Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by and welcome to Jabil's Fourth Quarter and Full Fiscal Year 2013 Earnings Call. [Operator Instructions] Thank you. I would now like to turn today's conference over to Beth Walters, Senior Vice President of Communications and Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. Welcome to our fourth quarter and fiscal year 2013 Earnings Call. Joining me today are CEO, Mark Mondello; and Chief Financial Officer, Forbes Alexander. This call is being recorded and will be posted for audio playback on the Jabil website, jabil.com, in the Investors section. Our fourth quarter and fiscal year press release, slides and corresponding webcast links are also available on our website. In these materials, you will find the financial information that we cover during this conference call. We ask that you follow our presentation with the slides on the website, beginning with Slide 2, our forward-looking statement. During this conference call, we will be making forward-looking statements, including those regarding the anticipated outlook for our business, our currently expected first quarter of fiscal 2014 net revenue and earnings results, the financial performance of the company and our long-term outlook for the company. These statements are based on current expectations, forecasts and assumptions involving risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results and outcomes to differ materially. An extensive list of these risks and uncertainties are identified in our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2012, on subsequent reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K and our other securities filings. Jabil disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Today's call will begin with our fourth fiscal quarter and fiscal year results and guidance on our first fiscal quarter of 2014 from Forbes Alexander. Mark has also prepared comments on our performance and his outlook for the business. We will then open it up to questions from call attendees. I'll now turn the call over to Forbes.

Thank you, Beth. Good afternoon. Please refer to Slide 3 for a review of the quarter. Net revenue for the fourth quarter was $4.8 billion, an increase of 11% year-over-year. GAAP operating income was $88.4 million or 1.8% of revenue. This compares to $144.3 million of GAAP operating income on revenues of $4.3 billion or 3.3% for the same period in the prior year. Diluted earnings per share were $0.61 during the quarter. GAAP earnings during the quarter were impacted by restructuring charges of $61 million as we discussed last quarter and approximately $104 million benefit due to a onetime tax benefit associated with our acquisition of Nypro. Core operating income, excluding amortization of intangibles, stock-based compensation, restructuring, impairment charges, acquisition cost and purchase accounting adjustments, increased 4% year-over-year to $181 million and represents 3.8% of revenue. This compares to $175 million or 4% for the same period in the prior year. Core diluted earnings per share was $0.56, an increase of 5% over the prior year. Now I'll ask you to turn to Slide 4. The fiscal 2013 net revenue was $18.3 billion, an increase of 7% year-over-year. GAAP operating income decreased 18% to $511 million, representing 2.8% of revenue. This compares to $622 million GAAP operating income on revenues of $17.2 billion and 3.6% of revenue in fiscal 2012. Diluted earnings per share was $1.79. Core operating income, excluding amortization of intangibles, stock-based compensation, restructuring, impairment charges, acquisition cost and purchase price accounting adjustments, decreased 2.1% to $721 million and represents 3.9% of revenue. This compares to $736 million or 4.3% for the same period in the prior year. Core diluted earnings per share for the year was $2.26. Now I'll ask you to turn to Slide 5, where I'll discuss our fourth quarter segments. In the fourth…

Thanks, Forbes. Good afternoon, everyone. I appreciate you taking time to join our call today. I'd like to start by thanking all of our people here at Jabil. I'm proud to work with the team that is obsessed with taking great care of our customers while working so hard to deliver for our shareholders. As I reflect on the past year, there are plenty of challenges, but these challenges were balanced with a few areas of exceptional performance. During fiscal year '13, our team delivered record revenues of $18.3 billion, generated more than $1 billion in operational cash flows, and achieved a core return on invested capital of 21%, approximately 10 percentage points above our weighted average cost of capital. I'll highlight these accomplishments for 2 reasons. One, I appreciate the effort and hard work required by our team to deliver these results. Two, growth, return on invested capital and cash flows are areas of focus for management. We carry a strong belief that these specific drivers, combined with unwavering discipline around margins, will provide long-term value for our shareholders. Another important accomplishment during the fiscal year was our Net Promoter Scores. Net Promoter Scores are a reliable, straightforward metric embedded in our business, which accurately gauges the health of our customer relationships. During the year, our Net Promoter Scores improved across the entire company. This is great news. My expectation is that we will see this trend continue throughout FY '14. I'm also quite satisfied with our deployment of capital during the fiscal year. We returned roughly $200 million to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks. In addition, we continue to invest capital back into the business, both organically and acquisitively. When I consider organic capital allocations, the one change I would've made if I could hit the rewind…

Operator, before we begin the question-and-answer session, I'd like to remind our call participants that in customary fashion, we cannot address any customer- or product-specific question. Thank you for your cooperation.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Steven Fox with Cross Research.

Just questions around some of the quantitative impact on your results from BlackBerry. So the $0.28 to $0.34 is -- seems like it's a hit to core operating income. Can you talk about the exact drivers there, how much from sales versus how much excess overhead you still have from ongoing operations? And then secondly, can you talk about the charges, exactly what that will be tied to, how much related to fixed assets versus, say, maybe headcount reduction?

Thanks, Steven. Let me take the first question and let Forbes talk a little bit about the charges. So to frame this out, when we sat 90 days ago, we were having a good year with BlackBerry. And again, I'll emphasize, BlackBerry has been a great customer. We typically don't talk about specific customers. But again, because of the impact to the company, we felt it important. As we look forward in setting the FY '14 models, we de-rated the BlackBerry numbers, just based on the overall environment and where we felt would be a very conservative estimate. That obviously appeared to be not conservative enough with what's taking place. So the core impact is a combination of loss of income as well as the infrastructure we have in place for BlackBerry. Again, we've been a customer -- or a supplier to them for 6, 7 years, and we have a substantial amount of infrastructure in place. So the infrastructure is a combination of depreciation. We're going to -- we're in discussions right now on how we're going to wind down the relationship. And depending on the timing of that, we'll end up with individual or employee resources to deal with. Some of that will be captive or captured in the charges. And then we have depreciation that we won't be able to redeploy immediately. Most of the assets for BlackBerry are fungible. So we'll be able to move them around, but that will take a little bit of time. And then we just have an overhead structure for a relationship of this magnitude, and it will take us time to figure out how to redeploy that and/or get rid of some of those resources. So again, the bar we showed on Slide 13, I believe that's a reasonable to slightly conservative look. If you can imagine, we've acted on this in the last few days, and we felt it was important to communicate to the investor community where our thoughts were at. And with that, I'll turn it over to Forbes and he can talk a little bit about the charges.

Yes. The range of charge is $35 million to $85 million. As Mark said, we were active in the last few days to the lease activity with BlackBerry. That's quite a broad range. And at the center point of that range, a kind of expectation that would be primarily costs associated with reductions in force. As you can imagine, it's a very large scale relationship, about [ph] the same customer last year. And that takes many thousands of people to support relations for that size. So certainly, the midpoint -- the majority of those costs are associated with reductions in force. And as Mark said, it's early right now, but I believe I've been relatively conservative in the range that we've given there in terms of those charges. As regards to timing of that, much will depend on our negotiations and discussions with the customer in the coming weeks and months.

Your next question comes from the line of Amitabh Passi with UBS.

Mark, just on the slide where you have an EPS progression and your initial take or initial stab at fiscal '14, any help you can give us in terms of how you're thinking about the top line? It looks like BlackBerry could be a $2 billion drag, but then Nypro probably adds $1 billion. And I'm just curious how you're thinking about your underlying business growth as we look at fiscal '14?

Yes, we anticipated somebody asking the question, and we're just not in the position to talk about revenue right now. I feel good about the chart. I feel good about the EPS. I don't want to get into margin or revenue at this point in time. I would say directionally, you're probably accurate on Nypro and you're probably a little bit high in BlackBerry. So I'll just leave it at that, and we may choose to have a little bit more color around this during our Analyst Day at the end of October.

Okay. And then just maybe a quick follow-up for Forbes. Forbes, how should we think about DMS margins going into the November quarter? I mean, do we think we can hit a 5 handle? Just any help you can give us there.

In terms of the DMS area?

Yes.

Yes, I would certainly -- I think we'd hit a 5 handle. I remind you, in the fourth quarter, we had about $150 million of Nypro revenue essentially at breakeven in terms of margin. So I certainly expect Nypro to contribute nicely in the quarter and certainly, we would be well into the 5 handles during the course of the fiscal quarter.

Your next question comes from the line of Amit Daryanani with RBC Capital Markets.

Two questions for me. One, maybe just on the DMS side. Margin was down 70 basis points year-over-year. I think maybe half of that or 40 basis points is, to your point, Nypro being breakeven. Could you just talk about what led to the rest of the decline? Was it the cost overruns that you talked about? And maybe if you could quantify that and talk about how you recover that cost inefficiency, if you may, as you go forward?

Yes, I think your math is correct. I think we ended up printing a 4.9% margin on DMS. If you take Nypro out, as we talked about in our third quarter call, that was bringing Nypro into the company. It was a bit of some empty revenue. And if you take Nypro out and kind of normalize the margins, I think you end up at 5.2% or 5.3%. So we were 20, 30 basis points off the bottom end of our range, and that was around some cost overruns. We talked the last couple of calls about Q3 and Q4 being some fairly extensive product ramps, and I believe it has -- that's what it was associated for and we don't expect a repeat of that in Q1.

Got it. So you should be able to pick up that entire 70 basis points drag in the November quarter then, right? Nypro gets to better performance and the cost overruns don't exist. Is that fair?

I think I would echo what Forbes said, which I have a strong belief that DMS margins will have -- be a 5 handle in Q1, and I believe we'll be back to the bottom end of our overall DMS range.

All right. And then in the fiscal '14 road map, you guys obviously are providing the headwinds you're going to have with one of your customers. How much of that is baked into your November quarter guide of $0.55 as the midpoint, which seems like it's $0.10 below what most of us were modeling. Maybe some help on what sort of headwinds are you seeing in the November quarter specifically from High Velocity, I guess.

Yes, there's clearly some headwinds, and we're right in the middle of those discussions with the customer and looking at our schedules. But my guess would be somewhere in $0.04, $0.05, $0.06 type range, just given what I know today, just given what we've undertaken and used over the last 4 or 5 business days here. So a little bit tough to tell, but it's that type of magnitude.

I think Forbes is being really generous through this transparency, and I think that's good. It's just if you can imagine, there's a lot of moving pieces, and we're working it real time really hard.

Your next question comes from the line of Matthew Sheerin with Stifel. Matthew Sheerin - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: I want to just change the subject a little bit to the E&I segment. Your revenue was in line with expectations, up nicely year-over-year. But you're guiding kind of flattish year-over-year, so a little bit slower there. Could you talk about the puts and takes that you're seeing and also the pipeline within the customer sector?

Matt, in that whole comment, no acknowledgment of the 3.3% margins for Q4? Come on. Matthew Sheerin - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: That was my follow-up.

Come on. Throw us a little bit of bone. Lead with a good news. Yes, we're -- we've said this before and we sound a little bit like broken records, but we're really blessed with serving phenomenal brands in that area. And I think our service offering is outstanding. I would -- I think we're doing all of the right things. The team is certainly doing a number of really good things as far as optimizing costs. And I just feel really good about our E&I business. And as we look one quarter out, you're right, the top line is -- we're guiding essentially flat. So -- but I feel good about the diversification we have there, and I feel good about the brands that we serve. Matthew Sheerin - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: Okay. Fair enough. And back to the High Velocity, so x your big handset customer, could you talk about what that business looks like, what you're seeing sequentially? And given the experience that you've had in handsets, is that a business that you want to stay in, in terms of High Velocity assembly business on the handset side?

I'm not sure I understand the first part of your question. Matthew Sheerin - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: Well, the -- okay. So x the BlackBerry, what does that business look like in terms of seasonality with your other customers?

Matt, it's Forbes. The balance of the business there, there's not a lot of seasonality. I remind you, in the balance of that High Velocity business, set-top boxes, printing, some level of automotive and some point-of-sale in there. So not a lot of what I call straight consumer spend with seasonality in the business. So we'd expect that revenue stream, the $750 million to $800 million in the quarter materially down sequentially. As I said in my prepared remarks, about $0.5 billion of handset revenue coming out. So that's very significant in terms of the operating performance as we look into Q1 of that segment. So overall, in summary, not much seasonality. The business is stable. Relationships are good. And we're pleased with our capability in High Velocity and look forward to applying that capability across a number of customers and industries. Matthew Sheerin - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc., Research Division: Okay. And then relative to handsets going forward, is that something you'd still want to look at in terms of opportunities?

I think we'll take a look at it. I think our main focus around that market will be in -- it will be in coatings, metals, plastics and mechanics.

Your next question comes from the line of Brian Alexander with Raymond James. Brian G. Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: If I look at the $0.30 or so of earnings decline related to BlackBerry, and I know there's a lot of moving parts, but I just want -- does that assume no revenue from that customer in fiscal '14? Because it looks like a lot of lost income. If I convert that to operating income, it's over $80 million, which is almost a 4% margin if you assume all of the $2 billion in revenue goes away, and that's the higher margin than we would have assumed for that business historically. I know there's some negative leverage there, but I just wanted to get a sense. Are you assuming all the revenue goes away when you talk about a $0.30 decline?

Brian, it's Mark. We haven't gotten through that yet for modeling purposes. We were conservative. We felt like that was an appropriate communication at this point with what we know. The -- so we don't know what the revenue is going to be. We modeled conservative revenue. I wouldn't say it's 0 for the fiscal year, but it's small. And I would tell you that the red bar on Slide 13 is a combination of lost income as well as the deleveraging of some significant scale in assets and a whole bunch of deleveraging in people. Brian G. Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: Okay. And then just referring back to the EPS waterfall, you didn't change your organic growth assumption of $0.11 to $0.31, which at the midpoint is about 10% growth in the core business. Yet, if I look at your guidance for Q1, it doesn't look like your core EPS is growing at all, if I try to back out BlackBerry and Nypro. So I'm just trying to understand why wouldn't the organic assumptions have changed from last quarter when you gave the $0.11 to $0.31, especially given your DMS performance looks to be below expectations, you're running below your 5.5% to 7% margin goal.

Good question. I don't know that we're -- we had a -- our Q4 results were below the 5.5% to 7%. I don't think that will be the case in Q1. And it's hard to extrapolate, although I understand that's all the information we gave you, a quarter of guidance to kind of extrapolate out what's going to happen throughout the year. We feel -- I guess I'd leave it as we feel good about the organic growth bar that we have on the chart. And again, if you take a look at what we've said for Q1 and figure out what our models might need to look like in Q2 through Q4, there's a very reasonable assumption set that kind of grounds that bar on the chart. Brian G. Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: And then just a final clarification, why wouldn't the restructuring benefits have increased from last quarter if you're taking another round of restructuring actions of $35 million to $85 million? I just thought maybe the savings would go up in fiscal '14 as a result.

I think the -- Brian, I'll let Forbes comment, but my thought is, is the additional restructuring that we've talked about is solely around the discussions we've had with our handset customer. And the majority of that restructuring is really to mitigate costs and mitigate what otherwise could end up being more problematic for FY '14.

Your next question comes from the line of Jim Suva with Citi.

On the question side, I have 2 questions, and I'll just give them both now so you guys can divide up how you want to talk about it. But first of all on the guidance, if I'm correct, it looks like it's a bit larger guide range than normal. I think you normally give about a $200 million. Now you're giving a $300 million range, which I think is about a 50% increase. But when we look at your handset customer, it looks like you're kind of materially removing them completely from the equation. So why a wider revenue guidance range? What else is going into that? And the second question is for those of us who's been around Jabil for a long time, you used to have some big customers, whether it be Nokia then that struggled, then BlackBerry, now we're seeing it struggles there. And it looks like Apple now is going to be an above 20% customer with BlackBerry going away. So what are you guys doing to strategically manage these large concentrations of customers? And by all means, I'm not calling for problems with Apple. I'm just saying you got to run the business and help your shareholders and mitigate risk. So can you walk us through that?

Sure, Jim. Let me take your last question first and then Forbes and I can kind of tag team the guidance. So yes, it's -- there are certain variables outside of our control at times, and it's incumbent on management to act when certain variables occur. I -- Apple is a large customer. Ideally, and one of the things that management's working towards is, is to further diversify our company. Our objective and our goal over the longer period of time is to have no 10% customer. I think it will take us a bit of time to get there. But I would also comment on the fact that we feel very comfortable with Apple as a customer. Again, they're announced at the end of the year as what percentage they were for FY '13. I think unfortunately, when we look at a company like a Nokia or a BlackBerry, unfortunately, they've had some strategic issues of their own. I feel very, very comfortable that Apple is sound as a corporation and they're an outstanding customer. So although I'd like to see no particular customer being more than 10% of our business and we're working hard towards that, I'm very pleased with having Apple as our largest customer. As far as the guidance, Jim, we -- Forbes mentioned it, I think I mentioned it. We're in the middle of discussions right now real time with BlackBerry. So we did not take BlackBerry down to 0 in Q1, and we're in those discussions real time. So based on the fact that there are some unknowns and there's some uncertainty around the discussions, we thought it was prudent that we offered a abnormal range of guidance for Q1. And we should be able to narrow that once we get complete in our discussions with our customer.

Your next question comes from the line of Shawn Harrison with Longbow Research.

I guess first question I wanted to address is if my math's right, you're going to generate about $700 million of free cash, give or take, next year. When should we expect, I guess, a decision or an announcement on the commentary regarding another buyback or step-up buyback? How quickly can you implement that?

Timing is TBD. I think it's a great question. Forbes and I need to have more conversation. We want to run through some more models, and then we need to have a conversation with our board. So we feel like -- we acknowledge your comment on we do feel like free cash flow is going to be strong. And let us get through some additional models, let us have some appropriate conversation with our board and we'll be back to you.

Okay. And then 2 quick clarifications. The $0.28 to $0.34 loss associated with BlackBerry, that includes restructuring offsets? And then second, do you expect all the ramp issues associated with DMS in the August quarter to be completely gone in the November quarter?

I think to your first question, that's appropriate that the red bar on Slide 13 is net of all restructuring offsets, that would be correct. I think if I understood your question, Q1 will be void of the types of program ramps we talked about in Q3 and Q4. Although that might not be 100% true, I think for purposes of modeling out the fiscal year, that's an appropriate assumption.

Okay. I guess when do those -- when should we expect those headwinds to end?

Q1.

Your next question comes from the line of Wamsi Mohan with Bank of America.

Forbes, can you share perhaps what BlackBerry was as a percent of revenue in the fourth quarter?

It was certainly north of 10% in the quarter. In my prepared remarks, I did note that our current midpoint of guidance assumes a reduction of $500 million sequentially. So they were a sizable customer.

And how much of the BlackBerry EPS hit are you assuming in Q1 of your annual number?

We have -- Wamsi, we haven't broken that out. We said $0.28 to $0.34 for the year. As Mark and I have noted, we're in discussions with the customer as we speak. So there's clearly some significant impact in Q1 depending on where we land, just given the abruptness of this change and our ability to react to the overhead that's in place in such a short time frame. Remember, we're effectively 1 month into a 3-month quarter here. So it's material, and we'll see how that shakes out as we move through the next 60 days or so.

And Forbes, if you could just talk about the linearity through fiscal '14. I mean, the headwinds of BlackBerry, is it fair to assume that, that would be concentrated in the first half of the year? So we'll see most of that hit in the first half and significantly lesser amount of hit in the second half. Is that a reasonable assumption?

Yes. That's very reasonable, yes.

And one more question on cost here. You mentioned cost overruns with respect to DMS. Could you give us some color on what those cost overruns were? And did you have associated yield issues during the ramp?

I really can't comment on that. I mean, if you look at where we ended up, I think, x Nypro and DMS, we're about 5.2%, 5.3%. We talked about our number right about 5.5 points for the quarter coming into the quarter. So the $4 million or $5 million on the scale of operation that we have is not overly material. So I can't really give much more color than that.

Okay. And last one for me. Can you talk about any view on long-term HVS margins in light of the BlackBerry news?

Much of that is going to -- it's clearly going to depend how quickly we can either redeploy the fixed cost base we have in that area during the course of fiscal '14. But certainly, as we sit today and there's a lot of work to be done and discussion to be had, but certainly, with the cost base we have as we work through this, certainly going to be well below the low end of the range that we previously provided, which was 2.5% to 3.5%. And I believe we'll see that recover in the second half of the year as we manage to take that resource out. So first half of the year, it's going to be in the point, point and a half type range, I would suggest.

One thing I think is important to think about in your modeling, our High Velocity business is in -- as we end up disengaging, if you will, with BlackBerry, the High Velocity portion of the relationship, the balance of our High Velocity business is in very good shape. And we're fairly bullish on that business as we move through FY '14. It's just the weight of the SG&A and the overhead that's problematic, and we're working on that real time as we speak.

Your next question comes from the line of Sean Hannan with Needham. Sean K.F. Hannan - Needham & Company, LLC, Research Division: So question -- actually 2 parts to a question within DMS. So just from a 100,000-foot perspective, the segment grew 9%, I think, this past fiscal year. So I think a little bit disappointing versus perhaps what your viewpoint was a few quarters ago and your general feel around the space. Can you talk about your viewpoints for continued growth or perhaps some resurgence within that segment as we look to fiscal '14? And then I've got a follow-up to that.

Sean, just to be sure Forbes and I understand your question, are you talking about the 9% sequentially Q4 to Q1? Sean K.F. Hannan - Needham & Company, LLC, Research Division: That's correct.

So you're talking about DMS going from Q4 '13 to Q1 '14 and sequentially, the math comes out to be around 9%. Is that correct? Sean K.F. Hannan - Needham & Company, LLC, Research Division: Yes. And I think that entering the year that you had some higher expectations for this group, so just looking to see what your perspective might be for '14.

Right. I'll start off, and I don't know if Forbes has anything to add. But again, when we think about DMS, DMS is made up of industrial, JDAS instrumentation, Clean Tech, our AMS services business and others. So I feel like in this market, with some of the challenges that we've had, 9% sequential growth is actually quite good. So I don't feel like I'm answering your question, but I'm really making a statement that going from Q4 '13 to Q1 '14, a 9% growth in that sector is good. Sean K.F. Hannan - Needham & Company, LLC, Research Division: Yes, Mark, sorry for the reference point and the 9%. That's more of an acknowledgment on the quarter. But I think that overall for the segment, this probably was not performing as you would hope entering the year. So just a contrast as you look into '14, what is your perspective and what is your outlook here as we stand today?

We still remain bullish on DMS. I think that -- a couple of comments I made prior. Our DMS business has been hugely successful. It's approaching -- that business is approaching a $10 billion base. I've said before that once we start to get close to a $10 billion base, I don't know that we can continue to meet our growth range of 15%. But we've done an excellent job growing that sector over the last 2, 3, 4 years. I feel good about that sector for '14. I think if we do our job correctly and continue to take great care of our customers, we'll see growth rates that are double-digit on an annual basis from '13 to '14. So overall, as we sit today, I still remain bullish on this sector, and I think that margins will end up back in the 5.5% to 7% range. Sean K.F. Hannan - Needham & Company, LLC, Research Division: That's great. And I think about a year ago, we had some yield challenges with some of the programs that we were ramping within that space. Given where we are a year later and considering the seasonality of where we are, are you facing similar yield challenges at current point in time? Or is this a little bit more abated this year?

I would say that there's no repeat of any of that type of thing now versus last year.

Your next question comes from the line of Sherri Scribner with Deutsche Bank.

I just wanted to ask sort of from a top-level perspective, and I know it's early days in terms of figuring out what you're going to do with BlackBerry. But for fiscal '14, would you expect to see your revenue grow?

Again, Sherri, I think it's a great question. We're just not -- at this point in time, we're just not going to comment on revenue. And again, we may add some color to that during our analyst meetings. But as we sit here today, we're just not going to comment on that.

Okay. But you're still comfortable with 15% growth for DMS and sort of 0 to 5% growth in the E&I segment?

My comment was, is I felt like on an annual basis going from FY '13 to FY '14, I felt like DMS would grow double-digits. So that might be something greater than 10%. And 0 to 5% for E&I seems reasonable, yes.

We have reached our allotted time for questions. I would now like to turn the call back over to management for any closing remarks.

Thank you, Susan, the operator. Thanks for joining us everyone on the call today. As Mark has mentioned a couple of times during the call, please look for your invitation to our Analyst Meeting, which will be held near the end of October, the 30, and it will be out later this week. So thank you very much for participating.

Thank you for participating in today's conference. You may now disconnect.