Welcome to Boston Properties first quarter earnings call. This call is being recorded. All audience lines are currently in a listen only mode. Our speakers will address your questions at the end of the presentation during the question and answer session. At this time I would like to turn the conference over to Arista Joyner, Investor Relations Manager for Boston Properties. Please go ahead.

Welcome to Boston Properties first quarter earnings conference call. The press release and supplemental package were distributed last night as well as furnished on Form 8K. In the supplemental package the company has reconciled all non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measure in accordance with Reg. G requirements. If you did not receive a copy these documents are available in the investor relations section of our website at www.BostonProperties.com. An audio webcast of this call will be available for 12 months the investor relations section of our website. At this time we would like to inform you that certain statements made during this conference call which are not historical may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Although Boston Properties believes the expectations reflected in any forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions it can give no assurance that its expectations will be obtained. Factors and risks that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statement were detailed in Tuesday’s press release and from time-to-time in the company’s filings with the SEC. The company does not undertake a duty to update any forward-looking statements. Having said that, I’d like to welcome Mort Zuckerman, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer; Doug Linde, President; and Michael LaBelle, Chief Financial Officer. Also during the question and answer portion of our call our regional management team will be available to answer questions as well. I would now like to turn the call over to Doug Linde for his formal remarks.

Mort, I think you’re going to start today, right?

Well we are I think continuing to do fairly well as a company in what has been a very, very difficult environment but one which I must say I think is getting somewhat moderated and easier and improving. The economy in general as we all know has been through a very, very difficult patch and the recovery I suspect will be slower than the typical recovery from a different kind of recession, this being a recession that was obviously provoked by a financial crisis that came about as a result of the collapse of the housing market and what it all did to the securitization, the world of securitization and through that the world of finance. As all of the serious studies of these kinds of recessions that are provoked by a financial crisis indicate recoveries from this kind of recession is longer and slower than the typically recovery from the kinds of recessions we have had since the end of World War II. I guess that’s one reason why this is going to be called the great recession and let’s just hope it’s just a recession and I still think it will just be a recession. We are certainly in an area of the economy that has been affected by it in this sense in that a lot of office building activities of the American business world, the corporate life of America has been under the cost controls and concerns about over expansion I think was spread throughout the business economy. Nevertheless, I think as I’m sure you’ve heard from us before and probably have heard from other people who are in this world of commercial office space before. We are in the same markets that we have underscored before, namely supply constraint markets. Supply constraint for difference reasons,…

We sit here I guess in sort of the middle of earnings season for corporate America and it’s clear that the story is no longer about margin improvement through aggressive cost cutting which we think of as another way of just describing job cuts and people aren’t even talking about inventory restocking anymore. I think there are clearly signs that there is top line revenue growth across a pretty broad spectrum of the economy and everybody’s commentary, including Mort’s this morning I think, is a much more positive tone. We are actually seeing some isolated announcements of renewed hiring. A year ago I think everybody was just keeping everything in check because there were so many job reductions and we had rising unemployment and we were having lots of personal and corporate distress and while I think Mort would clearly say unemployment is still a pretty high number and we still do have this foreclosure issue, but it feels like business sentiment and consumer confidence is really starting to look through these negatives. While we are not yet seeing any consistent hiring trends from our customers, our tenants, there is clearly a change in psychology and velocity is starting to pick up. If I bring you back to last year in the first quarter of 2009, Boston Properties completed 250,000 square feet of leasing transactions. In the first quarter of 2010, we completed over 1.8 million square feet in 71 separate transactions. 730,000 of it was in Washington, 212,000 in Boston, 437,000 in New York City and another 400,000 in San Francisco. It is by far the most active quarter we’ve had in the last few years and if we even adjust for those one large 500,000 square foot transaction which was really a set of short term extensions with…

I want to start by giving a quick update of the capital markets. As you can see from our press release we had a productive couple of months in the debt markets. We successful closed three major secured financings on our joint venture properties including a $207 million loan at 125 W 55th, $180 million loan at 2 Grand Central Tower and $175 million loan on Metropolitan Square. As we look back on how we expected these financings to go earlier this year, it’s clear how far the secured markets have progressed. Last summer we anticipated that these loans would have been sized at only 75% of what we ultimately achieved and at rates between 7% and 8%. Today, we were able to place reasonable leverage with secured financings at debt yields of 10% to 11% and pricing on new 10 year loans in the high 5% range. The life insurance companies and banks are offering very aggressive pricing for high quality buildings and in addition the CMBS originators are in the market offering slightly higher leverage and pricing although we haven’t seen evidence that they have actually originated a material amount of new loans yet. We have covered the majority of our 2010 debt maturities and expect to pay off a couple of smaller loans due later this year at maturity. One in Cambridge in a portfolio within Carnegie Center in Princeton which combined totals $80 million. We’re also preparing to enter the market to refinance our Market Square North joint venture mortgage that matures in December and are still evaluating our low floating rate bank loans on our Reston development and on Annapolis Junction, each of which has an extension option. Our billion line of credit expires in August and we anticipate exercising a one year extension moving…

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from Michael Bilerman – Citigroup. Michael Bilerman – Citigroup: Either Doug or Mort, just in terms of putting capital to work it sounds like you have a little more confidence of using some of the $3 billion of excess capacity over the next 12 to 18 months. I’m just wondering if you’re able to contrast I guess your positioning and your competitiveness in terms of transactions given your comments of there’s a plethora of capital available in the marketplace, a lot of people chasing assets. But, also what it sounds like is you believe in a more slower type of recovery and so maybe it’s hard to stretch on deals if you’re not forecasting in a faster rise. I’m just wondering how you sort of put everything together given your confidence to put out the money.

Let me just tie together two things that I said, one of them is that we do foresee a slower sort of economic recovery than many but again, as we have said many times you have to [inaudible] the markets. The upper end of the market, the higher quality space we believe will do a lot better. I mean, just look in New York, there’s no space available in our buildings and as we now go in to further renewals or whatever limited space we have left, we’re continuing to step up the rents. Now, this will reflect itself even more strongly I believe when there is a stronger economic recovery. So I think in terms of making acquisitions we are still comfortable with taking a longer term view and we do believe that three, four, five years out we’re going to be very happy that we had the cash today to buy the kind of high quality assets or invest in the type of high quality assets that has been our basic strategic space since we started the business. We’re really as always frankly, really looking to a longer term perspective in the types of investments or developments that we will undertake and we still think that those kinds of developments will do well. It may not do extremely well in the shorter term but in the medium term and the longer term we think they’ll do very well. So, that’s still our basic sort of analytic structure as we look at investments and whether they be acquisitions or developments. We do think that yes, there is capital but as Doug pointed out there’s a combination that is needed. It’s not just capital, it’s also operational ability and here is where we think we have a competitive advantage in terms of understanding what we can and what we cannot do. So, we obviously are at this point modestly bullish. I don’t want to over state anything until we can actually announcement some things. But, I do think we are modestly bullish about what we can do with the additional capital. Again, we’re not trying to pretend that this is going to have a huge uptick from day one although we will have the uptick in the sense of the alternative investment of capital. We’re clearly going to do better than what we’re currently able to invest the capital in so we’ll have that short term benefit. But, in terms of the longer term investment on the assets that we either buy or begin to develop, we think that will work out very well for us. Michael Bilerman – Citigroup: You look at the recent deals, you talked about the activity, the buildings in San Francisco, the buildings that have closed in New York, the Tishman, the Carr portfolio in DC, where were you in those processes relative to final pricing?

I don’t want to disparage other people’s transactions. Obviously, the pricing that we had was lower than the pricing where the deals ultimately priced. We’ve underwritten everyone of those deals pretty hard and in certain cases we’ve just looked at ourselves in the mirror and said, “Does it really make sense to stretch on this deal given what we believe the other opportunities are that will present themselves and what our return expectations?” To date, we just haven’t been prepared to do it. Michael Bilerman – Citigroup: My second question just on 250 W 55th, you talk about the activity that’s happening in New York and certainly the larger tenants in terms of space requirements in New York, where are those discussions today about – I realize it just got wound down this quarter but are there discussions at this point of potentially restarting that? And, at what level of commitments would you need and how far will rents need to move to be able to start that project?

We are having discussion with potential tenants for that space. As I mentioned, or as Doug mentioned, as we both have observed, we really are virtually leased up in all of our other space so yes we are looking at this building and yes we are talking seriously with at least one tenant, maybe with two. Let me just put it this way, I don’t want to be specific about the amount of space that we’re talking about but we believe it’s not just a function of how much space, it’s where in the building the tenants would take the space and I think if we decided to go ahead it would be with the understanding that we would be comfortable with the leasing prospects and the return prospects in the overall transaction.

Your next question comes from John Guinee – Stifel Nicolaus & Company. John Guinee – Stifel Nicolaus & Company: Doug, I thought you said something very interesting regarding Lockheed Martin and the NGA contract. Can you elaborate a little bit on that as it pertains to your overall thinking about the GSA demand and the defense contractor industry in Northern Virginia? Maybe Ray’s on the call and he can talk about it also.

I’ll let the guy on the ground start.

Well first of all as you know John, the NGA campus is relocating to Springfield. As many times is the case they’re a little bit behind schedule and have to extend the leases to maintain occupancy in our core buildings out there and we were the core beneficiary of a very nice hold over. However, they are looking to relocate down to Springfield. That will free upwards of 700,000 square feet and Reston and we are already in an intensely competitive process right now to try and secure another defense contracting government agency to backfill the 520,000 square feet which is the core of the campus. We think that is extremely important besides the obvious of replacing the income. We also are restoring another major demand generator to that Dulles corridor. So we’re going after it aggressively, we’re very optimistic of success but obviously there’s no guarantees. If they take the 520,000 the remaining 180,000 which is a brand new fully compatible building relative to defense and intelligent standards, will be available for either additional government leasing or private sector camp followers wishing to be right next to that agency. But, more importantly, we’ve also taken a very aggressive position down in Springfield where the NGA is going. We have, as you may remember, secured a campus of upwards of one million square feet atop the Springfield metro. Not only does it have metro but hard rail access down to Quantico. It’s got direct access to the pentagon via public transportation and is the closest owned major office campus to the new NGA facility. In addition to that we have our [VI95] Park which we’ve owned for nearly 30 years where we have upwards of 800,000 square feet of very competitive space that is literally within walking distance of the NGA campus. So we think while we’re facing a short term challenge to backfill the NGA campus in Reston that our barter strategy is really fully formed and in place to be very response to this changing situation. John Guinee – Stifel Nicolaus & Company: The second question Doug, I don’t know if you have anything to add, is can you walk through the capital stack at 885 3rd and how that’s being marketed?

I don’t want to go through because of confidentiality agreements and the such that are out there. Big picture there is a ground lease and then there is a first mortgage and then there is some additional debt on top of that. A portion of that capital stack is currently being marketed for sale. John Guinee – Stifel Nicolaus & Company: Do you know who the ground lessor is?

I do but again, I just don’t feel comfortable talking about a confidentiality agreement that has bound me.

Your next question comes from Steve Sakwa – ISI Group. Steve Sakwa – ISI Group: First question I guess if for Mort, I realize that all of this financial regulation discussion is very much up in the air but as you kind of peel the onion back here on things like the vocal rule and other things that House and Senate are trying to pass, how do you think about the impact on the financial services industry, prof trading, hedge funds and its impact on New York?

Well, we all at this point can’t be totally sure about how it’s going to come out and it’s been held up by two different votes in the Senate because all 41 Republicans are basically saying that the democratic proposals are not going to pass muster as far as they’re concerned. I do think it’s going to have some effect in terms of the kind of leverage in particular that has been available for a number of these funds, particularly for the library large hedge funds. I don’t really think it’s going to effect – if this doesn’t get in to a very nasty political fight, what has been going on and I’ve been very critical of this publically on television and in writing, it is an attempt really to demigod the financial industry as far as I am concerned and make it look as if it is the financial world that is responsible for the great recession that we are in. That is just unfair. The financial world is responding primarily to the collapse of the housing market and what that meant for the securitization market. There were some excesses in terms of lending without question and maybe in terms of investing but it was fundamentally these programs that were initiated I might add, by the Congress in mandating Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac and the FHA to really do a lot of things that I think they would regret and frankly a lot of banks made a lot of credit card lines available that have been cut back dramatically. So we are in a transition period in that regard. I expect again in the short run it’s going to have some affect. But, I’ll say this about New York and I said it after 9/11 and I said…

Let me explain. There have been no decisions made about that but I will tell you this, we have a unique structure, this is $3 trillion development. At this stage of the game nobody – it is going to be the dominate building downtown both for the city but particularly for international tenants. We will have a very, very limited investment that will be less than 5% of that total cost, less than 4% of that total cost in fact and it will be in a preferred position. Frankly, there are some projects you do not just to maximize the financial return but also to establish another layer of the creditability of this firm. We will be very happy to do that transaction under the circumstances that we have proposed to the various public authorities. It is not an accident that four of the major firms in this city entered in to that competition. I can understand why they’re doing it and I can certainly understand why we are doing. Again, because of confidentiality I really can’t talk too much about it but I think we will all be very comfortable all of the different elements that go in to being involved in a transaction like that. What I don’t want you to come away with is a feeling that we’re treating this as a normal development, we are not and nobody can. It is a project of an incredible cost and will be an incredible icon for the city of New York. But, the vast, vast bulk of all of the funding and financing is going to be put up by the public authorities.

I think Steve and Mort may have said trillion and I think he meant billion.

Did I say trillion?

Oh my goodness. $3 billion still seems like a trillion to me.

But, the fact of the matter is that we do have a operational expertise that we can bring to the table here to really hopefully help the port authority manage its way through what’s going to be a very complicated and long road to successful completion of that building and the marketing of that building. And, to the extent that we can do it in a way where our capital is thoughtfully invested we will do that. We have an organization that can bring something to bear that would be a good thing for both the city and for us. Steve Sakwa – ISI Group: Doug do you just have any sense of the timing? I realize these things are really unpredictable but where do you kind of get the sense you are in the process?

Well I guess we’re in round three of God knows how many. Hopefully it’s just four rounds. We continue to cooperatively engage with the representative of the Port Authority in answering their questions and providing them with additional information. We hope they’re going to make a decision sooner rather than later.

Your next question comes from Chris Caton – Morgan Stanley. Chris Caton – Morgan Stanley: I was hoping you could give me a little more color on kind of some of the forward-looking leasing activity? What are tenants thinking in terms of downsizing or expanding at this point in the economy now that we’re kind of three months forward in say the recovery I suppose? Second is, what type of options are the tenants looking for in terms of expansion or contraction and how does that in any way kind of encumber vacant space in the portfolio?

I’m going to try to answer this very succinctly and I apologize if it doesn’t give you a full answer but if I answered it fully I would be talking for the next 25 minutes. Big picture, professional services firms went through a downsizing in people and they are now going through sort of a rationalization realignment of their new premises on a going forward basis. Most of them are going to be getting smaller marginally, 10%, 15%. Technology companies and corporate America in our portfolio in our cities we think are on the margin going to stay where they are from an overall platform perspective but not grow as quickly as they were growing in 2006, 2007, 2008 even. From an overall concession perspective, the tenants that are in the market today are looking to try and achieve savings in rents that they’re currently paying, lock in as long a term cost basis as the possibly can and for the most part are really not looking for much in the way of options that are driving those transactions as opposed to in 2007 expansion space and getting must take or option space in three and five and seven years were predominately the drivers of many transactions. Now, it’s if we can reduce our rent and we can lock in on that number for a long period of time we’ll figure out how we’re going to grow if we grow later on. That’s sort of how I would answer the question.

Your next question comes from Ross Nussbaum – UBS Securities. Ross Nussbaum – UBS Securities: On yesterday’s SL Green’s call Marc Holiday was talking about how he’s underwriting 25% rent growth in Manhattan over the next three years and I know that there are some brokers out there that perspective buyers are underwriting as much as 50% rent growth in Manhattan over five years. I’m curious what our take on those numbers are and how you’re approaching the underwriting of assets not just in New York but in all of your major markets in terms of the rent growth?

I would say that is the reason we have been outbid on each of these three properties that Doug referred to. I don’t think we are looking to that kind of increase. I think we will see increases I just don’t think they’re going to be in the next three years at the level of that kind of double digit level. We think they’ll be double digits perhaps but not nearly at the 25% level. I think what he is talking about is the fact that we do see the financial world is frankly picking up steam in a lot of different ways and associated people who service the financial world will be doing the same. Also of course, there is very little vacancy I believe not just in our buildings but in all of the first class or A or A- buildings. I think this is the rational for what they are seeing. We are frankly more cautious and more conservative in our estimates and I think that is what explains why people have out bid us on a number of these properties and frankly, I hope they’re right. Ross Nussbaum – UBS Securities: What changes the dynamic in terms of your ability to put upwards of $3 billion of equity to work in the next year or two if there are others that are continuously underwriting stronger rent growth?

Well, we are in a competitive market and we are still going to maintain whatever our sort of standards are for how we invest the funds. Bear in mind we have not just a financial ability but we have an operational ability that we think will make a difference and in particular we have the opportunity to do some major developments where we think we will do very well and there are unique situations that might come up that provide us with those opportunities and we are working on some of them and we’re comfortable with that sort of mix of opportuinities. We have performed well, if I may say so in good markets and in bad markets for now over four decades and we think we will continue to be able to do that and you will have the opportunity to review what we do and I think we will be able to produce as we have in the past. It’s hard for me to just sort of speak in more than generalities because there are things going on that we just simply aren’t in a position to talk about until they’re finalized. As we hope they come in to clear site you will understand the rationale for what we are saying.

The other thing Russ is that all space is not the same even if it’s in the same market and it’s in two buildings next to each other. I guess one of the postulates that we make is that some of these buildings are going to languish and other buildings are going to perform in a much stronger capacity and knowing which of those buildings to put your money in to is probably more important than necessarily picking the market. So those are decisions that we have to make on an asset-by-asset basis. But, big picture the tenant demand in various markets is changing as time goes on and buildings that might have been suitable for certain types of institutions at certain times over the last 20 years may not be the same on a going forward basis and we have to think about those issues when we’re making our investments.

Your next question comes from Jordan Sadler – KeyBanc Capital Markets. Jordan Sadler – KeyBanc Capital Markets: It sounds like I hear you are optimistic despite the ongoing sovereign debt crisis across the pond. Maybe in that context, what’s your current view of long term interest rates in the US and how is this factoring to the view of cap rates or values as you guys are going through your underwriting?

Let me just deal with the first reference, I must say this situation in Greece is really critical for Europe in a sense because it leeches in to the banking system since the European bank holds so much of the Greek sovereign debt. You want to talk about a too big to fail situation, in a way they are too big to fail, too small as a country and too big as debtor to fail. I do think sooner or later they’re going to work something out that is a standoff between Germany and the countries it represents and the Greek government which of course doesn’t want to introduce the kind of tax increases or cost of government reductions in various government programs. They’ve got to work something out and they both know it and they’re playing chicken at this stage of the game and I just hope nobody plays that game for that one step too late and I doubt if they will because it is just impossible to let this whole thing to go under. It would be terrible for Greece and terrible for Europe and they both know it. But, it would have international consequences, there’s no doubt about that. I think it’s a scary situation. As far as we concerned here in this country I really do not think that we are going to – let me put it this way, I don’t think there are any inflationary pressures in this economy and there will not be inflationary pressures of anything significant for several years to come. Therefore, I think the feds have no choice but to be very careful about what they do with interest rates. Nobody quite knows what’s going to happen going forward. I mean we’ve been, and I am happy to say…

Your next question comes from Jamie Feldman – Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Jamie Feldman – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Mike, I was hoping you could give a little more color on the CMBS market and kind of what you’re seeing and how fast things have changed and maybe your outlook from here?

I guess I’ve been surprised at how fast things have changed to be honest with you. We are certainly being marketed by multiple different banks who have started up programs. The debt yields that they have been talking about have moved pretty quickly. Now, I would say the debt yields in the overall market have moved pretty quickly as well and I think they believe that they’re competitive advantage seems to be that they’ll provide 75% leverage where the traditional whole loan lenders are still kind of holding on to a little bit lower leverage than that. They’re trying to get a little bit more rate. They’re out there marketing these programs. I think one of the institutions has made some loans. Another institution that we spoke with said they had a significant number of applications that they had signed but they hadn’t made any loans yet but, all of them are all out there marketing clearly. Where size was a constraint before, I would say size is less of a constraint now. Six months ago when we first started talking about the CMBS market coming back it was they’ll do $50 to $75 million loans really looking for a lot of diversity. Now, they’re asking us if they can bid on our Market Square North financing that we’re coming out with for example. They seem to be willing to size loans that are in $150, $200 , $250 million maybe even higher. So I think it’s improved pretty significantly from that point. Jamie Feldman – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Then I’m sorry if I missed it but did you give a cap ex assumption for the year? Based on the $90 million in the first quarter I’m just curious what the thought is to get the rest of the leasing done this year?

Well, from a leasing perspective based upon where we think our occupancy is going to be we think we are going to lease about two million square feet give or take for the rest of the year. A lot of that is renewals as we talked about and I mentioned the DC market where we have almost a million square feet of renewals coming. I think that our transaction costs associated with that two million square feet of leasing is going to be significantly less than our transaction costs were in the first quarter. So, I would expect to be more in line with kind of what our typical is which is $25 to $30 a foot on that space for TI costs. Then, for kind of traditional cap ex and maintenance cap ex, we also had a pretty low first quarter where we only I think had $1 million or so of cap ex. That was really related to two things, one we came off some pretty big jobs last year like the 601 Lex lobby and we haven’t really started some of the 2010 jobs yet and we still expect somewhere between $25 and $30 million of that type of cap ex for the year.

Your next question comes from Jay Habermann – Goldman Sachs. Jay Habermann – Goldman Sachs: Just touching on development for a second, the Atlantic Wharf in Boston and 2200 Penn in DC, it sounds like you’re close with the DC project and that could be close to fully leased in the near term. I’m just wondering when you look sort of in the near term at the acquisition market, it’s obviously very competitive, does your appetite seek to increase here for development now that you could have 1.1 billion of projects that are close to fully leased.

I think the answer is if it makes economic sense the answer is absolutely yes. Economic sense means rental rates get to a point where they justify new construction and starting with a project where you have to buy land from somebody and then build a building the question is whether or not those lines will cross sooner rather than later. If you said predict where you would start a building which might have some speculative leasing associated with it, there are clearly three places where that could happen in my mind. New York City is obviously one of them. The second would be the District of Columbia, not in 2010 or 2011 but in 2013 or 2014 because there is literally nothing of quality being built right now and as buildings in DC are limited by their size, as tenants have to grow and look overall at their footprints out three or four years, they’re going to run out of options to have big continuous blocks of space so I think there’s an opportunity potentially there and we happen to have this building which we purchased from NPR which is a development site that we’re going to start drawing probably sometime later this year or next year so that we’re in a position to accommodate those tenants. Then, there’s an interesting phenomena going on in some of our suburban markets and particularly Boston where there are tenants who are looking at the available inventory and are saying, “The stuff that is out there is not the stuff that we really want and we may be willing to pay a premium to go in to a new building that is constructed with more of an amenity base, a better floor plan, a better window line, with better materials that may have a more energy efficient sustainable quality to it.” Those are sort of I would say the three areas where I would say there is a chance for a building to be built other than the built to suit in a Princeton or northern Virginia when the GSA or some corporate user comes along and says, “We want a building for ourselves.” Jay Habermann – Goldman Sachs: Just touching on acquisition now, I know some of your competitors have been putting together some funds but are you talking to joint venture partners or potential partners as you seek to make these acquisitions just given your more conservative underwriting of rent growth and perhaps cautious views on the economy?

I would say that there isn’t a week that goes by that we don’t get in a room with some institution and/or foreign investor who is interested in doing an acquisition or a group of acquisitions with us. At that moment we have really not seen eye-to-eye on either pricing, or cost of capital, or opportunities. But, it’s certainly something we would consider. Obviously, when you have the kind of capital that we have sitting on our balance sheet, you’re a little less apt to be if you find a great deal putting that deal in to a joint venture with the amount of cash we have sitting on our books. Jay Habermann – Goldman Sachs: Just lastly for Ray, with the rollover in DC for the next few years, I know rents are in the low 40s, can you give us a sense there if you have any concerns that you expect the law firms to pull back or is it really just the expansion you talked about the Treasury and government agencies that continue to expand?

Well, I think the tightness in the space market, especially the Class A, I mean Doug made a reference to the normal market in the Ballpark District and clearly those are challenged markets but the CVD is still very tight. We do have some rollovers, some relocations and where we are really competing on space is space that is being vacated by tenants moving to new space. As Doug mentioned, we’re 65% pre leased at 2200 Penn and really strong activity on the balance and believe it or not we’re starting to get some inquiries about the NPR site just because there are so limited a field for new development sites that the larger tenants are looking ’13, ’14, ’15 and out. We’re optimistic about DC. We’re still seeing rents in the – when you say mid 40s, we’re looking mid 40s triple net and plus at 2200 Penn, we just did a renewal at 401 9th Street which was $50 triple net. It was just a terrific renewal there too.

Your next question comes from Alexander Goldfarb – Sandler O’Neill. Alexander Goldfarb – Sandler O’Neill: Just going to the transaction market, I think historically you guys have said you’re not apt to invest in debt, you’d rather own title. Just given how some of these portfolios seem to get worked out and not come to market, is it your view that maybe it’s better to start preemptively trying to buy parts of the capital stack to try and encourage the process along or is it just better to wait until the assets come to market and the books start going around to then get involved?

I think what we said in the past is we’ve never looked at being a lender as a sort of business model. We are realistic about the fact that much of the projects that are going to be available are projects where the debt capital is really in control from a financial perspective of the ownership. So where it makes sense to be participating with the debt market executions as opposed to waiting for a book to come out, we’re aggressively looking at those opportunities. I would not be surprised to think we would actually take advantage of those types of transactions more opportunistically than we would with simple a fee interest. In many cases we would like to partner with the ownership or that lender because I think we would prefer not to get in to a year and a half litigation bankruptcy battle but if we thought that the control position was firm enough I think we would be very aggressive about purchasing a piece of debt.

Your next question comes from Michael Knott – Green Street Advisors, Inc. Michael Knott – Green Street Advisors, Inc.: You mentioned the legal lack of demand or contraction over the next couple of years, what do you think picks up that slack or is that maybe the reason why you’re a little less optimistic than some others?

I guess I think that once the law firms have sort of reestablished their new base they will start to grow again. I just think we’re in that readjustment phase. I don’t believe that a national law firm that has reduced it’s headcount by 7% to 10% and has reduced it’s footprint by 10% to 15% is never going to grow again I just think you have to sort of reestablish the base before that occurs. Clearly, transactional activity has started to pick up but it’s nowhere near what the pace was in 2006 or 2007. I think as that occurs you will start to see law firms hiring again. It’s an interesting predicament that the law firms are in right now because their profits per partner are actually higher probably in 2009 than they were in 2008 in many cases because the partners are working harder and the partners have a higher billable rate. The question will be at what point will they start to recognize that they are foregoing business by not having a staff and an organization that is available to take in more work as opposed to simply asking a higher rate.

Your next question comes from Mitch Germaine – JMP Securities. Mitch Germaine – JMP Securities: Doug, any thoughts on possibly pursing some asset sales?

I think that it’s certainly in the back burner. There are some assets that we have considered over time not strategically core to our company. I think that if we started feeling even better about our opportunity to deploy capital we would think more seriously about those types of situations but I would say it’s not a strong focus right now.

Your next question comes from George Auerbach – ISI Group. George Auerbach – ISI Group: Mike, can you quantify for us the progression of straight line rent and FAS 141 income as the year goes on in to the first part of 2010? I know you mentioned that the FAS ticks down $4 million in Q2 but where would you expect the run rate to start in 2011?

We really haven’t provided any guidance at all for 2011 to be honest with you. We really don’t want to get in to that at this moment. On the 1414 side it is going to drop down after the first quarter by the $4 to $5 million and then I think it stays pretty steady for the rest of the year. On the straight line side the second quarter is going to be high as well. Then the last two quarters will drop because some of the New York City leasing that we did in the third and fourth quarter and in the first quarter of this year will start to burn off. The only big thing that will still be out there will be the Ropes lease that goes all year. George Auerbach – ISI Group: Is it fair to say that the New York City leasing and the Ropes lease will be sort of fully burned off by the first quarter?

By the first quarter of 2011? George Auerbach – ISI Group: Yes.

Yes, that’s fair to say.

Thanks for joining us this quarter. We will see many of you in Chicago at NAREIT and others we’ll talk to you on the phone and get you again in the middle of the summer.

This concludes today’s Boston Properties conference call. Thank you for attending and have a good day.