Jennifer van Aken - Director-Investor Relations Thomas A. Ellman - President-Rail North America & Executive Vice President Robert C. Lyons - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President Brian A. Kenney - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer.

Justin Long - Stephens, Inc. Matt S. Brooklier - Longbow Research LLC Derek S. Rabe - Raymond James & Associates, Inc. Ken H. Newman - KeyBanc Capital Markets, Inc. Stephen M. O'Hara - Sidoti & Company, LLC Mike J. Baudendistel - Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc. Kristine Kubacki - Avondale Partners LLC Justin L. Bergner - Gabelli & Company.

Good day and welcome to the GATX First Quarter Conference Call. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Ms. Jennifer Van Aken, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead..

Thank you, Angela, and good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us for the first quarter 2015 conference call. With me today are Brian Kenney, President and CEO of GATX Corporation; Bob Lyons, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and Tom Ellman, Executive Vice President and President of Rail North America.

As a reminder, any forward-looking statement made on this call represents our best judgment as to what may occur in the future. We have based these forward-looking statements on information currently available and disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise these statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances.

The company's actual results will depend on a number of competitive and economic factors, some of which may be outside the control of the company. For more information, refer to our 2014 Form 10-K for a discussion of these factors. You can find this report as well as other information about the company on our website, www.gatx.com.

Before I get into the numbers, I'd like to remind everyone that our annual shareholders meeting will be held tomorrow. It will be in downtown Chicago at the Northern Trust building, which is at the corner of Lasalle and Monroe. The meeting begins at 9:00 A.M. Central Time.

Slides from Brian Kenney's presentation will be posted to our website, www.gatx.com. I'll now give a brief overview of the results provided in our press release earlier this morning, and after that, we'll take questions. Today we reported 2015 first quarter net income of $62.2 million or $1.39 per diluted share.

This compares to 2014 first quarter net income of $42.1 million or $0.90 per diluted share. These results are reflective of Rail North America's strong fleet performance. Utilization, excluding the boxcar fleet, was 99.3% at the end of the quarter. The renewal rate change of GATX's Lease Price Index was 43.2% and the average renewal term was 59 months.

Our renewal success rate remained very high at nearly 85% in the quarter. We continued to selectively sell certain railcars and generated more than $36 million in asset remarketing income.

While the first quarter results were very good, some uncertainty remains in the tank car market due to pending regulations and uncertainty in the energy markets due to the low price of crude oil. Rail International had a solid start to the year.

GATX Rail Europe's utilization remained steady in the first quarter as they continued to take delivery of new railcars. American Steamship Company is facing challenging operating conditions again this year due to the ice coverage on the Great Lakes. The ASC is currently operating 12 vessels and expects to operate 13 this season.

Portfolio Management's results were driven primarily by the performance of the Rolls-Royce and Partners Finance affiliates. The joint ventures now have a portfolio of more than 430 engines with a net book value of approximately $3 billion.

We were active under our share repurchase authorization during the quarter, buying back approximately $27 million in stock. And with that quick overview, we'll open it up for your questions.

Angela?.

Thank you. And we'll take our first question from Justin Long with Stephens, Incorporated..

Thanks and good morning, guys.

First question, I was wondering if you could talk about the sequential change you saw in lease rates during the quarter with any commentary by car type, if possible? Mainly I'm just curious if it's still a stable lease rate environment as you described last quarter or if you've seen any softening given the weaker than expected volumes that the rails have put up along with several guide downs from that group?.

Hi. This is Tom Ellman, and I'll take that question. Overall, I'd say what we've seen in lease rates is very much in line with our expectations at the start of the year.

One of the things that we talked about was that with the long run-up in the flammable liquids market that we expected over time to see some softening in those rates, and sequentially, compared to last quarter, we have seen that. But those rates are very much still at historically high levels just lower than they were in the fourth quarter.

More broadly, across the tank car market you've seen some quarter-over-quarter decline in rates maybe on the order of 5%, and that again was in line with expectations because of the strong effect that the flammable liquids demand and strength in the backlog provided the tank car market overall.

So we've seen that, but as you saw from the LPI, the rates still are quite strong and quite high from a historical level perspective. The only other one to comment on individually would be the coal market where the combination of increasing velocity and decreasing demand has caused rate decline in that area..

Okay. That's very helpful.

But outside of tank and coal, would you say other lease rates or lease rates on other car types have remained fairly stable on a sequential basis?.

I think that's a fair statement; both fairly stable and in line with expectations..

Okay. Great. Also, wanted to ask about remarketing income; obviously, it was a big number here in the first quarter.

I know it's a very tough line item to predict, but could you go over your expectations for 2015? Any change on the total amount of remarketing income you expect? And I know it's early on 2016, but just looking at your fleet today, do you have any initial expectation on how remarketing income could trend next year as well?.

Justin, its Bob Lyons. Commenting on 2016 is a bit of a tough one at this point as you know because remarketing income can move around quarter-to-quarter so let me cover 2015 first.

As we said, coming into the year we expected full year remarketing in 2015 to be around the same level as what we had in 2014, which was total net gain on dispositions of about $87 million.

So yes, we had a very big first quarter, but as we said in the earnings call back in January, we were already in the market at that point in time with a couple of different packages, so we expected remarketing income.

There was a possibility that it would be relatively high in the first and second quarter of the year, during the first half of the year, and we've seen that. The full year expectation hasn't changed. We should still be in the same range, at a very high range, with a lot of secondary market demand currently for our assets.

2016, I can give you a better assessment on that as the year progresses, but given the strength in the capital markets and the demand for the assets that we have, we would expect another solid year in 2016, too..

Okay, great. That's helpful. And last question, I just wanted to ask about capital deployment. Obviously, you've locked in long-term committed cash flow. Could you speak to the opportunities you're seeing today? I know GE has recently discussed its divestiture of some of its assets.

Could that create an opportunity? Are you seeing some things in the international market, whether it's Europe or somewhere else? And if not, is there a possibility that you could increase the amount of the share buyback that you're executing on today?.

Yes, it's Brian, Justin. The answer is yes to all the above, but we're not going to comment on any specific opportunities, like the GE opportunity. So we know what the public knows there, and that's that GE Capital is for sale.

GE Rail is part of GE Capital, so we assume that's for sale, too, and GATX is always interested in any of these properties that come for sale, but we basically know what the public knows there. As far as Europe, we've been focused on that for a while, and there's been a couple of smaller properties that have come up for sale and changed hands.

I expect more of that. It's a very tough market, both from an economic perspective and from the perspective of rules getting more complex. It's a more fragmented market, and it may be tougher for some of these entrepreneurs and smaller fleets to hang in there, so yes, we'd expect some activity there in the coming years.

And we're focused on all of that, as well as share repurchase and continuing the 96 year dividend..

Justin, I'll just add to that, too. We were active in the stock repurchase, as Jennifer mentioned in the intro and would expect, as we said coming into the year, we anticipated we'd use the balance of the repurchase that was available to us, which was $125 million.

And to the extent we work through that, then obviously that would entail a discussion with the board and a board-level decision on what we do going forward. But as you know, we've returned a lot of capital to shareholders over the years, both through dividends and share repurchase. So they're all alternatives for us..

Makes sense. I'll leave it at that. Thanks so much for the time..

And we'll take our next question from Matt Brooklier with Longbow Research..

Hey. Thanks and good morning. So I just had a quick question as we get closer to flammable service regulations.

I'm curious to hear if there's been any change in the market as we get closer to that date and specifically, curious to hear your thoughts on if there has been an increased rate of redeployments of cars in flammable service that have potentially been shifted to other commodities?.

Yes. I'll start with the market commentary. The most obvious thing you've seen is on the new car side, people taking a little bit of a pause in the order activity to see what the final regulations are before pulling the trigger on any order activity.

As far as redeployment, one of the – for us one of the hallmarks of that fleet is that we have really gone long on term. So we have quite a bit of term associated with the car types in the flammable liquids service, so the number of potential remarketing activity is fairly low.

Where possible, again, one of the things that we really try to focus on is redeployment into a wide variety of commodities and to be as diverse as possible, so we certainly have continued to do that with the upcoming regulations.

More broadly in the market, I think most of that activity in that car type continues to be concentrated in crude oil and ethanol..

Okay. And then maybe if you could just touch on – I think it's pretty clear that there's been a little bit of a pause in terms of demand for crude cars. It's kind of twofold, it's regulations and then obviously with this correction in crude price.

But maybe if you could provide us a little bit of commentary in terms of demand for non-crude and I guess non-ethanol cars as well.

How does kind of your outlook – what's the outlook on non-flammable service cars at this point?.

Yes. Again, I would say that's very much consistent with the outlook that we had at the beginning of the year.

As you know, we have two long-term supply agreements and what we've talked about repeatedly is that we can place the majority – the vast majority of the activity from those two agreements into non-crude oil and ethanol service and that hasn't changed. We continue to believe that as we go into the rest of the year here, and so no change in that area..

Okay. I appreciate the color..

And we'll take our next question from Art Hatfield with Raymond James..

Yes. Good morning, everybody. This is Derek Rabe on for Art. Just wanted to look at the – so the industry orders that were released yesterday showed that the mid and large cube covered hoppers is kind of where the strength was coming from in the quarter.

We saw the small cubes come off drastically and then the tank, obviously, it's a slow market right now, given that regulations are forthcoming.

But, what do you think is behind the strength in that mid and large cube covered hoppers beyond just maybe potentially some grain orders? And then broadly speaking, from your portfolio, I was wondering if you could just comment on what you're seeing from your customers across specific car types, if any outside of tank are showing particular strength or weakness?.

Yes. So as far as the commodities that mid-cube and large cubed covered hoppers would carry, the mid cubes' biggest single commodity is grain. Larger, there's two different areas that you could see activity, one would be DDG which is an ethanol byproduct and the other is the plastic pellet market.

Lower energy prices has created increased demand in the plastic pellet area so that's an area of strength to your earlier question. Beyond that across the market in the non-energy car types I would say that demand is fairly consistent with what it has been over the past couple of quarters..

Okay. Thanks.

And as I look at your renewal term it did come off about eight months sequentially, I was just wondering what specifically was the driver behind that?.

Yes. So again an area that we expected to see that happen, one of the biggest areas is the coal market which we've talked about for the last couple of calls. That is a market where we've intentionally gone short and we continue to try to place our cars in that market on shorter terms.

Although you noted the sequential decrease, it's worth noting that the term that we saw in the first quarter is still very long by historical measures and when you get into a quarter-to-quarter change it's hard to make real meaningful commentary on just a single quarter.

So I think that the more important issue is for most of the car types in the fleet, rates are at historically high levels which is causing us to try to take terms out and we continue to be successful doing that..

So how should we think about the renewal term for your portfolio going forward? Should we see much more downside risk to that? Or I guess more broadly, what exposure is still left from the coal side?.

Yes. So with – specific to coal, since we have intentionally gone short waiting for that market to firm up, we have a significant portion of our coal fleet each year that's going to turn over. We have about 9,000 cars either owned or managed in our coal fleet and for most car types a good rule of thumb is about 20% expiring in a given year.

Coal would be higher than that..

Derek, I'd add to, just to be consistent with the comments we made at the beginning of the year with regards to the LPI, where we expected that to be in the mid 30% range for the year, but indicated it could be volatile from quarter to quarter just depending on car types and really outlook in flammables and the energy market, you could see some of the same on term as well where it could bounce around a little bit from quarter to quarter, but in general keep in mind a 59-month average renewal term is quite strong historically and we're getting more than that in tank as well, but still being able to put cars to work for a very long period of time..

Okay, yes. Great, color. I was just curious about the slack capacity left, given that your utilization was so high and still trending higher. So just going back to the earlier comment that you guys made on the decline in the tank car lease rates. You mentioned that it was down basically another 5% or so.

Does that bring the total from the peak down to about 20%? Does that sound right?.

I think that's true for the flammable liquid cars because that's been declining probably over the last 12 to 18 months. I would not generalize that for tank and the rest of it has been relatively consistent..

Okay, great. Thanks guys..

Yes. Just to add to Brian's commentary there. If you look at the non-flammable liquids portion of our tank car fleet, the quarter-over-quarter decline and the year-over-year decline are in the same range. So, it's really only the flammable liquids portion that you would be looking at a larger year-over-year decline than a quarter-over-quarter decline..

Okay, great. Thanks..

And, we'll take our next question from Steve Barger with KeyBanc Capital Markets..

Hey. Good morning. This is Ken Newman on for Steve. You gave some pretty good commentary on lease rates by car type. I was just curious. Given what's happening with mix and term, should we think that monthly average rate per utilized car has peaked? Just wanted to get your thoughts on that..

So for the fleet as a whole – these are again historically high levels both in tank and for the fleet as a whole and I think it's fair to say that we're at the top of the market right now..

As we came into the year, Ken, we talked about again bringing it back to somewhat of an LPI conversation but we indicated that across a very broad large of car types we were at record lease rates or near record and didn't really see those going up from there that's for sure.

And with some of the volatility in the marketplace a little bit of pare back from those levels was expected..

Got it.

And you had pretty impressive margins this quarter; I'm just curious in this environment what else can be done to drive margins higher especially for North American Rail?.

Well in terms of – we're going to continue to see very strong rate performance, I would say, broadly, across the fleet as we renew, again, this year a good portion of cars that are coming off older rates so we'll see nice pickup there and that will manifest itself again still an extremely strong and positive LPI for the course of the year..

Another thing that helps with margins is the strong renewal rate. When the cars renew with the same customer and don't require a shopping event that's positive on margin and we were at 85% renewal success this quarter..

Thanks. I'll jump back in line..

And we'll take our next question from Steve O'Hara with Sidoti & Co..

Hi. Good morning..

Good morning, Steve..

I was just wondering in terms of the – I know you guys had gone through a bit of a maintenance bubble for the last few years. Maybe it's continuing outside of new regulations.

Can you just kind of refresh us on where you stand on that and what you see for maybe potentially 2016 in terms of maintenance expense, obviously outside of anything from new tank car regulations? Thank you..

Yes. What's driving maintenance expense is the addition of the boxcar fleet; remember that happened at the beginning of the second quarter, so that's what's the main driver of increased maintenance expense is. As far as the compliance bubble, we've been talking about that for a few years. We're really on the downside of that bubble.

It increased from 2012 to 2013 from if I remember right about 3,300 cars to 4,000 cars. It went to 5,000 last year. This is in terms of that tank qualification number which really drives compliance cost in our fleet. That's down significantly in 2015.

We had to pay less than 4,000 and scheduled again in 2016 would be less than that, so we're on the downside of that bubble. All that is scheduled, and it depends on what you actually do with your fleet in terms of buying and selling, and perhaps the new regulations could have an impact on that as well.

But, as we look at projected scheduled compliance, we're on our way down this year and next year..

And Steve, to quantify the point Brian made on boxcars that was $61 million last year maintenance expense. For North American rail in the first quarter it was about $69 million this year. Almost that entire delta was boxcars..

Okay, great..

...and that, boxcars are a very good thing..

Yes. Okay.

And then just quickly, it seems to be, the commentary so far seems to confirm this, but just in terms of your ability to kind of keep term long historically and keep rates relatively high, would you see you're getting a little more push-back from customers at this point in the cycle? Or is it still fairly strong in terms of, obviously with 85% renewal success it seems pretty good, but if you can just maybe – has there been any maybe change in the customer behavior?.

Yes, as you know historically, it's still very strong 85% renewal success and if you look at the rate and term numbers, very strong by historical standards. One of the things you want to take a look at, though, is the length of the new car backlogs because that would be an alternative to renewing a car or finding an existing assignment car.

And while the backlog again is very, very strong by historical levels, production capability has gone up, so the time it takes to work through that backlog is shorter than it used to be and probably more importantly, we're seeing pockets of availability in that new car backlog.

So overall, tank car backlogs are up, probably on average up to about the first half of 2016, freight car backlogs may be a little bit longer than that, but there are pockets of availability that we hear about, potentially even earlier than that.

And if that became broader, that would be an area that you'd have the potential to see competition to the renewal rates..

Okay.

And then just in terms of the order that you have, the firm order that I think was out through the end of 2016 or mid-2016, are all of those cars essentially signed up with customers at this point? Is there any kind of wiggle room there in terms of their ability to get out of those leases?.

Yes. So as far as our deal, again, we have two of them, one that finishes up in August of 2016 and then one on the back half of that that starts right after. For the one that starts in August of 2016, we've just placed our first couple of hundred cars.

On the 2011 order, we are placed sort of like what I talked about pockets, basically into the first quarter of 2016 a few pockets earlier than that but all of those are absolutely firm. There is no ability for customers to back away from any of those cars that we've placed..

Okay. Thank you very much..

And we will take our next question from Mike Baudendistel with Stifel..

Thank you. Just looking at the data that came out yesterday on railcars, large number of deliveries, about 20,000.

Can you talk about the degree to which you compete with those new car deliveries directly? And you view that as the increased capacity from those deliveries as being the biggest risk to lease rates going forward? Or is it more freight volumes or something else?.

Yes. So all of those things figure in so at the highest level a statistic you absolutely want to take a look at is the total railcar loadings because that shows how much demand there is in the market. And we've seen some recent downward trending there.

On a more immediate basis, the availability of cars is more important as far as what you're going to be able to do from a rate and term perspective.

And I don't know if you've heard a question or two ago, we talked about the new car backlogs remain very long, but with pockets of availability and as those pockets increase, that's where you might see more competition..

Got it. That makes sense. And also wanted to ask you, I guess with the flammable liquids tank car safety standards coming out pretty shortly.

Assuming it's the option two that the mid-range option is what comes to fruition, do you think the industry is most likely to address that with new car builds or retrofits of existing equipment based on any visibility you have on price?.

Yes. So the RSI, the Railway Supply Institute put out a statistic a while ago that their best guess was that 28% of the existing cars would be retired which would mean 72% something would happen to them. We have commented that GATX is probably less likely than that to work on the retrofit side more likely than that to work on the replaced set..

Great. Those are my questions. Thank you..

And we'll take our next question from Kristine Kubacki with Avondale Partners..

Good morning. My question is on ASC. You talked a little bit about the slower start to the selling season, no surprise there.

But I guess much did it impact the quarter more than you were expecting and do you think you can catch up on that? Is there demand for it as we go through the year?.

Kristine, most of the quarterly activity – first quarter activity at ASC normally is January activity to begin with, as they're wrapping up the season. So, in terms of a late start in the end of March, it's not that significant an issue. But, if operating conditions remain challenging, it will be going forward.

We'll see how that plays out in terms of overall customer demand. Last year we were able to make up a substantial portion of that late in the year..

Okay. That's helpful. And then a little bit of follow-on to the last question about how the rules come out on the tank car side.

I guess beyond kind of what you're looking at in terms of the rule, I guess what happens – are you concerned at all as we start to get this retrofit or if we do retire or we need to find homes for these other cars that are now currently in crude or ethanol service? Can these be repurposed into other areas? Or is that likely to lead to further pressure or will they just simply exit the market?.

Yes. The answer about repurposing is a qualified yes. So of the 360,000 or so tank cars in North America, about 100,000 of which are of the size that carries crude and ethanol and other flammable liquids. The ability to repurpose within products that are of similar densities, you can do fairly easily with a pretty limited modification to the car.

But crude and ethanol make up a very, very large percent of the total commodities transported in that car type. So your ability to do that is somewhat limited by demand. If you want to move into other tank car types, the other 260,000, that's very challenging because the nature of the commodity would not be conducive to that car type..

Okay.

So it wouldn't really necessarily affect the lease rates on those particular car types if we just have these other car types roaming around at that point?.

Yes..

Okay. And, this is a bit more theoretical question and I'm probably going to re-ask the same question from before.

But I guess we kind of know a little bit about what the tank car design is going to be and you guys have limited exposure to crude, but can you help us maybe think about, I guess the OEMs have been pretty public about that they think there's going to be a frenzy – an immediate frenzy once the rules are released that there's going to be a big order frenzy, but it sounds like you guys are taking a little bit more approach – that retrofit would be more your avenue.

I guess help us understand, do you see that there will be a big frenzy of tank car orders out there, like what would be – what would my car need to be in service to be that I would go out there and decide to go replace, fully outright, replace my car?.

Well, first of all let me correct your statement about the retrofit. We're very unlikely to retrofit cars at GATX, and there's a few hurdles for us versus other people in the industry that make a retrofit more difficult.

And the first one is we didn't participate, as you just said, as heavily as others in the crude oil boom in recent years or the ethanol boom in the mid-2000s. So on average, our fleet of those 30,000 gallon tank cars is older and we have less remaining car life to recapture those retrofit costs.

The second reason is we think that retrofit cost that's put forth in the DOT notice of proposed rulemaking is way understated, I think they were at 26,000 to 32,000. We could easily see that being double and we think the cost of recovering that cost from customers over time are probably relatively low.

So we're much more in the we'll scrap them than retrofit them mode. But then I'll let Tom handle the market..

Yes.

So the thing on the market is absent regulation, and this came up earlier on the call, the relative demand for flammable liquids and the relative supply – with the significant ramp-up in production that has gone from an average tank car year being something like 10,000 cars to 35,000 cars, we've been talking for quite some time about an eventual oversupply in that market.

And we think absent regulation that the market was getting pretty close to having enough cars to transport crude methanol, so what might happen with – very briefly with a change in regulation is difficult to say. But over the long term it's hard to see that the market needs materially more of that car type..

Okay. Fair enough. Thank you..

And we'll take our next question from Justin Bergner with Gabelli & Company..

Hi. Good morning, everyone..

Morning, Justin..

My first question just relates to the Rolls-Royce joint venture.

With the appointment of a new CEO come July, does that change sort of the potential options or framework for that joint venture going forward in your eyes?.

Justin, at this point we wouldn't anticipate any change to the joint venture. We've been in that joint venture for 15 years and have gone through any number of different management changes at Rolls-Royce and it's remained a very critical part of business overall and one that they see as a very strong growth opportunity. So sitting here today, no..

Okay. Thank you. My second question is a clarification question.

When you were talking about sequential tank car rates at the beginning of the call and you were talking about, I believe a down 5% figure sequentially, was that meant to be referring to non-flammable tank cars or was it that number was down 5%, all the decline was driven by the flammable class?.

Yes. So overall, the 5% number is good across the tank car fleet. The flammable liquids decline actually happened – began to happen earlier, so we've been seeing flammable liquids decrease for multiple quarters. So, the distinction we were trying to draw is everything else in this most recent quarter, flammable liquids for a longer period of time..

Got it.

And so, the 5% decline might be – the 5% sequential decline might be felt relatively equally this quarter across flammable/non-flammable or would it be greater than non-flammable?.

It'd be probably fair to say even across in the single quarter..

Okay, thank you. My final question relates to the issue of velocity on the rails. You mentioned that velocity in coal was improving on the rails.

Are you seeing any other imminent improvements in velocity in other rail car classes that might pose a head wind to demand in the leasing business going forward?.

Yes. So to clarify that, the rails have seen an increase in velocity overall, but overall actually, it's been fairly modest.

It's hard to get direct evidence, hard for us to get direct evidence on a commodity by commodity or car type by car type change in velocity, but it's reasonable to believe that the car types and commodities that move the most miles see the biggest increase in velocity and most material impact to car demand. Coal is at the very top of that list.

Coal moves a lot of miles compared to a lot of other car types, so where you'd expect to see that happen the most is other car types that share that characteristic, like intermodal would be an example.

The car types that most – the biggest parts of our fleet consist of, tank cars and covered hoppers largely moving in manifest service; they see a much smaller impact from changes in velocity.

A notable exception to that rule about most of our cars moving in manifest service in tank and covered hoppers is the flammable liquids area where a relatively higher percentage move in unit train service..

Okay, great.

And would you expect velocity to be a headwind to your leasing business looking out for the rest of the year? Or do you think it's sort of most of the easy improvements have been made and we'll see things sort of stay pretty steady from here?.

Yes, velocity improvement, the railroads are very, very focused on that. They've made a lot of investment in that area. Some of the improvement is a direct result of that investment, both in infrastructure, hiring crews, and some of it is things like the weather being relatively better this year than last year.

They are going to continue to focus on that area. And again, in the areas that – parts of our fleet that are car types that move a lot of miles like coal, as they continue to see improvement, you'll see an impact there. But it's a relatively small percentage of our fleet overall..

Thank you for answering all my questions..

And it appears that there are no other questions at this time. Ms. Van Aken, I'd like to turn the conference back to you for any additional or closing remarks..

Okay. Thanks, Angela. I'd just like to thank everyone for their participation on the call this morning. Please contact me with any follow-up questions. Thanks..

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today's conference. We thank you for your participation, and you may now disconnect..