Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the NASDAQ OMX First Quarter 2012 Results. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, today's conference call is being recorded. I'd now like to turn the conference over to your host, Mr. John Sweeney, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. And thanks for joining us today to discuss NASDAQ OMX's First Quarter 2012 Earning Results. Joining me today are Bob Greifeld, our Chief Executive Officer; and Lee Shavel, our Chief Financial Officer; Ed Knight, our General Counsel, joins us as well. Following our prepared remarks, we'll open up the line to Q&A. You can access the result, press release and the presentation on NASDAQ OMX's investor website, nasdaqomx.com. We intend to use our website as a means of disclosing material nonpublic information and for complying with disclosure obligations under SEC Regulation FD. And these disclosures will be included under the Events and Presentations section of the site. Now before I turn the call over to Bob, I'd like to remind you that certain statements in this prepared presentation and during the subsequent Q&A period may relate to future events and expectations, and as such, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The actual results may differ materially from those projected in those forward-looking statements. Information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements is contained in our press release and other periodic reports filed with the SEC. And with that, I'll turn the call over to Bob.

Thank you, John, and thanks -- thank you, everybody, for joining us on this call this morning. I would first like to thank Vince, who has done an excellent job for us in Investor Relations for NASDAQ OMX over the past 6 years. Vince is assuming increased responsibility in our market data group, where I'm sure he will continue his success driving that business. So thank you, Vince. We're also, obviously, pleased to have John Sweeney join us today. He's our new VP of Investor Relations, and I'm sure all of you will enjoy getting to know John. I'll begin by spending a few minutes highlighting our results and then update you on our plans going forward. Lee will then walk you through the detailed financials. For the first quarter, our net exchange revenues were $411 million compared to $413 million in the prior year, up 1% when you exclude the impact of currency changes. Our non-GAAP EPS was $0.61, the same level as the prior year quarter and also equaling our fourth best performance ever. This solid performance concerning the weak U.S. trading environment reflects the benefit of the diverse non-transaction driven businesses that we've built over the past several years. And that now represents over 2/3 of our net exchange revenues. In short, while our combined net cash equity trading and derivatives revenues were down $15 million from the prior year quarter due to volumes, revenues from our other businesses were up $13 million continuing to grow across the board. Net exchange revenues in our volume-based trading and clearing businesses of $127 million declined compared to the prior quarter as a result of the challenging volume environment. In the U.S., derivatives trading clearing -- once again, we had a leading market share. However, revenues were down $6 million…

Thanks, Bob. Good morning, everyone. Our GAAP net income for the first quarter of 2012 was $85 million or $0.48 per diluted share, compared to $104 million or $0.57 per diluted share in the prior year period. Non-GAAP expenses for the quarter included a $12 million impairment charge on our equity investment in EMCF, a $9 million restructuring charge, primarily related to workforce reductions and $2 million for merger and strategic initiatives expense. Excluding these costs, our non-GAAP net income was $108 million or $0.61 per diluted share, essentially consistent with our results of $110 million or $0.61 per share in the first quarter of 2011. Reconciliations of GAAP to non-GAAP results can be found in the attachments to our press release and in the presentation that's available on our website at irr.nasdaqomx.com. Starting with revenues, net exchange revenues came in at $411 million compared to $413 million in the first quarter of 2011. As Bob described, each of our businesses that are not industry trading volume driven, including Access Services, Market Data, Broker Services, Issuer Services and Market Tech achieved revenue growth, increasing in aggregate by $13 million in the first quarter from the prior year. This increase was offset by weak industry trading volumes, which generated a drop in revenues of $15 million from our U.S. cash equity and U.S. derivative trading and clearing businesses. This outcome reflects the success of our strategy over the past several years of developing diverse businesses that are not volume driven and contribute earnings growth. Looking in greater detail at our trading revenues, which represent less than 1/3 of our total revenues, total net derivative trading and clearing revenues were $74 million in the first quarter, down $6 million compared to the first quarter of 2011. The year-over-year decline was the result…

Thanks very much, operator. We'll now take some questions.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Alex Kramm of UBS.

Maybe just starting on the dividend real quick. I think go -- leading up to it, I think you sent mixed signals in terms of like the size and how you think about them. So maybe you can just talk a little bit more about how you arrived at this dividend yield or this payout ratio? And maybe a little bit of how you think this can grow over time and what we should look for in terms of how we should grow the dividend, I guess, over the next few years?

Well, I would say this, Alex. One is we'd want you to focus on the fact that we have released the -- announced the dividend today. And we're certainly not going to speak about how it might grow over time. I think Lee did an excellent job taking you through our cash flow in a given quarter and how we think about that. And Lee, why don't you just touch on that again?

Sure. The thing I would emphasize is that we first established the dividend with an analysis of our cash flow and making certain that clearly, we have the ability to support this. We also believe that the level that we initiated this at is an attractive yield and comparable to our other exchange competitors as well as the S&P 500, certainly within the range of those other players. But fundamentally, we believe that this is a level that we can support, and that we're very pleased to establish this level.

All right. And then just maybe staying on the capital side, not to get too detailed here, but obviously, I see the deployable capital of $37 million to $57 million a quarter, which certainly allows for healthy continued buyback. Maybe I missed this, but with the capital that was just released from the clearinghouse, and I think IDCG will probably release another $75 million or so, maybe you can refresh us on that? If that transaction goes through, can you just tell us what you would do with that excess capital? I guess buybacks would be the most logical route here.

Yes, the -- you're correct. I think our -- we expect with IDCG, as we've said in the past, that, that will release approximately $75 million in addition to the Nordic clearinghouse. Now certainly, utilization of that capital, if we see opportunities to invest that internally and are generating and regenerating, what we believe, are going to be good returns on that, that will be the first priority. But in the absence of any expectation of an investment opportunity, then we would expect to utilize that for share repurchases going forward, as we've indicated in the past. Where we released capital within the business, if we don't have a good alternative use for that, then we'll be returning that to shareholders.

Our board has authorized $300 million share repurchase, and it's obviously our intention to carry through on that.

Okay. And then just like a very quick one. Section 31 Fees in the quarter, I don't think you actually disclose those anymore. Can you just give us that number and maybe put it back in the release going forward?

I think you'll see this number in the 10-Q. Our Section 31 Fees for the first quarter of 2012 were $71 million in comparison to the first quarter of 2011 of $73 million. So that disclosure will be -- will continue to be in the Q.

Our next question comes from Niamh Alexander of KBW. Niamh Alexander - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: Can I touch on the options business because that is the biggest of your transaction businesses? And we've seen some competitors get pretty aggressive with price reductions effort. I think you've made some changes in March. Help me think about the pricing going forward because your pricing's held up pretty well relative to where we might have expected. Should we -- and you'd mentioned in equities, you don't expect it to come down this quarter, but help me think about options.

Well, one with options, and we covered a little bit on the last quarter. But I think the team has executed very well. You saw some increase in share quarter-on-quarter, and we have a number of different plans in place. And I think our ability to maintain our capture rate is pretty strong. Niamh Alexander - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: Okay. So we shouldn't necessarily expect you to follow with kind of fairly significant price cuts?

No, I think we have more clever ways to approach it. The other thing I would say is with respect to the ISP program in the equity world, it certainly was more successful than we anticipated in the first quarter, which has obviously some good elements to it. It certainly improved, I think, the attractiveness of our venue. But we will be tweaking the pricing on that program and some other things in May, which we are very confident will have a positive impact on our capture rate. Niamh Alexander - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: Okay, that's helpful. And then if I can go back to the capital, and thank you for the disclosure for kindly laying out the flexibility, help with the buybacks and the deals. And philosophically, do -- are you more inclined to kind of long-term look towards kind of growing the dividend that you're giving yourself this level to kind of want to grow the dividend in the future versus kind of laying it out there and think is the level we're at and we kind of need all that other flexibility. Is the kind of level of debt somehow limiting the dividend right now?

No, Niamh, one is I would say that we have announced a dividend. We've thought about it for a long period of time. And when you saw the dividend program, it's easy, but you have to think about it in the context of your future. So I think it's well-thought out at the board level, at the management level. And I think the way Lee described the quarter and how we break down our cash flow in the quarter to the extent that those numbers increase as a business is successful over time. I think you could draw your rational conclusions from there. So certainly, as we achieve greater financial success, we would certainly look to the allocation of that additional capital in, I'd say, a fair way.

And I would just add one thing to that. Niamh, I know everyone naturally is focused on the dividend today, but I want to make certain that everyone understands that it's merely part of our broader capital return strategy. And that our plan to continue share repurchases as a component of that as we allocate what we think is a pretty substantial amount of our excess capital generated back to shareholders through both channels is important to understand beyond just the specific dividend.

Our next question comes from Rich Repetto of Sandler O'Neill. Richard H. Repetto - Sandler O'Neill + Partners, L.P., Research Division: First question is on the $50 million in cost reductions and $25 million realized this year. Can you help us with what areas that will come out of? Is there any revenue impact to that as well?

No. First point, no revenue impact to us. We're certainly just doing a bottoms-up analysis of how we can become more efficient. As we've said through the years, the quest for efficiency really never ends. We're putting a little more emphasis on it now based upon our given set of circumstances. But each and every area of our expense base will be subject to greater efficiencies. So it's hard to focus on any one. I highlighted 3 or 4 in my prepared comments. But Rich, we're not going to leave a stone unturned is what I would say. Richard H. Repetto - Sandler O'Neill + Partners, L.P., Research Division: Okay. And then on Market Technology, and this is on Slide 8 specifically. I see the pipeline grew nicely. But if you look at the total order value and how it's -- you put in how it's bucketed per year, it looks like it got pushed out where more value is in the later years, actually 2012, down a bit. Is that -- will that impact the actual Market Technology revenues in 2012?

No. I mean, 2012 is shaping up to be a very good year for Market Tech. It hit the wires today that we just signed a deal with Nigeria, and the Swiss Exchange also just went live with a new platform, so they're enjoying some strong trend lines. And I think over the long term, Rich, we certainly expect to have Market Tech continue to grow through some of our broker-based offerings, meaning basically SMARTS and FTEN and the extension of products we're going to build from those acquisitions.

And Rich, I would also just point out that the increase -- that the $114 million in 2012 is an increase from the prior quarter. So obviously, we're expecting continued growth in 2012. Richard H. Repetto - Sandler O'Neill + Partners, L.P., Research Division: I had -- well, from the last earnings press, I had $141 million in 2012, but it could be my error. Anyway, last question, on LCH.Clearnet. So this -- I know we talked. You were looking for sort of resolution last quarter. And can you give us a feel for the timeframe, I guess, because even the timeframe of where this capital might come into play and be freed up because the transaction is still, I guess, not fully consummated.

Yes. No, it's definitely not fully consummated. I think conservatively, you would see us be able to free up the capital probably early in the third quarter, in early summer.

Our next question comes from Chris Allen of Evercore Partners.

A couple of questions. First on the expense savings plan, the $25 million in 2012, was anything in the first quarter run rate? And is any potential savings from IDCG baked into the expense savings plan?

The answer is I think no on both counts.

Okay. And then I'm not sure if I missed it. Did you guys provide a breakdown of the European derivative business by asset class?

No, not by asset class.

We'll follow up with you on that after the call.

Our next question comes from Howard Chen of Credit Suisse. Howard Chen - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Bob, can you just elaborate on what you mean when you say LCH is a core asset and what your long-term aspirations for that asset going forward will be?

Well, I meant that we'll be a shareholder, and we don't have intentions obviously to sell the shares by that statement. And in my prepared comments, I talked about support for the horizontal clearing model, so we think there's opportunities to work with LCH to lever that approach into different asset classes. Howard Chen - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Great. And then Lee, on last quarter's call, you noted some of the $40 million to $50 million of new investment spending wasn't earmarked yet, and you're going through that process. Could you just give an update of where that is and where some of that has been allocated to?

Sure. I can't, Howard, mention specific projects, but they were clearly -- we were identifying our targeted level for 2012 that anticipated a pipeline of projects that were being presented to us internally. I think since that last call, there has been -- there've been probably 2 projects, 2 additional projects that we've reviewed that probably account for $3 million to $5 million in incremental expense. And as I've pointed out in my comments, you'll see an increase in the new initiative spending in the second quarter of $5 million to $10 million, up from the first quarter level. And that reflects both some additional projects as well as a phasing-in of projects that have previously been improved, but you simply had increasing investment requirements as we build them out here. Howard Chen - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Great. And then just final one for me, on the Technology business, Bob, in a weaker volume environment, does that necessarily -- like does that accelerate or delay conversations that -- with other exchanges to kind of outsource or seek technology solutions?

I would say the exchange business, exchange Market Technology business is relatively immune to short-term volume trends in the marketplace. You could see it at the spot level with respect to what we call CRs, customer request, because obviously that's of the moment. But we have not seen that at this point in time. And the Technology business is going very strong. As I said, the Nigerian deal, which just went public today. We have another signing that we can't announce yet, but it's coming. We have TOCOM last quarter, and then obviously, the Swiss Exchange went live. So we're doing quite well.

Our next question comes from Michael Carrier of Deutsche Bank.

Maybe one question on the expenses, the color's helpful. But when you look at your cost structure and you look at the percent that's variable, like where does that stand now? And just if we continue to be in a weak environment or it even gets weaker, you just want to kind of gauge what portion of the cost structure or the expense base is --you have the ability to reduce versus the fixed side?

Well, I mean that's, I think, a timeframe-dependent question. So we operate on the concept that all fixed costs are variable over time, so we can make some medium-range plans that can take the cost bases down quite dramatically. I think your question is in the short term, what can you do? And certainly, the number that we've put out there, the $50 million, I think is a very reasonable and achievable target for us. And I would take that as the way to look at the cost basis in the short term. To the extent the volumes were going to be 5 billion shares for a long period of time and basically a similar decline in Europe, then we can take other changes, other steps. It will just take longer to implement.

Okay, that's helpful. And then just one other one on the capital side. So in that excess capital that you have each quarter, you have multiple options in terms of what to do with that. But just give us an update on the target capital structure, just so when we look at what debt's coming due over the next 1, 2 years, we at least have an idea on, if you're going to be paying that down versus if you're comfortable kind of where the debt level is. And so most of the priorities are going to geared towards either M&A investment, buybacks or the dividend over time.

Sure. We are very comfortable with where we are from a debt standpoint with the total leverage at 2.3x. And I would say that we're prioritizing the capital generated towards the, as we said before, the high -- where we think we can generate the highest returns. If those returns are in the business or through mergers and acquisitions, that's going to be the top priority. Secondly, in the absence of that, share repurchases would be the next alternative. And I don't think we have any defined plans to reduce our debt levels from this point. From a debt maturity standpoint, we continue to -- it will be very comfortable given that we refinanced our debt in the third and the fourth quarters with some of the changes that we've made. We don't have any significant near-term maturities. Our next significant maturity is for our convertible notes in 2013 of $89 million. Beyond that, it's really just our $400 million maturity in 2015. So we're not anticipating any near-term pressure to refinance any of those maturities.

Okay, that's helpful. And Bob, just on the volume environment. So I think we all kind of look around and try to figure out if this is like the new norm or a variety of issues out there that are weighing on activity levels. So just, I guess, any insight that you have. And then probably more importantly, just given the percent that's off exchange more recently and part of that's due to the volatility, but anything there that can bring more not only back to NASDAQ, but to New York to the competitors, but just more in the lit markets?

Yes, 2 very good questions. One, with respect to the macro view of volume, we obviously try to find the one data point, which will point the way to us. And that's obviously not available, but we do study, as I think we've covered previously, the net inflows into the loan-only funds. And certainly, that has been in a downward trend line for multiple years. And to the extent that, that reverses -- then it will have a positive impact on the overall volume. And we certainly keenly recognize that when you have natural flow in the market, that it has a dramatic ripple effect on the volume. It just is somewhat of a feeding frenzy. So we watch that very closely. And then stepping back from that, we pay attention to consumer confidence as a clear correlation between consumer confidence and inflows into the equity marketplace. So if I have to give you 2 data points, that was -- those would be them. Neither one of them are particularly positive at this point in time, and we deal with that reality. Now in terms of volume, you have short-term spikes based upon volatility, which we've seen in the last 2 years. And so that tends not to be sustainable over time. So the first 2 factors identified can give you a sustainable volume environment, the volatility tends to be episodic. We tend to enjoy those episodes so we certainly can't plan for, but hope for something like that happens somewhere in 2012. And I think it's a reasonable assumption. With respect to the increasing darkness in the market, one is it's important to recognize we think there's a proper role for dark bulls in the market. We understand that lit markets can't do everything all the time for everybody. We also understand the lit markets are the place of price formation. And to the extent that there's going to be dark trading, it should deliver some incremental value to the markets since it's not contributing to the common good of price discovery. And the 2 metrics we look towards is basically size, and price would be a proper delineation of that. So we think lit markets are good overall. We're certainly here, defenders of lit markets. And we have common cause with the other exchanges on that.

Bob, before we move to next question, I wanted to come back and clarify the answer that we gave to Rich Repetto regarding the backlog. Rich, the -- our previous report in the fourth quarter of '11 for the order backlog of $141 million, that includes 12 months of 2012. The drop, $214 million, is because that reflects only 9 months of the year, so it's not a full-year-to-full-year comparison. We continue to believe that the increases in the order in the backlog are positive for 2012 as we indicated.

Our next question comes from Chris Harris of Wells Fargo Securities.

So question on expenses here. I just want to maybe reconcile a few things that we've been talking about. So it sounded like in the prepared commentary that the expenses may come back up, assuming a better environment. And I'm just kind of curious if there's really no revenue impact from these cost reductions, why aren't they permanent? Why they're variable in nature? I wonder if you can kind of help me out with that.

Well first of all, the comment that we made on the expense guidance is that we are bringing our expense guidance for 2012 down, obviously driven by the expected reductions that we will achieve in 2012. And it also reflects our current expectations for the -- for where we are from a revenue standpoint, assuming that there's no change in revenues. Now obviously, to the extent that the market environment improves and revenues increase, then we do have a variable component to our expense levels that may increase. And so we're merely making the point that if the market conditions change, then we'll adjust guidance accordingly. But make no mistake, we are looking at our current cost infrastructure. We are making very specific reductions in our infrastructure to achieve these hard dollar levels of cost savings that we will -- it will certainly be difficult to move back up. But there are components in our expense structure that are more variable, specifically incentive compensation tied to our performance that will increase in an improving market environment.

But I do want to make clear that when we speak to the $50 million, that's a permanent reduction. That is us doing more with less of an expense base.

Okay, that's it. And then I guess the second question here on the listings business, congrats on the Facebook IPO. I mean, that's obviously a great win for you guys. But it seems like NYSE has also had some recent successes in technology, and even though it's really only 2 competitors out there, it seems like the competition for new listings is pretty intense. Have you guys seen any pricing pressure as a result of you and NYSE kind of going at it here in the tech IPOs, or has that been really not the primary driver of competitive advantage?

Well, I would say that the competition has been intense for a long period of time. I think it's been intense since the day I walked in here back in 2003. And I do remember the Google bake-off was equally intense. But that being said, we've had tremendous success in the technology franchise. And our ability to have companies switch to NASDAQ in the technology space is unparalleled. So we had Texas Instruments, as I said, they're just joining the NASDAQ-100 and ADI. So Texas Instruments, I think, was $35 billion and ADI was $11 billion. So it's as intense as it has ever been. We expect it to continue to be. And with respect to pricing, as I think people know, our top rate is just $100,000. And theirs is at $500,000 so we're certainly not feeling any pricing pressure to reduce that.

Okay. And then with the problem that BATS had, obviously, they're going to be out of the listings business at least for a while. Is the technical glitch they had, is that unique to BATS or is that something that could potentially happen to NASDAQ? And what can you guys do to make sure that, that really doesn't happen on your system?

Yes. Well, I would say that BATS never really got started in the listings business and it's hard to build that franchise. And we certainly have direct experience with what BATS had to accomplish when we did the BRUT and INET acquisitions. And we had to take SuperMontage on those 2 platforms and put it together. We chose INET, and the big gap from functionality is that SuperMontage as a listing venue always had the ability to run an auction to open and close the market. And INET did not have that and our team had to build it. They obviously built it successfully and not what we've done forward from there. We are a technology-based businesses. We have to engineer our technologies as best as we can, but certainly, we're sympathetic to what BATS went through. We recognize that the business is hard, and we certainly have excelled at it. We have a wonderful team. And certainly, our experience over the last 9 years shows you how good that team is. But we're not overconfident. We recognize that when you've got to engineer and be very careful about how you release product to the marketplace.

Our next question comes from Dan Fannon of Jefferies. Daniel Thomas Fannon - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Can you refresh us on the current P&L impact of IDCG assuming today then if we -- so we can kind of model it post the transaction does close?

So as I said before, IDCG basically was around $0.01 per quarter. Use that as a round number. So after that closes, we'd have that sort of positive impact. Daniel Thomas Fannon - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Okay. And then just to clarify an earlier comment about the capital coming out of the Nordic clearinghouse, is that something that will be then moved back to the U.S. for the potential capital allocation that you guys have outlined? Or is that something that will stay over in Europe?

At this point, our expectation is that, that will stay in Europe. Obviously, there are repatriation costs that are imposed if we bring that back to the U.S. We are, on a regular basis, able to bring some amount of capital, but our current expectations are that, that amount will remain in Europe. Daniel Thomas Fannon - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Is there specific projects or potential M&A opportunities that are being outlined or that you have kind of, as a backlog, for that capital or will that just be used over time?

We do expect that, that capital will be utilized in a variety of internal and potential acquisition projects within Europe on a small scale.

And it's interesting, our last 2 acquisitions have been in Europe. NOS that we announced today and Glide earlier in the year.

Our next question comes from Jillian Miller of BMO Capital Markets.

Now that the member default fund in the Nordics has been completed, I think, kind of based on what you said in the past, it sets the stage for you to make progress on your plan to become more of a Pan-European clearinghouse. So I just want to get an update on that. What the next step is in that plan and kind of what road marks we should be looking to?

Yes, that's a great question. So when you look at the Nordic clearinghouse, this is what the last step to make it, I think, operating subject to European norms and really the norms of all clearinghouses on a global basis. And when you see what's transpiring in the derivatives world, in particular, the over-the-counter world, we have a version of that, that is transpiring in the Nordics. And now, we're ideally positioned to take advantage of that, whether that be in repos or interest rate swaps centered around our Nordic-based currencies. So I would say that's the short-term thing. We've been investing in that for the last year or so. And I think we're in a very good position to monetize that as we get to the end of 2012 going into 2013.

Okay. And then I saw that you announced plans to launch a third options exchange. I just want to see if you have any thoughts on what your angle's going to be there, just in terms of pricing or market structure to differentiate it?

Well, the first thing I'd say is when you look at our initiatives, the ones that have the greatest certainty, with respect to providing a somewhat immediate return and increased profitability is the use of additional licenses here. So we obviously have 2 very successful options markets today. And within BX, you've seen what we've done in the equity side, and that's been more of a pricing play. So I think you'll see a combination of average, both pricing and market structure in BX options. And we're highly confident it's going to have a similar success as our other use of licenses has had.

I would now like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Bob Greifeld for any closing remarks.

All right, great. Thank you. The one thing I do want to say, with respect to the acquisition we announced today, it will be immediately accretive to our shareholders. As you look at the details of the acquisition, the purchase price was somewhat less than the cash on the balance sheet. So combining that with our existing energy and commodities franchise will provide a quick and substantial return to our shareholders, so we feel good about that. And then I'll just close on the comment again that we have been on the long march to diversify these businesses while making sure we focus on our core. This has been, I think, most evidenced in this quarter. $0.61 is our fourth best performance ever, and we did that against a very low volume environment. The last time we saw a volume environment like this, we made $0.38, so clearly a testament to the team here in terms of the work they've done over the years. And that work has also resulted in tremendous cash flow generation, which Lee touched on quite well. That cash flow generation allows us to confidently announce this dividend today and also to reaffirm our commitment to the share buyback program. So NASDAQ OMX is in great financial shape, strategically positioned, and we certainly look forward to the quarters to come. So thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today's conference. You may all disconnect, and have a wonderful day.