“And then we are left with EMEA. And EMEA volumes, I expect, will be consistent. I can't see anything that suggests that we'll see a significant improvement in the second half.”

In context

“est of Asia, India, particularly, I see growth continuing. I see that momentum in the second half as well. ASEAN, a little bit softer will still grow, but will be probably softer growth than we've seen. And then there's a story of China. I mean, as you know, without getting to a lot of detail on China, I'd say to you, the highlights are, year-on-year volumes were flat sequentially, up 4%, largely because there was a lunar year in Q1, based on what I'm seeing, I expect Q3 volumes to be flattish, to [ph] chemicals, electronics demand continues to be soft. The government has earlier this week, in fact, on 24 announced a large intent of stimulation of the economy and consumption. But really for an economy that size for us to see any visible impact of that probably towards the end of the year. And then we are left with EMEA. And EMEA volumes, I expect, will be consistent. I can't see anything that suggests that we'll see a significant improvement in the second half. I believe in Q3, as an example, adjusted for seasonal variations, et cetera, you will see flattish volumes. Michael Sison: Thank you. Operator: We will take our next question from Vincent Andrews with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Vincent Andrews: Thank you and good morning, everyone. Matt, I might be overthinking this a little bit, but could you just maybe help me better understand historically, your guidance midpoint had assumed no economic growth and now the high end assumes no economic growth. So what caused you to sort of change that framework? Matt White: Yes, Vince. We have - if you go back far enough, we have bounced a little bit around on that, sometimes high end, sometimes middle end. It just gets to a function of when we put the numbers together and we sort of how many qua”