My name is Colin Rusch. I am the Head of Industrial Innovation Research here at Oppenheimer. We are thrilled to be joined by the management team from Aspen Aerogels, Don Young, CEO, Grant Thoele, CFO, and Neal Baranosky, Head of IR. Guys, obviously you just put up a great quarter and a great guide. I just want to get a sense of with Thermal Barrier revenue up sequentially, but down from a year ago, how are you thinking about some of the cadence of volumes on EV programs in North America? We should think about those volumes scaling up here or maintaining over the next several quarters. Thanks, Colin. Thank you for having us. On the North American PyroThin Thermal Barrier business, we have obviously been through a little bit of a journey here over the course of the past 12 and 24 months. After very rapid growth from really 2020 into 2025, the market share of EVs in the U.S. for regulatory and incentive reasons, were cut in half, in essence from roughly low double- digit percentages to a range today. They seem to have stabilized around 5.5%, 6%, depending on the calculation. Our numbers reflected that. We believe that we have largely stabilized at this point, or that market has stabilized around 6%. The key driver for us in North America, of course, is General Motors. What we see of them here in Q3 that is a little different from what we saw of them in the first half of the year, is that they seem to be producing vehicles at the rate that they are selling vehicles. They had a significant destocking or lowering of inventory during the first half of the year. Even though sales rates were at one level, production rates were at a lower level. What we have seen is that leveling out now, and even potentially building modestly inventory. We are seeing that as creating a more robust second half for us, from a North America Thermal Barrier business. We are seeing it here in Q3 and most forecasts have it continuing through the year. Okay. I trust that is giving you a little bit more comfort on 2027 build rates, even though it is a little early to predict where those things end up. Yeah, I think our expectation and when we look at IHS and some of the other analysts' views of the North American build in market share, look, we think that that 5.5%, 6% market share number will gradually grow, and that we'll be the beneficiaries of that as it does grow. We haven't provided an outlook for 2027, but we do believe that that part of our business will be a growth vehicle for us in 2027. Just to add onto that, I think one thing to keep in mind is that right now GM has number two market share, and we believe that going into 2027, that it's a very strong possibility that they're going to maintain that market share. You have a lot of other launches, in terms of other vehicles from other OEMs that are launching in 2027. So, we're optimistic and we're confident that we can supply GM maintaining that number two market share throughout 2027. Excellent. I guess changing geographies into Europe, you guys raised your outlook to $20 million-$30 million this year. I just want to get a sense of where that upside is coming from. Is that coming from new nameplates? Is it higher content per vehicle, or is it just more units selling through? Because we've seen some pretty strong numbers in the EU. How do you see that market evolving over the next couple of years, given some of the new relationships that you've been able to announce? Yeah. Thank you. Over the course of the two earlier earnings calls before the one most recently, we had signaled that we were expecting European Thermal Barrier revenue to be in the $10 million-$15 million range. As you cite, we raised that recently to $20 million-$30 million based in part on the fact that we had already booked revenue for approximately $11 million in the first half. So, we're coming at this from a pretty strong position as we get into that $20 million-$30 million category for the year. I would say that it is broad-based, Colin. We have seven OEMs now where we have won design awards that are beginning to ramp their business. So it's broad across those seven as opposed to any one or two. And honestly, these are still ramping volumes as opposed to SOP volumes, which we anticipate some of them to engage in in 2027, quite possibly all of them. As we also cited last week, we won the JLR, the Jaguar Land Rover design award, which is a terrific award for us. It is pretty late stage, in that we think that it will begin to generate revenue, not in the usual 2+ year incubation, but almost immediately here, they are well through their design phases here. That is why we are confident in the $20 million-$30 million this year, and we cited on slide six in our Q2 2026 earnings presentation, the potential. The calculation is, the design award contracts that we have, basically volume times price equals that $135 million opportunity for us in 2027. We cited, through experience, that we think we have the opportunity, quite comfortably, to double our 2026 revenue. So that $20 million-$30 million, you know, $40 million-$60 million in 2027. Just to add to that, the $135 million is purely for our awarded OEMs. So that is the seven that Don was just speaking about. We have a robust quoting pipeline that there still is potential for other OEMs that do have an SOP in 2027 to, if we win those awards, that that could impact 2027. Looking at 2028 when these design awards are ramping at serial volumes in 2027, we feel very confident that there is going to be not only seven, but there could be a few others. The best part about this is that we do not need a grand slam from one of the OEMs. We can get singles, doubles, triples from various OEMs to fill out and diversify our Thermal Barrier revenues. I guess I want to dig into this Jaguar agreement a little bit more, just from a technology perspective. Obviously, you guys have been talking to them for a fairly long time. There has been some evolution around architectures here. The fact that you have won a next gen architecture award, it seems significant to me. Can you talk a little bit about that process and what you think it signals out to the rest of the EV landscape around available alternatives and where architectures are going? Jaguar has been one of the early movers in bringing EVs to market. Just want to get a bit better sense of what the broader significance is of that deal for your technology position and longer-term growth. The design award does have a history to it, and kind of an unusual history in that, I would say approximately two years ago, we were notified that we lost that piece of business, Colin. We stayed with them and we wanted to learn more, and so we stayed close with JLR through the process, as close as possible. It was really JLR that came back to us, I want to say approximately six months ago, and said, hey, we want to reengage with Aspen. We don't know all the details, but I think it's fair to say that the other solution didn't work or wasn't robust enough or couldn't deliver for whatever reason. We were there for them, and we have won that design award now, as they are very close to ramping themselves. It is two different architectures across several of their vehicles that they will be promoting in Europe and in the United States. Excellent. Can we talk a little bit about the shift to LFP? Obviously, folks are working to optimize performance of vehicles, reducing weight in those vehicles, but then also trying to optimize the cost, right? Looking at doped LFP. Can you talk about significance for your solution and what that means, that shift to LFP particularly in Europe and in the U.S., and then potentially with solid-state starting to merge and semi-solid state solutions starting to merge for the EV market, and how you guys intend to adapt to some of those shifts? Yes. First, I would just maybe remind us that there is significant infrastructure for lithium-ion batteries, and they're going to have a very significant market share in the years to come. I think that's pretty clear. On the LFP side, we also are seeing relatively high density LFP batteries, which is being driven by the desire for range, and we know that there are thermal management issues as you drive, as you push for density. We are engaged in several LFP chemistries today. In fact, some of the work that we have done next stage with General Motors on the LMR side have, I think indicate that progress as we kind of work through different chemistries, and so we're optimistic that we're going to have a role to play. Also, Colin, we've talked a bit about the battery energy storage opportunities for us, the BESS. Those cells are largely high density LFP cells, sourced from overseas, typically often from China. Those are the very same cells that we're working on qualifying our materials, developing our materials, qualifying our materials for that opportunity. Again, I just cite the LFP similarity to your question. On the solid-state side, let me just say maybe it's a little bit too early to tell. There is an enormous amount of energy stored in a solid-state battery, and I think time will tell as that segment or sub-segment matures here, Colin, in time, what their thermal management challenges will be. We're engaged and knowledgeable about that market. We'll see. Okay. Can we just dig into the BESS opportunity a little bit? Yeah. Because as we look at what the data center duty cycles look like, that's a very intense operation for Yeah a lot of those batteries, right? You end up with having, I think, unforeseen thermal issues in many cases. Right I guess, can you talk a little bit about how that opportunity has come to you? Yeah. What you're seeing in terms of the duty cycle and where Aspen solutions uniquely address some of those needs as you start to see some of those batteries get pushed really, really aggressively out in the field. Yeah. It's a really interesting opportunity for us, Colin, in that we're able to apply the lessons that we've learned in addressing EV battery modules and battery cells and thermal management challenges in EVs. We've been able to apply those lessons in what sort of feels like an industrial setting for us. If you look at our team, which by the way, we are expanding specifically to address the BESS opportunities. We are working with the developers who are building the modules, and we are designing and qualifying product. When I say designing, I don't need to think R&D type designing, but really, really designing for commercialization. We're at that end of the spectrum. Because as you cite, the size, the intensity, the reliability needs for these applications are significant. We believe that we will generate near-term revenue on this opportunity. I think to be honest, we're still sizing the market. We believe that it is measured at least in the tens of millions of dollars of opportunity for us per year. But we know that the size of the market is significant. The other thing, of course, that we bring to the party is the desire, the incentive that those developers have for U.S. content. And where many of the cells are coming from outside the United States, the vast majority, our U.S. content is an important part of the equation for them. Excellent. Let's shift gears to the Energy Industrial and some of the adjacent markets. With the energy market, you're down just a little bit versus a year ago, but you noted acceleration on the quarter. I guess what can you point to in terms of the sales process, demand, sell-through, inventory levels that give you some comfort that that business is starting to re-accelerate? Well, we're seeing it here in the third quarter, for one thing, and that gave us the confidence to provide a relatively robust outlook, I think, for the quarter, and I think body language for the second half of the year. The re-acceleration, if you will, is largely coming from our project activity, which was, I think, just cyclically light over the course of the past 12 months. We've seen it before. We know that kind of comes and goes, but we're very confident that both our Subsea work, and our LNG work will lift us significantly here in Q3 and for the second half of the year. We have talked about approximately 20% revenue growth here in 2026 for this segment, and we believe that we have the opportunity to do that and to carry that kind of growth into 2027 as well. I think the macro is very supportive of us. We look at the backlogs of our significant end users and our customers, both in the Subsea and in LNG, and they have really record backlogs today, and we will be the beneficiaries of those as those projects play out. As you know, Colin, insulation, thermal management in those systems comes relatively late in the build cycle. I think we have good visibility, and we have an excellent track record of performance and customer service in that market. Excellent. If we're thinking about this, we've got the EV market, you've got the historic energy market that you're going through those cycles with, you've got this growth opportunity with stationary storage. Can you talk about any other adjacent markets that we should be thinking about as growth opportunities for the platform on the Thermal Barrier side? I think we're very focused. As you know, we brought our resources down pretty significantly with the downturn of the EV business, and we went from roughly 1,400 employees to 800 employees. We took $80 million of cash costs out of the business. Having said that, we remain targeted, if you will, to continue to build innovation in the company. We're an innovation leader in our space, and we will continue to do that. Colin, I think we've put extra resources on the BESS. We want to reach pay dirt there, and I think analysts and investors will give us a lot of credit for creating a third growth driver in the business, especially leveraging the flexible aerogel blanket, our current assets, our current IP, et cetera. To be able to grow our Energy Industrial business, our Thermal Barrier business, and potentially this BESS opportunity without meaningful capital expenditures, I think is very valuable. We also have a group in our R&D organization who are focused on aerogel technology that is not the flexible aerogel blanket, that provides other paths for us to build out. These are in the earlier stage, and so I don't want to get ahead of ourselves today, but we do have a targeted R&D effort to explore additional uses for Aerogels that may not come in the form of the flexible aerogel blanket, which has been our bread and butter for these years. Excellent. So it's good to know that clear focus on three core markets here, leveraging the same IP. Just turning to the operations. You completed a staged restart of East Providence. Can you talk about what the team's learned through that process, and how that's informing how you're running the facility and thinking about safety and operational resilience going forward? Yeah. It was a significant event for our company. April 8th, we began the staged restart, as you cited. We began that on May 14th. We have made good progress. We believe that it will take until the first half of 2027 to reach our full production capacity post the April 8th incident. In terms of building in reliability, we have taken many lessons from the event. Again, I cannot say this often enough, we feel immensely thankful that no one was seriously injured that day, that evening. We have built in redundancy, safety redundancy, reliability redundancy. It has also caused us to broaden our relationship, I think, with our external manufacturing facility as well, a relationship that we really began to rely on really back to 2024. I think it has given us both short and long-term supply flexibility as we have developed that relationship here certainly over the course of the past several months since the incident. To be able to not disrupt our customers in any meaningful way from a supply point of view was quite an achievement by our team. Our hand-in-hand work with our external manufacturing facility was also a critical component to that successful customer relationship through this period. Excellent. You are still working through the insurance process as well as some of the supply chain hiccups. Can you just walk us through the puts and takes, some of the incremental charges that you are seeing right now and some of the cost recovery that you are anticipating over the next several quarters? Yeah, sure. I am happy to take that one, Colin. Good. What we had in Q2 was $5.3 million of incident-related add backs. Those are charges that are basically burdening your gross margin, and we are adding them back to adjusted EBITDA. Our adjusted gross margin in Q2 would've been 17% versus the 7% reported, and the difference is that $5.3 million of add backs. As we look forward, in our guide for Q3, we had $5 million-$10 million. What happens is that we have three buckets. The first bucket is going to be just pure expedited freight for Thermal Barrier blankets to our China manufacturing partner, and then to Mexico for finished good assembly into a Thermal Barrier. We're elongating our supply chain in this time where East Providence is being restored to full capacity. We've already worked through the kinks of that, and we have been able to deliver on time with our customers and respond to fluctuating demand. I think the way that, so that's one category. The second category would be just professional services out at East Providence. This is your contractors, engineers working on the restoration and to return the facility to full capacity. The third bucket is really going to be applicable in Q3 and going forward, is just all around the temporarily sourcing our certain Energy Industrial products from the external manufacturing facility that typically we would source out of East Providence. Think about these as U.S. deliveries of rolls. We're obviously incurring a few extra charges there by making those rolls over in China and then shipping them to the U.S. All of those three categories will be submitted to business interruption insurance. The way that I explained it on the call and think about it broadly, is that all these add backs, we are going to submit the total amount of that add back as a business interruption claim. Those claims are submitted in arrears. The $5.3 million we incurred in Q2 is going to be submitted in Q3 and expected payment sometime thereafter. We are still working through the insurance process, but we're very confident that what we are submitting is going to be covered, and we feel very good about the overall cash needs during this time. In particular, from now until the end of the year, we believe that we have some good liquidity to absorb some of these costs and see the insurance proceeds come through. Excellent. Has it changed your thinking at all around internal capacity versus contract manufacturing as you grow here? Obviously there's some domestic content considerations with some of your customers. Yeah. But just curious about your philosophy around own capacity versus contract manufacturing as you go forward and start growing into some of these markets. Yeah, sure. I think that one of the big items that I think is really kind of a silver lining throughout this process is that we were already planning on taking our PyroThin products and having our partner over at EMF being able to manufacture those, and really to have an opportunity for our European OEMs to have a different supply chain, and in some cases, a lower cost to them. And so that was kind of already in the works. What this did is it really expedited that process. And so now what we're envisioning is that as you get on the other side of a full restoration of East Providence, we can have a dual supply mentality, and really look at the profitability impact and the supply chain impact of supplying various OEMs in our Energy business, either internationally or domestically. Okay. Let's shift to the balance sheet here for a minute. Can we just talk about the process of liquidating the assets in Georgia? You mentioned it on the call, working it through, but can you just walk us through how that process is developing and how we should expect that to evolve here over the next three, four quarters? Yeah, I'll take that. Let me just get my timing here right. About 100 days ago or so, we signed a P&S agreement with a counterparty, and that counterparty was in the midst of negotiating for a long-term lease with a third party. Our P&S expired while they were still negotiating. They continue to negotiate. So upon that expiration, we reopened the bidding to other interested parties who were active at the earlier time. So we have that being marketed actively. It's in an excellent location, a very robust industrial environment in and around Statesboro, the location of our facility. We do believe that we will sell that facility. We think that it will take a little longer now. We were citing the second half of 2026, and we think that could go into 2027. But we are confident in the asset value that we were talking about. You may remember we expected net proceeds to come approximately $25 million, and that would go directly towards paying the MidCap term loan. Look, it is a delay, but I think that the basic premise continues to hold. Okay. Excellent. The final question here is really around the guidance for 3Q and how that translates into sustainable business on a go-forward basis. You guys have obviously lowered the breakeven level for the company. You have gotten yourself into a good position from a balance sheet perspective in terms of managing cash. I guess the question is really, with the sequential growth in 3Q, you returning to being EBITDA positive here, how are you thinking about sustainable revenue levels and the growth trajectory from here, and the lumpiness potentially given some of the way these programs lay out and the project-based nature of some of the business? Yeah, no, it is a good question, Colin. I think that the break-even level we have been targeting in the second half of this year is a $200 million revenue level for adjusted EBITDA break even. Then by the end of 2027, we are targeting $175 million of revenue level for adjusted break even. We have more work to do. We are actively working all these various cost initiatives. I think that one of the things that we are seeing in Q3 is a little bit of a return to just once you absorb your overhead costs, the incremental profit is going to fall to the bottom line. So for every dollar above our break-even level, we are dropping $0.50-$ 60 cents of adjusted EBITDA, down to the bottom line. So that is a very powerful tool for us as we begin to see these volumes materialize and progress. I think that one of the things that we are seeing is that the gross margin level, I will continue to report on that adjusted gross margin as we have these incident-related add backs. Just because in our view, when you get to the guide of $65 million-$80 million, you are going to have a significant step up in your gross margin, and it will still be burdened by some of these costs that you just cannot add back to gross margin. We are adding them back to adjusted EBITDA, but we feel confident in our ability to scale and really drive operating leverage to reach revenues that are well in excess of the $175 million and then $200 million break-even levels. That leverage that Grant talks about is important. We think the elements of the growth strategy are very much in place, whether it is scaling Energy Industrial, which we are confident that we can build a $200 million business there, a good high margin business. We think the stabilization that we see in the North American EV market, and we are just starting to grow in the European market, on the Thermal Barrier side, as this array of companies move into SOP, basically. We think we have got a real opportunity to grow the business sustainably, to use your term, Colin, and we are confident we will be able to do that. Just one last thing on that is that when we look at all these European programs, the growth in Energy Industrial, the growth in North American EV demand, we already have the infrastructure in place, the capacity in place, and we now have a dual supply strategy. While we have been put through the wringer here with North American EV demand, what we have done in the meantime is we have batted down the hatches, and we have restructured the business to be more efficient and optimal for higher volumes. Now we do not have incremental CapEx that is tied to any of these volume growths. We have got the manufacturing capacity in place, and we have a dual supply strategy. All the pieces are kind of coming together as we go into the back half of the year here. Excellent. Well, guys, we are at time here. I was going to ask you for some final comments, but I think you just nailed it for us. You have got three growth drivers. You have got a cost structure that is coming down, the 50%-60% incremental operating margins above your break-even level. And you have got sufficient cash on the balance sheet to drive the business and support the working capital needs here going forward. Guys, thank you so much for the time. If anyone online has any questions, do not hesitate to reach out. We have known Don and the team for a long time, like a very long time. So pleasure to still be working with you guys and we look forward to talking with you again soon. Take care. Thanks, Colin. Thanks