Blackstone Mortgage Trust Inc (BXMT) 2008 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Hello and welcome to the Capital Trust fourth quarter and year end 2008 results conference call. Before we begin, please be advised that the forward-looking statements expressed in today's call are subject to certain risks and uncertainties including but not limited to the continued performance, new origination volume and the rate of payment of the company and its funds loans and investment portfolios, the continued maturity and satisfaction of the company portfolio assets, as well as other risks contained in the company's latest Form 10-K and Form 10-Q filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company assumes no obligation to update or supplement forward-looking statements that become untrue because of subsequent events.

There will be a question-and-answer session following the conclusion of this presentation. At that time I will provide instructions for submitting a question to management.

I will now turn the call over to John Klopp, CEO, Capital Trust.

Okay. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us and for your continued interest in Capital Trust, and thank you for your patience when we needed to reschedule this conference call from last week to today in order to complete some very important work.

Last night we reported our results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2008 and filed our 10-K. Jeff will run you through the detailed numbers in just a moment but first I want to get right to it and focus on the debt restructuring we completed over the weekend and announced last night. On our last call in October I told you that we were in a street fight, battling against declining property values, deleveraging financial institutions and a capital market that has virtually ceased functioning. As the fourth quarter progressed the bad news just kept coming from all directions and we found ourselves in the fight of our lives. In the aftermath of Lehman's failure, the entire global financial system seemed on the edge of melt down, prompting serial government bailouts of many of our largest financial institutions and desperate attempts to restart the markets.

Credit spreads blew out, liquidity evaporated, rating agencies downgrades accelerated and margin calls from CT's secured lenders rolled in. With few exceptions, our assets continue to perform but our liquidity was rapidly being drained through debt repayments triggered by marks to market. In the fourth quarter alone we paid down our secured debt facilities by over $117 million.

With our unsecured credit facility also becoming due in March, we decided that we had to act and approached our lenders with a coordinated restructuring plan. The primary objective of the plan was time, gaining the time for us to do our job of managing and collecting CT's assets. The provisions of the plan are outlined in the press release and laid out in great detail in the 10-K. But the essence is as follows: The maturities of $580 million of our secured repo debt and the $100 million unsecured facility, were extended for one year, plus two additional one-year extension options with the first option exercisable by us as long as we have met pay-down targets, and the second at the discretion of the lenders. Cash margin call provisions in our restructured repo facilities were eliminated and replaced by pool-wide collateral valuation tests which are based on the performance and value of the underlying real estate collateralizing our loans as opposed to the liquidation value of our loans in this dysfunctional market.

If we breached the test going forward we can be forced to liquidate assets. We agreed to lock down the balance sheet, making no new investments, incurring no new debt, paying only those dividends necessary to maintain our REIT status, and dedicating all of our efforts and our free cash flow to reducing debt. In return for these modifications, we agreed to a 125 basis point increase in the pay rate on the unsecured facility, and added an accrual feature to that same facility. In addition, we issued approximately 3.5 million warrants to the participating secured lenders who froze their rates at their current level. Separately, we exchanged approximately 100 million of our trust-preferred securities for new instruments, increasing the principal balance by 15% leaving the maturity basically unchanged, and cutting the pay rate from roughly 7.25% to 1% for the next 3 years. And, lastly, we swapped assets for debt with two of our secured lenders, which painfully resulted in a $48 million hit to book value that was run through the fourth quarter financial statements.

The only good news here is that these asset trades eliminated approximately $30 million of unfunded loan commitments which we otherwise would have been obligated to fund. When the dust settled, we had modified or terminated over $880 million of recourse debt with 13 separate lenders, all of which had to close simultaneously. The terms of the restructured debt are predictably tight and tough, requiring us to meet stiff amortization hurdles along the way. But we believe that the plan provides the needed stability to the right-hand side of our balance sheet that will allow us to continue to fight on.

We have no delusions that the next year or two will be easy for Capital Trust. Real estate fundamentals continue to deteriorate rapidly and cash flows from virtually all types of property will come under increasing pressure as this recession grinds on. Washington's attempts to restart the credit markets have so far been ineffectual but more programs are on the way.

If the economic environment does not improve, and the capital markets remain closed, our assets will encounter performance issues. But we believe that we can manage our way through this crisis ultimately producing real value for our shareholders. And we believe in the strength of our people and our platform, which at the end of the day are our most valuable asset. I want to thank the entire CT team, our outside counsel, Paul Hastings, and, yes, even our lenders for their tireless work to pull off this remarkably complicated and difficult transaction.

With that, I'll turn it over to a very tired Geoff Jervis to run through the numbers and then we'll come back and open it up for any and all of your questions. Geoff?

Thank you, John, and good morning, everyone. While I know the primary order of business is a further description of the debt restructuring, I would like to briefly summarize our operating results, balance sheet activity and liquidity before we dive into the terms of our debt restructuring.

For the full year ended December 31st, we reported a net loss of $57.5 million, or $2.73 per share. And for the fourth quarter our net loss was $51.2 million or $2.30 per share. The net loss for the year was primarily the result of a $26 million or 29% decrease in net interest income relative to 2007, driven by lower asset levels and lower LIBOR levels, impairments and reserves of $66.5 million as we recorded allowances on five loans and one bond, an evaluation allowance of $48 million associated with the loan sales that are part of our debt restructuring.

While these items were partially offset by increased fees from our investment management business, gains from the forgiveness of debt, and reductions in G&A, the net impact was a significant loss for the company. From an operating standpoint we have two segments: balance sheet investments and the investment management business. CT Investment Management Company, or CTIMCO, a wholly owned subsidiary of Capital Trust, is the entity through which we execute the management of six private equity funds, six CDOs and our public company parent. All of the employees Capital Trust are employees of CTIMCO, and for the year, on a deconsolidated basis, CTIMCO had base management fee revenue of $20 million.

Our investment management platform has $5 billion of assets under management and through our two active funds, CT Opportunity Partners I and CT High Grade Partners II, we have $1 billion of equity capital available for investment.

Over to the balance sheet. Our CMBS portfolio stood at $852 million at year end and our portfolio experience downgrades on 13 bonds and upgrades on six bonds during the year. One of our bonds, a $6.2 million C rated security, was deemed other than temporarily impaired, and we reported a $900,000 impairment against that security. From a fair value standpoint, our CMBS was estimated to have a market of $583 million at year end or 68% of our carrying value. 88% of our CMBS is in our CDOs, so the impact of these changes in market value have been muted.

Over to loans. Our $1.8 billion portfolio comprised of 73 loans shrank by 21% or $466 million primarily as a result of repayments of $255 million, the reclassification of $141 million of loans as loans held for sale, and reserves of $63.6 million. This quarter we began to disclose a watch list. The watch list is dry from our internal rich grading process and at year-end we had 15 loans with a carrying value of $377 million on that list.

Loans held for sale, a new classification for the company, resulted from our decision to sell four loans with a carrying value of $141 million, or $92 million in connection with our restructuring plans. While the sales occurred after year-end, GAAP required the financials to reflect our intention to sell these loans with a reclassification of these loans out from our held maturity classification.

Equity investments reflect our co-investments in our investment management fund, and increased as we funded a portion of our $25 million commitment to the Opportunity Fund, offset by fair value adjustments in that fund that flow through to us under the equity method. Another new classification on the balance sheet is real estate held for sale, an account necessitated by our taking possession of multi-family property in Southern California that had been collateral for an $11.9 million loan. The $9.9 million carrying value reflects impairment charge recorded as we adjusted the value of this investment to our expected sales proceeds.

On the liability front we experienced significant pay-downs on our secured credit facility in association with repayments and margin calls from our lenders. At year-end, our secured debt balance totalled $699 million, a $213 million or 23% reduction from 2007. Our CDOs remained relatively constant. However, from an operational standpoint we breached the over-collateralization test in our CDO II. This breach redirects our cash flow on this CDO to deleverage the structure and will end the investment period of this vehicle. Furthermore, our CDOs required that collateral assets that are impaired, in our case primarily performing CMBS securities that have been downgraded, have their income redirected to repay senior note holders. This redirection will have varying degrees of impact on all of our CDOs.

Our $100 million unsecured facility was set to mature later this month and has been extended pursuant to our debt restructure. Our junior subordinated debentures that we also refer to as trust preferred securities were also partially restructured. Interest rate hedges, a contingent liability, decreased in value by $29 million and the change in value is picked up as an increase in the liability account with an offsetting decrease to equity.

Finally, our shareholder's equity account ended the year at $401 million, translating to, on a diluted basis, book value per share of $18.01. The company paid dividends of $2.20 per share in 2008, representing regular quarterly dividends for the first three quarters, and in the fourth quarter the Board of Directors chose not to pay a dividend as previous distributions were sufficient to satisfy REIT requirements and the board looked to preserve liquidity. Going forward, our ability to pay cash dividends will be governed by our debt restructuring.

Total liquidity at year-end was $64 million, comprised of cash and restricted cash, and today liquidity stands at $39 million. Our liquidity reductions were primarily driven by payments we made yesterday of $22 million to our lenders in conjunction with our restructuring.

Yesterday, after several months of work with our lenders we executed a restructuring of substantially all of our secured recourse credit facilities, our unsecured credit facility and over 80% of our trust-preferred securities. The restructuring accounts for over 95% of our non CDO interest-bearing liabilities. As John mentioned, the restructuring was developed to stabilize our liabilities in order to allow for the orderly collection of our assets. While there can be no assurances that the restructuring will be successful, management believes that we have significantly improved the opportunity for shareholders to preserve the value of equity in the company.

At year-end we had secured lending relationships with six financial institutions - JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Lehman Brothers and UBS. In late February we terminated our $10 million debt obligation with UBS. UBS financed a single $15 million asset and we sold the asset to UBS for proceeds sufficient to repay our obligations. This transaction generated a loss of $5.5 million as we sold the loan for below its carrying value.

Yesterday we terminated our $88 million debt obligation with Goldman Sachs. Goldman financed four assets for us with a carrying value of $142 million. Our termination involved repurchasing one $17 million loan for $2.6 million, prefunding $2.4 million of an unfunded commitment associated with another loan, and selling the remaining assets to Goldman Sachs for proceeds sufficient to repay our obligations. This transaction generated a loss of $42.8 million as we sold the loans for below their carrying value.

While we have not entered into any agreement with Lehman Brothers, an $18 million lender secured by a single $26 million collateral asset, we are in negotiations to either modify or terminate our obligations under this facility.

The remaining three lenders, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley and Citigroup, with balances yesterday of $580 million, $583 million at year-end, entered into amendments to their existing credit facilities with substantially the same terms. The material terms of the amendments are as follows. Maturity dates on all facilities were modified to March 16, 2010, with two one-year extension options. The first extension is at the company's option subject to our meeting a 20% pay-down hurdle including any pay-downs that we made yesterday. In total, the 20% pay-down hurdle equals $118 million. The second extension can be granted at the lender's discretion. The term extension is designed to run long enough to allow us the opportunity to collect our loans as the bulk of our portfolio matures in 2010, '11 and '12.

In return, the company agreed to accelerate our amortization as follows: Payments at closing yesterday of $17.7 million reducing the facility amounts by roughly 3%, monthly payments of 65% of the net interest margin from each lender's collateral pool, direction of 100% of principal proceeds from each lender's collateral pool from repayments, sales or refinancings, corporate cash flow sweep in the event that the company's cash balances exceed $25 million, plus amounts necessary to fund unfunded loans in co-investment commitments in our funds. All of these amortization payments, except the up-front payment made yesterday, are expected to be funded out of future operating or principal cash flows. One component of principal cash flows may be asset sales and/or refinancing. In such event, we have minimum release price mechanics with our lenders ranging from their assessment of market value to a floor of the amount we borrow against each asset.

The company also agreed to eliminate the lender's obligations to fund a portion of the company's unfunded loan commitments. Today, after giving effect to loan sales, unfunded loan commitments total $23.6 million and fund co-investment commitments total $19 million. These commitments are expected to be funded over time and through our unrestricted existing cash balances, currently $20 million, sales of unencumbered assets, $21 million of carrying value, and net operating income going forward.

A critical element of the restructuring is the elimination of our current margin call and mark to market provisions. The restructuring provides for no mark to market through September of this year. And then monthly valuation tests of the portfolio. So long as our loan to collateral value, representing our lender's loan amount against their valuation of the portfolio, does not exceed 115% of the ratio as of today, there is no impact to us. In the event that we fail such a test, we will be required to bring it back into compliance through additional collateral postings or, more likely, asset sales. In addition, and very important to us, is the amendment of the valuation methodology used by our lenders in calculating this test. Pursuant to the plan, the banks will no longer derive value based upon the liquidation value of our loans, but rather based upon real estate fundamentals and performance at each underlying property or portfolio.

As part of the plan, the secured lenders agreed to keep their interest rates unchanged. And finally, the last element of the secured lender plan, the company issued approximately 3.5 million warrants to the three secured lenders at a strike price equal to $1.79 per share, which was the closing price on Friday.

We also amended our $100 million senior unsecured credit facility that was set to mature March 22nd. The terms of the modification, negotiated in conjunction with the senior lender amendments, are as follows: Maturity date on this facility is extended to March 15th, 2010, with two one-year extension options granted to the company, as long as the secured lending group extends their maturity dates, ensuring that the unsecured facility is in place so long as we are being extended by the secured lenders. In return, the company agreed to increase the cash interest rate from LIBOR plus 1.75%, to LIBOR plus 3%, and at a quarterly accrual feature at the rate of 7.2% less the cash rate actually received each period. We pledged as collateral for the unsecured lenders all of the company's unencumbered CDO interests from its four balance sheet CDOs. Going forward the cash flows from these CDOs will continue to flow to the company subject to the amortization test described below. Starting now we will begin making quarterly amortization payments to the unsecured that will sum to on an annual basis the greater of 25% of the cash flow from the CDO securities mentioned above, or $5 million.

As part of the restructuring we eliminated the financial covenants in the participating secured and the unsecured credit facilities and replaced them with the following new covenants. No new investments without consent of the lenders, other than protecting investments on our existing portfolio, generally limited to $5 million per protected investment, and in controlled circumstances additional co-investments in future investment management funds. No additional debt other than replacement debt, debt on unencumbered assets and subordinated debt. Limitation on cash dividends other than those necessary to maintain REIT status subject to our using, to the maximum extent available, stock dividend rules. Minimum liquidity of $7 million in 2009 and $5 million thereafter, a cross default provision with a $1 million threshold. And going forward the CEO, COO and CFO will be subject to certain cash compensation and employment restrictions. Compensation for all other employees is subject to a predetermined pool.

We also modified $103 million of our $125 million of junior subordinated debentures or trust-preferred securities. The modification is in the form of an exchange for 100% of our $50 million 2006 issuance of trust preferred securities, and 71% or $53.1 million of our 2007 issuance of our trust preferred securities, in return for a new single security. The terms of the remaining trust-preferred securities, $21.9 million of the 2007 issuance, remain unchanged. The terms of the exchange security are a three-year rate reduction from 7.23% to 1%,an immediate face balance increase of 15%, and the new securities have been made senior to the remaining unmodified trust-preferred securities.

As I mentioned earlier, we believe that this restructuring represents the best deal available for the company and will allow us the opportunity to repay all of our lenders and realize value for our shareholders. That said , the success of this plan will be dependent upon, among other things, asset level performance, repayments and/or liquidity of our loan portfolio, and the lender's valuation as modified of our assets.

With that, I will turn it back to John.

Thank you, Geoff. Hopefully we've provided a lot of detail on a very complicated transaction but nevertheless we are ready to take any and all of your questions. Katie, could you open it up?

(Operator Instructions) We'll take a few moments for any questions to queue. Our first question comes from the site of David Fick of Stifel Nicolaus. Please go ahead, your line is open.

Good morning. Congratulations, I guess. Given the mark that you took on the Goldman and UBS facilities, roughly 33%, what is the asset coverage from your current secured facilities based on their asset value? The implied mark to market in your other facilities says your equity in those is zero.

Well, the collateral pool -- is that the end of your question?

Yes.

The collateral pool that secures the three participating lenders, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, and Citi, is 100% performing. The advance rate on that pool is roughly 50% of our face value, and we believe that there is cushion in that collateral pool as do to lenders.

Against the mark?

Yes, yes.

Okay. Any idea how much that cushion is?

To a certain extent it doesn't matter, because what we have moved from is a liquidation value mark system to one in which the collateral value tests performed going forward are based primarily on the underlying collectability, performance, of our loans. And that was the entire purpose, really, or certainly one of the primary purposes of the restructuring that we have put in place.

If I heard correctly you no longer have access to any unfunded elements of your CDOs. Is that correct?

Correct.

More accurate is that we soon will have no further access to the unfunded elements of your CDOs. We only have one CDO that that applies, which is CT CDO II. CT CDO I's reinvestment period ended last year in normal course.

Okay. And you don't have at this point -- well, let me just ask. What is the cash flow status going forward? What should we be modeling in terms of cash flow out of any CDO source? I presume zero.

No, I think what we said is that CDO II will have its cash flow redirected to amortize the structure, so while the cash flow is not coming to us it is redirected to our benefit by deleveraging the pool of assets. And then on the other three CDOs, varying impacts across each CDO, mostly driven by rating agency activity in the last two or three weeks, particularly Moody's activity. And we're working through the exact impact with the trustee now, but I would not assume zero.

Okay. Can you just walk us through your funding commitments and how you expect, you got roughly $76 million forward funding with $45 of cash, and your cash flow is now essentially being lock-boxed, if I understand that correctly. How are you funding that? What are the banks doing to assist you there?

As I said in my script, while we did eliminate the lenders' obligation to fund any portion of our unfunded commitments, that after the loan sales, in particular the sales to Goldman, our unfunded commitments drop down to $23.6 million. That $23.6 million we expect to fund out over the three-plus years, so it's not all in '09 or even in the next two years. And we do have control over some elements of those fundings. And in addition we have a $19 million funding commitment to our private equity fund. We expect to fund these through our $20 million current cash balance, the sale of our $21 million on a carrying value basis of unencumbered assets, and net operating income going forward which we believe to be a significant amount of cash going forward.

Okay. Can you -- I guess this is for John -- just briefly address the business plan, given that you've essentially put the company in the hands of the lenders in terms of any significant decisions, I don't know if you want to characterize it this way, but I would characterize it as a conservatorship situation where you're working on behalf of the banks going forward. What is the case for shareholders here? Or is there a case for shareholders here in your stock? And, how do you run this company, or how do you staff, how do you motivate people, given that your hands are so tied?

Well, that's your characterization, and certainly mine. We don't believe that we're in conservatorship, but instead believe we have made a necessary transaction with our lenders that should and we expect will, allow us to collect our assets in an orderly fashion in the normal course, with the ultimate end point being we want to retain as much of the book value of the company, which is $400 million, $18 a share, as we possibly can. We believe that we have the operational flexibility, and the capacity to do so. Subject obviously to the market.

Our assets, just like everybody else's, anybody else's, are subject to what is going on in the world right now, which is a tough place to be exposed to commercial real estate, as we are. But with that caveat, we believe that we have a business plan, that business plan is to continue to move forward and collect our assets, and repay our debt, and realize as much of our book value as we possibly can. At the same time we have a vibrant investment management business that has over a billion dollars of capital included in existing funds, and we intend to be an active participant in the markets taking advantage of some of the opportunities that are created by the pain we're otherwise suffering on our legacy portfolio.

It would appear there is a lot of that opportunity out there, but given a co-investment requirement in those funds, and restrictions on your ability to access that, could you describe what the conditions would be for you to be able to make net investments in those funds?

Yes, but there are 60-some people on this call and this will be the last conversation. You can call me separately and ask any number of questions.

Okay, thank you.

We are unconstrained as to our ability to deploy equity capital that is committed into the two funds that have the billion dollars of capital. It is 100% available to us, and 100% in our discretion to make investments on behalf of our partners in those funds, and take advantage of those opportunities. The constraint that I think you may be referring to, that's part of the restructured debt deal, is a constraint on our ability to make co-investments in new, yet to be created, funds going forward, which certainly will, to some extent, impact our ability to continue to grow our investment management business, but it has no impact on our ability to deploy that equity capital. But thank you for your many questions, Mr. Fick.

We will take our next question from Tayo Okusanya from UBS. Please go ahead, your line is open.

Yes, good morning, and congratulations in creating (inaudible) to work through what you're trying to do. Quick question. Have you guys come up, yet, with an estimate of giving all the pay-downs, tied to all the debt restructuring, just to how much cash flow that is going to require of you over the next (inaudible) years and if you could give us a sense of the potential sources of cash that you are looking to be able to recover that, so at least you get the next (inaudible) extension?

I think that quantifying piece by piece our uses of cash flow on this call is probably not the thing to do but I would say there are sources of cash flow, as I mentioned in my script, our existing cash, the sales which we have, some are pending now of our unencumbered assets and operating income. And operating income is, as I mentioned earlier, a significant number. And those three sources we actually expect to build or maintain our cash balances over the term of this plan. Look, we have a tough row to hoe, there's no question about it. We have amortization requirements on the restructured secured debt and an amortization requirement on the restructured unsecured debt. But we were able to essentially cut our cash interest carry as part of this overall transaction and we believe that with some aggressive action on our part to force repayments to sell some loans if we need to, and relying on our existing in-place resources, we can make it.

Okay. That's fair, but I guess the math I was trying to do in my head, and tell me where I'm wrong, if I am wrong, is when you look at the cash on hand of about $45 million, and then I looked at your cash from operations last year of about $54 million, which comes up close to $100 million or so, but to get the extension on the debt you have to pay down by at least 20% which is going to cost you about $120 million of cash you need to come up with. I guess I'm just coming up with a deficit and I'm wondering where the plug comes from.

I think with respect to the secured facilities we expect the lion's share of it to come from repayments and/or sales to the extent necessary of collateral. And we believe that as I mentioned in the script, other than the up-fronter payment that we made yesterday, we should have no obligation out of our cash balances with respect to the secured lenders, but amortization requirements should be met through portfolio cash flow and/or portfolio capital events. Coming back to our amortization obligations on the unsecured, those are covered by at least a margin today of four times with respect to CDO cash flow. So it is the net that actually flows, if you want to think about cash balances, the net of operating income that does flow to us off of the secured loan and the net of the CDO cash flow including our management fee revenues from CTIMCO are the sources of cash into the corporate account.

And then just one more question, how much in unencumbered assets do you guys have at this point?

$21 million of carrying value.

Thank you very much. Best of luck.

Thank you.

(Operator Instructions) Our next question comes from the site of Fred Stein from [Mohns, Kresge and Hart]. Please go ahead, your line is open.

I know you guys have a very tough job and you did a great job restructuring everything. Do you have an opinion on what you see in the marketplace, do you see any sign of stability, or any sign of stability in price, or a modification of the decline in commercial pricing?

Honestly, not yet. I think that the fundamental -- I think, during the course of last year, what we had basically obviously was a credit crisis and a liquidity crisis. What we have rolling through commercial real estate right now, is a fundamental issue, meaning, as the economy continues to limp or deteriorate along, the impact is on the fundamentals of real estate right now. Occupancy, cash flow. And I don't think we're done with that, yet.

We've obviously seen first hotels get hit and the budgets and expectations for 2009 across pretty much the entire lodging sector is grim. It hits hotels relatively quickly because of the duration of the leases, if you will, overnight, but it's rolling through the other property categories. And the truth is that, unfortunately, we think it's going to get worse before it gets better, and haven't seen really the impact of stimulus and all the other programs, yet, that are coming out of Washington, really impact the liquidity of commercial real estate yet. Transaction volume is way down. Lending volume is virtually nil. And liquidity in the markets is very tough right now. I'd love to give you a more positive answer but the truth is, we think it's going to get worse before it gets better.

Let me just follow up with this question. You probably, I'm sure, in your modelling, did a best, probable and worst-case. And in your worst case, are you still equipped to handle this over the next 12 to 18 months without a really major impairment to your book value and your operating capabilities?

Well, I guess that depends on what your worst case is. I'm not sure what the worst-case is in this environment. We've certainly done a lot of modelling, a lot of expectations. We believe that in the band where we expect the world to end up, that we will be able to work our way through this. But it is very tough. There is no question about it, and it's very tight. I mean, I don't know exactly how to model a so-called worst-case, but in a worst-case scenario, we would expect fairly significant write-downs, and losses, on some of our loans, that could and would impact book values. We don't think that's likely, but it's possible.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you .

Your next question comes from the site of John Spratt, a private investor. Please go ahead, your line is open.

Congratulations in terms of your restructuring. Given the circumstances, would you consider a report out to investors on a monthly basis versus a quarterly basis?

I guess the one-word answer is no. I think we're going to stick to our reporting. We've strived over time to be beef up our reporting and put as much detail in it as we think is commercially reasonable. But I think that the answer is we're going to stick to our quarterly reporting cycle.

(Operator Instructions) We'll take a few moments for any other questions to queue. And it appears we have no further questions at this time.

Well, thank you, all. We'll talk to you again , soon. Have a good day.

This concludes today's program. You may disconnect at any time. Thank you and have a great day.