Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Fourth Quarter 2016 Results Presentation of BBVA. I'm Gloria Couceiro, Global Head of Investor Relations. And here with me today are Carlos Torres, Chief Executive Officer of the Group, and Jaime Saenz de Tejada, our Chief Financial Officer. As usual, Carlos will begin with a presentation of results, a few words on the successful deployment of our strategy and some highlights by business areas. We will move straight to the Q&A after that. Let me take the opportunity to remind you that, as it was the case in the last quarter results presentation, we will be conducting a live Q&A. We would appreciate all the participants to try to make the calls from landlines and avoid using the speaker phone so that we can hear you as better as possible. Now, I will hand over the call to Carlos. Good morning, Carlos.

Good morning, Gloria, and thank you. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to BBVA's fourth quarter and full year 2016 audio webcast. I can say that we have had a good set of results in the quarter and in the year. Bottom line in the quarter of €678 million impacted, as you know, by the provisions we had to make for the mortgage floors claims. Excluding this item, the results in the quarter would have come out at €1.1 billion, almost, €1,082 million. And as you can see, during the year, we have maintained a strong upward trend over the quarters. We started off low, you might remember in the first quarter because of the impact of the oil price and seasonal effects. But then we had extraordinary second quarter with some items like the Visa disposal there and finished off very strongly in the third and this fourth quarter, save again for the impact of the mortgage floor clauses provision. For the entire year, the bottom line came up to €3,475 million, again, good results despite the fact that it was a tough environment in 2016 again because of the low rates and softening growth in some of the geographies where we're present as well as some unusual provisioning. Excluding the corporate operations that we also had last year and the impact of the mortgage floors, we grew slightly in the year from €3,857 million to €3,879 million, which is very good news because it means we have been able to absorb a significant impact of the FX depreciation, which was in fact €415 million net impact coming from that, net of hedges, I mean. The highlights for the results in the year are the positive performance of the net interest income which grew by 7% in constant euros versus…

Thank you, Carlos. We are now ready to move into the live Q&A session. For the sake of time, I would like to ask all of you to limit yourself to one question per caller so that we can attend as many participants as possible. So, first question, please?

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, the Q&A session starts now. The first question comes from José Abad from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. José Abad - Goldman Sachs International: Hello. Good morning. Thank you very much. Congratulations on your numbers. Only one question then, which has to do – obviously, in light of the potential changes actually in the trade and migration policies by the new U.S. government, how is the bank thinking now the potential impact of these changes? On two of the key regions that you operate, one being Mexico where we've seen already an increase of around 10 basis points in Q4. We've seen also some slowdown in loan growth in competitors, particularly Santander, México and Banorte. And the other region being the U.S., given that actually you have a relatively high market share in the remittances business. So, therefore, any impact on immigrants here that impact your business there. So, I would appreciate any guidance that you could give us in terms of actually loan growth, cost of risk and revenues in these two geographies. Thank you very much.

Okay. Thank you, José. Thank you for the congratulations as well. No doubt that the situation in the U.S. associated with the election and the messages coming from the new administration have already had an impact on Mexico through the depreciation of the peso, as I already mentioned, mostly. And we have already indicated in past meetings that the economy was decelerating. We just saw the numbers of the quarter yesterday, 2.2% growth, 2% for the year 2016. Going forward, we are seeing lower growth in Mexico, around 1%, but then we expect the economy, which is young, vibrant, to continue to grow afterwards. It is uncertain what the policies will do to Mexico. Of course, they're talking about NAFTA maybe being renegotiated. They're talking maybe about tariffs at the border. They're talking about things that will have an impact on trade potentially or they could have an impact on foreign direct investments. Given all of that, which are things that I think the market is factoring in, it is also true that the U.S. and Mexico are very linked economies, and they have a trade among them of more than $500 billion and such linkage will not be stopped going forward, no matter what we believe, so that, to the extent that prospects for the year's economy are also more positive given the stimulus that the new administration seems keen to introduce around the fiscal policy of various types, it is true that if the U.S. economy goes well, we believe Mexico will be doing well as well. They're just so linked. In terms of our prospects and our guidance for the year, again loan growth will be lower but decelerating to high-single digits, we believe, with NII growing in line with that. Fees and commissions, around mid-single digits. We will continue to improve our jaws, so expenses will grow less than revenue in 2017 for Bancomer. We're looking at asset quality that will be relatively stable around the 350 basis points. And all of that would give a bottom line, which is high-single-digit growth. And then the FX, as you know, we have coverage hedge of around 50% of the P&L for 2017. So, those would be the numbers for Mexico. The U.S. would be the other side of the coin. Things are looking in the U.S. more positive with the rising rates and with pickup in volumes. So, for us, that would mean slight loan growth. We would continue to focus on profitability over capital. So, focusing on the more profitable segment, we would be changing our mix more towards retail, consumer loans and secured loans. And with all of that, NII would be growing around high-single digit. We, as you know, have very high sensitivity to rising interest rates. And the cost of risk would be around 50 basis points, so slight uptick, but explained by the change in mix primarily.

Thank you, José. Next question, please.

The next question comes from Alvaro Serrano from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Alvaro Serrano - Morgan Stanley & Co. International Plc: Hi. Can I just clarify – a question on revenues in Spain. Can you just talk about why the fees were so weak in Q4 and explain why? And also, the guidance for NII in 2017 and medium-term given the shape of the curve? And the other, just one clarification what you just said around – can you repeat what are your guidance for Mexico provisions, please? I didn't understand it. Thank you.

So, Jaime, do you want to answer the first one? Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Sure. First of all, on fees, it's true that quarter-on-quarter, fees went down by 3.2%, the main reason being the capital markets business. Quarter-on-quarter, they are down by €18 million. That in itself explains fully then the reduction because the rest of the fees and commissions have behaved well. Mutual funds and pension plans fees have gone up by almost 6% during the quarter. On the NII line, we are expecting similar behavior as we've seen in this quarter. We're expecting flat NII going forward for 2017. We're expecting a similar trend in volumes, still reduction in public sector portfolio and slight reduction also in mortgages, but strong increases both in consumer and in the commercial side. We are guiding for flat spreads during 2017. The ALCO portfolio will continue to decrease its contribution. As you've seen in the quarter, the size of the portfolio has decreased significantly in the year, around 24%. But NII will be impacted positively by both reduction in wholesale costs, funding costs, as well as the impact of the TLTRO.

And on Mexico, sorry that – maybe I explained it wrong. But it's very simple. Cost of risk, we expect to be 3.5%.

Thank you, Alvaro. Next question, please.

The next question comes from Francisco Riquel from Alantra Equities. Please go ahead.

Yes. Hello. Thank you for taking the question. I wanted to ask about the guidance in terms of capital. I understand the volatile nature of the AFS portfolio and the currencies. But if we leave that aside, if you can please clarify a bit more on the guidance, in terms of the organic capital generation that you expect. Any regulatory headwinds, the impact that may come, IFRS 9, et cetera? Or also if you are leaving yourself some room for M&A opportunities so that you maintain the flat capital ratio. Thank you.

Thank you. Our guidance on capital is very simple. It's the same one we have been giving for more than a year, which is to maintain an 11% core equity Tier 1, which was our target for 2017 and we have been hovering around those levels for the last two or three quarters. We have volatility. You've seen that over the quarters, given how market moves and affect our AFS and our FX, we do have a hedging policy that covers most of the excess over the natural protection. So, the impact of FX, it's reduced. I already mentioned in the call that it's a 2 basis point sensitivity to 10% depreciation of the lira and similarly with the peso. And beyond that, we do have regulatory developments that are underway; IFRS 9 and Basel IV in particular. Basel IV was delayed. The meeting that was the Head of Supervision and Governor (sic) [Governors and Heads of Supervision] meeting that was set for January, as you all know. So, it's uncertain when that will be clarified. You know that BBVA has a strong position versus other banks in most of the things that are being discussed. And regarding IFRS 9, it's too early to know what impact would be on capital. As you know, IFRS 9 would not be over the cycle having a meaningful impact, although it would be a way to recognize losses faster when the cycle goes down and then free up provisions faster when the cycle goes up but overall, shouldn't change things. And then, it's not clear either how that will impact capital, if there is need for more or less provisioning associated with that. We are also well-prepared in the sense that we're well-provisioned versus the incurred losses right now. I don't know if I'm missing anything. Jaime, if you want to add... Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: No. I think that if you take the yearly perspective, we've increased our core Tier 1 ratio by 58 basis points, as you said in the call, in 2016. Out of that, almost 90 basis points come from net earnings. We have paid 32 basis points in dividends. And the other bucket which, as you said, changes every quarter on a yearly basis, it's only a positive of 1 basis point. So, with some volatility, as you said, if you take one year perspective, I think what it clearly shows is the focus that we have on capital, on profitability and the recurring nature of our growth rate.

Yeah. I think that would be the most important thing to highlight. And we have mentioned this repeatedly as well. Return on capital is one of the key priorities. One of the key areas of focus in the way we manage the bank in the whole cycle from planning and budgeting to really and then executing, including the admissions of operations, that should have prices that are reflective of the right returns on capital. And by doing that, by focusing that way, we have been able also to be more conservative in our expansion of risk-weighted assets. And we will continue to manage in that way. We are not planning excesses of capital to then be used to M&A. So, we're not doing that. We're not planning that. That's not in the cards at all.

Thank you, Paco. Next question, please.

The next question comes from Carlos Cobo from Société Générale. Please go ahead. Carlos Cobo Catena - Société Générale SA: Hello. Thank you very much for the presentation. Sticking to only one question then, I will ask on mortgage floors. You've disclosed some worst case scenario of around €1.2 billion total impact of the mortgage floor activity, but you are providing for around half of that pre-tax. How confident are you that we won't have new top-ups of that reserve and could you elaborate a little bit on the risks that you are covering? Are you providing as well for the mortgage loans that have matured already or this is not covered? Thank you very much.

Thank you, Carlos, for your question. What – as we always do, we think we're taking a very conservative approach to accounting for these risks. As always also, we have an independent opinion from a third party that has analyzed the experience in many other instances, in which clients have asked for similar things with the bank and it's based on that experience that the independent auditor has suggested us to provision €577 million. We feel very confident and comfortable that that is the right provision to account, as of the end of the year, and we will not be expecting any further adjustments. The details of the calculation are very complex as they are – a lot of assumptions have been made, and I don't think it's worth it to get too much into detail.

Thank you, Carlos. Next question, please.

The next question comes from Andrea Unzueta from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Andrea Unzueta - Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Ltd.: Hi. Good morning. I wanted to go back to Mexico. I understand the visibility here is limited for you as for anybody. But if you could comment a bit on the worst case or more negative scenarios that you, I'm sure, are contemplating as a possibility and the impact that that would have both on volumes and provisions. And really quickly, in the U.S., if you could comment on your expectations for cost of risk going forward given that the quarter was low. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for the question. It's hard to comment on a worst case scenario because then one sends may be the wrong signal. I would reiterate what I said. There are uncertainties but there is also a bright lights ahead, given the size of the economy, the youth of the economy and how vibrant it is and how competitive it is. And we believe there are also automatic correctors, including the currency that has depreciated so much that, right now, Mexico is even more competitive to export to the U.S. than it was just a couple of months ago. And that dynamic is hard to stop, so that acts really as quite as a protection in the sense for the activity there. Cost of risk, for us, it's much more associated with the revolving. And given the strength of the domestic economy, one can consider that that could go higher, yes. But on the wholesale front though, things are, we believe, more stable in the sense that the Mexican book, it's limited in its exposure to the foreign currency. It's what – 15% or less in our case. And the companies that take such loans have natural protection and have behaved very well. So, we don't see much risk there. So, overall, as I said, we expect Mexico to slow down to around 1% growth in 2017, the economy. That would have an impact on our loan growth decelerating to high-single digit but we do see the cost of risk will continue to be around 3.5%. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Yes. I think, Carlos, that the biggest buffer that we have in Mexico against any potential change in the macro expectation is the very significant customer spread that we enjoyed in the franchise. We have a customer spread of 11% and that offers a huge buffer to any potential asset quality deterioration that we currently are not expecting.

Yeah. There's another question, I think, on the U.S. cost of risk, 50 basis points.

Thank you, Andrea. Next question, please.

The next question comes from Stefan Nedialkov from Citigroup. Please go ahead.

Hi, guys. Good morning. If I may ask two half questions for a total of one question. The first half question, so to say, what is the hedging benefit that you saw in 4Q in millions of euros? And my second question, just looking at the Q-on-Q loan growth in Mexico, in euro terms I must say, corporate loan growth was very strong. Could you give us some color? Was it mostly multinationals or through domestic corporates? And how does that corporates loan growth break down into FX lending versus peso lending? Was FX lending growing a lot more or a lot less? And any additional color would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Okay. The hedging gains from the depreciation of the currencies, as you know, are accounted at the Corporate Center. It is true that we had a very good quarter in terms of net trading income at the Corporate Center and part of it had to do with the trading gains. We do not disclose the actual number, okay, but just to give you some sense, in this line, we've also included €17 million coming from the sale of 0.22% of CNCB, okay, as opposed to the €75 million that we made in the third quarter. So, that gives you, I think, a good idea on more or less the size of the FX gains that we've accounted on the fourth quarter. Regarding the volume growth in the quarter, we've seen a very strong quarter-on-quarter growth in Mexico that's reached around 4%. And it's mainly driven by two factors: very strong performance of the credit card business, it has grown in the quarter alone by 4%; and also on the commercial segment that has grown around 5%. Those have been the most significant drivers of volume growth in the quarter. The year-on-year rate, as you know, is almost 13%.

Thank you, Stefan. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Rohith Chandra-Rajan from Barclays. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. I'm going to stick with Mexico and Turkey, if that's okay. Just back on the hedging, actually, thank you for the update in terms of how much of the 2017 P&L is hedged for both. And for Mexico, it sounds like the hedging has increased from, I think, it was previously 40%, now it's 50%. It would be really helpful if you could tell us or give us some indication of the FX levels which of those hedges have been taken out to help us get some understanding of how that impacts the 2017 P&L? And for Turkey, are you able to give us some similar earnings outlook expectations in the same way that you gave us for Mexico, please?

Jaime, do you want to comment on the FX levels? Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: We do not disclose, we've never had, and I don't think we will, the hedging levels under which we hedge our exposure. As you rightly pointed out, our P&L coverage right now stands at 50% for Mexico. In the case of Turkey, it's a little bit higher. It's around 64%. And as Carlos said during the call – the presentation, sorry, the impact on core capital remains at more or less the same levels as the end of September, around 70% in both jurisdictions. A little bit higher in the case of Turkey, something around maybe 84%, 85% and around the 70% mark in the case of Mexico.

Regarding the outlook for Turkey, I would defer mostly to what our CEO there, Fuat Erbil, mentioned yesterday in their announcement, which is that, certainly, we do have an environment which is more uncertain given things that are going on in the country, both domestically and in the surrounding region. And that has had an impact, of course, in the FX depreciation that Jaime was commenting on. But regarding loan growth, we continue to see around double-digit growth decelerating from the very strong 17% in 2016, but still around high single digits or double-digit growth in loans with NIMs flat. And in terms of cost of risk, with a risk of deterioration, but we're seeing around 110 basis points for 2017 versus around 90 basis points or 87 basis points in 2016. But, as I say, given the environment, there might be a risk of additional deterioration in that number, but that's what we're planning for.

Thank you, Rohith. Next question, please.

The next question comes from Daragh Quinn from KBW. Please go ahead. Daragh Quinn - Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc.: Hi. Good morning, and thanks for taking my question. The question on the outlook for Spanish loan growth. You highlighted you expected loan growth to be flat in 2017 with a recovery in corporate or commercial lending. Just curious, given the further decline in loan growth we've seen through the year in your numbers, and at a sector level, the ongoing decline in new business lending, particularly in corporate loans, and just if you could provide some color around your outlook for loan growth. And just a very quick comment on provisions in the Spanish real estate division, when do you expect that to go to zero? Thanks.

Okay. Thanks. Thanks for the question. I think we commented already on the Spanish loan growth. And we think we're going to see a 2017 which is going to be very similar to what we have seen in 2016. So, flat volumes, so a bit better there, but just flat performing loans overall and similar trends by segment. Jaime commented that the leveraging continues in mortgages despite the high growth in new production, but still not reaching the levels of the amortizing book, and deleveraging as well in the public sector. And that will be compensated with growth in the rest of the portfolios in consumer and in commercial. Regarding the real estate, I mentioned in the call that, here, it's really a trade-off in a sense on how fast we want to run it off. Right now, the business as usual would be a runoff of the real estate portfolio, excluding our land holdings that would happen in a period of around three years' time. And that run-off would be done with positive results in the sale of assets that we have seen in the last couple of years already. We've been making in excess of €100 million profit in the sales of the portfolio on a running basis. Now, this could be faster than those three years if we increase wholesale sales. Good example is this last fourth quarter, you've seen that, apart from the reallocation of provisions to the real estate portfolio to the land that I mentioned, we also have in the fourth quarter numbers some one-off charges that are associated with wholesale transactions that, in fact, are still in the making. But one of them, for example, is in the news today, Testa Residencial, we are contributing quite a significant portfolio of holdings. And there's a slight loss there that's already recorded in the fourth quarter. And we have others that have similarly been booked in the fourth quarter, but have not yet been executed. If we accelerate that, there could be a faster period in which we reach zero, as you were questioning. And we think that, by doing that, in fact, we could minimize the total loss, but that might imply that we have higher losses in 2017 than with a more gradual approach.

Thank you, Daragh. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Sofie Peterzens from JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Yeah. Hi. Here is Sofie from JPMorgan. Quick question, could you remind us what the 100 basis point increase in rates across all the regions, what impact it has on BBVA, and also give specifically for each country what it means? Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Okay. On 100 basis points increase, we'll have a positive impact of around a little below 10% in the euro balance sheet. This is significantly down from the numbers that we shared with the markets at the end of the third quarter. We are changing certain assumptions on the evolution – on the stickiness on checking account and time deposits, taking into account the huge movements that we're seeing between both lines. In the case of the U.S., sensitivity is down to 6%, okay? For every 100 basis points increase, NII will go up by 6%. After the increase in rates that we've experienced the last few quarters, we are closing a little bit this sensitivity. And the situation in Mexico and Latin America remains more or less the same. For every 100 basis points increase, we have a positive sensitivity in Mexico of around 2% and along those similar lines in South America. The only country, the only business, as always, where we have negative sensitivity is in Turkey. And for every 100 basis points increase, our NII will go down by between 5% and 5.5%.

Thank you, Sofie. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Mario Ropero from Fidentiis. Please go ahead.

Hello. Good morning. My question is on the net interest income of Spain. Did it include the income coming from the TLTRO-II cost savings? If not, when are you expecting to include these and what should be the impact from that? Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Mario, we have not included any revenue coming from the TLTRO. We are expecting to start accruing during 2017 and probably in the first quarter, okay. But no numbers whatsoever in 2016 figures.

Thank you, Mario. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Mario Lodos from Banco Sabadell. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I'm sorry to come again from – to the NII on Spain and just this consequent question on my colleague, Mario, is I don't understand so much the performance of the NII in the fourth quarter, taking into account that the customer spread fell quarter-on-quarter, but the net interest income grew in the quarter. How is that possible, taking into account that the ALCO portfolio has been reduced by more than 20% of the year? And the other question, if I may, is about the net interest income in U.S. Again, just quite a difference between the net interest margin increase quarter-on-quarter against the customer margin increase. Can you explain a little bit more how come the net interest margin is increasing by nearly 15 basis points with almost no changes in the balance sheet compositions? Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Thank you, Mario, for your questions. Yes, you're right. In the case of Spain, there's one missing piece, and the missing piece is the reduction in wholesale funding costs that we've been experiencing. This was also the case in the third quarter and remains the case in the fourth quarter that had a very positive delta. And then, always in the fourth quarter, we tend to have an increase in NPL recoveries, and that always affects positively the NII line. In the case of the U.S., you're also right with the question. Customer spreads increased by 5 basis points in the quarter alone, 20 basis points year-on-year. It is true that NIM is positive and remains maintaining the positive trend. In the case of the U.S., the ALCO portfolio has grown by around €1.5 billion, more or less, during the year. So, we have a slight increased contribution from the ALCO portfolio, but we've had a one-off impact as of the fourth quarter. And we've had a reclassification of €18 million of other income to the NII line. And these are interest rates received from our reserves in the Fed.

Thank you, Mario. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Carlo Digrandi from HSBC. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning. I would like to go to slide 25 where you have the real estate activity. I understand the way the impairment reallocation has been happening, but the question is more, can you give us an idea about the dynamics of the net attributable loss to the real estate activity? It looks like the more you reduce foreclose and the exposure, the more losses you have. Probably, in reality, this is not the case. And maybe given the fact that you have a reallocated provision, the trend should reverse. How do I square the circle here? Can you give us an idea to understand what is going to happen over the next few years as long as you continue to reduce net exposure? Thank you.

Well, I think I commented earlier, so let me try to do it again. So, in a sense, we have a running activity of selling property more on a granular basis that is generating actually profits as we sell it, and that would take about three years to run off. Now, if we accelerate sales by selling the more illiquid assets or we do it on a wholesale basis even – like we have done in 2016 with Metrovacesa and we're doing now with Testa Residencial. Those are two good examples. Those are operations that do have some loss when we do them. It's around €27 million, I think, in the Testa Residencial case for several hundred million euro portfolio value. If we do more of those, we would be cleaning up the book, in a sense, getting rid of an exposure that is not a core business. It's not something we want but something we inherited as we foreclosed. We would be getting rid of that portfolio faster. So, that is really the main dynamic, and that is the main trade-off, speed versus recording the loss or taking a longer time and doing it in a more granular basis. You have to understand also that there is assets in that portfolio that are not so liquid. They don't have a clear market to know what the market price is, and that happens more as you tend to look at assets that are less developed, assets that would be sold through wholesale counterparties, like the examples I'm giving.

Thank you, Carlo. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Adrian Cighi from RBC. Please go ahead.

Hi there. This is Adrian Cighi. Thank you. I have a follow-up question, please. I might have missed this. But can you provide your view on the outlook for the cost of risk in Spain? Thank you.

Yeah. I don't think you missed it. It's going to be, we believe, less than 40 basis points excluding the real estate, which I just commented on. So, it's a slight uptick from the 32 bps we had in 2016, which of course were affected by the reallocation of provisions, the 2016 numbers. So, quite stable, 40 basis points.

Thank you, Adrian. Next question, please?

The next question comes from Ignacio Cerezo from UBS. Please go ahead.

Yeah. Good morning. I have a question on Mexico. If I were to look at the loan spread of the country, it has been coming down quite steadily as rates have been rising. So, the customer spread is up, but the lending spread actually down significantly. If you could give us some color in terms of how much of that decline is attributed to competition? Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Okay. I don't know if we have the same numbers. But what we've discussed in previous calls is that, although we do have that positive sensitivity, not that much, 2%, as I mentioned before, to increase in rates, it tends to be negative at the beginning, okay? And we need at least four months for that positive sensitivity to kick in. As rates have been continuously going up during the year, it has taken us a little bit longer to benefit from that positive increase in rates. And we started to see that in a more significant fashion in the third and in the fourth quarter, where loan deals increased 13 basis points and 35 basis points, more or less, respectively. So, we've seen a significant increase in loan deals in the last two quarters. What remains impressive is that, even if rates have increased by over 250 basis points, the stickiness and the high quality of our funding sources in Bancomer has allow us to increase only our funding cost by 9 basis points. And that what explains the significant increase in customer spread during the quarter.

Thank you, Ignacio. We have time for one additional question. Next question, please?

The last question comes from Juan Tuesta from JB Capital. Please go ahead.

Hi. And thank you very much for taking my question. My first question will be on the wholesale funding side. If you could share with us what are going to be your wholesale funding issues, expectations for the coming years in regards to the upcoming MREL regulatory requirements. Should we expect to see BBVA using Tier 3 or senior non-preferred instruments for the purpose of fulfilling the buckets? And also, if you could give us your expectations, on general terms, on wholesale funding cost evolution in the coming years? Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Okay. We do not have yet sufficient clarity on what our MREL requirements are going to be. We expect to have that feedback from the SRB during the first half of 2017. But of course, we do expect some convergence between MREL requirements and TLAC. So I think we are starting to have a better idea on both the amounts and the eligibility of instruments where we've seen significant progress the last few months. I think that, clearly, to do a senior non-preferred as qualifying MREL debt is an option. We are studying that possibility. As you know, we also have the Tier 3 possibility open, but we would like to issue an instrument that is as harmonized as possible with the rest of our European counterparts and, clearly, the senior non-preferred will, hopefully, be the way forward. Wholesale prices, I think the dynamic still is for maturities to be more expensive than new transactions. We have a significant amount of maturities in the next three years at over €20 billion. A good portion of those are concentrated during 2017. So, even if we have a pickup in cost from MREL-eligible debt, I do still believe that the wholesale funding cost will continue to drive the NII going forward.

Thank you, Juan. We are now running out of time. So, as you know, the IR team will remain available to answer any questions you may have. So, thank you, Carlos. Thank you, Jaime. And thank you, everybody, for participating in this call.

Thank you. Jaime Sáenz de Tejada - Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA: Thank you.