Hello, and welcome to the Bladex Conference Call. We now have our speakers in conference. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the conference over to Melanie Carpenter. Ms. Carpenter, please begin.

Thank you, Lindsey. Hello, everyone. Welcome to Bladex's Second Quarter 2012 Conference Call on this, the 19th of July of 2012. This call is for investors and analysts only. If you're members of media, you're invited to listen only. Joining us today are Mr. Jaime Rivera, in what I'm sad to say is his last quarterly conference call as CEO of the bank. But we also happily welcome Mr. Rubens Amaral, longtime Chief Commercial Officer, who you all know well and has been named his replacement effective August 1. Also with us is Mr. Christopher Schech, Chief Financial Officer of the bank. Their comments will be based on the earnings release issued yesterday. A copy of the long version is available on bladex.com, which was recently redesigned, so we invite you to go visit the website for some new additions. Any comments that management makes today may include forward-looking statements. These are defined by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. They're based on information and data that is currently available. However, the actual performance may differ due to various factors, and these are cited in the Safe Harbor statement in the press release. And with that, I'm very pleased to turn it over to Mr. Jaime Rivera for his opening remarks. Please go ahead, Jaime.

Thank you, Melanie, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to our quarterly conference call. Thank you for your continued interest in Bladex. Like Melanie just said, this is a special occasion for me. It is, after all, the last chance I get and the last opportunity that I have to exchange views with you regarding the current state of the company and the way I believe it's going to move forward. So because of that, because it is the last chance I get to talk to you from within the context of this forum, I hope you will allow me to change the format of the call just a bit. If you noticed, the press release -- in the press release, rather, I extended my comments on the quarter a bit more than I usually do. So I will be addressing the quarter only in a very short way because what I would want to emphasize and where I would want to spend a bit more time on is to outline the strategic drivers that I will -- I think that under Rubens' leadership and direction, will allow the bank to accelerate its growth and creation of value in the future. Following my comments, Christopher will cover the highlights, the growth about -- on the drivers of the second quarter, and then we will be glad to take up whatever questions and answers you might have on any topic that might interest you. And after that -- after that, I will go through and go through my literally closing comments. And then ask Mr. Amaral to give us a few thoughts on what he thinks what he's going to do about the current state of the company and about his preliminary comments and preliminary ideas of the way…

Thank you, Jaime. Hello, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us on the call today. In discussing our second quarter of 2012 results, I will focus on the main aspects that have impacted our results, and I will put them in context with the previous quarter and the same quarter of the year ago. Now both these comparison quarters have shown particularly strong net income performance, which was significantly impacted by the release of reserves in the case of last quarter, and the investment fund trading gains in the case of the second quarter of last year. Net income this second quarter of 2012 is the result of -- is the result of the return to more normalized levels regarding reserve levels and trading gains in the investment fund. Nevertheless, we believe that core business fundamentals remained solid this quarter. On a year-to-date basis, results are as strong as they have ever been in the course of more than a decade, leaving us well positioned for the remainder of the year. But let us look in more detail into these and other factors that have shaped the second quarter results. The second quarter of 2012 closed with net income of $23.2 million, a decrease of $9 million or 28%, compared to the previous quarter and a decrease of 10% versus net income reported for the second quarter of 2011. Let's get right into the key drivers that defined this quarter, starting with the performance in the Commercial division, where net income was $15.7 million in the second quarter compared to $25.7 million in the first quarter of 2012 and compared to $10.8 million in the second quarter of 2011. As Jaime mentioned, a change in generic reserve provisions for loan and off-balance sheet credit losses was the main…

Thank you, Christopher. Ladies and gentlemen, please, we would love to listen and address whatever questions you might have on the quarter or any other issue related to the Bank or Latin America or the industries that you would wish to discuss. Please go ahead.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Saul Martinez with JPMorgan. Saul Martinez - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: I have 2 questions. First, is there any way to quantify what the impact of the medium term debt issuance had on your financial margins? Obviously, it declined sequentially quite a bit, I think in absolute terms $3 million, $4 million. How much -- is there any way to quantify that, the impact? Either in terms of the difference of funding cost versus your other funding, just any color around that would be helpful. And how quickly can you get your net interest margin back from 1 -- this quarter 1.7% back to what it was in the first quarter, closer to 1.9%. And then secondly on your generic provisions, can you provide a little bit more color on what drove that, what changes in your or what your risk model -- how your risk model is incorporating some of these increased exposures? Any color on what drove that? Because, obviously, as you mentioned credit quality was -- didn't -- deteriorate at all in the quarter.

Saul, this is Jaime. I would take the first part of -- or the second part of your question, and I will let Christopher deal with the ones related to margins. Just to give you a flavor for how our provision system worked. It is based and driven by a sophisticated model. As that takes into account the type of transaction that is involved, tenor of the transaction, the risk rating of the client involved and the geography of the country where the deal is taking place. Different types of transactions combined with different geographies bring about different need for provisioning, in terms of percentage of the deal. And what happened in this quarter is that we had the opportunity and there was demand from -- on the part of countries that are lower or -- lower on our risk rating as to do transactions that were more general -- more capital intensive. They were very attractive from the point of view of risk adjusted returns, but they did require of higher provisions. They were, in all cases, they were strategic transactions with clients that we have been trying to develop with -- a relationship with for a long time and that we think are going to continue doing business with us. In essence, those were good deals, that because of our provisioning model, have brought about the need for what this quarter were, particularly heavy provision charges. That's simply what happened. Again, we could have forgone them, but it would have been a very bad decision from a business perspective. Once those transactions are repaid, and they are short-term transactions, by the way, as I said in the press release, provisions will be released. They will either come back to the income statement as reversals, or having -- as the provisions having been created, they would allow us to do other business, either with the same client or in the same country and with -- on the same structure. Did I answer your question? Saul Martinez - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: No, that's great. But I guess the bottom line is that on a more -- obviously, these are good transactions from an economic standpoint and in a more normalized quarter, the provisioning level should be lower.

That's correct. On a normalized quarter, it should. And actually, like Christopher alluded to, in a normalized quarter, the provision levels probably approximate the provision levels that we have averaged over the first 2 quarters. That's more like it. The first quarter, the business mix was just the opposite. We did a lot of transactions in lower rated countries and lower -- from our perspective of risk and lower risk restructures. That was the opposite this quarter. Going forward, provisions will remain necessary, of course. We will continue growing. But they'll be somewhat more normalized. Saul Martinez - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay, that's great.

And in regards to your question regarding the funding cost, I would like to take that question, Christopher. You saw it in our quarterly analysis, in exhibit 3 and 4, I believe it is, that our average funding cost did increase by around 21 basis points, and that is really attributable to the higher levels of medium-term funding that we have put on the balance sheet. But remember also that we decided to reduce short-term borrowings, which were, of course, cheaper than medium-term funding, but were in our view, beneficial. Because within the short-term bracket, this short-term fund borrowings were relatively expensive. So we’d rather be keeping our powder dry in those short-term tenors of funding and make better use of that type of funding when it becomes necessary. So overall these 2 factors drove up the average funding cost by around 20 to 21 basis points. Now the question is, of course, how quickly can we compensate for that on the lending side and here, I think, it is clear to us at least, that the differential between the rates that we get in 2- to 5-year tenors are vastly superior than the lending rates that we achieved in our short-term business. So we are quite confident that any new deal that we place in the 2- to 5-year tenor will more than compensate for the incremental cost. And eventually, that will lead to a strengthening of the net interest margin again. We expect that to be happening over the course of the next couple of quarters. Hopefully, we can see substantial inroads in this year, but certainly we will benefit from that in the coming years as well.

One last comment on the subject if I may, Saul. Also critically important that the funding that we raised will allow us to expand our syndication business. We already have a couple of mandates in the bag that will be structured probably over the next quarter. The syndication business, of course, not only produces interest income, but also produces fees, which as we have admitted in the past, remains one of the few weak points that we still need to address in our business model. So the benefit will be double, not only higher spreads that's because of the tenor of the loans that we will be extending, something we can afford to do. As you can see from the press release, our average loan tenor, actually, came down to 2, something like 280 days. Although, we have a lot of space to prudently extend it to other tenor on the portfolio, but also there will be a very significant and real impact in terms of syndication fee. An area, by the way, where we have less competition than we had in the past. There are fewer players because there are fewer banks that have the capital resources to be able to underwrite the transaction, which is something that I'm sure Ruben's going to be emphasizing over the coming quarters.

Our next question comes from Jeremy Hellman with Divine Capital Markets.

Most of what I have has been covered. But I did just wanted to chime in and say thanks and wish you all the best. It's truly been a pleasure working with you over the years. And I think you may remember, I first started studying the company when Carlos Yap held the CFO position, so it's been a while. So just wanted to wish you well, all the best and I have enjoyed it and extend my welcome to Rubens.

Our next question comes from Marc Miller with DePrince, Race & Zollo. Marc Miller - DePrince, Race & Zollo: I just have a follow-up question from some of the questions that were asked earlier. Just on the NPL coverage risk, can you talk to the risk level for high-risk markets, such as Argentina?

I'll be glad to take the question up. But if you give me just a bit more depth to the question, so that I can address the exact issues that might be worrying you. Marc Miller - DePrince, Race & Zollo: Yes, I'm just trying to better understand your NPL coverage risk, specifically, where you're allocating the provisions. You talked about some of the more stable markets where you've reallocated capital. But I'm trying to also better understand what the risk level is for smaller markets that have higher risks, such as Argentina.

Clearly, the way the model works, if we do a transaction in the riskier markets, let's just say Argentina, clearly, the model allocates significantly more provisions to that transaction than if we were to book it, say, in a country like Chile. Also if we extend a long-term loan in Chile in connection, say, with leasing transaction to import machinery, that loan will carry significantly heavier generic provisions than a freestanding pre-export financing in Chile. So the general idea is riskier countries get heavier charges for provision, longer tenors do as well. All within the context -- and by the way, it's all model based and the model itself is based on 14 years of statistics experience in the region. That's the basic principle of how it operates. Did I answer your question? Marc Miller - DePrince, Race & Zollo: Yes. And just the only follow-up would be, have provisions dramatically changed then in Argentina from your risk model over the past quarter?

I don't believe so, Mark. What has changed we've -- by the way, we review the model frequently as we gather more experience. But, no, they haven't changed significantly. What happened this quarter is that the composition mix changed. There were more transactions done in a -- of a longer tenor or less structure or in countries where the risk is higher. In all cases, again, just to make a point, as the return, risk-adjusted return on what -- on the transactions that we did was very favorable and also made all the sense in the world to go through with it.

Our next question comes from Michael Bunyaner with TLF Capital.

It's Michael Bunyaner and I'm with TLF Capital. I just want to ask you a couple of questions. I have known Bladex for just about 10 years or so. And the promise of the growth and the benefits from the growth really didn't come through for various reasons. And what was very helpful is to hear you discuss all the hard work that you did do that today, the company is a rocket about to take off. Could you be kind enough to take a step back and share what does it truly mean in terms of asset growth, the returns that you hope in terms of asset growth, either in terms of spreads or in terms of return on equity, and please share with us the distribution of dividends as you think, as a percentage of earnings going forward, because, obviously, we have gone from steady growth up until the crisis and then we had the dividend cut from $0.22 to $0.15 and then you rebuilt it back to about where we are now. Just if you can step back and tell us what is this rocket going to look like 3 to 5 years out.

I'll take the third part of your question first, regarding dividends. I think that our record shows 2 things. Firstly, dividends has been raised along with improving -- along with the improving performance of our core business. I expect that to continue being the case. Caveat to the comment is that dividends have been raised only after the company is sure of the ability to sustain the higher level of profitability that we achieved as we moved forward. And I believe that will continue being the case for the reasons that I will next address. So I am convinced that profitability will continue increasing and that the company will continue increasing its dividend. I can state publicly, I've done it before, that from the perspective of the board, we want to be classified as a company that pays an attractive dividend here. Secondly, asset growth. Asset growth, to an extent, depends externally on what goes on in the world and how quickly economies in Latin America and trade finance grow or not. Trade finance, as I said before, tends to grow at a multiple of economic growth. So you can assume that as long as Latin America continues growing, trade will grow at a multiple of anywhere from 3x to 4x that, and that we will, at least, accompany that growth as we've done in the past. Difficult, if the economic cycle turns against us as it did in 2000 and 2009, it's not only difficult, but it's downright dangerous, even fatal, to try to move against the business cycle, in the banking business at least, to try to move against the business cycle, because you're probably going to feel extremely sorry than you did 1 year or 2 years afterwards. Because of the reasons that I just explained, I'm…

Yes. One more if I may. The mid -- the $750 million which you have just secured, does this mean that the percentage of the portfolio that is geared toward the 2- to 5-year loans will grow significantly beyond the next couple of quarters? How are you thinking about that?

Absolutely. We -- those $750 million will be deployed, of course, and will be deployed at attractive risk adjusted returns. And by the way, the beauty of it all is that, because we raised that money under such favorable conditions, the spread that we're going to be able to earn on that money will probably be significant, which is why I spoke of a very good investment to the company a few moments ago. The overall composition of the portfolio, the distribution between short and long, between trade and non-trade, will probably not change much because the rest of a portfolio, the short-term portfolio, will grow concurrently. So I don't expect any major shift to take place now.

Very helpful. And one last question. You also mentioned that one of the core business -- one of the opportunities in terms of improving the business model are the syndication and the fees. How large of a total profit or net interest income -- net interest margin, excuse me, the fee has become?

Can I ask you to please repeat the question because I missed the crucial part, what you said. And I mentioned that one of the important elements in the business model going forward was the fees. Was that what you said?

Fees, syndication fees. Yes. How significant could this become?

It will have to become very significant. Actually, even a few years ago, we're running at relative fee -- our relative fee a few years ago were running at something like twice what they're currently at. And we had explained this before, starting 2010, we focused on what was the most critical element, the most critical limitation of the business model at the time, which was scale. And we worked and dedicated a lot of time to that, just regaining and acquiring scale. We are a relatively small company, one. And secondly, we are obsessively -- we are obsessed about focus. We are focusing our efforts on growing scale to the detriment, admittedly, and we’ve stated and admitted it before, to the detriment of our ability to generate what should have been a larger amount of fees. That is now changing. We have now acquired the scale. And fee generation has now become a very important part of our business model going forward. It is the best and most effective way of reaching a higher ROE. Again, just as we were successful at gaining scale rapidly and faithfully and prudently, when we focus the organization on that, I'm sure that as Rubens focuses the team on the generation of fees, the efforts will bear fruit fairly rapidly.

Our next question comes from Bill Jones with Singular Research.

Two quick questions. First for Christopher, on the income statement, there's a gain on the sale of premises and equipment. Maybe you could give little color on that?

Yes, sure. This is in reference to the sale of our old corporate offices, and we moved to new, and in my view, much nicer corporate offices in a different part of town in Panama City. And so we sold what used to be our property at a gain of $5.6 million. We have this -- we were owners of this property since the inception of the premises back in '82 or '83, I believe. And we realized a gain on that sale. That's all there is to it.

Okay. And then secondly, on prior calls, we have -- Jaime had discussed possible resolution to the Asset Management business or an exit or final resolution. Have there been any more thinking in that regard? Maybe you could bring us up-to-date on what the thought process is there and how we should be -- what we should expect?

Firstly, there's been a lot of thinking on that. Just to restate our position, and we stated this a couple of quarters ago, we find the status quo not acceptable. Business as we run it now has been a good business, but it has two limitations. Firstly, we haven't been able to generate fees out of it, and there are good reasons for that. But the fact is we haven't been able to generate fees. And secondly, while volatility, the result, has diminished significantly, we still believe that our exposure to the fund is too large -- is larger than we would like it to be. So we have been actively working on a solution or a new structure that would allow us to make the most out of what has been a very good track record in the business. The solution that we have been working on and we have made progress on, is one that would allow us to firstly, reduce our investment in the fund; secondly, preserve the ability to generate fees; and thirdly, reduce amount of management time that is spent by the corporation running the business. We've done significant progress on it. We will -- on the solution, we are considering a couple of serious proposals. This is something that I know Rubens will be focusing efforts on during the next couple of quarters. A solution will be forthcoming. And if no solution is forthcoming, no solution that allows us to achieve all our goals, that is: reduced exposure, increased fees and monetization of our track record, then we will all consider shutting down the position and moving on with our work. But again, that's our least preferred option. We're working on structures that I think will provide a solution that will be effective, will continue to realize trading gains, will generate fees and reduce the amount of management time that has to go into it. Rubens is going to work on it, and I'm sure he'll bring you up-to-date on what we're doing.

Your next question comes from David Ross with Chevy Chase Trust.

Just a quick question. It looks like there's some declines in places that kind of surprised me, like Colombia, Chile and Mexico, which I know has been a focus for you. Can you give us some context as to what's going on there?

It's controlled -- in Colombia, I'll tell you what happened for instance. We had extended financing to a number of banks because of changing liquidity conditions in Colombia. When the transactions matured, they did not replace them. The temporary happens from time to time in different countries. Nothing more than that, normal changes in the markets. In Chile and Colombia, was basically the result of more liquidity in the local market and banks not needing to renew the financing that we have extended to them. I'm sure that either this quarter or next, the situation will change again. In Mexico, there were a couple of companies that actually prepaid extensions of credit that we provided with them. As you know, in Mexico the conditions in the capital markets improved. Money became widely available. But that's one of the reasons why Bladex issued bonds in Mexico, so did some of our clients and they used the proceeds to pay us. But Mexico is growing, the United States is growing. And I'm sure we'll see that business being replaced either with the same companies or with others. So the changes that happened in all countries follow simply a purely business-related developments in the industries and the countries involved. Our business is short-term in nature, as you can imagine. Our average portfolio, the length of our loan on average is 280 days. So even small changes in the conditions in one or another country quarter-to-quarter will and has -- had and will continue to bring about quarter-to-quarter changes, which we don't really "worry about." We manage the portfolio more on the basis of year-to-year trend.

Our next question comes from Alessandro Arlant with the Bank of America.

Three quick follow-up questions. If you could confirm the pace of loan growth now for the second half, if we can expect that loan growth to accelerate and what do you have as loan growth for 2012, the full year?

Traditionally, our -- the second half of the year has been stronger for us than the first. So we expect the second half of the year to follow what has been the pattern over the last few years. It is changing world, however. And we were surprised, the first quarter, as you probably remember, has traditionally -- had traditionally been for us as the weakest quarter of the year. This year, we have a sterling first quarter. So again, all I can say is that if things behave the way they have behaved in the past, our second half of the year should be better from the point of view for growth. We have a good pipeline than the first half. Whether it will happen or not, quite frankly, it will depend on the way the world economy react over the next couple of quarters. We should, however, Latin America, according to the latest IMF figures, is supposed to grow somewhere around 3% per year. Growth in trade ought to be in the order of 9% to 12%. And God, we ought to be able to at least match that and quite possibly beat it.

Okay, great. My next question is with the middle-market lending, it's at 9% of your portfolio. And you mentioned that you will be deploying more capital into it. Do you have like a medium-term target in terms of a percentage of the portfolio where you want to attain maybe above 9%? And if you could give us a number so we could have it at the back of our mind, that would be great.

I comment on the middle market. By definition -- by definition, we extend very little, if any, medium-term lending to the middle-market, simply because our middle-market activity is driven by trade finance. Almost exclusively middle-market in general, tends to be riskier than the larger corporations. When we define one of the principles of our middle-market strategies, we concentrated our exposure to the middle-market on trade finance, which is by the way, most of our trade finance exposure to the middle-market, even has really solid and real guarantee. So I expect most of the -- most of the middle -- most of the long-term or medium-term money that will be extended either to the banks or to the -- or to large corporations. Within the size of the -- within the figures of the portfolio, you can simply add $750 million in medium-term lending and at the same time, we will probably grow about what we've been doing over the last couple of quarters, $100 million to $200 million in short-term loans. The percentages will not change much within the portfolio.

Okay. So we can assume in the medium-term that you'll -- the middle market is going to be around 10% of the portfolio.

Yes, for now that's what it's going to be, yes.

Okay, great. And then my last question is, I know you issued a dollar bond. Given this push in terms of the duration on the asset side, again, in the medium-term, do you expect to access the international capital markets by the end of this year? Or is this something that ought to be a project for next year?

What we have is enough ammunition to take us through the end of the year. Just -- so the answer is, all things being equal, no. But things might not remain equal. If another window of opportunity wants to open for us, where we could secure medium-term funding at attractive rates that would provide us with fuel to ensure the growth in 2013 and onwards, we might consider it. But that is not on the table at the moment, no. We have ample ammunition to do what we need to do this year to probably the middle of next one.

Our next question comes from Jordan Hymowitz with the Philadelphia Financial.

Just a quick question. You talked about mid teens ROE and you mentioned 14%, 15% once or twice. What's the earliest you get there?

If things go well, but if things go well, if we extend the medium-term loans that we intend to extend, I mean, if we are able to increase the fees the way we are intending to do, and if that brings about as it would, increasing levels of profitability and that allows us to increase the dividend, and therefore the rate of growth of our equity slows down, we should get there fairly fast. And fairly fast means, in my mind, I would think anywhere from no less than 2 quarters to probably no more than 4. That's a frame of mind or time that I will have in mind, anywhere from 2 to 4 or maybe even 5 quarters.

So by the end of 2013 as you sit here today, do you think there's a reasonable possibility that you could be at 14%, 15% of ROE on a run rate basis?

Reasonable possibility, yes, depending on exogenous factors really. If growth rate in Latin America remains reasonably strong, then that is very much within the realm of the possible. My only concern would be a deepening recession in Europe, a slowdown in Latin America, it will still grow, but not as fast as before. If risk levels will increase, that would lead us to be more careful and that will delay the process. But absent exogenous factors of that nature, I think that you've seen our ROE doubled in something like 15 months. Clearly, we're not going to do that again, but we're most -- we're most of the way towards our meeting our ROE goal.

And would you say the current economic environment as we stand here today, no better, no worse, is good enough to get you and that was plans of 14%, 15%?

It's there in a steady, slow, proven manner, again. The environment, as it is today, is sufficiently beneficial for us to continue making progress. Again, keep in mind that as we look at our performance over the next year rather than quarter-to-quarter, because we might have another quarter like the ones you just saw because of special opportunities in the market we are forced to take actions that might be detrimental to that one particular quarter. But quarter-to-quarter, we're doing well. The company is very well positioned, the region is growing, trade is growing and we have the best team in place that we've had ever since the creation of the company. 15%, a reasonable and reachable number.

[Operator Instructions] I'm showing no further questions. I will turn the call back over to Mr. Jaime Rivera.

Well, thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, many, most, all of you, my friends, this being the last time that I have the privilege of speaking with you in the context of this forum. I would want to thank you, really, from the bottom of my heart, for your steadfast support, for your trust, for your encouragement and really for your downright faith placed in Bladex, in our team, and ultimately on me during the 8 years that I have the honor and privilege of being at the helm of this great company. As the person charged with the ultimate responsibility for safekeeping the bank's sterling reputation and for securing its place as a winner within the new emerging economic reality, because that's what I think is happening, this new, emerging economic reality that will define the next decade. It was only through your steadfast support and along with the help of my teammate, that provided me with the inner strength and the inspiration, that helped me remain focused on fulfilling the Bank's mission in Latin America and fulfilling its commitments to its clients and its obligation to you, as our shareholders. So for all that support and for all that faith, I thank you again. I thank you from the deepest part of my heart. A couple of additional comments. For all mistakes made along the way, and there were a few, I take full and complete responsibility, and hope for your understanding. And for everything that we did right, and there were many things that we did right, I want the record to unequivocally state that it was all the result of a wonderful team effort. As I had the honor to work among a group of consummate professionals and just wonderful human beings. I want to take the…

Jaime, thank you very much. Good morning to everyone. I would like to say just a few quick words. First of all, I'm trying to paraphrase someone very famous. The state of Bladex is strong, financially sound, a growing business franchise, a skilled workforce and a clear view to continue to add value to our clients and shareholders by catering to an important emerging region on the world, Latin America. We all know that Latin America presents important business opportunities associated with the growth of trade, namely inter regional flows and regional integration, which are the two main important pillars of our business preposition. Of course, we'll continue to work clearly to preserve credit quality and to face the challenge of generating fee income, and not least -- and last but not least, making sure we continue to run a very efficient company. I want to thank you, Jaime, for your insight, mentoring and friendship throughout all these years I have had the privilege of working closely with you. I wish you all the best in your new endeavors. May God bless you. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm looking forward to talking to all of you in the next quarter. Thank you.

Thanks, Rubens. Ladies and gentlemen, this literally brings to a close my cycle with the company. Again, thank you very much. On a personal basis, I wish you and your families health and continued success and look forward to continue meeting you in the context of the financial industry. Best of luck and a fair wind to all of you. Bye, bye, and you will be speaking to Rubens and to Christopher in October. Bye, bye. Thank you.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's teleconference. You may now disconnect.