This conference call transcript was computer generated and almost certianly contains errors. This transcript is provided for information purposes only.EarningsCall, LLC makes no representation about the accuracy of the aforementioned transcript, and you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the information provided by the transcript.
Operator
Greetings and welcome to the Kimball Royalty Partners fourth quarter earnings conference call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. And as a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce to you Rick Black with Investor Relations. Thank you, Rick. You may begin. Thank you, Jim.
Rick Black
Thank you, operator, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Kimbell Royalty Partners conference call to review financial and operational results for the fourth quarter and the full year ended December 31, 2022. This call is also being webcast and can be accessed through the audio link on the events and presentations page of the IR section of KimbellRP.com. Information recorded on this call speaks only as of today, February 23, 2023. So please be advised that any time-sensitive information may no longer be accurate as to the date of any replay listening or transcript reading. I would also like to remind you that the statements made in today's discussion that are not historical facts, including statements of expectations or future events or future financial performance, are forward-looking statements made pursuant to the Safe Harbors Provision for the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We will be making forward-looking statements as part of today's call, which, by their nature, are uncertain and outside of the company's control. Actual results may differ materially. Please refer to today's earnings release for our disclosure on forward-looking statements. These factors and other risks and uncertainties are described in detail in the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Management will also refer to nine gap measures, including adjusted EBITDA, and cash available for distribution. Reconciliations to the nearest GAAP measures can be found at the end of today's earnings release. Kimball assumes the no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to Bob Ravenous, Kimball Realty Partners Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. Bob?
Bob Ravenous
Thank you, Rick, and good morning, everyone. We appreciate you joining us on the call this morning. With me today are several members of our senior management team, including Davis Ravnis, our president and chief financial officer, Matt Daly, our chief operating officer, and Blaine Reinsberger, our controller. We are pleased to report another very strong year for Kimball, which included new records for revenue, EBITDA, distributable cash flow per unit, and net income in 2022. In addition, we strengthened our financial flexibility by increasing our borrowing capacity and maintain a conservative balance sheet with net debt to trailing 12-month adjusted EBITDA of 0.9 times. We also completed a highly attractive and accretive acquisition in one of the highest quality and most active parts of the Permian Basin in December. The hatch acquisition reestablished the Permian as the leading basin for the company in terms of production, active rig count, ducts, permits, and undrilled inventory. For the fourth quarter, including a full quarter of production from the hatch acquisition, Run rate daily production exceeded 17,000 BOE per day for the first time in our history. To put that in perspective, when Kimball IPO'd in 2017, production was 3,116 BOE per day. This massive growth in production represents a five and a half times increase, largely a result of our continued consolidation of the mineral space. Today, we also declared a cash distribution of 48 cents per common unit. Again, looking back to 2017 through today, the total cash distributed to common unit owners since we became a public company is $8.45 per common unit. Turning to the operating environment in the fourth quarter, we had a record 92 rigs actively drilling on our acreage at the end of the year, representing 12.1% market share of all rigs drilling in the continental United States. We also had a record number of net ducks and permits which is unique given the massive drop in duck inventory nationwide. While the US rig count increased during the year and is now approaching pre-COVID levels, we do not expect much in the way of significant oil production growth from US operators. A primary reason for this is that the number of ducks in the US, one of the best indicators for near-term production growth, has dropped precipitously since 2020. In fact, in the Permian Basin alone, ducks have dropped from a peak of over 3,500 in July 2020 to just over 1,000 a day, levels not seen since 2015. While many companies will focus on replenishing their duck inventories in the short term, we believe that inflationary pressures in the drilling completion and labor side of their businesses will continue to temper oil production growth during 2023. Production stability, profitability, and quality of inventory will continue to be the primary themes of energy investing rather than the hypergrowth models of the past. At Kimball, We updated our detailed portfolio review that we initially introduced in May of 2021, and we are very pleased to report that the results of the review confirmed an estimated 19 years of drilling inventory, a superior five-year annual average PDP decline rate of 12%, and only 4.5 net wells needed per year to maintain flat production. We continue to believe that Kimball has the shallowest decline rate of any public minerals company. This characteristic is no accident. We designed Kimble this way so that we can more easily generate organic growth and stable production through various market environments and cycles. We will continue to drive growth through our disciplined acquisition strategy that is both a consistent and proven method that has been in place for over 20 years. We employ a strict set of time-tested acquisition criteria focused on adding quality production with low PDP decline rates and upside drilling locations in a transaction that is accretive to our unit holders. We are now realizing the benefits of this acquisition strategy as reflected in our record profitability, record production, high-quality inventory, and conservative balance sheet. Turning now to the commodity environment, we remain structurally bullish on oil over the long term due to years of extremely low investment, especially among energy companies outside of the United States. and strong global demand trends that we expect to accelerate later in 2023. For Kimball, we maintain a strong competitive advantage of being a pure royalty company. Namely, we have zero inflationary risk in terms of drilling and production costs, yet we receive the upside from higher commodity prices. We expect to continue our role as a major consolidator in the highly fragmented U.S. oil and gas royalty sector. that we estimate to be over $700 billion in size. And, as I've stated in the past, there are only a handful of public entities in the U.S. and Canada that have the financial resources, infrastructure, network, and technical expertise to complete large-scale multi-basin acquisitions. We believe that we are still in the early ages of this consolidation and will actively seek out targets that fit within our acquisition profile. Finally, we are very grateful to our employees, board of directors, and advisors for their contributions to our company, achieving record results in 2022. We are excited about 2023 and the prospects for Kimball to generate long-term unit holder value for years to come. I'll now turn the call over to Davis to review our financials in more detail before we open the call to questions.
Rick
Thanks, Bob, and good morning, everyone. We are very pleased to report record performance during both the year and the fourth quarter. In addition, today we are providing our full year 2023 guidance. I'll start by reviewing our financial results from the fourth quarter, beginning with oil, natural gas, and NGO revenues of $64.4 million, a decrease of 13% from the third quarter, primarily due to a decline in realized commodity prices. Kimball's fourth quarter average realized price per barrel of oil was $82.04, for MCF of natural gas was $5.02, for barrel of NGLs was $30.55, and for BOE combined was $43.65. Our record fourth quarter run rate daily production was 15,394 barrels of oil equivalent per day on a six to one basis. an increase of 3% from Q3 2022. This daily production was comprised of approximately 61% natural gas, again on a six-to-one basis, and approximately 39% from liquids, 26% from oil, and 13% from NGLs. The fourth quarter run rate daily production includes only 17 days of production from the company's $270.7 million acquisition of mineral and royalty interests held formally by Austin-based Hatch Royalty that closed on December 15th, 2022. Including a full Q4 2022 impact of the acquired production, the revenues from which will be received by the company, run rate production was 17,176 BOE per day, a new record for Kimball. As of December 31st, Kimball's major properties had 882 gross and 3.67 net drilled but uncompleted wells, as well as 675 gross and 3.27 net permits on its acreage. This data does not include our minor properties, which we estimate could add an additional 20% to the duck and permit inventory. The total amount of net ducks and permits at year end was 6.94 which is higher than the 4.5 net wells we need to maintain flat production. Based on this metric, we are optimistic about the production profile we expect for Kimball as we progress through 2023. On the expense side, general and administrative expenses for Kimball were $7.2 million in the quarter, $4.2 million of which was cash G&A expense, or $2.97 per BOE. Fourth quarter net income was approximately $35.2 million. Total fourth quarter consolidated adjusted EBITDA was $46.2 million. You will find a reconciliation of those consolidated adjusted EBITDA and cash available for distribution at the end of our news release. Today, we announced a cash distribution of 48 cents per common unit for the fourth quarter. This represents the cash distribution payment to common unit holders of 75% of cash available for distribution, and the remaining 25% will be used to pay down a portion of the outstanding borrowings under Kimball's shared revolving credit facility. Since May 2020, excluding this upcoming Q4 payment, Kimball has paid down approximately $86.1 million of outstanding borrowings under its secure revolving credit facility by allocating just a portion of its cash available for distribution for debt pay down. Commenting further on our balance sheet and liquidity, as of December 31st, Kimball had approximately $233 million in debt outstanding under its secure revolving credit facility. It also had a net debt to fourth quarter 2022 trailing 12-month consolidated adjusted EBITDA of approximately 0.9x and remained in compliance with all financial covenants under its secure revolving credit facility. Nimble had approximately $117 million in undrawn capacity under its secure revolving credit facility. We believe the company is in a stronger financial position today than it has been at any point in the last five years. Today, we are providing full-year 2023 guidance, which includes production guidance that, at its midpoint, reflects roughly flat daily production relative to our fourth quarter 2022 run rate daily production, including a full quarter of the acquired production from Hatch. We believe that most operators will focus their 2023 budgets on replenishing their duck inventories, with the goal of flat to low single-digit production growth in 2023. We also anticipate in our guidance a slightly higher production contribution from oil in 2023 compared to last year. This is due to the Hatch acquisition, which is primarily liquids focused. We expect that approximately 68% of the Q4 2022 distribution declared today will be considered return of capital and not subject to federal income taxes, with the remaining considered a qualified dividend for tax purposes. We continue to believe our tax structure provides a highly compelling competitive advantage in terms of generating superior after-tax returns to our unit holders. We begin the year having grown our borrowing base and elected commitment on our revolving credit facility to $350 million with enhanced liquidity and a conservative capital structure. In 2022, we paid out 1.88 in the tax-advantaged quarterly distributions during the year and paid down approximately $41.5 million on our credit facility. We are confident that Kimball is well-positioned for continued growth in 2023 with a resilient business model that continues to perform very well in the highly cyclical energy industry. We will continue to benefit from a dynamic and diverse portfolio, which is largely the result of strategic acquisitions, both recent and historic. We are focused and energized in pursuit of continuing to generate long-term unit holder value for years to come. With that, operator, we are now ready for questions.
Operator
Thank you. We will now be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate that your line is in the question queue. You may press star 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. And for participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary that you pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. We ask that you please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. Thank you. And our first question comes from the line of John Anis with Stiefel. Please proceed with your question.
John Anis
Hi, good morning, all, and congrats on a strong quarter. Yeah, thank you. For my first question, I wanted to ask about your views on an optimal leverage ratio. As you continue to pay down debt, how should we think about the use of cash once that level is met? Do you put it on the balance sheet with near-term macro uncertainties or providing dry powder for M&A, or would you consider increasing the payout?
Rick
Yeah, great question, John. That's probably the thought that we and the conversation that we at the management and board level have most often. It's a high-quality problem, obviously. You know, what does the company do with its cash flow? And I think the first priority will always be to send distributions on a quarterly basis to our unit holders. That being said, you know, we started during COVID allocating 25% of cash flow to debt paydowns. We're very happy and pleased that we did that historically. For the time being, we intend to continue that same policy, which would be to allocate 75% of cash flow to distributions and 25% to debt pay down. We had originally targeted a leverage ratio of, you know, frankly, looking back over time, the leverage ratio that we've targeted just continues to get lower and lower. It seems like the investor appetite for leverage in this business just continues to get lower and lower. And credit facilities and debt in general has just become much more difficult to come by in the space due to a variety of factors, many of which are unfounded in our opinion. But we're at a nice milestone currently, which is less than one time debt to EBITDA. I think we will continue to drive that down lower over time. Obviously, with natural gas prices dropping, we think it's even more important. So precipitously, I think 65% since mid-December is think it's even more important in that environment to pay down debt particularly when the uh when interest rates have risen so so rapidly you know the the return you get from paying out your revolver is better today than it obviously was really at any point since we've gone public so locking in kind of a guaranteed you know all in eight percent cost of capital by paying down a revolver is not a bad way to allocate capital and allocate that cash flow so Long way to answer the question, but I think we'll continue to drive debt lower. There may be a point at which we consider buybacks or allocating capital to third-party acquisitions. We'll obviously weigh the relative benefits of buying an external asset relative to buying our own assets or stock, which we know better than anyone does, of course, and we'll make a judgment call into what we think would generate better returns at that point. But for now, continuing to pay down debt, I think, is what we as management and the board believe is the best and highest use of our capital at this moment.
John Anis
That makes sense. And then for my follow-up, understanding that ink is still wet on the hatch deal, I wanted to ask for your thoughts on Kimball's role in consolidation in the minerals space. You highlighted being one of the few companies that can execute on large multi-basin acquisitions. In your view, which basin screen most attractive and are you starting to see seller expectations come in with the pullback in the commodity?
Rick
Yeah, great question. I could go on and on. I'll try to keep it short. Hatch was a fabulous deal for us. It was the right asset at the right time. Given the outperformance of oil relative to gas, it's even more accretive to us today than it was at the time of underwriting. I'll also share that production volumes are slightly ahead of underwriting expectations, so it's always nice to see when the deal's off to a good start. We're proving to be very conservative in how we're forecasting duct completions. So looking at the environment today, this could be, you know, from the folks that we speak to and the relationships we have on the banking side, this could be a little bit of a tougher year from an AMD perspective that tends to always happen when you see huge fluctuations in price one way or the other on either oil or the gas side. So I think we look at this environment and say, we're never going to be the largest mineral company out there. We don't want to be the largest mineral company out there. We're not going to win every deal that we look at. In fact, we lose 95% of the ones that we've been on. But every once in a while, we'll find an acquisition at the right time that that's accretive to us and meets our underwriting criteria, and we'll execute. So we continue to believe that that strategy of being patient and being conservative has worked out for us for 25 years of doing this. So I think we'll just kind of continue down that path going forward. And what was the second part of your question, John, forgive me?
John Anis
Related to which basins are screening most attractive?
Rick
Yeah, so it fluctuates. I would say that we haven't done a gassy deal in quite some time, the largest of which obviously was Haymaker, which was, in our opinion, the best mineral footprint in the Haynesville, continues to be the best mineral footprint in the Haynesville. But then again, we got priced out of the Delaware for, what was it, three or four years, Bob and Matt, and then finally were able to pull off Hatch in the fourth quarter, which I think speaks to the fact that that basin is maturing in such a way that you can buy a nice balance of existing cash flow, which is immediately accretive to distributable cash, but then you also have enough inventory to make it NAV accretive as well. So in this environment, I'd say Permian's still competitive. really tough to buy gas assets i don't think people really want to sell when the you know the strip is is down so much and especially spot being you know pushing that two dollar barrier i think it's going to be tough so we look at everything uh but if i had to guess i'd say that opportunities in less favorable contrarian basins like the eagleford or the midcon maybe even the bakken you know a little bit tougher to buy there with inventory concerns but I'd say those basins, maybe the VidCon first, frankly, I think in terms of value opportunities there, but certainly also the Eagle Fern. And then the Permian is obviously just going to continue to be the big deal source there. It just happens to be more competitive. Bob or Matt, anything you guys want to add there?
Bob Ravenous
Yeah, this is Bob. The only thing I'd like to add, too, on that is I think sometimes people get confused. I'm looking at mineral companies. versus operating companies. We don't operate. If we're able to get and screen our criteria in a basin, we're able to buy something that is more accretive than in the Permian. And of course, we love the Permian just like everybody else does. But we aren't going to buy a dilutive acquisition in the Permian just to grow for growth's sake. We only do accretive acquisitions. And if we can get a more accretive acquisition and pass all of our screening criteria in other basins, We'll do that. And by screening criteria is that, you know, obviously when we do an acquisition in another basin other than the Permian, it has to have a lot of runway for, first of all, it has to be accretive, but then it has to have long life. We always buy properties that have at least 30 to 40 years of economic life, even on low pricing cases. And then it has to have a significant room for development. So that's how we screen things. And that's why we've grown our company to not focus just on one basin, frankly, because We're asset managers. We aren't an operator. And if we can buy something that's extremely more creative in, like Davis said, a basin that isn't as popular as the Permian, we'll do that. We are not going to do a dilutive deal just to get bigger.
Bob
Great, Cutler. Thanks for taking my questions. Thanks, John.
Operator
And the next question comes from the line of Tim Rezvan with KeyBank Capital Markets. Please proceed with your question.
Tim Rezvan
Morning, everybody, and thank you for taking my questions. I wanted to start on the production guidance for the year. It's essentially in line with your current run rate, and you've talked about how Hatch is outperforming your underwriting. So in order to kind of step back a bit and talk about kind of what you're seeing across the rest of your portfolio, are you starting to see Dux getting kind of rebuilt a little bit? Are you seeing activity slow down or just trying to understand kind of how you landed on that, on that guidance for the year?
Rick
Yeah, no, it's a good question. Um, first and foremost, I'll say that we're, we're, we've historically established a pattern of being very conservative with guidance. We think that is prudent and, uh, and frankly, just the right way to run your business. So if you, if you look back over time, we've generally been in line, if not above kind of the midpoint of our guidance range. just about every factor going back since we started providing guidance a few years ago um your point raises your question raises a good point which is that you know we've made the observation in this press release that our net ducks and permits are relative to the amount of permits or the amount of completed wells necessary to keep production flat which is four and a half net our net ducks and permits which is over six currently is that ratio has never been higher so that would suggest you know, assuming historical patterns of duck completions remain constant, that would suggest that we have some amount of organic growth this year. We feel very good about that number. Let me just put it that way more directly. That being said, we're in an uncertain environment. Our company is still majority gas by revenue and production on a six to one basis. And so when you see gas spot at two bucks, it's just a harder environment for us to provide to really get aggressive about what production growth will be. So our hope is that three months, six months from now, you're on this call and you're looking at our production numbers and we're hitting what we're putting out there. And if we happen to be above those numbers, because operators have been more aggressive on either accelerating completions or drilling new wells that we don't even have in the queue right now, so be it. So Conservative numbers, we don't think it's overly conservative, but we think it's a conservative number, and we feel good about the ability to maintain or grow production volumes on our asset even without making any aggregations. Matt, Bob, anything?
Davis
No, I mean, I think that's right. I think, you know, it's interesting. This is the highest spread we've ever had between line-of-sight wells and our maintenance wells, the 4.5 net wells per year. So everything you say was correct, Davis. I mean, it's a – We do do conservative guidance, and in 2022, the midpoint was 14,400 BWI per day, and we exited at 17,176. So, you know, that's beating my quite a bit. But, yeah, so it's very conservative, we think.
Tim Rezvan
That makes sense. Gas at $2, you know, should drive one to be conservative. So I appreciate that. And then just one – That 12, I guess, 12.4% is the PDP decline you've highlighted, which I do believe stands out among the public minerals companies. Obviously, Hatch, with the activity this year, will be much higher. I mean, should we just, we can do weighted average production. I mean, should we think about that decline rate kind of going to like a mid-teens, you know, as you look out a year?
Rick
yeah so i'll i'll take a stab at this and i think you'll love this this uh color and i'll turn it over to obviously bob is the reservoir engineering arguably the best in the country in this field to provide more color it's it's interesting so it really doesn't affect the time rate as much as i'd expect and i was a little bit curious looking at the number itself initially so hash has a lot of it has an existing pdp base which has been a creative door distributable cash flow But because it's not, you know, an overwhelming component of our overall production mix, it really doesn't drag down that. It's not such flush production with such a high decline rate that it drags down the overall company decline in a really meaningful way. So there's that. So it doesn't really affect the initial PDP decline rate in a material way if we were at, you know, 12.5% before, and now it's, if we were like 11.9% before, now it's 12.4. It still hasn't moved it more than, you know, 50, 60 basis points. So not enough to create a rounding difference on that initial decline rate. So then the next question is, well, what happens when all these wonderful development catalysts materialize, unhatch, you know, all these ducts? And so that, you know, you would assume because it's flush production coming online at a higher decline rate, you would assume that would have an impact on increasing our decline rate. But you have to keep in mind that the rest of our portfolio, a lot of which is more mature in nature, the decline rate there is flattened out. And so it's kind of offset that increased decline on the hash assets with a lower decline on the more mature existing legacy KRP assets. And so the net effect, in our view, is actually not material enough to really make much of a difference. But I'll turn it over to Bob for any additional color. I articulated that in a way that makes sense. Go ahead, Bob.
Bob Ravenous
No, really nothing I can add to that. I agree with everything Davis just said.
Tim Rezvan
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for your time, everybody.
Bob
Yeah, thank you. Yeah, thank you.
Operator
And the next question comes from the line of Trafford Lamar with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question.
Lamar
Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. To kind of follow up on that last comment about the base decline rate, obviously the flush production from Hatch has offset the legacy decline of Kimball's majority assets. I noticed that the net duck and permit total kind of reverted back to the the number prior to 3Q at 4.5. Is that simply due to the influx of ducts via hatch and just the higher decline rate of those initial wells?
Rick
Bob, how would you answer that question? I think that's a good analysis.
Bob Ravenous
Yes. In looking at it, we thought that possibly it would go down because of Davis' comment about our production maturing and taking less net wells to maintain production being flat. But that didn't go down, I would say, as a primary driver of what you alluded to, is the new wells that are coming out, all the ducts that are coming out on Hatch.
Davis
Yeah, and I would say that without Hatch, it would probably be closer to 4.1, 4.2 net wells would stay flat. So Hatch probably added 0.3 to that. Okay, perfect.
Bob
Okay.
Lamar
And then, you know, last question, kind of circling back to kind of M&A landscape. Obviously, Hatch was, you know, higher unconventional versus the rest of your asset base. Does that kind of affect your mindset going forward with regards to potential acquisitions? Or is it still, I know you all mentioned, you know, if it's a creative, you know, that's priority number one. So I guess, you know, are you all looking more to lower decline assets moving forward or in the near term? Or is it simply agnostic accretive?
Rick
Agnostic accretive. It's been our experience that when you try to get too selective on, hey, we're going to go out and buy a low decline, you know, central base and platform asset that has to be our next deal. If you get that mindset, it just becomes very difficult to transact on anything and you end up missing out on nice opportunities that aren't necessarily in what you're immediately targeting. I would extend that to, uh, hydrocarbon streams. So we have folks that come into our office all the time and say, oh, you just bought a liquid focused asset with hash. Should you guys go out and buy a gassier asset now to balance it out? And the answer is no. I mean, we, we're going to look at everything and I think that's a big advantage that we have. We're not, uh, we're not, we're not pigeonholed into one basin. We're not pigeonholed to gas versus oil. Uh, we are, we, we look at the entire landscape. We try to look at as many opportunities as we possibly can. And we're not in the business of predicting which commodity is gonna outperform. So we take the view of we're gonna look at as much as we can, and we're gonna, we're gonna underwrite deals in such a way that they're accretive to us. And we have a conservative price put into it and we'll buy whatever opportunities give us the highest and best return on capital amongst that larger landscape. This business is hard enough and competitive enough as it is. I can't even imagine having to only buy oil-based assets in the Permian Basin only or only being able to buy gas assets in the Amesville only. I just think that's a much harder business to run. You'd lose out on opportunities if you didn't have a more geographically diverse footprint. That being said, I will say this. we would absolutely love, love, love, love to be able to go out and buy a, you know, single digit decline, you know, to pick on that one place, but you know, like central basin platform asset that, that just had a long life reserve base. I mean, that's how, that's how Kimball got started. That's how we made our money historically is buying these very, very predictable, very conservative, um, Will based assets that all sorts of nice things end up happening in terms of an answer or recovery and workovers and re completions and all that on these assets that people think are melting ice cubes, but ultimately aren't. So we would love to do that. It's just hard to find those opportunities. I mean, the people that own That don't want to carve up overrides the people that own those minerals have typically built at least the larger positions have owned them for generations. And so they're not, you know, they're just as astute as we are in terms of how predictable and wonderful that cash flow is. So they're harder deals to get. But, no, nothing would make us happier than to underwrite a, you know, $100 to $300 million, you know, conventional oil asset on the platform in some, you know, world-class unit. That's how we got started.
Lamar
Right. Awesome. Well, I appreciate the color, guys. Thanks again. Thank you. Thank you.
Operator
Thank you. At this time, there are no further questions, and I would like to turn the floor back over to the Kimball Royalty Management Team for closing remarks.
Bob Ravenous
We thank you all for joining us this morning and look forward to speaking with you again when we report first quarter results. This completes today's call. Thank you.
Operator
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation. This does conclude today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and have a wonderful day.
Disclaimer