Good afternoon. My name is Candace, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Manhattan Associates' Fourth Quarter 2012 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, ladies and gentlemen, this call is being recorded today, January 29, 2013. I would now like to introduce Mr. Dennis Story, CFO of Manhattan Associates. Mr. Story, you may begin.

Thank you, Candace, and good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Manhattan Associates' 2012 Fourth Quarter Earnings Call. I will review our cautionary language and then, I'll turn the call over to Eddie Capel, our Chief Executive Officer. During this call, including the question-and-answer session, we may make forward-looking statements regarding future events or future financial performance of Manhattan Associates. You are cautioned that these forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, are not guarantees of future performance and that actual results may differ materially from projections contained in our forward-looking statements. I refer you to the reports Manhattan Associates files with the SEC for important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in our projections, particularly our annual report on Form 10-K for fiscal 2011 and the risk factor discussion in that report. We are under no obligation to update these statements. In addition, our comments include certain non-GAAP financial measures in an effort to provide additional information to investors. All non-GAAP measures have been reconciled to the related GAAP measures in accordance with SEC rules. You'll find this reconciliation in the schedules in the Form 8-K we submitted to the SEC earlier today and on our website at manh.com. Now I'll turn the call over to Eddie.

Thanks Dennis. Good afternoon, everyone. 2012 was a year of exceptional success in Manhattan Associates, both in the Americas and internationally. Financial results were very good, our competitive position continues to improve and customer satisfaction continue to increase across the board. We posted solid results across essentially all financial metrics for the fourth quarter and for the full year. Q4 total revenue of $95.4 million increased 14%, and adjusted earnings per share of $0.71 increased 18% over Q4 2011. Overall, I'm pleased with our financial results in all areas. However, we did see some buying hesitation based upon the lingering global macro uncertainty. And as a result, our license revenue for the quarter fell just short of our goal. License revenue for the quarter was $14.4 million, down from $16.6 million in Q4 2011. For the full year, it was $61.5 million, up 13% over 2011. We recognized 3 $1 million-plus deals in the quarter. All 3 were in the United States, and all 3 were with existing customers who saw fit to extend their partnership with Manhattan Associates. 2 of the 3 $1 million-plus deals were in the retail vertical. These 2 large retail deals to existing customers demonstrates the strength of our WM Open Systems solutions. Both customers had implemented the solution at one or more of their warehouses and have been so pleased with the results, they purchased the right to use the solution at more of their facilities. We're thrilled with the success of rolling out our WM platform and are excited by the opportunity to continue to sell additional platform-based solutions into this happy base of WM customers. All in all, we had a very solid quarter. Our competitive win rate remains strong all year. In head-to-head sales cycles against our major competitors, we won 75% of the time in Q4 and about 70% of the time in 2012 as a whole. We also had a very successful year driving improvements in customer satisfaction and continuing to deliver innovative new solutions from our research and development investments. And I'll comment on those areas following Dennis' full financial review. And as we look forward, I believe we're very well-positioned for 2013 and beyond. We're not expecting the global economy to improve materially in 2013. Nonetheless, we're optimistic about our financial outlook for the year ahead, and I'll discuss some of our exciting market opportunities after Dennis has provided the full financial update. So, Dennis?

Thanks Eddie. I will cover our results for Q4 and full year 2012, then review our 2013 guidance and then turn the call back to Eddie for our business update. For the quarter, we delivered total -- record total revenue of $95.4 million, increasing 14% and adjusted earnings per share of $0.71, grew 18% over Q4 2011 on 19% Services revenue growth. Also Q4 2012 GAAP diluted earnings per share was $0.63, increasing 26% over Q4 2011. Our Q4 results capped off a record 2012 year in revenue, earnings per share and operating cash flow. Full year total revenue was $376.2 million, growing 14% over 2011. Total revenue growth by region was solid, with Americas up 13%; EMEA, 23%; and APAC, 19%. Adjusted earnings per share was $2.82, and GAAP earnings per share was $2.56, both increasing 22%; on license and services revenue growth of 13% and 16%, respectively. And operating cash flow increased 35% for the year, totaling $75.3 million. Excluding currency impact, full year total revenue increased 15%, and adjusted earnings per share grew 18%. Foreign exchange rate variances positively impacted Q4 adjusted earnings per share growth by $0.01 and full year, $0.08. License revenue for the quarter was $14.4 million, down 13% compared to $16.6 million in Q4 2011. And as Eddie mentioned, full year license revenue was $61.5 million, increasing 13% over 2011's revenue of $54.2 million. While Q4 license revenue of $14.4 million was a solid-base license quarter, with the strong deal activity in the quarter, we were disappointed to see a number of large deals push into 2013. Nevertheless, we continue to experience solid activity in our target markets, and the demand environment continues to be quite positive. So we remain cautious and optimistic. Turning to Services revenue. Q4 was $72.3 million, up 19%…

Thanks, Dennis. Well, first, let me provide a little more detail on the deals we closed in Q4. As I discussed on the front end of the call, we recognized 3 large deals in the quarter, all with existing customers. Overall, about 35% of our full year license revenue was generated from new customers and 65% from existing customer partnerships. We're quite pleased to be able to capture 35% of our license fees for the year from new customers, which is higher than most participants in the application software space, an important validation of our platform-based strategy and organic investment in innovation driving our ability to win these new customers. For Q4, about 70% of our license fees were associated with Warehouse Management and about 30% with our other solutions. For the full year, about 65% of our license fees were tied to WMS. As is customary for us, the retail, consumer goods and logistics service provider verticals were our strongest license fee contributors and made up more than half of our license revenue for both Q4 and the full year. Now we saw some nice strength in the retail vertical, both in Q4 and during the full year. And as I think you're all aware, since most of us are participating in it, we're in the crucible of a retail revolution, really the first one in 25 years or so. The way in which consumers engage with retailers has changed. They, the consumers, have tremendous access to information on hand via smartphones and tablets. And they can get it anytime that they want. And the cost for their loyalty is the retailers' ability to offer flexible shopping choices and timely service. And for retailers to do this, they need a wealth of capabilities that few previously had. They include…

[Operator Instructions] And your first question comes from Terry Tillman with Raymond James. Terrell Frederick Tillman - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: The first question actually, Eddie, as you're talking about cautious optimism, given that there were a couple of flipped deals, larger deals in the fourth quarter, which somebody kind of always had to deal with anyways, does that actually do anything, though, to change kind of your assumptions for close rates either on just kind of more of the meat-and-potatoes business or larger deals into 2013?

Not really, Terry. Obviously, we were disappointed with a couple of deals, slipping out of the quarter in Q4. But license revenue is still decent in Q4, 3 larger deals, which meant, to use your expression, the meat-and-potatoes deals were pretty solid in Q4. You're right, there always are deals that slip from one quarter to another, for sure. But as I said, our pipeline remains solid and active. So it really doesn't change our perspective going into Q1 or for the full year 2013.

Yes, Terry, we've had -- on the mid-six-figure deals, we've had pretty good traction post 2009, good consecutive growth year-over-year 2010 forward, kind of filling in or creating an underlying foundation when we have some of these challenging quarters. Terrell Frederick Tillman - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: Okay. And I guess, Eddie, I'd be remiss if I didn't ask for an update on Distributed Order Management. How is that coming along in terms of this quarter was 30% of total license sales were non-WMS. Has this increasingly become one of the more prominent non-WMS products? And is it something that's now starting to be more pervasive where you see business every quarter with that?

Yes, certainly, we're very encouraged by the progress that we're making with Distributed Order Management, Terry. It is becoming an active, certainly a very active product in our portfolio. We're seeing nice -- very nice growth in the business, not the largest component of our business, for sure. But certainly, the growth is impressive and so on. Now as we see this continued, revolution in the retail industry an omni-channel, if you want to phrase it that way, Order Lifecycle Management, Distributed Order Management certainly is right front and center in the middle of that phenomenon. As I mentioned in my prepared comments, retailers are seeking to get a single view of the customer across all of the sales channels that they serve to get -- trying to leverage all of the inventory across their network in every node of fulfillment. And DOM is the solution that it gives retailers the ability to have that single view and execute across the network. Combined with this new offering that we announced at NRF, we're calling Store Commerce Activation, where we're driving some of the frankly more traditional execution capabilities that look a good bit like distribution center capabilities into the stores so that you can get a combination of leveraging the inventory assets that retailers already have in their stores, leveraging the assets that they have in their people to do 2 things: Provide very timely and flexible service to their customers but also frankly, take some of the edge off of the peaks during the real busy seasons and smooth out the demand across the distribution centers. So a pretty interesting offering for sure.

Yes. And I would add to that, that's what gets me a little bit excited about that, Terry is, is that's the money side of the supply chain. We've always been great at driving cost efficiency, but the Store Commerce Activation, DOM, et cetera, that really drives at the heart of revenue and assisting customers and prospects with monetizing their supply chain networks. So the other thing that I would also point out, we've always been a large seller of WM deals. What's kind of unique in terms of catalyst in the market is, is we're in this multiyear -- the market's down, the globe continues to struggle with the macro, which is -- it creates caution. But my optimism is, is that it's driving a lot of our target markets into not just the omni-channel dynamics but also legacy replacement of old systems, very old systems. And that was kind of the earmark of some of our larger WMS deals in 2012. Terrell Frederick Tillman - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: Got it, got it. And my last question just relates to competitive dynamics. I mean, there was definitely a notable transaction that occurred with one of your traditional merchandising planning competitors and then supply-chain execution competitor joining forces. Any commentary about what your field salesforce or just what you may have seen at all initially in the fourth quarter? And any perspective into 2013?

Yes, yes. Thanks, Terry. Well, to be honest, the transaction is pretty fresh. So we haven't really seen the impact of that transaction yet in the field from a competitive perspective. I don't think our salesforce are really having to particularly respond to it. Of course, we continue to remain very encouraged by our position. The fact that we have a very high level of research and development investment as it compares to the number of products that we offer and the number of products that we have to support, we think gives us the ability to drive significant innovation into our solutions. That's what we're about, driving innovation and differentiation for our customers to deliver value for their business.

Yes. So let me piggyback on that. I really -- I'll focus on Manhattan. I think the platform strategy that we embarked upon and our organic growth strategy is a key differentiator in the marketplace. What gives me kind of affirmative data points is our competitive win rate, and we're going to go focus on keeping that competitive win rate up, as well as continuing to drive customer satisfaction. So I think our relative competitive position based on our win rates, this multiyear cycle focus is going to continue to improve. What gets me excited is we got 2,400 associates focused on growth and customer satisfaction. To Eddie's point, we're investing in innovation. We got a lot of great market catalyst happening out there. So I think we're well-positioned.

And your next question comes from Yun Kim with Janney Capital Markets.

So Eddie, can you just talk about whether any of those 3 seven-figure deals were legacy replacement deals? And just the overall self pipeline for such large replacement deal for 2013 and whether or not you still expect large deal activity for the year to be driven by them?

Yes. So I think -- in reverse order, we still certainly are seeing significant legacy replacement cycles. And it is that time of the product life cycle for Warehouse Management, transportation management and certainly, these Order Lifecycle Management products as well, given the e-commerce business and the multichannel business, the first systems are really put in about 10 years ago at the turn of the century and as e-commerce becomes a much more mainstream part of retailers business and so forth, it's time for a refresher of those systems and frankly, a more integrated approach to multichannel retailing. So we're seeing that, that phenomenon as well. We expect it to continue during 2013. In terms of the -- without going into too much -- too many specifics around Q4 large deals, a couple of them certainly were legacy replacements. And as I pointed out, they were very -- we were very pleased with the fact that it was an expanded relationship that we developed with those particular customers. Essentially, they tried one site, it was very successful compared with their old legacy system, and they chose to expand the relationship. So very pleased with that.

If I don't mind asking, how long did it take from the initial sign of the smaller deal and the rollout of the pilot before they engaged with you guys in terms of signing up much larger deal this quarter?

Yes, yes. I'm not sure that I have those exact numbers off the top of my head. I would tell you that a typical implementation cycle for a pretty sizable distribution center, now bearing in mind when you're doing legacy replacement or any kind of replacement, there's generally not a super rush, right, to get it implemented. But it's generally about 7, 8, 9 month cycle from initial signing to go live. And then there's usually a period of making sure that the customer gets the results that they expect.

There's not a single bright line answer for that, Yun. We've seen some customers where basically, their first buy was WM for their e-commerce. And now, they've had great success and they're rolling the platform out, replacing legacy on the bricks-and-mortar side of the equation, so, and vice versa.

Okay, great. And then, Eddie, with what you call the retail evolution going on out there in your target market with a lot of the retailers and CPG companies focusing on omni marketing, mobile and whatnot, do you expect your R&D efforts to focus more on revenue-generating products like the one you just released, I forget the name, still a commerce activation product?

To some extent, Yun. Now the beauty of our platform strategy is, first of all, we have a significant part of our research and development organization that's sort of horizontally focused on the platform, the architecture, the technology to support the innovation across each of the kind of specific offerings, number one. And number two, since we are developing on a common platform and a common set of technologies, we can, first of all, from a personnel perspective, move people around from product to product quite readily. But also, we get the benefit of essentially reusing capabilities that have been developed for one solution for another particular functional capability. So the answer to your question is yes, but it's not a student body left shift of personnel from one product to another. But certainly, we're enjoying the opportunity, as Dennis pointed out, to be on the revenue generation side of the supply chain, that's newer for us. Creates the opportunity for us to have different conversations with different people in our customer organizations and create some real value for our customers.

Okay, great. And then a quick question for you, Dennis. I don't know if you actually said it or not, I'm still picking notes from your comments. But do you feel revenue balance declined sequentially in the quarter, which was the first time it happened sequentially in Q4 in a long time? Can you just comment on that?

Yes, it was -- primarily, it was just cash collection, Yun, where we recognized revenue on maintenance renewals on a cash-collected basis. And maintenance is about 90% of our deferred revenue, and we just had just an awesome quarter in terms of catch-up on collections.

Okay. And so that's really a function of strong Q3 collection or do you expect Q1 collection to be strong?

Strong, Q4, strong Q4. Because what happened -- we'll have catch-up revenue recognition in any quarter because we amortize the cash. Once we receive the cash, we amortize it in. So if the customer pays on time, there's no lumpiness by quarter. But if a customer delayed, say, for 6 months and in the third quarter, they pay, you get 6 months of revenue recognized in that quarter. So it creates some lumpiness from quarter-to-quarter. We had just a very strong collection Q4.

Got it. So should we expect Q1 deferred revenue to be more or less flat or maybe even down?

That's probably reasonable.

And we have no further questions at this time. I'll turn the call back to our presenters.

Very good. Well, thank you, Candace, and thank you, everybody, for joining us this afternoon. We appreciate your time, and we'll look forward to speaking to you again in right around 90 days from now. So thank you very much, and have a good evening.

And this concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.