Good afternoon. I'm Erik Bass, U.S. life insurance analyst for Autonomous Research, and I'm excited to have AIG joining us at the conference this year. The company has undergone an impressive turnaround and transformation over the past few years, and I'd like to welcome Peter Zaffino, who joined AIG in 2017 and became CEO in March of this year. Peter will kick off with a few opening comments, and then we'll move into Q&A. If you'd like to ask a question, please click on the live Q&A feed on box in the upper right corner of your screen. With that, Peter, thank you for joining us, and let me turn it over to you. Erik, thank you for having me, and looking forward to being together this afternoon. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for inviting me to participate in this conference. I thought I would provide a few opening remarks, and then we can turn to questions. I think everyone here knows I joined AIG in the second half of 2017. Since that time, we've been very focused on several key priorities: underwriting excellence, operational excellence, investing in world-class talent, fixing the core of AIG, reducing volatility, and achieving more predictable outcomes across our businesses. Our first quarter 2021 financial results, which we issued a few weeks ago, reflect the tremendous progress that we've made. As we noted on our earnings call, we had an excellent start to the year and have significant momentum across the entire company. General Insurance delivered outstanding results, especially in our commercial business and our international business in particular. We remain on track to deliver a sub-90 combined ratio excluding CAT by the end of 2022. Life Retirement delivered another solid quarter despite a persistent low interest rate environment, and our investments unit also delivered very good results. Looking back over the last few years, 2020 in particular was an important inflection point for AIG. We managed through COVID exceptionally well with our global colleagues showing resilience and incredible commitment to each other, our clients, distribution partners, and other stakeholders. The General Insurance portfolio improved significantly in coming into 2021. We pivoted from remediation to growth. We also announced our intention to separate Life Retirement business from AIG, and we made significant progress on AIG 200, our enterprise-wide transformation program, where we're investing in core processes and infrastructure. We did this in a remote work environment, and we even accelerated some of our AIG 200 programs. On the capital management side, our liquidity, capital, and balance sheet all remain very strong and expect to complete our previously announced $500 million stock buyback by the end of the second quarter. Lastly, we continue to work hard on a minority IPO of Life Retirement and are making good progress on this important strategic initiative. Overall, I'm pleased with where we are as a company, and I'm confident about AIG's future. I think with that, Erik, I'm going to turn it over to you to questions. Perfect. Thank you. That's a great overview. Maybe we'll start a little bit from the beginning and the journey that you've been on over the past couple of years. Maybe stepping back in time a little bit, what attracted you to AIG in 2017? Can you talk about your observations early on? What did you identify as kind of the biggest issues at AIG that needed to be addressed, and how did you go about fixing them? Well, I think everyone knows I joined from Marsh & McLennan, where I had a terrific job with a terrific company. I've been there for 16 years. I had been approached over time to pursue other public companies as a CEO. None of them were particularly appealing just based on what was being asked. When I looked at the AIG opportunity, one is it's an iconic brand. I think it had a leadership position at one point in the marketplace, and I was excited for a new challenge. Little did I know how big the challenge was. I had a pretty good understanding, but obviously not fully aware. I think people don't remember, I didn't come in to run General Insurance. I came in to be the Global Chief Operating Officer and run the global field operations for all of AIG. Within 60 days of doing extensive business reviews, getting a clear picture of what was going on with the company, I realized we had some real foundational problems. That's when I shifted into running our General Insurance business in order to reposition it in the marketplace. I thought that AIG would be a terrific opportunity to apply sort of the skills I had in terms of turnarounds, and repositioning it as an industry leader. Perfect. Maybe digging into that a little bit more. After you had spent some time at the company, and probably when you transitioned to that General Insurance role, maybe what were the biggest surprises you uncovered, and were there places you had to pivot your strategy or kind of change your approach? As, again, the CEO of Marsh and running risk and insurance services, I had a pretty good seat in terms of what was happening at AIG. I didn't walk in thinking that the underwriting strategy was particularly strong or relevant in the market. I do have to say some of the biggest surprises were just the talent. I don't know if it's a talent drain. I just don't think the talent was there in terms of what was being asked. The strategy of this large limit was heavily flawed, became very commoditized. Underwriting capabilities, no culture of underwriting excellence. When we looked at deployment of limits and taking significant risk across the portfolio and not having any really reinsurance strategy was something that was very troubling. It lacked operational capabilities, which on the end-to-end is really important in underwriting in terms of data capture. Quite frankly, with the amount of scientists that existed within AIG in its past, I was expecting much more insight on data. That was the one area where I knew that the underwriting wasn't strong, the strategy was flawed, no reinsurance. Some of that stuff's fixable, the data and the data architecture, I was expecting to be significant, and it just didn't exist in terms of being helpful. That is why once we got the underwriting turnaround moving, we also had to get AIG 200 going because we needed to have an end-to-end process with capabilities of extracting data and making really good decisions on the foundation. Got it. Just given that as the backdrop, when was the point that you kind of knew you were on the right track and that the General Insurance business had reached an inflection point? There's not a particular, like, I wouldn't go to a specific month or a quarter. I think the foundational work that was being done was all about positioning the company to actually thrive in the future. One of the things that I'm proud of many things at AIG and our colleagues, one of the best is the team we've been able to assemble. Early on, Don Bailey coming in to design with me a lot of the underwriting criteria and how we're actually going to assess risk. Charlie Fry, who is an expert at reinsurance, having him come on board, followed by David McElroy, Mark Lyons, Chris Schaefer. I could not get better people in the industry. If you gave me any draft picks at all, I think we've assembled a tremendous team. That team coming together, and assessing the problems, in terms of what we needed to do. I felt very good about the baseline in terms of how we were decreasing some of the risk. I said on the last earnings call, I almost wanted to pause because it's such a monumental number, we have reduced over $650 billion of aggregate in a company. I don't know how many companies that creates, we've reduced risk in the portfolio significantly since we started this, that can't go unnoticed. I think the other piece is the biggest validation is from reinsurers. They're in the business. They get it. They have a perch to look at every seeding company in the world. When we were starting to do renewals and had more participation, more companies wanting to trade across multiple lines of business and multiple geographies, we felt very fortunate to have those relationships. They entered by trusting the team that was here, knowing the portfolio was going to be challenged. They continued to commit themselves as wanting to be strategic partners based on the underwriting that we were doing in the company. That was a real big validation as we got to some of our big renewals and saw more reinsurers coming in, bigger lines being taken, the willingness to trade across multiple relationships. I think that was, for us, a big piece. You start to see the traction that we're getting in the marketplace in terms of underwriting quality, leadership characteristics. I talk about ventilation, I think that sometimes is not fully understood. AIG not only took these massive limits, they did them in lead layers. Taking the portfolio and spreading it out and getting away from first losses meant a lot. Like when we were ventilating, we were just taking our lead capacity and taking some of that and putting it in mid-excess and high excess. When you do that, you just get better balance. Some of the high excess becomes commodity, not if you're doing the lead pricing, because they want to make sure that they have that capacity. As we started to remediate, started to get acceptance in the marketplace, having come from the broker side, brokers are greedy. Brokers ask for a lot of different things as they should, I would have done when I was there. The one thing they want the most is consistency because they have to also recommend insurance companies to their clients. One of the things we tried to do is not only re-underwrite the portfolio and start to get a better balance, we need to have that consistency so we continue to get recommended. The renewal retention reflects that. Our new business now reflects that, think that we have a lot of tailwinds as a result of the work that we've done. Great. If we move to the other big strategic focus, which you hinted at in your opening remarks, is that last fall you announced the plans to separate the Life & Retirement business from AIG. Yeah Which is something that some investors I think have been advocating for for several years now. Why do you believe this is the right strategy going forward, and why is now the right time to pursue this? Well, a lot of what we've outlined in the past remains the same. We took a comprehensive review of the composite structure, and we concluded that separation was the right path to create value for our stakeholders and also position both businesses to succeed in the markets they compete in. There's very little overlap in terms of distribution. There's no overlap in product. I think having independence is going to allow us to apportion capital to strategically move those organizations forward. The other piece, too, is General Insurance really couldn't stand on its own until recently because of the profitability, volatility, and lack of track record. I think getting a strength in General Insurance and having that foundation with material reduced risk and volatility, and positioning it for profitable growth in the future was very meaningful. I think we've had effective management of the diversification benefits. We said no additional equity capital will be needed in subsidiaries. I think that was also another major fact. We talk a lot about the DTA, the foreign tax credits, which are part of the DTA, they need income from the life company. We think we would consume a lot of that by the time we would actually get to a majority sale. Doing the minority IPO or minority at the time, if we were to look at a private sale, we would be able to preserve a lot of those foreign tax credits. That was less of an obstacle. Just making sure we had no surprises within the Life & Retirement property and casualty businesses. Then last, I think investors like both sectors, but sometimes they like to choose. They don't necessarily want to choose a composite. They may want to choose one life company, one property and casualty. I don't think we were getting all the interest that perhaps we would as separate entities. Also as we reposition General Insurance, we think we're going to be an industry leader across the globe. We want to make sure that that business is less complicated and the story is a little crisper. Those are some of the reasons why we decided to pursue it. We did a lot of work on it, and that was not in October, "We should do this." We've been working on it for quite some time. Got it. You've now determined that an IPO of the 19.9% stake in Life & Retirement is your preferred approach. Why do you believe that's the best path to maximize value? Well, we always thought it was the base case, we outlined it as the path we were likely to take, we said that we would entertain any private approaches. They were very good companies and quality views in terms of what we should be doing with the 19.9. We wanted to make certain that no matter what we did, we preserved the value on the 80.1 as well. Did not want to mortgage the future by doing something that might have a very positive headline price, but would have us doing things that would compromise value in the future. I think we felt we reviewed alternatives that were in front of us and decided that at the point in time when we went through earnings, that the preferred approach would be the base case, which was the IPO of the 19.9. Got it. Can you walk us through the timeframe for the separation? Realizing it's not all in your control, what are the next steps in the process? We outlined some of this on the earnings call. We're working hard towards getting the S1 filed and getting the IPO launched. The two big ones that we had to work on as components of that were getting our standalone financial statements for Life & Retirement completed. We've made enormous progress there, getting third-party actuarial reviews to complete and validate the work that's been done within AIG. We've made enormous progress there. We've built a separation management office as well, simultaneously. It's like AIG 200 in terms of having a transformation office, so we have work streams and actually how we separate Life & Retirement from AIG with the minimal amount of disruption. We've been working through that, and that is going to be a critical part of making sure that we can execute on the 19.9 and then subsequent dispositions after that. Working towards the fourth quarter in terms of timing. As you said, there's things out of our control like the regulatory approvals. The market, we're not looking to time the market, there's always things that come up in terms of timing that could make it slip into the first quarter. We are working with a sense of urgency to make sure that we have all the details fleshed out and that we have a bunch of different work streams that are pulling up all the floorboards to make sure we're positioning this business to be highly attractive and think the market will respond accordingly. Maybe building off of that last point, what do you think for the Life & Retirement business differentiates AIG in the marketplace, and why do you think it's well-positioned to be a successful independent public company? It's got size and scale, well-diversified portfolio. It's been a very consistent performer. Its platform and distribution network are a key differentiator in our view. The business has leading market positions across the board. I think the position of AIG's Life & Retirement business will be very attractive. Also with Fortitude Re, which we've talked a lot about, is that we've limited net exposure to legacy blocks of business and therefore have addressed some of the more complicated issues as we are getting ready to do the 19.9. Great. Now maybe we'll pivot over to General Insurance, which will obviously be the base of AIG going forward. Maybe before getting into some of the specifics for the business, can you talk a little bit about how you're thinking about market conditions overall and the sustainability of the current hard market? Where lines or geographies still need additional rate, and where are you seeing pricing momentum slowing? Well, we've been in this market of rate improvement above loss cost for, I guess we're entering year three. It depends on how you look at it. I think the market that we're in now is the market we're going to be in for a while. There's anecdotes. If you think about it, if I go right to the reinsurance market where deals were oversubscribed on capacity layers within Florida for CAT, that's an indicator, I don't believe that incumbents were impacted. I think that the new capacity is going to be challenged in terms of their relevance in the marketplace as clients make choices and look at quality and consistency and ability to trade across multiple lines of business and multiple geographies. When we look at the current market, certainly, there's balance. I don't believe in prior markets, you could pick a time and place that the rate increases, or the condition of the global market was as balanced as it is now. For instance, when we report our first quarters, getting rate increases in our international business on commercial being very commensurate to what's happening in North America. That typically doesn't happen. I would say the balance has been in many geographies, many product lines. Areas where we're getting very meaningful rate increases have been driven by lines of business that need it. Some of the financial lines, casualty, property, making sure that we are focused on getting the right rate on a risk-adjusted basis, which means understanding the risk components of how we underwrite. So, we've been very thoughtful on that. I get the question often, it's like, well, rates slow down. What are we trying to answer is that are you going to get more margin this year in terms of getting rate above loss cost than you did last year? The answer is yes. If you're looking at absolute rate, I'm not saying I won't get it, I think looking at absolute rate and declaring victory on having the highest rates sustainable in every quarter, you better watch your portfolio, because that starts to shift, too. We want to make sure that we're getting the appropriate risk-adjusted rates for a portfolio that we like on an underwriting basis, tightening up terms and conditions, and making sure we're deploying capital in areas where we think those risk-adjusted returns are the strongest. That's what we've been doing in 2021, and we'll continue doing in 2022. We like the market. We think the market is very balanced. I think our leadership position in the overall market is highly valued. Our underwriting consistency across the globe is very strong, expect us to see real opportunities for growth in the short and medium term. Perfect. Maybe picking up on that point, AIG put up impressive growth, particularly in commercial lines in the first quarter, it sounds like you expect this momentum to continue. What gives you confidence that now is the time to start stepping on the gas a bit from a growth perspective? Well, Mark Lyons gave a little bit of guidance that we would see growth in our personal insurance business in the second quarter that's different than some of the prior quarters, we can go into that if you would like. The reason I have confidence is because I think the underwriting that we've done has us with a portfolio that we like. I think the brokers have been great partners for us and are looking to find ways to grow with AIG. This is an infomercial, the number of times I've heard that the industry wants a strong AIG, they really like the path we're on, want to collaborate with that and be a partner, has been tremendous. We owe a lot to our brokers and clients in terms of giving, while this management team didn't have anything to do with the past, giving us another shot to recalibrate underwriting standards and to be relevant to them. I think that's been very well received. I think that we have expertise in multiple lines of business and multiple geographies. If you think, you pick the U.K. as an example, when you look at global specialties, no one has the capability that we have, the reaching network that we have across the globe, the ability and strong presence that we have in London, also having a syndicate that we can use stamp capacity to balance the portfolio. We see it from a variety of different angles, then our strength in terms of how we are repositioned in the North America business. We see lots of opportunities for growth. It'll be growth that we think drives profit and drives margin and is focused on consistency and improving the combined ratio. Great. Another topic we're starting to hear a bit more about is inflation. Can you talk about what you expect in terms of loss cost trend across different products? Are there any areas of particular concern? I think we've done a very good job of looking at our portfolio optimization work in terms of going by line of business, by geography, excess at all different stratifications, and making sure that we have taken a very conservative position in terms of how we're building in loss costs in the accident year. We work very closely with the underwriters, with claims, actuarial. Actually, Mark Lyons leads the portfolio optimization work. Together with making sure that we understand the marketplace that we're in, and that not getting a false positive on some of the rate increases, but make sure that we're building margin in the book is really how we apportion capital, and we look to grow. We are watching it, Erik, very carefully. It's not something that is going to be looked at the beginning of the year and not get updates throughout the year. We'll make sure that as we learn what's either happening post-COVID, if there's going to be some trends that start to emerge that we're on top of it and can anticipate the future as best we can. Also, our reinsurance strategy is one that is not there to drive results other than to protect volatility, and making sure that we don't have the pendulum swinging in terms of now we can take significantly more net because we feel really comfortable with the portfolio. We want to make sure that we maintain that risk appetite deploy capital very carefully and watch loss cost inflation in lines of business that would concern us with a great amount of scrutiny. Perfect. You mentioned reinsurance. We have a question coming in from the audience on that topic, so it probably makes sense to go there now. One area you've made significant changes over the past few years is your usage of reinsurance. Can you talk about your philosophy around reinsurance more generally and how you see the program continuing to evolve going forward? Absolutely. We said from the beginning that we would be consistent buyers of reinsurance, and that consistency is synonymous with buying reinsurance that reflects the growth portfolio that we have today. What we had to buy in terms of protecting from a property and casualty perspective, you got to remember, AIG was taking substantial nets everywhere. Property, casualty, I've not seen net limits like that in the past. We needed to reduce our net position across the portfolio. We did that immediately. Then simultaneously, we began the re-underwriting. That takes a little bit of time. As we look to the future, meaning in 2021 and 2022, we just don't need as much reinsurance on an absolute basis, even though we're not changing our risk appetite. We've been able to improve all of our reinsurance treaties, whether it's in terms of limits purchased. If you look at the property CAT, we lowered attachment points in North America on an occurrence and an aggregate basis on our risk retention per risk programs. We eliminated all of our annual aggregate deductibles. There's a lot of ways in which we've improved the portfolio, and have improved the reinsurance at the same time, where we're just not taking as much risk and volatility. Reinsurance is a very important component, and we have some unbelievable executives that have reinsurance backgrounds. I would say, if you're an investor, please don't do this, but if you were to start in terms of a reinsurance company, in terms of building executives, I think actually AIG has some of the best reinsurance minds in the business. We have five to seven people that have done incredible work in the reinsurance field. We are looking at very different ways in which we can approach our reinsurance strategy. That's every year. While we made enormous improvements in 2021, we're already in the planning stage for revising what we want to do in 2022 to improve it. Again, less volatility, more predictability, and making sure we have a reinsurance portfolio in terms of how we purchase that reflects the gross underwriting that we have in the portfolio today. It's something we spend a lot of time on. Thanks. Another question that's come in, just a couple of people asking about reserves, which is another area where you've done a lot of work on the past couple of years. How are you feeling? Are you feeling well-positioned to handle any emerging areas of higher losses or claims inflation? Maybe you can go through some of the puts and takes that we've seen in recent quarters. Well, look at Mark Lyons gives updates on this every quarter. We've looked at the portfolio and the back years and have done a very thorough review of that. I would say the way in which we approach things is to recognize bad news when we see it, and let good news, if there is good news, emerge over time. We are constantly looking at the different trends in the portfolio that we had, and making sure that as we look back, that we're very confident in terms of how we have looked at the reserve adequacy of AIG. Again, it's something that we spend a lot of time on. It's not just the actuaries, it's claims, it's underwriting, it's taking a review, and getting into the details. That's going to be a discipline. It's not anything new that I'm telling you, but in terms of how we're going to be disciplined on taking a look at that. Don't forget, we also have the adverse development cover. Now that's not a backstop to prevent us from doing things that we need to do on the balance sheet. It is still there and one that in the event something did emerge, we do have that in place. Thanks. Commercial lines have gotten most of the focus for AIG, but you've also made some significant changes to the personal lines over the past year. Can you discuss how you've changed the business and how you're thinking about the goals going forward? I think the one that's probably the most confusing is what we did in the high net worth personal lines. If you start from the beginning, which is you look at where there is density, it's in peak zones. Whether it's in California, Florida, Northeast, and then even broader in the Southeast. We felt that in the portfolio over time, if we were going to be a profitable property underwriter, that the high net worth business was going to be one that's going to require more frequency purchases of reinsurance as well as tail risk. Felt that in order to look at the portfolio in a manner that we could position it for growth, that we needed to find a different structure. Working with the leadership at Lloyd's and creating, I think at the time, the largest syndicate that's ever been created, bringing in some strategic partners on the capital side as well, the reinsurance side, allowed us to reposition the portfolio to where we're sharing risk, that we're dealing with the catastrophe risk as a consortium. The positioning in terms of what we're doing to improve attritional loss ratios, and better underwriting over the next 12 to 24 months, was going to be critical for us, feel like we're in a really good position to do that. We did get rid of our mass affluent book, which is really the more commoditized homeowner business that's really below the high net worth, we announced that last year. That gobbles up a lot of aggregate. When we wanted to make sure that we were positioned the reinsurance structure or getting the appropriate return periods, to reduce, we needed to be in the portfolio that we like. Look, it's a re-underwriting. We have a really good portfolio that we think we can grow. What you saw last year was a lot of reinsurance cessions, either going into the syndicate, or going to reinsurance partners, which certainly affect the net premium written. We feel that two things. One is we'll be able to now pivot to more normalized growth, second quarter, third quarter, fourth quarter, and then into 2022. Our travel business was obviously a headwind with COVID because people weren't traveling, we'll start to see that pick up, and start to see some top-line growth as we get to the back half of the year. Those were two significant headwinds in 2020 that won't exist in 2021. I think you'll start to see growth, on an underlying basis. We will adjust reinsurance to fit that specific portfolio, the effects of COVID will start to subside and therefore we'll be able to grow the travel business. Although I don't think huge growth in travel will happen, but we will start to see some growth. You mentioned in your opening comments the guidance for achieving a sub 90% core combined ratio in General Insurance by the end of 2022. What are the key levers to achieving this from here, and what are you assuming in terms of pricing and market conditions? Well, we didn't assume the current pricing environment. We considered one that was less than we're getting. I'll start there. That's a positive. There's a bunch of different components that will drive to a sub 90. One is we're starting to see top-line growth. I believe that momentum will come from a variety of different areas. It's going to be better retention, more new business, and growing in areas where we think on the risk-adjusted basis that we can improve profitability. I think that goes into the portfolio work that we said we were doing. The second is, I don't think we're going to be buying as much reinsurance just based on the gross portfolios. Again, no philosophy change, no strategic change, but less reinsurance will have an impact, and I think that's going to be positive. AIG 200, we give you a bunch of numbers on the earnings calls, but we will have realized a sort of run rate that it's going to start coming through the income statements and start to give us a expense ratio that will be better. Then, just core expense discipline is going to be something that is part of the DNA of this company. In addition to what we're doing with an AIG 200, you should expect to see a lot of expense discipline and building bandwidth for our own investments. Believe that coupled with where I started, is the pricing environment's strong, and believe that the sort of underlying portfolio on an accident year basis will continue to improve. Those are five components. It doesn't rely on all of them, and doesn't overweight one in particular, but think that there's a lot of tailwinds in order for us to achieve that as we exit 2022. Maybe building on expenses, which have clearly been a big focus for you, and you mentioned the AIG 200 strategy. Can you just talk a little bit more about the program's objectives and targets and how you're going about achieving them? Absolutely. We've been talking about this for quite some time. When we looked at the underlying infrastructure and end-to-end process and digital capabilities that existed in AIG when we arrived, it was really at the bottom quartile of businesses. We took upon ourselves to go in deep on a variety of different work streams and talk about how we can substantially improve AIG's capabilities with end-to-end process, better data capture, using cloud technology, retiring a lot of either obsolete or technology that is no longer valuable to the underwriting process or operational capabilities. Again, I know that part of the earnings transcript is probably not everybody's favorite when I start going into the work streams of what we're doing. It's important because the things that we're undertaking as an organization that we're going to be reporting on for 3 years, and we've done incredible work. When I think about shared services that we talked about where it was highly fragmented, structure didn't really work, didn't have scale, had very little digital capabilities. Then partnering with Accenture to do shared services for AIG, they have enormous scale. They have over 50,000 people in the Philippines alone. We were able to have enormous resource capabilities. They had 54 digital capabilities we didn't have. Getting KPIs, customer service, cycle time decrease, but also clarity in back office in terms of its service expectations into AIG. It's just one example. We just have also entered into a big migration to the cloud, which again, it's like, okay, that's not all that innovative, but we were behind. In some instances, when you're behind, you don't have to do things in a linear basis, and you can actually leapfrog to get to real value. Those are just a couple of examples. The ultimate goal is to have great end-to-end process, customer service, better insight on data, better capabilities in terms of getting the type of underwriting risks to the top of the pile through front office algorithms, getting them to the underwriters to make better decisions faster. Also, the optimization of the portfolio, looking at where you can actually do risks that are not adding a lot of risk to the portfolio, like a property, like getting in non-CAT peak zones. If I look at what we're doing in down the street, when you look at, we may have a little bit more European, but we've reduced Florida. Doing things in a more digital, enhanced way can only be done if you have foundational workflow. I know it's boring, but it's incredible work. We're at the halfway point. We're hitting all our milestones and believe that we will be a different company when we come out the other end. I'm really proud of what we've achieved there. Great. Maybe another question on expenses that's come in is, do you expect any meaningful cost synergies as a result of the separation and setting up two independent companies? Let's just park aside what we're going to have to do from a legal and banking standpoint, doing a public offering. Our base case, and we're working through it now, would be that the investment that's required in Life & Retirement will be net neutral to the benefits it would get from AIG 200. It's going to be neutral. When we get to AIG and position it for the future, we expect, and we have some work to do, and expect to give a little bit more guidance on our next earnings call, where we would expect expense benefits from a combination of what remains in AIG and what currently is General Insurance. I would expect in AIG, your main co, an expense benefit, and our base case right now is expense neutral within Life & Retirement with the additional investments that will be required to get it to be a standalone public company. We're working through the work streams now and be able to provide a little bit more guidance next quarter. Great. Maybe now transitioning a little bit to kind of the capital topic. There's been a few questions. I guess first, just generally, can you talk about your philosophy on capital management and how you plan to balance investment in organic and inorganic growth with returning capital to shareholders? Yeah. Well, I said we were doing the $500 million buyback in the first half of 2021. I want to get more specific in terms of our capital management strategy, and intend to do so. A big part of it is what we do with the 19.9% of Life & Retirement, because there's a base case there of what we need to do on the debt side and what capital we're able to raise in the 19.9. Generally speaking, Mark's outlined in detail what our intent is in terms of reducing debt. We expect to be focused on returning capital to shareholders in some form of buybacks for the near future. We need to talk more about the dividend, and we need to position the company, not in the short term, but eventually to have the opportunity to acquire businesses in the event that there's something that complements the organization and allows us to position the company for longer term growth. I think that will be something in the future that we'll look to strategically. First, the priority is the Life & Retirement separation, then being able to outline with specificity, in terms of what we intend to do with the capital, and then also having regular updates in terms of how we intend to sort of manage capital, and that capital management strategy will be something that we'll talk about with more frequency. Perfect. Realizing it may be a little bit premature, but got a couple of questions as well on kind of the capital structure side and how you're thinking about leverage for both the AIG parent and the Life & Retirement business and capitalizing the different pieces. Realizing it's still early, I don't know how much you can say, but any kind of review of how you're thinking about it would be helpful. Yeah. Obviously, we've gone through it in great detail, the base case is all focused around our stakeholders and making sure that we don't have issues with rating agencies, regulators, the fact we don't need to raise equity capital. Making sure the base case is one that we would raise debt at the Life & Retirement company. There would be a dividend back to the AIG parent. Our consistency in terms of reducing debt and making sure that we have the leverage in a place where we feel comfortable is the primary focus. With excess capital, starting to outline what is the path forward on either share buybacks and/or reducing debt further. Again, I don't think we've talked about the dividend for quite some time and intend to do that over a period. The base case is really well thought out. I don't think there's going to be a ton of variability. I don't want to get into too much hypotheticals and really want to kind of get it away. All the different things that Mark and I and Sabra have been talking about to the investment community still remains the same and one that we're executing to. Got it. I'm assuming part of the reason for doing the 19.9% stake as opposed to a bigger chunk is that it allows you to continue to consolidate the business, which you think is favorable from both a leverage standpoint, but also, as you alluded to earlier, to protecting the DTAs. Yes. That is correct, Erik. I mean, the other thing too is at some point, the DTA, for the foreign tax credits will become less relevant, and I think that's really in 2022. Yeah, the leverage and we've got to figure out the path forward after the 19.9, which we have a lot of different scenarios, I think, we want to focus everybody on the initial step. Got it. Maybe coming back to, you commented a little bit about M&A, and it sounds like it's sort of less of a near-term priority, something you want to position yourself to consider, at points in the future. Maybe if you could talk a little bit about where you see potential areas of white space that might be interesting to fill in over time. Yeah, as you said, it's not a near-term objective. I mean, it's our responsibility to think about strategically positioning AIG for the future all the time. Obviously, we think through where there are opportunities. I like our business the way it is. I mean, like is there white space? Sure. We have a tremendous international business. We have an incredible position in Japan, which is, again, if you take the big three, we're the next largest insurance company in Japan, where we are making investments in digital capabilities in the front end. We are finding ways in which we think we can grow, and have more relevance to distribution in Japan. We have a great U.K. business that we think have great opportunities for growth. Again, we have a very good global platform. North America, we feel really well-positioned to capitalize on the specialty businesses. Again, we don't talk a lot about it, buying a high-quality business like Glatfelter has taken us from the bottom decile of program performers to the upper quartile within one or two turns. Building that underwriting discipline and high-quality standards that a Glatfelter has and our ability to reposition our portfolio. We're not looking to grow substantially in programs, but it's a nice little niche business that we have consistency, and core principles. We think there's really good opportunities for growth and we will position the company. We've got to get through the when you think about what's in front of us, don't want to take our eye off the ball on the underwriting turnaround. The turnaround is largely behind us, but our industry-leading position is going to allow us to make further gains in the short and medium term. I want to be very focused there. We've got to make sure we don't miss any of our intervals on AIG 200, and that's going to be critical not only from a strategic standpoint, but operational and financial outcome, then separating Life & Retirement, and doing that in a very thoughtful way where we maximize value for our stakeholders, then articulate a capital management strategy in terms of proceeds and what's the structure of that capital in the future, huge talent agenda. I think we'll come back to that sort of capital management strategy as sort of a 2.0 as to where are there possibilities for us to find ways in which we would grow perhaps through acquisition in the future. I think that's down the road and something that won't be part of the talk track in the short term. Perfect. Well, I think that's a great summary of kind of the road ahead. You certainly got work to do, but are making nice progress. Appreciate all the comments today, and thank you for your time. Thanks, Erik. Really appreciate the time. Take care. Great. Thank you. Bye.