Iridium Communications Inc. (IRDM) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good afternoon, everybody. Tim Horan, I am the satellite analyst as well as communications and digital infrastructure here at Oppenheimer. My pleasure to be hosting Iridium, Matthew Desch, the CEO. And Matthew, I'm sorry if I pronounced that wrong.

It's Desch.

Yes. I knew that.

It's been destroyed many times over the years.

Yes. Well, thank you for joining. Sorry about that. We initiated on Iridium a few months ago, the stock worked out great for a few months, pulled back a little bit here on earnings. I think we're back to a great buying opportunity, but we'll get into that in a lot more detail here.

Matt, can you maybe just give a little bit of, for people that know the company real well, description of what you guys do and what your niche is in the market?

Yes. Iridium was the first low earth-orbiting satellite system conceived in the early '90s and the early days of cellular phones to be a network that still today is the furthest reaching network. It covers 100% of the planet. It was original service back when it was launched in the late '90s, was for satellite voice devices, satellite phones, things like that. Turned out to be the really the optimum architecture for IoT, and we're really more of an IoT company today that's been growing really well over the 27 or 28 years we've been in operation. We have a second-generation network, which we launched in 2019, 2020, which is still quite fresh and has many years to go. And as a result of that while we continue to grow, we're quite profitable and generating a lot of cash and throwing a lot of that off and obviously, doing shareholder-friendly activities with it like buying back shares and putting in a dividend out. Our key businesses are still land, maritime, aviation, IoT. And really, we have a special relationship, long-term business relationship with the U.S. government and supply sort of a private network on behalf of a number of services for them as well, which is a little less than 20% of our business still today. We've given a lot of guidance about the future. We'll talk I'm sure about things like D2D and PNT and all kinds of stuff. We also operate a hosted partner on our network called Aireon, which is quite interesting. We use the opportunity when we launched a second-generation network to build a whole another business around us, tracking aircraft and think that has a lot of potential as well. So that's just a really, really small part. But it gives -- we were what was called a mobile satellite services company. I think that is really blurred now. The convergence between satellites and threshold is -- and between what's mobile and what's fixed is sort of blurred. But we were quite -- we operate in what we'll call L-band spectrum, that's shorthand for the 1.6 to 2 gigahertz sort of area that is really prime real estate that was all allocated back 30 years ago, very good service for being able to propagate for small antennas for being very mobile. We're being close to GPS for antenna synergies and that sort of thing. Very different than the microwave frequencies called Ku/Ka-band and others that really are optimized for supplying big broadband services but have other kind of limitations as well. So very different kinds of services that we offer than others. I think the one thing most investors should get out is that we're not so much competitive with a lot of those other companies, I'm sure we'll talk about. But we're mostly complementary in terms of our business strategies, growth. And we find ourselves in an important and growing niche that we're expanding.

That's a great way to put it. So basically, you provide unique -- a LEO satellite consultation, a unique spectrum and unique devices, mission-critical communication services for voice and data in a global coverage in a way that no one else can really do at this point, particularly for voice, I would say, but also obviously for IoT.

And and evolving those as the industry is today to a standard-based service. So we announced a couple of years ago -- we originally tried partnership with Qualcomm for a proprietary kind of system that would be part of their Snapdragon. The market really told us and everyone that they didn't want proprietary solutions around mobile phones. So we pivoted quickly. We have this incredible software kind of defined network that we were able to reprogram. And soon, we'll be live on air with a standards-based IoT product that can go into consumer devices and allow terrestrial cellular IoT customers to roam on to our network anywhere in the world. So it will be, we think, one of a number of growth drivers we have that continues to drive our growth going forward.

And that will be both IoT and smartphones?

Yes. Any device that uses a 3GPP, which is the acronym for sort of the 5G standard set that everything is developed on, we're in Release 19, which is finalized -- well, it's been finalized but goes into chips later on this year. We're testing with preproduction chips and will be a service available in 2026 that will -- anybody who puts that into a device and a carrier enables us, we'll be able to provide a narrowband IoT. So messaging, data going back and forth. This is not a wideband or broadband kind of service, but allows standard consumer devices, phones, watches, PDAs. And I think the biggest opportunity for us, given that we are the largest satellite IoT player, is to continue our leadership position in many more applications, in agriculture and unmanned vehicles and that sort of thing.

So this is a huge deal, basically. I mean, historically, you used to have to have proprietary expensive hardware. I'm sure that's not going to go away. But now you can -- I mean, what type of IoT devices are we talking about? Like how much would it cost for them to upgrade to be able to connect to your network? And how much space would it require them to do that?

So it really shouldn't require any additional cost, devices that comply with the standard. I mean there are IoT devices today that are going out there, that are tracking livestock or agricultural soil sensors or could be drones, it could be all kinds of things. Today, that are on the standard 4G, 5G network, if that supplier decides to upgrade that to a Release 19 chip, they should have access to our network. And it's only an issue for their the carrier that's currently supplying cellular, you just have to have a roaming arrangement with us, which we're implementing our service via Syniverse, which is sort of a roaming engine in the middle of that. They have all these arrangements with hundreds of roaming carriers around the world. So that's kind of all the infrastructure necessary for that to be billed and provisioned and will be available. So it's not additional cost at all, really. If you're implementing it, if you're already implementing, say, relationship with Nordic Semiconductors, there will be others that we announced as well, if you buy one of their chips that the latest version of this in it, I don't know that it'll cost anymore. It's really just software in there; and you should be able to roam onto our network.

And how about of Caterpillar or Mercedes? They wanted like to deal with you directly. Would they continue to use proprietary hardware? Or will they most likely put in the latest 3GPP standard chips?

Well, so Caterpillar is very large, valued partner of ours today. We're going into a lot of equipment coming out of [ Peoria ]. We're evolving them to even higher speeds and can do some additional things sort of on a proprietary basis that there's no reason that they might not stay in that path. But if they want to explore a standards-based solution, they can also do that as well. It will cover the same part of the planet, which is 100% of it. And that's always been a value for us for a major player like that. Now we're not in Mercedes yet. I would love to be that if they wanted to deploy. And I think it's really the automotive industry is taking a much stronger look at the satellite industry now that they see standards. They were always worried about going with a satellite -- a specific satellite supplier, even when as successful as Iridium that's been around as long as we have been, because the satellite industry has had failures in the past, and they don't want to deploy a technology that might be proprietary. And then they've seen some carriers, we're not one of them, that keeps evolving their proprietary standards and obsoletes the previous version of them. That happened to our largest Maritime customers. Every time they launch a new satellite, they obsoleted their previous technology and made everybody upgrade. That's not something we've ever done, but I can imagine why a car manufacturer might be a little worried about putting something in a car that might last 20 or 30 years. So I think standards -- integrating with 5G standards is going to be a lot more of these larger players, who want to move from terrestrial IoT, which only covers still, I don't know, 10% to 15% of the earth's surface and none of the skies, they want to take a technology that will be 100% of the planet and will expand their use cases.

Well, and to your point, a lot of the terrestrial networks are still on 3G. You're probably only talking about 5% of the earth that's on 5G as we speak.

That's true. That's very true. And so that's always been our calling card, people -- the applications that were important enough to be anywhere in the planet. And we always won from a satellite perspective, I've said we've -- I don't think we've ever lost a partner who's come on to our network. Nobody has ever gone in any place else because they knew that there were no compromises in terms of where we could supply service, and we're extremely reliable, and we're a service that operates in any look angle, you didn't have to worry about it being a geostationary satellite, and your generator was on the northern side of the barn can't ever see that satellite that's fixed in the sky. We were always overhead and could always provide a service. We're not the only one providing direct-to-device using that service. There's both Starlink and AST SpaceMobile, are the most notable ones right now. They're doing it in a very different way than we are. They're trying -- they're going to supply a wideband or broadband kind of service, according to -- at least they hope to, depending upon how much spectrum they're able to get. They've a very regional offering. They only work in land masses, where they don't create interference. So we think we're going to be complementary to those solutions, be the glue, perhaps in some of those devices that you can use those services and they might supply higher speeds. If you're able to use those services, I mean, there's lots of questions about their business cases and getting into service and all that stuff. I don't take a position too much in that right now, I like my business. I think for the incremental investment we're putting on top of our network, we got a great business case for D2D right now in terms of supplying incremental cash and profitability on our network.

I mean you're going to grow IoT in two different ways, more devices and maybe more ARPU devices if you're getting more speeds. Although if you grow a huge amount of devices, maybe the ARPU will go down, but that will be a new subsegment, How many IoT devices do you have now? And what do you think you can have in 5 or 10 years?

Well, I mean it's close to 2 million devices. But that number could grow dramatically if we become a standard solution. And yes, the ARPUs will probably be a lot lower. But as long as the usage of our network is commensurate with it, it really doesn't matter what the ARPU is because we're not putting incremental capital in to get incremental devices. That was always the model everybody followed on terrestrial. If you had to put in more cell towers and more cell sites, then you were really worried about falling ARPU because it meant higher capital for less value, especially when you're buying customers by subsidizing phones and stuff. We don't do that, we don't have to subsidize subscribers. They come on to our network, they create incremental revenue that drops almost up, almost completely into cash and profitability. And that's how we've continued to grow our profitability year-by-year and how our cash flows have continued to grown, and we've been able to successfully maintain that model ever since we...

But I mean, theoretically, you're sitting here, Verizon, all the carriers in the United States, for example, have a product for first responders, for a bunch of reasons. I mean, they could enable text messaging on their smartphones through your satellites as a mission-critical service, that's a backup that's basically always there. So I mean, this 2 million could be hundreds of millions in a few years, not to put words in your mouth...

It could be. I will say, we don't see a lot of excitement in the first-responder community that still uses our satellite phones for going to telling all their fireman, "Hey, just use your Android or iPhone. And text us, if you can." It's possible that, that will be what we hear, is they really want devices that are sturdy and won't break and that have long battery lives, and they want to keep their cell phone for personal use and everything. So I don't know that that's the biggest market for it. I do think -- there's a lot of questions right now about the total size of the market. I'm probably -- I don't -- I've had a history here. I've been the CEO of 19 years. I'm not pumping this very much, even when we were out with our Qualcomm relationship. I was more tamping the market down because I think it's going to be a big market, but I don't think it's like -- I don't think it's as big as some people believe it is. And that's why I think there's a lot of questions about the carriers that are spending billions of dollars building networks to do this. Those networks are $5 billion to $10 billion, and they have to be rebuilt every 5 years. We did build a $3 billion second-generation network, but it should last closer to 20 years or if -- maybe longer. So -- and we're just reprogramming it basically with some incremental capital to allow us to have standardized channels on our network. So the question is how many people will pay for texting on their phone? I think many people will support texting. I don't know how many are going to pay extra money for e-mail and all the other stuff to build a broadband network. But I do think most carriers we talk about do believe messaging, texting, SOS, location services; those are really critical services that I think we're going to be right in the heart of with our offering.

And is there any reason that Verizon or AT&T wouldn't resell your product through Syniverse and many other carriers?

Well, we've been told by the MNOs, and I said you probably heard in our second quarter earnings announcement, we've actually signed some deals. We just haven't announced them yet. What we're hearing from MNOs is "Look, pay no attention to who we've announced with. We want to diversify and provide a number of offerings to our customers and allow the best solutions to be the ones that carry the traffic. So you guys have a global network, others don't have that. You are able to provide services anywhere, including Oceanic and other places people could end up, that will be valuable to a number of our customers." And definitely, we see our IoT customers, which are typically enterprises that show up everywhere in the world, they don't want to be told which 7 countries that this works in. They don't know where their devices are going to end up. So they were really "We really like the value proposition of a no-compromise satellite IoT operator like you." So that's what we're focused on.

So in Caterpillar now and Garmin, they seem to be getting a little bit more capacity and they can do a few more applications on the devices you mentioned, Caterpillar. What's enabling that? Are you -- how are you increasing the speeds that they can get and the capacity?

Well, when we launched our second-generation network, when we contracted for it back 15 years ago, we knew -- we wanted to do all the services that our first generation did because we wanted to keep -- we didn't want to tell people that they don't have to turn anything off for a second-generation network. But we knew we also wanted to be a much more flexible platform. So we built it -- our brand name is Iridium Certus, which is just a name we made up, but that's sort of the brand name for a higher-speed service that could be offered on our network. Now we're not a true broadband player. We don't try to get maximum speed. We're really about how much speed can you get through a very, very small device. So a modem that's the size of a small credit -- smaller than a credit card, maybe the size even of a coin. That's the kind of size that a Garmin or other people would want to use in, say, a consumer device or other things. And in fact, we're really getting down to the point that's in a tiny chip at this point, that's really all the tax that you pay for the real estate to put Iridium connection into it. And what our goal was what devices could we create that we get higher speed. So we have a number of kind of capabilities now where our IoT is flexibly able to send pictures and voice notes and things like that. Still not videos and that sort of thing, but enough that if you could carry a small device around that would be you could record, say, a voice message to somebody, it didn't even have to be a real-time two-way connection. But for a very small amount and a very tiny device, you could still send voice back and forth to people and receive voice notes from people. So that's all a lot of people really want and need. You want a device that will have a standby of 2 weeks and will enable you to talk 20, 30 hours, send pictures when you have to. It might not be like your cellphone, but it's going to be -- it's going to work in the middle of the Pacific Ocean or anywhere you end up on.

And that what's the latency on your messaging now?

It's almost instantaneous. I mean, it's -- that was the other reason why our IoT service was successful over a number of other services, which were -- had really high latency, sometimes minutes or hours between the time that they'd be able to deliver messages. We have always delivered them instantaneously, I mean, seconds typically.

So you've increased the speed by better devices and some software upgrades on the satellites. Is that fair?

Yes. It was channelization of our software frequencies in the satellites, the ability to kind of manage very efficiently and be able to offer any subscriber a little more data speed and capacity still in a very small real-estate package. So we've offered Certus 100 package, our latest Certus IoT devices, the 9704, which came out last year. It's -- those are direct IP so that people weren't programming a special satellite language. I mean the strategy for us has been, over the 18 years, we've been in IoT or whatever it's been now, probably about 20 now; has been to make the devices smaller and smaller and less of a tax on anybody who wanted to put an Iridium service onto their -- what we didn't want them to do is have to talk satellite, we wanted them to be able to talk IP, talk 5G. So the time to revenue for us, if a partner says, "Hey, I'd like to put you on a delivery drone," it should be a week or 2 or 3 for them to implement us. It used to be 6 months and a lot of back and forth on that stuff, but it's quite quick now. And that's why we saw in the second quarter how many partners were still signing up, companies who are implementing us, buying our devices or planning to implement the future devices that we have and are implementing us in many, many industries right now.

Very helpful. And then you have also, I think, an extremely unique positioning -- technology positioning navigation timing. PNT, we all kind of call it. Can you just describe how you came to have that capability? And how can you monetize it?

Yes. I'm kind of personally proud of that. I mean, many -- I've been a while -- so it's been at least 15 years. We were working with Boeing Phantom Works, who are doing some stuff. They knew our network, especially our very powerful paging channel, which was used in the old days for early pagers, few people remember what those are. We don't sell those anymore. But the channel itself could get inside buildings and was 1,000x more powerful than a GPS signal. And they realized with the -- in a LEO network that's very close to the earth, where the satellites are moving around quite rapidly, you could send timing information through that, that a chip on the ground, even inside a building or whatever, could receive that signal. And it would be very difficult to jam it that it was also encrypted in a way that it couldn't be spoofed, so you couldn't fool anything. And I was really impressed with it. I thought it had a lot of potential. Boeing agreed that they probably weren't the right place to commercialize it. So they spun it out. We kind of supported the company. It was called [ Satellus ]. And they sort of built that as a start-up business, and we've started becoming quite successful productizing their device down to literally just a tiny chip with very little cost. And of course, in that 15 years, the problem of GPS jamming and spoofing has become a really big problem. I mean you can't fly over the Middle East or sail through the Red Sea or be in Ukraine or -- in fact, in the U.S., there's a whole bunch of situations where critical infrastructure is being jammed, and people are using illegal jammers or spoofing to create mayhem. And it really worries U.S. infrastructure suppliers. They're worried about cell towers that depend on GPS for timing, they're worried about data centers that need a timing reference signal to for all the routers. And so while we've been protecting things like the New York Stock Exchange and exchanges around the world, and we're starting to get into 5G in-building base stations, we see that market as being really huge. And we look around there's some regional solutions. You can kind of put some towers around a local town and create sort of the same sort of service, but it's very expensive, and it doesn't scale. We have a service that's extremely reliable, it is at least 5 to 10 years ahead of anybody else right now. And our real challenge is how fast can we take advantage of it. So we're signing lots of new partners. We're starting to get into, for example, shipping. They're starting to see the problem. In fact, maritime insurance companies are realizing we're the only thing that a ship could depend upon. So it depends on how fast we can get into the bridge. Maybe today, we're an overlay, but in the future, we could be a regulated solution in there that could be in the navigation systems. Same way in aviation. You can imagine if you have unmanned drones, you don't want those things to be -- bad people to be able to spoof them or jam them because basically, whatever you're either delivering or doing with that drone is useless without a position signal. So -- and you're seeing that a lot in the conflict in Ukraine right now and the back and forth. And so there's a lot of interest in critical infrastructure suppliers, governments around the world...

And then how big of a chip do you need? And how expensive is it?

It's smaller than your smallest nail. It's just a tiny little ship. It's a couple of bucks, and that could be implemented in lots of different solutions. Now today, it's in a card, it's a tiny, it's something of the size of, say, a credit card. A number of different solutions. A lot of partners are kind of taking us to market that way. The chip is available today and will be -- it's not available commercially today, will be commercially available next year. That's not really needed for a lot of those applications. If you're an inside base station or you're a cell tower, you don't need a chip. But we see a lot of applications that consumer devices and other things could be protected from GPS jamming, spoofing or could get a location signal inside a building all via a tiny chip that can receive that signal. So we think that the market expands dramatically. We're starting to work on the cybersecurity products that would protect, would provide a trusted location so that you are wiring money, you can't really provide fraud. It's -- if you think about it's quantum safe in the sense it can't be hacked via quantum down the road, you need to know, if you're in New York, this transaction is actually happening from New York because we are one of the few companies that could approve that, that device you have is in New York.

So Matt, as you know, the key to communications industry is standardization, right? And I mean, your device, it doesn't cost anything to operate. I mean, if you become the alternative GPS, and it's obviously needed, right; it's a chicken of the egg, how do you kind of convince maybe -- is there a way to convince 3GPP, "Look, we should incorporate that in the next standard, and it will be in every device, and we can license it per device or something"?

Well, 3GPP don't standardize GNSS systems. There's 5 or 6 of them. The U.S. has the GPS system. Galileo has a slightly different frequency and different system. Baidu is China's system. So the problem is there's already a discontinuity of systems. And they're all technically free today. And some devices are actually putting multiple of those in there for kind of resiliency, but they all are operating around the same frequency level, and they're all are very faint signals, and most of them are kind of unprotected signals. So I don't think it's going to be a standardization. I think we could be the standard though, because we are -- this is extremely cost effective, we've licensed it through many, many partners. We're open to licensing this technology globally. And frankly, our biggest challenge right now is marketing. There's a lot -- if there were 10 companies offering this thing and we were the best, it is pretty easy because 9 others are basically marketing your solution for you. But when you're unique and so far ahead of anybody else in the market right now, it's more a matter of showing people that it even exists and it's even possible to do this. And when they see it, they -- I mean we've won every competitive thing. It's just more getting the word out that there is actually solution to this growing problem that people are having.

So why wouldn't Apple just pay you a certain amount to basically have an alternative in every phone globally that they produce in...

That's a great idea. I -- those are kind of opportunities that are absolutely possible and affordable both for those companies and reliable and would provide a great service overall that is extremely robust and available and proven in many applications. So the pipeline is big. This is in our hosted and other revenue line. We've already said that we think that the service revenue from this is like $100 million in 2030. And I think it could be a lot more than that going beyond that, if we are successful at really finding some of these really large-scale applications that I think would make sense to put this in at a very low cost and very high value to the end application.

Well, I was using the word standards loosely. It can either be top down or bottoms up, right?

Yes. No, absolutely. Part of the problem, too -- I mean the problem is now being -- everybody -- I'm sure you've read articles, it's in lots of stuff. It's in -- but it's only been in the last year or 2, this has become globally recognized as an issue. Most people here in the U.S. say it's probably not that big a problem because we haven't really seen it ourselves. "My car hasn't veered off. So what do I care what's going on in the Red Sea?" I think it's -- these issues are well known that they're coming in the U.S. We've seen some very high-profile drone shows, where somebody jammed the drone show and all the satellites, I mean all the drones just fell in their lake. Things that have been stolen because they jam the receiver. People who jammed, were jamming their cab company and also jammed the airplanes at the airport next door. These are -- this is not a hypothetical problem like it was 3 or 4 years ago, it's becoming a -- this is a real problem. We got to figure out a solution. And then they look around and they see some sort of patchwork kind of solutions, but don't appreciate that there is something globally available today that's very cost effective and could work. So it's just an issue of implementing those into more and more applications.

So you're doing a little more than $600 million revenue run rate now. Your goal is $1 billion 5 years or so?

That's service revenue. And then on top of that, we don't subsidize equipment, but we have equipment revenues, which is -- which contributes. And then we have engineering services, which has grown a lot in the last couple of years as we built the government's ground infrastructure and running their SDA network with our partner, general Dynamics. But -- and that could lead us into Golden Dome and some other things down the road in terms of the long-standing relationship, We'd like to be able to supply our expertise to those kind of problems as well. But that's engineering services, which is low margin. The part that I think most investors look at is that service revenues because it's extremely high margin.

I apologize. I meant to say service revenue. So you can get $100 million incremental from PNT, maybe $200 million from IoT, I'm using round numbers. So where does the other $200 million come from?

Well, we're already close to 700. So it's only 300 we need. You already covered 300. I don't know if those are the real numbers here. But we also have -- as I said, IoT with D2D together is -- you're right, is a growth vector, a pretty significant one. PNT, and then we really believe that the work we're doing with the DoD is a growth vector as well and the ecosystem that's been around that 25-year relationship. There is growth in other potential areas as well. I mean, specific things like our PTT service, there's just isn't anything like it. A lot of civil and militaries and others around the world are realizing that this is a nice addition to their terrestrial infrastructure. We have other things in the works as well. But that -- those -- we think $1 billion is absolutely doable for service revenue. And a more important part, I was saying to an investor in one-on-one a little earlier, I find it interesting how we're valued today. You look at what we've returned in capital, over $1.2 billion or something like that we bought back, our market cap is aligned with kind of cash flow we're generating or returning to shareholders. Even with the next-generation network in the 2030s, which we don't think probably will cost as much as what we have today because there's lots more infrastructure we can build on, lower-cost launches, lower-costs satellites, we can expand our capacity, et cetera; we'll have excess cash flow even in the 2030s. But it's interesting that let's say, we did 9.75. And we're being valued like suddenly, we're going to do 500 somehow because there's this -- what we're finding is there's this sort of -- well, Starlink is really big, and they're private and they can do anything they want. And so they're going to eat everything up. And we just don't see that. We don't see it happening today, we don't see either the D2D or broadband services sort of -- as I said, I think we're more complementary to that. So going forward, I think we're going to generate a lot of value in the future, and it will be very shareholder-friendly.

Yes. Great point. And I apologize if you are getting closer to $700 million of revenue, and everything you mentioned is really true. And the government business, so I guess people worry that you're going to lose market share there. Once that contract come up, and what type of pricing power or new services can you provision there?

Well, I don't want to negotiate in public, as you might expect. But people need to understand, we've had this sort of private service that has been very valuable for both of us since 1998 with the government. And the last 2 contracts that we've had for the last 12 years -- well, 10 years, but -- who will expire -- the latest contract will probably need to be renewed by early '27; has been a fixed-price contract, which nobody else in the industry has. Very important relationship that we have. It's been embedded in like 150,000 devices that are in all kinds of applications in every service and in the State Department and many different agencies all over. And it can't be really just easily replaced by any other technology. All those things would have to be replaced one by one, if it changes. And so our goal -- we think there's a win-win here with the government, where we can still continue to grow with them, but maybe take on more work, do more with them. As I said, I think they know what our strategy is and sort of supports the general nature of it. We've got to work out to find details of it over the next 18 months. But I think we feel very, very confident that this is a long-term relationship, and there's a lot more that we can be doing with our unique network. I do know there was a lot of people who see the value, and I think there's a lot of value, in Starlinks broadband service, which, of course, is they have kind of a unique platform that they're supplying to the government, call Starshield or owned by other names and everything. And I think that they're doing some unique, proprietary things, but it's very different than what our network does. Again, I think it's very complementary to the approaches that we've had with the government. I think what our network can do, can support the kind of things and not just their network, but other LEO networks; will ultimately do because again, the unique spectrum we've had, the history we've had and where we've been built into so far.

Matt, we are out of time. I could talk to you for another hour, but I completely agree with everything you're saying. And I wish you the best of luck. And hopefully, when we regroup next year, the stock price will be double from here. Thank you.

Me, too. Thanks, Tim. I really appreciate it.

Thank you.