Forrester Research Inc (FORR) 2002 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good day, welcome everyone to this Forrester Research fourth quarter and full year 2002 conference call. Today's call is being recorded. There will be a rebroadcast available beginning today at 2:00 p.m. Eastern time through midnight, February fifth, 2003.

You may access this rebroadcast by dialing 719-457-0820. You will need to use the confirmation code 116140 to access this replay. With us today is the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer Mr. George Colony and the Chief Financial Officer Mr. Warren Hadley and the Directer of Investor Relations, Miss. Kim Maxwell. For opening remarks and introductions, I turn the call over to Ms. Kim Maxwell. Go ahead.

Good morning, thank you for joining Forrester's fourth quarter 2002 conference call. With me are George Colony, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Warren Hadley Chief Financial Officer.

Today's call is in three sections, one will detail our fourth quarter and full-year 2002 financial results. George will take you through a review of the fourth quarter as well as our plans for 2003 and we will complete the call with a question-and-answer session. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that this call will contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the private securities litigation reform act of 1995.

Words such as expects, believes, anticipates, intends, plans, estimates, or similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. These statements are based on the company's current plans and expectations, and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause future activities and results of operations to be materially different from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Some of the important factors that can cause activities and results to differ are discussed in the reports and filings with the securities and exchange commission.

The company under takes no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements. Whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise. Now I'd like to turn the call over to Warren.

Thanks, Kim. Over the next several minutes I'll review fourth quarter results, 2002 results. The balance sheet at December 31st, our fourth quarter metrics and the out look for our business for Q1 of 2003. Please note that the financial results I'm reviewing with you today are pro forma and reflect adjustments for the following: One, investment write downs.

Our Q4 in 2002 income statements exclude charges of $525,000 and $4.1 million respectively for write-downs of certain, unmarketable invests. Two, restructuring charges, our [INAUDIBLE] statement excludes Q1 and Q3 reorganization charges, totally $12.2 million related to work force reductions and space consolidation in the periods and three, income taxes. We have assumed an effective tax rate of 30% for pro forma tax purposes for both Q4 in 2002 unit 8 results.

I am pleased to report we met our financial guidance for revenue, operating margin and EPS in the fourth quarter and full year 2002. Forrester's fourth quarter revenue was $23.5 million, a decrease of 32% from $34.7 million in the fourth quarter last year. Net income was $2.8 million, a decrease of 54% from $5.9 million last year's earnings per share were 12 cents on diluted weighted shares outstanding of $23.2 million, compared with 25 cents and $23.6 million shares last year. Our fourth quarter core research revenue was $14.9 million, representing a 42% decrease from $25.8 million last year. Core revenue comprised 63 % of total revenue in the fourth quarter compared with 75% in Q4 of 2001.

Demand for analyst advisory services was strong in the fourth quarter and our advisory services and other revenue came in ahead of planned at $8.6 million, a decrease of 3 % from $8.8 million last year. Advisory services and other revenue comprised 37 % of total revenue for the quarter compared with 25% in Q4 last year. Also, we held three forms and two summits in the fourth quarter. For Q1, we plan to host one forum event and one summit and we expect advisory and other revenue to comprise 33% to 37% of total revenue and core research revenue in the range of 63% to 67 % of total revenue. On a geographic basis, 31 % of Forrester's fourth quarter revenue was derived from international sales, compared with 28% in Q4 last year. This was slightly higher than our estimated range of 26% to 30% due to strong demand for advisory performed outside of the U.S. In two European events.

Turning to operating expenses, operating expenses for the quarter were $20.9 million, down from $28.8 million last year. We have continued to align our expenses with our revenue base through strict cost controls and we are on plan with regard to expense savings estimated from our work force reductions in Q1 and Q3 of this year. Operating income was $2.7 million or 11% of revenue compared with $5.8 million or 17% of revenue last year. Now I'd like to turn to Forrester's full-year results. 2002 total revenue decreased 39% to $96.9 million from $159.1 million last year.

That income was $11.6 million, a decrease of 46% from $21.3 million last year and earnings per share for 2002 were 49 cents on diluted weighted average shares outstanding of $23.7 million compared to 89 cents and $23.9 million shares last year. On a geographic basis, 29 % of our 2002 revenue was derived from international sales consistent with last year. This was in line with our target for international revenues to comprise approximately 26% to 30% of total revenue. 2002 operating income was $11 million or 11. 4% of revenue, compared with operating income of $23.7 million or 15% of revenue last year. Now I'd like to turn to the balance sheet. We continue to maintain a solid cash position. Our cash in investments at end of the fourth quarter were $194.6 million.

Despite the tough economic environment, we were still able to generate positive cash flows from operations. Cash flows from operations were approximately $1.7 million in Q4 and $5.6 million for the full year. During the fourth quarter, we used $5.3 million of cash to purchase 353,000 shares on the market pursuant to the stock buy-back program. To date we have purchased 1.2 million shares for a total of $20.1 million. Our stock buy-back program, which we announced in October of 2001, allows for the use of up to $50 million to purchase shares. Accounts receivable at December 31st were $17.8 million, down from $24.5 million at the end of 2001.

We had another good quarter for collections. Our sales outstanding were 58 days compared with 67 days at the end of 2001 and accounts receivable over 90 days was 3%, same as the end of 2001. Net property and equipment decreased from 21.5 million at the end of 2001. Our 2002 capital spending was approximately 1 million, well under our plan of $2 million for the year. Deferred revenue at December 31st was $42 1 million, compared with $59.9 million at the end of 2001, representing a decrease of 30% year over year, but increased 6% sequentially from $39.6 million at September 30th. Now, I'd like to review Forrester's fourth quarter metrics.

Agreement value is a total value of all contracts for core research and advisory services in place without regard to how much has already been recognized or is yet to be recognized as revenue. Agreement valueis $78.1 million at December 31st, a 30% decrease from last year, but flat sequentially as agreement value was $78.4 million at September 30th, 2002. Forrester's average contract sizefor core research at December 31st was $43,900 a decrease of 11 % from $49,400 last year. In the past, we have presented average level one and level two advisory partner program contract sizes. With the addition of new advisory programs in 2002, these metrics are no longer representative of our corps advisory contract base. Therefore we will be presenting average contract size for core and advisory contracts going forward.

The average contract size per core research with advisory research as of December 31st was $80,500, a decrease of 10% compared to $89,500 at Q4, 2001. Forrester's retention rate for client companies at December 31st was 57%, up from 52% in Q4 of last year. In our dollar retention rate was 71%, up from 63% in Q4 of last year. These retention rates are calculated on a 12-month rolling basis. At end of the fourth quarter, our total for client companies was 1,125 a 3% sequential decrease for the second consecutive quarter, representing continued stabilization in our client base. For head count at end of the fourth quarter, Forrester had a total staff of 344, down from 581 at the end of last year. Current head count includes the research staff of 124, down from 191 at the end of 2001 and a sales staff of 105, down from 184 at the end of 2001. The last topic I'd like to cover today our business out look for 2003. On monday, we initiated a tender offer to acquire all sales of GIGA information group, enhancing Forrester's financial position.

We believe it would be a [INAUDIBLE] to revenue, earnings per share and importantly, operating cash flow in 2003. Our underlying goal is to increase cash flow, ultimately increasing shareholder value. We anticipate the deal will be completed during the first quarter and are currently planning integration strategy. However, as the exact timing of the closing of the deal is not determined, we are providing guidance for Q1, 2003 only, this guidance excludes any effect of the GIGA acquisition.

That said, and assuming no improvement in the current state economy, we expect to meet the following financial targets for Q1: Revenues of approximately $18.5 million to $20 million, an operating margin of 7% to the 9% and diluted earnings per share of approximately 7 cents to 9 cents. We expect to update our guidance for Q1 upon the closing of the GIGA acquisition and will update our guidance for the full year, 2003 on our Q1 earnings call in April. Thank you and now I'll turn the floor over to George.

Thanks, Warren. Good morning, everyone. I'll start off with a review of the fourth quarter. Before turning to strategy of 2003. The new products we will introduce in Q1, and impending acquisition of GIGA. The fourth quarter showed further stabilization. Client loss continued to ease with a net loss of 40 companies.

One B+ when company renewals were strong, including Bellsouth, Abbot Laboratories, BP AMMOCO, Colgate, Fannie May, Internal Revenue Service, Pfizer, and UPS. New client business improved in the quarter. Among the new accounts were After-market Technologies, Carheel, Clear Channel Communications, EMI Music, Hilton, and Honeywell. We also had significant win-backs including Goldman Sachs, Northwestern Mutual Life, PTC, Sea Gate, Unisis, Veritas and WebMd. Two new products debuted in Q4, tech spending profiles in business technologies techrankings. Tech spending profiles benchmarked the IT expenditures of One B+ companies against their industry.

Among the clients who have bought TSP, Cap Gemini Earnts & Young acquired all 16 industry profiles for use in their consulting practice. Business intelligence is the 10th techrankings category. This service analyses and ranks vendors in the business intelligence markets. We hosted three forums and two supports in the fourth quarter. The executive strategy forum focused on how to recover from the recession. Outside speakers included Ken Chanlt, Kevin Rollins, president of Dell, Doug Elix, IBM, and Larry Summers, president of Harvard University. Other summits and forums in the fourth quarter were the European Finance forum, the CPG summits, the Healthcare Summit and the European Consumer forum Turning now to 2003, I would like to talk about two elements of our strategy. The first is our expansion of pull research. Secondly, the widening of our syndicated research for it via the GIGA acquisition. Focusing first on pull research, Forrester has always stayed closely tuned to changes in our marketplace.

We introduced e-research in 1999 when clients wanted on-line access, we created [INAUDIBLE] research in 2002 when clients wanted no-barrier access to a broad range of content. Over the last two years we've had growing demand for pull research, now, this is research that is client directed. That is the client in a sense is pulling it to them. pull contrast with push research, the syndicated broadcast form of research that Forrester has traditionally sold. There are strengths in both the push and pull models. Push, or syndicated research, has a very high potential audience. It can be sold to a wide variety of users, companies, and going fees. It is a good means of building broad global influence.

Pull, or the client-directed research has the advantages of guaranteed client relevancy and direct and [INAUDIBLE] to the client's problems and challenges. In 2002 we tested several pull products and found the leverage could be as high as it is with push products. We have decided to augment a strong base in push research with pull -- pull research. We are now in a transition to become what I call a push plus pull company. Push and pull compliment each other. We are combining the high influence and expertise of push research with the strong client relevancy of pull. Forrester has two efforts in the pull research category for 2003. The oval program that we announced today and intensive advisory. The oval program is a family of pull research products for c-level executives in One B+ companies. The first is the CIO group, a board of One B+ CIO's. The program provides member of client-directed research, benchmark data, best practices, quick projects, and a peer-driven high-touch network. We piloted the CIO group concept in 2002.

The beta test included CIO's from EMC, LSI Logic, Lucent, NCR, Nortel, Select- ron, Sony, Storage -Tek, Sun, and Teradine. The group found high value in the close interaction, the discussions of best practices and the customized research approach. I should tell you the pilot ceo's told us they would love a board offering from Forrester. They believe that the technology expertise of the company would be a big improvement over boards. So in 2003, we begin to build the CIO group. Forrester's CIO group offers three improvements over existing boards: One, primary research. The CIO group has access to findings of the extensive data base of technology research. Two, expertise. The CIO group is staffed with technology experts with 55 collective years of experience in the industry. These are not generalists two years out of college. Finally, number three, vertical insight. Forrester's research in financial services, media, retail, healthcare, automotive, consumer package goods, telecom, travel, electronics and manufacturing will increase the value of the CIO group's content. Charter members of the CIO group include EMC, LSI logic, Telstra and Verizon.

I should tell you we've already seen synergy between the oval research and our push offerings. In late december, Lucy Pastori, one of our top sales people was on a sales call at Verizon. At the meeting, Lucy was told Verizon would not become a Forrester client unless the company had a special program for the CIO. When Lucy described oval, the response was, that's great, we will now become members of the CIO group and also buy Forrester's core research as well. And Lucy told me oval was the closer for the deal. Without it, Verizon would not have signed on. Also in the pull category, we've extended our advisory this year into what we call intensive advisory. Staffed by a team of special advisors, the program helps senior executives with large-scale technology decisions. Examples of projects include helping a large financial services company map their 3-year voice technology strategy, a second is guiding the head of a large North American services company as they develop a multi-country marketing strategy. And finally, our advisors worked with a executive at a Japanese farmer firm to develop a website-designed methodology. We're moving aggressively in this direction because one, as I talked about on the call, clients are directing more pull or client-directed work.

Two, they're hiring at higher rates. Advisory increases stickiness. Number three, this is an obvious way to leverage our syndicated research. Turning now to Forrester's push research: Wholeview has been active for 12 months now. Customer satisfaction since the launch moved from 60% to 75 %. Clients love the no-barriers packaging and ease the use. In 2003, wholeview will continue to be enhanced and shaped to match the content demands of our clients. I'd like to address for a few moments Forrester's impending acquisition of GIGA. As I outlined in the conference call last week, we are buying gig was for five reasons, number one, coverage.

GIGA products widen our product line and we've have a strong offering for the practitioner. GIGA brings approximately 900 new clients to Forrester. Number three, culture. The two companies share ethics, values and methodologies, this is a good cultural match. Number four, consolidation, this strengthens Forresters as the number two player in the history and five, financial. We expect the shareholder it increase value for cash flow. While the deal won't close for at least 20 business days, we are actively planning integration.

Order of events for 2003, we will host both the tech leadership forum and the automotive summit in February. In 2003 we will hold seven forums and one summit. This is in contrast to the 2002 calendar, including six forums and eight supports. We have retained the highest profit events while moving resources to new product launches. So, to conclude the call, we are all looking forward to 2003. By the way, it's Forrester's 20th year in business. We have managed through many economies and technology shifts in our history. I believe that Forrester possesses the management team, balance sheet, the One B+ client base and brand for strategy and integration of GIGA. Warren and I will present at the conference next month in San Francisco. We look forward to seeing many of you on the road.

Warren and I will now take questions.

Operator: Thank you. Today's question and answer session will be conducted electronically. To ask a question, press a star key, followed by the digit 1 on your touch-tone phone. Please make sure your mute function is turned off so your question will register in our system. That's star 1, our first question, Laura Letterman with William Blair

Just a few questions. One, talk a little about your high-level strategy for GIGA. Are you gonna try to provide higher level of service or also use aggressive pricing, just high-level thoughts on strategy. I know you're in early days, but I'd like to hear what you're thinking about. Also, can you talk a bit about how much of your revenues is from vendors versus MIS, when you were talking about the new programs for the CIO's. It was a lot of technology vendors.

Okay, you know, on the GIGA acquisition, Laura, the way I look at this is is that we are entering a new marketplace and that is research for the IT practioniners. I'll acknowledge we're going head-to-head with Gardener by doing this, but with GIGA, we enter it very quickly. We also look rather different from Gardener, because we have strong coverage in the wholeview side of the business of course, we have the vertical spread, which no other company has, and so our belief is if ewe take that coverage, plus the I.T. Practitioner coverage, we use a wholeview, if you will. And you know, very clear yet, we're talking about a lot of possibilities, but obviously we'll have very attractive cross-selling between the two products as we come together a month from now. So, that's the deal on GIGA. On the vendor -- on the vendor users side.

Specifically I think she's asking about on the old products, the current list --

Yeah, the oval products, it will not be just vendors on the oval side. The testing we did in 2002, Laura, was really around a specific vertical, vertical CIO's. That's why we tended to get vendor CIO's, but for oval, it will be all CIO's from all verticals.

Two other questions, given your acquisition of GIGA and your one reason for is consolidation of the industry. Are you looking at other things? Do you find yourselves making smaller acquisitions this year? Sort of your future view on acquisitions.

Nothing planned right now, but I would say we're actively looking, as we are at all times. Nothing planned right now, Laura.

One final question: You and I have been around in technology for a long time and it seems to me there's less innovation going on now than in the 20 years I've been hanging around in technology. On a status, on the strategy side, it seems as though people need strategy when things are changing more. Now that we're in a steady state, it's making sense you're buying GIGA because of the steady state and less changing. How do you reposition or change the strategic view when companies are dealing with less change and sort of nuts and bolts technology?

Let me take this apart. You're looking at two dynamics, one is spending in technology, which is subterranean right now, I mean, they're hibernating, essentially. Then you're looking at innovation in technology. I would argue in the speed of innovation has not changed. As I always like to say, go over to Cal Tech or MIT, they don't care if the market's at 8,or 6,000, or 1,1000 they will continue to create technology. Looking at web services or the space called organic it, there's tremendous innovation going on. No one's buying the technology right now, and that's the real difference as to what's in this market compared to even five years ago. So that being said, of course that's one of the reasons we bought GIGA is that it's a bit of an anchor to win in times like this because companies are focused on what they're gonna do tomorrow, not worried about next year. And if you look at GIGA's research, it's pragmatic research on I.T. Decisions. Those decisions are the ones being made today. So, really, the essence of the strategy of why we bought GIGA.

When are the CIO's you're talking to thinking they're gonna increase budgets? Most people are looking for flats this year. Are they back unloading it? Do they see an increase for 404? What are you hearing from major clients?

Our number was around 2 % for 2002 and we're currently in the 6% to 8% range. We actually had some data come back for 1,000 companies last week, showing 6% to 7%, in that range. What's happening here is a lot of band aides and bailing wire have been applied and these systems are just hanging on for their dear life right now. The shelf life to these systems and we're nearly sort of the expiration date on some of the upgrades and even pc's, people have to have great pc's by the end of this year. So again, the water's spilling behind the dam. At one point it will start to come over the top of the dam.

6% to 8 % for this year or for '04?

In '03. Thanks, Laura.

Okay.

Operator: Our next question, Fred McCray, Thomas Whitefield partners.

Good morning, everybody. Quick question, George. In terms of the renewal rates of the first year, or the fourth quarter you've gone through a major booking period with the pricing model. Maybe give us insight in terms of how the sales force did adjusting to this new model.

We've been renewing all year into wholeview, Fred.

Just given the fact this is kind of one of your biggest periods, so.

The biggest quarter?

The fourth quarter represents about 75 % of our bookings for the full year and the retention rate increased up to 57% in Q4. It's on a 12-month rolling basis, so I would say yeah, you did see increased retention during the quarter.

A lot of color here, a little bit, in that the business did improve in Q4, definitely. And what's interesting, as we go into Q1 now, we'll be renewing clients who have had wholeview for an entire year and should be interesting to watch renewal rates.

You think that will be the important data point?

Yes, looking at Warren here for the April call, because wholeview will be a year old this month, actually.

Correct.

Yeah, so new metrics coming your way.

Perfect. Then in terms of the oval program, other areas that you've targeted, or is CIO the first?

We have a bunch of targets, which we're not gonna talk about right now, but we have very interesting ideas here.

So to say there are others in the pipeline?

Yes.

Okay, very good. Then in terms of pulling back on the summit somewhat, have those typically been lower margin business? Talk about a little bit.

The summits definitely hit lower margins than the forums did. They were one-day events. A lot of expense of the forums were there, but you couldn't charge as much for that. That's why we pulled back from summits and added one more forum for next year.

Pretty much right on.

Great, thank you.

Thanks.

Our next question, Sandra Danado with Adams Partners Health

Hi. Thanks.

They'll never get your name right.

I know. I fight with them all the time. I know you can't provide guidance with GIGA, essentially you're waiting for these 20 days, but can you give a sense of Forrester as a stand-alone company in 2003, what you think revenue could be and the operating margins you're targeting?

Yeah, we haven't provided guidance because we're thinking at this point, the economy could change in the first and second quarter for one thing. Secondly, the numbers are likely to change anyway in March as a result of the acquisition of GIGA. Certainly revenue would be down slightly from the 96.9 we reported this year, given the Deferred revenue that's on the balance sheet at this point.

As you know, what would happen in 2003, the metrics are turning, but the revenue tended to go down.

From a margin standpoint, our goal would to be to keep margins pretty much flat with what we had done in 2002 with lower margin Q1 revving up Q2,3,&4 as we invest in the new products.

We're actually higher in this quarter.

Advisory services, something that seems to be coming a bigger part of the product offering here. What are clients asking about it? Seems like you saw a lot of demand for that in Europe. What are clients asking about and what is the plan for 2003? Terms of the balance between core and advisory, Forrester stand-alone. Let's just not talk about that right now.

On the ask for, I went through some examples, but I would say a lot of it is surprisingly strategic. Maybe just reflect our client base. Yeah, you know, we did the analysis of the voice and how they'll implement voice over in that company, but a lot of what we're working on is improving websites, creating an e-business strategy for the companies, that's in fact what we're doing for a lot of these guys. So a lot of it is one to two to three-year business. What's happening here is because our client base tends to be forward-looking, we're getting in that type of business, and I would say it's probably 20% tactical, meaning one year and near 80 %, which would be plus one year. Supprisingly strategic.

Is that worldwide?

That is worldwide.

Okay. Do you sense that Europe seems to be a little more strategic than tactical right now compared to the U.S. Or is there really no difference?

No if I had to split a hair here, I would say a little more strategic in the U.S., tactical in Europe. I just got back from Daubos and Europe is King the recession a year later and are doing more hammering than us at this point. So, a little more tactical in Europe.

Okay.

Sandy, on the next 2002, it was about a 70/30 split core advisory. 2003, we'd look to see about 65/35 for the mix. Part of the difference for 2002-2003 is the new product unlimited advisory, unlimited analysts advisory.

Right, right.

We launched in the first quarter, representing about 5% or 6 % of our total business at this point. That's an advisory product.

And is that sold as part -- I know you don't give out level one and level two programs anymore, but can a client buy intensive advisory alone or do they need to buy the research also?

UEA or the advisory? They're the 30-minute calls versus the project.

Intensive is the customized service.

Intensive advisory, yeah.

Can you buy that without buying core research or not?

Yes.

You can?

Yes, you can, however I will tell you that -- and we'll have better data for you the next call -- if we get an advisory client who buys a project, they tend to then buy core research. Right.

And on the UEA side, you need to purchase core research in order to buy uea.

But for 22 k you get the wholeview research. And for another 5k, 27k, you get a UEA seed, so it's a good deal.

Just a follow-up to Fred's question on the supports, you did bring the number down. Is any of the decision to bring the number of summits you're hosting in 2003 down a reflection of the fact that now you're gonna have to absorb some of the GIGA events? And what's the plan there? Do you plan on having them as stand-alone events or will you consolidate them into the forums you're hosting.

That was completed before GIGA happened. We're putting the money from supports down on other bets. As example, on oval and unintensive advisories. So, we're moving it no. Higher projects. As for as events for GIGA, I don't know yet. We've spent a lot of time working through that now.

Maybe one last question, then, what do you think happens with the Forrester customers that are currently in the wholeview platform? Do you think they'll be able to access GIGA research for a while for free and then you'll have to upsell? How do you plan on integrating the two research products?

Don't know yet, but what we should probably do is after the month has gone by, we should probably have a special con call to go through this with you guys. At this point we have 15 plans we're looking at, but haven't chosen one yet. Sorry to be evasive, but that's the deal.

I understand, thank you very much.

Operator: Steve from pack press securities.

Following up on sandra's questions, with regards to the breakdown between core research and advisory services, understanding GIGA metrics for the full year, what do the metrics look-for-Q1? And also given that we've started to see you know, pretty positive turn relative to Deferred revenue, when do we start to see that flow through from a core research perspective and start to see sequential increases in that line? Thanks.

The mix for Q1 is we expected to be 65% core and 35 % advisory. As far as the core research picked up from Q4 deferred revenue had an up-tick. We had 35 % of bookings coming inn the fourth quarter, which represents a big quarter for us. I would look to see core revenue increasing in the second half of the year at this point.

Great, thanks.

Operator: Again, that's star one on your touchdown tone phone for questions. Our next question, Kathy Leiberman.

Hi, I was sort of interested in the commentary about their being just as much leverage in the pull product as the push. That's a little could counter intuitive. Can you talk about a bit more?

Hi, Kathy. On the intensive advisory, those are the project works we're doing. Typical consulting is the in 3-1 space, you pay someone 100k and they do 300k of work for you. As with you , we look at the economics of it for us, because we have such a large base of existing research and data, that the work can rest on, we think we can move this into the 4-1, 5-1, even 6-1 to certain projects.

So they're asking for something that's custom, but you probably have a lot of answers in your --

Exactly. Then looking at oval, the other pull product that was announced, what you're doing is your essentially taking the project work and spreading it among many, many clients.

Oh yeah, I get that. That makes total sense to me.

You get that one, thanks.

Operator: Having no further questions, Miss. Maxwell, I turn the conference back to you for additional or closing comments.

Thank you for joining our conference call and we look forward to seeing many of you on the road this quarter.