Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Ford Motor Company fourth quarter earnings conference call. My name is [Katina], and I’ll be your coordinator for today. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. We will conduct a question-and-answer session towards the end of this presentation. (Operator instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded for replay purposes. I will now like to turn the presentation over to your host for today’s call, Mr. Bill Agney [ph], Director of Investor Relations. Please proceed.

Thank you, Katina, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to all of you who are joining us by phone or webcast. On behalf of the entire Ford management team, I’d like to thank you for spending time with us this morning. With me this morning are Alan Mulally, President and CEO; and, Lewis Booth, Chief Financial Officer. Also in the room are Peter Daniel, Senior Vice President and Controller; Neil Schloss, Vice President and Treasurer; Mark Hoffman, Director of Accounting; and, K.R. Kent, Ford Credit CFO. Before we begin, I’d like to review a couple of quick items. Copies of this morning’s earnings release and slides that we will be using today has been posted on Ford’s Investor and Media Web sites for your reference. The financial results discussed herein are presented on a preliminary basis. The final data will be included in our 2008 Form 10-K report. Additionally, the financial results presented here are on a GAAP basis, and in some cases, on a non-GAAP basis. The non-GAAP financial measures discussed in this call are reconciled to their GAAP equivalents as part of the index to the slide deck. Finally, today’s presentation includes some forward-looking statements about our expectations for Ford’s future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those suggested by our comments here. Additional information about the factors that could affect the future results are summarized at the end of the presentation. These risk factors are also detailed in our SEC filings, including our annual, quarterly, and current reports to the SEC. With that, I’d like to turn the presentation over to Alan Mulally, Ford’s President and CEO.

Thanks, Bill, and good morning, everyone. As you all well know, in the fourth quarter, we faced nearly unprecedented challenges across our global markets. Demand weakened dramatically not only in North America, but also in Europe and Asia. The worldwide economic slowdown driven by tight credit markets and weak consumer confidence has shaken the foundation of even the strongest companies in the automotive sector and other industries. Clearly, at Ford, the severe economic challenges had a significant impact on our fourth quarter results, with in terms of our operating losses and our cash flow. In response to these challenges, we took decisive actions, and we saw many positive developments that made us confident that we are on the right plan, are taking the right actions to survive this global downturn. And emerge as a lean, globally integrated company poised for long term profitable growth. In these challenging times, we remain completely focused on our four point plan, aggressively restructured the business, accelerate the development of vehicles people want and need, finance our plan and improve our balance sheet, and work together as one team, leveraging our global assets. Customers are starting to see that Ford is really different not only because we continue to believe we are well positioned to survive this global downturn, but also because of the growing fuel efficiency, quality, safety, and smart technology we are engineering into every new vehicle. I will start off today by providing you with an overview of last quarter’s results and our recent product and business highlights. Lewis Booth will take us through the details. I will then summarize our plan going forward, including our 2009 outlook. This will include an update of the actions that we are announcing during the third quarter call to reduce our cost structure and improve…

Thanks, Alan. Let’s move on to slide eight, which provides more information on our results. Starting on the lower left, our net loss for the fourth quarter was about $5.9 billion. And our net loss included minority interest in affiliates. This net loss also included $874 million of tax expense, more than explained by our reversal of tax benefits recognized early in the year for accounting standards FAS 109 and relates to our deferred tax valuation allowance. This is consistent with the guidance we provided during last quarter’s call. Adjusting for these items brings a fourth quarter pre-tax loss of over $5 billion. These results include pre-tax charges for special items or about $1.4 billion, which we’ll cover on the next slide. Excluding these special items, we recorded a fourth quarter pre-tax operating loss of almost $3.7 billion. Most of the remaining slides will focus on these pre-tax operating results. Slide nine covers special items, which were about $1.4 billion in the fourth quarter. In North America, we recorded a charge of $329 million largely related to our personnel reduction programs in the US. International operations incurred $280 million of charges related to personnel reduction programs, primarily related to implementation of Volvo’s and Asia Pacific’s restructuring plans. We recognized a gain of $82 million due to the planned reductions in the number of employees and job security benefits reserve, primarily due to the utilization of these employees at other plant locations. We recorded a charge of $224 million for accelerated depreciation related to AAI lease buyouts at our area and facility. And we recognized the $201 million loss on the sale of a portion of our investment in Mazda. In addition, we incurred supplier settlement and other costs at $209 million. Finally, we recorded $356 million of retiree health care…

Thank you, Lewis. On slide 36, we provide an overview of the business environment. We expect weak volumes this year across all markets with worldwide sales down over 10%, a record decline according to our data. Most of the 2008 weakness outside of the US occurred late in the year. Significant government policy stimulus has been implemented in most markets. This is expected to improve the environment for sales later this year. Financial markets remain under significant stress and further government and Central Bank actions to provide liquidity and stabilize banks are needed. Our suppliers and dealers also had been weakened by the global economic downturn and financial crisis. The decline in oil, fuel, and other raw materials, prices will provide a partial offset to the weak demand conditions. Currencies are very volatile, which poses some risks. Of note is a substantial weakness in the British pound, Russian rubble devaluation, and some Asian currency weaknesses. Slide 37 summarizes the key aspects of our plan. These have not changed. We are more focused than ever on informing our transformation plan to respond to the significant challenges presented by the continuing global economic downturn and deliver long return profitable growth. We are glad that we went to the capital markets at the right time to obtain liquidity to finance our plan, and that we sold nine core brands to raise credit capital, allow further focus of our resources on Ford. I’m especially please with how the team is working together to create one Ford in leveraging our global resources. Despite the present turbulence in the worldwide economies, I continue to believe that Ford is well positioned to take advantage of our scale and global product strengths. With a balanced portfolio of highly acclaimed and best in class vehicles and a sharp focus…

Thank you, Alan. Ladies and gentlemen, we’re going to start the Q&A section now. We have about 35 minutes for the Q&A. We’ll begin with questions from the investment community, and then take questions from the media who are also on the call. So we could allow as many questions as possible within our timeframe, I ask that you keep your questions brief so that we don’t have to move colors along after a couple of minutes. So with that, Katina, can we please have the first call – question?

Thank you. (Operator instructions) Your first question comes from the line of John Murphy representing Merrill Lynch. Please proceed. John Murphy – Merrill Lynch: Good morning, guys.

Hi, John. John Murphy – Merrill Lynch: I just wanted to ask a question about dealing with your constituents here. I mean you have two weaker competitors. Your competitors are not as well positioned. They’re having very significant negotiations with labor at the UAW and with creditors. And thinking as they might achieve something at some point in the future through various means, I mean is this something that you’re pursuing right now? I mean particularly on the debt side. You’re burning the balance sheet quite a bit here drawing down this revolver. So I’m just wondering if there might be an opportunity to do a more equity for debt swaps or debt for debt swaps. And on the UAW, would you be able to get a similar, maybe downsized contract that GM and Chrysler might be able to achieve? And are those negotiations ongoing?

You bet. I understand that completely, John. And the way I’d characterize it is that this clearly is a restructuring of the automobile industry. And even though we’re in a different place, and as you point out, much further along, we thought it was so important that we support the industry for the good of the industry and the US economy, and our suppliers and our dealers, which is why we went with our colleagues in Washington DC to help. Now having said that, clearly, the response we got was that this is an industry restructuring. The government wants to see a very viable automobile industry in the United States. And so, as we go forward, we – our plan is to continue to work all elements of competitiveness, including the ones that you delineated. And I really believe from the ongoing conversations that we’re having with all the stakeholders and the US government that as we go through this, we continue to take the actions that we need to take. And we will not be disadvantaged. John Murphy – Merrill Lynch: Okay. So I mean, is there an intention or something – or negotiations that are going over? Are there talks going on right now with creditors specifically or is more on the operating side right now?

I think I’d like to pass on that, and just leave it at we’re talking to all the stakeholders, clearly, just like we have been over the years. And clearly, the elements of competitiveness, we all know very well. But I’m very – I’m very pleased with the response of all the stakeholders to this bigger restructuring. John Murphy – Merrill Lynch: Okay. And if I could speak one other one, Chrysler is cutting labor costs at dealerships or at labor reimbursement for warranty work, and are doing some other things at their pre-owners for their dealers. Do you look at the dealership network as an opportunity to cut costs? Or do you look at them as they’re an opportunity as other dealerships are coming under pressure as a real strategic advantage here. I’m just wondering how you’re dealing with the dealership base right now.

You bet. I absolutely think of it in the latter. The Ford distribution network is a tremendous asset, as you know. The clarity of focus on the Ford, Lincoln, Mercury brand is phenomenal. The fact that we have been consolidating those – over the last few years to improve the dealers’ throughput and their profitability, we’re tremendously strong in every small and medium sized community across the United States. And the only issue that we have been working with the dealers on has been the over capacity in the large material areas. And clearly, the dealers want to work that. And this is the time to do it because they are business people, they’re entrepreneurs. And they absolutely know that we need to straighten this out in the big metropolitan areas. And that’s where we’ve been focusing. I know you know the numbers of the consolidations that we have accomplished. And so, we’re going to continue to work with them. This is clearly led by them. There’s lots of working together we can do to help make it go easily. But I am very pleased with the progress we’re making on our distribution channel. One reason I think it makes it much easier, so to speak, is the fact that we have such a laser focus on the Ford brand. John Murphy – Merrill Lynch: Great. Thank you very much.

You bet, John.

The next question comes from the line of Rod Lache, representing Deutsche Bank. Please proceed. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Good morning, everyone. Can you hear me?

Yes, Rod. How are you? Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. Thanks. Can you talk a bit about what the capital going forward, I think, Lewis, you mentioned the cadence of production could help you a bit in Q1 versus Q4, but there’s also a lot of talk about supplier distress and the potential for fast pay programs that help suppliers. So elaborate a little bit on what your expectations are? And how would you be able to increase payables from here just given the state of the union amongst suppliers?

Sure. In the fourth quarter, all our production cuts were basically towards the end of the quarter. And that means our payables run off significantly. As we look at the first quarter, our production cuts are basically as we came out of Christmas, so the beginning of the quarter. And we’d expect our payables to come back up to a more normal level in the first quarter. And as we go through the year, whatever happens that would project in the second half will have a high level of productions. And therefore, high level of payables. Our suppliers are into some distress, and it varies by individual suppliers. It’s not a Ford problem. It’s an industry problem. And we’ll continue to work with them to solve individual problems. But we believe the payables will come back. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Is it your view that this still represents a systemic risk just given the magnitude in the cuts and the distress. There’s been a lot of talk, especially in the past week or two, that suppliers may need some federal assistance here.

Yes. I think the whole industry is concerned about the low level of production, which affects all the suppliers and (inaudible) inter-dependents. And it’s not just the domestic brand that’s – the transfer brands as well are all dependent on a very similar supply base. And we’re all very carefully watching the situation. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. Can you also elaborate on the $4 billion cost reduction objective. How does that break down, North America, Europe, Volvo? And just also clarify if that’s still a net cost reduction objective?

We won’t give you the detail by business unit, Rod. But it is a net cost reduction on structural cost. It does not include material cost changes. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. What’s your preliminary view on material cost? Is it a plus or minus looking into ’09?

We expect to see our material cost relate to the commodity cost increases we saw last year continue through the first half as we see some of our contracts rolling through, and the second half to come back down a little bit as the provider of commodities in past levels start feeding through into our supply contracts. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. Just lastly, when do you expect to hear back on this IOC application? Is there any guidance that you’ve been given on what the status of that application would be?

No.

No. Active negotiations.

Active negotiations.

Rod, I might also add on the – on your supplier comments. I think it’s really important. We’ll continue to see – I think we’ll continue to see more consolidations as they take out the over capacity and they focus on the three big companies. Rod Lache – Deutsche Bank: Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Rod.

The next question will come from the line of Chris Ceraso, representing Credit Suisse. Please proceed. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Thanks, good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: One thing maybe you can help to clarify, when you talk about these structural cost savings, for example the $5 billion, over the past few years. You say it’s on a constant volume basis. Does that mean that it was actually greater than that but because volume was lower, you’ve adjusted it? Or I’m wondering if you shouldn’t have saved a lot more considering the big drop in volume and the cost that would go away naturally because of the drop in volume.

Yes. The volume adjustments many work are variable. And when we do the analysis, we take out the volume adjustments first, and then we do the cost structures at constant volume. Otherwise, it changes whether the volumes are going up or going down. So that’s why we do it. We think that’s a much more representative way of explaining material cost changes. The large part of the cost savings were not variable at all. They were true fixed costs. So any area that may get into that is a bit of exchange rate movement. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Okay. You outlined the change in pension funded status year-end ’08 versus ’07, but you didn’t give us your expectation for pension expense in ’09. Can you share that?

For the US, we don’t expect earning expense this year. We’re still – sorry, I’m using the wrong terms that Alan pointed out, contributions. For the US affiliates, we’re still updating that, and we’ll have that in the 10-K. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: But on a P&L basis, not a cash basis?

Yes. We’ll tell you in the 10-K. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Okay. The Volvo, what’s – do you think you’re going to have to fix this? I mean how do you expect to sell it when you’re generating these kinds of losses. Do you think maybe you have to pull back and fix it before you can get interested buyers?

What we have said is we are exploring our strategic alternatives. Our management team at Volvo is completely consumed with fixing the business and continue to get large amounts of support from the rest of the Ford team. So whatever the results of our deliberations, the local team and the encouragement they get from Dearborn is to fix the business, that needs to be done whatever happens. Chris Ceraso – Credit Suisse: Okay. Thanks for your help.

You bet.

The next question comes from the line of Patrick Archambault, representing Goldman Sachs. Please proceed. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: Hi. Yes, can you hear me?

Yes. Hi, Patrick, we can hear you well. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: Just on the supplier issue, obviously there has been a lot written in the press about Visteon. And I just was wondering if you could comment, have there been any discussions between you and them in terms of trying to get ahead of what some people have speculated to be a filing within the coming weeks and how do you react to people who sort of look parallel between Delphi and how involved GM had to get in that in sort of the attempt to turn around, are those parallels accurate or is the situation very different having gone through several restructuring with Visteon already.

I understand Patrick. I think that Visteon and Ford are clearly in a different place. We completed those transactions and we took care of part of the plans and they started Visteon. They have really diversified their portfolio and so they are in a much different place. Now, with respect to your first question, we along with Visteon with all of our suppliers, we are talking to all of them weekly because the most important thing we do is continue to make progress and deal with this overcapacity and keep the supply chain going but they are I think clearly in a different place Patrick. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: And any chance you could give us a sense of kind of the dollar amount of – I mean, things have changed so much, the dollar amount of parts that you guys do count on them for on an annual basis?

No, but I would just emphasize that you can probably get maybe more insight from Visteon but they have clearly moved to dramatically diversified. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: Okay, thanks. I had one on the UAW ABIVA, I guess you have replaced cash with notes it sounds like, if I am interpreting it correctly, giving you access to that liquidity for the year, is that something that you negotiated with the UAW in recent weeks or was that just part of the original contract that you just decided to exercise?

It was in the terms of the agreement, and we obviously, in consultation with the UAW agreed to access it really to help us through the first quarter with the January slow start ups, very cooperative discussions with the UAW there. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: Okay. So it was done in consultation with them.

Yes, absolutely. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: Okay. I guess one last one I guess is housekeeping, how come you did not draw down the entire $10.6 billion credit facility because I believe the number you have mentioned in the press release was $10.1 billion.

Yes, Neil, maybe you could speak on that.

Yes. That $10.6 billion includes letter of credit facilities that we have used so the net available for us on the facility is $10.1 billion. So we did draw the full amount available. Patrick Archambault – Goldman Sachs: Got it. Okay. Thanks a lot guys.

You bet.

I just want to clarify my comments to Credit Suisse, in terms of what we will give you in the 10-K, we will give you our total pension contribution not expense, sorry for the confusion.

I might add on the drawing down our credit facility that our plan is to not use that money to fund the ongoing operations and we think we also have sufficient liquidity to maintain our minimum cash balance without using that facility. What we try to say really clearly is that we thought it was just at this time very prudent with the volatility in the credit markets due to the uncertainty in the global economy that it was just the prudent time to move that asset over to us.

Your next question comes from the line of Himanshu Patel representing JPMorgan. Please proceed. Himanshu Patel – JPMorgan: Hi. Good morning, guys.

Good morning. Himanshu Patel – JPMorgan: There have been some actions I think actions taken outside of the US by various governments to stimulate sales, I think there is some scrapping incentives in Germany and tax holiday in Brazil, can you give us an update on whether any of these have had any sort of immediate impact?

We had some impacts in Brazil at the very end of the fourth quarter and we are seeing significantly increased (inaudible) traffic in Germany as a result of that. I must admit I have not spoken directly to the Germans to find out how much of that has been translated into sales although it looks like they are having a good month, so I think we are modestly encouraged by the German action. Himanshu Patel – JPMorgan: Okay and then I don’t know if Neil is there but on the ILC, can you give us an update on – I am just trying to quantify how much that could help you buy in terms of providing low cost funding, should we still think about maybe $12 billion to $18 billion worth or so per year?

This is K.R. To be clear on the ILC, the ILC was never expected to be a big portion of our overall funding plan. We have talked in the past that looking at out banks that would grow over time to somewhere $10 billion, $12 billion or so. They actually grew up over time it was not one time.

And I think initially that the plan was to use retail assets and so I think we still have numerous options from a standpoint of those assets and how they get funded. Himanshu Patel – JPMorgan: Can you talk a little bit about the TARP, how meaningful do you think that would be, I mean there is obviously a lot of excitement in the marketplace about that being something that could be effective on the ABS market but I guess in the case of Ford you have got some conduits lined through Ford Credit that are running off, I mean do you view some sort of improved access to ABS as essentially sort of offsetting that?

I think from our perspective we are pretty excited about the TARP program in general because it clearly is a broad asset program each term and we have gotten a lot of interest already from investors for TARP eligible securitization. So we are working with the New York Fed and we expect to have something up and running in sort of mid February. Himanshu Patel – JPMorgan: Okay, great. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Itay Michaeli representing Citigroup. Please proceed. Itay Michaeli – Citigroup: Thank you, good morning. Just a couple of questions on cash flow and liquidity, just for clarification on the $14 billion to $17 billion of cash improvement, how much might you expect it to generate in ’09 and is the $4 billion of structural cost savings that you are guiding embedded in the $14 billion to $17 billion as well or is that incremental?

It is roughly half and half 2009 and 2010, the $14 billion to $17 billion and the $4 billion is embedded in 2009 that is part of 2009 but as Alan said we will continue to look at restructuring, we are just not ready to talk about the details. Itay Michaeli – Citigroup: Okay on liquidity, if I kind of take the comments on the revolver draw down as back up for the operation to the post actually to be used in the operations, if I just did very simple math, you may own $15 billion of cash. Let’s say you need $7 billion to $8 billion of minimum cash, shall we roughly assume $7 billion to $8 billion is kind of what you are thinking for ’09 cash burn or am I missing something there?

We would not go into the math because we are not about to declare the minimum cash levels but we expect 2009 cash burn to be much, much lower than 2008. There are some significant run offs like the ABIVA payment in 2008, there is the payables impact as we go through the year with a gradually increasing volume or declining volume. Our CapEx is down $1 billion to $1.5 billion and we are as you heard us say applying for both Section 136 loans from the Energy Independence and Security Act and also applying to the European Investment Bank for CO2 related loans. Itay Michaeli – Citigroup: Okay. I see that is helpful. And then just finally, just a point of clarification on the stakeholder negotiation, I know you can’t really get into any detail but shall we assume these are just simply Ford Motor Company stakeholders or you are also speaking with stakeholders specific to Ford Motor Credit, specifically creditors there?

Our actions are around being competitive in the auto industry so the discussions that Alan was talking about specifically were Ford Motor Company stakeholders. We are doing a number of things about Ford Credit, not just financing actions but also we are having discussions on different business arrangements in various countries where funding is difficult to achieve. For example we have just announced that we have withdrawn from retail financing in Australia and we are about the last person to withdraw. We made different arrangements in some parts of Northern Europe. Obviously as the Jaguar Land Rover divestiture occurred, we are making different arrangements for Jaguar Land Rover finance. So there are different actions happening with Ford Credit and as you know today the US part of Ford Credit announced a 20% personnel reduction during this first-half of the year. Itay Michaeli – Citigroup: Great, thank you.

Welcome.

Ladies and gentlemen, at this time we would like to welcome questions from the media community. (Operator instructions) Your first question comes from the line of Bryce Hoffman representing The Detroit News. Please proceed. Bryce Hoffman – The Detroit News: Good morning, gentlemen.

Hi, Bryce. Bryce Hoffman – The Detroit News: Am I understanding correctly that you have just lowered your SAR estimate by about 1 million units for the year, correct?

We provided a range when we were in Washington on December 2 we provided 12.5, we are now providing of 11.5 to 12.5. You know, it is very volatile. We don’t just know whereabouts in that range it will be but the fact that we have identified a range suggests that within 12.5 is towards the top end of probability. Bryce Hoffman – The Detroit News: And Lewis, just following up on that, you guys have said that you would not need to go to seek Federal assistance if the domestic market did not significantly deteriorate from your planning assumptions, isn’t this a significant deterioration potentially from those assumptions, can you explain a little bit more how you remain confident in your ability to proceed without aid from Washington given that?

Specifically, it is not what we would regard as significant deterioration. Obviously as volumes come down a little bit we have to work harder on other aspects of the business and I think you have seen in the past we are relentless if we are acting to the providing demand and that is what we are doing and that is not just around the US, it is around Europe and South America and Asia Pacific. Bryce Hoffman – The Detroit News: Got you. One just clarification, following up on the analyst question about Visteon, I just wanted to be clear, you guys are not anticipating any sort of kind of dramatic rescue action with regards to Visteon, correct?

No what we have seen in the press reports we are not contemplating dramatic action. Bryce Hoffman – The Detroit News: Great, thank you.

You bet.

I want to explain my response to the price on industry volumes. As we said in Washington, it is not just around the absolute volume, it is also around the length of the downturn and when the recovery starts. We still feel that with the amount of stimulus that is going on in the US market we will see some improvement in the second-half of this year.

You bet.

The question will come from the line of Jeff Bennett representing Dow Jones Newswires. Please proceed. Jeff Bennett – Dow Jones Newswires: Lou, it’s just a quick question, my line cut out, so you are not anticipating making any kind of cash contributions into Visteon to keep it running, it’s basically on its own from your standpoint?

Visteon is a stand alone company. And like all our suppliers, we talk to them, we talk to our suppliers when they have problems and try and work with them but they are a stand-alone company. Jeff Bennett – Dow Jones Newswires: Do you anticipate in the structural cost that that would include more involuntary lay-offs and plant idling or where would that kind of focus in on?

I think it really Jeff is going to be determined by the market and the industry and the volumes going forward. We are about where we need to be right now but we are going to, like we have, we are going to monitor it very closely and take decisive action. The most important thing we do is match our production with the real demand. Jeff Bennett – Dow Jones Newswires: Okay. Thank you.

You bet.

Your next question comes from the line of Tom Kirsher [ph] representing Associated Press. Please proceed. Tom Kirsher – Associated Press: Hello, gentlemen.

Hi, Tom. Tom Kirsher – Associated Press: I was wondering if the restructuring your $4 billion structural cost reductions for ’09, does that include anything you might net out of the Treasury Department’s demand that you are trying to seek parity with Chrysler and GM?

First of all, there are no demands on Ford or we don’t request government assistance, the demands on Ford are self-induced to remain competitive and anything we do to improve our competitiveness will go towards achieving or over-achieving on the $4 billion cost reduction. Tom Kirsher – Associated Press: Okay. And the 30,000 units of production that you plan to take out beyond your prior estimates, how would you achieve that, would there be any plant closures or is that blind rate reductions and more gradual things since it is a relatively smaller number.

This is a relatively small in that day-to-day production adjustment, it will be a bit of down time I think. Tom Kirsher – Associated Press: Very good, thank you.

You are welcome.

Your next question comes from the line of Amy Wilson representing Automotive News. Please proceed. Amy Wilson – Automotive News: Good morning.

Hi, Amy. Amy Wilson – Automotive News: I wanted to ask when is the soonest that you think you can go out the deal you fund and how much would you expect to get in an initial disbursement there?

We don’t know the exact timing of that Amy but I think it is going to be relatively soon. We feedback that we have gotten is that we are in very good shape with our sub metal, our enabling technology is very much lined up with the intent of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. So we are continuing now answering questions for clarifications but I think it will be relatively soon. And I can’t give you an estimate on the amount yet but I just might say that I think it is really meeting the intent of the bill that was passed in 2007 because it really is going to help (inaudible) technology that the congress really wanted to support, so it will be substantial. Amy Wilson – Automotive News: Okay, so we understand correctly, it is something that could help bolster your liquidity position during this calendar year as well.

Yes, absolutely. Amy Wilson – Automotive News: Okay. I just wanted to ask, why is the CapEx higher, $0.5 billion higher than the plan?

Mainly completing the launch of the F-150. Amy Wilson – Automotive News: That was more expensive than you had budgeted for?

No, not so much that it was more expensive but as we continued to develop our whole product cycle plan, we just ended up where it was about – we want to spend that much to further solidify the product strategy going forward.

CapEx spending forecasting towards the year end is really hard, sometimes the bills pop over to the next year. When we set the objective, I think it was a rounded $6 billion and we are pretty close. Amy Wilson – Automotive News: Okay, thanks.

You bet.

The next question comes from the line of Robert Schoenberger representing the Plain Dealer. Please proceed. Robert Schoenberger – Plain Dealer: Good morning. I have a technical question a more serious one on the technical side, jobs tank, how many people are in there right now?

About 1500 right now, we expect that to reduce significantly in the first quarter as some people move to different plants where we have opportunities. Robert Schoenberger – Plain Dealer: And at the Detroit show Jim Farley mentioned that January sales were looking a bit healthier than December, is that trend continued or is there any hope for any kind of even modest recovery in the first few months of this year?

It is about the same. Robert Schoenberger – Plain Dealer: Really about the same as December or –

As December. Robert Schoenberger – Plain Dealer: Great. Thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of David Bailey [ph].

Next question please. We can’t hear David if he is online. David are you on?

Yes I am.

We didn’t hear your question.

Okay, the question was do you expect the Volvo VOX to go out in the next few weeks in terms of the potential sale of the brand?

We are not giving any details of (inaudible) strategic options.

No, it is a further question about the supply base, certainly we talked a little about Visteon but how much have you broken out, how much money you expect to need to put into the supply base this year to keep it running given the stresses you discussed.

No.

Thank you very much.

You bet.

Your next question comes from the line of David Kiley representing BusinessWeek magazine. Please proceed. David Kiley – BusinessWeek: Good morning gentlemen.

Hi, David. (inaudible). David Kiley – BusinessWeek: Yes I have as a matter of fact. Two questions here, one on cash burn for the year, the first question is if you could give me a little color on that $9.4 billion line item and exactly what goes into that and then secondly if you could do a little color on how the production mix in the first quarter is going to impact cash burn because I believe that you are doing a lot more trucks and I wondered how that is going to impact your cash burn for the first quarter.

Yes the $9.4 billion more than $5 billion or about $5 billion was accounted for by Tried [ph] declines. David Kiley – BusinessWeek: Tried declines, so that is the biggest element of it.

We are reducing the production. It really reflects the reduced production and the factor that the last few weeks of December we had very little production taking place. I am sorry I didn’t hear your question on mix in the first quarter. David Kiley – BusinessWeek: I wondered if you could – because you have said that your cash burn will be much improved and I wondered in the first quarter, I believe that production of the F series is going to be a much more pronounced part of production in the first quarter and I wondered if you can give some color on how that is going to impact cash burn and also what are your dealers telling you about demand for the new F series.

I think the bigger impact on cash burn in the first quarter will be around total production and this will be a secondary impact. In terms of response from dealers we are hearing very encouraging things about the reception of the F-150, very, very strong hi series mix which is encouraging so we have had an encouraging start.

David I might add just a little bit more color, one of the positive things about taking decisive and aggressive action in the fourth quarter on production to match the production to the real demand is that we kind of got that behind us now and as we go along here stabilized at these lower rates the first two quarters and start to come back in the second-half of the year that really, really helps us significantly reduce the cash burn. David Kiley – BusinessWeek: I am going to just sneak a quick one in here, as far as dealing with the government right now, since you are not accessing loans per se but have this application outstanding for a line of credit, are you having to meet basically all the same parameters of financial viability as GM and Chrysler for the actual loans by February 17 and by March 31?

No, not at all. We are not in that process, we stay involved, we will continue to update them on our continuing restructuring of Ford. Also I might just point out David that at the end of the year last year, the Treasury put in place an automotive financing act for vehicle their intent was that anybody that needed to see them without hurting the automotive recovery, there is a vehicle for them to come and see them. So we don’t have a standing line of credit but we have a vehicle that if we ever needed access to money that we could use. We are not in that process because we are not taking any tax for the money.

We have time for one more question please.

Thank you. Your final question comes from the line of Joann Muller representing Forbes Magazine. Please proceed. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: Hi there.

Hi Joann. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: Hi Alan, you said that you still believe Ford does not have to access any government funds unless there is a significant event. Could you be a little more specific about what you would define as a significant event.

No because it could be many things, it could be the economy itself, it could be the industry, it could be share, it could be the credit. We have not scoped that. The best thing we did as you know during the hearings is that the congress asked us for a range of outcomes, so we gave them a range of three different outcomes. They kind of bracketed the whole thing and we are clearly moving along on the bottom side of those scenarios. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: The bottom side of it you said.

For the first half and then coming back in the second half. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: I mean, just to be clear, it sounds like the door is still wide open and that you might need to go and ask for some assistance with so many things that you just kicked off there that could go the wrong way.

It is a very volatile time for all of us but I think that with the actions that were taken on the fiscal policy and the monetary policy that we could just can know if this is going to support the economic turn around and it is not our plan at all to access the government money and as we share today, we put this plan in place including the line of credit so we have sufficient cash to continue to finance our product development and our restructuring. So we have no plans at this time and I don’t anticipate using the government funds. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: One last thing on Ford Credit, you talk about it as a strategic asset. General Motors of course as the result of the aid of (inaudible) will no longer have capital [ph] finance at all, I suppose you could argue that they did not when they sold controlling interest but nonetheless they are going to wind down to almost nothing. How do you think that will put forth at its advantage to have its own capital finance company?

We believe more than ever Joann that Ford Motor Credit is a strategic asset of the Ford Motor Company. The dealers just absolutely love an integrated approach to being able to finance the cars, finance the show room and have one-stop shopping that is completely integrated when you work with Ford. We are more positive than ever that Ford Motor Company really is a strategic asset for Ford. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: Your write-downs, any idea what the total write-downs have been for credit losses over the last year?

Jo I think they are going to do a credit call pretty soon, might be a good time to – it will be a good place to help you out, you will have all the experts there on credit. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: Okay. Thank you.

Very good. Watch out for that dog. Joann Muller – Forbes Magazine: That was my collie.

Thanks, Joann.

That concludes today’s presentation. Thank you for joining us.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today’s conference. This concludes your presentation, you may now disconnect. Good day.