Marianne [ph]. Welcoming you to the ING's First Quarter 2023 Conference Call. This conference is being recorded. Before handing this conference call over to Steven van Rijswijk, Chief Executive Officer of ING Group, let me first say, that today's comments may include forward-looking statements such as statements regarding future developments in our business, expectations for our future financial performance, and any statement not including historical fact. Actual results may differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statement. A discussion of factors that may cause actual results to differ from those in any forward-looking statements is contained in our public filings, including our most recent Annual Report on Form 20-F filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and our earnings press release as posted on our website today. Furthermore, nothing in today's comments constitutes an offer to sell or solicitation of any offer to buy any securities. Good morning, Steven, over to you.

Good morning, and welcome to our first quarter of 2023 results call. I hope you're all well. And as usual, I'm joined by our CFO, Tanate Phutrakul and our CRO, Ljiljana Cortan. And I'm pleased to take you through today's presentation. After that, we will take your questions. We started 2023 with a very strong quarter in both our retail and wholesale business, by keeping focus on our customers and delivering value and demonstrating stability in their water turbulent time for the banking sector. We continue to record organic growth and add another 106,000 primary customers, we choose ING for our superior customer experience. And this is supported by our digital-only mobile-first strategy, as evidenced in the largest share of mobile-only customers. Another achievement was a growing fully mobilized, to help our wholesale banking clients transition to a more sustainable business model. At €22 billion the volume mobilized was up by more than 25% compared to the first quarter of 2022. In our P&L, we continue to see the benefits of the current rate environment, both on our retail customer deposits, and our wholesale payments and cash management business. This comes on top of the structurally higher fee base, a strong performance on total income, a year-on-year growth of 23%. For the quarter, we realize the strong 13% ROE, increasing our four quarter rolling average ROE to 9.7%. And all of this has enabled us to announce an additional distribution in the form of a €1.5 billion share buyback, which will kick off tomorrow. We accomplished all this in another exceptional quarter. Although honestly, there has not been a dull moment since I became CEO almost three years ago. And I'm proud that our performance has been strong throughout these years and I'm confident, we will continue to deliver value.…

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from Rahul Sinha from JP Morgan.

Good morning, Steven. Good morning, everybody. Thanks very much for taking my questions. I guess the first one is around capital distributions. Thank you for the new slide on the withholding tax mechanics and also further clarity on the next decision date. I guess my question is around how do you decide the size, this is the right size of the buyback? Just it looks like you seem to have a good prominent that. Your capital ratio is not changing much even after a 50% dividend accrual and the share buyback. So are you expecting a rebound in RWA growth or capital consumption later in the year? I guess, we're all related? And the second question is just on costs. You had 55% costs in Q1 and obviously, you're not reiterating this 55%, 56% that you said last quarter for the year. I was just wondering how to read this? It looks like it's a bit easier now for you to get to your 50% to 52% and is that why you're not really reiterating the 55%, 56% because you're already in the lower end? Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Rahul. I will answer the question on costs. And Tanate will answer the question on the decision on how we decide the size of share buybacks or capital distributions. On cost, I said during the presentation, we saw the quarter-on-quarter cost rise with 10.7%, that had to do with, first of all, the fact that there were salary indexations and CLA that came in this quarter, but we're not there basically in that level in the first quarter last year. Two, we had a number of specific cost items that we either move forward in terms of already CLA agreements that we have for later this year and some other costs in Wholesale Banking as well as a legal provision that we took. So we took some additional costs in that sense in the first quarter. And we continue to invest in marketing and in our digital experience [technical difficulty] and extrapolate that over the year, but I want to reiterate that point. We've given a cost guidance of 55% to 56%, but actually, we do not currently see the 55% as a floor. That should give you some guidance.

Thank you.

Rahul, on capital, I think we look at three things. The most important of which is the level of capital generation that our franchise determines. That would be the first factor in looking at capital. The second, we look at stress testing, making sure that we capture all the macroeconomic situation into our numbers in terms of determining the level of additional distribution. And then we look at any [technical difficulty] we have split our capital management in terms of providing this clarity in Q1 and that we would give, based on certain calibration of outlook, another announcement in Q3. So that's a bit how we do the decision-making around the level of capital distribution.

Thanks so much. And RWA growth, are you expecting a rebound?

At this point in time, no. The level of negative risk migration despite the situation remains benign.

The next question comes from Jon Peace from Credit Suisse.

Thank you. Good morning, everybody. So my first question is on NII. I'm not sure what you would consider a normal level of the sort of FX swap revenue transfer between NII and other operating income. But it feels like underlying NII was probably at least € 100 million above the reported number. So given lending margins are stabilizing, could we think of annualizing to sort of 16.4, 16.5 as an NII level that would be reasonable for this year? And my second question, please, is just on the cost of risk. Are you seeing Stage 3 defaults still running at a very low level in Q2? So could we imagine you might again be well below the through-the-cycle rate for this quarter? Thank you.

I'll do the one on NII and then Ljiljana will take the cost of risk. Look, as you know, we have given a guidance that we will increase our revenues compared to last year of more than 10%. We -- of course, we've seen the tailwind from the interest rates. And indeed, you point out to the revenue that we booked in other income, which indeed is therefore, sort of a deflation of interest income because that was moved through P&L lines, so as a matter of fact, interest income, if you correct for that anomaly, if you will, would have been higher. And at this point, we continue to see that tailwinds. And basically, the question is, when do interest rates also move or savings rate move, that also is very much linked to higher loan demand, which would then therefore, create more competition, but that's currently not what we're seeing. So currently, we -- at this point, we continue to see that tailwind continuing.

Good morning. On the risk cost, I think Steven already said, we see very modest and benign overall risk cost for the quarter. And if we are looking specifically the structure at the S3 risk cost, we do see €197 million, as we've presented. However, less than 40% of that amount relates to individual as risk costs. Coming back to your questions. No, we do not see an increased number of individual defaults. On contrary, this quarter has been characterized by a very low number of individual defaults in wholesale banking, while in retail banking as well we do not see a structural deterioration in our major portfolios. Also, if we are looking at delinquency rates, days overdue, but as well unlikely to pay. What is also important to note is why such increase in S3 is clearly, we have had a few of the model updates for some of our regular mortgage and consumer loans, IFRS models, but as well, we have had the impact of the index mortgages in Retail Banking in Polish with respect to the Swiss franc mortgages. So all in all, a very good quarter and no signs of deterioration on that part.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Johan Ekblom from UBS.

Thank you. If we can just come back to the NII and these temporary effects. I guess two things I'd like to understand. One, the full negative amount we see in Q1, the €271 million, I guess, transfer between the lines, should we expect all of that to reverse into NII at some point? And then maybe if you can just highlight the mechanics for what would cause that to transfer back to NII to start and what's the duration? So do we need to wait for ECB rates to stabilize or to fall? And how quickly would that unwind? And maybe just to come back on the cost side. When we talk about the regulatory costs this quarter, you flagged both the lower SRF contribution and something that sounded like temporary effects in Belgium. When we think about risk costs going forward, is the kind of run rate we saw last year, Q2 to Q4, the right level to think of? And -- or will we see some of these effects in Belgium, et cetera, reverse in the coming quarters?

I guess this is for Tanate.

Thanks, Johan. Just to be clear, there are certain market opportunities, which are linked to interest rate differentials between different currencies. So you can see this transference between other income and interest income to be completely linked, right? So that would mean if we unwind these position, those would normalize. So you should be able to see that the normal run rate of replication and lending of that 234, it should be added to our numbers for Q1. So it's related to each other. With such trades, with such opportunities will continue into Q2. It really depends on, again, market opportunities and the interest rate differential that you see in the markets today. So I would say that we would give clarity in Q2 what these effects are, but that's why we flagged it out because these opportunities had a material impact in Q1. Then on the regulatory expenses, yes, you do see a reduction of €124 million, something that we want to flag is, of course, that the SRF contribution will likely be finished by the end of 2023 and that the DGS contribution would be targeted to be filled by the middle of next year of '24. We have given some guidance during our Investor Day that we expect regulatory expenses in this bucket to be down by approximately €400 million starting in 2025 from '21 levels, and we stick with that guidance.

So just maybe to come back on the NII side. I mean the -- when we look at -- is there a normal kind of historical run rate of these trades or is it roughly a zero kind of net impact over time? Just to try and gauge kind of how big the extraordinary component is?

Well, I think the extraordinary component we mentioned exactly that is €234 million in NII. And...

Okay. So CRO is the long-term average.

Yes. Indeed. Yes.

The next question comes from Amit Goel from Barclays.

Hi, thank you. So I just wanted to come back in terms of the broader revenue kind of picture then. So the greater than 10% revenue growth, I mean, clearly, given the level of revenue growth in Q1, I guess, partially driven by this effect that you just were talking about, it still means that the actual kind of revenue trajectory in the rest of the year doesn't need to be very strong to achieve it. Just want to get your sense of where you could see revenues kind of getting to this year. And also just in terms of the NII development, again, relative to the kind of information you gave at Q3 in terms of the sensitivities based on rates at that time. Just curious how you're seeing that based on current rates and your current expectations?

Okay. Thank you, Amit. I will do the question on revenues and Tanate will give an answer on the NII trajectory and you refer, I think, based on the model or I think the replication levels given at Q3 or the examples we gave. NII. Yes, well, I mean, we said -- I don't want to nitpick on words, but we said greater than 10% for 2023, which we still stand by. And as you said, I think it was based, I think, on a previous question that what we -- how we clearly benefit from a tailwind in interest rates, we continue to see that currently because part of the pressure to increase interest rates will depend on the loan demand in markets or the high loan demand in markets, and that's currently what we do not see. So we continue to currently see benefits from these interest rate differentials and that supports the greater than 10% revenue growth. Tanate?

Amit, if you go back to look at our presentation in Q3, I would say that the shape of the interest rate curve is more beneficial to us than it was then. So a much sharper short-term rates increase compared to then. And I think in terms of the simulation that we did then, that curve was based on a simulation of roughly around 30% tracking speed for 2023 and what we see in Q1 is that the tracking speed is significantly below that number and how it would look the rest of the year, it really depends on competitive pressure and it depends on demand for deposits to fund our loan growth. And so far, we see that competition level has been relatively benign.

The next question comes from Benoit Petrarque from Kepler Cheuvreux.

Yes. Good morning. So the first question is on the current deposit margin at 114 bps, which is well above the cross cycle average. So the question is, yes, are you confident you can sustain this level also kind of in the medium term? Or is that fair to assume that there will be a bit of a normalization at some point towards the end of the year? And also on the deposit side, do you see any indication? I think you talked about the pass-through rate but more on the shift out of current accounts into savings or term deposits, do you see any customer behavior on that side? And then the next question will be on the cost side. So I get the message that, obviously, we should not extrapolate Q1, but okay, now you have a CLA on the Dutch staff. Belgium inflation seems to slow down. I mean the clarity -- there's more clarity on the wage front. Do you think you could maybe be a bit more specific in terms of cost growth for this year -- I mean on the full year? I think in the past, you would try to provide a bit more granular levels in terms of expected cost growth in terms of guidance. But could we get a bit more details on -- and basically details and how you see cost growth for the full year, a bit more specific than what you guided, please?

All right. So I will give both questions to Tanate then.

When you talk about the deposit margin, I think we've given guidance before that over the long term, we see deposit margin around 100 basis points, right? And we're sitting at 114, so from that perspective, we are flying a little bit higher than what we normally do. And to address, do we see any shifts? We don't see that material shift in terms of fixed-term deposits. There are some, but not that material. What we do see as more of a trend line is the switch from current account into savings account. It is small for the time being, but it's beginning to increase compared to Q4. So that's a bit of a flavor around deposit margin. And to reiterate the point, we don't see competition for deposits being very heated in light of fairly muted demand for loan growth. In terms of cost, maybe a bit more guidance. If you talk down from the 10.7% increase in cost, we have had in Q1, quite a sizable legal provision and also high marketing spend. Those would account for roughly around 2.5%. So the run rate in Q1 on a normalized basis is closer to around 8% cost growth. Where would we go from here? Kind of indexations on salaries are coming down, energy costs are coming down and so that bodes well for in terms of the trend line. But if you say where we are in terms of Q1 cost projection, it's around 8%.

The next question comes from Benjamin Goy from Deutsche Bank.

Hi, good morning. Two questions, please. So first, on new customer growth. It seems like you were a bit more on the front foot. Just wondering a bit more color on the markets and whether attractive savings rates are the other main driver of that? And then secondly, you mentioned so far subdued loan growth. Historically, you mentioned some pockets like Asia or U.S. that were better. Wondering whether there is some differentiation or whether you see essentially rather subdued demand essentially across all your lending book? Thank you.

Yes. Thank you, Ben. I think that on customer growth, I mean, that was a little bit over 100,000 this quarter. A significant part came from Germany, as we've already said earlier, but I think also our CEO in Germany said we want to grow our customer base there to 10 million in the next three years. So we invest well and the digital experience as well as in our marketing, and that is paying off by seeing the growth there. But also in other markets, we continue to see primary customer growth. And in the end, what we want to do, and that's why we call them primary customers is not only to make them customers. And as you may know, we currently have this action currently in the German markets that we started in April in the end, we want to convert those new customers and primary customers because we do more with these customers and the customers are more profitable. So that's how we target them. In terms of loan growth, whether there's any differentiation in different markets, not really. We see -- I think that what you do see is mortgage levels in the markets and talk about the markets in general are down 30% to 50%. But on the other hand, the stock stays stable, so therefore, you see our book being relatively stable. At some point, that mortgage market will return and wholesale banking more on, let's say, term lending and syndicated loans with a little bit less in working capital and trade commodity finance, that's based on lower commodity prices. And that has influenced the book, but there's not a particular regional element in there.

The next question comes from Flora Bocahut from Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning. The first question is on revenues. I'd like to come back to this guidance for this year, where you expect revenue growth of over 10%. I know it's only Q1, so the beginning of this year. I know that guidance doesn't have a maximum, so technically stands. But if we annualize the Q1 run rate, you're actually going for about 20% growth this year versus last year. So the question is really why do you keep that guidance unchanged? Or another way to ask it, is there anything when we look into the Q1 results today, that you think will not be sustainable or could turn more negative before the end of this year? And the second question, still on revenues. The revenues that you booked in other income this quarter, but you say are actually NII related, could you clarify that these come actually on top of the replicating portfolio contribution guidance that you had made? Thank you.

I think the answer on the second question is yes. And the answer on the first question is, yes. Look, we cannot predict the future. We can only report on what we currently see. And for us to continue to benefit in a similar way that we have benefited from increasing interest rates so far means that the level of tracking should remain relatively limited to what we see in the past. And Tanate already said that based on what we presented in the third quarter last year, we gave a few examples how tracking could develop itself. It is lagging. And as a result of it, we have been benefiting more. And an element of that tracking would increase would be that there would be higher lending demand, which would spur more need for savings, for example, or deposits. And that we currently do not see. So at this point in time, we see continued benefit in the same level, and we need to see how that will further develop.

Okay. Thank you.

The next question comes from Kiri Vijayarajah from HSBC. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning, everyone. A couple of questions from my side. So firstly, coming back to core lending group slide, which, if I look at it annualized, is running at less than 1%. And given last year, you added over 0.5 million new primary customers, and I think it was another 0.5 million a year before that as well. So my question is how come all of that kind of primary customer growth isn't translating into better lending volumes, particularly when I look at the retail and challenges growth segment on that slide, if you call lending growth? And then linked to that, with the deposit margin recovering quite nicely, I was wondering, is that feeding through more meaningfully into rising customer acquisition costs as you add these extra primary customers, particularly in those markets where maybe some of your competitors might be a bit more deposit-driven in terms of their growth strategies that, that's pushing up your customer acquisition costs across your retail markets? Those are my two questions, please.

Okay. I'll give these questions to Tanate.

I think maybe addressing your second question, Kiri. If you look at the positive negative interest rate, acquisition of customers using deposit was a negative proposition from a P&L perspective. Given the curve, given the current absolute rates from the ECB, customer acquisition using deposits has turned into a positive proposition. And that's why you see promotions that we do in a number of markets, whether Poland, Germany or Spain. And that's what is driving our primary customers. And in terms of lending, we continue to acquire lending customers, but it's just demand given where the rates are, is more subdued, right? So that's basically it. But we have accelerated somewhat additional marketing spend during the course of Q1 to increase our drive of primary customers. So that is the case.

Okay. So that ramp-up in marketing flat for 1Q. Are you anticipating more of a pickup than on the lending, retail lending side maybe for the back end of the year?

It's demand-driven. I think the market, I think, during the course of '23, we just need to adjust to these new rates environment. And when that adjustment takes place, then it will be reflected first in GDP, consumer confidence and feed through into bank lending.

Fair enough. Thank you.

The next question comes from Andreas Scheriau from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Hello. Thank you for taking the questions. So I'd like to come back to deposits, please. What you see on your most rate sensitive customers doing, are they moving towards variable savings accounts, time deposits or money market funds or other investment solutions. And if you could just speak a bit about any difference that you see across regions, I think that would be helpful? And then the second question is on the size of the Eurozone retail replicating portfolio. Has that -- is the size of that changed materially since the last time you gave an update? And then following on from that, are you expecting to adjust the size of that hedge going forward? And how you thinking about this in general? Thank you.

Okay. I'll give the second question to Tanate, and I'll do the first question. Yes, you asked -- so first of all our deposits have increased again. This time with €1.3 billion. And you talk about money market funds, but that's a U.S. phenomenon, we don't have that here in Europe, and people can't use -- individuals can use not to buy money market funds. So there is some shift from current accounts to savings, as Tanate has already said, but that's relatively limited. And we do see some shift to asset under management. So that is what we see. So we see our asset under management books increase, not yet the number of trades, but we do see the number of clients and accounts increase. That is the main shift that's currently taking place but not so much in any other funds that you talked about.

And then there's -- for the second question, from what we disclosed before the size of our Eurozone deposit replication, it's roughly about the same. Maybe the level of deposits is somewhat higher than perhaps in Q4, Q3. And then in terms of interest rate, whether the replication is -- or adjusting the hedges, we dynamically change our hedges all the time to reflect prevailing rates, prevailing customer behavior. So that's a dynamic process that we do constantly.

Okay. Thank you very much.

We will now take the next question from Anke Reingen from RBC.

Hello. Can you hear me?

Yes, hi. We can hear you.

Sorry, apologies. Thank you for taking my question. Just two, please. On the fee growth, you're slightly below your target range. And clearly, Q1 last year was a high level, but do you think like in order to move higher up in the range, more supportive capital market and wholesale leveling to pick up again or is there -- or could there also be a headwind from especially on payment packages given the higher rate environment? And then secondly, just on this treasury impact in Q1. I mean it's like an absolute number, so it's quite sizable. I'm just -- I mean if you can just provide some comfort in terms of the size of the positions that the treasury is ticking? I mean I guess it's also because of the magnitude of the rate changes, it's quite meaningful, but it if you just seem quite large in terms of impact that you can provide some from color here? Thank you.

Yes. Thank you, Anke. I will answer the first question and Tanate the second. A couple of remarks on fees. If you -- in general, we want to grow our primary customers because if we have more primary customers, these customers we know will do more with us and also do more in commission products. Then we are active in a number of markets where there are, let's say, local incumbents who may feel more pressure to increase prices on commission products and then we can follow. And there are also markets in which we are more a challenger, where we have started only in a limited way to levy fees for services that we provide. So there is room there. And then we are extending our services. So if you look at our number of investment accounts, we only started a couple of years ago with apps on investment accounts, and we're seeing good growth in a number of countries, and I've mentioned Germany, n number of times. Yes [technical difficulty] currently more subdued given the uncertainties in the market, but the number of accounts has again increased. And once the confidence in the market returns, we can see and we will continue then to see an uplift in investment income. In payment packages, we gradually have increased payment packages in a number of the markets, but we've also seen that the number of transactions have increased as well. And lending in wholesale banking, we've seen a very good quarter in the fourth quarter because of a number of larger syndicated loans that is a bit lower now. But once the market is rebounding, we'll expect that also to pick up.

And Anke, on the trading opportunities. I just want to reiterate the point we operate well within our market risk tolerance. So there's more why this thing is highlighted at the moment, is the accounting asymmetry that you see in Q1 that instead of matching these positions in the net interest line, just given the fact of this trading strategy, it happens to be split between other income and interest rates. And as Steven mentioned, is really unique to this trading strategy, and it doesn't affect our overall NII replication of our savings book. And if these trading strategies were unwound, then it will both disappear.

Okay. Thank you.

The next question comes from Giulia Aurora from Morgan Stanley.

Hi, good morning, everyone. This is Giulia from Morgan Stanley. Thank you for taking my question. Just a follow-up on the liability margins. ING has indicated that this will remain the main tailwind and the key income driver for this year. Yes, the Netherlands screen is one of the fastest for the deposit pricing across Europe. Can you share what you are seeing on the ground in terms of repricing pressures from competition in the Netherlands as well as other markets such as Belgium and Germany? And how close do you think we are to the peak NII? And the second question on overlays. So you have made a top-up in the overlays this quarter? And how should we think about the overlays going forward? Do you think you can expect further top-ups to come in the next quarters? Or are you comfortable at these levels of the overlay buffer?

Okay. Ljiljana takes the question on risk cost, I on liability margin. Like I said, so the speed of the tracking rate is amongst others linked to the speed of growth in loan demand. And currently, we see an environment whereby loan demand is relatively subdued. You see that in mortgages where I said that depending on the market and that goes for all the large markets in which were active, the current mortgage production is between 30% and 50% lower than we typically see. But yet, the stock is there. So therefore, that you see some stabilization and also in wholesale banking, the loan demand is relatively subdued. So it will depend on the pick of loan demand and economic growth. That's -- therefore, there's more demand in loans in it but also then also have an impact on deposits required. So that's one element of it. So it depends on pickup of loan demand, which we currently don't see. The second element I want to say now, like I highlighted before, in a number of the markets we are a challenger, and that mean that we sometimes do actions like you have seen in Germany, we're more on the front foot. And in some markets, we're more incumbent with a more staled market environment. So there, we are more of a follower that you see in markets like, for example, Belgium.

On the overlays. Good morning. Yes, the total amount of the overlay in the first quarter is a bit above €500 million, precisely €521 million. And yes, it has topped up. However, the top-up come primarily from the model update, so IFRS model update that are to be implemented in the second quarter. When it comes to the real risk overlays, I would say, we see quite constant or even a bit decreasing situation having in mind that the macroeconomic forecast are more positive at this point of time that have been once we have set this overlay. So for the time being, we are quite confident about the size of these overlays. And as you see also for some of the quarters already, we are at a quite stable level.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Farquhar Murray from Autonomous. Please go ahead.

Good morning, all. Two questions from me. Just coming back to the approach taken in sizing the €1.5 billion capital return announced today, it feels like a simple repeat of the €1.5 billion we saw at 3Q '22, and that's clearly consistent with equal steps. But if we look at the pro forma CET1 ratio of 14.4, we're not really seeing the downward trajectory we need to get to the 12.5% target. Can I just ask, is that a reflection just of the lag nature of the conversation with ECB and maybe a blowout quarter? And can we expect a resumption of the downward trajectory in the pro forma ratio looking perhaps at a 3Q update? And then secondly, you actually mentioned the recalibration as part of this exercise. Is that a recalibration of the forward scenarios and what are the kind of key changes you've made there? Thanks.

So let's put it this way. We have said we want to move to around 12.5% by the end of 2025, roughly equal steps. We have repeated that statement. And when we apply for certain levels to -- for share buybacks or capital distributions, we do have a couple of months in advance. And the circumstances change and maybe a bit more positive, a bit more negative, but we can't every second change than these levels. These are then -- and we want to do that in a gradual way. But of course, if, let's say, our profitability would turn out to be higher and therefore, our capital will turn out to be higher, we would calibrate also the capital plan, and that could then also mean that we would calibrate those capital distributions. But that depends on where we are at that point in time with the targets to go back to around 12.5% in 2025 in roughly equal steps. With that -- sorry, go ahead, Faruhar.

And then with regards to the recalibration, I've seen just macro being slightly better than it was three months ago?

Well, so I said we then need to depending on how things go. And if the outlook is better or if it is worse, on profitability and capital, we then would indeed need to calibrate. That's how we would do it.

Great. Thanks guys.

Thank you very much for your time. Thank you very much for listening to us. Thank you very much for your good questions. I will leave -- we will leave you for now, but I'm sure you can also be in touch with our Investor Relations team and I'm looking forward to speaking to you again in three months' time. Thank you. Operator?

Thank you. That will conclude today's conference call. Thank you for your participation, ladies and gentlemen. You may now disconnect.