Michelle LaSpaluto - Senior Director-Accounting Michelle Berrey - President and Chief Executive Officer Tim Trost - Chief Financial Officer Garrett Nichols - Chief Medical Officer.

David Leibowitz - Morgan Stanley Katherine Xu - William Blair Yigal Nochomovitz - Citigroup Phil Nadeau - Cowen and Company Ed White - H.C. Wainwright.

Good morning. Welcome to the Chimerix Conference Call discussing the Financial Results of the Second Quarter 2018. Please be advised that today’s call is being recorded at Chimerix’ request. I would now like to turn the call over to the Michelle LaSpaluto from Chimerix..

Thank you, and welcome to the Chimerix second quarter 2018 financial results conference call. This morning at 7:30 a.m. Eastern Time, we issued a press release containing the financial results and other updates for the second quarter of 2018. The press release is available on the company’s website at www.chimerix.com.

You may also access today’s call via webcast on the Investors section of the Chimerix website. An archive of the webcast will be available approximately 2 hours after the conclusion of the event. With me on today’s call are Michelle Berrey, President and CEO; Tim Trost, Chief Financial Officer.

Other members of the Chimerix management team, including CMO, Garrett Nichols; and Kevin Reeves, VP of Marketing will be joining us for questions.

Before we begin, I like to remind you that the statements made on today’s call include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are subject to risks and uncertainties and other factors, including the possibility that our current or future clinical trials of brincidofovir may not be successful, that the FDA and other regulatory authorities may not approve brincidofovir or brincidofovir-based regimens, and that marketing approvals, if granted, may have significant limitations on their use.

As a result, brincidofovir may never be successfully commercialized. In addition, Chimerix may be unable to file for regulatory approval for brincidofovir with other regulatory authorities. These risks and uncertainties and other factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements.

You’re cautioned not to rely on these forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties are described in detail in Chimerix’ filings with Securities Exchange Commission, including Form 10-Q filed early today.

All forward-looking statements are based on information currently available at Chimerix, and Chimerix assumes no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. At this time, I’d like to turn the call over to President and CEO, Michelle Berrey..

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. The first six months of this year had been particularly productive for Chimerix. We’ve had significant progress across multiple programs, and are positioned to achieve key clinical milestones in the second half of 2018, and then into 2019.

Brincidofovir is our broad-spectrum anti-viral and the lead candidate for Chimerix. We believe in its potential to transform, how we prevent and treat many serious viral infections for which there are currently no therapies.

We remain committed to advancing brinci treated clinic incorporating lessons learned from the nearly 2,500 patients who’ve received brincidofovir for life-threatening viral infections.

We’ll kick off our updates today with AdAPT, our late stage trial of short course oral brinci for the treatment of adenovirus in pediatric stem cell transplant recipients. We are delighted to report that over half of our clinical sites are now initiated. We expect to have nearly all of the remaining targeted sites enrolling by the end of September.

Importantly, we continue to expect full enrollment during 2019. I want to spend a few minutes recapping why we're so confident in our trial design for short-course oral brinci for adenovirus. First, oral brinci efficiently delivers the active antiviral to the gut.

In pediatric patients, we know that about a third of stem cell transplant recipients carry adenovirus into their transplant and reactivate the virus from the gut tissue where it replicates to higher levels during the first few weeks, while their immune system is at its weakest point.

Based on demonstration of antiviral effect in over 1,500 patients who’ve received brinci for adenovirus, we expect the majority of subjects to clear adenovirus within four weeks. This shorter duration of therapy, with the treat to clear approach has been well-tolerated, especially in pediatric patients. Second, with data from AdVance and from the U.K.

consortium we know that brinci has superior antiviral efficacy, compared to standard-of-care to clear the adenovirus from the bloodstream, especially in T-cell depleted transplant recipients, which we’re targeting in AdAPT, whose immune system is crippled for a longer period of time.

And third, AdVance data demonstrated a strong correlation between adenovirus viral burden and mortality, meaning that a more rapid reduction of adenovirus should translate to a survival benefit. Data from our landmark study, AdVance and for multiple independent sources, are moving towards publication later this year.

These external datasets also confirm the strong correlation of adenovirus viral burden, the adenovirus Average Area Under the Curve over 16 weeks or adeno AAUC with mortality risk. Conforming this association in multiple independent settings can facilitate FDA's consideration of this virologic endpoint for an accelerated approval.

You will recall that AdAPT was designed together with European regulators, who have historically accepted virologic endpoints ahead of the FDA. Our expectation is that demonstration of superiority of brinci in the AdAPT trial will be sufficient for marketing approval in Europe.

With data in-hand, we will then make our case to the FDA for an accelerated approval. This small 141 patient study is expected to complete enrollment in 2019, and have top line data and regulatory filings shortly thereafter.

Our regulatory strategy is to advance short-course oral brinci as we believe it can give us an early commercial foothold, while building a platform on which to advance multiple development opportunities for IV brinci, the land and expand strategy.

We’re pleased to have of our Vice President of Marketing, Kevin Reeves with us today for the Q&A portion of the call this morning. Kevin joined our commercial team four years ago and prior to that was at GSK for over 25 years in various commercial capacities.

Turning to IV brinci, we’re pleased to announce that our open label Phase 2 studies in adults adenovirus infected patients are opening for enrollment at sites in the U.S., U.K., and in Europe. We look forward to sharing both PK, and virologic data from these trials later this year.

In June, at the American Transplant Congress in Seattle, we had a very productive meeting with kidney transplant specialists and stem cells transplant physicians to discuss potential study designs for a dose ranging study of IV brinci and BK virus, which we plan to share soon.

We continue to see great potential for IV brinci and viral diseases at the central nervous system such as HHV-6 and herpes encephalitis, given the higher drug concentrations we’ve seen in animal studies of IV brinci.

Just this week, a review of viral encephalitis in the New England Journal reiterated the importance of developing new drugs to treat the 6,000 hospitalizations per year in the U.S. for encephalitis, which resulted in a total cost of between $350 million and $540 million per year.

With more immuno-oncology therapies in the pipeline, these often-devastating viral infections are likely to become more frequent. As we look to 2019 and to dose range ranging studies for IV brinci, viral infections of the CNS will certainly be one consideration.

We’ve completed the 13-week toxicology studies for IV brinci, and continue to see improved tolerability in animal studies that have served as good models for our clinical studies.

These data support our belief that IV brinci can successfully provide the longer duration of dosing needed to prevent multi-viral infections in high risk stem cell transplant recipients.

Turning now to our smallpox program, I was honored to be invited to deliver remarks before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health in support of reauthorization of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act or PAHPA.

The purpose of the hearing was to reauthorize certain programs under PAHPA, which originally passed in 2006. PAHPA reauthorization would improve the U.S. medical preparedness and response capabilities for emergencies, whether deliberate, accidental or natural.

The draft reauthorization would authorize funding for BARDA and for Project BioShield Special Reserve Fund, a secure funding source for the purchase and stockpile of critical medical countermeasures such as vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics.

We know that there have been substantial advances in the ability of would-be terrorists to weaponize smallpox, a threat that’s resulted in recent preparedness exercises at Johns Hopkins and the Shattuck lecture from Bill Gates earlier this spring.

Our private public partnerships over the last 15 years, in particular with BARDA have been critical to the survival and progression of our smallpox program with brinci.

Companies like ours, rely on the existence of a government market for medical countermeasures to sustain the long-term investment of researching and developing these therapies for biodefense indications, which provide a critical bulwark against biological threats.

Recently, we’re delighted to see FDA's first approval of a smallpox countermeasure, as it underscores the government's medical and economic commitment to protecting the public.

Importantly, it confirms the path forward for brinci as it has been stated by CMC [ph] that two antivirals with different mechanisms of action are needed for the stockpile to protect the public from the smallpox outbreak.

The revised FDA draft guidance issued last month recommends the efficacy be demonstrated based on two studies in two different animal models infected with related viruses. We expect to begin conducting our rabbitpox adjunct study shortly and efficacy study in mice towards the end of 2018.

We expect to have final data on each of these studies early next year, and to submit marketing applications shortly thereafter. Last month, we received orphan drug designation for brinci to treat smallpox and we look forward to working with the FDA in advancing this critical program.

Moving now to our norovirus program, we were excited to present both oral and poster presentation at the 31st International Conference on Antiviral Research. These presentations highlighted results from preclinical studies of CMX521, the first direct-acting antiviral specifically for the treatment and prevention of norovirus to reach the clinic.

The data demonstrated that CMX521 targets a region of virus common to all strains, and showed activity in vitro against all strings of norovirus tested. This suggests broad efficacy against human noroviruses and supports our ongoing Phase 1 program.

Specifically, the presentations showcased CMX521’s promising safety profile with no genotoxicity or mitochondrial toxicity observed. Moreover, oral administration of CMX521 delivered drug directly to target cells in the gut and showed dose-dependent inhibition of norovirus replication in mouse GI tissues and feces.

We’ll be presenting this clinical safety and tolerability data from the single-dose administration of CMX521 in September at the European Society for Clinical Virology in Athens, Greece. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Tim for a review of our financials..

Thanks Michelle, and good morning everyone. As Michelle LaSpaluto mentioned in her introductory remarks, earlier today, we issued a press release containing our financial results for the second quarter 2018.

Starting with our balance sheet at the end of second quarter 2018, we remain well-capitalized with approximately 196 million in capital to fund operations, no debt, and approximately 47.9 million outstanding shares of common stock.

Turning to our statement of operations, the company reported a net loss of 18.6 million or $0.39 per basic and diluted share for the second quarter of 2018, compared with a net loss of 16.7 million or $0.36 per basic and diluted share in the second quarter of 2017.

BARDA contract revenue for the quarter was approximately 1.2 million, as compared with 0.7 million for the same period in 2017.

Research and development expenses increased to 13.7 million for the second quarter of 2018, compared with 11.6 million for the same period in 2017, primarily due to increased expenses associated with our oral BCV clinical program, manufacturing expenses, and our smallpox program.

General and administrative expenses increased to 6.7 million for the second quarter of 2018, compared to 6.3 million for the same period in 2017.

Loss from operations was 19.2 million for the second quarter of 2018, compared to a loss from operations of 17.2 million for the same period in 2017, due primarily to the increased R&D expenses as previously mentioned. Before turning the call back over to Michelle, I’d like to again emphasize the 196 million in cash on our balance sheet.

And although we continue to expect R&D expenses for the full-year 2018 to trend upward from 2017, we remain committed to a focus on cost control. With that, I’d now like to turn the call back to Michelle for final remarks..

Thank you, Tim.

In closing, we have a number of upcoming clinical milestones, including full-enrollment of the European registrational trial AdAPT in 2019 with data readout and regulatory submissions shortly thereafter; adenovirus to K curve from the open-label Phase 2 studies of IV brinci, and adult stem cell transplant recipients with adenovirus later in 2018; data from our smallpox animal efficacy studies in the rabbit and mouse models; and in September presentation of safety and tolerability data from our single-dose administration of CMX521, the first clinical stage targeted anti-viral for norovirus, an initiation of our multiple ascending dose study later this year.

We have the resources to support achieving our objectives for 2018, 2019, and into 2020, and a team focused on achieving our key milestones, which we believe will enhance shareholder value. Finally, we look forward to hosting each of you at our annual R&D update in New York on October 17.

Just after market close, we will provide additional details on our anti-viral pipeline. We hope to see you all there. So, please save the date. With that, operator, we’ll now open the line for any questions..

Yes ma’am. [Operator Instructions] Our first question or comment comes from the line of Jessica Fye from JPMorgan. Your line is open..

Hi, this is [indiscernible] on the call for Jessica. Thank you for taking our questions. With AdAPT open for enrollment, can you elaborate on how many U.S.

sites are currently open for enrolling patients, and how many in the UK? And would you also comment on the regional mix of targeted sites to be open?.

Yes. This is Garrett Nichols. So, we do have the majority of our sites open. However, there is still a couple of key countries that are still undergoing regulatory and ethics review. We have a majority of the sites in the U.S. open, we have a couple of targeted sites that are still in the process of opening.

And again, we have key countries that we are in the process of initiating. And once we have all the sites open after a good understanding of the enrollment occurs we’ll give an enrollment projection update.

But just to clarify, as far as the targets are concerned, we have a target number of sites, about 30 sites to 40 sites, total we have about a third coming from the U.S., a third coming from the U.K., and a third coming from Europe..

Thank you..

Thank you. Our next question or comment comes from the line of David Leibowitz from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open..

Thank you very much for taking my question.

I was curious, when the upcoming interim data release from the Phase 2 IV trial, what type of data should we expect to see from that study?.

Yes, that study is a Phase 2 open-label study of IV brinci versus standard-of-care for the treatment of adults with adenoviremia.

This will be providing important data with regards to pharmacokinetics with regards to safety and tolerability of the IV formulation in which we expect to see improved safety and tolerability versus previous studies in comparable to the gut tolerability that we saw in healthy volunteers, but importantly this is also a study in which we will be able to generate data with regards to pharmacodynamic effects.

So, we will be able to see the effects of IV brincidofovir on adenoviral levels in stem cell transplantations with adenoviremia..

Thank you for that.

And jumping over to CMX521, understanding that this study thus far is on healthy volunteers, is there anything from the upcoming data from that study that might be able to hint at potential efficacy?.

It’s healthy volunteer data. I think for the time being we’re looking at safety tolerability and pharmacokinetics. So, this is the data that we will have thus far, I think that the efficacy data that we’ve presented at ICAR in the animal model speaks to the potential that is drug has with regards to prevention of adenovirus infections..

Thanks for that..

Thank you. Our next question or comment comes from the line of Katherine Xu from William Blair. Your line is open..

Yes, good morning.

Michelle, I was just wondering, you know intrigued by your comments on the CMX infections, you, kind of alluded to immune-oncology treatment side effects, can you just elaborate a little bit on that and what you are thinking, you know potentially positioning brinci towards that direction?.

Yes, thanks good morning and thanks for the question Katherine.

Just as we’ve been watching that space, I think we’ve seen some reports side effects from the increasing immune-suppression that has been associated with these different types of therapies and some anecdotal reports about viral infections that typically haven't caused severe outcomes or death, including BK. So that has really gotten our attention.

We’ve had a couple of points of outreach to see if brinci would be available for those kinds of infection.

So, it’s something we’re keeping an eye on, certainly that’s a hot area and it was great to see this best pipeline making its way through that, can you provide some additional improved outcomes in oncology and in some of the genetic diseases where we haven't had that in the past, but with something that not surprisingly is resulting in some additional immunologic suppression.

So, it’s part of that growing population and diverse population of relative immunocompromised and in some cases, severe immunecompromised that can make these viral diseases even tougher to deal with..

So, I guess, so you’re starting an IV brinci study in BK virus?.

So, right now, the Phase 2 is our adenovirus, but yes, we are anticipating starting a dose ranging study in 2019 in BK that’s something that we’ve just had an advisory board about and are still working through some of the details on what that study design should look like.

We hope to share that with you in the coming weeks, that’s something that we look forward to getting back to. We do have data showing the fact of brinci in vitro against the polyomaviruses. So, to be able to provide a therapy for the polyomaviruses and specifically for BK is something that we’ve long held as an objective.

IV really gives us that opportunity to do more dose ranging than we were able to do with oral. Also, for better CNS penetration, we see in the animal models up to 10 times higher concentration in the CNS in animals then we can achieve with oral.

So, it’s a real opportunity to be able to treat some of these viral CNS infections that have some pretty substantial impact on those long-term survival and in functionality..

Okay.

So, previously, I mean over the years there were a lot of evidence, you know looking at a double-standard DNA viruses in viral oncology, viral neurology, such as GBM [ph] you know Alzheimer's, neuro, schizophrenia can you just give us an update on the – I guess the science/medicine in those departments and then do you have any intentions down the road going towards those indications?.

Yes, I think all we can see at this point is there are some active conversations and certainly an area of the literature that we’re keeping a close eye on and having some active conversations with groups that have interest in this area.

I think long term for us, you know sticking with our, what we know best the transplant recipients, we are having increasing requests for IV brinci that’s something that we’re focusing on our AdAPT study right now and IV getting the data from the Phase 2 studies, but I think as we look towards 2019 and the different opportunities for IV brinci that’s something that we hope to be able to share more specific plans on in the coming months..

Alright. Great. And then lastly, can you remind us the rabbit adjunct study design? Thank you..

Yes. So, the rabbit study you will recall from our prior 041 study where we had different times post-infection and after a clinical trigger, which in the rabbit is very much like the humans as fever, and then shortly thereafter rash. That was a pretty complex study and provided some great information.

We’re also able with that study to show 100% survival in the rabbits after they had a confirmed viral infection. First triggered by fever, but also with rash around that same time. And then, they were randomized at that time of clinical trigger to either immediate or delayed therapy.

The current study does not rely on a clinical trigger, we found that was an added complexity for the study and this next study has a signs timing so after a rabbit has confirmed infection, they’ll begin therapy on a certain day post-inoculation where we’ve shown very high rates of infections, but not based on a clinical trigger.

It’s all easier to predict staffing needs, things like that, and these are our large efficacy studies that can get complex, pretty quickly. So, we felt this would give us a better opportunity to have a successful study that finalizes the smallpox, efficacy program..

Alright. Thank you..

Thank you..

Thank you. Our next question or comment comes from the line of Yigal Nochomovitz from Citigroup. Your line is open..

Good morning, Yigal..

HI, how are you Michelle? So, on the strategy for the FDA accelerated approval for the oral brinci, speaking of based on the data from virologic endpoint from AdAPT as well as the support of data on AdVance with correlation with reduced mortality, I’m wondering, is there any precedent that you are aware of, where the FDA has provided an accelerated approval for a viral drug, based on a biological endpoint, and then with some other data set that’s supportive on mortality in the transplant setting or maybe not in the transplant setting, I'm just wondering if there’s some president there?.

I think that the FDA typically has lagged a bit behind the EMA, as far as accepting virologic endpoints. Certainly, as we were negotiating the suppressed study, the EMA recognized clinically significant CMD viremia as a relative primary endpoint for full-approval, whereas the FDA was considering that as an endpoint only for accelerated approval.

By the time the suppress study, and now the [indiscernible] study have completed, the FDA have now moved towards acceptance of clinically significant viremia as an endpoint for full-approval. So, certainly movement ended up occurring in the CMV space in the transplant picture.

The FDA has also issued its guidance with regards to development of CMV, agents to include CMV clearance of CMV viremia in the case of maribavir as a primary endpoint for preemptive studies. And that’s in essence what we’re doing with adenovirus.

We’re using preemptive brincidofovir versus preemptive standard of care predominantly IV off label cidofovir as our randomization arms and we are looking for clearance of virus. We have a number of endpoints.

We’ve described to you all the area and the curve as the most precise way of describing the effective and anti-viral, but essentially the FDA is accepting of clearance of CMV viremia for primary endpoint of the maribavir study.

So, we think that there is – recently established precedents in the transplant space and obviously there is a lot of historic precedents as viremia was accepted for endpoints in the HIV space in hepatitis B space and the hepatitis C space as well..

Okay. That’s quite helpful.

And just to clarify Garrett, on AdAPT, so it’s open for enrollment as talked about, but just so I’m clear, have you enrolled patients yet or that’s something that has not happened yet?.

We’re in the process of enrolling patients.

As we just stated, we’re in the process of still opening our final sites in the U.S., and we have a couple of other countries that are under review, and once we end up getting a couple of months of full recruitment under our belts we’ll provide you guys with updates in terms of our projected completed enrollment.

With that, we remain on target to complete enrollment in 2019..

Okay.

And on 521, with the norovirus program, are you aware of any other competitors that may have a drug with substantially similar profile to what you’ve seen so far in the preclinical work?.

No, there is a number of vaccines that are in development, but no direct directly targeted anti-viral to our awareness. There are other drugs with other mechanisms of actions, but not targeting norovirus or RNA specifically..

Got it. Thank you..

Thank you. Our next question or comment comes from the line of Phil Nadeau from Cowen and Company. Your line is open..

Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions and congratulations on the progress. I guess the first question is on the AdAPT study. Your guidance on today's call is to complete enrollment in 2019 and in the past, I think your guidance was for data from the study in 2019, so it seems like there’s a small change there.

Is it possible now that data could fall in 2020 or am I parsing your words too closely?.

No, our guidance really hasn't changed, as far as where we’re – what our goals are. We’re looking to complete the enrollment in 2019. We have 16-weeks of primary endpoint.

So, the data from the patients who enroll and follow for 16 weeks will be available about four months after enrollment is complete, and we look to have regulatory filing shortly thereafter..

Got it. Okay, thanks.

And then second is on the smallpox studies, I believe in the past you’ve shown efficacy in two different animal models, so can you maybe give us some idea of what is different between the guidance document and the studies you’ve conducted to necessitate new animal studies, or basically why weren’t those supportive?.

Yes. The new guidance, I think just clarifies a few points, so there is nothing substantially different from with the animal rule. There are some differences for smallpox and for other threats, specifically smallpox only infects humans, primates, and so therefore you have to use different viruses in different animal species.

So that’s something that’s a little different than say plague or a radiation threat, where that’s the same regardless of which animal you’re using, but there is really that’s substantially different in the guidance.

We are a fixed rabbitpox study, so we're pretty confident in the model and the data that we’ve generated where we – in which we’ve shown as I’ve said before 100% survival in those animals that receive treatment immediately upon confirmation of their infection, then we had 93% survival at 24 and 48 hours.

So, a stepwise reduction if you continue to wait. The rabbitpox model is one that replicates a lot of what we see in humans. So, it’s a very nice model, but it does require an inoculation. The mouse model has the advantages of being aerosolized or respiratory infections. So, that replicates a different part of the human smallpox model.

So, they are complementary, but the rabbitpox is a more robust model. So, that’s what we anticipate will be our last study in rabbitpox that should be starting shortly, and then the mouse final efficacy study towards the end of this calendar year..

Got it. Okay, thanks for taking my questions..

Thanks very much Phil..

Thank you. Our next question or comment comes from the line of Ed White from H.C. Wainwright. Your line is open..

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question.

So, I just want to circle back to the AdAPT study in – I heard it correctly because from the other question I think you had said you are enrolling, has the first patient been treated yet?.

Yes, we do have our first subject in..

Okay.

And then just as far as the 521, while you're going to have the data on the healthy patients, how should we be thinking about the timing of the first challenge study beginning?.

Yes. That’s something - we've would probably be into 2019 before we could give any guidance on timing around that. You know, with our main programs with brinci moving forward, we need to keep those moving forward, and then for 521 once we get our multiple dose data, so that’s something that will be coming towards the end of 2018.

So, I expect it will be in early 2019, before we could give more guidance on when we can do a challenge study. You’ll remember we talked about doing prevention and treatment in parallel, so – meaning more data to come on that.

We’ve not had any regulatory discussions on that yet to get a feel for how large a safety database would need to be factoring that something we hope to share in the coming months..

Okay great. Thanks Michelle.

And then just, my typical BARDA question and smallpox question, but from your most recent presentation you were expecting data from the mouse and the new rabbit studies in – it looks like early 2019, and I guess I want to clarify that as because you had just said earlier 2019, so it’s early or you know first half of 2019 or could it be later than that? And then also on the EU or U.S., which do you think is going to come first? I think, in your most recent presentation, it looks like you’re expecting to have sales in the EU first in 2019, followed by potential stockpiling in the U.S.

in 2020. .

Just to clarify, for adenovirus, we feel we have a little more clarity on the path to an approval there because the AdAPT study was designed together with the European regulators and they have given us their assurances of their acceptance of a virologic endpoint. So, we felt there is a little straighter path.

Once we get the AdAPT data in hand, we hope to achieve the same approval here in the U.S. for adenovirus. For smallpox, in the U.S., we have the animal rule, so we have a well-laid path with I think 34 medical countermeasures that have already proceeded through the animal rule.

There is no animal rule equivalent in Europe that they generally follow on FDA approval on the basis of the animal rule. So, we’re – in the smallpox case, we’ve got a little more clarity on approvals and stockpiling, which could be independent out of an FDA approval.

In Europe, they generally follow on the FDA's lead following the animal rule and stockpiling. It’s the other way around for adenovirus. I hope that’s helpful and clarifying..

Sure. Thanks Michelle..

Thank you..

Thank you. I’m showing no additional questions or comments in the queue at this time. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Ms. Michelle Berrey for any closing remarks..

Thank you very much. I appreciate you all joining us this morning. And we look forward to seeing you all in October. Thank you, and goodbye..

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This concludes the program. You may now disconnect. Everyone, have a wonderful day..