Good morning and welcome to the United Rentals Third Quarter 2012 Investor Conference Call. Please be advised that this call is being recorded. Before we begin, note that the Company’s press release, comments made on today’s call and responses to your questions contain forward-looking statements. The Company's business and operations are subject to a variety of risk 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 more 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, 2011 as well as the 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 expectations. 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 non-GAAP term. Speaking today for United Rentals is Michael Kneeland, Chief Executive Officer; William Plummer, Chief Financial Officer; and Matt Flannery, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. I’ll now turn the call over to Mr. Kneeland. Mr. Kneeland, you may begin.

Thanks, operator, and good morning everyone and welcome. With me today are Bill Plummer, our Chief Financial Officer, and Matt Flannery, our Chief Operating Officer and other members of our senior management team. The financial results we reported last night were strong. They reflect an operating environment with a solid level of demand and integration with RSC that’s very much on track and most important the successful execution of our strategy as reflected in our margins. Now we will talk about all three of these things today, but also I want to give you some – our current thinking about the months ahead. But before I begin, I want to remind you that any year-over-year comparisons we give you are on a pro forma basis that is measured against combined results of United Rentals and RSC for 2011. So just take a look at the quarter. It incorporated the most intense three months of our integration plan. From July to September, we completed the harmonization of most of our major account relationships, realigned our sales territories and closed 126 branches bringing the merger related closings to a 187 so far. We deliberately set the bar high to get most of the heavy lifting behind us by September 30th and I’m very happy to say that we met that goal. And while we’re managing all that change, we generated a solid 9% increase in rental revenue year-over-year and $570 million of adjusted EBITDA at a 47% margin. That’s the highest margin, yeah. And in addition we’re running ahead of plan and cost synergies. We realized another $45 million of savings in the third quarter and we now expect to reach a $100 of realized cost synergies in 2012 for our ultimate goal of $230 million to $250 million on a run…

Thanks, Mike, and good morning everyone. I’d like to start with the progress report on our integration efforts and then give you a brief overview of market conditions across our regions. On our call in July, we reported that our integration efforts got off to a very strong start and we’ve made significant progress since our call. Our field team has heard me say from the very beginning of this merger that we need to focus on moving the big rocks. This means making sure we’ve communicated with our key customers and our sales territories are realigned to eliminate confusion and that we communicate with our new operational footprint will be to serve our customers. So let me take a minute to tell you what we’ve done. I will start with the customer first. Our sales team has done a great job of focusing on our key accounts which grew by 17% in Q3. Now this was partially due to the fact that this past quarter we finalized over a 125 new national account agreements. And we’re negotiating while complete the remaining 260 throughout Q4. Additionally, we realigned over a 1000 sales rep territories. Now this was a large and necessary undertaking due to the overlap in coverage between reps from the two legacy companies. Our reps have now been in their territories for over 60 days and they’re well on their way to further penetrating their new territories and the customers that they’re calling on. : And operationally as Mike mentioned, we completed a 126 branch consolidations in Q3 and that takes our year-to-date total to 187. We’ve integrated the teams into common facilities, one technology platform and most importantly one voice to the customer in the effective markets. We’ve charged forward with an aggressive closure schedule and that…

Thanks, Matt, and good morning to everyone. As is usual, I will add a little bit more color to the third quarter results and I will also spend little time updating our outlook for the full-year. And before I get started, I will just remind everyone as Michael did that all of the comparisons and comments that we make are about the pro forma company combined basis comparing to as though we’ve combined in the prior period. So let me start with net revenue first. Net revenue was up 8.9% in the quarter with strong contributions from both rental rate and fleeted on rent. Rates were up 7.5% compared to the third quarter last year and they were 2.8 percentage points better sequentially versus the second quarter of this year. I will touch on it a bit later, but given the strong pricing performance that we’re seeing throughout, we’re comfortable increasing our outlook for the full-year and now expect rates to be up 7% for the full 2012. Looking at our volume performance and time utilization, you all know that our measure of time utilization is obviously on rent. That measure was up 7.9% in the quarter to a record for us of $5.2 billion of fleet on rent on average throughout the quarter. So clearly there was a strong demand environment and that certainly supported our investment in the fleet. Time utilization for the quarter was 69.8% and that is a very strong absolute level and it’s certainly consistent with the demand environment that we’ve been dealing with. Unfortunately, time utilization was down 200 basis points compared to last year and that reflects a few factors. So maybe I will spend a second on those factors. First as Michael mentioned, we had the consolidation effort really at its peak…

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from the line of Scott Schneeberger from Oppenheimer. Your question please.

Hi, Scott. Scott Schneeberger - Oppenheimer & Co.: Hey, Mike. Thanks. Good morning, guys and a nice work. If I can make my one question a two parter, the first part would be, could you discuss the utilization trend months to months to months sequentially as you progress through third quarter into fourth quarter. And my second question is; with regard to this CapEx guidance for this year; could you give us an idea of what you’re thinking for next year and how CapEx would compare to this year and perhaps how free cash flow would compare to this year? Thanks very much.

Yeah. Sure. I’ll give you the time and then I’ll shift it over to Bill on the capital. Once you look at July, we were at 68.6%. For August we were at 69.7%. For September we were at 71%. As I mentioned in my opening comments as we stand for the month of October we’re slightly above 72%.

And Scott on CapEx, I’ll start with just an additional comment about 2012. We’re maintaining the range of $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion, but we’re focused more on the lower-end of that range for 2012 and we think that that’s an appropriate way to think about it right here and now. As we look at 2013, we haven’t definitely set a plan, but our general thought is that, our capital plan will look pretty similar next year to what it does this year, about flat it could be a touch lower and by a touch $50 million is sort of where I define a touch. If we do what we think we’re going to do next year in terms of operational results, with that kind of a capital plan our free cash flow is probably going to be in the range of $400 million to $500 million. That’s consistent with the forecast that we put in the S-4 that we released earlier this year and it’s still consistent with how we’re thinking about the next year or so. Scott Schneeberger - Oppenheimer & Co.: Okay, thanks Bill. I appreciate it.

No problem.

Thanks Scott.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Vance Edelson from Morgan Stanley. Your question please. Vance Edelson - Morgan Stanley & Co.: :

Thanks Vance. So, we’ve spent some time recently with our Board talking about this very topic and we’ve aligned around a view that we will be targeting a lower level of leverage to sustain over the next number of years. So if you look at leverage just as total debt to EBITDA and I know that’s overly simplistic, but just to keep it simple we’re now targeting a range of between 2.5 and 3.5 times total debt to EBITDA and we feel comfortable that we can maintain that range over the next number of years and it reflects the cash flow profile that we expect to see over the next few years starting with that $400 million to $500 million range next year. 2.5 to 3.5 will be a normal operating range, so in good time we’ll trend down towards the lower-end of that range. Right now we expect by the end of next year, if you look in our investor deck if we give you some very broad brush forecast. We expect that by the end of the next year we’ll be solidly in the middle of that range, right at about three times, and from being just below four times on a trailing 12 basis right here and now. So nice robust de-levering over the next year to two, and we think that it makes sense for us to maintain those leverage levels as we go forward. What do we do with the cash flow beyond 2013, can I answer that question next year. I think we want to think very carefully about where we reinvest the free cash flow that we have. We’re certainly going to be bringing down debt consistently over the next several years and – but we also want to make sure that we’re looking for the opportunities that makes sense for our investors. Vance Edelson - Morgan Stanley & Co.: Okay, that’s really helpful. And then may be just a clarification on something earlier. You talked about the shift towards the monthly renting and the impact that, that has which makes perfect sense, but I might have missed it, but what's driving the shit itself. I would have thought in this uncertain environment with the elections coming up and so forth that, if anything rental periods would get even shorter. So, what do you think the driver is there?

I think it’s the strategy. We’ve been targeting the key account groups that historically have rented the equipment for longer periods of time, and as we grow the share of revenue from those accounts, it’s a natural outgrowth of being with those accounts and its playing very well. It’s playing very much according to the strategy. As you grow with those folks you give yourself a better margin opportunity, because the cost fall away and it’s driving to that result as we speak. Vance Edelson - Morgan Stanley & Co.: Okay, that’s great. Thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of David Raso from ISI Group. Your question please.

Hi, David.

Hi, good morning.

Good morning.

Hi my question is about rates heading into ’13. Two angles on it; when you speak with your larger customers, some of the larger accounts you mentioned earlier you’re in conversations with. How are the rates looking from current levels looking out to the new contracts for ’13? And then secondarily if we kept the rates where they are today and just ran them out flat; how do you see that rolling into next year for full-year rental rates or maybe how first quarter ’13 would look? Just trying to get some sensitivity.

David this is Matt, I’ll talk about the key account rate harmonizations that we’re doing. We have – as I stated we’ve already inked and completed a third of those. We’re in negotiations with the other two-thirds, and the improvement is falling in line with our overall improvement and certainly we feel it accretive to our goals.

And David on 2013; if we do what we expect to do what we’ve said we’re going to do at 7% for rate this year, that will give us a carryover benefit next year something like 2.5% even if we don’t advance rates any at all during 2013. So, pretty good tailwind to start, but let me be clear. We certainly do expect to drive rates beyond that carryover, but we’ve got a nice starting point.

Okay. And then on the debt reduction comment. The total debt at the end of this quarter over trailing EBITDA, pro forma is about 3.9%.

That’s right.

To get to your full-year free cash flow, the fourth quarter is going to be significant cash flow. And then you have the $400 million to $500 million as a baseline you’re talking about for next year. You’re using total debt in your comment, a set of net debt, just so I understand what you plan on doing with the cash that comes in, in the fourth quarter and next year just for the pure calc? I was trying to understand the exact math because the 3.5% seems like something especially EBITDA grows at all you’re going to be below that pretty quickly. I just want to make sure how you look on that calculation?

So, the cash that flows in during the fourth quarter we’ll immediately reduce the ABL and that will drive down that overall debt through the ABL balance. And then as we go forward as I said, we’re going to be right at about three times debt to EBITDA by the end of next year on our current view. And so you’re right, we’ll certainly be in the lower-end of the range pretty quickly, and we’ll be looking very carefully at how we should deploy that cash flow with a bias toward initially continuing to pay down our overall debt balance.

[Obviously] I’m trying to back you into giving an EBITDA guidance for next year essentially because if you got …

I might avoid it.

Yeah, I know, but I mean, so you can certainly do the math now, right? I mean you’re basically saying that the total debt the way I’m calculating this quarter was about $7.375 billion. You’ve generate 375 of cash roughly in the fourth quarter to get to the free cash flow full-year roughly. So if you’re at $7 billion going into next year and you generate say 450 mid-point, you’re down to 655 for the year divided by three, it’s implying EBITDA next year slightly below 2.2.

Yeah.

And I just want to make sure that’s – for me person that’s a little bit lower, but I am thinking for ’13, so I’m just trying to make sure you’re not backing into something, you’re not trying to imply?

No we’re certainly not trying to imply a specific number certainly not that low, right. You look at the S-4 data that we put out earlier this year. If you just add those, the RSC and the URI together plus synergies I think you get a number that’s beyond 2.2, so that’s certainly not what we’re trying to imply. I think there are a huge number of assumptions that we would have to guide you to in order to get to the right number and that’s why I’m trying to avoid that discussion right here now because there are just too many assumptions to walk down that road.

Okay. So we’ll leave it wherever it is, either a movement in the $400 million to $500 million of free cash flow and/or if that’s what you generate in cash you’ll be below at three times. All right, so if the EBITDA is above 2.2 and you generate that cash you’re below three times total debt-to-EBITDA – I mean, its kind of leave it as that, right? You’re not implying below 2.2 of EBITDA next year?

We are not implying an EBITDA of that level.

Okay, just making sure. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thanks, David.

Bye, bye.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Joe Box from KeyBanc Capital Markets. Your question please.

Hi, Joe.

Hey, good morning guys. I just have a high level question for you Mike. It feels like the RSC deal has kind of really steered the pot in the industry. I guess with almost six months under your belt, I’m just curious how you’re seeing competitors respond to the deal. Specifically any color on how industry pricing has been impacted, the prospects for future consolidation or just how competitors maybe thinking about fleet growth going forward?

Yeah well I will tell you – I think if you – obviously you’ve been hearing from all the other competitors that are out there publicly and those of that public debt out there, their rates all have been improving and also its supported by Rouse what he’s been – he recently had a call I think yesterday with one of the analyst. So that supports that data that overall the industry is improving on price. So that continues to grow. With regards to the way people are putting their fleet in, I think each one has their own strategy on where they’re going and what they’re trying to do. Each one is completely different. When you look at what we are doing, we said we’re going to focus on diversifying our customer mix, our portfolio and we’ve done that. And then we’re enhancing that, we’re growing across our footprint. We have the broadest footprint, that’s one of our – what I believe is a significant advantage for United Rentals particularly with larger accounts and that’s what we’re focusing on, and we’re utilizing the best of both worlds between both organizations and growing on that. Does that mean we have competitors in certain markets? Yeah absolutely, but on balance, I think that the industry is still reeling back from the declines of ’09 on the rate and they haven’t really levered-up or I should say levered-up or brought a lot of fleet in as if yet, I think it’s still challenging for a lot of smaller tier players to get access to capital. It’s better than it was, but not where it was before the downturn.

So I guess with respect to the last part on the fleet growth side. Is it your expectation and that industry fleet growth is going to be somewhat muted next year?

That's hard for me to say. I don’t know what happens in the credit market, if things get opened up, I don't know. It’s hard for me to call. I can only tell you what Bill mentioned, how we’re thinking about the world and what we’re focused on.

Great. I appreciate the color. Thank you.

You’re welcome.

Thanks, Joe.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Nick Coppola from Thompson Research Group. Your question please.

Good morning, guys.

Good morning.

Good morning.

One thing I wanted to do is just kind of clarify what specifically changed relative to your previous expectation on the synergy front. You were able to get 12 up to 100 million for cost synergies and now, the fully developed range of 230 on the cost side – moving up from 230 to 250 on the cost side?

Sure. This is Matt. We – first of all for the accelerated achievement of the branch closures and some of the other corporate savings that we’ve got that guided us to the $100 million for this year. As far as for the top end of the range, we are starting to see that there may be more opportunity and some of the central dispatching we are doing, some of the branch efficiencies I mentioned earlier about the productivity improvements in some of our larger scale facilities and we think that there is some upside there that we are going to get at and we should definitely be able to get at before our fully developed plan in 2014.

Okay. That’s helpful. And then on utilization, I mean, I was noticing for fleet mix that aerials ticked down sequentially as a percentage of your fleet. Was there any impact there on utilizations or anything else based on fleet mix that you would want to call out?

This is Mike. I’d tell you that it has some effect over time. It’s – we don’t look at it that way, but it’s a valid point. What we’re doing is we’re expanding what we call the other, inside of that you would see the power side, the trench side, and the tool side because we are going to leverage our footprint. We are going to leverage the relationships that we’ve and expand the expertise that RSC brings to the table. So to some degree you will see some changes. I think when we do our investor presentation, we will try to give a better view on what that would look like. It’s too early. We're going through it and we’re trying to see what the opportunities are. We know they’re there and we are actually investing so that we can capitalize on it.

Okay. That’s helpful. Thank you.

Thanks, Nick.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of George Tong from Piper Jaffray. Your question please. George Tong - Piper Jaffray & Co.: Thanks and congratulations on the quarter.

Thank you.

Thanks, George. George Tong - Piper Jaffray & Co.: You've noted time utilization has been improving sequentially over the past four months, reaching just slightly north of 72% so far in October. Could you give us color on what’s driving the improvement and whether you expect these factors to persist?

Sure, George. This is Matt. I think what has driven the improvement is demand first and foremost, but we’ve also moved further away from those closures that started towards the end of June and as Mike stated, we are really ramped up between July and August and we're starting to move away from that. So, our team is much more focused on trying to grow revenue versus our early focus candidly was making sure we stabilized the base business. So, I think that’s given us some tailwind in time utilization.

Yeah, I will also add that I made the comment – in my opening comments about penetration. Penetration to me is one of the drivers in the industry. It’s also a seasonality. The third quarter is always our strongest, so we did see it build up and as Matt mentioned – as we mentioned in the call – in our results that we did have a disruption. But there is a seasonal trend, but when you step back away there is a shift towards rental penetration. George Tong - Piper Jaffray & Co.: Great. Thank you.

Yep.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Philip Volpicelli from Deutsche Bank. Your question please.

Hi, Phil.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I was hoping you could walk me through the different components of what changed in your free cash flow guidance from previously being negative $90 million to $140 million to now being negative $25 million to $75 million, is that just better EBITDA and less net CapEx or is there some interest savings there? Could you just walk us through the pieces?

Yeah, Phil. The biggest drivers are in working capital and CapEx. Working capital we – as I said earlier, we – we've revised our expectation about the impact of shortening the payment terms for fleet purchases for what we buy for RSC, that was probably the biggest factor. And then we are working at the lower end of our CapEx range and that contributed a little bit more as well. So, those were the two predominant drivers. There is a little bit of a benefit from profitability improvement as we started to realize a little bit more in the way of synergies, but it’s CapEx and working capital, the big drivers.

Great. And Bill if I could sneak a second one in there, earlier you gave guidance for 2013 in terms of CapEx, but you talked about gross. Can you talk about on a net basis, if possible?

So, earlier I was talking about gross. Net is probably not going to be dramatically different than this year either. We are on target to realize new sales proceeds somewhere around $440 million and it’s probably going to be something like that again next year.

Great. Thank you very much. Good luck.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jerry Revich from Goldman Sachs. Your question please.

Hi, Jerry. Jerry Revich - Goldman, Sachs & Co.: Good morning.

Good morning. Jerry Revich - Goldman, Sachs & Co.: Bill can you talk about how monthly rates you’re signing today compared to prior cycle highs? I think spot rates are back at prior cycle highs and I’m wondering if your new monthly businesses as well, if you can give us a broad update? Thanks.

So without the specifics here in front of me, Jerry, I do know that what you call spot rates are – let’s call it what we call it, our daily rates are already above the prior cycle highs. The weekly rates are about at the prior peak and we're still below on the monthly rates, somewhere in the neighborhood of 7% below the prior peak. So, some room to go on the monthlies to get to the prior peak. Whenever people raise this point though, I always have to ask the question, why does the prior peak matter? Is the prior peak some kind of physical law that limits where rates can go? We don’t believe so. That was five years ago and the environment is different now and so, I think it’s interesting to talk about where we are versus the peak. I don’t know that it really defines where we can go though in the future. Jerry Revich - Goldman, Sachs & Co.: Yeah, so the question is from the standpoint of understanding how much room the monthlies have to catch up because obviously they roll on a delayed basis, so I’m assuming the 7% number you mentioned is the entire book of monthly business and I’m wondering if you are comfortable commenting on the monthly business that you are signing today not the overall book?

No. That’s the monthly rate that we’re experiencing today compared to what we experienced back in the early part of ’07. Jerry Revich - Goldman, Sachs & Co.: Okay. And in terms of thinking about the timing of the CapEx spend over 2013; I’m wondering if you could just give us more context there? Earlier this year you mentioned that you because of how front half weighted the CapEx budget was there were some utilization pressure, I’m just wondering how that factors into your timing decision of when to pick deliveries next year and how should we think about utilizations heading into next year, first quarter looks like a pretty tough comp. So I’m wondering and if you could just provide some broader brush comments to the extent you are comfortable on those topics? Thanks.

Yeah. Just, I think next year you will see timing of our CapEx that’s more normal. There was a specific strategy behind front-end loading of the CapEx this year and I don’t know Matt if you want to flush that out a little bit?

Yeah. We did a big pre-buy of multitude reasons last year and we won’t need to do all of that this year and we won’t need the timing to be the same. If projects accelerate and demand peaks up we will always hold the right to adjust, but I don’t think it will be as frontloaded next year.

Jerry just on your comment about the time utilization next year, we will try to give some guidance later on and during our investor presentation on the fourth. But to your point on the seasonal swing, we did have a very mild winter. I don't know what that is going to deal with us this year, but on balance we will continue to strive to expand it. Jerry Revich - Goldman, Sachs & Co.: Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Henry Kirn from UBS. Your question please.

Hey, good morning. It's actually Eric Crawford on for Henry.

Hi. How are you?

Hey, good. Thanks. Bigger picture on time utilization, once you get past the branch consolidations, adjust the fleet mix and the business mix, what’s the ideal time utilization for the new URI? What’s the right range for the business post transformation?

You know that’s – I think an earlier question we had was around the same thing and we are going to kind of give some guidance. We have to go through, we’re going to take a look at what is coming in from the – all of the regions on what capital they want to spend. As I mentioned before, we are expanding into the trench, the other side of the business, the tools as well as the power, which historically runs at lower time utilization with very nice returns. So as we go through our business process, and our budget process, we are going to take a look at that and then we are going to come back on the fourth and give you some guidance. I don’t know that’s going to change dramatically because there is still opportunities we think in specific markets and areas that we can do better, but you can look forward on the fourth.

Okay. That’s fair. And then just a point of clarification on the rates, how they trended through the quarter?

They – for July, they were up 7.5%, for August, they were up 8%, and for September, 7.1%.

Okay, great. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Let me just tack on to that real quickly. So that gave us the 7.5% year-over-year rate that we realized for the quarter, on our way to 7% for the full-year. I just wanted – I think there is – I’ve heard people talk about fourth quarter year-over-year rate realization and I’ve heard some pretty interesting numbers. So just to be clear, we think about the fourth quarter year-over-year rate realization needed to get to that 7% for the full-year as being about 6%. I’ve heard some numbers that were significantly higher than that and I just wanted to make sure that everyone heard it here that we are thinking of fourth quarter year-over-year of about 6%.

Thank you. Operator Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Yilma Abebe from J.P. Morgan. Your question please.

Thank you. I was hoping if you could comment on how you’re looking at an overall credit risk and leverage specifically. The 2.5 to 3 times leverage target that you have, how does that compare in terms of the Company, it looked that leverage pre-recession as a standalone company. I was hoping if you can put this 2.5 to 3 times in historical context for us?

Yes, sure. We used to talk about the preferred leverage range being in the 3.5 to 4.5 times range and certainly 2.5 to 3.5 represents a shift in our thinking there. To give some context during the absolute depth of the recession in 2009, we peaked up just above 5 times on a trailing ’12 EBITDA basis. Clearly in the extreme, a higher leverage than we would want in our normal range. But that gives you a little bit of context of where we’ve been over the last number of years. So, 2.5 to 3.5 times is fundamentally different and I think it reflects our view that we want to maintain a reasonable level of leverage to make for very efficient capital structure. But we don’t want to go too far because you lose that advantage as you go too low in leverage. On the other side, you don’t want to get too high because it really does amplify the volatility and cash flow and returns that we have from the business and that’s something that hurts the returns for equity investors and makes the debt investors – puts them in a riskier position as well.

So if I can add on to that, so – why do you have a lower – what’s the driver behind a lower target in terms of leverage based on [multiple] context? May I know, why have you reduced that target, if you can give a little bit context on some of the drivers behind this lower leverage target now?

I think we – again, it’s about reducing the volatility of our results, so overall is an important driver for why we want to target a lower range. It will solidify our access to debt financing, although it’s pretty good right here now, but we want to make even more sure that we got free access to debt financing. It will reduce the volatility and cash flow and equity returns and that should make the equity more attractive. And it just gives us a firmer foundation for driving the strategy of the Company, whether we grow organically, whether we position ourselves for further acquisitions, it's all held by the somewhat lower leverage. So that was – those were the main drivers of the thought process.

Thank you. That’s all I had.

Yeah. Thank you.

Thank you. This does conclude the question-and-answer session of today’s program. I’d like to hand the program back to Michael Kneeland for any further remarks.

Thanks, operator. I want to thank everyone for joining us today and I want to make sure that everyone goes onto our website to see our latest Investor Relation presentation. I had some new slides out there that hopefully you will find helpful. It talks more about the business and how we’re seeing the world and we look forward to talking to you again on December 4th at our Investor Day. So operator, this concludes our remarks and you can end the call.