Greetings ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the BB&T Corporation Third Quarter 2017 Earnings Conference. Currently, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. As a reminder, this event is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce your host Alan Greer of Investor Relations for BB&T Corporation.

Thank you, Laura and good morning everyone. Thanks to all of our listeners for joining us today. On today's call, we have Kelly King, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and Daryl Bible, our Chief Financial Officer, who will review the results for the third quarter and provide some thoughts about the fourth quarter. We also have Chris Henson, our President and Chief Operating Officer; and Clarke Starnes, our Chief Risk Officer to participate in the Q&A session. We will be referencing a slide presentation during our comments. A copy of the presentation as well as our earnings release and supplemental financial information are available on the BB&T Web site. Let me remind you that BB&T does not provide public earnings predictions or forecasts. However, there may be statements made during the course of this call that express management's intentions, beliefs or expectations. BB&T's actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by these forward-looking statements. Please refer to the cautionary statements regarding forward-looking information in our presentation and our SEC filings. Please also note that our presentation includes certain non-GAAP disclosures. Please refer to Page 2 and the appendix of the presentation for the appropriate reconciliations to GAAP. And now, I will turn it over to Kelly.

Thanks Alan and good morning everybody. Hope you're having a great day and thanks for joining call. So, we had a solid third quarter with growth in revenues that despite the hurricanes which as you know impacted a meaningful part of our market. We did have growth in core loans and we had very good expense control and net income available to common shareholders totaled $597 million, diluted EPS was $0.74 up $1.04 versus third quarter 2016. But, if you adjust for the four penny effect because of merger-related and researcher charges, it would be an adjusted $0.78, which is up 2.6% versus third quarter 2016. Our adjusted and return on assets, return on common equity and return on tangible common equity were 1.2, 9.2 and 15.6, which I think are very respectable performance ratios in this environment. Positively, we did have adjusted positive operating leverage which we were very pleased with. Taxable revenues totaled $2.9 billion, which is up $1.04 versus the third quarter and that was led primarily by a good core loan growth and we did have the [benefits] [ph] and higher rates. Net interest margin increased 1 basis point to 348 as did our core net interest margin and we are pleased about that. Adjusted efficiency ratio improved to 58.3 from 58.6, if you recall early on the year, we talked about our -- our cost began to kind of peak in the middle part of the year and begin to kind of common down that proving out as we hope to it was. Non-interest expenses excluding merger-related restructuring charges totaled $1.698 billion and that was notably a decrease of 7.8% annualized versus the second quarter. Our point of view, we are spending a lot of time on reconceptualization around all aspects of our business; it's…

Thank you, Kelly, and good morning, everyone. Today I'm going to talk about credit quality, net interest margin, fee income, non-interest expense capital; our segment results and provide some guidance for the fourth quarter. Turning to Slide 9, we had a really strong quarter with regard to improved charge offs and non-performing assets. Net charge offs totaled 127 million or 35 basis points, it decreased from 37 basis points last quarter. Loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing increased 2.4% versus last quarter. This is mainly due to government guaranteed residential mortgages. Loans 30 to 89 days past due increased 113 million or 12.9% mostly due to seasonality and hurricane related impacts. NPAs were down $10 million or 1.4% from last quarter mostly due to improvement in the commercial portfolio. Looking to the fourth quarter, we expect net charge offs to be in a range of 40 to 50 basis points assuming no unexpected deterioration in the economy. The slight increase in the expected net charge off range is due to seasonality. Continuing on Slide 10, our allowance coverage ratio remain strong at 2.93x for net charge offs and 2.44x for MPLs. The allowance to loans ratio was 1.04% up slightly from last quarter. The allowance includes 35 million qualitative adjustment for the stores. Excluding the acquired portfolio, the allowance to loans ratio was 1.12x unchanged from last quarter. So our effective allowance coverage ratios remain strong. Third quarter provision of $126 million compared to net charge offs of $127 million. Going forward, we expect loan loss provision to net charge offs plus longer. Turning to Slide 11. Compared to last quarter net interest margin was 3.48% up 1 basis point. Core margin was 3.32% also up 1 basis point from last quarter. GAAP and core margin…

Thanks Daryl. So very good Daryl it was a solid quarter take on a challenging environment, our revenues grew we had good core loans and growth, we had good core deposit growth, we have excellent expense control. We have a lot of focus on the future, focusing on our branch - rationalizing, our strategy, our digital strategy and most importantly we continue to be tightly focused on our vision mission and values. At BB&T we clearly believe our best days are ahead.

Okay. Thank you, Kelly. At this time, we'll begin our Q&A session, and we would ask our operator alone to come back on the line and explain how our listeners may participate.

Thank you, sir. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from Nancy Bush with NAB Research. Nancy your line is open please go ahead.

Good morning Kelly, how are you?

Hi, Nancy. How are you?

Good. In this differentiation that you are talking about and in this rethinking of the franchise what has been the biggest emphasis to this, I mean when you are thinking about the factors that are out there right now, what really plays into this?

So Nancy, I think it's, its broadly speaking is that the, world is changing frankly a lot faster than I would have four, five years ago, is largely around, the whole digitalization, artificial intelligence, robotics, all of which are allowing us in the back room to restructure and, frankly we can robotize many, many processes that were manually handled forever. And we get that quality and more efficiency. So the back room offers, really prefers them in my career offers huge opportunities to recentralize and do the same with less expense. In the front room as you know the world has changed in terms of their expectations of convenience banking and is not just Xs and Ys in the many years although they are the most strategically focused on it, but everybody who just have very, very high quality mobile banking et cetera. So that is where we are having a spend an enormous amount of focus on being sure that we have the best offerings in terms of digitized delivery of services think mobile banking and et cetera and be able to do it in a efficient way. So in order to pay for all of the front room, we are rationalized in the back room and we rationalize in the branch structure. So it's, simple way to answer and I think about is just, you actually wrote to our commentary about some time ago, the world if really changed and so, we are thinking about every aspect of our business that we are today, than we were three years ago, two years ago.

Did this that thought process include and we just saw JPM by WePay doesn't include, the bringing in fintech franchises, have you thought that for ahead is that something and that would be attractive to you?

Absolutely, we have for 18 months, you may have heard how we wanted first to have one of our executive officers as our Chief Digital Officer. He is full time focused on scouting the role figuring out what the best fintech offerings are, looking for opportunities to buy partner loan from we are just completely open minded about how we can integrate the advanced technique to fintech brought to the world. So, the answer is clearly yes.

And I would just ask as the final part of this, in looking at the banking franchise and rationalizing the banking franchise is it possible, I mean you guys have spend decades now building a franchise is it possible that you will look at regions to exit?

In today's world Nancy, everything is possible. So, well we think about that is we first frankly focusing on, pardon me, we are first focusing on what I call residual business and that we have that, don't really make sense because of not that we might not be making money, but we just can't make much money. So we get as I mean those kind of strategies recall they won't be tightly focused on the ones that do make sense. In terms of regions, in terms of the market outreach, as I sit here I don't have any particular regions that I would say we are in that we don't want to be in. But, the clear thought process that I will be focusing is, de-emphasizing regions that don't offer as much opportunity and improving our profitability. Now that may ultimately lead to your point lead to actually exiting, but right now our focus is on improving profitability in those regions that don't offer substantial growth, but do offer good solid relationships today, we were focusing on providing still good, always quality, but because we have such huge brand value there, we think we can provide this solid service quality value with less expense. And then reinvesting those expenses and the market instead our higher growth markets and offer more long-term potential.

Thank you.

You bet.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Betsy Graseck with Morgan Stanley.

Hi good morning.

Hi Betsy.

Hi good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I just want to focus in on the loan growth opportunities here, because I know that you are looking for the core portfolio to be growing in the 2% to 4% range or so, yet in the near term it's going to come in below that because of the run-off portfolios which feel like they are going to be done running off in 1Q, 2Q next year. But maybe if you can give us a sense as to that piece of change and what's the issues in the run-off portfolio that you really want them to be moving off as oppose to sticking with them in this low growthish environment? And then maybe highlight where you see opportunities in your regions for accelerating loan growth? Thanks.

Betsy, I'll take a start and then Clarke can add some detail. So we are really focusing on, as you how to say optimizing these the mortgage portfolio and the prime portfolio there is no surprising those portfolios are now generating adequate returns on equity and in terms of when you think mortgage in terms of rising rates, now we are about to have auto where we wanted to be, I mean the business we're going to stay in, but this would be and not chasing volume, but chasing margins and profitability that's heading towards stabilization, mortgages heading towards stabilization just a natural run-off. So, you are right first half that being, they would be where they want to be. But really the more important thing it doesn't really come through I think in our numbers is that we have really good traction in a lot of areas. Our corporate banking strategy is growing extremely well, strong double-digit growth and has a good long runway. Because, as you know we weren't natural player in the big, the high-end market until the last few years, we have a fantastic team in that area and it is doing really well and we'll continue to do well going forward. Our growth strategy is really hitting in all cylinders in terms of fees and asset generation is doing extremely well, all of our specialized lending businesses are doing fantastic. I mean you grow in double, you grow in 20%, 24%, 25% growth rate and as seasonal somewhat, but I mean still they are doing extremely well and we are differentiating it, so I don't worry about it comparative prices much on that. The biggest challenge is in the community bank, where we are competing with everybody in the world, but what we are doing…

Okay, thanks. Very helpful answer. I appreciate it Kelly.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from Matt O'Connor with Deutsche Bank. Matt your line is open.

Good morning.

Hi Matt.

I was hoping you could elaborate on the insurance performance-based commissions, how much of the insurance fees, does that represent what are drivers and what's the outlook?

Yes. Happy to do that Matt, this is Chris. First thing I would maybe point out that, I think that there might be some mistake about the inline performance. We come off our second quarter which is our highest quarter of the year to our lowest which is in the third, when you call out that $84 million reduction about $56 million of that is seasonality about $9 million was just directly related to hurricane losses due to performance-based commissions, three was like Kelly said was just production loss, facilities are really shutdown, so we couldn't do business. And there is about $16 million related to timing through various businesses where we might have received something in the second quarter of this year, we received in the first quarter in the year's prior. So just to clear that on seasonality, but the outlook I think it's a great question that the storms do cause a reduction in performance-based commissions in the short-term, but we get improvement over the intermediate term. So, really over the long-term this is good for brokers, you have to go through this wonder of short-term paying to really get pricing up to the long-term. I think what you could expect from us in fourth quarter is commission is being up around the 5% level and that includes in the reductions we would have in performance-based commissions. We still see economic expansion driving our unit growth, this quarter we had 5% new business growth, when you drive insurance one is pricing and its stabilized down from 4 and to say the 2 to 3 range and we have the opportunity now through storms for pricing to actually improve further. Second, it would be client retention and we're industry leading at 91%, 92% or so there. So economic…

Okay that's helpful. And then if I could just squeeze in on a follow-up on expenses, I know there was a comment about hoping to continue to push cost down obviously fourth quarter, the ability on does you think about 2018 any early thoughts on can you reduce cost on absolute basis, are you trying to offset kind of inflationary pressures, what are the thoughts on the expert plan heading into next year?

Yes Matt, this is Daryl. We are still putting together our 2018 plan. I think the best way I can tell you right now is what Kelly said is that we are continuing to look forward our efficiencies and kind of redistribution of our cost structure and you will continue to see the salary line item and more severance payments which will drive our personnel cost down for the next couple of quarters. We're going to use that into 2018, we are going to give guidance on 2018 yet, but no that we have pretty much wind in our sales right now from an expense basis because its headed down right now and well we're going to make investments in our company, we still have a pretty good trajectory down.

Okay, thank you.

Our next question comes from John McDonald with Bernstein.

Good morning, Daryl, I was hoping to ask just a little bit about the NII outlook and net interest margin on. For the net interest margin down 3 to 5 basis points next quarter, can you give a little details on the funding cost and asset mix pressures that you referenced?

Yes, I think we made a decision John to grow our investment securities portfolio, over the next quarter or two consistent with what we think we're going to see loan growth over the next year or two. So our securities portfolio is going to ramp up a little bit kind of close to what it was a year or so ago. So, consistent with maybe three plus percent that's basically given us a negative asset mix change, but gives us positive net interest income, a contribution from that perspective. And then from a deposit beta perspective if you look at the last four rate increases, our deposit beta has been about 14% today on interest bearing deposits. We continue to respond and, be a aggressive on the commercial side as we need to and I think retail side is still pretty tame though we are starting to have a couple competition more for wealth clients and all that. So we're trying to be responsive, but I think over the next couple of rate increases you are going to see that 14% start to drift up probably back to normal levels you had, but closer to higher levels than where they are today.

Okay, and the change in mindset about the securities is driven more about the loan growth and challenges of loan growth rather than a rate outlook change or anything like that it sounds like?

Yes, I don't think we're smart enough to know exactly which way rates are going to go, but alone that the shape of the curve and you have adverse as long and all that, I think we just want to keep our portfolio approximately 20 plus percent of our balance sheet, from a liquidity perspective. We're really gearing up to have pretty solid loan growth into 2018 and we just want to make sure we have liquidity, so we want to make sure that we're funded with our core clients, we have been liquidity with our securities portfolio as our important loan portfolio starts to take-off.

Okay. And then just on the fourth quarter outlook for net charge-offs, so can you remind us what portfolios see that seasonal up tick in the fourth quarter and also is that charge-off guidance the 40 or 50 include any hurricane impact on charge-offs that you might expect for the fourth quarter?

Yes. John, this is Clarke. Primary seasonality impact in the fourth is always going to be in our retail portfolios, but more specifically its Regional Acceptance or some problem or wind or so while we are not expecting any increase in deterioration it would be the normal year-over-year seasonality that's the biggest impact, but also just to remind you, well we had extremely low third quarter number in our commercial losses and we're just forecasting maybe a little more normal losses, hopefully we'll do better, but those are the two primary factors.

Okay, got it. Thank you.

Thanks.

Our next question comes from Gerard Cassidy with RBC.

Good morning guys.

Good morning, how are you doing?

Kelly, can you give us a little more color you talked about looking over the long-term and not necessarily the short term when it comes to loan growth and some of the things that you folks are seeing in the marketplace on underwriting. What are you seeing that makes you little nervous especially at this point the cycle and can you bring that by loan category whether its CRE or commercial or consumer?

Yes. Gerard, I think the mega issue here is that you know we've been on a nine year slow economy. Asset returns for all investors have declined steadily that's driven the profitability down and so everybody is scrambling for profitability which means they are scrambling for assets and is invariable happens as you know when people are scrambling for assets and there is a lot of people scrambling then you get declines in prices and you get, stretching in terms of term. So, the mega issue is we did a lot of pricing and to two level of underwriting, two longer terms not special covenants et cetera. I think that's generally occurring across the board, it was more specific and, like more to family although we would tell you that as improved two years ago, 18 months ago we've heard about that, but I think everybody is going to rationalize that down a bit more, little more rationale. And so, I don't think that there is any one particular area that we were, there is a little bit of a spike in story facilities, fee links like that, but nothing that's dramatic, and Clarke would you add anything to that.

I would just add to what Kelly said, on the corporate side to our generally probably the most rationale, but what we see its time to continue to get a mandatory, to deliver the mandates for the syndication or loosening covenants, reducing the number of covenants, dispose federal structural weaknesses that we know in the long-term, you got to be careful on, I think we see the most hyper competition in the small regional community bank winning space which is again a lot of structural consideration give ups and little pricing for that's probably the most hyper compared to and your third point, I think you'll had to always look at is not all growth is per saying, so I think everyone in the slow environment is trying to find a little niche or something to get it growth that they are not highly experienced into kind of the herbs chasing some of these new forms of lending to have it being tested yet and that's underneath the lot of these numbers. So, we're just trying to be mindful of all those issues.

Could you guys equate this period to 2005 or is that, or is too aggressive back then when you think back about it?

I think it was too aggressive back then. Then you had a much less informed, you for around chasing bubbles. And you know we have a much more inflated level of bubbles throughout all asset classes. So this is nothing like 2005 and 2006, but totally in the real estate category. So, I personally think anything impressive we would make about lending today should not suggest, we think its way out of control and its leading to recession and all of that not at all.

Very good. And then on the deposit side, obviously you guys are very clearly about taking down the interest bearing deposits and you grew your non-interest bearing obviously quite well. Aside from the betas that you've already touched on, was there something else in the interest bearing that prompted you to kind of take them down the way you did this quarter?

Yes. Gerard, it was basically just lower funding play, we had some deposit that was close to LIBOR flat that was indexed to market rates, and we just made a decision to basically fund them for federal more bank advances which was sub-LIBOR probably by 10 or 15 basis points. So it's just an economic decision, when you are being paid LIBOR flat that's really not a, I would call core client, they are very, very sensitive from that perspective. So we didn't lose any core clients, it was just a economic decision.

Great, thank you.

You're welcome.

Our next question comes from Erika Najarian with Bank of America.

Yes, hi good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

My first question Kelly is on maybe asking further little bit more detailed and how you are thinking about the branch reduction strategy for 2018 and 2019? And, as you think about your distribution channel, do you think that could naturally lower the efficiency ratio all those being equal from the 58% that you've been, booking all year?

Yes. So conceptually, we're going through cannibal process and the, the first phase of the process is looking at kind of what we call the life free that's where you have, in the market you may have 15 and 20 branches on this one particular street you have three branches all that are within 5 or 6 miles each other. So you close the one in the middle, you move the associates to the, of the two and it doesn't really change and your expenses go down. So that's what we've been doing kind of this year, as we head into 2018 and 2019 then what we have to do is think in terms of eliminating the branches but being assured that we are investing properly in the other areas, other forms of distribution so for example you might see us there closing branches but adding free standing ATMs or you might see us closing branches but adding ATMs and drug stores or Wal-Marts or places like that, because while most of the declines still go to the branches for more complex products, I'll now for a lot I feel just making a deposit in cash and checks, as we go through 2018, 2019 it will be a little more complex, but still a plenty of opportunity it just may require a bit more add back not terribly expensive add back in terms of the way to meet the convenience needs of the client. In terms of the efficiency ratio all of those to get will improve our efficiency ratio, because we're simply able to reduce expenses and have relatively small negative impact in terms of income. So, everyone that we closed improves our efficiency.

The other thing I would add with that Erika is as we are closing branches what we have found is our retention rates are really, really high in the high 90s. So, we are maintaining the almost 100% of clients in revenue and deposits that from the closed branches. So, I think there has been really little impact on revenue or core deposits.

That's really helpful. Thank you. And the follow-up to that is, so essentially you are telling investors is the value of the branch and changing world has declined, how should we think about this relative to the strategy in terms of how BB&T grow up. So, in terms of you had been community bank roll up story, so as we think about potential other roll ups going forward does that mean your less likely to do them or does that simply mean that the natural cause savings going forward from here is it completely differently and maybe higher math than we had seen in the past?

So Erika, that's a very good question, I have addressed that in a couple of conferences. So it does make a material change and here is how. So historically, when we acquired an institution you could very reasonably mathematically project the future cash flows from the projected operations of a branch discount those cash flow and back them figure out what paid for and it makes sense, because the projected cash flow is relatively constant and in many cases it's growing. Now as we look at a bank acquisition, we have to be thoughtful about the future cash flows of those branches going down, because in the last two or three years especially the level of branch activity has been going down for us and everybody else though we have been 6 and in some cases higher percentage of lower activity three year. And so what that means is if you are looking, an out of market acquisition where you're going to keep the branches it doesn't mean it's not valuable, but it means is meaningfully less valuable, because when you look forward the predictability the cash flow is less and you are sure will be a decline in cash flow. And so you have factor that in, so you would be discounting back a lower projected cash flow with more volatility and so necessarily you pay less of that. For all of that means and as it's said the value of out of market acquisition for somebody like us doesn't make any sense. There is a price you do it, it may have a price that [fell when they expect] [ph]. End market hasn't changed the reason for that is because you got the same factors with regard to the changes in the future projected cash flows of those…

Got it. Thank you.

Our next question comes from John Pancari with Evercore ISI.

Good morning.

Good morning, John.

On that -- just going back to the M&A topic, can you just remind us though -- in terms of bank versus non-bank acquisition interest and would you be interested in ensuring some properties if they come about or you're not looking when they are growing that inorganically anywhere? Thanks.

We are very interested in insurance acquisitions today we are not prohibitive regarding insurance acquisitions and we are open for business as you will. And very interested into an insurance acquisition today. We like to think of our insurance business and Chris can give you more color if you want. We would like to ideally keep it at about [2010] [ph] revenues, we are about 17% that's why we have room to expand there. And there are good opportunities out therefore. We would consider other non-bank acquisitions, but to be honest other than insurance, I don't really see that happening. People talk about asset acquisition businesses. Most of the times now we don't work in those and so we are -- I would say we are currently tightly focused on insurance. The single -- any small things and by the payment business we look at but they are not meaningful in terms of moving the numbers. And then, we reopen the bank acquisition opportunities I just described to Erika.

Great and that's helpful. And just remind me on the bank side, what will be your suite spot again in terms of target asset size, if you were to do whole bank deals?

I think, the suite spot would be 20 plus billion.

Okay. All right. Thanks guys. And then, separately back to the competition discussion, I know you flagged it a few times here in terms of where you are seeing that pressure particularly on the lending side. Can you talk a little bit about what that means for -- your loan yield here borrowing any incremental moves from the fed? How do you think the competition could weigh on loan pricing and how that could play out in terms of your loan yield as we look in the out quarters? Thanks.

As we said, it's highly competitive out there. So, this quarter we did see some compression and the new loan spreads not material. So we have been doing a really good job despite the competition of generally holding up our spread although they continue to be pressured comparatively -- a wrong yield was actually up as we benefited from the rate increases and as Kelly laid out very well earlier in the presentation, mixed strategies around better pricing schemes for things like our indirect auto, the business that we get out of some of the subs which have higher margin. So, we think those help to offset some of those competitive pressures. But, it is a real challenge as we look forward and we fairly don't want to comment on…

The only thing I would add to that John is, you have to look -- so, we are optimizing mortgage and auto. When you look at the spreads like for example auto is big chunk of the book was put on as spread that was a little over 100 basis points or at 120 basis points. We now optimize that the spreads are not close to 200 basis points. So as those old ones renewal and roll over that's going to give us some left. As Clarke said, there is competition in specific C&I credit, whatever, but if you point it all together, I think our credit spreads are still hanging in there pretty well because of our optimization efforts that we have there. And rate sensitivity wise, we are about -- very still up or the short end is about 2/3rds going in, it is our net interest income come up at the -- curve actually even and then shifts, we will also benefit from that. So, it really just depends what the rate outlook is.

Got it. All right. Thanks Daryl.

And our final question comes from Kevin Barker with Piper Jaffray.

Thank you. Good morning.

Hey, good morning.

So, you obviously talked about M&A quite a bit here and you are looking at that as a longer term strategy, you have to deal with consent or first but taking the other side of it, there has been an increased talk of the Sify buffer potentially moving into $250 billion or going to some type of quality approach. Given then, you are a little bit over $220 billion in assets right now, have you ever considered staying below $250 billion in assets in order to not have to deal with possibly the liquidity coverage ratio or having more flexibility with your capital ratio.

So, Kevin, I -- first of all, the value of the $250 billion is very much in slice, there are a number of conceptually proposals and converse the ensuing bill et cetera, it's not at all clear, what's going to happen with regard to the value is at $250 million. What's most likely getting ready to happen is, I'm going to eliminate the hard ones when the fed is reshuffle in terms with their board of governors. I think they are going to eliminate the hard full 50, 250 and unless they can go away and banks that will be gauged based on the weighted average assessment of their risk. And so, if that happens, it's actually for us given that our weighted average category of risk, but relative to some of the biggest banks, we could be $400 billion, $500 billion and still not be just be a Sify or require a huge amounts of excessive regulation. So, we will see how that plays out. But, independent of that, as we look at the next deal, it's already, this is close to $250 billion, if that's still the existing rule, we will be mindful of exactly how we do that deal. But, look here is the thing Kevin, for us sit back here now and say that we are not going to go over $250 billion because there are some things that we have to deal with -- would be redeeming ourselves a long player. In this business, you are growing or you are dying and we are a growth company and robust right $250 billion, when the appropriate time comes we will be real happy about it.

Okay. And then, when you think that you talked about this and it has but some of the expenses as you build up or some of the investment that you made in order to prepare for the $250 billion in assets. At what point, as far as the investments, how far long do you think you are in preparation for a $250 billion?

It really depends on what happens to the rose Kevin. I would say that we are hopeful that the advanced approach kind of fans away when Governor Tarullo was in office. He was not a fan of the advanced approach. We believe that will continue on, but we really need to see and hear that from the new board of governors. That would be one big expense you can take off the table. As far as the capital, the OCI market that's just something that we would manage and I think we were very comfortable managing that with our held to maturity portfolio. OCR and got talked about that in the past, I think with the combination of our core deposits and our current liquidity coupled with usage of letters of credit from the home loan bank, we can minimize that cost, so until we significantly. So, there are couple of other things, but as Kelly said, we will grow over $250 billion. We will -- you pay us to manage our business and do it effectively and we will minimize the cost as much as possible. We don't see anything prohibitive there.

Okay. Thank you for taking my questions.

At this time, I would like to turn things back to Alan Greer for any additional or closing remarks.

Okay. Thank you, Laura. This concludes our call for today. Hope everyone has a great day. If you have further questions, please don't hesitate to contact Investor Relations. Thank you.

This concludes today's conference. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.