Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Thursday, April 23, 2026 at 3 p.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

  • President and Chief Executive Officer — Craig Richard Smiddy
  • Chief Financial Officer — Francis Joseph Sodaro
  • President and Chief Executive Officer, Old Republic National Title Insurance Group — Carolyn Jean Monroe
  • Managing Director, Financial Relations Board — Joe Calabrese

TAKEAWAYS

  • Consolidated Pretax Operating Income -- $211.5 million, down from $252.7 million, reflecting lower segment contributions.
  • Consolidated Combined Ratio -- 96.6%, above last year’s 93.7%, indicating reduced underwriting margin.
  • Operating Return on Beginning Equity -- 11.5% for the quarter.
  • Book Value per Share Growth (including dividends) -- 2.6% increase, supported by operating earnings.
  • Specialty Insurance Net Premiums Earned -- Up 4.7%, with pretax operating income at $209 million versus $260 million, and combined ratio at 94.8% versus 89.8%.
  • Title Insurance Premiums and Fees -- Increased 12%; pretax operating income rose to $16.7 million from $4.3 million; combined ratio improved to 100% from 102%.
  • Net Investment Income -- Gained over 4%, reflecting a larger investment base and higher bond yields.
  • Favorable Prior-Year Loss Development -- Added a 1.5-point benefit to the consolidated loss ratio, compared to 2.6 points last year.
  • Specialty Insurance Net Premiums Written -- Rose 3.4%, supported by mid-teens rate increases in Commercial Auto, and partially offset by lower renewal retention ratios.
  • Commercial Auto Net Premiums Written -- Increased just over 1%; achieved 16% rate increases, with a loss ratio of 70.4%.
  • Workers’ Compensation Net Premiums Written -- Grew just over 1%; loss ratio at 62.3%, with 2% rate decreases.
  • Expense Ratio in Specialty Insurance -- Reached 31.2%, up from 28.1%, attributed to investments in new operating companies, technology, and AI.
  • Title Insurance Agency-Produced Premiums -- Advanced 14%, now comprising nearly 80% of segment revenues.
  • Title Insurance Commercial Premiums -- Accounted for 27% of earned premiums, up from 24%.
  • Title Insurance Expense Ratio -- Improved to 97.5% from 99.4%.
  • Title Insurance Loss Ratio -- 2.6% including 1.1 points of favorable development, compared to 2.7% and 0.8 points last year.
  • Shareholder Payouts -- $77 million in dividends paid, $161 million in share repurchases during the quarter, with another $52 million repurchased since and $640 million remaining under authorization.
  • New Strategic Initiatives -- Launched Old Republic Property, a selective property insurer, and rebranded Lodestar Claims and Risk Services as a fee income business.
  • Planned Acquisition -- ECM acquisition expected to close by July 1, with anticipated contribution beginning in the second half of the year.
  • Title Insurance Reinsurance -- Entered a new excess-of-loss reinsurance agreement to underwrite larger commercial deals and expand capacity.

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email [email protected]

RISKS

  • Expense ratio pressure from new company formation, system modernization, and AI initiatives expected to persist over the next one to two years, with no immediate reduction below the 30% level indicated.
  • "Premium is the wildcard here," CEO Smiddy said, signaling that growth is lower than prior periods, creating uncertainty around future expense leverage.
  • Retention ratios have fallen below historic levels in Commercial Auto due to strict underwriting discipline and required rate increases, impacting top-line growth.
  • Unfavorable loss development in General Liability within Specialty Insurance, though partially offset by favorable experience in older accident years.

SUMMARY

Management cited disciplined underwriting and significant investments in new business formation, technology, and analytics as contributing to elevated expense ratios and moderated premium growth. The formation of Old Republic Property and a new reinsurance arrangement in Title Insurance were highlighted as major strategic developments to drive future growth in select markets. Repurchase activity intensified post-quarter, further utilizing the $640 million buyback authorization. The ECM acquisition, slated to close by July, is expected to add scale and earnings in the second half. Commercial Auto retention ratios have declined, reflecting a deliberate prioritization of rate adequacy amidst competitive pressures.

  • Book value per share increased to $24.53, supported by core operating earnings and active capital return.
  • Title Insurance commercial premiums grew as a share of segment revenue, enabled by the new reinsurance structure for large accounts.
  • Management emphasized that expense pressures will persist until both start-up operations and modernization projects reach maturity, timing of which remains variable.
  • The consolidated favorable loss development fell short of prior years but was described as "within our expectations" in terms of reserve trends.

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

  • Excess-of-Loss Reinsurance: A contract providing insurance for losses above a specified retention, used here to increase Title Insurance capacity for large commercial risks.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Operator: Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Old Republic International Corporation First Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers' remarks, there will be a question and answer session. Thank you. I would now like to turn the call over to Joe Calabrese with the Financial Relations Board. You may begin.

Joe Calabrese: Thank you, Rob. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for joining us for the Old Republic International Corporation conference call to discuss first quarter 2026 results. This morning, we distributed a copy of the press release and posted a separate financial supplement. Both documents are available on Old Republic International Corporation’s website at oldrepublic.com. Please be advised that this call may involve forward-looking statements as discussed in the press release dated 04/23/2026. Assumptions, uncertainties, and risks exist that may cause results to differ materially from those set forth in these forward-looking statements.

For more information on these assumptions, uncertainties, and risks, please refer to the forward-looking statements discussion in the press release and the company’s other recent SEC filings and the risk factors discussed in the company’s most recent Form 10-Ks and other recent SEC filings. We may also include references to net income excluding net investment gains, or net operating income, a non-GAAP financial measure, in our remarks or in response to questions. GAAP reconciliations are included in the press release. Presenting on today’s conference call will be Craig Richard Smiddy, President and CEO; Francis Joseph Sodaro, Chief Financial Officer; and Carolyn Jean Monroe, President and CEO of Old Republic National Title Insurance Group.

Management will make some opening remarks and then we will open the line for your questions. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to Craig. Please go ahead, sir.

Craig Richard Smiddy: Okay, Joe. Thank you very much. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome again to Old Republic International Corporation’s First Quarter 2026 earnings call. In the quarter, we produced $211.5 million of consolidated pretax operating income compared to $252.7 million, and our consolidated combined ratio was 96.6% compared to 93.7%. For the quarter, our operating return on beginning equity was 11.5%, and growth in book value per share including dividends was 2.6%. Specialty Insurance grew net premiums earned by 4.7% over 2025 and produced $209 million of pretax operating income compared to $260 million. Specialty’s combined ratio was 94.8% compared to 89.8%.

Title Insurance grew premiums and fees by 12% over 2025 and produced $16.7 million of pretax operating income compared to $4.3 million. Title’s combined ratio was 100% compared to 102%. Our conservative reserving practices continue to produce favorable prior year loss development in both Specialty Insurance and Title Insurance, and Frank will provide more details on that topic. So with that, Frank, I will turn the discussion over to you, and then you can turn it back to me to cover Specialty Insurance, and then we will have Carolyn cover Title Insurance.

Francis Joseph Sodaro: Thank you, Craig, and good afternoon, everyone. In this morning’s release, we reported net operating income of $171 million for the quarter compared to $[inaudible] last year. On a per share basis, comparable quarter-over-quarter results were $0.68 compared to $0.81. Starting with investments, net investment income increased just over 4% in the quarter, primarily as a result of a larger investment base and higher yields on the bond portfolio. While our average rate on corporate bonds acquired during the quarter was 4.7% compared to the average yield rolling off of about 3.8%, the total bond portfolio book yield held fairly steady with year-end at about 4.75%.

With the current interest rate environment, we expect net investment income growth to remain in the low- to mid-single digits throughout the rest of 2026. Turning now to loss reserves, both Specialty and Title Insurance recognized favorable development in the quarter, leading to a 1.5 percentage point benefit in the consolidated loss ratio compared to 2.6 points of benefit last year. While this level of favorable development was lower than we had experienced in recent years, it is within our expectations. For Specialty Insurance, Property continued to have favorable development and led the way this quarter, with a slightly higher level than last year.

Commercial Auto and Workers’ Comp had solid favorable development in the quarter; however, both were at lower levels than last year. General Liability had a moderate amount of unfavorable development that spanned several more recent accident years; it was partially offset by favorable development in older years. We ended the quarter with book value per share of $24.53, which inclusive of the regular dividend equated to an increase of 2.6% since year-end, resulting primarily from our operating earnings. In the quarter, we paid nearly $77 million in dividends and repurchased $161 million worth of our shares.

Since the end of the quarter, we repurchased another $52 million worth of shares, which leaves us with about $640 million remaining in our current repurchase program. I will now turn the call back over to Craig for a discussion of Specialty Insurance. Thanks, Craig.

Craig Richard Smiddy: Thanks, Fran. Specialty Insurance net premiums written were up 3.4% in the quarter, coming from strong rate increases on Commercial Auto and General Liability, some new business writings, and increasing premium in our newer Specialty operating companies, partially offset by a decline in our renewal retention ratios as we continue to prioritize rate in certain lines of coverage within our portfolio. We appear to be leading the market, specifically within Commercial Auto, by driving mid-teens rate increases. As mentioned in my opening remarks, in the quarter, Specialty Insurance pretax operating income was $209 million, while the combined ratio was 94.8%.

The loss ratio for the quarter was 63.6%, and that included 1.6 percentage points of favorable prior year reserve development, and that compares to a 61.7% loss ratio in the first quarter last year that included 3.3 points of favorable development. The expense ratio for the quarter was 31.2%, and that compares to 28.1% in the first quarter last year. Our continued investments in new Specialty operating companies, technology modernization, data and analytics, and AI placed some strain on the expense ratio this quarter, but we remain confident that all of these investments will provide significant long-term upside.

Turning to Commercial Auto, net premiums written were up just over 1% in the quarter, while the loss ratio came in relatively flat with the first quarter of last year at 70.4%. As I referred earlier, rate increases remained steady with the fourth quarter that we reported, and that is at a 16% rate increase level, which is in line with [inaudible]. Workers’ Comp, on the other hand, net premiums written were also up just over 1% in the quarter, while the loss ratio came in at 62.3% compared to 58.7% in the first quarter last year, and most of that difference is due to the difference in the level of favorable prior year loss reserve development.

Rate decreases for Workers’ Comp were about 2%, and here too, that is in line with loss trends, with severity remaining relatively consistent and frequency continuing its downward trends. So while we are seeing some top-line pressure along with some pressure on the expense ratio, we remain confident that our underwriting approach to focus on risk-adequate rates will continue to produce profitable combined ratios, which is the foremost priority for us. We also expect to see continuing growth in top-line contributions from our newer Specialty operating companies.

Additionally, in the quarter, we announced the formation of another new operating company, Old Republic Property, led by Patrick Hagerty, who has assembled a highly respected team of underwriters that will specialize in very selective property placements. Just this week, the executive team here at the holding company in Chicago met with Patrick and his team, and they are currently focused on building out their operating platform. Ultimately, we expect this new venture to produce solid underwriting profits, very similar to what Old Republic Inland Marine has delivered over the last couple of years.

We also announced the rebranding of Lodestar Claims and Risk Services, which is now set up as a separate stand-alone operating company focused on growing fee income for our portfolio. And finally, as we mentioned in the release, we expect to close on the ECM acquisition around July 1, which will also contribute to the top line and bottom line in the second half of this year. That concludes my comments for Specialty, and I will now turn the discussion over to Carolyn to report on Title.

Carolyn Jean Monroe: Thank you, Craig, and good afternoon. Title Insurance reported premium and fee revenue for the quarter of $678 million. This represents an increase of 12% from the first quarter of last year. So far in 2026, we have seen continued strong commercial activity. Consistent with prior years, the first quarter is seasonally slow in the residential market. The start of the 2026 home-buying season was marked by higher inventory levels, lower interest rates, and moderating price growth compared to 2025. While interest rates spiked during the last month of the quarter due to uncertainty and inflation concerns, they did ease slightly in April. The premiums produced in our direct title operations were up 6% from this time last year.

Our agency-produced premiums were up 14% and made up nearly 80% of our revenues during the quarter, which is up from 78% in the first quarter of last year. Commercial premiums increased this quarter and were 27% of our earned premiums compared to 24% in the first quarter of last year. During the quarter, we entered into a new excess-of-loss reinsurance agreement that will expand our capacity to underwrite large commercial deals. Investment income was also up this quarter by 4% compared to 2025, driven by a higher invested asset base and higher investment yields.

Our loss ratio improved to 2.6% this quarter, including 1.1 percentage points of favorable prior year loss reserve development, compared to 2.7% in 2025 that included 0.8 percentage points of favorable development. Our expense ratio improved nearly two percentage points to 97.5% from 99.4% in 2025. While our combined ratio of 100% is still elevated, the improvement reflects increased revenues and the margin expansion efforts we have been working on. Our pretax operating income increased to $16.7 million this quarter compared to $4.3 million in 2025. As we look forward to some long-awaited improvement in residential housing, we remain focused on operational efficiency and efforts to expand our margins.

We are committed to equipping our agents with the latest fraud prevention tools and other technological solutions to help them succeed in all market conditions. Internally, we are busy continuing to execute on the rollout of our new operating platform across the title operations. We are also progressing with ongoing enhancements to our commercial structure and enhancing our ability to service the elevated level of commercial transactions taking place in the market. With that, I will give it back to Craig.

Craig Richard Smiddy: Okay, Carolyn. Thank you. That concludes our prepared remarks. While we are seeing some top-line pressure along with some expense pressure in Specialty Insurance, the fundamentals in Specialty remain very strong, and the investments we are making will contribute to continued profitable growth. In Title, we are well positioned for a turn in the residential real estate market while we continue to reduce expenses in the short term. We will now open the call for questions.

Operator: Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to withdraw your question, simply press star 1 again. Your first question comes from the line of Paul Newsome from Piper Sandler. Please go ahead.

Paul Newsome: Maybe just a little bit more color on the expense drag. Do you have any thoughts about when some of these new efforts will be able to directionally impact the expense ratio in a positive way? Is it something that we should expect to happen very gradually, or is there some sort of moment when you think some of this stuff will kick in a meaningful way that we will see in the results?

Craig Richard Smiddy: Yeah, Paul. Hello, and thanks for the question. I am happy to respond. Really, there are two main drivers that we referenced in the release, and that is the start-up operating company expenses, and then what I will throw into a second category even though there are three subsets, and that is information technology with systems modernization coupled with data and analytics coupled with AI. I will speak first to the new start-up operating companies. We have about eight of the companies that we would put into the category of new, three of which are at a maturity level that we consider to be at scale.

On the other end of the spectrum, we have three new companies that have yet to produce premium. The nature of these start-up businesses, of course, is that the initial people you are hiring are the new leaders of those companies, and with that comes a higher level of compensation. Therefore, it is a matter of time for all of the companies to get to scale. Some in the middle will be reaching scale in the next year to two years, and then the latter three that have not produced any premium yet are still two to three years out before they get to scale. That is the dynamic around the start-up company expenses.

It is a matter of where we will be at the end of the day, and again, we think profitable businesses will be the end result. When it comes to information technology, data analytics, and AI, to give you some feel for that, about half of our 20 companies within the Specialty Insurance group are in the process of core system modernization. As you may know, accounting rules are such that initial expenses need to be expensed immediately. We are at the beginning stages in a lot of these core system modernization efforts, so a lot of the costs are falling directly to expense.

Then in the midterm, we will hit a point where we are able to capitalize certain costs, and that happens when the system is ready for production. At that point, we will capitalize those costs and amortize them over a period of, Frank, ten years?

Francis Joseph Sodaro: Ten years, usually, on the core systems.

Craig Richard Smiddy: Yeah. So that is what is happening there. On data analytics, we have built out a pretty significant team. I think we have most of the staff in place. For AI, we are still building out that team, and there will be more cost there to come. There are a lot of moving pieces. I know it is hard to put it all together, but it will take a little bit of time for it all to get to what I would call a run rate that will be an expense ratio less than 30%.

Paul Newsome: I guess pulling this all together, you had almost a 35% expense ratio in the first quarter, I think—well, 31% as you adjust it. Is that a good starting point for the following quarters, and then we should see some of these other efforts kick in over time and it kind of goes away? Or is there anything one-time in there that we should consider?

Craig Richard Smiddy: I follow your question, Paul. Unfortunately, it is a hard one to answer because so much is also dependent on what is happening with premium. If we had a crystal ball, we could give a much more firm answer if we knew what exactly was going to happen with premium. As you saw, and as I mentioned a couple of times in my comments, while we still have some growth, if you look at net premiums written, they are coming in a bit lower than net premiums earned, which is, of course, a leading indicator.

If you compare those growth rates to last year, the growth rates are lower than the robust growth rates we have had over the last couple of years. Premium is the wildcard here. With respect to just thinking about the expense ratio, if we can continue to grow at, say, a 3% to 5% clip for the rest of the year, I would think that an expense ratio that is at or below where we came in the first quarter is reasonable.

Paul Newsome: Well, that is great. Thank you. Much appreciate the help as always. I will let some other folks ask questions.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of David Smart from Citizens. Your line is open.

David Smart: Hi. Thank you for taking my question. This is David on for Matt. Just a question on the accident-year ratio. It looks like what was booked in Q1 was a couple of points lower. Can you help us understand how you got to that? Any pieces to think about within that?

Craig Richard Smiddy: David, just so that I make sure I understand your question correctly, you are looking at the current accident-year loss ratio for Specialty? I am looking at page two of the supplement. We are at a 65.2% compared to a 65% last year. So the current quarter was—

David Smart: Last quarter or last year?

Craig Richard Smiddy: Right. Okay. Are you comparing it to the full year?

David Smart: Yes.

Craig Richard Smiddy: Okay. Thank you. I now understand your question. Sorry about that. It makes perfect sense. It is a bit lower in the first quarter than it was for the full year of 2025. But as you can tell by comparing first quarter to first quarter, it is actually 0.2 points up. As we get through the year, it could be closer to where the full year 2025 was. But starting where it is at, even if we were to assume it stays at a 65.2% for the rest of the year, coming in at about a point and a half better than where we were in the last couple of years would be the rationale.

We have had cumulative compounded rate increases in numerous lines of business. On Workers’ Comp, we have given up, frankly, less rate than trends would suggest we could give up. Sticking to our underwriting discipline, we are willing to give up top line to maintain loss ratios. We are going out and pushing rate, particularly on Commercial Auto and General Liability where we know we need it, even though a lot of others in the marketplace are still looking in the rearview mirror and not obtaining the rate that we know is necessary.

We are going to continue to get the rate we need relative to the trends that we are observing in order to maintain the loss ratios that we have been able to get to through our compounded rate increases, or on Workers’ Comp through our very measured level of rate decreases.

David Smart: Great. That is helpful. Thank you very much.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Greg Peters from Raymond James. Your line is open.

Greg Peters: Good afternoon. I am going to focus on the Commercial Auto segment for my first question. Specifically, you talked about the continuing progress on rate increases in that line of business being in the double-digit range, and if I look at the written growth and the earned growth on a quarter-over-quarter basis, it does not seem to square with what seems to be strong pricing conditions for that line. Maybe you could give some perspective on what is going on the competitive front. Are you losing business? We hear anecdotally stories about MGAs getting more active in the space. We hear other carriers becoming more interested in the space.

Just curious about how you see your top-line results in Commercial Auto and how you see the competitive outlook going forward.

Craig Richard Smiddy: Yeah, Greg. Great question. In my comments and in the release itself, we talked about the challenges we are having with our retention ratios. For us, what we call a challenge is probably, for others, routine, but we have been able to maintain 85% to 90% retention ratios. That has slipped this quarter for sure. Growing net written by only about 1% in Commercial Auto is a reflection of that lower retention ratio, and that also ties to my comments that our approach is to require the rate increases needed to keep up with the severity trends we are seeing, be disciplined underwriters, and focus on the bottom line—focus on loss ratio.

If top line is more muted, then so be it. We think there are competitors that, as I mentioned a little bit ago, are looking in the rearview mirror and are not looking forward as best as you can look forward. If you observe, where we saw severity trends last quarter and where we see them this quarter are almost identical, in the 15% range, and we are going out and we have to get rate increases that are in that same range. With competitors, MGAs are not who we are competing with so much, so I would not say that MGAs are a reason for our lower retention ratio.

But there are a lot of other competitors, and I know I have talked about this on previous earnings calls—we pride ourselves on pricing precision and making sure we are on top of trends and reacting quickly, and others just frankly are not as good at that, especially if they are relying on ISO data. ISO is not going to be as current as we are. There are competitors out there that we think are willing to write Commercial Auto at levels that will ultimately be unprofitable. The proof is in the pudding.

We have prided ourselves on being an outlier for the last three years or so, putting up favorable development on Commercial Auto while a lot of our competitors are putting up unfavorable development. If you then take what I am saying about where we sit today in the competitive environment, they are going to continue to put up unfavorable development because they are not getting the rates they need to keep up with the trend. It is competitive. It does not help that the trucking industry has been under pressure for the last several years when it comes to their margins. They are under pressure, and the continued need for rate is difficult for them.

At the end of the day, it is all about legal system abuse, which we have talked about on prior calls. The industry is very focused on it. We are working with the Triple-I and the Chamber of Commerce to educate the public that plaintiff attorneys and litigation system abuse are costing everybody at the end of the day. But we have to deal with it, and we have to get the rate that is needed to pay for that abuse.

Greg Peters: Thanks for that color. As I think about what you are talking about, two things come to mind. You talk about profitability pressures for the trucking business. I am curious if you have a perspective, given the recent jump up in gasoline and diesel prices—if there is any spillover consequence to your company? And then, secondly, on the competition side, is it your risk management business that is being affected where you are losing share, or is it the traditional risk transfer when speaking on the Commercial Auto piece?

Craig Richard Smiddy: I will answer the last part first. It is not our risk management—Old Republic Risk Management—business. The majority of it is coming from where we write most of our Commercial Auto, which is Great West. We do write Commercial Auto in several of our other businesses as well, and similarly, they have challenges as well trying to get the rate they need relative to the trend. With regard to trucking, we are very closely aligned with the trucking associations and industry, and there were some reports that spot rates were improving—maybe some indication that, for them as an industry, they had bottomed out.

But then, as you pointed out, add on top of that increased costs for them relative to higher diesel fuel and gasoline costs. I do not know enough to tell you if the better rates they might be getting are offsetting the higher fuel costs they have or not. There are some indications that maybe that industry will be better, but as I said earlier, it is not helpful when our clients are under pressures of their own and we have to get more for our product as well. It does create a challenge on the top line.

Greg Peters: Thanks for that detail. I will pivot just for a second—I have taken up more than my fair share of time. But, Carolyn, I want to ask you about your comments on commercial, and you highlighted the excess-of-loss reinsurance arrangement and the opportunity set for writing larger commercial accounts. Can you size that up for us as we think about the growth of your commercial business over the next twelve months? Or provide some ideas of what you are thinking about when you talk about larger account opportunities?

Craig Richard Smiddy: Carolyn, I will be happy to kick it off and then let you fill in. We are seeing a large amount of opportunity on data centers, energy production facilities—large accounts that actually require more than one title insurance company to coinsure the risk. We wanted to be in a position to comfortably deploy limits that made us a significant participant on those placements. That was a good reason behind why we decided to put in place a reinsurance treaty to give us “sleep at night” coverage, so to speak, to go ahead and write more large-limit accounts, because the frequency at which we were seeing these opportunities has continued to grow over the last two years.

Carolyn, I will turn it over to you to provide details on what is happening there.

Carolyn Jean Monroe: Sure. Greg, there are some states that tell us what our limit can be, but in a lot of states it is really just up to us. That was a lot of the discussion behind getting this—just feeling a little more comfortable. We have spent a number of years growing our commercial presence, and it just became a time that it would really help us elevate what we are able to do in the commercial market. We really see commercial continuing to grow because, if you think about it, there was not a lot of commercial during the pandemic years and for about a year and a half coming out of that.

Commercial properties—something has to happen with them over five to seven years. We are starting to see a lot of portfolio projects come through, not just the data centers like Craig talked about, but a lot of other large projects that we are a lot more comfortable taking on now, knowing that we have the reinsurance.

Greg Peters: Fair enough. Thanks for the answers.

Operator: There are no further questions. I will now turn the call back over to management for closing remarks.

Craig Richard Smiddy: We are happy to have provided these comments and updates relative to the first quarter. We have three more quarters to go for the year, so we are optimistic that things will continue to progress along as planned, and we will continue to deliver solid profitability to our shareholders. We look forward to seeing you at the end of the second quarter, giving you another update, and having another discussion. Thank you all very much. Have a good day.

Operator: This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.