Ebix Inc (EBIX) 2006 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good morning. My name is Adrian and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Ebix 2006 investors' conference call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers' remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. (OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

We have today with us Ebix's CEO, Robin Raina. Thank you. Mr. Raina, you may begin your conference.

Thank you. Good morning, gentlemen. Thank you for attending Ebix's 2006 annual investor conference call. I have also with me today Mr. Carl Serger, Ebix's CFO, on this investor conference call. Before I begin, I must apologize for having a bad throat, so please bear with me.

We announced our 2006 financial results on Monday, and all of you must have seen those numbers by now. I will take a few minutes to summarize these results for you.

Each of the last few years have been a record year for Ebix in terms of beating all its results in the last -- each of its results in the last 31 years. This year was no different from the last few to the extent that the financial results for the year 2006 are record results again -- the best ever in our 31-year-old history.

The Company posted $1.90 in diluted EPS as compared to $1.37 per diluted share in 2005. Net income after taxes for the year rose 38% to $6 million compared to net income of $4.3 million in 2005. Ebix's operating income rose 44% to $6.71 million in fiscal 2006 compared to operating income of $4.65 million in fiscal 2005.

In 2006, the Company's basic earnings per common share rose to $2.15 as compared to basic earnings per common share of $1.51 in 2005.

Ebix's 2006 fourth-quarter revenue rose 50% to $9.28 million compared to $6.16 million during the fourth quarter of 2005. Q4 '06 net income rose 77% to $1.67 million or $0.53 per diluted share versus Q4 '05 net income of $0.94 million or $0.30 per diluted share.

So what is Ebix's vision plan? Where is Ebix headed from here? Are these results flash-in-the-pan performances? What is Ebix's long-term vision? These are some of the questions that you might have in your mind. During this call, I will try to answer these questions for you.

Let's start with the first question. What is Ebix's vision plan? Ebix's goal is to be the leading back-end powerhouse of insurance transactions in the world. The Company's technology vision is to focus on convergence of all insurance channels, processes and entities in a manner that data can seamlessly flow once a data entry has been made.

We intend to do that by designing products and services that are pioneering and at least a few years ahead of our competition. We believe that profitability and revenue growth must go hand in hand. We intend to do all this in a transparent and sincere manner while ensuring a high level of satisfaction to all the entities that we deal with -- customers, employees, investors and the society around us on whom we can have a positive influence.

Another question that we often get asked -- what are the chances that these results are flash-in-the-pan performance results? We at Ebix have always believed in letting the numbers speak for themselves, and thus have abstained from issuing any guidance numbers. For those of you who have been investors in the Ebix stock for some time, you've heard me say this many times earlier. I am not going to depart from that thought process and issue a future guidance. Instead, I will lay out a few metrics from the past for you to discover an answer for yourself.

Ebix's 2006 fourth-quarter revenue rose 50% to $9.28 million compared to $6.16 million in the fourth quarter 2005. Our revenue on average grew 21% consistently year over year both in 2006 and 2005. Ebix's 2006 net income grew 166% as compared to 2004 net income and 38% as compared to 2005. Ebix's diluted EPS for 2006 grew 168% as compared to 2004 EPS and 39% as compared to 2005. If you looked at the year 2006 itself, each sequential quarter was an improvement over the previous quarter in the year.

Another question we at Ebix get asked often by investors -- what are the chances that Ebix is a good investment? The reality remains that there are obviously no guarantees to anything -- anything in the future in the world, except maybe global warming. But if your criteria was to look at past performance of Ebix's stock in terms of return on investment and extrapolate it to the future, then Ebix would definitely look like a good investment.

Let's take yesterday, April 3, as a reference point. For every $1 invested in the Ebix stock on April 3, 2003, that investment was worth $10.56 as of yesterday, April 3, 2007. The stock price on April 3, 2003, was $2.84, while the price on April 3, 2007, was $30.

Another question that I have heard new investors often worry about is as follows -- every time Ebix talks about making an acquisition, new Ebix investors worry about the risk for dilution. Are these fears valid?

To answer that question, let's look at our actions in the past. In the last three fiscal years, Ebix has made three acquisitions -- namely, Heart, Infinity and Finetre. Let's look at the diluted outstanding share number in 2004, 2005 and 2006. The number was 3.1 million in 2004, still 3.1 million in 2005, and yet still 3.1 million in 2006.

While the outstanding share number remains unchanged in these three years, EPS has grown by 168% in this period. I do not mean to say that Ebix will never sell any new stock, but rest assured that anything we do will be prudent and will be done in the best interest of the investors, with a target to improve EPS rather than take it down.

Another question -- how has Ebix done as compared to other companies in the industry -- U.S. industry today? If we were to look at an unbiased analysis to get an answer to this question, we could look at FORTUNE Small Business magazine's study of all companies with a market cap of less than $200 million. FORTUNE ranks all companies based on a cumulative three-year revenue, income and return on investment basis. In 2005, the magazine ranked Ebix 83rd in this list of 100 fastest-growing companies, while in the year 2006, Ebix was ranked 19th in this list of 100 fastest-growing companies with a market cap of less than $200 million.

Another question -- how key is Ebix to the insurance industry today? Are its solutions replaceable? Ebix remains committed to converging any islands that exist in the insurance industry today, be it consumers, brokers, insurance companies -- converting B2C and B2B processes in insurance, converting front-end and back-end processes of insurance. Our goal remains to be the Cisco of the insurance industry in terms of powering transactions as a back-end player.

Today, our exchanges power transactions between hundreds of brokers and carriers in P&C insurance. Our life exchange powers close to $10.2 million life sales illustrations every year. We power an annuity exchange on which close to $15 billion in premiums are presently conducted yearly. We're working on spreading our exchange in the Australian markets aggressively -- Australian and New Zealand markets aggressively. And towards that, we have created a new division with an ex-computer science insurance professional to head that effort in Melbourne.

For a company our size, we have a lot of global reach and domain knowledge. We power businesses in more than 50 countries today across six continents. We have in excess of 16 offices today worldwide. We provide a multinational broker or carrier a common code base worldwide. And frankly, we do not know of a vendor in the insurance industry who has the geographical reach that we have and can do that in the insurance industry. Our systems are multilingual, multicurrency, and work in French, Portuguese, Spanish, Japanese, and of course, English.

We have the domain knowledge of insurance that spreads all across the world today. With our fully owned offshore facilities in India, we have the ability to make an acquisition, bring India to reduce their cost structure and make them more efficient. Our center in India has Carnegie Mellon's highest CMMI 5 rating, and that establishes the quality of our operations to any of our perspective customers.

We are one of the few companies in the insurance industry that can provide solutions across the world for a customer while keeping the code base exactly the same. That fact by itself, besides the fact that we have not lost an existing customer in the last five years in international markets, coupled with the fact that our solutions are designed to be a few years ahead of our competition in terms of technology, design and functionality, have led Ebix today to a position where we have a Who's Who customer base and a pending order base spanning product implementations across 30 countries or more at this time.

Another question -- do we intend to pursue acquisitions in the near- or long-term future? We at Ebix believe in growing the Company's revenues and income proportionately and have abstained from going after opportunities that provide us market share at the cost of profitability. We intend to pursue acquisitions that help us sell or cross-sell our existing products.

For an acquisition to interest Ebix, the acquisition must develop convergence through their technology, convergence through their existing platform, must have cross-selling opportunities, and clearly be accretive for our shareholders, either immediately or in the near future. At the present time, we are looking at a number of opportunities in specific geographies and specific sectors that we believe are complementary to our interests.

In the third-quarter investor conference call, I went into a detailed analysis of our numbers. A transcript of that call can be heard and downloaded from the investor home page on the Ebix site. A rather detailed analysis of the annual financial results can be seen in our 10-K, and thus I will abstain from repeating that analysis unless there is a specific question regarding that, and we will address that question.

Lastly, let me say that we recently launched a new comprehensive investor home page on the Ebix site with a view to providing a one-stop place to analyze Ebix from an investor perspective. The audio and the text transcript of this call will also be available on the investor home page at the Ebix website, located on www.ebix.com.

Having said that, I'm going to hand it over back to the moderator to open the call for questions. Thank you.

(OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS). Timothy Collins.

Congratulations on your great quarter (multiple speakers). I am kind of interested in the growth of the Company, and I just wondered if you maybe could give us additional color on that. You have grown organically year to year. And you're also apparently in a fragmented business in the sense that you can make acquisitions geographically, as well as in specific product lines.

And so I guess my question would be I would think that there would be a lot of acquisition opportunities. But just how are you going to go about selecting those on a product basis, and how many acquisitions could you integrate in a year?

So it's more about -- I guess my question is more about your plan for acquisitions and where that will take you, because I think you're still, even with your current revenue level, you're still a fairly small factor in the industry.

Let me answer your question, and I'll try to answer your question. On an acquisition side, what are we really looking at? We are looking at specific industries today. We're looking at opportunities in the life insurance marketplace. We're looking at opportunities in the claims transaction processing marketplace. We're looking at opportunities in the health processing industry today. We're looking at opportunities in P&C, however, in international markets.

We're looking at specific geographies, be it Europe or be it Asia, in terms of growing our presence. We understand with our expanse in 50 countries, if we don't spread that expanse and use that opportunity to achieve the goal that we keep talking about convergence, we know broker systems, we know carrier system, we understand exchanges and we have the knowledge of how insurance is conducted across the world.

So we feel we need to go and look at local companies there in these markets and these geographies and try to use the back-door entry to get into the marketplace, because typically, our experience has been that in Europe and Asia, you need to first become a local before you get fully embraced.

So having said that, those other kind of opportunities we're looking at. As I said earlier in my call, all of this has to fit in into our technology vision. It has to be cutting-edge, which means -- everything we do today is an ASP. At the end of the day, it is either -- it has to be a transaction-oriented industry -- a company that we look at. And we look at companies that can give us repetitive revenue streams rather than give us huge ups and downs.

At the end of the day, it also has to fit in into our technology vision, it has to fit in into the convergence and it has to be accretive for our investors. So those are the main criteria for us.

And to answer your second question with respect to how many can we take, I think it will depend on the size of the company rather than anything else, meaning it will be -- we clearly feel we have the bench strength today in terms of our management team to be able to handle big-sized acquisitions.

At the same time, I think we are very -- we are prudent. We don't want to overdo it. We are only going to -- we also feel that when we get into an acquisition, we're not going to -- there are two approaches. One is a high-risk approach and one is an absolutely low-risk approach. Our strategy has been to go with the low-risk approach traditionally. Clearly, high-risk approach can give us faster results, but we also feel that we don't want to put everything we have done until now at rest.

So what we always do, anything we get into, we try to first make sure that it is a sensible acquisition for us. But also, we do it in a manner where we are not putting the remaining Company at risk. So that is part of our approach.

So to answer your question, I think it will depend on the size of the company rather than anything else. And it will also depend on the geography, meaning we have -- for example, we could make an acquisition in Australia, and really, our Australian company pretty much knows how to handle that, so which means it doesn't really impact us here and you could have done another acquisition, for example, in the Singapore market.

That is the strength of Ebix today, that we have built a very strong management team in each of these geographies and who is raring to go and has proven to us over a period of time that they are capable of handling these.

So I guess to answer your third question, clearly, Ebix is not still a leader worldwide, meaning in the insurance markets, and that is what we want to be. So today we made, I would say, quite a good improvement in where we were, meaning you know where we were in revenue a few years back, and today, we are running at a run rate of -- if you go by the fourth-quarter results, they are basically a run rate of $9.25 or $9.28 million a quarter. Pretty much, we used to do a few years back -- that was the run rate for a year for this Company.

So I think we have grown quite a bit. At the same time, I think if you ask us is the management team contented with where it is today, no, we are not. We clearly feel we have a long way to go. Our goals are aggressive. But we'll achieve those aggressive goals in a rather conservative manner. We don't want to overdo it, by any means.

It is quite an accomplishment. I guess the other question I had was just kind of about the insurance industry itself, because as I understand it, it's a very long sell cycle. And it is a very -- it's an industry that resists change. And so basically, it is a tough sell. And so probably one of the greatest accomplishments you have had is to land large carriers and to penetrate the industry.

And so I guess my question would be the fact that you have established this beachhead in the industry -- won't that enable you to sell new products into your client base easily and to expand your client base? And isn't the heavy lifting kind of over?

Well, heavy lifting is not over as yet. But I would say that the resistance to change is a good and a bad thing. It is a good thing because, for example, the revenue base we have built -- the majority of our revenue base, 70%-plus, is repetitive, first of all. That is we are basically in the fiber of the insurance industry today across the world. So for a broker or for an insurance company to even decide to move away from us, they will probably need at least a three-year plan -- for bigger brokers, at least five-, six-year plan to get rid of us if they had to. So I guess that is a good thing for us, the resistance to change, sometimes.

But on the other side, we also believe that -- we also, when we launch all these so-called cutting-edge products, when we go into the industry, while people respect us, insurance industry is slow to move. So it's not going to suddenly jump in, especially if we're going in into a new industry that we have not approached. If we went into the same industry, they will probably -- we will be able to convince them.

But if you get into a new industry that we were not into, I think there we clearly -- in a specific geography were we haven't been there really strong, what we then need to do, we need to find a local player who already is in that market, is already dealing with those customers. So we basically acquire the company, use that as a back-door entry, and now launch all our cutting-edge products. That way, your resistance to change becomes a lot less.

So I guess on the heavy lifting side, there is a lot more to do. I still rate Ebix probably four on a 10 in terms of where it needs to head. So I think I would say that clearly, if there is one difference, that is today we're not in a survival mode or a consolidation mode. We are in a growth mode today. And if you look back at the earlier years, we were first in the survival phase, and then in the last few years we were in a consolidation phase of kind of picking up from where we -- once we survived, we knew that we had to consolidate our business. Now we are in clearly a growth mode. And we hopefully will keep growing aggressively.

Good answer. Can I just ask one more question, and then I will let you go? I am interested in your revenue, and I just was curious how much of your revenue is recurring, and in the future, how do you see the recurring revenue and the new revenue developing?

70%-plus of our revenue base is today recurring. So it is not that we sit every quarter and worry about what is going to happen exactly this quarter. Good news about our business today is that, first of all, the way revenue gets picked up and so on, we pretty much can predict six months down the line what our revenue base should look like because we don't just -- there's nothing big -- we're not big on license revenues. We are big on transaction revenue and [T&M] services -- consulting services.

So we expect this trend to continue. Anything we do, we have clearly -- all our products are built in a manner that they will, once we get it into our customer, that revenue will -- has to keep re-happening. Whether you look at any of our acquisitions, or whether you look at our organic business, everything we have built is in an ASP mode. So customers either -- will continue needing us.

Secondly, we do not sell any -- we don't just sell a product to a customer. Everything is owned still by us. We don't -- for example, if you look at our organic products, whether it is our carrier systems or our broker system, we lease our products to a customer. All these big brokers around the world, for example, who use our product, they get a five-year lease, which means they can use those products until they continue paying us for support and until they keep using us for anything that needs to be done on the product.

So clearly, the product right still remains with us -- the ownership of the products. So that, I guess, is a positive for us, and that guarantees or gives us some assurance that if our customer does stop using us, the customer's business would be at risk, because they would really not have a license to their system.

Gregory Wilbur.

Robin, looking at the income statement, your line for income taxes is substantially larger than I would have expected. Could you give us some color on that, please?

Sure. Primarily, you by now know we are conservative -- we are reasonably conservative in the thought process of the management team, and we want to make sure that we are prepared for everything. So what we have done, in the fourth quarter, we decided to reserve a decent amount of tax reserves, primarily. We fully expect that some of this number will basically be picked up back in the year 2007. So I guess that is a positive thing.

Why don't you go on to others and then I might come back to you.

[Mark Lindy].

A couple of questions. Greg had just asked about the income tax this quarter. Can you quantify on a per share basis the tax reserve?

Well, again, I will say what we have done as a tax reserve, at the last minute, we reserved around $0.12 in earning in terms of taxes. At the same time, as I said, once we work through -- over the next few quarters, as we work through it, or hopefully in the first quarter, we will try and see whether we can pick up most of it back up, but it will depend on as we provide the documentary support for that.

I understand. Can you comment on how things are going with the most recent acquisition, Finetre?

Finetre has done extremely well for us. We are very pleased with the manner in which -- first of all, we have a very solid, stable management team. We are quite pleased with Finetre per se. For example, as you know, Carl Serger is our CFO now of the Ebix group. And he came out of the Finetre acquisition. So I guess that is a positive thing.

And on top of it, we have -- if you look back at our experience, we clearly see Finetre being a very a positive influence on our results in the year 2007. We have always maintained that we believe that Finetre will be quite accretive to our results in the year 2007. And our belief remains unchanged today. In fact, it has been reinforced with respect to our experience in the last one quarter. We picked up some rather nice, large deals since we acquired Finetre, and I have to complement the Finetre management team for doing that.

Am I correct in my assumption that Finetre really did not contribute to the results that you just reported?

Finetre actually did contribute, but it was a lower contribution in terms of the results. And the reason primarily is it's the first quarter of our acquisition, as you can tell. And the normal integration cost -- normal understanding of how you start establishing revenue recognition processes and so on, and initially, there are a bit more costs and so on. But we expect that it will be, like I said, a very positive influence on our results in the year 2007.

Great. Last question -- you haven't filed the 10-K yet. When do you anticipate doing so?

I think we are expecting to file by Monday.

Brian Black.

Just a couple of kind of housekeeping questions. The accounts receivable balance built up to $3 million and change at the end of the quarter. Can you comment on that and what your expectations are in terms of collections normally.

Brian, obviously, our operating cash -- positive operating cash flow level looked a lot more positive [if you've collected better, yes?] At the same time, basically, it's just a timing issue more than anything else. We have no collection problems. We don't have any customer problems or anything like that. So I think it is more of a timing issue. We will collect that payment, and that is pretty much it.

Just towards the end of the year, you run into a lot of issues. We had a finance move-over, so as you can tell, we moved our finance from Chicago to Atlanta very successfully as of 31 December. So it came up with a few new challenges for us. And maybe we lost a bit of focus in terms of collecting our money, but it's not really -- we don't have an issue and I think we are absolutely on target of collecting that money pretty soon.

We are most of the way through the first quarter, so the collections experience on that balance has been normal so far this year, basically.

Sure.

Did the use of your free cash flow, if you -- let's say you don't find another acquisition until the middle of the year or whenever, but putting aside using free cash flow for acquisitions, what do you expect to be your use of that free cash flow? Would you pay down the credit line? Would you buy back stock, or some combination of those two?

I think it will be a combination of those two, assuming that we didn't go after anything in the next few months -- chances are, we probably will. And we have been in very active discussions with a number of parties with very complementary interests, and we are quite excited about some of them. And so we can use some of our free cash flow that we have.

But assuming that none of that came out to fruition, clearly it would be a combination of us paying down our line, reducing our interest, and also probably returning some of the stock back. Again, we're limited by the guidelines regarding how much stock we can buy every day. There are specific rules regarding that.

Right, and when you can buy it. And then, can you -- sorry to harp on the tax issue, but can you comment about your -- we can see this in the Q when it comes out, but your cash tax rate during '06 and how you expect that to look going forward?

Your cash tax rate -- I don't understand the question.

Meaning like as opposed to the GAAP -- the book tax rate that you made an adjustment in this year differs from the checks you write to the IRS. In other words, your actual effective cash tax rate -- what did that approximate in 2006?

You see it finally will boil down to many factors. There is no real straight, simple answer to this in terms of 2006 or 2007. You could take, if I had to simplify it, I could say 8% cash, and it's around 8% probably. But from a perspective of accrual, probably 10%, but then that is probably oversimplifying the problem, because we have a tax strategy in place and we're trying to see how we can make it even better in the year 2007.

So order of magnitude, kind of high-single-digit cash tax rate?

Correct.

But you are working on improving that -- not that it is not great already, but --

Yes.

Can you maybe approximate -- the last caller asked about the contribution of Finetre, and you have only had one quarter, and there were some integration costs. Can you kind of give us a ballpark figure for what those costs were in the quarter to integrate the companies?

Yes, primarily in terms of revenue, Finetre probably came out at around $1.7 million or so. And in terms of the cost structure, after amortization, I think they were around $1.6, I would say, close to $1.6 -- again, which means normally you would say that is a run rate of close to $6.8 million in revenue. However, we expect that to improve quite a bit, dramatically.

A lot of it has to do with revenue recognition issues, and we are trying to put our hands around it in terms of how -- most of what they do is transaction oriented, first of all. We also are in the process of -- some of the revenue recognition is mandated by how -- as the customers go live, we pick up a lot more revenue and so on.

So we expect Finetre revenue to be a lot higher. We have kept -- we have a tight control on costs, so we expect Finetre to be solidly profitable for us this year. We would like to say, if you were to say what would we -- I am not saying that we are going to [trouble be], but if I were to -- since I have not issued guidance in the past, I wouldn't want to do that on Finetre. But I will tell you where we would have liked it to be. We would like Finetre to finish the year at at least $8.5 to $9 million in revenue.

Great. Two more quick questions. One, you just mentioned cost control, which has been sort of an impressive feature of your management of the Company as you have grown. If you look at the SG&A or overhead over the last three years, the numbers continue to decline. Do you feel comfortable with the overhead or infrastructure you have in place as you grow in '07 and as Finetre grows, or should we expect you to need to ramp up your infrastructure to support growth?

I think as we grow, we will have to ramp up, there's no question about that. But it will be balanced, meaning it won't -- we won't blindly go out and suddenly increase our expenses unless we are starting to ramp up, and then once we start growing our cash flows and as -- or unless we start growing up our revenue, meaning they have to be proportionate to each other.

But presently, if you look back at -- if you look at where we are in terms of where our revenue streams and where we are today, I think we are quite comfortable with where we are in terms of what we are spending on SG&A.

With some of the moves that we have made, for example, the move from Chicago to Atlanta, we in fact expect some of it to come down. We have identified a few other areas are where we feel the expenses should actually come down rather than go up. For a company our size, we believe that our expenses are still a bit higher in certain areas. So we are going to address that. But however, on the same token, as we grow in size, whether we make new acquisitions, or whether we grow organically, we will probably have to ramp up that infrastructure.

And then the last question is -- back to the acquisition strategy for a second. The three that you have completed seem to be -- have been very successful, and Finetre sounds like it is going to be a great deal. But the last deal you were working on, which was Docucorp, was very large relative to the size of the Company. I understand the strategic rationale, but just want to understand, as you look for future deals and in the deals you're looking at now, like, order of magnitude, can we expect sort of tuck-in acquisitions of $3 million, $5 million, or you be evaluating deals that are transformative in terms of their size?

I think you are going to see in the short term, at least, you're going to see deals similar to what we have done in the past -- smaller-sized companies, but companies with a solid bottom line that can give us a solid bottom line and can -- Docucorp was a very different rationale. Again, we might come across similar companies in the future.

We saw in Docucorp an opportunity. We saw that we could cut their costs pretty heavily based on our present infrastructure, based on our present investments in India and so on. And we felt there was a lot of room. We had geographical -- we were geographically complementing them in many areas and so on. And some of our existing technologies complement what they do. So there was a lot of value that we saw.

However, as I said, meaning, again, Docucorp was based on a lot of sound logic. Again, we also knew in Docucorp where to draw the line at a point where we knew we were not going to go beyond that point. And so we stopped at that point because we felt after that it became too expensive for us.

But having said that, in terms of future acquisitions, you're more likely than not, you're going to see smaller-sized acquisitions, but companies which are in niche areas and are leaders in those markets. So those are the kind of acquisitions you are going to see. Once in a while, you might see something very attractive. Again, I can't predict the magnitude of that company as of now, but it will -- it will not be something -- anything we do, rest assured, it will be prudent, it will be based on sound logic.

Like I said in my talk, we are not -- if over three years, we haven't changed our outstanding shareholding, that tells you a lot about our management style, and the fact that even the stock that we sold, we actually, to some of the investor [ways] -- for example, in the EbixLife acquisition, LifeLink, whatever stock we sold, we bought it back. And that kind of explains to you that we are reasonably prudent in our thought process.

But at times, we also don't want to -- we also believe that we are in a mode where we can grow as a company and finally become a strategic revenue company. And if that is where we have to head, we also have to keep a good head on our shoulders, but also look at opportunities straight in the eye and see whether they work for us.

[Peter Mork].

Brian just covered most of the questions, so I still have just a few. The line of credit that is in the current liabilities -- does the whole thing get rolled over to long-term debt? Or how are you guys going to handle that?

Carl, do you want to handle that?

We are still evaluating whether we would continue to roll that into the line or whether it makes more sense to handle it through debt or any other method.

Okay, and so you guys will make an announcement on that just going forward, then?

Correct.

And just touching on the Docucorp again, the reason that was cited, there was illiquidity of the stock for it not going through. Is that something that is a concern? Or was it because of the size, and with future acquisitions that you are just talking about with Brian, with the smaller companies, is that not going to be an issue -- it's kind of an anomaly, or--?

Sorry, I didn't understand your question. Can you repeat that again?

Just it was cited illiquidity of the stock for the deal not going through.

Well, I believe that was not a real valid reason.

That wasn't the reason.

No, clearly that was not the reason. The reason was simply that the management -- they had already signed a deal with Skywire. And frankly, there was a bidder who had already committed to the money. So there was cash that they knew will definitely come in a week from now, versus us, who were saying, we will want 30 days due diligence. Clearly, we wouldn't have done it without a detailed due diligence. And they were primarily -- they were not comfortable with the fact that we were still looking for a due diligence.

But they had to justify it, so they came up with some justification. I don't believe that was the real reason. The real reason was that -- I think they did what they thought was right for their investor base, which is that they could see cash out there already, without due diligence, to be paid -- to be taken, versus Ebix, which could have up to 30 -- they could have lost both the deals -- Ebix could, after 30 days of due diligence, have told them, incidentally, we have changed our mind. And if we at that time said we changed our minds, and Skywire also backed out because Skywire's offer had been rejected by them and they have asked us to do due diligence, then Docucorp would have been left without a buyer. And I think that was their thought process. And I don't begrudge them that thought process.

Makes sense. Well, congratulations on a good year.

(OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

Thank you. Since we do not have any questions at this time, I think -- let me first thank each one of you for coming to the conference call. As I said, the audio and the text transcript of this call will be available on the Ebix website, www.ebix.com. And the new investor home page that you can click on and you will see -- you can download the audio, you'll be able to look at the text and so on. The text -- this will be uploaded probably two hours from now. There will be a lag of probably two hours between now and then. But you could definitely do that.

Again, thank you very much. And with that, I will close the call. Thank you.

This concludes today's conference. You may now disconnect.