Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Archer Daniels Midland Fourth Quarter Earnings Conference Call. My name Chantalle [ph] (2:42), and I will be your facilitator for today's call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the presentation over to your host for today's call, Mr. Dwight Grimestad, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please proceed.

Thank you, Chantalle [ph] (3:11). Good morning, and welcome to ADM's Fourth Quarter Earnings Conference Call. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that we are webcasting this presentation on our website, adm.com. The replay will also be available at that address. For those following the presentation, please turn to Slide 2, the company's Safe Harbor statement, which says that some of our comments constitute forward-looking statements that reflect management's current views and estimates of future economic circumstances, industry conditions, company performance and financial results. Statements are based on many assumptions and factors, including availability and prices of raw materials, market conditions, operating efficiencies, access to capital and actions of government. Any changes in such assumptions or factors could produce significantly different results. To the extent permitted under applicable law, the company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements as a result of new information or future events. Slide 3 lists the matters we will discuss in our conference call today, and I will now turn the call over to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Pat Woertz.

Thank you, Dwight, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us on the call today. As you turn to Slide 4, as I usually do, I'll begin with safety. As we closed out our fiscal 2010, we reduced our lost work day injury rate by 26% and our total recordable injury rate by 9% compared to 2009. I would like to thank ADM colleagues and contractors alike for your efforts and commitment to improve safety. Turning to our financial results. The ADM team finished strong, capping a very good year with very good fourth quarter performance. This morning, we reported annual net earnings of $1.9 billion or $3 per share and quarterly net earnings of $446 million or $0.69 per share. Our large projects are nearly finished. We have started up our dry ethanol mill in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, which should be fully operational by the end of this month. And we are moving toward completion of our propylene glycol plant in Decatur, Illinois, though we've slowed the pace as we work through some start-up issues. We expect this plant to be fully operational in the fourth quarter of this calendar year. As we begin our new fiscal year, we commit to use our strong balance sheet and cash flow to deliver shareholder value. In the past, we've discussed with you our strategy to expand the volume and scope of our core model. Now as we start the year, I want to give you a clear sense of how and where we intend to grow over the next five years. I plan to provide some detail each quarter, so let me start this quarter with Global Oilseeds. We will grow crush volumes over the next five years at a compound annual growth rate of 7% to 10%. This is…

Thanks, Pat, and good morning, everyone. You turn to Slide 5, please. Slide 5 lists our financial highlights for the quarter and for the fiscal year. Overall, financial results rebounded strongly this quarter from the depressed levels of a year ago when we were feeling the impacts of the weak global economy. Segment operating profit was $799 million, up $591 million from a year ago. And in a moment, I'll review these results on a segment-by-segment basis. Quarterly net earnings were $446 million, up $388 million from last year's fourth quarter, and earnings per share were $0.69 compared to last year's EPS of $0.09. Looking at our effective income tax rate, you'll note that our full year rate came in at just under 26%, mainly due to a slightly more favorable final geographic mix of earnings than we had been forecasting. Finalizing this full year rate then resulted in a tax rate for the quarter of about 19%. And as a reminder, last year's income taxes for the quarter and year included charges of $61 million and $158 million, respectively, related to changes in the holding company structure of our equity investee, Wilmar International Limited. As we look forward to fiscal year 2011, we're estimating at this time a tax rate of about 28%. As you can see from the waterfall chart for the quarter, on the bottom left of the page, we've called out a couple of items. LIFO had a negative impact this quarter of $15 million after tax or approximately $0.02 per share due to rising commodity prices. And with the start-up of our new plants being so significant in fiscal year 2010, we thought it would be useful to call these costs out for you. We incurred start-up costs this quarter of $24 million after tax…

Thank you very much, Steve. John Rice will join Steve and me for the Q&A. So operator, if you’ll please open the line for questions.

[Operator Instructions] And your first question comes from the line of David Driscoll of Citi Investment Research.

Pat, wanted just to start off with just the big picture question here on Oilseeds. Obviously, we saw a fairly different result at one of your key competitors last week. And I just wanted to ask whether or not the basis issue that seems to have affected that company would in any way affect you in any future periods or if it was just simply ADM was positioned differently, thus the different results. So can you make some comments to perhaps alleviate some fears out there about what may or may not happen going forward?

Well, I'll start, and then maybe I'll ask John to comment as well. We can't comment about our competitor's business, but we can say that our ADM team looks holistically at our business. And from a risk position, I think we take a very conservative yet smart view of the markets. And going forward, I think you heard our views about crop conditions and market update. And I think there’s a good story here to tell about both our balanced view of it as well as our geographic look at it. John?

I would just add to what Pat said. Don't really pay a lot of attention to what our competitors are doing in the market. We really manage our own book. But there's a lot of things, David, as you well know, that go into processing margins. It can be bean basis. It can be the long beans to meal. It can be long oil to meal, beans to oil and everything else. So there's a lot of moving parts in that and just to be able to pick out one part just gets a little bit tougher. I think our group and our team managed through this last quarter's market and for the year very well.

Would say that the outlook going forward would be consistent with results generated this quarter?

Well, we don't like to give forward guidance. But right now, as in Steve’s comments, we do see a fairly steady and growing world protein demand. Now the North American Oilseed operations are running slower than the rest of the world, and also we have increased capacity coming on in Canada. And as you well know, conditions are constantly changing and what the August weather's going to do, what the corn harvest comes out and then also how the soybean harvest comes out here in September.

Okay. Those comments sound a bit cautious relative to where we've seen the last few quarters of excellent profitability in Oilseeds. Hopefully, I'm taking you right. Just wanted one more question on the balance sheet. You made comments, Steve, about the increased flexibility to do share repurchase. Can you quantify this for us in anyway? And I apologize if you said it, but I missed the number on readily marketable inventories. Can you give us that number? And then comment on the balance sheet and your ability to take on new debt.

The first one is, we didn't give you readily mark [marketable]. I'll get to these maybe in no particular order. The readily marketable inventories, I didn't give you the readily marketable. The total inventories were about $7.7 billion at June 30. From a flexibility perspective, that's exactly what we have. We have flexibility within our current ratings to buy some shares back. We're going to do that in an opportunistic way, and we're going to do it in a way that maintains that credit rating that we have. So that share buyback opportunity is going to be in the mix with our acquisition program and CapEx program. So we're not going to lay out the exact number, but it's going to be a number that certainly fits within our current credit rating.

I suppose what I was trying to draw the idea was that if net debt, total debt minus cash, is $6.5 billion, and if readily marketable inventories, I think last quarter, was over $5.5 billion, if you treat readily marketables as a cash equivalent, then it would put ADM's balance sheet at one of the lowest levered multiples that I have seen in a very long time. So I think, quite frankly, maybe some people wouldn't understand that you're being very understated when you say that you have flexibility, thus the question goes right to the heart of the share repurchase. It would feel like you should have significant capacity to do share repurchase, but your comments would maybe seem a bit more tempered than that. So I was simply trying to draw out a little bit more.

Well, I think there's two points. First of all, readily marketable inventories are just that. We do use them to market and make profit. So as they're considered in our rating, it has a little different feel than just cash and other financial flexibility. And as you're well aware of and as we've demonstrated in the past, we do like to have a little bit in end reserve just in the case of volatility in the commodity market. So we do have more flexibility. We continue to have ongoing conversations with the rating agencies, and we're just pleased to have that lever of share buyback in the arsenal.

Your next question comes from the line of Mr. John Roberts of Buckingham Research.

Could you provide a little more color on the EPA's evaluations going on? It sounds like you're expecting or at least they’re working on a split approval here for different years of cars?

I'll start, John. As you know, they're reviewing a request to allow gasoline blends up to E15, which is likely to be only applicable to certain model years. While we support that, we're also concerned that any regulatory outcome that cannot be applied to all cars or might not be applicable to all cars will not be widely accepted. So we have formally requested that the EPA consider up to E12 in the context of its E15 waiver request so that you could use E12. They would be allowed for use in all vehicles. And we've studied the available technical data, and our technical team has provided our analysis to the EPA in support of blends up to E12 for all vehicle model years. And so we think we've shown the EPA. They have multiple options to punch through this blend wall, but I can't predict the outcome. So we're hopeful, but we'll see.

And then, secondly, back on the -- you said you regained financial flexibility for share repurchase. Do you have to maybe buy back debt equal to equity? Or do you have any constraints like that? Maybe characterize what flexibility means.

Flexibility means that I can buy back shares right now with my current balance sheet to a certain level. Once we get past that, then there's all the moving parts such as buying back debt, et cetera. So at this point in time, we have some flexibility to buy shares back as is.

Your next question comes from the line of Vincent Andrews of Morgan Stanley.

On your process volumes, can you remind me, Corn Processing, is that just the Sweeteners & Starches and BioProducts? Or does that encompass the corn component of Ag Services?

It does not include the corn portion of Ag Services. That's the volumes of corn we're processing.

And the huge step-up in volume is just a function of the new ethanol plants that we saw both in the quarter and in the fiscal year?

Yes, that's the majority of the change.

Okay. So there's no issue with crop quality or anything else that's driving more corn through the plants.

We had a slight increase in the wet mill grinds that we try every year. But the majority, as Steve said, is through the dry mill.

Okay. And then maybe, Pat, I'll ask a follow-up on the ethanol issue. Everything I hear out of Washington on going to an E12 suggests that EPA would want to do their own testing. I understand that you're presenting the work that you guys and others have done. Is that sort of the response you've gotten from them as well?

Well, they have asked the DOE for additional testing, which has taken some time. It's not complete as I understand it. So they've also asked if we had any additional data to provide it. So we used all the data of record and scoured more publicly available data and put that in a format with our analysis to support as well.

And do you have any insight from them as to why they're not sort of looking at it on their own or if this is something that they'll want to open up and do on their own in the future? I mean, was there a general receptivity to the idea?

Well, the EPA staff and our technical staff and any time we've met, there's been receptivity to good science, good data, good discussion and analysis. So we'll see. We're hopeful.

Okay. And then maybe my last question will just be on what's going on with global wheat crops. Maybe, John, if you can just sort of give us -- compare and contrast what's taking place today relative to what took place sort of around the '07 timeframe. And how far away are we from getting sort of the Ag Services band back together and starting to see real a pickup and profitability in that business?

Well, the difference between those two different time frames, and I want to quantify that as of today, since we have a lot of moving points right now, is we do have a bigger crop carryout when it comes to wheat and other oilseeds also, which should help with other blending opportunities. We come in Monday. The Russians are not going to export wheat. We come in today. The Russians are going to export wheat. So it's a constantly moving target. We're going to have to watch the weather. We're going to have to watch the Australian weather. That's going to be the next key crop. And then I think we're just going to have to see how the harvest comes to really get a determination on what kind of disruptions of any flows we'll see.

Okay. But is it fair to read from your comments that you're expecting to see some opportunities? You're just not sure the extent to what they're going to be based on the status quo.

You just don't know. If there is a poor wheat crop, the world will have to come back to the United States for wheat exports as it did back in '07/'08.

Your next question comes from the line of Christine McCracken of Cleveland Research.

This is Michael Picken in for Christine. Just continuing on the theme in terms of the global wheat supply situation. If in fact, we do end up seeing a reduced Russian wheat crop, and some of the other areas, Canada, also come in weak. What type of impact do you think that might have on corn exports? And how should we think about it sort of net-net if we do see an increase in U.S. corn exports, given that your Ethanol business and some other opportunities here in the U.S. are also reliant on that corn?

Well, as the price of wheat, here in the last month, has raised a lot compared to the price of corn, you will see people switch from feed wheat into corn. And as prices come back down, so you could build a case that coming out of the United States, you could see more corn exports and more wheat exports.

And then turning back to some of the ethanol policy issues that are out there, I mean, what is your opinion given kind of the current favorability of blending economics? I mean, if we see that blender tax credit expire at the end of this year, would you expect to see any sort of reduction in consumption, given the favorable blending economics? Or what is your view in terms of kind of industry-wide volumes if that blender credit were not extended?

Well, currently in Steve comments, we're way below the mandate. So at that point in time, I would not anticipate any blending cutbacks with the refiners, but as you well know, this is always a moving target, it changes from, as the price of corn moves, as price of gasoline moves but at the current economics, it wouldn't change in my opinion.

Two other policy questions. Have you heard anything regarding the extension on the Brazilian ethanol tariff? I mean, I've seen it included in several bills that are trying to do multiple things, but is it possible that we see that tariff extended on a stand-alone basis? And then finally, if you could give us any sort of update on California and what's happening out there.

On the tariff itself, I think that could be separate than the blenders credit. Like we've said in the past, we're all for free trade, as long as everybody plays by the same rules, and that's our view on the import tariff, as long as other parts of the world will take or imports or our exports, I should say, then that's what our concern is on the import tariff. But I think that will be a separate issue than the blenders credit.

And California, Michael, has, as you know, adopted a low carbon fuel standard, and it's to go into effect in January 2011, I believe. And they're talking about extending it a year. It set a high standard, but certainly you need to calculate the individual plant's carbon intensity score, and we believe that good science is part of that process. And I believe there's new studies from the same university studies they used the first time that revised the science, and so hopefully that will be part of the work going into the extension. So still stay tuned on the California Resources Board's work there.

Your next question comes from the line of Ken Zaslow of BMO Capital Markets.

Pat, you said earlier in your remarks that you on a quarter-by-quarter basis, you're going to be telling us a little bit about your strategy. Is there a reason why you wouldn't want to tell us kind of all at once? What's the reason for the progression like that?

Well, I think it's more the progression of the specificity of growth targets, Ken. So we've talked about our holistic strategy, and as you know, filling out the global footprint and what we're attempting to do in each segment, we've talked about in many of our conferences as well as presentations. I think the example with global oilseeds of the 7% to 10% growth and exceeding predicted market growth and having some information about specific projects that are used as sort of the backup and the clarification of that, I think lines up well when you have the projects to announce. So we're going to do that as they come forward, and it has more clarity for you, I think, and more specificity as you have more information.

Are the current ethanol margins sequentially higher than the quarter? And do you have any more upfront costs to be had, to be incurred during the next couple quarters?

I'll take the upfront costs and John can talk to you about the market. But we do have our Cedar Rapids plants up and running. It's not to full capacity yet, so we'll have some additional costs related to the Cedar Rapids plant. And as Pat mentioned, we're still working out some startup issues in our propylene, ethylene glycol plant, so we will have some. But I do expect certainly the pace of those costs to be dropping pretty significantly.

And as far as the ethanol margins, with the price volatility we've seen here in corn, I'd still say they're not real profitable but at times you get plants that can run at a profit. But I think the whole issue still is we have about 14.6 billion gallons of capacity that would be ready to come online at the end of this year, and we're running at about 13 billion. So I'd call it close for a lot of plans, close to maybe a breakeven, depending on what the price of corn is any given day.

I know this isn't the biggest of all your businesses, but wheat cocoa we always have a hard time kind of forecasting and getting hands around that. Can you tell us, and quarterly it goes all over the place, can you tell us kind of where you see this business going? Are we at a run rate, three of the last four quarters have been north of 100 and then prior to that, it was a like in the 50s to 80s on a quarterly run rate. Can you just tell us like where you kind of think this business should be doing? Are we above or below the typical run rate? So just kind of put some parameters around the Cocoa and Wheat business, if that would be possible.

And just as you, we do have some difficulty predicting what the bottom line result will be for that segment because it is somewhat dependent on how markets close and how positions move. And as we point out in the description there that some of the results are impacted by some of these forward derivatives that we have and that, from an accounting perspective, have to bring to market. All that being said, as we pointed out here, we had a gain in this particular quarter that was higher than what I would call the market or the economics of the business. And we've tried to point those out when they got significant in the last couple of quarters. So to say that it's the run rate is not accurate. That's why we give you those numbers to try to help cushion that back and forth. So we have some of that in all of our divisions, that happens, we're calling it out in the other because it is so significant to that particular segment.

Is the wheat environment improving? And is the cocoa environment improving? Or are they both kind of status quo?

The wheat market, our Wheat business has had a very good year, and they continue to do well, again, subject to some of these same market conditions that all of us face. The Cocoa business has been improving, and as I pointed out, but it's still a tough operating environment in the cocoa side.

And your next question comes from the line of Diane Geissler of CLSA. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: When you reported your March results in the Corn Processing unit, you had talked about mark-to-market., and I think that at that time it was estimated that if you had not had the mark-to-market, you would have had an operating profit sort of similar to previous levels. Was there a flow back on that mark-to-market in this quarter? And if so, how much was it?

The answer is there was a little bit of a flow back, but it's not have enough to mention. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: So if we look at the operating results in this quarter, that's a pure, for the most, operating number?

That's fair. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: And when would we expect that mark-to-market then to flow back into the P&L?

As I think I pointed out on the last conference call that some of that mark-to-market did come into this quarter, but you have to remember it's a position that is constantly moving. And then part of that flowed back to prior quarters, so it was a mixture of both. There was some hedge ineffectiveness in there, so we did bring the results of that position, a part of that, into the quarter. As I said, though, it just wasn't a significant impact. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: I guess what I'm asking is, for the next two quarters, should we expect to benefit leftover from the March quarter? Or is it wash away?

No. There is nothing significant that's there going forward. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: And then on the plant that you're building in Paraguay, is that included in the billion dollar CapEx budget you gave? Or could you help us understand how much it will cost to build that facility?

Well, we'll probably not give you the full cost, but yes, it is included, the amount of spending that we will make in 2011, Diane, is included in that rough $1 billion spending. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: And I would assume you'd have some spending in fiscal '12 for that plant as well? Is that correct?

That's right. We expect to have it online in '12 so additional spending would move into '12, too. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: And then the remarketing of the debt securities, I think you said when you expected to do that, but could you just remind me? I missed that.

That will be in 2011. I think it can actually be done over a period of time, and I have to look at it, but I believe it starts in March, between March to June that I've got that window. Diane Geissler - Credit Agricole Securities (USA) Inc.: So the volatility on the interest rate swap will swing quarter-to-quarter between now and March of 2011 based on where interest rates are?

That's correct.

Your next question comes from the line of Robert Moskow of Crédit Suisse. Robert Moskow - Crédit Suisse AG: Pat, maybe you could take a step back and just help us understand the overall corporate strategy here. On one hand, you're saying that there's a lot of cash and that you're leaning towards buying back shares, but on the other, you're saying you're going to double the growth rate for Oilseeds Processing at a time when there's actually kind of a weak crop in Canada. And we already hear about some excess capacity sitting around in North America. And then we have the same kind of situation in ethanol where you're opening up a plant at a time when there's excess supply of ethanol. So are you trying to make kind of an aggressive stand here and saying that you're going to build while others are contracting? So maybe you can just kind of give a general comment about your market share kind of objectives here. Are you trying to take advantage of an environment where everyone else is kind of pulling back?

Well, there's a couple of questions in there, Rob. So let me first start with we have very strong cash flows, cash from operations, as you know, and as we've wound down this organic capital spending, our cash will be very strong. When I talk about our strategy, it's an investment for the future. It's growing and it's growing over a five-year period. So as an example, the growth in global oilseeds is it's an annual compound annual growth rate of 7% to 10%, but it's over a five-year period. So yes, it's important to invest sometimes even when you're on a little bit of a down cycle or not, timing isn't always perfect, but sometimes timing can be very perfect relative to acquisitions and when things come online. So strong cash flow, good investment for the future, good opportunities. We've got to continue to look at the pipeline and be disciplined about those investments, but we feel good about our opportunities longer term. Robert Moskow - Crédit Suisse AG: And then if I could drill down in oilseeds then, this plant in Paraguay, to what extent is that going to be contributing to the 7% to 10% estimate you're making? Is it half of that incremental growth rate? And then to what extent do you think you need to make acquisitions to hit that 7% to 10%?

Well, I think to hit the 7% to 10%, it will be both organic and acquisitions. It represents about 25% of the South American crush and about 3 1/2% of total global crush. So it's a move, but it's not the whole piece, so we'll continue to build. We've talked about Eastern Europe. We've talked about South America. We continue to have India on our radar screen. So you'll hear more in the future as things are specific in those regions, but yes, we'll need more than just this plant, but it's part of the puzzle. Robert Moskow - Crédit Suisse AG: And how aggressively are you pursuing acquisitions right now? Is there a big pipeline of perspective deals more so than there was a year ago?

Well, I'd say that we have both process and deal flow has increased, and process is to allow both a capability internally that we have, as well as people on the ground and our evaluation process, etcetera, is a strong. And we continue to look and fill the pipeline with opportunities, obviously things not necessarily that we can talk about, but yes, we're improving that pipeline. I'd say there's more than there was a year ago, yes.

Your next question comes from the line of Christina McGlone of Deutsche Bank.

Just following up on Rob's questioning. I mean, you talked about initial or term excess capacity in oilseeds globally. I think one of the reasons that the U.S. has excess capacity is because of your plant expansions that you've done. So I'm curious, how do you know that the market is going to be able to absorb the capacity you're adding in Paraguay and perhaps other places?

Well, we feel that this plant is very well located, and it's really a long-term trend, like Pat was mentioning. Global demand will keep increasing as the population keeps increasing. We look for a 5% compound annual growth rate when it comes to that. So we're always looking at where we feel the best investment is, where these assets would fit into our offer global value chain and we're not going to hit every quarter right when the plant comes on but we still believe in the long term.

Christina, I'd add, too, John's point, the soybean production in Paraguay has been growing. It's been growing at a double digit, I think 13% for the past 10 years. Our strategy has been to increase our origination and the logistics in the region. So building the plant is actually an important move and a continuation of that strategy. I think the market absolutely is both asking for the plant, and I think we'll have a good position there.

And then, Pat, for E12, if it was applicable to all vehicles, you wouldn't have that liability in terms of splitting up the vehicle fleet, but would there be other that liability issues in terms of pumps in underground storage? Or do you think that if E12 were approved by the EPA, that immediately it would be adopted?

Well, I think if it's applicable to all cars in the fleet, the issue of substance substantially similar comes into play, so it works through the gasoline pool in the same way as E10 does today. You don't need additional labeling, there's no additional issues related to pumps, infrastructure, etcetera, it merely flows through the system the way E10 does today. So that's the positive side of having any amount of ethanol in the entire fuel pool that there's not this bifurcation, so to speak in it . You asked how readily adoptable, I think eight out of 10 of our customers talk about blending economics, and I think they'd like to be blending beyond the current rates because the economics are there. So I believe it would be acceptable in the market as increases have been in the past.

In terms of starting up Cedar Rapids, given the fact that corn does seem to be tighter in the U.S. than expected based on the last stocks report, are we looking at any sort of procurement issues or basic issues in the near term in order to get that plant up and running?

We do not see it. The USDA is still calling for about a 1.4 billion bushel carryout this year and next, fairly close. The rough rule of thumb is any time it's over a billion bushels, there's plenty of stocks.

Your next question comes from the line of Bryan Spillane of Bank of America.

Working capital was, I guess, slightly favorable or a slight benefit to cash flow this year. So if we're thinking about working capital in fiscal '11, can you just talk a bit about what some of the variables might be from where we stand today? And I guess the thing I'm thinking about more specifically is just given where crop prices have gone recently, is it going to be difficult, would working capital actually be a drag this year?

As we look at it, the most significant factors, well certainly is price and the volatility in the price. So assuming that we carried the same quantities, we've got the price both in the inventory, as well as in the underlying receivables as we collect those. So that's always the biggest wildcard for us by far. I think the other interesting component is the quantities themselves. Of course, we're adding a bit more processing capacity in the company, but I don't believe that will significantly move the working capital per se. The question more likely is the phrase we use here is what is the market telling you to do with inventories. We see with some of these large crops, especially here in the U.S., we could have more peaks and valleys in the working capital as the harvest all comes at potentially at one time, and we could see more inventory quantities as the market conditions dictate. So it's a real wildcard, and that's one of the reasons we leave ourselves with as much flexibility in our balance sheet as possible. I mean the good news with that is that it always runs through a cycle, right? These commodities are purchased and processed in a period and it does flow through. So sitting here today, it's hard to predict, but we have both a price and a quantity question here.

So is it fair to for us to assume that in the conversations that you all had with the rating agencies that they asked a question about some outlook on working capital, like the factor that they were thinking about in terms of the flexibility?

Well, I think certainly, Bryan, and It goes back to the last couple of years and the reasons why they have been very conservative with us. They certainly have memories of 2008 when commodity prices went as high as they did, and that's factored into their thought process as they evaluate our credit, just as it goes through ours as well. So there's no question, that's part of their consideration.

In terms of as you're thinking about decisions today to, I guess, build new facilities or make acquisitions, can you talk a little bit about today just construction costs? I'm assuming relative to what it was a few years ago when you started building ethanol facilities, construction costs maybe a little bit more favorable today than they were then. And if you could just think about it, that has been a factor in terms of sort of driving your decision in terms of build versus buy.

Well, the reason we're building in Paraguay, as Pat mentioned, it's a growing area. We're building a fertilizer plant. It just really fits into our total infrastructure in Paraguay, but as you go around the world, we will be I would say probably more acquisitions than on the Greenfield sites. But we've been many places, we've talked to many people and we will decide what makes the most economic sense at the time. But to your other point, to your other question, has cost come down. It depends on the country and the unemployment situation. So it's kind of tough to just put a cart blanche statement out there on the cost. We've seen steel prices go up and down. So I'd say it's a little bit lower globally than the peak but not substantially.

Maybe adding to John's point there, just a moment, Bryan, also it depends on, if you recall, we had quite a tight contractor workforce issue in the U.S. three years ago when we started these plants construction and that became a bit of a higher cost for us but that has subsided now.

Your next question comes from the line of Ann Gurkin of Davenport. Ann Gurkin - Davenport & Company, LLC: Just wondering, trying to get a better understanding on the Ag Services segment and how we should look at volume with these record crops as we look out for that segment. It looks like this quarter benefited from the favorable risk management. Can you help me kind of understand how I should look at it going forward?

I mean, I'll start here and then let John or Pat chime in. I think as we look at Ag Services, as we sit here today, we are anticipating near record U.S. corn and soybean crops. And here in the U.S. specifically, where we have a tremendous amount of storage and capacity, that should bode well for our handling and storage side of the business. That's in contrast to last year, even though we ended up with a large crop, it came over more ratably during the year, as well as much wetter. So there's always a different set of opportunities. We have seen good demand, which is really the driver of all in the end. We've seen good demand recently, and that's encouraging. And then the question that's the most hard to predict is how much volatility in the market and then where are you positioned relative to that volatility. I don't know, John, if you want to build on that at all?

Well, to Steve's point, that we've been able to export soybeans out of the United States this summer, which a year, six months ago, I don't think many people would've thought would happen. And as we talked earlier, on the global wheat crop, what happens in Russia and Australia, that will have an effect on the exports of wheat out of the United States, and then also the relationship with the price of wheat to the price of corn, where we see more corn exports, plus how's the Chinese weather, I mean, with their corn crop. So there's still a lot of variables, but right now it looks like we should have a very good crop in the United States. Ann Gurkin - Davenport & Company, LLC: And then picking up on the Chinese comment, how do you look at China in the global supply and demand picture? And can you help us walk through kind of your thought process?

Well, their bean exports have been better than people have expected throughout the year, and they have been importing a little bit of corn. But no major, no big numbers, I should say. And I think it's going to depend on their crop size.

Your next question comes from the line of Ian of Rafferty Capital Markets.

Can you just talk a little bit, Pat, I guess, about the biodiesel tax credit issue? You said basically for the U.S., you're pretty much shut in now due to the lack of economics for blending. First of all, is this progressing at all? Do you see kind of an end to this for your North Dakota assets are going to come back and start producing to the income statement? And secondly, does this make you at all concerned about -- did the reluctance of putting the credit back on, does it make you at all concerned about the $0.045 blenders credit on the ethanol side?

Well, I think as Steve said in his remarks, that without the blending credit in place, it's sort of the industry the U.S. biodiesel industry is essentially nonexistent. We have seen some vegetable oil exports from the U.S. There has been several discussions in Congress or members of the staff that have tried to put the extension in various bills, but with the discussions in Congress today, I guess it's find a bill to attach it to, which may be a similar situation for the ethanol tax extension upcoming here at year end. I think there's positive signs that people want to extend it. They understand in an overall energy policy that this is part of the mix and should be a strong part of the mix, but again, you need a bill to get it through. So more time, less to do the one on ethanol and perhaps the biodiesel credit could still be retroactively applied. Some are still discussing that.

And then the second part, is this a concern when you look out at the $0.45 ethanol credit and its expiration here at the end of the year?

Well, I guess, as I said, depending on where Congress is, there's a discussion about the extension of the tax credit and finding the way to pay for it, so to speak and having it part of another bill. So there's always a concern when a tax credit is about to expire but I think there's good discussion, and I think those that are involved understand the issue and understand how many jobs are at stake and how much of the Ethanol business contributes to the world economies, etcetera. So I think there's very good understanding.

The South American farmers' reluctance to sell into the market, it seems to have caught a couple people by surprise this year, and I guess can we quantify a little bit to some degree how much of a surprise this was? How typical -- has this happened in the past? And kind of what can be done in future years to kind of hedge out this risk of reluctance to sell?

Well, throughout the world, you'll have different scenarios and different timings in when farmers will sell the crops. It can be tax reasons, it can just be inverses in the markets, it can be different carries, it can be just transportation issues. And currencies can also come into play. So I don't think there's a real rule of thumb in how farmers sell their crop throughout the year. It's kind of a little bit of a moving target all the time. It's really more about how you position, how your make your sales, you have x amount of demand going on globally all the time and how you cover those positions. I guess I don't really know how else to answer that question.

I'll just jump in a little bit. It's also dependent on how the farmers have done in the prior year, availability of credit, it's a long list of subjects. When I think about Brazil, specifically, the question of currency is a big one because soybeans are priced in dollars around the world, and that strengthening of the Brazilian currency just cuts into Brazilian farmers margins. So they're big farmers and many of them are big farmers and a part of it is their ability to hold the crops. Some can, some can't. So it all fits in their own risk management.

And, Ian, I'll jump in here, too, Ian. We take a global view of this. ADM's risk management is a very global system where we consolidate daily, if you will, in one spot, in one view and share that view. And I think it helps to understand what's going on in lots of different markets, as well as what farmers are viewing in any particular region. And so I'd just say, it's part of our overall way we look at risk management.

[Operator Instructions] And your next question comes from the line of David Driscoll of Citigroup, Inc.

Steve, can you talk about acquisitions in F '11 just in terms of like a dollar figure that you would be comfortable in handling? Would $500 million to $1 billion in acquisitions be kind of a reasonable guess? Obviously, I know this is kind of a hypothetical, it depends if they actually if you can come to terms with them, but I'm just trying to get a sense of scale.

Well, we certainly have that capacity to do that, and if we think about it and maybe even more than that, the pipeline easily supports that level of acquisition. It just depends how many are out there. So I don't think I have anything to add beyond that.

Can you comment on the depreciation and amortization for fiscal '11, given the new plants that you guys have completed and will complete?

Well, yes, I can. I'm going to cheat here because I've got a piece of paper that helps me with the new plants. The deprecation and, again, it's a moving target, but we ought to be up $70 million or $80 million from last year, just thinking about the new projects year-over-year. I have to think about the rest of them, but we'll certainly be up on the cash flow.

Can you say what the increase in volumes was in the Starches and Sweetener units? And obviously the segment itself was up, the way you guys report the overall segment, it blends in both pieces. But I'm just curious, can you give us any sense as to what the increase was in volumes in starches and sweeteners?

Well, I can tell you that we're running over fructose assets at full capacity and that we've actually slowed down our ethanol here in Decatur. I mean it's kind of a little bit of a moving target, but right now we're running our assets out.

Your next question comes from the line of Vincent Andrews of Morgan Stanley.

Pat, just a quick follow up on the E12, would a substantially similar ruling, would that automatically change the automobile warranty, which right now is 10% to 12%? Or does something else need to happen to incentivize the automobile manufacturers in that instance?

Well, I don't know, I don't think there's an automatic to any liability issue, but I think there are, I can't speak for the auto manufacturers in total, but there are ones that support the E12 in the full carpool because they know their fleet is capable of it. So I can't comment about liability issues that I don't know.

Your next question comes from the line of Ken Zaslow of BMO Capital Markets.

You said that your process for acquisitions has changed. Can you talk about what changes that you've made, when they took place?

Well, we've been building trying to get better all the time, first of all, Ken, and I think we've expanded our team that includes those that both evaluate both on the ground in the business units, coordinated with our team at the center. Our evaluation process, our due diligence process, as well as we've added, we made an announcement this quarter on opening an office in Beijing. One of our strategy folks and business development executives will be leading that office and moving there. So there's been both a geographic and a capability increase in the overall process.

Would you say the majority of it is done in terms of how much changes they've made? Or are you still evolving to a new level in terms of resources?

Well, I think we'll always continue to evolve and get better. A quick example, we're doing look-back processes. John and his team have looked back at what we've spent on those capital projects, small acquisitions, larger ones. we looked back, learned, feed it into the system for the next one, I mean, we're always getting better.

So it really wasn't an inflection point over the last couple of months. There's nothing that significantly, it's an evolution that's changed? Or is there -- I'm just trying to figure out because the last company had said they changed their processes, three months later, they bought National Starch. So I'm just trying to figure out how much of a change has been made.

I think it's been a focus. So I'll call it a change that's stepped us up because it's a focus, and I think it's a focus for a greater number of leaders, yes.

Your next question comes from the line of Christina McGlone of Deutsche Bank.

John, I forgot to ask you. Can you talk about how the short rapeseed crop in Europe, what are the implications there? Is it a net negative because of lack of availability? Or will you see maybe more soy products going to Europe and it could be a positive?

It will have an effect on the rapeseed crush in Europe. So they will need to import some more protein. There is some talk they will actually import some corn, maybe some more corn byproducts, but it will have an overall protein effect on them. But I think so much still depends on how the wheat harvest comes on what their total needs are going to be.

And in your terms of your positioning to deal with that, should we think about it as a threat, an opportunity? Like how would you categorize it?

We'd like to come in every day and say there's new opportunity.

And then Pat, the other question I had is there's been talk by Peterson and I think Rose Energy about maybe instead of having an ethanol tax credit, using the funds to actually fund infrastructure build out to use ethanol. I was curious what your stance is on that.

Well, we haven't studied it thoroughly. I think every time you have an opportunity for an innovative idea or using innovation or different ideas are helpful to talk it through. We think support associated with the vetech [ph] [12:37] is important here, and if there are suggestions to get that kind of support in another way around, we'll certainly look at it.

At this time, there are no further questions in the queue, and I would like to turn the call back over to Pat Woertz, Chairman and CEO for closing. Please proceed, ma'am.

Well, thank you so much for your time, everyone, and all your questions today. As you close out a year, it's sometimes good to take at a moment to reflect, and I'd just like to say bravo to the ADM team and thank you for a very, very good year. We have Slide 18 showing a couple of upcoming investor conferences, and we'll look forward to talking with you in November. Bye now.

Thank you for your participation in today's conference. This concludes the presentation. You may now disconnect. Have a wonderful day.