Good morning, and welcome to Dana Incorporated's First Quarter 2020 Financial Webcast and Conference Call. My name is Thea and I will be your conference facilitator. Please be advised that our meeting today, both the speakers' remarks and the Q&A session, will be recorded for replay purposes. [Operator Instructions] At this time, I would like to begin the presentation by turning the call over to Dana's Senior Director of Investor Relations and Strategic Planning, Craig Barber. Please go ahead, Mr. Barber.

Thank you, Thea, and good morning to everyone on the call. Thank you for joining us today. You'll find this morning's press release and presentation are now posted on our investor website. Today's call is being recorded and the supporting materials are the property of Dana Incorporated. They may not be recorded, copied or rebroadcast without our written consent. Allow me remind you that today's presentation includes forward-looking statements about our expectations for Dana's future performance. Actual results could differ from those suggested by our comments today. Additional information about the factors that could affect future results are summarized in our Safe Harbor statement found in our public filings, including our reports with the SEC. Before we begin this morning's call, you may have noticed that our presentation coverage was not the usual product or market pictures but highlighted what is the focus for Dana today, namely getting fully back to work safely and taking care of those around us, and we have fully embraced the separated together concept. So, joining us remotely this morning are Jim Kamsickas, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and also Jonathan Collins, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Jim, would you please start us off?

Thank you, Craig. Good morning and thank all of you for joining us. I hope that all is well with you and your families. As we've been navigating through the coronavirus for three to four months now, starting in China, earlier in the year, certainly, everything has changed in the world since we last spoke with you in February. We knew that COVID-19 was serious, but that was before we understood it would become a global pandemic and have such an impact on our lives, businesses and communities. While these are unprecedented times, I want to assure you that our business is strong, and our priorities are to continue protecting the safety of our employees and communities, supporting our customers, and being prepared for the future. Our financial health is very good -- in a very good condition as our unique multi-market business approach allows for operational flexibility needed to be responsive during this difficult situation. Now turning to slide five, I'd like to share with you some of the measures we are taking to help ensure the safety of our most important asset, our employees around the world. Over the past several months, we have felt the power of the Dana family, not just from the formal actions implemented across the organization to navigate the crisis, but also the individual behaviors that have made a significant impact on the safety and welfare of our people. Together, everyone has done their part to ensure that we remain safe and to act responsibly, whether on the job or in the communities that we call home. Through it all, we have communicated a regular cadence with our employees so that they can feel confident, whether they're working safely in a Dana facility or in their home. The sharing of information with their…

Thank you, Jim. Good morning, everyone. I'd like to begin with the topic that's top of mind for us and our investors, so please turn with me to page 11 for a review of our near-term financial priorities as we navigate through this challenging time. Beginning on the left, as Jim touched on, our first priority is to conserve cash as production schedules and sales fall. We're taking several key actions to achieve this objective. First, we are aggressively managing our supply chain by reducing our material orders and eliminating nonproduction material spending wherever possible. The flexibility we have built into our supply chain over the last several years allows us to fine-tune the inflow of material to ensure that our inventory levels fall with lower production demand. Second, we continue to flex our conversion costs across the globe, including temporary layoffs of direct and indirect hourly associates, across-the-board compensation reductions for salary associates, as well as intermittent temporary layoffs and reduced workweeks throughout the organization. We're also dramatically reducing our overhead spending across all non-labor categories. Third, we throttled back our capital spending, making judicious decisions on where to invest as we work with our customers on current and new programs. Finally, we've temporarily suspended our common stock dividend, a step we did not take lightly, but one that we deem prudent to further preserve cash during this period of uncertainty. Our second priority is illustrated on the right-hand side of the page, is to maximize our liquidity. We had a cash and marketable securities balance of nearly $650 million at the end of March. The undrawn portion of our revolver provides us with a comparable amount in ready capital. And earlier this month, out of an abundance of caution, we put in place a new $0.5 billion bridge…

At this time, we would like to begin the Q&A session. [Operator Instructions] The first question will come from Dan Levy with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead

Hi, good morning and thank you. First, I want to just understand a couple of points on your capital allocation framework. Could you just give us a sense of, obviously, your net debt-to-EBITDA will come up. But where would you ultimately aim to take that down to? And then as far as priorities, deleveraging is probably going to be the priority. But how do you stack deleveraging versus other areas between internal growth, M&A, cash return? Would you be opportunistic on M&A? And under what circumstances, should we expect the dividend to be reinstated?

Hey good morning Dan, this is Jonathan. Relative to our capital allocation priorities, we went into this year, highlighting that delevering was near the top of the list. That is something that, if we're in a situation where we generate cash this year, if the end markets end up being better than the breakeven scenario that we laid out, we would certainly look to build our liquidity and delever. And then, I would just mention on the M&A front, our position there remains unchanged as well. We'll certainly look opportunistically. But in this environment, we're thankful that we've collected all of the critical pieces that we need to compete as the market shifts from internal combustion engines to electrified. So, there's really nothing that we'll need to do out of necessity, which gives us the ability to continue to focus any cash that we generate towards continuing to strengthen the quality of our balance sheet.

And the dividend, like what--

Yes. And relative to the dividend, we've indicated this is a temporary suspension. I think we're going to look for the markets to stabilize. So we would imagine that this is something that will be in place for a number of quarters and that we would likely evaluate once the market starts to stabilize, which we would expect would certainly be towards the latter half of this year or early next year.

The next question will come from Aileen Smith with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Good morning everyone and thanks for all the clarity and the outline today. Beyond April and May, do you have any visibility around customer releases and the velocity of recovery or rebound in production across major markets? And is there an expectation to return to kind of pre-crisis levels at some point in the next few months or quarters? Or is there an incremental level of conservatism being applied as demand has potentially been impaired?

Yes. Relative to -- Aileen, it's Jonathan. Relative to the outlook that we have, sitting here at the end of April, we do have releases from the majority of our customers that would take us certainly through the month of May and for many of them through the month of June. So the indication that we gave about second quarter sales being down about 50% from prior year are based on those releases. And then based on that math, that would assume that as most of our customers come back up in May and June, it would be at levels that were lower than the pre-crisis amount. Certainly, if they ramp back up to those amounts, sales would be better than down 50%. So, I would say that our near-term indication for the second quarter assumes that demand levels are softer than when we went in. And then obviously, for the second half of the year, we've opted not to take a position on that just because there's too much uncertainty relative to what the consumer or the end market demand will be.

Great. That is helpful. And then following along on some of the prepared remarks about the complexity of relaunching plans across different countries and states. Do you have any approximation for how fungible your capacity might be to flex where you need it across customers and end markets and instances where your plants are restarting sooner versus later?

Yes. Jonathan, I'll take that one. Generally speaking, I would look at it in these forms. Obviously, the program-specific capital and you start kind of back forward in the assembly area, that could be movable and could be more fungible. You could stop the heavy capital, can be somewhat fungible, but much -- obviously, it can't be moved. So, I would say the answer to the question is that we don't believe that we're going to be in a situation to move a lot around, but I don't think we're going to be in a situation to have to move quite a bit of it around. I can't tell you right now, there's not a country that I can think of, off the top of my head, that's in it's just in this dramatically worse condition with a significantly longer runway of expectations as to when they think they're going to get back into operation. So I'm not predicting that, not that I should predict anything right now. But I'm not predicting that to be a scenario that we're going to have to be overly concerned about. I think we have enough inventory and enough protocols in place to manage the supply base to navigate through that.

Great. That's very helpful commentary. Thanks for taking the question.

Thanks Aileen.

The next question will come from Rod Lache with Wolfe Research.

Hi everybody. I also want to add my thanks for this presentation. This is very, very helpful. I was hoping you might be able to just talk a little bit about incremental margins on the other side of this. Obviously, pretty impressive containment of the decrementals here. But would you be anticipating adding costs back in as production starts to ramp?

Rod, it's Jonathan. The short answer is yes. So, for example, it depends on the level of the sales decline, but in the illustrative breakeven scenario, you would see decrementals closer to the mid-20s than the low 20s. And some of that is the fact that we would be in a position where as we start to ramp back up, we would be releasing some cost and adding back the ability to support demand at a higher level. So, you see that. There's also some end market mix factored in there as well to -- based on what demand would be for each of the segments. But in principle, under the illustrative scenario, we would continue some of these significant austerity measures for a good part of the year, and that would help to keep those decrementals kind of in that mid-20% range, which is just slightly higher than what we saw in the first quarter.

Right. I was just curious about the incrementals beyond this, as revenue starts to ramp, is that at a lower level than that mid-20s range simply because you have to add that cost?

Yes, I think it would be probably comparable. So, I think it would still probably be in the low to mid-20s on the way back up. So, I think there would be some symmetry as we start to get on the other side of this.

Great. And then just secondly, can you just talk a little bit about the business mix in off-highway and your end market exposures there. Maybe you can just remind us of what that looks like. Your current expectations for the business, given the center of gravity, is a little bit more European and Italy?

Sure. As we touched on in the prepared remarks, for example, the agriculture segment is one of the ones that continued to operate at certain levels around the world during the downturn. That's something that's provided some stability. We're starting to see customers in Europe in that segment that are resuming production at higher levels. That's a very important part of the business for us. But as a reminder, the construction segment is as well, too. So, as construction around the world begins to resume and ramp up, which we've already started to see happening in Asia and in particular, in China, that's going to add support to that business as well, too. And that includes segments like material handling, which are important for us as well, too. Mining has continued to operate reasonably well around the world. We're starting to see signs that, that's picking back up as an important segment for us as well, too. So, really, across each of those areas, we certainly saw periods of much lower production and particularly in Europe right now, we're starting to see those ramp back up similar to what has happened in China a few weeks before that. So, we'll look for that to continue to flow through to North America here in the coming weeks as well.

Just to clarify, similar to in the light vehicle segment, the ramp is occurring, but not back up to the levels that you had seen prior to this decline, is that accurate?

Yes, that's our expectation, Rod, virtually across all three of our end markets. We're certainly seeing production schedules for May and June. That would be a bit lower than what we saw before. There are a few exceptions, but broadly speaking, that's a fair characterization.

Great. Thank you.

Sure.

The next question will come from Noah Kaye with Oppenheimer. Please go ahead.

Good morning and thanks for taking the questions. I think in the prepared remarks, you talked about the experience of restarting production in China and the lessons that you kind of drawn from that being helpful as you restart elsewhere. Can you expand on that? What would you say are the big lessons that you've taken away? How are those going to be applicable to restarting in North America and Europe? And any differences that we might want to keep in mind as you do restart?

This is Jim. Thanks for the question. I appreciate it, especially the ones that deal with mostly the people are the ones I like the most. And I would tell you a couple of things. You laid it two ways. The most, by far, the most important part of it was obviously safety protocol. And everybody's basically falling into the same playbook. But we took our team on the old Mike Tyson statement of, you got a plan until you get punched in the face. We didn't wait to get punched in the face in Italy. We've had very lucky or good. We've -- we were way out in front of it, relative to separate before people were even talking about social distancing and a lot of things like that. We took all those into account, all the other things associated with face mask, et cetera, et cetera. And if you watch the pandemic go, we know how it went. China and Italy was kind of next big mecca center, and we have big penetration of assets there. So, that was the big thing on that. But the other one in terms of returning to work, I'll just give you an example and everybody did tiers on operational detail. But if you think about furnaces and maybe you've seen some or not, I mean, they're gigantic, even the concept of shutting them down is a little bit reckless at times because it can be so costly and you can run into a lot of difficulties and that type of thing. Just following protocols in terms of getting those up in advance of when you're going to operate, making sure that you've done all the preventative maintenance in advance of that, all the other things are associated with it, those seem simple when it comes off my tongue. But let tell you, just on somebody that comes from that side of the business, there's been multiple issues across not just the sheer type of thing, but over the years of people underestimating the importance of that, especially on the safety side, but also on the efficiency side.

Yes, that's very helpful. And then you talked, I guess, on a similar theme, you talked about kind of the confidence and the stability of the supply base. Are there different considerations that you're taking into account here, I would guess, yes, on restarting and you reaching out to that supply base in the North American environment, say, versus China, understanding that production in China is pretty regionalized. Just wondering how you're thinking about that and potentially trying to increase localized manufacturing or proposal?

Yes. I think there's -- thanks for the questions. I think there's a couple of questions in there. One in the real term, you touched directly or indirectly on it that we have to be cognitive. One, our globally integrated supply base, you have to think about distance. As simple as that sounds, you have to think about distance, thing's going all over the place and you have to think about where are shipping containers at or where ships themselves that and all those type of things, that's certainly one of the key variables. And then the second part of it, more broader picture is as we know the pandemic and the movement has been it's kind of moved around the world and where the escalation points. And there's some different areas around the world that are -- they're not going to get to their apex as early as United States, speaking from America here, that you have to keep into account as well. So, those are the big ones that -- as it relates to the pandemic. The other side of it, which is maybe where you're going, but certainly, I don't hide from a direct question, we all have to be cognizant of and the OEMs to tell you the same thing, it's a tiered business, Tier 1, Tier 3, whatever it may be and the financial stability across all these organizations. I mentioned in my prepared remarks that we're close to 3,000 suppliers, whatever it may be. And if you don't have strong diligence and you haven't had it, but you just started yesterday, in terms of knowing where your supply base is coming from and being out in front of that side of it, you're going to have some pretty big problems. I feel good about where we're at, but you can never feel good enough because it's just too integrated, too complex to say that you've got it all covered. So, you just have to stay on top of them. So, hopefully, that answers your question, but that's how we're looking at it, both on the health and safety side, the distance side and the financial health side.

Thanks. I appreciate the color.

The next question is from James Picariello with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Hey good morning guys and congrats on a very resilient quarter. And appreciate the color on your free cash flow scenario here. Just as I look at the first quarter, the decrementals were very similar across your light vehicle, commercial truck and off-highway segments. And typically right, the decrementals would be the highest in off-highway and lowest in light vehicles. So, were there any unique factors that played into the quarter? Should we expect a more normalized relationship through the rest of the year when thinking about the decrementals?

Good morning Jim. I think in this case, you're probably going to see them move more towards what we would expect, which is what you had described, off-highway being a little bit higher and commercial vehicle being the lowest. I think in the near-term, given all of the cost levers that we pulled across the board on austerity, I think that had a little bit of effect of balancing them. But I think your intuition, in the long run, is right. As the volume downturn protracts, the contribution margin loss will be higher. One of the other things that probably impacted us in the first quarter is just the benefit of the aftermarket. So given the volume decline was more concentrated on OE production, that helps the business like commercial vehicles, decrementals to do a little bit better. So I would say that's one of the other factors that played in, in the short term, that kind of even those decrementals out.

Got it. That's helpful. And then just on the breakeven -- the free cash flow breakeven scenario. The strong working capital conversion makes sense. I just want to ask about CapEx. In the scenario you provide CapEx would still be just north of 4.5% of total sales. This would be almost in line with the prior year. So you clearly don't expect to cut this level of spend, commensurate with the sales decline or maybe in prior downturns, the level of CapEx, cut. So, I do view that as encouraging. If you just talk about maybe some of the key investments you still intend to make this year? I imagine there's commercial vehicle electrification programs, new launches within light vehicle, any color there would be helpful.

Sure. That's a really fair point. I mean, it's helpful to remember that we still have a significant amount of backlog. The amount we disclosed earlier this year, $700 million will be affected by the volume decline. So we expect on a volume-adjusted basis this year and potentially even next year's number could be lower. But it's a significant amount of new business coming on line. So, out of that scenario, with the $275 million that we would still spend, there would be a meaningful amount of capital that would go towards launching new programs and bringing new technology to market. So we do see that as a benefit. But we also think it's important to demonstrate that there are some discretionary investments in there that we can defer and we can delay to make sure that we balance near-term financial health with the longer-term opportunities for growth. So, I think it is fair to point out that we're able to flex it to keep it in line with the percentage of sales. But that, more importantly, it's not a fixed amount and that we are able to adjust it down when the market is softer.

Thanks guys.

Sure. Thank you, James.

The next question will come from Ryan Brinkman with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. Congrats on the decrementals. Question, just how should we be thinking about the $700 million, 2020 through '22 backlog. Do you see the risk there relating more to just simply there being lower numbers of vehicles produced? Or do you sense the potential already for some programs to be delayed or probably less likely even be canceled? I ask because we've seen a couple of delay announcements already from GM and Ford, including, I think, as it might relate to the Bronco that you are on, seemingly as they look to preserve capital.

Sure. Just -- it's probably the greater impact is going to be the overall vehicle volume coming down. So, certainly, the $700 million will be affected by that. And really, because it's hard to call the end market right now, whatever projection you have there for the end markets could be reasonably applied to the backlog as well, too. Relative to program delays or timing, Jim mentioned in his prepared remarks, those have been relatively minimal in terms of the impact to us right now. What we're seeing are some, what we'd call, shorter delays that are measured in months, not all out. Program cancellations or things being pushed back a year or two. So, you may see just a modest move to the right. But based on what we can see right now, the core programs in our backlog are important to our key customers. We're continuing to work on preparing those. And while overall volumes are likely going to be softer, we think that the program cadence there has held up pretty well at this point in time. But we'll continue to monitor it carefully and support our customers with their product development road maps.

Okay, very helpful. Thank you.

Sure.

The next question will come from Brian Johnson with Barclays. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning. And I wanted to ask Jim, sort of a broader question, and I'll probably get a more diplomatic answer than an OEM CEO gave you last night on the state of lockdowns. But my question is just what advice would you give policymakers, both at the federal level, your old boss, for example, Mr. Secretary Ross, and at the state and local levels about what needs to happen to get North American with vehicle production restarted?

That's a good question per usual, Brian. Thank you. I think the -- maybe, so come across a little bit pedestrian. You put me in spot with a direct question and you'll get a direct answer. My view is that to use an adage, I'll be the first one as a CEO to say, if you -- going back to work, in any of our facilities, is unsafe. And I told some OEMs that have asked me to go back to work, no, already because I didn't think it wasn't right. I would say I wouldn't support it. But if I do feel that all the protocols and governments feel the protocols are in place, by now, many of the governments have their own audit people, they have their own audit sheets and checklist and all the other stuff if you feel like that the manufacturing environment, in fact, is doing their job. In theory, I can say this much, this is the pedestrian way of getting at it, I feel better than many of our manufacturing plants, if not all manufacturing plants, are probably going to be safer than going to the local grocery store or maybe going to local pharmacy. So, that's the only thing I can kind of frame up as it relates to is an example for them. I know our diligence and what we're doing from anywhere that you saw in our prepared remarks with temperature scanning, with distancing -- I mean we've had really, knock on wood, we've had really, really good performance if that's a word for it, relative to the number of cases we've had and I think it can be done. And I think everybody is learning from each other and pulling with each other. So, that's the -- I guess that's the best way I can answer that question, Brian.

And how does the age or health status of the workforce fit into that, especially with what you might have learned in Italy, as the data seems to show that the COVID virus is more dangerous for older, obese, diabetic men than for the broader population? And just stereotypically, that some other workers are in that category, factory workers. So how have you kind of dealt with that in Italy? And how do you expect to deal with that in North America?

Another great question. I can honestly tell you, we did not differentiate on age. We didn't, personally. Maybe some other companies did. Maybe they took some other unique precautions or whatever. When you manage kind of the peak, not the trough in terms of your focus and your commitment to safety, there is no age limit. You have to do the same for everybody. I say to see inside of our company; we've had spectacular safety performance, thank you to the team out there. And it's great safety in any form or fashion has nothing to do with reacting to metrics or reacting in any form or fashion. It's everything about being preventative and looking for an opportunity that something that will go wrong before it goes wrong. And that's exactly the same thing on the pandemic in managing COVID-19 and that's what we're doing in our facilities. We're doing many things that are probably unique, but we're passing along all best practices for all those that are interested.

Okay. Thanks. We'll follow-up later on.

The next question will come from Joseph Spak with RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Thanks everyone. So, if we take a sort of face value, the second quarter sales down 50%, breakeven EBITDA, then the decremental margins are a little bit worse in the second quarter versus the first quarter, despite a much more significant decline. And I know you went through the cost structure in great detail, but I was wondering if you could maybe bridge, on the margin, where you expect more of those offsets to the variable cost to come in the second quarter versus the first quarter?

Sure. Good morning Joe, its Jonathan. Some of it's going to have to do with the end market mix and also some of the estimates on where we would think the aftermarket would be. But I wouldn't take the breakeven as an exact indication. We do think the longer this lasts and the more significant the downturn, the decrementals are likely to be a bit higher than what we saw in the first quarter. But just broadly speaking, we think Q2; we're going to see a more broad spread reduction across all of our product groups than what we saw just in the last couple of weeks of March. We're trying to make sure that we're prepared for that in the next 60 to 90 days.

Okay. And then as we sort of touched on, but just on the illustrative scenario, which, again, is helpful. Like that -- I know you're not guiding to $6 billion, but that $275 million in CapEx, can we interpret that as sort of a fixed amount or sort of look at more as sort of the percent of sales and then use that for whatever we think sales are going to be? And I was a little bit curious about your comment about how you don't think that really impacts growth because it would seem like that would that seems that was planned at one point, it would need to come back. So, is it fair to assume that maybe 2021 and beyond, CapEx is now looking higher than previously thought?

Yes. Sure. Relative to CapEx, the $275 million is representative of the choices we would make at that level of sales. And certainly, we would preserve the critical equipment or the products that we have to make for the programs that we're launching. But we have choices that we can make relative to what we're going to do in-house, what will we do on the outside. Some of that flexibility, there's CapEx that we spend on continuous improvement exercises or other things that we could continue to defer. So, I would look at that as a thoughtful prioritization of the CapEx that we really would feel we need to spend at that level of sale, and it does include some level of growth. As programs continue to come online in the next couple of years, it's possible that CapEx could be a bit higher going forward. Coming out of this, we may choose to spend some more as the market recovers. But being about $100 million lower than what we originally expected, so just as a reminder, we expected CapEx to come down relative to last year as we got some of the major program launches behind us. But certainly, some of the levers that we would pull here would be because of the softness in the end market.

Okay. But that's sort of $100-odd million, that -- there were obviously programs associated with that. So as those programs come back, it needs to get spent eventually.

Some of it will, but there are other areas that don't relate to new program spending that would not come back. So, we may just choose not to do some things that we thought could create some efficiencies. We prioritized the new programs over other areas of CapEx that don't directly relate to new business.

Okay, very helpful. Thank you.

Sure.

The next question is from Brian Sponheimer with Gabelli. Please go ahead.

Hey good morning everyone.

Good morning Brian.

Just two real quick ones. Just if we're thinking about the ramp and the potential for broader shutdowns occurring again or just kind of as hotspots develop, is there going to be a need for greater working capital to be kept in order for you to maybe give yourself a two-week cushion, if Tier 2s or Tier 3s have issues in geographies where you're buying from?

Yes, it's a really fair point, Brian. Even with the significant working capital that we demonstrate in the breakeven scenario or the significant use of cash -- or source of cash that we would get from working capital, the days of inventory that we would be carrying would be higher than normal. So, it's not -- the inventory reduction is not at 100% efficiency. If we were carrying 60, 70 days in inventory at year-end, under any outcome in the second half of the year, we're probably going to be carrying more days than that. Because of what you highlighted, we're going to want to make sure that customers protected and that we're making sure that we're in a good position. But even with maybe slightly less efficient inventory levels, there's a significant amount of cash flow to be generated as sales levels fall.

Yes. And then just, Jim, going back to when you went through this in 2008 and 2009, obviously, it's a different sort of challenge that you're facing here. And apart from maybe where the balance sheet is now relative to then and some post-retirement obligations, what's most structurally different about the auto industry? I know you weren't at Dana at that time, but what's more resilient now than before?

Well, I hope I just answer your question. Thanks for the question, Brian. I think the biggest thing is just lack of having a cure to the pandemic and to the virus and that leading such seemingly so much more uncertainty as to how long it could be prolonged. I guess, if I fell back into 2007, 2008, 2009 and all that, back then, we probably would have said to ourselves, how long is this really going to go? We don't really know. But this one's real, and this one is dealing with human life. So that's the biggest thing to go along with it. As it relates to the operating of the company, at least in my view, obviously, I was a CEO in that period of time, but like many of us, we were all involved in anywhere from the grid loss in the United States, the volcanos in Iceland that impacted Europe and all the things. I mean I can tell you this, the chair of a CEO, you're pulling off all of those levers and you're remembering all those best practices you took into account, and you're just making sure that the team stays united, and if I overemphasized the need for communication is cheesy maybe as that sound. The ability to communicate on an incredibly regular basis via your business unit leads, your country leads, your continent structures, whatever it maybe has been mission-critical, but there is a small silver lining and a blessing in the skies. Many of us have been through it in one form or fashion to the 2008, 2009 crisis, and we're executing it. The biggest lever to it is nobody had any idea that we'd have to manage something like this on the health and safety of our people, the most important asset we have.

All right. Appreciate that. Best of luck and [Indiscernible].

Thanks Brian.

The final question is from Dan there's a follow-up from Dan Levy with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Great. Thank you so much for squeezing me in. Sorry for the drop earlier. I guess you mentioned that you're not seeing much in terms of launch delays. And I imagine, in any case, most of your discussions with customers are really limited to how to get through today rather than bidding on new programs. But I guess I'm wondering, what do you think this disruption might do to EV program development at your customers? How did EV story change at your customers, if at all?

Yes, I would tell you, and there's some pretty good public information out there. If you Google, for example, the CEO for Daimler was out recently, you can Google it, but he made some pretty direct comments about where he was focused like many of us CEOs and -- we've got pretty strong conviction behind the EV platforms. And I can tell you, generally speaking, maybe even more than generally speaking, it's still full speed ahead on electrification, at least on the products that we're working on. And I guess, we're working on them in all of our end markets. So, that should tell you something.

And this has not changed any of your spend, in fact? I would imagine it's still probably skewed to the upside.

If you call -- go ahead, Jon.

No, no, go ahead, boss.

Well, I was just going to say, I mean, we spend at the upside, yes, it was already on -- in upside. Are we ultimately taking some costs out of there via the short term, hopefully, short-term actions relative to reduced wages and all the other stuff? Absolutely. But other than that, I would say, we're just going to stay on the same path. We're not going to -- we are definitely not going to cut the throat of our future in electrification in this tenure. We will -- we have a lot of other levers to pull. The team is doing a spectacular job pulling all those levers. So, that's how we're looking at the business.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

There are no further questions. Are there any closing comments?

Yes, I'll take the wheel for just a second. First, I'd like to thank everybody. I understand, of course, you're all dealing with the same fears, challenges, issues that we are. And I think -- I appreciate you taking the time to spend time with us. Second, I'd like to say I wish, on the one hand, we could have provided you even better color and information around markets and restart and all that. But frankly, I think, of course, we all know this, we're just facing an uncertain demand environment, and it is what it is. On the other hand, hopefully, by talking to Dana, talking to us, we can helpfully provide you some more color that maybe you don't can't get elsewhere relative to all of the end markets and a trigger stock maybe relative to respective GDPs so on and so forth. We don't know what's going to happen. That's for sure. If you take our closest to home, the United States and the impact of the $4 trillion to $5 trillion is going to be pumped into the economy, is that going to get spent and going to go right back into new vehicle sales or not? People going to send -- save the money? Who knows what's going to happen there. Is it -- will be a recovery? Is it not? Who knows? All I know is we're prepared as a company to handle whichever that is and hopefully, that came through in the presentation and the response today. I will tell you, hopefully, one other thing you took from today's presentation, we've talked about it a lot in terms of how we kind of reorganized the organization, potentially even transform the organization with what we titled to leverage the core strategy, which is all about a matrix organization to make sure that we have cooperation and teamwork is really what it means across business units. And in some companies, that's just, let's just call it, it's lip service. It's not real. We would not personally have been nearly as effective if we didn't have the matrix organization, leveraging the core, working as a team. And by the way, getting to where we wanted to from at least the last five years, getting that balance across the business with 50% of our business being a heavy vehicle and 50% of it being in light vehicle, even with all the growth in light vehicles. So, all those things, all in, they're playing out as good as you can expected, but this is certainly not the end of this game. This is a -- we got a lot in front of all of us, and I appreciate all your support through this. With that, we look forward to talking to you in the next call.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference call. You may now disconnect.