Good day, and welcome to the McKesson Second Quarter Earnings Call. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I'd like to turn the conference over to Craig Mercer. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Jessica. Good morning and welcome to the McKesson fiscal 2018 second quarter earnings call. I'm joined today by John Hammergren, McKesson's Chairman and CEO; and James Beer, McKesson's Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. John will first provide a business update, and then James will review the financial results for the quarter. After James' comments, we will open the call for your questions. We plan to end the call promptly after one hour, at 9:00 AM Eastern Time. Before we begin, I'll remind listeners that during the course of this call we will make forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties regarding the operations and future results of McKesson. In addition to the company's periodic, current and annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, please refer to the text of our press release for a discussion of the risks associated with such forward-looking statements. Finally, please note that on today's call, we will refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures. In particular, John and James will reference adjusted earnings, adjusted operating profit margin excluding non-controlling interests, and items excluding foreign currency exchange effects. We believe these non-GAAP measures provide useful information for investors with regard to the company's operating performance, and comparability of financial results period-over-period. Please refer to our press release announcing second quarter fiscal 2018 results for further information, and a reconciliation of the non-GAAP performance measures to the GAAP financial results. Thank you, and here's John Hammergren.

Thanks, Craig, and thanks everyone for joining us on our call. Today, we reported solid operational performance across our business as we make continued progress towards a strong finish to our fiscal 2018. For the second quarter, we achieved total company revenues of $52 billion and adjusted earnings per diluted share of $3.28, and we are reiterating our fiscal 2018 adjusted earnings range of $11.80 to $12.50 per diluted share. Before I dive into the details of the quarter, let me briefly touch upon today's announcement that Paul Julian will be retiring at the end of the calendar year. I'd like to acknowledge the tremendous contributions by Paul over the past two decades. Paul's business acumen and strategic leadership have helped us expand our market reach as well as the breadth of services and solutions we offer to our customers. His dedication and tireless commitment to our people, our customers and the industry set him apart. Starting in McKesson Health Systems, the company's distribution business for hospitals, he led many of the businesses that now comprise our Distribution Solutions segment. Paul has had a four decade career in healthcare. He has received numerous awards and throughout his career have been recognized for his many contributions. He has demonstrated exceptional character, accomplishment and leadership in the industry and in the community. I worked closely with Paul for many years and he is my friend as well as a close colleague. His perspective and insights are critical to the growth and success of McKesson, including building a deep bench of talented leaders to carry McKesson into the future. On Paul's retirement, the presidents of these businesses within Distribution Solutions will report to me. I will miss working with Paul and wish him the very best in this new chapter of his life.…

Thank you, John, and good morning, everyone. Today, we reported second quarter adjusted EPS of $3.28, which was slightly better than our previous expectations, and we are reiterating our fiscal 2018 adjusted earnings outlook of $11.80 to $12.50 per diluted share. Unless stated otherwise, the underlying assumptions that were detailed in our fourth quarter fiscal 2017 press release, and on our first quarter fiscal 2018 earnings call, are being reiterated today. I will talk in more detail about our outlook, but first let's review our results fourth quarter. GAAP earnings per diluted share from continuing operations equated to $0.01 for the second quarter. These earnings include impairment and restructuring charges of $2.60 per diluted share related to our retail pharmacy business in the UK. As we discussed on our last earnings call in July, the UK government announced additional reimbursement cuts, which were incremental to their more typical annual reimbursement reductions and to those assumed in our plan. Primarily as a result of these cuts, we have identified and started to implement initiatives to partially offset the impact of these cuts, which include approximately 190 store closures and divestitures. The resulting savings from this program are expected to more meaningfully benefit our fiscal 2019 performance. The program's total asset impairment and restructuring charges are expected to be between $650 million and $750 million. Specific to the second quarter, we recorded goodwill and other long-lived asset impairment and restructuring pre-tax charges totaling $586 million. As a reminder, these charges will impact our GAAP financial results. However, they will be excluded from adjusted earnings. Now let's turn to our second quarter adjusted earnings, which exclude the following items: amortization of acquisition-related intangibles, acquisition-related expenses and adjustments, LIFO inventory-related adjustments, gains from antitrust legal settlements, restructuring charges, and other adjustments. Turning now to…

Thank you. The question-and-answer session will be conducted electronically. And we'll first go to Robert Jones of Goldman Sachs. Robert Patrick Jones - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC: Great. Thanks for the question. James, lot of moving parts, but wanted to make sure I understood what was factored into the full year guidance today versus the previous update. So just, is it correct to assume that guidance now contemplates roughly an additional $30 million from additional UK reimbursement cuts that weren't in the previous guidance? And then, with the EIS divestiture or sale intra-quarter, is that about $35 million that you're absorbing into the full year range that's unchanged? Are those the two biggest new things that we should be thinking about in the full year guidance range?

Well, in terms of the three headwinds UK, EIS, and Rite Aid, so in the UK, I would say the figure is higher than what you were mentioning there. So, we'll update you as time goes by. With EIS, as I mentioned, feel as though the EPS impact in FY 2018 of the buyback roughly offsets what we would have benefited from EIS in our back half of the year. And for Rite Aid, you can think about the original guide that we put out of $0.20 to $0.40, effectively, we're going to have about a 10% effect of that in the balance of the fiscal year. So, hopefully that helps give you a little bit of direction around that. Robert Patrick Jones - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC: No, it does. I guess just ultimately trying to get a better sense that, there really was not a change to the core drug distribution outlook then, as we think about the previous update relative to this update? Is that a fair statement?

That's right, because, again, the three items, the UK, the EIS, and Rite Aid, obviously, two of those are embedded within the Distribution Solutions business. Those are, in essence, being offset by share count, tax rate, and FX assumptions. Robert Patrick Jones - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC: Okay. Great. And then just, John, a quick follow-up, two significant management departures announced this week. Can you talk about the process, as you think about backfilling, big shoes to fill, with Paul and Mark's departures announced this week?

Sure. As you might expect, the management team and the board have a very rigorous process of, not only talent development and talent review and sort of talent planning, but also a lot of work is done, particularly at the higher levels, in terms of succession planning. So yeah, Paul and I have worked together for an awfully long time, and one of the priorities we've had together for that entire tenure together has been the development of a very strong bench. We announced very quickly a replacement for Mark Walchirk upon his departure, and we're really pleased at, not only the contribution he's made to us over his career, but the fact that he landed in an important job, and it shows that McKesson executives are sought after and that they're well-trained and that they can take on big responsibilities. So, I think that's the good part of that news for him certainly, and we're excited that we are able to replace him, in the new combined responsibility for both our U.S. Pharmaceutical business and our Specialty business, with Nick Loporcaro. You probably met Nick on occasion on our Investor Days. Nick runs our Specialty business now, and will also have the combined responsibility for our U.S. Pharmaceutical business. And frankly, I think Nick is very well-suited for this job. He ran all of our Canadian distribution and operations businesses in Canada. He knows retail pharmacy well. He knows hospital pharmacy. He knows independence and chains. He understands the manufacturing environment. He certainly understands what we think is a significant going-forward opportunity in Specialty. So, we're excited about his leadership and what he can do for us. And as I said, it's not as if Paul was going to be here forever and we've been always thinking about how are we going to make sure that we're well positioned in the event that he decides to pursue retirement. So, I'm excited for Paul, excited for Mark and especially excited for Nick. Robert Patrick Jones - Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC: Great. Thanks for that.

Yeah.

And we'll now go to Charles Rhyee from Cowen & Company. Charles Rhyee - Cowen & Co. LLC: Great. Thanks for taking the questions. Just to follow up on the cadence in the guidance. So James, is there any – you talked about the pull forward – I'm sorry, the step up in 2Q from the manufacturer contracts. Are there any kind of step-downs in the back half of the year that we should be aware of?

Well, I would say, as you think about the progression of Q3 and Q4 and the relative contribution of those quarter to the full year, I would see Q4 generating a number of percentage points more than Q3 will. And, indeed, I commented on that, that trend pull forward into Q2 from Q3. So, I think that, hopefully, helps a little bit on the sequencing of the quarter. Charles Rhyee - Cowen & Co. LLC: Okay. That does. And then, John, you talked about moving into differential pricing. Can you comment on the progress that you've seen so far? And particularly, are you seeing any kind of pushback from clients, maybe from some of your larger ones? And maybe can you help characterize what those discussions look like? Thanks.

Thanks for the question, Charles. We have been in a consistent process with our renewals of our agreements with our customers and I think we've been quite successful. Our customer base understands that the pricing that we used 20 years ago, which were basically a brand and generic and even mostly brand if you go back that far, just doesn't work in today's environment. And having a more specific approach to pricing categories of products that are more similar to one another, we think, is better for us and, frankly, better for them as well. You're not mixing discounts between different types of products and different revenue and margin characteristics, and this provides better clarity for both of us. So, I think we've been almost universally successful in getting this accomplished, and we feel confident we will continue to do so as we finish this contract renewal cycle over the next several years. Charles Rhyee - Cowen & Co. LLC: Great. Thank you.

And we'll now move to George Hill from RBC.

Yeah. Hey. Good morning and thanks for taking the questions, and if Paul is listening, I want to wish him well, John, because I know he served you a long time. I guess, James, I would ask, is there any chance that you can quantify kind of the impact of ClarusONE and the brand drug pull forward in the quarter? And should we think of the brand drug impact is not repeatable in Q3, but ClarusONE should be a more sustainable contribution? Like, I'm just trying to make sure I have a good understanding of the cadence of the balance of the year.

Yeah in terms of the branded compensation, as I mentioned, where – we do have these timing elements from Q1 to Q2, Q3 into Q2, but for the overall year, we're not expecting a change in the branded comp that we would receive. In terms of ClarusONE and their work around the generics, we've been very pleased with how that has proceeded. I mentioned in my remarks that the NCI line reflects the progress that ClarusONE has been making at sourcing pharmaceutical at lower prices than we had expected at the outset of the year. So, our COGS are benefiting, our Walmart's colleagues COGS are benefiting from the progress that ClarusONE is making.

Okay. Then maybe my follow-up would just be a little bit nuanced. Is that the – the outperformance in the quarter, I guess, versus consensus expectations was pretty strong. Should we think of that largely as the timing of the brand contribution verses maybe what the Street might have been expecting for the year?

Yeah, that's certainly one driver of it. Obviously, tax rates has come down as well. We've updated our full year guide in that regard. And I did note that Q2's results were slightly ahead of where we had planned to be originally at the start of the year.

Okay. I appreciate the color. Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Ricky Goldwasser from Morgan Stanley. Ricky R. Goldwasser - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Yeah. Hi. Good morning and congrats on a very good quarter. So, two questions. First, John, for you. We're hearing, obviously, a lot of discussion and getting a lot of questions on Amazon. Can you just share with us your thoughts? And also, do you see opportunity for you guys to work together with Amazon if they were to enter the drug supply chain?

Thanks for the question, Ricky. To some extent, we were Amazon before it was cool to be Amazon. Now, if you think about our business model, largely it is an online order relationship. From an order processing perspective, it is very well functioning that has been in place for a long time, next-day delivery and a complete process from a logistics perspective. But it's also supported by field salespeople, return goods management, sometimes private trucking, and certainly things like controlled substance management, billions of dollars of inventory, and very significant back-office operations that reconcile the significant delta in various pricing strategies that are our manufacturer partners, both in medical supplies as well as in pharmaceuticals, rely upon with us in partnership. So, I would say, in some ways, it's very similar to what Amazon would do maybe logistically. But if you actually think about what's behind the scenes in terms of us taking credit risk, in terms of us processing invoices and processing returns, and then processing pricing on a regular basis, it's quite significant and more nuanced, perhaps, than it would appear on the surface. Clearly, we are also heavily focused on trying to make sure that our customers have the right tools and capabilities to help them with all of their – particularly in the independent side with all of their requirements in terms of patient relationships to make it more than just a transaction and make it a healthcare experience supported by a professional pharmacist that really understands the nuances of drug-to-drug interaction, understands what it means to dispense things like opioids and other products, and understands certainly the regulatory framework and the larger clinical issues that may be facing the patients that they're working with everyday. So, the easiest thing to talk about in the world of wholesaling is the logistics function. But I would say that that's probably the simplest part of our business. And clearly, we try to excel in myriad of other areas that we think differentiate us. Having said all of that, we don't take the entry of any competitor lightly and we continue to evolve our strategy so that our value to both the manufacturer and to our customers is unique and superior. Ricky R. Goldwasser - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Okay. Thank you for that. And then, just a follow-up question in terms of the guide and the progression. So, you've tightened the range on your LIFO credits. So, what are you seeing in terms of the deflationary environment? How do you think about the progression for the second half of your fiscal year? And then also, how should we think about that in the context of your Distribution operating margin goals for the fiscal year?

Well, in terms of generic deflation, as we've discussed before, ClarusONE is doing an excellent job. We're purchasing pharmaceuticals at lower prices than we'd expected when we first put the plan together. Now, again, as we've discussed, that equation of optimizing our cost of goods sold is quite separate to the economic equation on the sell side, where I mentioned in my prepared remarks that, suddenly, the environment is still competitive, but with less pricing volatility than we would have been looking at this time last year. In terms of our Distribution Solutions operating margin guide, I felt appropriate to really direct you to the lower half of that original guided range, based on the UK situation that we've been discussing at some length. And then, of course, there'll be some effect on the P&L that will impact the Distribution Solutions operating margin from Rite Aid as well as those stores transition at a yet-to-be-determined rate. Ricky R. Goldwasser - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Thank you.

We will now go to Lisa Gill from JPMorgan.

Thanks very much. I also want to add my congratulations to Paul on his retirement and we'll definitely miss him, John. First, just trying to reconcile a number of the statements that have been said today. James, you just talked about sell-side pressure continuing being less volatile, you talked about the benefit to COGS on ClarusONE. Is the expectation, as we move throughout the rest of the fiscal year, that you have to share some of that ClarusONE savings back with customers? I'm just trying to understand how do we think about ClarusONE, specifically, as we're thinking about the cadence of the quarter?

Well, I think the best way to think about it, as James mentioned a moment ago, is really in two distinct buckets. Our ability to manage our costs across the board are an important aspect of what we do, whether it's a cost of our operations and the productivity improvements we get or whether it's a cost of the goods we purchase, driving those costs down to market levels or below should be our priority, and our focus has always been to buy right and to manage right and to be efficient. The second priority is to make sure that our customers are getting the deal that they need to continue to be competitive in the marketplace. And largely, that's determined on what the market price is for products. So, we have a completely separate team that decides what we're going to sell products for from what the team is that does the buying of our activity. And we're focused on making sure that we have the right data on both sides of those operations to assure ourselves of market competitiveness, and that's what we're attempting to do and that's where the margin comes from is our ability to manage those operations with, hopefully, solid execution. So that's the way we think about it. So, the more we overachieve the ClarusONE and the more stable the market can be, then more likely it is for us to get margin expansion over time to grow our business, and that should be our priority for it (50:21) to create value.

Okay. That's helpful. And then secondly, John, you did mention in your prepared comments, talking about the opioid issue in the U.S. and talking about these media reports, over the last several years, the drug distributors have had several settlements around DEA issues, et cetera. Can you maybe just talk about what your anticipation is around opioids? Would you expect that there will be some cash flow impact, we'll see incremental settlements? Or do you think that that's largely behind you at this point and this is more of a regulatory issue rather than the states coming back to the drug distributors looking for some kind of settlement?

Well, in a larger context, not even speaking necessarily about this particular issue, when you're faced with litigation or litigation risk, you usually find opportunities to try to determine whether or not there's any real risk there or any data that would support the alleged activity or risk that you may be facing. And you trade that off against what would it cost for us to not – to eliminate that risk, and the associated potential liability of that (51:37) if you're not successful. So, I think all of those decisions are made on their own and probably in isolation from one another. Are we concerned about opioid and the continued risk and things that are going on in the marketplace? Certainly, but we're probably more focused – as I tried to mention in my conversation at the beginning here, we're more focused on solutions that we think can make a difference. Frankly, lawsuits from various parties and settlements don't solve the problem. What solves the problem is thinking in a broader context and putting the solutions in place that can actually prevent this from happening. And when I mentioned physicians at the start of this, it really is related to how they think about the prescriptions they're providing to their patients and the quantities that they're writing in those scripts. Clearly, whether the script is legitimate or not when it shows up at the pharmacy, if we use electronic prescribing, that can make a difference. And third, if we have information about the patient real-time in the workflow at the pharmacy when they're doing the rest of their adjudication of the claim if they understood that the patient recently had four other scripts filled in the last two weeks from five different pharmacies across state lines, it might give…

I agree. I appreciate your comments.

Thank you.

And we'll now go to Kevin Caliendo from Needham & Company. Kevin Caliendo - Needham & Co. LLC: Hey. Thanks for taking my call. So, another question on ClarusONE. Looking at the non-controlling interest line, it was sort of flat sequentially and for the year, your guidance implies not a significant amount of growth in that number over the course of the year. I guess my question is, is ClarusONE a growth opportunity sort of going forward, or are we sort of peaking? Is it something that can grow as we get into fiscal 2019?

Well, I think when we talk about ClarusONE, it's important to think about the two places on our P&L where it drives the benefit. So, the first place is the cost of goods sold.

And maybe I can jump in there, because the NCI is really not an indication of ClarusONE's opportunity and its growth. It is an accounting-related matter that James will address here in just a moment. But we see a great opportunity with ClarusONE, frankly. Today, it's focused primarily on generics. And as James mentioned, we actually overachieved our objectives, in terms of the results of our sourcing activity, and it's being reflected in our cost of goods. And obviously, we're pleased with that. But beyond just generics, and beyond just generics in the U.S., we think ClarusONE can grow. Walmart is very satisfied with what we've done thus far, and our ability to expand into other product categories and other geographies in partnership with Walmart, we think, will be continued opportunities for us to grow the ClarusONE relationship and thus, the impact on ClarusONE's cost of goods into our businesses and other categories. And that may or may not affect the NCI line. The NCI is really an artifact of the current construct of the generic relationships we have and the JV partnership that we have. And it's an output, basically, from that relationship, as opposed to something else will be put into this category, OTCs or something else, may not have an NCI component to them.

So, think of the cost of goods sold line as the line that receives the primary benefit from the work of ClarusONE, then the NCI line is – as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, it's fee income. So, think of that as the fees earned by ClarusONE, which is a contracting entity, in many ways. And so again, in the text, I mentioned that the future guide for the NCI line is really underpinned by the fact that, as ClarusONE continues to have more success than we originally planned for in its sourcing capabilities, then there'd be a lesser level of fee income enjoyed by ClarusONE. So, I think that's an important distinction to make between COGS and the NCI line, and then focusing on the NCI line as fee income from a contracting outfit.

And there are other things in NCI that aren't related to ClarusONE at all.

Yeah, yeah. There are multiple other drivers in the NCI line. So, those can drive volatility in any one particular quarter. Kevin Caliendo - Needham & Co. LLC: That's incredibly helpful. One just quick follow-up. You spent about $1.9 billion in acquisitions. You've highlighted them to us already. Is there any potential impact from these acquisitions in the second half of this year, or will the benefits be mostly a fiscal 2019 type of event?

Well, I think it's most likely going to fall into FY 2019. We contemplated the closure of some of these acquisitions as we provided the original guidance, and we knew that certain of these transactions were going to close. But I don't think they'll have any material impact on our FY 2018 guidance. And whatever impact we do anticipate is embedded in our reaffirmation of that guidance today. Kevin Caliendo - Needham & Co. LLC: Great. Thanks, guys, so much.

We will now go to Eric Coldwell from Baird. Eric, your line is open Hearing no response, we'll move to Erin Wright from Credit Suisse. Erin Wilson Wright - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Great. Thanks. A follow-up to the last question, I guess, can you give us an update on the performance and where we stand with some of the potential synergies and contributions from some of the recent acquisitions, like CoverMyMeds and Rexall and Biologics? And can you also speak to maybe the profit profile of some of the more recent acquisitions that you've done? Thanks.

Yeah. I'd say that our approach to the integrations of those various transactions that you note are going along nicely. We're hitting our synergy cases and so forth. So no, we're pleased. We feel as though those acquisitions fit very nicely with the strategies that we're pursuing across our organization. So, in terms of...

The margin profile...

Yeah. That...

As I say, that was going to follow more aligned with the kind of businesses that they are. So, the distribution-related businesses will have more of a distribution margin and the technology businesses, like CoverMyMeds, will have a margin rate that's much higher and much similar to the rest.

Yeah. And one further thing that I would note, going back to how we were talking about operating expenditure for the full year, multiple of those transactions, those acquisitions fall into either the retail arena or the technology arena. And in those types of businesses, you tend to have more operating expenditures as a percent of revenue than would be the norm for our traditional business.

That's in the OpEx line. Erin Wilson Wright - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay. Great. And then, I guess, a follow-up to that one as well. I mean, as you think about your capital deployment strategy and the priorities there in terms of acquisitions, I guess, do you see sort of a healthy pipeline out there, opportunities potentially in tangential businesses? And what sort of annual deal spend are – do you continue to expect at this point? Thanks.

It's probably difficult to speculate on what the annual deal spent would be. I think what's best for us to sort of reaffirm here is that we do prefer M&A. But as you know, we do this in a portfolio way. We're not afraid to do share repurchases. We talked about our share repurchases in the quarter and we clearly talked about our dividend again in this press release and we talked about M&A. The critical thing, from my perspective, is that the M&A has to make financial sense. And we focus on our long-term cost of capital and making sure that these acquisitions come in well above our cost of capital and that we get the kind of returns that are appropriate on these investments. And the answer to the other part of your question, we do have a pipeline of acquisitions that we actively work almost seemingly all the time. And sometimes, they come to be and sometimes they don't, for various reasons, but I think we're pleased there are still opportunities for us in various markets. I think we have time for one more question, Jessica.

And we'll go to John Ransom from Raymond James. John W. Ransom - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Oh, boy, I get to be last. That's better than nothing. So, thank you for squeezing me in. I'm sorry that was – I didn't mean that to be serious. Just one thing in our model that there seem to be a big sequential drop in depreciation from the second quarter. So, the EBIT number was better, but the EBITDA number was a little below our number. Can you provide some help on that number? Is this the new normal given some of the portfolio changes that you've made?

Well, perhaps, one thing to note is that as we proceeded to be close to the sale of EIS to Allscripts, that transaction closed on the first day of Q3. But in terms of the way our accounting runs, we put it as held-for-sale in Q2. So, that might be one of the items that you'd want to focus on. John W. Ransom - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: But I mean – so you are running about, what, $27 million or something in depreciation in the third – it was (1:03:05) like a $70 million drop. I'm just asking on a go-forward basis, is this the right depreciation number for the back half of the year?

Well, I wouldn't expect anything material in terms of the rate and pace of change in depreciation. But we can certainly follow up with you... John W. Ransom - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Okay.

...John, on the specifics. John W. Ransom - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: All right. Thanks so much.

All right. Thanks, John, and...

And that is all the time we have for questions today. I'll turn the conference back over to our presenters.

Thanks, Jessica, and thanks to all of you on the call for your time today. I also certainly want to, once again, say thanks to Paul Julian for nearly 25 years of friendship and 21 years here at McKesson. And I'm confident that in retirement he and I are going to continue to stay close and I wish he and Michelle (1:04:00) all the best, and his family, going forward. McKesson continues to execute against our fiscal 2018 plan and I'm excited about the opportunities ahead of us. I want to recognize the outstanding performance of our employees and their contributions to help our customers improve lives and deliver opportunities to make better health possible as most clearly demonstrated this quarter by how we came together to provide the support to those impacted by the recent natural disasters. I'll now hand the call over to Craig to review upcoming events for the financial community. Craig?

Thank you, John. I have a preview of upcoming events for the financial community. On November 7, we will present at the Credit Suisse Healthcare Conference in Scottsdale, Arizona. On December 5, we'll present at the Global Mizuho Investor Conference in New York City. And on December 6, we will present at the Citi 2017 Global Healthcare Conference in New York City. And on January 9th, we will present at the JPMorgan Healthcare Conference in San Francisco. We will release third quarter earnings in late July. Thank you and good bye.

And this concludes today's presentation. Thank you for your participation.