Leidos Holdings, Inc. (LDOS) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome back. Thanks for joining us at the 2021 JPMorgan Industrials Conference. We're going to continue this afternoon on the aerospace defense track. And we're very happy to have Leidos here with us and grateful to be able to share some time with the CEO, Roger Krone. Roger, welcome. And yes, I think we'll probably be able to do just kind of a fireside chat, Q&A here, back and forth.

But maybe I'll start it off with kind of a pretty open-ended question to allow you to give a little bit of a state of the business. And basically, what are the key trends that you're observing now in the government services market? And how is Leidos kind of shaping and responding to those trends?

Yes. Let me talk a little bit about the trends we're seeing in the way the government is procuring, and then I'll talk a little bit about what we expect to see sort of out of the Biden budget in May and what we think will be some shifting priorities under a top line that probably grows at historical levels. So we are seeing continued strong procurement of services. Although, Seth, I would like to tell you that we view Leidos as a government technology company. And I know everyone loves the word services, but there's really technology in everything that we do. And so we kind of look at life through that lens. But we're seeing consolidation into scale of a lot of the work that they have procured over time, which simplifies their acquisition process and gives them a single contractor to hold accountable for performance. We're seeing a move from buying transformation on a cost-type basis to buying more as a service, and that can be the -- I think the big example that everyone is familiar with is cloud. I mean, cloud really is a service. People are moving out of mainframes. They've moved to the cloud, where they don't need to own the infrastructure. And so they buy processing and storage as a service. And we think that's the beginning. And we will see digital transformation. We will see a lot of other things that the government wants to be bought on more of a usage basis or as a service. And then we're seeing just trends and the capabilities that the government is interested in. They're worried about their outlays and their obligations. And they want to spend more of their money on mission and less on back-office and infrastructure. And then even within mission, they're much more interested in the things that will be important in the future and tomorrow than things that have been relevant in the past. And so as we move to great power competition, we might be fighting or conducting military operations more, say, in the South China Sea as we're coming from a period of time where occupying land and having forces on -- in the desert, might have been more important. Now it may be more important to be in space, to be in hypersonics, to be in cyber domains. Now going back to the Biden administration, and I know that's been a topic in the conference, all the meetings that we've had. We expect to see sort of the first look at the Biden budget in late April or May in a [ PB ]. We think the top line number is going to be where it has been historically. But as everyone has been talking, defense is probably going to be flat to GNP, and we'll see a shifting of priorities within the administration. We know that health care is going to be very, very important to the President and his cabinet and whether we call it Biden Care or Biden Healthcare 2.0, but the importance of CMS, Medicare, Medicaid, I think we'll see that in the budget. We're going to see investment in infrastructure, ports, borders, highways. We think clean energy issues around global warming are going to be very, very important. And then, frankly, we see a lot of work yet to be done around border security and immigration. Unfortunately, we see some of these issues on the news yet even today with some very troubling issues at the border. And technology has a role to play in securing the border, and we expect to see continued investment in a immigration policy and the supporting border security that goes with that.

Right. Do you expect -- just curious, do you expect these priorities and sort of the -- some of the key funding plans for these priorities to come out as part of the request, the budget request that will come out in late April or early May? Or will we see kind of a separate sort of infrastructure or stimulus type of plan?

I think we're going to see what will really be all 3. In the accelerated Recovery Act or whatever it's called, there is money in there for IT infrastructure. So there's some of that already in the $1.9 trillion. We will see some priorities that come out in the [ PB ]. And then there's been, I think, very, very serious conversation around an infrastructure bill that might be separate and above. And it's a little hard to predict when that will come out. I think the team is working on the [ presence PV ], again, which we'll see in the spring. And I think that will be followed by an infrastructure investment bill, which, again, it may be passed by reconciliation the way the American Recovery Act was. But I think there will be components in all 3.

Right. Okay. Okay. Excellent. Moving back to Leidos. I guess you've spoken to this a little bit, but Leidos is a highly diversified company. And so can you talk a little bit -- you mentioned technology. So maybe dig into the themes that like unite the various activities that Leidos is involved in? And then also how you kind of make sure that your -- the company to make sure that you stay focused on the things that are in your core?

Yes. Great. I appreciate the opportunity just to really talk about what is our corporate strategy, right? So we have a mission statement like I think most corporations do, and it's about safety, health care, efficiency, providing value for the customer, really, really important. And then what we've tried to define is the things that make us different, that give us a technical advantage or a lead around innovation. And we have what we call our 5 technical core competencies: digital modernization, cyber operations, mission software, integrated systems and then something we call mission operations, where we're actually out in the forefront, helping customers conduct missions. And then we take that technical core competency, investment theory, and we apply it over the 4 markets as we define them. I know our segments are, if you will, a juxtaposition of the 4 markets, but our health business, our civil business, our intel business and our defense business. And we really use our TCCs as a guide on where do we spend our internal research and development, what customer research and development early-stage money do we go chase to build our discriminating capability. And then when we go bid against a large program of record, like the Navy's next-generation IT system or the FAA's network system, a program called FENS, we look back to the work that we have done in our core competencies to see if we really have a compelling technical advantage. And then when we do the kind of the magic happens, then we can write a compelling proposal. And then because of our size and scale and the way we manage overhead and G&A, we still are very efficient and very cost effective. And so we think we can write a technically compelling proposal and still be very, very competitive on value.

Excellent. Thinking about -- and I'm touching here on some of the overarching themes for the company, and then we'll kind of dig into some of the individual businesses. But thinking about the theme of capital deployment. We've seen a fair amount of M&A from the company in 2020 and 2021. How do you think about that going forward? And how do you think about the role of repurchases and kind of balancing repurchases and M&A in your capital deployment strategy?

Yes. We hadn't done a lot of M&A until the 2016 IS&GS. And we had been focused on getting the portfolio right, doing some portfolio shaping. And then we had this terrific opportunity to significantly increase the size and scale of the company through the Reverse Morris Trust structure. And then we kind of learned, there's a lot of good things in M&A, but it's a lot of hard work. And it took us a couple of years to digest that. And so we were out of the M&A market for a couple of years. And then we bought a small health care company to supplement our disability, a [indiscernible] business called IMX. And then last year, we bought 2 companies and really finished the negotiations on a third, Dynetics, the security detection and automation business from L3. And both of those were to address specific markets and specific customers and to augment capabilities that we had. And we were very familiar with both companies. We had done work with Dynetics, both as a prime and as a sub, and we knew the team there. And so that was an exciting opportunity. And then the security detection and automation business was really an industry consolidation play, where the security detection business has been screaming for consolidation for years. And we saw this as an opportunity to play in that. The timing wasn't ideal. We're more than willing to talk about don't buy an airport security business in the middle of a pandemic. But we signed a deal before the pandemic, and we closed the deal on the terms that we signed. And then we announced and now we have closed this 1901 business, which is frankly smaller than the other 2, which really helps our digital transformation business with an as-a-service platform and a great workforce in Blacksburg. And we like having a large presence in college towns because it gives us access to a highly skilled workforce outside of the national capital region. The hardest place to find an IT professional is in the Washington, D.C. area. So if we can bring in hundreds of Virginia Tech grads into the company who want to do digital transformation, that's a huge win for us. And then we've announced but not closed the Gibbs & Cox transaction, which solves a problem that we had around naval engineering. It's a Navy engineering services business, a long, long history, 91-year company. And we learned in our unmanned surface vehicle competition that we were great with the technology and the unmanned software and the sensors. But we didn't know a lot about naval engineering, and Gibbs & Cox provides us that capability and helps us to build a market in what we see as a growing surface and subsurface Navy. Now all of those were deals that we closed to address a specific need and a specific shortfall that fell directly from our strategic plan. And so we have, like most corporations, an annual planning cycle that starts with a strategy and strategic plan and come of that -- coming out of that comes a GAAP analysis. And these deals came out of our GAAP analysis. I would add to this, though, that we have now sort of 4 transactions that we are in some stage of integration, and that's a lot. And so we're very, very comfortable with the deals that we have made, but we are not overly enthusiastic about doing a lot more deals anytime soon. It's not to say that we wouldn't do a technology play, a $25 million or $50 million technology deal. But we're happy with where we are. We're happy with the strategic positioning that these deals give us. And we're going to focus a lot on integration and execution, which will allow us to think about our capital deployment strategy, again, with capital left over. We've always talked about we want to be a dividend payer. We want to invest in growth in the company through technology, through special use assets where that makes sense through M&A. And then with the cash that's left over, we want to return that in a tax-efficient way to our shareholders.

Right. Okay. Excellent. No, that's very helpful. And then I had -- I'll bring it forward. I had a question or 2 about Gibbs & Cox, but that was some good color. I guess, when we think about how that deal fits in, it's basically to support the company's own efforts in unmanned -- in the unmanned naval arena. And I guess, how do you see those efforts evolving? And what's sort of the strategy in that area?

Yes. Well, at Gibbs & Cox, it's really an exciting opportunity, and it's one that we had carried on our screen, but we didn't think was actionable. Because Gibbs & Cox was a privately owned -- essentially an employee-owned company. And we had known about them. And in fact, in our medium unmanned surface vessel, they were on a competing team, frankly, the team that won. And it became known to us that they were interested in a capitalization event. And we started some very preliminary discussions with them over an extended period of time. And we talked about the work that we do in the maritime domain, which is a lot of sensors and capability and machine learning and some very unique hardware and some testing and some deployment programs and quite a bit in a classified area, some on the surface and some under the surface. And as we got to know Gibbs & Cox, they are really an engineering company. There are some people who thought Gibbs & Cox own a shipyard. And they're very asset light, they're very much like us as an engineering services company. They have no shipbuilding capability. They're the largest independent naval engineering company in the United States. And as we started to do mapping of capabilities, what we realized was how complementary we were, is that we brought mission equipment packages, electronics and sensors to the ship design that they had, and they brought, if you will, understanding naval architecture, NAVSEA specs and designing Navy assets for at sea long endurance that we didn't have. And we think together, we can enter markets that we couldn't have entered on our own, while both business grow in their independent markets as they would have had the transaction not happened. The other item that we really like from -- with the Gibbs & Cox team is the people. These are just fantastic naval architects, and they have very long relationships with the Navy and navies around the world. The name Gibbs & Cox is really a gilt edge. And the credibility that they bring NAVSEA, NAVSUP, all the way up to the senior leaders in the Navy. And then in foreign countries, in Australia, in Saudi Arabia and other navies around the world, help us to get more access to the international market that we could have gotten on our own.

Great. That's helpful. When we look back at the deals over the past year or so and we think about Dynetics and SD&A and Gibbs & Cox, I guess, as kind of an engineering firm, but it enables the production of naval vessels, how do you think about the mix between products and services at Leidos and how you want it to evolve? Is there a target mix? Is it just that you see certain kind of move in the direction of where opportunities are? How do we think about that mix?

Yes. So Seth, I realize that the market is broken down into services company and products company and OEMs. And I really like people to view Leidos as a technology company and primarily a government technology company. But I think your answer has merit, and I'll try to address it specifically. We like products where they complement a mission. A product -- a commodity provider of a black box is of no interest to us. Making a black box that provides a communications capability that enables a customer to do something they couldn't do before is of high interest to us. Now on a number standpoint, is that 15% of our revenue, 20% of our revenue, we do not have an internal goal. We don't -- we're not chasing a certain number. But we do something called Mode S for the FAA. Okay. It has to do with the transponder and how you do certain kind of navigation. We are the design integrator for Mode S. But in the Mode S system, there are pieces of hardware that are critical to the system. And we're very comfortable with having teammates that provide the hardware. We're also comfortable with manufacturing some of those components ourselves. And so we -- like in Dynetics, we have electronic manufacturing capability. We have a machining capability. We can build prototypes. We can do rapid prototyping. But we have no interest in being viewed as some of the -- like the big 5 OEMs. We're not headed in that direction. We don't see that as our market. We think that market is filled out. We like the idea where the value of the end mission can be enhanced by hardware. And we have the capability inside the company to build differentiated hardware which accelerates mission and, by the way, gives us some intellectual property and some stickiness in the contracts. We like the way that fits in the strategy.

No, that's very helpful and good color. Maybe we'll dig into some questions more oriented toward the financials and the model. And so I think the guidance on cash flow for 2021, the market kind of saw it as a little bit low, but I think you had explained that there would be some headwinds. And you also tend to -- if we went back and looked, the company tends to outperform the initial expectation on that metric in particular. And so maybe when you look at 2021 and the potential to do a little bit better there, where might those opportunities be?

Let me back up and recount, obviously, the story that we've been telling since we printed our fourth quarter on our cash flow story, and then I'll talk to the opportunity to outperform. But -- and I've done this for a long time. I understand that cash I generated last quarter was great last quarter, but we're all worried about what we're going to do in the first quarter and in 2021. But we significantly outperformed our initial guidance and even our third quarter guide on cash. So we ended up at $1.334 billion in cash, which was a number, frankly, even higher than I had expected. And that's because a lot of very positive things happened. Some we could anticipate, some that we couldn't. As you know, we had a payroll deferral of about $103 million. We had an early payment at Leidos Biomedical of about $114 million. We had the VirnetX onetime settlement of about $80 million. And we had some other accruals that made up the $50 million or $60 million, which caused our $1.334 billion to be higher than historic, right? So if you took out maybe $150 million of outperformance at the end of '20 and you added that to our $850 million guide, we'd be at $1 billion. And we wouldn't have had long conversations on the earnings call, and we wouldn't be in this position of explaining why there's kind of a nominal $500 million drop in our cash flow guidance. And of course, the reason there is, is the payroll deferral, we have to pay half of that back. There are other nonrecurrings. We are growing. We're going to grow 10% organically, probably 13% at the top line. So we've got working capital needs just in the business that equate -- essentially consume the growth in EBITDA that we're going to have in the year. So the $850 million on an adjusted basis is much closer to sort of our historical 100%, maybe slightly better than 100% cash conversion. But you asked a specific question, hey, at $850 million, and we have always guided cash as a floor, and we always say like better than $850 million, so what are the good things that are going to happen? There are always nonrecurring. So let's put that into a bucket. There is more to go in this VirnetX lawsuit saga that we've been on. No one knows when those will settle, but that can be a significant cash number. There are other things kind of related to COVID, which are onetime events that could be in the single or double-digit millions that could help to increase the cash flow in the year. And then it's just a flat outperformance. So if we outperform EBITDA, that's dollar-for-dollar for cash. And then in our business, as it was in all the businesses in my career, what happens the last 2 or 3 weeks of December could move that $100 million. There are customers who will pay invoices early. And they're oftentimes where an invoice gets caught up into a pay office, and we think we're going to get paid on major subcontractors or a major billing and it gets hung up, and it doesn't hit our cutoff. And at the end of the year, there is volatility in the December number and that could happen. Now our job is to build timely, to build correctly so that the customer can pay the bills, and then to pursue timely payment of the billings that we submit to customers. And around the holidays, our treasury organization, our cash teams are out working hard with customers to accelerate payments. And when we are successful as we were in 2020, we now have to repeat that in 2021 or we end up with a deficit. So there is obviously some upside in cash across the board, but it's really based upon some nonrecurring events, which are almost outside of our control. And then it comes back to execution and performance.

Right. Okay. Excellent. No, that's helpful color. Thinking about profitability and the EBITDA margin, it seems it's been fairly strong through most of last year. Is it -- I know in the past, you kind of talked about a low 10% type of range. Is it reasonable to expect the company, as it's constituted now and given the level of growth you expect in the different businesses, for that to remain in sort of the mid-10% range?

Well, we have now guided center point of our guide is at 10.4%. And that's, in my memory, the highest guide that we have put out kind of in the beginning of the year. Normally, we do this 10% or better. And we've learned a lot over the last 12 months. We've learned how to operate in the COVID environment. We've learned to live without a lot of traditional things that we thought were really important, like a lot of travel and a lot of meetings and a lot of trade shows and a lot of nights in hotels and everybody in our building. And we learned in COVID that we can telecommute. I haven't been to a physical trade show in more than a year. And I have done them all virtually. And I will tell you, in many ways, they're just as good, maybe even better. So -- and then we learn thing it's about health care, our dental benefits and the amount of vacation that our people take. And we have assumed that there will be a COVID effect that's going to last probably through half of 2021. And so our 10.4% guide is a combination of capturing nonrecurring cost reductions and baking it into our business model and some COVID-related expenses that won't come back until later in '21 and '22. But we are aspirational that the 10.4% is a number that we're going to strive to keep. And I can't guide '22, but we are making permanent changes in our real estate footprint, in the way we do telecommuting and how many people come into the office. We're trying to bake that into the company going forward so that we can look to the 10.4% as permanent margin expansion.

Right. Okay. No, that is very helpful. Because it does seem like across the space, some of the cost savings that we've seen as a result of the pandemic have supported margins. And to have a sense of how much of that might be able to become part of the go-forward is helpful.

Yes. Seth, one point I want to make, maybe more for any of my employees who may see as much for investors, is the savings that we got on health care and dental, we don't want to keep. We want to get back to normal. We actually gave our employees a health care payment holiday in December because we had so underrun our health care costs. And we want our employees to take vacation. We want our employees to go to the doctor. We want them to go to the dentist. We want them to have their elective surgery. And so as we go forward, we are not looking for a permanent change in our employee benefit costs. We want our employees to take advantage of the benefits that we offer them and to have a healthy life. And by the way, we added some mental health benefits during COVID. We had an app called Headspace you can put on your phone. We enhanced some mental health benefits. We enhanced some of our supplemental home care benefits that we offer employees. And we're going to keep those benefits even after COVID because we think they're really, really important to a healthy workforce.

Okay. And then maybe as a final one, just about the broader model. Given some of the impact of COVID during the year, the cadence at which something like NGEN is ramping up, is there anything we should be thinking about with regard to sort of the cadence of sales and earnings during 2021?

Yes. Well, we have said that we'll be building throughout the year a top line. And that's because of some of the major wins, the military, family life and counseling program, the Navy NextGen program, what we hope will be the reserve health affairs program and others, perhaps the NGA UDS program, if we're fortunate enough to win that. And so that means hiring. It means, hopefully, bringing over people from the incumbent. Like in Navy NextGen, that was a win from Perspecta. We call it incumbent capture. Our hope is as we ramp up over the summer, between Leidos and our teammates, we'll be adding more than 3,000 people to the engine program. A lot of those people will come from our teammates, but we are hopeful that some of the Perspecta employees who are currently on the Navy IT program will want to come to Leidos and continue supporting the Navy customer. So -- and we say this in our 10-K disclosures. Because we are a people business, being able to attract, retain and develop and promote people is a significant driver of revenue for us and, therefore, a risk. We've been fortunate that we have moved to a virtual hiring platform during COVID. And we actually ran a summer intern program this summer, where we had interns who worked for us who we never had physical contact with. So someone from University of Maryland, who interviewed -- we got the resume on LinkedIn. They interviewed on our virtual hiring platform. We did their background check. We made them an offer. They accepted the offer. And then to start, we sent them credentials of badge, disclosures and a laptop by FedEx. They Zoom chatted with their supervisor. They got their assignments. They went to group meetings. And at the end of the summer, they took all their credentials, their laptop, they put it back in a FedEx package, and they sent it back to us. And we were wildly successful in attracting some terrific, new Leidos employees with that method. And we have continued that virtual hiring. And we only have 2 months in '21, but we are meeting our hiring goals in January and February.

Right. Excellent. A couple of questions about the segments. I guess, looking at Defense Solutions, how do we think about -- is there much growth in that business? Or, I guess, when we're dissecting the growth in Defense Solutions, there's NGEN, which will be a significant growth driver. There's Dynetics, which was in the business for almost all of 2020, and I assume that, that's still growing at a very healthy rate. Is there other growth in the sort of legacy business for this year? And if so, where are the opportunities?

Well, you've hit on the major growth drivers in the defense segment. The ramp-up in engine, we've always said is -- could add a couple of points to the company, and that will really, really drive the segment. A wild card, and I want to make this really clear to you and everybody on the call, is in the Dynetics business, we are a contender for the next phase of the Human Lander Program. But in our guidance today, we have no continuing revenue or earnings or cash associated with what's called the Phase A contract. And we left it out because at the time we put out guidance, the status of the program, the new administration, it was uncertain and unclear, we wouldn't know what to put in. And as you know, and I know many of the people on the call know, there are 3 competitors for the Human Lander Program: Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and us. And we expect that there will be 2 awards, and that's our hope. That's sort of our baseline. And we are hopeful and optimistic that we will be one of the awardees. And that is probably weeks away. It could be end of this month, could be first week in April. But I think it is literally weeks away, and that the NASA program office, I think, is on the verge of making that decision and going through the review process at headquarters. There's $800 million or $900 million in the NASA budget left over in their fiscal '21 for that program. If they split it 50-50, that would be $400 million. That's not in our guide. If they do some reprogramming to try to support an early landing on the moon, it is quoted in the press that our bid is in the $5 billion range. I'm not going to disclose what our bid was, but it's probably a little bit north of $5 billion. If we're going to land on the moon in '26, you can do the math. This is going to be a significant growth program for us and even in 2021 because we get 3 more months in our physical over the government physical. And that could drive significant top line growth in the defense segment as well as the programs we discussed. And then there's some new bids, the Defense Enclave Services, but that's probably not going to affect us in '21. That looks more like '22. And then there's some other bids of that ilk that would hit the segment as well.

Okay. Do you see Enclave as both -- I know it's an attempt to consolidate a lot of work. Do you do a lot of work, IT support, for the defense agencies now such that Enclave is both kind of a risk and an opportunity?

Well -- so this is DISA work, the Defense Information Security Agency up at Fort Meade. And this is a Roger view of the competition. Although there are likely to be 3 or 4 bidders, there are 2 companies that have major work at DISA today: ourselves and GDIT, in some historic programs. And we have it in our GSM-O program, GD has it in another contract. Those contracts are independent of what we call DES, the Defense Enclave Services. So we are competing as would be prospective Peraton and perhaps others for the DES program, right, to do work beyond what we do under GSM-O. And it is more extending the breadth and depth of DISA to the services. So think about extending the network into all of the services, it is notionally a $10 billion procurement. Again, I wouldn't tell you our exact number, but it is likely to be in double-digit billions. The proposals have been submitted. So we submitted ours, I don't know, a couple of weeks ago, a month ago. And all the competitors have done that. So we will be in this evaluative process that we all have come to know, and then there will be an award. There's likely going to be a protest after that. There could be Court of Federal Claims. But it's likely to be a '22 actual -- a revenue event for us. But it is a significant number. And it is not as much of a takeaway from either ourselves or from GDS, it is a consolidation of a lot of work that's done in the defense community. So if we lose it, it doesn't hurt our GSM-O program, which I think is the question you started out with.

Yes. Exactly. So more of an opportunity to win new work should it move in that direction.

Right. And as I said at the beginning, a real example of customers consolidating, looking for a single provider, a single company that they can hold accountable for delivery and execution.

Yes. Okay. We're coming up against the time here. Maybe just one final question. I've always been curious about -- in the health business, do you see a long-term opportunity outside of the USG customer set? And is that kind of a priority? Or is that something that we may develop over time, but it's not necessarily a priority in the near term?

Yes. We've played outside of USG. We had companies that were -- we call maxIT and Vitalize. When they did meaningful use, and there was a big rise to electronic health care records, we entered that market by acquisition, and we did a lot of installs of electronic health care records. That business sort of degraded to a commodity staff log business, and we have divested that business. We have gone to large consolidated commercial health care providers with our digital transformation credibility, and we have had moderate success in providing the same kind of digital transformation in the commercial health care environment that we have done for both the VA and the Department of Health Affairs in the DoD business. It is aspirational. It is in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Could it be significantly bigger than that? It could potentially be that, but we are very careful and very thoughtful. Now we're in discussions with all of the household names that you know as large kind of regional health care providers. We would do this, do the scale offers, but we have to do it in a way that makes sense for us, that would be profitable, that takes advantage of the value that we can create. We are not a business process outsourcer. So we -- we're not interested in going into a hospital and taking over their IT department and then renting it back to them on a per hour basis. We are interested in partnering with a commercial health care provider who has a mainframe, who hasn't moved to the cloud, who's got a very antiquated electronic health care records and can't do patient workflow and billing and rev rec. And if we can get that kind of transformational opportunity, we will do it. And we have several companies that we do that for today, several health care providers. Again, it's not a huge business for us. By the way, it also -- it keeps us well grounded in what state-of-the-art is. And so there's a lot that we learn about health care in the commercial world, which I think makes us a better provider in the government world and vice versa.

Excellent. Okay. Well, with that, we've run up against the time. So Roger, thanks for being with us. Thanks for all the insight. And look forward to being in touch again.

Great. Seth, thanks for doing this, and thanks for continuing the conferences even in time of COVID. It's really important for us to be able to get our message out to our investors and our shareholders, and we appreciate the opportunity.

Great. No, glad to do it. We'll be in touch.

All right. Great.

Thank you.