Welcome to the M&T Bank Fourth Quarter and Full-Year 2017 Earnings Conference Call. It is now my pleasure to turn the floor over to Don MacLeod, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Scott, and good morning. I would like to thank everyone for participating in M&T's fourth quarter and full-year 2017 earnings conference call both by telephone and through the webcast. If you have not read the earnings release we issued this morning, you may access it along with the financial tables and schedules from our website, www.mtb.com, and by clicking on the Investor Relations link and then on the Events and Presentations link. Before we start, I would like to mention that comments made during this call might contain forward-looking statements relating to the banking industry and to M&T Bank Corporation. M&T encourages participants to refer to our SEC filings, including those found on Forms 8-K, 10-K, and 10-Q, for a complete discussion of forward-looking statements. Now, I would like to introduce our Chief Financial Officer, Darren King.

Thank you, Don, and good morning, everyone. Before we get to the results, I want to take a moment to recognize and celebrate the story, career, and life of our late Chairman and CEO, Robert Wilmers or as we all knew him Bob. Simply stated, Bob was our leader, our mentor, and most of all our friend. As a leader, Bob's track record was unparalleled. Under his stewardship, M&T grew from its position as the fourth largest bank in Buffalo to a top 20 bank in the country, which is an accomplishment in and of itself. To do so without suffering a quarterly loss and with the highest stock price appreciation amongst the 100 largest U.S. banks in existence in 1983 and which are still around today, says it all. He did the same thing with his vineyard in Bordeaux and was on a similar path with the newspapers in the Berkshires. Whether in civic or business life, Bob was truly a leader. Bob’s approach to mentoring was not what one might call traditional. Rather than fill you with advice about how to handle certain situations, Bob peppered you with questions. There were times I thought Bob only knew one word, why. Over time, you learned to ask questions of yourself from many angles, trying to anticipate where Bob might take the conversation. In fact, he pushed each of us to be better. Another favorite question of Bob's was who is the best at fill in the blank? No matter what your answer, you knew that there was a new benchmark against which your performance was going to be measured. As a friend, Bob was extremely loyal. Once you earned his trust and respect, you had a friend for life, no matter what circumstances you might encounter. Bob liked to…

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Steven Alexopoulos with JPMorgan. Your line is open.

Hey, good morning, Darren.

Good morning, Steven.

I want to start – can you talk about – give more color on the C&I loan growth? You talked about paydowns being elevated, maybe can you quantify that? And what's your view how tax reform impacts loan growth in 2018?

Okay. And we'll go through those in turn. So C&I loan growth, when we look at the fourth quarter and we talked about this on the third quarter call, fourth quarter originations were very strong, best quarter of the year, and when we entered the quarter, the pipeline at the end of the third quarter was as strong as we had seen all year. So those two things made a lot of sense to us. What we've been seeing really throughout or had seen throughout 2017 was elevated paydowns in both CRE and C&I. When we have looked specifically at what we saw in C&I, we saw the increased activity largely from private equity whereby we had customers who were selling all our parts of their business because asset prices have been pretty inflated given the abundance of capital chasing deals. And so that activity was a little higher than what we have historically seen, probably 5 to 10 percentage points higher than we had historically seen in terms of payoffs and paydowns as a result of that. So when we talk about that as a wildcard that's kind of where our thinking is, how much that continues, at what pace that continues a little bit hard to predict. When you think about the impact of tax reform on lending and loan growth in 2018, it’s hard to believe that it won't have a positive impact. To me and to us, the question is more the timing of how quickly that happen? I think if you – everyone is I believe trying to figure out what the impact of the tax reform means to them. For many businesses, what it means for their cash position, for their repatriating cash? How much of that cash they're going to use? What their current capital structure looks like, whether they're over the 30% or 35% limit on interest deductibility? So there's a number of factors that I think people are just going to work their way through. And for us, we're not expecting a big up tick in the next quarter, but we expect as the year goes on and as the GDP growth takes hold and employment stays where it is or potentially gets better that you'll see some of that demand start to pick up as the year goes on.

Okay. That's helpful. If I could ask you one other question on deposits, you guys have really put up one of the lowest beta as we've seen in the industry, give us some color on the lack of deposit pressure or your commercial customers just not demanding more? Is there any pent up pressure where we might see a larger adjustment at some point? Thanks.

Yes. So I guess a couple things on our deposit and overall cost of funds. You need to keep in mind that we’ve continue to have our run down and repricing of our Hudson City time portfolio. So that's something that we have. That's a little bit unique to us compared to others in the industry. So that's helping our funding costs. The other thing is we've done very well with maintaining non-interest bearing deposits and we've seen some migration into those accounts and a mix shift has helped with our overall cost of funding. When you look underneath and you see where some of the pricing movement is happening, certainly our trust demand deposits and our mortgage escrow balances are typically linked to the index, so those ones are 100% reactive. When we look underneath at our private banking and our commercial, we saw a bigger uptick in our pricing in the third quarter than we did in the fourth. The fourth quarter prices moved up a little bit in those two categories, but not as much as we had seen in the third quarter. And I think on the commercial side, there's certainly some pressure there. I’ll remind you that that's earnings credit, which kind of shows up as an offset to fees. And generally balances are still strong, folks haven't put that those balances to use yet in the business. So they have more than enough fee offsets that they're not demanding as much from an earnings credit rate at the moment. We've got our eye on that. It's something we pay a lot of attention to and we're always considering what the impact is of earnings credit rates versus balance diminishment, and those two things cannot offset each other, and we pay a lot of attention to that. But it's something I think us and the industry are all expecting to see, but we take a 25 basis point increase by 25 basis point increase.

Great. Thanks for all the color.

Your next question comes from the line of John Pancari with Evercore. Your line is open.

Good morning.

Hi, John.

Darren, I wondered if you can talk a little bit more about the – on the expense growth. I believe – just want to confirm, you indicated nominal expense growth for 2018 and then also what would that equate in terms of the amount of positive operating leverage that you could expect for the year? Thanks.

So here's how I would think about expenses. If you look at the third and second quarter of 2017, those would be more normal expenses, so third quarter you want to take out the legal settlement, but otherwise those quarters kind of give you a good sense of where the run rate is on average. And starting from that base, we anticipate expense growth less than 2%. And then we announced last night that we plan to invest some of the tax savings in our hourly employees, many of those are the face of the bank. There are tellers and our telephone center reps, and we expect that to increase the expenses a little bit beyond that 2%-ish growth rate that I mentioned prior, and if you put those together that's kind of where the expenses are to come out for the year. When you think about operating leverage, I would expect, we would be 1% to 2% positive operating leverage over the course of the year and that could move depending on when and by how much the Fed changes Fed funds rates.

Okay. Thanks. And then separately on the capital side, I heard you on the – that you're not going to warehouse until opportunities come up, but on that opportunistic angle, can you give us your updated thoughts around acquisitions on the whole bank side and non-bank? What are you seeing and what do you think is likely to materialize for 2018? Thanks.

Sure. So our thoughts about acquisition and what makes sense for us hasn't changed from what we’ve talked about in the third quarter. Obviously, we’re interested in whole banks. We’d be interested in branch networks, but we'd also be interested in wealth and asset management as well as mortgage servicing. So it's pretty broad, the types of things we would consider. I guess I would describe the market right now is fairly quiet. I think everyone is digesting what tax reform means for them, what it might mean for their business. Their digesting the current credit environment and what that looks like? And so from what we've seen right now, there's a lot of activity, which is why we've made the comment that we wouldn't sit and wait for something to come around before we deployed capital back to our shareholders.

Okay, thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Ken Zerbe with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

Great, thanks. Just go back to the comment that you said you're going to reinvest, called 15% to 20% of the tax savings back into the business. Obviously, I saw the $25 million you talked about, which is probably a little less than the 15% to 20%. But what are their actions are you thinking about that you could be taking that you're referring too in terms of following it back into expenses? Thanks.

Sure. So as you mentioned, we talked about the increase to the hourly rates once fully implemented. Those will be worth about $25 million, we think on a run rate. There is other actions that we are considering for employees like 401(k), match increases things like that. So investing in our employees will continue to invest in our communities. Traditionally we've given [1.9%] of net income every year to our communities and with the tax increase. We would expect to benefit our communities a little bit with that. And then the other thing is continued increase in our infrastructure in particular technology. And so we described an increase of 15% to 20% of the savings over the next couple of years, but these things will feather in over the course of 2018 and 2019, as we do our work and we think about what ways of investing that those dollars will be most impactful for our business. Obviously technology is something that's important and we will continue to invest in. But it's not one of those things that you can just write a check tomorrow and pay for software off the shelf and then go back to a different run rate. It starts to embed in your expense base and will be thoughtful about how we do that, but we thought it was important to signal where our intentions were going.

Got, understood. And then just – in terms of credit, I think you said the outlook is relatively stable, obviously your first half credit was different from the second half credit. Are you talking about full-year stable or stable from sort of fourth quarter levels?

I think in stable more from like the last four years, stable and I'm thinking more – both the third quarter was very strong. The fourth quarter was strong and impacted by recoveries. So if you look at where we had been in the prior three years that's kind of where our head is that.

Got, understood. And then just last question, in terms of the CRE growth or lack of CRE growth, I think you mentioned that the growth going forward is going to depend on your willingness to offer more perm financing, which you've been hesitant to do. What does that depend on? Is just the yield? Are you seeing bad structures in the market, but why are you not in that market today and what might get you in there?

So primarily it's pricing. That the yields and the rates that are being offered by our competitors are lower than we think make economic sense for us over the long-term, obviously there's a relationship involved. Those are mortgages that we will do. But this year has been particularly active. We've seen the insurance companies particularly active in the 10-year space with a lot of interest only option. So it's just not something we've generally participated in. If the pricing changes and returns change, then our activity in that space would likely change as well. But the big issue for us on the construction or the commercial real estate is we had that run up through 2015 and 2016 in construction and as those projects come to completion they paydown, which is – it actually a good thing because that's what we're really hoping for when we do those loans is that they'll get completed and people will take over the permanent financing if it's multifamily or the condo owners obviously accept their units and pay us down, but take out a personal mortgage so.

Right.

Not expecting any material change, given what we see out there in the world right now, but obviously if rates change, we would be willing to participate.

Great, thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the Ken Usdin with Jefferies. Your line is open.

Thanks. Good morning. Darren, I want to ask you about a mix of the balance sheet. I notice that the securities portfolio has shrunk over the course of the year, offset on the wholesale borrowing side. Just can you help us understand just where your comfort zone is both in absolute levels of that securities book and whether or not that changing rate environment will cause you to think about adding – to turning the corner on that going forward?

Sure. So the securities portfolio, the primary driver is liquidity coverage ratio. And what we need to have in securities to make sure that we're compliant with the coverage ratio. When you look at the last little bit or over the course of the year, given how the balance sheet has evolved, we haven't needed the securities portfolio to be as big and that moves around a little bit with our cash balances, which are affected by trust demand, but then also how we choose to reinvest the mortgage-backed securities payoffs that sit within the securities portfolio. And really over the last quarter, maybe the last two quarters a little bit given where short rates were when we looked at what was running off and where rates were likely going, we've felt better just keeping that in cash because the premium you were getting to invest it for two years wasn't really worth it. So as you go forward, I'd be looking at cash and securities together and where we need to see some – have a better feeling about what the shape of the curve is going to look like before we make any decisions to change that reinvestment rate or change the mix of what we’re investing in.

Okay, got it. And then to follow-up on that deposit side, you mentioned that the Hudson City loan book might start slowing its rate of decline. Can you help us understand the offsetting side of that on the time deposits, like how much – how fast and how much of that is still left to runoff that how fast do you think that will be running down?

So the rate of decrease is slowing just in dollar certainly because the portfolio is smaller. When you look at what's left to reprice, we're down to less than a third of the balances that need to reprice. Much of the book has shifted towards shorter duration CDs typically six months or a year. And when we're in the market most of the activity is in that one-year space. We are starting to see a little bit of movement into two-year, but really it's all been around one-year is where all the activity is. So what's out there are some longer dated CDs that were three and five years back at origination and as those come due obviously they'll reprice and they'll either likely go short, which is what has been typical if they stay on the balance sheet or the runoff. I would be thinking $1 billion to $2 billion of additional runoff and time in those CDs that are Hudson City related over the next 12 to 18 months. The offset to that is when you come out of a lower interest rate environment, generally the place where balances move first is into the time deposit. So while there might be some decrease in legacy Hudson City time deposits. When you look at the total time deposit category, it might not decrease by that same amount because we expect we'll see some shift of money market in the time over the course of 2018.

Okay. I understood. Thanks for that Darren.

Your next question comes from the line of Geoffrey Elliott with Autonomous Research. Your line is open.

Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Back to technology, you touched on that briefly earlier scenario where you'd like to invest. How do you think you stock out there relative to peers and competitors?

Well, it's a good question. I don't have a great benchmark for what others look like. You have the most obvious ones, which are your mobile devices which are probably the most benchmark of anything. When I look at our online and in branch capabilities, I think we stack up well. I think on the mobile we're competitive, but we will be looking to improve in our mobile channel through time. We're teed up to implement Zelle this year, which will be a big positive, and we're looking forward too. But I guess when we think about mobile technology across all of our lines of business, our view is that mobile is now regular cost of doing business and it's not a technology event, right. So when you think about you see on your phone, the little red circle in the corner of an app that says by the App Store there's an update available. That's the mentality that we're bringing to mobile. It’s something that you're going to be constantly providing updates and new feature functionality, which will really become an embedded expense. When you look across the rest of the franchise that what's datacenter versus what's cloud and core applications. Our core applications are pretty much the same as everyone else, and in fact, we believe that we have fewer of them than others because our acquisition history was not to maintain dual system environments, but to consolidate always to one. But we're always investing and maintaining those core systems or investing in infrastructure like data, investing in security, cyber security obviously being a big one and making sure that our environment is safe. So there's a number of places where we're investing technology dollars. Some of them very visible to the outside world, but many of them inside to the bank and making sure that we're stable and safe.

And when you think about potential M&A, do you think you could do M&A to acquire new tech capabilities is not something you’d look out?

That’s a really good question. I think when we look at technology, we would be open to talking to people to bring technology capability to our customers, but to acquire another bank just to get their systems is probably a tough one. And the reason I say that, I would never say never, but the reason I say that is typically you're buying a bank that's smaller than you. And if you’re going to convert M&T on to a smaller bank systems and technology architecture and infrastructure, you'd want to be really certain that it was ready to handle that kind of volume, right. Typically we're very conservative and worried about risk, and to that end, we've generally converted others on to our systems because as a percentage of the business it's small and we know that we can handle it from an infrastructure perspective, and it minimizes the risk should something go bad. But are we looking more at partner opportunities to deploy new technology? Absolutely. And could that mean investments in some of those? We'd be open to it, if it makes sense.

Great. Thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Brian Klock with Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. Your line is open.

Hey. Good morning, Darren.

Good morning, Brian.

On the expense side, I just want to kind of catch back up and just make sure I understand the guidance. When you look at the last three quarters on an operating basis, taking out the Wilmington Trust and the charitable donation in the fourth quarter, it’s averaging about $755 million a quarter. So that's the base we should be thinking about quarterly and then grow that by 2% when we think about 2018, is that the right way to think about that?

That's the right way to think about it. Yes, and obviously you've got the first quarter increase that is pretty typical, and then the $25 million that we disclosed yesterday that would be the run rate of investments in our employees.

So that $25 million would be additive to the 2% growth on top of that?

That's right. But you won’t see the full $25 million likely in 2018, it'll come in over the course of the year, and the full $25 million would be more likely in 2019s run rate.

Okay. And then really the other cost of operations in the fourth quarter that typically can be seasonally higher for you guys in the fourth quarter and when you adjust it for the Wilmington Trust and the charitable donation, it was down about $15 million sequentially. And usually, the first quarter is when you see it come down from the fourth quarter, so is there any seasonality we should look at in that line item? If we adjust to $212.9 million for the $44 million, is that something you expect to be flat or is that something we’ll see this normally seasonally slower or lower first quarter out of that line item?

There's movement in that and it's not really seasonality per se. It can just be timing of when certain expenses hit. I think the safest thing to do is to look at our annual other costs and divide it by four and we're not anticipating anything that's going to drive it up materially in 2018 or down. The one thing to keep in mind is in their professional services expenses some relating to technology and some relating to legal, and we're hoping that we're going to run at a slightly lower legal costs in 2018, but we do have the next wave of trial coming up in the spring. So it might not move down quite as much as we would like early in the year, and then we'll see what happens from there. So I would take the total year number and think about that averaged on a quarterly basis.

I got and just the last follow-up on the end of period balances and you talked about the excess liquidity at the Fed is down, end of period versus the average. It looks like a lot of that came out of interest-bearing deposits. If can talk about that end of period, the balance trend and with a lot of that from Hudson City time deposits that $1.5 billion that came out of interest-bearing deposits on end of period base?

It's a combination of trust and there's some mortgage escrow and there as well that moves around, say about $0.5 billion is mortgage escrow and some of its time probably $300 million to $400 million and then other just normal movement up and down in the quarter. And I guess partly we made the comment about the cash at the Fed, when thinking about first quarter margin that the increase in cash reduced the margin in the fourth quarter even though it was a very visible by about 4 basis points just because of the rate there right. So if it goes away, the market is going to go the other way in the first quarter, but doesn't necessarily mean that net income is going to go correspondingly higher.

That’s exactly great. All right, thanks for your time, appreciated Darren.

No problem.

Your next question comes from the line of Matt O'Connor with Deutsche Bank. Your line is open.

Hi, you guys have addressed, so I think most of the kind of guidance questions that I would have had. But maybe from the strategic point of view, if you look at the fee businesses, you've obviously had some good momentum in trust and you talked about building out the mortgage servicing. How about in the capital markets side? This is an area that we've seen some of your peers build-out and it does seem like it provides a little bit of hedge from C&I loans going and CRE going to the capital markets instead of loan balance sheet. Maybe you could remind us like what your capabilities are there and just the thoughts of organic growth or I guess bolt-on deals in that broader space?

Sure. We do some M&A advisory of a small operation that operates at a Baltimore that helps our customers when they're considering M&A activity and we also have a debt capital markets business that also operates at a Baltimore. Those businesses both had some modest increases year-over-year in terms of their fees that we’re in. So it's a space that we're in. We think there's upside there, probably lean a little bit more right now in the debt capital markets side than in M&A. But really when we look at where other parts of our fee business have been, it's been in the commercial mortgage space and when you think about our balance sheet with our heavy commercial real estate focus at our expertise there that's a good feeder system for our commercial mortgage fee business. And at the end of last year, we added a team in Philadelphia that complements that business that their specialty is more dealing with insurance companies and placing business with insurance companies where we've been in Fannie and Freddie DUS lender and that's a place where we saw some nice growth this year in fees and we expect to continue to see that happening in 2018 as well, and it's a nice complement to our commercial real estate business. So there's a few places where we try to participate on the fees side to your point as a complement to the balance sheet part of our business. We don't have any specific plans to grow aggressively in debt capital markets or M&A, but it's something we certainly pay attention to given the commercial orientation of our balance sheet.

Okay, that's it for me. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Frank Schiraldi with Sandler O'Neill. Your line is open.

Hi, Darren. Just two quick ones, first on the NIM, I think you noted 5 to 8 bps of NIM benefit from a 25 basis point hike is a good way to think about things. So for the December rate hike, does it make sense to further adjust that range by the 4 bps you kind of noted on LIBOR getting ahead of itself, does that make sense?

So the 5 to 8 bps that we noted earlier is really on a go forward basis and we have been talking about 6 to 10 bps is where we had been and the last rate hike would fall more in the 6 to 10 bps. So I would think about the 4 as along the path to that 6 to 10 bps and we'll get a little bit – the rest of it in January depending on what happens with deposit pricing.

Okay, gotcha. And then just on the effective tax rate you cited. The lower relative percentage decrease, I guess M&T expects to see versus just the statutory federal reduction from 35% to 21%. Is that basically all due to just the impact from state and local taxes or is there anything else in there that's somewhat meaningful offset?

You nailed it. It’s pretty much all the states we’re in and the impact of state and local tax.

Okay. All right. Great. Thanks.

Your next question comes from the line of Chris Spahr with Wells Fargo Securities. Your line is open.

Thank you. Good afternoon. I was wondering, is it possible to eliminate your bank holding company charter, given how your businesses are structured particularly if the bank regulatory relief doesn't really come down to the states at $100 billion threshold that some have suggested recently?

I think the answer technically is yes. It's possible, anything's possible, but when you look through the businesses that we have underneath of it and the way they're structured, right now we don't really see the benefit. Something we looked at after the announcements from Zions earlier this year and concluded it didn't make sense for us at that point, especially given some of the proposed legislation of relief for banks less than $250 billion. So we're – for the moment watching that with interest and we can see what happens. It's something we would consider, but at the moment, we don't have any plans to make any changes to our structure.

And given that your balance sheet hasn't been growing recently, is that safe to assume at least for 2018 that long-term debt will remain flattish this coming year?

Well, we've got some debt rolling off, and obviously we’ll be watching where the loan growth is and what's going on with deposits. And then our capital structure and the amount of capital that we have, we commented a couple times about where we feel our capital ratios are relative to where we think they should be and so there might be some mix shift on the balance sheet between debt and equity as well. So those will be the factors to consider when thinking about debt for the year.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Peter Winter with Wedbush Securities. Your line is open.

Thank you. Darren, in regards to capital return just given the valuation of M&T, I'm just wondering what your thoughts are looking at share buyback versus dividends?

So when you look at our history and you look at the mix of distributions through time that are between dividends, stock buyback, and M&A, those tend to move around a little bit depending on the environment we're in. But as we look into 2018, given the change in tax rate and the appreciation our stock price, our dividend yield and our dividend payout ratio is likely to – both going to be down. So we'll be looking at what our dividend yield is and what the dividend payout ratio is and thinking about that in conjunction with our distributions and the rest we would look at as capital returns. But over time that mix between dividend and share repurchase, we don't expect to change that much. So we will make our adjustments, and as we go through our CCAR work, and obviously we've got to increase in the dividend planned for next quarter in the second quarter of 2018, and we'll obviously look at the mix as we go through CCAR and look to return capital in the most friendly way for the shareholders.

Okay. Thank you. And just on a separate note, net interest income in the first quarter, I'm just wondering – assuming that the interest recoveries don't reoccur, which I think is about $8 million and then two less days in the quarter, do you think, net interest income would be down slightly from fourth to first?

Maybe I’ll touch. You definitely got two less days, that’s important. And then it will be about – our calculations, $3 million to $5 million of recovery. So you've got those two things working against you, but we'll have the full quarter of the hike helping on the other side. So I guess when we look at it, we're thinking flattish or flattish to slightly down first quarter versus fourth quarter.

Got it. Thanks very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Kevin Barker with Piper Jaffray. Your line is open.

Thank you. I just wanted to follow-up on some of your commentary on mortgage servicing and potential M&A there. Why do you view that business to be attractive right now given that we've seen many banks shy away from mortgage servicing and have issues with it through the cycle?

So I guess when we look at the mortgage servicing business, we think about both service and sub-servicing. And the number one thing that we like about the business is the returns and the return on equity. And we think that that is helpful to our overall return profile, and if it's servicing, we're not tying up the balance sheet – if it’s sub-servicing I should say, we're not tying up the balance sheet. But we're selective. When you look at – if we look at the pricing and we look at what the return measures look like of any business we might do and like any investment decision we make, whether it's a new loan, buying another bank or investing in sub-servicing, it has to make sense for our shareholders. And over time, particularly during the aftermath of the crisis, it proved to be a business that people were shying away from mainly because of reputational risk and some of the fines that were out there. So it placed a premium on operational excellence. And we've been through a number of reviews with our regulators, both the Fed and the CFPB, and proven to be a pretty clean shop in terms of our operations. And therefore, we believe we can manage the reputational risk and the operational risk. And if we can get paid for it, which we were able to, then we like the business. If those dynamics change and the returns change, then we won’t like it as much, but from where we've been over the last five years, it's been a great source of fee income and return for us.

Okay. And then a follow-up on that. Is there a certain size you are targeting where you start to see the returns on those portfolios that you could acquire start to hit peak margins or to really grow to a level where scale really matters?

From what we see, we're far from that. At our peak, we’re servicing about $99 billion worth of mortgages. There's not a circumstance that we currently envision that takes that to $200 billion anytime soon. It's been when we've acquired servicing. It's tended to come in smaller chunks and kind of $15 million to $20 million – $15 billion to $20 billion size lots, which is easier to integrate, easier to manage the transition, and doesn't get us over our skis in terms of the size of portfolio we're trying to manage and the risk we're trying to manage. But it's really – we're looking at each potential deal, what the mix of mortgages looks like, how challenged it may or may not be based on delinquency, the mix of Freddies and Ginnies that are in the portfolio and the regional mix. There’s a whole bunch of things that we consider before going forward. But at this point, it's not something we're looking to make a major business, but given our experience in mortgage and our ability to service it's been a nice complement to businesses that we're in, and again, a nice source of fee income in return for us.

Okay. Thank you for taking my questions. End of Q&A

There are no further questions at this time. I will turn the call back over to Mr. MacLeod.

Again, thank you all for participating today. And as always, if any clarification of any of the items in the call or the news release is necessary, please contact our Investor Relations department at 716-842-5138.

This concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.