Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the AMC Networks' Third Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. After the speakers' remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. Thank you. I would now like to turn today's conference over to Seth Zaslow, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning and welcome to the AMC Networks' third quarter 2015 earnings conference call. Joining us this morning are members of our executive team: Josh Sapan, President and Chief Executive Officer; Ed Carroll, Chief Operating Officer; and Sean Sullivan, Chief Financial Officer. Following a discussion of the company's third quarter 2015 results, we will open the call for questions. If you don't have a copy of today's earnings release, it is available on our website at amcnetworks.com. This call can also be accessed via our website. Please take note of the following. Today's discussion may contain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of the future performance or results and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ. Please refer to the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission for a discussion of risks and uncertainties. The company disclaims any obligation to update the forward-looking statements that may be discussed during this call. Further, we will discuss non-GAAP financial information. We believe the presentation of non-GAAP results provides you with useful supplemental information concerning the company's ongoing operations and is appropriate in your evaluation of the company's performance. Please refer to the press release and related footnotes for GAAP information and a reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP information, which we'll refer to on this call. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to Josh. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning and thank you all for joining us. AMC Networks had an exceptionally strong third quarter, with total revenue and adjusted operating cash flow growth driven by the success of our high quality content and…

Certainly. Your first question comes from the line of Michael Morris with Guggenheim Securities.

Thank you. Good morning, guys. Two questions. First, Josh, you addressed The Walking Dead ratings a bit, but there is clearly some sensitivity in the marketplace about how audience, perhaps some audience decline could impact the value of the company. So can you talk a little bit more about, maybe how the audience is relative to your initial expectations and your thoughts on the sensitivity of the value of the company relative to that particular program? And then I have a follow-up on subscribers. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: Oh, sure. So we are, overall, Mike pleased with The Walking Dead, perhaps not surprisingly remains the biggest show on television in season six. We treat The Walking Dead in the broadest sense as a franchise. And although of course it's a TV show, we try to think franchise, and that has led us to a few things that I think are important. Number one, a insistent focus on creative excellence which happily all the people involved have I think over delivered on and I think the world would sort of agree. And the notion of franchise I feel just in response to your question, compelled to say that led us to Fear the Walking Dead and as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, it's sort of delicate to do what is commonly called spin-off in television. They had a checker history. We tried not to look at it as spin-off, we really tried to respect the world created by the creators and to make it as rich, as sustainable, as enduring and as character driven as possible. And I actually think that the groups involved really achieved that. So it broadly, Walking Dead met our expectations and is meeting our expectations, you're familiar with the numbers and Fear the Walking Dead, we were extremely pleased with. We think it's creatively, all I can say is excellent and its reception was superb and some of that's reflected in the numbers. So we look forward to treating it with care, with a clear eyed view toward how things play-out in the world and we have expectations that it has a good life – a very good life and the important thing for us do is to treat it as carefully as we can. And so that's my best answer to your question.

Thanks, Josh. And then with respect to the subscriber numbers that you provided in your press release, they come from Nielsen. We know that that may differ from what you're seeing. But can you talk a little more about that? I mean, it looks like AMC Network had a 2% decline in its subscriber base over the past year? And is that consistent with what's driving your financial performance? Thanks. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. Mike, the broader subscriber question, if I may, is probably really what you're I think asking about and as you know better than me, this quarter was a better quarter for the MVPD universe with large and the prior one, we're obviously participants in that. It's a nice change to see in terms of sort of trend. The specifics for each of our channels differ a bit. They each have different levels of penetration against what is commonly called, the full available basic universe. And so, we're pleased with the trend that was stabilized over the past 90 days. It is important to us and we have of course views of it as we go forward and we try to make those views conservative, reasonable and to invest appropriately against them.

Thank you, Josh.

Your next question comes from the line of Anthony DiClemente with Nomura Securities.

Hi, thanks a lot. Good morning. Hope you guys are doing well better than we are after a week like this. But I have two questions for Josh, one for Josh and one for Sean. Josh, just a follow up on those subscriber numbers. I presume that Sling TV and Sony PlayStation Vue that those online video distributor subscribers are not included in the Nielsen numbers. Can you guys just maybe confirm that? And then just more broadly, can you talk about your learnings in terms of your participation in Sling TV and PlayStation Vue? And what you see in terms of the future of online video distribution or online bundles if you will? And then I'll follow up with Sean after. Thanks. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: Sure, Anthony. So on the second part of your question first. We are participants in both Sling and Sony's activities. We think that they are adjacent to and ultimately consistent with a bundled approach to the video world that we're in and so we did choose to participate in them. And our view is to continue to participate in like-minded and like-structured multi-channel video offerings from our current distributors and potentially from new ones depending upon their effectiveness. So we like that. I actually – I'm going to refer you to Nielsen to give you a defined answer on their sampling, their count, their methodology and their manner. I wouldn't want to be a surrogate and speak for their methodologies. So, we like everyone else participates in Nielsen calculations and I just would refer you to them for questions about methodology, projection, inclusion, and exclusion, if you don't mind.

Will do. Fair, very fair enough. And then for Sean, the company and you have done an excellent job in delivering those broadly stable margins that you talked about this year, in 2015. Of course investors care about that trajectory as we start to think about 2016. And so, I wonder what you can tell us about that at this early stage. And as part of the question, my assumption on The Walking Dead is that because it's an AMC owned property, the amortization of that is matched on an accounting basis with the revenue generated from Walking Dead. And so as opposed to a straight line amortization, it would be accelerated, which I think, even in the case of a revenue decline for Walking Dead would argue for margin stability into 2016 and 2017. So, can you just help us and investors with that or clarify or confirm that assumption? Thanks, Sean. Sean S. Sullivan - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Sure, Anthony. So on the second part of your question, yes, The Walking Dead, just like Fear the Walking Dead are owned. We do do the ultimate method of accounting on owned originals as articulated in our public filing. So the matching of the revenue and the amortization of that is occurring in those shows. So, I'll allow you to conclude as you may. I think the trends, the historical trends shouldn't necessarily differ from the future, but again, there is a revenue attribution element to it. As it relates to, again, the broadly stable margins, I commented about the fourth quarter. I think, this management team has been consistent in articulation of how we view the business, how we view the investment in content and the impact of the timing and premiere of shows, and how that may impact any margin in a particular 90-day period. So I think that should inform your view of 2016, but I'm certainly not going to comment further about what it looks like at this point.

Great, thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Nathanson of MoffettNathanson.

I have two for Josh on strategy. Josh, I know how much you enjoy Rectify, you've talked about Rectify. When you look at it, how it debuts on Sundance, the ratings are pretty low given the quality of the show. So I know your strategy about building other networks. But do you ever rethink the strategy of launching shows on AMC's main network to kind of build awareness and then put them down to Sundance, because it seems like you're not getting the lift on a kind of show like that that you probably deserve? Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: I think I'll respond and Ed can too, because he has engineered some unique things between our shows and actually we have – it's a good question. It is of course a challenge that we deal with. We have shows that we think are extremely strong and some of them don't frankly meet our ratings expectations and it does provoke questions about platform – platform strength, exposure, I'll just say broadly and I'll turn it over to Ed. We have thought that it is very wise at minimum to experiment and actually go further and try and do everything from premiering online to utilizing our other channels for simultaneous premieres in order to boost exposure and sampling and create opportunity. Ed has actually engineered a couple of things that you may want to hear about.

Yeah. Michael, I'll just add. We did develop Rectify with Sundance Channel in mind. Frankly, we're not sure that Rectify would be deemed a broad enough show for AMC's audience, and the cost structure of Rectify complemented that thinking. And the other point I'll make is one that you raised, which is cross promoting on our networks is something we look to do. You probably don't recall, but we premiered Rectify, we dual premiered it on AMC and on Sundance, actually coming out of an episode of Mad Men and we have since stunted episodes of Rectify on AMC for just that purpose, to raise its profile and to bring audience over to sample Sundance Channel.

But what's interesting – the ratings didn't hold up as much as you probably thought over the summer given that, right? It was – it's strange how it ended given the quality of the show?

Yeah. Look, I think the ratings for Rectify – Sundance is a smaller universe, but the ratings for Rectify were strong enough to justify a season four. We think it does a lot to raise the channel's profile. It's a very upscale show. We know advertisers like it. And it's really – when you see Sundance included – Rectify included in the list of top 10 series for the year on many critical lists, it's really done a lot to raise the profile of the Sundance Channel.

Okay. Thanks. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: It's interesting, Michael, not to take up too much time, it's a subject that we really like. So, I hope we don't bore you and everyone else with a long response to it. But it is – I'll answer slightly more broadly, the sort of a little bit of history of TV has sometimes shows that have a life that pops when it's least expected. It's not common, but it does occur. There are examples of shows that in their secondary life become revered and actually live more greatly than their first life. I could point to nothing on our air, but I think Friday Night Lights went into its odd sharing arrangement on network television and DIRECTV probably got more attention and I don't know exactly what happened to the ratings, but it sort of had a resurgence of interest. So, we continue to toy with what we can do when we have quality material and how we can boost it and it doesn't form a lot of where we think opportunities go as people view on, I mean it, new devices, new ways as things that are in a, so called digital library where the increasing on demand capability of cable television can be meaningful as well as SVOD, so it's a rich area, I'm going to take up too much time and irritate everybody on the call with too much on this except to say, it's subject, we like a lot, we think about and we think that great content probably has more upside than it may even be – than the system maybe acknowledging today.

Okay. Thank you, Josh. Thank you, Ed.

Your next question comes from the line of Todd Juenger of Sanford Bernstein. Todd Juenger - Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC: Hi, good morning. I suspect the question I'm going to tee up may also elicit longer than usual response, so I'll probably just keep it to this one. The topic of SVOD, which you just mentioned, has been an important and much debated topic for many years. As I'm sure, you're aware, it's back, front and center this week and especially, yesterday and so there is – there are those who hold a philosophy that says maybe the industry should rethink about how quickly they are willing to put shows on to that window or platform and then maybe thinking about creating a longer delay if those shows show up their all in an effort to, I think, increase the perceived or actual value of the linear view. On the other hand, your particular franchises and networks, I think in point is evidence that in your case, I think you believe that SVOD has in many cases helped the performance of your shows in your linear networks. So given this change and given changes made by big strategic players this week, I would love your current thoughts on how you think about the SVOD window? How you think about the tradeoffs between putting content there soon versus later versus putting content in other on demand places? I told it would be a long answer, it was actually a very long question, sorry about that. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Thanks. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: So, thanks. It's a really – obviously, it's a good question, Todd. And we've been fairly consistent in our thinking since we engaged in SVOD exploitation. When we…

I would just say broadly the windowed holdbacks are consistent with what they were in the Netflix deal, and we won't say and we've never said how long the deal lasts. We did say that Fear the Walking Dead is the first show in it. And then a number of the scripted series that come from the networks will fall into it as well. Todd Juenger - Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC: Excellent. Thank you, guys.

Your next question comes from the line of Vasily Karasyov of CLSA.

Thank you. Good morning. I think my question is for Ed and Sean. Can you please help us understand the correlation with your ratings, especially for your Marquee shows and advertising revenue growth? I don't think you ever had to call out make-goods since you became a public company and yet you benefit from ratings that one would say are higher than base case assumptions going into it. So how correlated those revenues are? And, say, 10%, 20% decline in live-plus-same-day for a couple of episodes of The Walking Dead, how impactful is it on the top line?

Yeah. This is Ed. It's hard to directly correlate. I would say, we've done a pretty good job of estimating our shows. There is an art to it. And we have a model and we look at a high end and a mid range and a low end in terms of new premieres and in terms of returning series. And I think our track record has been pretty good. One of the things that's very helpful and when you look at the BBC acquisition is we now have a stable of more scripted shows and many of them appeal to affluent audiences and we're able to work with advertisers to move impressions around and I think we've done a good job at that. And then, I guess, the last point I would make is on CPMs. I think our sales force has done an excellent job of growing CPMs. And you mentioned The Walking Dead, its unique appeal to 18 to 49s and a subset of that, 18 to 34-year-old males, looks much, much stronger by comparison as other networks have had trouble appealing to and holding that audience. So that's sort of the best indication of the factors I can give you that correlate.

And if you look at the past quarter, the September quarter, would you be willing to give us color on volume versus pricing growth drivers for advertising revenue in the quarter?

I don't think we'll get into one factor versus another and specifics.

Well, thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Ben Mogil with Stifel. Benjamin E. Mogil - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.: Yeah. Thanks for taking my question. So one on a follow-up on Todd and then one new question. The follow-up to Todd's question was about the holdback and the windowing. I'm kind of curious, when you look at Hulu that has the ad-supported and you look at Netflix, that's not, when I say, which one do you have a preference for, I'm curious your views on how you think about sort of different shows on different of those two services and sort of retraining the customer to see advertising. And sort of as a follow-up to that, you've had – FX has been out there sort of saying there's almost too much TV out there. There's obviously a ton of scripted programming out there on all the platforms. Curious how you sort of think when you look into 2016 and the new shows you're launching, how you sort of cut through the clutter, if you will? Thanks. Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. So I think – I can answer that I think – as Ed mentioned, I think we think broadly of Netflix and Hulu similarly in that their SVOD services, they have different obviously United States distribution, Netflix being substantially bigger at the moment and that itself has potential implications that we'll monitor over time that are probably obvious. It's bigger and more widely available. You could argue that that will be good or bad depending upon what you're trying to accomplish. The nature of the services I don't think have – in terms of their construction have by themselves necessarily meaningful impact on who and what they are and how it affects…

Your next question comes from the line of Alexia Quadrani of JPMorgan.

Thank you. I just had a quick question for – maybe not quick, but for Josh. I know no one has a crystal ball, but you obviously have a lot more insights than we have here. If you were to fast forward, I don't know, a few years out, how do you see your revenue mix differently in the sense that you think a notably larger amount comes from non-traditional subscription fees, such as the Sony or the Sling, et cetera., the over-the-top providers versus terrestrial cable? Are you more in the camp where you don't see the ecosystem really changing that quickly? Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: I guess, Alexia, the first thing I might say is to point to the past, if I may, just for a second, and point out we did in my prepared remarks that a dramatically increased percentage of our revenue now comes, compared to the past, not from United States advertising or affiliate fees at all. It comes from international channels that we operate around the globe and it comes from the exploitation of content that we now operate, which effectively makes us, the common word is, studio. So we have diversified our revenue mix dramatically over the past 24 months and 36 months. It actually doesn't look at all like it used to look. In terms of the more specific question you asked about – I think you meant – you were talking about domestic conventional if you want to call them MVPDs, by which we might include satellite, cable and telco versus the newer entrants. It's a little hard to know. If your timeframe is two years, I would say it's not dramatically different from how it looks today. We'll learn an awful lot from the entrants who are extending – who are incumbent and extending their distribution outside of their current format from the new entrants. I think to-date it probably looks like it's slightly additive, but not moving all that fast.

Okay. Thank you very much. Sean S. Sullivan - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Operator, why don't we take one last question, please?

Your final question comes from the line of Ryan Fiftal of Morgan Stanley. Ryan Fiftal - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Great. Thank you. Good morning. I have one for Josh and one for Sean, if I can squeeze them in here at the end. Josh, going back following up on The Walking Dead, so live-plus-three ratings have been down double-digits, but Nielsen doesn't capture all of the monetized viewing. So is there anything else you could share on performance of any other types of monetized viewing outside of those first three days that we might be missing is outside of the servers? And in the same vein, maybe rough order of magnitude, how should we think about how monetization fades as you go from the first three days to seven days to maybe later VOD viewing? Joshua W. Sapan - President & Chief Executive Officer: I'm not sure that I'm going to offer you any incremental insight beyond what is available today. You have all the statistics. We see meaningful viewership in the three days afterwards. You see the relationship between live-same-day and C3, you see the relationship between live-same-day and C7. Increasingly some of the broadcasters and others are paying a lot of attention to that. So that's what's in evidence. So really you see what we see. It is certainly a strong show in every regard and all of that benefits its strength and its momentum and its monetization. Ryan Fiftal - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Okay. Thank you. And then, Sean, I think you reiterated the broadly stable margin guide for National Networks and, I guess, I'm just bluntly – I mean, how broad is broad? I mean, I think year-to-date margins are up 400 basis points and you sounded positive about top line growth in 4Q. So I'm struggling to understand how margins could be stable this year. Thank you. Sean S. Sullivan - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Right. So Ryan, I think I'll guide you got back to the comments I made. As you know or just to reinforce, we have a new show premiering in the fourth quarter Into the Badlands and, obviously, some meaningful marketing spend against that as we launch the show. So that's what I'm guiding to. There's variability quarter-to-quarter based on the timing and the dollars relative to it. So I think our past experience and our past results hopefully are guiding how we're managing the business, how you should be viewing our financial results, and the variability that will occur. Ryan Fiftal - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Okay. Thank you. Sean S. Sullivan - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, thank you, everyone, for joining us on today's call and for your interest in AMC Networks. Operator, you can now conclude the call.