 Live from Las Vegas, Nevada, it's theCUBE at IBM Interconnect 2015. Brought to you by headline sponsor, IBM. Hello everyone, you're watching IBM Interconnect conference live in Las Vegas. This is the special presentation of SiliconANGLE Media's theCUBE. This is SiliconANGLE's flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the civil noise. I'm John Furrier, joining my co-host Dave Vellante and guest Stu Miniman with Wikibon. Just put out some new research. They had a crowd chat. We are live in Las Vegas, breaking down IBM's big moves into cloud, into technology, under the hood. Big show for IBM as they continue their transformation as a huge global multinational company, bringing the modern era technologies a new way to think, a new way to do business. This is IBM's core theme. We're live inside the Go Social Lounge, a new digital experience that brings the bloggers, brings everybody together, trending hashtags, crowd chats, all the top VIP influencers, and Veronica Belmont, who's hosting a bunch of videos. And this is a place where people can tweet, can chat, post on Facebook, put up photos, and of course theCUBE is broadcasting live. This is our anchor desk, our ESPN of Tech. Dave, watching the show. Stu, welcome to this segment. Thanks guys. Stu, you're out on the floor scouring for stories. You're talking to people. You're looking at the keynotes. You've hosted a crowd chat. Release some new data on infrastructure as a service. So I got to get your take. Dave and I have been talking about data oceans, data lakes, systems of records, systems of engagement. What is your take on what IBM's doing? Start the big picture and then drill down into some of the key areas. All right, well, yeah, Johnny, throwing out a lot of terms there. I'll start with one of the big trends that I've been looking at for the last few years. It's really talking about distributed systems. Here we are at this show. It's really distributed conference. We've got two hotels, 21,000 people all over the place and bringing cloud, mobile, social business all into one place. A lot's going on and it's interesting to watch IBM as they take really these three shows and kind of munch them together. There's some that fit together real nicely. Of course, cloud enables mobility and social leverages a lot of these and some that it's going to take them a little while to kind of smooth out the edges and push things together some. So it was a decent keynote this morning. I'd love to get in a little more detail. Areas that I cover, things like OpenStack. IBM announced OpenStack as a service and there really wasn't much documentation or detail to be able to explain on it yet. Enterprise containers is kind of interesting leveraging. Of course, Docker, the hottest trend I've seen none of the last couple of years, but almost ever, it's just thermonuclear how hot Docker's been. So Stu, I got to tell you that I've heard Redis, Docker, BlueMix, a lot of good stuff going on BlueMix. I mean, they're running fast. They're trying to go really, really hard, but can they go any faster without redlining their engine? At some point, can they pedal any faster? Go faster. People want to go faster to see the progress. Where are they and what do they need to do? So John, BlueMix is doing well. I think it's a good momentum there. Tim Crawford and I did a crowd chat earlier today and looking at infrastructure as a service, SoftLayer, we feel has a lot of good promise and there's a lot of things to be built off of it, but really doesn't feel like the IBM marketing engine has gotten behind it. Some of the other things that you've mentioned there would love to see IBM a little bit more forward, pushing their vision there and showing how partners and customers can take adoption of it. And in the survey that we did, customers that were using IBM gave them the highest marks out of any of the cloud providers out there. I mean, it's real close in between them, but when I talk to users, I don't hear SoftLayer talked about an awful lot. Well, let's back up a couple of years ago. IBM had that high profile head-on with Amazon EWS. Amazon won in court, they won the deal. That was a wake-up call for IBM. They'd already initiated the SoftLayer by, I'm sure, but subsequent to the SoftLayer acquisition has completely changed IBM's posture in the marketplace, Stu, and I want to get your opinion on this. So the last quarter, IBM announced that they had a 60% growth in cloud for the year. They said there's a $7 billion business. Now, that includes private cloud. I mean, it's unclear what they're including on that. It's like when Microsoft talks about its cloud business, you know, Amazon doesn't really talk about its cloud business, although it talks about talking about its cloud business. Oracle does actually talk about its cloud business. It breaks it out. But IBM also said, they gave another data point that said, as a service business, it's running at a $3.5 billion run rate. So I feel like these large companies are waiting until it's big enough so they can either claim leadership or maybe not divulge too much information to the competition. But what do you make of those numbers? A 60% growth rate, $7 billion business, $3.5 billion run rate on as a service. Yeah, so Dave, IBM has a really solid SaaS portfolio and their infrastructure in pass has also been doing well. The breakout I saw, it was actually on, gosh, the business cloud news has IBM's just if you take infrastructure as a service, platform as a service and hybrid combined, IBM is 48% growth year over year. So that's pretty good and puts them number three revenue behind only Amazon and Microsoft. So actually more revenue in infrastructure and platform as a service than Google does. I still wouldn't call IBM one of the mega cloud providers and even in the keynote this morning, Robert LeBlanc said, we're not trying to be building mega data centers. We want to build local distributed regional pieces. They're adding services on top of it. So it's a little difficult to pin down, what do we call, how do we characterize IBM? SoftLayer in fact, is it really public cloud or is it hosted private cloud because I can get bare metal? I can really just put a lot of my own environment on a bare metal and do whatever I want with it versus just taking services and using them, which is what we think of more from a public cloud provider. Yeah, I mean, I really, it's hard to figure out exactly what's being counted. I would love to see a clean infrastructure as a service, platform as a service, software as a service and you're bringing up a really good point. IBM under Steve Mills' direction had purchased well over dozens. It's probably hundreds of SaaS companies that's all included in there. Really would like to better understand that breakout. I got to say Oracle's the only company that I know of that breaks that out cleanly. Salesforce might as well, I can't say for sure. And obviously the SaaS guys do, but I'm not even sure Salesforce does, but it's nice, clean infrastructure, service, platform as a service, software as a service. That's what I'd like to see more of just so we can understand really what's in there because like for instance, IBM did two outsourcing deals last quarter. One with Lufthansa, another one with ABN, Ambrou, Ambrou and they both involved cloud deals, right? So it was a billion dollar outsourcing deals, one billion with cloud. So cloud, analytics, this is abundantly in, I don't know if that's in there or not, but so what your point is that they're starting to be perceived anyway as a player. They've got reliability and security to their advantage, but it still feels disjointed to me. The whole market feels disjointed to me. And Dave, I mean, IBM has some really good strengths on the analytics side. They're building up Watson and putting that into some of the other pieces. As a matter of fact, I overheard somebody talking about, if you listen to the keynote, it sounded like some of the other cloud solutions were following some of the same use cases that we heard from Watson, just in the medical field. IBM's taking their playbook and going to other parts of the business and trying to replicate the success that they've had in the past. Well, it's not a bad strategy is to say, okay, just call everything cloud that could be cloud, put it into the cloud and then get there and then build a roadmap around it. I mean, that's not a bad strategy. I mean, you can say that's some cloud washing, but as long as there's R&D behind it and products come out of the pipeline, I really don't have a problem with it. I actually think it's smart. But, you know, again, John and I were talking about this morning, when you look at IBM's growth initiatives, you're talking about 16% growth and it's a $25 billion business. We're talking about cloud, analytics, mobile and social. There's a $25 billion business for IBM. That's 27% of the company's revenue. Sounds good and it's growing at 16%. The problem is there's that other, you know, 75% of the business that's really under a lot of fire. The other thing John and Stu for IBM is they got a lot of currency headwinds now. The higher dollar accounted for 10 points of lost growth last quarter for IBM. So that's a real challenge, just perception wise, but Stu, what does IBM have to do to be number one in cloud, which is its stated goal? Well, it's a good question, Dave. One of the things is how much, if you look, IBM has the cloud that they own, but then they have plenty of solutions that they could put into other clouds. So, I mean, I would walk through the show floor and there's, you know, the mainframe group. There's the power systems and all the pure systems that are going on there. How much can they push those into really the cloud service providers the managed service providers, I think is what IBM usually calls them. And I haven't heard enough from IBM on that piece of it because, you know, there's lots of places where people are going to put their data. That application modernization takes a lot of time. So there's lots of companies hoping with that push and, you know, IBM historically is really good at working with a broad ecosystem, but I still feel that I haven't seen enough, you know, as to how IBM's really enabling those partners and I'll borrow a line from Tim Crawford is we're talking a lot about the highway and we're not talking enough about the on ramps to get us on to that beautiful road. Stu, I got to ask you about your research report because share with the folks out there what's going on with infrastructure as a service is a lot of confusion around where the line is between platform as a service and Dave and I were talking earlier this morning about the old way and the new way. They're not a rip and replace. The new way is clear, Redis, Docker, all this cool stuff with developer. Yet I got to appease the infrastructure side where infrastructure service fits beautifully, converge infrastructure, web scale, but legacy, right, data center. So data center, hybrid, all coming together. Break that down for us. OpenStack is in the center of that. It's open stacks like the overlay, little transitional opportunity. Do you see it that way? What's going on? So John, here's one of the challenges we have. So I'm an infrastructure guide by background and when we think about the infrastructure that my applications live on, it's very tough for me to sometimes break down that infrastructure as a service versus platform as a service or something goes more like a software as a service. If we look from an application standpoint, it breaks down a little bit easier. Am I taking an existing application and just trying to move it somewhere? Whether that be hosted, do I get a VM and put my application in it? Am I just buying a new application? When I talk about CRM, people are going to Salesforce. I don't worry about, well, what model is that? I just do it. And if I'm moving to a new database, maybe I decide to go on Amazon. Maybe I decide to go on DB2, do some blue. From an application standpoint, that's how most IT practitioners should be thinking about things is I look at my IT application portfolio and I figure out on a case by case, what can I get to the new stuff? What do I have to just maintain for a while? And then where's the best place to do that? And most IT people are really going to worry about, well, if I'm putting it on some public cloud, is that infrastructure services platform as a service? It's what's the application? Does it deliver the services that my users need? Does it give the mobility that I want? And in many ways, those lines are blowing. Amazon tries to blow away those lines. Microsoft really started as platform and gone to the infrastructure layer. So I'm tired of arguing over some of those definitions because I think the applications. You're an analyst, I could be tired of arguing, come on. No, I'd like to put- Stop arguing, go for the jugular right now. Put it to bed, what's the issue? Yeah, so it's really about helping to modernize those applications. Don't let that legacy drag you down any further. Doesn't mean that you have to cut everything today and put it in the public cloud, but understand what you've got, have good understanding of where things, what makes sense and what you should own and what you shouldn't. Before Dave wants to jump in, I know Dave wants to jump in, I got to ask you a question. So Doug Bailoff said essentially the top conversation for IBM and certainly his group of power is one of them is drowning in data, the other one's on-prem or off-prem for cloud delivery, for the delivery of services. Totally makes sense, obviously ecosystem. Drowning in data. Will more companies drown in data lakes or data oceans? What's your take on that? So well, John, if we go to the public cloud, isn't storage free? So we're going to make that a little bit easier. I've seen your conversations. I've never seen a cost of ownership slide that had an iceberg on it in the lake. Icebergs are in the North Atlantic, but that being said, oceans are lakes. And what do you prefer? Take a side. Dave, bail me out on this one. I don't know, Stu. I mean, I think- Hey, what's your position? My position is, first of all, I like oceans, oceans are bigger, they're more vibrant, they have currents, they're a broader ecosystem. I think lakes are, I think so. There's some big lakes, Jeff, Rick pointed out, that was surfing in Lake Tahoe on six foot waves, and there are some big lakes. But the ocean, aren't you, too many things are outside of your own control. It crosses borders, there's security. Certainly outside people's control. So that's why I think it's a more accurate description. Maybe I want the data reservoir is what I want. Data lakes gonna stick. You drink from the lake, because of fresh water, but the point is, I think they're both good. However, data lake is not the definitive thing to do. So again, this brings up the question of the technology to handle that. I had a great comment on my Facebook page. Data oceans are for web scale, which just makes a lot of sense. A lot of stuff's happening. What's going on with web scale? So- Relative to the cloud, big guys, are the enterprise ever going to get web scale or? Yeah, it's interesting. That term tends to get a lot of people riled up. I'll actually be sitting on a panel at Interop this year saying, should your IT look like Google's? And of course, the short answer is no, of course your IT is not going to look like Google's, but can we learn from what Google has done and make things better? It's that balance between the enterprise, has to spend way too much time creating bespoke IT and care in feeding the pets that I have, as opposed to Google focuses on their applications. They only have a small number of them. Google and Facebook, and we want to monitor and administer tens of thousands of nodes with a single administrator. So, you know, you just use it. So, you know, Wikibon, since before I even came on board, has been watching that hyperscaler web scale market and it definitely is bleeding into the enterprise quite a bit. It shows huge promise, really the tip of the spear as to where things are changing. They were some of the first guys to really leverage Flash to help rebuild applications and it's having just a ripple effect through the IT space. All right, so I'm going to jump in now, okay? So, it seems to me stew that, so Amazon comes out with AWS EC2 in 2006. To me, all the big guys, the cartels stuck their head in their sand, in the sand and said, oh yeah, that's fine, blah, blah, blah, it's for developers and it went on for a long time, right? And then we saw an uptick during the downturn. Everybody said, well, CapEx, the OpEx, the big guys were sort of A caught flat-footed, plus they were going through big transitions financially and so that slowed them down. Finally, they're coming around. It feels like, and I want you to get your take on this, it feels like IBM, HP, VMware, Oracle, I guess Cisco, you could maybe answer that, are finally coming around to the hyperscale guy's way of thinking. Now, the other piece of it is you got Amazon, Google, and Microsoft and everybody always said, well, they're the hyperscale guys, they're the big interconnect guys, I shouldn't call them whales, because I think of enterprise whales and then you got the web scaler guys, they're the big web scalers, they have the cost structures. I see two things happening and I want to get your take, just help us squint through this. Looks like the enterprise guys are finally getting their act together and it looks like the hyperscale guys are learning how to play enterprise. So there's a really interesting dynamic where those two worlds are finally coming together and your survey results show that Microsoft, in particular, is doing very, very well there. We always, you know, we talk about Amazon all the time, we don't have to pump them up anymore and Google, there's a developer crowd there, so help us really understand and decode that matrix. Yeah, a lot of good points there, Dave. So let's start here with IBM. You know, one of the comments I made is that IBM is trying to take all of these open source pieces that are out there, take OpenStack, for example, and just deliver it as a service with, you know, Bluemix and SoftLayer and everything they're doing. Let's take containers, which, you know, Google and some of these other guys are doing cool things, let's do enterprise containers. And I sit here and I'm saying, that's great, we want to take these cool tools and make them available for the enterprise, but on the other hand, I look at the OpenStack community, I look at, you know, DockerCon last year and the people using Docker. These are all the developers out there. These aren't the enterprise guys, you know, the enterprise guys are saying, oh crap, we need to take advantage of this stuff because, you know, there's whole groups that are just disrupting us majorly if we don't move. And you said, right, the enterprise guys are trying to learn and harden and work on this and the developers are maybe doing a little bit of enterprise stuff, but there's still a big gap between those two. Does enterprise containers make sense to you? I mean, is it a real deal? I like what I heard, I'd like to see more details on it. There's, you know, some good pieces, they talk about, you know, one of the best things about Docker is really the Docker Hub. And what IBM says is it's great that you can have a public repository to be able to handle all these, but we're actually going to make private repositories for you because in your group or across maybe, you know, a couple of partners, you're going to want to have some security and make things that are just for me and there's goodness there. And I think IBM is offering some things that, you know, people should look at and it'll help make it easier to deploy. That being said, you know, the kind of open in what Kubernetes and Mezos are doing, the developer community are going to just grow like wildfire and we'll see how much the developer way starts to overrun the enterprise versus the enterprise, you know, taking over. Back to the consumerization of IT. My concern is that, because Docker takes off, nobody saw it taking off except, well, Furrier, you did actually when Jerry Chen funded Docker was his first deal. No, no, prior to Docker, I said Jerry Chen AWS reinvented a year ago. And he was prospecting for the next Amazon. And he couldn't find it. But what he saw with Docker was an old concept that hit the perfect storm. I just tweeted this, I just tweeted it out. The perfect storm for what the market needed right now. To galvanize the developer community for cloud scaling like apps, the perfect timing, open source was ready for it. It was the temperature was perfect, the barometer, all the pressure points were in place and Docker came in because they weren't threatening. They were just doing some great work and they're on their surfboards, they hit the right wave. And so it explodes, nobody saw that coming. And then I feel like companies like IBM and others, VMware, we saw this at VMworld last year. They talk to their customers, say, hey, this is hot, we want it, but this is some things it doesn't do. So they say, okay, we're going to do enterprise containers. Now, my question is, how much of what they're claiming that they're going to have is real versus sort of in the pipeline of development. Can you just flip a switch and have enterprise? I mean, they have the capabilities to do enterprise. We know that, but can they marry it with things like Docker overnight? Yeah, let me go back to your previous question though, Dave. We were talking about hybrid. Hybrid is in the survey that we did. The number one choice is what everybody is doing today. And if you look at the players out there, Microsoft is the one that scored highest in our survey because they've really got the best hybrid solution out there. They really do. One of the two biggest public eyes out there and they've got such a large footprint in the private, they're really embracing open source a lot lately. I mean, Dave, if you told us 10 years ago, oh, Microsoft's doing a lot of Linux and open source and giving away things to open compute. We were all been like, what are you talking about? Microsoft will just buy that and kill it. So some of it even started before Nadella. So I mean, absolutely, Sachi has done a lot to bring cloud first and drive that out there. Was he driving a lot of that? Yeah, in the cloud space, absolutely, he was driving it. Or was it his predecessor? So I mean- Was it Bahama? Well, developers, developers, developers, right? Yeah, that's true. That's true. It's always been the heritage of Microsoft. That's fair. Okay. Yeah, but just to finish out that thought on hybrid is, Microsoft is killing it there. Numbers we've looked at, we really think within the next 12 to 18 months, Microsoft could be number one revenue in public cloud. So I mean, that's big. Everybody thought that Amazon's lead was just something that nobody would be able to catch. Does Amazon have its head in the sand when it comes to hybrid? Well, so- They didn't really even use that term, right? No, they don't. And they're back at re-invent- Don't you think Amazon, their public posture and what they're saying privately is different? Are you hearing that? In other words, the public, they're recognizing on-premise, okay? But privately, don't they want everybody to go into the AWS cloud and is that reasonable within the enterprise? Dave, Amazon wants all applications in the public cloud now. And that's just not posturing, that's what they're pushing their folks in the field to work on. And in some ways that's going to hurt them, Dave, because if you look at our survey, you talk to any IT practitioner, it's, you've said the public cloud is, it's an arrow in the quiver. And there's places where it makes sense to go full bore. Absolutely, I might want to look at elasticity and buy by the drink, but it's not one solution. It's finding the right fit. It tors for courses for the different pieces. So, Sarbjit from Oracle, I think he's with Oracle. He says he treats his Oracle. Thanks for watching. Says, at Stu nailed it. In cloud, enterprises are a bit misled by success of the likes of Googles and Facebook. They have fewer homogeneous workloads, but enterprises have lots of heterogeneous workloads. Hug your developers if you have any exclamation point. Really, really good discussion. Yeah, that's a great point. When you have a heterogeneous network and you have legacy, it's always harder. It's always harder. Even when you talk about Google search engine, you couldn't, Enterprise search is only hard from web search. Why? Clean sheet of paper, unstructured if you will, and a lot of legacy. What was the stat that Mark heard throughout two open worlds ago that the average age of the Enterprise app is 19 years? So, one, the life cycle of software development in the enterprise has been slow. The golden disk we heard at the end of the thing is gone. DevOps changed the game. Hug your developers, implying, look it, you got to have some developers in the enterprise. What's the plan? I mean, if you're an enterprise, you just can't go to the yellow pages and say, give me some DevOps. Oh, by the way, I know Node.js. I took an online class in eighth grade. Eighth graders could be higher potentially, but that's not enough experience, Stu. Where are they going to find the developers? Yeah, John, just a great comment pushback. I did an infographic a year ago on hyperscale in the enterprise, and I got a ton of calls because said the enterprise has cloud envy. It's they're all jealous of the price points and I've talked to a lot of the Wall Street guys and what they're doing with software defined networking and as they're looking at cloud is they have IT staffs that are big and they put millions of dollars into their IT budgets and they're tired of getting beat up saying, why are you playing huge margins to these legacy guys and they want something what they think is better? Here's the thing. Here's the thing that I'm just writing a tweet back here. I'm going to comment on this, but in DevOps, some DevOps concepts scare the enterprise and I've heard people saying, I run for the hills because I'm afraid I can't compete. New guy comes in, I'm going to get laid off or all this change with the things break. I'm running a bank. So okay, it might scare a little people. They have cloud envy. I would totally agree. But here's the deal. The DevOps, cloud ops, whatever conversation, it comes down to engineering. We need more engineers to engineer the architecture. Big data stew. Dave, we've heard this on theCUBE many times. It's an engineer. It's an architect in the big data side whether you're a data scientist, cloud architect, DevOps, you got to be able to engineer the solution. You're taking? Yeah, I mean, look, I've always said, John, it comes down to engineering, getting product through the pipeline, taking R and D and translating it into real product. That takes development effort. It takes engineering. It takes a concerted market effort. You can't just wake up and say, okay, we're in the market. Yeah, to follow up on another point that you made, John, the refresh cycle is what's killing IT. From an infrastructure standpoint, David Floyd, our CTO put out a note, I think about a little over a year ago, and he said, never build another data center. Because when you build another data center, you're locked into that for like 35 years. And when you buy any infrastructure, it's what's your refresh cycle on that? It's like building a football stadium. It's, you know, you're- Hold on, life cycle of a data center is probably longer. Yeah, it's, you know, unfortunately, the average data center lasts longer than the average marriage does. So it's, you know, you've got a lot of challenges there. The advent of cloud is really, I should be able to, you know, use what I need today and be able to change and grow and move in the future going forward. It's, you know, we're using legacy applications for way too long. I'm using all of my infrastructure for longer than I need to. It's not performing up to the newest piece. So you want to be able to buy things that allow you to add new functionality, scale, get rid of things like migration because that's just huge amounts of waste on moving from one thing to another and having to upgrade. So, you know, lots of challenges there. And, you know, there's newer models to go to. I'm not saying everything goes to the public cloud. There's lots of options in private, hybrid. John, a quick question back to you. I did turn the table, you know, a couple of years ago, we were all arguing, you know, is hybrid cloud a halfway house? And we think that, you know, at least from the research I've seen, this is really where it's going to be for many years. And it's, you know, where is the water level, you know? Are you asking if I want to follow my story on the Pat Gelsinger Cloud? No, no, I say, to look back now and say, you know, is this, you know, are we halfway towards a journey towards, you know, there or? So you were talking about the comment about Pat Gelsinger when they launched hybrid cloud three years ago. Here's what I said. It seems like it was cobbled together as a visionary document, more of a directional guiding principle statement. And now they're there. So vSphere recent announcement is interesting, they are there. IBM's the same way. IBM is directionally correct. All their messaging, I believe they're on the right vector for innovation. But it is a halfway house, Stu. It's a middle layer. If you look at the stack, it's the same game different generations of computer industry. Lower ends of the stack, more hardened networking, you know, that stuff. It's the OSI model of the 80s, middle of the stack protocols, apps at the top. So when you look at the stack here, if you look at infrastructure as a service and data center technologies on-prem, that's classic lower end of the stack type software. The middle layer, path of service, hybrid, essentially a private cloud in the cloud, right? Okay, we'll give or take. That's over simplification. And then full public cloud. So apps have to traverse, in my opinion, those three things. So yes, it's a halfway house because the enterprise really aren't ready. So it's a way station, if you will. Pat Gelsken didn't like that term halfway house, but my point is most people aren't deploying full on public clouds. They're not deploying full on hybrid clouds. Their nirvana was private cloud, which was what they really want. So they want the data center in the cloud, which becomes private. So you can parse the definition. So I still think today, it is a middle ground to the public cloud, which is the best economics, in my opinion. But where you're born, born in the cloud, born in the hybrid, born in the data center, the apps have to work- I would say we're all hybrid choppers these days. I buy lots from Amazon, but I still go to the local grocery store. My neck of the woods, I can't get the delivery like maybe you can out in the valley, John, but. You know. So you're technical, right? You've been a CTO in those roles. If you're building apps, right? You need to have choice. You have to have the ability to plug and play. By having those three areas, your app workloads can be tailored based upon one, economics, workload criteria, resources, cost, economics. So now you can move those resources around. So from a developer standpoint, that's the beautiful thing, is that making that abstraction layer that makes that go away is the final destination. Complete abstraction between on-prem, private, hybrid, and public. All right, Stu, thanks a lot. Dave, appreciate you've got our next segment coming up. You're watching theCUBE live. And here in Las Vegas, we'll be right back with our next guest is theCUBE, extracting the seeds from the noise. IBM Interconnect in the Go Social Lounge, theCUBE. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante and Stu Miniman, we'll be right back.