Good morning. My name is Stephanie and I will be your conference facilitator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the American Axle and Manufacturing fourth quarter and full year 2009 earnings conference call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question-and-answer period. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, today's conference call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the call over to Mr. Christopher Son, Director of Investor Relations and Corporate Communications. Please go ahead, Mr. Son.

Thank you, Stephanie and good morning to everyone. And thank you for joining us today and for your interest in American Axle & Manufacturing. We released our fourth quarter and full year 2009 earnings announcement early this morning. If you have not had an opportunity to review this announcement, you can access it on the aam.com website or through the PR Newswire services. A replay of this call will also be available beginning at 5:00 PM today through 5:00 PM Eastern Time February 12th by calling 1-800-642-1687. The reservation number you would need is 5158206. Before we begin, I would like to remind everyone that the matters discussed in this call may contain comments and forward-looking statements, subject to risks and uncertainties which cannot be predicted or quantified and which may cause future activities and results of operations to differ materially from those discussed. For additional information, we ask that you refer to our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Also, during this call we may refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures. Information regarding these non-GAAP measures as well as a reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures to GAAP financial information is available on our website. During the quarter, we will participate in the following conferences. The Barclays Industrial Select Conference on February 17th, J.P. Morgan's High Yield and Leverage Finance Conference on March 1st and the Banc of America-Merrill Lynch, New York Automotive Summit on March 31st. We look forward to seeing many of you there. In addition, we are always happy to host investors at any of our facilities. Please feel free to contact me to schedule visit. With that, let me turn things over to AAM's Co-Founder, Chairman and CEO, Dick Dauch.

Thank you, Chris and Good morning everyone. Thank you for joining us today to discuss AAM's financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2009. Joining me on the call today are David C. Dauch, AAM's President and Chief Operating Officer, along with Mike Simonte, our Executive Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer. To begin my presentation today, I will provide some highlights of our fourth quarter and full year 2009 results. I will also comment on overall business conditions and recent industry trends. Finally, I'll make a few comments on AAM's outlook for 2010, before turning things over to Mike to discuss the details of our financial performance. After that, we will open the call up for any questions that you may have. Let me open my discussion today by stating that 2009 was a brutal and punishing year for the global automotive industry. We witnessed historic bankruptcies of two of the three major U.S. based OEM, numerous automotive supplier bankruptcy filings and countless automotive suppliers that have simply ceased operations or liquidated. They were liquidated outside of the bankruptcy process. As difficult as it was, the year's end, we definitely see signs of a recovery and hope for the global economy, the automotive industry, AAM and our country. For AAM's, 2009 was a year in which we successfully navigated through one of the most difficult periods in the history of the global automotive industry. AAM achieved transformational improvement in our cost structure, operating flexibility and capacity utilization. We preserved the significant value inherent in AAM's unparalleled manufacturing and engineering expertise, AAM's product, processing systems, advancing on all technologies, as well as our expansion of new business backlog. For many key stakeholders, these were all crucial accomplishments. We stabilized AAM's capital structure by securing new financing…

Thank you, Dick and good morning everybody. Let me get right into it. We're going to start today with a review of our fourth quarter and full year 2009 financial results. First, as Dick previously mentioned, today we did report GAAP net earnings of $48.6 million and that's $0.80 per share in the fourth quarter of 2009. This was our second consecutive quarter of profitability. This is notable only because of the difficulties our industry has endured over the past two years. Let me just say this. Every winning streak has to start somewhere. We believe this is a start of AAM's new winning streak. As Dick mentioned, our fourth quarter of 2009 results include a tax gain of $48.8 million. And that equates to roughly $0.80 per share. This gain represents the benefit that AAM will receive under the Worker, Home Ownership and Business Assistance Act of 2009. Of course, that was passed into law in November of 2009. We have filed a U.S. tax refund claim under applicable provisions of this Act, which allow for a special five-year carryback election on our 2008 net operating loss. We recognized the accounting benefit associated with this refund claim in the fourth quarter of 2009. We expect to receive the favorable cash flow benefit in the first half of 2010, probably in the first quarter of 2010, that's our expectation but it is outside of our control. Also included in our fourth quarter results was a net charge for special items of $8.5 million or $0.14 per share. The most significant element of this net charge was a $7.7 million non-cash write-off of unamortized debt issuance cost related to the prepayment of the $250 million term loan otherwise due in 2012. There was a small portion of this write-off associated with…

All right. Thank you, Mike and thank you, Dick. We have reserved some time for some questions. So I would ask that you try to limit your questions so we can accommodate all of the individuals in the queue. At this time, please feel free to proceed with any questions that you may have.

(Operator Instructions). Your first question comes from Chris Ceraso with Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Hi. Thanks. Good morning.

Good morning, Chris.

Good morning, Chris. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Just a couple items. Can you just remind us of the ballpark difference in content on a T-900 SUV versus a pickup? I know that the four wheel drive penetration tends to be higher on the SUVs, right?

Yeah. That's right, Chris. There's not as much variation across the entire portfolio of pickups versus SUVs, because as you get into the heavier duty applications on the pickups, the size of the axles drives higher content. When on an apples-to-apples basis at the lower end of the pickup duty range, you're probably talking about roughly $100 increase in content on those SUVs. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Okay. Mike, on the taxes, I was surprised to see on an ex items basis that you had a tax benefit. You've been running a small tax provision. Can you explain that and what do you expect for 2010?

In the fourth quarter, I wouldn't make too much of that. It was really just the accounting impact of making relatively small adjustments to our tax accrual. Of course, relatively small adjustments are big when our earnings are where they are right now. So on a go-forward basis, what I can tell you is that for our internal planning purposes we are planning on a tax provision in the range of 15% and that of course reflects the entire portfolio of our businesses on a global basis most of our earnings of course coming from the country of Mexico in the next year or two. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Okay. And then last one, kind of bigger picture. The outside of the changes in volume from 2009 to '10 and the new business that's coming on stream, can you give us an idea of some of the bigger items that will influence the change in profit things like material cost changes, any launch costs that you expect comp accruals, that kind of stuff?

I think one thing specifically would be the – very enhanced productivity. And I'll just keep that at a macro level. Productivity is becoming very positive and getting normal to where we were strong company. We're becoming strong again. That's another major contributor. The other thing is our launches are launching so flawlessly, it's giving us a better margin contribution.

Yeah. Chris, I think as you – when we're sitting together here a year from now talking about 2010, the big driver of our profit improvement's going to be the contribution margin on increased sales. We see relatively moderate inflation this year. We see the opportunity to offset inflation in our material purchases with productivity as Dick just mentioned. We're going to have some higher SG&A expense in calendar year 2010. We – of course, all of our salaried associates took 5 to 10% pay cuts in calendar year 2009. Those have been put back in 2010 and we do have an opportunity to earn some incentive compensation our executives do, in calendar year 2010. So that will drive some moderate growth in our SG&A costs. But by far and away the key driver of profitability and year-over-year activity is going to be that contribution margin. We have got our cost structure, our fixed cost structure down to such a degree now that we'll see very strong contribution margins. We long-term said 30%, maybe a little higher on the GMT-900 program. We won't do quite that well on some of the new programs we're launching, but we're holding ourselves to a 25 maybe 30% incremental margin. We achieved the 28% incremental margin in the fourth quarter and we see that and maybe a little bit better going forward. So I think, Chris, that's going to be the key driver next year.

Okay. Thanks, guys.

Thank you, Chris.

Your next question comes from Himanshu Patel with JP Morgan. Your line is open. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan: Hi, good morning, guys.

Good morning, Himanshu.

Good morning, Himanshu. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan: First, I just wanted to clarify one of your comments. Did you say that you would be disappointed if 2010, EBITDA margins weren't towards the high end of that 12 to 15% range?

Yes. Himanshu, what I said specifically was we would be disappointed, if our 2010 EBITDA margin was not at or above the mid-point of that range 12 to 15%. We talked about that range of 12 to 15% at the auto show and I think you or maybe one of two others very accurately explained our thinking about that range, that – because over the long term and remember that guidance range was established for a long-term time period. We may see some material inflation like we saw back in 2004 and '05. So the lower end of that range is really a situation where we have maybe lower volumes – that's certainly not the case in 2010 or higher materials inflation. So we feel we can execute our plan at the mid-point or slightly higher in 2010. Now, we don't want to get you guys all excited and have you run your models at 15% quite yet. Let us gain some traction under our business plan, get some new programs launched. And you know what? If the 900 program and other programs in our portfolio take off the way they could, if some of your overall SAAR estimates are accurate, remember ours are a little more conservative. Then we can talk about the higher end of that range. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan: Okay. And then – thanks for that color on '10. But I mean, just when you look beyond 2010 medium term. I'm just trying to understand why you wouldn't be at the high end of that range, even in the outer years. I mean, you're exiting this year it looks like on an adjusted basis at about a 13.3 EBITDA margin, which is kind of the mid-point of your long-term guidance and just baking in some operating leverage. What – I mean I guess this goes back to Chris' questions, but what are kind of the sort of additions of costs that you see over the next couple of years that make you reluctant to think you're not going to be at the high end there?

Hold on a minute. I don't want you to think I'm reluctant to think that we can achieve at the high end of the range. I was answering your question specifically about calendar year 2010. Let's not get too carried away. We're just months away from relatively low – historically low SAAR levels and a whole bunch of problems and difficulties for the entire industry. We think the higher end of our EBITDA range is achievable as we execute our plan and it may be achievable for 2010. Otherwise, we wouldn't state that the range is 12% to 15%. We just, we think it's a little bit too early to be projecting everything to the higher end or the best possible case scenario. So we just want to make sure that we get a few quarters under our belts here before we start getting carried away on that metric. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan Chase & Company: Okay. And then can you talk a little about, is there a big content per vehicle difference between the 900 light duty and the medium duties?

Himanshu, there is. As I mentioned to Chris, based on the fact that the axle sizes are higher, they're bigger on the heavier duty versions of the GMT-900 program. So we do see higher sales content on those versions, yes. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan Chase & Company: Can you quantify that?

Well, we've discussed over the years that the range on that could be roughly $1,300 to $1,400 on up to $2,000 or so. But we're not going to be more specific about any specific items. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan Chase & Company: I'm just asking because it looks like in the quarter overall T-900 production was sequentially up 5% but the medium duty variant was down like 27% or so. So it looks like there was a lot of inter T-900 mix degradation. Was that a big headwind for you guys this quarter?

Not really. There were a couple of things working there. First of all, as you know, GM is preparing to launch the new version of those pickup trucks early in 2010. The heavy duty version I'm speaking of which is really the essence of your question. So I'm working down inventory and managing that part of the process I'm sure is at play. The other thing is the availability of the diesel engines for those applications is constrained now. So I guess you could characterize it as a mild, moderate headwind but we were pleased to have the higher volumes on the lighter duty versions. In total our GM T-900 production was higher in the fourth quarter than the third quarter. So we see the 900 program as nothing but headwind, Himanshu. I'm sorry, tailwind. So used to saying headwind, I said it. I meant tailwind. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan Chase & Company: Okay. Last housekeeping Mike, you mentioned 5% to 10% pay cuts were going to be reversed. What's the dollar impact of that on full year 2010 versus 2009.

It's in the range of $8 million to $10 million and then there are some higher amounts for other elements of the comp structure. But that element is about $8 million to $10 million. Himanshu Patel – J.P. Morgan Chase & Company: Okay. Great. Thank you.

Have a great day, Himanshu.

Your next question comes from Brian Johnson with Barclays Capital. Your line is open. Brian Johnson – Barclays Capital: Good morning.

Good morning, Brian.

Good morning, Brian. Brian Johnson – Barclays Capital: Just wanted to get in since a lot of questions have focused on GM T-900 which you explained well on the non-GM part of the business. So a couple things, what are you thinking about in 2010? How should we think, what percent of the revenue and what percent of the EBIT is coming from outside GM, roughly?

Well. Brian, as you know, the outside GM portion of our business is going to grow nicely. We've got about $200 million of our $300 million backlog launching in 2010 for new customers or non-GM customers. We've got the Mack Truck order, the Tata Ace program in India, the Nissan USA van program and others launching here in 2010. So our sales growth will be up about $200 million on that activity. So it will help us to contribute. One of the best things about that is we've got some infrastructure cost in place to support those programs that have been nothing but a cost drag for us and now in 2010 we'll see some contribution margin. I'm not going to get into specific profitability contributions from any individual programs or even this relatively small group of programs but I will say that these programs are going to contribute to our profitability margin in 2010 whereas in 2008 and 2009 due to engineering costs and getting ready to launch we've had nothing but cost, no contribution at all. Brian Johnson – Barclays Capital: Is there a range of increment margin we should be thinking about the new business that's coming from outside GM?

Some of this business, for example the Tata Ace program, is the first bit of business we have the new facility. So the incremental margin on that is going to be closer to the gross margin or EBITDA margin versus 30% may be a little higher percent margins, we see on the GM T-900 where our fixed cost structure is really established. So I would say, Brian, that we'll see a mixed bag. We'll see probably 10% to 15%, 20% contribution margins on roughly half of that. Little bit higher on some of it because in Mexico we've got our fixed cost structure in place. But remember we're launching, it's a ramp curve. So in the early months of 2010, it will be on the lower side of contribution. But by the time we get to the second half of the year these programs will be contributing nicely. Brian Johnson – Barclays Capital: And within the pickup truck segment, what's the impact of the 2010 guidance in within 2010 and within last quarter of the various refreshes going on in the three-quarter ton truck line, the Ram heavy duty, of course Ford's re-launching and GM has a freshened three-quarter ton truck as well. How does that play out in the cadence in the next few quarters?

I think Himanshu mentioned and he's certainly accurate that the production volumes right now on the heavy duty series 900 program down a little bit and we expect they will stay down here through the first quarter and then start to pick up again as they launch the new trucks in the springtime. So on the GMT-900 program for the year, we do expect good, solid contribution from that part of the program as they restock inventories and we believe put a very solid competitor on the street. So we're looking forward to that. On the Dodge Ram heavy duty program that's going to be a nice contributor for us as well and it's already helping us right now in the first quarter. That program launched in the fourth quarter of 2009, so production volume on a sequential basis was up substantially on that program. To give you context in the whole year 2009, we had orders of roughly 50,000 to 55,000 on that program. We're conservatively estimating somewhere in the 80,000 range for 2010. So you can see that's an increase of higher than 40%. So that's going to be a good profit driver for us in 2010. Brian Johnson – Barclays Capital: Okay. And final question, could you maybe recap between accounts payable and then the receivables for GM? How we should be thinking about trade days over the next year or two?

Okay. Let's separate these two items. The accounts receivable situation, I mentioned that at the end of the year we were around $130 million receivables and that reflected about $62 million of benefit on the accelerated GM payment terms versus the Product 25 [ph] terms that we had up until September 16th. So that's the impact there. Through the course of 2010, we would expect to see another $10 million or so of benefit associated with those accelerated payment terms as production volumes increase. And so that might get us to roughly $75 million of total liquidity benefit at the end of 2010. That's our best estimate at this point in time. What's going to happen, potentially, anyway, is we, the earliest time that we can terminate these accelerated payment terms is June 30th of 2011. We think that's the right day for us to target but we have the ability to keep those terms outstanding until December 31st of 2013. When we transition to standard payment terms at that point, what's going to happen is that we're going to give back the approximately $75 million of benefit that we enjoy under these terms versus Project 25 [ph]. And then we're going to extend out to roughly a 50 day payment cycle with General Motors. So we'll give back the $75 million and then maybe another $25 million to $50 million, depending on production volumes. And so we'll have a net liquidity impact of about $125 million or so that's our current estimate at the time we make that transition. Okay. So accounts receivable, I think that's the way to think about that. On accounts payable, in 2010 of course we'll have a lower CapEx, so that's going to drive a lower nominal payables balance. We've been running $140 million roughly, CapEx over the last couple of years. We're transitioning to a level closer to 80 million. You're going to be $10 million, maybe $15 million lower structurally on your payables just based on CapEx. So that's the first thing to keep in mind. From a trade situation, we see no significant changes in our payables terms with our suppliers, other than the fact that we are transitioning all of our suppliers back to standard payment terms at this point in time and we'll probably see a net benefit in 2010 of roughly $10 million, maybe $15 million or $20 million associated with that transition. We still had a few discussions open with suppliers. Settlement agreement with GM was September 16th and of course our refinancing didn't occur until December. So right now, in fact we've got a lot of it done in January. Right now we are transitioning, so we'll see that benefit in 2010. Brian Johnson – Barclays Capital: Okay. Thank you.

Your next question comes from Joe Amaturo with Buckingham Research. Your line is open. Joe Amaturo – Buckingham Research Group: Hi, good morning, guys.

Good morning, Joe.

Good morning, Joe. Joe Amaturo – Buckingham Research Group: If we could just touch on the pension funding status where you finished out 2009 and what the asset return was and I guess as it relates to that subject, if you are now going to, when you put it in your 10-K, are you going to include the receivables associated with the legacy liabilities from GM that you excluded from the 2008 number?

Okay. Joe, there's a number of questions there. Let me peel them off one at a time. You might recall our underfunded position, funded status I guess is the technical term at December 31st, 2008 was roughly $255 million. At the end of 2009, apples and apples it was $261 million. So a very small slight degradation in that funded status. Now, getting into the details, our asset return was in excess of 20% in 2009. We were pleased with that return. Our outside investment management firm, SGI, that handles that for us did a good job. We transitioned our overall portfolio to a more balanced mix now of equity and bonds. So based on all the right metrics, that was a good return, our asset managers did a good job. The discount rate on our pension liabilities was lower at year-end 2009 by about 40 basis points, so that pretty much offset the impact of favorable investment returns well ahead of our 8% long-term assumption. So net-net on our pension funded status was about the same year-over-year. Now as it relates to the portion of our OPEB liability covered by General Motors, let me leave pension aside and move to OPEB because there is no legacy issue in our accounting with GM on pension. They record their share of the pension on their balance sheet. We record ours. Pensioners actually receive two different checks. It's in the area of post retirement healthcare where we do have a commonly administered program. Our aggregate post retirement benefit obligations are measured at around $507 million at the end of 2009. That's about $8 million lower than it was a year ago. Two factors driving that. Number one, we had curtailment gains of $69 million in 2009 and so that drove our liability lower. Now, unfortunately, the discount rate as I mentioned was down about 50 basis points on this liability, so that drove our liabilities back up on an actuarial basis. So net-net, our OPEB liabilities are about the same on a year-over-year basis. Net of GM receivable basis, we're at $278 million at year-end 2009. That's about $15 million to $16 million lower than where we were at the end of 2008. Joe Amaturo – Buckingham Research Group: Okay. And then one final one. If in fact GMT-900 production does go to 900,000 units where do you think your capacity utilization will be and where was your capacity utilization during the fourth quarter?

Joe, this is David Dauch. To answer your last question first, our capacity utilization at the end of the fourth quarter was over that 80% range. At the same time, with volumes trending upward with the GMT-900 program and potentially going even higher, we definitely we can achieve and get up over that 90% range which is what our target was.

Joe, the important thing is, we can handle the volume that GM has reserved for the program. And know that the way GM measures that is to ensure the supply base is ready to handle lot higher volumes because seasonally volumes are going to be higher and lower depending on what's going on. We can handle much higher volumes much higher even than 900,000. Joe Amaturo – Buckingham Research Group: Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from John Murphy with Banc of America. Your line is open. John Murphy – Banc of America/Merrill Lynch: Good morning, guys.

Good morning, John. John Murphy – Banc of America/Merrill Lynch: A lot of my questions have been answered here, asked and answered. But Mike, you had mentioned something about having liquidity and cash that's four to five times what you need to run the business. Obviously, that's not all in the balance sheet. Some of that is in revolver capacity. As you step forward and you generate cash, what are going to be the priorities for that cash? Are we looking at debt pay down or are there other investment activities or other things you see as potentially creating shareholder value?

Yes. John, that's a great question. Listen, first of all, we need to and we plan to generate free cash flow from operations to improve the leverage position of our Company. So debt pay down is clearly a very important priority probably the most important priority in the short run. We think we can create a lot of value for our shareholders by essentially transferring that enterprise value created in the business back to the equity owners of the Company and paying down some debt. So that's number one. Now in the short run, we really don't have much in the way of debt that we can pay down so we do expect to build some cash on the balance sheet, at least until we transition back to standard payment terms with General Motors. So in terms of the dynamic between cash and revolver, we'll likely be out of the revolver early in 2010 and then allow any cash generated this year to simply be on the balance sheet. I don't want to lead you to believe that our only focus here is on paying down debt. While we do think we can create a lot of value there, we do think that investing that cash in the continuing diversification and profitable global growth of our Company is very important. So we continue to be looking at ways that we can establish new relationships with other customers, potentially expand some of our joint venture relationships that we have, particularly in China and penetrate new markets such as that commercial vehicle market. So John we're going to be, particularly once we, I guess I should say if we but we think we will, generate positive free cash flow and further strengthen our liquidity position, we're going to be very focused on quote, unquote, strategic activities that can allow us to drive further sales and profitability growth in 2011 and forward. John Murphy – Banc of America/Merrill Lynch: Great. And then just one last question. Dick, I mean, obviously you've been in the industry for a while and have some of your own personal ties to Chrysler. Just wondering what your thoughts were there as they transition some PI [ph] product potentially to the North American market and if there would be any opportunities, what you think the success of that could be? And if there's any opportunities to grow within Chrysler outside of the heavy duty pickup truck that you have good exposure to now?

Good morning, John. First of all, we are delighted to continue to be part of the key Chrysler program on this heavy duty Dodge Ram which Mike has already discussed with you. Guys are bringing it up to speed. We're very happy with them and happy with ourselves on that. Point two, we have oodles of opportunity with Chrysler as they are now organized and with their affiliate and their ownership in Fiat. And we also see that not only in North America, we see that on a global scale. So we see lots of opportunities. We're very focused on that. And I don't want to go any further because it's still in a discussion point. David, if you want to add some, please do.

The only other thing I would say is we're going to stay focused in regards to what we think their core brands are. At the same time obviously we've got to manage any and mitigate any risk that might potentially be there with some of the products. But we're actually excited in regards to some of the new opportunities that are presenting themselves based on Fiat bringing some of their platforms and their technology and where our technology can meet up with theirs to help drive some of these CAFE and fuel efficiency. John Murphy – Banc of America/Merrill Lynch:

Thank you, John.

Your next question comes from Rod Lache with Deutsche Bank. Your line is open. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Good morning, everybody.

Good morning, Rod.

Good morning, Rod. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Most of my questions were answered but maybe just a housekeeping one. Could you tell us what the T-900 production was in the quarter? Looked to me like it was annualizing at around 780,000. Is that correct?

Rod, the total production, hold on just a second here. I have the data. I've just got to pull it out. Our total production was around 206,000 units for the GMT-900 program in the fourth quarter and I would, I believe that's annualizing closer to about 825,000 to 850,000 annual pace. Again remember the production days in the second half of the year are much lower than the first half of the year. And much as I said for the early months of 2010, we're tracking around 850,000 pace roughly now or somewhere well, four months of history through January and the customer release schedules that we have through the months of May now tracking at that same level. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. So basically you're smack in the middle of the range that you're giving for 2010. That's the run rate that you were already at right now. And then you had the $300 million of additional business, so if you're annualizing it, $1.85 billion, with the $300 million of additional business minus whatever productivity is shared that's how you're getting to the $1.9 billion to $2.1 billion, is that correct?

Yes. It is. But you've got to be careful when you look at that backlog. There are portions of that backlog that relate to activity that launched in the second half of 2009. Okay. So in the early quarters of 2010, for example, we'll be posting our first ever sales in the first quarter for Tata and for the Mack Truck program but some of those programs were already in a run rate in the fourth quarter. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: The $300 million for next year is not all in that calendar year?

No. No, it's all in the calendar year. What I'm saying is you've got just in terms of evaluating the run rate of that quarter on its own. Some of the programs are already in the fourth quarter. Part of that $300 million relates to what we [ph] realize in the fourth quarter or second quarter, so by the time you get to the third quarter, on a year-over-year basis, it's a push. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: But I understand. It's a comparison against the full year 2009 not versus the fourth quarter.

The way to think about the guidance range that we provided is that we've got roughly $1.5 billion in sales this year, 2009. Last year really but 2009. We've got backlog estimated to launch around 300. That takes us to about $1.8 billion. We've got growth expected in the GMT-900 program for sure, the Dodge Ram program. There's some other programs where we don't expect growth. So net-net we're calling for $100 million may be $200 million of growth in those programs. And we have a very conservative, certainly compared to your expectation, Rod. We have a very conservative view on the SAAR. We know it's conservative. We understand that. If the SAAR turns out to be more like 12.5 million to 13 million like many are calling for, we'll take a look at our guidance range and we may have to change it. We're trying to be cautious about how we're planning for the business and we don't want to get caught up in a situation where we or others establish expectations for the year that are based on a short-term inventory build and don't have legs because of economic weakness. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. Thanks for the clarification.

Thank you, Rod.

Thanks, Rod. We've got time for one last question.

Your last question comes from Brett Hoselton with KeyBanc. Your line is open. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: David, Mike, Chris.

Good morning, Brett.

Hi. Brett. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: First of all, point of clarification. The free cash flow I wanted to make sure that we're basically including the $49 million in tax refund as well as the $40 million to $50 million cash outflow for the workforce payment. So the two kind of net against each other to some extent. Am I correct in that?

Yes. That's exactly right. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: So switching gears, the upside for the GMT-900, you didn't say that but I'm thinking that. As we think about the content per vehicle, the $1,400 that you're currently running at, is that a fair number to use for the GMT-900?

May be because of the some of the factors that we discussed earlier today may be $1,350 maybe a little bit higher than that. Between $1,350 and $1,400 is the right blended average rate to use. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: And then I'm thinking, we've been talking 25% contribution margins might be reasonable number to use.

If you're just talking about the specific GMT-900 program, we would be a little higher than that. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Got it. Okay.

But if you're looking at the blended contribution margin on all of our programs, we were in the 28% incremental margin performance in the fourth quarter sequentially. Probably 25% is a good expectation going forward. Least for the next couple quarters as we launch new programs because we're just not going to get a 30% margin on some of the new programs where our fixed cost structure is not totally established. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: And you probably won't be able to answer this Mike but I just want to ask you this, the tax rate on those incremental numbers, 15%, 20%, 25%? Would you take a pass on that? I know it's difficult to say.

As we emerge from this period of time, we expect to emerge from this period of time where we have significant losses in some quarters, profits in others, you get some funky accounting for that. If we have stable, solidly profitable situation as we're expecting here in 2010 there should be less volatility in our tax provision. So I think I mentioned to an earlier question, we think the best way to think about the tax provision and in fact the specific way that we're modeling it for our internal purposes is a provision rate of about 15%. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Okay. Excellent.

It could be a little bit higher, could be a little bit lower but 15%'s a good estimate as far as we know right now. Brett Hoselton – KeyBanc Capital Markets: Okay. Very good. Very helpful. Thank you very much, gentlemen.

Thank you.

Great. Thanks, Brett and we thank all of you who have participated on the call and appreciate your interest in AAM. We look forward to talking with you in the future.

This concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.