Good morning and thank you for waiting. We would like to welcome everyone to AmBev's Fourth Quarter and Full-year 2016 Results Conference Call. Today with us, we have Mr. Bernardo Paiva, CEO for AmBev; and Mr. Ricardo Rittes CFO and Investor Relation Officer. We would like to inform you that this event is being recorded and all participants will be in listen-only mode during the company's presentation. After AmBev's remarks are completed, there will be a question-and-answer session. At that time, further instructions will be given. [Operator Instructions] Before proceeding, let me mention that forward-looking statements are being made under the Safe Harbor of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1996. Forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs and assumptions of AmBev's management and on information currently available to the company. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions because they relate to future events and, therefore, depend on circumstances that may or may not occur in the future. Investors should understand that general economic conditions, industry conditions and other operating factors could also affect the future results of AmBev and could cause results to differ materially from those expressed in such forward-looking statements. I would also like to remind everyone that, as usual, the percentage changes that will be discussed during today's call are both organic and normalized in nature, and unless otherwise stated, percentage changes refer to comparisons with Q4 2015 or full-year 2015 results. Normalized figures refer to the performance measures before exceptional items, which are either income or expenses that do not occur regularly as part of AmBev's normal activities. As normalized figures are non-GAAP measures, the company discloses the consolidated profit, EPS, EBIT and EBITDA on a fully reported basis in the earnings release. Now I'll turn the conference over to Mr. Ricardo Rittes, CFO and Investor Relations Officer. Mr. Rittes, you may begin your conference.

Hello everyone, thank you for joining our 2016 fourth quarter and full-year earnings call. I will now guide you through operational highlights of Brazil, CAC, LAS, and Canada, including our below-the-line items and cash flow. And after that, Bernardo will give you more details about our performance in Brazil and how we are positioning ourselves for the year to come. Starting with the main highlights of our consolidated results. 2016 proved to be one of the most challenging years of our history. As solid growth in our international operation was offset by a negative performance in Brazil on a consolidated basis. Top-line was up 0.4% in the quarter and the full-year. Top-line was up 1.9% with volume decline of 5.8% more than offset by a net revenue for the growth of 8.3%. EBITDA was down 12.1% in the quarter and 6.9% in the full-year reaching 19.5 with an EBITDA margin of 42.7%. Net profit was up 13.5% in the quarter while on a normalized basis net profit was down 15.9%. In the full-year net profit was 1.6% while adjusted by exceptional items net profit was down 9.7%. The difference between reported and normalized profit is driven by the swap of assets carried out with ADI person to each of a greater transfer our businesses in Columbia, in exchange for the Panama business originally owned by transaction when accounted for using the proceeding value for the Panama asset and the cost value for that ADI resulted in our 1.2 BNRI non-cash gain. In Brazil, our EBITDA was down 19.7% in the full-year. We are nothing but disappointed with our performance but it is important to understand the main drivers that have impacted our full-year results. The first one is connected to the adverse micro economic scenario in Brazil. Economic activity reduced…

Thank you, Ricardo. Hello, everyone. We've been through a tough year especially in Brazil where as stated by Ricardo, three main drivers have impacted our results. One, the external conditions are very challenged with a volatile political and economic macro environment and negative disposal income leading to the industry decline. Two, on top of the preceding industry, some states have significant increase this year too, despite of the in the strong mobilizations to qualify the higher taxation bring to recession instead of additional revenues for the state. Three, our cost was impacted by the fact especially in the second half of the year comprising our margin. We acknowledge that Brazil's long-term growth involves a vital skews of volatility and as the Brazilians are facing a very tough environment. With the measure of the foremost, these absolute and we are not pleased refer to any '16 results at all. With that in mind, I want to concentrate my comments in Brazil before we move to the Q&A. The theory is that support our long-term growth in Brazil as today, favorable demographics with reduction of regional disparities includes few more continued demand for innovative products and stronger end. Based on that, we made stricter investments in our business, hosting a five commercial product forms in a transformation away. That is we celebrate the core, our first and most -- platform. In the last two years, and the core was even high in our journal. And think that's in more time and resource to have the right in size to bring innovation and innovation to our mainstream brand. A good news is that some of the outputs of such initiative are started to hit the market as we speak. For instance, we are launching new VDI's for Isco and Brahma. Differentiating and the…

[Operator Instruction] The first question comes from [indiscernible] Bank of America. Please go ahead. Your line is open on our end. It is muted on yours.

Sure. Good morning everyone. Thank you for the call. I have two questions. First, you guys mentioned the expiration of some tax benefits impacted at the other operating income if you could tell us if you already able to renew those benefits or it's not if there is any expectation of doing that and second when we look at the guidance for 2017 you guys provided much less detail compared to what we saw in the previous years. If you could explain a rational of doing that because there is lower visibility at this point or for competitive reasons. Thank you.

Hi, this is Ricardo. Thank you for question. Well let me start with your second question. So, just as I start for that answer our guidance has varied along the years. So if you go back 2010 we had only COG, EBITDA. 2011 was COGs, volume and CapEx 2012 was COGs volume of Brazil, net revenue, CapEx so and so forth. So it varies across the years. We have not being like with the same guidance for a long period of time. For 2017, we decided we provide more qualitative guidance in the outlook session to limit the top-line numbers as only Brazilian beer market gave guidance over the course of 2016. Therefore driving to a symmetric competitive dynamic and this is the reason behind our the way we gave the guidance for 2017 and when we go to your first question discussing specific in the income it was down mainly driven by the reduction of the government grants like you said and this reduction essentially came for the two reasons, number one was the volume decline and the revenue geographic mix which explains 75% of the decline and expiration of government grants agreement that represents around 25%. We decided to give this break down in order for people to be able to separate and differentiate between what is consequence of the mix and the temporary impact and what has expired. With index expiration that's when you asked your question is can you renew it etcetera I just -- concession of government grants is primarily linked to CapEx and from time to time we may decide not to make this investment resulting a loss of efficiencies and tax incentives. So when you look at 2016 CapEx which was down 35% in Brazil year-over-year from BRL3.1 to BRL2.0 I think that's a driver that you need to take into consideration when projecting going forward. As you see Brazil accelerating CapEx increasing you could see difference in the…

Thank you.

The next question comes from Pedro Leduc with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Good morning everybody. Thank you for taking the question and with regarding to pricing in Brazil do you - we saw sequential improvement I know about 17% or BRL284 per hectoliter this quarter. Now just trying to reconcile imagine how we can carry this figure into 2017 because there wouldn't be the mid to high single digit increase if you keep the 284 into the full average of 2017. so just help us understand, you already have the full pricing effects of 4Q then how much usually in 1Q is not sequentially not price per hectoliter drop if it this year it's going to be as substantial as it was in the last year, last 1Q and just trying to reconcile here how should we imagine pricing if we can carry this nice number into 2017. Thank you.

Hi Pedro. Thank you very much for your question. So like you said on a sequential basis, net revenue per hectoliter was up 17.3% and just to remind everyone that excise tax expiration impact consumers but even a fully compensated buy would not impact net revenue per hectoliter and therefore as a result net revenue per hectoliter is a good proxy of price increase net of tax increases if you will. As a consequence the longer it appear the better or more precise is the visibility of the net revenue per hectoliter as a result you should expect some volatility in that line. For instance, if we go five for example sorry, five years our net revenue per hectoliter has increased in line with inflation despite of short term volatility. Having said that we continue to be confident of our strategy to increase our price in line with inflation and for that I think just to develop a little bit on that I think first it's very important most important for us to give strong brand and this is the key to ensure the profitability of our business and that's why our first commercial platform is [indiscernible]. Second along the time we have improved a lot of revenue management strategy initiative mainly through technology and price strategy allowing us to capture also significant net revenue per hectoliter opportunity. And third when you look going forward I think it's very important to take into consideration premium end year, as they continue to grow driving a positive mix impact on the other hand the growth of returnable glass bottle presents the challenge for the future when you look only as net revenue per hectoliter in the perspective although they are margin accretive and they are good for business.

Okay. Ricardo thank you and then just again back of to 2017 should we expect this figure growing in line with inflation again or you still expect another shift mix and returnables just to get some color. Thank you.

The type of guidance that we are giving like we said in the guidance the discussion previously is a bit of a more qualitative guidance we are not guidance _ quarter-by-quarter basis but the drivers behind the volatility in that line _ so we continue to be confident about our strategy to increase our price _ inflation _ and the shorter the period of time that you look you see like I have seen in the past some volatility in the line _ out of this extraordinary and it continue to be very confident about this strategy.

Thank you. That helps.

The next question comes from Luca Cipiccia with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning thanks for taking my question. I wanted to ask two, one as more of a clarification on the returnable penetration. I think in the third quarter you said it was 25% and I think in the release I think it's 23. I was wondering if it is just function of seasonality or am I interpreting this incorrectly and more generally can you update us on not necessarily your push into this format but how consumer reception adaption is evolving and how much you think it will stick assuming that eventually as you _ well the consumer will recall it and that's my first question and then the second very quickly just going back on the guidance we sort of got used to the idea that you preferred to talk about the things that you can control and you expressed that lot in the past I am not sure I follow the rational to not give indication about both SG&A and CapEx which I think in the past were fairly discretionary items for you to decide on how to spend on how to invest in any given year and on the CapEx and _ about are there before is it fair then to assume that as a percentage of revenue _ other income should - we should probably _ to what we saw in the first quarter given some benefits are expiring and some others are more _ long growth and CapEx but I would assume CapEx is not going to go up this year. So maybe if you can clarify a little bit on this point it will be great.

Hi Luca. I think the _ and important to highlight RBG became from 4% in the _ 2014 to 23 _ supermarket in 2016. So no doubt there is a great success. I mean it's good for everyone to always talk I mean people to drink, good for environment, good for margins as well. On top of that _ have shown that diminish have increased _ royalty among their buyers with positive impact on brand attributes such as flavor, eco-friendly, and cost benefit proposal. It has also improved the perception of heritage of the brand due to the _ having said that going forward as we improve the execution we see _ become even more important that may change the consumer habit. And quarter-by-quarter this could vary but the main number is as you came from in 2014 4% to 22% in 2016 and trending up. So I think that's right path with this strategy.

And Luca this is Ricardo. And also to add to what Bernardo just said the 25% was a number _ third quarter and 23% is the average number for the full-year as it has been growing from average of 14% in 2015 you could expect that the average for the year tends to be in growing pattern a little bit lower than the end of the year. I think that's - I think that might help you in your calculation. And _ specific to the guidance I mean when you look at historically _ and you are right _ prefer to give guidance number one on _ control and number two on things that we not allow _ competitive dynamic. I think those are two important criteria but if you go back to the _ I am hear with the guidance for the last seven years of the company we gave guidance on SG&A only _ seven years and prior to 20 - and I don't think we gave guidance at all. I think going back to our discussion that we had in the first question 2017 we decided that why _ provide a little bit of more qualitative guidance in the outlook session which might help you come to the conclusion some of those that you ask in the question we decided to limit the top-line and some of the like you said even CapEx and SG&A quantitative numbers provided. Again I think that's --.

And maybe just to quantify on the SG&A, on the stated ambition to rebuild market share, what role do you think investments in the brands comparatively to last year will take. I think that's going to impact I think the line in particular is that you said you want to go back, you want to rebuild market share. I think there has been a positive trend, how much of that you think would come from investments in SG&A how much of that you think will be more sort of a price driven or mix driven strategy?

So, I mean just to provide you some assurances, there is not going to be anything different than what we have done in the past couple of years. So, we shouldn't expect any surprise. And I think when you look at market share for example, the only publicly available source to measure our market share in the full-year of 2016 is using as we thought we're distinguishing in December 13. Therefore, we according to news, our market share was down below the range that we normally work to 66.2% in the average of the year. But as Bernardo pointed out in the growing trends, and it's important in terms of answer your question specifically about SG&A, that one of the cornerstones of our strategy the cost connect wind platform like we kept internally and even externally. And in this platform, I think control of cost and controlling expense is not a problem, is not something that is temporary here. It's a way of doing business and we try to be more efficient every year and every day on average everything that we do internal SG&A is not different.

And let me add to that Luca, these are our marketing and sales team, have been two kits to deal brands in a way that doesn't mean necessary more investment but way more efficient and the way more precise. That's what we have been doing in the last few years and then we applying this year as we speak.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Antonio Gonzalez with Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning Bernardo and Ricardo. Thank you, for taking my question. The first one is a follow-up on Luca's last question. I was also curious about the wording that you used in the outlook for 2017 with respect to market share in particular. I think you didn't use the market share metric in the last few years in terms of your guidance and I wanted to ask in light of the changes in the consolidation that is taking place in the industry. Do you think it makes sense to have a higher range for example and if so would you be willing to pursue market share even if it comes with lower EBITDA margin, I mean more EBITDA in nominal terms with lower EBITDA margin or that is not the case? And then I have a very quick follow-up question afterwards.

Antonio, thank you for your question. So, I mean let me just clarify that. I think what we have done in the past 6% 7% 6% 9% is the optimal point in which us managing the complement to maximize value for the shareholders. I think that is the objective. Market share of course is a sustainable and long term way of getting there. And I think what we meant here in our Luca's section is the saying that we have always talked about. We work on that on a range but from time-to-time we are up or down within that range. If you go back to five, six years ago, you see that we were like way ahead of the range that we set ourselves and then we used that over time. I think we have we wanted to put it there like our discomfort and being below the range and that using the same platform to cross-connecting and the commercial platforms we will work very hard to go back to the range as soon as possible.

And added to that, you see it's important to highlight that we started in 2017 as I explained in my speech with the market share increasing, I mean a post this trend, so just to add some flavor, we transform.

Alright. And secondly if I may, the total distribution of decent plus IOC obviously this year was little bit lower compared to the previous 12 months and I obviously understand that we casted with a cash and duration that was lower this year, etcetera. And but I wanted to ask you get growth again and obviously working capital dynamics become more favorable as the company grows and I don't know CapEx will come back to let's say 2015 levels very rapidly or not but do you see room to increase this figure from the last 12 months and maybe even have a little bit more of an aggressive balance sheet structure or difficult to give some color on these specific number for the next 12 months or so?

Thank you for the question. I think just a couple of points there, during 2016, we turn approximately turn below as equity holders. Like you said that was a little bit lower than that of 2015. And our policy for some time has been to return excess cash to shareholders and have done that and if you go little bit back like ------- 69 still the range? Or over the medium-term, I understand that 2017 has obviously be a little good. Over the medium-term, do you think it makes sense to have a higher range for example and if so would you be willing to pursue market share even if it comes with lower EBITDA margin, I mean more EBITDA in nominal terms with lower EBITDA margin or that is not the case? And then I have a very quick follow-up question afterwards.

Antonio, thank you for your question. So, I mean let me just clarify that. I think what we have done in the past 6% 7% 6% 9% is the optimal point in which us managing the complement to maximize value for the shareholders. I think that is the objective. Market share of course is a sustainable and long term way of getting there. And I think what we meant here in our Luca's section is the saying that we have always talked about. We work on that on a range but from time-to-time we are up or down within that range. If you go back to five, six years ago, you see that we were like way ahead of the range that we set ourselves and then we used that over time. I think we have we wanted to put it there like our discomfort and being below the range and that using the same platform to cross-connecting and the commercial platforms we will work very hard to go back to the range as soon as possible.

And added to that, you see it's important to highlight that we started in 2017 as I explained in my speech with the market share increasing, I mean a post this trend, so just to add some flavor, we transform.

Alright. And secondly if I may, the total distribution of decent plus IOC obviously this year was little bit lower compared to the previous 12 months and I obviously understand that we casted with a cash and duration that was lower this year, etcetera. And but I wanted to ask you get growth again and obviously working capital dynamics become more favorable as the company grows and I don't know CapEx will come back to let's say 2015 levels very rapidly or not but do you see room to increase this figure from the last 12 months and maybe even have a little bit more of an aggressive balance sheet structure or difficult to give some color on these specific number for the next 12 months or so?

Thank you for the question. I think just a couple of points there, during 2016, we turn approximately turn below as equity holders. Like you said that was a little bit lower than that of 2015. And our policy for some time has been to return excess cash to shareholders and have done that and if you go little bit back like three, four, five years you see that our -- has more than doubled in that period. While you if you look at how the year progress or evolve over the course of 2016 has increased and why is that because when you look in terms of cash flow there is specifically a normal cash flow in the tax line in the first quarter and that's like we said in the first quarter results 2016 that was diluted overtime and so there is only shorter period of time that you look at that line the harder it is to reconcile but that impacted the full-year cash flow generation for the year when you analyze. Without giving any guidance in terms of pay out I think what you should expect what we have done in the past is that we doubt that impact you will get to that we use our strong cash flow generation which number one is reinvesting the organic growth of our business which we already discussed some of the use of cash for that purpose to invest in the organic growth of our business which we have already also some of the opportunities and then returned excess cash to our shareholders which we have been doing consistently over time so again that's as far as we can go to answer your question.

The next question comes from Lauren Torres with UBS. Please go ahead.

Yes. Hi everyone. I think you started the call mentioning that this was your most more challenging years in Brazil, but obviously you had volatile conditions before. I guess I am asking you to look at the past to predict the future and as we think about trends and the consumer hopefully stabilizing and coming back for maybe particularly in the second half of this year. I was just curious to get your perspective is there a lack of effect on returns are better here and softer in growth meaning the consumer may feel better but the categories that you participate in and take longer to kind of comeback just curious to get your perspective on that. Just is this more really 2018 event or just a easier comp feel better about year two, just general perspective would be great. Thank you.

Thanks Lauren. Thanks for the question. First let's understand quickly the 2016 again I mean three main drivers, The EBITDA the client, that we have I mean the first one is connect to the market here in Brazil so we know the economic activity I mean it was going down for the second is that through the year. If an unemployment rate in the higher rate recorded in years leading to the continuous decline for the income and decline in the industry. So second is that and the first quarter 2016 we have subject to the rate increase in some states putting additional pressure in our top-line and third one is really the temporary impact of the FX in our cash COGs as Ricardo explained. So we have good earnings in 2016 but again we will do the main - last year we would do the same really looking for the long term investing to make sure that our business will be healthy for the long term. So I mean moving to 2017 I think four points are important to highlight. So one, which finds that the main market has [indiscernible] first inflation continues to decelerate. GDP is expected to be flattish after two consecutive years of decline and employment will be increasing trend in the second. And fourth the income is likely to resume roads towards the end of the year. So it's good - better news for 2017 in the market form. Number two I mean the second semester of 2017 the FX impact in all COGs year-over-year, even becoming deflationary driver. And third is high in 2017 and not to be so significant as in 2016 as the most representative as the rate increase to from 19 to 20 to be effective much, much lower than previous…

That's very clear. I guess I was just trying to get a sense of there is a lack to meaning the consumer, but the beverage category takes a little bit more time but I think I understand your direction. If I can just ask one other thing then increase that we saw coming into last year and affecting you last year is there more threat toward success we should be thinking about this year?

Hello this is Ricardo. So just reminding every state has its own model, own tax rate and any state law that increases rate must be published in December 31 of the previous year and since we already have the visibility of the laws approved by the states we know that rate increases forced on 2017, and always more fraction of what we have seen in 2016 and we also know that the meaningful impact is the one that came from 19% to 20% rate to be effective as of March 31 like Bernardo already mentioned. That said I think what we can say also in terms of -- is that the cold beverage industry holds a permanent and constructing dialogue with each state government within showing that what we believe that a lower tax burden on the industry enables a greater potential for volume growth for the investment and as a result allow collection to continue to grow with no pressure inflation job creation investment. That's the model that we believe and I think what we see in terms of evolution of the behavior of some of these state is that migration towards that model that we believe.

Okay. Thank you.

The next question comes from Robert Ottenstein with Evercore. Please go ahead.

Great. Thank you very much. Couple of questions. First earlier on the year one of your competitors started to peruse some fairly aggressive discounting. Can you give us any kind of update on whether that's continuing, or getting worse and I understand the conditions the competitive position conditions is always tough in Brazil but are you seeing things stabilize on that front?

Hi Robert, thank you for question. So it's very important to start with question like that but just what's obvious but very important to say that the Brazilian industry has always been very competitive and today is no different. There is no difference either way. What happened in 2016 we believe is not related to what more competitors doing but what is going on with Brazil. And with significant declining consumer possible income. We see this in our own business providing affordability in a profitable way with gaining a lot of in 2016 in spite of gaps that we still have and know a lot about represent 23% of the volumes in supermarket. On the other hand some value brands from competitors also benefited from the scenario sometimes line up possible way which explains some of the market share volatility that we have had. I think what's important to highlight is sequential net revenue per hectoliter increase which someone is in line what we have seen in the previous year which shows I will say that there is normal, if you will in the Brazilian market at the moment. I think that's as far as we can go Robert.

Understood and then possibly related I don't know if you can comment on it but I guess the [indiscernible] has been down now for a while. I understand it's going to be replaced are you seeing or sensing that competitors are they paying their taxes from what you can tell. Is that having any effect on the competitive dynamics?

So Robert I think first and foremost I think one of the most important thing is that government recognizes that it's very important for the industry to have an external monitoring system and so I think that has been said time and time again by the government. This new monitoring system needs time to be in place and I think the government is working to get that in place. In the short term you see no changes that for anyone to behave differently would be we have to be like a structural change and I think just of the government and the fact that the government is working to get the external monitor in place. I think it is enough to prevent people from structuring the change in their behavior. I think that is as far as we also can go but again we are - we also believe that's very important external monitoring system for the Brazilian industry.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

The next question comes from [indiscernible]. Please go ahead.

Hi, good afternoon everyone. I mean I appreciate the whole conversation about not giving - not tipping off competitors etc, with a symmetric information etc. which is why I am little more confused now about why you stopped giving market share information on quarterly basis last year because obviously your competitors have that and you are not giving anything away because I mean I think when you told that 66.3 for the year based on the estimates I had for market share for earlier in the year it basically brings you to closer to 65 or something like that. And I appreciate your comment about it increasing already in 2017 but wouldn't it be a lot more helpful in the absence of more specific top-line guidance to substitute that with going back to releasing the market share information on a quarterly basis I think would help the market to that have the tools to do what you are not doing with guidance this year. So is it possible for you to tell us now what the first three quarters of the year were in terms of market share for beer Brazil?

Hi, this is Ricardo. I think first a couple of sources in terms of market share like we have said in the call I think their internal sources, their nuance and there are other source of market share. I think each of those sources they are very important for specific reasons but they are in nature very competitive as well so I think so has a variation of inventories and so the shorter the time that you look the harder it is for you to draw any conclusions. Trends are very important. However trends are very, very important. and we hear you when you say specifically given the fact that is no longer there for you guys to make your projections that it's gets harder for you to read and etc. but the only publicly available source to measure market share in the full-year that is the fact and we as a company we decided of the course of 2016 disclose all year in all the market share. We can go back and outside the call follow-up with you in order for you to give you the more color on how you could build your models with public availability information but in fact that at this point the company has decided not to provide quarterly info on market share.

The trends that the source show to us are the same. So that's what we can say to you and then again with start of the year I mean the market share increasing in a positive side. So.

So is it fair to say that in the fourth quarter of 2016 it did below the nine month number?

Yes we will provide the quarterly market share data.

Alright. Okay. We will take offline, thanks.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Alex Robart with Citi Group. Please go ahead.

Yes hi, I want to go back to the market share number in Brazil beer and a couple of questions around that. The first one is when we think about the you reaching the 66 point with the 120 basis point loss in 12 months, is it I mean you suggest that this was mostly within the value segment I mean trading down kind of spurge demand in the value segment the response of RGBs 300 M.L. very effective in such during the year you have given us some numbers of how that's built up in the supermarket but is it fair to think about the 120 beeps of loss in beer market share as happening mostly in the value segment or any color that you could give us as to where that loss occurred during the year and the second part of the market share question so when we think about your strategy to rebuild you are pretty open about, that's the key priority this year and it also sounds like it's not going to be as expensive necessarily a big hockey stick molding SG&A you want to be more effective in that and might it be just perhaps possible to think about not going back to the 67 and 69 and thinking about maybe a lower market share range to get margins back quicker and this any color you can give us beyond what you have kind of hinted out or referred to as what do you think can be the pace of rebuilding that beer market share during the year. So a couple of questions around the market share. Thanks very much.

Thank you for question Alex. So I think you are absolutely right when you have economic situation like the one we have been living in Brazil for the last couple of years what you tend to see not only in our industry but overall in different consumer industries and even like automotive industry whatever is that you have premium and value suffering last proportionally to the main stream in this. As we are disproportional and again the main stream market for a proportionally more important when you compare to some of our competitors of course there is main stream first proportionately more into the environment like you pointed out yourself. And again that's the dynamic we have. But like you also said when we - when you move forward I think this is the segment benefited the most from the way so the single side represents a high up side for a recovery. And like you - like Bernardo said in his speech and like we put in our outlook session to develop that in a moment we are I think the word of cautiously optimistic about 2017 for exactly the same reason that made some of the previous year or like quarters like so difficult for the organization and I don't Bernardo if you again I think. Yes. So again we do not have any follow-up questions but we see there is a lot of questions in the line but Alex even the last one today we will follow up with everyone that is in the line privately because we have already overcome our time by 12:30 minutes already so. If you have a follow-up question Alex we can take from you and then Bernardo is going to do a …

Yes. No. I mean so when we think about the rebuild right it's just kind of I mean do you think it's possible that it - that this recovery of market share occurs really in function of the economic improving or do you think that there can be something more company specific that can perhaps anticipate that and does it frankly make sense to keep the 67 to 69 range for this year. So that's kind of the follow-up on that.

So I mean your aggression to do a closing so I think that's why we think that 2017 Brazil specific be a better year. So again first one just to repeat the macro EBITDA and going down for the second half of the year growth towards the end of the year I mean just to give one, two examples on the macro side and this helps our business and helps our program because more and when disposed by income increase the more the benefit of that in our core brands means is the first point that's why we optimist in the industry. The second impacting our cost year-over-year decelerate. So was a big hit last year. And third tax the hikes for 2017 as I explained as Ricardo explained will not be so significant as it was in 2016. So the only exception that's a minor one happened last year. So the market we have two things that I - the facts and the taxes will help as well but the most important one we have a strong plan and that the economy I mean going back again that will help our core brand and we have boosting investment in our core business I have seen that could make a big difference for us. So I repeat we talk about new for the brand packaging enhancement that helps the quality perception of those brands. In terms of core business stepping up our service level as well. It's will be there. The key in selling moments like we have done in carnival that not only but the brand as well a fully integrated market and sales plan. So that will help the core business and you get this positive trend I would say that's thing for disposal income and industry. So premium to be very important portfolio is amazing that we have and preference of premium brand is already 30% above the market share, brand of the market I mean that's Budweiser and it's very relevant. continue to help. not only RGBs but how we can really access I mean improve the shop experience in the stores some e-commerce initiatives as well and in just to repeat one thing the key brand selling moment will continue to be significant. So having said that I mean we think that 2017 we are pretty sure that we have much better year. We are confident in our plan. Our team is very, very inspired by the plan, very engaged on that so that's it. So we really think that first sign of the year January and February of the market share could tell us that this year we are on the right track.

The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.