Good day everyone, and welcome to the Northern Trust Corporation first quarter 2010 earnings conference call. Today’s call is being recorded. At this time I would like to turn the call over to the Director of Investor Relations, Bev Fleming for opening remarks and introductions. Please go ahead.

Thank you Andrea. Welcome to Northern Trust Corporation’s first quarter 2010 earnings conference call. Joining me on our call this morning are Bill Morrison, Northern Trust’s Chief Financial Officer; Aileen Blake, our controller, and Preeti Sullivan from our investor relations team. Also joining us this morning is Allison Quentin [ph], who will be joining the investor relations team in Northern Trust in May, as Preeti embarks on a new role in corporate and institutional services. We welcome Allison into the investor relations team at Northern Trust and wish Preeti well in her new role. Both Preeti and Allison will attend our New York Investor Day on May 26. For those of you who did not receive our first quarter earnings press release or financial trends report by email this morning, they are both available on our web site at northerntrust.com. In addition, this April 20 call is being web cast live on northerntrust.com. The only authorized rebroadcast of this call is the replay that will be available through April 27. Northern Trust disclaims any continuing accuracy of the information provided in this call after today. Now for our safe harbor statement; what we say during today’s conference call may include forward-looking statements, which are Northern Trust’s current estimates or expectations of future events or future results. Actual results of course could differ materially from those indicated by these statements because the realization of those results is subject to many risks and uncertainties. I urge you to read our 2009 annual report and our periodic reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission for detailed information about factors that could affect actual results. Thank you again for your time today. Let me turn the call over to Bill Morrison.

Thank you Bev. Let me add my welcome to those of you listening to Northern Trust’s first quarter 2010 earnings conference call. Earlier this morning Northern Trust reported first quarter 2010 net income of $157 million equal to $0.64 per share. To assist you in understanding our performance this quarter, we’ve organized today’s remarks into the following sections. First, I’ll discuss market conditions that impacted our performance in the first quarter. Second, I’ll review our financial performance focusing on those items that most impacted our results. Third, I’ll offer our perspectives on the near term environment as well as the strong competitive positioning of Northern Trust. And finally, Bev and I will be pleased to answer your questions. The equity market environment improved for the fourth consecutive quarter. The S&P 500 was up 46.6% when compared with one year earlier and increased 4.9% during the first quarter. Let me give you the equity market trends that are most relevant to our fees. Equity market performance calculated on a one quarter lag basis, which is the methodology used for calculating C&IS custody and PFS Wealth Management fees, was strong. The S&P 500 increased 23.5% year-over-year on a one quarter lag basis. On a sequential quarter basis the one quarter lag markets 5.5%. Using the one month lag methodology that applies to PFS fees, excluding Wealth Management, the S&P 500 was up 34% versus the prior year and up 3% versus the first quarter. The positive impact of improving equity markets while welcome and encouraging was diminished in our performance by the ongoing negative impact of historically low short-term interest rates. For example, in the United States overnight interest rates averaged only 14 basis points in the first quarter. Three-month rates averaged only 26 basis points and short-term rates for the euro…

(Operator instructions) And our first question will come from Betsy Graseck with Morgan Stanley. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Good morning. Thanks.

Hi, Betsy.

Hi, Betsy. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Hi. A couple of questions. One is can we talk a little bit about the money market funds business, I just wanted to get your sense as to how your plan is – how your results are going relative to plan to retain that portfolio, and what your goals are as rates start to raise to attain that business internally?

We have seen a very slight decline in our money market assets taken at the top of the house level during the first quarter. Relative to the issue of how we plan to deal with recouping the level of money market fees that we are giving up today, which is meaningful, is predicated on the assumption that we will share part of the increase in yields in our funds that result from higher rates with clients, and our assumption is we will share roughly 50% of that increase with clients, which extrapolates out to us needing 50 or 60 basis points in increases in short-term rates in order to recoup the level of fees that we are currently rebating. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Okay. And that is primarily US dollar denominated, is that right?

Yes. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Okay. Could you – and the second question is just a follow up on, could you discuss your plans for the capital that you do have, you know, I know we don't know exactly how much excess capital you have given the fact that regulars aren’t out with their commentary yet with regard to Basel III. But will you give us a sense as to how you would like to use capital as you learn how much excess you have.

Well, the ongoing process of defining and defining to me means getting regulatory consents around what the definition of our excess capital is after whatever buffers are decided upon, it is still going to take some time to get through. Northern has just entered the parallel run process for the external parallel run for Basel II. So we're just at the beginning of the process. Assuming, to respond more directly to your question, that we had some clarity around that, we would like to do the things that you and others who own our stock would like to see us do, including perhaps buybacks on stocks at what would turn out to be attractive prices. I don't think we are going to be able to do that in the near-term until we get the kind of definition we are looking at – we're looking for. And so, we have become a little more focused than traditionally has been the case on acquisition opportunities both for the personal side of our business and the institutional side of our business, and in our investment management business. Obviously, we have not done anything materially, but we are out there looking in all segments. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: And is there anything in particular that is defining what you are looking for in terms of any geography or product?

Yes. In PFS Betsy, we are looking to add more client and support professional concentration in the north-eastern Mid-Atlantic States, and same kind of approach in the Western United States, principally in California. Again those initiatives are mostly client acquisition focused, and in the institutional side of our business, I think we are a little more focused on capabilities, principally in the fund administration business, but across the product range both in Europe and the US and Asia. We looked it a lot, haven't done anything yet. Betsy Graseck – Morgan Stanley: Okay. All right, thanks very much.

Our next question comes from Robert Lee with KBW. Robert Lee – KBW: Thanks. Good morning.

Hi, Lee. Robert Lee – KBW: Real quickly, back to the money fund business, on the fee waivers understanding that I guess the expectations that rates stay here for the remainder of the year, but would you expect to see – maybe some modest improvement. You have kind of had cash market rates kind of down sort at January lows, and there are some other money fund companies talk about seeing a little bit of easing after pressure. Not elimination, but little bit of easing of the pressure heading into Q2. Do you see some of that?

We look at that every day in hopes that we will see the kind of improvement you just described. It is up-and-down, but there has been a tiny bit, but Rob I don't see anything material so far. Robert Lee – KBW: Okay. And you know maybe sticking with the asset management business; I mean the new business trends in the past have been pretty good the past year. And I guess you know, held up reasonably well in the first quarter based on your comments. Any color you could give us about you seeing that kind of slow up at all or that business kind of continuous at that pace it had been last year, are you seeing any kind of change there?

The investment management business or new business broadly? Robert Lee – KBW: Well, I was thinking really in particular that flows into the past business within investment management?

I don't think we see any significant change either way. You know, new business across both sides of our client facing businesses are strong, pipelines are very strong. We remain quite optimistic. Robert Lee – KBW: Okay. And, you know I just wanted to clarify some of the comments you made about your new business pipelines, and I apologize, I probably didn't write down properly, but were you suggesting that in PFS you start to see side investors or clients rerisking, to some extent you are starting to see pick up once again in new business activity and new client wins?

Yes. I think the specific comment was March was the best month in PFS since we began keeping records and a lot of that is clients that are new to Northern, or we can't really comment necessarily on whether they are becoming more risk tolerant although the suggestion is that they are. Our internal clients, our existing clients are also – our existing clients are also becoming a little more active, but there is nothing in our statistics around asset allocation that would suggest that they are suddenly becoming much more risk tolerant. Robert Lee – KBW: Okay, and –

Rob, this is Bev, one of the statistics we did say in case you missed it during the call is that at the end of the quarter of our PFS assets under management, the equity portion was about 35.5%. So it was up a little bit from the end of the year, but not in a meaningful way that would suggest that people are jumping back in. I think the point is that we are just seeing people start doing things, start talking to us. So whether or not they are actually starting to take on more risk is yet to come. Robert Lee – KBW: Okay, great. And one last question, just on the comp line, I know, if I recall usually Q1, there is besides the spike in benefits, that there is usually a seasonal jump up in incentive compensation accruals, I guess, for how you have to account for option grants and whatnot. So could you possibly quantify – give us some sense of what that kind of seasonal impact would have been in Q1? And what I guess mostly goes away or somewhat goes away in subsequent quarters?

One of the things you will note is that there is some relatively meaningful noise in the component of share based compensation related to performance stock units, and that is because we actually reverse prior expense accruals as Bill mentioned in his prepared remarks in both the first quarter of 2009 and in the fourth quarter of 2009. And again that is all disclosed in our annual report prior 10-Qs and we will provide the details next week. In addition to that, your other question is that there is traditionally some seasonal uptick in stock option expense portion of share-based compensation because of the fact that any stock options issued to retirement eligible employees need to be immediately expensed in the first quarter. Obviously that didn't have as much of an effect last year, because stock option grants were lower last year as a result of circumstances you are aware of. So you will definitely see that the performance of stock had the impact on last year, and you will also see an uptick in the first quarter in stock option expense because of the seasonality that you exactly described. One of the things you will note is that there is some relatively meaningful noise in the component of share based compensation related to performance stock units, and that is because we actually reverse prior expense accruals as Bill mentioned in his prepared remarks in both the first quarter of 2009 and in the fourth quarter of 2009. And again that is all disclosed in our annual report prior 10-Qs and we will provide the details next week. In addition to that, your other question is that there is traditionally some seasonal uptick in stock option expense portion of share-based compensation because of the fact that any stock options issued to retirement eligible employees need to be immediately expensed in the first quarter. Obviously that didn't have as much of an effect last year, because stock option grants were lower last year as a result of circumstances you are aware of. So you will definitely see that the performance of stock had the impact on last year, and you will also see an uptick in the first quarter in stock option expense because of the seasonality that you exactly described. Robert Lee – KBW: Is it possible that that seasonality impact and how much of that kind of fades away over the subsequent quarters, just from the – for the retirement eligible employees?

You know, I think I do have that figure. Let me find it. So why don't we – Robert Lee – KBW: We can circle back.

Yes. Because I can get – I can give you the retirement eligible portion of share-based compensation for the first quarter. Is that the percent number that you are looking for? Robert Lee – KBW: Yes.

I think it is a little over $6 million. Robert Lee – KBW: All right. Great. Thank you very much.

Our next question comes from Mike Mayo with CLSA. Mike Mayo – CLSA: Good morning.

Good morning Mike. Mike Mayo – CLSA: Could you just help with the disconnect – I mean, your franchise is showing growth, what you said. So PFS gross new business was the best this quarter since you've kept records, best in March since you've kept records, I want to know what is gross new business, how you define that. And then assets under custody, it is up and you said new business is the best since the first quarter of 2008. Asset under management are up, so the core franchise is growing. At the same time the revenues aren't doing a whole lot. So can you quantify the impact of all of the seasonal and all of the nonpermanent factors that are hurting revenues to help fix that disconnect that I'm having?

Well, I think the biggest issue Mike on the personal side is the money market fee waivers. As to the impact of what you said you wanted to get a definition of how we calculate gross new business or net new business, it's typically the annual dollar amount of fees that are forecast by a new client relationship or an addition from an existing client. So if you define it that way you could bring in a substantial piece of business in March, it will be reported in March and you wouldn't see any revenue impact on that until the period beginning in April. We don't count new business at Northern trust until it is funded. So you should have a direct correlation to the time that the new business is announced and the beginning of the fee stream connected to that new business. Mike Mayo – CLSA: How much of the new business was new clients versus you know additional businesses with existing clients?

I haven't seen the detail on that yet, specifically from March but generally it's about 50-50 Mike. Mike Mayo – CLSA: And who are you getting new clients from?

Everyplace. Mike Mayo – CLSA: If you are – okay, I mean, big banks, brokers –

It is across the board. I don't think that you know, there are a lot of times where I could tell you, look, we are getting most of our business from one of two places and you and I have had those conversations in the past. Now I can tell you that there is one or two principal sources of business. It's, you know, in this environment where mostly everybody is deemed to be safe. You get back to these issues that we like where clients are looking for high quality of advice, consistency of service teams and companies that do business the right way. And so it's from all over the place Mike. Mike Mayo – CLSA: And I don't want to put words in your mouth, then, so does that mean the second quarter revenue numbers are partly baked in as the new business both from PFS and C&IS rolls through?

No, they will certainly be improved relative to that new stream of business, yes. Now, you don't know what you're going to lose in the second quarter that could make that run in a different way, but I think it's important to say that on both sides of the business, but particularly the personal business, our loss business experience has been among the best it has ever been. So at least through the first quarter, very high levels of gross new business, very low levels of lost business, and that should all things being equal drive the kind of revenue experience that you are talking about. Mike Mayo – CLSA: So, all in, last follow-up should this be the low point of the year?

No. You know, if – it depends on what we lose going forward Mike. Mike Mayo – CLSA: All right, thank you.

Our next question comes from Brian Foran with Goldman Sachs. Brian Foran – Goldman Sachs: Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning. Brian Foran – Goldman Sachs: How should we think about normalized SEC lending revenues? You've tended to average 11 to 12 basis points of your cash collateral, the industry as well over the past decade. When we look at the current run rate, excluding the mark-to-market being about half of that, is it all cyclical or is there any structural change in the revenue realization in your opinion?

Well, I think that we definitely saw in the first quarter the impact of interest rate environment, and the narrowing of spread there. But we also are seeing clients choose to take less risk in their collateral reinvestment guidelines. So that's having an impact as well. Brian Foran – Goldman Sachs: Is there any dimension you can put on, you know, if interest rates were normal right now and clients were showing their current risk appetite? Would we be kind of 10 basis points versus the historical 11 to 12 or would it be 8 basis points. Just trying to understand how much of it is the interest rate environment and how much of it is lower risk appetite?

I don't think we’ve provided any disclosures to break it down that way Brian.

But it's a combination of both, in fact. Brian Foran – Goldman Sachs: Okay, thank you.

Our next question comes from Brian Bedell with ISI Group. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Hello, can you hear me?

Yes, hi Brian.

Hi Brian. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Hi. I'm not sure if you have disclosed this yet but if you haven't, can you give me the breakdown of the equity fixed in the money market and the C&IS asset management and the same for PFS, I know you did the equity in the PFS.

For C&IS asset management, it was 45% equity, 14% fixed income and 41% short duration. For PFS equity it was 35%, fixed income was 33% and short duration was 32%. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: And was that – that's 35.5 in the equity?

Yes, I'm giving you rounded numbers. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Up a little bit. Okay. And then just to reconcile again the growth in new business, the comment on the growth in new business, I guess in terms of – Bill, you talked about what may or may not have already been funded, and if we look at PFS assets, both managed and custody, they're up 2.5% to 3% linked quarter, so – and you would have thought the market would have been largely responsible for that, you know, maybe some new business flows, are you basically saying of the gross new business, most of it is not funded in that end of period number?

No, most of it is funded. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: It is.

Yes.

Yes, in fact I’m saying Brian that we don't report news business unless it is funded. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Great, great, okay.

None of it is not funded. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Okay, so you must – I mean, with the asset numbers being up just about 3% linked quarter, you must have had some significant outflows, is that a fair statement or…?

Yes, I'm not sure which line item you're referring to Brian. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: I’m using like, just like the assets under management and PFS going from 140 – hold on one second, using 145 to 149 in the quarter.

Okay, I wanted to make sure I knew which line item you're referring to. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: And then the 331 to the 341 on the custody side.

Some of this, I think, comes out of our wealth management group and PFS. Wealth has had a fair amount of cash go out basically and they have also had a shift between assets that we’ve accounted as managed assets, cash typically that has been put into investment programs, more broad investment programs that we custody, but we don't run. So you've got money moving out, staying within Northern, but moving out of AUM and then moving into AUC and there is, obviously it has been in AUC, but there is a resultant decline in fee revenue because of that. So that may speak partly to your observation. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Okay, okay. So the basic takeaways, the gross new business trends are good but are you still seeing some – a mitigating factor from the items that you mentioned? And then I would also say is there also an impact from clients paying taxes on the negative side?

Sure. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: And that's seasonally high in the first quarter or more, do you see it more in the first couple of weeks this April?

It's actually higher in the second quarter as you would expect around April. There is planning for it. There is money moved around in advance. So it is spread across both quarters. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Okay, great, and then the total fee waivers, I'm sorry, can you repeat that the total amount that you’ve waived on money market fees for the quarter?

It's roughly $20 million, $16 million in the personal side and $4 million in the institutional side. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: Great, great, and then just one last question on credit quality. It seems that you're now down to this $40 million run rate. I know it's always tough to predict but based on what you are seeing on credit quality as of right now, do you think that provision level is sustainable going forward?

I can't say, you know, we look at it every quarter and as I've commented the last couple of quarters it's extremely lumpy and this quarter is a pretty good example of how lumpy it can be. We – as we measured it this year, we thought – or this quarter rather we thought $40 million was the right number based on the consistent process that we perform every quarter. We are going to have to take it quarter by quarter. Brian Bedell – ISI Group: All right, okay. Great. That's what I had. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Howard Chen with Credit Suisse. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Good morning Bill. Good morning Bev.

Good morning.

Good morning Howard. How are you? Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Good, thanks. It looks like a tick-up in loan balances this quarter. Could you just discuss Bill the broader environment and appetite for the lending that you do?

Yes, that's a very, very small up-tick in loans balances, but an up-tick none the less. Yes, I think generally that trends would be as we discussed previously that is our large corporate business continues to be very slow. I think our large corporate borrowers are continuing to access the credit, the fixed income markets and not use their bank lines. That seems to be continuing. There is some pretty good loan demand in certain parts of the PFS franchise. As you all know, the recovery is very uneven in the United States, and it is true in our franchise as well. So we are seeing growth in places like Texas and the northeast, some parts of the Midwest and northern California, but there is relatively limited quality demand in some of the more challenged states in our franchise, including Florida and Arizona and others. So it's pretty uneven Howard. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Okay.

I wouldn't say that there has been a turnaround and that loan demand is on the upswing. Let us say we are where we are. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Okay, thanks. That's helpful. And then on the asset servicing side I think you know, you and management have been of the belief that we didn't see more assets servicing market share shift during the height of the financial crisis due in part to the SEC lending gates that were up. As we continue to normalize here, where are we in that conversation Bill?

We are just – we are kind of following it. You know, we're looking at it every month and seeing what's happening. Bev commented a minute or two ago on the PFS side of the business with the exemption of those wealth management clients, who are moving, and remember wealth management has about 44% of its AUM in cash. Those clients are moving into more aggressive programs, some of which benefit us and some don't. The PFS business is really not doing much at all. You know, our equity percentage I think was up 1% quarter to quarter and that's principally market-driven. So we can't point to anything that says that our PFS clients are becoming more aggressive. However, the new business results suggest that personal clients, perhaps not previously our clients are becoming a little more aggressive, but it's not in our asset allocation to districts yet. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Okay, I'm sorry maybe I mis-stated the question. I was curious on the asset servicing side. We’ve talked in the past about some of these securities lending gates being up and that's not, you know, driving a lot of market share shift?

Right. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: From your perspective wanted to know from an industry perspective, where are we in that conversation of the SEC lending gates being you know, up or down?

As far as we know, those gates are up substantially everywhere, except we're probably the most lenient in that regard among the key players in this business. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Okay.

So very little change. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Okay, and then finally I know you have to go but not to beat this to death, but another follow-up on the new business trends in your commentary in March. Any specifics you could share on just you know geographies or products that that business seems to be skewed towards?

In terms of geographies it is pretty consistently spread on the personal side of the business around the United States. I think all of our regions were strong. That's looking at the numbers that even stand out.

Yes, in the Midwest – the Midwest and the southeast both did particularly strong on a sequential quarter basis.

Right, and as you know, those two are our biggest units by far in PFS. Howard Chen – Credit Suisse: Okay. Great. Thanks very much for taking the questions.

Our next question comes from Gerard Cassidy with RBC Capital Markets. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Good morning, Bill. Hi, Bev.

Hi, Gerard.

Hi, Gerard. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: A question for you guys. Bill, you mentioned that the wealth management clients had about 44% of their assets under management in cash. If you go back to '07, '06, during the peak of the market, where would that number have been about?

Well, first of all Gerard I want to make sure that you and others recall that when we refer to wealth management, we are specifically talking about the family office clients at the very high end of the wealth spectrum that we are not talking about our PFS clients in totality. We can tell you that from the perspective of PFS clients overall, we are at 35%, 35.5% right now. I would say most normally in recent years, we’ve probably been into the maybe the 50% range. We peaked at maybe 60%. So for PFS, the core PFS clients we’re still meaningfully below, but for wealth management families, it was not unusual for us to have a high proportion of cash we manage. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: And that 60% was in equities, correct, Bev?

Oh, yes. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Okay.

That was the peak – Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Correct. And regarding the fees, the waivers that you guys indicated on the money market mutual funds, $20 million, $16 million personal, $4 million institutional, when that comes back, we should see that show up I assume in the fee lines for PFS and C&IS. Is that right?

Yes, absolutely. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: And if I heard you correctly, earlier, we need to see Fed funds somewhere around 50 basis points to 75 basis points for them to come back or do we need it higher?

No, I think I said 50 basis points to 60 basis points higher than they are today so that would get you some place close to what you said to a 70, 75 bibs, but again remember that we are making the assumption unlike some of our competitor that we will have to share some of that rate increase with our clients to keep the balances and I don’t think certain others have that assumption into their planning, but we do intend until we see that there is another option to share 50% of that market increase in yields with our clients. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: So if we're fortunate enough to be seeing higher rates a year from now, and say Fed funds is 150 basis points or 200 basis points, you would – I would assume be able to capture all of those fees, is that fair? Because you're splitting with–?

Yes. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Okay. And then…I'm sorry?

It is a lower number than that. It is 60 basis points to 75 basis points, or 60 basis points to 75 basis points in short-term rate environment that would allow us to share 50% of our increased yield with clients and earn back all of our rebated fees. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Do you expect to be able to recapture the fees that have been waived thus far?

No, no, no. There is going back on these, but we will seize rebating fees entirely when we are at. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: I see. You referenced earlier the spread between I think it was the Fed funds rate and the 30-day LIBOR rate.

Correct. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Is that most important to look at for the securities lending business? That part, I didn't fully capture.

Yes. That is why we put it in there. That is the relationship that drives the investing spread and securities lending. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: And I think you said it is the lowest that you guys have seen in many, many years, if not at a record low?

That is right. And that is why our core earnings from SEC lending are where they are. Our volumes are up a little bit, in fact I said up 27% year-over-year, but the spreads are down dramatically because of that spread phenomenon. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: And then finally, if we are stuck in this low rate environment for another 12 months, and we don't see rates higher a year from now, are there expense reduction programs you can implement to help offset some of the pressures on your revenues and your margins?

There always are. We have been trying to manage expenses judiciously, and maintain the integrity of our client facing teams and our technology budgets, because today's environment on both sides of the shop, personal and institutional is quite complex. We need strong consistent teams of client support to maintain our business and to generate the kinds of new business that we are pleased to be able to talk about this morning. Up until now, we're happy with where we're and we will see what the future brings. Gerard Cassidy – RBC Capital Markets: Thank you for your time.

And our last question today will come from Clare Hart with JP Morgan. Clare Hart – JP Morgan: Hi, good morning. I think Gerard sort of asked my question, but just taking a step back from it, maybe a top line perspective, or a high level perspective, how do you think about sort of negative operating leverage? In any given quarter, it sounds like it might just be what happens as you sort of continue to fill out and support the brand and your people in the front office and that sort of thing, but beyond one quarter, let's say, how do you think about negative operating leverage or operating leverage in the model?

You know, we almost like it, and we are targeted to generate positive operating leverage almost all the time. In this kind of environment, it just hasn't been possible for us to do that. And frankly when macroeconomic conditions drive the level of reduction that we have seen in some of these revenue categories, I don't know how we could have recognize positive leverage over the past couple of quarters when you take the non-recurring stuff out particularly. We are optimistic that the growth rates in the business and the facts that these economic conditions can't last forever, it won't last forever. It will get us closer to where we historically have planned to be. Clare Hart – JP Morgan: I guess just, the way I was thinking about it was over the course of the call, we've talked about a lot of things where fees were waived and different opportunities, new business wins and that sort of thing, so from my perspective as I hear that, I think that should, as the top line essentially comes back, we should be able to see some of the benefits of that on the bottom line, so to speak. I don't feel like you've been sort of holding back on expenses that will sort of come back and forth as we see the revenue come back and forth, I guess is my question really?

I would think that you have that exactly right. So that is exactly how we are thinking. Clare Hart – JP Morgan: Okay, thank you.

And with that there are no further questions. I would like to turn the call back over to today’s presenters.

Okay. That is all we have. We thank you very much for joining us, and we will talk to you all shortly. Have a good day.

Again, this does conclude today's call. Thank you for your participation.