Good morning, this is Joyce Brooks, Vice President of Investor Relations. Thank you for joining today's call for a discussions of McCormick's first-quarter financial results and our current outlook for 2016. To accompany our call, we’ve posted a set of slides at ir.mccormick.com. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following our remarks, we will begin a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions]. With me this morning are Lawrence Kurzius, President and CEO, Gordon Stetz, Executive Vice President and CFO, and Mike Smith Senior Vice President, Corporate Finance. During our remarks, we will refer to non-GAAP financial measures. These include adjusted operating income and adjusted earnings per share that exclude the impact of special charges as well as information in constant currency. Reconciliations to the GAAP results are included in this morning's press release and slides. As a reminder, today’s presentation contains protections and other forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially from those projected. The Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or other factors. As seen on slide 2, our forward-looking statement also provides information on risk factors that could affect our financial results. It’s now my pleasure to turn the discussion over to Lawrence.

Thank you Joyce, good morning everyone, thanks for joining us. McCormick's first-quarter results were a great start to the year. We created momentum with our growth strategies throughout 2015 and are building on this strength in 2016. This strength was evident in our topline growth, we grew constant currency sales 6% for our Consumer segment and 7% for our Industrial segment with increased base business, new products and acquisitions, our three drivers of long-term sales growth. We are improving gross profit margin and achieved a 70 basis point increase this period. This was a sequential increase from 30 basis points in the fourth quarter of 2015 and ahead of our expectations due in part to favorable product mix. A big driver of the year-to-year improvement is cost savings from our Comprehensive Continuous Improvement program, CCI and our organization and streamlining action. Employees throughout the Company are improving productivity and we have greater confidence in our goal to achieve at least $95 million of cost savings this year. Under Mike's leadership, efforts are underway toward delivering the four year $400 million cost reduction target that we announced in February. We grew first quarter adjusted operating income 12% from the year ago period on a constant currency basis led by the higher sales and increased gross profit margin. We’d initially planned a year-on-year increase in brand marketing this period but shifted this timing to second quarter to better coincide with some of our new product launches. At the bottom line, adjusted earnings per share of $0.74 was up 6% from $0.70 in the first quarter of 2015. This includes the unfavorable impact to foreign exchange rates and the underlying increase was quite strong. These first-quarter results give us increased confidence in our ability to deliver our plans for constant currency growth of…

Thanks Lawrence and good morning everybody. I'm going to discuss our first-quarter results followed by comments on our current 2016 financial outlook. We started the year with strong sales growth and higher adjusted earnings per share. Our adjusted earnings per share result was ahead of our first-quarter guidance due to a timing shift for brand marketing and discrete tax benefits. Let's turn to our topline results as seen on slide 16. On a constant currency basis, we grew sales 7%. The incremental impact of the acquisitions completed in 2015 was 3%. We drove the other 4% with higher volume and product mix and to a lesser extend from pricing actions that we took in response to higher material cost. Constant currency sales growth for each of our two segments was in a 6% to 7% range and driven by contributions from these same three factors; volume and product mix, acquisitions and pricing. On slide 17, consumer segment sales in the Americas rose 4% in constant currency with about a third of the increase from Stubb's. Base business sales growth in this region was led by higher US sales of core spices and herbs, Lawry's brand, Hispanic items and simply Asia products. These increases were offset in part this period by lower sales of certain economy products in the US. Also volume and mix declined in Canada as consumers adjust to some significant price increases related in part to currency pressure. In EMEA, we continued to achieve strong sales performance, up 14% in constant currency. This increase was driven by D&A which added 10% to sales growth as well as expanded distribution in Poland and our performance in France with new products and brand marketing. Consumer sales in the Asia-Pacific region rose 5% in constant currency. We grew constant currency sales…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Alexia Howard with Bernstein. Please proceed with your questions.

Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Alexia.

Can I do two questions? I know you comment on the Premier Foods specifically, or not very much, but just philosophically about your plans for acquisitions from here on out. You said there are other possible deals in the pipeline. What strikes me as different here is that it's quite big, which is a break from the bolt-on acquisitions you've done in the past. It is based in the UK which, frankly, even though I'm from there, doesn't strike me as a particularly attractive market. And it's moving out of your core spices and seasonings into more regular smaller growth categories. So maybe if you could just comment on if not this, are these the kind of criteria that you are focused on? And then as a really short follow-up, a number of other companies have announced that they will be labeling products that are containing GMOs in addition to obviously what you are doing which is labeling the products that are not containing GMOs or GMO free. In advance of the Vermont labeling legislation kicking in in the middle of the year, how are you planning to deal with that? Thank you and I will pass it on.

Alexia, this is Lawrence here and first of all, as we look at the Premier business, there is – we are pretty limited on what we can say. But I can tell you that what’s attractive to us about this business is that it is still predominantly a flavor business with some terrific iconic flavor brands that are much loved in the UK. I am sure that you are very familiar with these brands yourself. Gordon, and Mike and I have lived in the UK ourselves and know that brands like Bisto, Oxo, Saxa, Sharwood, these are fantastic brands that are much loved by UK consumers and are widely consumed and we see them as flavor businesses. Our flavor portfolio on the consumer side is not just herbs, spices and seasonings, we have sauces in many parts of the world. We are launching cooking sauces in North America, we have over the last few years, so we see brands in the Premier portfolio as being a very complementary to the flavor business that we have and are building globally. With the brands that are very close and we are looking at a whole company. So there are some brands that are not on their face core to our business, but I would remind you that we have strong dessert business on the continent with homemade dessert products through the Vahine brand and a fairly good part of our US business is based on cooking and baking products anyway as well. So we feel pretty good about the fit. It is bigger than the bolt-on acquisitions that we have done so many of, and I think we have been signaling really for several months now that we were going to look at some bigger opportunities in addition to the bolt-on opportunity.…

Great. Thank you very much. I'll pass it on.

Our next question is from the line of David Driscoll with Citigroup. Please proceed with your questions.

Great. Thank you so much and good morning, everyone.

Good morning, David.

I just had two questions. I think on the last conference call you had indicated that you expected brand marketing to increase in the first quarter and I think it was flat. So, I'm just curious about the thoughts on how marketing lays out in the year and I believe you reiterated the $20 million increase number. So I think the pattern shifted a bit, but I'd kind of like you to comment on that. And then I just have a quick follow-up.

Great. I will start and then may let Gordon pick up right behind me. But we did signal that we would have the brand marketing increase in the first quarter largely related to some new product launches. And I think in our prepared remarks, we indicated that we push that advertising into mostly in the second quarter just related to the timing of the distribution build on the new product. There is really nothing dramatic here. It’s just around the actual retail execution predominantly on our herb grinders as we work through the holiday season and the Super Bowl season, the on-shelf placement of those products is a little bit slower than we anticipated at the very beginning of the year and so we’ve shifted the spend out on a bit further to coincide with the retail distribution. Our particular problem is just the timing of it, so we still believe that we will deliver on that brand marketing increase that we talked about in our initial guidance for the year. Gordon, you want to elaborate on that?

No, absolutely right. I mean, a lot of it is - the decisions are made as we progress through the quarter and determine when the best timing of it is as it relates to the rollout, so this purely a decision to make sure it’s spent at the appropriate time to support the business.

And then just a quick follow-up on your pricing in the United States and what are you seeing on price and volume elasticities?

Price increase has just really been implemented at retail. Our expectation based on the analytical work that we did is that we will have minimal impact on volume and our price elasticity was an important consideration in developing this increase. Particularly in the US, the increase is quite surgical and item-specific. It’s not a broad-based flat increase. It’s, what I would call a very smart analytically based set of increases. Some items – it wasn’t all an increase, some items went down as well. We took this as an opportunity to adjust our prices across the portfolio and the net was about 1% to 2% increase.

Smart increases are my favorite kind. I appreciate it.

Our next question is from the line of Brett Hundley with BB&T Capital Markets. Please go ahead with your questions.

Yeah. Good morning, gentlemen.

Good morning, Brett.

Just wanted to stay on that topic with pricing and maybe a little bit as it relates to your cost savings program as well. But I wanted to revisit raw material inflation, Gordon, and maybe get a sense of whether you're still looking for a low-single-digit increase. And just your comfort with being able to use pricing or additional cost savings as needed if raws were to rise on you further. I hear about the garlic market and how that's just moving higher and maybe poor weather in India. So I just wanted to revisit that with you and get an update from you.

Yeah, our outlook on the raw material increases this year has not changed, so we are still in the low single-digit. I really don’t want to speculate too much in terms of how we would deal with certain issues. As you know, they are automatically dealt with in the industrial side up or down based on those movements. In the retail side, all I would say is we lean on these tools and the techniques that we’ve developed. We will look at the elasticities and the thresholds. Back to Lawrence‘s earlier comments, I’ve been with this company a long time and I would say that the level of sophistication around the price increase just executed was the highest I’ve seen. So I have confidence in our team to go back, use their analytics to make whatever decision is necessary to deal with whatever cost issues may pop up. CCI, we will always lean on CCI. We talked about that as part of our strategy over time, that’s where we look first in any type of an environment as to generate cost savings through our CCI. And under Mike’s leadership, as you’ve heard, we’ve upped our resources there which has give us confidence to raise our target. So that will always be the first place we look.

Okay, and then just as a follow-up question -- this is a little bit of an oddball question, but I'm curious. The US protein industry has spent a lot of time year-to-date talking about how they are really going to focus on pushing hot dogs this growing season. I am just curious if that actually negatively impacts your US retail business at all if your see a switch as what goes on the grill or if you business is diverse enough of course that you really don’t see any impact based upon what US protein producers try and decide to push.

I will say that while hot dog seasoning is not – I am not aware that we’ve got a specific hot dog seasoning in our portfolio. I’ll bet Montreal steak seasoning tastes great on a hot dog. But anything that promotes more grilling is going to be good for us during the grilling season. I am sure that Stubb’s barbeque sauce is fantastic on a hot dog.

And Zatarain's Creole mustard.

All right, great, guys. I appreciate it.

Our next question is from the Ken Goldman with JPMorgan. Please go ahead with your question.

Good morning, it is Tom Palmer on for Ken. Thank you for taking my questions.

Good morning, Tom.

We have started to see organic and non-GMO products on shelves in food retailers. I realize it's still a bit early, but how is the adoption progressing? Have you gained incremental placements at retailers? Can you comment on the rate of customer adoption? Thanks.

I’d tell you that the plans for the roll out of our conversions is organic on our gourmet line and the non-GMO labeling on the bulk of our herbs and spices is very much on track. We expect to have the rollout fully implemented by the end of the year. And we are pretty pleased with the results so far. We’ve got great acceptance by retailers. I know we have a specific case to cite here, but I know we have gained additional distribution particularly as a result of the organic conversion. And we are optimistic about it. I think you may have heard in our prepared remarks that we are seeing a great lift on our gourmet line with that conversion as well.

Great, thanks. And just a quick follow-up. Gross margin expansion was the strongest in a couple years. Should we look for this degree of expansion to recur again this year or in subsequent quarters or was some of the increase perhaps a rebound off of an abnormally light figure in the first quarter of ‘15?

We’ve indicated gross margin improvement for the year in the 50 to 100 basis point range and this is squarely in the middle of that. So we’ve dialed that into our thinking.

Okay, thanks.

Our next question comes from the line of Max Lewis with JPMorgan. Please go ahead with your question.

Hi, guys. Congratulations on the good results. I think my question is just more to do with the Premier Foods deal. Obviously aware there's a limit to what you can say there. But I think the very first thing that I'd be interested just to hear is the potential impact of this transaction on your credit rating. I mean, if we look at Premier Foods right now, I mean, in US dollar terms for a second, excluding the pension deficit, I may get about $930 million of net debt coupled with a pension deficit of GBP416 million is roughly $600 million resulting in the total additional net debt of almost $1.5 billion. I think because of that, even assuming an all stock deal, this is a deal which could almost double the net debt of the group. I think what I'd be interested to get your kind of guidance on is firstly whether or not you feel you can preserve your investment-grade credit rating if your net debt were to increase that materially. And secondly, whether or not it would make sense after acquiring Premier Foods, the Premier Foods legal entity to still issue its own bond and to sit outside the restrict group that currently contains all the assets that are referenceable into the McCormick bond restricted group in order to preserve the investment-grade rating of those bonds.

In terms of the second question, we’re getting into a level of detail that a speculation and I can't really comment on right now. In terms of your first question, I'll just point to our historical track record around, when we have done large acquisitions and the debt capacity that we have. We pride ourselves in our investment-grade rating and our full intention is to maintain our investment-grade rating and we believe we can achieve that through this transaction. While it is significantly large, if you go back in our history and you look at Ducros back in 2000, and you look at Lawry's as recently as 2008, on a percentage of our market cap and the size of the company, it's really not quite different from those sized transactions. So our intention, as we did in those two previous transactions, would be to lever up. Obviously, it will take our debt-to-EBITDA about where it is now, but it wouldn't be at a level that would be unlike where we were with Lawry’s and Ducros at the time. And as we did in the past, we would curtail our share buyback program to pay down our debt and return to our investment-grade ratings. So that is how we would finance this acquisition and again, it would be very much in line with previous deal.

I think one thing that I just struggle to understand there is whether or not you would expect to maintain your investment-grade rating immediately after the deal completed. Because obviously whilst I can understand that right now, you may not be willing to give all the information out, even if you give some guidance as to when you'll be able to give this information out regarding the potential impact this could have on your credit rating that would be important. So I think currently the credit market is quite concerned about a deal which, even on an all stock basis, could quite easily more than double the net debt of the group. And if it were to take place on an all cash basis, that's very significant to net debt to EBITDA for the group.

Well, again, I can't speak specifically to what the rating agencies will or will not do, but all I would suggest is we are currently an A rating and we’d have a ways to go before we get below investment grade and again the debt-to-EBITDA parameters would not be unlike where we were previously on other deals where we were able to maintain our investment-grade rating.

Okay, I think second question I would throw off was more about the EPS impact of the deal and the potential of this deal to be accretive maybe in the future. Whilst I suppose kind of given the material discrepancy in terms of your P/E ratio versus Premier Foods' P/E ratio that could imply the deal could be quite accretive. I suppose some concerns that many of your investors have right now is firstly the impact of the pension deficit. And I've got the Premier Foods' legal entity pension deficit of GBP416 million, which in US dollar terms gets me to a little bit under $600 million. Premier Foods' management team announced that even though in 2015 they had a partial holiday for making the addition -- deficit contribution, the total cash outflow due to servicing the pension deficit will increase $14 million to $16 million this year and go up to almost $60 million, that's 60 million in 2016 and '17. I suppose how concerned are you about the EPS impact of one, the material payment the group will need to make moving forward to service its very large pension deficit? Secondly, the impact of the UK minimum wage on the large fixed cost base of the group given the fact that there are a large number of UK employees due to see their wage increases?

Max, Can I just interrupt you for just a minute?

And just thirdly if I may, just about the competitive landscape in the UK where we've seen a number of the large [indiscernible] markets, the big [indiscernible] markets in the UK?

I appreciate it, Max, but these are all questions that we're not going to be able to answer. If I could just interrupt, these are all matters that we're not going to be able to address and so I don't want to tie up. We've got a lot of other questioners and so, I don't mean to be rude, but I'm just saying, we're not going to be able to address any of those points. Obviously, we would expect that this transaction were to occur, would be beneficial to the Premier shareholders and the other stakeholders in the business, by providing greater security than they perhaps have in this highly levered situation that they find themselves in today and we would also expect it to be value creating for McCormick shareholders as well. The degree to which it is accretive is something that we can't even speculate on, no deal has been agreed at this point and so the return would be -- any discussion of the return would be highly speculative other than we've been good stewards of shareholder value for McCormick shareholders and we're going to continue to keep our financial discipline and any deal that we undertake is going to be favorable through both accretion lens and through an EDA lens.

I suppose at the very least can you give the market some kind of indication as to when we might start to get some kind of firm statement from management as to the financial impact of this deal.

Max, we've got several people in the queue and we want to move forward. So any other questions you have, we can take them offline, you can call me after the call. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from the line of Chris Growe with Stifel. Please go ahead with your question.

Hi, thank you, good morning. Hi. We'll get back on track here. I had a question for you if I could please. In relation to the US business, you showed a chart early on in the slides where the US spices and seasonings category accelerated a bit in Q1. So I was curious about that sequentially even from Q4, but the gap between McCormick's performance and the category was a little wider. But I think I heard you say that your branded performance was in line with the category. So I wanted to understand those two comments or those really two questions there if you will. Then I had a second question, just a quick follow-up.

Yes. We are continuing to see sequential improvement in our US business and spices and seasonings. And so you’re right when you say you are seeing that acceleration, I think that that remark that you were referencing earlier refer to our A-Z spices. Within the different sub segments of that broad category, we have portions of that that are gaining share and our branded -- McCormick branded A-Z spices are certainly one of those segments that's gaining share. I think overall, we're still, someone correct me if I’m wrong here, 60 basis points down in share for the quarter, but we continue to see sequential improvement. We’re really pleased with the growth in our US business I have to say overall and we believe we've got the right momentum to get to continue to grow and to get the share gain.

Okay. And just if I could, a quick follow-up question in relation to the CCI savings. Are the phasing of those cost savings this year more backend loaded? And then I believe they were more backend loaded in 2015. So is that what's really helping drive the stronger gross margin performance here early in the year?

Hey, Chris. This is Mike Smith. They are more evenly weighted this year. Last year, they were really back loaded because as the year built, we identified more savings opportunities. We also had the North American effectiveness initiative, which really hit in the second half of last year, but you will see a more balanced deal this year.

So, with those savings being more backend loaded last year, this should help support a stronger gross margin at least early in the year it would seem.

Yeah. Our gross margin should be consistently up in that 50 to 100 basis point range for the year.

Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you.

The next question is from the line of Rob Dickerson with Consumer Edge Research. Please go ahead with your question.

Thanks a lot. I just have one question and two quick clarifications. The first one is for free cash flow for the year, I don't believe you've given a target and, if not, can you? That's one. And then just any commentary around the cadence of free cash flow build throughout the year given the increase in your inventory policy.

We have not given a target. Obviously, we have some aggressive programs that we spoke about earlier under Lawrence's leadership, he has certainly elevated internally with targets that we’re cascading internally, but I would say that we are expectation wise in line with the net income growth that we’re forecasting and projecting with benefits coming through various levers that we’re focused on in the working capital side. So I know that's not as specific as you would like, but we certainly have a focus on increasing our cash flow, year-over-year this year.

Okay, fair enough. And then two quick ones. On income from unconsolidated, I think at year-end, you said that was down slightly and now it's about flat year-over-year, is that just from currency or is there something else there. And then also just, I want to make sure I heard correctly, you said the operating income year-over-year growth for the industrial segment should be in line with total company, which is 60%, including FX. Just want to make sure that that's right.

Hey, Rob. I'll take the unconsolidated and I'll pass it to Gordon for the industrial question, but income from unconsolidated operations is definitely an FX matter. The underlying businesses in local currencies are all doing very well.

As it relates to the industrial business, we’re very, very pleased with the start, but as I said in my remarks, we expect the full year number to be in line with the total year guidance for the total company and that's primarily a function of customer order patterns and mix that can vary quarter-to-quarter. So we're just giving people a heads-up that while we are very, very pleased with the start that at times that can change based on timing of promotions and things by our customers.

Okay, great. Thanks, guys.

The next question is from the line of Eric Katzman with Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead with your question

Hi, good morning. I guess the first little more specific question on the fiscal second quarter, if the new product introductions were deferred to the second quarter and you are going to have some offset due to A&P spending, I guess all else equal, should sales be a bit stronger in the second quarter with those launches?

I'd say Eric, we haven't given specific sales growth guidance, but it wouldn't be out of line with say the full-year guidance, I would say.

Okay. And then just maybe a bigger picture question on the Industrial. You've been doing better there with the margins for a while now. And I guess having followed the company for a long time; you've talked a lot about improving the mix and the technical capabilities and winning new contracts on the back of the Industrial segment. And it seems to me that maybe the best way to judge that is the margins because the more technically advanced the products are, the more likely you are to get a better margin for them. And so, is there a percentage margin that you are looking at for that segment that will suggest let's say that you're closer to some of your competitors like an IFF and others who seem to generate a higher margin in that business? And I'll pass it on. Thanks.

Hi, Eric. This is Gordon. You obviously have followed us a long time so you know there was a time period where we had put out a specific margin target for that business, 8% to 10%. We didn't talk about that as much during rising commodity costs, because the pass-through mechanisms on that side of the business mask what was really good underlying performance at the time, to the tune of almost 200 basis points. We haven't put out a specific target, but I can say the progress that we've made in the margin story there is very, very pleasing to us. So it just demonstrates to us that strategy that we have in place with the portfolio of products that we’re focusing on, the acquisition of Brand Aromatics are all the types of things that we have always worked towards in our strategy. So we hope to just continue that journey and I can't tell you there is a specific endpoint at this stage.

Okay. If I can just follow up on one thing. Just remind me, Gordon, your pension here -- or I guess globally I should say -- your pension is -- is that overfunded or I mean I know it's always been very conservative, but -- and your accounting on it is pretty conservative. But where is your pension today relative to its funding needs?

On an ABO basis, which is the accumulative benefit obligation, it's pretty much fully funded. We have minimal contributions to make to that plan in the US this year. So it's very much within our guidelines and we expect minimal pension contributions this year.

Okay, thought so. Thank you.

Our next question is from the line of Robert Moskow with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, thanks. I guess just one last question about margins on the consumer side. Historically, your margins in consumer were around 19%. And I guess the way I would tell the story is over the last couple of years, you've made a bigger investment in your consumer business to become more competitive with maybe lower price competition and now the margins in the mid-17% at least it was last year. When you think about what's possible going forward now that you've raised your CCI targets, do you think about maybe those margins getting up towards 19% again? Or do you really not think about it on a quantitative basis, it's really just a matter of driving the top line and then as your competitive position improves just the profit grows? Just wanted to know how you thought about it.

Well, Rob, this is Lawrence. I will -- and good morning, by the way. Part of the -- we haven't set a target for the margins on that business that we communicated externally, but we certainly believe that there is upside to those margins for two reasons. First, in a more benign commodity environment, our CCI efforts are better able to drop to the bottom line. Our goal on CCI is to provide fuel for growth, but a portion of the CCI is always expected to support bottom-line growth and so that would go straight to your margin question. Second is as our US consumer business returns to growth that of course is one of the highest margin businesses and largest businesses in our portfolio and with return to growth, it mixes up the whole consumer business.

Very good, okay, thank you.

Thank you. I would now like to turn the floor back to Lawrence Kurzius for closing remarks.

Well, thanks everyone for your questions and for participating on today's call. We are excited about our growth strategies and plans underway in 2016 to build on our base business, accelerate innovation, expand availability and footprint of our business and excel in customer intimacy and consumer insights. Our acquisition pipeline is robust and we have aggressive cost savings programs underway, all driven by McCormick’s experienced leaders and engaged employees. Thanks for your attention this morning.

Thanks, Lawrence and thanks to everyone for joining us today. If you have any questions regarding today's information, please give us a call at 410-771-7244. That concludes this morning's conference.