Welcome to the Wolverine World Wide second quarter 2008 earnings conference call. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to introduce Christi Cowden, Director of Investor Relations and Communications for Wolverine World Wide.

Welcome to our second quarter conference call. On the call today are Blake Krueger our CEO and President and Don Grimes our Senior Vice President and CFO. Other members of the Wolverine management team are sitting in as well. Earlier this morning we announced record second quarter results. If you did not yet receive a copy of the press release please Lizzi Neinheitz at 616-233-0500 to have one sent to you. The release is also available on many news sites or it can be viewed from our corporate website at www.WolverineWorldWide.com. Before I turn the call over to Blake Krueger to comment on our results, I would like to remind you that the predictions and projections made in today’s conference call regarding Wolverine World Wide and its operations may be considered forward looking statements by securities laws. As a result, we must caution that as with any prediction or projection there are a number of factors that could cause results to differ materially. These important risk factors are identified in the company’s SEC filings and in our press releases. With that being said I would now like to turn the call over to Blake.

I am pleased to report our 24th consecutive quarter of record revenue and earnings per share. Our team’s excellent execution against our long standing business model led to our record Q2 performance. Our business model is multi-brand, multi-country and multi-category in nature. The distribution of our brands in almost 200 countries and territories around the world enables us to consistently achieve strong results even in challenging economic times and it also reduces our exposure to any single country, consumer group or fashion trend. Revenue for the quarter of $267.4 million increased 6.8% from the prior year. We achieved revenue increases in all regions and across all of our branded groups. Our sales results also include a revenue reduction of about $3 million from the exit of our transition businesses; slippers, Stanley and private label. Q2 earnings per share of $0.33 were up 17.9% from last year’s $0.28 per share. Included in our earnings results was about $2.4 million of one time expenses primarily associated with the consolidation of our UK offices. I would like to begin my brand review with Hush Puppies; Hush Puppies revenue increased 4.5% in the quarter. Importantly the revenue gains were broad based across all regions and businesses. Hush Puppy International which operates in about 135 countries through licensing and distribution agreements continues its strong performance with single digit revenue and double digit earnings gains. Hush Puppy base of control distribution around the world anchored by over 400 concept stores helped generate significant increases in global product orders from our licensees and distributors. At the end of the quarter the International backlog for Hush Puppies was up very strong double digits reflecting the strength of our International businesses and greater design innovation from the new Hush Puppies global design structure. Our new men’s casual product featuring…

Earlier today we reported record financial results for the second quarter ended June 14, 2008. Revenue for the quarter totaled $267.4 million a 6.8% increase over revenues of $250.3 million in the prior year. Earnings grew 17.9% to $0.33 per fully diluted share versus $0.28 per fully diluted share for the second quarter of 2007. We are very proud of the fact that the company has now delivered double digit growth and earnings per share in 17 of the last 19 quarters. Outstanding performance which reflects the effectiveness of our diversified business model. For the first half of 2008 revenue reached $555.6 million a 4.6% increase over the $531.4 million reported for the first half of 2007. Fully diluted earnings per share grew to $0.79 up 17.9% from $0.67 per share for the same period in 2007. We continue to achieve excellent operating and financial leverage as the rate of growth in operating income with more than twice the revenue growth rate and the rate of growth in earnings per share was more than three times the revenue growth rate. The strong revenue growth in the second quarter was broad based with all branded operating groups contributing to the increase. Foreign currency translation specifically a weaker US dollar versus the Euro and Canadian dollar had a 2% positive impact on reported revenue in the quarter while our continuing planned exit from our private label, Stanley and slipper businesses had a 1.3% negative impact on revenue growth in the quarter. Gross margin for the second quarter 2008 was 38.3% a modest improvement over the 38.2% gross margin in the prior year. Benefits from foreign exchange were essentially offset by higher freight and product costs the later being partially driven by the closure of factory in China and incremental reserves related to…

In closing we are pleased to have delivered another quarter of record revenue and earnings. Rigorous execution against our business model which is multi-brand, multi-country and multi-category in nature allows us to efficiently build global brands, limit risks and gain market share while delivering outstanding financial results in a variety of economic climates. Thanks for your time and attention this morning we’ll now turn the call back to the operator so we can take your questions.

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from Jim Duffy – Thomas Weisel. Jim Duffy – Thomas Weisel: I had a question on where you are seeing strength and weakness globally if you could provide a little bit of color on the overall environment.

Obviously being in 200 countries and territories around the world has its advantages. Obviously there are some consumer and retail issues here in the United States. In certain countries in Europe maybe primarily the UK that is also the case. This is also in light of the fact that we have many other significant territories that are doing just fine. What’s interesting in Q2 the USA was actually on a percentage growth basis our second best performing region which we found very encouraging and frankly it’s a testament to our product innovation and what our brands are putting out there for the consumer. Jim Duffy – Thomas Weisel: Are you feeling any slow down in Europe?

Yes, I think there is some slow down and some credit issues in the UK primarily, maybe a little more than some of the other countries in Europe. Their currency remains fairly strong and it’s still a large and very important market. Our business in Europe has grown from about 3% five or six years ago to over 20% today and we still feel like we’re under distributed in Europe and we’ve got plenty of room for growth. Jim Duffy – Thomas Weisel: One last question about the Outdoor Group, how should we think about that shift in revenues into Q3?

It’s hard to think about anything in this environment in a concrete form. There was a pretty significant shift to large international distributor. I’m trying to recall probably in total in the $3 to $3.5 million range. That will be shipping in Q3 as opposed to maybe a similar shipment in Q2 last year. I’d probably think in those terms. Jim Duffy – Thomas Weisel: Should we be looking for a return to that mid single to high single digit growth in the Outdoor Group in the back half?

We believe so, we think Q2 sales performance was really impacted by delayed shipments to the international distributor. We had some product delays from the Far East going into Europe that also impacted our European sales in the quarter. Frankly in Q2 the Merrell brand in particular had much fewer close out sales which also had an impact on their overall sales number. I think also in the United States and a few other markets the retailers are cautious and it’s for that reason that we really saw an up tick in our at once orders and a fall off, a transfer from future orders to at once orders in the quarter which was just the opposite of our experience in Q1. We’ll wait and see what happens in Q3 and Q4. I think retailers are understandably cautious especially in the USA market and they’re only ordering as necessary and they’re really relying on those brands like Merrell which continues to outperform.

Obviously we avoid giving revenue guidance by quarter but our ability to view future business the fact that Blake talked about shift from future orders to at once orders so that shift has made it even more difficult to actually get a good handle as we sit here today on what the revenue will be in Q3 and Q4.

Your next question comes from John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: I wondered if you could give us a little bit of guidance in terms of the strong sales results of the Merrell brand in the US is that being driven from existing retail accounts or have you opened up any new channels that have also helped to stimulate strong growth of the brand in this country.

Obviously the new running program is going after some new distribution for the brand but that’s very very small base in the quarter at the present time. Most of that growth is going to come in the future. I would think for about the last couple of years Merrell has been primarily focused on taking additional shelf space from the competitors in the retailers and in other distribution channels that it’s in. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: You mentioned in your preliminary comments that you feel Merrell is gaining market share. Do you have any specifics that you can share with us in terms of what Merrell’s share of its specific market is?

It’s really hard to say, it depends on how you split up the market. They are clearly the dominant player in multi-sport and really in outdoor performance, still gaining market share. The retailers in the US are having a bit of a tough time now with traffic counts and sales. As Merrell sales go up they’re obviously taking in a macro sense market share from somebody and continuing to perform for the retailers. In times like these the retailers tend to refocus back on those brands that have historically performed for them and continue to perform. We’re encouraged despite maybe the overall gloomy news regarding the economy. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: In your comments about the Merrell store expansion do you see this as a potential catalyst to really making aggressive move into retailing and is there a possibility that you’d consider converting the Track ‘n Trail stores into the Merrell outlet if the market opportunity exists for a strong growth in that category as well.

We see Merrell retail as really an opportunity of growth for the company to be honest. We also like e-commerce and we also like several of our other potential avenues. You have to remember that although we operate 91 or so stores here in the United States we’ve got 3,600 points of global distribution for our brands around the world. Most people today don’t realize that Hush Puppy has 400 branded Hush Puppy concept stores around the world that’s very powerful. We think Merrell can get to globally maybe around 70 stores by year end and clearly the potential for Merrell stores over the long run whether we own it and operate them in our own territories or our distributors operate them globally is in my mind at least as great as it is for Hush Puppies. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: Is your preference to have company owned stores or does it matter to you one way or the other?

On our model, our international distribution model is frankly great. We like, in many countries around the world our good international partners are retailers as much as they are wholesalers. In a lot of those markets the retail is less overbuilt, a little bit of a wide open than it is here in the United States. It’s an easier competitive environment. In the short an near term even though we’re going to be opening company owned Merrell stores like we did in Whistler the home of the Winter Olympics or our new store in San Francisco or a couple of other we’ve got scheduled this year we’re going to be putting as much time and effort behind expanding our international base of controlled distribution for Merrell. It’s an opportunity for the company especially when coupled with apparel. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: I wonder if you could comment on what’s prompting the renewed vigor of the Bates operation that had been a trouble part of the company for the last several quarters and all of a sudden it seems to be a real vigorous growth opportunity. What’s going on?

As we said over the last couple of years we expected this year the Bates business to reach a pre-war normalized level. I think we’ve gotten there. Quite honestly I think our sales this year in Bates have been front end loaded in the first half. I think we said that at our year end call and maybe in our Q1 call. We expect some fall off in Bates in the second half of the year but fundamentally the success in Bates like most brands in our industry is driven by product innovation. Even in tough economic times if you’re out there with superior product you’re going to do just fine. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: The last question I have is on the price increases that you’re finding in China specifically and what that may mean in terms of your spring ’09 wholesale pricing structure. Are you going to have to raise prices in order to absorb some of the cost increases that you’re incurring in China?

The pricing pressure from China in my opinion is going to continue. Maybe if we see oil back down at $90 a barrel and some other things happen it will abate at some point. The strengthening of the Chinese currency and labor costs and food and energy over there is going to put pressure on footwear. The United States sources today over 85% of all footwear consumed comes from China. I think you’re going to see prices going up. I think for the second half primarily which includes much of our spring/summer ’09 lines we were able to negotiate and we believe lock in place 3% to 5% price increases which when I talked to my friends around the industry appears to be almost best in class performance. I don’t know what the second quarter of ’09 will hold or the rest of ’09 but we expect the pricing pressure to continue. We’re going to stay flexible on sourcing initiatives. We’re going to look at reengineering product and not take the quality out of the product by reengineering it. We’re going to continue to look at select price increases.

We felt some of the impact of increased factory costs in the later part of Q2 part of that was driven by the closure of one factory. I think I read the other day that about 2,000 shoe factories have closed in China some of the middle sized factories have closed down due to the profit pressures. We had to shift some production for our soft style shoes to another factory at a higher cost and we felt some of that impact in Q2. As a result our brands have gone forward with some price increase in the later half of ’08 planned prices in the later half of ’08. We’re trying to respond appropriately. John Shanley – Susquehanna Financial: Have the retailers been fairly responsive in terms of being able to bear these price increases or are you getting a lot of resistance?

In the US in particular they’ve been amazingly quiet. You have to remember that although footwear is centered in China many other industries from electronics to furniture to you name it is also centered in China and I think the consumer in general and the retailers also in general understand that some of the price increase is coming through from China are frankly warranted by macro economic conditions.

Your next question comes from Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: A couple questions on the backlog I’m have a little bit of a tough time understanding. It was up over 10% at the end of Q1 and now I think you said it’s around 4% in dollars. You did talk about a shift away from future orders to at once. When you reported the last quarter I think you said that the backlog at that point which was up over 10% was more skewed towards Q3 and Q4 versus Q2. Are you actually seeing cancellations on those orders that you’d already received at the end of Q1 or are you just not over the course of the second quarter were you just not getting in the orders that you were getting in a year ago at this time? Could you give us a little more color on that?

Let me first say that future orders are always subject to some percentage of cancellation, push back, and delays, whatever. A dollar of at once orders obviously computes to a higher sales number than a dollar future orders. Our Q2 backlog though, what was interesting is I tried to give you the parage number but our parage number was puts our global business in perspective. I think our Q2 backlog number was first and foremost affected by our strong shipments over planned for the quarter which is a very good thing. We had about a 2.4% impact because of lower close out orders and obviously lower orders for Stanley, slippers and private label. Our backlog number that we’ve always quoted of course is more weighted to our own businesses which are the footwear and the backlog is in at a wholesale selling price as opposed to license or royalty income. What we saw in the second quarter and frankly surprised me a little bit was a pretty significant shift from future orders to at once orders. That would have impact our backlog number at once orders are not in our backlog number. I think it’s just retailers being relatively cautious and in waiting to order what they need and not burden themselves with future orders. That may reverse, the trend was just the opposite in Q1 maybe it’s going to reverse in Q3 and Q4 but it clearly was a significant trend in Q2.

To underscore what Blake said. If you take the official reported backlog of almost 4% and adjust it for the 2.4% related to the close out and the discontinued businesses you get about 6.5%. If you evaluate that in the context of the really strong revenue growth in Q2 and the shift between at once and futures I think you come up with a conclusion that is more consistent with what you’ve seen in the past in terms of the backlog number. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: Since you already had some back half orders in your backlog at the end of last quarter should we be thinking that the decline in the backlog reflects you would expect less sales growth in Q4 than Q3? I would imagine that you’d have had more Q3 orders in your backlog versus Q4 orders at the end of last quarter. Now you probably have a larger portion of Q4 orders in.

We’re just into the Q3 but just to give you a little color and a little guidance. I would say today our view on Q3 is that Q3 is going to be a little stronger than Q4 right now. Again, that could change with order trends that could change with the ratio of futures to at once orders but right now I would think that Q3 is going to be a little bit stronger for us than Q4. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: Maybe a little help on the margins as well. You mentioned about $2.4 million in incremental expense from this consolidation.

In SG&A, yes. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: When does that anniversary, when do we stop seeing that impact?

We recorded the expense in this year’s quarter so when you get to next year’s Q2 we wouldn’t have those expenses but there will be our full year earnings guidance reflects some additional consolidation type expenses in Q3 and Q4. That’s embedded in the earnings guidance and that embedded in the operating margin growth that I have sighted. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: When we’re thinking about gross margin versus SG&A for the balance of the year the gross margin up around 10 bps in this quarter SG&A down 10 bps which was the opposite of what we saw in the first quarter where gross margin was a lot stronger and SG&A was higher as a percentage of sales. Should we expect the Q2 trend to continue over the balance of the year to get to your guidance? I think you mentioned the continued benefit from FX and mix shift over the balance of the year but then some opposite impact, adverse impact from production, freight and all that.

We do expect gross margin expansion in the later half of the year versus the prior year. As we said before we also expect some SG&A de-leveraging on a full year basis and that will continue in Q3 and Q4 as we continue to make investments behind some of our initiatives. Net net we’re projecting that 30 to 50 basis point operating margin growth versus the prior year.

Your next question comes from Todd Slater – Lazard Capital. Todd Slater – Lazard Capital: You said you saw some slow down in the UK I’m wondering if you could talk about your expectations for second half growth internationally in the UK which is an important market for you as well as the rest of the world.

I would think that right now we expect very good growth in the second half in our international markets including Europe in that overall definition. Some markets like the UK are experiencing a little tougher retail conditions probably not at the level we’ve experienced here in the United States but I think the UK in particular is experiencing some of that right now. A lot of our other international markets though, licensing and distribution are very solid with strong backlog positions for that segment of the business. Todd Slater – Lazard Capital: Would you mind updating us on the international segment in terms of revenue and EBIT margin contribution for the quarter or the year?

I don’t know if we normally give that level of detail quite honestly.

I will say in the first quarter we sighted that our non-US business contributed 70% of the operating profit for EBIT in the quarter. In Q2 that dropped to about 60%. Todd Slater – Lazard Capital: Is that due to seasonality or is that?

I believe we had sighted it as full year go forward with about 60/40 between international and US and so obviously what we experienced in Q1 this year was excessively high in terms of the mix between the US and non-US pieces of the business from a pre-tax contribution standpoint. Todd Slater – Lazard Capital: So we’re just back down to normalized levels. Q1 was a bit of an anomaly. What was the FX benefit in terms of EPS in Q2 I know you mentioned how much it affects revenues, how much are you assuming in the back half of the year as well.

We are seeing some moderate foreign exchange benefit to reported revenue and EPS but as it relates to the impact of foreign exchange on earnings on a year to date basis we did sight that the second quarter benefited about 2% from a weaker US dollar and we can all do the math and come up with about a $5 million revenue impact on foreign exchange. We also have foreign exchange impacting operating expenses that we incur in foreign currency and I think I quoted about a 1.9% increase on a year to date basis for that. Consistent with past practice we’re purposely not quoting a specific FX impact on anything other than sales and operating expenses because there are just too many other factors that we have at play here. The way I look at it and the way the company looks at it is that every company in the industry that has a presence in the UK or continental Europe has been a beneficiary of the weaker US dollar really over the last five years or so. In a fluid and dynamic competitive marketplace there are many pricing decision primarily that are getting made and in some cases don’t get made that are the direct result of foreign exchange trends. Many of the major European retail chains are aware of the foreign currency trends obviously and they’re pushing back on some pricing that would otherwise we’d be able to take. To take the foreign exchange impact on the top line and then off the foreign exchange impact on the operating expenses and drop that to the bottom line and say this much of EPS is driven by foreign exchange it’s a simplistic of looking at it and in my mind not really reflective of reality. There are just too many other factors that are at play here to distill it down to something as simple as that. Therefore we’re limiting our public comments regarding impact of FX to the impact reported revenue and reported operating expenses. Todd Slater – Lazard Capital: Are you implying or suggesting that going forward FX becomes less of a benefit on the top line there may be a more beneficial offset somewhere else it’s just not quite as relevant. I’m trying to understand it.

To extent there’s less benefit from foreign exchange going forward everyone will be impacted by that and there will be more opportunities for front line price increases. Frankly the opportunity directly related to the foreign exchange environment everyone is experiencing.

Your next question comes from Kate Mcshane – Citigroup. Kate Mcshane – Citigroup: I wondered if you could give some more detail behind the three Merrell retail stores you plan to open and how big these stores will be. Are they going to be wholly owned by you or is it going to be a partnership like your other Merrell stores?

The three stores we’re currently planning including the flagship store we’re opening on Union Square in San Francisco in Q3 will be owned by the company. I don’t have the exact figures on the size of those stores but I think the San Francisco store is in the 2,500 square foot range. It will carry the full Merrell footwear line as well as Merrell apparel and Merrell bags. The other two stores will present Merrell’s lifestyle brand as well. Kate Mcshane – Citigroup: In terms of your gross margin is there any way you can quantify now much of your gross margins were impacted by markdown money you had to pay during the quarter?

I would say I’m sure we can quantify it but just speaking generally I would say it was a relatively small impact in the quarter, very small impact in the quarter.

Your next question comes from Scott Krasik - CL King.

In the US for as well as the Outventure Merrell stuff is doing I’ve gotten some pretty mixed responses in terms of your casual product line. Is that just as big as its going to be? Have you hit a little wall there; is there something that you can do to really get that casual part of the business going again?

The Fusion part, the casual portion of Merrell line has really been Merrell 10 years ago was a men’s hiking boot brand. It has truly been one of the success stories in our industry. It’s been a success story not just through performance outdoor product but really through the Fusion portion of its line. Internally we think there are plenty of growth opportunities on the Fusion side of the line. Our sell throughs on Fusion product, the report cards we get from our top 10 customers have been very, very good whether its women’s casual sandals or some of the other men’s products. We do believe that there is plenty of growth opportunity even in the USA the largest market for Merrell for that portion of the line.

It just so happened that the outdoor stuff drove the growth this quarter but it very well could shift.

Yes, I think the outdoor growth the multi-sport in particular and hiking and some of the sandal products, the performance so far in Q2 and so far in Q3 has been excellent.

I wasn’t sure; in the last two quarters you’ve given the gross margin contribution from currency I think it was 50 basis points in the first quarter. Are you willing to give that for the second quarter?

No, we’re not going forward with that because of the reasons that I have mentioned in the conversation with Todd a few minutes ago.

Your next question comes from Jeff Mintz – Wedbush.

A couple of different questions on backlog are the delayed Merrell shipments that you talked about are those included in the backlog or not?

The delayed shipments to the international distributor would be in the backlog number. They would not be in the at the full wholesale selling price or what might be the wholesale selling price it would be in there at the much lower royalty income level.

The second question related to that is given the excellent inventory control that you’ve had what do you see as your ability to meet the increase in at once orders and the shift that you might be seeing from your retailers?

We’ve been on the narrow and deep inventory philosophy for two years now. We thing we’re pretty good at it. We obviously carry a little of everything but we try and be narrow and deep for each of our brands and the stuff we believe is really going to sell through and the stuff that the retailers are going to come back and want some immediate deliveries on. We always believe we have room for improvement in our overall aggregate inventory. On the other hand our performance, especially this past quarter when there was a significant shift to at once orders from future orders was confirmation that we’re doing a lot of things well in keeping the right stuff in our warehouses for our retailers.

Do happen to have the share count at the end of the quarter?

The actual shares outstanding?

Yes.

Forty nine point six million shares. That’s not the weighted average share outstanding for the quarter that’s at the end of the quarter.

Your next question comes from Sam Poser - Sterne Agee.

When you shifted Sebago out of the Outdoor Group into the Heritage Group can you give us an idea of how that impacted both Q1 and Q2 so the value of that just for planning purposes.

We really don’t think it had a huge impact on either quarter from an overall company standpoint. There’s a separate Sebago team, product development, general manager and everything else. We made that shift primarily to take advantage of the infrastructure that the Heritage brands group has in Europe and also the strong international infrastructure Heritage Brands have and frankly to have the Outdoor group focus primarily on Merrell which has been our main growth driver over the last several years.

In sales dollars how much did that really impact that better than expected number in the Heritage Group? Without Sebago would the Heritage Group have been negative?

The growth rate is normalized for reclassifying Sebago into Heritage. It was apples to apples basis. We reclassified prior year Sebago activity into the Heritage Brands Group.

On a diluted basis what share count should we use down through the year?

In the 50.5 to 51.5 million range is what we’re going for now. Obviously we will continue to opportunistically buy back shares but the unknown is the share price which has an impact on the fully diluted calculation.

What was the profit matrix of your own stores versus the distributor run stores?

It’s hard to give you any general comments on that. I will tell you that our own stores, about 90 stores in the USA substantially outperformed the FDRA index in the first half of the year. The comp store FDRA index year to date was down about 5% and the performance of our stores which carry primarily our brands although it was negative it was much better than that. Our e-commerce business year to date is up significantly and was up well over 50% in Q2.

With the new stores, when the Merrell stores started to come in you had spoken earlier also about some Hush Puppy possible stores in the US as well. Is this situation where you’re going to take back more business for yourself possibly away from some of the retailers that aren’t managing your brand as well as you would like?

We don’t view it that way. We really view it as a necessary brand building growth initiative. If you look back over the last 20 years wherever a brand has levered in some level of controlled distribution its wholesale business almost every time grows. The business with existing retailer based becomes even stronger. It’s not just a top line and a P&L impact we’re trying to show the Merrell brand in particular in the best possible light as a true lifestyle brand. We wouldn’t anticipate opening these stores as frankly taking back any business. I suspect when we open the Merrell flagship store on Union Square in San Francisco I expect the Merrell business at Macy’s which is a block away will increase.

Are you planning on making money on that store on Union Square? The rents aren’t prohibitive enough to do that. I can see.

We hope so. The rents are always outrageous but I don’t know if we’ll make money on the store in the first year out of the block but our plan is to make money on all of our retail stores.

Your next question comes from Heather Boksen – Sidoti & Company. Heather Boksen – Sidoti & Company: I have one quick question involving what you were talking about with retailers switching to more at once orders. Is that phenomenon really occurring across the brand portfolio or is it more in any one particular group or brand?

Actually it was in Q2 it really occurred across the brand portfolio. We’ve got eight great brands and a variety of different target consumers and distribution channels but it was at least in the United States something that was pretty universal in Q2.

Your next question comes from Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: Could you talk about how it breaks up by product group and US versus international? I think you’d said that Hush Puppies backlog was up double digits can you talk about the other groups and then again US versus international was it up for both those two.

Our backlog was up for all of our regions. I would say that on a parage basis our international backlog at the end of Q2 was the strongest. Mitch Kummetz – Robert W. Baird: Then by product group was it also up for Wolverine, Heritage and Outdoor.

The backlog was up across all of our major brands.

At this time we have no further questions.

On behalf of Wolverine World Wide I’d like to thank you for joining us today and as a reminder our conference call replay is available on our website at www.WolverineWorldWide.com. The replay will be available through Wednesday July 23, 2008. Thank you and good day.