Good day, everyone and welcome to Diebold Incorporated’s first quarter financial results conference call. Today’s call is being recorded. At this time for opening remarks and introductions, I would to turn the call over to the Vice President and Chief Communications Officer, Mr. John Kristoff. Please go ahead, sir.

Thanks, Ardra. Good morning and thank you for joining us for Diebold’s first quarter conference call. Joining me today are, Tom Swidarski, President and CEO and Brad Richardson, Executive Vice President and CFO. Just a few notes before we get started. In addition to the earnings release, we’ve provided a supplementary presentation on the Investor page of our website. Tom and Brad will be walking through this presentation as part of their comments today, and we encourage you to follow along. Before we discuss our results, as past calls, it’s important to note that we are restructuring a non-routine income and expenses in our financials. We believe that excluding these items gives an indication of the company’s baseline operational performance. As a result, many of the remarks this morning will focus on non-GAAP financial information. For a reconciliation of our GAAP to non-GAAP numbers, please refer to supplemental material at the end of the presentation. In addition, our results of operations reported today, including prior periods, exclude discontinued operations. Finally, a replay of this conference call will be available later today from our website. And as a reminder, some of the comments today may be considered forward-looking statements. Internal and/or external factors could significantly impact actual results. As a precaution, please refer to more detailed risk factors that have previously been filed with the SEC. And now with opening remarks, I’ll turn it over to Tom.

Thank you, John. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining our call today. As you’ve seen our earnings report this morning, we got off to a slow start in the first quarter. However, these results didn’t not come as a surprise to us, as we anticipated a slow start in the first half of the year. While we don’t provide quarterly guidance, we have communicated that 2011 would be heavily back-end loaded from an earnings perspective. We slightly exceeded our expectations for the first quarter despite heavy losses in Europe and a higher tax rate. Increased order activity in the North American continues to drive the business on a macro level and given the strength in our North American backlog, our outlook for the year remains intact. Let’s review our results in the North America during the quarter. Revenue increased 3%, while order grew about 5% in the region. Most encouraging is that financial self service orders within the regional bank space where we enjoy competitive advantage increased more than 30%. This marks the second consecutive quarter in which financial self-service orders in the regional bank space have increased over 30%. As these orders convert to revenue in the second half of the year, we expect a significant uptick in operating profit. The increasing demand in the space continues to be driven by three primary factors. One, pent-up demand in the marketplace. Two, industry and regulatory requirements such as, ADA and PCI compliance. Three, increased deployment of deposit automation enabled ATMs as more regional and community banks are implementing this technology to compete with their larger rivals. As depicted on the graphic on slide six, we now have over 20,000 deposit automation terminals deployed across the country and that number is rapidly growing. These factors have also contributed to significant…

Thanks, Tom, and good morning, everyone. There are a number of key topics I’ll discuss this morning, including our progress in the restructuring of EMEA, the second half seasonality of our forecast, our operating expense outlook and working capital and free cash flow. Regarding our restructuring efforts in EMEA, we are planning a thorough comprehensive set of actions through all elements of our operations. We are reengineering to free up more resources for core markets where we compete most effectively. Further, we are also reviewing our profile in the region and weighing our legal and compliance risk against our profitability in certain countries. In addition, we are planning changes in our manufacturing, supply chain, logistic and administrative functions. During the first quarter, we’ve made progress identifying actions necessary for specific areas and planning needed to execute on those actions. This has resulted in restructuring charges of $0.14 per share in the quarter. Given our adherence to various European labor laws, we are limited in terms of details we can provide at this point. We can’t say this work will essentially take much of this year to implement and the associated costs are anticipated to continue into 2012. We have an aggressive plan to get our EMEA operations to a breakeven point by the end of 2011 and after spending some time in Europe recently, I remain confident in our ability to deliver on that plan. Regarding the seasonality of our 2011 forecast, on slide 15, as Tom indicated, there are several factors that have led to a very heavy second half of the year from an earnings perspective. First, our product order backlog in the US regional bank space has increased dramatically since the first quarter of 2010. We anticipate much of this backlog will be converted to revenue in…

Thanks, Brad. Ardra, we’d like to open the call for questions at this point.

(Operator instructions) We’ll go first to Kartik Mehta at Northcoast Research.

Hi, good morning, Tom and Brad. Both of you talked about, obviously, the challenges you’re facing in EMEA, especially Europe. And I’m wondering if you could, maybe, give some numbers as to the income or loss that region generated for you in 2010 and the first quarter of this year, so maybe put some perspective around how much of restructuring is going to help you as we move forward?

Okay. So, I would say that, in essence, the delta between the two years is approximately $10 million. So, you’d say last year was more or less a breakeven situation. This year, we lost about $10 million in EMEA for the first quarter.

And what about for the year, Tom, for 2010?

So, Kartik, you’re asking comparison what our – what we did last year?

Yes, so I understand first quarter, obviously, a really bad quarter out of EMEA and it looks like you are going to make a lot of progress at least by the end of the year. I’m just wondering in 2010, what did EMEA generate income for even – I don’t know if there was a loss, perhaps you -- ?

Okay, so we had – yes, we did have a loss last year in EMEA. Just call it around of the $5 million to $7 million, $8 million range right in there.

That was in 2010.

And so, Tom, in the past, you’ve had some restructuring in Europe. I remember when you had a plant in France and you tried to shut that down and that took a little – probably a little bit longer than, maybe what everybody expected. It seems like you’re being more aggressive this year or this time around, I apologize, in Europe. And I’m just wondering are there any similarities between the two restructurings or is this completely different and won’t be as difficult or as time-consuming as the last one?

Well, I think, anytime you do anything in Europe, it is always time consuming because you’re working through the World Council and the whole bid. I think the big differences here compared to last one is the kind of strategic objectives of what we’re trying to accomplish and one of the key things here is putting more of the resources in the market that we can make the biggest difference; the Frances, the Italy, the Spain, UKs and make sure we allocate our resources there and address some of the service and logistical infrastructure issues. Back in when we made those first changes, while we made some other changes, really the focus of that was really the manufacturing piece. Now, we’re talking about really the guts of the operation and putting ourselves in a much better position there to compete effectively. And I think as you saw from the orders, when we focus on specific countries that there are so many countries there, we don’t have the presence we do in other parts of the world and we tried too many things in too many countries with so many distributors, we’ve been ineffective and it’s been frustrating and disappointing for all of us. So, we’ve really turned our attention from a senior level standpoint to one of the more strategic things we’re going to accomplish this year and in essence, make the decisions this year. So while some of the restructuring costs may actually leak into next year just because of the timing of the (inaudible) accounted for. And my expectation is Brad and I and the leadership for EMEA will have made all the important decisions this year and as you see how fast we’re making those, we we’re able to take some additional visibility to increase our restructuring charge for the year.

And, Tom, just turning to the US, obviously there is lot of debate about deposit image-enabled ATMs that whether you should have a dual throat [ph] or a single throat. And I know you’ve gone with where as of now the dual throat technology, and I’m wondering as you competed for business if that has been a headwind at all or what type of experience you’re having with your customers as you talk about their technology needs?

Okay. I think as we said all along for us, the technology conversation is really a second, third type of conversation. So, first of all, the evidence in terms of what we’re seeing at the regional bank space with orders up 30% again for the second consecutive quarter and momentum growing there, we said all along that as the deposit automation takes hold into the next tier players, we felt very well positioned there/. So just that you understand from our standpoint, our first conversation is about technology, about integrating services, about the complexity of their business and how we off load that. And the other pieces that we talk about, when they do want to talk in terms of technology, because that’s always important, is certainly speed, availability, reliability, cost of ownership and then you get into the ability to repair and talk about the service organization. So, we feel very, very confident in our ability to move down this path and think that really the table starts tilting in our favor. And it’s pretty evident really when you look at the last six months and you see the backlog that’s growing relative to that. The other thing I would comment on is from the integrated services standpoint, again, they get the integrated, the services because of the deposit automation conversation, where you’re solving bigger issues, then something is – when you ask the question about single or dual throat, that really is not the issue. They want to solve compliance issues. They want to solve ADA issues. They want to solve PCI issues. They want to solve the whole infrastructure complexity issue which is really what we’re offering. That’s why, again, our integrated services order book in the first quarter was at a record high, coming off a record high from the fourth quarter. So, we did $50 million. And when you do that, then you start getting into the operations of the bank and can really improve the efficiencies. The other thing I would say there is again as we talked previously that backend system to be able to monitor, improve the work flow and process, again, it’s from a service’s standpoint, a key point that we point out. So, we’re not feeling – we’re feeling like very good, very confident that the momentum we’ve created is going to continue in the second quarter.

Thank you, Tom. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

You’re welcome.

Next, we’ll move to Matt Summerville of KeyBanc.

Good morning. Just I have a follow-up question on EMEA. I guess I’m a little surprised by the magnitude of operating losses in the first quarter of $10 million, more than you lost for the entire year 2010. I mean, can you kind of walk through in a little more detail how things sort of added up to get to that destination? And I guess, in your plan or in your $2 to $2.20, just so unclear, does Europe move to a breakeven position for the full year or move to a breakeven run rate exiting the year, if you could clarify that please?

Okay. So, I’ll start and then Brad, feel free to jump in as we deal with this.

Sure.

First of all, Matt, in the first quarter as compared to last year, as always, you run into certain factors. The biggest are product gross margins were significantly lower this first quarter as compared to the other quarters of last year which relate to certain specific opportunities or deals that you end up revenuing in the first quarter. The second thing is because of our lack of density there, our service gross margins don’t increase like we have in other parts of the world. So, while service gross margins overall when you look at it, you’d say, gee, service gross margins, we’re growing overall. They actually decreased on us in the first quarter because lack of product volume impacted installation, which impact our service, our service margins there in the first quarter as well. That worked against us. Then the last thing was tying those two together is really the mix issue. So, those were probably three of the primary factors. The other thing is while we’re moving on the restructuring activities, we still get here with all that expense here in the first quarter. And as a matter of fact, that escalated somewhat in that we’ve got some outside help helping us, so your costs are a little bit higher here in the first quarter. So, for the first quarter, the $10 million versus kind of where we ended up last year, again, it was in line with our expectations. So, from our standpoint, as we thought about the whole year in math, the $2 to $2.20, this first quarter is absolutely in line and was factored into kind of overall guidance and kind of reaffirmed today.

Yes, Matt, let me just kind of reinforce and then answer kind of the second point of your question. I mean, it certainly is, as Tom pointed to the product margins in the first quarter being down substantially from the prior year, it certainly is. We’re moving into Eastern Europe and rebuilding Russia. Certainly, that has put pressure. That’s a more competitive marketplace. Our manufacturing operations in Hungary, we’re running at a lower rate, just as you can see, based upon the overall revenue levels for the business. So, those are the things that ultimately grow the product margin. As we look at kind of where we’re focusing the business is to get the business to breakeven by the end of the year. So, I would think of that as more on a run rate basis versus being able to offset completely the $10 million loss that we had in the first quarter.

Okay. And then just in terms of the China dynamic, you guys have kind of talked about that, Brazil sounds like – it maybe a little bit more backend loaded than maybe you originally thought heading into the year. I guess, as you’re having these discussions more real time with these banks, I guess I just want to get more comfort with the timing on when these things come in because I was thinking if you started getting these things, these things don’t come into until June, July, August, that’s not going to revenue this year. So, I guess I just want to try and put some sort of probability around being able to execute on these potential awards.

Okay. So, I’ll talk about Brazil first and then we’ll move to China. We have pretty good visibility here, if not really good visibility here. The issue you faced in Brazil this year, every year when they have the election, the big government banks – so they just had the Presidential election last fall, the Presidential elections affect the big government banks as they start shipping around different players in those banks. So, we actually are at a meeting as we speak here with one of the big government banks that’s doing the public hearing this morning which will be letting the order out. Thus, the information we had uptil this morning was basically that these decisions will be made here in the May timeframe – May, early June timeframe which would allow us the revenue. And their expectations, what they’ve been indicating to us is, they looking to have all this installed this year. Same thing with the private banks we’re dealing with in Brazil as well that the May timeframe really is when decisions will be made, orders will be let and they are going to move very quickly. So, we’ve got I think excellent visibility here into Brazil. If you move to China, it’s the same scenario. It’s just the banks are different, both the big government banks and what’s occurring there and the information we have directly from the banks is several will be moving here in the month of May; decisions made toward the end of May, beginning June; deliveries, third and fourth quarter. So, from an internal standpoint, while we know what’s going to be backend loaded because of the timing of these, it’s definitely all third and fourth quarter, whereas it begins the year with May, of course, there will be something towards the second half of the second quarter. But, I think from a visibility standpoint, a probability standpoint, they’re both very high in terms of what’s going to occur. The only variability could be is we had Intel saying they were going to look for 8,000 and they do 7,000 or 6,000. That could be a sling factor, but again we should know all of that well into the second quarter and we’ll also know where we stand relative to that and what we’ve got in our forecast.

Okay. And then just – thank you for that comment, Tom. And then just one final question. I know you guys don’t want to necessarily get into the habit of giving quarterly guidances, so Brad, I appreciate talking about 75% back half of the year as far as far as earnings that implies 25%. In the first half, if you use the midpoint of your range and just do kind of simple math that implies an EPS of around $0.30 or so in Q2 which is still fairly below kind of where you guys were at last year. I guess, sequentially, I’m trying to understand some of that dynamics as I would assume your tax rate is not as high going forward in Q2. Your losses in Europe maybe come down a little bit off that $10 million rate. I guess why we’re not seeing a little bit more of a bounce off Q1?

Well, Matt, I think you – again, I appreciate your preface there right at the beginning of giving the quarterly guidance. Certainly, we are doing the $0.23 in the first quarter, there is a sequential improvement implied as you just factored in. So I do think we actually are showing sequential improvement driven by again starting to see the EMEA turn and certainly the losses in EMEA is what drove the higher tax rate. So we would expect our tax rate to start to also drop. So I do think we are actually seeing the sequential improvement.

Matt, the other thing I would say is, if we went back and looked last year, you would see for instance, Brazil at the big banks, they made their decisions earlier in the year. So that’s the big swing factor because of the importance of Brazil for us in particular and certainly, we had communicated all along all of the voting was going to be in the second half of the year which is consistent, but really the big swing between two years would be Brazil big bank decisions which have a big impact on us. So, again, because they got out of the gate slower this year than they normally would have because of the election with the government banks, that has really moved a lot of that now into really the third and fourth quarter. So, I think that would be the biggest variable that has changed year over year.

Thanks, Tom. Thanks, Brad

Yep.

And next from Gil Luria at Wedbush Securities Gil Luria – Wedbush Securities: Yes, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. First of all, on your orders in the US, it sounds like there is a mix shift almost apples to oranges between orders of ATMs and integrated services contracts, could you help us understand the difference in math here, so I know there is no exact numbers, if a median typical ATM is a $20,000 order, how much is an order for a five-year integrated service contract ATM? Is it different order of magnitude, even if you just have to talk about a typical scenario here, what’s the difference in kind of the order rates for those two different scenarios.

So, Gil, let me try and frame it up, because in essence there is, the difference between the two is not the price of the technology or the contract of service. What it would be with the IS order, we get additional services that would come along with that. So, for instance, they may be having us monitor the ATMs, we may be doing patch management, currency forecasting, so it is a whole suite of services they choose between, and again, what we are seeing over time is that as we get them on an IS deal over five years, sequentially they begin to pick other services once they have confidence and the ability to deliver. And these are not like $1000 a month type of services. In many cases, these could be $5000, $10000, $15000 [ph] unit type of services, but as you begin to spread that and build that out which is what it’s building for us; it has given us really big confidence in not only the business model, which is really taking that order off the street and giving us five years to work specifically with an institution. It is also allowing us to help them improve their operations and being in there with them. So, an order of magnitude, the ATM is going to cost the same and the service contract is about the same. That really doesn’t change it all, it is just the ancillary services that come along with that over the five year period. Gil Luria – Wedbush Securities: Well, let me ask you this slightly just to make it more specific maybe, so if you had a small bank that was going to buy 10 ATMs from you this year, that would be a $200,000 order, so if you had the same bank sign a five year integrated service contract with you for 10 ATMs with some of those upsells that you are talking about, let’s say a typical level of upsells, what would that – how big would that five-year contract be?

Maybe, it moves up 5% over the course of five years, because we only revenue the managed services pieces in the current year and that’s kind of the building effect. So, say it was an additional $5000 in this hypothetical situation, maybe you are one that’s only additional $1000 in services revenue. Is that clear? Gil Luria – Wedbush Securities: Maybe, I’ll just take it offline. Let me just then kind of translate it to what I’m trying to get to which is, how much do you expect the US regional revenue to grow this year over last year?

I would say that first of all the order entry certainly is the case to solid growth. I don’t think we are giving out specific relative to the growth in regional versus the big guys. What I would say is, in essence, our mix is changing whereas the last several years, you would have seen the mix being heavily weighted by the national accounts or strategic accounts. It’s now shifting more back, especially second half of the year to being influenced by the regionals which is very good news for us. And the other thing it also suggests is, as we are not only able to hold the revenue, we are growing, that means we are filling up pretty big buckets from strategic accounts or national accounts with a lot of smaller accounts. So I think for me that’s the overriding message that you’ve got. A lot of activity, we have 450-plus customers now using deposit automation, you have a 100 – I don’t what the number is, 110 or 50 customers that have 10-plus deposit automated terminals out there within their network. So we are starting to see that. What we have talked about for a long time coming is the regional bank space really beginning to take off, deposit automation is a key driver. Deposit automation decisions lead to this IS capability and for us, that’s a good sequence to occur.

Hi, Gil, this is John. Just one more point on the IS, you used the example of a bank that was going to replace 10 ATMs, one of the dynamics we are seeing is they typically would replace all their ATMs. So, maybe, this a bank that did two ATMs a year over a five year period, now they transition to an IS contract and they want to replace all 10 ATMs, because we are taking over management for that. Gil Luria – Wedbush Securities: Got it. And then my second question is kind of following up on some of the guidance questions. So if we are saying three quarters of the profit in the second half of the year more than the fourth quarter, that’s a 40% of the profit that you expect to come in in the fourth quarter, how much of that is in or you’re marking for December and how much of that has the risk of slipping into January.

Gil, I mean that’s a good question. And that’s something that we are looking very closely at. I don’t know if we have that exactly here marked, but I can assure you this much that the installation ability and the ability to revenue and because it’s backend loaded, there obviously is risk associated with that. But we certainly think that the – we certainly think we have the ability and capability of hitting exactly what we are lining up and we’ve got our organization geared up for it. And the point is, as long as we get the orders in and we can schedule them here in the May, June, July timeframe, we are very, very confident in our ability to be able to deliver and meet that, and while some may slip, I think within our guidance we have that factored in appropriately. Gil Luria – Wedbush Securities: Got it. Thank you.

(Operator instructions) We will go next to Paul Coster at JPMorgan. Paul Coster – JPMorgan: Thank you. Good morning. A couple of questions. First of all, regarding the European restructuring, it seems like it’s quite complicated, can you talk a little bit about the organizing principles around it? And specifically, how you protect your incumbent customer accounts over there, specifically those customers that might be more than country specific, maybe regional and even have operations in emerging markets, is there any risk associated with this restructuring there?

Yes, I’ll start and then ask Brad to comment as well. I would say the driving is exactly what you hit, I mean the reason EMEA so strategically important to us and the reason we are putting resource back into or additional resource into specific locations and maybe, not putting as much resource in other locations has to do with the large strategic accounts that or residents there that are morphing into global banks, it doesn’t take you long to figure out between Spain and France and the UK as you’ve got a lot of the single, a lot of the players that impact other parts of the world. So, in essence we are putting more resource there and maybe, looking at some of the other areas that are less important than small geographies, whether it be in Africa or little parts of Eastern Europe where there is complexity and now with the compliance, I mean the guideline are saying, you know what, it’s really not worth it, we are not going to drive much profitability there and it doesn’t give us much benefit globally, why do it? In terms of the complexity part of it, we’ve basically broken it down into seven discrete projects and it’s being run by specific managers, the things like service and logistics, there is one specific tranche of work that is being done, it’s being evaluated; shared services. We take a look at that, our country’s focus activities, manufacturing you go right down the line. We don’t believe this is complex. The complexity comes in terms of dealing with the work councils and making sure that we dot all the i’s and cross the t’s. So, again, I think I’d reiterate we are – Brad and I feel confident we can made the decisions this year, some of the cost maybe into next year, but our goal is, we are taking cost out immediately because there is something, whether it be shared services and logistics that – those are not discussion points. There are other things that are more strategic that will be heavier discussion points, but we feel pretty good and have a lot of clarity in terms of leading that, likewise, we’ve added some resource to help us make good decisions to manage these projects over in EMEA to support the existing EMEA team. Paul Coster – JPMorgan: Do you think you have the right products for EMEA at this time?

I’m sorry, would you say that again? Paul Coster – JPMorgan: Do you believe you have the right product lineup in Europe?

Yes, I think the – the thing we can’t do is, try and be all things to all people. And that’s why I think when you look at our order entry, when we focus on specific markets, we can do exceedingly well. So, order entry is up 40% in the quarter. Again, these things are lumpy, but what that proves to us time and time again is we are focused on specific accounts, specific countries, we can do pretty darn well on EMEA. We are nowhere near where we want to be in EMEA, we don’t have the same influence and have the same capabilities we do in Brazil or Latin America or North America or in Asia Pacific, we understand that which means we have to be even more focused to make sure that we start building some density within these countries to drive our business model, which is services and recurring revenue stream in these key countries and with these key customers. Paul Coster – JPMorgan: As you pursue these service opportunities in emerging markets, you cited the example of India, is there any compromise to your margin structure?

I would say overall, I mean if you look at India, in general, there absolutely is, the services is much better than the product margin. So, the key there for us is, as we build density, much like we have in the United States, if you look historically over the last maybe five, seven years in the United States and look at our service margins, I mean, there we can see the two improve through efficiencies, through density, through the technology, the backend systems that we are deploying to be able to take calls out the system, the quality of the products. Once we have the density, it is very advantageous. Right from the get-go in India, that was the business model we went to. And so, we recognized on that early and everybody has been there, everybody wants to be in India, local guys are in there, all the global players are in there. So, on the product side, that’s going to be very, very competitive and very challenging. So as such, building – the first thing we did several years ago was build an IS center there and begin to manage the products. And as such, we are very happy with the growth, we are very happy with the profitability we have moved to -- in India, whereas three or four or five years ago, we didn’t have the density, we were nowhere near where we are today. So, it’s a good business model, it seems to make sense and on top of that, as you can see from some of the comments today, we’ve been able to secure some pretty significant orders, so people are confident in our ability to deliver as well. Paul Coster – JPMorgan: My last question relates to the domestic business, I think you and your main competitor in the US have both talked about order intakes in excess of 20% year on year growth in the last few quarters, and yet the revenue growth is modest, is this just simply because the order intake relates to just such a small subset of your business, or is there – it seems to be a delay between the order intake and the actual revenues, can you talk about the cycle time there and what is that I’m missing?

Yes, so – I mean I think you hit on the head. There is an increased delay between orders and revenue, absolutely. There is couple of parts there; one is, you are no longer just talking about an ATM, because the impact of deposit automation, the bank itself has much more to do to be prepared for deposit automation in either a process or a network to be able to handle the more complex transaction to build, but handle that deposit free ATM. They need to have the right technology infrastructure with (inaudible) making sure they’ve got their IT pieces in place. And then third, they have work flow issues within the bank branch facility. So, I think for anyone when you deal with the complexity of deposit automation outside of the big – five or ten national banks, once they have that in place, you can just move very quickly. With a lot of the smaller players, it takes a while for them to be prepared even after they order it. So, as such, you see the delay relative to self service, it has extended. The other thing that extended is really the IS piece, because again IS is more complex than just a simple ATM. Again, both of those work in our favors long-term and they also change the dynamics from a competitive standpoint and really prevent a lot of the kind of the low-end providers to just come in and compete. It’s very, very difficult and complex when we had IP, add software and you have the technology piece to it and the ability to manage that. So, you are exactly right, it takes much longer as you move to the tier banks, the smaller tier banks which is the phase we’re in and where our orders have increased significantly over the last six, eight months.

Hey, Paul, I – also – I mean, your question was certainly in the order entry and I think if you go back and kind of look at the discussion and the pattern of our order entry in North America, certainly, it began to strengthen significantly in the fourth quarter of last year. We’ve had another strong quarter, the first quarter and therefore, kind of a proxy of six months to revenue, that’s why it’s now coming in the second half, that’s what is contributing to back-end loading nature of our earnings performance for the corporation, one of the factors. Paul Coster – JPMorgan: Thank you very much.

Ardra, we have time for one more question please. Operator: Alright. And we will take that question from John Williams of Goldman Sachs. John Williams – Goldman Sachs: Hi, guys. Thanks for (inaudible) A couple of questions, you’ve seen couple of orders a couple of quarters in a row, pretty order growth from the US regionals, I was just curious if you could give a few more specifics on when you expect to see those translate into revenue and I know you just gave a little bit more color on that, but just in terms of – I know that with the extended self cycle, is this something that should probably continue into early 2012 or should we see the full impact of what you’ve seen in the last few quarters over the rest of 2011?

Yes. Well, certainly, John. I mean, what we saw in the fourth quarter and what we’ve seen in the first quarter, the vast majority of that should revenue here in the second half, obviously as we continue to strengthen the order book and we certainly have seen continued strength in April; if that continues, then obviously that revenue will be in 2012 to support the continued momentum.

The other thing is, John is that we have, again, we talk about IS, remember that those are five years, so we’re going to get to the point here within this year or next year where that additional revenue begins to kick in as well. So we’re expecting IS to start contributing really in a meaningful way in the second half of this year as well. And again, as that goes over time, our backlog in that space alone has continued to grow rapidly. So, that again will yield – impact or begin impacting third and fourth quarter, but have begin to have a material impact in 2012. John Williams – Goldman Sachs: Great. Just in terms of clarity on the growth that you’re seeing, is there something specific from the regionals that continues to be driving this or is it just the fact that there is probably some backlog on their side in terms of upgrading and ordering?

I think there’s two things, one would be that, as we said, there’s pent-up demand and you have ADA and PCI compliance issues hanging over them. The other thing is we began five years ago really with an education of theory that have carried on for five years out in the field where we take in essence this entire solution out to the market. This year alone we’re going to be running, I think it’s like 35 or 40 seminars and generally, have 20 to 25 banks attend. Most banks, from what we’ve seen, end up attending these over a two or three year period before they make a big decision relative to IS, but deposit automation maybe brings them in the door and they may see the whole suite of solutions in security and logical security and that really is a big factor. So, we’ve been building toward this and the marketing and the development of the capabilities as well as the product capability, I mean, Kartik asked the question earlier. We’re the only ones with the flexibility of letting someone have a single check, or a single note. That’s a huge issue for a small credit unions to begin down this path. If you want a single check and a bulk note, you can have that. So, the flexibility becomes much more important to this segment which is why we designed the terminals the way that we did and as such, I think we’re enjoying the success of that right now, and that’s going to continue. We see nothing to prevent that with the issues of reliability and availability. We get the cost of ownership, again, with the kind of the service infrastructure and with the capability. It’s not just now we have been talking to them, we’ve been talking to them for two or three years. It’s just now that they have begun to move in a serious manner. And I think the other thing that’s impacted them is, you probably have about 35,000 deposit ATMs deployed by the top three or four or five banks in the United States. We are starting to see them everywhere. We’re starting to see ads on TV, so they have a need to really move. John Williams – Goldman Sachs: Got it and that’s good to hear. One other question, I guess just quickly on capital allocation. You guys obviously buy back some shares on the quarter. You’ve got a pretty good cash position. You got what seems like a decent 3.5 million share block left under your authorization. What are you thinking now in capital allocation, would you consider sort of an enhanced buyback or at least, really ramping it up given, the stock option today is down a little bit, but what are you thinking here?

I think, John, we’re still focused on the 4 million share authorization that was authorized in February. Again, we will continue to look at this, and I’d just continue to point to you that as we look at our overall capital allocation or we look at the balance sheet, certainly a lot of our cash is offshore at this point. And so, we’re accessing that cash to fund the share buyback program and we’re trying to do that in a tax efficient way. So we’ll just continue to kind of execute on the current program, look at our tax repatriation strategies and we will take a look at this as we get through 2011 for 2012. John Williams – Goldman Sachs: Got it. Thank you, guys. I appreciate it.

And that does conclude the question-and-answer session. I will turn the conference back over to management for any closing remarks.

Thanks, Ardra, and thank you everyone for joining us on the call today. As always, if you have any follow-up questions, please don’t hesitate to reach down for myself or Chris Bast. Thanks again.

And that does conclude today’s conference. Thank you for your participation.