Welcome, ladies and gentlemen to the MercadoLibre’s Fourth Quarter 2013 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants on the phone are in a listen-only mode. After our prepared remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. (Operator Instructions) And as a reminder, this call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to the company management.

Hello, everyone and welcome to MercadoLibre earnings conference call for the quarter ended December 31, 2013. My name is Martin de Los Santos, and I am the Head of Investor Relations for MercadoLibre. Our senior management presenting today is Pedro Arnt, Chief Financial Officer; additionally, Marcos Galperín, Chief Executive Officer; and Osvaldo Gimenez, Executive Vice President of Payments will be available during today’s Q&A session. This conference call is also being broadcast over the internet and is available through the Investor Relations sections of our website. I remind you that management may make forward-looking statements relating to such matters as continued growth prospects for the company, industry trends and product and technology initiatives. These statements are based on currently available information and our current assumptions, expectations, and projections about future events. While we believe that our assumptions, expectations, and projections are reasonable in view of the currently available information, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on those forward-looking statements. Our actual results may differ materially from those discussed in this call for a variety of reasons, including those described in the Forward-Looking Statements and Risk Factors sections of our 10-K and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commissions, which are available on our Investor Relations website. Finally, I would like to remind you that during the course of this conference call, we may discuss some non-GAAP measures. A reconciliation of those measures to the nearest comparable GAAP measures can be found in our fourth quarter 2013 earnings press release available on our Investor Relations website. Now, let me turn the call over to Pedro.

Welcome everyone to our earnings call for the first quarter of 2013. Wrapping up another successful year for Latin America’s e-commerce ecosystem I would like to recap some of our strategic priorities financial results and key initiatives for the upcoming year. We ended the year on a good note with solid performance across our marketplace and payments businesses both closing the fourth quarter with accelerated revenues despite FX headwinds that continue to impact our consolidated results. Revenues in local currencies also accelerated across our largest countries showing a trend across the board that was led by our largest markets Brazil. I would like to start this off by taking a step back and briefly looking at the full year so as to recap the advantage we have made during the past four quarters. During 2013, registered users on our platform grew by 22%, items sold grew 23%, gross merchandise volume grew 44% in local currencies and 28% in U.S. dollars, total payment transactions grew by 34% and total payment volume grew 60% in local currencies and 40% in U.S. dollars. We believe these growth rates directly results from our execution against the set of ongoing strategic objectives which we have identified and stated for our business over the past quarters. These broadly involved the promotion of our payments and shipping solutions as strategic facilitators for e-commerce helping to eliminate friction points and enhance our user experience on and off our platform. The ongoing development of mobile and vertical category specific, capabilities that allowed for ubiquitous and customized trading, trends that are both in their early stages in our region and represents huge upside potential going forward. The promotion of our open platform making our services increasingly accessible to third parties be they outside developers building new solutions or retailers requiring…

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) And our first question in queue is from Gene Munster of Piper Jaffray. Your line is open. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon and thanks. Real quick, I guess we are just about two months into the first quarter of 2014 and I was wondering if you could give us some color on some of the trends we are seeing specifically from Brazil and also from Venezuela has any of the turmoil impacted transactions there?

Hi. So, I think we have always said that we would rather comment on the existing quarter when we give the results to the quarter and we rather focus the questions right now on the quarter that just passed. So we can talk at length on Q1 Brazil and Venezuela once we released the numbers for that quarter in May.

Okay, thanks. And then I guess just real quickly, you talked a lot about some of the OpEx improvements that we saw during the quarter, I am just wondering is there any – whether you can kind of quantify how some of that was impacted by currency – by some of the currency weakness in Argentina, did that have any impact on some of the OpEx improvements?

Yes. So as we have always said we have a significant portion of our OpEx in Argentina and so any devaluation in Argentina does help. However, it would be misleading to assume that the scale is coming primarily from the deval. I think if you run the numbers, there is much more that’s actually coming from operational improvements and not just from the devaluation of the peso. So, it’s less than 100 basis points are actually coming from currency and the rest is simply scale in the business year-over-year.

And our next question in queue is from Jordan Rohan of Stifel. Your line is open.

Thanks, guys. I have two questions. The first is on the translation of revenues within Venezuela back to I think U.S. dollars for the purposes of reporting, are you still – I guess you still use the 6.3 rate in the financials that you given us today? I believe the answer is yes. Second is so just clarify that and how think about it, since the parallel rate on Venezuela and perhaps this is not all that helpful, but it’s still over 80, maybe closer to 90. Even if the government moves towards an ‘11 SICAD rate, how do you expect to translate those revenues back to your sellers in the future? And then finally without the foreign currency gains on U.S. dollars held within non-Venezuela subsidiaries, what was your earnings, I think I heard $2.5 million was the extent of that upside. Is that right? Thanks.

Great. So, let’s see. First one thanks for asking so we can make sure we are crystal clear on this. The fourth quarter still is reported at the official rate of 6.4 Bolivars to the dollar. Consequent events in Venezuela have led us to disclose that we will use a new official rate that has been announced, which is the SICAD rate, which is a floating rate, which currently at the last auction that determines that rate was 11.8 Bolivars to the dollar and that will start occurring as of January 24 of this year. And so when you look at Q1 numbers, the rate will be this new floating rate. And then the third point is if you look at the disclosures in the 10-K that we just pointed investors to, we run a couple of sensitivities analysis to give people a sense of what the Venezuela and P&L looks like. One of the sensitivity analyses that we run uses a rate that is closer to what we believe is the implicit exchange rate of the actual transactions that occur on our platform. And then there is some others sensitivities. So, there is a lot of additional disclosure together sense of how exchange rates are playing out with our Venezuela numbers. As we’ve always said the rate of nearly 90 is a rate that’s illegal, illiquid and obviously because of that also has significant distortion built into a just as the official rate one could argue had leading up to this new SICAD rate.

Alright, thanks.

Question number – sorry, question number two, FX gains ForEx impact we just called out that, the ForEx gains generated by our subsidiaries holding of U.S. dollars were $2.3 million that standard U.S. GAAP accounting to re-measure and book those gains in the ForEx line. Great. And I don’t know if you had a third question but...

I think that’s it and thanks. Nice quarter.

Thank you. And our next question in queue is from Ross Sandler of Deutsche Bank. Your line is open.

Thanks guys. Look like Pago was the real bright spot again in the quarter, can you, Pedro or Marcos, talk about off MELI Pago, what categories you feel like you’re well penetrated in, which ones represent a good future opportunity? And then as we kind of go out a couple of years and look at the strategy for mobile Pago, how does mobile Pago work in tandem with carrier based billing systems and then a follow-up just on Venezuela. I hate to kind of keep going back, but on it looked like the unit growth has been very elevated, 26% last quarter, I think 12% you said this quarter. So it feels like we’re kind of stabilizing. Where do you think of that unit growth? Are we at the point of macro concerns are equal with under penetration of e-commerce or do you think that still a couple more quarters out? Thanks. Marcos Galperín: So, let me take this one. With respect to Pago, it’s growing our platform very strongly as well. So, we are very happy with where Pago is evolving overall with very healthy improvements in our approval rates and our chargeback rates. So, we are seeing very strong growth both on platform and off platform. Clearly, we believe mobile payments, is a huge trend and is one of the opportunities that we see for Pago going forward. So we look forward to providing greater details of this opportunity as we continue – as we go along and continue to release new products and there is more information to give, but at the time I would say we are very focused on it in mobile in general both for MercadoPago and for MercadoLibre and we will be probably announcing more stuff this year around mobile payments. And with respect to Venezuela, obviously with all the events that occurred in Q4, the growth in units was impacted and we continue to have a very healthy operation there. Obviously, when there are massive events and people are not going to work etcetera, that is impacted and that will happen during certain extended periods of Q4. As situation gets back to relative normalcy, we see again good growth rates on when that doesn’t happen, again our operation is impacted. So I think that’s what we have been seeing going forward. We prefer to talk about that after the facts. Okay, next question?

Our next question in queue is from Mark Miller of William Blair. Your line is open.

Hi. I think a strong quarter overall, I guess the one number that kind of jumps out though in terms of not as robust as the unit growth. So part of that’s coming from the deceleration in Venezuela, can you give us overall unit growth for the enterprise third quarter and fourth quarter without Venezuela because you are also lapping an easier comparison there?

Sure. Hi, Mark so if we look at the quarter excluding Venezuela, the fourth quarter it would have given us slightly higher number of 21% unit growth excluding Venezuela. I don’t think we disclosed that for the previous quarters. I don’t have that off the top of my head right now.

Let me come at a little different way, do you have any sense for what growth in items sold across Latin America e-commerce, I mean what’s your confidence level that you are gaining share of unit volumes?

If we look at annual growth for units, right. And again units, is a metric that we point a lot to because it strips out any currency or ASP issue. So the usefulness of excluding Venezuela when looking at units is somewhat more dubious than if you are looking at numbers. If we look at unit growth for the year we did about – we did exactly 23%. I think our overall sense of general e-commerce growth in the region we have always said is somewhere in the mid to low 20s for the year. So I think what we’ve been characterizing the unit growth is at market growth for our marketplace business. When you tack on the growth in the payments business and you tack on the other businesses and you look at revenue growth for the year we would believe that the revenue growth numbers are coming in slightly above what the overall e-commerce numbers are coming in. But so in units that’s probably in line with somewhere around where the market is, low 20s.

Pedro, that’s helpful. On the shipping solution it sounds like you are getting nice traction from this, can you give us further perspective around the benefits to the organization, I mean what the profitability of those transactions is for example and the customer feedback or loss rates it seems like those will be positive, but anymore you can share on that? Marcos Galperín: So shipping for us is a strategic initiative, that’s a long-term initiative. What I mean long-term is five to ten years initiative. We are in the early stages. We are very happy to have ended the quarter with over 10% of the units in Brazil using our shipping product and the reason why we are happy is because these transactions have a lower contact rate, have a higher NPS. Overall, it provides a better experience to both buyers and sellers. Sellers have lower shipping costs, buyers have more clear and unified shipping cost across products and we have a better information of what is going on with the transaction in general and we also have a better information about handling times etcetera. But this is just a first step. This is a multistep process and we look forward to continuing to make progress in terms adoption of our shipping solution and also getting deeper into the fulfillment on logistics. So this is just the beginning of a long-term process.

And from a financial aspect just for clarity what I would complement there is because what we are running is an agent or a marketplace model where we are joining the demand that exists for shipping solutions from our buyers and sellers with the existing logistic solutions providers and carriers. The way that we book that business is net of cost. So if we are able to negotiate prices because of our aggregate demand of 100 and the actual cost to us of that is 100 then we would be booking zero revenues, if the cost is 90 we will be booking 10. So it’s net of the pass through cost. So as Marcos was saying because this is a strategic initiative right now we are essentially trying to run this as close to breakeven as possible and passing on all the savings that are coming from the demand aggregation back to our users, which is the ultimate goal right now, better and cheaper shipping across the platform. So the financial impact should be easy to manage.

Okay, that makes sense and that seems pretty important for the long run. A final question for me. Could you give us a rough sense of the category sales mix, just to help us understand the changes taking place with verticalization, so CE, apparels, sporting goods, whatever you would be comfortable talking about? Thanks.

So we have continued to see the trend that is in large part by design as we have gotten consistently better at verticalizing certain key categories such as apparel, sports – sports apparel and apparel auto parts, home and garden. And those categories have been growing at above average rate and obviously the average is very much influenced by customer electronics. I think overall maybe we are at a point, where the apparel category, plus sports apparel is closing in on 10% of GMVe already. Some of the other categories I just mentioned are slightly below that, but in that range. Consumer electronics continue to trend downwards into the low 40s now. If we had looked at that number last year that was in the mid 40s to high 40s and two to three years ago was closer to 55%. So the trend continues to be consistent and that’s also part of what has been driving our ASP down in some of the countries.

That’s helpful. Thanks.

Thank you. Our next question in queue is from Bob Ford of Merrill Lynch. Your line is open.

Thank you and good day everybody. Peter, I was hoping you guys could comment on the regulatory developments eCommerce in Venezuela and Argentina. But before that, I just wanted to go back to the FX because there’s the SICAD 1 and soon the SICAD 2. And my understanding is that not too many corporates are able to access the SICAD 1, that 11 for the 1680 FX rate. And the SICAD 2 is expected to be the more liquid FX market, which one do you expect to use between – because now we’ve got four FX rates, right? We’ve got the 630, we’ve got the 1, we’ve got the 2 and we’ve the border rate, which is ludicrous. But I was curious if the SICAD 2 turns out to be the more liquid of the two SICAD rates, is that the one that you use for reporting and translation purposes?

Right. Great, Bob. So, right now what we need is we need to have a fair amount of confidence in the sustained reporting of the rate by the government so as to move towards that rate. And then obviously is any of those rates become more liquid for liquid enough that we can access it and that would obviously be the rate that we would be using. Under the current conditions the rate has been consistently reported on greater frequency has been SICAD. We have not access SICAD 1or SICAD 2so under current thinking SICAD 1 the 11, 8 last time. I saw I don’t know if there was an option today. I don’t think so would be the one. When we would be using for the first quarter…

It hasn’t even started.

Yes. I think you are accurate in anticipating that SICAD 2 for whatever reason is more liquid for more in line with the rate that we would be able to access and we could going the direction. But just to be very, very clear here under current thinking and understanding the rate being used for the first quarter is SICAD 1 for the one that at the last option was 11.8. It’s obviously a fluid realty and Venezuela I think an additional SICAD rate with the greater liquidity that would actually allow us to access hard currency would be very welcome. But let’s wait and see for that actually happened.

Yes, and for power sellers as well. And then with respected to Argentina, just to confirm the comment earlier, you’re suggesting that your contribution margins for Argentina would go up in the event of greater peso weakness. Is that correct?

I think the comment earlier was actually in terms of looking at the overall cost distribution of the company, I think what we’ve said consistently is of total cost, Argentina as roughly 40% plus of total cost. Most of those Argentine cost are peso denominated and so further weakening of the Argentine peso actually dilutes our cost basis more than it does a revenue base because Argentina is only mid 20% of revenues over periods of time. And so the comment and we consistently said this is the devaluations of peso are actually at the margin somewhat positive to us, because they dilute more cost and they do revenue and so our exposure to peso devaluation is somewhat hedged by that allocation of cost.

Got it. And then there have been some regulatory developments in Argentina and Venezuela in terms of e-commerce, now in terms of some of the cross border things, the limitations in terms of hard currency for Argentine buyers as well as some of the listings for classifieds in automotive that I am aware of and I was wondering if it was limited to that or if there’s more behind it. And then maybe if you could expand a little bit on how much of your business in Argentina is maybe – or how much of the platform is cross border that might be affected by the constraints now in Argentina? Marcos Galperín: So, not much of our platform today is cross border. We have just started to experiment with some cross border trade where we see a lot of potential moving forward, but currently it’s insignificant on our business. So we don’t see these changes in regulations affecting our business at all.

And with respect to Venezuela, Marcos, the listings changes or the – yes, the classifieds changes appear to be related to price controls for cars and I was curious if there are other categories or maybe power sellers that might be at risk to price controls, there was not too long ago that the nationalization of a small consumer electronics and white lines retailer in the country that made the press here and I was curious if you see additional risks to some of those categories of goods? Marcos Galperín: Well, I don’t want to speculate about the what can or cannot happen in general and particularly in Venezuela, but this was related to cars that you mentioned, it’s a category where the government is very, very focused and there were official prices for cars and obviously there were no cars at the official prices. So there was a lot of control about cars being sold at unofficial prices. So in a marketplace as big as (indiscernible) combined, which basically dominate classifieds in the country, it was very hard for us to understand exactly what price each different model has to have. So it was result basically to scrap away the prices from our side and therefore not run the risk of having any particular car or any particular model, not being listed at the official price.

Not good for you. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Marcos Galperín: You’re welcome.

Thank you. Our next question is from Marcelo Santos of JPMorgan. Your line is open.

Two questions actually. First, I would like to understand a little better the sequential gross margin improvement, so you talk about the year-over-year, but when you see the third quarter versus fourth quarter gross margins improved nicely, so just some color on that if possible. And the second question is if you could comment your perception is on competition in Brazilian e-commerce, so if it has changed, how it has changed, anything would help? Thank you.

Great, Marcelo. So sequentially we have obviously also seen a very strong gross margin improvement. I think a few drivers on that to point out. The first one is fourth quarter obviously has top line strength and traditionally is a strong quarter. On top of that if you look at this year specifically, we had been running an open TV, cable TV campaign during the first three quarters of the year primarily focused on the second and third quarter. We typically don’t do television in the fourth quarter where the ROIs and the rates because the rates go up, change significantly. And so there is some significant marketing leverage that occurs from the suspension of the open TV campaign. In general beyond that there has been some significant scale around compensation costs. We call that out in the prepared remarks, some of that is associated to the way we accrue for the long-term retention plan, which is tied to capital market performance. So salaries and wages also scaled nicely. And then probably the third area is as we mentioned fraud loss provisions that both on a year-on-year basis, but also on a sequential base generated some additional leverage. Marcos Galperín: Sorry, you continue with second question.

Yes. With respect to competition in Brazil, I would say competition in Brazil continues to be very strong, we have lots of players willing to spend very large amounts of money in media and it continues to be a very intensively competitive market and we expect that to remain the case for the foreseeable future. It’s a market that is growing very healthily. We continue to have a leading position there and we grew transactions at 29% year-on-year. So we are happy the way our business is evolving and we see many opportunities ahead.

Okay, thank you very much.

You are welcome.

Thank you. Our next in queue is from Michel Morin of Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

Thank you. Pedro, I was wondering if you can expand a little bit on your comments about the Argentina cost structure and the fact that you have 40% of your costs in pesos, because I guess the expectation is that following devaluation, inflation would likely accelerate. So, I was wondering if you could parse out for us kind of the big categories of costs and how quickly some of those costs could potentially adjust two different FX environment?

Yes, sure. So correcting your point, I think when we look at Argentina what we are looking at is what is the actual devaluation ex-inflation, what we had been seeing in Argentina over the previous I would say two years had been a country where inflation had certainly been beating the rate at which the peso was devaluing and so implicitly we were exporting some of that Argentine inflation to our overall cost structure. Over the last few periods, we have seen a reversal of that, where obviously with the acceleration in the rate of devaluation of the peso and that is significantly stronger if we look at the first quarter of this year has been outpacing inflation. So that’s real improvement in our cost structure because of that devaluation. The largest cost item particularly for the Argentina cases salaries and wages. So, I think if you look at that game, that’s a bit of game of cat and mouse that we do not adjust salaries on the monthly basis we typically do it in our annual basis with some minor adjustments at a six month period. So, there is a significant lag there in terms of the salary and wage cost actually catching up to the devaluation. So, that works to our advantage and then most of the other cost probably going in line with the overall rate of devaluation of inflation in Argentina. And again what we’re seeing right now is devaluation outpacing inflation. And so the comment stands that we would believe that the current devaluation of the Argentine peso is actually pretty well edged and dilutes enough cost that it’s at the margin actually accretive to earnings.

Great. And on just a change of topic, I think you mentioned in your prepared remarks that you’ve seen the pickup in financing as your lower spreads have been enticing more activity, with interest rates rising still, especially in Brazil, how much more are you prepared to take in terms of spreads narrowing? Does there come a point where you’re prepared to start increasing those spreads or protecting them?

The theoretical answer is obviously there could come a point where the interest rate increases begin to step out enough profitability of the business, that we chose pass on some of those additional cost of capital to consumers. That hasn’t been the case so far and it is in our current thinking. So, were prioritizing access to attractive credit that also has the additional benefit of driving more volume to the marketplace platform, albeit at a tighter spread for us. So, there hasn’t been any pricing on what were charging our consumers refinancing despite the fact that are spreads have been taking because obviously we’re paying somewhat more for that capital.

Alright, okay. And then finally from me on Venezuela, there was also a comment of the government capping profit margins at 30%. Have you – has there been any more communication on that and how do you see that impacting your business there?

Yes, so there has been more communication that the government has issued further attempt at clarification and how that regulatory framework works. We are still working through that with our internal teams and external teams to understand exactly how that plays out. I think there isn’t any level of clarity yet within Venezuela. It seems to be a law that really isn’t very sort out for service companies. So we will comment more on that I think once there is greater clarity on exactly how that plays out. Michel Morin – Morgan Stanley: Okay, great. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next question in the queue is from Chad Bartley of Pacific Crest. Your line is open.

Hi, thanks very much. Last couple of quarters, we have seen an acceleration in GMVe and revenue if you adjust for currency, so some of that was a function of easy year-over-year comps. So looking forward when comparisons get a little bit more difficult, I was hoping you guys could share your thoughts or give us some color on maybe how growth trends might play out this year I think similar to comments you made back in early 2012? Thanks.

So as you know we will be very happy to talk about our growth rate in 2014 after we close into one of the quarters. So right now we feel comfortable talking about our growth rates during 2013 and prior to that.

Okay. Yes, I just thought I would ask because you had talked about the difficult comparison of the new world order platform and the impact it would have on growth in the back half of 2012. So that’s the context of the question, but I understand if you don’t…?

No. So I think fair enough. I think the way I would say that is we had a significant comparison issue that impacted our business as you just mentioned because of a launch of a new platform about 2.5 years ago. And so that generated a significant step function in our growth rate that impacted the readout from the business for the two ensuing periods. I think we are at a point now where we haven’t had any sort of step functions since then. And so I think we are at a much more normalized pace of growth if you look at the last few quarters. And so I think the whole issue of the difficult comps to tough comps becomes much more normal and less relevant than it was three years ago when we saw spikes at 20% plus in our growth rates from one quarter to the other.

Okay, that’s helpful Pedro. Thanks.

Thank you. Our next question in queue is from Stephen Ju of Credit Suisse. Your line is open.

Did you guys win any listings promotions during the fourth quarter to help you on your items show growth at all? And also, can you summarize how much you have spent on commercial real estate in Venezuela during all of 2013 so we could pull apart CapEx in the normal course of business versus extraordinary? Thanks. Marcos Galperín: When you ask about listing promotions specifically what type of promotions do you have in mind?

Like what you did in the second quarter of this year, that accelerated your volume. Marcos Galperín: What we had in Q4 was Cyber Monday and Black Friday, which were very successful as large retailers and branded stores have increase their listings on our platform we saw relative to prior years stronger growth in those specific dates. So that’s kind of the thing that I would single out in Q4 with respect to special promotions.

In terms of the investments in commercial real-estate, just a very quick recap, Venezuela is as we said a profitable and strong business for us. It generates cash. It’s also a hyper inflationary country and one that has capital control. And so because we are unable to pursue our standard treasury policy, which is to remit cash generation from our Latin American operations into US dollars, into U.S. bank accounts in the case of Venezuela what we have to pursue is investment in alternative assets that best preserve value against inflation and also against devaluations. And the choice there that we have been pursuing in most U.S. companies that have operations in Venezuela have to an extent followed suit is to buy commercial estate. We bought roughly 450 million Bolivars worth of commercial real estate last year. So at the official exchange rate, that’s about $75 million of property, plant and equipment on our Venezuelan balance sheet.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is from Luiz Carvalho of Tree Capital. Your line is open.

Yes, hi. Thanks for taking my question. So in your recent – in the numbers you just published you mentioned US denominated assets in Venezuela. So now can you please just give us a little bit more color as to what you mean by US denominated assets in Venezuela? That’s the first question. The second question is can you please – so, and I’m sorry to go back to Venezuela and Argentina, but how do the devaluations affect your dollar growth going forward?

So the first one is again, once again standard U.S. GAAP, Venezuela is a hyperinflationary regime, therefore the functional currency is the U.S. dollar, when we purchase commercial real estate that goes into the balance sheet. The balance sheet is in dollars and therefore, that’s what we referred by U.S. dollar denominated assets in Venezuela. It’s essentially the commercial real estate. In terms of the impact of the devaluation on revenues, that’s fairly straightforward calculation. It’s grabbing the reported local currency revenues and discounting it by whatever the devaluatory amount was to get to dollars. So, that’s just a straightforward impact whatever your assumption of further devaluation for those two countries is just to go back to the Argentina case and that’s why the issue of cost comes up is because Argentina is 25% of revenues but 40% plus of total cost that means that you are devaluing more cost percentage than revenue percentage in that builds in an implicit natural hedge to earnings of any devaluations of the Argentina peso. That’s not the case for Venezuela. Venezuela obviously doesn’t have nearly as much cost as Argentina does.

Okay, okay. Thanks.

Thank you.