American Midstream Partners LP Management Discusses Q2 2013 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

| About: American Midstream (AMID)

American Midstream Partners LP (NYSE:AMID)

Q2 2013 Earnings Call

August 14, 2013 10:00 am ET


Kyle Quackenbush

Stephen W. Bergstrom - Executive Chairman of American Midstream Gp Llc, Chief Executive Officer of American Midstream Gp Llc and President of American Midstream Gp Llc

Daniel C. Campbell - Chief Financial Officer of American Midstream GP, LLC and Senior Vice President of American Midstream GP, LLC


Edward Rowe

Michael J. Blum - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

James Jampel


Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Q2 2013 American Midstream Partners, LP Earnings Conference Call. My name is Leanne, and I'll be your operator for today. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this call is being recorded for replay purposes.

I would now like to turn the call over to Kyle Quackenbush. Please go ahead.

Kyle Quackenbush

Thank you, Leanne. Good morning, and welcome to the Second Quarter 2013 Investor Call for American Midstream Partners.

Before we start, I'd like to mention that our earnings release can be accessed at the Investor Relations page of our website. Our 10-Q will be filed with the SEC today and will also available on our website. A replay of this call will be available later today until September 14.

Leading the call today are Steve Bergstrom, Executive Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Dan Campbell, Chief Financial Officer. Matt Rowland, our Chief Operating Officer, is also on the call. Steve and Dan will be discussing our results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2013. Afterwards, we will open up the call for your questions.

We would like to remind you to take note of the cautionary language regarding forward-looking statements contained in the press release. That same language applies to the statements made in today's conference call. This call will contain time-sensitive information, as well as forward-looking statements, which are only accurate as of today, August 14, 2013. American Midstream Partners expressly disclaims any obligation to update or amend the information contained in this conference call to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after today's date, except as required by applicable law. For a complete list of the risks and uncertainties that may affect future performance, please refer to the company's periodic filings with the SEC.

With that, I'll turn the call over to Steve.

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Thank you, Kyle. Welcome, everyone, and thank you for joining us for a discussion of our second quarter financial results. On the call today, I will share a few highlights of the recent developments at American Midstream before turning it over to Dan to review our financial performance. I will then conclude with a few comments, and we'll open the call for questions.

I'd like to begin today by saying that the April transaction with ArcLight and High Point Infrastructure Partners, or HPIP, is off to a strong start. Our second quarter results were solid, and we have made significant progress on the integration of the High Point assets into American Midstream. We'll talk in depth today about both our financial results and the integration. In addition, the Eagle Ford project is well underway, and we'll provide an update on the project later in the call.

Let me preface our detailed comments with an overview of the equity restructuring transaction we announced yesterday. I can tell you with confidence that ArcLight and HPIP are very focused on growing American Midstream, and that focus was the driving force to complete the equity restructuring. During the diligence process, earlier this year, ArcLight recognized that one of the critical steps to growing the partnership would be restructuring the equity side of the balance sheet and more specifically, eliminating the subordinated units, modifying the incentive distribution structure, improving distribution coverage and creating line of sight for increased LP distributions.

The agreement we announced yesterday accomplishes all of these objectives with the primary outcome of creating an MLP that is positioned to deliver long-term sustainable distribution growth. As part of the agreement, our subordinate units and IDRs were combined into and restructured as a new class of IDRs that are entitled to 48% of all distributions above the minimum quarterly distribution as set forth in the partnership agreement. The impact of the restructuring is immediate as our distribution coverage ratio will increase substantially. In addition, we are entitled to receive $12.5 million of cash that was escrowed as part of the April transaction, and we will use the funds to repay borrowings on our credit facility.

The former owner of the general partner commenced legal action against the new majority owner of the general partner in connection with the equity restructuring, which may result in the delay of the release of the $12.5 million from escrow. If funding is delayed beyond September 30, 2013, HPIP has agreed to pay $12.5 million to the partnership to be used to repay borrowings on its credit facility.

Perhaps the most important part of the transaction is that the restructuring gives ArcLight and HPIP a very strong incentive to drive long-term growth for the partnership. The reason is simple. With the new IDR structure, the general partner will recoup the value of the subordinated unit distribution it gave up only had EBITDA and the DCF increased, which ultimately benefits both the GP and LP unitholders in the form of higher distributions. I can tell you that based on my daily interaction with ArcLight and HPIP, we are working very closely with our general partner to aggressively grow the partnership so we can increase DCF and distributions.

Finally, as a result of the improved distribution coverage that will result from the transaction and as a demonstration of the company's commitment to sustain distribution growth, management intends to recommend a distribution increase of 3% to 5% for the third quarter of this year. As you can imagine, we are very excited about this transaction, and we believe our unitholders will benefit greatly from the distribution growth of the transaction -- that the transaction will enable over the next months and years.

Now let me turn the call over to Dan to review our financial results, after which I will provide an update on the integration of High Point into American Midstream, as well as our growth plans, including an update on the Eagle Ford project.

Daniel C. Campbell

Thank you, Steve. My comments today will focus on an overview of our second quarter operating results, including segment performance and the status of our derivatives, balance sheet and capital expenditures. I'll also discuss the impairment charge we recorded this quarter.

And as a reminder, our earnings release includes reconciliations of certain non-GAAP items that we'll discuss on today's call and their GAAP equivalents. We remind you to refer to these reconciliations and additional details regarding our results that are contained in our quarterly filings.

We've reported total gross margin of $16.9 million for the second quarter and $29.9 million for the 6 months -- first 6 months of the year, which is an increase of greater than $5 million for both periods versus the same periods last year. Gross margin was impacted in our Gathering and Processing segment by lower natural gas throughput volumes and lower realized NGL prices, which remain at significantly lower levels than last year. However, gross margin benefited from the addition of the Chatom system, which we acquired in the third quarter of 2012.

Let me touch on each of our 2 segments in more detail, beginning with Gathering and Processing. Growth margin for the second quarter was $9.3 million, approximately 10% higher than the second quarter of 2012. For the first 6 months of 2013, gross margin was $18.3 million, which was approximately 8% higher than 2012. The increase in gross margin was associated with the percent-of-proceeds and fee-based contracts associated with the Chatom plant that we acquired last year and proceeds from our business interruption claim as a result of Hurricane Isaac, both of which were offset by lower volumes on the Quivira and Burns Point systems and lower realized NGL prices.

Average daily throughput volume in the segment decreased 24% for the quarter and 29% for the first 6 months to 261 million and 253 million cubic feet per day, respectively. And the decrease was primarily due to lower production volumes on our Quivira system, which also negatively impacts us at the Burns Point plant. It is important to point out that throughput at Quivira and Burns Point is currently flowing at a much higher level than in the second quarter, though still below the levels we saw on the second quarter of 2012.

Volumes on our other major systems were generally flat year-over-year. Our plants NGL production was lower by approximately 7,000 gallons per day versus the second quarter of last year due to lower NGL production at Burns Point and Bazor Ridge that was only partially offset by higher incremental NGL production from the Chatom plant. Plants NGL production is roughly flat for the first 6 months of 2013 compared to the same period of last year, and condensate production continues to be significantly higher year-over-year as a result of our condensate POP agreements with the Chatom plant.

In our Transmission segment, we reported gross margin of $7.6 million for the second quarter and $11.6 million for the first 6 months compared to $2.8 million and $6.8 million for the corresponding prior year periods. The increase in gross margin in this segment is due to the acquisition of the High Point assets.

Throughput volumes in the Transmission segment averaged 690 million cubic feet per day for the quarter and 567 million cubic feet per day for the first 6 months compared to 408 million cubic feet per day and 401 million cubic feet per day for the quarter and first 6 months of 2012, respectively. This increase was primarily the result of incremental volumes from the High Point assets, as well as new production on the offshore section of our Midla system. It's important to remember that throughput does not necessarily correlate to gross margin because many of the agreements in the Transmission segment are firm transportation contracts.

Before moving to adjusted EBITDA, let me spend a minute talking about the impairment charge we recorded in the second quarter. Shortly after the April transaction with ArcLight and High Point, the management team completed an extensive review of the partnership's assets to determine which assets, if any, were non-strategic. We determined a handful of assets were not strategic to the long-term success of the partnership and recommended to the Board of Directors and the board approved a plan to streamline the assets of the partnership by divesting certain small non-core assets in the Gathering and Processing segment. Collectively, these assets contribute less than 1% of our annualized adjusted EBITDA, and the assets are not in areas that we intend to pursue growth opportunities.

As a result of the divestiture process that's currently underway and in accordance with the requirements of GAAP, we recorded a noncash impairment charge of $17 million in the second quarter. Certain of the assets identified for divestiture have been classified as held for sale and the respective financial operations presented as discontinued operations. An impairment charge is recorded for certain of the assets held for sale if book value exceeded the fair market value for the assets.

For the remaining assets that were identified for divestiture, we evaluated the assets for impairment using discounted future cash flow, taking into consideration current operating and market conditions. It's important to note that approximately 90% of the $17 million impairment charge relates to 2 assets and the current book value for those assets with respect to the acquisition of the assets from Enbridge in 2009. I know that's a lot of details, but hopefully, this overview provides some clarification on the impairment charge for the second quarter.

Adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter was $5.9 million compared to $4.4 million in the second quarter last year and $11.1 million for the first 6 months compared to $10.6 million in the same period last year. The increase in adjusted EBITDA in the second quarter was primarily attributable to the reasons for the increase in gross margins that I mentioned, partially offset by the incremental direct operating expenses and SG&A expenses associated with Chatom and High Point.

Our distributable cash flow for the second quarter was $1.8 million after cash distributions paid to the Series A convertible preferred units. On July 23, we announced second quarter distribution of $0.4325 per unit, which represents a coverage ratio of 0.48x. As a reminder, when we executed the credit facility amendment in April, our general partner agreed to forgo $400,000 of its quarterly subordinated unit distribution, and our coverage ratio for the second quarter includes the benefit of the lower distributions to our general partner. Following the execution of the equity restructuring, the general partner will no longer be required to forgo any of its quarterly distribution.

With respect to our commodity hedge program, as of June 30, approximately 70% of our expected exposure to commodity prices for propane through natural gasoline and -- are approximately -- and approximately 60% of our expected condensate production for the remainder of 2013 is hedged. And given the current low prices for ethane, we've hedged approximately 40% of our expected exposure for the remainder of 2013. And as always, the details regarding our hedge transactions can be found in our quarterly filings. And we're currently evaluating our commodity exposure in 2014 and beyond and plan to execute additional hedges to further mitigate our exposure to commodity prices.

In addition, during the second quarter, we entered into a 2-year $100 million LIBOR interest rate swap, which became effective on July 1. Given the current low interest rate environment, we felt it was prudent to lock in the interest rate for the majority of our outstanding revolver balance.

And also during the second quarter, we executed a weather derivative with Swiss Re to mitigate our hurricane risk in the Gulf Coast in the event a hurricane damages our assets or disrupts production. The swap pays up to $10 million if a category 3 or higher hurricane passes through a predetermined area of the Gulf.

Moving to capital expenditures. We incurred $4.5 million in the second quarter, including growth capital of $3 million, maintenance capital of $1.3 million and reimbursable project expenditures of $200,000.

Turning to the balance sheet. As of June 30, 2013, the partnership had $126.3 million of total debt outstanding, including $2.6 million of letters of credit, which results in a leverage ratio of 4.6x, which is well within our current leverage covenant. As a reminder, in conjunction with the April 15 transaction with ArcLight and HPIP, we entered into a fourth amendment to our credit agreement that, among other items, permitted the issuance of preferred units associated with the ArcLight transaction, modified the leverage ratio covenant to provide us with operating flexibility and permanently waived the leverage ratio covenant for the quarters ended December 31 and March 31. For additional details regarding our credit facility and liquidity, you can always find details in our 10-Q.

This quarter, we're pleased to initiate guidance for 2013. We expect 2013 adjusted EBITDA in the range of $24 million to $27 million and DCF in the range of $9 million to $12 million, with each range reflecting the benefit of the acquisition of High Point from the closing of the transaction on April 15 through the end of the year. The partnership forecasts 2013 growth capital expenditures of approximately $14 million, which does not include capital for maintenance, integrity management or new costs associated with the Eagle Ford development project. Going forward, we'll update guidance on a quarterly basis, and we plan to provide 2014 guidance with our third quarter earnings in November.

To conclude, we're off to a great start with ArcLight and High Point and taken the necessary steps to position American Midstream to pursue organic growth projects, development opportunities and acquisitions and deliver long-term distribution growth. And with that, I'll turn the call back over to Steve.

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Thank you, Dan. Since our last call, we have been busy integrating the High Point assets and team into American Midstream. After closing the transaction in April, we identified nearly 50 critical items that need to be executed in the first 100 days of the transaction, including management changes, improved corporate communications, system implementations, addressing commercial opportunities and developing new incentive compensation plans. To date, 90% of the tasks are complete or nearly complete, and we have made significant progress on the remaining items.

As part of the integration plan, we are implementing common processes and business systems across the combined company, including nomination, scheduling, measurement, invoicing, accounting, SCADA and gas control. When these systems come online in the fourth quarter, we will be able to better manage the partnership on a real-time basis, customer service will improve significantly and we will be well positioned to integrate new assets into the company from drop-downs, acquisitions or development projects.

We have also made a number of personnel changes on our team as we consolidated the High Point, American Midstream offices in Houston, which included eliminating several positions. And as of August 1, all of our employees are on the same payroll and benefit systems. As a result of our consolidation and implementation, we believe we will see cost savings of $1 million to $2 million on an annualized basis through the combination of American Midstream and High Point beginning in 2014.

From a more strategic perspective, our team has been reviewing our assets, and we have identified a number of operating synergies and commercial opportunities, particularly around our assets in southeast Louisiana. Starting in September, our Gloria and Chalmette systems will be fully integrated with the High Point assets, which will link incremental supply sources with on-system end-use markets. In addition, we added incremental compressions to the Gloria system to increase available throughput capacity. This integration and the expansion will enable us to take advantage of underutilized capacity to improve overall system throughput and margins.

We are also thoroughly reviewing the operations, customer relationships and market dynamics around our FERC-regulated interstate pipeline assets and expect to achieve improved performance through our strategic pipeline alliances and firm contract extensions. Finally, we also initiated a project to increase the amount of NGLs that we fractionate at the Chatom plant, which should be fully online by the end of the year.

As Dan described earlier, we identified a number of non-strategic assets that we are in the process of divesting so that we can focus our core systems and position ourselves to incorporate new assets into our company that we expect to be drop-down in the future. It is fair to say that most of our efforts since the closing of the transaction in April have been to integrate and streamline the organization, execute on organic growth projects and finalize the equity restructuring. With these steps behind us or nearly finished in some cases, our primary focus is to now grow our asset platform.

On that note, I would like to provide an update on the Eagle Ford development project that we discussed on the previous call. The development team, which includes employees of both American Midstream and our general partner, has made significant progress over the last several months, including procurement of the site for the central facility and much of the required right of way, selection and mobilization of the EPC contractor. As we disclosed in our press release, capital expenditures for construction are expected to range between $65 million and $75 million, and operations are expected to commence in early 2014.

After several months of consistent results, we believe the asset will be dropped down to American Midstream at the development cost plus a modest rate of return for our general partner. After the drop down, we will continue to work closely with our general partner to develop and fund the expansions of the system.

We are optimistic about the prospects for this project and other opportunities in this area of the Eagle Ford. Our producer customers continue to see very positive results from newly drilled wells, and several production companies in the area have drilled new wells with extremely large production volumes. We believe there are additional opportunities around the new asset platform that we are building for new infrastructure to serve our current customer and others in the region.

As you saw in our press release and as Dan mentioned, we provided guidance for 2013. Keep in mind this only includes 8.5 months of the benefit of High Point. Going forward, we will provide you with more regular updates to our annual guidance so that investors and analysts have a better gauge for company performance. Finally, we are proud of the progress that we have made since the closing of the transaction just a few months ago, and we believe American Midstream is well positioned to deliver meaningful distribution growth to our unitholders.

We'll now open up the call for questions.

Question-and-Answer Session


[Operator Instructions] And your first question is from Edward Rowe from Raymond James.

Edward Rowe

In regards to the $65 million to $75 million in CapEx for the Eagle Ford assets, I know -- is it fair to assume low- to mid-teen IRRs, cash-on-cash return for these assets once it reaches full capacity? And in terms of dropping down the assets, you mentioned you would like to have consistent operations for a few months. Is that the consistent operation specific metric on full utilization? Or what metric are you guys looking at before dropping down the assets?

Stephen W. Bergstrom

This is Steve. The full utilization is not really the criteria. When you bring on a system like this that has a 3-phase system where you're going to transport oil, gas and water, you want to make sure that your operations are solid before -- you're going to have some startup hiccups, so we're really referring there to kind of get rid of the startup hiccups and issues, and so we got a good consistent operations and good run rate. That shouldn't take a whole lot of time once we get up and running, but this is a pretty complicated system anytime you handle liquids like that and those kind of volumes in a 3-phase system. As far as the capital cost, we expect the EBITDA percentages to be consistent with any type of project that you would -- on a rate of return similar to what you talked about. For run rate, we don't expect to get to full capacity until probably in 2015, '16, but the capital cost is consistent with a normal-type project that you would see in the midstream space.

Edward Rowe

Okay, that's helpful. And in terms of other potential CapEx backlog, there's been a lot of positive news surrounding the TMS. And given your asset profile, do you guys see a lot of -- or identified any projects within your system to leverage that?

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Yes, I mean, we're looking at that. We're frankly focused really on the last couple of months on kind of taking what we've got and really optimizing it and just focusing on trying to kind of fix some of the assets that were out there. We're well positioned in a lot of space with our assets for a lot of things, but we're primarily focused on kind of taking care of business than what we've got in our hands and try to take care of those and get them to operate that way we think they ought to be operating because we think there's a bunch of upside on just kind of taking care of our own knitting [ph] at this point. And with the position that we're in, if those shale plays end up doing what we think they might do, we're perfectly positioned to take advantage of those.

Edward Rowe

Okay. And a couple more questions. The decrease in throughput in Quivira and Burns Point, they're flowing at much higher levels than kind of previous quarter. What are some of the drivers around that? If -- do you guys have any expectations to increase that going forward even further from where they're at today?

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Yes. I think the driver with that is, is that when you start integrating the 2 systems -- 2 companies together and you put the proper focus on the places you need to be focused on and good people in the organization who actually focus on that every day, you get results. And the reason why we put that in the discussion was we are seeing -- you've got to remember, we just acquired this thing in April. We restructured it. We did a lot of work around the whole company and kind of changed the way it operated. And so we're just barely past the 100 days of being part of this. It took us 30 to 60 days to kind of get our arms around everything, so now you're -- we're starting to finally see, as we speak, the execution around some of our assets. And so we see a lot of opportunities to continue to drive throughput through our assets that, frankly, when we did the -- when we looked at this from ArcLight's perspective, we saw that in the diligence process. Now we're just starting to execute it. That you'll see -- and so I think there'll be good things to come in the next couple of quarters that you'll see.

Edward Rowe

Okay, that's great. And last question. With really improved coverage and improved leverage metrics, how do you guys evaluate between looking at solutions to continue to improve your cost of capital versus maybe internally funding these projects, at the same time, looking at issuing more equity to increase the flow within the partnership?

Daniel C. Campbell

Sure, Ed. That's a great question. Obviously, at this point, we're just kind of -- just out of the gates here with this new transaction. But I think that as we go forward -- obviously, when you have a project like the Eagle Ford, it's going to most likely be funded in the near term from our sponsor, and we appreciate their support on that because it allows us to do those great projects. But if you fast forward a few years, you're probably going to see some combination of us doing some of the projects internally, potentially working with them on others. We'll be issuing equity probably on a regular basis like most MLPs do and at some point tapping the high-yield market. So I think those things are to come. In the meantime, we're focused on the coverage ratio and making sure that, that happened with the equity restructuring and getting these projects on the door to get our EBITDA larger so we can start to do some of those other things.


Your next question is from Michael Bluhm from Wells Fargo.

Michael J. Blum - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

I guess a couple of questions for me. One -- and apologize if I missed this. Are there any notable assets in the ones that you're divesting that we should make note of? I didn't see if you actually identified any of the assets. Or are they just pieces of other systems? Or just kind of get a feel where those assets are.

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Yes, we didn't identify which ones they are. I mean, obviously, they're less than 1% of EBITDA, so they're pretty insignificant. And because we're in the middle of the sales -- bunch of sales processes with these different assets, we really don't -- didn't want to disclose. You can probably figure out what they are if you just kind of look at our portfolio. Doesn't take real hard to kind of figure that out. But they're small, they're -- they take just as much time of the management team and of the accounting people and all that as they do a larger project, and they're not driving any value. And we saw -- once again, we saw that in diligence when we went through this, and that was part of the plan when I came onboard, is to identify what we were going to focus on and put our resources and our talent to focus on those and not have to worry about these systems that drive less than 1% of your EBITDA.

Michael J. Blum - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

Got it. Fair enough. And then second question, I wonder if you can just -- I guess maybe from the MLP's perspective, just address what the impact of this legal action between the former gp sponsor and the current sponsor and all of the -- all that was outlined in the press release. I'm just trying to understand it from the MLP's perspective if there's anything that I need to be sort of thinking about there.

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Yes. From the MLP's perspective, it really doesn't have any impact on us. It's really a dispute between our formal -- former general partner and our new general partner. We have put an arrangement together with our new general partner and its affiliate to guarantee that we get the $12.5 million, which, from the MLP's perspective, was a big part of the transaction on the equity restructuring. And we've taken that risk off the table because we're going to get that $12.5 million one way or the other. We're going to get it from either the escrow -- the $12.5 million that's in the escrow or a partner one way or the other. So it really doesn't have any impact on us. The equity restructuring is done. Our coverage ratios are greatly improved. Our balance sheet is much better. All the things that we strive to get out of the equity restructure have been accomplished, and we're positioned now to be able to actually do something. I know in the last quarter, I got questions about drop-downs and "When is this going to happen?" and all that. Well, frankly, we weren't really in a position to be able to do that, both from a financial standpoint and from an operations standpoint, being able to handle it accounting-wise and systems-wise. We now have all the things in place to be able to do that, and so I think what you see in the second quarter was a focus to get us to this point. And we feel really good about where we're at and ready to grow.

Michael J. Blum - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

Great. And that's probably a good segue to my last question, which is just can you provide any update from an ArcLight perspective on portfolio of companies or anything that you think could potentially be a drop-down candidate? And should we expect that the first drop-down will be this Eagle Ford system? Or could we see something sooner than that?

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Well, we've -- ArcLight has a tremendous incentive now as a result of the restructure to drop assets into the company. I've been in active discussions with them over the last 45 days, as we got this restructure put together on drop-down candidates. The Eagle Ford project will be sometime next year. I want to grow this thing a lot faster than wait until next year before we do anything. We've got a lot of projects in the works, both at American Midstream that we're working on, as far as growth projects. There will be acquisition deals that we're doing plus drop-downs. So without promising anything, I wouldn't be surprised if we don't do something between now and the end of the year.


[Operator Instructions] And your next question comes from Matt Nitzberg [ph] from HITE.

James Jampel

It's actually James Jampel from HITE. We noted, in the press release, that your rate of distribution next quarter is somewhere between 3% and 5%. Putting that together with your guidance, what kind of the coverage ratio should we be looking forward in the third, fourth quarter?

Daniel C. Campbell

Yes, we didn't give a specific range of what that coverage ratio would be, but I think it's probably fair to think about it in the 1.3%, 1.4% or potentially even higher than that range, so it's pretty significant improvement, pretty healthy, pretty strong because of plenty of coverage. In the event that -- at this point, we get to that point where we need to be, doing some kind of capital markets down the road to fund some growth.

James Jampel

So the idea here is that the coverage ratio for this quarter to subsequent quarters, really have to do with the elimination of the subordinated units?

Daniel C. Campbell

That's correct, because essentially half of our distribution, right now, dollars going out the doors, goes to the subordinated units.


At this time, we have no further questions. [Operator Instructions]

Stephen W. Bergstrom

Well, if there's no more questions, we appreciate your time and being on our call and look forward to next quarter and look forward to stay tuned and see a lot of the exciting opportunities that we got before us. And we hope to pull some of those off in the next couple of months. Thank you very much for your time.


And thank you for your participation in today's conference. That concludes our presentation. You may now disconnect. Thank you.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to All other use is prohibited.


If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: Thank you!