Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the first quarter fiscal 2018 earnings conference call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded on Wednesday, September 20, 2017. I would now like to turn the conference over to Jeff Siemon, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thanks, Sarah, and good morning to everyone. I'm here with Jeff Harmening, our CEO; and Don Mulligan, our CFO, who will share a few remarks in a moment. Before I turn the call over to them, let me cover our usual housekeeping items. A press release on first quarter results was issued over the wire services earlier this morning. And you can find this release and a copy of the slides that supplement this morning's remarks on our Investor Relations website. I'll remind you that our remarks this morning will include forward-looking statements that are based on management's current views and assumptions. And the third slide in today's presentation lists factors that could cause our future results to be different than our current estimates. And with that, I'll turn you over to my colleagues, beginning with Don.

All right. Thanks, Jeff, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us today to discuss our first quarter fiscal 2018 results. As we mentioned at our Investor Day in July, our #1 priority in fiscal 2018 is improving our top line performance by focusing on 4 global growth priorities: growing cereal globally, including CPW; improving U.S. Yogurt through innovation; investing in differential growth opportunities; and managing our Foundation brands with the appropriate investment. As Jeff will share in a moment, we executed well against these priorities in the first quarter, and we're seeing the results in our in-market performance. In the U.S., our Nielsen-measured retail sales trends improved by 300 basis points versus our fourth quarter results. And we saw good improvement in France and the U.K. as well. We anticipated a slow start to the year on adjusted operating profit and adjusted diluted EPS, driven by sales declines and the phasing of input costs, expenses and cost savings. We expect sales results to strengthen and first quarter margin headwinds to lessen in the remainder of the year, driving growth on profit and EPS in the second half. We continue to maintain a disciplined focus on cash. And we delivered strong growth in free cash flow in the first quarter. And I'm pleased to announce that we've reaffirmed our full year fiscal 2018 targets in this morning's release. Let me review our performance in the quarter. Slide 5 summarizes first quarter fiscal '18 financial results. Net sales totaled $3.8 billion, down 4% as reported. Organic net sales also declined 4%. Total segment operating profit totaled $664 million, down 16% on a constant currency basis. Net earnings decreased 1% to $405 million and diluted earnings per share increased 3% to $0.69 as reported. Adjusted diluted EPS, which excludes certain items…

Thanks, Don, and good morning, everyone. I'd like to start my remarks this morning by summarizing 3 main takeaways from our first quarter results. First, our entire company is showing great focus and urgency in executing against our global growth priorities in the first quarter. And we've started to see those efforts gain traction in the marketplace. I can sense the change in momentum as I talk to employees across our company. Now we still have much work to do to return to growth. But our efforts are beginning to pay off, and we're confident in the direction that we're headed. Second, we're going to build on the momentum that we saw in the first quarter as we approach the second quarter. We'll continue to expand successful innovation, like Oui by Yoplait. We'll increase our brand-building investment behind Häagen-Dazs, Nature Valley and our cereal portfolio. And we will drive significant improvement on our performance on soup and refrigerated dough. And third, as Don mentioned earlier, we have a line of sight to delivering on our full year commitments on sales, earnings and cash generation. Now let's review the results we're seeing in the market so far this year, beginning with the broad overview of the U.S. before covering our global growth priorities in more depth. Our first quarter U.S. sales trends improved by more than 300 basis points over the fourth quarter of last year. Our results strengthened each month in the quarter. And that improvement has continued as we've seen the first couple of weeks of data in September. And the improvement is broad-based. 80% of our U.S. Retail sales are represented in our top 9 categories. And we're seeing stronger Nielsen trends in almost all of them. Our largest business in the U.S., cereal, improved by almost 200…

[Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from the line of Andrew Lazar from Barclays.

Just first off, I think last quarter, you had talked about expecting positive pricing in the first half of the fiscal year. And even though price was positive in North America Retail in the market, I think as you pointed out, Jeff, in the P&L for North America Retail, pricing, I think, was still down about 2% year-over-year. So I'm trying to get a sense of how much of that was just due to that sort of funky year-over-year trade spend comparison that you noted. And I guess would you expect positive year-over-year pricing maybe as we go into fiscal 2Q in North America Retail segment?

Yes. Andrew, this is Don. We did come into the year, obviously as you mentioned, with the funky trade expense relationship, which I'm happy to go into a bit more as we talk about gross margins. But I think we do -- as you saw in the first quarter, we saw positive pricing in our retail sales in U.S. We had that reverse because of the trade expense phasing in our P&L. So as the year unfolds and as that trade expense unfavorability unwinds, we will see better pricing come through on our P&L, too, more reflective of what you're seeing in the marketplace.

Okay. And then you note, obviously, that had probably a pretty significant impact on the gross margin piece as well. Is there any way to help us quantify a little bit about maybe what impact that had on gross margin?

Sure. Let me maybe talk about gross margin more fully because I'm sure you're not the only one with questions on it. And I guess I'd start with saying that, as Jeff noted in the release and in his remarks, our top line came in as expected. Our bottom line was a little bit short but not materially, not material enough certainly to change our full year expectations. We expected operating profit -- segment operating profit to be down double digits. So the actual results were not materially off of that. And importantly, as I've already said, we continue to hold to our total company SOP guidance for the year with flat to plus 1%, and frankly for each of our segments as well, the guidance we gave in July on margins to be higher in North America C&F and Asia, LatAm still holds, and to be down in EU/AU, driven by the currency-driven inflation on our imported products in the U.K. So both the total company and in each segment, we're holding to the guidance that we provided in July. As we look at the quarter, there were the 3 items that we mentioned: deleverage, the input cost phasing and the trade expense phasing. The volume deleverage was the smallest of those. That was probably 20% of the miss, and then the other 2 were kind of evenly split. But I think the most important thing is as we look forward, we expect improvement in each of those areas. HMM will accelerate as the year unfolds. And that's because we will start to see in the back half, particularly the fourth quarter, the initial benefits of our global sourcing initiative that we began talking about at CAGNY last year. Volume obviously get better as we expect that strong retail…

Got it. Okay, I appreciate that detailed answer, Don. I had literally a very quick one just to follow up for Jeff, if I could, and then I'll pass it on. Just, Jeff, I know this is a self-described kind of reinvestment year. It's all geared, right, to getting the top line going again. I guess does the positive EPS growth expected for the full year versus last year, does it handcuff you at all in terms of the sort of investment that you feel like these brands really need, particularly in light of maybe the weaker, albeit expected, the weaker start to the year? And I guess if not, maybe if you'd just go into a little bit why that would be because that is a question that I get a lot.

So the spending profile we have this year and the guidance we've given for EPS really doesn't handcuff us to do the things that we want to do. In fact, one of the things that I see as I look at the first quarter, I'm pleased that the areas where we've invested in marketing spending, so Nature Valley, for example, which is up 8%; Häagen-Dazs ice cream, which retail sales are up 20%; cereal, where we've closed the gap on growth. The areas where we've invested in consumer spending are the ones where we've seen the best results. And I'm really pleased with our marketing efforts and the quality of our marketing in the first quarter. Our execution has been really good. So the short answer, Andrew, no, the guidance we've set out does not handcuff us to do what we need to do to get our business back to growth -- to get the business back to growth. And the key for us is making sure that as we make investments, we're monitoring whether they're working or not. And so far, what we've seen in the marketplace, whether it's the spending on the brands I just talked about or the innovation on Yoplait, are playing out the way that we had anticipated. And we're really pleased with that.

And our next question comes from the line of Ken Goldman with JPMorgan.

Don, one for me. I do appreciate that your total working capital is improving. But your receivables as a percentage of sales have been growing. I think 1Q's level, at least by my model, was the highest in over a decade. And it looks like it's the sixth straight quarter in which this metric has grown year-on-year. There's a lot of concern about retailer versus vendor power and so forth. Can you just walk us through some of the drivers of this receivables trend, how long you think it will last and so forth?

Yes. Well, I think there's 2 things. There's a longer-term trend and a shorter-term trend. The shorter-term trend that we see, actually both in Q4 and Q1, was our sales strengthened as the quarter unfolded. So the exit rate of our sales was stronger than the average for the quarter, which means we had more shipments late in the year -- late in the quarter, so we had more receivables on the balance sheet just from a timing standpoint. Jeff showed you the chart, for example, of the U.S. Retail sales trends and the improvement every month. So that can happen. That's quarter-to-quarter and it just depends on the phasing. The longer-term one is as we continue to see a mix of our business more international that have longer payment cycles both on the receivables and the payable side, that will have, if you will, a mix effect on it. Our payables is -- our receivables, as you look in each market, are very competitive. It really becomes a mix play over time. And we continue to focus on keeping those at the right level. And again, in our working capital, we think the bigger lever is on our payables side.

Okay. So just to be clear, in the U.S. Retail segment, no real meaningful changes to your receivables, except for the one-time timing issue this quarter that you're looking at?

Yes. No, from -- yes, not at all.

Okay, great. And then a quick follow-up for me, Jeff. Obviously, we're talking about e-com a lot more and more these days. With Amazon picking up Whole Foods and Amazon doing what it can, obviously there's a lot of delivery that's growing and the earliest expectations of that. But we're also seeing some food retailers really double down on click and collect. And I'm just wondering from your perspective, is there really any difference in how you would approach the merchandising and the marketing of that? Any difference to the margin? Just trying to get a sense for sort of which of these is better for the vendors, if there's really any difference at all?

Well, so first of all, I appreciate the question on e-commerce. I touched on it because there have been a few things written on e-commerce here in the first quarter. And in July, with investors in the investor meeting, recall that I said, "Look, I like our chances in e-commerce." And I think a few heads kind of looked at me sideways like, "Are you sure?" And what I want to reiterate is that we've seen really good growth in e-commerce, and it's been broad-based. And the question you ask is a good one in that when people think of e-commerce, a lot of times they just think of Amazon. But we have, throughout our customer base, whether it's the likes of Walmart or a Kroger or a lot of our East Coast customers, we have e-commerce sales throughout our customer base. And we're being successful across them. And so whether it's click and collect or whether it's delivery, what you need to know is that when it comes to full basket sales, we feel good about the progress we've made and the shares that we have. In terms of the economics for us on delivery versus click and collect, I'm not going to get deep into it, other than to say that there's not really a difference in the economics for us. And the way we manage our categories across those two is not dramatically different.

And our next question comes from the line of Rob Dickerson from Deutsche Bank.

I have two quick questions. The one is just, I guess, in terms of the retail takeaway we're seeing relative to what you're putting up in organic. And it sounds like what you're saying is that as we get through the year, hopefully, they should start to trend together a bit more closely. But I'm just curious like in terms of the, I guess, what you called out as kind of a near-term cereal inventory reduction at retail. Does that -- is that supposed to bounce back or -- I'm just trying to get a sense as to why exactly, going forward, that we shouldn't see incremental organic sales pressure relative to the retail trend, especially as I think you said in the last results call, it seemed like maybe the mix in Nielsen on a pricing basis wasn't as good or was not as good as what you were getting because you're implying that maybe the retailers themselves were taking a little bit of the pricing pressure. So really just one, why they should trend a bit more closely as we go forward? And the two, I guess, is there any change in that retail pricing dynamic with the retailers?

Rob, thanks for that question. This is Jeff. Let me talk to you broadly about retail inventory and let me then talk more specifically about cereal. If you look at retail inventory for the quarter, there really wasn't a change at all as we look across our U.S. portfolio. So there wasn't -- there was not an impact from -- we call it pipeline. But a retail inventory change, there wasn't one at all. But there are differences between categories. So for example, we actually built inventory in our soup business because as we head into the season, we expect our merchandising to increase. Our retail inventory in cereal actually decreased because, as we said in June, we had a build-up in the prior quarter. The reason why -- but our inventory levels in both cases are reasonable. And so as we look ahead, getting to cereal specifically, our reported net sales were down 7% in the quarter. Nielsen was actually only down 1%. And frankly, if you look at where we did in unmeasured channels, which is about another 1 point, our sales were about flat overall on cereal. So there's about a 7 point gap between reported net sales and what we see organic -- our retail sales to be. Of that gap, about half of it is expense timing that Don talked about, our trade expense timing. And the other half is a change in pipeline and really reversal from what we saw the prior quarter. For these reasons, that's why we're confident as we look ahead on cereal. The gap, cereal specifically, the gap between reported net sales and retail sales will close because we know what that expense phasing looks like. And we know that, that will correct itself over time. And we also know that we don't have an extraordinary level of retail inventory. And so we're in a pretty balanced place. And so we would expect that to even out over time. So we've got a pretty good line of sight to both of those things, which gives us confidence to tell you that we're -- the delta between reported net sales and what we see at retail will close.

And the next question comes from the line of Chris Growe with Stifel.

Just had two questions for you. And the first one would be -- and just to kind of follow up on [indiscernible] you gave earlier in the call, Don, around pricing. So as I understand it, you're going to have a little higher promotional spending year-over-year in Q2 and Q3, especially in some of the seasonal categories. Is pricing in that North American division expected be up or down then? There shouldn't be a phasing issue then going forward the next 3 quarters, it sounds like. Am I right in saying that?

Yes. Well, the trade expense, as it evens out over the course of the year, will actually go from a drag in the first quarter to a plus, particularly a plus in the second half of the year. So that will actually, in terms of our reported sales, will be accretive as the year unfolds. In the marketplace, we will be seeing different dynamics in the second and third quarter on our seasonal businesses than a year ago. So that what you'll see in the marketplace will differ a touch from what you're going to see in our reported sales. But in both cases, certainly in the retail market, we still expect for the full year to be showing neutral to positive pricing.

Okay, that's helpful. And then just a question for you. Overall, there's been a lot of talk and a lot of interest in private label growth currently. We do track that certainly through the IRI database, and I know Nielsen is very similar. But it looks like you've had pretty modest overall private label market share gains in your categories. Do you see any pressure there, any further acceleration? And just curious how you see retailers using that, certainly in your categories.

So Chris, as we look at our categories, the starting point, I would say, is that private label penetration in the categories in which we compete is only about 18% -- or about 10% versus 18% more broadly. So we see lower private label penetration in our categories. What you say really is true in that as we looked over the last 12 months, there have been a couple of categories where we've seen pretty significant growth in private label. But broadly speaking, that hasn't been the case. And those 2 categories, I don't think -- and not consequentially, are in refrigerated dough and in soup, where the fact that we weren't very competitive on merchandising over the last year kind of opened the door. And so as we look at cereal, we don't see a big growth in private label. As we look at yogurt, we don't see a big growth in private label. As we look at bars, we don't see a big growth in private label. And those are areas where we've been more competitive, and we like our innovation and our marketing. And so what I would say is, look, the challenge of private label will be there, in fact internally we call them retail brands. So it's something we take seriously. But your remark is right in that we don't see broad-based growth in private label in our categories, really a couple. And other than that, when we do our job on innovation and marketing and we get our price points right, we're able to compete very effectively with retail brands.

And our next question comes from the line of Jason English with Goldman Sachs.

I want to come back -- not to beat a dead horse, but I want to make come back to make sure I really understand this trade spend accrual. Can you give us some quantification of how much that impact was on your net price for North America this quarter?

So our net price -- Jason, this is Jeff Siemon. Our net price in North America was down 2 points. And I think the trade expense phasing was the full amount of that on rough terms.

That's helpful. So let's say your net price in the segment would have been neutral absent that noise. I think Jeff pointed to retailers -- your price at retail up 2%. Per Rob's question earlier, you mentioned that last year, retailers were effectively subsidizing some of your prices. So your net price wasn't as negative as what we're seeing in retail. It looks like that's slipped. So are you now seeing retailers effectively take margin on you and try to reverse some of that? And if so, is that something we should expect to continue on the forward?

No. Retail margin changes wasn't really a big driver in the quarter for us. I mean, what really -- if you look at retail sales, what drove our positive pricing was a combination of 2 things I talked about. One is our baseline sales outpaced our growth overall. So we saw a 300 basis point improvement in our overall sales. But our everyday sales were up 450 basis points. And the other thing that drove it was we got really good quality merchandising. We had good display merchandising at higher price points. And that's really what drove our pricing improvement over the last quarter. And the reason why you don't see that translate into reported net sales is what Don talked about earlier, which is the trade expense phasing. And so that really is the reason why you see the results that we posted in the first quarter.

Okay, that's helpful. One more question, I'll pass it on. There's clearly been a bit of a disconnect between what your expectations are and what The Street's expectations are as illustrated by results this quarter. Can we help close that gap? So can you give us a little bit more color in terms of what you're expecting for the second quarter? You mentioned sort of sequential improvement. But are we still talking about a down year-on-year quarter? And then for the full year, the path to margin progression, what are your expectations on gross margin for the full year?

Yes. So Jason, as we said at the beginning of the year, our expectation is that we're going to see sales sequentially improve first quarter to second quarter, first half to second half. And we expect profit to be down in the first half and then positive profit growth in the second half. And that's still our expectation. And it's driven -- for the 3 factors I mentioned, that in terms of our margin, the expansion that we're going to get between HMM and inflation is going to be strongest in the second half, particularly the fourth quarter as global sourcing contributes to a greater extent. The sales strength and the volume associated with that will give us less volume deleverage as the year unfolds, and then the trade expense reversal. So we still expect -- and the trade expense reversal, to be clear, is primarily in the back half because, again, last year, as we eliminated the trade, it was really a back half trade elimination. So the comparisons are going to be -- are most acute in a positive sense this year in the back half of the year. So that guidance still holds. We expect our operating profit and our EPS to be down again in Q2 and then turn positive in the second half of the year.

And our next question comes from the line of Michael Lavery with Piper Jaffray.

Just wanted to touch on -- you mentioned as part of your yogurt initiatives, you've gotten expanded distribution on Yoplait Original. Can you give a little more color there? Is that already in place? How significant is that upside? Was -- is it replacing? Is it regaining lost distribution? Or is it purely incremental? Can you just help us understand? That's been a part of the business that's had some pressure, and it sounds like it's not Oui that you're referring to, obviously. So can you just help us understand what's happening there?

Yes. So as we look at our yogurt business, let me go broad picture and then I'll work it down a little bit more on Yoplait Original distribution. Broadly speaking, what we said this year for our yogurt business to get better is that we needed our innovation to work. And we're pleased by that, both on Oui and our yogurt Mix-ins. And we needed to see some improvement in our Yoplait Original and our Go-GURT businesses because -- we needed to see those because we're going to see declines in Yoplait Light and Greek 100. And so we're seeing the declines in Yoplait Light and Greek 100. Our innovation has worked the way we expected. And we're starting to see improvements in our Yoplait Original and our Go-GURT business. The Go-GURT trends have really accelerated dramatically in the last few weeks because we've introduced some new innovation on our existing business, easier-opening tubes with some really good marketing. So we've seen that accelerate faster. And we're now starting to see an impact from distribution growth on Yoplait Original. And that's really only been recently and will accelerate in the second quarter. And so I would anticipate that our distribution on Yoplait Original will improve in the second quarter from where it was in the first quarter, and we should see the results follow. Some of that is going to be replacement of things that weren't as successful. So as we see declines in distribution on Yoplait 100 and on Yoplait Light, it certainly won't be all incremental distribution, but we expect some of it to be incremental because some retailers probably cut back too far on Yoplait Original in the past. So some of it will be incremental, but certainly not all of it. Some of it will be replacing what we've lost in Yoplait Light and Greek 100.

And so is it, on a net basis for your total yogurt portfolio, a reshuffling? Or do you have some of these retailers where you're expecting a net increase in your total shelf space on the yogurt side?

Yes. Our yogurt shelf space now is down from where it was a year ago, and that we expected. But we also expect that, that position will improve throughout the year. And we continue to expect that in everything we see. Based on what we see now in the second quarter and what we anticipate from our new product innovation in the back half, we'd say that our distribution will improve as the year unfolds. Whether it's gets to positive or not, I don't know. But it will improve from where it currently is as the year progresses.

And our next question comes from the line of Matthew Grainger with Morgan Stanley.

This is actually Pam Kaufman on the line for Matt. I was just wondering if you could elaborate on what drove the softer performance in the Focus 6 platforms in the Convenience and Foodservice segment. It seems like there was a moderation there versus what we've seen recently.

Yes, Pam, this is Don. There was a couple of factors. One is that -- just as we've seen, as Jeff was talking about with our U.S. Yogurt business, as we see some of our positions in Light and in Greek, as you've seen those negative trends in the U.S., we're starting to see a little bit of that in our foodservice business as well. We think there's an opportunity to launch Oui and get some presence in Oui in our foodservice segment. And we think that will help reverse it and continue to drive our Parfait Pro business. More importantly, as we look forward, we continue to see terrific performance in our cereal business, and we're going to grow on that. And we actually have seen that as the school year has started. We're getting terrific take on our products, continue to get terrific take on our college and universities. And then most importantly, if you remember last year, we talked about the fact that we didn't really have a good bid season with the K-12 frozen breakfast. We missed some windows. And this year, we were able to get those accounts back. And we obviously started shipping that as the school year started. So we will see that strengthen as the year -- as the second quarter starts. And those are the things that are going to turn the Focus 6. We still expect Focus 6 to be a contributor to sales this year and show sales growth. We think cereal, we think our frozen business, and we think our snacks business in C-store can contribute as well as we get presence with some of the Nature Valley innovation that we've driven in retail, like the cups business. So we still feel good about it. It was a quarter that the sales weren't as strong we'd like, clearly, but it doesn't diminish our expectations for the full year. And frankly, we think we'll start seeing that strength return in Q2.

And our next question comes from the line of Robert Moskow with Crédit Suisse.

I think the major concern that a lot of people have about what's happening at grocery in your categories is breakfast cereal, because we saw the dispute in canned soup affect Campbell quite a bit with one major retailer. And I guess with breakfast cereal consumption down so much, my question is, do you have to do more for the trade to persuade them to maintain shelf space for your items, maintain shelf space for the category? And the discrepancy in the trade spending in the quarter, it just seems to reflect that, like the big difference between your negative 7% on shipments for cereal and the negative 1% in retail. Is there more you're having to do for the trade in this category than your other categories? Or is that just optics?

Well, Rob, look, it's a fair question and I certainly understand it. But it really is just optics. The reason for -- I'm not getting into soup. But for cereal, the fact is that the difference between what you see in reported net sales and what we actually saw in retail was really the 2 things I said, it was the change in retailer inventory and the phasing of trade expense, which does not mean more trade expense or deeper trade expense, it really just is a timing issue. And so look, I understand the concern and I understand the broader narrative. But when it comes to cereal, that really hasn't been the case for us. The results you see and the discrepancy is really as I described. And so while I understand the question, I just want to be clear that we know those things that drove the difference. And we see those -- that gap closing as the year unfolds.

And our next question is from the line of John Baumgartner from Wells Fargo.

Jeff, I'd like to touch on yogurt and snack bars. I mean, you're clearly very active on the innovation front this year. But in more at the category level, those 2 really strike me as having become very over-SKU-ed and the velocities now are also softening. So I'm curious in your view, what gets retailers to begin adjusting these shelf sets, stripping out the underperformers that are dilutive to growth? And how much influence do you have in terms of the category [ captaincy ] to influence that? I'm just trying to think through some of the exogenous factors here going forward.

So let me -- you asked a series of questions. I will try to make sure that I hit all of them. If I don't, please follow up. But when we look at snacks for bars and for yogurt, I mean, they really are driven by innovation and constant innovation and news. And as we look at the yogurt section itself, it has expanded over time. I'm not sure that yogurt is over-SKU-ed. But certainly, it's expanded so much as new innovation comes to the market, I don't think we'll see the same level of expansion in that category and distribution that we have seen. So the key really is to have the best innovation brought to the marketplace. And there probably are some underperforming SKUs that can be taken out, some of which are ours, which I talked about Light and Greek 100. But some are competitors as well. And so that's why it's critical for us that we have good, new product innovation in yogurt as well as good news on our established brands, which we feel like we have now. And we see our retail trend starting to improve, and we expect them to improve more. While we are satisfied that we made progress in the first quarter, we are not satisfied in the absolute, either for our yogurt business or overall. When we get back to growth, then we'll be more satisfied. So when it comes to the snack bars, the bars category is still growing, when you look at nutrition bars and grain bars. And certainly, the key for us is that we have brands that are growing within that Nature Valley, which is the largest in the bars category, and LÄRABAR. And those 2 are providing a significant amount of growth in bars, just those 2 brands alone. And so again, like yogurt, the key for us in bars is making sure we have good, new product innovation as well as terrific marketing on our established brands. And we feel like we have both of those on Nature Valley and LÄRABAR. And we're working to get that on Fiber One.

I think that's all the time we have. Everyone, please, I know we didn't get quite to everybody in the queue, I imagine. So please feel free to give me a ring. I'm on the phone all day today. With that, I think we'll wrap up. Thanks. Thanks, Sarah.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude the conference call for today. We thank you for your participation, and ask that you please disconnect your lines.