Good morning. My name is Lisa, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to The Hartford First Quarter 2014 Financial Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Thank you. Ms. Sabra Purtill, Head of Investor Relations, you may begin your conference.

Thank you, Lisa. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to The Hartford first quarter 2014 conference call. Our speakers today include Liam McGee, Chairman, President and CEO; Douglas Elliot, President of Commercial Markets; Andy Napoli, President of Consumer Markets; and Chris Swift, CFO. Other members of our executive management team are also present and available for Q&A, including Beth Bombara, President of Talcott Resolution. As described on Page 2 of the slides, today's presentation includes forward-looking statements as defined under Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are not guarantees of future performance, and actual results could be materially different. We do not assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements, and investors should consider the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from these statements. A detailed description of those risks and uncertainties can be found in our SEC filings, which are available on our website. Our presentation today includes several non-GAAP financial measures. Explanations and reconciliations of these measures to the comparable GAAP measure are included in our SEC filings as well as in the earnings release and financial supplement. Finally, please note that our 10-Q will be filed by the end of this week. I'll now turn the call over to Liam.

Thank you, Sabra. Good morning, everyone, and thanks for joining our call. Just over 2 years ago, we launched The Hartford strategy to enhance shareholder value. Profitably [ph] grow the P&C, Group Benefits and Mutual Funds businesses, reduced the size and risk of Talcott Resolution, and increased the company's operating effectiveness and efficiency. Our focus on executing that strategy has been unrelenting, and I am very proud of this -- of the substantial progress we've made in transforming The Hartford. Building a successful 2013, The Hartford outstanding first quarter results further demonstrate that our businesses are profitably growing through margin expansion and top line growth. In addition, the Japan sale, announced yesterday, is an important milestone in the company's transformation. This is an excellent transaction for shareholders, generating an estimated $1.4 billion capital benefit and sharply reducing The Hartford's risk profile by permanently eliminating the Japan variable annuity risk. Our policyholders in Japan will also benefit from a financially strong, strategic Japanese buyer. In evaluating the transaction, we examined a capital benefit compared to the economics of running the block off. We consider the permanent risk transfer and the likelihood of regulatory approval. After a comprehensive process, we concluded that the sale to Orix was clearly the right decision for the company. The transaction will accelerate the return of capital from Japan so we can be redeploy it for accretive activities were quickly. We will provide details about our plans for the capital benefit after the deal closes, which we expect to occur in July. The transaction also accelerates the transformation of The Hartford, putting greater emphasis on our successful efforts to profitably grow the P&C, Group Benefits and Mutual Funds businesses. This is an important transaction for The Hartford. With the return of capital from Japan and the permanent…

Thank you, Liam, and good morning, everyone. Commercial Markets is off to a strong start in 2014, and clearly building on the growing momentum established over the past several years. With an improving earnings profile, particularly in Middle Market, P&C and Group Benefits, our attitude towards growth has turned more positive across all our businesses. Let's begin on Slide 5. For the first quarter of 2014, P&C Commercial delivered $264 million of core earnings and a combined ratio of 91.2. Compared to the first quarter of 2013, this is an increase of $40 million in core earnings and a decrease of 2.8 points in the combined ratio. Current accident year CATs for the first quarter of 2014 were approximately $60 million. Significantly above the very light CAT quarter 1 year ago. Partially offsetting the increase in CAT losses was a onetime expense benefit resulting from changes in New York Workers' Compensation Board assessments. The underlying combined ratio excluding CATs and prior development was 87.7 for the first quarter of 2014, a decrease of 5.4 points versus the prior year. Excluding the favorable effects of the New York Assessments changes, the underlying combined ratio improved 2.2 points, reflecting our strong execution across all market segments. CAT losses for our Property & Casualty businesses this quarter were more heavily skewed to Standard Commercial lines. This is largely a function of our extensive Small Commercial business and low temperatures across the Midwest and Northeast, that resulted in a much higher frequency of burst water pipes that we normally see from winter storms. Turning to the top line on Slide 6. Our total written premium was up 1%. However, underneath this overall modest change, a very important story is unfolding for our P&C Commercial businesses. Adjusting for the $43 million written premium decline in…

Thank you, Andy. This morning, I'll cover several topics. First, I'll review first quarter 2014 results; second, I will cover the HLIKK transaction and its financial impacts; third, I'll provide updates on our legal entity realignment work; and finally, I'll cover our second quarter 2014 outlook. Let's begin on Slide 14. Last evening, we reported first quarter 2014 core earnings of $564 million, or $1.18 per share, up 23% from the first quarter of 2013. First quarter results included about $58 million after-tax, or $0.12 per diluted share of favorable items. These items included $26 million in after-tax, favorable prior year development, mostly from prior year catastrophes and $32 million after-tax for a reduction in assessments for the New York State Worker's Compensation Board. Current year catastrophes were in line with our outlook of $57 million after-tax. The addition to these items, limited partnerships returns were 13% annualized, or about $0.07 per diluted share higher than our 6% yield we are using for outlooking purposes. Turning to Slide 15. Consolidated net income for the quarter was $495 million or, $1.03 per diluted share, compared with a net loss of $241 million, or $0.58 per diluted share in the first quarter of 2013. Hedging losses and credit impairments were modest, reflecting relatively stable capital markets and a favorable credit environment this quarter. Combined, our P&C group Benefits and Mutual Funds businesses, generated core earnings of $452 million, up 23% from the first quarter of 2013. Doug and Andy covered their businesses, so I'll cover the rest. Mutual Funds core earnings rose 5% over prior year due to higher fees resulting from increased assets under management. Fund performance remains solid and we were ranked as a Top 10 Mutual Fund Family in the Barron’s/Lipper survey for the second year in a row.…

Thank you, Chris. We have about 30 minutes for Q&A. [Operator Instructions] Lisa, could you please give the instructions for Q&A.

[Operator Instructions] And your first question comes from Mark Finkelstein from Evercore.

I guess my first question is on the transaction and kind of the earnings outlook that you talked about. I guess, how much in stranded costs get -- or shared services cost get reallocated? And is it too early to start talking about an expense plan in terms of kind of dealing with those?

I'll let Chris and/or Beth take the details of that question. But Mark, I think as we demonstrated with our sales of the Life and Retirement Plans businesses as well as our broker-dealer, we are always determined to eliminate costs that are associated with businesses we sold. And I think our success to date in those businesses are supportive of that concept. With that, I'll have Chris and Beth give you the details that you asked for.

Thank you, Liam. I think your point is right on. I think, Mark, if you put into context that HLIKK was really a standalone business unit in Japan, reallocated a small amount of holding company expenses to Japan. When I mean small, you think in terms of $20 million, $25 million after-tax -- or excuse me, pretax. And we'll put that part of our efficiency objectives and we'll get out as quickly as we can, but it's relatively small.

Okay. And then Chris, just what happens to the hedging cost? I mean I know that 70 basis points likely goes away, but is there an opportunity to take down the macro hedge as well? And if so, how much of that save the strain in the -- below the line?

Mark, from the hedging side, I will just reiterate, we are going to continue to hedge from now until closing. That's important as we try to lock in our capital benefit. I think as you forward, in U.S. block, we still spend at 30 to 40 basis points of hedging cost. The macro program cost is approximately $75 million. So I do think we'll have the opportunity, with Bob Rupp's leadership, to recalibrate our U.S. hedging programs. And that's on the list, and we'll update you as we modify it going forward.

Okay. And then just finally, Andy, is the expense ratio improvement in Consumer sustainable? André A. Napoli: Mark, this is Andy. Yes, we believe that we should sustain 1.4 point improvement throughout the year.

And our next question comes from John Nadel from Sterne Agee. John M. Nadel - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: I have a question. I know you don't want to address sort of the deployment of the capital until the deal actually closes. But I guess my question is this, should we think -- how should we think about those proceeds in the capital freed up from the sale? And by that, I mean, is it fair for us to look upon those proceeds as completely unencumbered and available to the holding company, either directly as it relates to the sale price or, over time, as it relates to getting the dividends out of the life co?

John, it's Chris. How about if I frame it that the $1.4 billion capital benefit is obviously the gross impact of that combination. I think when you think about it, what we announced our capital management plan for 2014 and '15, you would say as our thinking, this transaction overlaid with that plan. We would say that there's an incremental $1 billion of capital that will be available to supplement that plan. And as you know, we're going to work on it with -- we're going to work on closing the transaction first and then, simultaneously, that will work on our plans. And again, consistent with our past actions, I think we demonstrated the ability to be balanced to achieve our deleveraging goals while returning excess capital to shareholders. John M. Nadel - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: Yes, that's fair. I just wanted sort of an affirmation, if you will, that the net proceeds here over what you had already assumed in your $2 billion outlook was indeed unencumbered. And I guess it's fair for us to assume that, right, given the 400% RBC at the group company and the 430% at Talcott on a pro forma basis. Correct?

Yes. I mean, the way we think about it is the capital that's in the U.S. entity, we'll work with our regulators to do an extraordinary dividend to get it out. The cash that's going to come from the sale of the legal entity in Japan will go directly to the holding company. But all that totals in incremental billion dollars compared to our announced plan. John M. Nadel - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: Okay. And then if I can just sneak one more in. I kind of hate asking about the Corporate segment on the conference call, but as you look at that $63 million operating and core operating loss in Corporate this quarter, can you give us some help on where we should expect that to trend given the debt reductions as well as your expectation for incremental expenses from here?

Yes. John, I'm looking at the supplements. So I always think in terms of -- at the Corporate segment, there's about $60 million to $70 million of pretax operating expenses up there in addition to the interest expense -- yes, for the year -- I'm sorry, that's for the year. So that will continue to be there, with the -- just the catchfall from some unallocated expenses to the line. So think about it as $50 million to $60 million for an annualized basis pretax within there going forward. John M. Nadel - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: Okay. So most of the expenses that we should see from here then are truly in the operating units?

Clearly. I mean that's where all the action is.

And our next question comes from Vincent DeAugustino from KBW. Vincent M. DeAugustino - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: I'll just start off with Doug real quick. I'm just curious if you're seeing any shifts in quote submissions that might indicate that your clients and agents are becoming more complacent with, call it, mid-single-digit rate increases since we're also seeing a concurrent modest rise in retentions as well?

Vince, I would describe the operating environment the last 60 days as relatively consistent. So I don't see any major changes out there. Excited about the progress we made in the quarter, sales achieved across our businesses, as I noted, really positive signs for the franchise. But I still see a very rational environment that is allowing us to compete effectively. Vincent M. DeAugustino - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: All right. Good. And Andy, you've already provided some information on the non-CAT non-weather. But I guess the question would go to both Doug and you. But clearly, the winter weather was a drag on the CAT line, and I'm just curious of any thoughts on weather outside of the catastrophe line. There might be some benefit across the writing [ph] lines like auto and workers comp, or some of these frigid temperatures may have weighted on whether it be discretionary driving or construction activity. I'm just looking at some other things in the economy, and we see it in retail sales, home starts, tons of things that are impacted here. And I'm just wondering if there's some also non-CAT, non-weather accident frequency benefits here in the quarter that's benefiting the quarter [ph] line loss ratio that we should maybe thinking about normalizing out or just breaking that down would be helpful. André A. Napoli: Okay. Vince, this is Andy. I'll address for Consumer and then hand it off to Doug. So let me talk about homeowners first. So we did see an abnormally large increase or spike in freezing pipe claims, so we got to deal with that. And so, when will that repeat itself towards the end of this next year, into next year. The long-term 3- or 4-year trend for non-CAT weather has been slightly negative. And so I view that, as the year plays out that, that trend should continue despite what happened in the quarter with the frozen pipe claims. What's more interesting, at least to me, is what's happening in auto. So we observed a sharp increase in collision frequency that we attribute largely to ice and snow throughout the Northeast and Midwest. And what's interesting about it is we did not see a corresponding increase in auto liability frequency. But that said, that's something that we're paying really close attention to, as we come out of the cold weather period, to see if the collision frequency drops off and auto liability frequency remains modest. That help? Vincent M. DeAugustino - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: It does.

Vince, let me add a few points to that. One is we had some pressure on our non-CAT weather inside Commercial Markets in the first quarter. Not big, big numbers, but clearly states that we're borderline, ISO-defined CAT-ers, et cetera, so a couple of points of pressure there inside our property lines. Secondly, we feel we also had some frequency in the auto line just because of weather. So we had commercial drivers out on the roads for extra hours, et cetera. And we know, as we look at geographies, it had some pressure in the quarter. And the last piece I'd throw to you, maybe a contrarian thought to you. In comp, we think we saw a little bit in the frequency area just based on weather. So whether it be employees on the job sites with more challenging temperatures, ice, et cetera. So we actually looked at our first quarter frequency numbers and comp and think we saw a little bit of lift in areas that had those adverse temperatures. Vincent M. DeAugustino - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: Okay. So to your point on being contrarian, we should maybe actually think about this at least being sustainable, if not potentially getting some improvement throughout the rest of the year based on all the rate and non-rate actions as well.

That's fair.

And our next question comes from Jay Cohen from Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Two questions. You had mentioned in the U.S. VA book an offer that you're putting out to contract holders of -- if you can give more detail on that. And then on the Property & Casualty side, I guess really on the Commercial side, this was the first quarter that I can recall, where there was no adverse reserve development in any major line of business. And I'm wondering if you're seeing in some of these liability lines better claims trend, or is it simply that, "Hey, we've gotten the reserves where they need to be," at this point?

Okay, Jay. We'll have Beth take your first question on U.S. annuity offers -- customer offers.

Great, thank you. Yes, so in markets, as Chris outlined in his remarks, we did start an offer related to our fixed annuity block. This offer is going to cover about $5.5 billion of account value. These fixed annuities, think of them as offering minimum interest rate guarantees of around 3%. And so, with this offer, we're offering policyholders an enhancement and increase to their surrender value as they would surrender their contract.

And Beth, what's the expectation as far as what that should produce as far as surrender value -- surrender rate?

Yes. It's early to tell right now. As I said, we just started the first launch in March. And for the first wave, currently we're experiencing about an 8% take rate. So we modeled that we thought, in total, we'd get somewhere in the 10% to 15% surrender rate.

Great. And the development?

Jay, it's Chris. Yes, on the adverse development, I'll add my comments and Doug might have a view. I think you're kind to notice that we've worked hard to getting the balance sheet right and we believe it is right. I would also tell you that I think we have better collaboration amongst the financial reserving actuaries and the business actuaries, Doug and myself, so that our current year picks, at least over the last 2 years, I think we are more confident about those picks. There's more real time data that goes into our planning process and quarterly process. So Doug, I think we feel that the process that we go through is just tighter, more realtime and better data and to give comfort out on those picks.

Jay, I would totally agree with Chris' comments. We just feel very good about the process and we jumped on issues early. Just we're solid about where we are.

And our next question comes from Erik Bass from Citigroup.

I guess now that the legal entity restructuring is complete, can you just provide an update on the statutory capital levels for the different blocks remaining within Talcott?

Erik, what I would say, if you look at our printed results in the supplement for U.S. Life statutory surplus of $7 billion, $1.4 billion of that is HLA. So the remainder $5 billion, $6 billion then would be the 2 Life legal entities that support Talcott. That $5 billion, $6 billion then is before the approximate $275 million loss. So you could think of it on a pro forma basis for that loss, we have $5.3 billion of surplus supporting Talcott runoff and that we have approximately $600 million of that -- on that surplus, that capital is allocated to VA Japan risk that, over time, will -- again an extraordinary dividend and extract, and return to the holding company. So I think, in total, we ought to think about what we have for Talcott runoff is about $4.7 billion of surplus on a pro forma basis, and our Group Benefits company has $1.4 billion of surplus.

Okay. That's helpful. And can you talk a little bit about the different options you have for additional deleveraging going forward? I believe you've already committed to retiring the maturities in 2014 and 2015, so would you be looking to potentially tender for additional debt, or do you have any securities that become callable?

Yes. I would say, Erik, that our thinking is very early and preliminary, so I wouldn't want to comment beyond that, that we do need to continue to delever. Our goals are geared towards the go-forward businesses and sort of where we need to be to support those businesses going forward and that will continue to require some deleveraging. How we do that, just give us a little bit more time and we'll come back to you.

And our next question comes from Brian Meredith from UBS.

Just a couple of quick ones here. The first one, could I get, in the P&C insurance business, what the new money yield is versus the current book yield in the investment portfolio? Do you have that?

For the P&C business, I don't have it. I think in total that most of the cash flows relate to the new P&C business, Brian, because we put new money to work at about 3.9% and what was rolling off was about 4%.

Okay, so not much deterioration in that here going forward.

Correct.

Okay, great. And then, Andy, just quickly, you gave us what the non-CAT weather was for the home owners. Do you have that number just for the whole consumer unit? And how does that compare to last year's first quarter? André A. Napoli: Yes. So all-in personal line, 2.7 points of non-CAT weather, all auto and home combined relative to last year.

Relative to last year. That's the increased relative to last year. André A. Napoli: That's the increased relative to last year, yes.

Perfect, that's helpful. And then last one, Doug. I'm just curious, Doug, could you talk about progress being made in the Group Benefits business with respect to voluntary products for the public exchanges that you guys have been working on or just exchanges?

Absolutely. Good progress to report. We now are out in the market with our critical illness product, feel good about that, and working on that product with several customers as we speak. And I expect as we move toward the latter half of 2014, we'll be also in the market with accident for a 1/1/15 launch as well. So excited that revamped our FLEX disability, out with critical illness and accident to come shortly.

And our next question comes from Jimmy Bhullar from JPMorgan.

Operator? If you can go to the next question and then Jimmy can re-queue if he needs to.

Our next question comes from Christopher Giovanni from Goldman Sachs.

I guess one of the big surprises is also just kind of the pace of buybacks, particularly so far in April. So I wanted to see if you could talk some about how tactical and aggressive you look to be with the current authorization, recognizing you're almost 1/3 of the way through this $2 billion program that doesn't expire until the end of 2015.

I'll let Chris give some perspective and then I may answer as well. So Chris, go ahead.

Yes. Chris, yes, we're pleased that we're able to do 2 tranches. I think we've said before that we've been operating under a 10b5-1 plan that we put in place for the first and second quarter of late 2013. So we were very opportunistic, our agent was very opportunistic. But our current philosophy really hasn't changed as it relates to the program over the next 6 quarters. We want to be stable, consistent, generally ratable. But we do have opportunities to be opportunistic here in the second quarter remaining in the next 2 months. So generally, we're pleased with what we've done to date and we're going to continue and execute ratably over the next 6 quarters.

Okay. And then, for Doug, just a question kind of on the broader markets. So you continue to show significant improvement across really all your commercial businesses as you stayed disciplined on the underwriting. The rate of price change seems to be pretty consistent with what we've seen from your peers, but I wanted to see if you could comment on any maybe incremental changes in terms of carriers looking to get either more aggressive around pricing or terms and conditions?

Chris, I'm not sure I would add any to what I shared to my opening comments. Again, recently balanced marketplace, from own perspective, very much improved profile of our businesses, small and middle, and we talked about Group Benefits as well. Like the product balance in the marketplace, we'd still be driven by our product analytics. And '15 is a long way out, but feel very good about the start of '14, and we'll jump into the second quarter as we ended the first.

And our next question comes from Tom Gallagher from Crédit Suisse. Thomas G. Gallagher - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Just had a more of an overall company enterprise risk management question first, and then a specific question on the statutory. But the -- so Chris, I know you mentioned $1 billion of capital as what's been earmarked from this transaction to be freed up. But also just listening to Liam's comments to open the call about the significant risk reduction, I have to imagine that, from an enterprise risk management standpoint, capital buffers would be significantly reduced as a result of this transaction or the need for capital buffers. So is there any contemplation in terms of how we should consider that and, ultimately, how those capital buffers that exist today may come back to the shareholders?

Yes. Tom, it's Chris. I think one point of clarification, what we're saying about the $1 billion, that's the incremental to the capital management plan we announced for '14 and '15. So that is the incremental amount of capital that we will put to work. I think as far as your question regarding capital buffers, capital levels going forward is valid. And we are thinking, really second half of '14 into '15. Now that the legal entity separation work is done, and then I think you know why that was so important to put that out, it put us in a position to run Talcott's 2 remaining legal entities off over a longer period of time with the right targeted runoff capital levels. And we do have the ability to recalibrate that, with Bob Rupp's help, from the risk side. but our guiding principles will always be for Talcott to be self-sufficient in a stress scenario. So with that backdrop, yes, I do think there is some tolerances that we'll look at more closely and change going forward. Thomas G. Gallagher - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Okay. That's helpful. And then just a specific question on how we should think about not necessarily dividendable earnings generated from Talcott U.S. going forward, but I'm more interested in capital generation. And I realized there are restrictions to getting money out today because of negative earned surplus. But I assume the outlook on statutory earnings, all things equal, now that you've folded in White River, or that you're in the process of folding it in, probably looks a little more clean and clear. Can you update on what kind of earnings stream on a stat basis you think that entity can produce over the next couple of years?

Yes. I think about it just sort of total capital generation no matter if it goes through the P&L or directly to equity. So we still think in terms of -- Talcott has about $300 million to $400 million of annual capital generation. I think we got off to a good start, particularly in '14. So a lot of that was front-ended. But even beyond that, I think it's reasonable to project a steady dividend return from Talcott, that will be our philosophy. And it will be tied to excess capital and generating statutory surplus as these blocks run off.

And our next question comes from Jay Gelb from Barclays.

As we work through all the shifts in the balance sheet and earnings from the Japan VA sale, I just want to get a sense of whether you feel the 10% corroborating ROE by 2016 would still be reasonable?

Jay, it's Chris. How to frame that, I think the way we think about it is that the dilutive impact on core earnings of Japan, we think the go-forward business is their growth with our incremental accretive capital management plans can offset that dilution and gives us a good shot at achieving a 10% ROE in '16.

That's what I thought. And then for Andy, the personal lines growth is the fastest in many quarters and you are now generating attractive margins from a combined ratio standpoint. I just want to see if there's anything else going on there, sort of underneath the surface, that you feel is driving those better results. André A. Napoli: Jay, it's Andy. Thanks for the question. Yes, we feel great about our growth and it's absolutely a reflection of the momentum we created in 2013 across all the channels. So I talked about agency channel ease of doing business, so I won't spend any time on that. But don't underestimate the power that, that can have in that channel for agents and CSRs to place more and more business with us. We've grown our AARP Agency appointments almost 12%. We now have 7,200 agent locations out there that are taking advantage of that terrific program. We've also begun rolling out a new class plan for auto that has the effect of expanding our underwriting sweet spot, if so to speak. We traditionally had a strong focus on more mature, older AARP members, and that very methodical and disciplined expansion of that sweet spot is starting to hit the market. So we've got a lot of things sort of hitting at the same time in the agent channel that are contributing to the growth and then just better execution and marketing in our AARP direct channel and class plan implementation there that also serves to open up our underwriting aperture.

Lisa, we have time for one more question please.

Our final question comes from Randy Binner from FBR. Randy Binner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: So kind of like an older -- more of a forest rather than all the trees kind of question and it goes back to the Japan VA divestiture here. And so, if I kind of put together the expense saves and the looser capital buffers and the potential for debt paydown and buyback, is that going to -- just from an EPS perspective, not necessarily from an ROE perspective, are all of those initiatives -- can we expect all of those initiatives going forward in our model to kind of make up most of that lost EPS, that's $0.40 or so a year that we lose from the VA earnings in Japan? Should we think about those initiatives as being able to kind of backfill that in our models going forward, or do we kind of lose those EPS the way we seem to be for second quarter here?

Randy, 2 points. One, I think implicit in that question, the way we think about it is that net income is going to become more and more important to us as we focus in growing book value per share and ROE. So net income, as you know, over the last couple of years, has been the de minimis or negative sometimes just given the amount of hedging, so I would also have that as a first thought. The second derivative is your core earnings comment then is -- what I was trying to say before is that, yes, I believe that the growth in our go-forward businesses, our efficiency saves, expense saves, the incremental accretive capital management actions, I think we can offset Talcott's Japan's core earnings decline starting in '16. Randy Binner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: Okay. And just -- that's very helpful. But when you say starting in '16, I'm sorry, wouldn't it start kicking in before that?

Yes. But sort of the crossover point. What I'm saying is that the dilution, the $0.40 that you're talking about, the dilution in earnings, again, I think we could make that up over the next couple of years. Randy Binner - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: Okay, as we work it through over like the next 18 months is kind of...

Yes.

Thank you. And thank you, everyone, for joining us today. We certainly appreciate your interest in The Hartford. And Shannon and I are available after the call for any follow-up questions you might have. Thanks, and goodbye.

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