Thank you very much. Good afternoon, everybody and thank you for joining us for the Q3 Analyst Teleconference. As usual, I'm joined by Simon Dingemans, our CFO, who after I made a few introductory comments will add his commentary to the quarter and then we'll open for Q&A. So, GSK's third quarter performance as seen had continued to deliver a broadly based sales growth, bring significant new products from our R&D pipeline to market and grow returns for our shareholders. If I turn to the numbers first, total sales were up 1%, core operating profit up 11% and core earnings per share were up 16% to £0.289. The increase in core operating profit was driven by continued strong cost control, including a reduction in R&D expenditure and the delivery of a further benefit from the program of initiatives we started in 2012 to reshape and reduce certain long-term operating expenses. As we saw last year and signal to you earlier this year, contributions from this program are unevenly phased and we will continue to look for more of these types of opportunities to help deliver sustained reductions in costs and balance sheet liabilities. We continue to return cash to shareholders with the dividend again increasing by 6% to £0.19 a share and £1 billion of shares were repurchased by the end of the quarter. I can also, today, reaffirm our full year guidance of core EPS growth of 3% to 4% on sales growth of around 1%, both at constant currencies. Sales grew 1% despite the impact of a significant decline in China sales and the timing of various vaccine tender shipments. This was a resilient performance and is being driven by contributions across the group. In the U.S. first of all, sales grew 2% impacted by wholesaler and retailer…

Thank you, Andrew. To recap in the third quarter we delivered 1% sales growth despite significantly lower sales in EMAP which are impacted primarily by a decline in China sales but also the phasing of tender shipments in our vaccines business. The broad range of growth contributions we are now seeing across our business more than offset these pressures in the quarter. And if you exclude China pharm-run vaccines, the rest of the group’s operations delivered overall turnover growth of 2% in the quarter. Our results for both the quarter and the first nine months also show how we are improving leverage across the P&L. The rest of the group's operations delivered overall turnover growth of 2% in the quarter. Our results of both the quarter and the first nine months also show how we are improving leverage across the P&L. This is reflected in core operating profit up 11% and EPS growth of 16% and 1% turnover growth in the quarter. But also, EPS up 5% on turnover in line with last year for the first nine months. The 1% growth in turnover reported in Q3 is without any material contribution yet from our recent launches. We are pleased that in the U.S. our key pipeline launches such as Mekinist, Tafinlar and Tivicay are underway and since the quarter end, as Andrew highlighted, Breo has started shipping. As more geographies and products come online, contributions from our portfolio of new product should grow, but we continue to expect that in the current environment, they may take some time to build. To ensure that we deliver against this opportunity we are continuing to invest behind the pipeline while tightly managing our cost base. Our ongoing restructuring programs are on track and delivering in line with our plans. And in aggregate…

Thanks very much, Simon. And I’m very happy to open up the call to questions please.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, your question-and-answer session will now begin. [Operator Instructions] Our first question is from the line of Graham Parry from Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Please go ahead. Graham Parry – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Thank you for taking my question. Just on the pensions benefit. Given you booked £395 million last year, you’re only booking 367 this year, am I crazy thinking that's about a 20% headwind to operating profit growth in 2013 and if I had envisaged Kevin about 2%, you guidance is really implying underlying EPS growth for more like 7% to 8% after you strip out those two headwinds. And then looking into 2014, should we think of that as a bass to add pipeline growth onto or do we expect that 367 benefit for this year to dropout next year and just be pure headwind? Secondly, on China, if you could just explain how the phasing of your business has gone through July, August and September? So, which is the worst month, because September is starting to look a little better than August, are we seeing any kind of stabilization there at all. And then thirdly, if you could quantify the European contracting benefits to Pharma and the wholesaler benefits to wellness sales end consumer in the EU. Just so we can track the underlying growth properly there. Thanks.

Thanks very much, Graham. Simon may want to add a little bit, but I think your math on the impact of the headwinds of VESIcare and the year-on-year between the pensions last year – pension adjustment we made last year and the U.S. health benefits program we confirmed today, I think your math works out. We're obviously not going to give you guidance for next year but certainly your assessment of what the equivalent headwind is for 2013 I think makes sense. China, I won’t go into too much detail but I would say, kind of, July, August were worse than September and I wouldn't call that a trend yet but we want to see how October and November plays out. But I think it’s very clear that July and early-August were particular difficult for us. I’m not sure I completely understood your question on Europe. But I’ll ask Simon, did you understand?

No, I was going to ask Graham to repeat.

Okay. So, Graham, you’re going to have to bear with us and just repeat that if you wouldn’t mind.

[Operator Instructions]

Okay. Graham, if you want to ask again, come back on and we’ll come back. I’m sorry, I just couldn’t quite follow the thread of the questions. If we could move on to the next question then, please.

It’s from the line of Tim Anderson from Sanford Bernstein. Please go ahead. Tim Anderson – Sanford Bernstein: Thank you. If I can just go back to China and really have a slight influence of other markets outside of China, whether that's in the emerging markets or developed markets. In your press release, you say, you’ve notified the U.S. Department of Justice and the UK’s Fraud Office of the China situation and I'm wondering, why you would feel compelled to do that? Second question is on generic Advair in the U.S. and the IP landscape specifically, which has never been a 100% clear to me because that entails both the drug and a device and I know you guys talk about the last device patents expiring in mid-2015, but is it in the realm of possibilities that you'll be able to exercise some sort of additional IP that could end up delaying generics beyond that? I would imagine you'd be pulling all available levers here.

Tim. Thanks very much for the question. I mean, as far as communication with various regulators, that’s kind of a routine thing. We signal that out even in Q2 I think. And, you know, nothing particularly unusual but absolutely the appropriate things to do in these sorts of situations. As far as generic Advair is concerned, I have always believed there are – there is much more to the genericization of products like Advair than simply the IP environment and there is really in my view three discrete things that have to all happen. One is obviously a clear runway from an IP perspective and as you well know and I think you allude to, we retain particularly for the Discus device, IP protection in the U.S. through in to 2016. So there is an issue around – some people – is there a clear runway on IP. Secondly, are there clear guidelines about how to manufacture and how to register such a product? And thirdly, even if you have one and two can you actually manufacture the product to the specs which have been agreed within the regulatory process and then what we have seen with a repeated number of putative generic competitors is that one or other of those hurdles have proved insurmountable for them and it is not always the same hurdle. Now over time, obviously, the IP hurdles start to diminish, by definition, but those other hurdles still remain, and again, even with things like draft guidance, and we emphasize the word “draft”, so presumably it still has a potential to change from FDA, there remains the challenge of whether or not people can manufacture, and I think even if you talk to companies like AstraZeneca and you talk to companies like us, there have been…

Graham, you are on the line now, please go ahead. Graham Parry – Bank of America Merril Lynch: Okay, thank you. It is a question in relation referred to – in EE things, some contracting benefits in Pharma, and then you also saw some wholesale benefits to your wellness sales in consumer in the EE. Both of the questions are about the EE business, so I was wondering if you could quantify what those benefits were both on the contracting side for Pharma and on the wellness side in consumer EE?

I think on the consumer side we have seen over the last several quarters the European business delivering at low single digit growth and that is probably the underlying trend so will some stocking in the quarter reflecting that contracting position and some internal restructuring as well which will unwind in Q4. I think on the pharma side it is less significant and not something I think we should break out from an overall improved focus in the business which is driving the top line performance. I think in the growth of 5% that we have got, if you want some guidance on that, I think that is kind of running probably a couple of points ahead of the underlying trend in the quarter but it is only a quarter so I think the overall improvement you are seeing quarter by quarter really reflects the broader set of initiatives that we're putting into the business. So, hopefully that’s helpful. Graham Parry – Bank of America Merril Lynch: Thanks, Simon and Graham. Thanks for bearing with us to clarify it. Next question.

Andrew Baum from Citigroup. Please go ahead. Andrew Baum – Citigroup: Yeah, good afternoon. Couple of questions. First, U.S. scripts [indiscernible] Advair and Flovent continue to deteriorate. I mean, about minus 8% now in volume terms. How much of that decline in volume in the market share is just due to pricing pressure. I read the recent Thorax review, highlighting the 75% increase in pneumonia with Advair versus Symbicort. How challenging is that for you in the marketplace? And then following on from that, given Breo’s greater redundancy in the lung and the fatal pneumonia signal, how much is that going to be a challenge for you as you try and rollout that product? And then perhaps you could also comment separately on the Express scripts formula restrictions and how we should be thinking about the impact on the marketplace over the next 12 months? Thank you.

So what we've seen on Advair over the last several years is gradual, slow script volume decline which bounces up and down according to where the market is. So, the market slowed down a little bit over the last couple of quarters, that's just knocked that script decline down into the minus 4%, minus 5% territory. At the same time what we typically get is shifts in prescription size which often brings that volume back up again. And then of course there is various price effect, whether that be list price effect or RAR effect. And one of the things that we've been very, very good at over the last several years is to manage very carefully our discount exposure in the U.S., and particular in Advair. And that contrasts quite significantly, I think, to some other products in the sector. Flovent, similarly what you see in products like Flovent are swings as you see slightly more dynamic contracting. So, in Flovent what we've seen during the year are some shifts where we've seen more exposure into Medicaid businesses, we've seen some shifts in and out interestingly. So, early in the year we saw some shifts of some commercial books of business. We’ve actually seen some of that decision-making go back the other way in the last few weeks in our favor. And so, you’re going to see, I think, on these older more established products in the U.S. you’re going to see a lot of quarter – not necessarily quarter-to-quarter volatility but you’re going to see volatility over a 12-month period as the varied swing – puts and takes of contracting play through. And it's one of the reasons why in the release I made the point that it is a more dynamic pricing environment in the U.S. There…

This is from the line of Mark Clark from Deutsche Bank. Mark Clark – Deutsche Bank: Good afternoon. I just wanted to ask a question about China. The 61% reduction, is there any way you can give us some feel of how much is that due to inventory run down by sort of scared wholesalers, if you like and how much is actually end user demand collapsing? And I am also interested in that some products that one would expect to lose share to directly competing products, for example Advair to Symbicort. I am sure we could all have guessed that they would lose out, but some of your products are essentially the standard of care and yet those are also highlighted in the statements of having fallen sharply. So I wonder if you could just talk us through some of the dynamics. Just so we can at least make our own assumptions as to the scale of any rebound.

Thanks Mark. I won’t go into, you know, huge amounts of detail, mostly because I think it is just premature to call a trend here and I think there is a lot of potential volatility. As I signaled earlier it was worse at the beginning of the quarter than at the end but again I am not going to call that as a trend. It is just a fact. A couple of things just to be aware of. You will all be aware that some time ago, a year, maybe 18 months ago, China changed the pharmacopoeia vaccines which affected many importing companies including our own and what that meant was that a number of vaccines were no longer able to be imported pharmacopoeia change and that has nothing to do with the events over the last three months. That alone accounts for about 15% of the decline we have seen in this quarter. So a chunk of this, although we characterize appropriately, the total decline in China, a chunk of this is clearly really nothing to do with these events. If you then look into the rest, there is clearly a de-stocking effect. Now the problem – we can’t tell you really what that truly is – data doesn’t exist in the China in the same way that it exists in the U.S. to be able to call out inventories and it is clear there has been a de-stocking effect. We can only really get to the bottom of what that looks like over the next six to eight weeks I think where what we see through September, October, November maybe even December really will start to give us the proper trend of what is going on. So very hard to call out beyond those guidelines. I think it would be misleading for me to get in to more specific analysis, because it is just as likely to be noise in the system as something real and it is just as frustrating for me as it is for you.

From the line of Andy Kocen from Redburn, please go ahead. Andy Kocen – Redburn: Hi there, I have a couple. One on SG&A, which grew pretty strongly on an underlying basis if you exclude the provision reversal, so is that down to launch costs and if it is how long should we expect this sort of bulge to last for? And secondly, on R&D, should we expect another update on your IRR from R&D at the full year results now a couple of years on from the last guidance? And also how do you really feel you delivered in terms of genuine innovation and my apologies for this it feels childish light of all of the launches you have got this year, I am not saying that you have not delivered. But clearly the innovative scientific risky products that you have pursued over the last couple of years have tended not to work and the ones that you are launching now while most important have not really been that novel in terms of mechanisms. Kind of philosophically, how do you feel about your R&D going forward.

Okay. Let me take the SG&A question. I mean, I think a little bit in the same vein as the benefits that we've delivered on the medical side. I wouldn't focus too much on the individual quarter. If you look at the nine months, you’re broadly flat on last year in terms of overall SG&A expense. And that's really being driven by recycling of the savings we’re making out of our ongoing programs as well as some of these particular initiatives that we've identified to give us the flexibility to support the pipeline launches without a big bolus or ramp up in expenditure as we've talked about a number a time. So, I would kind of step back from the quarter and just look at the underlying trend, which is broadly steady and that's probably what you should think about going forward.

Thanks, Simon. So, Andy, as far as R&D is concerned, yes, we would intend to do an update on the rate of return analysis for the full year. As far as the how innovative or not that would be. I think the reality is, it's a portfolio, isn’t it? We've developed over the last several years what we think is a balanced portfolio. We all know – and in fact even I think Glaxo in the 90s fell into the trap of having a portfolio which was all unprecedented mechanisms and I remember an era where we had medicines in there for stroke, cognitive function, et cetera, et cetera and they all failed and partly created one of the big gaps in the Company's history. We can all think of other companies, competitors of ours, who’ve been very, very dominated again by unprecedented mechanisms and had sequential failures, very late stage developments and which then went on to cause great strategic challenge for those companies. So it's important to have the blend. Now, what’s then critical, I think, is that within the blend everything creates value for the patients and for the payor and that's where I think you have to really look at the GSK portfolio and you got to give it some credit for that. So, yes, Breo isn't a first-in-class product but it addresses the two or three fundamental needs that we know patients are really striving for in COPD, who are using inhale therapy. They want basically a full 24-hour duration of action drug, they don't feel that exists in the marketplace and they want it. They want devices which are easier to use. And that's what we've striven to build into this. Now, the date which will potentially really define this product will come with…

It is from the line of Jeffrey Holford. Go ahead. Jeffrey Holford – Jefferies LLC: Hi, thanks for taking my questions. So just on relative pricing of Advair and Breo in the U.S. market, can you give us any more color on how you expect to proceed here going forward now with the launches getting underway? Do you intend that you keep these on parity pricing with each other and are there any initiatives like couponing that you will particularly apply to Breo to help for some switch there? And also just related to some of your comments earlier, Andrew, now that you have a little bit more visibility on these disposable gains coming through, you sound a bit more cautious than usual in terms of increasing the buyback more aggressively at least through to the end of this year anyway, is that just due to timing when proceeds will be received or does it reflect a slight shift in sentiment on capital allocations from you from disposables? Thank you.

I think on the latter no shift in our mind set vis-à-vis capital allocation and I have said repeatedly, that while again, I am not giving you any guidance for next year, I think you should be surprised if we gave you any guidance different on share buy backs than we have given you for the last two or three years. We are very, very comfortable with the notion of starting the year saying we are going to buy back between one billion and two billion. That sometimes proves quite difficult to do when you have very, very busy regulatory years like we have this year. But the intent absolutely is to continue to lean into the buy back at a nice steady pace, not create lots of drama or noise in the buyback space, but a nice steady pace combined with a commitment to constantly increase the dividend. That is exactly what we are doing. You are quite right the proceeds of these disposables won’t come until the end of the year but the reality is no change in terms of our I think balanced sustainable commitment to how we use capital and most importantly reaffirm the signal that we are not in the business of creating reserves of capital to go do some major acquisition. We remain very much of the view that we are tilted toward the seller rather than the buyer of assets. It doesn’t mean we will never buy an asset or invest in a business that maybe we already partially own. But as you have seen over the last 20 months or so we have been very much a divester rather than an acquirer. Why? Because we want to continue to improve the quality of the company as the pipeline and the pharma vaccine business portfolio strengthens, take out complexity, take out low margin businesses, take out businesses where we believe that others may be better on their own than we are at a time when we have a tremendous amount of opportunity to prosecute in the pharma vaccine space. So that is really the position that we have on that. Next question.

The next question is from the line of James Gordon. Please go ahead from JPMorgan. James Gordon – JPMorgan Securities Plc: Hello, thanks for taking my questions. This is James Gordon from JPMorgan. The first question is just following up on the response about the use of divestment cash, I was wondering do you worry about fines and that might mean that you need to carry a larger than normal cash buffer? What is the right level of net debt to GSK or how much cash you actually need to carry? And one other question is on emerging markets, if we exclude China EMAP pharma vaccines grew 2% this quarter, what is a realistic run rate for Q4 and for next year if we exclude China? And then just a final question which is about a year after the Hoxsey [ph] acquisition, growth are good for the U.S. but not doing too much outside the U.S. So my question there would be how should we see this acquisition, and do you think Benlysta is going to accelerate a lot now, is it going to become a very material product for GSK? And the other part of the Hoxsey acquisition, the other part would be the not having to pay royalties to Hoxsey, what are the plans there in terms of -- is that something you are going to sell yourself or partner with someone?

Okay James, I am going to try and cover all of that. So as far as fines, you know, what is important, and the number you should be looking at is what legal provisions we take. Our obligation, quite rightly, is to make sure that we provide it in our accounts for what we believe to be the most likely outcome of liabilities for the company whether they be legal or any other liability and we review that regularly at every quarter and we make adjustments up and down according to that. So that signals to you what our composite view is of our legal liabilities and I think this quarter we’re holding a legal provision of about £750 million, something like that. And within that that covers the whole raft of things and I would say that is at the low-end of where it’s been for the last several years, because we resolved a huge amount of litigation over the last few years. We can’t give you any guidance on EMAP growth rates because that would be guidance. So, we will wait and do that in February and we’ll decide what we share with you at that point. But it’s fair to say that EMAP remains – growth remains slightly volatile quarter-to-quarter mostly because of vaccines and there’s no question, just as we’ve seen in the last several years, that you should anticipate Q4 being a substantial vaccine quarter for EMAP because that’s just the way the customers choose to order the product. As far as HGS is concerned, actually, Benlysta has had a slow start ex-U.S. but it is beginning to build up some quite nice momentum particularly in Europe. Interestingly enough, we’ve seen a very similar phenomenon with Prolia, the drug we partnered with Amgen, very slow…

It’s from the line of Keyur Parekh from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon. Thank you for taking my questions. I have three, if I may. First, Andrew, just I noticed that you’re kind of talking about pricing pressure in India in addition to what you’re facing in China, can you just help us think about the possibility for further pricing pressures across the rest of the emerging markets? Secondly, for Simon, as you look at the ongoing benefits from the cost reduction and the substantial benefit you get in this quarter, how should we think about the ongoing benefits on the service cost? And then thirdly, Andrew, as you launch kind of the respiratory product, what is going to be your marketing message? Are you looking to switch patients from Advair to Breo or should we think of this more as an opportunity for new patient starts? Thank you.

Thanks very much. So, as far as India is concerned. As you know, there’s been a new price control regulation brought into India that’s affected a whole raft of companies. Of course, as one of the biggest companies with some very big products, we’ve been affected by that. I think that’s going to take, you know, obviously the next couple of three quarters to really wash through the system and you’re going to see some adverse quarter-on-quarter comparisons as those price cuts come through. It’s also worth remembering that some of the products which were in the old price control system will now be able to have price increases, not immediately but in the future. So there again GSK had a lot of products in that old system, so there’s going to be some puts and takes there. And the key to India is really the key to the whole price question for emerging markets is understanding what the volume elasticity of demand is. So, the reality, of course, is that India, in particular, every product we sell – almost every product – has multiple generic copies out there, very often sold at lower prices than ours. So, I think it’s highly likely that as we see prices cut we’re very likely to see volume go up, because if you had the choice between the generic and the lead brand in a market like India, I think we’re going to see increased volume demand for the product. So, I think what you will continue to see is governments intervene periodically on pricing, I don’t think that’s unexpected or surprising, I continue to believe that the underlying demographic momentum of most of these countries means that over a period of two or three years very often the volume compensates for that price effect, but you just have to realize that over a period of a decade you are going to have two or three rounds of price interventions at different points. Simon, if you want to answer and then I will come back to the [indiscernible] question.

In think in terms of the ongoing benefits as well as the particular benefit we reported this quarter, I think if you assume a few tens of millions you are probably in the right sort of territory but remember each of these produces similar kind of savings so they build up over time. And the other important thing to remember is that it also addresses significant balance sheet liabilities, which require cash funding over time as you agree the evaluations of those and so it is reducing the volatility of those requirements and leaving us cash free to invest elsewhere or return to shareholders. So there are a number of benefits from these programs.

I would just like to add to this and compliment Simon actually, because right from when I first announced Simon’s appointment and people asked me why we hired Simon, I explained that I wanted him to focus on a number of things in the business but also to really address; a: our tax strategy b: our interest rate exposures and c: our long term financial exposures, and at the time I talked about pensions. And Simon has done a fantastic job over the last two or three years on all three of those dimensions and on this latter piece of these significant long term costs which frankly many companies have not tackled – this company had not tackled for a long time, what you are seeing is a program year-after-year now of taking on these big areas of day-to-day P&L costs but also significant balance sheet liabilities which needed to be addressed and we planned last year to do the UK pension environment, a very difficult thing to do, we did that, we planned this year to do U.S. health care for folks who are still in employment but are going to retire in the future. We have other things that we have planned for next year and it seems to me completely right that we should be putting in place a very sustained program. Not just to tackle the things we can turn on or off in a quarter but to really fundamentally get a grip of the shape of some of those cost areas which aren’t actually talked about very often on these calls but actually represent enormous expense for the company and in some cases can create almost unlimited liabilities down in the long run. And I just want to thank and congratulate Simon for extraordinary leadership…

It is from the line of Luisa Hector from Credit Suisse. please go ahead. Luisa Hector – Credit Suisse: Three questions please if I can. You just said that Andrew about restructuring in 2014 I wonder if you can give us any more details to tell us what they could be, could they be as sizable as we have seen this quarter and then maybe exceptional question of whether they should be treated as quarter earnings playing forward. A question about the [indiscernible] particularly in the respiratory in the U.S. As you enter into the fourth quarter is that something that is unlikely to change going forward, do you think U.S. would stay as the top of the year to run with low inventories -- levels of many of these respiratory drugs and for what? And largely can you confirm whether you have recruited more sales reps ahead of the US Breo launch and do you plan to do –to recruit more ahead of the Anoro launch early next year?

First of all, let’s not – we are not talking about restructuring for these – this restructuring over way we treat things like benefits. So there is no big cost associated with it. I don’t want people to confuse that there are big cost costs associated with the changes in the way we would normally talk about restructuring. These are – I prefer the word re-shaping the long-term cost profile of the business. We have a plan for more these things next year, I am not going to tell you what they are just yet for some obvious reasons I think. This year’s benefit is somewhat lower than next year’s and we will potentially give you some sense of that next year. So Simon, do you want to add to that and also what – make the comment on the core earnings and I will come to the other two.

I think as Andrew has highlighted that they are not restructuring in terms of charges and savings from fixed costs as we reprogram or make the change program would be. This is about changing the nature of benefits we are providing in the future and the savings arise therefore from the accrued savings that you make over time. And those are through the core P&L and those charges otherwise flow through the core P&L and say what we think is appropriate the savings should play through the core P&L. And that’s how we thought about last year, it’s very much more of the same what we plan for the future will be treated in the same way as well.

Thanks Simon. Just so on the last couple of points, so the destocking we have seen has been pretty sustained over the last 12, 14 months, not clear to me whether it will restock in the fourth quarter or not. I think it’s possible we’ve often seen restock trends in the fourth quarter but occasionally for example last year we didn't. So we just have to wait-and-see what plays through on that front. What’s been interesting I think over the last six or nine months is that we have seen some destocking both the wholesale and on retail level. We are seeing a lot of these companies talk about cash management. So it wouldn't surprise me if this was a bit more permanent than temporary but again we just have to wait-and-see what comes from that. As far as our sales force is, if your real question is should you expect a big jump up in SG&A because we are going to hire lot more people? The answer is no. We feel like we have the right overall scale of operations to deal with the products we are launching out at the moment including Anoro if we were able to get approval at the end of the year. I would say we have reconfigured as you would expect our deployment of resources in the U.S. as we move from the old portfolio to the new portfolio. So I am not going to quantify that but I can tell you that substantially more people involved in our research business rather than there was a year ago. More importantly we’ve reconfigured over the last four our entire U.S. operations to be much more we believe aligned with where the modern customer dynamic is really going in the U.S. and we believe that…