Welcome, everyone. Before I get started, I would like to remind everyone that there is certain forward-looking information in the presentation and that you should read the disclaimer at the back of the presentation and the asset book. Welcome, and thank you for attending our Biennial Investor Day and the release of our fifth asset book. We will provide an overview of what we have accomplished over 11 years and a range of outcomes for the next 10 years. We also have three founders presenting on three plays that represent one-third of our future value in our portfolio from only 2 million acres of our 18.3 million acre land base. The common thread with the CEOs of these businesses is that they are founders, major shareholders, and have a history of great execution and a track record of value creation. PrairieSky is Canada's largest mineral title owner, with over two-thirds of the fee in Canada. This provides unparalleled optionality and a long-duration cash flow stream. Our CAD 245 million annual dividend, our ability to cancel shares below intrinsic value, and a track record of high-return acquisitions at the low parts of the cycle provide strong risk-adjusted returns for our owners. Royalty companies are not all created equally. What is missing from a comp table is the undeveloped land base, but it is the most important thing to own as new plays are uncovered and technology evolves. All PrairieSky managers, board of directors, and employees own shares, as we believe a strong ownership culture helps deliver better results and alignment. At IPO, you owned 40,000 acres for every million shares you owned, and today you own 78,600 acres per million shares you own. That is over three full townships of land per million shares that you own in the business. Half of your land you own is productive, and half will someday be productive. A large portion of our royalty rights have multiple zones as well, effectively multiplying the future optionality. Per-share numbers are what matter in a business. Our oil production per share has been growing at a 6% compounded annual growth rate over the past three years. Our share of industry capital is at all-time highs, which highlights that we have invested in the low-cost plays in the basin that attract capital in all cycles. Because of our investments in the lowest full-cycle F&D cost plays in the basin, our growth rates for oil have decoupled from that of the basin. This is a major competitive advantage for us and an impenetrable moat for any competition. Over the next few years, you will hear of significant growth in the Southern Alberta Basal Quartz play, as well as the development of numerous modular small-scale SAG-D projects. PrairieSky is the largest landowner on both, so you're already positioned for the future. As a result of our 98% operating margins and the replacement of our produced royalty barrels, we are the ideally suited business to return capital to shareholders. Since our IPO, we have generated over CAD 3 billion in free cash flow after tax, after G&A, and have returned over CAD 2 billion. We eschew debt and view it as a performance-enhancing drug. We do not intend to use leverage as a permanent part of our capital structure. I would argue that this is the most powerful slide in the entire presentation and best demonstrates what separates us from all of our peers. For four years, since 2021, with no significant acquisitions, we have entered the year with 65 million barrels of proved reserves. Over that period, we generated over CAD 1.3 billion in after-tax, after G&A free cash flow while producing out 34 million of those barrels. Over half of those original barrels had been produced out. Today, with no reinvestment, we still have 64 million barrels of proved reserves. This is the anatomy of a compounder. This is why we buy back stock, and this is why I reinvest all my dividends. Now, you've got a playbook in front of you, so I'm going to just talk a little bit, just for a few slides, about what's in it and how it's composed and what's not in it, which is just as important. The green wedge is the independently evaluated booked reserves that I talked about on the previous slide. This has an undiscounted value of $2.7 billion. This includes only producing wells and zero future locations. The teal wedge is what is published in the asset book. This has a value of $27 billion undiscounted. This is the development wedge offsetting our producing wells. No value is assigned to the navy wedge, and it includes expansions of productive trends, enhanced oil recovery, better type curves with technology, and the discovery of new pools. This wedge is why I own the company. In 2017, we've had these same maps for the last three investor days, and you can just see how they change over time. In 2017, the producing wells were booked, and the value in the orange shaded area on the 2017 map was booked in the playbook as well as the teal wedge. Fast forward to 2025, and a significant expansion to the north resulted in the unbooked navy wedge moving into both our proved reserves and into the playbook. With 18.3 million acres, this happens every quarter. Time is the enemy of a bad business, but the friend of a great business. As time melts away, dividends are paid, the business grows, and the share count declines. We have identified 34,000 future development drilling locations on our lands. At our 800 well per year pace, this is a 42-year inventory of drilling. If this sounds like a large number, it is not even comparable to our current producing wells. We currently collect royalties today from 42,800 wellbores. We are not even booking a well for every producing well that is on our assets right now. In fact, an even bigger number is over the last decade, we've collected royalties on over 80,000 different wells. Again, this 34,000 well count is not that significant. Over half a billion future barrels are the reserves associated with those 34,000 locations we've identified. We draw approximately 9 million barrels from this playbook and bring it into our proved reserves every single year. At that same rate, we have 60 years of future replenishment on the declining assets. The total undiscounted value is CAD 29.8 billion using $65 WTI forever. We have unmatched duration in North American energy. Some of the significant changes from our last asset book are shown below. We have added 4,000 future locations, including 730 in the Montney. Our base volumes have increased 11%. Between the Southeast Saskatchewan Mississippian play and the Clearwater, we have seen a CAD 2.9 billion increase in value. Zero value from our recent CAD 50 million Petro-Canada fee acquisition made into these numbers as our cutoff was December 31, 2023. I won't spend too much time on the changes, as this is another busy slide, and hopefully people can read it. We added significant inventory during a strong capital cycle. We lowered our WTI in this asset book to $65 forever and ACO to CAD 2.50 forever. The last asset book, the 2023 version, had CAD 3.70, so we brought that down a little bit based on current pricing. This chart on the screen plots select key plays in our portfolio with booked reserves on the X-axis and playbook values on the Y-axis. Over one-third of our future potential sits on just 2 million acres of land, or 10% of our total acreage. We have the founders of our most important counterparties in the Clearwater, the Mannville Stack, and the Duvernay here to present. We are going to start with the Clearwater, and I will walk through it for about five minutes and then turn it over to Ian. The Clearwater, as many people in this room would be aware, is now Canada's largest conventional oil play, and it boasts some of the best full-cycle economics in all of North America. PrairieSky is an early entrant into the play and has the largest land position, and mirroring the rest of our business has more undeveloped land than developed. New discoveries across the acreage have uncovered over 1 billion barrels of resource. Over time, a number of these pools will be developed and added to our PDP reserves and our asset book values. We also see potential for modular SAG-D in some of these areas, providing longer-dated call options that can only be found in Canada's largest mineral portfolio. These are further examples of things that do not show up on broker comp sheets. PrairieSky has the lowest base decline of any North American royalty company by a wide margin. I said that one slow on purpose. This has been independently evaluated at 18%. This is another major competitive advantage for our business. As more of our assets fall into the water flood category, our declines will improve and our recovery factors will increase. Since 2023, we have seen a 15% increase in assets under water flood. Visually on this map, you can see in blue areas that are under water flood and in green areas that are developed. Two major takeaways from this map are, one, how significant the potential to add to the water floods are, but two, how much undeveloped land you own as a shareholder for future development. I will not go into detail on the types of floods present on our lands, as we have Ian from Spur presenting detail on this shortly. But we have had both line drive and a bottoms-up flood implemented successfully on these assets. Our second presenter, Tom from Caltex, has a potential line drive polymer flood on our lands that he may touch on as well. With just what has been discovered to date, we have a 23-year development inventory on this play. The undiscounted value of this play alone is CAD 3.5 billion, or 65% of our current market capitalization. We will now have Ian Curry present from Spur, the largest Clearwater producer and our largest royalty payer. Ian started his career at Shell as a driller and was a founder of Profico, along with Margaret McKenzie, our Chairman, who's also in attendance. Margaret and Ian were the founding executives at Profico, and I was there shoveling coal into the furnace, but learned extensively from both of them. I'll now turn it over to Ian. When all the presenters are done, we'll do Q&A for the whole group. Good morning. Thanks, Andrew. You promote Spur better than Ian, so we may get you on our circuit. Good morning, everyone. Again, it's Ian Curry. A real pleasure to be here. I was fortunate enough to be asked here two years ago, or it was in Toronto actually, on their Investor Day, and it gives me great comfort that I was actually invited back, so that's always a good sign. Also, a pleasure to be knowing these two gentlemen for a long time, and a pleasure to be on the same panel with them. Spur, we were founded in 2017. We had our eighth anniversary in January. We are kind of the first movers in the Clearwater. The analogy I like to use is we did not really find a Clearwater. It was always there. The resource was there, just no one knew how to crack the nut. The best analogy is the Permian. It is not as though they rediscovered the Permian 15 years ago. It was that technology, in that case, multi-stage fracking, in our case, multilaterals, unlocked that great, great resource. Multilaterals, very, very simple technology. We set casing at 90 degrees. We drill six to eight one-mile legs, and we etch within each leg so they all come to a common point at casing. You get essentially 10 times a single leg effective flow area, and that's how you get such good wells. Also, the Clearwater is not a great sand. It's quite dirty, lots of clay. When you frack the clays, it mobilizes them and they plug off all the pore throats as it's a bit of a heavier oil, and it reduces the ability to flow. We can't frack it. Multilaterals are cheap, super effective. It's worked out very, very well. We currently hold 1.7 million acres. The vast majority of that is held alongside PrairieSky. They've been wonderful in that. We had a major, major land sale December 6, 2017, where we bought, along with PrairieSky, a million acres on that single sale. That really set us up for today. The land tenure, it is oil sands land tenure, so it's a 15-year land holding rather than four to five on PNNG, allows us to continue to relook and fail, struggle, and come back and try new discoveries on our land. Current production is 52,000 BOE a day, and we are currently 30% under water flood, and I will spend a lot of time talking about that today. Again, our company is a bit of a weird entity. We're a very widely held public and our private ending, pardon me, that was a slip. We have about 800 shareholders, but we do have a great market. We actively trade about CAD 200 million a year of liquidity, so it's kind of the best of both worlds. I get to do what I'm good at, I think, and still we have enough liquidity for our shareholders. Being private, we cannot do share buybacks, so it's not really efficient from a tax perspective, so we are into dividends. We have distributed CAD 855 million of dividends over the last three, four years. We will surpass the billion-dollar mark this year. Last year was a great year for Spur. We cash flowed CAD 705 million. We dividend CAD 282 million, so 40% of our cash flow, and grew the company by 25%, so that was a great year. We initially raised about CAD 42 million, and have raised about CAD 81 million to date. You can see that our forecast is to grow our production between now and 2027 at a rate of 20% per year to 75,000 BOE a day. Now, when I presented last time, we had just updated that, but say if you go back two and a half years ago, at that time, Spur was saying we'd grow our production to 60,000 for 6-8 years. Now we're saying we're growing our production to 75,000 for 8-10 years. If you actually look at that incremental wedge, that's an additional 60-80% production we're now forecasting over the next 8-10 years. Very significant. That's due to some discoveries, some new opportunities, but primarily due to water flood, and that's why I want to talk a little bit about water flood today. Andrew did not kind of box me in on what I could talk about, so I am going to go through my odyssey of water flood, and hopefully I will not bore too many. Get your nerd on here. It really started for me about 11-12 years ago when Spur Resources at the time bought the Provost Veteran Viking Sea South Unit amongst a whole bunch of other assets from Bonavista Petroleum. That was a unit that was unitized in 1973, so when I was going through the closing documents, I came across the initial unit ballot of why they were unitizing. I cannot remember if it was Amoco or Imperial Oil at the time, but their rationale for unitizing was to do water flood. They said on this specific unit that they would expect to recover 5% from primary, but up to 35% from secondary. The 1973 reservoir engineer felt you would get a seven-fold increase in water flood in the Viking in this unit. Again, a very different mindset from today. They kind of had some few starts and stops. They probably in the unit miscalculated a little bit to the south. It was a little wetter, so it did not work quite as well as they thought, but they did make about 2.5 million barrels before they stopped. This is on the sheet in front of you, is kind of the wells. That is what they had in front of them when they unitized in 1973. Fast forward, we did a little bit of work on it, then we sold it to Tamarac, kind of coincident, who did a lot of work on the water flood. Ultimately now we expect that pool to make 12 million barrels. Not seven times, but a five-fold increase from primary. Pretty amazing number. That really kind of resonated with me about the power of water floods. Why do water floods work so well? It really depends on the rock, but it's really just a piston. You have a producer at one end and an injector at the other end, and you're pushing that water like a piston over. If the rock is homogeneous and it doesn't find different secret pathways, it tends to work very efficiently. If you have high perm streaks or fractures, it will find a quick route through there and kind of flood itself out. Those are the failed water flood projects. The other way is it helps with the pressure of the reservoir. You hear about in the Permian how all the wells are becoming so gassy. That's because they're losing all their pressure. Gas flows to the wells faster than the oil, and there's not a lot of energy left in the reservoir, so that's why water floods work so well. It sounds fantastic. What happened with water floods? Really, technology changed. Twenty years ago, fifteen years ago, we started pivoting towards two things that were at the time better. One of them was multi-stage fracking. That worked very, very well. Much, much quicker payouts, great IPs, lots of unconventional resource. Made a lot of sense to pivot that way. The other one was the oil sands, which are very similar to water flood, but huge scale and scope. The industry kind of changed on that, and we kind of forgot about water flood. There were some attempts at water flood, but they were on these fracked horizontals. As we all know, when you frack, you create this incredibly heterogeneous reservoir or fracture plane. You have two tips that are almost touching, so when you water flood, you just flow your way through and have an unsuccessful. We have now created a generation of not only reservoir engineers, but also investment bankers that do not understand what water flood is, and it has been a four-letter word because of what happened with multi-stage fracking. It kind of went dormant. Fast forward to the Clearwater. Again, it is all about the geology. What is very unique about the Clearwater is these are not channels. These are not beach sands. These are called low stands, which are 5-10 miles offshore. They are not interrupted by hurricanes. They are not interrupted by river flooding. Again, it's not a great reservoir because there's lots of clay in it, but it's incredibly homogeneous and laterally continuous. I have here shown the core from our upper Nipisi Sand. It's about 4 meters thick. It's about 300 millidarcies perm in the top meter, the middle meter, and the bottom meter. Incredibly homogeneous, and in our estimate, a very good reservoir to water flood. We have worked out that. Again, now represents 30% of our overall flooding or production. Our design, we have kind of two masters. We have the primary master, the quick payout master that we report to. One thing that's very unique about the Clearwater is how fast they pay out at better prices than today, or actually very similar prices today on a WCS basis. The well will pay out twice in the first two years. Sorry, pay out twice in the first year, pardon me, and five to six times in the first five years. Incredible economics from primary. The water flood has to compete with that. Where it competes is on EUR, ultimate recovery. We are now seeing, in all cases, at least a doubling of recovery resource, and the better wells are at two and a half times with still very little water breakthrough. We are exceptionally pleased with that. The design is different from days of yore. We like the Texas two-step, or this is called the Texas three-step in this case. It is a bit of a funny story. Tom here at Caltex had kind of the original idea of two close well laterals. I think they were injectors at the time, actually. I blatantly stole that idea, but because I called it Texas two-step after Caltex, Tom was happy. It shows you the difference between an E&P company and a royalty company. Andrew would have asked for a GOR on that, so anyways, super pleased with that. We call it the Texas three-step. We get 6 mi of productivity with the closer aligned wells, and that gives time for the injector down the middle to flood that. That is kind of balancing our two masters of primary high IP production as well as high EURs. At Spur, they call this Ian's pet well because I always keep looking back to it. This is in the Cabin Creek Sand, again in Nipisi. It kind of shows it has been on since 2021, still at 3% water cut. Beautiful, beautiful well. It came on kind of flat at about 150 barrels a day for a little part of a year. During that time, all six legs are acting as independent legs, similar if they were properly spaced. After about a year, you start to see decline because now those six legs are talking to each other, and you see that decline. You can see at the start of 2023, we started injecting water, and about nine months later, showed incredible reservoir response to that, and the well kind of came to where it started from. We have since, because we have seen water breakthrough, I kind of got to break one to see what my limits are. I have increased my water injection again. This morning, it was at 215 barrels a day, so about 30% higher than IP four years ago. Again, incredible response. Again, we talk about EUR, what's important. GLJ forecasts this in 2021 to produce 153,000 barrels on primary. Today, as of December 31, 2024, they're suggesting 325,000, so a little more than a double of resources on that timeframe. As you can see, I've now increased that productivity by another quarter, so we'll be interested to see what December 31, 2025 suggests. Again, the power of the water flood. I'm sure there's a few smart people. We got Mike Timms in the audience, so a few smart people here immediately say, "Ian, you have kind of a year of flat production. Why did you allow it to decline? Why don't you just start the water flood earlier so I get that flat response post-water flood?" That's what we've tried to do with our water flood. I call this my beautifully boring graph. This is all our wells under water flood since December 2024, so over the last six months. Now it represents 30% of Spur's corporate production, and it's absolutely flat because you get the initial rate from the six legs as they're not communicating with each other. As they start to decline, the water flood picks up and pushes that out and gives you this beautiful flat profile. This is similar to what Andrew showed a few minutes ago. Our two big core areas, Nipisi and Martens Hills, two different well designs. We do have at Nipisi, we call it the double down. There are two sands, so we have two independent water floods going in the upper sand and into the lower sand. Because we can share infrastructure, typically you spend about 1.6 times per section to water flood a section rather than primary, but because of sharing of infrastructure and source wells, etc., we're only spending about 1.4 times. Again, we struggled to compete with IRR because of the amazing IRRs of primary, but we're now seeing that on an NPV basis, which is probably more important. On an NPV basis, we are seeing a true doubling of NPV per section by using the double down technique in those 30 key sections at Nipisi. Again, this is becoming our best area in the company, and you can see the quick plot there is very analogous to what we've shown. Again, very flattening, and that's now been flat for four years at that rate. Martens Hills, our other big giant field, is a little more wacko well design, 30 meters thick or 100 feet thick. We drill tiering of wells, so we drill in the upper tier, the middle tier, and the lower tier. We can objectively or not produce the lower tier for one to two years to pay out the well. Then we flip that well into an injector and start kind of a bottoms-up water flood to flood the middle legs. What's shown on the graph here is those middle legs. Again, they've been on for three years, producing at a higher rate than they did originally, and three times what we think a well not water flood supported is under. We use both techniques across our field. 100% of wells drilled in Martens Hills and Nipisi are drilled with water flood in mind, and we anticipate that by year-end 2025, 50% of our company production will be under water flood. Now, why is that good news for PrairieSky? Andrew, being the shyster, he paid me great value for my primary, but he knew about the water flood and I did not, which he did not pay for. We found the pot of gold at the one end, and now we found the pot of gold at the other end with the water flood. It has been an amazing story, so thank you, and thank you for your support of the time, Andrew. Thank you. Again, we will have time for questions for all three presenters after the next two sections. After the Clearwater, we saw the potential for multilateral drilling to unlock resource in the conventional heavy oil fairway in Eastern Alberta. This was once the largest conventional oil play in Canada, developed almost exclusively with vertical wells. At IPO, we did not own a single section of land on this play. Mostly during COVID, we spent just under CAD 1 billion to acquire the largest royalty position on this play. Land values are now up over 1,000% since we made these acquisitions. What attracted us to this play? Trans Mountain was nearing completion, and this map sheet boasts up to nine different oil zones with no bottom water present. With billions of barrels of original oil in place and a technology pioneered and refined in the Clearwater, we saw the potential for a multi-decade inventory of economic drilling locations. When we executed the heritage acquisition in December 2021, we had 200 net royalty barrels from this play. Our royalty production now totals over 800 barrels and has the potential to produce over 3,000 barrels at some point in the future. At IPO, this map sheet was blank. With the CAD 1.8 billion CNRL acquisition, we acquired the first position in the area, and no, we did not see the opportunity for multilateral drilling at that time. This map sheet, as you can see, in 2025, we now dominate the entire map area. It is us, Caltex Trilogy, and Canadian Natural Resources effectively. In 2015, we acquired the Lacouri block of land from CNRL. Using our consistent playbook methodology, we only have 19 wells contributing to value in the asset book. Of note, there are already 11 licenses on this block by Canadian Natural Resources. We have identified over 100 future locations on this block that are economic today, so expect future upside in the 2027 asset book. The undiscounted value of our Mannville heavy oil asset is CAD 4.2 billion, or 76% of our current market capitalization. We own over 30 years of future drilling inventory in the play at the current pace of development. Tom Bishkey is the founder and largest shareholder of Caltex Trilogy. Tom is originally from Texas but has been a Canadian entrepreneur for a long time. This is his third successful Caltex, and he has created tremendous value for shareholders developing heavy oil assets over the years. He also operated Canada's second largest polymer flood behind Pelican Lake and Brittnell, so has very unique expertise on that front. Tom? Okay. There we go. Thanks, Andrew. And yeah, thanks to Andrew and the PrairieSky team. We've been in business together for over a decade since they IPO'd at a couple of different iterations of Caltex, and so happy to be here and sharing our story. I'm not happy to present after Ian. It's kind of like batting after Aaron Judge. There's not a lot of upside, but congrats on you guys' continued success there, Ian. Yeah, the normal legal disclaimers. Caltex is a fast-growing private company. As Andrew mentioned, this is the team's fourth private company and our third iteration of Caltex. We've been doing operations for about two and a half years, and you can see from the map here where our previous two Caltexes were, and we're not very creative. We kind of stay in the same sandbox, and we're just slightly north of where we've been in our last couple of iterations. The etymology of the name is a set of three works of art that are connected and can be seen either as a single work or as individual works. Our controller came up with that, and the team all liked it, so it kind of stuck. As I mentioned, PrairieSky and Andrew have been great partners. We currently have over 95,000 acres in various types of partnerships with PrairieSky. We have now drilled 78 wells on PrairieSky, which is over half of the wells that we have drilled to date. Thanks again for you guys' support. I do truly view the Caltex-PrairieSky partnership as a win-win. Hopefully, we will not look at Andrew as a shyster in the future. Actually, I guess that is a good thing. It is like paying taxes. A bit of a snapshot on Caltex. We raised around CAD 85 million of equity in 2022 and 2023. To show you again the compounding that Andrew talked about, operating income at kind of current prices will be a little over CAD 200 million in 2025. We have drilled 1.6 million meters of multilateral wells, and it sounds like a big number, and it is. To put it in perspective, it took us two decades and three private companies to drill 900,000 meters, and we hit that number in about two years at this iteration. Just with the way that the technology has changed, we have now drilled 10 different zones. Andrew talked about nine different pay zones, and we would even break some of those pay zones into two or three different sands. Lots of multi-zonal optionality, and we will talk about that. Caltex is now about 12,000 barrels a day on the back of great growth in 2023 and 2024, and we'll probably grow another 80% or so this year. We've got about 214 net sections of land, kind of 270 wells in our third-party reserve report, and about 900 that the geologists in the shop have de-risked. So what exactly are we doing? Much like Ian talked about, we're drilling multilaterals. We go down vertically 3-500 meters, and then we'll drill sideways from that main leg in multiple laterals up to 20 laterals off of one vertical and up to, call it, 19 kilometers, so over 10 mi of penetration of the rock in the same formation. Because, again, as we talked about, it is a stack, we can do that in one well, and then right below it or above it, we can do it in another well. We can share on our surface footprint, which is good for cost efficiencies as well as just lesser environmental footprint. Again, because of the multi-layers of this, we can really get some high reserve densities. If we want to get real geeky, we'll bring out the log, and you can see here we've got five different pay zones colored up on this one well bore here. This one is slightly offsetting our land, and we just use this as a type well because it's been cored top to bottom. This is an oil sands area, as Ian talked about. We didn't discover this. is a well half a mile away from this one that was drilled in 1952 by a predecessor to Imperial Oil. We are just playing in an area that has had oil in it. To take it even a step further, most of these zones are historically non-commercial, but the technology has changed our ability to develop these resources profitably. With that, one of our sections of land, we drilled a dry hole on 20 years ago at a previous company, and now we have a 200-barrel-a-day multilateral on the same section of land. The one thing to take away from this slide again is the multi-stack. When we start talking about four to seven wells per section per zone, and we start multiplying that times two, three, four, even five zones in certain sections of land, it really allows us to compound and share on some of those surface facilities, as Ian talked about, and it is a great business to be in. As Buffett said, "I try and invest in businesses that are so wonderful that an idiot can run them because sooner or later one will." As you can see, I am just a pretty face, and we kind of already checked that box that Warren said most companies will get to. While what we do is simple, it is not easy. This is one of the flow diagrams that the team uses to look at things. We have a number of different things that we consider for every well that we drill and every area that we drill. Is the sand consolidated or unconsolidated? What type of oil is it? How viscous is it? How will it flow? Will it produce sand? Do we need to drill fish bones? Do we need to drill multilaterals? Do we need liners? If we need liners, what slot sizing? A lot of different things, and that is just dictated by the reservoir. On top of that, we have a lot of other choices on the technology type of drilling practices that we use. On top of all of that, we have reservoir considerations as far as the spacing and the density of how close we drill the wells. On top of that, we have surface issues and challenges on access, vapors, various number of things. All of that combines. As Edison said, "Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration," and the team does a great job of managing all of that. I do not want to overcomplicate it in that generally we figure it out, and then we can go multiply that and do it 20, 30, 40 times in an area, and then we just figure it out for the next area. Again, one thing to have lots of wells to go drill, and this is a bit of a busy slide here, but obviously the litmus test for our business is, is it profitable. This play has a few things going for it to make it extremely profitable. On the revenue side of things, we make almost no gas, just enough gas to kind of service our needs. That makes all of our revenue oil barrels as opposed to gas barrels, which obviously in today's environment are considerably higher value than gas. That makes our top line great. This play also has a number of advantages that help with the bottom line. We have a number of OpEx advantages, strong per well rates, low water cuts. We consume our own energy. We need minimal infrastructure, that which we do need, we are able to develop. We have clean oil at all of our leases, which helps with marketing flexibility. All that leads to great netbacks. Similar to what Ian talked about on the CapEx side of things, we can do pad drilling. We can share facilities. We have a high reserve density, so we can get lots of wells in a small area. We do not need fracs, minimal infrastructure, and that allows for great recycling of cash, add to that moderate declines. Again, we can get multiple payouts. As Ian talked about, he has been showing this graph for years on the right side, and imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. Again, we can get a couple payouts at current pricing in a little over a year on a median well. We start stacking those zones up, and it really helps. It is one thing to talk about. We can do it on a type curve and do it in a spreadsheet, but I am kind of a show-me guy. This is an example of one section of land which will really demonstrate the power of that Mannville stack. On the right side of this, you can see a graph, and that is the production coming out of 11 wells in this section of land. You can see it is a little over 1,600 barrels a day now, full cycle, so facilities, land, seismic, you name it. We have invested about CAD 20 million in that section of land, and it has now already made CAD 28 million of operating income in a couple of years. It is fully paid out and would have a run rate of around CAD 30 million a year. Really powerful. That is one section of land of our 214, albeit it is an exceptional section. They are not all created equal, much to Andrew's and all of our chagrin, but it is extremely powerful. From a corporate perspective, what does that look like? Again, similar to the last graph that you saw, we have our green, blue, and red, which represent the Waseca and the Upper Sparky and the Lower Sparky. That, as you can see, is the lion's share of our production. Of the 10 zones that we have drilled, it is 90% of our current production. It is 90% of what is in our reserve report, but it is not the only part of the story. While we have hundreds and hundreds of locations in those three anchor zones, we also have hundreds and hundreds in other zones that the team is testing. You can kind of start to see a little wedge there forming at the top. We have 10 zones that we have now tested. Seven of those have IPs greater than 100, and we constantly are improving those with changes in technology, and half a dozen of them have tests over 150 barrels a day. Kind of the same thing in a timeline view to just, again, show the possibility of where things are going. We have now drilled 10 zones, and that is what will continue to drive growth for Caltex. You can see at the bottom left, that is the very first deal we did with PrairieSky. We committed to two wells and grew that area to about 1,000 barrels a day from three different zones. Still lots of inventory to go on that, but that was just kind of a seed. We started testing and acquiring lands in other areas, made another acquisition, started testing a couple more zones. Again, these new zones, as well as continuing to develop the older areas, added to future growth. We've now done our third acquisition. All told, the acquisitions are only around 5,600 barrels a day, but great land opportunity with all those. There is lots more to go. Just recently, we've tested a 200-barrel-a-day zone, not included in any of our reserve reports, not included really in any of the growth here that you're seeing. It's just kind of coming online. To date, we've now done 16 deals with PrairieSky on various styles. We've now drilled 47 wells on our original commitment of two wells on the first deal that we did with them, and have drilled 78 wells with PrairieSky. They have just been a great partner and will continue to look to grow the company with these new zones. On that, the second half of the year will be busy. We'll be drilling about 20% of our zones. We'll be outside of the three anchor zones looking to kind of continue to improve upon things that we've already been doing, as well as we'll balance that with efficient growth in our three anchor zones. The team will continue to look at growth through land sales, farm in, and acquisitions. With that, I'll end there. I look forward to answering questions. Thanks again to Andrew and the rest of the team. Thank you, Tom. That was great. The Duvernay Shale is Canada's one true shale play. It has all the characteristics of a resource play as it is predictable, repeatable, and scalable. PrairieSky has just under 1 million acres of fee mineral title on this play. The oil produced is over 40-degree API and has associated liquids rich gas between 1,000 and 2,000 standard cubic feet per barrel. In a few years, when you see our gas volumes growing, remember this slide. A lot of the gas will come from there. Mapping the thermal maturity of the rock shows that most of PrairieSky's land is within the volatile oil window and has superior economics to many other areas of the play. Our royalty production was flat at 400 barrels a day for the last four years and just recently spiked up to over 700 with just three new wells on the play. Ultimately, our delineated lands have the potential to grow to over 5,000 net royalty barrels per day, making this our largest cash-flowing asset. There it is. Sorry, this is ripping apart. PrairieSky has over 30 years' drilling inventory in the play. The combination of high IPs and high royalties gives PrairieSky owners significant exposure to the growth of the play. Martin Malik is a founder of Spartan Delta and is responsible for the great execution and the discovery of the large contiguous resource west of the Homeglen-Rimbey Reef Complex. Spartan's ramp to their current status as one of the largest Duvernay landowners has been very impressive, and we're very happy to have Martin present for us today. Perfect. Thanks, Andrew. Thanks for having us on your investor day. A special thank you to Ian and Tom in growing all these heavy oil barrels. Just as a point of education, all these heavy oil barrels require a lot of condensate and diluent to move across the country and down south and to tidewater here with TMX. Your success is a great segue to the Duvernay here, which we see as more of a 45-55 API oil play. Spartan Delta has a pretty very well-articulated three-pillar strategy here, and it is really anchored on that first pillar, the Duvernay growth. The best way to describe Spartan Delta's Duvernay here is that it really is the ground floor, getting in on the ground floor of the Duvernay. There are a couple of differentiators for Spartan Delta compared to Spartan Caltex here. We are a public company. We're listed on the TSX. It does provide a complimentary avenue for investors to participate in this Duvernay story alongside with PrairieSky. Also, we are one of the younger relationships with PrairieSky, having basically built our entire Duvernay position here in the last year and a half. Very rapidly, we've amassed a considerable acreage base, but from a development perspective, we're very early on. It's really the ground floor here. Now, our Duvernay is partially funded by a legacy asset in the Deep Basin. It's a liquids-rich asset, and it really comprises the remaining two pillars of the strategy. Those two pillars, practically speaking, what they offer is a stable free cash flow engine to help with the Duvernay. It does provide the investor the optionality with participating in some of those gasier BOEs that Andrew mentioned as well. Geographically, one of the advantages of the Duvernay position Spartan's been able to accumulate is shown with our position, the Duvernay in the green here on the screen. We are a two-hour drive from where we're sitting today. What that translates to practically is that all of the access surface infrastructure and a lot of legacy egress infrastructure was already existing when we moved in here, a big bonus for the Duvernay. Similarly, you could see the proximity of that green acreage to the legacy deep basin gas acreage within our portfolio. The synergies operationally, having the same operators work this area and leveraging that infrastructure for the Duvernay is also a big plus. A bit of a snapshot, we're about a 40,000 BOE a day company. Ambitious capital program and growth in the Duvernay. We forecast exiting our Duvernay volumes to be between 20%-25% of our exit volumes this year. Very ambitious growth profile in the Duvernay. Just a little history, a little bragging moment for Spartan as well, since I got to follow it up with the success of these fine gentlemen here. Spartan, this is the fourth iteration of the Spartan franchise as well. There have been four of these. This current iteration, Spartan Delta, was created in 2020. It really leveraged this legacy asset, its first major acquisition in the Deep Basin, to build, to assemble and build a Montney resource play that was then sold primarily here in May of 2023. Lots of experience in Spartan in very rapidly accumulating, building, growing corporate production to 80,000 BOE a day when that asset was sold. A lot of that experience in resource accumulation, resource development exists within our shop. Out of the CAD 635 million of equity that has been raised here in this tenure, there has been CAD 1.8 billion returned to shareholders through dividends and other distributions. Meanwhile, also retaining this Spartan entity, which has its own market cap, as well as spinning out some select Montney assets that were not divested into its own publicly traded entity, a junior producer called Logan Energy. Just a tremendous amount of value creation from 2020 to now that has existed within this iteration of Spartan Delta. Again, just the history of rapidly accumulating, developing these resource-type plays. The punchline for Spartan Delta, in my view, is the rate of change that exists in our net back. We have our actual results here in 2024 versus what we anticipate to accomplish here in 2025. Really, 2024 is a proxy for this legacy Deep Basin production that we have. This is our steady state. It is that tremendous increase in condensate throughout the year as we invest in the Duvernay that is really driving about a 50% increase in our netback year over year. There we go. Just to recap what we have accomplished here in the short time, we have amassed 320,000 acres in what we believe to be the most productive area in the West Shale Basin Duvernay. We started our inaugural operations last year. We have put on production 3.4 net wells. Here in Q1, we have already drilled about 4.2 net wells, and we are forecasting 50 net wells for the year. It truly is, I will keep saying it, the ground floor, the entry level here in the West Shale Duvernay. All of the infrastructure to support the ambition that we have to grow the asset to 25,000 BOE a day is now behind us. We've spent some money primarily on water infrastructure. Unlike the heavy oil world here, this is a multi-stage fract play that requires a lot of water. The logistics of getting that water sourced, stored, transported to site is very important. It is really going to be the key to driving capital costs down in this play. Lots of work done today just in a short amount of time accumulating the position. This is the punchline of our thesis here, a very ambitious play. Really could not have done it without PrairieSky. Here you could see on the map with our acreage position, these wells are long. In fact, the longer, the better. I call it the quicker we get to a Ford assembly plant, the better. That means long wells, lots of wells on a single pad, and realizing those efficiencies of scale. The length of the wells is quite a bit important because we're drilling at a minimum 2.5 mi wells and trying to stretch that to 3, 3.5. That requires a contiguous asset base to develop effectively. Again, kudos to PrairieSky team for having the confidence and partnering up with us to be able to develop that. That is what it requires. Secondly, as a differentiator to maybe some of the heavier barrels as well, here what we've seen from a technological perspective, because Ian mentioned it, stuff's been around, it's been known for a long time. The real differentiator, the same theme across all of us here, is technology. What we've noticed is what attracted us to this postal code here is that a lot of evolution and delineation that has occurred, occurred 10 years ago up to probably five years ago. Interesting results, resource was proven, but commerciality was still not quite there. Meanwhile, what we've seen is the Duvernay makes steady gains in both productivity and lowering CapEx year over year. We found a perfect opportunity here to start to rapidly assemble that position in advance of these technological step changes and capital step changes to put this together. What we've realized is in our early stage activity here, there's some callouts on the map here with our early results. We're seeing an improvement of 50-100% over and above some of the legacy wells that were drilled largely to the same well length. This is just taking advantage of a completion scale-up of how we do our business. The thesis for Spartan is that it is an early stage play that's complimentary to the heavy barrels that are gushing out of the basin here with all the success here and driving that machine, that Ford assembly plant in play so that to get it to a position where we could improve on that profile of growth here, which is about a 50% annual compounded growth rate. With that, I'll leave it there and look forward to questions. Okay, we have a quick 10-minute break after this, but we just thought we'd open it up to questions for the panel while they're all sitting up here. Someone must have one out there. Mitch. I'm just curious, especially as it relates to the two heavy oil developers. As you enhance the recovery from the technologies that you're using and you get these increasing production profiles, what does it look like at the back end? Does it come down more sharply? Does it actually just sort of what is because you're getting more and more of the oil out, especially with the water flood, then what happens at the end of the curve? Yeah, ultimately, let's actually for a second, but ultimately, you'll just recover more oil. Primary is 5%. Some of these will recover 20%, but maybe there's some more. Yeah, we haven't seen water breakthrough, so we don't have a perfect answer for that. Certainly, the models we've run and the analogous pool suggest that it will hit a terminal decline rate of about 15% and just kind of go through that. We're feeling pretty good about that, mostly because we've seen no significant water breakthrough to date. It doesn't get gassier at the end? Not at all. No. No. In fact, it's more the opposite because, again, heavy oil, there's not a lot of gas entrained in it, so you've let off a lot of that. Yeah. Good question, Aaron. Would you be able to comment on what your average royalty rate is on PrairieSky land? How much of your CapEx is being spent on PrairieSky land and what we would expect for growth over the next one to three years? Just have something to add to Aaron. Go for it. Is it a change with the royalty rate at these lower prices here in terms of how that CapEx differs as well too? Does that enter give us a lower royalty rate? Is that what you said? Yeah. That's not a thing. Oh, got a mic? Okay, perfect. Jeremy, do you want to? Does it enter like Aaron? Yeah. I guess, in essence, would each producer say how much they're willing, how much they're going to spend, what's the average royalty rate, and how much are you going to grow? That was the question. Spur is easy because, call it, 80% plus of our land is aligned with PrairieSky. Easily 80%-90% of the growth will be aligned with PrairieSky. Our two best fields, Nipisi and Martens Hills, have a PrairieSky royalty on it. Again, we're 52,000, we'll be at 20 or 75,000 by 2027. That's really the simple math from that. What would? 20% Keger. I'm sorry? What would your average royalty rate be? With PrairieSky, it would be 4%-5%. Sure. Caltex will grow about 80% this year. Our average royalty rate with PrairieSky is probably on the order of 8% because we have some fee minerals as well as overrides. Similar to Ian, roughly two-thirds of our acreage would be in partnership with PrairieSky. Some of it more, some of it less. Our growth, we may have quarters where it is a little less or a little more PrairieSky weighted, but over time will be similar to our acreage holdings. Aaron, I'm going to disappoint you here. As much as our land position is almost set, there's still a bit of a competitive advantage and a little bit of tug-and-war going on in our area. I will defer on the royalty rate. What I will mention is we're partnered up with PrairieSky, I'd say just over 20% of that acreage. Yeah, thank you, Travis from National Bank. Ian, this question's probably for you, but open to everybody participating. You had put up a heavy oil slide on one of the wells, I think at Nipisi, showing the impact of water flood at a certain part of the life cycle. You made a joke about Michael wanting to know why you did not do it earlier. Have you found an optimal part of the life cycle of a primary well where water flood should be enforced in terms of, is it three months? Is it where you think you are at the bottom end of the curve? Or how do you think about that? I will leave that open to the panel as well. Yeah. From a reservoir standpoint, the question generally is almost the opposite. Is there a point in time where you're too late to initiate a water flood? The concern is when you've let off all the pressure that the water then can find some sort of channel or short-circuit the path and the flood does not become effective. From a reservoir standpoint, we have flooded wells as late as three years after primary, and we've seen no ill effect of that case. They just flood beautifully. We feel pretty good technically on that. I think operationally, we're kind of having a little bit of fun with some of our best wells where we drill the injector at the same time as the producers. We're actually producing the injector to payout and then flipping it to an injector. We produce the injector for six months to a year, pay out the injector, and then flip it to a producer. Operationally, we're now into these huge pads. You can imagine with the double-down area, we're 20 wells per pad, 10 producers, 10 injectors into two different zones. It makes a lot of sense to drill that all at once as one big pad. By and large, we're now just adding injectors as we add producers. Yeah, I guess if you want a little more color commentary, we do not have anything under flood right now, but at our last company, we had a very large polymer flood, and we found the optimal time was to initiate the polymer day one. Similar to what Ian was talking about, the sooner you are spending all that money upfront, it pays great dividends and you get a lot of capital efficiencies by doing it all at the beginning and driving big construction projects and doing everything at once. For those in the room around it, polymer is effectively mixes with water. It's a powder, and it effectively thickens the water and allows for more effective sweep. I'm sure there's a better way to say that, but. Yeah, that's perfect. You get better mobility ratios with polymer for heavier oils, which generally our oil would be heavier than what Ian's dealing with. Hi, Jeremy from BMO. Just a quick question on, we've seen the Clearwater, see a lot more water floods now. Do you expect to see more water flood, polymer floods in the Mannville stack as we go along here? Is that something that's going to be a more talking point here two years from now, five years from now? Yeah, so we do not have anything currently under flood. We are currently developing a pilot for an upcoming test, and that we will be doing hopefully in the third or fourth quarter of this year. A number of different things are on the go as well. We have some guys in the office that are working on some SIM, on some things. In general, we are dealing with quite a bit heavier oil than the Clearwater. Whatever% ultimately that the Clearwater gives to, I would not expect you to have the same amount under flood in the Mannville stack. Having said that, there are going to be lots of great little pockets that are highly amenable to either water flood and/or polymer flood over time. Again, as Andrew mentioned at the beginning, time and technology are great for large resources. Hi, Trent Bain from Granite Ridge Capital. This is a question to be directed to Martin about your lines in the Duvernay. I'd like to commend you on the unbelievable reduction in costs that you've seen in this play. I was wondering if you could elaborate a little bit on why you think these changes are sort of sustainable going into the future and whether or not there's room for them to decrease further. Yeah, thank you for the question. Absolutely. If you were to look at the map sheet of the page that we have our activity on, you could see it's relatively sparsely populated with wells that are one-off wells, early delineation wells. It's only really in the last 12 months, quite frankly, that Spartan and some of our flanking operators have started to employ, and I'll always repeat it, the Ford assembly plant. That mentality of drilling multi-well pads off the same surface and utilizing services to drill and frack these wells in a concentrated fashion is the definition of economies of scale for that play. It is very much sustainable. I think as we learn more into the play and we dissect what are the primary ingredients for costs here, we're getting creative on how we could further reduce those costs. The other part I'll say is that the Duvernay itself, it's not new. It's a fairly productive member in the basin, over 200,000 BOE a day. A lot of it's concentrated up in Kaybob right now, and there's some other pockets in the East Shale Basin as well that are much more mature than the sub-basin that we're playing with. We could look to their data and their cost efficiencies as well and have a barometer for where we could go. It's not just theory at this point. We have some actual data that point us to sustained reduction in capital, but the most fundamental description is the Ford assembly plant. We are drilling multiple wells off every pad, and to date, we've only done three and four well pads. Thank you, Jamie Kubik from CIBC. Maybe first question for all three panel members. Down to what oil price is your growth trajectory expected to be sustained, and would you have to change course at where current oil prices are at at all? We'll start with Ian. Sure. A couple of precursors to that. While the WTI is in the 50% percentile range of what prices have been in the last five years, the WCS price, thanks to a very tight WCS differential, is in the 75% percentile of current price. Thank you, TMX. That is huge for us. We would say in a normal differential environment, $55 WTI, at that point, we are comfortable still growing by 20% and paying the dividend. The dividend formula is based on a flat $55 number, so we feel very comfortable with that. If we want to not grow at 20% per year and just stay flat and pay the regular dividend, we are confident down to low 40s, $42-$43 a barrel. If we want to not pay dividend and not grow, we are confident down to $30. Yeah, so we do not have a dividend in place, so we do not have to worry about that. We are purely focused on growth and testing new plays. At current levels, we will run three rigs for the second half of the year, which is really what we have done for the last year and a half, and that will provide about 80% growth, give us free cash flow at current prices. Sorry, not 80% cash flow, 80% growth and still have free cash flow. As prices soften, probably the way that we'll adjust would be we would probably drill less of our upper-tier wells that are purely growth for growth's sake and not develop those resources in a kind of lower pricing environment, and we'd just spend more money testing things so that as things did improve, we would have more of our upper-tier wells to go drill into a better price environment. Generally, our lower-tier wells are also lower decline, and so we like the idea of kind of drilling up and testing things in a lower environment, and then as things get stronger, really drilling into that with the better plays. Spartan also does not have a dividend and being public, there's no share buybacks put in place either. Also a public growth vehicle. For us, at $60 WTI, our program is intact. That growth profile is intact. Really, once we start to get $55 or less, philosophically, it becomes probably more attractive to us to start looking at acquisitions and/or picking up additional land here in this depressed environment. We do have a gas portfolio very efficiently run. It is still a free cash flow engine for us, despite there being last year even historically low gas prices in the basin, specifically in the summer. Still churned out a decent amount of free cash flow. If those two commodities ever tilt, it also provides that optionality as well. Great. Thank you. Maybe a follow-on question for Ian, just with respect to the Clearwater. I know that the topic of co-development with water flood with your primary wells has come up a bit, but how do you think about areas that previously maybe were developed in a wine rack fashion? Can those areas be water flooded, or does that sort of sterilize that acreage from pressure support in the future? Yeah. One of the negatives of the Texas Three-Step or others is you kind of got to decide to pick. Are you going to go primary and secondary out of the gate, or are you just going to do primary, in my opinion? It was easy at Martens Hills because we could just drill three stacks, and we could always just flip wells later. I did not have to make that difficult decision early. I have been on record not supporting wine racks from day one simply because I think you preclude the ability to water flood. I could easily prove them wrong, but I will maintain that stance at this point. Great. Thanks for all the questions, everyone, and thank you guys all very much for coming. Very much appreciate the insights, and we'll go reload the coffees, hit the washrooms, and then we'll be back after break. Thanks. I hope everyone had a good break and appreciated the three producers. I thought they all did a terrific job, and their success is our success, so it's important to see some of these well-capitalized, well-companies, doing good things on PrairieSky lands. The next section will be—we're going to talk about a few feature plays, including the Montney and our SAG-D assets. I will move on to the financial and leasing part of the presentation, and we will end with a range of outcomes for the business for the next 10 years and what you can expect on a low end, right up to a higher end in terms of total returns as shareholders. Upon IPO in 2014, we had zero production and land on the Montney resource play. We added significant exposure with the acquisitions of Range Royalty and Canadian Natural Resources. Subsequent to these, we added material and developed land on the play at a very low cost. Currently, royalty production is 1,700 net royalty barrels net to us, but we will see this double over time with no future capital. Similar to our entry in other large resource plays and the individuals that we talked to next door here, we were very early into this area. It's called the Two Rivers area of Northeastern British Columbia, and we bought these blue, dark blue lands eight years ago for CAD 18 million. What we knew at the time—these assets sit in Northeastern British Columbia—is that they were southwest of the overpressured line and that there were up to four different Montney zones totaling 325 meters of pay, or over 1,000 feet of potential pay. The pool had not been discovered yet, but we had a pretty strong geology and a pretty good feel for the economics of it. Now, fast forward eight years, and the first major development happened this winter with exceptional results and first productions coming on in Q2 for our shareholders. As you can see on the lands, when you look at a fully developed Montney piece of acreage, you can't even see the blue, so there's a huge amount of drilling to be done on that acreage over time. Ultimately, we believe this will be worth over CAD 200 million to PrairieSky owners, or 10 times our initial investment. Buy quality real estate, add time. On another Montney example, it's just to show the materiality of higher royalties on a six-and-a-half-section block. So far, a third of a billion dollars of capital has been spent on the Navy Blue Lands. This is in kind of Wembley, so just west of Grand Prairie, and we currently have 530 net royalty barrels per day from two very well-capitalized producers. We get paid at the wellhead with no capital, no transportation, no operating cost, and no future liability. We have one common slide from our 2023 Investor Day, and we just presented this as one of our 28,000 sections we have in inventory. It is a Montney Royalty. It is a 12.5% Royalty, and it is right in the heart of Nest 2 with ARC. We were just showing that you own this as a shareholder, and someday—we do not know the timing of which it is going to be developed—but someday it will be developed. Sure enough, about nine months ago, nine licenses came across our lands, and all these wells have been drilled and fracked by ARC, and we think in the range of CAD 50 million of income will be generated net to us over the next 15-20 years. Again, something that was worth zero in your portfolio is now worth CAD 50 million. Again, as a reminder, we contribute no capital, no operating expenses, no abandonment liability, and 30 years down the road, these will all need to be abandoned. We will not have to pay for that either. Moving on to SAG-D, one of the major advantages of Canadian production is the low base declines of the oil sands. Just under 10% of PrairieSky's oil production comes from steam-assisted gravity drainage projects. When we bought these assets, we anticipated recovering around 50% of the total oil in place. Adding solvents, a new technological adaptation has shown that you can take recovery to over 80% of the original oil in place. The Lindbergh expansion is now underway on our largest SAG-D producing asset. Over the next five years, our net royalty production will more than double from current levels. After completion in 2030, we will have a 30-year remaining RLI on the asset. Murray Lake, on the north end of this map, is a fully core hole delineated asset that has zero value attributed to it in our asset book, but will someday sell a well. PrairieSky's long RLI with no future capital highlights the challenge in valuing our shares. If you run a terminal value calculation for our business, even with a discount rate in line with other good businesses, you get to more than double our current share price. My argument is that with a multi-decade RLI, no future development capital, a lower discount rate is appropriate for a business like ours. One of the largest assets not recognized in the asset book you have in front of you are our numerous small-scale SAG-D opportunities on our land. Over 10 leasing arrangements have been signed with qualified counterparties, including one senior producer. Over the next decade, we will likely see two to four projects developed, and this could uncover hundreds of millions of future cash flow for the business. Multilateral drilling is now very active in the Williston Basin, targeting both the Bakken and the Mississippian formations. Given the shallow drilling depths and the sweet light oil, the economics of the play are strong. This is the area where we did that $50 million Petro-Canada fee acquisition. None of those lands are in here. December 31 was our cutoff, so those will show up in the 2027 asset book. We also have recently leased lands for potash, helium, and lithium. Shareholders in this room also own 27% of a large carbon sequestration hub in Alberta's industrial heartland that we have zero value booked to. Upon full completion of this carbon sequestration hub, it'll be one of the top 10 carbon depositors on Earth. It can do about 3 megatons a year. Maybe it is worth zero, but it did not cost you anything. Okay, on to the financial and leasing update. Revenue from our oil portfolios averaged CAD 400 million per year over the last three years. Growth of 12% organically has helped mitigate the decline in prices. Natural gas and NGL revenues dropped dramatically from CAD 176 million in 2022 to CAD 62 million in 2024. With a decades-long reserve life index, we will capture value on any price recovery or spikes that occur in this volatile commodity. If you run a natural gas producer with high declines and a 6-8 year RLI, you require a near-term price recovery to capture value for your business. With a long-duration business like PrairieSky, you care more about the average price over decades, not near-term spot prices. What differentiates a royalty barrel from a producing barrel is cost. What differentiates PrairieSky from the royalty roll-up schemes is the replenishment of produced royalty barrels from our inventory of undeveloped land. It is an important distinction. Owning consolidated 100% petroleum, natural gas, and all other minerals not only allows us to control leasing, negotiate favorable terms, and choose our counterparties, but we also receive perpetual lease rental income and bonus revenue that is de minimis in all other royalty companies, with the exception of Texas Pacific Land Trust. In other income, we also generate seismic fees and other minerals such as potash. Our seismic database is one of the largest in Canada. You own this as shareholders, and it would cost over CAD 600 million to replicate the seismic database. It is not recognized in our asset value, but it has tremendous value to us. There are three main cost centers in our business: cash taxes, production and mineral taxes, and cash G&A. I'll talk about the cash taxes in a couple of slides, so I'll start with our freehold mineral taxes. We have reduced our production and mineral taxes from CAD 8 million to CAD 4 million, so they're in half, over 10 years, while tripling our land base. This was accomplished by changing our lease form and having the producer pay the FMT. While tripling our land base, our G&A has less than doubled, and as our production continues to grow on a per-unit basis, we will see the cost per barrel drop from here. Bank debt. We have run the business with net cash for most of our history. We currently have CAD 220 million in debt as we recently canceled 1.4% of the shares outstanding and bought CAD 75 million of royalty assets with anticipated returns in the high teens. Currently, we have a CAD 350 million facility extendable to CAD 600 million with a 4.75% effective interest rate. This interest is tax-deductible. Under the taxes, we have CAD 1.3 billion in tax pools entering the year. So the first CAD 130 million of pre-tax cash flow sheltered and all other cash flow after that will be taxed at 23.5%. Going into 2026, we will have just over a billion in remaining shelter, so the first CAD 100 million of pre-tax cash flow in 2026 will be sheltered. The rest, again, at the statutory tax rates. Cash taxes are the unfortunate outcome of generating loads of cash and spending little. The primary reason the vast majority of EMPs are not taxable is they do not generate full-cycle returns. Now, on to the fun part: potential returns and a long-term range of outcomes for our business. In a cyclical industry, you can take advantage of both highs and lows of the commodity cycle and the capital cycle, which, by the way, do not have an R-squared of one. Cash is another form of optionality, and it allows this type of behavior. When pricing is strong, we are a seller or a leaser of land while building cash or paying down debt used in a previous downturn. With our massive undeveloped land base, we can be patient investors. In the year 2000, the average CEO tenure at a Fortune 500 company was 10 years. Today, it is five years. Patience and consistency are both lacking in the majority of businesses. If it is important to make hay while the sun shines, it is equally important when it is pouring rain to go outside with bathtubs, not a thimble. In challenging environments, we will execute on the acquisition of low-cost royalty assets or share repurchases, whatever provides the best long-term return to our owners. Call options in our portfolio include, but are not limited to, new discoveries, technological changes both on drilling and production, enhanced oil recovery, other minerals including potash, lithium, helium, hydrogen, and one of the bigger ones is oil and gas pricing. You have got fat tail upside, and you have got prices at kind of structural lows. Amazingly, if you took 2022 and had that for six straight years, we could cancel all our shares with our current share price here today. There will be years again where pricing goes to more normalized levels. If not, we're still good, but those are fun, and we miss them. These call options have no premium and do not expire. I think that's another part. Having a basket of calls and having duration, it's important. Technology can arguably have a bigger impact on our future returns than a new discovery. Multilateral drilling techniques have added billions of barrels of new economic resource. With better F&D and recycle ratios than the Permian, these assets will continue to attract capital and gain market share from higher-cost barrels. Not to be outdone by new drilling techniques, some of the first downhole gas separators have been installed in the Elk Point region of Alberta. Wells on production for more than two years have shown a doubling of oil production upon installation. This picture shows what a whale shark looks like. Effectively, without that, all the production just comes up the tubing, and it's really foamy because you've got the gas mixed with the oil, so they can't shoot fluid levels. They can't pump the wells down. You install that, and then it separates the gas and the oil. The gas goes up the annulus, and then you can pump your well efficiently, and it's shown a doubling of production. I think a lot of those gassy oil wells we have in Elk Point, township 55 and 56, range 1-7, a lot of those will be switched out with these downhole gas separators over the next few years. Again, it's not just drilling efficiencies or fracking efficiencies. There's actually new production efficiencies as well. When triangulating the value of PrairieSky, we have to stretch to get to a number less than double our current capitalization. While fee title is mispriced, while our fee title is mispriced, that is not the case everywhere. The S&P 500 member, TPL, carries a valuation that gives credit to their current cash flow stream as well as future optionality. I would argue that PrairieSky has a higher terminal growth rate from this point forward than TPL. Our returns on equity and returns on capital employed look competitive with other high-quality businesses. When you remove DDNA, as that number is borne by the producers, you can see we achieve very compelling returns. Those are the adjusted ones on the bottom. Given our impenetrable moat, our 98% operating margins, our longer duration, our stronger balance sheet, our shares should ultimately decouple from the XEG. While we have seen modest outperformance over the last few years, as quarters are printed, we should over time see this disconnect further. This slide compares PSK to other long-duration cash flow streams with strong moats. When you look at the midstream entities, they trade at triple our free cash flow multiple, and the rails at more than two and a half times our free cash flow multiple. In addition, both of these industries carry meaningful debt loads. If you assume similar terminal growth rates for the businesses, you can buy PrairieSky for one half to one third the free cash flow multiple and get, in my opinion, a superior business. While the mining royalty companies have high margins and net cash, they trade at double our valuation and expose investors to higher risk jurisdictions. In addition, mining royalty companies trade at two times NAV, where PrairieSky trades at a significant discount. The reason I picked on these three sectors is because they're all great businesses. I do not want to spend long on this slide, but this one is very simple. If PrairieSky and this group of REITs turned off their distributions, PrairieSky could cancel more than all of its 235.5 million shares in the time it takes the group to repay their leverage. Get to our balance sheet. PrairieSky is like an underground REIT that is half leased, the tenants pay for the maintenance, and has no leverage. After tax and after G&A, our business generates loads of cash. At the midpoint and below our current growth rates, we will generate 75% of our enterprise value in 10 years and have a bigger business at the end of it. Similar to last investor day, we took all the free cash flow in two conservative scenarios and applied it to buying back stock at today's share price. We applied today's multiple close to the lowest we've ever traded at to get to the closing share price. The low number is a 7% compounded annualized return or CAD 56 per share, and the high case presented, which is actually the mid case on the previous slide, gets us to CAD 137 per share or a 19.5% compounded annualized return. Two years ago, we presented the same thing. How did we do? The two range of outcomes are seen there in the two different color lines. We kind of landed in the middle, the lower end of the middle with the green dot there. That was a reasonable range of outcomes, I suppose. The story, and I'm getting way behind. That is where we ended up landing. Today, this is the one we're presenting going forward over the next 10 years. Visually, this is the range of outcomes in the future based on the scenarios we presented. As we all know, there are possibilities above these lines and below these lines, and the lines will definitely not be straight. What you should know is the management works every day to lease land, bring present value forward, and will continue to buy stock aligning our interests. I would like to thank all our staff for their hard work, our board for their support, and most importantly, our owners for putting trust in us and allowing us to execute on our business plan. We'd now like to open up to any questions anyone has. Hi, Andrew. I noticed in the playbook here there was a number of changes that saw a declining value change. Was that more the commodity? Was that just lack of operators not deciding to drill those plays? What was the reason behind the decline? And could those come back? For sure. Yeah. So there are a number of them that could come back, Jeremy. Some of them come off when we move the price deck, and we do not believe the producer gets a high enough rate of return. We take them out. But then when pricing recovers, those will go back in. So there is a number of assets that are like that. And in some cases, they are truly gone forever because someone finds the edge of the pool, and you had a booking there, so you take that out as well. And then lastly, we did adjust pricing down. Last playbook, we had $70 US WTI, $3 ACO, and we moved that down to $2.50 ACO, which killed a bunch of gas assets. We took WTI down $5, which does not sound like a lot, but our operating margins are 98% today, 98% at $10 oil, where there are companies at $70 oil that have 50% operating margins, and right now they have zero. We try and take out things that we think in today's world, if we do believe we are going to be $65 forever, which we do not, but we need to pick a number, we will take those out of the asset book. I will ask you a hard question that I know you cannot answer. You talked about broker comp tables not actually capturing land very well. You outlined a scenario that has 10 years of development. You showed the undiscounted cash flow associated with that. How should we think about valuing that land on a discounted basis under a reasonable development scenario? How would you quantify that into a financial metric? Yeah. I think the way I just simply think about it is that you have the 34,000 wild boards that are directly offsetting our current production, and that's your inventory for the future, but you're not valuing those, obviously, when you're looking at our current cash flow stream. I just think what it does gives you a better terminal growth rate than any of your peers. Our peers will have to take some wedge of their cash flow and buy new asset and buy new asset and buy new asset to keep up with us. I guess that was kind of a wishy-washy answer, but I don't know what the right number is. I think certain areas, like we could sell our land in Cold Lake. If we want to sell it for cash, we could probably sell it for CAD 10,000 a hectare right now. That's what someone would probably pay to get rid of the royalties. There is a way bigger value there than is represented because that does not even show up in any of our asset values. The reality is we also know there is a 23-year drilling inventory on those lands, so we want to keep them. We'll get more money over longer periods of time. I also think one of the struggles people have when they look at these, you always see companies do, like I see these US deals all the time. Some of them are really short ROIs, have very small land bases, and they print a pretty good IRR. Actually, you look at it and you're like, "Well, that actually probably makes sense, but it's a high IRR for three years and a terminal value of zero." What we have always targeted is duration. Like our oil sands asset that's right now going to double with the capital Strathcona spending, that's one of those assets where it would be a lower, like that would be a 9.999 kind of return. That does not sound as good as some of the 20s you hear, but their 20s are gone after two years, and our 9 goes out till I think it's 2060. I'll probably be dead, but that IRR goes that long. I think that's the other thing is the duration of the assets that you target are very important. Arthur. Can you talk a little bit about how you think about growth rates for your different product streams? We'll talk about gas versus oil and talk about maybe $60 WTI, maybe stick below that versus a $70 oil price environment. Do you think you still see conceivably mid-single digits liquids growth in a $60 oil world? Does it change that much if all the producers really just give it back, give back more to shareholders? Like Ian, for instance, he's not growing less than 20%. All that's going to happen in a higher oil price environment is you're going to get more specials. Does that change? What happens maybe in the difference between $2.50 AECO and, knock on wood, $4 AECO? Yeah. Yeah. At $4 AECO, we saw what happened in 2022, and amazingly, two things happened. We had, I think it was CAD 64 million of revenue from our natural gas and NGL portfolio last year. 2022 was CAD 176 million, and the portfolio grew by 5.5%. Two things happen, and it compounds when if we do ever see pricing that's better. We just ran 2.50. I think one year we ran three, and people were like, "Three is crazy. It's 2.82 today." We are just like, "Let's just run a low one." If you did get back to that environment, you'd see growth in the portfolio, and then you'd also see, obviously, better revenue off the portfolio on the gas side. On the oil side, it's tricky because you have like we get paid on oil royalties from 320 producers. I think the top 25 represents 78% of our payments, so we pay very close attention to those. I think with what we know today, mid-single digit growth does not seem, that is what we have been saying for the last three years. It does not seem like a bad number. I think, again, if you go back to our decline slide, that is the more powerful piece. I think our declines are 18%. I struggle to, if you could find me a royalty company that had a decline less than 27%, I would be curious who it is. As a result, there is a lot less capital needs to be spent just to maintain that. I think that is a bit of a structural advantage of why we have shown outsized growth organically from our peers over the last three years. Hopefully that continues, but it can change in R&P. You go to $40 oil, there is going to be rigs dropping, but some of these lower-cost producers continue to drill. You're still comfortable with mid-single digits at $60 or a little bit less? Correct. Yeah. We're comfortable at $60 with the mid-single digits now. I mean, we wouldn't put it out in print. Maybe this is print. Again, time will tell. It's interesting how when you're running your budgets, you carry the three and you have 329 people making decisions for you, and that's their capital. When they put the wells on, how they put the wells on, if they junk a well, there are all these different things that go into putting together a budget for us. I think the mid-single digit growth feels good, but it's hard for us to predict. Again, if you have 35,000 future development locations and 800 get drilled this year, 720, it doesn't change our world that much. Short term, it does, which is one of the reasons we like to buy back because technically, under some of those scenarios, like you could in 11.2 years if our stock did not go up, there would be no shares left. Someone would own a CAD 5.7 billion share, which would be cool. I just wanted to build on the REIT compare. Sorry about the REITs. Yeah. No, no. It is a good one. If you compare to 10 years ago, you guys probably have a much lower base decline and a much higher cost of capital today. I would think that secondary recovery penetration on your lands is the argument for a higher cost of capital or a lower cost of capital because you are improving the duration of the cash flows. Why do you think that you have not been able to kind of put that together for shareholders? Why are they looking at a business today? Is the base decline materially different enough from 10 years ago to make that argument hold? Yeah. I think time will tell, and I think as quarters are printed, people will get more and more comfortable with the business and our growth rates and the outperformance of our peers just given the natural quality and structural quality of our business. Maybe I don't do a good job. Maybe we as a group don't do a good job explaining it. Someone at TPL, I watched some of their videos. I don't know how they're explaining it, but something's working. I don't know. Maybe Margaret's got a search out for a CEO who can actually get a proper multiple. I don't know when it gets recognized or how it gets recognized, but there's always little weird disconnects too. Like we had a major shareholder that has been puking stock for three months really messily. That is happening, and stocks go down when that happens. I think commodity prices, 25 times free cash flow versus 12 is night and day, call it 10 years ago to today. It feels like it is all perception around the terminal growth rate and commodity prices. Pivoting that from prices to volumes would be the unlock, I would think. We heard from three people today who are all self-funded and growing like +20%. Yeah. Hopefully we get back there. We did start to see the multiple climb a little bit, but it is shocking to me how closely aligned we are on multiple with inferior businesses. Like you get the CEO beside me, he'd be like, "Yeah, I got a worse business." I think over time, that just takes care of itself. Keep printing good quarters, pay down debt, cancel shares. Should take care of itself, but. I'm curious how you think your production and leasing activity is performing against the 90% of fee land, which is not owned privately. How are you doing versus the Crown? Also, there was a little bit of a shift in, I think you mentioned you owned two-thirds of the fee land that was available. In the past, that number has been a little higher. Was there more? I do not think you sold any, or. Yeah. It is more like 70%. I just rounded down. But yeah, it is still 70%. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. I think when you compare yourself to land sales, we watch every land sale because it is an important price marker for us in terms of if we are doing a two-year lease, what can we expect to get for a bonus? I think I would not like to say we are beating the crown. I think we are equivalent. For every crown section that trades relative to the amount of fee that is out there, I think we are leasing just as much as they are. It remains still active, actually. We have signed, I think, Sean, four leases last week. Yeah. Again, we are kind of still entering into a lease every business day. It is busy, and crown is also busy. There is a bunch of land sale activity, and it is good to see because I think there are some new capital pools coming back to Canada. Great. Thanks. Thanks, Andrew. I'm going to ask a question on slide 14, which I know is really busy, but it is one of my favorites that you guys put together. I'm just hopeful you could walk through a few of the changes that you saw from the last update to this. A couple of items that just stick out perhaps a little bit is just the Viking Oil, the number of locations that moved off this playbook from last, as well. Mannville Gas, Montney Gas. Looks like you have higher locations, lower value, lower EUR. Can you just talk about some of the changes that were happening in there perhaps? I know it's detailed, but it is a helpful slide. No, for sure. I mean, the Viking is an interesting one because we have, including Alberta and Saskatchewan, we have 9,000 future development locations. Those were being drilled at about 600 a year back in 2016, and now it is down to we might have something like 120 Viking wells drilled. The inventory, for the most part, is intact. There are a few places where they found the edges of the pool, so we took a few out. For the most part, we still have a massive Viking inventory. There is actually one company that is ramping their Viking this year, which is a good thing for us. We adjust them every year, and we actually adjust the type curves every year. One of the things we did in one area, we had type curves at 45,000 barrel EURs, and we took them down to 35,000 because that is just where we saw the wells heading. That pulled out a bunch of inventory at today's pricing. Some of those can come back, of course, as well, and there could be new extensions as well. The gas price, when we took gas down from $2.75, $2.50, that writes off a bunch of assets as well. Those can come right back in with pricing because we own it forever. Okay. Are any of the SAG-D opportunities that you talked about included in this update? No. I think that's sort of all I had. Maybe actually just a question on the Duvernay. You did have lower locations in here, higher EUR, a bit higher NPV. Can you just talk about the mix on that? Yeah. One of the things that changed, there was almost exclusively two-mile wells drilled in the last asset book and some one and a half mile wells drilled. Now people are going at a minimum two miles and sometimes three miles. You are getting more capital, longer wells, but obviously concurrent with that, higher EURs because you have bigger frac stages, more frac stages. That was just some of the tweaking we did based on newer data. There was actually a pretty major shift because some of those old wells that we were capturing for the original value of the Duvernay still had all the original Repsol and Talisman wells in it. Some of those were really old tech, like mid-2000s, 10-stage fracs. They were not good. It was not good tech, and those were dragging our type curve. Now every time you get a new batch of wells, you can start to get a better flavor for what the actual EURs are. Thank you. Hey, Andrew. Can you just talk about the effect of Canadian Natural on your lands, specifically in the Mannville stack? They're the biggest, and they drill the most, and you have pretty good exposure, I believe. Then secondarily, they did that royalty sale or Arc to the royalty sale kind of a while back where C&Q bought those. Just wondering if that would be something you would be looking at or just not really. Yeah. Interestingly enough, they were our largest royalty payer in the area by a large margin. When we bought CNRL's royalty portfolio, we paid CAD 1.8 billion and got all of their lands that they were not the payer on because they wanted to keep their cost structure. Our biggest payer in there, I am just giving you a bit of history. It is probably too much, but our biggest payer in there was Devon Canada. They bought Devon Canada, so they became the royalty payer to us. They've been very active in the region. When gas dropped last year, they moved seven rigs in there. They've kind of been drilling around our lands. Our lands are higher royalty. There's an additional 10% GOR on top of what they pay the crown. Now they're finally starting to license on our lands. They've been quite active. Sorry, what was the second part of the question? Just the royalty sale that they participated in. Yeah. Interestingly enough, Arc Resources from probably 25 years ago had a royalty on all this Mannville Heavy Oil stack. It was not like our fee, but it was a gross overriding royalty, pretty high-quality royalty package. Our team thought we were the natural buyer of that. We did a huge amount of work on it. Actually, there was a really good opportunity, we thought, to double production on that. We bid very aggressively. We bid on that one through our multiple because we said, "This will grow twice as fast as our current asset base." We did not get a second call back. Dan called the guy, and he said, "Oh, you must have lost my number because we for sure were the high bidder there." He said, "Oh, you did not make the second round." Anyway, it got disclosed. They paid triple. They paid triple our multiple for that. You know what is interesting, and they are the payer on it. They know they can double or triple it, but it just shows what a royalty is worth. Like if you're an E&P and you're going to be paying that royalty over a 25-year period of all those multi-lots, these things are worth more. We always try and say that we're worth more than we trade at, and people don't properly value our fee. They properly value the fee in the U.S. with Texas Pacific. They overpriced the fee at Landbridge, whatever. That's a meme stock. We shouldn't even talk about that. You have a sophisticated, disciplined company. The eighth largest non-governmental producer in the world, C&Q, buys a royalty for triple what we bid. It shows you the value of these things over long periods of time. I think it just highlights the mispricing. It wasn't like a $2 million royalty. They paid CAD 86 million. I thought it was an interesting data point. Thanks. Hey, Andrew. Good presentation this morning. Thank you for all the detail. I'm just curious. You've got the slide with countercyclicality and how you've taken advantage of the market. Where are we in terms of that cycle right now? What are the signposts you're using to guide? Obviously, peak and trough oil prices are not static. How is that impacting your capital allocation policy today, whether it be debt repayment? We saw you utilize the NCIB, dividend growth, and acquisition strategy right now. Yeah. It's a great question, and it's more of an art than a science. You definitely know when you're in COVID, and then you definitely know when you're getting $100 oil for your oil. Everywhere else in between, it's not clear. It's more of an art than a science. It's a great question. I think we do a bit of work on marginal cost of supply. We want to know if you're above that line, you're probably in the harvest mode. If you're below that line, you should be looking at opportunities, whether it's buying back your own shares or making an acquisition, whatever provides a higher return. Our number's in the mid-60s. Now, I mean, a geologist and finance guy picking that, so be careful of that. I think that almost seems like the marginal cost of supply. It actually seems to be rising, which I think is positive long-term for oil prices. We're just kind of getting down here. It's just kind of moved down here. We don't know exactly where we are. What we do know is our business is still generating a lot of cash. We're still very busy leasing land. Our biggest producers are still drilling their programs this year, so we're going to see growth. Our stock disconnected 28%. It was an opportunity to cancel some shares. Amazingly, we canceled 1.4% of the shares outstanding, and it's a net neutral cash proposition because you do not pay the 4% dividend. We borrow at 4.75%, write that off against our business because we're taxable, and so there's actually no net cash change. If you had CAD 5.7 billion, and you could keep that 4.75%, you could cancel all the shares, and you'd have no same cash. Anyway, I probably went on too long about that. Again, I think we're pushing towards that part of the cycle. It's a little more challenging, but do not know where we'll land. We can be patient and see where it really lands. What people forget is when you hit times like this, people forget that you do have two years of $100 oil, and you do have two years of $4 NYMEX. It never feels like it at this time, but at that time, it never feels like it is going to go down either. That is why we make sure we never do acquisitions up there and never buy back stock up there. That is when we save our pennies. Just in the context of that, I am just curious about the dividend because if you give us a dividend, I cannot do as well with it as you can on share repurchase. I am just curious how you think about the dividends are different. You were pretty clear when you were talking about acquisitions versus share repurchase and trying to get the best return. The dividend and its related policy seems to be this other thing. I'm just wondering how you think about that. Yeah, it's interesting. I'll break that into two pieces. The dividend today is CAD 245 million annually. We've kind of been growing it just under the pace of the business, so you'd add more free cash on top of it. When you really break down the business, should you even have a dividend? Should all the money go to repurchasing shares? If you believe even some of what we presented you today, you're buying dollars for 30 cents. There's a bit of that. We do have a buyback in place, and we'll balance that against any acquisition opportunities we have. The dividend is something we think about, and it is something we have to always evaluate as a board. I think over the next 10 years, it's a big decision because you're going to do, is it CAD 4.3 billion of free cash after tax after June or CAD 4.7 billion? Either way, you're almost at your market cap. Do you want to give that all away as dividends, or would you rather simulate the compounding? I've reinvested every dividend since IPO. I've taken all $8 of dividends and reinvested them. Now, I had to pay Govtree a bunch of money to do that. It's not tax-effective. That shows you what I would like. I think there's a bit of a balance, but it is something we review and look at. I think it's a differentiated business. A lot of companies pay dividends to get cost capital. Cost capital doesn't matter to us. It's a good question. Tough one to put me on the spot in front of everyone, but you did come all the way from Florida, so I have the ability to ask that. Someone asked Pam a question. Dave Harrison, you always have questions for me when it's just you and me. I'm not allowed to ask questions. Great. We'll be around here for the next little while, and management's sitting around. Mike's in the penalty box, but you're still allowed to talk to him. Please feel free to ask any question you want. Thank you all very much for coming. I know it's time out of your busy days.