Hello, and welcome to today’s Medtronic’s Q4 earnings release conference call. [Operator instructions.] I would now like to turn today’s call over to your host, Jeff Warren, vice president of investor relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, operator. Good morning, and welcome to Medtronic’s fourth quarter conference call and webcast. During the next hour, Omar Ishrak, Medtronic’s chairman and chief executive officer; and Gary Ellis, Medtronic’s chief financial officer, will provide comments on the results of our fourth quarter fiscal year 2013, which ended April 26, 2013. After our prepared remarks, we will be happy to take your questions. First, a few logistical comments. Earlier this morning, we issued a press release containing our financial statements and a revenue by business summary. You should also note that some of the statements made during this call maybe considered forward-looking statements and that actual results might differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statement. Additional information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ is contained in our periodic reports filed with the SEC. Therefore, we do not undertake to update any forward-looking statement. In addition, the reconciliations of any non-GAAP financial measures are available on the Investors portion of our website at medtronic.com. Finally, unless we say otherwise, references to quarterly or annual results, increasing or decreasing, are in comparison to the fourth quarter and full year 2013, respectively, and all year-over-year revenue growth rates are given on a constant currency basis. With that, I am now pleased to turn the call over to Medtronic chairman and chief executive officer, Omar Ishrak.

Good morning, and thank you, Jeff. And thank you to everyone for joining us today. This morning we reported fourth quarter revenue of $4.5 billion, which represents growth of 5%. Q4 non-GAAP earnings of $1.124 billion and diluted earnings per share of $1.10 increased 8% and 11%, respectively. These results were a strong finish to a solid fiscal year, and more importantly, represented another step toward our goal of delivering consistent and dependable growth. Our performance was broad-based, with many businesses and geographies making significant contributions to our overall growth. In the second half of the fiscal year, we delivered 4.4% revenue growth, which was consistent with the model we shared at the beginning of the calendar year. This quarter, our revenue exceeded our outlook, which contributed to a portion of the earnings upside, the details of which we will discuss later. We recognize that every quarter may not be a perfect fit on our trend line because of a variety of reasons, but the most important outcome for me is that we are establishing a track record of consistency. We’re still in the process of continuing to strengthen and geographically diversify our businesses so that we can reliably deliver balanced and consistent growth. Looking back at FY13, I’m proud of the work that our approximately 4,500 employees around the world have accomplished. We improved our top line performance for the second consecutive year, delivering 5% growth, which exceeded our original revenue outlook. We maintained our market share in almost all of our businesses while delivering SG&A leverage. Our FY13 non-GAAP EPS grew 300 basis points [faster than] revenue, and we generated $4.4 billion in free cash flow. And while these financial metrics are important, they come as a result of living our mission, partnering with our physician and administrative…

Thanks, Omar. Fourth quarter revenue of $4.459 billion increased 4% as reported and 5% on a constant currency basis after adjusting for our $48 million unfavorable impact of foreign currency. Q4 revenue results by region were as follows. Growth in central and eastern Europe was 24%. The Middle East and Africa grew 21%. Growth in Latin America was 18%. Asia-Pacific grew 13%, including 19% growth in Japan. Growth in greater China was 10%. South Asia grew 6%. And the growth in the U.S. was 3% while western Europe and Canada grew 1%. The emerging markets were up a combined 14% in Q4, and represented 12% of our total sales mix. Our Q4 emerging market and greater China growth was negatively affected by difficult comparisons due to the timing of the Chinese New Year. Excluding this impact, we estimate that our emerging markets and greater China business grew in the mid to high teens. Looking ahead, we would expect emerging markets to consistently grow in the high teens. As we address the barriers and work with stakeholders our goal is to ultimately drive 20% growth in the emerging markets. Q4 earnings and diluted earnings per share on a non-GAAP basis were $1.124 billion and $1.10, an increase of 8% and 11% respectively. Q4 GAAP earnings and diluted earnings per share were $969 million and $0.95, a decrease of 2% and an increase of 1% respectively as the prior year’s GAAP numbers included the gain on the sale of our Physio-Control business unit. This quarter’s non-GAAP pre-tax adjustments included a $5 million gain associated with the acquisition-related items and a $182 million net restructuring charge that is largely driven by the planned reduction of approximately 2,000 physicians, which predominantly took place in CBG and spine. From a geographic perspective, about half of…

Thanks, Gary. Before I open the lines for Q&A, let me conclude by reiterating that our broad-based Q4 growth was a strong finish to a solid fiscal year, and represented another quarter [unintelligible] toward our goal of delivering consistent and dependable growth. We are still early in the process of strengthening and geographically diversifying our business in order to deliver this performance reliably. There are still areas of uncertainty that are reflected in the guidance we are giving for FY14. However, we intend to execute in areas we can control, including growing our market and building our business so that it is strong enough to offset the variables that are beyond our control. And over time, we aim to reliably deliver on our baseline expectations, which are consistent with [unintelligible] revenue growth, consistent EPS growth of 200 to 400 basis points faster than revenue and returning 50% of our free cash flow to shareholders. At the same time, we are positioning Medtronic to play a leading role in transforming global healthcare by addressing the long term imperatives of economic value and globalization. We are only at the beginning of establishing our track record, but we believe the [unintelligible] execution of both our baseline and long term growth strategies, combined with strong and disciplined capital allocation, will enable us to create long term, dependable value in healthcare. With that, we would now like to open the phones for Q&A. In addition to Gary, I’ve asked Mike Coyle, president of our cardiac and vascular group, and Chris O’Connell, president of our restorative therapies group, to join us again for the Q&A session. We’re rarely able to get to everyone’s questions, so we respectfully request that you limit yourself to only one question, and if necessary, one follow up, so that we can get to as many people as possible. If you have additional questions, please contact our investor relations team after the call. Operator, first question please.

[Operator instructions.] Your first question comes from the line of Matthew Dodd with Citigroup.

Emerging markets was up 14%. Sounds like if you make a few minor adjustments maybe 15% to 17%. But it’s below your plan of 20%-plus, and when we look at fiscal ’14, do you think 20%-plus is still reasonable for emerging markets? Or is 15% to 20% more reasonable just based on what you think the markets are growing?

Twenty is certainly the number that we stated, but it’s a number to work towards. And that’s certainly going to be our goal. But I think 15% to 20%, if you were going to pick between the two, I would say 15% to 20% is probably a more realistic outlook. But I’m holding all the regions accountable to try to get to 20%. There are barriers here that we have to overcome that are taking perhaps a little longer than we originally anticipated. So that’s what I would say on that.

And then Gary, quick one for you, I know you don’t like giving quarterly guidance, but if you look at the first call progression, is the $0.90 for Q1 reasonable? Or should we think about more of a ramp as we go through the year?

As you said, we don’t like to give quarterly guidance. But as we highlighted on our expectations, the $3.80 to $3.85 obviously includes some operational headwinds we’re dealing with, the interest expense, the medical device tax, for example. And if you take those into account, I think the $0.90 right now is indicating like a 6% to 7% growth in earnings per share, which would be basically not including that medical device tax and interest expense, [unintelligible] on the modeling. Right now my guess is that if you looked at it, [DSI] probably would see a shift. I think as you update your models, you’ll probably be shifting a couple of cents from Q1 to Q4. But in general, that guidance we gave should really kind of [unintelligible] across all of the quarters as we go forward. So I think the number currently in Q1 is probably a little bit high as people take a look at their models.

Your next question comes from the line of Mike Weinstein of JPMorgan.

If I look at the U.S. business, it’s your best quarter in three years, maybe even a little bit more than that. One way we’re looking at it, as we try to wade through the anniversary of the Resolute launch, is that if we looked at it ex-Resolute, it’s also you’re best quarter in a few years. So the one question probably everybody has is repeatability. And so if you could just talk about, in particular, the performance in the CRM business this quarter in the U.S. and whether you feel like that’s a sustainable number, or if there was anything that really pushed it at the end of the quarter.

I think we’ve certainly seen signs of end markets stabilizing to some degree. But there are many dynamics here, including the ability to launch new products, and some Resolute share gain in this. And I’m going to ask Mike Coyle to really take this one, because [unintelligible] is obviously driving it.

We’re obviously on the front end of a pretty robust new product introduction cycle here in the U.S., with the Advisa MRI in the early part of the quarter, but really starting to have impact on the back end of the quarter. And we’ll be just heading into our high power new product introductions with both the Viva/Brava system here in the CRT-D segment and then the Evera device system as well. So that’s really the thing that’s giving us the catalyst, not only in terms of market share, but also giving us some cover for the pricing pressure, not just because of these high-end technologies, but now we have multiple tiers to deal with, competitive pricing dynamics. So those are the primary drivers. And as you saw, we’re also continuing to take market share in the DES segment with Resolute Integrity and we’re seeing channel strength across the businesses, across [EVG], so I think we’re really getting some benefit, principally as we’ve talked about before, from the shift over to CRDM, picking up the ball here from what Resolute Integrity has been providing us over the last fiscal year.

Let me try and cover a few items you covered on the call really quickly. One, you said you expect CoreValve approval in the U.S. in the first half of FY15. The question there is have you gotten signoff from the FDA to separate the two cohorts and submit the [extremers] cohort early. And then second question is on the commentary around the FDA and the insulin pump quality systems, it sounds like that’s going to impact the timing of 530G approval. Can you just give us some insight there?

Let me quickly take on the diabetes question, then I’ll ask Mike to provide the answer for the CoreValve. In terms of diabetes, clearly until we get approval it’s not going to get launched. And so that does affect the timing to some degree. We’re planning for it within the calendar year. I think that’s the best I can tell you right now. We’re working closely with the FDA and doing everything we can to ensure that the quality systems are compliant, and per the requirements. And in addition, we’re working with them on any other needs that they may have for the approval itself. So the best I can tell you is that we’re still looking at it for the calendar year. When exactly, it’s impossible for me to estimate.

And on the CoreValve IDE, nothing really has changed. We’ve completed the enrollment phase and the extreme risk side, and completed the follow up phase in the extreme risk side. High risk, we will be finishing up in the coming quarters. At this stage, we are viewing those as being submitted modularly, but planning for them to be reviewed together. And if that changes based on what the data looks like, then we will communicate that.

And Mike, just so I’m clear on that, if the FDA waits for the high-risk arm in order to review it, then it’s unlikely you would have approval in the first half of FY15?

We see a path to getting there that way, but it would certainly be much more difficult.

Your next question comes from Bob Hopkins, Bank of America.

I just want to follow up on some of the things that have been asked about here, with the theme of the pipeline. Can you give us a sense as to when we’ll see the results of your U.S. trial for renal denervation in the United States? Should I assume maybe ACC or PCR of 2014?

For renal denervation, we’re obviously in the process of completing the enrollment and randomization phase. We would think we would be looking late in the fiscal year before we would see those data being recorded with complete follow up.

So that would put you at about ACC or PCR, correct?

At this stage, it’s a little early to tell. It would be late in the fiscal year.

And then just a follow up on CRM and the drivers of your share gain, and what you assume in fiscal year ’14, just to be specific, as you put together your fiscal year 2014 guidance, do you assume that you’re going to be able to continue to take share at the pace that you’re taking it currently?

Well, I think share gain is an important factor here, because our end markets are clearly not growing at the rate we’re growing. And so again, I’ll let Mike give some color to that, but that’s certainly in our consideration.

There are multiple factors that I think are going to help us drive market share capture. Obviously the Advisa MRI in Japan we’re going to continue to get benefit of that until the anniversary. The Advisa MRI launch here in the U.S. [unintelligible] really in the second half of Q4, so we will have the benefits of both the price premium we have gotten there, as well as the ability to take share and initials and to use the broader product range we have to deal with pricing pressure, which we think will help us in our share position overall. In Europe, the Viva/Brava launch has really been very well received. It’s not just the fact that our Adapta CRT technology is really the first feature that has actually been able to show increase in CRT response, but it’s also addressing reductions in heart failure hospitalization which is a hot button, both in Europe and in the U.S. In addition, the Attain Performa lead obviously gives us our first quadripolar lead in the marketplace and we think is offering, from physician feedback we’ve received, significant advantage over competitive product in terms of the narrow dipole giving us an opportunity to have lower phrenic nerve stimulation as well as the use of the [unintelligible] Express algorithm, which automatically adjust for what the physician adjust for, the LV capture thresholds in the lead impedance. So these are giving us ASP increases as well as the opportunity to take share in Europe, and we will have the Viva/Brava system without the Attain Peforma lead in the U.S. for most of the year. And then obviously we have not even begun the launch of the Evera product line, which gives us size and longevity advantages which we think will help us in the standard CRT segment. Not to mention that we’ve also been growing north of 20% in the AF segment, because of the cryo advance technology, our Arctic Front Advance technology. So we think we have a number of ways to continue to take share in that segment, and we think that will be an important part of getting to the guidance we’ve given.

Just quickly, if you think about it, our end markets are kind of growing in a 2-3% range overall. Our guidance of 3-4% says that we will continue to outperform the market in FY14. That doesn’t assume at the level we did in FY13. If we performed at the levels we did in FY13, we’d probably even exceed our guidance. So there is some assumption in our guidance that we gave for the revenue that assumes that we basically continue to gain share and outperform the market, across all businesses, not just CRDM.

Your next question comes from David Lewis with Morgan Stanley

Omar, obviously a lot of focus on the call today on the pipeline, and FY15 is looking like one of the most interesting pipeline years for the company in terms of catalyst. But a lot of that traction with the pipeline may occur late FY15 into FY16. I just wonder, if you think about the timing of that pipeline, over the next 18 months, do you feel comfortable with your organic growth? Or is this a period where Medtronic looks to maybe supplement this sort of gap period, 12-18 months, externally, or with M&A?

M&A is always a possibility. But in our guidance, our planning right now, we haven’t [received] anything concrete, although things can happen. Really our formula here is to attempt to repeat what we had over the last 12 months. And therefore, we’ve kind of kept the guidance where it was earlier this year. And agree that some of the products have anniversaried, but we’ve seen enough new product activity that we feel there’s enough reason for us to expect to repeat the year, or at least meeting the guidance that we just stated. You know, there are many issues here that we’ve got to overcome. The markets are still uncertain. Europe, as you’ve seen, was down last quarter, up this quarter, and it’s somewhat volatile. We’ve got these approvals of some of these products, where the timing is uncertain. So there are pressures. We’re just assuming that the amount of new product activity that we’ve seen across the board, and there’s a lot of that, is enough to offset those. So that’s really all I can say, and we’ve got to work through the next 18 months and [unintelligible]. This is a balanced look and we’ve got to work towards achieving it. But it’s a level of execution that I want this team to be able to deliver on.

And then Gary, maybe just a quantification. You talked a lot about what’s embedded in broader guidance, specifically CRM. If you look to spine, obviously another encouraging quarter. Can you just talk about what you think you saw across the balance of the year in terms of spine market share? What’s the expectation for fiscal ’14? And is there any embedded expectation of acceleration if the June results with BMP are positive?

The answer is no, we’re not expecting, from the June results necessarily, any uplift from, for example, [unintelligible], any growth there. But as we did highlight in the call, [unintelligible]’s testing has stabilized a little bit, which is obviously minimizing the drag that we had on the overall spinal business, starting to become a little bit less as we go forward, as we’ve anniversaried that product, falling off. But the reality is, the other core spine business, with all the new products we’ve been launching, continues to gain share, and as I indicated in the call, we’ve picked up a couple of points of share here in FY13 on the core spinal business, with AMT, with Solera, some of these new products, and we expect that to continue as we go forward, that we will continue to gain share. I’ll let Chris expand on that. Chris O’Connell : That’s right, Gary. I think the spine story is very consistent with what we’ve talked about in the past, that our relative performance in the market is steadily increasing, and we’re clearly in share capture mode at this point in time. We have the bulk of our Solera systems in the market and that’s really driving our overall growth. But as Gary pointed out, we’ve added new technologies into the mix, like the Bryan cervical disk in the U.S., where we’ve now doubled our modest market share from 5% to 10% in that category just six months after launch, where we have new AMT and body devices into the market. But also, what’s really driving our spine business is the use of enabling technologies like imaging and navigation. Our O-arm imaging business is up in the 30% range this year, and where we have O-arms placed in key accounts, we’re seeing up to 10 points higher growth in our core spine business. So we’re getting more and more traction in terms of combining some of our unique surgical capabilities on imaging navigation, power monitoring, etc. to drive our overall spine implant business, which is really helping customers achieve their goals.

Your next question comes from Bruce Nudell, Credit Suisse.

Hey, this is Matt in for Bruce. You mentioned cost uncertainties in Europe, and I wondered if you could talk about, relative to the weakness that you highlighted in January in Europe, has Europe kind of stayed the same? Or do you think it’s gotten a little better? And what factors are different now versus what you saw then?

You know, what we talked about in January potentially was a reflection of the new year cycle. There was a difference in the holiday period which really put pressure on sales for that quarter. Since then, the market has stabilized back to the normal levels that we’ve seen prior to January, early in Q3, which we talked about at that time. And so to that degree, the market has returned to some degree of stabilization, but I can tell you that in Europe you’ve got a variety of countries, they’re all dealing with different types of economic pressures, and healthcare is certainly central in their mind as a cost item. And so while we’re working with governments to make sure that we provide the right value with what we have, at the same time, there could be austerity measures in a variety of countries. There could be a [re-look] of some of the regulations like they’re doing in the U.K. where the NHS has recently, in the last couple of weeks, completely retooled in the way they’re organizing things. So there’s a variety of activity going on in Europe, and that’s why we say that it’s somewhat uncertain, because there are a number of governments out there driving policy, all the way from austerity to [unintelligible] healthcare policy. That’s the best I can give you. But in general, I’d say that our weekly run rates, for example, are comparable to what we had in November, December of last year.

Obviously in our third quarter earnings call, we were very nervous about what happened in January, and were much more cautious. And as we saw in the results, western Europe and Canada grew 1% this quarter. Last quarter, I think it was down 1%, 1.5%. So the fact of the matter is, yes, we saw an improvement in the January, significant shortfall, clearly has improved over this quarter. But as Omar said, that being said, the marketplace is still very volatile, just 1% or 2% growth in the market. And that’s with us outperforming the market. The reality is probably the market in Europe is flat to even slightly down, and the fact that we’re kind of growing 1% to 2% is outperforming the market. So in general some of our fears on the third quarter earnings call maybe were a little bit overstated, but the fact is Europe is still very volatile.

And then you mentioned an easement in U.S. ICD pricing pressure in the quarter. And I wanted to see if you had a sense, are you getting a mix benefit there? Or do you think the like for like environment is actually getting a little better?

I think we’re getting a bit of a mix benefit, but we’re also doing more of our provisions and discounting on multi-line deals across our cardiac and vascular group. And this gives us an opportunity to spread the discounting that the customers expect, or are asking for, from targeted reductions from competitors across a much larger revenue base, which has given us an opportunity to push off some of that discounting. So those items, I think, in addition to probably most importantly the new product, are what give us the opportunity to manage this pricing a little more effectively than we were doing six months ago.

You know, one comment that I’d like to make, probably in response to a number of questions earlier, is that in our outlook for FY14, we talked a lot about new products and their success. But I also want to point out that let’s not underestimate the impact of our CBG sales force are approaching the cardiac [line] administrator. Now we’ve had like two years of doing this. We’re learning how to optimize our presence [unintelligible] the [line] industry to make [unintelligible] more effectively, and I think that’s probably a factor as well, in our success.

And your next question comes from the line of Joanne Wuensch with BMO Capital Markets.

One is, can you set expectations for the [unintelligible] results? What would you consider to be a best case, and what would you consider to be a worrisome outcome?

I don’t want to conjecture on that. The results are due in June. Let’s see what comes out, and then we’ll kind of go from there. But it’s inappropriate for me to speculate on either what they’ll be or what we think would be good or bad.

The second follow up is you’ve talked about a more healthy economic approach to selling over time into the hospital purchasing process. You mentioned that a little bit in how it’s helping your pricing in your [unintelligible] business, but is there another way that we can think about measuring that over time?

Well, you know, we’re going to work on that to try to highlight some of the key factors there. In the end, we want to deliver overall growth and performance, and the exact reason for that, either it’s not that important to be too specific about that, but we do know that hospitals and physicians are sensitive to the economics of their purchase, and we try to line ourselves up in a way that we can demonstrate the value of what we have in that language. Now, having said that, the other thing to look at are perhaps deals that we make where we have combined imaging, navigation, as well as [unintelligible]. That clearly is a deal that we can make, only because we have that selection of products and the users see some value in that collection. So going forward, looking at the number of accounts where we have all of that, and how our spine [unintelligible] is doing, may be a measure. And then as you further refine the CBG look, we might even do more sophisticated programs that you can highlight.

Just one other thing to keep in mind, in addition to simply being broader offerings and targeted call points for line administrators as well as the interventional physicians, we’re also offering a large number of value-added programs, [unintelligible] outpatient clinics and patients flow through the cath labs. Use of technology like Care Link Express to have ERs be able to identify a patient with a device immediately when they come in the door, without having to wait for a represent. [We think blood] conservation is a program that minimizes the use of blood products. We’re also helping with market development, with things like Heart Mark, which basically allow them to look in an [attachment] area and see what the level of therapy is that’s being provided to various untreated needs and see if they are at national averages above or below. So these are all things that actually get translated from the viewpoint of the cardiovascular line administrator into value that we can claim credit for in lieu of pricing. So it’s share, it’s pricing, it’s basically our ability to partner and be viewed as a strategic partner in addressing the healthcare needs that these administrators are struggling with.

One other comment I’d make is that as we formulate the strategy as we go forward, we’ll help you understand some of the specific drivers, but we’re still in the process ourselves of organizing this, figuring out how to communicate this and organize the structure. So it’s still early in the process, but developing a framework for economic value. And when we’re ready, we’ll share it with you.

And the only thing I would add to what everyone’s said is basically in the end, this economic value and our ability to work with the line administrators is a way for us to differentiate ourselves from the competition. And I think you’ve seen that in the share gains and results we’ve had so far, and we expect that to continue.

And your final question comes from the line of Derrick Sung with Sanford Bernstein.

I wanted to follow up with you on some of the comments you made around further combining the CBG group down to the district manager level. Does that combination initiative, economic value center you talk about, does that result in any sort of selling line synergies? And/or, more broadly speaking, when we think about the 30-50 basis points of SG&A leverage that we’ll be seeing next year, how much of that, if any, comes from selling line synergies and where might you be with some of the selling line pilot programs that might lead to some cost savings there?

Let me just give you a little perspective and then I’ll let Mike also add to that. First, the primary goal of this is to align with the customers. That’s the primary goal. Second, to the degree that our people are required to deliver care, to deliver therapy, which a large number of our clinical representatives do, that will never go away. So our relationship with physicians at that level will always stay. We view that with great importance, and that will never go away. This move is primarily around aligning with the way our customers themselves are looking at their own business. Now having said that, in any organization there will be some efficiencies. And I’ll let Mike comment on that.

I would just echo Omar’s comments. First of all, first line sales representatives are physician focused, as they have always been, and are aligned with our original businesses, because that’s where you have to win first, is with the physicians. But this move toward consolidation at the next level up for sales management is really to make us much more nimble and efficient in dealing with the hospital, and viewing it more holistically as the cardiovascular line, because frankly where we’re seeing our [hospital] customers winning is where they are aligning their various cardiovascular lines under a single administrative leader. And so this makes us more efficient both at the physician level and at the first line sales management level. But there are efficiencies, and I would just remind you, from our discussion of the Resolute Integrity launch, we basically went from a 10% market share to a 30% market share, with no extension of our sales force in terms of adding new people. And the way we did that was marry up the existing coronary focused sales reps with mostly CRDM clinical specialists who had excellent cardiology relationships to be able to basically move much more quickly in terms of putting those products into the market. And the other thing that it allows us to do, for example, with [IDNs] is because Medtronic approaches those IDNs as a single CBG supplier, we were able to hold off what competitors were trying to do in terms of basically pushing out contracts when we brought Resolute Integrity into the marketplace so that we would be blocked from coming in. When we approached those IDNs and basically talked about the broader CBG system, they were basically not willing to extend contracts for competitors, and that really helped us ramp Resolute Integrity very quickly. So there are synergies that we’re realizing from the strategy of beyond simply the first line sales management consolidation.

There’s no question that what’s going on on CBG, what we’re also doing across the restorative therapies group, in our regions, that is where we’re getting some of the leverage that we’re talking about in the SG&A. It’s making our own sales organization much more effective and more efficient. We’re obviously getting the benefits that both Mike and Omar talked about, but there’s no question a part of the 30 to 50 basis points of improvement in SG&A are coming from some of these as a result of it being more efficient and leveraging these resources.

We have been hearing some anecdotal evidence that Biotronik is getting a little bit more aggressive on the pricing front there in the market, and our survey shows that they may be picking up a little bit of share. Just wanted to get your thoughts on how you would respond to that threat of a low price strategy from a competitor in the near term. I understand that you’re talking about this tiered pricing strategy, so you clearly have a long term strategy that you’re putting in place to address that. In the near term, how do you respond to that low price threat from a competitor?

I think in all of this, our ability to provide evidence for value is pretty critical. And the more we tie it to clinical [unintelligible], economics, the better off we’ll be. And that’s a thread across all of our businesses, and that will help us deal with any low-cost competitor, in that we’ve differentiated ourselves by demonstrating the value that we have.

Specific to that statement, Biotronik is not the only one who’s been using aggressive pricing tactics to try to take market share. In fact, some players who’ve not historically done that have become more aggressive in that particular area. But if you look at, for example, our product tiering now available to us on the pacing side, we have six tiers of technology that we can be able to bring to deal with giving pricing where it has to be given, but protecting our higher-end technologies from that kind of pricing pressure. So I think we’re in a good position to use the [blood] CBG strategy, the services that we talked about, and frankly, the fact that we are the ones who bring that next generation of technologies, the key therapies, things like renal denervation, like transcatheter valves, drug eluting balloons, like the cryoablation technologies, that also give us an opportunity to establish a relationship on the basis of what we bring totally in our program. And those things together are giving us an opportunity to basically protect pricing and take market share.

Thanks for all your questions, and before I end today’s call, as you think about your summer calendars, I’d like to note that an every other year cadence for our analyst meeting is more appropriate, and we do not plan to host an analyst meeting this year. I would also note that we anticipate holding our Q1 call on August 20. With that, and on behalf of our entire management team, I’d like to thank you again for your continued support and interest in Medtronic. Thank you.