Good morning, and welcome to the United Rentals' Fourth Quarter and Year-End Investor Conference Call. Before we begin, note that the company's press release, comments by presenters and responses to your questions contain forward-looking statements. The company's business and operations are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond its control, and consequently, actual results may differ materially from those projected. A summary of these uncertainties is included in the Safe Harbor statement contained in the release. For a complete description of these and other possible risks, please refer to the company's annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, as well as to subsequent filings with the SEC. You can access these filings on the company's website at www.ur.com. Please note that United Rentals has no obligation and makes no commitment to update or publicly release any revisions to forward-looking statements in order to reflect new information or subsequent events, circumstances or changes in expectation. You should also note that today's call will include references to free cash flow, adjusted EPS, EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA, each of which is a non-GAAP term. Speaking today for United Rentals is Michael Kneeland, Chief Executive Officer; and William Plummer, Chief Financial Officer. I will now turn the call over to Mr. Kneeland. Mr. Kneeland, you may begin.

Thank you, Operator. Good morning, everyone, and welcome. On the call with me today is our Chief Financial Officer, Bill Plummer, and other members of our senior management team. In some ways, this won't be a typical year-end discussion. We just reported our results for a period that may be the most significant in the last three years. Our performance in the quarter was pivotable (sic) [pivotal] to our company. It allowed us to close out the year from a position of strength and carry that momentum into 2011. On the construction cycle, it's showing signs of turning, although the commercial sector is still very weak. But that's okay. We have our arms around that challenge, and as you'll hear, we're bullish about our ability to capitalize on any level of recovery. I'll start with a look at some of the key metrics for the fourth quarter, and then I want to talk about our goals as a company and the progress we expect to make towards those goals. And then after that, Bill will cover our outlook and results in detail, and then we'll take your questions. So first the numbers. It was a good quarter for us. We were able to take a non-residential construction environment that was negative year-over-year by about 8% and leverage it into a performance that was not only positive, but in some cases, dramatically so. Our rental revenue was up 10.4% in the quarter, including a 14.3% increase in same-store rental revenue. And in addition, we had record time utilization of 69.3%, and that's important because that was the third consecutive quarter of record utilization. And perhaps the most telling, our rental rates were up 1.2% for the quarter, year-over-year. In fact, we turned a corner on rates a little earlier and more…

Thanks, Mike, and good morning to everyone. As Mike said, I'll go further into the fourth quarter results. But before going into the fourth quarter, let me recap the 2010 performance against the objectives that we've been updating for you. In looking at our SG&A objective, we laid out a $40 million to $50 million save in SG&A costs for the full year in 2010. We achieved the $41 million that Mike mentioned. So toward the bottom of the range, but we achieved the range. As we have seen in a number of the prior quarters, the reductions came about through almost every line of SG&A, but particularly through salaries and benefit costs associated with headcount reductions, through professional fee reductions as we focus our spend there, through T&E [travel and entertainment] reductions and, again, through almost every line of G&A. Importantly, the reductions that we achieved over the full year offset an increase in selling and commission costs associated with higher revenues. So we feel very good about the SG&A performance for 2010. Cost of rentals x depreciation, we targeted for a reduction of $5 million to $15 million in 2010, and we finished the year with a $14 million increase. As Mike pointed out, that increase included the impact of the $18 million self-insurance charge that we booked in the fourth quarter. Take that out, and we would have actually had a $4 million reduction very close to the bottom end of the range that we had guided to. Our overall sense is that the cost of rental performance was good in 2010, and that certainly is a strong statement to make, given that we had a very nice rebound in transaction volume and the variable costs associated with that represented a headwind that we did a nice…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of David Raso from ISI Group.

Just one quick comment and clarification on that last statement you made, Bill. It looks like just running some simple math on the revenue growth for this year, that would imply an incremental EBITDA this year of about $160 million or so. Is that how we should roughly be thinking about it? So about a $700 million EBITDA base in '10 growing in that ballpark $160 million kind of range? Is that a fair assessment?

David, I won't offer a specific comment on the number. I think we've given enough components, especially with the EBITDA flow-through, so that you can converge on a pretty good sense of what we're thinking about. So I won't offer a comment on your specific number.

Okay. And on that, for drop-through, on my numbers, your EBITDA went up about $70 million last year. And the revenue growth was roughly -- the conversion rate was not terribly different. So, okay, main question though, the margin for '11, when we think of the equipment rental margin, if you look at the history of the company, obviously, back when you got started back in the late '90s, you did have one year around 57%. In '06 it was a shade above 55%. Given what you're seeing on rental rates and your forecast, and obviously, that has a pretty big impact on dropping to the bottom line, how should we think about '11 equipment rental margin versus your history? Should this be the year you get back to your peak level? How should we be thinking about that?

Well, I'd certainly -- I'd hesitate to say that we get back to a peak level, but not because that's not where we might end up, but because I would rather not address it that specifically. I do think that we will have a nice improvement based on the components that we've already talked about, and if we achieve what we've got in our plan right now, I'd feel very good about how we've driven those margins over the course of 2011.

What are the risks on the cost side that, maybe, I'm not appreciating? Again, thinking about how rates drop to the bottom line, how should we -- we can go all the way down to the operating profit line if you want. The cost, I mean, obviously, some years, we've seen fuel costs suddenly become something -- you don't think about that, it's not an insignificant cost for you, for some of your fuel costs. How are you thinking about wages? Is there any change to the comp you’ve given to your sales people as a percent of the rental commissions they bring in? Just what are some of those costs we should be thoughtful about that you're thinking could be maybe a little higher than the Street’s contemplating?

So just to offer some comments on the various line items, the relationship of revenue to selling cost’s probably not going to be dramatically different as we go forward. And so I don't know that the percent of sales representative of selling cost you should think about as changing dramatically. Certainly, fuel costs as part of our overall delivery cost environment is something that we're watching very carefully. The trend of oil prices will be a major driver there. Repair and maintenance expense, we're operating at very nice levels of OEC on rent growth in the plan that we got for 2011. And as you might expect, repair and maintenance correlates pretty closely. So R&M expense is an area that we're going to be focused on, and that's one of the key variables in our variable cost bucket. Delivery costs, I mentioned already. Headcount and salary and benefit, our plan has headcount not changing dramatically over the course of the year. And so depending on sort of whether it's slightly plus or slightly minus will be a major driver there. The challenge with headcount is that we are coming off of the prior couple of years where we have restrained merit increases. And so merit increases are going to come back in 2011. So there'll be a headwind from that effect that we're going to have to manage through as the course of the year unfolds.

Also, David, we're reinstating our 401 contribution as well. So that's the only other bucket that I would say. But nothing has changed from a material standpoint.

On CapEx, obviously, it's a pretty healthy number for '11. And clearly, the question's more trying to get a feel for how you view the CapEx for the company over the next couple of years. That strong CapEx number in '11, what is that implying about your thoughts on '12? And how much does the 100% equipment expensing that you have to work with in '11 influence the '11 numbers? I'm just trying to get a feel. If you look out to '12, '13, structurally, are you thinking this is a gross CapEx number that's $700 million, $750 million a couple of years out after that? Or was some of the 100% expensing somewhat related to pulling forward some '12 into '11?

The 100% bonus depreciation scheme is not going to be a major impact for us. As may have commented before, we have a fairly large NOL position. It's going to take us a while to work off those NOLs, and so the cash tax benefit of 100% depreciation will be pushed out for us. So it’s a small enough effect so that we're not thinking explicitly about accelerating 2012 or 2011, into 2011 expenditures. In terms of how 2011 reflects our thinking about the longer term, I think the answer has got to be it depends on what we see developing going forward. Our view is that 2011, certainly, will be a nice down payment for growth over the next several years, if the market supports it. So if we go through 2011 and it develops the way we're thinking about right now, then that will give us more confidence that another round of nice investment in 2012 is warranted, and then I could say the same thing about '13 based on '12's performance. That's the way we're really thinking about the level of CapEx going forward. If the market's there, then we'll continue to invest in what we think are high return investments in capital. If the market develops more slowly, then we'll consciously look at dialing back some of the expectations that we might otherwise have had. A little vague, I know, but I think it’s important to understand that the investment decision is going to be keyed off of how we see the market developing, how we see our customer relationships developing and where we think we could put it to work at good returns.

Yes, David, I just want to add that we are spending more CapEx, you're right. It's still down from peaks that we've spent as a company historically. And that we remain focused on free cash flow generation as an organization. And we want to drive our capital expenditures to be much more efficient, that's why we're transferring more equipment.

Our next question comes from the line of Henry Kirn from UBS.

I guess, the first point, how are you thinking about seasonality this year given what you're seeing so far with the weather and your fleet addition plans?

Well, there's a seasonal trend every year. Some are more volatile than others. If you recall, the first quarter of last year, we had a significant seasonality swing with a lot of snow. Obviously, we're going through that. That hasn't changed our view on what we think 2011 can deliver. We're very comfortable with that. We planned for it. We understand it. And we just continually look at areas of opportunities, like the new accounts I mentioned. With regards to how our capital will be spent, I don't think it's going to be dramatically different as far as how it's been done in the past because you really want to bring the capital in so that you can get most of it put to work for the season. Having said that, we will spend capital as we have customer demand and as we continue to shift our focus on the national and industrial accounts and to meet those demands.

And on the fleet additions, you're buying a little bit more equipment than I expected. Could you give some color around the fleet categories you're focusing on? Your latest thoughts there, and maybe dovetailing with that, how able is the industry as a whole to go out and make fleet addition? Is there a strategic advantage there?

The first part of that, I'd say that nothing's dramatically going to change from our purchases last year. We're going to be -- obviously, we'll buy aerial and all the products. The question is, will we be buying more on earthmoving? Yes. Will we be buying more in industrial-related products? Yes. And as I mentioned, we'll be expanding in the area of power HVAC and Trench as well. So our pattern and what our goal is hasn't changed. We will increase our percentages in earthmoving and other. And we will have a shift of our forklifts to be also not only reach forklifts, they’ll be higher reach forklifts but also the industrial forklifts. And then from the aerial standpoint, it will come down as a percentage of our total fleet mix. As far as the capacity, I can't speak to everyone's strategy that's out there. As we reported, we're seeing record demand, and we've seen three consecutive quarters. The way in which we focus on it is on customer demand and to make sure that we're staying true to our strategy. Do I think there’s capacity for the vendors to meet our demand? Absolutely. But I think, as an industry, and I go back to rates, we still need to focus on getting an ample return and make sure that what you are buying, you will get those returns over time.

Our next question comes from the line of Chase Becker from Credit Suisse. Chase Becker - Crédit Suisse AG: On the free cash flow, just trying to understand the stickiness of the CapEx, assuming that rates end up being better than your 5% assumption. I understand it’s probably more tied to utilization and demand, but just trying to understand how I should be thinking about free cash flow if rental rates do exceed that 5%?

I think it's probably not far off to say, "Look, if rates do better and we therefore generate more operating cash flow, we're probably not far from saying dollar-for-dollar, operating cash flow goes to CapEx." Now I hesitate in saying that because we certainly will have a lot of discussion around what the environment might support. But if the momentum is there, our view is let's try and put more fleet to work because we would be doing it in an environment that supports better returns. There's certainly a benefit to adding more fleet. There's certainly an impact on our ability to generate profitability and margin. But there's also an impact on our ability to continue to invest in the fleet to manage fleet age, to manage the mix and to support key customer growth. So we'd look for opportunities to invest more. And if the world goes better than we expect, then we're probably going to bump up the level of investment. Chase Becker - Crédit Suisse AG: Okay. And then just in terms of the long-term margin potential for the company, I can appreciate that you've got a significant amount of cost coming out of the structure relative to last cycle, and I understand your normalized margin target. But is there any reason structurally why your peak EBITDA margins next cycle can't be closer to your peers', you were kind of in that 45%, 46% range? Is there anything that I'm missing? It seems like the restructuring actions alone can kind of get you closer to that 40% range, and then you get rates on top of that? I don't know if that's more of an analyst-day-type question or not, but...

Yes, probably, but I guess I would answer at a high level. I don't see anything structurally that should keep us from being very competitive with our major competitors in terms of margin. A key question that we would need to wrestle with is, "Should we let margin go up to the mid-40s?" Right? Or if you're at that level of performance, your returns are going to be very attractive. Should you be investing more in your business and taking maybe a little bit less marginy kind of investment to drive better net present value of the business? That's the debate that we would have if we were north of 40% and given the opportunity of going 45% versus investing more and maybe staying at 40% and just being a bigger company. So that's the kind of discussion we would have. It's a high-class problem to have. Let's get there first.

Our next question comes from the line of Seth Weber from RBC Capital Markets.

Just following up on that last question. Your time utilization guidance for this year, up a point, basically gets you to your intermediate-term target of the 67%. So what are the implications of that? I mean, should we think that, that number doesn't go any higher in the next -- in 2012, 2013? I'm just trying to understand how you're thinking about time utilization going forward. I mean, it sounds like it's similar to what you were just talking about.

I know. As I said, that's the way we're viewing the world going into next year. Keep in mind that the construction by McGraw-Hill’s standards is only going to go up in the low-single digits. But do I think that we can go beyond that? Sure. We have a set goal that we've laid out there to achieve. We've been marching in that direction very nicely. We've had consecutive records for the company. But there's also a component that we are throughout all 10 Canadian provinces, and there's changes in the environment that you can't rent in certain areas because they’re in the outer banks, it's 40 below zero. But that being said, do I think that we can improve our time utilization? Yes. It will also come with the mix, the changes that we have as we layer them in overtime and we continue to develop our customer base.

I guess I would add, I agree, 100%. We could drive utilization higher. I think one of the important discussions that we should and will have as a business is, how much higher and whether we should allow utilization to go much higher than 67%, 68%, or should we, again, if the environment supports, should we invest more, grow the fleet more and keep utilization at about that level in the service of growing profitability and improving return? So yes, we could go higher. I have no doubt about that. I’ve become very fully convinced of that fact. The question is how much higher should we go. Again, high-class problem. Let's get there and then we can talk about it.

And I would just also point out that it's also balanced against a rate. You want to be able to get the rate. You can drive time in this business all day long, but you've got to balance the two of them.

And then just on the pricing target, can you just talk a little bit about how we should think about the slope of pricing through the year? I mean if you're looking for a full year number of 5%, presumably, you're going to have to end the year at a pretty robust number. Can you just talk about how we should -- the trajectory of that?

So without going into too much detail about how we've laid it out over the quarters, I will point out that the first quarter comps from last year are the easiest in the course of the year. But that said, we believe that there will be enough demand and enough momentum as we get into the second and third quarter in particular, so that there's a sequential rate improvement opportunity for us even in those environments. And then fourth quarter, again, we think that we can continue to trend sequentially rates higher in the fourth quarter. So there's a broad statement. I think the view is that we'll be able to continue to push rates higher as we go throughout the course of the year. The challenge of the comps from the prior year gets harder in the second and third quarter, but we believe that the market will be there to support rate improvement.

Did you not see the typical seasonal softening at the end of the year this year? Is that a fair statement?

Yes, I would say that's a fair statement. If you recall, the 69.3% time utilization is a record, and the performance speaks for itself. And we didn't see that drop off, as Bill mentioned, even with the holidays and the seasonal trend. Is there a seasonal component to our business? Absolutely. But clearly, we outperformed it.

And then just lastly, I mean, can you just remind us where you are relative to the past peak pricing? Are you down 10 points, 12 points? Is there a number we could think about?

So versus the prior peak, recall that we came down 12% in 2009. We came down a little bit in '08 before that. And we came down another 2% this year. So versus the prior peak, somebody have the number handy?

21%.

So versus the prior peak, 16%, the high teen kind of range.

Our next question comes from the line of David Wells from Thompson Research Group.

I guess, first off on the rental rate expectation front, just looking at the fleet statistics that you put in your deck, with aerials sitting at 74% utilized, I guess I'm trying to get a sense of that 5% expectation, how much of it can you see on the aerial piece? Or is it more in some of the other categories that you're being able to push that lever more effectively?

Well, as I mentioned, we saw the aerial in weekly and daily terms actually go up in the quarter. We did see a sequential improvement in aerial on the monthly side of things, but it wasn't enough to break through on a year-over-year basis. As we go through the year, we would expect to see more demand and be able to support a price increase for that product as well as we go through the year. So it's really -- we don't break it down specifically by categories. It's much more scientific than that. But we look at it by geography. We look at what we're capable of getting by the customer. We look at utilization and we make judgment calls. And then in some instances, we walk away from deals. And we'll transfer the assets. So it's all the above and how you manage it. But I would expect to see aerial rates improve as we go through 2011.

And then thinking about the mix of customers, obviously focusing on the larger national account, presumably they're going to be more price savvy or have the leverage in place from a purchasing perspective to get greater scale. Does that hurt the ability to move the rate, that 5%, or are you baking in some of a return, if you will, to that smaller contractor base, that doesn't have the scale in place to push back on rates?

No, it's all the above. We negotiate a lot of these rates on an annual basis. Some are set not to exceed pricing. There's a lot of things that we can do to manage those rates more efficiently. We've got systems in place to help us with that. But to your point, the spot customer who wants to come in for that shorter term, yes, depending upon the utilization of that asset and that type of customer, they could probably expect to pay more. So just in general on rates, this is an industry that really needs to focus on rates, needs to get a return on the capital it's employing out there. This is not just for me, it's the whole industry. So I think as we begin to see the turn of the trend of being in the construction, starting to pick up, most companies are seeing sequential improvements. I don't see them stopping. I see them continuing to focus on improving that picture. So it's all the above that will get us there.

And then lastly, just one quick housekeeping question, how should we think about the share count for next year?

So with profitability, David, the share count clearly will start to include some of the securities that were anti-dilutive when we were in a loss position. As we look at the full year, assuming that we've got a nice net income position for -- a stock price in the $25 to $30 stock price, we think that the expected fully diluted share count will be somewhere in the, let's say in the mid-70s, as sort of a starting point for the year. So $75 million, let’s say, right in that area.

Our next question comes from the line of Scott Schneeberger from Oppenheimer. Scott Schneeberger - Oppenheimer & Co. Inc.: A couple of scattered ones here. First, Mike, could you address stimulus? What type of -- how material was that in '10? Is that going to be headwind, tailwind? Will that be a headwind, tailwind in '11, and just speaking to infrastructure and your business overall?

It really affects the Trench business and the Trench business has seen a nice uptick as it went through the year. And as I mentioned, we're going to continue to invest in that line of business. So the stimulus dollars don't peak out until '11. I would say that, that area of the business will continue to go forward as we have been. It ramps up, but it peaks out in '11. But there's a lot of projects that are underway. Scott Schneeberger - Oppenheimer & Co. Inc.: Shifting gears, if you do, in fact, end up 2011 doing the CapEx that's been discussed in the outlook, what type of OEC at the end of the year and what type of fleet age are we looking at? And how are you thinking about fleet age?

Sure. Our average for the year, and you can expect our fleet to probably up an average of $100 million for OEC on average. With regards to age, our age is going to be relatively flat. I'll put the goalposts – it could go a month in either direction. We're very comfortable with that. And we'll continue to monitor it. We still sell the oldest assets, and we're very active in our fleet management program.

In terms of the fleet size at the end of the year, you can back into it reasonably closely, but say the fleet goes up 175 to 200, in that range. Scott Schneeberger - Oppenheimer & Co. Inc.: And then finally, just on the self-insurance. Mike, could you speak to your safety record? Is there anything we should be concerned about? Just a progress update there.

No, this is something that's very important to the company. It was also pointed out in our engagement surveys where we've got one of the highest scores on safety. We continue to improve our safety in all areas that Bill mentioned, both in general liability, our recordable rate as well as our automotive. So it's something that we take very seriously. And in fact, we have a program where every employee has to go through on an annual basis, including myself. And we're very stringent around safety. It's very core to our business.

Our next question comes from the line of Emily Shanks from Barclays Capital.

But I did want to ask just a follow-up around the fleet age. As you gave color around CapEx spend being targeted, if I heard correctly, around earthmoving and industrial-type products and that aerial will become a lower percentage of the fleet mix, should that naturally take your fleet age down or not materially?

Not materially, I mean, if you think about it. I mean, obviously, when you buy new, it brings it down. But a lot of our aerial fleet, we refurbished, and we're going to hold on to it. And so you'll see that age out over time, especially a lot of the booms, and to a lesser degree, some of the larger forklifts. So we see that as a viable alternative to buying some of these assets. So that has an impact as well. But again, as I mentioned, it's going to fluctuate a month in either direction, and we're very comfortable. And you can see by the utilization that we have out there, that our service ability on these assets is just fine.

This may sound completely counter to what everybody else is asking, but in the event of a double dip or another pullback, are you comfortable with the fleet age where it is? And how much longer would you want to age it or would you be comfortable taking it to?

We haven't crossed that path yet, but aging it out does not scare me. We're always prepared for a double dip, if need be. We're not afraid to make those choices, whether it be selling assets or going through and doing what we have to, make hard choices. We've done that. We'll do it again if need be. I just don't think that, that's in the cards, but you never know. That's beyond our control at this point. But as far as aging the fleet out, if we had to age it out even further, it would not bother me. Our R&M expense would go up, but it wouldn't go up dramatically.

This does conclude the question-and-answer period of today's program. I'd like to turn the program back for any concluding remarks.

Thank you, Operator. I want to thank everybody for joining us today. And as always, you're welcome for follow-up calls, here in branch, getting hold of Fred Bratman or visiting one of our locations. And I just want to remind everyone that next week, we're holding an Investor Day on February 11, in New York City, starting at noon Eastern Time. We will be webcasting the event to a link on our website, so I hope you join us. With that, I think that concludes today, and we'll talk to you after the first quarter. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your participation in today's conference. This does conclude the program. You may now disconnect. Good day.