Welcome to IMAX Corporation’s Third Quarterly Earnings Conference Call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Ms. Heather Anthony, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, ma’am.

Good morning. Thanks for joining us on today’s on third quarter 2010 conference call. Joining me is our CEO, Rich Gelfond; and our CFO, Joe Sparacio. Also with us is our Senior EVP and General Counsel, Rob Lister. In addition, this morning we’ve loaded a PowerPoint presentation in PDF format on the IR section of our website to help illustrate some points included in today’s discussion. Before we begin, let me remind you the following information regarding forward-looking statements. Our comments and answers to your questions on this call may include statements that are forward-looking and that they pertain to future results and outcomes. Actually future results or occurrences may differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Please refer to our SEC filings for a more detailed discussion of some of the factors that could affect our future results and outcomes. During today’s call references may be made to certain non-GAAP financial measures as defined by Regulation G of the Securities and Exchange Commission. A discussion of management’s use of these measures and the definitions of these measures as well as reconciliation to adjusted EPS and adjusted EBITDA are contained in this morning’s press release. The full text of our third quarter release, along with supporting financial tables, is available on o www.imax.com. Today’s conference call is being webcast in its entirety on our website. With that, let me now turn the call over to Rich Gelfond.

Thanks, Heather. These are exciting times at IMAX. Today we sit at the intersection of the entertainment industry, innovation and the digital world, which is revolutionizing our business in many ways. The powerful global appeal of our brand is increasing and consumers worldwide are seeking premium at home entertainment experiences, differentiated from the choices in home and in traditional theatres. These trends are providing wind at our back. Our third quarter results reflect these trends, demonstrating the strength of IMAX’s business model and the continued demand for IMAX theatres throughout the world. In many respects the third quarter was the best quarter we ever had, most notably for theatre system signings. These signings have resulted in a backlog that should increase the size of our commercial network by 70%. The simple fact is that consumers are embracing the IMAX brand and experience. As the result exhibitors around the world are more interested than ever for being in the IMAX business and theatres are eager to provide the IMAX experience for their blockbuster films. The powerful combination of strong global consumer demand and contracted network growth is giving us increased visibility in to the future of our business. The third quarter, one which featured only one breakout film, Inception, illustrates how network growth and diversified film slate can drive financial performance. We believe that for the next couple of years, the math is relatively simple. To hold our film performance constant with historical levels, excluding any impact from Avatar and simply layer on the growth of our theatre network, our financials will continue on a positive growth trajectory. The slides have been prepared and designed to help illustrate this math. Before I spend further on the model, let me give you some highlights of the quarter and then Joe will provide…

Thanks Rich. I too am very pleased with the quarter. As we look at our results overall we are hard pressed to find an important metric of the business that did not meet or exceed our expectations. Rich highlighted the third quarter headlines. So, I’m going to jump into the details. Gross box office in the third quarter increased 70% to $97.7 million versus last year’s $57.6 million. Our global box office per screen in Q3 increased 26% to $321,000 compared to $254,000 in the same period last year. Our domestic box office per screen increased 12% to $263,000 and our international per screen averages increased over 55% to $451,000. Looking at our key business segments, total IMAX film revenue increased 68% to $21 million in the quarter compared to $12.5 million in the third quarter of 2009. DMR revenue increased 58% to $12.4 million compared to $7.8 million last year. Revenue from our joint venture arrangements increased 89% to $6.5 million reflecting increased revenue per screen as well as the growth of our JV network. During the quarter, we installed 18 new JV systems and one digital upgrade. Our joint venture theaters generated an average box office per screen of approximately $269,000 in the third quarter up 44% versus last year. We are please that during the quarter, our domestic and international JV screens performed relatively consistent with the overall per screen averages of the IMAX theaters in there respective regions. Revenue from IMAX system sales decreased to $14.8 million in the third quarter of 2010 compared to $20.1 million in the third quarter of 2009. During the quarter we recognized revenue on 74 full new theater systems with an average value of $1.4 million compared to 8 systems in the third quarter of 2009 which had an average…

Thanks, Joe. We are very excited about our third quarter results. This is the quarter where we had only one blockbuster film and an average number of sales-type lease install. And that our financial performance exceeded our expectations as well as the Street expectations. It proved out the power of our model, and we expect our business momentum to continue into the fourth quarter and 2011. With that, let’s open it up to questions.

(Operator Instructions). Your first question on the line comes from James Marsh, Piper Jaffray.

Couple of quick questions here. First, Joe as we’re going to going through that film revenue it looked like it was very strong. It seem like the big delta was distribution and I was hoping you could elaborate a little bit more on that, maybe how the margins might will go over time, seemed like a lot of it was Hubble in the quarter. I just wondered if you can give a sense, do you think is this kind of one-time event related to the quality of Hubble or this something that you think you can replicate going forward as the network increases?

Also included in that James was the licensing of some 3D titles, a couple of titles in particular and I would hope that as we move forward we may able to take advantage of opportunities like that periodically.

Okay then I had a question for Rich related to China, I was hoping you could just give us kind of update on what’s going on there. Obviously you mentioned the Flying Tigers, is that movie that’s going to be DMR locally so it would be at the 15% rate in China and if that’s the case do you think this is going to be a movie that plays well in the US, obviously it crosses over with the Chinese you have seen?

Yes, James I don’t want to specifically deal with the contracts but it will be DMR locally, so it would be rates that are for local movies not rates that are for imported movies and because of our growth there and because how well we’re doing on a per screen basis, I would be surprised if that was the only film we’re doing in 2011 and we are actually talking about some other titles over there and we’ll see if they come to fruition.

And then just one last follow up for Joe regarding digital upgrades. Joe we are having some difficulty kind of modeling, it seems like there are double digits some quarters to the low single digit the next. What’s the best way to think about kind of modeling the pace of those installs going forward in your mind?

James, In your modeling I would view those as somewhat margin neutral in terms of absolute dollars, we are basically selling them fairly close to cost in many cases.

Okay.

James on the other hand they get modeled that way but remember when a theater converts, it can play a lot more films because digital now allows two week runs like we’re doing right now with Paranormal Activity 2. So they’re revenue neutral on the short-run but in the long-run they contribute.

The next question comes from Richard Ingrassia with Roth Capital Partners.

Rich or maybe Joe, can you put a dollar figure on the investment in technology enhancements in ancillary business opportunities through your 3D network portables, so how much has been spent so far this year and how much, maybe a range if you will between now and next year?

What I think we can comment on right now Rich is what we invested in through the end of the quarter, it’s roughly $2.2 million in the aggregate between the channel and LOE investment that we’ve announced.

And Rich just to give you little color, I would think that next year as we’re actually right in the process of going through our R&D budget and as I said in my comments, I’d like to reinvest a more of our money in around R&D as well as other things I think there is lot of opportunities whether its live events in IMAX or different businesses that are sort of no brands perhaps, in terms of ways maybe we should go, I think like enhancing the portable, which we’ve rolled out. As well as just next generation things like Laser Light Engines. So I thing you should see next year that number going up a little somewhat.

Okay. But not big number in any case.

No.

Rich given your recent meetings in LA. would you say there is any pressure whatsoever in the share of IMAX box office you received from distributors or I mean given the competition between the studios when IMAX release, could we actually see that in your average start to move higher next year?

Your first question Rich, I met I think with either directors or executives from probably four or five studios and I saw that the question of the theme did not come up once. In terms of it going up, that’s not really our plan Rich. The plan is really to the extent that people want to be in the IMAX window, they try and get them through the differentiated content, which we talked about, our differentiated marketing. As I mentioned in my remarks, we’re pretty pleased that DreamWorks is doing more than they have before for the Megamind Film and I think Twilight which I talked about. And Hollywood is the kind of place where there are rules and I think just like I don’t expect them to come back to us and try incumbency we are certainly not going to go to them try and raise that theme, I think this is precedent in what gets done on their precedent.

Got it. Okay, and last question and you have made some public comments already about Harry Potter 7, I like you to just touch on that quickly I mean, Warner Brothers' decision not to release part one in 3D. Do you think it, it says anything about standard digital 3D versus IMAX 3D or is this really just they didn’t have the time to invest and obviously it’s a cheaper ticket across the board but does 3D make a bigger difference on proportionally to your box office as it does to the box office as a whole for the movie or for example a company like RealD?

In terms of 3D it does not have the same impact on ourselves as a company that solely focuses in the 3D business. For example, we were going through yesterday looking at Harry Potter and a lot of the midnight shows that already sold out around the country and you talk about a film that is I guess over a month away at this point, so the demand was very strong. In 3D, obviously, we believe we are the best experience in the world that has, good-better-best and we think we perform well under that model and as you know I think historically we have done anywhere from three to five times per screen what 3D digital screens have gone. However, as I said during the speech we are in both of the 2D and 3D worlds, and if you look at Inception we did way north of 10% in terms of our percentage of the box office and our prices are pretty similar for 2D or 3D. So using kind of a glib commercial line, we don’t really care if its in 2D or 3D as long as it’s in IMAX and that certainly been our experience. So to your question that, that decision has much less negative impact on us than it does on the company that’s solely focused on 3D. One could argue, although I don’t want to take it too far, that we’re the only premium differentiated way to see it when it’s in 2D. In terms of Warner decision not to do it in 3D, as you alluded to Rich we have a very good relationship with Warner particularly on the Harry Potter franchise and I am completely convinced that it was because the time was short and production issues and for no other reasons.

Thank you. The next question on the line comes from Jeff Blaeser with Morgan Joseph.

Thank you and good morning. Can you tell us how many upgrade potential do you have going forward?

I think that too is starting to wane a bit. Right now, we’re targeting 25 additional units next year. That’s a preliminary estimate. But that population is starting to wane overtime and there’s been significant upgrade activity this year. Right now, our targets are, by the end of the year, we will have upgraded in 2010 approximately 30 units. So, I think will be pretty far along by the end of next year.

Okay. Then how should we look at. You mentioned Harry Potter 350 theaters versus maybe a less popular title that has less, Legend was 250, obviously we’re going to add some pretty aggressively in between that. Is that primarily the upgraded that our digitally exist that you are not sending out. How should we look at a low-end and high-end versus the current install base in terms of showing the films.

Yes, some are upgrades, but we are opening at the pace of about four a week right now before Megamind and Harry Potter. So the network is growing quite rapidly at the present time. One of the big differences you will see in number of screens that a film really is released on, actually relates to the time its out there. So if you take a film like Paranormal, two which is out right now that was the digital-only release because it was only a two-week run. So the studious and we didn’t really feel and investing in prints over such a short-run made sense. Harry Potter is a longer run and more of a franchise property, so it will open on a greater percentage of our network.

It’s okay. And then you also mentioned, international is doing quite well, averaged little bit more. I guess you expect that 1.2 million, I know it’s kind of just a number a historical number to increase because it seems like the backlog is getting more internationally weighted than domestic. Is that the trend do you expect going forward?

I mean I would say Jeff as the trend we hope for going forward in terms of predicting the bad news is the movie industry is very difficult to predict how particular titles will do. The good news is as we go to portfolio theory, this year we have around 14 movies in North America some will do better, some will do worst and you put them all together, if you look back two years that’s what we average around 1.2 million. If you look at that this year, we’ll average significantly more than that but that includes Avatar, which is certainly something of an [over layer]. However, if you put some movie in there not Avatar but regular performing movie we would have done better than we would have done last year on average. So, I leave the modeling to folks like you who are better at it than we are but somewhere we have a lot of faith in our films slate and we think our brand is getting marketed well and our growth in international network, we hope that we see increases.

Okay, great, and just one last question on the distribution side, are the commercial theaters start to shell more of the under the season, Hubble, is that growing in popularity.

Yes, it is I mean, I don’t want, you change your earnings estimate materially based on that but they are gaining a little bit more traction, yes.

Your next question comes from Marla Becker with Hudson Square.

Thank you, I have a couple of questions. First, with the Regal and [AMC] it’s great that the economic model changed over the past couple of years of the economic models now enables IMAX in some mid size markets, like Charlotte and Atlanta and obviously that will add dollars in absolute box office growth. But how should we think about the average box office growth per screen going forward as mid size markets can grow as part of the IMAX networks.

In a sense so all of that’s a little bit the other side of what Jeff was saying so our place, great growth going forward is international markets, you look at big cities like Paris where we just opened at first theater or Rome where we don’t have a theater, yet or Tokyo where we have one theater in the suburbs and Hong Kong we just opened and it one of the successful theatres in the world. So I think as do you see us open in some of the international cities that would skew towards the upside and as we go in some of the more middle market cities in the US, I would tend to be towards the downside although there is client of our called Zyacorp that has two theaters one is in [Sacto Maine] and the other is in Hooksett, New Hampshire and I think those theaters are doing numbers consistent with our averages for larger cities. So I think in the worst case say it balance out and may be in the best case for reasons I talked about with Jeff before about the growth of the brand and more titles we can see some upside.

On the film slate, you added Paranormal Activity pretty much at the last minute, I view that as essentially down money. How quickly at this point in the DMR profit, how quickly can you turn around a project to get it on the slate and when you are mapping out your slate like you said that you have the 2011 slate pretty much all planned just have an announced at all. When you are mapping to slate out do you put any titles on a waiting list in case you know you want to make an insertion at some point later on in the year?

Marla we can add a title probably in a couple of weeks that all it will take us to do it. And I think you should think of it in two different ways, one is kind of the blockbuster can pull times of the year, Christmas, Thanksgiving, Memorial Day July 4th I don’t think we would ever think of putting in our last minute still on them. Our slates are pretty locked in. I think the terms of last minute would apply more to the September -October period or the mid January - February kind of period or something doesn’t seemed to be playing through. And in terms of waiting, I don’t think is that formal, I think we been having so many discussions now about films that we really can’t do just because our schedule is full but I think we’re always in constant dialog with the different studios. So we know what’s out there and I think you can put things quickly together. In fact there are other alternatives to paranormal that we could have done in this period and we decided not to do for one reason or another, so this is just the only choice.

Thank you. Your next question comes from Mark Argento with Craig-Hallum Capital.

When you think about international, given the money growth you have over there do you think about some of these Russian and Chinese markets are you going to be operating in, how do you think about the mix of content versus local lets just say how much content can you repurpose from the States and bring it over versus the local or having more localize content as those markets developed?

I think you really have to think about of the Mark on country-by-country basis. So a place like Russia has a great advertised for Western type films and as we said during the script its we believe it maybe our highest box office per screen in the world and especially 3D near they have a great advertise but 3D in Russia. So country like that even though you have a big growth, I don’t think in short-run it’s really necessary to supplement with local content. Country like China where there is obviously import restrictions on foreign films as well as something you’ll find very interesting on the big movie going times of the year. In China, on February around the Chinese new-year and October around golden week and that happens to be the slowest time in the U.S. So, even if we put the quarter a side on the ability to released block bluster movies in those periods of time, can really supplement your films play in a very interesting way. Obvious country we haven’t talk that much about is India, which has a high viewership of local produce Bollywood films. We’re taking a strategic approach to India, which is looking when and how is the right place handover. That could be another country, we’re doing local contents would make sense as long as we have enough theaters to support, but if the bottom line is, its really a country-by-country analysis.

Got you, in my earlier question you alluded to kind a local market DMR fees versus I would assume traditional DMR fees. Was DMR fees on a local basis is a cost less to do it locally or is the responsibility of the local market content?

I think the question was more on the revenue side. Mark. Mark Argento – Craig Hallum Capital: Okay.

Then on the cost side. In China there is a very complicated distribution system. So, we tend to get half of the DMR fee. We get on other countries for films we import from the United States, but if you do it locally you can get your full DMR fee just because of the way the studios get paid. China is fairly unique and pretty much every other country. It’s constant. So it’s really not on the cost structure.

Got you. Then last question referring to the slides that you guys put out for the call, on slide 6 and walk through the different map behind the incremental theaters and I just wanted to get a little bit more color on so I am looking at this correctly, just like your assumption is, the incremental margins on this business assuming kind of a 20% of JV revenue growth box office so in to the JV revenue on JV streams in the 12.5% on the DMR side. What stake you assuming basically 100% incremental profit margins on these businesses does that, do you think that’s realistic the incremental margins are truly 100% or do you think that there is some other cost such as some of the local content I think we talked about there separate factor and over time?

The only thing Mark on the slide, I mean the top section is an EBITDA calculation so its more cash flow geared. The only cost that would go against that would be the depreciation cost for the JV units, which is roughly in today’s day 45,000 in units but that’s really it.

The next question on the phone line comes from Martin Pyykkonen with Wedge Partners.

Yeah, thanks good morning, very nice quarter and the growth and so far as, couple of questions on China and Russia in particular, can you talk about what average ticket prices at the box are turning right now and may be more importantly where they come from over the last year when you had a much smaller footprint, where you think they might be going just curious how much the ticket price is going now?

Yes, Martin, you have to really separate in to conventional market and the IMAX market. So on the conventional market in China its around $4, its higher than that in the big cities so unlike Beijing and Shanghai but in IMAX we averaged about $12 for inception and about $16 for arbiter so that’s actually wanted a appeal is that IMAX is an affordable luxury. So you have higher income level for years, income level is in such state you going to go buy a Ferrari, but for a couple of extra bucks to go see in IMAX you really did differentiate you from your neighbor if you happen to be rising with the economic type there. In Russia the ticket prices are kind of crazy, the average in some cases more than North America I would use something consistent I don’t know what they are in 35 millimeters theaters but IMAX ticket prices are very similar to what they are in North America.

And then just going forward opening a specific number to a do you think there is upside to that in these markets where your coupons getting bigger just kind of a viral effect as people, more people get to see an IMAX film which you get more ticket price leverage there?

Again, I think it depends on the market and I think it also three things, the market obviously the economy and the third thing would be the timeframe you are talking about. If you are talking about a five year timeframe, yes, I do think there is upside in this economic environment that wouldn’t be the bet I would make. I don’t think there is lot of downside but I think it’s found a level people are comfortable with.

Thanks. And then going forward at the end of next year we can probably trying it around this, but can you just going to summarized based on your backlog nothing more than existing backlog. How many total systems you would have by year-end 2011, what number of those or percent would be JV’s and what number of percent would be digital.

Yes, if you look more in the page five of the slide presentation, the estimate would be roughly 206 to 213 JV units at the end of next year, and 238 to 248 were sales type leases the average of commercial footprint would be in the neighborhood of mid 40’s to roughly 460.

Okay, considering the upgrades and what’s new going in would the vast majority digital by that time or what kind of range would you have be?

Those units that where we can upgrade to digital, I think you’ll see a large chunk have been upgraded by the end of next year. You still going to have the bigger GT units that we don’t have a solution for today. So those who’s continue to be in operation, generally those who are our least problematic units anyways. They generally are high grossing units we get tends for.

Okay and then last question I hit on in the slide is that I don’t have access to it right now but as you look towards 2012 just based again on existing backlog you have talked about 2011 screen capacity network grouping up about 40%, how much is left for 2012 installation out of again just what you have signed to date.

Around 257 in backlog and back 20 out for upgrades that leaves you with 237. So area of that gets burned out next year roughly there is a mid point Rich quoted earlier, so that leaves remaining population and that alone wind itself for over the next couple of years.

Right okay.

Now don’t forget Martin that we still have reported to go this year and moving into next year, hopefully we continue to back so the backlog.

I’ll give you the one word answer Martin, plenty.

Right. Yes, I’ll take it that one. And then just last question on international, I mean, you obviously trying and rush has been a great success, new deals, you have got a strong presence in Japan. What about other parts of the world where should we expect to start seeing deals over the next several months and I am thinking more deeper in other part of Europe, you mentioned something like there is nothing in Rome, Latin America, just even if its qualitative the way you might be doing next?

Yeah, those were actually true as going to mention one is in Latin America, we kind of have a master agreements with the partner there who’s rolling them out and he has had quite a bit of success and particularly recently, with local partners there and I think you will see a number of openings coming from that area next year. Europe its self, we are just really started to see that in the last couple of years we opened our first Joint Venture in Holland and now we have four there. We just opened our first five in France and they performing pretty well, lets see how they do there and important point is we had no theatres in Germany and we just signed our first theater deal in Germany. And the way that works if it hits certain benchmarks the deal expands to more theaters but I think more importantly based on our experience if it works not only that exhibitor but others will be interested in coming into the market. I was in the Europe a couple of weeks ago, I had a bunch of meetings in Italy, I am optimistic that we’ll find the right partner there and get that going so you know I think there is a lot of promise in western Europe as well.

Next question comes from Jim Boyle with Gilford.

Good morning, in five years what percentage of revenue do you think internationally even comprises if you continue finding good partners?

If you look at our market potential, I would say North America is about 400 of 1250 zone, so when build out the whole world, and if the theaters performed in a comparable basis around the world, you would expect two-third of your revenue to come internationally now. We won’t have the world built out in five years and obviously the big variances in performance. So, it’s very difficult to predict but certainly the majority of the theaters will be outside in North America.

Okay. And is there anything that could really impact or slow your installation phase. Besides, North American and or global economic downturn in the next couple of years?

No. I mean I don’t even think downturn would have that much of an impact. And if you look back at the last two years, pretty bad downturn, it didn’t have that much impact. Mostly because remember we’re putting out most to the capital on the revenue sharing deals and on the sales type lease deal, that we’ve been paid in advance on those. So, the economic condition does not had a mark factor and I don’t see them having it. I mean exploring down the installation phase, I mean, I guess there could be a slide of Hollywood movies that comes out to exhibitors if just drop building screens or stop installing but its really hard to see and that’s why the guidance we gave today was only related to those that have signed backlog. I think, where you would more likely see the impact would be in sign and installs rather than the backlog. I think those are pretty solid.

And then, swapping my question down its head. Is in your estimate, what sort of capacity you will face could you push in the out years, and let say 2012 and beyond whereas that say the 80 that you’re looking at roughly for 2011?

Again, that’s does not a prediction I am prepare to make at the moment from a capacity point of view as I mentioned, we’re putting out for a week so today, so we could install if we had the contracts from the locations. Couple of answer to year and may be more than that so the question is just what’s the market in China has been, what’s the role out schedule but there is no real constrain on us on rolling amount.

Thank you. The next question comes from [Steven Frankel with Dougherty & Co]. Please go ahead. Steven Frankel - Dougherty & Co: Good morning. Most of my questions have been answered, but wonder if you might talk in general as you have the discussions with Regal and AMC about expanding JVs. Are they targeting incremental geographies or kind of back filling some of the larger zones with the second screen with those new screens?

They are largely targeting new places. I think some of the locations are looking at existing zones that’s a place as you know Steven well that we would encourage them to go more and we’re certainly talking about it but most to the role after a new locations, new zones. Steven Frankel - Dougherty & Co: Okay. And could you gives us anymore details on how you might test this affordable fear you just took possession of?

Sure. First thing is kind of what I call a technical test and we cut it off in a field outside of our Toronto where we like to get rain on and the wind blow on, and all kinds of things like that. Just wanted through some of the durability issues and we pretty much completed that and now we’re trying to find some business locations to put in and where the economics are attractive to us and we could kind of have the business model side evidence, we will really have probably about a dozen conversations going on after places to test out, and I wouldn’t be surprise in the next couple of months you started to see it showing up in real places and the business model which start to tested. Steven Frankel - Dougherty & Co: Okay and how about an update on the digital cameras, when will those be deployed to bring content to the screen.

We are actually using our IMAX digital camera today with a film called ‘Born to Be Wild’ which is we’re shooting on the North African, South American comes out next year, and it’s working very well. In terms of the cameras used on commercial projects you saw yesterdays LA Times article which I reference you should look at it. People like Christopher Nolan are going to use IMAX cameras or other large format cameras to special things for IMAX, we are in discussion with other film makers on that as well. I think people should be and I am certainly less focused on, is it our camera or is it high resolution digital camera because film makers are obviously creative artists and just like a musician may has its own Shalom or Violin. A film maker may have his own camera that he likes. So our cameras usable and available today but I think you will see a lot of film makers doing special things for IMAX with high resolution 2D or 3D cameras that are manufactured by us but by others which is fine with us as long as the image looks great on the screen. Camera revenue is not place where really to make a major financial difference.

The last question one the lines comes from Jim Goss with Barrington Research.

Thank you for giving me, earlier you mention that 14 was about the number of titles that you had this year, is that assuming to be a good working number or do you think that might vary and that something we still working and if you increase it with the DMR cost start to become a factor what I have set having more titles, and related to the flexibility of titles, inspection as it aged started to have a little lower take at your box office would you moved that off sooner if something that promised had developed?

Okay, I needed three things number of films, I think you will see more of those next year than the 14 that we see this year. And I think you know its probably because in some slots but the two block buster films that are very close together, so we are going to try as best as we can, to accommodate as many films as we can, so I think you will start to see some instances where maybe a film opens on all of the screen and then week or two later. It gives us some of those screens to accommodate another movie. So, I think there will be more films as particular in some of the international markets as we talked about before In terms of DMR cost there is some fix cost that gets amortized over the films showed for the year, so if you do more films, your cost should come down but I don’t think that’s material numbers. Its mostly variable cost such as labor that involved but it will come down to some extend And your third question about moving in section. It depend on the market and what the alternatives are but that’s the one can only get from a financial point of view is very good from a branding point of view. And we frequently make decisions that are focused as much around certainly more around the brands than they are in short-term financial result, so we were offered movies this year to sort but then we could have done, we could have put it in for a week, we could put in for two weeks. But we’re really count within. And over the long run IMAX needs to mean something and it means handful films, it means an arm aspiring experiences.…

Ladies and gentlemen this does conclude the conference call for today and we appreciate your participation. You may now disconnect your lines and have a great rest of the day.