Cardlytics, Inc. (CDLX) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining once again. This is Nat Schindler from Bank of America Internet Equity Research. I'm happy to have Lynne Laube and Andy Christiansen, CEO and CFO, respectively, of Cardlytics. Love to just jump in with questions.

I got to start with the elephant in the room, though. Because it's the question I keep on getting for the last week from everybody. So I might as well just ask it first.

I can't wait to hear it. What?

What are you going to talk about tomorrow at your annual day?

Okay. Look, we're going to talk about the same things we've been talking about for a while. The difference is we're going to show them to people. So we're going to have a demo of what self-service looks like. We're going to have a demo of what the new user experience and what the play at U.S. Bank looks like. We're going to have a demo of the Nectar open banking pilot that I'm thrilled to say, actually rolled out this week. So a lot of the stuff that we've been talking about for a while now we're actually going to show what that end product looks like to investors. So I think that will be cool. And Andy and I are going to talk hardly at all. It's going to be the management team. So they'll get real exposure to Ross and Michael and Farrell and even Peter, our brand-new CTO hire. He won't be presenting, but he'll be there to answer Q&A to the degree it makes sense. So we're excited.

Great. I want to start really high level, and talk a little bit about you guys since your IPO. Obviously, you've done a spectacular job about getting up the number of users, potential users, whatever you want to call it, you have the 2 other biggest banks now, along with Bank of America that the consumers can access your ads. Basically, you've got the billboards on all 3 highways now. You -- and the next phase became the focus on getting the advertisers. And I know you really started that in Q1 of last year, pandemic hit. That obviously was a jab for virtually everyone. But I'm sure it derailed those plans a bit. But you're back to growth, your -- the business is growing and should and go back. But when can we expect? And -- well, 2 things. One, can we expect advertisers to get back to the same level of -- and I know the ARPU wasn't how they looked at it, but it's how the investors see it by the division of the potential users and the revenue. How -- when will they get to the ARPU level you were at when you were just BofA or BofA plus a lot of small banks to now this triple level? When can that happen?

Yes. So we're on our pace here to get back to that $2.37 ARPU level, which we were at before we launched both Chase and Wells. We hope to get back on that pace in the next couple of quarters. And then once we get back on that pace, it will be simply just a matter of time until we get back to $2.30 on a trailing basis. The real exciting things are some of the things that we're doing here. The couple of acquisitions we've made, the product development initiatives that we have to really take that ARPU from a $2.30 level to something in the high single digits. We've talked about that before. These acquisitions that we've made that's going to take a little bit of time. We need to invest and support Bridg, for example, before we're ready to have the scale necessary to bring it to the banks. But we're laying this foundation to get us to that high single digit. As we look to pivot to working with agencies, working with the long tail. And not only having store-level offers, but having [ prop ] level offers and the various other type of offer constructs that we'll be able to have in a new user experience. So we're excited about that journey of going well beyond the $2.30 because that's well in our sights.

Yes. Yes. I mean we're not stressed about $2.30 anymore. It's just -- COVID set us back a bit. It's just a matter of time. It's more, Andy is exactly right. How do we get to $8, $9, $10, $12, those type of ARPU numbers, is where our focus is now.

And so on the initial one and getting to $2.30, that seems like an easy way of just getting the Starbucks of the world to say, "Hey, you have tripled the number of people, I want to pay triple as much. That's one side of this. And it's also getting more advertisers. That's the next wave. What is -- at this point where -- that you got to now has the -- and your wave to get to $2.30 from here, do you think it's been more on the getting more advertisers so far? Or has it been just going back to the big guys and saying pay up?

Yes. The new logos are for future ways of growth. It's the existing logos that we were working with pre-COVID, we just got to get them to scale to the MAUs. And that will take us -- that -- even that alone will take us beyond the $2.30 quite frankly. And then everything else is gravy on top of it. New logos that we've been going after COVID, those were not part of the $2.30 base. Self-service, SMBs, agencies, new products, all of that is well above and beyond the $2.30.

And how has the life cycle of an advertiser changed on your platform? And what I mean by that is when they come in, obviously, it's not the new guys coming in that really drive you directly back up in revenue very quickly because they don't come in with huge budgets. How long does it take until it's moved off the experimental and moves into the yes, this is real budget, here, go for it?

Yes. We see that commonly, right, where you have to start somewhere. And most every client we work with, new clients have a test and learn budget, and it's kind of a crawl walk around. Even our recent pivot that we made Q2 of last year, we pivoted into D2C. It was really a source of strength for us. And it's a bit of a new area for us. We even saw the clients in that space, go through that same process. Now admittedly, they were actually a quicker cycle because they are very analytical. They speak the same language that we do. They're very focused on acquiring customers, know what they're willing to pay for those customers. They understand the lifetime value of their customers. And so it's a little bit easier sell and relationship from that perspective. So I think we were pleasantly surprised to see a very, very natural, quick sales process there. But we commonly do that. And even in the pivot we're making to work with agencies to the new self-service platform, we are going to see -- have a test and learn phase for each one of those clients as well. And I think that for every client, you reach a certain size, right, where the client needs to feel it. They need to also reconcile with the attribution, right? That's one thing that we do struggle with. We're trying a number of different things to try and overcome that. But we largely don't fit into some of those models. Because we have the actual attribution. We know how our program really translates to additional dollars. But we commonly see that cycle, and it varies by customer.

Great. And looking at all the new logos that you signed during COVID, they were -- there was obviously moving away from restaurants, which is pretty obvious, travel, pretty obvious. And you signed a lot of direct-to-consumer, a lot of online guys, lesser-known brands. Earlier, that was a kind of -- a bit of a no-no for the big banks. They wanted the big logos, they wanted the people, they -- the Starbucks of the world that everybody had heard of. How has the success of the Cardlytics platform during COVID with those brands and how those consumers interacted with those brands affected how the banks kind of view their kind of control?

Yes. That's changed everything. I mean if there's a silver lining for us with COVID, it's the fact that we were able to use it to pivot to brands that the banks traditionally didn't want us to sell to. And now the banks have seen -- I mean, I'll pick on BofA, they had their highest redemption quarter ever in Q1 ever in the history of the program. And that's without some of the big advertisers being back in the ones that they traditionally wanted. So it's been great. And we've said it before, we do believe when this whole thing is over someday, which to be clear, it's not yet, right? I mean, I know investors may feel like it is, but there's some meaningful suppression and spend in a lot of different categories. But when it's back to normal, we're going to be stronger than ever because these new brands are still going to be in the platform and the old brands are going to come back.

Makes perfect sense. And looking at that and how BofA thinks. Obviously, you've talked about this, the contacts I've talked to in the bank. Obviously, it's a lot less about the money for these giant banks and then much more about how the consumer appreciates it. Obviously, like Starbucks has been one of your -- probably your killer advertisers on the platform. But is there any data yet by either you or the banks that shows whether or not the consumer, even if they're interacting with these lesser-known brands, are they as -- did they cause the stickiness that the banks are really looking for?

Yes. It's a good question. And honestly, we haven't done a lot of stickiness analysis during COVID, to be perfectly honest with you, because there's just so much noise in the network. Pre-COVID, however, we absolutely proved and our banks, I think, proved for themselves individually. Pre-COVID, we proved that people who used our program traded less, spent a tiny bit more on card, and were absolutely more digitally engaged. And to your point, that's why banks use this. It's the engagement that they're driving with consumers. The revenue share is nice. Don't get me wrong, we wish we could negotiate it away. That won't happen anytime soon, but that's not the primary driver for the banks. It's the engagement that's the primary driver for the banks. And it's actually a huge focus of ours right now. If we're honest with ourselves, over the last 2 years, we've been so focused on getting Wells and Chase launched that we probably lost a little bit of focus on engagement. And so we're now back full fledge. In fact, with a bank that we may or may not be talking to right now, we're doing a bunch of engagement testing, and bringing some of those cool engagement features that we got from Dosh, from the Dosh acquisition to the banks to show them different ways that we can drive consumer engagement. And where it's great is we can drive it surgically. Just in the pockets where the banks want more engagement, in the places where we have more ad budgets. Driving engagement is really easy to do, quite frankly, you just got to know the right offer to present the right consumer at the right time, which is not hard. It's just a matter of doing it. And that's kind of where we are also in the cycle as we start to come out of COVID, it's time to start focusing on engagement again. It wouldn't have made sense during the COVID experience.

Makes sense. So I want to actually go to something. I remember last year, you were here and you talked about something that was news to me at the time and certainly very interesting because I think I had just interviewed Quotient's CEO. And you had mentioned doing product level discounting. It's basically coupons. And now you have done Bridg and you've built more capability there. Where are you in growing out that? And how do you envision that looking within the bank, within the bank's app where you're limited to the number -- the amount of real estate?

Well, first of all, tune in tomorrow, you'll see the new user experience where we're not limited to the amount of real estate and where each offer takes the user, each different kind of offer construct takes the user on a different journey. So you can really differentiate. This is a product level offer. This is a grocery level offer. This is a local offer. This is a national offer, and it's intuitive in the embedded user experience. And you're not limited from a content perspective. So a picture is worth 1,000 words, you'll be able to see that tomorrow. But importantly, the tenet -- one of the core tenets of how we drive higher ARPU is we need to have more and different kinds of media products that we can sell. And that's really what these different offer constructs are, whether it's richer imagery or product level or product level, there's sort of 2 elements to it, right? There's buying a pair of Nike's and there's grocery level offers, 2 very different things. But that is the thesis behind the partnerships with people like Quotient and the acquisition of Bridg is to be able to bring in, whether it's grocery offers or product offers, fueled by the Bridg acquisition to bring all that different kind of content into our channel, which, of course, ultimately drives engagement, which is what the banks want.

Great. And one of the questions that I think has come up a lot is, obviously, you've gotten back to growth, and you've gotten there without some of your biggest advertisers who have been staying back. But even on the biggest categories, something like travel. Do you see your advertising unit, your ad unit concept, is it used by advertisers as a share gainer or is it used as an awareness builder? Is it a -- opening -- is it an opening up ad unit? Will they come back fast right as they have the ability to offer product? Or will they wait and do it later term when they're fighting to get that last bit of share?

That's a great question. When we think about something like travel, for example, I do expect that the environment for travel and for travel advertising, especially performance marketing to come back in the next several months. One of the things that we're experiencing right now is that many of our partners have an inequity between their supply and their demand, right? Many of our partners are experiencing demand far in excess of their supply. So we are actually looking forward to perhaps even as we get into late summer and back-to-school season, a little bit of a return to a more normal operating environment. We do expect that those campaigns and those efforts will happen on a leading basis. We will know when our large travel partners, for example, are looking to make significant investments in performance marketing. We have not seen that yet, but we will see it, obviously, ahead of that season. But I would say that when we get into our Q2 reporting in August, that we would expect to have a very good read as to whether our thesis, that when school is coming back in session that that supply and demand will reach a much closer equilibrium and that the conditions will be right for travel advertising to come back.

And every vertical uses us differently. I mean the D2C brands tend to use us more as acquisition. Some of our larger, more valuable clients tend to see us as the full life cycle, pushing the consumer from acquisition to lots of repeat use. The ideal client is using us to help basically shift share from 0 to as much as possible, which means they're both acquiring and they're marketing to existing customers and getting them to come back and grow share. That's the ideal client. Most do start with, let's acquire first. Let's see how that goes. And then we'll journey into now let's market to people who have been with me before and focus on the share shift element of it.

Great. So overall, I mean, as you look at travel as a vertical, are you modeling that -- I know there are certain advertisers and you had some concentration there, that it's hard to tell what one advertiser will do. So what will the group in the travel do overall, do you think? And how will that -- how long do you think before that real budget comes back?

Well, actually, so far, the year has played out pretty much how we expected. I think that we knew there were going to be some challenges in the first part of this year for travel to reach some form of normalcy. And so I don't think we have any concern around travel. I think, like I said, our thesis is that we get into the back half that we're going to have a much better environment for advertising there. We've kept very good relationships with our channel partners, even through the pandemic last year. We provided a lot of insights to them and helping them understand where there were still pockets of opportunities. And we maintain those relationships despite the fact many of whom weren't working with us at the time. So I think we're in a really good position to capitalize on that return. It just is not quite in our sights yet. But as this year has played out in Q1 and Q2, it's exactly what we expected.

Makes sense. Let's pivot over to some of your acquisitions, particularly Dosh. Dosh is interesting because they also run their own app. And that's how they've had their connections with their advertising partners and their more retail partners. That's a real different world than where you are. How do you intend to use that and...

Yes. That's a great question. Yes, it's a great question. So look, Dosh has about 3.5 million users on that app. Obviously, a smaller subset of those users are active. The way we think about it, our acquisition thesis with Dosh was always the fact that they have a tech platform that starting with direct-to-consumer and then evolved to a white label tech platform that can meet the needs of smaller organizations, neo banks, nonbanks, fintechs, et cetera. As we've discussed, the Cardlytics' core tech platform was built for banks like BofA, Chase and Wells, we have so much legal regulatory compliance stuff wrapped around it. It's just a very heavy lift for a small neo bank that's got 2 million customers. They don't need it. But the Dosh platform is perfect for them. So the core acquisition thesis for Dosh was to enable us to go after nonbank or fintech-type MAUs over time. That do come with a much more profitable margin profile than a large bank MAU does. The app was sort of the way we're thinking about it is we will keep it. But it's going to be an innovation lab, if you will, for us. So we're using the app to prove out features and functionality and then bring those to the very large banks who will not let us test inside their environment for very obvious reasons. Now we have a scaled test bed, it's still really small, right, 3 and 3.5 million customers, super small. So we're not going to grow it, but we're not going to shrink it. We're going to maintain it as an innovation lab to bring to the 170-plus million MAUs in sort of a scaled proof point.

I thought that was a fascinating idea that you literally had to buy a consumer app to have a test bed because BofA won't allow you to. How is that...

It's not just BofA, it's all the banks. But yes.

I know it, all the banks for the fun of it. But Chase and Wells are just as bad.

Yes. They're just the same. Yes.

And I'm sure you're not going to say it's bad because that is the negative...

Never say that. But they have the same concerns. Yes.

Yes, I totally get that. And I'm actually fascinated by this because what is that -- how has that limited your development? I mean, I'm sure this has frustrated you for years. And I know that you've talked in the past that the one great thing is once you've got BofA to put the 5 logos on the front page, at least then you could use that and say, look, Wells and Chase, you should implement this way. Right.

Yes.

So how much did that -- has that slowed you down though, prior to the acquisition of Dosh?

I mean an enormous amount. I say this all the time. Our biggest strength is our biggest weakness. Our strength is our relationship with the banks, is the access to data, the access to the customers that we have. Our weakness is they are banks, and by definition, they're incredibly slow and incredibly risk-averse. So pretty much everything we've ever done in a bank has taken 20x longer, 30x longer, I don't even know how many times longer, than if we owned our own supply base like every other digital platform does, right? Pinterest owns their own supply base. Facebook owns their own their supply base. We, unfortunately -- or demand base, however you want it, however you want to -- however you -- they own their own users. We don't own our own users. And so everything we want to do takes way longer than any other digital platform that's out there. Even if this only accelerates us by 2 quarters, it's material in terms of being able to prove to banks, for example, the new user experience. They got to take the new ad server, but there's -- and you'll see it tomorrow. There's I think 9 or 10 different elements, material elements to the new user experience that banks can choose to turn on. We can now prove a decent size base of customers that they should actually turn these on. So I think it's going to accelerate. It will still always be the longest pole on the tent, though, for us is getting the banks to do anything, quite frankly.

Makes sense and probably to get those big 3 to do anything. I assume you're going to move forward with some small banks to show these platforms faster. How far along are you with some of the smaller banks that you've always had as customers at updating and moving the platform along.

It's funny. Like when you look at Chase, Wells, BofA, right? Those are the big 3 and they're massive. But PNC is #4. PNC does not consider themselves a small bank, right? Truist is #5. They don't consider themselves a small bank. So honestly, why investors might look at that as a small bank, they act just like BofA, quite frankly. So the real poster child that we have right now is we got U.S. Bank to launch with the new ad server. It's definitely easier to start with the new thing versus get a bank to upgrade, right? Once a bank decides they're going to work with us, they're going to take our latest technology. So we got lucky with getting U.S. bank. So that's now a proof point that we have. But honestly, getting PNC to do something is no easier than getting Chase or whoever you want to pick on, Wells, BofA, Truist. They're all -- they all view themselves as very, very large banks, and they're all very, very conservative.

And the people working there, right? The people working there have been at the [ bank ] or Chase or Wells, right?

Yes.

Yes, risk aversion is something that's kind of inherent to us. So I guess that's going to be -- there is no way that a technology company and a bank would kind of merge their way of thinking and mesh perfectly. That just doesn't work. Great. Well, then, thinking about what Bridg is bringing to you. Well, let's go first on Dosh. Dosh is obviously going for more on the nitty gritty. You've talked about it lowering adjusted EBITDA. It is a cash burn company. How quickly do you think you can turn that around? And how long do you think you're going to be investing in this and holding down your margins in order to drive Dosh?

Yes. The fortunate thing here, right, is that we can leverage the scale of Cardlytics, right? And we control our own destiny here. We are working very hard to integrate the 2 businesses. Dosh is very complementary to our own business. From both a people and a technology perspective, there are so many similarities, right? So we've been working, first and foremost, on integrating the people and the organization, and we're now turning our attention to integrating the technology. So by the end of this year, we expect to have one platform, if you will, being able to push content into Dosh and their neo banks, fintechs, the same way that we're pushing content to our own bank partners. And once we reach that, reach that point, we will be able to realize a significant amount of synergies such that the legacy Dosh business won't have any burn or any additional drag on the Cardlytics business. But we need to get the technology integration completed such that we can really take advantage of that.

So we will have burn this year, but investors should assume very little of any burn next year related to Dosh.

So early '22, we should be in a position where Dosh is no longer creating additional burn for us.

Yes, and we can confidently say that now that we've had them for a couple of months. We weren't able to confidently say that with Q1 earnings, which I do think is a little bit of a hit we took. I think investors were looking at the 1-month of burn and saying, how long is that going to happen. We've got good line of sight to reducing that to basically 0 in and around the end of the year.

Great. I just noticed something for the first time, I think I have questions in our Veracast system. This is amazing.

Exciting.

Very exciting. So I've got 2. First, from an investor, are MAUs on Chase, Wells as engaged with Cardlytics as those on BofA.

Every bank is different. It's based on a couple of things. It's based on, first of all, how long they've been using the program because new customers find it all the time. As I mentioned, BofA just had their highest redemption quarter ever, and they've been on the platform for 10-plus years. So the longer a bank has the program, the more users they have. But then also the user experience that they've wrapped around it and the marketing that they wrapped around it. So we've openly talked about the fact that Wells launched in the middle of a pandemic and purposely held back on marketing and still doesn't have all the features functionality that BofA and Chase have to enable content to come to them. So Wells is nowhere near the same level of engagement as BofA as an example. But we know how to drive that. And Wells for where they are in the stage of launch is pleased with their engagement. But if BofA had that engagement, they'd be screaming at us. So it's just -- you have to look at it bank by bank.

Makes total sense. I got another question here from investment. This is like I feel like Christmas right now. Quite frankly, I haven't had one of these in any other panel. And actually, the whole system didn't even work for me yesterday. So here's hoping we do a live conference next year. Yes. So three -- will Bridg have a billions component in their P&L, in your P&L?

So we are going to be breaking out Bridg separately. I mean, obviously, that is a different business model. It's going to be operated on a stand-alone basis. And so people will certainly see that business separately. But there really is no difference, if you will, their billings will be roughly equal to their revenue unlike our platform where we have a net revenue model. They don't have that, but certainly, we can show their billings as well.

And 1 more question from our investor group. How do user cohorts look over time? Do active users increase engagement over time or plateau? Is the expectation for U.S. Bank to have a higher level of engagement?

We're going to show you some stats tomorrow. So tune in on U.S. Bank engagement. Now it's early, early days, right? I do want to caveat that. But so far, the very few pieces of functionality that U.S. Bank has taken on in the user experience, is delivering some pretty impressive results, early results look pretty impressive. We'll share those with you tomorrow. And then users, I mean, we generally have 4 segments, if you will, of users. We clearly have users who have never engaged, right? There's a whole segment there. They've never once engaged with the program. We treat those users differently from those who have engaged once, first time engagement is always the hardest to get. Once they engage once those are a segment of users. And then we have what we call the habitual users, those who go from engaging once to habit. And then there are some who engage once, and then they don't quite go to habit. They go more to once a quarter type of thing, occasional type of things. So those are the 4 high-level segments that we have. Because I'm sure people will ask, yes, the biggest segment by far is people who've never engaged. That is far the biggest segment. The other 3 segments are still very big across the 170 plus million MAUs. You've got a lot in all of them. But still the biggest segment by far is those who've never engaged. The good news is we know exactly what to do to get them to engage. But because we are still content constrained, as we've discussed, we don't have enough advertising content to fill the demand of the people who are engaged. We're not worried too much about that base yet until the budgets start to grow, and then we know how to go up to that base and start to drive engagement there.

Makes sense. And now another question kind of on the follow-up of that, what percentage of MAUs would you call your habituals?

To be honest, I don't actually know the number off the top of my head, it's small relative to the 170 million. It's probably high single digits, low double digits, depending on the quarter or 2, there's seasonality in it. So it's small.

I don't think our superusers or habitual users look really any different from any other platform. There's always a smaller subset of people that really, really [ act ].

Yes. But what the investor needs to remember is we're not actively driving engagement. That's not the problem, right? We know how to get consumers to engage when we have enough content to do so. So we're waiting -- we're trying to fill in the content, then we tackle engagement. It's super easy. I know how to get people to engage. I just got to find those that are digitally engaged with their banks. So to be clear, there's some subset of those people not engaged at all, who aren't engaged with their banks. We throw those away. Until they're engaged with the banks, there's no way they're going to engage with us. But once we know they're digitally engaged with their banks, we know exactly how to go after them to drive engagement. It's just a matter of doing it. But you've got to have the content to do it.

And a somewhat selfish final question here because we're right up on time. How does a user who happens to be an analyst, who wants to, like, review all your advertisers get to see all of them? Because if I haven't gone to Starbucks after pressing the thing enough times, I don't get the next ad. So I don't see it. So how do I get to see all your advertisers saying how quickly that's growing on the platform. Because sometimes I go onto my BofA app, and I only have five. And a client I'm talking to sees 40 on their Chase app.

Right. I mean, the answer is you can't, as an individual person, have any idea what the breadth and width of our advertisers are, because it's based on -- it's all targeted based on your card usage. And so if you're not using your card that much or you're only using it in certain categories, particularly if it's categories that we're not strong in yet, I mean, you're exactly right. We have -- our -- some of our -- some of our not necessarily users, but some of our MAUs have 40, 50, 60 offers, and some have none. And it's because of their engagement with the bank and the types of categories where they're spending. So it's hard for any one person to get a full picture of the breadth of logos. And then also, even more importantly, as we've discussed, the vast majority of advertisers do not have enough budgets to cover all the MAUs that would be eligible for those budgets. So the way we build campaigns is we sort of say there's 20 million MAUs that should respond well to this campaign. And the advertiser says great, but I'm only going to give you the budgets for 1 million. So then we randomly based on the bank's percentage of MAUs, distribute those 1 million offers. And so even though there's 20 million people who should get it, only a million do, and that's a little bit of a randomness relative to that 20 million population. So you'll never have a full view. Years from now, as we have budgets to fill everything up, you will start to have a more holistic view of all the advertisers, but even still because they're all targeted, as budgets fill up, we're going to take the targeting. So you're still never as an individual person going to be able to see all the advertisers in [ play ]. I mean, our aspiration is to have thousands over the next couple of years. There's no way an individual user would be able to see that.

And I probably should stop using my Amex cards for transactions and start using my debit card, which is somewhat unusual. It's very common throughout the United States, but unusual in certain demos. I get that. One last question. I know we're over, but it's coming in from a client. So why has Bridg's success in restaurants not translated as much into brick-and-mortar retail like a Best Buy? It seems like a great restaurant success, why not in other retail? Is that an opportunity?

Yes. That's a huge opportunity. I mean, it's why we bought them, quite frankly. They started in restaurants. It's where -- it's just an easier sale. Because restaurants, for sure, don't have the money to invest in their own CDP platform. Retailers like Best Buy do have the money to invest in their own CDP platform. What they don't have is the ability that Bridg has to find that unknown customer and find it systematically and routinely. You need scale and years of technology and algorithm building that Bridg has. But yes, it is -- the sweet spot is the big box retail. That's the scale we're going to try and bring to Bridg. Tomorrow, at Investor Day, we'll show you a handful of their marquee logos. It's just a few, but you will actually see, I think, 1, maybe 2 big box retail in those logos of existing Bridg clients. And we're, of course, going to help them scale that.

Great. Lynne, Andy, we're 5 minutes over, and I'm sure my conference people want to kill me. But I will obviously see you tomorrow, and hopefully, we can do both this and an Analyst Day in person sometime soon as opposed to.

We're looking forward to it.

Thanks.

Thanks. Stay safe.

Bye. Thanks.