Good day, and welcome to the IAC Reports Q1 2014 Results Conference Call. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I'd like to turn the conference over to Jeff Kip, Executive Vice President and CFO. Please go ahead, sir.

Thanks, operator. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to our First Quarter Earnings Call. With me today is Barry Diller, our Chairman and Senior Executive; Greg Blatt, Chairman of the Match Group; and Joey Levin, CEO of our Search & Applications segment. Barry will start the call with some introductory comments, then I'll give a review of our first quarter financial performance and our expectations for the second quarter and the year, then Greg and Joey will discuss the Match Groups and the Search & Applications segments' performance and outlook, respectively, and then I'll conclude with some color on the Media and eCommerce segments. Before we get to our results, though, I'd like to remind you that during this call, we may discuss our outlook and future performance. These forward-looking statements typically may be preceded by words such as we expect, we believe, we anticipate or similar statements. These forward-looking views are subject to risks and uncertainties, and our actual results could differ materially from the views expressed today. Some of these risks have been set forth in our first quarter 2014 press release and our periodic reports filed with the SEC. We'll also discuss certain non-GAAP measures, which will include our new financial metric, adjusted EBITDA, which Barry will discuss in a moment and which we will refer to as EBITDA for simplicity during this call. I'll refer you to our press release in the Investor Relations section of our website for all comparable GAAP measures and full reconciliations for all material non-GAAP measures. Barry?

Thank you. It's nice to be with you all. For me, I think that the story this quarter is not on the consolidated earnings, but on the growth of our largest businesses and also some great stories in some of our developing ventures. What I want to do is to simply make 4 points before my colleagues fill you in more fully on the quarter. First on our accounting changes, there shouldn't be any worries, there's nothing nefarious going on here. We're simply changing from OIBA to EBITDA because it will allow easier comparisons to the other companies in our sector, and we're also reorganizing our businesses under their more appropriate leadership. That's it. Second, as we said last quarter, Greg Blatt has become the Chairman of the Match Group. We broke this out because we love this team and its expertise in subscription Internet products. We added 2 new ventures to the group because of their expertise, Tutor in the revolutionary Internet education space and DailyBurn in the high-growth fitness area. Third, note the healthy status of Search with sequential growth. These are our 2 large businesses, but we have 2 fine stories in other parts of the company. Our homegrown Vimeo is seeing tremendous adoption and HomeAdvisor is turning around and will be a substantial earner this year. Finally, a word on Aereo. While this is a small investment, it certainly created an awful lot of comment and noise as the beginning or the end of television as we know it. Its fate isn't material to IAC, but there is a lot of interest and controversy. We went to the Supreme Court last week, and of course, no one knows what its decision is going to be, but I'd just like to make one comment. Aereo has been criticized as a gimmick, as a way of avoiding copyright rules. In fact, it was built to comply with copyright law and I'm really tired of being accused of stealing anyone else's programming when we're not, and I'd never be part of any service that was doing so. We are no more stealing programming than the person who puts up an antenna to receive the signals he's entitled to receive. Kind of obnoxious for broadcasters to take away the signals they promised the public that they could receive directly, simply because they want to squeeze every dollar they can from consumers. Think if the 30-year-old Supreme Court ruling on video recording, went in reverse, abolishing video recording, what the world would have been like? stop Aereo and you stop technology. Well, thank you, all. I had to get that out. And now we turn it back to Mr. Kip and my colleagues, who will talk about everything else.

Thanks, Barry. In the first quarter on a consolidated basis, IAC earned revenues of $740 million and EBITDA of $108 million, about flat and down 15%, respectively, from the first quarter last year. Taking the segments one by one, in the first quarter, the Match Group's revenues increased nearly 10% and the segment's EBITDA decreased 1% versus the prior year. Although segment EBITDA growth was impacted by $11 million of losses this year in our investment businesses -- Tutor, DailyBurn and Tinder -- versus approximately $3 million last year, as well as a positive $3.9 million adjustment for VAT taxes this year. Excluding those impacts, segment EBITDA would be up mid-single digits over last year and Dating EBITDA by itself would be up as well. In the second quarter, we expect the Match Group's revenue growth to be modestly higher than in the first quarter with EBITDA growth mid-single digits after taking into account high-single digits to low-double digits millions of investment in Tutor, DailyBurn and Tinder during the quarter. For the full year 2014, revenue and EBITDA growth will accelerate from 2013 for both the Match Group in total, and the Dating business by itself, even expanded levels of investment for Tutor and DailyBurn within the group and significant expansion of investment in Tinder within the Dating business. In terms of overall investment levels, which could change, we're currently expecting to expand investment to roughly $25 million to $30 million in 2014 across Tutor, DailyBurn and Tinder combined. The Search & Applications segment had a solid first quarter, growing revenues sequentially in both an as reported and an organic basis. Growth was driven by the Websites business. The Applications business was about flat sequentially. Adjusted EBITDA margin was down approximately 400 basis points in the segment from first quarter…

Thanks, Greg. Q1 was a solid quarter for the segment. We returned to sequential revenue growth and we continue to be excited about the progress and prospects we see for high-quality content publishing on the web. Websites' revenue was up 14% sequentially on the strength of About.com and with the help of the acquisition of the assets from ValueClick. As a result, our mix of profits from the content sites, excluding Ask, continues to grow as a percent of total and is now nearly 1/3 of the full segment EBITDA. With the added focus on the new content properties, we also switched our metric from queries to page views. The prior metric wasn't able to tell the full story because it didn't reflect audience engagement on the content sites, so we felt it important to update the page views. Page views at Websites were up sequentially on both desktop and mobile, with mobile and tablet growing much faster and now combined, representing 44% of total Websites page views. We now have traffic growing sequentially at About, Dictionary and Urbanspoon, and in Q1, as you know, we added Investopedia and PriceRunner to the group. While mobile was a meaningful contributor to the growth, we also continued to work through the playbook, upgrading the best practices across the sites. This effort included successful expansion in the marketing-driven user acquisition, one of our core strengths and key competitive advantages. We're also seeing some nice wins on organic traffic as we've been cleaning up the basics, improved sites with lighter and cleaner pages, responsive design and of course, most importantly, more and better content. At About.com, we added over 150 new experts to our rigorous recruiting and screening process since we began a focused effort at the beginning of Q4, allowing us to open…

Thanks, Joey. We're obviously feeling extremely positive about the developments in our 2 larger businesses. We also continue to be very happy with returns we're seeing on our investments in our Media and eCommerce businesses. In Media, Vimeo continues its strong growth trajectory, comp score unique viewers are up 56% to an all-time high of 171 million in March. Vimeo's audience has expanded across all devices. Vimeo's mobile audience actually exceeded desktop for the first time this quarter, and we're making significant investments in our mobile product and platform this year. Vimeo revenues were up 60% in the first quarter and Vimeo now has over 470,000 paying subscribers with increasing per customer value and life. The Vimeo On Demand open VOD distribution business launched in the first quarter last year, is also gaining real traction without any significant marketing or promotion. Vimeo On Demand now has over 8,000 paid titles in its catalog, and monthly transactions have tripled over the last 6 months. During the first quarter, we also announced plans to invest in more high-profile content for the platform, a recent example is the film, In Your Eyes, by Joss Whedon, released exclusively through Vimeo On Demand immediately following its world premiere screening at the Tribeca Film Festival. We view the development of Vimeo On Demand as the online equivalent of the rise in premium pay television: great content, no advertising, premium pricing. We plan to continue to invest in the VOD platform and content catalog throughout 2014. Likewise, HomeAdvisor had a great quarter, registering its first quarter of double-digit revenue growth since the first quarter of 2012 and its first quarter of double-digit EBITDA growth since the third quarter of 2012. Additionally, both service requests and accepts saw positive growth for the first time since the first quarter of 2012, and active service providers grew 15% year-over-year. After a difficult rebranding last year, the business is recovering well and we're very optimistic about its prospects. We have several other bright spots among our Media and eCommerce businesses. Just to mention 2, we've seen great traffic growth at The Daily Beast, with unique viewers up over 30% year-over-year to roughly 18 million, and at CollegeHumor, where we saw monthly unique viewers rise 70% to an average of 19 million for the quarter. We continue to be excited about our entire portfolio of businesses. With that, we'll take your questions. Operator?

[Operator Instructions] And we'll take our first question from Ross Sandler with Deutsche Bank.

I just have one question for Jeff and then maybe one for Joe -- Joey. Jeff, a question on capital allocation, you guys didn't buy back any stock in the quarter, yet the liquidity position's over $1 billion. And looking back in history, the only time you haven't bought back shares is when there's some kind of strategic situation going on, so can you just give us an update on capital allocation and maybe what would have prevented you guys from doing buybacks given the market environment right now? And then Joey, you mentioned a bunch of new initiatives, can you give us a little bit more color on which of those is driving the strength that you're seeing in the Websites' revenues sequentially? Are those initiatives organic versus paid traffic and where do you think we are in terms of Google smart pricing and are we over the hump on those issues?

On capital allocation just to take your first question, our view today is no different than it's ever been. We will buy back opportunistically at -- in any given quarter. We didn't buy any this quarter, we didn't buy any in the third quarter last year, but we've obviously bought back a tremendous amount, $230 million approximately last year in share buyback, $716 million in 2012 and almost $3 billion since the beginning of 2009. So I think we're just the same.

We only talk about what we've done or not done, so to speak. We don't predict, we don't comment on why or whatever. We're opportunistic and nobody should read anything into whether we buy or not. Over time, we've just been very clear that we are buyers of our stock and that's been true for more years than my little brain can count. So there that is. Joey?

Yes, on the Websites side, it's a few things. It's both organic and acquired. I mean About is doing very well, we continue to be pleased with all the progress we're seeing there in terms of how they're growing content, how they're growing traffic on both an organic and a paid side. Obviously, we had a ValueClick in the quarter, and so that helped on the growth too, sequentially. As it relates to Google smart pricing, that change, we are -- sequentially, we are clearly growing that, which is good. I think we're still -- if you go back to comping to Q3 '13, I think we still have a few more quarters to comp to -- on a year-over-year basis or something better, but sequentially, we are making progress and clearly improving there.

We'll take our next question from John Blackledge with Cowen and Company.

Just a couple of questions. Maybe, Greg, if you could just discuss timing of Tinder monetization and what are the unique monetization opportunities for Tinder aside from using kind of the traditional mass monetization playbook and what's the current user base? And then separately, how should we think about prior Local, Media and Other guidance to the new Match Group and Media and eCommerce segment guidance? Grégory R. Blatt: All right. On monetization of Tinder, I think, look, this is still an early business. I think you'll see us begin to monetize it soon, but I think that will be more in terms of nailing the business model as opposed to a push for maximum revenue. I think when that sort of comes will depend on a whole host of things. It's really a question of -- it's certainly big enough that you can start to monetize it now, but I think there's priorities -- this is a small sort of startup-like team that we're building, and everything you do comes at the expense of something else, so I think that -- I think that you'll start to see certain things, but I wouldn't be looking for big P&L impact in the near future. I think in terms of what opportunities Tinder present itself that others don't, I think there are a couple of ways. One, advertising has not been a great -- has not been a great monetization vehicle in this category, traditionally. I think Tinder has the possibility of changing that. I think the nature of the Tinder user experience presents itself -- presents real opportunities for native advertising that certain of other products don't. I also think that Jeff -- each business, because of the way its feature set works and product works, present sort of its unique opportunities for discretionary feature monetization and I think Tinders are unique in that way. And think just the pure engagement levels of Tinder, which are just so much higher than our other businesses, provides the sort of more à la carte lower, lower priced transactions, priced through the App Store, but in high-volume, create meaningful, meaningful revenue where as a Match, with its part subscription logic doesn't present those types of opportunities. Why don't you take the bridge question, Jeff.

Listen, I think what we said last time was that we spent $15 million or so investing in DailyBurn and Tutor a year ago, and that we'd expand that investment this year, and that the rest of our investments in what are now the Media and eCommerce segments were going to be low-double digits millions, which I think is what I just said. And I think we commented on, if you throw Tinder in with Tutor and DailyBurn, we get to $25 million to $30 million, although that number could change. To Greg's point, these are early-stage businesses that we only have interest in making great, and so we're going to opportunistically invest and then it could pull in here or there, or we could expand.

Yes, I think the nature of these businesses is such that the loss numbers tend to go up when things are going well, at this stage. And so if you see momentum, you double down. I'll give you an example, DailyBurn this year, Q1 is a big quarter in the fitness business and we invested in marketing and we grew in the -- Q1 ended subs 7x higher, it's not -- 7x higher than the prior year. And just over the course of the quarter alone, we grew subs by 300%. So -- and that's on loss marketing, that is lifetime value subscription marketing, that's a loss number but that kind of -- but it's profitable on a lifetime basis, so that kind of thing enthuses and drives further investment not less. Tinder has got great momentum. Jeff gave you the numbers for right now and we'll sort of update you as we go, but certainly, not numbers that we can lock into at this point.

Next we'll go to Jason Helfstein with Oppenheimer. Jason S. Helfstein - Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., Research Division: I have 1 housekeeping and then just 2 questions on Match. Can you talk about that $30 million purchase of noncontrolling interest on the cash flow statement? Does that have anything to do with Tinder, I thought you want to comment. And then secondly, on Match, is it a fair way to think about the fourth quarter -- the first quarter sub change versus the fourth quarter, so basically North American subs were up 11% in this quarter -- paid subs, Core were up 9% the way you previously reported it, is that the right way to think about it? The 9 go to 11, or just us bridge that. And then just lastly, can you just talk about the long-term guidance for Match? Previously it was $500 million of OIBA. In 2016 [ph] , you're moving to EBITDA; if you would just want to give some color around that.

Sure. On the $30 million question, I will confirm that over the course of the quarter, we bought in all the minority interest in Tinder, such that today, we own -- we, together with management, own 100% of the business. I will say that we bought in -- that the amount we spent to buy that in was greater than the $30 million in the cash flow statement. And the accounting does not match up with the economic reality. I'm not going to tell exactly what the valuation was, I'm not going to tell you exactly how much we spent. There are confidentiality agreements, et cetera, but I know that people have tried to back into that $30 million and it's not doable, let me put it that way. But we do -- we do now own 100% together with management. On the Core issue or the Core to North America-ish, look, I think it's -- whenever you do a change like this, it's a little hard to bridge. I will say that the big shift in North America are that OkCupid and Match Canada, effectively both of which are big grown businesses came into Core is the way to think about it. And then on the other side, Twoo, which was in Developing sort of went into international and then you have LatAm and all that sort of thing. I think in that 11%, I think that there is higher growth at OkCupid and Match Canada and lower growth in what was traditionally Core. And that gets you to 11%, and that lower growth in traditional Core was driven by the things that I talked about, which was the increase in acquisition efficiency, the increase in terms, and we think, as I said on the last call, I think that Core, although we're not going to continue to report it, will have a comparable this year to last year, that's what we think. Things like the App Store entry last week and a whole bunch of other things are going to drive that number back up, and over the course of the year, we expect the PMC growth numbers to rise. What was the final question there?

Final question was about the $500 million, which [indiscernible].

It was always -- the $500 million was always EBITDA. I've always talking about it from an EBITDA perspective. And also again, my statements stand, but I do want people to re-examine them, which is it's not a $500 million absolute stake in the ground. It's a way of looking at the growth of the business and I think that -- I still feel very good about the fact that's a reasonable way to look at the opportunity. We're not including fitness and education in that number, so that's exclusive of fitness and education. I think it becomes, depending on what we do with Tinder, it becomes easier or more difficult depending on what happens. There's a bunch of different ways to get there. I feel good about it and as I said, I think last quarter, I don't know if it's going to be $479 million or $521 million, it's 3 years away. But as a general way of thinking about the size, nothing has diminished our enthusiasm or confidence in that outlook.

And next we'll go to Peter Stabler with Wells Fargo.

A question for Joey. You called out some of the progress you've been making on pricing in the Websites business, I'm wondering if you could just talk a little bit broadly about programmatic. The shift to programmatic hasn't been universally hailed as a positive across the industry, it sounds like you guys are getting some good traction on pricing year-on-year. Any additional color would be appreciated.

Yes, it really depends on your starting point. So I think the biggest place where we're doing programmatic is at About.com and I think that when we picked up the asset and for the first period that we owned it, it was woefully behind the market. I mean, we didn't have the premium ad -- the premium ad sales group really communicating with the programmatic ad sales group in any way, and we didn't have that whole stack of things optimized. So just putting that all together and having it all work on a common system where you can basically optimize the waterfall of that, really sort of dramatically changed that. I mean we were in -- I think that we were years behind the market in looking at programmatic and using programmatic technologies. So where we've improved there is really just getting up to market. Now I think we can start to really innovate on things. But again, all that, by the way, has been with the same number of ads. So we're not increasing the number of ads on About.com at all, except actually in one small area, the search results pages. But other than that, the article pages that get the vast majority of the traffic, we're not increasing the ads. What we're doing generally is improving the ads, improving the placement of the ads. We're on a 1 ad in, 1 ad out policy, so when we bring in a unit, we'll take an old unit out and just that sort of optimization has really dramatically transformed that. And I think as we start to roll that out to the other properties, we'll start to see more efficiencies there.

One quick follow-up, if I could, on the Websites business. Could you offer any color about query, growth and revenue per query there? We understand the restructuring, but any color would be great.

I think on revenue per query, there is -- I'm trying to remember, I think that what we said last quarter still stands in terms of what we think of the trends in query growth, which is we will be growing from here on queries. And revenue per query is -- again, it's not a totally relevant metric anymore, which we explained it -- queries really only cover the search businesses and didn't significantly cover the content business, so we really should focus on page views now. But revenue per query, I believe...

It's up in Q1 in both businesses over Q4 and we expect it to be at roughly the level that it's now through the year. I mean things could change, but that's our current expectation.

And next we'll go to Mark Mahaney with RBC Capital Markets.

I just want to ask a basic question about the potential spin for the -- all the Match businesses. Let me ask the question this way, is there anything -- structurally, is there anything about the business itself that you think makes it not yet ready for a spin? Or do you think the conditions are all there to spin the asset if you wanted to do so today?

Well, it's not a precise measurement. We have a lot of experience in this area, as you all know. And when and if -- and when and if are really accurate. We don't have a when and even precedent to that, we don't have an if. So there's no way you can -- the speculation here is lovely, but as I said, there's no precise measurement. And again, I just repeat, when and if we do, we will, and I can't say any more than that. There is nothing more to say to it than that. What do you want to add Mr. Blatt? Grégory R. Blatt: The direct answer to the question though I think is -- I don't think there's any major structural problem to do it. I mean, if we wanted to do it -- the issue -- the decision-making process is the same as its always been. It's a subjective process, there is a right time and a wrong time and there is an if and...

Or there is a no time. Grégory R. Blatt: That's right. There's an if and there's a whole bunch of things that go into it. But certainly, I think that there's no structural deficit to deal with that.

Well, there's never been a structural reason. We've always structured everything so that we can spin anything off. And God knows we have -- we've gone in that direction 7 times so far.

And next we'll go to Heath Terry with Goldman Sachs.

Just a couple of questions. I guess, Greg, completely understand the decision to pull back on some of the disclosure around Match, but with the deceleration in paid subscriber growth, can you just give us some context around where the growth in the business is happening, whether it's in the kind of recurring subscribers that you have at Match versus the freemium subscribers at sites like OkCupid? And then Joey, I guess can you give us any sort of sense of the contribution from ValueClick to the search business this quarter? I guess if we assume roughly $34 million in contribution, which is what we are assuming for Q4, then it would suggest that the search business declines actually accelerated this quarter. That's really rough math, so I'm sure it's probably wrong, if you could kind of help correct us there, I'd appreciate it. Grégory R. Blatt: On the first question, yes, again, I don't -- not to quibble, I don't think we've really pulled back on disclosure. We just moved basically, again, we basically moved OkCupid into Core and Twoo into Developing because to call big business in Developing that are bigger than Core just didn't make any sense anymore. So we're trying to give the same level of disclosure and there's a temporary dislocation but then you'll have this disclosure and it's as fulsome as the last, I think. So I don't think there's an issue there. I think that clearly though, as we've said for a while, different ones of our businesses have different growth trajectories within each market. Over the last 12 months, OkCupid has grown faster than Match and People Media. There was a time People Media was growing faster than Match, but these things sort of rise and fall based on a variety of…

On ValueClick and organic versus sequential growth. The Websites grew organically, sequentially, meaning excluding ValueClick, Websites grew organically. The -- I think low- to mid-single digits. And then in terms of EBITDA overall, if you look at the down 16% year-on-year for the quarter, the big contributor to that was the spend we did in B2C marketing. We saw a big opportunity to -- for ROI-positive spend, and when we see those, we spend into them and we're generally very good at predicting the ROI builds [ph] , we feel good about that spend. So that was really more of a choice in terms of what we decide to do there in terms of profit. Jeff, you can add to that, but I think that answers the question.

No comment, that's right.

We'll take our next question from Brian Fitzgerald with Jefferies.

We were hoping you could help us think about the strategy around Vimeo as you incubate it. Right now, are you trying to aggressively grow user levels, maybe maximizing the user base or are you more focused on driving near-term revenue potential, maybe both? And then on the monetization side of Vimeo, how do you think about pre-roll advertising versus the efficacy of in-stream versus display versus subscription?

Well, last first, which is -- Vimeo is not an advertising product. We do not do -- the only kind of advertising we do -- we do not do display, we will never do display advertising. But the only kind of advertising we do would be the deepest kind of native advertising, where an advertiser has a story to tell and there's some sort of, underneath, so to speak, some mostly indirect relationship to the products that they have. We feel very strongly that Vimeo is a differentiated product, particularly from YouTube. And part of that differentiation, one of the strongest parts is that it's clean, it's safe, there is nothing there other than the video, which is protected by the person who puts it up, and we feel very much that, that is why Vimeo is having such growth, is because it is emerging as the trusted video brand for user-generated video. In terms of what the strategy is, the strategy is on all fronts. We are absolutely after building, continuing to build our audience, which we have been doing. We are after subscriptions, which we have been growing. I think it's remarkable that we have this many subscriptions, in fact, in this short a time being in the subscription side of Vimeo tools and services part of Vimeo, and we're starting to build Video On Demand, so there's really 3 strategies. They each, I think, reinforce the other. And we're very, very aggressive and intend to be aggressive in furthering those strategies. The goal here is not anything to do with near-term revenue extraction, it is to build this brand into something that is not only enduring, but it is a real differentiator in the whole space of video.

And we'll next go to Eric Sheridan with UBS.

Barry, following up on that, with respect to Vimeo, you've talked a little bit recently about original programming for Vimeo and we see the big push by a lot of parties around online video to invest in original content, maybe help us understand sort of your plans around investing in original content as the driver for the subscription element of that business.

Sure. This is -- it's a very long-term project of ours on Video On Demand, we've just really begun. We are not at this time going to announce doing television series or announce doing, call it a house of cards-like program though I would hope in time, we would be able to. What we are doing is we're really in the middle part of the long tail, where independent film is ripe for us. The Joss Whedon recent example, with The Avengers series has made his own film, and is offering it $5 a pay-per-view. These are all -- relatively small efforts. Until we build our base, know what our audience is interested in. We have said that we're going to put probably $10 billion into program development at various times; that's not a big number in video terms. But we absolutely believe over time that we will build up a substantial Video On Demand business. But the flavor of the day, everybody and their mother plunging into high-cost video, over-the-top programming, I think is great. But for us, it is in our way of doing it, step by step by step, find out what our audience is interested in, acquire products, stimulate production, et cetera.

And next we'll go to Jordan Monahan with Morgan Stanley.

Actually just 2 quick ones, if I can. I know Match has been discussed quite a bit, but I have just a higher level, bigger picture question about online Dating. I think if we look at online Dating in, say, 10 years ago, it seems like one of the big barriers to entry was actually generating an ecosystem that had enough participants to have effective matches, and now with Facebook's ability to use its APIs and anyone's ability to kind of develop an app on top of that, has that changed in your view the barriers to entry to building a successful Dating app and do you actually see the competitive environment as any different than it might have been kind of pre-Facebook? And then just a quick question on search. I'm wondering if you have any updates on your distribution strategy just given some of the changes toward mobile tablet and so on, in the last couple of years? Grégory R. Blatt: I think it's an interesting question. It's a question that we sort of, were preoccupied with 4 or 5 years ago, which is, were the fundamental dynamics of liquidity construction going to change with Facebook and everything else? The reality is it hasn't. If you look back over the last 10 years, there have been -- there've been hundreds, if not thousands, of entrants into the category. There was a time when I was first at Mantra, I just had to stop reading my TechCrunch because every day there were 5 new sites coming in and I just couldn't -- it was just ridiculous. But very few have come up and achieved that scale. Over the last 10 years, really the only ones are OkCupid and Tinder. And OkCupid did it over a long period of time…

So on the Websites side in terms of distribution strategy, it is our content really is fundamentally what we call full content, as opposed to push content. Meaning we make the kind of content that people are looking for and our job is to get it in front of people, wherever they are. And I think we've done a very nice job getting that in front of people on mobile devices, as well as on desktop, et cetera. I think that the -- we have a huge portion of our traffic now coming from mobile and tablet to all the Websites. And we continue to look for new forms of distribution there, but wherever people are doing searches, wherever people are doing queries, wherever people are asking questions, we find a way to put our content there. On the application side, there isn't a perfect analog in terms of that business model, that business model being search monetized. But one service that, that application provides in addition to distribution for our services is that the application model offers a monetization solution for developers. And developers on mobile, as much or even more so than a desktop, need monetization solutions, they need help in monetization. And we -- while we don't have anything to report yet there, we're continuing to experiment with things there, we're continuing to work with various developers and hope to have something to discuss there soon.

We'll take our final question from Kerry Rice with Needham & Company. Kerry K. Rice - Needham & Company, LLC, Research Division: A quick question on HomeAdvisor. It appears that the marketing has been ratcheted up with that business. I wonder if you could talk a little bit more about the strategy and what you plan on doing to continue the turnaround there and if you're going to continue to raise your marketing levels.

Yes, listen, the increase in marketing last year and the increase this year is largely TV advertising. On national cable TV advertising, we've had very positive ROIs that led us to choose to expand it, and it's been very effective at attracting both SBs and consumers. So we're pleased there, and our strategy is what it is I think with most of our business, which is to differentiate and build a great product, and to build a great brand. And we think that the business has kind of turned the corner on building its brand, we hope, and it's on its way on a good trajectory. And thanks, everybody, for joining.

This does conclude today's presentation. We thank you all for your participation.