ArcBest Corp (ARCB) 2009 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good afternoon. My name is Jennifer and I will be your conference operator today. At this time I would like to welcome everyone to the Arkansas Best Corporation second quarter 2009 earnings conference call. (Operator Instructions)

Thank you, I will now turn the conference over to Mr. David Humphrey, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Welcome to the Arkansas Best Corporation second quarter 2009 earnings conference call. We'll have a short discussion of the second quarter results, then we'll open up for a question-and-answer period. Our presentation this morning will be done by Mr. Robert A. Davidson, President and Chief Executive Officer of Arkansas Best Corporation and Miss Judy R. McReynolds, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Arkansas Best Corporation. We thank you for joining us today. In order to help you better understand Arkansas Best Corporation and its results, some forward-looking statements could be made during this call. As we all know, forward-looking statements by their very nature are subject to uncertainties and risks. For a more complete discussion of factors that could affect the Company's future results, please refer to the forward-looking statements section of the Company's earnings press release in the Company's most recent SEC public filings. We will now begin with Miss McReynolds.

Thank you, David, and thank you for joining us this morning. Because of the ongoing effects of the economic recession and its impact on ABF's freight levels and LTL industry pricing, I'm reporting weak quarterly results for our company. Despite our efforts to closely control costs and maintain pricing disciplines, our second quarter totals reflect the challenges we face in this adverse environment. We continue to assess and act on our best options while responding to the current conditions in a manner that preserves our ability to provide a superior level of customer service. Later, Bob will give his thoughts and perspective on our recent performance, but now I'll cover the details of our results for the second quarter of 2009.

Our second quarter 2009 revenue was $363 million representing a decrease of about 27% per day compared to last year. Our net loss for the second quarter was $0.62 a share compared to net income of $0.63 a share last year. Our quarterly results were impacted by unusual increases in non-union health and pension costs as well as workers compensation and third-party casualty costs. The combination of these increases lowered our earnings by $0.12 a share. Our yearly non-union pension costs will have doubled in 2009 compared to 2008 and this increase is driven by the 2008 stock market decline.

Our non-union medical costs have increased this year despite plan changes that we initiated beginning in January. Our workers' compensation and third-party casualty costs increased as a result of a few severe claims. We are managing each of these cost areas to the best of our ability and over longer periods of time our results are favorable. However, that is not the case this quarter. On a positive note, the market performance of the cash surrender value of executive life insurance policies improved by $0.06 a share compared to last year's quarter. Our year tax rate was 38.5% based on the projected full rate for the year. We ended the second quarter with a cash and short-term investments of $191 million. And now I'd like to move on to ABF's results for the quarter.

ABF reported second quarter revenues of $344 million, a per day decrease of 28% compared to last year. ABF's tonnage declined 17% per day during the quarter. So far this month, our July tonnage is down approximately 13.5%. You might recall that it was July of last year when we began to see our monthly tonnage trends get progressively worse. ABF's second quarter operating ratio was a 107.8 compared to a 94.7 in the second quarter of 2008. The impact on ABF's second quarter 2009 operating ratio of the unusual increases in non-union health and pension costs and workers compensation and third party casualty claims is three operating points. And now I'll turn it over to Bob for his thoughts about our quarter.

Thank you, Judy, and good morning, everyone. The ongoing economic environment continues to take a severe toll on our Company's financial results. For ABF, the freight recession began back in October of 2006. Since then, ABF system resources, primarily labor and equipment, have been reduced in line with the decline in tonnage. However, some fixed and semi variable costs haven't been cut commensurately hurting our profit margin. In addition, the pricing competitiveness of the LTL industry has intensified as carriers struggle for business.

On a sequential basis, historical seasonal trends in ABF's profitability would imply that second quarter results would be better than those in the first quarter as the average daily tonnage increases. This year in the second quarter ABF did experience the normal seasonal daily tonnage increase compared to the first quarter and as a result the second quarter operating ratio did include expected operational improvements from from additional freight moving throughout the system. However, as Judy described, these positive effects were almost all offset by significant sequential increases in workers compensation and third-party casualty claims. Because of the positive experience we had in the first quarter in these cost areas, our year to date costs are only slightly above historical averages.

ABF's second quarter tonnage declined 17% compared to the same period last year. This is reasonably consistent with the nearly 16% tonnage decrease ABF experienced in this year's first quarter. As Judy mentioned, so far in July year-over-year tonnage declines are somewhat lower than we saw in the first half of the year. The sequential improvement from the second quarter and from the year to date numbers is better than we've seen in the past decade. In other words, we're seeing modest improvements that aren't just attributable to easier comparisons. However, we're cautious interpreting this potential stabilization of business levels. For instance, about this time last year we were describing how freight tonnages appeared to be bumping along the bottom, then in late summer and into the fall freight levels began to sharply decline to an even lower level. And, for that reason, we want to see a consistent sustained change in freight pattern before positively reacting to these recent trends.

In the midst of these challenging times in our marketplace, we've remained committed to providing a high level of service to our customers every day. The value ABF offers is what allows us to prosper in a growing economy and it allows us to retain good business in a difficult economy. Although at times our commitment to service has limited the depth of our cost-cutting initiatives, we believe these choices will help preserve the long-term relationships we've established with many of our customers. For instance, we previously reported that in 2008 ABF provided a record-setting level of cargo care. A ratio of cargo claims expense to revenue of 0.67% was the lowest in at least the last 25 years. In the first quarter of 2009 our cargo claims ratio improved even more to 0.66%, and during the second quarter we continue that excellent performance.

The principals of ABF's quality process emphasize doing things right the first time, attention to detail, effective training and a focus on meeting agreed-upon customer requirements. ABF's experienced employees are the best in the industry and are trained and equipped to provide the highest level of service. Cargo care is just one tangible example of the kinds of things that can be accomplished even in a difficult freight environment to differentiate ABF to our customers. Although the total costs associated with third-party casualty claims increased during the second quarter, the rate of ABF's city and road DOT reportable accidents per mile decreased 16% in the second quarter and 10% year to date versus the same period last year. In addition, these figures are better than our historical averages.

On the cost side, it only takes a few instances to turn a great quarter into a poor quarter. Though we're disappointed that these costs increased during the second quarter, the improvement in the rate of accidents demonstrates why we believe that ABF still has the safest drivers in the industry and why we think this quarter's experience is an anomaly. ABF's regional freight initiative continues to be a priority despite the reduced freight volumes even in many of these short haul distant claims. Changes previously implemented as a part of our regional service offering has resulted in a service improvement of at least a day in over 40% of ABF's lanes. During this difficult time, we're fulfilling the pledge of consistent, expedient transit time service that we made to our customers when we first entered this new market. The dependability that we're establishing now will provide a solid foundation for future growth of our regional business when overall freight trends improve.

During July we implemented an important line haul network change that we mentioned last quarter. The purpose of these changes is to align the ABF line haul network to improve efficiencies and better position driver domiciles in order to more promptly move loads between our facilities. As a result of these changes, ABF has experienced lower costs, improved resource utilization and increased shipment velocity while our customers have benefited from more efficient and timely movement of shipments throughout the ABF network. We currently expect a three-month pay back of our implementation expenses.

As was the case in the first quarter, the enhanced competition for available business has prevented ABF from obtaining sufficient base rate increases to cover non-fuel related cost increases. During the second quarter, ABF's total billed revenue decreased by 13%, primarily due to the year-over-year reduction of the fuel surcharge which was well below the peak it reached a year ago in July 2008. Pricing competition in our industry has intensified somewhat since the first quarter. In the midst of more aggressiveness by industry competitors, ABF's disciplined pricing approach of considering each individual account on its own merit remains in place. We've always believed that pricing to maximize the profitability of each unique account is the best long-term approach. This is even more important in the challenging freight environment in which we find ourselves.

The current operating environment is obviously very challenging. With our typical limited visibility on the future shipping patterns of our customers, we don't know when things will truly improve. Though our financial results continue to be below acceptable levels, we remain committed to establishing long-term customer relationships and cultivating them while providing excellent service even in the midst of a poor economic environment. Our financial strength allows our customers and our employees to have the confidence to know ABF will be here in the future. We value our fortunate financial position and we don't take it for granted. Going forward we will seek to adhere to the operating principles that have made us successful, stringent cost control, disciplined pricing and a focus on superior customer service and value. Despite the inherent distractions of the current challenging economy, we'll continue to work for the future benefit of our customers, our employees and our shareholders. I think we're now ready to take questions.

(Operator Instructions) Your first question will come from Edward Wolfe with Wolfe Research.

Good morning.

Hey, good morning.

Good morning, Ed.

Judy, can you go over the tonnage trends by month in the quarter?

Yes. Really there's not much change when you look at the individual months in the second quarter, it's down about 17% year-over-year every month. And then I think, Bob and I commented about July so far being down about 13.5%.

Yes. And Bob said that not all of that is the comp. What areas are you seeing improve in terms of customers or regions or where is that coming from if you see any pickup?

I think we're seeing comparatively better results in our regional market than in our long haul markets. As you know, particularly southern California it's been weak for some time and still is.

And is there any particular product? Is this auto related in July, manufacturing related, what are you seeing?

Ed, as you know, we've got very low first order exposure to the automotive sector. We may be seeing something on the second order basis, but I haven't picked up on any trends by industry.

Okay. Generally when you look at seasonality, you talked about second quarter being stronger over first quarter and you saw that seasonality. Third quarter, is it normally equally stronger than second quarter than second is over first or how do you look at that directionally?

Ed, it's --we've had so many changes that have occurred over the last three years and kind of normal patterns and trends, I don't know that we could really comment on that.

Okay.

Let me correct that I think I heard you just say. Our year-to-date July results are sequentially better than second quarter and year to date than they historically have been. I think our second quarter to first quarter sequential results were in line with historical trends.

Yes. So I'm trying to -- yes. Thank you for clarifying that. What I was trying to get at is what are third quarter over second quarter historical trends? And I guess Judy said they've been changing and it's hard to know. But normally you would say July seasonally over June should be weaker, I'm guessing.

Yes.

And it sounds like it's stronger.

I think that's exactly right.

Still weaker, just not as weak as normal?

I think that's the way you would characterize it. What we did when we were looking at this ourselves was just to look at those normal relationships and to consider the fact that we did begin to see a decline last year and to look at that factored out and what we're seeing is just a slight improvement from what we would have expected.

Sure. Given the labor concessions that are being voted on at YRCW, do you plan to seek any and is there anything else you can do to address that discrepancy?

We're closely monitoring those events, Ed, as you might guess and we're currently in conversation with the teamsters regarding some meaningful and effective ways to preserve and restore jobs.

When you say you're in talks with the teamsters, you're talking about in terms of your teamsters and how to get something to even that playing field with yellow or is this something separate from that?

We do not believe that the proposed agreement between YRC and IBT is appropriate for our company just as we felt like the first level of concessions were not. Nevertheless, there is a cost disparity there that has to be addressed. The teamsters are mindful of that. They're certainly on top of the situation and we're having good discussions with them on that.

Okay. Can you give an update if YRCW were to go away what the impact would be from the multi employer pension both as you see it in the near term and longer term and maybe an update on what that potential liability is for you and where it might be capped?

Well, I think the first question you had is what near-term impact that has on us and we have, as I mentioned before, a contract that describes how we will contribute on an hourly basis in the increased levels that we have and that doesn't change as a result of a YRC failure if that were to occur. I think from a funding standpoint, obviously the fund is already in a difficult spot and it becomes more difficult if that happens, but there are kind of legal steps that occur over time if the fund were to go into reorganization or insolvency and we're comfortable that our company can manage through that. I think in a reorganization scenario we would have increases that are no more than the increases that we've already agreed to pay. And so without getting into a lot of detail on that point, we believe that the legal actions that would have to be taken by the fund over a long period of time would allow us to continue doing business as we've always done.

Ed, in a perverse sense, the potential loss of a large contributor to those funds is helpful in raising the awareness of what is fundamentally an unfair issue and even beyond that is obviously unsustainable. So the fact that these issues are being raised is helpful to all us in Washington who are trying to achieve some sort of fundamental resolution to this issue.

Appreciate it, Ed.

I'm sorry?

I said I appreciate it.

Yes. In the past --

Hey, Ed, I'm going to let you move on and we'll let you get back at the end of the line.

Okay. I just have one follow-up to that particular issue if that's okay and then I'll drop.

Okay.

Just in the past, Bob, you have said that the liability or a year ago was around $850 million, the potential liability at Arkansas Best for withdrawal and that if your percentage increased your cap at your last 20 years I think it was paying that it wasn't all that different from that amount. Does that still stand true or am I thinking -- am I saying this correctly?

Well, I think what matters, Ed, is the factors that I described to you, our contractual obligations and over time, a long period of time, the legal actions that are required of the fund. If we're not in a situation where we're withdrawing our -- from the fund as we were talking about whenever we disclosed that number, it really is not relevant what our share of the underfunding is because that can be dealt with in many ways over time through either employer increases or adjustments to the benefits as they would be required over many years.

Your next question comes from Jason Seidl with Dahlman Rose.

Hi, Jason.

Hey. Morning, everyone. Quick question. You mentioned you're in discussions with the IBT and obviously that if this next proposed change goes through this does sort of create an unfair cost advantage for one of your major competitors. But if you were to get anything back from the IBT, this would have to go the same course again where it would have to be voted on by the rank in file membership any changes, correct?

I believe that you're correct and that any changes to the labor agreement would require a vote of our employees.

Now, if I'm reading between the lines in what you said, you were in discussions for creating jobs for the IBT, would this sort of be jobs for a little bit more of a fair alignment, if you will, with your major competitor?

Well, I think if we address the cost differentials that we're seeing, you would naturally see restoration of at least a portion of the jobs that we've had to furlough in this tough environment. I think it's implicit in the nature of what you would see in the agreement.

Okay. Fair enough. One last question, can you talk about your contractual business that you are re-signing in the quarter and sort of at what rates you were signing that business?

During the quarter we had about flat roll overs of those. That's worst experience that I can recall, I'm kind of running through the numbers in my head over time, I think it's about the worst we've ever seen.

The worst you've seen. And how does that compare to 1Q?

Let's see. We had -- we got 1.3% in the first quarter and 2.5% in the fourth quarter.

Okay.

So my comments about the environment becoming more competitive in the second quarter, that's one point of light on it.

Right. Was there any differential with the regional pricing versus long haul?

Not that I'm aware of.

Not that you're aware of. Okay.

Customers tend to have both kinds of freight. We obviously measure revenue, weight in all of those markets, but there are profile shifts in both. I'll just say I didn't notice any particular difference.

Okay. That's helpful. And one last one and I'll turn it over to somebody else. Have you seen an uptick in business going to sort of third party carriers in terms of freight brokers that you do?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

Are you seeing more of your -- seeing more of the freight that's generated in the ABF system come from freight brokers?

We operate a separate truck load freight brokerage division and it's doing reasonably well, but we typically are not a supplier of services in the ABF system.

Okay. Fair enough.

Our channels tend to be direct consumer channels, we view ourselves as a retailer, not a wholesaler. So we have a limited amount of business in the ABF system even in the good times in that respect.

Okay. Understood. Listen, I appreciate the time as always.

Thank you, Jason.

Your next question comes from Tom Wadewitz with JPMorgan.

Good morning, Tom.

Good morning, Judy, good morning, Bob, David as well. What -- so, Judy, you gave us a number of comments about what you thought was unusual on the cost side in the quarter. If you look at third quarter, how much of that do you think affects the third quarter and how might we view the operating ratio in broad terms in third quarter compared to the 107.8 in the second quarter?

Well, if you kind of step through the comments that I made, I guess the first additional comment that I want to make is that it was really the combination of these things that created the unusual situation. If you look at the health costs that we experienced, we had a larger than normal increase that resulted from experience with large claims. We don't know if that will be a trend that continues, but we know that it was unusual for the quarter. From a pension cost perspective, we know up front that our 2009 costs are going to be double what we had in 2008 and that will be there in the third quarter and the fourth quarter and any improvement that we have on those numbers as a result of better market conditions would reflect -- be reflected in our numbers in 2010. And incidentally, on our pension plan, our non-union plan, we've earned about 4% so far and that's better than our assumption and so we could have an improvement in 2010, but we'll have to see what happens as we close out the year.

From a workers comp and BIPD perspective, in looking at those results, I think Bob mentioned that our accidents per million miles actually improved, but what we dealt with was a few large claims in the quarter and the result of that was unusual and although it can happen again, it is -- it would be unusual for it to happen again that way in the third quarter. So when you look at our results on a year-to-date basis, we had positive results in the first quarter, these results in the second quarter and the year-to-date results are slightly worse than our five and ten-year averages. So over the year so far, we're a little north of those five and ten-year averages and hopefully things will settle out in both the third and fourth quarters. I know that's a little bit -- that was a long-winded answer, but it kind of gives you some perspective on why we were talking about these as unusual.

Clearly the -- those last two cost factors, workers comp and third-party casualty, were volatile because we true up the reserves every quarter, but if you look at the trends over a five and ten-year period, they're clearly in the right direction. If you look at the accident rates that we continue to see, we're really pleased with the safety record of an already great platform. So while the pension costs are going to -- not going to improve until 2010 and while we don't know on non-union health care, when I look at the workers comp and third-party casualty claims, I don't know what the third quarter is going to be, but I'm clearly pleased with the long-term trend.

So what is the magnitude of the workers comp and casualty, I don't know if it's on a year-over-year basis or sequential -- ?

Year-over-year it was 1.6 points of the -- I mentioned the total of these cost areas, the increase was three points. It was a little bit more than half of that.

Okay. So from -- I mean from a broader OR perspective, would you expect third quarter OR to be better than second or kind of it's going to be -- obviously freight will still be probably pretty tough, so do you think we should be cautious about expecting a lot of OR improvement third versus second? How would you look at that?

I tell you, it depends upon tonnage, it depends upon yield.

Okay. What about -- I'll ask one other question and pass it along. Can you provide any thoughts about how you would be positioned to respond if there is a YRC event in terms of what you might do on pricing and also how much excess capacity you would have if a wave of freight comes your way?

Tom, I'd say that we've got a substantial ability to handle additional freight. We've got about 3,000 good employees that are on layoff and I would suggest that particularly -- it's a great job and particularly in this environment we would be able to recover most if not all of them. We've got equipment resources. We've got room in our terminal network and I think that we would -- as you saw back in 2004 when changes in the hours of service took a lot of freight in the truck load sector and dumped it into the LTL sector we were able to sort that in an environment which was better than what we now find ourselves. So we've got contingency plans in place. We're not predicting anything, but we're ready because that's prudent and we will be able to handle substantial additional freight.

Thanks, Tom.

Okay. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Ken Hoexter with Merrill Lynch.

Hi, Ken.

Good morning. Just a couple of quick numbers questions to start. What was length of haul and weight per shipment?

Our length of haul was 1108.

Okay.

And the weight per shipment was 1303.

Okay.

That's total weight per shipment.

And so that climbed a little bit sequentially, right?

Let me see if I have -- I have it. I have --

I think the --

Yes, it did. It was 1275 in the first quarter.

As I recall, the weight per shipment was up about 3% and length of haul was down about --

Oh, it's 2.3. No. Quarter over quarter, weight per shipment was down 3%, but I think Ken's question was sequentially and it was up a little.

Yes. And can you talk about you said you're down 3,000 employees on layoffs. How many employees do you have now and where was that a year ago?

It's about 9700 employees right now and at the end of -- when you say a year ago, you mean at the end of the second quarter last year?

Correct.

We had 11,528 and these are ABF employees that I'm reading to you.

Okay. And so when you look at the salaries and benefits line remaining high, is that kind of where you were talking about some of the workers comp and other charges including in that salaries and benefit line? I would have expected that to come down maybe a little bit closer with some of the volume reductions, or is it not as variable as maybe you hoped?

Well, I think we talked about this that certainly the health care, pension costs and the workers comp costs, all three of those affect the salaries and wages line and so those were a factor, and Bob commented in his remarks that we did see the improvement, if you look sequentially for instance, in those figures if you consider that we had more freight in the second quarter than we did in the first quarter, but that improvement that you would normally expect to see was offset by increases in these other cost areas.

Understood. And last thing is just on the working capital during the quarter really had a pretty big swing to a positive. Is there anything within those numbers that was extraordinary there?

No, there's really nothing there that unusual.

All right. Great. Thanks for the time this morning.

No problem, Ken. Thanks.

Your next question is from David Ross with Stifel Nicolaus.

Good morning, gentlemen and Judy.

Hi, Dave.

Quick question on the acquisitions. I missed the beginning of the call, I'm not sure you talked about it, but I know you mentioned you hired somebody, using your big cash balance to buy a strategic property and didn't know if there was an update there as to whether you've shelved that idea or are still interested?

Well, for several quarters we've discussed our interest in the third party logistics and domestic transportation space. In the second quarter we actually purchased a small logistics related company that has some interesting business potential, but it does not represent the core acquisition and the logistics space that we're continuing to pursue.

Okay. So would you use that small logistics company as a platform to grow organically?

It has some interesting elements to it. As you know, we tend to test concepts rather than betting the farm on one good idea. For instance, we currently have pilot projects that are in specialized delivery services, truck load freight brokerage, international freight forwarding, full container importation from China and even domestic warehousing and the new company broadens our exposure in freight transportation management. I look forward to the time when it deserves a detailed discussion, but our entry into the domestic transportation space will be not on that platform, but on a larger core company.

Okay. Judy, if you could talk a little bit about the CapEx levels, you're running well below maintenance CapEx at the moment. How long, considering this downturn may last another six months, who knows, how long do you think you can keep those maintenance levels -- those low levels before you have to bring it back up to maintenance?

Well, I think what you have seen so far this year is really not that we're -- it's not that we're going to be below the numbers that I disclosed earlier, which was about $45 million to $50 million, it's just sort of a timing issue at this point and we do plan to spend those replacement dollars, although those are a lower than normal replacement levels. So, what you'll see when we close out the year is that we most likely have spent those dollars, again albeit at a lower level. We really are going to be looking in 2010 at the options that we have on the 2010 engines. I think there are some considerations on fuel economy and some other considerations on whether we would want to buy more of those and we're still working through that kind of in a test phase right now, and so ultimately we will need to ratchet up our levels to more of our normal replacement cycle, but the great news for us is that we have the flexibility to kind of maintain at these lower levels and really not hurt our total ownership costs at all and that's just because of the newness of our fleet and the way we maintain our fleet.

Okay. And the last question is just on the pricing side. Bob, you mentioned that you priced the -- each count has their own profitability and that's how you judge whether or not you need to raise rates. Given that you kind of still have a large fixed cost and volumes down so much, would you in essence need to go back and be raising rates of more customers? Is that just a discussion you can't have or does your salesperson try to go out and your customers actually the cost to serve you is going up with 15% plus volume declines?

Well, obviously you would like to do that, but in this environment, it's especially tough to increase rates. You you find yourself on the other end of that more often. Fortunately, it's not a global discussion, it's a micro discussion. Our sales people are trained to focus on each individual customer's situation, to explain to them the value they're getting and ask them to pay for it and we'll continue to do that regardless of the environment. The thing that changes in this particular environment, particularly with the double digit tonnage declines we have is how much of our costs we consider to be fixed versus how much are variable and in this kind of environment we consider more of our costs to be fixed and, therefore, our walk away point changes. But even in this environment, there's a walk away point. I should also mention that while we've trimmed a lot of expenses and trimmed head count 23% cumulatively during this recession, the sales and marketing area is a place where we're not cutting back, we're rather aggressively adding good performers within our sales force and we think that's a great investment for the future.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, David.

Next question is from Art Hatfield with Morgan Keegan.

Good morning, just a couple of questions. Judy, can you go back to last year in Q3 and tell us what -- if you have it by month, what the year-over-year declines in tonnage were?

Yes. You wanted them in third quarter, is that what you said?

Third quarter of last year, yes.

Third quarter of last year. Our year-over-year tonnage decline in July was 2%, in August it was 5.3% and in September it was 8.1%, for the total quarter at 5.1%.

Okay. Thank you. And then just, Bob, if you could talk a little bit about what you've seen in past downturns or really in past recoveries as volumes have started to improve? What kind of lag have you seen with regards to improvement in pricing?

Well, it depends upon how much improvement there is in tonnage compared to how much you're down and I think it's fair to say that we've not ever seen this level of tonnage decline, therefore, I don't have an experience point to base on. I will tell you that we have cued up business that's not contributing and when you recall I talked about those fixed costs, when they start to become variable we, like any other rational pricer in this industry, will begin to raise prices rather than add additional costs to cover business that is not paying its fixed costs. So it's a matter of not only your discipline, but also the amount of information you have. I think it would happen in weeks rather than months.

Great. Thank you. That's all I have.

Thanks, Art.

At this time we have no further questions. Are there any closing remarks?

I don't believe so. We appreciate everybody joining us this morning and that concludes this call. Thank you.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This does conclude the conference call for today. You may now disconnect your lines.