Vicor Corp (VICR) 2005 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Good day ladies and gentlemen.

Thank you for your patience and welcome to the Vicor Corporation 2005 year-end results conference call.

My name is Bill and I will be your conference coordinator for today.

At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode.

However, we will be facilitating a question-and-answer session towards the end of today's conference. (OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

As a reminder, today's conference is being recorded for replay purposes.

I will now like to turn the conference over to your host for today's presentation, Mr. Mark Glazer, Chief Financial Officer.

Please proceed sir.

Thank you.

Good afternoon and welcome to Vicor's quarterly conference call.

I am Mark Glazer, Chief Financial Officer, and with me is our CEO, Patrizio Vinciarelli.

Before we begin, we would like to remind all of you that today's conference call is being recorded and is the copyrighted property of Vicor Corporation.

Any rebroadcast, reproduction or other transmission of this conference call in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Vicor is prohibited.

We would also like to remind you that various remarks that we may make during this call about future expectations, trends, plans, and prospects for the Company and its business constitute forward-looking statements for purposes of the Safe Harbor provisions under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

These forward-looking statements merely reflect our current beliefs, expectations, and estimates which we share with you during our quarterly conference calls.

Actual results may differ materially of the result of risks and uncertainties, including those discussed in our quarterly and annual reports filed with the SEC.

A replay of this conference call will be available beginning shortly upon its conclusion through February 22, 2006 by calling 888-286-8010 and using the pass code 8534-2785.

In addition, a replay -- a webcast replay of the conference call will be available on the investor relations section of the Company's website at www.Vicorpower.com\irwebcast beginning shortly upon its conclusion.

However, the information we provide during this call is accurate only as of the date of this call.

We undertake no obligation to update any of the statements made during this call and you should not rely upon them at [the conclusion of this] call.

We're now ready to begin the Q&A portion of our conference.

I would like to ask that you limit yourselves to up to two questions at a time so that everyone gets a chance to ask his or her question.

You may, of course, get back in the queue to ask additional questions.

Bill, we will now take the first question.

(OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

Walter Nasdeo, Ardor Capital.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

I have a question.

You mentioned the productivity improvements that you guys are experiencing now and expect to experience into the future.

I was hoping you could expand on that a little bit and kind of layout how they are developing and what you expect to kind of get to going forward.

We expect the continuation of the pattern that has been in place for a couple of years of [say the -- costed action] for the [PD] improvement.

We don't see any significant change in that pattern over the next couple of quarters.

And it was underlined that our cost reduction initiatives, including both reduction in the material cost, the LIBOR cost and [motivational] the overhead as well as reduce depreciation relating to equipment that has been in place for quite some time.

Okay, and for my second question, what types of customers are you targeting for the initial production of the VI Chip later on this year?

[IM the] information technology, consumer electronics applications -- those are the two primary markets in the short-term.

Ron Opel, Moors & Cabot.

The statement in the press release -- Vicor business units entering next phase with product roadmaps that support significant penetration of new markets -- will this involve several customers?

You say that there -- VI Chips have completed customer qualification.

Is it -- is there more than one customer here?

Yes.

Okay.

And would you say that the application in high-end IT would be mostly powering microprocessors?

I cannot identify, Ron.

I regret, but I cannot identify the application.

Steve Smigie, Raymond James.

I was hoping you might be able to comment a little bit on what you meant by the -- I think you said substantial earning -- substantial profits in 2006.

Is that in terms of EPS?

What level are you indicating there?

We are not going to be making specific predictions with respect to the level of profits for 2006 beyond that which is in the press release.

I think it would be fair to infer from that that we don't view the profits for 2005 as being substantial.

So you should generally expect them to be well above recent profit levels.

Okay.

In terms of revenue you might see from VI products -- is any of that going to be license revenue?

I really cannot comment with respect to that.

But let's put it this way, I think it is in the public domain that we have licenses in place.

And we obviously expect that these licensing relationships as they get to a certain stage will be generating royalties -- significant royalties.

Jim Bartlett, Bartlett Investors.

Could you comment on the -- the three business units -- Vicor legacy chips and Picor and comment on new hiring and the current level headcount?

Yes, well for the [length of the] -- with respect to reorganization, we are faced with a legacy product.

Our legacy business model and with very diversified customer base, counting about 8000 customers around the world.

They tend to be small to medium volume accounts.

We have an infrastructure in the front end of the business and an infrastructure in the back end in terms of a manufacturing process, this mass customization process and so on and so forth, tailored to those kinds of business opportunities.

With VI Chip and with Picor products, there's going to be much more significant opportunities, much higher volume opportunities of different kinds of customers [certifying] a different infrastructure, different channels, different manufacturing strategies.

And this difference is out of the heart of focusing in the separate business units with in effect different charters.

With respect to the hiring, we are continuing to add significant talent particularly recently in the VI Chip business unit.

But that's as far as I can comment at this point in time.

So would you -- infrastructure is set up for those three -- the Picor, the legacy and the VI?

Obviously, the legacy has been set up for a long time.

Right, no, but the split off for the other two.

Picor exists as a separate wholly-owned subsidiary and VI Chip is about to be incorporated.

About to be incorporated.

And have there been salesman hired for the VI Chip area?

All I can tell at this point in time is that we are in the process of hiring talent into the VI Chip business unit.

We've had significant hires recently.

And the headcount at the end of the year?

Mark?

Total headcount for the Company was just under 1100 employees.

That's down about 80 from the end of 2004.

And the CapEx ended up at 8.9 for 2005 and I believe your expectations for 2006 before was about 10 million.

Yes, in the range of anywhere from 10 to 12 million kind of range.

Could you explain to me -- at one point you said 4 million of CapEx would give you 2 to 4 million units of VI Chip.

Do those numbers still carry through or the roughly 10 million?

The same ratio?

Well, let me be clear with respect to the number of units of VI Chips.

Depending on whether the VI Chip in question is what we call a [full-dig] which is the first form of introduced, a [double-dig] which is the format for the PFM or a [half fig] which is a smaller format, the capacity scales pretty much in reverse proportion to the size of the VI Chip.

So there's a great deal of dependency on the actual footprint of the VI Chip, essentially 4 to 1 viability depending on the particular [size].

So if we normalize it to full [dig] just as a unit of production, what we indicated in the past is that the $4 million investments that we made in dedicated VI Chip manufacturing equipment will bring about approximately 2 million units of yearly production.

And that's what we expected to see happening going forward and roughly speaking, that gives you the measure of the leverage between the capital equipment investment and incremental capacity.

Well, if that was the case, so with a 10 million rate roughly 5 million units, if your ASP was roughly $20, you have already put in significant capacity and -- in terms of revenue, and it seems like more than what you're talking about going forward in 2006.

Well, we just [casting the past] the fact that we will need to lead the investment in capacity relative to the growth in revenues with enough leadtime to install capital equipment and get it ready for, production.

So that cycle, it takes somewhere between six and nine months of -- perhaps in some cases it may take a little bit more than that.

Beyond that, we made the point in the past, and I would like to reemphasize it now, we have a very flexible model for scale and capacity with respect to VI Chip.

And that model is not confined to manufacturing in Andover, in our main facility in Andover.

It does entail over time working with licensees and other kinds of partners to supplement capacity to address a variety of opportunities, so there's some significant (indiscernible) between the capital equipment investment and revenues arising from all of these considerations.

Dick Feldman, Monarch Capital.

I have two questions.

First, in previous conference calls you have given some indication as to the breakdown between your legacy business and the two new businesses.

I wonder if you could update us as to how that looked during the fourth quarter in terms of profitability.

In terms of the revenue makeup?

Revenue and/or profit contribution or lack of profit contribution (multiple speakers) in the new businesses.

The revenues as of the fourth quarter of 2005, the revenues from the new business unit is incidental.

Most of the revenues are still from the legacy business which is growing, and they will continue to grow.

And the new business units and the new products are going to lay on top of that.

With respect to profitability, as we discussed in the past, the new business units are not contributing profits.

They are the subject of considerable investment at the rate which is approximately 7 million per quarter.

In other words, absent of those investments, the profitability of the business would be quite a bit higher than it would appear first flush.

But I think as we all recognize, these investments are, we believe, leveraging terms of future growth and profitability, so the new products, the new business units are not at this point in time moneymakers.

It would be next year before we get into a position where we could begin to see net profits out of VI Chip.

Relating to that, as you start to ramp productions in second quarter and the second half of this year, what type of incremental margins should we be thinking about or guiding to with regard to these new products as they compare to the legacy products?

Well, in the short-term, the best way to model would be the revenue margin contribution of the new kinds of products is in terms of -- what is essentially fixed cost structure except for materials.

In other words, we have an infrastructure in place.

We have (indiscernible) equipment with people.

We have overhead.

In the short term, those costs are what they are and they're not going to be affected by processing orders.

So the incremental cost is in the materials for the particular products.

Would they have a material bill relative to their selling price less than your legacy products?

Well, I guess to be clear, these products are by their nature products with a lower cost structure than the legacy bricks.

And to make the comparison meaningful, we would need to look at it in terms of cost per watt because obviously the power level has a good deal to do with that comparison.

You just can't compare a brick with a VI Chip because the functionalities are different, the power levels could be quite different.

But I think a general answer to your question, I can tell you that the cost structure going forward as these products get into volume and the economies of scale begin to apply to them, the cost structure of these products supports a cost level in terms of cents per watt or price per watt to customers that is a good deal more attractive than legacy bricks.

So they are more attractive both to the customers and to Vicor?

We think so, yes.

We know so.

Okay.

Good luck then and I'll get back in the queue.

Thank you.

Ron Opel.

Yes, has there been any prospective customer interest expressed in using VI Chips with these cell microprocessors?

And if so, could you maybe discuss the nature of the interest?

I cannot comment with respect that.

I'm sorry, but you seem to be asking questions that unfortunately I cannot answer.

Very sensititve.

I understand.

It's just too bad but I cannot comment with respect to that.

Is there any update as to whether or not any PC manufacturers, laptop manufacturers are planning architectural changes that would maximize the leverage of your smallest form factor for VI Chips?

We expect to see the PFM being applied in AC adapters as a backwards compatible alternative to existing type of solutions first.

But I can say that there's a good deal of interest with respect to the flexibilities of factorizing the building blocks to advantage to being about further benefits.

But that is still further into the future than other kinds of opportunities that from a (indiscernible) standpoint are backwards compatible.

And is the potential application of VI Chip technology to your traditional markets still a couple of years down the road?

Well, if by that you mean using our existing channels, and I'm now referring to the legacy business unit, to promote VI Chips into (indiscernible) our customers, I would say it's in the shorter time horizon.

But to be clear, those are opportunities that we're not focused on at this point in time.

Our focus has been, contrary to the historical focus with big [type] products, to first bring this enabling technology and products to key customers in key end markets with highly leveraged opportunities and avoid in the short term the proliferation of customer engagements through our classic channels and classic type applications.

But those opportunities are there.

Obviously there's infrastructure in place and those customers are quite interested in applying VI Chips.

But in terms of focusing our effort and maximizing the opportunity, we're recognizing that there's a limited bandwidth to support too much breadth of applications, at least at this point in time.

We chose to focus all of the resources on key engagements.

And so over time, as we build organization, VI Chip organization, add bandwidth at various levels particularly in the front end of the business, we are going to expand the breadth of focus which has been very, very limited.

Great.

Thank you.

Steve Smigie, Raymond James.

I was wondering if you could talk about option expense that you might have starting in Q1?

It's very, very small; fraction of a penny.

And could you also give some discussion about what tax rates might look like throughout '06?

We haven't really analyzed that for '06 yet.

There is still some work we need to do in understanding our net operating loss carryforwards from prior years, so best I can tell you is that will have a better idea for the year at the end of the first quarter.

How about this first quarter?

No, we're still working that issue too.

Okay.

Remember, Steve, under the new rules, each quarter has to stand-alone.

It's not an average for the year anymore, so we have to look at each quarter separately.

Right, I understand.

And could you just give a sort of breakout first gen, second gen in terms of percentage of revenue?

Well, what I can tell you is that the recent growth has been in the second gen.

With respect to legacy business, we see the growth opportunity rising out of second gen bricks and delivery products of those second gen bricks.

Okay, and last question is -- I forgot exactly [where we're at], but I think you talked about having tangible revenue from VI Chip in 2006.

I am just curious; does tangible mean something in the million dollar range or closer to 5 million or something like that?

It would be in the high single digits.

High single digits.

Okay great.

Thank you.

Jim Bartlett, Bartlett Investors.

What can you tell us so far about the manufacturability of VI Chips?

With respect to first the products going to production, we are already at yields in the very high 90s.

High 90s already?

Yes.

That's -- I would imagine you think that is very encouraging.

I will say so, yes.

And what about -- could you just tell us -- the Vic brick, [what] --the status of the product line and how you see it sitting in the -- generating revenues what kind of timeframe?

We have not been very focused on that because to some extent, there is a (indiscernible) line that is (indiscernible) of the legacy customers and the legacy business opportunities.

As I mentioned earlier, the focus has been on major engagements with new kinds of customers in end markets other than communications, which is where Vic bricks would play a role.

But the capability is in place and in due course is part of the broadening of horizons that I was referring to earlier.

We're going to take advantage of that capability.

When you said -- and you said earlier focusing on key engagements, roughly how many key engagements would you say you're pursuing?

A number.

This -- I don't want to give you a specific number, but I can put it this way.

We're pursuing key engagements in the key end markets -- consumer electronics, IT, particularly [IE and] IT, and transportation.

And in each end market, there's more than one significant customer involved.

And just to keep me updated, one of the certainly hot areas has been flat-panel TVs and specifically in the plasma area where you have been focused.

I remember because that was higher power application.

Could you just educate us a little bit about to the advantages of VI Chips in, say, a plasma TV?

Generally speaking, the type of VI Chip that would directly apply to those kinds of applications would be the PFM.

And the figures [I made] that would be relevant in those kind of applications will be density overall, where we can achieve levels of the order of 40, 50 watts per cubic inch for a complete isolated AC/DC front end low-profile.

The ability to package a power system solution in -- with low [height] consistent with the kind of form factor that some of these consumer electronic products require.

And there are other benefits as well that are technical in a variety of different ways, but [from a mid] to small size and low-profile premise are key attributes for some of these applications.

And what would be the negatives or reasons that manufacturers might not be so quick to move to your technology?

Well, I think it would be first to think of some of them.

Obviously any technology that has [disruptive] attributes in terms of it being different, it being new, it relating to the rest of the system in other ways is -- carries with it a certain level of skepticism.

And there are some obstacles, some inertia that needs to be overcome with the novelty.

But the advantages of the technology are compelling and the reception we're getting particularly in the Japanese market in terms of interest in the PFM in particular is quite high.

How far along in the adoption process do you see yourselves?

I think that with respect to opportunities for the PFM, we are really in the very early stages.

But generally speaking, the consumer electronics market, we might see early engagements turning into volume production as early as the [other] part of this year, the very end of this year.

[John Dylan], [DRS].

Congratulations on a great quarter.

My question had to do with your backlog or your -- your book to bill, I should say.

It sounds like you have got significant opportunities coming up and I am wondering why the customers haven't started placing orders for delivery of this quarter and next quarter.

We have had very strong January and February promises also to be quite strong, so while the book to bill in the fourth quarter was below the level of the third quarter, there was seasonality to that.

And we're quite confident with respect to the near-term outlook in terms of growing booking, supporting revenue expansion in turn supporting margin expansion and significantly higher profits.

It sounds like your book to bill is going to be significantly higher than 1.0 for this existing quarter.

Is that correct?

We'll have a tally when the quarter ends, but the yearly in the [cash] (indiscernible) through today are quite encouraging.

Great.

The next question I had is with your IBM deal.

I know you had a published article about how you're doing business with IBM, their servers.

I am wondering how that's going along, and what kind of revenue you would expect to contribute from that and when it may start coming in.

All I can tell you is that the engagement is progressing quite well and that's one of those applications where we have customer qualification and we're moving to the next stage.

Okay, so you're in the qualification stage right now?

We're done with the qualification of the first product, so we are ready for production.

Okay.

So have they started placing orders with you?

I really cannot comment with respect to that.

Thank you Patrizio.

Congratulations again, I appreciate all your hard work.

Dick Feldman, Monarch Capital.

You talked about 90% yields on some of the early VI Chips, which is excellent.

Are using basically just one Fab?

Well, all of the VI Chip products -- let me rephrase that -- virtually all VI Chip set this point in time are made in the Andover facility.

All of the VI Chips made by Vicor are made in Andover.

We have a licensee in Japan that has made VI Chips in Japan, but all of the fabrication activities by Vicor have been in one facility.

So you're making the chips in Andover?

Yes.

What design line width would the chips be?

The VI Chip is what you might call a system in a package.

It's an overmolded assembly that behaves as a component.

If you look at it, it would remind you of a chip such as an Intel microprocessor, but it is a system in a package.

Meaning it contains within it, within the overmolded body, a multiplicity of components including control chips -- these are a variety of controllers made by our Picor subsidiary.

Power semiconductors that we purchased from [affiliated] (indiscernible) our third parties.

So it is an assembly that contains a lot of semiconductor components -- a number of semiconductor components and some other components, ceramic components both for [rice] and ceramic and multilayer ceramic [capacitors].

So these materials came to Andover from our vendors and they're assembled in our facility at (indiscernible) in Andover.

Okay.

And how important, as you want to get these major engagements, is the need for a second source?

Well, it is important and it is something that we are progressing to have in place.

We have a number of very interested parties and we're going in effect to a selection process based on -- this [part] is developing significant business opportunities in their own right to justify their investment in a VI Chip license.

So we are progressing along in respect to have additional VI Chip manufacturing capacity in Asia in a year timeframe, possibly earlier, possibly a little later depending on certain circumstances.

So at the moment, the only two licenses of the two that -- the only licenses are two that you announced publicly?

That's correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

[Vrikash Jayen], Beekman Capital.

I just have one question.

I just wanted to know whether you're actively repurchasing your stock right now.

We've been buying stock.

We bought some stock in the fourth quarter and we bought some stock in the first quarter.

Okay, and what is your plan going forward?

Do you plan to actively repurchase your stock?

In the existing buyback program, we still have approximately --

As of the end of the year we had 19.4 million remaining in the program.

(OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

Ron Opel.

Your comments concerning the strength that you are seeing -- I interpreted that as being in the legacy business here since the beginning of the year.

Can that be seen as a sign that the legacy business may do better in 2006 in terms of growth than 2005?

And is there improving visibility?

Well, I think if you look at 2005 versus 2004 the overall growth was very small.

If you look at Q4 2005 versus Q4 2004, the growth was better and that's the kind of growth that we see coming in 2006 for the legacy business.

Okay.

And is there continuing solid or strong interest from automotive potential VI Chip customers?

And is that a possibility still for -- to be contributor in 2007?

I think I mentioned in the past that those kinds of engagements, which we are seeing some more instances, are very long-term.

These are applications that are in terms of volume production years out, because the gestation period in terms of developing automotive systems or related type of applications in the transportation market let's say, tend to have significantly longer leadtimes than consumer electronic or communications or industrial markets and so on and so forth.

So you're looking at 2008, 2009 timeframes in terms of those kinds of opportunities.

Given that, is there [sufficient] opportunity in the IT and consumer electronics markets so that the slope of VI Chip's (indiscernible) volume could steepen significantly vis-a-vis the volume you're expecting in 2006?

Yes.

We are obviously looking to balance a variety of interests.

We want to develop applications in automotive transportation because in the long-term, that market is perhaps the largest market.

But recognizing there is a very long gestation period, it is not a market for rapid short-term growth.

And for that reason, it is only taking a certain -- a [duly] small fraction of our focus [and] investment resources, and for that reason we have been primarily focused in other kinds of applications that are shorter fuse.

And consumer electronics and applications, information technology and some other kinds of applications in other markets fit that characteristic.

So we are looking at a combination of opportunities, some that are short-term and some that are longer-term.

And we're looking at this opportunity trying to maximize synergy with developments in terms of VI Chip that can be [reacted] to address the different needs of these different markets, leveraging the capability of the VI Chip as a power component in terms of its flexibility and adaptability to a variety of different environments, application environments.

Steve Smigie, Raymond James.

I apologize if I missed this, but you mentioned here obviously VI Chip and Picor entering the next phase.

I was wondering if you could talk about what products you might expect to see out of Picor in the next phase this year.

There are some very exciting products.

There are various stages of development or near completion of development, but I'm not going to anticipate introduction that needs to be made by the Picor team at the right time, so all I can tell you at this point in time is that given the visibility I have I think there is some great opportunities in the making.

Okay.

But would they be power related and [disruptive] as well?

You can count on that.

It is leveraging the general technology base that we have collectively been developing over the last several years.

And in effect, we [sadly] needed to provide capabilities in related areas where there can be synergy in terms of both power possessing applications, actual power components that convert one voltage to another voltage, as well as other kinds of power management products that play ancillary roles within -- with all power systems.

Okay.

Just to turn back to an earlier question, I think you mentioned -- what is the actual R&D spending on VI Chip?

Did you say it was actually 7 million (indiscernible)?

Yes, collectively between the VI Chip and Picor R&D we are spending at a rate of approximately 7 million per quarter.

Okay.

Because I guess I was just trying to get a little bit at the profitability comment you made about a 7 on VI Chip, so some of it is being spent on Picor and I don't know how much -- let's just say half, so that would mean even if you're spending 3.5 million a quarter on a VI Chip that would be 14 million there, plus a couple million of CapEx on that.

So you're saying you'd be 16 million -- at least 16 million of revenue in VI Chip in 2007, obviously to become profitable (indiscernible) have to be something more than that.

Is that -- am I doing the math right?

If I were to answer your question, I will probably get myself into trouble one way or another so I am not going to do that.

We're not at a point where we want to get too specific with respect to that, but I think the upside is significant rather than the kinds of numbers you're suggesting.

Ned Hamarat, Beekman Capital.

At what point will the team at Picor and/or be -- and since you're thinking about incorporating the VI group as well, when will they be stand-alone enough that they will comment separately from Vicor's comments?

I think that's still sometime in the future, but we're setting things up in such a way that these entities will have the ability to stand on their own feet as independent entities, but I think your stock will listen to me with respect to them for a little while longer.

So when the time comes, the time will come.

But it's still some distance in the future.

(OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

Dick Feldman, Monarch Capital.

I wonder if you could explain the dividend policy and at the same time your share repurchase and how do you decide between these two uses of funds?

Well, in either case, we're dealing with the reality that we are generating cash and we expect to be generating more cash as we increase the level of profitability.

While we have tremendous opportunities with the new products, our strategy going forward will differ from the strategy that we had with a second gen where [in effect] we invested $100 million in capital equipment to put the infrastructure in place to build second gen products in Andover.

As I commented earlier, the strategy with VI Chips is going to be more global, more granular, more leveraging in terms of involving other parties.

And last but not least we are not in terms of our business model, we have not and don't anticipate we're going to be interested in using funds for acquisitions.

We see the opportunity for (indiscernible) growth to be a better opportunity for a variety of reasons.

So given all of that, this prospect for adding to the cash level of and not having a use for it that we would regard as leverage enough to justify not sharing that cash with our shareholders.

We don't believe there is a need to have too much cash beyond that which we would [release] or need it to finance the growth of the Company.

And for those reasons, dividends and share buybacks are part of the mix to use the cash.

And so would I be putting words in your mouth to say even if the work there were to be a rapid ramp up at some point in your new products, their inherent profitability would be sufficient that you still would be generating significant excess cash?

I think I would put it in slightly different terms.

I would say that it's more an issue of manufacturing [standards than] profitability because no matter how high the profitability, with a very fast ramp, the business would be consuming cash if the strategy were to make the products in-house or to facilities that are financed directly by us.

But as I mentioned earlier, that's not the strategy.

While we're going to have a significant role as a manufacture of the products, particularly in the early going, we expect to scale up manufacturing in part, in significant part indirectly through third parties.

And that diminishes the dependency on a cash [hoard].

It's of course -- the capital equipment investment to make the product.

I take it that these people would be paying you a licensee fee.

Well, if they're licensees they would be paying us royalties.

If they're subcontracting after this, they might sell us product at an attractive price or they might sell our customers products.

So it depends on the particular nature of the relationship, but all these kinds of relationships are -- I think partly [make up] with respect to the business model for VI Chip going forward.

Thank you.

Thank you very much sir. (OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS).

We'll take one more question if there is one.

And at this time, actually we don't have any more questions, sir.

Okay.

Well I want to thank you all for participating and we'll be talking to you again at the end of the first quarter around mid to late April.

Thank you.

Thank you very much sir and thank you ladies and gentlemen for your participation in today's conference call.

This concludes your presentation.

You may now disconnect.

Have a good day.