cit TranscriptQ4edited

CIT
Moderator: Valerie Gerard
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Confirmation # 3102269
Page 1

The following transcript has been provided by a third party transcription
service for informational purposes only. The transcript has been reviewed
and edited by CIT and in our opinion is the best interpretation of the
statements made on the call. The actual conference call may have differed
slightly.

CIT

January 19, 2005
11:00 am CIT

Operator: Good afternoon, my name is Kim and I will be your conference facilitator.

At this time I would like to welcome everyone to the CIT Year-End Earnings
Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise.
After the speaker’s remarks there will be a question and answer period. If you
would like to ask a question during this time simply press star then the number
1 on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question
press star then the number 2 on your telephone keypad. I would now like to
turn the call over to Ms. Valerie Gerard, Senior Vice President of Investor
Relations.

Valerie Gerard: Thank you Kim and good morning everyone. During this call any
forward-looking statements made by management relate only to the time and
date of this call.

We expressly disclaim any duty to update these statements based on new
information, future events or otherwise.

For information about the risk factors relating to our business please refer to
our quarterly and annual reports filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 2

Any references to certain non-GAAP financial measures are meant to provide
meaningful insight and are reconciled with GAAP in the Investor Relations
section of our Web site located at www.cit.com.

With that, I’d like to introduce Jeff Peek, our Chairman and CEO.

Jeffrey Peek: Thank you Valerie and good morning to everyone. To start, I’d just like to
report very strong results for the fourth quarter and for the entire year of 2004.
And I’ll just take you through several of the highlights here.

Our core earnings per share were 91 cents for this quarter versus 75 cents for
the fourth quarter of 2003. Now, this is the seventh consecutive quarterly
increase in core earnings that we’ve had at CIT.

Return on tangible equity increased to 14.5% compared to 13.1% for last
year’s fourth quarter.

We had strong new business volume. New business volume was up 32% over
the fourth quarter of 2003 and up 16% for the entire year versus 2003.

In the quarter managed assets increased $1.1 billion and were up $3.7 billion
or 7.5% for the entire year.

Credit trends remain favorable with core charge-offs at 52 basis points.

Our balance sheet metrics continued strong with the ratio of Tangible Equity
to managed assets at 10.7%.

Our year-long effort of redeploying capital in the higher return core businesses
continued with agreements to sell off a majority of our liquidating
manufactured housing portfolio and substantially all of our private equity
limited partnership interest.

Looking back over 2004, I’d like to discuss the progress we’ve achieved in
our three most important initiatives. Those critical initiatives are: first,
improving capital discipline; second, creating a sales and growth culture; and
third, enhancing our profitability.

First, on capital discipline. This year we introduced our new risk adjusted
capital allocation methodology and this has literally changed the way we look
at our businesses. We’ve been able to liberate capital and redeploy it into
higher returning businesses. TRS and Argentina were businesses we wanted
to get out of, we lacked scale, and we got out of them.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 3

Our liquidating portfolios of recreational vehicles, marine, manufactured
housing; We accelerated those divestitures so we could take the capital and
put them into other businesses. And then what we call venture capital, both
our direct investments and our private equity limited partnerships, we divested
these so we could redeploy the capital. The results have been that over the
last seven quarters we’ve had an improvement in return on tangible equity of
over 350 basis points.

Our second initiative was creating a sales and growth culture, one which
would rival in intensity our credit and risk culture.

This summer we held our first sales summit which resulted in initiatives to
promote cross selling, information sharing and general collaboration across
our business units. And we’re also actively recruiting a Chief Sales Officer.

We’re moving forward by organizing our businesses around key industry
sectors and key customer areas, and that’s being led by our new Vice
Chairman, Rick Wolfert. We have a new industry focus in healthcare and
communications, media and entertainment. And we’ll probably roll out
several more verticals during the year.

As a result, origination volume was strong across the businesses, up $7 billion
from 2003.

And third, improving profitability. While we’ve made strides with
streamlining our businesses during 2004 we obviously need to focus on
improving our operational efficiency in 2005. As many of you have noticed,
total operating expenses were up $25 million over the third quarter. The
reasons for the increase varied from acquisition expenses at CitiCapital to
greater incentive-based compensation, to greater expense on a higher level of
recoveries. But the reality is that our expenses are too high. And all of us are
very disappointed in the efficiency ratio remaining above 40% and we’re
going to do better in 2005. Joe will discuss projected improvements and
operating expenses in a minute.

Now, let’s look at the highlights of our individual business units during 2004.

First Commercial Finance, and as you know this is the portion of our portfolio
businesses that’s now managed by Rick Wolfert. In Commercial Services, it
was a record year for our Factoring unit, highlighted by the successful
integration of HSBC factoring and GE factoring. Our factoring volume is
approaching $40 billion now annually. Also we tapped new market segments
away from our traditional textile and fashion industries. This would be
electronics, refactoring and furniture. These were all up year-over-year, over
50%. Factoring assets ended the year at $6.2 billion which was down

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 4

somewhat during the quarter predictably as retailers liquidate their
inventories. Profitability over the year that was improved greatly due to larger
commission and fee income.

Now, let’s talk about Business Credit. They had originations of nearly $600
million in the quarter which was strong, although I will say asset levels
continue to be offset by high levels of prepayment and general liquidity in the
marketplace. We did make good progress on our European lending initiative.
We received our UK banking license and also recruited a leading asset based
lender to head our London based operation. The media and communication
sector within Business Credit had solid deal flow resulting in substantial fees
and good margins. We’re also focusing our efforts on building out our
Corporate Finance business which services private equity sponsors in the US
and Europe.

Now, let’s go to Equipment Finance. Their net income doubled to $25 million
for the quarter. Credit has greatly improved in this unit with charge-offs at 23
basis points. And we are targeting the construction industry and industrial
sectors as the primary focus of Equipment Finance going forward.

Capital Finance. Let’s talk about Rail. Having the youngest fleet in the
industry during an economic expansion means the demand for our railcars
remains very healthy. The utilization rate here is in the very high, 90%. We
added seven new customers in the fourth quarter and lease rates continue to
improve. And as you might expect we’re pushing for longer lease terms at
this point in the cycle.

On Aerospace. We had improved performance in what I think everyone
would concede are difficult market conditions. We will receive 18 new
jetliners in 2005. We’ve already placed 14 of those. We will receive four in
the fourth quarter of 2005 and we expect those to be signed in the first quarter
of this year. We have two aircraft on the ground, currently one of which is
covered by a letter of understanding with a new lessee. Lease rates have
stabilized. Rents on new production planes are back to 9/11 levels. Out of
production aircraft are still 20% to 30% below their historical level. Our
focus is on opening up new markets like China, India and the Middle East.
And in the fourth quarter we added eight new customers to bring our base of
lessees to 92.

Now, let’s turn to the Specialty Finance businesses that are managed by our
Vice Chairman, Tom Hallman. They had an excellent 2004. Major vendor
turned in another solid quarter with volumes up 9% for all of 2004.
Profitability increased due to higher margins, excellent credit costs and an
11% jump in major vendor earning assets. Within DFS, our joint venture with

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 5

Dell, we are experiencing very good demand for personal computers as well
as high levels of repeat business from existing customers.

Now, let’s talk about International. We had growth of 40% in managed assets
in International this year, reflecting the CitiCapital Europe acquisition, and
we’re ahead of schedule in integrating that business into our Dublin base.
Profitability here continues to improve and returns are approaching corporate
targets. Also we found the Pan European platform is critical in attracting new
vendors. We’ve signed up OCC copiers and Schindler Lifts.

Small–to-mid-ticket leasing. Assets grew here 15% over the year due to the
GTS acquisition from GATX and volumes were up 11% reflecting an
intensified business development effort of 20 of our new sales professionals
which have signed up 11 new vendors. In the quarter, profitability declined
somewhat due to the charge-offs related to the NorVergence situation.

In Small Business Lending, we had a solid fourth quarter. The volumes were
up 7% relative to last year and we expanded the number of offices where we
do business. Credit quality remained good with a noticeable improvement in
past dues. And for the fifth year in a row we were ranked as the largest SBA
lender and the #1 volume lender to women and minorities.

In Home Equity, overall volume nearly tripled to $1.6 billion in the fourth
quarter. Managed assets in Home Equity are up $1.8 billion from a year ago
and credit quality remains good with delinquencies at 2.3%.

During 2004, we made acquisitions in our Specialty Finance unit (two of
them) GTS leasing from GATX and CitiCapital in Europe. And these
acquisitions broadened our portfolio. They diversified our customer and
dealer base and they added significant resources to our sales force in the US
and Europe which we think is very important. And just two weeks ago we
announced an agreement to acquire Educational Lending Group which will be
a solid growth oriented business for us to add to our Specialty Finance group
and a diversification in that portfolio. We’re in the tender offer now and the
deal is expected to close in February. When you view this acquisition with
our liquidations of Private Equity and Manufactured Housing, EDLG
illustrates the redeployment of capital into higher growth businesses with
favorable risk return profiles. We like the market for student lending and we
like this company. But let me tell you what we think CIT brings to EDLG.

First, we bring the resources to expand their sales force, to accelerate their
conversion to internal servicing and also to promote new products that they
had not been able to promote in the past. Also, we give them a chance to
invest in new markets such as the plus loans, education loans to graduate
students and package loans for professionals once they graduate from school.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 6

Also, we bring funding flexibility to hold the assets on the balance sheet, to
sell them in the market or potentially support them with deposits. Also, we
think CIT’s extensive banking relationships will sharpen EDLG’s focus on
buying and selling student loan portfolios in the second market. Finally, we
have a valuable customer list which can be utilized to create strategic
marketing alliances with existing clients of both firms.

Now, why do we think we can compete in this space? Like with many of our
businesses, we feel the bank competitors are distracted. Student lending is
one of many products for them and they frankly lack the focus on this
particular market. Also, we think the market is broader than generally
defined. We compete in the school channel but we also find very appealing
opportunities in the channel for consolidation loans and also PLUS loans.

We think together CIT and EDLG have efficient funding, reputable and
experienced management teams, proven ability to react to the market in a very
flexible and nimble manner and size and scale to build this market in a rapidly
developing sector.

Now, I’d like to turn the discussion of our financial results over to our Vice
Chairman and Chief Financial Officer, Joe Leone.

Joseph Leone: Good morning everyone. Thank you Jeff. Just staying at 30,000 feet for one
minute we had a great year and it was capped by a great quarter. We grew the
business. We grew the profits. And as Jeff said, we significantly improved
returns. Those are the bottom lines. But let’s get into some analytics. I know
you need some more color on the earnings for the quarter and hopefully my
commentary is focused on the areas you have focused on.

First let me give you some more color on the three items that added an
additional 4 cents to our GAAP earnings this quarter. Jeff mentioned some of
them.

Consistent with our strategy to accelerate the liquidation of non-strategic
portfolios when we compare the valuation we see in the marketplace to sell
versus liquidation scenario, we contracted to sell over $300 million of our
Manufactured Housing portfolio in December. We transferred the assets to
assets held for sale, wrote them down $16 million pretax at year-end and this
reduces our fees and other income. The valuation we used was based upon
the sales price or expected sales proceeds. And we’re closing on this
transaction in January.

We also contracted to sell substantially all of our Venture Capital fund
investments as Jeff mentioned, roughly $160 million. Again we wrote the
portfolio in the fourth quarter to the approximate sales value. In this case, the

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 7

pretax loss is $14 million. We show net venture capital losses as a separate
line item in the income statement. We expect to close this transaction in
April.

These two sales free up approximately $200 million of capital in our risk
adjusted methodologies and we will redeploy that to the Student Lending
acquisition we made, EDLG. So this capital earned little today and is being
redeployed to a more predictable, non-cyclical business which we believe will
generate good risk adjusted returns.

The Telecom reserve. We’ve been working that portfolio for 2 1/2 years as
you know. We’ve written off or restructured most of the problem accounts.
The portfolio is $335 million, $21 million is in non-performing. Given the
low level of non-performers, no charge-offs in the fourth quarter and as we
look forward into 2005 we have lower charge-off forecasts. So we reduced
the Telecom reserve by $43 million; $23 million remains.

Now, let me get into some of the drivers behind the operating results.

Asset growth. Jeff mentioned, assets grew over $1 billion in the quarter and
that includes covering $550 million plus of seasonal run-off in Factoring and
$120 million in run-off in prepayments and Business Credit, as we do have
seasonality in the run-off.

Let me reconcile managed asset growth to organic growth for the year.
Managed asset growth for the year was $3.7 billion, about 7.5%. Jeff
mentioned that. During the year we made two acquisitions, $1.3 billion
GATX and the CitiCapital Europe. We sold or liquidated $500 million of
liquidating portfolios from both owned and managed securitized assets.
Earlier we sold our TRS business, $120 million. And if you remember into
the second quarter we had two unusually large syndications that we did for
risk purposes and that was about $150 million. If you net those acquisitions
and dispositions, growth from our core businesses was about 6% for the year,
about where we were expecting it to be.

Moving to credit quality, you saw the credit quality numbers. Recoveries
were very strong in the fourth quarter, $27 million, 30 basis points. We had
increased efforts and expenses on the collection front but it paid dividends.
And if you look at it sequentially we had $18 million in recoveries in Q3
which was nice, 22 basis points but Q4 was even stronger.

Margin. The net finance margin was down slightly and we did have
refinancing benefits. While they are decreasing, we still have refinancing
benefits and I’ll talk more about that in a moment. Yield related fees were
down quarter-to-quarter. Down $6 million and that was about 7 basis points

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 8

decline in margin so that’s why the margin was down sequentially. As I’ve
said, margin has a lot of dynamic to it but simply put, that was one of the
significant reasons.

Lease margins improved very nicely in the quarter, up 35 basis points to about
6.5%, particularly strong in Air and Rail. Rental Income was up $12 million
in the quarter due to new placements, working at getting past new rents and
improving lease rates in rail. Depreciation expense you’ll see is a bit lower
and that’s driven by lower depreciation in our Small and Mid-ticket leasing
business.

Non-spread revenue appears flat quarter-to-quarter, but we did put the $16
million Manufactured Housing write down through Fees and Other Income.
So if you take that out Fees and Other Income were up driven by very strong
fee generation, up about $11 or $12 million in Capital Finance, Equipment
Finance and Business Credit.

Operating Expenses. We’re working hard here and we’re very disappointed
here. But I want to give you some numbers. Our efficiency ratio is 43%
excluding the one-time items, the losses on the sales of those two portfolios.
We’re 43%, but it’s still higher than it was in Q3. Expenses sequentially were
up $25 million. Let me give you some analytics.

Headcount was flat quarter-to-quarter, other than the staff we brought on in
the CitiCapital acquisition. The CitiCapital acquisition added $6 million to
the expenses this quarter. We will complete the integration of this portfolio
onto our platforms in the first half of 2005.

Jeff mentioned that higher incentive compensation accruals occurred this
quarter and that was tied to the higher volume and revenues. And those
compensation accruals were up about $7 million in quarter on a 20% quarter-
to-quarter increase in volume and fees.

Credit and collection expenses were higher. We think that will turn as the
portfolio continues to improve in quality but we did have a significant number
of recoveries. We spent some money to get them as credit collection expenses
actually increased in the quarter by $4 million.

We had a severance accrual, in Specialty Finance, put up $2 million as we
restructured some of our back office operations. We will get payback on this
in 2005. This is similar to what we did in the Business Credit unit a few
quarters ago.

We did make some enhancements to our operating leases enabling us to
improve revenues. And we continue to have higher professional fees to my

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 9

disappointment, due to compliance initiatives. That was up about $2 million
in professional fees.

So those are the reasons for the $25 million quarterly increases. Expenses
were up and we’re not happy about it. Some of the expenses did contribute to
the quarter’s earnings, either higher recoveries, margins, etcetera and others
will contribute in the future. Having said that we have a lot of work to do.

As I look forward to the first quarter of 2005, excluding the impact of EDLG,
I expect first quarter dollar expenses to be lower than they were in the fourth
quarter. And when you think about some of the items I just described I think
that will give you some of the reasons I have that belief. As I look to the full
year and we’ll be talking about this more as the year develops. We have
several initiatives, major initiatives under way to reduce costs. We’re looking
at the number of leasing systems we have and can we consolidate them.
We’re doing processing efficiency reviews at all our platforms and we will
consolidate platforms. As I said earlier, we like to make acquisitions and put
them on our platforms, and we will do so in Europe. More on our outlook on
expenses later.

Funding. We had a great year in the capital markets on the debt side. We
issued $12 billion in unsecured term debt, $4 billion in the asset back market
and we lengthened maturities and tightened spreads both on an absolute and a
relative basis to our competitors set. And we further diversified our investor
base which is critical in our strategy in terms of growth. I’m particularly
pleased with the geographic diversification. We tapped a non-US market this
year for over 20% of our funding and that’s up from less than 10% last year.

Some going-forward numbers, as we look to 2005, we have $7 billion of term-
debt maturing, $4 billion fixed which has a rate of Treasuries plus 125 basis
points and a little over $3 billion in floating, LIBOR plus 59 basis points. So
we continue to see some refinancing benefits there.

Total maturities next year are lower than they were the last two years and
that’s a function of us having lengthened maturities.

When I look at the total year I would expect funding needs in the $10 billion
plus area.

Capital. A little more color on the risk-adjusted capital allocations. You will
begin to see in 2005 as we implement that into a external reporting. We’ve
analyzed the capital requirements of all our sub-segment portfolios. As you
know or may know the allocations will range depending on the risk we see in
the portfolios and will range from a low of 2% against the government backed

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 10

student loans to 100% against any remaining equity investments. But most of
our asset classes fall in the 6% to 14% allocation range.

When we pro-forma our year-end 2004 balance sheet for the closing of the
portfolio sales, Manufactured Housing and Venture Capital and the
acquisition of EDLG, when we look at our requirements based upon this risk-
adjusted methodology, we think the requirements in the 9% plus area utilizing
this risk-based approach. And we have reviewed and will continue to review
our conclusions on this and our allocations on this with the agencies.

Controls and Procedures. We have been reporting certain income tax controls
as a reportable condition in our Qs. We’ve been rebuilding the tax function.
We’ve been hiring and improving the detailed tax basis reporting that’s
necessary under current standard which is a tax balance sheet by individual
asset and liability.

As you know, Sarbanes-Oxley and PAOB have raised its standards with the
respect to evaluating controls for the year end reporting. And that requirement
is that you must a very high assurance, a very high probability of detecting
relatively small differences.

As we are still reconciling this detailed asset and liability balance sheet for tax
purposes, we decided we will likely classify the tax controls as a “material
weakness” in conformance with that new standard. Having said that, we are
confident that our effective tax rate based upon our jurisdiction by jurisdiction
analysis and 2004 tax year provision calculations are appropriate.

The outlook for 2005. We’ve completed our 2005 financial plan, so we
thought we would share with you some highlights today. I’ll do some
numbers. Jeff will talk about some business color and initiatives.

Some baseline assumption. We see the economy having a momentum into
2005. And we expect GDP growth in the 3% to 4% area. We assume interest
rates will rise as the forward curve predicts. So view our guidance and our
color in that context.

2005 EPS growth, will come in above our 10% target. More specifically we’re
looking for mid-teens EPS growth. The assumption there is a relatively stable
share count. And this excludes the impact of any GAAP change like
expensing option which we would plan to adopt in the second half of the year.
Expensing option is not a big deal for us. Our current estimate costs us 2
cents a share per quarter.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 11

Asset Growth. We’re looking for organic asset growth in the same range as
this year. And we will continue to supplement and look for bolt-on
acquisition.

EDLG will boost overall asset growth in 2005. We expect the impact of
EDLG on earnings to be neutral this year.

Margin. We’ll continue to benefit somewhat from the refinancing of the high
cost debt. I gave you the numbers earlier. That will be offset by the
competition from the higher liquidity in the market and rising interest rates to
some extent. If you pro-forma for EDLG, that will reduce margins by 25
basis points. But we also like the non-spread revenue we get out of that
portfolio.

Credit quality. Looking for charge-offs in the area of 80 basis points or 70
basis points factoring in EDLG.

Efficiency. We are managing to get the efficiency ratio under 40% in 2005
while dollar expenses are likely to increase due to acquisitions, inflation,
EDLG. We expect to make dollar progress in Q1 versus Q4 as I mentioned
earlier.

Balance sheet, continue to look for balance sheet strength, strong reserves and
liquidity. We will maintain over 9% capital against managed assets following
the acquisition of EDLG. And that’s consistent with the numbers I mentioned
earlier to you.

Those are some of our financial highlights. Hopefully that helps you with your
analytics. And let me turn it over to Jeff for some additional business color.

Jeffrey Peek: Thanks Joe. Joe has given you some quantitative guidance for 2005 and I’ll
try to provide some color. I would, just as an overview, say that our main
priorities will be the same as they were in 2004, maybe in a different
sequence. But we see those as improving operational efficiency, focusing on
organic growth and furthering our capital discipline.

As I look down the road in 2005, I would emphasize that the current business
and economic trends remain favorable for each of our major businesses as the
economy continues to expand. So let’s run through that from a high level first
for Business Credit.

We think Business Credit is going to benefit from a broader international
origination effort. We’ve opened in London and also expanded marketing
activities through the creation of various industry verticals.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 12

Commercial Services, the new business backlog remains very strong here due
to it’s market leadership and marketshare. And the penetration of new markets
as I said earlier, has been very favorable.

Capital Finance, in Rail we expect another strong year of profitable growth.
There’s high demand for the railcars and locomotive. On Aerospace,
particularly when you think that it’s 75% outside the US, we see a year of
improved profitability and also initiative to penetrate new markets.

In Equipment Finance, the focus is going to be on volume growth. We do see
positive signs in their core markets of Construction, Industrial Equipment and
Business Aircraft.

In Specialty Finance, we see another good year in 2005. Obviously Tom and
his people will be focusing on the opportunity provided by the acquisition of
EDLG. Major Vendor, we’re looking to benefit from a recovery in business
spending as well as the greater acceptance of Internet Protocol Telephony
which will help several of our joint ventures. In the International sector, we
see growth driven by vendors needing a global financing solution. In Small-
to-mid-ticket, the outlook’s good. We’re going to penetrate the direct market
with new programs to take advantage of the sales force we acquired from
GATX. And in Home Equity, the overall mortgage market remains healthy,
although originations are down from the peak refinancing period.

In addition to that, we expect to make significant progress in our sales
initiatives. Our industry verticals will help us with our growth initiatives by
getting closer to the clients. We also expect to align our organization around
the sales force to a greater degree. And that’ll be driven by a recruitment of a
Chief Sales Officer. Also, we’re focusing more on the large industrial sectors:
Healthcare, Media, Telecom.

Finally, our acquisition strategy. Our acquisition strategy remains on track.
And we will continue to explore bolt-on opportunities that will lend breadth
and depth to our growing business. We view bolt-ons as being the vast
majority of our acquisitions going forward.

So in summary, we feel like we have a strong economy behind us. The
outlook is good. We’re on track to reach a return on tangible equity of 15% by
year-end and also achieve mid-teens percentage increases in earnings per
share in 2005.

Additionally, we have strong momentum on our sales and growth initiatives.
But we feel that all the pieces are in place for CIT to rise to the next level.
We’re looking to find new areas of profit and growth in the year ahead as we

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 13

continue to build on our position as a leader in providing financial solutions to
our clients around the world.

Now with that, I’d like to open it up to questions.

Question: I wondered if you could just clarify what the enhancements to the operating
leases were and then the 6% loan growth in 2005, how much of that would be
expected from Home Equity? It was a pretty big contributor in 2004. And I
have another question about the asset sale.

Answer: Yes, just first on the operating leases, in order to move leases and get them out
on rentals on planes and trains, you need to configure them for the new lessee.
So they relate to, principally to the air and the rail portfolio, that’s number
one.

Number two, we expect growth in Home Equity again next year or in 2005.
2004 was a particularly strong year where the interest rate environment was.
Given that interest rates will in our scenario, likely to increase, we would see
some of that growth coming off the 2004 highs. But we’re looking for growth
across all our channels. It’s not a specific one-channel growth strategy. And as
I said earlier, that’s the organic growth we’re looking for, the current
platforms which we should enhance with some of the initiatives described and
some of the vertical industry strategies we have targeted for 2005.

In the second half of the year, I think we saw some particularly attractive
opportunities in Home Equity to purchase some portfolios at prices and credit
combinations that we hadn’t seen for a while.

Question: Okay and then can you just clarify what changed over the last month and a
half besides the EDLG acquisition that led to the accelerated liquidation of the
Manufactured Housing and the Venture Capital Investment?

I guess my sense was before that that was something you were planning but
you were waiting as values recovered and didn’t seem inclined to take a loss.

Answer: Okay, I’ll take that. We track that continuously. And we felt as we got a bid
towards the end of the year, we felt that those bids were closer to and in some
cases, better than our assumptions of holding and liquidating over time.

So we look at the current bid on a loan sale or a current bid on an equity
investment sale and we compare that to the IRR we see as we liquidate the
portfolio over time. And as you know, both those asset classes have long
maturity horizons. Some have no maturity horizon. So that’s the analysis. And
the question to be specific, the bid improved.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 14

Also on the Private Equity, we had a commitment to fund another $100
million of that. So we felt it was urgent that we get out of that commitment.

Question: You haven’t disclosed the buyer on the MH portfolios, just one quick note.
And if you did, I missed it. But if you could repeat that.

And then Joe on the margin, you said the benefit in 2005 will be from less
high cost debt. Can you also breakdown any of the other moving parts and
how the EDLG acquisition will impact that and your thinking and how the
student loan mix will be funded what part of securitization, what part on
balance sheet going forward?

Answer: My memory’s not good enough to remember all that. So where do we start?
We start with the buyer. We did not disclose that name. You did not miss that,
so we did not disclose that.

Secondly, the margin benefits, the dynamics on the margin, I did say that we
would continue to have some refinancing benefit. I gave you the numbers so
you can do your calculations. It’s several basis points. There’s a lot of
expensive debt yet to refinance. Some of it has long maturities but we have
about $7 billion in 2005. I mentioned that. So that’s one item that will move.

We expect improved rental rate particularly in Capital Finance. We expect
that trend to continue. That’s two. Thirdly, there’s a mix shift. We see good
growth in some of our Specialty Finance businesses, Home Equity. The Small
and Mid-ticket business should have nice growth as well as the International
business as we’ve put on and integrate the CitiCapital organization. So, we’ll
have some mix shift. And generally the Specialty Finance businesses have
slightly higher general spread because their losses are higher in those
businesses being small ticket.

What else can I tell you? We do see some impact of higher interest rates, the
way we finance the company as the curve flattens or as short-term interest
rates increase a little bit. We have a little interest rate sensitivity but not
significant. So those are the dynamics we see.

On the yield-related field side, we would expect stable to slightly lower yield
related fees in the margin as pre-payments would decline with a higher
interest rate. I don’t know if I got it all, but that’s what I remember you asked.

I missed the EDLG part of it. I think I mentioned that since EDLG has about a
1% spread, we will make nice fees in non-spread revenues in that business.
But since that is at 1% spread, as we layer in that business to our overall
portfolio. That would have a dampening effect of about 25 basis points or so.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 15

Question: Okay and then just one quick last one. When you said the culture during the
course of 2005 will change, I think I heard you say more around a sales
culture, looking to hire a Chief Sales Officer. Can you just talk about how
that compares to the previous model and what are some tangible or
measurable things we might see from that?

Answer: As you know, I think the way we’re organized now is each of the sales forces
are pretty much resident within the business units in the silos. We really don’t
have a sales executive who’s more senior in the organization than any one of
the business units. So just in a simple way, if we’re approaching the corporate
market, we tend to have - large corporation tend to get called upon by six or
seven different people from CIT each selling their own product. So we really
have a structural flaw in that it’s very difficult for us to organize collaborative
selling across a number of products calling on the same company.

So we’re very interested in recruiting a Chief Sales Officer that would help us
with sales management, team selling, trying to make sure that we’re exploring
the right markets and for each of our businesses.

We’ve pretty much left that to the business unit CEOs and they’ve generally
done a good job. But we think we can get state-of-the-art, we can get best
practice. So we’re deep into looking for that person. And that would be a very
senior role within our organization.

Question: Good morning. The earnings guidance or the earnings growth guidance, what
are you guys assuming as the base of earnings of 2004? Are you assuming an
operating number? Are you assuming the actual full year reported number that
you’re giving the mid-teens guidance off of?

Answer: Three dollars and thirty-five cents is the core operating number.

Question: Okay, thank you. And then within the context of as you gave guidance also for
charge-offs in this 80 basis points I thought I heard correctly that for quite
some time you’ve been able to bring down reserves. At what point does that
stop or should we expect that trend to continue at more or less the same pace
in 2005?

Answer: Well, we did reduce reserves on some specific portfolios this year whether it
be Argentina, it got redistributed and charged-off or Telecom which improved
significantly. Generally, what we look at - I’ll repeat this - is when we look at
our loss reserve every quarter, what we look at are a variety of metrics, going
forward losses, level of non-accruals, level of impaired loans as defined under
the FASB standard and our feeling about the specific high risk sectors.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 16

And as we’ve looked at that at the end of this year of every quarter, we felt
our loss reserves are very strong relative to the continuing improvement in the
portfolio. And what we said is that we think the reserve is very strong and
we’d like to see the growth take up some of the room in the reserve. And I
think you start to see a little bit of that with the loss reserve decreasing a bit in
terms of percentage to outstanding.

I would expect as we go forward that the growth that we anticipate would take
up some of the reserve that would free up from the improved credit quality
statistic. But if we get the growth we have, we will continue to need to
maintain a loss reserve in an area based upon our historical coverage ratios.

So I know it’s a little bit of this and a little bit of that, but the loss reserve
analysis is a very scientific analysis we do at the end of every quarter
depending on the risk we see in the portfolio. And if that risk continues to
come down and continues to improve, we will have a reserve that we can re-
establish for growth and we’ll have to take them back.

Question: Okay great. And just a housekeeping question, is there any chance to have you
run through all the metrics of the guidance that I may or may not have gotten
quickly as you gave it, any chance you guys will put that out in writing or as
part of a transcript?

Answer: Yes it will be in a transcript.

Question: I think this is always my area of focus with you, but I’m going to try again.
Operating Lease Appreciation. As I look at the mix of operating leases in the
portfolios, sequentially there’s no change but yet we see a pretty significant
decline in the operation lease depreciation rate which really boosted your
operating lease margin significantly. I think you mentioned Small ticket. Can
you just give me a little more color there?

Answer: The overall macro trend has been that we’ve been growing the longer term
assets in the operating lease portfolio and shrinking the shorter term assets in
the operating lease portfolio.

So when that happens, and the way I’ve said this a few times and maybe it’s
not the right way of explaining it, for $100 of 20 year assets you put on, you
have $5 of depreciation. For every $100 of three-year assets that run off, you
have $33 in depreciation that runs off. So those two dynamics have a very
major effect on the percentage of depreciation, asset mix. That’s number one.

Number two, the Specialty Finance operating lease portfolio continues to be a
smaller part of our overall operating lease portfolio. But even more so, the
performance of that portfolio has been very, very good. Actually we’ve had

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 17

some significant or very pleasing gains at the end of some of that equipment
coming off lease. So as we put on new equipment, we have to take that
experience into effect when we set our new depreciation going forward with
equipment because it’s sort of mark to market on the new equipment you put
in. So that would lead us to slightly slow down the depreciation a little bit that
we’ve been taking or increase depending on the direction of values. The over-
riding answer to your question though is mix. We see more long term assets
and less short-term assets.

Question: Okay, but I’m calculating the mix in this directly as unchanged sequentially,
yet the operating lease appreciation as a percentage of average operating lease
assets went from 12.5 last year to 11.8 this quarter. Obviously, the gains at
the end are a good thing. It means you’re being conservative. Did you say it’s
a retroactive change to the entire portfolio or it’s just…

Answer: No, no, no. No, two things. One, we had a lot of growth in the airline portfolio
towards the end of the quarter. So that may upset your analytics a little bit.
And at the year-end there’s a hard evaluation of the depreciation so you would
make some fourth quarter adjustments, not a major magnitude, but that may
be coming through some of your analytics. So as we look forward, we would
expect the depreciation if Aerospace is the growth and Specialty Finance
operating lease declines continue to be lower as a percentage of the portfolio.

Question: Okay. If I take the operating leases out of the margin, the finance margin
metrics aren’t quite so impressive. Just give me additional color, I think you
mentioned the competitor environment in your 2005 outlook, what are you
seeing exactly in the competitive environment? What I’m looking at is it
looks like rates are ticking up on you, but your topline yields not ticking up.
Do you think we should gain some pricing buy back in 2005 as the economy
is recovering? And then also on the prepayment side, are people being really
aggressive chasing business right now and that’s why you’re starting to lose
some of these higher paying assets?

Answer: I think actually throughout 2004, one of our real issues in a couple of our
businesses has just been the high level of liquidity. And so if anything, the
fourth quarter seemed to be a little bit of a let up at least anecdotally in terms
of us being paid out of various loans and that type of thing. I think we’ve
been pretty good on the calls about Business Credit doing a great job of
originating loans but having that growth not stick on the balance sheet because
of a doubling or tripling of prepayment. The liquidity thing and the high level
prepaids has been with us all year. I’d like to think that the fourth quarter was
a trend that had a little bit less prepaids. It would be both for Equipment
Finance and Business Credit. Maybe that was going to tone down a little bit.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 18

Question: Hi, thanks. Just going back to that issue of prepayment, Equipment Finance
volume looks like it’s picked up pretty well but the actual balance growth has
been less robust. Would that be referring back to the level of prepayment
activity you’re seeing?

Answer: Yes I think both Business Credit and Equipment Finance probably. Those
would be the two areas where the prepayment activities have been strong and
as a result, the volumes look good but the balance sheet growth has been
somewhat dampened by it.

Question: Okay, in terms of where you are seeing a pick up in demand on the volume
side, any particular specialized industry niches that you guys are pointing to
on Equipment Finance?

Answer: Corporate Air. Over the last 18 months has been very, very strong going from
where there were corporate jets on the runway to now certain models I think
are sold out through 2006 production.

Question: Okay and you had mentioned, just changing directions here. On Home
Equity, you had mentioned that the bulk environment was still pretty
favorable in the fourth quarter. What portion of that $900 million in
sequential growth, in Home Equity, was from bulk purchases?

Answer: I don’t know the exact number but it was a little over $.05 billion – a little
over $.05 billion.

Question: Okay great and then there was just one last housekeeping item. You had
mentioned in the press release the charge-offs related to NorVergence, what
was the actual number and dollar number on those charge-offs and then how
much exposure do you guys have as of the end of the fourth quarter?
Answer: The numbers in the aggregate, our charge-offs that we’ve taken are about $15
million between the two quarters, $10 or $11 million in the third quarter and
$4 or $5 million this quarter. And then the remaining exposure that we have
any concerns for are covered through and carved out in our loss reserve.

Question: First question is just on asset growth. Joe, you delineated what you thought
organic growth was and if we strip out Home Equity which perhaps is unfair,
it seems like the organic growth was very low single digits. I was hoping you
could just expand on why we’re not seeing more momentum in some of your
more traditional businesses, i.e. not Home Equity and perhaps some of those
prepayments, maybe you could expand on that.

And secondly, just a clarification. In terms of the net interest margin absent
the Education Lending Group acquisition, is it your overall statement that on

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 19

balance the margins should be relatively flat with the puts and takes in 2005
versus the exit level at 2004? Thanks.

Answer: Yes, in terms of the growth, I think we had pretty good growth overall - all
year and I mentioned some of the ways we covered the dispositions and the
liquidation.

Having said that, when we look at the fourth quarter numbers and that’s what
I tried to give some color on, we had relatively high run-off in terms of
seasonality which we’ll build again as the year progresses in both Commercial
Finance businesses which are Factoring, Commercial Services and Business
Credit. So I factor that into my thinking in the quarter - that we had $700
million plus of liquidations or seasonality run-off that we had to cover in the
quarter.

Question: Yes, but I was just looking at it year-over-year and you’re saying $3.7 billion
in overall growth, $1.3 billion acquired.

Answer: Yes.

Question: Which takes you to $2.4 billion and then of that $1.8 billion came from Home
Equity. And I realize that there’s $500 million or so that was also disposed of
that worked against the average but still seems like no matter how you cut it,
well over a half of the growth came from Home Equity.

Answer: Yes, and I think it’s unfair for you to throw it out because it is growth and it is
growing earnings and is growing value. But I think if you look at it year-over-
year I think in the first half of the year and if I can dial back to a call about six
months ago when we didn’t show growth because of a lot of dispositions I
think since that time the Commercial Finance businesses have picked up a bit
in terms of their growth. We did outline our expectations for 2005 and some
of the areas we’re targeting and feeling about 2005.

We see pretty decent growth coming out of Specialty Finance businesses
either out of the Major Vendor programs or the Small and Mid-ticket
business. And on the Rick Wolfert Commercial Finance side we think with
the strategies that we’re employing and deploying that we’ll see better growth
in the Business Credit business and we’ll start to see improved growth in a
more focused Equipment Finance business be it construction or general
manufacturing.

Question: Okay that’s helpful and then just on the margin?

Answer: Yes, I would think that’s sort of the way I’m thinking about it and we’re
looking at our plans and remodeling and modeling.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 20

I mentioned some of the factors. Interest rates will rise in the short-term curve
will cost us a few basis points, right? Lower prepayment fees will. We will
get some benefits for the refinancing and it is competitive out there
particularly in the Commercial Finance arena. In our Business Credit
environment in terms of spread, but we’re changing the mix a bit. We’re
looking to grow some of the Specialty Finance businesses that have slightly
higher margins like the Small and Mid-ticket area or the SBA business.

So I think when we factor all that in, putting EDLG to the side, we’re looking
at a margin that’s flat to our more recent trend over the last six months of the
year.

Question: Okay and then just lastly, Jeff mentioned in passing, potentially deposit
funding some of the EDLG portfolio and I was hoping you could elaborate on
that. I know you just went live with the bank in the UK, but talk about deposit
funding.

Answer: Well, I think with - these are very high quality assets so we now have two
banks, we have a bank in the UK and we have a bank in Utah. Obviously, we
have to apply to the regulators and that type of thing. But these are 100% -
98% government guaranteed assets that are generated out of EDLG so that
would be a place where we might get attractive funding for this portion of
their originations on the balance sheet.

Question: Thanks. Just with respect to the margin guidance, you mentioned a forward
curve, are we to assume that about another 100 basis points by the Fed is what
you’re modeling in your internal model?

Answer: It’s 100 basis points or slightly more.

Question: Okay. You mention your efficiency ratio under 40%. I’m assuming that’s by
Q4 2005 not for the full year?

Answer: No. What we’d like to do is get the efficiency ratio for the year under 40%.
So I recognize we have work to do, but that’s our goal for the 2005 planning
horizon.

Question: Okay and then the 15% ROE target you put out an 8-K in December which,
and maybe I read it wrong but it seemed to imply that you were going to
revisit that ROE target. Seeing how you’re at 14.5% already and given the
overall position, the company is in 15% by Q4 2005 seems conservative.

Answer: I think that we’ve laid out 15% as a goal and we still haven’t gotten there and
we’d like to get there and once we get there we’ll reconsider whether that’s

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 21

appropriate or not. But we’re confident we’re going to get there and that’s
really that.

Question: Okay, you’ve laid out a pretty good roadmap for 2005, but now that you’ve
been there for awhile, what do you think are the biggest challenges as you
head into 2005?

Answer: I think the plan we’ve laid for 2005 and the guidance provided are ambitious
and challenging. I think as you all have reflected the credit improvement,
financing improvement, got us through 2004. I feel very good about cleaning
up the balance sheet this year and the capital redeployment. I think we’ve
done well on that. The organic growth obviously is something that we’re
focused on and I’d say managing the operating expense at the same time that
we’re trying to build organic growth I think we’re focused on that but that will
be a challenge.

The one thing I’d say is we’ve really held headcount flat except for picking up
about 150 people in CitiCapital. So if headcount was going through the roof
I’d probably be less enthusiastic about our ability to make our plan that Joe
articulated getting the efficiency ratio for the year down below 40%. I’ll just
add that is the one that we all get paid on so it has quite a bit of focus here.

Question: Thanks a lot. I just had a couple of points of verification. I was wondering if
you are funding anything right now with deposits and if not, how long do you
think you set up that type of funding or default bank as far as Utah Bank?
And what type of pricing trends have you been seeing with respect to the bulk
purchases of Home Equity?

Answer: On the first question it’s dominimus in terms of our deposit funding. We do
have a bank in Utah and dominimus in the $100 million area so it’s not
impactful on our overall funding equation yet but as Jeff described we’re
evaluating different asset classes to see where we should take that.

Question: Do you know how long…?

Answer: And on the Home Equity pricing, we can answer it this way, I think it’s been
attractive to us in that it gives us our targeted risk-adjusted return of 15% or
greater when we’ve been looking at these portfolios. So we look at the
portfolio, they generally meet our overall FICO in overall credit screens, and
based upon the loss assumptions we assume, which are very similar to what
we assume on our broker network origination business, then we’re looking for
15% ROE or greater and they do achieve that.

Question: Do you count those bulk purchases in your organic growth?

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 22

Answer: Yes.

Question: And on the deposit funding, how long do you think it would take to set up that
funding source?

Answer: We have to get assets that qualify and then we have to have the systems that
work and move the assets or the assets being originated through a different
entity. So there is some setup but the overall mechanics are in place. It’s a
question of us making a strategic decision and then putting resources to it. So
look for more guidance on that in 2005 as we work our way through it.
We’ve actually had it for three years now.

Question: Thanks. I was wondering if you could expand a little bit on the capital issue.
You talked about the risk based capital framework, is that something that
you’ve gotten the rating agencies to agree to? And now that that’s in place
and you’re still more than 100 basis points better and change the way you are
acting going forward?

Answer: Yes, let me clarify. I don’t think we’re 100 basis points better because we
need in the pro-forma and the acquisition we’ve already decided to go forward
with, which is EDLG. When we factor that in, we have a nine handle in front
of our leverage ratio, so that’s number one.

Number two, we have had fulsome dialogs with the agencies and we will have
our normal annual reviews at the beginning of this year with them and I think
it’s been a very favorable discussion. I think they look at the asset classes
from a risk weighted perspective exactly the way we do. Now whether they
agree with 6% for this or 8% for that, I think on balance and overall I think
we’re in pretty good agreement.

More specifically and more recently we had a very good dialog with all the
agencies relative to the capital allocation we make on non-guaranteed student
lending or unguaranteed for that matter student lending. And we threw out
our ratios, our 2% on the guaranteed and 6% or something greater on the
unguaranteed if we decide to go forward with that and they were very much
on board with those numbers.

So I think the dialog has been healthy and as described and driven, I think the
discipline which we’ve really put in place internally in our acquisitions and
our measurement of businesses to stay in or get out of has been very helpful
during the course of 2005. And as you see the numbers in 2005, it’s been
helpful in 2004, continue to be in 2005 and as I said before, you will begin to
see the different leverage loads on the business segment in the public
reporting starting with the first quarter Q. So hopefully you’ll find that useful
as well.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 23

Question: I had just one quick follow-up on the airline business. Am I correctly hearing
a bit of a change in tone? It seems like in the past couple of quarters you’ve
said well we’re not committing a lot of new capital there. We’re waiting to
see if pricing comes back to a point where we can get acceptable returns. It
seems like this time you’re talking more about entering new markets and new
lessees and that sort of thing. Is there a little bit of a shift going on?

Answer: No, no, I think the environment may be a touch better but we’re just talking.
Our discussion of new markets and new lessees is really just a sign of
confidence in our ability to place the new aircraft and we’re 12 months ahead
in terms of placements and that type of thing. But we’re still working off our
order book from three or four years ago and I think everybody knows that we
have planes that we’re going to get this year and in 2006. So there really
hasn’t been any change in our view and if there were we would certainly
announce it.

Question: Thanks. Just two quick questions, one’s just a follow-up on a question. At
what stage would you consider, perhaps if a rating upgrade is not forthcoming
redeploying that excess capital in other ways?

Answer: We view ourselves as being well capitalized at this point and we like our
levels of capital for where we are in the cycle. I’m not sure we would view
ourselves as having excess capital at this point.

Question: Okay and secondarily just given your comments a few minutes ago that ex-
EDLG the margin would be largely flat with this year. I’m still confused
about why the earnings growth is going to be roughly twice the level of the
balance sheet growth. Is that stemming entirely from the operating leverage
that you anticipate on the efficiency ratio?

Answer: I think it’s a couple of things. One, we said 6% asset growth plus bolt-on
acquisition opportunities, right? So you’ve got to factor that in. Number two,
you mention the operating efficiencies that we need to drive, getting 42% to
40% and then third, the one ingredient that you need to look at is we do have a
lot of initiatives to continue to increase the non-balance sheet sources of
revenue. So we would anticipate a growth in non-spread revenues that are
independent of the asset growth and that’s not an equation that we’ve given
any modeling advice on but you can look at fourth quarter trends and the
trends we had all year and make some educated guesses there.

So it’s assets, organic plus bolt-on acquisition opportunity, it’s some operating
efficiency as we’ve described, and lastly it’s improvement in generation of
more non-spread revenue.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 24

Question: And the primary sources of that non-spread revenue is what?

Answer: We’ve challenged all our businesses to create non-spread revenue sources,
whether it’s cross-selling a customer to another unit with other services and
can we get fees on things and value that we’re providing to the customer or
business strategies that are based on selling our services or selling the value-
added we do rather than our balance sheet and generating assets that we may
not like from a risk-adjusted return basis but the market may have some more
liquidity or higher liquidity asset type work. So there’s a lot of initiatives in
every business. Rick Wolfert and all his businesses and Tom Holman and all
his businesses as well as part of the EDLG acquisition has non-spread revenue
generation. So it’s a charge throughout the organization.

Question: I was wondering if you could address the percentage of your Home Equity
growth that was brokered versus originated directly and what your
expectations for that mix is going forward? Thanks.

Answer: When you say brokered I guess you mean bulk portfolio acquisitions. I don’t
have the specific numbers. It would be over $1 billion of acquisitions during
the year but I don’t have the specific number.

And as we look forward, as I said earlier, we would anticipate the overall
Home Equity originations declining somewhat given the interest rate
environment, having said that, we could offset that by expansion into new
markets. So I’m sorry I don’t have the specifics on that but it’s somewhere
over $1 billion of portfolios bought during the year.

Question: My question is regarding Education Lending. There’s a little confusion
regarding whether that it is a strategic focus going forward, education as a
sector. Do you view that as a focus going forward and your growth plans for
early education sectors are more towards origination or syndication? And
could you comment on the competitive landscape as well?

Answer: Well, we clearly think it’s a strategic opportunity for us or we wouldn’t have
stepped out of our existing footprint. We think it helps reposition us for the
future in terms of what we think is potentially the fastest growing asset class
in financial services and very low risk. So clearly it’s something we think is
strategic.

One of the points we were trying to make in our prepared remarks is we think
that there’s several opportunities there for us over and above the in-school
channel, the consolidation loans, PLUS loans, 2,800 campuses around the
country. So we tried to pick a company that had skill and experience in
generating loans in all of those channels as opposed to just one.

CIT
01-19-05/10:00 am CT
Page 25

One of the other things we got was an unrivaled Web presence through
Campus Dirt.com and the FinancialAid.com. So, we expect to generate assets
out of all three of those channel and we’re excited about it so it’s clearly a
strategic acquisition for us and one that we think will pay return going
forward.

Question: Do you foresee doing some more acquisitions to bulk up any of the three
channels that you talked about?

Answer: I think at this point we probably need to focus on Education Lending and
make sure we fully understand their potential. We can, as I think we’ve said,
we continue to look for bolt-on acquisitions. If you go back before Education
Lending I think the last five acquisitions we did were all bolt-on and that’s
where the majority of our M&A work is going to be in sectors where we’re
already a leader.

Question: And will you tolerate dilution for any of the bolt-ons if you find the right
opportunity going forward?

Answer: I would say we’d have to look at that on a case by case basis but I think it
would be very rare that we would tolerate dilution on a bolt-on.

Jeffrey Peek: Thank you. Thanks everyone very much.

Operator: This concludes today’s conference call.

END

cit TranscriptQ4edited

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (7)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (17)

Similar to cit TranscriptQ4edited

Similar to cit TranscriptQ4edited (20)

More from finance28

More from finance28 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

cit TranscriptQ4edited