Angi Inc. (ANGI) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

All right. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Day 3 of the TMC Conference. Cory Carpenter, Internet analyst at JPMorgan. Pleased to have Angi's CEO, Jeff Kip, with me today. Jeff, thank you for joining.

Thanks for having me.

I got a ton of questions to get through. We have an iPad, so if you want to submit a question online or raise your hand, we can -- happy to do Q&A as well.

Jeff, just not your first company as a public company CFO, but your first quarter as a stand-alone for Angi. It'd be great to hear about -- a bit about yourself, just your background and what led you to the seat.

So in terms of IAC, I was the CFO from 2012 to 2016. I then raised my hand and Joey and Barry asked me to take over the international business in what was then HomeAdviser. And a lot of fun. We started with the market leaders in the Netherlands and France. We ended up acquiring 3/4 and 80% of the market leaders in the U.K. and Germany. We've taken that business and we've taken now 5 different companies, if you include the Canadian business. We've merged them all. We put them on the same technical platform with the same product. And over the last 2 or 3 years, we've had double-digit revenue growth and significant margin expansion. I think we went from 0 or negative a few years ago to making $20 million plus. And so we're pretty pleased with that. And about 1.5 years ago, Joey sort of tapped me on the shoulder and said, I want you to come help me with the U.S. And I said, okay, obviously. And a few months later, he asked me to be the CEO. And we're just trying to continue doing what he started, when was that, October of '22 and get this thing back to growth, but also make sure we're delivering the quality experience to both the homeowners who want to find a skilled reliable pro on our platform and the skilled reliable pros who want consistent work on our platform. You put them together, that's job's done well and everybody is happy. So I think that's what it is, and that's how I got here.

So Angi has gone through a lot of change over the years, the merger of Angie and HomeAdviser. More recently, you went through, as you referenced, a bit of a shrink to grow phase. For those who haven't followed it as closely, maybe just bring us up to speed on how Angi has evolved and the state of the business today.

So a few years ago, Angi had close to $1.5 billion of revenue and negative cash flow. I think this year, we're going to be over $1 billion in revenue but positive cash flow. We're going to have swung the cash flow $100 million plus in that time, grown our adjusted EBITDA quite a bit. I think this year, we expect it to be roughly level to last year based on our current guidance. And what Angi has done is a couple of things. One is gotten rid of -- first, gotten rid of the much lower quality revenue that existed when Joey took over in chunks as the work was done, as the things were understood that we need to get rid of. I think secondly, we fixed the unit economics. That has materially accelerated over the last 1.5 years. And so you can see that now at whatever it ends up being, I'm going to say 30% because I don't have the numbers in front of me. At 30% less revenue, we're now going to be delivering double-digit adjusted EBITDA. Margins are better. And we think that we've brought this thing to a baseline where we are delivering jobs done well at a much higher rate. We think that versus 2 years ago, our homeowners are hiring approximately 30% more when they submit an SR than they were. You can see it in the homeowner NPS, which has moved 30 points in 2 years. You can see it in the pro lifetime. The pro lifetime is up 30% over a couple of years, 30% is a good number in business. And so I think we feel pretty good about getting to a baseline. We think we have a lot more room. The European success rate is 50% plus better. So we have a pretty clear road map to keep improving, bringing the business along. And I think we feel pretty good about things.

So how do you think Angi benefits from being a stand-alone company? Is there anything we should expect to change now that you're not part of IAC?

So I answered that on Bloomberg yesterday. All right. I'll answer it again. So look, we're the same company. We have the same mission. We have the same strategy. The IAC officers came off the Board and Joey came with us. So our Board is roughly the same. Our management team is the same. Our customers are the same. Our employees are the same. Our shareholders are not the same necessarily, but I haven't tracked it all. But we have -- we're the same company. Nothing really changes immediately for us. I think longer term, obviously being an independent company affords you a separate currency that's much more liquidly traded. And so it's going to be a more stable, more consistent currency. I think that really benefits our employees in terms of having a reliable stock-based comp. And it's a competitive environment, so having the right team is really critical for us. And secondly, longer term, in what is still a fragmented industry where nobody has really broken through, even though people keep saying they are, we have the opportunity to be appropriate consolidators and acquirers at the right time, at the right value for the right reasons.

You made me nervous. I hope I don't ask all the questions Bloomberg asked yesterday.

No, they didn't.

So before we dive into the business, I want to get the macro and tariff questions out of the way. Obligatory this week, unfortunately. Just on macro, what type of impact on the business have you seen in recent weeks? And then just more broadly, bigger picture, how do you think about Angi's resilience during weaker economic periods?

So the first thing I'll say is -- anything I say here with a number is our best estimate because it's very hard to -- we don't have an AB test of tariff and not tariff. So what I'd say is when we first had the shock in early April, we saw something like a 10% move in traffic and then some additional move in consideration. So let's just say a double-digit impact. That leveled out after 7 to 10 days, started coming back. We think that we took -- are going to net take sort of 3% to 5% between some hit to traffic off our best guess of run rates conversion. If you talk to our pros, actually, our pros all said they got crushed in terms of getting the quote taken and signed in April. But they're back up and going, probably some of that is backlog. And we're back up and more normal. We still think there's a little bit of an undertow on consideration job size, which we see in our average revenue per lead and traffic. So we factored that into our outlook. We think it's there. We think it's mostly leveled out. There's some percentage of people who are thinking another shoe might drop. Maybe I'm not going to do that 2,000 square foot addition, but -- or my $250,000 kitchen remodel or whatever it is. But we think it's more normalized now and there's just some impact.

And then on tariffs, you don't have any direct exposure, but how are you thinking about just indirect tariff implications across the home services category?

So the way tariffs work is tariffs would potentially hit raw materials, right? If we hammered Canada, there's a lot of lumber that comes Canada. Anybody who's trying to get work done during COVID saw the same thing. In 2021, I needed to get my deck redone before my wedding, which was being done at home. Lumber doubled. Before lumber doubled, I couldn't find pros to do it. My wife was about to call off the wedding because she didn't want her family on my crappy deck. But lumber doubled, and all of a sudden pros were free. And so I paid twice as much for the lumber, but I got the deck done and the wedding went on. So I think we'll see the same type of dynamic, right? When people see the raw materials, they're delayed, they'll cut down. And you'll see some tension on pro availability. With our business, when you look back, so we've done a lot of looking at how HomeAdviser performed during the financial crisis. Homeowner demand comes down because people delay, they shrink. About 1/3 of our business is nondiscretionary. It doesn't shift dramatically, but we think the consideration size shifts. So that happens. But what that means is since we're under 2 points of the entire market, it's not just happening at Angi, it's happening through all sources for pros. So that means pros are getting fewer inbound calls, so then they need to come to us. We get more pro demand. If you went back to the financial crisis, you'd see acquired pro volume go up, you'd see cost of pro acquisition go down and you'd see pro competition per lead go up and the ability to take prices there. So I'm not saying it's completely offsetting, but we do have a nice countercyclical force. We haven't seen that, per se. That tends to lag a little bit as pros work through their pipelines. But we expect in an environment where homeowners have a little less certainty and a little more exposure or a little more worried about the next shoe to drop, that means pros will need a little more work from us, and it will balance out.

Makes sense. So kind of zooming in on Angi now. The recent big change has been the implementation of homeowner choice, which you completed in January. I think first, for those unfamiliar, just talk about what that is and then the type of impact that's having on your business.

So what homeowner choice means is you come to Angi, you tell us by answering the questions we ask you what the job is, and then you're presented a list of pros. Homeowner choice means only the pros you click on and choose, whether you select all or you select a subset, are going to call you and are going to pay. Before full homeowner choice, our entire network channel, our third-party network was auto-matched. So in other words, the homeowners weren't presented the pros. They didn't choose, they were auto-matched. And so we had much higher lead per SR. And also using our algorithms and our matching system, we knew which SRs were going to get the most matches. So we ran that channel that way. The other thing we would do is we would time out. If a homeowner came all the way through, they told us they wanted a pro, they told what the job was, we'd time out to one pro. That was a pretty small piece of it. And so what we've done is we're only -- we may have some small amount of traffic for large pros who want the unchosen stuff. We're not doing that right now. But right now, every single lead that goes to a pro is because a homeowner chose them. Now in our pre-switch data, homeowners demonstrated a much higher tendency to hire more than 50% better when they've chosen than when they've been auto-matched, and then pros are thus much more likely to win the job. So you have more satisfied homeowners because they're getting choice, and you have more satisfied pros, then it lifts all boats. But effectively now, we've eliminated almost -- all of our revenue is really chopping the auto-match out of the network channel because you can see that the leads in the proprietary channels were basically flat, and our comment was that traffic was improving year-over-year during the quarter on the proprietary side.

So you provided new metrics in disclosure this quarter. Maybe talk through the changes, sorry to pain you to do this again, I know you did this recently. And then why you think these are the right metrics for investors to gauge the progress of Angi.

So let's just start with the service request and the leads, which is basically the measure of homeowner traffic. A service request is when a homeowner completes the path and essentially tells us what their job is to be done. A lead happens when they choose the pro. So the leads go to the pro. You have to 1.2, 1.3, I can't remember the exact number, leads per SR. And what we wanted to show was the way we've moved our business is really to shift towards proprietary. In order for people to actually understand, I think, what's going on with volume and revenue, they needed to see that. I think we could sunset this at some time in the future if it becomes less material, but we think it's very critical to understanding the company's path over the next 4 quarters. Because as I've said, if you have a path to growth in your proprietary and you brought your affiliate to a stable baseline and you don't grow it -- sorry, affiliate is network, then flat plus growth equals growth in 2026. And we think it's pretty important for people to understand that. So that's that story. And otherwise, service requests and leads and leads per service request have been there a while. On the pro side, we have been trying to give people data points. At 12 months, our retention is this much better than previously, et cetera. Hard for people to really grasp that and draw a through line. So what we thought was, let's show people the cohorts. And if we can show a base cohort, which is everybody who was acquired more than a year ago, so you have a very stable -- yes, more than a year, so you have a stable year-over-year comparison, you can actually see in that base cohort that the retention is moving or not. Ours has been moving. We think this shows it pretty clearly. It gives people like you, Cory, a simpler way to model things, I think. You tell me, what do you think?

You've got some homework. You got to rework things a little bit.

I'm not -- that's not what I was trying to do. What I was trying to do is help. And by the way, I stole this. I come from the restaurant industry, where having your base restaurant cohort is actually how people try to look at the unit economics. And I was at Panera for a number of years, I didn't tell that earlier. But -- so we stole it there. And then what you're also able to do is say -- with ratios, you're able to say, if I acquire new pros, how well am I doing in terms of engaging them, keeping them? And so you have what we're calling an activity rate, which is just the average number of monthly pros divided into the total pros acquired. It's a little bit of a ratio rather than pure operational relationship. But if that's improving, I'm probably exiting and doing better with that group. And then if I look at that group in the prior year versus the current year, which is that middle cohort, then you can say how well are they doing with those newer pros. And so if you look at the stack, sorry, I'm talking about it without being in front of me, you saw 8% improvement in your base, 16% improvement in what you might call your prior year, and then people can see that and people can say, okay, I'm pouring in new stuff. How is that going to convert? How is the prior year going to roll and how is the base going to roll? And I think it gives people a better way to actually understand our network.

Yes, I agree. A lot more transparency. Beyond homeowner choice, maybe you could talk about some of the other key priorities for Angi this year from a product and operational perspective.

So a few things going on. I would say operationally, we're going to continue working on our marketing and sales efficiency, which I think you can see in what we've done with our margins and what we told you about, generating almost 150% more value from a 40%, 45% smaller sales force year. We're going to continue with that. We think there's some more room there. Included in that value generation on the pro side with acquisition is we plan to get online enroll stood up and going finally in the second half. That's been a very successful -- that's the only way we grow our network in Europe. And we've run a test using the European model and technology in Boston to understand it. We look like there's an approximate kind of performance there so we hope to get that out. That will help us with our active pro volume and our newly acquired volume, and it's going to chart the path back to network growth we've said by 2027. I think it's also going to give us an access to a new set of pros, pros who don't want to pay the full amount required with phone sales, pros who want to fill in their schedule rather than have a monthly flow. So there's a number of advantages there. On the homeowner side, which also benefits the pros, we're putting a lot of work into that interview of the homeowner, actually understanding the details of the homeowner's job. I've been a homeowner of multiple homes over the course of the last 20 or 30 years. And I can tell you, they've all been old. Most of them have been around Boston. I can tell you that I still don't know half of what I'm talking about when I talk to a pro. And so what we're developing are ways to talk to the homeowner with better questions and language they understand so that we can actually know what the job is. And we've added an AI helper there, which you can see it's fully rolled out. And what we're able to do is we're able to much better match the pros because we know what the job is and we don't price it wrong, right? Oh, you're not doing a whole concrete foundation, you're fixing the concrete foundation. Sometimes homeowners get mixed up and answer us the wrong way, and then the pro has to pay $80 instead of $20 and they're not happy with that. So we're able to drive the matching. We think that this will drive a lot more hires, a lot more jobs done well, drive pro retention, drive homeowner repeat, drive NPS. And we think that's pretty exciting. So I think at the core, what we're ultimately trying to do is consistently drive the quality of the interaction, the quality of the pro, the quality of the job, the quality of the match and then the hire. And we think that's the key to our business because that's why people come to our platform.

So maybe let's talk more about the first one, marketing and sales efficiency. You've talked more -- you've talked about sales force consolidation. You've done sales force consolidation. And you're also transitioning to a single pro product. Just give us some of the rationale for that and how big of an undertaking this is.

So it's a pretty big undertaking. We started it a year ago. What really it is, is Angie's List and HomeAdviser merged. They had two different products. They had two different sales forces. They had two different prospect databases. And that's how we ran starting in late 2017 until March of this year. That's a little confusing for customers. It's not efficient on the sales side. It's not efficient operationally. You have to have two management teams. You have to have two comp structures. And it also makes your internal matching difficult because the taxonomies don't match on the two platforms, right? And one of the things we've said about single pro product is now all the ads pros will have a finer grain of task and geo selection. It used to be that the ads pros had to take a package of geographies and a category. If I was a plumber and I didn't want to deal with overflowing toilets but I wanted to do bathroom remodels, it didn't matter if I bought that product. So I probably didn't call anybody who had an overflowing product (sic) [ toilet ] when they match. Bad customer experience. Pro is not getting the grain she or he wants, doesn't work as well. So what we've been able to do is eliminate the overhead and the complexity and the bad customer experience of having two sales forces, and that helps drive efficiency. We're going to migrate the ads pros by the end of the third quarter, we think, into the single product. All those pros will now get the finer grain of selection, and we think we will have a much improved experience for pros and homeowners alike.

Let's go to AI. You mentioned the AI helper. But how else are you using AI in the company today? And what type of impact do you think AI could have on the broader category?

So our view of AI is AI, anywhere it helps us, right? AI is really very sophisticated, predictive modeling on language. There's a lot of language in our business. We have to talk to the homeowner about what their job is, make sure we talk in their own words, make sure we know what their job is. If we don't know what their job is, we have a much harder time making them happy and we have a much harder time making the pro happy. We're rolling out online enroll. We're going to have a conversation with the pro. The predictive modeling and the pattern recognition that you can get with an LLM in that process allows you to do that online, may allow you to do that on the phone, right? You can imagine both that homeowner SR path being enabled by text and phone using an LLM and the online enroll path. You then have obviously the advantage of the processing of data with AI in terms of your matching and ultimately trying to ensure that the connection happens and the hire happens. If you go to operationally, AI and machine learning continue to help us be more effective with our marketing targeting and they also continue to help us be more effective or they will help us be more effective particularly as we get to a single platform with sales, predicting next best action, perhaps taking some of the load off the salespeople and automating it. And then with care, which you see much more commonly now, actually enabling customer care through an LLM chat and hopefully doing it more effectively than, say, my bank does, which frustrates me every time. But if you can do that well, you can drive efficiency and actually customer satisfaction by getting people's needs taken care of faster. So there's also opportunities -- I'll keep going. There's also opportunities in the overhead, right? The fixed cost, where certain kinds of coding can really be enabled, particularly new coding using -- coding tools using AI. I think there's a number of things we can do in terms of customer research and moving faster as well. So there's a lot of applications. We have a Chief Artificial Intelligence Officer. We were lucky to get him. He was at Airbnb. He's sort of in charge of looking at all this. And we are going to try and apply it everywhere we can, 80/20, and we think it's going to help us.

So you mentioned the industry is fragmented earlier. I think Google has probably historically been the elephant in the room from a competitive perspective. Yelp has leaned more into home services as well. How do you think about the competitive landscape? And maybe you could help frame for the audience just what your reliance on Google is in particular as a source for leads.

So we still have a relatively high percentage, over 1/3 of reliance on Google. That hasn't changed so much over time. We've probably expanded our paid, and as everybody knows, our SEO has shrunk. We've worked pretty hard to fix that but Google is not opening up new parking spaces for its customers really in free. So we've actually been able to get to proprietary growth despite those headwinds because we're really executing on the paid side. Google obviously controls the highways, so they decide whether or not we can drive on it. And right now, with their LSAs, they're not letting us drive there. So we've had to compensate elsewhere. And they're obviously a tough competitor for that reason. We think we have the capabilities to deliver better matches and vet our pros better than their approach. And so we think that our competitive ground will be understanding the industry, putting more work into the fine matching, serving our customers more accurately instead of asking customers to basically go through and dial a bunch of pros and see if they get calls back and if it's right or not. So we think we can be more effective. We think we can be the appropriate agent, if you will, to go back to the AI conversation, for our homeowners. I think then you look at the rest of the landscape, Yelp has done a very nice job. They had a business which served local businesses. They had a number of pros there and they've been expand that, deploy the traffic they have. They've done a nice job. And Thumbtack, they've been working away for a long time. They do a nice job. They have a nice product. They've been able to grow. I think we're somewhere in the range of maybe a little bigger than the two of them combined. But that's not the important thing. I think the important thing is they're doing a nice job trying to solve customers. We're trying to do a nicer job, and we'll see how it goes. There's a number of smaller players too that compete in SEM, but I think those are really the big players in the United States.

International, so you're familiar with international, safe to say.

A little, yes. A little.

And you mentioned it earlier, a steady grower over the years. It's now 10% of your revenue. I think the question is, what are your priorities on the international business going forward? And how big of a focus is this for you?

So international is another technical platform. It's another product. The product has outperformed for the customer. The business is obviously smaller. On a simple growth basis and margin basis, that business has outperformed the U.S. business over the last few years. What I would say is, we obviously actively look at how to serve our customers the best. Our products are getting closer and closer together. We have opportunities actually to combine those platforms over time, in the same way we're right now combining U.S. platforms, in the same way we've already done 4 or 5 migrations in Europe successfully. So those are all the opportunities. In terms of focus, I think it's 10% of the revenue. It's a little more than that of our operating profit. It gets that kind of focus. In terms of opportunity, Europe is a different market. Half the pros in Europe have no employees. We think the number in U.S. is more like 1/4. And then 95% of pro businesses there have under 10 employees, and we think that, that number is half in the U.S. So it's a different market structure. And the products we have there where the pros entirely pick and choose is different on the pro side. We have that feature in the U.S. side, we will use it in online enroll. So basically they're different businesses. We don't look at either having more or less opportunity to grow. We're looking to combine the best of both worlds and we're looking to win on both sides of the Atlantic, really. And if we see greater and smaller opportunities in one place or the other, we'll appropriately allocate our resources. But there's not some differential view there.

Great. Cool. And if anyone has a burning question, feel free to raise your hand. I've got a few more to work through in the meantime. And I actually think this is a really important one on the financial side. So you reiterated your '25 outlook last week, including -- which embeds an expectation for revenue trends to improve through the year, and as you mentioned earlier, a return to growth in '26. I think the question here is like why should investors be confident growth bottomed in 1Q? And just what are the building blocks or like the algorithm that gets you back to growth next year?

So the simplest thing is really virtually all of our revenue decline was the drop in network leads, if you look at the disclosure. Our revenue per lead was in decline fairly significantly in the back half of last year. That's now stabilized and we've said it's going to grow. Again, if you look at what we said about proprietary, we said it was almost flat but proprietary SRs we're improving every month. Likely means that proprietary leads were improving as well, we just didn't say that out loud. And so if you look at that, you say, okay, proprietary leads growing, revenue per lead growing, network flat. Flat plus growth plus growth usually equals growth. And so that's how we anticipate -- actually you don't decelerate declines. You reduce your declines sequentially through the year and then you get to growth in Q1 because you've dropped -- its aggressive and dramatic to say we dropped the bottom out of the network channel. But effectively, we've dropped the network to a new baseline, and we expect that to be flattish. We don't have reason to believe we're going to focus on it as a growth area. We don't have reason to believe we're going to take it down more. So we expect that to be stable. So if you add the two of them together, fine. If you look at the pro side, our pro network isn't going to grow this year and probably not next year. But a, we have excess capacity in the network. All you have to do is look at the leads for pro in Q3 not so many months ago and the leads for pro in Q1 and you see room. I think it's roughly 15 Q3 of 2024 and 11 Q1 of 2025. And so that's room. Secondly, we are -- while we have fewer heads and we're adding fewer pros on a relative basis, our average pro is coming in at higher capacity because of the model shift and the product we're selling shift. And then ultimately, coming in from the back will be the online enroll pro. So we think we have ample capacity to grow. We'll add capacity in 2026. And then we think we'll get back to growth with our network. And that paves you -- between the excess capacity, the added capacity and the general trajectory, we think that's kind of the clear through line that allows us to keep saying we're going to grow revenue in 2026 and we're going to have, whatever the words are, sequentially smaller declines in 2025.

And then on the margin side, margins have expanded over the past few years despite the shrink to grow phase. Where do you still see opportunity for leverage in the model? And then as revenue trends do improve, are there areas where we should expect incremental investments?

So I think it's entirely possible we will get, if I were to guess, we may reduce, we may -- our paid share of our revenue may increase, which you're adding margin, but you may be adding it at lower percentage margin. So you could see pressure on the variable margin. And a really clear example is we took TV out of the first quarter. We're kind of spending at our most obvious ROI level this year. We'll likely to not go back to $100 million, but we're likely to increase that spend next year. That would net probably make our margin a little less effective as a percentage. But again, it would grow profit. I think secondly, as you look at the pro side, if anything, we're likely to get more efficient. Again, if you think about consolidating to one platform, getting everybody into one place. And then online enroll has historically been highly efficient in Europe and our Boston test says it's very efficient. That should be accretive there in that margin. And so those are probably in the range of offsetting. So let's just say you hold your operating margin. And then as we consolidate our technical platforms, we reduced overhead, which basically means we don't have to grow. And so we will get operational efficiencies. If you shut down the old Angie's List platform, you pick up millions of dollars in software and maintenance costs. If we are able to bring the services functionality into that platform, you do the same thing. So there's waves of efficiency that we think if you keep -- again, if I grow revenue and I hold my margin and I keep my overhead flat, I get real margin leverage.

Makes sense. Two more questions I think we've got time for. So Angi has historically talked about an ambition for double-digit growth just given the size of the category and the low penetration levels. How do you think about the right long-term growth in margin profile for the business?

So I think a couple of things. I think if you look at our category, if we have the most scale and we're under 2% of market share, what market share could we achieve? So I think our business is a little more complex and nuanced than online travel, but let's just take numbers on online travel. About half of travel is booked online. In the U.S. and Europe, about 80% of that is controlled by two OTAs: Expedia and Booking. They're about even, I think, in the United States, last I checked. I haven't checked in a couple of years. And then Europe is dominated by Booking a little more, but Expedia still has a decent business. So if they're 80% or 50%, they've got 40%. You've got two leaders who are at 25% and 15% or something. I look at that and I say, well, maybe we're not going to get to 25%, but I think we ought to be able to get to between 5% and 10% over the next X years. And I think if I could go from 1.5 to 6 in 5 or 8 years, I think that would imply a pretty impressive level of growth. I'm not forecasting that, but when you think about the opportunity to grow, there's real opportunity there. I think our business is more complex and nuanced, and so everything we do is focused on understanding the homeowner or understanding the pro, getting the right match and getting the job done well because we think that is the key, improving that success rate. So in Europe, over the last few years, we've been able to generate mid-teens growth. We've had some regulatory things that have bumped us this year 7 or 8 points, I think I said on the call. And so we're not going to be double digits this year, but that will return once we anniversary, we assume. We think the U.S. has the same potential. We think we have to grow our success rate, grow our repeat. We think by using TV and getting this enhanced customer LTV, we'll be able to get there. So we think longer term, we think double-digit revenue growth is a reasonable expectation and getting margin leverage from there.

Last one on capital allocation. Given you're on your own now, just if you could talk about your philosophy and then also your priorities and then what some of the limitations are in the near term from the spin.

So I've got 1 minute 12, I'm going to try and be less long-winded. So I think the way we think about capital is in terms of returning capital to shareholders, we think about buying in our dilution, sometimes backwards, sometimes forward. But we want to offset dilution, which is mostly employee stock grants. And obviously, our Board is looking at that and deciding when they think it's a good valuation. If you look in the rear view mirror, they obviously thought there was a decent valuation. We bought in a reasonable amount. We put in a new authorization. It doesn't mean it's happening tomorrow, but that will kind of roll forward. So obviously, that's where we are. In terms of acquisitions, as I said earlier, we're still digesting the Angie's List merger, Angie's List, HomeAdviser and the Handy acquisition and then we have our European platform. So we've got a lot to digest. If we were going to do something, we have to be very clear that it was not pulling us off our core mission and strategy, that it was accretive to shareholders and that we could handle it. But we would obviously, I mean, we have IAC's CEO. I was the IAC CFO. We're not afraid of acquisitions. We'll do them where we think it creates value.

Awesome. We'll end there. Thank you all.

Thanks.