Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Hercules Technology Growth Capital Q3 2015 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder this conference call is being recorded. I would now like to introduce your host for today’s conference, Michael Hara, Senior Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Charla, and thank you, everyone. Good afternoon and welcome to Hercules conference call for the third quarter 2015. With us on the call today from Hercules are Manuel Henriquez, Founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and Mark Harris, Chief Financial Officer. Hercules third quarter 2015 financial results were released just after today’s market close and can be accessed on the Hercules Investor Relations section at www.htgc.com. We’ve arranged for a replay of the call at Hercules webpage or by using the telephone number and pass code provided in today’s release. During the course of this call, we may make forward-looking statements based on current expectations. Actual financial results filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission may differ from those contained herein due to timing delays between the date of this release and in the confirmation and final audit results. In addition, the statements contained in this release that are not purely historical are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements, including without limitation the risks and uncertainties, including the uncertainties surrounding the current market turbulence and other factors that are identified from time-to-time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Although, we believe that the assumptions on which these forward-looking statements are based are reasonable, any of those assumptions can prove to be inaccurate and as a result, the forward-looking statements based on those assumptions also can be incorrect. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements contained in this release are made as of the date hereof, and Hercules assumes no obligation to update the forward-looking statements or subsequent events. To obtain copies of related SEC filings, please visit sec.gov or visit our web page htgc.com. For today’s agenda, Manuel will begin the call with an overview of our Q3 2015 financial highlights, followed by a business overview and an overview of the current market conditions and our perspective and outlook for Q4 2016. Mark will follow with a broader summary of our Q3 financial performance and results. And following the conclusion of our prepared remarks, we will open the call for Q&A. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Manuel, Hercules’ Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.

Thank you, Michael, and good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Hercules Technology Growth Capital Q3 2015 earnings call. Today, I’m delighted to share with you that Hercules delivered another outstanding and impressive quarter, delivering net investment income of $0.33 per share and effective yield of 16.4%. Thanks to our outstanding and driven team of investor professionals who are executing exceptionally well on all fronts. The quarter exemplifies the achievement and the capabilities of Hercules by its results and the new origination commitments and fundings that occurred during the quarter. Our Q3 results serve to highlight Hercules strong technology position within the market, market leadership position, as well as our continued unprecedented access to some of the leading, most innovative and disruptive technology and life sciences companies financially back and supported by some of the industry top tier venture capital firms. These outstanding and visionary venture capital firms are a tremendous source of deal flow to Hercules and we’d like to say thank you and acknowledge their continued trust and support and confidence in Hercules, as a critical source of growth capital for the respective portfolio companies. Thank you very much for that continued support, as evidenced with a deal flow that we witnessed in Q3. In addition, Hercules third quarter results demonstrated our high brand awareness, our market leadership position, and overall differentiation for qualities that separate Hercules from the rest of the venture lenders. In addition, let’s not forget one very important designation of differentiation within the BDC industry as well, and that is that Hercules is an internally managed BDC, meaning that we are directly aligned with shareholders and more interested in generating total returns on behalf of our shareholders that merely focused on increasing AUMs for additional fees or asset management fees. Now, with respect to…

Thank you, Manuel. What I’d like to do is try to give some context for the numbers that Manuel covered earlier in the conversion. Starting off of net invest income, which increased to $23.6 million in the third quarter versus $16.8 million in the second quarter, an increase of 41%. On a per share basis, NII increased to $0.33 per share compared to the $0.23 per share in the second quarter, another increase of 44%. We saw our return on average assets on an NII basis increased to 7.5% in the third quarter from 5.3% in the previous quarter with our return on average equity on an NII basis materially increase of 13.7% in the third quarter from 7.5% in the second quarter. Investment income drove a lot of this, which increased to $47.1 million in the third quarter of 2015 versus $37 million in the third quarter 2014, an increase of 27% over the same period in the previous year. Our loan portfolio decreased on a cost basis to $1.109 billion in the third quarter compared to that of $1.171 billion in the second quarter, or a decrease of approximately 5%. As Manuel discussed, while we had new fundings of approximately $157 million, which was a record third quarter for Hercules, this was offset by the decrease led to the $190 million of unscheduled paydowns in a quarter, which was not fully anticipated. The GAAP effective yields increased to 16.4% in the third quarter from 13.8% in the second quarter, an increase of 260 basis points. The increase was primarily related to the acceleration of interest and fees pertaining to early loan paydowns and payoffs. We expect our prepayment activity to return to rate of $50 million to $70 million in the fourth quarter. The weighted average age or…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question will be coming from the line of John Hecht from Jefferies. Your line is now open.

Thanks very much. Active quarter for your guys. Just considering the repayments – the elevated repayments in the commentary that you expect these to come down in Q4, so you get back to portfolio growth. A couple of questions and that is, in the near-term what drives unexpected repayment activity and what kind of visibility do you have in the 4Q that you wouldn’t experience that spike over the remaining part of the year?

John, thanks. Good question. As we’ve tried to share with investors over the 10 years that I’ve been on this earnings call is that, it’s very difficult for us to have visibility. A full quarter out, I almost like to say that we probably have visibility and confidence probably on a 45 or so ruling basis. And a lot of the takeouts are early repayments are often times driven by pending M&A events that may or may not replace, or as we saw in the third quarter by some commercial bank refinancing some of our loans, because it’s a natural progression of our companies that we’re working with them, they’re young and experiencing growth. And eventually they will mature to a level that in commercial bank, they offer some of the resources that we do not provide like deposits or operating accounts what have you. But during the early stage of growth, it’s an area where we actually work with our companies very diligently and work with them. That said, in the third quarter, we proactively took the approach of also reducing expose in certain area, i.e., China was one of the areas that we – mean it, fairly a strong push to reduce exposure in that area. So we kind of help deliver that portfolio turnover by encouraging some of these companies to seek financing elsewhere as you want to reduce that Chinese exposure. So the last part of your question visibility in Q4, as of right now, I think, our confidence level for, I’m going to say in a very odd way unanticipated, but now predicted early payoffs somewhere in the neighborhood around $50 million to $70 million. That could change materially up or down by $20 million only because I’m aware of four companies that are actively engaged in M&A discussions. But if they do occur, that will make the number in the higher-end of the range and if they don’t occur, they will put it down on the lower-end of the range. So that’s one of the problems that we always have, it’s trying to handicap where exactly are we in the continuum of these early past activities.

Okay. That’s helpful. So if I just – I guess to clarify, I hear correct, Q4 based on your margin commentary that you kind of hit the core level of margin that you’d expect to be at, I guess, resume in a stable level for May or and that Q4 we see us return to the kind of portfolio growth that you experienced in the first-half of the year, is that kind of a fair way to think about the near-term view?

Absolutely. I think that you will see portfolio growth in Q4 in the neighborhood of maybe $100 million to $120 million net bluff that were forecasting in the portfolio in Q4. You then – I don’t expect to see our yields – our effective yields to sustain the level of 16% because of the early past activity that took place in Q3. So we do expect the more modest early same activities by more mature companies being later-stage companies that are now and probably months saw 20 or beyond. So you’re not going to see the large impact from both fee acceleration, as well as prepayment in penalties kicking in. So you’ll see a continued separation of core yields to effective yields. But I think effective yields modulate downward a bit in Q4 to the level that’s unclear right now as we’re still actually trying to figure out, which loan the ones you’re going to pay off again certainly, they’re paying off or not. And so I think that we’re certainly looking at yield at the 13.5% to 14.5% is probably the right range to look at.

Okay. Thanks very much. And then final question, you gave us a lot of updates on the competitive environment and yes, there has been volatility in the equity markets that certainly flat over to some of the high yield markets. How do you view the competitive market, I guess, maybe particularly your ability to capture some decent warrants and and maybe deployments, because I know you had mentioned was, yes, the equity guys were getting higher, are they changing or they’re giving you guys more opportunity?

Well, I think that the equity evaluations in the private sector will remain at elevated levels. I do expect sometime in the first-half of 2015 to probably see some gradual pullback on private company valuations. And clearly with $300 million of available liquidity to invest, we certainly expect to take advantage of that and bring on Board more attractively the price warrants that may offer better upside than you otherwise would see in the near-term. And so I think that the portfolio will benefit from the eventuality of valuation adjustments, because we’re coming in with debt – with warrants, so we can actually reprice those warrants different metrics there just to give us advantage of that upside total return potential.

Great. Thanks very much, guys.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Vernon Plack from BB&T Capital Markets. Your line is now open.

Thanks very much. And, Manuel, you addressed most of my prior question and your response to John just a second ago. But looking at the – I’m curious in terms of, should we see any further reduction in your available and encumbered commitments from the $110 million range that you just reported?

You’ll continue to see a lesser of an extreme reduction in Q4, but a continued reduction in Q4, as we both convert unfunded commitments to new funded assets, as well as we or the company doesn’t achieve expected milestones in Q4 that in itself naturally will cause some of those unfunded commitments to last and not be available. So the combination of those two, yes, we do expect continued contraction in unfunded commitments, but not to the extreme that we saw in Q3 to – Q2 to Q3.

Okay, great. And the G&A line in the P&L, I know that this quarter it was about $4.5 million, I think, is that a good run rate going forward?

Yes, I can address that. This is Mark.

Okay. Hi, Mark.

It’s a run rate that we currently have based on the activity that was going on within the quarter the growth, et cetera. I would tell you that that number probably would decrease a little bit in Q4 and that would probably be more of a normalized rate. But I do want to kind of caution that clearly as we continue to grow making that assumption through 2016, et cetera, then yes, the answer would be, it should grow in line with revenue.

Sure. I understand. Okay.

It’s very – a lot of the G&A in Q3 had final payments on executive search fronts that we were using that running, of course, we’ve made – we’ve been making some higher, some of which we would be announcing here, hopefully, next week or two. But we have been very active also and adding to our organization. As you may realize, we also just recently opened an office in Huawei. We’re expanding in other areas and other markets. And we’re also augmenting both our East Coast and West Coast team with some extremely high caliber and new investment professionals that we just added or soon be added to the organization further driving further growth of earnings and assets for our shareholders.

Okay, great. And just one quick follow-up. What is your FTE account right now, and what are you trying to grow there too in the short-term?

We’re at approximately – we’re approximately at 62.

62, okay.

And that will probably grow to mid-70s by most likely second-half of 2016.

Okay.

We’re slow to higher, because it’s just like we invest. We take time to make sure we understand the people.

Okay, great. Thank you very much.

Chris York. Your line is open form JMP Securities.

Good afternoon. So my first question kind of ducktails with Vernon’s question. So, Manuel, you recently opened up and you talked about your LA office, some other remote offices. So I would like to hear about the production and how it’s been at some of those offices and then more specifically your origination activity away from the Valley?

Well, it’s on the way from the Valley. We’re extremely visiting the Valley. But what we realized is that, we were spending too much time in airplanes, servicing the calls and the needs of those new emerging markets that have venture capital activity. LA is actually representing a very strong social media, gaming marketplace that we are quite optimistic about. And so we’re seeing a growing demand of capital in that market. And as we always prefer to do at Hercules, we actually prefer to have physical presence in the market that we’re involved in. And I think Hercules down has offices in – and actually larger than any other venture lender out there. But we have offices in Boston, obviously, Palo Alto, LA, Washington DC, McLean, Virginia, Philadelphia and New York and Chicago. And that really gives us a very strong footprint into canvassing all the trickle venture capital centers in the country. So we’re well positioned in that area. As to productivity, we think that an office over time should generate over $100 and new loan origination on an annual basis, if not more as we add more staff to it. But that’s typically what we look to.

So since some of those remote offices aren’t new, I would suspect that they’re not at that level.

No.

So should we expect a greater contribution maybe in the first-half of 2016?

It typically takes us nine months to a year to have a new hire be conditioned to the Hercules underwriting paradigm. And we prefer it not to rush, because we don’t make. We make investments and we care about the outcome of those investments, not market share. And so we’re very much focused on the fundamentals of underwriting and identifying the right companies then we simply are rushing to put money to work. So that’s what we give our individuals new hires anywhere between six to nine months to get condition and become productive. And so that is exactly the timeframe you referred to is sometime in the second-half of 2016, you start seeing that productivity really starts kicking in.

Got it. It makes sense. And then last one here. So I would like to have you elaborate potentially more on your prepared comments for support and interest in BDC M&A. So if you found a target that you are interested in, would you consider taking a strategy similar to another BDC that has involved in potential M&A by acquiring shares in the open market or what other route would you consider?

It’s hard for reference to always do transactions on a friendly basis and partner together as opposed to also transaction. But as we’re seeing in the marketplace, I think that there is a two different approaches going on right now, and I think we just want to watchfully wait what is going on. We’re not in any urgency to do anything, and it’s something that’s probably more of a tertiary strategy than a primary strategy or say differently opportunistic than anything else. I think that we are successfully enough in our business and busy enough in our business that if an opportunity present itself as attractive and it’s really friendly, I think, we will pursue it. And that’s my first choice of doing any transaction.

Got it. That’s it from me. Thanks, guys.

Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Douglas Harter from Credit Suisse. Your line is now open.

Hi. This is Sam Choe filling in for Doug Harter. Our questions have been answered. Thank you.

All right.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our next question will be coming from the line of Jonathan Bock from Wells Fargo. Your line is now open.

Hi, Jonathan. Fin O’Shea: Hi, guys. Thank you. It’s actually Fin O’Shea here for Jon Bock, sorry about that. First question you mentioned you’re going to take down more of the – I believe that was 7% 2019 notes. How should we look at your liability that’s also going forward as a split between revolver and term debt? Is this going to be replaced with a cheaper term debt or the bank facility?

Sure, let me try to answer that for you. Obviously, one is without thought and the other in the sense that when we reduced the 2019 7% notes by $40 million, as I articulated into the conversation there is good savings involved and that’s accretive obviously over to the P&L. We’re always trying to get sub-5% on our weighted average cost of debt. So now that we have an effective shop registration we will be looking externally to seeing what options we have there in the public debt markets. As it pertains to the credit facilities that we have, we use those as you can imagine to assist us with our cash drag that is right now you can see the liquidity we had at the end of the quarter as we found new investments, we will start drawing back down on to the facility, when the facility sizes start to aggregate in value then we will look back into the debt markets and replace that with another long-term debt product and then keep recycling as we see fit to minimize cash drag as much as possible.

As I said historically, I don’t like having more than 20%, 25% of our capitalization be on short-term bank lines. And I think that will [indiscernible] manage the business to some of that level, it is clear my preference who continues to leg out maturities of bonds and mitigate any mature – debt maturity walls that come up and that’s one of the reason why we’re proactively also looking to push out and restructure some of our credit liabilities. Also reminder, that our convertible bonds, the last remaining tail of that matures is in April of 2016. And now we’ll clean up any remaining legacy convertible bond as well. Fin O’Shea: Very well thank you and on fundings this quarter, do you have a number or even a ballpark number, fundings that were new at the time of originations versus prior commitments?

I don’t think we have that allocation in front of us, but I think that you’re safe to assume that Q4 you probably look at gross fundings allocated probably, you are talking about Q3 or Q4, I’m sorry. Fin O’Shea: Q3.

I’m sorry, Q3 I think that Mark will actually have Q3 data.

Yes, I think the easiest way to described that is the – of the $157 million we had it’s about a 50-50 in terms between the new loans and existing loans. So, it’s still pretty consistent in terms of what we’re discussing on the new companies, which is funding the existing companies. Fin O’Shea: Okay very well that’s all from me. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question will be coming from the line of Ryan Lynch from KBW. Your line is now open.

Hey, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. It looks like you guys had about $35 million uptick in investments that are listed as grade five in the quarter and also looks like you guys had about $1 million of collateral base impairment write downs in the quarter. I just would have expected more collateral write downs in the quarter given the move significant or the decent size of new grade five investments, so can you just help me understand why there are so little collateral based write downs in the quarter?

Sure, as I said, I have four companies that have signed – four companies who are in the midst and throws of the completed M&A event, without getting into specific names some of those names maybe reflective in a rated 4 or rated 5, and we do that, because until such time as our companies have secured subsequent amount of financing that will fund the operation of the business for next 12 – 9 to 12 months until that is completed we take the cautionary approach to merely market down to signal that we’re monitoring situation closely. And often times the case is because there’s an abundance of enterprise value that cover our loan and that will mitigate any need or necessity to then markdown the credit or markdown the loan in that context. So just because of the rated five did not directly correlate that there has to be an impairment of principal or loan value against the credit. If the credit were to deteriorate further, meaning, that in M&A event that is personally not completed and subsequently not followed up by an equity infusion by the venture capital firms that would re-merit or revisit the credit rating on that credit or the impairment on that credit. But at this juncture, given that many of our companies are very actively involved in M&A discussion to which we are very much aware of. We don’t see at this juncture any necessity to enter principal risk.

Okay, great. And then you guys have done a nice job of producing unfunded commitments over the past few quarters. You also talked about reducing – actively reducing some specific exposures like your exposure to China in the most recent quarter. I was just curious if any other repayments in the current quarter were initiated by new guys in an effort to reduce any associated unfunded commitments with a specific portfolio company?

So the answer to that question is obviously, yes. As Hercules has done throughout its many years in history and monitoring credit, we take very proactive approach to looking at credit, not necessarily in the current quarter, but what is the occurrence of a credit situation two or three quarters out. And that has served us well over the years. Yes, they may hurt than I may gave up some current interest income, but I also mitigate the possibility of principal risk two or three quarters later on down the road. So we actually took a proactive approach in the portfolio valuation in Q3 and we identified those companies that we felt had a disproportionate risk to China pullback. And we have taken the efforts to reduce that risk and part of that risk is manifested itself in the $190 million of really loan payoffs. So, yes, we do that from time to time. China is one of those issues. We also have another sector, I don’t want to disclose. So I don’t give some of our competitors, the clue. But there is another sector that we have made a conscious effort to pullback some as well, while some of our competitors are leave fully looking to wait in and we’re fine with that.

All right, great. That’s all from me.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Aaron Deer from Sandler O’Neill & Partners. Your line is now open.

Hey, good afternoon, everyone.

Hi, Aaron.

Just one quick follow-up question from me on the unfunded commitments. I’m just curious if there has been any shift in the and how you’re underwriting credits or the structure of the credits that’s bringing down the level of unfunded commitments or contributing to anyone?

So obviously new credit origination will not impact legacy unfunded commitments, but the answer to your question is, yes. We have made material changes to our business that would absolutely ensure that the unfunded commitments continues to decline every time. As you saw that our ability to risen in Q3, we’re not seeing any impact to our business, because thankfully the SEC has applied the methodology system-wide, so others will have to calibrate if there’s anything that we’re doing anyways. So we see no impact to our business on a go-forward basis. And we’re actively, as we said in the beginning of the call, a lot of the unfunded commitments convert into funded assets, as well as a portion of those unfunded commitments expired merely they passed this time or the milestones that the company expatiating we are not achieved. And those two factors certainly helped relieve or reduce the unfunded commitments that we expect to see further decline in Q4.

All right. And so what are the material changes that were made on new credits versus the legacy stuff?

I’m sorry that we’re not going to disclose, because that’s competitive advantage. But the answer is that we are and we were not going to get into the specificity – this specifics as to how we conduct our business and divorce straight secrets on these calls.

All right. Fair enough. Thanks for taking my questions.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Leslie [indiscernible] from Raymond James. Your line is now open.

Hey, guys, it’s Leslie Vandegrift. [How are you doing there] [ph]?

Good. Thank you. How are you.

Doing well, thanks. So I got a couple of just kind of tied together questions. First of all, you are talking about possible BDC M&A interest, I know right now we are all kind of watching to see how that kind of new story goes, but if you were interested in looking any sort of qualities or looking for an expansion of our current, the same kind of loans you guys currently do expansion into maybe a different area in the market, any color on that would be good?

No, I’m sure you’ll like color on that. Today, we’re not going to disclose that I think that like you we’re watching the developments in the BDC industry. There are certainly larger BDCs than us that I’m very much aware, who are closely scrutinizing and monitoring the business. I think this gives managers the opportunity to readjust our management fees [indiscernible], but I think that right now we’re all watching and waiting the current development, if that saga that’s taking place in a market. And see how that kind of comes out and see, which processes tend to be viewed more favorable and what tend to be viewed less favorable. And I think that we’re patient and like I said it is a tertiary part of our strategy, not primary and if we don’t do anything for six months or year that’s fine as well, it’s much more opportunistic and as I said at the beginning of the call, I prefer to have it done in a friendly basis in a very collaborative basis than a hostile basis.

Of course yes. And then on [indiscernible] I know we talked about a lot in this called and you guys have been taking it down. Any response in the SEC, I know that obviously your mix shift got filed and was effective before filling your 10-Q, so that’s through. But I have seen a lot of other BDCs have correspondent come out publicly, were they’re responding back and forth with the SEC have you guys said that and if so color on the response to your differentiation between milestone versus not milestone?

Sure, I’ll let Mark answer that, but you’re absolutely right. I think the first wave of BDCs we’re eager to put this situation behind them who are engaged and very open, open comment letters back and forth of the SEC, we certainly opted to go and engage proactively with SEC on a more private basis, which Mark can kind of open and give you color on the current development and prior conclusions from the SEC, Mark?

Sure, I mean look the SEC as I’ve discussed before when we first began this process we had some come out as go back and forth. I think one of the more interesting parts that we did was really sit down with the Securities and Exchange Commission on a phone call for about an hour an half walking them through not just the BDC space, which I think everybody generalizes a bit too much, but that were ventured debt however on funded commitments are potentially different to mid-and-low market lenders, et cetera, et cetera and it was a very meaningful discussion. We followed that up, kind of with a letter just this is rearticulating the points that we made. We had some good conversations back and forth. And again, we weren’t surprised at all in terms of how it all came out that was what we were expecting at least hoping and expecting. So, it all worked out very well, it was very proactive and was very meaningful discussions. In terms of your first point, which is the available and unavailable milestone basis. Yes we had discussions around that they I think had a much better appreciation of one being openly contractually obligation versus one is not. The hurdle rates for those that were not achieving the milestones yet. And the way that we manage our balance sheet is incredibly consistent. And our ability, which is why I was personally very pleased with the representation and essence basically saying that we’ll be careful and monitor unfunded ways to our balance sheet, which of course we would do. So, I hope that helps you in terms of where we got to with them.

Yes, certainly, okay. And the last question I know you guys are talking about the market outlets seems pretty positive on your end kind of all around for fourth quarter, but we’ve heard other peers either in some of the bank, and the Silicon Valley bank had issues in the third quarter talking about the DC market maybe they will be a little slower over the next two quarters and obviously you guys aren’t seeing that do you know any reason why there we got to see better deals more deals coming through any differentiation there?

Well, Silicon Valley banks is a good quality name, and they’re very large in the asset class but they’re a bank they focus on customers and deposit, we focus on making investment in prudent later stage companies that are approaching greater liquidity events. So, I think that we basically fish in two different types of areas and with a pullback in valuations that we expect to see occurring in Q4 and the first half of 2015, first half of 2016, I think debt is a natural product to kind of helps stem the dilutive impact on a lower evaluation and that requires you to be able to do larger transaction sizes to which Hercules balance sheet lends itself very favorable to, while others don’t have the wherewithal and the balance sheet to do it $30 million, $40 million, $50 million transaction as we can. So, I think that the differentiation of market will become very clear. And in Q4 and our first half of 2015 those with capital, those without capital to be able to benefit themselves on those larger transactions that we think will come to the table, which is why we’re pretty excited of our liquidity position where we’re at and the opportunities that we see before us, with $300 million of available dry powder to invest. So, we actually think Q4 and first half of 2016 are going to be great quite attractive periods.

Okay perfect, that’s it from me. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. And at this time I’m not showing any further questions. And I would like to turn the call back over to Manuel Henriquez, you may proceed.

Thank you operator, and thanks everyone for joining on the call today. As most of you maybe aware of we’re attending the Wells Fargo BDC Conference in New York on November 7, through the 18th. We have a very, very busy schedule already on that date with many investor meetings. But clearly if you want to put your name on that list and have a meeting with management, I would encourage you to reach out please to our Investor Relations department, Michael Hara and he will help coordinating a time slot if available or a meeting if you are in New York, while we are there as well. Thank you everybody and operator that concludes the call.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today’s conference. This does conclude the program. And you may all disconnect. Everyone have a great day.