ChargePoint Holdings, Inc. (CHPT) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us today. We're very pleased to welcome ChargePoint to our 24th Annual Needham Growth Conference. We're joined by Pasquale Romano, President and CEO of the company. Welcome, Pasquale.

Thanks, Vikram, and thanks for having me.

First, I will kick off with questions but I want to remind investors and everyone watching that they can submit questions as they come to mind, and we will get as many questions answered as possible as we go through our discussion. So let's get started. Pasquale, for the viewers who are -- and investors who are new to the story, could you just share like a brief overview, a very brief overview and what differentiates you from competition? There's a number of companies who have made their debut on the stock market. There are a ton of hardware companies out there now. So what makes you leader in Level 2 charging market? What differentiates you from competition?

I mean, I would just adjust that a little bit. We're a leader in literally every single segment of EV charging. We don't focus on any particular technology. Charging rates are matched to the natural parking duration and the application. So I tend not to think about the industry in general as split between L2 and L3. That's a pretty common, I think, misconception. We see a mix in a lot of deployments and the mix is based on kind of the parking duration. We're also not a hardware company, even though we do make a lot of hardware. We don't consider ourselves a hardware company. So to zoom back a bit and answer that question a little bit more fulsomely. The company is 14 years old, over 14 actually. It's been public for almost a year. So March 1 will be our debut on the New York -- anniversary of our debut on our -- on the New York Stock Exchange. And from the very beginning of the company, it was founded on a few basic tenets, a few basic principles that were assumed to be true in the future, which is now with respect to electric vehicles: number one, it's a parking model, not a drive to a destination to refuel model anymore because electricity is pervasively distributed. So the most important thing is you can put electricity everywhere. You can look at a map of the Earth from space at night and see lights everywhere. So electricity is not regulated with respect to the storage of a volatile fuel, right, like gasoline. So it doesn't have the distribution issues, which is why you have to drive some place to get your primary fuel with the gas car. So that's a big difference, and you have to understand that assumption. Cars are parked 96% of the time. It doesn't matter whether you're a European or American, it's about the same statistics. So it's a 4% utilized asset, meaning there's plenty of time to onboard most of the fuel. When you're driving beyond your battery range or on a long trip, that's when you need something that looks like a gas station, but that's the only time. And then because it's a parking model and not a depot model for refueling, the other assumption tenet for the company was that most of this stuff is going to be unattended. And so it's the perfect realm for software to enable businesses to use chargers to engage customers and employees. These things are unattended so they have to be software-driven from either your mobile application or your in-dash navigation system from your car. And those are coming into alignment. Your car plan, Android Auto, where you're in the car with your mobile app on your phone, or good synergy between the environments and the vehicles and the Internet at large. So if you look at it from that lens and you say it's that big a CapEx problem and you couldn't possibly be significant if you're trying to be a CapEx owner. And more importantly, selling power for profit, there is no return on a lot of the assets. Being an asset owner is something that we avoided. There are certain scenarios where being an asset owner could be profitable, but that's probably going to be in the realm of project investors, which we enable, so we have that capability in our ecosystem of partners. So we decided to essentially be a combination of an equipment company with a big SaaS value add. And so we sell subscriptions to businesses to keep chargers on the ChargePoint network. I finally got to what we do. We sell subscriptions to businesses. We sell them chargers as well. And to keep the charger on the ChargePoint network, have it appear in ours and many other mobile applications because we roam with a ton of other players, have it be well integrated with the ecosystem and provide all the tools necessary for businesses to be able to really engage customers and their employees in this new fueling model. That's what we do. So every time you see a ChargePoint charger, think of it as a source for a recurring payment on an annual basis to us that is not proportional to utilization or energy. So we are not utilization-dependent. That fee is fixed. And we are not energy dependent, that fee is fixed. We affect the energy transaction for the site owner so they can set a price. We meter the energy. We can bill drivers for that we do on a regular basis. So we deal with all the payment management if there is payment. We deal with all the authentication. We deal with all the enforcement of the hours of operation or the access rules. But what we don't do is get in the way of the ultimate way that the businesses that are our customers, so we are a B2B ultimately -- we are a B2B company generally. And in that B2B chain, we enable businesses to, in an unfettered way, use charging any way they want. So it can be pure [ amenity ], we don't care because we're not in that economic chain of the energy. So if they give the energy away, we don't care. In fact, most want to or use it, they want to use it as an incentive, as a reward, as an employee benefit, as a signal to customers about their ESG line, et cetera. There's so many reasons why businesses want to embrace charging. On the fleet side, it's quite a bit different. Won't get into as long-winded discussion there. I think it's more straightforward. Fleet operators need charging. It's core to their business. They need very complicated software systems from us that enable the scheduling of vehicles so that the economic -- best economic conditions are met for the cost of the electricity as fuel, and that things are loaded on time on to vehicles for their next shift's planned routes. And there's a lot of software that has to get integrated with the route planning systems at a fleet and the telematics systems of a fleet to enable that. I'll pause there, Vikram.

That's great. That's very detailed. Thanks, Pasquale. The 2 questions we get most frequently about ChargePoint are, one, obviously, growth; and second, about margins. So I'm going to ask you one question each on both those strategies. In terms of growth strategy, you've had a pretty busy year last year. You made 2 acquisitions, ViriCiti and has·to·be. You entered into multiple partnerships with Mercedes and WEX. Could you just talk about the integration of acquisitions, your learnings from those acquisitions, how the growth process is going? You wanted 1/3 of your revenues, the target was 1/3 of revenues from Europe at some point. Where are you in that achieving that target? When do you see that happening? And the nature of your partnerships, how big they can be both WEX, Mercedes and other partnerships that you've entered?

Yes. There's a lot in that question.

Yes, I'm going to combine multiple questions, given the limited time, so...

That's the mother of all questions there. So let's start with the integrations of acquisitions. So they're very -- the 2 acquisitions we made serve very different purposes. And in our opinion, both have gone quite successfully for us in the early innings. I'll start with ViriCiti since we closed that one first. I'll just do it in that order. That was to enable an advancement of the fleet functionality that we had in software. ViriCiti had focused more on the vehicle management and telematics side, which for certain fleets, especially in the transit sector and the heavy sector is -- was underserved, so we integrated that. But even with third-party telematics providers, they're reporting battery health monitoring, et cetera, capability, was a good adder. It fit like a puzzle piece in -- with our existing fleet management software because we hadn't focused on that to date, but it was on the road map so it was a way to pull that forward. We also had good customer synergy with them, meaning there was -- there were certainly customers in the fleet space that we had or they had pre-acquisition that neither one of us had. And then there was an overlapping set where they were using some vehicle services from ViriCiti and our charger control. So it was a good consolidation from that perspective. The team there, as in with the has·to·be acquisition, mostly engineers and all software engineers. Software engineering is one of the hardest talent markets in the world, bar none. And getting a prebuilt known pressure-tested team on 2 acquisitions in an area that's challenging was challenging to hire in is a very good thing. And so for all those reasons, we're progressing nicely. We were -- we've been moving our customer bases forward jointly, I think, in a very organized way. So that one is going well. has to be is going well as well. That one is more native ChargePoint in terms of what we had done commercially. has·to·be is -- I think, emphasis was on the customers that wanted to own assets and be service providers themselves, many of them are electricity retailers. In Europe, it's a different regulation market for energy, so you see a lot more diversity there in asset ownership. And in Europe, they had a very, very, very strong position as a software provider, as a network provider effectively. So it was hand in glove with our road map. So it moved us up the curve. A good customer [ officer ] moved us up the market share curve well. And we're continuing that integration. We picked up with that some very, very good pieces of technology. They have some incredible capabilities in the billing and invoicing area, which we thought were just very well architected that we're integrating into a joint -- all our systems will be joint. We're not maintaining either acquisition as an independent thing. So everything will be joint. And has·to·be, because they existed in Europe as a hardware-less company, meaning they don't make hardware, they've had to deal with just a myriad of compatibilities with legacy hardware, which we have as well there. We have a lot of third-party hardware on our network. And so when you take the compatibilities that they have for legacy hardware plus ours, it's pretty unmatched with respect to compatibility with the plethora of hardware that's in the ground already. So we're very happy with both. And that's how it moves us up the curve, your question on market share. It's -- we've certainly moved up the curve quite a bit on a port count basis. We're at close to 50,000 or whatever the number was we reported in the last earnings calls, it's in that ballpark in Europe. But most importantly, it's an all software business there. So all of that business is of the high-margin software ilk. We can sell hardware into that customer base now that we are a joint company. So we hopefully can amplify the revenue from the existing customer base and continue to add with has·to·be, same with ViriCiti in Europe. And in terms of how we get to 1/3 of the revenue, that's how you get to 1/3 of the revenue. You've seen our comments. We comment on the billings number, not the revenue number, but the billings number from Europe on our earnings call. So I won't repeat, which you can see in transcripts, but you see that marching up the percentage of our total revenue. So I think it was plus or minus 10% or so of our revenue last quarter and will continue to climb.

And remaining on the same topic, Pasquale, have you seen any positive or negative surprises from these acquisitions? Have you seen upselling opportunities from ViriCiti acquisition, I guess, the hardware cost that you're charging is, I think, $75 per vehicle or fleet. Have you seen upselling opportunities with your current customers? How successful you've been in doing so? Anything you can share that you learned from these acquisitions?

What price did you just quote, Vikram?

$75 per vehicle.

Yes. There's per vehicle fees, there's per charger fees and there are per site fees. For a fleet, there's a lot of options.

I was just focusing on the ViriCiti portion.

On the ViriCiti portion, yes, they're definitely -- there have -- there is and has been up-selling capability now that we are a joint company and have all the functionality plus the hardware under the same umbrella. So yes, I mean, it's -- we're very proud of the comprehensiveness of the fleet portfolio on the software side before the ViriCiti acquisition. Afterwards, it's pretty unmatched. I mean, it was unmatched before but I just don't see a like-for-like out there right now.

Okay. And then moving on to margin side, Pasquale. I think one of the pushbacks you get is the equipment side of the business, leaving out the SaaS side. The equipment side of the business is that it's very difficult longer term to maintain an edge over your competition in designing the equipment and providing bells and whistles, which differentiate you from competition. So what's your view about long-term margins in that business, which always is like what people are trying to calculate terminal value when all the growth is behind it, you guys? What's sort of the terminal value of these assets?

Yes. So it's an age-old argument. I'm going to point to a couple of examples in other industries, and then I'll give you some specifics about our industry that I think address that question. So if you look at other industries, let's take the PC industry. I'm sitting here on my nice Mac, and the banking community and the investment community are much more PC-oriented. Poor, you guys. But -- and BlackBerry is finally gone, thank God. So if you look at the PC industry, though, even though I just made fun of it, it has converged back into -- if you look at Microsoft, they now are making their own hardware. They still enable the third-party hardware OEMs, but there are much -- there are far fewer of them. And the reason is reliability support and being able to move features as fast as a company that's integrated end-to-end. It's not that there isn't a standard set out there that you have to be compatible with. We're compliant with all of the standards of communication between our network and the endpoints. But there's always extensions to those standards because the standards just will never keep pace with the pace of change and the future requirements being driven by our customers. So -- and Cisco did this, by the way, in the router space. So you can look at the phones, mobile phones, you can look at PCs, you can look at network gear, you can look at anything and the market leaders tend to have control or at least the ability to have control of both sides of it. Where we depart a little bit -- and I guess the analogy is there with Cisco is that we're fully compatible. If you want the compatibility with that third-party hardware, we're fully compatible, but you can get state-of-the-art support and state-of-the-art features if you use our hardware, assuming we have a piece of hardware that's applicable. And sometimes, we're not going to make everything. We're not going to make every niche of charging worth of hardware that's just intractable and much like Cisco. So if you look at the universe, what we'll continue to do, I think, is build leading-edge stuff that really has a reason to improve the support, picture is high volume, has a reason to exist, essentially. We need to make that stuff so we can be in control of our destiny. If that were to change, we could reconsider. I just don't see it changing and it hasn't changed in other industries. And if you look specifically at our customer base, this is the pivot into kind of the reasons that are really unique to us in this market. This is, for most people, something that's in their parking lot that they really want to have there but they don't want to have to manage it. And so if you need one entity that's supporting the whole thing, that can help you from first, sales engagement to installation and commissioning, best practices in consulting on how to use it, how to set it up, how to integrate it with your IT and your HR systems and your -- whatever type of business you are, your customer systems, if you're a retailer, your reservation systems if you're a hotel, et cetera, that really needs to kind of come from a single company. If you've got a fleet that wants to buy best-of-breed and wants to invest in the particulars of having -- kind of being the integrator, maybe, even there, we find that that's not that common in attitude. But if the customer really wants to be the integrator, they can. We just don't see that many applications where a customer has the motivation to be the integrator. It's just not something that they care about. Lastly, on price sensitivity, let's address that one because I think it was kind of a tangent to one of your multipart questions. The price sensitivity is kind of interesting in this space. While there's always price sensitivity, most -- half at least of the installed cost of a port of charging is installation, which means that if we cut the price of a charger in half, it only affects total installed cost. It only takes the total installed cost down by about 25%. So a decent -- that natural labor component, which is not compressible, and it's not that different. In fact, we think we have easier installation practices with our hardware so we can make an argument that our hardware is going to have lower installed cost. But let's say it was equivalent across the board. That natural ballast there being so large desensitizes the total invoice from the specific price of the hardware. So you've got a little flexibility to be a premium hardware player.

Yes. And staying on that topic about premium hardware, Pasquale, what is the next generation of products that you envision ChargePoint will have 2, 3, 5 years from now? You've seen B2Gs, you've seen companies coming up with all different connectors. You have optionality to buy the connector you want to install. You have companies which...

We pioneered that.

Yes. And you've seen companies installing batteries with their chargers, which provides a boost to chargers or Level 2 chargers sort of operates like a fast charger. Like what do you envision in the few years we'll see from ChargePoint?

So we're -- so ChargePoint's hallmark from the beginning is flexibility. It's -- we focus on total cost of ownership. So -- and I think that wins the day at the end because these are outdoor assets that have to be bulletproof, that have to be super reliable. And when they break, they have to be easy to fix and it has to be easy to have a network of technicians to not only install, configure but also repair in the event that something were not operating. That's why we invest so much in our Assure product where it's sort of AppleCare for a ChargePoint charger. You can leave it to us and we'll take care of things if things break. So if you look at the modularity, let's take the last fleet announcement we made where we had the fleet hardware product line, which was the worst-kept secret in the industry because it was a very well-known healthcare reform before we announced it. But let's take the Power Link, which is the super dispenser that we have that can be mounted on a gantry, put on a pedestal. It's just got 1 million different mounting configurations. The little -- the screen and the brains is in a module, it's in a subassembly. You can't tell from looking at the unit that it's not -- that it's a LEGO block. That's the same exact one that we use in the new AC charger that was in that fleet picture. It's the same exact one. So if you were to be a fleet or even a consumer because those pieces of hardware are the same ones we use for consumers in our commercial business, if you were to stock spares, you stock one thing. When that box gets replaced into an AC charger, it wakes up and says, oh, I'm in this particular model of AC charger with this configuration. I know how to act when it gets locked into a DC dispenser that's on a fueling and convenience store for long-haul consumer driving, it wakes up and knows what to do and knows how to contact our network and knows how to configure itself. So the modularity in how few things we build for how many configurations we can hit is really our hallmark. User-installable cables, this company pioneered that in terms of -- and we're doing more and more stuff with cable options. So if you look at that same dispenser that was -- that I referred to, that was in that press release, the DC cables, the communications to the vehicle are in a little tiny piece of circuitry in the connector that plugs that cable into the charger itself. So do you have a new version of CCS that comes out? No problem, change the cable. It's that simple, right? And so we've dealt with all of these things, ad infinitum. And let's get to storage because that's an interesting one, centralize the storage. If you have very few occasions or you're going to have one port of DC charging. It's -- there are some, okay, there are some where that's applicable. The minute you have more than one port of DC charging, stick the -- with the storage centralized, so it can be shared in what -- the stall closest to the door is going to get more use, right? And so you don't want that charger's battery to be depleted and the charger, 4 stalls away, to have plenty of juice and now the 1 that wants to get the regular use gets the short end of the stick because the charge rate isn't there. You really want a centralized storage, if you use storage, if the application warrants it, and there's some nips around that, there are great applications for storage. But it really demands centralization. I also think margin stacking batteries in a charger, no one is willing to tell about that one, okay? Margin stacking is something that is effectively a commodity. We deal with that as balance the system. We don't want that running through our books. Just because the -- if you look at the solid-state disk drive market, who owns that now? It's the people that make the flash chips. We expect that the battery cell manufacturers will make storage cabinets before too long. And when they make storage cabinets, that's not something we can compete with because they make the commodity that is dominating that bill of material. So it's not something we want to be part of.

Great. Moving -- changing gears. I wanted to talk about the margins in SaaS. It somewhat has been a topic of debate since you guys have been public. That margin unfairly sometimes get compared to margins of SaaS companies out there and that it should be in 60% range, not -- sometimes not realizing there is network services in there, there's depreciation in there, there is Assure maintenance fees in the COGS of that margin. Where do you see that margin stabilizing? There is certainly economies of scale in that business as well. And expectations, I guess, are -- it stabilizes in the mid-50% range. Where do you think it stabilizes? When do you think you'd get there? And what causes, frankly, volatility in that margin to -- quarter-to-quarter?

I don't think there's much cause for volatility in that margin so I don't think volatility is a factor unless you really have a reliability issue, which we don't have a history of having. So -- and if you -- and we want to continue to invest into our job right there. So black swan events, notwithstanding volatility in the SaaS margin isn't really our concern. The SaaS margin or the services line margin because you lumped Assure into your comment, which is where it shows up...

Subscriptions.

Yes, and that makes sense. That's a -- so I'll just give you a couple of examples that will help, I think, the listeners understand where the margin structure will go and where it's coming. We're not guiding that specific margin line so I can't give you a specific target. Not being evasive, but I'll give you how to think about it. The M2M cost, the backhaul cost for the cellular communication to the units, first of all, is in our network fees. Also driver support is currently lumped into that and we don't charge consumers anything. It's part of our value-add. There are definite economy of scale issues at the current size of the market, especially when you look at 24/7, 365 care for drivers. And then you also deal with station owners, not necessarily all 24/7, 365 but pretty aggressive SLA terms there now in multiple countries in Europe, Canada, North America, all the languages you need to support everywhere. It actually is an expensive proposition at even -- and the scale we're at is an insignificant but it's insignificant relative to where it's going. It's just not at a point where it's up the optimization curve. And then our own investment in tools to really make more of that self-serve and automatic that there's a massive investment going on right now in ChargePoint to get our business systems in line with where we know through good data and 14 years of information, right, telling us where the optimization real advantages are. We're investing to basically shrink that. So you will see improvements on the cost structure of that line. Right now, because it's the early days of the market is not the time to try to cut corners on customer satisfaction. You won't live to tell about that in this phase. And if you look at how much growth is in front of us, not something we want to short change at this point. We want to do it through investment in automation tools and systems and then just let scale handle the diversity of language and locale and hours of operation, let that fill in the optimization blank, so to speak, over time. So those margins should head in a good direction over time with that scale and our own investment. And then it will be capped by a couple of things that won't let it go to pure SaaS margin. It won't let it go to pure SaaS margin numbers. It won't be -- I don't think it will be that far off, but it's not going to be -- because we're burdened with the M2M costs and we're burdened with the additional driver support costs, which will drag that down a little bit. And that's how I think about it, but I don't think it's going to be a very healthy business over time. And it actually is a very healthy business now, it will just get better.

Sure. And then just tying it all together, with the subscription margin and the equipment margin, you face supply chain and logistical issues like all the competitors and everyone else in the market who has anything to do with shipping. And that has impacted your margin. Last quarter was 3 percentage point impact. What's the expectation? What are you seeing in the market in terms of those costs? It seems like shipping costs have stabilized but they've not gone down. When do you think that impact goes away this year? One. And two, I noticed some of your products are back-ordered. It seems like the residential charger is back-ordered. Is there a thought to change the pricing strategy until things open up, until the shipping costs come down and you capture sort of support the margin and take it off the back orders as well?

It's complicated. So again, that's a whole fireside chat in itself there, that question is. It's a really great question, by the way. So first of all, I think there are very few companies out there, we're one of them, that have been able to beat and raise guidance in a supply chain-constrained environment and still make margin progress without having major pricing actions. So we've still made forward progress on margins. Now as I even have to explain to my own Board, the things that work across purposes when you're in a supply chain-constrained environment are assurance of supply and progress to margin. And the reason is when you lock in supply, literally in many cases, by taking the inventory if you have to or building ahead or guaranteeing payment on things that are really in tight supply, what you do is you have now a pipeline of materials that you can't change because you've already -- it's sunk now. So you're cutting in cost reductions in the form of alternative supply, in the form of design changes, in the form of any number of things. Those are challenging to do. And then the contract manufacturers, they're impacted by COVID on the labor side. So churning the training, so even things that improve time and motion on an assembly line, changing test procedures to reduce test time, all that sort of -- improved yield, all the stuff that you do to improve margin, everything is now hitting -- just hits a friction because of either labor impacts by COVID you've got or needing to make commitments to assure some supply. And even with that, we've improved margins even with that. And we've hit the high. So imagine what our ops team is facing when our sales team says, we need more cookies. And they're like, you're kidding me, right? Do you know what chocolate chips -- how hard they are to get? And so they're out there finding more of them and figuring out how to make more supply for sales force and our customers. So we're incredibly happy about that. In terms of it braking, I think the best position to be in is a position of assurance of supply right now, given the scale in the market. And so you have to take a conservative position with respect to any estimate of when this thing is going to subside. So our attitude internally is until we see it change meaningfully, assume it's not going to change. And we did the same thing with our employees with COVID. We say until we see it's really over, we're not going to assume it's over. Even in our own internal operations and here's Omicron, right? And so our -- we never even set our -- we never set expectations with anybody: our employees, our customers, our investors, that things are going to break until they break because it's just -- there's too many variables. So we're being incredibly careful with respect to that, not the -- we don't want to disappoint customers right now. That's the #1 thing is do not disappoint a customer if you can avoid it. Obviously, even with that, even with all our efforts, there are some things we can't ship that we'll catch up on. And so that's how we're thinking about that. When that does break, that same team that has still been able to make forward progress on margin improvement and assure supply gets to put 100% of its energy into cost improvements and new product introduction. So there's, I think, the proof that we've got, I think, the good infrastructure in the company to be able to tackle margin challenges on a go-forward basis. So every company has its margin challenges, but I think we've got a team with a very good track record of being able to manage a very complicated supply chain.

Certainly, revenue beat in every quarters in your public history puts you in a unique position and the margin progress is impressive, too. You mentioned, Pasquale, COVID sort of causing some of these issues, labor shortages and so forth. And you're seeing the spread of Omicron is doing sort of the same thing over and over again. Are you seeing some of the issues you saw 3, 4, 5 months ago resurface because of supply -- labor shortages because people are being asked to work from home all across the globe? Are you seeing some of those issues resurface or early indications of those issues resurfacing?

In our supply chain, where -- depending on where you are in the globe, we've been dealing with hot spot issues, not so much -- not with respect to labor per se, but we've been dealing with hotspot issues across the board. I would not be surprised if the Omicron bubble kind of moves through labor. Right now, our contract manufacturers seem to be managing that reasonably well. And remember, all the countries out there aren't synchronized. This is kind of hitting somewhat time-delayed, either ahead or behind, depending on the country you're looking at. We do manufacture pretty diversely so we have manufacturing operations in many -- or contract manufacturers, I should say. We don't directly manufacture. But we have teams managing contract manufacturers in a lot of places around the planet because of the complexity of the logistics around the product and some of the tariff management and certification things that you have to deal with globally I won't bore you with. So that means that we get a little bit of insulation, a little bit, not a ton, but a little bit of insulation from a particular hotspot with respect to labor in one location.

That makes sense. And I see we have -- you have a hard stop and we have 2 minutes left so I wanted to hand it back to you for any feedback you want to be shared from the conference, anything that you feel needs to be highlighted, needs to be addressed, maybe is misunderstood. Anything you want to share on your part?

Well, I mean, I think the interesting thing to leave you guys with is that while this industry, I think, is starting as it should be measured like a run rate industry, and we applaud that because it should be, you need to be disciplined investors and we need to be disciplined operators, the sheer magnitude of the opportunity in front of a company like ChargePoint, assuming we execute, is pretty breathtaking. We are at single-digit percentage penetrations in North America and in Europe into the fleet at large of consumer vehicles and fleet vehicles. In fact, fleet vehicles, commercial fleet vehicles are behind in penetration because they're supply constrained from OEMs. And yet, we still manage to have the scale of the company that we have and you look at the growth rate and that growth rate is -- just look at what's driving its vehicles and look at how few vehicles have actually penetrated. And this is not a substantially build-ahead kind of market. So the opportunity for investments in the EV ecosystem, if well placed, and we think we're a good place to put it because we're broadly -- enable broad exposure to the EV space. We're not a battery technology company. We're not a particular OEM targeting a single set of verticals. We're broadly exposed. What it presents is a massive investment opportunity over the long haul if we can execute, if we can continue to deliver, which we have we good confidence in ourselves and our ability to do that. But time will tell. And assuming we do that, look at the size of this industry in general. Just look at it, it's breathtaking. It's just reengineering transportation globally. And the paradigm shift to fueling mostly while you're parked because of the pervasive distribution of energy, that's going to completely change the landscape, completely change the fueling landscape. And I think it's going to lead to very, very, very exciting times not only for companies like ChargePoint but for everything in the industry, and I'm sure, Vikram, I didn't get to listen to all the fireside chats, but I'm sure that my comments are not unlike a lot of the other folks in this space.

No, definitely. Your comments were echoed in most of the discussions. So on that high note with ending the presentation, thanks, everyone, for joining us. Thanks, Pasquale. If you have any follow-up questions, reach out to me, Pat Hamer at ChargePoint or Pasquale, and we'll try to get them answered. Thanks, once again, everyone.

Thank you, guys.