerry, the leadership team here is pretty experienced with cost-reduction activities. All of us have been through it before. So every one of them in our recent strategy meeting had to come up with a set of reductions that they thought they would implement and still be able to meet the key -- strike a balance that Pat talked about, about investing in the key growth programs and making sure that they can still hit their growth targets and revenue commitments. So that's what we're trying to strike here, and I think every member of the team is committed to doing that.

And as a follow-up, I'm wondering, Pat, if you can bridge for us the margins you're targeting in Power Gen and Engines in the back half of the year versus back half of last year? On flat to down sales, you're looking for margins to be flat to up. Can you just step us through the major moving pieces there?

Yes, let me try and take this one, Jerry. I'll give you a high-level bridge from the first half of the year to the second half of the year. And the first half of the year was considerably better than the second half of last year. We do expect revenues to be flat, maybe slightly better in the second half of the year than the first 6 months that we've just gone through. That being said, there are a number of headwinds coming our way, so the product mix is not as favorable in the second half of the year. We've talked about reduction in oil and gas. We've talked about reduction in Power Gen. So in the high horsepower engines where we do have some margins, we see a lot of negative mix going on there. Warranty costs are expected to grow a little bit in the second half of the year. And joint venture income will certainly be down in China and in India, more so in the third quarter, I expect, than the fourth quarter but it's definitely softened. Now on the other hand, we've seen terrific work so far in the manufacturing plants to improve productivity. We expect that will continue as we go into the second half of the year. The supply chain savings that we've talked about, the 1% margin target for 2015, we're on track there, the 0.2% or maybe even a little bit better now this year based on what we've seen in the first 6 months of the year. And finally, material costs are almost certainly going to be better in the second half of the year than what we've seen in the first half of the year. And that's a combination of metal markets being a little bit better than what we thought they're going to be and just ongoing good working cost-reduction with our supply base.

Your next question comes from the line of Jamie Cook with Crédit Suisse. Jamie L. Cook - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Two relatively simple questions. One, if you could just expand within North America and Power Gen. Last quarter, you talked about some weakness in orders. You still cited North America is up. I think you said in your prepared remarks that things in July looked a little better. So can you just give a little more color there and comment on the overall competitive environment? And then my second question, just with regards to Pat, as you're thinking about your guidance cut for the year, generally the thing I like about Cummins is you make a cut and it's big so there's not generally risk in the back half. I guess what I'm concerned about is I still look at your North America ACT forecast or your North America truck forecast, which is essentially in line with ACT. So what gives you confidence orders pick up in September? Or could you just speak to where you think the risk is to your guidance in the back half?

Okay, Jamie. This is Mark. I'll answer the first part of the question on Power Gen and North America. So the first thing to remember is we are expecting 15% revenue growth in North America on Power Gen, but 2/3 of that is coming from new products rather than the underlying market. And that remained like a stable forecast for the full year. We have seen orders bounce around. So for the base business, originally we're expecting 10% growth for the full year, and we've now lowered that to 5%. We did see a pretty sharp drop in incoming orders around the middle of March, April time, and we talked about that on the Q1 call. Orders stayed down for a while and then have picked up a little bit recently, so a kind of 10% growth underpinned with the new products, 5% from underlying market. I think market’s reasonably competitive at this point in time. But I think based on current trends, it's a little hard to exactly forecast, but we feel good about the 5% underlying market growth.

Jamie, I guess the other thing I would just say is the volatility of the market has obviously picked up some. To talk about recent order trends and things that's obviously a little frustrating even for us because we would have liked to have had a better view of what our current guidance is back when we gave our first quarter call, but things fell off quite quickly. And we saw the order rates trending down in April, and we just didn't know how lasting or how big a deal that was. They stayed down through all of Q2 and then recently have picked back up a little bit. So it's volatile, and we just don't exactly know how to read it other than generally speaking, as Mark said, we've got some new business in the market that's helping us, plus we've got a pretty broadened global business that's helping us. So all in, we feel good about the Power Gen forecast, but we are definitely seeing more volatility in order rates in a number of markets and in a number in North America that you highlighted. I've got Rich here though, Jamie. Let me ask him to comment a little bit on the ACT forecast in the North America truck market.

Jamie, this is Rich. So yes, as you noted, we've taken our forecast down from the 278 production build down to 260. So that implies we're basically building at a 280 the first half of the year, building at a 240 rate the second half of the year. And so a few things we're looking at. One is, as you're aware, net orders have been weaker than that the last few months. I think that will probably continue through July. The things we're looking at that give us some confidence is one is retail sales. That averaged over 24,000 last 4 months. So you think at a 240 rate, that we'd be building at 20,000 a month. So retail sales are coming in higher than that. Conversations we've had with lots of customers, especially, again, more geared towards the larger customers are saying they're sticking with their second half order rates that they're going to continue with. The backlog remains pretty strong. So here we are in July, and there's well over 80,000 in the backlog. And I think lastly, we will see just the normal seasonality and some elements of increased orders in November, December ahead of the emissions change or greenhouse gas change in 2014. So I think it's obviously a moving target. But the net of that, I think the 240 build rate is balanced and right for the second half the year. Jamie L. Cook - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Okay. And then I'm sorry, just last question, Pat. Can you just quickly quantify what's the material cost benefit in the back half of the year?

Well, for the first half of the year, Jamie, we'll be 3/10 or 4/10 of a point benefit. Second half of the year, we expect to be 1%.

Your next question comes from the line of David Raso with ISI Group.

I wanted to delve a little bit further into the second half margin guidance. Obviously, the margin guidance is pretty impressive. And the 2 businesses that stick out is the Power Gen business, the margins in the first half the year were 10.1. You're implying they go up to 10.9. In Distribution, it was 11.9 in the first half, and they go up to 13.1. But can you take us through a little bit what you're seeing? I think you mentioned in Power Gen, the mix is a bit adverse. I'm just trying to understand why the margins would go up first half to second half? I mean, you are implying the revenues go up a little bit sequentially. Some of that -- some could be just better overhead absorption, but just trying to better understand that part of the margin guidance.

Yes, so we'll start with Power Gen. Their gross margins have actually been doing quite well over the last few quarters. And some of that has been masked by mark-to-market adjustments we've had to take on forward contracts with copper. So we don't see copper decreasing further beyond this point. So we don't expect to see any more of those mark-to-market adjustments having kind of negatively impacted their margins in the first and more so in the second quarter of the year. So as volumes pick up in the second half the year in Power Gen, I expect their gross margin to improve and then not to fall to the bottom line. Tony and his team are thinking all over the cost management activities in the Power Gen groups, so I feel pretty good about their ability to expand margins from where they've been in the first half of the year. Distribution, they suffered a little bit in the first half of the year as I was taking in the earlier remarks on higher currency impact than what we had anticipated. They're down almost 2 points from a year ago, and half of that is currency and half of that is just increased SAR spending on key initiatives for them in the future. I think the revenues are going to improve in the second half the year. There's no question to that in my mind. I think the mix we're starting to see in that business is starting to move more towards aftermarket and away from whole goods which, again, will give them a lot more of a bump as we go forward.

All right. That's helpful. The backlog at the end of the second quarter, do you have any color at all you can provide us on where the backlog is at the end of the quarter year-over-year?

Backlog for what, David?

I’d don’t know if you have a total company number. I'm just trying to get a feel for you were down 4% revenue for the second quarter back half and implied down 5%. Just trying to get a little feel for kind of where we're launching from on a backlog going into the second half in the growth rate.

We don't have an overall one because it's just so different by markets. I think Rich talked a little bit about where he sees industry backlog for North America, so we’ll have different numbers for different, but some of our businesses operate with no backlog ever. So it's just too wide a variety.

All right. I'll just wrap up then. The related one is share repo. What should we think the second half the year maybe at a minimum compared to the run rate we've said in the first half of -- in the second quarter was, whatever, 188 million-or-so of repo. How should we think about the next couple of quarters on share repo?

We're not really going to change any part of our strategy or our planning when it comes to returning value to shareholders. So we said before, we'll look to do that by growing the business profitably. We'll look to do that by increasing the dividend, which we just did, and we'll look to do that by buying back stock. And we go into the year, as you know, with a target to reduce stock by 1%. If the market price is attractive, we may do more than that. We did more of that in the second half of last year. So we have the flexibility. I'm not going to commit a number just now, but we certainly don't see any change in the way we want to look after shareholders when it comes to dividends and stock buybacks.

Your next question comes from the line of Rob Wertheimer with Vertical Research Partners.

I just wanted to drill into the Power Gen segment a little bit. I assume that your outlook in the comments you made today were made in advance of any changes relative to the terrible outage they're having in India. Does that have the potential to affect anything this year? And then just in general, in 1Q, did you -- I'm trying to figure about the gap between the Indian segment stationary power and then Power Gen revenues. Did you overbuild a little bit and then -- or underbuild a little bit this quarter and the rest of the year?

Rob, I'll start with the India thing. You're totally right that we did that. All the comments we made were before we considered that. And really, I don't exactly know how it's going play out. It is terrible, actually. There's quite a bit of problems going on even in some of the bigger cities like Delhi, with mass transit basically unusable. So it is a bad situation for them. It's unfortunately reflective of the stability of the power grid broadly across the country. And that helps our business, of course, because that's a lot of reason why people buy standby generators. But definitely there's great need for much more stability than it had. We will definitely see what we can do to help in different parts of the country with trying to stabilize the grid, as well as provide emergency services. That's one of the things we do regularly and do best. So we'll be actively trying to help what the impact is. It's just way too early to tell. But I think it talks about why we have -- why we're optimistic long run about our participation in the Power Generation market in India. There just is a lot of grid improvement and other kinds of things to do there, and that's kind of where our products are targeted.

I think the second part of the question on inventory, the drop that we see in demand in the latter part of the second quarter kind of took us by surprise. And across the business, we ended up with more inventory than we anticipated. So as I said in the earlier remarks, we intend to work that down through the start of fourth quarter and get inventory back into a more normal target range for us.

I should add to that, that there's not really any area that's got a lot of extra inventory or where we've seen a lot cancelations. As Pat said, it's just across several parts of the business. The deceleration happened faster than we could adjust, and we're now going to adjust that to the next couple of quarters. So there's no area we're particularly concerned about, but there are several areas where we'll have to take production rates down below what sales have been. That's what affected our guidance for the second half.

That's very helpful. Can I ask real quick on the oil and gas, which I know is small. But did your outlook assume that new builds -- I know the revenue outlook but I don't know how much is aftermarket. I don't know but it seems new builds go close to 0. Are you still getting orders for new builds in that market and do you assume to continue to get orders in the back half of the year. I'll stop there.

Yes -- this is Rich. Yes, we're continuing to get orders for new builds. We're down over 50% from where we were in the first quarter, but there is a level of that coming in. And then the parts and service business has remained pretty steady. So while there's been some shutdown, we've remained slight growth on the parts and service side of that business.

Your next question comes from the line of Tim Denoyer with Wolfe Trahan. Timothy J. Denoyer - Wolfe Trahan & Co.: A couple of questions on the Components margins. Pat, can you quantify the impact in 2Q of the Hilite acquisition? Was there an impact? And can you also just talk about the revenue and margin profile of that acquisition?

Yes. So in the second quarter, we incurred about $5 million of cost relating to the acquisition, so that's about 50 basis points. In the second half of the year, as we look forward in our guidance, we think that the ongoing cost with that technology business that we purchased is going to cost us about 0.5 point at the Components segment level under margin both in the third and fourth quarter. With regards to the profile of the business, I mean, this is a technology that we went out to purchase them. So it's not really -- it's not one of these big acquisitions you see other companies do. We've always said that where we attractive opportunities to move faster with technology development, that's what we'll be interested in. And that's exactly what this deal is. I think the revenue benefit in the second half of the year is going to be fairly modest. It's probably going to be in the range of $40 million to $50 million. But overall with the cost structure, with the technology investments we're seeing there, it will have a negative impact at a segment level of about 0.5 point.

The technology there helps us across our entire after-treatment business, so we'll see the technology impact our after-treatment business totally. But the big next hurdle for that business is really Euro 6. So Euro 6 is where the volume starts to turn up and the opportunity further shows, it also affects Tier 4 Final. And as I mentioned, it will affect all of our business. But if you want to think, "So when does this thing start to show some positive benefits?" It's not -- even though a technology investment, it's not 100 miles off Euro 6 and Tier 4 Final relatively close in time. Timothy J. Denoyer - Wolfe Trahan & Co.: And is it fair to assume that the liquid-base SCR, the doser, is lower cost than the ARS ones they are using now in North America truck?

What I'll say about that now because new products -- and of course, we want to make the proper announcement at the proper time. Our target is to provide customers with better performance at a lower cost across this technology. That is -- in an after-treatment, the name of the game is being able to give people the ability to integrate effectively in a very complex system with higher liability, lower cost and better performance. That's what we're thinking this technology brings us. Especially across the large engines, the technology is pretty unique. And so we think it will be -- we think it will give us an advantage with customers.

Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Kaplowitz with Barclays.

Tom, I want to ask you about the mining business. You mentioned that it was a little bit softer in the U.S., but you have a big international business. What's your visibility like in that business and what are your customers telling you? There's a lot of noise out there, as you know, in the system.

Yes, there is a lot of noise. I’ve got Richard. I'll let him comment. But I would just say at a high level, our view about the mining business is that we have pretty -- it's one of those markets where we do get reasonably good visibility. We are able to look out pretty far in terms of order rates and backlogs. We do have -- there's now 1 million customers that we're serving there, so we can kind of see what they're doing. And we can watch commodity prices with relatively -- with relative ease. You can kind of see what the numbers are and see what drives what. Obviously, our view of the market changes when we see commodity price changes dramatically, but we do have reasonable lead time on that. And Rich, I know, has been in conversation with a number of customers, so I'll let him comment further about what he's seeing.

Yes, so we're still in the guidance of up 7% for the year. Coal obviously is our biggest concern with commodity prices coming down, so that's the one we're paying the most attention to. Copper, iron ore, gold, those remain strong. We have not seen a lot of cancellations, small numbers. We've seen some delays. And so it's one we'll be watching. I think through the balance of the year, it looks pretty solid. And just one, we'll have to pay attention to going into 2013. Order boards are still strong as you know. In our orders and there's a delay, we have a lag effect on our side. So folks are still building out equipment. We're still shipping engines. So I feel pretty confident through the balance of 2012 that we’ll see not a lot of changes.

I do think, Andy, it's one of these things where if copper, iron ore prices fall off a lot again, we would then change our outlook probably for 2013. Again, it's unlikely to have a big effect in the second half of this year. But change in commodity prices down would affect prospects for next year and vice versa. Of course, if they strengthen or get some underpinning for where they are, we think that will help next year. So we're keeping our eyes really closely on this. And everybody knows the things to watch here in terms of commodity prices. But right now, the good mines still are keeping their equipment running and ordering new equipment -- the good mines, I mean, the ones that are a low-cost operation and effective and are still doing it. New mines, we've seen a bunch of announcements about people saying they're going to postpone activity on new mines. I think you've probably read some of those, but existing mines are still going.

Tom, that's helpful. So kind of similar but maybe a little different, a place where we have -- it's more difficult to get visibility is China. I know you've talked about China. Your OEMs sometimes tell you one thing and then something else happens. The confidence level that you have from the OEMs now as we go forward, given that China at least is sort of making more noise about infrastructure investment and sort of doing the right thing, how comfortable are you that we won't need to change our Chinese forecast again when we go forward?

I think you've characterized it well that it's difficult to get good numbers. I think the OEMs, in their defense, suffer from the same lack of information that we do, to some degree. The published numbers are not often timely or not often complete. And there's even some game playing by the OEMs in terms of how they put the numbers, how they feed the numbers into the market, research work. So I think there is some uncertainty around the numbers. And I think there's also a debate within the Chinese government about what they want to do with the stimulus program. I've met with members of the government while I was there last, that there's clearly -- the #1 priority is to make sure it's a soft landing, not a hard landing. But there's also priorities within the government about shifting the economy a little bit away from only internal infrastructure and into consumer-based economy, which you've probably read some about that. And there's also a sense that the last stimulus program kind of over stimulated. There ended up being quite a bit of waste in some of the programs, and they ended up with a big bump that they have to recover from when inflation overruns. So I think there's just different parts of the government and different goals they're trying to manage here. So I have high confidence that they will stimulate, and they will continue to work on the economy to ensure it's not a hard landing. In other words, it doesn't get a lot worse than it is now. But I do think it's hard to say how quickly it's going to improve, especially in this infrastructure side. And we were feeling reasonably confident that they would stimulate enough to clear the excavator inventory and to get construction going by the fourth quarter. As you know, from our remarks, we have now -- our view has dimmed on that, and we think it will not do enough to clear the inventory and begin to increase build rates this year at all. We think it will be in the next year before that happens now. When and how, we're just not sure. So I think it's uncertain. I would be very careful about anyone who says they're certain about what's going to happen there because I think it's hard to know. And certainly, any one OEM would not be a reliable estimator.

Your next question comes from the line of Stephen Volkmann with Jefferies. Stephen E. Volkmann - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Curious about sort of the cadence of the quarter. It seems like -- please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems likes things sort of changed fairly rapidly through the quarter. And I'm wondering, you made a couple of comments, Tom. I think that you thought things had sort of stabilized. And I wondered if you could just sort of take us through the key end markets where things really did deteriorate and whether they have stabilized and if you even have any kind of quick look into July?

Yes, Steve, it's a good question. Because again, we left the first quarter call with a couple of troubling signs but not a clear view really of where the rest of the year was going to go. So we were unable to change our guidance in a way that was any more accurate than what we already had. That was unfortunate. Because, as you said, it changed pretty quickly. April was a very good month for us, and then May and June were weaker. And that was the cadence, basically. And what -- I think what made it worse is that our view was that as we saw those numbers weakening, we didn't see instigators that we're going to make them improve quickly and turnaround. Good examples we talked about today, North American truck, while we do see some improvement in the back half of the year, we didn’t see a way we were going to get back to 278,000 units. And we saw the order rates dropping. You saw them, too. But the -- we were all debating in April, was that just a one-off with special causes. And then as we went through the rest of the quarter we said, "No, it looks like it's going to stay." In China, we saw a bunch of new data come out, a bunch of information about how inventory had changed in the first quarter or in this case, had not changed very much about in excavators was disturbing news for a whole bunch of people and made us rethink where we were. Truck markets in China, same kind of thing. India economic results were much worse. Excise taxes got implemented. There was some debate about where they were. And then I mentioned Brazil, where what we saw -- we saw…

I think the second thing is more accurate. They remain volatile, and we think we've captured it. We think we better characterize what we think is going to happen because when we're out in the first quarter call, it's when everything was starting to get a little bit squirrely. We now had 3 months to look at it and say indeed, it is worse. Stephen E. Volkmann - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Okay, great. And then just a follow up, just to broaden that out a little more. Feels like a lot of companies this quarter have sort of taken the tack that things have certainly slowed here, but we're still in a growth market. '13 and '14 are probably still up years. We don't want to cut a lot of muscle here, so we're willing to build a little inventory. We're willing to keep our R&D spending going, et cetera. Would you to put yourself in that camp? Are we still in a growth market of a kind of a longer-term backdrop or are you kind of more nervous? And what would you have to see to really start to batten down the hatches?

Definitely, we would put ourselves in that category of seeing our long-term growth prospects remain the same but the basic characteristics of our industry, as I mentioned in my remarks, have not changed. Our view still is developing countries will be growing faster than developed countries and investing in infrastructure and our position there remains strong. We will still be investing in new products and technology. The Components business, for example, we've got a lot of promising technologies there that will require investment. We'll still be spending money there. Having said that, we do know how to reduce costs, and we are starting to reduce costs. So we're striking a balance now is the way I'd characterize it. And obviously, we can change that balance pretty rapidly. There's a whole bunch of us here that have a set of programs that we know what to do when we need to do it, and we will be monitoring. In a volatile economy like this, watching closely all the time and making adjustments on the fly is exactly what we need to do. Having said that I feel, like those others do, that the characteristics of our industry are still ones that will give profitable growth over a sustained period as the economies return. The question for us, and I think probably for a lot of people, is when do the economies return? What's the instigator that gets things back? And I think that's where there's a fair bit of uncertainty and frankly, right now, a fair bit of negative yield.

Your next question comes from the line of Ann Duignan with JPMorgan. Ann P. Duignan - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Most of my questions have been answered. But I'd say somewhat tongue in cheek, we've gone almost an hour and nobody has asked about it, natural gas, which I think is a big change from 1 quarter ago or 2 quarters ago. Maybe if you could just update us in terms of your outlook for NAFTA heavy-duty. Have you seen any change in demand for CNG equipment or CNG-related engines?

Yes, well certainly, the demand on our natural gas engines has increased significantly versus a year ago. The volumes in the second quarter were double. So there's definitely more -- we're definitely seeing more demand. We're seeing a lot of inquiries. So it's an active market for sure, and we expect that to grow. It's still, if you look at the overall mix of business relatively low compared to the total, but it is growing. And we are active in the market. Rich, I don't know if you want to comment at all about anything else?

No, that's fine.

Yes. So I think that's -- we are seeing active. We are seeing growth, and we are seeing a lot of inquiries about it. And with gas prices where they are, I just don't expect those are going to slow down. I think there's going to be a lot of people that are going to try to get natural gas into their on-highway truck engines among other applications and see if they can get the overall cost to work out when they look at where they can fuel, on how they maintain, all that kind of thing, because prices are really attractive today.

It remains, as you know, somewhat infrastructure constrained so places where that's not a constraint like refuse market where you can go out, refuel. We've seen high market share in business move there. But I think it's going to be mostly driven by as infrastructure builds out and you can take advantage of these lower prices. Ann P. Duignan - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Sure, I appreciate that. And then as my final quick follow-up. We know that Navistar is going through a supplier selection process for its SCR components. Is that something you're prepared to talk about? Are you bidding in that business? Have you been invited to bid? Is it something that you'd be interested in or is it an Engine plus after treatment or nothing?

Ann, this is Rich again. As you said, lots of speculation, rumors out there. A couple of things we do know is the technology now settled out, EGR versus SCR and with their announcement moving to the SCR. Another thing we know is Navistar is -- remains -- is a large customer of Cummins. And 25% market share we still have in our NAFTA business, again, outside of the U.S. So we know where the technology is. We know -- we've been partners or customers for long time and have maintained discussions, relationships even despite the competition we've had the last couple of years in the U.S. How this technology changed impacts their product plans, we don't know. And so it wouldn't be appropriate for me to add to that speculation of how that might turn out. And so I’d really need to direct you back to Navistar on how -- what their product plan will be and who their resources will be to meet that product plan.

Okay. I think that's the end of the hour. We appreciate your interest and your questions, and I will be available for follow-up. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today's conference. This concludes the presentation, and you may now disconnect. Have a wonderful day.