NiSource Inc (NI) 2011 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the third-quarter 2011 NiSource earnings conference call. My name is Lacey, and I will be your coordinator for today. At this time, all participants are in listen-only mode. Later, we will facilitate a question-and-answer session towards the end of the presentation.

(Operator Instructions)

And I would now like to turn the presentation over to your host for today's call, Mr. Glen Kettering, Senior Vice President of Corporate Affairs. Please proceed.

Thank you, Lacey, and good morning to everyone. On behalf of NiSource, I would like to welcome you to our quarterly analysts' call. Joining me this morning are Bob Skaggs, President and Chief Executive Officer; Steve Smith, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and Randy Hulen, Managing Director of Investor Relations. As you know, the focus of today's call is to review our financial performance for the third quarter of 2011 and provide a business update. We'll then open the call to your questions.

At times during the call, we'll refer to the supplemental slides available on our website at NiSource.com. I would like to remind all of you that some of the statements made on this conference call will be forward-looking statements. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the statements. Information concerning such risks and uncertainties is included in the MD&A and Risk Factors sections of our periodic SEC filings.

And now, I would like to do the call over to Bob Skaggs.

Thank you, Glen. Good morning, and thanks for joining us today. This morning's agenda is crisp to allow time for your questions. To start things off, I'll touch on a few key highlights that demonstrate the team's continued progress on executing NiSource's business plan. I will provide a few specific updates on NiSource's results, as well as the performance of our key business units. And then we will open the line to your questions.

Starting off, let's turn to slide 3 in the supplemental deck labeled Key Takeaways for the Third Quarter. As I will discuss in a moment, despite sluggish economic conditions, our balanced investment-driven strategy continues to deliver solid earnings growth and increased shareholder value. Our strategy also has remained true to our underlying commitments to do the right thing in enhancing customer service, modernizing our energy infrastructure, and expanding our network across the entire NiSource footprint. As noted in this morning's release, our performance to date has NiSource on pace to deliver earnings at the upper half of our 2011 guidance range of $1.25 to $1.35 per share, non-GAAP. NiSource is also on track to deliver double-digit shareholder returns for the third consecutive year, significantly outperforming the utility indices in the broader markets.

This performance record is the direct result of the continued exceptional execution of an array of core initiatives across each segment of NiSource's businesses. Just a few examples. From a regulatory standpoint, we received approval for a significant rate case settlement in Pennsylvania. We also advanced settlement of our Columbia Gulf rate case, with FERC approval targeted by year end. In Indiana, our watershed electric rate case settlement remains on track for approval late this year or early 2012. Meanwhile, NIPSCO's substantial environmental scrubber investment program at our Schahfer generating station remains on schedule and on budget. And in our Gas Transmission and Storage business, new CEO Jimmy Staton is driving development of an aggressive comprehensive plan to leverage NiSource's unparalleled position in the Marcellus and Utica's shale regions.

With that preface, let's now take a closer look at the quarter, starting with the financial highlights on slide 4. As you can see, we delivered third-quarter net operating earnings, non-GAAP, of about $33 million or $0.11 per share, compared to $0.04 per share in 2010. And our operating earnings increased for the quarter from about $110 million to over $140 million. As I mentioned a moment ago, given our strong year-to-date performance, coupled with our expectations for the balance of the year, we expect that our full-year results will be in the upper half of our non-GAAP earnings range of $1.25 to $1.35 per share for 2011.

Shifting to our individual business unit results, let's start in Indiana with our Electric business, as summarized on slide 5. The pending electric rate case settlement is unquestionably a huge milestone for NIPSCO, its customers, and our many other Indiana stakeholders. This landmark agreement has been, literally, years in the making and sets the stage for NIPSCO to provide customers with reliable, competitively priced electric service while making long-term investments in our infrastructure. This outcome contributes to the economic vitality and the environmental sustainability of Northern Indiana, while earning a fair return on NIPSCO's investment base. As I mentioned earlier, we anticipate receiving approval of the pending settlement by year end or early 2012.

Our Indiana team also continues to make significant progress on efforts to improve operating performance, meet customer needs, and modernize our systems. For example, on the customer front, we received approval for a number of new electric energy efficiency programs that complement our existing natural gas conservation programs and help customers manage their energy costs. Progress also continues on significant environmental upgrades at NIPSCO's Schahfer generating station. As I noted earlier, this work remains on schedule and on budget. As you'll recall, the Schahfer improvements are part of a NIPSCO environmental investment stream over the next 6 to 8 years that will approach $900 million. Taken together, these efforts are helping NIPSCO customers manage energy use, providing long-term environmental and economic benefits for Northern Indiana and supporting stable and sustaining earnings growth.

For the third quarter, our Electric operations reported operating earnings of about $73 million, compared to $80 million for the same period in 2010. Revenues were down about $4 million, primarily reflecting lower environmental spend and associated cost recovery, compared to the third quarter of 2010. Operating expenses increased by about $3 million, primarily due to higher employee and administrative expenses and rate case costs.

Let's now take a look at our NiSource Gas Transmission and Storage Operations, highlighted on slide 6. Jimmy Staton and the team are working aggressively to advance key strategies to enhance system reliability and customer service, develop new growth projects, and leverage NiSource's strategic footprint in emerging shale production areas. For the quarter, NGT&S generated operating earnings of about $68 million, compared to about $76 million in 2010. Net revenues were up about $11 million, thanks to growth projects placed into service, as well as the impact of new Columbia Gulf rates that took effect subject to refund in May. Operating expenses were up $19 million for the quarter, due primarily to an adjustment of an environmental reserve totaling about $11 million.

As I noted earlier, Jimmy and his team are intently focused on developing and deploying a robust comprehensive strategy for meeting customer needs and maximizing the value of our extensive pipeline and storage assets in our attractive positions at Marcellus and Utica shale production regions. In the Marcellus area, our expansion projects continued to produce tangible results. In aggregate, we have added about 1.2 BCF per day of pipeline capacity in the Marcellus shale region. And, as I noted, the team continues to aggressively pursue additional growth projects.

On the leadership front, just yesterday we announced that 2 seasoned industry veterans are joining the NGT&S senior leadership team. Joe Shields, who most recently served as CEO of Millennium Pipeline, is joining NGT&S in the role of Chief Operating Officer for our regulated pipeline and storage businesses reporting to Jimmy. In addition, Steve Warnick, who has served in a variety of executive positions in virtually every sector of the industry, including a stint with Chesapeake Energy, will be joining Joe's senior team as Senior Vice President of Supply and Business Development.

You also may recall that we have announced a number of key leadership adds in our midstream business, the most recent of which is John Howard, who joined the team as Senior Vice President for Strategy and Development. In his new role, John will support the development and execution of the Company's midstream strategy, from mineral rights to project development. In tandem with our midstream efforts, the team is continuing to advance low-risk high-value growth opportunities, including projects to serve gas-fueled electric generation markets. In addition to the Warren County, Virginia, project that we announced earlier this year to serve a 1,300-megawatt new Dominion power-generating facility, the team is in active discussions with a number of large power generators to meet their need for new natural gas infrastructure.

Before moving to our Gas Distribution unit, I would like to touch on a couple of additional matters relating to NGT&S. First, I know there is considerable interest in the extent and potential value of our mineral rights, particularly in the Utica shale region. At this point, what we can share with you is this. We currently estimate that we have between 100,000 and 200,000 acres in the Utica area, associated with our Ohio storage leases, that may have potential for natural gas and/or oil production. We will refine this notional range as we continue our geotechnical and legal analyses, and as the producers continue to delineate the parameters of the play. In addition, I would note that our ultimate mineral rights strategy and value will be heavily influenced by our ongoing discussions with key producers participating in the Utica -- discussions I would describe as constructive, but not yet at a mature stage.

Finally, I want to emphasize that, as we develop and assess our approach and our options for this opportunity, our focus will be on long-term shareholder value, which ultimately is what we are all about. I fully recognize that folks are anxious to receive additional detail and definition on our minerals opportunity. For our part, we are committed to being transparent and timely in providing high-quality reliable information, without premature or speculative observations. At this time, we expect to be in a position to provide further definition in the first quarter of next year. That said, if we have something meaningful to share prior to then, we will certainly do so.

Turning to the second NGT&S-related consideration, as you would expect, we have observed with keen interest the significant level of activity unfolding in the midstream business, including pending M&A transactions involving Southern Union and El Paso. In light of those developments, it might be helpful to take a moment to reiterate our perspective on our NGT&S business, which is very straightforward. We believe it is a great business and a key part of the NiSource portfolio, with tremendous assets, exceptional investment opportunities, invigorated leadership, and the ability to consistently grow earnings and increase value over the long-term for our shareholders. While we have consistently said that we have an open mind when it comes to options and approaches, including alternative structures to ensure we are optimizing the value of NGT&S, we believe that our current plan and structure continue to be the appropriate one for us. Having said that, I can assure you that our team will continue to explore and test how best to continue optimizing our NGT&S business.

Let's now shift to our Gas Distribution group, discussed on slide 7. The hallmark of our Gas Distribution strategy is to work closely with all stakeholders to deliver a broad array of core infrastructure, customer, and regulatory initiatives. Our team's execution of that strategy continues to be nothing short of exceptional. NiSource Gas Distribution operating earnings for the quarter were $8 million, compared to a loss of about $41 million during the same period in 2010.

Revenues were up $24 million, while operating expenses were about $25 million less than last year, primarily as a result of lower depreciation costs from lower depreciation rates at NIPSCO Gas. On the regulatory front, as I noted earlier, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission approved the settlement of Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania's base rate case. The order authorizes an annual revenue increase of about $17 million, effective October 18. The Commission also approved a new rate design incorporating a higher minimum monthly charge, including a fixed customer charge and usage allocation.

On the customer front, our Gas Distribution company has continued to introduce and expand programs to help customers reduce energy usage and manage their monthly bills. For example, Columbia Gas of Ohio filed a proposal with the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio to extend and expand its broad array of energy efficiency programs for an additional 5 years, starting in 2012. Over the life of the proposed programs, COH estimates customers will save up to $300 million. And most notably, our Gas Distribution teams continue to execute on an industry-leading series of long-term infrastructure modernization and replacement programs. For 2011, NGD is on pace to invest at a record level, more than $300 million, to ensure safe and reliable service. These investments are part of the more than $4 billion modernization program we have placed in motion over the past few years. As we have highlighted in prior discussions, these investments are part of our commitment to do the right thing to ensure continued safe, reliable, and responsive service to our customers, while supporting NGD's earnings growth on a long-term sustainable basis.

Before we wrap up, I want to reiterate that we have a strong financial foundation to support our infrastructure investment-driven business strategy. That foundation continues to be our commitment to preserving our investment grade credit rating, maintain the financial flexibility and liquidity necessary to support a disciplined annual capital spend north of $1 billion. At the end of the third quarter, NiSource maintained net available liquidity of over $460 million, as well as a stable investment grade credit rating. We remain on track to invest more than $1.1 billion in capital expenditures this year. I would also note that we continue to monitor the historically attractive debt capital markets for opportunities to reduce financing costs, extend our maturity profile, and manage our liabilities, in particular, our pension obligations. And on the equity side of the balance sheet, given our strong cash position, including the positive impact of bonus depreciation, we are now planning to draw upon the proceeds of our 2010 forward-sale equity offering in the second half of next year.

To wrap up, as this quarter's and our year-to-date results attest, the NiSource team is continuing to build on a strong track record of delivering collaborative regulatory and commercial solutions for our customers, while making disciplined low-risk investments that will grow earnings on a sustainable basis. We are dedicated to maintaining a solid level of performance through the balance of the year and to hit the ground running in 2012. Although much work certainly lies ahead, I'm convinced that we have a compelling game plan and the resources and capabilities to continue to deliver on our commitments, including our commitment to grow [earnings in the 5% zip code] on a long-term sustainable basis. Coupled with a secure, attractive dividend -- one we hope to grow in the not-too-distant future -- we believe this plan creates a compelling proposition for investors. As always, we will communicate with you and all of our stakeholders in a transparent and timely manner through our analyst calls and news releases posted on NiSource.com.

Thank you for participating today and for your ongoing interest and support of NiSource. With that, Lacey, we can now open the call to questions.

Thank you. (Operator Instructions).

Our first question will come from the line of Stephen Maresca with Morgan Stanley. Please proceed.

Hi. Good morning, everybody.

Good morning. How are you?

I'm doing well. Thanks a lot for the color and candor, Bob, on the midstream side. I had a couple of questions just to follow up on that. So, you said 100 to -- 100,000 acres. Now, that's what you have associated with the storage.

Are you still trying to figure out what mineral rights you have? Is that the deal? Or do you know you have mineral rights on that number, that 100,000 to 200,000?

Typically, we have mineral rights associated with that number. But I've got to be clear. We are in the midst of extensive legal geotechnical analysis to prove out to establish precisely what we have with regard to the 100,000 to 200,000 acres.

Okay.

I'll just emphasize again, extensive legal and geotechnical work lies ahead.

Okay. When you are thinking about once you find what exactly it is, what are you thinking about terms of how you deal with it? Should we think about how you handled the Marcellus transaction as something as a blueprint?

Well, that is certainly one approach. But, I would say that we are digging through various approaches to best realize the long-term value of the assets. And as you would expect, and as I mentioned in the prepared remarks, we are intently focused on how to ensure that we optimize our downstream investment opportunities that are associated with those lease positions.

Okay.

More to come.

Okay, absolutely. And you're building up quite the team in midstream, it seems. And you mentioned you added 1.2 BCF of capacity in the Marcellus. And appreciate the thoughts on structure, given all the activity. What would change your mind on structure?

It seems to me that the opportunity set is growing, which is a good thing, but something where you could potentially benefit from another type of vehicle frees up capital, and you could become even more of a kind of dividend growth company. What are you looking at that would change your mind, I guess, going forward?

To your point, we believe that our base business plan is extraordinarily strong. We believe it will be even more strong as we define our minerals position, as we complete the development of this midstream commercial team that Jimmy is compiling. So, we believe we have just a strong, strong prospect. And to deviate from that strong plan it's going to have -- we're going to have to see something that is extraordinarily compelling.

Okay. Final one is, anything that could cause the NIPSCO settlement to slip? And could you remind the magnitude that you think potential impacts on earnings?

Yes, we are literally at the stage of the process where the commission is deliberating. So the hearings, the briefing the process has been completed, so, this is in the commission's office being considered for approval.

As you may recall, the parties to the settlement urged the commission to approve this agreement prior to year end. We believe that the way that we have handled the briefing, the very small amount of opposition, that we have a good shot of getting this approved prior to year end. So, I don't see any blockages at this point. And in terms of ongoing operating earnings lift, the ballpark number is about $40 million pre-tax, is what we are looking at in the way of lift.

Okay. Thanks a lot, everybody.

Yes, and I would just remind you, tagging onto that, that we will be providing 2012 guidance, probably in that January time frame when we announce our earnings for the fourth quarter and the full year. And that will include the results of the NIPSCO rate proceedings.

And our next question will come from the line of Paul Ridzon with KeyBanc. Please proceed.

Thank you for the update on the Utica. That has been on everyone's mind.

Yes, absolutely. We recognize that, and again, Paul, to you and everybody else, we are going to be timely, transparent, and it will be meaningful information. So, stay tuned.

I just had a question. The NGT&S, there was an $11 million remediation charge. Is that behind us? Or, do we need to think there could be more of that coming?

We believe that it's behind us now. Never say never. There may be minor additions required to the reserve over a period of time. But we believe that this, for all intents and purposes, is it. And this relates to a historic PCB cleanup consent decree, so this has been in place for many, many years. And again, we believe it is the tail end of that project.

How long do think it takes discussions with producers to mature? Is this something you can talk about when we potentially meet early next year?

Again, we are going to keep you up on a consistent basis with those discussions. We expect over time that we will be in a position to announce infrastructure investment arrangements with producers. So, it is going to be an ongoing dialogue with the financial community.

Can you -- if you could pick the relationship you are going to have, what kind of interaction is there going to be between the infrastructure and the actual molecules?

I'm sorry, Paul, I'm not following the question.

Do you think you are just going to sell the mineral rights outright, or do you think there is going to be a more complicated relationship with the producers that involves your infrastructure?

It's impossible to speculate on the exact nature of relationships with folks. It is awfully dynamic, and it does vary from case to case. But in my first question and answer, what I made the allusion to was, that any arrangement we might have around minerals, we certainly want to ensure that we are positioned to capture the bulk of the downstream infrastructure investment opportunities. That's our business, investing in infrastructure, we want to capture everything we possibly can.

Thank you very much.

Yes.

And our next question will come from the line of Yves Siegel with Credit Suisse. Please proceed.

Yes. Thanks and good morning.

Good morning.

Just to continue to kick the can down the road --

Are you saying you or me?

No, no, me. Really just 2 questions, as it relates to the Utica. One is, how complicated are the legal issues that you need to -- or perhaps a better way to say, could you elaborate on the scope of the legal issues that you need to evaluate?

Yes. The entire oil and gas legal arena is pretty complicated, so I want to put it in that context. I'm not sure our leases are extraordinary in one way or another. But just to give you, again, perspective, we are talking about thousands of leases over an extended period of time that involve many, many different forms of leases and, therefore, different language.

The leases have been operated differently according to the storage, there's statutory considerations, there are common law considerations, there are equity considerations. So, that gives you a bit of the dimensions that are involved when you undertake this sort of an extensive analysis.

And again, I would emphasize, Yves, from our point of view, this is not really extraordinary when you get into the oil and gas leasing legal arena. But our intent is to fully understand what we own, so we need to go through this very methodically and in a very thorough manner.

Okay. And then the follow-up to that, who owns the leases, though? Would that accrue to the NiSource shareholders? Or do some of those leases belong to your utility customers?

No, these are leases. We are the lessee, and they are held by our operating corporations, Columbia Gas Transmission.

Okay. I got it. Thanks so much.

And then, lastly, not to be nit picky, but I think this is the second time you have discussed a 5% zip code, as opposed to saying 3% to 5% in terms of thinking about earnings growth. So, you know, could I suggest that maybe you are in a new zip code?

The zip code, area code. What we have tried to be consistent about, what we have been saying to the financial community, if we can sustain an annual CapEx spend at $1 billion or so, we would be at the upper part of the 3% to 5% range.

This is now the second year that we have spent $1 billion. Certainly, next year, we would like to be a bit north of that. So, we do believe that we are at a bit of a different zip code, so let's call it 5%, though, for the time being.

Okay. Thanks.

Yes.

And our next question will come from the line of Carl Kirst with BMO Capital. Please proceed.

Thanks. Good morning, everybody.

Hey, Carl. How are you?

Good. So, not to, again, beat a dead horse, but one other question on the Utica. And this was really more a clarification, and these may sort of overlap. But when you mentioned the 100 to 200, I guess I was trying to figure out, because we have both geotechnical and legal issues to work through, are those -- is any one single issue creating an upper or lower bound?

Meaning, gee, we know we have at least 100 that might be prospective, but maybe there's 200 that legally we think is free and clear. And it is the geotechnical work more so than the legal, for instance, that is going to be the primary factor in that delta. Or vice versa? I didn't know if there's any more color on that.

The answer is no.

Okay. And then maybe just one other to follow up on the environmental, on the pipeline side, and just trying to kind of get a sense of the $19 million perhaps in total, because there was a couple of other issues wrapped up in that.

What was just related to the, what you might call embedded personnel? Not the environment, not the severance, but just sort of the embedded piece, maybe, that we should look at as far as recurring.

Carl, I am not following your question. Are you talking about the core environmental reserve adjustment?

Exactly. The $11 million of the $19 million. And I'm just had to figure out now much of a return beyond the $11 million might we see in third quarter of next year.

I would say it is in the $4 million range, if that.

Great. Thanks, guys.

Okay. Thank you.

And our next question will come from the line of Craig Shere with Tuohy Brothers. Please proceed.

Hi, thanks. Just wondering in what counties your potential Ohio Utica mineral rights cover?

I cannot give that to you over the phone. And follow up with Randy Hulen, and we can give you little bit more of a geographical sense on where the storage assets lie.

Okay. I can follow up.

Yes, just do that off-line.

Very good. Thank you.

And our next question will come from the line of Andy Levy with Caris. Please proceed.

Hi, guys. How are you today?

We're doing good. Good morning.

Just kind of to follow up from the last question, can you give us some ideas. Is it at the middle of the state where most of this acreage is? Is it the state of Ohio, I should say, or is it near the Pennsylvania/Ohio border? Any kind of broad geographic locations?

It tends to be midwestern part of Ohio to the eastern border is where these facilities are. And you know, we can make available the Columbia Gas Transmission map, and on that map you will see storage fields, compressor stations, and the like, and that will give you a sense, a general sense of where our facilities are. That's readily available.

But, as I mentioned in other questions, I would caution you not to extrapolate too much at this point, because it would be pure extrapolation and involve a lot of speculation. But, we can clearly -- we can show you where the facilities are situated.

And I guess -- I'm sorry, because I'm on a train -- but I guess you had said that they're basically located are focused on where your storage facilities are? Is that kind of the way to look at it?

Yes. If you look at where our storage fields are sited, that typically is where the leases are, in fact.

Great. You guys are doing a great job.

Thanks so much.

Thank you.

And our next question will come from the line of Faisel Khan with Citi. Please proceed.

Hi, guys. Good morning.

Hey, good morning. How are you?

All right. On the specific storage fields in Ohio, are you -- I mean, is it still possible to lease acreage on top of those storage fields? Or do you have to keep those storage fields sort of separate from -- does the acreage have to be kind of away from those storage fields, so you don't interfere with any of the completed reservoirs of some of those fields?

Yes. You're getting way beyond my area of expertise, but one of the key considerations when you do your work around this assessment is, we have to protect the integrity of the lease operations. That is first and foremost. So again, to go through the geotechnical analysis, the operating analysis, maintaining that integrity is key.

Okay. And can you remind us a little bit of what exactly you guys did in the Marcellus? I know you leased out acreage there from mineral rights or from leases you had in that particular area.

Can you remind us of what was the negotiation that you had with developers or with producers in that area? And what came out of that? Just so we can kind of get an idea of how it will take place going forward?

Yes, we leased about 135,000 acres. Typically, the transactions involved a upfront bonus payment, and we retained a 1/16 royalty, if you will, in production. And in some cases, we may have had rights to proceeds from liquids, or a portion of proceeds. So, that was the general structure of these arrangements. And the counterparties involved, Chesapeake, CNX, and Range.

Okay. And what would you say the contribution to earnings is from those leases that you guys put in place a while ago?

Ballpark, royalty and any proceeds, roughly $10 million pre-tax. A year, and consistent with what I said earlier in the call, our intent and interest is investing in facilities downstream. We considered these leases as being of limited interest so that we can, again, reap the ability to invest downstream, as opposed to the primary interest being creating a revenue stream. It's a nice thing to have, but our intent was to align ourselves with CNX, Chesapeake, and Range in the Marcellus region.

Okay. And I guess you had mentioned that you have a map on the storage fields acquisition. We've seen some of that. But from what your understanding is of what the producers have put out there in terms of what is in the so-called liquids-rich sort of the region of the Utica, do you have an idea if your storage fields sit in that window? Or is it mostly in the dry gas window?

Yes, we are assessing that, and, again, I alluded to this earlier. The producers are still in the midst of delineating that region. I think we have seen some notional delineation. But I think what is notable is, the level of drilling activity in Ohio has still been very, very small.

There have been only a dozen or so wells, if that many, drilled in Ohio, and it has not been expansive in terms of geographical coverage. So, from our perspective, we are very, very early in the stages of understanding what we have got.

Okay. I'll get off. Thanks. Appreciate it.

Thanks.

And our next question will come from the line of Gabriele Sorbara with Caris & Company. Please proceed.

Good morning, gentlemen. Thank you for taking my call.

Just another Utica question here. I realize you guys are very early in determining the acreage that's prospective for the play. But can you provide some thoughts on maybe how you guys plan on getting this -- creating value from this asset? I realize that you hired some new key people. Do they play a role in kind of determining your options in the Utica?

Absolutely. It is going to be Jimmy Staton and his midstream team, coupled with legal and geotechnical advisors, that will, number one, identify what we have and develop the strategy to best optimize the position, and then begin deploying and executing the strategy.

Would you ever consider ringing in a rig, or is this something you would farm out or JV, ultimately?

Just general business philosophy is that we are not a commodity business. We are a fee for infrastructure investment-driven Company. So, we don't anticipate participating in production and commodity sorts of activities.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes our question-and-answer portion of today's call. I would now like to turn the call back over to Bob Skaggs for closing remarks.

Thank you all for your interest and your support. We certainly appreciate it, and we look forward to chatting with you in the not-too-distant future. Have a good day and a good weekend. Thanks.

Thank you for your participation in today's conference. This concludes the presentation. You may now disconnect. Good day, everyone.