This presentation and comments made in the associated conference call today may include forward-looking statements Forward-looking statements include information concerning future results of our operations, expenses, earnings, liquidity, cash flow and capital expenditures, industry or market conditions, AUM, acquisitions, debt and our ability to obtain additional financing or make payments, regulatory developments, demand for and pricing of our products and other aspects of our business or general economic conditions. In addition, words such as believes, expects, anticipates, intends, plans, estimates, projects, forecasts, and future or conditional verbs, such as will, may, could, should, and would, as well as any other statement that necessarily depends on future events, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees, and they involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. There can be no assurance that actual results will not differ materially from our expectations. We caution investors not to rely unduly on any forward-looking statements, and urge you to carefully consider the risks described in our most recent form 10-K and subsequent forms 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. You may obtain these reports from the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. We expressly disclaim any obligation to update the information in any public disclosure if any forward-looking statement later turns out to be inaccurate.

Welcome to the Invesco's fourth quarter results conference call. All participants will be on a listen-only mode until the question and answer session. (Operator instructions). Today's conference is being recorded. If you have any objections, you may disconnect at this time. Now I would like to turn the call over to the speakers for today, Mr. Martin L. Flanagan, President and CEO of Invesco and Mr. Loren Starr, Chief Financial Officer and Ms. Karen Dunn-kelly, Head of Invesco Fixed Income. Mr. Flanagan, you may begin.

Thank you very much, and thank you everybody for joining us for the 2009 fourth quarter briefing. I want to point out we'll be speaking in the presentation that is available on the website if you're so inclined to follow through it. And as we have done in the past, I'll spend a few minutes to give a summary of the business results. We will give an update on where we are with the Morgan Stanley Van Kampen combination and specifically Karen is going to talk about some of the fixed income opportunities that we see there and Loren will get into review of the financials and we'll open up to questions as we have in the past. So just for an overview for the fourth quarter, what you'll note is our consistent and good long-term performances benefiting the organization where we saw close net inflows during the quarter and again you'll see areas of exceptional performance during the quarter but all-in-all consistent good long-term performance. And although markets have improved considerably during the fourth quarter, we continue to take a very disciplined approach to our business. It helps when maintaining these net inflows that I just talk about in a strong operating margins and increasing results and operating income. And as we have been speaking of more recently that we're going to continue to look for areas to reinvest in the business as we become more optimistic looking forward that will result in identifying those areas that we think will make a difference and with that operating expenses would follow that once we make those decisions. I would like to point out too since we announced the other combination with Morgan Stanley, Van Kampen Asset Management in October we've made very, very good progress in achieving our goal of…

Yes, thank you, Marty, and good morning. As Marty has said that the combination of these two groups is incredibly complementary and it really just enhances what we do and what we look like as a business. So what I'd like to do over the next couple of pages is sort of just from the fixed income perspective, give you a concept of who are we currently. What are we going to look like post merger, where are we going and what are some of those opportunities we see for our customers. So if you're looking at slide 17, you can see this is what we are as a fixed platform today. We are number one. We are very, very large. We are major in all of these classes. We are a global business, and you can see that we have offices and people, fixed experts across the globe. We also have the way we describe our business four major asset classes, and in each of those asset classes we are very deep, we are very diversified, and we have a long history and a long standing in those businesses. So with that in mind, the next slide really says what are those investment capabilities and investment strategies, how do we view ourselves? But if you look on the side of the slide, there is the S curve. And so you can see from that S curve, we manage more assets in every aspect of the fixed income market and you can see on the bottom you have got the more conservative asset classed such as money market, stable value, and then as you go through it from the municipal slide, the core plus, high yield side you get to the more opportunistic where we do thinks like we will,…

Great. Thank you, Karen. And as you can see, one of the things we wanted to too, you knew of our fixed income capability being very, very strong, but really highlighting another benefit of Morgan Stanley/Van Kampen, and specifically nonetheless obvious there is really the leadership position that we'll be taking in the municipal bond area. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Loren for financials, and then we will get into Q&A after that.

Great. Thanks, Marty. During the quarter, as Marty pointed out, we saw positive long-term flows, also market gains, favorable foreign exchange which was offset somewhat by net outflows in our money market funds resulting in 6.2 billion increase in AUM as we ended the quarter with $422.1 billion in assets under management that’s up 1.5% since the end of September, and our average AUM for the quarter increased $13.4 billion to $420.3 billion. And also we're pleased to see the modest improve independent in our net revenue yield in Q4, driven by the growth in the higher fee asset categories so its 53 basis points or net revenue yields excluding performance is now roughly in line with where we were in Q3 of 2008. So, clearly moving in the right direction. Let's move to operating results. As you see on the next page total operating revenue increased $42 million that's 6% increase quarter-over-quarter. Investment management fees are up 7.3% $41.5 million increase. That was a result of a positive mix shift and again higher overall average AUM. Within our mix, importantly, equities as a percentage of total AUM increased from 39.2% in the third quarter, now to 41% in the fourth quarter. Service and distribution revenues which typically move in line with our average AUM actually decreased quarter-over-quarter by 0.4%, and this was a result of certain annual fund expense recovery limits being reached in Canada. The impact was a full year reduction of $5.4 million in TA and administrative revenues, all of which were reflected in Q4. So that's an important note. Performance fees going down, came out at $6.8 million. The magnitude of our performance fees in Q4 was lower than what we have typically seen in prior quarters at this time, but I'll be going into more…

Thank you. And we'll just open up to Q&A, whether it'd be for myself, Loren, or Karen.

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) One moment for the first question, please. Our first question comes from William Katz of Buckingham Research. Sir your line is open.

Marty, on the transaction with Morgan Stanley, I'm sort of curious and you could give us an update on the [fixed income] that more generally how is that being received so far? And any sort of comments there would be helpful.

Yeah. We've been very, very engaged with all of our key constituents, whether distributors or consultants, where it's relevant, and I am in a number of those businesses myself, and they have just been very, very positively received. And why is that? Just from all that we've talked about, it starts by just, on the surface, the combination of the two organizations makes a lot of sense, everybody can see the complementary nature of the organizations, and when we walk through the process that we're going through of what we're trying to achieve through our clients, and also organizationally, they feel very, very comfortable about it. So, right now, I would say, I feel about as comfortable with this of any combination that I've ever been involved in my career.

And just a quick follow-up maybe for you or Karen. She has spent a lot of time talking about the fixed income business. If you look on an absolute basis or relative basis, I appreciate the fact that your flows have improved nicely year-to-year, but sort of looking relative to some of your peers, you've lagged a little bit. This 2010 really should be lynchpin here, the inflection point for this part of the business?

For fixed income?

Yeah.

I'll make my point, and then Karen can talk about it. At one level, we all wish we could close this combination sooner than later. It's going to be a mid-year event. We're doing as much as we can, as jointly as possible, but there are limits, legal limits that we can do. So the power of the combined firm is really not going to kick in until the second half of the year. And so I think where you're really going to start to see an impact is 2011. Now, we would like it to be fast or too, but what I can tell you is the way that we structure the transaction, the way that we went into it, and the other elements we talked about, I feel we are going to be, achieving progress, as quickly as anything that I've been involved in. So am I answering your question, or am I answering the question that you asked?

To some degree. Still curious, that being said, the fixed income business should be able to grow apart from the Morgan Stanley transaction. So I'm just really curios are you seeing a step up in the institutional channel for fixed income given the focus that you still put on this call.

Yes. Karen, you can answer that.

Yes. Let me make a couple of comments to you. In fact we've had the market crisis that started in '07 went through '08, and what we really did in 2009 and so we need to position ourselves for the future. So what we did is we did a couple of things. We went out on extensive road shows across the U.S., Asia, and the UK to talk to the consultants about how are we looking in our business, what are we doing in our business, how are we growing it, where are we going? We did a full blown training on all of the retail sectors at the Invesco [interface], fixed income the time and the place is now as I mentioned in the earlier comments. We also went through that obviously we became a PPIP manager, and now its one of the PPIP managers. Again we launched the Invesco Mortgage Capital REIT that was launched. So what we did during 2009 is really say in every aspect of our business, let's bolster it, let's solidify it and lets say okay be prepared for the future. And so what has happened from that is we have gotten more consulting conversations going on. We have gotten higher levels of RFPs. We have gone more discussions going on, which is exactly what leads to two more sales. So one of the things that I have been saying and I will continue to say is that 2009 was a year that we positioned ourselves for the future, and that plus all the things I have said plus is very, very exciting Van Kampen merger I believe very strongly that 2010 is the future. We are really poised to do great things in fixed income this year.

That's helpful, thank you.

And Bill let me add to it. Here is my point of view. I don't think that, if you want to call it the additional clients in fixed income are reflective of our capability, and it's just a longer runway than any of us would be happy with, but I feel quite confident that as the market place recognizes just the absolute strength we have in fixed income and some of the things Karen highlighted, those are very material, recognition type wins for us. And I feel very good about the future.

Okay. That's helpful, thank you.

Michael Kim of Sandler O'Neill, your line is open.

First, just in terms of the deal, any change in how you're thinking about the AUM attrition estimate that you laid out last quarter, just particularly given some of the growth opportunities on the fixed income side that you just highlighted?

No, the market place is still more stable than a year ago in March, but not the stability that we want, and I think we think the wisest thing right now is just to stay at the guidance that we had originally given. And as we get closer to it, we'll feel more confident, and, you know, if there needs to be revisions, we will make those for everybody.

Okay. And then in terms of activity in the institutional channel, you talked a little bit about the fixed income side, but are you starting to see more interest in maybe some of your equity strategies more recently?

Yeah, the areas that continue to get focus for us are real estate direct but also listed real estate REI Ts continues to be a very, very popular area. We're getting in the international and global area, are other areas that are starting to come up and some of the quantitative mandates also.

Okay. And then maybe just finally a question for Loren. I know the margin was probably depressed, to some extent this quarter, just due to some of the non-recurring items and some seasonality, but any color on how we should be thinking about the margins going forward for the standalone business? And then just following the close of the transaction?

I think, again, we don't have any specific margin targets that we can give you. I think the goal of certainly getting the margin above 30% exists. Obviously, I think that's certainly achievable, given where the markets are today. Operating leverage will certainly work in our favor to see margins expand more rapidly if the market improves. Obviously if it declines from here, it has the reverse element, so nothing has really changed. The only thing that we've said, which again I think is probably reasonable just to repeat the guidance is sort of anywhere. But that’s only thinking more in a traditional sense of historically our incremental margin has been the 60% to 65% range, and I think you're thinking about 2010 versus 2009, those are the kind of numbers you shall be thinking about generally, again, it's a business as usual type of environment with markets being reasonably stable.

Okay. That's helpful. Thanks.

Robert Lee of KBW. Your line is open.

Quick question to Loren. I just wanted to clarify a couple of things. That pension expense, is that kind of a one-time item, or that kind of flow through kind of a true-up or is that kind of a flow through on a go-forward basis?

We're certainly hoping the one-time item, its really an annual evaluation that's done. Obviously there are certain inputs in terms of discount rates in actuarial assumptions. In this time it created this charge, which is largely non-cash. So again we hoped that it would be improving situation. It's really been driven by the state of the markets more than anything else, and we're not alone if that, but I would characterize it more as unique, as opposed to a recurring thing.

Okay. Great, and, you know, in thinking about margins and expenses. Can you talk a little bit and you guys have done kind of I guess described as kind of a yeoman's job of kind of keeping a lid on expenses and comp costs in particular which maybe that’s some people. But how should we think about going forward? You've had this big rebound in assets as the whole industry. Going through a merger, performance has been good. Are you starting to feel like, hey, with all the things are better, but there's a lot of change going on that you kind of have some, we'll call it higher, a greater pressure on comp costs in the coming year than maybe you've been experiencing?

Yeah, you're right on the mark, and that's what I was trying to highlight at the beginning of it, and you could sense a little bit of that just in Loren's comments, as we've gone through some of the details and the expenses. We feel we have positioned ourselves to actually make a difference and in the marketplace, and there are more and more opportunities in front of us. And we are responding to them and what comes with that is you have to spend money, and we feel confident that we should be doing that, because we think we'll make a difference. And that's some of the pressure we were alluding to previously, but we think those are good things, not bad things.

Okay. And I'm just curious, is there anything at Trimark in Canada? It looked like there was an unusually large outflow in the quarter? I think it was almost like half your outflows for the year. Was there a particularly large counter to that left, or anything unusual there?

Not that I'm aware of. I think there may be some seasonality in how redemptions work just generally other than the U.S. as well, and so there may have been more of an outflow just because of the seasonality. But we aren't seeing any sort of it, we wouldn't view that as a continuing trend.

And maybe talk a little bit about power shares. As we all know what's been going on with ETFs broadly speaking and the industry, but can you kind of update how power shares has been doing and kind of its contribution for the year and the quarter to net flows, and how you were, given the competition in that space is increasing, if nothing else, how you kind of feel about your ability to grow at least in line or faster than the ETF business overall?

Yeah. I'll make a couple of comments. Loren, do you want to talk about flow. And then I'll talk about the positioning with it, if that makes sense.

Yeah, if you want to do the comments first I'll have the closing session.

Sure. We think it is a real strength to the organization. When we bought power shares, recognizing that really the passive end of the ETF market was pretty well captured with some of the incumbents, but from our point of view, power shares is a strategic advantage, we'll continue to be one and we just see future opportunities for us in that marketplace. And seeing it more the area that has been the slowest has really been the adoption of ETFs in the advice channel. That was one of our premises going in that continues to be a real focus of ours, and we think that as they are becoming more and more common placed in the advice channel, we're going to do very, very well with it. So again, we think it's a real strength of ours, and we're very optimistic about the future for us.

And we had another quarter of positive flows related to the power shares. There was about half a billion. It was down somewhat from Q3, which is 0.9 billion but again, it's been positive flows ever since we purchased and kind of had them become part of the firm. And one of the things I think that is quite exciting is they reached $1 billion dollars in Europe that was kind of a mark that we've been waiting for a while. So that was a nice line on some of the milestone and obviously the use of ETFs in Canada is another example of just how we can use these products very effectively in different markets. Traditionally they haven’t really played a role. And we think that there's a lot more that can be done to continue to grow that business. But it's currently about $15 billion in assets under management. That doesn't include the Q-to-Q or the Deutsche Bank products. If you add all that in, it's about $45 billion in term of the total assets that are affiliated with power shares and so are our presence actually in the market is larger than some of the numbers that we present, provide, and certainly that's something that we're going to try to give you better transparency going forward.

And just adding to that so to be clear. So if you look at the PowerShares franchises $46 billion, it's 6% market share, it's BGI, State Street, Vanguard and ourselves. So we're fourth in there so we feel and recognizing that we're not playing in a number of those areas, we feel we have a real strong franchise there and we intend to continue to make an impact.

Great. Thanks for taking my questions.

Dan Fannon of Jefferies. Your line is open.

Good morning. Loren, another couple of questions on the expenses. I just want to clarify here with regards to the G&A line, as well as the property and office, are those run rates. That we should be thinking about going forward? Because they are coming higher than what I was looking for.

On property and office, I think the answer is probably yes, that that's a reasonable sort of run rate going forward, and some of that is offsetting salaries above, so as we continue to use our operating platform in Hyderabad, you're seeing those expenses on that line item. And then it's offsetting kind of other elements and other expenses in other parts of the P&L. So in that it's saving money and we do think it's the right approach for us to continue to grow that. So I would say that's kind of one point. On G&A, there is some seasonality there typically in the fourth quarter and the second quarter, there's a spike offer about $1.5 million of every time mailings go out in Europe and UK as you'll see some spike up there. Also in terms of product launches, that can be a little bit hard to predict as to when those things happen. So I don't want to say it's non-recurring, because we do tend to launch new products and have plans to launch new products, but some of the pickup that you saw quarter-over-quarter is really because of business activity picking up. Once again I think it’s a good point, I assume I could say that’s a travel which has been constrained as a general matter is something that we're beginning to travel more and go out and work on and do things of that nature. So that's the productive part it. So general guidance is there may some return going down to a lower level, but I wouldn't take it down to the Q3 level, because I think that would not be a correct run rate.

Okay. And then on the service and distribution side, just to clarify that, $5.4 million, that was one-time in nature in terms of just kind of the year-end, as we think about the first quarter, that should artificially be increased by that and then some depending (inaudible) for AUM growth.

That's correct. That is the right way to think about it

Okay. And then Marty, maybe just in terms of on the heels of the commentary on money market reforms from yesterday, do you guys anticipate any change in terms of how you are operating your business, or how you think about that opportunity going forward?

Since we have Karen on the phone, Karen why don't you respond to that?

From a big picture on the money market performed new and amended rules that came out yesterday, the full release and the full details are not expected until the earliest of tomorrow. So again what we're speaking from is the macro information that was brought forth yesterday. And so when we look through that information, really there are four major categories that the reforms are going to take place, and they are portfolio liquidity, portfolio maturity, portfolio credit quality and then other shareholder protections that they put in place. So as we have looked through them at the macro level; number one, generally we think they are very consistent with the expectations as we have worked and the industry has worked closely on this issue; number two, they are going to be managing money market products much more aligned and much more closely to the way we've been managing them for over 20 years; and then finally, I would just conclude by directly answering your question that, no, we do not believe there are going to be any material changes from what we have seen.

Great. Thank you.

Mike carrier of Deutsche bank, your line is open.

Thanks, guys. Loren one more question. I think just on some of the expenses in the quarter. You mentioned the $0.27 which excludes kind of the transaction charges, and then you're saying if you normalize some of those other noisy items in the quarter, it could be are you familiar $0.022 cents. Just trying to figure out what were those items. Because there were a few items that were noisy I just wanted to make sure that I included them all.

The pension charge was $4.1 million. That's about $0.6. The Canadian service revenue, which is a top line thing, it was $5.4 million that $0.9 and payroll expense is $4.3 million, and that's about $0.7. And the impact of those are about $0.022 also on margin was about 29%. So if you added all that back and we wanted to do that, the margin, adjusted margin would be 32.3%, and EPS would be $0.29. So again, it depends on what you want to take as one-time. And the reason I could qualify, the Canadian service is definitely pension charge is more one-off. Payroll expense when stock and assets depends on the stock price at the time of divesting, so that could be one of those things that happens in the future quarter, but this one was a little exception on the sense of kind of how large it was.

Okay. And then just the item that you mentioned in the G&A, no adjustment there, so if some of those come down that would add a little bit.

Yeah, I think the $1.5 million certainly on seasonality on the mailings I think that would come down in terms of product launches, if we were to launch no new products in Q1, it would come down. I'm not sayings that what's going to happen. So there's an element of cost related to that. Travel, I think is one of these things that's probably up a few million dollars quarter-over-quarter, and my guess is that we're going to continue at that level. So again, we're somewhere in between.

Okay. And then just looking, not quarter-to-quarter but more 2010, 2011, when you think about back to like 2007, pre-crisis, where Invesco based on our margins you were kind of in the mid-30% range, but from an efficiency to standpoint, the firm wasn't near as efficient as it is today. When you think about the margins of hitting in the 40% range, what would you say, like what has to happen like from average markets, but from a flow perspective? What kind of an organic growth rate or is it the mix shift that you need to see based on the current operating structure to kind of get to those.

Well, I think there are two parts, at least if my opinion. One is, obviously markets are going to be quite important, because they have the biggest impact on equities as part of our mix. And so I mentioned that we were at 41%. I think if you go back to 2007 that number was in the high-40s. And so there's an element there that would drive our efficiency rate at 53 basis points, where sort of an Q3 '08 levels, but if you go back to '07, the effective fee rate was as a much higher level high 50s, low 60s even. So getting to that can be done most effectively by the market but obviously we can't count on that. I think the other part of that is definitely going to have an impact, would be the continued launch and the attractiveness of the product that we're offering on the alternative side. So Wilbur Ross is a perfect example of some of those funds have a very high fee. We have talked about fund five at some point being something that could happen in 2010. So I do think, you can do the math as well as I can, but a $4 billion asset that's coming in a 150 basis points can definitely move the dial in the year, and the more that we can do of those types of things the better and certainly that is where we're seeing a lot of the interest from the consultants and clients in terms of our capability.

And then just one for Marty. When you think about the new Invesco with Van Kampen and Morgan Stanley, whether it's from a product perspective or distribution? And again not in the next couple of quarters, but over the next year or two, where do you see the most opportunity in terms of bringing in new assets? Is it on the distribution side, or just products being sold through different distribution channels?

It's predominantly a U.S. event, right? They're the next largest part to it is Japan, within it. So it is a U.S. event, and if you stay on some of the topics we've been talking about, the complementary nature of the investment teams and vehicles coming in really makes us quite strong. If you look at the depth and breadth of the products, it's probably going to be one of the, arguably, the deepest and broadest set of products capabilities in the marketplace. And that's from, whether it'd be unit trust, ETFs, and mutual funds. And then within that, again, the traditional advice channel whether it'd be broker dealers and regional, we will be very, very strong. But then the next opportunity for us, we've been making some real good progress in the DC area. I think DC opportunity goes to a very different level than where we've been operating before. Also in the RIA area for both of the organizations, we will have the resources to really start to make a difference. So if you look across the spectrum, by channel, within the United States with the investment capabilities we have and the ability to deliver them in really any vehicle that the clients want them and it sets us up very, very strongly for some real strong success.

Okay. Thanks, guys.

Craig Siegenthaler of Credit Suisse your line is open.

I just have another one here on the Morgan Stanley acquisition. Now that you've got more time to analyze the business. Can you help us identify areas where the ability to harness earnings is running a little better than expected? Ad really, specifically, how do you view the prospects of being able to see the $0.13 per share as an annualized run rate by 3Q 11?

I think as we sort of talked in Q3, we feel good about the $70 million. We think that those opportunities exist in terms of the combining platforms, technology, stream lines and product lines and so forth. The opportunities beyond that are areas that I think will fall into consideration only as we look at these things broadly across Invesco, and its only the process where we're looking to find ways to bring the parts of the firm together more effectively. We don't have any insight at this point that the $70 million grows to something different. And I don't think we're in a position right now to talk about that. I think if there's one area where we feel most excited at least from what we're seeing right now is the ability to have more distribution synergies than originally in our modeling. And again, it's hard to quantify those elements. But when you think about the potential of having platforms open up for both their products and our products that they traditionally have not experienced. We think that there's something that could be quite exciting there, and I think, again, not in a position to talk about it right now, but certainly as we get closer to that opportunity, and feel more and more comfortable about sort of the certainty, we can, and we will provide more input on that.

And Loren, in terms of harnessing the distribution opportunity you were talking about, this is more on the flow side, so the ability to generate better organic growth from kind of the cross-sell opportunity, and not a reduction of kind of fixed distribution expenses?

That's correct.

Okay. And if I can just ask one more question on performance fees. Slide 24 is really helpful, but can you provide us an update of relative fund performance for your [quant], real estate and UK alternative funds. And just how are they positioned and even seasonally able to generate first quarter performance fees?

Yeah. Well, probably the most important one is on the UK, and the only thing I can say is their performance over the last three months has been spectacular, just because I think they have more than 90% of their assets meeting peers and benchmarks as some of the financial stocks have sort of given up some of the gains they got for the full year of 2009. So depending on your review of financials I think it will have a lot to do with, how well the one-year numbers kind of shape up going into 2010 and specifically Q1. I think to assume that there's going to enough to actually move the one-year numbers by Q1, that I couldn't really tell you specifically, other than the trend, I would say, is encouraging. And so I wouldn't want to provide any sense of total pessimism that there's no more performance fees coming from the UK. That would probably be an incorrect way to interpret what we're showing you here. I do think near term, it's still a question. I think in terms of the other products. Real estate continues to be very strong, direct real estate very strong. And the quant products, I think there obviously is some maybe a little bit more mixes depending on which product you're looking at. But it’s a very strong performance, and some less strong, but they have not jet generated, got enough above benchmark to generate performance fees. And again it's not something that I would necessarily guide you to expect in Q1.

Loren, this $7 million in the fourth quarter, was that all it says, kind of Asia Pacific kind of Atlantic trust? Was that real estate or what was kind of in that bucket?

That was Atlantic trust. They had a very successful product, an MLP fund that generated a big fee.

Our last questions from Ken Worthington of JPMorgan. Your line is open.

On the long-term sales you've got a long way 8.4 billion redemptions, you're at 2.6 billion of sales, but of a firm of your size, it's still not wonderful. I know Morgan Stanley changes your world, but on a same store sales basis, what still needs to be done in your legacy businesses to get those sales, north of 2.5 billion to something more consistently in the 5 billion to 10 billion?

Great question, Ken, and I think we're on the path to be doing it, and I think it's a range of things, not a simple thing, and what would that include? One, and it's been the things we've been focused on over the last number of years, narrowing the product line, having it strong relative performance but then a little bit of a topic that we talked about previously too is sort of recognition of the strengths in the market place takes longer than any of us would like. And where much of the flows have been coming from right now have really been from the equity side of the business. And when you consider that the flow has been coming from equity that's really quite astonishing considering the market that we've been in. So one level that's interesting, good news, the bad news is we haven't seen these strong fixed income flows, and the reason is we've not been recognized broadly as a fixed income manager that in fact we are. So we just need to continue to make that progress. And to your point at least on the retail side, I do think one of the real strengths that's coming out of the combination with Morgan Stanley/Van Kampen is depth and breadth of our combined distribution capability broadly throughout United States, and I think that should make a difference.

Great. Thank you very much.

I want to thank everybody very, very much for joining us today. And we'll talk to you next quarter, we'll continue to keep you updated on the Morgan Stanley/Van Kampen process. And, again, we think we are positioning quite well to continue to participate and grow and be successful in this marketplace. And again thank you very much for your time.

This conference has ended. Participants may disconnect at this time.