Now presenting Bill Wood with Sylogist. Good morning, and thank you for coming. Before we begin, just a reminder that today's remarks include forward-looking statements, and you can find our full cautionary language in our MD&A and the AIF. Please come in. Take your time. Yeah, no problem. Over the past three years, we've transformed Sylogist into a purpose-built public sector SaaS company that's ready to scale. Our business is anchored in three large, resilient markets: provincial, state, and local government, education at the district level, not in the classroom, and the nonprofit sectors. These are mission-driven sectors where trust, reliability, and domain experience are imperative. This lends itself to a very sticky customer base with high lifetime value. Today, we're already trusted by more than 2,000 organizations across North America. That represents $60 million-plus in top-line annual revenue run rate. That's now largely recurring. No, that's okay. Come on in. Our current $60 million-plus top-line annual revenue run rate is largely now recurring, representing approximately 70% of our total revenue. We're still in the early days of capturing a massive opportunity from 25,000 state, provincial, and local governments across Canada and the U.S., 16,000 school districts, and 2 million nonprofits, of which a significant percentage are in our ideal customer profile or ICP. These markets remain highly fragmented and underserved by legacy providers whose systems are not fully SaaS and in the cloud, have security weaknesses, and lack contemporary functionality and analytics that public sector organizations want and need. We believe that combination creates a compelling growth runway for Sylogist. As I just mentioned, our three primary markets all share a similar pain point. They largely rely on 15-year-old to 20-year-old fragmented on-prem systems, and that's why our unified platforms win. We invested heavily over the last few years to develop three integrated SaaS platforms that are all now in market and quickly gaining awareness and scale with strong existing and new customer adoption alike. Built entirely on the Microsoft Cloud, these solutions are not nice-to-have systems. Rather, they serve as the mission-critical systems that customers rely on. Once adopted, our solutions become foundational to their operations and day-to-day activities. In turn, these are long-term customer relationships that are very sticky and provide predictable recurring revenue. There are ongoing upsell and cross-sell opportunities, which expand wallet share, as is reflected in our SaaS net revenue retention rates of over 107%. The three graphics you see represent the market-specific functionality offered in each platform. All three segments are growing, and we're consistently now winning targeted competitor takeaways. Partner-led sales and development and deployments are accelerating, making Sylogist Gov our fastest growing pipeline where we introduced the partner-led strategy first. The Texas Office of the Attorney General contract we signed in Q1 of 2025 for our victim services suite, the largest in the company's history, highlights our ability to also win large-scale state-level and hopefully provincial-level government projects as these agencies move to the cloud. We believe the long-term demand is resilient with SaaS subscriptions expanding, partners building their growth plans around our solutions, and our sales pipeline continuing to strengthen. Why Sylogist? Our differentiation rests on four pillars: really strong market demand, operational excellence, customer advocacy, and well-moated intellectual property. As supported by many studies, customer spend in our target market continues to migrate to the cloud at double-digit rates. Our best-in-class SaaS platforms are tailored to meet the specific needs of these markets. Our customer experience remains a competitive strength. Our incredibly high net promoter score that we've now achieved of 62 reflects an engaged community that advocates on our behalf. Customers now sign five-year agreements with annual 5% increases built in. In turn, we now have a very predictable revenue profile with a built-in growth flywheel. Microsoft is the go-to technology provider of our target markets. Being built on Microsoft's Business Central and Dynamics CRM platforms is a differentiator that gives us instant credibility and lowers friction in every deal. Lastly, we've structured our operational model and go-to-market strategy for operating leverage. As sales and implementation delivery is increasingly handed off to partners, high-margin SaaS recurring revenue grows, and we anticipate operating margin expansion will follow. To that end, over the last two years, we significantly invested in our partner strategy. Today, we are in a position to harvest those investments. Our model is relatively simple. As recurring revenue grows, predictability further grows. As partners take on more of the sales and delivery motions, we gain reach and efficiency. As operating leverage builds, we convert that scaling into expanded profitability. It's a disciplined, repeatable framework designed to compound results and create sustainable shareholder value. Our metrics tell the story. We're seeing clear, measurable progress across all three indicators. Bookings growth has accelerated, delivering back-to-back record quarters in 2025, with Q2 up 33% year over year. The SaaS portion of our recurring revenue continues to steadily grow, now at 72%, reflecting our ongoing shift. In Q2, SaaS ARR was $31.7 million, up 12.5%. These are not just one-offs. They reinforce the momentum, predictability, and resilience of our transformation to a SaaS company with solutions our target markets want. As I mentioned, the partner model is fundamental to our value creation thesis. We began enlisting well-known partners in late 2024, and that's now proving to be our core growth and value creation engine. Our partner strategy is central to everything we do. It's how we scale efficiently, expand market coverage, and accelerate delivery without adding significant internal costs and complexity. What's important is that these partners are now originating, closing, and delivering projects in the Sylogist Gov sector independently, where we first introduced our partner model. We will begin our handoff to partners in the Sylogist mission sector in 2026. We take a deliberate approach to partner selection and certification, invest upfront in partner training and enablement, co-delivering with them on early projects, and then gradually transition projects to be fully partner-led as they gain capability. That approach has admittedly caused margin compression over the last year as we handed off the service revenue to partners but kept our people to bring partners up to speed. That investment is now starting to pay off in terms of SaaS bookings acceleration, and we anticipate corresponding operating leverages ahead. Partner-led bookings, partner-led attached bookings represent about 45% of total bookings and have driven a 45% year-over-year increase in our pipeline. Partner win rates above 70% demonstrate the effectiveness of this channel. This approach not only enhances capacity, but as I said, it also strengthens margins and reinforces the scalability of our business model. Looking ahead, our priorities are clear: maintain disciplined execution, drive recurring revenue growth, focus on organic growth and opportunistic inorganic growth when it makes sense, and continue to manage costs responsibly. While we experience some ARR timing shifts in Q2, these are deferrals, not losses, and we expect them to flow through in the coming quarters. The demand environment remains strong, as strong as I've ever seen it in my 40 years in this space. Our competitive positioning is stronger than ever. With three fully SaaS platforms in market, our expanding partner ecosystem, and strong customer advocacy, we now have what we need to deliver predictable, profitable growth. The transformation we set out to achieve and the investment that was required to take Sylogist from a professional services, billable hours-oriented provider of on-prem siloed software to now a partner-centric, 100% SaaS-focused company over the last three years is largely complete. We have an incredibly strong executive leadership team with deep experience in the markets we serve and in scaling SaaS companies. Now it's about profitably growing Sylogist, recognizing the operating leverage of a fully SaaS company, and executing with discipline to build shareholder value quarter after quarter. Our key success metrics tell the story of a company performing with consistency and focus. We're delivering healthy SaaS ARR growth, strong partner attachment deal flow, and stable gross margins, all while maintaining disciplined cost management. These results reinforce that our strategic focus and the thesis that I brought to Sylogist is working. We're seeing an engaged partner network, loyal customers driving high net revenue retention and LTV, and continued pipeline growth across our three strategic markets. Beyond the metrics, what I'm most proud of is the incredible team we've assembled to make all this possible with a culture of accountability and determination and a customer-first mindset. I've been involved in several success stories building software companies in this market. Without question, those company and culture attributes that I just mentioned are the crucial ingredients to long-term value creation. We're proud of the progress we've made and confident in where we're headed with the pieces now in place for scalable growth, disciplined execution, and sustained value creation. I'll take some questions. The opportunity, the question, if you couldn't hear, was largely around the mention of operating leverage and obviously the partner channel being an important ingredient for that. It's really the centerpiece, Daniel, more than anything else. The operating leverage for us is transitioning from and handing off that lower margin professional service delivery revenue. That's actually flattened. It was purposeful. If you just look at our revenue, top-line revenue trajectory, it's been flat. We did that for a reason because we handed off that 40%, 35% to partners to engage them to go out and sell 85% margin, 90% margin SaaS revenue. They also take the first-line support. We're not up, we're burdening our company with more and more costs to ultimately recognize the value that that represents to a SaaS company that ultimately doesn't have to have headcount to be able to scale. I started with 200 people. We have 200 people today based on everything that we've accomplished, and I don't see that materially needing to grow to be able to grow Sylogist in any way. Sir. Can you go back up to 5%? Is this mission the primary thing you look at the company? If it is, can you explain how you're positioned? Like folks, it's always the base code, bigger selling. Are you providing extra money? Why was it only 5% for you versus Microsoft? What's different about the offer? Yeah. The question was twofold. On first, the size of the team. When I started, we had one salesperson and a half a marketing person. We're a $40 million company. You can quickly derive what that company was at the time. It had no organic growth trajectory. Ultimately, we grew that to now be about 25 or 26 in total. I wanted to prove out with an experienced account management and sales team that our message and our software and our motion worked because I wanted to make sure that playbook could then be effectively handed off to the client, which we're now doing. Ultimately, that's kind of where we were, where we've gone to. Why would somebody not buy? Do you know how many clients work at Multiple? They're all, all but six, which are marketing-related, are quota-related. They're only quota-related on SaaS revenue. We ripped out professional service revenue quota altogether to encourage them to attach partners. We've been extraordinarily draconian in making sure that we set watermarks that are aligned with value creation. Oh, yeah, sure. I thought I was close enough. Sorry. Why would somebody buy Microsoft? Why wouldn't they buy Microsoft? The Microsoft technology is an incredible tailwind. Trust me, all of our competitors, if they could jump to a platform now as a starter versus a siloed mishmash of what they have, they would do it. What they can't do is take their legacy stuff and get there in an organized way. We ultimately were largely Business Central-oriented in our solutions, the ones that we chose, or Dynamics CRM. I came into that, and we've ultimately extended those platforms. It's about 40% maybe built-in functionality of Business Central or CRM, but that last 40% is the secret sauce. That's why somebody in the public sector can't go with just out-of-the-box Business Central. It doesn't have fund accounting. It doesn't have. They did for what's called a starter pack for their low-end nonprofit solution. They wanted to kind of get in the game. As of nine months ago, they collapsed that venture altogether. They realized again that they're not a vertical market software company. They're a horizontal provider. We no longer, they were never a competitor. They were really down-market with really, really small charities. Ultimately, never within our ICP anymore. On the right, in the right chair. The question was, what's the top risks of executing on this strategy? I think it's focus. The markets I've known for a long time, and as I said, they're bubbling right now coming out of COVID at a pace with funding now commitments that I haven't seen for a long time. Execution and focus is crucial. I think that we needed to first gain our customer trust. We needed to then get our software where we wanted it to be. That was two years of investment without really having a product in market that we were going to sell. I was damned if I was going to put my name on something that ultimately wasn't going to come out to be a lasting solution that was a real step up from what was out there. I don't see the competitive landscape changing materially. They are where they are. They're doing what they're doing. They're trying to figure out how to get to their next quarterly earnings call without the ability to invest because they don't have a lot of free cash flow to be able to do that to support their efforts. I'm quite bullish. It's really about execution now. We have the technology. We have the partner commitment, and we now have the kind of the flywheel kind of starting to gain momentum. I'm pretty blue. The question was, what would we do differently in terms of our partner community? What will we do differently as we're learning, as we're gaining learnings? I just want to, mission is our largest current segment of our revenue. We just mentioned the charity space. While government is starting from a lower base in terms of growth, materially lower base, it is our fastest growth. It's where we ultimately have unleashed the partner channel 100% out of the chute. Where we see efficiency is our enablement. We have now built machine learning and AI into the people-to-people work that we have done with our bench, not getting the revenue, but delivering the support to train and get them up to speed and then have the criteria for success that we can measure to make sure they're getting the same results as we were directly. Ultimately, we see the wash, rinse, repeat of our knowledge base and our training and enablement materials and the AI-driven component of that to help them with implementations and data conversions. We're handing all of those things to our partners to be able to bring fewer cycles off our shoulders and truly more onto theirs. The question was about some of the bottlenecks in the partner side. It was the opaqueness of what these are well-known implementers of digital transformation firms that we work with. Much to the question about, and they have deep Business Central experience and teams, and they have deep CRM teams as well. That last mile of what it means to implement in a local government or in a charity is what that sequence saw. That's where we had some learnings of one another to make sure that we understood their core competencies and skill sets and how we could backfill that. We got in a little more bullish early on that they were like, "We got this." We deferred. Ultimately, when they started to stumble, thank goodness we hadn't decremented our team so that we could plug in and co-deliver. The other part was, I want to mention this because I've gotten questions about why we've seen the bookings, but it hasn't translated to the ARR acceleration piece yet. It's coming. The reason on the partner side is that our original papering with partners was tied to the customer going live. That journey, which is ultimately out of our hand, tied us to when we could start lighting that up. We changed all that. As of the beginning of last month, now when we paper a deal, we get paid as soon as we provision it to the partner. Thirty days. The journey they take with the customer is now completely off. That changes our timing relative to ARR. That is one thing, Adam, that we have learned that we course-corrected on and ultimately I think will lead to kind of more fulsomeness of the activities showing up in our financials. The question is, I know we're running out of time. The question was where we sit in the competitive landscape. It's very different by market. You have some very, very well-known SaaS profile, aggressive Oracle NetSuite, Sage, Unit4 on the charitable, on the nonprofit ERP side. That is where we have the most collisions of what I would say competent providers. We have a really deep customer base. We're holding our customer base. We're adding incrementally where we win. It's largely because of the wellness of our customer community versus others. We think the partners that we have queued up on that space will really help to amplify our message of why they, and we are the only Microsoft solution, which is a big deal. On the municipal government space, they are largely dusty long-term providers. CentralSquare, Vista's roll-up of their kind of portfolio of many, many Canadian kind of mid-market solutions on the local government side. They're long in the tooth. They're not doing anything in terms of the competitive landscape. Sometimes we have partners, two or three partners bidding our software in the same opportunity going on. We see a lot of velocity going on there. On the ed side, you see PowerSchool being bought by Bain. They're in a crisis. Their price point was way high. We're getting some overflow from those kind of providers because people in the mid-market school districts are saying, "Why am I paying all this for Infinite Campus and PowerSchool when I really don't need all the things that they're providing or saying they provide?" I feel very good about Sylogist. We've worked really hard to define what our ICP is, where we fit, and where we thought the most grass was to mow. There is a lot of it, and we're going after it. Our competitors right now can't do a lot about where we are. We're kind of coming in to see us. We're really focused on a few competitors that we know are on their list. I think we're done. I'm sorry. If you have questions, we have means of making sure that you get them answered. I really appreciate your time. Thanks for coming.