“So we're building those plans, and I'm confident it will leave us in a reasonable place from an earnings growth standpoint, while not jeopardizing the investment in sustained organic sales growth and share growth”

In context

“time when we had to do this coming out of COVID, with the supply chain crisis. I think the team even further sharpened their skills and reformulation. We further diversified our supply base. We further diversified our flexibility on our formulations and we further sharpened our understanding of what our short-term productivity levers that we can pull. And honestly, there's a lot of room in our P&L to drive short-term productivity and that will be the first place to go. Will it be sufficient to offset the full $1 billion after tax, likely not. With that, we continue to innovate. And pricing -- selective pricing with innovation where the consumer tells us their interest is high, their willingness to pay for better performance is there will be the other part of the offset that we're driving. So we're building those plans, and I'm confident it will leave us in a reasonable place from an earnings growth standpoint, while not jeopardizing the investment in sustained organic sales growth and share growth, which honestly, we're just delighted to see the ship turning this quarter. Operator: Your next question will come from the line of Dara Mohsenian of Morgan Stanley. Dara Mohsenian: Just 2 follow-ups on Steve's question. Just a -- can you discuss if you can see any advantage on relative sales performance versus competitors here as you look at the post Iron conflict situation from a supply chain or sourcing standpoint, is that something you think can be significant? Or is it more modest in nature? Obviously, it's a fluid situation, but any thoughts there would be helpful. And just be, you mentioned progress in a lot of areas on the growth side, whether it's certain brands, et cetera, with the innovations you put in place, your spending behind the business in Q4. The first part of the quest”