Andrew Clark – The Guardian Ken Li – The Financial Times Shira Ovide – Wall Street Journal Claire Atkinson – Broadcasting and Cable Claire Delahunty – The Business Spectator Ryan [Nakatumo] – The Associated Press

Welcome to the News Corporation second quarter 2010 earnings release conference call. (Operator instructions) At this time I will turn the conference over to your host, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations for News Corp., Reed Nolte. Please go ahead, Sir.

Dave will give a detailed presentation of the quarter results followed by Rupert who will give his own perspective and color on the quarter. We will then take your questions, first from the financial community and then from the press. This call may include certain forward-looking information with respect to News Corporation's business and strategy. Actual results could differ materially from what is said. News Corporation's Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2009, identifies risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ, and these statements are qualified by the cautionary statements contained in such a filing. Additionally in this quarter you might have noticed that we have changed the presentation format of the consolidated income statement to no longer display an operating income caption. Instead we provide the measurement of total segment operating income in the earnings release and our financial statements. As contrasted to our prior reporting of operating income the only difference is that total segment operating income excludes impairment and restructuring charges. Prior periods have been revised to conform to this new presentation. Total segment operating income is a non-GAAP financial measure. The definition of and a reconciliation of total segment operating income to income before taxes is provided in both the earnings release and our 10-Q filing. In addition, we may refer to other non-GAAP financial measures. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures can be found on our website. If you have any questions on the presentation you can contact me after the call. With that, I will turn it over to Dave.

Thank you, and good afternoon everybody. At the outset of the call I would like to note that our reported results this quarter reflect a one-time charge related to the previously announced settlement of litigation involving the company’s integrated marketing service segment. The related $500 million pre-tax settlement charge is reflected in this quarter’s segment operating income and it had a $315 million or$0.12 per share net income effect. After adjusting for this item we are extremely pleased with the underlying strong financial results we reported for the second quarter of fiscal 2010 where total segment operating income reached $1.2 billion. This is an improvement of 44% from a year ago and this improvement rises to 50% when factoring in the absence of the results from NDS which are no longer consolidated this year. This increase was fueled by a 10% overall revenue growth and was further supported by the cost reduction efforts we initiated over the past several years. Our reported net income in the quarter was $254 million with earnings per share of $0.10. This compares to a reported loss of $6.4 billion or $2.45 per share last year. However, excluding the net income effect of both tiers of one-time items such as the litigation charge this year and the impairment charge we took last year, second quarter earnings per share this year were $0.25 as compared to the year-ago results of $0.15. Now I would like to provide some context on some of the results in our segments. Let’s start with the film segment where second quarter operating income was $324 million. This is up $212 million over last year’s result with revenue growth of 28%. This strong performance was led by the worldwide home entertainment release of Ice Age, Dawn of the Dinosaurs and also reflected…

Thank you Dave. Good afternoon everyone. As Dave has just described our true operating results for this past quarter were extraordinary and we have endured the most severe recession since the Great Depression but have emerged from this turbulence and turmoil I think as the world’s preeminent content company. The crisis recasts companies in weak economies. The crisis highlights weaknesses and expedites pre-existing trends. From a crisis comes clarity and the strength of our company and our strategy is clear for all to see. Excuse the immodesty but News Corporation’s preeminence as a content creator comes at the debate over the primacy of content is over. Content is not just king. It is the emperor of all things electronic. We are on the cusp of a digital dynasty in which our company and our shareholders will profit greatly. Devices and platforms are proliferating but this clever technology is merely an empty vessel without any great content. Machines are not powered by batteries but by creativity and ingenuity. By content that is original, accessible and trusted. Those characteristics define the nature of our company and are the pillars on which we are building a profitable future. It is worth taking a moment to put the company’s content into context. We have the world’s leading film studio which has just made the most successful film in cinematic history. We are thrilled that the confidence we placed in Avatar and its talented team led by James Cameron has been recognized by appreciative audiences around the world and is still being recognized. Just this morning it was nominated for nine Academy Awards including Best Picture. Beyond the stunning financial success, I am convinced Avatar will be a harbinger of fundamental change in the industry and herald an exciting new era of 3D entertainment. It…

(Operator Instructions) The first question comes from the line of Allan Gould – Soleil. Allan Gould – Soleil: How big a deal is this retransmission consent, when are there a lot more coming up in the near future and over the next 3-5 years should we be thinking $40 million a month or $100 million a month coming out of retransmission consent?

I am probably not going to quantify it with specificity at this point. What is clear is it is a transforming event. It really puts the network on a path where it is a profitable business that generates the type of profit I think it should for the audience and the importance it represents in the marketplace. In terms of timing, we have two of the top ten distributors done. We are obviously in very early stages. There really are two fronts to this issue. One is through our O&O’s where we deal directly with distributors. The second is through the affiliate body. First, in the arena where we deal directly it is about a 3-4 year process and in the next two years about half of the distribution universe is up with us we will deal with it. In terms of the affiliates who are engaged now, we think we value the relationship. We think it is important that we reach a fair conclusion. That being said we think the network is the most valuable and important programming we provide to consumers. We have begun those discussions but those discussions will really probably continue in the months to come. Certainly they will move forward. We are engaged now and we will move forward on those. Again with the affiliates their deals come up with distributors likewise and probably that same 3 plus year timeframe. I think that is the broad context. Obviously we have a lot of work left to do but I think this really does set us on course and points us in a direction that Fox Network can assume the role it should. It is the most important television channel we have. It is the force that drives our television business and it should generate profits that reflect it and we think we stand on that course. Allan Gould – Soleil: So this fixes the broadcast business model?

I think it puts us…overly simplistic to say everything is fixed. We have great management there. We are a number one network. I think it puts us on a course where we can generate the profits we should at the network. So yes, I think it is simplistically it fixes it but it certainly puts it in a competitive place where it has a dual revenue stream like successful cable networks does and those that it competes with.

The next question comes from the line of Jessica Reif Cohen – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch. Jessica Reif Cohen – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: I was hoping you could help us on Avatar in terms of the timing of the impact, when you think you will have the home video released? Can you discuss any plans for sequels and how the economics may change? Then on TV just to follow-up on Alan’s question I was hoping you could comment one on the kind of current advertising outlook as we move into second half of fiscal 2010? Would you expect between retrans and reverse comp you will get back to prior levels of the TV business of more than $1 billion in OI?

I will answer on Avatar first. We put in some of the costs of course were taken in the last quarter. Avatar we think about 60% of the profits, perhaps better, will be in the following six months. Over the next two quarters. Which means we certainly plan to release the DVD as soon as possible. But it is continuing for a great period it seems in the cinemas.

We are not going to yank it out of theaters when it is doing $30 million a weekend.

It was $30 million here but it was $95 million outside of here in the rest of the world. So we have $125 million a weekend, at even $100 million we will keep it going. Jessica Reif Cohen – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: On the sequels and any change in the economics?

Sequels, we are in very early talks about it. Jim has ideas for one. We haven’t come to any agreement with him or budgets or timing or anything. Being Jim Cameron I wouldn’t hold your breath for an early one.

We certainly both intend to have one.

We will be pushing for one. Jessica Reif Cohen – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: I guess I am getting is there a chance you will have more than 40% of the economics in a sequel?

Not necessarily. We are very happy with the way the break up has come. Jim Cameron’s pictures tend to go over budget and we like to lay off the risk of loss. 60/40, 50/50. You are in that area. We don’t know if there is still going to be the money there but I think after the experience of our partners this time they will be back.

We think film financing is still an intelligent way to run the business. As we negotiate them going forward we negotiate them. It is a negotiation like anything else. There is value inherent in a sequel.

Ask anybody. It is very easy to drop $100 million in a hurry on a film and we like to lay off a lot of the risk. Jessica Reif Cohen – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: On the…

On the ad market, on a positive it continues to be really good in a very strong ad market. The network is still doing scatter business at 15%, sort of mid teens above the up front. The cable channels really solid, double digits in news. The entertainment business on the cable side probably in the neighborhood of 20% of up front. Sports which has probably been the one that probably had the toughest road to hoe given some things like autos is actually stronger than it has been. So the ad market has really been a solid market. In the station business I think Dave said it the station business we have a quarter that looks like it will be sort of mid to high teen’s year-over-year. So you still have an environment where I would say you don’t have the visibility historically you had and people talk about the economy and how reliable are some of the positive things you are seeing but certainly with those qualifications what we are experiencing and dealing with in the marketplace all continues to be positive from an advertising perspective really across stations, network and cable.

I think you could say this quarter looks like the stations will be up 18-19% but you must remember we are now beginning to compare with some very bad quarters last year and are we down on the booms years of two years ago? Yes, certainly. But our profits are very well up on last year.

To your question….

You can only see one quarter. In newspapers, it is very hard to see more than 2-3 weeks.

In terms of what is the longer-term profitability of the broadcast business and the network combined, it is certainly…I am not going to be specific. It is certainly $1 billion plus business.

The next question comes from the line of John Janedis – Wells Fargo. John Janedis – Wells Fargo: I have a question on Sky Italia. It looks like this year you could see margins maybe back to the 2007 levels. I assume you think you could increase subs by at least a couple of million over time. I am wondering what should we look at as a leading indicator for improvement in the business? Is it less promotion? The economy? Political? Something else? Are we at a point now where the soccer and programming costs are largely fixed so we can see a start of the margin going forward when you see the sub gains?

I think as we look at Sky Italia, if I look next calendar year roughly probably it is not where we are focused on sub growth. I think it probably is a more stable sub environment. So that tough economy. We sort of really are getting to the end of digesting the price increase, the VAT increase that occurred close to a year ago. So it helps just as we absorb that. I think we had to adjust to some of the issues in terms of selling our product with the loss of advertising space on the media fat channels. Again, I think we are making adjustments and the court has given us the right to do it. I think we are again, sort of appropriately getting on top of that. Given that environment our focus in the short-term we are looking at stabilizing that appropriately and managing the business in a tough environment. I think if you look through towards the end of the year and going forward we do really still think we have a lot of sub growth in front of us. It is a market that still has only 30% pay penetration. We have a great product. I think we have a great brand and a great franchise in the market place and we really should be able to build on that position as we go forward. The Soccer deal we have a deal done for three years so we have CPI type increases in the next three years so we have a pretty predictable situation in terms of those costs. And I think our focus in the short-term again we will probably be on stabilize the business dealing with some of the issues we have had like churn. Churn has been a challenge this year and again similar with the price increase. The market itself but I think we feel we are taking the steps to get on top of it but I guess if I had to look for something in the short-term I think something like churn would be the type of measure we would be focused on and improving efficiencies and really stabilizing that business in a tough environment so it can grow which it should.

The next question comes from the line of Doug Mitchelson – Deutsche Bank. Doug Mitchelson – Deutsche Bank : I wanted to ask about growth prospects for cable networks. Profits have increased over four fold from 2004 to now to at least what looks like a $2 billion plus of EBIT this year. The last year or two had a good chunk that was driven by Fox News renewals. I was hoping you could help us understand how much growth is left at cable networks. Can you break down the drivers of growth from here? Also indicate how much longer can cable nets maintain double digit profit growth. That would be helpful.

Certainly in Sky News we have had most of the effect of the big increase in the price we are charging for it but we have another year to go before everybody [cut] kicks in. It probably will not be as big an increase as this year but it is a very solid one, turning a big double figure. Overall, we think we have great potential for growth in our existing channels both in profits and in distribution. We have quite a long way to go yet. When you look at the profits of a long established channel like USA we have got plenty of room for growth.

I would second that. If you look at it in two levels in the U.S. I think you are going to head into a period where it is quality over quantity and I think we said that before. I think if you got really strong channels you should be able to drive them. I think we are more popular than ever. I think we are continuing to take share and if you look at our big drive channels FX is nowhere near what USA generates. Nat Geo nowhere near where something like Discovery Channel generates. Fox News realistically, Fox News just continues to get stronger and stronger. I don’t know there is a channel that is more important or powerful in the television universe in the U.S. I think that channel has great upside to it. I think those powerful channels which are going to drive it have a lot of room left to grow and is something we are bullish about. The international marketplace which is the other front really at its core is going to get driven as the international pay TV business really follows the U.S. business in terms of growth and penetration first and foremost. We are a leader in most of the places we deal if we do business so we are in a great position to take advantage of those markets as they grow in terms of size, penetration and the like. We think that business internationally has enormous growth ahead of it as the market grows and we take advantage of the position and we enter those competitive markets. It is a business that has a lot of room to grow. I know everybody asks where does the money come from. Realistically we want good relationships with distributors but the distributors are making a lot of money with big, healthy profit margins. I guess those will be the negotiations we have in the marketplace to get our fair share for the quality of the content we have.

Basically throughout the world outside of America which is pretty fully developed you have about 20% growth in Pay television wherever you look, wherever it is available in the world. We are on those platforms and we get that 20% growth. We expect to put other channels on, to charge more and improve them. We have a very big future ahead of us there. I think we have really only just started.

The next question comes from the line of Michael Nathanson – Sanford Bernstein. Michael Nathanson – Sanford Bernstein : Dave I wanted to know if you could help us drill down on papers for a second? What percentage of the revenue growth and profit growth has come from currency or what was organic?

It is about $190 million of revenue from currency and about $25 million of the earnings. As I said before, that relates to the Australian dollar strengthening against the U.S. dollar. Michael Nathanson – Sanford Bernstein : In terms of your guidance for this fiscal year and operating profits does your guidance envision Avatar going to DVD? You kind of danced around that. Is that part of what you are assuming when you provide guidance?

I didn’t get that. I am sorry. Michael Nathanson – Sanford Bernstein : No the question we have is within your operating income guidance for this fiscal year does that assume DVD release for Avatar in the current fiscal year?

Yes but it won’t be 3D. At this stage the science is not developed into 3D DVDs. Isn’t that correct?

We haven’t put a date out. We are not going to…we will have actually the second copy. We want the opportunity to have it evolve as much as 3D Avatar down road but not in this window. The only thing I will say on the film is if you look year-over-year we had a pretty good second half last year so in terms of what is driving year-over-year compared to when you get to the second half we had a pretty good film year in the second half. I wouldn’t say it is the film that is driving the second half.

The next question comes from the line of Rich Greenfield – Pali Capital. Rich Greenfield – Pali Capital: I wanted to follow up on this whole retrans issue. I think Chase you said at an investor conference several months ago that if ESPN gets $5 a month why shouldn’t Fox be getting $5 a month. I guess you had incredible success with Idol and Season 9 and you have obviously gotten retrans and the cable operators seem increasingly willing to play ball on retrans in bigger and bigger ways. I am wondering what are the issues? Is it regulatory? What stopped you from literally setting a hard level of something like $4-5 per month per sub for the Fox Network? How do you drive this far faster even than you are now or why aren’t you even just pushing with an extra zero in front of it?

We are modest people.

I guess in some ways Rome wasn’t built in a day. We have important relationships with distributors. We want to get fair value for our content but I think in all honesty we tried to approach this constructively. We built businesses with them. We built valuable cable channels. We feel we have enormous value in the Fox network. We felt with the right thing to do was to try and take a big step forward to get the value of that Fox content recognized. Could you argue it is worth significantly more? Sure. You could. There are a lot of issues involved. Certainly you did hear noise from an array of fronts and I think you try to take all those factors in terms of the relationship you have with them in other businesses, the broader marketplace and try to figure out how do you get this to a place that at least gets us started in terms of recognizing the fair value for the Fox Network. It doesn’t have…I think what we are trying not to do is while it is a difficult negotiation and a negotiation that ultimately was really destructive to a point that fractured a lot of things in a way that it wasn’t sort of respecting how do we continue to build a business with the distributors as we have over the last X years.

I would just like to add the big cable companies are making really great operating profits and what we are asking for and even of our network competitors ask for the same and get the same is certainly not going to kill the cable companies. Maybe 10% of their operating profits. We still have 2-3 years to pass through.

I think over time we expect we should get a value that is reflective of the value of our content. It is a matter of how do you get there in a way that is I guess people would call it aggressive and another level that we tried to be respectful of an array of fronts and relationships. Rich Greenfield – Pali Capital: When you look at the deals you have outstanding if this is the baseline of your new contract strategy going forward how many years before…is it a 2-year process? Do you get 50% of it in the next 12 months and the other 50% the year after? What kind of is the waterfall to get this to affect the vast majority of the country for you over the next few years?

I think what I said was again the ones we deal directly with we have some [inaudible] of affiliates but we don’t have quite the visibility through the affiliate side, but my guess is it is not dissimilar. The ones we deal with directly it is a 3-4 year process. Probably in the next few years about half of the sub base about half of them or so.

The next question comes from the line of Imran Khan – JP Morgan. Imran Khan – JP Morgan: Can you please talk about your view on the value of film libraries in current conditions? There are two reportedly for sale, MGM and Miramax. Are these two attractive and complimentary assets for a major studio like News Corp.? Secondly, cable networks which is roughly half of your operating profit the markets were 34% in this quarter operating profit. How should we think about long-term operating profit margins for this business?

There are two questions. Film libraries. It is just a matter of opinion what they are worth. The big one, MGM is for the most part very old and there are some good films there. The right price we would be interested but it appears that others are more interested. I think you can count us out of that one altogether. We don’t know how that will end up. I can rule out Miramax right away.

I think in terms of film libraries again it is certainly value. You have to look at a DVD market that is in decline not growth which is a significant part of it. On the flip side the television market overseas is pretty healthy. The second issue on film library is you need that current product that clearly reinvigorates. If you just have a stale library that sits there and gets stale over time it is probably a depreciating asset. So I think it is important in a film library that has current product flowing in that continues to give it a currency and liveliness to it. I think in terms of the long-term cable, long-term cable margins I think we could leave it as we have got it and we continue to drive and in some ways the business is as quickly as you take global franchises that probably have opportunities. National Geographic, National Geographic Wild, the type of content that really travels around the world I think gives us an opportunity to really create value very cost efficiently and the like. So I think we feel good about where the cable business is and opportunities to continue to drive those margins forward.

The next question comes from the line of Spencer Wang – Credit Suisse. Spencer Wang – Credit Suisse : On the guidance, I believe you grew EBIT about 26% in the first half so the guidance would seem to imply a little bit of a deceleration in the second half despite the ad market getting better, comps getting easier plus Avatar.

When you doubled your guidance it was a deceleration but…essentially it is the same as we had before. We had a great first half in the film company. Spencer Wang – Credit Suisse : Then maybe a second question for Rupert.

This quarter we honestly do not have any visibility on the last quarter and certainly you will be paying the usual business of charging a lot for new films for the next financial year.

The biggest [tailgate] in the film was we actually had a very good last year a very weak first half and much stronger second half. So we have comparative to last year we got a big benefit in the first half on a comparison from a weak film business the first six months of fiscal 2009. Spencer Wang – Credit Suisse : Maybe one quick question for Rupert. On the books business obviously there has been a bit of controversy over how Apple may price e-books versus Amazon. I was wondering if you could just share with us your perspective on retail or wholesale pricing with books in a digital delivery mode?

We don’t like the Amazon model of selling everything at $9.99. They don’t pay us that. They pay us the full wholesale price of $14 or whatever we charge. We think it really devalues books and it hurts all the retailers of the hard cover books. We are not against [inaudible] books. On the contrary we like them very much indeed. It is low cost to us and so on. But we want some room to maneuver in it. Amazon, sorry Apple in its agreement with us which has not been disclosed in detail does allow for a variety of slightly higher prices. There will be prices very much less than the printed copies of books but still will not be fixed in a way that Amazon has been doing it. It appears that Amazon is now ready to sit down with us again and renegotiate pricing.

Before turning to the press inquiries which will be next, I would like to leave investors with a few closing comments. We obviously feel good about our second quarter results and the momentum of our business for the rest of the year with our fiscal 2010 guidance doubling from a quarter ago. But with these results do not really reflect the degree to which our businesses are truly positioned to grow over the next few years. In broadcasting as we have touched on we are now on track to build a dual revenue stream business that enables Fox to achieve a value that equals its strength and its importance to viewers. Our leadership in content creation in both film and television as Rupert said, continues to build as many of our competitors struggle and new technologies like 3D and mobile platforms open up new avenues of revenue growth. At the same time these new platforms and devices open up new avenues for our new sports and print content. Our cable channels have great momentum both in the U.S. and overseas. In the U.S. we believe quality brands and content will be the real winners. Channels like Fox News and Nat Geo ideally position us. Internationally we have built a position of true leadership that will take advantage of its subscription TV as it catches up with the U.S. and around the world. These businesses while they are all unique franchises provide News Corporation a great opportunity to drive our profits and cash flow to a whole new level as we grow beyond this year. Thank you. With that I guess we will turn it over to the press.

The next question comes from the line of Andrew Clark – The Guardian. Andrew Clark – The Guardian: I wonder if you could just give us an update on where you are with charging for newspaper websites. Have you made a decision for what kind of model you will be implementing whether it will be some sort of metered or membership model and what that climate is looking like?

We are looking at various alternatives. I don’t think we are ready to announce what they will be. We won’t be ready yet to make an announcement but we are in the midst of a lot of talks with a lot of people that are coming to a head and I think you will hear a lot more from us over the next two months. Andrew Clark – The Guardian: I don’t know if you had a chance to read Alan [inaudible] recent lecture but I wonder what you think of people who all think that newspapers are sleepwalking into oblivion if they feel they cannot see an irreversible trend of content becoming free?

I think that sounds like BS to me. Andrew Clark – The Guardian: So you think that free content strategy is not going to work?

The next question comes from the line of Ken Li – The Financial Times. Ken Li – The Financial Times: Rupert you mentioned earlier that traffic was stabilizing at My Space. Can you give us an update on the traffic at My Space with regard to Google and will it still fall short by about $100 million on that $900 million agreement?

On the search the answer is yes. It does fall short. I think we have seen on both, everybody I think Facebook sees this too that people using social networks do not use search a great deal. But our advertising is showing a little bit better strength for the future. It has been disappointing and there is a lot going on there. We have made tremendous reorganizations and it is really too early to make confident predictions.

Trend wise clearly things have improved. We have got work in progress. I think it is better service.

From going down we are beginning to go up. It is too early to draw big conclusions.

I think in terms of we are pretty much on track with what we talked about a quarter ago.

The next question comes from the line of Shira Ovide – Wall Street Journal. Shira Ovide – Wall Street Journal: Since the Time Warner Cable deal has been such a focus today by year four of that deal could you give us a sense if Time Warner Cable has agreed to pay more than $0.60 per sub for Fox?

We are not going to comment on specific contract terms. Shira Ovide – Wall Street Journal: Even to give a range?

No, we are not going to comment. We feel we achieved the goals we set out to achieve. We are not going to comment on specific terms. Shira Ovide – Wall Street Journal: Let me just ask about late night then. Do you think you should and will start a late night TV show with Conan O’Brien?

I would say there are different opinions within the network. Certainly if the program people can show us that we could do it and be fairly confident of making a profit on it we would do it in a flash. We are giving it a lot of thought and a lot of examination. Shira Ovide – Wall Street Journal: But you haven’t started talks with Conan or his representatives?

I am sure there have been some conversations but no, if you mean real negotiations, no.

The next question comes from the line of Claire Atkinson – Broadcasting and Cable. Claire Atkinson – Broadcasting and Cable: I wonder if you might be able to talk about second quarter cancellation options. Are we seeing marketers firming up for next quarter at this point? I wonder if we could get maybe an outlook on the up front whether we think that is going to be a lot stronger than last year’s?

It is January, that is six months away.

Given we are selling scatter pricing at 15-20% off, I think we would probably have to take the cancellation. We are in a very good place in terms of what we have sold. So…

We will be going to the upfront as the number one network and stronger than anybody else but that is about all we can say.

If things continue, and we can’t really predict the upfront but if they continue as they are now it will be better. There is a lot of time between now and then.

The next question comes from the line of Claire Delahunty – The Business Spectator. Claire Delahunty – The Business Spectator: Can you give any uptake for any plans to charge for online content and as well what regions will you be looking to do outside the U.S. market with charging for online?

We will be charging online wherever we have publications. We certainly plan on Australia, Britain and this country. Claire Delahunty – The Business Spectator: Any more precise plans for Australia? Any specific online publications you will be looking at next?

It will certainly be true for all of our publications. We will see how it develops. It wouldn’t surprise me if Australia is a couple of months behind the other countries. It is just a tremendous amount of work to do everywhere.

The next question comes from the line of Ryan [Nakatumo] – The Associated Press. Ryan [Nakatumo] – The Associated Press: Repeating the late night question if you do go into talks with Conan O’Brien how are your relationships with affiliates and how would you make that work? Would you potentially run into similar problems that NBC had with affiliates?

No, certainly very different ones. NBC’s problem was their move from 10 to 11 reduced the lead into all their news services which reduced the news service ratings which in turn gave Conan a much less lead in than Leno had been getting. We don’t have that problem. On the other hand, all our affiliates tend to run syndicated programming from 11 to 11:30. Most of them profitably. It will take time to adjust. If we started to go ahead and do it and do it at 11:00 rather than 11:30 immediately I am sure we would have some difficult negotiations. But I am speculating. We will have to wait and see.

Thank you everybody for joining the call today. If you have any further questions please call us in New York.

Ladies and gentlemen this conference will be available for replay after 6:30 p.m .ET today through February 11, 2010 at midnight. You may access the AT&T teleconference replay system at any time by dialing 800-475-6701 and entering the access code of 140389. International participants may dial 320-365-3844. That does conclude your conference call for today. We do thank you for your participation and for using AT&T Executive Teleconference. You may now disconnect.