[quote=BullBroker][quote=Primo]You can’t sit there and tell me that you would turn down 5.5% liquid every 7 days, and some of the municipal yields were returning 8%-9% TEY’s.

    Yes I can.  I also shared the conversation I had with another broker about this very issue before the market freeze up.  I did not know anything beyond my understanding of fixed income, nor did I predict anything, but turns out I called it right.  Deal with it.  As far as you saying that if I did not short the ARS market (how would you do that BTW) it doesn't really count is just plain dumb.[/quote]   The thing that cracks me up about you is that you say you didn't know it was going to happen, but you knew that historically something that pays 4.5%+ on AAA is too risky.  And C payed 12% on preferreds because they are such a solid company?  No they were forced to pay a high rate because the risk involved is elevated.  Knowing what was going to happen is irrelavant.  The simple fact is, rates on fixed income are a measure of risk.  That is why AAA pays less than BBB.  For AAA to be 200 bps over a 5 year A says something is wrong.  That had nothing to do with why the market failed, it didn't fail because even the increased (even if only perceived) risk was too high for even the elevated rates and everyone stopped buying them.  Fill in your own effecient market statement here because Closed Ends were paying a higher yield than they could afford and defaulted.  They are actually having to pay an even higher failed rate now than they were before.  Your reasoning for avoiding ARP's was completely wrong, it was basically dumb luck guys like you think guys like me get lucky alot that's why I am calling you out.  Did any of the ARP's default? Not yet although Jefferson County Alabama is very close.  Has anyone lost their money?   Has anyone lost a dime of interest?  Just the student loan ARS that have reset at 0%. If the answer was yes then I would agree with your reasoning that the yields were too good to be true.  Unfortunately, for you none of the above are true and the reason you avoided them has nothing to do with why they failed.    Basically you avoided them for the complete wrong reason, by dumb luck you just happened to be right in the call to avoid them, even though you did it for the wrong reason.  Now you are coming on here thumping your chest stating how stupid other brokers were for being in them.  Just try and show me something more ignorant!   I never said you could short you said if I didn't short them then I should shut up.  Again, how would I have accomplished this?  them why don't you reread the post and try again.  I stated that Goldman made money on the other side of the trade, not only did they see what was happening they positioned themselves to make money when everyone else was having to do massive writedowns.  [/quote]   You made the statement "you can't tell me..."  I can.

[quote=Primo][quote=BullBroker][quote=Primo]You can’t sit there and tell me that you would turn down 5.5% liquid every 7 days, and some of the municipal yields were returning 8%-9% TEY’s.

    Yes I can.  I also shared the conversation I had with another broker about this very issue before the market freeze up.  I did not know anything beyond my understanding of fixed income, nor did I predict anything, but turns out I called it right.  Deal with it.  As far as you saying that if I did not short the ARS market (how would you do that BTW) it doesn't really count is just plain dumb.[/quote]   The thing that cracks me up about you is that you say you didn't know it was going to happen, but you knew that historically something that pays 4.5%+ on AAA is too risky.  And C payed 12% on preferreds because they are such a solid company?  No they were forced to pay a high rate because the risk involved is elevated.  Knowing what was going to happen is irrelavant.  The simple fact is, rates on fixed income are a measure of risk.  That is why AAA pays less than BBB.  For AAA to be 200 bps over a 5 year A says something is wrong.  That had nothing to do with why the market failed, it didn't fail because even the increased (even if only perceived) risk was too high for even the elevated rates and everyone stopped buying them.  Fill in your own effecient market statement here because Closed Ends were paying a higher yield than they could afford and defaulted.  They are actually having to pay an even higher failed rate now than they were before.  Your reasoning for avoiding ARP's was completely wrong, it was basically dumb luck guys like you think guys like me get lucky alot that's why I am calling you out.  Did any of the ARP's default? Not yet although Jefferson County Alabama is very close.  Has anyone lost their money?   Has anyone lost a dime of interest?  Just the student loan ARS that have reset at 0%. If the answer was yes then I would agree with your reasoning that the yields were too good to be true.  Unfortunately, for you none of the above are true and the reason you avoided them has nothing to do with why they failed.    Basically you avoided them for the complete wrong reason, by dumb luck you just happened to be right in the call to avoid them, even though you did it for the wrong reason.  Now you are coming on here thumping your chest stating how stupid other brokers were for being in them.  Just try and show me something more ignorant!   I never said you could short you said if I didn't short them then I should shut up.  Again, how would I have accomplished this?  them why don't you reread the post and try again.  I stated that Goldman made money on the other side of the trade, not only did they see what was happening they positioned themselves to make money when everyone else was having to do massive writedowns.  [/quote]   You made the statement "you can't tell me..."  I can.[/quote]   You are just scrambling to save face, what is currently going on with the ARP has next to nothing to do with the yields, or the rating of the ARP.  If that was the case they would have all defaulted, they failed and are still paying interest.  You obviously don't even understand what you are talking about.  Quit quoting rates and yields in your argument because those are not why the ARP's failed.    You should probably just drop your argument now because you are just digging your self deeper and deeper into your obvious lack of knowledge about ARP's.  Once again I NEVER said ANYTHING about shorting ARP's that's just ignorant, and I don't know why you keep bringing it up.  I stated that Goldman was on the other side of the trades making a market in the auctions and all of the sudden stopped when they saw what was happening with the credit crisis. 

[quote=BullBroker] Quit quoting rates and yields in your argument because those are not why the ARP’s failed. 

 [/quote]   This is getting a little into semantics now, but if Primo avoided the ARP's because the yields were too high for his liking, and the ARP's auctions fail, his reasoning still stands and it worked well for him.   If I buy GM because I think their new line of cars will boost sales and send the stock up, and the stock does go up and I double my money, does it really matter that their new line of cars didn't sell well at all?  It could have been that they got rid of Hummer and cut retiree's benefits, and cut jobs, and sold a plant, which made the stock go up.    For argument's sake, who cares?  I don't think Primo's saying that's why the ARP's failed; he's saying that's why he didn't get into them.

Inless he put money on the opposite side of the trade don’t come on here and thump your chest against the guys who lost money.

  Did I read that wrong?  For the third time, how?   Tell me which doesn't fit.   AAA (safe) Daily Liquidity (at the very least on the 7 day reset) Pays 200 bps over Fed O/N rate tax free   My problem is you should at the very least ask why.  We are financial advisors who should act differently than Joe Sixpack.  My comments are based on a specific broker in my office who refused to ask why, just plowed ahead.  I am certain he was not the only one.  Then all these guys take absolutely no responsibility, blaming the entire mess solely on the B/D.  While the B/D does also bear blame, and probably most of it, it was disclosed (at least at my firm) that daily liquidity was provided as a service at the discretion of the firm.  I am the type of person who questions everything and if you can't give me a plausible answer, I am not putting any client money there, so I avoided ARS. Good for me.   You can't sit there and tell me that you would turn down 5.5% liquid every 7 days, and some of the municipal yields were returning 8%-9% TEY's.   You made a blanket statement that I can refute, so I did.  BTW, please respond to the ARS clients who are now getting 0%.  Seems as if you overlooked that.  And the reason that the ARS market froze up is that B/D's stopped providing liquidity.  Yes it had nothing to do with defaults or credit ratings.  Never said it did.  Didn't say it at the time and am not claiming it now.  Said rates on fixed income were a measurement of risk.  Liquidity risk is still a risk, right?  You don't need to know what the risk is to recognize an efficient market pricing it.   As far as Goldman, well they have access to a bit more information than you or I.  Like how supportive of the auctions B/D's were.  Good for them that they played the right side of the trade.

[quote=Primo]Inless he put money on the opposite side of the trade don’t come on here and thump your chest against the guys who lost money.

  Did I read that wrong?  For the third time, how?   Tell me which doesn't fit.   AAA (safe) Daily Liquidity (at the very least on the 7 day reset) Pays 200 bps over Fed O/N rate tax free   My problem is you should at the very least ask why.  We are financial advisors who should act differently than Joe Sixpack.  My comments are based on a specific broker in my office who refused to ask why, just plowed ahead.  I am certain he was not the only one.  Then all these guys take absolutely no responsibility, blaming the entire mess solely on the B/D.  While the B/D does also bear blame, and probably most of it, it was disclosed (at least at my firm) that daily liquidity was provided as a service at the discretion of the firm.  I am the type of person who questions everything and if you can't give me a plausible answer, I am not putting any client money there, so I avoided ARS. Good for me.   You can't sit there and tell me that you would turn down 5.5% liquid every 7 days, and some of the municipal yields were returning 8%-9% TEY's.   You made a blanket statement that I can refute, so I did.  BTW, please respond to the ARS clients who are now getting 0%.  Seems as if you overlooked that.  And the reason that the ARS market froze up is that B/D's stopped providing liquidity.  Yes it had nothing to do with defaults or credit ratings.  Never said it did.  Didn't say it at the time and am not claiming it now.  Said rates on fixed income were a measurement of risk.  Liquidity risk is still a risk, right?  You don't need to know what the risk is to recognize an efficient market pricing it.   As far as Goldman, well they have access to a bit more information than you or I.  Like how supportive of the auctions B/D's were.  Good for them that they played the right side of the trade.[/quote]   So basically in your alternate Universe, because I myself for the most part avoided ARP's simply because of the fact that I had yet to aquire many clients that had a need for a higher yield with weekly liquidity.  I can come on here and thump my chest because I don't have millions of client assets tied up in ARP's either.  Now what would you think if I came on here running down all the idiot brokers who fell into the ARP trap and bragged about how I didn't touch them?  In your world it doesn't matter why I avoided them just because of the mere fact that I did I have the right to take credit for it and put down those who did.  How much sense does that make? 

[quote=BullBroker][quote=Primo]Inless he put money on the opposite side of the trade don’t come on here and thump your chest against the guys who lost money.

  Did I read that wrong?  For the third time, how?   Tell me which doesn't fit.   AAA (safe) Daily Liquidity (at the very least on the 7 day reset) Pays 200 bps over Fed O/N rate tax free   My problem is you should at the very least ask why.  We are financial advisors who should act differently than Joe Sixpack.  My comments are based on a specific broker in my office who refused to ask why, just plowed ahead.  I am certain he was not the only one.  Then all these guys take absolutely no responsibility, blaming the entire mess solely on the B/D.  While the B/D does also bear blame, and probably most of it, it was disclosed (at least at my firm) that daily liquidity was provided as a service at the discretion of the firm.  I am the type of person who questions everything and if you can't give me a plausible answer, I am not putting any client money there, so I avoided ARS. Good for me.   You can't sit there and tell me that you would turn down 5.5% liquid every 7 days, and some of the municipal yields were returning 8%-9% TEY's.   You made a blanket statement that I can refute, so I did.  BTW, please respond to the ARS clients who are now getting 0%.  Seems as if you overlooked that.  And the reason that the ARS market froze up is that B/D's stopped providing liquidity.  Yes it had nothing to do with defaults or credit ratings.  Never said it did.  Didn't say it at the time and am not claiming it now.  Said rates on fixed income were a measurement of risk.  Liquidity risk is still a risk, right?  You don't need to know what the risk is to recognize an efficient market pricing it.   As far as Goldman, well they have access to a bit more information than you or I.  Like how supportive of the auctions B/D's were.  Good for them that they played the right side of the trade.[/quote]   So basically in your alternate Universe, because I myself for the most part avoided ARP's simply because of the fact that I had yet to aquire many clients (not having the clientele to do an investment doesn't mean you avoided it, just you didn't have the clients to do it, purposefully avoiding an investment that you have the clientele for that turns sour is a good thing). that had a need for a higher yield with weekly liquidity.(they had daily liquidity provided by the B/D.  Are you sure it is I that doesn't understand ARS (which covers ARPs, MARs, and MARPS, use the correct terminology please)  I can come on here and thump my chest (for not having the clientele?, that makes me laugh)  because I don't have millions of client assets tied up in ARP's either.  Now what would you think if I came on here running down all the idiot (I never used the term idiot you did, reread your own posts) brokers who fell into the ARP trap and bragged about how I didn't touch them?  In your world it doesn't matter why I avoided (you didn't avoid them, you didn't have the clientele to buy them.  I avoided them) them just because of the mere fact that I did I have the right to take credit for it and put down those who did.  How much sense does that make?  [/quote]   You can't sit there and tell me that you would turn down 5.5% liquid every 7 days, and some of the municipal yields were returning 8%-9% TEY's.   You made a blanket statement that I can refute, so I did. You cannot dispute this hard as you try to redirect the conversation.  Sounds to me you would have done them if you could.   Inless he put money on the opposite side of the trade don't come on here and thump your chest against the guys who lost money.   Did I read that wrong?  For the third time, how?  Still waiting for a reply.   BTW, please respond to the ARS clients who are now getting 0%.  Seems as if you overlooked that.  Still waiting for a reply.

Bull - First - full disclosure - i didnt read this entire thread - i skimmed it, its just too freakin long!

With that said, it seems to me, it didnt take a genius to figure out that there was something wrong with ARS when they were yielding 4.5% plus for 7 day maturities when T bills were yielding 1%. I didnt really understand how ARS even worked. One of the brokers in my office came into me and said something like "wow did you see the yields on the ARS 7 day? What a great deal for liquidity needs!" With no understanding of ARS methodolgy, it is not hard to figure out that there was risk in the ARS market, that was SLIGHTLY more than the risk free investment in T Bills.   Its the reason i stayed away. It just didnt make sense. I think its also the point Primo is trying to make. Again, i didnt rread the whole thread, maybe i am misunderstanding, in which case I;m sure I'll get sh*t for it.  

Ok this has gotten too far and has gotten off track.  The original point was that primo was thumping his chest because he avoided ARP/ARS’s, ok good for him that’s all well and good, then he went on to take shots at the brokers who did use them.  I tried to defend the brokers whom invested in them, while I don’t think what they did was right I don’t think it’s right “in hindsight” to sit there and judge them.  I also disagree with the reasoning behind primo avoiding ARP/ARS’s because they gave too high a yield, for the rating and liquidity.  In my opinion that is not why the ARP/ARS’s failed in the first place making void the fact that is in fact why you avoided them. 

  And.....I'm done you all say your peace and move on, I just disagree with judging these brokers in hindsight. 

I agree this has spun out of control.  You missed my original point.  You made a blanket statement, I refuted it.  The comments (pathetic specifically) in my first post were directed at the broker in my office.  Read the post again.

  What spun this thread so far off track was all the comments after that.  I realize Bull that you are a trainee and this isn't really a fair fight.  Let me point out a few mistakes.   You said I didn't understand the ARS market, while I clearly do.   You said if I didn't short the market I should shut up, which you (unless you working at the institutional trading desk) nor I can do.   You said no one is losing money.  To this point you are correct, although Jefferson County AL is very close to default and others will follow.  More on this later.   You said no one had lost a dime of interest.  Thousands of holders of students loan ARS are getting 0%.  Back to losing money.  Stop thinking like an investor and start thinking like and investment professional.  0% interest on illiquid money is losing purchasing power.  This is what an investment professional is concerned about, not volatility.   ARS=car.  ARPS=Chevy.  MARPS= Ford.  You keep talking about a Ford and calling it a Chevy.  At the very least refer to it as a car.   You refuse to acknowledge that rates on fixed income are a measure of risk, perceived or real.  This is not based on historical data, this is fixed income 101, very basic stuff.   You state that the defaulted rates are higher.  Another blanket statement.  Many funds have max rates based on a benchmark, the S&P/Kenny AA for example.  Many (not all) ARS are back to paying market rates.  Not such a good deal for an illiquid investment.   You said that what was going on with ARS had nothing to do with rates.  Thats like saying your cough has nothing to do with your lung cancer because you have a cold.    Prato, you get my point.  I don't have a problem with anyone who did their due diligence and bought an investment that turned sour.  My issue is those who buy an investment based on Mr. Producer is doing it so should I, then crying afterwards.  Again I was referring specifically to the broker in my own office, although I am sure he is not the only one.

Not to add fuel to the fire, but at least you’re not with UBS after their ARS news coming out today…

  Unfortunately, none of my UBS prospects were in the ARS market...   http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B1F56B7B9%2DF6A7%2D44C4%2D9072%2D73EB9B575CA1%7D&siteid=mktw

norway401:

OOOPPS!!  Wonder what their legal defense will be??

  UBS, You & Us, until we start losing money and can use you to bail ourselves out...

I was thinking perhaps something along the lines of - No connection with our selling at that particular time But am sure the best of legal firms will be representing them on behalf of UBS.

Bailouts not here in Canada....yet!!!

[quote=norway401]

Bailouts not here in Canada....yet!!![/quote]   I'm curious to know, when will you canucks actually become a real country?

Good Lord, I was ready to let this go but I have to correct you a little.     [quote=Primo]I agree this has spun out of control.  You missed my original point.  You made a blanket statement, I refuted it.  The comments (pathetic specifically) in my first post were directed at the broker in my office.  Read the post again.   What spun this thread so far off track was all the comments after that.  I realize Bull that you are a trainee and this isn't really a fair fight. Your problem is that you assume too much.  You make assumptions about brokers across the country when you know very little about their individual situation.  You also assume that since I am a trainee that this isn't a fair fight.  Some advice, quit making generic assumptions about people you know nothing about.  Let me point out a few mistakes.   You said I didn't understand the ARS market, while I clearly do.  Your under the impression that rates and yields are the main reason why ARS failed.  While it is a small part it's missing the big picture about what truly happened and that's why I said I don't think you fully understand ARS.   You said if I didn't short the market I should shut up, which you (unless you working at the institutional trading desk) nor I can do. Let me correct you, I never once said you could or should short ARS. I said Goldman was on the other side of the trade meaning they were making a market in the ARS and making profit on the spread.  If you need me to explain how market makers make money on the spread I will.    You said no one is losing money.  To this point you are correct, although Jefferson County AL is very close to default and others will follow.  More on this later.   You said no one had lost a dime of interest.  Thousands of holders of students loan ARS are getting 0%.  Back to losing money.  Stop thinking like an investor and start thinking like and investment professional.  0% interest on illiquid money is losing purchasing power.  This is what an investment professional is concerned about, not volatility.  I didn't realize the student loan ARS's stopped paying interest.  We didn't have the ability to ticket the student loan backed ARS's in our system.  So if this is true I was wrong, and should have done my research before stating otherwise.  ARS=car.  ARPS=Chevy.  MARPS= Ford.  You keep talking about a Ford and calling it a Chevy.  At the very least refer to it as a car.   You refuse to acknowledge that rates on fixed income are a measure of risk, perceived or real.  This is not based on historical data, this is fixed income 101, very basic stuff. Never once stated that rate, was not a measure of risk.  I just stated that the rate was not the reason why the ARS failed, which you are barking like it's the only reason and that is just plain wrong.  In your world if ARS had a lower yield (less risky) this would have never happened, and that would be wrong.  Why you claim to understand the ARS market but can't grasp this point is beyond me.    You state that the defaulted rates are higher.  Another blanket statement.  Many funds have max rates based on a benchmark, the S&P/Kenny AA for example.  Many (not all) ARS are back to paying market rates.  Not such a good deal for an illiquid investment. There are many if not more that are paying failed rates, I read the prospectus for the one I held, they don't have a choice they must pay the failed rate.    You said that what was going on with ARS had nothing to do with rates.  Thats like saying your cough has nothing to do with your lung cancer because you have a cold.   I stated that it had very little to do with rates, and you can't bring proof that it was based on rates because that is just wrong.  It all started when a market maker decided not to make a market in the other side of the trade hence a ripple effect through the entire market.  The market maker didn't come and say "ya know these rates are just too high I don't think I want to participate today".  At least I can admit when I was wrong about the student loans not paying interest rates. Prato, you get my point.  I don't have a problem with anyone who did their due diligence and bought an investment that turned sour.  My issue is those who buy an investment based on Mr. Producer is doing it so should I, then crying afterwards.  Again I was referring specifically to the broker in my own office, although I am sure he is not the only one.[/quote]

[quote=BullBroker]

Good Lord, I was ready to let this go but I have to correct you a little.     [quote=Primo]I agree this has spun out of control.  You missed my original point.  You made a blanket statement, I refuted it.  The comments (pathetic specifically) in my first post were directed at the broker in my office.  Read the post again.   What spun this thread so far off track was all the comments after that.  I realize Bull that you are a trainee and this isn't really a fair fight. Your problem is that you assume too much.  You make assumptions about brokers across the country when you know very little about their individual situation.  You also assume that since I am a trainee that this isn't a fair fight.  Some advice, quit making generic assumptions about people you know nothing about.  Let me point out a few mistakes.   You said I didn't understand the ARS market, while I clearly do.  Your under the impression that rates and yields are the main reason why ARS failed.  While it is a small part it's missing the big picture about what truly happened and that's why I said I don't think you fully understand ARS.  That is not what I said at all.  Elevated rates indicate a risk, unable to determine the risk on my own or find someone who could give me a plausible explanation, I avoided ARS.  Your reading comprehension is poor.   You said if I didn't short the market I should shut up, which you (unless you working at the institutional trading desk) nor I can do. Let me correct you, I never once said you could or should short ARS. I said Goldman was on the other side of the trade meaning they were making a market in the ARS and making profit on the spread.  If you need me to explain how market makers make money on the spread I will.  You said if I didn't short the market I should quit thumping my chest.  It is right there in black and white.  This implies that I somehow had the ability to, otherwise why would you have said it?   You said no one is losing money.  To this point you are correct, although Jefferson County AL is very close to default and others will follow.  More on this later.  This is not a secret, in fact if you are following the ARS market, this is quite prominent news.  Why no comment?   You said no one had lost a dime of interest.  Thousands of holders of students loan ARS are getting 0%.  Back to losing money.  Stop thinking like an investor and start thinking like and investment professional.  0% interest on illiquid money is losing purchasing power.  This is what an investment professional is concerned about, not volatility.  I didn't realize the student loan ARS's stopped paying interest.  We didn't have the ability to ticket the student loan backed ARS's in our system.  So if this is true I was wrong, and should have done my research before stating otherwise.  There are many facts about this issue that you do not realize, it is plastered over each of your posts, yet you continue to plow ahead. ARS=car.  ARPS=Chevy.  MARPS= Ford.  You keep talking about a Ford and calling it a Chevy.  At the very least refer to it as a car.  Again no comment?   You refuse to acknowledge that rates on fixed income are a measure of risk, perceived or real.  This is not based on historical data, this is fixed income 101, very basic stuff. Never once stated that rate, was not a measure of risk.  I just stated that the rate was not the reason why the ARS failed, which you are barking like it's the only reason and that is just plain wrong.  In your world if ARS had a lower yield (less risky) this would have never happened, and that would be wrong.  Why you claim to understand the ARS market but can't grasp this point is beyond me.  There you go making connections that do not exist.  I did not nor do I now feel the ARS market failed because of rates, I stated that elevated rates denote risk, and that I avoided the market for this reason.   You state that the defaulted rates are higher.  Another blanket statement.  Many funds have max rates based on a benchmark, the S&P/Kenny AA for example.  Many (not all) ARS are back to paying market rates.  Not such a good deal for an illiquid investment. There are many if not more that are paying failed rates, I read the prospectus for the one I held, they don't have a choice they must pay the failed rate.  Thanks for restating my post.  Point was, you said everyone was clipping higher rates, and there are thousands that are not.   You said that what was going on with ARS had nothing to do with rates.  Thats like saying your cough has nothing to do with your lung cancer because you have a cold.   I stated that it had very little to do with rates, and you can't bring proof that it was based on rates because that is just wrong. Again, rates did not cause the failure of the market, they just predicted a risk in an efficient market.  If ARS were paying the historical 50 bps over the market when it failed you would be right.  However they were paying 200 bps over the market at the time of failure.  Why?  Could it be an efficient market pricing risk correctly?  Funny thing is, you will never know if a market if pricing any instrument correctly until some point in the future.  If you took the information you had at the time and participated or chose to not participate and your decision turns out to be correct, is that not a good thing?  It all started when a market maker decided not to make a market in the other side of the trade hence a ripple effect through the entire market.  The market maker didn't come and say "ya know these rates are just too high I don't think I want to participate today".  At least I can admit when I was wrong about the student loans not paying interest rates. Prato, you get my point.  I don't have a problem with anyone who did their due diligence and bought an investment that turned sour.  My issue is those who buy an investment based on Mr. Producer is doing it so should I, then crying afterwards.  Again I was referring specifically to the broker in my own office, although I am sure he is not the only one. No reply?  It's funny that you only reply to half my posts. [/quote] [/quote]

Get ready for the title fight of the night, Primo vs. BullBroker.  This 10 round Registered Rep Rampage will decide the forum champion with full on filibuster flair.  Will we see someone bite off the other’s ear, or will a TKO decide who wins the Binary System Buckle?  Stay tuned…

  We will be making odds and taking bets.  Please deposit all monies into my PayPal account...thank you.