Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to KKR's Fourth Quarter 2017 Earnings Conference Call. During today's presentation, all parties will be in a listen-only mode. Following management's prepared remarks, the conference will open for questions. As a reminder, this call is being recorded. I would like to hand the call over to Craig Larson, Head of Investor Relations for KKR. Craig, please go ahead. Craig Larson - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you, Glenda. Welcome to our fourth quarter 2017 earnings call. Thanks for joining us. As usual, I am joined by Bill Janetschek, our CFO; and Scott Nuttall, our Co-President and Co-COO. We'd like to remind everyone that we'll refer to non-GAAP measures on the call, which are reconciled to GAAP figures in our press release, which is available on the Investor Center section at kkr.com. The call will also contain forward-looking statements which do not guarantee future events or performance. Please refer to our SEC filings for cautionary factors related to these statements. And like previous quarters, we have posted a supplementary presentation on our website that we'll be referring to over the course of the call. This morning, we reported our Q4 and full year 2017 results. The fourth quarter was a strong finish to a strong year for us. Let's begin by turning to page 2 of the supplement. We reported after-tax distributable earnings of $427 million for the quarter, or $0.52 on a per adjusted unit basis, and for the full year after-tax DE came in at $1.6 billion, or $1.91 per adjusted unit. Fourth quarter and full year after-tax economic net income came in at $415 million and $2 billion, which translates into $0.48 and $2.38 of after-tax ENI per unit, respectively. We had a record fee-related earnings quarter with $238…

Thank you. And our first question comes from the line of Glenn Schorr from Evercore ISI. Your line is now open.

Hi. Thanks a lot. Just I appreciate all the thinking on the conversion thought process. The part – my words, not yours – it feels like you'd actually like to do it if you knew you'd get to two turns. I'm curious on how you finish the thought process now, because you clearly did a lot of work to analyze and I think the world is at a similar point now. How does the final decision get made? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Hey, Glenn. This is Bill. That final decision, once we decide what to do, will be communicated to you. We just thought it was important to let you know that we're seriously considering it and have actually talked to our board members and they are talking to advisors to make sure that we make the right decision. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Yeah. We'll have an update for you next call, Glenn, but we just wanted to share that we're working actively with the board in analyzing all the trade-offs.

Okay, fair. It was worth a shot. One quickie, on the $8.5 billion raise you mentioned that $3 billion is coming from KKR balance sheet. Is that your best way to ensure better diversification of the balance sheet going forward? And for us, analysts and unitholders, is it the same economics whether you're adding on pieces to the balance sheet one piece at a time or a slug into a fund? Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Yeah. I think in that last question, correct, you could think of it as, either way, we're making an investment in an underlying company, whether it's coming through a fund or, in this situation, alongside a couple strategic partners in more of a bespoke partnership. So yes, we end up with the same kind of net exposure to the underlying investment, but maybe I could step back for a second. I mean we have talked in the past a little bit about this core investment strategy. And the background is that we see a lot of opportunities where we find great businesses that we like, that are stable. We'd like to own them for a long time, but it's a bit lower risk and a bit lower return than what would fit into a traditional fund that we'd be normally managing. So historically we've passed on those opportunities. After doing that several times, we kind of asked ourselves why we didn't have a proper home for them. And so we created this strategy to be able to actually pursue those opportunities. So we'll be making a large investment off the balance sheet, $3 billion incremental, to the USI investment and then we found some like-minded partners, just two, to invest alongside us in this. And so that's where the $5.5 billion comes from that pays both a management fee and a carry. So implicitly the way you should think about it is it's an investment that we'll be making off the balance sheet that will increase our equity exposure over time, and we'll get some incremental economics from the third-party capital. And importantly, perhaps in terms of the thought of monetizing content already here, we're adding no direct head count in order to do this.

Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Chris Harris from Wells Fargo. Your line is now open.

Yes. Thanks. Hey, guys. Why is the BDC structure viewed as a good way to grow private credit? I understand the tax benefits, but the vehicles themselves have had kind of a mixed track record with respect to performance and many of the public ones trade at discounts to book value. So if you can elaborate a little bit on that, it would be great. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Sure, Chris. It's Scott. Happy to do that. Look, I think the way that we look at it is having BDCs as part of our Private Credit platform makes a lot of sense. The underlying investments that we're making in that strategy tend not to have the duration that you'd seen in a lot of our other asset classes. So a lot of the assets may have a two, three year type duration, maybe a bit longer. And so, as you know, we do have private funds that have their typical episodic nature. We raise them. We invest them. They run off. But what happens as a result of the relatively short duration of the assets, you end up with teams on the road raising capital continuously, virtually. And so as we've thought about what's a proper funding structure over time for that underlying activity, having more permanency to the capital base makes a lot of sense to us to supplement the more episodic funds. The other thing I'd say is with the permanent capital structure you can be more creative and kind of raise a longer-term financing probably at a lower cost, all else equal. So that's another reason we think we can use that structure to drive better risk-adjusted net returns to investors over time. You are right. There at times when BDCs trade at a premium to book and there are times when they trade at a discount. The key, in our experience, is to generate the required dividend yield to investors to earn the right to have them trade at a premium. And that's our primary focus. But you'll see us scaling both the permanent parts of the Private Credit funding model and the more temporary. William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: And remember, Chris, from a KKR point of view, we are going to be the manager of these assets. So there is nothing better than to bring on permanent capital, because we will be managing these assets for those investors. And let's not forget. As we continue to grow our Capital Markets business, from an origination point of view that dovetails quite well into trying to grow our credit strategy.

Okay. Thank you. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Craig Siegenthaler from Credit Suisse. Your line is now open. Craig Siegenthaler - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC: Thanks. Good morning. So I just wanted to come back to C-Corp. If one of your partnership peers converted, re-rated higher, was added to some indexes, I mean this might take a little bit of time, but I imagine this would really probably help your case to convert. Or are you guys really thinking about your decision here more in isolation? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Craig, this is Bill. Again, we're just asking you to stay tuned. We mentioned in prepared remarks that we're seriously considering this. We'll take into account all variables going forward and we'll report back certainly next quarter. Craig Siegenthaler - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC: Got it. Okay. And then just coming to the Capital Markets business then, really, really strong year. From a modeling perspective, what's the right way to think about the run rate here? And I'm looking at 2018, just with how much growth you've seen, but also thinking about where we are in the cycle and also thinking about future growth here. William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Well, on that point, it's tough to give you a run rate. The only thing that I could share, and I'll let Scott chime in a little bit later, is that the model has expanded both from third-party investors as well as geographically. You could see that for 2017. And the $440 million number, roughly 23% of that came from third-party. That was a nascent business as far as KCM was concerned a few years ago. In addition, when you look at that $440 million, 50% of it…

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Bill Katz from Citigroup. Your line is now open.

Okay. Thank you very much for taking the questions and I appreciate the brevity of your remarks, very good stuff. So first question is just in terms of payout policy, just given your growth, diversification, increasing growth coming from more permanent, longer-dated vehicles, wondering how we should be thinking about the $0.17 quarterly dividend. And then how might that change as you're talking through the C-Corp conversion? And obviously we'll wait until second quarter to get that as well, but just thinking what might be the shift there. William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Good question, Bill, and obviously this goes hand-in-hand. Typically what we would have done if we weren't contemplating going C-Corp is probably on this call we would give you a new number for 2018. But because they go hand-in-hand, once we decide what we are going to do from a corporate structure, we will then communicate what the new distribution policy or the new dividend number will be.

Okay. That's helpful. And then just as a follow-up, appreciate the momentum of the franchise. Maybe on a bit more concrete basis as you think out for 2018, 2019, where do you see the greatest opportunity to gather assets, apart from leveraging Franklin Square? Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Why don't you take...? Craig Larson - KKR & Co. LP: Bill, it's Craig. Why don't I start with that? I think in terms of episodic funds, if we look in Private Markets, the list would include our Infrastructure, European Private Equity and Energy Income and Growth strategies, and in Public Markets would include Lending strategies in the U.S. and Europe. And this would be in addition to areas where we look to raise capital on a more continuous basis, so that would include the CLO business, the leverage credit platforms in the U.S. and Europe, and you mentioned the BDCs as well as the hedge fund partnerships. And, of course, any new strategic partnership activity would be incremental to this. And from a management fee standpoint, it's worth remembering, back to page 4, that we have about $20 billion of capital that's in our AUM that pays management fees on an as-invested basis. So that will transition as we make investments and it will also begin generating management fees as that investment occurs. And then you mentioned FS correctly. And we'll see a $14 billion increase once that – on that pending transaction in fee paying in the $120 million of revenues associated with those assets. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Yes, just a couple of thoughts to add to that, Bill. I mean we remain in a robust fundraising environment. If you really just step way back from the quarter or the year, over the last four years, we've raised over $100 billion. And that was during a period of time, if you think about it, where we had a lot of young businesses, Fund I, Fund II type strategies, and also while we were growing our investor base by investing in our sales team. So suffice it to say we feel good about where we can go from here as we keep generating investment performance.

Okay. Thank you very much for taking the questions. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Brian Bedell from Deutsche Bank. Your line is now open.

Great. Thanks very much. Just one on the C-Corp, I appreciate the review. Is it technically possible for you to do that for 2018, or even if your decision -decides to move to that, is it more like a – would it have to be like a 2019 and forward event? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: From a technical point of view, if we decided to do it, it would happen and could happen in 2018.

Okay. Great. And then maybe just broadly on the Capital Markets strategy. Thanks for all that color, Scott, on that. That was helpful. As you think about – your business has definitely evolved pretty substantially in a lot of different ways over the last few years, including the Capital Markets. And as you think about evolving it over the next say, three to five years, how should we be thinking about the growth of that Capital Markets business in terms of how it will compete with the investment banks? Given 23% is now third-party, could that third-party component of that business say, three to five years out, be half or more and compete – be much more in the league with the traditional investment banks? Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: It's a good question, Brian. I'd say, first off, we're not trying to compete with the investment banks. They've got a lot more resources and a lot more capital than we do. What we're really focused on is having our Capital Markets business help facilitate the activities of our investment business and help drive returns in our investment business. So when we're looking at a new transaction, we'll speak for equity and debt and help drive the syndication of those, so that ends up in the right hands and we can maximize economics and control for the firm. It also allows us to do transactions we otherwise could not do. The example last year of the European infrastructure transactions that were two or three (33:07) transactions, when our entire fund size was $3 billion. So we're able to actually complete transactions and control companies by using that model. So, for the most part, our activities are focused around facilitating the investment business of the firm. It also…

Great. That's super helpful. I'll get back in the queue for a follow-up. Thanks. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thanks, Brian.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Robert Lee from KBW. Your line is now open. Robert Lee - Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc.: Thank you and good morning, everyone. Sorry to beat the C-Corp horse again, but just kind of curious. Maybe, Bill, as part of your internal conversations about this, is there any thought or benefit that you guys see to changing over to a Method I accounting as part of any potential corporate structure change? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: No, Rob. It's interesting and it's a good point. We actually kicked that around. So, again, if we decide to change our corporate structure, we're thinking about a lot of things as we're going to be reaching out to potentially new investors. And so that would address reporting. And one of the things that we did take a look at is whether or not Method I as opposed to Method II was what I would say less volatile. And suffice to say that the decision was made that we're going to continue to use Method II, because that really shows the true economics and the true mark-to-market and the real reality of how our business is performing. Robert Lee - Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc.: Okay. Great. And then maybe shifting gears, I'm just interested in maybe getting an update or your thoughts on – you have this joint venture with FS coming up soon. But beyond the BDCs, more broadly, could you maybe give us a sense of what other opportunities you see with FS and how that's kind of dovetailing or maybe spearheading some of your initiatives into, say, the high net worth channel or the retail channel? Just kind of where you envision that heading. Scott C.…

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Patrick Davitt from Autonomous Research. Your line is now open.

Hi. Good morning, guys. One more on the C-Corp and hopefully that will be the last one. The other comps seem to be pretty concerned about the current shareholders and felt like their current shareholders actually like the structure, which you don't seem to be as concerned about. Is there something different about the makeup or opinion of your shareholder base that maybe is thinking about this trade-off differently? Craig Larson - KKR & Co. LP: Patrick, it's Craig. I guess I don't have a point of view as it relates to our peers and the nature of their shareholder base. But I think suffice to say that this is a topic that has been written about by you and your peers for some time now. And I've never thought of our shareholders as being shy in sharing their points of view with us. But in terms of whether there is a difference, tough to comment on. But, of course, we're taking into account all factors as we think through a potential conversion.

Okay. Thanks. And just as my quick follow-up, could you give us an idea of how much of the 43 million National Vision shares are actually in the funds? Because it's a pretty big needle-mover now given how much it was up. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Virtually all. Craig Larson - KKR & Co. LP: Yes. I think of that as a fund investment, Patrick.

So there's not a lot of co-invest from third-parties in that 43 million number? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Not that I'm aware of.

Okay. William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: But honestly I don't have that information in front. But when you think about KKR's ownership, to be clear, National Vision is held in a fund, not on the balance sheet, if that's what you're driving at. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: There's a GP commitment to that fund, but there's no co-invest in addition to that.

Great. Thanks. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Gerald O'Hara from Jefferies. Your line is now open.

Great. Thanks. Perhaps pivoting a little bit in the other direction from the C-Corp conversation, Bill, maybe you could talk a little bit about how the change in corporate tax could impact your earnings, recognizing obviously revenue mix is going to be a factor, but for the next 12 months or looking out over the next couple of years in the current structure? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: In the current structure, when you take a look at what we historically reported, our effective tax rate ranges anywhere in between 5% and 10%. And that was with a corporate rate of roughly 35%. Under the current structure, if we were to remain a PTP, because the corporate rate went from 35% down to 21%, that 5% to 10% would be discounted from a corporate level and so that would probably then step down to anywhere in between 3% and 8%.

Okay, helpful. And maybe as a follow-up just with respect to the balance sheet composition, just kind of looking quarter-over-quarter, cash looks like it's down a little bit, energy up, other up significantly. And apologies if I missed this or just didn't catch it, but can you perhaps talk a little bit about what's really driving that other quarter-over-quarter for up to over $700 million, if I have my numbers here right? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Sure. And specifically we're talking about page 12, the other.

That's correct. William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: And what's in that number is liquid securities that don't actually fall naturally into any category up above. And so suffice to say that they are all liquid securities and that this number moves up from time to time as we try to actively manage our portfolio. So it wouldn't be sitting in cash, but again, in liquid securities. And I would expect that number to be somewhat down next quarter based upon the activity we're seeing in the first quarter.

Okay. Thank you for taking my questions.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Andrew Disdier from Sandler O'Neill. Your line is now open. Andrew Paul Disdier - Sandler O'Neill & Partners LP: Hey. Good morning, gentlemen. So to piggyback on Patrick's question before, just thinking about some of the visible fee activity thus far in 2018, would you be able to provide any comments or detail around realization activity you've seen this quarter? And thinking from a closed transaction perspective and then also announced but not yet closed, so Pets, Aricent, PetVet, and then Unilever spreads on the Capital Markets side, kind of... William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: I'll bifurcate that question into two separate answers. One has to do with fee income and the other really has to do for 2018 what sort of performance income and what sort of balance sheet activity has taken place. And so as we stand here today, assuming all the investments that have been announced close, the cash generation from an income point of view is going to be roughly $175 million. Away from that, we generally don't talk about fee income. If you look at our fee-related earnings, you could assume that certainly the management fees are on somewhat of a run rate basis. More specifically to your question, embedded in that fee income is Capital Markets activities. We're not going to give you a number quarter-to-quarter, somewhere intra-quarter, what the final quarter number would be, other than to just say that the Capital Markets arm of the KKR enterprise is off to a very nice start, like the deployment and the monetization so far to-date. Andrew Paul Disdier - Sandler O'Neill & Partners LP: Got it, understood. And then on the $20 billion of capital commitments and the associated 100…

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Michael Carrier from Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Your line is now open.

Hey. Good morning. This is Mike Needham in for Mike Carrier. First, just on core investment strategy, can you provide a few more details on the $8.5 billion, or the management fees and carry rate on the third-party stuff? And then, like, return targets and when fees ultimately show. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Sure, Mike, Scott. Let's break it down. So, first, you've got – of the $8.5 billion, $3 billion is coming from our balance sheet, so third-party capital is $5.5 billion. Return expectations on that would be in the teens. So not kind of high teens to 20% plus you'd expect in PE, more like mid-teens, give or take, in terms of return profile. The way we think about it is if the balance sheet investment generates mid-teens, because obviously we're not burdened by the management fees and carry ourselves, and then we can generate economics on the third-party capital, we think we can blend that mid-teens to a 20% or so total ROE figure on the $3 billion commitment to the strategy. The third-party economics we're not going to share publicly but they are in line with what you'd normally see in a fund construct for core funds with some innovations that we've built in that we're not going to share.

Okay. All right. That sounds good. The only other one I had was on incentive fees for Public Markets. They were it seemed like a little bit high at $65 million. Is that unusually high or does it just kind of reflect the progress you've made in that business, like a reasonably good year for the hedge funds? So is like that $65 million kind of in line with what you expect going forward? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Yeah. Michael, this is Bill. As we said historically, when you think about the strategic partnerships that we have in certain hedge funds, the incentive fees typically land in either June, with PAAMCO Prisma Capital that we have invested with them, and all of the other hedge funds come in, in December. So what you'll actually see is, really from an incentive fee point of view, no activity in the first and third quarter, some activity again just around PAAMCO Prisma in the second quarter, with all the other strategic partnerships, and there are five in total. And that's what generated that $60 million plus this quarter. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Yes, I'd say the standout – Marshall Wace had a particularly good year.

Okay. Thanks. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Alex Blostein from Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open. Alexander Blostein - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC: Hey. Good morning, everybody. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Good morning. Alexander Blostein - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC: I wanted to ask you guys around capital management, just to follow up on one of the earlier questions. So I hear you on the dividend, obviously kind of depending on C-Corp. But I guess if I look at the exit activity, clearly picking up. Accrued carry I think is up 10-ish-percent quarter-over-quarter. Some of the larger funds, whether it's NAXI or Asia II, are both doing extremely well. So I guess as we think about the fact that we're still kind of early in the realization cycle for you guys, anything new you're thinking about in terms of retaining capital on balance sheet or returning it back to shareholders? Whether it's buybacks or more sort of a systematic special, or is that all sort of all on the table pending C-Corp conversion? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Well, it's on the table pending C-Corp conversion, but when you think about the way we manage our business is a lot different than the other alternative asset managers. And we made that conscious decision back in 2015 to pay out a regular way distribution that was predictable and taking the excess to do two things. One is to continue to put that capital back on our balance sheet and compound it, and from time to time use some of that capital in the way of buybacks. And so I don't think anything has changed and probably won't change if we go to a C-Corp but that's... Scott…

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Michael Cyprys from Morgan Stanley. Your line is now open. Michael J. Cyprys - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. I just wanted to ask about the interest income and dividends in the quarter. They just looked a little bit more elevated at $90 million, a little above the pace that we've seen in recent quarters. Just curious what drove that and how we should think about a good run rate pace going forward from here? William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Hey, Michael. What I would use as a run rate is anywhere in between $65 million to $85 million, only for the fact that there are certain anomalies in each and every quarter. And you are right. What ended up happening in this particular quarter you saw an elevation on the dividend. We had a couple of recaps that were done in the funds and those economics flowed through to us vis-à-vis our carry as dividend income. And likewise, on the balance sheet, to the extent that we have our ownership interest in the fund or we might have a co-invest it showed up in that number. But, again, I would say the run rate number should again be anywhere in between that $65 million and $85 million. Michael J. Cyprys - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Got it. Thanks for that. And just as a quick follow-up here, just on the balance sheet this quarter, can you talk about how much was deployed and monetized from the balance sheet? Just trying to get a better understanding in terms of the moving pieces all around the balance sheet. Thanks. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Sure.…

Thank you. And we have a follow-up question from the line of Brian Bedell from Deutsche Bank. Your line is now open.

Great. Thanks for taking my follow-up. Some of this is answered. It was around the core investment strategy. I guess, more broadly, just thinking about the pace of growth of fee paying AUM, first, if you could comment on sort of a range or a view of that $20 billion of commitments turning on and generating fees over the next couple of years. And then a little bit more broadly, the potential sort of long-term growth outlook for the strategic partnership strategy and the core investment strategy. And maybe just a little bit of differentiation of how you think about those two different areas separately. William J. Janetschek - KKR & Co. LP: Hey, Brian. This is Bill. I'll take the first one and then I'll pass the second one off to Scott. And when you look at the $20 billion of capital commitment that's yet to earn fees, away from the core – and Scott had mentioned earlier the breakdown is $5.5 billion of capital was actually raised and we're going to get paid a fee as that capital is deployed. So set that aside, we're talking about the remaining $15 billion, again, in Private Markets and Public Markets. And we would assume that capital, again, at roughly 100 basis points, will get deployed anywhere between years two, three and four. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: I'd say on the second question, we do look at them a bit differently. So when we say strategic investor partnerships, what we tend to be talking about there are very long-term partnerships with recycling, so that we have an ability to recycle capital, plus a percentage of the profits for extended period of time. And the expected duration of those partnerships is somewhere in the 20 to 30-year range,…

Yes. That's extremely helpful. Just maybe the long-term growth prospect of this, as you think about this type of business and the attractiveness of this structure, say, again over the next say three years, is it something that you think you can enter in with more partners and look to extend that substantially? Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Yes. I'd say a slightly different answer for each. I'd say core, we are going to be deploying that capital over the next three to five years and before it probably makes sense to create more dedicated capital. We'll see how the deployment pace looks. Not to say we wouldn't do other things alongside or expand that, but the base case expectation is that money will get invested over the next several years and then we'll figure out where to go from there and hopefully scale the strategy from that point forward. Strategic partnerships is something that we want to continue to scale on a more continuous basis. They take a long time. They are highly complex. They tend to be several billion dollars in size. And so at any given moment, we're working on several of those with close partners of the firm. So that's much more continuous in nature versus core.

That's great. That's helpful. Thank you so much. Scott C. Nuttall - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you.

Thank you. And that concludes our question-and-answer session for today. I would like to turn the call back over to Craig Larson for closing remarks. Craig Larson - KKR & Co. LP: Thank you, everybody. We look forward to giving you an update next quarter.