Marvell Technology, Inc. (MRVL) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Well, good morning, everyone. Thank you all for coming. My name is C.J. Muse, Semiconductor Equipment Analyst at Cantor. And it is truly my pleasure to be hosting a fireside chat with Marvell. We have Matt Murphy, CEO; and Willem Meintjes, CFO. Welcome, gentlemen.

Yes. Thanks, C.J., for having us. Good to see you.

Very good to see you. So we were going to play the Dropkick Murphys on your entrance in, but New York union rules state that you can't have bands from Massachusetts.

I'm shipping up to Boston tomorrow.

So you've only got me.

That's right.

I hope that's okay. So it's great to have you here. We have a very, I think, broad audience. So the thought was maybe start at a high level and then kind of take it down. So I guess, just to start and to level set the audience, if you could start perhaps with your recent decision to pivot Marvell all in on AI. What was the thought process? How have kind of logistics investments within the company changed with that pivot?

Yes. No, great question, and great to see everybody. Thanks for the opportunity. So I think the harder pivot on the all in to AI obviously built over many years. I became CEO in 2016. And very early on, we made the decision back then to pivot to what we call the data infrastructure opportunity, which our view and my view at that time was that ultimately was going to drive the biggest TAM growth in semiconductors on the go forward. Even though Marvell was consumer levered, we sort of knew we needed to make that change. And a lot of you guys are investors, you followed that story and sort of methodically, year-by-year, organic investment, M&A divestitures, all the different moves we made. And that TAM has sort of exploded, obviously. And in particular, the data center side of it has continued to increase at a tremendous rate. And so as we found ourselves now, in the last few years, with 90% plus exposure in the data infrastructure and I think down to 5% in consumer, what's happened is that the composition of that market has skewed big time to data center. I mean it's like 75% of the TAM now for chips that we do is in that market. And that's been driven primarily by the increase in AI. So it may sound like, hey, yes, let's go after AI. It's like this new thing. But for what we do, it's the biggest end consumer of the types of things that we're good at. On top of that, I would say that our pivot at Marvell 8 or 9 years ago to data infrastructure, the pivot to all in on AI is an extension of that, but it's as consequential. And we can talk about what that means for our other businesses, which we actually feel really good about. But in order to really execute and succeed and win in this big market transition and dislocation, which you only see 3 or 4 times in a long career, our view is the best way to succeed and to change our fundamental trajectory is just to completely laser focus and take constantly a 5-plus year type of time horizon on our investments and we're making that big bet. And so far, we're really happy with where it's landed.

Makes sense. Anything worth kind of highlighting in terms of R&D focus, evolution, hiring, engineering? You announced the program with Amazon. Would love to hear kind of strategically how things may have evolved?

Yes. I think from an R&D standpoint, very pleased with not only how our team is performing, but how we've grown it. And even with all the ins and outs and the market cycles up and down and all the challenges that semi companies face, I think we were looking at this data. We've grown our R&D spending very consistently actually every year in and out. Now we've done a lot of, I think, very, very appropriate and very sort of forceful capital allocation moves to take people who are working on, say, one set of technologies and move them, and we've got that ability now inside of Marvell to do that. It's actually really hard to do in companies. You have business units and you have people with teams and nobody wants to get rid of their team. And anyway, so we've actually established a culture where that's part of the operating system of the company. So in the last couple of years, we've really pivoted the R&D resources ahead of the market share growth we saw and the revenue growth into the data center area. I mean we were running probably 80% of our investments plus in data center the last few years back when the revenue was 50%, 60% of our revenue was in data center. Now it's 75%, so you start to see those things catch up. But on top of that, we've really focused the effort around a dedicated data center business group, and that's led by Raghib Hussain, who's been my longtime partner and President of Marvell. He was a co-founder of Cavium. He and I have worked kind of jointly and hand-in-hand to really create a vision for Marvell back in 2017 when we were doing the Cavium deal. And so this is like a sort of a dream job for him. This is really what he's great at. And then we've taken the nondata center end market customers and products and opportunities. We moved those under Chris Koopmans, our COO. And part of that was just to get the focus, right? Not just the focus on the data center, but actually also having a senior executive on my team that was going to really manage for -- with its own P&L approach and its own profitability profile and investment profile for the multi-market business as well. So just because we decoupled them doesn't mean one got sort of deemphasized. In fact, we think we can recover and grow that multi-market business back up. But that's another big change we made. Again, those are hard to do when you go from the product technology organization to end market focus. It usually creates a lot of noise and a lot of pain and everybody's upset. This was actually a very smooth transition inside of the company. So we're very well positioned now. Dedicated data center engineering group, business group, all in focus, no distraction, and I think that's going to serve us really well.

Yes. And C.J., just maybe one additional, a little bit more tactical comment on the R&D, but we're really pleased on the leverage we're driving. If you look at the progress we've made over the last year and then this guide into Q1 where typically, we'll see sort of a mid-single step up into Q1. And this time around, when you look at that guide, we guided up only $10 million. And it's really a reflection of the overall model and the NRE that we're able to recognize as contra OpEx and really encouraged on the trajectory and focus on driving continued leverage right through next year as well.

Perfect. Maybe sticking with the high-level thought, perhaps you could give us kind of state of the union. What are you most excited about? And what are the challenges do you see for the AI semiconductor market in '25-'26?

Yes. I think the thing I'm excited about is also the challenge. So it's all wrapped into one, which is that -- and I've been in the industry for 31 years, okay? And I've been -- and I had the chance, especially in my prior company, to get exposed to kind of all these end markets and all these different end product cycles like laptops and Internet and cloud and all. I've seen all these, just like you would, you've been doing this on the other side of the house. But what happens when you hit one of those inflections is, I've just this a few times, you end up going -- having to go just flat out every day on your engineering execution, your innovation that's needed. And you always feel like you're behind. That's the challenge. And the reason is -- and with AI, it's very pressing as this technology needs to be fundamentally lower power. It needs to fundamentally have more and more compute density. It needs to have a better TCO. It's like there's all this massive economic productivity unlock in the globe that can come from this. But today, if you just -- and then look, it started to hit a major inflection just with the combination and really led by my good friend, Jensen at NVIDIA, with the fundamental leveraging Moore's Law plus system engineering approach plus software plus everything. Finally, it has created an opportunity for AI to really take off, but we're still at the beginning stages. So it's an exciting time to be in semiconductors because where we sit now at Marvell. And I think there's only a couple of companies that are really at the bleeding, bleeding edge. The whole industry is now being driven by HPC. That's a big shift. I mean this was a mobile PC-driven world on technology for the last 30 years. In the last 2 or 3 years, and even TSMC has said it, right? I think their shift to their business is more HPC than mobile now, and that's where they've oriented their road map. So the challenge and opportunity is there's a lot to do. We're at the early stages. I mean we're going to need multiple successive generations of these technologies, I think, to really get it to where it needs to be. And the challenge is it's really hard stuff. And that's a good thing for us because I think there's scarce, few companies that have the ability to design these large-scale 100 billion transistor chips, get them done first-pass silicon, which we've been able to do. All of our 5-nanometer products actually for data center have been first-pass successes. That's been a great track record approach. But also the broad suite of intellectual property you need, the packaging technology, the thermals, the system modeling and then the ability to actually have the manufacturing and supply chain partnerships very deep and multiyear, multi-generation. And you got to have scale to do that, and you also have to have the right capable team. So those are all reasons we feel good. But yet every day, I'd tell you, we feel like we're just -- it's just an all out assault to keep up with what the market is requiring. And I think that's a great place to be. Once it slows down and you go to 5-year cycles or 7-year cycles and nobody needs a refresh and the next nanometer is -- it's a different world, and we are the farthest thing from that at the moment.

Yes. No, I agree. I think McKinsey said $1 trillion semi revenues by 2030, and we're modeling $800 billion this year led by AI.

Right. Yes.

We're almost there.

Yes, the trillion always look like, how we're going to get there, and actually -- especially when the down cycle when those reports were coming out and it definitely looks feasible. But it's 100%. The only thing that gets it there is AI. It's not coming back because of consumer tech and smart watches and phones and things like that, that's not going to get us there, right? What's going to get us there is the data infrastructure market led by AI as the primary use case and driver.

So that's a good segue to custom silicon. So perhaps you could kind of speak to how you think about your competitive positioning there. And you talked on the most recent conference call in terms of ramping at full volume for one large customer, another soon. Could you perhaps start there?

Sure. Yes. We feel very good about our competitiveness. And in fact, the contrast of where we are today from where we were when we won those initial 5-nanometer designs back in '21, '22, '23, call it, now the last couple of years comparison -- I'm comparing, I mean literally, we won a lot of those initial designs off of a 5-nanometer test chip and great PowerPoint presentations from our ASIC team, right, which we had acquired from GLOBALFOUNDRIES, which was an asset called Avera, which had been inside of IBM for a long time. It was a very successful chip design team, had never designed on TSMC before. It always used IBM GLOBALFOUNDRIES processes. And we have Marvell, by the way, when we got into this ASIC business, our prior most advanced node was 12-nanometer. We had no products on 7-nanometer. We made the decision to skip it. And the reason I bring all this up is we went from that and actually capturing those designs, getting the trust of our customers to go take that risk and do it. We executed really well, as I pointed out, in terms of the success rate. I'm super proud of our team. But we're like -- it's like a 180 from where we were then to now. I mean we are on -- we have the silicon. We have the proof points. We actually have invested ahead of the curve now in very unique IP. We're at the bleeding edge on the TSMC shuttles, the packaging partnerships. It's just like we are ready to execute and we're pushing the limits on the next gen of everything and even 2 generations out where before, we were kind of wondering how are we going to catch up. And we absolutely caught up. And this sort of full Marvell technology platform approach from process package, IP, manufacturing is -- I think is what's setting us apart. And I think to your point, there's very few companies that can actually do what we do. And we do think that over the long term, despite the fact that there are different business models and different approaches these customers are going to take to get their silicon ambitions fulfilled, we still believe the large portion of the TAM in the future that ends up shipping is going to come from full service fully equipped custom silicon companies like Marvell. There will be other exceptions. It's not a binary thing. But I think the bulk of what ends up getting produced gets produced by people like us because in the end, you can try to do it yourself and you can try to augment it, you can try to license things and bootstrap it together and maybe you can, in theory, save some money. But in the end, are you going to get your chip delivered? Is it going to yield? Can it work first-pass? Can you underwrite the success of that and derisk the program? And that's proven to be a very valuable thing that we can bring to the table. We can show we can get these to production. And as I said earlier, time is of the essence because if you're late and you have to spin the thing 2 or 3 times, you might as well throw it away, right? It becomes irrelevant as long as the market leader keeps pushing the state of the art.

So a few months ago, you talked about an expansion of your strategic relationship with AWS, multi-generational 5-year agreement, both custom silicon and connectivity. Can you speak to, I guess, how has your relationship, if at all, deepened since that announcement? How we should think about that structure and what it means to kind of your multi-generational, multiyear kind of commitment to one another?

Yes. The announcement was a big deal. It was a huge deal for us and for them. And I think industry-wide, it was quite unique, right, to see something like this. It was born out of, though, really, years of working very closely together on two directions. The first is we've become a very strategic supplier to them of custom silicon, of networking products, connectivity products. And I think that has sort of very much strengthened over the last few years to where that partnership is very deep. At the same time, we were one of the early semiconductor companies to enable our EDA in the cloud and our design engineering network, portions of it to be done in the cloud and we chose, early on, we chose and we went all in with AWS for that. And that was a risk in an investment, just like they took a risk in an investment in us. And working together, we've made that a very efficient tool and platform for Marvell. And so part of this strategic agreement we have is that we're going to expand our usage of their cloud services and our design network, which I think really puts us on the forefront of major design companies leveraging that capability. And for them, that's a big deal because they have a very strong teaching customer that's in there every day, helping to improve their performance, and that helps them overall in terms of their business they're trying to drive. So that's very strategic. And then for us -- and then on top of that, we entered into this agreement where they -- there's a warrant structure where they're incentivized if certain revenue milestones are achieved that they get an opportunity to participate in the upside of Marvell. And the scale of that is significant and that covers both custom silicon products as well as it covers networking and connectivity products. So a very all-encompassing partnership. And I think it's just a -- I think it's a symbol of the deepness of the relationship, but certainly codifying it in this way only makes it stronger. So we're really pleased and they've been a great partner to us.

Perfect. If I could ask maybe a more narrow question. I think, from an investor perspective, the breadth and scale of growth of revenues for this business, disappointed near term. And I guess, is that a reflection of perhaps pull-in of business earlier, perhaps conservatism, perhaps second half weighted? How should investors kind of think about that?

Yes. Well, let me give it from two angles. I think the first is -- and as a public company CEO, you've got to kind of manage those two dynamics, right? One is your internal plan, your internal view, how is the team doing, how are we tracking? And your commitments, by the way, like what have we said, what are we doing? And then there's the external world always, right? Equity markets, competitive rumors, landscape, et cetera. And sometimes those things diverge, okay? So from our standpoint, set aside the whisper, the expectation, we're extremely pleased with the performance of the company. We had a huge beat and raise from Q3 to Q4. There was a big step-up in the revenue as we ramp some of these key programs, that was great. We performed well against that ramp. We executed. We guided ahead of consensus for Q1. It wasn't as high as people wanted, but as far as what we've said we were going to do, we're actually way ahead. I mean let me just take you back a year real quick just as we're sitting here. Consensus for Marvell for fiscal '25 at that time was $5.3 billion. We ended at $5.8 billion. So we upsided $500 million in 9 months, mostly driven by AI. That was pretty cool. At the same time, for fiscal '26, the year we're in, consensus a year ago was like $6.7 billion. And now consensus has us at $8.2 billion. So that's $500 million. Again, this is actuals plus sort of Street forecast. So in basically a year, we've got $500 million last year more and we are projected to have on top of what was already looking like a pretty strong growth, and when we look also year-over-year from fiscal '25 to '26, there's very few companies, I think, that if we can deliver this type of growth, per the Street forecast, it would be like astonishing, especially at our scale. And then when you step back, too, and you look at just the net add per year, we're adding an incremental data center revenue year-over-year. I think last year, we added like $1.8 billion or $1.9 billion, and this year, Street said $1.8 billion or $1.9 billion. And '26, we said we're going to grow, too, in terms of -- so again, we feel really good about how we're doing. Now there's -- we can talk more about the external environment. But as far as where we're tracking, I mean we guided the best quarter in the history of the company, we've got the best EPS. We're GAAP profitable. We're buying back shares. SBC is under control. We got great TAM outlook. So from our standpoint, actually, nothing's changed. It's only gotten better over the last year since the AI Day. And I would say even since the December quarter results that we announced in December, if you just look at sort of with the administration change and all the kind of news about the overall AI market, big capital projects being announced, sovereign data centers, rumors of huge spend by the hyperscalers in the future, it looks really positive. All those data points look more incremental over the long term. So if I didn't know what was going on in the stock market, I'd be -- we'd be having a glass of champagne and say, good job, Matt. You took this company. It was kind of a mess and you sort of turned it around and you bought these assets and you integrated them, and you figured out to get into this AI market and you got the thing up to like $8 billion in revenue this year, and cool. So that's contrasted with the reality, which I understand and I appreciate. And I understand the frustration by investors with certain externalities that are happening. And I'm trying to be as helpful as I can, but you guys also would understand, these partnerships I've built with these customers, they're so deep, they're so trust-oriented and they're underwritten with NDAs and contracts and the whole 9 yards. But at the end of the day, it's a trust business. And I have gotten the honor to know the CEOs of these big companies, and they're trusting me. They're trusting me, not just with executing to meet what they need, but with their fundamental, we know their road map, we know all the ins and outs in some of these things. I'm not going to -- I can't talk about -- I would never do that. And I think every investor here would understand. But me and my team will try to be as helpful as we can. So we framed the long-term opportunity. But some of these short-term things, it's just hard to comment. And we're no stranger to rumors at Marvell. I mean every once in a while, there's OFC 2023. You guys remember that one? Linear optics was going to wipe out the DSP business.

I wasn't going to bring that up.

The stock plummeted. What's that?

I wasn't going to bring that up.

I remember the DSP. So we're just going to -- we're a very heads-down, execution-oriented focused company, drive the stability, drive the long-term growth, take care of the team.

Makes sense. So maybe a higher-level question on custom silicon. I think in the last 12 months, the market has decidedly made the call that if there is a second source or primary source vis-a-vis NVIDIA, it's custom silicon. And I guess within that construct, there's 2 large players, you and Broadcom with the IP, the advanced packaging, the SerDes, whereas there's others, I would highlight kind of in Taiwan and Mainland China, design houses with less kind of IP. So curious, as you look at the landscape, as you look at the push to 3-nanometer and below, how does the differentiation increase? And how -- I don't want to call it market share, but how kind of is the prioritization of just 2 players occur over the next 1, 2, 3 years?

Yes. So I think a couple of things on the market dynamic. This view that there was going to be one big merchant guy, NVIDIA, and then custom silicon and then probably not a lot of room left, that was me and Raghib's high-level thesis in 2018, okay?

Why didn't you call me?

Well, no. We did. We bought Avera in 2019. We announced it in May. And it was born out of all these meetings we were having with these hyperscalers, and we had an inference chip, by the way, from Cavium, the M1K. I don't know if you guys remember this as I may have talked about it, maybe didn't. But we had an inference chip. We had a great team. It was awesome. It was the best performance of any 7-nanometer chip in the history of mankind. There's no customers for it. None. Everyone wanted their own. And our -- so we shut it down. We redirected those resources in -- at the end of 2018, early 2019, we acquired Avera. And we set it on that journey. And I think that thesis clearly has proven to be the correct one. I'm glad we didn't try to do an M1K and an M2K and M3K and we'd be still telling you some story with no revenue, instead we've got revenue in this area. And I think that -- so I think that's going to continue. And then within that, as you point out, there's sort of the full service model, right, which is the end-to-end suppliers that can do everything. As I said earlier, I think that's still going to dominate in the future, the large chunk of the revenue that shifts through. But clearly, with the amount of spending going on, there's going to be room for experimentation, there's going to be room for companies to try to do it a different way, which is more like do-it-yourself, but augment with some design resources, license a lot of IP, use a whole bunch of partners and try to pull it together. And so far, that approach historically has been kind of a mixed bag. What's really shipping today primarily has been the full service model. If you just look at the percent of the revenue. So I think you'll see that, and I think there's a valid reason for companies to try to do that. But to answer your question, it's only going to get harder. I mean we're already out looking at A16 and A14 at TSMC, the next 2 nodes beyond 2. We're looking at what that complexity is going to bring. We're looking at things like backside power. We're looking at things like CPO and scale-up networks and how to integrate all this stuff and 2 generations out on package technology and the cost structure that's going to be required to go drive all this. And I'm just looking at all this in my engineering reviews and thinking to myself, how is somebody going to do all this themselves? Maybe somebody can and they can try to cobble it together. And that may work sometimes, and I'm not saying it's going to be 0% of the market. I've never said that, that this is binary. That will exist. It has existed. But I just still believe, based on how complex it's going to keep getting, the large customers, I think, are going to rely on the full service companies to really underwrite the success. And just don't take any risk and get the best engineering team, best technology, and someone that's going to get in there will be able to fix it, yield it, ship it and you don't have to worry. And that's worth a lot, especially in a world where manufacturing cycle times now are astonishingly long on these new EUV-based technologies, I mean it's 20-something weeks in the fab. So you do an all layer change and you spin the chip and oh, it didn't work, sorry. But we went cheap on the PD and we didn't have a close timing. We didn't have all the advanced verification techniques like that Marvell would have and then it didn't work. And then you spin it, and okay, I'll see you in a year. It's really risky. So these are the dynamics that we see.

Makes sense. And maybe pivoting to networking and connectivity. Inphi, obviously, tremendous acquisition. I think you've grown your optics revenue by more than 150% versus calendar '22, really pivoted to high-value data center interconnect and switching solutions. With OFC just around the corner, what are you most excited about in terms of the near-term trends?

Yes, I think there's a lot of good stuff happening and OFC is always a blast, always something fun to look forward to. But no, I think we have -- if you guys are there, come see our booth. I mean we're going to have a great lineup in terms of speakers, in terms of demos. And yes, I don't want to steal the team's thunder, but I think the suite of technologies that we have, really, the full end-to-end in connectivity is very unique. The combination of having silicon photonics in-house, broadband analog circuits, advanced DSPs, new use cases, things like AECs, retimers. There's a lot of companies -- there's companies that have one of these or two of these or some of these. We've got the broadest range and all at the sort of bleeding edge and we can stitch them all together. We also -- I mean not only that, we take all those technologies and we form this group and the reorg we did called our cloud platform group, where now we've implemented a very sophisticated system modeling capabilities so we actually can help our customers decide what's the right blend of I/O that they need, what's the best trade-off in terms of how they want to architect their interconnect. And we can do that because we can provide everything from SiPho to linear optics to full DSPs in the most advanced node to electrical solutions instead of optical and everything in between. It's very compelling because at some point, the stuff is so complicated and it's such a mix now, it's totally heterogeneous that going supplier by supplier may be an approach, but there's also a value in pulling the pieces together. So that's how we think about our business there. We couldn't be more thrilled with the Inphi team. They've done an outstanding job. It's been a great integration that we've just like completely came together. We staffed the heck out of it, took a lot of talented Marvell folks, put them in there, one giant connectivity engineering organization. You don't even know who's who anymore. And it's, yes, it's way outperformed the deal model, obviously. Thank God because that was really expensive when we bought it.

So not getting in front of OFC but perhaps getting ahead of GTC, where I think co-packaged optics is going to be a critical area of focus. So perhaps you could give us kind of how Marvell sees the adoption curve there where I think you're of the view that, that's a handful of years out as opposed to near term.

Yes. I think historically, co-packaged optics definitely was historically more of a science project. I think there's been -- I mean I was going to OFC even when I was at Maxim at like 2012, 2013, and there was -- this was the holy grail. And there was small SiPho companies running around and is this sort of going to disrupt things or not. And it's definitely continued to shift because it's a lot of complexity. But the issue there was always technology is maybe not ready manufacturability-wise. And also the impact when you try to implement that in a scale-out network and in the aggregation switching area, it's just -- there's too much risk because if one of these fails, and there's a lot of issues about what's the actual reliability of these, you're not just taking out one switch box, you're creating a blast radius where you're taking out a whole bunch of switches. And so the sort of network uptime goes down. And is it really worth the trade-off versus if you want to really go hyperscale mode and scale-up a massive data center and do it fast, pluggables is the way to go. And we think that, that's going to continue. But in the scale-up where now, inside the rack and from inside the accelerator clusters, the need for high-speed connectivity is only getting more because that's going to be a limiter on the throughput. And we think that this copper passive approach is probably going to run out of steam soon. And so that's where I think a new market opens up, which is new SAM for us with something like co-packaged optics or some version of that or even linear optics as an example. And again, we're fine with either and all of those because we are the full provider. We want to provide the most optimized solution. But in the scale-up, that would be fundamentally incremental SAM for us. So it's an opportunity, and we'll see what happens at GTC.

Perfect. Maybe last question, thinking about the synergies between connectivity and custom silicon where scale-up, scale-out, obviously, becoming more and more critical and thinking of the way Jensen does, viewing the data center as kind of one large GPU or one large XPU in your parlance. I guess, can you speak to -- as you think about your investments and your conversations with your customers, how critical and/or competitive advantage is it to have kind of both businesses in-house?

I think it's fundamental. I mean the -- you, paraphrasing Jensen, is the right way to think about it. It's a high-speed networking problem. Obviously, the compute is very sophisticated, and that's at the bleeding edge. And they and our customers that are doing their own custom chips have done a great job on that. But it sort of doesn't do you any good if you haven't optimized all the I/O. And literally down to things like -- I mean we're optimizing HBM interfaces at this point. And you think, well, what's the big deal, Can't you just make it go faster or something? Or why can't there be an industry standard? But again, we can apply a lot of our novel design approaches and use our IP to fundamentally create more room actually on the accelerator for compute. We can shrink the beachfront area that's required and shrink the HBM PHY physical size on the accelerators to the point where a customer can actually have more compute as an example. And then at the same time, we can enable denser HBM on the periphery of the chip. I'm just giving you that as one example of, if you didn't have that innovation, there's a throughput issue there, and there's a limiter there. And so I think starting from literally die to die interfaces, all the way building up to -- I mean you can go memory to accelerator, you can go accelerator to accelerator, you can go cluster to cluster, you can just think of this thing. And with Marvell, we're trying to build it literally on every hop, right, we want to participate all the way to all the data spinning out of the data center over the DCI network and going back and forth. We want to own that. We want to be the key provider there. And that's the capability that we've built up, and it really becomes a differentiator for us because we're not just offering to our customers, "Hey, we can do an ASIC job for you. What do you want?" We can actually provide a full solution relative to the connectivity surrounding it. And then we could start to talk about, "Hey, let's partner up as you're doing your accelerator design on what kind of scale-up solution might you need to go couple with that." And then so we view, for example, silicon photonics, we pitched it as part of our ASIC platform. It's not a random separate science project. It's highly integrated into our value prop. So those are things that are long-term, actually, competitive advantage for us because very few digital companies are going to have a SiPho team inside of them that's world-class that's actually shipped in volume, which we do have today.

Well, perfect. Well, I think with that, we've run out of time. So thank you both.

Okay. Yes, thanks very much.

Really appreciate it.

Appreciate it. Nice to see everybody.

Thank you.