Hello and welcome to Citi’s Fourth Quarter 2012 Earnings Review with Chief Executive Officer Mike Corbat and Chief Financial Officer John Gerspach. Today’s call will be hosted by Susan Kendall, Head of Citi Investor Relations. We ask that you please hold all questions until the completion of the formal remarks, at which time you will be given instructions for the question-and-answer session. Also, as a reminder, this conference is being recorded today. If you have any objections, please disconnect at this time. Ms. Kendall, you may begin.

Thank you, operator. Good morning and thank you all for joining us. On our call today, our CEO, Mike Corbat, will speak first. Then John Gerspach, our CFO, will take you through the earnings presentation, which is available for download on our website citigroup.com. Afterwards, we’ll be happy to take questions. Before we get started, I would like to remind you that today’s presentation may contain forward-looking statements which are based on management’s current expectations and are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Actual results in capital and other financial condition may differ materially from these statements due to a variety of factors, including the precautionary statements referenced in our discussion today and those included in our SEC filings, including, without limitation, the Risk Factors section of our 2011 Form 10-K. With that said, let me turn it over to Mike.

Susan, thank you and good morning everyone, and welcome. As you know, we reported earnings of $1.2 billion for the fourth quarter of 2012. Excluding DVA and our repositioning charge, net income was $2.2 billion, or $0.69 per share. These earnings were below expectations, reflecting the high level of legacy costs, most notably in legal and related expenses. We also had a reserve release which was significantly smaller than in previous quarters as our credit trends are normalizing and we’ve not yet begun to release mortgage reserves. To be clear, we’re not satisfied with these bottom line earnings, and our focus is not only on putting the drag of legacy issues behind us, but also on optimizing the efficiency and returns of our business as a whole. Despite the disappointing bottom line, our businesses generally performed well during the quarter. Investment banking increased its wallet share, loans grew in our core businesses, such as Latin American consumer, where we saw double digit growth. In addition, we decreased Citi Holdings assets by 9% during the quarter for a 31% reduction for the year. Our capital strength improved during the quarter, with the tier 1 common ratio increasing to an estimated 8.7% on a Basel III basis. Although the environment has shown signs of improvement, we believe it’s likely to remain challenging, with continued spread compression, the introduction and implementation of new or evolving regulation, as well as the costs associated with putting legacy issues behind us. This puts even greater importance on getting our operating efficiency to a level we’re satisfied with, and on allocating our resources to opportunities with the greatest risk-adjusted return. Regardless of the environment, Citi needs to be recognized globally as an indisputably strong and stable bank. We believe the proper essentials are the combination of a strong balance sheet, made up of high-quality assets, supported by the appropriate levels of capital and liquidity. Along with our risk profile, our necessary levels of capital and liquidity are a function of the consistency of the quantity and quality of our earnings, and as a company, we need to deliver on our commitments. When I became CEO in October, I stated three main objectives to accomplish by early in the New Year. First, conduct business reviews and prepare the 2013 budget, which drove our repositioning charge in the fourth quarter. Second was to structure my management team, which was announced on January 7, and third was to finalize and submit our CCAR, which was submitted on the same day.

Year over year, about half of the decline in the reserve release was driven by Citicorp, mostly in North America cards, and about half was driven by Citi Holdings, reflecting declining loan and reserve balances versus last year. In Citi Holdings, we recorded a net reserve build in the fourth quarter as a significantly lower net reserve release was more than offset by the impact of losses on loan sales. This compared to a reserve release of $663 million last year. On slide five, we show total Citigroup results for the quarter. Revenues of $18.7 billion were up 8% from last year, while operating expenses of $12.8 billion were roughly flat as higher legal and related costs were offset by a 3% decline in core operating expenses. Credit costs of $3.2 billion increased 11% versus last year. Net credit losses of $3.1 billion declined by 25%. However, as I just discussed, the net reserve release of $86 million was down significantly from $1.5 billion last year. We earned $2.2 billion of net income in the fourth quarter, or $0.69 per share, up from $0.41 per share last year on a comparable basis. This was driven by loan growth, lower core operating expenses, and lower net credit losses, partially offset by the increase in legal and related expenses and a lower net loan loss reserve release. Citigroup end of period loans grew 1% year over year to $655 billion, as loan growth in Citicorp continued to outpace the wind-down of Citi Holdings and deposits grew 7% to $931 billion. We saw an expected decline in deposits during the fourth quarter, reflecting the runoff of episodic deposits which came in at the end of the third quarter, as well as the expiration of the transaction account guarantee, or TAG program. This decline…

Glenn Schorr – Nomura:

Assuming that we continue to reduce the risk in the portfolio, and if there’s an improving environment that is the way the model should work.

No, no. The reductions that you see in Basel III primarily reflect, again, movement in the actual books themselves.

We don’t go into detail on specific reserving actions unless it’s in connection with a settlement that we’re announcing. But look, many different aspects of U.S. consumer-related products and offerings are the focus of reviews across the industry, including by several of our regulators. I don’t think it’s any secret that the CFPB has been reviewing various consumer products, and in fact they’re currently reviewing us. But I’m really not going to say anything more about individual regulator discussions.

And your next question comes from the line of John McDonald with Sanford Bernstein.

Hi, John, a couple of clarifying questions about your outlook comments. You indicated that you hope to keep the net interest margin stable. Would that imply that you expect to have some expansion of net interest income dollars given that the balance sheet is growing?

The answer to that is it somewhat depends. I’m going to have fudge this a little bit, only because of the impact of the trading book, and how that impacts net interest. So when you look at our core banking operation, we should have some improvement in net interest revenue. The difficult thing to project, always though, is the exact movements of net interest revenue, and therefore NIM, on the trading book. In this quarter, for instance, I mentioned roughly half, 4 basis points, of the 7 basis point improvement came about as a result of the trading portfolio.

Okay, that’s fair enough. And then on the expense outlook, you said core operating expenses should be trending at the $11.5 billion per quarter? Right?

I said that that’s a good base on which to start to think about it.

Okay. And for the year, you expect that core operating expense to be lower in 2013 versus ’12. What’s the amount in ’12 you are looking at when you say it will be below that?

Take a look at the full year reported operating expenses for Citigroup.

Do you have the number that you’re looking at?

I think there’s a slide in the appendix. How about 29? So it’s 46.3.

So you expect the core operating expense to come in below that in ’13. That’s what you’re shooting foreign. And that’s before the $900 million in repositioning saves?

I rolled it all together. I’m trying to stay away from giving you a specific number. But think in terms of the 11.5, as I said, as being an indicative base for moving forward. Off that 11.5 base, we’re going to deliver the $900 million of expense saves coming off of the repositioning. We’re going to drive down expenses in Citi Holdings. We’re going to have to spend some amount of money off of those two reductions in order to fuel volume growth that we’ll see in the business, but we’re also anticipating continuing our reengineering program and therefore driving up more expenses on top of the $900 million.

Jim Mitchell – Buckingham Research:

Jim Mitchell – Buckingham Research:

Jim Mitchell – Buckingham Research:

Jim Mitchell – Buckingham Research:

Your next question comes from the line of Matt O’Connor with Deutsche Bank.

It sounds like you’re not ready to comment on future cost saves, although there was a comment earlier that some additional efficiencies should be coming. So I do want to just prod a little bit there. As we think about the $1 billion or so of savings that you disclosed last month, is that kind of a downpayment on something that’s going to be pretty big? Or is this a pretty big chunk of what the overall pie might be?

Matt, I think that what you described as the downpayment was as I described the results of our budget process, and I think as we went through the budget, we came to some conclusions that we had expenses, people, businesses in places that we didn’t think we were going to be able to earn the requisite returns on those businesses over the intermediate period, and chose and made decisions to exit, downsize, rescale those activities. I think as an institution, and you heard me mention it, that from an operating efficiency perspective our businesses and geographies need to be focused, really BAU, on the way they think about and run their businesses. And so we’re trying to drive, as we come out of this budget process, a mentality that rather than having one-off events or annual events around repositioning charges, people need to have specific metrics by which they’re going to be held accountable for delivering against their businesses and that they need to make real-time decisions in terms of how they choose to make that happen.

And in terms of the timing of some of the metrics that you’ll provide us and I guess just kind of the overall strategy review -- I can appreciate you’re a couple of, or a few, months into this -- what’s the timing of that in terms of when you’ll communicate to investors and the Street?

You know, we’re working through it, and I think over the next coming months we’re going to come out with that.

And I realize it’s still being formed, but as we think about which metrics are important to you, I’m not going to pin you to the level, but in terms of whether it’s the ROA, the ROE, the efficiency, or all of them, are there a couple of key ratios that you think about?

Yeah, in my opening remarks I mentioned a few that I think are critical and my guess is as we refine this we’ll speak to… In no particular order, I’ve mentioned operating efficiency. I think ROA is one of those things I think that return on tangible common equity is a ratio that we should probably be out speaking and measuring ourselves to.

And then just lastly, maybe a question for John. If we look at some of the capital markets revenues and I guess specifically [thick], I think last quarter you had a very good quarter and maybe the first three quarters you gained a lot of share. And it seems like at least so far, as we have seen report this quarter, you might have given back a little bit this quarter. Is there something different in your mix, because it’s more global, or just a product set, that maybe explains some of the relative weakness in 4Q?

I wouldn’t call it a weakness in the fourth quarter at all. I actually think we had a very good fourth quarter in our [thick] business. And I think that for the full year, you’ve got [thick] revenues up 28%. That’s good performance. And I think that that ongoing performance, you know, reflects a lot of the repositioning that we did in the business in 2011. So, relatively speaking, we probably had more of an outperformer in the third quarter and therefore it makes the fourth quarter -- you know, when you’re doing quarterly sequential comparisons -- look a little small therefore. But I think that if you judge the year in its entirety, that’s really the way to look at the business. And I think the business had an excellent 2012.

And your next question comes from the line of Brennan Hawken with UBS.

Just wanted to follow up first on something Glenn hit on, the reserves and holdings. And I just want to make really clear, there’s nothing that you’re seeing there in the data -- given your comments, John, I wouldn’t assume so, but just want to make sure here -- that would be preventing you from releasing any reserves there?

Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley:

Okay, and then on the comments around investing to get the revenue share that you’re looking for, how do you think through the timing? Just as you go throughout the year in 2013, you generate the expense saves and the $900 million that you discussed, and then you’re investing that along the way or are you needing to see some revenue improvement first to have business units self-invest?

I think when we talk about operating efficiency, Betsy, it’s the want to have the balance between a strong focus on expenses but understanding that you can’t cut yourself to where you need to be, and that we have businesses we need to make investments in, but understanding that expenses are the things that you can control. So we’re going to be looking across the company in terms of where and how we make those investments, and we’re going to have a set of parameters and an understanding around those investments as they come for people to make them. But we need to be in a position to be able to make those on a regular basis and drive that in a BAU way.

Your next question comes from the line of Erika Penala with Bank of America.

My first question is actually a follow up to Matt and Betsy’s questions. Mike, specifically regarding GCB in Asia and Lat-Am, we appreciated John’s comments with regards to revenue growth potentially starting to converge into earnings growth in Asia. And now we have a public comparable in terms of looking at credit growth trends in Mexico now that Santander is public. I guess I’m wondering, have you gotten a chance to evaluate whether or not the infrastructure in those two regions are right-sized to potentially reap the revenue acceleration? Or is it still sort of unwieldy relative to the secular changes of retail banking generally? And tell me if you need clarity on the last part of the question.

I think if I understand your question right, I think Erika it’s important to understand the way we think about, and the way we’ve asked Manuel to drive our consumer business, and that is that we operate a consumer business in roughly 40 countries around the world, and that we recognize that aside from a few individual countries, our scale is not going to come from any one particular country, that our scale has got to be driven on a global basis. So as we think about our lending platforms, our card platforms, the mundane things of account openings, we’ve got to make sure that the systems and the way we approach things allows us to recognize that scale on a global basis. So I don’t think of our consumer business as being constrained in the intermediate term in terms of any individual geographies but it’s making sure that we have this drive to come in on our platform so that that can occur. I’m not sure if that answers your question.

I guess, just to be clear, there are not any additional investments that you would have to make in specific countries in those regions. I know you’re focusing on China, but in Mexico, for example, to reap sort of the credit growth and the revenue growth, if the Mexican economy is picking up as much as folks down there are saying. There’s no additional reinvestment coming?

We’ve been making investments. You know, we started making reasonable investments into Asia last year, and around the world -- Asia, Mexico, and other places. We’ve continued to invest and I expect we’ll continue to invest in some of those higher-growth areas into the future.

Okay. And just a quick one that’s not on Holdings reserves. If I look at the provision levels in GCB North America, it was up quarter over quarter, but flattish year over year. Is the bump up just simply seasonal as the volume spend is higher in the fourth quarter, and could potentially come down on a dollar level in the first quarter?

You’re talking about the overall provision, or just the NCL rate, I just want to make sure…?

The overall provision in GCB North America.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus. Mike Mayo – CLSA: I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus.

I wouldn’t call it a secondary focus. We understand why we come to work, and it’s a primary focus. Mike Mayo – CLSA: The reason I ask, I mean as a new CEO, you have so many options of what you could do with the stock price. You could have all the directors take a lot of stock, and you’ve had some CEOs take their personal net worth and buy extra stock, and as investors I think that’s a huge focus. I guess whenever you’ve done your review, perhaps we’d hear more about what you might do along those lines. Is that a safe assumption?

Yes. Mike Mayo – CLSA: Okay. And would you ever consider having a target of where you’d want the stock price to be? In other words, if you’re looking for higher returns on equity, and you get the business mix that you ultimately want, and the efficiency and the capital allocation, would you have a target in mind? Or is that just left up to the stock market to kind of let the valuation fall wherever it will?

I think we need to look at all the metrics that are out there. You talked to one of the challenges of that particular metric in terms of how the market is approaching certain things, but it’s obviously something we need to keep in mind.

Your next question comes from the line of Gerard Cassidy with RBC Capital Markets

Can you share with us on the sale of the assets out of Citi Holdings the pricing trends that you’re seeing compared to the sales of the delinquent mortgage sales, for example, that you’ve sold in the past? I think through the third quarter it was over $14 billion. Are you seeing better pricing now that the markets have improved a bit?

Pricing did improve slightly in the fourth quarter. I’ll tell you that. I wouldn’t say that it went up by leaps and bounds, but it definitely improved over the levels, certainly, that we saw at the beginning of the third quarter. I’d say the pricing on some of those asset sales improved toward the end of the third, and then held up in the fourth, is the way that I would characterize it.

Okay, and did you finance any of the sales of the assets in the quarter?

No.

Would that be a consideration of yours on a go-forward basis, to help accelerate the disposition of some of those assets?

Actually we’ve done that in the past, if you look at some of the deals that we’ve announced. We’ve actually taken on those financings, in certain amounts, in order to make sure that the deals would go. So that is not something that we would shy away from. Again, it’s a matter of being the right deal, the right price. Think in terms of what we always say, economically rational.

Sure. Shifting away for a moment to the net interest margin, your interest-bearing liability cost in the quarter, when we look at it with and without the FDIC insurance, is higher than some of your competitors. Is there an opportunity to bring those costs down, or is it just because of your global footprint, you just need to pay higher costs in markets outside the U.S.?

I think that we, especially on the international deposits, I still think that we’ve got some opportunity. We’ve probably got some more opportunity on the international deposits to bring some pricing down than we do on the domestic deposits. As long as we stay in low interest rate environments in those countries, I do think that we’ve still got some opportunities. We continue to reposition those books away from time deposits. So if you take a look at what goes on in Asia in particular, or specifically, even what we would consider to be normal checking accounts here in the States, which don’t bear interest, a lot of the checking accounts in foreign countries do bear interest. So as you start to grow those checking balances, you’re going to, even though they’re operating accounts, see an increase in your interest bearing. The trick is to make sure that you’re growing the real operating accounts and shifting the mix away from time deposits, which have much higher rates than just the base checking account. So even within something that gets reported as interest bearing deposits, there’s a mix shift that you can still work on, and we’re certainly in the process of doing that.

And one last question on the balance sheet. What’s the duration now of the securities portfolio, in years?

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources. Marty Mosby – Guggenheim: I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against…

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources.

I think we’re at a point today, after making what I would characterize as good progress against those, whereas we look at business decisions that need to be made and where we want to make investment, and how we’re going to spend those dollars, I think those become not just operations technology, safety, and soundness decisions, but they become more broadly business decisions, and I want Jamie and Manuel thinking about that. So in my earlier comment that Manuel has got to take our consumer business to scale around a drive toward common in our consumer franchise, and that Jamie’s got to continue to wring the synergies of what I call adjacencies amongst our businesses, our client sets, out, and to make sure that we can provide the things we need, we can develop the things we need, but we can do them in an efficient way. And so I think the part of the organization attempts to dictate and drive that. From a geographical perspective, I had the four large region heads reporting to me as well, and when you think about the balance in an organization, you want the balance between your products and your geographies, and obviously the third piece around your clients. And you’re just going to make better decisions. When I can look at what’s going on in the products, and I can measure what’s going on in the geographies, and I can see what our clients, and in particular our global clients, are doing around the world, we can just make better decisions about where we want to be, how we want to be there, and where we want to use our resources. Marty Mosby – Guggenheim: And would you say profitability, as we manage or monitor that, being focused on those two big pieces primarily, meaning consumer and commercial? Or still kind of a matrix approach across all of the different geographies, products, and all that? Or are those two business units really, with what you’re breaking out, going to drive the profitability overall?

No, I think as a company that comes to work in a hundred companies around the world every day, we’ve got to have a balance between geography and product. Our products are global, many of them are world-class. We’ve got to make sure that that gets celebrated and used in the right way. And I’ll go back to the example I’ve used before, that when we think of EMEA, where I came from, we operate in 55 countries, and we come to work very differently in most of those countries. And so if you’re going to make sure you get the most out of your franchise, you’ve got to be mindful of that, and make sure that you’re driving the metrics and holding people accountable for the things that you need to do. If not, what you tend to see is you tend to see style drift, or you tend to see the business start to veer into activities that really aren’t core to its overall mission and principles. And having spent three or four years trying to clean that up, I’m not anxious or willing to go back there. Marty Mosby – Guggenheim: And then lastly, and thanks for your time here, when you look at just the business lines and segments that are reported, do you see any changes related to that in relation to the changes that you made here in management?

I think right now we’re focused on the metrics that really drive these businesses. I think over time, as always, we need to make sure that our reporting structure matches our management structure, and I think today it does. So I’m comfortable with it, but over time we’ll continue to reassess that.

Your next question comes from the line of Vivek Juneja with JPMorgan.

Just on the lines of some of those questions that you’ve been getting, are there significant businesses that you think you would consider exiting? And as you think about savings, do you see them more U.S. or non-U.S. following this down payment that you talk about?

You characterize it as a down payment. I didn’t. I think that we went through an extensive, exhaustive amount of work around the work for the 2013 budget. And again, I think we made a number of decisions in terms of what it was we felt we needed to do, and what were the right choices around those things. Again, I think as we go forward, I don’t want to be in a position, or the company to be in a position, where we do these in one-offs. It’s got to be BAU, we’ve got to continually be assessing how, and where, and with whom, and in what ways we’re using our resources. And that’s got to be driven and compared at the business level, and I think that’s got to be something that’s ongoing rather than either being done on an occasional basis or in a step function basis. Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Vivek Juneja – JPMorgan:

Eric Wasserstrom – SunTrust:

The answer to that is, I’m not going to say in business by business, because spread compression is going to hit you differently in different businesses, and I think we’ve seen that. Certainly in Transaction Services, if you’re not able to offset spread compression, but the volume, you can have the impact of spread compression, you know, it will take away revenues without impacting your level of volume. And so therefore, you’re really running the same stuff through your shop. So your ability to take expense out is then just limited to your ability to generate reengineering savings, which may or may not be enough to offset the impact of the spread compression. So in general, you know, you’re thinking about it the right way, but it is somewhat dependent business by business, and it’s also dependent upon the magnitude of the spread compression that is impacting each business.

Well, general economics. If our customers aren’t growing their businesses, if our customers have a change in sentiment as far as how they view the general economy and cut back on either savings or borrowing or any of that, that certainly is a risk factor.

Although I probably will be directing you to make sure that you do a thorough reading of every risk factor that we publish in the 400-page 10-K that we’ll be delivering to you at some point in time in the next 45 days or so.

Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Marquardt with Evercore Partners.

Just following on that line of questioning, on expenses, can you talk about the areas that you’re most focused on investing? You talked about, obviously, cost saves and there’s more to come, it sounds like, after this first cut, but the investment spend that you need to focus on to drive the volume and the revenue, can you talk a little bit about where you’re most focused?

Sure, so we’re focused in a few areas. One is in the operations and technology area in terms of continuing to combine, streamline, develop, and roll out common systems around our global network. I think that would be one significant area where we’ve made investment. We’re going to need the continue to make investment. We’re always investing in our people, in terms of wanting to continue to retain and attract talent, and in particular in our institutional parts of our business, we’ll be continuing to invest in the build-out of our commodities businesses around the world. We’ll continue to be investing in digital and digitization around our consumer banking. I’d say those are probably a few of the more significant investments.

And then regionally, if we were just to focus on the global consumer bank, it sounds like you’re turning the corner in terms of revenue in Asia and Lat-Am remains very strong. How should we think about revenue in North America?