Scott Freidenrich – Director IR Vikram Pandit – CEO Gary Crittenden – CFO

Guy Moszkowski – Merrill Lynch Glenn Schorr – UBS Mike Mayo – Deutsche Bank Jason Goldberg – Lehman Brothers Meredith Whitney – Oppenheimer Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley James Mitchell – The Buckingham Group William Tanona – Goldman Sachs David Hilder – Bear Stearns Larry Greenberg – Langen McAlenney Jeff Harte – Sandler O’Neill

Good morning ladies and gentlemen and welcome to Citi’s first quarter 2008 earnings review featuring as Citi Chief Executive Officer, Vikram Pandit and Chief Financial Officer Gary Crittenden. Today’s call will be hosted by Scott Freidenrich, Director of Investor Relations. (Operator instructions). Mr. Freidenrich, you may begin.

Thank you operator and thank you all for joining us this morning. Welcome to our first quarter 2008 earnings presentation. The presentation we will be going through is available on our website so you will want to download that now if you haven’t already done so. The format we will follow is Vikram will begin the call. Gary will take you through the presentation and Virkam will have some summary remarks. Then we’d be happy to take any questions that you may have. Before we get started I’d like to remind you that today’s presentation may contain forward looking statements. Citigroup’s financial results may differ materially from these statements so please refer to our SEC filings for a description of the factors that could cause our actual results to differ from expectations. With that said, let me turn it over to Vikram.

Scott, thank you, good morning everyone. To start with, we’re not happy with our financial results this quarter. Although they’re not completely unexpected given the assets we hold. I do want to start by emphasizing a few points and then I’ll turn it over to Gary. Firstly, despite the bottom line results, we had good operating performance in a number of areas. We had record revenues in transaction services, where revenues grew 42% and net income grew 63% versus a year ago. International consumer revenues were up 33% or 22% excluding onetime items. Deposits in our international consumer franchise were up 23%. International card revenues were up 37% ex the onetime items. Within fixed income markets, we had very good results in our client related or floor rates and currencies businesses with revenues up 17% versus a year ago and up 52% versus last quarter. Of particular note was the strong performance of our local markets business in the emerging markets, a franchise that is unique to Citi. Revenues at Smith Barney grew at 18% and the private bank grew 10%. So we had continued strong momentum in many of our businesses. Secondly, our capital ratios were up versus fourth quarter with our tier one ratio slightly higher than our internal target and our TCE ratio slightly lower than our target. But more importantly, we’re executing on our capital plan and are enhancing capital by reducing legacy assets in non-core businesses. I’m sure you’ve seen the many announcements we’ve made including the sale of most of Citi Capital to GE, the sale of Diners and Ready Cards and the planned reduction of our mortgage portfolio. Thirdly, we are on top of our risks and have focused on prudently managing our legacy risk assets and are reducing risk assets in a…

Thank you Vikram and good morning to everyone and thanks so much for joining us today. Once again this quarter I have a lot to cover so I apologize in advance for the length of my prepared comments but I’m going to go quickly. Please turn to the slides that are available to you on the website, I’m obviously going to begin on the first slide. Slide number 1 shows our consolidated results for the quarter. The first quarter results were driven by two main factors, write downs and losses related to the continued disruption in the fixed income markets and in higher US consumer credit costs. As I take you through the results of the quarter, I will discuss the actions that we’re taking against the key risk exposures for the company. To summarize our first quarter results, net revenues declined 48% driven by the continued disruption in fixed income markets, partially offset by underlying growth in several of our other businesses. Expenses were up 4%. The reengineering plan for 2008 is well underway and we’re very focused on managing expense levels in the company. The cost of credit more than doubled over last year primarily due to higher net credit losses and a subsequent change to the increase in loan loss reserves, both principally in our US consumer business. These factors drove a loss of $5.1 billion for the quarter or a loss per share of $1.02. This EPS is based on a basic share count of 5.1 billion shares. Our diluted share count for the quarter was 5.6 billion, but in accordance with GAAP is not used in the EPS calculation in a net loss situation. I’m turning now to slide number 2, slide number 2 shows a significant, shows the number of items which significantly affected…

Gary, thank you. I want to reiterate many of the things that Gary just said. We had good operating performance in a number of areas. We’re executing on our capital plan. We’re executing on managing our legacy assets down. We’re executing on positioning the company for the future and we are very, very focused on efficiency. And I hope you’ve all been watching the announcements we’ve been making over the last three months. We’ve brought in a tremendous amount of new talent into the company, starting with risk; we have Brian Leach as our Chief Risk Officer. Just yesterday we announced Richard Evans will be joining us as, head up risk in our institution clients group. We also Neil [Bakshi] to be head of our risk area for our consumer businesses. We also hired Charles Monet, [Adile Notani], Greg Hawkins and John Davidson, all as senior risk professionals. Together with our current team, I believe we now have a world class risk organization. In addition to risk, we announced significant additions in several of our businesses. You saw our announcement on Terri Dial who is a world class consumer banking leader. John Havens, who is now running our institutional client business. Ned Kelly who is running our alternatives business. Tom Flexner who will be head of our real estate business across the entire institutional area and Paul McKinnon who is leading talent. And you should expect us to continue to bring in new talent to the company to add to our very deep talent pool that we already have here. As you can see, we have a fierce focus on having the right people in the right places doing the right things. As I said, we’re also completely focused on efficiency both in terms of driving our client business as…

Thank you Vikram. Operator, we are ready to begin the question and answer session. Before we begin may I ask that all callers observe a one question and one follow up limit, thank you.

Your first question will come from the line of Guy Moszkowski with Merrill Lynch. Guy Moszkowski – Merrill Lynch: Good morning. I wanted to follow up on your discussion of consumer allowance for loan loss compared to the coincident write off rates. As you pointed out, although in the US you’re now slightly ahead in terms of allowances internationally you’re below. And when I look at the page towards the end of the supplement which does it on a global basis, you’re about 10 basis points below your coincident loss rate in terms of your allowance. Your global allowance is 241 and your coincident loss is 250. Given some of the trends that we’re seeing I’m just wondering why you wouldn’t have wanted to bring that more in line or even ahead?

Guy I’ll take the question, you know if you look at most card competitors that have businesses that are outside the US, you know card businesses outside the US, generally you find the loan loss reserve to be somewhat lower outside the US as it is in the US. And importantly for us if you look at the 90 day delinquencies in the card business or in our international card business or in our international retail banking business, the 90 day delinquencies are dead flat with a year ago, in fact they’re slightly better than they were a year ago. So we feel that with the additional things that we’ve done in Mexico and India that we’ve properly captured you know the amount of reserves that we should have in that portfolio. And I think as you rightly pointed out, we feel very good about our overall level of reserves. We’ve taken very aggressive action as I’ve mentioned, you know we’ve added $8.7 billion to strengthen our reserves over the course of the last four quarters and feel good about our aggregate reserve position. Guy Moszkowski – Merrill Lynch: And with respect to that international delinquency rate which as you correctly point out is very, very consistent, it doesn’t really seem to predict either very significant increases or decreases in the coincident loss rates and we did see that loss rate pop up on the international cards by a couple hundred basis points again this quarter on a 12 month lag basis or a coincident basis actually. So I was just wondering why you have as much faith as you do in the delinquency data to predict your long term losses.

Well you know I wouldn’t, I guess the way I would think about it is, and we have many, many different reserve pools across the company, right. This is one of the reserve pools that we have. We look at each one of those independently and make a valuation about what we think is appropriate. The impact of acquisitions in any given quarter can have a fairly significant impact on the loss rates. So for example, when we acquired Egg, that’s primarily an international card portfolio, the losses that are imbedded in the card portfolio at the time that we do the purchase end up in the goodwill rather than being imbedded in the loss rate calculation. And so that loss rate calculation can go up because of things like that acquisition noise where the underlying delinquencies can remain relatively flat. And so you know as I said we look at each one of these things individually, there’s some noise in it from quarter to quarter but we feel like we’re properly reserved for that at this point in time. Now, having said that we’re carefully watching Mexico, we’re carefully watching India and we’ll be reporting on that to you as we go forward and we’re very focused on taking the right actions in those markets to ensure that credit doesn’t deteriorate beyond what you know what our forecast would indicate that it will. But I think most of what you’re seeing there is probably acquisition noise. Guy Moszkowski – Merrill Lynch: And just a follow up, one more question on the US card business, can you comment on the sharp decline in the managed yield that we’re seeing there two quarters in a row now, it’s now about 100 basis points below where it was six months ago.

I think there are a couple of things there, the federated impact is included in those numbers and so there’s some mix change associated with that portfolio. There’s also if you look at the way LIBOR and Fed funds have moved together and in fact this is I think the primary factor, some of our pricing takes place off of the Fed funds rate while our underlying funding cost is based off of LIBOR and the combination as you know, LIBOR and Fed funds have not moved in concert in the same way they have over the course of the last couple of years. You know the last six months has been a distinct difference from where it had been before and that difference in LIBOR versus Fed funds has resulted in some of that yield squeeze. Guy Moszkowski – Merrill Lynch: Okay thanks and I’m going to try and respect your restriction on questions so I’ll let you move on, appreciate it.

Your next question will come from the line of Glenn Schorr with UBS. Glenn Schorr – UBS: The balance sheet grew a little bit sequentially and a little bit more year on year, tier one’s in reasonable shape all things considered but if you look at the tangible common equity ratio its pretty low. How do you and regulators, rating agencies, how much do you care and what exactly are you managing towards as you think about your decisions on what to sell off and capital raises and things like that.

There are actually a number of different points to the question that I think are important to respond to. If you look at the balance sheet you correctly say the balance sheet was flattish during the course of the quarter. But a fair hunk of that was you know revaluation gains that were driven by widening spreads that took place during the course of the quarter. The actual balance sheet itself, I mean if you actually look at the management of assets, the management of assets continued pretty much unabated during the course of the quarter and we feel good about the progress that we’re making in that regard. We obviously have a commitment to having a very strong capital structure and you saw rightly that the tier one ratio improved from 7.1 to 7.8 and the TCE ratio improved substantially. And we do have an ongoing plan to continue to reduce assets, so we announced about three weeks ago that we expected the mortgage business to have a roll off of assets of about $45 billion over the next 12 months and we’re continuing to manage other non-core assets very aggressively, the legacy loans sale that we announced last night is a good example of that. We continue to manage those non legacy assets very aggressively and that will generate capital. Additionally we’ve had three major transactions this quarter, the Ready Card transaction and the Diner’s Club transaction and now the Citi Capital transaction with GE that we announced yesterday. I think a good way to think about that is that that is the pace that we expect to continue through the remainder of this year, obviously those things take time but we don’t anticipate reducing the pace of those kinds of divestitures during the year. And all of that will add to our capital base as we go along. That said we are very focused on insuring that we have the right amount of capital in the company, we proactively raise capital and we thought that was the right thing to do. We’re very focused if opportunities come up that we think are appropriate for the company or if the risk environment should be fundamentally different we will do whatever is necessary to ensure we have a strong capital base. Glenn Schorr – UBS: Great, thanks and just one last one, on slide 11 given that full detail on the $58 billion of the low doc borrowers, I guess if you could provide any color on, it feels like a little bit of a mismatch, most of these people have reasonably high FICO scores or at least above the [Mendoza] line and then low LTV. But it feels like a mismatch of what I think of as a high quality borrower but doesn’t want to fill out documentation. In other words, are these all wholesale funds or are these being derived from your platform?

These are both, they cover both sources but I think you actually pointed out exactly the point that we were trying to make on the slide and I probably didn’t do it very well in my written script. I mean I actually think there’s good news associated with this. So of our $151 billion portfolio or so, $58 billion fall into this category. It was this category that was characterized by a somewhat higher loss rate. But even though for whatever reason the buyer selected to provide less documentation about these loans, we were very careful to ensure that we had borrowers that had very strong credit ratings. And so the net result of that is is that 33% of the entire prime mortgage portfolio falls into this category, 33% of the total $150 is in that top left hand box and the delinquencies against that are very, very manageable. And you can see how different that would be if more of the borrowers were down in the bottom right hand corner where we’ve actually had very high losses against the portfolio. So you know as we study this issue and dissect where losses exist and where reserves need to be taken, we thought that this provided valuable additional information of the true exposures of the company. Glenn Schorr – UBS: Okay I appreciate that, but no split out on wholesale originated versus in house?

Not today. Glenn Schorr – UBS: Okay, cool, thank you.

Your next question will come from the line of Mike Mayo with Deutsche Bank. Mike Mayo – Deutsche Bank: Good morning. Another question on capital, what are your thoughts for needing additional capital and I understand that’s in the context for your outlook for problem assets, you mentioned consumer credit is likely to get worse this year. And also if you could describe that in the context of the short term money markets, LIBOR is not behaving very well. So can you address the potential need for additional capital given those considerations?

Yeah I mean it is exactly as I described it. We feel very good about our capital position as you know we moved very early to raise capital and as I mentioned with all of the actions taken we’ve raised about $35 billion, that is reflected in the way our ratios have improved during the course of the quarter and we’re trying to be very prudent about this and we’re managing our assets down. We have a large pool of legacy assets that we hope are not part of the family here you know a couple years from now but we hope to continue to manage through. And we will continue to do divestitures. But we are committed first and foremost to having a strong balance sheet. And so either in the event of opportunities to come along that we think are very valuable opportunities or if as you mentioned, you know factors in the environment become significantly difficult, you know we will be properly capitalized as we have a firm commitment to be properly capitalized and that’s the way we have thought about it in terms of our capital position overall. Mike Mayo – Deutsche Bank: So do you feel good about your capital and that means you don’t need more capital unless things get really bad?

Well you know the fact is you can never say never with regards to these things. I mean our commitment is to have a strong capital base. And so we will monitor this and we do monitor this virtually every day. I mean we look at what the situation is and we act appropriately. You know we’ve got a schedule by which we hope to reduce assets; we have a schedule by which we hope to sell businesses. We have to achieve that plan. We have an expectation as well of what we think losses are going to be going forward. And we monitor our results relative to those losses and we try to be very realistic about it. And what I really try to underline here is that we have been proactive and we intend to continue to manage our capital such that we have a strong balance sheet and the ability to both take advantage of the opportunities we have and withstand a difficult environment. Mike Mayo – Deutsche Bank: And then as a follow up, what is your outlook for the increase in problem assets? You mentioned consumer credit, any other areas that you’re watching more?

Well what I tried to do was give you a pretty good feel around the card business. Because around the card business we have a lot of history and so you can kind of go back and look at that and it gives you a sense of the volatility and how much that has moved and that’s obviously an important factor for us. We don’t have that same you know history around the real estate business, we’re kind of in uncharted territory there, and so what we have done obviously is we have chosen to take very significant reserves there. And I mentioned the months of coverage we have as a result of our reserving methodology. The months of coverage that we currently have are around the losses that we have in that portfolio and we’re watching it very vigilantly. But it is in fact trending up as you saw very significantly during the course of this quarter. We’re going to continue to monitor that. We believe obviously that we have properly accounted for the losses that are currently imbedded in the portfolio and the reserves that we have taken. But we’re going to monitor that and if things change then the reason why I mentioned near the end of what I said, that there’s a possibility of additional losses. If things change we’ll continue to try and stay ahead of that. Mike Mayo – Deutsche Bank: Thank you.

Your next question will come from the line of Jason Goldberg with Lehman Brothers. Jason Goldberg – Lehman Brothers: Thank you. Just with respect to I guess on headcount I guess last quarter you mentioned you were going to reduce 4,200 positions and then you, I think mostly in banking and I think this quarter it was 1,300, so I guess is there more to go on that 4,200 and then is the 9,000 you kind of mentioned this quarter incremental to that and I guess at what parts of the company is that coming from?

It is incremental so we announced 4,200 last quarter, we announced 9,000 this quarter. The way to think about this is these are the heads that we can reserve for 12 months in advance. So you’re kind of limited to taking reserves for a 12 month time period and so this is you know the severance that we have paid out to these individuals or will pay out to these individuals, so these are identified positions. And the way I would think about this is that we will continually as we go through the year be focused on reengineering. So I think it’s unlikely that you will hear some very large significant number that we’re going to announce but I think it’s highly likely that you’ll continue to hear that we’re very focused on improving our cost competitiveness and as a result are consistently working away from a productivity perspective. If you split the two of these pieces out on the consumer side about 7,000 of the 9,000 comes from the consumer business and the actual number is 9,300, 1.3 comes out of, I’m sorry, yeah, so the actual number is 9,000, 1.3 comes out of the commercial banking business. Jason Goldberg – Lehman Brothers: Okay and I guess a follow up, so you announced and that’s roughly 15,000 position reductions since April of last year. I guess of that I guess how many has actually left the company?

Well if you look at the chart for the best way to track that is to go to the headcount chart without acquisitions, right. So if you, we actually don’t split the acquisitions out of this number but if you pulled the acquisitions, so the big driver of our headcount increase that we went through was the acquisitions that were added in the second, third and fourth quarters were down from t peak that we had in terms of headcount of 375,000. And so actually I don’t have a split that would show the total number that have left the company. I mean we have in terms of the strategic initiative that we did in the first quarter of last year, we expected 14,000 people to come out by this point in time and those 14,000 people have come out. As regards to the 4,200 that we announced last quarter, I believe the number against the 4,200 was about 1,500 or so that had come. So I add that up in aggregate it would be somewhere in the 16,000 range, something like that. Jason Goldberg – Lehman Brothers: Okay, thank you.

Your next question will come from the line of Meredith Whitney with Oppenheimer. Meredith Whitney – Oppenheimer: Good morning Gary. I had two questions; the first is with respect to Smith Barney. And you guys showed the net asset flows. They looked like for the last four quarters anyway, actually you go up on the flows five quarters; you haven’t had much of inflows. And then for the last four quarters revenues have been really flat. Can you comment on what’s going on there and what’s the reaction of your customers to what’s going on in the SIV market, what’s going on with the auction rate security market, give some color on that. And then I have a follow up please.

Well it is accurate, what you said is true, so our flows have been flat in Smith Barney. There’s two parts of you know the revenues that we recognized there, the fees that we earn on assets which are heavily driven by the level of asset markets. So as asset markets go up and down and since that’s primarily a US based number, as asset markets go up and down in the US, the number has gone up and down with the level of the markets. So as you know equity markets weakened as we came through the month of March, they’ve obviously rebounded over the last three quarters, three weeks or so, but equity markets weakened for the most part during the first quarter of the year and the overall revenue level associated with that was weakened as well. The second element of their revenues are transaction revenues. Transaction revenues were actually quite strong in the fourth quarter, have weakened a little bit as we have come through the first quarter and tend to go down during time periods where customers are concerned about what the levels of equity markets are going to be. So both of those things impacted their revenues in the quarter. Obviously focusing on flows is a key initiative that Sally has underway and one of the things that she has done is she has revised the FA comp plan to specifically provide incentives to our FA team to increase customer flows. And so it’s certainly one of the strategic objectives that we have and we hope to be able to have a positive impact on that trend. Auction rate securities is not a happy outcome for anyone, it’s not a happy outcome for those who operate these auctions where we have had warehouses and…

First of all we hope to be able to provide at Citi day a good sense of what our long term view is on our financial model. And that’s a couple weeks away. And I’m very sympathetic to the difficulty that you have in trying to sort out all of the moving parts that we currently have and I’m afraid it’s going to be like that for a little while. I mean there are some big blocks that you can look at. I mentioned in the comments that I made that if you took the marks out of the markets and banking business that had impacted us significantly in the quarter then our revenues would have been roughly flat. Obviously on the page, I think it’s page 2 of the deck, I talked about a number of charges which if you rolled those back into pretax income you could do some kind of an estimate of what the run rate would be for the company and it would give you a little bit of a sense of what our core earnings might have been during the course of the first quarter. But we hope to do a good job of kind of talking about the steady state company with the core businesses when we get together on Citi day. As regards to reserving, you know I think I carefully said that we feel very comfortable that we’re properly reserved for the losses that are imbedded in our portfolio today but we are watching both the real estate and the credit side of this thing very carefully and you know you can see that historically there have been increases in credit card losses that have happened during the course of cycles like these. And this cycle could be particularly difficult if…

Well you know I guess the way I would think about it is, we’ve been engaged in a pretty significant effort of you know selling business for the last little while. You have seen what we have sold. I said that you should expect the same kind of a pace going forward in future quarters. And so I’d think about it roughly in that context. I mean in aggregate taken over a long period of time, that’s a fair amount of asset reduction.

And as important Meredith, on investor day at least you’ll know what our core assets are, that’ll give you guidance on the other side. Meredith Whitney – Oppenheimer: Okay, thanks so much.

Your next question will come from the line of Betsy Graseck with Morgan Stanley. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Thanks. On the leverage in the investment bank could you give us a sense as to where you feel you stand on that and how you see yourself trending. Do you anticipate further deleveraging or do you feel that you’re done for now?

You know I think we’re going to continue to work down those exposures and you know a way to refer to that is deleveraging but I think we’re going to continue to work away at that. You know and some of these positions we actually feel very good about. So I talked in some detail about the remaining CDO positions that we have an I think it’s very important that you know there was a chart that I showed that talked about the collateral position that we have against those positions and the amount of delinquencies against various types of collateral. We feel actually pretty good about those positions and the potential of those positions if we hold those positions through to maturity. You know leveraged loans have now been marked down pretty significantly and we see you know a pretty good opportunity frankly at these pricing levels to hold those kinds of positioned to maturity. That being said I think we’re very dedicated to, the word I’ll use is narrowing the guard rails here a little bit so that the inherent volatility that we have on any individual position is not as large as the inherent volatility that we’ve had historically. And so whether you call that deleveraging or whether you call that just narrowing the risk parameters around the kind of warehouse or carry trade positions that we have, I think we’re very dedicated to trying to move those into a category that will expose us to less volatility from shocks in the environment. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Okay and on the headcount, is any of the headcount numbers related to the businesses that you will be exiting?

Yes, obviously so far not because we’ve just, real business divestitures have just happened. But the eventual headcount numbers will be what our real headcount numbers are and that would include whatever divestitures that we do, it would include if we off-shored activities and moved those jobs outside the company. It would include all of those activities. We’ll report to you what our real underlying headcount numbers are. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: So the 13,200 in headcount does come with some top line associated with it?

It does come with some top line associated with it, that’s correct. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Right so I’m just trying to estimate what expense falls to the bottom line.

It’s very, very accurate; it’s a small portion of the number that we’re talking about here. But it does come with some top line impact associated with it. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Okay and then lastly on Japan could you give us an update as to how you’re feeling about the reserve ratio that you have for your Japanese consumer loan business relative to domestic peers.

Yeah well the domestic peers have a different accounting regime and they have taken very large multi-year reserves. And it’s not US GAAP to be able to do that. We have been very vigilant in managing that exposure and each quarter we evaluate exactly what our position is and we are very careful to take you know the reserves against that business that are necessary. This is you know a difficult business environment, there are no easy solutions here, no silver bullets and our intention is to manage this as effectively as we can and to ensure that we’re reserving each quarter for whatever exposures of all. This happened to be a quarter where there was not a lot of news around that business fortunately but that shouldn’t take away from the fact that there’s still risk associated with that and you know but we’re just managing it as I said in my comments. It’s in a difficult environment; we’re going to continue to manage it reflecting the difficulty that surrounds it. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: So just to make sure I understand, you’re required to have, you’re limited to a one year look forward as opposed to a cum loss expectation?

That’s essentially correct. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Okay, alright thanks.

Your next question will come from the line of James Mitchell with The Buckingham Group. James Mitchell – The Buckingham Group: Hey good morning. Could you maybe just two quick questions, one on the CDO, the ABCP paper, obviously it’s older vintage, can you speak to the duration of that portfolio and at what point would you expect if you aren’t seeing material actual losses to start seeing some time value accretion into the valuation of those assets?

It’s about four years; it’s about the duration of the portfolio. James Mitchell – The Buckingham Group: From today or from when they were originated?

Going forward. James Mitchell – The Buckingham Group: Okay. That’s helpful and how much in SIV assets do you have left?

Let’s see we’re down by $9 billion, so the total $47. James Mitchell – The Buckingham Group: $47 now. Okay great, thank you.

Your next question will come from the line of William Tanona with Goldman Sachs. William Tanona – Goldman Sachs: Good morning guys I just got one question. On the alt A portfolio, obviously you guys have $22 billion there and looking at the write down of $1 billion, when you compare that to kind of other industry participants who have taken things down to $0.70 on the dollar, it just seems like it’s a little light. I don’t know whether or not we’re just looking at that incorrectly of if there are hedges involved or is there something that we should be looking at differently or comparing that $1 billion to the $6 billion in trading as opposed to the available for sale. Just trying to get a sense as to why that write down was so light relative to a lot of your peers.

It’s the last point that you made. So it’s the split between, if you look on the chart, we split it out into available for sale versus trading. Obviously we do have some hedged positions against the trading book. But it’s the available for sale versus the trading. So we took the $1 billion in write down against the trading book essentially. I mean $120 million of the write down was associated with the 15.4, the large, the top right hand side of slide number 19. $120 million of the write down was associated with the 15.4; the remainder was associated with the 6.7. William Tanona – Goldman Sachs: Okay, thank you.

Your next question will come from the line of David Hilder with Bear Stearns. David Hilder – Bear Stearns: Good morning, two separate questions. Sorry, looking at the chart on page 12 in your presentation, you mentioned that the nature of the credit card portfolio in the US has changed a bit over time. How relevant do you think the prior maximums are for as we look forward to what a potential peak write off ratio might be.

Well we do have private label portfolios that are bigger today than we had in those earlier cycles and that’s an important difference. If you look in the supplement you can actually get a pretty good breakout of the amount of private label versus the bank card portfolios that we have. The private label portfolios do have higher losses. They have higher net interest margin as well, but they do have higher losses. And so that mix change will cause the number, all else being equal, should cause the number to be higher. That said I think it’s important to point out that the real high points that you see in 05 and 06 were driven by unusual factors. So the 05 was driven by a private label portfolio where we had some unusual losses right after acquisition and the 06 spike was obviously cause by the anticipation running up to the bankruptcy legislation and by the Katrina reserves that we took. And so those two real high spikes I think are not necessarily you know indicative things that one should plan off of. You know this is a very difficult thing to do, we provided this information to give you the best look at kind of what the ranges might be, but this particular situation, economic situation is different than others that we’ve confronted in the past. And so none of this is necessarily dispositive about what the eventual outcome is going to be but I think it does give you at least a handle on where things have been historically with all of the caveats that I think you’ve rightly pointed out about looking at the data. David Hilder – Bear Stearns: Okay, thanks. And then separately on page 7 of the supplement it looks like there was a negative swing of about $2.7 billion in accumulated other comprehensive income and I was wondering if you could break out what the major sources of that were.

It’s primary funding essentially, it is you know we obviously have interest rate hedges to try and protect us from you know negative surprises in the environment and obviously there was a, interest rates have improved somewhat during the course of the quarter and so that’s an impact on that. So we also have losses in our AFS book which at this point are not fully recorded in our regular income statement and in addition to the losses on those interest rate positions, the losses that we have on those AFS positions are recorded through that particular line item OCI. David Hilder – Bear Stearns: But those would have been the two biggest components rather than say currency?

Those are the two biggest components. David Hilder – Bear Stearns: Okay, thank you.

Your next question will come from the line of Larry Greenberg with Langen McAlenney. Larry Greenberg – Langen McAlenney: I was wondering if you could give us an idea of what portion of your CDO portfolio has EOD language allowing you to liquidate and in cases where you can, what factors govern your decision? And in cases where perhaps you have liquidated, are the levels received consistent with the written down valuations?

In answer to the first question I don’t actually know the answer. I’m sure Rick [Stuckey] if he were here could give us an answer to that question but I don’t know that. I’ll tell you what we do in this process. I went through a long explanation of how we actually do the valuation of these securities to ensure that we’re properly marking these. That said we also look at the underlying trading value of the collateral and we cross reference the underlying trading value of that collateral versus these positions. Now you can’t use that to value because it covers a relative, the collateral that’s trading covers a relatively small portion of the total. So it’s not necessarily representative of the value that we actually have in the portfolio. But where we can we cross reference that and I can assure you that having completed that cross referencing process, we’re very comfortable that the marks represent what observable trades we see in the environment. Larry Greenberg – Langen McAlenney: Do you have any examples of where there’s been liquidations and what that has amounted to relative to valuations?

You know again I’m not; I don’t have the detail on this one to offer to you. We have as you know we have a team under Rick [Stuckey’s] leadership that is very focused on managing our exposure down here. And there is a lot of activity that’s taking place to try and hedge particularly our highest risk exposures here. But I’d be overstating to say that I knew the detail of it or that it would make sense for us to disclose it frankly. Larry Greenberg – Langen McAlenney: Fair enough thank you.

And this morning’s final question will come from the line of Jeff Harte with Sandler O’Neill. Jeff Harte – Sandler O’Neill: Good morning guys. Can you talk a little bit about the loan growth you’re seeing on the commercial side of the business? And I suppose I’m curious as to whether, what’s driving that? I mean are you starting to see lines of credit being drawn down and things like that? Larry Greenberg – Langen McAlenney: No it really is, I mentioned this a little bit, if you turn to page 7 of the supplement and kind of step down through some of the categories here you know you see for example brokerage receivables that are up a fair amount. So part of this, these are very idiosyncratic things. Because of the trading in the quarter we did a higher amount of treasury trading that has a longer settlement period associated with it. That had an impact on that number during the course of the quarter. We had revaluation gains against our trading account assets. Those revaluation gains had an impact on the numbers in that particular column. And so they are very idiosyncratic factors that are driving each of those individual line items. If you were to take kind of the real day to day management of assets has been very, very tight and I think particularly our markets and banking team have done an outstanding job of managing the exposures that they have an eliminating less productive areas where you know we have capital invested. That’s a long term process, it doesn’t happen overnight, we’re still going to be working on this diligently I’m sure a year or two from now. But the team itself has made good progress and the areas where you see increases here generally…

Well thank you all for listening today. If you have any questions regarding what has been discussed today, please call investor relations. This concludes the call.