Welcome to the teleconference for the third quarter results. We would like to keep this conference at 45 minutes due to other arrangements throughout the day. I will hand over immediately to Annika for the introduction.
Okay. Welcome to the presentation of the third quarter of 2016. Operating profit SEK 5.2 billion. Slide two. Even though market conditions continue to be challenging, both for our customers as well as for ourselves, we saw a small increase in activity at the end of the quarter. Market uncertainty after Brexit continued into the third quarter and Swedish short-term interest rates fell further. Activity increased towards the end of the quarter, when we saw stronger demand for loans and also better stock market climate. We continue to have a strong balance sheet as the quality even this quarter is very good. On slide three, you can see that this quarter we had no one-off item. To make it easier to follow our underlying results, I will just briefly address the non-recurring item that we've had in the recent quarter.
Let's remember that in the second quarter of this year, we realized the Baltic part of Visa, SEK 520 million came in under other income. In the first quarter of this year, we had a write-down of the goodwill after our reorganization. We are now organized on the basis of customer segments, we had restructuring effects due to that totaling of SEK 5.9 billion. During the second quarter 2015, we also had a negative effect from being denied the right to deduct withholding tax of SEK 900 million in Switzerland. For simplicity, I will now continue presenting the results of the underlying operational results i.e., excluding these one-off items on those plus and minus. In a challenging business environment, income declined by 5% compared to the first nine months last year. Operating expenses dropped 1% and operating profit fell 9% compared to last year to SEK 14.7 billion.
Return on equity came to 11.2% and our common equity Tier 1 capital ratio was 18.6%. It was 17.8% a year ago. On page four, if we take a look at the third quarter standalone revenues increased by 2% versus the second quarter of this year, which is quite unusual. Costs were unchanged and the operating profit increased by 4%. Return on equity was 12.3% for the quarter alone. In other words, a pretty good Q3 for SEB. I will now just comment on the different line items. On page five, you see NII decreased 3% compared with the first nine months of last year, but was unchanged from the second quarter this year. Also, customer-driven NII was unchanged from the previous quarter. Currency-adjusted lending volumes increased in all customer segments by a totaling of SEK 28 billion in the third quarter, even though Large Corporates investment-driven loan demand remains low.
In addition, we have support from slightly better lending margins. The positive effects within lending were offset by the negative repo rate and also that STIBOR dropped further in the quarter, was down 8 basis points in Q3, which put pressure on deposit margins and markets and treasuries' NII. Non-customer-driven NII weakened slightly further quarter-on-quarter. On page six, you see NFI commission. Net fee and commission income fell by 14% for the first nine months and 1% against the previous quarter. The reason is primarily that both stock prices and business activity are lower this year compared to the first nine months of 2015. In addition, our revenue from so-called stock lending operations has declined as we have adapted to the new liquidity and capital regulations. The positive stock market climate in the third quarter increased managed asset volumes in the quarter.
Commissions from payments and cards also increased compared to the second quarter. The underlying net result of financial transactions increased by 7% compared with the first nine months of last year. The increase would have been greater if adjusted for market valuations that we had working against us this year. In the first nine months, the difference is just over SEK 900 million. Compared with the previous quarter, the effects were more than SEK 100 million better, even though they remained negative in the quarter, and that is on page seven. The results rose 11% against the second quarter 2016. The quarter was characterized by higher activity in the aftermath of Brexit, which meant that customers were active on the fixed income and foreign exchange side.
As we said in the last two quarters, our strong NFI income is proof that our customer-driven business model shows good results in shaky markets, even while those shaky markets often lead to lower corporate activity, which affects commissions negatively. This is another example of the importance of our well-diversified business mix. You need to look at all three lines. On slide eight, you see the first nine months of the new three-year plan has been very challenging as market conditions have changed. We are closely monitoring international developments and how our customers are reacting. We have for many years now worked to reduce underlying expenses. We do this while at the same time investing around SEK 2 billion per year in pure IT development. As I said earlier, this has been held under our cost ceiling. I will show some examples of this later on.
On page nine, with the Large Corporates and Financial Institutions, the result is down by 18% excluding one-off effects compared with the first nine months of last year. Major reason for this is the negative market valuation I mentioned earlier. Customer demand for risk management services has been strong in all asset classes. The number of business transactions were few. Credit demand has been held back by uncertainty. However, we now see an increase in lending demand in the third quarter, driven by a number of major transactions. Currency-adjusted lending increased by SEK 19 billion in the quarter. Apart from the higher activity after Brexit, activities within financial institutions have been rather low. The results for the third quarter amounted to SEK 2.1 billion, of which was 9% lower than the second quarter of this year. Asset quality remains very good.
The division corporate and private customers in Sweden adversely affected by the negative interest rates as well as the new regulation on interchange fees on the credit card side. Operating profit dropped 2% versus the first nine months of last year, but were up 1% from the previous quarter. Even here, credit quality is good. On the corporate side, we continue to see that both the number of customers and loan volumes increase. I will come back to that. Since last summer, we have grown more slowly in mortgages. Currently, we're growing by a bit more than 2% annually versus 8% for the market as a whole. Looking at the savings area, we see that customers selected more strategy and equity funds again. In private banking, we continue to attract new net inflows of capital, SEK 25 billion so far this year.
On page 10, the Baltics show a better result versus last year, increasing by 5%, and we are seeing continued increase in customer activity and loan demand in all three countries and for both business and for individuals. We can clearly see now that the Baltic companies have been able to mitigate the impact of the Russian sanctions. Asset quality remains strong, and return on equity for the division is close to 20%. Life and investment management report slightly lower operating profit, down 4% against the first nine months of 2015. Here, the stock market downturn during the year hits, of course, asset values and both base commission and performance-based revenues decrease. Stockholm stock exchange turned upwards again during this quarter, which also, of course, helped asset under management.
Our fund ratings from Morningstar have continued to improve, and we do maintain our leading position among the major players. Life business performance increases. We are the only bank with a complete savings offering, which is appreciated by our customers. For us, it was therefore a significant token to now also be a selectable option within the traditional insurance with the SAF-LO agreement on the occupational pension side. In total, weighted new sales in Life accounted to SEK 40 billion in 2016, and here we are clearly building future value. Page 11. In addition to the growth, the new business plan focusing on transformation with three main components, customer experience and service, skills development, as well as digitization and automation, and also for our internal processes. This year, we have completed a number of major investments.
IT investments worth about SEK 2.5 billion over the past four years to further lift our customer service. We have tried to move away from very large IT projects which create complexity and instead work much more agile and make smaller launches more frequently and faster. This will now finally be possible to accelerate further when these huge projects are finally implemented. Examples include an entirely new custody platform, a completely new fund management system, a brand-new FX risk management system, and a complete new private banking platform in Norway. We also tested blockchain technology on internal transfers via a service called Ripple. Just the other week, we launched our first MP, Amelia, who is based on artificial intelligence. Digitization is really starting to take shape and opens up new ways to enhance customer experience.
Turning to capital ratios on page 12, our common equity Tier 1 capital ratio was 18.6% compared with 17.8% a year ago and 18.7% last quarter. The ratio decreases slightly between quarters due mainly to risk-weighted assets having increased in the quarter. Lending volumes grew partly because the Swedish krona has weakened against the euro and the US dollar. If we calculate in the same way as the Swedish FSA does, our capital requirement totals of 16.1% in Q3. On top of this, we can add 0.8% for changes in the maturity flow and corporate risk weights, which means that we end up at 16.9% at the end of Q3, and that means that our buffer is 1.7%. Continuing the balance sheet on page 13, credit quality remains very good and the loan loss ratio is seven basis points for the first nine months.
We still have around a quarter of our balance sheet in liquidity reserves. To round up before taking your questions, customer expectations and behavior is changing rapidly. Our starting point is to always have the relevant products and services for our customers. We want satisfied customers who feel we are creating value for them, and that means we do that by service them the best possible way. In the current operating environment, the need for resilience and for well-diversified business mix increases. SEB has that resilience, and we're also well-positioned to support our customers. I think we're all now ready to take your questions. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the Q&A session. If you have a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you change your mind and wish to withdraw your question, you can press the hash key. Again, that's star one for any questions. Your first question today is from the line of Matti Ahokas from Danske Bank. Please go ahead.
Yes, good afternoon. Two questions, please. Firstly, on the large corporate division, there's been a substantial growth in the lending, especially during this year, but the margins have decreased quite a lot. Could you clarify a bit what's going on here? Is it a question of a mix effect or why has the margin come down so much? Question number 2 is on the commission income. The performance-based asset management fees have been at the lower level for now for quite some quarters. Is this a kind of general trend we're seeing or is it just bad luck that the performance fees just didn't come in? Thanks.
Matti, I think on the first question there on the NII in LCFI, what you're seeing is really a little bit of a anomaly in a way. With the way the NII works in LCFI is that you have corresponding vessels between NII and NFI to a large extent, depending on the anatomy of the transactions done in the quarter. I agree with you, it looks a little bit odd that as volumes grow and we hold margins well on the lending side, it doesn't appear that way because some of the effects come through on the NFI line. That's one component. It's the markets deal flow, a customer-driven deal flow comes through in NFI, which is the compensating effect.
Another one to think about is that we talked about in the past that we've sort of, what should I say, compensated the divisions a little bit through the internal transfer pricing to hold our and increase our deposit volumes. We've done, I would say, so well on that we scale that back a little bit. That's the other effect causing that. On the second question, which I think related to performance fees, right. I think it's just a result of previous high water marks being so strong that it's in this stock market environment it's difficult to surpass those.
Fair enough. Great. Thanks.
Thank you very much. The next question is from Johan Ekblom from Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Thank you very much. Just a couple of things. If we can continue first on the corporate side. You mentioned in the press conference this morning and also in the report that there are some signs that credit demand is picking up. Can you talk a little bit more about where you're seeing this? You mentioned that it's more domestically focused. Is it on the SME or the large corporate side? Sticking with the corporate side, last quarter we spoke at length about repricing and/or expected repricing on the back of this increase in capital requirements. Are you seeing that in the conversations you're having with corporates today, that there has been a repricing in the market? Is this something that we should start to see already in Q4, or is this a much more long-term trend?
Finally, just on the cost cap, you mentioned as well this morning that you're clearly running well below, but historically you've been good at incorporating unforeseen charges within the cost cap. You alluded to the bank tax. Is that how we should think about it, that you're keeping some room there for this bank tax and maybe post some other mitigating actions that don't necessarily drive higher costs overall if we think about 2018?
Annika here. I can start with the last one regarding the cost ceiling. At the moment it seems like we have a lot of room for maneuver, and that's been actually very much on purpose because we also see slow but steadily FTEs are leaving the bank, which we have. We also are forecasting. We also think that the higher bank tax. We also know that taking care of all these IT launches with the licenses in the future, these investments will also be done. All of that is thought to come in below the 22. You have the 22 ceiling, and we try to make sure that the SEK 700 million in extra tax is within that ceiling. We try to do as much as we can at all times to keep the ceiling of 22.
We hope that we can also make room for the SEK 700 within the ceiling. You asked about corporate lending. When we look at corporate and private, the SMEs and mid-corporate in Sweden, the less international you are and the more domestic you are, the better the climate has been. We've been very active there. We've also been very active in construction companies, the construction in Sweden, and that's something we promised domestically, saying that when construction starts, we as banks must be able to support. One can clearly see that the market grew with 4% when it comes to corporate domestic sector or corporate, and we grew with 11%. We're really keeping that promise, and we've been very active in that area. Do you want to add something, Jan Erik?
No, I think maybe in relation to the pricing power that you asked about from the, whether we're going to offload the cost for increased regulation, the answer is yes. We're certainly going to do our best to do that. I think as we move from the very largest corporates, it's going to be easier and quicker to do it as you move down to mid corporate and SMEs. On the larger corporates, you have an international market price, and I think it's going to take a little bit longer to do that. That repricing, we will certainly attempt to start now in Q4 when we have the net addition expense on our books.
Perfect. That was all very clear. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Your next question today is from the line of Yafei Tian from Citi. Please go ahead.
Thank you for taking the question. I have a question more on the Baltic business. Obviously, it's very strong this quarter. I was thinking, are you taking market share or is this underlying strong economy there in the Baltics, and how do you see this developing going forward? I think in the press interview that Annika mentioned, that you think that none of the banks have sufficient capital, and you still think that there are uncertainties. Could you please explain what are the uncertainties that is yet to be clarified for yourself? Thank you so much.
In the Baltics, we of course see genuine growth. We also see, of course, the effects are coming out also. Of course, we are gaining from the uncertainty a little bit about the new bank of DNB Nordea. Of course, a lot of customers are thinking about where is my long-term home at the moment, and of course, we are very active there as well. I think a little bit of both. I think we are taking a little bit of market share, but we're doing it carefully. We're definitely growing, in particular, I would say Lithuania and Estonia, while a little bit slower in Latvia.
On the second question relating to regulatory uncertainty, there isn't so much of that left if we stay with the Swedish regulator for a minute. What they have now done is to finalize the SREP process. We have, as a result of that, the 80 basis points addition that Annika talked about earlier. They still include an element of standardized surcharge at this point, and the part of the process with the regulator is to hand in a couple of models that need to be approved, hopefully before year-end. I can't guarantee that. That's in the regulator's hands. I'm hoping that we will have approval on those models before year-end, and in which case the 80 basis points may become lower than that. We'll just see how much lower. That remains to be seen. Stay tuned for an update on that at year-end.
Other than the model approval, my impression is now with all the N factor and PD factor, 80 basis points being announced, the regulatory uncertainty is much lower than we went into beginning of the year. I was just thinking from a big picture point of view, are there any other pending regulations that we should-
No, I think if you follow on the press calls, there's also the discussion regarding Basel IV, because I do think that is a big unknown. I think we said in Sweden, depending on if that one grows in, will the Finansinspektionen then look at other pillars that they could work with, other buffers that might be changed. It is a big known actually. It depends on who you talk to, but if you would have heard, of course, the head of the Basel Committee talking, of course you have a lot of respect for that process as well. We will see how this plays out. That one is a big unknown, even though we think it's far ahead and it will take some time, and most out of the Swedish regulator is already out there. We are more than a Swedish bank.
We also have to compete outside Sweden.
Yeah. I'm sorry to extend this answer even more, I think just to add on to what Annika is saying, I think it is a big testing buffer for potentially what they're suggesting. I think one has to also factor in the time horizon, as you say, Annika, and the fact that before that has filtered through the European Commission and the Swedish or any national legislation, a number of years will have passed. I think the time available for banks to adjust their business models and for regulators to compensate through Pillar 2 arrangements will be there. I think we are actually fine.
Okay. That's very clear. Thank you so much.
Thank you very much. The next question today comes from the line of Jan Wolter from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead.
Hi, Jan Wolter here, Credit Suisse. Thanks for taking the questions. Just a couple of follow-ups after the conference in Stockholm this morning here. You mentioned activity has been picking up. Just do you feel that there is a larger shift in any way in fundamentals leading to a sustained increase in activity levels? I think you comment on better levels, especially at the end of the quarter. That's my first question. The second, on capitalization, I think the bank is comfortably above new regulatory requirements here, and we've had now the corporate risk weight, so it's clarity on that. I know it's a board decision, but is this time to act or think about excess capitalization? Is that too early? Thank you.
Well, if you ask me, I think to talk about excess capital, it is too early. I think so. I just think we are comfortably above our own buffer, including actually what the Finansinspektionen is demanding from us. The year has not ended yet, and we need to see a bit more about that. Now, Jan Erik looks very worried, so I'll ask him to add on some comments here before I say too much.
I don't look worried at all. I look very comfortable with that answer.
Thank you. The question around if you feel there is a larger shift fundamentally leading to a sustained increase in corporate activity levels based on what you've seen here.
No, I don't think you can say that yet. I think what we did see, of course, we have now created some of our own where we can track where we are active, and we can see that everything that is moving, actually SEB has had some kind of lead position into that, and that is what we are tracking. Unfortunately, it's not that much. There have been some bigger ones. I think actually there is still a lot about confidence, but it's still a lot about worry, about negative interest rates and where is Europe heading and what is going on. On the M&A side, for example, we haven't really seen a lot. We are working on a lot of stuff, as usual. Of course you don't know if that would materialize. I think we need a little bit more self-confidence.
I think we feel actually that we could do more, and I think at the same time, the business has not been that active. We are investing all our time, in particular now, I think in organizing ourselves up to customer segments. We can see that we have a completely different agenda, the way we talk to our customers and understand their needs. I'm quite optimistic that we can take the business that is out there, but we just need a little bit of activity. September was actually better, and that was what I tried to say on the press conference, that the activity did pick up in September. If that emanates all the way into Q4, it's too early to tell.
Okay. Many thanks for your help.
You're welcome.
As a reminder, it's star and one if you do have a question. The next in line is from the line of Anton Kryachok from UBS. Please go ahead, sir.
Good afternoon. Thank you for the presentation. A couple of quick questions, please. Firstly, to come back on the net interest income in the large corporate division. Going forward, would you expect a little bit of rebalancing between NII and NFI in the division to happen in Q4 and then maybe Q1 next year? The second question, please, on dividends. Can you remind us whether you're still committed to having growing DPS year-on-year? What is a growing DPS for you? By how much do you think it needs to grow in order to satisfy your requirements for progressive cash return? Finally, third question, or rather clarification, please, on the effects of the bank tax. Did I get you right that you're planning basically to include the bank tax within the cost cap and the cost cap doesn't move? Thank you.
Anton, on the first question on NII, I think, yes. I think you should probably see a little bit of rebounding for one more certain than the other. I think on the treasury side, the fact that we have been reducing the subsidization of deposit gathering in LCFI, that effect will not be there to the same extent next time around. The other component, which is basically the trading patterns in markets, is more difficult to predict. I would probably put my money on an improvement on that line for next time around. On the DPS question, I think even if we said just now that we don't have excess capital in the traditional sense of thinking about that, the ambition is certainly in the bank to have a growing DPS stream.
We've always been quite clear on that. We've delivered that for a long period of years, and that ambition stays the same. How much we can do and the discussion around that is something that we will need to leave to the board to think long and hard about. No change in ambition there, of course. On the bank tax question, yes, you did hear us right, that we aim to cover the bank tax increase by SEK 700 million in the SEK 22 billion cap. We're aiming to absorb that through internal efficiency.
Thank you. That's very clear.
Thank you very much. The next question is from the line of Omar Keenan from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thank you very much for taking the question. I just had a follow-up question on net interest income. I was hoping to explore after a good increase in mortgage margin, what the front versus back book dynamic is on mortgages. Secondly, what level of corporate repricing you think is required to maintain ROEs for the 80 basis point impact of higher corporate risk weights? Do you think that will be achievable in the next two years? The second part of my question, also on net interest income, it's a little bit more short-term in nature, is what do you think the quarterly ambition, I guess, is over the next couple of quarters? It feels like, borrowing any more central bank rate cuts, we're more or less done with headwinds from short-term rates, which I guess is always a dangerous thing to say.
I guess going forward from here, you mentioned that the positives are volume growth, and maybe a bit more mortgage margin, and the change in how you treat the deposit costs in the division. Against that, I guess there's the higher resolution fee of SEK 600 million annualized or SEK 150 million a quarter. Do you think all the positives can offset that SEK 150 million headwind? Thank you.
Well, Omar, on the mortgages, the only number we actually talk about is the back book, and that's at 119 basis points. The same truth is there that new sales are quite a bit above that, and the rollover rates are also higher than the back book rates. I won't give you numbers on those, but what I would say is that the repricing of the back book will continue for, I think, certainly for another year. We may not be able to keep the pace we've done this year, which will be, I think, very close to 20 basis points. We've done 16 in nine months. It will certainly be continuing for another year. On that second question on how much do we need to reprice to cover for the 80 basis points?
Well, let's see where those 80 basis points end up first, I think. Hopefully through the model influence approvals and the buffer on risk-weighted assets that we could decide at last year-end, we can bring that number down. In the meantime, we will start to reprice to cover for standardization of the risk rates. The two ends will probably meet at some point here in the future, and we'll just have to see when. We hope those two will be positive, I think. On the quarterly ambition and the signaling of what's going on, I think especially if we're just seeing a more sustained pattern develop in that loan demand is a little bit slower, fee generation is a little bit slower, but customer-driven trading is strong.
I think we're just seeing how that's continuing, and I think what's going to change that may be in a few weeks time when we're past the U.S. election. Perhaps a little bit further down the road, the U.S. might even increase its interest rates. Those two things are, I think, fairly important milestones that the market gets behind rather than in front of it. Those things, I think, can change sentiment a little bit. On the resolution fund fee, we're going to have to carry It's more like SEK 700, SEK 750 or more than SEK 600 a year in addition, unfortunately. We will certainly do our best to cover for that and for other surcharges loaded onto the bank, including bank tax and non-deductibility for subordinated debt interest and the like.
Okay. How easy is it to reprice for the resolution fund fee?
Well-
I guess because. Yeah. On a quarterly level, it's SEK 150 million per quarter or maybe a bit more than that. Is it easy to pass that price on? Who should pay the price?
It's never easy. I don't think it's easy at all. It's another cost of doing business. I think there are all sorts of charges that are being put onto the financial sector from the authorities here. There are variations that we're seeing here. The bank tax is actually a production. It's a cost of producing financial services in Sweden, that is the cost of owning here for industry. That's something that I think any industry wants to try to compensate for, financial industry is no different. Whether we call it resolution fund fees or bank tax, it's all the same. I look at the resolution fund fee actually as tax. It goes straight into the state budget.
Thank you very much. Due to time constraints, could we please ask the remaining participants to ask just one question only? Thank you very much. The next in line is Riccardo Rovere from Mediobanca. Please go ahead.
Yes, thanks. Thanks for taking my question. Just one from my side. When it comes to Basel IV, in whatever forms it will be adopted in Europe, do you think the Swedish regulator will opt for a softer or a harsher version of whatever is going to be approved in Basel?
We think it's going to be softer, Riccardo. In fact, I think the Swedish regulator has been fairly open on that. If it becomes harsher versions of Basel IV, they will be willing to look at the ability of Basel III introduced.
Very clear. Thank you.
Okay. The next question is from Daniel Dosoi from JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thanks for taking the question. Just have one on deposit margin. When it comes to the SEK 400 billion or so of deposits that you have within Large Corporates and Financial Institutions, on what proportion of those deposits are you currently charging negative rates? Is there any scope to improve margins here? I don't know, by either widening the net or increasing the charge. Thank you.
I think, Daniel, the number of deposits in the large corporate and financial institutions is to a small extent in Swedish krona because there's a lot of in other foreign currencies.
We are charging on, I would say, the predominantly part of the Swedish krona-based deposits within LC and FI. There's more mitigation on the sensitivity. We also have the floor working in our favor on the asset side. That's how it looks.
On almost all Swedish krona deposits. Did I hear that correctly?
For the large corporate and financial institutions, yes, we have some kind of compensation. I'm not saying that we're compensating fully.
Yeah.
I'm also saying that the total amount of Swedish krona deposit in that division is substantially lower than in the other parts of the bank.
Okay. Ballpark, 50%, 60%, 70% of deposits? Can you give any?
We haven't disclosed the details on that deposit base.
Okay, fine. Thanks very much.
Thank you very much. Our last question today is from the line of Jacob Kruse from Autonomous Research. Please go ahead, Mr. Kruse.
Hi. Thank you. I just wanted to ask, the Swedish bank tax, does that change the way you look at your operations in terms of where you put your staff and back office technology, et cetera? Do you think you will just have to live with the situation as it is and work with your cost in other areas? Thank you.
I think the Swedish Bankers' Association is out very actively trying to lob this into exactly what you are after. That, of course, if you have a special tax just focusing on people within the banking and financial industry, we have asked the Copenhagen Economics to calculate on that and found out that we're talking 16,500 jobs at stake, of which 7,200 in the large banks. Of course, this will lead to that FTEs that anyway is on its way down, will go down in a much faster pace. I guess we're all looking at outsourcing. We're all looking at the digitization and processes in a much faster pace than we have done it before. I guess for Sweden, then the tax that they hope to get might not be the tax because there will be a lot of redundancies.
I think actually it's a very tough thing to come out with now trying to do this very easy way. I guess you should compare banks with the media sector and see how quickly it goes. Hopefully they will take some impressions from that. We definitely argue on what we can see from external firms calculating this will lead to jobs over approximately 16,500 jobs that will be gone from Sweden.
Is that consistent with you? If you are, let's say, 20% of the Swedish banking market, is that consistent with how you look at your staff levels?
Yeah, very much so, I think.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Okay. Thank you everyone for this telephone conference.
I'm very sorry that we have some flights to catch, but thank you.
Thanks.
Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude our conference for today. Thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect your lines.