Welcome to the Sanofi Conference Call. I’ll now hand over to Mr. Sébastien Martel. Sir, please go ahead. Sébastien Martel: Thank you. Hello everyone and welcome to our First Quarter Conference Call. As always, I would like to draw your attention to the Safe Harbor statements. I must advise you that information presented in the call today will contain forward-looking statements that involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors. These may cause actual results to differ materially. I invite you to refer to our [inaudible] with the SEC and also out for description of those factors. Today with us on the call, we have Chris Viehbacher, our CEO, Hanspeter Spek our President of Global Operations as well as Jerome Contamine, our CFO. Without any further adieu I will hand the call over to Chris.

Thank you Sébastien. Good morning and good afternoon everybody. I think we have got a very strong set of results in the first quarter. Sales up 7% at constant exchange rate. Business earnings per share up 7.2% at constant exchange rates, clearly benefiting from the acquisition of Genzyme, which you may remember was completed on the 4th of April last year. I think it’s always useful to come back and say where we have been going strategically. If I go back to 2009, you will all remember that really the story around Sanofi was in genericized products, how many sales were going to be lost. And you can really see the cliff graphically here. The products, and they are noted in the footnote on the bottom that are subject to patent expiry amounted to some €2.2 billion in Q2 of 2009, which was kind of the last quarter before the cliff started. That €2.2 billion on the same set of products today is now down to €813 billion. So, as we have seen and I think we have roughly €250 million drop in the quarter due to generics in the first quarter, but that’s down from the average of about €500 million from what we have been seeing up till now. So, increasingly we get the cliff behind us, certainly from a sales point of view it’s pretty much behind us. From a profit of view of course the second shoe has now dropped on the patent cliff. We are really about T minus three weeks from the patent expiry of Plavix in the US. Avapro went at the end of March, and of course we’ll see generic activity restart actually in August of this year. But clearly the impact of Plavix is the biggest one. This shouldn’t be a…

Thank you, Chris. Good morning, good afternoon. I would like to share some additional information focusing on the growth platforms and you find as a first chart beginning with number 17 the performance in the emerging markets. If you remember we had achieved for the first time and as the first company 10 billion of sales in emerging markets during 2011. You see then that this 2.6 billion we had once again a very strong quarter, it was off nearly 10%, 9.9% to be precise if you concentrate on separate countries the growth even has been 16.5%. If you look to the four different segments we have spelled out on the chart, you see that overall we have a strong growth rate. So we are able to also compensate less stronger growth rates as in Eastern Europe and Turkey. You know that Turkey has been for several times now by price cuts and overall we have to see that Eastern Europe in terms of growth is approaching more and more Western Europe, but from the other segments which closed between 8% and 16% overall we achieved to compensate single digit performances. In diabetes, we had a very, very impressive acceleration during the second half of 2011 and this performance continues. You see that in the first quarter we achieved 1.3 billion sales, nearly 18%, respectively 14% of course at constant exchange rate. Excellent performance of Lantus helps by now 51% of quarterly sales in the US through SoloSTAR. A solid performance is 8% in Western Europe and really outstanding performance in emerging markets at 32%, which means that if you go more into details in the emerging markets we have close to 64% in China, 35% in Russia, 30% in Brazil, and 57% in Mexico. So after having analyzed, also…

Ladies and gentlemen, we’ll now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] The first question is from Tim Anderson from Sanford Bernstein. Please go ahead. Tim Anderson – Sanford Bernstein: Thank you. I have a couple of questions. The first one is on the ORIGIN trial and I fully understand you can’t say anything about the results, but I am hoping you can in broader terms say how this trial could theoretically be impactful or not from a commercial perspective to the franchise, if the primary endpoint is either hit or missed? And then second question is on the various drugs that are filed for regulatory review or that will soon be filed, I’m hoping you can answer two different questions, which of those products has the highest eventual sales potential in your opinion, and which of those products is perhaps the riskiest in terms of a regulatory outcome?

Well, I mean I think on ORIGIN, we’re going to – we want to save this for ADA. I think we started trying to dance around this and sort of say, well, we think this would have an impact on that. I think let’s just wait for the ADA. I think the second question Tim was, which one do we think has the highest impact, the ones already filed, is that right? Tim Anderson – Sanford Bernstein: Yeah. It’s really – of the ones that have been filed or soon will be filed, which of those could be the biggest in terms of eventual sales potential? And then, also which of those products do you think embeds the most regulatory risk in terms of getting a favorable regulatory outcome.

You know I don’t think we really see – on the regulatory outcome I mean I would rather predict the weather than predict a regulatory outcome. Right now as I look at it I don’t particularly see a higher risk on any of them, and actually I think everything so far we’ve seen everything is progressing well. I mean they are all in different categories. Kynamro obviously doesn’t have the same size population as a Lyxumia. At the same time I would suspect that that’s probably a little bigger than most people think. This is a drug that really has a very clear meaningful benefit in those patients that need the drug and there isn’t anything else there today. I actually think, I think Kynamro is probably underestimated. Lyxumia is extraordinarily important for our diabetes franchise and getting that – and then I think particularly because – I think it’s fair to say that we see big synergy with Lantus especially because you can either add GLP1 to insulin or add insulin to this which Victoza can't. So I think that one is a big one. You know the Visamerin is going to be kind of a tricky one, because there isn’t anything there today. Is there something that physicians prefer to use today in terms of Lovenox, well we’ll see. But I think actually having the data and showing the clear benefit is going to open up an opportunity. You can figure out what Zaltrap is going to do as because that market is pretty well known. And Aubagio I think is also one that’s probably underestimated. I mean you’ve got a very – you’ve got an oral treatment. It is clearly shown to be equal and as we could see to standard of care, but it is becoming…

Thank you. The next question is from Mark Dainty from Citi, please go ahead.

Thank you. Two quick questions. Firstly on a Aubagio, findings might suggest that you would know whether you were going to need an outcome from the FDA. We haven’t seen – I was just wondering if you could add some color. And then just a quick question about productivity improvements. Could you quantify in Euro terms what that would be? Thank you.

We haven’t seen –we are in discussion with the FDA, some sort of regulatory decision is expected by Q3, but we haven’t heard anything either about that outcome at this stage. That doesn’t mean that there will be or won’t be, we just – we haven’t heard anything.

Okay.

Well, on the first question. I mean you could [inaudible] I’d say to quantify it in Euro because lots of [inaudible] taking to a town [inaudible] mix over time. So it means not just a direct equation. So it’s somewhat more complex, but what I can say is that we are now – I mean reaching from 4% productivity improvement per year. So if you say on this 4% I would apply to pharma, would not [inaudible] try to vaccine which is somewhat of a longer term improvement, but you should take just [inaudible] and take 4%, you are right it was something like €200 million to €250 million.

Okay. Can I just – a quick follow-up then? I mean if you take what you are saying in terms of productivity improvements in SG&A and R&D as sort of around 5%, 6% and you are adding your 2 millions for COGS you are already getting close to a billion a year for this year and you targeted €2 billion by 2015. So I'm just wondering how quickly can it reach to €2 billion and really how far you are going to go.

I think that you have to go step by step. So I mean we are really heading into the right direction. I mean clearly the Q1 results show that we are generating savings [inaudible] improve as well as synergies with the execution of Genzyme on Merial ,possibly somewhat faster that what we we expected. But I think it’s a bit early to revise how much we can achieve for the full year and keep in mind that we will remain some [inaudible] on the course of the quarter [inaudible]. So yes I think we remember that we have given publicly to save 2 billion from 2012 to 2015, and well there is a good chance that it is more than – the average proportion of a business [inaudible] that we need someone to be cautious and I like somewhat to wait for the next quarter to give you somewhat precise revised quantification for the first kill. We have to take into account the expense, we are going to appreciate two new launches. You know we give the 2 billion target on the net basis not on a gross basis so we take into account also the extra expenses which was linked to the launches of the serial quarters we have heard just two minutes ago.

I think it’s fair to say that given – you know, nobody ever feels like you won an organization that you can take a lot of cost out. But once you loose some patents and you are under pressure on profits it’s amazing when you start looking at things how you can take cost out of the business. I mean when we launched our first €2 billion program I can tell you that you know there was not a belief that this is going to be easy, we ended up doing it in two years instead of four years. I think I would agree with Jorlem [ph] it’s a little early to say, but equally I think there has been some very strong done on looking at just things on efficiency, how we organize ourselves, every piece of the business actually has things that could be run much tighter. So I could certainly say that I’m extremely confident that we will get the €2 billion, but we are going to be reinvesting in some of that and new product launches, but we will give you an update later, but we are certainly pretty confident about the cost savings.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you The next question is from Peter Verdult from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Peter Verdult – Morgan Stanley: Hey, good afternoon Peter Verdult from Morgan Stanley. Chris, just suppose the only guidance, given what you have achieved in Q1 and you stated conservatism regarding planning for our Avapro and Plavix generics, I would just like to better understand what actually needs to go wrong for Sanofi to feel not to comfortably exceed your current EPS guidance for the year? And then on Lantus, can you just remind us what the US sales forces in – for promoting Lantus currently and what your plans are if any going forward. I mean quickly I don’t – Hanspeter Spek on the ORIGIN study. Just a clarification we know it can represent the ADA, can you just clarify other results in the house or have anyone from senior management actually seen the top line data for ORIGIN?

So guidance, we’re confirming guidance. We’ve ever updated guidance after one quarters worth of results. We give guidance because we have a degree of confidence in achieving it. Having them said we live in a reasonably dangerous world with the macroeconomic situation where it is, I would say that one of the things that has progressed is that a lot of the uncertainties that used to be associated with Sanofi are pretty much gone. We used to worry about when are we going to get for Lovenox? Well, we kind of know that. What’s going to happen with the growth platforms versus the patent expiries and I think we’ve built up these growth platforms and they own 63% of sales these days. So they have real critical mass and so I think borrowing anything that’s really unusual in the macroeconomic environment, right now I don’t think we do see anything that would put us off our game. At the same time I think it would be far too early, we won’t have enough data really yet to see how things are going to go to change the guidance at this stage? Do you want to talk about salesforce?

Yes, I think for understandable reasons we don’t be really precise on the number of FTEs, but there’s an overall orientation. Evidently we have significantly unchanged – increased the support during 2011 which then triggered the nice increases you saw. As the second orientation of course we try to match and we successfully matched usually with Novo Nordisk, and as the last perhaps very recent comment we have taken notes that I believe today Novo Nordisk announced to increase the overall headcount in US by 15% and we would be prepared to do the same each times it comes. So, if you mentioned Novo Nordisk you will get a pretty good picture. Now on origin, again I don’t want to say much more than what Chris had said before, please keep mind this is a very huge file. It is the largest file ever than on insulin, it’s more than 12,000 patients it’s up to seven years. So, it is not possible to start say this is success, this will be not a success because there is multiple outcome, there are kind of question of benefit of earlier or later insulinization. There is the question on cardiovascular outcome. So, it will be an extremely interesting report and evidently I cannot go any further. Peter Verdult – Morgan Stanley: Thanks.

Thank you. The next question is from Luisa Hector from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Luisa Hector – Credit Suisse: Hello, I have got two questions please. So, firstly on emerging markets, you certainly seem to have very strong quarter compared to some of your peers, were there any particular large tenders in the quarter that we should be aware of? And then secondly, for Jérôme, just going back to the other operating income, just to check on understanding you correctly, so the licensed litigations settlement, are you saying that that’s somewhere in the region of €50 million or €100 million and also can you explain what that was with regard to?

I did phonetically not understand the middle part of your question when you were referring to emerging markets. Would you please kindly repeat it. Luisa Hector – Credit Suisse: Of course. So for emerging markets, you had a particularly good quarter compared to your peers. So just wanted to check whether there were any large tender orders during Q1 that we should be aware of?

Absolutely not, more into contrary, the development we had in Africa was charged below 10% was – was a little bit marked by tenders which were delayed also with the overall situation in the Northern part of Africa. So there is no upside from tenders at all.

Thank you.

On your second question, Luisa, I can say that the net impact on the – as you know, we have a midyear guidance by around 10% and we can say that around 3% was due to this – to this positive outcome of this license litigation. I mean the actual topic, the kind of disclose precisely because of the other topic I wanted to actually disclose. I can just tell you that it came out to a pretty good forward [inaudible].

I think you meant there was – of the 10% deep versus consensus of 3% was related to that settlement. So without that, we will still – and ahead by about 7%. Luisa Hector – Credit Suisse: Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. The next question is from Vincent Meunier from Exane BNP Paribas. Please go ahead. Vincent Meunier – Exane BNP Paribas: Hello, thank you for taking my questions. The first one is, on your strategy on acquisitions and both on acquisitions, you were talking about the possibility to spend €1 billion, €2 billion in both on acquisitions and emerging markets few months ago. I think that nothing happened. So what’s going on on this? And the second question is with regards to the anti-PCSK9. In the Phase II data infection rates as well as injection site reactions occurred, what’s you view on that with regards to the Phase III trial and also the device? Thank you.

Well, I mean on the €1 billion to €2 billion, it was meant to be a guidance versus a target. I think we constantly are looking at things, but it’s a little like fishing. You never sure of – you may be out there fishing, but you are never sure when the fish is actually going to come in over the boat. I think it’s fair to say that – I would say that pretty much all of the acquisitions we’ve done have been able to drive some significant value, because we’ve kind of been ahead of everybody else. I can tell you that there are plenty of people wondering why they missed Medley for example. I think Chattem acquisition really showed a lot of value because we had Allegra. So I think we spend our time looking at things, we are not here just about to go jumping on some things. I have some concern when I see what some of our competitors are doing and some of the valuations that are being paid. You really got to look a little further and in little different places to create value so we are not just doing what your competitors are doing. So it’s meant to be a guidance, but I wouldn’t say that hey, if we don’t do €1 billion to €2 billion by July that we are falling behind. On the PCSK9, so we would expect that the device will be some sort of auto injector device for patients to use themselves. We haven’t really seen any big issues with injection side reactions been very few discontinuations for this reason in the study that we’ve seen to date. We’re not even really like to know what the actual number is, so I don’t see that as being a big issue. Vincent Meunier – Exane BNP Paribas: Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. The next question is from Mike Leuchten from Barclays. Please go ahead. Mike Leuchten – Barclays : Thank you it’s Michael from Barclays. Just one question on Lantus. Your friendly competitor said at Lilly you are quite aggressive with the view on biosimilar Lantus I think to suggest that the analogs market to data margin could be split in three ways with equal shares between improved products Lantus has it is today and the biosimilars, just wondering what your answer to that would be? Thank you.

It’s a simple answer is that we don’t share this points for many reasons, if you look to penetration I’ll see biosimilars which are to-date is market you see penetrations which are much, much lower than what you have been transporting Lilly for. Second we believe that the impact of devices will play another role for not to say we’ll present as an hurdle to a more rapid penetration of biosimilars. So we don’t this point of view at all on the fact perhaps another positive information we have obtained the prolongation of our patent protection – our overall protection due to the pediatric use at the couple of stage because also from a fewer time plant if the feel is rather comfortable.

I think we’ve got a new formulation coming. We have record number of SoloSTAR users and we know from others. You have to at some point go back and look at analogues among these forecasts. You can’t just have people hoping for things which is what this Lilly forecast sounds like. You don’t see that kind of a market situation in the other markets, if you go back and look at respiratory devices, for example, we know that the device plays a big role in patient preference, I believe Lilly’s own comments have said that they don’t expect this to be a substitutable product. So how do – how are they going to get this, I mean, you can go look at other cases like the growth hormones, erythropoietins, interferons, we haven’t seen that so far, it doesn’t mean it won’t happen but I think you’re going to see something like this is going to be a fourth entry into a market. This is going to be essentially a me-too insulin analogue and for entry into a me-too market has got anywhere from probably around 10% market share. I mean I think that’s what you have seen in some of the biosimilar markets, I think that’s what you probably see here. And by the time you take into account devices and new formulations and the fact that Lily remember is not really present much in emerging markets. So they don’t the presence set in Novartis really does. So I don’t think we wouldn’t share the same to Hanspeter’s point we don’t share the same forecast as Lily does. Mike Leuchten – Barclays : Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from Philippe Lanone from Natixis. Please go ahead. Philippe Lanone – Natixis: Good afternoon gentlemen. One question again on the emerging markets because if there is no special items in the Q1 it must be a product mix and geographic mix that makes you much better than especially your UK competitors. So we should be able to project that for the next quarter. Do you think it will be the case that we can project about 8% comparable for the next two quarters of the emerging markets? Can you make it comment on price component of the emerging market as it deteriorated especially in the quarter? One – maybe if I may, another one on the other prescription product line that seems to be deteriorating a bit faster than usual at minus 6%. Are there any special items here so that it continues this way?

Well I basically expect a similar growth for the upcoming [inaudible]. I have this limitation of China, which answers also your second question. We have seen not a negative size impact on our presence in China during the first quarter but we expect price changes for the rest of the year. We can only speculate for the time being on which products there may be an impact on Plavix or maybe an impact on Lantus for the time being. We don’t know. So in summary I have to leave a certain question mark in terms of continued growth for the second and the third quarter for China, but for the other markets being it Latin America or being it Africa, I don’t see this at least as of today. The negative clause of the other product is mainly driven by the dents you have in the European community and the European community once again is hit by all sorts of interventions, there are mainly price cuts which occurred during the last 12 months and on top of it we have a pretty negative scenario in Turkey as far as the emerging markets are concerned coming from price. Philippe Lanone – Natixis: Okay. Can I have maybe a follow up on organic growth you were almost at 0% organic growth in last quarter and you will have less headwinds where the vaccines and Taxotere in the second quarter if emerging markets go the same way. Can we hope to have a positive organic growth in Q2?

Yeah, let's not get into doing guidance on a quarterly basis here. I would say, look, I think we have always said that 2011 was where we felt to be the bottom of our patent cliff on a sales basis, gluing there profit basis because what don’t consolidate Plavix and MSO in the US and there is a piece of that this year. How fast we can get back out I mean it’s kind of a little bit of a mix. It’s pretty hard to predict where quarterly sales are but I think the kind of the 0% organic growth that you saw is this kind of consistent with the message that we have been giving all along that we got to a point where the organic growth is able to offset the patent expirees. Philippe Lanone – Natixis: Thank you very much. Operator: Thank you, the next question is from Kyle Rasbach from Cowen & Co. Please go ahead. Kyle Rasbach – Cowen & Co.: Thank you for taking my question. I was just going to ask another question on the – with Lixisenatide. I was curious beyond the combination with Lantus what you might see as some of the differentiating features of this drug. And I was also curious if you believe that there may be a good strategic reason for Sanofi to add another GLP-1 to your portfolio. Thank you.

For the time being we really try to have Lyxumia and why Lyxumia because we believe it is the ideal combination partner with insulins and more specifically of course is with Lantus. The profile of the product is very favorable to see it as a preferred partner and that’s our intended positioning. If there will be other products also same charge cannot be deducted of today. Lyxumia shows very good tolerability beside the disease to titrate because you have only one titration set to make while the other product also shows you may speculate about need several titration sets. So we believe that this product is not the first in charge but we believe that it has a very attractive profile especially for us very strong positions. Kyle Rasbach – Cowen & Co.: Any other strategic reasons to consider another GLP-1?

You know, just given all the speculations going on, I think we are just going to leave it t just there. I suspect this is kind of a backdoor question around the [Unclear] situation and we couldn’t comment on any specific targets. We are very happy as Hanspeter said that with our GLP-1 I think it marries extremely well. We are committed to not only the launching as an individual product but you may remember we have got a considerable investment in developing this as a combination product with Lantus and would expect to go into Phase-3 with the combination product in early 2013. Kyle Rasbach – Cowen & Co.: Great, thank you.

Okay, Rachel we are going to take two more questions.

The last question is from Richard Wass from J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead.

Hi, Richard [Unclear] from J.P. Morgan. Thanks for taking my question. Just a couple of questions please. Firstly what you are seeing, update some – how you are seeing the situation of bad debts across Europe given the obvious fiscal crisis. And in France, how are you seeing the taxation situation developing around the presidential election candidate? So anything you could help us on with those two would be good. And just one on the diabetes franchise. I think we are seeing taking a little bit of incremental share in the US. If you could focus around the dynamics there and how you might resolve those, that would be useful too. Thanks very much.

Well let's take the first two and then I will take the last one.

On the bad debts well A, we need to keep in mind that our total sales in the countries which are mostly back to the [inaudible] to the clients. So you could say that the overall exposure we have spent to the client. So far we have not seen your daily significant derivation of cost. I need to accept the Greek situation. Of our payment conditions, so we are used to the fact that in some Southern European countries hospitals tend to pay late or public sector tends to pay late. But this has not really deteriorated over the last 18 months let's say. So very, very marginally, so I would not say today that it is really [inaudible] attention but it is also a scenario of business in concern. The taxation in France, well, it’s very difficult to read through the programs from the candidates. Basically there is a trend towards somewhat increase of fluctuations business, but will be not on [inaudible] corporate situation. So when it comes to corporations not so clear that it will be some significant duration on top of that. I remind you that today we are making only 3% of our safe in France, and I mean we have the taxation scheme adapted to IP taxation on royalty linked to IP which can bring you farewell and which I don’t think is going to change, because [inaudible] is still looking for sustaining all time innovation in biological sector and other sectors as well. So nothing dramatic as I see today, but once again it’s a bit difficult to read the crystal warranties in a particular situation. Kyle Rasbach – Cowen & Co.: Cool. Thanks.

But on Lantus and [inaudible] in the U.S. I’m expecting nothing alarming. Lantus keeps by far the lion share in the segment of analogues which is approximately 80% market share. The overall market including Lyxumia and [inaudible] in total prescriptions and Lantus is trying approximate between 7% and 9.5% depending on the timeframe that you are looking at. A 9.5% is year-to-date February 2012 which means we continue to build up market share [inaudible] but we see absolutely no reason to be allowed. Kyle Rasbach – Cowen & Co.: Thank you.

Alright. Who is going to take the last question now?

The final question comes from Jeff Holford from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Jeff Holford – Jefferies: Hi there, thanks for taking my question. Just quickly on the upcoming [inaudible] just wanted to get your perspective if that comes to the market. How it will might affect the market dynamics and then just wants your latest view internally and assumptions around potential timings of any generics of Lovenox in Europe? Thank you.

I mean quite honestly I’m not even sure why Pfizer is bothering here. You know you already got two players in here and where did these market you know doing a market share strategy and rare diseases doesn’t strike me as being a particular intelligence strategy. But in any case you know the product is approved I believe it’s in Brazil and hasn’t done extremely well. And we certainly been able to maintain a big share of that even with our constraint supply situation. Obviously the product has had some difficulty in getting approved everywhere else including in the U.S. which suggest that there are some wrinkles around this product. So you know even if it does I would suspect we will have plenty of ammunition to fend the Cerezyme here. Jeff Holford – Jefferies: On Lovenox generics in Europe [inaudible].

Well, Lovenox the European market is totally different to other markets mainly because the low molecular market in Europe has seen competitions in 10-15 years as say is a group of product which is very – very similar perhaps not buyer similar but pretty similar since many years consequently intensive competition on price and on contract. And we have seen sharp battles between Novartis, CSK, previously Pfizer and [inaudible]. So I don’t see a lot of opportunity for biosimilar low molecular rate Heparin because since it’s really nothing users no innovate aspect to it come today biosimilar low molecular rate Heparin in Europe. So I believe a very – very low penetration for those products. Jeff Holford – Jefferies: That’s great. Thank you.

You know I think again we keep giving one quarter further every year every time through the path in question one quarter closer to getting back to our gross situation. You know I look at the performance of the growth platforms. Obviously lot going on over, but you know very good performance in the first quarter and that’s really what's going to go at Sanofi going forward. Last September we gave a medium term outlook which suggested a compound annual growth in sales of about 5% between 2012 and 2015. You know when I look at the growth platforms I look at actually an increasingly robust portfolio of new drugs coming along. And I look at the very strong cost control with all of our colleagues there has been able to implement, I continue to be confident in the medium term outlook as a business and we are on track with where we said we will be. And this is just one more month of good solid execution. So I thank everybody for your interest in your questions and we will talk again next quarter.

Ladies and gentlemen this now concludes our conference call. Thank you all very much for attending.