Welcome to the AerCap Deal Roadshow call. I will hand the call over to Ashley Everett from Goldman Sachs to open the call. Thank you, Madison. This is Ashley Everett from Goldman Sachs' Investment Grade Capital Markets team. On behalf of Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, I'd like to welcome you to AerCap's fixed income investor presentation. Speaking from the company today will be Aengus Kelly, Chief Executive Officer, Pete Juhas, Chief Financial Officer, Brian Canniffe, Treasurer, and Joseph McGinley, Head of Investor Relations. Before we begin today's call, we encourage you to access the investor presentation at netroadshow.com using the password AerCap485. I would also like to direct you to the relevant disclaimers, including it in the front of the investor presentation. The AerCap team will provide a brief introductory overview with Q&A as the main focus of the call. I'll now turn the presentation over to the company. Thank you, Ashley. Thank you all for joining us for the call today. As Ashley mentioned, the presentation is available on the roadshow.net. For today's call, we really want to encourage you to ask any questions you have. In comments, though, I want to make three points to you. Firstly, it is clear that global air travel is recovering far quicker than we had envisaged when we agreed the GECAS transaction at the beginning of this year. This is driven by the huge success of the vaccination program and the easing of government restrictions. We see this already in our improving operating cash flows, deferral trends, and we see it in the demand for leasing aircraft and the recovery in aircraft values. Secondly, the acquisition of GECAS, which we expect to close shortly, will significantly enhance the revenues and cash flows of the business, as well as the overall quality of our assets. Thirdly, I believe that the recovery that we are seeing in aviation, the combination with GECAS, our own extremely strong balance sheets, and our track record of having done this before, will put AerCap on a higher ratings trajectory. A higher rating is a key priority of the company and of mine. Operator, let's open it to questions, please. All right. Thank you. If you like to ask a question, please signal by pressing star one on your telephone keypad. If you're using a speaker phone, please make sure your mute is turned off to allow your signal to reach our equipment. Again, press star one to ask a question. We'll go ahead and take our first question from Jonathan Ness with Fidelity International. Please go ahead. Jonathan Ness here from Fidelity. Going to ask a couple of questions on the transaction itself and also on the state of the regulatory approval. First of all, what's the sort of size and tranche that you are considering, and how much are you comfortable issuing in the long bonds? I guess it's an interesting thing given the average lease length. What portion of your cash actually could be in long bonds going forward? How certain is it that you will issue in the euro market? For example, if you were to get enough demand in dollars, could you do the whole lot in dollars, or is it definitely going to issue in euros? Thirdly, what is the status of the regulatory approvals? What are the remaining hurdles specifically, are there any sort of risks on recent pacing? Thanks, Jonathan. This is Brian Canniffe here, the Treasurer. With respect to your first question, I think that the tenors that we are considering are anywhere from 2- 20. I think the final sizing of each of those tranches we'll determine with our advisers over the course of the next 24 hours. Obviously, we do think that there will be significant interest in the long end. I think it's a natural progression for the company to issue outs to 20 years. Up to now, we've obviously done out to 10. We think as the company grows in size, it also helps as well in matching the overall average lease term of the company as well. With respect to the overall size, we're thinking something in the context of $20 billion ±. To your question around could we do it all in dollars, well, again, we'll discuss that with our advisers over the next day or so. We believe that there's going to be a strong level of support for the transaction, we do think it would be possible. Obviously, we have the EUR option open and available to us as well. Aengus, do you want to deal with the approvals? In relation to the regulatory approvals, you'll have seen in the filing that we made last night that we do have the last major approval that was outstanding was China. That came in. There are two minor things that have to get done between now and closing, but we would expect they're to be done in the coming days. Thank you very much. As a reminder, that is star one to ask a question. If you find your question has been answered, you may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star two. We will go ahead and take our next question from Patrick Lonergan with MFS. Please go ahead. Hi, this is Patrick from MFS. You mentioned the higher ratings trajectory. Just curious about how you're thinking about shifting the funding composition over time. I think that should be key to. Unlocking that higher rating trajectory and just curious on the pace and how you're thinking about accomplishing that. Sure. Patrick Lonergan, it's Pete Juhas here. With this transaction, we're going to be funding predominantly unsecured. The acquisition takeout financing here. As a result of that, we expect to be below 20% secured debts to total assets, which is a key kind of rating threshold for the rating agencies. Going forward, we'd expect to maintain that and to be below that. I think that in and of itself, post this transaction, should put us in a better place there. We're going to continue to do some secured debt offerings. Obviously, that's going to continue to be a part of our funding structure. Just by virtue of this transaction alone and the predominantly unsecured nature of it, that will basically get us there. Okay, thanks. You don't expect? Sorry, Patrick, it's Aengus here. I would note that six, seven years ago, we were faced with the exact same issue on how to make sure we got the company on a rapid ratings ascent. We did that, and a lot of discussion, a lot of work into how we put the capital structure together, but of course, then how we optimize the business as well. Again, at that time, we did get there well ahead of schedule, and as you can see in our operating cash flows in the presentation, you've seen consistent and strong improvement in those over the last 15 months. Thank you. Sure. I think it's worth noting though, Pete, just before we finish on that point, this isn't contingent on us changing the overall cap structure of the company. The rating trajectory maybe gives some process to why we think we're on a higher rating trajectory. It's not about just reducing our secured funding. It's about a lot more than that. Sure. As we look at it, I think there are three reasons why we think we're optimistic about getting an upgrade. One, we were close to an upgrade prior to COVID. As COVID hit, we were in a good position of positive outlook with the rating agencies, and so we felt we were close to an upgrade then. Obviously, then we were subject to COVID, which is about the worst stress test imaginable for a company in the aviation industry, and we came through it very well. For example, and we talked about this in the presentation, but our leverage ratio went from 2.6x pre-COVID to 2.4x today. That's a huge, I'd say, example and demonstration of how resilient AerCap is. Finally, the combined company is going to have a better credit profile than AerCap does standalone. Aengus mentioned before, from a revenues, from an earnings, from a cash flows standpoint, but also in terms of our customer diversification. I mentioned before the secured debt profile, that percentage is going down, and we're going to continue to maintain a huge amount of liquidity. We expect to have $17 billion of available liquidity upon closing this transaction. I think all of those things should argue for a higher rating. Happy to go on to the next question. Thanks. Okay. We'll go ahead and take our next question from Jay Contis with Manulife. Please go ahead. Hey. Yeah, thanks. I guess maybe just at a higher level, just thinking about what risks, I guess you see, if any, of being such a large issuer. I guess I'm looking at just my world, myopicly, and you're going to be up there with banks that are mostly deposit funded and have access to the discount window, and you will not. I guess does that pose a risk that you have thought about? Well, look, we are going to be a large issuer, we balance that against that $17 billion of liquidity. Obviously, it costs us a fair amount to hold that liquidity, we think it's important, we size that against looking out at our cash needs going forward. When you think about the maturity profile that we'll have, obviously, in this transaction, we're going to do this over a number of tenors, spread that out, make sure that we don't have high maturity towers in any specific year. I do think it's manageable from that standpoint. We report very openly our source of use as target, we will continue to maintain that. At the moment, that's 1.5x coverage of our next 12 months usage of cash. We're going to maintain that. I think from that perspective, we're comfortable, even though it will be a larger company. Look, if one thing that even during the COVID environment showed is that there is strong access for this company to the capital markets, and I think it's just with this transaction, with the increased liquidity that will be there, we think that will improve. Okay, thanks. Sure. All right, we can go ahead and take our next question from Nate McNamee with GW&K Investment Management. Please go ahead. Good morning, gentlemen. Interesting question. A lot of your outstanding capital structure is $150,000 by one denomination. I am just wondering if you guys are considering going lower denomination for this new issue. Thank you. Hi. Yes, it is something we've been aware of. Obviously, the retail issuers, it's helpful for certain investment funds in terms of the size that we've looked at. I think just for the sake of continuity for this issuance, we try to be consistent with our historical issuance and try not to change too much. It is something we're aware of and may look to address in the future. I think for this issuance, we'll stay at the institutional increments. Great. Thank you. All right. As a reminder that a star one to ask a question. We'll go ahead and take our next question from Karl Lee-Young] with Exodus Point. Please go ahead. Yes, good morning. Thanks for hosting the call. Just a quick one. On the leverage target you have, I believe, for my closing, you'll be up just a tad at about three turns or so. I think I believe you're targeting getting back to that 2.7x over about 12 months. I guess my question on that is, once you get there, where do you really want to go here in the future? Would you like to see that particular metric trend below that 2.7x? Add a quick follow-up question. Thank you. Sure. Thanks. You're right that we expect to be around 3x leverage at closing, and we expect to get back down to our target of 2.71 within 12 months of closing. That's really frankly, based just on our operating cash flow that we project. Without projecting a significant amount of asset sales, if we do a significant amount of asset sales, if that market continues to recover and we do that should accelerate that timetable. Once we get there, look, we're maintaining our target. We think that my comments before about the ratings upgrade, that we're optimistic about that. We are optimistic about that even with maintaining that target. I don't think that goal necessitates changing that target at all. I think we would plan to keep that target. Whether we run exactly at that target or around there, remains to be seen. I mean, you can see now, right, we're running significantly below our target. That will move around where we actually are from quarter- to- quarter. I don't envision changing that target now. Giving Pete a point on the velocity of getting to 2.7 is very valid. That 2.7 number is based really just on operating cash flows. As we projected at the time of closing the transaction, since then, there's been a huge resurgence in air travel on a global basis around the world. We've seen a significant increase in aircraft values since we closed the transaction, or since we agreed the transaction, I should say, in March. There's significant uptick in interest for people buying aircraft assets at the moment also. Again, just more generally, the pandemic proved that aircraft assets are a very solid asset. Throughout the pandemic, people did well out of them and are willing to reinvest in them. If we do go anywhere close to the level of pre-pandemic sales of the two companies were doing a $4 billion-$5 billion a year, we would get to this lower leverage ratio much, much faster. Great. Thanks for all that information. Appreciate it. Just a quick, shifting gears to your aircraft portfolio here, pro forma. I guess referring to Slide 14, you obviously have a nice overweighting to the 320neo relative to the MAX. Just wondering if you could tell us, based on your order book, how you see relative weightings between the neo and the MAX sort of trending here over the next several years. Thank you. That's it for me. Thanks. In our order book, the Neo makes up the vast majority of our entire order book. MAX would be significantly smaller, a small minority of the order book. That being said, of course, in the market, we see what's happening every day around the world. On the MAX 8 aircraft, that aircraft is in demand. We've seen lease rates increase materially over the course of the last, I would say, 2- 3 months in particular. Demand for the aircraft is much more solid. It won't ever catch the A320neo. That's not going to happen. It will have a significant customer base. It is a very good aircraft, probably the safest aircraft that's ever been built. I would say that that particular variant of the MAX, the MAX has three variants, an 8, a 9, and a 10. The 8 in particular, which is comparable to the A320neo, we're seeing good, strong demand in the market for that. I would say that when you look at that slide, the bubble slide in the portfolio that you referenced, what's very interesting here, you may have heard me describe this in prior presentations. We have a barbell approach to the portfolio. The new technology or next generation of technology, the stuff on the left, we want to keep that as young. That's what we want to focus all our new acquisitions on. We do not want to buy, at any cost, end-of-line current technology assets because those assets will get replaced by the next generation of technology, the new tech, the neos that you referenced, and the MAXes. What's interesting is that the two largest lessors in the world, who have more information than anyone else in the world about airline strategies and what's happening in airline fleets, have very similar portfolio strategies, which was to avoid buying end-of-line new technology assets for the reason that they will not have demand for 20- 25 years. They'll have demand for another decade or so, and only purchase new technology assets. The older technology assets, you want to make sure they're old assets and that they can consume their remaining life. You can see here on that chart, those assets that we have average around 12 years of age. They'll be in demand for the next decade. We'll extract all that value on a profitable basis. If they were two years old, that wouldn't be the case. As I said, as succinctly as I could on the roadshow, is that put simply, any six-year-old new technology asset, such as a 787 or an A320neo, is better than any three-year-old current technology asset, be that the 737NG, the A320, the 777. Many of our competitors over the last 10 years, in order to keep their portfolios young, bought end-of-line current technology assets. That's where the greatest risk lies, if you're looking at an aircraft portfolio. I would encourage you, as you look at portfolios of aircraft lessors, to understand risk, you have to look at each individual component and what's the appropriate age for those components, rather than the simple average age. That's why over the last 15 years, AerCap has led the industry in this regard. Very helpful. Thank you. All right. We can go ahead and take our next question. Okay, we'll go ahead and take our next question from Louise Pitt with RPIA. Please go ahead. Good morning, guys. Thank Thank you very much, and thanks very much for the call. Just two questions. One, could you talk a little bit about other types of funding that you might want or need to do post the U.S. dollar and euro senior deals? Anything in the hybrid or pref and anything outside of those two currencies, is that to come after the initial financing? The second question just on ESG. Could you just comment a little bit on how that's developing and what you might expect to be looking at with respect to even Scope 3 emissions targets or any other additional information you might be willing to put out over the next few quarters or years? Thank you. Sure. I'll cover the first part. We are doing an institutional term loan as well, in conjunction with these other offerings. That would be a couple billion dollars. It's a secured term loan that we're looking to do. Other than that, there's no other financing that we're going to do now or really for a while after this offering is completed. I think I'll turn it over to Joe McGinley on the ESG front. Hi, Louise. Yeah, look, our focus on the ESG side is quite frankly on increasing our transparency and disclosure in that regard. You'll have seen that ramp up in the last number of years. In our report this year, which you'll see on our website under the environmental and sustainability section, we do disclose our Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Our Scope 3 emissions, as you can imagine for a company of our size, we want to make sure it was accurate. We have a number of science-based targets that we would like to transition towards over time, but obviously finding a reliable data source is the most important thing before we publish any information on it. We have a pretty good handle on it at the moment, and we feel that directionally, we've done a very good job. Even on an intensity basis, we're down double digits over the last couple of years, notwithstanding the impact of COVID, which obviously flattered it for 2020. Yes, it's an area that we'll continue to look to disclose even further on, and we're confident that the new technology strategy that we have in terms of reducing our overall emissions is the best way for us to interact with that. We'll be glad to share more information with investors in due course. If I could just to finish off Joe's point there. No other airline or lessor in the world has bought more of the most environmentally friendly fuel-efficient aircraft available. AerCap has invested $25 billion already in those aircraft types. When we complete the GECAS acquisition, that will be closer to $35 billion. No other entity has done as much in that regard as AerCap has, and we have ambitious targets to continue on that trend, given our order book over the course of the next 4 years- 10 years. Great. Thank you. Thanks, Louise. All right. We can go ahead and take our next question from Phil Buller with Berenberg. Hello, this is Philip Buller from Frankfurt. Can you hear me? Yes. Yeah, okay. You already spoke a lot about that you want to move to a better rating trajectory. However, when the merger was announced, Fitch placed the [BBB-] rating on watch negative. This would be my first question. How do you see that Fitch placed the rating on watch negative? The other question would be, just when you look back through the coronavirus pandemic, what were the challenges there? What help could you provide to airlines which needed to raise cash? Maybe what were the challenges and how did you manage them? Thank you. Sure. I'll cover the first part and then turn it over to Aengus. On the Fitch negative watch. Fitch put us on negative watch really because of the pending financing that they wanted us to get through. They came out with a press release earlier today that said that assuming that we complete a large portion payoff, basically do enough financing in order to cover a large portion of the bridge financing that we have done, that they would take us off negative watch at that point. We're confident that once we've completed this transaction, then we'll come off negative watch. Maybe turn it over to Aengus on the second part. Sure. On the second part, what did we do during the pandemic? You don't decide what to do when you're in it. You prepare for many years in advance. That's the experience and history of the company. In order to survive and indeed thrive in periods of difficulty in this industry, which we have done many times, you have to have a clear portfolio strategy. That means you have assets that your customers want for the remaining useful life of that asset. That portfolio strategy evolves over a decade, and you have to stick to it. AerCap stuck to it religiously over the course of the last decade, as I just highlighted on an earlier question. That's very important. You have a portfolio of assets that your customers want. Two, is on the liability side of the business, that you have an appropriate liability structure that has a couple of components. First of all, the right duration. You don't have big maturity towers in any given year, and that will be the same on the far side of this transaction, how the liability structure is layered in post the transaction. That will be for sure. Two, you don't want to have any mark-to-value tests or similar covenants in your debt structure that could enable anything to be called there. We didn't have any of those, like we didn't have them in the financial crisis. Thirdly, you need to ensure that you have adequate liquidity. For the last 12 years, AerCap has carried $10 billion of liquidity. hat had a significant cost to the business. Many equity holders asked me several times not to do that. They said, "You should assume that the capital markets are there for you. I said, I will never, ever do that. It cost us $100 million a year to do that. That discipline in the business, again, is crucial to being able to go through the pandemic, to help our customer base where we believe in the customer, that they had a viable business model, which the vast majority did. Then enables us to take advantage of the GECAS transaction on the far side. Thank you. All right. We can go ahead and take our next question again from Patrick Lonergan with MFS. Go ahead. Hi. Just curious. I know, obviously, the valuation of the company is going to be in flux post close, and I know that you have to pay down to the 2.7x target. Can you talk about the capital allocation priorities after you get there? You have a pretty aggressive fleet upgrade kind of target, and just how you're going to prioritize that versus share buyback at the end. Look, the balance sheet, as Pete said in his comments on the roadshow, always comes first. That's the side of the business I grew up on. A strong balance sheet is crucial in this business, and a strong balance sheet means getting the right rating. That is the only focus of the business at the moment. Once we get to those levels, which we're very confident of, we'll determine what's in the best long-term interest of all our stakeholders. Rest assured that the strength of the company and the flexibility that a strong balance sheet gives you is absolutely crucial in this business. I said it at the outset, the number one priority for me is to get back on a higher ratings trajectory. Indeed, as Pete noted, we were about to be upgraded by Moody's just prior to the pandemic. We'd already been upgraded by S&P, and we just went through the worst possible stress you could. There was no rating agency stress that remotely approached what we went through over the course of the last 18 months. The track record that we have as well, seven years ago, of rapidly delevering and putting the company on a higher ratings trajectory. These things carry a lot of weight with the rating agencies. Suffice to say, the only objective we have right now in regards to capital structure is to delever down to 2.7x. You mentioned capital expenditure. CapEx has to be seen in context of the business. This is a 2,000 aircraft business along with having the largest engine leasing business in the world, the biggest freighter leasing business in the world, which is an important aspect as we go forward. When you see the levels of aircraft purchases, which we show in one of the slides in the presentation, you'll see that in any given year, starting in 2022 at 73 aircraft, then 79. You have to see that in the context of the 2,000 aircraft fleet. This is very manageable. We've always been very careful about how we grew the business in that regard, and we'll continue to do so. All right. Thank you very much. We'll go ahead and take our next question from Pavan Kumar at Capital. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Thanks for doing the call. Appreciate it. Could you walk us through some of the asset sales that you guys might be considering? I look at the engine leasing and the small regional jet portfolios, it's almost 5% of your combined asset base. It doesn't seem like the equity market is giving you a whole lot of credit for these assets. I'm quite curious, how are you thinking about those? When it comes to asset disposals, of course, as we have in the past when it comes to aircraft disposal, a very firm strategy there, what we want to do. On the engine business, to talk about that for a minute, that is a very complementary business to our own. It provides you with so much more knowledge and access about what an airline is doing. When you have the largest engine leasing company in the world, what you see is the daily activity of all the aircraft in the fleet, the condition of all the engines in the fleet, and you have another very active daily source of contact with the airlines. It is a business where we have less competition. It's still a large business in the engine world, just in terms of the size of our balance sheet. Not quite as big as you say, it's 5%, but our balance sheet is not small, of course. The engine leasing business is one that's very important. Now, where do we end up? up? There's huge amount of interest in that business, but for good reason. What we do see, though, more generally across the industry, is a significant uptick in the number of investors wishing to purchase aircraft and indeed transactions that are closing. We've seen that ourselves in the aircraft that we've sold, and indeed, we see the aircraft values rising right now, and we think that will continue as air travel continues to return. In the numbers that we gave you, I want to reiterate where we said that in 12 months, we get to 2.7x. That's based off at the de minimis level of sales activity. As we said, if we're to pick that up in any way at all, we expect to get to that 2.7x faster, just like we did before in 2014, 2015. Got it. That's very helpful to know that you plan to hit the targets even without asset sales. On the cash lock box feature in the GECAS transaction, of course, you're going to get all the earnings and cash flows from September 2020. I'm curious, I do apologize if you've given any details in the equity conference. The pro forma EBITDA free cash flow for 2022, have you guys made any public comments what number you guys are expecting from a forward-looking perspective? We have not, other than we have said that we expect to have a combined operating cash flow of over $5 billion for the combined company. Got it. Perfect. That's very helpful. Thank you very much, guys. Sure. All right. We'll go ahead and take our next question from Harold Thomas with Schroders. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, guys. Appreciate the call. Just a question on the $17 billion of available liquidity. Roughly how much of that, do you think is going to be committed from the banks? That includes about $11 billion of committed lines from the banks. Already contracted. Which we've already put in place. Appreciate that. We already had a couple of large revolving credit facilities. At the same time that we put the bridge financing in place when we announced the transaction, we also put in place a new revolver and essentially doubled that, basically. It should be worth noting that those facilities were tried and tested in the pandemic when they were fully available to the company. Definitely noted. The other thing I'd mention, Harold, which is worth noting, is of that $17 billion, that doesn't assume any aircraft sales either. That's just the baseline liquidity that we would expect. Got it. Can you talk about the labor shortages that we're seeing? Do you see any impact whatsoever on aircraft? Well, in the first order on the airlines that you lease to and the indirect impact to aircraft. On the airline side, there are two issues on the supply chain that are affecting them. You are correct on labor, for sure. There is a shortage of ground handling, shortage of cabin crew, and to a lesser extent, pilots. To be fair, that's mostly focused in North America and Western Europe. It's not the case for the most of the world. When we look around the rest of the world, that's not the case. It is prevalent, as I said, in Western Europe and North America, which are both very significant markets, but not so much elsewhere in the world, really. The other supply chain issue that's affecting the airlines and something that is a clear positive for us, is what's occurring in Boeing and what is occurring with raw materials. There is a significant delay to the production of aircraft. We don't see that changing for a long time to come. That's despite even if Boeing gets through their current issues, we don't believe that you're going to see the level of deliveries that the manufacturers are hoping for. We just don't think that's going to happen. Obviously, as the largest owner of commercial aircraft that are in service in the world today, we would expect that that should be a benefit to us. Very helpful. Appreciate that. I should comment, one thing I didn't mention earlier on, we talked about engines, we talked about the GECAS portfolio. In relation to this, gently, is the GECAS freighter business. We said that we bought GECAS for the right price, the right asset at the right time. The right asset is very complementary to our fleet portfolio strategy, big narrow-body content, biggest engine leasing business in the world, also the leading freighter business in the world. As we all know, over the course of the pandemic, people have been buying a lot more online. That's not going to change, and also the supply chain constraints the world faces, that won't clear anytime soon. GECAS was well ahead of this trend. It already has one of the biggest freighter fleets in the world. Vitally, when you're getting into the freighter business, you have to have ordered the slots to convert a freighter airplane, which is a big industrial process, takes a long period of time. Without those slots, you cannot get into the freight business. GECAS has more 737 slots than anyone in the world, and also it is in an industrial joint venture that launched the 777 conversion program. As we look forward with the GECAS fleet, it is a unique leadership position in the freight business also. Again, that is star one to ask a question. All questions are allowed. We'll go ahead and take our next question again from the conference with Manulife. Please go ahead. Sorry. Patrick, once again. It would be interesting to just, can you talk about the synergies of having that freighter business unit? Obviously like A330 and other older aircraft, 777s are facing cargo conversions and just some more. Are there any other synergies in terms of realizing higher values on those aircraft that are facing pressure in the passenger market? Well, we have a unique position to do it. We have a unique position. What's important in an aircraft? Your input price, your capacity to lease it, and your capacity to deliver the airplane to the customer on time. Our input prices are lower than anyone in the world. This business has been built over the last 20 years on buying companies at big discounts from carrying values. All our competitors always buy at premiums when they do an M&A transaction. AerCap's the only one that's bought at a discount. Our input price is lower to start with, and the GECAS transaction is another example of this. 2, your capacity to deliver the airplane on time. GECAS has the leadership position in the slots for the two most popular aircraft types in the world on the freight side, on the narrow body, the 737, and on the wide body, the 777. They're a first mover, the leadership advantage there, and indeed, they're the industrial partner on the 777 program. Also, crucially in the freight business, much longer lives. You want to have the engines to power those airplanes. You don't want to have to send them into the shop to overhaul them. Given that we're the biggest engine leasing company in the world, we have all the engines that are needed. When we put a freight rate in the market, we don't need to go in and overhaul a GE90 for $15 million. We have them ourselves in our own inventory. Thank you. Can you put into context some of the price trends we've seen in new aircraft? I guess Ryanair stepped away from a deal a couple of months ago. Just more comments on that new aircraft market. It seems like the prices there could be on the upswing. They are, is the short answer. Boeing will tell you the best deal they ever did in the financial crisis was to turn down Ryanair. They will tell you the best deal they did in the pandemic was to turn down Ryanair again. What we see in new aircraft, and we've seen this in the first recovery, if you go through it was the same in all the prior downturns. The most in-demand airplane in the world is the 320neo. AerCap is the biggest owner of those in the world with the biggest order book of them. That recovered first. We've seen the MAX recover, as I said. We've seen the 320, the 737 market start to recover, and now the new technology wide bodies. We definitely see upward pressure on the new aircraft prices for new technology airplanes. As I said, because of supply chain issues, I don't believe that Airbus, in particular, are going to be able to achieve the numbers that they would like to. Again, that will have a knock-on effect for us. And I'm sorry, one more- So. Sorry. Sorry, go ahead. No, you please go ahead. I was just curious, like, in sorry. Please go ahead. No, you go. No, you go. I was just curious, like a follow-on to that. Seeing the new aircraft prices going higher, how do you deal with new leases? Do you try to shorten the lease terms, or do you just stick to the long lease terms that you typically do when you have that kind of transparency into recoveries and lease rates? Well, what you're doing right now is you're pushing up the lease rates on the new technology airplanes from where they were. They were fully recovered back to pre-COVID levels on the 320neos. Now, what you would've done over the course of the last eight months, 10 months, is not lease any of those. We were pretty well leased coming into the COVID pandemic, which is very important, too, as to how you manage your portfolio. We have the vast majority of all our airplanes delivering over the coming couple of years already leased. Now we held back. We weren't under pressure to put airplanes away over the course of the pandemic. Now we're being fairly choosy about how we place the airplanes right now. Great. Thanks so much. Yeah. We'll go ahead and take our next question from Jason Fairclough. Please go ahead. Thanks. Just to follow up, you mentioned a couple of businesses. The one you did not mention is helicopters. Just curious as to how you think about that. Is there a market if you choose to sell it? It seems like that's the first market to get disrupted by new technology. How do you think about it? Well, the helicopter business is one that was heavily reliant on oil and gas. Indeed, when GE bought Milestone, which is the helicopter business that's within GECAS today, that was back in 2014. Oil and gas was quite high, similar to today's prices. Oil and gas tanked. We saw a lot of oil and gas projects get pushed to the right or canceled altogether. With the upswing in commodity prices over the course of the last year, what we have observed is that none of those oil and gas projects are getting pushed to the right. They're all firm, or they're beginning to happen. In the meantime, the portfolio has been reduced from 80%- 60% oil and gas. It's still 5% of the business, clearly not as complementary to the company as the engine leasing business is. We are pleased to see some positive trends in that business because, again, from when we were negotiating the price for that part of the deal in December, January of last year, and where we are today, things have gotten better. Okay. I appreciate it. It doesn't sound like. If there's no more question, then I will just in the interest of time. We're running up. I know there's one question left in the queue. Sorry, Jay. We might just give them an opportunity to ask their first question, and then we'll have to call it after that. Does everybody have another one on that? Okay. We'll go ahead. Sure. We'll go ahead and take the next question from Sean Conaghan with New England Asset Management. Please go ahead. Hey, thanks for putting me in. I was just curious, you talked about the benefits to existing fleet from aircraft delivery delays. I was wondering if you could help me understand maybe the impact if some of your deliveries are delayed, just in terms of how that works with contracts if they're pre-placed or how it impacts your margins if they're pre-funded. Sure. Of course, that was helpful during the pandemic, to be honest, that Boeing were so delayed in their deliveries. What happens is that in those situations, you have matching termination rights. If a lessee had a right to walk away due to the aircraft being late, we would mirror that. That's mirrored in our contracts with the manufacturers. We wouldn't take that risk in any situation. As we look forward, our first available airplanes are not really out there until 2023, 2024. We'd be quite keen to hold the manufacturers' feet to the fire on those deliveries. Well, thank you everyone for joining the call today. It's much appreciated that you've come in at short notice. My name is Joseph McGinley. If you do have further follow-up questions, and I'm conscious that there was a lot of demand on the call, but feel free to just direct your questions to me via email or via our partners, and we'll be more than happy to come back to you. Thanks again for joining the call. This concludes today's call. Thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect.