I would like to welcome everyone to the Stanley Works fourth quarter and full year 2009 results conference call. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to turn the call over to our host, Miss Kate White, Director of Investor Relations.

Good morning everyone. Thanks for joining us today on the Stanley Works fourth quarter and full year 2009 conference call. On the call in addition to myself is John Lundgren, Stanley’s Chairman and CEO, Jim Loree, Stanley’s Executive Vice President and COO and Don Allen, Stanley’s Vice President and CFO. I’d like to point out that our fourth quarter earnings release which was issued this morning and a supplemental presentation which we will refer to during the call are available on the Investor Relations portion of our website stanleyworks.com. This morning, Jim, John and Don will review Stanley’s fourth quarter 2009 results and various other topical matters followed by a Q&A session. The entire call is expected to last approximately one hour and a replay will be available beginning at 2:00 pm today. The replay number and the access code are in our press release. We’ve also added a new option for you to be able to listen to the replay. You can download it as a Podcast from I-tunes and even set up a subscription for all future replays of calls that we post. You can access this within I-tunes itself by typing in Stanley Works in the search window or from the link on our website. This should be posted within 24 hours. And as always, please feel free to contact me with any follow up questions after today’s call at my number which is 860-827-3833. Lastly, we will be making forward-looking statements during the call. Such statements are based on assumptions of future events that may not prove to be accurate and as such they involve risk and uncertainty. It is therefore possible that actual results may differ materially from any forward-looking statements that we might make today, and we direct you to the cautionary statements in the 8-K which we have filed with today’s press release and in our most recent ’34 Act. With that, I will now turn the call over to our CEO, John Lundgren.

Thanks Kate. Let’s start by looking briefly at some highlights from the fourth quarter and the full year 2009. First, as it relates to the fourth quarter, we recorded diluted EPS of $0.89. That does exclude $0.22 related to the transaction and integration planning costs primarily associated with the Black & Decker merger. Diluted EPS from continuing operations on a GAAP basis then was $0.67. I think important to note, $0.04 to $0.05 of the $0.89 was an unanticipated tax benefit and the remainder of the tax benefit was included in our guidance as explained in the press release, and that we’ll cover in a little bit more detail later on in this morning’s presentation. So for the year, diluted EPS was $2.80 versus $2.74 in 2008 again excluding the $0.22 per share in the fourth quarter related to the Black & Decker transaction. Fourth quarter was $0.89 and for the year that brought us to $3.02 which did include the gain of the debt extinguishment reported in the second quarter 2009. So EPS for the year up 10% versus 2008 excluding the fourth quarter charges and 2% on a GAAP basis including those charges. Quarterly gross margin rate 40.7% was quite encouraging and it was our second consecutive quarter above 40%. Pricing, cost productivity initiatives and commodity deflation all continued to offset the impact of the volume under absorption and that led us to a record annual gross margin for the year of 40.4%. Cash flow was encouraging as well, $446 million for the year, up 6% versus 2008, and working capital reached 7.9 turns, another record. And that’s due to the ongoing success of the Stanley fulfillment system that Jim Loree is going to talk to you a little bit more about in his part of the presentation.…

Thanks John. As you indicated one highlight for 2009 was the extraordinary in the area of gross margin. We achieved 40.4% for the year, a record with a 40.7% rate in the fourth quarter. For the full year that’s a 260 basis point increase over prior year, and this was achieved with the backdrop being the worst economic conditions in 60 years. And the 2009 performance, as well as the long term positive trend is really a function of four factors. One is the tight operational management across our businesses as it related to productivity projects, supplier management, price realization, product mix and new product vitality. Secondly, it’s the strength of our value propositions for our customers, able to get paid for those. And we also are benefiting quite extensively from the implementation of the Stanley fulfillment system which I’ll talk about more in a moment and then finally the deliberate shifting of our portfolio in higher margin, higher growth area. And now as we look forward, the challenge will be as we merge with Black & Decker and their gross margins in the low 30’s so on a weighted basis when we put the companies together, we’ll be right around 35% or so, and we need to begin this march forward over the coming years to get the combined company back up to these levels over time. And that will be an exciting challenge that we’ll take on with the integration process. Now moving to working capital, I have to say our fourth quarter working capital performance was a very pleasant and positive surprise. Coming into the end of the year, we were confident that we had plans in place to achieve mid to upper six turns for the year and we basically blew that number away with a…

Thanks Jim. The next page is walk of the SG&A in the fourth quarter. As we typically try to show you each quarter, we take last year’s SG&A and walk it forward. I’ll start with the right side of the chart. If you look at the cost reductions that we’ve done throughout the year, just as a reminder, in total we reduced cost by $265 million in 2009. Of that number, about $150 million impacted SG&A and the head count impacted was just under 3,000 individuals. So in the fourth quarter we saw a $37 million benefit of that which is 13% reduction to the base versus the fourth quarter of ’08. And then looking at some of the increases on the left side of the chart, we did have some integration costs associated with the planning of the merger of Stanley and Black & Decker of about $5 million. FX was a negative impact year over year of $10 million and then we continued investments in SG&A. Jim just spent a fair amount of time talking through the brand investments and the significance of that. As many of you are aware we made investments in our Security businesses to put more feet on the street and focus on certain share gains we can achieve. And then as we began to re-instate some of our employee benefits in the fourth quarter that were suspended earlier in the year, we begin to see some cost increases there. So the net result is about a 2% decline in SG&A and we continue to see the impact of our reductions in the fourth quarter. Now I’d like to spend a little bit of time walking you through the segments. We start with the Security segment. Once again Security was the gem of the…

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from Eric Bosshard – Cleveland Research. Eric Bosshard – Cleveland Research: Can you talk about the source of the 2% to 4% revenue growth? You seem optimistic about some progress in CDIY and a little bit more conservative in the other two segments. I’m just wondering if you can talk a little bit about the why the 2% to 4% revenue expectation and where you expect that to come from? Secondly, I’m interested in your thoughts on free cash flow especially in light of the six million additional shares coming out in 2010 and if there is any consideration to buy back stock to offset that.

2% to 4% we think is modest as I mentioned. If you look at our three different segments, we do think CDIY will likely have some nice growth during 2010. Industrial has the potential but we’re very cautious for growth as it’s difficult to see how the supply chain is going to react to their customers in that segment. And in Security, we think relatively modest growth. There will be pressure associated with the commercial construction slowdown and how long that lags on. We think the vast majority of 2010 commercial construction will be relatively slow. I think obviously our history as a company around share repurchases, we evaluate those on a case by case basis. We will have a fair amount of need for cash associated with the Black & Decker Stanley merger. There’s a lot of one time costs, restructuring and other payments that will need to be made. There is about $670 million of one time costs. Of that, about $470 million is cash so there will be significant cash obligations in connection with that. But we’ll have to see as the two companies come together what the projections we have for cash flow are in the first two to three quarters.

Your next question comes from Peter Lisnic – Robert W. Baird. Peter Lisnic – Robert W. Baird: First question, on the 40% gross margin this year, and that’s in the context of volume down 20%, how should we think about that going forward if we get basically volume under absorption dissipates as you progress with better comparisons going forward? And then on the strong free cash flow in the fourth quarter, does that have any implications for what you might be able to extract out of BDK and that $1 million target that you said?

As far as the second question, I’ll start with that one. We have no idea what their cash flow looks like in the fourth quarter or what it might look like prospectively until we have a much deeper integration process and we close the deal. So it’s really a difficult question to answer without the requisite information. As far as the gross margin rate goes, we’re pleased with the 40% and excited about the progress. We don’t see anything that suggests that on a standalone basis the gross margin rate would go down any time soon in the company and obviously there will be all sorts of things that we’ll have to deal with along the way such as the CDIY business grows at a faster rate than the Security business. That’s going to put a little downward pressure on it. We’re pretty confident that we’ll continue to see progress in productivity including the effect of absorption benefits that should accrue as volume begins to come back in general. So we those two as more or less offsetting and then we’ll continue to work all the levers that I mentioned when I went through the gross margin chart, the price inflation recovery. If you go back to 2004, we’re still almost $90 million short in terms of the recovery of inflation through pricing. So we’re not building any kind of a price umbrella at all, and we’re not over extended in that area. However, you never know what competitive conditions are and how they’re going to evolve. So we’ll continue to manage that with our pricing center of excellence and all the folks that we have out in the business coordinating very carefully on that one. Then we have our productivity, our mix management, our new product innovation and as I said earlier, getting paid for the value proposition. So we’d like to see that 40% carry on. We think we can do it and I guess time will tell.

Just to supplement what Jim said, with 39.9% in the second quarter and then third and fourth quarter both above 40% in the face of the volume decline that we cited, I think demonstrates we strongly believe demonstrates that we have right sized our company to make money and to achieve a 40% gross margin in a volume environment that’s 15% to 20% below our highs in 2007 and 2008. That being said, obviously we’ll get tremendous leverage from any upside volume improvement some of which will be reinvested in growth initiatives because we were really encouraged with the results of those modest investments that we experienced during 2009.

Your next question comes from [Sam Sargach – Raymond James] [Sam Sargach – Raymond James]: You have taken great pains to itemize all of the cost savings opportunities with the transaction and obviously it’s a key focus of the organization. Talk about what you’re dong to maintain and possibly grow market share of the combined company beyond just the verticals of Black & Decker is strong in Latin America and Stanley is strong in the automotive. Oftentimes when you have these combinations, you have cuts in sales and marketing and R&D departments and it tends to hurt market share a little bit. The second question would be what the interest expense expectation of the organic business would be in 2010?

The answer to the first one is simple. Talk to us again in April or May when the deal is closed. Your question is a very fair one. It’s one that I wish we had a better answer to. It’s one where I wish we could collaborate more closely with Black & Decker because getting to know the people and the capabilities that exist within that organization has been extraordinarily encouraging. That being said, we’re not legally able to coordinate, collaborate to the extent required, quite frankly the answer to your answer. We can do a lot of things, but we can’t collaborate on markets. We can’t collaborate on strategy, even product development, anything that’s forward looking, and you’ll understand the legal constraints for that. While we don’t essentially compete in the marketplace, the products are complimentary, we are in the same marketplace so we essentially have to think about what we’re going to do independently until the deal closes, and then we’ll get the collective best heads from both companies together and we’ll have a much better answer to your question than we’re able to provide now.

Let me just further say is what we can answer is on the standalone basis what we’re doing, and just very quickly, in the CDIY business, the name of the game has and will continue to product innovation and we’ve just sat through several days a few weeks ago right before the end of the year of an update on what they were doing, what they’ve got planned for this year, and it’s really exciting. It continues to be a new product machine let by Jeff Hansel and his team. And then in the Industrial business, they’ve done a lot of work in harnessing the power of the combined platform. So whereas in the past we used to go to market as Mac and Facom and Vidmar separately, effective January 1, we put that all in one business leader with a functionalized organization as well as a regionalized organization where they’re sharing new product development. They’re sharing global strategy development and market development. So I think you’re going to see a real power house initiative in terms of market share emerge from them, and then of course in Security we have new products in Mechanical. We have the YQ product in particular in both Electronic and Mechanical. We have the addition of feet on the street which Don mentioned is a significant investment in Security, and all of those I think are geared along with our significant increase this year in brand investment to continue to push the needle in that area, all in there interest of market share gain.

As you know, interest expense is about $61 million in2009. We would expect it probably to be somewhere between $52 million and $54 million in 2010.

Your next question comes from [Jeff Kessler – Ontario Capital] [Jeff Kessler – Ontario Capital]: With the increase that you’ve shown in margins relative to sales in particularly in the Convergent side of Security, I’m wondering what are you doing to increase your RMR component both in the quality of the RMR as well as the absolute amount of recurring revenue that you’re getting from that division?

You almost answered the question in that it’s the quality of the RMR and increased percentage of RMR that is driving the margin improvement within Security. It’s a bit of a double edged sword. As our business mix improves, as we fully integrate HSM and GTP, we’re getting a much higher MRM component. That in and of itself, those very solid companies that [Rick Von Trager] and the team have done a very, very job bringing on board. That’s helping a lot. The double edged sword is as commercial construction is down, regrettably install as a percent of the total revenue was also down. So that’s driving a mix based margin improvement which has been very favorable the last couple of quarters. Importantly, you understand this business well; we need to pick up on the installations. They’ll be profitable installations, but they’ll be less profitable than the RMR element in order to fuel our fund that future RMR. So we’re at a bit of a crossroads. We’re at a really good position where we are in terms of mix and now with a little help from the marketplace and aggressive share gain program on the installations, we’ll drive some installations to make sure the RMR pipeline stays full. [Jeff Kessler – Ontario Capital]: And as a follow up to that, you’ve made an announcement you’ve settled the law suit with the franchisee group that was suing you. Is that issue effectively put to bed and will the cost effect along with that be put to bed?

The issue is put to bed. The cost I’ll go so far as to say diminutive and we’re going to move forward. A lot of noise. You follow this industry very closely. A lot of noise and a lot of sizzle but not a lot of steak. Consider it behind us.

I would also say that we had a very, very satisfactory session with them shortly after the beginning of the year and I think we’ve turned to corner now in terms of how the franchisees view us and we view them. It’s a much more positive win win approach and now the proof will be in the execution but the spirit is there.

Your next question comes from Kenneth Zener – Macquarie. Kenneth Zener – Macquarie: I wanted to ask a broad question then ask about CDIY. But first, your 2010 sales guidance of 2% to 4%, I’m wondering just conceptually how you can, or any comments you have relative to the 2% flat line growth you’ve given for the merged companies in your 1, 2, and 3.

Basically if you look at the Stanley projections that are in our S-4 it was about just under 2% growth for 2010. That was in there. I can’t speak to the Black & Decker projections going forward whether there are any revisions associated with that. But on the Stanley side, just under 2%. Now we’re thinking a range of 2% to 4% and it’s really I think an indication of some of the trends that I mentioned around CDIY and in particular that makes us feel a little bit better about that. Kenneth Zener – Macquarie: It does seem rather low. On CDIY which did obviously good margins year over year but I think in the quarter sequentially it was perhaps a little bit low. I wonder if you can talk about the margin puts and takes there given that revenue actually in 4Q was actually than 3Q so I would have thought your absorption was there. If you could just go into some of those details; I think that was one item that might have caught people’s eye in the quarter.

Historically if you look at the CDIY business, although they’ve experienced significant under absorption during 2009 even in the later stages of 2008, in the fourth quarter we do historically have significant shut downs above and beyond just normal volume trends. So we tend to see somewhat of a dip in the segment profit rate in the fourth quarter from the third quarter to the fourth quarter. That’s the main driver of that.

Don’s referring to the fact that you understand as well, home centers are a large source of revenue for CDIY. As you know the home centers close their books at the end of January and as a consequence, orders and shipments are very light in late December and early January. Historically there are always several hundred basis point decline all other things being equal in margins in that segment third to fourth quarter which is why we don’t spend a lot of time tracking sequential margins by segment and talking to it externally unless there was an unanticipated event. To come back to the whole year, the biggest driver in the CDIY margin improvement which we’ve talked about a little and maybe not enough is the tremendous success of the integration of Bostitch within the consumer tools storage business to form the new CDIY platform. Bostitch which is was a struggling business and facing unprecedented volume declines, many of which were market driven has dramatically improved its margins within CDIY despite the fact that its 20% to 25% less volume. So that’s a huge driver within that segment, but the sequential decline was no surprise at all to us. Your next question comes from Michael Rehaut – J.P. Morgan. Michael Rehaut – J.P. Morgan: I wanted to get a little more color on your outlook for next year. Obviously we’re just at the beginning of the year but as it more relates to the Security segment where you said that you gave some general comments on each segment but with Security said perhaps modest growth because of the commercial construction slowdown, and I was wondering if you could first, remind us of the breakdown in terms of your exposure to commercial construction by CSS and MAS and it appears that despite that, you’re still looking for overall perhaps a little bit of modest growth in the segment, so how do you get there? And number two, just more broadly if you could remind us how you think about the end markets and the longer term growth outlook perhaps over the next five years as it relates to the comments that you’ve made in the past about the way those markets grow and your positioning within those markets.

I’ll try to summarize the questions for Don. What is our exposure to commercial construction in our Security business and what’s our view on some of the end markets as it relates to our projection of 2% to 4% revenue growth in 2010?

Just as a refresher, there is actually a nice end market chart that I believe is in the appendix of the presentation, but Kate White can get it to anyone who’s looking for it. Commercial construction for total Stanley is 11% of our revenues. You look at the Mechanical Access and Convergent businesses, for Mechanical it’s about 12% and then for Convergent it’s about 17%. So it’s not a huge portion of the business but it’s certainly significant and it’s something that can have a bit of a negative impact on us and we would expect a little bit of a negative impact in 2010 from that. But there are other sectors as I mentioned such as health care, education, and government that are significant in both the Security businesses. In the case of Convergent, health care is almost 23% and then government and education combined is about 14% in Convergent and about the same number in Mechanical. So there’s some nice verticals in both businesses that have not been as dramatically impacted by the slowing economy nor do we think they’re going to be significantly impacted as we go into 2010. So you have a dynamic that’s happening in our Security segment where they will have a negative drag around commercial construction, but we do think there’s some verticals that can offset that and result in slightly modest growth for the year. Michael Rehaut – J.P. Morgan: And then in terms of longer term how you think about Security and the different end markets in the annual growth potential?

We’ve always said long term that we believe that the Security businesses will grow anywhere from 3% to 6%. It really depends on which component of the business. The Convergent business or the Electronic piece would grow at the higher end of that range and Mechanical at the lower end of the range. Who knows exactly when these economic circumstances get back to normal, but over the long term that’s what our expectation would be.

One benefit of what Don said is historically we were always in a position to say we’re making a trade off. When Convergent was growing faster but margins were lower, so we were balancing growth and margin within our Security platform. Steve has done a really nice job as evidenced by Jeff Kessler’s question, basically getting the Convergent margins up to or even above a level of Mechanical, and while we don’t spend a lot of time focusing on margins by segment, right now we’re quite encouraged because we have a high growth high margin in the Convergent security business as well as a very, very profitable but more modest growth on the Mechanical Security business.

This concludes the allotted time for today’s questions. I turn the call back over to Kate White.