The following is excerpted from the question-and-answer section of the transcript.
(Questions from industry analysts are provided in full, but answers are omitted - download the transcript to see the full question-and-answer session)
Question: Chris Perrella - UBS Group AG - Analyst
: It's Chris Perrella on for Josh. I wanted to follow up on the strength in specialty. Is there a restocking that took place in the business in the first
quarter? Or should we think about that as a strong growth and a good run rate for the business for the rest of '24?
Question: Chris Perrella - UBS Group AG - Analyst
: All right. No, I appreciate the color on that. And then switching over to Fire Safety. The fire season to date, you had the higher burn acreage in
Texas. Given some of the noise in the first quarter, how would you think about the trends in the fire season and how it relates to PRM?
Question: Chris Perrella - UBS Group AG - Analyst
: No. No, I appreciate that. And then just one more on working capital. Where are you targeting the -- that for the year? And is that going to be
positive for '24?
Question: Dan Kutz - Morgan Stanley - Analyst
: I just wanted to ask about the UAFA's calling for the U.S. fire service to kind of revisit and revise its ¡ it's [QPL] qualification process. I guess the first
part of the question is -- is just simply -- are any of the -- are any PRM products at risk from this requalification process? I'd assume no because it
sounds like in all of the articles that the stress is on new product qualification. But firstly, I just wanted to confirm that.
And then I guess, secondly, a lot of folks are trying to wrap their head around what the timeline would be for -- for the U.S. fire service to potentially
revisit and revamp this process. It sounds like it's a pretty old process. So maybe the answer to this question is no, not really, but I'm just wondering
if there's any -- if there's any relatively recent experience you have with revisions or updates to the QPL process and any read-throughs to the
potential revision of the process today.
Question: Dan Kutz - Morgan Stanley - Analyst
: Great. That's really helpful color. And sorry, to -- to batter this again. But I just wanted to come back to the working capital and inventory question
and just confirm, so if I look at past first quarters, you guys would invest a little bit in inventory, this quarter was basically flat. Is the interpretation
of that, that there's maybe less runway than you've contemplated a quarter ago for the incremental tailwind versus your normal long-term working
capital framework? Or are you guys still pretty confident that -- are we kind of in a similar place today as we were a quarter ago in terms of the
magnitude of what you think that tailwind can be?
Question: Dan Kutz - Morgan Stanley - Analyst
: Got it. Super helpful and very clear. Maybe if I could just sneak one last one in and Haitham, this might be for you. But I know sometimes some
investors aren't huge fans of special dividends or special dividends versus buybacks. I was just wondering if you could talk us through what scenario
or what the situation would be where special dividends might rank the highest in your capital allocation framework. Just broadly, what kind of
would be the circumstances where that might be the preferred capital deployment method?
Question: Chris Perrella - UBS Group AG - Analyst
: It's Chris Perrella again. Just a quick one. Can you comment on fire -- your outlook for fire return pricing for the year?
Question: Chris Perrella - UBS Group AG - Analyst
: I appreciate the color on that. And then just one quick one. For mil-spec, does that have an impact in 2024? Or is that a slow build for that product?
| 
