AMC 電影院 (AMC) 2015 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Greetings and welcome to AMC Entertainment's second-quarter 2015 earnings conference call.

各位好，歡迎參加 AMC Entertainment 2015 年第二季財報電話會議。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to your host, John Merriwether, Vice President, Investor Relations for AMC Entertainment. Thank you. You may begin.

提醒各位，本次會議將被錄音。現在我想把會議交給本次主持人——AMC Entertainment 投資人關係副總裁 John Merriwether。謝謝。您可以開始了。

Good afternoon, everyone. I'm John Merriwether, Vice President, Investor Relations, and I would like to welcome you to AMC's second-quarter 2015 earnings conference call. Before we get started with our prepared remarks, I'd like to remind everyone that as referenced in our press release issued earlier today, we simultaneously posted a CFO commentary on the investor relations page of our website at AMCTheaters.com.

各位下午好。我是 John Merriwether，投資人關係副總裁，歡迎各位參加 AMC 2015 年第二季財報電話會議。在我們開始宣讀事先準備的發言稿之前，我想提醒各位，如同我們今天稍早發布的新聞稿所提及，我們也同步在 AMCTheaters.com 網站的投資人關係頁面上發布了 CFO 評論。

I'd also like to remind you that some of the comments made by Management during this conference call may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of section 27a of the Securities Act of 1933 as amended, and section 21e of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions and are discussed in our public filings, including our most recent 10K. Statements made throughout this presentation are based on current estimates of future events and the Company has no obligation to update or correct these estimates. Listeners are cautioned that any such forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainty, and that actual results may differ materially as result of these various factors. We caution you not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements. And the forward-looking statements made during this call speak only as of the date of this call.

我也想提醒各位，管理層在本次電話會議中所發表的部分評論，可能包含《1933 年證券法》（修訂後）第 27a 條及《1934 年證券交易法》（修訂後）第 21e 條所定義的前瞻性陳述。前瞻性陳述受風險、不確定性與假設影響，並已在我們的公開申報文件中討論，包括我們最近一期的 10-K。本簡報中所作之陳述係基於對未來事件的目前估計，公司無義務更新或更正這些估計。提醒聽眾，任何此類前瞻性陳述並非對未來績效的保證，且涉及風險與不確定性；由於上述各項因素，實際結果可能出現重大差異。我們提醒各位不要過度依賴前瞻性陳述。此外，本次電話會議中的前瞻性陳述僅截至本次電話會議日期為準。

In addition, comments made on this call may refer to certain measures, such as EBITDA adjusted EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA margin, which are not in accordance with GAAP. However, Management believes these results more clearly reflect operating performance. For a full reconciliation of EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA to GAAP results in accordance with Regulation G, please see our press release issued earlier today and furnished as an exhibit to our form 8K dated July 29, 2015, which is located in the investor relations area of our website at www.AMCTheaters.com.

此外，本次電話會議中的評論可能提及某些衡量指標，例如 EBITDA、調整後 EBITDA 以及調整後 EBITDA 利潤率，這些指標並非依據 GAAP 編製。然而，管理層認為這些結果能更清楚反映營運表現。若要取得依據 Regulation G 將 EBITDA 與調整後 EBITDA 與 GAAP 結果進行完整調節，請參閱我們今天稍早發布的新聞稿；該新聞稿亦作為 2015 年 7 月 29 日提交之 8-K 表格的附件提供，並可於我們網站 www.AMCTheaters.com 的投資人關係專區查閱。

After our prepared remarks there will be a brief question-and-answer session. Joining me on the call today are Gerry Lopez, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Craig Ramsey, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. I will now turn the call over to Gerry.

在我們的事先準備發言結束後，將有一段簡短的問答時間。今天與我一同參與電話會議的有：總裁兼執行長 Gerry Lopez，以及執行副總裁兼財務長 Craig Ramsey。現在我把電話交給 Gerry。

Thanks, John, and thank you, everyone, for joining us this afternoon. Before we get going with a discussion of the quarterly results, let me just say on behalf of the 20,000 associates at AMC and our families that our hearts, thoughts and prayers are with those affected by the tragic events in Lafayette, Louisiana last week. On behalf of our family associates the AMC Cares Foundation has made contributions to the memorials chosen by the victims' families to honor their memories. We are saddened by what happened, but admire the bravery of those guests, theater personnel and first responders who brought the situation quickly under control. Safety and security been, is and will continue to be, amongst our top priorities and we will continue to strive to make our theaters as safe as possible.

謝謝你，John，也謝謝各位今天下午加入我們。在開始討論本季業績之前，我想先代表 AMC 的 20,000 名同仁及其家人表示：我們的心、思念與祈禱與上週路易斯安那州拉法葉悲劇事件的受影響者同在。代表我們的同仁家人，AMC Cares Foundation 已向受害者家屬所選定的追思基金捐款，以紀念他們。我們對所發生的事情深感悲痛，但也敬佩那些迅速協助控制局勢的觀眾、影城人員與第一線應變人員的勇氣。安全與保全一直是、現在是、未來也將持續是我們最優先的事項之一；我們將繼續努力，讓我們的影城盡可能安全。

Now on to the quarter. The old adage that records are meant to be broken was never more evident than in the second quarter of 2015 as the industry box office in general recorded new highs. And AMC, specifically, shattered multiple records. From revenues to adjusted EBITDA, from gross profit to food and beverage in aggregate and per patron, to guest satisfaction scores, AMC raised the bar higher than ever before as our strategic initiatives took a pretty strong industry box office and made it work even harder for us. That's enough words, so let's talk some numbers.

接著談本季表現。「紀錄就是用來被打破的」這句老話，在 2015 年第二季再貼切不過，因為整體產業票房創下新高，而 AMC 更是打破多項紀錄。從營收到調整後 EBITDA，從毛利到餐飲（合計及每位觀眾），再到顧客滿意度分數，AMC 將標準推升到前所未有的高度；我們的策略性措施讓原本已相當強勁的產業票房，為我們帶來更大的效益。話不多說，來看一些數字。

Compared to the second quarter of a year ago, AMC's total revenues in Q2 2015 grew 13% to $821.1 million, while adjusted EBITDA grew nearly 20% to $157.8 million. We like the flow-through those growth rates will imply, who wouldn't? But we like even better that both of these figures are the highest we have never reported for any quarter in our 95-year history. Indeed, this second quarter was AMC's biggest revenue quarter ever and biggest adjusted EBITDA quarter ever, period, bar none.

與去年第二季相比，AMC 2015 年第二季總營收成長 13%，達 8.211 億美元；調整後 EBITDA 成長近 20%，達 1.578 億美元。我們喜歡這些成長率所代表的利潤流入（flow-through），誰不喜歡呢？但我們更高興的是，這兩項數字都是我們 95 年歷史中任何單一季度從未報告過的最高水準。事實上，本季是 AMC 有史以來營收最高的一季，也是調整後 EBITDA 最高的一季——毫無疑問，無可比擬。

Let me break it down a little bit by talking first about admissions revenue. By our count, the industry box office for Q2 was $3.1 billion, in itself the highest industry-grossing quarter ever. This $3 billion or so was a 9.4% increase compared to the second quarter a year ago. That's not bad, except AMC performed even better, growing admissions revenue 11.4% to $533.4 million, marking our highest-grossing quarter on record, and a 200-basis point outperformance to the industry.

我先從入場（admissions）收入談起，稍微拆解一下。依我們統計，第二季產業票房為 31 億美元，本身就是產業史上票房最高的季度。這約 30 億美元的票房，較去年第二季成長 9.4%。這表現不差，但 AMC 的表現更好：入場收入成長 11.4%，達 5.334 億美元，創下我們史上最高票房季度紀錄，且較產業高出 200 個基點。

Our 11.4% admissions revenue growth in the second quarter was fueled by two things: one, a very strong 7.3% increase in attendance, better than the industry by 140 basis points; and two, a 3.8% increase in average ticket price, which for us now stands at an all-time high of $9.91. For the circuit, on a per-screen basis the revenue numbers are equally strong, up 10% year on year, and a nearly 120-basis point over-performance to the industry's approximate 8.8% gain.

第二季入場收入 11.4% 的成長，主要由兩個因素帶動：第一，觀影人次大幅成長 7.3%，較產業高出 140 個基點；第二，平均票價上升 3.8%，目前達到歷史新高的 9.91 美元。就整體院線而言，以每銀幕（per-screen）計算的營收數字同樣強勁，年增 10%，較產業約 8.8% 的增幅高出近 120 個基點。

What drove all of this? Simply stated, the fast cars, avenging super heroes and unruly dinosaurs of this quarter were best enjoyed in the premium format for which audiences know and love. Take IMAX for example, our 150 screens, by far the most of any circuit in the world, were up 44% for the quarter. The 3-D format was also a contributor, up 34% in box office dollars. Even our newest format, Dolby Cinema at AMC Prime, had positive admissions growth, this in spite of having nearly 6% of the AMC prime locations off-line for conversions and retro-fits.

是什麼驅動了這一切？簡而言之，本季的飛車、復仇超級英雄與失控恐龍，最適合在觀眾熟悉且喜愛的高端格式（premium format）中觀賞。以 IMAX 為例，我們擁有 150 個銀幕，遠高於全球任何院線，本季成長 44%。3D 格式也是貢獻者之一，票房金額成長 34%。即使是我們最新的格式——AMC Prime 的 Dolby Cinema——入場人次也呈現正成長，儘管因改裝與翻新，近 6% 的 AMC Prime 據點在期間暫停營運。

But as strong as all of these were in Q2, when it comes to size, penetration and broad impact, once again no one thing and no one format can match the recliner remodels. We now have, of June 30, far more of these than anyone else, with 826 recliner-equipped screens in 70 theaters across the country. And boy, did they light it up.

然而，儘管第二季上述各項表現都很強勁，就規模、滲透率與廣泛影響而言，再次證明沒有任何單一因素或單一格式能與躺椅（recliner）改裝相匹敵。截至 6 月 30 日，我們在全美 70 家影城共擁有 826 個配備躺椅的銀幕，數量遠超過任何其他業者。而且它們的表現非常亮眼。

First screen admissions revenue at the recliner remodels was 20.1%. The industry was up 8.8 % as I said a moment ago, which is again is not shabby, except our recliners outperformed by 1,130 basis points by themselves. These screens will be a top-five circuit in the US and yet they more than doubled the industry's strongest period of growth in quite a while, proving that guests are driven by more than just the movie slate.

首先，躺椅改裝影廳的每銀幕入場收入成長 20.1%。如我剛才提到，產業成長 8.8%，這已不差；但僅靠我們的躺椅影廳就高出 1,130 個基點。這些銀幕若單獨成為一個院線，將可名列美國前五大；然而它們的成長仍遠超過產業在相當長一段時間內最強勁的成長期，證明驅動觀眾的不僅僅是片單。

Movie-goers discriminate based on experience, on you all know we like to call comfort and convenience. We are very proud of these results and believe that our business will continue to grow as we continue to invest. And make no mistake, invest we will. As the remodel investments deliver not only the results I outlined a moment ago, but they continue to exceed our 25% return hurdle by a pretty wide margin.

影迷會依體驗做出選擇——你們都知道，我們喜歡稱之為舒適與便利。我們對這些成果深感自豪，並相信隨著我們持續投資，我們的業務將繼續成長。而且請不要懷疑，我們一定會投資。因為這些改裝投資不僅帶來我剛才概述的成果，且其回報持續以相當大的幅度超過我們 25% 的報酬率門檻。

Just to give you an idea of how we are investing to grow, right now as we speak, we have currently 10 theaters in various phases of recliner reseat renovations. And later in August we expect the units under construction to be at an all-time high, maybe into the high teens or more. Short-term pain, but it bodes well for our future. Of course, the success has brought about many imitators. Imitation is, after all, the sincerest form of flattery.

為了讓各位了解我們如何透過投資來成長，就在此刻，我們目前有 10 家影城正處於不同階段的躺椅換座改裝工程中。而在 8 月稍晚，我們預期施工中的據點數量將達到歷史新高，可能上升到十幾家甚至更多。短期會有些陣痛，但這對我們的未來是個好兆頭。當然，成功也帶來了許多模仿者。畢竟，模仿是最真誠的恭維。

Competition is nothing new, though, and we believe that the AMC guest experience continues to offer a complete package, a great value that goes beyond just the one idea, as good as that idea may be. This is not a shocker, but our results will support that theory. For example, a little more than a year ago we knew that to drive convenience we needed to develop our own proprietary online ticketing engine, which would make AMC tickets available from more websites and would make choosing a movie and buying a ticket to AMC easier than it has ever been before.

不過，競爭並非新鮮事，我們相信 AMC 的觀影體驗仍持續提供一套完整的組合與極高的價值，這種價值不僅僅侷限於單一概念——即便那個概念本身再好也一樣。這並不令人意外，但我們的成果將支持這項論點。舉例來說，略多於一年前，我們就知道要提升便利性，就必須開發自有的專屬線上售票引擎，讓 AMC 票券能在更多網站上販售，並讓選片與購買 AMC 電影票比以往任何時候都更容易。

We reported on this during our prior calls, but here we are now, barely a year later with our second-quarter Internet ticketing revenues up 36% over last year, as we sold 11.6 million tickets online, representing approximately 21% of our total. Now this compares to 14% of our total tickets sold on the Internet a year ago, a better than 52% improvement. Importantly, our proprietary ticketing engine AMCTheaters.com continues to perform well for our guests, accounting for about 38% of our online tickets sold in the second quarter, a 46% increase compared to the second quarter a year ago.

我們在先前的電話會議中曾提到這點，而現在，僅僅一年後，我們第二季的網路售票營收較去年成長 36%，線上售出 1,160 萬張票，約占總售票量的 21%。相較之下，一年前透過網路售出的票僅占總量的 14%，提升幅度超過 52%。更重要的是，我們的自有售票引擎 AMCTheaters.com 持續為觀眾帶來良好表現，第二季約占我們線上售票的 38%，較去年第二季成長 46%。

All of these improves the overall guest experience at AMC. And it also adds to our unslighted revenues and gives us greater influence over our guests' entire movie-going night out. We simply want to make it easier and more convenient to have a great experience at AMC.

這些都提升了 AMC 的整體觀影體驗。同時也增加了我們的非票房營收，並讓我們對觀眾整個「看電影的夜晚外出」體驗擁有更大的影響力。我們只是希望，讓在 AMC 享受美好體驗變得更容易、更便利。

Of course, no experience at any of our theaters would be complete without something to eat and drink while you're enjoying your latest newly favorite movie. And our record-setting second-quarter food and beverage results clearly say more and more guests are enjoying the complete package in more and more of our theaters. For evidence, look no further than our food and beverage revenues, which in the second quarter grew 18.4% versus prior year, to a new record of $250.5 million. That's a lot of Coke and popcorn, people. And a lot more than just Coke and popcorn, a lot more food and beverage too, because to heed those kind of numbers you need more than just the tried-and-true.

當然，在我們任何一家影城，若在欣賞你最新、剛成為最愛的電影時沒有吃喝，體驗就不算完整。而我們第二季創紀錄的餐飲表現清楚顯示，越來越多觀眾在越來越多的影城享受這套完整組合。最直接的證據就是我們的餐飲營收：第二季較去年成長 18.4%，創下 2.505 億美元的新高。各位，這可是大量的可樂和爆米花；而且不只是可樂和爆米花，還有更多餐飲品項，因為要達到這樣的數字，光靠那些經典不敗的品項是不夠的。

To give you an idea of how far we've come with this initiative, let's level set for a moment. Back in 2011, the early days, about 64% of our guests bought something from a concession stand. Although that incidence rate was pretty good, it did mean though, that about 70 million guests, the combined attendance of all teams during the full season of major league baseball, did not buy a thing. You've heard us say that before. Well, what we have not updated you on, but will now, is that by the end of 2014 and since, approximately 68% of our guests are buying some food and beverage in our buildings. And those almost 400 incremental basis points of incidents mean that today there are an additional 6.6 million food and beverage consumers in our buildings. Hence, the record-setting results.

為了讓各位了解這項計畫我們走了多遠，我們先把基準拉齊一下。回到 2011 年、也就是初期階段，約有 64% 的觀眾會在販賣部購買商品。雖然這個購買率相當不錯，但也意味著仍有約 7,000 萬名觀眾——相當於美國職棒大聯盟整個球季所有球隊的總觀眾人次——什麼都沒買。各位以前也聽我們說過。不過，我們過去尚未向各位更新、但現在要更新的是：到 2014 年底以及此後，約有 68% 的觀眾會在我們的影城購買餐飲。這將近 400 個基點的購買率提升，代表如今我們的影城內多了 660 萬名額外的餐飲消費者。因此，才有這些創紀錄的成果。

And we think that we're just scratching the surface. Our total food and beverage revenues and growth for the quarter were not the only food and beverage record. In fact, I'm even more excited about our 10.2% growth in food and beverage revenues per patron, to another Company record and all-time high of $4.65. That's six consecutive quarters now, every quarter since we have been public, that we've reported a record quarter in food and beverage revenues per patron.

而我們認為這才剛開始。我們本季的餐飲總營收與成長並不是唯一的餐飲紀錄。事實上，我對每位觀眾的餐飲營收成長 10.2% 更感到興奮，這也創下公司另一項紀錄與歷史新高，達到 4.65 美元。這已是連續第六個季度——自我們上市以來的每一季——我們都回報每位觀眾餐飲營收創下單季新高。

We are very proud of that track record and its duration, which confirms the strength and sustainability of our work in the enhanced food and beverage strategic action front. Not to be forgotten is that we achieve our targeted flow-throughs as food and beverage gross profit per patron also grew 10.2% to a new record of $3.99. This performance is a result of the successful execution of our strategy to serve our guests and ensure that they have a variety of food and beverage options available to them that are both convenient and satisfying.

我們對這項紀錄及其持續性深感自豪，這證實了我們在強化餐飲策略行動上的工作具備強度與可持續性。同樣不容忽視的是，我們也達成了目標的利潤流入（flow-through），因為每位觀眾的餐飲毛利也成長 10.2%，創下 3.99 美元的新高。這項表現來自我們成功執行策略：服務觀眾，並確保他們能取得多樣化、便利且令人滿意的餐飲選擇。

And speaking of satisfaction, overall guest satisfaction that is, for the second quarter in a row we set an all-time high with our guests. We had top box satisfaction score for the whole quarter was 61.4, the second time we finished a quarter above 60 and 221 basis point higher than prior year, an incredible feat when the customer loads in our buildings are growing, as they have all year. In the retail service industry these are world-class numbers, the kind you need to build engagement and loyalty with your audiences. And credit here goes to our theater teams, without whom there is no magic at the movies.

說到滿意度——也就是整體觀眾滿意度——我們連續第二季創下歷史新高。整季的「最高評等（top box）」滿意度分數為 61.4，這是我們第二次單季分數超過 60，且較去年提高 221 個基點；在我們影城人流量如今年以來持續成長的情況下，這是一項驚人的成就。在零售服務業，這是世界級的數字，是建立受眾參與度與忠誠度所需要的水準。這份功勞要歸於我們的影城團隊，沒有他們，就沒有電影的魔法。

Ladies and gentlemen, the consistent unifying theme in all of these results in one word is innovation. Over the last few quarters we have shared with you many of the ideas we're experimenting with, testing and are preparing to roll out. It will take me the better part of this afternoon to give you a recap of all that we have going on, and believe it or not, I want to get to the Q& A too. So I'll spare you for now. But know this, it goes well beyond recliners. Whether it's our new, as I originally announced, arrangement with Paramount, our continued work in social media, our aggressive use of guest space and technology, or the deployment of Dolby Cinema at AMC Prime, the list can go on. The point is that at AMC we've made innovation and bold thinking a way of life, and our guests have noticed and are rewarding us for it. For that we are very grateful.

各位女士先生，這些成果背後一致且貫穿的主題，用一個字概括就是：創新。過去幾個季度，我們與各位分享了許多正在嘗試、測試並準備推出的想法。若要我回顧我們正在進行的一切，恐怕得花上今天下午大半時間；而且信不信由你，我也想進入問答環節（Q&A）。所以我先不贅述。但請各位知道，這遠不止是躺椅座位而已。無論是我最初宣布的與 Paramount 的新合作安排、我們在社群媒體上的持續投入、我們積極運用觀眾空間與科技，或是在 AMC Prime 佈署 Dolby Cinema，清單還可以繼續列下去。重點是，在 AMC，我們已將創新與大膽思維變成一種生活方式，而觀眾也注意到了，並以行動回饋我們。對此我們非常感謝。

Now this seems like an appropriate spot to bring my formal comments to a close and hand the call over to Craig for a few words before we take your questions. As I do that, I would be lying if I did not confess to mixed emotions. Although the time to move on has come, I am now and will always be, very proud of what we have accomplished here over the last 6.5 years. Most of you know the story and I'll let you be the judges of our work.

現在看來，這是結束我正式發言、並在進入提問前把電話會議交給 Craig 說幾句的合適時點。在交棒之際，如果我不坦承自己百感交集，那就不誠實了。雖然是時候往前走了，但我對過去 6.5 年我們在這裡所完成的一切，現在以及永遠都感到非常自豪。你們大多知道這段故事，我就讓各位自行評斷我們的工作。

But most of all, we let our guests decide. They seem to have a point of view, and after all, it is for them that we actually do all of this. Personally, I could not be more optimistic about AMC's future. We have an innovative culture which remains in place. And we have a proven guest leadership strategy that has years of runway left. Most importantly, I am leaving AMC in great hands.

但最重要的是，我們讓觀眾來決定。他們似乎有自己的看法，而畢竟我們做這一切，都是為了他們。就我個人而言，我對 AMC 的未來再樂觀不過。我們的創新文化仍然存在；而且我們已被驗證的「以觀眾為領導」策略，未來仍有多年可供發揮的空間。最重要的是，我離開時，AMC 已交到非常可靠的人手中。

I am confident that the Management Team under Craig's leadership will continue to successfully execute on this strategy, and I am looking forward to great things to come out of AMC. I have a vested interest. I'll be watching and I know who to call.

我有信心，在 Craig 的領導下，管理團隊將持續成功執行這項策略；我也期待 AMC 未來會有更多精彩成果。我對此有切身利害關係。我會持續關注，而且我知道該打給誰。

With that, I will turn the call over to Craig. One more time, Mr. Ramsey.

那麼，我把電話會議交給 Craig。再一次，Ramsey 先生。

Thanks, Gerry. These last 6.5 years with Gerry have been incredible and filled with great accomplishment for AMC, as we have driven significant value for our guests, our associates and our shareholders. Gerry's vision for a differentiated growth strategy was exactly what AMC needed when he arrived in 2009. Along the way he cultivated an enduring guest-centered culture committed to driving results and innovation for many years to come. We are grateful for his leadership and me personally for his friendship. And we thank him for positioning AMC to lead the industry into the future.

謝謝你，Gerry。過去 6.5 年與 Gerry 共事令人難忘，AMC 也在這段期間取得了許多重大成就；我們為觀眾、同仁與股東創造了顯著價值。Gerry 在 2009 年加入時所提出的差異化成長策略願景，正是 AMC 當時所需要的。一路走來，他培養出一種持久的、以觀眾為中心的文化，致力於在未來多年持續推動成果與創新。我們感謝他的領導；就我個人而言，也感謝他的友誼。我們也感謝他讓 AMC 站在有利位置，得以帶領產業邁向未來。

We are very excited about AMC's future. We've had a record-breaking first half to 2015 and we are continuing to see tangible benefits from our strategic initiatives and investments. When we measure ourselves against the competition within a 20-mile radius of our buildings, we continue to see approximately 6 percentage points of box office per screen outperformance, dating back to April of 2011. This metric shows, on a detailed per-screen level, that our customer-centric approach is the right thing for our guests and our shareholders over the long-term.

我們對 AMC 的未來感到非常振奮。2015 年上半年我們創下破紀錄的表現，並且持續看到我們的策略性計畫與投資帶來具體效益。當我們以影城周邊 20 英里範圍內的競爭對手作比較時，自 2011 年 4 月以來，我們每銀幕票房表現持續約領先 6 個百分點。這項指標在更細緻的「每銀幕」層級顯示，我們以顧客為中心的方法，長期而言對觀眾與股東都是正確的選擇。

We believe our guest experience leader strategy differentiates us from our peers and our 2015 results bear that out. We will continue to innovate and invest in our portfolio to drive meaningful returns, having touched only a fraction of our circuit thus far. And when attractive acquisition opportunities arise, like our recently announced transaction to acquire Starplex Cinemas, we will be acquisitive.

我們相信，我們的賓客體驗領導者策略使我們有別於同業，而我們在2015年的成果也證明了這一點。我們將持續創新並投資於我們的投資組合，以帶動具實質意義的回報；截至目前，我們在整個院線版圖中所觸及的仍僅是一小部分。當出現具吸引力的併購機會時，例如我們近期宣布收購 Starplex Cinemas 的交易，我們也將積極進行併購。

We are very excited about the definitive agreement to acquire Starplex. It's a great circuit with theaters in complementary markets, and we believe there is value to be unlocked by deploying our strategic initiatives. We expect the transaction will be accretive from a cash flow, EBITDA and EPS perspective in 2016 and beyond, exclusive of any one-time transaction costs. And we look forward to welcoming Starplex into the AMC family of theaters by year end.

我們對收購 Starplex 的最終協議感到非常振奮。這是一個優質的院線，其影城分布於與我們互補的市場，我們相信透過推動我們的策略性計畫，將可釋放其價值。我們預期該交易自2016年起及其後，從現金流、EBITDA 與 EPS 的角度來看都將具增益效果（不含任何一次性交易成本）。我們也期待在年底前歡迎 Starplex 加入 AMC 影城大家庭。

So to our guests and shareholders, thank you for continuing to choose AMC. We will continue to focus on being the customer experience leader in movie-going, and in doing so, exceed your expectations and drive greater value. And we look ahead to the balance of 2015, the prospects for a record box office remain intact and our future looks as bright as ever.

因此，對我們的賓客與股東而言，感謝各位持續選擇 AMC。我們將持續專注於成為觀影體驗的客戶體驗領導者，並在此過程中超越各位的期待、創造更大的價值。展望2015年剩餘期間，創紀錄票房的前景依然完好無虞，而我們的未來也一如既往地光明。

Thank you for listening, and I will turn the call back to the operator so we can take a few questions.

感謝各位收聽，我將把電話交回給接線員，以便我們回答幾個問題。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

Ben Mogil, Stifel.

Ben Mogil，Stifel。

Hi, good afternoon, and thank you for taking my question. And, Gerry, I'm sure we all feel same way -- you will be very much missed on these calls going forward.

嗨，午安，謝謝讓我提問。Gerry，我相信我們大家感受都一樣——未來在這些電話會議上將非常想念你。

Thank you, Ben.

謝謝你，Ben。

So, wanted to talk to you a little bit about the quarter. There's about a $16-million increase year over year on the other film -- on the other expense line -- other theater-operating expense line. Of that increase, how much do you think is tied to the high royalties around IMAX and 3D? How much of this is fixed costs? Trying to get a sense of how much of the cost structure in that line item that you see as variable versus fixed.

我想跟你稍微談一下本季。有一項「其他影片——不，是其他費用項目——其他影城營運費用」的科目，年增大約1,600萬美元。在這個增幅中，你認為有多少與 IMAX 和 3D 的高額權利金相關？其中有多少屬於固定成本？我想了解你認為該項目成本結構中，可變成本與固定成本各占多少。

Well, I would say the year-over-year impact, if you're looking at the total operating expense line, is probably about 3%. On those premium format -- oh, I'm sorry, I was comparing payment processing and premium format. The premium format's probably about 2%, I think, year-over-year increase of the total operating expense.

嗯，我會說如果你看的是總營運費用那一行，年對年的影響大概是3%。至於那些高級格式——喔，不好意思，我剛剛是在比較付款處理費與高級格式。高級格式的部分，我想年對年增加大概占總營運費用的2%。

What I would add, Ben, is we're playing in a new delicate balancing game where you have some of these other expense -- some of these expenses of operating the theaters showing up in the other line and migrating across different lines of the P&L, specifically, as we fight some of the increases in labor costs, because of minimum-wage pressure, et cetera, et cetera. What you see us is trying to shift around and use technology to defer some of the labor costs. Well, technology inevitably is going to come with its own costs. Oh, by the way, it also comes with a credit-card processing fee. Oh, by the way, if the movie is going to the premium format, then on top of that you have the IMAX and the RealD licensing fees you've always had.

Ben，我想補充的是，我們正在進入一個新的、微妙的平衡局面：你會看到一些其他費用——也就是影城營運的某些費用——出現在「其他」這一行，並在損益表（P&L）的不同科目之間移動。特別是當我們因最低工資壓力等因素而努力對抗勞動成本上升時，你會看到我們嘗試透過調整與運用科技來延後部分人力成本。但科技不可避免會帶來它自己的成本。順帶一提，它也會帶來信用卡處理費。再順帶一提，如果電影是以高級格式放映，那麼在此之上，你還會有一直以來就存在的 IMAX 與 RealD 授權費。

So what you're beginning to see is that, as we adapt to the new operating models and new pressures on this cost, you will see things migrating across different lines of the P&L. We'll try to give you guys as much visibility as we can to some of these things, but that's why you see us harping on, for example, the work on the internet and the internet ticketing engine. Every time we sell a ticket on the internet, the processing at the theater reduces and that reduces our labor load. So lower labor costs there, but, gee, now you got an increase in the credit-card processing.

因此你開始看到的是：當我們因應新的營運模式與這些成本的新壓力時，某些費用會在損益表的不同科目之間移轉。我們會盡可能讓各位對這些事項有最大的可視性，但這也是為什麼你會看到我們反覆強調，例如在網路與網路售票引擎上的工作。每當我們在網路上賣出一張票，影城端的處理作業就會減少，進而降低我們的人力負荷。那裡的人力成本降低了，但，哎呀，信用卡處理費卻增加了。

So it's really a balance across all of the different pressure points in the P&L that we're trying to keep an eye on. At the end of the day, it's the total operating expense that we're going to try to clamp down on, even as customers adjust, and we adjust, by using technology to fight some of that off.

所以，這其實是在損益表各個不同壓力點之間的平衡，我們必須持續留意。歸根結底，我們會努力把總營運費用壓下來；即使客戶在調整、我們也在調整，並透過科技來抵消其中一部分壓力。

Okay, that's helpful. Absolutely. And then the second question is, and it may have just been me, but I'm trying to understand this. Two benchmarks that you've referred to, 9.4% and 8.8%. Can you delineate the two different benchmarks on the industry box office?

好的，這很有幫助，確實如此。第二個問題是——也許是我自己沒聽清楚——我想理解你提到的兩個基準：9.4% 和 8.8%。你能否說明這兩個不同的產業票房基準分別代表什麼？

Well, 9.4% is absolute year-over-year and the 8.8% would be on a per-screen basis.

嗯，9.4% 是絕對的年對年增幅，而 8.8% 則是以每銀幕（per-screen）為基礎計算。

Got it, okay. And that's -- was there that much screen growth in the industry in the quarter on a year-over-year basis? That seems like a pretty big divergence.

了解，好的。那——本季產業的銀幕數年對年成長有那麼多嗎？看起來差距相當大。

It was about half of that, only made about 1/2 point, 6/10 of a point in screen growth. The fact is, new builds continue. We're not putting out many, but we have seen a pretty solid continuation of the new builds. The screen count, it's up from what we can track, about 1/2 point for the industry. We, ourselves, were up a little better than 1 point, about 1 1/4 points in screen count.

大概只有那個差距的一半，銀幕成長只貢獻了大約0.5個百分點、0.6個百分點。事實上，新建影城仍在持續。我們自己新增的不多，但我們確實看到新建案相當穩定地延續。就我們能追蹤到的資料，產業的銀幕數大約增加了0.5個百分點。我們自己則增加得稍多一點，銀幕數增加了略高於1個百分點，大約1.25個百分點。

Now some of that has to do with the spot acquisitions. None of that includes, obviously, the Starplex announcement. So, yes, it's perhaps a little more than some other quarters, Ben, but it's a quarter shift. It's not a -- I wouldn't call any of the trends that we've seen in screen count and new builds an anomaly from anything that we've seen in years past.

其中一部分與零星收購有關。當然，這些都不包含 Starplex 的宣布。所以，是的，Ben，這可能比某些其他季度多一點，但這只是季度間的變動。我不會把我們在銀幕數與新建案上看到的任何趨勢稱為異常，因為這些與我們過去多年所見並無不同。

Okay, that's great. Thank you very much.

好的，太好了。非常感謝。

You bet, thank you.

不客氣，謝謝你。

Eric Handler, MKM Partners.

Eric Handler，MKM Partners。

Yes, thanks a lot. I wonder if you could focus on the film rent for a quick moment. Obviously, in the last 24 hours it's been a little bit of a hot-button issue -- or the last 48 hours. I wonder if you could talk -- are you seeing any changes with Hollywood in terms of cyclical pressures of film rents of films doing so well you have escalators hitting and driving film rents higher? Or any secular changes?

是的，非常感謝。我想請你們先簡短聚焦一下影片租金（film rent）。很明顯，在過去24小時——或過去48小時——這成了一個相當受關注的議題。我想請問——你們是否看到好萊塢方面有任何變化：例如因為影片表現太好，觸發了分成加成（escalators），進而推升影片租金，這種循環性的壓力？或是有任何結構性的變化？

So, Eric, let me be about as direct as I can be. So this is the Wednesday call, not the Monday call. And we're well aware of what you're referring to. The answer is, no, we are not. Yes, our film rent expense was up year on year for the quarter by about 170 or so basis points, because of the concentration of the big films.

Eric，我盡可能直接地回答你。這是週三的電話會議，不是週一的那場。我們很清楚你指的是什麼。答案是：沒有，我們沒有看到。是的，本季我們的影片租金費用年對年上升了大約170個基點左右，原因在於大片的集中度較高。

The fact of the matter is, when you step back and look at it, the film rent expense was not out of line for a big quarter with big movies. The pressures that puts on the calls that we're seeing with the studios on this front are no different than I've ever seen across my career between a supplier and his retailer. We are the retailer side of things.

事實上，當你退一步看，這樣的影片租金費用並未偏離「大片季度、大片上映」時的合理範圍。我們在這方面與片商的溝通所感受到的壓力，與我職涯中在供應商與零售商之間所見並無不同。我們是零售端。

There are many ways in which we fight back on that pressure point, on that cost item, whether it is by monetizing some of the marketing assets, by shifting some of our pricing strategy, when we went to tax on top, for example, at the box office. There are any number of things that we do to fight it back.

我們有很多方式來反制這個壓力點、這個成本項目，例如將部分行銷資產變現、調整部分定價策略——例如我們在票房端改為稅額外加（tax on top）。我們有許多做法來抵消這些壓力。

So whereas, yes, our film rent quarter on quarter -- year on year for the quarter, rather, was up, and up 170 basis points. The fact of the matter is, they are not out of control, they are not out of line, they are not an anomaly, we're not seeing an escalation in scales. This is completely as we would've expected, given the size of the movies and the concentrations of the movies.

因此，雖然是的，我們的影片租金在本季年對年——更精確地說，是本季年對年——上升了170個基點；但事實是，它們並未失控、並未偏離常態、也不是異常情況。我們沒有看到分成比例（scales）出現加速上調。就電影的規模與上映集中度而言，這完全符合我們的預期。

Perhaps more important of all is that the gross profit for the quarter -- the gross profit per screen for the quarter was at an all-time high. So, yes, sure, our costs might have gone up, but so was the gross profit. Frankly, if we can keep that cost -- it is bound to come up -- under control, and we continue to drop the profitability on a per-screen and per-patron basis like we did in this quarter, that's a trade-off that we'll go ahead and take all day long.

或許最重要的是，本季的毛利——也就是本季每銀幕毛利——創下歷史新高。所以，是的，當然，我們的成本可能上升了，但毛利也同樣上升。坦白說，如果我們能把那項成本——它勢必會上來——控制在可控範圍內，並且我們能像本季一樣，持續在每銀幕與每位觀眾的基礎上提升獲利能力，那這樣的取捨我們願意一直做下去。

So not quite sure what happened for other folks out there in the marketplace, but for us it is completely under control and not out of line versus our expectations. Now Mr. Ramsey's going to want to add some color here.

所以不太確定市場上其他同業發生了什麼，但對我們而言一切完全在掌控之中，也沒有偏離我們的預期。接下來 Ramsey 先生會想補充一些說明。

I'd add one point. And Gerry's point, I'd repeat, that gross profit per screen -- we watch the percentages and we negotiate with the studios as aggressively as anyone does. We also really focus on that statistic that he gave you -- gross profit per screen up 6% over last year in the same quarter, and to a record. So another record set.

我補充一點。也重申 Gerry 的觀點：每銀幕毛利——我們會看比例，也會像任何人一樣積極地與片商談判。我們也非常聚焦他剛提供給你的那個指標——同一季度的每銀幕毛利較去年成長 6%，並創下新高。所以又創下一項紀錄。

The other thing is, it does feed -- the movies like this do feed our food and beverage business, we're also mindful of that. And that's driven our food and beverage per patron up about 10% and our gross profit per patron on that business up about 10% as well.

另外一點是，這類電影確實會帶動我們的餐飲業務，我們也有留意到。這使得每位觀眾的餐飲收入提升約 10%，而該業務的每位觀眾毛利也同樣提升約 10%。

So, a lot of patrons coming through the door. Higher take rate on food and beverage driving higher results on the food side of our business as well.

因此，進場的觀眾很多。餐飲的購買率提高，也帶動我們餐飲端的業績更上一層樓。

I'll close on the point, Eric, by just offering two thoughts, looking into the future. We're not in the business of trying to forecast too much in this volatile industry, but two thoughts.

Eric，我最後用兩點想法作結，談談未來。我們不太會在這個波動很大的產業裡做過多預測，但有兩點想法。

A, the pricing schemes are in play in this industry today versus those that might have been in play in this industry six -- five, six, seven years ago. I think that you'll find a lot more flexibility and a lot more room for exhibitors to defer some of those costs and pass along some of the costs of some of the more expensive and higher films onto the customer. That trend, over the last five or six years, I would expect will not at all slow down in the future.

第一，今天這個產業正在採行的定價方案，已不同於五、六、七年前可能採行的方案。我想你會看到更高的彈性，也有更大的空間讓影城業者延後承擔部分成本，並把某些更昂貴、成本更高的影片所帶來的部分成本轉嫁給消費者。過去五、六年的這個趨勢，我預期未來完全不會放緩。

The day where movies will be priced differentially is closer today than it was a year ago and two years ago. You can pretty much take that to the bank. I cannot give you a specific day as to when it may happen, but we are headed in that direction -- of that there is no doubt.

電影採取差別定價的那一天，現在比一年前、兩年前更近了。你幾乎可以把這當成板上釘釘。我無法告訴你確切會在哪一天發生，但我們正朝那個方向前進——這點毫無疑問。

The second thought that I'll offer you -- new arrangements with the studios. I've said for a while now that there are many touch points between an exhibitor and a studio, and new arrangements, like the one you saw us announce a couple of weeks ago with Paramount, are indicative of a new emerging relationship with our suppliers. Where, you know what, some of these film rents may be deferred or it may be absorbed in different ways when we have, all of a sudden, a different scheme for some specific genre of movies, or for some specific film. Those type of arrangements, I will also expect, will continue and grow broader into the future.

第二點想法——與片商的新型合作安排。我已經說了一段時間，影城業者與片商之間有許多接觸點；而像你們幾週前看到我們與 Paramount 宣布的那種新安排，正顯示我們與供應商之間正在形成一種新興關係。也就是說，某些片租可能會被延後支付，或在不同方式下被吸收；當我們針對某些特定類型的電影，或某一部特定影片，突然採用不同的方案時，就可能出現這種情況。這類安排我也預期未來會持續，並且會更廣泛地擴大。

So, I totally understand the point of film rent and it is a big one. It is the single largest expense item in our P&L as exhibitors. But the fact of the matter is that there are many tools and many ways that we can address that cost pressure while driving our profitability as we did in the quarter and as Craig indicated.

所以，我完全理解片租這個議題，而且它確實很重要。對我們這些影城業者而言，它是損益表中單一最大費用項目。但事實是，我們有很多工具、很多方法可以在推動獲利能力（如本季以及 Craig 所提到的那樣）的同時，去因應這項成本壓力。

Does that answer your question? I want to make sure that was said.

這樣有回答到你的問題嗎？我想確認我有把重點說清楚。

Very helpful, Gerry, very helpful. Just as a quick follow-up, in the past you've talked about some of the key drivers of your growth in concessions. I wonder if you could break out how much of the 10% growth was alcohol sales, how much was dine-in theaters. I wonder if you could walk through some of those metrics.

非常有幫助，Gerry，非常有幫助。再快速追問一下，過去你們談過一些推動餐飲（concessions）成長的關鍵驅動因素。我想請你拆解一下這 10% 的成長中，有多少來自酒精飲品銷售，有多少來自餐飲式影廳（dine-in theaters）。能否帶我們走過一些相關指標？

We'll give you a little bit of a broader breakdown. Of the $0.43, I think $0.27 of it was pricing and about $0.15, $0.16 was related to the initiatives. And the pricing goes back to the tax-on-top strategy that we implemented and we're still seeing the impacts of that -- and will, as we go forward, until its run rate becomes a permanent addition for us.

我們給你一個更廣的拆解。在每位觀眾增加的 0.43 美元中，我想其中 0.27 美元來自定價，約 0.15、0.16 美元與各項措施（initiatives）相關。而定價的部分回到我們所推行的「稅上加稅」（tax-on-top）策略，我們仍在看到其影響——而且未來也會持續，直到其運行水準（run rate）成為我們的永久性增量。

But $0.15 from initiatives and that's spread across all the different initiatives fairly evenly. I hope that is helpful.

至於來自措施的 0.15 美元，則相當平均地分散在各項不同措施上。希望這樣有幫助。

You're quite right, Eric, the single most impactful, from a financial perspective, of initiatives, are the MacGuffins, our lounges, the bars. We're up to 108 as of the end of June. They are adding about $0.37 per patron when we put them into a building. $0.28 of the $0.37 are gross profit.

你說得沒錯，Eric，從財務角度來看，影響最大的單一措施是 MacGuffins——我們的休息室、酒吧。截至 6 月底我們已達 108 家。當我們把它們導入一個據點時，每位觀眾可增加約 0.37 美元，其中 0.28 美元是毛利。

So, quite the successful run that we continue. 108 is about a third of the fleet, a little less than that. Of course, permitting and all of that is the regulator there, because our return on investment on these things, it's just phenomenal.

所以我們持續取得相當成功的成果。108 家大約占我們整體據點的三分之一，略少於三分之一。當然，許可申請等流程是主要限制因素，因為我們在這些項目上的投資報酬率實在非常驚人。

So you are quite right in singling that out. That particular initiative has worked well, continues to work well, and we expect it will in the future.

所以你特別點出這一點是完全正確的。這項措施過去成效很好、現在也持續有效，我們預期未來也會如此。

Thank you very much, and, Gerry, best of luck to you.

非常感謝，Gerry，也祝你一切順利。

Thank you, sir.

謝謝您，先生。

Mike Hickey, Benchmark.

Benchmark 的 Mike Hickey。

Hey, guys, thanks for taking my questions. Congratulations on an awesome quarter.

嗨，各位，謝謝回答我的問題。恭喜你們交出非常出色的一季。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Given some of the recliner installations, if you could provide a little more insight into your admission growth per screen? It seems like a few factors, attendance and ticket price growth, it seems given the strength this late that maybe this is more ticket price growth in the quarter versus attendance? That would be helpful.

考量到部分躺椅（recliner）安裝，如果可以的話，能否多提供一些你們每銀幕入場收入成長的洞見？看起來有幾個因素——觀影人次與票價成長——以目前這麼晚期仍然強勁的表現來看，似乎本季更多是票價成長而非人次？如果能說明會很有幫助。

Specifically on the recliners, is that -- or across the board? If you could clarify it.

你是特別指躺椅的部分，還是整體而言？能否請你澄清一下。

The admission growth per screen from your recliner installations, up over 20%. I'm just curious how that balances between attendance and ticket price increases.

你們因安裝躺椅而帶來的每銀幕入場收入成長，超過 20%。我只是好奇，這在觀影人次與票價上漲之間是如何分配的。

The ATP on the recliners specifically, Mike, our ATP shows about a 4% improvement year on year and a balance then coming from attendance. So that 20% is mostly attendance driven -- 15, 16 points of it was attendance driven and about 4 points was ATP driven, average ticket price driven.

就躺椅而言，Mike，我們的 ATP（平均票價）年對年約提升 4%，其餘則來自人次。因此那 20% 主要是人次驅動——其中約 15、16 個百分點由人次帶動，約 4 個百分點由 ATP（平均票價）帶動。

Okay, awesome, thank you. Then last question from me. Curious on your partnership with Paramount to accelerate movies to digital. It would seem on the surface this has opened Pandora's box here as it relates to windowing. Of course that's something that's been aggressively defended historically from your peers. And I wonder, from a risk perspective, thinking about the potential of [upping] the valuation of theater content would seemingly outweigh the incremental monies you'd earn from participating in the digital delivery of those movies.

好的，太棒了，謝謝。那我最後一個問題：關於你們與 Paramount 的合作，加速電影數位化。表面上看，這似乎在檔期窗口（windowing）方面打開了潘朵拉的盒子。當然，這一直是你們同業過去強力捍衛的領域。我想從風險角度來看，若提高院線內容的估值，[提升] 的潛在影響，似乎會大於你們參與這些電影數位交付所能賺到的增量收入。

We see it a little differently. The truth is, this is a test. It's limited to the two films. It is indicative of our willingness to listen to our studio partners and figure out how to make the pie grow for all of us. We need more films. For a studio to feel limited in the genre and the type and the size of films that they can bring out because of the economics that drive their side of the industry, it doesn't really help us either.

我們的看法有些不同。事實上，這是一個測試，且僅限於兩部影片。它反映出我們願意傾聽片商夥伴的需求，並找出讓大家一起把餅做大的方法。我們需要更多電影。若片商因其產業端的經濟因素，而覺得在類型、題材與影片規模上受到限制，這對我們也沒有幫助。

The fact is that we have, as an industry, as a segment of the industry, used this very broad brush to paint all films in the exact same color. Well, we know that's not true. That's just not reality. So, to not experiment, to not be willing to listen, to not be willing to strike a new arrangement that financially could be very lucrative, not just because of the arrangement for the specific two movies, but on what it may imply in terms of product flow in the years to come, we just did not think that was smart.

事實是，我們整個產業、作為產業的一個環節，長期以來用非常粗的筆觸把所有電影都塗成同一種顏色。但我們知道那不是真的，那不符合現實。因此，如果不去嘗試、不願意傾聽、不願意達成一種在財務上可能非常有利的新安排——不僅是因為針對這兩部特定電影的安排本身，也因為它對未來幾年產品供給流量可能代表的意涵——我們認為那並不明智。

So as we listen and as we try to think of different ideas, it seemed to us that it was important to do this. Now, to be clear, we talk about the window opening may be in the arrangement. The one thing that has not been said enough -- theatrical window continues to be first and continues to be the single most important. No better window exists for the studio than the theatrical window where every customer pays every time. There's just no better quality in any other electronic or home or otherwise delivery method for the studios. The theatrical window continues to be first and the theatrical window continues to be important, even with this new arrangement. So that's a point that has been lost in the shuffle as we all try to wrap our heads around what does it all mean, number one.

因此，當我們聆聽並嘗試思考不同的想法時，我們覺得做這件事很重要。現在，為了說清楚，我們談到的窗口開放，可能是在這個安排之中。唯一一件沒有被充分提及的事情——院線放映窗口仍然是第一順位，而且仍然是最重要、也是唯一最重要的。對片廠而言，沒有任何窗口比院線放映窗口更好，因為每一位觀眾每一次都要付費。對片廠來說，無論是任何其他電子、家庭或其他交付方式，都沒有比院線更高品質的窗口。即使在這個新安排下，院線放映窗口仍然是第一順位，且仍然很重要。所以，當我們都在努力理解這一切到底意味著什麼時，這一點在混亂中被忽略了，這是第一點。

Number two, we are in control. We are equal participants with the studio as to what content gets included in this kind of arrangement or not.

第二點，我們掌握主導權。我們與片廠是平等的參與者，決定哪些內容會被納入這類安排、或不納入。

Number three, there's a screen-count threshold on the thing, right? So, hey, when you add all of this in there, when you add the fact that you need to try to continue to innovate and experiment and find ways in which the economic equation continues to work for the studio and continues work for us until the years to come, this seemed like a very rational, thoughtful approach to try and figure out how a window can be shaped differently for different kinds of product.

第三點，這件事有一個銀幕數門檻，對吧？所以，嘿，當你把這些都加進來，再加上你必須持續創新、實驗，並找出讓經濟方程式在未來多年仍能對片廠有效、也能對我們有效的方法時，這看起來是一個非常理性、周全的做法，用來嘗試釐清不同類型的產品，窗口可以如何以不同方式被塑造。

The only thing I'd add, it is -- just to be clear, it is the first time a studio has offered an exhibitor downstream participation post-theatrical. So there's give and take here. And just to reiterate, to Gerry's point, this is a test. We've always been willing to try different things and a lot of times that proves to be the future, and lucrative or profitable for us. We think there's an opportunity here -- we will see as the test results come out.

我唯一想補充的是——為了說清楚，這是片廠第一次在院線之後的下游（post-theatrical）提供放映商參與分成。所以這裡有取有捨。而且再重申一次，呼應 Gerry 的觀點，這是一個測試。我們一向願意嘗試不同的做法，而很多時候那會證明是未來的方向，並且對我們而言是有利可圖或能帶來獲利的。我們認為這裡有機會——我們會在測試結果出來後再看。

Does that answer your question, Mike? Does that give you a little bit more context and clarity?

Mike，這有回答你的問題嗎？這是否讓你多一些背景與更清楚的理解？

(Laughter). Yes, you answered it and then some. Thanks, Gerry.

（笑聲）。有，你不只回答了，還講得更多。謝謝，Gerry。

(Laughter). Happy to help, bud. That's what we're here to do. (Laughter).

（笑聲）。很樂意幫忙，老兄。這就是我們在這裡要做的事。（笑聲）。

David Miller, Topeka Capital Markets.

David Miller，Topeka Capital Markets。

Hi, guys, I just have one quick question. I noticed that -- let me know if my numbers are wrong -- that you added 10 reseated theaters over the last 90 days. Is that generally, Craig, the pace that we should expect over the next, say, two, three, four quarters? Thanks a lot.

嗨，各位，我只有一個很快的問題。我注意到——如果我的數字有誤請告訴我——你們在過去 90 天新增了 10 家完成換座（reseated）的影城。Craig，這大致上是我們在接下來比如說兩、三、四個季度應該預期的速度嗎？非常感謝。

Look, I think between now and the end of the year, as an example, may be a good way to think about it, probably -- which is a six-month period -- probably 15 to 20 is probably a range. And then you look into next year, probably 30 to 40. It depends a little bit on the lease. We've always talked about the fact that we try to align with the lease life and try to strike the deal with the landlord when it's most opportunistic for us to do so. But I think that, that's probably indicative of the go-forward at lease pacing.

你看，我認為從現在到年底，舉例來說，可能是個不錯的思考方式——大概是一個六個月的期間——大概 15 到 20 家可能是一個區間。然後你再看明年，大概 30 到 40 家。這會有點取決於租約。我們一直都在談，我們會嘗試配合租約年限，並在對我們最有利的時點與房東敲定交易。但我認為，這大概能反映未來在租約節奏下的推進速度。

We've been building up towards that. I mean 4 to 6 would be more our pace and now we're stepping up more into the 8 to 10. This is construction. You never know what you're going to find when you rip out the carpet. But that has been our objective, to step it up little bit into that 10 range. That's been aspirational. And we've hit it. But it's six to eight, eight in that range, it's a pretty good cadence for us.

我們一直在朝那個方向累積。我是說，4 到 6 家會比較像我們原本的速度，而現在我們正提高到 8 到 10 家。這是施工，你永遠不知道把地毯拆掉後會發現什麼。但我們的目標就是把速度稍微提高到 10 家左右。那一直是我們的期望目標。我們也達到了。不過 6 到 8、或 8 左右那個區間，對我們來說是相當不錯的節奏。

Has the duration at which it takes, or in terms of the length of time that it takes to completely reseat an asset, has that been generally consistent across most of the projects that you've done, let's call it, I don't know, 60 days or something like that? Or is it diverse, generally based on where you are in terms of location. I'm just curious. Thanks.

完全換座一個資產所需的工期——也就是完成整個換座所花的時間——在你們做過的大多數專案中是否大致一致？比如說，我不知道，60 天之類？還是說差異很大，通常取決於所在地點？我只是好奇。謝謝。

The construction timing has been pretty consistent. The thing that drives it more is the number of screens in any given building, when you're doing 18 or 20 screens versus when you're doing 10 or 12, obviously, so that may take a little longer.

施工時程一直都相當一致。更主要的驅動因素是單一建物的銀幕數；當你做 18 或 20 個銀幕，對比做 10 或 12 個銀幕，顯然可能會花久一點。

Sure.

了解。

The one variability that we've seen, if anything, has been that the cost of transforming any one screen has escalated some. Now, part of it is, because of course, in some of the markets we're now doing the remodels, it's just higher labor costs, higher material costs. And the other piece is, the economy is coming along and construction is picking up, so it's costing more to hire an electrician and a construction laborer today than it did two years ago.

如果說我們看到任何變動，主要是單一銀幕改造的成本有些上升。部分原因是，當然，在我們現在進行翻新的某些市場，人工成本更高、材料成本更高。另一部分是，景氣正在回升、建築施工在增加，所以今天雇用電工和建築工人的成本，比兩年前更高。

Yes.

是。

So, we've seen some escalation on the costs and some variability there, market to market, more than we've variability in the actual construction timelines.

所以，我們看到成本有一些上升，且在不同市場之間有些差異；相較之下，施工時程本身的變動反而比較小。

Yes, the other thing to keep in mind is these are buildings we are familiar with. We know the bones. And we're a little more intelligent going in, I guess, as opposed to a new theater situation.

是的，另外要記住的是，這些都是我們熟悉的建物。我們了解它的結構底子。我想我們進場時也更有經驗、更聰明一些，相較於全新的影城案子。

Got you. No problem. Thank you.

了解。沒問題。謝謝你。

Eric Wold, B. Riley.

Eric Wold，B. Riley。

Thank you and good afternoon. Couple of questions. Two on the remodels. One, as you look into the remainder part of this year and into next year with what you've got planned for the reseats, is there further opportunity to do some acceleration as you did towards the end of last year?

謝謝，午安。我有幾個問題，其中兩個關於翻新。第一個，當你們看今年剩餘時間以及明年、就你們規劃的換座進度而言，是否還有機會像去年年底那樣再做一些加速？

And then, two, when you think about the landlord contributions, are those -- fixed is not the word I'm looking for -- but do you use a same formula going forward, or as you get better results and better attendance draws out of yours, do you have a little more negotiating power as you go back to get those done?

第二個，當你們考量房東的出資（contributions）時，那些——我想用的不是「固定」這個詞——但你們未來是否會沿用同一套公式？或者當你們取得更好的成果、帶來更好的出席人次後，你們在回頭談這些案子時，是否會有更大的談判籌碼？

I think the acceleration next year question, we're in our planning process and I quoted -- gave you some idea of what we -- the range of outcomes for next year on a number reseats. We'll look at how our free cash flow develops for this year and build that into our planning process, and consider whether we have an opportunity to accelerate. Probably not ready to commit to that at this point in time. The second question was --.

我想關於明年是否加速的問題，我們正在進行規劃流程，我也引用——給了你一些我們對明年換座數量可能結果的區間。我們會看今年自由現金流的發展，並把它納入規劃流程，然後評估是否有機會加速。但此時此刻可能還沒準備好做出承諾。第二個問題是——。

Accelerate?

加速？

No, we talked about the acceleration.

不，我們剛談的是加速。

What kind of landlord --?

房東那邊是什麼樣——？

Oh, yes, it's held fairly constant. I will say we probably did improve our leverage in that negotiation. Each deal is a negotiation and they're all different. But there's a trend that establishes as you deal with large numbers. And probably from the early year, those that are now two years old, three years old, since then and since the popularity, the whole concept has gained traction, we probably did gain a little bit of leverage.

喔，對，基本上維持得相當一致。我會說我們在那個談判中的籌碼可能確實有所提升。每一筆交易都是談判，而且都不一樣。但當你處理大量案子時，會形成一個趨勢。可能從早期那些現在已經兩年、三年的案子以來，隨著這個概念的受歡迎程度、整體概念獲得更多認同，我們大概確實多了一點談判籌碼。

And we're seeing the contribution to CapEx still averaging around 35%. I don't know that there's necessarily more leverage there potentially, but I think the popularity impact we've already seen. Everybody, I think all the landlord -- most all of the landlord community knows the power of a remodel and a recliner reseat remodel. So I think we have experienced that basically.

而且我們看到資本支出（CapEx）的出資比例仍然平均約在 35%。我不確定那裡是否一定還有更多潛在籌碼，但我認為受歡迎程度帶來的影響我們已經看到了。我想所有房東——至少大多數房東社群——都知道翻新、以及躺椅換座翻新的威力。所以我認為我們基本上已經體驗到那一點。

The only other element, Eric, that I would add is, keep in mind, these remodels are pretty extensive renovations, right? We go in and essentially strip it down to the bare concrete and go from there. But besides that, we are also building the MacGuffins. We're also doing the Dolby Cinema conversions. We're still looking for appropriate locations in which to add IMAX. So those are not the only projects that our crews are out there executing against.

Eric，我唯一還想補充的是，請記住，這些翻新是相當大規模的整修，對吧？我們進去後基本上會把它拆到只剩裸露的混凝土，然後再從那裡開始。但除此之外，我們也在建置 MacGuffins。我們也在做 Dolby Cinema 的轉換。我們仍在尋找合適的地點來新增 IMAX。所以，我們的團隊在外執行的並不只有這些專案。

So, in balance, although part of us wants to go out and get them all done in the next three months, the fact of the matter is, that just wouldn't be physically possible. And we are not yet prepared to go all out against a single element of the strategy and abandoning all of the other ones. So it's really a question of moving forward across all of these opportunities on all of these fronts. And we like this balance, as I call it, that we've been able to achieve, where we bring all of these different ideas forward at their own pace, but not leaving any of them behind. And trying to improve, through it all, the overall experience that the customer sees when they walk in the door.

所以，整體而言，雖然我們有一部分人想在接下來三個月內把它們全部做完，但事實是，那在體力與資源上根本不可能。而且我們也還沒有準備好只針對策略中的單一要素全力以赴，並放棄其他所有要素。所以，這其實是要在所有這些機會、所有這些面向上同步向前推進的問題。我喜歡我們所達成的這種「平衡」（我稱之為平衡）：讓這些不同的想法各自以自己的節奏往前走，但不把任何一個落下。同時在整個過程中，努力改善顧客走進門時所看到的整體體驗。

Perfect. And last question. As more and more of the reseats that have been hitting their one- and two-year anniversaries, has been any change in the normal extra 10% ticket price hike you take on those anniversaries? Or any change in the response of consumers?

很好。最後一個問題。隨著越來越多的重新改裝座椅（reseats）陸續迎來一週年與兩週年，你們在這些周年時通常會額外調漲 10% 票價的做法，有沒有任何改變？或是消費者的反應有沒有任何變化？

No, the trends actually have remained remarkably consistent. We see this big year one after the remodel, fantastic bumps -- 50%, 60%, 70% year on year immediately following the remodel. They moderate in year two, they come back into the teens. And then, by year three, they begin to mimic the industry, the attendance trends.

沒有，趨勢其實一直都非常一致。我們看到改裝後的第一年會有很大的成長，非常亮眼的跳升——在改裝後立刻出現年增 50%、60%、70% 的提升。第二年會趨於溫和，回落到十幾個百分點。然後到了第三年，就開始與產業一致，模仿整體的觀影人次趨勢。

The food and beverage per patron continues to escalate. Now, part of that is because it is a better experience. Part of it is because we installed the bars. Part of it is because we put in the Coke Freestyle machines.

每位顧客的餐飲（food and beverage）消費仍在持續攀升。這其中一部分是因為體驗更好；一部分是因為我們裝設了酒吧；另一部分是因為我們導入了可口可樂 Freestyle 機台。

So what we have seen over the last three years, even as the assets age, the year-on-year increases, of course, the numbers bring you down. But the trend has continued remarkably consistent -- frankly, not only was a surprise, but it has met and exceeded our expectations for the sustainability on a go-forward basis.

所以我們在過去三年看到的是，即使資產逐漸老化，年對年的增幅當然會因為基期而被拉低，但整體趨勢仍然驚人地一致——坦白說，這不只是出乎意料，也符合並超越了我們對未來可持續性的預期。

Got it. Thank you, guys. Thank you, Gerry.

了解。謝謝各位。謝謝你，Gerry。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Barton Crockett, FBR Capital Markets.

Barton Crockett，FBR Capital Markets。

Okay, thank you for taking the question. Gerry, I wanted to hear you out on this one question, which is the timing to leave AMC now. I was wondering if you could tell us a little bit more about why now, when things are so interesting. You can take a bit of a victory lap on some of the innovations that you have done there. Why not continue to ride it through? Why make this change right now?

好的，謝謝讓我提問。Gerry，我想就一個問題聽聽你的看法，也就是你現在離開 AMC 的時點。我想知道你能不能多談一點為什麼是現在——在事情這麼有趣的時候。你其實可以就你在那裡做的一些創新稍微「繞場致意」一下。為什麼不繼續把它一路做下去？為什麼要在此刻做這個改變？

Thank you for implying that I could even take a victory lap (laughter). The battle is not won, so I'm not sure that a victory lap -- but thank you though, Barton. Look, the truth is, an opportunity came up -- an opportunity that an old friend, an old boss, a guy that I've known for a dozen years, called up with.

謝謝你暗示我甚至可以繞場致意（笑聲）。戰役還沒贏，所以我不確定什麼繞場致意——不過還是謝謝你，Barton。你看，事實是，有一個機會出現了——一個老朋友、老闆，一位我認識十幾年的朋友打電話來帶來的機會。

There's never a great time, there are times that may be better than others. The truth is, the Company is hitting -- is firing on all cylinders. As you heard us say in the prepared remarks, and the press release will underline, we've had the best quarter in our 95-year history. To the extent that there is one time that is better than the other, on top will tend to be one of those times that is somewhat better.

從來沒有真正完美的時機，只是有些時點可能比其他時點更好。事實是，公司目前——正全速運轉、火力全開。正如你們在事先準備的發言中聽到的，新聞稿也會強調，我們剛創下 95 年歷史上最好的單季表現。若要說什麼時候比其他時候更好，處在高點往往會是相對更好的時候之一。

The fact is that the team is in place. The fact is that the strategy is in place. The fact is that the strategy has got runway left. And that the second version of that strategy, or what's to come next, that work is now beginning. And it will be the perfect timing for a new leader to come in and put his or her fingerprints all over that next iteration, that next version of the strategy.

事實是，團隊已經到位。事實是，策略已經到位。事實是，這個策略還有很長的跑道。而且策略的第二個版本，或接下來要做的事情，那些工作現在也已經開始了。這會是新領導者進來、把他或她的印記全面烙在下一次迭代、下一個版本策略上的完美時點。

So not going to try and tell you that the timing to do this is great, because I know that great timing ever comes, but it's certainly about an appropriate a time as I suspect it will ever get -- coupled with the fact that what I'm going to go do is an opportunity that presented itself when it presented itself. It's a friend, he's ready to retire and wants someone to come in and, frankly, try to do some of what we have done here, over there. And see if these ideas and some of the work that we have done here, that we have been engaged in for the last four, six years, does some of that rub off? Does some of that translate into a different industry?

所以我不會試圖告訴你這個時點有多完美，因為我知道所謂完美時機從來不會出現；但這確實大概已經是我能想像得到的、相當合適的時點——再加上我接下來要去做的事情，是在它出現的時候就出現了的機會。那是一位朋友，他準備退休，想找人接手，坦白說，是希望去那邊嘗試做一些我們在這裡做過的事情。看看這些想法、以及我們在這裡過去四到六年投入的工作，能不能產生一些外溢效果？能不能轉化到一個不同的產業？

It's an adventure, and, frankly, that's what appeals. It's that sense of adventure, that sense of potential that exists over there. And doing that while I know that this equation here at AMC is totally solid: strategy, team, the execution -- everything is right.

這是一場冒險，而坦白說，吸引我的就是這點——那種冒險感、那種在那邊存在的潛力。同時我也知道，AMC 這邊的整個方程式是完全穩固的：策略、團隊、執行——一切都到位。

I do appreciate the sentiment for the victory lap. I'm not taking one, because the work's not finished and the battle is not won. We're enjoined in the battle, but the battle is not won. Thank you, though, Barton, for the question. I do sincerely appreciate it.

我很感謝你提到繞場致意的心意。我不會那麼做，因為工作還沒完成、戰役也還沒贏。我們仍在戰局之中，但戰役尚未獲勝。不過還是謝謝你，Barton，這個問題。我真心感謝。

Okay, and I will miss your presence on these calls. It's been very nice.

好的，我會想念你在這些電話會議上的出席。一直以來都很愉快。

Thank you.

謝謝。

But I wanted to switch a little bit, Craig, if I could, to a couple of number questions. I think I heard you say that you guys outperformed the industry by 1 percentage point. You outperformed your peers in a 20-mile radius by about 6 percentage points.

不過如果可以的話，我想稍微換個方向，Craig，問幾個數字方面的問題。我想我聽到你說，你們比產業表現高出 1 個百分點。你們在 20 英里半徑內相較同業高出大約 6 個百分點。

And I think in previous quarters you guys have quoted similar type of trends. Does this say that your markets are underperforming the industry? What are you seeing there?

而且我想在前幾季你們也引用過類似的趨勢。這是否表示你們所在的市場其實落後於整體產業？你們看到的是什麼？

No, I don't think so. I think if the way we look at the AMC markets in the quarter, they were up 10%, almost 11% as well, I think. So I'm not seeing that. And on a year-to-date basis, I think similar as well.

不，我不這麼認為。我想如果我們看本季 AMC 所在市場的表現，它們也成長了 10%，接近 11% 左右，我記得是這樣。所以我沒有看到那種情況。以年初至今來看，我想也差不多。

We're trying to think of some of the geography and the differentials. And the truth is, Barton, we're not really -- our markets -- not really. There's some geographies that we're not competing in that have experienced some nice growth, some of the secondary cities and so on. But nothing that is -- we're trying to think of some of the details, there's nothing that's specific.

我們正在思考一些地理區域與差異的因素。事實是，Barton，我們的市場——其實沒有。確實有一些我們沒有參與競爭的地區出現了不錯的成長，例如一些次級城市等等。但沒有什麼——我們在想一些細節，沒有任何特別明確的因素。

Maybe what's going on here is the 6% is since 2011. That's the base year for that proximal zone. I think now I understand where your question is coming from, the disconnect. They're different time periods.

也許這裡的情況是，那個 6% 是從 2011 年開始算的。那是那個鄰近區域（proximal zone）的基準年度。我想我現在理解你的問題來源、以及你覺得不一致的地方了——它們是不同的時間區間。

Okay. All right, that's helpful.

好的。好，這很有幫助。

The 6% is that chart that we kept updated and we used during the road show a year and half ago. And it is really the cumulative effect of all of these customer-centric initiatives that we put in place. We began rolling them out in April of 2011 with AMC Stubs. And that 6-point differential that we quote is really the cumulative effect on a per-screen box-office basis. And it does limit the geography rather tightly to 20 miles around each one of our screens.

那個 6% 來自我們一直更新的那張圖表，我們在一年半前的路演（road show）中使用過。它其實是我們所推行的所有以顧客為中心的措施所累積的效果。我們從 2011 年 4 月推出 AMC Stubs 開始逐步上線。而我們引用的那個 6 個百分點差距，實際上是以每銀幕票房（per-screen box-office）為基礎的累積效果。同時，它把地理範圍限制得很嚴格：以我們每一個銀幕為中心、周圍 20 英里。

I was trying to think about the total US, and there's really no discernible trend there. But when you think of the specific geographies, we have been very, very specific to our buildings and the buildings around them. We are not even going DMA-wide, we are not even going statewide -- we're going building by building to build that chart and it's a cumulative effect dating back five years.

我原本在想全美整體，但那裡其實看不出明顯趨勢。不過當你看特定地理區域時，我們一直非常、非常聚焦在我們的影城建物，以及它們周邊的影城。我們甚至不是以 DMA 全區來看，也不是以州為單位——我們是逐一影城、逐一影城地建立那張圖表，而這是回溯五年的累積效果。

Just to be clear, we talked about, in the quarter, the industry up 9.4%. We actually looked at our markets and think they were up about 10.8% and we were up 11.4%. So, our markets outperformed the industry, and we outperformed both of them, is how we view it.

再澄清一下，我們在本季提到，產業成長 9.4%。我們實際上看了我們所在市場，認為它們大約成長 10.8%，而我們成長 11.4%。所以，我們的市場表現優於產業，而我們又同時優於兩者——這是我們的看法。

Okay. All right, that's helpful. One other number question. On the operating expenses that were up 11.5%, in a flat box-office environment, what would be the growth trend in that line? How much of that is driven by the revenue growth and how much of it is baked in expense inflation?

好的。好，這很有幫助。還有一個關於數字的問題。營運費用上升了11.5%，在票房環境持平的情況下，這一項的成長趨勢會是什麼？其中有多少是由營收成長帶動的，又有多少是已反映在費用通膨裡？

2% to 3%. I think we've always thought that, in a flat environment on the product, we ought to experience inflationary cost increases. And that's an offset of you've got the ACA Act that's affecting your insurance costs, but you ought to be able to get efficiencies in maybe some of your other variable operating expenses. You're always trying to minimize it. But in a flat environment, couple of percent.

2%到3%。我想我們一直認為，在產品處於持平環境時，我們應該會經歷通膨性的成本上升。這其中有《平價醫療法案》（ACA）影響你的保險成本，但你也應該能在其他一些可變的營運費用上取得效率。你總是在努力把它降到最低。但在持平環境下，大概就是幾個百分點。

Okay. All right, I'll leave it there. Thank you very much.

好的。好，那我就先到這裡。非常感謝。

James Marsh, Piper Jaffray.

James Marsh，Piper Jaffray。

Great, thanks very much. I was hoping you could break down the 10% growth that you guys saw in food and beverage per cap. It's a big number, but break it down between how dine-ins were doing and alcohol versus the Freestyle and marketplace. Any particular drivers of that 10% number? Or are they all contributing equally?

很好，謝謝。我想請你們拆解一下你們在人均餐飲（food and beverage per cap）看到的10%成長。這是個很大的數字，但能否在「餐飲到座（dine-in）」與酒精飲品，以及 Freestyle 和 marketplace 之間做個拆分？這10%有什麼特別的驅動因素嗎？還是大家貢獻差不多？

I'll try to give you a little more clarity. We're talking about the, I guess, that $0.15 -- that $0.15 to $0.16. Bear with me for just --.

我試著讓你更清楚一些。我們談的是，我想，是那0.15美元——0.15到0.16美元。請稍等我一下——。

(multiple speakers) I think it was a 10.2% increase.

（多位發言者）我想是人均增加了10.2%。

I'm sorry?

不好意思？

I think it was a 10.2% increase in the per cap for food and beverage.

我想餐飲的人均是增加了10.2%。

And I had responded earlier that the two big chunks of that are pricing is about $0.27 and the balance is the -- driven by initiatives, the $0.16, getting you to the $0.43 between change from the prior year. It is spread evenly. Gerry mentioned that the MacGuffins drives probably a little higher and the Freestyles probably overweight a little bit as you start breaking apart that $0.15. Those are the two that probably contribute a little more.

我先前回覆過，其中兩大塊是：定價大約0.27美元，其餘則是——由各項措施帶動的0.16美元，合計讓你相較去年增加0.43美元。整體分布算平均。Gerry提到，MacGuffins 可能拉動稍高一些，而 Freestyle 在你把那0.15美元拆開看時可能占比偏高一點。這兩項大概貢獻會多一些。

But it is spread across dine-in theaters, Freestyle, MacGuffins and some of our marketplace concepts. It's even but maybe a little heavier weighting to the two, MacGuffins and Freestyle.

但它是分布在餐飲到座影城、Freestyle、MacGuffins，以及我們的一些 marketplace 概念上。整體算平均，但 MacGuffins 和 Freestyle 的權重可能稍微高一點。

Yes. And it's across the formats, James, what we saw in food and beverage spending per patron -- the old per head, as we used to call it -- it's sort of consistent. It's 9 points for the core theaters, it's 9 points for the DITs and it's 12 points for the recliners. Of course for the DITs, those 9 points are coming off of a base that is closer to $9. But the growth has been fairly consistent across all of the formats.

是的，而且跨各種型態，James，我們看到每位觀眾的餐飲消費——以前我們叫 per head——大致一致。核心影城是成長9個點，DIT 也是9個點，躺椅（recliners）則是12個點。當然對 DIT 而言，那9個點是建立在更接近9美元的基期上。但成長在所有型態之間都相當一致。

Okay. All right, great. Thank you very much.

好的。好，很棒。非常感謝。

You bet.

不客氣。

Jim Goss, Barrington Research.

Jim Goss，Barrington Research。

Thanks. I was curious, with the discussion you had earlier about the film rental splits, whether the customer-service initiatives -- the reseatings and enhanced food and beverage -- gave you any greater leverage with the studios such that they might be sufficiently interested in having their product shown in those locations that, that might help you get a little more bargaining power with them on that figure?

謝謝。我好奇的是，針對你們先前談到的片租分成（film rental splits），你們的顧客服務措施——重新座位配置（reseatings）與強化餐飲——是否讓你們在與片商談判時有更大的槓桿，使他們更有興趣讓其產品在那些據點上映，進而讓你們在那個數字上取得更多議價能力？

Not really. I mean, with the studios it's an aggregate discussion. They leverage that the reseat initiatives delivered to us is attendance growth. The productivity of the VPF that a studio pays -- the truth is they are paying that virtual print fee, that's VPF -- they're paying the virtual print fee whether 2,000 people over the course of two weeks enjoy the movie on that screen, or whether 20,000 people do. Clearly, they rather it be 20,000 and clearly that's what we delivered to them. So greater efficiency in that front and that does help the negotiations.

不太是。我是說，和片商的討論是以整體來談。他們所能利用的是，我們的重新座位措施帶來了出席人次的成長。片商支付的 VPF 的生產力——事實是他們在支付那個虛擬拷貝費（virtual print fee），也就是 VPF——不管兩週內有2,000人看那個銀幕上的電影，或是20,000人看，他們都要付。很明顯他們寧可是20,000人，而這也確實是我們交付給他們的。因此在那方面效率更高，而這確實有助於談判。

The truth is, when we sit down with these guys, it's about the total package. It's about what we deliver in efficiencies on the virtual print fees, about what we deliver in efficiencies in terms of [pair] building. It's the ability to deliver the big number on the opening weekend, which as you know, drives so much of the value of that product, both for the theatrical life as well as for the ancillary windows.

事實是，當我們和他們坐下來談時，談的是整體方案。談的是我們在虛擬拷貝費上的效率提升，談的是我們在（影院）建置方面的效率提升。也談到我們在首映週末交付大數字的能力——你也知道，這會驅動該產品很大一部分的價值，不僅在院線生命週期，也包括後續的各個發行窗口。

The real leverage comes from the total ability of the Company to deliver on that potential gross and the efficiency with which we do it. The trailer showings, because of the number of people that we bring in, all of that factors in. There is no one element I would tell you that delivers any more leverage point than the other.

真正的槓桿來自公司整體交付潛在票房總額的能力，以及我們執行的效率。預告片放映，因為我們帶進來的人數，所有這些都會納入考量。我不會告訴你有任何單一要素比其他要素帶來更多的槓桿。

It's really the fact that they know that if they want their movie to open big, they are going to need our help. And we know that if we want to have a big weekend, we're going to need their help. So sober, clear-eyed people over a negotiating table, we will strike a deal that works for everybody on all the movies.

重點其實是，他們知道如果想讓電影開片很大，就需要我們的幫忙；而我們也知道如果想要有一個很大的週末，就需要他們的幫忙。所以在談判桌上，理性、清醒的人會達成一個對所有人、對所有電影都行得通的協議。

Okay. And I don't know if it's too soon to get any early read on Dolby Cinema at AMC Prime, but are there any situations where you have had both that and an IMAX in the same theater? And if it's a particularly hot movie, you might have it in both places at the same time.

好的。我不知道現在要對 AMC Prime 的 Dolby Cinema 做任何初步判讀是否還太早，但你們是否有同一家影城同時有 Dolby Cinema 和 IMAX 的情況？如果是一部特別熱門的電影，你們可能會同時在兩個廳上映。

Yes, it really is too early. We only have five of them up and running, five under construction. We're very encouraged by what we've seen. We have some thresholds that we set for ourselves and that we have set with Dolby, because this involves their participation. They are deploying some capital into some of the screens with us. And all of the hurdles that we have set for ourselves have been not only met but exceeded. So we're very, very encouraged.

是的，確實還太早。我們目前只有5個已經啟用，另有5個在施工中。我們對目前看到的情況非常鼓舞。我們為自己設定了一些門檻，也和 Dolby 一起設定了，因為這涉及他們的參與。他們也在部分銀幕上與我們共同投入一些資本。而我們為自己設定的所有門檻不僅達成，甚至超越。所以我們非常、非常受到鼓舞。

But it's way too early to tell. Can't really get into it any of the specifics. I will tell you that part of what's muddying the waters is the success that some of the movies that we put in Dolby Cinema have had. When Jurassic World becomes the juggernaut that it becomes -- man, it worked on every screen that we put it up, okay. So was it the movie or was it the screen? You know what? It worked.

但現在要下結論還太早，也無法深入談任何細節。我可以說，讓情況更難判讀的一部分原因，是我們放在 Dolby Cinema 的某些電影本身就非常成功。《侏羅紀世界》成為那樣的票房怪物時——老實說，它在我們放映的每一個銀幕上都有效果，好嗎。所以是電影的關係，還是銀幕的關係？你知道嗎？反正就是有效。

That's about all I'm -- so it's going to take us a little longer to sort through. We're highly encouraged. The customer feedback has been phenomenal, both on the technology as well as the seats that we're installing in this thing. So the people are really liking it.

我大概就只能說到這裡——所以我們還需要多一點時間來釐清。我們非常受到鼓舞。顧客回饋非常好，不論是技術本身，還是我們在這個廳裡安裝的座椅。大家真的很喜歡。

But it's way too early to tell. The truth is, Jim, we think the future involves IMAX -- we got 150 of them out there, and always looking for an opportunity to add more. Even Dolby Cinema, when fully deployed, over the next 10 years we're expecting 100, so this is not an either/or to us, it's an and game. It's IMAX and Dolby Cinema, combined, that deliver, we think, the greatest potential -- the greatest value for our shareholders.

但現在要判斷還太早。事實是，Jim，我們認為未來會包含 IMAX——我們目前有150個，而且一直在尋找機會再增加。即便是 Dolby Cinema，完全佈建後，在未來10年我們預期大約是100個，所以對我們而言這不是二選一，而是「兩者都要」。我們認為，IMAX 加上 Dolby Cinema 的組合，能為股東帶來最大的潛力——最大的價值。

Absolutely. IMAX was up 45% for us year over year. And that was very important to our financial results. So we're excited about Dolby Cinema at AMC Prime. We're also excited about the IMAX relationship.

完全同意。IMAX 對我們而言年增45%。而這對我們的財務結果非常重要。所以我們對 AMC Prime 的 Dolby Cinema 感到興奮，我們也對與 IMAX 的合作關係感到興奮。

Okay, and one last thing, Gerry and Craig. With the Starplex acquisition, and maybe it's a model for some others, but you implied that there would be some things you could take advantage of with your customer-service initiatives. As you look at potential acquisitions, do you think you would rather have something that could use some extra attention so you can put your little magic with it? Or would you rather have a theater that would be in perfect running order?

好的，最後一個問題，Gerry 和 Craig。關於收購 Starplex，也許它是其他案子的模型，你們暗示可以在顧客服務措施上發揮一些優勢。當你們看潛在併購標的時，你們會更偏好需要多一些關注、讓你們可以施展一些「魔法」的標的？還是更偏好營運狀況已經非常完善的影城？

Well, we've said all along, Jim, that, for us, acquisitions was a three-filter, or a three-test deal. One, of course, the financial filter that you would expect us to apply, accretive at what price, multiples, impact of the NCN chairs, et cetera, et cetera. That we've always had that filter is not going away. It's as important now as it has ever been.

嗯，我們一直以來都說過，Jim，對我們而言，併購是一個三道篩選、或三項測試的案子。第一，當然是你會預期我們會套用的財務篩選：在什麼價格下具增益性（accretive）、倍數、NCN 座椅的影響，等等等等。我們一直都有這道篩選，未來也不會消失。它現在的重要性不亞於以往任何時候。

The second filter, which comes into play more and more, is the DoJ. As you know, there has been the investigation that is ongoing and so on and so forth, all of which underlines the fact we've always known and we've always said, that any acquisition we need to be ever more thoughtful, particularly of our site about what kind of scrutiny will it take from the DoJ, how proximal are the theaters to our existing fleet, et cetera, et cetera.

第二道篩選，而且越來越常派上用場的，是司法部（DoJ）。如你所知，目前仍有調查在進行等等，這些都再次凸顯了我們一直知道、也一直說過的事：任何收購我們都必須更加審慎，特別是從我們的角度來看，司法部會進行何種程度的審查、這些影城與我們既有影城網絡的距離有多近，等等等等。

And then the third piece, which perhaps is unique to us, but one where the Starplex -- this is what makes Starplex such in an attractive opportunity for us, is the fact that what we do, we believe can play well in their buildings. They are well run, it's a good circuit. They have already begun to do some things themselves already, so it's not as we're starting from zero. For example, we're going to add 80 more screens to the recliner, but they really have 90 screens that are already reclined. So we're not starting at zero there.

第三個部分，或許是我們比較獨特的一點；而 Starplex——這也是讓 Starplex 對我們如此具吸引力的原因——在於我們所做的事情，我們相信能在他們的影城裡很好地發揮。他們經營得很好，是一個不錯的院線。他們自己也已經開始做了一些事情，所以不是從零開始。舉例來說，我們會再增加 80 個配備躺椅的銀幕，但他們其實已經有 90 個銀幕是躺椅了。所以在這方面我們不是從零開始。

So for us, our analysis is really about, gee, putting the potential acquisition through those three filters. This is not an either/or and it's not a multiple-choice exam. You got to get through all three filters. And if you get through all three of them in good shape, as Starplex did, then you're going to find us being very acquisitive.

所以對我們而言，我們的分析其實就是把潛在收購案放進這三道篩選裡檢視。這不是二選一，也不是多選題。你必須通過全部三道篩選。而如果三道都能以良好狀態通過，就像 Starplex 一樣，那你就會看到我們會非常積極地進行併購。

What you will not see us do is, oh, gee, let's engage in an acquisition because we have made some statement or we've made some promise that is predicated on screen count or building count or something like that. Our strategy is focused on customers and being customer-centric. And it's supported by the productivity of the fleet, the existing fleet and the fleet that we would add to, on the productivity of each visit. When we can add to that productivity by being customer-centric, we will add to the fleet. But we will not do so just because we're chasing some number. That's just not what we do.

你不會看到我們做的是：噢，既然我們曾經發表過某種說法或做過某種承諾，而那是以銀幕數或影城數之類的指標為前提，那就來做一筆收購。我們的策略聚焦在顧客、以顧客為中心。並且由影城網絡的生產力所支撐——既有影城網絡，以及我們可能新增的影城網絡——也就是每一次到訪的生產力。當我們能透過以顧客為中心來提升那個生產力時，我們就會擴充影城網絡。但我們不會只是因為追逐某個數字就去做。那不是我們的作法。

All right. Gerry, good luck to you.

好的。Gerry，祝你好運。

Thank you, sir.

謝謝您，先生。

Jason Bazinet, Citi.

Jason Bazinet，花旗。

Thanks so much. If I can go back to the interplay between a very strong box office and the ticket price increases and the food and beverage per patron. If we enter a period with a more benign box-office gross number, I think it's fair to say that ticket-price increases, or year-over-year increases, will be more modest because of less IMAX and the like. Is the same thing true on the food and beverage per patron? In other words, do you find that consumers are less apt to open up their wallet if they're not going to a movie that they're super excited about? Or is it all driven by the initiatives and it doesn't really matter?

非常感謝。如果我可以回到非常強勁的票房、票價調漲，以及每位觀眾的餐飲（food and beverage）消費之間的互動關係。若我們進入一段票房總額較為溫和的期間，我想可以說，票價的調漲、或年增幅度，會更為溫和，因為 IMAX 等因素較少。餐飲每位觀眾消費也是同樣情況嗎？換句話說，你們是否發現，如果觀眾不是去看一部他們非常興奮的電影，他們就比較不願意掏錢？還是其實完全由你們的各項措施所驅動，並不太受影響？

Jason, I'll be honest with you. What you are describing has a name -- it's called 2014. It was not a great year for the box office. In fact, it was a down year. And what we saw in 2014 was that our initiatives carried the day, that the food-and-beverage spending grew dramatically compared to the box office that didn't.

Jason，我跟你坦白說。你描述的情境有個名字——叫做 2014 年。那一年票房表現並不好，事實上是下滑的一年。而我們在 2014 年看到的是，我們的各項措施撐起了整體表現：餐飲支出相較於沒有成長的票房，出現了大幅成長。

So the scenario you're describing we just lived through it. And what we saw was that the consumer, when given that better experience of a reclined theater, it will go up. Now, we helped it by doing the Freestyles; we helped it by doing the MacGuffins; and they responded well.

所以你描述的情境我們才剛經歷過。我們看到的是，當消費者獲得更好的體驗——例如躺椅影廳——消費就會上升。我們也透過導入 Freestyle（自助飲料機）來推動；也透過 MacGuffins（酒吧/餐飲品牌）來推動；而消費者的反應很好。

So, we saw growth in food and beverage even though the box office itself was soft. So, one of the things that gives us such great firepower behind these initiatives is that, when the industry softens up, as it's bound to do any given year -- we don't think it's this year, we don't think it's 2016 either -- but when it softens up, these initiatives fill in the gap rather nicely. Now, Mr. Ramsey wants to add some soda to that.

因此，即使票房本身疲弱，我們仍看到餐飲成長。所以，讓我們對這些措施如此有火力支撐的一點是：當產業在某一年走弱——這在任何一年都可能發生——我們不認為是今年，也不認為是 2016 年——但當它走弱時，這些措施能相當不錯地補上缺口。現在，Ramsey 先生想再補充一些關於汽水的內容。

Yes, if you went under the microscope you would probably find there's some variation in film genre on spend, family versus action. But I think that probably the more salient point is, going forward, we think we'll continue to have impact. What will continue to have impact on food and beverage per patron spend is the deployment. As we roll out more of our initiatives and cover a greater percentage of our fleet, we'll not only enjoy the benefits of what we've done already -- and the higher levels of spend -- we will take it even further, even to higher levels, as more theaters get deployed. So, not film-specific, I think more related to the pace at which we deploy.

是的，如果你用顯微鏡去看，可能會發現不同電影類型在消費上確實有些差異，例如家庭片相對於動作片。但我認為更關鍵的一點是，往前看，我們認為我們仍會持續產生影響。未來會持續影響每位觀眾餐飲消費的，是部署（deployment）。隨著我們推出更多措施、覆蓋我們影城網絡中更高的比例，我們不僅能享受既有措施帶來的效益——以及更高的消費水準——隨著更多影城完成部署，我們還能把它推得更高、達到更高的水準。所以我認為不是特定電影所致，而是更與我們部署的速度相關。

Very good. Thank you, gentlemen.

很好。謝謝各位先生。

Thank you, Jason.

謝謝你，Jason。

Chad Beynon, Macquarie.

Chad Beynon，Macquarie。

Hi, thanks for taking my questions. I wanted to go back to some of the details on the Starplex acquisition. You guys keep mentioning that the acquisition is accretive from a cash flow-EBITDA earnings standpoint. Wondering if you can provide some more disclosure around the EBITDA. All we see is the price per screen.

嗨，謝謝讓我提問。我想回到 Starplex 收購案的一些細節。你們一直提到，從現金流—EBITDA 獲利的角度來看，這筆收購具有增益性（accretive）。想請問你們是否能提供更多關於 EBITDA 的揭露？我們目前只看到每個銀幕的價格。

And then if you cannot, help us understand how you're thinking about M&A in the space, and the returns that you're going to get on $172 million in M&A versus reseating. Just some overall color there. Thanks.

另外，如果你們無法提供，也請協助我們理解你們如何看待這個產業的併購（M&A），以及在 1.72 億美元的併購投入相較於更換座椅（reseating）上，你們預期能取得的報酬。想請你們提供一些整體的看法。謝謝。

What I could say about the acquisition is we think that, after synergy, after all the different impacts, including the National CineMedia piece of this thing, this deal was done between a 5.5 and a 6 turn. It ultimately depends on how well the theaters perform when you get to that point. But that's how we think about it, from is it accretive? So I think that should answer the question. Absolutely, it's accretive.

關於這筆收購我能說的是，我們認為在計入綜效、各種不同影響（包括其中的 National CineMedia 相關部分）之後，這筆交易的倍數大約落在 5.5 到 6 倍之間。最終仍取決於影城在你走到那一步時的營運表現。但我們就是用這樣的方式來思考：它是否具增益性？所以我想這應該回答了你的問題。毫無疑問，它是具增益性的。

The quality of the circuit, I think, has certainly played heavily in our thinking. And this circuit performs at an attendance-per-screen basis, at about a 25% premium to the industry average. And they've got a good mix of urban and smaller-market mid-tier markets. And so, if you take that into account, you would expect lower levels of productivity. Not really the case here.

我認為院線的品質在我們的思考中確實占了很大比重。這個院線以每銀幕入場人次（attendance-per-screen）來看，表現約比產業平均高出 25% 的溢價。而且他們的組合不錯，兼具都會區與較小市場的中階市場。因此，若把這些因素納入考量，你可能會預期生產力水準較低；但在這裡並非如此。

So, highly attended theaters, which I think sets the stage for us to deploy the food and beverage, monetizing the attendance, providing returns above the accretion of the base deal. And the same for the reseats, which Gerry said they've already -- probably about halfway through their reseat program. So there's more opportunity to reseat.

因此，這些高出席率的影城，我認為為我們部署餐飲、將出席率變現奠定了舞台，並能帶來高於基礎交易增益性的報酬。更換座椅也是同樣道理；Gerry 說他們已經——大概完成了他們更換座椅計畫的一半左右。所以仍有更多更換座椅的機會。

And what is the return opportunity? No different than really what we've seen in our circuit. You may have some smaller markets in the Starplex organization. We actually have, ourselves, reseated some of the smaller markets that we acquired -- as an example, in the Kerasotes transaction -- so we know what that looks like.

至於報酬機會是什麼？其實與我們在自家院線看到的並沒有不同。Starplex 的組織裡可能有一些較小市場。我們自己也曾對一些我們收購來的較小市場進行過更換座椅——例如在 Kerasotes 交易中——所以我們知道那會是什麼樣子。

Even in situations where you may not have the major market population, oftentimes these smaller markets don't cost quite as much to perform the work for a lot of different reasons. But we think the return opportunity is really no different in the Starplex circuit than it is in the experience we've had within our own circuit.

即使在你可能沒有主要市場人口規模的情況下，很多時候這些較小市場因為各種原因，施工成本往往不會那麼高。但我們認為，在 Starplex 院線的報酬機會，與我們在自家院線的經驗相比，基本上沒有什麼不同。

Absolutely.

當然。

Okay. Craig, that's super helpful. And, going forward, do you expect to continue to see some M&A opportunities in the next 18 to 36 months? Obviously, keeping the DoJ's concerns in mind, do you think there are still other circuits where you can implement your strategies and see similar type returns?

好的。Craig，這非常有幫助。而且，展望未來，你是否預期在未來18到36個月仍會看到一些併購（M&A）機會？顯然，在把司法部（DoJ）的疑慮納入考量的前提下，你認為是否還有其他院線能讓你們落實策略並取得類似的報酬？

Absolutely. Those will be -- you never know when they're going to happen, when they're going to come up. You can try to position yourself, but you really never do know when someone's going to decide to put their circuit up for sale.

當然。這些機會會——你永遠不知道它們何時會發生、何時會出現。你可以嘗試讓自己處於有利位置，但你真的永遠無法確定何時有人會決定把他們的院線拿出來出售。

But we will be selective. And we will -- we're generating a lot of free cash flow and we'll want to put it to work. We think that consumers everywhere want the better experience. And so that leads us to believe that there are going to be opportunities to buy circuits and deploy what we do best, and that is these guest-centered, guest-centric initiatives that Gerry has introduced and got us well on the way to (multiple speakers).

但我們會有所取捨。我們也會——我們正在產生大量自由現金流，而我們會希望把它投入運用。我們認為各地的消費者都想要更好的體驗。因此，這讓我們相信會有機會收購院線，並部署我們最擅長的事，也就是Gerry所引入、並讓我們在（多位發言者）方面已經走在正軌上的這些以顧客為中心（guest-centered、guest-centric）的各項措施。

Chad, there's a word that occurs that we haven't used when thinking about this, and that is discipline. And that discipline, you see it in our painting of the remodels. You see it in the announcements that we do for the acquisitions. You see it in so many of these things that we're working against.

Chad，有個我們在思考這件事時尚未使用的詞，那就是「紀律」。而這種紀律，你可以在我們對改裝（remodels）的規劃中看到；你可以在我們對收購案所做的公告中看到；你也可以在我們正在對抗的許多事情上看到。

And, whereas there is a temptation to grab a headline, and there is a temptation to race ahead in order to have something to talk about in an earnings call, the fact of the matter is that something that this organization does very well, is that it exercises that discipline, financial and operationally. And it brings that discipline to everything that it does.

而且，雖然人們會想要搶頭條，也會想要為了在財報電話會議上有話可說而加速往前衝，但事實是，這個組織做得非常好的一件事，就是在財務與營運層面都能保持那份紀律，並把這份紀律帶到它所做的每一件事上。

And that's what perhaps sometimes makes AMC a little less flashy on a quarter-in, quarter-out, headline-grabbing basis. Yet, you know what? It allows us to provide, we think, more sustainable high-quality results. And that's part of what you may be seeing here with some of these M&As, is that we're not going to jump on each and every single one of them. We're going to jump on the ones that make sense to us.

而這也許就是為什麼AMC在每一季、每一季那種搶頭條的層面上，看起來沒那麼花俏。不過，你知道嗎？它讓我們能夠提供——我們認為——更可持續的高品質成果。而你在這些併購案上可能看到的部分原因就是：我們不會對每一筆都出手。我們會出手在那些對我們而言有意義的案子上。

Okay. Thanks, very helpful. And, Gerry, best of luck and I will be speaking with you on your conference calls at your next job.

好的。謝謝，非常有幫助。還有，Gerry，祝你一切順利，我會在你下一份工作的電話會議上再和你交流。

I'm looking forward to that. Thank you, Chad.

我很期待。謝謝你，Chad。

Leo Kulp, RBC Capital Markets.

Leo Kulp，RBC Capital Markets。

Hi, thanks for taking the question. With the 2016 slate starting to fill out a bit, how are you thinking directionally about the performance of the box office next year?

嗨，謝謝讓我提問。隨著2016年的片單開始逐步充實，你們對明年票房表現的方向性看法是什麼？

It's kind of early, and I'm the guy that, one call ago, went out and predicted $11.25 billion for the industry this year. So I'm perhaps the one that is most prone to make predictions about the future.

現在還算早，而我就是那個在上一次電話會議就出來預測今年全產業票房會到112.5億美元的人。所以我可能是最容易對未來做預測的人。

It seems too early about 2016 even for me. But I will tell you couple of things. So, on the one hand, I'm trying to be cautious and, on the other hand, here I go. I think 2016 is going to be, based on what we know, a fine year for the industry. Don't know that it will burst through, what I expect will be $11.2 billion, $11.25 billion in 2015, just don't know enough about that yet.

即便對我來說，談2016似乎也還太早。不過我可以告訴你幾件事。一方面我想保持謹慎，另一方面——我又要開始了。我認為，依我們目前所知，2016對產業而言會是個不錯的一年。不確定它是否會突破我預期2015年將達到的112億到112.5億美元，現在對此還了解得不夠。

But here's what I can tell you. For AMC, 2015 is shaping up to be another record year. So 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 -- four record years in a row. Given the acquisition, which we expect will close very late in 2015, which will give us wind in our sails for all of 2016; given the pace of the recliner remodels, which we have escalated up by three -- two to three units a quarter; if the box office helps at all -- if it's stable, we're not even going to need a lot of help from the box office, even if it's just flat to prior -- 2016 will be another record year for AMC, even if the industry just holds its own.

但我可以告訴你的是：對AMC而言，2015正朝著另一個創紀錄的年度發展。所以2012、2013、2014以及2015——連續四年創紀錄。考量到這筆收購案，我們預期會在2015年底非常晚的時候完成交割，這將讓我們在整個2016年都順風順水；再加上躺椅（recliner）改裝的進度，我們已把速度提高到每季多兩到三個據點；如果票房能幫上一點忙——如果能維持穩定，我們甚至不需要票房給太多助力，即便只是與前期持平——那麼2016也將是AMC的另一個創紀錄年度，即使整個產業只是維持現狀。

So, can't give numbers because it's just a little too early, but I am very encouraged by what I have seen so far from the industry and extremely encouraged by what I know is coming from AMC. Between the initiatives and the acquisition and everything that we got cooking, all of those projects are already in the pipe. So these are not betting on the come, we know when these projects are going to hit.

所以，我現在還不能給出數字，因為確實還稍早，但我對目前從產業端看到的情況非常受到鼓舞，也對我所知道AMC即將發生的事情感到極度振奮。無論是各項措施、收購案，以及我們正在推進的一切，這些專案都已經在管線中。所以這不是在賭未來會不會發生，我們知道這些專案何時會落地。

So I see 2016 as -- at the moment -- as the fifth record-setting year in a row for this Company. So that's about all I can tell you about the year to come.

因此，就目前而言，我把2016視為——在此刻——本公司連續第五個創紀錄的年度。關於未來一年，我大概只能告訴你這些。

Got it. Thank you very much. And all the best, Gerry.

了解。非常感謝。也祝你一切順利，Gerry。

Thank you, Leo, appreciate it. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for spending the better part of your afternoon with us. It has been an honor and a privilege to lead this organization for the last 6.5 years. It has been a tremendous amount of fun to interact with all of you over the last 1.5 years. Thank you for all of your good wishes just this afternoon, and I know I will be seeing you down the road. Thank you again.

謝謝你，Leo，感謝。各位女士、先生，感謝各位在今天下午撥出大部分時間與我們一起。過去6年半能夠領導這個組織，是我的榮幸與特權。過去1年半能與各位互動也非常有趣。謝謝各位就在今天下午給我的所有祝福，我也知道未來還會再與各位相見。再次謝謝。

Thank you. This concludes today's teleconference. Thank you for your participation. You may disconnect your lines at this time.

謝謝。今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位的參與。您現在可以掛斷電話線。