Okay, good morning, everybody. Same drill as always. I'll review the businesses pretty quick. I'll go through the slides fairly quick, give you an opportunity to drill down with your questions later and Russell will run through the financials. As you, I think, probably already saw, this isn't one of our best quarters. Not a terrible quarter, but not what we planned. So the net operating margin profit, excluding the normal stuff, is down and we'll go to the various reasons, there's no one reason for that, but there are various reasons that kind of led to that result. With the U.S. business, volume is up 6% which is a little short of what we have planned and we were thinking it would be more like 9%. And when you look at the full year, I think it's -- half year, sorry, or at half year, I think, it's like 11%. We'll get to that slide next. We did think the second quarter didn't have any problems in the volume side, it was just kind of a quarterly variance thing, because the order file right now is okay. First quarter was a little bit more than we thought, or right where we thought we could get, second quarter was soft. Price coming into the year, we gave you that guidance flat, plus or minus 2%, and we're down to minus 2% for both quarters, which is a little bit worse than we thought it would be, not a huge, obviously, reduction in price, but it is a stubborn reduction in average price. Now they have the same guidance the rest of the year, flat, plus or minus 2%. And we think we'll be looking more like the flat then right on the bottom of the range we gave you. It's…

Good morning, everybody, and thank you, Louis. Louis has, I think, dealt with most of these issues, but I'm just provide a little more color on a couple of them. Really the results in the second quarter were impacted by improved sales volume in the U.S. business, and the market environment there is, obviously, better than it was a year ago. But for us, price has been constrained and so we're not seeing the volume flow through to the bottom line to the extent that we'd like it to. We're increasing our spend in particular areas of the business, particularly around sales and marketing, but it is broader than that, as we build -- rebuild our capability. We had a -- in Q1, a non-recurring foreign exchange gain of $5.5 million, which obviously was a benefit in Q1 and in the year-to-date. And in Q2, we've had a recovery of $2.7 million of legal costs relating to the RCI tax litigation but was concluded, late last financial year. We're calling those out just because we do not see them as non-recurring items, but we're not adjusting for them in the same way we do with ASIC expenses or asbestos adjustments. But perhaps just add that the $2.7 million we recovered in relation to the RCI litigation is a fraction of the cost that we incurred for the years 2006 to 2012. In addition, we had a charge in Q2 for an increase in a provision for product liability claims in New Zealand. Louis alluded to that, I'll just provide you with a little more detail. New Zealand changed its building regulations in about 1998 -- 1997, '98. And claims that we're dealing with on product liability actually going back to the period 1997 to 2004. They're quite old. We have…

Thanks, Russell. We'll go investors and analysts first and then finish up with media.

Yes. Can you just clarify a bit more around pricing, so to the extent you're -- there's not many small builders around anymore, you're selling to the big builders. Is that having an impact in pricing, in terms of...

Yes. The big builders are going to increase a little bit coming out of the downturn, but not enough to really notice in our results. So it's more the price that Cemplank's being sold at relative to before we lost the category share a couple of years ago. The fact that there's more Cemplank, so during the downturn, the builders basically got more price conscious, so those guys that were on the fence between Hardie and Cemplank, some of them went to Cemplank. And then multifamily is a bigger piece and multifamily is at a lower price in some key markets. So it's more of a -- it's those things rather than big builders. Big builders, I think, they're going to go up about 4 points from where they went into the downturn, where they come out on the market share of the total housing market, but that's not enough to really change our numbers.

The extra R&D expense, is that more -- is that something we should see -- we should expect...

Yes, it's part of that, we're spending to kind of get ready for growth so -- and R&D projects usually run 3, 4 years so, yes. You might see some quarters where we don't spend it. It's project-driven but, I think, for the most part, you should see our R&D spending up a bit.

And Louis finally on U.S. housing, second quarter, 6% growth; first quarter, 17%. It's never going to be a straight line, but is there anything you're seeing that should indicate anything other than an annual about 15% growth? What are you feeling about those, the pace of the growth...

I don't think we'll get 15%. I mean, I think new constructions went up low 20s, and more of that multifamily than single-family. And then I think R&R is up about 2%. So when you put them together, it probably doesn't come to 15%. It probably comes more to 8% to 9%. Now if you can see that through other companies, and you just got to figure out which companies are highly tied to new construction and which companies are kind of more tied to R&R in the split. But that's our -- we're 4.5%, we're up 11% so we're seeing the market up 7% as far as our opportunity, that includes Canada as well.

Yes, I was meaning -- the 15%, I was meaning to, for new construction, so if we look at single...

Yes, yes, our new construction, I don't know. 20s look -- we've got, what, 3 20s in a row, so I think most of the market feels like they're going to hold that pace.

So that's most -- as you point out, mostly multifamily rather than...

More multifamily than single-family, for sure. That's more the case in Canada than the U.S. it’s pretty interesting. Multifamily in Canada is appreciating much greater. Now our penetration in Canada is fairly low, so Canada is not driving our numbers either. Although we are getting a pretty good business in Canada, it's still fairly low penetration.

It's Michael Walsh from CBI. I think you made a point in the presentation that you expect the pricing to be flat for the full year...

No, I don't know if we'll get to flat, but I think it'll start flattening out.

Sorry, I thought you said flat for the full year.

Yes. No, I don't think we'll get to flat. So we're 2% down, we've got to be 2% up, and we won't get 2% up for the rest of the year. But instead of seeing 2% down every quarter, I think you'll start seeing flat and then eventually it'll come above flat. But if you look at the full year and I did a guess, I didn't calculate it, but I'd say maybe your down at a 1.5% for the year, by the end of the year rather than down a full 2%, would be my wild guess.

Okay. And then you also made a comment around the IPSC [ph] business, I think, in the medium term, getting better. Irrelevant of -- or independent of what the market actually does, what's going to drive that, it's improvements?

Okay. Is that Asia Pac?

Yes.

Okay. Yes, we have a very good business model, especially in Australia. And New Zealand, I think, is kind of getting themselves reset. Europe’s ran hard for a while there. They've lost a little of their traction so I think they'll get that back in a quarter or 2. Yes, I just believe that the houses that get built around here, more of them are going to have more fibre cement. And I think most of the incremental we get rather than Buckridge [ph] or PSR [ph] because it's more around the Scyon product line than it is around traditional products like Hardiflex and [indiscernible].

And then just finally, Russell, you made the comment around the ICI cost that you got back for only a fraction of money you've actually spent. Are you sort of signaling that you expect to get more back? Or is that it?

Won't be any further recovery. All done.

Just 2 quick questions. One, you mentioned the order file was looking reasonably positive. I wondered if you could expand a bit about that.

Yes, just said it's more like -- it's actually a little bit above our forecast now. So again, if I look at that 3 quarters together, it kind of makes sense. If I look at the second quarter -- I think what happened in the recovery is our lag changed. I think dealers are actually bringing board in quicker when they see the starts than they were in a downturn. So I think they brought board in quick in the first quarter than they left things settle down in the second quarter. And now we're probably back normal. Now having said that, I mean we're only what, 5 or 6 weeks into it so.

And a second question was just around the manufacturing overhead. I understand what the SG&A part that you've talked a lot about, the S part. But it's the manufacturing overhead change I'd be interested to hear more about.

Yes, that's a good question. It gives me an opportunity because I made a kind of overall comment. We took costs out and we're putting it back in. The way we took cost out, and a lot of you would know, we were building not quite one plant a year at Hardie, but we're building a lot of plants and had a lot of capacity. We had a construction organization to do that. When we hit the downturn obviously, we weren’t going to buy -- build plants, so most of those people went into the business and displaced other people that were in the business whether they'd be project engineers or project -- now we're in the process of pulling those construction people back out. We're working on construction projects and we're hiring in the plants. So we'd be an organization about 15 or 20 people that are fairly highly compensated people that basically build things for us in the U.S., and we didn't use those people in the downturn in that function. So now we're back to using that. So that's probably the biggest area right now in MD&A.

Simon Thackray from Nomura. Just want to step back a bit and talk about the mix of volume between new housing and R&R market, first of all. And help me understand how the capacity comes online, what should we be looking for? Is it the capacity utilization? And so just start with those 2 questions.

Okay. So our new construction -- the way we look at the mix -- and you can calculate it. Our guys calculated it, and the number I saw was they feel like 40% of our business has now come from new construction up from 35%. Okay, so it's been a small change. The way that change happens is the new construction market just gets bigger and our share stays the same so we get more bored out of that segment. The reality is our job is to grow market share in both segments. You can add multifamily in there as well and have all 3 segments. But in the downturn, we're very focused on repair and remodel. We were trying to hold our own in new construction and growing in R&R, which we were successful in that. And now we're trying to grow in both segments again. So we're now -- the resources we're putting back in are about growing in new construction. So I think the percent new construction will go up because I think our -- I'm not talking about next quarter, I'm talking more about next year. I think it will go up because I think we'll start growing market share quicker in new construction, and of course, new construction is going to grow faster than R&R. So when we get back to 50-50, I'm not sure, but certainly sometime in the next 3 years, I would think we'd get back to 50-50 type for each segment. And I do think our market share will be higher in both segments in 3 years time as well.

Is it a rate of growth at which you do worry about the capacity...

Well, housing growth, yes, it's pretty high though. So in the current market growth, we have a lot of coverage. Now if it really did spike, we'd have to scramble and kind of get around optimizing capacity around certain products. We don't anticipate we'll be in that position. The sequence of capacity to come online, we're starting the machine at -- we're actually [indiscernible] the second machine. We're [indiscernible] that's been down through the downturn is starting up about a year ago, maybe not that long ago, maybe it was 8 months ago. We started running all 3 machines in Plant City, so we didn't increase our gross hours in the facility but we started moving from machine to machine. So that way, those 3 machines are ready to grow 24/7 pretty quick if we need them. We don't think we're going to but now, we know there's no lag, time lag. If we need them, we have them. I think Fontana will start in about 15 months, right before the 15 months and not for this coming selling season but for the following one. We haven't finished that capital but -- capital plan, but I think we're far enough to know we're going to convert one of the 4-foot wide machines to a 5-foot wide machine. What that will do is that will allow -- because California has high raw material cost, high energy costs and people costs that are a little bit higher, not as high as they used to be. So we had to get some advantage for that plan in order for it to compete with our more modern facilities. Basically it's going to have a very tight shipping radius because our Backer business around Fontana is very well-developed. It doesn't have a 5-foot line so…

So in terms of actual CapEx then...

We're going to start hitting some 100-plus numbers in CapEx. We might even hit 150 or something. But right now, we just don't have all that planned. But we are going ahead. We need Artisan on the East Coast. We need more trim because -- so we have Waxahatchie [ph]. We're spending some money instead of Fontana kind of reengineer. And if we go to Backer and Sumerville, it'll be a similar situation there. We're also looking at another sheet machine in Texas in one of the existing facilities probably, because our Trim product in Texas has continued to grow well. So that's using up a lot of our capacity in the Cleveland plant so we're looking at dropping other sheet machine for planks in the Cleveland plant. So we do have a lot of capacity projects we're working on right now.

Okay. And just finally, you made a comment earlier that the organization probably hadn't responded to the upturn quite as you'd expected. Can you just elaborate?

Probably my fault more than theirs. Maybe my expectation was just a little bit under...

Too high…

It's not that we're -- the business ran well. By the way, one of the things I didn't cover is manufacturing had a very good quarter. This year, manufacturing is just having a really good year. So a lot of work we did in the downturn is now transferring very well to higher utilization and that's why you don't see us panicking for new capacity, because most of our lines are actually producing more per day to a reasonable degree. I'm talking about 10% or 15% than they did before the downturn. So it's not that we're not running well. So I don't want anyone to think we forgot how to run a fibre cement business. It's just the challenge of the market recovery, which I guess naively I think, well, that's all upside, that's easy stuff, extra volume. You just decide kind of where to source it from and where to put the money. But the reality is, like I said, we brought the organization down and this example that David brought up about construction people is a good example because now we've got 15 or 20 people come out of our plants working on construction, and you've got to put 15 or 20 people in your plants. So that's usually recruitment -- external recruitment. And most people, that first 6, 12 months isn’t their most productive time with the company. So it's just a lot of that stuff. It's just -- and then I will -- I do need to be honest. The pricing situation at Hardie kind of threw a lot of us through a loop. It definitely went further than we thought it was going to go. So we've been kind of trying to sort that through, and because we don't want to just shove a price increase through the market to cover up our problem. Our problem is we didn't execute as well as we should have, and we got into tactical pricing around category share. So we just don't want to put a price increase in the market to mask that. We'd rather kind of fix the thing correctly and look at price increases in the market separate to kind of what I consider a tactical pricing problem.

It's Jason Steed at JPMorgan. Maybe back to the question on the order file. Just interested in whether you're seeing any mix shift in sort of the latter 2 quarters of the year. And if not, when you expect...

I think our product mix shifts have been consistent, a few of them flat. So color's growing, trim's growing. Backers becoming a little bit less of the business because of sidings growing with the new starts. Cemplank grew more than the business, so that became a bigger part of our mix. And therefore Hardie Prime grew less than the business. So for the most part, those are like 3 or 4 year trends. Not a lot going on, a little bit as you go from more new construction, less R&R. R&R has more color, has more Hardie, has more trim. As you go to more new construction, that kind of dampness that trend. But nothing unusual happening.

And just on color, you mentioned a couple of months ago in the U.S., that color probably hadn't been executed as well as you'd like it to have been. Are you -- have you implemented -- has that...

Yes, we -- I can't remember in September. Had we already switched the structure to a color business manager, Ryan Sullivan. Sean O’Sullivan: I think so, yes.

Yes, so we have. So we -- basically for those of you not there in September, what I tried to communicate is we're still prime business with a kind of color off to the side. And since color is kind of one of our real core strategies, we needed to become a color business as well as a prime business. So we have structured that way. So Ryan Sullivan, one of our long-term senior guys at Hardie, he's taken on color and he's brought enough resources and exclusively on color, product management, cost management, capacity and that stuff, to where they work in a color organization now. But they still source the production in the network of plants, but they have a lot more say on kind of what goes on every day with the color business. So do I think we've taken the early steps to move forward the way we want? Yes, I do. But I do think Ryan's work will mean that we'll do things a little differently in the future than we've done in the past. If you remember, the Northeast is very high-color; Midwest, high-color but not as high as the Northeast. So we've got to figure out why that is, why there's -- why does a market like Boston hit a terminal color share of like 85 or 90 and a market like Minneapolis hit one like 50, okay? So we've seen some of those Midwest markets start to flatten out at that 40-to-60 range. I don't quite understand that. So Ryan's working on that. And then the other thing in the South and the West, we think there's value creation in color but our new construction customers aren't seeming to recognize it. So if we don't get a premium for color, if they're not willing to pay a premium for color in the South and the West, then they shouldn't buy color because there is value there. So us just giving them the value and not taking any for our shareholders doesn't make sense for us. So we do have some kind of redo work in the South and the West on color. Some of that has to do with supply chain, some of it just has to do with the fact that painting is fairly cheap in the South and the West, so economics we can offer the people in the North don't transfer well there. We probably have to be a little bit more restricted on the segments we go after. And again, R&R is a much better segment for color than new construction and that goes -- that would be a statement about the South and the West.

So another question for Russell on capital management. Is there any reason that you've chosen to do it or looking to do via the buyback, rather than just going for a high payout rate, a high dividend now? Is there an advantage from a tax perspective, structure perspective, that you're going to hold it through potentially a buyback, and if not, then roll it into a dividend?

No. For the company, Jason, I think we have a view that the outcome is pretty much the same. So we've very deliberately chosen a preference of mixing large dividends and some share buybacks, share buyback activity. But if the share buyback isn't attractive to us as a company, then we're quite happy to distribute it by way of dividend. So it's something that we're timing on an annual basis and we'll take advantage of share buyback if we can. If we can't, then we'll use the same funds to just allocate it to dividend.

And the $150 million, if you're looking toward the capital structure, what you said in the past in terms of what gearing might be comfortable, call it, 30%. $150 million obviously still leaves you virtually ungeared or not particularly geared. Is there a reason that you didn't do more?

No sort of overwhelming reason other than the fact that this is something we want to do over time. So we’re only looking 1 year forward for each of the share buyback or the dividend distribution. And I guess at the moment, we'd feel a little constrained. Louis just alluded to capital expenditure plans and on 2, I think we've got a better handle on exactly how much and when. We're probably being a little conservative in terms of the outlook, very deliberately.

Any other questions from the room? Any questions on the telephone?

Your next question comes from Emily Behncke, Deutsche Bank.

I just have a couple of questions. So I was just wondering relative to some comments on market share. I think in the past, you've indicated this year maybe around a percentage point of share you're expecting to gain. And I'm just wondering if you're on track to deliver that. And secondly, just wondering if you can give us a little bit more color on the repair and remodel market performance at the moment.

Okay. On market share, so I indicated first half for about 4.5% to 5% on PDG. So that's just a straight calculation against, say, a 14% market share. Whether you get the point or not, I think you'll come up a little short if we finish the year that way. When we came into the year, we were aiming for a 6% PDG. It's still in play. I don't know if we'll get there but it's still in play. So if we get this fixed, then I think it translates to better to maybe a percentage pickup. As far as R&R, our R&R in our program in the north is really good, and you guys understand it now. We're running it in a lot of markets, not just a handful of markets. We're doing well there. So our market share gains, north constructions -- northern regions against vinyl is very good. In the South, on our R&R gains are really against ourselves to a large extent. So we have a lot of fibre cement standard markets that people use our planks for R&R as a standard whether they buy it through the pro channel, more reside contractors or they buy it through the Home Depots and the Lowe's. But what they don't normally do is they don't buy all the product they need for the house or could use on the house. And that would be your corner boards, your window trim, your soffit and then facia. That's the bigger opportunity in R&R in the South and the West. In color, if we can get the color, high percentage of color, that helps kind of attach those things all in the job. But overall, it's a -- that's kind of on the market side. The #1 thing we accomplished in the downturn was we got our programs and R&R kind of designed and well-understood in our organization. So we run it pretty well. New construction market share, we're just getting started. So we'll be on the flat part of that curve for a while. So any PDG growth you're seeing this year you're probably seeing coming out of R&R rather than new construction.

Okay. And just interested in your comments around the margins getting back to 20% to 25% range in FY '14. Is that a result of increased capacity utilization or reduced new investment in inside sales or sales force or how should we -- what's the main driver of that?

Well, I think part of it just the volume catching up to the stem. So like we're kind of clear in communicating, we're putting things in the business before we have the volume to pay for it. So hopefully if we get some kind of volume growth next year, that's kind of indexes to the market plus some, you're just catching your volume up to the spend. I do think our pricing funk we've been in an increasing market, there'll be opportunities not only to take care of the tactical part but to look at some market increases. I'm not saying we're going to take one in the short term, but in an increasing market, materials tend to go up and I don't think ours will be an exception necessarily. Manufacturing, actually that might be a little bit of a drag on the 20%, 25% range because we'll have a lot of startups going on. So startups, you expense. So plant isn't near as efficient. First 180 days as it is as an ongoing plan. But I don't think it's a major factor. We've always absorbed those startups pretty well in the past and I think we will. But that doesn't work for us. It kind of works against us.

And maybe just finally, Russell, in terms of the capital management that was announced, I think Jason talked about a question maybe you could have done a little bit more. Does that mean that maybe we can look at a particularly high dividend in FY '14 again if the balance sheet allows?

We've announced a dividend payout ratio of 30% to 50%. I think that's the guidance that we'd give for FY '14 and beyond, Emily.

So a buyback is unlikely to continue in FY '14 as well?

No, I wouldn't say a buyback is out of the question. I mean, one thing we flagged when we announced the change in May of 2012, which is still on foot, is that we anticipate that in the right sort of market conditions, we could be quite active in share buybacks and that's not exclusive from dividends.

And what are the right market conditions in your view?

It's an actual natural return. So we need to see a market condition where we think our share price is attractive enough for us to get a financial return from it. And that's all measured by earnings per share increment, return on equity, impact on [indiscernible].

Well, I'll add to Russell's comment. I think, without screwing up his guidance, basically, I think most of you are more aggressive on the balance sheet than we are. So we're a fairly conservative company on the balance sheet. But we acknowledge we shouldn't be sitting with 0 debt. But we're uncomfortable is just trying to fix that. We're uncomfortable and also somewhat restricted just trying to fix that overnight. We are going to move the lever balance sheet, but it's probably going to take about 4 or 5 years. But every year, you should see us moving further down the track. And then of course, on our share price, we're like you guys. We don't -- we won't be buying when it's high and sell -- we don't sell, but we don't want to be buying when it's high. So if we see opportunities to buy and it makes a lot of sense, we'll be in the buyback market. And that isn't that we don't think our -- we think our share price is ever overvalued. It just means sometimes it's more undervalued than other times. So today is a good day.

Your next question comes from Peter Rowling [ph] from RBC.

Look, I just wanted to ask a question about the asbestos compensation fund. I just wanted to find out how high does that set up on the agenda at board meetings. And how important does the management of that remain in the rebuilding of the James Hardie reputation?

Okay. I think our track record on the fund's pretty clear. I think the original fund didn't have enough money yet. Everyone kind of came to that conclusion by 2004 something. But Russell, one of the first things he did, when he took his current role stick to lead on negotiating a fund that we felt contributed the money that was going to be needed for claimants over a long period of time. So it's what I would say is a pay as you go fund. So Hardie's 100% in compliance with that. The state government -- of course, it was -- we worked on it with the state government, the unions, the claimants groups and the, yes, state government and ourselves. So everybody's behind the fund. The fund has been working really well. I think the balance right now is $171 million. Obviously, that was helped out by the win on the RCI tax case. But even last year, when the funds were -- the claimants' requirements were higher than what was in the fund, the state provided a backup facility for the fund. So now it is managed outside of Hardie. It's consolidated in our results, but it's managed outside of Hardie. It has its own board. Our board meetings, I don't want anyone to think we're kind of working on fund issues in our board meetings. Our company -- our board kind of helps us run the company and then the fund board actually runs the fund. So we think it's been working very well. The fund believes it's going well. They're very happy with the relationship with both the state and with Hardie. So I think that's one of the real positives that's evolved over the last 5 or 6 years for Hardie. Over the last -- since 2001, we contributed $900 million to the claimants funds. $300 million in the first fund and then -- roughly $300 million in the first fund and $600 million since we established the second fund. Any other questions on the phone?

We have a question from Andrew Peros.

I'm just trying to get a feel for PDG again, sorry to harp on this. But I think you mentioned it was negative 1% for the quarter, and you guys are about 4.5%, 5% for the first half. I'm just trying to reconcile that with what some of your competitors are reporting, which is relatively strong PDG growth over that period. Can you perhaps provide us some more detailed comments around that to get a better understanding of how you guys might fair for the balance of the year?

Yes, I'm not sure what you mean by competitors, if you're talking about other building materials companies or competitors in the siding business. But just go through the mechanics of PDG. One, it's just the calculation's not a good calculation on a quarterly basis. It's just too short a period of time. I think it's pretty good year-to-year and it's good for kind of 4 months -- I mean, 4-quarter rolling average. PDG is about our exterior business. It's not about our Backer business, okay? So 25% or 24% of what we sold last quarter was Hardie Backer, so that's outside of the PDG calculation. As far as what our competitors have done in siding, yes, you have the -- all the different types. You have brick stone, stucco, fibre cement, wood and vinyl, okay? The main ones we track are wood, vinyl and fibre cement, obviously. Fibre cement, PDG for the 3 quarters, now I’m going to really confuse the calendar year, is very similar to what it would be for the engineered wood part of the wood segment. Now as far as cedar siding, which is a natural wood, plywood siding, we don't have a good way of measuring that, okay? Now neither those categories appear to be growing so it's not a big deal. But us and engineered wood siding or chipboard siding basically, seem to be growing at about the same rate. Maybe they're a little bit ahead on a little smaller base, or maybe it's about the same rate. Vinyl siding is giving up the share, and you can see that -- I think a lot of you would have access to what they call vinyl siding institute numbers. You can see vinyl siding is still giving up share, and that's probably even accelerated a little bit. So if you're talking about other building materials companies as our competitors, like gypsum companies and roofing companies and things like that, that's where you've got to figure out how much of those companies' business is -- volume increase is driven by new construction and how much is driven by R&R, kind of how does that compare to our mix.

We have a follow-up question from Emily Behncke from Deutsche Bank.

Just a follow-up on my margin question earlier. You indicated that with improved volumes, you would expect some margin improvement, obviously manufacturing a little bit stronger. But is it fair to assume sort of when -- as the market recovers, that we should continue to expect margins to improve, and at the terminal year you'll be above that 20% to 25% margin range?

Yes. Well so far with the volume improving, you haven't see that. So I'd worry if I were you. But in reality, you should. I just think we're too early in the recovery. Basically, any business, as they more fully utilize their kind of fixed cost in the business, whether it be salespeople, marketing spend, planned investment, whatever it is, should get better returns, obviously. But even -- or returns. Yes, and then terminal share. I think the only thing there, the tricky thing there, I hate to introduce it here because it's a bit of a concept you've got to think about, so it's more of a September tour concept. But the question is, I mean, right now -- historically, we sold most of our board in the South and West and it's been prime board, okay? And in the future, most of our growth will be outside of the South and the West prime board markets. But That Southwest prime board is a very high-returning board. So the bottom of the market and the top of the market are unlikely to return at the same rate as the middle of the market. I think the kind of what -- it doesn't make that an issue for us is because I do think our kind of market position and our efficiency and our business gets better every year. So that just generally lifts up all margins. So even though the top and the bottom, which is going to be a lot of the new business, won't be at the same margin as the middle of the market, it will still be the market that all adds -- I mean at a margin, that all adds up to kind of the right level. So it's no guarantee that it's higher at terminal, and it's no guarantee that is higher at 6 or 7 years. But if we're successful running our strategy and we continue to grow fibre cement category, and we continue to maintain the lion's share of that for ourselves, what is pretty guaranteed is you can have a lot more dollars. And how the percentages work out, now that's less known than how many dollars are probably going to be there.

Your next question comes from Philip Bare from Morgan Stanley.

Just a quick question on capacity expansion in Australia. Can you give us any more detail on when you expect you will have resolved that issue just in terms of timing and location?

No, I think the good news is we're not under pressure to make a decision quick. But the bad news is, it's just way too expensive. There's a significant amount of work we need to do to get the number to work. And when I say that, it's not obviously, we don't have a balance sheet problem. It's just the dollar invested per dollar revenue is off. And it's not off by U.S. standards, it's off by what we consider Hardie Fibre Cement business model standard. So we don't expect it to be the same as the U.S., okay? Where you build capacity much cheaper in the U.S. than we can in Australia. We know that, okay? Part of that has to do just the difference in geography, the difference in the economies, the exchange rate in Australia is probably not -- the really strong exchange rate is playing a part. There's also a learning curve. It's because it hasn't been run down here, a lot of the bids have these insurance premiums in them to make sure they know what they're getting into if things go a little bit wrong for them, they still make money on the job. So in the U.S. where we have the same contractor build let's say, like, 7 plants in a row, they were able to really zero in on what it cost to build that type of plan and they didn't have any fluff in their bids. I think there's a fair amount of fluff in the Australian bids at this point. So it just doesn't work. It's just too many dollars per output of revenue. And you've got to get down quite a bit. It's not like we got to get down 5%. We've got to get down quite a bit. So we're working on that. And when it's going to happen, I'm not sure. But it'll happen before we need it to happen, meaning we won't run out of capacity in Australia trying to figure out the perfect investment for capacity down here.

We have no further questions in the queue at this stage.

Okay. I think that takes care of all the questions from investors. I'm not sure if we have any media questions. Yes?

[indiscernible] the first half of next year, we got the fiscal cliff, the debt ceiling issues, possible credit rating downgrades perhaps. What extent do you think that might derail whatever recovery you're expecting in the housing sector? Or do you think to some extent, that's already in place and that there's a certain amount of immunity there?

First thing I need to tell you is I'm not an expert on economics, even U.S. economics. So yes, I'm aware of all the situations. I think where we're at in the U.S., most of us feel that even if we have some bumps not shocks, but some bumps, higher tax rates, stuff like that, the housing -- we starved the market for housing long enough to where it will still grow. It may not grow at the optimum rate if we didn't hit those bumps but it'll still grow. Having said that, if it doesn't, then we're back to like every other company dealing with the reality and reacting to a lower demand. But myself and most people in our industry just don't see that happening. We think we will be at least some increase in housing next year over this year even if we have some political bumps in the road.

I've got one question about Australia. I just wanted to -- if you could to zero in on the specifics of a comment you made. You said even if the market in Australia doesn't get much better, we think our results will get much better.

I think we performed below average of where we usually perform. I don't think that's going to carry on too long. So again, we're a quarterly reporting company. So you see 3-month slices of our company. I think we just had less than what we had expect-type performance as we went into a softer market in Australia. A lot of faith in the organization down here, I just think they'll start running the business better, given the market conditions, if it doesn't increase.

Just one final question. Have you had a chance to watch the ABC series Devil's Dust?

I have not. I just got here Wednesday morning.

Are you intending to watch it?

I'm going home so I don't know if I'll watch it or not. So our company's history on asbestos is well documented, so I'm aware of the company's history on asbestos. It was before my time but I'm completely aware of kind of the history on Hardie asbestos. I'm also aware of the contributions we made before the fund, the first fund and then the current fund, which I think the current fund, as I commented earlier, is just very appropriate fund for the type of liability we have as a company.

Do you think Hardie has left the issue of asbestos as a problem behind for good?

I think all the investors in the room know that every year we generate cash flow, some of it goes to the fund. So I don't think Hardie and asbestos ever gets separated. It's a very a long-tail liability. But I think what we've done is put a fund in place that it manages the situation for investors and for claimants. So it's kind of a balanced approach. The pay as you go seems to work much better than the Chapter 11s in the U.S., which is the standard way of dealing with an asbestos liability. Okay, thanks, everyone for coming and see you next time.