Good morning. As always, we’re going to answer the questions that we received over the Web. And if there is time, then we will take the questions that we have received over the telephone. The presentations are already available in Spanish and English for those of you who would like to follow them. But they are all of the slides presented by the CEO and the CFO available to you. First of all, let us begin with the questions on strategy and regulations, follow up questions on the European Banking Authority. I’m going to group the questions. Sergio Gamez from Merrill Lynch and (inaudible) from Bernstein asked whether we can say something about the latest news from the EBA. What are the consequences of that for the group, particularly in future acquisitions or divestments. And if you think the European Union will somehow limit or impose?

The Q&A session will begin now. (Operator Instructions)

Well, I think we give lots of details in the presentation that we just made on the requirements of the EBA, on the one hand, and it’s also very clear in the different activities that the bank is going to carry out. Some of them are already underway. But we’re going to do other things as well to meet the requirement. We have an internal objective of reaching 10% by June 2012, more specifically in the chart that I presented a moment ago. We indicate three levels that we will be reaching in the future – organic generation of capital, which is very expensive. But we have been achieving this, a reduction in the risk-weighted assets basically due to the progressive rollout that comes from the past of the rolling out of models for our assets – risk asset to – our efforts to convert them into risk asset and then continues optimization of our operations which will lead to reductions of the risk-weighted assets. So, all of these will allow us to meet the limits set by EBA. So, I wanted to insist that we don’t need to do a capital increase to achieve this and nor will we change our dividend payout policy. I think I’ve answered the question.

Yes, what about the assets?

No. We don’t have any need to adopt any other measures than the ones I just mentioned.

Francisco (inaudible) is asking that in order to reach the guidance of repeating recurrent benefits in 2011, you would need a net profit of EUR2.3 billion in the fourth quarter. Are you still going to keep that guidance for 2011? And to you think that the agreements that were reached last night in Europe will allow markets, debt markets to open for Santander and Spanish banks at viable prices?

With regards to the first question, in effect, arithmetically speaking, we are lacking that amount to reach the same level of profits that we had last year, but there’s still a quarter left and the third quarter is always worse than the other. So, we still have the idea that we expect in the Investor Day that we would like to repeat our largest profit or slightly less than that. But basically, yes, we would like to equal last year’s profit. And with regards to your second question, I would say that we hope that these measures that were decided on last night will open market, would put market at ease. But taking into account the recent history, I dare not do any forecast yet.

There’s a question from Carlos Berastain from Deutsche Bank. The organic generation of capital; (inaudible) low taking into account the profits that we are obtaining in the traditional generation of capital. And those 40 basis points for three quarters. We have been conservative because as you know we have been generating quite more than that. So, that’s because we wanted to give out a conservative message when we talk about the future capital figures.

(Inaudible) is asking the EBA says that those banks that don’t reach 9%, they expect not to pay out any dividend or bonuses. So, can we therefore draw the conclusion that Santander will not pay out dividend until it reaches that 9%?

I don’t think we apply to this because as I’ve said we are going to have more than that 9%. Even in December of this year, it is possible that we might reach that figure, that 9%. Therefore, we are not in that situation.

There are several questions on the capital gains generated by the selling of the business in the U.S. Sergio Gamez from Merrill Lynch and Raoul Leonard from RBS asked, first of all why did those capital gains – why are they used to reinforce provisions and not – and are not included in the capital? And can you shed some more light on how provisions are going to be dealt with? And there’s another technical question on what could be the impact in the capital of minority interest.

The impact of capital, I can answer that. It’s very small. And it affects the risk assets, the goodwill, and minority interests, and that netting is a very small impact. So, basically the question is can you shed some more light on the provisions and why do you put the money into provisions and not capital.

Well, the 1.5 billion in capital gains can be used as we wish, and right now we – there are different alternatives, of course, total or partial to make use of that 1.5 billion. And we want to have the chance at the end of the year to decide with flexibility. So, our idea right now, but that’s just the first thought, is that we don’t need to reinforce our capital, nevertheless, we do think it is a very good signal to the market if we reinforce our provisions particularly in Spain, and particularly in Spain for real estate assets. And therefore, I repeat, it’s just the first thought that we haven’t reached a binding decision yet is to go along those lines. And most probably a significant part of this 1.5 billion will be used for provisions for real estate assets. But so far we haven’t yet made the final decision on how much we would dedicate to that, so we prefer not to say anything more. But as I said, that’s what we’re thinking of right now.

There’s a question from Marco Trellano about the impact of risk-weighted assets and the Greek bonds and so.

We specified that in the EBA stress test already. So, if you want, we can give you the technical detail of the weight of each of the assets at risk.

More questions about EBA. Andrea Filtri from MedioBanca is asking what do we think will be the impact of all the measures adopted on the Spanish banking sector overall, not just us? Jaime (inaudible) is asking about dividend payment which we’ve already answered, and whether this includes scrip dividend or not, the EUR15 billion that we mentioned.

Yes, it is.

And Martha Romero from Keefe is asking whether we could give more detail about the additional buffer of 70 basis points we mentioned. And Frederic Chenot from Natixis about the evolution of core Tier 1 capital in Q – no, in Q3 which we’ve already answered, too.

So, that’s just two questions, really. Detail about that extra – our additional buffer of 70 basis points and the overall impact on the Spanish financial sector.

Question is more details about additional 70 basis points buffer.

Well, this whole range of measures, this whole series (audio gap) Hold on. It seems we have a slight technical problem. Okay. My microphone seems to be back. Okay, So, my apologies, something went wrong with our microphone. Okay. So, the additional 80 basis points I mentioned are part of a really long list of small measures that bring in 3 basis points, 5 basis points, 8 basis points each. I suppose to the person asking the question, it was quite well that the things that can be done to optimize and to make assets or risk as efficient is possible is really long. In fact, our plans, which we’ve been working on for months now – huge long list of things and all of them together will bring in those additional 80 basis points plus, of course, our own sale of assets, mostly in Spain but also in other countries. And all of these things will add up to 80 or approximately 80 or maybe more. But it doesn’t really make a lot of sense for me to go into each and every one of these things because what matters is 9% and we’ve shown clearly that we will be comfortably above that level.

Okay. And to finish this part on strategy regulatory framework and capital ratio, there’s a question from Santiago López and from Benjie Creelan about why core capital dropped in absolute terms in the quarter? And same thing about negative adjustments and there’s a series of questions about this.

You have to think about the exchange rate adjustments. They impact both capital and assets and risks, especially in Latin America. I answered – there several questions about accident risk and the deferred capital, and these are the factors that affect them mostly. Hence, you have to consider the impact of the exchange rate. This quarter was significant. And final question about capital ratio, it says that the price of convertible bonds that we issued sometime ago is substantially below listed price. What do we plan to do with these convertible bonds? Are we going to compensate holders in any way? Well, this is a question that has come up several times already. It did come up several times at the Investor Day. And also, I think in the last result presentation last quarter, and the bank will convert based on the terms of the issue. Bondholders in the same position as our shareholders, there will be no chance of any kind of compensation. Okay. Moving on to financial management, there’s a question about – or from Santiago Lopez about the loan-to-deposit ratio which according to him is at 139% considering deposits, and we don’t know how you came up with that number. Our number is loan-to-deposit ratio of 118%. So, we can go through your figures later if you like. And you can explain how you came up with that number. Andrea Filtri is asking whether given the regulation that has just been approved in terms of liquidity and financial management, do we plan to use other kinds of liquid assets other than sovereign debt bond especially the general hedge. I don’t really get the question but will you take what I mentioned. We hedge our interest rate in those units where loans are predominantly at variable rates like Spain, Portugal, Mexico are very typical example. So, the state bonds are hedged our core deposit. So, how many fixed rate assets. I suppose the question is that since if we will consider these instruments in the future. But there are, of course, other alternative methods like interest rates and swaps although of course those would require kind of macro hedge. But the hedge were not just from the economic point of view but accounting point of view, if that was your question.

(Inaudible) from UBS is asking about the evolution of our ROS particularly in Spain and the comparison work with (inaudible) the corporate center. Can we talk about the trend in both Spain and in the corporate center? And what – how do we expect these two variables to evolve? And then another question about spreads for the whole group from our loaner. We’re saying that spreads, in general, are suffering. And whether we’re worried about this trend and what kind of management measures are we considering for asset spread in general. All right. As for our net interest income, in Spain, I think the quarter has been basically flat, the Santander retail network. And this was sort of the low season. But we still see positive trend on spreads on loans, and we had a significant drop on the cost of deposits when we renewed those expenses, deposits, but volumes aimed are not helping, and there’s – nor do we expect them to help. As was said in the Investor Day, we expect the loan portfolio in Spain to keep shrinking by about 3%. So, volumes won’t help. But I do think lending spread will continue to rise and in the process, there could be some additional negative impact if, as the market believes, the ECB lowers interest rates. And we reported in the Investor Day the impact, which is 100 basis points, would represent in the Eurozone and in the different areas. I’m speaking from the top of my head, but I think it was EUR140 million in the Eurozone. And I think it was £180 million. So, that’s basically the payable volumes in lending spread which are improving and possible changes which would be basically interest rates. And as for the corporate center, there are two basic functions…

Question from Ignacio Cerezo about whether we can say something about that guidance we issued of about 80 basis points of EBA impact. So, it think that slide showed all the detail, the impact of 90 basis points without the mark-to-market of the assets, and that’s basically what we mentioned. A question from Marcelo Palermo about sensitivities of basis point variation and interest rates. And José Antonio Álvarez has already explained that. A question from Raul is about whether we can say anything about the fall in the assets in the quarter and also the change in derivatives mark-to-market. And then there are simple questions from Antonio Ramirez and some other analysts about our sovereign debt portfolio exposures’ back to maturity.

There’s a slide from the Investor Day with each of our exposures. We have no healthy maturities, all FSS in the group. And in the presentation for the Investor Day, you have 35 for each country, exactly what we have. Okay. The drop in assets available for sale in the quarter is basically Brazil. In Brazil, we have a debt – a public debt portfolio, and I think the basis in the Investor Day that José was just referring to, I think it was about EUR18 billion, EUR19 billion. I’m not sure if it was euro or dollar. It wasn’t specified. And this in part was brought when we did the capital increase. There was surplus liquidity in Brazil which we invested in sovereign debt. The non-portfolio is growing strongly as we showed in the presentation. And we sold bonds in Brazil, and that’s the main aspect of the drop in available for sales. And as for the mark-to-market derivative versus market trend, so mark-to-market by definition, so that’s it. In general, our exposure to derivative year assets with customers from fixed rates to variable rates through the evolution of interest rate, up or down is what changes this figure, but there’s nothing really on top of that as far as I can remember. Moving to Spain, there’s a question about M&As, about whether we’re planning anything. A question from Daiwa Asset Management, are we planning to buy some banks or perhaps savings banks in Spain. And Britta Schmidt and Raoul Leonard from Autonomous and RBS have a similar question about the possible sale of our EUR3 billion portfolio real estate assets in Spain, are we selling, are we not, what is our position, do we plan to sell these assets off aggressively?

Well, the first part, I think, we’ve repeated many times, we are, of course, looking at each opportunity in the market. It’s our responsibility and professionally we do have to analyze each of these opportunities and that’s all I have to say to that. And then the second point, it is true that our recovering units are having talks of all types with lots of intermediaries to study possible transactions of this type. But in any case, the transaction you just mentioned is not really advanced at all, just some preliminary contacts and talks. I can’t really be more explicit. And moving on to risk, Spain. There are several questions from Benjie Creelan in Macquarie and Francisco Enriquez from N+1 about the evolution of the NPL Spain and Matteo Ramenghi from UBS, are there any segments that are specifically deteriorating? How do we expect the rising interest rates this quarter? And we believe that the peak NPL – or have we reached the peak NPL in Spain yet? When do we think we will reach the peak? That’s another question. And do we plan to create a bond bank and transfer all those NPLs there and sell them off?

Well, there’s a chart which I think Matías Rodríguez Inciarte showed in the Investor Day showing the breakdown of the NPL by segment: individual mortgages, businesses, others and then the real estate developer business, mostly. And there you can very clearly see that the trends for NPL other than real estate developers were pretty flat or growing only very slightly. However, well, we still saw significant NPL rises is in developer loans, maybe because it’s a big percentage. So, that’s the first part of my answer. We don’t see real changes in trend in NPL in segments other than the real estate developer. That’s my first point. The second point is that we were thinking a year ago, that towards the end of the year NPLs in Spain would have peaked. But now, we no longer think so. We think that they could still rise 5 potentially, especially real estate developers, mostly. So, it went up in Q3 over 5 percentage points, which we did not expect to happen a year ago. And we think that in 2012, it will continue to rise. Perhaps not very significantly, but we don’t think that it has yet peaked, and probably won’t in the next quarter either. We have to wait and see what happens next year. And we expect some ranges. So, it’s going to be in that same assessment with real estate developers. Oh, and José Antonio is right about the bad bank thing. Well, I don’t know what that means, nor do I understand what you mean by that question. Of course, a lot of people are talking up there about dividing up the bank and creating a bad bank, but we certainly have not thought anything about that. And if you have any idea about it, go ahead and tell us. But we’re certainly not considering any such thing.

Next question is about what do we expect to happen with the quality of loans to developers and so on (inaudible) that. And Matteo Ramenghi is asking whether we’re comfortable with the current coverage levels in Spain. And finished with risk, there’s another question, also from Fuji from Brazil, how about Brazil, if we can explain the situation with loans and risk quality in Brazil. Do we think or how do we think NPLs will evolve? Have they peaked in Brazil?

Well, in Brazil, what has happened in Q3, we already anticipated last month. We said that in Q3 there was going to be a rise in NPL. It was going to be rising but then it would normalize in the following quarter. And after that, we didn’t expect to see anything particularly unusual. So, the cost of lending would remain, more or less, constant. And loan growth would be the driver for rising NPLs but ratios would remain the same because there’s no change foreseeable. And as coverage in Spain, are we comfortable? Yes, we are comfortable. Maybe as I’ve said earlier, we may reconsider the coverage of some of the real estate asset towards the end of the year as a possible way to allocate the capital gains we’re generating. That might be the only area where we might allocate some of our capital gains to improve those coverage levels for some specific real estate asset. But in general, we are comfortable with the coverage level we have. Plus if you compare with our peers of Spanish and elsewhere, it is also very good. It’s above average. And as for the NPL ratio in Brazil, remember that in the Investor Day, we said that it could worsen by an additional 30 basis points, and it’s actually been quite flat, and early in the quarter, reasonably flat too. The evolution has been as our CEO has pointed out in line with our target or better.

And finally, Spain, the top part of the income statement, a couple of questions from Benjie Creelan from Macquarie. He’s saying that’s we’re growing deposits, but it seems with higher costs. Have we seen any deposit wars in Spain, or how do we expect this to evolve in Spain, and can we shed some light on net interest income over lean assets and ratio medium term or in the next quarter?

Well, I think there was a question about that already where we basically explained what we thought. We saw widened spreads on loans and for deposits, I think the main impact would be interest rates, percent to European banks were to lower rates, that would have an impact on spreads for deposits. As for deposit wars, well, there is intense competition for deposits, but I wouldn’t call it a war. There are different strategies at different times, but I wouldn’t say there’s an all-out deposit war.

Similar question from Jaime Becerril from JP about covered bonds in Spain, do we think that this could be a product that might be used more in our particular case, how our sales going, can we give some idea about volumes or amount?

Well, the main reason for those maturities are significantly longer for deposits. So, that gives you more stability than time deposits, particularly when liquidity – when there’s so much competition for liquidity and the wholesale market are so limited. They’re not the figures here but generally, we will place what was scheduled.

Okay. And finally, for other unit, Andrea Filtri in the UK is asking whether we can remind them of the regulatory impact and other impacts for ‘12 and ‘13.

We also specified this during the Investor Day. We talked about total impact, combining regulation and other things between £500 million and £600 million annual. Alexander Bernadski from ING is asking about the drop in lending in Latin America, suppose that’s an exchange rate impact could it actually eliminate growing in Latin America. And he’s also asking about tax rate in Brazil which explains what José Antonio said in this presentation the negative impact on our profit. Alfredo Sáenz Abad: (Interpreted) Well, that is the end of all the questions we’ve received over the Internet. I don’t think we have any time left for questions over the phone but there aren’t any. So, we’ll leave it there. Thank you very much. If you have any other questions or if you can think of anything else, you get in touch with Investor Relations. Thank you.