Earnings call transcript: NFI Group Q3 2025 sees mixed results with battery recall impact

NFI Group reported mixed results for Q3 2025, with earnings per share (EPS) falling short of expectations while revenue slightly exceeded forecasts. The company announced an EPS of $0.10, missing the forecasted $0.1083 by 7.66%, while revenue reached $879.9 million, surpassing the expected $871.85 million by 0.92%. Following the announcement, NFI Group’s stock price declined by 1.85% in after-hours trading, reflecting investor concerns over a significant warranty provision for a battery recall. According to InvestingPro data, the company has not been profitable over the last twelve months, with a diluted EPS of -$2.47.

Key Takeaways

• EPS fell short of expectations, while revenue slightly exceeded forecasts.
• A $229.9 million warranty provision for a battery recall impacted financials.
• Stock price decreased by 1.85% in after-hours trading.
• Liquidity improved significantly, with a $240.2 million increase.
• The company is transitioning to a new battery supplier.

Company Performance

NFI Group’s Q3 2025 performance was marked by a significant year-over-year increase in adjusted EBITDA, rising by 52%. The company also reported an improvement in free cash flow by $12.8 million and a substantial boost in liquidity, which increased by $240.2 million to reach $386 million. However, a $229.9 million warranty provision for a battery recall weighed heavily on the financial results. Despite these challenges, NFI Group remains a leader in the transit and coach markets, supported by a strong backlog and strategic investments.

Financial Highlights

• Revenue: $879.9 million, up from the forecast of $871.85 million
• Earnings per share: $0.10, down from the forecast of $0.1083
• Adjusted EBITDA increased by 52% year-over-year
• Free cash flow improved by $12.8 million
• Liquidity increased to $386 million

Earnings vs. Forecast

NFI Group’s EPS of $0.10 missed the forecast by 7.66%, marking a negative surprise for investors. In contrast, revenue exceeded expectations by 0.92%, reflecting strong sales performance despite the challenges posed by the battery recall. This mixed result highlights both the company’s operational strengths and the financial impact of unforeseen warranty costs.

Market Reaction

Following the earnings announcement, NFI Group’s stock price fell by 1.85% in after-hours trading, closing at $13.56. This decline reflects investor concerns over the financial implications of the battery recall and its potential impact on future earnings. The stock remains within its 52-week range, with a high of $19.90 and a low of $9.83, indicating ongoing volatility in investor sentiment.

Outlook & Guidance

Looking ahead, NFI Group expects Q4 2025 adjusted EBITDA to range between $105 million and $125 million, with full-year 2025 revenue guidance set at $3.5 billion to $3.7 billion. The company is confident in its ability to navigate supply chain challenges and anticipates continued growth in revenue, gross profit, and adjusted EBITDA into 2026.

Executive Commentary

CEO Paul Soubry expressed confidence in the company’s growth trajectory, stating, "We are confident in the strength of our markets, our business, our product offering, and our people to deliver outperformance as we head into 2026." CFO Brian Dewsnup added, "The majority of our remaining 2025 vehicle sales are already produced or will be finalized in November," highlighting the company’s strong production capabilities.

Risks and Challenges

• Battery recall costs could impact future earnings.
• Supply chain disruptions remain a concern, despite reduced high-risk suppliers.
• Tariff impacts need continuous monitoring and negotiation.
• Market volatility may affect stock performance.
• Transitioning to a new battery supplier poses operational risks.

Q&A

During the earnings call, analysts focused on the costs and implications of the battery recall, seeking clarity on how these would affect NFI Group’s financials. Executives reassured stakeholders about the strength of market demand and the company’s robust backlog, emphasizing strategic initiatives to mitigate supply chain risks and enhance production capacity.

Full transcript - NFI Group Inc (NFI) Q3 2025:

Michelle, Conference Operator: Please be advised that today’s conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Stephen King, Vice President, Strategy and Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Stephen King, Vice President, Strategy and Investor Relations, NFI Group: Thank you, Michelle. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our conference call. Joining me today are Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Brian Dewsnup, Chief Financial Officer. On today’s call, we will give an update on our quarterly results, highlighting the continued improvement in our overall margins and unit economics as we convert our strong backlog. We’ll also provide an update on the non-recurring battery warranties that impacted the quarter and recap our outlook. This call is being recorded, and a replay will be made available shortly. We will be referring to a presentation that can be found in the Financials and Filings section of the NFI Group website. As we move through the slides via the webcast link, we will call out the slide number.

On slide two, we provide our cautionary or forward-looking statements and note that certain financial measures referenced today are not recognized earnings measures and do not have standardized meanings described by International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS. We advise listeners to view our press releases and other public filings on SEDAR for more detail. In the appendix of this presentation, we have provided a list of key terms and definitions that will be used on today’s call. A reminder that NFI statements are presented in US dollars, the company’s reporting currency, and all amounts referred to are in US dollars unless otherwise noted. Slides three and four provide a brief overview of our company. NFI is a global independent bus and motor coach mobility solutions provider.

We offer a wide range of propulsion-agnostic buses and coaches on proven platforms, and we hold leading market share positions in transit and coach markets. More detailed information is available on our website. Slide five provides a brief insight into NFI’s product and geographic mix and other major milestones. I will now pass it over to Paul to provide an overview of NFI’s results for the third quarter.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Thank you, Stephen. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us this morning. I’ll dive right into the Q3 results on slide seven, starting with demand. Despite the third quarter being seasonally slower, we secured 644 equivalent units in new orders, generating a 108.5% LTM book-to-bill ratio and a strong 71.8% option conversion rate. This highlights the continued strength in market demand supported by government funding in both Canada and the United States. Our total backlog, which includes both the firm and option orders, now totals 15,606 equivalent units, worth $13.2 billion. In Q3, we delivered a 52% year-over-year increase in adjusted EBITDA and a $12.8 million improvement in free cash flow. Liquidity increased by $240.2 million, reaching $386 million at the end of the quarter. Total leverage, inclusive of all debt, improved to 4.28 times, an improvement of one full turn since the end of 2024.

These improvements were largely driven by the continued conversion of our strong backlog into operating results, with increases in the average revenue and margin per delivered unit. While there were numerous positives, the quarter was negatively impacted by a warranty provision for an ongoing battery recall. On slide eight, we provide details of this provision. In September, we announced a recall affecting approximately 700 buses and coaches, primarily New Flyer buses. The recall relates to batteries provided by our US-based supplier Exalt that was initiated due to the potential of a cell short circuit or cell fault, primarily during charging or at full state of charge. For context, we provide an overview of the components of a battery system on this slide, starting with the cell all the way through to the battery enclosure.

As safety is our top priority, immediately after issuing the recall, we implemented operational guidelines and software updates to limit the state of charge and the speed of charging on the affected buses and motor coaches. This allows customers to continue operating their vehicles with the affected batteries still in use. We’ve now determined that ultimately we need to replace the batteries on these buses. The campaign is expected to take 18-24 months in total, beginning in the first half of the early part of 2026, and we will use a different battery supplier to replace those batteries. Our plan is for the replacement to be completed in the field, and we intend to leverage our service center network for this work. While we are still finalizing our approach, we do expect this work not to disrupt our production in 2026.

Reflecting the expected replacement, along with future potential costs to support other legacy Exalt batteries in the field, we booked a $229.9 million warranty provision in the third quarter. This reflects our best and conservative estimate of the total cost of the battery recall and related support. We are comfortable with the tentative term sheet that we entered into with Exalt and expect to finalize a definitive agreement for costs associated with the recall as we move through the fourth quarter. Exalt recently announced its decision to wind down their US battery operations. This announcement does not change our expectation that we will achieve a satisfactory agreement on the recall costs that meets our needs and those of our customers. We do also not expect that this wind down to have any impact on New Flyer’s production.

We had previously moved most of our electric bus battery supply to an alternate US-based supplier. We will use those different batteries on the buses going forward. We currently use the Exalt battery on our fuel cell electric buses, and we expect all of the batteries needed for our 2026 production will be provided by Exalt before they wind down operations. The batteries on the fuel cell buses are different than the batteries on the electric buses. Long term, we’ll be moving our fuel cell bus battery supply to an alternative provider. Recognition of the warranty provision for the battery recall impacted numerous financial metrics in the quarter. Given the non-recurring nature of this event and the ongoing negotiations on an agreement for related costs, we have normalized adjusted EBITDA and adjusted net earnings calculations.

This morning, we will call out a few other areas where the recall had a meaningful impact, and on slide nine, we outline some of these impacts. Without the battery recall, manufacturing segment gross margin would have been 10.2%, with a gross profit per equivalent unit of $66,300, a 58% improvement from the third quarter in 2024. Manufacturing net earnings would have been $26.7 million. Reported working capital of $248 million was positively impacted by the provision and would have been $464 million without it. The graph on the right bridges net loss to adjusted net earnings, with the battery recall and the associated tax impact being the largest bridging items. This is our third straight quarter of positive adjusted net earnings.

I’ll now turn the call over to Brian Dewsnup, our Chief Financial Officer, to provide a supply chain update and discuss our financial results in more detail. Over to you, Brian.

Brian Dewsnup, Chief Financial Officer, NFI Group: Thanks, Paul. Picking up on slide 10, we provide an update on our supplier risk profile. We currently have just three companies that we consider high risk/high impact, down from 50 in the peak of 2022. This improvement reflects the ongoing work of our sourcing, procurement, and supplier development teams that are actively working directly with suppliers to improve delivery performance. While there’s been recent disruption in automotive supply chains, we largely have not seen any significant impact. It’s a situation we’ll continue to monitor. We don’t have much of an overlap with automotive, but there could be cascading effects that may impact our supply base. Slide 11 highlights a recent strategic investment to strengthen our supply chain through our joint venture assumption of American Seating assets with Gillig. We expect this partnership will drive financial stability and operational performance at American Seating.

This will benefit improved performance for NFI, also the broader industry. Financial terms were not disclosed, but the transaction is not considered material. While we are now investors in American Seating, it’s critical that we maintain a diversified supply base for seats and are continuing to work with other seat suppliers. The number of New Flyer buses built, but yet built, but they’re still missing seats, remains relatively flat since our last update. We did see an increase in August and September, followed by a reduction in October to 50 equivalent units. This impacted Q3 deliveries, and we remain focused on bringing this number down prior to the end of the year. We have lower production with American Seating in the fourth quarter, which should free up capacity for them to prioritize deliveries for seats on these essentially complete buses. On slide 12, we recap quarterly deliveries.

Transit deliveries were up 14% year-over-year, driven primarily by the North American business. This increase was achieved despite some zero-emission bus customer acceptance delays and seat-related disruption. Coach deliveries were down in the quarter due to lower private sector deliveries, although we anticipate a strong recovery in the fourth quarter consistent with the seasonal nature of the business. Reflecting the strength of our backlog, we achieved a 19% year-over-year increase in the average selling price for both heavy-duty transit buses and motor coaches. We also delivered a record 217 low-floor cutaway buses in the quarter. This is up 36% year-over-year, and the average selling price was up by 21%, reflecting continued strong demand. Turning to slide 13, aftermarket gross margin was essentially flat quarter over quarter and down year-over-year. This reflects sales mix, reduced program revenue from large midlife projects in North America, and the impact of tariffs.

In the manufacturing segment, gross margin, excluding the impact of the battery recall, was 10.2%, consistent with the second quarter. This reflects timing-related impacts in the third quarter and sales mix. The year-over-year improvement in gross margins highlights our improving backlog profile flowing through quarterly results. Slide 14 walks through year-over-year changes in adjusted EBITDA within our reporting segments. Manufacturing EBITDA was up by $36.1 million, driven by higher deliveries, favorable sales mix, and improved pricing. Corporate adjusted EBITDA declined by $2.2 million, primarily due to negative impacts of foreign exchange, including a lower US dollar. Slide 15 shows LTM adjusted EBITDA performance for both manufacturing and aftermarket segments from 2022 to 2025. Our manufacturing segment continued its strong upward trajectory, achieving $174 million on an LTM basis, which is an increase of $114 million year-over-year.

Slide 16, quarterly free cash flow was positive, with a strong increase driven by the higher adjusted EBITDA and lower interest expenses. There was a significant positive impact from working capital in the quarter, but this was largely due to the battery recall increasing provision balances. Excluding those impacts, free cash flow combined with changes in working capital would have been $35 million. This represents a $68.9 million improvement from the prior third quarter of 2024, reflecting lower inventory balances and our milestone payment structures. On slide 17, we look at our total leverage, liquidity, and return on invested capital. We continue to execute our deleveraging strategy and reduce total leverage to 4.28 times on an LTM basis. Note that this calculation includes first lien, second lien, convertible debentures, and lease obligations. For banking purposes, which exclude convertible debentures and leases, total leverage was 3.37 times.

Liquidity was up approximately $241 million year-over-year and up by $59.3 million from the second quarter. This reflects our positive cash generation and debt repayment. ROIC has continued to trend positively, supported by improved adjusted EBITDA and lower total invested cost base. I’ll now turn the call back over to Paul to discuss our outlook.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Thank you, Brian. As we look into the fourth quarter and our plans for 2026, we expect that NFI will continue to grow revenue, gross profit, adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow, return on invested capital, and net earnings. I’ll walk through the drivers behind this continued momentum and comment on the key risk factors in our operating environment. Now on slide 19, you can see the makeup of our backlog: over 15,606 equivalent units, 37% of which are firm and 63% are options. Our firm orders provide significant visibility for the fourth quarter of 2025 and have also helped us fill the majority of our 2026 public market production slots. The options offer runway and visibility for our production schedules over the long term.

The black line represents the total dollar value of the backlog, which is now $13.2 billion, having grown $8.3 billion just over the last three years. In the third quarter, we saw higher new orders for internal combustion buses, which is consistent with our experience in the first half of 2025. As a result, the ZEB percentage of our total backlog remained relatively flat. Our improving total backlog and firm option profile is displayed on slide 20. The chart demonstrates the improvement in average sales price, or ASP per equivalent unit, across our total backlog, including both firm and option orders. Average selling price has increased for both heavy-duty transit buses in the dark blue and motor coaches in the light blue. Year-over-year, ASP for heavy-duty buses was up 1.5% and up a whopping 64% since Q3 of 2021.

ASP for motor coaches was up 20% and 52% over that same time period. Now, these pricing improvements are expected to continue flowing through our income statement. We saw this in the first three quarters of 2025, and we expect even more improvement going forward. We anticipate further gains in the fourth quarter, supporting our OIC for the highest quarterly adjusted EBITDA quarter in the company’s history. The North American bidding environment remains strong, as shown in our bid universe on slide 21. We ended the quarter with active bids of 7,503 equivalent units. This includes 6,217 EUs in bids submitted, which is up 50% from the second quarter of 2025 alone. This reflects recent submissions on a large multi-year bid related to upcoming major sporting events that are being hosted over the next couple of years in the United States. The black line on the chart shows new awards.

We saw some decrease from the previous quarter, primarily due to timing delays on new orders. The chart illustrates the typical correlation between bids submitted in light blue and contract awards in black, with a lag of a few quarters from submission to award. Over our five-year expected bid universe, which is compiled from customer fleet replacement plans, remains very strong at nearly 23,000 equivalent units. This sustained demand is driven by increasing fleet age, with nearly half of the North American public transit fleet now over 12 years of age and continued strong government funding. On slide 22, we show our book-to-bill and option conversion ratios. NFI’s option conversion ratio has improved significantly, reaching 71.8% on an LTM basis. This improvement reflects increased order activity, a higher number of exercised options, and the improved competitive landscape and our competitiveness.

The slight decline in our book-to-bill from the second quarter reflects slower new orders and higher deliveries in Q3. On slide 23, it reflects our guidance ranges for key metrics for 2025. Based on our year-to-date performance and our expectations for the remainder of the year, we’ve tightened up a few certain ranges. We now expect revenues to be between $3.5 billion and $3.7 billion and driving adjusted EBITDA ranging from $320 million-$340 million. In the fourth quarter, we expect higher deliveries, particularly in private markets and improved sales mix drive, and should deliver our highest quarterly adjusted EBITDA ever. This reflects continued improvement in our per-unit economics and a strong contribution from the aftermarket business.

Cash CapEx are projected to be lower than initial expectation, even as we have invested into several new facilities, including our All Canadian New Flyer Build Project in Winnipeg and the Alexander Dennis plant set up in Las Vegas, Nevada. For clarity, our guidance includes year-to-date impact of tariffs and some of the smaller potential tariff impacts on fourth quarter results. It does not reflect any material changes that tariff environment could have on demand, pricing, or costs going forward. This risk is somewhat offset by the fact that the majority of our remaining 2025 vehicle sales are already produced or will be finalized in November. On slide 24, we provide our latest views on the macro tariff environment.

We observed some stability in the tariff environment during the third quarter, and we saw relatively consistent direct tariffs on goods that we import and suppliers that have started to provide additional details on tariff surcharges that have been included in their pricing. Those are indirect tariffs, ones we pay to suppliers for parts and components used and installed on our vehicles. On November 1, a new US Section 232 tariff of 10% was applied to all buses and coaches imported into the United States from any jurisdiction. This is expected to lead to increased pricing and tariff surcharges to end users, as there’s no domestic US production of motor coaches. Prior to November 1, we had moved the majority of our finished good inventory from Canada into the United States physically.

We continue to view tariffs as a pass-through to cost to customers through contractual obligations and through general price increases and negotiation. This does require negotiation with customers, and we may not be able to cover all of our costs. We have generally had success in being able to find solutions with customers so far. Longer term, we will continue to assess our geographic production schedules to try and minimize tariff exposure. We have made significant investments in the United States operations, increasing our staffing in the US by 7% since the beginning of 2025. During the last 10 months, we have opened the Las Vegas, Nevada production facility for Alexander Dennis double-deck buses, opened a new service center for MCI in California, and we acquired the Michigan-based seat supplier. We also recently put our first bus into our All Canadian Build production line that has been commissioned in Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Tariff-related costs have been accrued in work in process inventory as we complete customer negotiations. Within the aftermarket segment, we’ve experienced some margin pressure, primarily due to the timing between tariff incurrence and the pricing updates. Our ability to address pricing models quickly has helped mitigate longer-term impacts. Now on slide 25, a few closing comments. The first three quarters of 2025 laid a very strong foundation for continued momentum. We increased deliveries, we converted backlog into results, and we’ve had solid cash generation supporting debt repayment and the deleveraging plan that we set out. Our total backlog of $13.2 billion, combined with option conversion rates and strong book-to-bill ratios, reinforces our confidence in our near-term and our longer-term outlooks.

In the U.K., we were pleased to see active engagement and very strong support from the Scottish government, and several active procurements have supported growth that we project now for 2026 deliveries by Alexander Dennis. NFI’s aftermarket business is a foundational business unit with steady and recurring revenue streams, a solid margin profile, and significant free cash flow generation. Calculating and enforcing tariffs are becoming more established in our operation, and as part of our industry, we continue to actively track trade developments and will take all actions possible to ensure an appropriate response where required. While there will be some headwinds and volatility, especially with private motor coach markets, our domestic production, our nimble aftermarket pricing, our extremely strong backlog, and contractual provisions leave us feeling well-positioned to respond as needed to the dynamic environment.

Despite headwinds related to seat supply, tariffs, and now battery replacement programs, we have not changed our overall view that NFI is on a very strong trajectory of growth that should see significant investments in operating and financial metrics. We are confident in the strength of our markets, our business, our product offering, and our people to deliver outperformance as we head into 2026. With that, we will now open the line for questions. Michelle, please provide instructions to our callers. Thank you.

Michelle, Conference Operator: Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 11 again. The first question will come from Chris Murray with ATB Capital Markets. Your line is open.

Hi guys, good morning. If we can go back to just talking about the battery reserve and maybe some extra color on that. I guess the first piece of that, can you maybe walk us through your confidence level on what the actual cash cost might look like to NFI and the proportions that might be covered by the suppliers and how to think about that evolution over the next couple of years? If you can also talk about supply chain around batteries, because I know at one point, I guess, Exalt had been a bit of an issue about even getting batteries, which has led you to look for a second supplier. Now that Exalt’s exiting the market, do we still have a supply chain issue in batteries, and how do we think about that on a go-forward basis?

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Great questions. Thanks, Chris. Let me start with the second one first. We’ve been dealing with Exalt for a decade, and Exalt had gone from a private ownership in the United States to being acquired by a very, very large multi-international business who invested dearly in them. Yes, there’s been volatility of supply dynamics over time, and as the percentage of zero-emission buses increased in our backlog, we did it out of not of concern of supply, but of surety and competitive dynamics. We actively went out and set up a second battery supplier, which took us about two years to validate and commission onto our buses, and we’ve now been delivering buses with those alternate batteries for about two and a half years now.

We go to a situation now where, yes, we have a recall we have to deal with, but Exalt is leaving the US market and leaving the battery business. We have signed a term sheet. Of course, it’s non-binding, but it recognizes both how we would do the recall, the economics associated with it, as well as how product support, technical support, field support, warranty support would work going forward. That is the process we’re in the middle of. We signed the term sheet about, I don’t know, three weeks ago, and we are actively negotiating with Exalt and its parent on the economics associated with that. We do not have a definitive agreement, and therefore we can’t provide the details associated with it.

We are confident that the batteries we’re going to put on in replace of the Exalt batteries are proven, and the supplier has assured us that they can handle not only our ongoing manufacturing requirements for the manufacturing demand, but also the surge demand over the next year and a half or two years, whatever it takes to finish the actual recall. I wish I could give you more color on actual dollar cash, the economics, the timing, and so forth. Don’t have that completed. Therefore, it’s not prudent to be able to provide any details or insight into that at this point. Brian, you want to add something? Okay. Yeah, just like Chris, let Brian give you a little bit more color on some of the economics associated.

Yeah, just as we mentioned in the call, we would expect the campaign to be executed over the next 18 to 24 months. Just from a cash flow perspective, we’ll start that campaign in the first half of 2026. We would expect there to be, in round figures, half of that done in 2026 and half in 2027. The warranty piece of what we put in there, we would expect to be dispersed over the next kind of one to four years. While it’s a big number, that’ll be done over kind of two to four years in terms of the cash effect of that.

Okay. That’s helpful. Thank you. I guess going back and thinking about the outlook, big quarter coming up, and I guess even going to the bottom of the range still of guidance still implies there’s a lot of buses that have to move out the door. Can you talk a little bit about how you’re feeling about that? Also, I think more broadly, how you’re feeling about the manufacturing platform where you’re at as we go into 2026. As we move beyond, I guess, some of the, call it the problems of COVID and the echoes of COVID and supply chain, 2026 feels like it’s setting up to be maybe the first normal year in almost a decade.

How do we think about this as a year kind of of normal operations with good backlogs, supply chain kind of for the most part fixed and working? What do you think the business can actually do at this point?

It’s a great question, Chris. Let’s start with the fourth quarter. The guidance that we’ve maintained on the low end, and we’ve just dropped the top end a little bit to reflect that we’re almost 10 months into this business for this year. The guidance range suggests the fourth quarter of 2025 would deliver an adjusted EBITDA in the neighborhood of $105 million-$125 million. While we have always expected fourth quarter to be the biggest period, it had been further supported by some deliveries that were originally planned for Q3 2025 that moved into Q4. The exit rate does provide us with increased confidence in our ability to deliver growth in 2026. We’ve not yet provided guidance for 2026, but as we’ve discussed previously, as we look into 2026, we expect improvement in overall deliveries for a couple of reasons. First, we increased the Canadian build.

We have four to potentially five units a week of additional deliveries. We freed up capacity that we would have taken for in Crookston, Minnesota, to build a shell in Canada, send down to the US for completion, now add more capacity in the US for builds. We should be finally past the seat supply disruption, two issues. We are now in control of our own destiny of American Seating after a very long and protracted and painful process. Number two, as you know, we have diversified the supply to effectively to other suppliers. Our reliance on American Seating, for example, in the third quarter is somewhere in the range of 22% or 24% of the deliveries, not 60% like it was this time last year. The UK market has gone through quite a bit of challenges this year.

Paul Davis has done an amazing job of idling its facilities where that made sense, working with the government of Scotland on furlough schemes, but more importantly, has been able to already solicit or solidify a reasonably serious increase in volume in the U.K. and in the ADL markets for 2026. The other thing that is often under the radar is that our Arboc business continues to perform extremely well. They are by far the market leader in low-floor cutaways in North America. They are also now deep into the reintroduction of a medium-class vehicle that we already have sales for booked for 2026. Add to that the underlying contribution that continues from the aftermarket business. Now, if you look at some of the graphs, you may see a bit of a tail off on margin. You may see the EBITDA slightly less than last year.

However, that part of that business is highly volatile associated with programs. Where customers will do mid-lifes or upgrades to their fleets, something we can’t really control. That core business of aftermarket continues to grow. John Proven, who started well over a year ago now to run that business when Brian moved to CFO, has done a really good job at focusing on growth opportunities in that space. All that stuff adds up to what we believe will be a record quarter for us in 2024, sorry, in fourth quarter of 2025, and a very strong performance opportunity for 2026. Sorry for the long answer, but I thought all those things were appropriate.

No, that’s great color. Thank you very much. I’ll leave it there.

Thank you, Chris.

Michelle, Conference Operator: The next question will come from Christa Friesen with CIBC. Your line’s open.

Hi. Thanks for taking my question. I just wanted to go back to your slide on the high and moderate risk suppliers and just comparing it to what you’d put out for Q2 and the numbers for July 2025. It looks like there’s been an uptick in the moderate risk from 9 to 12 and high risk from 1 to 3. I was just wondering if you can give a little bit more color on those suppliers and what’s changed there.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Yeah, good question. Obviously, there’s a subjectivity here in terms of how we rate things. We’ve seen kind of a nominal movement there in our medium risk. I don’t think you should really read anything into that beyond the fact that we’re actively managing this and we’re sensitive to any types of disruption that we’re seeing there. I wouldn’t say that things have materially changed from earlier this summer.

Okay, great. Thank you. I also just wanted to confirm on the guidance front. Did you say that at this point in time, the guidance for the remainder of the year includes all tariffs that are in effect?

Yes. That’s everything we know as of right now. Yes. The early November tariffs, we do not think they will have a significant effect in 2025. We think that will be more of a 2026 issue that we will need to deal with.

Okay, perfect. Thank you. I’ll jump back in the queue.

Thank you, Christa.

Michelle, Conference Operator: The next question will come from Daryl Young with Stifel. Your line is open.

Hey, good morning, everyone. With regards to the replacement of the batteries that needs to be done, which personnel, I guess, are going to be doing that? Is it New Flyer people that you’re going to have to pull from your current facilities, and is that going to result in a bunch of overtime and added costs and disruption to your existing supply chains, or really no impact there?

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: It’s a really good question, and we spent a lot of time. When we started the thinking of a recall, we had kind of three options. One was to pull the buses back to the factory, not really practical. You also have border dynamics and so forth. Number two was to set up a third party or engage third parties maybe on the east coast or the west coast. The third option, which is the one we selected, is to run those buses on a battery exchange type program in a service center. We have service centers in New Jersey, in Montreal, Chicago, Dallas, San Francisco, Los Angeles. What we will do is effectively, because they’re battery electric buses, we will have trucks, if you will, driving a battery electric bus into the service center. We will dedicate a bay or two.

We’ve done a heat map of all the locations of all the battery buses that will need a recall. There’s a high propensity in the population of Southern California and in Northern California. We will dedicate two or three bays or whatever’s appropriate at each of those service centers and run them through an exchange program. Each bus in terms of taking off the batteries, putting on new batteries, there’s some cabling and some small equipment that needs to be changed, and then there’s software upgrades and then testing. It’s not massive. We think we’ll be able to do a number of buses a week at each service center. None of the people from the factory will be involved, so there will be no impact on the manufacturing operations.

We may need to add a couple of extra people in each of those service centers depending on each of their individual needs. The service center will forego a little bit of third-party work that they do today to be able to assign the space and the people to do this program. As Brian alluded to, at this point, the scheduling, the preliminary scheduling says somewhere between 18-24 months to be able to complete the entire campaign. The very first replacement will be done in Winnipeg at our new product development center, where we’ll have all the engineers and new product development people, the supply people validating the builds, materials, and so forth. That will start in probably January. In earnest, we’ll start the recall most likely right after the first quarter.

We have got to make sure the supply is right, the people are skilled and trained, and then we work with the customers to allow them to get the vehicles to us. Just some color as well, Daryl, as you probably heard in the notes, we have disposed, or we have distributed software on all of those battery-electric buses. We are well into that process right now to be able to allow the operators to use the buses. Yes, there is a slight degradation in the pace of charge, and there is a slight reduction in the total battery capacity. In the interest of safety and caution, we have deployed that and are well into that process now.

Got it. Okay. When you flip to the sole battery supplier in 2026 for your new orders, and I know you mentioned you’ve been working with them since 2023, I think, is the batteries they’re going to be supplying, is that a new technology, or is that the same old proven one that they’ve been building and you’re going to add it to the buses and there’s no design spec changes or anything like that that needs to come through? Do they have the capacity to kind of hit the ground running in terms of volume?

The cells themselves are an LG cell. They are packaged by a company called American Battery Systems that’s located in Michigan. These LG cells are cylindrical cells as opposed to the ones that are currently on there, which are pouch cells. Those batteries are in use in many applications, including vehicles, trucks, buses around the world, and by some of our competitors today. There is not a new chemistry or a new application or type of search or anything associated with those batteries. We have validated with that supplier they can handle both our normal production requirements, which we have for 2026 and the slots sold, as well as the surge capacity to deliver the pace at which we need these recall batteries. As you can imagine, we’re going to be taking off almost 700 buses’ worth of batteries.

We’re also actively working on the recycling of those batteries, the appropriate tear down, the disassembly, and working with providers to do the right thing from both an environmental but also from a cost and a safety perspective. We’re pretty comfortable with those, which then leads into our engineering teams have already started looking for yet another battery type that would be an alternate to what we have. What we want to be able to have is always two sources of batteries. Should anything like this ever come up again, we will have multiple sources. Yeah. Largely—oh, sorry, Daryl. Yeah. As Paul mentioned, largely view the replacement of batteries as plug and play to make it simple of the new supplier versus the Exalt battery.

Just wanted to reiterate, as we’ve discussed on the call and numerous times, we continue to discuss costs associated with the recall with Exalt, and we have that term sheet in place, and we’re looking to get that definitive agreement in the fourth quarter. Just really wanted to reiterate that as people are thinking about costs and the costs associated with this campaign.

Right. Okay. Thanks. That’s a good call. I’ll get back in the queue. Thank you.

Thanks, Darrell.

Michelle, Conference Operator: The next question comes from A. Blanda with Bank of America. Your line is open.

Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. From my understanding, and going back to the battery recall question, that $230 million that you took essentially is what you currently expect, your portion of the battery replacement plus the warranty cost. Correct me if that’s wrong. I guess maybe I’m looking for.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: It is—let me just clarify that. It is the total cost of the recall plus with Exalt leaving the business. It is our estimate of future warranty exposure associated with any installed buses that are not associated with the recall. What is being negotiated and what is reflected in our term sheet is the portion or the recovery from Exalt as a supplier.

Okay. So that 230 is like a gross cost, let’s call it.

Correct.

If you reach some sort of agreement with Exalt, it could decrease from here.

Absolutely. We would expect it to dramatically decrease.

Now, of that 230, I guess, can you maybe—what’s the cadence? I mean, I could do a divided by eight quarters or six quarters. You can do, call it, 30 or 40 million per quarter. I guess, is it going to be more front-end loaded? I guess, how does the cash layout of that, let’s say, on a gross amount before any sort of recovery look like into 2020 and beyond?

The gross number comprises two pieces, as Paul mentioned. It is the campaign money to go out and literally take the batteries off and put the new batteries on vehicles. That is the bulk of that accrual. We would expect that to commence in the first half of 2026, and it will take 18-24 months. In round figures, that would be half of the cash flow in 2026 and the other half in 2027. The balance from a warranty standpoint would be spread, we will just say, fairly evenly over the next four years. The cash impact would have that kind of a profile. Obviously, as we talk about any sort of settlement, that would be highly dependent upon the terms and conditions of that settlement. To all our listeners, we are not trying to be purposefully cute or evasive.

We have a term sheet. It is still not binding. We’re in deep negotiations with Exalt. It is imprudent to give any indication. We’re comfortable at what the term sheet reflects in terms of the economics. The minute we get that done, we will issue a press release and clarify to the market our portion, if any, of that recall.

Have you provided a split between, of that 230, the warranty portion and the replacement portion?

We haven’t provided that, but like I said, the majority of the accrual would be the battery replacement.

Okay. And then maybe going back to—that was all super helpful, Keller. Then just going to the tariffs question, obviously, quite a few new ones out there, the 6, 2, 3, 2, the 10% on imported buses. I guess, if we’re to kind of think about 2026, what would be the unmitigated tariff impact? Or if you want to give a quarterly number or annualized number before any sort of price negotiation with customers?

Yeah. It’s a little bit too early to comment on that. I think we can give a little bit more color on that as we move forward. We’re still digesting all the implications of the November 1 changes because it brought some new stuff, and it also did away with some other stuff. We’re still kind of working through that math, and they will be more prepared to comment on the high-level nature of that as we get closer to the end of the year and certainly as we talk about the full year results. Just to comment on 2025, the vast, vast, vast majority of units that we’ll sell in 2025 are already physically in the United States.

The real tariff dynamic that Brian just alluded to is the country tariffs, the tariffs on our suppliers as they input parts in what we bring into Canada as opposed to what goes straight to a US supplier. Now, of course, the Section 232, 10% on buses and coaches. Your question is a good one in terms of the unmitigated. We also have an awful lot of mitigation opportunities, which might mean migration of more of our work or of our supply chain physically to the United States.

Okay. My last question is, I’ve read a lot of articles, maybe they’re just newspapers or local kind of warning about local transit budgets, service cuts. I guess I kind of want to know what you’re hearing. When you speak to your transit customers, what are they saying regarding their budgets, their busing needs, any sort of comments on timing or changing of timing of bus deliveries? That would be some helpful color. Thank you.

It is a good one. Of course, it is not a simple answer because we have multiple business units. Let us just kind of dissect each of them very quickly for color. Alexander Dennis, of course, sells a small amount of buses in North America. The schedule is sold out in our mind for the vast majority of 2026. There are a few slots we still have to fill, but there have not been any changes, reductions, cancellations, anything associated with that. We will see an increase in volume in the U.K. and internationally. We are pretty excited about, after a pretty rough year for Alexander Dennis, about them next year. The Arboc business, just like when we entered into 2025, has almost all of their slots sold out for next year on the cutaways and a very healthy portion as we reintroduce the medium-class buses into the United States.

New Flyer, the vast majority of the schedule is sold for 2026. If you go back to our—you look at our backlog, both as well the firm portion as well as some expected options to conversion, we’ve seen some customers change in order from a zero-emission to a hybrid or a diesel or natural gas. We’ve seen some people push out. We have not seen the option conversion drop as we showed you in the charts. We also have not seen a drop-off in any of the RFPs hitting the street or the bid universe. In our deck on slide, I think it was slide 21, we showed both the very healthy portion of active submitted and received bids, but also the continued expected buy over the next five years. We haven’t seen that drop-off. The other area of our business is MCI.

MCI is roughly 65% or 70% private customers and 35% public customers. There are only, I don’t know, seven, nine real operators in the public domain, and that’s blotchy in terms of they buy in certain years, they don’t buy in other years, they’ll buy at high volumes or recurred loans. There is some risk on the MCI side associated with filling all the 2026 slots, although it’s not a big, big portion of our overall business. The private market has recovered fairly well in terms of the private operators, and the overall market demand continues to be, let’s call it, in recovery mode. These new Section 232 tariffs of 10% apply to us just like they apply to all of our competitors, whether it’s another competitor that’s in Canada or international competitors.

An extra 10% tariff, we’ll all try and pass on to some of those private operators. It could have an impact on that demand. When you roll all that stuff up and look at our business going into 2026 from a market perspective, from the portion of our business that is sold or secured slots, we’re still, in our views, in very much an operational and execution-focused mode as opposed to worrying where we’re going to get business from. Yeah. Abe, the only thing I’ll add there, obviously, been encouraged by comments from the administration around getting America building again and investments in the Surface Transportation Act. We saw the 2025 allocation for the Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act was the same as 2024. There is another year of that funding act that goes until September 2026.

The FTA is still active and still actively funding projects that have been approved even during this kind of current shutdown. Our customers are still getting funding for their capital projects that have been previously approved. All that to say, to Paul’s point, still feeling very confident in the government funding environment in the United States.

It sounds like the majority of your buses for public use or the build slots are essentially filled for next year.

Absolutely.

That’s part of the strategy. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you very much for your color this morning. Appreciate it.

Thanks, Abe. Appreciate it.

Michelle, Conference Operator: The next question will come from Cameron Doerksen with National Bank Financial. Your line is open.

Yeah. Thanks. Good morning. I want to come back, I guess, to the bus recall and the battery issue. It sounds like you’ve got, I guess, productive talks and some sort of agreement with Exalt. I guess maybe you can sort of give us your assessment of the risk around this potentially leading to some sort of lengthy legal dispute. I guess, how do you protect yourself over the long term if the owner of Exalt, given that they’re shutting the business down, decides to put that business in bankruptcy and somehow get out of the liability that they have? I’m just wondering how you sort of assess those risks and how you can protect yourself.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Kevin, look, there’s always the risk of something turning sideways. I have been personally and actively involved, along with David Weiner, EVP of Supply, directly with Exalt and with the owners of Exalt. The owner of Exalt is a very, very large global international privately held business that has a very strong reputation for responsible customer support, responsible products, and so on and so forth. We signed a term sheet, which would be a normal process. I would suggest it was a very constructive and healthy negotiation. We independently hired technical experts to try and assess the cause, the root causes, the ability to operate them safely during the process of all that stuff. I would characterize the negotiation as constructive, as healthy, the outlook being very positive. The economics that are in our term sheet are acceptable to us.

We just got to convert that into an agreement. We believe very definitively in our technical position and assessment of the cells and the cause of the risk associated with the short circuits. We have done our work from a legal perspective and have worked with outside external counsel to defend and prepare our position if and when we ever had to get there, which I do not believe we will do. We have had unbelievably strong support from the board, A, to do the right thing for the customer, and B, to prepare all avenues associated with both our negotiation and litigation if it got to that.

Okay. That’s helpful. Just second question, I guess, on the investment in American Seating, the JV with Gillig. Anything you can sort of disclose as to how much capital you might have to put into that business? I think it was sort of indicated that maybe there’s some investment required for them. I guess, what’s the intention kind of long term? Is this a, I guess, a supply that you want to have long term in-house, or is this something that at some point in the future you don’t think you need to necessarily have?

Look, and we’ve talked to you and all the other analysts about how hard is this? Why don’t you just change suppliers, or why don’t you just put pressure on American Seating? This has been a year-long ordeal or nightmare for us and for Gillig, for that matter, and some of the other customers of American Seating. We finally came to a scenario, and given the status of their debt and the debt holders’ decision and desire to get out, where we could acquire the debt and then proceed with that. Job one is stability. We have changed the leadership team. We have put a turnaround firm in place to fix the business. We are actively recruiting for long-term employees to run the place and executives to operate the business. We have a joint board of two from Gillig and two from us.

It is all about stabilization of operations. The investment is not material in our overall business. The pain we suffered over the last year has been ridiculous relative to just one supplier. The amount of seats that are behind is still a notable number. It got better, notably better as we got through the summer of this year and then started to return, which is why we jumped at the opportunity to take control. Seating is not a strategic element of a supply chain that we want for the long term. We will deal with that in due course once this place is stable. Quite frankly, if we can have three suppliers in the US competing and vying for that business, the quality of what we all get, the pricing effectiveness, and so forth is critical.

Typically, our strategy for insourcing, and Cam, you’ve been to our plants, is where we own or control the drawings associated with critical parts on the bus, the frame, the structure, certain electrical components, fiberglass, those kind of things. We’ve insourced that. And about 10, more than that, about 15% of our cost of sales we control. This is, I would say, a targeted strategic investment to ensure surety of supply for the next couple of years, and then we’ll decide whether this is a long term. It’s awkward. We’re doing it in a joint venture with a competitor. I will tell you they are stand-up people. We work cooperatively. We’ve put all the controls in place from an antitrust perspective. I’m comfortable we’ll get this place back on track, and then we’ll deal with this future as we move through 2026.

Cameron, obviously, as Paul mentioned just there, a little different than our usual acquisitions where it’s a joint venture. You’ll see it on our Q4 results as an investment in the joint venture on the balance sheet. We’ll have a bit more detail with Q4 results in March on the accounting treatment.

Okay. No, that’s super helpful. Really appreciate the time. Thanks.

Thanks, Cameron.

Michelle, Conference Operator: The next question comes from Jonathan Goldman with Scotiabank. Your line is open.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Hi. Good morning, Cam. Thanks for taking my questions. If we think about just a battery replacement in isolation for a layman who does not know much about the industry, if you strip out the cost of the actual battery itself and all the materials, what would be the approximate cost per battery for labor, freight, and overhead to change out a battery?

Good question, Jonathan. It’s nominal. I’m going to give you an estimate that’s context, right? We’re going to ship a bus from one location on a flatbed to our facility, a grand or two. We’re going to ship it back a grand or two. We’re going to put 30-40 hours of labor into each to take the old battery packs off, put the new ones on. That part of it is not the major part of it. The vast majority is the actual battery pack replacement itself.

Okay. That’s really helpful, Colin. I appreciate that. In the quarter itself, the sequential decline rather than transit bus ASPs, is that mostly just a mix issue, or is there something else going on there? How should we think about the trajectory of ASPs for Q4 into 2026?

The ASP, first of all, your intuition on that one is exactly right. Mix. What we bid on that window, what we deliver in any quarter has a massive impact on the average selling price. What we put into our backlog is the bid price. In between bidding, going through the final bill of materials reconciliation, any changes the customer makes, any additional electronics and so forth they put on, there could be a material, not material, but a notable change from what the average selling price into the backlog is compared to what the actual average selling price is when it is delivered. The other dynamic that happens, and as you can imagine, almost all of the stuff that goes into the backlog are multi-year contracts. We put it into the backlog at current year selling price.

As those options convert, we have purchase price indices that get applied to those in the out years. It will depend on any changes that make to the bill of materials, but also what the PPI is in those out years. That is what drives up the ASP between point of installation into the backlog compared to what happens when we actually deliver the unit.

Okay. That’s good, Colin. Thinking about the repricing and time of manufacture, would that include outside of the PPI any increases on account of tariffs or, I guess, force majeure type of events?

No. Think of tariffs if you and I were building a house almost like an engineering change order. We are going back to the customers. Now, again, every customer is different. Every contract is different. For the most part, here is your bus for $500,000. Here is an added charge for the tariff. Of course, the math associated with the tariff. For a while, we were able to use an average tariff application per unit. Now, given some of the changes in the regs and the calcs, most customers want a specific tariff calc based on what is actually in their bus. That is an add bill or an engineering change order type dynamic as opposed to an embedded part of the PPI or any other part of the pricing.

Okay. That makes a lot of sense. I guess last one for me, and I guess Cam asked this earlier about the capital investment required in American Seating. From an OpEx perspective, what level of OpEx would be required on your part to support American Seating into next year?

None. I mean, at the end of the day, this is an investment we’ve made. We have bought the debt. We are helping with investing in the business to operate the cash flow. They are still in two facilities. There will be a couple of million dollars spent to rationalize those facilities into one. It is not a notable amount. Of course, the operating costs will be managed by the business itself.

Okay. Perfect. Thanks for the call. I’ll get back to you.

Michelle, Conference Operator: I would now like to turn the call back over to Stephen.

Paul Soubry, President and Chief Executive Officer, NFI Group: Thanks, Michelle. We have one question from our webcast. I’ll just read it aloud. It references similar to what we had this morning in other cases. Is the warranty provision a worst-case scenario? Does finalizing the agreement with Exalt lead to a scenario where the provisions will be reduced in material?

Yeah. I’ll take that question. What we booked is the liability side, which is our best guess today at what all the costs will be to retrofit all the batteries and support the warranty obligations on those batteries. That’s what’s sitting in our financial statements right now.

The second part, Brian, the finalizing the agreement with Exalt lead to a situation where the provisions will be reduced? Yes. We are both motivated, us and Exalt, to complete this agreement before the end of the year. We have meetings every day and every week in this negotiation. As part of us assuming some warranty obligations going forward, there is diligence on certain people and equipment and IP and software and so forth that is actively going on. The ultimate agreement and the economics associated with it, if it goes the way the term sheet would, would be a significant reduction in the provision. We will press release that as soon as we know. All right. That was it. That was all of our questions. Thanks, everyone, for attending today and for listening in.

As always, please do not hesitate to reach out to us with any further questions. All of the information you need is on our website, including today’s presentation. Thanks so much, and have a great weekend.

Michelle, Conference Operator: This does conclude today’s conference call. Thank you for participating, and you may now disconnect.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.