Diageo plc (DEO) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary
September 4, 2025
Earnings Call Speaker Segments
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsGood afternoon, everyone, and thank you very much again for joining us for this afternoon session. I'm very happy to have Nik Jhangiani here from Diageo joining us. So Nik, thank you for coming to the conference this year.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesCheers.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsYes. We've got these lovely Ritual drinks in front of us. So...
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. We served them all day yesterday, I think, starting at 8:10, and that's the beauty of a nonalcoholic product. There's no real cocktail hour that you need to wait for to start drinking them. So if you haven't tried them, please go out and buy some today.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsOkay. So you've been at the company for about a year now. So how has that measured up to your expectations?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesHow has it measured up to my expectations? I mean, I think, listen, I joined Diageo for what I have truly seen, which is amazing iconic brands, amazing marketing and brand building capabilities, I mean, I think, unparalleled scale and reach both from an angle of the size of the markets and the categories in which we play, but also from an angle of just our geographic diversity of where it is. And all of that's been incredible. And that's really been supported by amazingly passionate people who truly love the business, love the brands, love our consumers. But on the flip side, having come in from the Coke system and spent more of my time on the bottling side of the business, it's also incredible to see where we don't necessarily have, in my mind, the same degree of love and passion, and I'd link it to our customers and our commercial execution capabilities. And I think that's a big opportunity when I look at Diageo. I also look at it from an angle that says it's a really interesting time to come into a company where clearly there is a lot of noise. I didn't realize that I'd spend my whole first year in every kind of conversation, be it with investors and with friends and with family, around structural versus cyclical. And Laurence and I were joking, I probably wake up in the middle of the night saying, I don't know. But it's something that I just never expected to have dominate the conversation so much. But it is interesting when you then start getting into it that says there are clearly trends and indications of stuff that's been around for a number of years. So potentially, is this cycle taking us longer for a variety of different reasons that, I believe, and we can talk about those potentially. But is that also some accelerated changes that have been around that might be coming more at pace? And do we need to be thinking about our business and our business model and portfolio with a slightly different lens without losing what is the beauty of what we have? And I think that's the exciting part of coming in and being here a year and, in some ways, still being in that luxurious position of being that what I call an insider-outsider, where you've been inside long enough to have a view in a sense, but you're still an outsider where you're continuing to view and challenge because you haven't been there long enough that you've gotten kind of steeped into that culture or that environment or that category or that business, where you can step away and say something different. So that's where I am.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsWe'll certainly get to a number of those topics, structural, cyclical and portfolio and the like.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesI thought I addressed it right there.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsWe're going to go a bit deeper than that, I think.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesOkay.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsBut in terms of -- you've come up with -- new cost saving target has gone up from $500 million to $625 million recently. Where are you finding these cost savings? Where does the additional opportunity come from? And importantly, will it cost you anything to deliver them?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. There's no such thing as a free lunch, so yes, it will cost us, but we'll come back and talk about that. So I think Diageo has been really good in terms of some of the work that they've been doing in the recent years around supply agility. And I think there continues to be opportunities as we look at our supply chain all the way from manufacturing through to logistics and distribution and how can we actually look and eke out dollars that are not necessarily driving growth and/or efficiency for us. So I think that continues, but truly looking at it with a lens of what is actually dollars that are delivered to the bottom line as opposed to a cost avoidance element, which is important for us to track in terms of how we're performing relative to how the market is doing, but that's not necessarily real savings that come through. So I think for me, that's just a bit of a shift in terms of how we're looking at it and how we're communicating to the market around those opportunities. The second piece really is when you look at Diageo, one of the strengths that they've had which you don't want to lose is you've got this real entrepreneurial way of working. So each of the markets in a way has had a lot more freedom to be able to go out and do what they need to do, which is great because you want them to be close to the consumer and the customer, and you don't want to lose that. But with that freedom also means there's almost been an opportunity for them to opt in, opt out and/or also, in my mind, I joke and I say, it's not just a menu that we offer. And they kind of say, well, I'll pick this and I'll pick that. It's actually they also have the choice of going off menu. Well, what does that mean? Well, clearly, when I talked about one of the strengths and the scale that we have, why aren't we creating those capabilities at scale but still being able to have that flexibility at a local level? And that comes back to being clear around some of the decision and what gets done where, and what happens at a market level, what happens at a region level, what happens at a corporate or group level or a center of excellence or capability development. And that can unlock a lot of wasted resources and dollars because you're creating a lot that might just be on the margin different but not necessarily giving something that's so substantially strategically different. So I think that's the second bucket of work that we're looking at that will drive obviously some OpEx savings. And then the third piece really is around the whole bucket of our trade investment and our A&P dollars, which have both grown at a very high rate. And in some ways, they've grown at a much higher rate than our NSV growth. And we've allowed that to continue happening because it was almost this vicious cycle around, well, I need to continue investing there to get the growth. And if I'm not getting the growth, I'll put more money in there, and I hope that the growth will come. And I'm not saying that we want to look at that and in any way cut what is the brand building element of it. Because if I look at those numbers, you've got about $3 billion of addressable spend in trade investment. And if I look at the $3.6 billion that we spend in A&P dollars, only about 40% of that today, rough numbers, is actually spent on media scale and reach. Another 40% was being spent on commercial A&P, which is also linked to trade investment. And then we've got this big bucket of what was nonworking, which we've been working very hard at bringing down, and we can talk a little bit about that. So I think it's really feeding more on the media scale reach piece through more digitization and digital media that we can leverage where we can track better returns and move quicker in terms of how we allocate those dollars to where the growth is and actually pull out inefficiency in these other buckets to be able to reinvest. So that's what it's all about. And I think as we laid out the target of around $500 million, as we got deeper into some of the work and actually, in some ways, it was great because we started working with each of the markets around that, and they were able to think about unlocking more opportunity and, hence, the ability to take that number up. In terms of cost, I would say to you, circa $500 million over that 3 years to deliver that savings. But remember, that would be an exceptional cost in our P&L, but that's very much included in my free cash flow guidance because cash is cash. I always joke, there's no exceptional cash and I can kind of pull that out. It's cash. So we will deliver the $3 billion, which is net of any of the cash element of that $500 million.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsWhen we think about cost savings, I guess, as analysts, we, of course, like that and it's going to grow the margin and all the rest of it. But whenever I talk to people in the industry, there's a sense that the drinks world, the spirits world is a very relationship driven world. So how can you be sure -- like you mentioned in terms of the marketing spend, how can you be sure that when you take the cost out of the business, you still maintain that person-to-person relationships that are so important to the industry?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. So it's a really great question because I actually think in the last round of the productivity savings that Diageo did back in '17 through '19, one of the areas that they cut the most was on the commercial muscle, okay? And if you look at what we've positioned and talked about is we do expect to see roughly half of those savings being reinvested. And I would actually tell you, that's around commercial excellence and commercial execution. Now is it linked to more business development and feet on the street? Is it related to more tools that allow us to work with our partners to effectively drive better margin-enhancing growth, whether it's around the center of expertise for our GM capabilities where we can drive data and insights? That's where I see a lot of that going. So in fact, that's where I think we need to rebuild and actually gain back that strength because you're absolutely right. It is very relationship oriented. And that relationship should be that point of contact that's helping that outlet grow their business. But it's also that relationship that has a better ability to understand what is happening at the consumer trend level through that outlook for the occasion and/or experience that the person who's coming into that outlet is there for. Because you don't expect each of them to build out their own shopper marketing or consumer kind of choice framework. That's what we should be able to bring to them. But that has to then marry up with how we actually brand build both in terms of digital or traditional media or scale and reach through influencers, et cetera, as well as how does it come to life at the point of sale. Because I always say brand love is great. But if it's not translating into a purchase of my product, well, how good is brand love? So that's where we need to rebuild some of that muscle.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsAnd I guess similarly on marketing spend, when I talked to your predecessors, there was a general sense that marketing was looked as you just want to get the return on the marketing spend you put in. There's no limit to how much was spent on marketing. There was no maximum and actually marketing spend has been increasing over the past sort of few years, well, around a decade. How are you thinking about the sort of quantum of marketing spend that the business is going to be putting in? Do you have a set limit? Or are you looking at things like the returns that you're taking from that marketing?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. I mean, I think, again, you have to step back and look at it. Are you looking at just the marketing scale and reach? Or are you looking at your commercial A&P dollars and what it's actually delivering at that point of sale? And you've got to look at it holistically. So I think the first thing we need to be focused in on is how well are we looking at it end-to-end and how well are we looking at it from the brand building all the way to the point of sale. And I think that's where we've not been as strong. I think where we have to continue driving that cost down is on wasted commercial A&P that is not necessarily effectively going back towards shopper, consumer and/or customer if we want them to be our preferred partner of choice. And it's not just I add more discounts because I want to push more volume because I want to get it out there, but there's nothing really that drives to help activate that at the point of sale. So I don't necessarily look at it as we need a prescribed number of dollars. We need to look at it firstly in terms of growth. We also need to look at it in terms of markets because not all markets are created equal. And what are the markets in which we see breakout growth or future growth potential versus what our value contributors today versus what our growth engines today, and how do we allocate resources within market, within portfolio, within channel end-to-end in a more effective way? And I joke about the fact that we've got a number of brands. It's kind of like having a lot of children. But I don't each love all my children in the exact same way. Might sound terrible to parents, I'm a parent. But yes, but that's why I only had two so I could love them equally. But when you have the 100-plus, well, it's difficult to love them all equally. So we've got to go where the performance is and where the growth is.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsI think one of the changes that we've heard from you since you joined a year ago was a focus much more on the dollar margin rather than the percent margin focus. What's this change all about? I wonder if you could sort of run us through what your thinking is there.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. I think what I saw as I came, and I can give you a couple of examples of that, which is there was such an obsession with gross margin percentage that we were actually driving some of the wrong behaviors in the business, all right? So we were getting out of categories or businesses because the margin percentage was low. And I'm not talking about RTD, so I'll come back and talk about that in a moment. I'm also talking about within, let's say, whiskey, because we were so focused on premiumization or because we were so focused on margin percentage, and that meant how much more can I premiumize, than I was forgetting or not focusing on what might be primaries or lower-aged liquid. And in some instances, I was actually selling off those brands where, if I came from the last place, I would kill and chop my left arm and leg off to get a business that had that type of gross margin. I'm talking about 65% plus as opposed to an arbitrary 70% being a measure. So it was leading us to the wrong decisions that we weren't going after the growth. I'll give you another great example of that. We have a new GM MD who's gone into Mexico, and he was in GB. And we had spent a lot of time together in the U.K. market, just home market, and it was easy to go out and stuff for that. And we were chatting a lot around this margin percentage piece. And he got to Mexico. And he said, I've come here and I want to redo my whole business plan. And I said, tell me more. And he said, well, I've come here and we're just about to launch Don Julio Ceniza, but that sells at MXN 900 a bottle. But we are completely ignoring doing Don Julio Blanco because it sells at MXN 600 market and the margin is going to be lower. The size of the Don Julio Blanco market is probably 10x as large as the Ceniza market. And more importantly, what have you lost by not playing in that profit pool? And opportunity to build the Diageo brand, Don Julio, right a Blanco, which naturally then leads to brand affinity. And if you've got a brand ladder, you can move people up, like we do with Johnnie Walker, for instance. That was a flawed choice because it was a margin percentage led kind of decision to be able to do that. So that's why I kind of am turning that metric around because there's profit pools and dollar pools that we're not going after where the absolute growth is great and we have a right to win. And that's why I think, in some ways, that's very liberating for the organization who were told, well, you can't do it if the margin is going to come down percentage. Even though if we're focused on operating profit dollars and an outcome, if I'm growing my operating profit dollars at a faster rate than growing my top line, is clearly going to mean the commitment to leverage, which means an expansion of my operating profit margin and, over time, that will also allow me to get my dollars. And if I'm focused on those elements of cost in the right way, does it really matter what my gross profit margin is, whether it's 69% or 70%, as long as my operating profit and what cash I take to the bank is growing? That's not to say margin percentage isn't important, but it's an outcome of you doing your business right.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsNo, that's very helpful. The examples are very helpful as well. Just want to go back to something you said at the beginning around portfolio. Because at the beginning of this year, you talked about substantial disposals and, of course, this have caused a lot of speculation in the world.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesIntentionally.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsSure. But how are you evaluating the various parts of the business that could be thought of in this way in terms of their relative importance? Are there any criteria that you're putting on any brands or businesses that could be potentially looked at as disposals?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. I mean, I think we've looked at it from the first lens that says if we're growing, and the largest part of our business is actually growing in the spirits world, okay? And yes, it's international spirits but it's not only about premiumization. Are there businesses that I have today that don't offer me synergies and/or growth opportunities for what is the largest part of my business? And am I actually driving that business which actually could belong in the hands of someone else, and particularly, if it's a scarce asset, it might be something that a buyer universe would be willing to pay very attractive valuations for, which also then means I have the focus on what I'm doing? So I really see those are noncore, nonstrategic types of businesses. And disposing of those also allows me to focus where I'm growing but, more importantly, gives me that flexibility also on my balance sheet because I'm clearly not happy with where we're sitting from a leverage perspective. But that's an outcome, again, as opposed to I'm doing it because I want to get to a leverage target because my leverage target should really be achieved by me doing the right things organically and growing my profits and growing my cash flows to allow me to delever. But this will support it, but it's being led by a strategic review. And I think as we continue to do the work around our portfolio being led very much by the consumer, the occasion, the experience and the choice that they're looking for, do we have the right portfolio going forward? I think we largely do, but I think there's work that we need to continue doing. And are there areas that indicate, well, maybe this isn't a part of our portfolio going forward and/or do we have gaps that we need to think about? And that gives me more flexibility if there's either M&A and/or partnership opportunities that today I'm a little more strapped on given where my leverage is. Now if it's the right opportunity, I'm still going to go ahead and do that. But I'd clearly like to have a lot more flexibility. So that's the way we've thought about it. And I think it's truly where we feel we can maximize value for Diageo and our shareholders but also allow us to get more focused, and that's what we're doing.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsOkay. Well, I do want to talk about the structural/cyclical question as it's one that does dominate the....
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesAt least you waited until about the sixth question.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsWell, yes, we've got a little bit through. But I guess you've changed the tune, I suppose, from a lot of your peers within the industry talking about the effects of moderation on the industry. I think you've said it's largely cyclical but there potentially are some elements of moderation. I guess we don't take a hugely different view. But some of these moderation trends we have seen for, say, 15-odd years. I think some of our data suggest that anyway. And what we've seen in terms of alcohol consumption is a very dramatic change over the past 3 years, really since the middle of the pandemic to now. Do you think there's been any real change in moderation over that period that could explain that really quite dramatic change? Or are you describing a more continuous -- well, a continuation of the moderation changes that we've seen over that sort of, say, 15 years?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. So listen, the big debate has been out there, which then goes down to, well, so if it is not cyclical and it's more structural, what are those structural issues. And what are the ones we all talk about, well, or I get asked about? Well, cannabis, GLPs, Gen Z is drinking less and then, to your point, a continuation of moderation. Now let's come back to the first three. But when you think about moderation, it's interesting because are people moderating because I'm more focused on health and wellness? Or am I more focused on how much I'm consuming and how I'm going to wake up the next morning? Are they also moderating because they just don't have enough money to spend and so they're moderating? That's still moderating. Now is that a trend that's a continued one or is that a trend that will reverse because that's linked to more of the cyclical or the macroeconomic issue? And is that probably a part of what's exacerbating what looks like a longer trend and a more dramatic falloff? Because what ended up happening, at the end of the day, people were buying so much through COVID and at premiumized because they had a lot more money. They were buying better stuff and I wasn't going out and I wasn't traveling and all that kind of stuff. And then all the post-COVID issues hit from a supply chain issue, from a cost issue, et cetera. And what did everybody do? They started taking their prices up. And in some ways, I would almost step back and say, has the discipline been in place in the industry, and I would actually say led by Diageo being the leader, around taking pricing almost each year? And I don't mean just a blanket I'm going to go out and take a 1% pricing each year and that's what's going to solve my problems. But it's actually back to this RGM capability and where is there elasticities or relative inelasticities for not a brand, but for an occasion or an experience that a consumer is looking for in a particular type of outlet? And how well are you taking advantage of that as your price and mix opportunities? So you get a lot more surgical around how you think about that. But let's come back to that because that's a capability that we need to build. But going back to this then, it says there was such a large inflation element and people were already dealing with the fact that they had stock. Well, clearly things slowed down. And then when you're actually going to think about replacing that stock, well, you're thinking twice because you don't want to spend that money or you'll wait until you're literally down to the last drink before you go out and replace that. But you also start thinking about your cash outlay. So moderation just is coming through from a macroeconomic pressure perspective. But the other elements are probably different. And there's probably one that's the one that I think we need to continue to understand more, which is what is the impact of GLP-1s on consumption. Now clearly there's been impacts on some categories. To date, we don't necessarily see anything of a significant impact on TBA other than potentially, within TBA, how are people consuming, but it's one that we need to think about. And that's the one piece that's different. Because cannabis has been around for a while. And in fact, when we look at all the trends of what we're seeing and the research that we have across the states where it's been legalized and keeping aside some of these THC and hemp-derived beverages, actually, the majority of the consumption is co-consumption. So it's not like people are saying, I'm only smoking or I'm vaping or I'm chewing and I'm not drinking as well. So there's a lot of co-consumption going on. So I don't think that's a big issue. I think this whole thing about Gen Z drinking less, I think, is an over-exaggerated piece because that's probably the cohort that is feeling the most pressure on their wallet. And that's not something that suddenly -- a structural change doesn't happen overnight. It's years. So I do think moderation is a theme. But it's not suddenly that moderation was pacing, and I'm making up a number, 1%, suddenly it's is gone to 10%. Now is that 1% going to be 2%? Or is it going to be 1.5%? Or is it going to be 3%? We don't know that. But there is a real world of a continuation of moderation and perhaps maybe at a slightly higher pace. We don't know. Because we'll only know that once the economic elements kind of settle and people get back to more normality. But even when you look at the Gen Z cohort, we're talking about a group of people, some of whom have not even reached legal drinking age, some of who are in the earlier part of their legal drinking age piece and they're probably the most cash strapped. So actually, when people say it's all about health and wellness and the younger generations, all about health and wellness, I'll call a bit bulls*** on that. There probably is, don't get me wrong. But it's not every one of those coming in is like suddenly become the healthiest person overnight. And that's all that they're focused in on. And actually, when you look at it, as they get into the large -- the higher age cohorts, there's probably a different level of type of socializing that happens. And then they'll probably get back to more normal levels. But I almost step back in a way and I say, well, if there is a theme here, and even if it's slightly higher or even if it's at the same rate, is there something that we can tap into in terms of what we can offer from an angle of moderation? And we've been doing some research, and it's early days. But I guarantee you if we went around this room with over 100 people and we asked what moderation means, we have at least 15 different answers of what moderation means to that individual. Because moderation doesn't mean the same thing to me as it probably does to you. And so the research, what we've been doing says, okay, in a world of moderation, well, what are you consuming? And I joke and I say, well, there's one end of the spectrum of people who say, well, I'm not substituting with anything. Well, those are the boring lot that none of you want to go out and party with. So at the end of the day, someone's going to go out and I'm just not drinking something. Well, kind of boring. So we'll keep them aside for a moment and we'll see how we can convert them over time. But we can only convert them if we offer them a great alternative where they feel that they might be willing to drink something. But there are other ones who are drinking soft drinks, adult soft drinks, more premium soft drinks, functional beverages, hot beverages. So those are -- are there pools or opportunities there that we might be able to tap into? But there's also ones who are saying I'm looking for lower ABV products. I'm looking for RTDs and convenient formats because I'm drinking differently. There's ones who are saying, well, when I do drink, because I'm moderating, I drink premium, not more. So I actually will have my one drink, but I really go for that 1942 as opposed to two Blancos type of thing. There's ones who are zebra striping. I'll have one regular and have -- so everybody is doing something different. Those are areas we can tap into more. But also I would say, that broader other occasion consumption that we don't play in today, is there something that we can do there? And that's how I want us to think about an opportunity set that in potentially a world of moderation, could we tap into that? And if all of this is all cyclical, well, I've still got my business that I want to continue growing, but not just on one vector, which is premiumization.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsWell, it sounds like we're going to be in violent agreement around the structural versus cyclical arguments. But one of the other areas we do think about a lot and get a lot of questions on is, I think it's fair to say that Diageo is generally taking share within the U.S. market over the past few years. But that recent growth has largely come from -- it's not even just two brands. There's a couple of SKUs within the portfolio. You've got Don Julio Reposado, which has been doing brilliantly. Crown Royal Blackberry, a recent innovation. And then you might also argue Guinness has been very helpful as well. But outside of those successes, there is a lot of the portfolio that has been struggling and is feeling the impact of the difficult industry. So how can you breathe life back into all of these brands, not just the few that are being very successful?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesYes. No, you're absolutely right. Listen, firstly, I think we should be proud of the growth that we've had and the market share gains that we've had because that's where the growth has been and we've been winning there. So I don't want to take away from that. But absolutely, why do I have a portfolio or why do I have 100 children when only 2 of my children actually smart and doing well and the other 98 are dunces? Well, that's not great. And so either it comes back to, do I have the right portfolio? But if I do have the right portfolio that I'm thinking about from a consumer and an occasion-led perspective that is relevant there, why am I not utilizing that as effectively? So I think it does come back to stepping back and looking at, again, consumer occasion, experience led, what is relevant. And are we focused around execution then of that set of brands and/or category or sub-offerings within that for that particular channel and occasion? And I think that's where we need to get better. And I think part of it has also come because of this element back to margin percentage and premiumization was the one vector. And that's great. But I've also got a great set of other brands in the premium plus and the mainstream core that actually have a role to play for what is actually a great consumer base that I might not be addressing. And I think we just need to look at it differently. So I think there's an opportunity as we look forward to be -- but that doesn't mean I do everything everywhere. So I've got to be more choiceful. And I think the U.S. team has clearly been focused around tequila but also building out a lot of expertise in whiskey because those are our two biggest brands and those are probably the two biggest growing opportunities. But that's not to say we won't do stuff on some of the others. Ketel One is actually a great example of a brand where we've actually maintained, if not slightly gained share. And it's incredible because vodka is an interesting category and you've seen one of our competitors do extremely well over there. But we've done a great job in terms of bartender advocacy around Ketel One. And I think another thing that we're doing with Ketel One that's great is with some of these ready-to-serve cocktails and the Ketel One Espresso Martini that's being sold out, those are elements that build the brand as well. Bulleit is another example of that. And so we've got to continue looking at where these pockets of growth are too and how do we accelerate some of that too. So that's what we're focused in on, and that's what we'll be doing going forward.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsAnd then I appreciate we've only got a couple of minutes left. But are you seeing -- one of the themes at this conference has been what's happening in the U.S. consumer. Are you seeing any signs of an improvement in the U.S. consumer as we sit here today?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesI can't say we are. It's something that I would say we continue to track even from an angle of how is sentiment looking as opposed to necessarily buying because one links to the other. I think there's still a large period of continued flux and uncertainty. I don't think the tariff situation and everything that's going on there helps. I don't think, obviously, outside of the signaling of what might be happening from a rate cut perspective, it's really happened and how long does that actually take to translate into the spend power and/or sentiment that starts improving. So for '26, for our fiscal, we haven't necessarily planned for an improving consumer environment, but nor we planned for a further deterioration in that environment either. And again, we remain very much focused on what we can manage and control for now, but also, at the same time, building out a more robust and inclusive growth algorithm that we can start leveraging sooner than later but, at the same time, do what we can manage and control.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsOkay. Well, I feel we've only scratched the surface of what we could talk about. But you've been in meetings the last few days. And are there any questions you think we, as analysts, or the investment community should be asking you. What part of Diageo do you not talk about, do you want to talk about? Where should the focus be?
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesWell, I think, obviously, if you ask me, I think it's been an overfocus on this whole structural versus cyclical. And I do believe that the category is still very robust and very attractive. And I think there are growth opportunities in this that are just not being appreciated right now because of the uncertainty around this whole debate, is there truly much more structural versus the cyclical element. So I think that's probably an area that gets overindexed on. I think the other interesting piece for me is really this whole debate out there around, in some ways and links into what could be structural if people bought into that, this whole no safe level type of piece that seems to have just garnered and gained so much momentum when clearly the science doesn't really support it. But you don't start rationalizing and reasoning with people from a scientific perspective only because outside of the scientific element, there's a social and a structural element of enjoyment and being together that's equally important. And we were talking earlier, at the end of the day, when that happens, it typically revolves around drink and food and stuff like that. So I think the category is still very robust and has been overshone and overtaken by some of this. And as an industry, I think we can do a lot more to be able to manage that dialogue in the public domain space. Not so much with the regulators because I think we work with them. It's about what is that public opinion piece.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsNik, I could ask you questions all afternoon, but I really appreciate you coming and joining us at the Barclays Conference.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesThank you.
Laurence Whyatt
AnalystsThank you very much.
Manik Jhangiani
ExecutivesAppreciate it.
This call discussed
For developers and AI pipelines
Programmatic access to Diageo plc earnings transcripts and 32,000+ others is available through the
EarningsCalls.dev REST API. Plans from $24.99/month — full transcripts, speaker segments,
full-text search, and the recently-added /api/v1/transcripts/recent polling endpoint for ETL pipelines.