Franco Ruffini, Oral History

Recorded: March 19, 2010
Interviewed by Craig Simpson
Transcribed by Amanda Faehnel

Note: This transcript includes geo-references to locations that are discussed in the oral history. Geographical names linked in the transcript will open in a new window or tab that takes you to that location information and map in the Mapping May 4 project. To request a transcript without geo-reference links included, please contact Kent State University Special Collections & Archives.

[Interviewer]: Good morning. The date is Friday, March 19, 2010. My name is Craig Simpson. We are conducting an interview for the Kent State Shootings Oral History Project and could you please state your name?

[Franco Ruffini]: Sure. My name is Franco Ruffini.

[Interviewer]: And where were you born?

[Franco Ruffini]: I was born in Villa Franca, Italy, 1949.

[Interviewer]: When did you come--

[Franco Ruffini]: I came here when I was about five years old.

[Interviewer]: And where did you grow up?

[Franco Ruffini]: I grew up in Warren, Ohio and well, that's where I grew up.

[Interviewer]: Okay. And you went to Kent State as an undergrad?

[Franco Ruffini]: Part of my undergraduate. I actually left Ohio when I was--right after high school--the next day I was on a plane to California. I went to the University of California, at Irvine, and I went to a different school out there, and after two years, I came back to Kent. Or actually, to Ohio, and came into Kent.

[Interviewer]: What years were those that you were in Kent?

[Franco Ruffini]: Kent, I started in '69--fall of '69.

[Interviewer]: And what was your major?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, originally, it was physics, and then when I came to Kent, I switched to anthropology.

[Interviewer]: What made you decide to come to Kent State?

[Franco Ruffini]: A couple things. Strange as it may seem, I didn't like the weather in California. Much too sunny for me. But I was also a physics major--this was, again, the Vietnam War was going on, and going to school in California, at the University of California--I started thinking about things and decided I wasn't cut to be a physics major and wanted to get in some other area and knew Kent had a pretty good program in prehistoric archeology, particularly in the Midwest. So I decided to come to Kent, Ohio.

[Interviewer]: What was the Kent State campus like prior to 1970? Just some of your general impressions in '69.

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, general impressions? Again, coming from Southern California back to Kent, it just seemed to me very comfortable. It felt like I was coming home, even though I'd not been to Kent State University, but it was the Midwest. I grew up thirty miles away, or roughly, and it just felt pretty much like I was coming home.

[Interviewer]: Did you detect any changes that year--1969, 1970--with regard to the protest movement?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, again, in California, I became involved in student protests and student movements out there, anti-war movements, and coming back to Kent, I really didn't know what the situation was here, and I was surprised to find in fact it was a fairly active movement. And I remember the fall of '69 demonstrations, joining the demonstrations, going to meetings, rallies. And this is where I get into that issue of narrative. I know I went to the march on Washington, and I was trying to think, When was that? But I think it was November of '69 if I'm not mistaken.

I hooked up with a few people I didn't even know. We got in a car, left Kent, Ohio with I think about twenty bucks in my pocket, went to Washington D.C., spent the weekend, came back, stayed there with people I didn't know, went to demonstrations, and I think I spent a total of two dollars on the whole trip. It was a different time, I guess.

[Interviewer]: Were you involved at an organizational level, like, with SDS [Students for a Democratic Society], or was your involved more individually?

[Franco Ruffini]: Individually. I'd gone to SDS meetings out on the West Coast, been involved in demonstrations organized by SDS, but I never--I'm not much of a joiner of organizations. I guess I'm still not.

[Interviewer]: What do you remember about May 4, 1970, and you can start wherever you like. Some people start the weekend prior. Wherever you're comfortable.

[Franco Ruffini]: I remember, again, the demonstrations that occurred, participating in some of the demonstrations, I remember I think it was the history students that buried the constitution--copy of the constitution, and just it seemed like a lot of excitement in the air.

I remember I guess the morning of May fourth, getting up and--I lived in McDowell Hall at the time--and going to my mail slot and seeing a piece of--I think that's where I picked it up, I know I picked it up before I went to class, and I was struck by it because after reading it, I got the impression that, you know, we're not supposed to gather in groups larger than--I thought it said three or four--I forget what the exact language was. And I was really toying with whether to go to class or not that day, or whether just to go to The Commons, and my class was right around the noon hour, so I thought, Ah, do I go to class? Do I not?, and decided to go to class.

At the time, it was an anthropology class with Dr. Olaf Prufer. And I remember when we walked into class, he kind of looked around, waited until we were seated, and he started counting. And he counted the number of students in the class, and said, "Well, we're an illegal assembly." Because the flyer that was distributed didn't make a distinction where you were not supposed to gather; it said you're not supposed to gather in groups of--and I forget what the numbers were.

[Interviewer]: And that was the flyer you had that morning in your mailbox?

[Franco Ruffini]: Yes. I had seen it. And so here's Dr. Prufer indicating that's illegal assembly and "Let's go out to The Commons." So the whole class, we went out to The Commons.

And by that time, things had already been happening. The demonstration had already moved up over Blanket Hill. In fact, we were out in the area where the old steam plant was, and we were talking--there were a number of students there, several professors--other professors we saw from the anthro department--and that's when we heard the shots fired, and we were just struck by what was going on.

I think it was one of the professors say, "Oh, those are just blanks," or something like that. And somebody else chiming in, "No, no, no, no, those aren't--"

At that point, we sort of dispersed. Went different ways. I went out around and onto The Commons and tried to go up Blanket Hill to see what was happening. Saw some students that I knew coming the other direction. They filled me in on what had happened and I was angry and spent some time standing around. Saw some other students I knew, sat and talked, and then the group started re-coalescing and I joined a group that was sitting on sort of the Blanket Hill back-facing [National] Guard.

And I remember there was a lot of confusion at the time. Someone had a transistor radio--that's the other thing I thought about: transistor radio is nothing--I don't think about [them], but at the time, someone had one, and we were listening to a news report and I remember the report was that there was sniper fire from a dormitory that caused the Guard to shoot at students and what's going on here. So there was a lot happening, a lot of ideas, suggestions being thrown about, Well, we heard this.

So, that's what was going on that day and then, of course, it appeared that there was going to be another confrontation. And I remember some of the faculty working with the Guard, trying to calm the situation and at a point soon thereafter, I decided to leave and went back to the dorm. Heard soon thereafter the university had been shut down and packed up my bags and left town.

[Interviewer]: Backing up just a little bit, were you here I guess it would have been that Thursday, April thirtieth, when they--because usually, that was the day I think Nixon announced the invasion of Cambodia.

[Franco Ruffini]: Yes.

[Interviewer]: Do you remember where you were when you heard that news?

[Franco Ruffini]: You know, I don't remember exactly where I was. For some reason, I was thinking Lowry Hall, in the anthropology department. I remember talking about it with people and people were very upset.

[Interviewer]: Were you present--did you witness any of the events that weekend, say, that Friday with the riots downtown?

[Franco Ruffini]: I was downtown for part of the time but I was not involved in--went down, had a few beers, left with some friends, and really wasn't involved in what occurred downtown that evening.

[Interviewer]: And also Saturday, with the ROTC building, the R-O-T-C building?

[Franco Ruffini]: I was not there. I was not there that day. I do remember walking around campus--and this would have been subsequent to that, when the Guard were here and just feeling--my reaction was of somewhere occupied. These are people that have taken over our campus and feeling very upset about that. You know, when I think about this, I get emotions, the first things that come back. Whenever I think about this, one of the emotions that constantly comes back is the emotion of anger and frustration and so those are sort of the impressions that I have of that day and that time.

[Interviewer]: Where is McDowell Hall on campus?

[Franco Ruffini]: Oh gosh. I'm trying to think, now, I get disoriented--it would be east of I think about Prentice Hall parking lot and walk directly east, that's kind of where it is.

[Interviewer]: Okay. Was that close at all to any of what happened on Sunday night, where the Guard and students had some confrontations that evening?

[Franco Ruffini]: No, but I do remember, at least, I'm not aware of that, but I know we were sitting around in the dorm talking about the situation and my recollection is of something going on outside because there helicopters, and lights coming through the windows, and again, sort of enforcing that idea of what's going on here? It just didn't feel right and people were very upset.

[Interviewer]: Yeah. Other people have talked about that too. Being in their dorm rooms that evening and being unable to sleep, and I think many of you had exams that week because it was midterms, I believe. And they talk about the helicopter lights and the window and even tear gas, sometimes coming through.

[Franco Ruffini]: Yeah, we were up on an upper floor. I don't remember tear gas, but the lights and the noise and it seemed pretty constant, at least, my impression, again. How long it lasted, I don't really recall.

[Interviewer]: So, you mentioned--getting back to May four--so you return home to Warren, Ohio. Did you take any classes that summer? How did that work out for you?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, I forget exactly how this was set up, but we were supposed to contact our professors and in some cases we had some assignments to finish. I think one of the most interesting things that happened that summer is living in Warren, which is a steel town, steel industry was still flourishing. Well, maybe not flourishing, but active at the time, and I had worked a prior summer in the steel mill, and so we decided--and some other Kent State students showed up to find out about a job, get a jump start on the summer. I think there were about ten or twelve of us and in talking, we all figured out--I didn't know any of the people--we all figured out we were all from Kent and we went through the process of filling out the applications, et cetera, and told we were going to get the job but first that they wanted to have someone talk to us in the front office.

So, we were marshalled to a front office. I just remember I went into a room with about five or six men in suits and I thought, This is kind of interesting. And what happened next I thought was pretty amazing because we were basically lectured on what occurred at Kent State University, how they wanted us to know that they were one hundred percent behind the Guard, so far as they were concerned, more of us should have been shot, and that said, they were willing to have us work there, but they wanted us to sign some papers. And they pulled out some papers. They told us a couple things. The papers themselves said nothing more than--and we're asked to sign this--that we were not, never have been, and never intended to be members of the Communist Party of the United States of America. And that was the condition upon which we would be allowed to work.

I remember, you know, my reaction was, well, I guess I need this job. You know, I felt like telling him to go take a hike, but at any rate, I signed the paper, turned it in, and thought this was amazing. And then we were told, final instructions, that we were not to talk about what occurred at Kent State, because they didn't want any trouble in the steel mill.

And that was interesting because the following week when I went to work--I worked with bricklayers and the first question was, "Isn't school still in? You guys must be from Kent." It didn't take too much to figure this out, and I was amazed, but spent the whole summer talking about what happened at Kent, and found that the bricklayers, as a group, were split almost fifty-fifty.

You know, the, They should have shot more of you crowd, to the, Absolutely, you need to demonstrate against this sort of thing, what's going on in Vietnam is wrong, and parallels to the steel strikes and discussions about that and, sort of, working for social justice. It was quite an education. Again, I was twenty years old at the time, so I learned a lot from the people I worked with about how this was viewed and also how this relates to some other things that happened before that I hadn't made connection with.

[Interviewer]: What was your family's reaction to it?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, of course, moms being moms, my mom was just very glad that I was safe. Politically, I never really talked to them. I mean, they knew how I felt about the war--it was never an issue we discussed at home. I had an older brother who I would not say had much sympathy for war demonstrators, et cetera, so there was a bit of tension between him and me. But it was really nothing we discussed.

I remember getting calls. My relatives in Italy called when they heard about it right away, wanting to know if I was okay, but really not much discussion in the family.

[Interviewer]: Did you find the reaction overseas, like in Italy, different compared to what you experienced here?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, again, the reaction there, from at least from my relatives' one, they were generally opposed to the war in Vietnam, but their most immediate concern was, "Are you okay?" Because, again, this hit the headlines pretty--well, all around the world--and they knew I was at Kent, and that was their primary concern.

[Interviewer]: I ask that question because we have in our May 4 Collection a barrage of correspondence and telegrams and it's interesting to contrast the local correspondence with that from overseas in Europe, for example, where it was, like you said, overwhelmingly sympathetic toward the students, whereas here, of course, it was a different story.

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, I was struck in the last month or so with regards to the nomination of the Kent State Shootings sites to the National Register--reading the local press, particularly the Akron Beacon Journal, and now with the internet and the ability to comment. It was just interesting to read the comments--this was with the article in the Akron Beacon Journal--I just thought it's like right back to 1970, with regards to how things seemed split out locally.

[Interviewer]: You found the comments divided?

[Franco Ruffini]: Oh, divided like crazy, right, and not much middle ground. There were a few comments that tried to put some of what was being said in context, or trying to provide some perspective, but a lot of it was just sheer emotional reaction with absolute right or wrong, one side or the other, and that's my recollection of the way things were in 1970 as well.

[Interviewer]: What's your recollection of what it was like in the fall when you returned?

[Franco Ruffini]: I think things were pretty tense. The anti-war movement was still active, things were a little different. I'm trying to think now--this is where it gets into what happened when, and I forget exactly when it happened--but there were demonstrations, and I remember being involved in a demonstration out on front campus. It had something to do with the ROTC building, and there was a tussle around a flagpole and the flag was taken down. I'm not sure if that occurred in the fall or later in the spring--it might have been in the spring quarter of that following year.

So, yeah, I just remember tenseness. We were very suspicious in the anthropology department about a new student that showed up that no one knew, kind of kept apart from everyone and didn't seem to engage. He looked a little older than everyone. He had short hair. We were just very skeptical of who this guy was.

[Interviewer]: That he might be undercover.

[Franco Ruffini]: Yeah, in fact, frankly, I think he probably was undercover. I remember being upset with the university. And again, you know, looking back, thinking of it as a twenty-one year old, my opinion was the university let the students down. You know, you just let the National Guard come in here and take over. Well, they may have had no choice, but my reaction at the time was the university is complicit and I was very angry about that. So I was very suspicious about a lot of things that happened that following year and how the university was reacting.

I was still living in McDowell Hall at that time. And I remember we'd sometimes go up on the roof and goof around, throw water balloons, even though it was pretty high up, we found a way to get up there. And I remember going up there and seeing a big number painted on the roof of the building that hadn't been there before and what's that all about? And I remember that issue being brought up with the university and their response was there was a new system of taking inventory of buildings. And well, our impression was how stupid can we be that you put numbers on buildings to take inventory? They were numbers up there in case there were disturbances for helicopters to be able to--number thirteen, or number twelve.

And I remember also in downtown Kent, close to--I forget what it's called now, but that station that's been turned into a restaurant--

[Interviewer]: Oh, The Pufferbelly.

[Franco Ruffini]: Okay. Well, at the time, in that area, they built a chain link fence that was like twelve feet high--nothing in it. Got questions about that, the response from the city was impound lot for cars. It was kind of odd, because they had barbed wire at the top with elements of the fence pointed inward, and we thought, Wait a minute, something fishy here. And again, in anticipation of additional riots, they were gearing up for places to impound people, not cars. So, it was an interesting time. 

[Interviewer]: You talked about the protesting--did you have the sense that the protest movement tapered off after May four or did it intensify?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, I don't know that it tapered off. It's hard to judge intensity, but I know when I went to demonstrations I felt much more intensely about what I was doing, in part because of what happened at Kent State.

I remember, and I mentioned the situation on front campus that, as that occurred, there was a police car--and I can't remember now whether it was KSU Police or Kent Police--but they had jumped out of their car and they were running around after someone. We were right out in front and this was pretty close to the front of Lowry Hall. So we went out there and the doors were left open and we could hear the radio blaring. So we went over and listened to the radio and there were questions coming over the radio, "Have you seen so-and-so yet?" And it was saying, "Make sure you arrest--" They were basically giving instructions over the radio on who to look for and who to arrest, and of course, we were thinking, What's going on here?

By the way, as a result of that particular demonstration--I can't remember the person's name who was arrested--I think there were several arrested, but there was one person in particular arrested. He was pretty well-known on campus, I just can't recall his name, but this guy used to walk around--always had a black leather jacket or brown leather jacket with a--you know, sort of a power fist painted on his back--and he had long red hair and he'd walk around campus with an iguana stuck to the side of his head. He was kind of an interesting character, always involved in demonstrations--

[Interviewer]: An actual iguana?

[Franco Ruffini]: Yeah. And I remember he was arrested and I thought it odd because, I read about it in the paper and saw that he was the one that tore the flag down and I thought, Well, I was there, I didn't see him do that.

And I remember, maybe it was a few weeks, months later, that there were flyers out for anybody that had seen, witnessed what had occurred. They were looking for people to come forward as witnesses. So I decided to go down and I was interviewed by his defense attorneys and I conveyed what I had seen, et cetera, and eventually that led to me to being a witness for the defense for the trials in Portage County.

And that was an eye-opener to me as well, because I basically testified that I didn't see that he did what he was accused of doing, and the fact that I saw someone else who was dressed entirely differently, looked entirely differently, as the person who pulled the flag down. And I remember when I was being cross-examined by the prosecutors, they pulled out a three-ring binder with black and white photos and they just had hundreds of photographs of what was going on that day. Which, kind of--a sort of light bulb went off in my head. Clearly they had people all over the place photographing from every direction imaginable.

And the prosecutor started by opening up and there was a circle around my head, saying, "Is this you? Where were you prior to this?" And I thought, What's going on here? I thought maybe that, me being naive, such things wouldn't happen.

So, we went through the questioning and I had the feeling he was trying to undermine what I was saying, et cetera, but I told what I saw. And I do remember in looking around the courtroom, looking over at the jury every once in a while, I just still remember--I can still see this guy's face--an older gentleman sitting in the back row of the jury, sound asleep. And I thought, again, another epiphany: here's justice. The wheels of justice grinding away.

And it was also interesting in my mind that in the photographs that they showed me, they actually had photographs of someone pulling the flag. I don't know the guy's name, but he had a fatigue jacket on, and as I said, the guy that they were charging with it had a black leather jacket. They had other photos the same day--different clothes. Their own evidence showed that this guy wasn't the guy that did it and of course, he was found guilty. And, again, I never followed it, but I do know that upon appeal--I don't know if the case was thrown out, but it was reversed and it was let go.

But it was just another, I don't know, episode or event in that whole aftermath that solidified my feelings about, at that time, very negative feelings towards the university. I mean, not the academic situation, not my experience with the anthropology department, et cetera. I felt like I was part of a family, but I felt that the university and the administration was part of the other side.

[Interviewer]: Were you involved in Tent City in the later seventies?

[Franco Ruffini]: No, no. After I left Warren--I meant Kent--I didn't come back. In fact, I felt very frustrated about what happened, angry about it, and I just really didn't want to have anything to do with Kent State University. I'd get the annual call--now, thinking back, I feel bad for the students who called me to ask for donations, and I would always say the same thing, you know, "Look, it's not you, but you can carry this message: there's no way I'm going to give anything to Kent State University and here are the reasons why."

And, you know, again, now with some perspective and so on, my feelings have changed, but they haven't--I mean, some of them are still very strong. And it's really this whole process of going through this National Register [of Historic Places] nomination that's helped me think about this again, because a lot of times if I start thinking about it, I push it back away, not even want to engage it. I've been able to do that more now, and it's starting to, I guess, put it in perspective.

[Interviewer]: Talk about your involvement in the nomination. How did you get involved in that?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, after Kent, I taught for a while. I taught up in the intercity in Cleveland and then I finished up graduate school, and going to work for the Ohio Historical Society in the preservation office. That would have been 1977, and it was interesting because at that time, I remember one of the first experiences I had, I was given this form, apparently the Society had received bomb threats. I thought, Bomb threats? I found out the reason they were receiving bomb threats, apparently there was a nomination being considered for the Kent State shooting sites and some people were threatening the historical society, and I thought, What? This is interesting.

Again, I started in '77. It turned out, earlier that spring, a nomination was being considered and it was clear, at that time--I think it was still Governor Rhodes that was in office--no nomination is leaving this office, and made it clear that, although they didn't want to be associated with squashing this nomination, they made it clear that they didn't expect this nomination to move forward. Again, this is seven years after the fact, I thought, Oh my God. Here I am again. You know, it's the same kind of attitude.

So, over the years, there had been a number of attempts. Every once in a while, we'd get a new nomination and often times, they were students that were part of the--I now forget the names of the organizations--Coalition Commemorating May Fourth--they would start up a nomination again and perhaps prepare some draft language, we would review it, mapping, et cetera. So, there had been several episodes of an attempt at this.

And it was a few years when Mark Seeman, here at Kent State--actually, I didn't even learn it directly from him, but I learned it from Barb Powers, who is the head of our National Register program. I supervise Barb and she said, "Oh, you know, Mark's filling out a nomination, or thinking about pushing a nomination," and I thought, Wow, that's interesting.

So, he was very deliberate about it. Took time, did a lot of research, I know, and when the nomination did come around--I normally don't review nominations, but I thought his one I'm going to review because I had some sense of what occurred there. And I read it, and I thought it was very, very well done. We did have a few questions about some technical aspects of the nomination, but overall, I think it really did an excellent job of documenting the situation in a manner that's required for the National Register program.

But, more than that--and I haven't read many accounts--I started, you know, after the fact, within a year or two, I would read everything about it, and then I just (unintelligible). So, this was the first account that I had read in many, many years, and I thought this is a very accurate account of what occurred that day.

I was very impressed with it. We reviewed it in the way we normally do. It goes to a governor-appointed review board. There's a group of--seventeen or eighteen, I should know, but I think it's seventeen--members, citizens from Ohio. Some of them are architects, some of them are historians, anthropologists, and public members that review these nominations and make the recommendation to us as to whether they feel it meets the National Register criteria. And then we do a final review and send it to Washington for final approval. It was interesting, because this is the first National Register nomination that I ever signed. Because typically, I let Barb, who oversees that, but I thought, you know, this one, I just want to be part of this thing. So I had the opportunity to sign it. I don't know, I think it helped heal some internal wounds about what occurred here. Because this is an account of what occurred on that day that's not managed by anyone with any particular agenda and I thought that was important and I also think it's important that this is recognized as an event that's important in our past. As something that we think of and learn from, and continue to learn from.

[Interviewer]: Did you have to present it?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, I didn't have to, and I've never presented a nomination before, but actually Barb said, "How about you presenting this one?" Because what we used to do in the past, many years ago, is actually have the person that wrote the nomination present it. We got away from that a few years ago because we wanted to try to standardize and take--some people were more persuasive than others. What we were trying to do is put all the nominations on a level playing field, so we started having staff present them, and staff would present them in a very sort of matter-of-fact way. We had short presentations.

I remember preparing to present that and I wasn't really, you know, I was going to try to just be fairly straightforward. I remember my recollection of that day, and I hope I don't do it again, but as I stood up to present the nomination, I just choked up. Excuse me for a minute.

[Interviewer]: It's okay.

[Franco Ruffini]: I told myself I wasn't going to do this. Actually, could I have a glass of water--

[Interviewer]: Yes, we'll pause it.

[Pause in recording]

[Interviewer]: We're back with Franco Ruffini. We were just talking about the National Register. What do you feel the ultimate significance is of the site being inducted into the National Register?

[Franco Ruffini]: Well, I mean, it's a recognition. It's official recognition of the country that this is an important place and I think that there are efforts now to make this not just a property that's on the National Register of Historic Places, and it is listed as being of national significance, which is important because listings on the National Register could be there because of their local significance or their statewide significance, and very few are listed because of national significance, so a next step here might be consideration for National Historic Landmark status.

[Interviewer]: Oh. Okay.

[Franco Ruffini]: So that's already been discussed to some degree. In fact, going way back in time, it was discussed at the time the [Gym] Annex was being put into place because, well, there was quite a bit of reaction to that. Again, being at the Ohio Historical Society, one of the things we do is we review projects that are federally funded for their effects on historic property. So, the issue came up, what would building the annex--one, is there funding involved? And if there is federal funding involved, what are the effects of the construction, and so on.

And at the time, I remember discussions with Senator Metzenbaum's office and others in Ohio with regards to the significance of this property. There was an effort to have the National Historic Landmark program in Washington study the situation and I was very disappointed to have them come back with a finding that not enough time had passed for them to make a judgment as to whether this property qualified for National Historic Landmark status.

And again, there is this fifty year--even for the National Register--typically properties that are less than fifty years old are not eligible for listing unless they meet a criteria exemption and that being of special significance. So, even for this nomination being less than fifty years old, there did have to be consideration for that, and I think it could easily pass that concern or that question.

At any rate, I just think it really brings--and for Ohio, I should back up and say that I think there are in the order of sixty-some properties that are National Historic Landmarks, so this would be--if it did receive that designation, which I think it clearly warrants--it would be toward the highest recognition on the national level of the historic significance of the site.

[Interviewer]:Those are all of my questions. Are there any more thoughts you'd like to share?

[Franco Ruffini]: No. Probably lots, but, I mean, nothing that comes to mind at the moment.

[Interviewer]:Okay. Franco, thanks very much.

[Franco Ruffini]: Sure. You're welcome.

 

×