Good morning, everyone. And welcome to our First Quarter 2011 Earnings Review. As a reminder, this conference call is being webcast and accompanied by a slide presentation that can be found in the Investor Relations section of our website at www.alliancebernstein/investorrelations.com. On the call today, we have our Chairman and CEO, Peter Kraus; our Chief Operating Officer, David Steyn; and our Controller and Interim CFO, Edward Farrell. Now I’d like to draw your attention to the cautions regarding forward-looking statements on slide two of our presentation. Some of the information we present today is forward-looking and subject to certain SEC rules and regulations regarding disclosure. You can also find our cautions regarding forward-looking statements in the MD&A of our 2010 10-K and in our first quarter 2011 10-Q which we filed this morning. Under regulation FD management may only address inquiries of a material nature from the investment community in a public form. So we encourage you to ask all such questions on this call. With that, let me turn the call over to Peter.

Thank you, Andrea. Good morning and good afternoon and good evening to those overseas. Today I’d like to briefly recap with you our long-term strategy and to talk a little bit about how we are achieving those goals and our recent accomplishments that we have been able to achieve. I’d also like to underscore where more work needs to be done. David will then talk about performance and flows and then Ed will follow-up with the financial and operating results, then of course at the end, we’ll take questions -- any question you have all of them are fair. So to start with, I’d like to begin with a little perspective. After 2008 this was a firm that needed to change. We created a more nimble and progressive firm. We are trying to recapture our performance edge and we are restoring our standing with clients and the industry. As we discussed previously in other earnings calls there is never a quick fix, these things take time. We had to put a clear strategy in place, position AB for long-term success and execute decisively and consistently. In doing so, we built our strategy on four primary initiatives. First and foremost, restore our performance track record and our client confidence. Secondly, diversify our businesses to provide balance and support stable growth in any market environment. And third, meet evolving client demand for innovative new products and services, that means long-term growth areas like alternatives, defined contribution in emerging markets and more importantly, it also means focusing on our core services and delivering that value proposition that we’ve promised our clients. And last, we need to improve our operating leverage and financial results. We’re all unitholders and we all expect that. In the past two years we’ve focused on executing these four initiatives…

Thank you, Peter, and good afternoon from here in Europe. I’d like to start with assets under managements and the flow picture during the first quarter of 2011. As you can see from slide eight, end of period assets under managements and average assets under managements were essentially unchanged from year end 2010. Gross sales were up by one-third during that time and our net outflows moderated substantially as well. The rolling quarter view gives us some more perspective. Gross sales increased across all three of our channels and in institutional and retail gross redemptions declined substantially, though they were up slightly in private client. Taken together, as a result net outflows moderated across the Board and we’re more in line with third quarter 2010 levels than fourth quarter. Now naturally, we’d like to see even more improvement but I’ll point, that our outflows continue to be concentrated in few albeit significant areas, global and international equities in institutions and I’d also like to point out that we continue to attract flows to our fixed income products across all channels. So let me dive down into channel-by-channel data to give a more detailed picture of the business environment in the first quarter. Beginning on slide 10 with institutions, gross sales improved by 49% over both the fourth quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2010, led by higher sales in both customized retirement strategies in United States of America and fixed income on a global basis. In fact, they were the highest since the second quarter of 2010. At the same time, gross redemptions declined by 30% from our very challenging fourth quarter. The result in aggregate was 42% decline in net outflows during first quarter of this year. Again, we want to do better and we have reason…

Thank you, David. Before I recap the first quarter results, I’d like to quickly review the adjustments we make to our GAAP revenues each quarter and explain a modification we made this quarter and on a go-forward basis. Since we introduced these measures last year we’ve adjusted GAAP revenues to exclude investment gains and losses, as well as dividends and interest on our deferred compensation related investments and 90% of investment gains and losses of our consolidated venture funds attribute to non-controlling interest. We also net distribution related payments to third parties and the amortization of deferred sales commissions against distribution revenues. The modification I made now excludes additional transfer agency-related pass-through expenses that are reimbursed and recorded as fees and revenues from our adjusted metrics. These fees are not material and have no impact on our operating income but they do have an impact on our operating margin. We believe that adjusting for these distorted items better reflects how we manage our business and helps people compares to our industry peers. For a full explanation of our adjusted earnings measures, please refer to the appendix at the end of the presentation, our press release or the 10-Q. Now let me give you the first quarter adjusted financial highlights reported earlier today. Adjusted earnings per unit were $0.41 in Q1 that’s up $0.01 from Q4 and down $0.06 from Q1 2010. Adjusted revenues of $659 million were up 1% from Q4 and up 2% versus the prior year quarter. Adjusted operating expenses were flat sequentially and up 6% from the prior year quarter. Our adjusted operating margin was 21.9% in Q1, up slightly from 21.3% in Q4 and down from 24.5% in Q1 2010. We repurchased 2.2 million units in Q1 at cost of $49.8 million. We’ll continue to buyback…

[Lisa], I think we’re all set to take questions.

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from the line of Robert Lee with KBW. Your line is open. Robert Lee – KBW: Great. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. First question maybe, I’d just like to drill down a little bit into performance. Maybe Peter, when I look at the performance slides, you see the strong rebound from the bottom a couple years ago, but then when I look across the appendix and you look at some of the institutional equity performance relative to benchmarks, it still seems pretty challenged over a multi-year period. I mean, from your perspective where do you think, as you go out and talk to consultants and clients, potential clients, I mean, is there any -- are they still focused more on kind of the one-, two-, three-year versus benchmark? How much weight are they putting towards the performance from the bottom? How do kind of maybe square those two things when you talk to clients?

Great question. And a tough one to answer with one sort of definitive answer. A great deal depends to consultants and you’re right, the industry standard of a one-, three-, five- or particularly three-year track record in some sense is a very arbitrary measure. I just took this -- just a few days ago completed a tour of some of our operations in the Asia-Pacific region and I met with the Head of Consulting at one of the biggest consulting firms and we were just talking about this dilemma. And they are very sophisticated consultants, been in this industry a long, long time and immediately acknowledged that arbitrarily when looking simply at three-year numbers doesn’t tell half the story or can tell a very, very distorted story. Starting at various consultant consultants and region by region, I mean in some sectors, it’s going to act in our favor when in a few quarters the particular -- particularly challenging performance of 2008 drops away from the three-year numbers. I think the really useful debate we’ve been able to have with consultants is to say let’s break down performance between what happened during the crash and then what happened as the market began to bounce back from the events of 2008. And that’s a much more constructive discussion. Robert Lee – KBW: Well, okay. That’s helpful. And maybe a follow-up question. I mean, I saw a couple of weeks ago, I guess, a month ago maybe where you bought in part of the JV with AXA Pacific, I guess it is, that you didn’t own as that business was sold to AMP. And I know there is a fairly substantial amount of assets in that JV. I guess there’s really two questions to you here. Number one, what’s your view on kind of the stickiness of those -- some of those assets now that AMP is basically the owner of those products or shall we say the distributor? And to what extent would this, in the near term, will we see any impact in your financials? You have 50% more of that -- whatever percent more of that JV that you didn’t have before. Is there any kind of earnings impact that we should be looking for going forward?

Sure. In fact, I was just down in Australia last week and I met with, as you’d expect, AMP. And I think just that -- slightly more color, I have actually been the Chairman of our Australian joint venture with AXA. So I’m intimately involved in that business. Now I certainly shouldn’t, on this earnings call, talk on behalf of AMP. So I’m not going to talk on behalf of AMP and I’m not going to talk about what their intentions are. What I would say is this, AMP has been a very, very strategic partner of this firm for many, many years across a full array of services. It is a client we’ve had a long and deep and extremely close relationship with -- for as long as I have been involved in the Australian side of our business. When the opportunity came for us to take full ownership of Australia, which by the way represented the very last JV we had anywhere in the world -- we having bought out all of our JV partner’s everywhere else in the Asian world for the preceding few years. We were very happy to do that. We did have, as you would expect, a detailed and very constructive discussions with AMP throughout that process. We will continue to partner with them going forward. We don’t need a JV in order to have that type of relationship. We don’t need a JV with AMP in order to have that type of relationship. There is an agreement in reach with AMP as to how the treatment of the assets that they have acquired from AXA will be handled over a multiple-year period. I think that’s really about as far as I can go in speaking on behalf of -- trying not to speak on behalf of what is a key strategic partner, AMP. Robert Lee – KBW: Great. Thank you very much.

Our next question comes from the line of William Katz with Citi. Your line is open. William Katz – Citi: Okay. Thank you very much. I just thought I’d talk about some of the dynamics on the flow side here, there seems to be a lot of sort of cross current. When you look on the roll forward of the distribution, one of the things that sort of struck to me was the non-U.S. institutional attrition. Can you talk a little bit about the dynamics between sort of retail and institutional outside the United States? Is most of your fixed income discussion or just discussion overall, in terms of traction outside the United States more retail or what is it going to take to sort of get the institutional side of business turned around as well?

Again, a difficult question to answer as the whole rest of the world behaves as one. The fixed income interest or the interest in our fixed income services transcends all of our trends in all geographies in which we operate. So we see healthy interest in fixed income in private clients, but more to the point to your question, we see healthy interest in fixed income in institutions and we see healthy interest in fixed income in retail. Now, in different parts of the world there is certainly some slightly different passages of that. So, in the retail market place in Asia, for example, we see very -- we have seen and continue to see strong flows into fixed income in just about every one of the regional markets in which we are active right now. Institutional markets -- I think it’s a slightly different story there. It goes back to what Peter was talking about, the shift from defined benefits into defined contribution. As that shift has acquired momentum over multiple years, so we have seen amongst corporate DB plans worldwide with almost no exceptions. I can only think of one market where I think there’s a slightly different investment pattern. We’ve seen a shift out of equities and into fixed income securities and that’s not really a market timing decision and it’s not a response to the events of 2008. So, we continue to see fixed income activity whether that’s in Europe or whether that’s Japan, the institutional market in Japan or indeed – I just came back from Australia, my meetings in Australia last week were -- many things we were talking about included fixed income. William Katz – Citi: Okay. Second question is, in terms of some of the change you’re making in research, I guess two part question. Number one, was there any material cost savings associated with that shift? And then number two, when you look at sort of the adjusted operating margin, you’re still sort of down 300 basis points year-on-year. Would the mix from here continue to migrate the margins higher all else being equal?

No. The changes and innovations we’ve made in research are not directed as cost savings, they are directed, as we said, to improve the efficacy of getting ideas into the portfolio and to continue to organize ourselves in a way that we think is innovative for the markets that we’re operating in. So, I wouldn’t view that as an attempt to improve margin, Bill. We think actually the margins that we have and the cost structure that we have across the firm is positioned where it needs to be. Recognize that and this goes to the second question or second part of your question, recognize that where we are today, if we have an improving top-line and we have improving mix and improving yield, that will drop to the bottom line. We have a very attractive marginal margin, that’s really what we’re shooting for. And that’s where we continue to see operating leverage, positive operating leverage. And we expect in the future that’s where shareholders will get the significant increase in earnings should we be able to grow those appropriate financial metrics. William Katz – Citi: Peter, what do you think the marginal margin is at this point?

Well, we said that we would think about compensation as being 50% or better on revenues, so that’s one big piece of it. And you can look at the other expenses which are largely rent and amortization of equipment and things like that, that don’t change very much. So, there’s inflation in the general expenses, but there’s not a need to grow the footprint, there’s not a need to take on additional fixed cost. So you’ve got a pretty attractive marginal margin even if you assume that compensation is at a maximum of 50%. William Katz – Citi: Okay. Thank you very much.

Our next question comes from the line of Craig Siegenthaler with Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Craig Siegenthaler – Credit Suisse: Good morning. First, when you look at the improvement in institutional sales, I’m just wondering, it looks like some of the sales was pulled forward in the pipeline which wasn’t replaced. So I’m wondering what’s your view on that? And secondly, when you look at retail sales, you historically have had a pretty good first quarter. So I’m thinking, are these two issues kind of headwinds that could impact the comparison in the second quarter? Maybe just provide your view there.

Craig, great question. On the institutional side it’s very, very hard for us to predict what the pipeline is going to be because it is so lumpy. Peter touched on the size of those DC customized retirement services wins. We’re talking about big, big accounts and whether they come in Q1 or Q2 or Q3 it is something which we have very little control or actually have no control and very little transparency of insight. We’ve talked in the past -- you and I have talked in the past about the DC -- one of the challenges of the DC business is that the sales cycle on the fulfillment cycle DC is notoriously slow. So, I wouldn’t read too much into it. In fact, a couple of big mandates funded in Q1 or one big one in April of this year is pretty arbitrary. On the retail side, that’s an interesting -- a really interesting question and I’m going to be slightly careful how I choose my words here. I think if there was a market -- we are looking at in the context of what could be happening there year-on-year and what does that mean? It would be Japan where they tried to commence the first quarter, obviously pre-occupying a great deal of minds rather than necessarily doing product launches or launching new services and so on. So Q1 last year was a very strong quarter for us in Japan. It wouldn’t -- it would surprise absolutely no one in our industry if Q1 or Q2 or whatever in Japan is going to be a little bit more subdued, but that’s the only data point I would mention. Apart from that I don’t think there’s any particular pattern out there. Craig Siegenthaler – Credit Suisse: Thank you, David. And just…

And by the, we have continued good growth in Taiwan and Korea, for example. Craig Siegenthaler – Credit Suisse: Got it. Thank you, David. Just have a follow-up here. When you look at the really strong pickup in the research services business the last two quarters here, I’m wondering if you look at the contribution from the electronic trading business in Europe or the U.S. derivatives business as an unusually strong, I’m just trying to figure out is this kind of a core good run rate to build on here or if we should expect to step down?

Craig, I think -- that we have shown since we started these calls the last couple years that we have improved our market share in the research business around the world. And that owes to the terrifically strong franchise -- and position that our analysts have with their clients. So, I think that some of what you’re seeing in terms of strength of revenues is that franchise and is that coming to fruition. Yeah we continue to build out our electronic trading platforms, yeah we’ve continued to build out our European presence and as you know, we started building and are now operating in Asia which is a completely new space for us. So, having said all those positive things, we are, like everybody else in this market, a bit of a prisoner of trading volumes. And if trading volumes expand we’re going to benefit significantly from that and if they contract it will have an impact on us. So, I think that what you’re seeing in the Bernstein franchise is incremental strength amongst its client base, incremental expansion of the foundation of revenues across different services and you mentioned the option business as well, which we added. So those are all good things, but it’s always going to be driven by the environmental question of volume. And so if volume remains constant, I expect that what you’ve seen in the first quarter is a good example of the strength of the franchise. If volumes expand we’ll do better and if volumes decline, that will obviously have an impact. Craig Siegenthaler – Credit Suisse: Great. Thank you, Peter.

Our next question comes from the line of Michael Kim with Sandler O’Neill. Your line is open. Michael Kim – Sandler O’Neill: Hey, guys. Good morning. I guess on the fourth quarter you saw a step-up in redemptions related to some under-performance in, I guess, the second quarter, but you subsequently outperform and performance has been pretty strong since the market bottom. So I’m just wondering what else may be driving the ongoing redemptions aside from performance. Is it rebalancing, is it shift to passive strategies or maybe more solutions-based strategies? I understand it’s difficult to generalize across the franchise, but any color there would be helpful.

A bit of all of that and probably a few things which we haven’t even discussed or covered. There’s a lot of -- institutional space -- there’s a great deal of activity as a result of the slow death of defined benefits and the refocusing of schemes. And it’s manifested itself in a number of different ways, one of which we touched on today which is the shift out of equities by corporate DB plans and I’m going to make a very big distinction between corporate DB and public sector DB, our investment business is a fixed income. You’ve also got a shift into alternatives in both corporate and public DB which is one of the reasons why we’re focusing on broadening and deepening our alternative array. You do have derisking in the form of going into passage. You’ve got derisking in corporate work and two is, one, getting out of the high-risk asset class of equities and then secondly, derisking getting out of [active] equities and into passive equities. And that’s probably happening most or is being seen most in domestic large-cap mandates. But you’ve got multiple strands of what’s going on here, some of which help us and some of which hinder us. So, a couple of strands which help us and they’ve been helping us over a sustained period of time is the move into global equities and into fixed income. Some things hurt us, the secular shift or cyclical or secular timing that’s been done whether they are secular and of active domestic large-cap. And by the way, although that phenomenon is often noted and discussed in the United States of America, it’s really a global phenomenon. So most of the big institutional markets around the world are seeing or witnessing the same sorts of trends. In fact, some of them are and when I say ahead I don’t mean as to the value judgment that would be a good place to be, but I mean ahead in terms of time of the United States of America. Michael Kim – Sandler O’Neill: Okay. That’s helpful. And then maybe if you could just give us some more color on kind of the shift from incentive to base comp and talk about the potential implications, if any, for the comp ratio going forward?

Sure. The shift of base comp and incentive is pretty simple. We increased some of our employees’ compensation or salaries during the course of the year. And of course salaries are earned pro rata across the year, bonuses are paid at the end of the year. So, clearly to the extent that you create that shift you’re creating some front-end expense as a result of that which over the course of the year evens itself out. So, I think that’s a small issue that you’re seeing in the first quarter which won’t repeat itself. In terms of the accrual of comp to revenues, we’re broadly in the same region we were last year and I expect that’s our best estimate for this year. Of course subject to changes in revenues, if revenues go up that number could change, if revenues go down there’s not much room for that to go up because obviously we’ve said 50% is where we like the limit to be unless really unusual things happen. So I think, Michael, the first quarter effect of salaries is one that over the course of the year I’m sure in your models you’ll handle. And with regards to the cost of revenue ratio that we’re estimating, I think that right now that’s our best estimate of what we think the world is going to look like for the rest of the year. Michael Kim – Sandler O’Neill: Okay. That’s helpful. Thanks.

It looks like we have time for one more question.

Our next question comes from the line of Cynthia Mayer with Bank of America/Merrill Lynch. Your line is now open. Cynthia Mayer – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: Hi. Thanks a lot. I just have a question on G&A. I’m wondering in terms of the -- it seems like you didn’t really decline despite the subleasing you did and I’m wondering what kind of savings you’re getting from that? And you mentioned professional fees as a driver for the expense, what are those for and do you expect those to remain elevated?

Cynthia, this is Ed. In terms of G&A, our occupancy expense specifically -- the charge we did take the last year, we are starting to see that benefit, but we have an offsetting expense within occupancy and that’s really driven by some of our international operations where we’re consolidating some space, primarily in London. In London, we need to take some swing space as we’re moving from one building to the next. That change is not going to result in any incremental charge because we’re actually -- the lease that we have in London is actually expiring at the end of this year. So, we are seeing the benefits from the charge that we took last year which, again, was primarily a New York based charge. As it relates to professional fees, as we have businesses -- we’ve expanded into some new businesses and product launches, we have seen some additional legal and other professional fees related to those launches. Cynthia Mayer – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: Okay. And I guess if I get a second one, maybe you could just talk about the retail pickup in sales, how much of that do you see as seasonal? Would that tend to come down this quarter?

No. We don’t -- we think the retail activity is not seasonal. In fact, we think we’re building a momentum in that channel, as David mentioned. And as our performance continues to build, one of the things that we said during the course of the call was the dichotomy between the performance we show from the bottom of the market until now and the one-, three- and five-year numbers. As David mentioned, as that third quarter of ‘08, fourth quarter of ‘08 begins to roll off, our one- and three-year numbers are going to look particularly attractive. And that’s also going to, we believe, support the continued growth of sales in the retail channel. So Cynthia, that’s actually one of the things that we’re optimistic about. Cynthia Mayer – Bank of America/Merrill Lynch: Great. Thanks a lot.

Thank you everyone for our participating in this conference call. For anybody who didn’t have a chance to ask a question on the call or anyone who has any follow-ups, feel free to give Investor Relations a call. And thank you very much. Have a great day.

This concludes today’s conference call. You may now disconnect.