Associated Banc-Corp (ASB) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to Associated Banc-Corp's Strategic Update Conference Call. My name is Paul, and I will be your operator this evening. [Operator Instructions] Copies of the slides that will be referenced during today's call are available on the company's website at investor.associatedbank.com. As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. As outlined on Slide 1, during the course of the discussion today, management may make statements that constitute projections, expectations, beliefs or similar forward-looking statements. Associated's actual results could differ materially from the results anticipated or projected in any such forward-looking statements. Additional detailed information, concerning the important factors that could cause Associated's actual results to differ materially from the information discussed today, is readily available on the SEC website in the Risk Factors section of Associated's most recent Form 10-K and subsequent SEC filings. These factors are incorporated herein by reference. For a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures to the GAAP financial measures, mentioned in this conference call, please refer to Page 29 of the slide presentation. Following today's presentation, instructions will be given for the question-and-answer session. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Andy Harmening, President and CEO, for opening remarks. Please go ahead, sir.

Well, good evening, everyone. I'm Andy Harmening. I am joined by Derek Meyer, our CFO here tonight. I appreciate you joining us tonight, after hours to share an update on our strategic direction of the bank. We are not going to do a page flip, but I'm going to give an overview, of what's occurred in phase 1, that leads up to phase 2 and what actions we've actually already taken. We've come a long way, over the past few years, since announcing our initial plan in September of '21. And the team has been very hard at work in recent months to identify opportunities to build on that plan. So if I take you back at the time of launch in '21, we were oversized, relative to peers in low-yielding noncore customer residential real estate loans, almost twice as much. We had an opportunity to deepen our customer base on both the consumer side and commercial sides of our business, and we had an opportunity to grow our customer base. But importantly, we've spent a decade cementing our strong risk profile. That includes both the credit-risk viewpoint and our operational risk perspective. So phase 1 of our plan, started with expanding our lending verticals and started to provide optionality beyond residential real estate. The expansion of our commercial team by 34%, the launch of our equipment finance vertical, the launch of our asset-based lending vertical and the launch of our auto finance vertical, all of this led to a 28% loan growth from Q3 of '21 to Q3 of '23. But importantly, what it really did it set the table for us to begin to deemphasize some of our noncore customer-related residential real estate businesses. On the Consumer side, we launched initiatives that have improved customer retention, improved acquisition and have deepened relationships. The digital platform launched, served customers in the highest volume area of our bank just under 100 million visitors a year. And this platform has hit 3-year highs in customer satisfaction. After its launch, we've experienced double-digit decrease in customer attrition. We launched a branding campaign in multiple Consumer products. That led to double-digit increases in household acquisition. We have changed a 7-year trend of negative 1% to 2%, annual household losses, to a forecasted breakeven in 2023 with a clear path for growth in '24, '25 and '26. This should, on a go-forward basis, serve as a tailwind for us. We launched our mass affluent segment strategy and have seen a lift in deposits measured in the hundreds of millions. This lift was clouded by the challenged deposit market in 2023 but has been a major factor in our outperformance to market and customer deposit growth in 2023. A market that has that seen a -- forecasted to see a 7% to 8% decrease where our number will be approximately 3% to 4% down. And finally, as we enter phase 2 of our strategic plan, we have record high customer satisfaction and record high employee engagement. So with that as a backdrop, we've already moved to execution on Phase 2 of the plan. Phase 2 includes 3 primary areas: Number one, disciplined expense control. As a means of funding revenue-generating initiatives, we have made and largely executed tough but necessary decisions around expenses. Number two, an organic plan that helps us transition the asset side of our balance sheet from lower-yielding to higher-yielding segments and continued emphasis on funding the majority of our growth through our core customer deposit franchise. Both of these areas of the strategy have been made possible by foundation laid in phase 1. Number three, a nonorganic action. This action will provide additional liquidity. We will accelerate the restructure of our balance sheet away from lower-yielding noncore residential real estate loans and improved many of our near-term and midterm financial metrics. So going back to the first area, the expense actions are largely completed. It did include a 3% reduction in force, that was worked on over the past few months and executed earlier this week. As a result of this action and several others, we're forecasting a 3% to 4% increase in expenses in 2024, above a run rate that does not include 2023 material onetime expenses. As always, our goal is to drive operating leverage, and we will flex our expenses within that 3% to 4% range in accordance with revenue growth. Secondly, our expense actions have put us in a position to fund an organic growth plan focused on people, products and technology. On the people front, we are well underway. Neil Riegelman joined the bank in October and will cover middle-market banking from Milwaukee and Madison, after a 20-year career with BMO Harris. And by the way, Neil was very recently named 40 Under 40 honoree. Jayne Hladio joined us in October, as the President of Private Wealth. She had a 12-year career with U.S. Bank ultimately leading, as a national wealth management executive across 26 states. She joined us directly from Midland Wealth Management, where she served as the President of that group. Her expertise in both mass affluent and wealth will certainly help accelerate our existing plans in that space. Gus Hernandez was named Director of Business Banking. This is an important growth area for our bank, and Gus will help us create a bridge from the branch network to business banking to commercial. And finally, we expect to announce the new Head of Commercial -- Group Leader for Commercial Banking by December 1 of this year. On the commercial plan -- our commercial plan has an emphasis in existing footprint markets like Milwaukee and Madison, the Twin Cities, Chicago and St. Louis. We intend to hire 20 RMs by the end of year 2024, operating under the balanced scorecard model that emphasizes holistic relationships. In fact, as has been our custom, we already have a running head start on the recruiting and placement of some RMs in this quarter. By the end of 2025, we expect these commercial expansion efforts alone to generate cumulative incremental loan growth of $750 million and deposit growth of $475 million. Now as we've discussed, investments in one area of the business typically require offsets in another. Our efforts to expand our lending capabilities over the past 2 years have given us additional levers to drive balanced growth. This growth has given us the flexibility to decrease our reliance on low-yielding, long-duration assets like mortgage loans, which made up nearly 30% of our loan portfolio in the third quarter. After exiting the TPO mortgage business, earlier this year, we made several additional changes to our mortgage strategy that are expected to reduce outstanding mortgage balances by $600 million by the end of 2025, through paydowns and production decreases. And finally, the commercial expansion mentioned previously is just one of several initiatives we have in place to attract, deepen and retain, relationships and drive sustained core deposit growth over time. All across the bank, we're making investments that contribute to increased customer acquisition rates, decreased attrition rates and steadily improving customer satisfaction scores. We're dedicating additional resources to grow our mass affluent segment. which is expected to attract and deepen high-value customer relationships and create an upstream opportunity into wealth. We're modernizing our product and marketing approach. We're leveraging customer data and analytics to drive decisions on product enhancements, marketing tactics and channels. And we're continuing to make major upgrades to the digital banking experience for our customers. After deploying 11 major customer-facing upgrades over the past 13 months, we plan to continue with a quarterly cadence of additional enhancements in 2024. One of the clear signs to me, that our initiatives are working, is when I look at our customer growth trends. As mentioned previously, we've seen net negative annual household growth for the past several years. That trend has improved to flat, here in 2023, and we expect to see net annual growth of 3% by 2025. As a correlation to these customer growth trends and the initiatives highlighted, we also expect to see cumulative incremental deposit balance growth of $2.5 billion by year-end 2025. In summary, the organic initiatives within our plan are iterative by design. We're building on a plan that was created 2 years ago, while staying true to the foundational strength that got us here in the first place. We are funding our balance sheet with lower-cost core customer deposits and decreasing our reliance on higher-cost non-relationship funding sources. We're decreasing our reliance on low-yielding loan portfolios and growing into higher return asset classes. And we're transforming into a franchise, that can grow customer households sustainably. All of this while staying disciplined on expenses and credit. Now while we're excited about the organic aspects of our plan, we also want to discuss an inorganic transaction that accelerates the financial impacts of our efforts. Earlier today, we announced a onetime balance sheet repositioning transaction to offload low-yielding assets and high-cost funding. As a part of this repositioning, we've sold approximately $800 million in securities and have agreed to sell approximately $1 billion in mortgage loans, primarily from single product relationships and our TPO book. The proceeds of this transaction will be used to pay down the FHLB advances and reinvest in securities at higher rates. The transaction provides several attractive benefits. First, it reduces our reliance on wholesale funding and enhances our liquidity position. Secondly, it enhances our ability to generate capital and improves our profitability profile. Third, it reduces our exposure to low-yield, long-duration assets. Fourth, it enables us to improve our overall yields on earning assets. And finally, it unlocks the benefits of our organic plan by providing added capacity to drive more profitable loan growth on our balance sheet. So in summary, I'm pleased with the foundation that has been built as a company since I started 2.5 years ago, particularly in the face of a challenging operating environment here in 2023. While we're continuing to realize the benefits from the initial plan we rolled out in '21, this update provides us with an opportunity to accelerate our efforts to grow our customer base, improve our profitability profile and enhance returns to shareholders. With that, I'll open it up to any questions that we might have.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is from Scott Siefers with Piper Sandler.

I guess the first question just relates to the anticipated NII pickup from the balance sheet restructuring. Just so everyone's on the same page, maybe -- I was hoping you could detail the planned pickup. It looks like you get about 16 basis points to the margin, which is great, but we'll lose about $1 billion in average earning assets. So I think if I'm doing the math correctly, you pick up about $32 million a year in NII. So, one, maybe if you can help me make sure I'm okay on the math. And then if that's correct, just curious how you're thinking about the payback. I guess it costs nearly $200 million pre-tax to do these, but if that NII pickup is correct, it looks like the earnback might take a little time. So just curious how you're thinking about those dynamics?

Do you want to touch on that, Derek?

Yes. So the only guidance that we're giving on the pickup in NII is the -- on Slide 24, where we do a pro forma against third quarter. I think that captures all of it and you can use that to roll forward and whatever rate assumptions you're using. You are right on the pre-tax assumption. The way we thought about the earnback was really against CET1, which is about a 3.5 year earnback with the about $600 million reduction in RWA.

Okay. All right. Perfect. And then, I guess, just broadly, Andy, positive operating leverage has always been important to you all, I guess, with all the balls in there, do you expect to generate positive operating leverage in 2024? And I guess, if so, maybe just some further clarity on how you would get there? And if not, when would you think about being in a position to generate positive operating leverage?

Well, I've been advised by my friend, Derek, not to commit to that yet for 2024. But, you heard it in my comments, and you can see it in the final page of midterm guidance. I mean that's the plan. And so we had a lot of pieces that we wanted to execute on. We wanted to make sure we got the expense piece right. That's hard, and we wanted to be there early. So we had a kind of a clear runway going into the year, and we didn't hold that over people's heads, going into the year. Secondly, we wanted to start hiring people in key positions and not just anybody, we wanted to hire game changers. And so far, that's what we've been able to do. Those game changers generate business. That's the way that will work. And some of it's formulaic, but when you get the right people, it certainly accelerates the time frame on that. So what we're taking a look at right now is very closely going to monitor October, November, December financials, look and see if we've hit that bottom on margin compression, see what impact that has for the year. Do we continue to see the progress on growing customers, which I think we will, and then fortify the timing of each key player that we have coming on board right now. So when we do that, my expectation is we're fighting to get to a positive operating leverage in 2024. We haven't committed to that yet because we haven't finalized the budget. But certainly, we get a tailwind in many things that we've already done in the past that are happening, and we get a tailwind from the inorganic action that we're taking as well. So more to come on that specifically, but that is going to be the push for us right now.

Our next question is from Daniel Tamayo with Raymond James.

I guess, first, just on the -- I guess, clarifying on the medium term. You talked a little bit about it in your previous answer, Andy. But the 3% margin, just curious on what your guys' assumptions in terms of when you may get back to that?

Do you want to take that? Or do you want me to take it?

Yes. Well, I think the first thing is we see that over the next 3 years is the horizon as we looked at for medium-term guidance. I'll point back to the answer I just gave Scott, which is we think this transaction itself captures -- accelerate 16 basis points of that. But to get back to Andy's earlier answer, we haven't declared victory on has the bottom happened last quarter or this quarter. And how this rolls together with all the strategic finance we just laid out, rolled up into a 2024 outlook. And we think we try and incorporate a little more visibility in -- when we lay out that guidance in January.

But Daniel, I'll also say it's definitely a place where we see a clear path to. When you can fund yourself at a little bit lesser cost in big dollars, and when you can start to take the mix shift of what you have as a high return business in our commercial bank versus a low-return business in our single product mortgage lending business, that just chips away at the balance sheet. So each year that one runs off and one gets added, you continue to flip that return profile. So a little bit depends on the market and how fast loan growth is able to happen over the next 6 to 9 months. But to me, it feels more like a when than an if.

Okay. Great. And my next question is just on credit, actually. You gave some guidance on net charge-offs. Just curious actually on reserves, the kind of the impact of the loan sale on reserves and then how you expect that relative to loans to trend going forward given the change in mix?

So again, we'll try to not preempt 2024 guidance. But I will tell you, these loans are all very clean. So the ACL release on these would be low relative to our total ACL. So all things being equal, the ACL ratio would go up a little bit, although we would expect the dollars to be released with this.

Okay. That's helpful. And lastly, this is more high level. Just curious, Andy, on your thought for the reason of the loss in households in prior years and then kind of what's driving your confidence in the forecast for the growth going forward?

It's a little-known fact in consumer banking that a lot of people aren't growing their households. It turns out that there's a disruptor called digital banks. And they've taken 25% to 30% of new accounts that are -- opened in the marketplace. So there are many regional banks that have probably been flat to slightly down. There are many banks that have been flat to slightly down because of that new competition. So in order to compete with them, you have to be strong in digital, you have to be strong in how you communicate. You have to have products that are relevant. And the way you find out those products' relevancy is by testing them. When I brought in Bryan Carson, he -- his expertise was granular acquisition, based on testing products and a customer's willingness and wanting-ness to buy that. So as we've tested that, as we've launched it, we've seen a correlation through all the levels of the funnel and what we do. So it is not an easy thing to do. I very really celebrate breakeven, I'm celebrating this breakeven because I know the platform and where it goes from here is growth. So you have to do a lot of things right. If you look on Page 18 of our document, you'll see all the things that need to happen in order to -- in my view, to grow your household number. So if somebody is just starting that now, I can promise you it's a 2-year project. We've got that behind us, which gives me a lot of joy as we head into '24 and it -- with regards to our ability to grow our foundation.

Our next question is from Chris McGratty with KBW.

Andy, I'm trying to just kind of walk from your current ROE to the mid-teens. I appreciate the comments on the 3% NIM over a couple of years -- 2 or 3 years. Is there a capital -- is there another capital action to get -- to help bridge the ROE gap, meaning buybacks since you talked about the RWA reduction is the motivation versus the earnback? Just Scott's question.

I mean, if it's a specific question on buybacks, that's a no. That's not a plan. We feel like we have a lot of good things, that we can invest in our own company, and we've seen that those give us a nice return. We're going to keep capital base that makes us comfortable. So trying to deteriorate capital in some ways, definitely not the goal. In fact, this will give us good earnings power and good earnback. The thing that could happen is if you have slightly lower loan growth, you actually will accrete capital even faster. So for us, as we head into a downturn, one thing that made me confident in doing this is I see the trends in our credit portfolio. I know what we have. I know one of our weaknesses on a return basis is residential mortgage, but I also know it's a strength from a quality standpoint. So -- when we have a lot of it. So we're in a pretty good place with an expected downturn but capital matters and liquidity matters. And in this case, we were able to harvest quite a bit of liquidity. But no, on the buyback front, that is not in the cards. And as long as we have good ideas that we can grow organically, it probably won't be for a little while.

Okay. I totally appreciate that. The -- related to this decision to go the securities route -- sale, the $157 million. Was there ever a discussion about, let's use that similar amount of capital to buy back the stock at 90% of book? Or is it purely, let's improve the earnings balance sheet setup?

Well -- this is Derek. So I think one of the things that's important from our standpoint is to focus on the organic strategy. So what we think the transaction does, is actually accelerate the balance sheet profile that makes it more consistent with our go-forward strategy vis-a-vis funding our growth with relationship banking and not doing third-party or non-relationship low-return assets. So we could get there more slowly without doing this transaction. This transaction gets us there more quickly and then gives us more wholesale funding capacity. So that was the lens we looked at it through, it wasn't looking at how inexpensive our stock price is and what to do with capital from that standpoint.

And if you look at just the run rate payback over the next 2 years, we're pulling a lot of levers to bring that down, as you saw our production level go significantly down on residential real estate. But payback is at historic low. So we shrink that only $600 million in 2 years, in 1 quarter, we'll shrink at $1 billion to go along with that. So that will materially change the way that we're structured.

I don't want to -- I'm probably repeating myself, but a buyback would not have given us the upgraded liquidity posture that we were trying to get with the improved profitability.

Our next question is from Brody Preston with UBS.

So I just wanted to clarify the last point on the buyback, before I ask my other question. So if I'm understanding, so is was 5% hit to tangible book value on using the number that you -- the $157 million, and the decision tree was we can use that capital to improve the liquidity and improve the go-forward profitability and maybe enhance our ability to generate capital going forward versus buying back like, I think it was like 6.5% of the float and maybe seeing a mild improvement in tangible book value. So it was more about structurally improving the balance sheet versus just using the capital, correct?

Yes. I mean, said a different way, we're betting on ourselves. But yes, You're correct.

The medium-term targets. I just wanted to clarify what I thought earlier. That's like a 2- to 3-year kind of goal, is the -- targets that are laid out on Page 27?

I think of it as a 3-year. Yes.

3- year? Okay, cool. Thank you for the clarification.

Although I reserve the right to come back on positive operating leverage for 2024.

Yes, yes, yes, that's really -- that's an everyday goal.

Got it. Yes. We'll see who wins that arm wrestling match, I guess. Could I ask you just what the implied ROA is within that ROTCE target?

I haven't thought about it that way.

Okay. Would it be fair to assume that just based on the CET1 target that you already have out there, that it's consistent with the range that you plan on operating in, I guess, the capital level associated with that ROTCE?

I think -- it sounds like the answer is yes, but I'm not sure what else you might be looking for.

I just wanted to make sure, I understood what level of capital you're planning on operating with going forward.

I think we gave the range and we're not trying to hit the ROTCE target by leveraging up more, is how I'm thinking about what you're talking about.

Yes. I did want to ask just on the incremental deposit growth that you guys are looking to achieve, I guess, is there -- is that going to be driven predominantly from the commercial hires? And are the RMs going to be meaningfully incentivized on the deposit side versus loan growth? I'm just trying to better understand how we get that incremental deposit growth.

That's a really important question. I think if you look at 2 pages, Page 15 shows that we expect $475 million from our commercial strategies. Now Brody, we changed to a balanced scorecard approach in our commercial bank 2 years ago. What that means is they get incented for bringing in full relationships, treasury management, fee income, deposits and loans. So that is a fundamental of how we're doing business and it has improved our acquisition. We know what we get per commercial RM, based on the time they start. We think that about $500 million out of the $2.5 billion would come from the commercial RMs. If you forward on to Page 18, when I was saying earlier, you better have a lot of tactics, we do. Mass affluent has brought in several hundred million dollars above BAU. We will invest specifically in mass affluent bankers in multiple branches. That will bring in additional balances for us as we continue with that strategy. In addition to that, Jayne Hladio brings an expertise, literally expertise in transitioning from mass affluent to wealth. I don't know if it's serendipity or I did something nice recently, but she happened to live in Milwaukee, have experience in doing this across multiple states. We expect that we're going to get $50 million to $100 million just in that alone. We then look at what we do in our product enhancements and what we do on acquisition, when you acquire a 1% to 2% growth, those people bring deposits with them. We've changed our data and analytics approach in teams. So we know what works and where it works in each funnel. That brings tens of millions of dollars in with it. We shifted our focus on marketing from a little heavier on sponsorship to acquisition, that brings more dollars with it. So when I said it, it's hard to put this together. We didn't just put this together in 90 days. This has been put together over the last 2 years. And now we're starting to reap the benefits of that. Plus, when we went for a cost savings, which we did, we immediately look at this reinvestment at a time when we think a lot of others maybe aren't thinking of it that way. But we think of it that way from a deposit gathering and a loan standpoint of significance. So -- that's a long way of saying it's a lot of pieces. The commercial piece of it will be about 1/5 of it.

Got it. And actually have 2 clarifying questions that I wanted to ask. When I go through the kind of the math of the repositioning, I wind up with about a $35 million positive impact to net interest income. Does that feel right to you Derek?

I'll trust your math. It depends on your rate assumptions. I think we -- again, we tried to be clear on what we thought this does, which comes through margin, and that's the 16 basis points on Page 24.

Got it. And so if I'm doing the math correctly, that equates to about a 5.5 to 6 year earnback. Does that sound -- does that feel right to you, when you did the math?

We're looking at the earnback based on regulatory capital, which is, as I said earlier, a little under 3.5 years. It is longer on dollar earnback on income, but directionally...

And then my last one is just on the on the moving parts of the mark on the securities and the loans. I just wanted to ask of the $157 million post-tax mark. So I think Chris said earlier, it's about $200 million pretax. What was -- I guess, how much of that was on the loans versus the securities? And then on the loan mark, how much -- what was the interest rate mark and what was the credit mark, I'm assuming credit mark was de minimis.

Yes. We're not going to break it down that way. Our after-tax breakout is a hundred -- and this is estimates, we've executed trades on both of these, on both the loans and the securities, securities settled tomorrow, a loan settle before the end of the year. So the estimate after tax on the loans is $106 million and the estimated after tax on securities is $52 million. And that $52 million theoretically is already in our TCE as AOCI.

Our next question is from Timur Braziler with Wells Fargo.

Just 2 questions on my end. Maybe looking at what Brody asked but asking it from a loan side, 20 new RMs being added there's good incremental capacity there over the next couple of years. I guess, how should we be thinking about the loan growth profile of Associated going forward once this is all implemented?

That sounds a lot like 2024 guidance question. I think...

No. I mean beyond '24, just how should we think about Associated on a go-forward, annualized growth perspective? Is this a mid-single-digit bank? Or are the initiatives that are being taken place today, is this something that can grow faster than that?

In terms of what? In terms of earnings, in terms of loans? I'm...

Loan growth. Loan growth -- with the RMs being hired, 20 RMs being hired.

Yes. My experience tells me that we have a really good path. And the reason I say that, Timur is not necessarily absolute loan growth. It's the mix and it's the shift, excuse me -- it's the mix shift. So if we grow 5%, for instance, but we go down $1 billion in something that has an 8% ROTCE and we go up $1 billion in something that has an 18% ROTCE. We're not going to have the same economic profile of somebody that just grows 5%. So one of the benefits of being so heavily weighted towards mortgage is as we run that down, which we are, and we run up other categories, whether that be equipment finance, commercial, ABL, small business. Our 5% to 6% should be a little bit more profitable and get us to a return improvement year-over-year in a little bit more significant way. That's how I would think of it. And I would be very hesitant to try to grow double digits on loans on a regular basis. I learned long ago that if you do that on a regular basis, you're going to probably run into troubles.

Okay. And then looking at the mortgage book specifically, I guess what portion today is -- of originations is out of the private wealth, mass affluent and the CRE customers?

We don't break that out. I don't think we're prepared to do that right now.

Okay. And I guess with that being the only component that's being put on the balance sheet but still continuing to service the remainder of the community. Should we expect a material change in mortgage banking revenue as a result of some of these changes?

Are you talking about fee income?

Yes.

Yes. I don't think that's -- one, that's down. Generally speaking, as you know, just because the mortgage business is down. What we do see, and this is not as much guidance as trying to illustrate the magnitude of change. We see us switching much more to a conventional originate-to-sell model, when we were putting almost everything on the balance sheet before. A lot of banks started going that way when they're reaching for growth. We are committed to mortgage as an important part of our consumer business. But we expect to -- all things being equal, originate more to sell. So in the same scenario -- same rate environment before and after this, you would expect to have more fee income. But it's hard to say we're going to have lots more fee income, but I don't think anyone is growing mortgage fee income a lot. But our strategy should generate more fee income and less balance sheet consumption out of the mortgage business than it is [indiscernible] this. It's a pretty big change.

I'd say the piece that probably rolled times up pretty well for us is with the slow pace of pay downs and repayments in mortgage, that gives us time to continue to ramp up other lines of business. So as rates stay higher, the mortgage prepay is very low. And if you assume that they're going to be at some reasonably higher level through a portion or a lot of 2024, as those start to pay down even a little bit more, we'll be even in more solid footing on the commercial growth side of the business. Over time, of course, we'll make less money. We'll have a portfolio that is by the end of '25, about a [ $1.6 billion ] less than it is today. And originations that are half of what they were or less from '22 to '24. So the short answer is yes, but we'll make that up in other areas.

We tried to outline a little bit of those dimensions. On Page 19.

Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. This concludes our Q&A session.

Thank you all very much.

This concludes today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time. Thank you for your participation.