Hello and welcome to the Time Warner Cable Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. Today's conference is being recorded. If you have any objections, you may disconnect at this time. Now, I'll turn the call over to Mr. Tom Robey, Senior Vice President of Time Warner Cable Investor Relations. Thank you. You may begin.

Thanks, Candy, and good morning everyone. Welcome to Time Warner Cable's 2015 second quarter earnings conference call. This morning, we issued a press release detailing our 2015 second quarter results. Before we begin, there's several items I need to cover. First, we refer to certain non-GAAP measures. Definitions and schedules setting out reconciliations of these historical non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are included in our earnings release and trending schedules. Second, today's conference call includes certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which are based on management's current expectations and beliefs and are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from those expressed or implied by the statements herein, due to various factors which are discussed in detail in our SEC filings. Time Warner Cable is under no obligation to, and in fact expressly disclaims any such obligation, to update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Third, the quarterly growth rates disclosed in this conference call are on a year-over-year basis, unless otherwise noted as sequential. Fourth, today's press release, trending schedules, presentation slides and related reconciliation schedules are available on our website at twc.com/investors. With that covered, I'll thank you and turn the call over to Rob. Rob? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Thanks, Tom, and good morning everyone. It was a very eventful quarter, or should I say another in a series of very eventful quarters, at Time Warner Cable. In the span of a little more than a month, we terminated the Comcast merger and entered into a second and even more attractive agreement with Charter. As this is our first earnings call since…

Thank, Matt. Candy, we're ready to begin the Q&A portion of the call. We would ask each caller to ask a single question, so that we can accommodate as many callers as time permits. First question, please.

Thank you. Our first question comes from Craig Moffett with MoffettNathanson.

Hi. Thank you. Rob, I wonder if you could just talk a little bit more about the priorities that you've set for the business now, given the transaction change. What are you doing differently and how do you think differently about 2015 and 2016 in light of the transaction? I think about some of the longer-term initiatives like WiFi, like Enterprise, and what have you. Could you just describe how you think about those longer-term initiatives in the context of your merger? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Sure, Craig. I think the reality is that the policy we've been following since the announcement of the Comcast deal has essentially been continue on the same course we would've been on had none of the deals been announced. And that same policy is going to guide us during the pendency of the Charter transaction and that includes making investments both for here-and-now benefits of improving customer experience, but also for longer-term benefits of growing the business. So we're certainly, in addition to rolling out Maxx, which is having benefits in real-time, we're continuing to invest for growth. We're investing in residential line extensions, continuing to connect commercial establishments to our network. We're rolling out WiFi as we have been and we're continuing to evolve our products, including video, high-speed data and phone. So the reality is we're thinking like long-term managers in spite of the pendency of the transaction.

Your strategy of bringing in customers at the $90 price point and then moving them up over time is strikingly similar to Charter's own. Is that a coincidence and it's just the way you would've done it anyway or is there any sort of intent to say this is a sensible thing to do, in light of the fact that we're going to be one company down the road? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah, the decision regarding our pricing and packaging is wholly our own and independent of the transaction. Until the deal closes or until we get regulatory approval, we have no choice but to run the business independently. And the decisions we've made on the $90 triple play is completely an independent decision that we think is best for the business. William F. Osbourn, Jr. - Senior Vice President, Controller & Chief Accounting Officer and Acting Co-Chief Financial Officer: And it started in Q4 of 2014.

Okay. Thank you, guys.

Thanks, Craig. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Ben Swinburne with Morgan Stanley. Benjamin Swinburne - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Thank you. Good morning. I wanted to ask about the outlook for Rob or Dinni, or both of you. When you look at the rest of this year, I think your guidance implies a nice improvement in the fourth quarter on OIBDA growth, or a lower decline at least versus Q3, but you face political comps. So maybe you could just talk about what's going to happen in Q4 that gives you confidence that you're going to see some, I think, top-line improvement is probably what's implied in your guidance. And then, broadening that out, you guys didn't, at least in your published documents this morning, have any 2016 commentary, the $9 billion of EBITDA. I was wondering if you could just talk about whether that number is still the right number to be thinking about and then if the CapEx outlook for next year is different than it was before, because your CapEx for this year is obviously coming in higher? Thanks. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: All right, Ben. Let me start with 2016 and then I'm going to turn it over to Matt Siegel and Bill Osbourn to talk about the remainder of 2015. So, as hopefully came through throughout our prepared remarks, we feel great about the trajectory of the business. And we are very confident that the subscriber growth we're achieving this year, as well as the investments we're making this year, will yield significant financial growth next year, but given the pendency of the merger and the changes on the horizon, we just felt it was inappropriate to give 2016 guidance. But I will reiterate that that's not in any way a…

Thanks, Ben. Candy, next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Amy Yong with Macquarie. Amy Yong - Macquarie Capital (USA), Inc.: Thanks. Two really quick questions for me, can you just update us on the regulatory process and perhaps areas of focus for the FCC as they review the pending merger and then, any early thoughts on competition from AT&T and DIRECTV and how that might change? Thank you. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: All right. I'll take the regulatory update and then Dinni will do the competition. So we're working towards a year-end closing of the transaction, but I think if there's anything that we've all learned over the last couple of years, it's that we don't really control the timing of this process. So we'll have to see exactly when it gets done. In terms of status, I think most of you saw that the FCC issued a Public Notice on Monday of this week stating that it had accepted our application, which is the first step, really, in the formal part of the process. They also indicated that they would issue another Public Notice as soon as they work through and voted upon the Protective Order that will govern the treatment of confidential information during the process. So we're hopeful that that's imminent. And that will start the 180 day clock ticking. As for the DOJ, we received our second request last week and we're in the process of responding to that. And as far as the state and local process, we filed all of our applications for transfers of franchises and so on with the state PUCs that require it and the local franchises that require it. So that's where we are in the process, as we sit today. As far as competition from AT&T and DIRECT, Dinni, you want to handle it?

Yeah. Amy, I think it's just too premature to say what we predict will happen as part of that. It's just all too new. I think that both companies are companies that put a lot of money in the market in terms of marketing, so that's something that could change. On the other hand, we all know that one of the things that AT&T was most interested in was the NFL games. So it's just too early for us to see how all that's going to play out. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: The only thing I'd add to that is that from an industry structure perspective, in roughly a quarter of our footprint, the deal results in two competitors becoming one. And, generally speaking, that's a positive for all the players in the industry. Amy Yong - Macquarie Capital (USA), Inc.: Great. Thank you.

Thanks, Amy. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Mike McCormack with Jefferies.

Hey, guys. Thanks. Rob, maybe just a quick comment on the CapEx side, thinking about longer-term run rate CapEx intensity, where should that go? And I guess part of that is your set-top box investment clearly has been elevated. I'm guessing that over time you're expecting that to come down as we move into more of a BYOD world, so maybe a comment around that. And then, just secondly on the competitive landscape in the quarter, AT&T clearly pulling back, Verizon FiOS not overly successfully in the quarter either. Was this just a really good time to be out there hunting for subs? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: All right. On CapEx, again, we're not going to give specific guidance, I think, until we're complete on the rollout of TWC Maxx. And until we've retired all of, sort of what I would refer to as, last-generation consumer premises equipment, I would expect that CapEx is going to continue at a somewhat elevated rate. But I think on a longer time horizon, your point is well taken, which is that as we deliver our video product in IP, it enables customers to use any of their customer-owned IP-enabled devices to consume the video product. And that in time will result in fewer customers leasing boxes that we have to spend capital on and more bringing their own device. So I do think that that, in theory, promises to reduce CPE capital, but I think that's a multi-year kind of event. And at this point in time, we're anticipating that we're going to continue to provide the best possible equipment for our customers that we deliver. You know, we do offer customers an opportunity to bring their own modems. And I think it's roughly 12% of our base is bringing their own modems, but that means the vast majority of modems are still being purchased by Time Warner Cable. As far as competitiveness in the quarter, I would only say that our connects were up in both FiOS and U-verse markets. And in fact our connects in U-verse markets did better year-over-year than in any other part of the footprint. And on the disconnect side, disconnects were down in both FiOS and U-verse markets and, in fact, were down most in FiOS markets. So I think the simple characterization of the quarter is that we did well against all competitors and that gave rise to the really outstanding subscriber results that we reported.

Hey, Rob, just on the connects in the U-verse areas, were you seeing a significant delta between the speeds being offered between AT&T and yourselves? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I'm not sure I understand the question.

Meaning your offering in those U-verse markets, is it meaningfully faster speeds for high-speed than you're seeing from AT&T? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Look, U-verse historically has offered a pretty competitive product and they certainly have offered speeds that are faster than in traditional DSL markets. So I think it's maybe in part based on product superiority, but I think it has a lot to do with just pure execution on our side.

Great. Thanks, guys.

Thanks, Mike. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is John Hodulik with UBS.

Great, thanks. Maybe just a couple questions about the Maxx rollout. Rob, I think you guys had previously said that, based on the spending, you'd pass about 40% to 50% of homes with Maxx. Now that you're going faster, is there a revision to that number for year-end? And then could you remind us, are you guys, as you go all-digital and increase speeds and improve the products, are you putting full set-top boxes in front of every TV in these markets? I'm just trying to get a sense for how the CapEx is going to scale post-merger. And then lastly, you talked about the 35% decline in voluntary disconnects. Is there a way that you could sort of help us scale that number, maybe in terms of voluntary churn versus voluntary churn or sort of just help us contextualize that number? Thanks. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Okay. So as far as year-end Maxx completion, while we're accelerating the start of the rollout in Wilmington and Greensboro, we're not going to complete Maxx in those markets this year, so we won't get to speed increases. We'll probably start the process of going all digital, which frees up the bandwidth, and then we'll follow that up with speed increases next year. So the projection of 40% to 50% by year-end is still a good number to work with, but it will mean that earlier next year than had been anticipated, customers in Greensboro and Wilmington will start to get the benefits of Maxx. As far as our all-digital play, we put DTAs on outlets that previously had no CPE unless a customer chooses to take a full set-top box, but we don't mandate it. So that's that one. The last question, refresh my memory.

You talked about better voluntary disconnects as you got in the markets where you've rolled out Maxx. I think you said 35% decline. If you could sort of help us, maybe give us a sense for, I know you haven't in the past, but maybe overall churn, or the voluntary churn versus involuntary churn, that kind of thing. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: We're not going to provide any more granularity. We've always shied away from giving specifics, churn stats, but suffice it to say that voluntary churn, when you take voluntary churn and non-paid churn, those are the ones that really are a reflection of the kind of experience that customers are having. And those are the ones we target the most. So success on voluntary churn is a big deal for us.

Got it. Thanks.

Thanks, John. Next question, please, Candy.

Thank you. Next question is Rich Greenfield with BTIG.

Hi. Just a quick question, Time Warner's been pretty out front, along with Comcast, in trying to set the bar for getting paid for peering and interconnection and even experimenting historically with usage-based pricing and tiering. Just wondering how you think about the importance of those levers for growth over time, especially as we're seeing OTT video, whether it's Netflix, or we're starting to see things like Sony Vue and Sling in terms of virtual MVPDs and maybe even an Apple launch. How do you think about the opportunities for both of those items as you think forward into 2016? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: The two items being peering and usage-based pricing, Rich?

Yeah. Caps, usage-based pricing, however you look at usage-based pricing. I assume you need a cap for usage-based pricing. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: All right. I actually view the two topics almost entirely separately. So let's start with usage-based pricing, which we've been implementing for some time for explicit tiers of service. That has, from our perspective, never been about managing over-the-top video consumption or discouraging customers from using other people's video product. It's been 100% about matching price and value. So the goal of usage-based pricing was to offer customers who use less bandwidth, who maybe just do e-mail, an opportunity to pay less and have an Internet offering that better meets their demands for both usage and price. So it's all about customer segmentation and customer choice. With respect to peering, we have both settlement-free peering relationships and paid peering relationships and to the extent that there is an exchange of money, either from us or to us in our peering relationships, those are really designed not to generate an independent revenue stream, to create another business, but rather to make sure that there's an alignment of interest between us and the counterparty in how efficiently we utilize available capacity. So that's really the way we think about those two areas.

And are you surprised that Charter is willing to do without both items as part of their consent decree to acquire you? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Look, different providers have had different philosophies on these things. When I mentioned usage-based pricing, I don't want to minimize the fact that we have been completely committed to delivering an unlimited broadband offering in connection with whatever else we do, because we know customers do place a value on the peace of mind that comes with unlimited plans. So we never had any intention of substituting the availability of unlimited with exclusively usage-based programs. And let's not forget that the vast majority of our customers do, in fact, take those unlimited plans. So I guess I'm not surprised to hear Charter having a different point of view about that. Look, I'm not going to comment specifically about the new Charter peering policy from a substance point of view, but I will say that the fact that it addresses a specific concern that's been raised by some opponents of the merger and, at least in theory, takes that issue off the table, that's a net positive for getting our deal done, so we're pleased with it.

Thank you very much.

Thanks, Rich. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Phil Cusick with JPMorgan.

Hey, guys. Thanks. I think people are a little confused with the ARPU trajectory, especially given the strength of the Mayweather fight. Can you remind us, is this really just because growth is so strong and a lot of people coming in at the $90-plus sort of triple play level, or is there any sort of down-shifting in the legacy base in terms of what customers have to spend? Thanks. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I think there's really two things driving it, Phil, and you hit on one of them. And I think Bill covered it in his prepared remarks, and that is this inflow of new connects at promotional pricing. And when you do better on the connect side, inherently, although the overall connect revenue goes up, there is some dilution of ARPU. The second thing we shouldn't lose track of is remember that we've moved now to a unified price increase, meaning we increase prices and add fees one time a year per customer. We did that in Q1 this year and we did it in Q2 last year, so that it's not a surprise to us that ARPU growth in Q2 was not quite as strong as it was in Q1, because we've lapped last year's increase. So I think that's essentially what's going on. I don't know, guys, if you want to add anything to that. William F. Osbourn, Jr. - Senior Vice President, Controller & Chief Accounting Officer and Acting Co-Chief Financial Officer: Yeah. I mean, just as I said in the prepared remarks, it's really just a factor of us driving volume, promotional discounts on triple plays and adding those to the base at a lower amount, tempering the ARPU growth.

And if I could follow up, how have you been treating retention? Have you been any more or less aggressive in terms of letting customers keep their discount as they roll off one year? William F. Osbourn, Jr. - Senior Vice President, Controller & Chief Accounting Officer and Acting Co-Chief Financial Officer: You know, our whole view of retention hasn't really changed since the middle part of 2014. I think that what we're doing is getting better at executing it. So our view is that we will always rather save the customer than lose the customer, but I think we're pretty disciplined about not giving away the farm in doing that.

Good. Thank you.

Thanks, Phil. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Laura Martin with Needham & Company. Laura A. Martin - Needham & Co. LLC: Hi, there. Can you hear me okay? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Laura, we're not really hearing you too well. Laura A. Martin - Needham & Co. LLC: Okay. Is that better? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Little bit. Laura A. Martin - Needham & Co. LLC: Okay. So I want to talk about OTT. It looks like these content guys are going to continue to roll out over-the-top services. We've got Lifetime launching. And now Bob Iger has said that over the long-term, ESPN probably will go direct. I'm really interested in your point of view about how that affects sort of your core bundle and how you think this plays out over the next five years. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Let me start with something that I've said many times before, which is that at the highest level, we embrace over-the-top video to the extent that customers choose to avail themselves of video over-the-top. It highlights the value of the high-speed data offering that we deliver, we think, better than anybody else. So we think it would be foolish to resist what might otherwise be an attractive behavioral trend. To the extent that we want to make sure that on the video side we don't lose customers to over-the-top, the way to do that is to compete aggressively and ensure that our video product is the best that's out there. And for what we deliver, I continue to believe that it is the best that's out there. The breadth of content is far better than anything that's delivered over-the-top. Quality of the picture is better, and availability of on-demand choice is better. So I feel like we can compete on that front. And to the extent we don't, shame on us. As far as the impact that more and more direct-to-consumer offerings have on our ability to sell, well, look, as long as the playing field is even and costs are comparable, I think we'll be able to compete effectively. To the extent that programmers begin to offer, on a direct basis, their offerings at prices which are either lower than they offer them to us on a wholesale basis at or in some other way on a more attractive packaging basis, in other words, with more flexibility to package the way they want, well, then I think it's going to undercut our ability to sell. And that's going to be a negative for us, but maybe more significantly, it's going to be a negative for the primary distribution channel for all of those video providers. So we'll have to see how it plays out. I think we all have to proceed with our eyes wide open as to what the impact might be. Laura A. Martin - Needham & Co. LLC: Thank you.

Thanks, Laura. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is James Ratcliffe with Buckingham Research Group.

Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Two, if I could, first of all, continued very strong telephony growth in triple play, can you give us color about whether that's mainly, the telephony growth, that you're selling a lot more triple play or are these still a lot of double play, triple play upgrades and what sort of ARPU delta you're seeing between the triple play customers and double play customers? And secondly, any thoughts on Verizon's Custom TV and, particularly, do you have the ability to offer skinnier bundles within your existing programming contracts, particularly the ones that might exclude some of the high-priced sports content? Thanks. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Dinni, you want to take the first one?

Yeah. So in terms of your question about phone growth, yes. I would say that most of that phone growth is coming from triple play. You know, we have very high triple play sell-in rates right now, the highest that we've ever seen. And I think that that is clearly driving it. We are getting some upgrades from double to triple as well, but I think the vast majority of it is coming from new customers taking the triple play. In terms of the other part of your question about ARPU, can you just ask that part again, James?

Sure. Just for customers who are upgrading or for the new customers who are taking triple play instead of a double play, what sort of ARPU uplift are you seeing by selling those customers voice as well?

Okay. So that's roughly $10.

Got it. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: On skinny bundles, James, look, I've been intrigued for a long time about the idea of giving customers more choice about the video products that they take. And, in fact, we've experimented with some of the same things that you're seeing other players in the industry experiment with now. We'll continue to watch it. We're fans of giving customers flexibility. That said, I will point out, and it sometimes gets lost in all of the headlines about skinny bundles, 80% of our video base now takes what people refer to as the full bundle. We call it our Preferred video product. And 82% of video connects took that offering. And the reason they do is because it's a great value. So I think choice is great. Experimenting with skinny bundles is great. And we'll do it to the extent that we see stuff working in the marketplace and it's consistent with our agreements with programmers, but we shouldn't lose track of the value of the bundle we offer as well.

Thank you.

Thanks, James. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Vijay Jayant, Evercore ISI.

Thank you. It's David Joyce for Vijay. Could you please talk about the Business Services side? Growth was decelerated below the 20% range for the past two quarters. Just wondering if that was law of large numbers, given the opportunity set in your footprint, or if competition from new telcos is stepping up. And along those lines, what are your thoughts about the potential for the industry working together in confederation to have a more nationwide kind of commercial offering? Thank you. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: So, David, yes, law of large numbers. Don't forget, this is, again, I think Bill mentioned it, but the 16th consecutive quarter of north of $100 million year-over-year revenue growth. So we're pretty pleased with the absolute growth we're seeing. And as the base gets bigger, naturally, percentages' growth go down somewhat. I'd also remind you that 2014 growth benefited from the acquisition of DukeNet at the beginning of 2014. Obviously, we didn't have a comparable acquisition in 2015, so that also has an impact on growth rates, but we're completely pleased with the growth we're seeing and, even more so, the OIBDA contribution that's coming from the business now that it's scaling and that margins are going up. Did you have another question?

Thoughts about how the cable industry could work together in confederation to have more of a nationwide commercial offering, to be more... Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Look, it's an opportunity we've all talked about. There are certainly Enterprise customers today who are interested in one-stop shopping and that tend to go to one of the big telcos that, in theory, would be anxious to work with cable if we could figure out a way to ensure that they had end-to-end visibility across the network and common pricing and all of the things you get when you deal with one provider. So I think it's an intriguing opportunity, but it's complex, to say the least, when you have to work with a network that's owned by multiple providers.

Great. Thank you.

Thanks, David. Candy, next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Bryan Kraft with Deutsche Bank.

Morning. Thanks. I had two quick questions, was wondering, first, if you could talk about the mix of DTAs versus fully-featured set-top boxes that you're deploying as part of the transition to all-digital. And then secondly, I was just wondering if you know yet or have any idea what the impact from Title II reclassification will have on the high-speed data taxes and fees? Thank you. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Why don't I do the second one first and then Dinni can do the first one. The answer is not yet.

No indication at all from the FCC or...?

I'm sorry, Bryan?

No, no. I was just saying no indication at all from the FCC as to what they're thinking at this point or...? Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: No.

Okay.

Yeah. In terms of the Maxx rollout, Bryan, I think that, as Rob said earlier, for customers who are direct connected, they're all taking DTAs. We're not really seeing an increase of people taking normal set-top boxes, due to the going all-digital process. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: And I think, on average, when we go all-digital, we're basically, on average, it's about two DTAs per customer, thereabouts.

Okay. All right. And are you seeing any uplift in the Maxx markets on DVR penetration as you're rolling that out?

No, nothing significant.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

Thanks, Bryan. Next question, please.

Thank you. Next question is Tom Eagan with Telsey Advisory Group.

Great. Thank you very much. A follow-up question on the programmer OTT services, I guess what is the impact on the negotiating leverage between the operator and the programmer, do you think? And then also, have you seen the programmers' threat to block the data subscribers' access to their site? Great. Thanks. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Admittedly, since the announcement of the Comcast deal, which dates back to February of 2014, we haven't had the pace of programming renegotiations that we might ordinarily have. So I'm not sure that the recent events yet have filtered into our programming negotiations, so I'd be basing it on theory as opposed to on actual experience. In theory, though, I think it's fair to say that if customers can get programming outside of our video offering, that that, in a sense, diminishes the leverage of the programmers as they negotiate with us, because if we don't have the video product, customers can still get it. And, therefore, they don't have to switch from us to some other video provider in order to get that particular programming. So that's the theoretical answer to the question. I think we'll see how it plays out in practice. Give me the second one. Sorry.

Well, it was just I think that that makes sense unless the programmer blocks the access from the data... Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Ah, Yes. Well, look, that has happened in programming disputes before. We think that it's the flip side of open Internet and something that we've urged regulators to ensure that they provide protection against, because I think it really works against the consumer when they buy Internet product, but can't necessarily get everything that they think they otherwise would have had access to because it's available for free. So whether or not programmers will go down that path, I don't know. Some have in the past. And if they do, we'll certainly challenge that kind of behavior with regulators.

Does the FCC seem to have an ear on this? Or I know in the past the Chairman, for example, he has understood that problem. I'm not sure if the current one does. Robert D. Marcus - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I think they do understand it and I think that it's a kind of a natural corollary of their interest in open Internet.

Right. Thank you.

Thanks, Tom.

And thanks everyone for joining us. I think that's all we have time for this morning. Just to give you a little advanced notice, Time Warner Cable's next quarterly conference call, which will reflect our third quarter 2015 results, will be held on Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 8:30 a.m. Eastern time. Thanks for joining us.

Thank you for your participation. That does conclude today's conference. You may disconnect at this time.