Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by and welcome to the Artisan Partners Asset Management’s third quarter 2013 earnings conference call. My name is [Jamie] and I will be your conference operator today. At this time all participants are in a listen only mode. After the prepared remarks management will conduct a question and answer session and conference participants will be given instructions at that time. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. At this time I would like to turn the conference call over to Makela Taphorn with Artisan Partners.

Good afternoon everyone. Before we begin I would like to remind you that our third quarter earnings release and the related presentation material are available on the investor relations section of our web site. I would also like to remind you that comments made on today’s call and some of the responses to your questions may deal with forward-looking statements and are subject to risks and uncertainties. Factors that may cause our actual results to differ from expectations are presented in the earnings release and are detailed in our filings with the SEC. We undertake no obligations to revise these statements following the date of this conference call. In addition some of the remarks this afternoon include references to non-GAAP financial measures. You can find reconciliations of those measures and the most comparable GAAP measures in the earnings release and exhibits and earlier today we launched a registered public offering of 4.8 million shares of our Class A common stock. Because we are currently marketing this offering we will not be discussing or taking questions on the pending transaction on this call so please refer to the documents on file with the SEC if you would like further information. And with that I will now turn the call over to our Chief Executive Officer, Eric Colson.

Thanks Makela. Good afternoon. Welcome to the Artisan Partners Asset Management business update and quarterly earnings call. I am Eric Colson, CEO and I am joined today by C.J. Daley, CFO. Thank you for your time today and I hope you find this discussion useful. During this time I want to make sure to reinforce our long-term business strategy through a current presentation of our operational and financial statistics. Additionally as I mentioned last quarter I want to take some time to review our management approach. Last quarter I focused on our talent driven business model. This quarter I am going to spend some time highlighting how we view growth. We are very committed to managing our business for growth. We think it is critical to talent acquisition and retention. But we don’t believe in growth for growth’s sake. We believe growth needs to be thoughtful and grounded in a long term view of success. Once I am done, CJ will take the lead walking through our financials. Since our last reporting period, the only real change as noted on slide 2 is our AUM, which increased to nearly $97 billion during the quarter through a combination of organic growth, market appreciation and alpha generation from our investment team. Since quarter end, we have surpassed the $100 billion level. While reaching this milestone is noteworthy and worth recognizing this as an achievement for our hard work and great client support, $100 billion is just another number and states nothing about the quality of our business or thoughtfulness in our growth to achieve this milestone. I will elaborate our approach to growth later on this call. The deck two slides provide a current view of our long term investment results. As a reminder, it’s our goal to produce superior investment returns…

Thanks Eric. Good afternoon everyone. Slide 14 begins the review of our third quarter September 2013 results. In summary it was another very strong quarter for our firm. AUM increased to $96.9 billion and net client cash inflows were $2.1 billion. Revenues were $178 million up 10% over revenues in the preceding quarter ended June 30, 2013. Our adjusted operating margin declined slightly to 43.3% and was negatively impacted by 191 basis points as a result of the expense related to our first public company employee equity grant in July of this year. Net income per share on an adjusted basis was $0.67 per share compared to $0.64 per share in the June 2013 quarter. On October 22, our Board of Directors declared a dividend of $0.43 per Class A common share. Moving on to Slide 15. Ending assets under management was $96.9 billion, up 13% from assets of $85.8 billion at June 30 and up 39% from assets a year ago. Average assets for the September quarter were $92.4 billion up 8% from average assets in the June quarter. The increase in our year-end during the September quarter was due to $2.1 billion of net client cash inflows which equates to 2.4% organic growth rate for the quarter and a 10% annualized rate as well as 10.5% of market appreciation which includes alpha generation. For the nine months ended September 30, 2013, net client cash inflows were $5.7 billion a 10% annualized organic growth rate. Market appreciation including alpha generation added another 23% of AUM growth. While we are pleased with the strength of third quarter net inflows we were equally pleased with the diversification of our growth. Growth occurred from clients both in the U.S. and abroad with all vehicles, teams and distribution channels experiencing positive growth for…

Thanks C.J. We will welcome a call for questions.

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from William Katz from Citi. Bill Katz – Citigroup: Appreciate the run down. Just Eric, so curious, a number of those reporting earnings already in the third quarter have been so struggling for unit growth, and by contrast you put up some pretty diversified and solid growth. Any sense you are getting, I know some of this is third-party money, but any sense you are getting in terms of the reasons why Artisan has been so successful? Is it replacement from others, is it just an asset classification, sort of curious what you are seeing there on those dynamics?

Bill, I don’t have a great answer for you on any trend line. We don’t see it as replacement on the institutional business; you can see some modest growth there in the institutional side. On the broker/dealer side, you are seeing an uptick there in the allocation to Artisan. I wouldn’t want to state that it’s due to the rotation out of fixed income at this point or any major trend. I think we've been generating some solid performance results and are being recognized for those results. Bill Katz – Citigroup: Second question maybe for C.J., just sort of curious in terms of your – you mentioned that the comp ratio all-in which was sailing to the mid-40s, but if you strip away the non-cash comp awards, if you were to look only at sort of the base comp if you will, and so if you strip out the cash retention package as well which I guess ends this quarter upcoming, I think that number was about 40-ish and 40.5 or so in the third quarter, what’s your sense for that dynamic as you look out into both the fourth quarter and into 2014? Is there any cognizant of the big move in assets both in the third quarter and again into this quarter?

I think the major driver of that ratio is going to be two-fold, one its growth in AUM and therefore leverage of holding that ratio down as we grow in the fixed costs are more stagnant than the growth, and offseting that is sort of the equity-based compensation expense which we said it’s going to be the major driver of that ratio going up. We plan to grant equity once a year, so our guidance of 3.9 per quarter will hold true for the next several quarters until the next grant in July of 2014.

And our next question comes from Robert Lee from KBW. Robert Lee – KBW: I just had a question, Eric, this is actually kind of referring to Slide 9, I guess, where you’d go through the teams and team development, and understanding that they have expanded the teams since each ones start, but I guess when I just kind of glance at the two value teams and understanding each is unique, it does seem like there is maybe not quite as broad an analysts in the PM base as maybe some of the other teams, and I guess what my question is are any of the teams currently looking to expand there, their staff to any degree, kind of have with searches, and maybe you feel like – maybe the value teams or one or both of them could use a little bit more kind of build-up underneath the senior guys?

Each of the five teams have their own culture and own way of designing their research. And so the value teams tend to build research analysts in a generalist framework as opposed to industry or sector or region expertise, and we’ve found that the value teams have tended to have a smaller team and a more focused decision making than the growth teams that have been broken out by industry or by sector and tend to demand a little bit more information flow to know how earnings are driving price versus the value teams looking for a discount. So, there is going to be natural differences based off of philosophy and process across teams. I think the teams right now -- across the all five teams are very well resourced. With that said, we are always looking for a good talent to join any of the teams. We tend to in most cases develop talent in our research associate or analyst level and groom that talent within the philosophy and the process of each group to create decision makers. So we are always looking at the junior to the research associate level to build, and I wouldn’t say there is a need for any team right now to fill a hole.

Our next question comes from Michael Kim from Sandler O'Neill. Michael Kim – Sandler O'Neill: Just a couple of questions. So, first in terms of the flow outlet going forward, number of your strategies remain close to new investors, but at the same time you are still generating pretty strong organic growth across teams. So, just wondering if you could maybe give us some incremental color in terms of the mix of the underlying inflows because I assume a number of the strategies that are closed are still generating inflows from existing clients or from channels that are still available?

Certainly, it’s been fairly broad based especially this quarter here, all five teams experienced positive flows – and the flows were pretty well dispersed across the growth and the value teams there, with global value having a little bit higher flow than the other teams. And from a channel perspective, we still are seeing quite a bit come from broker dealer side of the equation. On a go forward basis, the closed strategies as we have said in the past are soft closed that we still see existing flows come in from defined contribution or broker dealer or the 15 institutional clients. So we will see a decent amount flow even though the product is closed but the pipeline and the growth for open capacity we are seeing more and more in the global equity space, whether it’s global opportunities, global equity and our global value. In the global value we are trying to control the mix there that I said on the call, -- some mature stage when I look at the balance of the assets more than we are looking for growth. Michael Kim – Sandler O'Neill: Can you just maybe give us an update in terms of your plans as it relates to further building out non-U.S. distribution capabilities and how you are thinking about maybe potential incremental costs related to that as you build out the infrastructure?

Right now we have a few individuals in London. We had a relationship in Australia and those act as our hubs into non-US distribution and those hubs are utilized primarily by our business leaders that represent our five teams here in the United States. And those business leaders do quite a bit of travel working with the group out of London and out of Australia; they gather assets through consultants and other advisors. We think we are fairly well staffed there for opportunities that we see in the marketplace. We potentially could see a person or two next year but I wouldn’t quote much of an expense there into our non-US distribution efforts, we believe it’s working quite well.

Our next question comes from Marc Irizarry from Goldman Sachs. Marc Irizarry – Goldman Sachs: Just on the emerging markets strategy, just curious looks like flows turned the corner a little bit there. Any perspective on, number one, I guess how allocations are sort of shaping up for institutions in that space given some of the recent volatility in in the markets there, maybe just a view sort of maybe more what you are seeing specifically for that strategy which probably turns out occasions?

Certainly emerging market is continuing to gather assets. I think we saw it more so in the first half of the year but emerging markets continue to get flows across the industry. You have seen fairly concentrated group of managers gathering that flow. They tend to be the larger cap growth oriented that have had a nice tailwind behind them. Our strategy is an active strategy distinguished against some of the larger emerging market players and we think we are fairly well-positioned of the diversified and emerging market portfolio and we also feel that the underperformance this last quarter hopefully the signal there is turning the corner. Marc Irizarry – Goldman Sachs: And then can you just talk a little bit about either the retirement announcement from Scott Satterwhite in the US value team and obviously you have three year notice period. I am curious how the discussions with the consultants gone, can you just give some perspective on sort of the benefits that your structure provided in terms of managing –

Certainly. Obviously our large cap value, small cap and mid cap value strategy was launched by Scott Satterwhite and Jim Kieffer and they built I think a nice team in Atlanta with now four decision makers -- of the announcement with the three year heads up provides an enormous amount of transparency and to how we manage key man risk is that we clearly like to build the depth inside of the investment teams and also work through that transition in the marketplace like communicating to our clients and we find that the consultants and our clients find it helpful to know how the team is evolving and what their expectation should be on a go forward basis that we sat in a couple of different meetings that – the biggest risk we see out there is not a statistical risk of trying to measure to an index or on any type of traditional statistics out there. But the real risk is surprising your clients and he set expectations on the philosophy, the process and the people, and you follow through with an outcome to hit client and consultant expectations. And we are setting expectations that we are evolving the team and we are going to deliver on that. And we believe that dilutes risk for the future. So it’s been well received in the marketplace and I think people are appreciative of the thoughtful nature of how we are growing and evolving the team.

Our next question comes from Cynthia Mayer from Bank of America-Merrill Lynch. Cynthia Mayer – Bank of America-Merrill Lynch: Just to clarify some of the ways in which you shape the flows, I guess you said global value is closed to separate accounts to encourage flows from other channels. So which channels are those and how is that going? Is that mostly overseas, is that in the U.S.? And then if you look at slide – I guess it’s 11, the channels aren’t that diversified for global value but also not that diversified for emerging markets, so would you do something like that with emerging markets as well as the flows recover?

Certainly Cynthia, the global value as we said we are closed to separate accounts, the asset base there on slide 11 has clearly shown an institutional bias in that team. We are seeing more flows in the broker dealer and financial advisor and global value versus our other strategies and we are seeing more non-US flows out of any of the teams, the global value receiving the highest amount of flow overseas, either primarily through the usage that we have for global value. So we believe by closing the separate account and focusing on the pool vehicles for those other distribution channels that it will diversify that team asset base quite a bit. The emerging markets strategy interested in ‘06 when we launched the strategy, it’s kind of back to that lifecycle that we talk about. We launched an institutional share class, we did not open it up to the retail investor at the time we felt that we are in volatile period for emerging markets. We felt that if we raised some hot money in the first year due to good performance and if you had a boom-bust cycle in the following year, was a poor performance and we had redemption and fore-selling, you were putting the attract – the early track record caught in harms away there for a very adaptive flows. And so we controlled the asset flow and had a clear bias towards the institutional marketplace. As we get into a point where we feel the strategy is well-positioned for growth we will certainly think about how to balance that out.

Our next question comes from Chris Shutler from William Blair. Chris Shutler – William Blair: As we look at the global value team, can you help us think about the magnitude of remaining capacity there, so is it more like 5 billion, 10 billion, any more color there would be helpful?

As we get closer to the 5 billion we have to see how growth occurs in that rate. So we will be cautious on we layer that capacity in. Eventually long-term it could grow larger but we are error on a smaller number over time to protect alpha generation. So we don’t have the exact number but it’s out of your numbers there, that lean towards the smaller number. So we've looked at the philosophy of assets, we've always looked at total capacity and mix and we’ve protected the velocity to some degree. We are working on the mix and as we near our capacity number to protect alpha we will make that decision as we get closer. Chris Shutler – William Blair: And then just one quick one on the P&L, the G&A expense in the quarter was flat sequentially, a little bit lower than what we had expected. So just wondering how we should look at G&A going forward, should they just gradually kind of increase over time or is there something that could cause that expense to jump up?

Yes, there isn’t really any one thing in particular other than the change in control costs. So we have told you about that should be in the $2 million to $3 million range over the next couple of quarters. But just sort of ongoing expenses around G&A and communications and technology we would expect to – communications and technology to more slightly uptick than G&A on an ongoing basis.

Our next question comes from Surinder Thind from Jefferies. Surinder Thind – Jefferies: I was hoping just to maybe get a little bit of color around non-organic growth and you talked about perhaps either adding some new strategies or how that would go about, then you would be perhaps lifting out a team or maybe just bringing on a smaller individual or capabilities and then building that out?

From looking at new teams, we would look at a lift-out situation to bring on a new team and new strategy. We clearly have seen quite a bit of activity in the marketplace and we have a good pipeline of groups out there that we are looking at but the intersection of the group, the type of strategy that fits with Artisan is a fairly limited set that becomes a scarce resource for us to really find. But we are guiding quite a few teams out and if an opportunity arises we would develop non-organic growth through a new team, or one of our existing teams having an additional strategy to add to the mix that we currently have. Surinder Thind – Jefferies: And related to that, as you mentioned that it’s challenging to find the perfect fit out there. But is there kind of a timeframe that maybe you can think about or – is it more like a year timeframe out there that you can probably potentially pull a trigger on giving the amount of activity that you are seeing or is it just that kind of a wait-and-see that when the right fit does manifest itself, that’s when you guys pull the trigger?

I would like towards wait and see having any artificial timeframe of saying we have to fill this type of strategy over this certain timeframe. We found it’s just a force event that didn’t have the right outcome. So when we find that opportunity, and we feel it’s a great fit and no brainer, we will make that decision. Surinder Thind – Jefferies: And just one quick follow up, and if I may have missed this earlier. But I think last quarter your flows were relatively balanced between the US and international. How they fared this last quarter in 3Q?

Slightly down, but slightly from last quarter and when you look at the growth in number of clients we've had a good growth in number of clients and depending on the assets level of each client, it will create a lumpy outcome. So we had a similar growth, number of clients quarter over quarter, and looking at year over year I think we are about on track for the same number of non-US clients. Sometimes you get some larger pools and sometimes you get some smaller pools and that’s lumpy nature of the institutional business. We feel that our non-US pipeline is healthy, it’s a balance of US and non-US opportunities and with that opportunities we feel that they'll uptick our non-US assets and will have a higher growth rate in non-US assets given the low asset base we have currently and the opportunities that we see.

And ladies and gentlemen at this time we will conclude our question and question. I would like to turn the conference call back over to Mr. Colon for any closing remarks.

Thank you everybody for your time today and we will see your next quarter.

Ladies and gentlemen that concludes today’s conference call. We do thank you for attending. You may now disconnect your telephone lines.