We're good? Good afternoon, everybody. I'm here with Patrick, and he is here to present Intermap Technologies. Thank you. Can you guys hear? All right, good. I'm Patrick Blott. I'm the chairman and CEO of Intermap Technologies. We are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, IMP, and the QBITMSF. I've been in this industry just about, well, over 15 years. This is my second geospatial company, where I play the leadership role. I've been in this role at Intermap for just about 10 years now, and it sure goes by quickly. I'm going to talk about the company a little bit for people in the room who don't know it. I don't know if anybody is already a shareholder or I'm sure we're going to have some questions, so I want to get to those questions as quickly as we can. Then we'll leave some time for that Q&A. Disclaimer statement. Forward-looking statements. Intermap is a dual-use military technology company. We operate sensors, we build exquisite elevation and terrain data maps, inputs into maps, outputs from maps, features, and all the different data layers that come from that. We do it at a very, very high spec. We do it at a very, very large scale. We sell it generally into two markets, our core market, which is the government market, and the commercial market, which is our dual-use market. This is data that can be used for both military purposes, and it can be used for commercial purposes. We are ITAR regulated, controlled goods regulated. We have to operate under various strict permits and permissions. It gives us an incredible moat and competitive advantage when it comes to commercializing what we do. I would argue Intermap's got almost a 100-year history. It's very good at commercializing what we do, and I think that's an important part of the story here with this company. We have engineering in Calgary, the head office is in Denver. We have a team in Prague, we have a team in Jakarta, and then we have a couple of other satellite offices as well, which are customer-facing. We have mapped the world several times over. When I say mapped, I don't mean take a picture. I'm talking about very robust 3D, real reality capture, not synthetic maps of the world. We do it from multiple platforms, some of which we own. We do it from multiple sensors, some of which we own. The difficult ones we do own, which is really important, and those are the regulated ones. This is what our core products, this is a visual representation of what they look like. On the left, that's called a surface model, and that is the Earth. That's San Francisco, and it's got all the man-made features, buildings, roads, and natural features, rivers. That's San Francisco. On the right, it's the same scene, but with all of those features stripped away. That's a very hard thing to do and get right. All of this matters because ground truth matters. In a world where whether it's a military application or government application, disaster management, mapping, cadastral, or commercial application flood underwriting, you can't underwrite flood risk with the surface model on the left or some synthetic derivative of the surface model on the left. You need the model on the right, which is hard, ground true, because that's the way water flows if you're going to worry about a flood. Some real-life examples. This is the scene with an optical image from space draped on it. You take a nice pretty high-res picture, and you drape it on exquisite elevation 3D terrain data, and you end up with a scene that is precise. That scene right there, the 35th floor of any one of those buildings is in the exact right place in space. It's target grade coordinates. It's very, very special and exquisite, and you could do a lot of things like that, like fly a drone. On the right, when you don't have the elevation data, you end up with a garbled mess because the Earth is 3D and it is round. It's not 2D. Your optical image from space gets all distorted. They come up with synthetics to try and make it look more like the one on the right. They can make it look a lot like the one on the right, but they can't have reality capture for the applications that our customers need. Here's a real-life application. Some of you may have seen this before because it's a good one. This is Blackrock Island and a search and rescue helicopter in a storm in an emergency. Did a search and rescue on that island, and it was running synthetic data through its nav system. It was dark at night, stormy, couldn't see, instrument flying. They did a CFIT, which is Controlled Flight Into Terrain. They navigated themselves right into the side of that mountain because the bottom scene is Intermap data, and there's a 50-meter difference between the synthetic and the reality. When you have crappy data, you hear about things like helicopter crashes, right? You hear about things like drones hitting a hospital. It really matters a lot capturing the 3D data, and that's what we do, and we've been doing it for a very, very long time I would argue we invented it. Government base maps, core customer, all kinds of use cases, natural resources, disaster management, land planning, policy formation, flood mapping at scale, country scale, global scale, and that's a core business. We have all kinds of technology that drives how people use that, how they extract the features, how they extract If you're a telecom provider, how you figure out clutter that's interfering with your signal. All the trees. Let's pull the trees, let's pull the fire hydrants. All of that is automated. All of it's done at scale. 30 years ago, it was 2,000 or 3,000 people in Jakarta doing it manually, today it happens in the blink of an eye, and it's all automated. We also run proprietary sensors. That's an optical image from space on the left. That's our sensor on the right. The difference is our sensors are not atmospheric dependent. I could count the trees in that tree block. It cuts through clouds, it cuts through storms, it cuts through tree canopy. It cuts through the ground, depending on how it's calibrated. That's why, again, it's regulated. You could do a lot of stuff with that. You can see the infrastructure. You can see the fence lines in the road, which are completely obscured by tree canopy in the scene on the right. It's providing an exquisite data set. We're doing that, very importantly, not through a soda straw, not on a 100 sq ft. We're doing that at scale, at country scale, and really, really fast. Our commercial market is positioned in the growing segments by design. Insurance is our largest, communication second, navigation is third. The last two, by the way, feed into space. Space is an emerging vertical for us in terms of growth and size, both at the same time. It's becoming really important. Those are our core focus applications. We have a bunch of other horizontal use cases for the data which we serve, but the core commercialization efforts are around those four verticals. Looking ahead, you're going to see the commercial revenue continue to grow. That's a high double-digit grower. A lot of the insurance growth is being driven by our AI agent and the adoption of that by the larger carriers, like Generali, we've announced. You're also going to see an expansion of the space, which I talked about, and we will be talking about more, and then the large government geospatial infrastructure programs. Right now, the company is about 80% recurring. It's like a software, right? 80% of the revenue is very high margin recurring. We're still working off a small base. We're still public, and we're still pursuing these very large government mandates. There's operating leverage there. As that scales up, it'll convert. At the contribution level, that's a software business in terms of the margins. Talked about insurance. We're being pulled, I should say, into the scope of that insurance market. Right into the P&C, we're now driving property valuations as an example. Property valuations matter to claims management. "Hey, how much did I lose?" It matters to the risk premium. "How much could I lose?" Our data and our application layers are getting pulled into the value chain of our existing customer base at that top level, where the big carriers live. In space, it's just going crazy because there's been such a capital allocation into space. Like I said before, if you live in space, whether you're in the communication sector, whether you're in the Earth observation sector, when it comes down to Earth, it's coming down into a 3D environment. If you want reality capture, you bump into us. We operate in the processing and the image processing layers, and we feed many customers to help them improve the usefulness of that signal or image that's coming down from space. We talked about the AI. We've productized it. We've run machine learning for over a decade now. We have the largest elevation data stack in the world, commercial. We have a ton of training data to run our algos on, and we have a lot of people who do nothing but that. I think very importantly, as we pursue these larger projects, what's really changed from a year ago, I spoke here a year ago. We've doubled shareholders' equity. We've eliminated the debt, and we're now in a position where we have the financial qualification to actually convert some of these contracts that we've won into meaningful revenue. Going forward, recurring revenue, we're selling points to commercial rather than large area. We're trying to sell points. We're not trying to sell large square kilometer data sets. We're trying to sell useful points. That's going to grow, and that's driving the business. It's being helped with the AI. It's all subscription-based. We're on contract with almost probably 8 to 10 very large US DOD, and that will convert. Of course, the sovereignty theme is ubiquitous now in Southeast Asia, but also around the world. People need to understand their maps, and they're investing budget to upgrade their maps. We'll do a U.S. listing, and that'll open up strategic opportunities for us. That's in a nutshell. I will maybe pause right there and see if anyone wants to ask some questions. I thought you'd never ask. I just came from there to here, which is not an itinerary I'd recommend to anybody. A couple of things. One, we're in the middle of this right now. Both for confidentiality reasons and for a whole bunch of other reasons, it's not in our interest to talk too much about it. I will say a few things because I think people are trying to calibrate what these probabilities and risks are. Starting with Indonesia broadly, not just Intermap, there's a lot of attention on it right now, right? If you're tracking it at all, you can see that there's a lot of capital markets attention, there's a lot of government attention, there's a lot of strategic attention. They're in a place where they're making some big decisions. That's the overall top-level backdrop. It doesn't change. I spend a lot of time there, and I spend a whole lot of time analyzing it and engaging with it and engaging with the government there. I have a different perspective on it coming more bottoms up. It doesn't change, in my view, the fundamentals. The fundamentals are this is a high-growth country, right? This is a rich country from a resource base. This is a young country with a lot of hardworking people who want to climb up. This is a country that has a president that's all about doing that. He's about development. Prabowo, he's about growth, he's about anti-corruption, right? I mean, that's the core of it. I think there's execution challenges because it's Indonesia, because it's hard to tell corruption from incompetence, and it's hard to get what you want done, accomplished when you're dealing with such a large population and thousands of islands, and it's not easy, but there's a lot of attention on it. I will tell you this. In our world, we're dealing with a World Bank procurement, right? We're dealing with a government agency that's never done that. That doesn't mean Indonesia. There's a credit relationship with the World Bank at the top levels of Indonesia, not where we live. Where we live, they're doing this for the first time, right? But there are sophisticated, experienced people who now have a lot of eyes on Indonesia and this procurement in particular, right? Because it's important that they get it right. I think that context matters. I don't think there's a change of policy at the top. I think the market's trying to figure out if there is or what's going on there, and you see it in the currency, you see it in a whole bunch of things. My observation is this government is trying to do those three things, growth, right? Development, anti-corruption, and that's not new. The risks around that are not new. Mostly incompetence in the execution and the communication. I think you'll see people changing around, and I think you'll see them try to do a couple of things, trying to get that right. Fundamentally, I don't think that there's been a major change of direction here. Finally, the most important thing, I think they want, and I think they deserve a world-class map. They've got thousands of islands, some of them under sovereignty dispute. They've got all of this wealth that they want to basically get their arms around and be able to protect. They've got these growth agendas, and they need a map to do it. I think that's what ultimately drives this. I don't think they need a science experiment. I think when the right people are properly engaging, they're not going to go do that. By the way, the World Bank didn't sign up for a science experiment. I think from my perspective, there's a lot of noise coming out of Indonesia, especially at the macro. On the ground, we see more signal, and it's essentially that, yeah, there's execution bumps, but fundamentally nothing has shifted, and that's why I just signed an agreement with them to give them more time to get it right. We've given them an extension on our side. They're doing the stuff they need to do on their side. I still believe, it is a phenomenal Forget about just us. As a country, it's a phenomenal investment opportunity. Hugely undervalued right now relative to its peer set, given what it has compared to its neighbors. I think they got people there that are competent, trying to get it right, and I just think that there's execution bottlenecks to that. Our shareholders, because of disclosures that they're making, not us, some of them are living that roller coaster. Not sure why they would want to because I have to go there. I'm on the ground. I see it. They don't. That's happening. Maybe that's a long-winded answer, but that's why we're still allocating capital and resources there. Both yes, right? Again, it gets to what I just said. I think the latest deadline was yesterday, right? It's meaningless. What matters is that they get it right. That's why we don't tag on to those schedules, because I don't want to be They got all of these layers, and then they got people saying stuff, and they got It is not us. At the end of the day, they need a map. I don't think they're going to go and waste their time and money on a science experiment. I don't believe the World Bank signed up for that. We've just all lived a rollercoaster with the Strait of Hormuz, right? That is a $600 billion trade corridor, give or take, for oil, depending on the price of oil. The Strait of Malacca, where Indonesia lives, is a $7 trillion trade corridor. This is a very important choke point, and it's important to everybody, especially to them, right? They need to get along with everybody, and they need a proper map to do it, especially with thousands of islands sprinkled among that strait. I just think at the end of the day, quality map is what matters here. I think there's two really important ones, which one is the insurance. Are you talking about in terms of the whole company? Is the insurance business and the growth that's happening there. That's a very important commercial catalyst. Married onto that is the space catalyst because, again, it's the capital budgets, right? We live, we're not throwing birds into space, so we're not capital intensive. Anything that's coming off those birds is coming to us. We're processing it at a really high margin to get it good, and we're doing it for a lot of people. Any capital budget going that direction benefits us. We'll be talking more about that. I think that's an important catalyst. Not trying to compete with it. We're benefiting from it. I think obviously the US DOD is really important. We're on a very large wallet when you add up all the contract vehicles, and we're going to convert some of that into actual awards, which will be a big deal. We're getting close. I think there's maybe a minute or two left. It's a great question. That gets to the operating leverage. The question was, what about the commercial business and the subscriptions, and when's it going to get to a place where the company doesn't depend on it? The answer is it doesn't now. That's a super high margin business, and it's scaled, and the churn is de minimis. I'm talking like 1% or 2% of a typical software company churn, because once people are consuming our data, there's nowhere else to get it. If it gets into their workflow, they can't go substitute it. If it's something they say, "I want it, I'm going to use it," it's sticky, right? We have de minimis churn. It'll probably cross CAD 10 million this year in terms of top line. The rest of it is, again, pointed to these large government wallets, and that's important too. I should say, we're on these defense contracts for a reason, right? You can't just knock on the door and say, "Hey, we're here," and then get on eight to 10 DOD contracts, some of them classified. That doesn't happen. We're on it for a reason, because we have a technology that nobody has. It does drive that commercial business, but it's important we reinvest in it. It's important we pursue those defense dollars because they fund our R&D, and they also enable these large-scale base maps, which are big programs. That's a good question. Yeah. Yeah. Each vertical's different, which is why we've sort of picked four of them, right? Because what matters in this commercial, once you have the tech and once you have the data, right, which we got because we've been doing this for the government for 100 years. We have this core capability. Commercializing, it's all about the use cases, right? It's all about having the right people, the right teams, the right engagement with the right customer, and that's a lift. A lot of companies out there will say, "I'm going to launch birds," or, "I'm going to go fly drones. The use cases will take care of themselves." No, that's not how it works at all. It's all about the use cases and making sure that they're tailored to solving a problem. I'm not trying to sell reams of data to someone who's never going to use it. I'm selling specific points that are bringing value to their workflow, right? That's the setup. That's how it works. In insurance, our approach has been to accumulate the customers, and I think we're well north of 50% share, like hundreds around the world of catastrophe underwriters using our stuff. As we lock down that market, de minimis churn, right? We've never had pushback when we start to take price. That will happen as we add value and sort of lock down the bulk of the market. We're in the process of accumulating that market right now. Anyone else? I think that's it. Thanks for your time, everyone.