Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by and welcome to the American Express Second Quarter 2013 Earnings Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later there will be an opportunity for questions. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. And I would now like to turn the conference over to your host, Senior Vice President Investor Relations, Mr. Rick Petrino. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Welcome and thank you for joining us for today’s call. The discussion today contains certain forward-looking statements about the Company’s future financial performance and business prospects, which are subject to risks and uncertainties and speak only as of today. The words believe, expect, anticipate, estimate, optimistic, intend, plan, aim, will, should, could, likely and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements, including the Company’s financial and other goals are set forth within today’s earnings press release and earnings supplement, which were filed in an 8-K report and in the Company’s 2012 10-K and Q1 2013 10-Q already on file with the SEC. The discussion today also contains certain non-GAAP financial measures. Information relating to comparable GAAP financial measures may be found in the second quarter 2013 earnings release, earnings supplement and presentation slides, as well as the earnings materials for prior periods that may be discussed, all of which are posted on our website at ir.americanexpress.com. We encourage you to review that information in conjunction with today’s discussion. Today’s discussion will begin with Dan Henry, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, who will review some key points related to the quarter’s earnings through the series of slides included with the earnings documents distributed and provide some brief summary comments. Before I turn the discussion over to Dan, I did want to acknowledge that this will be Dan’s last earnings call as our CFO. He will be leaving Amex after a distinguished 23 year career, including the past six years as CFO, where he has played an important role in building relationships with the investment community. On behalf of all of my colleagues throughout the finance organization, I want to sincerely thank Dan for his many contributions and to wish him the best of luck on his retirement. I also want to recognize that Jeff Campbell is joining us on the call today. Jeff joined Amex from McKesson Corporation where he was Executive Vice President and CFO of the largest healthcare services company in the U.S. Jeff will be assuming CFO duties in early August after we file our second quarter financial results and are we are excited to have him as part of American Express. And with that, let me turn the discussion over to Dan.

Okay. Thanks, Rick. So I’ll start on slide two, the second quarter 2013 summary of financial performance slide. Total revenues came in at $8.2 billion. That’s 4% higher than a year ago. On an FX adjusted basis it’s also 4%. In the first quarter, the growth rates were 4% on a reported basis and 5% on an FX adjusted basis. I will speak about the impact of cardmember reimbursements on revenue growth a little later. Net income came in at $1.4 billion, 5% higher; EPS is $1.27, 10% higher as you can see the benefit of our share buyback program. And on the last line you can see that shares outstanding are declining. Return on average equity was 24% in the second quarter. Without the three adjustments in the fourth quarter of 2012, as this is a 12-month rolling calculation, ROE in the second quarter of 2013 would be 27%. Moving to slide three, our metric performance; billed business came in at $237 billion. That’s 7% higher or 8% higher on an FX adjusted basis. That compares to the first quarter when we grew at 6% reported and 7% FX adjusted. So this quarter it’s about 100 basis points better growth rate than the first quarter. Total cards in force are $104 million. That’s a growth of 4%. Proprietary cards grew 2%, which is comparable to what we’ve seen in recent quarters. Average basic cardmember spending is $4,097 in the quarter. That’s up about 4% and reflects the continued strong cardmember engagement that we have seen. Cardmember loans are $63 billion. That’s an increase of 3%, 4% on an FX adjusted basis and reflects continued modest growth in loans. Moving to slide four, this is billed business growth by segment on an FX adjusted basis. So total billed business, the…

Well, thank you Dan and good afternoon everyone. I am excited to have joined American Express this week, and I will look forward in the coming months to spending time with many of you on the call, and to continuing the strong legacy of performance that Dan’s leadership has helped to create here at American Express. So with that Rick?

Thanks, Jeff. Okay, so we are going to start the Q&A just before we kick it off, I do want to ask everybody as a courtesy to all those who do want to ask a question, that we strongly encourage you to limit yourself to one question and one follow-up, so we can get as many folks on the call as possible. And with that, let’s open up the lines for questions.

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from the line of Craig Maurer of CLSA. Please go ahead. Craig Maurer – CLSA Limited: Yeah, good afternoon. Dan, first let me congratulate you on your ride off into the sunset, it’s been a pleasure.

Okay, thank you. Craig Maurer – CLSA Limited: A question regarding the GNS business in Europe and the 12% of the $505 million you discussed, I am not sure, I don’t think any of us know in terms of the breakdown of GNS revenue, is there any component of that that would be susceptible to the cap that they are placing on interchange or is that strictly network and acquiring fees or is there some level of interchange split with the issuer? And as a follow-up, is there any guidance going forward on cardmember reimbursements that we can think about in terms of suppression of revenue or help on expenses. Thanks.

So yes the draft is not even out yet, so getting very specific in terms of answering all the elements of your question is really not possible. I think the main point that we wanted to make is that the cap relates to four party systems, and from our understanding does not relate to three party systems, which is our system therefore our proprietary business, the proprietary consumer business, and our corporate card business is not impacted. However in our GNS business, we think the cap will apply as a result of that we’ll have an impact directly on that business, exactly how it’s going to play out will depend on, exactly what the draft says and the debate that will take place between now and the time that the final rules are issued, which will be several quarters in the future. So it’s hard to be more specific at this point and it is our intent, once we have a chance to read the draft, to touch on this topic at the Financial Community Meeting which will take place on August 8. In terms of cardmember reimbursements, as we identify items we look for root [causes] [ph], and if there is a need for us to modify our procedures going forward, we’ll do that and if it’s appropriate to have reimbursements for customers we’ll do that as well, as I said in the second quarter of last year and this year the numbers are at a similar level. It has varied from quarter-to-quarter in terms of how much it is. Forecasting what might happen in the future is difficult because certainly anything we know about, we have addressed at this juncture, but certainly in the course of our work of reviewing our policies and our practices, it’s potential we could identify other items, and if they do we will remediate those, and if appropriate have reimbursements, but there is really no way to forecast what that might be.

Okay. And the next question from the line of Sanjay Sakhrani of KBW. Please go ahead. Sanjay Sakhrani – Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc.: Thank you, good evening and congrats Dan. Just two questions; one on Europe, I was just hoping, if you could just talk about, how you would deal with the competitive pressure of lower rates from Visa and MasterCard when domestic interchange rates go down and kind of how you would offset any potential impact to the extent that you have to take your pricing down. And also I just wanted to get a sense of how much of your volume is commercial as well. And then just second that Canadian VAT benefit you mentioned, I just want to know how much that was. Thank you.

Okay. So certainly as I said, there’s going to be a direct impact as it relates to GNS and the business we do with GNS partners. And then there will be an indirect impact, but that’s something again that will be very dependent on what the final rules actually say, and how we need to react in the marketplace. Certainly we have faced these types of challenges in other markets, and I think we have reacted in a way that's been beneficial in terms of our overall business. It’s hard to really specifically say, what's going to happen, because we don’t even know what the draft rules are exactly nor what the final rules will be. A whole lot will take place in the marketplace. This is something that I think will play out honestly not only over a couple of quarters, but likely over a couple of years, but we will be very thoughtful about how we approach that. In terms of the commercial piece of the European business that’s not disclosure that we’ve historically made at this juncture. I thought the most useful information that was to actually share what percentage the GNS billings were of the total billings in Europe. So hopefully that was helpful. Canadian benefit, kind of falls in this category of an amount we thought was large enough that we should mention, but not large enough to give the dollar amount, which is kind of in our practice on a fair number of items like this, but to let you know that there is something in there that is affecting the line item and therefore the growth rate. Sanjay Sakhrani – Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc.: All right, thank you.

Okay, the next question from the line of Bill Carcache of Nomura Securities. Please go ahead. Bill Carcache – Nomura Securities International, Inc.: Thanks, good evening and Dan, I will also add my congratulations, and it’s been a pleasure working with you. I had a follow-up question on the comments that you made. You made it clear that the proprietary business is not covered by the proposed caps. Does that suggest that you will be able to generate premium economics and be able to offer greater rewards, and therefore you have greater value for your customers, and I guess that the logical thought process then, does that put you in a position where you can experience similar results to what you saw in Australia? And I have a follow-up.

Yeah, so I mean currently we have a premium position, right? And that’s what enables us to provide the value in our products that we provide to our customers. And certainly, initially the gap between what our discount rates are and the cap will probably widen that gap somewhat. But realistically we know we’ll have to react to a second place in the marketplace. I don’t want to analogize this exactly to Australia because every market is different, but what we did in Australia actually demonstrates the fact that we have a flexible business model and are thoughtful in terms of how we do react when the environment changes. Bill Carcache – Nomura Securities International, Inc.: Okay. And to address some of the concerns that are out there around regulators focusing on the three-party system, can you just talk – your comments today were very helpful in the release and what you’ve said so far in the call, but can you just give us, I guess more broadly a perspective on whether you’ve ever heard of any regulator, you have any experience with any regulator anywhere around the world, really talk about bifurcating the negotiated merchant discount rate in your proprietary business with the goal of regulating it. I think that's kind of where some people were going and it just seems, I remember from past meetings that we've had with your Head of Global Merchant Services, it seems pretty clear that regulators around the world kind of get your models different because your rates are negotiated. I wonder if that's still a fair, a reasonable way of thinking about it, if you can just comment on that. Thank you.

So I just said we negotiate our rates with the merchants around the world. Certainly in Australia that regulation didn't address our rates specifically. That was a four-party systems and your understanding of this draft as it was characterized us we don't believe addresses three-party system such as ours. So that seems to be the course of action that happens historically and our understanding of the same plays here. What may happen elsewhere, always time will tell, but that has been the focus historically when it's come to a change of regulation.

Okay. And the next question comes from the line of Brian Foran of Autonomous. Please go ahead. Brian D. Foran – Autonomous Research: I guess maybe switching gears to capital, as these Basel III rules firm up, two things, one, is there any reason to think the advanced approach would be a meaningful change from the 12.2%, Basel III you kind of implied by the 30 basis point hit; and is there any reason to think the liquidity coverage ratio is a hurdle that would be an issue in terms of the way you manage the excess liquidity?

So the 30 basis points is when we go from Basel I over to Basel III, kind of skipping the Basel II piece, right. It’s hard for me to say what the impact will be until we actually complete the work on the advanced Basel III methodology. It requires the gathering of an enormous amount of information that we have to process with systems. That work is actually underway currently. We actually have scheduled to enter a parallel run in the beginning of 2014, at that juncture we will have a better sense of what the impact would be on capital ratios. So I don’t have an estimate for you at this juncture. In terms of liquidity rules, I guess we don’t have final liquidity rules at this point although from what we understand so far, we think we have a strong liquidity position and don’t, at this moment based on our understanding, think that the new ratios that will phase in over time would have a substantial impact on us. So therefore I would say it wouldn’t necessarily have an impact on kind of how we think about liquidity at the moment. Brian D. Foran – Autonomous Research: One follow-up, I guess on the other expense. All the dimensions you gave are very helpful. But if I just think about it simplistically, I mean, is the $219 million kind of a good run rate for that number or is it better to think about since the Visa and MasterCard benefit rolled off and excluding the quarters where you had the big reimbursements, it’s tended to be more in the kind of $260 million to $270 million range?

Well, the $219 million, as I said, includes the Canadian item. So I don’t know that I used that number in the first quarter. So in the first quarter of this year we didn’t have any items that we spiked out and it was $246 million. Brian D. Foran – Autonomous Research: Perfect. Thank you very much.

Okay.

Okay. And next question comes from the line of Rick Shane of JPMorgan. Please go ahead. Richard B. Shane – JPMorgan Securities LLC: Hey. Thank you guys for taking my questions. And Dan, I will miss these conversations and wish you all the best.

Thank you. Richard B. Shane – JPMorgan Securities LLC: I’d love to talk a little bit about the nuance of your conversations with the regulators. We’re in a situation now where it appears that the press has seen the documents and what you guys have indicated is you had conversations, it doesn’t sound per se like you’ve actually seen the draft at this point. You guys are very deliberate in your communications, you’re very cautious and you come out with a strong interpretation of how this is going to play out for your guys. I’d love to understand what the dialog was like when it started and make sure that we understand the subtlety of this because it is pretty significant as you can see from how the stock traded around all those today?

Yeah. Well, I haven’t said that. I mean, we’re not necessarily intimating that the conversations of the people who have characterized this to us are the regulators, right? So it is based on our understanding, previously to this leak of the drafts where we would come out and based on the characterizations of those people who have seen the draft and discussed it with us, our sense is that in fact notably different than what we have been thinking about before. However we actually see the draft and get a chance to read it and digest it, then we’ll all even be in a better position, but as you indicated there were certainly notable discussion in the press and activity in our stocks, and so we wanted our press release to share our understanding of where we are even though we haven't read the complete document. And so that's the state of play at the moment. After it is issued on the 24th, we will read it and if there is anything – any refinements we can make, we will do that at the financial committee meeting on August 8. Richard B. Shane – JPMorgan Securities LLC: Great, I guess we look forward to reading it at the same time you guys do. Thanks guys.

Okay.

Okay, thank you. Next question from the line of Ken Bruce of Bank of America. Please go ahead. Kenneth Bruce – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Thank you and good evening gentlemen and Dan, wish you good fortune in your retirement. So thank you very much for the help over the years. My question, I’ll stay around Europe for the moment. Looking at the average cardmember spend, that has been decelerating really for the last several quarters and that has always been one of the metrics that you all have really focused on in terms of the health of the business and obviously there has been a change in strategy, at least there has been some additional products that maybe impacting the numbers, but I guess what I’d like to understand is or get some response from you is, how you’re seeing the deceleration in the average cardmember spend growth? What ultimately will turn that if it’s just purely the weak economy strengthening or if there is something specifically within your strategy set that will drive that or if you expect that to be less going forward just given the nature where you are adding new cards and the like?

Yes, so I think, historically our growth in billed business has come from both the combination of the growth in Cards-in-force, as well as growth in average spend. The growth in average spend comes from really two things, in recent history, that is just greater engagement on the part of our current customers who are spending at higher levels, but it’s also coming from our premium strategy. So we’re bringing on higher spending customers compared to what we were doing several years ago, and I think that shift to a more premium mix is influencing as well. However, well first off, the broader economy has an impact here as well and certainly just consumer confidence is the fact in terms of how much people spend. That’s been shifting a little bit recently, certainly things like housing prices firming, stock market doing better are all things that can influence that. But as we have talked about a fair number of times, there is pretty good correlation between billed business for us and GDP and I think the average cardmember spend numbers we see now are being impacted by the fact that GDP is below the average rate that we’ve seen over the last 10 years. And if history is any barometer, and if GDP picks up, you would think, it would have a positive impact on average spend. There is obviously also totally contingent on us having the best value propositions in the marketplace and providing the best service, and that’s what we are focused on. So it’s hard to spike out exactly how each of those things impact average spend, but certainly the general slow growth in the economy I think is a factor here. Kenneth Bruce – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Okay, thank you. And just on a clarification or maybe just, if you could provide some senses to what the differences are in the cardmember reimbursements that will either determine whether, it’s a revenue item or an expense, can you give us some examples as to what the cause of that change please?

So we think it’s, each items to talk one item this quarter, it’s a number of items in each quarter, and each item is unique. So each quarter we evaluate the items that are in front of us and make the judgment based on our view at that quarter of how it should be categorized, so you can have different types of items in different quarters. That’s really the thing that is the primary driver. Kenneth Bruce – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Okay, thank you and best of luck.

Thank you.

Okay. The next question is from the line of Ryan Nash of Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Ryan M. Nash – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Hey, thanks. Just as a follow-up on Ken’s question related to spend growth, outside the acceleration we saw in GNS from new business wins. Do you think particularly here in the U.S., do you think the current run rates are good proxy for what we should see for spend over the next few quarters? Should we expect it to remain stable or just given the fact that we are seeing improvement from the [welfare] fact whether it’s higher home prices and higher markets, should we start seeing that manifesting into higher spend?

So as you know me, I don’t want to forecast here, I guess, one of the factors is the grow over later in the year although a lot of steeper thing were earlier in the year. But clearly I think where the economy goes and consumer confidence will also be significant factors about whether it accelerates from here or not. Ryan M. Nash – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Okay, and then just a question on expenses, so Europe 69% as a percentage of managed revenues and I know you’ve talked about migrating towards 67% over time, so I guess should we expect to stay at these levels in near-term, and if revenue growth does have to accelerate and we could see a pickup in expenses from here?

So we say we went migrate back towards historical levels, okay. We are having to have 2007 on there, which is 67%, but we went and migrate back to the historical levels. If we are successful and it’s our plan to be successful of growing operating expense at less than 3%, that’s going to create leverage and should enable us to continue to improve that number over the next 18 months. Ryan M. Nash – Goldman Sachs & Co.: Great. Thanks for taking my questions and congrats.

Thanks.

Thank you. Next question is from the line of Dan Fandetti of Citigroup. Please go ahead. Donald Fandetti – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Hi, Dan. Just a conceptual question, I was looking back in your merchant discount rate, it’s down a couple of basis points over the last 2.5 years. And you just had very strong GNS growth, which I would think would naturally bring that down more and so. I guess my question is, do you really have any sort of core change in your merchant discount rate, when should we think about that as more flattish going forward, the mix?

Okay, so first GNS is not in the discount rate calculations, it’s really a calculation based on our proprietary business, so that’s not in there. So we have said, in the absence of increasing price anywhere because of our strategies drive further into everyday spend categories, in the normal course we’d expect the discount rate to drop by two or three basis points a year. We in fact have not seen that over the last several years as there have been opportunities where we are bringing greater value to merchants and then obviously we’ve been able to increase price in certain situations, so that the drop in discount rate has been probably more in the 1% or 2% level over the past several years. So if we can drive sufficient volume by moving into new categories and driving volumes up, then I would expect to see some drop in discount rate as we go forward. But that's very much on strategy for what we want to accomplish over the long-term. Donald Fandetti – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Okay. And then quickly any updates on Bluebird in terms of transaction over fees.

So I think we're going to do some updates of the data that we shared at the FCM in February, at the August, FCM. So we'll update that information on August 8. Donald Fandetti – Citigroup Global Markets Inc.: Okay. Thanks.

Thank you. And the next question comes from the line of James Friedman of Susquehanna. Please go ahead. James Friedman – Susquehanna International Group, LLP: Hi. Thanks, and let me echo the congratulations. I want to ask about cards in force, Dan. It was one of the faster growing numbers in the past year up 1.2 million. I guess question in two parts. One is, should that continue to be the emphasis going forward in terms of driving billed business? And two, it looked like about 700,000 of that 1.2 million came from GNS. Should we anticipate going forward that GNS will be the driver of cards in force? It sounded like in your introductory comments it suggests that some of the growth may have come from China. Is that a correct interpretation?

So, cards in force number, which is 4% was 2% on proprietary cards. So that’s pretty consistent. We’ve kind of been at the 2%, 3% growth rate over the last five or six quarters. So the growth rate there is very consistent with the last few quarters. The growth rate in the GNS cards at 7% is somewhat lower than what we’ve seen over the last several quarters. It had been kind of in the low-single digits, right. So the lower growth rate is driven by fewer GNS cards in out there. So the growth in our business is going to come, as I said before, from both higher average spend as well as higher number of cards and the fact that cards are growing at 2% and 3% compared to maybe proprietary cards compared to higher levels historically is due to the change in strategy more focused on the premium cards as opposed to just being cards in. In terms of new cards in China, part of what drove the strong performance in GNS and in JAPA, the answer to that is, yes, right. So both in China and Korea we’ve had some new partners signed and some new product launches in those countries, both by new partners and existing partners. So that is part of what’s driving the GNS and JAPA growth rates that we see. James Friedman – Susquehanna International Group, LLP: Hi. And just as a follow-up housekeeping. So Bluebird is not included in that cards in force type of zone, imagine that’s a pretty big number, but…

It’s not included in cards in force, no. James Friedman – Susquehanna International Group, LLP: Okay, okay. And at some point will you start to decompose the cards in force at that level? Thank you.

So, I mean currently we share information in terms of what the GNS piece is. I think we can do some geographic splits for you. So, I think that I don’t know that we are going to give more detail on that, it wasn’t in our thinking, but certainly as we move forward we’ll provide information as it relates to new products like Bluebird but we think it’s appropriate.

Okay. Thank you. And the next question is from the line of Mark DeVries of Barclays. Please go ahead. Mark C. DeVries – Barclays Capital, Inc.: Yeah, thanks. Dan just help me, if you could provide a little more color on what we can expect on the GNS growth in Asia, you referenced. Is it realistic to think that at least for the next three quarters you’ve got some fairly positive year-over-year comps on that, should we continue to expect to see that kind of robust mid-high teens billed business growth from Asia?

So, I don’t want to forecast. In China, it is an important market for us and we’re focused on the partners that we have and the [biologics] that will take place. So my sense is that will be a good growth market, but I don’t want to forecast exactly where our GNS growth is going to be over the next couple of quarters. And also potentially it will be impacted by the economy in China. But right now, our growth rates are being driven there by new partner signings and new product launches. Mark C. DeVries – Barclays Capital, Inc.: Okay, got it. And then just a follow-up, with marketing and promotion expense kind of leveling off on a year-over-year basis, is it reasonable to expect or continue to see kind of the 4% to 5%, cards in force growth that you had over the last year or so?

Well, we have come up with this 9% number out there. And I don’t want it be a target or a guideline, but I think it’s recognition of the fact that on an annual basis, right we have fluctuations from quarter-to-quarter. On an annual basis, we need to increase investments at the rate they were growing the business, if we’re going to continue to have the type of business momentum that we want. So my view is we are very committed to investing in the growth of business. You have seen us do that historically and we will continue to do that. So our view is we want to make sure that there are sufficient investment dollars to sustain the business momentum as we go forward. Certainly the whole focus on reengineering that we announced in January is designed to grow operating expense at a slower rate, so that it provides additional resources for investment in the growth of the business. Mark C. DeVries – Barclays Capital, Inc.: Got it. Thanks, best of luck to you Dan.

Thanks.

Thank you. Next question is from the line of Chris Brendler of Stifel. Please go ahead. Chris Brendler – Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.: Hi, thanks, good afternoon. A quick follow-up on the cards in force, it’s my understanding that you had some minor annual fee increases in some of your proprietary products this year and some – did you see that in the net cards in force, is there any pricing activity across your portfolio, I guess any (inaudible) but it’s significant, is that a contributing factor and is that something you continue to squeeze higher over the years, given the strength of your products and the consumers attraction and loyalty to your products?

As we said, there were selected price increases on certain products. We never tried to squeeze out higher fees, we don’t want to increase fees without improving the value proposition for customers, so our practice has been where we increase fees to also avail that increase the value propositions to our customers and we have been very successful at that and when we have had fee increases, we have not seen a notable attrition as a result of that. So it’s all tied into – we’re delivering value, we’ve increased the value, part of the increase in the fee and probably of course it goes into the bottom line, what portions goes back into increasing the value to the cardmember. That has been our strategy and I think it will be our strategy going forward. Chris Brendler – Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.: Okay, great and then my follow-up question, enterprise growth and your initiatives there, the $3 billion target, I guess and possible with your Bloomberg update for the community meeting in early August, so ultimately feel an update there, I am just curious as to the investments you made over the past several years, serving particular, are we starting to see any meaningful contributions from those new initiatives yet? Any color there would be helpful.

Yeah, so we set a $3 billion target couple of years ago to exit 2014 at that rate. Simply when we set that target, we didn’t necessarily contemplate the economy being as slow as it has been over that period, that number as we’ve disclosed last year was $1.5 billion. So we have a lot of work to do between now and then, but we continue to think that it’s an appropriate target for us to inform. I don’t anticipate us updating that until we update what I just gave now. Chris Brendler – Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.: And what about the Serve?

So, I think one of topics at the meeting will be Dan Schulman and he will talk about what’s taking place both in Serve as well as Bloomberg in particular. Chris Brendler – Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.: Excellent. Congratulations Dan. Thanks a lot.

Okay, so we’ll just take one more question.

Okay and our final question then comes from the line of Brad Ball of Evercore. Please go ahead. Bradley G. Ball – Evercore Partners Inc.: Thanks, and congratulations Dan and good luck in your future endeavors.

Thank you. Bradley G. Ball – Evercore Partners Inc.: I wonder if you can give us a sense for the progression of billings over the course of the quarter, month to months, was it stronger late in the quarter and would you give us an update for July to-date?

So the earnings growth over the month-by-month was relatively consistent. There is no sharp upward trend or downward trend. I would say it’s relatively consistent. And we don’t really plan to give an update about what has taken place in July. When you tend to give even a quarter is a short period of time, you try to do it for a couple of weeks. We’ve found the side note necessarily indicative of what’s going to happen to the quarter. But within the quarter, month-by-month, it was relatively consistent. Bradley G. Ball – Evercore Partners Inc.: Okay, fair enough. And then one follow-up on the EC proposal, you said in your press release earlier today that separating the payment network and processing functions did not appear to impact proprietary networks like AMX’s. Could you explain what you mean by that and what’s the basis for making that statement?

So I am not going to say, I am an expert here. But I think there is some language in there about what you need to split the merchant core processor and the merchant acquirer I guess in the network. In that case, in our case, we do all those functions, so it doesn’t appear to us that that was the applicable in our situation. But again once you get a chance to read the draft, we can address that more specifically. Bradley G. Ball – Evercore Partners Inc.: So it would apply to a four party system, but not to the three party system, is that…

That’s our understanding. Bradley G. Ball – Evercore Partners Inc.: Okay. That’s helpful. Thanks very much.

Okay. Thanks everybody for joining the call and thank you very much for your congratulations. From my perspective it has been a pleasure dealing with each of you as well and we are highly confident that Jeff will do a terrific job as we go forward. So thanks very much.

Okay, thank you. And ladies and gentlemen this conference will be made available for replay after 7 PM this evening through July 24 at midnight. You may access AT&T executive replay system at any time by dialing 1800-475-6701, entering the access code 295471. International participants dial 320-365-3844 and again that access is 295471. And that does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for your participation and for using AT&T.