Greetings and welcome to the AMG third quarter 2015 earnings call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to your host, Ms. Selene Oh, Vice President, Investor Relations for AMG. Thank you, you may begin. Selene Oh - Vice President-Finance & Investor Relations: Thank you for joining AMG to discuss our results for the third quarter of 2015. In this conference call, certain matters discussed will constitute forward-looking statements. Actual results can differ materially from those projected due to a number of factors, including but not limited to those referenced in the company's Form 10-K and other filings we make with the SEC from time to time. We assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made during this call. AMG will provide on its website at www.amg.com a replay of the call and a copy of our announcement of our results for the quarter as well as a reconciliation of any non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures. With us on the line to discuss the company's results for the quarter are Sean Healey, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Nate Dalton, President and Chief Operating Officer; and Jay Horgen, Chief Financial Officer. With that, I'll turn the call over to Sean Healey. Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Thanks, Selene, and good morning, everyone. AMG reported economic earnings per share of $2.93 for the third quarter of 2015, which is 6% higher than the year-ago quarter, notwithstanding meaningful declines in global market indices over the same period. While our overall results for the quarter were inevitably impacted by declining markets and muted investor…

Thank you. Our first question comes from the line of Craig Siegenthaler with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question. Craig Siegenthaler - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Thanks, good morning. Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning. Nathaniel Dalton - President & Chief Operating Officer: Good morning. Craig Siegenthaler - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): So I appreciate Nate's comments on the net flow variance analysis versus 2Q. But other than Yacktman's net flow reversal, what other themes or trends can you point us to as reasons why flows have continued to slow versus the very strong levels back in 2012 and 2013? Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I think we covered the variance in our prepared remarks around a small number of institutional clients who chose this quarter to reposition their portfolios independent of performance, so that I think is the dominant effect. Nate, would you add anything to that? Nathaniel Dalton - President & Chief Operating Officer: Yes, so let me just say a couple things. So first, I think we talked about this quarter the three specific things that impacted it. One, the one you called out, which I would say is really U.S. equities in general rather than just Yacktman-specific, so U.S. equities in general, especially U.S. equities in retail, whereas we said in our prepared remarks it was disproportionately larger. And then we had the specific to this quarter events. Other than that, I think if you look at the long-term trends, we feel pretty good about it, and I think that includes the trends over this multiyear period, which is a large number of good performing products. The global distribution platform is growing. We have this opportunity to keep adding products both from…

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Dan Fannon with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question.

Thanks, good morning. I guess, Jay, if you could, help us with the new investments that were announced this morning or yesterday, and give us a sense of the contribution as you think about next year, and the guidance you gave from those transactions, and separate that from the existing business and the growth of that? Jay C. Horgen - Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer: Sure. So on the deals, I think I'd maybe start where the last question left off. We had $60 million drawn on the revolver at September 30. Of course, we got our distributions from affiliates in the third quarter this past month. So we've obviously paid off our revolver. I think we expect our revolver balance to be a little over $500 million at 12/31, expecting to close all of the deals at that time. So we're not individually calling out the purchase prices, but I think you can tell, order of magnitude, the amount of capital deployed. When you think about typical capital deployment into deals, we've said in the past we see accretion in the $0.10 to $0.14 range per $100 million spent. So I think you can get a good sense for what's in the 2016 guidance based upon that capital and that metric. Because we expect them to close on 12/31, we will get a full year of that in 2016. Maybe I will take a step back and just talk about 2016 more broadly, if that's okay, Dan, which is that that range of $13.20 to $14.80, it obviously starts with our pro forma AUM with those deals. And since we're going to get a full-year effect, includes markets as of Friday, and that blend was up a little bit less than 4% as of Friday for the quarter to-date, so that's since the end of the quarter. Because you can see what our AUM was at the end of the quarter, you have to put myCIO, which closed on 10/1, into that number, grow it by the 4%, more or less, and then you end up adding the deals, and you can see what the full-year effect would be in 2016. We have our normal model convention of 2% per quarter beginning the first quarter of 2016, no market performance through the rest of the 2015 period. And then we have a range of performance fee assumptions for the year. And then we also have our model convention of repurchasing 50% of annual economic net income, and I gave you the weighted average share count that we expect next year of 54 million, down from 55.2 million. So I think that's the broad set of assumptions that I think you'll need for 2016.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Bill Katz with Citi. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, thanks. This is actually Jack Keeler standing in for Bill. My question is just around the deal pipeline. I guess, A, what's the status of the deal pipeline? What are you seeing? And then, B, the market volatility in the third quarter, does that have any impact on the potential pipeline? Thanks. Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: As we indicated, the pipeline continues to be very strong, I would say, including traditional, alternative firms, wealth management firms, on a global basis. The volatility – I think if the volatility in the quarter had continued, it probably would have had an effect, but there's no discernible effect that we're seeing on the firms that are in our pipeline at this point. The large majority of our opportunities continue to be in negotiated transactions that arise out of proprietary relationships. We do our best to avoid organized auction processes. And you saw the effect in the transactions we announced, where all of them, as I noted, arose out of proprietary relationships and were negotiated in a way that was attentive to the particular circumstances of each new affiliate. And going forward, we think that by far, that's the most attractive way to make investments, most appropriate way to make investments, and obviously results, we think, in a much better transaction for everybody.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Kim with Sandler O'Neill. Please proceed with your question. Michael S. Kim - Sandler O'Neill & Partners LP: Hey, guys. Good morning, maybe another question for Jay in terms of the guidance range for this year. Any changes to organic growth or performance fee assumptions for the fourth quarter, just given the downturn last quarter? And then looking ahead to next year, are you still pointing to maybe the 5% to 10% range of total earnings for performance fees? Jay C. Horgen - Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer: Good question. So the 2015 guidance range of $12.20 to $12.80, so first, Michael, that reflects the actual results. We've already booked $8.93 year to date. We do have an estimate in our model for the fourth quarter, and that's based upon the third quarter AUM plus the closing of myCIO, and then noting that quarter-to-date market blend up a little less than 4% gets you to a reasonable estimate for where our AUM is right now in early November. We don't assume any more beta. So the last bit then would be performance fees, and performance fees are the primary driver of the range at this point. We have lowered our expectation for performance fees given the market volatility over the past three months, especially in products that are beta-sensitive. That being said, because of the diversity of our performance fee opportunity in both the absolute products as well as the beta-sensitive products, we still see the 2015 performance fees coming in at 5% to 10% of earnings. If you remember, last quarter we thought it might be a little bit higher than 10% at the top end, but we're back to that 5% to 10%, just also noting that…

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Carrier with Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Please proceed with your question.

Hi. Thanks, guys. Just a question on maybe the slower outlook, and the color of this quarter was helpful, in two parts. I think one, just on the three affiliates you made the transactions with, any color on how their organic growth has been trending in the last call it year or two? And then I think when you look at all the affiliates and you look at the industry trends in demand and maybe the performance of the affiliates, it's harder for us to see some of that. I just wanted to get your sense. When you look over the next year or two, do you feel like the firm is well-positioned to maybe generate above-average organic growth relative to the industry? Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: So I'll answer the first bit and then turn to Nate for the broader part of your question. With respect to the new affiliates where we announced investments today, they are all doing very well both from a performance standpoint as well as in terms of organic growth. You would expect that in a way because firms generally choose to pursue investment transactions when they have strong momentum in their business, and these three certainly do. Systematica has terrific long-term and near-term performance, is opening new products and gaining market share in their larger existing products. Abax, the same goes for them, having an excellent year in terms of performance, with a very exciting opportunity to build a global equity product or build on and grow an already very successful, well-performing global equity product. And then Ivory has, as we noted, an outstanding long-term alpha generation record, but has a long-only product which has just terrific prospects for growth and excellent performance. So these three affiliates I think…

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Chris Shutler with William Blair. Please proceed with your question. Christopher C. Shutler - William Blair & Co. LLC: Hey, guys. Good morning. Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning. Christopher C. Shutler - William Blair & Co. LLC: So I think it had been a year and half or so since the last large new affiliate investment. You had done AQR and I know some stuff on the wealth management side, but it had been a while otherwise. So I guess the question is just what changed over the last few months, or was the timing here just a coincidence in that you did three? And ultimately, I'm wondering. Did something change in the environment with the market downturn in the back half of the quarter that opened the floodgates, or what exactly happened? Thanks. Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Sure. I can understand the question given the number of transactions, but it is actually just the fortuity of the circumstances. And as you know, our investments in the main rise out of proprietary relationships that we've built over the years. And obviously, that's a very important part of our forward opportunity set. The timing of transactions is driven by idiosyncratic circumstances of each prospective affiliate. And it varies from demographic considerations to an outside investor's preferences, for example, in part of what was involved in the Systematica investment. The market volatility in the quarter, I would say, had those transactions really no effect. Those transactions were well underway. And importantly, as I said in response to an earlier question, going forward we don't see any discernible effect from the market volatility on our forward opportunity set, and we continue to be very optimistic about our prospects going forward, with a very strong pipeline and a competitive position that continues to be extremely strong. So lots of good opportunities, but they will never appear in a precise orderly timing, because that's just not how it works.

Thank you. Our next question is a follow-up from the line of Dan Fannon with Jefferies. Please proceed with your question.

Thanks. Just to follow up on just the quarterly flows and the outlook, I think there was a comment, Nate, that you mentioned about some delayed fundings. So just curious if those delays have now funded, and if you actually – and also just looking back on the quarter, did you lose some of the business that you might have thought that was coming in the door and that's not coming, back based on either performance or client decisions? And then also, I think the question was asked, but I'm not sure it was specifically answered. Are you assuming inflows for the remainder of the year in your 4Q guidance, and the low end of guidance next year still assumes inflows? Just want to clarify that. Jay C. Horgen - Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer: Okay, so let me try and take those in order. So the question about deferred fundings, as I said in the prepared remarks, we did have some mandates in the third quarter that were deferred due to that volatility. A number of them have funded. Some of them have not. And obviously, the ones that have not, obviously, you're never 100% sure until it's done. I do think the volatility may have – there were a few mandates that I'm not sure. This is, again, completely unrelated to performance. I think the volatility in some product categories did have some potential investors say that they're slowing it, and so I think some of those might not come back. I think that this is highly possible. But again, you'll see what happens if things are stable from here. So I think that's the first bit, which is, I think we've had a number of them fund, not all. I think there are a couple that you…

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Kim with Sandler O'Neill. Please proceed with your question. Michael S. Kim - Sandler O'Neill & Partners LP: Hi, thanks for taking my follow-up. I'm just curious if your thinking or timeline has shifted at all as it relates to building out the U.S. retail platform, just in light of some of the more recent flow trends and sustained lack of demand for actively managed domestic equity funds, really across the industry? Nathaniel Dalton - President & Chief Operating Officer: So let me just talk a little bit about what we're doing right now in the U.S. retail business. So first, I'd say we're making good progress on the product development side. A little bit of this is related typically to – look, we have a scaled business with the exposures that it has, but we have a bunch of very good opportunities to take the team that we've got there, and the sales and marketing client service infrastructure, and marry it with the good – and we've talked about this on prior calls – marry that with the very good performing products, especially in alternative, global, and emerging markets. So when you focus on this quarter, I think we've done a lot of work on what I'll call product development side, and maybe I'll call out two specific examples. One is we've started working with Harding Loevner in the wirehouse channel, which is taking their products which are performing well, having good flow in the distribution channel, and leveraging the places that we think we can really be additive. That's one example. And then another example I'd give, and this goes specifically to the opportunity set in alternatives, I think we've talked about on prior calls a product that we've been building with Pantheon in bringing private equity into the 1940 Act funds space. We've built that. We've now got that, 1940 Act (44:33) registered this past quarter. They'll be rolling that out through the team, and so things like that. We've been making additional progress on product development on some concentrated equity things and some other alternative products. It's good progress in product development to leverage our affiliate capabilities through the distribution team. I guess the other thing I say is look, all the judgments about that business and what it can achieve, further to Sean's point, are in the forecast that we've given you. And in the forecast, we're not really assuming any big trend changes to that trajectory. As some of these product development things come on, we expect it will take a little while to really gain traction and change things. But the last thing I'll say, to repeat a point I made earlier, we are seeing slowing outflows in U.S. equities and we are seeing good momentum on the alts, global, and on the EM side, both within our AMG funds platform but within our retail distribution more broadly.

Thank you. Our next question from the line of Chris Shutler with William Blair. Please proceed with your question. Christopher C. Shutler - William Blair & Co. LLC: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my follow-up. On the institutional outflows in the quarter, can you just talk about what types of strategies that you saw that the repositioning occur? I've had a couple of investors ask me if – it sounded like they're concerned about momentum types of strategies that have obviously worked well during the bull market that we've been in. Maybe just talk about where you've been seeing the repositioning. Nathaniel Dalton - President & Chief Operating Officer: So I think it's very hard to generalize. So I think the repositioning came – I'll say it had three pieces. So one, there were some, and this wasn't the bulk of it, but there were some where it was related to performance, so that's some of it. I think the others where it's clearly unrelated to performance and performance was quite good, I think it would be very hard to generalize and assign into a strategy. It was a couple things, and they were all we think unrelated. So I don't think there's something I'd generalize beyond that there.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Craig Siegenthaler with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question. Craig Siegenthaler - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Thanks. I may have missed this, but to the response to my second question, did this $500 million draw on the revolver, did that include the three new investments and myCIO, or just the three new investments? Jay C. Horgen - Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer: No, so we had already – because we closed on 10/1, but we actually expected to close on 9/30, we had already drawn from myCIO at the end of the quarter – or done in the quarter. Craig Siegenthaler - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Healy, there are no further questions at this time. I'd like turn the floor back to you for any final concluding remarks. Sean M. Healey - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Thank you again for joining us this morning. As you've heard, we were pleased with our earnings growth in the third quarter and especially to welcome three outstanding new affiliates. We remain confident in our ability to continue to create shareholder value through both organic growth for existing affiliates as well as to create investments in new affiliates going forward. We look forward to speaking with you in January.

Thank you. This concludes the teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.