Morgan Stanley (MS) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

All right. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the breakout session on project finance trends. I am Will Marder, your moderator today. I want to thank Platts for having us this afternoon. Wilmington Trust is really pleased to be sponsoring the Global Power Markets Conference. And while I'm certainly pleased to be here with you virtually today, I just had my second COVID shot. Got my CDC card right here, and I'm really looking forward to when we can actually get together in person. Spent a little too much time trapped inside the house staring at the screen. So I hope you bear with us. Hope you enjoy the session. We've got a really good topic to discuss for the next 40 minutes or so. We're going to talk about the state of the project finance market. We're going to talk about that in light of the pandemic. We're going to talk about kind of where we've been. We're going to hear from our speakers about their experiences over the last year. We're going to talk about where we are going with a look forward, especially in light of the various infrastructure and renewable energy plans that have been proposed by the Biden White House. Quick housekeeping item. I'm going to leave some time at the end for questions, maybe about 10 minutes or so. You can submit your questions in the Q&A box. So feel free to do that kind of while we're talking. With that as a backdrop, I'm just going to briefly introduce my panelists and we'll kind of jump right in, and I'll give a few introductory remarks about the market. Joining us today, we have Michael Kumar, Managing Director and Global Head of Project, Commodity and Infrastructure Finance at Morgan Stanley. We have Ray Wood, Managing Director and Co-Head of Natural Resources at Bank of America; and we have Srips Ilango, Chief Financial Officer at Soltage. So looking back to last year, I was pleasantly surprised. I think 2020 turned out to be a fairly robust year for project finance. And I think our industry demonstrated its ability to keep churning in times of -- in challenging times. And if you look at the league table data, I pulled some quick stats from Infrastructure Journal. Bank loan activity was actually up 9% in terms of deal count last year. Although it was down 7% in terms of funded volume, I think that's a pretty good stat that there were actually more deals done in 2020 than in 2019. Bond financing was slightly down, down about 5%, but it made up about 17% of the total market in terms of deal count, which is interesting because traditionally, bond financing typically makes up more like 10% to 12% of deal activity in the marketplace. Certainly take those numbers with a grain of salt. I think we all know that not every deal gets reported for league table credit, but I think it does give us a bit of a snapshot of what the activity looked like last year. Renewables, obviously, remained really strong. It was the largest sector for project finance last year globally, followed by oil and gas and then conventional power. If you look at some of the subsectors within renewables, wind energy had its strongest year ever in 2020 with installed megawatts up 85% over 2019. I think looking forward, obviously, very bold plans have been proposed by the Biden White House. We've got a broad infrastructure plan, a suite of incentives for renewable energy, including, I think, a very aggressive target for offshore wind of 30 gigawatts by 2030. When you consider the fact that the United States has a single operating wind farm of 30 megawatts, and we're going to go up 1,000 times in the next 8.5 years, that's a lofty goal. We call that a stretch goal where I come from. I think with that as a backdrop, I'm going to turn to the panelists. And maybe Michael, I can kick it off to you first. And I'd love to hear from each of you. Give me a flavor where are we today versus a year ago and kind of thinking back to some of the early days of the COVID pandemic. Certainly, we can -- give me sort of the high level, and I think we can dig into some of the details as we go.

Sure. Listen, I think, well, you summed it up well. Last year was a fairly busy year. We expect this year to be actually a busier year, frankly, because there were things that were kind of put on hold because of COVID, I mean, candidly, which I think will -- the markets will be open for those activities. I think with the exception of what I would call -- I think there were 2 COVID effects last year. I think the financing markets froze up in March and April, but then they robustly came back to life and made up for lost ground. So I think that was the only COVID effect from a financing perspective. And then to be practically speaking on the actual operating side last year for projects and construction. I think it's not noted, but I think almost every project had some level of delays, whether that was due to COVID as far as the workforce for a project under construction, delays because of health and safety requirements or more importantly, I think there were delays in equipment sourcing. I think a lot of equipment that's put in place in the United States in conventional as well as in renewable a lot of that equipment is sourced and manufactured actually in Mexico. And I think as we're all acutely aware that Mexico got hit with COVID and a lot of factories were shut. So I think no catastrophic delays, but they certainly were delays of anywhere from, I think, 30 days to 45 days on almost all projects.

Yes. That's helpful, Michael. Thank [indiscernible] and get your perspective on how things went over the course of last year?

Sorry, you're going in and out for me. Did you call me or somebody else, sorry?

Yes. Ray, I was going to you.

Okay. Great. Maybe it's my Internet. Good afternoon, everyone. Great to be here. Good morning, depending on where you are. Look, I think to echo Michael's comments, I think the one thing we did see in addition is total demand for corporate securities on the debt side after the initial pandemic wave. So late spring through the summer, kind of the bond market and the high-yield market, both bonds and B loans would run fire. There was a lot of capital being raised, I think, because the window was open and people feared what a second wave could do to the market. And so there was built-up anxiety there for issuers. And you also had a market with, because of very low interest rates, you had incredibly tight spreads combined with that, just given the macro environment. So it was a perfect -- somebody needs to go on mute. So that was a perfect storm. I do think getting project financings done last year, the tax equity was more limited because of the pandemic and bank tax appetite. And doing diligence on a project with the independent engineers and the supply chain disruptions pushed a lot of activity to the back end of the year and even spilled over into 2021. So we can go into that in greater detail. But it was -- the markets were wide open. There were some logistical challenges and many issuers found the combination of kind of 0 interest rates and tight spreads to be pretty enticing.

That's perfect. Thank you, Ray. And Srips, maybe rounding out our perspectives and coming from the borrower side of the equation, how did you find last year, generally speaking?

I agree with what Michael and Ray said. There was a little bit of a time out that all parties took in the beginning of the COVID period in Q1, Q2 time frame. But the market really came back from both the debt as well as an equity standpoint in terms of financing these assets. Where we've seen a continued delay in terms of financing is on the tax equity side, but frankly, that's not just the COVID. I think some of the tax bills that were passed earlier in the previous year had also had an impact on that. One thing as developers we are focused on is how this is going to impact development of new assets and opening up new markets across the U.S. Last year, a lot of the state legislatures were clearly focused on COVID, on other matters or they're not concessions for large portions of the time. So in terms of new states opening up, new regulations being passed in the state houses, that has been delayed, and we are continuing to track how that is going to delay opening up of new markets across the U.S.

In thinking -- I mean -- and maybe this is a good question for you, Srips, and certainly interested to get Michael and Ray to opine on what they've seen. But kind of thinking back to the -- when the pandemic kicked off, a lot of the discussion was around potential supply chain issues, construction delays. We certainly saw developers filing force majeure. What do you see, I mean, in actuality, sort of on the ground? What were your experiences?

Right. It was a blip. There was an initial delay. I think the utility-scale assets were hit more just because of the logistical issue that the developers or the EPC contractors had in terms of housing and managing large workforces. But in general, given the work was being done outdoors and also the fact that the industry rallied as a whole to get essential worker status for most of the construction people, these are some force majeure, some delays, but nothing that was a significant impact in terms of construction time lines or financing impacts across the board.

Yes. Ray or Michael, I mean, coming from the banking side, does that sort of mesh with what you experienced, providing capital to these projects?

Yes. No, that's -- please. Sorry. Go ahead, Ray.

No. No. Michael, after you. I'll mute for a second.

Yes. Look, I mean, as I mentioned, I would say there's an average delay for about 30 to 45 days. I mean, candidly, we had 1 transaction, which added 1 year force majeure delay, but that was because of one of the off-takers. But no harm done. Look, I think there was an increase -- by the time we got to August, September, I think capital committees and credit committees were certainly asking very detailed questions around what are backup plans, how much leeway is there in the force majeure contracts et cetera, right? So again, I don't think anyone, frankly, suffered any type of loss because of this. But I think there was absolutely increased scrutiny and there's always the cranky person in a credit committee who says, well, don't say it can't happen because it will happen. I think that did come to pass. And I think, again, I think going forward, I think people will ask for a little bit more cushion to be built in from a contingency perspective and a timing perspective.

Yes, I would echo that. Sorry that we're all in such violent agreement early on. We'll find something to disagree on later. But I can say that most of the stress we saw and a lot of it is, as we've seen consolidation in the renewable space, we're not dealing with undercapitalized developers. We're dealing with larger companies who have accumulated many of these in cases. And then we've coordinated the product and the allocation of tax capacity and capital in those instance, the broader frameworks and relationships that are multifaceted. And what we found, we see it -- I would say it's probably a poor rule of thumb that we probably -- we're a little bit like Target. We probably do 50% of our business in December. So I would say the last 6 weeks of the year, we probably do more fundings than the rest of the year combined or about the same as the rest of the year combined. This year, people wanted year-end fundings, and they didn't always have the accoutrements to show certified completion and things of that nature. And so there were some attempts to, I don't want to say shortcut, but to go without certain assurances that typically are done with project financings. And so there was tension because -- and that was happening for precisely the reasons Michael articulated, which was that it was harder for the engineers to validate certain things. And so people wanted their -- they wanted their capital but they still had to certify that they were operational or complete. And so there was, I would say, there was some drama there, but it was all managed.

I think in terms of last year was the time frame when it really mattered whether you had a good track record or not with respect to financing parties. I think if you had a track record, if you had outstanding commitments and capital raises that you were performing well on, it was a relatively less bumpy ride for most developers.

Yes. Ray, you mentioned consolidation in the renewable energy space. Do you think -- was any of that driven by COVID? Did we see any fallout related to, let's say, smaller developers having issues and that maybe led them down the road towards being acquired by someone else?

No. The consolidation trend was well underway before COVID and it makes economic sense, and it's consistent with almost every other industry. And it first happened on wind, and it's probably in the early innings on solar, if we were to prognosticate on that. I would say that COVID -- ironically, post COVID and the boom in SPACs, we're seeing more appetite for growth and for ESG-generated returns on invested capital, to throw out a lot of nomenclature. So I'd say the consolidation trend might be slowed a bit in the near term if growth equity is willing to capitalize some of these companies at certain multiples. And if public investors through a pipe process are willing to validate that value and dedicate capital to a pipe, we may see traditionally private developers going public instead of -- many were going out and raising pension money or sovereign wealth money or annuitize capital but liked the returns they were getting from owning real assets, and they compare them to certain low-risk equity or debt. And so this -- but this ability to kind of capitalize on the growth that -- we'll see how that impacts consolidation, whether a new public companies and roll up others or whether that means their appetite for value is such that typical consolidators won't play. But that theme was not a pandemic-generated theme, at least from my vantage point.

Yes, that's helpful. I think we can turn in a minute to some of the new structures that are out there. You mentioned SPACs, which I think is interesting to talk about. I think before we kind of move to that, I just wanted to pick up on something that a number of you touched upon, which is the availability of tax equity. And that seems to be one of the lasting effects of the pandemic, and I mean it's a multi-step process by which we got there, right? But I think as some of the large financial institutions and corporates that were monetizing tax credits found themselves maybe looking down the road at a point where they might have less of a tax appetite, less taxable income and sort of either took a break or took their foot off the gas a little bit and then less aggressive with tax equity. What -- maybe I'll flip over to Srips for a moment. As someone that utilizes tax equity, what did you see out there in the marketplace? And was it challenging? What did you see? And what were you sort of hearing out there last year?

Yes. Tax equity has always been an interesting market, to say the least, among the project financing spaces. Again, this goes back to the earlier comment I made. People with track record, people with track -- existing relationships weren't able to find tax equity capacity from the investors, newer developers or newer assets where we're having a tougher time. I think, in general, there has been a recognition and we are seeing this with the new Biden infrastructure built, that tax equity investors, while they play a very strong part in the space, there may be other ways of incentivizing these assets. The direct pay proposal in the bill is definitely something that is -- it has [ legs ] and will be an interesting option to have in our back pocket. We've also, on the pricing side, seen the pricing for tax equity erode, at least from an investment standpoint; meaning, tax equity investors are asking for a higher premium given the market dynamics at this point. But what happened last year was, last year, we are seeing demand but investments come back; meaning, a lot more tax equity investors are coming back into the market and tracking details. The later part of this year will pick up quite nicely, given how basically the impacts of COVID not be as disastrous as everyone thought it would be.

Right. Yes. Thank you for that. Michael, what about from your perspective, what were you seeing on sort of the tax equity side?

So look, we -- Morgan Stanley made a decision a few years back to really exit the PTC product for various reasons. We just felt uncomfortable on how we were risk managing it and the view of trying to take a 7- to 10-year horizon on your tax capacity was not particularly attractive. So we've really been only active in the ITC product, which is more directly applicable. And we don't mind it. We don't necessarily love it. We think our capital can be deployed in better ways, and we do it for our clients. So from our perspective, we'd be thrilled to have a direct pay option because we think we can take that same capital and provide it to our clients in different ways, in a much more efficient way, but I think, frankly, for the client as well as for ourselves. So we are, as an institution, very big supporters of the direct pay option. If it doesn't come to pass, I think we'll continue to be participants in the ITC product. And it will -- I think the big question will be how does offshore wind get dealt with.

I think that's right. It's challenging. We -- so at Bank of America, we've been a traditional player, a large player, in the tax equity market. And given the timing of when that activity ramp was, it was dominated by wind and PTC. And as we came out of a financial crisis, the PTC was, ironic to Michael's comments, was more palatable because our tax capacity was certainly limited with a bunch of embedded losses that were unrelated to ESG, at least to the environmental part of ESG, was more of the mortgage crisis. And so having 10 years, having that tax appetite, the -- your tax appetite any given year was less impactful to the IRR than it would be in ITC. So allocating tax capacity to an ITC, if you can't use it, is somewhat problematic from a discounted cash flow perspective. So I think we are doing both. And when we look at the unit economics out there and the scope of activities in the market as well as the growing role of decentralized options or distributed options, whether that's democratization, digitalization or decentralization, whether resi solar, community solar, C&I solar, that allows us to have programmatic draws quarter-by-quarter so that we can levelize our activity, and we don't have jolts to our consolidated P&L from a tax perspective. We are very much motivated to continue to invest in this space. We -- if there's a direct refundability point, we're not going to stay in the way into that. I mean the tax credits is something -- these are policies that Congress has passed and we have dealt with, but we're certainly supportive of whatever it takes to facilitate more capital coming into renewables. And -- but in the meantime, we're allocating our tax capacity. It was a topic of conversation of the highest levels for us as our taxable income went down with our main street lending during the pandemic. And obviously, we think about how to allocate that tax capacity based upon our appetite. And so the market suggests, for a whole variety of reasons, the banks will have a more normalized P&L going forward, and hopefully, the market is correct in that assumption. And we look forward to playing it. And we're active across the board and we find we have limitations in our personnel to underwrite deals. And we have strategic goals and objectives as well as corporate strategic objectives based on ESG. So -- and then the return objectives and credit, we've all gone through the ERCOT's -- the Texas storm and what the implications were. Fixed shape hedges, et cetera, we can get into that if it's topical today. But the tax equity market, we think, is resilient here, and we plan to continue to play in a big way.

That's great. Thank you. I think it's somewhat ironic. I mean we're going to -- we'll turn to some of the Biden White House proposals in a minute. It's somewhat ironic that the plan has rolled out contemplates increasing corporate taxes to pay for the plan, much of which is focused on renewables. There's certainly a lot of benefit there for renewables. But the plan is increasing tax appetite for many corporates and yet removing the need for monetization of tax credits by offering a direct pay. So I guess all the tax equity investors out there are going to have to find a new asset class to invest in.

I don't see that. I can take those odds, Will. Frankly, I think we are just in the beginning days of where renewables can go. And with start of storage, ITC and other technologies that definitely will combine later to us, to other developers like, this is very much a real-time solution. Tax equity investors, our investors at the end and I think anyone who's really going to rely on direct pay has forgotten [ '16 ] free cash flows a little bit. So it's not the easiest solution to go to the higher end and talk about a direct pay. So it is just another tool to have in your toolbox as you build out your portfolio of investments as to which solution is going to make sense for which asset.

That's a great point. Maybe Srips, sticking with you for a moment. I did want to touch base with each of the panelists just to talk a little bit about structures that you're seeing out there in the market. Srips, I know Soltage did a big equity raise in 2020. Maybe tell us a little bit about that, some of your market experiences. And then I'd be interested to hear about what some of the structures are that you're seeing out there. And if -- has that shifted kind of over the past year or not?

Absolutely. Absolutely. So Soltage, to just give you a little bit of background, is a solar IPP. We focus on distributed generation assets that are ground-mounted, not residential, grid interconnected and have a large component of community solar and PURPA U.S. assets that go through it. So most of our assets come in the 20- to 30-megawatt range. And what we have found useful as the best practice over time is to get very flexible capital that can work with us across the portfolio, across building a 300- to 500-megawatt portfolio as opposed to tinkering about 10-, 20-megawatt assets at a time. So what we get in 2020 was a lot of process, and we have some faith in it. And we are now partnering with Harrison Street. And it is a really great result in terms of where we wanted to go. It's a large commitment over multiple years that will help us build that 500-megawatt portfolio. That can focus across every state in the U.S. So it can do [ QS ] assets in the southeast, for instance. It can do community solar assets. And as the ESG programs ramp up, we are seeing more state regulators focus on LMI and the ability to have -- the ability to include social justice, inclusivity parameters that these regulators want in these assets is very important to us to partner with investors like that on the equity side. And we are seeing a lot of interest from the lenders also. Similarly, on the lending side, we have been working with large syndicates, with the lenders covenant for about $100 million, $200 million commitment to build out this portfolio to get the best in plans on the financing aspect, applying to the smaller assets in the DG space that we're in.

And Michael or Ray, how does that sort of mesh with what you saw in the marketplace over the last year? And are you seeing a shift at all in terms of the types of products? For example, we saw a lot of private placements get done last year, many more than we would typically see. Is that something that you saw advancing as a structure in the project finance space?

Yes, I can comment and, Ray, jump in. Look, I think from our perspective, I think that's an ongoing trend. I don't think -- in other words, I think completely unrelated to COVID, from -- and I think it's -- whether you call it a private placement or an institutional investor, and whether it's a loan or bond farm, I think what we've seen develop is an increased demand from institutional investors who traditionally would just buy bonds or 144A bonds. They're willing to buy [ 4-2s ] and they're also building to buy private loans. So you don't have to just rely on the high-yield term loan B market or the traditional bank market. So I think what we've seen is infrastructure debt funds and versions of infrastructure debt funds become increasingly prevalent. So especially in the renewable space, I think people really want access to this type of an investment. And so we see a lot of demand from the buy side.

Look, I agree with that. The liquidity is kind of omnipresent. So you have the traditional -- you have the securitization market. You've got your traditional B loan market. You've got the A loan market. And now you've got private players who can complement an A loan if you want to go out for duration because the banks tend to have a regulatory problem beyond a certain maturity set. The project lives and the creditworthiness of these projects dictates longer financing. So we have seen a proliferation of what we might broadly characterize as nontraditional, but that fit the traditional kind of credit metrics that we've always had for these projects. And we've seen it, like we've talked about resi solar. We've set up sidecar financings where the resi solar public shareholders really wanted to see more cash flow generation from the companies rather than being measured on kind of the NPV value of their fleet. And so more of these players were selling off their originated volumes into dedicated -- sorry, captive vehicles, but third-party vehicles, affectionately called sidecars. And we've seen those with securitized debt and we've seen those with traditional kind of bank debt, coupled with institutional debt, and really to the same metrics. And so you -- once you can -- there are certain markets it's easier to max leverage but not every shareholder is looking for that, just given the preponderance of demand for basically ESG paper, both equity and debt, we found a lot of flexibility. And for the utility-scale projects, I think we, by and large, seen more traditional structures, although some institutional tranches are getting done. The bank market continues to be probably the market of choice there. But with technology enabling solar, storage and other behind-the-meter management systems, this -- what the fellow panelists are referring to is really coming into play pretty directly with the volumes. And so we are seeing kind of the distributor side growing as fast, if not faster, and we've seen these other debt instruments be deployed.

Yes. Thanks, Ray. I mean, that's a great segue. Srips, you touched briefly on storage as well. We have -- we do have a couple of questions that have come in. One attendee was curious about storage. The question says both sides cited issues with PTC and ITC. Storage does not yet have its own tax credit. How could Congress get a storage tax credit correct? So I think that is actually part of the Biden plan contemplates tax credits for stand-alone storage. Am I correct?

Yes. It contemplates it along the lines of ITC, and I personally think that's a good solution given storage assets have multiple revenue streams, and it's all being worked out. There is a lot of wholesale market participation being expected of these storage assets. And while we figure all that out, I think an ITC is going to help get storage assets built much faster with a greater penetration of the market.

Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Srips. We have another question about the attitudes towards Mexico. The question is, I would like to know what the perception towards Mexico is among investors, given the current political environment and the recent actions taken by the federal government. Any -- do the panelists have -- are you active in doing project finance in Mexico? And what do you see there?

Sure. I'm happy to take a crack at that, Will. We do have -- I mean, in fact, we financed last year, I think it was September or October, we did a bond financing -- refinancing for Blackstone's Tierra Mojada project because the combined cycle, a highly efficient plant in Mexico. And there was not a concern at that point in time. There have been developments since then. So I think there's a hope that the government's actions will not pass muster through the courts in Mexico. And in fact, one of the government's actions related to renewables was overturned in the courts. But I think people are careful and cautious. I think there's a wait-and-see approach.

Yes, I would agree with that. We've seen activity across LNG, fossil generation, renewables. We were able to sell a platform. It was not without trials and tribulations, as any project would be. That's not to insinuate it was all Mexican issue, but the overhang of the political environment there certainly has weighed on return requirements. And so it would be artificially kind of quantitatively robust for me to tell you exactly what we think it costs, but probably north of 100 basis points. And so there was some decline in interest just given the perceived volatility and what that could do depending on their whole horizons. But we are seeing deals get done, and we're seeing it across all the major energy infrastructure asset classes, if you will. So we believe it's open for business. It's got to be well structured. And increasingly, there's -- particularly as you get to the thermal side or the gas value chain or the oil value chain, there are obviously hurdles to accomplish from a diligence perspective.

Yes. Thank you, Ray. Right now, we don't have any other questions. I just quickly remind attendees, if you do want to submit a question, you can do that in the Q&A box on your screen. We've only got a couple of minutes left, and I thought perhaps we could just -- let's go around the virtual table here, and I'd love to get some quick feedback on what your thoughts are around the infrastructure plan, specifically as it relates to renewables. Maybe touch upon the goals for offshore wind. Maybe Ray or Michael, if you want to kick it off?

Sure. Well, look, I think we're very bullish about what the plan could achieve, and we'll see how Congress responds. You can see renewables is such a broad term now that you could certainly see on the e-mobility side the demonstrable impact that the bill or the proposal had for stocks of EV companies, charging station companies, et cetera. So obviously the -- when you look at the penetration rates that governments around the world want for EV and the technology now supports, and you see where the OEMs are, then the infrastructure has to follow. And so we're seeing incredible appetite for capital in that area, whether it's battery manufacturing, whether it's charging station deployment, software therein and then all the components, et cetera, across the EV value chain. So that will -- clearly, that has been impacted from an expectations perspective and will be impacted pretty dramatically by this infrastructure plan. Offshore wind, the appetite is also palpable. And you can see that in public stocks of the big players, you can see it in the rush to get in there. And that's consolidated very, very quickly. It will be interesting to see where the West Coast goes, what we get offshore California, given the floating structures there. But the plan could be very helpful there. And there's much on the plate, and there's quite a bit more density that could be achieved in the Northeast and the Mid-Atlantic. So we're quite bullish on that. The amount of tax capacity, all that takes, the amount of capital that takes, it's going to take markets like these that are wide open to accommodate all that, and there's long lead times and the supply chain has got to be worked out. But we think the bill is quite an inducement.

Yes. Look...

Yes. Thank you. I think if I can squeeze in a comment from the other panelists, I'll do that. I think we're just about out of time. I'm not sure if we're going to get cut off. See, if we were not in a virtual environment, we could just keep on blabbing on the panel and force everyone to keep sitting there. But it's a little easier for them to cut us off in the virtual world. Michael, Srips, maybe a quick 30 seconds on the Biden plan.

Yes. No, listen, I'll second everything that Ray says. And I think the biggest -- if we can make it work, the biggest positive thing would be on the tax credit would be the direct pay. I think that, that would just open the market dramatically.

And just to wrap it up. We, as developers, are super excited about the opportunities could grow over the next few years. As Ray said, it's such a great table to be set in terms of the opportunities to grow and coming into storage and the EV penetration and any other new technologies that come after the next 5 years. So we've been excited to -- I think it's a definite change in direction that is not temporary.

Thank you. Yes, I agree as well. I think we're very bullish and hope that the plan remains robust as it goes through the approval process. I want to thank our panelists. We are out of time. Srips, Michael, Ray, thank you so much for making yourselves available. And thank you to all the attendees and to Platts. We look forward to seeing you all soon.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Thanks, everyone.

Bye.